Turin King List: column 9

The trace where the papyrus breaks off following the year is been read as a ditto mark, indicating zero years, with the months lost, and only the number of days remaining.¹ However, it cannot be excluded that the trace after the year sign should be read as a number rather than a ditto mark, yielding x years, 3 months (and 0 days).² The figure for number of years could be read as any of 1, 2, 3, 8, 10, 20, 30, or 40.³

The pestle sign (U33, ti) was certainly an error by the scribe for the very similar oar-sign (P8, ḫrw).¹ The spurious name name Khatira can thus be emended Khakherura (ḫa-ḫrw-rꜤ).²

This is the only record of this king, there are no other attestations.¹

The end of a long row in the previous column (8.3) encroach the start of this line. This is the only record of this king, there are no other attestations.¹ The end trace of a likely 11/21 days is evident just before the one.

As the papyrus cuts off after three vertical stokes, the number of years is either 3 or 4.¹

The months and days are lost, and fr. 75 (containing numbers) placed by Farina¹ does not belong here,² but at the end of column 7 (i.e. 7.10-13).³

This is the only record of this king, there are no other attestations.¹

This is the only record of this king, there are no other attestations.¹ The unreadable sign after the year notation seem to indicate a reading of zero years.²

Only tiny traces of an unreadable name remain, with a reign of one year, the number of months and days are lost.¹

Only a partial name is preserved, the rest is lost. This is the only record of this king, there are no other attestations.¹ The lack of space for the number of years before the ditto mark for months indicate zero years.²

This is the only record of this king, there are no other attestations.¹ The number of years is lost, but the reading of 3 months is likely, as it is placed directly below the previous entry for months (9.10).²

The lacuna marks that the number of months was lost.¹ This is the only record of this king, there are no other attestations.² The number eight at the end is badly damaged but certain.

This is the only record of this king, there are no other attestations.¹

The number of years is lost. The lacuna notation at the end suggest that the records for an unknown number of kings were lost in lacuna.¹

The name is lost, only the number of days remain. The papyrus break off, but it is clear that the number could be in the 21-24 days range.

The dot after the year signs is a clear indication that the years should be read as zero.¹ Only a 1 is preserved for the number of days, but any number from 1-4 could have stood where the papyrus breaks off.

The dot after the year signs is a clear indication that the years should be read as zero.¹ This is the only record of this king, there are no other attestations.²

This is the only record of this king, there are no other attestations.¹ The year and month numbers are lost, and the days number can be 10 or 20, followed by the sublinear tail of a nine, yielding a probable 19 days, or less likely 29.

This is the only record of this king, there are no other attestations.¹

Ibscher added a tiny fragment to fr. 101 here that is not present in Lepsius.¹

The horizontal fibres of fr. 123 corresponds with fr. 101.¹ The upper part of fr. 123² must have been added by Ibscher or Farina,³ as it is not present in Lepsius.⁴ However, Ryholt did not comment on the removal of this small fragment, which I have marked as unplaced fr. 123* for now.

The traces where the fragment break off is likely the beginning of a nomen, but cannot be identified.¹

The N21-sign (r) tentatively read by Gardiner, can be confidently read as the determinative Y1-sign.¹

The V30-sign (nb) is likely a mistake for O29 (ꜤꜢ),¹ which would yield the correct name ꜤAnati (ꜤꜢ-nꜤti),² and the last sign is the determinative of a seated man (A1), not the walking legs (D54) which are very similar in hieratic.³

The last sign is the determinative of a seated man (A1),¹ not the walking legs (D54) which are very similar in hieratic.²

Only traces of the cartouche close remain, the name is lost.

The papyrus is lost.