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 

Is this the skull of Smenkhkare or Akhenaten?
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Egyptian Dreams Forum Index -> Evidence from Amarna
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Amun
Account Suspended


Joined: 06 Jan 2008
Posts: 350
Location: Istanbul

PostPosted: Fri Feb 01, 2008 9:51 am    Post subject: Is this the skull of Smenkhkare or Akhenaten? Reply with quote

http://www.touregypt.net/featurestories/smenkhkare.htm


KV 55:

http://www.thebanmappingproject.com/sites/browse_tombimages_869.html

Here it says: "possibly of Akhenaten"
_________________
I'm a historian.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
anneke
Queen of Egypt
Queen of Egypt


Joined: 23 Jan 2004
Posts: 9305

PostPosted: Fri Feb 01, 2008 3:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

That has been a big debate for many years now.
After the latest set of CT scans the age of the body was said to be in the 20-40 years range. This is a very large spread and seems to confirm what Smith said when the originally examined the body. Some parts point to a younger individual, others point to an older individual.

Hawass concluded after the latest round of tests that this is most likely Akhenaten.

In recent years this has also been argued by German egyptologists (I think it's Helck, but I'mnot sure). Or at least they argue that the coffin the body was found in was meant for Akhenaten (not Kiya as some have argued).

Seems to me that the information we have does not allow us to say with 100% certainty who this is. Maybe DNA testing will give us some resolution to this question? But even that may not allow us to draw any definitive conclusions Confused
_________________
Math and Art: http://mathematicsaroundus.blogspot.com/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mayameritay
Citizen
Citizen


Joined: 12 Mar 2008
Posts: 10
Location: Germany

PostPosted: Wed Mar 12, 2008 7:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Idea The last I heard about this mummy is, that scientist now say, the man was older than 60 years, when he died. If this is true, we have a problem with both theories, Smen-ka Ra was, like Akhenaten much younger. When the tomb was excarvated (puuuh, hope, my english is not too bad! Confused ) there were found a lot of parts of things from other kings. The Sarcophargus seemed to be thrown into the tomb. If The dying-age of the person will be prooved some day, so I can only think it is the Divine (godfather) Ay. When I think about the destruction found in his tomb... who knows. It ist only speculation, I had the same idea with the mummy which is now called Ramesses I. I´m working on a reconstruction of the face of this mummy to see, what it looked like, when he lived. Perhaps a DNA-Test helps but, thats my information, DNA is killed after 700 years...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Lutz
Pharaoh
Pharaoh


Joined: 02 Sep 2007
Posts: 4060
Location: Berlin, Germany

PostPosted: Wed Mar 12, 2008 10:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mayameritay wrote:
The last I heard about this mummy is, that scientist now say, the man was older than 60 years, when he died.

Thats not really correct. After CT scanning the condition of single parts of the skeleton would permit an age estimate between 25 and 60 years. Nobody did the statement that he was over 60 at time of death.

Quote:
Hawass : "... Our CT scan put Akhenaten squarely back in the running for the identity of the mummy from KV55. Our team was able to determine that the mummy may have been older at death than anyone had previously thought. Dr. Selim noted that the spine showed, in addition to slight scoliosis, significant degenerative changes associated with age. He said that although it is difficult to determine the age of an individual from bones alone, he might put the mummy’s age as high as 60. The jury is still out, but it is certainly tempting to think that Akhenaten has finally been found. ..."

( http://www.guardians.net/hawass/articles/Mystery%20of%20the%20Mummy%20from%20KV55.htm )

Quote:
The Sarcophargus seemed to be thrown into the tomb.

Also not correct. The tomb was regular sealed (and intact) in the time of Tutanchamun (same seals of the royal necropolis like on the door of KV 62).
The situation of January 1907 is the result of at least two re-openings in ancient times. Nobody knows who re-opened the tomb and why.

Quote:
I can only think it is the Divine (godfather) Ay. When I think about the destruction found in his tomb... who knows. It ist only speculation

Schaden found remains of bones of a human in KV 23, dateable back to 18-th / 19-th dynasty. In the times of Haremhab the memory of the gods father was pursued (see the buildings at Karnak for Tutanchamun, completed by Aja). So, who has brought the mummy of Aja to KV 55 and when ?

Greetings,

Lutz
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Mayameritay
Citizen
Citizen


Joined: 12 Mar 2008
Posts: 10
Location: Germany

PostPosted: Thu Mar 13, 2008 5:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

@Lutz
Thank you for the informations. Shocked I really had a bad source, I think...
Greetings
Mayameritay
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Segereh
Pharaoh
Pharaoh


Joined: 22 Apr 2004
Posts: 2934
Location: Bruges

PostPosted: Thu Mar 13, 2008 7:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

There's something "off" with that estimate of 25-60.
I mean... At age 40 different signs of age are to be seen than at age 40.
Actually I don't know of any skeleton with such a terrible ageing. Confused
You can tell major differences between ages 15-20, 25-40, 40-60 and 60+
How can it be they cannot tell the difference between 25-40 and 25-60?

Sometimes I think Hawass just wanted another Hatshepsut for his collection of discoveries...
Akh is more well-known than Smenkh.
But that's just me being paranoid. Cool
_________________
"Leave him in error who loves his error."
"Learn politeness from the impolite."

Feel free to visit my site in construction:
-- www.enks.net --
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Segereh
Pharaoh
Pharaoh


Joined: 22 Apr 2004
Posts: 2934
Location: Bruges

PostPosted: Thu Mar 13, 2008 7:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Segereh wrote:
I mean... At age 40 different signs of age are to be seen than at age 40.

I meant... At age 40 different signs of age are to be seen than at age 60.
_________________
"Leave him in error who loves his error."
"Learn politeness from the impolite."

Feel free to visit my site in construction:
-- www.enks.net --
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Lutz
Pharaoh
Pharaoh


Joined: 02 Sep 2007
Posts: 4060
Location: Berlin, Germany

PostPosted: Thu Mar 13, 2008 8:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Segereh wrote:
Segereh wrote:
I mean... At age 40 different signs of age are to be seen than at age 40.

I meant... At age 40 different signs of age are to be seen than at age 60.

I personally think that age regulation by bones alone is not a particularly sure method. They do this by using of modern data of bones meant for the seal of the growth joints in a particular age. But, these data could absolutely have changed, however, in the development of mankind over long time periods (as many other things in our physical development, like size and the beginning of the puberty, etc.).
In addition, they also are influenced by certain aspects as diet and illnesses, etc.

And when I look on the condition of the bones of KV 55 still when there were found ... Sad

Greetings,

Lutz
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Segereh
Pharaoh
Pharaoh


Joined: 22 Apr 2004
Posts: 2934
Location: Bruges

PostPosted: Thu Mar 13, 2008 8:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lutz wrote:
I personally think that age regulation by bones alone is not a particularly sure method. They do this by using of modern data of bones meant for the seal of the growth joints in a particular age. But, these data could absolutely have changed, however, in the development of mankind over long time periods (as many other things in our physical development, like size and the beginning of the puberty, etc.). In addition, they also are influenced by certain aspects as diet and illnesses, etc. And when I look on the condition of the bones of KV 55 still when there were found ... Sad

True, but what about the skull itself?
Condition of teeth can say one hell of a lot.
And I think this one has a lot of them for an AE 40 year old?
Unless dental plans were included in pharaonic office?


_________________
"Leave him in error who loves his error."
"Learn politeness from the impolite."

Feel free to visit my site in construction:
-- www.enks.net --
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Lutz
Pharaoh
Pharaoh


Joined: 02 Sep 2007
Posts: 4060
Location: Berlin, Germany

PostPosted: Thu Mar 13, 2008 10:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Segereh wrote:
... what about the skull itself?
Condition of teeth can say one hell of a lot.
And I think this one has a lot of them for an AE 40 year old?
Unless dental plans were included in pharaonic office?



Yes thats right. I think this is the problem (and reason for the different ages over the years) in case of KV 55 : the age of the skull seems not match the age of the bones (?).

So, to identify the person we have to take a look at all the stuff from KV 55, not only the bones. And when I do this I personally come to Akhenaton.

Greetings,

Lutz
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Segereh
Pharaoh
Pharaoh


Joined: 22 Apr 2004
Posts: 2934
Location: Bruges

PostPosted: Thu Mar 13, 2008 10:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lutz wrote:
So, to identify the person we have to take a look at all the stuff from KV 55, not only the bones. And when I do this I personally come to Akhenaton.

I understand, but I have a problem with that.
Is it possible to not call KV55 a kind of cachette?
And if you would call it so: how trustworthy are the links between the objects within?

Take the mummy of Ramesses II for instance, found within a wooden coffin.
That coffin was first believed to be his, stripped of its gold wrapping.
The wrapping was never there though, and the coffin was from before his time.
Within the context of a cachette nothing is what it seems.

Granted, the cachette Ramesses II was found in, was way bigger...
But KV55 had been entered, re-entered and re-arranged too.
That does not give its items a constant or reliable context.
_________________
"Leave him in error who loves his error."
"Learn politeness from the impolite."

Feel free to visit my site in construction:
-- www.enks.net --
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Osiris II
Vizier
Vizier


Joined: 28 Dec 2004
Posts: 1752

PostPosted: Fri Mar 14, 2008 3:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I really doubt very much that it could be Akhenaten, and mainly because of the general conception of him being a heretic.
I would think, that after his death and burial, those who thought of him as a criminal (perhaps even the priests of Amun, seeking revenge) would have broken into his tomb and tore the mummy apart.
Granted, he may have been re-buried in KV55, but even if his mummy had been recovered and moved, it would have been in pieces, even if it had outwardly been given the shape of a mummy.
There is more than simple evidence of his tomb in Amarna being broken into and defaced.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Lutz
Pharaoh
Pharaoh


Joined: 02 Sep 2007
Posts: 4060
Location: Berlin, Germany

PostPosted: Fri Mar 14, 2008 7:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Segereh wrote:
Lutz wrote:
So, to identify the person we have to take a look at all the stuff from KV 55, not only the bones. And when I do this I personally come to Akhenaton.

I understand, but I have a problem with that.
Is it possible to not call KV55 a kind of cachette?
And if you would call it so: how trustworthy are the links between the objects within?

I would call it a re-burial. Members of the royal family which were buried first in the royal tomb of Amarna (at least Akhenaten and his mother Teje) were re-buried here under Tutanchamun (door-seals).
Quote:
But KV55 had been entered, re-entered and re-arranged too.
That does not give its items a constant or reliable context.

Thats true but nobody knows when and why. But interesting is what was left ... Just stuff with close relation to the burials of Akhenaton and his mother. Think of the magical bricks. There are also notices from Maspero that he has seen the cartouche of Akhenaton on the now lost golden mummy ribbons.

But at the end it is a question of believe I think. We don`t have enough information at the moment. Idea

Greetings,

Lutz
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Lutz
Pharaoh
Pharaoh


Joined: 02 Sep 2007
Posts: 4060
Location: Berlin, Germany

PostPosted: Fri Mar 14, 2008 7:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Osiris II wrote:
I really doubt very much ... broken into and defaced.


Nice story ... For a movie or a book ... But nothing more.

Greetings,

Lutz
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Gerard.
Scribe
Scribe


Joined: 26 Jan 2008
Posts: 492
Location: France

PostPosted: Fri Mar 14, 2008 8:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Osiris II wrote:

1. the general conception of him being a heretic.
2. those who thought of him as a criminal
3. There is more than simple evidence of his tomb in Amarna being broken into and defaced.


1. This is a mainly a modern conception. The word heretic itself is a nonsense when employed with the egyptian religions.
2. The two attestations are from the time of Ramses II (at least 50 years latter) and one can argue about these two when they are not considered at face value.
3. The Amarna steles remainded untouched and anybody can see them.

IMO, "Who, when, why" hated Akhenaten, remain unanswered.
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
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Page 1 of 6

 
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