Thutmose IV is misplaced

Egypt has a fascinating past. Share your knowledge or ask your questions here.

Moderators: DJKeefy, 4u Network

Post Reply
User avatar
Ra-Mont
Junior Member
Junior Member
Posts: 42
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2012 7:31 pm
Has thanked: 1 time
Gender:
United Kingdom

Thutmose IV is misplaced

Post by Ra-Mont »

Something else I've discovered during my researches over the past years is that Thutmose IV wasn't the father of Amenhotep III, he was that king's son. Thought I should put that on record here to see if it's of interest.

R.J.T.


User avatar
LovelyLadyLux
Egypt4u God
Egypt4u God
Posts: 11596
Joined: Sun Nov 29, 2009 9:12 pm
Location: Canada
Has thanked: 417 times
Been thanked: 2714 times
Canada

Re: Thutmose IV is misplaced

Post by LovelyLadyLux »

Interesting Ra-Mont! How did you figure this out? How do you know this? What, in your research gave you this information?
User avatar
Winged Isis
Top Member
Top Member
Posts: 561
Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2008 2:15 am
Location: Australia
Has thanked: 5 times
Been thanked: 2 times
Australia

Re: Thutmose IV is misplaced

Post by Winged Isis »

Most interesting. But where's your proof, please, R-M?
Carpe diem! :le:
User avatar
Ra-Mont
Junior Member
Junior Member
Posts: 42
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2012 7:31 pm
Has thanked: 1 time
Gender:
United Kingdom

Re: Thutmose IV is misplaced

Post by Ra-Mont »

Thanks for the responses, LL and WI. As to how I came to realise that Thutmose IV was wrongly placed in Egyptian chronology, like my pyramid theory, I don't think I can disclose one particular piece of evidence just yet. However, I can happily outline my thinking and give several pieces of evidence to go with it to see what you and others think of my conclusion. As for proof, WI, there is some -- in DNA form. For whatever reasons, we haven't been allowed to see it yet.

I really need to start at the very beginning, about 20 years ago, before I had any interest in Egyptology. I was writing a folklore piece (a weekly publication at the time) and half listening to a quiz programme on TV (University Challenge) when I heard a question involving an Old Testament prophet which intrigued me, so I thumbed through a bible to find out more. Focusing on the passage referred to in the quiz, I saw a very odd 'something' in connection with Yahweh, the OT god. Very soon I saw that this something was associated strongly with Yahweh worship as practised by Moses. Puzzled as to how he and others had acquired this 'something', I began looking into Egypt's past to see if I could find any trace of it there and very quickly realised that Akhenaten was worshipping the exact same god as that of Moses, though, of course, the former called his deity Aten. My initial thought then was that Moses must have been a priest of Akhenaten's who fled Egypt after the death of that king, a belief, I later discovered, that had previously been put forward by Sigmund Freud. Then I happened upon the works of the Muslim Egyptologist Ahmed Osman. In his book Moses: Pharaoh of Egypt he pointed out that Akhenaten was himself to be identified with Moses, having fled Egypt after reigning for 17 years. I saw at once that Osman was correct on this and most of his other identifications of Egyptian/biblical figures. Lots of hitherto ill-fitting pieces of the puzzle I'd been trying to assemble fell perfectly into place once Akhenaten and Moses were seen as one and the same.

But I didn't agree with all of Osman's conclusions. In identifying Akhenaten as Moses he identified the latter's brother Aaron as a 'feeding brother' of Akhenaten's, that is, a child belonging to the royal nursemaid responsible for breast-feeding the king in infancy. I thought this identification was somewhat weak and it niggled me. You see, Osman had explained that the 'staff of Moses' as mentioned in the bible was in fact a pharaonic symbol of authority. But I read that Aaron, too, had a staff that was referred to in the story of exodus (and which was supposedly placed inside the Ark of the Covenant) which had to mean that he was also a king, and not a mere 'feeding brother'. So, which king was he? According to the bible, he was the brother of Moses, who I knew, thanks to Osman, was Akhenaten. But Akhenaten had no known brother after childhood. It seemed I'd been misled on my reading of the bible -- but later I learned enough to question Egyptology and I came to realise that a surprising amount of it is, in fact, based on assumption, assumption so deep set that it's come to be regarded as solid fact. And once one of these false assumptions takes root, it in turn reinforces other false assumptions. I'll explain in a following post how I came to suspect that Thutmose IV had been the victim of one such false assumption. Other things press now.

R.J.T.
User avatar
Ra-Mont
Junior Member
Junior Member
Posts: 42
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2012 7:31 pm
Has thanked: 1 time
Gender:
United Kingdom

Re: Thutmose IV is misplaced

Post by Ra-Mont »

To continue...

I absorbed all of Ahmed Osman's works and was greatly impressed with his vision. With his identification of various key biblical figures as being historical Egyptian ones, many mysteries were solved for me which allowed my own work to move forward. But something else didn't fit well for me. Osman pointed out that the OT's King David was to be identified with Thutmose III and the mighty Solomon was Amenhotep III. That was confirmed by my own researches. But while David was the biblical father of Solomon, Egyptology had Thutmose III as probably the great grandfather of Amenhotep III. Osman didn't touch upon this discrepancy, but it puzzled me that the bible was so loose with this particular lineage, which was quite an important one. And so I took a look to see what proof there was for the pharaonic chronology presently accepted by Egyptology. First off, I found the husband of Amenhotep III's mother, Queen Mutemwiya, has only one known mention by name (that is, by cartouche), in the so-called "birth room" in the Luxor temple. However, this particular cartouche took damage some time in the past to its base. Crucially, this damage obliterated an area where three strokes of plurality may or may not have been. This means the name in question could have been Menkheper-Ra (Thutmose III) or Menkheper-rw-Ra (Thutmose IV). Egyptology is certain that it's Thutmose IV who is represented in the birth room; in every write-up of the scene he's routinely named as the king in question.

Why is Egyptology so sure in its identification? So far as I've been able to discover, the only apparently solid confirmation of it comes from the kings lists which, sure enough, tell us the chronology in question ran: "...Thutmose III-Amenhotep II-Thutmose IV-Amenhotep III..." To Egyptologists' eyes this obviously goes: "father-son-father-son..." Nice and simple, which is how Egyptologists like things. But I don't believe the kings lists were meant to be read in that way alone. I think they carried additional information which sometimes outweighed who was the father or son of who. For instance, how were co-regencies taken into account whereby there were two (or even three) kings ruling different parts of Egypt. And what if occasionally they weren't related?

In the British Museum is the fragment of the kings list found in the memorial temple of Ramesses II at Abydos and this particular piece illustrates very clearly what I think was going on. Below each of the cartouches there is carved the image of a seated king representing the king whose name is above. Each of these figures wears the crown of Upper or Lower Egypt -- and they alternate. From this I came to believe we not supposed to read "...father-son-father-son..."; we're supposed to first and foremost read "...north-south-north-south..." (or vice-versa). Examining the cartouches of the Ramesses II kings list, we can see below that of Thutmose III the seated king wears the red crown of Lower Egypt, indicating that was his chief, or sole, region of rule, or perhaps the region he was ruling when he died; the cartouche of Amenhotep II is denoted by the white crown of Lower Egypt. I think this is telling us there was a father/son co-regency with the location of who was ruling where when he died. Then we find the cartouche of Thutmose IV above the red crown and Amenhotep III above the white. So, the former was ruling in the north -- Memphis, we know, was his seat of power -- while the latter ruled the south from Thebes (or at least was doing so on his death). I'm certain they were a son and his father, so placed on the kings lists to keep a geographical symmetry pleasing to the Egyptians and not to denote who fathered whom.

So, if Thutmose IV really was the son of Amenhotep III as I believe, there is only one other contender for the father of the latter. The birth room cartouche at Luxor does not, as Egyptologists have always supposed, conceal strokes of plurality. The name must surely be read as Menkheper-Ra -- Thutmose III. That king must have co-ruled with Amenhotep II until his death, when his (other) son took over. It must have been after the death of Amenhotep II that his brother, Amenhotep III, moved down to Thebes and appointed his son Thutmose IV to rule from Memphis. From all this something significant happens in that Ahmed Osman's theories gain support, for now we find that King David -- Thutmose III -- really was the father of King Solomon -- Amenhotep III. The bible was right all along and Egyptology was wrong.

More to add soon.

R.J.T.
User avatar
LovelyLadyLux
Egypt4u God
Egypt4u God
Posts: 11596
Joined: Sun Nov 29, 2009 9:12 pm
Location: Canada
Has thanked: 417 times
Been thanked: 2714 times
Canada

Re: Thutmose IV is misplaced

Post by LovelyLadyLux »

Sounds to me like you're onto something!!!
User avatar
Ra-Mont
Junior Member
Junior Member
Posts: 42
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2012 7:31 pm
Has thanked: 1 time
Gender:
United Kingdom

Re: Thutmose IV is misplaced

Post by Ra-Mont »

Glad you think so, LLL. Of course, a typo above had me associating Amehotep II with the white crown of Lower Egypt, which should have been the white crown of Upper Egypt (direction was never my strong point... sighs). I've a fair bit more to add and I hope people will find it all worthy of consideration.

R.J.T.
User avatar
Ra-Mont
Junior Member
Junior Member
Posts: 42
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2012 7:31 pm
Has thanked: 1 time
Gender:
United Kingdom

Re: Thutmose IV is misplaced

Post by Ra-Mont »

So far as those Egyptians who compiled the kings lists were concerned, then, geography took priority over genealogy, probably because the latter didn't always apply anyway and their north-south pattern gave better order. And so, if Thutmose IV is recognized as the son of Amenhotep III he becomes brother to Akhenaten. Indeed, it's well known that during his childhood while under the name of Amenhotep, Akhenaten did have a brother called Thutmose who supposedly disappeared from the records before reaching adulthood. Thutmose IV, meanwhile, is believed to have had an older brother called Amenhotep and he, too, vanished mysteriously while the pair were still boys. It really isn't rocket science to figure out what happened to these brothers.

Some scholars cleverer than the rest have already speculated that Thutmose IV may have usurped the crown from this older brother Amenhotep, which explains why he used his famous "Dream Stele" inscription to justify his rule. This is pretty much what happened. They were non-identical twins, Jacob and Esau in a separate biblical tradition (see Thutmose IV's Dream Stele and Genesis 28:10-22), which must have led to an argument as to who was the rightful heir. It would seem that by whatever means, Thutmose IV won out and was set up as a legitimate king to rule the north while his father remained at Thebes.

Now we have an explanation for Akhenaten's hitherto bizarre move in setting up at Amarna. If he couldn't be recognized as the northern king, then he'd start his own mini-kingdom elsewhere -- and so he did. But his kingdom would be nothing without subjects. Those subjects can only have been drawn from the multitude of foreigners -- mostly of Asiatic blood, giving a link to Akhenaten who carried the blood of the Asiatic Yuya -- living in the vicinity of Thebes at the time. These people were recorded by Amenhotep III, who said that his mortuary temple was "filled with male and female slaves, the children of the chiefs of all foreign lands, the captivity of His Majesty... their number is beyond knowing, (the temple itself) surrounded by the settlements of Syria." [1]

But Akhenaten must have needed his father's blessing for such a drastic move and evidence suggests that wasn't easily forthcoming. Ahmed Osman [2] points out that there are really two exoduses written of in the OT, one involving a departure by high-ranking families from Amarna with the king, and a second which was the escape from Egypt by the Israelites. I agree with this; the two accounts, spliced together to form a continuous narrative, aren't difficult to pick out. But I argue that there were, in fact, three exoduses and two pharaohs of the oppression. The first such pharaoh was Amenhotep III, the father of Akhenaten-Moses himself. The latter apparently spent much time arguing with his father trying to persuade him ("Let my people go!") and it would seem that at this point he had his brother Thutmose IV-Aaron on-side to help persuade the old man. They were obviously eventually successful but -- laden with folkoric themes of divine punishments -- this episode was tacked onto a separate tradition in which the Israelites were later broken out of captivity in the Delta. I don't believe there was any long drawn out dialogue attached to this escape; I think Akhenaten and his accomplices just went in there and did it, leading to the demise of Ramesses I while pursuing them [3]. My reading of Egyptian and non-Egyptian sources tells me that Akhenaten was later caught up with by Seti I on Sinai and beheaded in retaliation for his father's death.

But before all that, of course, Akhenaten was to pitch up at Amarna. The boundary stelae he set up there look to me like he was agreeing to some deal he'd made to stay there and not cause trouble outside the bounds of his city. And very early on he used one of these to make it apparent that something had angered him considerably. On stela E he lets rip in an unfortunately heavily damaged narrative about how he'd heard something most "evil". We don't know what it was, but I'd speculate it was harking back to the decision by his father to make Thutmose IV the rightful heir, and not him. Ahmed Osman devotes a section of Moses: Pharaoh of Egypt to an ancient Egyptian legal case in order to point out that the name Moses derives from the Egyptian Mos, meaning "rightful heir".

Of course, Akhenaten described himself at Amarna as "Lord of the Two Lands", etc, because every king did, no matter which part of Egypt they happened to be ruling at the time. But in his mind and in his heart, it was particularly meaningful to him. He also took every opportunity to declare that he was "living in Maat", that is truth, justice, righteousness. Again and again he had this chiselled into his texts. This obsession looks very strange until we put Thutmose IV in his rightful place, then we understand that Akhenaten was shouting to the world that it was he who was in the right -- and not that pesky brother of his.

The Amarna Letters are interesting. I suppose Akhenaten may have had the bulk of them transported up to his city from Thebes after his father's death. Then again, it's just possible he was intercepting the old man's mail with help from a double agent.

More to follow.



1. Akhenaten, Redford, p. 28
2. Moses: Pharaoh of Egypt.
3. Ibid.
User avatar
Ra-Mont
Junior Member
Junior Member
Posts: 42
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2012 7:31 pm
Has thanked: 1 time
Gender:
United Kingdom

Re: Thutmose IV is misplaced

Post by Ra-Mont »

Additional evidence to support my theory about the misplacement of Thutmose IV is provided by Yuya, father of Queen Tiye the wife of Amenhotep III. Rightly, in my opinion, Ahmed Osman identifies Yuya as the Old Testament Joseph. [1] To demonstrate that Yuya was an Asiatic, an alien to Egyptian society, Osman points out the great difficulty scribes had agreeing on the spelling of his name. There are eleven variations of it on his funerary items, rendering attempts such as: Ya-a, Ya-Yi, Ya-Ya, etc. [2] Osman goes on to point out that since Amenhotep III married Yuya's daughter when he was very young, then Yuya himself must have been established in Egyptian royal circles before that king's reign. He therefore places the arrival of Yuya into Egypt in the time of Thutmose IV.

But if, as I claim, this king wasn't after all, the father of Amenhotep III, then Yuya must have entered Egypt in the time of Thutmose III, who I say was the real father of Amenhotep III. In support of this, I point to mentions made by Cyril Aldred of a man named Yey [3] in the court of Thutmose III as Commander of the Chariotry, Master of Horse and Father of the God. Yuya's titles as listed in his tomb include those of Deputy of His Majesty in the Chariotry, Master of the Horse and Father of the God. [4] I'm very sure that Yey and Yuya are the same man, Yey being yet another try by the scribes at an unfamiliar name that was transmitted orally to them. That gives us 12 different variations of his name.

It's of note that Egyptian chariots as a well organized weapon of war don't appear until the reign of Thutmose III. This must surely have meant the acquisition of Asiatic expertise in horsemanship, which I would attribute to the arrival of Yey/Yuya. No wonder he was so highly thought of. Adding to this, I offer the following text:
"Year 27 under His Majesty the King of Upper and Lower Egypt
Menkheperre, son of Re Tuthmosis (III), to whom it has been
given to live and last as Re in eternity. The barber of the king
Sabastet entered into the presence of the young princes of the
royal palace, saying: "My slave, a man of my property named
Ameniu, whom I had taken prisoner with my own arm when I ac-
companied the king [ . . . ] He has never been struck nor impris-
oned behind a door of the royal palace. I gave him as wife Ta-
Kemnet ("the blind one"), daughter of my sister Nebet-Ta, who
had previously lived with my wife and my sister. He now leaves
the house, being deprived of nothing [ . . . ] and if he decides to
agree to a legal compromise with my sister, no one will ever do
anything against him." [5]
So, the barber of Thutmose III, one Sabastet, through valiant actions in the service of his master had acquired a slave called Ameniu who had become so trusted he was to marry into Sabastet's family. The man was clearly on the rise. As ever with Egyptian documentation which passes through the hands of Egyptologists, there are variations of translation. In his mention of the above, Donald Redford names the slave as Yuwi-Amun. [6] The second element is obviously an addition to assist in the Egyptianization of a foreign slave here called Yuwi by associating him with the god Amen. I'm sure that here we have Yuya with yet another variation of his name, arriving in Egypt as a slave just as the OT claims he did and in the time of Thutmose III, just as I claim he did. And in this earliest known attempt, his name looks like an attempt to render the name of Yahweh, which would later be reduced to the simple Ya as an addition to other Asiatic names circulating in Egypt. That makes thirteen different spellings of Yuya's name. Furthermore, this first offering would appear to read as Yahweh(is)Amen, which would make perfect sense to me, given what I've uncovered, though perhaps not to Egyptologists.

Which leads us to the mother of Thutmose IV. Her name is commonly rendered as Tiya or Tiaa. What we have here is simply another example of scribal difficulty in agreeing on a spelling. Yuya was Asiatic, and so he gave his daughter an Asiatic name, hence the variation. Tiya or Tiaa is none other than Queen Tiye, wife of Amenhotep III and -- I say -- mother of Thutmose IV and Akhenaten.

I was being disingenuous when I said earlier that "for whatever reasons" we haven't seen the DNA of Thutmose III and Thutmose IV, which would prove or otherwise my theory. Given the long-standing Arab-Israeli conflict I know perfectly well why some people of influence in Egypt don't want it known that certain kings of ancient Egypt were one and the same with prominent biblical figures. That's something Osman never counted on when he published his own findings. Egyptologists have been kept misinformed for the sake of falsifying history. They've also been over-acquiescent in not questioning the withholding of DNA results from two of Egypt's most important -- and most well preserved -- royal mummies. I can only suppose they're afraid of annoying certain people lest they lose a permit to dig in Egypt. But I don't have that problem. And I believe in the old maxim: The truth always comes out in the end.

R.J.T.

1. Stranger In The Valley Of The Kings, Osman.
2. Ibid, p. 122.
3. Akhenaten: King Of Egypt, Aldred, pp. 140, 220.
4. Stranger In The Valley Of The Kings, Osman, pp. 26-27.
5. Urkunden IV, 1369.4-16.
6. Akhenaten, Redford, p. 23
User avatar
Ra-Mont
Junior Member
Junior Member
Posts: 42
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2012 7:31 pm
Has thanked: 1 time
Gender:
United Kingdom

Re: Thutmose IV is misplaced

Post by Ra-Mont »

I will add that I view the damage to the cartouche which identifies the father of Amenhotep III with some suspicion. The obliteration of those strokes of plurality is extremely convenient in that, if I'm correct, it not only conceals the true name in the cartouche but at the same time it reinforces a misunderstanding of the kings lists. I think it not impossible that the damage was deliberately made some decades ago. I wouldn't automatically blame an Egyptian hand for this. Those pioneering Egyptologists who were part of a long established Christian heritage may also have had a vested interest in concealing the true identities of biblical characters. It's just possible, too, that this practice exended to the damage of reliefs and inscriptions elsewhere in Egypt, though I know of no proof of this.

Something in particular which puzzled me early on was the seal of a jar that once contained food stuffs and which was excavated from the site of Amenhotep III's Malqata palace. I've found references to this seal by Donald Redford, [1] Ahmed Osman [2] and Dominic Montserrat. [3] All three authors say a text on the seal refers to "the estate of the true king's son" in referring to Akhenaten, who was then a young Prince Amenhotep. Osman points out: "The use of the expression 'true son' indicates an early challenge to the prince's right to inherit the throne..." Indeed, the emphasis on Amehotep being "the true king's son" suggests strongly that, in Amenhotep's view, someone else wasn't "the true king's son", which bolster's my theory that it was his twin brother, the future Thutmose IV, with whom he was in contention. However, I read on another forum that there was no known reference to the phrase "true king's son" on any jar seal from Malqata. Confused, I managed to access an online list of all the known seals from that site and, sure enough, the phrase in question is minus the word "true". A minor, but significant piece of evidence to support my researches was no longer there. Very strange. It's possible that in his reference, Osman drew on Redford's work, which was published first. But Montserrat published in 2000, 10 years after Osman, and he gives separate sources. So, a) either at least two Egyptologists made the same mistake when passing on the text from that seal; b) the suggestive word "true" has been removed from the online translation; or c) the seal now in the collection at Cairo is not the same one referred to. One can decide for oneself which is most likely.

One example of a false assumption reinforcing others, which I alluded to above is, I believe, found on a so-called "surveying instrument" from the tomb of Tutankhamen. Inscriptions on both sides read: "he who renews the monument of ..., Lord of the Two Lands, Menkheperure" [Thutmose IV]. [4] Before "Lord of the Two Lands are hieroglyphs which could be read as it it-f, or it it it-f. Scholars believe this is meant to identify Thutmose IV as either the grandfather or great-grandfather of Tutankhamen, but this belief is founded on those misread kings lists. I wasn't able to locate the afforesaid object on display when I was last in the Cairo Museum, but I'm quite sure that Tutankhamen's cartouche cannot be on it -- at the moment of writing. (I contacted Egyptologist Katherine Griffis-Greenberg through another forum to ask if she could confirm this for me, but she ignored me). In that case, another misunderstanding is to be corrected. I'm confident that the relative referred to is a grandfather and not great grandfather, but the text isn't on behalf of Tutankhamen in reference to Thutmose IV as his grandfather. Knowing that Thutmose IV was probably a recently deceased uncle of Tutankhamen's, I read the text in question as: "he who renews the monument of his father's father, Lord of the Two Lands, (namely) Menkheperure." In other words, the object belonged to Thutmose IV and he was praising his own grandfather Thutmose III. In that case, the artefact most likely came to Tutankhamen during his childhood as a gift from Thutmose IV.

That pretty much concludes what I can say here on the misplacement of Thutmose IV. I hope others have found it interesting, and if anybody can find something to refute my theory I'd be interested to see it. I'm very sure I'm right, but if I've missed something, I'll be willing to see if it really does knock my theory down.

R.J.T.



1. Akhenaten: The Heretic King, Redford, p. 59.
2. Moses: Pharaoh of Egypt, Osman, p. 117.
3. Akhenaten, Montserrat, p.34, citing Hayes 1951: 159, 172 figure 27.
4. Causing His Name to Live, Edited by Peter J. Brand and Louise Cooper, p. 20.
User avatar
LovelyLadyLux
Egypt4u God
Egypt4u God
Posts: 11596
Joined: Sun Nov 29, 2009 9:12 pm
Location: Canada
Has thanked: 417 times
Been thanked: 2714 times
Canada

Re: Thutmose IV is misplaced

Post by LovelyLadyLux »

I enjoyed your writings RaMont. I'm not educated enough or informed enough re: Egyptology to really refute or argue with you on any points. Personally I think you nailed it.

Any other tidbits or theories you'd care to share? Love to read them if you do :) :) :)
User avatar
Ra-Mont
Junior Member
Junior Member
Posts: 42
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2012 7:31 pm
Has thanked: 1 time
Gender:
United Kingdom

Re: Thutmose IV is misplaced

Post by Ra-Mont »

LovelyLadyLux wrote:I enjoyed your writings RaMont. I'm not educated enough or informed enough re: Egyptology to really refute or argue with you on any points. Personally I think you nailed it.

Any other tidbits or theories you'd care to share? Love to read them if you do :) :) :)
Thanks for your comments on my ideas, LLL. I too think I've "nailed it", but it's not cut and dried yet. I've just returned from Egypt and a look at the prenomen which supposedly names the father of Amenhotep III has left me with yet another puzzle to solve. But I'm working on it with the help of knowledgeable people who are close to the subject. Awaiting feedback.

I'm not able to pass on anything else just yet, though I will say that the Aten (or Atens) will give quite a surprise to Egyptology. I believe I have enough evidence to be confident about this, but for now I really must knuckle down and get this book completed. Not easy, with so many disputed theories and what I see as various misunderstandings of history. But hey, who said life had to be easy?

R.J. Thompson.
User avatar
LovelyLadyLux
Egypt4u God
Egypt4u God
Posts: 11596
Joined: Sun Nov 29, 2009 9:12 pm
Location: Canada
Has thanked: 417 times
Been thanked: 2714 times
Canada

Re: Thutmose IV is misplaced

Post by LovelyLadyLux »

Will await your info! x:) x:) x:) Best of the Season Ra-Mont x:)
User avatar
Ra-Mont
Junior Member
Junior Member
Posts: 42
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2012 7:31 pm
Has thanked: 1 time
Gender:
United Kingdom

Re: Thutmose IV is misplaced

Post by Ra-Mont »

And a very merry Xmas to you too, LLL. I hope you enjoy a lovely one. x:)
User avatar
LovelyLadyLux
Egypt4u God
Egypt4u God
Posts: 11596
Joined: Sun Nov 29, 2009 9:12 pm
Location: Canada
Has thanked: 417 times
Been thanked: 2714 times
Canada

Re: Thutmose IV is misplaced

Post by LovelyLadyLux »

All the best to you too Ra-Mont! x:)
Post Reply