Tut's Treasures: Hidden Secrets

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
A new National Geographic series, Tut's Treasures: Hidden Secrets, has started. It focuses on recent examination of the thousands of tomb objects that had been quietly buried in the Cairo Museum's basement and more recent scientific examination of Tut's mummy (and other material). All of Tut's stuff is being moved to a new museum.


The first episode, the only one I've seen so far, focuses on objects that indicate that Tut was more than a weak boy when he died at 19, but rather that he had gone on foreign military campaigns. In fact, his mummy uniquely reveals two layers of mummification veneer (my term) indicating that he had been provisionally processed while on campaign in the field before being returned home for the complete and proper process.

Thousands of gold leaf shards have been reassembled to reveal propagandic artwork asserting Tut's authority into to the Aegean, to the Near East Levant, and even to Assyria. This comports with our assertion that the 18th Dynasty had imperialist ambitions, starting with Amenhotep III (the father of Akhenaten), at least. And that the 'failed on purpose' 'Aton to Yahweh' tableau was part of a 'crafty' scheme of seeding a controlled opposition in Judea and Israel (and ultimately beyond into Europe and its royal families).

Our hypothesis is also bolstered by Ralph Ellis's work regarding the narrative in the Scotichronicon in his book, Scota. Namely that the 18th Dynasty pharaoh, Ay, colonized Ireland and Scotland, after doing similar in Greece (the Danaoi). Some of the Danaoi to later become the northern tribe of Israel, the Dan, the tribe of Samson, the Nazarite.
Last edited:

Jerry Russell

Staff member
Summary of the video:

(1) Nearly all objects found in the tomb, appear to have been originally intended for some other pharaoh, and borrowed for use by Tut.

(2) The famous gold mask seems to have been crudely assembled from two pieces; the face was made separately from the crown / head-dress.

(3) The canopic jars and statues of Tut are feminine.

(4) The tomb is located to the right of the antechamber, rather than to the left. Again, this indicates femininity.

(5) The mummification process was botched, and the mummy was apparently heated to 200 degrees. This is strange, and might have damaged the DNA used for testing.

(6) Wall paintings were hastily done and have become moldy, indicating that the tomb was sealed while the paint was still wet.

(7) Suspicious high rate of deaths among Carter's companions at the discovery.

The video maker (Matt Sibson) conjectures that perhaps the tomb originally belonged to Nefertiti, and that Carter threw in some random objects including a mummy (perhaps Thutmose I) from other tombs, and painted (or re-painted) the walls to create the illusion that the tomb belonged to Tut.

This all seems very possible. Sibson acknowledges that the mainstream explanation for all of this, is that Tut's death was unexpected and so the tomb was thrown together hastily from available bits and pieces at the time. Sibson's answer is that other Pharaohs were known to prepare for their deaths for decades in advance, so why not Tut? But I can imagine that in the chaos and religious turmoil following Akhenaten's death, perhaps the ability to plan ahead for such events was compromised.

So, given the two hypotheses, I don't see any conclusive basis to choose between one or the other.

But: I don't fully understand the motive for Carter's alleged deception. If what he discovered was in fact Nefertiti's tomb, wouldn't that have been a sufficient discovery to make Carter famous, and make his patron Carnarvon proud?

Or was the goal to hide or obfuscate the implications with respect to the Biblical Exodus account?

Sibson suggests that perhaps the Egyptian government knows the truth, and is trying to prevent the opening of recently discovered chambers behind the tomb for that reason.

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
The argumentation for a massive hoax regarding the entire tableau of evidence seems very plausible.

It seems hard to believe that the burial officials would have seen the logic of providing Tut with borrowed goodies, and stealing them from other pharaohs.

That the tomb and some other artifacts may indeed turn out to Nefertiti's, and other Atonist artwork survived, in any such context is perhaps worth losing the existing picture of Tut. That such aspects of Atonism may have survived so late seems good for our controlled opposition theory.