Meike Becker, Anke Ilona Blöbaum and Angelika Lohwasser (Eds.) “Prayer and Power” Proceedings of the Conference on the God’s Wives of Amun in Egypt during the First Millennium BC ÄGYPTEN UND ALTES TESTAMENT Studien zu Geschichte, Kultur und Religion Ägyptens und des Alten Testaments Band 84 Gegründet von Manfred Görg Herausgegeben von Stefan Jakob Wimmer und Wolfgang Zwickel  Meike Becker, Anke Ilona Blöbaum and Angelika Lohwasser (Eds.) “Prayer and Power” Proceedings of the Conference on the God’s Wives of Amun in Egypt during the First Millennium BC 2016 Ugarit-Verlag Münster Umschlag-Vignette: The God’s Wives of Amun, Amenirdis I and Shepenwepet II, in the chapel of Amenirdis I in Medinet Habu (photo: A. Lohwasser) Ägypten und Altes Testament, Band 84 Meike Becker, Anke Ilona Blöbaum and Angelika Lohwasser (Eds.) “Prayer and Power”. Proceedings of the Conference on the God’s Wives of Amun in Egypt during the First Millennium BC © 2016 Ugarit-Verlag, Münster www.ugarit-verlag.com All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photo-copying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior permission of the publisher. Printed in Germany ISBN 978-3-86835-218-4 ISSN 0720-9061 Printed on acid-free paper Participants of the conference “Prayer and Power. The God’s Wives of Amun in Egypt during the 1st Millenium BC”, June 25th–27th 2015 at the University of Münster   Contents Foreword ................................................................................................................................................. IX Meike Becker, Anke Ilona Blöbaum, Angelika Lohwasser Introduction ............................................................................................................................................... 1 Amr El Hawary The Figurative Power of Prayer. The “Ode to the Goddess” (EA 194) as a Theological Justification for Establishing the Office of the God’s Wife of Amun as an Institution at the End of the 20th Dynasty ......................................................................... 9 Meike Becker Female Influence, aside from that of the God’s Wives of Amun, during the Third Intermediate Period ...................................................................................................... 21 Raphaële Meffre Political Changes in Thebes during the Late Libyan Period and the Relationship between Local Rulers and Thebes ......................................................................... 47 Claus Jurman Karomama Revisited ............................................................................................................................... 61 Mariam F. Ayad Gender, Ritual, and Manipulation of Power. The God’s Wife of Amun (Dynasty 23–26) .................... 89 Robert G. Morkot The Late-Libyan and Kushite God’s Wives. Historical and Art-historical Questions ......................... 107 Angelika Lohwasser “Nubianess” and the God’s Wives of the 25th Dynasty. Office Holders, the Institution, Reception and Reaction ...................................................................... 121 Wienke Aufderhaar The Sphinxes of Shepenwepet II .......................................................................................................... 137 Carola Koch Between Tradition and Innovation – the Hwwt-kA of the God’s Wives ................................................ 155 Mariam F. Ayad Reading a Chapel .......................................................................... ....................................................... 167 Anke Ilona Blöbaum The Nitocris Adoption Stela. Representation of Royal Dominion and Regional Elite Power ............. 183 Aleksandra Hallmann Iconography of Prayer and Power. Portrayals of the God’s Wife Ankhnesneferibre in the Osiris Chapels at Karnak ................................ 205 Olivier Perdu Une épouse divine à Héracléopolis. Suite ............................................................................................. 223 Abbreviations ........................................................................................................................................ 245 Indices ................................................................................................................................................... 249  Political Changes in Thebes during the Late Libyan Period and the Relationship between Local Rulers and Thebes Raphaële Meffre The monuments of the Third Intermediate Period show that a great change occurred among the most important figures in the political arena at Thebes during the Libyan Period. In the 21st Dynasty and the first half of the 22nd, the High Priest of Amun gathered in his hands economic, religious, and military powers: he was in charge of the clergy of the most important Upper Egyptian god, but he was also a General and Troop Commander; in other words, he was the most influential person in Thebes, and in the whole of southern Egypt. Such an assumption of power is sufficient to explain why this office was kept within the royal family, and for most of the time entrusted to a king’s son. On the other hand, the monuments of the 25th and 26th Dynasties show that the political role of the High Priest of Amun gradually became quite marginal, whereas the most influential Theban representative in Amun’s clergy was indisputably the God’s Wife. The analysis of how the titularies of the High Priests of Amun evolved from the mid-Libyan Period to the 26th Dynasty and of the means employed by the late Libyan Period rulers to maintain relations with Thebes clarifies the gradual changes in the political influence exercised by the High Priests and the God’s Wives of Amun, providing precise indications about when these changes occurred and what transpired at the transition from the Libyan Period to the 25th Dynasty. Furthermore, it also sheds light on the changes which took place within the great Theban families, their offices and responsibilities. It is necessary, however, first to review briefly how power was geographically distributed during the second half of the Libyan Period. Geographical distribution of powers in Upper Egypt in the second half of the Libyan Period The Upper Egyptian (“Theban”) 22nd Dynasty From the end of Osorkon II’s reign and during the second half of the Libyan Period, two royal lines ruled Egypt: the Bubastite 22nd Dynasty in the North and, in the South, the Upper Egyptian “Theban” 22nd Dynasty, initiated by Takeloth II who was the first to claim descent from Isis. After the civil war of the mid-Libyan Period, Prince Osorkon B was crowned as Osorkon III. He exercised power in the Theban area and is well documented in southern Middle Egypt, in Hermopolis and its vicinity. The reattribution of three monuments, previously assigned to his son, the High Priest of Amun Takeloth G, to Takeloth F1 leads to a re-definition of the territory controlled by Osorkon III. Before this reattribution, Takeloth G was thought to have been installed in Heracleopolis, both as the head of its fortresses and of the clergy of Herishef. Consequently, it was assumed that Osorkon III had power over the whole of Upper Egypt, from south of Memphis to Elephantine.2 The attribution of the three monuments to Takeloth F discredits this idea, and Osorkon III appears now merely as a ruler of the Theban area, his northernmost activities being at Akoris, a fortress in the vicinity of Hermopolis.3 1 See below p. 48. 2 See e.g. Jansen-Winkeln 2006, 256, with reservations; Aston 2009, 20–21, 24, and passim. 3 This point was developed by Meffre 2015a, 327–329. 48 RAPHAËLE MEFFRE Takeloth III, the former Takeloth G, is well attested in Thebes, as coregent of his father and later as sole ruler.4 Rudamun seems to have been mentioned in the chapel of Osiris Ruler of Eternity, and is documented by monuments coming from Hermopolis. Thus, at present, nothing indicates that the territory of Osorkon III and his sons extended further northwards than Hermopolis and Akoris.5 Rulers contemporary with Piankhy Some years later, at the time of Piankhy’s campaign into Egypt, four kings were ruling simultaneously, apart from numerous Libyan chiefs, including Tefnakht in the Western Delta. Two kings, Osorkon IV and Iuput II, resided in the Delta while two others reigned in Middle Egypt, Peftjauawybastet in Heracleopolis and Nimlot D in Hermopolis. The text of Piankhy’s stele gives great importance to the two last-named kings. Indeed, since their cities, Hermopolis and Heracleopolis, were two fortified areas, they represented barriers between Thebes and Memphis for Piankhy. This is particularly clear when the reactions of Piankhy to the progress of Tefnakht’s army are considered. When it passed south of Heracleopolis, Piankhy was informed but not very worried and he only took action when Nimlot D submitted to Tefnakht.6 The stele mentions neither king nor ruler for the Theban area. The text nevertheless specifies that the Kushite king already had great influence over Upper Egypt, and especially over the city of Amun: a Kushite army was residing in Egypt7 and Piankhy himself presided at religious feasts during the Opet festival.8 Some years after the campaign, several Theban papyri refer to Piankhy’s regnal years.9 In a recent study, Frédéric Payraudeau has endeavoured to show that Kushite influence had already been felt at Thebes before the reign of Piankhy, at the time of Kashta, who could have himself arranged for his daughter Amenirdis to become the heiress of the God’s Wife Shepenwepet I.10 Evolution of the functions devoted to the Theban High Priests of Amun from the mid-Libyan Period to the 26th Dynasty The examination of the titularies of the High Priests of Amun gives a clear view of their attributions and, more precisely their political influence. The chronological comparison of these titularies from the end of Osorkon II’s reign down to the Saite Period reflects the changes in function throughout the period. Before the Theban civil war of the mid-Libyan Period Takeloth F Until recently, Takeloth F was only known from a titulary inscribed on the exterior wall of chapel J of Karnak. There he is labelled High Priest of Amun (ḥm-nṯr tpy n Ỉmn) and Governor of Upper Egypt.11 Three monuments, once attributed to the future Takeloth III, belong in fact to Takeloth F, the future Takeloth II:12 1) the donation stele Hannover, Museum August Kestner 1935.200.208,13 2) the ex-voto stele Cairo JE 65841,14 3) the calcite vase Berlin VA Ass 2258.15 4 See Payraudeau 2009, 297–302. 5 Meffre 2015a, 336–339. 6 For the importance of Middle Egypt in Piankhy’s campaign, see Meffre 2015a, 350–352, 357–358, 362. 7 Stele of Piankhy, l. 8–9; Grimal 1981, 22–23. 8 Stele of Piankhy, l. 29; Grimal 1981, 50–51. 9 Jansen-Winkeln 2007, 361–363, no. 31–32. 10 Payraudeau, forthcoming. 11 See Perdu 2010, 101–121; Meffre 2015a, 92–93, no. 22, with earlier bibliography. 12 For this reattribution, see Payraudeau 2004, 79–81; Payraudeau 2014, 63–66; Meffre 2015a, 305–309. 13 Meffre 2015a, 162–165, no. 69. 14 Meffre 2015a, 160–162, no. 68.  POLITICAL CHANGES IN THEBES DURING THE LATE LIBYAN PERIOD 49 These monuments give to the future Takeloth II the titles of High Priest of Amun (ḥm-nṯr tpy n Ỉmn-Ra nswt nṯrw) (1, 2), (High) Priest of Herishef (ḥm-nṯr [tpy] n Ḥr-š.f nswt tAwy) (2, 3), General (mr-mša) and Troop Commander (ḥAwty) (1, 3), Chief of Persekhemkheperra (wr n Pr-sḫm-ḫpr-Ra) (2, 3), King’s Son (of Ramesses) (sA nswt [Ro-ms.sw]) (2, 3) and Governor of Upper Egypt (mr-Šmaw) (2). These titles accord well with those borne by Takeloth F in chapel J and they are very close to the titles of his father Nimlot C who died at some point before the end of the reign of Osorkon II.16 At the time of the Theban civil war of the mid-Libyan Period Prince Osorkon B Above the first text of the Chronicle of Prince Osorkon B on the Bubastite Portal at Karnak, the scene on the right17 presents Osorkon B as the High Priest of Amun (ḥm-nṯr tpy n Ỉmn-Ra nswt nṯrw), Generalissimo (mr-mša wr), Troop Commander of the Whole Country (ḥAwty n tA [r] ḏr.f), King’s Son (sA nswt), Prince and Governor (rpʿ ḥAty’). At the beginning of text A, he is also referred to as the Governor of Upper Egypt who is at the Head of the Two Lands (mr-Šmaw ḥry-tp tAwy). On fragment 7 of the annals of the priests of Karnak,18 Osorkon B bears the titles of High Priest of Amun (ḥm-nṯr tpy n Ỉmn-Ra nswt nṯrw), Governor of Upper Egypt (mr-Šmaw) and Troop Commander (ḥAwty). On Nile Level Record no. 22 of the quay at Karnak,19 he is mentioned jointly with Shoshenq III simply as High Priest of Amun (ḥm-nṯr tpy n Ỉmn-Ra nswt nṯrw). Harsiese B Fragment no. 2 of the annals of the priests of Karnak20 mentions Harsiese B as High Priest of Amun (ḥm-nṯr tpy n Ỉmn) and Governor of Upper Egypt (mr-Šmaw). On Nile Level Records nos 2321, 2422, 2723 and 2824, he is mentioned, together with either Shoshenq III (23) or Petubastis I (24, 27), with the title of High Priest of Amun (ḥm-nṯr tpy n Ỉmn-Ra nswt nṯrw var. ḥm-nṯr tpy n Ỉmn). Harsiese B is referred to, jointly with Osorkon II, on the right shoulder of a private statue (Cairo CG 42225)25 as High Priest of Amun (ḥm-nṯr tpy n Ỉmn). On the statue Cairo CG 4223226, he is men- tioned, together with Shoshenq III, as the High Priest of Amun (ḥm-nṯr tpy n Ỉmn-Ra nswt nṯrw), Generalissimo (mr-mša wr) and Troop Commander (ḥAwty). Takeloth E On Nile Level Records nos 2527 and 2928, Takeloth E is simply mentioned as High Priest of Amun (ḥm- nṯr tpy n Ỉmn), together with either Shoshenq III (25) or Petubastis I (29). 15 Meffre 2015a, 165–166, no. 70. 16 Comparison of their titularies is possible thanks to the charts published by Payraudeau 2014, 64, fig. 13 and Meffre 2015a, 307, chart 3. 17 The Epigraphic Survey 1954, pl. 17. 18 Kruchten 1989, 59–61, pl. 4, 19–20; Meffre 2015a, 97–98, no 28. 19 Von Beckerath 1966, 46 and 51, no 22. 20 Kruchten 1989, 36–37, pl. 2 and 16. 21 Von Beckerath 1966, 46 and 51, no. 23. 22 Von Beckerath 1966, 46–47 and 51, no 24. 23 Von Beckerath 1966, 47 and 52, no. 27. 24 Legrain 1896, 114, no. 28, with the end of the name quite badly preserved; von Beckerath 1966, 47 and 52, no. 28, who did not see the last part of the name. 25 Jansen-Winkeln 1985, 494; Jansen-Winkeln 2007, 135, no. 75, a. 26 Jansen-Winkeln 1985, 556; Jansen-Winkeln 2007, 205, no. 44, c. 27 Von Beckerath 1966, 47 and 52, no. 25. 28 Von Beckerath 1966, 47 and 52, no. 29. 50 RAPHAËLE MEFFRE After the Theban civil war of the mid-Libyan Period Takeloth G Once the three monuments recently attributed to Takeloth F are removed from the dossier of Takeloth G, the only monuments remaining for the latter are the blocks showing him next to his father Osorkon III from the Khonsu Temple in Karnak.29 The prince bears the titles of Eldest Son of this king (sA smsw n nswt pn; i.e. Osorkon III), High Priest of Amun (ḥm-nṯr tpy n Ỉmn-Ra nswt nṯrw) and Chief of Seers who satisfies the heart of Re-Atum in Thebes (wr mAw sḥtp ỉb n Ra-Tmw m WAst). Thus the titulary of Takeloth G appears very different from those of his predecessors: Takeloth G is presented as the hereditary prince, in charge only of priestly, not military, affairs. Osorkon F Osorkon F may be a son of Takeloth III or Rudamun bearing the name of his grandfather Osorkon III. At the moment, he is only known through the genealogies of his descendents,30 who retained, when mentioning him, the titles of High Priest of Amun (ḥm-nṯr tpy n Ỉmn) (Turin ME 1632) var. High Priest (ḥm-nṯr tpy) (Cairo JE 37163), Governor of Upper Egypt (mr-Šmaw) (Cairo JE 37163), and King’s Son (sA nswt) (Cairo JE 37163). Osorkon F may also be the person mentioned on a fragment of the wooden coffin Philadelphia UM 69-29-964 with the titles of [High Priest] of Amun ([ḥm-nṯr tpy] n Ỉmn-Ra nswt nṯrw) and Governor of Upper Egypt (mr-Šmaw).31 After the Libyan Period During the 25th Dynasty, the high priesthood of Amun remained in the hands of a king’s descendent: Haremakhet, a son of Shabaqo. Apart from epithets appropriate for a courtier, he bears only priestly titles: High Priest of Amun (Hm-nTr tpy [n] Ỉmn m Ỉpt-swt var. Hm-nTr tpy n Ỉmn-Ra nswt nTrw, or Hm-nTr tpy (n) Ỉmn),32 Priest of Khonsu the Child (Hm-nTr n ¢nsw pA Xrd)33 and Director of the Priests of all the Gods (mr-Hmw-nTr n nTrw nbw)34. His son Harkheb succeeded him and was still in office after the reunification of the country by Psametik I; his only known titles are High Priest of Amun (Hm-nTr tpy n Ỉmn var. Hm-nTr tpy n Ỉmn m Ỉpt-swt),35 Priest of Khonsu the Child the Very Great Firstborn (Child) of Amun (Hm-nTr n ¢nsw pA Xrd aA wr tpy n Ỉmn), Priest of Amonet (Hm-nTr Ỉmnt aAt wrt nbt tAwy ḥrỉ-ỉb Ỉpt-swt) and Priest of Mut who protects her city (Hm-nTr n Mwt ḫw nỉwt.s).36 During the 26th Dynasty, the title of High Priest of Amun decreased even more in importance.37 Significantly, on the Nitocris Adoption Stele, the main political and influential roles within the Theban hierarchy are assigned to the God’s Wife Shepenwepet II and the Fourth Prophet of Amun Montuemhat; in the list of the donations agreed upon for Nitocris, the High Priest of Amun Harkheb receives mention 29 Payraudeau 2014, 580, no. 236, A. 30 Concerning his dossier, see Payraudeau 2014, 346, 446–447, no. 64. 31 Payraudeau 2014, 446–447, no. 64 A reads also the title of Troop Commander (HAwty). Nevertheless, this part of the text (hieroglyphic text unpublished) seems unclear according to Simpson 1995, 84, TIP 1C. 32 Title attested on the statues Cairo CG 42204 (Jansen-Winkeln 2009, 347, no. 4) and JE 49157 (Jansen-Winkeln 2009, 347–348, no. 5), as well as on the lower part of an unpublished seated statue (Jansen-Winkeln 2009, 348– 349, no. 6), and in the amuletic decree P.Leiden AMS 59c (Jansen-Winkeln 2009, 349–350, no. 7) and on the coffin fragment Cairo JE 55194 (Jansen-Winkeln 2009, 351–352, no. 8). 33 Title mentioned on the statue Cairo CG 42204 (Jansen-Winkeln 2009, 347, no. 4). 34 Title listed on the lower part of an unpublished seated statue (Jansen-Winkeln 2009, 348–349, no. 6). 35 This title occurs on the Nitocris Adoption Stele, l. 22 (Jansen-Winkeln 2014, 18), on the Saite Oracular Papyrus Brooklyn 47.218.3 (Jansen-Winkeln 2014, 218, no. 363, texts 3, 231, text 50) and on Harkheb’s canopic vase Leiden C.I.272 (Jansen-Winkeln 2014, 33, no. 55). 36 These last three titles are attested in the Saite Oracular Papyrus Brooklyn 47.218.3 (Jansen-Winkeln 2014, 231, text 50). 37 On this point, see Leclant 1961, 275; Kitchen 1972, § 365.  POLITICAL CHANGES IN THEBES DURING THE LATE LIBYAN PERIOD 51 only after Montuemhat and his family.38 After a time when it seems that the office of High Priest of Amun was vacant,39 it eventually became the title of the presumptive heiress to the office of the God’s Wife of Amun, as it appears in the titularies of Ankhnesneferibre40 and Nitocris B41. The evolution of the titularies of the High Priests of Amun from the mid-Libyan Period to the Saite Period shows a progressive loss of importance, especially at the political level. It may also be noted that, in the present state of documentation, the High Priests of Amun in the second half of the Libyan Period are mainly known from mention of them in dates and not through monuments they themselves ded- icated in the temples (chapels, cultic objects, donation steles, private statues etc.).42 During the Theban civil war and immediately afterwards, they are referred to in the Nile Level Records simultaneously with kings, perhaps because these kings were not always present in Thebes43 and it provided a means to specify the date when the royal authority was contested by other parties.44 After the end of the Theban civil war, the influence of the High Priests of Amun was quickly restricted to the religious sphere: when Osorkon B was crowned as Osorkon III, his eldest son Takeloth G only bore priestly titles and no military title is known for Osorkon F.45 The High Priest of Amun seems no longer to be in charge of military titles. At the end of the Libyan Period, religious as well as political authority were held by the God’s Wife of Amun, thus becoming the most important personality of the Theban clergy. For example, on the walls of the chapel of Osiris Ruler of Eternity, no High Priest of Amun appears and the Divine Votaress Shepenwepet I is shown next to Kings Osorkon III and Takeloth III. The leading political role of the god’s wives of Amun increased under Kushite dominion. In the meantime, it can be deduced from the mention of Montuemhat, who was affiliated with the Kushite royal family through his marriage to Udjarenes,46 as šarru of Thebes in the Assyrian annals47 that administrative responsibilities48 were attributed to him. 38 Caminos 1964, 75 and pl. X, l. 22. 39 There is no High Priest of Amun known between Harkheb (grandson of Shabaqo) and Ankhnesneferibre (daughter of Psametik II). See Kitchen 1972, table 13A. 40 The title is mentioned on Ankhnesneferibre’s Adoption Stele, l. 5, see Leahy 1996, 146 and 148. 41 The title is attested on the bronze statuette of Amun-Re Chicago OIM 10584 (Jansen-Winkeln 2014, 753, no. 132: Hm-nṯr tpy n Ỉmn) and on a terracotta seal bought in Luxor (Jansen-Winkeln 2014, 735, no. 106: Hm-nṯr tpy n Ỉmn-Ra nswt nṯrw). 42 Compare the monuments of Harsiese B, Takeloth E and Takeloth G to the monuments of Takeloth F, Osorkon B or for earlier years of the 22nd Dynasty to the monuments of Iuwelot: statue of Thoth as a baboon (auction Paris, Binoche – Renaud – Giquello, 17/11/2006, no. 1; Patanè 2007, 9–11 and 29–31), altar stand Moscow I.1a.5000 (Jansen-Winkeln 2007, 81, no. 10), votive vessel fragments found in Abydos (Effland 2008, 59–69), “Apanage stele” Cairo JE 31882 (Jansen-Winkeln 2007, 77–80, no. 8). 43 For example, Shoshenq III’s sovereignty was in fact restricted to Lower Egypt, but in some Nile Level Records (nos 22, 23 and 25) he is nevertheless named, in lieu of a local authority recognized by all parties. Concerning these texts, see von Beckerath 1979, 51–52. 44 This could be the case for the mention of the High Priest of Amun in the Nile Level Records dated to the reign of Pedubastis I (nos 24, 27, 28 and 29). Concerning these texts, see von Beckerath 1979, 51–52. 45 On this point, see Payraudeau 2014, 361. Two other High Priests of Amun (with no other title) are known, Ankhtakeloth and Shoshenq, but their chronological place remains uncertain; see Payraudeau 2014, 347 and, concerning the first one, Meffre 2015a, 205–207, no. 116. 46 Concerning this Udjarenes, see Leclant 1961, 264–265. 47 Onasch 1994, 36, 57, 118–119, no. 109. 48 As far as military responsibilities are concerned, the documentation clearly shows a gap between the numerous army officers known for the Libyan Period and for the 26 th Dynasty, and the few known for the 25th Dynasty. Indeed, apart from the remaining Libyan chiefs dwelling in the Delta, very few army officers are known and most of them are of Kushite origin: the General (mr-mša) and Troop Commander (HAwty) Pegtaterer (Chevereau 1985, doc. 102; Jansen-Winkeln 2009, 352–353, no. 13), the General (mr-mša) and Commander of the Army (ṯsw-mša) Pawarma (Chevereau 1985, doc. 98; Jansen-Winkeln 2007, 338, l. 8), the Commander of the Army (ṯsw-mša) Lamerskeny (Chevereau 1985, doc. 98; Jansen-Winkeln 2007, 338, l. 8), and the Scribe of the Army (sš-mša), Director of the City and Vizier Nesmin B (Chevereau 1985, doc. 100; Jansen-Winkeln 2009, 487–488, no. 247). Naunton 2014, 105 has also noticed the paucity of sources concerning military officers during the 25th Dynasty. 52 RAPHAËLE MEFFRE The relationship between the late Libyan Period rulers and Thebes As Thebes at the end of the Libyan Period remained the most important Upper Egyptian city, economically and religiously attractive, the kings who did not rule over the Theban area intended to maintain personal relationship with the City, its gods and its political authorities. Fig. 1: Vase fragment Rome Museo Barracco Fig. 2: Drawing of the text on the body of the MB 277 (© Rome, Museo di Scultura Antica vase Rome Museo Barracco MB 277 (after Giovanni Barracco) Bongrani Fanfoni 1987, 71) Nimlot D’s action together with the Theban representatives Nimlot D’s relations with contemporary rulers are not well known. Nevertheless, a stone vase fragment kept in the Museo Barracco in Rome49 (Fig. 1) bears witness to external affairs because his name occurs on it together with the names of the God’s Wives Shepenwepet I and Amenirdis I. Its shape (like the heart hieroglyph Sign-list F34) and flat rim, together with its material (a hard stone), suggest that it dates to the Early Dynastic Period.50 Two texts added to this vase document its reuse some 2,000 years after it was manufactured (Fig. 2). This occurred during the late Libyan Period, as we learn from the first text consisting of two parts, inscribed on the body. There are four cartouches, belonging to Amenirdis I and Kashta on one side and to Shepenwepet I and Osorkon III on the other and a one-line text naming King Nimlot D. On the top of the rim, the second text invokes Osiris, asking him for offerings: .51 The presence of this text, together with the names of the God’s Wives and of a king, suggests that the vessel was an item of cultic equipment, rather than a piece of the funerary goods of one of these persons. Dedicating a vessel for the cult of Osiris is, indeed, a well-attested practice, especially at Abydos, his main Upper Egyptian cult centre.52 49 Museo Barracco MB 277. For this piece, see Bongrani Fanfoni 1987, 65–71; Meffre 2015a, 137–139, no. 52. 50 Compare Aston 1994, 83 and 121–122, nos 78–81. 51 The toponym could also be read […] . See Bongrani Fanfoni 1987, pl. II. 52 At least since the Ramesside Period, heart-shaped pottery vessels were dedicated at Umm el-Qa’ab (see Effland 2006, 139; Effland – Effland – Budka 2010, 74–76; Effland – Effland 2013, 49–51). The dedicators named are very few and belong to the high-ranking local priesthood. We can cite the High Priest of Osiris Sauypaankh, the Divine Father of Osiris and Scribe of the Army Wenennefer, the Prophet of Shu, High Priest of Onuris, Director  POLITICAL CHANGES IN THEBES DURING THE LATE LIBYAN PERIOD 53 The layout of the text incised on the body of the vase in the Museo Barracco is comparable to that added to other archaic stone vases during the late Third Intermediate Period by Amenirdis I for cultic purposes.53 Her two cartouches are disposed in two columns and next to them, there is a horizontal text that continues around the body. Unlike the stone vases of Amenirdis I, the vase in the Museo Barracco bears the titularies of two God’s Wives and one king. This indicates that the vessel was dedicated jointly by these three persons.54 By dedicating a cultic item jointly with Theban personalities, Nimlot D linked himself to the God’s Wives of Amun Shepenwepet I and Amenirdis I, and not to the High Priest of Amun or to any other political authority.55 Peftjauawybastet’s relations with Thebes The other king in Middle Egypt, Peftjauawybastet, is called the “Monarch of Heracleopolis” on Piankhy’s stele. Thanks to the preservation of several monuments, his family has been discussed repeatedly.56 The monuments related to Peftjauawybastet’s daughters indicate that he was married to two different princesses. The first, whose father remains unknown,57 was named Tasheritenaset; she is the mother of Princess Ieruth. His other spouse, named Irbastetudjanynefu, was a daughter of King Rudamun and the mother of Princess Sopdetemhaaut. The latter familial relationship was sometimes interpreted as a dynastic link between the Upper Egyptian line of the 22nd Dynasty and the king of Heracleopolis.58 In other words, it was proposed that of the Prophets of all the Gods in Abydos and Conductor of the Procession of Osiris Minmose, and some members of his family. There are three types of decoration on these vessels. Osiris, sometimes represented together with Harendotes or Isis, is depicted in one type with a hieroglyphic inscription naming the dedicator. A second type bears a scene showing the dedicator in adoration before Osiris with a hieroglyphic caption. The third and last type bears horizontal texts related to the coronation of Osiris (for these, see Amélineau 1904, 289–291; KRI II, 552, 6–11; KRI III, 64, 8–15, 476, 10–13; Effland – Effland 2013, 51, fig. 22 a–b). On the other hand, some dockets inscribed in hieratic on amphorae indicate that they contained wine. The custom of dedicating pottery for use in Osiris’s cult at Abydos was practiced after the New Kingdom: some fragments decorated with scenes show the High Priests of Amun of the second half of the 21st and the first half of the 22nd Dynasties in adoration or offering nw-pots of wine; other fragments bear only texts naming the High Priests of Amun or the kings of the period in question and can be compared to New Kingdom wine amphorae. Concerning vessels dedicated during the Third Intermediate Period, see Effland – Effland 2013, 58–70. 53 London British Museum EA 4701 (Sharpe 1837, 115; Meyrat 2013, 233–242) and 24709 (Jansen-Winkeln 2009, 279, no. 29); Oxford Ashmolean Museum 1872.286 (Jansen-Winkeln 2009, 261, no. 9). A fourth (current location unknown), made of calcite, was (like British Museum EA 4701) found by Piccinini and entered the collection of Giovanni d’Anastasi (Lenormant 1857, 69, no. 747; PM II, 300). 54 The text on the body of the vase was recently discussed by Broekman 2009, 99, who proposes that it originally showed the names of the Egyptian and Nubian kings contemporary with the God’s Wives. In his reading, the name of the “Nubian counterpart of Nimlot” would have been inscribed next to the name of Amenirdis I. 55 In this respect, it may prove significant to examine the priestly and political authorities of the second half of the Libyan Period and of the 25th Dynasty encountered in material from Abydos. The last High Priest of Amun documented on pottery found at Abydos seems to be Takeloth F (Effland – Effland – Budka 2010, 70; Effland – Effland 2013, 70), contemporary with the end of Osorkon II’s reign (but see Payraudeau 2014, 580, no. 236, C, and n. 84, who suggests that the High Priest of Amun mentioned together with a king Osorkon could be Takeloth G). Less than a century later, the high-ranking official named on the vessel found in Abydos is the God’s Wife of Amun Amenirdis I. At the end of the 25th Dynasty, we know, thanks to the statue Berlin ÄM 17271 (l. 10) and the autobiographical text A in the crypt of the Mut Temple at Karnak (col. 33), that the 4th Prophet of Amun and Director of the City Montuemhat oversaw some works at Abydos, especially concerning the processional barque of Osiris (Leclant 1961, 60–61 and 217, 220; Effland – Effland 2013, 81). 56 For a detailed study of the dynastic affiliations of Peftjauawybastet, see Meffre 2015a, 356–357. 57 Concerning this royal spouse, see Meffre 2015a, 356. 58 See Aston – Taylor 1990, 145. 54 RAPHAËLE MEFFRE Peftjauawybastet succeeded, directly or not,59 Rudamun; by marrying one of that king’s daughters, he would have been the heir to the Upper Egyptian throne. Another solution was also proposed: Upper Egypt could have been divided between the two sons of Osorkon III, Rudamun having power over Hermopolis and Takeloth III reigning in Thebes and Heracleopolis. According to this theory, when Kushite influence spread to Thebes, Takeloth III retreated to Heracleopolis and Peftjauawybastet succeeded him in there while Rudamun had power over Hermopolis.60 Nevertheless, the marriage of Peftjauawybastet with Irbastetudjanynefu can’t be taken to prove a dynastic affiliation of the king of Heracleopolis to the “Theban” 22nd Dynasty. Since the monuments previously attributed to the future Takeloth III, which seemed to link him to Heracleopolis, belong in fact to Takeloth F (the future Takeloth II)61, nothing now indicates that Takeloth III had power over Heracleopolis. Thus it is difficult to recognise in Peftjauawybastet an offspring of the Upper Egyptian line of the 22nd Dynasty. Rather, his links to Thebes must be considered relations maintained as a kind of “external policy”. Through his two daughters, Princesses Ieruth and Sopdetemhaaut, Peftjauawybastet maintained close relations with Thebes, especially with the God’s Wives of Amun and with a family involved in the cults of Amun and Montu. Ieruth as Songstress of the Abode of Amun Two donation steles found at Heracleopolis report that King Peftjauawybastet gave 50 arouras of land (i.e. about 13.5 ha) to Amun. The lunettes of both steles show Amun and Mut worshipped by the King’s Daughter Ieruth; she raises her hands in adoration (Cairo JE 45948) and she shakes a sistrum and menat before them (Cairo TR 11/9/21/14). The donation of land seems to fulfil the function of a dowry ceded to Amun by Peftjauawybastet for the acceptance of Ieruth into the choir of the Songstresses of the Abode of Amun. Giving one of his daughters to the Lord of Thebes was a political act of Peftjauawybastet towards the Theban clergy, and especially towards the God’s Wife of Amun whose links with these songstresses were very close.62 In this respect, Peftjauawybastet acted like several other late Libyan Period rulers. The custom of placing one royal daughter among the Songstresses of the Abode of Amun seems to have been initiated by Takeloth II with his daughter Karoma; the appointment of the princess as Songstress of Amun seems to have been coupled with a donation of land as recorded in the text of the stele Cairo JE 36159.63 Rudamun also placed one of his daughters in the entourage of the God’s Wife.64 So did some Libyan chiefs from the Delta, such as Ankhhor C, Chief of the Libu in the Western Delta. He sent his daughter Nebetimauemhat to Thebes to be near the God’s Wife;65 her closeness to the Divine Votaresses is underscored by an ex-voto she dedicated at Thebes on behalf of the God’s Wives Shepenwepet I and Amenirdis I: Shepenwepet I is depicted shaking the sistrum before the Theban triad while the text records the benefits Amun gave to Amenirdis I and names Nebetimauemhat. 59 After Broekman assigned Nile Level Record no. 3 (previously attributed to Shoshenq I) to a new king Shoshenq VIa (Broekman 2002, 176–177), Aston revised his chronology (Aston 2009, 20 and 24, table) and considered the possibility that this new king could be inserted between Rudamun and Peftjauawybastet. 60 Jansen-Winkeln 2006, 256. 61 See above p. 48–49. 62 See the observations of Yoyotte 1962, 47. 63 See Fazzini 1988, pl. XXXIII, 2. 64 She was buried in tomb 21 in the great temple of Ramesses III in Medinet Habu. Several grave goods from her tomb were discovered by Daressy (including the slab Cairo JE 33902) and then by Anthes. For the slab Cairo JE 33902, see Daressy 1897, 20, no. CXLIII (and more recently Jansen-Winkeln 2007, 393, no. 25); for other grave goods, see Hölscher 1954, 17 and 32. 65 Stele Cairo JE 40716: Yoyotte 1961, § 34, doc. G; Leclant 1965, 168, D.14, 186–187; Fazzini 1988, pl. XXIX, 1; Jansen-Winkeln 2009, 302, no. 65; Koch 2012, 101, no. 17.  POLITICAL CHANGES IN THEBES DURING THE LATE LIBYAN PERIOD 55 Sopdetemhaaut, married into a Theban family of priests of Montu By giving his daughter Sopdetemhaaut66 in marriage, Peftjauawybastet allied himself with one of the high-ranking Theban families. A text inscribed inside the lid of the inner coffin of Sopdetemhaaut67 (l. 1–5) describes her as: ỉmAḫt ḫr hA.s ḥm-nṯr Ỉmn-Ra (nswt) nṯrw sš ṯA n pr Mnṯw nb WAst PA-dỉ-Jmn-nb-nswt-tAwy “the imakhet beside her husband, the Prophet of Amun-Re (king) of the Gods, Scribe tja of the Estate of Montu Lord of Thebes Padiamunnebnesuttawy”. Fig. 3: Family relationships within the descents of Peftjauawybastet Whereas the title of prophet of Amun was quite common at the time, only a few examples of Scribe tja of the Estate of Montu are known. There is among them a coffin in Bologna68 of a woman named Tashaakheper, daughter of Padiamunnebnesuttawy, who bears the titles of Prophet of Amun in Ipet-sut, Prophet of Amun-Re King of the Gods, Prophet of Montu Lord of Thebes, Scribe tja and Administrative Worker (ỉmy-st-a) of the Estate of Montu Lord of Thebes. This man can surely be identified as the husband of Sopdetemhaaut, an identification strengthened by the fact that the mother of Tashaakheper is presented as the Lady of the House Sopdetemhaaut. Surprisingly, on this coffin, the genealogies never claim royal descent for Sopdetemhaaut. This Padiamunnebnesuttawy, father of Tashaakheper, was identified by Pernigotti 69 as the grandfather of the 36th witness of the Saite Oracular Papyrus (Brooklyn Museum 47.218.3)70. In year 14 of King Psametik I, the like-named grandson of Padiamunnebnesuttawy was in the office previously occupied by his grandfather. The genealogy detailed in the papyrus permits to identify the father of the 36th witness, named Raemmaakheru, with the “Prophet of Amun and Scribe-tja of the Estate of Montu Raemmaakheru” mentioned on a donation stele dated to Year 21 of Taharqa (l. 12)71. Thanks to these genealogical details (Fig. 3), it is possible to affirm that Peftjauawybastet gave his daughter Sopdetemhaaut in marriage to a member of a family involved in the cult of Montu which was 66 For this princess, see Graefe 1990, 85 and pl. 8a; Meffre 2009, 215–221; Meffre 2015b. 67 This monument will be published in Meffre 2015b. 68 Bologna EG 1961: Pernigotti 1990, 17–25. 69 Pernigotti 1990, 17–25; De Meulenaere 1997, 246–247, no. 36. 70 Parker 1962, 25 and pl. 12. 71 De Meulenaere 1997, 247; Graefe – Wassef 1979, 106; Jansen-Winkeln 2009, 210. 56 RAPHAËLE MEFFRE preeminent in Thebes from the late Libyan Period until the beginning of the 26th Dynasty. The main titles held by male members of this family were passed down from father to son until Year 14 of Psametik I, when Padiamunnebnesuttawy’s grandson was still one of the most important Theban priests who acted as witnesses to the oracular consultation reported in the Brooklyn papyrus. In other words, the family maintained its status throughout the period of political changes accompanying both the rise and the decline of Kushite power. Conclusion During the second half of the Libyan Period, the territory of the Theban 22nd Dynasty was quickly restricted to the Theban area, its northern frontier being located in all likelihood in the vicinity of Hermopolis and Akoris. As stated in the text of Piankhy’s triumphal stele, the Libyan household of the Upper Egyptian line of the 22nd Dynasty had disappeared from Thebes by the time of his campaign into Egypt, and the City was under the control of the Kushite household. The rulers of the two kingdoms of Middle Egypt known in the late Libyan Period solicitously maintained a close relationship with Thebes and its authorities. The main changes in the latter started in the mid-Libyan Period, and more precisely at the end of the civil war. Thereafter, the titularies of the High Priests of Amun show that their occupations were quickly restricted to the religious sphere and that they lost most of their political importance. Such change could be attributed to two factors which are linked. On the one hand, the exceeding importance of the High Priests of Amun might have been seen as one of the reasons for the civil war and on the other hand, the territory of the Upper Egyptian 22nd Dynasty being from this time on restricted to the Theban area, the political and military role of the High Priests of Amun could have been thought needless.72 Thus, the high priesthood of Amun became the province of the crown prince of the Theban 22nd Dynasty. The actions of late Libyan Period rulers toward Thebes reflected this change. When Nimlot D and Peftjauawybastet wanted to maintain a relationship with Thebes, they turned to the most influential representatives of the great religious institutions of the moment – those serving Amun and Montu, the two great Theban deities of the era. The prominent figure of the clergy of Amun appears to have been the God’s Wife, and no longer the High Priest. When Nimlot D dedicated a liturgical vessel, he acted together with the two God’s Wives, the Libyan Shepenwepet I and the Kushite Amenirdis I. Peftjauawybastet was also careful to maintain close relations with the God’s Wives of Amun when he sent his daughter Ieruth to the priestess to serve as a Songstress of the Abode of Amun and be a member of her entourage. The cult of Montu gained in importance in Thebes, alongside Amun’s cult, during the second half of the 22nd Dynasty; by the end of the Libyan Period, the high-ranking Theban families were involved in his priesthood. When Peftjauawybastet chose a husband from among the clergy of Montu for one of his daughters, he succeeded in forming an alliance with members of the higher Theban civil society. Thus, the choices of the late Libyan Period rulers shed light on the new balance of power in Thebes, already in effect during the second half of the Libyan Period and which became even more visible during the Kushite and Saite Periods. Bibliography Amélineau 1904 Émile Amélineau. Les nouvelles fouilles d’Abydos 1897–1898. Compte rendu in extenso des fouilles, description des monuments et objets décou- verts. Paris. Aston 1994 Barbara G. Aston. Ancient Egyptian Stone Vessels. Materials and Forms. SAGA 5. Heidelberg. 72 On this point, see, Payraudeau 2014, 361.  POLITICAL CHANGES IN THEBES DURING THE LATE LIBYAN PERIOD 57 Aston 2009 David A. Aston. Takeloth II, a King of the Herakleopolitan/Theban Twenty- Third Dynasty Revisited: the Chronology of Dynasties 22 and 23. In: Gerard P. F. Broekman – Robert J. Demarée – Olaf E. Kaper (eds.). The Libyan Pe- riod in Egypt. Historical and Cultural Studies into the 21st–24th Dynasties. Proceedings of a Conference at Leiden University, 25–27 October 2007. EGU 23. Leiden/Leuven, 1–28. Aston – Taylor 1990 David A. Aston – John H. Taylor. The Family of Takeloth III and the “The- ban” Twenty-third Dynasty. In: A. Leahy (ed.). Libya and Egypt c 1300–750 BC. London, 131–154. Von Beckerath 1966 Jürgen von Beckerath. The Nile Level Records at Karnak and their Im- portance for the History of the Libyan Period (Dynasties XXII and XXIII). In: JARCE 5, 43–55. Bongrani Fanfoni 1987 Luisa Bongrani Fanfoni. Un nuovo documento di Scepenupet Ia e Ame- nardis Ia. In: OrAnt 26, 65–71. Broekman 2002 Gerard P. F. Broekman. The Nile Level Records of the Twenty-second and Twenty-third Dynasties in Karnak: A Reconsideration of their Chronological Order. In: JEA 88, 163–178. Broekman 2009 Gerard P. F. Broekman. Takeloth III and the End of the 23rd Dynasty. In: Gerard P. F. Broekman – Robert J. Demarée – Olaf E. Kaper (eds.). The Libyan Period in Egypt. Historical and Cultural Studies into the 21st–24th Dynasties. Proceedings of a Conference at Leiden University, 25–27 October 2007. EGU 23. Leiden/Leuven, 91–101. Caminos 1964 Ricardo A. Caminos. The Nitocris Adoption Stela. In: JEA 50, 71–101. Chevereau 1985 Pierre-Marie Chevereau. Prosopographie des cadres militaires égyptiens de la Basse Époque. Carrières militaires et carrières sacerdotales en Égypte du e e 2 XI au II siècle avant J.C. EME 2. Paris. Daressy 1897 Georges Daressy. Notes et remarques. In: RecTrav 19, 13–22. De Meulenaere 1997 Herman De Meulenaere. Le papyrus oraculaire de Brooklyn, trente ans après. In: Jacobus van Dijk (ed.). Essays on Ancient Egypt in Honour of Herman Te Velde. Egyptological Memoirs 1, Groningen. 243–249. Effland 2006 Ute Effland. Funde aus dem Mittleren Reich bis zur Mamlukenzeit aus Umm el-Qaab. In: MDAIK 62, 131–150. Effland 2008 Andreas Effland. Iuwelot der Libyer – Zwei neue Belege für den thebani- schen Hohepriester des Amun aus der 22. Dynastie und ein ungewöhnliches Personendeterminativ. In: Eva-Maria Engel – Vera Müller – Ulrich Hartung (Hrsg.). Zeichen aus dem Sand. Streiflichter aus Ägypens Geschichte zu Eh- ren von Günter Dreyer. MENES 5. Wiesbaden, 59–69. Effland – Effland – Ute Effland – Andreas Effland – Julia Budka. Studien zum Osiriskult in Budka 2010 Umm el-Qaab/Abydos. Ein Vorbericht. In: MDAIK 66, 19–91. 58 RAPHAËLE MEFFRE Effland – Effland 2013 Ute Effland – Andreas Effland. Abydos. Tor zur ägyptischen Unterwelt. Darmstadt/Mainz. Epigraphic Survey 1954 The Epigraphic Survey. Reliefs and Inscriptions at Karnak III: The Bubastite Portal. OIP 74. Chicago. Fazzini 1988 Richard A. Fazzini. Egypt, Dynasty XXII–XXV. Iconography of Religions XVI/10. Leiden. Graefe 1990 Erhart Graefe. Eine Seite aus den Notizbüchern von Robert Hay. In: Arne Eggebrecht – Bettina Schmitz (Hrsg.). Festschrift Jürgen von Beckerath. Zum 70. Geburtstag am 19. Februar 1990. HÄB 30. Hildesheim, 85–89. Graefe – Wassef 1979 Erhart Graefe – Mohga Wassef. Eine fromme Stiftung für den Gott Osiris- der-seinen-Anhäger-in-der-Unterwelt-rettet aus dem Jahre 21 des Taharqa (670 v. Chr.). In: MDAIK 35, 103–118. Grimal 1981 Nicolas-Christophe Grimal. La stèle triomphale de Pi(‛ankh)y au Musée du Caire, JE 48862 et 47086–47089. MIFAO 105. Le Caire. Hölscher 1954 Uvo Hölscher. The Excavations of Medinet Habu V: Post-Ramessid Re- mains. OIP 66. Chicago. Jansen-Winkeln 1985 Karl Jansen-Winkeln. Ägyptische Biographien der 22.–23. Dynastien. ÄAT 8. Wiesbaden. Jansen-Winkeln 2006 Karl Jansen-Winkeln. The Chronology of the Third Intermediate Period: Dyns. 22–24. In: Erik Hornung – Rolf Krauss – David A. Warburton (eds.). Ancient Egyptian Chronology. HdO I,83. Leiden/Boston, 234–264. Jansen-Winkeln 2007 Karl Jansen-Winkeln. Inschriften der Spätzeit, Teil II: Die 22.–24. Dynastie. Wiesbaden. Jansen-Winkeln 2009 Karl Jansen-Winkeln. Inschriften der Spätzeit, Teil III: Die 25. Dynastie. Wiesbaden. Jansen-Winkeln 2014 Karl Jansen-Winkeln. Inschriften der Spätzeit, Teil IV: Die 26. Dynastie. Wiesbaden. Kitchen 1972 Kenneth A. Kitchen. The Third Intermediate Period in Egypt (1100– 650 BC). 4Oxford. KRI II Kenneth A. Kitchen. Ramesside Inscriptions. Historical and Biographical II. 1968-1990, Oxford. KRI III Kenneth A. Kitchen. Ramesside Inscriptions. Historical and Biographical III. 1968–1990, Oxford. Koch 2012 Carola Koch. „Die den Amun mit ihrer Stimme zufriedenstellen“. Gottesge- mahlinnen und Musikerinnen im thebanischen Amunstaat von der 22. bis zur 26. Dynastie. SRaT 27. Dettelbach.  POLITICAL CHANGES IN THEBES DURING THE LATE LIBYAN PERIOD 59 Kruchten 1989 Jean-Marie Kruchten. Les annales sacerdotales des prêtres de Karnak (XXIe– XXIIe dynasties) et autres textes contemporains relatifs à l’initiation des prêtres d’Amon. OLA 32. Leuven. Leahy 1994 Anthony Leahy. Kushite Monuments at Abydos. In: Christopher Eyre – An- thony Leahy – Lisa Montagno Leahy (eds.). The Unbroken Reed. Studies in the Culture and Heritage of Ancient Egypt in Honour of A. F. Shore. EESOP 11. London, 171–192. Leahy 1996 Anthony Leahy. The Adoption of Ankhnesneferibre at Karnak. In: JEA 82, 145–165. Leclant 1961 Jean Leclant. Montouemhat. Quatrième prophète d’Amon. Prince de la Ville. BdE 35. Le Caire. Leclant 1965 Jean Leclant. Recherches sur les monuments thébains de la XXVe dynastie dite éthiopienne. BdE 36. Le Caire. Legrain 1896 Georges Legrain. Textes gravés sur le quai de Karnak. In: ZÄS 34, 111–118. Lenormant 1857 François Lenormant. Catalogue d’une collection d’antiquités égyptiennes rassemblée par M. d’Anastasi. Paris. Meffre 2009 Raphaële Meffre. Une princesse héracléopolitaine de l’époque libyenne: Sopdet(em)hââout. In: RdE 60, 215–221. Meffre 2015a Raphaële Meffre. D’Héracléopolis à Hermopolis. La Moyenne Égypte durant la Troisième Période intermédiaire (XXIe–XXIVe dynasties). Paris. Meffre 2015b Raphaële Meffre. Le cercueil intérieur de la princesse Sopdet-em-hââout et la famille des rois Roudamon et Peftjaouâouybastet. In: Monuments Piot 94, forthcoming. Meyrat 2013 Pierre Meyrat. De l’origine du bol en gneiss d’Aménirdis Ire (British Muse- um EA 4701). In: ENiM 6, 233–242. Naunton 2014 Christopher Naunton. Titles of Karakhamun and the Kushite Administration of Thebes. In: E. Pischikova (ed.). Tombs of the South Asasif Necropolis. Thebes, Karakhamun (TT 223), and Karabasken (TT 391) in the Twenty- fifth Dynasty. Cairo/New York, 103–107. Onasch 1994 Hans-Ulrich Onasch. Die assyrischen Eroberungen Ägyptens. ÄAT 27. Wiesbaden. Parker 1962 Richard A. Parker. A Saite Oracle Papyrus from Thebes. Brown Egyptologi- cal Studies 4. Providence. Patanè 2007 Massimo Patanè. Nonnulla. Genève. Payraudeau 2004 Frédéric Payraudeau. Le règne de Takélot III et les débuts de la domination koushite à Thèbes. In: GM 198, 79–90. Payraudeau 2009 Frédéric Payraudeau. Takeloth III: Considerations on Old and New Docu- ments. In: Gerard P. F. Broekman – Robert J. Demarée – Olaf E. Kaper 60 RAPHAËLE MEFFRE (eds.). The Libyan Period in Egypt. Historical and Cultural Studies into the 21st–24th Dynasties. Proceedings of a Conference at Leiden University, 25– 27 October 2007. EGU 23. Leiden/Leuven, 297–302. Payraudeau 2014 Frédéric Payraudeau. Administration, société et pouvoir à Thèbes sous la XXIIe dynastie bubastite. BdE 160. Le Caire. Payraudeau, forthcoming Frédéric Payraudeau. Les obscurs débuts de la domination soudanaise en Égypte (deuxième moitié du VIIIe siècle av. J.-C.). In: CRAIBL 2015. Perdu 2010 Olivier Perdu. La chapelle “osirienne” J de Karnak: sa moitié occidentale et la situation à Thèbes à la fin du règne d’Osorkon II. In: Laurent Coulon (éd.). Le culte d’Osiris au Ier millénaire av. J.-C.: Découvertes et travaux récents. Actes de la table ronde internationale tenue à Lyon Maison de l’Orient et de la Méditerranée (université Lumière-Lyon 2) les 8 et 9 juillet 2005. BdE 153. Le Caire, 101–121. Pernigotti 1990 Sergio Pernigotti. Una famiglia tebana tra XXV e XXVI dinastia. In: SEAP 7. 17–25. PM II Bertha Porter – Rosalind L. B. Moss. Topographical Bibliography of Ancient Egyptian Hieroglyphic Texts, Reliefs and Paintings II: Theban Temples. Se- cond Edition. Revised and Augmented. 2Oxford 1972. Sharpe 1837 Samuel Sharpe. Egyptian Inscriptions from the British Museum and Other Sources. Vol. I. London. Simpson 1995 William Kelly Simpson. Inscribed Material from the Pennsylvania-Yale Excavations at Abydos. Publications of the Pennsylvania-Yale Expedition to Egypt 6. New Haven/Philadelphia. Yoyotte 1961 Jean Yoyotte. Les principautés du Delta au temps de l’anarchie libyenne (études d’histoire politique). In: Mélanges Maspero 1,1. MIFAO 66. Le Caire, 121–179. Yoyotte 1962 Jean Yoyotte. Les Vierges consacrées d’Amon thébain. In: CRAIBL 1961 (105e année), 43–51.  Abbreviations AF Archäologische Forschungen (Berlin). ÄA Ägyptologische Abhandlungen (Wiesbaden). ÄAT Ägypten und Altes Testament (Wiesbaden). AAWB Abhandlungen der Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften (Berlin). ADAIK Abhandlungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts Kairo (Glückstadt/ Hamburg/New York). ÄF Ägyptologische Forschungen (Glückstadt/Hamburg/New York). AH Aegyptiaca Helvetica (Basel/Genève). AJA American Journal of Archaeology (New York/Baltimore). ÄMP Ägyptisches Museum und Papyrussammlung (Berlin). ASAE Annales du Service des Antiquités de l’Égypte (Le Caire). AV Archäologische Veröffentlichungen (Berlin/Mainz). B-CK Base de données Cachette de Karnak. BAe Bibliotheca Aegyptiaca (Bruxelles). BAEDE Boletín de la Asociación Española de Egiptología (Madrid). BAR Int. Ser. British Archaeological Reports, Internat. Series (London). BD-Papyri Book of the Dead Papyri. BdE Bibliothèque d’Étúde (Le Caire). BeiträgeBf Beiträge zur Ägyptischen Bauforschung und Altertumskunde (Mainz). BES Bulletin of the Egyptological Seminar (New York). BIE Bulletin de l’Institut d’Égypte (Le Caire). BIFAO Bulletin de l’Institut français d’archéologie orientale (Le Caire). BM British Museum (London). BN Bibliothèque Nationale (Paris). BOREAS Boreas. Uppsala Studies in Ancient Mediterranean and Near Eastern Civilizations (Uppsala). BSFE Bulletin de la Société francaise d’égyptologie (Paris). BTAVO Reihe B Beihefte zum Tübinger Atlas des Vorderen Orients. Reihe B – Geisteswissenschaften (Wiesbaden). BzÄ Beiträge zur Ägyptologie der Institute für Afrikanistik und Ägyptologie der Universität Wien (Wien). CAA Corpus Antiquitatim Aegyptiacarum, Lose-Blatt-Katalog ägyptischer Altertümer (Mainz). CdE Chronique d’Égypte (Bruxelles). CFEETK Centro franco-egyptien d’étude des temples de Karnak (Karnak). Cairo CG/CGC Catalogue Général du Musée du Caire (Le Caire). CHANE Culture and History of the Ancient Near East (Leiden). CK The Karnak Cachette Database Project (L. Coulon, E. Jambon). CNMAL Collections of the National Museum of Antiquities Leiden (Leiden). CRAIBL Comptes rendus de l’Académie des inscriptions et belles-lettres (Paris). CRIPEL Cahiers de recherches de l’Institut de papyrologie et égyptologie de Lille (Lille). CT A. de Buck. The Egyptian Coffin Texts. 7 vol. OIP 34, 49, 64, 67, 73, 81, 87. 1935–1961 (Chicago). DAIKS Deutsches Archäologisches Institut, Abteilung Kairo Sonderschriften (Mainz). DE Discussions in Egyptology (Oxford). Dict. Eg. CT R. van der Molen. A Hieroglyphic Dictionary of Egyptian Coffin Texts. 2000 (Leiden). 246 ABBREVIATIONS EA Egyptian Archaeology. The Bulletin of the Egypt Exploration Society (London). EAO Égypte – Afrique et Orient (Avignon). EESOP Egypt Exploration Society. Occasional Publications (London). EGU Egyptologische Uitgaven (Leuven). EME Études et Mémoires d’Égyptologie (Paris). ENiM Égypte nilotique et méditerranéenne (Montpellier). ERA Egyptian Research Account (London). EVO Egitto e Vicino Oriente (Pisa). FCD R. O. Faulkner. Concise Dictionary of Middle Egyptian. 1962 (Oxford). FHN T. Eide – et al. (eds.). Fontes Historiae Nubiorum. 4 vol. 1994–2001 (Bergen). FIFAO Fouilles de l’Institut français d’archéologie orientale (Le Caire). GHPE Golden House Publications. Egyptology (London). GM Göttinger Miszellen. Beiträge zur ägyptologischen Diskussion (Göttingen). GM Beihefte Göttinger Miszellen. Beihefte (Göttingen). GOF IV Göttinger Orientforschungen. IV. Reihe. Ägypten (Wiesbaden). GWA God’s Wife of Amun. HÄB Hildesheimer Ägyptologische Beiträge (Hildesheim). HdO Handbuch der Orientalistik (Leiden/Köln). HPA High Priest of Amun. IBAES Internet-Beiträge zur Ägyptologie und Sudanarchäologie (Berlin). IFAO Institut français d’archéologie orientale (Le Caire). INRAP Institut national de recherches archéologiques préventives (Metz). JARCE Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt (Boston/New York). JE Journal d’Entrée du Musée du Caire (Cairo). JEA Journal of Egyptian Archaeology (London). JEOL Jaarbericht van het Vooraziat-Egypt. Genootschap Ex Oriente Lux (Leiden). JNES Journal of Near Eastern Studies (Chicago). JSSEA Journal of the Society of the Studies of Egyptian Antiquities (Toronto). KHM ÄOS Kunsthistorisches Museum, Ägyptisch-Orientalische Sammlung (Wien). KoptHWb W. Westendorf. Koptisches Handwörterbuch. 1965–1977 (Heidelberg). KRI K. A. Kitchen. Ramesside Inscriptions. 1969–1990 (Oxford). KSG Königtum, Staat und Gesellschaft früher Hochkulturen (Wiesbaden). L. E. Lower Egypt(ian). LÄ Lexikon der Ägyptologie (Wiesbaden). LD K. R. Lepsius. Denkmaeler aus Aegypten und Aethiopien. 1900 (Berlin). LED L.H. Lesko. A Dictionary of Late Egyptian. 5 vol. 1982-1990 (Berkeley/ Providence). LGG C. Leitz (Hrsg.). Lexikon der ägyptischen Götter und Götterbezeichnungen. OLA 110-116. 2002 (Leuven). LP Late Period. LRL Late Ramesside Letters. MAFTO Mission Archéologique Française de Thèbes-Ouest. MÄS Münchner Ägyptologische Studien (Berlin, München). MB Museo Baracco (Roma). MDAIK Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts, Abteilung Kairo (Wiesbaden/Mainz). MENES Menes. Studien zur Kultur und Sprache der ägyptischen Frühzeit und des Alten Reiches (Wiesbaden). MFA Museum of Fine Arts (Boston).  ABBREVIATIONS 247 MIFAO Mémoires publiés par les membres de l’Institut français d’archéologie orientale (Le Caire). MMA Metropolitan Museum of Art (New York). MMAF Mémoires publiés par les membres de la Mission Archéologique Française au Caire. IFAO (Le Caire). MMJ Metropolitan Museum Journal. Metropol. Museum (New York). MonAeg Monumenta Aegyptiaca (Bruxelles). NK New Kingdom. NLR Nile Level Record. OBO Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis (Fribourg, Göttingen). OIC Oriental Institute Communications (Chicago). OIM Oriental Institute Museum (Chicago). OIP Oriental Institute Publications (Chicago). OLA Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta. (Leuven). OMR Opening of the Mouth Ritual. Or Orientalia. Nova Series (Roma). OrAnt Oriens antiquus (Roma). PÄ Probleme der Ägyptologie (Leiden). pBerlin Papyrus Berlin. pBM Papyrus British Museum. PC Papyrus Carlsberg (Kopenhagen). pGreenfield Papyrus Greenfield. pHarkness Papyrus Harkness. pLeiden Papyrus Leiden. pLouvre Papyrus Louvre. PM B. Porter – R. L. B. Moss. Topographical Bibliography of Ancient Egyptian Hieroglyphic Texts, Reliefs and Paintings. 7 vol. 1927-1995 (Oxford). PMMAEE Publications of the Metropolitan Museum of Art. Egyptian Expedition (New York). pMunich Papyrus München. PT Pyramid Texts. Ptol. Lexikon P. Wilson. A Ptolemaic Lexicon. A Lexicographical Study of the Texts in the Temple of Edfu. OLA 78. 1997 (Leuven). QV Valley of the Queens. RAPH Recherches d’archéologie, de philologie et d’histoire. IFAO (Le Caire). RdE Revue d’Égyptologie (Paris/Louvain). Rec.Trav. Recueil de travaux relatifs à la philologie et à l’archéologie égyptiennes et assyriennes (Paris). RSE Rassegna di Studi Etiopici (Roma). SAGA Studien zur Archäologie und Geschichte Altägyptens (Heidelberg). SAK Studien zur Altägyptischen Kultur (Hamburg). SAKB Studien zur Altaltägyptischen Kultur. Beihefte (Hamburg). SAOC Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilizations (Chicago). SARS Sudan Archaeological Research Society (London) / Sudan Archaeological Research Society Publications (London). SCA Supreme Council of Antiquities (Cairo). SEAP Studi di Egittologia e di Antichità Puniche (Bologna, Pisa). SHR Studies in the History of Religion (Leiden). SL Gardiner Sign List. SMB Staatliche Museen zu Berlin (Berlin). SMPK Staatliche Museen Preußischer Kulturbesitz. SOAS School of Oriental and African Studies. University of London (London). SNM Sudan National Museum (Khartoum). 248 ABBREVIATIONS SRaT Studien zu den Ritualszenen Altägyptischer Tempel (Dettelbach). SSEA Publications Society for the Study of Egyptian Antiquities Publications (Mississauga). SSR Studien zur Spätägyptischen Religion (Wiesbaden). Stockholm MM Medelhavsmuseet Egyptiska Advelingen (Stockholm). TÄB Tübinger Ägyptologische Beiträge (Bonn). TIP Third Intermediate Period. TLA Thesaurus Lingua Aegyptiae. Berlin-Brandenburgische Akademie der Wissenschaften (Berlin). TT Theban Tomb. Turin ME Museo Egizio (Torino). U. E. Upper Egypt(ian). UC University College (London). UGAÄ Untersuchungen zur Geschichte und Altertumskunde Ägyptens (Leipzig, Berlin, Hildesheim). UMR Unités Mixtes de Recherche (Lyon). VA Varia Aegyptiaca (San Antonio). VA Ass Vorderasiatisches Museum Berlin, Assur Sammlung. (Berlin). Wb A. Erman – H. Grapow (Hrsg.). Wörterbuch der ägyptischen Sprache. 1926–1963 (Leipzig, Berlin). Wb Med. Texte H. von Deines – W. Westendorf. Wörterbuch der medizinischen Texte. 1961–1962 (Berlin). WVDOG Wissenschaftliche Veröffentlichungen der deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft (Berlin/Leipzig). YES Yale Egyptological Studies (New Haven). ZÄS Zeitschrift für ägyptische Sprache und Altertumskunde (Leipzig, Berlin).