Go to the Egyptian Dreams shop
Egyptian Dreams
Ancient Egypt Discussion Board
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Younger Woman has three arms/

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Egyptian Dreams Forum Index -> Evidence from Amarna
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
rainbowgardens
Citizen
Citizen


Joined: 16 Aug 2013
Posts: 1
Location: uk

PostPosted: Fri Aug 16, 2013 6:49 pm    Post subject: Younger Woman has three arms/ Reply with quote

The mummy of the Younger Woman had the wrong right arm when she was found. Later her own arm was found hidden in the wrappings.
So who did the spare arm belong to. Could have been from Nefertiti.
A facial reconstruction of the Younger Woman made at the faial reconstruction centre in Moscow did resemble Nefertiti though without her charm. I thought that the Younger Woman must be Meritaten. Question
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Thieuke
Citizen
Citizen


Joined: 11 Aug 2012
Posts: 77

PostPosted: Sat Aug 17, 2013 7:29 am    Post subject: younger lady Reply with quote

There are several options for the younger lady.
1) Marc Gabolde has a theory it is Nefertiti because he suggests the Royal line intermarried over several generations with the same family.

Even if the younger lady isn't Nefertiti it's been clear from the dna of Tut's daughters that their maternal line links them to Thuya.

2) So Nefertiti was a niece or cousin of Queen Tiye. If the younger lady is one of her daughters than she and Nefertiti are most likely first cousins (assuming Nefertiti was the daughter of a sister of Tiy or her brother who was married to a female relative of his mother). First cousins looking alike is not unusual.

3) the younger ladycould be the Great Royal Wife Meritaten and she and her uncle (??) Smenckhare, making them the parents of Tut. That would mean that intermarriage between generations has mixed up the lines as KV55 and the younger lady are now seen as both full siblings from the marriage of Amenhotep III and Tiye.

no doubt other scenario's will come up once more information comes out or new discoveries are made.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ikon
Scribe
Scribe


Joined: 09 Jul 2012
Posts: 267

PostPosted: Sat Aug 17, 2013 11:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I wonder if the arm has been DNA tested to see what it relationship it bears to YL, or anybody else. I think that this arm may have come from the original tomb of the YL, and from a body now lost. If YL was in a tomb with other mummies, then when it was robbed and the mummies hacked up to one degree or other, then if her real arm got tucked out of site in a mess of wrappings, it is possible that those who removed her to KV35 picked up another arm not hers and placed it with her. There is something not right at all about KV35. But another thread I think
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
karnsculpture
Scribe
Scribe


Joined: 27 May 2010
Posts: 301

PostPosted: Sun Aug 18, 2013 1:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

There are a few longer threads on the possible identity of KV35YL which are worth reviewing. My personal view is that she is one of Akhenaten's sisters, not Nefertiti.

What has not been discussed so much is the spare arm, which has a clasped hand as does KV35EL (Tiye), which may mean that it is also from a King or Queen.

The arm needs to be tested and compared to the rest of the group of mummies, including the young boy. I think its likely that the young boy is Prince Thutmose and the missing arm will be from either Akhenaten or Smenkhkare. It could clear up who KV55 is. Of course, if it also turns out to be male and a full son of Tiye and Amenhotep it won't be an end to the discussion but it would mean that we can say for sure that Smenkhkare was a brother not son of Akhenaten.

If the arm is female, it may be another GRW so possible candidates are Sitamun and of course Nefertiti.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
neseret
Vizier
Vizier


Joined: 10 Jul 2008
Posts: 1033
Location: United Kingdom

PostPosted: Mon Aug 19, 2013 12:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

karnsculpture wrote:
There are a few longer threads on the possible identity of KV35YL which are worth reviewing. My personal view is that she is one of Akhenaten's sisters, not Nefertiti.

What has not been discussed so much is the spare arm, which has a clasped hand as does KV35EL (Tiye), which may mean that it is also from a King or Queen.

The arm needs to be tested and compared to the rest of the group of mummies, including the young boy. I think its likely that the young boy is Prince Thutmose and the missing arm will be from either Akhenaten or Smenkhkare. It could clear up who KV55 is. Of course, if it also turns out to be male and a full son of Tiye and Amenhotep it won't be an end to the discussion but it would mean that we can say for sure that Smenkhkare was a brother not son of Akhenaten.

If the arm is female, it may be another GRW so possible candidates are Sitamun and of course Nefertiti.


As I recall, the arm was tested and was announced (by Hawass in late 2003, as I recall) that it belonged to a male, so that body was apparently not within KV 35. He even published a report along with the announcement, which made the rounds on the Internet at the time. Hawass was mainly trying to discredit Joann Fletcher and her "KV 35YL as Nefertiti" theories.

On the Theban Mummy Project, William Max Miller noted there was confusion about the arms for KV 35 YL from the beginning:

The mummy had suffered damage at the hands of thieves. A large opening had been broken into the chest, and the lower left side of the face (the cheek, mouth, and parts of the jaw) had been broken away. The left arm was extended with the hand placed over the thigh. The right arm had been snapped off below the shoulder. Smith himself seemed vague about whether this arm still existed or not. He commented that he had examined the mummy of the Younger Woman while it was still in side chamber Jc of KV 35, apparently not under optimal conditions, and refers to the "hasty" notes that he had jotted down at the time. These notes, however, clearly seem to indicate that the right arm was present "along with the three mummies" in side chamber Jc. Apparently, this severed arm was somewhere close to the bodies, perhaps on the floor along with their torn bandages. Smith described the arm as "flexed at the elbow," and he notes that "the hand was clasped." This arm was recently rediscovered in KV 35 by the University of York's Mummy Research Team, who confirmed Smith's description of the royal positioning of the arm, with the hand clenched as though it originally held a royal scepter.

However, this is from the Time magazine online article, Nefertiti Found?, concerning Fletcher's find in 2003:

Her left arm is intact, but her right one had been wrenched off below the shoulder. As it happens, two partial right arms turned up in the discarded mummy wrappings. The better preserved of the two is a woman's arm that may be in a flexed position; the hand on the arm is clasped.

Other reports say that both of the right arms were flexed and clasped. Rolling Eyes

So, which arm did Hawass test, and which arm actually belongs to the mummy? If there was a male arm in KV 35, the implication is that only the female one could have belonged to the body of KV 35 YL: however, none of this is ever made clear in the various online articles about Fletcher's find.

A review of the Hawass, Gad, et al. 2020 JAMA report does not mention this loose arm, and that the DNA material was apparently taken from the body of KV 35 YL (noting her height, scoliosis, etc.)

See:

Hawass, Z., et al. 2010. Ancestry and Pathology in King Tutankhamun’s Family. Journal of the American medical Association 303/7: 638-47.

_____________. 2010. Ancestry and Pathology in King Tutankhamun’s Family. (eSupplement). Journal of the American medical Association 303/7: 1-12.

HTH.
_________________
Katherine Griffis-Greenberg

Doctoral Candidate
Oriental Institute
Oriental Studies
Doctoral Programme [Egyptology]
Oxford University
Oxford, United Kingdom
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ikon
Scribe
Scribe


Joined: 09 Jul 2012
Posts: 267

PostPosted: Mon Aug 19, 2013 8:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Some wild speculation...

I wonder if there had been a fourth mummy in chamber Jc that had been removed for reasons we can only have wild guesses at. I always wondered why the three mummies that Loret found had been unwrapped. We must presume that they had been initially unwrapped and robbed when they lay in their original tombs. They would then have been re-wrapped and placed in KV35, though at what time we don't know, for instance at the same time as the other mummies in the cache?, or earlier. If KV35 was robbed when all these mummies were all in situ, why, apart from two skulls and the mysterious mummy on the boat, were only the mummies in Jc unwrapped. Were any remains found that could have belonged to the two skulls? I find no mention of this. I cannot understand why two skulls and no bodies for them.

However, and here is the wild speculation, what if the mummies in Jc had been put there at some unknowable time before the others. What if they had been interred there without any information on them as to who they were, though why? What if those who deposited the other mummies knew that in Jc were "names", and one particular one. Perhaps they found four mummies in Jc, but as there were no dockets, they had to unwrap them to find the one they were looking for. Though it is rather convenient for my wild speculation, that the one they looked for was the last one. Well, maybe they were curious or had other reasons to unwrap them all. So, maybe as far as this fictional mummy is concerned, it was male, and somebody they wanted to remove. I guess it is possible that the Jc mummies had been unwrapped and robbed in their own tombs, then had the indignity of have it happen again in KV35, but that the other mummies were still wrapped and named puts a ? over this. So, why had they alone been unwrapped and left as they were? A spare arm in a sealed chanber indicates, to me, that a fourth mummy had been in there, and possibly a king. I wonder who it could have been? But this is wild speculation of course....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
karnsculpture
Scribe
Scribe


Joined: 27 May 2010
Posts: 301

PostPosted: Mon Aug 19, 2013 11:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thankyou neseret, I thought that I had read the arm was identified as male.

It indicates that a fourth mummy existed at some point with KV35YL, but we can not assume that it was in KV35.

I would speculate that these three mummies were found in the state they are now left in, with the remains of a fourth mummy that was significantly dismembered. There may have been two arms left nearby and as it was uncertain which arm belonged to KV35YL, both were put into her wrappings before the bodies were moved.

I'd be very interested to know if this extra arm is a male member of the 18th Dynasty Royal family and/or is related to Yuya and Thuya. If just related to the Royal Family it represents a prince we don't have a body for, if it is related to Yuya and Thuya we can consider Ay (although I'd be wary of that), and if related to both family lines then you are looking at possibly another candidate for Akhenaten, Smenkhkare, or Prince Tuthmose.

Paul
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ikon
Scribe
Scribe


Joined: 09 Jul 2012
Posts: 267

PostPosted: Mon Aug 19, 2013 11:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thought I would add that I know the mummies in Jc had previously been in Jd, or at least the boy as one of his toes was found in Jd. Also aware that some think the three Jc mummies were deposited [/i]after the other mummies found mostly in Jb. Given that the Jc mummies were the oldest, and who they are, then if they were the last to be interred in KV35, to me, it makes the entire affair even more mysterious. Was Queen Tiye moved from KV55 in 20th Dynasty?, if she was ever buried there, despite the wreckage of her shrine. Where did the mummy that Tutankhamun's mask, second coffin and sarcophagus were originally made for go. I know equipment was re-used, but after only about ten years buried? and where? I know, I know, I ask the questions asked before and that we all want answered. Simply seeing were this spare arm may have come from.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ikon
Scribe
Scribe


Joined: 09 Jul 2012
Posts: 267

PostPosted: Mon Aug 19, 2013 11:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

karnsculpture wrote:
Thankyou neseret, I thought that I had read the arm was identified as male.

It indicates that a fourth mummy existed at some point with KV35YL, but we can not assume that it was in KV35.

I would speculate that these three mummies were found in the state they are now left in, with the remains of a fourth mummy that was significantly dismembered. There may have been two arms left nearby and as it was uncertain which arm belonged to KV35YL, both were put into her wrappings before the bodies were moved.

I'd be very interested to know if this extra arm is a male member of the 18th Dynasty Royal family and/or is related to Yuya and Thuya. If just related to the Royal Family it represents a prince we don't have a body for, if it is related to Yuya and Thuya we can consider Ay (although I'd be wary of that), and if related to both family lines then you are looking at possibly another candidate for Akhenaten, Smenkhkare, or Prince Tuthmose.

Paul


And my "wild speculation" suggests Ahkhenaten or Smenkhare, but I don't want to make a firm statement on this and fall flat on my face very quickly. I think we may have Akhenaten as a skeleton or an arm, and therefore, perhaps also Smenkhare. It is Nefertiti who is missing, at least as a named mummy.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Thieuke
Citizen
Citizen


Joined: 11 Aug 2012
Posts: 77

PostPosted: Mon Aug 19, 2013 1:58 pm    Post subject: fourth mummy Reply with quote

The arm of the fourth mummy has several candidates.

Male: Achnaten, Smenckhare, Ay , unknown pharaoh

Female: Muttemwiya, Sitamun, Iset, Nefertiti, Neferneruaten the female pharaoh, Meritaten, Anchesenamun, Tey, unknown Great Royal Wife.

so testing certainly would help. It could at the very least confirm if this arm belongs to someone from the 18th dynasty and who are the closest relatives we know about.
Im also not aware of any inclusion of the young male that was found with the YL and queen Tiye in the genetic research. The most likely candidate would be crownprince Thutmose as he was found with Tiye and her daughter.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ikon
Scribe
Scribe


Joined: 09 Jul 2012
Posts: 267

PostPosted: Mon Aug 19, 2013 2:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

There is some confusion within my own mind about who was DNA tested and who was not, and when. I thought these tests were carried out in 2010 and previous to that they had been only been scanned, I think from 2003 onwards. I have seen different lists of those tested, some include the boy, others, for instance in Jo Marchant's latest book "The Shadow King", say he was not. Yet on another thread I posted a photo of Hawass and others seemingly taking samples from him in 2010. Does anybody know the 100% truth on this matter of who was or was not tested, and when, including arms or any other body parts without a whole body.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
kylejustin
Vizier
Vizier


Joined: 23 Apr 2008
Posts: 1231
Location: victoria, australia

PostPosted: Tue Aug 20, 2013 7:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

the boy was tested, but the results never released (like the 19th dynasty), and as i understand it, only after the jama paper was released, due to backlash of not testing him with the others.
_________________
heaven won't take me.......hell's afraid i'll take over.....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ikon
Scribe
Scribe


Joined: 09 Jul 2012
Posts: 267

PostPosted: Tue Aug 20, 2013 9:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

kylejustin wrote:
the boy was tested, but the results never released (like the 19th dynasty), and as i understand it, only after the jama paper was released, due to backlash of not testing him with the others.


Thanks. Let's hope when the chaos ends they get back to work on this. Though I notice Salima Akram has found time to do another documentary with Hawass, or was before everything blew up. What is annoying is that these matters are discussed and argued about, books published with deifferent theories, yet we still make guesses, educated or not, while in Cairo are people who know the truth and are silent...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ikon
Scribe
Scribe


Joined: 09 Jul 2012
Posts: 267

PostPosted: Tue Aug 20, 2013 9:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Not a documentary with Hawass and Akram, it is the "live stream conference" on September 29
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Egyptian Dreams Forum Index -> Evidence from Amarna All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group