Hatshepsut reigned so long ago and much of evidence of her existence has been tampered with or destroyed.Kara Cooney has and includes lots of sources and notes.
Cooney does a good job using primary and sundry sources when write this book about someone who almost erased form history. Kara uses all sources that she can to describe Hatshepsut such as monuments, statues, temples, chapels, obelisks, portraits, stone blocks, reliefs, and chiseled inscriptions. Kara’s book states that Hatshepsut’s body is not yet found. However this may cause some disagreement between scholars. Due to the fact that some believe the mummy KV 60A to be Hatshepsut’s. Kara disproves this source by stating “Many other circumstantial signs do not support the identification of KV 60A as Hatshepsut’s mummy” providing …show more content…
In her notes she says “the later tomb of Tutankhamun provides the only comparison for Hatshepsut’s possible funerary goods.” One of the most important sources Kara uses is the evidence from Hatshepsut’S Temple of a million years. This massive temple is very effective at proving Cooney’s points and Hatshepsut’s existence. For example “Hatshepsut would call this temple Djeser Djeseru, and was meant to promote the sanctity of her kingship.” She also has to rely on other peoples translation. For example, the translation of the TT71 Tomb of Senenmut by Karl Leser. However Dr. Karl Leser is very experienced and creditable. Kara uses an ancient biography of an official to help prove Hatsepsut’s rein of power. However in her notes she states “although some Egyptologists argue that the biography of Ineni would have been written down long after the reign of Hatshepsut” and that “there is evidence that Ineni’s inscription finds its origins in the early reign of Thutmose III.” This proves that even Kara’s sources aren't perfect and can still be argued
Cooney does a good job using primary and sundry sources when write this book about someone who almost erased form history. Kara uses all sources that she can to describe Hatshepsut such as monuments, statues, temples, chapels, obelisks, portraits, stone blocks, reliefs, and chiseled inscriptions. Kara’s book states that Hatshepsut’s body is not yet found. However this may cause some disagreement between scholars. Due to the fact that some believe the mummy KV 60A to be Hatshepsut’s. Kara disproves this source by stating “Many other circumstantial signs do not support the identification of KV 60A as Hatshepsut’s mummy” providing …show more content…
In her notes she says “the later tomb of Tutankhamun provides the only comparison for Hatshepsut’s possible funerary goods.” One of the most important sources Kara uses is the evidence from Hatshepsut’S Temple of a million years. This massive temple is very effective at proving Cooney’s points and Hatshepsut’s existence. For example “Hatshepsut would call this temple Djeser Djeseru, and was meant to promote the sanctity of her kingship.” She also has to rely on other peoples translation. For example, the translation of the TT71 Tomb of Senenmut by Karl Leser. However Dr. Karl Leser is very experienced and creditable. Kara uses an ancient biography of an official to help prove Hatsepsut’s rein of power. However in her notes she states “although some Egyptologists argue that the biography of Ineni would have been written down long after the reign of Hatshepsut” and that “there is evidence that Ineni’s inscription finds its origins in the early reign of Thutmose III.” This proves that even Kara’s sources aren't perfect and can still be argued