# Talk:Amenhotep I

Shouldn't it be listed as going to A-Class review first? not just straight to FA? Oh well... Just a thought. Dreamy 02:20, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Amenhotep I is next on my agenda to expand, but it's going to be much harder to do than previous work, because I've hit so much conflicting data. The pharaohbox will look smaller when I get more info and it doesn't take the entire page, I suppose. Once I figure out the entire date conroversy I'll straighten that out. One question, is there any good source for that lybian invasion? I can't seem to find any. Thanatosimii 03:39, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

The date info is now in. Since I couldn't find any other date theses than the heliacal rise of sothis dating system, I standerdized the dates to Helk's thesis as recorded in Grimal's works. I also tagged some information which I don't doubt, but which has no sources on the page as of yet. Thanatosimii 19:16, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
And I've summerized his foreign policies and campaigns and stuff like that. Thanatosimii 05:37, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
Barring finding of a statue (which I may yet) I'll be putting "Image:Amenhotep I 1.jpg" on the page for his picture in the infobox. I'm just keeping it here so that I don't misplace it until the article is big enough to put the stele somewhereThanatosimii 18:44, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
I've moved some data into better spots, and have noticed that the introduction is lacking in a good summary. Unfortunatly, I can't write a good summary until I put way more of my data onto the page, which may take a little while to organize. Thanatosimii 06:17, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

This article mentions 'barque' in at least two places, but the WP articles on 'barque' do not support this use.  What gives here? Hmains 21:17, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

"Barque", sometimes "Bark", is the translation of wia, meaning the divine ship in which the god's idol was set during parades. Barque is the proper word. Thanatosimii 22:33, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Pretty good, but lead needs to summarize the article better. Make it do so and at least two paragraphs.Rlevse 21:43, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, it's two paragraphs now, and I did so by adding a summary of how he acceded to the throne. The intro now summarizes his family and accession, foreign policy, construction, culutral developments, and funerary cult. Help me understand your concern – Is there any specific hole you have concerns about, or is one of these points simply not flushed out enough? Thanatosimii 22:13, 14 January 2007 (UTC)...passed with updates.Rlevse 04:30, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

In my opinion (where this site has a lot of them) I would say that judging by the picture of him sitting next to the man that he is 8.5 feet tall.

In Egyptian art, height of an image represents importance, not physical stature. We have the mummy; he was nowhere near 8.5 feet. Thanatosimii 23:56, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

This needs to be defined, or an article or redirect needs to be created for it.  The term appears in the intro, but many readers will not know exactly what it refers to.--ragesoss 06:05, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Alright... I don't necesarraly think that's necesarry, but I linked it to Levant. Thanatosimii 06:40, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Great article – I would only suggest changing the references, so that the bibliography data isn't repeated – so that

Clayton, Peter. Chronicle of the Pharaohs. p.100. Thames and Hudson Ltd, 2006."
would  become
Clayton (2006) p.100 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Markh (talk • contribs) 23:40, 13 May 2007 (UTC).
About the citation from Manetho, I found it in two places in the Loeb translation. They are:

W.G. Waddell (editor and translator), Manetho, 1940 (Cambridge: Loeb Classical Library, 1967), p. 101 (frag. 50, from Josephus, Contra Apionem 1.15)
W.G. Waddell (editor and translator), Manetho, 1940 (Cambridge: Loeb Classical Library, 1967), p. 109 (frag. 51, from Theophilus, Ad Autolycum 3.19)
Note: the tradition represented by the text Julius Africanus used states that Amenhotep I ruled 21 years. This discrepency may be due to rounding. (In Waddell's trans. at p. 111 (George Syncellus' transcription of Africanus, frag. 52), p. 113 (Syncellus' transcription of Eusebius, frag. 53), & p. 117 (Armenian version of Eusebius, frag. 53) -- llywrch 02:38, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

This article has been reviewed as part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force. I believe the article currently meets the criteria and should remain listed as a Good article. My only real issue with the article at this stage is the use of terms like "some sources" or "some historians". If they are important enough to be cited, they are important enough to be named. Otherwise good job. The article history has been updated to reflect this review. Regards, Jackyd101 (talk) 00:28, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Numerous links added to assist the non-specialist. Amitchell125 19:57, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Wasn't he a son of Seqenenre Tao? That's what his page says. 94.66.59.214 (talk) 08:23, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

His page says he could be a son of Seqenenre Tao or a son of Ahmose I. Anyway, I went off to check the sources given on this page and on Ahmose Sapair's. The citation at the end of the relevant sentence on this page is Grimal (1988) p.201. The family tree on p.190 of Grimal (1988) places Ahmose Sapair as a son of Ahmose and brother of Amenhotep I. He is mentioned again on the cited p.201 as being the crown prince, a son of Ahmose Nefertari, and that he died before becoming king. Ahmose-ankh is not mentioned.
The source on Ahmose Sapair's page which says he is the son of Ahmose I does say that but is more round-about. It says Amenhotep I became the heir apparent after the death of Ahmose-ankh (not Ahmose Sapair) (Wente 1975 pp.270-271). Referring to the associated footnote (44), it refers to a suggestion by another author that Ahmose-ankh and Ahmose Sapair are the same person (still a son of Ahmose I and brother of Amenhotep I). Also mentions that Winlock (1924) thought Ahmose Sapair may be the son of Amenhotep I instead. Ahmose Sapair is only mentioned in this one footnote.
TL;DR: From a cursory look at only 4 sources, it seems to be like this: Ahmose Sapair is a son of Seqenenre Tao and uncle of Amenhotep I (Dodson & Hilton), or a son Ahmose I and sole elder brother of Amenhotep I (Grimal), or identical to Ahmose-ankh (Wente referring to Vandersleyen), or a son of Amenhotep I (Winlock).
Assuming my super quick look is correct, perhaps better wording might be "His elder brother, Ahmose-ankh[source] or perhaps Ahmose Sapair,[source] died before him..." Depends on the calibre of the sources used I guess. Anyway this is probably clear as mud. Not my area of expertise! Merytat3n (talk) 10:42, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
Back on my bullshit in this regard. I was sick of the sources not agreeing so I wanted to see the hieros myself. I tracked down an image of the stele which depicts Ahmose I, Ahmose-Nefertari and their son. It is Ahmose I's "Karnak Donation Stele". It is reproduced in ASAE 56 pl. II If I may WP:OR for a second, the prince is identified as (iaH-ms)|anx in the hieroglyphs. This is the same image that Dodson and Hilton (2004) use on p.127, the caption for which identifies the son as Ahmose-ankh. I feel this is resolved so I will remove the mention of Ahmose-Sapair and swap the citation to Dodson and Hilton (2004).Merytat3n (talk) 07:08, 1 April 2024 (UTC)