Ancient Egyptian Forum

Si-amun · Posted: Fri May 13, 2005 10:18 am Post subject:

Exactly, that is the reason I haven't bothered to write an answer to Claude II's post, frankly I can't be bothered to argue against a brick wall and am fed up with being accused of all manner of horrible things. The answer to solve a row Claude is to drop it completely, not try and carry it on hoping it might "resolve itself".
_________________
Thou dost appear beautiful on the horizon of heaven, oh living Amun, he who was the first to live.

Google · Sponsor

the_tutness_is_here · Posted: Fri May 13, 2005 12:06 pm Post subject:

Doesn't it strike you as odd that the topic has rather "drifted" a bit? Shocked

As far as I've read, this group is a civil one (Which is a major relief!). I don't like fights, and I hope Cluade II can see that not everyone on here likes to discuss a matter in which people CAN get offended by some things, and thier opinons are thiers, regardless. Actions speak louder than words, but in the case of the internet, typing speaks louder than words. ^_^; Heh heh.
As for me, the topic: Zahi Hawass means to do well, though he tends to have a big head sometimes, I think he's a self-confident and self-assured man and a well-respected Egyptologist (Honestly...I'm trying to settle this conflict by talking about something else, which is what the forum topic was. Though, I fear this may not work, and I want this to be as peacefull as humanly possible. ^_^; ).
_________________

How does it FEEL to lose the one who understood you the MOST? He died to protect you, and YOU were supposed to protect HIM. What a shame...

maatkara · Posted: Sat May 14, 2005 7:53 pm Post subject:

oh, dear! You are completely right and think I am responsible as well as Claude....I apologise!
It's nice that we can have somebody sensitive like you are!!
Wink

....you've got the right feeling! Wink

the_tutness_is_here · Posted: Sat May 14, 2005 9:13 pm Post subject:

Hatshepsut76 · Posted: Sun May 15, 2005 7:49 am Post subject:

I agree on what you say: my friend maatkara didnt't ever insult anyone here Wink

; besides, critics must be CONstructive...

Psusennes I · Pharaoh Joined: 09 Sep 2004 Posts: 913 Location: England

I quite agree. In fact I think that the title of this thread was itself counter-productive.
_________________

maatkara · Posted: Sun May 15, 2005 11:11 am Post subject:

wow! thank you so much to you all! Embarassed

Dark_Meryetamun_28 · Posted: Sun May 15, 2005 3:30 pm Post subject:

*sigh* TOPIC. No more flaming. The next one who flames gets on my bad list and this topic will be closed after that.
_________________

maatkara · Posted: Sun May 15, 2005 3:41 pm Post subject:

Psus!
I think that it is not the title of the topic but the way it has turned....we all should try to respect the other Wink

Anyway, I started the topic proposing an article in which Doctor Saleh was arguing with Hawass..By that time they still had to decide who was going to take part of the Scientific Team....now the game is over: tests on Tut are already done, and other themes are now going on about ..."Arguing with Hawass...."...
I believe that we should wonder why they didn't make a DNA test on King Tut's Mummy and toxic (?) test to see if he was poisoned....but this matter is already treated in other topics.... Wink

the_tutness_is_here · Posted: Sun May 15, 2005 4:25 pm Post subject:

^_^ I'm glad that all is well now. Flames are definately NOT welcome. It can be peacefull, now. And I'm happy everyone is in agreement that criticism should always be constructive. I hate it when all people are insulted. I just wonder, to reply to maatkara's point, if Tut's mummy should've had a DNA test...or something like that. Very Happy

_________________

How does it FEEL to lose the one who understood you the MOST? He died to protect you, and YOU were supposed to protect HIM. What a shame...

Unas · Posted: Sun May 15, 2005 4:41 pm Post subject:

Well, it might be interesting, but what would it prove? That Tut has CG AT thingies? ...Perhaps they could start a worldwide search for "Tut's lost kin" ..? Wink

_________________
"Does anyone ever truly think 'outside' of the box, or are they merely expanding the possibilities of what that box can hold to suit their own agenda?"
(Piquet: Nov. 3, 2005)

the_tutness_is_here · Posted: Sun May 15, 2005 5:22 pm Post subject:

Osiris II · Posted: Mon May 16, 2005 1:12 am Post subject:

I would love to see the question of Tut's relationships--his parents, his familial relationships--settled, but I don't really think DNA could do it. After all, the basic facts in DNA just tells us which family he came from--Amenhotep III's--if he had children--no--any physical reason for his death--no. Facts that we already know. Until a papyrus is discovered that tells us who his parents were, how and why he died, who his brothers and sisters might have been, we are still in the dark. And it's not likel;y that such a papyrus will be discovered.

the_tutness_is_here · Posted: Mon May 16, 2005 1:46 am Post subject:

The only evidence I can think of that can link Tut and his family is a stele--I read this according to Nicholas Reeves' "The Complete Tutankhamun"--that said: "The king's own bodily son, his beloved, Tutankhaten". (The king, of course, being Akhenaten.). Which, might I add, was found in Akhetaten, in the North palace, I believe. ^_^ That's what I've read, but I think there should be more evidence on it. Confused

_________________

How does it FEEL to lose the one who understood you the MOST? He died to protect you, and YOU were supposed to protect HIM. What a shame...

Osiris II · Posted: Mon May 16, 2005 6:50 pm Post subject:

I agree--the stele that was found spoke of "the king's own bodily son" and meaning Tutankhamen, but there is no mention of the king to which is being refered. If Amenhotep III had been his father, Tut would have refered to him as his bodily father. Actually, it was not unheard of for a king to refer to his ancestors as his "bodily father," as Tut had done in reference to Tuthmosis IV, his great-grandfather.