Written by BBC

Recently, the subjects of Ramses II were shocked to hear that the former heir to the throne, Prince Amun-her-khepeshef, was resurrected. After his death, the second in line to the throne, Prince Ramesses, was expected to succeed his father.

This resurrection has again shifted the line of succession, leaving many to wonder how legitimate this newly minted Amun even is.

The cause of death and resurrection is still up to debate. Chief of the Granaries Siese the Elder noted, “It worries me we haven’t talked about Crown Prince Amun coming back from the dead…” after at least 10 successive speeches failed to address the matter.

The main problem with this resurrection is not the legitimacy of the new(?) prince. Even if we assume he is legitimately the same prince as before, only no longer dead, it raises certain questions about how a primogeniture should function in cases of resurrection.

For example, are you “born again” when you are resurrected, or are you simply revived? Is the newly resuscitated prince considered to be born before or after his younger brother?  

Additionally, many worry about the tumultuous nature of repeatedly changing heirs. Many supporters of primogeniture say they enjoy the system of governing due to its reliability. You always know who is up next for the throne. If, however, a king allows his subjects to just die and come back as they please, then who is to say who will be the new king? One concerned peasant stated, “Back in my day, when people died they stayed dead.”

This succession re-shuffling is coming at a time of great uncertainty in Egypt. With Hittites invading to the north,  granaries burning across the country, and rumors of plots against almost every prince one could name, it is no wonder the people are looking for a bit of stability in their ruler’s line of succession. I’d advise any worried citizens query their local government offices about the legitimacy of a once-dead prince.