|
Was King Tut Murdered?
Was King Tut murdered or did he die from an
illness? King Tut’s death has puzzled both historians and
Egyptologists for many years. If King Tut was indeed
murdered, some research and evidence point to a few limited
servants or contacts that could have been responsible for
King Tut’s death. But who were these potential people that
could have been responsible for such a scandalous act? What
motives might the murderers have had if the pharaoh was
killed? Why is it believed that King Tut was murdered? What
about the prospect of King Tut dying due to an illness?
Could this be possible? With all these questions and with
the latest research we hope to shed some light into his
death.
In 1968, Ronald Harrison (British scientist) took
X-rays of King Tut’s skull. While doing an examination he
discovered fragments of bone inside the skull possibly
indicating trauma to the head. The damages to the head could
have been caused after death; however, it is highly
unlikely. A trauma specialist from Long Island University
insisted that this injury could not have been from a natural
cause. The specialist stated, “The blow was to a protected
area at the back of the head which you don't injure in an
accident, someone had to sneak up from behind.” So who would
have carried out this “sneak-attack” if this truly
occurred? Why would someone want to kill King Tut?
Moving forward to a more recent time, in 1994, Bob
Brier, an Egyptologist from Long Island University insisted
that Tutankhamen was murdered by Ay (a high ranking
official). Mr. Brier revealed his findings January 17, 1997
in a conference held in California.
Why would Brier suggest it was Ay who killed the
pharaoh? This answer is found after King Tut’s death—Ay
succeeded the throne. So now that we have a possible motive
that’s obvious, how did Ay become king if he was the vizier
and not a royal family member? This answer was found through
a ring. A ring discovered in Cairo in 1931 shed light into
Ay’s tactic used to attain the throne. Ankhesenamun (King
Tut’s wife) was forced to marry Ay after King Tut’s death.
This gave Ay the right to step into kingship. This marriage
was not a happy event as evidence found some points of
distress and despair on Ankhesenamum’s part.
Some Egyptologists believe that Ankhesenamun could
have made a desperate plea for help. But why would they
believe this? Some tablets, which are dated towards the end
of the Amarna period, were discovered. These tables appeared
to be from Ankhesenamum to the Hittites asking for help. The
Hittites were enemies of Egypt at the time.
These tablets, dating back to the end of the 18th
dynasty, revealed a possible last plea for intervention to
the Hittites revealing a potential scandal in the making.
Some Egyptologist’s strongly associate this letter with
Ankhesenamun as a last resort in the hopes of saving her
throne and her status. She informed the Hittite king,
Suppiluliumas, to send a son to wed her. She clearly stated
her humiliation and her feelings of being worried. The queen
pointed out the loss of her husband and stated, “Never shall
I pick out a servant of mine and make him my husband. I am
afraid!” Was this servant Ay she was talking about?
The Hittite son who was sent to be married never
made it to Egypt. He was assassinated. Could Ay have been
responsible for this? Ankhesenamun was eventually forced to
marry Ay but what transpired for this to occur still remains
a mystery. But is Ay the only suspect in the murder of King
Tut?
The king's deputy, also known as Horemheb, may
have been responsible for the death of King Tut as well. The
possibility that King Tut was getting older and probably
ready to take powers into his own hands also may have
contributed to his early demise. This might have worried
Horemheb and could have been a possible motive. After Ay
passed away, Horemheb became the pharaoh and restored
Ancient Egypt to its traditional times. He moved his capital
to Memphis and returned all the temples to the rightful
priests. During his reign as pharaoh he removed any sign of
the Amarna Period. It could be that if he contributed to
King Tut’s death, that this was done to restore Egypt to its
traditional ways and not so much due to the greed factor.
Although, in hindsight, it appears that King Tut was also
leaning in the direction of restoring Egypt to the more
habitual ways before his father’s reign. Nonetheless,
Horemheb can not be ruled out as a suspect.
Mohamed El-Saghir, head of Upper Egyptian
Antiquities, believes that Horemheb could not have committed
the murder of the pharaoh. Mohamed El-Saghir believes that
because King Tut was restoring Egypt to its traditional
ways, Horemheb would not have had a reason to kill him. He
does find it interesting that Horemheb removed King Tut’s
name from several items and replaced it with his. Even so,
it’s still not enough evidence.
Ay is also ruled out by Mohamed El-Saghir.
According to Mohamed El-Saghir, Ay would not have killed the
king as Ay assisted the pharaoh with personal and important
rituals. He goes on to say, "There is insufficient
evidence that he is guilty. He was the high priest and was,
moreover, the one who wrote Tutankhamen's negative
confession and performed his ‘opening of the mouth’
ceremony.” If Ay and Horemheb are ruled out, then how else
might have King Tut died?
Other theories as well have come to light though
scientific examination. Forensic experts from Egypt did an
examination on King Tut. It was found that he may have been
poisoned. They believed the blow to the head could have
happened during mummification. "His body might have been
dropped on the floor and his head hit the flagstones; there
is no trace of bleeding around the blow," said the experts.
Just recently, new CT scans of King Tut have been
performed and the results shed new light into King Tut’s
death. The scans revealed a broken leg that may have been
responsible for the death of King Tut. Doctor Zahi Hawass
says, "We found that he had a fracture on the left leg. And
that fracture proved to have happened a few days before he
died. It was before mummification, and therefore it could
happen, we are not sure, it could (have) happened that he
died because of this accident." So King Tut might have not
been murdered after all.
If King Tut was murdered, which the evidence
points in that direction, it could never be solved due to
many years of tarnish. King Tut was the son of the “Heretic”
Pharaoh—Akhenaten. This could have bred many angry
individuals who wanted nothing or anything to do with
Akhenaten. If it had not been his advisors or confidants, it
surly must have been the priests who were forced to shutdown
temples because of Akhenaten. One thing is for sure, the
quest for answers to King Tut’s death, continue to remain a
mystery and they may always remain an unknown.
|
