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 

Tutankhamen's family
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 8, 9, 10, 11, 12  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Egyptian Dreams Forum Index -> Evidence from Amarna
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Scribe2
Citizen
Citizen


Joined: 15 Feb 2010
Posts: 41
Location: Auckland, NZ

PostPosted: Mon Feb 22, 2010 8:24 am    Post subject: Reply to Nekht-Ankh Reply with quote

Well, Nekht-Ankh, it was worth a try.

Going back to my original comments on growth, the Fig 2 in this paper shows the tallest male (Tuthmosis II) at 1.73m, and Amenhotep III and Akhenaten at 1.6. Pity they didn't have Amenhotep II - he of the long bow. But generally they were not a tall lot, and therefore likely developed a little slower than we would consider normal today.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
kylejustin
Vizier
Vizier


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

PostPosted: Mon Feb 22, 2010 9:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

they did test for bubonic plague which is thought to have been in existence in the near east during akhenaten's reign. there were a few others they looked for too, but im not sure how many they looked for.
_________________
heaven won't take me.......hell's afraid i'll take over.....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Scribe2
Citizen
Citizen


Joined: 15 Feb 2010
Posts: 41
Location: Auckland, NZ

PostPosted: Mon Feb 22, 2010 7:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks for that, KyleJustin.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Oudjat-Paneb
Citizen
Citizen


Joined: 02 Feb 2010
Posts: 37

PostPosted: Mon Feb 22, 2010 9:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

neseret wrote:

...The burial procedures within KV 55 indicates that someone who believed in an Osiride style burial probably placed them there, and most likely for a royal male within KV 55 (the name of Akhenaten appears only on 2 of the 4 bricks, BTW, along with a /mAat xrw/, the Osiride epithet).

If the person who buried KV 55 is Tutankhamun - and we have sealings to indicate it was - then he is burying his father - and that father may most certainly NOT be Akhenaten, based upon what little Amarna-like equipment is there...


a French egyptologist sais the Osiride style burial of KV55 ve been made for Akhenaten by his son Tutankhamon, after recognozicion of Amun and after ancient cults retablished... he would buried (re-buried ) his father for have officialy and religiously the right for regn after Meritaten. if Meritaten was the first to leave from Amarna really , it's really Tutankhamon who was considered to the ancient rules retablisher by the next pharaos after.

his name is Marc Gabolde (De Akhenaton Toutakhamon)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website MSN Messenger
neseret
Vizier
Vizier


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

PostPosted: Mon Feb 22, 2010 10:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Oudjat-Paneb wrote:
neseret wrote:

...The burial procedures within KV 55 indicates that someone who believed in an Osiride style burial probably placed them there, and most likely for a royal male within KV 55 (the name of Akhenaten appears only on 2 of the 4 bricks, BTW, along with a /mAat xrw/, the Osiride epithet).

If the person who buried KV 55 is Tutankhamun - and we have sealings to indicate it was - then he is burying his father - and that father may most certainly NOT be Akhenaten, based upon what little Amarna-like equipment is there...


a French egyptologist sais the Osiride style burial of KV55 ve been made for Akhenaten by his son Tutankhamon, after recognozicion of Amun and after ancient cults retablished... he would buried (re-buried ) his father for have officialy and religiously the right for regn after Meritaten. if Meritaten was the first to leave from Amarna really , it's really Tutankhamon who was considered to the ancient rules retablisher by the next pharaos after.

his name is Marc Gabolde (De Akhenaton Toutakhamon)


I am aware of Gabolde's theory, though I'm not as sure I would agee with it.

Akhenaten had a very Amarnaesque sarcophagus made for him while at Amarna, and there's every indication he was buried within it (Martin 1974). If Tutankhamun reburied his father in an Osiride burial, he would have been going against his father's express wishes (as stated on the boundary stelaa at Amarna), and if so, why not simply remove Akhenaten's entire sarcophagus to KV 55 (it was found smashed to bits in the 1930's by Pendlebury at Amarna, but can be seen today in the side lot of the Cairo Museum (there's an image of this sarcophagus somehwere on this forum)?

Yet, we have every indication that Tutankhamun's own sarcophagus is taken from someone else and revised for his use. The sarcophagus he has is already set out with Osiride features, although some sections are recut over older text (Eaton-Krauss 1992). The second coffin of Tutankhamun does not possess his features, nor do the canopic coffinettes, which seem to argue for reuse of these item from someone wishing an Osiride burial before Tutankhamun takes over the items (such as the rishi design on the coffin and canopic coffinettes). This, IMO, argues for another individual other than Akhenaten, as noted by Dodson (1992).

Reference:

Dodson, A. 1992. KV 55 and the end of the reign of Akhenaten. In Atti, Ed., VI Congresso Internationale di Egittologia., 1: 135-139. Turin: International Association of Egyptologists.

Eaton-Krauss, M. 1992. The Sarcophagus in the Tomb of Tut'ankhamun. In C. N. Reeves, Ed., After Tut'ankhamun: Research and Excavation in the Royal Necropolis at Thebes: 85-90. Studies in Egyptology. A. B. Lloyd. London: Kegan Paul International.

Martin, G. T. 1974. The Rock Tombs of El-'Amarna. Part VII. The Royal Tomb at El-'Amarna. The Objects. (Vol. I.) Archaeological Survey of Egypt. 35th Memoir. T. G. H. James. London: Egypt Exploration Society.
_________________
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
Oudjat-Paneb
Citizen
Citizen


Joined: 02 Feb 2010
Posts: 37

PostPosted: Mon Feb 22, 2010 10:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote



sarcophage found in the KV55 tomb
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website MSN Messenger
Scribe2
Citizen
Citizen


Joined: 15 Feb 2010
Posts: 41
Location: Auckland, NZ

PostPosted: Mon Feb 22, 2010 10:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

And lastly in my posts, especially for Osiris, who thought Akhenaten looked grotesque, and for those people debating the age of Akhenaten when he died, here is a selection of statuettes showing a much more natural, slightly portly and middle-aged Akhenaten.


http://www.allposters.com/-sp/Statuette-of-Amenophis-IV-Akhenaten-and-Nefertiti-from-Tell-El-Amarna-Amarna-Period-New-Kingdom-Posters_i1348259_.htm

http://www.brooklynmuseum.org/opencollection/objects/3305

http://www.globalegyptianmuseum.org/detail.aspx?id=15430

and for a better shot of the last statuette, together with a good commentary:

http://www.grisel.net/newkingdom.htm


These statuettes often did not come from the 'royal' studios and therefore did not conform to the protocols of art quite so rigorously.
I would argue that they represent real life far more than the religious iconography of the colossi and the various wall murals.

They leave us still with the question of what Akhenaten was trying to 'say' through these iconographs. Personally I think there were several messages being broadcast.

As always, I hope this illuminates rather than irritates !!!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
neseret
Vizier
Vizier


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

PostPosted: Mon Feb 22, 2010 11:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Oudjat-Paneb wrote:


sarcophage found in the KV55 tomb


Coffin found in KV 55.

There is a difference. A sarcophagus is a stone box which holds the coffin of an individual. Akhenaten's was found at Amarna, smashed, but was reconstructed and is now on display outside the Cairo Museum. It's made of pink granite. It look like this:



All that was found in KV 55 was a wooden coffin which had been gessoed and gilded in a rishi pattern. It's difficult to say whose coffin it actually belongs to, but it was original made for an Amarna royal female, and altered to be used for a royal male.

The mummy possessed no death mask, nor canopics (the canopics in the tomb are Kiya's).

See:

Martin, G. T. 1974. The Rock Tombs of El-'Amarna. Part VII. The Royal Tomb at El-'Amarna. The Objects. (Vol. I.) Archaeological Survey of Egypt. 35th Memoir. T. G. H. James. London: Egypt Exploration Society.
_________________
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
kmt_sesh
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 13 Nov 2004
Posts: 7099
Location: Chicago, IL

PostPosted: Mon Feb 22, 2010 11:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I watched the Discovery Channel special last night, as I am sure almost everyone else here did, and have a couple of questions.

First, though, I thought it was a pretty good special. If nothing else it helped me to understand the genetic testing process a bit more, and that's one thing I was hoping it would do. I was disappointed, however, that the possibilities allowing for Smenkhkare to have been the father were barely even mentioned and mostly brushed aside, although I understand the special was meant to capture the interest of the general public and so had to be kept fairly simple, to a point.

But I digress. My questions:

1) I've already forgotten where the warehouse was, but there was the scene where Hawass and his companions found and reassembled the pair of blocks specifying that Tutankhamun was "son of the king, of his body." I've read about this inscription before, as I'm sure many of you have, and though the TV special tried to pass it off more or less as definitive proof that the father is Akhenaten, the inscription does not mention Akhenaten or any other forebearer by name. Am I missing something, or how is the inscription "proof" of Akhenaten as the father? Or is this a bit of the TV simplification I mentioned above?

2) One thing I'd never heard of is the sheets of gold originally found inside the KV55 coffin. There is the scene in the TV special in which Hawass pulls them out of archives and examines them. I could not make out a single thing on them until good ol' computer graphics outlined the name fragment "Waenre," clearly indicating Akhenaten. Is anyone else familiar with these gold sheets and have they been published at some point in the past?

Aside from the broken inscription in my first question, the gold sheets would argue to some degree that the coffin was remade for Akhenaten. However, I was wondering a couple of things that neseret has explained above, namely the Osiride features of the burial of KV55, which would argue against an interment for Akhenaten.

The more closely we look, the more confusing it can get. Laughing
_________________


Visit my blog!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
freeTinker
Scribe
Scribe


Joined: 27 Jan 2009
Posts: 397
Location: USA - Northeast

PostPosted: Mon Feb 22, 2010 11:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Just my two pennies worth...

kmt_sesh wrote:
1) I've already forgotten where the warehouse was, but there was the scene where Hawass and his companions found and reassembled the pair of blocks specifying that Tutankhamun was "son of the king, of his body." I've read about this inscription before, as I'm sure many of you have, and though the TV special tried to pass it off more or less as definitive proof that the father is Akhenaten, the inscription does not mention Akhenaten or any other forebearer by name. Am I missing something, or how is the inscription "proof" of Akhenaten as the father? Or is this a bit of the TV simplification I mentioned above?
Could this be a matter of language? - notice how often hawass (and some others) use the term 'proofs' in the plural, would we not tend to use the word in the singular, ie proof. Perhaps when he talks about 'a proof' we should translate that to being an item of evidence. Just like when our politicians talk about making 'choices', I tend to think of choice as something presented and about which we may make a 'decision' (not a choice) - language it's such a pain!

kmt_sesh wrote:
2) One thing I'd never heard of is the sheets of gold originally found inside the KV55 coffin. There is the scene in the TV special in which Hawass pulls them out of archives and examines them. I could not make out a single thing on them until good ol' computer graphics outlined the name fragment "Waenre," clearly indicating Akhenaten. Is anyone else familiar with these gold sheets and have they been published at some point in the past?
Yes, about 100-years ago they were referenced in Arthur Weigall's book
_________________
Est modus in rebus
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
neseret
Vizier
Vizier


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

PostPosted: Tue Feb 23, 2010 12:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

kmt_sesh wrote:
My questions:

1) I've already forgotten where the warehouse was, but there was the scene where Hawass and his companions found and reassembled the pair of blocks specifying that Tutankhamun was "son of the king, of his body." I've read about this inscription before, as I'm sure many of you have, and though the TV special tried to pass it off more or less as definitive proof that the father is Akhenaten, the inscription does not mention Akhenaten or any other forebearer by name. Am I missing something, or how is the inscription "proof" of Akhenaten as the father? Or is this a bit of the TV simplification I mentioned above?


It's either Discovery Channel sleight of hand, or simply pushing what Hawass believes, and thus wants YOU to believe.

But you are right: there's no indication of Akhenaten's name anywhere on the Hermopolis blocks (which is to what you refer).

kmt_sesh wrote:
2) One thing I'd never heard of is the sheets of gold originally found inside the KV55 coffin. There is the scene in the TV special in which Hawass pulls them out of archives and examines them. I could not make out a single thing on them until good ol' computer graphics outlined the name fragment "Waenre," clearly indicating Akhenaten. Is anyone else familiar with these gold sheets and have they been published at some point in the past?


There are at least 2 sets of "foils" related to KV 55: one set is now in Cairo, and the other in the Metropolitan Museum of Art (MMA) in New York.

The MMA foils are to be found online and are designated by alphabetical letter:

A
B
C
D
E
F

From Max Miller's website concerning these MMA foils:

Susan Allen describes the Metropolitan's gold sheets as uninscribed, but notes that one fragment bears traces of the feather pattern which decorated the KV 55 coffin. Allen also stated that the gold sheets are not markedly wrinkled or creased [personal communication.] However, the photos in George Johnson's KMT article and in the MMA catalogue show gold foil sheets which seem to appear wrinkled. Susan Allen states that these objects are currently on display in Gallery 17A at the Metropolitan...

This is what Miller has to say about the Cairo gold sheets:

The sheets were laid flat on brown paper, and, as Saleh and Abaza revealed them one at a time, Forbes noted that most had been inscribed. He also reported that a cartouche had been excised on one of them. Forbes could not examine the inscriptions in detail at that moment due to time constraints, so he could make no comments on their content other than noting that it will be difficult to read them due to the many creases produced by the folding of the gold sheets. It appears from the published evidence available to me now that this folding was not the work of any Egyptologist helping to clear KV 55 back in 1907. The sheets sound as though they had been wadded up by someone who wanted them to be easily--and clandestinely--transported out of the tomb, perhaps for sale on the antiquities market. However, Forbes reminded me that KV 55 had been hastily cleared, and his KMT "Editor's Report" allows for the possibility that the sheets had been folded (and, unfortunately, badly creased) by the "professionals" who officially removed the tomb's objects for shipment to Cairo. If these sheets were among the items stolen from KV 55, then exactly how they came into the possession of the Cairo Museum would be, like so many other aspects of KV 55, a mystery.

Nicholas Reeves' website notes this about what was seen on the foils at time of discovery:

Other items of jewellery found on the corpse included a gold cartouche containing part of the early name of the Aten, and a piece of gold foil with both of the early Aten cartouches.

There have been reports, although I don't know if published, that one of these "foil sheets" has been unfolded, showing Akhenaten's name upon it.

If so, many would argue that this would not necessarly identify the individual in the KV 55 coffin as Akhenaten, as foil sheets appear to have been cut out from the front panels of the KV 55 coffin, which has a prayer addressed to Akhenaten from the original female coffin owner.

So, as with so many things involved with the KV 55 and Amarna period, one mystery piles upon another, and nothing is as definitive OR clear as Discovery Channel likes to imply.
_________________
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
stephaniep
Scribe
Scribe


Joined: 20 Feb 2010
Posts: 266
Location: RI

PostPosted: Tue Feb 23, 2010 12:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The gold apparently fell off the inside of the coffin, which I was under the impression originally belonged to Kiya. The waenre would be part of a beloved of waenre inscription.

There is a lion which specifically mentions that Amenhotep III is Tut's father, but it may have been a glossing over of unmentionable people.

I doubt that Tut was in control when on the throne. Aye came from the military side of the family and was probably controlling things including burials. I always assumed Tut & his sis were just there to make amends to the gods for the sins of their parents while the govt was run by others.

The Amarna art style was realistic and depicted Akenaten (and family) as overweight and slightly busty. Anyone that goes to the beach must have noticed this is common: overweight men with breasts. Amenhotep III depicted himself in that pair of black granite sculptures with breasts, and I have noticed one of the Tutmoses with them as well. It was a family trait. Earlier in Karnak it was probably emphasized as a literal visual: the balance of the male and female principals, a common belief in esoteric religions. That would be why he was depicted with no genitals in the Karnak sculptures as well. There are sculptures of women with a bump in the penis area as well. In fact the first link of the art links about shows one of those.

Here is a link to a quite excellent sculpture of Akenaten.

http://www.worldvisitguide.com/oeuvre/photo_ME0000039475.html

The arm on the back that is all that remains of another figure that would have to be Kiya, there is no reason to preserve his image & not the other if it was Nefertiti etc. And there is no other damage to his sculpture at all.

As for Semenkare, much has been made of him because of the age of the skeleton. I had thought that the double portrait was him (with crutch) and Meritaten. That double portrait is not ascribed to anyone, and instead of bald Meritaten with the line under her stomach it could easily be Nefertiti (with the result of a lot of kids showing in the stomach region) and a blue crown, and Akenaten with a crutch (for arthritis or whatever). And it was clearly made by a grade B artist for mass consumption. Other that that is there anything other than a couple of boxes with his name?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Scribe2
Citizen
Citizen


Joined: 15 Feb 2010
Posts: 41
Location: Auckland, NZ

PostPosted: Tue Feb 23, 2010 12:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

kmt-sesh wrote:

Quote:
there was the scene where Hawass and his companions found and reassembled the pair of blocks specifying that Tutankhamun was "son of the king, of his body." I've read about this inscription before, as I'm sure many of you have, and though the TV special tried to pass it off more or less as definitive proof that the father is Akhenaten, the inscription does not mention Akhenaten or any other forebearer by name. Am I missing something, or how is the inscription "proof" of Akhenaten as the father? Or is this a bit of the TV simplification I mentioned above?



Yes, kmt-sesh, I have seen discussions on this, and it does not exclude Amenhotep III being also a contender. Of course from the on the discussion deteriorates into agendaed aguments on chronology and particularly co-regencies!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
khaemweset
Citizen
Citizen


Joined: 17 Feb 2010
Posts: 17
Location: New York City

PostPosted: Tue Feb 23, 2010 1:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

[quote="kmt_sesh"]

1) I've already forgotten where the warehouse was, but there was the scene where Hawass and his companions found and reassembled the pair of blocks specifying that Tutankhamun was "son of the king, of his body." I've read about this inscription before, as I'm sure many of you have, and though the TV special tried to pass it off more or less as definitive proof that the father is Akhenaten, the inscription does not mention Akhenaten or any other forebearer by name. Am I missing something, or how is the inscription "proof" of Akhenaten as the father? Or is this a bit of the TV simplification I mentioned above?[/quote]

Hawass has to prove his pet theories of course. He wants Akhenaten to be Tut's father because it's higher profile than if the father is Smenkhkare. But those blocks could be referring to the latter, couldn't they? Discovery thinks if they don't mention something that makes it true. It [b]could[/b] be Akhenaten, but until someone finds some actual [b]facts[/b] about Smenkhkare, I find him at least as possible. Maybe more, since I'm not sold on the age of the KV55 mummy.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
khaemweset
Citizen
Citizen


Joined: 17 Feb 2010
Posts: 17
Location: New York City

PostPosted: Tue Feb 23, 2010 3:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

[quote="kmt_sesh"]

1) I've already forgotten where the warehouse was, but there was the scene where Hawass and his companions found and reassembled the pair of blocks specifying that Tutankhamun was "son of the king, of his body." I've read about this inscription before, as I'm sure many of you have, and though the TV special tried to pass it off more or less as definitive proof that the father is Akhenaten, the inscription does not mention Akhenaten or any other forebearer by name. Am I missing something, or how is the inscription "proof" of Akhenaten as the father? Or is this a bit of the TV simplification I mentioned above?[/quote]

Hawass has to prove his pet theories of course. He wants Akhenaten to be Tut's father because it's higher profile than if the father is Smenkhkare. But those blocks could be referring to the latter, couldn't they? Discovery thinks if they don't mention something that makes it true. It [b]could[/b] be Akhenaten, but until someone finds some actual [b]facts[/b] about Smenkhkare, I find him at least as possible. Maybe more, since I'm not sold on the age of the KV55 mummy.
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 Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 8, 9, 10, 11, 12  Next
Page 9 of 12

 
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