Drama in History

Drama in History: Exemplars from Mid Dynasty XVIII Author(s): Anthony Spalinger Source: Studien zur Altgyptischen Kultur,
Bd. 24 (1997), pp. 269-300 Published by: Helmut Buske Verlag GmbH Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/25152743 . Accessed: 28/05/2011 05:31
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=hbv. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Helmut Buske Verlag GmbH is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Studien zur Altgyptischen Kultur.
http://www.jstor.org
Drama
in History:
Exemplars
from Mid Dynasty
XVIII
von
Anthony Spalinger
An analysis of the literary and historical forms of Egypt during the reigns of Hatshepsut and Thutmose III. Special attention is placed upon those texts dealing with the "nomination" to kingship. The focus of the study centers on the heigthened drama evident in those inscriptions, and the connection between Thutmose III and his predecessor of Dynasty XII, Sesostris I. In addition, the Berlin Leather Roll special attention placed upon its history as an administrative document. is covered with
Many with mose religious
have regard
discussed
the rise of historical Dynasty if not
consciousness the reigns
in Pharaonic
Egypt,
especially Thut
to the XVIIIth
of Hatshepsut been
and her stepson,
III1. However, overview d'appui will be
all too often which
such analyses historical
have
oriented The with
to a philosophical remarks That have is to
lacks a deep
background. deductive that covers
following
as the point say, what
an integration attempted here
of the empirically is an approach
the inductive.
the development
of native
Egyptian
Egyptian street
thought processes
outlook was open I have
in the early New Kingdom at a time in which,

to new perspectives an approach rather than being locked that is limited with find the road well lacking My
I feel, the
to historical by various primary is
into a one-way
of thought.
not chosen
regard served
sources. Quite signposts references, to provide of Pharaonic
to the contrary, nature
the interested instead
reader will
of a historical if being a mature
of being
a presentation philosophical.
in numerous goal
at the same presentation
time refreshingly of one
in this analysis transformation at an earlier I hope
side of the then growing did not occur
intellectual
Egypt which,
I firmly maintain,
in so great the final
a fashion product, the thesis.
time period. Although the results
the orientation
of this work
far exceeds
that
are not written
in so tentative
a manner
as to obfuscate
Basically,
As the studies concerned with these two Pharaohs are as varied as they are detailed, letme merely refer at this point to the provocative remarks of J. Assmann, Solar Religion in the New Kingdom, Egyptian 1995, 128 with note 159. His earlier remarks in: Agyptens Aufstieg zurWeltmacht, Mainz 1987, 47-55, are too brief. The following notes will amply cover the specific data which are, after all, the grist of the
historian's mill.
270 A. SpaUnger SAK 24
foUowing Egypt pectives, be brought nomination which Uterary The tion
upon
recent yet often unclear in early Dynasty the least being XVIII,
research,
I see a mental
transformation
of Pharaonic pers wiU
occurring not
a tendency
that can be witnessed Reasons to observe
from many
royal
inscriptions
themselves.
for such a change that the series form a useful with
into the discussion; texts which a more as weU of omens
however,
it is sufficient
of divine corpus their
Hatshepsut detaUed
and Thutmose from ones. Thutmose remarkable Incorrectly its French of prodigies
III "pubUshed"
deserve aspects series
working
a perspective
that is concerned
as historiographic that surrounded are extremely
Ill's early Ufe and presaged owing understood both to their purpose
his nomina and to the
to be ruler of Egypt in which
manner
they are expressed2. text has kept upon a series The
by Breasted
as a "Coronation because the
Inscription", narrative Thutmose
the lengthy
title of "Texte de la Jeunesse" and later offerings considerably in which
is concentrated EQwas
the youthful
involved. themselves;
text itself was
carved
later than the purported presents for a Sitz the im
series of events account
it is a retrograde
one3. The
style of the composition in arguing
in the first person,
and early Egyptologists
did not hesitate
Urk.
IV, 156-75. The most useful and very detailed analysis of this inscription and the following one discussed in this study is now that of M. Romer, Gottes- und Priester-Herrschaft inAgypten am Ende des Neuen Reiches, AUAT 21, 1994, passim, especially 142-52, and the summary list inAbteilung IV,
478-80. The author's preliminary analysis in:GM 99, 1987, 31-34, is extremely important and, in fact, forced Assmann to alter some of his ideas: see the latter's "State and Religion in the New Kingdom", in: Yale Egyptology Studies 3, 1989, 71. Redford's recent overview, in: O'Connor /Silverman (eds.), Ancient Egyptian Kingship, PA 9, 1995, 157-84, is quite brilliant but contains too much personal interpretation; e.g., "The common grizzly Hatshepsut vocabulary of Eighteenth Dynasty military records": page 159. On page 174 he discusses the texts of and Thutmose III which are covered here; note, however, that he considers them to be "juridical omens", an interpretation which is false, as Romer has shown. (Indeed, there is nothing
"juridical"about them) More judicious comments of Redford can be found in his perceptive "Pharaonic 1986, 168-71. King-Lists, Annals and Day-Books", For a penetrating study of these Eighteenth Dynasty nomination texts and others of similar nature, see P. Vernus, in: BSEG 19, 1995, 69-95 and, more generally, Essai sur la conscience de l'Histoire dans 3 l'Egypte pharaonique, 1995, 137-42. The comments of Lacau/Chevrier, Hatshepsout, should be taken into consideration. Nevertheless, the reader will find P.F. Dorman's detailed analysis (The Monuments of Senenmut, 1988, 47-50, 55-58, 64-65) very useful for deterrnining the overall date of the Thutmose III composition. I do not follow the analysis of C. Meyer, Zur Verfolgung Hatschepsuts durch Thutmosis III., in:H. Altenmiiller/R. Germer Fs Helck, 1989, 119-26. Breasted's comments in BAR II, 1906, (eds.), Miscellanea Aegyptologica, a translation (now dated and incomplete) is on pages 59-68. 55-59;
1997 Drama inHistory
271
Leben common words,
centered
at the court with backdrop from
Thutmose
III speaking was
to his courtiers4. employed notables,
That
is to say, the king's ought
the own
Uterary aU directed
of the Konigsnovelle his mouth,
to present aU of whom
to the assembled
to have
been weU-surprised The suite
at the tenor and focus was placed
of their monarch's on the southern upon after
argument. exterior waU of his of tjheHatshepsut The stepmother. smoothed to be partly III) for for
"Texte de la Jeunesse" some years
after he became over scenes
sole Pharaoh of the dead queen
the death the wall
inscription was for re-carving. determined. foUowing
placed An
itself had been
exact
date
for Thutmose's
retrospective
upon his early Ufe remains information, Dorman,
However, Seipel, has
in his judicious shown
sifting of aU the available late date ca. regnal (regnal year
that a relatively
year 42 of Thutmose
the text is impossible
and that a time frame
30 seems more may
appropriate be,
dating purposes5. Whatever Chapelle pubUcation As address of Rouge of Queen
the exact date of the "Texte de la Jeunesse" Hatshepsut concerned was with stiU standing his early career. presents an account when
the famous the
Thutmose
III ordered
of his thoughts
stated above,
the "Texte de la Jeunesse" to some Such were officials whose
in the form of an official beginning and high the end of
of the Pharaoh
titles are lost in the fragmentary in dialogue of Uterary form between king since
the composition. commoners, XI. Given
speeches, a weU-liked
normaUy method
ranking Dynasty
presentation under
the rubric Konigsnovelle, Fischer showed
they first occur in 19656. Hence, between
the reign of Nebhepetre regulated manners occurs often
Montuhotep of speech are not
(II), as Henry and language
the orderly,
of the conversation of Thutmose
the Pharaoh
and his foUowers of practices
a product
of the times
III nor even
a continuation
In general,
Hermann,
Konigsnovelle,
1938.1
provided
some
brief
comments
on
this
so-called
"genre"
in:Aspects of theMilitary Documents of the Ancient Egyptians, 1982, 101-114. The best treatment of this literary setting is to be found inA. Loprieno's well-argued study: The "King'sNovel", in:Ancient Egyptian Literature, History and Forms, PA 10, 1996, 277-95. Assmann, Egyptian Literature (Survey), in:D. Freedman (ed.), The Anchor Bible Dictionary II, 1992, 387, is too brief. 5 Dorman's remarks are found in his study referred above in note 3. 6 It is odd thatEgyptologists ignore this first case: see Fischer, Coptite Nome, 103-106 and 112-118 (No. 45); cf. Spalinger, Aspects of theMilitary Documents of the Ancient Egyptians, 1982, 114-115. For example, I. Shirun-Grumach, Offenbarung, Orakelund Konigsnovelle, AUAT 24, 1993, 149-73, persists with the older position claiming the Berlin Leather Roll (Sesostris I) to be the first case. If, in fact, one wants to see parts of the "Annals" of Thutmose III (Megiddo campaign) as well as the Kadesh "Poem" of Ramesses II as containing "Konigsnovelle" elements, thenMontuhotep's inscription from Deir el B alias ought to be included as well.
assumed
to have begun could
under
Sesostris the king
I7. Indeed, enunciating
a truncated his plans
version
of the Konigsnovelle In this one-sided from the conflict any sus of a
presentation format between pense by-play different campaign The Pharaoh one
occur with
to the court. resulting
the first
person
is stiU employed takes place.
but no overt Rather, account
tension
ruler and officials must be found
as in the "Texte de itself without
la Jeunesse",
in the narrative
the heightened
interest
between plans
the ruler and the high for the future; e.g.,
ranking members
of his entourage, of the Kamose
both presenting or during the
as in the beginning
Stela
of Thutmose "Texte as befits de
III against Megiddo. itself at Karnak. concentrates From upon the relations between Amun and
la Jeunesse" its location
the very beginning father", states
of the preserved referring
portions of
receives
this blunt
outlook:
"He is my I was
the king,
to Amun his
course,
"and I am his son. While me though
in his nest he commanded The age, approximated
that I be upon but overtly he
throne,
and he begot with akin
stoutheartedness". the aspects when priest8.
connected
the Horus
myth,
stresses
of the youthful he was (The
Thutmose:
is like a "puppy", of the hypostyle
to the child, Horus
of Chemmis,
standing
on the north
court, and in the role of the Iwn-mwtf Jeunesse" must predate the walling-up
latter fact indicates two obeUsks
that the "Texte de la between Pylons
of Hatshepsut's
located
IV and V.)
Suddenly he had made rays were the narrative festival in the eyes moves to a reUgious setting: "... the intimacy he commenced left. And of his horizon great prodigies, gave after his heaven through his beauty. When as when Harachti
of the nobiUty
the people
to him
This follows from the evidence of the Berlin Leather Roll. Pace: Ph. Derchain, in:RdE 43, 1992, 35-47, that text ismost assuredly amid Dynasty XVHI copy of an original of Sesostris. I find J. Osing's edition in: Fs Iversen, The Heritage of Ancient Egypt, J. Osing/E.K. Nielsen (eds.), 1992, 109-119, to be the
best. The passages are from Urk. IV, 156.17-57.8. For the "puppy" (inpw) motif see, inter alia, W. J. Murnane,
Ancient Egyptian Coregencies, SAOC 40, 1977, 255; my review in: JARCE 16, 1979, 189-90 and 192 with note 19; E. Wente, in:An X-Ray Atlas of the Royal Mummies, J.E. Harris/E.F. Wente (eds.), 1980, 247; P. derManuelian, Studies in the Reign of Amenophis II, HAB 26, 1987, 189 note 96; D. Franke, Anchu, des Prinzen, in: Fs Helck, Miscellanea Aegyptologica, 1989, 73-75; C. Un terme designant le roi avant qu'il ne soit pas roi, in: U. Luft, (ed.), The Vandersleyen, Inepou: Intellectual Heritage of Egypt, Studia Aegyptiaca 14, 1992, 563-66 (overly formal); and C. Obsomer, Sesostris Ier. Etude chronologique et historique du regne, 1995, 133-35. der Gefolgsman in: JNES 44, 1985, 251- 94. However, he in this context is his study "Das Bild des Vaters"^ in: Stein und Zeit, 1994, 134-37 (Die "Kamutef-Konstellation"), a study originally published in 1976. One might add his "Die Zeugung des Sohnes", in J. Assmann et al. (eds.), Funktionen und Leistungen des Mythos, OBO 48, 1982, 13-61. For the role of the Iwn-mwt.f priest at this time: L. Bell, avoided the twenty-year research of J. Assmann. Useful
273
[praise] Even
..."9. These though
unknown
miraculous bilt,
events
are never
explained;
aU is left in darkness. is left in abeyance took place; this
the crucial word, precisely, has been
occurs
in this passage, it was
the Ustener no oracle which
concerning eariier analysis instead
what,
occurred10.
Certainly
interpretation
finaUy put to rest by Pascal For Vermis time in order the omina to reveal
Vermis
in an extremely were plan activity,
important
of divine-human
affairs11.
presented the divine
not anticipated, even though there
they occur at an unexpected
is no real rupture of the norm. The king first proceeded on the fire and offering court of myself', under cattle and goats to his deity. "Itwas
to his ritual Then when Amun
placing
incense the
circulated
around
hypostyle science senses were
and finaUy states
stopped
at the king:
he stopped
that I took con lost his then adds, located was given with at a
the text, perhaps series
indicating events;
that Thutmose such occurrences,
III momentarily the king while
the awesome
of divine
not planned
by the priests who places
carried Amun's and bent
image12. Subsequently, in subservience,
one of the god's resting
("stations") being outside
Thutmose
further series of omina. Though in the divine specified sphere, the young
of the perception
of mankind
and hidden
king knew
of them and, apparently,
understood
these un
extra-Unguistic with
occurrences. the Pharaoh This elevation of divine translation then refers to heaven, nomination of the key to his ascent to heaven and en
Continuing counter cycle with texts,
his account, god, Re.
the creator is contained to present
not at aU specified to kingship. passages It wiU
in the birth not be out it is partly
in this account Assmann's
of place modified13:
here
although
[When he opened he unfolded When I rose
for] me
the door-leaves of [it]s horizon
of heaven for me.
the gates to heaven
as a divine image
falcon
<I ?> saw his secret And I worshipped
in heaven. (...)
his majesty
I beheld
the transformations
of Akhti
on his secret ways
in heaven.
9 10
11
Urk. IV, 157.14-17; cf. Vermis, in: BSEG 19, 1995, 72. Vermis, in: BSEG 19, 1995, 72-77, concentrates on this situation.
Vermis, op.cit., 73-74; see as well the analysis of Romer, Gottesund Priester-Herrschaft, 1994, 144-52.
Vernus, 19, 1995, 74 and note 27. 13 J. Assmann, Death and Initiation in the Funerary Religion of Ancient Egypt, in:Yale Egyptology Studies 3, 1989,142, note 41. On page 149 of his study will be found additional data concerning the role of the priest with regard to the "innermost sanctuary of the god" (in heaven). Note that Thutmose III was "not this "initiation" yet" a hm-ntr priest (Urk. IV, 157.9) in the temple of Amun at Karnak. Undoubtedly, or "path" of Thutmose III, if Imay borrow Assman's terms, iswhat these passages describe.
12
in:BSEG
274 A. Spalinger
SAK 24
When Re himself established me Iwas distinguished with [his] crown[s o]n his head,
his uraeus [Iwas remaining with at [my forehead]. his akh-power, of the gods (i.e., became like Horus, mature) in the house furnished] with
acquainted when
the wisdom his body
he counted
of his father Amun-Re. This five-fold and his section as well as the following is explicit ones connected Thutmose with the placement of the full
titulary of Pharaoh theological-mythical their ruler has
concerning
Ill's nomination to his followers.
to be Pharaoh They respond
presentation indicated
of the past events that he has
in turn after struction specified Beginning. The with "Texte
In the speech of for his father Amun. own utterance that Amun's they indicate
set up offerings and erected new con in this case the smrw are the courtiers is like the word of Re at the First
de
la Jeunesse"
is no coronation
inscription
per
se; neither
is it concerned the divine
Thutmose
Ill's accession
to the throne. Rather,
it connected
at a later date
intervention Egypt.
of Amun
to his son and the election even though
or nomination
of the youth
to the throne of to events the series As Seipel of
Hatshepsut under
is not mentioned
there are two specific III and his stepmother;
references namely,
that occurred divine offerings
the joint rule of Thutmose in regnal year (Imn-wr-biw, Rouge15. This
established entrances Chapelle
15 as well Imn-dsr-fiw,
as the three doorways14. and Mn-hswt-hr-Imn) that a date within
first listed
revealed,
those
are also the second
on Hatshepsut's
ought
to imply
decade a
of the joint reign of Hatshepsut-Thutmose date after year 16 for this edifice demise16.
III is to be assumed.
In fact, C. Nims program was
preferred probably referred
and observed If we follow
that the decoration the list of monumental associated with
finished
after the queen's
undertakings Thutmose, of certainty, all, the Vlth
to in the "Texte de la Jeunesse", construction of Pylon VI17. One in this narrative "no earlier
the three doorways, can argue, I feel, with
precede
the
some degree After
that the list Pylon, can III,
of such buildings at least be placed
is arranged than year
chronologically.
24" of the then
independent
ruler, Thutmose
14 Urk. IV, 172.15ff. for the offerings; Urk. IV, 167. Iff. for the Chapelle Rouge and the doorways. 15 W. Seipel, Zur Chronologie der Verfemung Hatschepsuts durch Thutmosis III, in:Acts of the First ICE, Berlin 1979,581-82. 16 C. Nims, in:ZAS 93, 1966, 98; cf. Dorman, The Monuments of Senenmut, 1988, 49. 17 Urk. IV, 167.6-9 with 167.15ff.
275
according Thutmose
to Dorman18.
As
for the doorways, level scenes
why
not assume, Rouge with
owing his
to the presence stepmother
of
III in the upper
on the Chapel
and then the the
those of him alone, obvious: decoration death", From Jeunesse" as he was
that no poUcy Pharaoh
of aggrandizement
occurred.
Rather,
the king
is stating
so he constructed registers
the doors.
After
aU, did he not complete after Hatshepsut's
of the uppermost to quote Dorman internal criteria,
on this monument,
"presumably
once more19? then, Thutmose to his second Ill's activities or somewhat as recounted later. in the "Texte de la
can be placed
decade
(I am ignoring
the date of
the prodigy inKarnak itself.) This time frame fits weU with what we know of his position
with the Egyptian dates state at this time. After often Hatshepsut's famous Punt expedition in regnal often been year 9, official include both Pharaohs, some of them with Hatshepsut and since occurring that date first more others have
than not. Redford
assembled
in 1967
discovered20.By year 11 one meets the surprising Sinai Stela (JdE 38546) that presents the
queen, whom herself. her majordomo the date One year Senenmut, That and princess Neferrure, who is now god's wife and under is inscribed21. it to say, the regnal year in Lower Nubia, is not connected to Hatshepsut the queen against the
later, at Tangur West recorded
both Pharaohs III saiUng stelae date
are listed; southwards years
is first but the campaign foe, specificaUy of both queen (the before
there refers to Thutmose Two further Sinai equaUty
the land of Kush22. second her appears
to regnal
16 and 20 the
to reflect a graffito
between
the two rulers, (year 20,
the first Usts to Hatshepsut of Thutmose
stepson);
at the Step Pyramid
referring
and Thutmose appears alone
III in that order) in the graffito
also does
the same23. Moreover, viceroy
the name
III
at Tombos
of an unknown
(Amun-em-nahku/Inebny?)
18 19 20
Dorman, The Monuments of Senenmut, 1988, 64. For the decoration and its connection to Hatshepsut
98-99; Dorman's statement will be found op.cit., 51.
and Thutmose
III, see Nims,
in: ZAS 93, 1966,
Eighteenth Dyn., 86 with note 143; add the data presented by Murnane, Ancient Egyptian Coregencies, 1977, 37(g), 38(i); and F. Hintze/F. Reineke, Felsinschriften aus dem sudanesischen Nubien I, Berlin 1989, 38 (No. 64: year 16 of Thutmose III); 90 (No. 365: year 18 of Thutmose III); 172 (No. 562: year 12 of Hatshepsut and Thutmose III in that order; see the following remarks). On can add here the year 18 inscription of Thutmose II: J. von Beckerath, Chronologie des agyptischen Redford, Neuen Reiches, HAB 39, 1994, 111 (with Krauss' earlier analysis inmind). The throne name of the Pharaoh was added over the original one of Hatshepsut which had, of course, been erased by the command of Thutmose III.
21 22 23
Redford, Eighteenth Dyn., 55-56 andMurnane, Ancient Egyptian Coregencies, 1977, 37-38 (h). F. Reineke, in:Fs Hintze, 369-76 = Hintze/Reineke, Felsinschriften aus den sudanischen Nubien I, 172 (No. 562). The references are listed inRedford's study listed above in note 20.
for year 20 and in the wiU of Senimose, is written. Bahri prayer Armant performed evidence Additional references with
dated
one year by Murnane
later, only refer
the name
of Thutmose year
III
enumerated Thutmose One can
to the king:
10 (Deir el stela, with a
ostracon, mentioning Stela
stamped
Ill's cartouche)
and year
13 (Sinai
the queen)24. as other
add here Redford's of the king that
analysis indicate
of Thutmose the major role
Ill's he
as weU
inscriptions
in foreign miUtary of the ChapeUe
activities the during the later years of Hatshepsut25. FinaUy, the outer scenes and inscriptions in particular reveals Rouge was aUve. Owing to this data, of the role of the their joint rule.
him to be frequently king was not
included whUe Hatshepsut to the queen second
at aU subservient during the entire of
in the last half-decade
Furthermore, III there is no
decade status of
of the joint reign of Hatshepsut-Thutmose the junior of the series partner. of Indeed, as Murnane el Bahri just Usted to the con a career in
indication even
a lowly
observed, connected it appears
Thutmose
occurs
at one
end
reUefs
at Deir
to the Punt expedition26. impossible to argue
To put it another way, shunted
considering away
the sources Quite upon
that Hatshepsut
her stepson. embarking
trary, he was the army.
in the midst
of the capital, 12 he was
at Karnak inNubia
itself, before with
If in regnal year Pharaoh de
already
the Egyptian early
army,
then we must princes. bsi is
see the young In the "Texte
as pursuing
the standard
or traditional
career inducted
of crown
la Jeunesse"
he states
that he had not yet been
(the verb
employed)27 into the office of "HighPriest" when those prodigious events took place during
which he was elected to be Pharaoh28. How then can we assume any attempt on the part of
the queen to disposess the boy from the throne of Egypt or to remove him from the hub of
activity within the state when he was intimately connected stress with the godhead of the Egypt, immersed rising I find regnal 24 25 in the theology of the day with its growing on the solar cult, and eventuaUy his stepmother, (between
to prominence it difficult years
at Karnak? Whatever
to argue a poUtical 7 and 12) by Hatshepsut.
his later feeUngs were concerning removal of the king for at most five
years
The references are also to be found in note 20. Redford, Eighteenth Dyn., 62; cf. as well L. Stork, Die Nashorner, 1977, 241-96. 26 Murnane, Ancient Egyptian Coregencies, 1977, 37. Indeed, it is not overly speculative to maintain that Thutmose III owed farmore to his stepmother than to his father, Thutmose II, who after all ruled for a short period of time. See, for example, his accession and her regency. The emphasis placed by Hatshepsut as well as Thutmose III on Thutmose I cannot be overlooked. The use of this verb has been discussed by me in: SAK 22, 1995, 276, note 23; add now Redford, in: PA 9, 1995, 164. 28 The passage may remind some of the role that queen Ahmose-Nofretary played in the hierarchy of Karnak; namely, the Second High Priest of Amun. See most recently B. Menu andM. Gitton's contre temps in:BIFAO 76, 1976, 65-89, 77, 1977, 89-100, 78, 1978, 327-31. 27
277
The question of the date of themiracles at Karnak solely recognized by Thutmose III
remains the queen position to be elucidated. is not mentioned Unfortunately, one is only we enter the realm of speculation the references upon at this point. As as weU as his left with to his youth
at Karnak.
Remembering it is not surprising
that the text is a reflection that his own some deeds
the past by the then sole monumental be placed construc within the after if
ruler Thutmose, tions)
(donations, can definitely
are recorded.
Furthermore, earUer
of the activities although
joint reign as noted the death of his
in this discussion Are we
others may
reasonably
be dated
stepmother.
deaUng with
a divine
nomination
that was itmay
approved be,
not "stage-managed"
by the queen herself29? Does
this account,
late though
imply
official acknowledgment of the heir to the throne?Considering his importance by year 12

and onwards kingship, did the prodigies to enhance at the main the (future) cult center of the land, intimately In an old appears the death connected interpretation in to serve role of the junior partner? Thutmose regent II now upon reflects
they occurred cumbent. Thutmose Since
in the reign of Thutmose queen Hatshepsut likely
I although
the probable
seems
to have been
of her spouse, recognition if only owing
II, it is most
that the "Texte de la Jeunesse" his claim was wife. time frame
an official
of the Pharaoh to his youth While
to be at a time during which from a secondary
not aU that secure,
and descent
adhering
to the present
chronological of what wise
I feel
that Thutmose
Ill's words stress on
are not a fiction divine namely, shown pective, NaturaUy portance quite nomination
but rather a reiteration fits with Dorman's
had occurred concerning
earUer.
In fact, his
remarks
the date
of the inscription; with the hostiUty a retros to Amun.
that it is not a late one by him appears god towards his
(ca. year 42 or later) nor one connected On the contrary, this narrative,
stepmother30. with the king's as poUtics
though deeds
concerned and king
nomination
and early beneficial
as weU placed had
is the emphasis of which
are intertwined. and theology But of equal im are his later deeds, Thutmose III on his career. Absent by repercussions for the Amun temple; e.g., his wars in
a number
strong
Asia and the booty brought back toAmun; his festal temple (begun in year 24)31.Hence, I
29
On this situation, note the comments of Redford, Eighteenth Dyn., 74-76 with the later (more interpre tative) ones: Pharaonic King-Lists, Annals and Day Books, 1986, 168-69. 30 Dorman, The Monuments of Senenmut, 1988, 46-65 (Chapter III) provides the necessary data. 31 This is well known from Urk. IV, 833-38; for a most recent translation of the inscription: J. von MDAIK 37, 1981,41-49 and the queries ofW. Helck on the lunar date, in:GM 69, 1983, Beckerath, in: 40-42. For the date of Thutmose Ill's Festival Temple Inscription (A. Gardiner, in: JEA 38, 1952, 6-23 and Urk. IV, 1251-75) see our comments below. However, note that Gardiner had earlier seen the correct solution in: JEA 31, 1945, 16, a position that he later retracted on page 9 of the editio princeps. W.J. Murnane, in: MDAIK 37, 1981, 373 and note 29, is somewhat unfair with Gardiner.
278 A. Spalinger
SAK 24
feel that the text mentions the divine nomination
those characteristics
which
needed
emphasizing religious
if not confirming: to Karnak; to predicate regarding hypotheses. III a the
of Thutmose shown
III to be king; By
his early large,
connections ought
and his beneficence date not too
to the temple. and,
and
such aspects
late in his
reign,
in essence,
the conclusions
of Dorman fit my
architectural One can
and epigraphic bring into
implications
of the "Texte de la Jeunesse" the lengthy Dated inscription to year regnal
the discussion
at this point
of Thutmose 24 the
describing mentions vides
the preparations earlier offerings
for his Festival that the king narrative
Temple.
inscription and so pro can be III
established of divine
in his nomination;
seventh
year
a parallel
to the king's
i.e., both accession
inscriptions
placed within as sole Pharaoh Dating Hatshepsut's standing he wished lost stress
a time frame and both
not that far removed refer to donations within
from
the (second)
of Thutmose
set up at Karnak the first decade the purport was
during
the king's Ill's
early years32. sole rule after its out
the "Texte de la Jeunesse" death allows
of Thutmose
us to understand nomination. this. The the king's Thutmose causes stress
of the inscription; of Egypt events
namely,
on divine
the Pharaoh
and, apparently, in Karnak of Amun are must
to emphasize
of the first series on his nomination
of divine by
to us; nevertheless,
the agency
indicate that some difficulty or difficulties were associated with his claim. After all, not being directly descended from Hatshepsut did pose a problem; equally, he extreme youth
had the to be considered throne of Egypt. III was alone since his father, Thutmose Indeed, the latter did not in a lengthy for his right II, likewise rule very was not old when twenty he came odd to long. After years
Thutmose record But
but this time, as proof
retrospective, to rule.
he singled
out that earlier
of godly
intervention flavor
the literary
orientation Amun have copy been
of Thutmose Ill's nomination in the first half and especially the section to be brought into discussion. inscription Fortunately,
inscription, dealing we with
as well
as its religious omina of
the sudden
have I, year Berlin
at our fingertips 3) that appears
a handy to have (P. Berlin that can,
of an early Xllth employed
Dynasty
(time: Sesostris to the well-known
as a quarry. doubts dismissed
I am referring
3029)33. I feel,
Although be easily
have been presented concerning the series of parallels between
Leather Roll its redaction queries that text and
the nomination
32 33
For this phase of the inscription, see Gardiner, in: JEA 38, 1952, 12 and note 5. The latest edition of this text is that of Osing, referred to in note 7 above. An up-to-date bibliography of the previous scholarship is provided as well as a fresh and improved translation. Useful as well is short study, Politik zwischen Ritual und Dogma, in: Stein und Zeit, 1991, 253-55, a study originally published in: Saeculum 35, 1984, 109-111. Most recently, two useful although brief analyses of this work can be found in the detailed volume of Ancient Egyptian Literature, History and Forms: Baines, op.cit., 162; and Loprieno, op.cit., 286. Assmann's
279
inscription Leeuwenburg Thutmose's a fifth
of Thutmose
HI are extremely a number
striking.
It is to the credit between cases
of de Buck Sesostris
and his pupil and
that quite were pointed
of concurrences four useful
I's account
out34. In particular,
of coincidence were
can be found; brought forward Leather to is
is close
to Hatshepsut who, contrary
at Speos Artemidos. to most scholarly XVIII,
Additional opinion,
paraUels
by Derchain Roll
preferred
to see
the BerUn
as an original Moreover,
text of Dynasty
a conclusion Ill's
that seems
extremely
difficult purpose
maintain35. prominent, The extremely history37. distinctive their
just as in Thutmose has seen36. Thutmose and
inscription,
the idea of divine
as Assmann
connection
between
HI and Sesostris book since was
I was
earUer noted with
by Redford concepts
in his of a
weU-researched There
thoughtful that ever
concerned the reign
the Egyptian
is Uttle doubt
of Amunhotep inteUectuaUy Leather
I, if not earUer, in this case, with RoU
trait of those warrior monarchs ancestors additional of a bygone piece
to forge a Unk, use with
successful
age. The
of the BerUn regard
by can be III
marshaled
as one
of evidence
to this pursuit38.
Thutmose
34
in:The Building Inscription of the Berlin Leather Roll, in: Studia Aegyptiaca A. de Buck/Leeuwenburg, see De Buck's comments on page 54 (note 6), 55 (notes 22 and 26), 56 (note 31), and 1,1938,48-57; 57 (note 43). 35 These parallels are listed in:RdE 43, 1992,46-47. C. Eyre, in:Ancient Egyptian Literature, History and
Forms, 1996,417-18, appears to accept the revisionist dating of Derchain. He has useful comments con
36
cerning the reign of Thutmose III which to some degree parallel mine in this study. Assmann, in:Yale Egyptology Studies 3, 1989, 70. 37 1986, 168-73; see as well his subsequent Redford, Pharaonic King-Lists, Annals and Day Books, comments in: PA 9, 1995, 169-171. 38 In this case it is not too speculative to maintain that the stress on Re in the Sesostris I text could have been understood by Thutmose III who, in the middle of his third decade, began work on the Festival Temple to the east of theMiddle Kingdom complex at Karnak. Specifically, one can refer to the em
phasis upon the solar cult in the new edifice: in general, see Barguet, Temple d'Amon-Re, 191-98. The
proximity of the Festival Temple to that of Dynasty XII (and directly or indirectly) to Sesostris I cannot be overlooked, as point emphasized by Redford, King-Lists, Annals and Day Books, 1986, 170-71. Since there are parallels between the Sesostris I text and the inscriptions of Hatshepsut as well as Thut mose HI (conveniently, Derchain, in:RdE 43, 1992,46-47), this position has to be broadened to include The Leather Roll the roles of both monarchs, a position that Redford, among others, has argued. is to be dated to year 5 of Amunhotep II; see note 45 below and the accompanying text. Since itwas used from the treasury and the Sesostris I composition itself is a palimsest, perhaps
one can argue that at least one other hieratic copy was available, and the extant text was not the first to be written down in mid Dynasty XVIII; i.e., can the preserved building inscription be one among many? in: Ancient Egyptian Literature, History and Forms, 1996, 427, deals with the possibility that Eyre, various
"widely
papyrus versions of the Battle of Kadesh were circulating and concludes

'published'".
that this text was
himself way. found
appears For
to deal with important room
his noble depictions
predecessor
Sesostris
I at Karnak his
in more kings I refer
than one can be to those
instance,
of Thutmose of the Festival
III with HaU.
ancestor
in a small
to the southwest
In particular,
fragmentary depictions of Thutmose III and Sesostris III in a paviUon located on the outer waU of the rooms built by Hatshepsut; they are identical in layout and design, and the former
is the one which analysis39. Sesostris The The accompanies the nomination text of Thutmose, is probably of the original hitherto a copy scene covered in this of latter, located to the east end of the waU, blocks of an original
I by Thutmose
III; some fragmentary reads:
are stiU extant.
accompanying
inscription
[Year] after the 9th, IV prt day 24. A [king's] sitting took place [in the audience haU]; the
court and the [officials Now when Ufe forever. The scription Leather of the palace] ... setting, were ushered in order to ...] with his majesty, given
same Uterary of Thutmose
the so-caUed
Konigsnovelle, is virtuaUy identical
is present
in the nomination
in
III; the beginning us with
as weU. Moreover, commencement
the BerUn of hpr famswt
RoU also provides
the common
if stereotyped
as probably did Thutmose DI. The latter copy of an original Xllth Dynasty building inscrip
tion provides other words, concluding nonetheless, remaining dates us with the smrw officials are strong showed if only great as in Thutmose enough, interest Ill's text and srw ones for Habachi, ancestor. This as weU. In us the coincidences that Thutmose is simpUstic, on a level of bare as they were in his worthy to warrant conclusion, wlulst year
as it avoids One
the problem could
of inteUectual
causaUty
empiricism.
equaUy marshal inteUectual
the "odd" regnal connection, to the only system. one
of Thutmose not
III and Sesostris
I to reveal
a further
that is,
in fact, cases depicted
so empty
of spirit as has been regnal year
assumed. using
I am referring the "year after" 9 IV prt
two extant I, as
of a post
Old Kingdom
Sesostris
by Thutmose
III, provides In his Festival
the date of rnpt sp m-ht Temple Inscription The
sw 24 with
hpr famswt 23 tpy
[nswt] foUowing)40. Smw sw 2 (also Sesostris which
Thutmose exact dates
III has rnpt sp m-ht are the tenth regnal to be expected connection.
foUowed
by hpr famswt nswt!). of Thutmose Here, then,
year of in
I and the twenty-fourth they were written down.
III. Both
are not
in the eras
is a further mental
For Hatshepsut's connections to the emergence of a theological discourse (via eulogies) based upon Amun-Re I can refer to the brief comments of Assmann, Egyptian Solar Religion in the New Kingdom, 1995, 128, and Agypten. Theologie und Frommigkeit einer friihen Hochkultur, 1984, 228. 39 L. Habachi, in: Fs Mokhtar I, 1985, 349-59; the text was alluded to in Aspects of theMilitary Docu ments of the Ancient Egyptians, 105 with note 17. 40 Habachi, op.cit., 353 and 354 note h. See references to the Festival Inscription in note 31 above.
281
As divine occur, may may
for
the Berlin
Leather
Roll
itself,
the contents to be king.
stress, Terms
especially such as
in Section inpw, swht, A similar Then
II, the and outlook too, one to his ti
choice
and predestination provide
of Sesostris
all of which
an amorphous
development nomination themselves.
of the king-to-be41. inscription Although
be seen at the beginning lay warranted stress
of Thutmose's the dates
as well.
upon
Thutmose's is not:
report
courtiers exactly Smw 4), mother's Pharaoh must death be
of an early divine two days before or virtually death42. would
selection
is undated,
his Festal exactly
Inscription 728 days
it took place (I step
his twenty-fifth
regnal year, second year
after his accession to his
at the end of his
as sole Pharaoh
subsequent
If the latter date be taken be
into consideration the Berlin
in his "third regnal the day given sole Pharaoh father, Amenemhet
year". On
(II prt 9 or 10), then the sole Leather Roll Sesostris who he came to the throne after the
is that upon which
of his
I: III iht 843. That
is to say,
the anniversary Kingdom in regnal
of his actual chronological years, sixty
accession, system
and thus the use of hci is significant. demanded that New Year's Day
Since
the Middle
(I iht 1) witnessed
a change
eight days had passed in the civil year before the royal sitting of Sesostris I took place; still,
we are in the third regnal year. The IV prt sw 24 copy of Sesostris drawn up in mid Dynasty to an event XVIII pre sents in the tenth regnal clear, then a new and year. If the latter refers after Amenemhet The connection (and also to such concepts
l's death,
as seems
and independent
reign had just begun. III previously Lastly,
of this text with some phrases
the scenes
inscriptions
of Thutmose close.
covered
of Hatshepsut)
is thereby made Roll
the more
one has but repetitive
to refer these
in the Berlin Leather and divine choice
such as the following copy outlook; and over
to see how affirms namely, again
of royalty with Atum
are. That XVIIIth the original refers over "nursed
the connection Heliopolis, to Sesostris
of the Pharaoh the sun cult, and as destined to be
his father, Harachty, in particular.
as befits
It furthermore
a "born conqueror",
"king by nature",
to be a conqueror",
and the like.
is discussed by J. Osing, Zu zwei literarischen Werken des Mittleren Reiches, in: Fs Iversen, 1992, 118-119. 42 With Helck, Manetho, 66,1 place the death of Hatshepsut in regnal year 22, II prt, sw 9 following the Armant Stela (Urk. IV, 1244.14). That inscription gives day 10, presumably the accession of Thutmose (at dawn: cf. Urk. IV, 855.14-896.8)
note 32.
41
This
situation
as sole Pharaoh once more; cf. Redford, Eighteenth Dyn.,
56 with
43
A. Gardiner, in: JEA 32, 1946, 100, realized the significance of the date; there are brief comments on the composition by Murnane, Ancient Egyptian Coregencies, 1977, 3, (e), 254-55. The Berlin Leather Roll clearly records a royal decree in the independent reign of Sesostris I: C. Obsomer, in:RdE 44, 1993, 103-140 (concerning the impossibility of a ten year coregency between Sesostris I and his father Amenemhet I) and Chapter I of his Sesostris I.
a "born conqueror", The cussion history
"king by nature",
"nursed
to be a conqueror", RoU factors ought have
and the like. to be brought too often been into the dis neglected in I's
and make-up
of the Berlin
Leather
at this point
if only as these more mundane the first was were to point on out
the Uterature. inscription deUveries, direction the script
Stern was at HeUopoUs,
that the main over
text, some
the copy notes
of Sesostris to wood
written erased; was
the recto
relating
most
of which
some of these were inverted the same dated in relation hand. On
later translated
by Erman44. even
The
of the report of Sesostris of both account although appears
to the earUer notes the verso wiU
though a partly
to be by
be found
preserved erased,
of a legal
difficulty, From
to the reign it is clear concerns
of Amunhotep
II; it too was is rnpt
only partiaUy.
the original
that the date a sculptor
on the verso named
sp 5 III iht sw
10 of Amunhotep
II, and the case
Ipw-m-R*45.
44
L. Stern, in:ZAS
12, 1878, 86; A. Erman/F. Krebs, Aus den Papyrus der Koniglichen Museen, Berlin 1899, 59-63, 87-89; andMoller, Palaographie II, 8. (I have simplified the use of the document to some degree.) Erman's account on page 87 must be altered somewhat. I have seen the original inBerlin and collated the verso owing to the kind offices of Drs. K.-H. Priese and I.Muller. Both Stern and Erman of the "indented" last lines of the Sesostris I text. For the reader's convenience clearly by means I refer to Tafel 9 (bottom)
were correct in their evaluation of the two texts on the recto. This can be seen most
inH. Goedicke, The Berlin Leather Roll (P Berlin 3029), in: Fs. Museum Berlin, 1975. Note as well H. W. Fischer-Elfert, Agyptische Handschriften 4, 1994, 50-51. 45 In addition to collating the verso I have seen Cerny's transcription as well as the original, which is in the Griffith Institute, Ashmolean Museum. Imust thank Dr. Malek for his kind assistance in allowing me to obtain a copy of the work. Cerny added the comment "lig." regarding the regnal year figure of 5, although he skipped over gr.kwi at the beginning of line 5. Erman also collated the verso for the files of the Wb., copies of which I have also consulted through the able support of Dr. Stefan Grunert. The text
reads:
"(1)Regnal year 5 thirdmonth of inundation day 10 under themajesty of the King of Upper and Lower Egypt ci-hprw-Rc the son of Re Amunhotep the godly one and ruler of Thebes who lives for ever and
ever. (2) What the sculptor lpw-m-Rc said: 'As for me, my son (hence read "My own son" as Erman
wished) Wsr-hit was sent... (3) and I (m.) was satisfied/silent' (gr.kwi). A (N. B.) woman said: 'Then he took everything'. And I (m.) gave the woman to him (??). (Cerny read rdi.i n.fti st whereas I saw rdit.i n.fti st. The passage is difficult as Erman saw. Is 'Then he took everything which I had given to him' possible? However, the ti st remains unresolved in this interpretation.) And I (5) said to him: 'Why have you acted thusly?'Then he said: '[I will] not... against you; [I]will not... your (m.) things. (6) So
long as the ruler endures, l.p.h., so long as the ruler endures, l.p.h., so long as Amun endures, so long
endures, I will never enter your house! (7) I will not seize/take (ph) your things!' Then the scupltor 'Ipw-m-R?gathered together (nwh) the ... (8) saying: 'You have heard the matters which my son did'. Then... peo[ple ??]... (9) her people (?)... his plea (mdt.f) in their presence. Then he said: 'The one ...'... (10) in front of the [witnesses/people ?] ... infront of Rc-m[s], (11) in front of Iwti, (12) infront
of Mn-hpr the son of the majordomo li-m-htp (13) Nn-wn-[ms ?]-... (14) ... (15) Imn-m-ipt the son of
as Amun
My...
(16) ... (17) Hiy
(18) Hwy
(19) ...".
283
treasury-directed The Leather RoU
affairs dated
around DI Smw 21 and concerns a variegated governmental If we history. First
official employed
matters
of deUveries.
thereby witnessed or ordinary matters - that of official for copying a monumental written before
for rather mundane it was then reused added on the of of pur
business
(deUveries)
inscription.
foUow Erman, I46. This
the legal case was is an exceUent leather. Once case
back
was
the text of Sesostris but, more
of reuse
material: Sesostris poses
not papyrus I was used
in this instance it lost
significantly,
the account
its importance
and so was At
reemployed
for governmental
of a more
expected
nature:
a legal conflict. away
this point
I cannot
fail to lay emphasis of wood RoU upon be it. it
on the text which and
was mainly
washed
(and so original);
namely,
the deUveries Leather written
the like organized
through
the treasury47. That before a copy
is to say,
the BerUn was
longed Hence, remains text was
to the state apparatus it was a moot placed relatively point easy
of Sesostris' officials avoid
inscription to obtain
for the governmental sold, I cannot
the roU. Although that the Sesostris been
if it had been
stressing accounts
the point rather
over a series
of mundane
bureaucratic
than having
the
46
Erman/Krebs, Aus den Papyrus der Koniglichen Museen, Berlin 1899, 59 and 87. This is one key reason why Derchain felt that the Sesostris I text was first written under Amunhotep II: in:RdE 43, 1992, 36. However,
the conclusion cannot be maintained since the text of Sesostris iswritten over an earlier one and, moreover, the account on the verso which is dated to Amunhotep II, is clearly a later one. 47 With regard to the treasury itself, Quirke has observed that some Saqqara papyri of the middle Period are also associated with treasury officials, in:Ancient Egyptian Literature, History and Forms, 391 and 396 (for the Third Intermediate Period). A notable example is P. Sallier III: Kitchen, Ram. Inscr. (= KRI) II, 101.11-14. That composition, the "Poem" of the battle of Kadesh, provides in more than one way a useful parallel to the Berlin Leather Roll. At the minimum, note the use of textual breaks, albeit inconsistently, through the preposition r (instead of "verse points" as in the Berlin copy): Ramesside Kuentz, Bataille de Qadesh, 204 (to line 4 of P. Raife). As I do not wish to overburden this note with details, letme state that P. Sallier III + P. Raife provide enough internal evidence to indicate that the hieratic composition was not copied from temple walls. That the text was considered to be a literary work can be seen from the colophon: KRI II, 101.11-14, especially the (restored but certain) iw.spw nfr m fatpwith Loprieno, in:Ancient Egyptian Literature, History and Forms, 1996, 42. However, Von derWay's argument that the date of P. Sallier III + P. Raife must be year 9 of Ramesses II is not at all secure: Die Textiiberlieferung Ramses' II. zur QadeS-Schlacht, HAB 22, 1984, 39-43. The problems of textual composition of the hieratic versions of the Battle of Kadesh will be discussed at a later date, but for the moment I can mention the alterations of grammar, the palaeography, the spelling of the king's name (Rc-ms-sw, not Rc-mss), frequent cases of homoeoteleuton indicating a hieratic Voriage, the colophon without "under",hr, in "under the majesty of, the "misplacement" of the Menna episode, and the missing first word of the colophon itself. Let us not forget that the detailed account of the seige and capture of Megiddo was kept on a leather roll in the temple of Amun: Urk. IV, 661.14-662.6. by Thutmose Ill's army
284 A. Spalinger
SAK 24
first one some Kamose
to be written48. the history directly
That
is to say, the building Tablet
inscription which
itself appears
to resemble of
to
degree Stela
of the Carnarvon
contains
the opening
the first
copied
from the text itself at Karnak49.
If this Thutmose
re-accession additional Thutmose's, made events version, clues was
III inscription can be seen to have been inspired by the king's

an earlier nomination That text, quite inscription similar of Hatshepsut provides to its genesis. in nature comments and phraseology worth noting were of miraculous
to the throne of Egypt, concerning
first described In both with Amun at Deir royal
in detail cases
by Sethe; the king
additional
by Redford50. connected located
or queen witnessed Even the woeful was
a series
in his Karnak indicates
temple. that when
state of Hatshepsut's standing in Karnak a
el Bahri,
the queen
series of omina of Thutmose borrowing
took place. The parallels III are so strong
between ought
this inscription not to hesitate
and that of the nomination in assuming some type of reworked of Thutmose to some a version that rather that divine their literary
that one
by the latter from
the former. Even
though Thutmose the purported
III subsequently nomination
this narrative through recarving and rewriting, clearly I even his accession date is noted! is not original useful literary passages nomination his from the Berlin Leather recorded Roll,
to him. Therefore, Thutmose
in addition
III had at his hand reign. and I suspect so copy
of a divine than
that was agents
under his stepmother's terrace temple
employing
to go simply
to Hatshepsut's ordered his
nomination models51. It is also nomination. 48
text, Thutmose
intellectuals
or scribes
to search
interesting On the Vllth
to observe pylon
Thutmose he had carved
Ill's
second
and chronological long account
report
of his
a relatively
of his economic
For the related problem of the cost of papyrus and its reuse, see most recently J. Janssen, in:DE 9, 1987, M. Bierbrier (ed.), 33-35, referring to Caminos' study in "Some Comments on theReuse of Papyrus", in: Structure and Usage, 1986. Papyrus: 49 Most recently, I can refer to Quirke's useful comments in:Ancient Egyptian Literature, History and Forms, 1996, 265 and 381. The Carnarvon Tablet was standing in the temple of Karnak when itwas copied, after the beginning of the stela was altered through the superimposition of "Year 3". 50 K. Sethe, Das Hatschepsut-Problem, APAW, 1932.4, 77-81, following the edition of Naville, Deir el Bahari VI, Pis. CLVI-CLVII. The preserved date of rnpt sp 1 Ibd 3 prt is to be restored with [sw 21]: W. Helck, in: Studia Biblica et Orientalia, 1959, 115. Note as well Redford's partial translation in his Eighteenth Dyn., 75-76 and the translation in note 89. There are only brief bibliographic references listed by Romer, Gottes- und Priester-Herrschaft inAgypten, 1994, 478, note 2. 51 The existence of an already utilized leather roll in the state archive (treasury) may very well imply that there was at least one other copy of the Sesostris I inscription in circulation. After all, it is remarkable that the Berlin Leather Roll was not in pristine condition when the royal composition was written upon it. With Quirke, I see parallels with the Carnarvon Tablet (Kamose text) and the hieratic copies of the Battle of Kadesh.
285
donations
to the temple
of Amun,
and from
internal
criteria
it is easy
to date
the narration
to
a time after his eighth campaign of victory inAsia (regnal year 33)52.The beginning of the
king's prince report was takes place foretold under the reign of his father, Thutmose in terms again identical II. In particular, to that of her the young stepmother to be Pharaoh
Hatshepsut and his accession date is included (I Smw 4); the fragmentary first section deals
with his presence "next to" his father. This for Thutmose for his choice. Thutmose's of offerings. III narrates The more in Asia composition the past lengthy and is also presented as weU in the format as his wish of a Konigsnovelle his god, Amun, upon to the smrw portions to repay con and his divine
of this account, of new
however, feasts with
centrate
success
the estabUshment
multipUcation nomination decade of
In other words, After
the Pharaoh
is far less concerned is within took charge
than his other account. the king's reign, more
aU, the date of the composition after he alone
the fourth of Egypt. II but
than one decade upon his divine success After
Considerations now
less concentrated booty,
choice
and connection
to Thutmose program to reiterate
rather linked with war, greater
abroad,
and a new building Uttle need
apparently once more occasion. ChapeUe
loomed
than his earUer feelings. to Amun however, us with
aU, there was prose
his rightful
connection
in such lengthy that we have
as he did on one previous to grips for that queen's
It is with Hatshepsut, Rouge inscription provides
to come
the clearest
and most
of the divine in royal election53. Throughout the inscription can be found which and phraseology part terminology identical expected to Thutmose marvels, Ill's lengthly narrative of divine
lengthy though
account
of the intervention only places of un of in
it is preserved and The in some series
are similar nomination54.
at least one of which
did not occur
at the expected
place
(the "stations
the king" in block 222), are frequent in the account. Two blocks (nos. 287 and 54) often
have been discussed in this context55. performed specificaUy The latter passage instead relates how Amun, of the king's now foUowing palace. the "Route of Offerings" his omina indicate at the gates Blocks
109 and 72, however, ordered relates
that Hatshepsut block 287,
was perhaps
Pharaoh
and Amun of aU,
her to the "stations of the king"; however the prediction of Hatshepsut to be Pharaoh
the most
famous
in the second
regnal
year of an unnamed
52 53 54
Urk. IY, 178-191.4; see the recent comments of C. Cannuyer, Presented toMiriam Lichtheim I, 1990, 105-109.
in: S. Groll,
(ed.), Studies
inEgyptology
Lacau/Chevrier, Hatshepsout I, 92-153. These coincidences are remarked upon by Lacau and Chevrier in their editio princeps. 55 See Romer, Gottes- und Priester-Herrschaft inAgyptens, 1994, 142-52 and his brief study in:GM 99, 1987,31-34.
286 A. Spalinger
SAK 24
king56. kingship
In that brief to the queen
section
the narrator mentions out the one to the second The
multiple
prodigies
which
predicted
the
and singles
that took place
on the twenty-ninth of Sekhmet. was rendered
day of the Amun acted a god
sixth civil month, in some temple untold
corresponding way during
day of the Litanies auspicious or, rather, occasion the filial
his festival.
at Opet,
specifically
connected
to kingship
connection
of father
was the date itself- virtually at the end of (Amun) and his son (the Pharaoh)57. Noteworthy one half-year the more open area of the broad court of Luxor58. and the specific location,
A further broken portion of the Chapelle Rouge inscription (block 54) covers additional
similar At rather events, apparently directed by the goddess Rouge Mut to the queen. the association (see pages with the sun god Re above and the least one section than Amun as, of the Chapelle in fact, presents III later
did Thutmose
273-274
translation
of Assmann).
Nevertheless historical
this portion
of the account
must
be seen
in a different description birth cycle is not of as the can
light than the explicit the "titulary-fixing", well, has to be
observations.
In similar manner,
the detailed divine
which
can be seen side when and queen Pharaohs
in the legend
of Hatshepsut's
laid to one god
examining (or king
the account. What Thutmose birth
is important
connection
between
as with
III); this interrelation in Dynasty XVIII we
occur whenever reiterating ground;
and wherever. beliefs
can claim
divine
by simply
age-old namely,
and stories. With reference
Hatshepsut to specific
and her stepson places and times.
are on another legend
the wholesale
In the birth
56
in:Kemi 18, 1968, 85-91; see as well Cannuyer, Studies M. Lichtheim, 109-115, who opts for regnal year 2 of Thutmosis I as the date of the major auspicious event that took place on day 29 of the sixth civil month. 57 Inter alia, see L. Bell, in: JNES 44, 1985, 251-94 and WJ. Murnane, s.v. Opet, in: LA IV, 574-79, (the best analysis in English) with his more general analysis in: Les dossiers. Histoire et archeologie 101, January 1986, 22-25; add now the pertinent comments of D. O'Connor, in: O'Connor /Silverman, Ancient Egyptian Kingship, PA 9, 1995, 276-78 and 282. P. Pamminger, in: Beitrage zur Sudan forschung 5, 1992, 93-140, is surprisingly not informative on this issue. 58 On the assumed public access for inscriptions and reliefs within temples, the recent analysis of Vemus, Essai sur la conscience de rhistoire dans l'Egypte pharaonique, 1995, 164 with note 695 (arguing against E. Bleiberg, in:BES 7, 1985/86, 5-15), neatly covers the situation. in J. Assmann/T. Sundermeier (eds.), Here, I can refer to J. Assmann, Das agyptische Prozessionfest, J.Yoyotte, Das Fest und das Heilige, 1991,105-22. In that succinct analysis the author has pointed out themundane nature of "ordinary" religious events in contrast to the extremely visible performances of bark festivals: "Es sind die Jahresfeste, die im ausgepragten Gegensatz zum sakralen Alltag stehen". I believe that the significance of the visible-hidden in religion is connected to the actual events themselves rather than where, precisely, they were depicted/recorded. Of course, the latter point is not to be ignored; however, one should not overly rely upon architectural locations at the expense of the actual rite itself. '
287
cycle,
for example,
all takes place
in a mythological various birth deities
(or at least surround
"godly") the queen;
setting59. The her titulary
scene is not for
is the hoary ratified within Amun. Of
shrine of Heliopolis; a temple with
humans watching
but instead
promulgated Year's Day had
via Thoth, of Thoth a regnal day
acting
Emphatically, neither
the time Hatshepsut
is said to be the ancient New nor any New Kingdom reckoned birth
1,1 iht I60. year system day. side I dis ...,
course,
Pharaoh from
based
on this anniversary; to say, such
she and the others texts
accession must
to accession to one
Needless when agree
as Hatshepsut's or creative
account
be placed At
examining with
the independent who with
aspect
of these
inscriptions. cycle
this point
Assmann
maintains
that the queen's dogma, stresses
"pictorial of
of divine
birth
although sense point. with
in keeping
the classical
the aspect original
'Heilswende' intellectual
in the same thought at this
as pWestcar"61. Specifically, I iht 1 (twice:
That
is to say, I do not recognize (in scholarly
it is oft-repeated see Urk. Kingdom.
literature) ought
that the queen's to predicate to Karnak
commencement a viewpoint older
IV, 261.8-9 The voyage
and 262.7-8) to Heliopolis
than that of the New similarly Hatshepsut (palace, monarchs (posterior considered is at variance places us
and not
(or even Luxor) accounts of both
in an environment III. The
at odds with
the aforementioned historical So too settings is it with whether
and Thutmose quay), in Karnak
avoidance has
of familiar
such at Thebes the dates. it be Both
or Luxor,
to be noticed. of divine the birth
recorded
a specific
occurrence In other words,
selection, cycle
predicted has to be set up or god III
act) or actualized. from a different
text of Hatshepsut setting;
viewpoint.
There
is no Konigsnovelle
the entire to the gods
to a royal speech. The queen does not state her munificence to the throne of Egypt. In fact, a late Dynasty XII
as a recompense
text of Amenemhet
can be brought forward as a likely Vorlage toHatshepsut's lengthy Deir el Bahri birth and
accession (often called "coronation") cycle62.
59
I therefore diverge with Assmann's analysis at this point: Yale Egyptology Studies 3, 1989, 71. Redford, in:PA 9, 1995, 174, has the same orientation as mine. Gardiner was the first to note Middle Kingdom antecedents for Hatshepsut's "Coronation": BAR II, 95 and note c. See H. AltenmiiUer, Zu Isis und Osiris, in: Wege offhen. Festschrift fur R. Gundlach, AUAT 35, 1996, 1-17, for new Old Kingdom
evidence.
60
The calendrical implications of this date have been misunderstood Eighteenth Dyn., 54-56.
by many Egyptologists;
cf. Redford,
For the date itself: A. Spalinger, in: SAK 17, 1990, 289-94; W. Helck, in: Or Ant 8, 1969, 295 with Geschichte, 154; Redford, Pharaonic King-Lists, Annals andDay Books, 1986, 168; and von Beckerath, Chronologie des agyptischen Neuen Reiches, HAB 39, 1994, 43 with note 233. 61 Assmann, in:Yale Egyptology Studies 3, 1989, 71. 62 The references are located in note 60 above; specifically, see Berl. Inschriften I, 1913, 138.
288 A. Spalinger
SAK 24
In order dependence specifically Hatshepsut deities Westcar. About point
to make
my
point
as clear with
as possible, regard some
let me
reiterate
my
parameters
of
in are
or literary set
creativity
to the texts of divine notable insertions
nomination. into
They
in time and
space. With age-old
the account,
both of
and Thutmose find,
HI eschew
settings; devoted by
there is no intervention to divine
of a series
as we
for example, the narrative seen
in the program is presented
birth or even is viewing
in Papyrus the past.
Moreover, Thutmose
the then ruler who texts can,
HI we have
that two separate facts. Such
in fact, be dated at Deir
to a specific regard are The of that
in time owing
to their internal
is not the case
el Bahri with Scenes, the other
to Hatshepsut's not associated
birth and subsequent with the divine differs archaic, choice; in both hoary,
accession
to the throne of Egypt. and parcel and of
in fact, cycle. accounts in a style
they are part narratives: purposely Then
language, Hatshepsut's was
of course, are clearly
the birth elevated, too, one
"coronation"
and even written can add
outmoded
at the time of between
its carving.
the relatively birth cycles;
minor such Granted the is
differences
that occur
Hatshepsut and Thutmose
and Amunhotep Ill's retrospectives of grammar;
Ill's divine
not the case with Hatshepsut that there is a similarity communality
on their kingship63. however, close.
of phraseology
and even
notwithstanding
of vocabulary,
their nomination (or god) play specific where
texts are not very roles Amun
It is true that the gods divine prodigies. no rupture more nomination The we
in all of these narratives. manifests himself
But with
the
are
in a world
through
various there is
birth cycle,
on the other hand, by the divine. accounts in no way For
is totally mythological this reason For a concentration
or miraculous;
of the human
on the considerably the of the of
historically-oriented of which words was
is necessary. arcane
it is in these
language recherche
and outmoded is given. Clearly,
or pseudo-intellectual constructions that a purportedly of these was chosen texts is clear;
literary compositions, note the absence sober namely, chronicle to give by proof
ruling monarch the designated god Amun. witnesses the royal
the purpose
king's right This was
to rule as he/she done
at some occasion king
time
in the past by the chief of them) with is the key, than but that
furthermore intimacy is quite birth cycle
on a specific between written
(or a series
present.
The
or linkage a different
and god naturally intellectual
nomination
and
presentation
offered
by the divine
of Hatshepsut.
Indeed,
it is significant story,
that the latter has as nomination
one of its literary patterns does not.
in the Cheops
and the Magicians
that of divine
63
In general, Brunner, Geburt des Gottkonigs2,
1986.
289
One must different
look
for the causes thought. before
in the historical It is here, delving
presentations
of divine
nomination
in a
realm of Egyptian to be considered
I feel,
that the role of Amun
and his Karnak in early
temple have XVIIIth XVIIth
deeper the rise
into the role of the inteUectual to power of Thebes Amun played, during
Dynasty Dynasty
history. Most
certainly,
the outgoing
had led to the great role which with the kingship64. One
the godhead
and that part was to Amun's of "Victorious
intimately importance Thebes", Feast of
associated as weU recently
NaturaUy, can mention
there were
antecedents
as that of Thebes.
the earUer position
brought
the VaUey as befits
Kingdom
into Ught by Franke65. In a similar fashion the visual display of the sources of the New at Thebes weU recorded in contemporary itself - can be traced back to the Middle its high religious importance King itself depicts the first the return of the victorious did upon as befitted at Karnak readily ruler to his capital setting amidst of
dom. The Kamose much cheering.
Stela Perhaps
thing that the Pharaoh the Karnak later went temple
foot at the quay
his capital was,
auspiciously,
to enter
his reUgious to inquire apparent
impetus66. (through that Kamose an
For just as Thutmose oracle) what would
IV some centuries occur if he were
to Amun
to go to Nubia, against
it seems
did the same before successor, Ahmose,
embarking
northward
his Hyksos
foe67. In the reign of Kamose's the temple precinct of Karnak
a grand and solemn
affair occurred within
solely concerned with the sale of the office of Second High Priest of Amun which was held
by the king's wife Ahmose-Nofretari68. by Amun, example appears Given arises stressed represented serves impossible the obvious In this case the specific juridical role was determined in this case by his temple priesthood as the god himself. If any interconnections of the day in fact, it does. the real difficulty by the god. As new as well
to witness
the theological-poUtical to separate the two sides - this legal account developments of the theology associated of historical the scholar
with Amun, intervention with
concerning above,
the origins with these
of the presentation nomination texts
is faced
a seemingly
64
D. Franke, in:ZAS 117, 1990, 124-26. In particular, see lines 33-34 of the Second Stela: L. Habachi, The Second Stela of Kamose, ADAIK 8, 1972, 42-44 and H.S. Smith/A. Smith, in:ZAS 103, 1976, 61. 67 in Agypten, Romer, Gottes- und Priester-Herrschaft 1994, 140, for an all-too-brief analysis; cf. J. Yoyotte/J. Lopez, in:BiOr 26, 1969, 5, for a useful study of the military arrangements of the Pharaoh. 68 The most recent analyses are:M. Gitton, in:BIFAO 76, 1976, 65-89 and in: BIFAO 79, 1979, 327-31; and B. Menu, in:BIFAO 77,1977, 89-100.1 have devoted some attention to this inscription in a forth coming study entitled, "Sovereignty and Theology inNew Kingdom Egypt: Some Cases of Tradition". 66
65
For the moment I can refer to Redford, in: PA 9, 1995, 159-72 and his earlier studies of Pharaonic 1986, 165-88; Eighteenth Dyn., 70-87. For the religious develop King-Lists, Annals and Day-Books, ment of the cult of Re at this time I can do no better than cite Assmann's monumental Egyptian Solar Religion in the New Kingdom, 1995, passim, especially Chapter 4.
presentation from
of divine-royal Kingdom
interaction. is extant. This
Unlike
the birth
cycle
presentation by both
no precedent the ever in and to an
the Middle
probably
can be explained
creasing
importance
of Karnak
at the time as weU in the Middle of Dynasty
as the lack of any centraUy-located Kingdom. XVIII, one A new tradition seems
theologicaUy-driven have extant been forged
cult of the capital in the opening century
that had
to rely upon
Uterary
format The
for its narrative
setting diffuse
and courtiers. allow After
latter format was of specific as the Stela
of king and dramatic verbal interconnection to is a better word enough perhaps general ("worldly") elements such as time and place. bear witness on a leather as I have to the role;
the introduction aU, such texts
mundane of Rahotep
or that of Neferhotep inscription,
preservation the interplay
of the format of Sesostris between king and miUtary
I's building men
later copied XI,
can be seen by Dynasty here
stressed texts poUcy the work or the to
earUer in the discussion69. lacked a series of dates, from the throne on was itself:
One main simply only
difference
is that these earUer Konigsnovelle the enunciation to time was (and possibly through of Pharaonic as
because
they dealt with reference
the opening
necessary foUowed prodigies
embarked acclamation). actual Pharaoh The date
preceded
by the announcement of divine was
by discussion it was not
But with of the royal the nexus
the aspect
intervention crucial.
sitting which through which
was
the divine
of god the actual revelation Rather, - were acts not the king's accompUshed. is therefore not that refined a designation
somewhat
overused although
term Konigsnovelle it is hard
for such presentations are too clumsy
to find another; These What
"royal audience" divine nomination
or "royal sitting" texts are the re bet time of ex soUdly earUer that
to employ and vague
as a designation70. format or matrix.
working ween occurs stressing pands placed method
of a broad king and
was
developed in which
is not a dialogue a progression over
and X but rather a historicaUy-based specific dramatic right events take place.
account
In other words, theologicaUy and which
owing
to the necessity the presentation time The
the king's to include within
to be on the throne, which be was
speaking,
past
events
can be dated it Luxor, Karnak, a brief
are at the same at Thebes.
an environment,
or other places setting
of the Konigsnovelle
to provide
(time and place)
and foUow
69
For the Rahotep text, see most recently E. Blumenthal, in: Fs Hintze, 63- 80. There are some brief remarks on these pre-New Kingdom Konigsnovelle texts in: Spalinger, Aspects of theMilitary Docu ments of the Ancient Egyptians, 1983, 101-105. The Neferhotep Stela will be found in M. Pieper, Die inAbydos, 1929. Both are now available inHelck's edition, grosse Inschrift des Konigs Neferhotep Texte der 2. Zwischenzeit, 1975, 21-29 and 59-60. Historisch-Biographische Cf. Redford, in:PA 9, 1995, 159. Loprieno, in:Ancient Egyptian Literature, History and Forms, 1996, 277-95, retains the term but easily sees its inherent weaknesses. The Konigsnovelle was most certainly no ancient Egyptian genre.
70
291
up with parties. Assmann become
the enunciation By Hatshepsut in fact argued virulent in the New
of
the king's
plan
and,
if necessary, is present towards
the reaction figure,
of concerned the king-to-be. which will
and Thutmose that "there Kingdom",
III there is a nuance
a solitary
the individual pointed
aspect
and he significantly
out the role of Sesostris
I in the Berlin Leather Roll as well as themiraculous birth of the three kings to be in the
Papyrus Westcar All story in contrast remains to the later Dynasty upon XVIII accounts of course, addressing of divine but now birth and there is nomination71. dramatic emphasis True, the (future) monarch, remains that of the king
movement.
the backdrop
his court with
the concomitant series of official praise by his followers bestowed upon the thoughtful and
successful understood 287 monarch. what was But there is now drama and suspense. It was only Thutmose who occurring Rouge in Karnak; the god Amun religious selected events him. Likewise, the god Amun as block allowed
of the Chapelle to intervene
indicates,
at auspicious
himself
in the course
of history.
The heightened suspense is notmerely a product of the historical technique of specifying

time and place. he or she plays Ramesses there It is equally is quite dependent upon the solitary role of the king-to-be. ones of Thutmose This part that or First, different even from the oft-cited two cases III at Megiddo to each other.
II at Kadesh,
if these between
are not at all similar and another, nor
is no real conversation policy.
the protagonist
is there an enuncia individual who by
tion of differing him/herself lowly made status alone
Rather,
the king-to-be the prodigies.
is regarded One
as a solitary
can understand
can add at this point to kingship To put
of Thutmose
or even Hatshepsut; as unexpected exploited for
the predictions sudden.
the seemingly are purposely way, the
to read as if they were
as they were a literary medium two individuals
it another
authors of these compositions aims:

"proper".
for specific whose claims
theological-religious were not all that
the
affirmation
of kingship
What Added more affect
was
produced,
however,
was
no reiteration
of a long-employed a core which compositions. lays the future and
literary reveals
device. to be to
as a nested historically-based
box within
the later royal
sitting was
itself
than those
earlier Konigsnovelle ineffable, past located
The open.
events
unroll
the future monarch; the king
the god Amun,
In the present period
during which
is speaking
to the courtiers, that is not
is narrated,
in that earlier with
of time a future drop he/she or royal
is revealed,
but one
contemporaneously from the perspective
the back of the king: that
sitting. Moreover, in a personal
the account manner
is regarded
experiences
the revelations.
I am strongly
of the opinion
71
Assmann,
in:Yale Egyptology
Studies 3, 1989, 71.
Derchain debuts frame72.
was de
on the right
track when
he titled a recent he took the wrong
study of the BerUn text though
Leather
RoU
"Les time
l'histoire";
unfortunately,
chosing
the right
But more
than an expansion narratives. EquaUy,
of historical as I have
consciousness
is present
in these overtly paragraphs, there
self-propounded
pointed
out in the previous that of Amun, differently their earUer
is a sense of drama. The but uncomprehending parts in the unfolding
roles of Thutmose/Hatshepsut, officials are drawn. Note events how from
and the weU-wishing play their
the latter figures role of mere
of the astounding that in miUtary
respondents. It is its
Itmust sufficient heightened occasion
not be forgotten to bring effect I have
compositions
there is a similar
development. Stela with On
to the fore produced
the story-like by upon the dramatic
commencement interplay
of the Kamose and advisors.
of king
another the
commented
the introductory tableau akin
setting
of the composition
wherein
Uterary effect presents This army section and
an idealized wars
to a story rather with
than to a narrative
of war73. to his to the a
of Kamose's
contrasts
greatly
that of Nebhepetre the dialogue speaks and
speaking
their response.
In the latter royal reading
inscription
at first may
appear
resemble expected
Kamose's fulsome
but a careful rhetoric
reveals
that the army presentation upon
to their king with responds with
of a Konigsnovelle deeds, now
the king
brief recounting to assemble points
of his miUtary aU of the known with
completed
the return
to Thebes.
If we were the I feel and is
miUtary
texts of the Pharaohs inscriptions Both groups
in an effort
to determine
of similarity
the nomination
of Thutmose differ
III or Hatshepsut, to theology
that the task would poUtcs, extremely Kamose his stela as befits Umited probably of victory there
not be that useful. their individual in war texts.
in their approach the presence
orientations;
similarly,
of the divine
world
consulted in Karnak. intervention of war the hated
his deity Amun However, of Amun Uttle
before else
his campaign; of a theological affairs
afterwards nature of
he erected pervades the
account; Although sudden be
is no
in the mundane as the center
the here
and now. his
the narrative victories over
presents enemy of,
the king with
of aU activity, his role
achieving
viriUty
and inteUigence, Thutmose, who
is not at aU to over the III at (or
compared
to the soUtary
one
for example, One
is astonished
revelations the Aruna Pharaoh) determined outside, 72 73
about his future kingship. Pass. There, even revealed
can say the same with is invoked, Amun. The
regard
to Thutmose of the man
though Amun by his God thoughts does
the decision choice
is one
and not one through
of what
road
to take was to him from be said
the innermost world. Amun
of Thutmose not personaUy
and not presented intervene;
from
the divine
the same may
Derchain,
in:RdE 43, 1992, 35-47. Spalinger, Aspects of theMilitary Documents
of the Ancient Egyptians,
1982, 36-40.
293
for Ramesses Thutmose's
II at Kadesh Megiddo
although
the situation
at that later date
is quite
different
from
the
In military
campaign74. no matter compositions, who acts. Naturally,
how much his decisions
the king's
relation with
his god
is stressed,
it is the Pharaoh there royal may
are his and his alone, of those accounts
and in these cases all other he of his
is little difference inscriptions. be, yet he But
(if any) between the king and is painted
the plots with
and virtually
a far different He is separate
set of pigments. from
Youthful
is not young
inexperienced. or tactics
the cult centers not reveal
god Amun. There
He presents
the strategy or series
to be employed;
god does
his plan. (as is
is no theophany
of omina; but most
any personal certainly of war not
relationship
to his father Amun The tension
at Kadesh) derived from
is that of dependence the battle narrative. nomination encounter
that of revelation. as at Megiddo
or the choice
plan,
or the beginning
of Kamose's The whose divine claims
compositions of Egypt
covered were
here were moot.
composed They were
for two written
individuals down (or not the over
to the throne
somewhat
carved) within carved
the temple precinct stelae.
of Karnak
or at the mortuary Rouge
temple
of Deir
el Bahri; within placed
on self-standing
In the case of the Chapelle on the exterior
the location
was
inner sanctuary original Hatshepsut
of Karnak,
albeit
facades75.
Thutmose
Ill's was located III was
texts on the exterior the briefer
southern wall second
of the chambers of Thutmose
to the south inscribed on
of the bark shrine enclosure;
inscription
the doorway to theVHth Pylon. The location of the Chapelle Rouge was quite remote from
the public; god. divine nevertheless, placed, it was though connected not to Amun from as the edifice general view, housed was the bark of the of the Similarly choice so hidden the account
of the young Thutmose III. Here the intimate relationship between was memorialized in stone within the innermost area of Karnak. None was set king and god on freestanding overt witness stelae bearing to the king's successful as, for up policies or Rahotep Sesostris I at Heliopolis, I at Abydos, at Coptos, to take example Neferhotep three pre-New These authors Kingdom examples of divine refined of the Konigsnovelle. choice would by have had to be composed before by a series of the
once more
inscriptions or at least
for publication
a group
of redactors
receiving
official Pharaonic stamp of approval. All three of them fit perfectly within the historical
74 In the Kadesh "Poem", Amun is called to by Ramesses II. However, the situation is radically different from that presented in the nomination texts. In general, Assmann, in: Mannheimer Forum 1983-84, 1984, I am not in agreement with the conclusions of Von derWay, Die 175-231; Textiiberlieferung Ramses H. zur QadeS-Schlacht: Analyse und Struktur, HAB 22, 1984, as the study is overtly anti-historical; cf. A. Spalinger, in: JARCE 24, 1987, 152-57. See the comments in note 58 above.
75
outlook Ramesside outlook Dedicatory Earlier, between temple
of
the early-middle Period is perfectly
XVIIIth
Dynasty. owing
The
absence
of
such narratives
from
the
expUcable, (One cannot
to the greatly these
altered
theological-poUtical II's Abydos is striking)77. connection such or
of that later period76. Inscription, especiaUy king during
compare
texts with Ramesses in reUgious such outlook an intimate
for example, the Middle
as the difference Kingdom, was
the lack of no major
and god was that have
the case. There been preserved
cult center with indicate how
a state god; particularistic
archives
from
that era
locaUy-based
the temples were. prevalent.
But by Kamose's
reign,
if not earUer, of "Victorious
the importance Thebes"
of king
and father god was back state was
Granted
that the concept
can be traced Theban it
to a time distant can be observed with the rise
from Hatshepsut's
or even Kamose's,
and that an expanding Period78. which
in the latter half of the First aggressively-poUtical differentiation Assmann from
Intermediate dynastic the earUer
Nevertheless, was reUgiously
of the new that a growing
house
bound
to Amun
theological when
interconnections he discusses the basis of the nor
to kingship problem
took place. Again, of legitimating
succinctly
covers
this aspect
of the state79. With sun god - a theology unpoUtical, In relation seemingly was
power coupled with the theologicaUy-grounded in particular the role of king as the priest the rise of the sun cult of representation intervention came came to the fore. If God is neither apoUtical
of Pharaonic
then the continual to this development
of the divine with of narrative
the royal reflecting
is ever-present80. the direct though nor
the creation
unsuspected
intervention in which course
of god
to king. There was exhibited determined
no theophany,
however;
there any dream the historical
the divine world was of the young the godhead avoiding upon king was revealed the accounts The
to the somnambulant by his presence foretold,
monarch. at a specific this did not present
Instead,
time and place occur at birth.
during which (I am purposely outlook
the future. Although of the divine narratives
birth cycle which told with
a different
reUgious
kingship.) By
were
a relatively matters by
straightforward
simple
vocabulary.
and large the reports
do not compUcate
76
Murnane, Ancient Egyptian Coregencies, 1977, 57-59, has some interesting remarks concerning the historical background to this inscription: KRI II, 323-36. 78 I refer once more to Franke's analysis in:ZAS 117, 1990, 124-26. 79 J.Assmann, in: Saeculum 35, 1984, 97-114 and Politische Theologie zwischen Agypten und Israel, Carl Friedrich von Siemens Stiftung, Themen LII, 1991. 80 Assmann, Politische Theologie zwischen Agypten und Israel, 1991, 93.
77
J.Assmann, Egyptian Solar Religion in the New Kingdom, with his Maat: Gerechtigkeit und Unsterb lichkeit im alten Agypten, 1990. He has followed up the detailed analysis of Maat with a useful interpre tation in:GM 140, 1994, 93-100, a reply to F. Junge's rather negative review of the original study of Maat in:GGA 245, 1993 145-60.
295
presenting
the dramatic The parallel
unfolding is always
of the divine clear even may
occurrence if the precise be added
through series
archaic of omina
language are not.
or old
turns of phrase. One useful
story
to these
accounts
to our survey
at this point;
namely, the king
the report of the foundation himself on new Cord" executes building ceremony,
of the Festival
Temple written plans
by Thutmose down were upon prepared
III81. In this case completing for the
the orders and has his policy activities. After the actual
a consultation "Stretching the
for itwas
in order to effect the appearance of his father, Amun, the day of the feast of this deity the tenth day of an Amun celebration in fact. At forth "began no oracle to signify (biit) numerous Immediately times with after regard to the lord", "placed to quote [=
the king went
this time the god Vermis82. Here,
took place.
this Amun
his majesty
Thutmose]
majesty events
in front of him at thismonument which his majesty had decided. And then the
[= Amun] rejoiced the Pharaoh over this monument". It is clear that whatever after divine this the occurred, understood them. Almost passage83: immediately
of this god actually adds
inscription
the extremely
tantalizing
yet puzzling
[Then the king spoke to themajesty] of this god:

Proceed! Celebrate every beautiful feast, my lord!
And then Iwill come in order to effect the

"Stretching-of-the-Cord" inasmuch as ...
[Then he ? placed the king ?] infront of him and he

inducted Egypt, him to the place of the King of Lower the first sh ("booth" ?)84 of the "Stretching-of for the majesty of-the-Cord" of this august god
81
Urk. IV, 833-38; a useful reinterpretation is that of J. von Beckerath, in: MDAIK 37, 1981, 41-49. The use of this inscription purely from a calendrical point of view was challenged byW. Helck, in:GM 69, 1983, 40-42 although not accepted by von Beckerath, Chronologie des agyptischen Neuen Reiches, HAB 39, 1994, 15. Romer discusses this text on pages 142-44 and 152 of Gottes- und Priester Herrschaft, 1994. Vernus, in:BSEG
Urk. IV, 836.13-837.5.
82
83
19, 1995, 77.
84
Can
refer to the "booth" or "pavilion" in which the king normally stood or sat during the MDAIK 37, 1981, 46 note r, has a different ceremony of "Stretching-of-the-Cord"? Von Beckerath, in: though not satisfactory explanation. Useful in this context is the compendium of P. Spencer, The Egyptian Temple. A Lexicographical Study, 1984, 114-19, although the analysis mainly deals with the term sfa-ntr.Note 167 (page 139) provides the reader with the useful study of H. AltenmiiUer, in: JEOL 22, 1971-72, 307-17, inwhich sfa is discussed. Spencer concludes that "The sfa itself seems to have been a light construction supported by a wooden column."; i.e., it could have been a temporary building as
in this case.
the word
wished
to effect
the "Stretching-of-the-Cord" being outfitted
in with ... "when he saw the great
aU the booths Then the god
(?) of this work, the activity
performed
and Thutmose
rejoiced
marvels (bilt) which his fatherAmun had performed for him".

The accounts mundane direction as of the plot in this text between way, god is considerably and king. with at variance In both royalty. cases The with the nomination enters phenomena of the is the interaction it another events god the divine auspicious
or to put specific
interacts
occur during Thutmose daily ritual
of a festival.
(It is not out of place during a reUgious
to observe festival
that the choice and not the drama
III by Amun at Karnak.)
probably
took place
in a mere consists
In the example definitely on
of the Festival
HaU preparations
of the role of Amun: of-the-Cord" Amun was would
itwas
not expected the last day
that the official of the sixth
ceremony
of "Stretching But it did, and
take place
civil month85.
the director with his god
of the work. and vice-versa; variance with
In this fragmentary there is dialogue
and aU too brief depiction between god and king.
the king The latter Note have In the
interacts aspect worthy
is at singificant as weU
the practice phrases
in the divine of the king: is what activities
nomination "... what you] have you
narratives. [= Amun]
is one of the concluding 'embeUish it!'; [that which texts concerned the courtiers, be found
commanded:
has occurred with building
commanded"86. one meets command
typical Konigsnovelle passage spoken by
or otherwise is what
"that which as early
has occurred XIII
you ka has Abydos identical reply
ed"87. The and later
latter will the Rahotep
as Dynasty
(Neferhotep
Stela, passage
Une 6) (Unes
XVII Stela of Dynasty includes a virtuaUy the courtiers many others can be added 3-4)88. In those examples in the case of Thutmose III at the beginning and the royal role of work is acted for the Festival by Amun. Hence,
to their monarch; the king takes
Temple there concerns
the roles of his foUowers a transposition, 85
is an elevation, god and king
of the participants
owing
to the fact
that the plot
Inmy review of von Beckerath's Chronologie des agyptischen Neuen Reiches, HAB 39, 1994, for BiOr I discuss the auspicious timing of the event, both from a religious perspective (the tenth day of one Amun Feast: Urk. IV, 836.3) as well as from a civil calendrical one. (Half the year was over, as we can
eliminate brief. the epagomenals). B. Letellier's article, s.v. Grundungszeremonien, in LA II, 912-14, is too
86
Urk.
IV,
838.1-2.
87
Spalinger, Aspects of theMilitary Documents of the Ancient Egyptians, 1982, 118 with the previous literature covered in note 76. J. Assmann, in:Yale Egyptology Studies 3, 1989, 77, avoids the earlier (preDynasty XVIII: Neferhotep and Rahotep Stelae) uses of this phrase. Loprieno, in:Ancient Egyptian Literature, History and Forms, 1996, 282-85, describes the role of the king in such activity as inter
mediary.
88
Conveniently,
see Helck, Historisch-Biographische
Texte,
1975, 22 and 59.
297
instead of king and officials. ed to deal with a different
Once more situation,
a preexistent one in which
model
of literary presentation now assumes
is alter the role of
the divinity
determiner The previously scriptions, scriptions, must to see agreeing plot
of history. of the nomination for royal texts was undertakings. is at the apex therefore We patterned can see upon a model that was in In again
employed for there
this even even when,
in our military in the Kadesh One
the king
of the drama,
his part is that of the pious interpretation of a new
son calling
out to his personal
god, Amun.
refer to Assmann's the beginnings with
of such compositions volition aspects
as the German by
scholar wishes Whilst texts is to to
role of divine in its general to enlist Ill's
revealed I would
such accounts89.
this interpretation up, it was necessary
only note
that for such That
to be drawn say, Hatshepsut have written divine
intellectuals were
to further not created the more been
the experiment. ex nihilo. direct from
and Thutmose for him a new
inscriptions which
The king had
approach
would
cover
involvement the need Text since
of the of both as well the event texts.
in his life, and such compositions
could
only have
created Yet
rulers to pinpoint indicates centers As the new on a divine an overt
his or her early and unexpected aspect which intervention Amun vis-a-vis
nomination.
the Festival XVIII
had achieved the monarch
by mid Dynasty just as it does relation
in the nomination
act of the Pharaoh based
this new
theological Those
between who XVIII,
god and king was first created such of men
composed, accounts who,
albeit must
on preexistent
models.
individuals
have were
belonged actively
to a learned milieu engaged
in early Dynasty the intellectual history
a group
apparently, This, enough
in developing aspect
frontiers
of Egyptian neglected. for such the origins theo in the a new first in outside
civilization. It is not intellectual must logical; realm
I believe, to stress
is a useful the originality
of Pharaonic
that has been the impetus cases
of thought; involved
one must
locate
changes
and the individuals of king
in such a process. that was separate.
In these as political But other
lie in the relation i.e., the Amun of Egyptian
to throne,
a connection neither
as it was alterations these,
temple and the monarch, thought aroound which the same by
time may
be noted. have been
Among
development the religious of that closed
in time reckoning, centers circle,
its nature would
concentrated to move
of the land and only can be discerned90.
later (early Dynasty One
XVIII)
began
can add the growing
importance
of the military
89 90
The major study of Assmann on the Kadesh Inscriptions of Ramesses II was referred in note 74 above. This is discussed, in:RdE 47, 1996, 67-77. One might add the restricted use of the Amduat in royal tombs; however, as the case of the vizierWoser proves, this was not so in the early portions of Dynasty XVIII. (For the problems of dating that religious text, Assmann, Egyptian Solar Religion in the New Kingdom, 1995, 7 and note 32, is worth reading).

arm of the state - and with the royal war development extant inscriptions of detaUed war a date
it the rise are altered
to prominence from
of this profession; Kingdom
even ones;
the accounts perhaps too
of the the the
early Middle
reUefs can be brought II appears
into discussion to be the best
although, terminus
considering a quo for
material,
ca. Amunhotep
expansion
of these pictorial
I do not wish (and Uterate) a wholesale a direction
representations91. to Ust one by one the factors itsMiddle Kingdom factors
that differentiate ancestors. pushing Such
early Dynasty a task would
XVIII one VaUey (actor)
eUte into in and
society from discussion hitherto or,
move
of sociological not reaUzed; to be more viz., correct,
the civiUzation of god
of the Nile cause
the predominance reduction
as direct
the eUmination acting overtly III. As action according seen
in the role of social mores poUtic. StiU, HaU such
(conformity; can be
to Ma'at)
in determining texts as weU present
the body
a direction
in these nomination these with
as in the Festival a vantage point
Inscription
of Thutmose inter This new
a totaUty, at variance
compositions earUer concepts "requires absolute
of theological-poUtical or pious person.
of reward
to the righteous as Assmann
theological he observes,
god".
orientation
sovereignty",
succinctly manifests
states92. And, the wiU of
"It is not the repeated
pattern
but the singular
event which
But,
to ask to age-old predicate
question:
what
came first? Did
the growing speculations more
importance
of Thebes
and its godhead to such a degree
an inward
turn to the theological became
of the inteUectuals (unsuspecting
that they, as weU
as their monarchs,
and more
ly?) ensnared by this deviation from older reUgious speculation? Certainly ifwe foUowing
Assmann's Kingdom elements severance, norm, mores analysis, reUgion, into an as presented then the historical estabUshed as Vermis and by the last two quotes altered. from After his lengthy study of New singular that a consciousness aU, to introduce must mean spUtting
non-consciously-viewed wiU occur from have been
society
or rupture
claims,
time to time93. This a chaUenge without
of the social
theological-poUtical of the day, itwas concepts
in our case, must that were hitherto
to the accepted or,
foUowed
question
if opposition present a new
occurred,
assimilated94.
In a nutsheU,
the texts covered
in this analysis
Zayed, in:Fs Mokhtar I, 5-17; cf. the recent detailed study of M. Muller, Die Thematik der Schlachten reliefs, Magisterarbeit Tubingen 1995. 92 Assmann, in:Yale Egyptology Studies 3, 1989, 75. The following quote will be found on the same page. 93 in: BSEG Vernus, 19, 1995, 72-82 with his Essai sur la conscience de l'histoire dans l'Egypte 94 pharaonique", 1995, 137-42. From a different vantage point but one that is, nonetheless, politically and ideologically important, I can refer the reader to the remarks of Henry Kissinger concerning the role of the conservative in a A World Divided, Boston, n.d, 192-93. This situation will be explored at a later date, revolutionary age:
91
299
theological different
attitude
(foUowing
Assmann), outlook on Amun
one
that was
quasi-revolutionary what was I have
since previously already
it set up a estab brought is from
theological-poUtical concentration
that was at Karnak
at odds with
Ushed. EarUer
can be recognized. Stela, but note how
into consideration the actual Donation copy
the impUcation during
of the Kamose the campaigns
absent Amun
turn of events
of the king. There,
In addition, however,
the weU-known the inscription is a
Stela of Ahmose-Nofretary legal proceeding;
can be examined. no new Uterary
of an official
presentation is directly
is achieved. involved
It is correct in the transfer (king or "Tempest Amun does
that in this case Amun of office; queen) however,
(through his priesthood
and image)
the god does he does
not reveal himself to Hatshepsut case
to any of the major or Thutmose aspect III. The
participants so-caUed
as, for example, may
Stela" of Ahmose involve himself

cases.
be an earlier
of this new not
for in the narration take direct action
in some way95. As
yet he does
suddenly
as in the later
The growing theological development of Amun in the first half of theXVIIIth Dynasty
was not produced was to enunciate a revolutionary alteration to overthrow with in the theological tradition whom we texts mores Yet of Egypt; its haU was an can neither mark, avowed understand thereby through lineage it supported by royal privilege and custom.
at least with
respect
to the two Pharaohs With regard
are concerned, only
self-consciousness. the sudden conscious direct or blood
to the nomination intervention through
the king-to-be
and unexpected plan.
of his god;
he and only aspects
he becomes of royalty Their but true
of a divine intervention
It is not
the traditional concerned although
that the two
individuals
become clearly
kings.
is never discussed II as befits
in these compositions
they are set in the choice ruler's on the part (Hatshepsut/
reign of Thutmose of the god,
the early Ufe of Thutmose a theological
III, his son. This of either
its revelation, rise
provided
ratification
Thutmose
DI) eventual
to the throne. But revealed
(To reiterate
a point made of god and king or regal-divine
earlier:
their birth plays strong, but one an that
no role in these compositions.) aspect now that is not merely is historicaUy-based.
the intertwining by official
is extremely custom,
dogma
95
but letme refer toMargolis' important work, Paradigms and Barriers, 1993, passim, especially p, 154 and 181. Even though the scope of the study is concerned with the habits of mind and how they govern scientific beliefs, his methodology is of crucial importance with regard to idea sets, such as those held the Egyptians inDynasty XVIII. by A new translation of the inscription is contained inK.P. Foster/R.K. Ritner, The chronological analysis given in the study is, however, faulty. in: JNES 55, 1996, 11-12.
300 A. Spalinger
SAK 24
As a final conclusion to this lengthy analysis Iwould like to turnback to the reflections
of Derchain traditional come The on the Berlin Leather Roll96. Contrary may have to hand to him, been over I have seen that narrative as not and not revolutionary. Sesostris present predestined the kingship but his god does at some
to him with mere mortals basic attitude
in order
later date.
of that composition challenge. at Heliopolis
is customary The
as it accepts
the norms
of Egyptian
kingship of
without for
any intellectual the sun god
aim of that text is limited and to argue
to the construction interplay of
a temple would Hall
for a the dramatic
king-god Festival
Ill's that inscription with Thutmose be superfluous; there is none. Contrast are the historical and the directed and one can see how differently Inscription In the latter, a solitary concept event breaking i.e., with the norm takes place; the of
theological history, unique. Pharaoh
viewpoints. to speak
of our modern
of it, occurs; is utilized
the general to reflect
But
this historical
orientation
in order linked
is replaced by the success upon say)
and the latter is intimately therefore end up with
and irrevocably an interesting
("stuck"
one might which
to his god see
Amun. We
and ironic outcome,
some might
as inevitable: the rise of a historical dimension in inscriptions of theKonigsnovelle

would ultimately lead to a total break with and shore up claims custom97. The challenge that were offered not constructed presented to enhance to the throne concepts norms. all
type
at this time, that valid, would duty to the
a turning of direction attack
in the theological religious
of kingship The movement
that ultimately away from of
lead to a wholesale loyalty, not so much custom. with
upon Egypt's
emphasized I believe
in any of these
inscriptions,
had as one III looked
its fonts
break with relationship political onwards
that Hatshepsut it through
and Thutmose a major
for a more
intimate
their god and found namely,
break with
established
theological
mores;
the intervention of oracles
of their god
into their lives. From and private
their time frame of kings and
one can trace the rise events Hatshepsut
in the theological
affairs
commoners, Neither
that fully reveal nor Thutmose
the divine movement III stresses
into the mundane. of duty in their nomination either was argue to
an ethic
To them are revealed the marvels inscriptions. pious or devout or even a follower of customary that both assert shared a feeling of loyalty able towards
of their god but religious their god norms. even
it is not because In a sense though
one might
it is more
correct
that the two were the divine more
to understand
Amun's
omina whereas
no one else was. choice;
They the
comprehended latter was
and so were
initiated
into that realm
through Amun's
nothing
than a preparation
for kingship98.
96 97
Derchain, in:RdE 43, 1992, 35-47. In general, J.Assmann, in: SAK 8, 1980,1-32 with his "Egyptian Solar Religion in the New Kingdom", 1995, Chapters 1,4,6-7. 98 The references in note 13 above (plus the accompanying text) can be re-read in this context.

Drama in History

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Drama in History

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Drama in History: Exemplars from Mid Dynasty XVIII Author(s): Anthony Spalinger Source: Studien zur Altgyptischen Kultur,

from Mid Dynasty

Many with mose religious

the rise of historical Dynasty if not

consciousness the reigns

and her stepson,

III1. However, overview d'appui will be

all too often which

such analyses historical

oriented The with

to a philosophical remarks That have is to

background. deductive that covers

as the point say, what

an integration attempted here

of the empirically is an approach

in the early New Kingdom at a time in which,

sources. Quite signposts references, to provide of Pharaonic

to the contrary, nature

the interested instead

of a historical if being a mature

at the same presentation

time refreshingly of one

in this analysis transformation at an earlier I hope

side of the then growing did not occur

in so great the final

a fashion product, the thesis.

time period. Although the results

are not written

270 A. SpaUnger SAK 24

foUowing Egypt pectives, be brought nomination which Uterary The tion

of Pharaonic pers wiU

that can be witnessed Reasons to observe

for such a change that the series form a useful with

into the discussion; texts which a more as weU of omens

of divine corpus their

deserve aspects series

as historiographic that surrounded are extremely

his nomina and to the

to be ruler of Egypt in which

they are expressed2. text has kept upon a series The

as a "Coronation because the

Inscription", narrative Thutmose

title of "Texte de la Jeunesse" and later offerings considerably in which

text itself was

later than the purported presents for a Sitz the im

series of events account

style of the composition in arguing

in the first person,

and early Egyptologists

did not hesitate

1997 Drama inHistory

Leben common words,

at the court with backdrop from

III speaking was

to his courtiers4. employed notables,

is to say, the king's ought

of the Konigsnovelle his mouth,

been weU-surprised The suite

at the tenor and focus was placed

of their monarch's on the southern upon after

"Texte de la Jeunesse" some years

after he became over scenes

sole Pharaoh of the dead queen