is tranlated as `mkt' and means `district' or `region', a remarkable resemblance to `mkty'. `Tmsq' could be Damascus, `itmm', Etam. One may ask, if `mkty' is not `Megiddo' where on the list is it then? While it is tempting to suggest `mkty' refers to Megiddo, there were many towns located between Jerusalem and Megiddo. His attack probably being an almost simultaneous attack on Jerusalem and Megiddo, the towns in between which were in the territory of Judah, came later for it appears the Egyptians studiously avoided the territory of Israel, Jeroboam's homeland now. However, if we conclude Thutmoses had the most important towns placed at the head of the list, then Megiddo certainly qualifies for 2nd position. But if Thutmoses sequence was one of the important towns first, how are we to identify #3 `hty', and for that matter the towns right after?Where some of these locations estates of land owners and not towns? Is it possible that land owners lived sometimes outside the city walls?
Variant spelling of Kades. [Sallier 3 Papyrus]
Other considerations should probably include that the Egyptians used in this name list names which they were familiar with and did not necessarily try to translate Hebrew or Canaanite names, except for the more popular towns. And so it was that the Egyptians were more impressed by `holy' city rather than calling it `Jerusalem'. `Holy' places they were familiar with, Hebrew city names not so much. Why `itmm', if it was `Etam', made the list, we don't know. Perhaps something happened there which made that name stick in their minds. Hard to pronounce names they certainly must have changed to suit their ears.
These considerations may help us realize that, without original instructions, such lists are difficult to interprete. A notable exception may be `qds', `kadesh', Jerusalem, the nerve center of Judah and main target of his campaign.
It is very likely that the city list was compiled from the records of seized property and goods throughout the whole region and not to memorialize the names of towns. Jerusalem made the top, because it was a very rich source of lootable goods. If Megiddo provided rich spoils of war, it made the list, if not, why mention it? No doubt the homes, farms, and places surrounding Jerusalem were next to the city itself rich sources for spoils of war.
. Comparing that to Thutmose's `mkty' 
we see some similarities and some differences. Deciding if these two names, in revised view written about 100 years apart, represent the same town would heavily depend on which chronology one prefers to follow. Since we think the `mkty' in the list of Thutmoses does not refer to Megiddo, we would suggest the `mkd(i) in Sosenks list is the better candidate.
That pottery is highly finished, with a bright polish and fine iron glaze of red or orange. Such was already the development of pottery in the Aegean at that age. Who knows what went before that? No one has ever found anything to date before that in Greece. What state the Aegean civilization was in at an earlier date we do not know. It has nothing to do with the historic civilization of Greece; it is a branch of the bronze age of Europe, as much so as Hallstadt or Etruria. That this pottery of Kahun could succeed the Mykenae pottery is in most cases apparently impossible in its very nature. Such pieces as (1, 8, 12 & 14) are all of styles which do not fall into any place in the historical development of pottery from Mykenae downwards, and yet which most certainly came from Greece or Italy." [Sir Fl. Petrie, `The Antiqities of Kahun', p. 10, 11.]
Return to Picture Show