Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

[deleted] t1_iui5bm3 wrote

Reply to comment by Dawnawaken92 in TIL that the damage on the back of King Tut's skull was due to mishandling of his remains rather than a fatal blow to the head. by KelpCakeDanny

[deleted]

−22

Dawnawaken92 t1_iui5xyl wrote

Just because he was riding on it doesn't mean he was the one driving it. Again you cannot prove without a shadow of a doubt. As you said. He has used canes. That leaves area for doubt

27

[deleted] t1_iui6pms wrote

[deleted]

−12

Mikethemostofit t1_iui6yhy wrote

His bones?

18

[deleted] t1_iui8eb6 wrote

[deleted]

−5

tfaddy2 t1_iui9edq wrote

> if y'all cant go read a book

You're talking about a topic that famously has conflicting positions, you didn't mention any book and actually just posted a Wikipedia link of a controversial archaeologist.

Don't be a pretentious twat. It's not that I disagree with your position but you're doing an awful job at defending it.

39

Small-Bridge3626 t1_iuib8kx wrote

This guy is a top fabricator of Egyptian histories to make them appear more appealing to modern audiences.

21

Dawnawaken92 t1_iuigya3 wrote

Watch him say Egyptians were all black next. When we know for a fact they all ended up being Greek.

2

CrossXFir3 t1_iuji962 wrote

I've done a fair bit of research on him myself. Was fascinated in him at one point. I've read a lot of evidence that he was quite disabled from inbreading. But have also heard he was into hunting. However, there's some thought he was more interested in going with hunters and watching than actually participating. He'd have to have been quite strong for a disabled 12 year old.

1