Unveiling the Abydos King List: Seti I’s Quest for Legitimacy in the 19th Dynasty
The Abydos King List dates back to the 19th Dynasty of the New Kingdom, specifically during Seti I’s reign, and is located in his mortuary temple in Abydos, on the west wall leading to the “Butcher’s Hall”. Unlike the more accurate Turin Canon, the Abydos King List and others from this period were intended for religious purposes rather than as chronological historical records. The list includes depictions of Seti I and Prince Ramesses, with detailed inscriptions and prayers, showcasing royal attire and symbols. The list features 76 kings, presented in a structured format with repetitive offering phrases and the kings’ names in two forms: the throne name (prenomen) and the birth name (nomen). The list is organized chronologically but notably omits several kings and periods, reflecting the biases and political motivations of the time. The Abydos King List is significant not just as a historical record, but as a cultural artifact that underscores the divine aspect of Egyptian kingship and the importance of legitimizing the ruler’s lineage and maintaining ma’at
Set I and his son, Ramesses II, are depicted with significant royal symbols: Seti in ceremonial attire and Ramesses holding a papyrus. An inscription to the right of the King and above the Prince details offerings to Ptah-Sokar-Osiris, emphasizing Seti I’s role in the ritualistic bestowal. The text for the first register says “King Menmaatre (Seti I) said: ‘I am presenting offerings to the god, including gifts for the kings of Upper and Lower Egypt. Greetings to you, Ptah-Sokar, South-of-His-Wall! I wish to do for you the special things that Horus did for his father Osiris.’” (Contemporary translation by Aaron Watson).
The text to the right of young Ramses reciting a prayer is an inscription which reads “The ‘Joyful Call’ from the hereditary prince and the king’s eldest legitimate son, whom he adores, Ramesses, who is justified.” The ‘Joyful Call’ is underlining the religious and dynastic responsibilities of the pharaohs, and their “link of continuity”. The cartouches are methodically organized in three registers, each containing the forms of the kings’ names and offering phrases.
Above the first register, an inscription highlights the Htp-di-nsw offering to Ptah-Sokar-Osiris, linking the ritual to the Abydos Temple and underlining its religious significance. The cartouches are arranged in three vertical registers, with the first two registers each containing the names of 38 kings. The offering formula, repeated in the cartouches, symbolizes the provision of sustenance to each king, emphasizing Seti I’s role in these offerings. Every cartouche starts with an address to a specific king, listing their throne name (prenomen) and birth name (nomen), along with symbolic determinatives of Upper and Lower Egypt.
The primary offering phrase used in the Abydos King List is a formulaic invocation providing sustenance to each listed king,. The “Htp-di-nsw” formula, translating to “an offering which the king gives,” is a common ancient Egyptian offering invocation used in various contexts, including the Abydos King List. The structure of the offering phrases indicates a continuous line of respect and sustenance for each king, linking them to Seti I’s reign and patronage. These offering phrases, such as a thousand of bread and a thousand of beer, go beyond literal offerings; and act as a form of sympathetic magic. The offerings are still being made in the absence of the literal offerings. Thus maintaining a focus on honoring and preserving the memory of past rulers.
These offering phrases mirror the ancient Egyptian beliefs in the afterlife and the sanctity of the pharaohs, serving as a bridge between the living and the divine. The mention of bread and beer, essential sustenance, symbolizes the care taken to meet the spiritual needs of the kings in their afterlife journey, while maintaining Ma’at and protection for the land of Egypt.
The list of 76 kings, from Menes to Seti I, presented with their throne and birth names and symbols, do not include rulers like Hatshepsut and the Amarna kings, nor the Hyksos. This reflects the political and cultural contexts of the period, indicating posthumous disfavor and dynastic politics. While at the same time reinforcing the legitimacy of the new 19th dynasty.
The inclusion of the Abydos Kings List within the temple edifice dedicated to Osiris, constructed by Pharaoh Seti I, holds profound significance, particularly in the context of the 19th Dynasty’s historical and political landscape. At this juncture, the 19th Dynasty was in its nascent stages, with Seti I, ascending as the second ruler, succeeding his father who assumed the throne at an advanced age. A crucial aspect to consider is the recency of the transition from commoner status within the royal family, a circumstance epitomized by the ascension of Horemheb, a figure of common origin who rose to power in the aftermath of the Amarna heresy.
For Seti I and the 19th Dynasty, it was of paramount importance to establish and underscore the dynasty’s legitimacy, weaving a narrative of unbroken linkage to the illustrious royal forebears. This endeavor was not solely aimed at reinforcing their sovereign rights and validating their dynastic claim in the eyes of the Egyptian populace, known as Kemet, but also served a pivotal role in affirming their divine sanction in the eyes of the pantheon of gods.
In this context, the construction of the temple dedicated to Osiris, supplemented by sanctuaries honoring Amun-Ra and other deities of significant authority, and the accompanying Abydos Kings List, transcended mere architectural and artistic endeavors. These elements collectively functioned as a critical instrument in Seti I’s strategy to fortify the 19th Dynasty’s political and spiritual foundations, asserting a continuum of royal and divine endorsement that was essential for the stability and legitimacy of his reign.
The intentional omission of certain rulers from the Abydos King List, notably female pharaohs, foreign sovereigns, and the Amarna kings – specifically Akhenaten, Tutankhamun, and Ay – manifests a strategic historical narrative crafted by the 19th Dynasty. This exclusionary practice was deeply rooted in the ancient Egyptian belief system concerning the afterlife and the maintenance of Ma’at, the principle of order, truth, and cosmic balance. By erasing these figures from the list, the intention was not merely to rewrite history, but to effectively deny these individuals their eternal legacy, as per the Egyptian concept of existence beyond death.
Moreover, this act of selective historiography served as a poignant declaration regarding the standards and expectations of kingship in Egypt. It underscored what was deemed acceptable and legitimate within the royal lineage and governance. Such omissions were inherently political, reflecting the 19th Dynasty’s efforts to align itself with certain traditional values and to distance itself from periods and rulers considered heretical or destabilizing to the established order. In this way, the Abydos King List transcends a mere chronological record, becoming a tool for political and cultural legitimization in the intricate tapestry of Egyptian dynastic history.
Furthermore, the strategic exclusion of certain kings from the Abydos King List served to reinforce the legitimacy of the nascent 19th Dynasty and its royal lineage. This historical curation was designed to present an unblemished chronicle of rulership, effectively negating the presence of any illegitimate monarchs in their dynastic lineage as well as in the broader royal history of Egypt. Such an approach was instrumental in undermining potential claims to the throne from descendants of these omitted kings. By ensuring that these figures were not acknowledged in official or religious records, the 19th Dynasty solidified its claim to unchallenged authority and rulership. This tactic was not merely a historical revision but a deliberate political maneuver, aiming to stabilize and legitimize the dynasty’s reign amidst the complex dynamics of Egyptian royal succession and governance.
Comments