Friday, December 19, 2008

King Tut's Father ID'd in Stone Inscription

Discovery Channel (Rossella Lorenzi)

An inscribed limestone block might have solved one of history's greatest mysteries -- who fathered the boy pharaoh King Tut.

"We can now say that Tutankhamun was the child of Akhenaten," Zahi Hawass, chief of Egypt's Supreme Council of Antiquities, told Discovery News.

The finding offers evidence against another leading theory that King Tut was sired by the minor king Smenkhkare.

Hawass discovered the missing part of a broken limestone block a few months ago in a storeroom at el Ashmunein, a village on the west bank of the Nile some 150 miles south of Cairo.

Once reassembled, the slab has become "an accurate piece of evidence that proves Tut lived in el Amarna with Akhenaten and he married his wife, Ankhesenamun," while living in el Amarna, Hawass said.

The text also suggests that the young Tutankhamun married his father's daughter -- his half sister.

"The block shows the young Tutankhamun and his wife, Ankhesenamun, seated together. The text identifies Tutankhamun as the 'king's son of his body, Tutankhaten,' and his wife as the 'king's daughter of his body, Ankhesenaten,'" Hawass said.

FreshNews

New evidence in the form of an inscribed limestone block in Egypt might have solved the mystery about the identity of boy pharaoh King Tutankhamun’s father.

The best-known pharaoh of ancient Egypt, King Tut has been puzzling scientists ever since his mummy and treasure-packed tomb was discovered in 1922 in the Valley of the Kings by British archaeologist Howard Carter.

“We can now say that Tutankhamun was the child of Akhenaten,” Zahi Hawass, chief of Egypt’s Supreme Council of Antiquities, told Discovery News.

The finding offers evidence against another leading theory that King Tut was sired by the minor king Smenkhkare.

Hawass discovered the missing part of a broken limestone block a few months ago in a storeroom at el Ashmunein, a village on the west bank of the Nile some 150 miles south of Cairo.

Found among other sandstone slabs in the storeroom of El Ashmunein’’s archaeological site, the block was used in the construction of the temple of Thoth during the reign of Ramesses II, who ruled around 1279-1213 B.C.


See the above pages for the full stories.

4 comments:

rymerster said...

I remain sceptical until we can see the block. I want to know if Tut is referred to as the child of Akhenaten or if he is just shown as a King's Son Of His Body. That alone would not convince me that he is Akhenaten's son.

Scrabcake said...

This is old hat. It says king's son of his body, and we've known about this fragment for a long time. It's just that now they've actually relocated it in the storehouse. This is mostly just Zahi grabbing media attention with old news.
I think that it is becoming more and more clear though that KSOHB is not used if the prince in question is not the son of the reigning king. I'm not sure that this fact was as well established in the past.

kiyato said...

Like "God's father" in Ancient Egypt means "father-in-law", I think it's possible "God's Son" can means "son-in-law"...

Anonymous said...

extremely old news! E. Velikovsky laid this all out conclusively and in great detail in 'Oedipus and Ahknaton', 1960... Hawass is so behind that he appears to ahead!