- Kiya writes: We all know that it was common practice for a Pharaoh to be portrayed as a great and powerful warrior, whether or not hat was the case in real life. Tut was taking his place with the gods so his tomb would need to be equipped for this task. It doesn't change what he was in real life.
Sekhmet writes: I am sorry but i know such thing. Would you please enlighten me with the source of your knowledge? "That it was common practice for Pharaoh to be portrayed as a great powerful warrior." The only such portrayals i am aware of are those of Pharaohs who were in acutuality warrior Pharaohs. Or 18th Dynasty Queens who were shown able and willing to carry out the Pharaohs job of stompping out the enemy. You're actually talking a 19th/early 20th century theory that has been mostly discarded.
"Amenophis III his grandfather, if not his father, was leading armies at the age of 17." pg. 49 Egyptian Warfare and Weapons, by Ian Shaw.
"Ramesses II as a 14 maybe 15 year old prince was allowed to lead his father's armies against Nubia. Pharaoh Triumphant the Life and Times of Ramesses II." pg. 24, by K.A. Kitchen
Tutankhamun died between the ages of 16- and 19 well old enough to have lead armies and to have died in that action. Why must he be a naive, little boy to you? Because it fits best with your understanding of his history?
"The events surrounding the death of Tut are still far from clear. The King died unexpectedly in his teth regnal year at a time when Egypt was engaged in a major confrontation iwth the Hittites. That ended in an Egyptian defeat about the time of Tut's death." pg 292 The Oxford History of Ancient Egypt, by Jacobus Van Dijk, Ian Shaw editior.
"The Kings were traditionally the chief warrior of the state, the King personally led his troops on campaigns." pg. 228 Handbook to life in Ancient Egypt, by Rosalie David.
Kiya writes- Yes Tut had neither a mother or a Regent. If we are to believe Kiya was his mother then she died/disapeared, as did Nefertiti. What could he do but allow the Vizier(his relative) and the head of the army to 'take charge'. These were men used to getting their own way as prooven by the murder of the Hittite prince Zananza, whoever carried it out.
Sekhmet writes- Your welcome to hang onto your desire to make a seconadary wife of Akhenaten, who has no position outside of Akhenaten, loses that little position to Akhenaten's daughters, the mother of King Tutankhamun. Myself i prefer to look at the facts and history of King/Queen ship in Ancient Egypt and say it just doesn't jive with history. Poor little Tut in your opinion and the opinion of those Victorian aged scholars who discovered him, more intuned with underlings attempting to control British and European royality than the respect Divine Royality achieved in Ancient Egypt.
Kiya writes- There was a documentary on the history channel which stated that Akhenaten had sealed KV55. This never did sit well with me considering the fact that Akhenaten had said he would never leave Akhet-Aten, why would he allow his family to be burried outside the city?
Sekhmet writes- could you please furnish me with source for this statement. I remember that Lucille Morgan in The Lost Queen of Egypt makes this statement regarding Akhenaten, it was a work of fiction and no real archaeologists supports her statement in the book. You haven't read her book too have you? It lead me for years in several wrong conclusions.
Kiya writes - Obviously I don't have any firm evidence stating Kiya was the mother of Tut as there isn't any. I stated above that I didn't 100% believe it, just that I thought it the most likely scenario. The obvious answer is usually the right one.
Sekhmet writes- The obvisous most likely interpetaton of the Armarna story at the time of the discovery was that Akhenaten had only one wife. It was obvisously wrong as much later finds proved. There is no proof that Kiya was Tutankhamun's mother and what proof that does survive indicates that she wasn't held with any affection by anyone other than Akhenaten.
Kiya writes- You quoted 'Akhenaten by Cyril Aldred, a copy of which I own, so I will also refer to it: It is Cyril Aldred who speculates that the 2nd death bed scene may have been Kiya. It does make sense, we know that she died/disapeared around this time. What other royal female could it be?
Kiya when i refer to a source i put the page number in it. To make it easy for someone else to check what i am saying. I can not find the reference you are referring to in the book. However i do find on pg.286, "It may well be, therefore that such an exceptional beloved queen (Aldred's words not mine) if only a secondary queen (never allowed the title or royal uranus, my words) was granted the privilege of burial in or near the Royal tomb.
On pg. 288 he writes The death of Kiya also about the same time, obliged him to bury her in the Royal Tomb or in a tomb nearby.
I find no reference to it being her in Aldred's book decipted as the other woman in the royal mourning scene in the Royal Tomb. As there are 2 such scenes and only one with an identifing name, the other one with the names wiped out. I maintain there is no reason not to believe that it was Nefertiti who was the dead queen, and her daughter Meritaten taking her mother's place beside her grieving father.
I also note in trying to find the information you offer from Aldred's book that on pg. 227 Kiya is thought to have outlived Nefertiti by 2 or more years. Which would make it hard for Nefertiti to have been the Queen mourning Kiya's death with Akhenaten, if it was her in the more defaced scene.
You may not like this but since you have the book i suggest you go and reread pages 113, and 285. On these pages you will be told that her position and importance have been taken out of context by modern scholars.