THE JOURNAL OF
Egyptian Archaeology VOLUME 97 2011
PUBLISHED BY
THE EGYPT EXPLORATION SOCIETY 3 DOUGHTY MEWS, LONDON WC1N 2PG ISSN 0307–5133
The Journal of Egyptian Archaeology All rights reserved ISSN 0307-5133 website: http://www.ees.ac.uk/publications/journal-egyptian-archaeology.html
Published annually by The Egypt Exploration Society 3 Doughty Mews London WC1N 2PG Registered Charity No. 212384 A limited Company registered in England, No. 25816
Printed in Great Britain by Commercial Colour Press Plc Angard House, 185 Forest Road Hainault Essex IG6 3HX
Editorial Team Roland Enmarch, Editor-in-Chief Violaine Chauvet, Editor Mark Collier, Editor Chris Eyre, Editor Cary Martin, Editor Ian Shaw, Editor Glenn Godenho, Editorial Assistant editorial email address:
[email protected]
216
BRIEF COMMUNICATIONS
JEA 97
written in Hurrian,10 and was followed in this by W. L. Moran,11 while F. J. Giles thought that it meant the tablet found at Amarna was ‘a cuneiform copy of a cuneiform original prepared for the archives’, with no further indication of what the language of this original would have been.12 Kühne reasoned that the place of origin of the tablet must have been Mitanni based on an impressionistic analysis of the physical characteristics as well as linguistic and palaeographic aspects,13 and his conclusion was recently confirmed by petrographic analysis of the tablet which concluded that ‘this tablet is undoubtedly a letter from Mitanni and not an Egyptian back-up copy’.14 The Egyptian designation ‘copy’, in other words, does not here refer to a locally produced cuneiform copy of an incoming letter, but rather to the manuscript’s status as a written ‘copy’ of the message delivered orally by the Mitanni messengers named in the docket.15 Again the rarity of such dockets among the hundreds of surviving tablets from Amarna shows that this was not a standardised practice,16 and suggests that it was not part of a widespread and consistent strategy to make administrative documents accessible in an archival context.17 Given that reconstructions of the reception and processing of the Amarna letters rely to a large extent on conjecture,18 these hieratic dockets provide rare but welcome evidence of such secondary handling. Fredrik Hagen A sun-shade temple of Princess Ankhesenpaaten in Memphis? Publication of the Amarna period block MRAH inv. 4491, part of a sloping balustrade perhaps from a sun-shade temple of Princess Ankhesenpaaten in Memphis. The inscription is noteworthy for containing a unique instance of the re-carving of the name of Aten from form IIa to either IIb or III. There follows an excursus on the Memphite ‘Horizon of Aten’.
The Memphite Amarna period block kept in the Brussels Museum (Musées Royaux d’Art et d’Histoire inv. 4491) has long been known, but no photograph of it has ever been 10
C. Kühne, Die Chronologie der internationalen Korrespondenz von El-Amarna (AOAT 17; Neukirchen, 1973), 44 n. 209. 11 W. L. Moran, The Amarna Letters (Baltimore, 2000), xvii. 12 F. J. Giles, The Amarna Age: Western Asia (ACE Studies 5; Warminster, 1997), 39. Compare the comments by K. A. Kitchen, Suppiluliuma and the Amarna Pharaohs (Liverpool, 1962), 7 n. 1, who also assumes that the tablet is an Egyptian-produced copy of another cuneiform text. 13 Kühne, Chronologie der internationalen Korrespondenz, 44 n. 209; cf. Fritz, SAK 18 (1991), 214 with n. 28. 14 Y. Goren, I. Finkelstein, and N. Na’aman, Inscribed in Clay: Provenance Study of the Amarna Tablets and other Ancient Near Eastern Texts (Tel Aviv, 2004), 42. 15 On the general context of delivery of messages at the Amarna court, see A. L. Oppenheim, ‘A Note on the Scribes in Mesopotamia’, in H. G. Güterbock and T. Jacobsen (eds), Studies in Honor of Benno Landsberger on his Seventy-fifth Birthday (Assyriological Studies 16; Chicago, 1965), 254–6; M. Valloggia, Recherche sur les ‘messagers’ (wpwtyw) dans les sources égyptiennes profanes (HEO 6; Geneva, 1976), 275–7. The argument of S. A. Meier, The Messenger in the Ancient Semitic World (Harvard Semitic Monographs 45; Atlanta, 1988), 166–7, that such oral delivery was not necessarily verbatim, is less relevant here; the central issue is that messengers generally delivered their messages by speaking before the king. 16 According to the original publication of the fragmentary hieratic docket on EA 23 by C. Bezold and E. A. W. Budge, The Tell el-Amarna Tablets in the British Museum (London, 1892), xlii–xliii, pl. 23, that entry also contained the word ‘copy’, but J. Černý, after his re-examination of the tablet in 1964, concluded: ‘There are many traces [after pr-Ha, ‘House of Rejoicing’, in line two] but they do not agree with Budge’s reading’, as reported by Kühne, Chronologie der internationalen Korrespondenz, 38 n. 178. However, digital photographs of the tablet available under ‘E29793’ on the British Museum website < http://www.britishmuseum.org/research/search_the_ , mit[t] in line two. Petrographic collection_database.aspx > (accessed 12 March 2010) show clear traces of analysis of this tablet demonstrated that it too originated in Mitanni, not in Egypt (Goren et al., Inscribed in Clay, 41), proving that — like EA 27 — it cannot be an Egyptian-produced copy of another cuneiform tablet. 17 The issue of archival practices in pharaonic Egypt is complex: a recent introduction (with a deliberately minimalist approach to the evidence) is C. J. Eyre, ‘On the Inefficiency of Bureaucracy’, in P. Piacentini and C. Orsenigo (eds), Egyptian Archives (Milan, 2009), 15–30, which to my mind downplays the potential distortion caused by the uneven survival of the sources. 18 The comments by Moran, Amarna Letters, xvii–xviii, are symptomatic; compare Giles, Amarna Age, 43–7.
2011
BRIEF COMMUNICATIONS
217
published.1 This block was found in the Ptah enclosure, probably with the other Amarna period blocks that Petrie mentions in his report of the excavation campaign of 1912.2 It came into the possession of the Brussels Museum in September 1913 with a donation from the British School of Archaeology in Egypt and the Egypt Research Account, as part of the standing agreement between them and the Museum.3 It is engraved with traces of a sun disk on the right hand side, to the left of which are its two cartouches and another three columns of epithets under a slanting p.t-sign at the top (fig. 1). Only the upper halves of the cartouches are preserved, and only the upper
Fig. 1. Block MRAH inv. 4491 (photograph by Raoul Pessemier, © Musées royaux d’Art et d’Histoire, Brussels; drawing by author). 1 Limestone; H. 20 cm; W. 40 cm. See PM III2, 872; L. Speleers, Recueil des inscriptions égyptiennes des Musées Royaux du Cinquantenaire à Bruxelles (Brussels, 1923), 100, 208a (419); B. Löhr, ‘Ahanjāti in Memphis’, SAK 2 (1975), 153 (doc. II.6); J. Málek, ‘The Temples at Memphis: Problems Highlighted by the EES Survey’, in S. Quirke (ed.), The Temple in Ancient Egypt: New Discoveries and Recent Research (London, 1997), 97 (c13). I would like to thank Luc Limme, keeper of the Egyptian collections at the Musées Royaux d’Art et d’Histoire (Brussels), for allowing me to publish this block and for providing information about it. 2 W. M. F. Petrie, ‘Memphis VI’, in R. Engelbach, Riqqeh and Memphis VI (BSAE/ERA 25; London, 1915), 32, pl. 54.6–10, though pl. 54.6 (which is also in the Brussels Museum: inv. E 4494) in fact dates to the Old Kingdom: Málek, in Quirke (ed.), Temple in Ancient Egypt, 97. 3 For which, see B. van de Walle, L. Limme, and H. De Meulenaere, La collection égyptienne: Les étapes marquantes de son développement (Brussels, 1980), 17.
218
BRIEF COMMUNICATIONS
JEA 97
third remains of the other columns. The slanting p.t-sign demonstrates that the fragment comes from a sloping balustrade giving access to an Aten temple.4 Comparison with other fragments of Amarna period balustrades suggests that the Brussels block was part of a scene showing royal family members (Akhenaten with Nefertiti and a princess, or Akhenaten with a princess) in an attitude of adoration or giving offerings, surmounted by the rays of the sun disk.5 The third sign of the first cartouche is problematic. L. Speleers, the first publisher of the block, initially proposed reading it as a HqA sign, implying a reconstruction of the first Aten . He subsequently changed his mind cartouche as the didactic name IIb or III:6 and proposed a H sign, corresponding to the first cartouche of the intermediary didactic . This last reading is reproduced name IIa (with omission of the r under the H):7 by B. Gessler-Löhr in her article on the Amarna period in Memphis.8 However, a close examination of this part of the block shows that the HqA sign and the H sign are both present, and that HqA was in fact engraved over the H. Moreover, the position of the H sign is high compared to the two Ax.t signs, and there is a dip underneath which should correspond to a now erased r sign (fig. 2).9 In other words, this block, originally inscribed with the rare didactic name IIa, was updated to either form IIb or III.10 Other cases of updated Aten
Fig. 2. Block MRAH inv. 4491 detail (from photograph by Raoul Pessemier, © Musées royaux d’Art et d’Histoire, Brussels).
4
For this kind of monument, see I. Shaw, ‘Balustrades, Stairs and Altars in the Cult of the Aten at el-Amarna’, JEA 80 (1994), 109–27. To his list of balustrades may be added: W. Smith and D. B. Redford, The Akhenaten Temple Project, I: Initial Discoveries (Warminster, 1976), pls 78–80; D. B. Redford (ed.), The Akhenaten Temple Project, II: Rwd-mnw, Foreigners and Inscriptions (Toronto, 1988), pl. 26 (TS 8863). 5 E.g. Shaw, JEA 80, pls 10.1, 11.1; J. D. S. Pendlebury, The City of Akhenaten, III: The Central City and the Official Quarter. The Excavations at Tell el Amarna during the seasons 1926–1927 and 1931–1936 (EES EM 44; London, 1951), pls 69.4 and 69.5; G. Roeder, Amarna-Reliefs aus Hermopolis (Hildesheim, 1969), pls 1–2. 6 Speleers, Recueil, 100 (n. 419). The numbering of the different forms for the didactic name of the Aten used here is that of M. Gabolde, D’Akhenaton à Toutankhamon (Collection de l’Institut d’Archéologie et d’Histoire de l’Antiquité 3; Lyon, 1998), 105–7. The number I is the earlier name, number III is the latter and the number II is the intermediate form with its two variants (IIa and IIb). The date for the change of the Aten’s name (to II then III) can be fixed between years 12 and 14 (instead of between years 9 and 11 as was commonly accepted previously): cf. Gabolde, D’Akhenaton, 110–18; this was followed by W. J. Murnane, ‘The End of the Amarna Period Once Again’, OLZ 96.1 (2001), 13–14, and by M. Eaton-Krauss and R. Krauss, review of Gabolde, D’Akhenaton, BiOr 58 (2001), 92. 7 Speleers, Recueil, 208a (n. 419). 8 Löhr, SAK 2, 153 (doc. II.6). 9 Conversely, the HqA-sign is just level with the two Ax.t-signs. 10 The updating only affected the cartouches. The jmy Hb-sd epithet was not changed despite the fact that the didactic name III usually used the new form nb Hb-sd. Thus, even if the Brussels block had been undamaged, it would be impossible to know whether the updated version read as the didactic name IIb or III. The beginning of the fourth column demonstrates the presence of the epithet ‘lord of all that which Aten encircles’ ([nb Snnw.t] nb(.t) Jtn). Although this epithet is generally combined with Aten's didactic name III (see Pendlebury, The City of Akhenaten, III, 184), it is also — less often — associated with the other forms of the divine name, for example:
2011
BRIEF COMMUNICATIONS
219
names are attested for form I, changed to IIa,11 and to IIb or III.12 However, the Brussels block is apparently the only known example of an alteration made to the didactic name II. The relative chronology of the forms IIa and IIb has not yet been definitively fixed,13 but if the Brussels block was indeed re-carved with the name IIb, it would prove the order IIa followed by IIb. Another neglected detail of the Brussels block is the anx group which appears after the Aten’s epithets at the beginning of the fifth and last column; this was probably part of the name of the place where the god was worshiped.14 Two possibilities exist for the reconstruction of the text: the anx group was either part of a temple name, or part of a personal name of a royal family member. Only one temple of the Amarna period currently known has a name formed with anx: the RwD-anxw-Jtn at Tell el-Amarna.15 As for royal family members, Princess Ankhesenpaaten was the only person with a name formed with anx when the didactic Aten name IIa was in use. Considering this last possibility, it should be noted that a talatat block from Memphis mentions a sun-shade temple (Sw.t-Ra) (fig. 3).16 This kind of monument (which does not only occur in the Amarna period) was apparently always associated with the women of the royal family in Akhetaten.17 It is therefore possible that the Brussels block may have come from a temple of Akhesenpaaten.
Fig. 3. Talatat found at Memphis; from Mariette, Monuments divers, pl. 27.e.
W. K. Simpson, Inscribed Material from the Pennsylvania-Yale Excavations at Abydos (PPYE 6; New Haven, 1995), 76 (NK 41–42) (didactic name I); N. de G. Davies, The Rock Tombs of El Amarna, II: The Tombs of Panehesy and Meryra II (ASE 14; London, 1905), pls 5, 7–8 (didactic name I); id., The Rock Tombs of El Amarna, IV: Tombs of Penthu, Mahu, and others (ASE 16; London, 1906), pl. 15 (didactic name IIb); id., The Rock Tombs of El Amarna, VI: Tombs of Parennefer, Tutu, and Aÿ (ASE 18; London, 1908), pls 4, 16, 29–31 (didactic name I); M. Sandman, Texts from the Time of Akhenaten (BAe 8; Brussels, 1938), 154.15–16, 155.13 ; 156.4–5 (didactic name I). 11 Pendlebury, The City of Akhenaten, III, pls 102.18–19. 12 T. E. Peet and C. L. Woolley, The City of Akhenaten, I: Excavations of 1921 and 1922 at el-‘Amarneh (EES EM 38; London, 1923), 149; Pendlebury, The City of Akhenaten, III, 183, pls 101.4, 101.13, 101.14, 102.22–6, 102.29, 102.39. 13 See Gabolde, D’Akhenaton, 106 n. 909. 14 S. Tawfik, ‘Aten and the Naming of His Temple(s) at Thebes’, in Smith and Redford, The Akhenaten Temple Project I, 59–60. 15 H. W. Fairman, in Pendlebury (ed.), The City of Akhenaten, III, 192; Gabolde, D’Akhenaton, 36–7 nn 306 and 308; J.-L. Chappaz, ‘L’horizon d’Aton’, in T.-L. Bergerot and B. Mathieu, (eds), Akhénaton et l’époque amarnienne (Bibliothèque d’Égypte Afrique et Orient; Paris, 2005), 76. An article about some points of Amarna toponymy, and notably about this temple (also a sun-shade temple), is in preparation by M. Gabolde and J. Williamson. See for now J. Williamson, ‘The “Sunshade” of Nefertiti’, EA 33 (2008), 5–7. 16 PM III2, 850; A. Mariette, Monuments divers recueillis en Égypte et en Nubie (Paris, 1872), pl. 27.e; G. Legrain, Répertoire généalogique et onomastique du Musée du Caire: Monuments de la XVIIe et de la XVIIIe dynastie (Geneva, 1908), 175 n. 298; Löhr, SAK 2, 152–3 (doc. II.5); Málek, in Quirke (ed.), Temple in Ancient Egypt, 96 (c6). It was discovered by A. Mariette at Middle Birka, in the eastern part of the temenos of Ptah (Survey of Memphis code: BAF). Its current location is unknown (very probably the Cairo Museum). Reconstructing the mention of a Memphite sun-shade temple has been proposed in the text of an offering list of Akhenaten found at Karnak: R. Saad et L. Manniche, ‘A Unique Offering List of Amenophis IV Recently Found at Karnak’, JEA 57 (1971), 72 n. 1; W. Helck, ‘Zur Opferliste Amenophis’ IV.’, JEA 59 (1973), 97–8. In that case, the name of the sun-shade owner is not mentioned (since there is not enough space to restore that on the stone), and so reading tA Hw.t pA Jtn m Mn-nfr/@w.t-kA-PtH (‘The temple of Aten in Memphis/Hut-ka-Ptah’) seems more likely. 17 For these monuments at Tell el-Amarna: Pendlebury, The City of Akhenaten, III, 200–8; B. J. Kemp, ‘Outlying Temples at Amarna’, in B. J. Kemp (ed.), Amarna Reports, VI (EES OP 10; London, 1995), 454–60;
220
BRIEF COMMUNICATIONS
JEA 97
This Memphis talatat block is the only talatat from that site which is not inscribed with the earlier name of Aten (with the exception of the Smenkhkare talatat block).18 On it, the first cartouche of the Aten is fragmentary, and so it is not clear whether it bore the didactic name IIa or IIb/III. Furthermore, it is impossible to say precisely which epithet was used, being either jmj-Hb-sd (names IIa/IIb) or nb Hb-sd (name III). However, nothing prevents reconstructing it with the didactic name IIa, possibly updated to IIb or III, as on the Brussels block.19 A sun-shade temple of Ankhesenpaaten is attested at Tell el-Amarna. The blocks from this monument were re-carved with the name of the princess over the original inscriptions that were for the king’s wife Kiya.20 These transformations date from after the disappearance of Kiya (her disgrace and/or her death?) around Year 12 or after Year 16 of Akhenaten.21 However, despite the reserve of R. Hanke, one block from Tell el-Amarna mentioning a sun-shade temple may have been inscribed with the name of Ankhesenpaaten from the beginning.22 The Brussels block published in the present article does not show any trace of re-carving of the hypothetical personal name. The reconstruction proposed in this article implies that the original inscriptions of the Brussels block and of the Memphis talatat block read as follows (figs 4 and 5): (anx Ra-@r-Axty Hay m Ax.t)| (m rn=f m Swty jj m Jtn)| dj anx D.t nHH (?) Jtn anx wr jmy Hb-sd nb Snn(w.t) nb(.t) Jtn nb p.t nb tA m tA Sw.t-Ra n(y.t) sA.t nsw.t anx=s-n-pA-Jtn
(The living one, Re-Horakhty, who rejoices in the horizon)| (in his name being Radiance-that-comes-from-the-Sun-disk)|, given life for ever and ever (?) the living great Sun disk who is in sed-festival, lord of all that which Aten encircles, lord of heaven, lord of earth in the sun-shade temple of the king’s daughter a Ankhesenpaaten.b
(a) It is not possible to know whether the long epithet sA.t nsw.t n(y.t) x.t=f mry.t=f was used on the Brussels block and on the Memphis talatat block. There might be enough space on both. (b) The inscription of the Memphis talatat block may have included a geographical specifier, ‘in Memphis’ (m Mn-nfr) or ‘in the Horizon of Aten in Memphis’ (m Ax.t-Jtn m Mn-nfr), for example.23 There is no space for something like this on the Brussels block. see also P. Spencer, The Egyptian Temple: A Lexicographical Study (London, 1984), 119–25; A. Cabrol, Les voies processionnelles de Thèbes (OLA 97; Leuven, 2001), 401–2; K. Konrad, Architektur und Theologie: Pharaonische Tempelterminologie unter Berücksichtigung königsideologischer Aspekte (KSG 5; Wiesbaden, 2006), 188–205. Their function was similar to the mammisis: R. Stadelmann, ‘Sw.t-raw als Kultstätte des Sonnengottes im Neuen Reich’, MDAIK 25 (1969), 159–78. For the suggested existence of a sun-shade temple of prince Tutankhamun, a monument which would contradict our hypothesis about Ankhesenpaaten, see A. Grimm and H. A. Schlögl, Das thebanische Grab Nr. 136 und der Beginn der Amarnazeit (Wiesbaden, 2005), 37, pl. 48. The reading is very unlikely. Furthermore, according to stylistic criteria, the block mentioning this temple is probably a forgery. See also the doubts expressed by M. Eaton-Krauss, review of Grimm and Schlögl, Das thebanische Grab Nr. 136, BiOr 63 (2006), 526. M. Gabolde considers that the temple named qd=f-Ax.t-n-Jtn could be a sun-shade temple of Akhenaten (personal communication). This would be the only monument of that kind for a man. 18 Löhr, SAK 2, 157–8 (doc. II.10); Málek, in Quirke (ed.), Temple in Ancient Egypt, 96 (c5). A fragment of the back pillar of an Akhenaten statue (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania University Museum inv. E 13644) is also inscribed with the didactic name II or III of Aten: Löhr, SAK 2, 149–50 (doc. II.3); Málek, in Quirke (ed.), Temple in Ancient Egypt, 97 (c16). 19 B. Löhr reconstructs as the didactic name III. 20 R. Hanke, Amarna-Reliefs aus Hermopolis: Neue Veröffentlichungen und Studien (HÄB 2; Hildesheim, 1978), 260 (Abb. 48: 207+234-VIIIA, 443-VIIIA), 261 (Abb. 49: 328-VIIIA, 324-VIIIC, 338-VIA). 21 J. Van Dijk, ‘The Noble Lady of Mitanni and Other Royal Favourites of the Eighteenth Dynasty’, in J. Van Dijk (ed.), Essays on Ancient Egypt in Honour of Herman te Velde (Egyptological Memoirs 1; Groningen, 1997), 36–7; A. H. Kramer, ‘Enigmatic Kiya’, in A. K. Eyma and C. J. Bennett (eds), A Delta-man in Yebu (Occasional Volume of the Egyptologists’ Electronic Forum 1; Boca Raton, 2003), 53; Gabolde, D’Akhenaton, 169. 22 Roeder, Amarna-Reliefs, Taf. 55 (450-VIIA); Hanke, Amarna-Reliefs, 135–6. 23 For which toponym, see excursus.
2011
BRIEF COMMUNICATIONS
221
This hypothesis also implies that the Brussels block was part of a scene depicting Akhenaten and Ankhesenpaaten under the rays of the sun disk.24 One might be surprised that Princess Ankhesenpaaten — who is not the most frequently cited among Akhenaten’s daughters — is mentioned on a block from Memphis, all the more since the blocks mentioning her at Tell el-Amarna are re-carved over Kiya’s inscriptions, except for the one block cited above. However, the existence of a parapet engraved with the name of a structure (a Sw.t-Ra?) of Neferneferuaten-tasherit located in one of the pr-Hay of Akhetaten demonstrates that princesses even less well attested could have possessed their own chapels.25
Fig. 4. Reconstruction suggested for the bloc MRAH inv. 4491 (drawing by author).
Fig. 5. Reconstruction suggested for the talatat of Mariette (drawing by author). 24 25
Compare Peet and Woolley, The City of Akhenaten, I, pl. 34.1; Shaw, JEA 80, pl. 10.1. Gabolde, D’Akhenaton, 285–6 n. 2028.
222
BRIEF COMMUNICATIONS
JEA 97
Excursus: The Memphite Horizon of Aten. In a recent article, V. Angenot showed very convincingly that a ‘Horizon of Aten’ (Ax.t-Jtn) existed in Memphis.26 This geographic name (which was formerly understood as Akhenaten’s capital city) appears in the title of two individuals buried in Saqqara: Merire/Merineith, ‘Scribe of the estate of Aten in the Horizon of Aten in Memphis’ (sS n pr Jtn m Ax.t-Jtn m Mn-nfr), and Raiay/Hatiay, ‘Scribe of the treasury of the estate of Aten in the Horizon of Aten in Memphis’ (sS pr-HD n pr Jtn m Ax.t-Jtn m Mn-nfr).27 According to her, this name was used ‘to designate some sacred area in which the Aten was revered, inside the limits of the big city’.28 Some years ago, W. Murnane proposed a similar hypothesis about the Theban ‘Horizon of Aten’, being ‘a larger territory that was the setting for Atenist Theban temples’.29 It can therefore perhaps be concluded that the Memphite ‘Horizon of Aten’ was the specific designation of the area which included all the Amarna-type temples.30 It is perhaps significant that a donation stela (Cairo Museum CG 34186; no. 18.12.1 of D. Meeks’s list of the donation stelae)31 from Tutankamun’s reign mentions a ‘Horizon of Ptah’ in Memphis: hrw pn jst Hm=f Hr jr.t Hss(w).t jt=f PtH nb MAa.t [... m ...] m Ax.t PtH n Nfr-Hr On this day, His Majesty was doing what is praised by his father Ptah, the lord of Maat, […] in the Horizon of Ptah for the Perfect-of-face (i.e. Ptah).32
There is a strong possibility that this last name was the one which replaced the ‘Horizon of Aten’ after the Amarna period and the restoration of traditional cults.33 It does not however imply the destruction of all the Aten’s temples, given the fact that the Hw.t-pA-Jtn and the pr-Jtn were still operational until at least the reign of Seti I.34 Stéphane Pasquali
26
V. Angenot, ‘A Horizon of Aten in Memphis’, JSSEA 35 (2008), 7–26. To these references may be added A.-P. Zivie, ‘Hatiay, scribe du temple d’Aton à Memphis’, in G. N. Knoppers and A. Hirsch (eds), Egypt, Israel, and the Mediterranean World: Studies in Honor of Donald B. Redford (PdÄ 20; Leiden, 2004), 223–31. The author proposes an alternative reading ‘estate of Aten of Akhetaten in Memphis’, in other words belonging to Akhenaten’s god itself. 28 Angenot, JSSEA 35, 23. 29 W. J. Murnane, ‘Observations on Pre-Amarna Theology during the Earliest Reign of Amenhotep IV’, in E. Teeter and J. A. Larson (eds), Gold of Praise: Studies on Ancient Egypt in Honor of Edward F. Wente (SAOC 58; Chicago, 2000), 306. 30 This hypothesis was also developed in S. Pasquali, Recherches sur Memphis au Nouvel Empire: Topographie, toponymie, histoire (PhD thesis, University of Montpellier III–Paul Valéry; Montpellier, 2008), to be published shortly. 31 D. Meeks, ‘Les donations aux temples dans l’Égypte du Ier millénaire avant J.-C.’, in E. Lipiński (ed.), State and Temple Economy in the Ancient Near East, II: Proceedings of the International Conference Organized by the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven from the 10th to the 14th of April 1978 (OLA 6; Leuven, 1979), 663; id., ‘Une stèle de donation de la Deuxième Période Intermédiaire’, ENiM 2 (2009), 142, available: < http://www.enimegyptologie.fr/index.php?page=enim-2&n=10 >. 32 Urk. IV, 2078.9–10. This stela was discovered in Mit Rahina: PM III2, 870. 33 This is the only reference to a ‘Horizon of Ptah’ to my knowledge. Memphis again became the main royal residence after the Amarna period, see J. Van Dijk, ‘The Development of the Memphite Necropolis in the PostAmarna Period’, in A.-P. Zivie (ed.), Memphis et ses nécropoles au Nouvel Empire: Nouvelles données, nouvelles questions. Actes du colloque CNRS. Paris, 9 au 11 octobre 1986 (Paris, 1988), 37–42; G. T. Martin, ‘Memphis: The Status of a Residence City in the Eighteenth Dynasty’, in M. Bárta and J. Krejčí (eds), Abusir and Saqqara in the year 2000 (ArOr Supplement 9; Prague, 2000), 99–120. 34 Löhr, SAK 2, 146–7 (doc. I.4) = KRI I, 279.14; H. D. Schneider, ‘The Tomb of Iniuia: Preliminary Report on the Saqqara Excavations, 1993’, JEA 79 (1993), 4, 7, pl. 2.2. 27
