TUTANKHAMEN
During the course of the excavations in the Valley of the Tombs of the
Kings made on behalf of the late Mr Theodore M. Davis in the years
1906 and 1907, a series of objects were discovered bearing the name of
Tutankhamen. In all probability they were stolen from his tomb during
the reign of Horemheb, only a few years after the pharaoh was buried.
Under a large rock, found tilted on one side near the foot of a high
hill, the late Mr Edward Ayrton, who was in charge of Mr Davis’s
Exploration in 1906, found a beautiful blue glaze cup bearing the
cartouche of Tutankhamen. In the following year, when the late Mr E.
Harold Jones was superintending the work, a rock-cut chamber was found;
and as it contained so many objects bearing the name of Tutankhamen
it was assumed by Mr Davis that he had discovered that king’s tomb.
Hence the volume published in 1912 giving an account of the work of
1906, 1907, and 1908 (during the last of which the tomb of Horemheb
was found on the south side of the chamber already mentioned) was
entitled _The Tombs of Harmhabi_ [Horemheb] _and Touatânkhamanou_
[Tutankhamen] (Theodore M. Davis’ Excavations: Bibân el Molük), and
the late Sir Gaston Maspero gave accounts of all that was then known
of the lives of both Horemheb and Tutankhamen. It is only right to add
that Sir Gaston Maspero did not regard the chamber opened by Mr Harold
Jones as the tomb of Tutankhamen. For in the closing paragraph of his
report on the scanty information we have of Tutankhamen’s life and
achievements, he states: “I suppose his tomb was in the Western Valley,
somewhere between or near Amenôthes III [Amenhotep III, the last
royal mummy known to have been buried at Thebes before Tutankhamen,
because Akhenaton and Smenkhara were buried at El Amarna, and removed
to Thebes later] and Aiya [Ay, the successor of Tutankhamen]: when
the reaction against Atonu and his followers was complete, his mummy
and his furniture were taken to a hiding-place, as those of Tiyi and
Khuniatonu had been, probably under Harmhabi, and there Davis found
what remained of it after so many transfers and plunders. But this also
is a mere hypothesis, the truth of which we have no means of proving or
disproving as yet.”
Although Sir Gaston was right in assuming that the chamber discovered
in 1907 was not Tutankhamen’s tomb, his hypothesis that the latter
might have been in the neighbourhood of his predecessor (Amenhotep III)
and his successor (Ay) has been shown by Mr Howard Carter’s recent
discovery not to be true. The chamber seems to have been nothing more
than a safe (perhaps cut out by the workmen who were making a tomb for
Horemheb) in which plunderers of the tombs of Tutankhamen and Ay hid
their spoil. Why they were unable to rescue all the gold they stole
and so hid away is not apparent. The chamber was buried at a depth of
25 feet and was almost filled with mud, which had been swept into it
by the rain of many centuries. In this room was found a broken box
containing several pieces of gold stamped with the names of Tutankhamen
and his wife Ankhsenamen, and others bearing the name of his successor
called the King’s Father-in-law Ay and his wife Tiy, but without any
title or prenomen. In the mud was found the very beautiful statuette
made of fine translucent aragonite commonly called “alabaster.” Apart
from its value as a wonderful work of art this figure is interesting
as the broad scarf around the loins is tied in the Syrian fashion.
Unfortunately there is no inscription on it. M. Daressy makes the
tentative suggestion that it may represent Ay before his succession to
the throne.
When it is recalled that in the recently discovered tomb parts of the
gold plating were found to have been torn off the throne and other
pieces of furniture brought to light by Lord Carnarvon’s expedition, it
is interesting to note that the inscribed sheets of gold found in 1908
represent scenes of Tutankhamen’s triumphs and captured prisoners such
as would have adorned the tomb furniture that has been found mutilated.
Other pieces of gold represent similar scenes from furniture plundered
from the tomb of Tutankhamen’s successor Ay.
A few days after the discovery of the chamber containing these stolen
objects a pit was found, some distance away from it, in which there
were large earthenware pots containing debris from a tomb, such as
wreaths of leaves and flowers and small bags of powdered substance.
The cover of one of these jars was broken and wrapped around it was a
piece of linen bearing an inscription in ink which refers to the sixth
year of Tutankhamen’s reign.
In this volume, as I have already mentioned, the late Sir Gaston
Maspero collected together the few scraps of information available in
1912 with reference to the life and reign of Tutankhamen.
In the British Museum there are two models of lions sculptured from
red granite, one of which was made at the instigation of Amenhotep
III for a temple in the Soudan. The other one may have been carved
for Tutankhamen, who claims that he “repaired the monuments of his
father Amenhotep.” For nearly a century scholars have been discussing
the question whether the use of the word “father” was intended to
refer to his parentage, whether, in fact, Tutankhamen was a brother
or half-brother of his father-in-law the heretic king Akhenaton,
or whether the word was used simply as a term of respect for his
predecessor. The problem still remains unsolved, for Tutankhamen’s
elevation to the throne was due to his marriage with the daughter of
Akhenaton, the customary method in ancient Egypt for establishing a
right to the kingship.
[Illustration: FIG. 4.—Tutankhamen receiving Ethiopian tribute from
Huy. [_After Lepsius._]
At the time of his marriage and succession he belonged to the Aton
faith, which his father-in-law had established, and his name was
Tutankhaton. But as soon as Akhenaton died, Tutankhaton and his wife
Ankhsenpaaton abandoned the heresy and returned to the orthodox faith
of Amen. As a token of their conversion they changed their names
to Tutankhamen and Ankhsenamen and left Akhenaton’s capital for
Thebes, the headquarters of the priesthood of Amen, who no doubt were
responsible for Tutankhamen’s sudden return to the old religion.
The little information we possess of his reign is derived mainly
from the inscriptions upon the Theban temples restored by him after
his return to the orthodox faith, though many of these records are
palimpsests, for Horemheb replaced Tutankhamen’s name on most of them.
The two other chief sources of information are: (_a_) the piece of
linen found in 1907, which is the only certain evidence that he reigned
as long as six years; and (_b_) a remarkably interesting series of
wall-pictures in the tombs of Huy at Kurnet (Murrai), which afford
the only record we have of Tutankhamen’s relations with Ethiopia and
Asia. These pictures are among the most familiar records of ancient
Egyptian life, having been used by Champollion, Lepsius, Brugsch and
Piehl, and the inscriptions describing the scenes have been translated
into English by Professor Breasted.[1]
[Illustration: FIG. 5.—Part of the Asiatic tribute presented to
Tutankhamen by Huy. [_After Lepsius._]