In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] (Eric Stevens) wrote:
> which is currently dated by many Egyptologists to between
> about 2950-2920 and 2800-2770 BC [172, 205]
And the latest King list I can find (2001) dates it to
> and to assign an arbitrarily equal reign to each of the eight >
kings of this dynasty,
Which is a big assumption.
> Among the indicators of a untimely end for Semerkhet is the >
fact that of all of the First Dynasty Kings and the first two >
kings of the Second Dynasty, he is the only one not to be >
represented by a mastaba tomb at Saqqara .
There are other possible reasons. The reign name of the Pharaoh
usually had religious significance. Semerkhet is significantly
different from other kings of the First and Second dynasty
indicating a possible difference of religion with a
correspondingly different burial practice. Compare with
Akentaton. This would also account for signs and portents during
> First Dynasty structures consistently show the
> effects of intentional burning, and most, especially those at
> Helwan, appear to have been razed.
Perhaps this indicates the transition from First to Second
Dynasty was not voluntary. Or that early Second Dynasty rulers
were worried about the magical effect of First Dynasty
inscriptions. An impact big enough to raze some structures would
raze them all for a distance from the impact point, the pattern
would be clear. Besides an impact that great would have destroyed
Egypt completely, not left something for the Second Dynasty,
Mastaba tombs were tough.