Hatshepsut: a critical examination of androcentrism within Egyptological interpretations of ancient Egypt's most contentious female ruler

<p dir="ltr">The infamous Eighteenth Dynasty Pharaoh Hatshepsut commandeered an almost two-decade long rule (reigning from c.1473-1458 BCE) during ancient Egypt’s New Kingdom period. However, scholarly interpretations of Hatshepsut’s rule have been enshrouded by fierce debate which often subject the female ruler to intense scrutiny predicated on the nature of her pharaonic representation. The masculinised iconology pertinent in Hatshepsut’s graphic evidence versus the feminine epigraphical conventions within her pharaonic titulary presents the historian a unique assembly of graphic evidence which many scholars have disregarded as a discontinuity in the historical record. This assumption is a consequence of the rigidity of Egyptology’s methodological parameters, which have scarcely undergone critical reflection - ensuring a continuity of epistemology for the interpretation of pharaonic rulership which systematically assumes pharaonic power was solely a man’s domain.</p><p dir="ltr">This thesis combines Egyptological methods with feminist discourses, archaeological and art historical epistemology to recognise the constitutive pressure that the discipline’s methodology places on recognisable stylistics. By outlining the interaction between methodological frameworks and individual historians, the present study provides an overview of the indoctrination of Egyptology in an androcentric philosophy - one that has subjected Hatshepsut’s graphic evidence to a slew of interpretations which undercut her pharaonic power. While there are numerous scholarly interpretations of the ruler Hatshepsut, this paper presents the findings of a comparative historiographical analysis of three; the interpretation of Hatshepsut’s gender dysmorphia and the surrounding connotations of transvestism, Hatshepsut’s cunning, manipulative nature and biological concepts of female inadequacy, and finally, the scholarly vein which favours the interpretation of Hatshepsut’s representation beyond the corporeal. This analysis supports the understanding that Hatshepsut’s perceived “otherness” remains at the crux of androcentrism within Egyptology, cautioning scholars of the danger of their continued adherence to Egyptological frameworks which are inextricably androcentric.</p>