Luxor4u

Due to my latest research, I believe that Horemheb may have co-ruled with Tutankhamun and Ay( 10 years +4 years = 14 years). I do however believe that he reigned for about four years independently on his own for four years and a month as Manetho stated in his documents. I do believe that perhaps the ancients may have annexed the years of his two successors with his own and not as far back as Akhenaten.

Horemheb was granted the title as the Crowned Prince via the next ruler of Egypt but was sidelined by Ay. This indication made me believe that Horemheb had some influence in court as well as Ay, but even more power than the High Priest himself.

If and when you get to this ancient city of Cairo may I recommend the Hormoheb Hotel on the Pyramids road a lovely 40 year old Egyptian hotel with seven, yes 7 bars.
You think I spell it wrong ? No it's been spelt like that for 40 years and they wont change it now upon my questioning. Everything from napkins, note-paper, matches Hotel illuminated sign all spelt Hormoheb plus the female receptionist is quite a card! about it...

Who2 wrote:If and when you get to this ancient city of Cairo may I recommend the Hormoheb Hotel on the Pyramids road a lovely 40 year old Egyptian hotel with seven, yes 7 bars.
You think I spell it wrong ? No it's been spelt like that for 40 years and they wont change it now upon my questioning. Everything from napkins, note-paper, matches Hotel illuminated sign all spelt Hormoheb plus the female receptionist is quite a card! about it...

Addendum: Her reply to my question about Hormoheb was instant "Oh him ? they are still looking for him, brother of Horemheb they say", a very funny girl plus there's a great disco in the basement all young Cairean ravers wearing very tasty headscarfs...
It's one of the few places were gallabia's are accepted as norm because the Hormoheb has specialized in catering for the upper egyptian business-man for years...a lot of business is done in the Hormoheb.

I don't know what you all are talking about really?

Likewise.

Frater0082 wrote:I don't know what you all are talking about really?

It's called "taking the pee" mate!

What I don't understand taking the pee, where's his tomb?

What? Im lost

I had a vision yesterday and it wasn't a good one. It was of the past I saw Tutankhamun lying on the ground with massive amounts of blood coming from his head. I don't know if this was a vision or a some sort of reminder from the stories I was hearing in the past.

I didn't see what killed him he looked as if he was lying in the desert some where.

Poor boy

There has been many contradictions to the death of Tutankhamun. Whay mystifies me the most is how can a young man with type 4 Malaria and an Already broken leg be able to even fight in battle it doesn't make any sense to me.

Another thing that is puzzling is that at the time of death Tutankhamun. Horemheb was East elsewhere now how could the king's army be else where without hy being present. I don't think Tutankhamun was in battle at all. However I do think he went riding somewhere perhaps with his killers and the act was done with no one around.

Thirdly if Tutankhamun was how you say killed in battle by an opposing country that ruler would have seized Egypt but they did not.

To me the scenario was that the king was left for dead and found minutes or hours later. Overall the answer should be re-asked as to whom killed Tutankhamun.

There has been many contradictions to the death of Tutankhamun. Whay mystifies me the most is how can a young man with type 4 Malaria and an Already broken leg be able to even fight in battle it doesn't make any sense to me.

Another thing that is puzzling is that at the time of death Tutankhamun. Horemheb was East elsewhere now how could the king's army be else where without hy being present. I don't think Tutankhamun was in battle at all. However I do think he went riding somewhere perhaps with his killers and the act was done with no one around.

Thirdly if Tutankhamun was how you say killed in battle by an opposing country that ruler would have seized Egypt but they did not.

To me the scenario was that the king was left for dead and found minutes or hours later. Overall the answer should be re-asked as to whom killed Tutankhamun.

Stop taking all this so literally and start thinking in metaphors.

Bloody tower of babel.

What do u mean?

Bullet Magnet wrote:Stop taking all this so literally and start thinking in metaphors.

Bloody tower of babel.

Or should that be the tower of Babbling

What's going on

Frater0082 wrote:What's going on

Frater, im risking your love for me by saying this, but, with all due respects I suggest you go back to the university/college you graduated from and first check that its a real university/college, if its not report them to the cops and if it is, ask them for your money back!

What are u talking about.?

Nevermind just forget that I ever posted here. Forget everything that I told u. Forget everything.

Frater0082 wrote:Nevermind just forget that I ever posted here. Forget everything that I told u. Forget everything.

But this is the problem we face daily, we try, but then you post again. But keep on posting as GD is showing little interest in the pages of your new testaments. By the way, just for one moment in time, pretend that you know absolutely nothing about Egyptology and tell us a bit about you as a person. What you do on a day to day basis, your other interests, family, friends, point of origin, [present tense, not past] Just as a point of general interest.

"For each man in his time is Cain, Until he walks along the beach. And see's his future in the water.
A long lost heart within his reach".

The One. Bernie Taupin.

Life changing stuff right there...

You see Frater', Cain and Able were not 2 people...