Doug M Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> This is the first I have heard of that. There is
> no doubt that by the late 18th dynasty there was
> dissatisfaction with the Amarna ruling family and
> a desire to return to the traditions of old and
> maintain a strong borders against a growing number
> of threats. This eventually led to the overthrow
> of the Amarna rulers and the installation of a new
> rulers from the military.

There was NO military coup in the late 18th D. None. The last male members *appear* to have died out naturally, permitting Aye & then Horemheb to rule.

Why am I setting appear off like that?

Well, if we knew as little about the early 18thC in France as we do the late 18th D in AE, we'd see something that looks like this:

Louis XIV dies 1715, succeeded by the Duc du Bourgogne.

What does this mean? Was there a period of unrest with a noble taking the throne? Was there no legitimate heir? Was the Duc named heir? Was he placed on the throne by those who wanted a resurgance of the Kingdom of BUrgundY?

All of those are reasonable speculations. One might even be correct. But without a crucial bit of information, we would be in the same place we are vis a vis Amarna.

What is that crucial piece that solves everything?

The Duc was Louis XIV's great-grandson & the only surviving male member of the senior branch of the Bourbons.

What. exactly, was the nature of Horemheb's relation to the old Royal family? We don't have that critical piece, and so we are trapped in the tar pits.