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 

Nefertiti Documented in Year 16 of Akhenaton
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 11, 12, 13
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Egyptian Dreams Forum Index -> Evidence from Amarna
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Lutz
Pharaoh
Pharaoh


Joined: 02 Sep 2007
Posts: 3551
Location: Berlin, Germany

PostPosted: Sun Mar 16, 2014 5:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Another thought, certainly very popular scientifically justified thinking, but...

The bones from KV 55 are organic material. Organic material reacts partly much noticeable / visible on temperature or humidity fluctuations. How is that with human bone? Have the bones from KV 55 really still the state / look of 1907-08 (with view on the not really ideal store conditions in the Cairo Egyptian Museum and different treatments with X-rays over the years), when Grafton Elliot Smith examinated them and came to :

Theodore M. Davis, The Tomb of Queen Tiyi - The Discovery of the Tomb, 1910, p. XXIV wrote:
"... the skeleton is that of a man of twenty-five or twenty-six years of age, without excluding the possibility that he may have been several years older."

Greetings, Lutz.
_________________
Ägyptologie - Forum (German)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
kylejustin
Vizier
Vizier


Joined: 23 Apr 2008
Posts: 1227
Location: victoria, australia

PostPosted: Mon Mar 17, 2014 9:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lutz wrote:
Another thought, certainly very popular scientifically justified thinking, but...

The bones from KV 55 are organic material. Organic material reacts partly much noticeable / visible on temperature or humidity fluctuations. How is that with human bone? Have the bones from KV 55 really still the state / look of 1907-08 (with view on the not really ideal store conditions in the Cairo Egyptian Museum and different treatments with X-rays over the years), when Grafton Elliot Smith examinated them and came to :

Theodore M. Davis, The Tomb of Queen Tiyi - The Discovery of the Tomb, 1910, p. XXIV wrote:
"... the skeleton is that of a man of twenty-five or twenty-six years of age, without excluding the possibility that he may have been several years older."

Greetings, Lutz.


neseret already covered this on the previous page. smith stated the remains were 25 at the most, and was pressured by his contemporaries in saying the body could be older, because they wanted the body to be akhenaten.

your also forgetting lutz, that a 100 years have passed, and most experts still say the remains could not be older than 25. the most qualified expert in 2001 stating even 25 was a stretch, and she thought they were 22.
_________________
heaven won't take me.......hell's afraid i'll take over.....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
neseret
Vizier
Vizier


Joined: 10 Jul 2008
Posts: 1028
Location: United Kingdom

PostPosted: Mon Mar 17, 2014 7:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lutz wrote:
neseret wrote:
If Akhenaten is 12 in Year 4 (and I doubt he could father a child at that age as puberty can only begin at this age and reproducible sperm does not begin until at least a year later), ...

These days begin in healthy, well-nourished human body usually from the age of eight or nine years of puberty underlying hormonal changes. The increased production of sex hormones sexual maturation is initiated and promoted. Initially, the ejaculate contains few sperm with mostly low quality, so that fertility initially reduced significantly but not completely excluded. The age at which these processes are running is far too individual to make about this here an absolute and general statement. This is true both for today and, in my view even more so, for over 3500 years ago - a time from which we have no significant statistical data for this.


I was using modern data for when reproducible sperm and age of puberty occur: there has been quite lot written recently that where early onset puberty occurs - such as age 8 or 9, there's usually a modern reason for it (such as modern obesity, modern diet makeup, and hormones fed into cattle and poultry, etc. which are in turn consumed by humans).

However, when you talk about the natural cycle of puberty, modern information available states that the earliest age of puberty for boys is about 12 years of age, with reproducible sperm coming into the body about 1-1.5 year later. I would have to assume, for purposes of this discussion, that Akhenaten and his male contemporaries, devoid of the modern diet which encourages early onset of puberty, would have become sexually mature by 13-14 years old.

Janssen and Janssen (2007: 78-82) also note that while there is some evidence of circumcision between the ages of 10-12 (NB: this was not widespread, and may have occurred only in certain levels of society and again, not widespread even within these groups), this was not tied to sexual maturity, but as a social initiation into society. They also note that up until the 1950's, circumcision was still not linked to sexual maturity, but social passage into society.

Actual adulthood - to the point where a male could take a wife - was linked, in ancient times, to his taking on a career which provided him the means to supply a household adequately (Janssen and Janssen 2007: 90-91).

However, in the case of royal children, the transition to adulthood appears to have been based upon a royal son's prowess in athletics and military skills, which served as his acceptance into his future role as king. Janssen and Janssen (2007: 111-14) note that Amenhotep II's prowess is discussed in the Sphinx Stela, in which he achieves the level of athletic mastery in his 18th year, which indicated his ability to defend the Two Lands. In response, his father (Thutmose III), states his approval of Amenhotep II as crown prince, assuring his career, and convey upon his distinct responsibilities:

He will make a Lord of the entire land
whom no one can attack;
eager to excel, he rejoices in victory;
Although he is only a charming young man, still without wisdom, and not yet ripe for the work of Montu (i.e., military campaigns),
he ignores already the thirst of the body, and loves strength.

Then his Majesty said to those who were at his side:
'Let him be given the very best horses
from my Majesty's stable at Memphis, and tell him:
"Look after them, master them,
trot them, handle them if they resist you'...
(Janssen and Janssen 2007: 114)

In this, Thutmose III acknowledges not only his son's abilities to rule, but that he has also overcome his body's desires, enough to assume royal responsibility: in short, he accepts him as a man into royal society. Note that this is not tied to sexual maturity, and it's evident from other portions of the text that the Crown Prince is not yet married at this time.

Now, acceptance into society first by circumcision appears a possible measure of a youth into his immediate society as a potential man, but among the elite and possibly, even the lower classes, it's his assumption of his career that makes him a full adult in the eyes of his culture - enough that he can provide for a wife and household.

Amongst royal males, it appears that his designation as the heir to the throne, exemplified by his prowess in athletics and military acumen, that makes a royal male designated as an adult, provided that he also can assume various responsibilities for his role as future king. For Amenhotep I, this did not take place until he was 18 years old, when he could exhibit the appropriate physical prowess and self-control of his own body's desires, in order to concentrate on the duties of royal power.

So, I doubt seriously that sexual maturity was the standard by which ancient Egyptians viewed their sons as mature enough to make households and marry - or rule. Even in ancient (and some modern) cultures, it is the assumption of responsibility and making one's own way into the world which defines an adult rather than the simple ability to reproduce.

While I will have to concede that the case of Amenhotep IV may have been unusual in his designation as heir to the throne (death of a (possibly) older brother, and him being the last male in the royal line), he would still, IMO, have needed to prove himself as worthy of the responsibility by acts which argue for an older age for such designation, as had Amenhotep II, which means, in my view, a later assumption in life of his position as Crown Prince - most likely in his later teens.

If Janssen and Janssen and my calculations are correct, even if I assume an age of 16-18 as designation of Amenhotep IV as Crown Prince, with a co-regency with his father, one has to admit that the remains of KV 55 are still far too young to be those of Amenhotep IV/Akhenaten, who would have been a minimum of 33 years at death, as opposed to the standard designation of 23 years at death for the KV 55 remains by several notable anatomists, anthropologists, and other medical professionals (Smith 1912; Derry 1931; Harrison 1966; Filer 2000).

Reference:

Derry, D. E. 1931. Notes on the Skeleton hitherto believed to be that of King Akhenaten. ASAE 31: 115-9.

Filer, J. 2000. The KV 55 body: the facts. Egyptian Archaeology 17/Autumn: 13-4.

Harrison, R. G. 1966. An Anatomical Examination of the Pharaonic Remains Purported to be Akhenaten. JEA 52: 95-119.

Janssen, R. M. and J. J. Janssen. 2007. Growing Up and Getting Old in Ancient Egypt. London: Golden House Publications.

Smith, G. E. 2000 (1912). Catalogue Général de Antiquités Égyptiennes du Musée du Caire. No. 60151-61100. The Royal Mummies. Service des Antiquités de L'Égypte: Catalogue Général de Antiquités Égyptiennes du Musée du Caire. London: Duckworth.
_________________
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
Kemetian
Citizen
Citizen


Joined: 25 Mar 2012
Posts: 33
Location: Staffordshire

PostPosted: Wed Mar 19, 2014 12:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lutz wrote:
Kemetian wrote:
I don't dispute there is no inscriptional evidence for Smenkhkare in KV55. However, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. ...

But halfway solid conclusions can not be justified by the absent, only by the present proofs... If not you can justify anything and science and research are unnecessary.

Greetings, Lutz.


Hi Lutz,

All I say is that discount KV55 Male as Smenkhakre because there is no inscriptional evidence is a poor argument in my opinion. KV55 could have (note could have i'm just theorising) been full of inscriptions naming Smenkhkare when Tutankhamen sealed it. However if those inscriptions were on valuable items they would not have been left there when it was re-opened later on.

My point is that in terms of solid evidence KV55 male could still be Akhenaten or Smenkhkare. Everything else is theory based on subjective interpretation of the scant evidence.

For instance say Smenkhkare was Akhenatens co-regent but he died after less than a year. There would have been few grave goods ready so soon, so perhaps they used goods made for Akhenaten and he commisioned replacments. Many of Tutankhamens grave goods werent originally his and he reigned for much longer than Smenkhkare. That could explain the coffin, as could the fact that the body may not originally have been in that coffin. Still too many possibilities for me.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Lutz
Pharaoh
Pharaoh


Joined: 02 Sep 2007
Posts: 3551
Location: Berlin, Germany

PostPosted: Wed Aug 27, 2014 11:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The long announced publication of the inscription has now been published:

Athena Van der Perre : The Year 16 Graffito of Akhenaten in Dayr Abū Ḥinnis - A Contribution to the Study of the Later Years of Nefertiti. - In: Journal of Egyptian History - JEH 7-1. - 2014. - pp. 67 – 108.

The stones were probably broken for the so-called Small Aten Temple (ḥw.t pa ancḫ Ἰtn) at Amarna.

Greetings, Lutz.
_________________
Ägyptologie - Forum (German)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Egyptian Dreams Forum Index -> Evidence from Amarna All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 11, 12, 13
Page 13 of 13

 
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