Harsiese A: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
The first Harsiese, king Hedjkheperre Setepenamun Harsiese or Harsiese A, is generally thought by [[Kenneth Kitchen]] in his book on the Third Intermediate Period in Egypt, to be a High Priest of Amun(HPA) and son of the High Priest of Amun, Shoshenq C. In all likelihood, he was indeed [[Shoshenq C]]'s son, and a dated monument from his reign in Middle and Upper Egypt has now been uncovered. This document, a Year 13 hieratic [[stela]], was recently discovered by a University of Columbia expedition to the Dakhla Oasis in 2005. However, recent studies by the Egyptologist Karl Jansen-Winkeln has demonstrated that all the monuments of the first (King) Harsiese show that he was never a High Priest of Amun in his own right. Rather both [[Harsiese A]] and his son [...du]--whose existence is known from inscriptions on his funerary objects at Koptos--are only attested as Ordinary Priests of Amun. Instead, while Harsiese A was certainly a Theban king during Osorkon II's first decade of rule, he was a different individual from the genuine High Priest of Amun, [[Harsiese B]]. |
The first Harsiese, king Hedjkheperre Setepenamun Harsiese or Harsiese A, is generally thought by [[Kenneth Kitchen]] in his book on the Third Intermediate Period in Egypt, to be a High Priest of Amun(HPA) and son of the High Priest of Amun, Shoshenq C. In all likelihood, he was indeed [[Shoshenq C]]'s son, and a dated monument from his reign in Middle and Upper Egypt has now been uncovered. This document, a Year 13 hieratic [[stela]], was recently discovered by a University of Columbia expedition to the Dakhla Oasis in 2005. However, recent studies by the Egyptologist Karl Jansen-Winkeln has demonstrated that all the monuments of the first (King) Harsiese show that he was never a High Priest of Amun in his own right. Rather both [[Harsiese A]] and his son [...du]--whose existence is known from inscriptions on his funerary objects at Koptos--are only attested as Ordinary Priests of Amun. Instead, while Harsiese A was certainly a Theban king during Osorkon II's first decade of rule, he was a different individual from the genuine High Priest of Amun, [[Harsiese B]]. |
||
Based on the aforementioned Year 13 stela of Harsiese, it seems more likely that he became a king at Thebes before Year 4 of Osorkon II as Kitchen argues in his TIPE book. Osorkon II's control over this great city is only first documented in his 12th Year by 2 separate Quay Texts. If Harsiese was king at Thebes already under Takelot I, it |
Based on the aforementioned Year 13 stela of Harsiese, it seems more likely that he became a king at Thebes before Year 4 of Osorkon II as Kitchen argues in his TIPE book. Osorkon II's control over this great city is only first documented in his 12th Year by 2 separate Quay Texts. If Harsiese was king at Thebes already under Takelot I, it might explain why Takelot I's own Year 5, Year 8 and Year 14 Nile Quay Texts, which mention the serving High Priests Iuwelot and Smendes III--who were all brothers of Takelot I--consistently omit any mention of his name. There would have been a rivalry between Takelot I and Harsiese A here. The Amun Priests may have chosen not to involve themselves in this rivalry by omitting any mention of the reigning king's name. |
||
Revision as of 06:03, 20 September 2005
The first Harsiese, king Hedjkheperre Setepenamun Harsiese or Harsiese A, is generally thought by Kenneth Kitchen in his book on the Third Intermediate Period in Egypt, to be a High Priest of Amun(HPA) and son of the High Priest of Amun, Shoshenq C. In all likelihood, he was indeed Shoshenq C's son, and a dated monument from his reign in Middle and Upper Egypt has now been uncovered. This document, a Year 13 hieratic stela, was recently discovered by a University of Columbia expedition to the Dakhla Oasis in 2005. However, recent studies by the Egyptologist Karl Jansen-Winkeln has demonstrated that all the monuments of the first (King) Harsiese show that he was never a High Priest of Amun in his own right. Rather both Harsiese A and his son [...du]--whose existence is known from inscriptions on his funerary objects at Koptos--are only attested as Ordinary Priests of Amun. Instead, while Harsiese A was certainly a Theban king during Osorkon II's first decade of rule, he was a different individual from the genuine High Priest of Amun, Harsiese B.
Based on the aforementioned Year 13 stela of Harsiese, it seems more likely that he became a king at Thebes before Year 4 of Osorkon II as Kitchen argues in his TIPE book. Osorkon II's control over this great city is only first documented in his 12th Year by 2 separate Quay Texts. If Harsiese was king at Thebes already under Takelot I, it might explain why Takelot I's own Year 5, Year 8 and Year 14 Nile Quay Texts, which mention the serving High Priests Iuwelot and Smendes III--who were all brothers of Takelot I--consistently omit any mention of his name. There would have been a rivalry between Takelot I and Harsiese A here. The Amun Priests may have chosen not to involve themselves in this rivalry by omitting any mention of the reigning king's name.
REFERENCES:
- Karl Jansen-Winkeln, JEA 81(1995), pp.129-149
- [University of Columbia 2005 Excavation report at Dakhla]
This is the University of Columbia on-line report which mentions the find of the Year 13 Harsiese stela. The stela is mentioned on Page 5(Point No.7) and a picture of it is enclosed on Page 15.