Iuput I
In this article we are going to explore the fascinating world of Iuput I. From its origins to its impact on today's society, Iuput I has played a fundamental role in various aspects of daily life. Throughout history, Iuput I has been a source of debate and controversy, giving rise to endless opinions and theories. In this sense, it is essential to critically and objectively analyze the influence of Iuput I on our culture, politics, economy and daily life. Likewise, it is crucial to examine how Iuput I has evolved over time and what the implications are of its presence today. Through this exploration, we hope to shed light on the meaning and impact of Iuput I in the contemporary world.
| Iuput I | |
|---|---|
| Pharaoh | |
| Reign | uncertain |
| Coregency | Pedubast I |
| Father | Pedubast I |
| Dynasty | 23rd Dynasty |
Iuput I (or Auput I) was an ancient Egyptian co-regent of his father pharaoh Pedubast I during the early 23rd Dynasty.
Biography
The exact dates of his coregency are unknown. It started possibly around 815 BC, or alternatively in the final couple of years of his father's reign; one authority provides the dates circa 816 to 800 BC.[2] His highest date is a regnal year 12 found carved in an inscription on the roof of the Khonsu Temple at Karnak.[3] A year 9 is also attested for him on the roof of the temple. Helen Jacquet-Gordon published a transcription of Iuput I's Years 9 and 12 of the Khonsu temple graffito, in which it is named "Graffito 244" and "Graffito 245A-B".[3]
References
- ^ Jürgen von Beckerath, Handbuch der ägyptischen Königsnamen (= Münchner ägyptologische Studien, vol 46), Mainz am Rhein: Verlag Philipp von Zabern, 1999. ISBN 3-8053-2310-7, pp.192-93.
- ^ Jürgen von Beckerath, Chronologie des Pharaonischen Ägypten, Mainz am Rhein: Verlag Philipp von Zabern, 1997
- ^ a b Helen Jacquet-Gordon, The Graffiti on the Khonsu Temple Roof at Karnak: A Manifestation of Personal Piety Archived 2013-10-09 at the Wayback Machine, vol. 3. Oriental Institute Publications 123. Chicago: The Oriental Institute, 2003, pp. 84, 85 no. 245