The Reign of Thutmose IV

395 Pages·1991·31.436 MB·English

by  Betsy M. Bryan

The Reign of Thutmose IV
The Reign of Thutmose IV
Betsy M. Bryan
The Johns Hopkins University Press
Baltimore and London
© 1991 The Johns Hopkins University Press
All rights reserved
Printed in the United States of America
The Johns Hopkins University Press
701 West 40th Street
Baltimore, Maryland 21211
The Johns Hopkins Press Ltd., London
The paper used in this book meets the minimum requirements of American
National Standard for Information Sciences-Permanence of Paper for Printed
Library Materials, ANSI Z39.48-1984.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Bryan, Betsy Morrell.
The reign of Thutrnose IV I Betsy M. Bryan.
p. em.
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 0-8018-4202-6
1. Thutrnose IV, King of Egypt. 2. Egypt-History-Eighteenth dynasty,
ca. 1570-1320 B.C. 3. Pharaohs-Biography. I. Title.
DT87.B78 1991
932' .014'092-dc20 90-27688
Contents
Preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
I. Chronology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
II. All the Kings' Sons ............................................................ 38
III. King's Wives and Kings' Daughters ............................................ 93
IV. Royal Monuments of Thutmose IV ............................................. 141
Appendix I: Tomb Objects Supplement ......................................... 208
Appendix II: Statuary .......................................................... 211
Appendix III: Varia ............................................................ 214
V. Civil, Religious, and Military Administration ................................... 242
Appendix IV: Officeholders .................................................... 294
Appendix V: Theb an Tombs ................................................... 300
VI. Thutrnose IV Abroad and at Home ............................................. 332
Works Cited ................................................................... 369
Indices ......................................................................... 387
Plates I-XIX
PREFACE
To acknowledge all the people who have helped me with this project over the years
would be quite impossible. I issue a large "thank you" ,however, to the many colleagues
and friends who have generously given of their expertise and time. Dr. Bettina Schmitz
deserves a first mention as editor during a period when the book was planned for
publication in the Hildesheimer Agyptologische Beitdige series. Her careful attention,
particularly to the references, has improved the manuscript enormously.
To my husband, Charles E. Bryan, I am inexpressibly grateful, for his support
which has been unfailing. My teacher Kelly Simpson deserves thanks for the topic and
the scores of references he sent my way. To Bernard V. Bothmer and to the staff of
The Brooklyn Museum's Egyptian, Classical and Middle Eastern Department I owe a
special debt, particularly to Richard A. Fazzini, James F. Romano, and Robert S.
Bianchi. I thank also the present and past members of the staff of the Egyptian
Department at the Metropolitan Museum of Art, particularly Edna R. Russmann,
Christine Lilyquist, Cathleen A. Keller, and Peter Dorman who, when they occupied
pertinent curatorial roles in that Department, were greatly generous. Likewise the past
and present staff of the Boston Museum of Fine Arts have my deep gratitude,
especially Edward Brovarski, Timothy Kendall, Peter Lacovara, Peter Der Manuelian,
and now Rita Freed. To the Keeper of Egyptian Antiquities of the British Museum,
Vivian Davies, and to Morris Bierbrier and Geoffrey Spencer, to the staff of the
Department, and to the past Keeper, T.G.H. James,I offer thanks as well. J. DeCenival
of the Louvre Museum was kind and generous; Bernadette Letellier of that same
institution shared her material from Karnak without hesitation. John Ruffle of the
Durham Oriental Museum has been most helpful indeed.
Claude Vandersleyen has helped me over the years, and I wish to thank him here
formally. Likewise Alan R. Schulman was always ready to listen and offer valuable
advice. Donald B. Redford was both willing to read through the dissertation form of
the manuscript and available as inspiration through his many writings. Naturally such
a list is not complete without an expression of thanks to Egyptian colleagues,
particularly in this case to Dr. Sayed Tawfik, Chairman of the EAO, Dr. Mohammed
Saleh, past Director of the Egyptian Museum, Dr. El Sayed Hegazy, Dr. M. Mohsen,
Dr. A. Qadry, and the late Sayed abdel Hamid. To the many representatives of the
Centre franco-egyptien at Karnak I express deep appreciation for the opportunity to
view and study the Thutmose IV material. I particularly thank J.-C Golvin, past
director of the Centre, Mssrs. J.-C Goyon and J. Lauffray, and alsoP. Martinez and
L. Gabolde. To my colleagues and friends at Johns Hopkins University, especially to
Jerrold Cooper, Hans Goedicke, David Lorton, and Glenn Schwartz, I express deep
gratitude. To the many I have omitted for the sake of space, I say again "thanks". You
are in my heart, if not here in print.
INTRODUCTION
In the analysis of any topic it is necessary to state the limitations of the data.
The evidence brought to bear on the rule of Thutmose IV, king of Egypt in the
early 14th century B.C., is largely monumental, often royal, and derives to the
greatest extent from temple and tomb contexts. Inscriptions and decoration intended
as eternal testament are formal rather than personal, and they contain ideological
or religious symbolism rather than individual_ motives or characteristics. In
interpreting these data, therefore, the following monograph has sought to isolate
patterns from both the royal and non-royal material and thereby to identify the
ideological, religious, and political attt:ibutes of Thutmose IV's kingship. The method
employed has combined the techniques of historical and art historical analysis in an
effort to interpret the types of evidence most fully.
Dr. William Kelly Simpson in his section of The Ancient Near East A History
identified a number of topics relating to Egyptian kings' reigns which could be
examined with our evidence. This study treats a number of those subjects, and, as
such, is a history of the rule of Thutmose IV. The first priority of this work was to
provide a catalogue of the monuments from the reign, and although such a
compendium will inevitably be outmoded by new discoveries, it can be of use as a
starting point for historical discussion. To supplement this primary function, a
number of hitherto unpublished monuments are included in the photographic plates,
and several appendices provide the results of research which could not be fully
accommodated in the text.
Chapter One assesses the length of Thutmose IV's reign by evaluating
individually the sorts of data used to construct chronologies. Although the major
goal of the discussion is to determine whether the king had a short or long reign,
the reliability of astronomical, anatomical and philological evidence pertinent to the
chronology of the 18th Dynasty is of great interest and is considered at length.
Chapter Two explores the material bearing on Thutmose's position as heir
apparent before his accession. In an effort to test the conventional hypothesis that
he usurped the throne from the legitimate heir, the discussion catalogues and
evaluates the monuments of contemporary kings' sons as well as those of Thutmose
IV himself. A by-product of this exploration is a clearer definition of the social and
religious roles played by princes in the mid-18th Dynasty. Chapter Three concerns
Introduction 3
the female members of the royal family. It compiles the material naming the Icing's
mother, wives and daughters and examines it to determine the ceremonial and cultic
roles performed by these royal women.
Chapter Four catalogues the royal monuments by site and attempts to place
them in a historical or religious context. These buildings, statues, inscriptions, and
miscellaneous fragments contribute to our understanding of the official persona of
the king. Thutmose IV appears, for example, as the adherent of Heliopolitan
religion, as well as the devotee of Thebes and the favored sites of the Thutmosid
rulers. In Chapter Five the people employed in Thutmose's administration are
identified and their monuments noted. Their families, titles, and responsibilities
provide significant information about the Icing's approach to rule, while their tombs
and funerary objects illustrate the standard of living enjoyed by the nobility of the
period.
Chapter Six discusses major historical issues of the reign, acting as both a
summary for some topics and a full expression of others. Issues relating to Thutmose
IV's intenial ruling policies, such as co-regency and the Icing's role in the
development of the later Atenist religion of Akhenaten, are included along with the
foreign policy of the period. Thutmose IV's military involvement in Asia and Nubia
are discussed, and his diplomatic agreements with the Syrian kingdom of Mitanni are
explored as well. An image of the king as the ruler of a powerful nation dealing
from strength with its neighbors emerges from the investigation. Thutmose IV is
seen to have prepared in a number of ways for the glorification of the sovereign
which characterized his son Amenhotep Til's long rule.
CHAPTER ONE
CHRONOLOGY
For those most interested in interpretive history, the problem of chronology
often delays discussion. For those, however, who recognize the pitfalls and rewards
of examining chronological evidence, this introductory chapter will be expected and,
I hope, appreciated--if not completely agreed to. How long did Thutmose IV reign?
The traditional answer to this question has been about eight years, a figure
corresponding both to the attested year dates and the Manethonian king lists.
Recently, however, the chronology for the New Kingdom proposed by Wente and
Van Siclen used a figure quadrupling the reign.1 Such a dramatic extension of
Thutmose's years as ruler warrants full discussion before it is embraced or rejected.
The discussion below, therefore, before passing on to the events, characters, and
monuments of the period, will examine the evidence for Thutmose IV's length of
rule and weigh the arguments bearing on his reign contained in the new chronology.
We begin by an admission that our evidence is spotty. Regnal dates, our most
reliable indicators, are not of themselves decisive in determining the last year of a
king. To ignore them, however, is irresponsible, for in a discussion of chronology,
speculation, a tool often useful in historical interpretation, has no place. It is by
examining the regnal dates along with all other types of evidence bearing on
chronological determination that we will best conclude the length of Thutmose IV's
(or any other king's) reign. Several sources of information, of varying degrees of
reliability, exist. These include: year dates; king lists; the anatomical evidence of the
royal mummy; the astronomical evidence as interpreted in various chronologies; the
Jubilee monuments; the time spans suggested by the lives of officials who served
under several kings; and the evidence of both inscriptions and building activity.
Analyzing the relative weight and reliability of these seven sources should tip the
balance in favor of either a short or a long reign for Thutmose IV and, as a
by-product, provide an insight, based on a single reign, regarding the accuracy of
Wente and Van Siclen's method of reconstructing chronology for the mid-18th
dynasty.
King Lists
Traditionally the king lists of Manetho's extractors have provided scholars with
estimates for reigns. Josephus recorded a Thmosis son of MisphragmuthosiS who
ruled 9 years, 8 months. Africanu s and Eusebius gave a Thmosis with 9 years. 2
This king's placement approximately matches that of Thutmose IV, but the
identification is not positive. The list is confused and Thmosis is preceded not by
Chronology 5
Amenophis but by Misphragmuthosis. He is succeeded by Amenophis and then
Orus. Helck pointed out several scribal mistakes that could have produced the
garbling and argued plausibly for a transposition of Thutmose IV and Amenhotep
II. Heick's reconstruction also reversed the 31 years of Amenophis and the 26 of
Misphragmuthosis. To the latter king he added the 22 years of the female king
Amessis and proposed to fmd the reign of Thutmose III.3 Redford4 accepted this
reconstitution in his 18th dynasty chronology and has confirmed his faith in both
Manetho's accuracy and Heick's method of unraveling technical copying errors. Both
scholars have now been joined by Krauss whose lengthy discussion of the king list
sources supported Thmosis as Thutmose IV.5 Nonetheless, identifying Manetho's
Thmosis as Thutmose IV yields no conclusive proof of the reign's length, particularly
if the figures given forother kings in the dynasty are garbled. We must depend on
the more ancient contemporary information.
Year Dates of Thutmose IV
The number of year dates from the reign of Thutmose IV is small but evenly
divided over eight years. In Year 1 are dated the Sphinx stela,6 a monument of the
king erected between the paws of the Great Sphinx at Giza, and a newly-discovered
stela from the Luxor Temple mentioning offering dedications? The stela was recut
by Seti I, who restored both the scene and the text, but there is no reason to
believe the inscription and date are not authentic to Thutmose IV. No dates are
known from Years 2 and 3, but from Year 4 there exists an inscription at the
entrance to a mine at Serabit-el Khadim8 left, in all probability, by the Mayor of
Tjaru, Neby, to commemorate the opening of work in the area. There is a
questionable date, "[Year] 5 under the Majesty of this [good] god" from the temple
at Serabit-el Khadim.9 Since the style of inscription follows that of the year 4 date,
Weill included his no. 100 with Thutmose IV inscriptions. The year of this
inscription is partially broken, however, and it was found in the temple, not at the
mine. It cannot be included as an identified year date for the pharaoh. Year 6 is
attested from the Theban tomb of Nebamun, Chief of Police in Western Thebes (TT
90 tempus Thutmose IV-Amenhotep III.) This date no longer exists and indeed has
°
been missing since shortly after the visit of Hay. 1 Champollion, 11 however,
reported it at the heading of Nebamun's appointment as Police Chief. This text
does not name the king referred to as "my Majesty", but the identification of
Thutmose IV is nearly certain. The scene of Nebamun hearing the order read to
him by the royal scribe Yuny is the left one on the double-scene southwest wall. To
the right Nebamun offers praise to Thutmose IV in a kiosk. While it is undoubtedly
true that the date of year 6 refers to the left-hand scene only,12 it is nonetheless
visually unlikely that Amenhotep III and not Thutmose IV was intended in the dated
inscription, both because of the scene of the latter king on the same wall and
6 The Reign of Thutmose IV
because the textual use of "my Majesty" would have been ambiguous.
Year 7 of Thutmose IV is attested twice, at Konosso and at Serabit- el Khadim.
These two dates are of double interest, since they both include the royal wife ~
, commonly called Iaret (for no stronger reason than convention). She will be
discussed in Chapter 3. The Konosso Year 713 appears at the beginning of a now
destroyed inscription which likely recorded a military action. The scene above
showed the king, followed by Iaret, striking an enemy before Dedwen and Ha. Heick
has suggested that the year 7 date be emended to year 8 to agree with the other
Konosso inscription of this king.14 Since this stela was positioned differently at
Konosso from the Year 8 text, and since the Year 7 with Iaret figuring prominently
has an analogue at Sinai, there is no need to emend the date. Surely Thutmose IV
could have carried out more than one action in the southern region.
The Sinai Year 7 date exists on a tablet which Birch found at the entrance of
a mine two miles southeast of the temple of Serabit-el Khadim. This text has
recently been refound.15 Apparently this is another record of a mine-opening, but
there is no scene preserved with this tablet, as in the case of Neby's Year 4
inscription. Below the Year 7, written horizontally, are four vertical lines. The
cartouche names of Thutmose IV and that of the King's Daughter Iaret face the
name of Hathor Mistress of Turquoise. Giveon's photograph shows clearly seven
strokes in the year date.
Year 8 occurs at Konosso,16 where it commences a description of the king's
personal involvement in a military skirmish on the Eastern desert. The scene above
depicts Thutmose IV offering wine to Amun and Khnum.
There are two more year dates which should not be included among Thutmose
IV's attestations. On a jar label from Deir el Medina, published only in
transcription, exists the notation: "Year 19: Wine of the Estate of Menkheprure
from the mw n Ptah: from the hand of Hek ay" .17 Although one cannot absolutely
rule that date out until the hieratic paleography has been judged, the date is almost
certainly one of a later New Kingdom ruler. The estate of Thutmose IV is attested
in a number of later 18th and 19th dynasty sources; and the jar labels from Deir el
Medina naming 18th dynasty kings, if dated by the royal estates named, would
contradict the paleography on numerous examples.18 We may reasonably assume
this date does not belong to the reign of Thutmose IV.
Some years ago, the late Dr. Klaus Baer reported discovering a hitherto
unnoticed Year 20 of Thutmose IV.19 He did not publish his fmd, but the date has
since been cited as chronological data.20 Dr. Baer kindly replied to a query
concerning the date and confirmed that it is a rock inscription at Tombos published;
by Breasted21 and later by Save-Soderbergh22 with photo and Breasted's handcopy.
Breasted stated that both Menkheperre and Menkheprure were possible readings
for a broken cartouche in the inscription. He opted for the former reading in his