Talk:Ay (pharaoh)

Ay and Aegyptus

Some questions by IonnKorr

- Was Ay the same person with Aegyptus (of historian Manetho)?

- Was Akhenaton (or an naval-general of Egyptian fleet) the same person with Danaus, king of Argos?

- Was Nefertiti post-developed ('mutated") into Aphrodite, Greek goddess of beauty?

Take into account the article "Danaus", from Wikipedia.

"It has been suggested that the figure Danaus represents an actual Egyptian monarch, possibly identified with the pharaoh Akhenaton (as accounted by the ancient Greco-Aegyptian, Manetho). Furthering the parallel, the character of Aegyptus bears similarities with the pharaoh Ay. This leads some to believe that the Aegyptiads were an Egyptian army that was sent by Ay and Ammonian priests to punish Akhenaton and Atenists, and, following from this presumption, that the Danaids were Egyptians who followed Akenaton to Greece after his escape from Egypt."--Ionn-Korr 18:07, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

Josephus gives Orus a reign of 36 years and 5 months and Amenhotep III had a high year mark of 37 years, making an excellent match. For this and other reasons, several Egyptologists have endorsed the correlation between the two. Josephus’s Rathotis has a reign of 9 years, which coincides precisely with that of Tutankhamen, who ruled only 9 years. Josephus’s Harmais has a reign of 4 years and 1 month, which makes an excellent fit with Aye, who has a high-year mark of 4 years. Finally, Josephus’s Ramesses has a reign of 1 year and 4 months, which coincides with Ramesses I, who ruled about two years, partly as coregent with Horemheb. This takes care of the more obvious correspondences. [1]. Not sure whether this is accepted fact though! Markh 13:14, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

Concerning the intro...

Why is the Osman thing there of all places? Come now. It's not a mainstream theory, and the prevolance of minority unorthodox theses makes these articles crummy. Thanatosimii 21:02, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Titulary =

Full titulary comes from my copy of the stela of Nxt-mnw.--Cliau 07:55, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

I am wondering if the title : "Father of the God of pure hands" is hereditary. As it looks like his brother Anen also bore the title. Didn't their father also have this title? It was most certainly a title held by priests. There are folks out there who take the limited view that the title of "God's father" to mean that Ay was the father-in-law of Akhenaten. If Ay were actually Nefertiti's father, I believe that he would have stated it. He was definately married to Nefertiti's nurse, and Nefertiti claims their daughter as her "sister", which also is pointed to as proof that Ay was Nefertiti's father. I think it would be a nice clarification to identify the "Father of the God of pure hands", "Father of the Divinity" as a familial/inherited title and a priestly position. This would help to negate the automatic assumption that Ay was Nefertiti's father because he is claiming to be the father-in-law of Akhenaten. rmeyermn 29 June 2008 —Preceding comment was added at 23:50, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

One more thought, I do not think that Ay was Nefertiti's father, nor Ankhesenamun's grandfather. The Amarna letter written to Supiluliumas asking for a husband and attributed to Queen Ankhesenamun,(in the Hittite records as Queen Dahamunzu ) states : "'My husband died. A son I have not. But to thee, they say, the sons are many. If thou wouldst give me one son of thine, he would become my husband. Never shall I pick out a servant of mine and make him my husband!...I am afraid.'"

Why would Ankhesenamun think of her grandfather as a servant? Ay was officiating at Tutankhamun's funeral and was going to be the next king by rights of sending Tut properly into the next world. So in my mind Ankhesenamun was writing about Ay. It is possible that she was referring to Horemheb though.

I think that Horemheb married Mutnodjmet to ascend the throne, not because she was Nefertiti's sister, but because she was Ay's daughter. He married the previous pharaoh's daughter and took the throne. rmeyermn —Preceding comment was added at 14:36, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Reverting

I have reverted the article, removing anonymous edits, to reinstate the Possible historical context section and clean up the introduction. Markh 11:27, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Ay/Horemheb

I agree with Thanatosimi. Just because Markh thinks Ay is Ephraim, the son of Joseph--based on Ahmad Osman's unorthodox views doesn't make it so. All we know is that Ay was an EGYPTIAN whose family came from Akhmin. Osman hasn't published in a scholarly journal like JEA, JNES, BASOR, Orientalia where all articles are subject to academic scrutiny prior to publishing. Its just all nonsense and lowers Wikipedia's standards. Encyclopaedia Brittanica must be laughing at us all! The problem here is that Kitchen has shown in his 1993 paper "He Swore and Oath" that Joseph was sold into slavery for 20 shekels--which was the standard price for slaves in the 20th Century BC Mesopotamia. So, there is no way his sons like Ephrayim could have lived into the 13th Century and ruled as Pharaoh Ay in the 1320's. Osman's ideas are not only a frimge theory--they are untenable. The problem with Wikipedia is that someone like Thanatosimii CANNOT edit out these impossible views. Major forums like Thoth Web have Moderators who can remove theses speculative articles. 24.87.128.182 19:31, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Would like to point out that I belive NO SUCH THING! I reverted the changes that User:Therealmikelvee made to my changes, so the Osman "speculation" didn't appear in the introduction to the article. Which by the way have now been reinstated again by the same user, everywhere they were removed. He seems to be the only one on Wikipedia that actually believes this, so how do we deal with these changes without having an on going edit war. Markh 11:12, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

(Actually, if Ay was Yuya's son, we don't even know he was necesarrily an egyptian... at least not paternally.Thanatosimii 14:38, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

notes

http://edoc3.bibliothek.uni-halle.de/lepsius/page/abt3/band6/image/03061140.jpg
Just some notes for possible edit. Link to Lepsius illustration featuring a beautiful stela of Nakhtmin, seems to have an extended offering formula, featuring - invocation of Amun-Re, Ptah-Sokar, Osiris-Wenenefer, using the full "ddt pt" formula ("Which heaven gives, the earth creates, the inundation brings forth from his cave"), plus an extended variation. Nakhtmin is the offering giver of all the gods.--Cliau 13:22, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Too much information about Tutankhamun?

I'm a bit perplexed that so much space is devoted to the possible murder of Tutankhamun in this article. No context is provided -- viz., how T.'s death affects our understanding of Ay's reign; this section reads as if it is the remains of a forgotten edit war. Unless this can be better integrated, I think it would be best to move this discussion to the article on T. -- llywrch (talk) 00:48, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I would agree that that some of the information in that section is unnecessary. Do other editors agree with the removal of the part shown below? Opinions please.

The National Geographic forensic researchers instead presented a new theory that Tutankhamun died from an infection caused by a badly broken leg since he is often portrayed as walking with a cane due to spina bifida, a hereditary trait in his family on his father's side.[9] The bone fragments found in Tutankhamun's skull were most likely the result of post-mortem damage caused by Howard Carter's initial examination of the boy king "because they show no evidence of being inundated with the embalming fluid used to preserve the pharaoh for the afterlife."[10] --Zanthorp (talk) 03:14, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Made minor edits to match Brier's actual murder theory as presented in his 1999 lecture series. He also said the bone fragments were postmortem damage because they they were not inundated by the embalming fluid, instead identifying a different part of the X-ray at the base the skull as signs of an injury. Brier's theory, which he presents as a theory, only suggests murder in the cases of Tutankamen, his queen, and the Hittite prince. Brier makes no claim that Ankhesenamen's two miscarriages, Akhenaten, Nefertiti, or Smenkhare were murders, so I have struck that. Edward321 (talk) 04:51, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

grammatical error corrected

I've corrected a minor grammatical error in the Tutankhamun section. I removed 'with' from the following sentence: He also alleged that Ankhesenamen and the Hittite Prince she was about to marry with were also murdered at his orders... --Zanthorp (talk) 03:00, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

a couple more points

To me at least, there seems to be a certain amount of visual similarity between the statue of Ay and the more famous one of Nefertititi, as you would expect from Father and Daughter.

The letters to the Hittite king smells like a put up job to me.The letters could only have been organised at the highest level and the Prince Zannaza was killed by the "men and chariots of Egypt".

If Tut died in March then the second letter of "where is your son" means that the military campaign season is advanced with the ambush already arranged and likely to leak. The Hittite king may have bought the story but seems to have had some suspicions and sent only a surprising junior prince to marry the crown princess of a superpower.

After the plague, whatever it was, borders were in a mess and populations on the move. Ay and horemheb needed a short war against the Hittites to stabilise their borders. The Hitler organised Polish border incident readily comes to mind.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.93.199.154 (talk) 10:27, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

speculative and unencyclopedic

" His death was natural" (about Tut) There is no reason to assume this and to pass it off as fact does a disservice to the reader. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.41.134.5 (talk) 03:18, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Ay and Horemhab

The whole country must have been in an uproar after a plague and the death of pharoah Tut. It seems unlikely that Ay could have taken the throne while an active General Horemhab still had control of the army.

One scenario is that they were surviving oldest and youngest brothers and a degree of trust between them. With the older brother as pharoah he would ensure that the younger, more active brother received all the necessary supplies to go on campaign and sort out Egypts borders and anybody else who wanted to try their luck as the plague had abated.

Both brothers must have been aware that this was a good policy as Horemhab would be next pharaoh anyway but with settled borders. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AT Kunene (talk • contribs) 12:33, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians, I have just modified one external link on Ay. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100731230154/http://www.drhawass.com:80/blog/press-release-king-tuts-chariot-travels-new-york to http://www.drhawass.com/blog/press-release-king-tuts-chariot-travels-new-york

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}). This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:53, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

"Ay" Origin - Reg (Tamil Nadu, India)

There may be a possible connection between these both

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ay (Egypt)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ay_kingdom (IT IS A TAMIL KINGDOM - More then 3000 - 4000 yeses back)

Please take this is a note — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.124.48.73 (talk) 09:44, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Ay as Nefertiti & Mutnodjmet/Mutbenret's father?

This theory is brought up on both Ay and Nakhtmin's pages with no citation, and is even dismissed outright on Nefertiti's page. The only evidence to make this connection is that Ay's wife Tey was Nefertiti's wetnurse, so the theory is thin at best. This should probably be clarified. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shoom'lah (talk • contribs) 22:17, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

Requested move 28 March 2022

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved.(non-admin closure) Turnagra (talk) 10:07, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

---

Ay → Ay (pharaoh) – No primary topic for this 2 letter word. Though the pharaoh gets the most views of topics called "Ay" some of the uses of the acronym have many more views[[2]] or long-term significance. Google, Images and Books seem split though many results aren't topic WP covers. Redirect to AY per WP:DABCOMBINE. Crouch, Swale (talk) 21:18, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

• Support per nomination. There are 19 entries upon the AY disambiguation page, with no indication that the short-lived Egyptian pharaoh from more than 3000 years ago left such an imprint upon history that it overwhelms the remaining 18 entries. Ay should indeed redirect to the AY dab page or the dab page's main title header should be moved to Ay. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 23:14, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose There is no other competitor to be the primary topic that isn't a partial title match. Disambiguation pages are not a search index; the current situation is perfectly fine without meddling. It can be differentiated from the acronym due to WP:DIFFCAPS. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 20:17, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
• Support - yes there is a competitor, Ay (river), a river that flows for hundreds of miles by hundreds of thousands of people. That's enough for me to say we have no primary topic. Red Slash 20:00, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose per Zxcbvnm. Daniel Case (talk) 05:00, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
• Support and comment While there is another pharaoh with the birth name Ay, from the 13th Dynasty, he is at Merneferre Ay. Technically Ay (18th Dynasty) would have been called pharaoh, since the word didn't exist in the reign on Merneferre Ay. Might be a cause of minor confusion since in common use 'pharaoh' could apply to both of these kings Merytat3n (talk) 00:50, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
• Support. I think there is some confusion above about partial title matches. You need to read the whole of WP:PTM not just the first phrase. I count at least thirteen entries at the DAB that would be valid destinations for Ay if the others did not exist. That's the important thing. For example, people searching for the river Ay will search for Ay even if we have decided to name the article on the river something else. Seen in this sense, there is no possibility of a primary topic here. Andrewa (talk) 05:23, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Leopard skin

Looks like a cheetah skin to me. Look at the tail and facial markings. 109.144.209.159 (talk) 01:19, 1 October 2024 (UTC)