Monkton
Re: Hatshepsut's Accession
Sat Feb 28, 2009 10:51
75.133.148.82 (XFF: 81.106.124.212)

The correct spelling is Uluburun and it was a scarab of Nefertiti that was found, not a ring. Tests on firewood from the wreck revealed a date circa 1300 BC.

  • Re: Hatshepsut's AccessionMonkton, Sat Feb 28 10:39
    "While it is true that Hatshepsut is not mentioned by subsequent 'dynasties', the total structure of Egyptian evidence, incuding the lack of any evidence for the alleged years 10-20 of Ramesses II,... more
    • Hatshepsut's AccessionCullom, Sat Feb 28 13:24
      Hello, You are thinking backward here. If the TIP is shorter, by about 175 years, then it must have begun later, not 'when it began'. The TIP is securely connected to later periods, which are... more
      • Re: Hatshepsut's AccessionMonkton, Sun Mar 1 01:28
        "You are thinking backward here. If the TIP is shorter, by about 175 years, then it must have begun later, not 'when it began'. The TIP is securely connected to later periods, which are securely... more
        • Hatshepsut's accessionCullom, Sun Mar 1 10:36
          Hello again, I don't know where to begin with my response. I don't like evidence bashing. I prefer to read the inscriptions and evidence as it written. You say that Twosret and Siptah are mentioned... more
          • Re: Hatshepsut's accessionMonkton, Sun Mar 1 23:51
            'I don't know where to begin with my response. I don't like evidence bashing. I prefer to read the inscriptions and evidence as it written." Don't you mean as translated? "You say that Twosret and... more
            • Re: Hatshepsut's accessionJoe Baker, Sat Apr 4 02:11
              Hi Monkton I have just been doing some house cleaning and came across this old unfinished aborted post. It rehashes somem old material I posted before buy maybe it will be of interest. On Cullom -... more
              • Hatshepsut's AccessionCullom, Sun Apr 5 09:45
                Hello Joe, Madness? Please educate me about the inscriptions of Ramesses II that were actually inscribed during the period from year 10 to year 20. There are several inscriptions that refer back to... more
                • To Cullom, Wade, Gordon, Monkton and The Rest, Some of you say: "We all know that assigning absolute dates is controversial", or say: "I prefer to rely on the information from ancient Egypt rather... more
                  • Hatshepsut's AccessionCullom, Fri Apr 10 20:53
                    Hello Waael ebn Fekry, Is there any publication of the interesting event you described? Have the dating tests been done? If so what were the results? Cullom
                • Re: Hatshepsut's AccessionJoe Baker, Wed Apr 8 22:09
                  Hi Cullom Please educate me about the inscriptions of Ramesses II that were actually inscribed during the period from year 10 to year 20 I do not have sufficient resources for that information but... more
                  • Hatshepsut's AccessionCullom, Wed Apr 8 23:30
                    Hello Joe, Thank you for a prompt reply on a difficult matter. In the excerpts of I have seen of KRI, Kitchen is uncritical of the inscriptions but only copies and translates them. The year 10 Nahr... more
            • Hatshepsut's AccessionCullom, Mon Mar 2 19:33
              Hello, The description of Thuoris in Manetho section 19 says clearly that he was a man who had a wife. Saying the gender of the two people was wrong so they can be equated with Twosret and Siptah is... more
    • Re: Hatshepsut's Accession — Monkton, Sat Feb 28 10:51
Click here to receive daily updates