imakegarb
Member
One wee, sleeket, cowran, tim'rous beastie
Posts: 3,573
|
Post by imakegarb on Jun 26, 2007 16:36:59 GMT
I'm not sure how much Masonic, or esoteric, interest there would be in this article, except that I've noticed a LOT of Ancient Egyptian references in my studies so far:
The rest of the article may be read [url=http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070625/sc_nm/egypt_mummy_dc_1 ]here[/url].
|
|
|
Post by maat on Jun 27, 2007 0:41:30 GMT
... or the Queen of Sheba? Palestine, not Africa, was always the region where conquering armies expected to find great riches. The Levant and Palestine also were looked upon as a sort of buffer zone by the kings of Mesopotamia and Egypt. Own Palestine and you could more or less sleep in peace or so they hoped. So it happened that the Queen of Sheba, Hatshepsut, `opened the doors' of the treasuries of Solomon laying the seed in the heart of young Thutmose to someday return and make them his own. We do not find this scenario explicitly explained in the Egyptian nor the Biblical documents, however, it stands to reason that considerations of this type, plus the success of splitting the 12 tribes, were the underlying factor in the sacking of Jerusalem by Pharaoh Thutmose III/Shishak. Therefore, the Queen, who visited Solomon, came from the same country Shishak came from, for the Jewish writers the ends of the earth were somewhere near Thebes bordering on the vast Sahara desert and the giant African continent. www.specialtyinterests.net/thutmose.html#thut3The first year subsequent to the death of Thutmose II (948) would also be the 1st year of Thutmose III while still a child and the beginning of his co-reign with Hatshepsut. For the next 22 years, his `years of silence', Hatshepsut with the strong support of her closest courtiers, among them Senenmut/Solomon (Ir she-El Amon)/Jedidiah [2.Samuel 12:25; How that could be click Here], rules over Egypt. Even when young Thutmose turned 16-18 years of age did she not relinquish the throne. It appears that Thutmose realized that he would not have a chance to climb the throne in his teens because of the influence of Senenmut in particular. And this is why today Egyptologists ask themselves the question, "How could someone with the drive and military ambition of Thutmose III stand by and allow Hatshepsut to retain the throne and virtually rule the country from the time he was 16 until he reached 24, or, even less likely, 35 years of age?" [0200] His revenge was that he sowed strife and discontent in the Egyptian educated servant of Solomon, Jeroboam. We all know how successful that was. www.specialtyinterests.net/alternate.htmlInteresting reading…. especially if you are a Velikovsky fan re time lines. Maat
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by Tamrin on Jun 27, 2007 2:57:30 GMT
A few months ago, under the Architecture of King Solomon's Temple thread (Esoteric Masonic Discussion category), I wrote (Reply #1): Hatshepsut’s temple was constructed under the direction of her Chief Architect Senenmut. It comprises three levels, connected by two ramps. From what I have read, the first has images of the account of her conception and birth. The second details events from her life, especially a journey to the land of Punt, while the third is her mortuary temple. However, her remains were not to be interred therein. The entrance to her tomb is in the nearby cliffs. From the tunnel’s initial direction, it appears that she was to be interred as near as possible, under the mortuary temple. However, the tomb makers apparently encountered weak rock and were unable to achieve that goal (her mummy is no longer there). One rather speculative source claimed she established the first school of Royal Sculpture (I would like corroboration of this). Immanuel Velikovsky also draws a connection between Hatshepsut and the Queen of Sheba, making much of the similarity of her prenomen or throne name, ‘Makera,’ with that of the queen’s name according to Ethiopian tradition, ‘Makeda.’ However, we do not have to resort to extreme chronological alternatives, such as Velikovsky’s or Williamson’s, to find a likely match for the Queen of Sheba. Josephus described her as the queen of Egypt and Ethiopia. During the Third Intermediate Period, around the time attributed to King Solomon, there was an Ethiopian Dynasty (25th) which ruled much of the country. During that time rival dynasties held sway and unity was achieved in the person of the ‘ Divine Adoratrice of Amen,’ who ruled the priesthoods in Egypt’s theocratic government and who, most unusually, shared much of the iconography of pharaohs. One of these monarchs (I use the term 'monarch' believing the office has not been appreciated for what it was), who had property in Kush ('Ethiopia'), was Makera Mutemhet (below). Hatshepsut means ‘foremost of the noble women,’ or 'first lady.' Mutemhet means ‘the mother goddess is at the head,’ or ‘Mum rules OK.’ Makera means ‘truth is the soul of the sun god,’ or ‘Truth enlightens.’ Senemut means ‘man of Mut’ (the mother goddess), or ‘Mut’s man.’ The office of Adoratrice developed from that of ‘ God’s Wife,’ a position held by Hatshepsut. Our modern, objective ideas of history make it difficult for us to see that, just as all pharaohs were seen to be a theophany of Horus and to share an identity with all previous pharaohs, (especially any namesakes), all Adoratrices were seen to be a theophany of Mut and to share a similar identity with previous office holders. Sharing the same throne name with Makera Hatshpsut, Makera Mutemhet is likely to have identified herself closely with her illustrious predecessor. Jerusalem, (which was not a developed settlement at the time), had, during the earlier ‘ New Kingdom,' been part of the Egyptian province of Retjenu and no doubt Egypt still considered it as such. Any person setting themself up as a king in ‘their’ province is likely to have been subject to some ‘hard questions’ as to where their allegiances lay. Seemingly, ‘Solomon,’ or whoever, told the queen all she desired, presumably acknowledging her as his suzerain. The latter Candaces or Kadakes of Kush are likely to have identified themselves with the earlier Adoratrices and they would have been familiar with [to] those who compiled the Bible (this familiarity and consequent assumptions may be more significant than the actual history).
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by Tamrin on Jun 28, 2007 21:08:43 GMT
One rather speculative source claimed she established the first school of Royal Sculpture (I would like corroboration of this). The source was M.V. Seton-Williams', "Egypt: Myth and the Reality," a chapter (pp.23/47) in Carolyne Larrington's (Editor), The Feminist Companion to Mythology, (1992, Pandora, London). The book, including this chapter, has a level-headed approach to its subject matters and is obviously intended for informed lay people. As the book is neither an academic tome nor a wildly speculative bit of trivia from the lunatic fringe, I am not prepared to accept the above statement without reputable corroboration nor to regard it as implausible. In the chapter, after discussing Hatshepsut's active role in at least two military campaigns, Seton-Williams wrote (pp.41/2, emphasis added): Hatshepsut's building enterprises were not her only contributions to architecture. She developed, for the first time, a school of royal sculpture, she moved two obelisks, ninety-seven-and-a-half feet high, from Aswan to Karnak, she reopened the Sinai turquoise mines, and rebuilt the temple at Serabit al-Khadim in Sinai and the Speos of Artemis at Beni Hasan, as well as her own temple. Hatshepsut reigned for twenty-one years and during this time her famous architect, Senenmut, acted not only in this capacity but as steward of the land and tutor to her children. He was probably leader of the powerful clique of officials who helped to keep the queen in position. Senenmut died before the queen [and before completion of the temple]; in fact there is no mention of him after year sixteen of her reign and after the queen's death his to tombs were despoiled. The queen died apparently on the twentieth day of the sixth month in the twenty-second year of her reign. There is no evidence that she was murdered or that her passing was anything but peaceful.
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by Tamrin on Jun 28, 2007 21:17:22 GMT
...her famous architect, Senenmut, acted not only in this capacity but as steward of the land and tutor to her children. I am interested in the area south of Egypt, (present day Sudan, Ethiopia, etc.—previously Nubia, Kush, Punt, etc.), and I theorize that Senenmut may have had connections there. His most prominent features were wrinkles or scars to his cheeks, like tribal scars which were and still are common to the region.
|
|
imakegarb
Member
One wee, sleeket, cowran, tim'rous beastie
Posts: 3,573
|
Post by imakegarb on Jun 29, 2007 3:16:18 GMT
Hmmmmm. Bro. Philip, Hatshepsut was a widow, was she not?
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by Tamrin on Jun 29, 2007 6:44:48 GMT
Hmmmmm. Bro. Philip, Hatshepsut was a widow, was she not? Short answer, ‘Yes.’ However, the long answer may be more interesting and may even accord with part of Velikovsky’s tendentious account, which links her to the Queen of Sheba. Hatshepsut’s throne name was Makera. Later, during the Third Intermediate Period (TIP), around the time attributed to Solomon, we find two other Makeras (A & B), with their relatives having several unlikely coincidences with the relatives of Hatshepsut. Bearing-in-mind the records from the TIP are sparce and confused, we may suspect that instead of there being two later Makeras, there may have been only one. Indeed, from the last I knew, there was only one piece of evidence suggesting the existence of Makera B. Consider also, for instance, the overlap in their relatives primary and secondary names:- *Makera A was the daughter of Pharaoh Pinedjem I (Khakheperre Setepenamun I) and Henuttawy I (Clayton; pp.176/7); * Makera A was also the aunt of Pharaoh Pinedjem II (Khakheperre Setepenamun II) and thereby the aunt-in-law of Henuttawy II (ibid.; pp.177 & 178); * Makera A had a brother who became Psusennes I (Pasebakhaenniut I) (ibid.; p.177); and * Makera B was the daughter of Psusennes II (Pasebakhaenniut II) (ibid.; p.181). If these duplications are eliminated so that Makera A and B are considered to be the same person we find this later Makera was matrimonially associated with her father, Pinedjem; somehow associated with her brother, Psusennes; and matrimonially associated with her brother's successor, Sheshonq I (Clayton; p.181), ( as was Hatshepsut with Tuthmoses I, II & III). Moreover, in both Hatshepsut’s case and that of the later Makera, the son/husband who succeeded her bother/husband sacked Canaan or Israel and was halted at Megiddo (ibid.; p.185)!? Clayton, Peter A., Chronicles of the Pharaohs: The Reign-by-Reign Record of the Rulers and Dynasties of Ancient Egypt, 1994, Thames and Hudson, London
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by Tamrin on Jun 29, 2007 8:41:58 GMT
Indeed, from the last I knew, there was only one piece of evidence suggesting the existence of Makera B. As well as Pinejem I being Makera A's father, Psusennes I being her brother and Psusennes II being Makera B's father; another of Makera A's brothers, the High Priest Menkheperre, married a niece (Psusennes I's, daughter Isiemkheb). Their son became Pinedjem II (Clayton; p.178). Velikovsky surmised this confusion around the relatives of this Makera arose from duplication. He stated: .... on this sole link the Libyan Dynasty and the Ethiopian, which followed the Libyan, are made subsequent to the dynasty of priest-princes.... Thus, the Twenty-Fifth Dynasty (Ethiopian) may have been contempary with King Solomon. However, despite his theory of duplication over centuries and Makera's name, position and period, Velikovsky curiously appears to have failed to draw a connection between her and Hatshepsut or the Queen of Sheba (1977; p.179). Clayton, Peter A., Chronicles of the Pharaohs: The Reign-by-Reign Record of the Rulers and Dynasties of Ancient Egypt, 1994, Thames and Hudson, London Velikovsky, Immanuel, Peoples of the Sea: Ages in Chaos Vol. IV, 1977, Book Club Associates, London
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by Tamrin on Jun 29, 2007 9:05:51 GMT
Because Hatshepsut exercised her sovereign prerogative and decided to rule in her own right, many writers have projected on to her their own cultural stereotypes and value-laden prejudices; presuming to know her motives, her character and even her sexuality (unscholarly assumptions, rare in studies of male rulers). Thankfully, the academic tide is turning and, while interest in Hatshepsut still focuses somewhat on her gender, earlier statements about her are increasingly used as case studies of academic gender bias. For instance students are asked to consider the following account, described as, "A particularly glaring example of gender bias on the part of a modern historian is displayed by Sir Alan Gardiner, one of the world's most distinguished Egyptologists, in his book Egypt of the Pharaohs, published in 1961 [pp.183/4]." (Hurley, et al.; pp.46-7, underlined and bold emphasis cited). Gardiner wrote: Meanwhile, however, her ambition was by no means dormant, and not many years had passed before she had taken the momentous step of herself assuming the double crown. Twice before in Egypt's earlier history a queen had usurped the kingship ... In many inscriptions she flaunts a full titulary ...
It is not to be imagined, however, that even a woman of even the most virile character could have attained such a pinnacle of power without masculine support. The Theban necropolis still displays many splendid tombs of her officials, all speaking of her in terms of cringing deference. The authors then asked students the following questions: * Explain how each of the underlined terms conveys gender bias. * How many historical facts does this extract contain? * How would you sum up Gardiner's opinion of Hatshepsut in this extract? * What reasons can you suggest that might help to explain Gardiner's bias? * If Hatshepsut had been a man, how might this extract be different? A popular theory among biased Egyptologists is that the defacement of many of Hatshepsut's monuments and the obliteration of her name was commissioned by her 'righteously' outraged successor, Tuthmoses III. This theory is not supported by the evidence, which shows that her inscriptions were selectively edited and were not defaced until at least towards the end of Tuthmoses III's reign (Tyldesley, 1996; pp.216/225) and possibly not until the reign of the heretical, Aten worshipping Pharaoh Akenaten and his co-ruler Nefertiti (who may have been particularly averse to Hatshepsut's strong association with the god Amen) (Murray; p.122). Even so, the defacing of monuments and obliteration of names was not solely directed at Hatshepsut, nor was it uniquely extensive in her case (Tyldesley; op.cit.). Hurley, Toni, Medcalf, Philippa & Rolph, Jan, "Problems of Evidence", in Antiquity I: Pathways to the past, 1995, Oxford University Press, Melbourne, ISBN 0-19-553690-8 Murray, Margaret A., Egyptian Temples, n.d., Sampson Low, et al., London Tyldesley, Joyce, Hatchepsut: The Female Pharaoh, 1996, Viking, London
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by Tamrin on Jul 6, 2007 10:42:04 GMT
Somewhat related to the topic of later Makera/s (being around the same time as them and as that attributed to Solomon), in Egypt Under the Pharaohs by Heinrich Brugsch-Bey, (1996, Bracken Books, London, first pub. 1906), we find a "Table of the Chief Architects" (p.17) and "The Pedigree of the Architects" (p.434). At the time attributed to King Solomon, the office was held around 965 by Hor-em-saf I; around 933 by Mermer; and around 900 by Hor-em-saf II (pp.17 & 434). Bearing in mind that two Hirams feature in the Biblical account of the building of the temple, the remarkable coincidence of office, together with that of dates and the similarity of the names Hor-em-saf and Hiram Abif, may well reward further investigation. There is a possibility that different stories are interwoven in that of Solomon.
|
|
imakegarb
Member
One wee, sleeket, cowran, tim'rous beastie
Posts: 3,573
|
Post by imakegarb on Jul 6, 2007 15:34:08 GMT
I watch so little television that it does catch my attention when I do.
I noticed the Discovery Channel (kind of a low budget PBS) has been running spots saying that 3,000 years ago, H was the most power person on earth. And that the finding of her mummy (which happened in the early 20th Century but we're only now getting around to figuring out what it is) is the most significant find since finding King Tut.
K.
I'm thinking I'll wait til the dust settles on this one.
|
|