• BIG question on ancient history for you

    From Oh so rich & successful JTEM@21:1/5 to All on Tue Nov 16 20:20:55 2021
    So was just watching a video on youtube from the
    MET -- "The" MET, the famous museum in NYC --
    and it present a partial kings list from the 18th &
    19th dynasties of Egypt and... and...

    It lists "Neferneferuaten" as the king between
    Akhenaten and Smenkhare.

    Hmm.

    Now I know things do change but before I weigh in
    here let me first say how I learned things...

    #1. Neferneferuaten is Nefertiti

    #1a. Nerfertiti in all probability was Queen Tiye

    #2. Smenkhkare may have been a queen, may have
    been Akhenaten's name after his religious revolution
    failed or they may have been a male heir older than
    Tutankhamun, who reigned between the heretic king
    and Tut.

    #3. There was nobody between Smenkhkare and Tut.
    In fact, whether or not Smenkhkare even existed was
    in doubt amongst some circles.

    Now this MET lecture is not only saying that, yes, there
    was a Smenkhkare but ALSO there was a queen who
    ruled before him.

    Oh. To make matters more confusing, this recorded
    lecture at the MET is on the topic of Haremhab.

    Which is weird because I learned him as "Horemheb,"
    but that's the breaks when dealing with transliterations
    (not translations) and evolving conventions...

    NOW I weigh in here...

    Neferneferuaten, in my thinking, was Nefertiti who was
    Queen Tiye. It's not very far fetched, Tiye was the power
    behind the throne during Amenhotep III's reign so the
    government, the people in power, the people who were the
    status quo would have really liked her sticking around.

    "Continuity."

    THAT is the thing you've got to keep in mind when talking
    about governments and kings in particular. When you've got
    a new leader, a new king, everyone who is not already on top,
    rolling in wealth & power, sees their opportunity to gain high
    office, titles, wealth & power. All they have to do is ingratiate
    themselves to the new king, or be their friend already, and
    ask. And their getting that office/title/etc means someone
    else loses it.

    Understand?

    The death of a monarch was traditionally a time of chaos.

    Well. Possibly overstated there. But it was a point in time
    when the apple cart got upset, and everyone would go
    scrambling to scoop them all up & put them back on the
    cart.

    This is also why, say, the Romans would wait until a king
    died before annexing a territory. They were already at their
    most vulnerable, the maximum weakness, incoherence...

    So this exact same fact works in favor of a Hatshepsut or,
    as I content, a Tiye.

    "But the Egyptians didn't marry mothers to sons."

    True. Not ordinarily. But there was nothing ordinary about
    the Amarna Period.

    "But Nefertiti had kids and Tiye would have been too old."

    No. Queen Tiye is known to have adopted one or more
    children, claiming parentage, so who knows how many she
    might've claimed parentage of?

    "But Queen Tiye was too old, old enough to be Akhenaten's
    mother! Nefertiti was much younger!"

    No. There's evidence that Nefertiti was no spring chicken.
    Even the famous bust of the beautiful Nefertiti includes
    some wrinkles.

    "But I saw something that said Tiye was sub saharan African
    and Nefertiti clearly had light skin."

    No. Queen Tiye was of "Asiatic" heritage. Her parents are
    known, their tomb amongst the most famous and certainly
    amongst the most intact prior to the discovery of the even
    more famous Tut.





    -- --

    https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/667888698881458176/the-right-wing-isnt-very-warm-cozy-with-gay

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Oh so rich & successful JTEM@21:1/5 to All on Tue Nov 16 21:24:04 2021
    Oh so rich & successful JTEM wrote:

    So was just watching a video on youtube from the
    MET -- "The" MET, the famous museum in NYC --
    and it present a partial kings list from the 18th &
    19th dynasties of Egypt and... and...

    It lists "Neferneferuaten" as the king between
    Akhenaten and Smenkhare.

    Hmm.

    Now I know things do change but before I weigh in
    here let me first say how I learned things...

    #1. Neferneferuaten is Nefertiti

    #1a. Nerfertiti in all probability was Queen Tiye

    #2. Smenkhkare may have been a queen, may have
    been Akhenaten's name after his religious revolution
    failed or they may have been a male heir older than
    Tutankhamun, who reigned between the heretic king
    and Tut.

    #3. There was nobody between Smenkhkare and Tut.
    In fact, whether or not Smenkhkare even existed was
    in doubt amongst some circles.

    Now this MET lecture is not only saying that, yes, there
    was a Smenkhkare but ALSO there was a queen who
    ruled before him.

    If it matters, I always identified the famous "Younger Lady" in
    KV 35...

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Younger_Lady

    ...as Tut's sister and surviving wife:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ankhesenamun

    It would only make sense that Aye would have her murdered
    once he crowned himself king.

    Whatever the case, two of the mummies in KV 35 are unquestionably
    tied to the Amarna Period, so, stretching things further, why not the
    third?

    Smenkhkare?









    -- --

    https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/667784930785378304

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)