DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.6444#0038
LEGAL DOCUMENTS.
-'7
quantity, and the fact that in the first year of
the new dynasty the household of the priest of
Usertesen's pyramid was officially reckoned up,
suggests some re-settlement, or perhaps con-
fiscation. There is at any rate after this time
no definite evidence of work at the pyramids,
such as we have abundantly under Amenemhat
III. The conditions of course were very
different from what they were during the long
and prosperous reigns of Amenemhat III. and
his predecessors of the Xllth Dynasty.
I. 5. The sign (?) after ^ is of doubtful
(?)
I. 6. <=i> ^ ^) (not -A) seems to be an
abbreviation, and might mean " name of an-
other acting as substitute (idnt)."
with ^fj, see p. 28.
I. 6". Beginning opposite 1. 5. This would
seem to refer to both the children.
/^^m occurs again, 1. 24", and PI. xi., 1. 2.
is the commonest form in
i i
hieroglyphics, though in Mae., Cat. Ah., 977,
we have '°==a> ^. <%m° and ^ seem abso-
lutely convertible. The hieratic sign in these
titles always suggests the latter.
<=~~>1 1 ^ is of course AnklrUsertesen.
1 A/VW\A
" Tear 40." This high date, which also
apparently occurs in 1. 24", must belong to the
reign of Amenemhat III., and the context
shows that the interval between this date and
the first year of Sekhem'khu'taui'Ra at the
utmost cannot have been much more than a
generation. Now we know that Amenemhat III.
reigned forty-five years, and that he was suc-
ceeded by Amenemhat IV., who reigned nine
years, and in turn was followed by Sebek'nefru,
who reigned nearly four years; thus between
the fortieth year of Amenemhat III. and the
first year of Sekhem'khu'taui'Ra, we have a
total of nearly eighteen to nineteen years, some
of which may perhaps be discounted owing to
co-regencies. It seems very likely that the
last uput of the household (referred to in 1. 24")
would have been made say about fifteen or
twenty years before the present one, so that it
suits extremely well to make this Sekhenrkhu'-
taui'Ra the first king of the Xlllth Dynasty.
On the other hand, it becomes absurd to
suppose that he was the fifteenth.
I. 7. ]E1^, also 1. 21, PL xi., 1. 1. In
Butler Pap., I. 21, the villain of the story is a
si A of the High Steward, and yet has his
house, servant, and other possessions.
II. 8-20. The orderly tabulation of the names
with blank spaces to indicate the repetition of
descriptions from above, may be noted as
characteristic of the period. The repetition
of the refrain in the verses on Pis. ii., iii., is
also marked in the same way.
It is difficult to know how to divide the
names in some instances, and here and there
the writing that gave the relationships is
destroyed. The genealogy, however, seems
to be :—
Hetepa
I
.* (Tbenem) -
Sat-Senefru* (?)
Sent*
(name lost)
Ay*
Paentini* Metankhta* Ameny Usertesen'Senbubu* Userteson-Senbubu* Sent* Sat-Senefru* Eenefsenb*
n n fl y y
11
Sent* Sebui Shent* (?)
y m i
-'7
quantity, and the fact that in the first year of
the new dynasty the household of the priest of
Usertesen's pyramid was officially reckoned up,
suggests some re-settlement, or perhaps con-
fiscation. There is at any rate after this time
no definite evidence of work at the pyramids,
such as we have abundantly under Amenemhat
III. The conditions of course were very
different from what they were during the long
and prosperous reigns of Amenemhat III. and
his predecessors of the Xllth Dynasty.
I. 5. The sign (?) after ^ is of doubtful
(?)
I. 6. <=i> ^ ^) (not -A) seems to be an
abbreviation, and might mean " name of an-
other acting as substitute (idnt)."
with ^fj, see p. 28.
I. 6". Beginning opposite 1. 5. This would
seem to refer to both the children.
/^^m occurs again, 1. 24", and PI. xi., 1. 2.
is the commonest form in
i i
hieroglyphics, though in Mae., Cat. Ah., 977,
we have '°==a> ^. <%m° and ^ seem abso-
lutely convertible. The hieratic sign in these
titles always suggests the latter.
<=~~>1 1 ^ is of course AnklrUsertesen.
1 A/VW\A
" Tear 40." This high date, which also
apparently occurs in 1. 24", must belong to the
reign of Amenemhat III., and the context
shows that the interval between this date and
the first year of Sekhem'khu'taui'Ra at the
utmost cannot have been much more than a
generation. Now we know that Amenemhat III.
reigned forty-five years, and that he was suc-
ceeded by Amenemhat IV., who reigned nine
years, and in turn was followed by Sebek'nefru,
who reigned nearly four years; thus between
the fortieth year of Amenemhat III. and the
first year of Sekhem'khu'taui'Ra, we have a
total of nearly eighteen to nineteen years, some
of which may perhaps be discounted owing to
co-regencies. It seems very likely that the
last uput of the household (referred to in 1. 24")
would have been made say about fifteen or
twenty years before the present one, so that it
suits extremely well to make this Sekhenrkhu'-
taui'Ra the first king of the Xlllth Dynasty.
On the other hand, it becomes absurd to
suppose that he was the fifteenth.
I. 7. ]E1^, also 1. 21, PL xi., 1. 1. In
Butler Pap., I. 21, the villain of the story is a
si A of the High Steward, and yet has his
house, servant, and other possessions.
II. 8-20. The orderly tabulation of the names
with blank spaces to indicate the repetition of
descriptions from above, may be noted as
characteristic of the period. The repetition
of the refrain in the verses on Pis. ii., iii., is
also marked in the same way.
It is difficult to know how to divide the
names in some instances, and here and there
the writing that gave the relationships is
destroyed. The genealogy, however, seems
to be :—
Hetepa
I
.* (Tbenem) -
Sat-Senefru* (?)
Sent*
(name lost)
Ay*
Paentini* Metankhta* Ameny Usertesen'Senbubu* Userteson-Senbubu* Sent* Sat-Senefru* Eenefsenb*
n n fl y y
11
Sent* Sebui Shent* (?)
y m i