Abstract
The absence of securely dated texts and monuments has been an obstacle in establishing the sequence and dating of Meroitic rulers. To compensate a chronology of rulers has been created by hypothetically associating them with a relative sequence of monuments especially the forty-one royal pyramids at Meroe. This lack of firm dating and attributions has led to a degree of circular reasoning in the creation of Meroe's chronology. Investigating degrees of continuity and change in the royal pyramid chapel decorations offers a tool for sequencing pyramids that avoids iterative reasoning. Based on a visual analysis of chapel reliefs in combination with data from Reisner's excavations plausible solutions to some of the problems in Meroe's relative chronology are presented; the correct sequence for BEG N 8, N 9 and N 10, the attribution of BEG N 12 to King Taneyidamani, and the relative dating of BAR 2 that challenges its attribution to King Teriteqas.
How to Cite
Yellin, J. W., (2014) “The Chronology and Attribution of Royal Pyramids at Meroe and Gebel Barkal: BEG N 8, BEG N 12, BAR 5 and BAR 2”, Journal of Ancient Egyptian Interconnections 6(1), 76-88. doi: https://doi.org/10.2458/azu_jaei_v06i1_yellin
2006
Views
439
Downloads