Doug M wrote:

Actually, there is NO conclusive evidence that the 19th dynasty originated in the Delta. Most evidence for this is circumstantial at best. In other words, since the 18th dynasty was said to be weak on defense and allowed the enemies to gain strength along Egypts borders, a new dynasty had to be brought up in order to reclaim land from the invaders. Therefore, a new king and dynasty had to be founded, based on a rennaissance of Egyptian glory of old. This new king, Pa'ramesse, is purported to be from the delta, but is often a very misleading relationship. Pa'ramesse was the son of Seti (link to Set worship), who was an official at an Egyptian border fortress. Now, just because you are an official at the border fortress does not mean you are from that area. That is like saying Americans in Iraq are Iraqis because they are stationed there.

In addition, many say that because this dynasty had strong ties to Set, ie naming themselves after him, that this also shows a strong affinity to the delta. However, this contradicts the fact that Set worship originated in upper Egypt.

All of this evidence about the origins of the 19th dynasty comes from the year 400 stela, which supposedly hails the orgins of Pa'ramesse and the Ramessid dynasty. However, in my opinion, the whole idea of the Ramessid dynasty originating in the Delta comes from not only a mis-interperetation of the year 400 stela, but a mis-interperetation of the whole point of the 19th dynasty itself.

Here is a link showing the commonly accepted story of the origin of the 19th dynasty: http://www.touregypt.net/hdyn19a.htm

If you actually look at the translation of the year 400 stela (of which there seems to be 2, one for Pa'ramesse and one for Seti I and it is not clear if they may actually be one and the same, thereby causing more confusion), it states unequivocally that his dynasty is tied to the south as he was a "champion of the Medjay" and one loved by Set as a "Nubti", a person from the town of Nubt in upper Egypt. What is Nubt? Nubt is the home of Set worship from predynastic times in Egypt. However,many scholars overlook this, and try to place the origin of Set worship in the ANE, in order to fabricate a relationship that doesnt exist. However, during the 19th dynasty, as Ramesses and others moved into the ANE, many of the terms reserved in tribute to Set were adopted in reverence to ANE dieties as a sign of respect for those who supported Ramesses in his campaigns. But this does not mean that Set worship in Egypt originated in the ANE.
In many ways, scholars try to imply that the 19th dynasty was somehow trying to embrace their bretheren in the ANE by rebuilding temples in the delta and moving the capital there for a short period. However, this totally ignores the fact that Egypt was at war with the peoples of the ANE for most of the dynasty. Therefore, it makes no sense for Egyptian rulers of the 19th dynasty (especially the early parts) to somehow symbolize a common heritage with the ANE.
As opposed to the 18th dynasty, the 19th dynasty was very much conquest oriented, and determined to push Egypt's history and cultural domination over others, not the other way around. It was only later, after the campaigns in the East turned out largely to be disastrous failures in many respects(see the battle of Kadesh as an example), that the 19th dynasty was forced to pay political homage to people like the Hittites.

So, enough for the blabber, here is the link to the year 400 stela translations that you can look at for yourself: http://www.touregypt.net/400yearstele.htm

Home of Set worship in AE: http://www.philae.nu/akhet/NetjeruS.html#Seth

Bottom line, the 19th dynasty was a continuation of the long tradition of dynasties that hailed from upper Egypt in and around Abydos (Nubia).

[This message has been edited by Doug M (edited 30 September 2005).]

That wasn't my point. Besides that, Tiye was a queen of the 18th dynasty and I wasn't even really talking about that. The point I was trying to make is that many people try and pigeonhole the 18th dynasty as being somehow unique (physically and otherwise) from other dynasties. When, actually, the opposite is true. Most dynasties had many things in common with the 18th dynasty. First and foremost, most of the dynasties had important ties to upper Egypt. The role of the area around Abydos, as the home of the Gods and origin of Egypts dynastic kings cannot and should not be minimized. Many try and use all sorts of pretexts and so called evidence to try and change the fundamental central focus of Egyptian culture and tradition throughout its dynastic history. Most times this is done by using all sorts of speculation about who was married to who or who as a distant cousin of whom and wheter so and so was a concubine in so and so's harem and where they 'may' have come from. All of which are peripheral issues, unless you try and ignore the majority of the population and presence of so many with ties to Upper Egypt.

Kingship and divinity in Egypt has always focused on the great pantheons of Upper Egypt as the home to and origin of Egypt's line of dynastic kings and the 19th dynasty was no different. I was pointing out how many have bought into this bogus story of the 19th dynasty originating in the delta, when no such thing is true. In fact, the evidence they claim to support this idea affirms the relationship to the South, in upper Egypt.

rasol said:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doug M:
The point I was trying to make is that many people try and pigeonhole the 18th dynasty as being somehow unique (physically and otherwise) from other dynasties

---

You are right Doug. The 18th Dynasty extends directly from the 17th Dynasty and is certainly one of the more legitimist dynasties in km.t history.

It's actually the immediately preceeding "dynasties" [Hyksos era] that are questionable at best in this regard.

[This message has been edited by rasol (edited 30 September 2005).

Djehuti said:

The 19th dynasty descended directly from the 18th which in turn descended directly from the 17th which was the clan of Sekenenra Tao of Nowet (Thebes).

quote:

---

Absolutely agreed!!

Who made the claim that the 19th dynasty was from the Delta anyway??

---

I made this claim based off what I read in

Peter Clayton's Chronicle of the Pharaohs.

According to Clayton Rameses's family was a military family that was favored by Horemheb. According to the following he was a general that rose up through the ranks of the military.

The Ramesside family had no royal connection to previous royalty.

Yes,Manetho's history of Egypt does say that the Ramesside family came from Thebes[Waset] modern day Luxor,but I am somewhat skeptical of it. You often find Semitic type names in the Ramesside family. For instance one of the Ramesside pharaohs had a daughter named Bint-Anath which is Semitic and not Egyptian.

quote:

---

Originally posted by ausar:
I made this claim based off what I read in

Peter Clayton's Chronicle of the Pharaohs.

According to Clayton Rameses's family was a military family that was favored by Horemheb. According to the following he was a general that rose up through the ranks of the military.

The Ramesside family had no royal connection to previous royalty.

Yes,Manetho's history of Egypt does say that the Ramesside family came from Thebes[Waset] modern day Luxor,but I am somewhat skeptical of it. You often find Semitic type names in the Ramesside family. For instance one of the Ramesside pharaohs had a daughter named Bint-Anath which is Semitic and not Egyptian.

---

This would explain Ramases physical appearance! I myself have stated that Ramases was of Levantine descent because of certain features like the "prominent hooked-nose" (Jewish-nose) he is famous for and which Eurocentrics and white supremacists constantly tout about!!

However, I think that the 19th dynasty connections can be found among his wives! I recall someone here made a comment about royal women from this dynasty having African features.

[quote}Actually, there is NO conclusive evidence that the 19th dynasty originated in the Delta. Most evidence for this is circumstantial at best. In other words, since the 18th dynasty was said to be weak on defense and allowed the enemies to gain strength along Egypts borders, a new dynasty had to be brought up in order to reclaim land from the invaders. Therefore, a new king and dynasty had to be founded, based on a rennaissance of Egyptian glory of old. This new king, Pa'ramesse, is purported to be from the delta, but is often a very misleading relationship. Pa'ramesse was the son of Seti (link to Set worship), who was an official at an Egyptian border fortress. Now, just because you are an official at the border fortress does not mean you are from that area. That is like saying Americans in Iraq are Iraqis because they are stationed there.[/quote]

He was not an offical but actually the father of Rameses I,Seti, was a general favorably appointed by Horemheb. This was right after the Amarna period and Horemheb was basically the pharaoh.

Sometimes you can tell by the name in the title of the pharaoh of which part of Egypt they came from. Rameses is connected with Ra usually a more northern neteru located around Innu[Heliopolis].

If Rameses was from the south then why did he move his capital to Avaris?

quote:

---

In addition, many say that because this dynasty had strong ties to Set, ie naming themselves after him, that this also shows a strong affinity to the delta. However, this contradicts the fact that Set worship originated in upper Egypt.

---

Yes, it may have originated there but it later became connected to the north. For instance, Ausar[Osiris] actually originated in the Delta but in later times it was moved to Abutu[Abydos] conforiming with a underworld deity at Abydos called Khennutiu-Amenti. So that does not nessarily mean Rameseside dyansty came from the south.

quote:

---

If you actually look at the translation of the year 400 stela (of which there seems to be 2, one for Pa'ramesse and one for Seti I and it is not clear if they may actually be one and the same, thereby causing more confusion), it states unequivocally that his dynasty is tied to the south as he was a "champion of the Medjay" and one loved by Set as a "Nubti", a person from the town of Nubt in upper Egypt.

---

Or it could also mean he was champion of the Miedjay in battle. To my knowleadge Nubt did not exist as a town in dynastic Kmt. It was a town in Proto-dyanstic and early dyanstic Kmt. When Kmt unified the city states ceased to exist.

quote:

---

What is Nubt? Nubt is the home of Set worship from predynastic times in EgyptHowever,many scholars overlook this, and try to place the origin of Set worship in the ANE, in order to fabricate a relationship that doesnt exist. However, during the 19th dynasty, as Ramesses and others moved into the ANE, many of the terms reserved in tribute to Set were adopted in reverence to ANE dieties as a sign of respect for those who supported Ramesses in his campaigns. But this does not mean that Set worship in Egypt originated in the ANE.

---

You are right that Set was not a ANE deity,but the Hykos did associate Set with their own deities. See my earlier part about Ausar[Osiris] originating in the Delta but later transformed into being from Abutu[Abydos].

After the conquering Hykos Set became more associated with foreigners. Set was not always considered the bad deity he was,but actually good at first.

quote:

---

. In many ways, scholars try to imply that the 19th dynasty was somehow trying to embrace their bretheren in the ANE by rebuilding temples in the delta and moving the capital there for a short period. However, this totally ignores the fact that Egypt was at war with the peoples of the ANE for most of the dynasty. Therefore, it makes no sense for Egyptian rulers of the 19th dynasty (especially the early parts) to somehow symbolize a common heritage with the ANE.

---

Even if Rameses family had a ANE origin, he would have still considered himself Egyptian. He would have shown no special alliegance to ANE people anyway.

quote:

---

As opposed to the 18th dynasty, the 19th dynasty was very much conquest oriented, and determined to push Egypt's history and cultural domination over others, not the other way around. It was only later, after the campaigns in the East turned out largely to be disastrous failures in many respects(see the battle of Kadesh as an example), that the 19th dynasty was forced to pay political homage to people like the Hittites.

---

Egypt already had a empire from parts of Mesopotamia to parts of modern day Northern Sudan. The Ramesside line to clung to accomplishments of the 17th and 18th dyansty,or expanded them. The title of Rameses II being the greatest pharaoh was unfarily been bestowed on him by modern Egyptology. To me he was not better than the 12,17,and 18th dyansties.

quote:

---

Bottom line, the 19th dynasty was a continuation of the long tradition of dynasties that hailed from upper Egypt in and around Abydos (Nubia)

---

I need more evidence. Rameseside pharaohs had no royal connection to the 18th dyansty.

quote:

---

This would explain Ramases physical appearance! I myself have stated that Ramases was of Levantine descent because of certain features like the "prominent hooked-nose" (Jewish-nose) he is famous for and which Eurocentrics and white supremacists constantly tout about!!

---

I would be hessitant to use current physical apperance of mummies to determine ancestry of a certain pharaoh. For the most part its nothing but beef jerkey.

The mummy of Rameses II actually has peper-corns stuffed in the nose that might make his corpse appear different.

White supremist like to claim Rameses II because some French tests found him to have red-hair. Which most Egyptologist,like Kent Weeks, will explain it was rare in ancient Egypt. Which is why some connect to his family being affiliated with Seti. Red things wheather hair,color,or anything was considered bad in ancient Egypt. Instead of this being something of glory that white supremist make it out, it was actually a defect.

quote:

---

However, I think that the 19th dynasty connections can be found among his wives! I recall someone here made a comment about royal women from this dynasty having African features.

---

I would not doubt it,for Rameses II had a wife of every nation in his harem. He fathered probably more children than any pharaoh.

However, after the Amarna period it appears that Horemheb took the throne and appointed whomever he wanted.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
This would explain Ramases physical appearance! I myself have stated that Ramases was of Levantine descent because of certain features like the "prominent hooked-nose" (Jewish-nose) he is famous for and which Eurocentrics and white supremacists constantly tout about!!

However, I think that the 19th dynasty connections can be found among his wives! I recall someone here made a comment about royal women from this dynasty having African features.

---

X-ray Atlas of the Royal Mummies (Chicago: University of Chicago, 1980).

Courtesy of James Harris and Edward Wente:

The difference between late XVII and XVIII dynasty royal mummies and contemporary Nubians is slight. During the **XVIV and XX dynasties we see possibly some mixing between a Nubian element that is more similar to Mesolithic Nubians (low vaults, sloping frontal bone, etc.), with an orthognathous population.**

Since the Ramessides were of northern extraction, this could represent miscegenation with modern Mediterraneans of Levantine type. The projecting zygomatic arches of Seti I suggest remnants of the old Natufian/Tasian types of the Holocene period.

If the heads of Queens Nodjme and Esemkhebe are any indication, there may have been a new influx of southern blood during the XXI Dynasty.

In summation, the New Kingdom Pharaohs and Queens whose mummies have been recovered bear strong similarity to either contemporary Nubians, as with the XVII and XVIII dynasties, or with Mesolithic-Holocene Nubians, as with the XVIV and XX dynasties. The former dynasties seem to have a strong southern affinity, while the latter possessed evidence of mixing with modern Mediterranean types and also, possibly, with remnants of the old Tasian and Natufian populations. From the few sample available from the XXI Dynasty, there may have been a new infusion from the south at this period.

For source the above excerpt: Please Click here!

The XVIV Dynasty is higher in ANB and SN-M Plane than the XX Dynasty.

Ramesses IV is the only one in these two dynasties with strong alveolar prognathism, at least, as indicated by SNA.

However, dental alveolar prognathism is quite common in both dynasties. Also, both have ANB and SN- M Plane at mean angles higher than even African Americans.

In terms of head shape, the XVIV and XX dynasties look more like the early Nubian skulls from the mesolithic with low vaults and sloping, curved foreheads.

The XVII and XVIII dynasty skulls are shaped more like modern Nubians with globular skulls and high vaults. Merenptah, Siptah and Ramesses V all have pronounced glabellae. Ramesses IV has a bulging occiput similar to the "Elder Lady." Ramesses II and his son, Merenptah, both have rather weakly inclined mandibles with long ramus. Ramesses II's father, Seti I, does not possess this feature, though, suggesting that this was inherited from Ramesses II's mother, Queen Mut-Tuy. The gonial angle of Seti I is 116.3 compared to 107.9 and 109 for Ramesses II and Merenptah respectively.

The XVIV and XX dynasty heads do not have steep foreheads, receding zygomatic arches or prominent chins. Generally, both glabella and occiput are rounded and projecting to varying degrees. The sagittal contour is usually flattened, at least to some degree, although this sometimes begins before the bregma rather than in post-bregmatic position. The whole mandible is rarely squarish, although the body sometimes has a wavy edge. **The latter feature, though, is very common in both ancient and modern Nubians. According to Gill (1986), an undulating mandible is a characteristic of Negroids.**

(1) Live the Horus: Mighty Bull, Who Loves Truth, ... .
(5) His majesty commanded the making of a great stela of granite bearing the great name of his fathers, in order to set up the name of the father of his fathers (and of) the King Men-maat-Re, the Son of Re: Seti Mer-ne-Ptah, and abiding forever like Re every day: Year 400, 4th month of the third season, day 4, of the King of Upper and Lower Egypt: Seth-the-Great- of-Strength; the Son of Re, his beloved: The Ombite, beloved of Re-Hor-akhti, so that he exists forever and ever.
Now there came the Hereditary Prince; Mayor of the City and Vizier; Fan-Bearer on the Right Hand of the King, Troop Commander; Overseer of Foreign Countries; Overseer of the Fortress of Sile; Chief of Police, Royal Scribe; Master of Horse; Conductor of the Feast of the Ram-the-Lord-of-Mendes; High Priest of Seth; Lector Priest of Uto, She-Who-Opens-the-Two-Lands; and Overseer of the Prophets of All the Gods, Seti, the triumphant, the son of the Hereditary Prince; Mayor of the City and Vizier;
(10) Troop Commander; Overseer of Foreign Countries; Overseer of the Fortress of Sile; Royal Scribe; and Master of Horse, Pa-Ramses , the triumphant, and child of the Lady of the House and Singer of the Re, Tiu, the triumphant.
He said: 'Hail to thee, o Seth, Son of Nut, the Great of Strength in the Barque of Millions, felling the enemy at the prow of the barque of Re, great of battle cry... ! Mayest [thou] give me a good lifetime serving [thy] ka, while I remain in [thy favor] ...'

Before we even get to the translation, there is the issue of who and when it was dedicated. No pharoah lived to 400 years old, so what is the significance of the year 400. Many think that this stela was dedicated by Ramesses II, to Seti the 1st. However, there is a lot of speculation and it is not really clear WHO is being referenced here. This is because it is not really clear who was the FIRST king of the 19th dynasty. Many point to the name PaRamese, which was later changed to Rameses I as the first king of the 19th dynasty who was chosen by Horemheb. They point to another stela, which is almost 100% identical to this one, as the evidence for this. However, since this stela and the other supposedly erected by Ramesses II are almost identical, there has been some confusion about the actual timeline and order of the first pharoahs of the 19th dynasty. Some say Seti came first (obviously noting the reference to Seti in the stela) but is the Seti referred to in the stela the same as Seti I? Nevertheless, PaRamese, is regarded as the founder of the 19th dynasty. His reign did not last long and he has a small tomb in the valley of the kings. His son was Seti I.

Here is a link that has a translation and more info, albeit they go to great lengths to suggest a "asiatic" slant, which I will get to in my next post.
http://sethy1.free.fr/histoira.html

But that is just the beginning of the story..... there is a lot more.