Sunday, May 29, 2011


What are tags? You can give your posts a "tag", which is like a keyword. Tags help you find content which has something in common. You can assign as many tags as you wish to each post. 
for everyone
"By the time that Tuthmosis III became sole ruler of Egypt in his Year 22 after the death of Hathepsut, four decades had passed without a major Egyptian military campaign in western Asia.
    Now the situation changed completely.     The King of Qadesh ( a strong fortified city on the River Orontes in northern Syia) led a Syrio-Canaanite confederacy in a general rebellion against Egypt. In response, Tuthmosis III marched into western Asia to regain the territories between the Nile and the Euphrates that had been conquered 40 years earlier by his grandfather, Tuthmosis I.
    In the next 20 years he led a total of seventeen campaigns in western Asia, at the end of which Tuthmosis III (David) had earned himself the reputation of being the mightiest of all the kings of the ancient world - and had re-established the empire that was the subject of the Lord's promises to Sarah's descendants, which are examined later in this book.

(The blue marker on the map is Megiddo).
     ".......... the most significant fact of all in establishing the identity of David is that the biblical account of his campaigns matches in precise detail the accounts of the battles fought by Tuthmosis III,, whose details are to be found inscribed in the Annals, a 223-line document at the granite holy of holies the king built after his Year 40 (1439 BCE) at Karnak (modern Luxor) in Upper Egypt, on the east bank of the Nile opposite the Valley of the kings.

     "Despite his relatively short reign, Tuthmosis I was the original founder of the Egyptian Empire. he marched into western Asia at the head of his army and reached the River Euphrates in the area between northern Syria and Mesopotamia, south of Anatolia.   

    There they succeeded in crossing the river into the territory of Mitanni (the ancient kingdom of northern Mesopotamia) where Tuthmosis I erected a stele (which has not been found) commemorating his victory.    At this time, however, the Egyptians were satisfied simply to crush their enemies and never tried to establish control over the vanquished territories.

    The account at Karnak of these various wars, copied from the daily records of the scribe who accompanied the army on its campaigns, serves to provide from Egyptian historical sources considerable additional light on the identity of the historical David, and to show how the events of his reign were adapted by Hebrew scribes to fit the reign of a tribal chief who lived five centuries later.

They include:  the significance of the battleground Armageddon; how Jerusalem came to be known as the city of 'royal' David' how David and 'all the house of Israel brought up the Ark [boat] of the Lord [to Jerusalem] with shouting, and with the sound of trumpets' (II Samuel 6:1); and the origins of the name Zion, which has not been found in any historical source and makes its first appearance in the Bible as soon as we learn of King David's entry into Jerusalem: 'David took the strong hold of Zion: the same is the city of David' (5:7).  I shall now examine these important points in greater detail.
    The Egyptian account begins with Tuthmosis III's departure at the head of his troops from the fortified border city of Zarw during the last days of his Year 22.      Ten days later he arrived in Gaza, where he celebrated the start of his Year 23 (1468BCE) with festivals in honour of his 'father', Amun-Ra, whose image he carried inside an Ark (a representation of a boat with a statue of Amun sitting in it) at the head of the marching army.  
    He stayed there for the night before pushing north towards central Canaan, where he paused in a town called Yehem to the south of a mountainous ridge he had to cross in order to reach Megiddo, the city where the Qadesh enemy had gathered.   At Yehem he was faced with a choice of three routes, but the shortest, called the Aruna road, was narrow and dangerous, and he therefore summoned a Council of War.
   His officers were opposed to choosing the Aruna route.   They said: 'How can one go on this road, which is so narrow?   It is reported that the enemy stand outside and are numerous.   Will not horse have to go behind horse, and soldiers and people likewise?   Shall our own vanguard be fighting while the rear stands here in Aruna (the starting point of the narrow road) and does not fight?'
      However in the light of fresh reports brought in by messengers Tuthmosis III decided that he would make his way to Megiddo by the unappealing – but, to his enemies, unexpected – narrow road, a choice to which his officers replied:  'Thy father Amun prosper thy counsel.

.....The servant will follow his master.'   Thus was set the scene for the first battle of Armageddon.

      "Jerusalem, the 'city of David', owes its prominence in the Bible, and as a place of devout pilgrimage today, to the role it played in the opening campaign of the long military career of Tuthmosis III – against Megiddo, which he always looked back upon as the most important battle he fought.
      The Encyclopaedia of Archaeological Excavations in the Holy Lands makes the point that the military importance of Megiddo and its long history as an international battleground is 'aptly reflected in the Apocalypse of John (Revelation, 16:16ff) in which Armageddon (Har Megiddon,the Mount of Megiddo) is designated as the site where, at the end of days, all the kings of the world will fight the ultimate battle against the forces of God'.    This underlines the belief up to the Christian era that the Messiah (Christ the Redeemer) born of the House of David will one day have to re-enact the battle of his great ancestor who conquered Megiddo, where the final confrontation between Good and Evil will take place.
     The combined Syrian and Canaanite forces facing Tuthmosis III outside Megiddo – modern Tell Megiddo in Palestine – had been divided into two armies.   The king vanquished them in the ensuing battle, but the defeated enemy fled to the safety of the city, where, as the gates were shut, they were hauled to safety by citizens who let down 'garments to hoist them up'.
     The account of the battle complains that the enemy had 'abandoned their horses and their chariots of gold and silver' and 'if only His Majesty's army had not given up their hearts to capturing the possessions of the enemy, they would [have captured] Megiddo at this time'.    Instead, they had to lay siege to the city for seven months before it was eventually taken.     However, Tuthmosis III did not remain with his troops during this time –
     His Majesty himself was in a fortress east of this town' – but returned to lead the final assault.   The actual name of this fortress does not appear in the Egyptian version of events, do doubt because the official scribe stayed with the besieging army rather than accompanying the king, but their respective locations, and the evidence that follows, indicate that the fortress was Jerusalem, situated to the south-east of Megiddo.
   "Neither does the name 'Jerusalem' appear in the western Asiatic city-lists of Tuthmosis III or any of his immediate successors.   This has not been previously explained.   My own view is that the Egyptians at the time recognized Jerusalem by another name – Qadesh, (Note – Not to be confused with the northern Qadesh on the River Orontes, not conquered until seven years after the conquest of Megiddo) a Semitic word meaning 'holy'.
     Among the historical records of Tuthmosis III found at Karnak is a list that includes more than 100 names of Palestinian locations under Egyptian control after his first Asiatic campaign.    Yet, at the top of the Palestinian (or Megiddo) list, we find the name Qadesh.   The modern Arabic name for Jerusalem suggest that this was a city at the head of the Palestinian list: al-Quds, which becomes ha-Qudesh in Hebrew, means, in both Arabic and Hebrew, the holy (ground), and is used in the first verse of Chapter 11 of the Book of Nehemiah where it speaks of 'Jerusalem the holy city'  (in Hebrew, Yurushalayim ha Qadesh).
      Evidence of these peaceful relations with Egypt is also provided by the Tell el-Amarna letters, the foreign archives of the 18th Dynasty.   Six communications, sent to the King of Egypt in the 14th century BCE and written in Akkadian, the diplomatic language of the period, have as their source not 'Qadesh but mat Urusalim, 'the land of Jerusalem'.   They make it clear that Jerusalem had been under Egyptian control since the time of Tuthmosis III, with an Egyptian military garrison stationed locally.
        Furthermore, the Akkadian name for Jerusalem found in the Tell el-Amarna letters can be divided into two elements, Uru and Salim.    The first element, Uru, is derived from the very yarah, meaning 'to found' or 'to establish'.   The second element, however, has caused some misunderstanding.   A number of scholars have argued that here we have a reference to a Western Semitic or Amorite god, Shulmanu or Shalim.   Thus Urusalim would, in their view, mean 'Shalim has founded'.    However, no textual or archaeological evidence has ever been found to indicate, either directly or indirectly, that the Amorite god Shalim was a deity worshipped at Jerusalem, which could not have been the case if the very founding of the city was related to him.
        When we abandon this unsupported explanation of the second element in the word Urusalim we find that Salim – as was correctly understood by the early Jewish rabbis in the Haggadah, the legendary part of the Talmud, representing its non-legal element – means 'peace'  (Hebrew shalom and Arabic salam).   Thus the meaning of Urusalim would be 'foundation of peace' or 'establishing peace', an interpretation that is supported by the historical evidence: the lack of any mention of Urusalim in Egyptian sources outside the Tell el-Amarna letter; the fact that Qadesh, used in both the Bible and later Arabic texts as a synonym for Jerusalem, is mentioned in the lists of subdued Asiatic cities of most Egyptian kings of this period; and that the Qadesh in question cannot have been the city of that name on the River Orontes. 
     When Tuthmosis III went out to fight against the confederation of Canaanite and Syrian princes at Megiddo, Jerusalem did not take part in the rebellion.   The king faced no need to take control of the fortress and, instead, was able to make his way straight from Gaza to Megiddo and, without need for military action, to seek safe sanctuary in Jerusalem during the long months that Megiddo was under siege.  Thus identified, Jerusalem was the city of David.

    The three principal victories in the long martial career of Tuthmosis III were the capture in his Year 23 (1469 BCE) of Megiddo; the conquest in his Year 30 (1461BCE) of Qadesh on the River Orontes, the capital of his persistent enemy who had managed to escape from Megiddo; and the ultimate restoration of his empire in his Year 33 (1458BCE) when he crossed the River Euphrates, defeated the King of Mitanni and, in honour of his achievement, erected a stele alongside that of his grandfather, Tuthmosis I.
      What did the biblical scribes make of these events?    The Old Testament is notoriously suspect in matters of names and the chronological sequences of events, doubtless as a result of the many centuries when the stories it contains were passed down by word of mouth.   However, although the order in which they occurred is muddled in places, the account we find in the Book of II Samuel is clearly dealing with the same events that are inscribed in the annals at Karnak.
      II Samuel identifies Megiddo by the name Rabbah (meaning 'goddess') (11:1).    We are told that the Ammonites (Semitic, non-Jewish people in east Jordan) 'hired the Syrians' (10:6), and it is quite clear that, in the subsequent battle against the army of David, the Ammonites and Syrians operated as separate units.   This echoes the description of the divided forces Tuthmosis III found facing him when he arrived unexpectedly by the Aruna road before his assault upon Megiddo.
      The escape of the King of Qadesh and his troops to fight another day is reflected in the biblical account of the battle where it says:  'And when the children of Ammon saw that the Syrians were fled, then fled they also...and entered into the city....'(10:14).   During the subsequent siege, matching the account of how Tuthmosis III left the field of battle for 'a fortress to the east', we are told that 'David tarried still at Jerusalem' (11:1)."
        Malcolm:   It would seem that after taking Megiddo, Tuthmosis III/David turned south and headed for the coastal city of Joppa.    From the Nat. Geo. Magazine Map of The Egyptians:
"Wars against the city-states of western Asia during the New Kingdom were meant to protect Egypt from invasion, but victory also brought great wealth in booty as well as captives, who became valued labourers.
     Thuthmose III left a legacy of campaigns long respected in Egypt.   The siege of Joppa or present-day Jaffa in Israel, became legend.
      According to a rare papyrus text, the commanding general, named Djehuty,   (Malcolm: obviously King David himself) resorted to subterfuge when the city held out against an assault.    Baskets supposedly containing goods plundered by the Prince of Joppa were delivered to the city.   That night Egyptian soldiers emerged from the baskets and opened the city gates.    (Malcolm: no doubt the source of Homer's wooden horse story).
      Osman continued: "Shortly after David's arrival, we have a description of how the Israelites 'brought in the Ark of the Lord, and set it in his place, in the midst of the tabernacle that David had pitched for it...'(6:17).    If David is to be identified as Tuthmosis III, the Ark – an Egyptian idea introduced later to the Israelites – must have been the Ark of Amun-Ra, not the Ark of the Covenant, in which Moses is said to have placed the Ten Commandments, because Moses, as we shall see, was not to be born until a century after these events.
        Although we have no supporting evidence, it is a logical assumption that the king would have been accompanied to Jerusalem by the Ark of his god, Amun-Ra, which had been carried at the head of his army as it advanced upon Megiddo.   We know that there were some rituals in Egyptian religion that only the king and high priests could perform before their deity.     It is also a logical assumption that the resting place for the Ark would be Mount Moriah, the high holy ground to the north of the city, which had been looked upon as a holy place since the time of Abraham and is today the setting for two of the holiest shrines of Islam, the Dome of the Rock and al-Asqa Mosque, as well as the Jewish Wailing Wall.
        We find the detail of this transaction – and further confirmation of the peaceful relations that existed between Egypt and Jerusalem – later in II Samuel where Araunah, the Jebusite king (the Jebusites were the Canaanite inhabitants of Jerusalem at the time), is said to have still been in control of Mount Moriah when David bought its threshing-floor 'for fifty shekels of silver' in order to build an altar.   In the course of these negotiations Araunah said to David: '...behold, here be oxen for burnt sacrifice, and threshing instruments and other instrument of the oxen for wood.  All these things did Araunah, as a king [my italics], give unto the kin...'(24:22-23).   The choice of a threshing-floor on Mount Moriah may seem a curious one for the site of an altar, but such elevated and exposed pieces of ground at the approaches to cities were often the site of cultic observance."

for everyone

     Tuthmosis III, the son of a concubine, came to the throne of Egypt under strange circumstances in 1490BCE. The 18th Dynasty had been founded nearly 100 years earlier when, after just over a century of rule over the eastern Delta of Egypt by the invading Hyksos (Asiatic shepherds, with some Semitic and other elements among them, who subdued the territory around 1630 BCE and set up their capital at a fortified city on the eastern borders of Egypt, which they named Avaris), the princes of Thebes united n the 16th century BCE in a successful attempt to drive them out of the country.

     This victory resulted in the crowning of Ahmosis I (c.1575-1550BCE), as the first ruler of the 18th Dynasty, which started what is known as the New Kingdom.     In all he spent 15 years battling to ensure that no part of Egypt remained under foreign control, including pursuit of the remnants of the Hyksos into the Gaza region.

    Ahmosis I was followed by his son, Amenhotep I (c. 1550BCE-1528BCE), who pushed further into Palestine and Syria in continuing campaigns against the Hyksos.      He, in turn, was followed on the throne by Tuthmosis I (c.1528-1510BC), one of his generals, after the king had arranged for him to be married to the royal heiress and appointed him as his co-regent."

Malcolm: I think from Amenhotep III's features alone, that Osman is not correct in writing that the Hykso were driven out.     Nor do I think he is right in saying that they only infiltrated as Shepherds.     The Pyramids date back another 1000 years and the story in 1 Samuel 5/6 places Israel in Lower Egypt during the reign of Djoser - Joshua the Bethshemite.      It is more likely that Semite engineeers planned and built the Pyramids.

Any comments may be made by going to this page:

for everyone
     "Scholars have largely chosen, despite the lack of any genealogical link between him and the start of the Christian era, to identify this tribal chief as King David, who is presented to us in a number of guises - shepherd; rival to Saul and later Ishbosheth, one of Saul's surviving sons, for the Israelite leadership; an accomplished harpist; 'a man of war'; the slayer of Goliath in an epic duel; and a coward who fled from the wrath of his son Absalom.
    However, he is also said to have been a warrior king who established an empire that stretched from the Nile to the Euphrates    . The Book of II Samuel tells us: 'David smote also Hadadezar he went to recover his border at the river Euphrates....and David gat him a name [erected a stele] when he returned from smiting of the Syrians in the valley of salt....' (8:3 and 8:13).     This account is repeated in 1 Chronicles: 'And David smote he went to establish his dominion by the river Euphrates' (18:3).

    The story of the founding of an entire empire by David the mere tribal chief has posed some problems for scholars. It does not equate witht the fact that he is said to have had an army of just a few hundred men.     Nor is there any evidence of any kind to support the view that an empire stretching from the Nile and the Euphrates was founded in the early years of the 10th century BCE.     Indeed no such empire can be said to have been created between the reign of Tuthmosis III in the 15th century BCE and the second half of the 6th century BCE, when Cyrus of Persia conquered both Mesopotamia and Egypt. Scholars have therefore had to explain - or, rather, explain away - the empire story of David by saying that the biblical narrator simply invented it as an acto of aggrandizement towards an important biblical figure.

     However, amalgamating the stories of two Davids - one a warrior king who lived in the 15th century BCE, the other a tribal chief who lived five centuries later - should be seen as another facet of the attempt by Old Testament editors (Jewish scribes living in Babylon between the 6th and 3rd centuries BCE) to conceal the fact that Tuthmosis III, not Abraham, was the father of Isaac, and therefore also the founding father of the 12 tribes of Israel. 
   The first part of the Pharaoh's name, 'Tuth' (or Thoth), becomes 'Dwd' in Hebrew, the word used for 'David' in the Bible."
  Malcolm:   This is exactly the same situation as we have for Solomon and Abraham.   In both cases biblical verses describe a huge empire, e.g. Abraham to be a father of many nations.    This was never the case with Israel beyond the Nile.  It was never more than small tribal hill states, which most certainly never expanded as far as the Euphrates - but Egypt did !!
Any comments may be made by going to this page:

     Few Biblical Kings are as crucial to the whole Bible Story as was KING DAVID.    In the Old Testament he is an outstanding warrior king, and the New Testament recognises only a Jesus descended from King David.      Here we have a problem, for not only are the gospel genealogies very much in doubt, but the Old Testament presents at least  two different characters with the same name.     There were however FIVE David’s who were all Kings of Egypt. 
     Ahmed Osman (see -  begins his chapter on 'The House of David' in his book "Out of Egypt" (reprinted as ‘Christianity and Ancient Egyptian Religion) with these lines:
"The task of identifying the historical David is complicated from the outset by the fact that the Old Testament provides us with two contrasting Davidic characters who cannot have been the same person.     One is a warrior king who lived c.1500 BCE: the second is a tribal chief generally agreed by biblical scholars to have lived from 1000 to 960 BCE, ruled over the traditional Promised Land - from Dan in the north to Beersheba in the south of the Israel-Judaen upland - and spent most of his life in conflict with the Philistines, the 'Peoples of the Sea', who had invaded the coastal area of Canaan in the middle of the 12th century BC and were trying to expand their territory."
     As with Solomon, there is no historical record of any King of Israel which fits the information given in the Bible about King David.    Obviously the real name and character has like Solomon, been disguised to divert attention away from the truth.    Whilst Solomon is easily identified as the Pharaoh Amenhotep III, we have less to go on with David.    Yet there is enough to recognise that Egyptologist Ahmed Osman's theory could well be right on the mark.
     The account of David and Goliath has been recognised by scholars as being very close to the story of Sinuhe, The Egyptian and his encounter with the champion of Retenu.    This tale dates back to the 20th century BC, so would have been well known to all who had lived in Egypt.    This proves nothing.    The Annals of Tuthmosis III, at Karnak, however do match precisely the biblical accounts of David's campaigns.    The Annals and the Story of Sinuhe can be found by going to this web site - Index of Egyptian Literature, and checking for oneself.

    The story of the epic duel between David and Goliath inserted to enhance tribal David's reputation as a 'man of war', is an adaptation of a much-admired Egyptian literary work, 'The Autobiography of Sinuhe', describing events that took place 1,000 years earlier, and it would certainly have been familiar to the Israelites from the earlier period of their sojourn, the four generations they spent in Egypt during the 15th and 14th centuries BCE.

      Sinuhe was a courtier in the service of Nefru, daughter of Amenemhat I, the founder of the 12th Egyptian Dynasty in the 20th century BCE.    The form in which his autobiography is cast - the story of his sudden flight from Egypt, his wanderings, his battle with 'a mighty Canaanite man' like Goliath, and his eventual return to be buried in the land of his birth - makes it clear that it was inscribed originally in his actual tomb.
      Many copies of the story, which is recognized as being based on fact, were founded subsequently, dating from the 20th century BCE (when the events actually occurred) until as late as the 21st Dynasty in the 11th century BCE.    It was a popular tale in ancient Egypt, taught as a literary example to students, and there can be no doubt that all educated persons in Egypt, no matter what their ethnic background, would have been familiar with its contents.

      The similarities between the two accounts have been noted by many scholars. For example, William Kelly Simpson, the British Egyptologist, makes the point in his book, 'The Literature of Ancient Egypt' that the 'account of the fight with the champion of Retenu has frequently been compared to the David and Goliath duel, for which it may have served as a literary prototype.'      Elsewhere (Note - "The House of the Messiah"), I have given a summary of the evidence indicating that this is the correct conclusion - that 'The Autobiograpy of Sinuhe' survived in the memories of the Israelites when Moses led their Exodus to the Promised Land in the 14th century BCE to escape from the harsh oppression of their Egyptian masters.
      Later, in the 6th century BCE, the Hebrew scribes writing the Book of Samuel during the Israelite 70 -year exile in Babylonia - which had invaded Judaea and destroyed the Jerusalem Temple - and anxious to enhance the image of the tribal David in ordere to make if possible for readers to accept that it was he who established the great empire stretching from the Nile to the Euphrates, included Sinuhe's encounter with a 'mighty Canaanite man'.
     We can judge from historical records that David was not the father of Solomon, but his grandfather.    This is not a problem.    We only have to look at the difference in the genealogies of Jesus given by Matthew and Luke.    One not only has many more generations than the other, but name different grandfathers.

    Unless there has been some incredible coincidence,we just have to recognise that David's biblical campaigns are those described in the Annals of Tuthmosis III.
      There were Five King David's in the 18th Dynasty.   The only one who matches the main biblical description of the warrior King David, was Tuthmoses III, known as 'The Egyptian Napoleon'.

Any comments may be made by going to this page:

for everyone
His Name

DHwti-msi    Djehutymose  (Born Of Djehuty)
   The above cartouche is how David’s name is usually written in Egyptian Hieroglyphs.   When spelled out in full, it is slightly different.     Few of the ordinary working Egyptians could read, but they could recognise the Ibis whose name in Egyptian was almost the same.    At the same time the Ibis was likened to knowledge, learning and writing, and these characteristics were also what were implied in David’s name.
     The following glyphs show us his name in more detail.  The first line is more or less the same as in the cartouche.  However the letter ‘T’ (hemisphere bread loaf) and the letter ‘Y’ (two strokes) have been added to emphasise the last two letters in the name.    We can ignore the letter ‘Y’ as in this case it means “He Who Is” (page117 of “How to Read Egyptian” by Mark Collier and Bill Manley).    The Ibis glyph is followed by the three foxtails glyph which is the letters MS, meaning 'Born of' and the final folded linen glyph is simply an emphatic glyph 'S' which is not pronounced.   Obviously whoever read the name MS S and then wrote Moses into the Bible was not aware of this.
         The second line of glyphs spells the name out.  
    The hand glyph is the letter D
    The twisted wick glyph is an emphatic H, made in the throat
    The quail chick is the letter W
     The hemisphere bread loaf glyph is the letter T
     The two strokes represent the letter Y  (they can also indicate the plural as can the letter W)
     The pennant glyph is a determinative glyph which tells us that this person is a god.
    So we have the name D H W T.    We do not know the vowel between D and H, but the Egyptologists convention is to insert the letter E.  Consequently the pronunciation would be something like  Dehut or Dayhut..   This is very close to ‘David’.
      Fortunately we have confirmation that it is David since King Solomon’s (Salim Amen III/Ymn Htp III) son was Ymn TWT Ankh.     Here the name has been abbreviated to TWT and in Hebrew this becomes DWD which really is DAVID.
Any comments may be made by going to this page:

THE GOD AMEN - PART FIVEDec 25, '10 11:59 PM
for everyone
        One thing that has been nagging away in my mind for some time is why the Egyptians pronounced the god name YMN as 'Ahmen' rather than 'Immen', since that is the way it is spelled.
       We know from Manetho's King list that it is 'Ahmen' as he translates the Egyptian YMN into 'Ahmen' in 'Amenophis' (Hellenised name for Amen Hotep).
        One thing we should always remember is that just about every name had a 'god' name which was written first, similar to first names in other languages.
        I now think my big mistake was to read 'AMEN' as one god name, the familiar 'Amen' to whom people still address their prayers.
        We only have to look at other Kings to see that we really have a combination 'God' here, representing both the Moon and the Sun, though beginning in the Old Kingdom with 'MEN', the God of Fertility - see
         This page on the God 'MEN' or 'MIN' even points out that Min was combined with Amen in the Middle Kingdom to show the creative force of god.
         However the New Kingdom brought with it newer notions what with the rising power of the Semite Heprew Kings.
          The first king of the 18th Dynasty was IAHMS, often listed as plainly Ahmes, though the hieroglyphs clearly show us that this name is the Moon God IAH or YAH, followed by MS meaning 'Born of", thus 'Born of the Moon God Yah'.    Iahms by the way is the origin of the name JAMES.
   iaH-msi(w) Iahmesi (The Moon Is Born)

 Here we actually have the moon glyph for IAH or YAH followed by the foxtail glyph and folded linen glyphs for MS S.     With some other kings, e.g. 'Y Pep Y' of the 14th Dynasty, his name is preceded by a single Water Reed which is the letter 'Y'.   This has to be an abbreviation for "Yah", and later on it took on a double role to represent the New and Full phases of the Moon, so 'YY'.

        What I now believe during the 18th Dynasty, especially with the arrival of Joseph in the King's Court, the two gods,  YAH and MEN were combined to give us YAH MEN.

         This is why Manetho translated YMN as 'Amen' and not 'Imen'.

          To understand this better, I direct your attention to this web page -  which not only confirms that Yah was part of Yah Weh (plural of Yah), but also the manner in which it was presented through glyphs.
         NOTE the glyphs in Budge's list.   These show the two alternatives - the Moon Crescents and the actual spelling.     I was once taken to task for suggesting that Y represented YAH, but there it is in black and white as glyphs which have been found in Egyptian Temple texts.

See -
This falls in line with Egyptian finds in Irish Barrows dating back to much the same period.
However Stonehenge would have been of great interest to Egyptian astronomers

Jacob was a King of EgyptSep 30, '10 12:00 AM
for everyone
       There isn't the slightest doubt about this.    It is  possible that other Hebrews including Jacob of Genesis were named after this king.     However this king was very well known not just in Egypt but in most surrounding countries:
"This king had a West Semitic (Ammorite) name like his predecessor and there are different ways to transcribe the sounds...
...His name has not been found on bigger artefacts like stelae or rests of buildings, only on small scarab-seals.     On the other hand they are as many as at least 112 with his name written on them and found in a wide geographical area from deep down in Lower Nubia in the south  to Palestine in the north.    The remaining 103 are all of unknown provenance like the only cylinder seal known of him.   A fair guess might be that the bulk of them have their origin in Egypt itself.

He's not on Manetho's list and has been identified, with rather fair accuracy, by the throne name (prenomen) Sekhaenre.       His reign was of unknown duration around 1560-1565 BC."
      In view of King Jacob's widely spread renown, this has to be the Biblical Jacob.    Otherwise the scribes would have made a point of separating the two so that there would be no mistake.
So how is it possible that the name of this well known king of Egypt has not been made known to our modern generation?      The answer is obvious.     THE RELIGIOUS DO NOT WANT YOU TO KNOW !!!.         Moreover Egyptologists of the three Abrahamic faiths have deliberately and knowingly tried to hide his true name and have presented the World with a name that is just not in the Cartouche.
      The name given by Egyptologists in general is JACOBAAM.      Anyone with a knowledge of reading Hieroglyphs can see immediately that this is wrong from the final three water ripples glyph.
       As always I invite readers to check for themeselves.      The source I mainly use is 'HOW TO READ EGYPTIAN HIEROGLYPHS'  by Mark Collier and Bill Manley.    My copy is published by The British Museum Press, reprinted with corrections in 2003.   The ISBN number is 0 7141 1910 5.     It can be obtained in America from Amazon or from the University of California Press - See
        To begin with, the Three Water Ripples glyph can be read as a 'Determinative Meaning Sign'  or the two-consonant letters MW.
         Page 5 of Manley and Colliers grammar:
 Determinatives: meaning-signs hieroglyphic writing words are sometimes written with meaning-signs, or determinatives, placed at the end of the word after the sound-signs.  Determinatives do not contribute to the sounds of the word and so are not transliterated.      From our point of view, they simply help us to get some general idea of the meaning of a word."
   2-consonant signs.    The second major group of signs are the 2-consonant signs, which contribute two consonants to the reading of a word.    .... The 2-consonant signs are rather common...and becoming familiar with them represents the major hurdle to be overcome in reading hieroglyphs. .... The second noticeable point in the writing of some of these words is that 1-consonant signs often occur as sound complements fleshing out the reading of a 2-consontant sign, helping to jog the memory, as it were, about its reading.   There is a simple rule about this:  if a 1 consonant sign shares the same value as an accompanying 2-consonant sign, then this 1-consonant sign is not read as a separate sound."
      1.  There is no sound complement following the 3-Water Ripples glyph.   If the 'MW' was intended then there would have to be a letter W which is written with the Quail Chick glyph, right after the 'MW' glyph.
      2.   The letter 'M' is written simply as a letter M.   So instead of MW followed by W, the scribe would have just written M - an 'Owl' glyph.
       The mistranslation is so obvious that Ralph Ellis jumped on it in his book "JESUS LAST OF THE PHARAOHS", page 17.      His translation of this cartouche was 'JACOBA' + 'pure' or 'holy water' since the three water ripples as a determinative not only means water but has some sacred significance.
Ellis then explains, " Judaism, Christianity, and even the early Essene cult of Israel, all have an initiation process that involves immersion in water.     In Egypt the body of the great God, Osiris, was floated down the Nile in a casket prior to his resurrection.

     Whatever the origins of this tradition, it is clear that water was central to the Israelite faith; it could even be considered to be their shibboleth or marker."

 Malcolm:       Ellis having opened the door and pointed out the error in translation, I began to wonder whether the final letter 'a' could also be wrong.      'Jacoba' sounds clumsy and just not right.      I soon found the answer in the Egyptian grammar:
  The Egyptologist's mistranslation only considers the 'arm' glyph to be the 1-consonant letter, 'Ah' or 'Uh' (glottal stop) and completely disregards the possibility that it could be an ideogram for an arm or as shown in the grammar, an alternative and simpler way of writing the determinative meaning 'Sacred'   (pronounced as  Djoser...Joshua).
     When I put this to Ralph Ellis he agreed that it could well be a determinative too, and not another letter.         He told me that Egyptologists had believed that no determinatives appeared in cartouches, though there are most definitely determinatives in later cartouches.       This may also have been another red herring that they threw out to hide the real name of the Pharaoh Jacob.
          So we can now take a look at the whole cartouche.    It begins with the God Name 'YY' - the two green Water Reeds.     This is an abbreviation for the duplicate moon god 'Yah' or 'Iah'.    Duplicating it makes it plural and so in Egyptian YW - YahWeh.       THIS KING THEREFORE HAS TO BE HEBREW and so more confirmation that he was the JACOB OF GENESIS.
           The red 'bowl' glyph is the letter 'K'   and the 'boot' glyph is the letter 'B'.
            There really is only one way to read this cartouche - JACOB  'Sacred Water' which we can interpret as 'JACOB The Baptist'.
         Like other Egyptian Kings, Jacob had throne names which give us SA'KARE - (Glyphs Sun Disk Re, Door Bolt S, Wooden Column Ah-Uh, Upraised Arms K).      This name could easily have been varied by Hyksos/Hebrew exiles from Egypt, who would have dropped the Egyptian God Name - Re.     This variation would result in 'ISAAK'.     Those who remembered in their folk lore, the 'R' god name, and added their own Moon God name 'Iah' or 'Yah', would have called him SA'KRYAH, whom we know as ZACHARIAH OR ZECHARIAH.

for everyone
     I see that Zahi Hawass is still desperately trying to prove that the young King Ymn Twt Ankh was the son of Akhenaten.      His latest article in National Geographic September 2010 describes certain DNA tests which only his approved Egyptian scientists were allowed to conduct.
     The end result according to this team is that there is a 99.9% probability that the young King David (for that is what 'Twt' really means) was the son of Akhenaten.   
      They haven't in fact been able to confirm that a mystery mummy really is the missing Akhenaten.     In fact all that these tests have shown is that the mummies examined are close family.    The evidence we have tells a completely different story.
      Before looking at the evidence it should be noted that Hawass hasn't even been able to translate the name of King Twt correctly.    It isn't and never could be Tutankhamun, spelled with a 'U'.       There is a hieroglyph for the letter 'U' or 'W' and it is not in the name.   When this happens the convention is to insert the vowel 'E'.       We know that 'AmEn' is the correct spelling since the Greek/Egyptian historian Manetho records the name of AMEN in Greek - with a vowel E and not a vowel U.
      More examples from Budge's vocabularies are shown in my thread on the God Amen - see
      The evidence telling us that King Twt was the son of Amenhotep III is extensive.
1.    The memorial found at Soleb in what is now the Sudan, was raised by Twt and names his father as being Amenhotep III.       Those who disagree argue that he really meant his grandfather.
2.    The Kebra Nagast names Menelek - who can be identified as MenTwtEk or Ymn Twt Ankh as being the eldest son of Amenhotep III (King Solomon) and his Queen ETIYE.
3.     A lock of hair found in King Twt's tomb belonged to his mother Queen ETIYE.
4.     A whip found in his tomb bears the name of Twt Ms who was the eldest son of Amenhotep III
5.     A chest found in his tomb also bears the name of Twt Ms.
6       A chair found in his tomb has both names - Ymn Twt Ankh Hek Iunu Shma AND Twt Ms on it, indicating at the very least that they were one and the same.
7.      A clay tablet with an Ankh as the main feature also has both names Ymn Twt Ankh Hek Iunu Shma and Twt Ms on it, again showing that they were the same person.
8.      Akhenaten and Nefertiti had many memorials made showing themselves and 6 daughters, but never any son.    This king was such a proud family man he would never have omitted to display a son had he had one.     He would have been shouting it from the roof tops.
9.       Akhenaten was known as the heretic king as he would have nothing to do with and of the old gods.     He claimed that their was one god which was the ATEN (meaning The Lord, Adhonai, and Adonis).    This god was shown as a SUN GOD.
          TWT was a MOON God.      Akhenaten would never have named a son after a Moon God.
10.     1 Kings 11/13 tells us that the Dynasty of Amenhotep III/King Solomon would end with his son and then the kingdom would go to an official or servant.   This is what happened.   King Twt was the last of that Dynasty and so he has to be the unnamed son of the 1 Kings 11/13.    The next King was indeed just an official though it is believed he was a relative of Solomon's father-in-law who was Joseph.     Ay is named as Ahijah in the same chapter of 1 Kings.
The main reason for Egyptologists to discount King Solomon III as the father of King Twt is one of age.       Twt Ms was the eldest son, and so it is a mystery that he could appear on the scene so late and after his brother Akhenaten.  
   I can only see one possible scenario.    The priests of Amen in opposition to Akhenaten resurrected the deceased Prince Twt Ms and paraded the body about as if he had come back to life.      Akhenaten actuallyr refers to something disgusting having taken place in Uaset (Greek Thebes).     We also know that the Prince's Tomb is empty and was resealed by King Twt.
     A Scarab was found in the Temple of Uasar (Greek Osiris) at Abedju (Greek Abydos) which names the mother of Twt as being MERIT-RA.
      This name may only be one of the 'extras' that Egyptians liked to add on, so it could refer to Queen ETIYE,    since it means 'Beloved Lady of the God Ra'.
      Ra was the old old name for the Sun God which preceded both Amen and the Aten.    Again it is most unlikely that Akhenaten would have allowed one of his wives to retain the name of one of the gods that he was so keen to get rid of.
       This brings us to the mystery mummy which these new dna tests want to believe to be Akhenaten.       It just cannot be Akhenaten, for this king swore that he would never leave his new city of Akhetaten and he had a tomb prepared for himself there.    It is empty, but so it would be, when he made a hasty retreat into the wilderness with a small band of his folowers.   The Bible then takes up the story of Moses who was Akhenaten and there is no mention of him returning to Egypt.     Instead the name of Akhenaten has been found on The Copper Scroll of Qumran - in Israel.    The scroll is Egyptian copper from the time of Rameses II and it uses Egyptian weights and measures.     Other scrolls also have measurements which match the City and Temple of Akhetaten.
         Furthermore had the priests of Amen really got hold of Akhenaten, they would have smashed the mouth and face in, as they did to Nefertiti.     The belief was that the departed spirit could not then be heard in the afterlife or come back to threaten them.

    I am presenting this mystery now, as I have just come across some evidence that connects the missing prince directly to the king Ymn Twt Ankh.

    Read on and then check out what I have just found, at the end of this piece:

The Three Coffins

        King TwtAnkhYmn was laid to rest within three coffins.    The Outer coffin enclosing the other two, has a face mask which shows the King as he was at the time of his death.    The Inner Coffin shows him as a child.     The middle coffin though has the face of another man and is nothing like that of the other two masks.    It does however match the Canopic Coffinettes holding his internal organs, one of which reveals that it was made not for TwtAnkhYmn but for his brother Smenkhkare.    Refer “Act of God” by Graham Phillips.      Perhaps the middle coffin and canopic jars were as this author suggests used as a matter of expediency.   If this was the case then it adds another question to the mystery of what happened to the remains of Smenkhkare.

         Is it possible that there was another coded message in the arrangement of the three coffins?   Did for instance the young King reign twice, either side of Smenkhkare?      At first this sounds quite ridiculous, especially in view of his young age.    It wouldn’t be worth giving a second thought to, if it weren’t for all the intrigue that was going on at the time, or if this was the only puzzle surrounding the young King David.  

          The eldest Prince and heir to the throne of Egypt was Tuthmose.    His tomb has been found, but it was empty, and from all appearances, though made ready, it was never used.    Nor were the final touches showing his funeral and mummification added to the walls.      His name is virtually the same as that of his youngest brother, with both sharing the same God Name.   The first means ‘Born of Dyhwt” (pronounced ‘Djayhut’.  The Second means “The Living Spirit of Dyhwt”.      It is as if the name has been changed only to assert that the King still lives on as his spirit.   The Kebra Nagast tells us that Menelek, who was also named David, was the eldest son of King Solomon.  Now, such a title was usually given to all Kings of Egypt, but if YmnTwtAnkh really was the eldest and he was still around when his father died, then something is really wrong with the accepted sequence of kings who followed Amenhotep III.     

            Let us suppose that YmnTwtAnkh and Tuthmose were one and the same.     The historian Josephus and the Book of Jasher both tell us that Moses went to Ethiopia or the Land of Cush and married a Queen or Princess of that country.       If as has been suggested, the Prince Tuthmose was Moses, then in his absence Amenhotep IV may have made his move and assumed Co-Regency with his father Amenhotep III.       When Amenhotep IV began to close all temples devoted to the God Ymn – Amen, and tried to change Egyptian belief to a new unseen God called ‘The Aten’, the repercussions must have been enormous.       Opposition may have driven him out of Waset, and decided him to build a new City and a new Temple, which he named Akhetaten.    At the same time he assumed a new name, ‘Akhenaten’.     We do know that something affected him intensely as proclamations found in the ruins of Akhetaten mention a great evil, greater than any others he had heard.

           With Akhenaten gone from Waset, the old establishment and priests of Amen saw an opportunity to reinstate the thousand year old and most popular belief in Amen.      It would have been a very difficult situation for those of the Royal Family who remained in Waset.      They could have gone to extreme lengths to maintain their authority.   They may have pretended that the Prince Tuthmose had returned and was reigning beside his father Amenhotep III who lived to a good age.       There is some evidence that does give this idea a little credence.       The Kebra Nagast recounts that the Queen went back to Ethiopia and raised her son there.   When he was twenty-two he told his mother that he wanted to see his father.   She agreed to let him go, but commanded his guards to bring him straight back.     He must have been very much like his father for everyone took him to be the King himself, “And when the people saw him they thought him to be the perfect likeness of SOLOMON the King.”

          The King then reprimanded his court officials and priests for talking about him disparagingly, pointing out that though they had said he had no son, here he was, and they had only to look at him.

          This is a very strange statement for in an earlier chapter the Kebra Nagast tells us that in those days the King had no children except for a boy, who was seven years old and named Iyorbeam or Rehoboam, and that Solomon only ever had three children of whom the eldest was the King of Ethiopia.    Iyorbeam may have been Akhenaten’s name as a child.    When succeeding to the throne, up to five names were given to Egyptian Kings of the Eighteenth Dynasty.     But why were the King’s Courtiers so disdainful of this son?    Could it have had anything to do with his odd appearance in statues of him in later life?

          The Prince Tuthmose is believed to have held the position of Governor in the northern Capital of Memphis before serving in the Army fighting Ethiopians.    He then became a high priest at Heliopolis before disappearing at the age of twenty-three.   (Refer “The Moses Legacy” by Graham Phillips).    So the chances are that he did return from Ethiopia at the age of twenty-two as we are told in the Kebra Nagast.   It is also possible that he was badly wounded in the Ethiopian campaign, and died soon afterwards.   But in that case why wasn’t he laid to rest in the tomb that had been prepared for him.      Could it be that the Priests and Establishment in Waset, in opposition to Akhenaten, pretended that he still lived, but had entered the priesthood?     They may have kept his mummified body in the unadorned tomb, or elsewhere until Smenkhkare was old enough to be proclaimed King.      In that case, this might well be the terrible evil that Akhenaten referred to in his proclamations.     It would also explain his assertion that he was the true king.

            Unfortunately Smenkhkare’s life was also cut short at a very young age, and Akhenaten disappeared.    It may have been at this point, that the dead Prince Tuthmose was ‘resurrected’ as King Tutankhamen, in some desperate attempt to prevent a Civil War of succession.      It would also account for the odd way in which 1 Kings 11:11/13 reports the demise of King Solomon’s line.   (See Appendix Note F10 – ‘Solomon’s Son David’.)    The verses are not written in the past tense, but in the future.     Somebody, probably Akhenaten was saying what was going to happen.    He knew what the Priests had done and were planning, with the High Priest Ay preparing to assume the throne when the time was ripe.

           Apart from the statement in these verses from 1 Kings, there is other evidence that Tutankhamen was the son of Amenhotep III.    An inscription on a Lion monument at Soleb by Tutankhamen states that he is the son of this Pharaoh.     Furthermore a Coffinette in Tutankhamen’s tomb has a lock of Queen Tiye’s hair.     It is his late birth that casts doubt.    But if he really was the Prince Tuthmosis, then this mystery is solved.       Soleb is today well within Sudan.    During the 18th Dynasty it would have been in Ethiopia or Cush.     The monuments at Soleb are therefore another indication that the Royal Family of Amenhotep III had strong ties with these countries, as did that of Solomon.

          There are at least three clues that shout out that the young King was indeed Prince Tuthmose.   A whip found inside his tomb has the Prince’s name on it.     Much more telling is the scene on a casket also found in the tomb showing Tutankhamen despatching arrows into a horde of Nubians, while riding in a War Chariot.   Some of the fallen lie beneath the Chariot, trampled by its horse.

    As far as we know, there was only one short mission led by the Viceroy Huya to control a minor revolt in Nubia, during the reign of Tutankhamen.    The scene on the casket has to portray Prince Tuthmose’s part in the earlier campaign against Ethiopia.    Howard Carter who discovered Tutankhamen’s tomb reported that there were many ritual links with Christianity in the tomb.   There were two gala robes and a pair of gloves similar to those later used by Roman Catholic priests.    In Carter’s words these “recall official vestments of the character of priestly apparel, such as the dalmatic worn by deacons and bishops of the Christian church...they take the form of a long, loose vestment, having richly ornamented tapestry-woven decoration with fringes on both sides...”(Refer Ahmed Osman’s ‘Out of Egypt’).    Other objects included a number of ostrich-feathers, recalling the flabella still used at a papal procession in Rome.

           Some Egyptologists claim that other tombs were robbed to fill King Twt’s last resting place.    This is most unlikely, for the whole idea of articles placed in a tomb was so that the departed would have all of his familiar possessions to reproduce in his afterlife.   They were a reminder of the life the deceased had led and blueprints for use in the next world.     Therefore the Whip, War memorial and his Priestly clothing, which were all attributed to Tuthmose, could only have stayed with the Prince.     Consequently Prince Tuthmose and King Tutankhamen have to be one and the same person on this conjecture alone.

          When Horemheb succeeded Ay as King, he had all mention of Akhenaten, Smenkhkare, Tutankhamen and Ay removed from monuments and the list of Kings.      Supposedly this was because he tried to erase all memory of the Aten cult and those Kings who had been associated with it.     But it was apparently Tutankhamen who with the help of Ay instigated the return to Amen, and changed his God name accordingly.     So there must have been more to it; something which disgusted Akhenaten.

            In a book by Paul Doherty, “The Mysterious Death of Tutankhamun”, the author remarks “There is a passivity about Tutankhamun which is quite chilling.”    Normally the text in the tombs of other Kings read in the present or future tenses, but as Doherty comments, “The inscriptions about Tutankhamun are always passive, in the main in the third person...”

           There is yet more that is quite extraordinary, again pointed out by Paul Doherty.    The important ritual of ‘the Opening of the Mouth’ was normally carried out by his successor who was never crowned until the required seventy days had passed after the late King’s tomb had been sealed.    But in Tutankhamen’s tomb there is a scene showing Ay carrying out the ceremony while already wearing the Crown of a King.    It is possible that Ay had become the King’s Co-Regent though there is no evidence of this as we might expect to find had this been the case.     The only reasonable answer is that the King had been dead for a long period, and very likely sealed in an earlier tomb.    There is every sign that the tomb and coffins were prepared in a great hurry, and that the latter had been moved from a larger tomb.

           So here we have a departed King of Heprews, who like Jesus of the New Testament stories was also known spiritually as Iosa, the Egyptian name for Jesus, may also have been resurrected from the dead in some macabre attempt by the Priests of Ymn to pretend that Egypt was still ruled by one of their faithful.

           Some new discovery in the Valley of the Kings may yield the answer, and we may not have to wait too long.      A new survey using the latest techniques suggest that there are still some areas within the Valley that have underground cavities.     Will a new generation of Egyptologists uncover the answers to these mysteries?   Will you be one of them?

        The New Evidence

     This is on the back of a chair decorated with royal names.

     I was fortunate enough on Thursday to find an amazing second hand bookshop that is crammed full of books and all sorted very well into categories.    It stretched way out to the back, with so many shelves it almost left one dizzy.

      I managed to pick up a book on Tutankhamen that I have never seen before and it is a million times better than most on this king, since it details most of the objects found in his tomb along with bountiful illustrations.

      The book is 'Life and death of a Pharaoh Tutankhamen" by Christiane Desroches-Noblecourt first published in 1963.

      On page 70 there is a full page colour picture of the back of chair and the hieroglyphs are therefore very easy to examine and read.

       I haven't been able to scan this page yet, but will do so in time.

      The King is seated on a stool with one knee folded under his thigh and the other bent with foot on the stool.

      His head is flanked by two columns containing the usual two cartouches - YmnTwtankh Hek Iunu Shma and  the other God of All Heprew.  

       There are two much larger columns further out and standing on the floor to each side.    These read the same, but with Ox and Quail Chick facing inwards.

        The Ox is at the top and this means 'Victorius'.   Beneath the Ox is an extended arm holding a stick.   This I take to mean 'Powerful' (can be read as a determinative meaning 'action', 'violence', 'effort'.)

        Below the arm glyph an arm of the King stretches across with hand clasping an extremely tall Hek (Crook - symbolising control over Sheep - i.e. Heprew people).

       Below the Kings Arms we then get a very large 3 Foxtail Glyph and glyphs for the letters T W T.

       There is no mistaking it.      These glyphs are many times larger than 'YmnTwtAnkh' in the aforementioned cartouche.

         They read plain and simply   MS  T W T  on one side and T W T  MS on the other.

          There is only one translation -  TUT MOSE - the name of the Missing Prince.

            Not only does the name appear on the same chair back as Twt Ankh Amen, but the Ox meaning Victorius and the Arm and Stick meaning Powerful (or in Action and Violent),  speak more of the Prince who did fight the Nubians than the picture we have of a meek and physically feeble king.

            Other glyphs on the chair stress his being King of the Two Lands, that he was Eternal and a Giver of Life.

             Hawass still maintains that the young King was the son of Akhenaten.  Since royal names were repeated, it could well be that instead of a king changing his name back from the god name Aten to the god name Amen, we could well have two different princes, one the son of Amenhotep IV (Solomon) and the other the son of Akhenaten.

            The dna evidence proves nothing, other than that Twt was related to Akhenaten.  Of course he was he was his brother.   Furthermore the whole dna invesitgation is doubtful as Hawas restricted it to his own people and would not allow anyone from respected dna laboratories such as Dr. Brian Sykes who is the leading expert in this field.

              This might explain the coffins whose face masks depict two different people.

The full story of how the ancient book, "The Mysteries of Osiris and Isis', ended up in the New Testament as the Book of Revelation is told in this page
The Mysteries were very popular in Ancient Rome more than 500 years before the Common Era.     They were then better known as the Sibyline Oracles.
The whole story is told further down the page in several posts, and not in the initial message.

for everyone
     I am copying out these links for the benefit of those who have not seen them in the 'Where's Jesus' Forum.
     These are all based on facts or on evidence provided in the Bible itself.    Just about all of them can be checked and verified by the casual internet reader.    Where a knowledge of Egyptian Hieroglyphs is called for, the meanings are given and again these should be easily checked on the Net.
      Someone has made a statement that there are demonstrable errors.    When challenged that statement was removed.
        If anyone can find anything that can be shown not to be as Egyptian records and/or the Bible state, could they please come forward and show us concrete proof that the facts contained in these threads are not correct.       Admittedly the Bible is full of errors and contradictions, but here and there, there are some statements which can be verified.   For example we do know that there were Kings of Egypt called Salim Amen and that facts given in 1 Kings 6 and 7 for Solomon match the historical records for Salim Amen III in every way.
The Gods of Egypt



                           *   *   *   *   *   *
Religious Figures in Egypt
                                  *     *    *    *    *    
The People of Egypt


                        *     *    *    *    *    *
The Cities of Ancient Egypt
          *     *    *    *    *    *
Religious Beliefs, Festivals and Symbols of Ancient Egypt

Clothes and Shoes that do not Wear Out.



                                  *     *    *    *    *    *
The Development of Christianity in Egypt

                                  *     *    *    *    *    *
The Jesus Miracles
THE JESUS MIRACLES - PART ONE - How the Old Beliefs were misunderstood by Gospel Scribes
THE JESUS MIRACLES - PART TWO - Feeding The Multitude
THE JESUS MIRACLES - PART FIVE - Raising Lazarus from the Dead.
THE JESUS MIRACLES - PART SIX - Spit in Dirt, Make Blind See.

                                  *     *    *    *    *    *
Kings and Queens of Egypt
KING DAVID Part One - His Name
KING DAVID Part Two - Identifying the King, The Goliath Story
KING DAVID Part Three - His Empire
KING DAVID Part Four - How He Came to be King
KING DAVID Part Five - His Campaigns

   Note:  Joseph is shown among the Kings as he had all the power of a King.
KING SOLOMON - PART ONE - Name, Quarry Men
KING SOLOMON - PART TWO - Wives, Concubines
KING SOLOMON - PART FOUR - Reign, Administration, Chariotry, Religion
KING SOLOMON - PART FIVE - City, Songs, Wisdom
KING SOLOMON - PART SIX - Family, Ancestry and Reign
KING SOLOMON - PART EIGHT - Wealth, Mines, City
KING SOLOMON - PART NINE - Punishment, Hebrew, Menelek
         *    *    *     *     *     *    *
Monuments, Temples and Pyramids 



         *    *    *     *     *     *    *
Historic Events

         *    *    *     *     *     *    *
Preparation for the AfterLife

for everyone
Malcolm:  Though I have posted the following before, there will be many who have not seen these facts about the Egyptians in Britain.
          There are legends and there are books, such as 'The Kingdom of the Ark' by Lorraine Evans and more lately a book about Scota by Ralph Ellis.     I haven't read the latter since I suffered some 'cognitive dissonance' myself when reading the rest of the title of his book.    All I have been able to ascertain from reading the former and reviews of the second are that these are only based on old legends.     For example from -
"Scota is the name of a woman who featured in the medieval foundation myth of Ireland and Scotland and who, if she lived at all, lived some time in the centuries around 1400BC. The wider picture in Scotland at the time is set out in  our Historical Timeline.
    There are several variations on the basic story, but according to the early Irish chronicle Lebor Gabála Érenn or "The Book of the Taking of Ireland", Scota was the daughter of an Egyptian Pharaoh named Cingris. She married Niul, son of Fenius Farsaid, a Babylonian.    They had a son, Goídel Glas, who gave his name to the race he founded, the Gaels.     He also created the Gaelic language by combining the best features of the 72 languages then in existence.
    The modern Scottish version of the story dates back to John of Fordun's five volume Chronica Gentis Scotorum, published in about 1360.     This first complete history of Scotland drew heavily on myth and legend in its early volumes, and Fordun seems to have rationalised several versions of the story of Scota found in Irish mythology into something that sounded right to him.     According to Fordun, it was Goídel Glas (who he calls Gaythelos) who married a Pharaoh's daughter called Scota.      Goídel Glas and Scota were subsequently exiled from Egypt (accounts differ as the the reason).      After wandering for many years they eventually settled in the north west corner of what is now called Spain, near the modern city of A Coruña.
      Having settled in Spain, they had a son, Míl Espáine.     Here things get a little complicated because by some accounts Míl Espáine married another woman called Scota who, coincidentally, was also the daughter of an Egyptian Pharaoh.     This suggests that, depending on the source you believe, Scota was either the wife, the mother, or the grandmother of Míl Espáine.
     In some ways it doesn't actually matter, because the key purpose of this creation myth was to tie the regal authority of the Kings of Ireland (and, subsequently, Scotland) back to a source of power that would never be questioned.      An Egyptian Pharaoh served the purpose admirably, whatever the details of the actual chain of relationships.
     The story continues that Scota and Míl Espáine had a number of children.     Two of their sons, Eber Finn and Érimón, later launched the "Milesian" invasion of Ireland (named after the "sons of Mil"), and after defeating the resident Tuatha Dé Danann or "peoples of the goddess Danu", divided the island of Ireland between them.  
     Over time, some of the residents of the island came to call themselves Scoti, after Scota, as did the residents of Dalriada in western Scotland, who, under  Kenneth I, went on to form what is now Scotland.  
      As a final twist, among the possessions carried from Egypt by Scota was a 152kg sandstone block which had been used as a pillow by Jacob when he had the dream reported in Genesis about Jacob's Ladder.      This became Scotland's  Stone of Scone or Stone of Destiny."
  Malcolm:   Very often there is some truth in the legend, just as there is, here and there, in the Bible.     Sorting out the small amount of grain from the mountains of chaff is a hard task which requires some knowledge of what you might be looking for.
       When I first read elsewhere, in another book about Celtic Myths and Legends, I didn't spot it at first.     When I did it was like one of those moments when you want to shout 'EUREKA'.
        The reason that I have highlighted Tuatha de Danann  above is that this was one of those moments.     In that book however it was a little clearer and explained that the name 'Tuatha' referred to the Netherworld..or Fairy Land.     It also had Dedanaan as one word and was spelled a little differently.     Celtic Myths and Legends also named Dedanaan as a goddess and said that Ireland had at one time been invaded and conquered by these people.
        When I read this, I could hardly believe that I had found such a corroboration for the skeletal remains and jewellery found in Ireland as being Egyptian.
         The Egyptian name for the Underworld is DUAT.      On its own that might have been a coincidence but an Egyptian God or Goddess was called TATANEN.     This exchange of hard and soft consonants [Tuatha/Duat and DeDanaan/Tatanen] is frequently seen between Egyptian and Hebrew words, so this is no surprise.   .
        Whilst I see little resemblance - [there is some..such as SD meaning a hill in both languages] - between the languages of Gaelic and Egyptian I did find a scholarly claim that Welsh has some relationship to Egyptian:
         In a note on page 78 of "Celtic Myths and Legends" by T. W. Rolleston the author quotes from a book by Professor J. Morris Jones which tells us "The pre-Aryan idioms which still live in Welsh and Irish were derived from a language allied to Egyptian and the Berber tongues."   

      On the same page we read "Approaching the subject from the linguistic side, Rhys and Brynmor Jones find that the African origin – at least proximately – of the primitive population of Great Britain and Ireland is strongly suggested.  It is here shown that the Celtic language preserve in their syntax the Hamitic, and especially the Egyptian type."

         This same book had another big surprise waiting for me, and one that I would have missed without a knowledge of Egyptian Kings' names.

On page 114 of Rolleston's book there is a paragraph that really does appear to be based on the story of Cain and Abel, and confirms that they were Egyptians.
          "Kian, the story goes, was sent northward by Lugh to summon the fighting men of the Danaans in Ulster to the hosting against the Formorians.    On his way, as he crosses the Plain 0f Murthemney, near Dundalk, he meets with three brothers, Brian, Iuchar, and Iucharba, sons of Turenn, between whose house and that of Kian there was a blood-feud."
           The first sentence establishes that Kian was of the De Danaan people (Egyptian Tatanen).      The second could well be an extension of Genesis 6:4.      Iucharba just has to be the Pharaoh Yyukheber.     According to Gerald Massey 'Iu' is the origin of the word 'Jew'.  In Egyptian it means 'To come' or 'coming' as in 'Iwsa' – the 'Coming Son'

           I have already shown in my thread on Cain and Abel [QYN and HBL] that these were the Egyptian Kings KIAN and HBR (Full name YYukHEBER).

           The Irish legend naming IUCHARBA is just an amazing confirmation that this theory is correct.

            That leaves us with King BRIAN.    Was he too and Egyptian King.     The Irish Halls of Tara (Egyptian King Tara) and Manetho's King List which names a King as BAION seems to suggest that this is indeed the case.

             But we know that BAION  was also known as SHESHI - throne name MA'IBRE and this King of Egypt is the Father of three Religions - namely ABRAHAM.

    Three ships found at Ferriby on the Humber Estuary may have been Egyptian.     At least one of them has been dated to the early bronze age – see
        There has been much controversy about these ships and it does appear that they are similar to the Ships unearthed from the Giza plateau next to the Great Pyramid.
         All this proves is that Egyptians could have sailed to Britain.

    Egyptian faience jewellery (beads) has been found in Irish Barrows.    I have since found that these beads have been found all over Britain, so it might have been a common form of currency that was manufactured in Egypt.

      Egyptian religious signs in the form of Sun Disks and Solar Ships have been carved on the rock walls of some tombs in Britain especially in Ireland.   These finds are extensive and crop up all over Europe, so I shall expand this evidence when I have more time.

      Now here we have perhaps the best evidence of all.      Skeletons of so-called 'Iberians' have been found in Irish graves.    They are notable for their long skulls and are therefore referred to as being dolichocephalous.    The term 'Iberian' is used to indicate that they are a people originating in the Mediterranean basin and not just from the Iberian Peninsula.    They are thought to have been of a dark complexion.     The 18th Dynasty kings YmnTwtAnkh and Smenkhkare both had the same long skulls.

Celtic Myths Extract pages 77/78:
      "There is very strong evidence of the connexion of the Megalithic People with North Africa.  Thus, as Sergi points out, many signs (probably numerical) found on ivory tablets in the cemetery at Naqada discovered by Flinders Petrie are to be met with on European dolmens.     Several later Egyptian hieroglyphic signs, including the famous Ankh, or crux ansata, the symbol of vitality or resurrection, are also found in megalithic carvings.     From these correspondences Letourneau drew conclusion "that the builders of our megalithic monuments came from the South, and were related to the races of North Africa.

Celtic Myths Extract page 79:
     "The classical writers felt rightly that the Celtic idea of immortality was something altogether different from this.      It was both loftier and more realistic; it implied a true persistence of the living man, as he was at present, in all his human relations.     They noted with surprise that the Celt would lend money on a promissory note for repayment in the next world.    That is an absolutely Egyptian conception.      And this very analogy occurred to Diodorus in writing of the Celtic idea of immortality – it was like nothing that he knew out(side) of Egypt. (Note Book V.)

for everyone
Malcolm:  It is very possible that the Greeks not only got their Theology, Mathematics, Science and Arts from Egypt, but also the idea of an Annual Sports Meeting.
Click on the individual thumbnail images to get a fuller description of the Game.
It seems also that the Egyptians had regular festivals that included Games and had visitors from all over their Empire.

Solomon's Punishment

1 Kings 11:11/12 -"....I will take the kingdom away from you and give it to one of your officials.    However for the sake of your father David I will not do this in your lifetime, but during the reign of your son."

This is exactly what happened to Amenhotep III.     His Son King Twtankhymn (commonly referred to as King Tut), whose name in Hebrew was David like his grandfather, was the last of the family line.

The kingdom then went to the Priest or Official Ay, the prophet Ahijah of the Bible. INCIDENTALLY These verses in the Bible solve the mystery of whether Tut/David was the son of Amenhotep III or of Akhenaten. 

Solomon The Hebrew

    On the Shrine of Amenhotep III's Son David/Twt is a cartouche containing one of the King's Royal Names, "RE HEPREW NEB".     (Following accepted convention among Egyptologists the missing vowels in Egyptian script have been guessed at as being 'E')     Re is Egyptian for God and Neb is Egyptian for Lord, and the usual given translation is "Lord God of Manifestations."(or Creations)    This is not correct since 'Neb' has a different meaning when it follows the noun it qualifies.    'Neb' only means 'Lord' when it precedes the noun.    Written after the noun it becomes 'ALL'.  
   The correct translation therefore is 'GOD OF ALL CREATIONS'.    However, leaving 'Creations in the original Egyptian, it reads 'GOD OF ALL HEPREW'.    The letter 'W' in Egyptian was the plural ending, equivalent to the English 'S'.    So we should read it as 'GOD OF ALL HEPREWS'.

     (In Egyptian the letter 'H' is aspirated as in 'Loch')     Most of Ymnhtp III's immediate ancestors, including grandfather and great grandfather also had the name 'Heprew' in one of their titles.    The 'Heprew' word is shown as a Scarab Beetle in Egyptian and it's real meaning is 'Coming into Existence', 'Creations', or 'Manifestations'.

     We only have to look at the face of Ymnhtp III in monuments and engravings to determine that he had the fine Jewish features.    One good example is that of an engraving where he is wearing the Blue Crown of Egypt.    Here we can see what he looked like from a left hand side of the face view.    Replace the crown with a typical Hasidic hat and he would look like hundreds of thousands of other Orthodox Jews praying before the Temple Wall in Jerusalem.    There is nothing Egyptian in this face whatsoever.

Solomon Father of Menelek

     The Kebra Nagast (The Ethiopian Bible originating from the Egyptian Coptic Bible) tells us that Solomon had other sons beside Rehoboam, namely MENELEK and Aadrami.     King Tutankhamen's cartouche reads YMN TWT ANKH for the name of God is always written first.

     TWT or DYHT as in his grandfather's name was the Lunar God whom we know as Thoth or Tuth.      IAH or YAH was another name for the Moon God and in Hebrew was often referred to as EL.      The Semite population of Egypt were therefore more likely to have known YMN TWT ANKH as YMN EL ANKH.

     When shown in biblical names 'Ankh becomes either 'AK', 'ONQ', or 'EK'.      Silencing the initial 'Y', King Tutankhamen's name to his Semite subjects was MEN EL EK.

     Conversely this means that there was a King Tutankhamen in Africa less than one hundred years ago.     King Menelik II was Emperor of Ethiopia until 1913. 

KING SOLOMON - PART EIGHT - Wealth, Mines, CityJul 9, '09 8:17 PM
for everyone
Solomon's Wealth

1 Kings 10:23 - "So King Solomon exceeded all the kings of the earth for riches and for wisdom."      Supposing that there was another King Solomon it is inconceivable that his riches could have been anywhere near that of the Pharaoh, never mind exceeding them.

Osman - 'Out of Egypt' - "Amenhotep III describes the temple (his mortuary temple) as: … an everlasting fortress of sandstone, embellished with gold throughout, its floor shining with silver and all its doorways with electrum [alloy of silver and gold].      It is wide and very long, adorned for eternity, and made festive with this exceptionally large stele.     It is extended with royal statues of granite, of quartzite, and precious stones, fashioned to last for ever.      They are higher than the rising of the heavens: their rays are in men's faces like the rising sun…..Its workshops are filled with male and female slaves, the children of chieftains of all the countries which my majesty conquered.     Its magazines have stored up uncountable riches.      It is surrounded by villages of Syrians, peopled with children of chieftains; its cattle are like the sands of the shore, totalling millions." 

     Osman then refers to Donal Redford's book "Akhenaten the Heretic King" in which he wrote, "The recorded figures of metals and precious stones that went into the Montu temple is quite staggering: 3.25 tons of electrum, 2.5 tons of gold, 924 tons of copper, 1,250 pounds of lapis lazuli, 215 pounds of turquoise, 1.5 tons of bronze and over 10 tons of beaten copper…"
Solomon's Mines

Charles Pope "The Mines at Timna in the Negev are traditionally thought to be Solomon's Mines.     They date to the period of Amenhotep III's reign.

Massey - 'Ancient Egypt' -"The Egyptians also preserved traditions of Ta-nuter, the holy land that was known by the name of Punt or Puanta.      Maspero spells the name Puanit.     The present writer has rendered it Puanta.     One meaning of anta, in Egyptian, is yellow or golden.     Hence Puanta the golden.      The name is applied in the Ritual (ch. 15) to the land of dawn, or anta, as the golden = the land of gold.      ……But the land of Puanta is also geographical, and there was an Egyptian tradition that this divine country could be reached by ascending the river Nile (Maspero, Histoire Ancienne, p. 5).  
    It was reported that in a remote region south you came to an unknown great water which bathed Puanta or the holy land, Ta-nuter.     This, we suggest, was that nearest and largest of all the African lakes, now called the Victoria Nyanza, from which the river Nile debouches on its journey north. is recorded on the monuments that two naval expeditions were made by the Egyptians to the land of Puanta.     The first occurred in the reign of Sankh-Ka-Ra, the last king of the eleventh dynasty, long before the expedition to Puanta was made in the time of Queen Hatshepsu (eighteenth dynasty).     The leader of this earlier expedition was a nobleman named Hannu, who describes his passage inland through the desert and the cultivated land.    
      On his return to Egypt from the gold land, he speaks of coming back from the land of Seba, and thus far identifies the one with the other.     He says: "When I returned from Seba, or Seboea, I had executed the king's command, for I brought him back all kinds of presents which I had met with in the ports of Puanta, and I came back by the road of Uak and of Hannu" (Inscription, Rohan).   
     In the story of the shipwrecked sailor the speaker says of his voyage: "I was going to the mines of Pharaoh, in a ship that was 150 cubits long and 40 cubits wide, with 150 of the best sailors in Egypt".      He was shipwrecked on an island, which turned out to be in the land of Puanta.      …..It is not said that this was the land of the mines, but he was sailing to the mines when he reached the land of Puanta (Petrie, Egyptian Tales, pp. 82, 90).     An inscription found in the tomb of Iua and Thua (of the eighteenth dynasty ), which tomb was rich in gold, informs us that the gold had been brought from " the lands of the south".

     The Egyptian word for Mines, 'Babait' lives on with the same meaning in Zimbabwe.      It seems more likely that the African Mines provided the fabled riches, than those of the Negev.
    But this may never be known for certain.
Solomon's City

     There are two theories behind the name of Jerusalem.     Osman suggests that it derives from the words 'Uru' and 'Salim'.      'Uru' comes from the verb 'yarah', meaning to found or establish.      'Salim' means peace.     Thus Uru-Salim was the City founded on Peace.     In view of Amenhotep III's long reign of peace, this is quite possible, and in this case it would have to have been Thebes.     On the other hand, according to Massey, "There were already two Jerusalems from the time when Judea and Palestine were appendages of Egypt.
     Two Jerusalems were recognized by Paul, one terrestrial, one celestial.     The name of Jerusalem we read as the Aarru-salem or fields of peace, equivalent to Aarru-hetep or Sekhet-hetep, the fields of peace in Egyptian.      Jerusalem below was the localized representative of Jerusalem above, the Aarru-salem or Aarru-hetep on the mount of peace in the heaven of the never-setting stars."  
     If this is the true origin, then Hebrew migrants may have named their new city after the celestial one.     On the other hand, if author Tony Bushby is right in surmising that King Solomon's Temple is the complex recently discovered beneath the Pyramids and Sphinx, then the immediate vicinity may have been the first 'fields of peace' or Jerusalem.

     There is, I believe, a more logical explanation.    We must remember that the biblical King David was Djayhwt III and that it was this king who built the first great temple in Waset (Thebes/Luxor)followed by his great grandson SalimAmen III who added to the Temple complex.    Therefore we know for certain that Luxor was King David's City.
      The Egyptians embellished people and places with several names besides the ones that we recognise today.    It is therefore quite possible that they not only called Waset the 'Many Gated City', but also knew it as IAH RE SALIM - (The Peace or Rest of the Moon God Yah and the Sun God Reh).   
     Wherever we find a name beginning with 'Y' in Egyptian or Hebrew, then English has a tendency to transliterate this into a 'J'.    Similarly Akhetaten's (Moses) new city of Akhetaten was very likely known as IAH RE KA - (The Spirit of Yah and Re).    Horemheb aka Djoser Setepenre (Joshua) was a general who became King and he did knock down the city walls of Akhetaten, and in fact tried to expunge every memory of this city and the King who built it.   
      So this was the original Jericho.

for everyone
 Something is very very wrong with the Temple description given in 1 Kings Chapter 6.    For a start the overall measurements of the Temple are minimal.    Using the Akkadian/Ugarit cubit they are no more than 27 metres long by 9 metres wide.    Most small churches or chapels are much larger than this and the furnishings described are far too grandiose for a building hardly bigger than a large garage.   

      There is also a noticeable error with the placement of the cherubim.    With their wings alone stretching from one wall to the other, there isn't a single millimetre remaining to fit in the bodies of these angelic creatures.     We can tell by the cherubim that adorn the golden shrine of YmnTwtAnkh that the bodies would have to be at least two-fifths of a cubit wide.    This means that the cherubim would have required almost 21 cubits of space between walls, which were only 20 cubits apart.

        A Christian apologist has offered the explanation that the creatures had their backs to the wall and that their wing joints were adjacent.      Stop here and think about it for a moment.     This excuse is very desperate and getting to the bottom of the barrel.      If this were so, then their wing joints would have to be touching each other with not even one millimetre to spare – since the measurements given are that precise.    Such a creature would not be able to flap their wings.     Their joints would crack together, not to mention the havoc caused to the delicate bone structure apparent in any of the avian species.    Besides, the artistry from wall to wall would be shocking and certainly not becoming a temple to a god.

      Greek Historian Herodotus was born circa 490 to 480BCE, so his visit to Palestine must have taken place around the middle of that century, when Solomon's Temple should have been well known, and worthy of at least a passing mention.    Yet Herodotus wrote only of two pillars in Tyre.    He just couldn't have missed a fabulous Temple where the entire inside was covered in gold.  
        During his visit to Egypt he recorded several tales about Thebes (Uaset) and he does mention the Temple of Jupiter in that city where a great statue of Jupiter had the head of a Ram.    This would have to be Ymnhtp III's Temple of Amen, where an avenue of ram headed sphinxes still leads to the entrance.    Herodotus was always interested in religion and how it was practised in each country he visited.    A Temple where there were no statues or images to any God would have been a curiosity to him, and one about which, he surely would have had some comment to make.

       Let us look at those figures again, from 1 Kings 6:2.    The Temple was a mere twenty cubits wide, equal to 9 metres or 30 feet, and only three-score cubits long, equal to 27 metres or 100 feet.    A church in Cairns along with a community hall close to it, was erected in December 2006, and each building would be larger than the one Temple of 1 Kings 6.    They were completed and the outside walls finished and painted within some two or three months.    

      Solomon's Temple though took seven years (1 Kings 6:38) and more than 150,000 people were employed on the project (1 Kings 5:15/16).    The King then had to employ 24,000 to work on the Temple, with 6000 officials to run the place, and 4000 porters to carry 'Heaven knows what?'    Another 4000 had to somehow cram into the confines of this tiny chapel, along with instruments to 'Praise The Lord'.    The crush within must have been unbearable, and if they did somehow manage to raise a tune on their instruments, the noise and smell would both have been very noxious.

      The Only Conclusion we can rationally make is that the Bible is talking about two different temples, perhaps one ever so small church in the Palestinian Jerusalem, and the real Temple that was remembered from another country and another time.

     New evidence has been highlighted in the latest book by Robert Feather, "The Mystery of The Copper Scroll of Qumran".    Not only are Egyptian numerals used in the Scroll, but Greek letters scattered through it, spell out the name of 'Akhenaten', the Heretic King, son of Amenhotep III/Solomon, who tried so hard to change religious belief in Egypt, and who is thought by so many biblical scholars to have been either Moses or Aaron.

     Weights and measures in the Copper Scroll also make more sense as Egyptian, and using them as such the amount of gold found in the ruins at Amarna are virtually a perfect match for the gold listed in some columns, with only a 4% discrepancy.

Robert Feather points out that the main building at Qumran is in the same alignment as Akhenaten's Temple at Amarna, and both are one thousand cubits from a river.    The Temple at Karnak also has this same alignment and again is one thousand cubits from a Great River, The Nile.

     We now know that temples in Egypt were aligned to the rising of Sirius.    See "The Egypt Code" by Robert Bauval.    In fact through the course of centuries and precessional movement of the heavens in relation to the Earth, new temples were realigned to the new position of Sirius in the first rays of dawning sunlight on the horizon.    Sirius was seen as the Evercoming Son, Iosa, also known to Egyptians as HR (To the Greeks - Horus).    The Heliacal Rising of Sirius only occurred every 1,460 years, and each new 'Sothic Year' was awaited with great excitement.    

      King SalimAmen III would have had his 'Nephilim' - Watchers, i.e. Astronomers - searching for it towards the end of his reign.    Alas, he didn't live to see it on or about 21st June, 1321BCE.    Instead it would seem that YmnTwtAnkh was 'resurrected' on that date.

    Like Qumran and Amarna the neighbouring streets at Karnak are laid out in the same general plan.    The alignment of the Temples at Karnak is a mirror reflection of the constellation of Aries and an avenue of Ram's Headed Sphinxes leads from Karnak to the Temple at Luxor.    Amenhotep III was therefore seen as a Shepherd King and the Living Image of God.    The Pharaohs of the 18th Dynasty carried a Flail and a Shepherd's Crook as their symbols of power over the people they ruled who saw the power of God as being centred in either Taurus or Aries.    (Refer Genesis 46:33/34 and 31:12 King James Version).

        Above - The Ruins of Solomon's Temple as they are today.
 Ezekiel's Dream

Ezekiel 47:1 - "Afterward he brought me again unto the door of the house, and, behold waters issued out from under the threshold of the house eastward: for the forefront of the house stood toward the east," (King James Version)

Ezekiel 47:3/4 - "And when the man that had the line in his hand went forth eastward, he measured a thousand cubits, and he brought me through the waters; the waters were to the ankles."      Again he measured a thousand, and brought me through the waters; the waters were to my knees.     Again he measured a thousand, and brought me through; the waters were to the loins."

Note: The Good News Bible reads 'Temple' Not 'house'.

     The dreams of Ezekiel weren't written until after the supposed prophecies had taken place.     Nevertheless some facts may be gleaned through the confusion of his fantasies.      The Temple he describes is aligned west-east and the river is very wide, but only a thousand cubits from the Temple.     This surely rules out the Temple in modern day Jerusalem.     Whilst these verses put the river to the east of the Temple, Robert Feather in his book "The Mystery of the Copper Scroll of Qumran" writes, 'Later in the Old Testament Chapter Ezekiel makes it quite clear that this very wide river is to the west of the Temple..'      Ezekiel chapter 48 does put the Temple to the west of the City..."

 The New Jerusalem 
 According to Robert Feather - see Part One - Text 5Q15 of the 'New Jerusalem' texts, found in Cave 5 at Qumran describes a City Plan, the number of blocks, and streets, together with the measurements of each block and the width of the streets.      It also says that 'all are paved with white stone…marble and jasper.'    

       Since Feather has identified Greek Letters in the Copper Scroll which approximate the name of 'Akhenaten' or 'Akhetaten' it is quite possible that the City in the New Jerusalem texts was the Pharaoh Akhenaten's Akhetaten.      That new city was said to be gleaming white in the sunshine for its roads and buildings were made from limestone, which had the appearance of alabaster, and the lay out of the ruins is precisely as given in the texts.      Furthermore the alignment of the Akhetaten Temple is the same as the buildings at Qumran, and both are one thousand Egyptian cubits from a great river or the Dead Sea.  

       How could the Essene community possibly know the geographical layout of the lost city of Akhetaten when the details aren't to be found anywhere else?      On top of that The Copper Scroll uses Egyptian numerals to list the treasures of gold, silver, etc. along with the places where they were hidden.    

       Another oddity is that their calendar was solar based, not lunar as we might have expected of a religious community in Israel.      None of the treasures have been found in modern Jerusalem despite the most enthusiastic activity by treasure hunters.      But the amount of gold found so far in Akhetaten apparently does match the quantity given in the Copper Scroll. 

         There is still much of the treasure still to be found, and Robert Feather points out the likely sites where it is hidden, in his book.      But if Akhetaten was the New Jerusalem, then where was the Old?     He appears to have overlooked the Temples at Karnak and Luxor where we have again the same strange north-west to south-east alignment, the same city plan, and again a distance of one thousand cubits to the River Nile.    

      Whilst Feather admits that he doesn't know what this alignment can be, Belgian Jean-Pierre LaCroix has shown at some length that the Temples in Luxor and Karnak are a mirror reflection of the constellation of Aries.     The title of his web page is - "Thebes: a reflection of the sky on the pharaoh's earth".      An avenue of Ram headed Sphinxes ran from one Temple to another to emphasise that each Temple was a Star in the constellation of Aries.   

      We do know that a Civil War broke out between the two factions of the new age of Aries and the old age of Taurus, and this is the subject of Ralph Ellis's book, "Tempest & Exodus".      He shows that the Tempest Stela has been wrongly translated, and his translation tells the story of what really happened.      If he is correct, then here is the root cause for the whole beginnings of Judaism and the subsequent upheaval when the next new Age - Pisces arrived and kick started Christianity. 

 The Furnishings 
1 Kings 6:20/23 - "This inner room was nine metres long, nine metres wide, and nine metres high, all covered with pure gold.     The altar was covered with cedar panels.     The inside of the Temple was covered with gold, and gold chains were placed across the entrance of the inner room, which was also covered with gold.      The whole interior of the Temple was covered with gold, as well as the altar in the Most Holy Place.     Two winged creatures wee made of olive wood and placed in the Most Holy Place, each one 4.4 metres tall."

1 Kings 6:29/30 - "The walls of the main room and of the inner room were all decorated with carved figures of winged creatures, palm trees, and flowers. Even the floor was covered with gold."

     A Temple of this grandeur would surely have left some traces, yet despite intensive searches over many decades, archaeologists have found nothing in Israel.     Nor has anything been found of his Palace.      But then in 1 Kings 10:28/29 the Scribes slipped up and didn't cover up the fact that Solomon had to have been King of Egypt.     Only a king of Egypt could control the export of chariots from Egypt.     The Temples in Luxor and Karnak appear to fit the bill admirably, and when we look at Solomon's Palaces we have all the main elements listed in 1 Kings.

From a plan of Luxor Temple, the Hall of the Barque may be an excellent candidate for the Inner Room described in 1 Kings 6:20. If not this Hall, then perhaps it could have been the Naos or Offering Hall?     We do know at least that it was square shaped.

Lorna Oakes and Lucia Gahlin - "Ancient Egypt" Page 152.     In a description of the Temple built by Amenhotep III/Solomon at Luxor - "..the buildings visible today date from the reign of Amenhotep III, the great temple builder of the Eighteenth Dynasty, a time when Egypt was very prosperous and powerful.      On a black granite stela some 3 metres tall, now in the Cairo Museum, his (Amenhotep III) inscription records that he built the temple of: "fine limestone, wide very great and exceedingly beautiful. Its walls are of fine gold, its pavements of silver.     All its gates are worked with the pride of lands.      Its pylons reach to the sky, its flagpoles to the stars.."

     This descriptive fragment doesn't tell us much, but that of Amenhotep's Montu Temple in Western Thebes does. According to the Stela found in this temple, Amenhotep III describes the temple as: " everlasting fortress of sandstone, embellished with gold throughout, its floor shining with silver and all its doorways with electrum (ally of silver and gold).   
      It is wide and very long, adorned for eternity, and made festive with this exceptionally large stele.     It is extended with royal statues of granite, of quartzite and precious stones, fashioned to last forever.      They are higher than the rising of the heavens: their rays are in men's faces like the rising sun…"

     The winged creatures are a regular feature in Egyptian Temples, and can be seen on the Shrine in Tutankhamen's tomb.

     In his book "Akhenaten the Heretic King" Donald B. Redford writes, "The recorded figures of metals and precious stones that went into the Montu temple is quite staggering: 3.25 tons of electrum, 2.5 tons of gold, 924 tons of copper, 1,250 pounds of lapis lazuli, 215 pounds of turquoise, 1.5 tons of bronze and over 10 tons of beaten copper."

     We could expect no less in the larger temples of Luxor and Karnak, and that means that we have found buildings of the same size and grandeur as are described in 1 Kings 6.

KING SOLOMON - PART FIVE - City, Songs, WisdomJul 8, '09 1:15 AM
for everyone
Solomon's City 
     There are two theories behind the name of Jerusalem.     Osman suggests that it derives from the words 'Uru' and 'Salim'.      'Uru' comes from the verb 'yarah', meaning to found or establish.      'Salim' means peace.     Thus Uru-Salim was the City founded on Peace.     In view of Amenhotep III's long reign of peace, this is quite possible, and in this case it would have to have been Thebes.   
     On the other hand, according to Massey, "There were already two Jerusalems from the time when Judea and Palestine were appendages of Egypt.      Two Jerusalems were recognized by Paul, one terrestrial, one celestial.     The name of Jerusalem we read as the Aarru-salem or fields of peace, equivalent to Aarru-hetep or Sekhet-hetep, the fields of peace in Egyptian.      Jerusalem below was the localized representative of Jerusalem above, the Aarru-salem or Aarru-hetep on the mount of peace in the heaven of the never-setting stars."
     If this is the true origin, then Hebrew migrants may have named their new city after the celestial one.     On the other hand, if author Tony Bushby is right in surmising that King Solomon's Temple is the complex recently discovered beneath the Pyramids and Sphinx, then the immediate vicinity may have been the first 'fields of peace' or Jerusalem.

     There is, I believe, a more logical explanation.    We must remember that the biblical King David was Djayhwt III and that it was this king who built the first great temple in Waset (Thebes/Luxor) followed by his great grandson SalimAmen III who added to the Temple complex.    Therefore we know for certain that Luxor was King David's City.  
   The Egyptians embellished people and places with several names besides the ones that we recognise today.    It is therefore quite possible that they not only called Waset the 'Many Gated City', ***    but also knew it as IAH RE SALIM - (The Peace or Rest of the Moon God Yah and the Sun God Reh).    Wherever we find a name beginning with 'Y' in Egyptian or Hebrew, then English has a tendency to transliterate this into a 'J'.
    Similarly Akhetaten's (Moses) new city of Akhetaten was very likely known as IAH RE KA - (The Spirit of Yah and Re).    Horemheb aka Djoser Setepenre (Joshua) was a general who became King and he did knock down the city walls of Akhetaten, and in fact tried to expunge every memory of this city and the King who built it.    So this was the original Jericho.
*** The Koran says that Joseph's brothers entered the city by different gates. This is also in Jewish traditions.(Midrash bereshith Rabbah 89).    Thebes was known around the ancient world as 'the city with many gates'.    Homer mentioned it circa 8th century BC as the hundred-gated city.   Waset (Greek named Thebes) was full of whacking great Pylon gates - ceremonial and part of the Temple complex.    
The Songs of Solomon 
     Either YmnHtp III, the Biblical King Solomon, may have written the songs of Solomon or more likely his son YmnHtp IV who renamed himself Akhenaten.     Psalm 104 has been identified as having its roots in the Hymn to Aten believed to have been written by Akhenaten.

     It is therefore no surprise to find a verse in the Bible Songs of Solomon containing three locations, which just have to be Egyptian.

Song-of-Solomon 4:8 Come with me from Lebanon, [my] spouse, with me from Lebanon: look from the top of Amana, from the top of Shenir and Hermon, from the lions' dens, from the mountains of the leopards.

     The Heprew migrants going into Israel may have resurrected these names like many others, but with the songs being attributed to Solomon they must be actual locations in Egypt or have some meaning in their old religion of the stars.

     Gerald Massey shows in his book "Ancient Egypt Light of the World" (1907) how Israel was once part of Egypt as was Iuta - Judah.    More evidence that this was so can be found in the Bible.    See"Israel Pre-Exodus" 

     It is tempting to take 'Amana' as Amarna, where Akhenaten built his new capital city devoted to the worship of the Aten.    However the name by which it is known now, Amarna, may be much more recent.

     Wikpedia - "The frequent designation "Tel el-Amarna" for the city is inaccurate: nowhere do the ancient remains constitute a mound of eroded architecture that would warrant the description of a "Tel" (Arabic: "city mound"), so common elsewhere in the region.     Cyril Aldred notes that the name "Tel el-Amarna" is a misunderstanding of the name for one of the modern villages near the ruins, Et Til el Amarna.     The name "Amarna" itself comes from the name of a tribe of nomads, the Beni Amran, who left the Eastern Desert in the 18th century to settle on the banks of the Nile along this stretch."

     It is still possible that if this is true, then these nomads may have named themselves after 'Amarna', especially since both Heprew and Arabs went on to worship the God, Amen.    After the demise of Akhetaten the priests of Amen resumed their traditional power base and temples to Amen flourished once more.
    We are on safer ground though to look to Gerald Massey who wrote " When the nether-world had been completely excavated by Ptah, Amenta was established as the lower storey of two in the mount of earth which henceforth becomes the mount of Amenta.    The name denotes the hidden or secret (Amen) earth (ta).    It is also called the earth of eternity, the land of the living; for the Egyptians call those the living whom the less spiritualistic moderns designate the dead.    The mount of earth became the mount of Amenta because Amenta had been tunnelled through the lower earth."    In this case the scribe is recalling the Egyptian 'Amenta' when writing 'from the top of Amana'.

     Shenir is much easier to place.    Massey tells us, 'the word Shennu or Sheni in Egyptian also denotes an orbit, the circuit or circle, to turn and return.    Hence the solar god was designated lord of Sheni.     Mount Sheni, as the place of turning and returning, is the mount of the equinox.    This was the mount of the two lions, and these also are the Sheni by name."    There were, it is thought, two lion Sphinx next to the Great Pyramid.

     In this next passage by Massey, Shenir is not only identified as Mount Sinai, but is linked to Hermon which was Khnum a religious site devoted to the worship of Khnum and later renamed Hermopolis by the Greeks:

     "Here there is some evidence to show that the Hebrew Sinai is derived from the Egyptian Sheni.    Ra, the solar god, is designated lord of Sheni in the Ritual.    The speaker in chapter 36 says, "I am Khnum, the lord of Sheni", or Shennu, equivalent to Sinai in Hebrew.    When Osiris becomes the supreme lord of the mountain in Amenta he is also described as the "commander in the region of Sheni."    He is a form of that lord over all who gave the Commandments on Mount Sinai."

     Massey then dismisses Mount Sinai as being a mountain in the earthly sense:
"The difficulty of identifying Sinai as a geographical mount, according to the book of Exodus, may be explained when we know that the beginnings were not geographical, and that the mount on which Shu-Anhur shared the throne of Ra his father was the mountain in Amenta, not on earth.     It was the stellar mount of glory in the eschatology which had been the mount of sunrise in the mythology."

     We can be reasonably sure that Mount Sinai was the Great Pyramid - (see Mount Sinai ) and it was of course a crucial focus point for the Nephilim - the Egyptian Astronomers who 'watched' the Giant Constellation, Orion.    As Ralph Ellis points out in "Tempest and Exodus", Mount Sinai would have to be an extremely small mountain to set bounds around it, and a boundary that was sharply delineated - 
"Exodus 19:12 And thou shalt set bounds unto the people round about, saying, Take heed to yourselves, [that ye] go [not] up into the mount, or touch the border of it: whosoever toucheth the mount shall be surely put to death"
Solomon's Wisdom 
1 Kings 3:9 -"So give me the wisdom I need"
1 Kings 10:4 -"The Queen of Sheba heard Solomon's wisdom and saw the palace he had built."
      Wisdom comes to us as inspirational ideas, but the main source is through books.    Small bookplates of faience have been found in the ruins of the King's Palace in Western Thebes bearing his name.     One entitled "The Book of the Pomegranate Tree" may have been referred to in connection with the building of the Palace.
1 Kings 7:20 -"There were two hundred pomegranates in two rows round each capital."
1 Kings 3:9/12 -Amenhotep III was renowned for his great wisdom.

Solomon's Reign 
1 Kings 11:42 -"He was king in Jerusalem over all Israel for forty years."
     Amenhotep III was King of both Egypt and the land that became Israel. It is now generally accepted that his reign lasted from 1382 BCE to 1344BCE, and according to the historian Manetho, his rule lasted for 38 years and 7 months.      But why stress 'Jerusalem'.      Why not just 'king over all Israel'?      It is like saying that the Elizabeth is Queen in London over all Australia which is true, but it wouldn't sound right if the record also said that she was Queen in London over all England.     Again true, but unlikely to be put this way.      If however Israel at the time was an appellation referring not to a nation but to a people who were highly concentrated in the capital province that was known as 'The City founded on Peace', i.e. 'Uru Salim', at least three hundred years before the supposed biblical account and before the Exodus then it makes more sense.     Furthermore Amenhotep III's son Akhenaten was a Co-Regent with his seat of power in his new city of Akhetaten.      Thus the verse could very well be disassociating Israel from the new heretic cult of the Aten.      The priests of Amen who still exist to this very day, were it is well known trying to regain power and Amenhotep III could have been in dispute over this with his son.      A possible scenario therefore is that Horemheb expelled Akhenaten (believed to be Moses), who left Egypt with his followers and ended up in Qumran, hence his name in The Copper Scroll.     Subsequently Rameses I expels the Heprw people who have reverted to the God, Amen.      Horemheb was the last Pharaoh to have the Heprw Sign in his Throne name, until Seti II in 1200 BCE.     But this is only conjecture and one of many possibilities.
Solomon's Administration 
1 Kings 4:7 -1 Kings 4:7 -"Solomon appointed twelve men as district governors in Israel. They were to provide food from their districts for the king and his household, each man being responsible for one month out of the year." (Good News Version).
Osman - 'Out of Egypt' - "The sudden appearance of such a supposed administration in Israelite tribal society during the 'United Monarchy of David and Solomon' in the 10th century BC, without any roots in the nation's previous history and followed by its sudden disappearance after Solomon's death, has been a source of puzzlement to scholars.      The apparent contradiction is resolved, however, once identification of the historical David (Tuthmosis III) and Solomon (Amenhotep III) makes it clear that the sophisticated administration described in the Old Testament is the administration established by these two monarch in the 15th and 14th centuries BC to deal with the day-to-day task of ruling Egypt and its empire.      During the empire period - and particularly during the time of Tuthmosis III (David) - the administrative system was reorganized to suit the needs of the age, and later further developed by Amenhotep III.      It was then that , for the purposes of taxation, the empire was arranged in 12 administrative sections, an arrangement that the biblical narrator drew on for his account of the king the world now knows as Solomon.      Almost all scholars agree (for example the German scholar Otto Eissfeldt) that the taxation system that the Bible says was introduced by Solomon matches precisely the system that was used in Egypt after Tuthmosis III had established the new Egyptian empire.     Each of the 12 areas was the responsibility of a high official and was expected to contribute sufficient tax to cover the country's needs for one month of the year."
Solomon's Chariotry 
1Kings 10:26 -"And Solomon gathered together chariots and horsemen: and he had a thousand and four hundred chariots, and twelve thousand horsemen, whom he bestowed in the cities for chariots, and with the king at Jerusalem."
Osman - 'Out of Egypt' - "These figures are far beyond the scope of a minor kingdom that Israel may have been at that time.     They could only have been mustered by Egypt.     Amenhotep III organized his Chariotry into a separate Unit early in his reign and his father-in-law Yuya (Yu-Zaph or Joseph), as the first minister to bear the title 'Deputy of His Majesty in the Chariotry."
1Kings 10:28/29 "The King's agents controlled the export of chariots from Egypt"
This is absolute proof that Solomon was a King of Egypt as well as head of his people whom he called 'Israel'.    Only the King of Egypt's own agents could control the export of what was then equivalent to the nuclear power of the 14th century BC.
Solomon's Religion 
1Kings 11:4 - "….his wives turned away his heart after other gods:…"
Amenhotep's name tells us that he worshipped the god 'Amen'.     Towards the end of his reign it appears that he turned to the god of his wife Queen Tiye's father, Yuya (Joseph), the Aten.      The events described by Graham Phillips in his book "Act of God" may have been the trigger. - "For someone so completely devoted to Amun-Re, Amonhotep does something very strange towards the end of his independent reign: he erects literally hundreds of statues to another deity - the goddess Sekhmet.     At Asher, half a kilometer to the south of the Temple of Amun, Amonhotep was in the process of rebuilding a temple to the chief goddess Mut, when he suddenly reconsecrated it as a temple to Sekhmet."
     We have to be talking about Egypt here. 1 Kings 11:4 His wives turned his head over other gods. If Solomon was devoted to one God, who were all these other gods? In the case of YmnHtp III we do know that he went along with his son Akhenaten with the worship of the one God, the Aten, the Lord. So this may be what was meant.

KING SOLOMON - PART THREE - PalaceJul 7, '09 11:48 PM
for everyone
Solomon's Palaces 
Koran - The Chapter of The Ant - 27 Mecca - (E H Palmer translation) "And it was said to her, 'Enter the court;' and when she saw it, she reckoned it to be an abyss of water, and she uncovered her legs.     Said he, 'Verily, it is a court paved with glass!' "    

1 Kings 7:7 - The Throne Room, also called the Hall of Judgement, where Solomon decided cases, had cedar panels from the floor to the rafters." (Good News Version).
The Throne Room of Amenhotep III in Western Thebes (Luxor west bank) has been described as follows: "The reception quarters consist of a large squarish hall with many rows of columns in wood and throne dais set along the axis of the entrance corridor, a second smaller hypostyle (columned) hall with a throne dais near it, a throne room and a bedroom.    

1 Kings 7:1 - "Solomon also built a palace for himself and it took him thirteen years."
     The King's Palace in West Thebes was "the oldest and most important building, occupying the south-east quarter of the great complex and adjoined on the east by its kitchens, offices and store-rooms.      It had also a section for the king's harem and was connected with a smaller palace, the residence of Queen Etiye, daughter of the king's high official, Yuya (Joseph).

1 Kings 7:8 - "Solomon's own quarters, in another court behind the Hall of Judgement, were made like other buildings.      He also built the same kind of house for his wife, the daughter of the king of Egypt."
Amenhotep III did indeed marry his own sister, the Princes Sitamun, "the daughter of Tuthmosis IV, in order to gain his right to the throne, which was the Egyptian custom.     William C. Hayes, the American scholar, commented in an article in the Journal of Near Eastern Studies in 1951: …'the great North Palace…appears to have been the residence of an extremely important royal lady, quite possibly Queen Sitamun.'

1 Kings 7:6 (KJV) - "And he made a porch of pillars; the length thereof was fifty cubits, and the breadth thereof thirty cubits: and the porch was before them: and the other pillars and the thick beam were before them.
      1 Kings 7:6 (Good News Bible 2nd Edition) - "The Hall of Columns was 22.5 metres long and 13.5 metres wide.     It had A COVERED PORCH, SUPPORTED BY COLUMNS."

     We can actually check these measurements against a plan of the ruins of Amenhotep III's Palace at Malqata on the West Bank of the Nile at Luxor.    Just check it for yourself.    Go to the web page Malqata Palace.    Identification can be made easier by increasing the size of the plan and scale until the scale of 40 metres is 4 centimetres long.    One can do this by right clicking on computer mouse, and then 'Save Picture As...'.    Open the image in a Photo, Browser or Word programme, and then drag a corner until the whole image inreases to the desired size.    The topmost hall in the plan only shows where 4 columns once stood, but in the Hall next to it, there is a double line of 8 columns, making 16 in all.    Now measure with a ruler the length and width of this Hall.    You should get a result of something close to 23.7 metres long and 13.7 metres wide.    This is slightly over the Bible figures, but there would have been some panelling, and we do not know what cubit the ancients were using.     The Good News Bible figures though indicate that the Akkadian or Ugarit cubit of 44.5 centimetres has been used
     Hayes described the Royal Audience Pavilion - "its floor elevated above the surrounding terrain, its northern façade provided with A BALCONY-LIKE PROJECTION JUTTING OUT INTO A DEEP, COLONNADED COURTYARD'.

1 Kings 7:2/3 - "The Hall of the Forest of Lebanon was 44 metres long, 22 metres wide, and 13.5 metres high.      It had three rows of cedar pillars, fifteen in each row, with cedar beams resting on them.      The ceiling was of cedar, extending over store-rooms which were supported by the pillars."
     Hayes described a 'Festival Hall, prepared for the celebration of Amenhotep III's second sed festival,' and wrote "a big colonnaded building that extended at the very north of the palace complex.      The complex also included houses for other members of the royal family as well as court officials and servants.     Exactly as the Bible says, all the pillars were of cedar wood imported from Lebanon."      Alexander Badawy, an Egyptian scholar, gives a detailed description of the hall in his book, 'A History of Egyptian Architecture: 'Ceilings were of timber rafters, covered beneath with lath and plaster and painted with a series of protecting Nekhbet vultures in the official halls and in the bedroom of the Pharaoh, or with vines within a frame of rosettes and chequered pattern, spirals and bulls' heads, similar to Aegean ornament.     Floors were decorated in the same technique to represent a pool with papyrus, lotus and fowl."
*   *   *   *   *   *

Kings-1  7:10  And the foundation [was of] costly stones, even great  stones, stones of ten cubits, and stones of eight cubits.
Kings-1  7:11  And above [were] costly stones, after the measures of hewed stones, and cedars.

     In the Good News Bible, they have kindly converted the cubits into metric - "some of them 3600 millimetres long and others 4500 millimetres long.
       From "Ancient Egypt" magazine June/July 2009:
"Another significatn find is a large sandstone architrave.   It was found broken in several pieces, which are now being cleaned and are to be joined and restored.   It is 4.42 metres long and 1.7 metres wide.    The architrave is inscribed on two sides with a hieroglyphic text in sunken relief, comprising the dedication text of the temple, which was called the 'House of Millions of Years' by Amenhotep III.  [Malcolm - Salim Amen or Solomon].
       There is however a discrepancy.  
  The Bible states that the palace was built with stones, and whilst this is true to some extent, as is proven by the architrave and foundation stones, it is thought that Malqata Palace was built with mudbricks which would have been much cooler in the hot summer months.
      The theory then goes on to say that the mudbricks have deteriorated and vanished over the thousands of years.     Isn't it just as likely that local villagers pillage stones they could move and use for their own homes?   After all they did this elsewhere and removed most of the limestone slabs that once covered the Pyramids.

No comments:

Post a Comment