Old and Middle Kingdom Tradition
in the Temple of Hatshepsut at Deir el-Bahari
A Ć
INSTITUT DES CULTURES MÉDITERRANÉENNES ET ORIENTALES
DE L’ACADÉMIE POLONAISE DES SCIENCES
ÉTUDES et TRAVAUX
XXVII
2014
Prepare for your exams
Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points to download
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Guidelines and tips
Prepare for your exams
Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points to download
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Community
Ask the community
Ask the community for help and clear up your study doubts
University Rankings
Discover the best universities in your country according to Docsity users
Free resources
Our save-the-student-ebooks!
Download our free guides on studying techniques, anxiety management strategies, and thesis advice from Docsity tutors
Old and Middle Kingdom Tradition in Temple of Hatshepsut at Deir el-Bahari, Study notes of History
Old and middle kingdom traditions explain about Sphinx anubis theory and given the structure and parts of complex about old middle kingdom royal pyramid.
Typology: Study notes
2021/2022
1 / 33
This page cannot be seen from the preview
Don't miss anything!
Partial preview of the text
Download Old and Middle Kingdom Tradition in Temple of Hatshepsut at Deir el-Bahari and more Study notes History in PDF only on Docsity!
Old and Middle Kingdom Tradition
in the Temple of Hatshepsut at Deir el-Bahari
Aඇൽඋඓൾඃ Ćඐංൾ
INSTITUT DES CULTURES MÉDITERRANÉENNES ET ORIENTALES DE L’ACADÉMIE POLONAISE DES SCIENCES
ÉTUDES et TRAVAUX
XXVII
62 Aඇൽඋඓൾඃ Ćඐංൾ
Until quite recently the subject of older traditions that influenced Hatshepsut’s achieve-
ments at Deir el-Bahari, although widely recognized in the scholarly literature, has rarely
been explored in more than one or two statements.^1 The use of the Pyramid Texts, an Old
Kingdom scheme of decoration in the offering chapels of Hatshepsut and Thutmose I,
and a few iconographic elements throughout the temple, like the king as sphinx trampling
enemies – were repeatedly given as examples.^2 It has also been noticed that the architec-
ture of Djeser-Djeseru refers to much older schemes,^3 although usually such remarks were
restricted to some elements of the architectural design of the temple. Marcelle Werbrouck
for example, suggested that Senenmut, when planning the courtyard for the temple at Deir
el-Bahari, styled on the Fifth Dynasty royal mortuary temples at Abusir.^4
Terraced layout, with porticoes on the façades of the steps, interpreted as deriving from
saff -tombs, but a direct reference to the neighbouring building of Mentuhotep Nebhepetre,
has been discussed in the broader context of the ideological background of Hatshepsut’s
kingship, and the way she referred (following in this respect her immediate predecessors)
to her illustrious ancestors of the Middle Kingdom.^5 It is perhaps not by chance that the
name of the queen was copying a Middle Kingdom princess name.^6 It must have been
a deliberate choice by her father Thutmose I, who certainly referred to the Middle Kingdom
tradition in a number of areas.^7 Hatshepsut continued this attitude, of which there is explicit,^8
- I am deeply indebted to Jadwiga Iwaszczuk for continuous discussion and many references and sugges- tions concerning the subject of this study. (^1) Already E. Naville in his publication noted, concerning the occurrence of the Pyramid Texts in the Chapel
of Hatshepsut: The presence of this text in this place is a proof of the desire which Hatshepsu shows in many ways, of going back as far as possible in her customs and her language. She was evidently fond of the archaic (E. Nൺඏංඅඅൾ, The Temple of Deir el Bahari I–VI, London 1895–1906 [= Temple], London 1901, IV, p. 8). (^2) E.g. C. Aඅൽඋൾൽ, Egyptian Art, London 1980 [= Egyptian Art], p. 152; W.S. Sආංඍඁ, History of Egyptian
Sculpture and Painting in the Old Kingdom, Boston 1946, p. 204; Iൽ., The Art and Architecture of Ancient Egypt, revised with additions by W.K. Simpson, Ithaca-London 1981 [= Art and Architecture], p. 235. (^3) R. Sඍൺൽൾඅආൺඇඇ, Totentempel und Millionenjahrhaus in Theben, MDAIK 35, 1970, pp. 303–321, sought the
origin of some features of the temple of Hatshepsut and later ‘Mansions of Millions of Years’ in the Old King- dom. Cf. Dං. Aඋඇඈඅൽ, Royal Cult Complexes of the Old and Middle Kingdoms, [ in :] B.E. Shafer (Ed.), Temples of Ancient Egypt, London-New York 1997, pp. 31–85, Fig. 3. (^4) M. Wൾඋൻඋඈඎർ, Le Temple d’Hatshepsout à Deir el-Bahari, Bruxelles 1949, p. 86. The author stressed also
the differences: the courtyard at Deir el-Bahari is surrounded by a double peristyle, with polygonal and not floral columns. On the Old Kingdom inspirations see also ibid ., pp. 106–107. (^5) E.g. F. Hൺංൺඅ, [ in :] E. Hornung, B.M. Bryan (Eds), The Quest for Immortality. Treasures of Ancient
Egypt, Munich-London-New York 2002, p. 10. (^6) L. Tඋඈඒ, Patterns of Queenship in Egyptian Myth and History, Uppsala 1986, Appendix A. Royal Women
(p. 158): 12.22 HATSHEPSUT A. Daughter of Sesostris II and Neferet II (12.19). Titles : C4/1 zAt nsw 1. Stela Cairo 2039 cf. Lange and Schäfer 1902, 390 ff. Scarabs with name of the Middle Kingdom princess Hatshepsut: J. Sൾඍඍൺඌඍ, Einige Skarabäen mit Königsnamen aus Kairiner Privatbesitz, MDAIK 18, 1962, pp. 50–53; W. Kൺංඌൾඋ, Ägyptisches Museum Berlin, Berlin 1967, p. 38, cat. no. 327. (^7) On the general attitude of the kings of the Eighteenth Dynasty towards the Middle Kingdom, especially
the Twelfth Dynasty, see: D.B. Rൾൽൿඈඋൽ, The Concept of Kingship during the Eighteenth Dynasty, [ in :] D. O’Connor, D.P. Silverman (Eds), Ancient Egyptian Kingship, Leiden 1995, pp. 157–184. (^8) Semna temple was built by Hatshepsut in the 2nd (^) year of Thutmose III, dedicated to Dedwen and deified
Senwosret III: R.A. Cൺආංඇඈඌ, Semna-Kumma. I. The Temple of Semna, London 1998 [= Semna]; cf. B. Kൾආඉ, Ancient Egypt. Anatomy of a Civilisation, London-New York 1989, p. 174, nn. 33–34. One of the scenes at
64 Aඇൽඋඓൾඃ Ćඐංൾ
The only attempt thus far to analyse deeper the references to earlier periods was made
by Ann Macy Roth, who found in the decoration programme of the Deir el-Bahari temple
a number of allusions to the Fifth Dynasty.^18 Roth concluded that Allusions to the Elev-
enth Dynasty (outside the temple) and Fifth Dynasty (inside it) appealed, respectively, to
the Theban populace and Memphite offi cials, by refl ecting a past period of glory familiar
to each. With its references to Thebes where Hatshepsut’s family originated, and also to
Memphis, where she ruled, the temple ties two great periods of Egyptian history and the two
most important cities of the Eighteenth Dynasty into a harmonious whole. (...) The allusions
to the early Fifth Dynasty in the decoration may have been meant to emphasize an earlier
juxtaposition. It was during the Fifth Dynasty that the city of Heliopolis, with its cult of
the sun god Re, became the religious centre of the Egyptian state, forming a counterpart
to the nearby administrative capital at Memphis. In Hatshepsut’s reign, Thebes began to
be called “Southern Heliopolis”, marking it as the same kind of religious centre. Just
as the early Fifth Dynasty kings had legitimized their rule by claiming divine birth and
glorifying the city of their divine father, Re, Hatshepsut – by invoking their monuments –
communicated to her court the parallel status that her construction projects and program of
ritual processions conferred upon both herself and the city of her divine father, Amun-Re. 19
The architecture, relief decoration, and statuary program of the Deir el-Bahari complex,
deserve further studies, exploring references to the Old and Middle Kingdoms, and possibly
even to the Early Dynastic times.^20
In the opinion of William Stevenson Smith: The building remains a unique conception,
in a way that recalls the Step Pyramid group of Zoser at Saqqara. Like this famous old
building of Dynasty III and the Luxor temple of Amenhotep III, it suggests the imprint of
a single mind. 21
1928, pp. 4–6, Figs 2–3. F. Mൺඎඋංർ-Bൺඋൻൾඋංඈ, Le premièr exemplaire du livre de l’Amdouat, BIFAO 101, 2001, pp. 332–333 suggested that the stone casing inside the tomb of Neferu, and its decoration including cursive passages from the Pyramid Texts and Coffin Texts, might have influenced Hatshepsut’s blocks with the Amduat in KV20. (^18) A.M. Rඈඍඁ, Hatshepsut’s Mortuary Temple at Deir el-Bahri: Architecture as Political Statement
[= Hatshepsut’s Mortuary Temple], [ in :] C.H. Roehrig, R. Dreyfus, C.A. Keller (Eds), Hatshepsut. From Queen to Pharaoh, New York 2005 [= Hatshepsut. From Queen to Pharaoh], pp. 147–151. Concerning the temple decoration Roth states that (...) a very different set of historical precedents was invoked, alluding to the glory of Egypt during the Old Kingdom, when powerful kings built impressive pyramids near Memphis. A particular focus was placed on the early years (2465–2389 B.C.) of the Fifth Dynasty, a period of strong kings who stressed their ties to the cult of Re at Heliopolis, north of Memphis ( ibid ., p. 148). Concerning the style Roth stresses that Throughout the temple, the elegant raised relief resembles reliefs of the Old Kingdom in proportions and style ( ibid ., p. 150). (^19) Rඈඍඁ, Hatshepsut’s Mortuary Temple, p. 150. (^20) It is perhaps not by chance that a scarab with names of MAat-kA-Ra , Mn-xpr-Ra and Mnj is the earliest
record of the name Menes and suggests a special reverence of Hatshepsut to the mythical founder of the Egyp- tian state (Mൺඍඈඎ, Les scarabées royaux, p. 52; W.C. Hൺඒൾඌ, The Scepter of Egypt. A Background for the Study of the Egyptian Antiquities in The Metropolitan Museum of Art. Part II: The Hyksos Period and the New King- dom (1675–1080 B.C.), rev. ed. Cambridge, Mass. 1990, p. 105. Cf. D. Wංඅൽඎඇ, Die Rolle ägyptischer Könige im Buwusstsein ihrer Nachwelt, Berlin 1969, p. 6 n. 11). (^21) Sආංඍඁ, Art and Architecture, p. 226.
Oඅൽ ൺඇൽ Mංൽൽඅൾ Kංඇൽඈආ Tඋൺൽංඍංඈඇ ංඇ ඍඁൾ Tൾආඉඅൾ ඈൿ Hൺඍඌඁൾඉඌඎඍ ൺඍ Dൾංඋ ൾඅ-Bൺඁൺඋං 65
It is not by chance that Djeser-djeseru has been compared to the mortuary monument of
Netjerykhet. Like the Step Pyramid complex, it is a monument settled in the earlier tradition
that have influenced its architecture and decoration,^22 and at the same moment revealing
new, revolutionary ideological proposals that would eventually become standards. This is
expressed in a large number of direct and indirect, explicit and implicit, references to the
past, in the overall schemes and general rules of the architecture and decoration, as well
as in details. In many cases it is difficult to trace an original source in a concrete period
or monument, firstly because the comparative evidence (e.g. the decoration of the Middle
Kingdom royal mortuary temples), is largely missing, and secondly because the temple
archives (also inaccessible for our research) might have been widely used as a source of
inspiration. Thus very often it is only safe to state that a feature is in line with a long,
though recorded accidentally, tradition.
Recently discovered reliefs depicting an expedition to Punt under Sahure are an impor-
tant evidence in this respect,^23 also in the context of copying themes by one king from
another (e.g. the often cited example of the ‘Libyan Family’ theme). This is not to say that
there was no expedition to Punt in the Year 9, but the choice of the subject for depiction
might have been influenced by an already ancient tradition, and one has to be perhaps
a bit more cautious about the historicity of depicted events, recorded names and details.^24
Hatshepsut’s interest in the past can be traced in various ways. It is explicitly stated
by Senenmut, her closest collaborator, in an inscription on his statue from Karnak: I was
a noble, to whom one hearkened; moreover, I had access to all the writings of the prophets;
there was nothing which I did not know of that which had happened since the beginning. 25
That Hatshepsut sought for the ancient patterns not only in archives but in situ as well, is
suggested by the graffiti left by her people at important Old Kingdom sites, e.g. at Saqqara,^26
(^22) It was even suggested that the inspiration for the temples at Deir el-Bahari was the Step Pyramid complex
itself (P. Gංඅൻൾඋඍ, Architecture et politique aux trois temples de Deir-el-Bahari, Bulletin de la Classe des Beaux- Arts. Académie Royale de Belgique 64, 1982, pp. 81–95). (^23) T. Eඅ Aඐൺൽඒ, Sahure – the Pyramid Causeway. History and Decoration Program in the Old Kingdom,
Abusir XVI, Prague 2009, pp. 155–185, 253–257, Pls 5–8; cf. Iൽ., King Sahura with the precious trees from Punt in a unique scene !, [ in :] M. Barta (Ed.), The Old Kingdom Art and Archaeology – Proceedings of the Confer- ence Held in Prague May 31st^ – June 4 th^ 2004, Prague 2006, pp. 37–44. A.M. Roth already noticed the scenes of Sahure as the Fifth Dynasty antecedents for Hatshepsut’s scenes (Rඈඍඁ, Hatshepsut’s Mortuary Temple, pp. 149, 151 n. 12). (^24) Elmar Edel already showed that the list of products from JAm in the inscription of Herkhuf and the list of
products from Punt given by Hatshepsut are almost identical (E. Eൽൾඅ, Ein bisher falsch gelesenes afrikanisches Produkt in der Inschrift des @rw-xwjf (Herchuf), SAK 11, 1984, pp. 187–193). (^25) B AR II, § 353. This claim by Senenmut should not be underestimated, given numerous borrowings from
earlier texts in his tomb TT 353 (e.g. the Pyramid Texts and ritual formulae, as well as list of decans influenced by the Middle Kingdom star clocks). Senenmut in TT 353 was represented bowing before large names of Hatshepsut (P.F. Dඈඋආൺඇ, Tombs of Senenmut, The Architecture and Decoration of Tombs 71 and 353, New York 1991, Pls 61, 81) – exactly like Hapidjefa (I) from Asyut in his tomb, before the names of Senwosret I (cf. W. Gඋൺඃൾඍඓං, The Middle Kingdom of Ancient Egypt: History, Archaeology and Society, London 2006, Fig. 22 on p. 106.). (^26) Graffito of Nakht in the Step Pyramid complex, dated to the Year 20, 3 month of Peret, day 2 of the joined
reign of Hatshepsut and Thutmose III: C.M. Fංඋඍඁ, J.E. Qඎංൻൾඅඅ, The Step Pyramid I, Cairo 1935, p. 80;
Oඅൽ ൺඇൽ Mංൽൽඅൾ Kංඇൽඈආ Tඋൺൽංඍංඈඇ ංඇ ඍඁൾ Tൾආඉඅൾ ඈൿ Hൺඍඌඁൾඉඌඎඍ ൺඍ Dൾංඋ ൾඅ-Bൺඁൺඋං 67
OVERALL STRUCTURE AND PARTS OF THE COMPLEX
In the case of Hatshepsut an overall scheme of the mortuary complex: tomb – upper
temple – causeway – valley temple, resembles much the structure of the Old Kingdom
‘classical’ pyramid complexes ( Fig. 1 ). 35 Contrary to the plan of Mentuhotep Nebhepetre,
who built his entire tomb complex at Deir el-Bahari, only part of the mortuary complex
of Hatshepsut was located in the valley. It was called Djeser-djeseru – ‘Holy of Holies’;
the name referred, as it seems, to the upper temple in the Deir el-Bahari bay, as well as
to the valley temple and the causeway with its kiosk ( Fig. 2 ). It was not merely a mortuary
temple, but a ‘Mansion of Millions of Years’,^36 the first one so vast, not only referring to
its overshadowed predecessors, but constituting a template for the generations to come.^37
KV 20 AND DJESER-DJESERU
It has often been assumed that the case of Hatshepsut provides one of the earliest examples
of a separation of the tomb proper from the ‘Mansion of Millions of Years’ related to it.^38
There is, however, a serious difference between what would become a standard for the rest
of the New Kingdom, and the spatial organization of Hatshepsut’s mortuary complex. The
tomb of Hatshepsut and her temple are in fact sharing the same space – the rock massif
separating Deir el-Bahari from the Valley of the Kings that can be perceived as a pyramid
of some sort. El-Qurn forms a natural pyramid, dominating the Valley of the Kings on
the south, and it seems that together with the massifs of gebel surrounding the valley it
constitutes a generic superstructure for all its tombs.^39 The arrangement is thus similar
to the Old Kingdom pyramid complexes: the tomb is located inside the massif, and the
mortuary temple is built against its eastern side. The tomb of Hatshepsut does not go
under the temple (which has sometimes been expected and discussed by scholars),^40 nor
the burial chamber conforms to the same rule as the burial chambers of the pyramids,
(^35) Recognized already by H. Cൺඋඍൾඋ, Eൺඋඅ ඈൿ Cൺඋඇൺඋඏඈඇ, Five Years’ Exploration at Thebes. A Record of
Work Done 1907–1911, London 1912, p. 40. (^36) The literature on this complex subject is extensive, see recently: S. Sർඁඋදൽൾඋ, Millionenjahrhaus. Zur
Konzeption des Raumes der Ewigkeit im konstellativen Königtum in Sprache, Architektur und Theologie, Wies- baden 2010. (^37) The Mansion of Million of Years at western Thebes was a royal mortuary temple as well as a divine (solar)
temple of rebirth, somehow joining the ideas of the Old Kingdom pyramid temples and sun temples. (^38) E.g. C. Lൾൻඅൺඇർ, Quelques reflexions sur le programme iconographique et la fonction des temples de
« millions d’années », [ in :] S. Quirke (Ed.), The temple in Ancient Egypt. New discoveries and recent research, London 1997, p. 55: Au Nouvel Empire tombe royale et temple de culte royal sont dissociés. On veut mani- festement souligner une différence. Hatshepsout inaugure le principe pour marquer une justifi cation de sa divinité. (^39) One might imagine that the peak itself was thus a ‘pyramidion’ only, the bottom of the valleys being the
‘base’ level of this imaginary pyramid. The tombs were therefore hewn in and under the ‘pyramid’. (^40) Cf. Hൺඒൾඌ, Royal Sarcophagi, pp. 17, 146–147. As rightly pointed by C.H. Rඈൾඁඋං, The Two Tombs of
Hatshepsut [= Two Tombs], [ in :] Roehrig, Dreyfus, Keller (Eds), Hatshepsut. From Queen to Pharaoh, p. 187, n. 18, the tomb corridor turns rightwards almost immediately after the entrance, thus it is unlikely that it had ever been aimed straight to the temple.
68 Aඇൽඋඓൾඃ Ćඐංൾ
being aligned with the temple axis. However, the first planned burial chamber C1 is roughly
aligned with the Offering Chapel of Hatshepsut in the Complex of the Royal Mortuary Cult
in the southern part of the Upper Terrace, the room which corresponds to the sanctuaries
in the Old and Middle Kingdom mortuary temples. Moreover, the final burial chamber J
in KV 20 is on the E-W axis with this room.^41 Such an interpretation, of a direct spatial
relation of KV 20 and the temple at Deir el-Bahari, obviously supports the assumption that
Hatshepsut was the first ruler to build a tomb in the Valley of the Kings.^42 D. Polz sees
(^41) The question of an internal chronology of KV 20, as well as the reasons of its extending in this particular
form (looking for better layers of rock? conscious realization of a previous or developed plan?) seems to be still open. Cf. Rඈൾඁඋං, Two Tombs, p. 186. One may notice a resemblance of the plan of KV 20 to the ‘cenotaph’ of Senwosret III at Abydos, which might suggest another Middle Kingdom inspiration for Hatshepsut. A. Sඍඎඉඈ, Sceny ofiarne w Kaplicy Hatszepsut (Deir el-Bahari). Diachroniczna analiza motywu, unpublished PhD thesis, Warsaw University 2011 [= Sceny ofiarne], p. 16 made an interesting suggestion that the turn of the chamber towards west after a long approach from north may be a reflection of the internal structures of Old Kingdom pyramids. (^42) Such is also the conclusion in D. Pඈඅඓ, Mentuhotep, Hatshepsut and das Tal der Könige – eine Skizze,
[ in :] E.-M. Engel, V. Müller, U. Hartung (Eds), Zeichen aus dem Sand. Streiflicher aus Ägyptens Geschichte zu Ehren von Günter Dreyer, Wiesbaden 2008 [= Mentuhotep, Hatshepsut und das Tal der Könige], pp. 530–531. A possibility that KV 20 was begun by Thutmose I or Thutmose II inevitably deserves an assumption that the king planned his mortuary temple at Deir el-Bahari or even started building there, only being followed by Hatshepsut. Such a hypothesis (for Thutmose II) was indeed raised by Rඈൾඁඋං, Two Tombs, p. 186, referring
- Scheme of the Old Kingdom Royal Pyramid Complex (left) and Hatshepsut’s Mortuary Complex (right). A comparison (Drawing: A. Ćwiek).
70 Aඇൽඋඓൾඃ Ćඐංൾ
- Plan of the temple of Hatshepsut with designations of main structural parts (Drawing: A. Ćwiek).
Oඅൽ ൺඇൽ Mංൽൽඅൾ Kංඇൽඈආ Tඋൺൽංඍංඈඇ ංඇ ඍඁൾ Tൾආඉඅൾ ඈൿ Hൺඍඌඁൾඉඌඎඍ ൺඍ Dൾංඋ ൾඅ-Bൺඁൺඋං 71
OVERALL STRUCTURE OF THE TEMPLE
The sun cult complex in the temple of Hatshepsut and other Eighteenth- and Nineteenth
Dynasty temples, identified as the ‘Shadow of Re’, is a New Kingdom version of the solar
temple of the Old Kingdom.^46 The solar temple was located north of the Old Kingdom royal
mortuary complex, and the mrt -building probably south of it. At Deir el-Bahari ( Fig. 3 )
this rule is reflected in the position of the Complex of the Sun Cult on the north, 47 and the
Hathor Shrine, playing the role of mrt ,^48 on the south. 49 Also the location and complemen-
tary roles of the Hathor Shrine (south) and the Lower Anubis Shrine (north) are deeply
rooted in the earlier tradition.^50
SOUTHERN RETAINING WALL OF THE MIDDLE TERRACE
A panelled wall with serekhs topped with Horus fi gures formed the face of the southern
retaining wall of the middle terrace ( Fig. 4 ).^51 Such a panelled wall had a long tradition
- from the Archaic Period through the Old and Middle Kingdom (Naqada-type mastabas,
the Step Pyramid enclosure at Saqqara, pyramid complexes of Senwosret II at Lahun and
of Senwosret III at Dahshur, etc.). A direct parallel of serekh s decorating vertical panels of
the wall occurs in the complex of Senwosret I at Lisht.^52 The retaining wall of the Middle
Terrace acted somehow as a pars pro toto enclosure wall of the temple, referring to the
early concept of the Götterfestungen. 53 At Deir el-Bahari serekhs decorated also the front
faces of pillars in the Lower Porticoes, columns of the Upper Courtyard, and the original
façade of the Hathor Shrine.
(^46) R. Sඍൺൽൾඅආൺඇඇ, ^wt-Raw als Kultstätte des Sonnengottes im Neuen Reiches, MDAIK 25, 1969, pp. 159ff. (^47) J. Kൺඋඈඐඌං, The Solar Complex in Hatshepsut’s Temple at Deir el-Bahari, Deir el-Bahari VI, Warsaw
2005 [= Solar Complex]. (^48) Dං. Aඋඇඈඅൽ, Rituale und Pyramidentempel, MDAIK 33, 1977, p. 13; K. Kඈඇඋൺൽ, Architektur und Theol-
ogie. Pharaonische Tempelterminologie unter Berücksichtigung königsideologischer Aspekte, Wiesbaden 2006, pp. 155–176. One should stress the complex role of the Hathor Shrine, with much developed structure and its own access ramp, conceived as an almost separate temple complementary to the main unit consecrated to Amun. (^49) The same scheme occurs later at Karnak and Amarna. It is related to cardinal points, and not the right-left
position, e.g. in the Akh-Menu of Thutmose III the solar complex is on the north. (^50) For a discussion of complementary roles of Hathor and Anubis, rooted in the Old and Middle Kingdom
tradition see A. Ćඐංൾ, Relief Decoration in the Royal Funerary Complexes of the Old Kingdom. Studies in the Development, Scene Content and Iconography, PhD thesis, University of Warsaw 2003 (cf. www.gizapyramids. org/pdf_library/cwiek_royal_relief_dec.pdf – accessed May 2013) [= Relief Decoration], pp. 309–313, 326– 328; S. Qඎංඋൾ, God in the Temple of the King: Anubis at Lahun, [ in :] S. Quirke (Ed.), The Temple in Ancient Egypt, London 1997, pp. 24–48. (^51) A drawing of the remains of the wall: Z. Wඒඌඈർං, Deir el-Bahari 1977–1982, EtudTrav XIV, 1990, Fig. 6
(on a leaflet). For a reconstruction see: E. Dඓංඈൻൾ, Eine Grabpyramide des frühen NR in Theben, MDAIK 45, 1989, Fig. 3 (after A.M. Lඒඍඁඈൾ, The Egyptian Expedition 1924–1925, BMMA 21, March 1926, Fig. 11). (^52) Dං. Aඋඇඈඅൽ, The Pyramid of Senwosret I, MMAEE 22, New York 1988 [= Pyramid of Senwosret I],
pp. 58–63 with Pls 27–37, 87–88, 94); Iൽ., Royal Cult Complexes of the Old and Middle Kingdoms, [ in :] B.E. Shafer (Ed.), Temples of Ancient Egypt, London-New York 1997 [= Royal Cult Complexes], p. 79: This almost unique type of decoration was repeated only by Hatshepsut.... (^53) R. Sඍൺൽൾඅආൺඇඇ, Die Wiederbelebung religiösen Gedankenguts des Alten Reiches in der Architektur des
Totentempels Sethos’ I, Qurna, [ in :] P. Jánosi (Ed.), Structure and significance. Thoughts on Ancient Egyptian Architecture, Vienna 2005, p. 486. Cf. Aඋඇඈඅൽ, Royal Cult Complexes, pp. 32–39 and Fig. 3.
Oඅൽ ൺඇൽ Mංൽൽඅൾ Kංඇൽඈආ Tඋൺൽංඍංඈඇ ංඇ ඍඁൾ Tൾආඉඅൾ ඈൿ Hൺඍඌඁൾඉඌඎඍ ൺඍ Dൾංඋ ൾඅ-Bൺඁൺඋං 73
SOUTHERN LOWER PORTICO
The scene of transportation of obelisks in the Southern Lower Portico (‘Portico of Obelisks’),
though itself unique, might have been inspired by parallel subjects occurring in the Old Kingdom
mortuary temples.^61 A neighbouring scene shows the obelisks standing in the Karnak temple.^62
NORTHERN LOWER PORTICO (‘MYTHOLOGICAL PORTICO’)
Northern Lower Portico (‘Mythological Portico’) contains a scene of Hatshepsut on
a boat, performing a ceremony analogous to the Old Kingdom zSS wAD. It is done in front
of Kamutef, who is a fertility deity, replacing here Hathor.^63 Accompanying fishing and
fowling scenes were based on the Old Kingdom examples.^64 Like their predecessors they
probably had double aim: controlling chaos and food supply.^65 It seems that some other
old rituals with ‘fertility’ meaning, like the ritual of Driving the Calves ( Hwt bHsw ),^66 were
also re-directed by Hatshepsut from Hathor towards Kamutef. Another scene from the
(^61) Rඈඍඁ, Hatshepsut’s Mortuary Temple, p. 149: While the scene of transporting obelisks from Aswan has
no exact parallel in the Old Kingdom, the causeway of Unis, last king of the Fifth Dynasty (r. 2353–2323 B.C.), has scenes depicting the transport of granite columns for his mortuary temple and may have been the inspiration for Hatshepsut’s reliefs. ( … ) Hatshepsut’s scenes would thus have combined Unis’s narrative of transporting materials from the borders of Egypt to its capital with the solar symbol of the obelisk – the bnbn stone so impor- tant in the earlier part of the Fifth Dynasty ( ibid ., p. 151 n. 10). (^62) Hatshepsut is the first in the New Kingdom to revive a custom of erecting obelisks (also in the names of
her father and brother), attested thus far only for the kings of the Sixth Dynasty and Senwosret I at Heliopolis. Concerning the possible Old Kingdom inspirations of Hatshepsut, it has been suggested recently that Hatshepsut herself (and not Thutmose III) was responsible for walling the obelisks in Wadjyt , composant ainsi la structure analogue à celle qui s’apercevait dans les temples solaires de la Ve^ dynastie au moins ceux d’Ouserkaf, de Neferirkarê et de Menkauhor... (C. Wൺඅඅൾඍ-Lൾൻඋඎඇ, Le grand livre de pierre, Paris 2010, p. 73). (^63) Pൺඐඅංർං, Skarby architektury, p. 155. For a discussion of the meaning of this ceremony in the Old King-
dom and from the New Kingdom on, see: M. Dඈඅංඌൺ, Funkcja świątyni Totmesa III w Deir el-Bahari. Rola bogini Hathor w ideologii królewskiej, unpublished PhD thesis, University of Warsaw 2008, pp. 54–58, 87–91. (^64) Nൺඏංඅඅൾ, Temple VI, p. 8, Pl. CLXIII. Pൺඐඅංർං, Skarby architektury, p. 154 noticed a resemblance of
a scene of fishermen pulling the net to those in the mastabas of the Fifth and Sixth Dynasties at Saqqara and Giza. Rඈඍඁ, Hatshepsut’s Mortuary Temple, p. 149 suggested an Old Kingdom antecedent for Hatshepsut’s scenes in the pyramid temple of Sahure. The earliest Old Kingdom royal example, in the temple of Seneferu (A. Fൺඁඋඒ, The Monuments of Sneferu at Dahshur. II. The Valley Temple, Cairo 1961 [= Monuments of Sne- feru at Dahshur], Figs 117a-c, 118) might have already been part of a ritual scene (Y. Hൺඋඉඎඋ, Decoration of the Egyptian Tombs of the Old Kingdom: Studies in Orientation and Scene Content, London 1986 [= Decoration of the Egyptian Tombs], p. 177 with n. 127, referring to M. Aඅඅංඈඍ, Les rites de la chasse au filet, aux temples de Karnak, d’Edfou et d’Esneh, RdE 5, 1946, pp. 57–118). (^65) Cf. J. Kൺඋඈඐඌං, Pharaoh in the Heb-Sed Robe in Hatshepsut’s Temple at Deir el-Bahari, EtudTrav
XIX, 2001, p. 88. (^66) Driving of the Calves occurs also on the W wall of the Upper Courtyard, above niche B. One may note
that Thutmose I has already represented himself in the same ritual on the travertine chapel of Amenhotep I at Karnak (G. Rඈൻංඇඌ, Proportion and Style in Ancient Egyptian Art, Austin 1994, Fig. 9.4 on p. 207). In this case, Hatshepsut followed only her father. On the Old Kingdom examples see Ćඐංൾ, Relief Decoration, pp. 244–
- For the general discussion of the ritual and its connection with Consecrating the Meret -chests, see: A. Eൻൾඋඍඌ, In Quest of Meaning. A Study of the Ancient Egyptian Rites of Consecrating the Meret -chests and Driving the Calves, Leiden 1995.
74 Aඇൽඋඓൾඃ Ćඐංൾ
- Hathor Shrine Vestibule. Detail of representation of the facade of an Archaic sanctuary (Phot. M. Jawornicki).
- Label for the scene of run for Hathor. Second Hypostyle Hall of the Hathor Shrine, W wall (Phot. A. Ćwiek).
76 Aඇൽඋඓൾඃ Ćඐංൾ
and Bastet were complementary goddesses in the Old Kingdom, with a special position
in the pyramid temples.^74
The scene of suckling the king by Hathor in form of a cow in the Bark Hall and the
Sanctuary of the Hathor Shrine^75 is attested before Hatshepsut only for Mentuhotep Nebhe-
petre.^76 Also a particular headdress worn in the sanctuary by Hatshepsut standing in front
of the cow is borrowed from representations of the Eleventh Dynasty king. 77
LOWER ANUBIS SHRINE AND UPPER ANUBIS SHRINE
Important functions of Anubis were connected with mummification and rebirth, and in this
role he occurs in the birth cycle at Deir el-Bahari.^78 However, it seems that another reason
inspired the creation of two chapels, at the northern ends of the middle and upper terrace
respectively, and his prominence there. A.M. Roth suggested that the choice of Anubis
(and not Osiris) for these suits of rooms, might have been a conscious reference to a Fifth
Dynasty tradition.^79 It seems, however, that the predominance of Anubis is explained by
different roles played by both gods. Osiris’ sphere confined to the tomb in the Valley of
the Kings. 80 What influenced the building of the two chapels was not a general notion
of ‘mortuary’ or ‘chthonic’, and even not Anubis’ regenerating powers,^81 but his specific
role of a psychopompos, transferring the dead through the liminal sphere into the neth-
erworld. 82 It seems that both chapels of Anubis, with their niches in sanctuaries oriented
building at the area of the Ramesseum (Cඁ. Lൾൻඅൺඇർ, À propos du Ramesseum et de l’existance d’un monument plus ancien à son emplacement, Memnonia XXI, 2010, pp. 61–108, Pls VI–LVII). At any rate, it is now certain that the name does not refer to the so-called Barakat’s temple, identified recently by Jadwiga Iwaszczuk as Khenemet-ankh , the mortuary temple of Thutmose I (J. Iඐൺඌඓർඓඎ, The Temple of Thutmosis I rediscovered, PAM XXI (Research 2009), 2012, pp. 269–277). (^74) Ćඐංൾ, Relief Decoration, pp. 308–313. (^75) Bൾൺඎඑ et al ., La Chapelle d’Hathor I, Pls 31, 32, 39, 40. (^76) Block in Kestner Museum Hannover 35.200.82. (^77) It is a rare headgear, resembling much the crown of Amun, lacking, however, the back sash. Beside the
scenes in the Hathor Shrine, Hatshepsut is wearing it on the pillars B-II-8-N and P-II-1-N in the Porticoes of the Birth and of Punt respectively. This particular form should be distinguished from other feather crowns occur- ring throughout the temple. For Eleventh Dynasty parallels at Dendera, Tod, Konosso and Elephantine, see: J. ൽൾ Mඈඋൺඇ et al ., Catalogue des Monuments et Inscriptions de l’Égypte antique I/1, Vienna 1894, pp. 71, 73 (nos 31 and 44); F. Bංඌඌඈඇ ൽൾ Lൺ Rඈඊඎൾ, Tôd, Cairo 1937, Pl. 32; L. Hൺൻൺർඁං, King Nebhepetre Menthuhotp: His Monuments, Place in History, Deification and Unusual Representations in the Form of Gods, MDAIK 19, 1963, pp. 43–44, Figs 7–8, 19–21, Pl. XIV; E.F. Mൺඋඈർඁൾඍඍං, The Reliefs of the Chapel of Nebhepetra Men- tuhotep at Gebelein ( CGT 7003/1-277 ), Leiden-Boston 2010, Figs 27, 30b. (^78) R.K. Rංඍඇൾඋ, Anubis and the Lunar Disc, JEA 71, 1985, pp. 149–155. (^79) Both Hathor and Anubis were particularly important in the period before the rise of Osiris in the late Fifth
Dynasty (Rඈඍඁ, Hatshepsut’s Mortuary Temple, p. 149). (^80) Therefore there was no ‘exclusion’ of Osiris (postulated by C. Dൾඌඋඈർඁൾඌ-Nඈൻඅൾർඈඎඋඍ, La reine mysté-
rieuse. Hatshepsout, Paris 2002, pp. 278–279, 435–438). Cf. Ćඐංൾ, Relief Decoration, pp. 326–327 on the different roles of Osiris and Anubis in the Old Kingdom royal mortuary complexes. (^81) Though this role is also clearly present in the scene of Anubis rolling the moon disk, on the N wall of
the Portico of the Birth (Rංඍඇൾඋ, JEA 71, 1985, pp. 149–155). (^82) T. DඎQඎൾඌඇൾ, Openers of the Paths: canid psychopomps in ancient Egypt and India, JACiv 10, 1995,
pp. 41–53.
Oඅൽ ൺඇൽ Mංൽൽඅൾ Kංඇൽඈආ Tඋൺൽංඍංඈඇ ංඇ ඍඁൾ Tൾආඉඅൾ ඈൿ Hൺඍඌඁൾඉඌඎඍ ൺඍ Dൾංඋ ൾඅ-Bൺඁൺඋං 77
towards west, served as termination points of two cycles of magical paths of the king.^83
Final rebirth before the coming back to the tomb is symbolized by the role of the Imy-ut
in the decoration and texts of the chapels.^84 The ideology of transfer made by a canine
deity can be traced back to the Old Kingdom; it was Wepwawet who performed this for
the king.^85 At Deir el-Bahari this role is fulfilled by Anubis. It is significant that in both
shrines Anubis bears an Old Kingdom epithet of Lord of Sepa, very probably reflecting
the ‘transportation’ role ( Fig. 7 ).^86
(^83) The cycles start in the Offering Chapels of Hatshepsut and Thutmose I, and in the Hathor Shrine respec-
tively. In the first case the kings were supposed to come from the tomb in the Valley of the Kings, emerging through the false doors. After having received offerings they were moving from south towards north following a complicated sequence of passages and transformations along the rooms of the Upper Terrace with the final stage of regeneration in the altar court of the Solar Complex (cf. Kൺඋඈඐඌං, Solar Complex, p. 84). The cre- ation of the Upper Anubis Shrine (a late addition to the architecture of the temple) was necessary to enable them the return to the tomb in the West. Anubis was acting there not once, but repeatedly, since the kings were repeat- ing (magically, through the decoration as well as thanks to the rituals) their eternal life cycles. (^84) For an interpretation of the role of Anubis Imy-ut in the Upper Shrine of Anubis, see: Z.E. Sඓൺൿඋൺඌං,
Imiut in the ‘Chapel of the Parents’ in the Temple of Hatshepsut at Deir el-Bahari, [ in :] M. Dolińska, R. Gund- lach (Eds), 8. Ägyptologische Tempeltagung, Warschau, 22.–25. September 2008, Interconnections between Temples – Königtum, Staat und Gesellschaft früher Hochkulturen, Wiesbaden 2010, pp. 187–196. (^85) Pyr.§ 1090: Wepwawet opens the way for me. Cf. also: Pyr. §§ 463, 1638. (^86) Cf. V. Lඈඋൾඍ, Le mille-pattes et la chaise à porteurs de pharaon, RdE 6, 1951, pp. 5–20. It is perhaps not
by chance that the same epithet occurs on the false door in Senenmut’s tomb TT 353. Cf. also: Bඈඋർඁൺඋൽඍ, SaAHu-Rea II, p. 104.
- Lord of Sepa, epithet of Anubis. Upper Anubis Shrine, niche, N wall (Phot. A. Ćwiek).
Oඅൽ ൺඇൽ Mංൽൽඅൾ Kංඇൽඈආ Tඋൺൽංඍංඈඇ ංඇ ඍඁൾ Tൾආඉඅൾ ඈൿ Hൺඍඌඁൾඉඌඎඍ ൺඍ Dൾංඋ ൾඅ-Bൺඁൺඋං 79
known. 92 However, the discoveries made recently by the expedition of the Metropoli tan
Museum of Art at the causeway of the Senwosret III complex at Dahshur changed
this situation radically. Some of the fragments found there come undoubtedly from
the birth cycle (including the text of Re speaking of a birth, and parallels to Hatshep-
sut’s scenes: two gods facing each other, presumably holding a royal child; Anubis
bending over the lunar disk; the head of the goddess Heqet), proving that Hatshepsut
has followed an already established iconographical pattern. 93 The fourteen ka s of the
king^94 are a motif that can be traced back to the Step Pyramid complex 95 and the Pyramid
(^92) Amenhotep III in the Luxor temple, Ramesses II in the Ramesseum, and the Third Intermediate Period
scenes at Karnak. The subject of divine birth of the king was analysed by H. Bඋඎඇඇൾඋ, Die Geburt des Gott- königs. Studien zur Überlieferung eines altägyptischen Mythos, 2 nd^ revised ed., ÄA 10, Wiesbaden 1986. (^93) A. Oඉඉൾඇඁൾංආ, The Early Life of Pharaoh: Divine Birth and Adolescence Scenes in the Causeway of
Senwosret III at Dahshur, [ in :] M. Bárta, F. Coppens, J. Krejčí (Eds), Abusir and Saqqara in the Year 2010 I, Prague 2013, pp. 171–188. (^94) Nൺඏංඅඅൾ, Temple II, pp. 17–18, Pl. LIII; Urk. IV, 230.15 (... mna Hm.s Hna kAw.s nbw ...). (^95) The number fourteen is by no means accidental: F.W. ඏඈඇ Bංඌඌංඇ, Versuch einer neuen Erklärung des
Ka’i der alten Aegypter, [ in :] Sitzungsberichte der Königlich Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. Philo- sophisch-philologische und historische Klasse 5, München 1911, pp. 3–15; A.H. Gൺඋൽංඇൾඋ, Some Personifica- tions, PSBA 38, 1916, pp. 83–95. That the fourteen dummy gates in the Step Pyramid temenos wall represented fourteen real doorways of the Memphite residence of the king was a view advocated by J.-P. Lauer (E. Dඋංඈඍඈඇ, J.-P. Lൺඎൾඋ, Sakkarah. Les monuments de Zoser, Cairo 1939, pp. 9–10). However, it seems that they rather were giant false doors for the ka s of the king. The number of the gates might have been conceived as 2 x 7 (doubling for Upper and Lower Egypt the seven lives of the pharaoh). The number and arrangement of the gates were subsequently copied in the complex of Sekhemkhet and on Middle Kingdom royal sarcophagi (S. Iඋൺආ, A. Dඈൽඌඈඇ, The Mummy in Ancient Egypt, London 1998, p. 252 and Fig. 347), as well as on the sarcopha- gus of Merenptah, reused by Psusennes (G. Jඣඊඎංൾඋ, Manuel d’archéologie égyptienne I, Cairo 1924, p. 329,
- Ka s and hemuset s of Hatshepsut. Portico of the Birth, W wall (Phot. M. Jawornicki).
80 Aඇൽඋඓൾඃ Ćඐංൾ
Texts.^96 Even the distinction between ka s and hemuset s (Pyr. § 396) is here repeated in
depictions of the divine figures nursing Hatshepsut ( Fig. 9 ). More general issue of the
nature and role of the royal ka , extremely important at Deir el-Bahari, seems to be deeply
rooted in the Old Kingdom.^97
The mother of Hatshepsut, Ahmose, bears archaizing titles – wrt Hts , wrt Hst , mAAt @rw
%tX. 98 They are rarely attested after the Middle Kingdom, and do not appear in the titulary
of Ahmose elsewhere.
The text on the investiture of Hatshepsut in the upper register of Northern Middle
Portico is repeating the phrases of the text of Amenemhat III from Arsinoe in the Fayum,
preserved on blocks in Berlin.^99
The scheme of the text in the Youth Legend of Hatshepsut copies the dedicatory inscrip-
tion of Senwosret I for Heliopolis temple.^100 The most important episodes are witnessed by
Seshat, recording them on a papyrus. Goddess’ figures copy the patterns from the Old and
Middle Kingdom royal mortuary temples.^101 In one of the scenes of the youth and coronation
cycle, figures resembling the souls of Nekhen and Pe (kneeling with the henu -gesture), but
of three kind, are depicted in three registers. Upper register: three jackal-headed nTrw nbw
aH-nTr Sma. Middle register: three falcon-headed [nTrw xntj(w) jtrt] Sma. Lower register:
three human-headed nTrw xntj(w) jtrt mHw.^102 This threefold division of the personifications
Fig. 222), and those of Padiamenope and Aspelta. On this issue see H. Kൾൾඌ, Die 15 Scheintüren am Grabmal, ZÄS 88, 1963, pp. 97–113. The occurrence of this unusual number in various architectural and textual contexts, not analysed here, can be explained by this primary meaning, reinforced by the importance for the ideology of birth and rebirth. (^96) PT 273–274 (‘Cannibal Hymn’). (^97) Cf. L. Gඋൾඏൾඇ, Der Ka in Theologie und Königskult der Ägypter des Alten Reiches, ÄF 17, Glückstadt-
Hamburg-New York 1952; U. Sർඁඐൾංඍඓൾඋ, Das Wesen des Ka im Diesseits und Jenseits der alten Ägypter, Glückstadt-Hamburg-New York 1956, (esp. pp. 40–51); A. Bඈඅඌඁൺඈඏ, Man and His Double in Egyptian Ideol- ogy of the Old Kingdom, Wiesbaden 1997. On the case of Hatshepsut see B. Oർංඇൺ, Hatshepsut’s Election to Kingship: the Ba and Ka in Egyptian Royal Ideology, BACE 6, 1995, pp. 89–102. (^98) Urk. IV, 224.16; A. Ćඐංൾ, Fate of Seth in the Temple of Hatshepsut at Deir el-Bahari, EtudTrav XXII,
2008, p. 48, Fig. 15; cf. L. Tඋඈඒ, Patterns of Queenship in Egyptian Myth and History, Uppsala 1986, pp. 163, 189. (^99) Berlin Inv. nos 15801–4 (Aegyptische Inschriften aus den Königlichen Museen zu Berlin I. Inschriften
von der ältesten Zeit bis zum Ende der Hyksoszeit, part III: Inschriften des Mittleren Reiches, Leipzig 1904, p. 138, and J. Bඋൾൺඌඍൾൽ, Ancient Records of Egypt II: The Eighteenth Dynasty, Chicago 1906, p. 95). A par- tially preserved text with the cartouche of Senwosret III on one of the blocks (15801) speaks, as it seems, of taking the royal office by his co-regent. The text on another fragment (15803) records establishment of the royal names of Amenemhat III (for a restoration of the original relation of the blocks, based on Nൺඏංඅඅൾ, Temple III, Pl. LXII, see: Aegyptische Inschriften aus den Königlichen Museen zu Berlin I, part IV: Inschriften des Mit- tleren Reichs und der Hyksoszeit, Leipzig 1913, p. 268). (^100) N. Gඋංආൺඅ, Corégence et association au trône: l’Enseignement d’Amenemhat Ier, BIFAO 95, 1995,
p. 279. For the text of Senwosret I (leather roll P.Berlin 3029), see: H. Gඈൾൽංർൾ, The Berlin Leather Roll (P Berlin 3029), [ in :] Festschrift zum 150jährigen Bestehen des Berliner Ägyptisches Museum, Berlin 1974, pp. 87–104; E. Bඅඎආൾඇ ඍඁൺඅ, Die erste Koregenz der 12. Dynastie, ZÄS 110, 1983, pp. 114–115. Pඁ. Dൾඋർඁൺංඇ, Les débuts de l’histoire. [Rouleau de cuir Berlin 3029], RdE 43, 1992, pp. 35–47 opted for the early Eighteenth Dynasty date of the composition of this text (a view rebutted by A. Pංർർൺඍඈ, The Berlin Leather Roll and the Egyptian sense of history, LingAeg 5, 1997, pp. 137–159). (^101) For the examples and analysis of the theme, see: Ćඐංൾ, Relief Decoration, pp. 209–210 and n. 872. (^102) Nൺඏංඅඅൾ, Temple III, Pl. LX; Urk. IV, 253.11, 15; 254.3.