Talk:Amenhotep III

	Amenhotep III was one of the History good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones Date Process Result April 20, 2007 Good article nominee Listed April 1, 2008 Good article reassessment Kept May 18, 2009 Good article reassessment Delisted
Current status: Delisted good article

This  level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography: Royalty and Nobility This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles This article is supported by WikiProject Royalty and Nobility (assessed as High-importance). Ancient Egypt High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ancient Egypt, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Egyptological subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Ancient EgyptWikipedia:WikiProject Ancient EgyptTemplate:WikiProject Ancient EgyptAncient Egypt articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. WikiProject Ancient Egypt to-do list: edit history watch purge Needed articles. We should have an article on every pyramid and every nome in Ancient Egypt. I'm sure the rest of us can think of other articles we should have. Cleanup. To start with, most of the general history articles badly need attention. And I'm told that at least some of the dynasty articles need work. Any other candidates? Standardize the Chronology. A boring task, but the benefit of doing it is that you can set the dates !(e.g., why say Khufu lived 2589-2566? As long as you keep the length of his reign correct, or cite a respected source, you can date it 2590-2567 or 2585-2563) Stub sorting Anyone? I consider this probably the most unimportant of tasks on Wikipedia, but if you believe it needs to be done . . . Data sorting. This is a project I'd like to take on some day, & could be applied to more of Wikipedia than just Ancient Egypt. Take one of the standard authorities of history or culture -- Herotodus, the Elder Pliny, the writings of Breasted or Kenneth Kitchen, & see if you can't smoothly merge quotations or information into relevant articles. Probably a good exercise for someone who owns one of those impressive texts, yet can't get access to a research library.

- Is possible that Amenophis III may identify with name Memnon of Greek Mythology (only with the name, not the hero)?

--IonnKorr 22:48, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You're not wrong. Manetho identifies one Pharoah from around this era (Amenôphthis) as BEING Memnon, but I haven't been able to discover which one. Tabbycatlove (talk) 03:13, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It seems the Greeks thought it was this one: "Since at least the first century, the Greeks themselves linked Memnon to Amenhotep III of Egypt, calling a portrait-colossus of that pharaoh "Memnon."" The Origin of Memnon by R. Drew Griffith (abstract) https://www.jstor.org/stable/25011083 https://fdocuments.net/download/memnon

Can someone add it? Tabbycatlove (talk) 08:45, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

2 photos on the page cover part of the text of the article.

I changed the page layout somewhat to avoid using "div" HTML tags, as these don't always come out right on all browsers (they didn't on mine, the image covered some of the text). Unfortunately, I couldn't quickly figure out how to stack two images on the left side of the page, so I put the photo of the statue of Memnon on the right. I think it looks okay, but if someone feels like they can improve it, they're welcome to! :-)

Archiesteel 18:52, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There's a lot of good content, but the arrangement and "flow" is awkward. Some suggestions on what needs to be done: - use the same formatting style for all quotations being used. I suggest Template:Cquote (using the example that contains citation and reference) - the citation format needs to be consistent and follow the accepted format; see: Wikipedia:Citing_sources#Full_citations - the section on his life begins with a statement on his statuary; this should be moved to the Monuments section. I would suggest instead to lead with the paragraph that starts "Amenhotep appears to have been crowned while still a child..." - I suspect the real reason for Amenhotep III's refusal to marry off one of his daughters is that the royal line of inheritance was matrilinial, something that was cemented earlier in this dynasty, started again Ahmose I and consolidated under his successor Amenhotep I. Might want to refer to that as well. - I have changed the instances I have found referring to "Queens" since that was not a standard ancient Egyptian title, and have replaced with Great Royal Wife where applicable. For similar reasons I am uncomfortable with calling his son "Crown Prince Thutmose" instead of simply "Thutmose" or "Thutmose B" (Dodson and Hilton's reference for him). Not sure what the correct title is offhand, but "Crown Prince" is definitely of Western origin. - the reference to the many statues of Sehkmet ought to be expanded, explaining current thinking as to why he built so many of this lion-headed goddess (thought to be a protector from plague, hint hint ;-)

This is a good start anyways. Will volunteer to do a copyedit pass on this afterwards. Captmondo 15:02, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This article meets the criteria for a

Does anyone know where that statue which is the main picture is located now? It was in the Egyptian museum in berlin, I gather, but last night walking through the Minneapolis Institute of Arts, I was amazed not only to find we had a new head of Amenhotep III, but additionally it looks exactly like that one. Does anyone know if it moved, or is our new one just a duplicate. If it moved, perhaps changing the location in the caption is in order. Thanatosimii 13:52, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The head in the photo is the Colossal quartzite statue of Amenhotep III, which was sent on loan from the British Museum on the "Temples and Tombs" travelling exhibition round the US from Sept 2006-Feb 2008. Chasuble (talk) 14:43, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This article has been reviewed as part of

Reference #6: Adler, Jerry (16 February 2009). "Why There Won’t Be a Revolution". Newsweek. ISSN 0028-9604. http://www.newsweek.com/id/183718/page/2. Retrieved 2009-06-19 is not the Forbes article but a reference to it. Can we get the actual reference?

The last sentence: "a superb 6 feet (1.8 m)-high (1.83 m) pink quartzite statue of the king standing on a sled-(god Tem, Atum) and wearing the Double Crown" reads very oddly. I haven't a copy of the Clayton book; could somebody check the quote? Myrvin (talk) 15:30, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I can't comment on the first reference so much, though might I suggest you be bold and locate it yourself?

I've had a search. I have found no reference to this historical list. Forbes' story of Amenophis' newly discovered head makes no mention of it either. Would-be bold Myrvin (talk) 22:00, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've just had a search and I can't track it down either. If it originated at Forbes, it can no longer be found on their Web site. Interestingly, some of the articles I found referenced a Wikipedia page which has since been removed. Given that, I think you can go ahead and remove that line -- an assertion like that needs to be fully referenced. Captmondo (talk) 01:25, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As for the Clayton reference I do have a copy of the book in question and will look up that specific quote, and correct if necessary. Cheers! Captmondo (talk) 16:07, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Good-oh! Myrvin (talk) 22:00, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I found the original quote, which is "a superb 6-ft (1.83-m) high pink quartzite statue of the king standing on a sledge and wearing the Double Crown". Somehow some extra words were inserted in the middle, hence the confusion. I am not sure why it was quoted in that way as it did seem awkward (not the fault of Clayton, but the quoter), so I ended up re-phrasing it, and adding further info about that statue from the original source. Captmondo (talk) 01:25, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tut described himself as "Son of a Pharaoh". With erupted wisdom teethe Tut was probably about 23 when he died of malaria. This makes him too old to be the son of Akhenaton as some believe so that leaves Amenhotep III as the most likely contender for Tuts paternity.

Amenhotep was in bad health during the last years of his reign but perfectly capable of fathering another and final child.

So the late Prof Harrison may well be corect when he concluded that Ahenaton was the son of Amenhotep and Tiye, Smenkhare and Tut were the sons of Amenhotep and Kiya. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.93.199.154 (talk) 13:55, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A more logical conclusion in my mind is that Tut is the son of Smenkhare, and that Smenkhare is a brother of Akhenaten. Amenhotep III had probably been dead for a number of years by the time Tut was born. Elakazal (talk) 17:20, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speaking of such things, the reference to Smenkhare as appearing as female is not supported by the Allen paper on the Amarna succession (at least as I read it), which differentiates between a female pharoah/co-regent, Neferneferuaten, and a male Smenkhare. I know there's been discussion of Smenkhare appearing in traditionally female positions in a place or two, but even there as far as I know he's dressed as a male and consistently referred to with male pronouns, etc. Unless some one has some info on this front, I'm going to take that reference out. Elakazal (talk) 17:20, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/176965.html --213.198.238.76 (talk) 11:21, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently in my Belgian newspaper De Standaaerd it was announced that a new find in Luxor confirmed that Amenhotep IV, alias Akhenaten, did have a period of co-rule with his father Amenhotep III. A mural painting dating from Amenhotep III's

The english-version of the paper by FM Valentin can be found here at Acedemia.edu (scans of KMT v.25 n.2 summer 2014, including link to PDF). Both names appear next to each other, each as king, at the time of the first heb-sed of Amen-III when Amen-III becomes deified as the still living Aten-Tjehen Nebma'`atri`a. — al-Shimoni (talk) 20:59, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Amenhotep III. 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 User:Cyberpower678/FaQs#InternetArchiveBot*this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130701103124/http://cassian.memphis.edu/history/murnane/Allen.pdf to http://cassian.memphis.edu/history/murnane/Allen.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• 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.—

Draft:A Sed Festival Stela of Amenhotep III -- Dlohcierekim (talk) 06:58, 26 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Any citation on the "Egyptian" pronunciation as Amāna-Ḥātpa? Making such an assertion of the pronunciation of a dead language seems questionable otherwise - also if there has been research into the "correct" pronunciation of Ancient Egyptian (as opposed to the Egyptological Conventional pronunciation) I'd be very interested in following that up. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amatama (talk • contribs) 15:58, 12 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]