|
| Semerkhet | | ab. 2925 B.C. till ab. 2916 B.C. | | 8. Pharaoh of the 1. Dynasty | | | Pharaonic names: | Nesw-bity: | Semu (Serekh) | | Horus: | Semerkhet | | Nebty: | Iry or Iry-Nebty | | Golden Horus | |
| | |
Length of Reign
As with all early pharaohs, there is some variety of opinions to how long Semerkhet actually ruled as king. From some archeologists, who
claim, he didn't rule at all, to Manetho, who called him Semêmpsés and listed him with a reign of 18 years. While the Turin canon lists
him with 72 years, which is quite impossible. There seems to be some consent in the middle of the archeological community, crediting
him with 8 1/2 years of rulership nowadays. This estimation is based on the records found on the Cairo Stone Inscription, which holds a
complete record over his reign. Additionally, they point to the archaeologocal records which also suggest a relative short rulership for
Semerkhet.
To understand this chaos, one has to see the way, Egyptian chronologists worked. They didn't use celandar years back then, rather they gave a
year a name based on something, that happened in that year. For example the "year of the smiting of the ". So to
correlate such a chronology to our calendar would work only, if we could find evidence, when this or that enemy tribe was defeated. And to
make it not too easy, the same enemy may have invaded several times and was thrown out and thus there will be several different years of
smiting him. So this is, what makes an estimation of what happened when (in our calendar) back then in Egypt more of a guessing business.
One also has to understand, that the early dynasties only in the last decades became a point of interest. Better technical methods, rendering
more hints and consequently more knowledge, were only invented in the last about forty years. Before that, there was just not enough
material available. So the reconstruction of what happened in the early dynasties, it has only begun and there will be the one or the other
suprise still coming up.
Family
There is not much known about his family. Chances are, one of his predecessors, Pharaoh Den, was his father, which would make him a brother or
half brother to his direct successor Pharaoh Anedjib. His mother may have been Queen Betrest, at least the Cairo stone describes her as his
mother.
Many archeologists assume, he had to have a wife, maybe several, and a considerable number of sons and daughters. However, none of their
names survived the millenia and the only reason to assume, that Qua'a, his successor on the throne, was a son of Semerkhet is basically
exactly that fact only ... that he followed on the throne. There is no inscription or depiction actually showing Qua'a as his son.
Controversity
In earlier years, some archaeologists doubted, that Sermekhet actually was a legit king and saw him rather as an ursurper. The reason is,
that a number of stone vessels with Semerkhet's name on it were in fact originally inscribed with Anedjib's name. Semerkhet had the name
erased and set in his own. Those vessels were the same as mentioned with the kings mentioned above: Anniversary vessels trying to show off
a longer reign. Furthernmore, it is noticeable, that no high officials and priests of his time of rulership were found in Sakkara. All there
kings there are also documented in the tombs of high officials and high raniking priests who died during their reign.
Today, this theory is mostly denied. Semerkhet's name is found on stone vessels found in the step pyramid of Pharaho Djoser (3rd dynasty)
together with the names of Den, Anedjib and Qua'a, Semerkhet's immidiate successor. The inscriptions show, that Qua'a accepted Semerkhet
as a legit king and not an ursurper.
Also, egyptologists point out, that almost every early king had an habit of stealing those anniversary vessels and write his own name on
them. Well, not all early pharaohs that far, in fact, the game started mostly with Adjib aka Anedjib. Later it became more common though.
Lets dwell on this for a little. While I agree with the majority here and think, Semerkhet ruled for several years, I see here some
behavioral and mathematical aspects shining through as well and consider them well worth a little pondering.Lets have a look at some
underlying details:
-
Semerkhet was the successor of Anedjib. Already in Andejib's time, there were first signs of an opposition trying to split the land in two
again.
-
Semerkhet's titles don't refer to the tow countries, but to two goddesses: Nekhbet and Wadjet. The interesting point is, that Nekhbet up
till Semerkhet's time was a more local worshipped deity, mainly the patron goddess of the city of Nekhbet. Only later, she would
become one of the protectors of all Egypt together with her sister Wadjet.
-
In fact only one of Semerkhet's high officials is known by name, a man called Hanu-Ka. Now Hanu-Ka obviously survived Semerkhet because he
appears also on ivory tags from Qua'a's tomb, indicating, he held still some office in the times of Semerkhet's successor. So the relevant
point seems to be not the lack of mastabas of officials from Semerkhet's time, the point seems to be, that there weren't as much officials
at all during Semerkhet's time of rulership. We all know paper pushers. They love to leave their signatures on things. Ancient Egyptian
paper pushers (or in this case papyrus pushers) were no exception. And they connect their life to the life's of their rulers. Today as much
as in the times of the 1st dynasty of Egypt. Back then, they wrote what they achieved in the service to their kings on the walls of their
tombs, today, some speaker lists all the Presidents they served at their funeral. Not much of a difference. So how likely would it be, such
a group of officials would try to go unnoticed and kept silence, also in inscriuptions. Unless of course, it was only a small group and
unless, it wasn't safe to do so.
-
The lack of family is significant. True, we have lost a lot of names of paharaoh's offspring. Not only in the case of Semerkhet, but also
for other royal families. They were historically not important enough to be preserved and nobody referred to them as legitimation for the
own claim on the ultimate prize: The throne!
However, with the obvious exception of Merneith, all paharaohs had inscribed the names of wifes in their tombs. The Queens also had often own
smaller tombs in which the fact, they were queens, was documented. Not so with Semerkhet.
-
I mentioned already in the text about Semerkhet's predecessor, that I don't actually believe, Anedjib's "stealing" of anniversary
inscriptions had any chance to go through during Anedjib's lifetime. The same is true with the stone vessels, Semerkhet allegedly stole
by erasing the name of Den and setting in his own name. He just didn't rule long enough, there were too many people out there, who remembered
the time, he ascended to the throne. Thus, I suspected, the actual erasing and re-inscripting was done by later kings in an effort to base
their legitimation on the kings of old. Kind of a political correct edited history. At the time of the 3rd dynasty, the 1st dynasty was
already rather mythic in the sense, that a lot of historical knowledge was lost and those early kings had become more legendary figures. At
the time of Pharaoh Djoser, and the stone vessels showing Den, Anedjib and Qua'a's names together were found in Djoser's pyramid, such a
fraud would have been possible.
Lets put this together: A king with a small court, in difficult times, he basically had inherited from his brother. Especially an opposition
that promoted to break up the country again in an upper and a lower part as nations on thier own. And the reaction of this king is to
promote basically two protective mother goddesses over the whole country. Not strong male gods like Horus and Seth, who already played
some role back then in Semerkhet's times, but two female deities. Add to that the lack of any wifes in the record. Add the lack of children.
What do you get? We're here at a recurring subject of royal history during all times and cultures with any form of underlying dynastic
thinking societies. England had it's gay king, France had one, Assyria seemed to have had more than one. Why not Egypt? It would explain all
the symptoms. Anedjib had been a strong king, made his claim of being king of both parts of the country. Anedjib had had family, kids
and wifes. Semerkhet appears not so much. And his claim is, "he who belongs to the Two Ladies" ... well, that is, how one can read the
hieroglyphs. One could read it as easily as "with", making him kind of the third lady.
Now, lets be clear here. There is no record explicit documenting homosexuality but especially if the king was homosexual, there wouldn't be
such a record anyway. And yes, I am aware, later kings used the title "... of the Two Ladies" as well and those pharaohs had families. However,
at their time, the Two Ladies, Nekhbet and Wadjet, had been already established as protective deities over Egypt. But in Semerkhet's times,
those two girls came virtually out of the blue. He put them in the position, they adopted. From a behavioral point of view, one can argue,
Semerkhet was pretty much at peace with his female side. And technically, why not. As long as he would take care to have a heir (and that
could have been as good a nephew) and given the excellent record, Egyptian Queens ruling as pharaohs have, why not?
The problem is, he lived and ruled in dangerous times. Remember, the first times, the realm was under tension to break, popped already up
during the reign of his predecessor. In the meantime, things could have become only worse. And under those conditions, I doubt, Egyptian
society was very tolerant. Especially not, if it would allow the opposition to paint the king as "different", as "pervert". Bigotry is and
was always a tool of politics. So, yes, I can imagine, he had a difficult time on that throne.
The record
THe Cairo Stone lists a kind of chronology for Semerkhet. I'd like to list it here and comment at the same time:
-
Year of the Coronation: Appearance of the king of Lower- and Upper Egypt; unifying the two realms
Significant is here the part at the end: "unifying". This indicates, that the thinking was sttill or again in terms of TWO realms which were
united basically only by the force of the king. That's far from voluntarily.
-
1st year: Escort of Horus; destruction of Egypt
Now, "destruction" is a pretty big word. So we can assume, it signified something pretty big, the writer would consider the end of things as
he knew them. And we can assume, thise "destruction" wasn't directly connected to the "Escort of Horus" feast which was an occurance every
year after the tax collection. The Escort of Horus feast was routine, regular. The "destruction of Egypt" wasn't, whatever it was. But since
there is no sign of famine, no sign of natural disaster and no sign of a devastating invasion in this time, we know, what the writer of the
Cairo Stone considered "destruction" had to be something social. However, since "social" was not in the realm of what ancient writers
actually considered, Manetho limited himself to "calamity" without mentioning what the clamity was and the Armenian version, which includes
the interpretation during translation method, suggests "pestilence", but there are no signs of more tombs, of the economical downfall that
a plague would have caused nor any signs in the archaeological record. Thus, "pestilence" is just a later suggestion because the translator
had in fact no idea.
-
2nd year: Appearance of the king; creation of a statue for Seshat and Sed
Seshat was a goddess of wisdom and knowledge, often depicted as a scribe. King of a female uber-Thot (the Ibis headed God of Scribes). Sed
was a male wolfgod, who also played a role in festivities celebrating the ongoing rulership of the pharaoh. Now, while there is no real
symbolic reason to put those two together, it happened quite often. In a way, it is fun to notice it. It will appear, not the Northamerican
romance writer but in fact Egyptian priests may have reinveted the half human/half wolf as loverboy. Only in ancient Egypt, this had to
include symbolism in it's own right. Here, this "couple" shows up as a kind of duality between civilization (represented by wisdom, knowledge
and technical progress) and animalism (the predator is still alive)
-
3rd year: Escort of ... rest is missing
Well, the usual suspect here would be "Escort of Horus". Which would make that pretty much of a routine entry. One has to love such routine
entries for what they are: Times with nothing else to report. As in realtive peaceful times.
-
4th year: Appearance of the king of Upper Egypt; creation of ... rest is missing
Interesting is, lower Egxpt isn't mentioned. So the tension at this time had to be strong, maybe with a danger of an imminent secession at
hand. The appearance of the king of Upper Egypt only would be under those circumstances a warning since Upper Egypt was definitively the
military stronger part.
The creation of something is notable as well. We know, Semerkhet built a new fortress and a new household for the kings's wifes(even all
names mentioned there were in fact widows of Andejib and even Den, none is connected to Semerkhet as wide) as his only bigger building
projects. So, given one was a fortress and it was directed against Lower Egypt, we can draw our own conclusions.
-
5th year: Escort of ... rest is missing
Well, maybe escort of Horus? It's a routine entry. The value is, that it shows us, the tension grew lower again. Nothing about riots, nothing
about more "calamities", nothing about any bloodshedding. So, in the greater picture, iut appears as if the warning was received and taken
to heart. For now.
-
6th year: Appearance of the king of Upper Egypt ... rest is missing
Again, only Upper Egypt is mentioned. So for some reason, the situation was still considered as unstable even the year before was quiet. The
meaning is, the opposition still exsited.
To understand the underlying dynamics, one has to understand, time had other values in the time of ancient Egypt than today. We are used to
news that reach us latest some hours after something happened. If the Pope or the President would catch a cold, we will know the same day and a
a hundred journalists will, more or less intelligent, discuss the impact of the common cold on the economy, the world, global warming and the
Constitution. But then, a courier on feet would need about two weeks or longer (depending on the season, thugs on the way and other
circumstances) to reach the court. And any reaction of the king would need double that time to show in the area where something happened.
Thus, any form of crisis could either go away on it's own (which happens with natural disasters, but not man made ones) or it would take
weeks and months to react. Consequently, a year longer meant not much for any form of ancient Egyptian crisis. It took already months till
everybody would know, there is something going on in another part of the realm.
-
7th year: Escort of ... rest is missing
Another routine entry. So we can conclude, nothing broke out, nothing rised up, nothing was axed down. As a matter of fact, it suggests, that
Pharaoh Semerkhet juggled pretty successfully with those demands of sourvereignuty from Egypt. So, pun intended, his record indicates once
more a reminder of the successful records of Egyptian Queens on the throne than of the often more heavy-handed politics of the kings.
-
8th year: Appearance of the king of Lower and Upper Egypt ... rest is missing
And there we are, one big happy family, Lower Egypt is in again! Seeing it as a dynamics, seeing social changes, the stagnation of process
after Pharaoh Den's death, we see here the first time, a king actually did something successfully agaisnt this tendency to split. And, as
all indicators point out, it was a peaceful solution, a negotiated solution. This is significant, because it is one of the rare examples
in human history, that negotiations with a determined opposite really led to a result. And of course, given, that two entries in his record
indicate in their own sublte ways a reminder to the military power of Upper Egypt, it wasn't just negotiation, those talks were definitively
backed up by power. Something, modern politicians maybe should realize too.
-
Year of death: The ...th month and ...th day (damaged)
Since that is an entry of it's own, we know, it was after the 8th year and not too far because there are no other entries, even not routine
entries in the style "Escort of Horus". And since the years started always at the same day, the raise of Sirius, the first year of
Semerkhet's reign was probably incomplete. This would give him a time of rulership between eight years mínimum and nine years maximum.
Whether it was actually 8 years and 6 months or a month more or less - who knows? But the ZIP-code appears to be the correct one.
The Tomb
Tomb U, Semerkhet's tomb in Umm el-Qua'ab, is compared to the other royal tombs quite primitive and small. However, this is of course all
relative. A ramp instead of a stair leads directly into the main chamber. When Flinders Petrie excavated the tomb, he noticed a small number
of clay seals, much less than usual (only 17 seals were found). Also surprising was the discovery of some baskets and jars dated to the
Ramesside ery. Archaeologists assume, Semerkhet's tomb was maybe redecorated during that time, when Osiris priests assumed to be Djer's tomb
in the neighborhood, to be the ritual burial site of Osiris' head.
The tomb is surrounded by 67 subsidiary burials. Some archaeologists see the architecturial development as prove, that the royal family were
killed willingly when their royal family head had died. Especially Wilkinson goes further and thinks that Semerkhet, the godlike king tried
to demonstrate his power over the death and life of his servants and family members even in afterlife. The tradition of burying the family
and the court of the king when he died, was abandoned at the time of Pharaoh Qua'a, Semerkhet's direct successors
Well, if nothing else, Wilkinson's theory proves, why we need real profilers in this history business. Seriously? Most of the kings of the
first dynasty had their tombs surrounded by other dead people from their court. Not only Semerkhet. In fact, by numbers, Semerkhet is rather
modest with 67. The real point is, we don't know, whether there were actually family members in those subsidiary burials. We don't even know,
whether he had family! More, we know, that the tradition had to exclude family members or certain family members form being killed to be
buried with the king. Merneith couldn't have been pharaoh if she, the former queen would have followed her husband in death, could she? And
don't forget, pharaohs since Narmer were all sons of paharaohs, thus another group of family members obviously excepted. And since Semerkhet
was the brother of a pharaoh and the son of another, obviously also the younger brothers weren't killed. Semerkhet had to build a new royal
household to stash the widows of his father and brother away ... which indicates, they weren't killed either. Uh-oh ... now we run out of
possible family relations that could be killed ... basically we are left with daughters. And we know, usually daughters weren't killed when
their pharaoh daddy died. Too many pharaohs were married to sisters or cousins and had children with them. So, obviously that wasn't
necrophilia. So all is left is maybe some distant relationship. And, to extend this game: Remember Henu-Ka? The only higher official we know
by name from Semerkhet's court? He obviously wasn't killed either, he served Qua'a, Semerkhet's successor. Now, what was killed and buried to
serve the king in the afterlife, those were servants, slaves, maybe a few priests in a kind of religious fanatism that considers life less
worth than service to a godlike king. But not the direct family (of which we in case of Semerkhet can't even assume he had one).
Also from the behavioral point of view, Wilkinson's theory makes not the faintest sense. Semerkhet had definitively, what other pharaohs
would have considered in the same situation a "soft streak". He warned, he negotiated, but he didn't cull the opposition. Lets face it, a
king like Den would, in the same situation have those guys fed to the crocodiles and archaeologists would have found a long and elaborate
inscription about who and why. And the chronologists would have added "4th year: The year of the well-fed reptiles". We see nothing of this
in the archaeological record. In a way, that puts Semerkhet almost in a line with later rare pharaohs known as kings of peace, for example
Amenophis III. So, lets forget Wilkinson.
Still, there are 67 subsidiary burials. Servants mostly. This shows two things: First, Pharaoh Semerkhet's court was smaller, but still big.
And second, he was still a fully blown pharaoh, part of the very same tradition, his ancestors had formed. He was maybe and probably
homosexual, one can argue, he was a weak king or he was a wise king, one can't but admit, he steered his country through difficult times ...
but he was a pharaoh, living god, the living Horus of Egypt and after he died associated with Osiris. And thus, latest, after he did his last
breath, tradition posed it's demands. Those, who killed the servants and buried them to honor the dead king, they were essentially the same
as those who had started it: Priests! Not the pharaoh himself. Which, by the discrepance between how Semerkhet acted while alive and how he
was buried after he was dead, shows us another aspect of the outgoing 1st dynasty: The objectizing of the king. While the king was souvereign
ruler, he was also already object to the schemes of the religious caste.
What else is tomb U telling us? Size and the primitive design tell us, the builders were pressured for time. Now, normally the work on a
king's tomb started the moment, the king ascended to the throne. That would be, in the case of Semerkhet, eight years and some months before
he actually needed it. Still, while one can argue, the ramp would have been replaced with a stair later, one can't deny, that the plan is
the original one used from the first day of the work on. Right into the main chamber, no forechambers, no side chambers. Simple and primitive.
And since the king was definitively involved in the planning process, we can assume, Semerkhet knew. So, even he was a little bit less
inflated ego, this is overly modest. Now, why would a king from the first day on plan for primitive and quick to build, if he has to assume,
he is healthy and will be ruling for the next few decades? Answer: He wouldn't. Semerkhet and probably nobody around him, exepcted him to
make it that long. Which indicates, as the family relations do, that he wasn't young anymore when he became king and that he probably
wasn't in good health either. Which explains the lack of war-scenes and hunting-images depicting him as the big macho guy, like other
pharaohs. Well, admittedly, there are other reasons imaginable, why he felt so mind-attracted to goddesses and avoided to appear too macho,
but seriously, gay or not, he was a pharaoh. Those depictions would pop up whether he ordered them or not. Unless there was a reason to hold
back also those who tried to get rank by flattering him. So in the conclusion: Semerkhet was neither young not at good health when he became
king.
| | ... back |
|
|
|
Tue, May 17, 2016
12:00 AM CT
Daniel Lee Siebert
Daniel Lee Siebert is now also in our serial killer collection. A more or less garden variety strangler type who got away longer than necessary bacause some big PDs dropped the ball ... and left it to smaller ones, to get the job done.
| Fri, Dec 18, 2015
12:00 AM CT
Christman Genipperteinga
THe legendary robber along the wine road Trier-Cologne made it finally into our collection. With a total of 970 victim, including six of them his own children, he is currently the most prolific serial killer in the Collection.
| Thu, Oct 22, 2015
12:00 AM CT
Gerard John Schaefer
The allegedly most prolific Florida Serial Killer, "Killer Cop" Gerard Schaefer, finally also made his way into out collection.
| Thu, Sep 24, 2015
12:00 AM CT
Royal Russel Long
Long was quite messed up in the investigation of the Wyoming Rodeo Murders, but details show, he was another kind of animal, y typeless pedophile serial killer. Now his file is in our collection.
| Mon, Aug 17, 2015
12:00 AM CT
The Wyoming Rodeo Murders
A story of misperceptions and midnless cabinet cleaning by police authorities that ended up with someone getting away with at least two murders on young women. Now in our collection.
| Wed, Jul 15, 2015
12:00 AM CT
Joseph Vacher, the French Ripper
Now new in our collection: Joseph Vacher, the French Ripper. The first case, blood spatter analysis was used in a court trial world wide!
| Sat, Jun 20, 2015
12:00 AM CST
No new addition in June
Usually, we try to bring another case up in our serial killer collection every month, but this month, we simply had no time. Between working open cases and other activities, it was just not possible. Sorry for the inconvenience.
| Sat, May 16, 2015
12:00 AM CT
The Beauty Queen Killer
New in the serial killer collection: Christopher Wilder, the Beauty Queen Killer. A case that shows how nonsensical the disctinction between serial and spree killers really is.
| Thu, Apr 16, 2015
12:00 AM CT
Burton W. Abbott
Abbott killed only one victim, a case that caused some public attention in 1955. But he showed all hallmarks of a fledgling serial killer and thus, we added him to our collection.
| Mon, Mar 16, 2015
12:00 AM CT
Darren Deon Vann
Ha is basically the usual garden variety strangler case if it wouldn't be for the early warnings statistical data cretated about serial killer activity in Gary/Indiana. Now he is in our collection.
| Wed, Mar 4, 2015
12:00 AM CT
Apologies!
Due to technical problems, the March article was up late. Take my apologies for this glitch.
| Mon, Feb 16, 2015
12:00 AM CT
Affaire of the Poisons
We have added the infamous Affaire of the Poisons to our collection. With more than 80 offenders, it breaks a little the format, but well, it's one of the biggest cases of "organized" crime ever, so how can we let it out?
| Mon, Dec 8, 2014
12:00 AM CT
Joseph Bryan
Once he made the FBI Ten Most Wanted list, now nobody remembers the case anymore. Nevertheless, the father of all allegedly schizophrenic serial killers has entered our collection.
| Fri, Nov 7, 2014
12:00 AM CT
The Trailside Killer
David Joseph Carpenter has now become also part of the Serial Killer Collection ... complete with profile.
| Tue, Oct 7, 2014
12:00 AM CT
The Vampire of Duesseldorf
Peter Kuerten aka The Vampire of Duesseldorf roamed the city at the River Rhine for more than two years and left behind a trail of bodies-
| Fri, Sep 12, 2014
12:00 AM CT
The Grim Sleeper
Lonnie Franklin aka The Grim Sleeper has been added to our serial killer collection
| Thu, Aug 14, 2014
12:00 AM CT
Michael Lee Lockhart
... and with a little delay, another serial made it into the serial killer collection. Michael Lee Lockhart, not so much interesting for his "achievements" but because his case appears as if he became a psychopath only after a serious head injury.
| Tue, Aug 12, 2014
12:00 AM CT
A Game of Daggers
Diane's new novel A GAME OF DAGGERS is now available at Amazon for Kindle. A story of murder, mayhem and political intrigue set up in the year of the Lord 1096.
Pope Urban II has called for a crusade, but this news has yet to reach Cornwall. And people there have anyway to deal with other problems from storms to wreckers on their coast and when some murdered men are discovered on the beach, nobody guesses, this is only the prelude to much greater events coming to the so remote shores ...
| Sat, Jul 5, 2014
12:00 AM CT
Ivan Hill
Ivan Hill, as the first of the many serial killers, who haunted Los Angeles in the 80s and 90s, is now added to our serial killer collection.
| Sun, Jun 8, 2014
12:00 AM CT
Raya and Sakina
The famous Egyptian serial killers have become part of our collection. And as so often, things are not as simple as the urban legend tries to tell us.
| Thu, May 1, 2014
12:00 AM CT
Dagmar Overbye
The infamous Danish baby farmer has been added to our Serial Killer Collection.
| Thu, May 1, 2014
12:00 AM CT
Pharaoh Djoser added to the Egyptian Collection
I finally came around to add a new pharaoh to our collection: Djoser, 1st Pharoh of the 3rd Dynasty.
| Fri, Apr 4, 2014
12:00 AM CT
The Green River Killer
This month, we added Gary Ridgway to our serial killer collection, a case, not so much interesting for the profiling but for the lessons about case organization to be learned from it.
| Tue, Mar 4, 2014
12:00 AM CT
Manson Family
The "Manson Family&quo; has been added to our serial killer collection. Especially interesting for those who think, brain washing isn't possible.
| Fri, Feb 7, 2014
12:00 AM CT
Hans van Zon
Dutch serial killer Hans van Zon joined our serial killer collection. Not entirely voluntarily though.
| Mon, Jan 6, 2014
12:00 AM CT
The Syracuse Dungeon Master
John T. Jamelske aka the Syracuse Dungeon Master has been added to our Serial Killer Collection. While not a seria killer but a serial rapist, Jamelske represents a similar psychopathology as some OCD type serial killers, for example Dahmer and therefore is some valuable object for studies.
| Thu, Jan 2, 2014
12:00 AM CT
Khasekhemwy
The last of the 2nd dynasty pharaohs, the man who re-united Egypt, is now also in the Egyptian collection.
| Thu, Dec 12, 2013
12:00 AM CT
Pharaoh Sekhemib added to the Egyptian Collection
I finally came around to add Pharaoh Sekhemib to the collection, the sixth of the 2nd Dynasty. So, with some luck, I can finish this year the 2nd dynsty, only one, Khasekhemwy is left.
| Tue, Dec 10, 2013
12:00 AM CT
The Riha disappearance
In 1969, Dr. Thomas Riha disappeared and in the subconsequent series of events, Gloria Tannenbaum was arrested for forgery and under suspicion of two other homicides. She plead not guilty by reason of insanity and got away with it. The case has now been added to our serial killer collection.
| Mon, Nov 4, 2013
12:00 AM CT
Richard N. Clarey jr.
Clarey is one of the lesser known serial killers, skirting the definition a little. Still, for some reasons an interesting case.
| Wed, Oct 2, 2013
12:00 AM CT
Now in the collection: William E. Cosden
A garden variety sexual predator, notable only because his existence shows, how wrong the idea of 1 monster at 1 time in 1 area is.
|
|
|
