Your source on the web for daily archaeology news!
https://archaeologica.org/forum/
A photo is a photo... Not the 'ranting of a lunatic'.Minimalist wrote:The rantings of lunatics does not constitute "evidence."
Ad hominem is hardly an objective, scientific approach.It constitutes "religion."
Rokcet Scientist wrote:Or was a pharaoh a king who was also a living god, while the non-pharaohs were 'just' kings, and thus mere mortals?kbs2244 wrote:So a “pharaoh” was a ruler of both upper and lower Egypt?
If so, what happened that made the people consider Menes/Manetho a pharaoh, a living god, while his predecessors apparently were not considered to be living gods?
Of course it could simply be spin, a.k.a. 'public relations': that Menes'/Manetho's Goebbels of the day thought it was a good idea to 'paint' the king as a living god...
