Turin King List: column 11

The identity of the first three kings is open to interpretation, as only the Sekhemra part of their names are preserved. All three are attested exclusively near Thebes which is compatible with a date in the Sixteenth Dynasty, however their order is tenative.¹

The identity of the first three kings is open to interpretation, as only the Sekhemra part of their names are preserved. All three are attested exclusively near Thebes which is compatible with a date in the Sixteenth Dynasty, however their order is tenative.¹

The identity of the first three kings is open to interpretation, as only the Sekhemra part of their names are preserved. All three are attested exclusively near Thebes which is compatible with a date in the Sixteenth Dynasty, however their order is tenative.¹

It is clear that the sign appearing to be a second s is likely an Ꜥnḫ with missing strokes.¹ As Gardiner himself noted, his reading of wꜢḏ is unlikely,² and it is unlikely that two successive kings shared the same prenomen (Sewadjenra).

Written mostly on a patch, the ink is much deteriorated, making the reading of many signs difficult. The record of the reign length contains two badly damaged figures, that according to Ryholt can be read as 26.¹ The 20 is certain, while the abnormal number following is hard to interpret. Gardiner read it as a 9,² while Farina saw a 6.³ The slanting stroke of a 9 would overlap with the 20, a 6 is therefore the most likely reading of the two.

The four small traces at the end were not transcribed by Gardiner, but seem form the usual cartouche close, divine-determinative, followed by the regnal year signs.¹

The incomplete traces written on a patch are difficult to interpret, as seen by the various reading by the scholars.^{1 2 3}

The lacuna notation indicate that the number of months was lost.¹ Some of the signs written on the patch are worn and difficult to interpret.

Some of the signs written on the patch are worn but still recognizable.

Only the opening cartouche and the sun-disc remain, the name is lost.

Only a partial title and the opening cartouche remain, the name is lost.

Only the traces of the title and the opening cartouche with a possible sun-disc remain, the name is lost.

Only the traces of the title remain, the name is lost.

Only the traces of the title and the opening cartouche remain, the name is lost.

The summation records a total of five kings, but this figure is evidently incorrect since there are 15 preceding rows (10.31 to 11.14), and should be emended '15 kings'.¹

The name on this line (or 11.17) could belong to Senebkay, whose throne name was wsr-ib-rꜤ.

The name on this line (or 11.16) could possibly belong to Senebkay, whose throne name was wsr-ib-rꜤ.

The papyrus is lost.

The papyrus is lost.

The papyrus is lost.

The papyrus is lost.

The papyrus is lost.

The papyrus is lost.

The papyrus is lost.

Only a tiny trace of the row remain, the name is lost.

Only the ending of an uncertain name remain.¹ This is the only record of this king, there are no other attestations.²

There does not seems to be much room for a name ahead of the kingship formula.

The list of kings end here, with traces of the name of an unidentified king.