13 March 2005 @ 10:15 am
Egyptology *headdesk*  
This has nothing to do with fandom and will probably not interest anyone not already interested in Egyptology but I just felt like I had to rant a little.



There's a programme on Discovery Civilisation right now called "Women Pharoahs" which is focusing on women who used the position of God's Wife to become powerful. God's Wife was a priestess who ritually re-enacted the creation myth with the God's earthly avatar. The creation myth in Egyptology is all about sex (as are most creation myths when it comes down to it but that's getting off track).

This programme is being narrated by a woman, the majority of 'experts' are women as well, and there are lots of glamorous shots of very beautiful women dressed as Nefertari, Hatshepsut, Nefertiti and it wouldn't surprise me if Cleopatra makes an appearance somewhere. The obvious implication here is that these women used sex to gain power.

Bullshit.

It may be part of their stories, but it's just part.

Hatshepsut was the first recognised female pharoah. She was the oldest child of Thutmose I, wife of Thutmose II and step-mother of Thutmose III. She was also God's Wife - not really surprising because members of the royal families were often priests and priestesses - the fact that the eldest royal child held the highest role possible in Amun's temples is not really a surprise.

When Thutmose I died, she was a very young teenager - 13 or 14 (her DOB is a little unclear) - and her step-brother took the title of king. Since he wasn't pure-blood royal, he married Hatshepsut to solidify his position. When he died, his son (by another wife) was still too young to take the throne so Hatshepsut took it. She reigned for around 30 years and there doesn't seem to have been any real rivalry between her and her step-son (Thutmose III). Years after her death but still in Thutmose III's reign, Hatshepsutp's name and effigies were largely destroyed - there's a difference of opinion as to why that is but the vast majority of egyptologists agree that it was because the Pharoah is the earthly embodiement of the god on Earth. He would be resurrected as Osiris in the after-life, therefore established religion dictated that the pharoah could not have been a woman. The erasure of Hatshepsut's role was most likely a whitewash by the religious institutions rather than a vendetta by her hard-done-by stepson.

The same may be true of Nefertiti - she was also God's Wife for a while. The main point about her though, is that she was the wife of Akhenaten. The Heretic. Akhenaten turned away from established religion and set up his own system of belief revolving around the sun disk god - Aten. Since the role of God's Wife was by definition part of the established religion, it's unlikely that she used that position to gain power.

One thing intrigues me about this programme, since it seems so determined to show that God's Wives used their position to gain power, it's completely ignored the ever-growing theory that Nefertiti herself became Pharoah after the death of Akhenaten. Sometime during her husband's reign, she disappears from history. And then suddenly Akhenaten gains a co-regent - Ankhkheperure Neferneferuaten - and after his death that co-regent becomes Pharoah under the name Ankhkheperure Smenkhkare and there are a couple of depictions of the co-regnets in intimate poses which some readers have taken to symbolise a homosexual relationship between the two. However, the similarity between the names Nefertiti and Neferneferuaten and other evidence from the time indicate that it may indeed be the same person. (Incidentally, it was Nefertiti's step-son Tutankhaten who became Pharoah after Smenkhkare, moved the country back towards the old worship and changed his name to Tutankhamun - ao the name change thing? Not so unusual in Ancient Egypt - plus, Hatshepsut dressed as a man when she was Pharoah, including the false beard)

This programme has completely skipped that argument, probably because to do so would further highlight Nefertiti's role in the Armana heresy which meant she could not have continued the position of God's Wife at the time she gained power.

What seems to have happened with this programme is that some producer somewhere stumbled on the term 'God's Wife'; found out a little about the story; decided to make a show; gathered a group of feminist theorists; ran out of story...

Hatshepsut, Nefertiti, Nefertari, Cleopatra. They were very powerful women, there's no question about that, but their position as God's Wife was only a small part of that and it certainly wasn't the path they used to gain power.

Don't you just hate it when TV sets out trying to make a point but lacks the real evidence to do it?

 
 
Current Music: Women Pharoahs on Civilisation
Current Mood: irritated
 
 
( Post a new comment )
[identity profile] bob-bobbing.livejournal.com on March 13th, 2005 03:56 am (UTC)
Wow,
Were did you get all that knowledge. That was fascinating!
Actually think I saw that programme, or a very similar one, a couple of weeks ago. I think they were just trying to sensationalise the story but I found it pretty interesting.
I know virually nothing of an ancient Egpyt but bizarely studied modern Egypt in school!
[identity profile] whiskyinmind.livejournal.com on March 13th, 2005 04:28 am (UTC)
I'm completely and utterly hooked on Ancient Egypt. I just don't mention it all that much on here or elsewhere because there aren't all that many others who share the depth of interest really. It's weird how I picked up the interest - I shied away from history of all kinds when I was at school, did one semester of Scottish history at Uni before I dropped out and then focused on anything but history. I guess I got into it again because I was studying formalism a little - the theory that all stories have a set pattern - got into reading Joseph Campbell and from there got into reading about Egyptology. Since then? Never looked back!

It's funny how these shows try to sensationalise everything - think it was over the New Year but there was an 'Egypt Weekend' where they ended up showing two programmes back to back which completely contradicted each other - the first describing how Tutankhamun had to have been murdered by his vizier and the second saying there was no way it was murder!
[identity profile] nwhepcat.livejournal.com on March 13th, 2005 05:11 am (UTC)
I saw a "news" link a week or so ago that said it was not a murder, but I was at work and didn't follow it.

I've had a real fondness for Egyptian history that crops up every now and then, but I haven't read deeply enough to know all this. I did have a wonderful time looking into Imhotep and Ptah when I was writing "Dormant Magics."
[identity profile] whiskyinmind.livejournal.com on March 15th, 2005 02:16 am (UTC)
Bizarrely enough I just re-read Dormant Magics this weekend!

The news last week was that they've found that Tutankhamun suffered a bad leg break which never healed properly so they're now theorising that it was infection from that which killed him. The murder theory revolves around a bone fragment in his skull which some people claimed was the result of a blow the back of the head but other theorists say was caused by the hook used to extract the brain in the mummification process. It does seem that there's a new theory every other day about Tut so I wouldn't imagine it'll take long before someone claims that Ai was the one who broke his leg knowing that it would become infected... :)
[identity profile] bob-bobbing.livejournal.com on March 13th, 2005 08:22 am (UTC)
I love history. Guess it is that "Where do things come from?" question that nags at me and I have always wanted to know more about Ancient Egypt (and other ancient histories) as, like you say, they seem to have forgotten but important relevance in understanding the world today.
Maybe you should mention it a bit more and educate the rest of us :-)
[identity profile] smhwpf.livejournal.com on March 14th, 2005 02:03 am (UTC)
Oh, please do continue to rant about Ancient Egypt! I'm fascinated by history. I've not really read much about Ancient Egypt, but then that's a good reason for wanting to see more about it!

Yeah, TV history can be pretty sucky, hitting on some fixed idea and trying to twist all the limited evidence to fit it.
[identity profile] ex-claudia69504.livejournal.com on March 13th, 2005 06:00 am (UTC)
I wish I knew more about Egyptology, but I'm proud to say I know enough to actually follow everything you said. =)

I watched a Discovery Channel or some other show about Nefertiti and her reighn as a Pharoh at the time. It was interesting, really.

'Behind every powerful man is an even more powerful woman'

I think that holds very, very true, expecially in Ancient Egypt.

I don't like the fact that this program you're talking about is going on just that one angle. I can see where it would be a factor in the whole of things, but being a God's Wife would not have just gotten any old woman into power. There had to be cunning behind these women. There had to be determination, a reason for them to want to get to power. And, while all the reasons may not have been as noble as we would like, I'd take a woman over a man any day.

Now I'm curious to see if they are running that same program over here in the US. I'd like to see it, if for no other reason then to point and laugh and agree with you. =)
(Reply) (Link)
[identity profile] saturn-girl.livejournal.com on March 13th, 2005 11:32 am (UTC)
Fascinating, thought provoking post. It's refreshing to see something non-fandomy on my f-list. Please feel free to post more about your interest in Egyptology, or anything else history related!
[identity profile] whiskyinmind.livejournal.com on March 15th, 2005 02:18 am (UTC)
I'm kind of amazed at how much interest there was from my little Egyptology rant! Maybe I should post more often about it! (Of course, the fact that I ended up reading about Robert Bauval and his 'Orion correlation' theory yesterday annoyed me a lot - the theory goes that the pyramids at Giza are a direct reflection of the stars in Orion's belt. Except they don't quite match up with it... :) )