Shoshenq II: Encyclopedia II - Shoshenq II - Shoshenq II's Identity:

Shoshenq II - Shoshenq II's Identity:

There is a small possibility that Shoshenq II was the son of Shoshenq I. Several bracelets from Shoshenq II's tomb mention Shoshenq I as either Hedjkheperre Setepenre Shoshenq I or Chief of the Ma--which was Shoshenq I's position before he became king. These items may be evidence of a possible filial link between the two men. Also, a forensic examination of Shoshenq II's body by Douglas Derry reveals him to be a man in his 50's when he died. Hence, Shoshenq II may have outlived Osorkon I's 35 Year reign and ruled Egypt before Takelot I. A second equally plausible alternative is that Shoshenq II was a short-lived successor of Takelot I because his Hawk headed coffin was similar to the coffin of Harsiese A, who died early under Osorkon II. This view has been endorsed by the German Egyptologist J. Von Beckerath, in his 1997 book, Chronology of the Egyptian Pharaohs. It has been commonly argued by Kenneth Kitchen, in his books on the Third Intermediate Period in Egypt, that Shoshenq II was the High Priest of Amun Shoshenq C, son of Osorkon I and Queen Maatkare, who was appointed as a junior coregent to the throne but predeceased his father. This theory is based solely upon the discovery of bandages on the Ramesseum Mummy of Nakhtefmut, which contain the dates 'Year 3 [Blank]' and 'Year 33 Second Heb Sed' respectively. The Year 33 king is certainly Osorkon I since Nakhtefmut wore a ring which bore this king's prenomen. Kitchen infers from this evidence that Year 33 of Osorkon I is equivalent to Year 3 of Shoshenq II/C.

Unfortunately, however, the case for a coregency between Osorkon I and Shoshenq II is quite illusory because there is no clear proof that the Year 3 and Year 33 bandages on Naktefmut's body were made at the same time. These two dates were not written on a single piece of bandage--which would denote a true coregency. Rather, the dates were written on two totally separate and unconnected mummy bandages which were probably woven over a period of several years, rather than all at once. A prime example is the Mummy of Khonsmaakheru in Hamburg which contains separate bandages dating to Years 11, 12 and 23 of Osorkon I–or a minimum interval of 12 Years between their creation and final use. A second example is the Mummy of Djedptahiufankh, the Third or Fourth Prophet of Amun, which bears various bandages from Years 5, 10 and 11 of Shoshenq I or a spread of 6 Years in their final use for embalming purposes. As these two near contemporary examples show, the Temple Priests simply reused whatever old or recycled linens which they could gain access to for their embalming rituals. The Year 3 linen would, hence, belong to the reign of Osorkon's successor. Secondly, none of the High Priest Shoshenq C's own three children – the priest Osorkon whose funerary papyri is located in St Petersburg Museum, a priest Harsiese known by a Bes-statue in Durham Museum (likely Harsiese A), or the God's Wife Karomama-Merytmut – ever gave their father a royal title on their own funerary objects. Significantly, the Priest Osorkon is only called "Son of the High Priest Shoshenq" C, rather than "King's Son" in his funerary papyri which would have been created long after his father's death. Finally, Shoshenq II's tomb did not contain a single object from Osorkon I's reign. This is an improbable situation if Shoshenq II was indeed Shoshenq C, a son of Osorkon I, who died and was buried by his father, as Kitchen writes. Other Dynasty 21 and 22 kings such as Amenemopet and Takelot I, for instance, employed grave goods which mentioned their parent's names in their own tombs. All these facts together suggest that Heqakheperre Shoshenq II was not Shoshenq C, Osorkon I's son.

Since this Pharaoh's funerary objects such as his silver coffin, jewel pectorals and cartonnage all give him a unique royal name or prenomen called Heqakheperre, he was most likely a genuine king of the 22^nd dynasty in his own right, and not just a minor coregent. The exclusive use of silver for the creation of Shoshenq II's coffin is a potent symbol of his power; in Egypt, silver was more precious than gold because it had to be imported from Asia. Von Beckerath, in his 1997 book, Chronology of the Egyptian Pharaohs, gives Shoshenq II a brief independent reign of 2 Years based upon these considerations. Beckerath's figure of 2 Years is an estimate of Shoshenq II's real reign length because dated documents from the early Third Intermediate Period in Egypt are quite sporadic in nature. Takelot I, for instance, ruled Egypt for 13 Full Years but is only first documented in a Year 5 Nile Quay Text.

Adapted from the Wikipedia article "Shoshenq II's Identity:", under the G.N U Free Docmentation License. Please also see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki