It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Egypt, thou knew

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 20 2009 @ 02:51 PM
link   

Egypt, thou knew


www.independent.co.uk

3rd paragraph in: The discovery of the cemetery this week really convinced me that there is someone important buried inside this temple," he said. "No one would be buried outside a temple without a reason. We saw in the pharaonic days, they were always buried beside pyramids."
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Apr, 20 2009 @ 02:51 PM
link   
Is this the 1st time Zahi Hawass has admitted that the pyramids weren't tombs,but the pharaoes were buried alongside? to me he has always been a stalwart of pyramid/burial chamber story?
Could this be a subtle change in the authodox history of eygpt?
Does this lead to the pyramids being older than the pharoes? Is this how you spell pharoes?
you tell me,im new to this lark.....

www.independent.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Apr, 20 2009 @ 03:14 PM
link   
Looks like Hawass feels that covering up Akhenaten is stil a priority, he even says it himself here. Could he be more of a tool, than to say that a tomb from 2000 years ago, of a minor Roman and his Ptolemaic wife, is more important than events 1300 years prior? File this under ooh-w-a-giveaway.



The discoveries follow excavations that started last week on three sites along the tunnels by teams from Egypt and the Dominican Republic. It is hoped that one of the deep shafts, identified by a radar scan, will lead to a burial chamber where the tomb will be found. Dr Hawass believes that the tomb could be "bigger than that of King Tutankhamen's", discovered in 1922.

It was more than two millennia ago when Mark Antony and Cleopatra challenged Caesar Augustus for control of the Roman Empire. Their armies were defeated and in 30 BC, rather than surrender, the two lovers committed suicide – Mark Antony by his sword, and Cleopatra with a poisonous asp.

The Roman historian Plutarch said Caesar allowed the two lovers to be buried together, but thelocation of their tomb was kept secret. "If this tomb is found, it will be one of the most important discoveries of the 21st century because of the love between Cleopatra and Mark Antony, and because of the sad story of his death," said Dr Hawass.


The love story is the primary reason? That's not a very rational reason for it being "Greater than Tut's tomb"? I think there was a love story in Amarna also, just not the one Hawass is favorable toward.

Maybe he is right; I actually believe the son of Cleopatra, Alexander Helios son of Cleo, was walking around in 0 AD and was about 60 years old right? So his son might have been 30 in 30 AD for example. From a Holy-blood line of thinking, perhaps Jesus was a royal personage and praying to "his father" was a prayer to the true Creator but also a plea to his hidden father, Alexander Helios who had gone into hiding? Such a grandchild of Cleo and Antony would be seen as kingly, I'm guessing and if he was 60 or so in 30AD then his son might have been important. History tells us little at this point.



wiki/Alexander_Helios

Alexander Helios was born and educated in Alexandria. In late 34 BC, as a result of the Donations of Alexandria, he was pronounced as titular ruler of Armenia, Media and Parthia by his parents, despite the fact that most of this territory stood outside of their control at that time; these areas were, in fact, already ruled by Artaxias II of Armenia (Who had been elected as King that same year after Anthony captured his father, Artavasdes II), Artavasdes I of Media and Phraates IV of Parthia. In 33 BC, he was engaged to Iotapa, a Princess of Media and daughter of King Artavasdes I of Media. However, Mark Antony and Cleopatra were defeated by Octavian at the Battle of Actium in 31 BC. The next year, they committed suicide as Octavian and his army invaded Egypt. Iotapa left Egypt to return to her father and later married King Mithridates III of Commagene.

When Octavian became master of Alexandria, he spared Alexander, but took him, his sister and his brother Ptolemy Philadelphus from Egypt to Rome. Octavian celebrated his military triumph in Rome by parading the three orphans in heavy golden chains in the streets. The three siblings were given to Octavia Minor to be raised in her house in Rome under her guardianship. They were generously received by Octavia, who educated them with her own children; Octavia Minor was Octavian's second elder sister and was Mark Antony's former wife.

The ultimate fate of Alexander Helios is unknown. Plutarch states that the only child that Octavian killed out of Antony’s children was Marcus Antonius Antyllus. The ancient sources do not mention any military service, political career, involvement in scandals, marriage plans or descendants; if he had survived to adulthood, it is thought at least one of these would probably have been noted.


I agree with wikipedia here: Seems fairly obvious that his disappearance from history is strange. But perhaps their conclusion that this means nothing, is actually a mask for something else? Wikipedia does not speculate (in fact they crush speculation) but on the historical scale, some people disappear, and others are promoted and it is the historian who selectively looks back and funds archaeological digs.

Son and daughter of this royal pair named Sun and Moon and taken in gold chains but then never seen again? Interesting at least. There was a claim to throne going on around Jesus' era, that is certain.

[edit on 20-4-2009 by smallpeeps]



new topics
 
1

log in

join