Scarab Seals and their contribution to History in the early Second Millennium B.C [I] 085668130X

Citation preview

STUDIES ON SCARAB SEALS

VOLUMEll ,r I &

3

ScarabSealsand their Contribution to History in the early Second Millennium B.C

"X=:,=jf:;:i=:'''

Length

mm l 2

h 5

15 18

Classinlcation

A5 xxx ell

D5 0 ell

19

D5

19

B3 0 ell

20

D7

0

e10

20

D3

0

e10

20

B4

0

e10

21

D6

0

e6

22

S

D3 0

d5

e5

Reference

Designs

Megiddo MB ll ph. B

IOB

Z,epalzf V, 14 Jericho

SfSc 11:2722 Gezer111,pl. CClla Megiddo MB ll ph. B Z,epa/zfV, 66 'Ajjul SfSc 11:2725 'Ajjul S/Sc 11:2726 Jericho S/Sc 11:2723 Z,ach/shIV, pl. 30:64 BZ)S,pl. XV:985

3C+lOAld lO(seated)if IOB

9D+lOAld

IOAld rOAld lO(seated)if IOBf

NS,.pl.XXV:2 10

22

B3 0

UC 30209 d5q:

11

22

B5 0 d5

12

22

B4 0

13

22

14

23

D3 0

e9

15

24

B3

e9

e10

'Ain Samiya (Jerusalem)

7A2a+8A+

Z,Cyan/111,nig. 1:8 'Ajjul SfSc 11:2728 Fara (south) S/.Sc11:2724 'Ajjul SfSc 11:2727 'Ajjul Sf.9c11:2729 BM 24710

IOAld IOAld rOAld IOAld IOAld IOAld

Total: 14 Average Length : 20.9 mm Scale2:1 SeeAnatolian Studies VI (1956)

Frontispiece : Toga Wearers

STUDIES ON To G.L.H. and R.R.-B

SCARAB SEALS

in gratitude for over fifty years

VOLUME R

of friendship

SCARAB SEALS AND THEIR CONTRIBUTION TO HISTORY TN THE EARLY SECOND MILLENNIUM B.C.

Olga Tufnell WITH CONTRIBUTIONSBY G.T.MARTIN AND WILLIAMA. WARD

2,S?o

N.e do Toaibo{

N.' do Cbamada

! ''"'.

Ovo':fss CONTENTS Ust of Text Figuresand Tables Abbreviations Acknowledgements

Xlv

Preface

xv

INTRODUCTION

British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data

A. Links with the First intermediatePeriodof Egypt B. Twelfth to Early Eighteenth Dynasty Scarabs

Studieson ScarabSeals. (Modern Egyptology) Vo1.2: Scarabsealsand their contribution to history in the secondmillennium B.C

C. Royal-name Scarabs

Part1; Text. 1. Seals(Numismatics) - Egypt 1. Tufnell, Olga 11. Series 737 .6'0932 CD5345

CHAPTERONE. PRELIMINARIES: MATERIAL AND METHOD

2. Scarabs- Egypt

3. Amulets, Egyptian

ISBN, 0 85668130X

A. ExcavatedSeriesfrom Syria-Palestine and Egypt B. DatingandChronoloW

24

C. Percentage Tables

24

D. Illustrations, Plate Descriptions and Publications Lists

25

3

27

CHAPTER'l'WO. STYLISTICANALYSIS

© Olga Tufne111984. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, storedin a retrievalsystem,or transmittedin any form by any meanswithout the prior written permission of the publishers.

A. Dimensions

28

B. Design classes

28

C. Headtypes

31

D. Back types

34

E. Sidetypes

36

F. Materials

38

G. ChronologicalSummary H. HistoricalDevelopment of ScarabStyle

43 44

CHAPTER THREE. EXCAVATED SCARABSFROM SYRO-PALESTINIAN SITES A. Ruweise near Sidon : Tomb 66 and supporting groups

53

58

C. Jericho : Middle Bronze Age Cemeteries

CHAPTER FOUR. EXCAVATED SCARABS FROM SOUTHERN AND EGYPTIAN SITES

85 85

A. KahunTown and UronartiFort B. Tell Fara(south) C. Tellel-'Ajjul nearGaza D. Kahun: MaketTomb

86 92 106

11 5

CHAPTERFIVE. CLASSESOFDESIGN

115

I . linear Patterns

116

2. Scrolls and Spirals

117

3. Egyptian Signs and Symbols

21600009371

53

57

B. Megiddo : Burials on the mound

Printed and Published by ARIS & PHILLIPS LTD, Teddington House, Warminster, Wilts.

3

4. ConcentricCircles

124

5. CrossPatterns

125

6. Coiled and "Woven" Patterns

125

7. ScrollBorders

127

Vll

8

Rope Borders

9

Animals and Heraldic Beasts

10.

131

131

Human and Mythical Figures

134

11

Namesand Titles (with G.T. Martin) 12. Unclassifiedor UninscribedScarabs

140 148

LISTOFTEXTFIGURES Frontispiece

Fig. 1

6 7

Te[[ e]-'Ajju] : Contents of Round pit 41 1

18

8

20

10

Tell el-'Ajjul : Contentsof Round pit 445 Tell el-'Ajjul : Contentsof Rectangularpit 407 Tell el-'Ajjul : Contentsof Rectangularpit 263

11

Tell el-'Ajjul : Contents of Rectangular pit GBE

22

c. Scarabs of the Beginning of the Thirteenth Dynasty (ca.1785-1745 B.C.)

12 13

14

Chart of ScarabHeads Chart of ScarabBacks Chart of ScarabSides

32

d. Scarabsof the End of the Thirteenth Dynasty (ca. 1690-1650 B.C.)

37

15

Some inscribed and uninscribed scarabsmade of materials other than "steatite ''

40

b. ScarabStyle : Introductory Remarks

16

c. The Main Hyksos Sequence: Stylistic Analysis

17

Scarabsfrom Tel Aviv Harbour Cemetery Scarabsfrom Hazor, Cistern9024

57

d. Royal-name Scarabsoutside the Main Sequence

18-19

e. TheScarabs of Nehsy

20

Jericho: PotteryfromTombA 34, Phases I (early)- 4 (late) Scarabs fromTell Fara(south), Tomb1021

21

Scarabsfrom Tell el-'Ajjul, Block A, room Q and Grave1165

22-24

Scarabsfrom Kahun, Maket Tomb

25

ScarabDesign Class3D : the Cartouche

122

26

Proposed relation between the Turin Canon, the Memphite Genealogy

157

2 3

A. Historical Considerations

151

4

151

5

The TwelfthDynasty a. Introduction of Royal-name Scarabs b. Contemporary Scarabs versus Re-issues : Criteria for Selection

2

T.he Thirteenth and "Fourteenth"

Dynasties

154

a. TheTurin Canon,Manetho,etc. b. Scarabs of the Sobkhotpe-Group (ca. 1744-1690 B.C.)

3.

7

Tell el-'Ajjul Tell el-'Ajjul Tell el-'Ajjul Tell el-'Ajjul Tell el-'Ajjul

CHAPTERSIX. ROYAL-NAME SCARABS,by William A. Ward

l

Toga Wearers Tell el-'Ajjul: Plan of the site

The Periodof the FifteenthDynasty(The "Hyksos"Age)

162

a. Remarks on the Historical Background

f. Kings of the Hyksos Period : Tentative Sequence Excursus

B. Stylistic Analysisof the Royal-nameSeries

1. Introduction

173

2. Scarab Length

9

: Contentsof Block K-L room LZ 9 : Contentsof Block AC-AD : Contentsof Block AJ-AQ : Contentsof Round pit TCH : Contentsof Round pit GDV

9 12 13 16 17

19 21

35

55

60 - 61 91 108

110- 114

andchronology

3. Design Classes

27

4. Heads

28

5. Backs

The development of Design 3B into the several chronological stagesof 3E

165

Frequencyof border designsin the Fifteenth Dynasty Royal-namesequence;

166

actual numbers and percentages

6. Sides

29

7. Summary : Characteristic Features 30

C. Scarabsof Djeserkheperre

176

D. Scarabsof Nubkheperre

178

E. The Supplementary Series

179

F. DistributionLists

Stylistic featureswhich help establishthe chronological order of the main Hyksossequence

168

Tentative chronological order of kings : period of the Fifteenth Dynasty

172

UST OF TABLES

184

l-xxv CHAPTER SEVEN. SUMMARIES AND CONCLUSIONS

193

xxVI

PARTTWO INVENTORY

203

PLATES

255

INDEXTOVOLS.IANDll

xxVll xxvlll-xxXll xxXlll xl -q '

\.0

-+ o\ o '+ oo t\

2577 2578

22 22

Total: I I

n

--4

19 20 21

cq o\ --


(X)

t'-

Cn

00

t"-

C> C''q tA

C'q

Cn

('r)

--4

t.fl

V)

V)

--H

('q

--+

--4

.D

a.

0

8

0 0 0

.a

0

Q

8

3 0

a. H

0

N

E

>b

g

HISTORICALCONSIDERATIONS

1.

THE 'TWELFTH DYNASTY

a.

Introduction of Royal-nameScarabs

The royal-name scarabsassembledin the present volume begin with SesostrisI. On present evidence, scarabs bearing royal names were not manufactured prior to the Twelfth Dynasty, (Sf.Sc1, pp. 12 f., 62, n. 267) and Hall's observationsthat there are no known contemporary scarabs of Ammenemes I still holds true. All things considered, however, it seemslikely that royal-name scarabswere first issued under this king even though no sure examples can be

>

D

A.

= +

8

0

Q Q

b

Ji

©

B

0

8 g

Q. >1

ote quoted.z

.H

0

n

i

.e

The beginning of the Twelfth Dynasty was a particularly auspicious time for the introduction of scarabsbearing royal names since it ushered in a period of increasing political and administrative activity in Egypt.3 The reign of AmmenemesI was an ambitious one asit had to be if he were to establish a new royal house and restore the unity of the country, a move begun but not completed under the Thebans who preceded him. One of the most significant changesto take place at the beginning of the dynasty was the move of the central administration from Thebes to a new fortress-town called "Ammenemes takes Possessionof the Two Lands", better known by its abbreviated Egyptian name of ltj-lowy. Ammenemes' major efforts were thus directed toward establishing internal stability and safe frontiers in the Delta and the south. He cleared out the last pockets of Asiatic resistance in the east Delta and at his death we find his son and co-regent Sesostrissubduing Libyan tribes in the west.

!

4Q

30 20 10

Once SesostrisI assumedthe throne, there wasa burst of activity in all areas,now possiblebecausepolitical sta-

0

bility had been restored. Sesostriscontinued the building activities of his father in aU parts of Egypt and was able to exploit even more the natural resourcesof the land as attested by texts from the quarries in the Wadi el-Hedi, Wadi Hammamat, at Sinai and Asswfn. An energetic policy in the south brought Nubia as far as the second cataract under Egyptian control. It is probable that this intensified activity is reflected in the numerous scarabs of this king (nos.

40

3001-3030). It is in this context of a newly unified and growing government administration that we can place the introduction of royal-name scarabs. The burgeoning government departments staffed with more and more bureaucrats would have need for official sealsand the scarab was an ideal object for this purpose. Although used for some time as an amulet, the scarabhad only recently come to be used as a seal;the earliest evidence now available comes from the decade or so prior toAmmenemes' siezure of the throne (S/Sc 1, p. 46). This does not mean that all scarabs,royal or otherwise, were used as sealsor that the manufacture of scarabswas primarily for this purpose. Scarabsoriginally servedan amuletic purpose (Stnc 1, p. 44) and this usagecontinued throughout their long history. Thus, there is every reason to believe that a higl{ proportion of the royal-name scarabs assembledin the present Catalogue were never used as seals. Certainly, the crude workmanship of many examples is excellent proof that they were not made in royal work-shops for the purpose of sealing documents and the like. Some must simply have beenjewellery such as the fine example of Sesostris111from DahshQr(no. 3065) and the splendid amethyst scarabof SesostrisI from Bethshan (no. 3029). Others will have had a purely amuletic intent, to be retained in a family for generations as attested by their archaeological contexts, often much later than the lifetimes of the kings with whose namesthey are inscribed.4

3A

3B

20 10

3C-E-

0

30

20 h'\

10 6

0

Throughout this chapter, the discussion,statistics and Tables include what

kings, a scarab bearing one name or the other cannot be ascribed to a

information can be gleaned from both the main series (nos. 3001 -35 i4) and

particular reign For the overall picture and the details of what follows, see:W.C. Hayes, C.4,H1,2, p. 492 tf. \ G. F'opener,i,itt6rature et politique dens t'Egypte

theSupplementary Series(pp. 179-84) of royal-name scarabs. This supple mentary material has been used with great caution and only those stylistic

featureswhich can be positively verified from the publications have been listed.

40

de /a xr7e dynasfie (Paris, 1956); J. von Beckerath, 24S 92 (1 96S-66), 4 ff.; ffl/I/W, pp. 65 ff. On ltj-towy, see especially W.K. Simpson, JH.RCf

The Cowroids, e]c., and a few scarabs of members of roya] families (nos. 35 ] 5 3535) are not included in the statistics but are noted where necessaryin the

2 (1 963), 53 ff.

discussion

It is of interest that this custom still prevails in Nubian villages.

\

1. z.

74

9-to

150

Scarabs

Scara&sB4/, p- xiii, Stock, Sfudlepz, p. 14, agrees. Petrie(PSC, p. 19) did

found in ancient sites become family heirlooms, handed down to the eldest son for many generations. Such scarabsare true amulets endowed

not agree,though his remarks are criticised by Hall, J£H 5 (1918), 74.

with the magic of age and have a special efficacy for the family possess-

There is no scarab engraved with both his prenomen and nomen -Sehetepibre Ammenemes -- and, since both names were used by other

ing them. I have studied one such modern heirloom in Orfen/a//a.fopanferzsfaPenodfca 6/7 (1 975-76), 589 ff.

151

I

In shot.t, there were many uses for royal-name scarabsand severalreasonswhy they were made. But most importtint in the present context is that royal-name scarabswere manufactured as amulets in memory of dead kings, some-

times long after their lifetimes. It is this problem which hasproved the most difficult in assemblinga collection of contemporary scarabsof Twelfth Dynasty kings. b.

Contemporary ScarabsVersus Re-issues: the Criteria for Selection Unlike the late Middle Kingdom and Hyksos periods, the Twelfth Dynasty presents no problems with regard to a sequenceof kings and their chronology. An accurate picture of scarabstyle should presumably be a simple matter. This is not the case, however. While numerous scarabsnaming Twelfth Dynasty rulers are known, only a pitiful few can be judged contemporary on the basis of a known archaeological context. Even when many excavated examples of a given king are known, it is frustrating that the archaeological contexts are usually later than his own lifetime.S

'there are indeed very few royal-name scarabsof the dynasty which were found in contemporary contexts; one each of SesostrisI and ll from Ruweise near Sidon(see pp. 3, 53f.), one of Sesostrisll from Bethshan (no. 3037); two of Sesostris111from Dahsh(Ir and two of Ammenemes 111from DahshQrand one from Lahun.6 We may add to this scant material a few seal impressions which we can reasonably supposeto have been made and used during the reigns of the king whose name they bear. There is one of SesostrisI from Gezer, others of Ammenemes ll and Sesostris ll from Uronarti and lah(in, and two of Ammenemes 111from Kahun.7 That such impressions were made by scarabs seemslikely sinceroyal namesare rarely found on ovoids or cowroids at this time ; only a few are known for Sesostrislll

(nos. 3516-3518). This excavated material supplies little information for a stylistic history of scarabsso we must depend on a judicious choice from the scores of scarabs bearing royal namesof this dynasty obtained by purchase and now contained

in collections throughout the world. Sinceso much obviously dependson the choice of which scarabsshould be considered contemporary to the Twelfth Dynasty, something should be said at this point as to the reasoning which lies behind the present collection of material. While the criteria now to be described were applied to the royal-name sca-

rabsof the late Middle Kingdom and SecondIntermediate periodsas well, the difficulties arenot asacute aswith the Twelfth Dynasty. The whole matter of re-issuesrarely applies in the later periods since we should expect neither the obscure kings of the Thirteenth Dynasty nor the "Hyksos" of the Fifteenth and their contemporaries to be honoured.

'lbe problem of choosingcontemporary or later examplesis thus more or lessrestricted to the Twelfth Dynasty. The underlying principle has been that a scarabwith a royal name should be considered contemporary unless there are compelling arguments to the contrary. Such arguments fall into three categories: 1. stylistic features which are demonstrably later in date. On present evidence, for example, it can be shown that the humera/ ca//osfry was not normally represented on the elytra until the beginning of the Eighteenth Dynasty (Stnc 1, p. 80; 11,Chapter Two, D). Or, specific head types can be proved to have come into use only after the Twelfth

Dynasty 2. the orthography of royal names. In general,it is assumedthat a royal namewould be spelledcorrectly on contemporary scarabsunless there seems to be some uniformity in a variant spelling, or a valid reason for same. For example, the spellings of several royal names where an original Rr is replaced by n/rr.wy,J -- a substitution accepted by many

aslegitimate 3.

"T'r'r

It is admitted at the outset that the Catalogue thus assembledis open to criticism and any expert in the RiGIdwill disagreeabout what has or has not been included. But when a sizable seriesof excavated examples is lacking, the meth-

odology usedmust of necessitybe somewhatsubjective. No matter how rigorous the criteria for selection, at some points the ultimate decision contains an element of opinion. While we have subjected the available material to repeated examination for some fifteen years, Miss Tufnell and I are the first to acknowledge that mistakes can be and probably

havebeenmade with regard to individual pieces. The largest number of omissionsof Twelfth Dynasty royal-namescarabshas beenmade on orthographic grounds. It is surprising how frequently incorrect spellingsof royal namesof this dynasty are accepted as legitimate "variant spellings and historical conclusions drawn from such doubtful evidence. One could perhaps justify such an approach if these "variants" were documented elwwhere than on scarabs,but such is not the case. The monuments. with extreme ly rare exceptions, show a universal tendency to spell royal namesof the period with the correct order and number of signsand it would be foolish to discount this. For example, one frequontly finds the statement that scarabswhich include the signs @)r-k;, with or without a cartouche, preserve an abbreviated form of the prenomen !gpr-k;.Rr(Sesostris 1). This may be true, but such scarabs are certainly not contemporary for, to my knowledge, there is no such abbreviation (ih any other type of monument made during the reign of this king. We do have, however, rare examples where this prenomen is written incorrectly in the order f?r-k;-h@r on contemporary documents instead of the normal Rr.&pr-k;: on a stela from the Nubian desert, two ostraca from Hatntlb and two stelae in the Louvre.ti But this spelling seems not to have been used on contemporary scarabsso that we need not be concerned here with those unique scarabs where the last signs were reversed.i2 For Ammenemes ll there is one inscription from Sinai in which his prenomen is spelled in the sequenceRr-k;wrzbw.i3 The prenomen of.Sesostris ll is written Rr.h@r./zrinstead of the normal Rr.hWr on stelae from the Nubian desertand the Wadi Gasses,thona rock stela from Asswgn i5 and on a piece ofjewellery from Riqqeh.i6 A dubious example is a private name which includes this prenomen on a scarabwhere the sun-disc may simply be misplaced due to the exigencies of space,' 'as often on scarabswhere spaceis at a premium. The use of the joined kJ-signs, or a single k;-sign, in the prenomensA/Z)w-k;w-Rr (Ammenemes 11)and !r'-k;wRr (Sesostris111)appears rarely on contemporary monuments. A single k; appears on a stela from Abydos naming Sesostrislllnand two k;-signs are written in the personal name Nubkaure-seneb on a seal-impression from I.Jronarti.i9 The peculiar form where two of the k;-signs are fused into a single sign does appear, albeit very rarely, elsewherethan on scarabs: in the personal name Waemkau on a Thirteenth Dynasty stela20andin an example of the prenomen of Sesostris111in a text from Sinai.2i The latter prenomen appears rather frequently with these variant spellings at Sem-

naFort, but alwaysin texts which post-datethe reignof this king.22 In general, then, it is quite apparent that Twelfth Dynasty royal names were very rarely mis-spelled on contemporary documents and that the rare examples of such mistakes should give warning that the numerous variants on the scarabsmay rightly be looked at with suspicion. We have therefore been reluctant to include in the Catalogue scarabs which deviate from the proper spelling. We have ignored all of the so-called "abbreviated" spellings of royal names eventhough they may sometimes be accompanied by a royal title and/or be written in a cartouche. The extensive use

of suchroyal insignia on design-scarabs cautionsthat their use doesnot automatically signify royal names.

have been omitted.

proven re-issues. Here again the criteria are basically stylistic, as they apply to groups of scarabs which

collectively show features that arelater. It is worth emphasizingMartin's warning that cults of Twelfth Dynasty kings flourished long after their deaths and that, in somecases,royal namescame to havea purely amuletic value in later

times.S Both factorswere responsiblefor the production of scarabsout of historical context. Unfortunately, one rarely Rindsa group of scarabslike the re-issueof SesostrisI made under Amenhotep ll where ten scarabsshow identical style, the same orthographic variants, and the name of the latter king on two of the group.v Theseprinciples have been applied throughout the Catalogue, forming a somewhat different approach than used by others. This is clearly seen by comparing the present collection with Giveon's very helpful list of Twelfth Dynasty scarabsfound in Canaan.io Almost two-thirds of his list has been omitted here as a result of applying the criteria just

Wehaveviolated our own criteria only at two points in the royal-nameseriesof the Twelfth Dynasty. First, we have accepted some scarabsof Ammenemes ll and Sesostris111with the variants of the triple-k; noted above since thesespellings also occur on contemporary cylinders of these rulers. Second, four scarabshave been included for Sesostris ll which reversethe order of the last two signsas on the documents noted above. But since this is not sufficient

reasonin itself, some further justinlcation seemsin order. No. 3040 shows an arrangement of hieroglyphs surrounding the name which is particularly associatedwith Twelfth Dynasty kings. Note especially examples of Sesostrislll (no. 3060) and Ammenemes lll23which show very similar patterTlsand signs. Closely related patterns are found with SesostrisI (no. 301 1), Sesostrisllm and Ammenemes lll 11

that many examples have not been included here. Again, thesehave been omitted on the basis of the criteria listed above

R.Engelbach,.4S4£ 33 (1933), 73; B. Grdseloff,.4SH£ 51 (1951) 144; G. Posener, JE=4 54 (1968), pl. IX; K. Sethe, Zgypffsche fesesf&cke

given. Similarly, comparisonswith the major published collections of Twelfth Dynasty royal-namescarabswill show

(Reprint;

25 (1973), 12.

13.

]4.

IS.

Darmstadtl

1 959), p. 81 : 14 (louvre

pl. 13: 2 (L.ouvre C3).

CI ); P. Vernus,

Repfg

(nos. 3078-80). This style has long been considered as contemporary to the Twelfth Dynasty.2Sand there can be little

doubt that the scarabin questionbelongsto this group. It should further be noted that it hasan A4 headwhich is most closely associated with the Twelfth Dynasty in both the royal-name and design-scarabseries. All things considered, in

spite of the incorrect order of signs,this scarabcan be taken as a product of the reign of Sesostrisll. No. 3043 has a B6 head found in the royal-nameseriesonly in the Twelfth Dynasty, with one examplein the early Thirteenth. This head does appear, however, in the Jericho series, primarily in Groups 111and IV. The d7 side is rare throughout the royal-name series and appearsin Jericho Groups lll-lV and sporadically in other groups of MB ll date.Z The most prominent feature is the border of concentric circles (design class 4D) which many have heretofore

felt is a signof post-MiddleKingdom date. The key discussionis that of Stock who, addingto Otto's previousremarks, concludes that concentric circles appear in the later Second Intermediate Period.a7 There is little use in repeating his arguments here since concentric circle designsare found already in the later First Intermediate Period (Stnc 1, p. 57) and 4D borders appear in Ruweise Tomb 66 and Group 111at Jericho.

No. 3037 from Bethshanwasfound on the tell in one of a group of unpublished burials only briefly noted shortly after their discovery.28 These burials were beneath housescharacteristic of the "Hyksos" ageand intruded into Twelfth

Dynastylevelswith which they are partially contemporary. MissTufnell informs me that the pottery from the burial in question nitsjust after Kenyon's MB lIB phase at Megiddo and between Groups 2 and 4 of the Courtyard Cemetery at 'AJjul.29 The burial thus falls within the period of Sesostrisll himself and the scarabcan be considered contemponary

The fourth example, no. 3047 from Jericho, has been included even though its archaeological context cannot be dated with precision. The B2 head and 7B3 border are at home in the Twelfth Dynasty though it is admitted that these features are also known later. This is one of the few scarabsincluded here solely on the basisof personal opinion. Finally, note should be made of no. 3057, a scarabbearing the prenomen of Sesostris111and what has been taken to be another name, Awibre. A near-duplicate in a private collection in Cairo was published long ago by Legrain, along with two very similar scarabsbearing the name Awibre only.30 The latter three scarabshave not been seen,though

there is no doubt about the date of no. 3057. In the royal-nameseries,sidee6 is characteristicof the Twelfth Dynasty and does not appear again until Merneferre; in the design-scarabseries,side e6 is again characteristic of the Twelfth Dynasty with only isolated examples thereafter. Roughly the samecan be said of head B4. No. 3057 must therefore date to the Twelfth Dynasty in spite of the various interpretations given to this scarab and the historical problems such a dating might create. J '

2.

THE THIRTEENTH AND "FOURTEENTH" DYNASTIES

a.

The Turin Canon, Manetho, etc.

One'sview of the Thirteenth Dynasty dependslargely on how one answerstwo questions: doesthe Turin Canon represent a reasonably accurate sequenceof kings, and was Egypt more or less united for most of the period between the Twelfth and Fifteenth Dynasties?The two main reactions to these questions are best represented by Stock on the one hand, by Hayes and von Beckerath on the other.

Stock answeredboth questions in the negative. He assumeda break-down in central authority shortly after the Twelfth Dynasty which was followed by contemporary dynastiesin the north and south. After this "interregnum," a group of kings known to modern historians as the "Sobkhotpe-group" reunited Egypt for half a century or so- Egypt was then disunited again until the advent of the ''Hyksos" age.3Z A substantially different answer is given by Hayes and von Beckerath who defend the basic reliability of the Turin Canon and feel that the Thirteenth Dynasty ruled from the Middle Kingdom capital of ltj-towy, near lisht. While the kings of this dynasty had no discernible family connections, they represent an unbroken line of rulers who controlled

most of the country at least up to the end of the Sobkhotpe-group. Central power declined after this key group of kings, culminating in the appearance of the Hyksos.u

Neither position can be proved beyond doubt though, on balance, the arguments of Hayes and von Beckerath are the more convincing. Even here, however, one may argue certain points. For example, while there is ample evidence that the Thirteenth Dynasty capital was at ltj-towy until the time of the Sobkhotpe-group,3'+it is questionable that any real evidence exists that this was true for the period following these kings.3s But on the whole the general reconstruction of the period suggestedby Hayes and von Beckerath is assumedin the present discussion, with one important

exceotion cep This exception is their interpretation of the "Fourteenth" Dynasty arising from an attempt to harmonize the Turin Canon with Manetho's statement that such a dynasty, consisting of 76 kings, ruled from the city of Xios in the easternDelta. The argument is that these rulers were once listed in the now badly destroyed Turin Canon Cols. Vlll to X, the remnants of which include severalfictitious names as well as genuine rulers. Hayes assumesthe existence of

a Fourteenth Dynasty "Throughout the regimeof the Thirteenth Dynasty and for some thirty yearsafter its fall."X Von Beckerath suggeststhat these kings do not represent a single dynasty, but numerous local families ruling at various towns in the Delta during the later Thirteenth Dynasty after the Sobkhotpe-group.3'Z

Historians have generally adopted some such attitude, seemingly reluctant to abandon the Manethoan tradition even though this tradition gives no names at all and those recorded in the Turin Canon which supposedly make up this dynasty are virtually unknown elsewhere. But is it necessaryto cling to Manetho? Future discoveriesmay validate a single Xoite dynasty or a series of local dynasties in the Delta, but there is no evidence presently known which leads one to believe this is true. What, then, if we abandon this insistance that Manetho should be harmonized with the Tu0 ?na rin Canon Redford's recent attempt to do precisely this is of some interest.38To Redford, the Thirteenth Dynasty would

embracemost of Turin Canon Cols. VI to IX, this is, over 80 kings, while the so-called "Fourteenth" was originally recorded in Cols. IX and X, something over 30 kings. The latter, he feels, were contemporary vassalsof the ''Hyksos kings at Avaris, hence, "Lesser Hyksos" rulers owing allegiance to the kings of the Fifteenth Dynasty. He makes the interesting observation that between the time of the Turin Canon and Manetho, scribal tradition appears to have confused these lesser "rulers of &;swf (foreign lands)" with the place-name.6rlsww (Xios) so that a group of minor local kings ultimately achieved a status of their own as a separatedynasty ruling from one specific place. This new approach should be taken seriously even though Redford has strained his arguments at certain points.39 He at least has shown that we need not be bound by Manetho's Xoite dynasty and that the way is open for alternative

interpretations. The following is such an alternativewhich I haveadopted asa working hypothesis in the presentwork (seeHig.26). We can begin with the now well-establishedfact that the Thirteenth Dynasty ruled from ltj-towy and, at least until the end of the Sobkhotpe-group, governed most of Egypt. Just how much of the Turin Canon should be assigned to this dynasty remains problematic, though there is much to be said for von Beckerath's opinion that it took up the whole of Cols. VI and VII. Since the Fifteenth Dynasty is found in Col. X.1 5-21 , it is the long list between the Thirteenth and Fifteenth Dynasties which presents a problem, that is, from Col. VIII.I to X .14. The rulers of Cols. VIII.I to X.14 were obviously included for good reason and may conceivably be thought of as local kinglets in various parts of Egypt contemporary to both the Thirteenth and Fifteenth Dynasties (see fig. 26). The intriguing idea that 8;swr was confused with e)sww fits into this scheme so that some of this large group of otherwise unattested rulers may indeed have been Hyksos vassals;it is not necessaryto place + all these rulers in the Delta within

a relatively short period of time.

There is one point about the composition of the Turin Canon -- indeed all ancient king-lists -- which needs emphasizingsince it plays a significant role in the present chapter. Dynasties or other groupings of kings are usually listed

asif in a singlechronological sequenceso that exterior controls arerequired in order to define contemporary, competing or overlapping dynasties. Precisely this situation is evident in the Turin Canon in both the First and Second Intermediate Periods. The Theban Eleventh and the Heracleopolitan Ninth/Tenth Dynasties were roughly contemporary, 34.

3S.

To the evidencelisted by W.K. Simpson,JHRCF 2 (1963),53 ff., and v. Beck.,p. 73 ff., showingthat the capitalremainednearLight throughout most of the dynasty, canbe addeda statuepublishedby H. de Meulenaere, B17(40 69 (1971), 64.

36. 37.

W.C. Hayes, C:4.H 11,1, p. 53

37a

Such an approach has been used by P. Kaplony, .D/e .Ro//siege/ des a/fen

The central argument revolvesaround the stenaof Horemkhawef, one of

a largegroup of contemporarystelaefrom Hierakonpolisand Edfu, pub. lishedby W.C.Hayes,JEH 33 (1947), 9. This stelanotesthat the king resided at ltj.towy;

two other stelae of the group name the rulers Djed-

neferre Dudimose I and Djedhetepre Dudimose 11. The stelae asa group

thereforebelongroughly to the time of thesetwo kings,thoughit is not possibleto placethem with any certainty in the Thirteenth Dynasty sequence; see further below, p. 160.

38. 39.

V. Beck.,p. 82

Proposed Retgtion betweett the Turin Canon, the Memphite Genealogy and chronology.

yet listed in sequencein Cols. IV and V.40 Further, the Fifteenth Dynasty is listed in Col. X, the contemporary Seven. teenth in Col. XI. While these overlaps can be substantiated by contemporary documents, we have available no help whatsoever in defining contemporary or overlapping dynasties or reigns for most of the period under consideration.

'Thatis, if we adopt von Beckerath'sview that the Thirteenth Dynasty wasoriginally listed in Turin Canon Col. VI. 5

B.C.

DYNASTIES

to the end of Col. Vll, then Cols.Vlll, IX and part of X must representlocal rulerscontemporaryto both the Thir-

TURINCANON

MEMPHITE

Cols. V-X

GENEALOGY

teenth and Fifteenth Dynasties. Historians have generally assumed that Cols. Vlll-X give an approximate chronological sequenceof kings so that

2000 1991

a king listed in Col. Vlll must necessarilyhave lived prior to a king listed in Col. IX. There is nothing presently known

V,19

which forces us to that conclusion. With rare exceptions, these kings are unknown elsewhere so that fr can/zof be glared

f/za/any c/zro/zologfca/order !s repress/zfed. Facedwith scoresof ephemeralkings about whom little may have been known in Empire times, the compiler of the Turin Canonsimply gavetheir namesastradition had handed them down. If the author himself had any specific sequencein mind, this escapesus completely; it may have been geographical rather than chronological. Thus, all attempts to put blocks of namestogether in one period or another overlook the possibility that there

IV,6 1950

IV, 5 SESOSTRIS I IV,4

may be no order intended at aU. The scribe may simply have listed all the miscellaneous names preservedin those re-

cords availableto him, lumping them together betweenthe better attestedThirteenth and Fifteenth Dynasties. There

AMMENEMESI

1900

Xll

is no reason to supposeaccuracy when he was faced with a plethora of nameswhich were evidently not connected by

AMMENEMESll

IV, 3 SESOSTRIS lll

dynastic ties. The reconstruction of the Turin Canon adopted here is shown graphically in fig. 26. While it is no more provable than the others, it does have the advantage of retaining the best arguments of both von Beckerath and Redford. Furthermore, it retains the now proved sequenceof the TwelfUI, Thirteenth and Fifteenth Dynasties in that chronological order, with the "Fourteenth," "Sixteenth," and Seventeenth having no separatechronological existence of their own. Finally, it releasesus from the debatable assumptions that (1) the Manethoan tradition is reliable at this point and (2)

Memphite tomb of the Twenty-second Dynasty.4i This records 60 ancestorsof the deceased,each supposedly the son of the preceding, as well as the kings under whom 27 of these priests servedand presumably died. The whole list covers the period from the Eleventh to the Twenty-second Dynasties and, becauseof its being a local Memphite tradition, the rulers listed here must have exercized control over that city. While the genealogy is incomplete at least at one point,42for the period of interest here, it seemsto be quite accurate with regard to the length of time elapsed. Allowing a quarter-century per generation, the kings listed from Ammenemes I to Amosis fit where we should expect them to, where their actual dates are known (see fig. 26).43

lists lby and Aaqen immediately after the Twelfth Dynasty, and Sharekjust before Apophis. No doubt the rapid turn-

1800 1778

VI,5

41

42 43

lll,I I

=

1700

X

0

i

1650

lll,lO 111, 9

0g 0 Bi

111, 8

< Z

111, 7

i

E

g0

111, 6 S/RK

Von Beckerath'sidentification of Aaqenwith the . . . lb Sethof Turin Canon VI. 23 is highly theoretical; v. Beck., p. 53 f. Sark is now usually thought to be Manetho's Salitis, involving a phonetic shift which is pos-

V. Beck., p. 27 f.; L Borchardt, .Die .A#rfe/ zar ze/f/fc/ze/z Fes//egung pon

fUnkfet! der dgyptisctten Geschichte uttd flare Anwendultg (Cano, \ 935), p. 96 ff. This and its partial duplicate in the Louvre have been usedpri-

sible but not probable in the present case; cf. L Borchardt, .D/e7Wlrz'e/,

marily assourcesfor the history of the post-Empireperiod; K.A. Kitchen,

proposed simply because 3;rk is the only reasonably contemporary name bearing any resemblance to Salitis. Helck's suggested Hurrian cognate 5a//aXu for XJrk seems acceptable though this does not solve the problem

77zeZ%frd/nfermedfafe Period Irzf&ppf(Warminster, with literature quoted there.

i

Xlll

1600 Most recently discussedin ff.MW, p. 2 ff., with previous literature quoted.

111,13:my 111,]2 r;KN

Scarabs of theSobkhotpe-group (ca.1744-1690 B.C.)

44.

Vlll,I

1750

Since only the kings of the Sobkhotpe-group are represented by more than one or two scarabs,it is to this group 40.

SESOSTRISlll

111,14[AMMENEMES lll]

VI,3

over of rulers during the period caused some confusion in the family records which lie behind this genealogy, but it is unfortunate that the three names which are preservedcan in no casebe equated with known rulers with any assurance:"

b.

IV,I

111,15[AMMENEMES lll]

But the document fails us at the crucial point, for beyond the Twelfth Dynasty there areno familiar namesuntil we reach Apophis and Amosis at the end of the segment given in fig. 26. That these two kings are listed in succeeding generations is of some interest. This conforms to the evidenceof the Kamose Stela (see below, p. 162) which shows that Kamose, Amosis' immediate predescessor,was a contemporary of Apophis. Therefore, the latter ought to fit precisely where he does in the Memphite chronology. Between Apophis and the restored Ammenemes 111,however, none of the names one would have expected, such as kings of the Sobkhotpe-group, have been recorded. Instead, the document

[SESOSTR]S]]]]

1850

that the Turin Canonpreservesa chronologicalsequence in Cols.Vlll to X. Another chronological document which has somepertinencehere is the genealogyof a priestly family from a

[V, 2

p. 106, n. 4, and v. Beck., p. 133 f. This identification may havebeen

1973), p. 1 87 ff.,

Four of Hivegenerations have been omitted between Ramses ll and

of whatto do with Salitis;Bezfe/zu/zg'en, p. 101,and Gesc/z/c/zfe, p. 132,

Amenemope;K.A. Kitchen, 77zzrd /n/ermedfafePerDd, p. 189.

n. ]

I have added the names of Sesostris111to line IV.2 where no king is listed and Ammenemes 111to lines 111.14-1 5 which are now destroyed. Theserestorations seemlogical.

111,5 APOPHIS X, 14

1550

111,4 AMOSIS

i500

156

157

that we Hirshturn our attention

It is listed in the Turin Canon as follows:4S

StScll

TURINCANON Col

VI.24

(nos. 3532, 3534). Three scarabs are known of a Queen Nubhetepti, though it is not possible to place her historically47 Far more numerous are scarabs of the "Great Royal Wife, She who Dons the Nefer-hedjet Crown, Ini." Brunton lists a dozen scarabs for this queen to which may be added several others.a The three illustrated here (nos. 3528-30) show collective features which Hit best with either Sobkhotpe IV or V. The measurements of the whole group of a dozen or so scarabs-- mid 50%o19-22 mm, average20 mm -- would indicate the latter king though her scarabs would go equally

3099-3108 3109-3130

asweUwith Wahibreor Merneferre.49Othermembersof the royal familiesof the periodmay be the "Royal Concubine Ned", conceivablythe queenof Sobkhotpelll.Stand the ''King's SonSihathor,born of the Royal Concubine Seket."SI However,the identity of both thesepersonages is uncertain.

3131-3161 3162-3167 3168-3171 3172-3201

It has long been recognized that the scarabsof these rulers are stylistically related through the design patterns on the plinth. In reality, two rather distinct periods of scarabstyle are represented within this group. Sobkhotpe lll, Neferhotep I and Sobkhotpe IV make use of the so-called "genealogical'' scarab on which the royal prenomen is shown in a cartouche on one side, the name of the father or mother on the other.46 There are no certain genealogicalscarabs

It is evident from the preceding and this should be kept in mind when comparing the royal-name seriesand design-scarabseries that in the royal-name seriesthere is a complete break in the typological sequencewith the Sobkhotpe-group This group is characterized by larger size, the dominance of C heads, the absenceof back O and the lack of ancillary designson the base. These scarabsthus represent a deviation in the stylistic history of the scarabsof the period, a depiaffon w/zlc/zdoes nof appear f/z //ze colzfemporary desk/z-scarabseries. In the latter, the size shows a steady decrease,C heads are infrequent, back O dominates throughout and ancillary designsform a constant part of the repertoire. Tlhis is true of both the scarab groups used in the present volume and contemporary deposits in Egypt. The reason for this atypical scarabstyle of the Sobkhotpe-group must be simply that the artists of the age preferred it, perhaps imitating a different speciesof beetle. It is'difficult to see here a "southern" style versusa "northern: style represented by the scarabs of the Twelfth Dynasty, there being no contemporary evidence that such distinction did in fact exist. The answer may lie in the origins of the family of Sobkhotpe 111,the first king whose scarabsconstitute a radical departure from the traditional style. Studies on this family by Habachi and MacadamS2indicatethat it

for the latter part of the Sobhotpe-group.

wasprobably of the middle or lower classesand cameoriginally from the Asswin district. They were pamenus,as

The last three kings of this group do not use genealogicalscarabs though they retain the generalarrangement with the cartouche on one side. The other side now contains the title "Goodly God'' or the nomen with "Son of Re." This style appearsonce with Neferhotep I (no. 31 10), once with Sabkhotpe IV (no. 313 1) and is normal with the next three rulers. It is not used again until Apophis at the end of the Fifteenth Dynasty. The two styles may thus have overlapped with the earlier genealogical style dying out under Sobkhotpe IV and the later style just beginning under his predecessors. This overlap helps to link the two styles together in a chronological sequencewhich conforms to the Turin Canon. Other features bear out this division into two stylistic groups, especially scarab length and the use of side types.

Macadamterms them, suddenly thrust into prominence as royalty. Could it be that a family of humble origins would emphasizeits new position by issuing the over-sizeand quite different genealogical scarabs?Once established, this style wasused for a while, to be replaced by another equally as atypical used by the later Sobkhotpe-group, perhaps for

VI.25

VI.26 VI.27

VII.I VII.2 VII.3

Sekhemre-sewadjtowySobkhotpe lll KhasekhemreNeferhotep I Sihathor Khaneferre Sobkhotpe IV Khahetepre Sobkhotpe V WahibreYayebi Merneferre ly

While an absolute chronology can only be obtained indirectly, von Beckerath dates this group of rulers ca. 1744-1690 B.C., differing slightly from Hayes. Stock's dates are somewhat earlier, ca. 1760-1710 B.C., resulting from his approach to the Turin Canon (see above). Von Beckerath's will be used for the present discussion.

This can be summarizedas follows: King

Size : range

mid-S0%

4perage

22 22 23 20

similar reasons.

c.

Scarabs of the Beginning of theThirteenthDynasty(ca.1785-1 745B.C.)

Having discussedthe scarabsof the Sobkhotpe-group, it now remains to examine the few scarabsknown for other rulers of the period. In the Turin Canon, the Sobkhotpe-group is listed in Cols. VI.24 to VII.3 (see above). This dynasty begins with Turin Canon Col. VI. 5, so there are 19 kings listed before the Sobkhotpe-group which, according to von Beckerath's chronology should fall in the period ca. 1785-1745 B.C. Of these 19 kings, four are represented by one

CharacteristicSide Types

scarabeach,one king by two scarabs:

d5 d5 d5

StScll

ZurfpzCanon

3098

Col. VI. 6

d9 d9

d9 e9

18

e9

19

e9

VL 8

3096 3097 e10

It is readily apparent that in both categories the first three rulers are distinct from the last three. A further difference between the two groups is found in the use of head types. While C heads are one of the main characteristics of the

Thirteenth Dynasty, within the Sobkhotpe-groupthey aremore common in the earlier half. They continue in use,of course, but already by Sobkhotpe IV D5 heads are strongly in evidence for the first time in the royal-name series. D5

headscontinue through the rest of the Thirteenth and Fifteenth Dynasties. B headsalso decline in usage,there being

Suppl. Series 47.

Name

Ciassi$cation

I)esigns

Sekhemkare Ammenemes SenbuefS3

B2

1

d8

7B3a

SehetepibreS4

?

0

e7

3B+3D5

d5

7B3a

d5

3D2+7C3b 3D2+7B3b 3D4

B6 0

VI.12 VI.18

Hetepibre Amu SihornedjheryotefSS

SedjefakareAmmenemesVllS6 )

(not seen)

VI.29

UserkareKhendjerS7

C;l

Cf. no. 3535 and Suppl.Series.While shebearsthe title ''Royal Wife'' on one scaraband ''Great Royal Wife'' on the other two, this is a rare personal name so the chances are that all three pieces belong to the same

person. This queen is probably alsorepresented on a scarab (no. 3533)

ll

Neferhotep 1: The Royal Wife Senebsen,namedin a grafnito at Sehel;.ffPre des .Ro/s11,p. 28; v. Beck., p. 174; M. Dewachter, Rep£g 28 (1976), 67 Sobkhotpe IV: the Royal Wife Tian;.f/vre des Rots 11,p. 38. Sobkhotpe V: the Great(Royal Wife) Nebemhat, on a stela

fewer used by the last three rulers than the first three, but this may be misleading as B heads were not common at this time. Perhapsalso misleading is the appearanceof a single A head with the Horstthree while six examples appear with the second three. In general, however, it is evident that the Sobkhotpe-group is not a stylistic unit, but divides neatly

namingthe ''Son of Re Sobkhotpe,born to the Royal Mother Nubhetepti,'' thusassociatingher with the 'r'hirteenthDynasty. Von Beckerath listsBlv167071 (no. 3533) underSobkhotpeV on stylistic grounds(v. Beck.,p. 58), but this is unlikely. HeadC5 and sided8 on this scaraband

Martin, Seals,no. 755. Since this scarab fits stylistically into the period,

into two parts. For theseand other details,seethe ChronologicalDistribution Lists on p. 184 ff.

on the example from the von Bissing Collection(Suppl.

is it possible that Ned was originally a concubine and then promoted to

While they are not included in the royal-name series,it is of interest to note a few scarabsbelonging to various members of the royal families of the Sobkhotpe-group. Haankhef and Kemp, the parents of Neferhotep I and Sobk-

hotpe IV, besidesbeing mentioned on scarabsof their sonsare eachalso representedby a singlescarabof their own

Series) and the

7B3 scrollborder on no. 3535 point rather to the beginningor end of the Thirteenth Dynasty, assuming all four scarabs name the same queen.

from Coptos, though there is some doubt that a king is actually named; .favre des .Ro/s 11, p. 41

the status of queen? Seeprevious note. QB 111,pl. XIX I (Cairo JdE 48238). Certainly not the son of Neferho-

Vll; lacking other evidence, no Hind conclusion is possible.

tep I who held the thronefor avery short time betweenhis father and uncle; v. Beck.,p. 57. Not only would it be strangefor a Crown Prince

G. Brunton,.4S.4£49 (1949), 99 ff.; to his examplesmaynow be added

to be the son of a concubine, but the royal family appears together in a

an impression from Kerma and two more scarabs: Reisner,Karma ll,

rock inscription at Sehel where King Neferhotep and QueenSenebsen

nlg.168: 59; Hornung127 (Suppl.Series);Hodjash, p'D/ 1973,p. 62: 13.

areshownwith the children. Headingthe list of the latter is Prince

Queens have been listed for the first four rulers of the Sobkhotpe-group

Sihathor; LZ) Text' IV, p. 126. The Prince Sihathor, son of Seket, of the

Shecould thus be associatedwith SobkhotpeI and ll or SobkhotpeVl-

asfollows Sobkhotpe 111: The Royal Wife Ned, found on Louvre StenaC8, noted in Z,/vre des Ro/s 11,p. 22. 'otis queen is also men-

tioned on a private stela in Leiden; Boesser,fe/dc/i 11,pl. XVI 17.

On the thinily relationshipsof this king, seeM.F. Liming Macadam, .//:'H .37 ( 195 1). 20 1't'.

Since these five rulers fall within a short span of 25-30 years, their scarabscan be discussedas a group. Their most striking feature is the use of scroll borders on four of the six. Sekhemkare and Hetepibre use 7B3a, already known with Sesostris1, 11and 111and then again in the Fifteenth Dynasty. Sedjefakare uses7C3, used in the late Twelfth and early Fifteenth Dynasties in the royal-name series, and 7B3 of the sameperiods plus the end of the Fifteenth Dynasty. This group at the beginning of the Thirteenth Dynasty thus continues the tradition of the Twelfth Dynasty with regard to scroll borders, broken off completely with the following Sobkhotpe-group but resumedin the royal-name series

just before the Hyksos age. Head B2 (Sekhemkare) is found throughout the royal-name series, though head B6 (Hetepibre) is otherwise restricted to the Twelfth Dynasty and does not occur again until Khyan and Apophis. Head CI is rare, but early. Side d5 (Hetepibre) is used from SesostrisI to Sobkhotpe IV after which there is a gap until Sheshi filled only by two examples of Merneferre. Side e7 (Sehetepibre) is unique in the royal-name series, though it appearsin Jericho Groups 11-111; side e8 (Sekhemkare) is found in sporadic examples with most kings of the Sobkhotpe-group Finally, Sehetepibre uses3D5

cartouche known from the Twelfth Dynasty, but very rare thereafter; Khendjer usesa 3D4 cartouche known in the Twelfth and 'lbhirteenth Dynasties; cartouche 3D2, used twice in this group, is found in all periods but is most common with the earlier Sobkhotpe-group. !n general, this small early Thirteenth Dynasty group fits in stylistically where it belongs according to the Turin Canon; after the Twelfth Dynasty, but prior to the Sobkhotpe-group.

d.

Scarabsof the End of the Thirteenth Dynasty(ca. 1690-1650B.C.)

Assembling a late Thirteenth Dynasty group of scarabsis extremely difficult owing to the lack of monuments for the period, the badly tattered condition of the pertinent columns of the Turin Canon, and the fact that so few scarabsare

known which givenamesstill preservedin that document. Only two scarabscan be definitely placedin this period, one of Merhetepre Ini(Suppl. Series) and one of Merkheperre (no. 3206), Turin Canon Col. VII. 4 and 22. Two scarabsbearing the name Djedankhre (nos. 3202-3) are usually presumed to belong to Djedankhre Mentuemsaf, otherwise known only from an inscribed block found at Gebe16n. There is nothing against such an identinlcation,

though the chronological position of this king is unknown. Weill and von Beckerathgroup him with Djedneferre I and Djedhetepre Dudimose ll on the plausible grounds of the identical name-formula used in all three prenomens, and becausea stenafrom Gebe16nnames Dudimose 11,thus helping to tie the three rulers together in time and place.S8While these namesare not now preserved in the Turin Canon, it has been customary to assumethat the fragmentary ms of Col. VII.1 3 is probably (Dudi)moss, more specifically Dudimose ll.s9 if the three kings noted here should indeed be grouped together, then Djedankhre Mentuemsaf and DJQdneferreDudimose I should be placed in the preceding lacu-

of the signsRr, /z.f}and dd.oz But the title N3w-bif appearsfrequently on scarabs where it does not introduce a royal name (design class 3B2) and we should rather expect the title "Goodly God" as was customary with prenomens of the period. Otherwise, these first known examples have no indications of royalty and may be interpreted simply as "goodluck" scarabs. Several other examples can now be quoted, discovered since the original group were considered to bear royal names.63 None of thew has any trappings of royalty and the whole group may indeed bear merely a fortuitous resemblanceto the prenomen of Dudimose 11. Scharff interprets an example from a Hyksos burial at Abusir el-Meleq asreading&rw/z# (notre ) with good-luck symbols.n This may, after all, be the =urc reasonable approach and this group of scarabs has been omitted from the present survey.

The final king or kings who belong to the late Thirteenth Dynasty group areknown from two scarabswith the prenomensMaatre and Nebmaatre? (nos. 3204-05). But this is problematic since there are three kings of the period to whom we might assignone or both these scarabs. Only one, Maatre lbi, is found in the Turin Canon, Col. VII.14; he hasheretofore been unknown elsewhere. From miscellaneousmonuments von Beckerath lists a Maatre Sobkhotpeas and a Nebmaatrem whom he places in the "Fourteenth" and "Sixteenth" Dynasties respectively. Of the two scarabsin question, the example in the Brooklyn Museum (no. 3204) is certainly of the Thirteenth

Dynasty on all counts, the 21 mm length and C head being clear indicators of that date. This scarab,then, can be assignedto Maatre lbi of Turin Canon Col. VII.14, hence part of the later Thirteenth Dynasty group. It has close analogiesto the scarabs of Merkheperre and Djedankhre of that group. The scarab from Tell Fara (no. 3205) is not so easily placed. The signsin the cartouche include a /zb at the bottom which might be taken to indicate the name Nebmaatre, hence von Beckerath's "Sixteenth" Dynasty ruler of that name. On the other hand, the /zb could be viewed as an inconectly carved f since the arrangement of signs is incorrect

for the nameNebmaatre.SVStylistically, this scarabfits well either in the late Thirteenth or early Fifteenth Dynasties on all counts so it could represent any of the three kings noted above. It has been retained here in the late Thirteenth

Dynasty group even though it should be kept in mind that it may be slightly later. The end of the Thirteenth Dynasty group thus consistsof the following scarabs:

StScll

55

/b/d., p. 39 f. L Habachi's very cautious suggestionthat this king might have been the husband of Queen Sobkneferu, the last ruler of the Twelfth Dynasty, is based only on the discovery of statues of both these rulers at

Qantir; 4S4£ 52 (1954), 468 ff. While Habachiarguesthat thesestatues were originally erected at this site, the argument is somewhat strained.

Helck, Gesch/c/zre,p. 1 17, n. 3, feels the statues of Sobkneferu were brought here in Ramessidetimes, and von Beckerath,p. 39, probably correctly notes that those of Hetepibre originally stood in the temple of Ptah at Memphis. It should be recalled that there was a good deal of

movingstatuesabout in the Ramessideperiod. Hayes, Seep/er 1, p. 342 nig. 226 top row : v. Beck., p. 46. A second scarab of ' this ruler is shown in NS, pl. XLIV 9, said to be in Cairo (p.

S9.

Apparently first proposed by M. Pieper, D/e Kd/z&e 4egyprens zwfsc/ze/z

Name

Classification

Designs

Head Back Side Suppl.Series 3202

na, in Col. VII.1 1-12. Having noted the scarabs of Djedankhre, something should be said about the supposed scarabsof his contemporary l2jedhetepre Dudimose 11. Some years ago, certain scarabswith the signsRr n/ and dd were thought to represent the name Djedneferre,w but there has been a reaction against this in the past generation or so. Weill, who had originally adopted this identification, omitted it in his !ast survey of the scarabsof the age, Stock considered them purely decorative, von Beckerath and Helck ignore them altogether.61 One is very much inclined to accept this more recent opinion since any real evidence to the contrary is impossible to produce. Of the original group of scarabsknown far many decades,only one might be said to bear a royal name; this has the title A/sw-bff plus a thrice-repeated grouping

Turf/z Ca/zo/z

Col. VII. 4 VII.13 (or Vl11.27)

3203 3204 3205

VII.14

3206

VII.22

MerhetepreIni Djedankhre

(not seen) C6 ll d14

Maatre

C2 C4 D7

" (or Nebmaatre)

Merkheperre

C5

0

e6

111

0

d8 e8

l

d14

3DI 3D4+2B2

3D3+7B4a 3B+3DI 3D3+7B3a

Tills group is stylistically related, though it is not quite as homogeneous as one would like. Four of thesescarabs

showC headswhich are closelyassociatedwith the ThirteenthDynasty. The size-rangeof 19-25mm, average23 mm, goesmore with the Sobkhotpe-group (admittedly the earlier half) than with the Fifteenth Dynasty. The back types -one each of 1, 11,111,two O represent a transitional stagebetween the Sobkhdtpe-group, where back O is very rare, to

the early Hyksosgroup, where this type is characteristic. Sided8 occurswith Merneferre,d14 only sporadically in the Twelfth and Thirteenth Dynasties. Sides e6 and e8 are also used with Merneferre, both going on into the early Hyksos

rio period 'rhe useof designclassesis ratherrestrictedbut showsa very closerelationshipto the scarabsof Khyan, the king who begins the Hyksos seriesas will be shown below. In the late Sobkhotpe-group, 3D cartouches have a very restricted usage,most examples being 3D4. Khyan, however, used 3DI to 3D4, the group at the end of the Thirteenth Dyna-

sty using 3DI , 3D3 and 3D4. Similarly, class7 scroll bordersnow reappears,having been unusedthroughout the

accurate and that he did not confuse the location of the scarab he

Sobkhotpe-group with the exceptionof one examplefor Merneferre. In the end of the Thirteenth Dynastygroup, one exampleis 7B3 (Maatre)found with the Horst threerulersof the Hyksossequence.The other is 7B4 (Djedankhre),a

published.

very rare border with round instead of oblong scrolls, found only with Sesostris 1, once with Sesostris 111and once at Fara.

198) though not included in ScarabsCairo. The two piecesare identical except for the scroll borders. I am assumingthat Newberry's drawing is

Hornung, Skard&ae/z, no. 103 ; v. Beck., p. 49 ff. Von Beckerath rightly notes that several scarabs inscribed with the prenomen Niramaat along-

side the prenomen Neferkare do not belong to Khendjer, but are magical talismanscombining the names of Pepi ll and Ammenemes lll; /bfd., P. 51 V. Beck., p. 65. Seea]soWei]], F}/z, p. 513, andX/7e dynasf/e ro.Faure, P. 12

3

a.

TnE PERIODOFTHEnF'rEENTn DYNASW(THE"nYKSOS"AGE) Remarkson the Historical Background It is now generally accepted that the Fifteenth Dynasty, comprising six "Hyksos" kings, ruled from Avaris in

the eastern Delta for a little over a century prior to the beginnings of the Theban Eighteenth Dynasty. Contemporary with this "Hyksos" dynasty were a multitude of other kings, perhaps ruling local city-states under the aegis of Avaris. But in spite of numerous attempts to put all these rulers into some kind of chn)nological order, we are still unable to do so. Indeed, it is even impossible to distringuish those kings who ruled at Avaris from those who ruled elsewhere. That is, who were the six Hyksos kings, who were their minor contemporaries? This problem is not surprising for an age where the main historical sources are later traditions and where most of the kings are known only from scarabs. Finally, historical studies have suffered from attempts to account for Manetho's "Sixteenth" Dynasty which never, in fact, existed. It is now quite clear that the Thirteenth, Fifteenth and Eighteenth Dynasties followed each other in chronologcal sequence. The designation "Sixteenth Dynasty" is therefore best discarded completely. The period of the Fifteenth Dynasty, the subject of this section, thus embracesthe main Hyksos kings at Avaris, the Theban Seventeenth Dynasty

placedin the Fifteenth Dynasty on the basisof monuments or clear historical evidence,and Khamudy by virtue of his being listed in the Turin Canon in the sixth position. Thus we can only be sure of the last two kings Apophis and Khamudy -- and a third, Khyan, whose position in the dynasty has always been uncertain. Savefor these three, practically all rulers of the Hyksos period are known only from scarabsand there is no way to distinguish the remaining rulers of the Fifteenth Dynasty from their lessercontemporaries. Other than the main group of Hyksos kings who ruled at Avaris, there are many others who should be considered

localrulersof the age,or perhapsvassals of the FifteenthDynasty. Oneof the main drawbacksin the study of this period is that we still have only a vague idea as to the extent of Fifteenth Dynasty sovereignty over Egypt and the type of rule imposed on those territories it controlled. There is no unequivocal evidence that any of the Fifteenth Dynasty

rulerscontrolled all of Egypt, although claimsthat they did are often made.

torical outlines of the period. First, it has been shown that the Fifteenth Dynasty was once listed in Col. X of the Turin Canon.a While only the last name, Khamudy, is still actually preserved,the next line informs us that there were

Similarly, the relationship of the "vassal" kings to the Fifteenth Dynasty rulers is ambiguous. It is possible that the latter, ruling from Avaris in the Delta, may have exercized some political control farther south through the medium of appointed local vassalswho adopted various trappings of royalty. Or, it is possible that there were actually rulers in variousparts of Egypt who were able to maintain their independence from Avaris. The Theban Seventeenth Dynasty seemsto have been one such group -- there is no proof to the contrary and this indicates there mayhave been others. But our knowledge of the political realities of the ageis so scant that all such proposals are speculation. The onlypoint on which all agreeis that the kings who make up the "Sixteenth" Dynasty do not actually represent a single dynasty, but isolated rulers of some kind or other who were contemporary to the Fifteenth.

"six (Rulers of) foreign countries, making 108 years."69 We are thus certain that there were six kings in this dynasty,

b.

and the numerouspetty kings of the age. As is well known, we possesstwo historical facts which at least offer a starting-point for reconstructing the his-

that they ruled a little more than a century, and that the last ruler wasKhamudy. Second, the now fully-published stela of Kamose,'mthe last ruler of the Theban Seventeenth Dynasty who began the "war of liberation" against the northern Hyksos kings, proves that he was a contemporary of the Hyksos Auserre Apophis. Since this war between Thebes and Avaris was completed around ten years later under Amosis, who began the Eighteenth Dynasty, it is evident that Apophis must originally have stood in the fifth position in the dynasty, that is, in Turin Canon Co. X. 19.7i The short time between the Delta campaign ofKamose and the conclusion of tile war under

Amosiswould surely allow for no morethan the closingyearsof the reignof Apophisand a short reignfor Khamudy. The Memphite genealogy lends its support to this by placing Apophis and Amosis in succeedinggenerations; seeabove, P

156

It can thus be established with reasonable certainty that Apophis and Khamudy come at the end of the Fifteenth Dynasty even though the latter's existence is attested only by the Turin Canon.n But who were the other Fifteenth

Dynasty kings? it is now generally felt that SeuserenreKhyan and MayebreSheshishould be included, though there is no proof for this; there is little agreement over the identity of the remaining two. Hayes suggestsYakubher and a second Apophis, Hplck proposes perhaps Semqen and Anathar, von Beckerath prefers Yakubher and Sekhaenre,and Bietak gives Yakubher and Sharek.73 These scholars,as well as most others, all depend to some extent on the list of namespreserved in the various redactions of Manetho. At this point it ghoul be emphasized that Manetho's copyists are little or no help since, with the exception of Apophis and possibly Khyan, it is impossible to equate the namespreservedin the various recensions of Manetho with those actua]]y ]cnawn from the monuments. Thus in spite of many efforts to use the Manethoan tradition to recon-

ScarabStyle : Introductory Remarks As a point of departure, the obvious can be stated: there is a general scarabstyle associatedwith a large group of

royal names,many of which areforeign; this generalstyle is characteristic of andrestricted to the period of the Fifteenth Dynasty. The purpose now is to show that there is a definite chronology of stylistic development within this generalscarabstyle. No attempt will be made to isolate the rulers of the Fifteenth Dynasty itself from their contempories; rather, this group is studied as a whole. The concern here is to indicate those details of scarab manufacture which allow us to place these scarabsin a stylistic, hence presumably a chronological, sequence regardlessof whether the rulers they represent ruled from Avaris or some other place. As a brief introductory statementthe following wiH illustrate the general conclusions reached in the present chapter. Four more or less homogeneous stagesof scarab style can be defined on the basisof the several details used in their

manufacture. The rulers included in thesefour stagesare:

l 2

3.

SfSc 11,nos.3207-3220

Meruserre Yakubher

322 1-3231

MayebreSheshi Khauserre

3232-3340 3341-3347

Sekhaenre

3380-3415

Amu3348-3363 ykbmw3364-3379 Nubuserre3487-3492

r'mw Ahetepre3420-3433

struct the Fifteenth Dynasty sequence,it is clear that most of the namespreservedin this tradition are too corrupted to have any value. Furthermore, the various redactors give different sequences,varying numbers of kings, and even different names. The present discussion will therefore ignore Manetho as being unreliable. Lacking other monuments, we are left with the numerous scarabsof the period as the only source from which we can attempt to reconstruct a sequence of kings. Contrary to the opinions of others, it is possible to establish a plausi-

SeuserenreKhyan7S

4.

AuserreApophis

3416-3419

3434-3462

ble sequencefor thesekings on the basisof scarabstyle alone. Previousstudieson thesescarabshave utilized only the

While there are several other kings known from scarabsof the period, it is only those listed here for whom enough are known to compile statistics so that a sequenceof scarab style can be established. The other rulers, some known only from a single scarab, will be placed in their approximate chronological positions after the basic sequencehas been de-

designson the base; the sides, heads and other stylistic features have been ignored.'K The inclusion of the latter features as criteria does produce a logical sequence of stylistic development, hence a plausible historical sequenceof rulers. This does not mean that the scarabswill solve the basic issue of who belongs to the Fifteenth Dynasty; we need

termined. It will soon become evident that this basic sequence of scarab style reveals the sequence of groups just given

seenand examined. Somehave been seenonly in photograph, though these are few in number. Scarpbswhich have

more than scarabsto determinethis. Indeed, of all the known rulers of the period, only Khyan and Apophis canbe

not actually been seen will be brought into the discussion where the information they supply is unique or important. There has been every care taken to use this supplemelntarymaterial judiciously;76 most of it is listed in the Supplemen

68. 69. 70. 71

It should be noted again that, with rare exceptions, the royal-name scarabsillustrated in the Cataloguehave been

V. Beck.,p. 22. 'r'hemost recentsurvey of the Hyksosperiodis by M. Bietakin fex/kon der .4gyprologfe11, Cols.93 ff.(1977). Turin CanonX.21. On the total of 108years,seeA. Gardiner,7%e.nova/

tary Series,p. 179 ff.

(]znon o/ Turin (Oxford, 1959), p. 17, note on Col. X.21. L Habachi, 77zeSecondSfe/a o/Kamose(Gluckstadt, 1972). V. Beck., p. 127 ff. Not a]] agree,however, Hayes,C4.H 11,1, p. 61,and Helck, Geschfc/zre,p. 133, place Apophis in the fourth position, relating

of the rulers who make up the basic Fifteenth Dynasty period sequence.

the date in the thirty-third year of this king found in the Rhind MathematicalPapyrusto the forty-plus yearsgiven in the Turin Canonfor the fourth (name destroyed) ruler of the dynasty. For discussions of this

Prior to entering into the main discussionof this section, it is well to insert at this point a few remarkson some

Meruserre Yakubher. This king is known only from scarabs,aU but one of which giveseither the prenomen or nomen. The single exception gives both names so that the equation of prenomen and nomen is assured(cf. Suppl. Series). This name therefore conforms to the name-pattern seenso often on scarabsof the age whereby the prenomen is Egyptian, the nomen is foreign, usually Semitic. The reading of the nomen is more accurately Xarqzzb/zar;it is an Amorite name meaning "(The god) Har protects," or the like.n

Fig. 27

The Development ofDesign 3B into the Swerat ChronologicalStagesof 3E

3n

3B

a

b

3EI

3E2

3E2

3E3

3E4

Khauserre .Amu.78 While these two nameshave heretofore been considered as representing two different rulers, there can hardly be any doubt that they represent one and the same king. Even though the name Khauserre appears on only sevenscarabs,the name Amu on 19 (including Suppl. Series), the total picture of scarabstyle makes these two groups almost identical. There is a near-exclusiveuse of side d5 and D heads and an identical use of 3E panels in about the sameproportion. Further, the sizes are practically the same: Khauserre shows a mid-50% at 21-22 mm and an aver age at 21 mm. Amu shows a mid-50% at 20-21 mm, an averageat 20 mm. Finally, Khauserre usesonly the title

;'Goodly God" while Amu usesthis only twice, but "Son of Re" on 17 examples.Comparisonwith otherscarabsof the period shows that the title "Goodly God" is usual with the prenomen, the title "Son of Re" with the nomen. All these factors combine. to show that it is highly likely that we should treat these scarabsas belonging to a single factors Sekhaenre,Ahetepre, Nubuserre, ykbmw, yrmw.ao As indicated above, scarabsinscribed with these namesform a third group in the basic Fifteenth Dynasty sequence. Severalfactors suggestthat these five names represent only three rulers and that we can probably combine four of them as Sekhaenre ykbmw and Nubuserre r'mw. In both cases the prenomen is always preceded by "Goodly God," the nomen by "Son of Re" and the two pairs of namesshow distinct stylistic features as follows :

Scarabsnaming: Stylistic features

Sekhaenreand Ykbmw

Nubuseweand Ycmw

Head type B Head type D

prominent with both emphasison D5-D9 both use only d5 mostly e9-el I use3E2-3E4

one exampleonly emphasison D8-D9 one exampleonly allell except onee10 use3E3-3E4

Sidetyped Sidetype e Design3E panels

Z)esignClass 3E rpalze/sJ. There is perhaps nothing more characteristic of Hyksos period scarabs than the socalled panel designs. These must certainly have originated in the Middle Kingdom style which arranges pairs of hieroglyphs in two vertical columns as illustrated in fig. 27a. This arrangement of paired signsis quite common in the Twelfth Dynasty, though practically non-existent in the 'llhirteenth in the royal-name series. The new element added to the design on scarabsof the Hyksos period are the two vertical lines which separatethese pairs of signs from the name which takes up the centre panel; fig. 27c-d. The older style is still rarely represented (fig. 27b) but by and large the division by vertical lines into three panelshas become the rule. The further development of the design is evident in fig. 27. Two pairs of nfr-signs shown in the proper upright position are a variety of the older groups of paired signs (nig. 27e) which leads to the common variety whereby the upper pair of nZr-signsis reversed; nlg. 27, design 3E3. From here it is a simple step to the stylized reversedpairs of rza'-signswhereby the tops of these signshave been fused together into a seriesof parallel horizontal strokes; fig. 27g,

design3E4. Thus a logical sequenceof alterations andmodifications on the original designcan be shown. Hence the design sequence3EI, 3E2, 3E3, 3E4 can be considered a chronological sequenceand provides a convenient cheek on

The distinctive characteristics of each pair are evident. Furthermore, the extensive use of side d5 and heads D5-D9 on scarabsof Sekhaenre and ykbmw continue the similar pattern on the scarabsof Mayebre Sheshi and Khauserre Amu, the two preceding kings in the seriesproposed here. The "Son of Re'' name of "The Goodly God Ahetepre" cannot be deHlned. It could be any (or none) of those kings listed below following the main series(pp. 169 ff). Since Ahetepre sharessome features with Apophis, the chronological sequenceof rulers under consideration is: Sekhaenre ykbmw,

Nubuserre r'mw, Ahetepre. c.

The Main Hyksos Sequence : Stylistic Analysis

Throughout the discussionwhich follows, referenceto the Chronologcal Distribution Lists on pp. 184 ff. will clarify details such as the actual number of scarabs recorded for any given stylistic feature. Scarub /engr/z. The eight kings here considered as the basic Hyksos sequencehavebeen arranged according to the length of their scarabsin the chart for scarablength on p. 184. As a working hypothesis, the sequenceis given from longest to shortest since Apophis, whose scarabsare the smallest,must be placed on historical grounds at the end of the series. A second reason for this arrangement by descendingsize is that in so doing the scarabsof the early Hyksos period show approximately the same general measurementsas those of the Thirteenth Dynasty. One therefore gets a rough sequencein descending order of size from the early Thirteenth Dynasty to the end of the Fifteenth. The key measurements are the mid-50% and the averagelength which show that the scarabsof the first four rulers of the Hyksos sequencehave an averagelength of 20 mm and a mid-50% falling in the 19-22 mm range, The scarabs of the last four rulers show a gradual decreasein both categories withthe scarabsof Apophis at the end of the seriesaveraging 16 mm, mid-50qu 13-18 mm. The general size rangesof the Hyksos sequencealso show a gradual decreasefrom the scarabsof Khyan at 16-25 mm to those of Apophis at 11-20 mm, with one larger example at 25 mm. On the basisof scarab length, then, the main Hyksos sequenceas arrangedhere shows a regular decreasein size beginning with the largest which tack on to the Thirteenth Dynasty and gradually moves to the smallest which places Apophis where he ought to be, at the end of the Hyksos period. Scarablength alone. of course, is not a firm indicator of date and other factors must be taken into account. However, it will become evident that other stylistic features

the sequence of rulers suggested here.

Khyan and Yakubher use only 3EI, Sheshi usesall four types; Khauserre Amu and Sekhaenre ykbmw use 3E2. 3E3 and 3E4, and are further connected by the particular 3E6 design common to both. Nubuserre yrmw and Ahetepre use only 3E3 and 3E4, Apophis does not use 3E designsat all. Thus a sequenceof rulers is clearly evident which

dividesinto the four groupslisted aboveon p. 163. This is the samesequence suggested by other criteria, namely,size and side types. That the stagesin the artistic development of design 3E conform to the groups of Hyksos period kings indicated by other criteria shows that this sequenceof rulers must be substantially correct. It is of importance that the sequence3EI to 3E4 is followed in the design-scarabseries as well. There are one or two examples of 3EI in most groups from Megiddo A-D to the later 'Ajjul deposits. Only one 3E2 has been recorded, from Fara Cem. 500; there are no examples of 3E3. The single 3E4 recorded in Jericho Group IV is on a scarab from the latest of four layers in Tomb G 73 (no. 1854); it has head D9 and side el I with the deep groove found only in the later Hyksos period in both the royal-name and design-scarabseries. This scarab indicates that the last burial in Tomb G 73 must have been made somewhat later than the generaltime span of Group .IV and that there is some overlap between Groups IV and V. 3E4 panels are then found at Fara and 'Ajjul where they fall into place with the royal-name sequencefrom Sheshi to Ahetepre (see also pp. 84 and 122 f.). Z)esig/z(:fass 7 rscro// bordersJ. This design classis best studied in connection with 3E (panels) for it is evident that the panels eventually replaced scrolls as the main decorative pattern during the Hyksos period. Scroll borders are relatively common in the royal-name seriesduring the Twelfth Dynasty and appear at the beginning and end of the 'lllirteenth Dynasty. Following the sequencealready suggestedby other criteria, the use of scroll borders and panels during the Hyksos age shows a most interesting development. This is illustrated in fig. 28 where three catagories of decorative designs are listed according to the actual numbers of examples which appear on the scarabsof each king: (scroll borders, paired signsas borders the predecessorof 3E) and panels.

conHlrm the historical sequence of rulers suggested by scarab length. 77. 78.

W.A.Ward,Ugarff-Forschung8 (1976), 358 ff.

79.

That Amu is twice shown with the title "Goodly God '' does not go against this; /b/d., p. 36 1

80.

On the latter two names,see/b/d., pp. 362, 359 f.

/h/d. PP.360 n.

164

165

Fig. 28

Frequency of border designsin the Fifteenth Dynasty Royal-name sequences; aetna! numbers and percentages.

Tora/ Afo. King

Scarabs

SeusernreKhyan MeruserreYakubher MayebreSheshi KhauserreAmu Sekhaenreykbmw Nubuserre yrmw

Design7

:

11;65.0

125

40;32.0

% Scarabswff/z

Khyan and Yakubher use only d6, Sheshiusesboth types, but the remainderof the proposed Hyksos sequenceuses only d5 in a decreasingpercentage of examples from Sheshi to Ahetepre; d6 reappearsin two examples of Apophis. 'llhis can be clearly shown by listing the percentagesof use of these two sides for the four groups of Hyksos kings as

PairedSigns

Design3E

thesedesigns

3;12.5 3:17.5

13:54.0

100.0

10: 8.0

3:17.5 70:56.0

100 0 96.0

3;11.5

8:33.5

1: 4.0

louows:

22:84.5

100.0

Side

62

62:100.0

16

16:100.0 12:66.5

100.0 100.0

d5

26

1: 5.5

Ahetepre Apophis )

6:16.0

4:11.0

Sek/zaenreykbmw

I'wetfth

Sobkhotpe- Khyan

Sheshi

Nubuserre'r'mw

Dynasty

group

Khalzserre,4mzi

.4/zerepre

yakub/zer 24

4

l

21

B

31

15

13

25

C

6

l

4

D

18

44 40

42

50

100

100

100

100

Sek/zaenre}'khmw Nubuserre Ycmw Ahetepre

66

Apophis 32

41

65 35

16

7

18

61

100

100

100

100

On the basisof these two side types, then, the first group is quite distinct from the third and fourth. Since Apophis ends the series, the implication

is that the third group is associated with Apophis, the Horstgroup precedes him and

thesecondgroup, which usesboth types,must representthe transition from the useof d6 to d5. Thelatter omits the notching on the legs of the former, a detail in keeping with the general trend of the later Hyksos group towards more carelesswork. It is signinlcant that two-thirds of the scarabsin the second group use d5 while the use of d6, character-

istic of the first group, hasdeclinedto only 16 and diesout thereafter. (The 7%of d6 for Apophis representsonly two scarabs.) The usageof these two sides thus confirms the sequencesuggestedby scarab length. Other side types tend to support this conclusion. Side d7 was never used much in the royal-name series; it ap-

pearssporadicallyin both the Twelfth and Thirteenth Dynasties,twice with Khyan and once with Sheshi. This indicates only in isolated examples in the Twelfth and Thirteenth Dynasties.

.drop/zls

7 9

100

Sheshi KhauseweAmu

that Khyan is rightly placedbetweenthe ThirteenthDynastyand Sheshi. In the design-scarab series,sided7 occurs

36 40

A

Khyan Yakubher

d6 Other

Scroll borders, paired signs and 3EI panels account for all scarabsof Khyan and Yakubher.8i Sheshi adds certain miscellaneous designson unique examples of class4 concentric circles and class 8 rope borders. There is only one example of a scroll border for Khauserre Amu who also retains a few examples of paired signs; the bulk of his scarabs show 3E panels. Only the latter are found with scarabsof Sekhaenre ykbmw and Nubuserre yrypzw. The end of the seriesshows the reappearance of scroll borders, though they remain rare; one for.Ahetepre, four for Apophis. Certain miscellaneous designsnow appear. In the caseof Ahetepre, these consist mostly of merely the name and titles with no additional decorative elements. Apophis introduces the style which is typical for his reign: the name on one side balanced by a large sign on the other. Seealso p. 127 ff. .IZeads.Ihe statistical analysis of the use of head types is somewhat vague and there is little to be said beyond some general observations. The percentage of use of the four main head types is as follows:

.fleas

Sides. The most revealing of the side types are d5 and d6. While both types were used in the royal-name series throughout the Twelfth and Thirteenth Dynasties, there is a very clear sequencein their usageduring the Hyksos age

100

Side el I is a particularly

important chronological factor as it shows an earlier style with a thin line along the

length of the side, and a later style with a deep groove. The earlier type is represented throughout the design-scarab seriesin smaHnumbers beginning in the late First Intermediate Period (Stnc 1, p. 30) and continues up to Jericho Group

V. Thelater type (with groove)is found in the Faraand 'Ajjul groups,that is, contemporaryto the Fifteenth Dynasty. In the royal-name series, the early style of el I is found twice in the Twelfth Dynasty (Nos. 3044. 3076) and with She-

shi(3310-3312). But Sheshialsousesthe later style (3260, 3289,3313 etc.) as do all the remainingkingsof the Hyksos sequence. This ties together the kings from Sheshi to Apophis, once again separating Khyan and Yakubher for whom no el I sidesare recorded at all. Scarabsfrom Sheshi to Apophis thus compare with Fara and 'Ajjul; scarabsof Khyan and Yakubher dQ not so compare, implying they are earner.

The earlier periods are included here for comparison. The main point of interest is that each period listed is characterized by the use of certain heads and no two periods are precisely the same. A heads emerge as a dominant type from

S mmary. The preceding discussion has shown that it is possible to define a plausible chronological development of

time to time and are rarely used in between.

in itself conclusive. Several criteria, each of which produces its own possible chronological sequence,must be combined.

B heads dominate in the Twelfth

Dynasty but are much less in evidence

scarabstyle duringthe Hyksosperiod. It had further illustratedthe all-important fact that no singlecriterion of styleis

thereafter. C heads are common only with the Sobkhotpe-group and D heads are the constant characteristic of the whole Hyksos age. Within the latter period, A and D heads are prominent at the beginning and end af the sequence; A heads are conspicuously rare in between with C heads not used at all except for a single example each for Yakubher and Apophis. With regard to the sequenceof the Hyksos rulers, the major point established by this tabulation is that

When these possible chronological sequencesare mutally compatible, it is not difficult

the secondand third groupsare practically the samein their use of all four main head types, another detail which ties

possiblesequence.8Z Since Apophis has the smallest scarabsand is known to have ended the series, those kings for whom

them together chronologically within the Fifteenth Dynasty period. Conclusions based on the use of sub-types are rather difficult to draw. 'the one exception is the group of D heads here numbered D7, D8 and D9. In the royal-name series, these are new in the Hyksos period and do not occur until Sheshi and Khauserre Amu, with the exception of two D7 heads for Ammenemes 111and one D7 in the late Thirteenth Dynasty group. From Sheshi onward, these three head types are characteristic. The extensive use of theseheads by every ruler from Sheshi to Apophis in the Hyksos sequenceindicates that Khyan and Yakubher pre' cede the rest. It is a small point but does add one more hint that the sequenceof rulers proposed here is correct. , .Backs. While 95% of the scarabsof the Hyksos age use back O, there is one detail which is important. Decorated backs (sprays, curls, etc.) occur only with Khyan, Yakubher and Sheshi which points to their being chronologically

a sufficient number of scarabsare known were arrangedin a sequencebasedon a descendingorder of averagelength of

related;cf. Distribution list, p. 187.

to conclude that we have before

usa reasonablyaccurate picture of how scarabstyle developedthrough the century of Hyksos rule. Fig. 29 graphically summarizes the arguments presented here. The royal:name seriesof the Hyksos agewas first arranged according to the three categories of size -- general range, mid-5090, average length -- and this was taken as one

their scarabs. Such a sequenceis naturally meaninglessby itself and proves nothing since, unlike in other periods, it cannot be compared with an excavated seriesor a known sequenceof rulers. Hence the sequenceof kings produced by a descendingorder in the size of their scarabsmust be compared with sequencesof other stylistic features. The most significant of these is the use of design class 3E panels as a decorative device accompanying the royal name. As proposed above, (p. 165) there is an artistic development in this design which begins with pairs of signsarranged in two outside vertical rows, then continues through a seriesof modifications on this original design to produce the stylistic sequence3EI to 3E4. In arranging the scarabsof the Hyksos rulers according to their usage of the panel decorations, four distinct groups of kings can be established which conform to the series of stylistic modifications just noted.

'' it is higldy significantthat the sequence thus producedconformsvery closelyto the sequencereachedby following a descendingorder of size.

81

The one exception is the scarab of Yakubher giving both prenomen and tomen (Suppl. Series) which I presume has a vertical line of miscellaneous

hieroglyphs on one sideonly due to the lack of space. The original inter ' bon was probably to have borders of paired signs. It is so considered here and included in the column under ''paired signs'

166

82. On the analogy of the design-scarabserieswhich shows a steady increase

Period to ca. 18 mm at the end of the Second Intermediate Period. For

in averagesizefrom 10 mm at the beginningof the First Intermediate

details,seeS/Sc 1,p. 20 ff.; 11,ChapterTwo, A.

167

Stylistic features which help establish the chronological order of the main Hyksos sequence.

Fig. 29

d.

Royal-name Scarabsoutside the Main Sequence. Having suggested a chronological order for the main Hyksos series, it remains to note the several contemporary

a

£ a

9

B S

3

$

£

£

e a q>

E

.a

D

E

,H

$

g

a)

3

=

3

8

>.

g

E

rulers known only from a few scarabs. Dating is much less sure here as individual scarabsare sometimes difficult to

.a

H

g 8

E 0 e