Ancient and Archaeology permalink
Tutankhamun
This discussion has been closed.
-
Message 1.Â
Posted by Ankhesenamun15 (U2550768) on Tuesday, 6th December 2005
Hey anyone in to Tutankhamun reply to this message and we'll have a chat...actually that goes for anyone into Egypt actually!
Ankhesenamun xxx -
Message 2
Posted by Smilerktopp (U2682641) on Tuesday, 6th December 2005
Yeah, I'm really interested in ancient Egypt, but haven't had the opportunity to learn about it at school since I was in year 5 unfortunately so my brain is a little rusty, I'm trying to persuade my sixth form to open an ancient history course but it look sdoubtful
-
Message 3
Posted by Ankhesenamun15 (U2550768) on Wednesday, 7th December 2005
Same deal with me, i haven't done Ancient Egtypt at school..ever. Its a natural curiousity for me, but i am doing my A-levels now and plan to do Egyptology, i do my own research, because i want to. What do you want to talk about?
xx -
Message 4
Posted by DL (U1683040) on Wednesday, 7th December 2005
Here's a quick question,
Was Tutankhamun murdered? There is a lot of evidence to say that he may have been, and if so was his successor Ay responsible for the murder?
Any thoughts?
Cheers -
Message 5
Posted by Sleepytutankamun (U2685051) on Wednesday, 7th December 2005
i think he died in battle
-
Message 6
Posted by DL (U1683040) on Wednesday, 7th December 2005
Hi,
But surely if he died in battle, it would have been commemorated somewhere in his tomb, or even on some inscriptions somewhere, yet in reality it was almost as if someone wanted to erase from from history, so a death in battle doesn't really fit. He has evidence of traumatic injury to the back of his head (which had not healed before his death), and Ay immediately tried to force his widow into marriage (and then assume the throne). She rejected his advances and asked the Egyptians' arch-enemy the Hittites to send her a husband. The Hittites did so, and sent a prince to Egypt to marry her, but he was murdered at the border. Shortly afterwards, the widowed queen simply disappears from history, and Ay takes the throne.
Too suspicious for my liking!
DL -
Message 7
Posted by Plancenoit (U1237957) on Wednesday, 7th December 2005
Nebkhprure, or Tutankhamun as he is more commonly known, was not a particularly healthy individual, which is hardly surprising given the Egyptian Royal Family's tendency to practise incestuous marriage. The idea was to remove all outside claims to the throne and strengthen the line, but the result was some pretty peculiar, unhealthy people. Amenophis IV, or Akhenaten who is a direct relative of Tutankhamun, possibly even his father, is a fine example. Surviving reliefs and images depict a man who is apparently slightly deformed, thick lipped, pot bellied and abnormally wide hipped. The new style Amarna art suggested that Akhenaten wanted to show things in reality, rather than stylised. The Royal Family are seen hugging, playing and worshipping the Aten in an informal style never before seen. We can therefore assume that depictions of Akhenaten, although somewhat hideous, must be reasonably accurate as he would have been aware of them himself.
Tutankhamen, as a direct descendant, would have probably inherited certain weaknessess, if not in his physical appearance then in his general physical health. It has long been believed that the 'Boy Pharoah' died of disease, possibly Malaria. An injury to the rear of his skull, which has given rise to theories of murder could be attributed to an accident shortly before death. I've read suggestions that the King, in his weakened state, was being carried to and fro in the private confines of the palace and may have been dropped, causing an injury consistent with that which shows on X-rays of the mummy.
I like the murder theory, as it makes way for AY who was undoubtedly a very ambitious man and as a relative of the childless Tutankhamun, had a reasonable claim to the throne should anything happen to him. I've read many books and articles about Tutankhamun, including the murder theory, but I keep coming to the same conclusion. Unless or until someone can produce positive evidence of some kind, it will be another unsolved historical mystery. -
Message 8
Posted by Richie (U1238064) on Wednesday, 7th December 2005
Forgive me if I’m wrong, but I was always under the impression that the reason for the rather intimate familiar connections between pharaoh and his wife was because in Egypt the royal power followed the female line. So, in order to be made legitimate a Pharaoh had to have a wife of the blood. His own blood was not as significant. Only a man could be Pharaoh, but he gained his power and legitimacy from the female line?
This of course could just be some mad mumblings that I have paid far too much heed to however -
Message 9
Posted by Ankhesenamun15 (U2550768) on Wednesday, 7th December 2005
The royal blood line did run through the females that is why when Tutankhamun died Ankhesenamun was forced to marry her own uncle 'Ay'. Tutankhamun was never in a battle, he was much too young he was no warrior king, you might be on about the chariot theory. It is said that he fell off his chariot when he was out hunting that is why the chariot was dismantled, but the reason why the chariot is dismantled in his tomb is because they couldn't fit it through the tomb doors.
As for murder Tutankhamun was more of a puppet ruler and kept out of the limelight by his advisors like Ay Maya and Horemheb. So when he got older Tutankhamun grabbed for more responsibility. Ay is the most likely subject.
However Tutankhamun was a sickly boy, he had a lame left leg that is why he walked with a cane, it is possible he died of a brain tumor, as calcium deposits have been found in his skull, yet again this could have been from a whack on the head.
xx -
Message 10
Posted by Plancenoit (U1237957) on Wednesday, 7th December 2005
Well yes...and no. Hatshepsut (s'cuse spellings) was a female Pharoah, although I don't know exactly how her accession came about. Pharoahs (male) would sometimes have concubines, not necessarily of direct Royal blood, but daughters of noble families, perhaps cousins. Pharoah would choose favourites and a male child of one of the favourites would be chosen as heir if he had no children with his 'official wife', who may well have been his own sister. Of course, the system can change a little to suit indidvidual Pharoahs and situations. Women did have a degree of freedom including the right to divorce, but I think that was probably unlikely in the case of the wife of a Pharoah. With Hapshetsup being female there must have been a point where it did follow the female line, so in that respect, I agree.
The very close relationships between Pharoahs and wives would inevitably lead to a weakened genetic structure of children, increasing the chances of deformity, and illness as the dominant mitochondrial DNA passes from generation to generation. Akhenaten, coming from already established generations of interbreeding, appears to have been very unlucky. Unless I am mistaken, his wife Neferuaten Nefertiti was not a direct relative, and his largely monogamous relationship and total break from the old traditions may have gone some way towards repairing a little of the damage. Tutankhamun, does not appear to have any obvious physical deformity or disability, but he was known to be a fairly weak and unhealthy individual. -
Message 11
Posted by Plancenoit (U1237957) on Wednesday, 7th December 2005
Ankhesenamun15, you're absolutely right. I'm forgetting about the problems Tut had with his leg and his chariot prang. As you can probably tell, I'm a bit better on the stuff preceding Tutankhamen. Tutankhamun was never in a battle, he was much too young he was no warrior king, you might be on about the chariot theory. It is said that he fell off his chariot when he was out hunting that is why the chariot was dismantled, but the reason why the chariot is dismantled in his tomb is because they couldn't fit it through the tomb doors.
.......
However Tutankhamun was a sickly boy, he had a lame left leg that is why he walked with a cane, it is possible he died of a brain tumor, as calcium deposits have been found in his skull, yet again this could have been from a whack on the head.
³æ³æÌý -
Message 12
Posted by Ankhesenamun15 (U2550768) on Wednesday, 7th December 2005
Tutankhamun's mom was Kiya not Nefertiti, Kiya was a lesser wife who died during child birth with Tutankhamun. But she was of Hittite birth so still the same she wasn't related.
Hatshepsut ascended the throne purely through Propaganda she knew the people were highly religious and played on that fact by saying her mother had sexual relations with Amun. This depiction is on then walls of her mourtary temple at Deir-el Bahri. She claimed there was no heir to the throne and claimed the throne. After her death her nephew came out of the dark and destroyed objects with her name on and statues, she HAD hidden him in the dark for years though so why shouldn't he?
xxx -
Message 13
Posted by Crystal Clear (U1010754) on Wednesday, 7th December 2005
Hatshepsut came to power as Tutmosis the Third's regent and kept the power despite when Tutmosis came of an age capable of ruling the country. I suppose the country was used to her rule and Tutmosis did not want to cause too much upset by overthrowing his perfectly healthy mother and causing trouble. He just waited until she died, then set about oblitering her name from records and so forth.
Back to Tutenkhamun, I do not believe he was murdered although I can see why it may be possible to think why. He probably wasnt a very well boy. -
Message 14
Posted by Plancenoit (U1237957) on Wednesday, 7th December 2005
It doesn't surprise me that Nefertiti was not Tutankhamun's mum, but Kiya was a lesser wife to whom?? This is the classic illustration of the point I was making about concubines, favourites and lesser wives. What's your opinion on the relationship between Tutankhamun and Akhenaten, if any?? What happened to the children of Nefertiti and Akhenaten?? Nefertiti and Akhenaten are shown grieving over the death of a child, but I'm sure there were surviving children. It's something I'm not sure about, and it's good sometimes to question all the conventional teachings, as the whole chronology of Egypt is now in question.
-
Message 15
Posted by Plancenoit (U1237957) on Thursday, 8th December 2005
Just been reading up on the end of the Amarna period. The last five years of Akhenaten are a mystery, with not much known. There is a gap of about three years between Akhenaten and Tutankhamen which is the cause of much of the confusion. The fact that Nefertiti seems to disappear, and Akhenaten just withdraws into his shell causes a void. If you check the Ö÷²¥´óÐã's own History section on the 'end of the Amarna period', they say Tutankhamen was the seventh child of Akhenaten and Nefertiti, which is what I originally suspected. Kiya is a lesser wife as mentioned, but how she is ruled out as Tutankhamen's mum is pretty confusing. The whole thing gets more complicated the more you look into it, and there are several different interpretations of things, just to make it worse. Good stuff though anyway. I'd forgotten how interesting Egyptology can be.
-
Message 16
Posted by Ankhesenamun15 (U2550768) on Thursday, 8th December 2005
Right...Kiya was Tutankhamuns mom and Akenatens lesser wife. Akenaten was Tutankhamuns dad. As for Nefertiti and Akenatens children, Ankhesenamun married Tutankhamun, Meritamun married Smenkhkhare, Smenkhkhare ruled for three years after Akenatens death, which allowed time for Tutankhamun to mature. This is what the three year gap is by the way. As for Nefertiti, after Akenatens murder, she dissapeared to somewhere in Nubia, returning after Tutankhamun's death, to then be murdered in her sleep.
xx -
Message 17
Posted by Ankhesenamun15 (U2550768) on Thursday, 8th December 2005
Sorry wasn't too clear Nefertiti and Akenaten had six daughters, each married and after the restoration lived in the palace of Malkata in Thebes. After Tutankhamun's death and then five years later, Ay's, the proceeding Pharaoh Horemheb had them killed for their heretic background. Some commited suicide including Ankhesenamun, they did this so they couldn't let Horemheb humilate them.
xxx -
Message 18
Posted by Nik (U1777139) on Thursday, 8th December 2005
Though I love Egyptian history, this period/place is not my speciality. I did knew indeed the deformity of Akenaton (could it be that his complexes from that deformity led him to break the intra-marriage traditions as well as the "tyranny" of the priesthood? - cos it was pretty much known to people at those times that intra-marrage may bring such problems). Now I also thought that Toutankaten later renamed as Toutankamon (when his consultants told him to bring back the old gods) was a relatively mentaly retarded plus he had hemorrophilia (or how is that illness where once the patient is blessed the blood flows for a long time without curing). If this was true then the most easy thing was to be assasinated (like... throw a peeled banana on the floor or something!!!). The fact that 'such' a ruler survived to see 14 years can only be explained by the fact that 'others' ruled behind him and it was convinient.
-
Message 19
Posted by boredboadiccea (U2682027) on Thursday, 8th December 2005
My word, I've never seen the boy king's name spelt this way, I'm fascinated by him, always have been been for over 60years now! where did this spelling come from? Am enjoying reading all this immensely, ta everyone Though I love Egyptian history, this period/place is not my speciality. I did knew indeed the deformity of Akenaton (could it be that his complexes from that deformity led him to break the intra-marriage traditions as well as the "tyranny" of the priesthood? - cos it was pretty much known to people at those times that intra-marrage may bring such problems). Now I also thought that Toutankaten later renamed as Toutankamon (when his consultants told him to bring back the old gods) was a relatively mentaly retarded plus he had hemorrophilia (or how is that illness where once the patient is blessed the blood flows for a long time without curing). If this was true then the most easy thing was to be assasinated (like... throw a peeled banana on the floor or something!!!). The fact that 'such' a ruler survived to see 14 years can only be explained by the fact that 'others' ruled behind him and it was convinient.Â
-
Message 20
Posted by Plancenoit (U1237957) on Thursday, 8th December 2005
Wow, this is heavy stuff. I think I need to take a bit of time to do a bit more research. You certainly seem to know your stuff Ankhesenamun15. How you can remember all the relatives etc etc.....you deserve some kind of medal. I wasn't sure what happened to Nefertiti so thanks for the info. Been quite a while since I took all this seriously, and the relationships and the actual timeline is still confusing to me.
E_Nikolaos_E, I think the condition where the blood does not clot is called haemophilia and it is hereditary. I didn't know Tutankhamun had it, but it's quite possible. It wouldn't be too difficult to dispose of someone with this condition. There's little doubt Akhenaten had serious health problems, physically and possibly mentally. Several children died very young (not uncommon at the time) and Tutankhamun would almost certainly have been unhealthy. -
Message 21
Posted by boredboadiccea (U2682027) on Thursday, 8th December 2005
Remember, was it this year, on TV, I think C4 they did yet another series on Tutankhamum, and a kind of posthumous investigation into the possible murder? For the life of me I can't remember the outcome. There was a small hole in his skull, which could only have been seen with today's technology, I think an M.R.I. showed that he could have been struck on the skull, but he could also have had surgery to remove, what, a tumour? who knows, but they were certainly into cutting and suturing even then Here's a quick question,
Was Tutankhamun murdered? There is a lot of evidence to say that he may have been, and if so was his successor Ay responsible for the murder?
Any thoughts?
°ä³ó±ð±ð°ù²õÌý -
Message 22
Posted by Ankhesenamun15 (U2550768) on Thursday, 8th December 2005
No Medal for me thanks lol, its my passion thats why i know so much.
As for the tumor or murder. There is a crack behind his left ear which at first threw Egyptologists into a debate that he was murdered, far gone were th days when they thought he died of malaria (which never held up, because they didn't find it in examinations) Anyway, the small incision was due to an incision to remove the tumor or a piece of metal (those are two arguments now, whether it was a tumor or something imbedded in) the crack seemed to have some time to heal because it has calcium deposits surrounding it, this is because after the operation he lived well for a few days, which looked like a good sign, unfortunately the young king being quite sickly anyway took a turn for the worst and went into a coma of which he never came out of.
Some have blamed the crack to being a mishap in the mummification as they did use too much natron on him so they thought, what if they messed that up to. But no because there is some eveidence of healing, it is safe to presume the crack was his cause of death, also because it isn't fully healed it backs up the fact that that was his cause of death. He died before the wound could heal.
xxx -
Message 23
Posted by Plancenoit (U1237957) on Thursday, 8th December 2005
"far gone were the days when they thought he died of malaria (which never held up, because they didn't find it in examinations"Â
I'm not sure about long gone. It was the recent examinations that brought all this back into the spotlight. Tutankhamen shows evidence of malarial infection, but this does not prove it caused his death. Some Pharoanic mummies (not Tut) have traces of nicotine and even cocaine in their hair. (Dr. Svetlana Balabanova) The hair and fingernails grow for a time after death and are a good indication of the health and habits during life, they store information. This was dismissed as cross contamination by many, but the argument goes on. If Balabanova gets permission to test Tutankhamen, it could be very interesting, but it's highly unlikely permission would ever be granted. They supposedly did not have such substances in Egypt at the time, but then Egyptian Lapis Lazuli beads have been excavated at Stonehenge (Niall Sharples excavations 1980's). Evidence of a far reaching trade network perhaps??.........
And don't forget, the Egyptian Princess 'Scota' is allegedly buried in the Slieve Mish mountains near Tralee, in the Republic of Ireland. The supposed site has been identified but not yet investigated. Could be fact, could be total nonsense, but wouldn't you like to be in on that one!! -
Message 24
Posted by Ankhesenamun15 (U2550768) on Friday, 9th December 2005
By far gone i just meant that his death was ultimately put down to malaria when they first investigated.
<quote user='Plancenoit'
Some Pharoanic mummies (not Tut) have traces of nicotine and even cocaine in their hair. They supposedly did not have such substances in Egypt at the time.
Well they did used to smoke in Ancient times so the nicotine is quite common really, as for cocaine that was never used so it is possibly just something used during mummification, as a herb or such mixed with something else.
xx -
Message 25
Posted by Plancenoit (U1237957) on Friday, 9th December 2005
Well they did used to smoke in Ancient times so the nicotine is quite common really, as for cocaine that was never used so it is possibly just something used during mummification, as a herb or such mixed with something else.Â
Thats a fair point, but what did they smoke?? To produce the nicotine it would have to be of a similar make up to tobacco, which was supposedly not known about until Raleigh was introduced to it in the Americas.
As for cocaine traces, another fair point, but to be present in hair and nail samples it would need to have been ingested for a period prior to death to be present. It comes from the Coca plant, another American (Central) plant. Nothing with the C17,H21,NO14 compound formula, has been found in Egyptian plants, but thats not to say it didn't exist in ancient times. Why no obvious reference to it anywhere?? It'll be there somewhere, just misinterpreted.
I've got too many questions and I'm drifting off the topic now.......... -
Message 26
Posted by Ankhesenamun15 (U2550768) on Friday, 9th December 2005
Perhaps the Egyptians did have a form of cocaine, and who's to say it didn't grow in Egypt, but as life and conditions change, different plants became grown.
xxx -
Message 27
Posted by Ankhesenamun15 (U2550768) on Friday, 9th December 2005
Or perhaps for it to be present they did use cocaine. Surely that is the only possibility. I have never seen any interprets of cocaine being used. But the ancients did have pipes of a sought that they smoked, Tutankhamun was buried with a few. other than pipes papyrus would have been used like a modern day roll up.
xxx -
Message 28
Posted by Plancenoit (U1237957) on Friday, 9th December 2005
Ankhesenamun15, if you get the time, do a google search for 'Merica star'. On the first page you should see a reference to 'Hiram Abiff, the true king of Egypt 1154BC'. Take a look at this and see what you think, particularly the reference to the Merica star.
I don't know if you are familiar with the story of Hiram Abiff, but if you are, what's your opinion?? -
Message 29
Posted by Ankhesenamun15 (U2550768) on Saturday, 10th December 2005
Hey sorry for my delayed reply by the time i got back last night, the board was closed. Anyway in what way do you want my opinion? In what context?
xxx I am familiar but i don't know what you want my opinion on. -
Message 30
Posted by Brazzur (U2691621) on Monday, 12th December 2005
I've always said I'd love to go to Egypt for about a half an hour just to see the pyramids and leave again. I'd no idea there was more ancient stuff than just that. I'm disapointed they've not gone any further into the construction of the Pyramids as I still find them incredibly hard to belive. the Great Pyramid being built on the geographical centre of the earth and them being so big. I know we saw in the last episode some pyramid construction but I still dont see how people would have done it in 4 years. How were there that many people in that small area? I'd want to see more about it.
Do they give you access to the great pyramid? i know theres a cavern that goes about a mile under ground. Is the Temple of Ramesses that Belzoni found open to the public or any of the tombs in the valley of the kings? -
Message 31
Posted by Ankhesenamun15 (U2550768) on Tuesday, 13th December 2005
For a start the pyramids took about 20 years to build not 4. Only a 100 people a day can go in the great pyramid, people que from about 5 in a morning, the ticket booth opens at 7 and closes at like 7!!!! Yes Abu Simbel (Ramses temple) is open to the public. The valley of the kings is open but not many are and they never will open again because of the damage done to them. In about ten years none of the tombs will be open and only Egyptologists will be allowed in them, luckily that will include me! when i last went in November, only 9 out of 62 were open. But the ones i did see were fantastic.
xxxxxxxxxx -
Message 32
Posted by Ankhesenamun15 (U2550768) on Tuesday, 13th December 2005
Sorry forgot to say you can go in the second Pyramid of Khafre but there isn't much to see, just an empty sarcophagus, and the ventilation is poor, and the shafts are very narrow and low.
xxxx -
Message 33
Posted by Plancenoit (U1237957) on Wednesday, 14th December 2005
Hey sorry for my delayed reply by the time i got back last night, the board was closed. Anyway in what way do you want my opinion? In what context?
xxx I am familiar but i don't know what you want my opinion on.Â
sorry about the long silence...very busy again at the moment. I was just wondering if you had any view on the similarities between the story of Hiram Abiff and the 'alledged' murder of Tutankhamen. All, or most of the symbolism surrounding this seems to be Egyptian, is there a possibility they could be vaguely connected?? -
Message 34
Posted by Plancenoit (U1237957) on Friday, 16th December 2005
With all due respect, can I take it from the silence that there has been a review into the interpretation of the physical and contemporary evidence presented??
-
Message 35
Posted by arianneweaver (U2757896) on Friday, 16th December 2005
I was taught on a short evening course (about 15 years ago) that the Great Royal Wife conferred kingship on the Pharoah, as this represented the right to rule of Horus through the line of Isis as daughter of Ra, rather than through the by-then dead Osiris. Each King only gained his title by marrying a female of the bloodline, although he could choose his successor from any of his wives (or marry a concubine)and declare him "Hawk in the Nest", ie the next Horus, as he was by then the embodiment of Ra himself. This child would then only be confirmed in Kingship by marrying a sister, usually daughter of the Queen,(I think
)
You're right about Hatshepsut being co-regent with her father and then taking the crown. There's a brilliant novellisation about it called "Child of the Morning" by Pauline Gedge, but it's really old & may be out of print. (1978!) isbn 0 7088 1488 3 if you're lucky.
Love, Arianne.
About this Board
The History message boards are now closed. They remain visible as a matter of record but the opportunity to add new comments or open new threads is no longer available. Thank you all for your valued contributions over many years.
or  to take part in a discussion.
The message board is currently closed for posting.
The message board is closed for posting.
This messageboard is .
Find out more about this board's
Search this Board
Ö÷²¥´óÐã iD
Ö÷²¥´óÐã navigation
Ö÷²¥´óÐã links
Ö÷²¥´óÐã © 2014 The Ö÷²¥´óÐã is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.
This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.