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 Previous  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
kylejustin
Vizier
Vizier


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

PostPosted: Sat Nov 15, 2008 12:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Seshat wrote:
DNA testing probably won't work in this case--dessicated tissue yields very little DNA, as do bones. The dessication process leads to breakdown of DNA molecules. Even if they could manage to get a halfway decent sample, what would they test it against?
It was thought that the Elder Lady was Tiye for a long time, but even that has been called into question lately. She's the only person for which a valid comparison could be made with mitochondrial DNA as it comes from the mother.
In short, what is needed to solve this mystery is the burial of One of Akhenaten's daughters or wives. We could then triangulate the position of the mummy within the family tree via DNA, but until then, the usefulness of DNA in this case at all is questionable.


that's why they get from inside the bones.

the reason they think it isnt tiye, is because though the hair in tut's tomb matches, the cranial shape doesn't fit with tuya, tiye's mother.

mitochondrial dna from tiye would only match with sons and any female descendants of her daughters. tutankhamun and smenkhare would have mitochondrial dna from kiya, not tiye. only akhenaten would have that dna. the daughter's of nefertiti would have hers too. but if aye and tiye are sibs, then tuya's dna would be in both.

i dont know what the likelihood of any amarna tombs is. i wouldn't think much of akhenaten's family have survived the ages. particurly how robbers and later kings acted.
_________________
heaven won't take me.......hell's afraid i'll take over.....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Seshat
Scribe
Scribe


Joined: 03 Feb 2008
Posts: 132

PostPosted: Sat Nov 15, 2008 8:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I thought it was still fairly difficult to extract DNA from bones as well, which makes me think they must be working from fragments on the stuff they are testing.
Also, since the elder lady may not be Tiye, mitochondrial testing against her would be nearly useless. Best strategy would be to test against Thuya.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Seshat
Scribe
Scribe


Joined: 03 Feb 2008
Posts: 132

PostPosted: Sat Nov 15, 2008 8:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Also, remember that some of the most intact new kingdom burials that we have are from lesser Amarna nobles, including Tutankhamun who was fairly unremarkable as a king. Why? Because people wanted to forget them. They didn't have their names and statues gazing out from the temples reminding people that they had tombs full of booty just waiting to be plundered.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Gerard.
Scribe
Scribe


Joined: 26 Jan 2008
Posts: 492
Location: France

PostPosted: Sat Nov 15, 2008 8:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sheshat, who do you call lesser Amarna nobles? In a forthcoming article from Steve Cross 'The Hydrology of the Valley of the Kings, Egypt', to be published in JEA 94, 2008. It should be explained that a powerful flood sealed tombs KV55-KV62-KV63 and KV6x to be discovered. A more detailed message was on EEF 24 oct 2008. It is a pity that Steve had to wait 10 years to be heard.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Seshat
Scribe
Scribe


Joined: 03 Feb 2008
Posts: 132

PostPosted: Mon Nov 17, 2008 5:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lesser Amarna nobles: Anyone who wasn't Merytaten, Akhenaten, Ankhesenpaaten or Nefertiti. Anyone who would have been overshadowed by the cultural backlash against Akhenaten himself.
Think about it--does anyone remember any of the names of Ghengis Khan's advisers and wives? They've been overshadowed by the memory of Ghengis Khan.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
neseret
Vizier
Vizier


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

PostPosted: Mon Nov 17, 2008 9:07 am    Post subject: Antipathy Towards Those Affiliated with the Amarna Period Reply with quote

Seshat wrote:
Lesser Amarna nobles: Anyone who wasn't Merytaten, Akhenaten, Ankhesenpaaten or Nefertiti. Anyone who would have been overshadowed by the cultural backlash against Akhenaten himself.


The antipathy towards the Amarna period was rather diffused, really, so I'm not sure than even 'lesser nobles' were free of this antipathy.

It's clear that priests and clerics who had been involved in the Aten cult and who survived the period often changed their name to avoid association with the previously royal cult (see National Geographic article, concerning varied career of the priest Meryre/Meryneith (near bottom)).

As early as the reign of Ankhkheperure, the populace was hostile to any and all who had harmed the cult of Amun, and this was not only the Amarna royals. From the tomb of Pairi, from that period, a prayer by his fellow-priest of Amun, Pawah:

Turn your face toward us, O lord of eternity!
You were here before ‘they’ arose,
you will be here when ‘they’ are gone.


(quoted in Assmann 1994: 14-15)

Later, during the early part of the reign of Seti I, a reference to the Amarna period in derogatory terms is also made, but not strictly about the royal house:

(The State of Egypt before Ramses I Became King)

[Lines lost]...] known wrong was done (1). No one overcame it , since there was [...] (proposed: dispute in the whole country)
. . . as children who bickered in the time of Re (2), it ended not until he departed (3).


Notes:

(1) Could also be translated as “it was a sin,” following (Schott, 1964: 18, I, line 1).

(2) Or translated as “struggled,” following kitchen (1993: 93, 111:1). The sense of children fighting is implied.

(3) The subject, “he,” here is problematic, depending on how one reads Schott and Clére. It may be that Akhenaten is referred to here. Schott (1964: 18, n. 4) appears to lean to the reference meaning Akhenaten, as he describes /Sms/ in the sense of “to die.”

Whatever the case, the shadow of the Amarna period touched not only the royals but even the non-royal nobles, and perhaps even the everyday populace, if we are to take the meaning of these texts as a general antipathy towards anyone associated with the Amarna period.

Reference:

Assmann, J. 1994. Ocular desire in a time of darkness: Urban festivals and divine visibility in Ancient Egypt. In A. R. E. Agus and J. Assmann, Eds., Ocular Desire: Sehnsucht des Auges: 13-29. Yearbook for Religious Anthropology/Jahrbuch für Religiöse Anthropologie. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.

Clére, J. J. 1957. Notes sur la chapelle funéraire de Ramses I à Abydos. Revue d'Egyptologie 11: 1-38.

kitchen, K. A. 1993. Ramesside Inscriptions: Translated and Annotated. Translations. Vol. I. Oxford: Blackwell.

Schott, S. 1964. Der Denkstein Sethos' I für die Kapelle Ramses' I in Abydos. Nachrichten der Akadamie der Wissenschaften in Göttingen. I Philologisch-Historische Klasse. No. 1. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht.
_________________
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
Gerard.
Scribe
Scribe


Joined: 26 Jan 2008
Posts: 492
Location: France

PostPosted: Mon Nov 17, 2008 10:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well, no doubt Ramses 1 did not like Akhenaten, he was not invited at Amarna. Maya did not have that problem when he wrote at the entrance of his tomb-chapel at Saqqara :
... the governance which came into being through me, as something that was ordained for me by my God since my youth, the presence of the King having been granted to me since I was a child. I happily reached the end [of my career], enjoying countless favours of the Lord of the Two Lands.... This inscription was visible at all time.
BTW : Ay and Pentu had a position with Tut. Regarding Meryre/Meryneith, he may have just switched back to the name received from his mother, the fact we know about him tell us he was not discredited.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Gerard.
Scribe
Scribe


Joined: 26 Jan 2008
Posts: 492
Location: France

PostPosted: Mon Nov 17, 2008 1:34 pm    Post subject: Re: Antipathy Towards Those Affiliated with the Amarna Perio Reply with quote

neseret wrote:
As early as the reign of Ankhkheperure, the populace was hostile to any and all who had harmed the cult of Amun, and this was not only the Amarna royals. From the tomb of Pairi, from that period, a prayer by his fellow-priest of Amun, Pawah:

Turn your face toward us, O lord of eternity!
You were here before ‘they’ arose,
you will be here when ‘they’ are gone.


We know nothing of what the populace could think. Pawah being blind priest, the graffito was written by his brother Bathay (?) both from the house of Ankhkeprure, I doubt they had something to say publicly against Amarna royals. A.Gardiner in JEA XIV pages 10-11 gave a slightly different translation : Thou wast here, when they are…. Thou caused me to see a darkness of thy giving. The verb being missing, it is a speculation to give a meaning to ‘they’.
From what Gardiner wrote one could understand “you were here [ie. before Akhenaten erased your name] when my eyes were gone. You caused me to see darkness that is your to give”.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Gerard.
Scribe
Scribe


Joined: 26 Jan 2008
Posts: 492
Location: France

PostPosted: Mon Nov 17, 2008 4:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sorry I should have copied the same sentences and add the next one. so you could compare. Here it is :

Turn thyself (?) to us, thou lord of eternity!
Thou wast here ere (aught) had come into existence
Thou wast here, when they are….

Thou caused me to see a darkness of thy giving.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
kylejustin
Vizier
Vizier


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

PostPosted: Mon Dec 29, 2008 2:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

they should run the mitochondrial dna of tutankhamun, kv 55, and tiye together to see if it matches. is it does, it means tiye is closely related to these mumies. and the blood matches between tut and kv 55, why not the dna?
_________________
heaven won't take me.......hell's afraid i'll take over.....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
littleone
Citizen
Citizen


Joined: 12 Feb 2009
Posts: 16

PostPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 4:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Is it really possible to run a DNA test on ancient bones and actually yield a exact result?
If they cannot even pinpoint an age range (25-60!!??) then how can they get DNA?
All I know, and I'm noooo scholar, is that the bodies from Akhetaten were reburied later on in the Valley, that some people think that the "elder lady" is Tiye and even fewer people, but some still, think that the younger lady is Nefertiti
I also hear that some people don't think Akhenaten's mummy had a chance, but that's sort of speculation, not fact, unless there is some proof it was desecrated....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
neseret
Vizier
Vizier


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

PostPosted: Tue Feb 17, 2009 7:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

littleone wrote:
Is it really possible to run a DNA test on ancient bones and actually yield a exact result?


Exactly what can we prove by DNA at this point? That the KV 55 bones are related to Tutankhamun? We already know this. See

Harrison, R. G., R. C. Connolly, et al. 1969. Kinship of Smenkhkare and Tutankhamun Demonstrated Serologically. Nature 224(October 25, 1969): 325-326.

Understand that, to date, we have only the following distinctly identified bones from the Amehotep III family:

Thuya and Yuya (Tiye's parents) - YES
Tiye - NO
Amenhotep III - NO
Satamun - NO
Other daughters of Amenhotep III - Unknown, but probably not
Thutmose (Crown Prince) - Unknown, but probably not
Akhenaten - NO
Nefertiti - NO
(any or all daughters of Ankhenaten and Nefertiti, including Ankhsenamun) - NO
Smenkhkare - Maybe
Tutankhamun - YES

If you see the problem, you can understand why DNA is possibly not beneficial to this question. But here's a brief summary: IF all you have is the mTDNA of the grandmother (Thuya), you have only 1/2 of the mtDNA information, IF (and this is a BIG "IF" ) the KV 55 remains is a child of Tiye and Amehotep III. Recall that mtDNA passes down through the female line, but the male child does not pass on the mother's mtDNA strand to his offspring, so any mtDNA for the KV 55 remains to be related to Tiye and Amenhotep III has to come from Tiye.

Recall that mtDNA is passed by a mother to both male and female offspring without any mixing, so your mtDNA is the same as your mother's mtDNA, which is the same as her mother's mtDNA. mtDNA changes very slowly so it cannot determine close relationships as well as it can determine general relatedness. If two people have an exact match in their mtDNA, then there is a very good chance they share a common maternal ancestor, but it is hard to determine if this is a recent ancestor or one who lived hundreds of years ago.

BUT, if the KV 55 remains are from a collateral line of the family, unrelated by DNA to Thuya, as has been proposed for both the KV 55 remains (if Smenkhkare) and Tutankhamun, then the mtDNA could be different altogether. This would also be true if the remains are those unrelated to the Amenhotep III line at all (such as a "foreign prince" as was proposed some years ago).

This type of result would leave us as much in the dark as before, exacerbated by the fact that we do not know, for sure, which set of remains are those of Amenhotep III (in fact, the proposed remains of who we think is Amenhotep III has been proposed by some Egyptologists to actually be those of Akhenaten!)

Without a definitive known sire to the Amenhotep III line, we can only speculate whether the KV 55 remains are those of Smenkhkare (and if Smenkhkare was a child of Amenhotep III, or related to Akhenaten (whose body we probably don't have)), and what was the relationship of Tutankhamun to the Amenhotep III line.

Many people like to point out that BYU's Scott Woodward stated publicly in 2001 that he intended to get DNA from the remains of Tutankhamun, the KV 55 remains, and even the two fetal remains in Tutankhamun's tomb to get an mtDNA sequence. He was never granted permission by the SCA to take such samples, FWIW.

Others point out that the SCA has also been doing DNA studies of the royal mummies. This is true, but results reported thus far are sometimes viewed with some scepticism, since the SCA has publicly stated that they will not allow the test results to be confirmationally reviewed by independent testing outside of Egypt - something which is universally accepted in DNA studies to confirm the validity ot the testing.

littleone wrote:
If they cannot even pinpoint an age range (25-60!!??) then how can they get DNA?


But they can pinpoint an age range for the KV 55 remains: it's who is telling you they can't, or that it's otherwise by honing on on a single portion of the body, are the ones who are wrong.

Since 1912, the KV 55 bones have consistently been said to be those of a younger man than 35 (Smith 1912), with the age honed downwards by further examinations of the entire body to be those of a younger man in his mid-20's (Derry 1931, Harrison 1966, and Filer 2000).

For most Egyptologists, this precludes Akhenaten from the picture, as he has a recorded 17 year reign before death and two of his daughters are already born before he becomes king (Smith and Redford 1976).

Many people, however, prefer the musings, but non-scientific results, of earlier Egyptologists, such as Ayrton, Davis or Weigall, and others, who wanted to believe the remains were those of a) Queen Tiye (demonstrably proved as false); b) Akhenaten, or c) even a Hittite Prince named Zannanza.

I think Maspero said it best, when, in the heat of the find, some of the above mentioned Egyptologists (Davis, Ayrton and later, Weigall) wanted to think they had found Akhenaten or Tiye in the KV 55 discovery, cautioned:

I wish to repeat this is unquestionably a reburial and therefore an archaeologist should avoid deductions that might prove to have been made without due consideration of all relevant facts...conflicting and confusing and hasty conclusions are to be avoided. I believe in the end the identity of the owner of this coffin may prove a surprise. (Maspero, as quoted in Smith 1956: 61)

I think, even today, we can say we know only a few things about the KV 55 remains and know them as fact:

- the remains are those of a male;
- by epiphyseal closure of the bones, who was no older than mid-20's at death;
- who was (re-)buried in a coffin originally created for a royal female, which was altered for a royal male.

As far as I can read the information (and I have read just about everything written on these remains), this is all we can say about the KV 55 remains for certain.

Reference:

Davis, T. M. and N. Reeves, Eds. 1990 (1910). The Tomb of Queen Tiyi. Second Ed. San Francisco: KMT Communications.

Derry, D. E. 1931. Notes on the Skeleton hitherto believed to be that of King Akhenaten. ASAE 31: 115-119.

Filer, J. 2000. The KV 55 body: the facts. Egyptian Archaeology 17(Autumn): 13-14.

Greenfield, J. 2001. Secrets of the Ancient World Revealed Through DNA: A lecture presented to the ESS by Dr. Scott Woodward, Professor of Microbiology, Brigham Young University, 20 April 2001. The Ostracon: Journal of the Egyptian Study Society 12/1 (SUMMER 2001): 21-23.(online (PDF))

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

Helck, W. 2001. Das Grab Nr. 55 im Königsgräbertal. Seine Inhalt und seine historische Bedeutung. Sonderschrift/Deustches Archäologisches Institut Abteilung Kairo 29. Mainz: von Zabern.

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.

Smith, J. L. and C. Smith. 1956. Tombs, Temples and Ancient Art. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.

Smith, R. W. and D. B. Redford. 1976. The Akhenaten Temple Project. Vol. I: Initial Discoveries. Warminster: Aris and Phillips.

Wente, E. 1995. Who Was Who Among the Royal Mummies. The Oriental Institute News and Notes, No. 144, Winter 1995. (Online)

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
kylejustin
Vizier
Vizier


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

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 6:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

you have a fantastic point on the kv 55 remains.

if we wanted to determine if amenhotep III's mummy was related, why not do blood testing? or just run the dna? you don't need mitochondrial dna to see if people are related in the male line.
_________________
heaven won't take me.......hell's afraid i'll take over.....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Kiya
Scribe
Scribe


Joined: 23 Jun 2008
Posts: 235

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 7:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
A more detailed message was on EEF 24 oct 2008


What is EEF? I've seen it mentioned here a lot and have been meaning to ask. Idea
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Lutz
Pharaoh
Pharaoh


Joined: 02 Sep 2007
Posts: 4009
Location: Berlin, Germany

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 11:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Kiya wrote:
What is EEF? ...

http://showcase.netins.net/web/ankh/eefmain.html

Greetings, Lutz.
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, 4, 5, 6  Next
Page 5 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