Narmer was an ancient Egyptian king of the Early Dynastic Period.
He probably was the successor to the Protodynastic king Ka, or
possibly Scorpion. Some consider him the unifier of Egypt and founder
of the First Dynasty, and in turn the first king of a unified Egypt.
1 Historical identity
3.1 Possible identification with Menes
Narmer and the unification of Egypt
Narmer in Canaan
4 Tomb and artifacts
4.3 Nag el-Hamdulab
5 In popular culture
6 Gallery of images
8 See also
11 Further reading
12 External links
Narmer's identity is the subject of ongoing debates, although the
dominant opinion among Egyptologists identifies
Narmer with the
pharaoh Menes, who is renowned in the ancient Egyptian written records
as the first king, and the unifier of Ancient Egypt. Narmer's
Menes is based on the
Narmer Palette (which shows
Narmer as the unifier of Egypt) and the two necropolis seals from the
Umm el-Qa'ab cemetery of Abydos that show him as the first king of the
The date commonly given for the beginning of Narmer’s reign is ca.
3100 BC. Other mainstream estimatings, using both the historical
method and Radiocarbon dating, are in the range ca. 3273–2987 BC.[a]
The complete spelling of Narmer’s name consists of the hieroglyphs
for a catfish (n'r) and a chisel (mr), hence the reading
“Narmer” (using the rebus principle). This word is sometimes
translated as “raging catfish” . However, there is no consensus
on this reading. Other translations include ″angry, fighting,
fierceful, painful, furious, bad, evil, biting, menacing″, or
"stinging catfish". Some scholars have taken entirely
different approaches to reading the name that do not include
“catfish” in the name at all,  but these approaches have
not been generally accepted.
Rather than incorporating both hieroglyphs, Narmer’s name is often
shown in an abbreviated form with just the catfish symbol, sometimes
stylized, even, in some cases, represented by just a horizontal
line. This simplified spelling appears to be related to the
formality of the context. In every case that a serekh is shown on a
work of stone, or an official seal impression, it has both symbols.
But, in most cases, where the name is shown on a piece of pottery or a
rock inscription, just the catfish, or a simplified version of it
Two alternative spellings of Narmer’s name have also been found. On
a mud sealing from Tarkhan, the symbol for the Tjay-bird (Gardiner
sign G47, a flapping fledgling) has been added to the two symbols for
″Narmer″ within the serekh. This has been interpreted as meaning
Narmer the masculine”, however, according to Ilona
Regulski, “The third sign (the Tjay-bird) is not an integral
part of the royal name since it occurs so infrequently.” Godron
suggested that the extra sign is not part of the name, but was put
inside the serekh for compositional convenience.
In addition, two necropolis seals from Abydos show the name in a
unique way: While the chisel is shown conventionally where the catfish
would be expected, there is a symbol that has been interpreted by
several scholars as an animal skin. According to Dreyer, it is
probably a catfish with a bull’s tail, similar to the image of
Narmer on the
Narmer Palette in which he is shown wearing a bull’s
tail as a symbol of power.
Possible identification with Menes
Reconstruction of the Narmer-
Menes Seal impression from Abydos
Naqada Label reconstruction Garstang 1905, p. 62, fig3
Although highly inter-related, the questions of “who was Menes?”
and ”who unified Egypt?” are actually two separate issues. Narmer
is often credited with the unification of Egypt by means of the
Lower Egypt by Upper Egypt. While
Menes is traditionally
considered the first king of Ancient Egypt,
Narmer has been identified
by the majority of Egyptologists as the same person as Menes. Although
vigorously debated (Hor-Aha, Narmer’s successor, is the primary
alternative identified as
Menes by many authorities), the predominant
opinion is that
Narmer was Menes. [b]
The issue is confusing because “Narmer” is a Horus Name, while
“Menes” is a personal name (birth name or nisut-bitj name). All of
King Lists which began to appear in the New Kingdom era list the
personal names of the kings, and almost all begin with Menes, or begin
with divine and/or semi-divine rulers, with
Menes as the first
“human king”. The difficulty is aligning the contemporary
archaeological evidence which lists Horus Names with the
that list personal names.
Two documents have been put forward as proof either that
Menes or alternatively
Hor-Aha was Menes. The first is the “Naqada
Label” which shows a serekh of
Hor-Aha next to an enclosure inside
of which are symbols that have been interpreted by some scholars as
the name “Menes”. The second is the seal impression from Abydos
that alternates between a serekh of
Narmer and the chessboard symbol,
“mn”, which is interpreted as an abbreviation of Menes. Arguments
have been made with regard to each of these documents in favour of
Hor-Aha being Menes, but in neither case, are the arguments
Necropolis seal impression of Qa’a Dreyer 1987, p. 36, fig.3
Two necropolis sealings, found in 1985 and 1991 in Abydos, in or near
the tombs of Denand Qa’a,show
Narmer as the first king on
each list, followed by Hor-Aha. The Qa’a sealing lists all eight of
the kings of what scholars now call the First Dynasty in the correct
order, starting with Narmer. These necropolis sealings are strong
Narmer was the first king of the First Dynasty – hence
is the same person as Menes.
Narmer and the unification of Egypt
Narmer Palette, discovered by
James E. Quibell in the
1897-1898 season at Hierakonpolis, shows
Narmer wearing the crown
Upper Egypt on one side of the palette, and the crown of Lower
Egypt on the other side, giving rise to the theory that
the two lands. Since its discovery, however, it has been debated
Narmer Palette represents an actual historic event or is
purely symbolic.[d] Of course, the
Narmer Palette could represent an
actual historical event while at the same time having a symbolic
Günter Dreyer discovered a “year label” of
Abydos, depicting the same event that is depicted on the Narmer
Palette. In the First Dynasty, years were identified by the name of
the king and an important event that occurred in that year. A “year
label” was typically attached to a container of goods and included
the name of the king, a description or representation of the event
that identified the year, and a description of the attached goods.
This year label shows that the
Narmer Palette depicts an actual
historical event . Support for this conclusion (in addition to
Dreyer) includes Wilkinson  and Davies & Friedman .
Although this interpretation of the year label is the dominant opinion
among Egyptologists, there are exceptions including Baines  and
Archaeological evidence suggests that Egypt was at least partially
unified during the reigns of Ka and
Iry-Hor (Narmer’s immediate
predecessors), and perhaps as early as
Scorpion I (several generations
before Iry-Hor).Tax collection is probably documented for Ka  and
Iry-Hor. The evidence for a role for
Scorpion I in Lower Egypt
comes from his tomb Uj in Abydos (Upper Egypt), where labels were
found identifying goods from Lower Egypt. These are not tax
documents, however, so they are probably indications of trade rather
than subjugation. There is a substantial difference in the quantity
and distribution of inscriptions with the names of those earlier kings
Lower Egypt and
Canaan (which was reached through Lower Egypt),
compared to the inscriptions of Narmer. Ka’s inscriptions have been
found in three sites in
Lower Egypt and one in Canaan. Iry-Hor
inscriptions have also been found in two sites in
Lower Egypt and one
in Canaan. This must be compared to Narmer, whose serekhs have
been found in ten sites in
Lower Egypt and nine sites in
discussion in “Tomb and Artifacts” section). This demonstrates a
qualitative difference between Narmer’s role in
Lower Egypt compared
to his two immediate predecessors. There is no evidence in Lower Egypt
of any Upper Egyptian king’s presence before Iry-Hor. The
archaeological evidence suggest that the unification began before
Narmer, but was completed by him through the conquest of a polity in
the North-West Delta as depicted on the
The importance that
Narmer attached to his “unification” of Egypt
is shown by the fact that it is commemorated not only on the Narmer
Palette, but on a cylinder seal, the
Narmer Year Label, and
Narmer Boxes;and the consequences of the event are
commemorated on the
Narmer Macehead. The importance of the
unification to ancient Egyptians is shown by the fact that
shown as the first king on the two necropolis seals, and under the
name Menes, the first king in the later
King Lists. Although there is
archaeological evidence of a few kings before Narmer, none of them are
mentioned in any of those sources. It can be accurately said that from
the point of view of Ancient Egyptians, history began with
the unification of Egypt, and that everything before him was relegated
to the realm of myth.
Narmer in Canaan
Manetho (quoted in Eusebius (Fr. 7(a)), “
Menes made a
foreign expedition and won renown.” If this is correct (and assuming
it refers to Narmer), it was undoubtedly to the land of
Narmer’s serekh has been identified at nine different sites. An
Egyptian presence in
Canaan predates Narmer, but after about 200 years
of active presence in Canaan,  Egyptian presence peaked during
Narmer's reign and quickly declined afterwards. The relationship
between Egypt and
Canaan “began around the end of the fifth
millennium and apparently came to an end sometime during the Second
Dynasty when it ceased altogether.“ It peaked during the Dynasty
0 through the reign of Narmer. Dating to this period are 33
Egyptian serekhs found in Canaan, among which 20 have been
attributed to Narmer. Prior to Narmer, only one serekh of Ka and one
inscription with Iry-Hor’s name have been found in Canaan. The
serekhs earlier than
Iry-Hor are either generic serekhs that do not
refer to a specific king, or are for kings not attested in Abydos.
Indicative of the decline of Egyptian presence in the region after
Narmer, only one serekh attributed to his successor, Hor-Aha, has been
found in Canaan. It should be noted that even this one example is
questionable, Wilkinson does not believe there are any serekhs of
Hor-Aha outside Egypt and very few serekhs of kings for the rest
of the first two dynasties have been found in Canaan.
The Egyptian presence in
Canaan is best demonstrated by the presence
of pottery made from Egyptian
Nile clay and found in Canaan.[e] as
well as pottery made from local clay, but in the Egyptian style. The
latter suggests the existence of Egyptian colonies rather than just
The nature of Egypt’s role in
Canaan has been vigorously debated,
between scholars who suggest a military invasion and others
proposing that only trade and colonization were involved. Although
latter has gained predominance,  the presence of
Tell es-Sakan dating to the Dynasty 0 through early
Dynasty 1 period, and built almost entirely using an Egyptian style of
construction, demonstrate that there must have also been some kind of
Egyptian military presence.
Regardless of the nature of Egypt’s presence in Canaan, control of
trade to (and through)
Canaan was important to Ancient Egypt. Narmer
probably did not establish Egypt’s initial influence in
Canaan by a
military invasion, but a military campaign by
Narmer to re-assert
Egyptian authority, or to increase its sphere of influence in the
region, is certainly plausible. In addition to the quote by Manetho,
and the large number of
Narmer serekhs found in Canaan, a recent
reconstruction of a box of Narmer’s by Dreyer may have commemorated
a military campaign in Canaan. It may also represent just the
presentation of tribute to
Narmer by Canaanites.
Narmer and Hor-Aha’s names were both found in what is believed to be
Neithhotep’s tomb, which led Egyptologists to conclude that she was
Narmer’s queen and mother of Hor-Aha. Neithhotep’s name means
Neith is satisfied". This suggests that she was a princess of Lower
Egypt (based on the fact that
Neith is the patron goddess of
the Western Delta, exactly the area
Narmer conquered to complete the
unification of Egypt), and that this was a marriage to consolidate the
two regions of Egypt. The fact that her tomb is in Naqada, in
Upper Egypt, has led some to the conclusion that she was a descendent
of the predynastic rulers of
Naqada who ruled prior to its
incorporation into a united Upper Egypt. It has also been
suggested that the
Narmer Macehead commemorates this wedding.
However, the discovery in 2012 of rock inscriptions in Sinai by Pierre
Tallet raise questions about whether she was really Narmer’s
Tomb and artifacts
Chambers B17 and B18 in the Umm el-Qa'ab, which constitute the tomb of
Narmer's tomb in
Umm el-Qa'ab near Abydos in
Upper Egypt consists of
two joined chambers (B17 and B18), lined in mud brick. Although both
Amélineau and Petrie excavated tombs B17 and B18, it is only in 1964
that Kaiser identified them as being Narmer’s .[g] Narmer's tomb
is located next to the tombs of Ka, who likely ruled
Upper Egypt just
before Narmer, and Hor-Aha, who was his immediate successor.[h]
As the tomb dates back more than 5000 years, and has been pillaged,
repeatedly, from antiquity to modern times, it is amazing that
anything useful could be discovered in it. Because of the repeated
disturbances in Umm el-Qa’ab, many articles of Narmer’s were found
in other graves, and objects of other kings, were recovered in
Narmer’s grave. However,
Flinders Petrie during the period
1899-1903,   and, starting in the 1970s, the German
Archaeological Institute (DAI)[i] have made discoveries of the
greatest importance to the history of Early Egypt by their
re-excavation of the tombs of Umm el-Qa’ab.
Despite the chaotic condition of the cemetery, inscriptions on both
wood and bone, seal impressions, as well as dozens of flint arrowheads
(Petrie says with dismay that “hundreds” of arrowheads were
discovered by "the French", presumably Émile Amélineau. What
happened to them is not clear, but none ended up in the Cairo
Flint knives and a fragment of an ebony chair leg were
also discovered in Narmer’s tomb, all of which might be part of the
original funerary assemblage. The flint knives and fragment of a chair
leg were not included in any of Petrie’s publications, but are now
Petrie Museum of Egyptian Archaeology
Petrie Museum of Egyptian Archaeology (University College
London), registration numbers UC35679, UC52786, and UC35682. According
to Dreyer, these arrowheads are probably from the tomb of Djer,
where similar arrowheads were found.
It is likely that all of the kings of
Ancient Egypt buried in Umm
el-Qa’ab had funerary enclosures in Abydos’ northern cemetery,
near the cultivation line. These were characterized by large mud brick
walls that enclosed space in which funerary ceremonies are believed to
have taken place. Eight enclosures have been excavated, two of which
have not been definitely identified.  While it has yet to be
confirmed, one of these unidentified funerary enclosures may have
belonged to Narmer[j]
Narmer is well attested throughout Egypt, southern
Canaan and Sinai:
altogether 98 inscriptions at 26 sites.[k] At Abydos and Hierakonpolis
Narmer's name appears both within a serekh and without reference to a
serekh. At every other site except Coptos, Narmer's name appears in a
serekh.In Egypt, his name has been found at 17 sites: 4 in Upper Egypt
(Hierakonpolis, Naqada,  Abydos,  and
Coptos); ten in
Lower Egypt (Tarkhan, Helwan,
Zawyet el'Aryan, Tell Ibrahim Awad, Ezbet el-Tell, Minshat
Abu Omar,  Saqqara, Buto, Tell el-Farkha,
and Kafr Hassan Dawood); one in the Eastern Desert (Wadi
el-Qaash); and two in the Western Desert (Kharga Oasis 
and Gebel Tjauti.).
During Narmer's reign, Egypt had an active economic presence in
southern Canaan. Pottery sherds have been discovered at several sites,
both from pots made in Egypt and imported to
Canaan and others made in
the Egyptian style out of local materials.
Narmer serekh on pottery sherd from Nahal Tillah (Canaan) showing
stylized catfish and absence of chisel, Courtesy Thomas E. Levy,
Levantine and Cyber-Archaeology Laboratory, UC San Diego
Twenty serekhs have been found in
Canaan that may belong to Narmer,
but seven of those are uncertain or controversial. These serekhs came
from eight different sites: Tel Arad, En Besor (Ein
HaBesor), Tel es-Sakan, Nahal Tillah (Halif
Terrace), Tel Erani (Tel Gat), Small Tel
Malhata, Tel Ma'ahaz, and Tel Lod,
Narmer's serekh, along with those of other Predynastic and Early
Dynastic kings, has been found at the Wadi 'Ameyra in the southern
Sinai, where inscriptions commemorate Egyptian mining expeditions to
Limestone head of a king. Thought by Petrie to be Narmer. Bought by
Petrie in Cairo, Egypt. 1st Dynasty.
The Petrie Museum of Egyptian Archaeology, London, exhibits a
limestone head of an early Egyptian king which the Museum identifies
as being a depiction of
Narmer on the basis of the similarity
(according to Petrie) to the head of
Narmer on the Narmer
Palette. This has not been generally accepted. According to Trope,
Quirke & Lacovara, the suggestion that it is
“unlikely”. Alternatively, they suggest the Fourth Dynasty king
Khufu. Stevenson also identifies it as Khufu. Charron
identifies it as a king of the Thinite Period (the first two
dynasties), but does not believe it can be assigned to any particular
king. Wilkinson describes it as “probably Second Dynasty”.
First recorded at the end of the 19th century, an important series of
rock carving at Nag el-Hamdulab near
Aswan was rediscovered in 2009,
and its importance only realized then.  Among the many
inscriptions, tableau 7a shows a man wearing a headdress similar to
the white crown of
Upper Egypt and carrying a scepter. He is followed
by a man with a fan. He is then preceded by two men with standards,
and accompanied by a dog. Apart from the dog motif, this scene is
similar to scenes on the
Scorpion Macehead and the recto of the Narmer
Palette. The man – armed with pharaonic regalia (the crown and
scepter) can clearly be identified as a king. Although no name appears
in the tableau, Darnell  attributes it to Narmer, based on the
iconography, and suggests that it might represent an actual visit to
the region by
Narmer for a “Following of Horus” ritual. In an
interview in 2012, Gatto also describes the king in the
inscription as Narmer. However, Hendrickx places the scene slightly
before Narmer, based, in part on the uncharacteristic absence of
Narmer’s royal name in the inscription.
In popular culture
Pharaoh (The First Dynasty Book 1) by Lester Picker is a
fictionalized biography of Narmer. The author consulted with
Günter Dreyer to achieve authenticity.
Murder by the Gods: An Ancient Egyptian Mystery by William Collins is
a thriller about prince Aha (later king Hor-Aha), with
in a secondary role.
The Third Gate by Lincoln Child is an adventure story with a dose of
the occult about an archaeological expedition in search of the real
Narmer and its mysterious contents.
Pharaoh: The boy who conquered the
Nile by Jackie French is a
children's book ( ages 10–14) of the adventures of Prince Narmer.
Beginning of an Empire: An Egyptian Historical Fiction Novel by Joseph
Hergott is an adventure story for young adults based on the premise
Menes were separate people, but twin brothers.
The Kane Chronicles
The Kane Chronicles by
Rick Riordan is a young person's trilogy based
on Egyptian mythology.
Narmer is mentioned to be an ancestor of the
books' protagonists Carter and Sadie Kane.
Gallery of images
Alabaster statue of a baboon divinity with the name of the pharaoh
Narmer inscribed on its base, on display at the Ägyptisches Museum
A mud jar sealing indicating that the contents came from the estate of
the pharaoh Narmer. Originally from Tarkhan, now on display at the
Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York City.
Narmer Macehead, on display at the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford, UK.
Pottery sherd inscribed with the serekh and name of the pharaoh
Narmer, on display at the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston.
Narmer wearing the
Deshret crown of
Lower Egypt on the
Incised inscription on a vessel found at
Tarkhan (tomb 414), naming
king Narmer; Petrie Museum UC 16083.
Narmer serekh in its full formal format on an alabaster vase from
Abydos, Petrie, 1901, RT II, p. 44, fig. 52.359(detail).
Narmer serekh on pottery vessel with stylized catfish and
without chisel or falcon, copyright Kafr Hassan Dawood Mission.
Arrowheads from Narmer’s tomb, Petrie 1905, Royal Tombs II, pl.
IV.14. According to Dreyer, these arrowheads are probably from the
tomb of Djer, where similar arrowheads were found.
^ Establishing absolute dating for
Ancient Egypt relies on two
different methods, each of which is problematic. As a starting point,
the Historical Method makes use of astronomical events that are
recorded in Ancient Egyptian texts, which establishes a starting point
in which an event in Egyptian history is given an unambiguous absolute
date. “Dead reckoning” – adding or subtracting the length of
each king’s reign (based primarily on Manetho, the Turin
and the Palermo Stone) is then used until one gets to the reign of the
king in question. However, there is uncertainty about the length of
reigns, especially in the Archaic Period and the Intermediate Periods.
Two astrological events are available to anchor these estimates, one
in the Middle Kingdom and one in the New Kingdom(for a discussion of
the problems in establishing absolute dates for Ancient Egypt, see
Shaw 2000a, pp. 1–16). Two estimates based on this method are:
Hayes 1970, p. 174, who gives the beginning of the reign of
Menes as 3114 BC, which he rounds to 3100 BC; and, Krauss &
Warburton 2006, p. 487 who places the ascent of
Narmer to the
throne of Egypt as c. 2950 BC. It is important to note that several
estimates of the beginning of the First Dynasty assume that it began
with Hor-Aha. Setting aside the question of whether the First Dynasty
Narmer or Hor-Aha, to calculate the beginning of Narmer’s
reign from these estimates, they must be adjusted by the length of
Narmer’s reign. Unfortunately, there are no reliable estimates of
the length of Narmer’s reign. In the absence of other evidence,
scholars use Manetho’s estimate of the length of the reign of Menes,
i.e. 62 years. If one assumes that
Menes are the same
person, this places the date for the beginning of Narmer’s reign at
62 years earlier than the date for the beginning of the First Dynasty
given by the authors who associate the beginning of the First Dynasty
with the start of Hor-Aha’s reign. Estimates of the beginning of
Narmer’s reign calculated in this way include von Beckerath 1997,
p. 179 (c. 3094-3044 BC); Helck 1986, p. 28 (c. 2987 BC);
Kitchen 2000, p. 48 (c. 3092 BC), and Shaw 2000b, p. 480 (c.
3062 BC). Considering all six estimates suggests a range of c. 3114
– 2987 BC based on the Historical Method. The exception to the
mainstream consensus, is Mellaart 1979, pp. 9–10 who estimates
the beginning of the First Dynasty to be c. 3400 BC. However, since he
reached this conclusion by disregarding the Middle Kingdom
astronomical date, his conclusion is not widely accepted. Radiocarbon
Dating has, unfortunately, its own problems: According to Hendrickx
2006, p. 90, “the calibration curves for the (second half) of
the 4th millennium BC show important fluctuations with long possible
data ranges as a consequence. It is generally considered a ‘bad
period’ for Radiocarbon dating.” Using a statistical approach,
including all available carbon 14 dates for the Archaic Period,
reduces, but does not eliminate, these inherent problems. Dee & et
al., uses this approach, and derive a 65% confidence interval estimate
for the beginning of the First Dynasty of c. 3211 – 3045 BC.
However, they define the beginning of the First Dynasty as the
beginning of the reign of Hor-Aha. There are no radiocarbon dates for
Narmer, so to translate this to the beginning of Narmer’s reign one
must again adjust for the length of Narmer’s reign of 62 years,
which gives a range of c. 3273-3107 BC for the beginning of Narmer’s
reign. This is reassuringly close to the range of mainstream
Egyptologists using the Historical Method of c. 3114 - 2987 BC. Thus,
combining the results of two different methodologies allows to place
the accession of
Narmer to c. 3273 - 2987 BC.
^ The question of who was
Menes – hence, who was the first king of
the First Dynasty has been hotly debated. Since 1926, 70 different
authors have taken an opinion on whether it is
Narmer or Aha. Most
of these are only passing references, but there have been several in
depth analyses on both sides of the issues. Recent discussions in
Narmer include Kinnaer 2001, Cervelló-Autuori 2005, and
Heagy 2014. Detailed discussions in favor of Aha include Helck 1953,
Emery 1961, pp. 31–37, and Dreyer 2007. It is interesting to
note that, for the most part English speaking authors favor Narmer,
while German speaking authors favor Hor-Aha. The most important
evidence in favor of
Narmer are the two necropolis seal impressions
from Abydos, which list
Narmer as the first king. Since the
publication of the first of the necropolis sealings in 1987, 28
authors have published articles identifying
to 14 who identify
Narmer with Hor-Aha.
^ In the upper right hand quarter of the
Naqada label is a serekh of
Hor-Aha. To its right is a hill-shaped triple enclosure with the
“mn” sign surmounted by the signs of the “two ladies”, the
Upper Egypt (Nekhbet) and
Lower Egypt (Wadjet). In later
contexts, the presence of the “two ladies” would indicate a
“nbty” name (one of the five names of the king). Hence, the
inscription was interpreted as showing that the “nbty” name of
Hor-Aha was “Mn” short for Menes. An alternative theory is
that the enclosure was a funeral shrine and it represents Hor-Aha
burying his predecessor, Menes. Hence
Menes was Narmer. Although
the label generated a lot of debate, it is now generally agreed that
the inscription in the shrine is not a king’s name, but is the name
of the shrine “The Two Ladies Endure,” and provide no evidence for
Menes was. The second document, the seal impression from
Abydos, shows the serekh of
Narmer alternating with the gameboard sign
(mn) sign, together with its phonetic compliment, the n sign, which is
always shown when the full name of
Menes is written, again
representing the name “Menes”. At first glance, this would seem to
be strong evidence that
Narmer was Menes. However, based on an
analysis of other early First Dynasty seal impressions, which contain
the name of one or more princes, the seal impression has been
interpreted by other scholars as showing the name of a prince of
Narmer’s named Menes. Hence
Menes was Narmer’s successor, Hor-Aha.
Hor-Aha was Menes. This was refuted by Cervelló-Autuori
2005, pp. 42–45; but opinions still vary, and the seal
impression cannot be said to definitively support either theory.
^ According to Schulman the
Narmer Palette commemorates a conquest of
Libyans that occurred earlier than Narmer, probably during Dynasty 0.
Libyans, in this context, were not people who inhabited what is modern
Libya, but rather peoples who lived in the north-west Delta of the
Nile, which later became a part of Lower Egypt. Schulman describes
scenes from Dynasty V (2 scenes), Dynasty VI, and Dynasty XXV. In each
of these, the king is shown defeating the Libyans, personally killing
their chief in a classic “smiting the enemy” pose. In three of
Narmer examples, the name of the wife and two sons of the
chief are named – and they are the same names for all three scenes
from vastly different periods. This proves that all, but the first
representation, cannot be recording actual events, but are ritual
commemorations of an earlier event. The same might also be true of the
first example in Dynasty V. The scene on the
Narmer Palette is
similar, although it does not name the wife or sons of the Libyan
Narmer Palette could represent the actual event on which
the others are based. However, Schulman (following Breasted 1931)
argues against this on the basis that the
Palermo Stone shows
predynastic kings wearing the double crown of Upper and Lower Egypt
suggesting that they ruled a unified Egypt. Hence, the
rather than showing a historic event during Narmer’s reign
commemorates the defeat of the Libyans and the unification of Egypt
which occurred earlier. Köhler 2002, p. 505 proposes that the
Narmer Palette has nothing to do with the unification of Egypt.
Instead she describes it as an example of the “subjecting the
enemy” motif which goes back as far as
Naqada Ic (about 400 years
before Narmer), and which represents the ritual defeat of chaos, a
fundamental role of the king. O’Connor 2011 also argues that it has
nothing to do with the unification, but has a (very complicated)
^ During the summer of 1994, excavators from the Nahal Tillah
expedition, in southern Israel, discovered an incised ceramic sherd
with the serekh sign of Narmer. The sherd was found on a large
circular platform, possibly the foundations of a storage silo on the
Halif Terrace. Dated to c. 3000 BCE, mineralogical studies conducted
on the sherd conclude that it is a fragment of a wine jar which had
been imported from the
Nile valley to Canaan.
^ In 2012, Pierre Tallet discovered an important new series of rock
carvings in Wadi Ameyra. This discovery was reported in Tallet 2015,
and in 2016 in two web articles by Owen Jarus These inscriptions
strongly suggest that
Neithhotep was Djer’s regent for a period of
time, but do not resolve the question of whether she was Narmer’s
queen. In the first of Jarus’ articles, he quotes Tallet as saying
Neithhotep “was not the wife of Narmer”. However, Tallet, in
a personal communication with Thomas C. Heagy explained that he had
been misquoted. According to Tallet, she could have been Narmer’s
wife (Djer’s grandmother), but that it is more likely (because
Hor-Aha are both thought to have had long reigns) that she
was in the next generation – for example Djer’s mother or aunt.
This is consistent with the discussion in Tallet 2015,
^ For a discussion of Cemetery B see Dreyer 1999, pp. 110–11,
fig. 7 and Wilkinson 2000, pp. 29–32, fig. 2
^ Narmer’s tomb has much more in common with the tombs of his
immediate predecessors, Ka and Iry-Hor, and other late Predynastic
tombs in Umm el-Qa’ab than it does with later 1st Dynasty tombs.
Narmer’s tomb is 31 sq. meters compared to Hor-Aha, whose tomb is
more than three times as large, not counting Hor-Aha's 36 subsidiary
graves. According to Deyer, Narmer’s tomb is even smaller than
the tomb of
Scorpion I (tomb Uj), several generations earlier.  In
addition, the earlier tombs of Narmer, Ka, and
Iry-Hor all have two
chambers with no subsidiary chambers, while later tombs in the 1st
Dynasty all have more complex structures including subsidiary chambers
for the tombs of retainers, who were probably sacrificed to accompany
the king in the afterlife. O’Connor 2009, pp. 148–150 To
avoid confusion, it's important to understand that he classifies
Narmer as the last king of the 0 Dynasty rather than the first king of
the 1st Dynasty, in part because Narmer’s tomb has more in common
with the earlier 0 Dynasty tombs than it does with the later 1st
Dynasty tombs. Dreyer 2003, p. 64 also makes the argument that
the major shift in tomb construction that began with Hor-Aha, is
evidence that Hor-Aha, rather than
Narmer was the first king of the
^ Numerous publications with either Werner Kaiser or his successor,
Günter Dreyer, as the lead author - most of them published in MDAIK
beginning in 1977
^ Next to Hor-Aha’s enclosure is a large, unattributed enclosure
referred to as the “Donkey Enclosure” because of the presence of
10 donkeys buried next to the enclosure. No objects were found in the
enclosure with a king’s name, but hundreds of seal impressions were
found in the gateway chamber of the enclosure, all of which appear to
date to the reigns of Narmer, Hor-Aha, or Djer.
have enclosures identified, “making
Narmer the most attractive
candidate for the builder of this monument”. The main objection
to its assignment to
Narmer is that the enclosure is too big. It is
larger than all three of Hor-Aha’s put together, while Hor-Aha’s
tomb is much larger than Narmer’s tomb. For all of the clearly
identified 1st Dynasty enclosures, there is a rough correlation
between the size of the tomb and the size of the enclosure.
Identifying the Donkey Enclosure with
Narmer would violate that
correlation. That leaves
Hor-Aha and Djer. The objection to the
assignment of the enclosure to Aha is the inconsistency of the
subsidiary graves of Hor-Aha’s enclosure, and subsidiary graves of
the donkeys. In addition, the seeming completeness of the Aha
enclosure without the Donkey Enclosure, argues against Hor-Aha. This
leaves Djer, whom Bestock considers the most likely candidate. The
problems with this conclusion, as identified by Bestock, are that the
Donkey Enclosure has donkeys in the subsidiary graves, whereas Djer
has humans in his. In addition, there are no large subsidiary graves
at Djer’s tomb complex that would correspond to the Donkey
Enclosure. She concludes that, “the interpretation and
attribution of the Donkey Enclosure remain speculative.” There
are, however, two additional arguments for the attribution to Narmer:
First, it is exactly where one would expect to find Narmer’s
Funerary Enclosure – immediately next to Hor-Aha’s. Second, all of
the 1st Dynasty tombs have subsidiary graves for humans except that of
Narmer, and all of the attributed 1st Dynasty enclosures, except the
Donkey Enclosure, have subsidiary graves for humans. But neither
Narmer’s tomb nor the Donkey Enclosure have known subsidiary graves
for humans. The lack of human subsidiary graves at both sites seems
important. It is also possible that
Narmer had a large funerary
enclosure precisely because he had a small tomb. In the
absence of finding an object with a Narmer’s name on it, any
conclusion must be tentative, but it seems that the preponderance of
evidence and logic support the identification of the Donkey Enclosure
^ Of these inscriptions, 29 are controversial or uncertain. They
include the unique examples from Coptos, En Besor, Tell el-Farkhan,
Gebel Tjauti, and Kharga Oasis, as well as both inscriptions each from
Buto and Tel Ma'ahaz. Sites with more than one inscription are
footnoted with either references to the most representative
inscriptions, or to sources that are the most important for that site.
All of the inscriptions are included in the
Narmer Catalog, which also
includes extensive bibliographies for each inscription. Several
references discuss substantial numbers of inscriptions. They include:
Database of Early Dynastic Inscriptions, Kaplony 1963, Kaplony 1964,
Kaiser & Dreyer 1982, Kahl 1994,van den Brink 1996, van den Brink
2001, Jiménez-Serrano 2003, Jiménez-Serrano 2007, and Pätznick
2009. Anđelković 1995 includes
Narmer inscriptions from Canaan
within the context of the overall relations between
Canaan and Early
Egypt, including descriptions of the sites in which they were found.
List of Pharaohs
^ a b Wilkinson 1999, p. 67.
^ Hayes 1970, p. 174.
^ Quirke & Spencer 1992, p. 223.
^ Redford 1986, pp. 136, n.10.
^ Pätznick 2009, pp. 308, n.8.
^ Leprohon 2013, p. 22.
^ Clayton 1994, p. 16.
^ Pätznick 2009, p. 287.
^ Ray 2003, pp. 131-138.
^ Wilkinson 2000, pp. 23-32.
^ Raffaele 2003, pp. 110, n. 46.
^ von Beckerath 1999, p. 36.
^ Regulski 2010, p. 126.
^ Godron 1949, p. 218.
^ Pätznick 2009, p. 310.
^ a b c G. Dreyer, personal communication to Thomas C Heagy, 2017
^ Heagy 2014, pp. 83-84.
^ Borchardt 1897, pp. 1056-1057.
^ Newberry 1929, pp. 47-49.
^ Kinnear 2003, p. 30.
^ Newberry 1929, pp. 49-50.
^ Helck 1953, pp. 356-359.
^ Heagy 2014, pp. 77-78.
^ Dreyer 1987.
^ Dreyer et al. 1996, pp. 72-73, fig. 6, pl.4b-c.
^ Cervelló-Autuori 2008, pp. 887-899.
^ Quibell 1898, pp. 81-84, pl. XII-XIII.
^ Gardiner 1961, pp. 403-404.
^ a b Dreyer 2000.
^ Wilkinson 1999, p. 68.
^ Davies & Friedman 1998, p. 35.
^ Baines 2008, p. 23.
^ Wengrow 2006, p. 204.
^ Dreyer, Hartung & Pumpenmeier 1993, p. 56, fig. 12.
^ Kahl 2007, p. 13.
^ Dreyer 2011, p. 135.
^ a b Jiménez-Serrano 2007, p. 370, table 8.
^ Ciałowicz 2011, pp. 63-64.
^ Heagy 2014, pp. 73-74.
^ Quibell 1900, p. 7, pl. XV.7.
^ Dreyer 2016.
^ Quibell 1900, pp. 8-9, pls. XXV, XXVIB.
^ Anđelković 1995, p. 72.
^ Braun 2011, p. 105.
^ a b c Anđelović 2011, p. 31.
^ Anđelović 2011, p. 31.
^ Jiménez-Serrano 2007, p. 370, Table 8.
^ Wilkinson 1999, p. 71.
^ Wilkinson 1999, pp. 71-105.
^ Levy et al. 1995, pp. 26–35.
^ a b Porat & 1986-87, p. 109.
^ Yadin 1955.
^ Campagno 2008, pp. 695-696.
^ de Microschedji 2008, pp. 2028-2029.
^ a b Dreyer 2016, p. 104.
^ a b Tyldesley 2006, pp. 26-29.
^ Wilkinson 1999, p. 70.
^ Emery 1961, pp. 44-47.
^ Tallet 2015.
^ Owen Jarus: Early Egyptian Queen revealed in 5.000-year-old
Hieroglyphs at livescience.com
^ Kaiser 1964, pp. 96–102, fig.2.
^ Kaiser et al.
^ Dreyer 1988, p. 19.
^ a b Petrie 1900.
^ a b Petrie 1901.
^ Petrie 1901, p. 22.
^ a b Petrie 1901, pp. pl.VI..
^ Adams & O’Connor 2003, pp. 78-85.
^ O’Connor 2009, pp. 159-181.
^ Bestock 2009, p. 102.
^ Bestock 2009, pp. 102-104.
^ Bestock 2009, p. 104.
^ Dreyer 1998, p. 19.
^ Bestock 2009, p. 103, n.1.
^ Quibell 1898, pp. 81–84, pl. XII–XIII.
^ Spencer 1980, p. 64(454), pl. 47.454, pl.64.454.
Narmer Catalog http://narmer.org/inscription/0084
^ Williams 1988, pp. 35-50, fig. 3a.
Narmer Catalog http://narmer.org/inscription/0085
^ Petrie, Wainwright & Gardiner 1913.
^ Petrie 1914.
^ Saad 1947, pp. 26-27.
Narmer Catalog http://narmer.org/inscription/0114
^ Dunham 1978, pp. 25-26, pl. 16A.
^ van den Brink 1992, pp. 52-53.
^ Bakr 1988, pp. 50-51, pl. 1b.
^ Wildung 1981, pp. 35-37.
Narmer Catalog http://narmer.org/inscription/0121
^ Lacau & Lauer 1959, pp. 1-2, pl. 1.1.
Narmer Catalog http://narmer.org/inscription/0115
^ von der Way 1989, p. 285-286, n.76, fig. 11.7.
^ Jucha 2008, pp. 132-133, fig. 47.2.
Narmer Catalog http://narmer.org/inscription/6002
^ Hassan 2000, p. 39.
^ Winkler 1938, pp. 10,25, pl.11.1.
^ Ikram & Rossi 2004, pp. 211-215, fig. 1-2.
Narmer Catalog http://narmer.org/inscription/6015
^ Darnell & Darnell 1997, pp. 71-72, fig. 10.
Narmer Catalog http://narmer.org/inscription/4037
^ Amiran 1974, pp. 4-12, fig. 20, pl.1.
Narmer Catalog http://narmer.org/inscription/0123
^ Schulman 1976, pp. 25-26.
Narmer Catalog http://narmer.org/inscription/0547
^ de Miroschedji & Sadeq 2000, pp. 136-137, fig. 9.
Narmer Catalog http://narmer.org/inscription/6009
^ Levy et al. 1997, pp. 31-33.
^ Yeivin 1960, pp. 193-203, fig. 2, pl. 24a.
Narmer Catalog http://narmer.org/inscription/0124
^ Amiran, Ilan & Aron 1983, pp. 75-83, fig.7c.
Narmer Catalog http://narmer.org/inscription/6006
^ Schulman & Gophna 1981.
^ van den Brink & Braun 2002, pp. 167-192.
^ Tallet & Laisney 2012, pp. 383–389.
Narmer Catalog http://narmer.org/inscription/4814
^ Petrie 1939, p. 78.
^ Trope, Quirke & Lacovara 2005, p. 18.
^ Stevenson 2015, p. 44.
^ Charron 1990, p. 97.
^ Wilkinson 1999.
^ Gatto et al. 2009.
^ a b Darnell 2015.
Narmer Catalog http://narmer.org/inscription/6014
^ Gatto 2012.
Adams, Matthew; O'Connor, David (2003), "The Royal mortuary enclosures
of Abydos and Hierakonpolis", in Hawass, Zahi, The treasures of the
pyramids, Cairo: American University in Cairo Press,
pp. 78–85 .
Amiran, Ruth (1974), "An Egyptian jar fragment with the name of Narmer
from Arad", IEJ, 24,1: 4–12
Amiran, R.; Ilan, O.; Aron, C. (1983), "Excavations at Small Tel
Narmer serekhs", IEJ, 2: 75–83 .
Anđelković, B (1995), The Relations Between Early Bronze Age I
Canaanites and Upper Egyptians, Belgrade: Faculty of Philosophy,
Center for archaeological Research, ISBN 86-80269-17-4 .
——— (2011), "Political Organization of Egypt in the Predynastic
Period", in Teeter, E, Before the Pyramids, Chicago: Oriental
Institute of the University of Chicago,
ISBN 978-1-885923-82-0 .
Baines, J (1995), "Origins of Egyptian Kingship", in O’Connor, D;
Silverman, DP, Ancient Egyptian Kingship, Leiden, New York, Cologne:
EJ Brill, pp. 95–156, ISBN 90-04-10041-5 .
Baines, John (2008), "On the evolution, purpose, and forms of Egyptian
annals", in Engel, Eva-Maria; Müller, Vera; Hartung, Ulrich, Zeichen
aus dem Sand: Streiflichter aus Ägyptens Geschichte zu Ehren von
Günter Dreyer, Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz., pp. 19–40 .
Bakr, M.I. (1988), "The new excavations at Ezbet el-Tell, Kufur Nigm;
the first season (1984)", in van den Brink, E.C.M., The archaeology of
Nile Delta: Problems and priorities. Proceedings of the seminar
held in Cairo, 19 - 22 October 1986, on the occasion of the fifteenth
anniversary of the Netherlands Institute of Archaeology and Arabic
Studies in Cairo, Amsterdam, pp. 49–62 .
Bestock, Laurel (2009), The development of royal funerary cult at
Abydos: two funerary enclosures from the reign of Aha,
Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz
Braun, E (2011), "Early Interaction Between Peoples of the
and the Southern Levant", in Teeter, E, Before the Pyramids, Chicago:
Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago,
ISBN 978-1-885923-82-0 .
Breasted, James H. (1931), "The predynastic union of Egypt", Bulletin
de l'Institut Français d'Archéologie Orientale, 30: 709–724 .
Campagno, M (2008), "Ethnicity and Changing Relationships between
Egyptians and South Levantines during the Early Dynastic Period", in
Midant-Reynes; Tristant, Y, Egypt at its Origins, 2, Leuven: Peeters,
ISBN 978-90-429-1994-5 .
Cervelló-Autuori, Josep (2003), "Narmer,
Menes and the seals from
Abydos", Egyptology at the dawn of the twenty-first century:
proceedings of the Eighth International Congress of Egyptologists,
2000, 2, Cairo: The American University in Cairo Press .
Cervelló-Autuori, Josep (2005), "Was
Archéo-Nil, 15 .
Cervelló-Autuori, J. (2008), "The Thinite "Royal Lists": Typology and
meaning", in Midant-Reynes, B.; Tristant, Y.; Rowland, J.; Hendrickx,
S., Egypt at its origins 2. Proceedings of the international
conference “Origin of the state. Predynastic and Early Dynastic
Egypt”, Toulouse (France), 5th - 8th September 2005, OLA (172),
Charron, Alain (1990), "L'époque thinite", L’Égypte des
millénaires obscures, Paris, pp. 77–97 .
Ciałowicz, KM (2011), "The Predynastic/Early Dynastic Period at Tell
el-Farkha", in Teeter, E, Before the Pyramids, Chicago: Oriental
Institute of the University of Chicago, pp. 55–64,
ISBN 978-1-885923-82-0 .
Darnell, J.C.; Darnell, D. (1997), "Theban Desert Road Survey", The
Oriental Institute Annual Report, 1996-1997, Chicago,
pp. 66–76 .
Davies, Vivian; Friedman, Renée (1998), Egypt Uncovered, New York:
Stewart, Taboti & Chang
Dee, Michael; Wengrow, David; Shortland, Andrew; Stevenson, Alice;
Brock, Fiona; Flink, Linus Girland; Ramsey, Bronk. "An absolute
chronology for early Egypt using radiocarbon dating and Bayesian
statistical modeling". Proceedings of the Royal society. Retrieved 31
October 2016. published 2013 .
de Miroschedji, P.; Sadeq, M. (2000), "Tell es-Sakan, un site du
Bronze ancien découvert dans la région de Gaza", Comptes rendus des
séances de l'Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres, 1:
Dodson, Aidan; Hilton, Dyan (2004), The Complete Royal Families of
Ancient Egypt, Thames & Hudson, ISBN 0-500-05128-3 .
Dreyer, G. (1987), "Ein Siegel der frühzeitlichen Königsnekropole
von Abydos", MDAIK, 43: 33–44 .
Dreyer, G (1999), "Abydos, Umm el-Qa'ab", in Bard, KA; Shubert, SB,
Encyclopedia of the Archaeology of Ancient Egypt, New York: Routledge,
ISBN 0-415-18589-0 .
——— (2000), "Egypt's Earliest Event", Egyptian Archaeology,
Dreyer, G. (2007), "Wer war Menes?", in Hawass, Z.A.; Richards, J.,
The archaeology and art of Ancient Egypt. Essays in honor of David B.
O’Connor, CASAE, 34.1, Cairo .
Dreyer, Günter (2011), "Tomb U-J: a royal burial of Dynasty 0 at
Abydos", in Teeter, Emily, Before the pyramids: the origins of
Egyptian civilization, Chicago: The Oriental Institute of the
University of Chicago, pp. 127–136 .
Dreyer, Günter (2016), "Dekorierte Kisten aus dem Grab des Narmer",
Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts, Abteilung
Kairo, 70-71 (2014-2015), pp. 91–104
Dreyer, Günter; Hartung, Ulrich; Pumpenmeier, Frauke (1993), "Umm
el-Qaab: Nachuntersuchungen im frühzeitlichen Königsfriedhof, 5./6.
Vorbericht", Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts,
Abteilung Kairo, 49: 23–62 .
Dreyer, G.; Engel, E.M.; Hartung, U.; Hikade, T.; Köler, E.C.;
Pumpenmeier, F. (1996), "Umm el-Qaab: Nachuntersuchungen im
frühzeitlichen Königsfriedhof, 7./8. Vorbericht.", MDAIK, 52:
Dunham, D. (1978), Zawiyet el-Aryan: The cemeteries adjacent to the
Layer Pyramid, Boston .
Edwards, I.E.S (1971), "The early dynastic period in Egypt", The
Cambridge Ancient History, 1, Cambridge: Cambridge University
Emery, W.B. (1961). Archaic Egypt: Culture and Civilization in Egypt
Five Thousand Years Ago. London: Penguin Books. .
Gardiner, Alan (1961), Egypt of the Pharaohs,
Godron, G. (1949), "A propos du nom royal [hieroglyphs]", Annales du
Service des Antiquités de l'Égypte, 49: 217–220, 547 .
Hassan, FA (2000), "Kafr Hassan Dawood", Egyptian Archaeology, 16:
Hayes, Michael (1970), "Chapter VI.Chronology, I. Egypt to the end of
the Twentieth Dynasty", in Edwards, I.E.S.; Gadd, C.J., The Cambridge
Ancient History, Volume I, Part I, Cambridge .
Heagy, Thomas C. (2014), "Who was Menes?", Archeo-Nil, 24:
59–92 . Available online "". .
Heagy, Thomas C. "The
Helck, W. (1953), "Gab es einen König Menes?", ZDMG, 103, n.s. 28:
Helck, W. (1986), Geschichte des alten Ägypten, Handbuch des
Orientalistik 1/3, Leiden;Köln .
Hendrickx, Stan (2006), "II.1 Predynastic-Early Dynastic Chronology",
in Hornung, Erik; Krauss, Rolf; Walburton, David A., Ancient Egyptian
Chronology, Leiden .
Hendrickx, Stan (2017),
Narmer Palette Bibliography (PDF) .
Hendrickx, Stan; De Meyer, Marleen; Eyckerman, Merel (2014), "On the
origin of the royal false beard and its bovine symbolism", in Jucha,
Mariusz A; Dębowska-Ludwin, Joanna; Kołodziejczyk, Piotr, Aegyptus
est imago caeli: studies presented to Krzysztof M. Ciałowicz on his
60th birthday, Kraków: Institute of Archaeology, Jagiellonian
University in Kraków; Archaeologica Foundation,
pp. 129–143 .
Ikram, S.; Rossi, C. (2004), "A new Early Dynastic serekh from the
Kharga Oasis", JEA, 90: 211–215
Jiménez-Serrano, A. (2003), "Chronology and local traditions: The
representation of power and the royal name in the Late Predynastic
Period", Archéo-Nil, 13: 93–142 .
Jiménez-Serrano (2007), Los Primeros Reyes y la Unificación de
Egipto [The first kings and the unification of Egypt] (in Spanish),
Jaen, ES: Universidad de Jaen, ISBN 978-84-8439-357-3 .
Jucha, M.A. (2008), Chłondicki, M.; Ciałowicz, K.M., eds., "Pottery
from the grave [in] Polish Excavations at Tell el-Farkha (Ghazala) in
Nile Delta. Preliminary report 2006-2007", Archeologia, LIX:
Kahl, J. (1994), Das System der ägyptischen Hieroglypheninschrift in
der 0.-3. Dynastie, Göttinger Orientforschungen. 4. Reihe: Ägypten,
29, Wiesbaden .
Kahl,, Jochem (2007), "Ober- und Unterägypten: eine dualistische
Konstruktion und ihre Anfänge", in Albertz, Rainer,; Blöbaum, Anke;
Funke, Peter, Räume und Grenzen: topologische Konzepte in den antiken
Kulturen des östlichen Mittelmeerraums, München: Herbert Utz,
Kaiser, W.; Dreyer, G. (1982), "Umm el-Qaab: Nachuntersuchungen im
frühzeitlichen Königsfriedhof, 2. Vorbericht", MDAIK, 38:
Kaplony, P. (1963), Die Inschriften der ägyptischen Frühzeit,
Ägyptologische Abhandlungen, 8, Wiesbaden .
Kaplony, P. (1964), Die Inschriften der ägyptischen Frühzeit:
Supplement, Ägyptologische Abhandlungen, 9, Wiesbaden .
Kinnaer, J. (2001), "Aha or Narmer. Which was Menes?", KMT, 12,3:
Kinnaer, Jacques (2003), "The
Naqada label and the identification of
Menes", Göttinger Miszellen, 196: 23–30 .
Kinnaer, Jacques (2004), "What is Really Known About the Narmer
Palette?", KMT: A Modern Journal of Ancient Egypt .
Kitchen, Kenneth A. (2000), "3.1 Regional and Genealogical Data of
Ancient Egypt (Absolute Chronology I) The Historical Chronology of
Ancient Egypt, A Current Assessment", in Bietak, Manfred, The
Synchronization of Civilizations in the Eastern Mediterranean in the
Second Millennium, Wein .
Köhler, E. Christiana (2002), "History or ideology? New reflections
Narmer palette and the nature of foreign relations in Pre- and
Early Dynastic Egypt", in van den Brink, Edwin C. M.; Levy, Thomas E.,
Egypt and the Levant: interrelations from the 4th through the early
3rd millennium BCE, London ; New York: Leicester University
Press, pp. 499–513 .
Krauss, Rolf; Warburton, David Alan (2006), "Conclusions", in Hornung,
Erik; Krauss, Rolf K.; Warburton, David A.,
Ancient Egypt Chronology,
Handbuch der Orientalistik. Section 1: The Near and Middle East: -
1:83, Leiden;Boston .
Lacau, J.P.; Lauer, P. (1959), La Pyramide à degrés. vol. 4.
Inscriptions gravées sur les vases, Excavations at Saqqara/Fouilles
à Saqqarah, 8, Cairo .
Leprohon, Ronald Jacques (2013). The Great Name: Ancient Egyptian
Royal Titulary. Writings from the Ancient World. Atlanta: Society of
Biblical Literature. .
Lloyd, Alan B (1994) , Herodotus: Book II, Leiden: EJ Brill,
ISBN 90-04-04179-6 .
Levy, TE; van den Brink, ECM; Goren, Y; Alon, D (1995), "New Light on
Narmer and the Protodynastic Egyptian Presence in Canaan", The
Biblical Archaeologist, 58 (1): 26–35, doi:10.2307/3210465 .
Levy, T.E.; van den Brink, E.C.M.; Goren, Y.; Alon, D. (1997),
"Egyptian-Canaanite interaction at Nahal Tillah,
Israel (ca. 4500-3000
B.C.E.): An interim report on the 1994-1995 excavations", Bulletin of
the American Schools of Oriental Research, 307: 1–51 .
Manetho (1940), Manetho, translated by Wadell, W.G., Cambridge
Mellaart, James (1979), "Egyptian and Near Eastern chronology: a
dilemma?", Antiquity: 6–18
Midant-Reynes, B (2000), The Prehistory of Egypt .
de Miroschedji, P (2008), "Sakan, Tell Es-", in Stern, E; Geva, H;
Paris, A, The new Encyclopedia of Archaeological Excavations in the
Holy Land, Supplementary Volume, 5 .
Newberry, Percy E. (1929), "Menes: the founder of the Egyptian
monarchy (circa 3400 B.C.)", in Anonymous, Great ones of ancient
Egypt: portraits by Winifred Brunton, historical studies by various
Egyptologists, London: Hodder and Stoughton, pp. 37–53 .
O'Connor, David (2009), Abydos: Egypt's first pharaohs and the cult of
Osiris. New aspects of antiquity, London: Thames & Hudson .
O'Connor, David (2011), "The
Narmer Palette: A New Interpretation", in
Teeter, E, Before the Pyramids, Chicago: Oriental Institute of the
University of Chicago, ISBN 978-1-885923-82-0 .
Pätznick, Jean-Pierre (2009), "Encore et toujours l'Horus Nâr-mer?
Vers une nouvelle approche de la lecture et de l'interprétation de ce
nom d'Horus", in Régen, Isabelle; Servajean, Frédéric, Verba
manent: recueil d'études dédiées à Dimitri Meeks par ses
collègues et amis 2, Montpellier: Université Paul Valéry,
pp. 307–324 .
"Petrie Museum of Egyptian Art (University College London)". .
Petrie, W.M.F. (1900), Royal tombs of the First Dynasty. Part 1,
Memoir, 18, London: EEF .
Petrie, W.M.F. (1901), Royal tombs of the First Dynasty. Part 2,
Memoir, 21, London: EEF .
Petrie, W.M. Flinders (1939), The making of Egypt, British School of
Archaeology in Egypt and Egyptian Research Account, 61, London:
Sheldon Press .
Petrie, W.M.F.; Wainwright, G.; Gardiner, A.H. (1913),
Tarkhan I and
Memphis V, London: BSAE ,
Petrie, W.M.F. (1914), Tarkan II, London: BSAE .
Porat, N (1986–87), "Local Industry of Egyptian Pottery in Southern
Palestine during the Early Bronze Period", Bulletin of the
Egyptological Seminar, 8 .
Quibell, JE (1898). "Slate Palette from Hierakonpolis". Zeitschrift
für ägyptische Sprache und Altertumskunde. 36: 81–84, pl.
XII–XIII. doi:10.1524/zaes.1898.36.jg.81. .
Quibell, J. E. (1900), Hierakonpolis, Part I, British School of
Archaeology in Egypt and Egyptian Research Account, 4, London: Bernard
Quirke, Stephen; Spencer, Jeffery (1992), The British Museum Book of
Ancient Egypt, London .
Regulski, Ilona (2010). A paleographic study of early writing in
Egypt. Orientalia Lovaniensia. Leuven-Paris-Walpole, MA: Uitgeverij
Peeters and Departement Oosterse Studies.
Regulksi, I. "Database of Early Dynastic Inscriptions".
Saad, Z.Y. (1947), Royal excavations at
Saqqara and Helwan
(1941-1945), Supplément aux annales du Service des Antiquités de
l’Égypte, 3, Cairo .
Schulman, AR (1991–92), "
Narmer and the Unification: A Revisionist
View", Bulletin of the Egyptological Seminar, 11: 79–105 .
Schulman, A.R. (1976), "The Egyptian seal impressions from 'En Besor",
‘Atiqot, 11: 16–26 .
Schulman, A.R.; Gophna, R. (1981), "An Egyptian serekh from Tel
Ma'ahaz", IEJ, 31: 165–167 .
Seidlmayer, S (2010), "The Rise of the Egyptian State to the Second
Dynasty", in Schulz, R; Seidel, M, Egypt: The World of the
Shaw, Ian (2000a), "Introduction: Chronologies and Cultural Change in
Egypt", in Shaw, Ian, The
Oxford History of Ancient Egypt, Oxford,
pp. 1–16 .
Shaw, Ian (2000b), "Chronology", in Shaw, Ian, The
Oxford History of
Ancient Egypt, Oxford, pp. 479–483 .
Spencer, A.J. (1980), Catalog of Egyptian Antiquities in the British
Museum. vol.V. Early Dynastic objects, London .
Tallet, Pierre (2015), La zone minière pharaonique du Sud-Sinaï -
II: Les inscriptions pré- et protodynastiques du Ouadi 'Ameyra (CCIS
nos 273-335), Mémoires publiés par les membres de l'Institut
français d'archéologie orientale, 132, Cairo: Institut français
d'archéologie orientale .
Tallet, P.; Laisney, D (2012), "
Narmer au Sud-Sinaï: Un
complément à la chronology des expéditions minères égyptiennes",
Bulletin de l'Institut français d'archéologie orientale, 112:
Tassie, G.J.; Hassan, F.A.; Van Wettering, J.; Calcoen, B. (2008),
"Corpus of potmarks from the Protodynastic to Early Dynastic cemetery
at Kafr Hassan Dawood, Wadi Tumilat, East Delta, Egypt", in
Midant-Reynes, B.; Tristant, Y., Egypt at its origins 2. Proceedings
of the International Conference "Origin of the state. Predynastic and
Early Dynastic Egypt", Toulouse (France), 5th - 8th September 2005.,
OLA, 172, Leuven, pp. 203–235 .
Trope, Betsy Teasley; Quirke, Stephen; Lacovara, Peter (2005),
Excavating Egypt: great discoveries from the Petrie Museum of Egyptian
Archaeology, University College, London., Atlanta: Michael C. Carlos
Museum, Emory University .
Tyldesley, Joyce (2006), Chronicle of the Queens of Egypt, London:
Thames & Hudson .
von Beckerath, Jurgen (1997), Chronologie des Pharaonischen Ägypten,
Müncher Ägyptologische Studien: - 46, Mainz .
van den Brink, E.C.M. (1992), "Preliminary Report on the Excavations
at Tell Ibrahim Awad, Seasons 1988-1990", in van den Brink, E.C.M.,
Nile Delta in transition: 4th-3rd Millennium B.C., Proceedings of
the seminar held in Cairo, 21-24 October 1990, Tel Aviv,
pp. 43–68 .
van den Brink, Edwin C. M.; Braun, Eliot (2002), "Wine jars with
serekhs from Early Bronze Lod: Appelation vallée du nil contrôlée,
but for whom?", in van den Brink, E.C. M.; Yannai, E., In quest of
ancient settlements and landscapes: Archaeological studies in honour
of Ram Gophna, Tel Aviv, pp. 167–192 .
van den Brink, E.C.M. (1996), "The incised serekh-signs of dynasties
0-1, Part I: Complete vessels", in Spencer, A.J., Aspects of early
Egypt, London, pp. 140–158
van den Brink, E.C.M. (2001), "The pottery-incised serekh-signs of
Dynasties 0-1. Part II: Fragments and additional complete vessels",
Archéo-Nil, 11: 24–100 .
von Beckerath, Jürgen (1999). Handbuch der ägyptischen Königsnamen.
Münchner Ägyptologische Studien. Münchener Universitätsschriften,
Philosophische Faklutät. 49. Mainz: Philipp von Zabern.
von der Way, T. (1989), "Tell el-Fara'in - Buto", MDAIK, 45:
Wengrow, David (2006), The archaeology of early Egypt: social
transformations in North-East Africa, 10,000 to 2650 BC, Cambridge
world archaeology, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press .
Wildung, D. (1981), Ägypten vor den Pyramiden: Münchener
Ausgrabungen in Ägypten, Mainz am Rhein .
Wilkinson, TAH (1999), Early Dynastic Egypt, London, New York:
Wilkinson, T. A. H. (2000), "
Narmer and the concept of the ruler",
JEA, 86: 23–32, doi:10.2307/3822303 .
Williams, B. (1988), "
Narmer and the
Coptos Colossi", JARCE, 25:
35–59, doi:10.2307/40000869 .
Winkler, H.A. (1938), Rock drawings of southern
Upper Egypt I. Sir
Robert Mond Desert Expedition Season 1936-1937, Preliminary Report,
EES, 26, London .
Yadin, Y (1955), "The Earliest record of Egypt Military Penetration
Israel Exploration Journal, 5 (1) .
Yeivin, S. (1960), "Early contacts between
Canaan and Egypt", IEJ,
10,4: 193–203 .
Library resources about
Resources in your library
Resources in other libraries
Davis, Whitney. 1992. Masking the Blow: The Scene of Representation In
Late Prehistoric Egyptian Art. Berkeley: University of California
Goldwasser, Orly. 1992. "The
Narmer Palette and the 'Triumph of
Metaphor'." Lingua Aegyptia 2: 67–85.
Muhlestein, Kerry. 2011. Violence In the Service of Order: The
Religious Framework for Sanctioned Killing In Ancient Egypt. Oxford:
Ray, John D. 2003. "The Name of
King Narmer." Lingua Aegyptia 11:
Shaw, Ian. 2004. Ancient Egypt: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Takacs, Gabor. 1997. "Note on the Name of
King Narmer." Linguistica
37, no. 1: 53–58.
Wengrow, David. 2001. "Rethinking 'Cattle Cults' in Early Egypt:
Towards a Prehistoric Perspective on the
Narmer Palette." Cambridge
Archaeological Journal 11, no. 1: 91–104.
Wilkinson, Toby A. H. 2000. "What a
King Is This:
Narmer and the
Concept of the Ruler." Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 86: 24–32.
Williams, Bruce, Thomas J. Logan, and William J. Murnane. 1987. "The
Metropolitan Museum Knife Handle and Aspects of Pharaonic Imagery
before Narmer." Journal of Near Eastern Studies 46, no. 4: 245–85.
Database of Early Dynastic Inscriptions
Early Egyptian Queen Revealed in 5,000-Year Old Hieroglyphs
Photos: 5,000-Year Old Hieroglyphs Discovered in Sinai Desert.
Hierakonpolis: City of the Hawk
Protodynastic to First Intermediate Period (<3150–2040 BC)
Narmer / Menes
Narmer / Menes
Merenre Nemtyemsaf I
Merenre Nemtyemsaf II
Neferkare III Neby
Neferkare IV Khendu
Neferkare V Tereru
Neferkare VI Pepiseneb
Middle Kingdom and Second Intermediate Period (2040–1550 BC)
Sekhemkare Amenemhat V
Ameny Antef Amenemhet VI
Mershepsesre Ini II
New Kingdom and Third Intermediate Period (1550–664 BC)
Osorkon the Elder
Late Period and Hellenistic Period (664–30 BC)
Alexander the Great
Philip III Arrhidaeus
Ptolemy I Soter
Ptolemy II Philadelphus
Ptolemy III Euergetes
Ptolemy IV Philopator
Ptolemy V Epiphanes
Ptolemy VI Philometor
Ptolemy VII Neos Philopator
Ptolemy VIII Euergetes
Ptolemy IX Soter
Ptolemy X Alexander I
Ptolemy XI Alexander II
Ptolemy XII Neos Dionysos
Ptolemy XV Caesarion
21st to 23rd
List of pharaohs
First Dynasty of Ancient Egypt
Tomb of Anedjib
Den seal impressions
Mastabas S3503 and S3504