6/19/2021 0:00:01
In this article, we will arrange and organize the story of the family from which the story of Tutankhamun emerged and which the West wrote for us, and we will analyze and criticize it.
——————
There was an Egyptian king named Amunhotep IV, from the Eighteenth Dynasty. He ruled Misr for 17 years, and he died in approximately 1334 BC.
Amenhotep IV was the youngest son of King Amenhotep III from Queen Tiye, who was Amenhotep III’s favorite great wife. Amenhotep was not destined to become crown prince until the death of his older brother Thutmose.
After Amenhotep IV became king of Misr, Amenhotep tried to unify the gods of ancient Misr, as there were many gods worshiped in its various regions, including the greatest Allah Amun-Ra in the form of the one Allah Aten, and he moved the capital from Thebes to his new capital (Akhenaten).
The fame of this king was that he abandoned the gods that the ancient Egyptians worshiped and created a new religion calling for the worship of one Allah named (Aton) of Misr, and he called himself Akhenaten, which means (the living spirit of Aten).
Akhenaten was married to his main wife, Queen Nefertiti, who shared his ideology in worshiping the Aten and appeared with him in religious ceremonies. He married a second wife called “Kia”, and he had five children:
Smenkhkare
Merit Aten
mix it up
Ankhesenamun
Neferneferre
Set Na Ra
Tutankhamun
King Akhenaten was preoccupied with his philosophy and religious reforms and turned away from foreign policy and managing the empire.
Akhenaten’s attempt to create a religion different from the traditional religion faced great resistance, but in the end that religion ended. When Akhenaten died, he was succeeded by his son (Smenkhkare), who ruled for a short period, and then (Smenkhkare) was succeeded by his brother (Tutankhamun), who was At a young age, he abandoned the Aten doctrine and left the capital, Akhenaten, to return to Thebes (Luxor today). He announced the return of the Amun doctrine under pressure from the priests of Amun who were still adhering to the doctrine of the Allah Amun-Ra, rejecting what Akhenaten presented to them regarding the idea of the new Allah Aten. Under these pressures and because of his young age, he changed his name from “Tutankhaten” to Tutankhamun. The Theban priests demolished the monuments of Akhenaten and his city, Akhetaten, and erased his name from them. The people migrated from them, and traditional religious practice was gradually restored.
The search for the tomb of King Akhenaten has continued since the discovery of the first tombs in the Valley of the Kings in the 19th and 20th centuries without reaching a decisive result, until studies conducted by the Supreme Council of Antiquities and Cairo University began on the mummies, where it was announced in February 2010 that the team had discovered through analysis Genetic fingerprinting and genetic analysis: “The mummy in Cemetery 55 in the Valley of the Kings is the mummy of the father of the Golden King Tutankhamun. It was believed that the mummy belonged to a man who died between the ages of 20 and 25 years, but the results of the research revealed that he died between the ages of 45 and 50 years, and He is the same as Akhenaten.
History says that there is doubt about the relationship between Akhenaten and his son (Smenkare), and the relationship between Akhenaten and his mother, Queen Tiye.
When Akhenaten assumed power, his mother, Queen Tiye, was still mentioned in inscriptions as the queen and the king’s beloved. It has been indicated that Akhenaten and his mother behaved like married couples until her death. This would have been viewed as incest at the time. Supporters of this theory consider that the historical Akhenaten is a model for Adibus, the legendary king of Thebes.
Akhenaten’s love for his son, Smenkhkare, and his attachment to him were out of the ordinary, so he gave him a feminine nickname for his wife. It was (the extraordinary beauty of Aten), and he was not ashamed to call him (his beloved), but it is likely that Smenkhkare was Akhenaten’s half-brother or son. Some have even suggested that Smenkare was the alias of Nefertiti or Kia, and thus one of Akhenaten’s wives.
After the death of Akhenaten, his son Smenkhkarre took over the rule, and he only ruled for a year, then Tutankhamun took over after him.
Tutankhamun ruled Misr from 1334 to 1325 BC.
When Tutankhamun ruled Misr, he was 9 years old, and his name in the ancient Egyptian language means “the living image of the Allah Amun,” the chief of the ancient Egyptian gods.
Tutankhamun lived in a transitional period in the history of ancient Misr, as he came after his father Akhenaten, who tried to unify the gods of ancient Misr in the form of one single Allah. During his reign, the worship of the Allah (Aton) was abandoned and the return to the worship of the multiple gods of ancient Misr that he represented. (Amun).
During the rule of Tutankhamun, a revolution began from Tell el-Amarna against the movement of the former pharaoh Akhenaten, who moved the capital from Thebes to his new capital, Akhtaten, in Minya, and tried to unify the multiple gods of ancient Misr, including the Allah Amun, in the form of one Allah, Aten. In the year 1331 BC, that is, in the third year of the rule of Tutankhamun, who was 11 years old, and under the influence of the minister, that is, the ban imposed on the worship of the gods was lifted.
He announced that he was abandoning his previous name, Tutankhaten, and was called (Tutankhamun).
Tutankhamun married his sister, whom he loved, Ankhesenamun.
Tutankhamun died in mysterious and unknown circumstances, and his former minister, Ay, who married Tutankhamun’s widow, Ankhesenamun, ruled after him.
There is a widespread belief that Tutankhamun’s death was not due to medical reasons, but rather it may have been the result of an assassination carried out by Minister Heperkhamun Ra Ai. There is a lot of evidence provided by believers in this theory, including, for example, the marriage of Minister Khabar Khabar Amun to Tutankhamun’s widow, where he was found. A Pharaonic seal bearing the name of Ay and Ankh-Sun-Amun, the widow of Tutankhamun.
Historical evidence indicates that there were two ministers for Tutankhamun, one of them was Ay, who was mentioned, and the other was named Horemheb. There is archaeological evidence that confirms that after the death of Tutankhamun, the minister Ay took over the reins of power for a short period, to be replaced by the second minister, Horemheb, during whose reign most of the evidence of his reign was destroyed. Tutankhamun and Minister Ay. This confirms the conspiracy theory among some that Tutankhamun’s death was due to malaria, which was widespread in the south.
Tutankhamun’s tomb was discovered in 1922 by the British Howard Carter.
It was believed that Tutankhamun was the son of Nefertiti, but after the discovery of Akhenaten’s tomb in 2010 and after an acid examination, it was found that it was the tomb of Akhenaten and that Tutankhamun was the son of Akhenaten from his wife Kiya and not from Nefertiti, and for this reason Tutankhamun may have been He married his half-sister.
———————
This is the summary of the story of this family and the story of King Tutankhamun, and we do not need at all any other details or dramatic historical scenarios.
Now…what is the strange thing about this family?
She gave birth to two famous kings:
The first king, who was the father… His fame was due to his works, because he changed religion in Misr.
The second king, who is the son… His fame is not because of his works, but because of his completed tomb and because of the mystery of his death. There is a great possibility that he was assassinated by his minister.
The two kings had two names, one of the names was famous and the other name was unknown:
The first king, who was the father, was named Amonhotep IV, but he changed his name to (Akhenaten) after he changed religion, and the second name dominated him to the point that the average reader does not know that his name was Amenhotep. the fourth.
The second king, who was the son… His name was Tutankhaten, but he changed his name to (Tutankhamun) after he restored the previous religion, and this second name overshadowed him, so much so that the average reader does not know that his name was Tut. Ankh Aten.
Amunhotepnetre—changes to—-Akhenaten
Tutankhaten —– changed to —– Tutankhamun
– The two kings instead of religion
The first king, who was the father, abandoned the worship of the Allah (Amun) to worship the Allah (Aton – the disk of the sun).
The second king, who is the son, gave up the worship of the Allah (Aten – the disk of the sun) to worship the Allah (Amun).
The two kings had incestuous relations and incestuous marriage.
The first king, who is the father… There are doubts that he was in a marriage relationship with his mother.
The second king, who was the son… married his half-sister.
– Doubts about the identity of Tutankhamun’s mother
Some say Nefertiti and some say Kia
– Doubts about the son’s relationship with the father
There are doubts about whether Smenkhkare is Akhenaten’s son or his brother.
– Doubts about the name Smankh Kare
Because of Akhenaten’s love for Smenkhkare, theories say that it may be the name of Nefertiti, and others say that it is the name of Kiya.
The inscriptions were unable to identify the tomb of Father Akhenaten.
Akhenaten’s tomb was discovered in 2010, but the inscriptions were not the tool in determining the identity of the owner of the tomb, but rather a DNA examination and comparison with the DNA of Tutankhamun and not his other sons.
——————-
However……..let’s think about the whole story logically.
– Firstly… We cannot read modern history recorded in printer’s books with full confidence about modern figures, and there are figures around us who are famous and we cannot talk about them with confidence and in details about them, let alone figures who lived tens of thousands ago. The years and their history are recorded in a very primitive and difficult writing that requires a lot of effort. Where did all this absolute confidence come from in the West to write the details of that family, and talk about marriage, relationships, feelings, beliefs, wars, etc.
And if we differ even today in understanding the names of geographical locations, peoples and countries, then why did the West, when it wrote this history, not have a box of possibilities about the identity of the sites and peoples? Rather, it had absolute certainty in determining the names of geographical locations in Misr and outside it, as if it were a Allah who did not say anything. Except the truth.
Rather, why do people deal with this large amount of history that the West writes for us, as if it were divine, absolute, confirmed and certain texts that do not tolerate doubt or denial?
– Secondly… The issue of changing belief is not an easy matter in an ancient society. Do you believe that a ruler can change the deep belief of a people in a moment of mood, change the belief of a people and change the name of Allah as well? These things require intelligent engineering and brutal force to do this, and not in this cartoonish way written by the West.
– Thirdly…. According to history, Misr worshiped the Allah (Ra – the sun) along with other gods, but Akhenaten decided to unite the gods under the worship of the Allah (Aten), and the Aten is the disk of the sun.
I mean, Amenhotep was able to unite the gods into one Allah named (Ra), so why did he invent a new name (Aten), which means the disk of the sun?
What is the difference between the sun and the solar disk?
From worshiping the sun to worshiping the sun disk is a funny story, and it is as if Akhenaten moved from worshiping the circle to worshiping the circumference of the circle.
If the sun means (Ra)…at least the disk of the sun meant to the Egyptians (Raton), so that we believe that (Ra) means the sun and (Tun) means the disk of the sun…but (Ra) and (Aten) have no relation. Between them until each of them refers to one thing called the sun.
– Fourth…. Are these the ancestors of the current Egyptians?
Yes…then it is logical that Egyptians today have left the culture and world of that family, and vice versa. What applies to Egyptians today applies to that family.
Question: Is there anyone in Misr who marries his mother or sister? Indeed, is there anyone in any country or in any religion who marries his sister or mother?
no
It is an innate nature among the people, and it is a presumption that a famous ruler and his family were doing this work. Even if it happened in secret, it is impossible for this statement to be recorded in public written documents presented to any person.
So…… How did the West dare to write this false history? At least it would raise the possibility that there was a mistake, but the West is confident of itself and confirms the matter in a strange way… Rather, how do people believe such a false history, and even how does a country allow… By making such talk an official national history for the people, generations will be raised knowing that their ancestors married their mothers and sisters, and this is normal.
– Fifth…. If the West has succeeded in deciphering Misr’s inscriptions, and the Ministries of Culture, Education, and Antiquities in Misr thank the West for that service, then it is logical that the West and Misr no longer need DNA tests in order to confirm the identity of any mummy.
Because reading the name is enough to know the identity of any owner of a tomb or coffin. He reads his name in the tomb, and he will be sure that it is Akhenaten, etc.
– Sixth……….. Knowledge requires calling names by their correct names, so that we can think about any matter correctly, because the one who discovered the tomb of those who named him Tutankhamun was not an archaeologist, but a British thief, and his family. The Khedives were not the rulers of Misr, but rather they were agents of Britain and France who appointed them to rule Misr after their invasion. The operation was a complete theft that was carried out and was not a subject of science, archaeology, and excavation under national Egyptian rule, but rather under a situation of occupation.
– Seventh….. How is it possible that an inscription was correctly deciphered by the West, and the West was able to extract all those writings from Egyptian inscriptions, and all those details, but they could not know the name of Tut’s mother, is she Nefertiti or Kia?
Eighth…It is logical that the assassination of US President John F. Kennedy is a mystery. He is a well-known figure, and he was assassinated and we do not know the reason. Indeed, it is a mystery that requires an explanation of its cause and the identity of the real perpetrator, but it is illogical for a body to be exhumed for me that I do not know. Originally from a cemetery, and I do not know its identity, and you weave a story around it for me, then you tell me that he was murdered by assassination and that his death is a mystery, as if you want to convince the audience that I have now come to believe that the history you wrote for me is correct, and there is no dispute over it, and now We have to live inside a complex and dangerous mystery atmosphere.
The real mystery…is not his assassination, but who is the owner of that cemetery in the first place, why does he own all that cemetery, and what is the truth about those writings inside his tomb?
Then, even if the history that was written was true and he was assassinated, what is the importance of it being a mystery, and many books being published about the story, such as Mexican TV series?
A person was present in Misr and died and was assassinated…. and there are many people in Misr who were subjected to assassination…. So why will we make history an exciting story about one assassination?
There are hundreds of mummies, so why did this person turn his case into an assassination story, and what is the thing that made them think it was an assassination? Is it because of a fracture in the skeleton? ….But it is natural for a break in the temple to occur due to something else natural, so why insist on his command being killing and assassination?
Moreover, the matter does not require the British Bureau of Investigation to summon Charles Holmes….. in order for a historical investigation to be opened…… If he was killed or assassinated, this information would be written in the inscriptions found in his tomb.
Oh, I forgot .
Whenever we present such logic, we find the West writing a story for us that talks about erasing antiquities and documents, because whoever came after Tut was the minister who may have assassinated him, and therefore this person erased the documents that condemned him… a Hollywood movie.
Exactly…just as the traces of Akhenaten and his religion were erased from Misr, after the return of the previous religion.
And completely……the traces of the Hyksos were also erased from Misr, after they were expelled by Ahmose.
And completely…. just as the traces of the Lighthouse of Alexandria disappeared, due to an earthquake that demolished it and its stones were used to build a castle.
And completely….just as the traces of the Library of Alexandria disappeared, due to the fire.
But suppose that whoever assassinated him erased anything that indicated that he was the killer, then the logical and ridiculous question is: Is he hiding the truth from us or from the people of that period?
Why does the killer hide his identity? …Is he afraid that he will be taken to prison and then executed, or is he afraid for his reputation if Tutankhamun’s tomb was opened after ten thousand years, and people read the story of Tutankhamun and realized that the vizier (i.e.) was the killer? ????
—————–
Now… logic is full of this history that was written. It is indeed a mystery that needs to be solved, but it is not the story of the assassination… It is certain that there is a secret that we do not know. The normal thing is to say that there is no need to write such a history. Why is it written like this? History, is it entertainment or is there something to be hidden behind this crowd in history?
If you review the strange things that we wrote about this family along with this history, you will find that the most important observation is the presence of a strange duality within the family history, identical in cases, and in opposite cases, and doubts that arise in the duality.
The duality of father and son
Digamy (Nefertiti – Kia)
Dual titles (Akhenaten – Tut)
The dual relationship between the father and Smenkare (brother or son)
Duality of Tut’s ministers (Horemheb – A)
Dual incest (Akhenaten’s marriage to his mother – Tut’s marriage to his sister)
Duality of Tut’s mother (Nefertiti – Kia)
Duality of religion (Amun – Aten)
The octave of the name Smenkare (the name of Nefertiti – the name of Kia)
There is something wrong with the matter. Coincidence cannot repeat this duality, except as a result of something wrong with the matter. I wonder what is the reason?
Could the reason be the West’s translations of ancient writing in Misr?
I think it is the strongest possibility that could explain the matter. The wrong translations would make the wife a mother, the mother a sister, the father a son and the son a father, the minister two ministers, and so on.
Let’s go see the names of the father, son, and mother and see the rules for Western translation of names.
Now look at the image of the article… We have placed the names of the son and father in the religion of Amun to the right of the image, and you will find the names of the son and father in the religion of Aten to the left of the image.
Now notice me carefully
Notice how the writing of the names of the son and son on the right and left of the picture are identical in the order of the letters and in the location of the two syllables (Amun) and (Aten).
To the north of the picture:
The son pronounces….Tutankha (Aten)
The father pronounces…our brother (Aton)
Notice how the phonetic syllable (Aten) comes at the end of the noun
But on the right of the picture:
The son pronounces…..Tutankha (Amun)
The father speaks…. (Amun) Hotepnetar
Notice how the phonetic syllable (Amun) has a variable position between the father’s name and the son’s name, and it is assumed that either the father recites (Hotepnetre Amun), or the son pronounces (Amun Tutankham).
But
Amun Tutankh
Amunhotepneter
And but
Tutankhamun
Hotepnetremun
Indeed…there is a clear distortion in the West’s translations, and therefore, if there is a clear error in the West’s translations, it is certain that the basic root of the problem is a mistake in the West’s decoding of the Egyptian inscriptions, and this means that there is no point in treating them. If this history is rooted in the problem, then perhaps we are entering a history that is not correct at all, and perhaps Tutankhamun’s real original name is different from this name that the West gave us.
Now the question: Is it possible that the West invented for us the story of an Egyptian king who called for the worship of the Aten, in order to convince people of his distorted translations of ancient Egyptian inscriptions? While it is one reading, for example, and accordingly there is neither father nor son, but rather they are one person?
Rather, the important question is: Why, in the pictures in Tutankhamun’s tomb, is King Tut present with only a woman (unless the woman is his mother or his wife), but his father Akhenaten is not present in the scene, and why is Tut’s tomb the only one in Misr that contains a chair and other things? Other?
The answer is in an upcoming article……