EEF INFORMATION, ARCHIVES & FAQ: - Sent using Google Toolbar
An interesting comment on EEF regarding the 2013 report of Project Djehuti. I do suggest readers of the blog who are interested in the subject signup for EEF to see more on this debate.
So, it's confirmed then that Intefmose is indeed a son of a king from an inscription in his Dra Abu el-Naga tomb. Kim Ryholt in his 1997 book on the Second Intermediate Period thought that Intefmose was the son of one of the later 17th dynasty Intef kings, not one of the Sobekemsaf kings. But I suppose that Galan accepts that after Djehuti, the next early 17th dynasty king must have been one of the two Sobekemsaf kings as Polz has suggested in a book titled 'Der Beginn des Neuen Reiches.'
Polz has Rahotep-Sobekemsaf Wadjkhau-Sobekemsaf Shedtawy-Intef Wepmaat-Intef Nubkheperre-Intef Heruhitmaat and then the final three Ahmoside kings as the most likely sequence of 17th dynasty Theban kings on page 7 of his book. Polz argued that Sobekemsaf Shedtawy was Sobekemsaf Wadjkhau's son.I don't know where Intefmose would fit in this sequence if he was the son of one of the two Sobekemsaf kings.
Regards, Fabian Boudville