Khaemwaset, son of Ramses ‘the Great’

by Damien F. Mackey An Occam’s Razor approach may be needed in the case of Khaemwaset, a son of Ramses II, because the history books (e.g. N. Grimal’s A History of Ancient Egypt, 1994) give us also a Khaemwaset II, son of Ramses III. And, since Ramses III folds so seamlessly into Ramses II: Ramses II, Ramses III. Part One: Some ‘ramifying’ similarities https://www.academia.edu/37461306/Ramses_II_Ramses_III_Part_One_Some_ramifying_similarities and: New Revision for Ramses II. Part Two: Ramses III was not emulating Ramses II https://www.academia.edu/38165672/New_Revision_for_Ramses_II_Part_Two_Ramses_III_was_not_emulating_Ramses_II then Khaemwaset I must be Khaemwaset so-called II. N. Grimal, bound as he is by the conventional chronology, could have no possible thought of linking together any (or all) of these princes-(pharaoh) Khaemwaset, considering that: Ramses II is dated by him to 1279-1212 BC; Ramses III is dated by him to 1186-1154 BC; According to Grimal’s scheme of things, these three entities are too well spread, chronologically and dynastically, with, so it is thought: Khaemwaset I belonging to Egypt’s Nineteenth Dynasty; Khaemwaset II belonging to Egypt’s Twentieth Dynasty; My radical scheme of revision, on the other hand, makes such a seemingly impossible link-up look highly probable. Khaemwaset I and II, already connected, can also be contemporaneous with Egypt’s Twenty-Fifth (Ethiopian) Dynasty, considering my view that this dynasty was essentially the Nineteenth Dynasty, that Ramses II/III was Piankhy/Tirhakah. All in all, one mighty pharaoh with one very significant son, Khaemwaset. More Khaemwaset Not listed by Grimal in his Index, but featuring on p. 289 of his book, is yet another important Khaemwaset, “the vizier Khaemwaset, governor of Thebes” during the later phase of the Twentieth Dynasty, officiating in “the sixteenth year of Ramesses IX’s reign”. Another pharaoh Ramses, another Khaemwaset, and, one would think, another duplication. Khaemwaset, a man of culture Khaemwaset, the son of Ramses II, showed great respect for Egypt’s past. Grimal tells of this on p. 72: “The tomb of [pharaoh] Kawab, one of the earliest in the Giza necropolis … his memory was still maintained up to the time of Ramesses II, at least, for Ramesses’ son Khaemwaset is known to have restored a statue of Kawab in the temple of Memphis”. And again, on p. 80: “… northern Saqqara … Wenis funerary complex (restored by Prince Khaemwaset in the reign of Ramesses II) …”. On pp. 267-268, Grimal will even refer to Khaemwaset as “the prince-archaeologist”: … Khaemwaset, the prince-archaeologist and restorer of the Memphite monuments. The cultured Khaemwaset had been linked with the worship of Ptah since the fifteenth year of his father’s reign, first as a sem priest then as Chief Priest, and it was in this office that he celebrated the first nine jubilees of his father. Khaemwaset died in the fifty-fifth year of Ramesses’ reign. …. P. 356: “In the fifty-second year of his reign Psammetichus [I] enlarged the Serapeum at Saqqara … rediscovery of Lesser Vaults created at the time of Ramesses II by Prince Khaemwaset”. Pharaoh Shebitku, contemporary of Sargon II of Assyria, also had the name of Khaemwaset. Khaemwaset Shebitku likewise built at Memphis (p. 346), “… Memphis, Luxor and Karnak”. And he was very Ramesside like: He revived [sic] the great Ramessid themes, adopting Khaemwaset (‘Crowned in Thebes’) as his Horus name …. This apparent return to the imperial values of the Ramessid period can doubtless be explained by a renewed desire to affirm royal power both inside and outside Egypt. Could it not the better “be explained” by this was “the Ramessid period”? The Tang-i Var inscription tells of this Shebitku handing over the fugitive rebel from Ashdod (i.e., Lachish), [Iatna-] Iamani, to the Assyrian king Sargon II, this incident known to have occurred during the reign of king Hezekiah of Judah. I had previously written on all of this: The Tang-i Var inscription dated to Sargon II’s Year 15 (c. 707 BC), according to which Shebitku - not Shabaka as was long thought - was the 25th dynasty pharaoh who had dispatched the rebel Iatna-Iamani in chains to Sargon II, has brought new confusion. Here is the pertinent section of this document (Wikipedia’s “Shebitku”): … I (… Sargon) plundered the city of Ashdod, Iamani, its king, feared [my weapons] and …. he fled to the region of the land of Meluhha and lived (there) stealthfully (lit. like a thief) …. Shapataku’ (Shabatka) king of … Meluhha … put (Iamani) in manacles and handcuffs … he had him brought captive into my presence …. This means that Shebitku (and Tirhakah) must now be re-located upwards by at least a decade in relation to Sargon II. Perhaps nowhere does the conventional separation of Sargon II from Sennacherib show up as in this case. Yet even revisionist Rohl, as late as 2002, was ignoring the Tang-i Var evidence, dating Tirhakah’s first appearance, at the battle of Eltekeh, to 702 BC, an incredible “thirty-one years earlier” than his actual rule of 690-665 BC, which is, however, about two decades too late. Thus he wrote: For five years the new king of Napata (ruling from Kush) had reigned in co-operation with his cousin Shabataka [Shebitku], king of Egypt (son of Shabaka). Then Taharka [Tirhakah] became sole 25th Dynasty ruler of both Kush and Egypt in his sixth regnal year following the death of Shabataka in 684 BC. There were other Libyan pharaohs in Egypt (such as Shoshenk V of Tanis and Rudamun of Thebes) but they were all subservient to the Kushite king. The year 684 BC is far too late for the beginning of Tirhakah’s sole rule in relation to Shebitku and his known connection with Sargon II’s 15th year! And that is by no means the only problem with the current arrangement of the Twenty-Fifth Dynasty. In fact there appears to be a significant problem in the case of virtually each one of its major kings. Regarding its first (according to convention) major ruler, Piye, for instance, Gardiner has written: It is strange … that Manetho makes no mention of the great Sudanese or Cushite warrior Pi‘ankhy who about 730 B.C. suddenly altered the entire complexion of Egyptian affairs. He was the son of a … Kashta … and apparently a brother of the Shabako [Shabaka] whom Manetho presents under the name Sabacōn. And whilst, according to Herodotus, Shabaka (his Sabacos) reigned for some 50 years, he has been reduced by the Egyptologists to a mere 15-year reign. Furthermore: “The absence of the names of Shabako and Shebitku from the Assyrian and Hebrew records is no less remarkable than the scarcity of their monuments in the lands over which they extended their sway”.