Annal stone of the 5th dynasty

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Palermo stone

The 5th Dynasty Annal Stone is a reconstructed artefact from ancient Egypt in the form of a large, inscribed stone tablet. The original was probably commissioned by King ( Pharaoh ) Neferirkare , the third ruler of the 5th Dynasty ( Old Kingdom ). The origin and the original place of installation of the artifact could not yet be determined satisfactorily.

The annals stone is of great importance for the Egyptian chronology , because on it the names of kings from the predynastics up to king Neferirkare are listed and for every ruler from the 1st dynasty all annual events and Nile flood heights are listed. The information on the annual events under the rulers was particularly intensively researched. Previous research results reveal certain refrain-like and canonical patterns in the event information , which are reflected in the permanent repetition of annual or every few years celebrations and ceremoniesexpress. These records are of great importance for comparisons with both contemporary and later sources and documents, as certain statements and anecdotes about individual rulers can either be confirmed or refuted. In addition, Egyptologists and historians can determine the correct period of rule of certain kings and compare it with later sources.

description

Shape and size of the original object and fragments

The annals stone originally measured an estimated 140 × 200 cm and later broke into several fragments, seven of which have survived today. The two largest fragments are called " Palermostein " ( P ) and " Kairostein " ( C1 and K1 ) due to their current location . The Palermostein is approximately shield-shaped , approx. 43.5 cm high, approx. 25 cm wide and approx. 6.0 cm thick, the thickness of the stone being irregular. It is inscribed on both sides, with the inscription on the front being better preserved than on the back. It was engraved in the stone and traced with chalk . The Cairo stone (JE 44859), on the other hand, is roughly rectangular, about 42 cm high and about 26 cm wide and about 6.0–6.5 cm thick on its back. Its front measures 36 × 26 cm, the differences are due to severe damage to the front. Both the front and back are so heavily worn in the lower two thirds that there is almost nothing left to read.

The remaining five fragments are much smaller. Because of their current storage locations, four of them are titled with “ C ” or “ K ” (for “ Cairo fragment”) and the fifth with “ L ” or “ LF ” (for “ London fragment”). Fragment C2 (JE 39735) is approximately triangular and measures approximately 8.4 × 9.2 cm. Fragment C3 (JE 39734) is irregularly shaped and measures approximately 9 × 11 cm. C4 (JE 39733) is also irregularly shaped and measures 7.5 × 11.5 cm. And finally, C5 is almost square and measures 9 × 9 cm. The so-called London fragment (UC 15508) is again triangular and 8.5 cm high and 8.0 cm wide.

material

Since no detailed petrological investigation of most of the fragments has taken place so far , different material descriptions are available. In the older literature, the Palermo stone is called amphibolite , black diorite or black quartz rock. So far only the fragment C5 has been examined petrologically. The result was that that fragment consists of olivine basalt , which is therefore most likely also true of the remaining fragments, provided they come from the same stone tablet.

Positional assignment of the individual fragments

Reconstructed positions of the individual fragments according to W. Helck, W. Barta and JD Degreef. P = Palermo Stone , 1-5 = Cairo fragments , L = London fragment .

It is uncertain whether all fragments actually belonged to the same annals stone or whether they came from different stone tablets. In earlier times, researchers such as Henri Gauthier and Georges Émile Jules Daressy noticed that the fonts on the Palermostein differed from those on the Cairo stone, the size of the characters and the directions of engraving differ from one another. In addition, the lettering on the Cairo stone seems to be more careless than that of the Palermo Stone. The different thickness of the fragments also raises the question of whether all the fragments really belonged together. The scholars William Matthew Flinders Petrie and Toby Wilkinson interject, however, that it should not necessarily be surprising if several scribes and engravers worked on a larger written object at the same time, since this was not uncommon in ancient Egypt.

The total of five Cairo fragments were named after their current location in the collection of the Egyptian Museum of Cairo , regardless of their former position in the Annals Stone, although only the Cairo fragments No. 2 and 3 are in the immediate vicinity of the Cairo stone (Cairo fragment No. 1) in the Annalenstein and the other two Cairo fragments No. 4 and 5 much closer to the Palermo Stone (P) . The fragment with the designation P1 (after W. Helck; generally titled as LF ) was once to the right of the Palermostein and is now exhibited in the Petrie Museum of Egyptian Archeology in London .

The abbreviations for all the fragments are given differently by different Egyptologists . For example, Toby Wilkinson calls them PS for the Palermo stone , CF1 - CF5 for all Cairo fragments, where CF1 stands for the Cairo stone and LF for the fragment that is now in the Petrie Museum of Egyptian Archeology in London. Juergen von Beckerath but refers to the Palermo Stone with P , the smaller Cairo fragments with K1 - K4 , the fragment located in London with L and the Cairo Stone, as the greatest today located in Cairo fragment with C .

Origin and original installation site

The "Palermostein" was first acquired around 1859 by the Italian traveler Fernando Gaudiano or his father; the procurement circumstances are unclear. The stone tablet was donated to the Museum of Archeology in Palermo on October 19, 1877 . Initially there was discussion about bequeathing the artifact to the Egyptian Museum in Cairo in exchange for other treasures, but a growing interest from scholars from Palermo and other European countries prevented this. The first scholar to study the origin and the original purpose of the annals stone was the Swiss Egyptologist Édouard Naville . He noticed regularly recurring references to the city of Heliopolis , which appear in the event reproductions of the 5th Dynasty . Therefore, Naville assumed that the annals stone as a whole could originally have stood in one of the sun shrines at Heliopolis and was thus of Lower Egyptian origin.

In 1910, the Cairo Egyptian Museum acquired three more fragments of the Annal Stone , including the "Cairo Stone" . Inaccurate information about their origin makes it difficult to draw any conclusions. The claim that the artifacts came from El Mina in Lebanon has been challenged by scholars such as Wolfgang Helck . Shortly after acquiring the three fragments, a fourth (fragment C4 ) was allegedly discovered in situ . According to WMF Petrie, it comes from the ruins of Memphis and was allegedly recovered from the search for Sebach (adobe bricks used as fertilizer) along with other art objects . Since that fourth fragment - in contrast to the previous ones - does not seem to have come from a purchase, its origin is considered to be certain and is of great interest for research. The location inspired scholars such as W. Helck, Gaston Maspero , Helen Jacquet-Gordon and GEJ Daressy to accept a shrine in Memphis as the original location of the Annals Stone. W. Helck assumes that the annals stone was dedicated to the god Ptah and was kept together with the so-called Schabaka stone ( 22nd dynasty ).

In the course of the research, the question was also raised whether the Annalenstein in its present form is a contemporary work or an accurate copy from a later period. The background to this are certain anachronisms that are particularly evident on the Cairo stone. For example, cartouche names are given for the kings Djer and Semerchet (both ruled in the 1st dynasty ), although this form of the king name did not even exist during their lifetime, but only came into use with King Huni towards the end of the 3rd dynasty . It is also noticeable that with the kings, their mothers are always called by name, but not the wives.

According to the opinion of Helck and Wilkinson, the fact that the names of the kings Djer , Den , Ninetjer and Chasechemui are correctly reproduced in their archaic form (as Horus names), in contrast to the cartouche names of the Ramessidic, speaks for an origin of the inscription from the Old Kingdom King lists that present heavily distorted and difficult to identify king names. Therefore, the time of origin of the Annalenstein may not have been too far from that of the original.

Original complete inscription

The entire Annalenstein was, or is, inscribed on the front and back according to the previous reconstructions. The overall labeling was ultimately only re-indexed by scientists in various variants from all known fragments and the actual partial labels on them. All fragments are therefore still the subject of ongoing research. In addition, there are various readings on individual events mentioned in the inscriptions , so that questions have also arisen in this regard.

Fragment L of the Annalenstein, on which the window of the year and the high tide of the Nile are clearly visible.

The division of the overall lettering is clearly structured in its basic form. The entries are made in the horizontal direction and are read from right to left. They are by the Jahreshieroglyphe Renpet ( Gardiner character M4 ; a bald Palmrispe ) (the "Annual Event Fields", "year fields" or "Event Fields") in small fields divided so that a modern-looking table format was created. The number of fields corresponds to the number of years since the unification of the empire . Not every row contained the same number of annual fields, as the individual rulers ruled for different lengths of time. The first line, which is still broad, is followed by two narrow rows. The fourth line is made wider again with extended entries, and from the fifth row onwards, it is correspondingly higher. Then the lines on the opposite side grow in their formats and their inscriptions increase in detail and content until they have reached a monumental size compared to the windows of the first four lines .

In the top line, the names of pre-dynastic rulers are entered in narrow vignettes without any details on their reigns. This includes all kings of the 1st to 4th dynasties . The names of Horus , throne names , gold names and cartouche names of the rulers, as well as the names of the respective royal mother , are noted in the free lines that separate the tables . The name bands of the kings are always positioned so that they are exactly in the middle above the associated table. The most important annual events are listed directly below from right to left in narrow windows. The current annual status of the Nile flood is indicated in small letters in an extra line under each window .

The tables of rulers always end with an indication of the calendar year in which the king died. The year counting for the successor king does not begin with the takeover of government, but only names the year in which the respective king ascended the throne (so-called coronation year ). The Egyptian administrative calendar was chosen as the calendar form , the beginning of which always began with the 1st Achet I in the Egyptian season " flood ". Both sides of the former memorial plaque are built according to this principle. The front of the annals stone is dedicated to the rulers of the 1st to 4th dynasties, the back is dedicated to the kings of the 4th and then all the kings of the 5th dynasty, which have not yet been mentioned on the front. Here, too, the texts are divided into tables, lines and windows, but the event windows are much larger in size and filled with more detailed texts than those on the front.

Kings and Queen Mothers

The inscriptions on the annals stone fragments can be assigned to different rulers of the 0th to 5th dynasties. In the following, all rulers and royal mothers identified so far are named, assigned to the individual fragments under identification according to W. Helck, Winfried Barta , TAH Wilkinson and IES Edwards , and the number of years of reign that has been preserved.

Palermo stone

On the front of the Palermostein the entries for the following rulers are preserved:

  • Seka , a Lower Egyptian king during the Predynastics ; Row I.
  • Iucha (or Chaiu ), a Lower Egyptian king during the Predynastics; Row I.
  • Tiu , a Lower Egyptian king during the Predynastics; Row I.
  • Itjiesch , a Lower Egyptian king during the Predynastics; Row I.
  • Niheb , a Lower Egyptian king during the predynastic period; Row I.
  • Wenegbu , a Lower Egyptian king during the Predynastics; Row I.
  • Imichet , a Lower Egyptian king during the Predynastics; Row I.
  • ... a , badly damaged name of a predynastic ruler; Row I.

On the back of the Palermostein the entries for the following rulers are preserved:

  • Huni , King (Pharaoh) of the 3rd Dynasty (Old Kingdom); only mentioned by name in connection with a domain foundation
  • Menkaure , King (Pharaoh) of the 4th Dynasty (Old Kingdom); date of death
  • Sheepseskaf , King (Pharaoh) of the 4th Dynasty (Old Kingdom); Beginning of rule +1 year
  • Userkaf , King (Pharaoh) of the 5th Dynasty (Old Kingdom); 2 years
  • Sahure , King (Pharaoh) of the 5th Dynasty (Old Kingdom); 5 years
  • Neferirkare , King (Pharaoh) of the 5th Dynasty (Old Kingdom); 1 year

The names of the following queen mothers are preserved:

Cairo stone

The entries for the following kings can be read on the front of the Cairo stone:

  • Djer , King (Pharaoh) of the 1st Dynasty (early Dynasty); Line II, 9 years
  • Anedjib , King (Pharaoh) of the 1st Dynasty (Early Dynasty); Line III, 2 years
  • Semerchet , King (Pharaoh) of the 1st Dynasty (Early Dynasty); Row III, 8 years (complete rule)
  • Qaa , King (Pharaoh) of the 1st Dynasty (Early Dynasty); Line III, 1 year
  • Ninetjer , King (Pharaoh) of the 2nd Dynasty (Early Dynasty); Line IV, 9 years
  • (Unknown) , no longer clearly determinable; Line IV, 5 years
  • Djoser , King (Pharaoh) of the 3rd Dynasty (Old Kingdom); Row V, 10 years
  • Sechemchet , King (Pharaoh) of the 3rd Dynasty (Old Kingdom); Row V, 2 years

The names of the following queen mothers are preserved:

Cairene fragments

  • Cairo fragment No. 2 ( C2 ): King Cheops (obverse), 2 years
  • Cairo fragment No. 3 ( C3 ): King Radjedef (obverse); 2 years
  • Cairo fragment No. 4 ( C4 ): King Sneferu (obverse); 3 years
  • Cairo fragment No. 5 ( C5 ): King Den (obverse); 5 years

London fragment

  • London fragment ( LF ): King Chasechemui (obverse); 3 years

To the event details

The preserved entries of historical events in the annual fields on the annals stone fragments are of great interest to Egyptologists and historians. As already mentioned, political, economic, religious and cultic events are listed here and presented in individual annual windows. Certain celebrations and events are repeated like a refrain. The most important of them are named and briefly described below.

Political events

Appearance of the King

This ceremony took place for the first time immediately after the assumption of the throne , after which it was celebrated every two years. Records from later dynasties suggest that there were three forms of the "appearance of the king": the "appearance of the king of Upper Egypt" (Egypt. Chai-nisut ), the "appearance of the king of Lower Egypt" (Egypt. Chai-biti ) and finally the "appearance of the king of Upper and Lower Egypt" (egypt. chai-nisut-biti ). The first contemporary mentions of this ceremony appear under King Djoser ( 3rd dynasty ). The “Appearance of the King of Upper Egypt” and the “Appearance of the King of Upper and Lower Egypt” are recorded on the fragments of the annals.

Cattle count and escort of Horus

All livestock (including cattle , sheep , goats , pigs and donkeys ) were rounded up and counted at regular intervals . The exact number was meticulously noted by clerks and inspectors and then the corresponding delivery amount was calculated. The livestock census was held in all Egyptian provinces and districts instead. Tax fraud was severely punished. Since the 2nd dynasty, the cattle count has taken place at the same time as part of the so-called Horus escort (Egyptian Shemsu Hor ). In this event, the king every two years traveled in a splendid bark around the country and visited the main administrative centers along the Nile to court to hold and to raise taxes .

Religious and cultic events

King Den during the Sed festival, miniature representation on an ivory plaque from his grave in Abydos
Apis run

The "run of the Apis bull " was celebrated every six years. During this festival the king walked around certain D-shaped markings four times, with the bull chosen to personify Apis following the king. The festival "Lauf des Apis bull" served the symbolic rejuvenation and power demonstration of the king. In pre- and early dynastic times, the Apis bull was still an independent deity associated with spring , sowing and the moon; from the late Old Kingdom onwards it was subordinate to the god Ptah and was now considered his herald .

"Birth" (creation) of the X fetish / statue

One of the frequent events that are mentioned on the Annalenstein is the "birth", ie the creation and setting up of various fetishes and statues for various deities. The goddess Mafdet , the god Min and the god Chontamenti are particularly often preserved by name. So far, the god Seth and the goddess Iatet have been mentioned once .

Sedfest

Another of the recurring festivals was the Sed festival (Egypt. Heb sed ), the first of which took place in the coronation year. The Palermostein narrates that the next Sed festival was only celebrated again in the 30th year of the king's reign, which is why it was known in Greek times as Triakontaeteris ("thirty year celebration"). After this throne jubilee, it was held regularly every three years.

Coronation year of King Djer (3rd window from the right), as shown on the Palermo stone . The death of his predecessor Aha is indicated by a death date (2nd window from the right): The sun stands for “day”, the crescent moon stands for “month” and the dashes represent numbers. Accordingly, Aha died “on the 7th day of the 6th . Month ". Djer's coronation year includes - from top to bottom - a "second date of death", the symbol Sematauj for "union", as well as the symbols for "walking around the white walls".
Sokar festival

In early dynastic times, the festival of Sokar was only celebrated during the coronation ceremony of the new king to celebrate the (physical or symbolic) death of the predecessor. From the 2nd dynasty the festival was held every six years, its fifth celebration coinciding with the first Sed festival. From then on, the Sokar festival marked both the death of the previous king and the foundation of the future tomb for the new ruler. Sokar was the god of the underworld and one of the divine patrons of the royal cemeteries .

Walking around the White Walls

The "White Walls" (Egypt. Inebu hedj ), today's Memphis , were founded according to tradition by King Menes and served as the main seat of government. Going around or walking around the walls of Memphis was celebrated in lavish processions and was intended to mark the king's right to his new seat of government and to declare Memphis his new imperial residence. On the annals stone fragments, the festival always appears in connection with the unification festival at the beginning of a new rule.

Unification of Upper and Lower Egypt

The celebration of the " unification of Upper and Lower Egypt " signaled the beginning of a new royal rule and was intended to symbolically consolidate the civil and political cohesion of the two halves of Upper and Lower Egypt . It is not known exactly which ceremonies were held during the festival. However, it was part of it that the new king visited all the shrines and temples of God and had himself confirmed and celebrated in the southern and northern national shrines .

One-time events

The Annalenstein also reports on one-off events. The annual entries of King Den mention, for example, armed conflicts with the "people of the desert nomads" ( Iuntiu ) and a royal hippo hunt . The annual entries of King Ninetjer report, among other things, the destruction or founding (the reading of the corresponding symbols is controversial) of two cities and the death of the king's mother. Other events that occurred once under the respective rulers are founding ceremonies for domains, temples and / or irrigation systems or the birth of princes and princesses.

Nile flood heights

The Nile flood heights noted on the annals stone very likely refer to the water levels of the fields flooded by the Nile in the northern valley area of Memphis . However, the exact fixed point of the measurement process remains unclear. A one meter increase or decrease in the Nile water level in Elephantine could cause a change in the Nile flood height in the fields near Memphis of up to two meters. The Nile flood heights of the predynastic up to the 2nd dynasty show a clear climate change that changed the daily life of the Egyptians in the early dynastic period . The consequences of the drier climate correspond to the archaeological findings, which confirm the strong lowering of the Nile flood heights that occurred especially at the beginning of the 1st Dynasty due to the parallel reduction in the building heights during the same period.

The Nile flood heights recorded during the Old Kingdom show a constant level that is comparable to the conditions of the 20th century as well as the temporal relationship of extremely high or low Nile floods. For example, a particularly high or low Nile flood occurred only about once every 300 years. Earlier hypotheses of regular famines at shorter time intervals are invalid due to the evaluated data. The lists of the Nile flood heights on the Annalenstein that have been examined so far contradict the assumption of Patrick O'Mara, who described the information on the Annalenstein as " fictitious ".

Nile flood heights in the northern Memphis valley area
Period epoch Water level (mean) Fluctuation range
Djer 1st dynasty 2.60 meters 1.58 to 3.23 meters
Successor Djers to Ninetjer 1st to 2nd dynasty 2.38 meters 1.05 to 4.26 meters
Ninetjer reign 2nd dynasty 1.78 meters 0.53 to 2.40 meters
Chasechemui and Djoser 2nd to 3rd dynasty 1.81 meters 1.29 to 2.30 meters
Sneferu and Cheops 4th dynasty 1.86 meters 1.58 to 2.72 meters
Sheepseskaf to Sahure 4th to 5th dynasty 1.85 meters 1.09 to 2.37 meters

Meaning of the inscriptions and interpretations

Chronological research

The inscriptions on the Annals Stone are of chronological interest for Egyptology and historical research . Researchers and scholars are primarily concerned with the rulers preserved on the fragments and the order in which they are listed. Scholars try to compare this chronology with later king lists such as the king list of Saqqara , the king list of Abydos , the royal papyrus Turin and the Aegyptiaca of the Greek- writing, ancient Egyptian historian Manetho . The background to this research are contradictions that come to light in the king lists. For certain dynasties the lists give a different number of rulers. For example, the list of kings of Abydos in the temple of King Set I ( 19th dynasty ) lists five rulers for the 2nd dynasty, while the list of kings of Saqqara in the tomb of the high official Tjuloy ( 18th dynasty ) and the Turin royal papyrus lists eight List kings and Manetho even gives nine names of rulers. For the 1st dynasty, the Saqqara list gives only two rulers, while all other lists present eight rulers.

Egyptologists and historians have raised the question of how many rulers the Annal Stone actually listed for the first three dynasties and which kings were left out. The focus is on particularly obscure royal names such as Neferka (right) , Neferkasokar and Hudjefa , as they appear in the Sakkara list and in the Turin royal papyrus (the latter is not a real name, but a note that the actual king's name was illegible). Scholars wonder whether these names were also recorded on the Annals Stone or whether they were missing. W. Barta and W. Helck, for example, are convinced that Neferka (right) , Neferkasokar and Hudjefa were also entered on the Annalenstein. As an argument for their explanations they refer to the histories of Manetho, the list of kings of Saqqara and the Turin royal papyrus, which according to scholars reflect Upper Egyptian (Memphite) traditions . In the opinion of Barta and Helck, this could also apply to the Annalenstein. W. Kaiser, on the other hand, prefers the shorter list of Abydos kings as a template.

Government lengths of rulers

The so-called "Escort of Horus" and the associated cattle count are of great importance for Egyptologists and historians. The main question is how long individual rulers actually ruled. According to the Annalenstein, the cattle count was carried out every two years from the predynastic period until the late Old Kingdom. After that it took place every year. However, later historical sources provide contradicting information on the length of reign of individual rulers.

A well-known dispute about the correct period of rule is that of the famous King Cheops from the 4th dynasty . The highest number of cattle counts can be found in the form of worker graffiti in the relief chambers above the grave chamber of the Cheops pyramid , which is a “17th Mention the cattle count ”. Since the cattle count according to the Palermostein only took place every two years at that time, a reign of at least 34 years would be attested for Cheops. However, this calculation arouses doubts and suspicion among some researchers, as the famous royal papyrus certifies Turin only 23 years for Cheops and the Greek historian Herodotus claims that Cheops ruled for 50 years, which is viewed as an exaggeration or a misreading. In the meantime, Egyptologists like Thomas Schneider assume that Cheops either actually ruled for a little more than 34 years, or that the author of the Royal Papyrus Turin did not take into account the fact of the 2-year cycle and in fact describes 23 cattle counts and thus certifies 46 years. Another, similar case is that of King Huni (presumably the last ruler of the 3rd dynasty). The Turin royal papyrus awards the ruler 24 years, while Manetho (who names the king Aches ) reports 42 years.

The reconstructions of the actual period of rule influence the assessment of the size of the inscription, the original size of the annals stone and its format. The longer a king had ruled, the more annual windows were written on the annals stone and the bigger it could have been. The question also arises as to how accurate, complete and thus credible later ruler's chronicles are. According to the opinion of Egyptologists, the Ramesside king lists and the historian Manetho obtained their information from documents and monuments such as the Annal Stone. But since, as already explained, these king lists differ from one another, there are also contradictions with regard to the reconstruction of the inscription on the Annalenstein.

Cults and gods

Mendes ram on a relief in Deir el-Medina .

Another focus of research is the festival of the Apis run. Manetho knows about King Kaichoós (he is generally identified with King Nebre ) to report that under him the gods Apies, Menevus and the goat were introduced to Mendes . However, Egyptologists are suspicious of this story, as the Apis cult was already celebrated under King Anedjib and the deity Apis himself has been attested since the beginning of the 1st Dynasty .

Winfried Barta, IES Edwards and Toby Wilkinson draw attention to an increasing mention of Seth fetishes and shrines and bastions dedicated to that deity on the Annals Stone. In line IV of the Cairo stone C1 , in the annual fields assigned to King Ninetjer , the representations of the Seth beast are piling up. Seth animals also appear in his successor's annual fields. Ninetjer's successor on the Cairo stone has not yet been identified, but recent investigations into the remains of the royal name band reveal a four-legged animal above the Serech , according to Barta, Edwards and Wilkinson . The only early dynastic ruler to date to use a four-legged creature as a patron saint was King Seth-Peribsen . Wilkinson interjects, however, that the position of the name band suggests a period of reign of around 10 or 12 to 14 years, which, however, appears strangely short in view of the extensive archaeological evidence. Since Wilkinson, Edwards and Barta suspect that Peribsen might not have been the only ruler with a Seth animal as a serech figure, at least Barta and Edwards suggest various “problem rulers” such as Nubnefer , Weneg and Sened as possible Seth kings. Wilkinson, however, leans more towards Peribsen as his successor. The scholars exclude King Sechemib as a candidate, since he demonstrably and exclusively used the Horus falcon as Serech patron.

To the royal mothers

A special feature of the Annalenstein inscription is the fact that the name of the king's mother was included in the royal title band. Kurt Sethe and Silke Roth explain this with the fact that royal mothers were assigned a considerably more important, genealogical history role than simple wives. Queen mothers have been regarded and referred to as "The Mother of God" and "Mother of God" since the Old Kingdom. The outstanding position of a king's mother is first clearly expressed under Queen Merneith (“Beloved of Neith ”): She is mentioned by name on royal necropolis seals along with her title Mut nesu (“Mother of the King”) between lists of Horus names . In addition, she received a tomb of royal proportions. Merneiths name appears on the Palermostein in the line between rows II to III. The characters for “r”, “t” and the determinative of a seated woman, which concludes all royal mother names, have been preserved. Problems with the Annalenstein consist in the fact that certain queens are named, which are archaeologically not clearly or not at all proven to this day. A certain Chenethapi ("musician of Apis") is named as the mother of King Djer . However, this name does not appear on any of the ivory labels that have been excavated to date and come from the Abydos necropolis. So far, no priests of the dead have been found who would have looked after the cult of the dead for this king's mother. Another queen named on the Annals Stone is Queen Batiires (" Bati be turned towards her"), the alleged mother of King Semerchet . In their case, however, a grave stele from Abydos may bear the original form of their name, although the reading remains controversial due to damage to the stele. The fourth queen mother is Queen Meresanch I , mother of King Sneferu . Remnants of her name can be found on the Cairo stone above the 6th line, which was intended for Sneferu. Her name also appears in the grave of the high official Peher-nefer and in dedicatory inscriptions from the 18th dynasty in the pyramid necropolis of Meidum .

To the high tide of the Nile

The already mentioned Nile flood heights are also of some importance, as they are particularly helpful in researching the 2nd Dynasty. The background is the assumption that with the death of King Ninetjer the Egyptian Empire was divided into two independent halves of the country. Some research is convinced that King Ninetjer had two of his sons or selected heirs to the throne rule synchronously. Barbara Bell had suspected a prolonged drought among Ninetjer that led to famine . In order to be able to secure the supply of the Egyptian population, the kingdom was divided until the drought and the associated famine ended. Bell justified her thesis with the records of the Nile flood heights below the annual window of the Palermostein. According to their interpretation , the Palermostein recorded unusually low levels of the Nile at the time of King Ninetjer.

Today this theory has been refuted. Historians like Stephan Seidlmayer have recalculated and corrected Bell's estimates. Barbara Bell may not have considered that the Palermostein only shows the levels of the Nile in the region around Memphis and ignores the levels along the rest of the course of the Nile. Stephan Seidlmayer was able to prove that the Nile flood heights in Ninetjer's time were balanced and comparatively high. A drought as a reason for dividing the empire can therefore now be ruled out. Other scholars, however, assume that Egypt's administrative apparatus by this time had become too large and complex and threatened to collapse. In order to prevent this and to facilitate the administration of the state, Egypt could have been divided and two rulers ruled at the same time. However, some Egyptologists urge caution with regard to a definition of the theory of division of the empire, since the Annalenstein inscription itself does not contain any explicit references to such an empire division.

Possible interregni

Beginning of the reign of King Djer (1st dynasty). The inscription is read from right to left. In the 2nd and 3rd windows from the right the change of government from King Aha to King Djer is noted, note the second "date of death" in Djer's coronation year (3rd window from the right, top section).

The Palermostein may provide evidence of a very short interregnum between the kings Aha and Djer . In line II of the inscription is the end of the reign of King Aha . This is followed by the beginning of the rule of King Djer . In the first year window of Djer , which announces the jubilee of the throne and the celebration of the unification of the empire, a "second date of death" is entered. According to W. Helck and Werner Kaiser , this phenomenon could point to a ruler named Teti I , who is shown in the Ramessid king lists as the 2nd king of the 1st dynasty. The background to the assumption is the equation of Teti's predecessor Meni with King Aha and Teti's successor Iteti with King Djer. W. Helck and W. Kaiser recognize an interregnum of 1 year and 45 days. However, this thesis is not generally accepted. Egyptologists and historians such as Juan Antonio Belmonte , T. Wilkinson and Jan-Phillipe Lauer have calculated a period of only 10 months and 20 days between the two "death dates" and doubt that such a short interregnum would have been of sufficient historical importance at all to be mentioned in such a significant document. In addition, a king named "Teti" has not been archaeologically proven on any contemporary artifact or monument of the 1st Dynasty. The scholars rather suspect that the double spelling was either a transcription error by the compiler of the annals list, or that the doubling is related to the Nile flood heights. JA Belmonte points out that the 315 to 320 days correspond to a so-called "Nile year", ie the period between the lowest and highest levels of the Nile flood in the year. The so-called "Nile calendar" was the form of the calendar that had been used before the introduction of the civil administrative calendar.

Original background and purpose of the Annals Stone

Shabaka stone from Memphis

There are differing, sometimes contradicting views on the original background of the creation of the Annalenstein as well as on its possible purpose, as the inscriptions that have survived do not provide any indication of the motives for its creation. The fragments themselves only present brief excerpts from the original overall inscription. Different scholars therefore represent different views and theories, which are based on comparisons with similar documents such as the Shabaka stone and the Turin Royal Papyrus.

Cultic purposes

According to W. Barta, K. Sethe and W. Kaiser, the creation and inscription of an annals stone could have fulfilled cultic purposes. The main focus was on the worship and honor of royal ancestors and the memory of them. Kings, who commissioned such annals stones, were careful to present and celebrate themselves as descendants of an extraordinarily long, mystified bloodline with as divine ancestry as possible. The fact that this did not correspond to reality was simply ignored. According to popular belief, an Egyptian ruler descended from the gods and was their physical representatives and representatives on earth. As a result, he naturally descended from an ancestral line with divine origin that goes back to prehistoric times. The 5th dynasty annals stone could have been such an ancestral document. Evidence of this is provided by the fragmentary vignettes of predynastic kings in the 1st line of the Palermostein and the Kairostein. Their names have not been archaeologically proven, so they may be fictional. However, mentioning and listing them extends the list of ancestors up to the time before King Menes, which may be the basis for the wish for confirmation of an ancestral ancestry.

Economic and calendar purposes

According to several Egyptologists, the fact that the annals stone of King Narmer (founder of the 1st dynasty) records the annual levels of the Nile may point to calendar as well as economic and economic purposes. This assumption is reinforced by the records of the biennial tax surveys. These records enabled the officials and viziers who lived and worked after the creation of the Annalenstein to orientate themselves on the recorded data and use the inscription as a yardstick for future tax calculations and collections.

Political purposes

The creation of an annals stone could also be based on political ambitions. Egyptian rulers were also anxious to be regarded, accepted and respected as kings legitimized and recognized by both halves of the country. Such a self-presentation served only to demonstrate power and intimidation, also (or especially) towards foreign correspondents and kings. An annals stone, which presents all ancestors of the client with the double crown of Egypt (as is the case in Narmer's records ), underpinned the legitimacy as king of Upper and Lower Egypt. This view is supported by the assumptions made by some researchers that the 5th Dynasty Annal Stone was placed in a publicly accessible location where anyone who understood hieroglyphics could read the inscription attached.

W. Helck and T. Wilkinson conclude that the Annalenstein could just as easily possess and fulfill all the properties and purposes mentioned so far. They emphasize that the selection of the labeling material is of great importance. King lists such as the King's Pararus Turin consist of ephemeral material, so their creation was not geared towards the longest possible existence, but limited to the purpose of providing information. On the other hand, lists of kings engraved in stone, such as the list of kings of Saqqara , the list of kings of Karnak and the list of kings of Abydos , should last as long as possible. In the case of the above-mentioned, stone king lists, their place of installation and display (a temple for the dead and ancestors) plays an important role. In the case of the Annalenstein, something similar may apply. T. Wilkinson adds that the informative scarcity of the Ramessid lists suggests purely cultic ambitions and selective thinking with regard to the selection of ancestors. The inscription on the Annalenstein, on the other hand, is much richer, so that the cultic appears to be expanded to include the calendar and the political. Helck and Wilkinson orient their interpretations on the historian Manetho, who starts the opening chapters of his historical work Aegyptiaca with gods, demigods and the mystical "descendants of Horus".

Questions about the authenticity of the Annal Stone Fragments

The Egyptologist Patrick F. O'Mara published the thesis in the 1970s that the fragments of the annal stone and the inscriptions on it could be forged. As a clue, he cited the anachronisms already mentioned, such as the naming of cartouches for early dynastic rulers and the fact that some of the royal mothers mentioned on the fragments have not yet been properly proven archaeologically. He also had doubts about the information on the Nile flood heights, which in his opinion were fictitious, as there are no contemporary, early dynastic inscriptions (for example on ivory tablets and vessels) that could confirm the stated Nile flood heights.

Some Egyptologists and historians strongly contradict the theses and point out that archaeological findings at least suggest that the Nile flood heights, as they are reproduced on the fragments, correspond to real climatic fluctuations. Traces of development that follow the decreasing level of the Nile underpin this. According to today's view of Egyptology, the anachronisms are not sufficient grounds for doubting the authenticity of the artefacts, rather they are to be viewed as the result of contemporary adaptations by the later copyists. They also refer to the Annalenstein fragment, which was discovered in situ and whose origin is considered to be certain. O'Mara's theses are therefore considered refuted and no longer find support within research.

See also

literature

  • Michel Baud, Vassil Dobrev: De nouvelles annales de l'Ancien Empire égyptien. Une "Pierre de Palerme" for the VIe dynasty. In: Bulletin de l'Institut Français d'Archéologie Orientale. Vol. 95, 1995, pp. 23-92.
  • Juan Antonio Belmonte, Mosalam Shaltout (Ed.): In Search of Cosmic Order. Selected Essays on Egyptian Archaeoastronomy. Supreme Council of Antiquities Press, Cairo 2009, ISBN 978-977-479-483-4 .
  • Andrew H. Gordon, Calvin W. Schwabe: The Quick And The Dead. Biomedical Theory In Ancient Egypt (= Egyptological Memoirs. Vol. 4). Brill et al., Leiden et al. 2004, ISBN 90-04-12391-1 .
  • Nicolas Grimal : A History of Ancient Egypt. Reprinted edition. Blackwell, Oxford et al. 1994, ISBN 0-631-19396-0 .
  • Wolfgang Helck : Investigations on the thinite period (= Egyptological treatises. Vol. 45). Harrassowitz, Wiesbaden 1987, ISBN 3-447-02677-4 , pp. 122-126: Chronology of the thinite time. and pp. 168–175: On the layout of the annual tablets .
  • Helen К. Jacquet-Gordon: Les noms des domaines funéraires sous l'Ancien Empire Egyptien (= Bibliothèque d'étude. Vol. 34, ISSN  0259-3823 ). Imprimerie de l'Institut français d'archéologie orientale, Cairo 1962.
  • Patrick F. O'Mara: The Palermo Stone and the Archaic Kings of Egypt (= Studies in the Structural Archeology of Ancient Egypt. Vol. 1). Paulette Publishing, La Canada CA 1979, ISBN 0-686-30249-4 .
  • Silke Roth: The royal mothers of ancient Egypt from the early days to the end of the 12th dynasty (= Egypt and Old Testament. Vol. 46). Harrassowitz, Wiesbaden 2001, ISBN 3-447-04368-7 , pp. 26-30, 376-382 (also: Mainz, Universität, dissertation, 1997).
  • Anna Maria Donadoni Roveri, Francesco Tiradritti (ed.): Kemet. Everyone cares. Electa, Milano 1998, ISBN 88-435-6042-5 .
  • Heinrich Schäfer : A fragment of ancient Egyptian annals (= treatises of the Royal Prussian Academy of Sciences. Appendix: treatises not belonging to the academy of scholars. Philosophical and historical treatises. 1902, 1, ZDB -ID 221471-4 ). With contributions by Ludwig Borchardt and Kurt Sethe . Publishing house of the Royal Academy of Sciences, Berlin 1902, online .
  • Siegfried Schott : Altägyptische Festdaten (= Academy of Sciences and Literature, Mainz. Treatises of the humanities and social sciences class. 1950, 10, ISSN  0002-2977 ). Publishing house of the Academy of Sciences and Literature, Mainz 1950.
  • Toby AH Wilkinson: Royal annals of ancient Egypt. The Palermo stone and its associated fragments. Kegan Paul International, London et al. 2000, ISBN 0-7103-0667-9 .

Web links

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ a b c d e f Helck: Investigations on Thinitenzeit , 1987, pp. 122–126; Schott: Altägyptische Festdaten , 1950, p. 52 f; Wilkinson: Royal annals of ancient Egypt. 2000, pp. 16-28 and pp. 42-50.
  2. ^ A b Wilkinson: Royal annals of ancient Egypt. 2000, pp. 18-19.
  3. ↑ JL de Cenival: Un nouveau fragment de la Pierre de Palerme. In: Bulletin de la Société Française d'Égyptologie. No. 44, 1965, p. 14; Wilkinson: Royal annals of ancient Egypt. 2000, p. 20.
  4. ↑ a b c Helck: Investigations on Thinitenzeit , 1987, pp. 122–126; Wilkinson: Royal annals of ancient Egypt. 2000, pp. 16-28 and pp. 42-50.
  5. ↑ Helck: Investigations on Thinitenzeit , 1987, pp. 122–126; Jacquet-Gordon: Les noms des domaines funéraires sous l'Ancien Empire Egyptien , 1962, pp. 11-22; Wilkinson: Royal annals of ancient Egypt. 2000, pp. 16-28 and pp. 42-50.
  6. ^ A b Helck: Investigations on Thinitenzeit , 1987, pp. 122–126; Roth: The King Mothers of Ancient Egypt from the Early Period to the End of the 12th Dynasty , 2001, pp. 26–30 and 376–382; Schott: Altägyptische Festdaten , 1950, p. 52 f; Wilkinson: Royal annals of ancient Egypt. 2000, pp. 16-28 and pp. 42-50.
  7. ^ Schott: Altägyptische Festdaten , 1950, p. 52 f; Wilkinson: Royal annals of ancient Egypt. 2000, pp. 16-28 and pp. 42-50.
  8. ^ Gordon, Schwabe: The Quick And The Dead. Biomedical Theory In Ancient Egypt , 1994, p. 46 and p. 52; Helck: Investigations on Thinitenzeit , 1987, pp. 122-126; Schott: Altägyptische Festdaten , 1950, p. 52 f; Wilkinson: Royal annals of ancient Egypt. 2000, pp. 16-28 and pp. 42-50.
  9. ^ Schott: Altägyptische Festdaten , 1950, p. 53.
  10. ↑ a b c d e f g Helck: Investigations on Thinitenzeit , 1987, pp. 122–126; Schott: Altägyptische Festdaten , 1950, p. 52 f; Wilkinson: Royal annals of ancient Egypt. 2000, p. 248 ff.
  11. ↑ Helck: Investigations on Thinitenzeit , 1987, pp. 122–126; Schott: Altägyptische Festdaten , 1950, pp. 64–71; Wilkinson: Royal annals of ancient Egypt. 2000, p. 248 ff.
  12. ^ Gordon, Schwabe: The Quick And The Dead. Biomedical Theory In Ancient Egypt , 1994, p. 46 and p. 52; Helck: Investigations on Thinitenzeit , 1987, pp. 122-126; Schott: Altägyptische Festdaten , 1950, pp. 64–71; Wilkinson: Royal annals of ancient Egypt. 2000, p. 248 ff.
  13. ↑ Schott: Altägyptische Festdaten , 1950, pp. 64–71; Stephan Seidlmayer : Historic and modern Nile stands . Pp. 87-89.
  14. ↑ a b c Seidlmayer: Historical and modern Nilstands , pp. 87–89.
  15. ↑ a b c d e f g Helck: Investigations on Thinitenzeit , 1987, pp. 168–175; Schott: Altägyptische Festdaten , 1950, pp. 64–71; Wilkinson: Royal annals of ancient Egypt. 2000, pp. 16-28 and pp. 42-50
  16. ↑ Schott: Altägyptische Festdaten , 1950, pp. 64–71; Wilkinson: Royal annals of ancient Egypt. 2000, p. 248 ff.
  17. ^ Thomas Schneider: Lexicon of the Pharaohs . Albatros, Düsseldorf 2002, ISBN 3-491-96053-3 , pp. 100-102.
  18. ^ A b Helck: Investigations on Thinitenzeit , 1987, pp. 122–126; Schott: Altägyptische Festdaten , 1950, pp. 64–71; Wilkinson: Royal annals of ancient Egypt. 2000, pp. 248-252.
  19. ^ Walter Bryan Emery: Egypt. Early history and culture. P. 103 and p. 274; Schott: Altägyptische Festdaten , 1950, pp. 64–71; Gordon, Schwabe: The Quick And The Dead. Biomedical Theory In Ancient Egypt , 1994, p. 46 and p. 52; Helck: Investigations on Thinitenzeit , 1987, pp. 168-175; Schott: Altägyptische Festdaten , 1950, pp. 64–71; Wilkinson: Royal annals of ancient Egypt. 2000, p. 248 ff.
  20. ^ Wilkinson: Royal annals of ancient Egypt. 2000, pp. 200-206.
  21. ↑ Roth: The King Mothers of Ancient Egypt from the Early Period to the End of the 12th Dynasty , 2001, pp. 18–23, 296–312; Wilkinson: Royal annals of ancient Egypt. 2000, p. 248 ff.
  22. ↑ Grimal: A History of Ancient Egypt , 1994, p. 55; Roveri, Tiradritti: Kemet. Alle sorgenti del tempo , 1998, pp. 80–85.
  23. ↑ Barbara Bell: The Oldest Records of the Nile Floods. In: Geographical Journal. Vol. 136, No. 4, 1970, ISSN  0016-7398 , pp. 569-573; Hans Goedike: King Ḥwḏf3? In: Journal of Egypt Archeology. Vol. 42, 1956, ISSN  0307-5133 , pp. 50-53.
  24. ↑ Grimal: A History of Ancient Egypt , 1994, p. 55; Helck: Investigations on Thinitenzeit , 1987, pp. 168-175; Schott: Altägyptische Festdaten , 1950, pp. 64–71; Roveri, Tiradritti: Kemet. Alle sorgenti del tempo , 1998, pp. 80–85; Wilkinson: Royal annals of ancient Egypt. 2000, p. 248 ff.
  25. ↑ Helck: Investigations on Thinitenzeit , 1987, p. 124.
  26. ^ Jan-Phillipe Lauer: Evolution de la tombe royale égyptienne jusqu'à la pyramid à degrés. In: Communications of the German Archaeological Institute, Cairo Department 15, 1957, p. 52; Juan Antonio Belmonte, MA Mosalam Shaltout: In Search of Cosmic Order. Pp. 90-92; Wilkinson: Royal annals of ancient Egypt. 2000, pp. 186-187.
  27. ↑ Helck: Investigations on the thinite age. 1987, pp. 168-175; O'Mara: The Palermo Stone and the Archaic Kings of Egypt , 1979, pp. 147-153; Schott: Ancient Egyptian dates. 1950, pp. 64-71; Wilkinson: Royal annals of ancient Egypt. 2000, p. 248 ff.
  28. ↑ Helck: Investigations on Thinitenzeit , 1987, pp. 168–175; Seidlmayer: Historic and modern Nile stands. Pp. 87-89; Wilkinson: Royal annals of ancient Egypt. 2000, p. 248 ff.