Amenhotep, son of Hapu

What the census claims

no description was carried with the name.

What was searched, and what was found

The whole archive was searched on 2026-07-30 — 16 sources: breasted-1912-development-of-religion-and-thought, budge-1895-book-of-the-dead-ani, budge-1901-bd125-negative-confession, budge-1904-gods-of-the-egyptians-vol1, budge-1904-gods-of-the-egyptians-vol2, budge-1905-am-tuat-vol1, budge-1905-book-of-gates-vol2, budge-1914-literature-of-the-ancient-egyptians, herodotus-book2-account-of-egypt-macaulay, mariette-1882-serapeum-de-memphis-fr, maspero-1894-inscriptions-pyramides-saqqarah-fr, maspero-1912-hymne-au-nil-fr, naville-1886-todtenbuch-einleitung-de, petrie-1895-egyptian-tales-second-series-griffith, petrie-1895-egyptian-tales-westcar, plutarch-de-iside-et-osiride-babbitt-loeb.

Terms tried: Amenhotep, son of Hapu, together with generated Budge-era spelling variants (consonant substitutions, leading- and trailing-vowel shifts) and a hyphen-insensitive pass, since Budge writes names like Ap-uat and Khenti-Amenti that a plain word match would miss.

Result: no occurrence in any archived source.

Why this is recorded rather than left blank

A stub can mean nobody has looked yet, or somebody looked properly and the sources do not contain this. This is the second kind, and the difference matters: one is a gap in the work, the other is a gap in the library.

Nothing here says this deity is unattested. It says the material is not in the eight books this reference has read, and names what to read next.

⚠ What this search did NOT cover

The sweep generated vowel-shifted variants of the modern spelling. It could not produce Greek forms (Arsaphes for Heryshaf, Imouthes for Imhotep) or Budge's hyphenated compounds (Ba-neb-Tettu for Banebdjedet, Heru-shefit for Heryshaf).

That gap has produced demonstrably wrong verdicts: Heryshaf scored one hit while attested in four sources under six spellings, and Banebdjedet was graded absent while Ba-neb-Tettu appears nine times. A hand-kept alternates table now covers the names that could be identified by hand — but it cannot be complete, and this entry was not individually checked against a Greek or compound form.

Read this as "not found under the spellings searched," not as "not in the archive." See C365 and C366.

What would recover it

No specific recovery source has been identified. The census description is not detailed enough to route this name to a body of material, and guessing one would be worse than leaving it open. The general answer is Leitz, Lexikon der ägyptischen Götter und Götterbezeichnungen — it indexes divine names and epithets on a scale nothing else approaches, and it is the correct first stop for any name this thin.