Akhenaten

[Frater0082]

With the new research going on in kv55. It made me think of that mummy. I know who it is and how he died.

I definitely think that Akhenaten died of rapid spinal degeneration but here's a twist to that. I believe that Akhenaten also literally took part in the construction of Amarna and didn't just have his subjects do it alone, he helped.

[A-Four]

I definitely think that Akhenaten died of rapid spinal degeneration but here's a twist to that. I believe that Akhenaten also literally took part in the construction of Amarna and didn't just have his subjects do it alone, he helped.

Well, as you have probably already noticed, there are few people who write on this forum these days, let alone this section, so go on, I'll buy it, it's a nice restful afternoon here in London,.......tell me more. .

[Frater0082]

I have noticed the big change. I should've been active more lol.

But it makes more sense as to what contributed to his death

[newcastle]

With the new research going on in kv55. It made me think of that mummy. I know who it is and how he died.

No you don't. You may think you do.

And if you think it's Akhenaton you're very probably wrong.

[Horus]

Frater, I have read many of your posts and at times your knowledge seems quite in depth, but I think it is mainly due to your interest and research rather than any reincarnation of you in another life. If I am honest with you what you are claiming would probably make a good fictional book and I applaud you for writing it and wish you well with it, however I personably cannot take seriously any post you make where you claim to have lived in ancient Egypt, some may, but regrettably I cannot. I do think that your extensive study of some aspects of Egyptology especially the Amarna period would allow you to put forward some reasonably argued theories, but without it only being substantiated by your own conviction that you were actually there at the time, only my opinion of course.

[A-Four]

Well, there you have it Fratter, from the two last posts here, that will tell you very clearly of the NEW 'big changes', so sorry to say free expression in a none pure science cuts no s**t here, something I really miss.

Good luck in the future .

[Dusak]

Surly the last two posts referred to are an example of free expression.

[newcastle]

Well, there you have it Fratter, from the two last posts here, that will tell you very clearly of the NEW 'big changes', so sorry to say free expression in a none pure science cuts no s**t here, something I really miss.

Good luck in the future .

Egyptology is "pure science".....or should be. Entries can be made under HISTORY AND ARCHAEOLOGY. This would include any theories, however far-fetched, which have at least some basis in evidence. Theories as to the identity of the KV55 mummy are correctly placed here.

Musings of past lives, 'new age theories' etc., "free expression" and anything else which is totally devoid of evidence can be posted under MYTH, MAGIC AND SPIRITUALITY or even GENERAL DISCUSSIONS AND RANTS.

Less confusing and contentious, don't you think?

Publications of any kind can be discussed under LITERARY CORNER - and, in fairness, this is where Frater mentions his latest output.

[Frater0082]

Well, there you have it Fratter, from the two last posts here, that will tell you very clearly of the NEW 'big changes', so sorry to say free expression in a none pure science cuts no s**t here, something I really miss.

Good luck in the future .

Egyptology is "pure science".....or should be. Entries can be made under HISTORY AND ARCHAEOLOGY. This would include any theories, however far-fetched, which have at least some basis in evidence. Theories as to the identity of the KV55 mummy are correctly placed here.

Musings of past lives, 'new age theories' etc., "free expression" and anything else which is totally devoid of evidence can be posted under MYTH, MAGIC AND SPIRITUALITY or even GENERAL DISCUSSIONS AND RANTS.

Less confusing and contentious, don't you think?

Publications of any kind can be discussed under LITERARY CORNER - and, in fairness, this is where Frater mentions his latest output.

A four I do know and that's that. And no my fascination of Egypt did not come from my research or anything like that something happened to me that made me fell into this dirty little whole and not any of you can tell me otherwise.

I'm not entertaining you any longer.

[A-Four]

If you are to leave, I am sure that I and many of those who still look in on this forum, though no longer comment, wish you all the best for now and the future, and thank you for your contribution.

A-Four.

[Horus]

If you are to leave, I am sure that I and many of those who still look in on this forum, though no longer comment, wish you all the best for now and the future, and thank you for your contribution.

A-Four.

Another of your nonsensical posts A4? of late you have taken any opportunity you can to comment and usually in a negative way, or in one designed to generate dissent on the forum, kindly desist.

As for Freighter, if he cannot see that my own and others comments are not aimed at him in a nasty rather than a constructive way then it is his loss. As Newcastle says he should be posting in the literary section if he wishes air his stories of ancient Egypt, or are we all going to be making posts describing how we know for certain that some aspect of Egyptology is true "because we were there"? I am quite happy to read his theories, but not when they are presented as fact because of some afterlife recollection.

[Frater0082]

If you are to leave, I am sure that I and many of those who still look in on this forum, though no longer comment, wish you all the best for now and the future, and thank you for your contribution.

A-Four.

Another of your nonsensical posts A4? of late you have taken any opportunity you can to comment and usually in a negative way, or in one designed to generate dissent on the forum, kindly desist.

As for Freighter, if he cannot see that my own and others comments are not aimed at him in a nasty rather than a constructive way then it is his loss. As Newcastle says he should be posting in the literary section if he wishes air his stories of ancient Egypt, or are we all going to be making posts describing how we know for certain that some aspect of Egyptology is true "because we were there"? I am quite happy to read his theories, but not when they are presented as fact because of some afterlife recollection.

I do apologize I seemed to have misread your posts. But u were right some of my recent posts aren't from that life that I lived I still dig and I'm still learning but I haven't been digging in a while too much going on in my daily life but yes its the truth

Hung Foot came in the picture at the same time of Meketaten death which might have been in the early fall or late summer. So I wouldn't know anything really only what I saw. Now ask me about the rammesides then I'll read the whole book to u myself they were not supposed to had that ruling thumb at all.

The time attested to Horemheb would be his years as an official as he served 14 years under both Ay and Tutankhamun combined there was a slight mix up. Horemheb own kingship was as short as Ay's.

I do believe I come from them I believe this with all my heart. One day(when Isis is not creeping around the corner) I really would like to return to Egypt, Abydos and Amarna where the fun really began but I wait with baited breath.

[newcastle]

@ Frater

I've never heard anyone suggesting that Horemheb's reign was as short as Ay's!

It is commonly thought 27/28 years with an attestable minimum of 14 years....the longer period possibly being ascribed to the addition of the years of his Amarna predecessors.

Recent work on wine dockets from Horemheb's tomb seems to indicate that 13/14 years is more likely the correct interpretation.

http://jacobusvandijk.nl/docs/JARCE_44.pdf

Sorry if this conflicts with your recollections.

[Frater0082]

@ Frater

I've never heard anyone suggesting that Horemheb's reign was as short as Ay's!

It is commonly thought 27/28 years with an attestable minimum of 14 years....the longer period possibly being ascribed to the addition of the years of his Amarna predecessors.

Recent work on wine dockets from Horemheb's tomb seems to indicate that 13/14 years is more likely the correct interpretation.

http://jacobusvandijk.nl/docs/JARCE_44.pdf

Sorry if this conflicts with your recollections.

Again those 14 years could've been his time as an official not a king, remember he served under Tutankhamun for ten years then Ay for probably four years.

[newcastle]

Whatever

[LuxorFan]

Since practically no one comes to this forum anymore I really don't see how it matters where Frater posts. I may not agree with his theories but he doesn't have a mean bone in his body. With all the nasty vitriol we endure on this forum he's a welcome breath of fresh air.

[Horus]

And to be fair when he researches his stuff he does pose some interesting theories.

[newcastle]

And to be fair when he researches his stuff he does pose some interesting theories.

Unfortunately whatever research he undertakes produces no rational argument, links etc......just : "I know 'cos I was there". I've tried to engage with Frater on numerous occasions and have no personal issues with him....but meaningful discussion always founders on this or some similar absurdity.

We have different sections on the forum for a purpose and whilst lines can become blurred, I wouldn't expect to see a discussion on Elton John's latest concert appearing under Living in Luxor.....or History & Archaeology.....or Kitchen Corner

Likewise I don't see any harm in asking that speculations on pre-existence be confined to Myth Magic & Spirituality where those interested in such matters can discuss it to their heart's content.

The belief in previous existences may be categorised any number of ways....but it's not egyptology.

It's true that contributors to the forum are few and far between nowadays. Having a ragbag of topics, with no demarcation, is unlikely to improve matters.

[Horus]

I agree about topics being all over the place and we on E4U are just as guilty, basically you hit the nail on the head with there not being so many active members therefore we all tend to be a bit lax when it comes to putting them in the correct section. To be honest it sometimes leads to interesting threads being missed as we skirt over the headings and at other times (the moderators) would have to chop out large sections and stick them elsewhere resulting in people complaining their posts have gone missing. However it is a valid point and in the future I will try to make that another 'change' and slot threads under the topic where they belong, not always an easy task.

[Frater0082]

Well I stand really strong on the belief that this mummy is Akhenaten just like I stand on the beliefs

That Queen Ankhesenamun was actually Ankhesenpaaten Tasherit(KV21A).

Horemheb's official years is counted as his rule not so etc.

Hopefully this new research could clear up the air on KV55.