Laura Peirce, "The Curious Case of the Colossal Statue of Thutmose III before the South-East Face of the Seventh Pylon at Karnak", Göttinger Miszellen 257 (2019), 153-164.

GöttinGer Miszellen Beiträge zur ägyptologischen Diskussion Heft 257 Göttingen 2019 I nhaltsverzeIchnIs TECHNICAL INFORMATION......................................................................... 5 KURzBEMERKUNGEN Graefe, Erhart: Die Uschebtis des Harwa (TT 37) mit Wedel und Krummstab 6 Monnier, Franck: Note complémentaire sur les tours de guet et tours swnww de la campagne égyptienne .......................................................... 7 MISzELLEN Bojowald, Stefan: Eine neue Erklärung für das ägyptische Wort „Agbw“ in CT VII 28 .................................................................................... 13 Broekman, Gerard P. F.: Royal shabtis from Tanis ........................................... 17 Castillos, Juan José: Chaos in Ancient Egypt .................................................. 25 Delhez, Julien / Kohl, Theresa: Aufgetaucht: Ein weiteres Uschebti für den Gottesvater Psammetich .............................................................. 37 van Dijk, Jacobus: Not Horemheb, but Meryneith: The Fields of Iaru Relief in the Liebieghaus .................................................................................... 41 Fitzenreiter, Martin: Schon wieder Stele Louvre C 14 des Irtisen..................... 49 Kromer, Bernd / Popko, Lutz / Scholl, Reinhold: Die Altersbestimmung des Papyrus Ebers ................................................................................... 63 Kucharek, Andrea: Papyrus PSI Inv. I 130: A New Egyptian Source on the Cult of Antinoos .................................................................................. 73 Kurth, Dieter: Die Reliefs der großen Schiffsprozession im Tempel von Edfu: Nautische Realität oder idealisierte Darstellung? .................... 85 Kwiecinski, Jakub M.: Depictions of crocodiles and scorpions in Predynastic and Early Dynastic Egypt: The case of the Abydos flint animals .............. 97 Morenz, Ludwig D.: Von Lese-Kunst und Pilgerschaft – Überlegungen zur Stele Liège I/630 ................................................................................ 109 Nassar, Mohamed Ali: Two Account Papyri from Deir el-Medina (P. Turin Cat 1961+2006)(P. Turin Cat. 2024+ P. Turin Cat. 2052+ P. Turin Cat. 2077) 119 Ouda, Ahmed M. Mekawy: Further Remarks on the Shabtis of the ‘God’s Father’, Panebmontu........................................................... 145 Peirce, Laura: The Curious Case of the Colossal Statue of Thutmose III before the South-East Face of the Seventh Pylon at Karnak ................... 153 Saad, Abubakr: Coptic numerical cryptograms from Esna ............................... 165 Stefanović, Danijela: Varia Epigraphica VI - The Middle Kingdom / Second Intermediate Period ..................................................................... 177 Sternberg-el Hotabi, Heike: Eine echte Kröte im imaginären Garten: „Der Dämon, der in Kothos einwohnt“. zum altägyptischen Hintergrund einer Passage im Enkomion des Makarios von Tkôw .............................. 187 BEITRÄGE zUR WISSENSCHAFTSGESCHICHTE Krauss, Rolf: zu Henri Stierlins Thesen über die Berliner Nofretete-Büste ...... 195 GM 257 (2019) 153 The Curious Case of the Colossal Statue of Thutmose III before the South-East Face of the Seventh Pylon at Karnak* Laura Peirce, Macquarie University A colossal statue of Thutmose III before the south-east face of the Seventh Pylon at the Temple of Amun-Re at Karnak (PM II2, 171 J) appears to have inscriptions dating from various rulers of the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Dynasties. Known as Statue J in Porter and Moss, the inscriptions on the base were wrongly linked to the northern statue (PM II2, 168 A), namely, the Osiride statue of Thutmose III before the north-east face of the Seventh Pylon. Fieldwork undertaken at Karnak has shown that these inscriptions have been wrongly attributed and belong to the southern statue, but the colossal statue itself is perplexing in other ways. Specifically, the name rings engraved on the base, which appear to be of a later date, together with a subsequent usurpation of Ramesses II in the Nineteenth Dynasty. Background The Seventh Pylon was constructed in the reign of Thutmose III, ostensibly replacing one of mud-brick, between central Karnak and the Eighth Pylon constructed by Hatshepsut.1 This pylon has been the subject of numerous studies, as it was here that Thutmose III carved his famous smiting scenes and topographical lists, documenting his various campaigns in the Levant and Nubia.2 The southern west or left face represents the king smiting peoples of * This article was written during research undertaken as a PhD candidate in the Department of Ancient History at Macquarie University under the Australian Post Graduate Award Scheme (2016-2019). The fieldwork at Karnak was made possible by the Ancient History Departmental Funding Scheme, awarded in 2016, whilst the trip itself occurred in December 2016. This article is aimed at rectifying the erroneous Porter and Moss references, as well as the possible date of the inscriptions, though for a more thorough publication of the statue with associated measurements and observations see Dimitri Laboury, La statuaire de Thoutmosis III. Essai d’interprétation d’un portrait royal dans son contexte historique (Liège, 1998), 114-117 (C 18). 1 Luc Gabolde and Marc Gabolde, “Les textes de la paroi sud de la salle des Annales de Thoutmosis III”, Kyphi 7 (2015), 71 (col. 27); Elizabeth Blyth, Karnak: Evolution of a Temple (New York, 2008), 84; Gun Björkman, Kings at Karnak: A Study of the Treatment of Monuments of Royal Predecessors in the Early New Kingdom (Uppsala, 1971), 91; Sethe, Urk. IV, 735-738 (208). The discovery of the “Southern Pylon” in mud-brick is also recounted on a block written in retrograde that was discovered in the Second Pylon (line x+15), see PM II2, 99; Charles F. Nims, “Thutmosis III’s benefactions to Amon”, in E. B. Hauser (ed.), Studies in Honor of John A. Wilson (Chicago, 1969), 70-71 (vii) (69-74); Henri Chevrier, “Rapport sur les travaux de Karnak, 1953-1954”, ASAE 53 (1955), 27-28; Paul Barguet, Le temple d’Amon-Rê à Karnak: essai d’exégèse (Cairo, 1962), 53 (note 4), 54 (note 2). 2 PM II2, 167 (496); Auguste Mariette, Karnak: étude topographique et archéologique avec un appendice comprenant les principaux textes hiéroglyphiques découverts ou recueillis pendant les fouilles exécutées à Karnak (Leipzig, 1875), pl. 19-21; Sethe, Urk. IV, 781-6 (216) C; 769-794 (217); Wilhelm Max Müller, 154 GM 257 (2019) Levantine origin, and on the southern east or right face, the king is represented smiting “Nubians”.3 Before the south face, two obelisks were erected before the gateway (one is fragmented, lying in the court) and the other is in the Hippodrome in Istanbul.4 To add to this grand southern entrance, two colossal statues of red granite from Aswan depicting the king were erected on either side of the doorway.5 The eastern statue is the better preserved example and the focus of this paper. The Eastern Statue The eastern statue comprises of a colossal striding statue of the king with a back pillar, which is believed to have measured some 9 meters originally without the base.6 It is preserved from the hips down, with the figure adorned in the shendyt-kilt and his hands held by his sides, with the left grasping a mékes and the right a folded cloth (Fig. 5).7 The kilt is preserved with crisp Egyptological Researches, Volume I. Results of a Journey in 1904 (Washington, 1906), pl. 44-53; Gaston Maspero, “Revision des listes géographiques de Thoutmos III”, RecTrav 7 (1886), 94-96; J. Simons, Handbook for the Study of Egyptian Topographical Lists Relating to Western Asia (Leiden, 1937), 109-122; Maria Michela Luiselli, “The Ancient Egyptian scene of ‘Pharaoh smiting his enemies’: an attempt to visualize cultural memory?”, in M. Bommas (ed.), Cultural Memory and Identity in Ancient Societies (London and New York, 2011), 16 (fig. 1.3: mistaken for Eighth Pylon); James Pritchard, Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament (Princeton, 1969), fig. 312; Sébastien Biston-Moulin, Glossaire des inscriptions de Karnak I. Le vocabulaire (Montpellier, 2017), 435 (KIU 2105, 2106). 3 It is not the subject of this paper, but it is worth noting these figures have not been depicted in the contemporary manner of representing Nubians, but have been represented as a mixture of both southern Levantines (full beards, hooked noses) and as archaic representations of Southerners (short squared beards, braided hairstyle ending in curls). PM II2, 170 (500); Sethe, Urk. IV, 774 (212) B.2, 795-800 (218), A-B (b); Burkhardt et al., Übersetzung (Berlin, 1984), 239, 252-269; Chic. Or. Inst. Photo. 6610; Mariette, Karnak, 52-54, pl. 23; Ernest Desjardins, “Considérations sur une suite de travaux de M. Mariette, relatifs à la topographie de Karnak, aux textes qui y ont été récemment découverts et à l’explication des fameuses listes géographiques de Thoutmès III”, Comptes rendus de l’Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres 20 (1877), 21-25; Barguet, Temple, 269; Elmar Edel, “Die afrikanischen Namen in der Völkerliste Ramses’ II. auf der Westmauer des Tempels von Luxor (Simons, Liste XXI) und ihre Parallelen in anderen afrikanischen Völkerlisten”, SAK 4 (1976), 81-101; K. A. Kitchen, “Egyptian New-Kingdom Topographical Lists: An Historical Resource with ‘Literary’ Histories”, in P. Brand and L. Cooper (eds), Causing His Name to Live: Studies in Egyptian Epigraphy and History in Memory of William J. Murnane (Leiden and Boston, 2009), 129-131, 135; Biston-Moulin, Glossaire (2017), 435 (KIU 2104). 4 PM VII, 400; LD III, pl. 60; Sethe, Urk. IV, 586-9 (187); Piotr Laskowski, “Monumental Architecture and the Royal Building Program of Thutmose III”, in E. Cline and D. O’Connor (eds), Thutmose III: A New Biography (Ann Arbor, 2006), 183-237; James Henry Breasted, “Obelisks of Thutmosis III”, AZ 39 (1901), 56-7, pl. iii (1); James Henry Breasted, Ancient Records of Egypt: Historical Documents from the Earliest Times to the Persian Conquest. Volume II: The Eighteenth Dynasty (Chicago, 1906), para. 630-631; Labib Habachi, The Obelisks of Egypt: Skyscrapers of the Past (London, 1978), 145-151; Anthony J. Spalinger, “A New Reference to an Egyptian Campaign of Thutmose III in Asia”, JNES 37:1 (1978), 37-38. 5 Blyth, Karnak, 84; R. A. Schwaller de Lubicz, The Temples of Karnak (London, 1999), 698. 6 Laboury, La statuaire de Thoutmosis III, 114. 7 In 2016, the broken right hand still rested on top of the pedestal. PM II2, 171 (Statue J); Georges Legrain, “Rapport sur les travaux exécutés à Karnak du 31 octobre 1902 au 15 mai 1903”, ASAE 5 (1904), 9, 17; Jean Capart, Thèbes. La gloire d’un grand passé (Bruxelles, 1925), 347-348, fig. 255; Schwaller de Lubicz, Karnak, pls. 369, 371; Jean Vercoutter, “Les Haou-Nebout (suite)”, BIFAO 48 (1949), 136 (XX); Paul Barguet, “Karnak, métropole religieuse de l’Égypte. L’oeuvre architecturale des pharaons à la XVIIIe dynastie”, Archéologia 15 (1967), 63; Claude Traunecker, “Le ‘Château de l’Or’ de Thoutmosis III et les magasins nord du temple d’Amon”, CRIPEL 11 (1989), 100-106; Michel Azim, “La fouille de la cour du GM 257 (2019) 155 pleat lines with the remains of a dagger attached to the belt, whilst the legs have clear “lateral peroneal muscles”.8 The statue rests on a large pedestal that is decorated with reliefs and inscriptions, with the remains of name rings carved in sunk relief.9 The surface of the stone base is uneven and has suffered substantial damage, with large sections of stone missing completely. The damage to the surface of the stone is particularly isolated from the ankles of the figure to the base of the pedestal. The damage has been attributed to humidity and high water levels, as varying levels of evaporation over time has caused the surface of the granite to crack.10 The Western Statue The other half of the pair, which is the left (or west) statue, is preserved only up to the legs, and shows clear evidence of reuse during the Ramesside period, with an image and text of Ramesses III.11 The Date of the Two Colossal Statues The attribution of the statues to the reign of Thutmose III is based on the following: VIIIe pylône”, Karnak 6 (1980), figs. 5-6; Jean Lauffray, “Les travaux du Centre Franco-Égyptien d’Étude des Temples de Karnak, de 1972 à 1977”, Karnak 6 (1980), pl. 11; François Le Saout, “Fragments divers provenant de la cour du VIIIe pylône”, Karnak 7 (1982), 265; Hourig Sourouzian, “Les colosses du IIe pylône du temple d’Amon-Rê à Karnak, remplois ramessides de la XVIIIe dynastie”, Karnak 10 (1995), 513-514, 521-526, pl. 13; Laboury, La statuaire de Thoutmosis III, 114-117 (C18). 8 Schwaller de Lubicz, Karnak, 698; Laboury, La statuaire de Thoutmosis III, 115. 9 Laboury, La statuaire de Thoutmosis III, 114. 10 This type of damage is seen on other colossal statues, such as the statues of Horemheb/Ramesses II before the north face of the Tenth Pylon, as well as to the shrine of Philip Arrhidaeus at central Karnak and not far from the statue under discussion. Capart, Thèbes, 347 (fig. 255), 348; A. Abd-Elkareem, M Asran, and A. El Shater, “Damage Blocks Granite of Philip Arrhidaeus Compartment and its Source and Treatment, Karnak, Egypt”, Egyptian Journal of Archaeological and Restoration Studies 7:2 (2017), 111-121. 11 The other half of the pair, the colossal statue before the south-west face of the pylon is preserved from below the knee. This example has been dated to the reign of Ramesses III in Porter and Moss, but the consensus today is that it was originally from the reign of Thutmose III, with the later usurpation by the Ramesside king. The inscriptions are in a worse state, with one line of head visible, indicating that this statue also once had name rings and probably the same text - nb.t is visible in one corner. Water damage is likewise prominent from the feet down. On the east side of the statue is a usurpation text of the statue of Ramesses III facing towards the south. Due to this damage to this western statue, which has almost completely erased all traces of the inscriptions on the pedestal, this article is focusing on the eastern example. PM II2, 171 (Statue I); Chic. Or. Inst. Photo. 5220; Schwaller de Lubicz, Karnak, 698, pl. 370; Laboury, La statuaire de Thoutmosis III, 114- 117 (C 17); Blyth, Karnak, 84. 156 GM 257 (2019) 1. The back pillar of the eastern statue contains the remains of the cartouche of Thutmose III.12 2. Thutmose III famously worked in the area, with the Seventh Pylon and obelisks attributed to his reign, with the associative context thus implying Thutmose III.13 3. The Annals refer to the creation of “two statues of my body”, within the context of a description of the construction of the Seventh Pylon by Thutmose III.14 The Inscriptions on the Pedestal of the Eastern Statue Left side of the statue base, facing west One row of hieroglyphs, reading right to left: [5 to 6 groups lost] /// [p]a.t nb.t rxy.t nb.t [@A]-nb.w nb(.wt) Hnmm.t nb(.t) r rd.wy nTr pn nfr d /// [5 to 6 groups lost] /// all the [pat]ricians, all the common-folk, all the [Ha]nebu,15 all mankind, are at the two feet of this good god /// [5 to 6 groups lost] Though these inscriptions generally start with pa.t, this is half cut out, as is the face of the name ring below. This would suggest at least one group at the start of the inscription has been lost. Vercoutter’s rendering of the inscription does not indicate this damage and, further, does not demonstrate the significant portion of the inscription that is missing at the end, namely, from the middle of the foot to the end of the base in line with the back pillar.16 12 According to Laboury, the inscription reads: “[Thout]mosis-néfer-khéper, l’aimé d’[Amon]-Rê maître des trônes du double pays devant l’Ipet-sout, doué de vie, éternellement”. The remains of an identical inscription is also found on the western colossus, though the name of Thutmose III is not preserved on this example. Laboury, La statuaire de Thoutmosis III, 116. 13 Laboury, La statuaire de Thoutmosis III, 116. 14 This is from column 28, “tw.ty n.y D.t=i”, “two statues of my body”. L. Gabolde and M. Gabolde, “Les textes de la paroi sud de la salle des Annales de Thoutmosis III”, Kyphi 7 (2015), 71, 95. 15 In the Eighteenth Dynasty, the Hanebu is a topographical term denoting coastal marshes or islands in the extreme north of the known Egyptian territory in the Levant, particularly land in the vicinity of a large body of water. William A. Ward, “Egypt and the East Mediterranean in the Early Second Millennium B. C.”, Orientalia NS 30:1 (1961), 33. For extensive discussions on the Hanebu, see Vercoutter, “Les Haou-Nebout”, BIFAO 46 (1946), 125- 158; Vercoutter, “Les Haou-Nebout (suite)”, BIFAO 48 (1949), 107-209. 16 Vercoutter, “Les Haou-Nebout (suite)”, BIFAO 48 (1949), 136 (XX). GM 257 (2019) 157 Front side of statue base, facing south One row of hieroglyphs, reading left to right: /// /// xAs.t nb(.t) xAs(.wt) /// /// /// /// /// S /// A /// /// Iwn[.tyw n.w #n.t]-Hn-nfr /// /// all xAs.t17, the xAs(.wt) /// /// /// /// /// (?) /// /// /// the tribes[men of Khent]hennefer Right side of statue base, facing east: One row of hieroglyphs, reading left to right: [rest lost] dbn pHr HA /// /// /// /// [rest lost] Going and turning about around /// /// /// /// [rest lost] The Case of the Osiride Statue Overall, it is clear that there is a possible reference to the Hanebu on this colossal statue before the south-east face of the Seventh Pylon, which is not indicated in the Porter and Moss entry (PM II2, 171 J). Notably, there is a Porter and Moss entry that does denote a reference to the Hanebu on a statue in the vicinity of the Seventh Pylon: the northern Osiride statue before the east wing.18 This Osiride statue is smaller than the colossal statue before the south face, measuring some 4 17 The noun xAs.t has not been translated, as the term has a myriad of meanings, from “hill-country”, “foreign land”, to “desert”. It is a goal of another study to determine how scholars should translate this term in specific contexts without the various connotations that are now associated with it in the literature. 18 PM II2, 168 (A). 158 GM 257 (2019) meters.19 It features Thutmose III in Osiride form, grasping two ankh-signs, with a column of hieroglyphs down the centre, as well as on the back pillar (Fig. 6). The base, like the colossal statue, has suffered significant damage and no inscriptions have survived (see Fig. 1). Curiously, the Porter and Moss reference (PM II2, 168 A) for this Osiride statue reads: “A. Osiride…text mentioning Ha-nebu on back of base of A”, with reference to Vercoutter following this description. However, in the Vercoutter reference associated with the statue in Porter and Moss, the inscription referring to the Hanebu is linked to the southern colossus, not the Osiride statue.20 Furthermore, in the publication of the Osiride statue by Legrain in 1903, which includes a full transcription of the texts found on the statue, the Hanebu is notably absent.21 In turn, it appears that these two references, namely, the south-east colossus and north- east Osiride statue, have become displaced in the Topographical Bibliography.22 Figure 1 The base of the Osiride statue (left) before the north-east face of the Seventh Pylon. The damage is absolute, with no remains of the inscriptions visible. Photograph by Peirce (2016). The Name Rings on the Pedestal of the Eastern Statue Below the inscriptions on the base, each side has the remains of a row of name rings. 19 Laboury, La statuaire de Thoutmosis III, 118. 20 In Vercoutter’s words, the reference to the Hanebu is: “Inédit. Karnak, base du colosse est, devant le VIIe pylône, face sud, moitié est”. Vercoutter, “Les Haou-Nebout (suite)”, BIFAO 48 (1949), 136 (XX), no. 1. 21 Georges Legrain, “Second rapport sur les travaux exécutés à Karnak: du 31 Octobre 1901 au 15 Mai 1902”, ASAE 4 (1903), 7 (7). See also Laboury, La statuaire de Thoutmosis III, 124-127 (C 22). 22 PM II2, 171 (J). The reference to this statue reads: “J, Tuthmosis III, lower part, with captive and line of text on base”. GM 257 (2019) 159 Left side of the statue base, facing west The figures are Nubian in appearance, with shaved heads or cropped hairstyles and clean- shaven faces. Some figures appear to be wearing headbands. The ears are visible, whilst the arms and torso are elongated and thin (see Figs. 2, 3).23 The figure protrudes from the name ring from the chest upwards (medium torso) and the outer delineation of the ring is wavy. The figures are joined to each other by a rope looped around the neck. The preserved toponym is Bkk, which is a region in Africa.24 Figure 2 One of the name rings on the western face of the pedestal. Line drawing by Peirce (2018). Figure 3 The name rings along the western face of the pedestal. Photograph by Peirce (2016). 23 This elongated and somewhat angular appearance is similar to the Thutmose IV examples from a statue at the Temple of Luxor. PM II2, 538 (called Ramesses II); Abdul-Qader Muhammad, “Preliminary Report on the Excavations Carried Out in the Temple of Luxor Seasons 1958-1959 & 1959-1960”, ASAE 60 (1968), 227-279; Mahmud Abd-Elrazik, “Luxor Studies”, MDAIK 27 (1971), 222-23, pls. 63 a, b; Betsy M. Bryan, The Reign of Thutmose IV (Baltimore and London, 1991), 186-188, figs. 33-34. 24 Rainer Hannig, Großes Handwörterbuch Ägyptisch - Deutsch (2800 - 950 v. Chr.) (Mainz, 2006), 1138. 160 GM 257 (2019) Front side of statue base, facing south The preserved outline of this figure appears to have a short Nubian coiffure, the remains of a headband, and a clean-shaven face. To the right of the figure is the “plant of the north” (namely, the papyrus stalk) detail attached to the rope (Fig. 4). Notably, as this is representing a Nubian, the symbol is incongruous with the image; the “plant of the south” (the flowering Sma plant) would be expected to be attached to this figure. Figure 4 The face of the name ring evident on the south facing side of the pedestal with a clear “plant of the north” detail. Line drawing by Peirce (2018). Right side of statue base, facing east The name rings on this side of the statue are almost completely lost, with the remains of a head on the southern-most point. The Date of the Inscriptions and Name Rings on the Eastern Statue Though Vercoutter, Porter and Moss, and Laboury date these inscriptions to the reign of Thutmose III, several factors allow them to be dated later in the Eighteenth Dynasty: 1. The name rings are Nubian in appearance, whilst the other name rings from the reign of Thutmose III at Karnak are generally southern Levantine, with full beards, long hair, and fillets.25 25 Laboury does not note the differences in the iconography between the name rings on the statues and the pylons (Laboury, La statuaire de Thoutmosis III, 117). The author has written an article observing iconographic changes over time in name rings that show that the iconography of the rings is important for dating: see Laura Peirce, “Some Commentary on Name Rings: Towards a Typology”, The Journal of Egyptian History (forthcoming). However, compare the name rings on the Seventh Pylon with those on this statue: PM II2, 167 (497); Müller, Egyptological Researches, Volume II: Results of a Journey in 1906 (Washington, 1910), 131-132, pl. 42; Maspero, Histoire ancienne des peuples d’Orient classique. II: Les premières mélées des peuples (Paris, 1897), 248 (fig.); Mariette, Karnak, pls. 24-26; Sethe, Urk. IV, 796-800 (218c), 801-806 (219); Simons, Handbook, 29-30, 111-115. GM 257 (2019) 161 2. The “Nubians” depicted in the smiting scene on the south-east face of the Seventh Pylon have been represented with a combination of traits that can be attributed to southern Levantines (long hair, full beards) and archaic representations of Southerners (short, squared beards, braided hairstyles). Accordingly, depictions of figures using contemporary Nubian iconography (clean-shaven faces, short hairstyles) on a statue before this wing is incongruous with the decorative program of the immediate vicinity.26 3. The figures are tied with the “plant of the north”, a feature not seen until the reign of Amenhotep III.27 4. The outer delineation of the name ring is wavy, a feature that is particularly common in the Eighteenth Dynasty, which is gradually phased out until the reign of Horemheb, replaced by a buttress design.28 5. The torso is of a “medium length”, a feature also common in the middle-half of the Eighteenth Dynasty, from the reigns of Thutmose III to Thutmose IV, though examples of this type are seen in the reign of Seti I.29 6. The figures are tied to each other around the neck, a characteristic of the name rings dating from the reign of Amenhotep II onwards, with the exception of the Deir el- Bahari examples of Hatshepsut30 and an example of Thutmose III at the Festival 26 See above, note 3. 27 See the examples from the reign of Amenhotep III at the Temple of Soleb (PM VII, 171 (23); LD III, 87d, 88 a-h; Joann Fletcher, Egypt’s Sun King: Amenhotep III - An Intimate Chronicle of Ancient Egypt’s Most Glorious Pharaoh (London, 2000), 45), those from the Mortuary Temple of Amenhotep III at Thebes (H. Sourouzian and R. Stadelmann, “Recent Discoveries and new Southern Place Names at the Mortuary Temple of Amenhotep III, Kom el-Hettân”, Sudan & Nubia 9 (2005) 78, pl. 6), and a colossal statue of Amenhotep III outside the Mut enclosure (PM II2, 277; Henri Chevrier, “Rapport sur les travaux de Karnak (1935- 1936)”, ASAE 36 (1936), 155-156; Helck, Urk. IV, 1440 (436), 1743-5 (581); Schwaller de Lubicz, Karnak, pls. 428-429). 28 This wavy design appears on the name rings of Thutmose I and continues throughout the Eighteenth Dynasty. Helen Jacquet-Gordon, “Fragments of a topographical list dating to the reign of Tuthmosis I”, BIFAO 81 (1981), 41-46; Jean Jacquet, “Fouilles de Karnak-Nord, cinquième campagne, 1972”, BIFAO 73 (1973), 214. For the Horemheb name rings, see PM II 2, 187 (579); Jean Champollion, Monuments de l’Egypte et de la Nubie II (Paris, 1889), 178 (top). Compare with later examples from the Ramesside Period which have a distinctive buttress design e.g. Wadi Abbad during the reign of Seti I: PM VII, 323 (3); LD III, 139a; LD IV, Texte, 77; Dagmar Stockfisch, “Zum geographischen Horizont der Fremdvölkerlisten”, in R. Gundlach and A. Klug (eds), Königtum, Staat und Gesellschaft Früher Hochkulturen: Das ägyptische Königtum im Spannungsfeld zwischen Innen- und Aussenpolitik im 2. Jahrtausend v. Chr. (Wiesbaden, 2004), 98-108. 29 Compare to the short torsos of the reign of Thutmose III on the Sixth Pylon (PM II2, 88 (238); Mariette, Karnak, pl. 22; Sethe, Urk. IV, 794-800 (218); Müller, Egyptological Researches II, 134, pl. 42), with the medium torsos on the Seventh Pylon (PM II2, 167 (497); Müller, Egyptological Researches II, 131-132, pl. 42; Mariette, Karnak, pls. 24-26; Sethe, Urk. IV, 796-800 (218c), 801-806 (219); Simons, Handbook, 29-30, 111-115), and finally, with those of Ramesses II, which show a long torso on the Second Pylon (PM II2, 38 (141); Legrain, Karnak, 131, fig. 82, 137; LD III, pl. 148 (d); Champollion, Not. descr. II, 24; Henri Chevrier, “Rapport sur les travaux de Karnak (1934-1935)”, ASAE 35 (1935), 103, pl. II (1); Chic. Or. Inst. Photos. 5204, 8775). 30 Compare the Deir el-Bahari examples: PM II2, 341 (4); Édouard Naville, The Temple of Deir el-Bahri VI (London, 1908), pl. CLII; Anne Minault-Gout, “À propos des listes des pays du sud au Nouvel Empire”, in C. Berger, G. Clerc, and N. Grimal (eds), Hommages à Jean Leclant (Cairo, 1994), 182. The next instance of the 162 GM 257 (2019) Temple at East Karnak.31 The other name rings from the six topographical lists at Karnak dating to the reign of Thutmose III rarely have the rope tied around the neck.32 7. The bases of the statues before the north-east face of the Seventh Pylon are bare. In turn, it is possible that the pedestals of the southern colossal statues were likewise left blank in the reign of Thutmose III (see Fig. 6, right).33 8. There is no discernible evidence of re-cutting, and both the inscription and name rings appear to have been executed at the same point in time. 9. The statue was usurped from the reign of Ramesses II, which is engraved on the side of the legs of Thutmose III, facing west.34 Accordingly, there is a precedent of reuse. In sum, by examining the iconography of the name rings on this statue, it is possible to refute the initial assumption that the inscriptions on the base date to the reign of Thutmose III. Further, identifying the discrepancies in the decoration in the surrounding areas of the temple, namely, depictions of the “Nubians” on the Seventh Pylon and the “Nubian” name rings on the Sixth Pylon, further reinforce the incongruity between the various representations of Nubians at Karnak supposedly dating from the same period. Overall, this paper demonstrates that though the statue dates to the reign of Thutmose III, the inscriptions on the base appear to date from later in the Eighteenth Dynasty, probably between the reigns of Amenhotep III and Horemheb, though a Nineteenth Dynasty date may also be possible.35 rope is during the reign of Amenhotep II: PM II2, 83 (213), Müller, Egyptological Researches I, 55, pl. 89; Müller, Egyptological Researches II, 111-112 (fig. 37); Mariette, Karnak, 54, pl. 27 (a); Legrain, “Rapport sur les travaux exécutés à Karnak du 31 octobre 1902 au 15 mai 1903”, ASAE 5 (1904), 40 (23); Helck, Urk. IV, 1336 (385); Helck, Übersetzung, 47-48 (385); Simons, Handbook, 39-40 (iii), 125; Schwaller de Lubicz, Karnak, pl. 116; Barguet, Temple, 101-102; Chic. Or. Inst. Photo. 8015; François Larché, “Nouvelles observations sur les monuments du Moyen et du Nouvel Empire dans la zone centrale du temple d’Amon”, Karnak 12 (2007), 458-463, pl. LIX; Luc Gabolde, “Remarques sur le chemisage des obélisques de la Ouadjyt et sa datation”, Karnak 14 (2013) 393-395; Biston-Moulin, Glossaire, 502 (KIU 4565). 31 PM II2, 112 (345); Müller, Egyptological Researches II, 80-82 (fig. 14); Simons, Handbook, 38-9 (iii), 123- 124; Chic. Or. Inst. Photo. 6528. 32 It is generally found if connected to a deity, for example: PM II2, 167 (496); Mariette, Karnak, pl. 19-21; Sethe, Urk. IV, 781-6 (216) C; 769-794 (217); Müller, Egyptological Researches I, pl. 44-53; Maspero, “Révision des listes géographiques de Thoutmos III”, RecTrav 7 (1886), 94-96; Simons, Topographical Lists, 109-122. 33 This is evident from personal observations and photographs by the author at the temple. See also: PM II2, 168 (B); Sethe, Urk. IV, 556 (179), 53a; Legrain, “Second rapport sur les travaux exécutés à Karnak: du 31 octobre 1901 au 15 mai 1902”, ASAE 4 (1903), 7 (7); Schwaller de Lubicz, Karnak, 694, pl. 363. 34 This includes a depiction of the Ramesses II with a damaged titulary. For these inscriptions see Sourouzian, “Les colosses du IIe pylône du temple d’Amon-Rê à Karnak”, Karnak 10 (1995), pl. 13. 35 One would be tempted to date it to the reign of Thutmose IV as the figure itself is stylistically very similar to the examples at the Luxor Temple. However, the “plant of the north” and the wavy outer line of the ring would suggest otherwise. Is it possible that these examples were engraved early in the reign of Amenhotep III, by the same artist or workshop as the ones dating to the reign of Thutmose IV? For this statue see above no. 23. GM 257 (2019) 163 Figure 5 The statue before the south-east face of the Seventh Pylon. Photograph by Peirce (2016). 164 GM 257 (2019) Figure 6 The Osiride statue before the north-east face of the Seventh Pylon (left). Photograph by Peirce (2016).