Luxor4u

My second topic of today is Thutmosis whom I dubbed Thutmosis V. My reasons is because he was supposed to be the fifth Tuthmosis to rule Egypt. As the line of ascension goes a Thutmosis was next to rule after an Amenhotep and that's how it was since the times of Amenhotep I and Thutmosis I. One can say that it was predestined for Akhenaten to do what he had done.

Anyhow, has anyone else wonder why they didn't put this mummy in the DNA analysis like the other mummies. It baffles me that they would leave him out. There are claims that the mummy is not Thutmosis but Webenesu the son Amenhotep II., but I disagree. I think someone didn't include him in the analysis because a certain someone( Zahi Hawass) was scared that his little theories of the KV55 mummy being an older man would be disproven. I most definitely think that this mummy is Thutmose and would help in some ways understand Akhenaten's rightful age.

Frater0082 wrote:My second topic of today is Thutmosis whom I dubbed Thutmosis V. My reasons is because he was supposed to be the fifth Tuthmosis to rule Egypt. As the line of ascension goes a Thutmosis was next to rule after an Amenhotep and that's how it was since the times of Amenhotep I and Thutmosis I. One can say that it was predestined for Akhenaten to do what he had done.

You are conveniently ignoring Tuthmosis II, Hatshepsut and Tuthmosis III.

Oh yeah i did forget about Hatshepsut did I. No I just forgot about her that's all. I guess you can say it was her destiny to become King of Egypt. But here's her link to the throne she was a descendant of Amenhotep I and it's now fact that Thutmosis I did not, so one can say she served as an Amenhotep between the two Thutmosis.

Remember their was a break between the early 18th dynasty family tree between Amenhotep I and Thumosis I, there is two families mixed into one. Hatchepsut being linked to the original family.

Frater0082 wrote:My second topic of today is Thutmosis whom I dubbed Thutmosis V. My reasons is because he was supposed to be the fifth Tuthmosis to rule Egypt. As the line of ascension goes a Thutmosis was next to rule after an Amenhotep and that's how it was since the times of Amenhotep I and Thutmosis I. One can say that it was predestined for Akhenaten to do what he had done.

Anyhow, has anyone else wonder why they didn't put this mummy in the DNA analysis like the other mummies. It baffles me that they would leave him out. There are claims that the mummy is not Thutmosis but Webenesu the son Amenhotep II., but I disagree. I think someone didn't include him in the analysis because a certain someone( Zahi Hawass) was scared that his little theories of the KV55 mummy being an older man would be disproven. I most definitely think that this mummy is Thutmose and would help in some ways understand Akhenaten's rightful age.

Do we have the mummy of Thutmosis (son of Amenhotep III) ? it's not be positively identified.

He could be the male mummy found with the 2 female mummies in KV35

There is evidence that Thutmose died young (between years 27 & 30 of his father's reign).

newcastle wrote:

Frater0082 wrote:My second topic of today is Thutmosis whom I dubbed Thutmosis V. My reasons is because he was supposed to be the fifth Tuthmosis to rule Egypt. As the line of ascension goes a Thutmosis was next to rule after an Amenhotep and that's how it was since the times of Amenhotep I and Thutmosis I. One can say that it was predestined for Akhenaten to do what he had done.

Anyhow, has anyone else wonder why they didn't put this mummy in the DNA analysis like the other mummies. It baffles me that they would leave him out. There are claims that the mummy is not Thutmosis but Webenesu the son Amenhotep II., but I disagree. I think someone didn't include him in the analysis because a certain someone( Zahi Hawass) was scared that his little theories of the KV55 mummy being an older man would be disproven. I most definitely think that this mummy is Thutmose and would help in some ways understand Akhenaten's rightful age.

Do we have the mummy of Thutmosis (son of Amenhotep III) ? it's not be positively identified.

He could be the male mummy found with the 2 female mummies in KV35

There is evidence that Thutmose died young (between years 27 & 30 of his father's reign).

Show me some evidence, because between Tiye and Nefertiti there was a boy about the age of 12-15.

Why would someone go through all that trouble to bury someone not completely related to the later royal line together it's completely strange. Surely, if Thutmosis was older than he wouldn't be depicted with a sidelock not even Tutankhamun had one when he reached a level of maturity. And that's from the depiction basis.

I'm sure you're going to thrown some of the titles to back you up but keep in mind his father became at a very early age.

Again why would someone just put some random past relative in between Nefertiti and Tiye.

Just look at his face and Tiye's face that boy is her son without a doubt.

Frater0082 wrote:

newcastle wrote:

Frater0082 wrote:My second topic of today is Thutmosis whom I dubbed Thutmosis V. My reasons is because he was supposed to be the fifth Tuthmosis to rule Egypt. As the line of ascension goes a Thutmosis was next to rule after an Amenhotep and that's how it was since the times of Amenhotep I and Thutmosis I. One can say that it was predestined for Akhenaten to do what he had done.

Anyhow, has anyone else wonder why they didn't put this mummy in the DNA analysis like the other mummies. It baffles me that they would leave him out. There are claims that the mummy is not Thutmosis but Webenesu the son Amenhotep II., but I disagree. I think someone didn't include him in the analysis because a certain someone( Zahi Hawass) was scared that his little theories of the KV55 mummy being an older man would be disproven. I most definitely think that this mummy is Thutmose and would help in some ways understand Akhenaten's rightful age.

Do we have the mummy of Thutmosis (son of Amenhotep III) ? it's not be positively identified.

He could be the male mummy found with the 2 female mummies in KV35

There is evidence that Thutmose died young (between years 27 & 30 of his father's reign).

Show me some evidence, because between Tiye and Nefertiti there was a boy about the age of 12-15.

Why would someone go through all that trouble to bury someone not completely related to the later royal line together it's completely strange. Surely, if Thutmosis was older than he wouldn't be depicted with a sidelock not even Tutankhamun had one when he reached a level of maturity. And that's from the depiction basis.

I'm sure you're going to thrown some of the titles to back you up but keep in mind his father became at a very early age.

Again why would someone just put some random past relative in between Nefertiti and Tiye.

Just look at his face and Tiye's face that boy is her son without a doubt.

1.Show you evidence of what?....I'm not sure which of my words you're referring to.

2. "....bury someone not completely....". Again....who are you referring to here?

3. "....Surely if Thutmosis was older...:. Again...can't follow what you're trying to say...or about whom or what.

P.S. Looking at faces of mummies & making definitive statements as to their relationship is just plain silly.

I was talking about Thutmosis V. Where does it implies that he was 27 and 30 years old. I don't get why Egyptologists try to squeeze their theories into facts.

Frater0082 wrote:I was talking about Thutmosis V. Where does it implies that he was 27 and 30 years old. I don't get why Egyptologists try to squeeze their theories into facts.

PAY ATTENTION !! Born in the years 27 - 30 "OF HIS FATHER'S REIGN."

newcastle wrote:

Frater0082 wrote:I was talking about Thutmosis V. Where does it implies that he was 27 and 30 years old. I don't get why Egyptologists try to squeeze their theories into facts.

PAY ATTENTION !! Born in the years 27 - 30 "OF HIS FATHER'S REIGN."

Who's to say that Amenhotep III didn't being having children in the middle of his reign he after all was a child when he became a pharaoh so whose to say that he began having children in his early years. To say that he did and didn't altogether is preposterous.

Frater do you re read the posts you make before submitting them because some of them I find very difficult to understand? Please try to be clearer for us that are not so knowledgeable about ancient history as you.

carrie wrote:Frater do you re read the posts you make before submitting them because some of them I find very difficult to understand? Please try to be clearer for us that are not so knowledgeable about ancient history as you.

Okay i'm sorry and know I'm not as knowledgeable to ancient history. Like I said I was only a baby at the end of the Amarna period and a foreigner when I return my information on the case is rather slim but not as slim as everyone else.