More on the South saqqara Stone
Dear Jimmy,
In the web page I sent you, therre was a note about the 32nd Count of Pepi I; but Pepi I’s last Year was certainly the Year of the 25th Count as noted in the South Saqqara Stone Annal. However, the Yea4r of the 32nd Count inscription(Year 32 here) was a just a brief inscription by a tomb foreman on a block of the king’s pyramid–not an official royal document like in an Annal or a stela. Also, the method of the dating suggests that in the VI Dyansty, some individuals were already shifting to an Annual method of dating events which wld occur in the 11th and 12th Dynasty once the Cattle Count dating system was abandoned.
Here is the context of the 2 messages from V. Dobrev about the date. Hope this helps with your reserach into the 6th Dynasty Old Kingdom kings.
Fabian
Dear Mr. Boudville,
As I have showed it on a slide during the 8th ICE in Cairo, the 32nd year appears on a stone that belongs to the body of the pyramid of Pepy I. It is highly improbable that this pyramid was already destroyed during the time of Pepy II and that this date belongs to his reign.
Yours sincerely,
V. Dobrev
_________________
Dear Mr. Dobrev,
You kindly informed me in June 2001 that a stone block which was
uncovered from Pepi I’s pyramid bears the date: Year of the 32nd Count.
You interpreted this to mean Year 32 of Pepi I’s 48 or 49 year reign.
However, a friend of mine has pointed out that Pepi II is known to have
performed some restoration work in the latter part of his reign. For
instance, a restoration edict for Menkaure’s temple is dated to the
Year of the 31st Count of Pepi II.
Can we be certain that the 32nd Count stone block was not part of
any restoration work performed by Pepi I’s grandson–Pepi II?
Personally, I would think not since the temple priests wld have fully
maintained Pepi I’s pyramid up to Pepi II’s later years at least. But
admittedly, I don’t know the full circumstances of this find–whether
this stone block was found deeply imbedded within Pepi I’s pyramid or
portruding out of the pyramid. If the former is the case, then the 32nd
Count must surely belong to Pepi I’s reign as Pepi II wld likely have
made repairs only to the exterior facade of his grandfather’s pyramid.
Thank You.
Dear Dr. Boudville,
During the 8th International Congress of Egyptologists at Cairo (2000) I gave a lecture about the Builders’ Inscriptions from the Pyramid of King Pepy I (VIth Dynasty) and I hope this paper will be soon published in the Proceedings of the Congress by the American University Press (Cairo). I said that one stone from the pyramid of Pepy mentions the 32nd year of his reign. That does not mean that this is a biannual count but just the 32nd year. Therefore, a 63rd year of Pepy is excluded. For the moment, the highest year of Pepy appears to be the 25 biannual count on the South Saqqara Stone, the 49th year. I still believe that biannual counts existed during the VIth dynasty, but for official documents, like the South Saqqara Stone.
With my best regards,
Vassil Dobrev
—————
Dear Dr. Dobrev,
Can you please tell me if you have recently discovered a 32nd Count for Pharaoh Pepi I?
Dr. Kanawati from McvQuarie University mentioned something about your
discovery here in an E-mail to me a few months ago.
I just ask you this question because I thought that in your
1995 BIFAO article about the Saqqara Stone, you mentioned that the
highest date for Pepi I was his 25th Count?
Also, none of the journals like JEA or GM has mentioned a 32nd
Count for Pepi I yet. Such a high count for Pepi I wld imply that a
Biannual cattle count could not have existed in the 6th Dynasty since
it wld mean Pepi I ruled for 63 yrs. (Dr.
Kanawati mentioned your discovery to suggest that a Biannual count for
Dynasty 6 is highly unlikely)
Thank You. Any reply which you can send about this discovery will
be deeply appreciated.