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 

Implications of DNA results + KV55=Akhenaten
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Egyptian Dreams Forum Index -> Evidence from Amarna
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Sobek
Scribe
Scribe


Joined: 26 Feb 2010
Posts: 113
Location: Maine, USA

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 4:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Has anyone noticed that if the KV62 male mummy is the father of the KV62 fetuses and they are full siblings then the KV55 mummy cannot be their maternal grandfather?


Apparently not.
Quote:
If the KV55 mummy is Akhenaten then Ankhesenpaaten cannot be the mother of the KV62 fetuses.

The mother of the KV62 fetuses must have the 6 and 13 alleles at position D7S820, and her father must have one of these alleles at the same position.

The KV55 mummy has two copies of the 15 allele at position D7S820.


Still not connecting. . . "her father" above means the maternal grandfather of the fetuses. The father of Ankhesenpaaten, Akhenaten (KV55 mummy?), in other words.

Some basic kinship genetics. Each individual has 2 alleles at each locus (position). One comes from the mother, one from the father. No doubling (two from mom, none from dad), or jumping (if neither parent has it, it can't come from grandparents).

Now on to intermediate level. Two parents must have from 1 to 4 different alleles at each position. So the minimum number of children (full siblings) needed to see all of them is 2. If two full siblings show 4 different alleles at one location, you know that both parents must have 2 different alleles at that location, and one allele must come from each grandparent.

With the DNA data just published this situation may apply at location D7S820 to the two KV62 fetuses (we don't know that they are full siblings). The KV62 fetuses have a combined list of 4 alleles(6,10,13,15) at this position, and the KV62 male (Tutankamun) has (10,15) here.
Quote:
No Alleles are shown on KV21A on the D7S820 column, but you might expect to find a 6 and a 13 there, you might also expect to find the 6 and 13 in the same place for Nefertiti (as KV21A's mother)


If KV21A doesn't have a (6,13) there she can't be the mother of both fetuses. If KV55 doesn't have a 6 or a 13 (one from the father,one from the mother), he can't be the maternal grandfather. It doesn't matter what alleles Nefertiti has, as mother she can only provide one to Ankhesenpaaten. The other must come from Akhenaten, and it can't if KV55 is Akhenaten, since KV55 is (15,15).
Quote:
Since KV21A is likely to be the mother (possibly Ankhesenamun) of the Fetuses, with Tut being the father, this simply means that the mother of KV21A is not included on the list of tested mummies - but Tut's mom is... and that would be Akhenaten's full sister KV35YL


If the fetuses are full siblings, daughters of the KV62 male mummy, we already know their mother is (6,13) since they are (6,10,13,15) and he is (10,15). If Ankhesenpaaten is their mother she is (6,13). We don't have to test the KV21 mummies to know this. It doesn't matter what the KV35YL mummy's relationship to the fetuses is unless it's parent or child (no jumping).

note to freeTinker: I noticed you have posted again while I was typing this, so some of this doesn't apply to you. I find the genetics so interesting, it's difficult to understand other's responses (or lack of them) to it. I hope you don't mind me using your comments as examples.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Sothis
Priest
Priest


Joined: 16 Nov 2009
Posts: 659

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 8:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The solution to the problem might be that either the babies are not full siblings but have two different mothers,or more likely that KV55 is not
Akhenaten but another son of AIII and Tiye. This is possible because then this other son (callhim Semenkhkare or not) has 15/15, but the "real" Akhenaten who`s mummy wouldn`t be known could have inherited a 6 from AIII and passed this on to Ankhesenamun. She could have inherited a 13 from Nefertiti,so it would all fit together.
Please correct me if I got something wrong.

At some point in this thread it was mentioned that if KV21A is Ankhesenamun then she had a clubfoot but she is never shown sitting. I think it is wrong to connect the images of a sitting Tut (or ofanyone else, for that matter) with disability or weakness.
I am convinced that these images donot show or even allude to physical problems, but quite the opposite is true: they convey superiority of the king over anyone else, even over the queen.
The message is: Look here, I am king and I am sitting comfortably on a cushioned chair or throne and the others have to stand (or sit on the ground at my feet). This message is emphasized by the fact that nobody is ever shown taller than the king. The queen is shown at the same height as him when she is standing and he is sitting, others like courtiers are shown on even a smaller scale.

The same applies to depictions where the king leans on to a long staff like the scene on the lid of the ivory(?) chest or the much disputed ostracon with unnamed king and queen. The staff again conveys power and superiority, and leaning on it means the king makes himself even more comfortable.

If the common belief that the king is shown sitting to express his weakness was true, how does one explain that on many other images he is standing unaided or involved in physical activity? On the little golden shrine for example Tut is shown in one scene shooting arrows while sitting, but in another he is standing in a skiff hunting ducks while stepping forward and leaning most of his weight on his left foot (which is oh so bad as we know?). The king cannot be shown disabled and at the same time physically fit on the same artefact,this is just unreasonable.

I donot say that kings never had physical problems, they sure did, but they were never shown like that.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Sothis
Priest
Priest


Joined: 16 Nov 2009
Posts: 659

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 9:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

After sending my post I remembered that the inital issue was Ankhesenamun, not Tut. So I just want to make it clear that I include the queen in my reasoning about their representations,too. A queen is always shown as beautiful from head to toe, no allusion to disability or similar things.

Just as a note: As much as I hope that the KV21 mummy is Ankhesenamun`s so that we can have her identified, secretly I hope that it isn`t hers because she would have had severe problems with that foot of hers.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Sobek
Scribe
Scribe


Joined: 26 Feb 2010
Posts: 113
Location: Maine, USA

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 11:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Sobek, you are correct about the KV55 grandfather observation. He cannot be grandfather to both fetuses- He could be grandfather or father to Fetus-2 (virtue of the red-coded 15 on D7S820), but not father or grandfather to Fetus-1


KV55 can be the grandfather (paternal, maternal, or both) of both the fetuses.
KV62 can be the father of both the fetuses.
KV21A can be the mother of both the fetuses.

...but KV55 (alleles 15,15 at D7S820) cannot be both paternal grandfather by KV62 (alleles 10,15) and maternal grandfather (mother must be 6,13) if the fetuses (6,10,13,15) are full (two alleles from father, two alleles from mother) siblings.

If the fetuses are paternal half siblings (different mothers), their mothers can be full sisters, both daughters of KV55 (or not).
Quote:
The solution to the problem might be that either the babies are not full siblings but have two different mothers,or more likely that KV55 is not
Akhenaten but another son of AIII and Tiye. This is possible because then this other son (callhim Semenkhkare or not) has 15/15, but the "real" Akhenaten who`s mummy wouldn`t be known could have inherited a 6 from AIII and passed this on to Ankhesenamun. She could have inherited a 13 from Nefertiti,so it would all fit together.


Spot on!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dkessler
Citizen
Citizen


Joined: 11 Aug 2010
Posts: 51
Location: London

PostPosted: Wed Aug 11, 2010 8:31 pm    Post subject: Did Neferiti commit adultary Reply with quote

Nefertum wrote:
If Tutankhamen and Ankhensenamun are brother and sister, they share the same father. They may have the same or different mothers.

If Tutankhamen's mother, KV35YL, is Nefertiti, then she is also the mother of his wife, Ankhensenamun, and they are full brother and sister, and the same relationship (it seems) should show between their DNA as does that of KV55 & KV35YL.

What if they were THOUGHT to be half-brother and sister, but in fact were not? i.e. what if Tutankhamun is the son of Akhenaten and his wife/sister and Ankhensenamun the daughter of Nefertiti and an adulterous partner?


Nefertum wrote:
KV21A shows descent from Amenhotep III and also from Thuya. However, she also appears (caveat: if I am reading the chart correctly) to show descent from some other unknown source, which Tutankhamen does not share, and which was not a part of this study.

This would fit neatly with my Nefertiti-adultery theory. And it gets better (or worse): I think the man she cheated with was her own father - Ay Wink
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Sothis
Priest
Priest


Joined: 16 Nov 2009
Posts: 659

PostPosted: Thu Aug 12, 2010 10:27 am    Post subject: Re: Did Neferiti commit adultary Reply with quote

dkessler wrote:
Nefertum wrote:
If Tutankhamen and Ankhensenamun are brother and sister, they share the same father. They may have the same or different mothers.

If Tutankhamen's mother, KV35YL, is Nefertiti, then she is also the mother of his wife, Ankhensenamun, and they are full brother and sister, and the same relationship (it seems) should show between their DNA as does that of KV55 & KV35YL.

What if they were THOUGHT to be half-brother and sister, but in fact were not? i.e. what if Tutankhamun is the son of Akhenaten and his wife/sister and Ankhensenamun the daughter of Nefertiti and an adulterous partner?


Nefertum wrote:
KV21A shows descent from Amenhotep III and also from Thuya. However, she also appears (caveat: if I am reading the chart correctly) to show descent from some other unknown source, which Tutankhamen does not share, and which was not a part of this study.

This would fit neatly with my Nefertiti-adultery theory. And it gets better (or worse): I think the man she cheated with was her own father - Ay Wink


Why assume such a nasty thing if we can get the answer more easily?
KV21A can have inherited some different alleles from Aye as her grandfather via her mother, no cheating implied.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dkessler
Citizen
Citizen


Joined: 11 Aug 2010
Posts: 51
Location: London

PostPosted: Thu Aug 12, 2010 10:47 am    Post subject: Re: Did Neferiti commit adultary Reply with quote

Sothis wrote:
Why assume such a nasty thing if we can get the answer more easily?
KV21A can have inherited some different alleles from Aye as her grandfather via her mother, no cheating implied.

But can we get the answer more easily? Kate Phizackerley has pointed out the problem very clearly. If the KV62 Foetuses got 10 and 15 respectively (locus D7S820) from their father, then they must have got 6 and 13 respectively from their mother.

But if Ankhesenamun was their mother (as we presume from the documentary record of Tutankhamun's only marriage and the presence of the foetuses in his tomb), then we are left with the problem of where these alleles came from, because Akhenaten was a diploid 15,15 at that locus.

However this problem vanishes if we factor in the possibility that Akhenaten was NOT Ankhesenamun's father. However she is recorded as his daughter out of Nefertiti. Bearing in mind that maternity was easier to determine in those days than paternity, my theory makes perfect sense.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Toth
Account Suspended


Joined: 07 Jun 2010
Posts: 1781
Location: Amsterdam, The Netherlands

PostPosted: Thu Aug 12, 2010 11:06 am    Post subject: Re: Did Neferiti commit adultary Reply with quote

dkessler wrote:
Sothis wrote:
Why assume such a nasty thing if we can get the answer more easily?
KV21A can have inherited some different alleles from Aye as her grandfather via her mother, no cheating implied.

But can we get the answer more easily? Kate Phizackerley has pointed out the problem very clearly. If the KV62 Foetuses got 10 and 15 respectively (locus D7S820) from their father, then they must have got 6 and 13 respectively from their mother.

But if Ankhesenamun was their mother (as we presume from the documentary record of Tutankhamun's only marriage and the presence of the foetuses in his tomb), then we are left with the problem of where these alleles came from, because Akhenaten was a diploid 15,15 at that locus.

However this problem vanishes if we factor in the possibility that Akhenaten was NOT Ankhesenamun's father. However she is recorded as his daughter out of Nefertiti. Bearing in mind that maternity was easier to determine in those days than paternity, my theory makes perfect sense.


You lost me... didn't you write in your previous post that
dkessler wrote:
his would fit neatly with my Nefertiti-adultery theory. And it gets better (or worse): I think the man she cheated with was her own father - Ay
Are we even looking at this seriously, or are we being set up for your next thriller, Dave? Perhaps you could provide proof for your "adultery-theorie"?

Richard, aka
_________________
[img]http://www.freeimagehosting.net/uploads/8fc1c47be2.png[/img]
[i][b][color=#0080FF]Toth[/color][/b][/i]
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dkessler
Citizen
Citizen


Joined: 11 Aug 2010
Posts: 51
Location: London

PostPosted: Thu Aug 12, 2010 11:11 am    Post subject: Re: Did Neferiti commit adultary Reply with quote

Toth wrote:
You lost me... didn't you write in your previous post that
dkessler wrote:
his would fit neatly with my Nefertiti-adultery theory. And it gets better (or worse): I think the man she cheated with was her own father - Ay
Are we even looking at this seriously, or are we being set up for your next thriller, Dave? Perhaps you could provide proof for your "adultery-theorie"?

Richard, aka


I am planning to write a thriller on this subject. But I'm not sure where I lost you. My reasoning is that the DNA suggests that Ankhesenamun (whether KV21A or not) was not the daughter of the man in KV55 who has been identified (in my opinion rightly) as Akhenaten. But history records that she is. Solution:

Her daddy ain't her daddy but her daddy don't know...

(shame and scandal in da family...)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Toth
Account Suspended


Joined: 07 Jun 2010
Posts: 1781
Location: Amsterdam, The Netherlands

PostPosted: Thu Aug 12, 2010 11:39 am    Post subject: Re: Did Neferiti commit adultary Reply with quote

dkessler wrote:
Toth wrote:
You lost me... didn't you write in your previous post that
dkessler wrote:
his would fit neatly with my Nefertiti-adultery theory. And it gets better (or worse): I think the man she cheated with was her own father - Ay
Are we even looking at this seriously, or are we being set up for your next thriller, Dave? Perhaps you could provide proof for your "adultery-theorie"?

Richard, aka


I am planning to write a thriller on this subject. But I'm not sure where I lost you. My reasoning is that the DNA suggests that Ankhesenamun (whether KV21A or not) was not the daughter of the man in KV55 who has been identified (in my opinion rightly) as Akhenaten. But history records that she is. Solution:

Her daddy ain't her daddy but her daddy don't know...

(shame and scandal in da family...)


We had that song here too, '70s I think; where did you loose me? Let me put it this way: First you say Mr. Jones is her father and the father of her children, Now you say Mr. Doe is the adulterer. Do you mind my asking for some proof to substantiate either one of these theories? Or will we end up accusing the butler of Ankhesenamun Idea Idea

Richard, aka
_________________
[img]http://www.freeimagehosting.net/uploads/8fc1c47be2.png[/img]
[i][b][color=#0080FF]Toth[/color][/b][/i]
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Toth
Account Suspended


Joined: 07 Jun 2010
Posts: 1781
Location: Amsterdam, The Netherlands

PostPosted: Thu Aug 12, 2010 12:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dave, I am mixing Dutch with English, so a correction is in order:

theorie = theory
_________________
[img]http://www.freeimagehosting.net/uploads/8fc1c47be2.png[/img]
[i][b][color=#0080FF]Toth[/color][/b][/i]
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dkessler
Citizen
Citizen


Joined: 11 Aug 2010
Posts: 51
Location: London

PostPosted: Thu Aug 12, 2010 10:06 pm    Post subject: Nefertiti adultary Reply with quote

Not two theories. I summarized some one else's view and then presented mine. For the record, here it is again: Nefertiti committed adultery (possibly with Ay though not necessarily). Ankhesenamum was her daughter but not Akhenaten's. Therefore Ankhesenamun is not a sibling of King Tut. This explains the DNA discrepancies QED.

I don't know about the butler, but the baker was put to death - just like Joseph predicted!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Sothis
Priest
Priest


Joined: 16 Nov 2009
Posts: 659

PostPosted: Thu Aug 12, 2010 10:23 pm    Post subject: Re: Did Neferiti commit adultary Reply with quote

dkessler wrote:
Sothis wrote:
Why assume such a nasty thing if we can get the answer more easily?
KV21A can have inherited some different alleles from Aye as her grandfather via her mother, no cheating implied.

But can we get the answer more easily? Kate Phizackerley has pointed out the problem very clearly. If the KV62 Foetuses got 10 and 15 respectively (locus D7S820) from their father, then they must have got 6 and 13 respectively from their mother.

But if Ankhesenamun was their mother (as we presume from the documentary record of Tutankhamun's only marriage and the presence of the foetuses in his tomb), then we are left with the problem of where these alleles came from, because Akhenaten was a diploid 15,15 at that locus.

However this problem vanishes if we factor in the possibility that Akhenaten was NOT Ankhesenamun's father. However she is recorded as his daughter out of Nefertiti. Bearing in mind that maternity was easier to determine in those days than paternity, my theory makes perfect sense.


Your mention of Kate Phizackerley implies that you have read her work on the subject which I much appreciate.
If you read it thoroughly then you must have noticed that she theorizes that KV55 is not Akhenaten but probably Smenkhkare.
So the constellation is Ankhesenamun is the daughter of Nefertiti and the real Akhenaten. The whereabouts of both their bodies are unknown but their probable genetic data can be deducted from the published data assuming that both babies were Tut`s and Ankhi`s. It does not even matter if one of the bodies of KV21 is Ankhesenamun, the babies` data is sufficient for the purpose of reconstructing the genetics.

So you see, there are other more likely scenarios than yours.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
herper
Scribe
Scribe


Joined: 18 Feb 2010
Posts: 229
Location: New Haven,CT USA

PostPosted: Fri Aug 13, 2010 3:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I know who did it! DR Hawass did it
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dkessler
Citizen
Citizen


Joined: 11 Aug 2010
Posts: 51
Location: London

PostPosted: Fri Aug 13, 2010 7:51 am    Post subject: Re: Did Neferiti commit adultary Reply with quote

Sothis wrote:
Your mention of Kate Phizackerley implies that you have read her work on the subject which I much appreciate.
If you read it thoroughly then you must have noticed that she theorizes that KV55 is not Akhenaten but probably .
So the constellation is Ankhesenamun is the daughter of Nefertiti and the real Akhenaten. The whereabouts of both their bodies are unknown but their probable genetic data can be deducted from the published data assuming that both babies were Tut`s and Ankhi`s. It does not even matter if one of the bodies of KV21 is Ankhesenamun, the babies` data is sufficient for the purpose of reconstructing the genetics.

So you see, there are other more likely scenarios than yours.


I said I read Kate Phizackerley's excellent essay on the subject, but not that I agreed with her conclusions. I actually commented on Kate's blog with my theory and although she disagreed with me, she acknowledged that "That's far and away the most astute comment on this article IMO."

My own view is that the KV55 mummy IS Akhenaten and I subscribe to the theory of Nicholas Reeves et al that Smenkhkare was the prenomen of Neferiti as Pharoah.
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, 7  Next
Page 4 of 7

 
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