Disputatio:Chronicon Lipsiense

message: Most of the names are identifiable. Ideally one would want to bring in the various manuscript traditions of Mantho to help. But I'm not sure how you'd want me to add the information. I guess a table would make sense, because then I could include a more standard Latin form, the Egyptian, and the regnal years. --Iustinus 22:09, 29 Decembris 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Regnal years is too ambitious: I'm having trouble reconciling the names with the chronology. --Iustinus 22:15, 29 Decembris 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: :Up to you ... it depends what you think is possible. -- A table would be nice -- footnotes would be nice -- even just links to preferable forms of names would be nice. Whatever might work best :) Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:47, 30 Decembris 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: ::I'm thinking let's start with a list of probable identifications. Note that these are IDs with specific names, as opposed to specific Pharaohs. I am somewhat limited by the fact that I don't have my nice tabular edition of Manetho with me (I'm on vacation). It does look like the period being described is the Libyan Period --Iustinus 16:39, 30 Decembris 2010 (UTC)
I am so disappointed that UC does not have access to De Gruyter, so I can't download those articles from APF --Iustinus 23:42, 1 Ianuarii 2011 (UTC)

text: Adde quod we have not even got our copy of that volume in yet. Argh! --Iustinus 20:14, 12 Ianuarii 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: :I take that back! We do have it if you know where to look. I now have more information on the Leipziger Weltchronik than I'll ever need :) --Iustinus 23:53, 12 Ianuarii 2011 (UTC)

text: ZÄS --Iustinus 19:15, 17 Octobris 2011 (UTC)
=== Probable identifications ===
*Smende[s], Zmendas = Smendes (Ns-Bɜ-Nb-Ḏd.t). Medes might also fall here.
*Us[e]rthus, Us[er]th[us], Usorthus, Userthus, (and possibly Uerthu[...], U[e]rthu[s]) seem to be forms of the name Osorkon (Wɜsỉrkn), given in Classical sources as Ὀσορθὼν. That this name repeats several time is not problematic: there were at least three Pharaohs by this name (in the 22—3rd dynasties), and a another in the 21st dynasty, who is sometimes called "Osorkon the Elder" because Manetho refers to him as Ὀσοχώρ, which may represent Wɜsỉrkn Wr—but apparently he is never called by that name in extant Egyptian sources.
*Psossam[m]is, Psonsame[s]: since there are so many names from the Libyan period here, I'm going to guess these are corrupt forms of the name Psusennes (Pɜ-Sbɜ-ḫˁ-n-Nỉw.t), which occurs twice in the 21st dynasty.
*Se[s]ynches, Sesonchis, Sesynch[es] = Šɜšɜnq, a name which occurs four times in the 22nd, and once in the 23rd dynasty. Classical sources usually use Sesonchosis or Sesonchis, but many variants are attested. Additionally this is generally accepted to be the same name as the Biblical שִׁישַׁק (Šīšaq), Vulgate Susac.
*So[c]ophthes looks for all the world like Sbk-ḥtp, but I don't think that name occurs in the Libyan period (most of the Pharaohs by that name were of the 13th dynasty) 
*Amoses = Amosis/Amasis (Ỉˁḥ-ms)
*Amenophis, and possibly Amenophris = Amenophis (both Ỉmn-m-Ỉp.t and Ỉmn-ḥtp — see page for details). There are many, many Pharaohs of both names, but most of them fall in the 18th dynasties. Presumably here we have Ỉmn-m-Ỉp.t, son of Psusennes I, who is given in Manetho as Ἀμενωφθίς. Therefore I'm guessing that the ρ in Amenophris is actually a θ.
*I have nothing firm so far for [...]mompsames, Amendesis or Syphois—one or two crazy ideas, but nothign useful.
--Iustinus 16:39, 30 Decembris 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Egyptology stuff 

message: *Smende[s], Zmendas = Smendes (Ns-Bɜ-Nb-Ḏd.t). Medes might also fall here.
*Us[e]rthus, Us[er]th[us], Usorthus, Userthus, (and possibly Uerthu[...], U[e]rthu[s]) seem to be forms of the name Osorkon (Wɜsỉrkn), given in Classical sources as Ὀσορθὼν. That this name repeats several time is not problematic: there were at least three Pharaohs by this name (in the 22—3rd dynasties), and a another in the 21st dynasty, who is sometimes called "Osorkon the Elder" because Manetho refers to him as Ὀσοχώρ, which may represent Wɜsỉrkn Wr—but apparently he is never called by that name in extant Egyptian sources.
*Psossam[m]is, Psonsame[s]: since there are so many names from the Libyan period here, I'm going to guess these are corrupt forms of the name Psusennes (Pɜ-Sbɜ-ḫˁ-n-Nỉw.t), which occurs twice in the 21st dynasty.
*Se[s]ynches, Sesonchis, Sesynch[es] = Šɜšɜnq, a name which occurs four times in the 22nd, and once in the 23rd dynasty. Classical sources usually use Sesonchosis or Sesonchis, but many variants are attested. Additionally this is generally accepted to be the same name as the Biblical שִׁישַׁק (Šīšaq), Vulgate Susac.
*So[c]ophthes looks for all the world like Sbk-ḥtp, but I don't think that name occurs in the Libyan period (most of the Pharaohs by that name were of the 13th dynasty) 
*Amoses = Amosis/Amasis (Ỉˁḥ-ms)
*Amenophis, and possibly Amenophris = Amenophis (both Ỉmn-m-Ỉp.t and Ỉmn-ḥtp — see page for details). There are many, many Pharaohs of both names, but most of them fall in the 18th dynasties. Presumably here we have Ỉmn-m-Ỉp.t, son of Psusennes I, who is given in Manetho as Ἀμενωφθίς. Therefore I'm guessing that the ρ in Amenophris is actually a θ.
*I have nothing firm so far for [...]mompsames, Amendesis or Syphois—one or two crazy ideas, but nothign useful.
--Iustinus 16:39, 30 Decembris 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Probable identifications