Tenth International Congress of Egyptologists Abstracts of Papers

XICE – Abstract of Papers
The Historical Inscription of Khnumhotep at Dahshur
James P. Allen
Final reconstruction of the newly-discovered inscription from the mastaba of
Khnumhotep at Dahshur, describing a conflict between Byblos and Ullaza and
Egyptian intervention during the reign of Senwosret III.
The pottery from the Pyramid Complex of Senwosret III at Dahshur after the
Middle Kingdom
Susan Allen
Excavations at the Pyramid Complex of Senwosret III at Dahshur by the Metropolitan
Museum of Art, New York, under the direction of Dieter Arnold have shown that it
had a long history as a sacred site beginning already in the Third Dynasty. During the
New Kingdom the area of the South Temple continued to function in royal rituals and
new burials began to appear on the site. After the destruction of the pyramid complex
in the Ramesside Period, an increasing number of burials were made over the debris
levels left by the quarrying away of the limestone of the temples and pyramid casing
as well as in the ruins of the mastaba cemetery to the north. These burials continued
from the Late Period into the Late Roman era in substantial numbers. The nature of
these burials indicates that they were probably made by the nearby inhabitants who
continued to regard the site as a cemetery. Pottery from this local cemetery does,
however, show considerable contact with the greater Mediterranean world in the form
of imported vessels and amphorae as well as providing information about local
funerary customs.
Ugarit’s alleged dependence of the Eiteenth Dynansty pharaohs reconsidered
Amnon Altman
A long-lasting and most widely accepted opinion holds that before Ugarit had
submitted to Šuppiluliuma I it was subordinated to Egypt. This opinion is based, on
one hand, on the mention in the Karnak and Memphis stelae of Amenhotep II of the
presence of an Egyptian garrison in the city of ’kt (i-k3-ty). This unknown city-name
was equated with the city-name of Ugarit, ikrt (i-k3-ri-ti), on the assumption that the
omission of the r is due either to a scribal error or to an archaic (Middle Kingdom)
orthography, according to which the sign k3 stands for the consonants kr. On the other
hand, many scholars who have rejected that equation still adhered to the above
opinion basing themselves on Ugarit’s letters in the Amarna archive (EA 45-49).
Their conclusion was derived from the style of the opening paragraphs, as well as
certain phrases used in these letters, which are characteristic of letters written by the
Canaanite kings to their Egyptian suzerain at that time.
The purpose of this article is to reconsider anew the available evidence. It will
first deal with the equation ’kt /ikrt, adducing arguments negating the likelihood that
Ugarit ever entered under Thutmose III’s or Amenhotep II’s overlordship. Then,
6