153

Abstract

A genealogical chart is proposed which, if correct, shows a shortened period for the 22nd–26th Dynasty.

This short note presents a chart showing a proposed assemblage of many of the known genealogiesof the Third Intermediate Period. To avoid giving endless references, the reader is asked to consultKitchen’s

Third Intermediate Period in Egypt

which has user-friendly charts and index so that most ofthe characters named can be quickly found and fitted into their own sub-genealogies.

1

The chartshown here was partly inspired by Morris Bierbrier’s 1979 chart.

2

That chart is out of date becausehis two Viziers Nakhtefmut, placed three generations apart, are now thought to be the same person,with Nakhtefmut’s wife as a daughter of Takelot II, not III. Also, Bierbrier postulated two extra gen-erations in the Fourth Prophet of Amun lineage.

3

The new chart fits together fairly tightly and does not appear to leave much room for other possi-

bilities, given the present state of our knowledge, but there are two surprising results which I willbriefly outline:

1) About two generations are lost from the early 22nd Dynasty royal genealogy as given by the well-known Pasenhor stela. Pasenhor’s genealogy is the only source for the usual royal sequencefrom Shoshenq I to Takelot I, and it might be inaccurate or fictitious. Jansen-Winkeln recentlycategorized this type of genealogy as “a long genealogy in which no mistake, contradiction oranachronism

is apparent

” (my emphasis; Jansen-Winkeln was not doubting Pasenhor).

4

Alterna-tively, Pasenhor’s sequence might be retained by making Tashepenbast a very late daughter ofShoshenq I and Neskhonspakhered a very late daughter of Iuput, plus other adjustments (e.g.,see final comment on the Neseramun genealogy below). If the early 22nd Dynasty is reallyshorter, then presumably Shoshenq I was overlord of Takelot I, and Osorkon I and II must havealso reigned partly in parallel.

1

The following abbreviations are used for convenient summaries of the genealogies:

TIPE

= Kenneth Kitchen,

Third Intermediate Period in Egypt

(Warminster, 1973; 2nd edition 1986). See especially chapter 13,plus 560–564 in the 2nd edition;

LNK

= Morris Bierbrier,

Late New Kingdom in Egypt

(Warminster, 1975). See especially chap-ters 4 and 5;

PBTS

= Günter Vittmann,

Priester und Beamte im Theben der Spätzeit

(Vienna, 1978). See especially chapters 2and 3. For a recent brief summary of Dynasties 22 to 24, including some mention of the genealogies, see Karl Jansen-Winkeln,“The Chronology of the Third Intermediate Period: Dyns. 22–24,” in Erik Hornung, Rolf Krauss, and David Warburton, eds.,

Ancient Egyptian Chronology

(Leiden-Boston, 2006), 234–64. Many of the genealogical texts have recently become available intranscription in Karl Jansen-Winkeln,

Inscriften der Spätzeit, Teil II: Die 22.-24. Dynastie

(Wiesbaden, 2007), and later genealogieswill become available in subsequent volumes in this series.

2

M. Bierbrier, “Review of

PBTS

,”

Bibliotheca Orientalis

36 (1979), 306–9.

3

Bierbrier, “Review,” 307. His “4PA Nakhtefmut” is probably the same person as 4PA Nakhtefmut B.

4

Translated from Karl Jansen-Winkeln, “Die Entwicklung der genealogischen Informationen nach dem Neuen Reich,” inMartin Fitzenreiter, ed.,

Genealogie – Realität und Fiktion von Identitat

(London, 2005), 137–45, esp. 142.

A Network of 22nd–26th Dynasty Genealogies

Robert M. Porter

JARCE 44 (2008)154

2) More difficult to avoid is the conclusion that approximately two more generations need to be re-moved in the mid to later part of the genealogy. This implies that Osorkon III and Takelot IIIreigned contemporary with Kushite pharaohs, presumably allied or subject to them. Similarlywith Shoshenq V.

The rest of this note consists of explanations for the chart and brief comments on some of the gene-alogies included. The test is whether or not the chart can be shown to be incorrect and an alternativechart drawn without adding too many hypothetical extra people or unreasonably long generations. Al-though not considered here, stylistic features of statues, coffins, stelae and papyri should come approxi-mately in appropriate sequences.

Notes to The Chart

1) A generation might be assumed to be in the 20 to 25 year range for earlier born children (thosemost likely to succeed to their father’s office, as with the line of Fourth Prophets of Amun).

2) Most generations are set three lines below the previous generation, thus a line would typicallyrepresent about 7 or 8 years. Inevitably some generation steps will be longer and a few might beshorter.

3) Often men marry females of a significantly younger age, but rarely an older female.4) Approximate starting points of reigns of some pharaohs, as dictated by the genealogy, are

shown in the left column. These do not necessarily correspond to the positions of the same pha-raohs where they appear in the genealogy because pharaohs may reign early or late in theirlives, often later rather than early. Psamtek is shown twice because his reign covers at least twogenerations.

5) If the line on which a person’s name is placed is taken to indicate their relative position at age40 years, then they can easily relate to pharaohs who reigned one generation before or after theline on which their own name occurs, but rarely much beyond that.

6) Pharaohs’ names in round brackets are attested in the life-span or at the death of the namedperson, e.g

.

, on their funeral statue. Because the chart positions people at approximately age40, but they may die several decades later (or earlier), a funeral statue may show a pharaoh fromfurther down (or up) the chart.

7) Dates in round brackets indicate that there are dated documents in which the person is named.8) The following abbreviations are used for job titles:

2P 2nd Prophet of Amun; 3P 3rd Prophet of Amun; 4P 4th Prophet of Amun; V Vizier9) The following abbreviations of personal names have been used in some places:

Ankhpa AnkhpakheredBes BesenmutDjB DjedbastefankhDjK DjedkhonsefankhDjMut/Mon Djedmutefankh/montuefankh

(variants for same person[

TIPE

, 227, n.146])DjMs DjedmutesankhDjT DjedthutefankhKaro Karoma or variationNa Nakhtefmut

Nam NamenkhpreNesA Nes(er)amunNesK NeskhonsNesKpa NeskhonspakheredOs OsorkonPs PsamtekSh ShoshenqShep ShepensopdetTah TaharqaTak Takelot

PORTER 155

JARCE 44 (2008)156

Brief Comments on Some of the Genealogies

Most of the genealogies can be found in

TIPE

,

LNK

and

PBTS

(see end n. 1).The

Fourth Prophets of Amun genealogy

is prominent towards the left side of the chart. Asalready mentioned, Bierbrier inserted two hypothetical extra generations between Nakhtefmut B andDjedkhonsefankh D (see n. 3).

The

Neseramun genealogy

appears at the right-hand side of the chart with a question mark besidethe dotted portion. This genealogy has two versions; one is shown in a chart in

TIPE

, 202, and a twogeneration shorter line via Vizier Nesipaqashuty is discussed in

TIPE

, 204–7. Kitchen concludedthat both lines of descent were correct, with short generations on one line and long ones on theother. This is possible, but in my opinion the genealogy is suspect for the following reasons. Hor videdicated a statue to Hor iii who would have been his great-great-grandfather on the longer geneal-ogy shown in Kitchen’s chart. This would be most unusual as such statues were normally dedicated bythe son of the person portrayed by the statue (although Hor vi does refer to himself as “son” of Horiii, this does not appear to be intended to be taken literally). Hor vi does not give any genealogicalconnection between himself and Hor iii but merely names his own father, mother and her father.

5

For some reason Hor vi was, or wished to be, associated with or related to Hor iii, and by the time ofHor vi’s descendants this association had become a long genealogy.

6

Actually, this became a

very

longgenealogy, stretching back to the end of the New Kingdom, and therefore likely to be partly fictitious.However, it must be admitted that extra generations between Hor iii and Hor vi would help restoreShoshenq I to a position earlier than Takeloth I.

In the center of the chart is the Vizier Nakhtefmut and one line of his descendents is shown viaDjedkhonsefankh vii to

Tarwa and

Neskhons i

, but I have made a major assumption here. This linewas attested on the coffin of Neskhons which was in the Boulaq museum in the 19th century and thebare genealogy was published by Lieblein

7

without further comment. However, Lieblein gave thegenealogy as one generation longer than I have shown, with Tarwa as the grandmother of Neskhons,not her mother, and Hormaat as the son of Tarwa and Ankhpakhered. I was prompted to query thisgenealogy because it did not fit easily into the chart. The coffin is now lost and, above all, Hormaat isknown to have married a Tarwa.

8

Also, it would be more expected for Neskons to name her motherthan to omit her mother while naming her grandmother. In view of these factors, an error by Lie-blein (or even by the original scribe) can not be ruled out.

In the bottom center of the chart is shown the 4th Prophet of Amun and Mayor of Thebes

Montu-emhat

and some of his descendants. However, the link is only via his cousin, Tabetjet, thus allowingsome flexibility in his placement. It is probable that a slightly earlier date would be appropriate, a lineor two higher, but the chart is clearer as drawn. Tabetjet married into the

Besenmut family

whichoccupies much of the lower center part of the chart.

Pamiu iii’s linkage across to Hor xv

at the lower right of the chart was recently proposed, withcaution, by Jansen-Winkeln.

9

5

Statue CG 42219 in Georges Legrain,

Statues et Statuettes III

(Cairo, 1914), 45. Also, note that the chart in

TIPE

, 202, incor-rectly shows Hor v as named on this statue.

6

Statues CG 42222 and 42224 dedicated by the son and grandson respectively of Hor vi.

7

Jens Lieblein,

Dictionnaire de noms hiéroglyphiques en ordre généalogique et alphabétique

(Leipzig, 1871), 364, no. 1113. Seealso

PBTS

, 10–12.

8

TIPE

, 215, there designated as Tarwa ii, apparently also named Gautsoshen (n. 109).

9

Karl Jansen-Winkeln, “Thebanische Statuen der 25. und 26. Dynastie,”

SAK

34 (2006), 217–40. See especially the charton 231, but note that Djedmutesankh has been accidentally married to Pamiu’s son instead of to Pamiu (the correct relation-ship is shown on 230).

PORTER 157

For the

descendents of

4P Nakhtefmut A

, I have followed Payraudeau in giving the succession 4PNakhtefmut A—[Djedmut]esankh—Ankhpakhered i.

10

It is possible for Ankhpakhered ii to have beenalive in 651

bc

, as sometimes thought, but the numerous Ankhpakhereds make this a questionablelink. The neighboring line through another Ankhpakhered and Iufo (possibly a brother of Hormaat)to Muthetepti, is rather stretched on my chart. Bierbrier related this line to 4P Nakhtefmut B,

11

notA, but had to insert two hypothetical extra generations between Nakhtefmut B and DjedkhonsefankhD (see n. 3).

Independent Scholar

10

Frédéric Payraudeau, “La statue Caire CG 717,”

RdE

56 (2005), 203–7.

11

Morris Bierbrier, “Two Confusing Coffins,”

JEA

70 (1984), 84–85.