Egyptian Dreams

[Orwell]

Actually, I think it was the coffin I was thinking of, kylejustin. My bad. The coffin was apparently first made for a female. So I'm looking through "The Tomb of Queen Tiyi" to see if there is any reference to how the mummy was laid out.

[Meretseger]

[Osiris II]

The physican counsulted by Davies after the discovery was a dentist who was staying at the same hotel as Davies.

It is impossible to move the arms of a mummy, other than to break them off.

[Orwell]

So, do we have any idea of the positioning of the mummy? I haven't found it referred to yet in Davis's book or in Aldred.

As to the girl coffin, I don't immediately think that you'd have to be homosexual to be placed in it. Can't discount it, but certainly don't think it the most 'obvious' explanation.

[Orwell]

[Lutz]

Again: The assumptions the coffin from KV 55 was originally made for a women and reworked for a king could disproved by his investigation in Munich. See Grimm / Schoske: Das Geheimnis des goldenen Sarges - Echnaton und das Ende der Amarnazeit (2001).

Briefly to the pr-ehistory: In 1980 were submitted to the director of the collections in Munich, Prof. Wildung, a convolut of gold foils and inserts from a Swiss private property for expertiese. It fast became clear that these are the remains of the coffin tub from KV 55, which disappeared in 1931 from the museum in Cairo.

In arrangement with the Egyptian government the coffin tub was restored in Munich. A tub from plexiglass in original size was made and applied on this were the foils and inserts. The extremely impressing object was presented in the context of an exhibition in Munich 2001 to the public (now Museum Cairo, Amarna room).

One piece of this extraordinary exhibition was also the cover of the coffin, for the first time lend by the Cairo museum. While the piece was in Munich the coffin was for the first time intensively and with the possibilities of most modern technology (among other things CT-scan) examined. Analyses took place of the used materials and work procedures.

For a later re-working no references could be found. Uräus and wig are original, likewise the inscription volumes on cover and tub (A - E). Only the inscription on the base plate (F) was changed at least two times.

A - E are more or less similar. They offer the full titulatur for Akhenaton, known from inscriptions for Kija. But here name is not called. The cartouches with the name for the king (and owner of the coffin) were cut out. For example the translation for columne C:

"Completed ruler, large one of loving, king of upper and lower egypt, which live on the truth, lord of the two countries (cartouche), the completed child of the living Aton, from which is valid: it will live now and always into all eternity. Son of Ra, which lives on the truth, lord of the crowns (cartouche), largely at its lifetime."

As are said, the inscription volumes must addressed as original. They do not show any referring to changes in material or scribt (with exception of the cartouches naturally).

Inscription F probably originally contained the name of Kija. This was removed and the inscription was easily amended. A hieroglyphic, a female determinative, was ignored. It is probably the Amarna variant of a prayer for the salvation of the deceased. On other examples from the NK it is spoken by a goddess (usually Isis or Nephtys).

Greetings, Lutz.

[Lutz]

A highly reliable and informative source for informations abot KV 55 on the net : "The Theban Royal Mummy Project" by Max Miller .

Greetings, Lutz.

[Meretseger]

[Meretseger]

Appropo of the position of the arms it is perhaps worth mentioning that the statue of Smenkhkara noted on the discussion of that name his holding both the crook and the flail in one hand. Perhaps this was characteristic of him? Are there examples of other Pharaohs so posed?

[Lutz]

[Lutz]

I have found only one reasonably comprehensible explanation for the position of the arms of the body from KV 55 in the literature (Reeves ??) : The rejection of osirian dominated believe in the afterlife during the Amarna period.

Lutz

[Orwell]

I'm probably going cross-eyed, but I can't find the actual reference to the position of the mummy's arms. Were they in the normal position for a female? If so, do we speculate a rejection of Osiran beliefs based on one mummy's arm position? Is there other actual evidence to support the idea?

(Questions only, not theories. )

[Lutz]

[Lutz]

[Meretseger]

So what I'm seeing is a lot of variation suggesting that arm position was less conventionalized then thought. Perhaps different embalmers had different customs?