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 

about the Younger Lady`s brain

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Egyptian Dreams Forum Index -> Mummification
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Sothis
Priest
Priest


Joined: 16 Nov 2009
Posts: 659

PostPosted: Mon Mar 01, 2010 12:59 pm    Post subject: about the Younger Lady`s brain Reply with quote

This topic is related to both the Amarna Period and mummification, but I chose to use the latter as the Amarna section has become heavily overloaded.
I`ve just watched the documentary about Fletcher searching for Nefertiti again (please don`t groan, I know it`s not the best way to gather sound information, but I thought it might be useful to hear again what other examiners claim to have found out about the Younger Lady).
Apart from the claim that of course the bent right arm belongs to her which has been disputed by Hawass, they state that her brain has not been removed. And really one can see something on her skull x-ray that could resemble a mummified brain.
In this docu they say that it was typical for the late 18th dynasty to mummify royals with their brains left in place.
I have never heard that this was usually done so, but I only know for sure that Tut`s brain has definitely been removed. But what about the other mummies of the same period, AIII,Tiye, the boy buried with her etc.?
What could have been the reason that the embalmers did not remove the Younger Lady`s brain?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
stephaniep
Scribe
Scribe


Joined: 20 Feb 2010
Posts: 266
Location: RI

PostPosted: Sat Mar 06, 2010 4:13 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

That's interesting.

My understanding of mummification was that they tossed the brain as useless (how true) because the heart was the true seat of the body. I wonder if she's got her heart.

These mummies all seem to have abnormal burial/mummification issues. The bent arm is straight in the photo & the arm that needs to be bent is the left one, which isn't. It was always supposed to be hers, however.

It's as though they were buried with reverence, but they really weren't. Tut's arms are straight down instead of folded. He may or may not have his heart. Even if the claim is true (I don't believe it) that he died on the march, they could have bent/broke them later but they didn't. I read someplace that the first time they did Tut's embalming fluid, he was hanging upside down. I wondered if the holes in the mummies' in the heart area had deeper significance than fishing for jewels. In any case, none of them have a label on them, so they have no name. This happened at a later date than the burial. I couldn't find a reference, but I think that was really bad.


here are the photos: the other 2 are on the next 2 pages

http://www.lib.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/eos/eos_page.pl?DPI=100&callnum=DT57.C2_vol59&object=223

Here's a PDF:

http://www.andrew.cmu.edu/course/98-030/mummies.pdf
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
stephaniep
Scribe
Scribe


Joined: 20 Feb 2010
Posts: 266
Location: RI

PostPosted: Sat Mar 06, 2010 4:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Look at the arms crossed post further down. He has his arms crossed in a photo. Does this constitute lying? Or just reality TV?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Sothis
Priest
Priest


Joined: 16 Nov 2009
Posts: 659

PostPosted: Sat Mar 06, 2010 7:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Do you mean Tut? Yes, his arms were originally folded neatly across his chest. After he was broken into pieces by Carter he was re-arranged with arms crossed over the abdomen ( this is the often shown full-body photograph) .
When I heard Hawass saying on the show that Tut`s arms are unusually laid out straight I secretly groaned. Some things on these shows are really close to lies.
For example the elder foetus is said to have Marfan`s but everywhere else neither of them nor any family member had it.
If I recall correctly they say on the show that KV55`s reconstructed pelvis is wide and accounts for the feminine hips in Akhenaten`s depictions, but in the JAMA paper is stated that the pelvis of KV55 shows no unusual (feminine) traits, and Tut`s is missing.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Osiris II
Vizier
Vizier


Joined: 28 Dec 2004
Posts: 1752

PostPosted: Sat Mar 06, 2010 4:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The pelvis of Tutankhamun was not missing.
The mummy had been heavily damaged by Carter and his crew in the search for gold and valuables, but several things that were said to be wrong eith the mummy just wasn't true.
Although now his chest and rib cage are missing, at the time of discovery that was no so. It is thought that the damage occurred when tomb-robbers of the 20th century broke into the tomb and damaged the mummy to get a necklace that had been left in situ. His arms were cut at elbows an wrists to remove bracelets. His legs were amputated in efforts to date the bone structure. His head was removed from his torso again in the search for gold, and to make it easier to remove the Golden Mask. His heart, though, which had been removed from his body, had been dried and wrapped in linen, and them replaced. Even his penis was lost! But found, buried in the sand on which Carter had re-assembled the body. (to hide the damage, more than anything else!) And then the violated mummy was "reverently" laid to rest in the outer coffin, with-in the tomb.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
stephaniep
Scribe
Scribe


Joined: 20 Feb 2010
Posts: 266
Location: RI

PostPosted: Sun Mar 07, 2010 10:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Unbelievable. So do you know what happened to the heart?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
stephaniep
Scribe
Scribe


Joined: 20 Feb 2010
Posts: 266
Location: RI

PostPosted: Sun Mar 07, 2010 11:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Some things on these shows are really close to lies.


Not close to, is a lie, which scientists apparently are capable of doing.

Quote:
KV55`s reconstructed pelvis is wide and accounts for the feminine hips in Akhenaten`s depictions


Apparently no one interested in the Amarna period has ever noticed that people can be pear shaped and it runs in families as a trait. And what can be great looking on a woman is not as flattering on a man, especially one who never went to the gym.

http://www.worldvisitguide.com/oeuvre/photo_ME0000039510.html
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Osiris II
Vizier
Vizier


Joined: 28 Dec 2004
Posts: 1752

PostPosted: Mon Mar 08, 2010 2:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Unbelievable. So do you know what happened to the heart?

The heart was removed, dried in natron, wrapped in linen and replaced in the body.
Because it was dried and wrapped, Dr. Derry (who did the autopsy) assumed it was an amulet.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
stephaniep
Scribe
Scribe


Joined: 20 Feb 2010
Posts: 266
Location: RI

PostPosted: Mon Mar 08, 2010 2:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Why did they say on the TV show that he had no heart?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Sothis
Priest
Priest


Joined: 16 Nov 2009
Posts: 659

PostPosted: Mon Mar 08, 2010 1:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I`m a bit confused about the stories of Tut`s heart.
As far as I know, Dr. Harer was the first to suggest that his heart might not be in his body because there is no heart visible in the CT-scans from 2005.
But one must bear in mind that not only the heart but the whole chest wall and front ribcage has been removed as well, so I think whoever did this might also have gotten hold of the heart either intentionally or accidentally by not recognizing it.

How can Dr. Derry have known anything about what was inside Tut`s chest and what wasn`t? He did not have the opportunity to make x-rays (it is said that the radiologist died on his way to the examination) and he did not open the chest or any other part of the body. At least, so they say claiming that they replaced the mummy in the coffin immediately after taking the last well-known full-body picture where Tut`s chest is intact with a broad collar sticking to it.

What regards the pelvis Iknow that it was not mentioned to be missing by now. So it was still there in 2005 and no special comments have been made about it, so there were probably no abnormalities detected.
But in the JAMA paper it is reported as almost completely missing so that a further examination was not possible. There is no further comment or question on how this could have happened.

It is pretty sad that obviously every time that Tut`s remains are examined ( and it was only Hawassand his team members who dealt with them since 2005) some pieces go missing. And it is even more disturbing that no one seems to bother anymore.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mandy-b
Citizen
Citizen


Joined: 03 Mar 2010
Posts: 1
Location: North London, England.

PostPosted: Mon Mar 08, 2010 3:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hello, I do not know if this has come up before, as I am new to the group and still rummaging through past posts and threads, but it would be intresting to read the orignal reports from all the different examinations/autopsy's of Tut's body to compare what was/wasn't missing from Tut's body as the bits I read are all other peoples interpretations of them. How/where would I get a copies? In particular Derry, Harrison and the C.T Scan one that took place in 2005??

Thank you

Mandy Very Happy
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
anneke
Queen of Egypt
Queen of Egypt


Joined: 23 Jan 2004
Posts: 9305

PostPosted: Mon Mar 08, 2010 4:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sothis wrote:

What regards the pelvis I know that it was not mentioned to be missing by now. So it was still there in 2005 and no special comments have been made about it, so there were probably no abnormalities detected.
But in the JAMA paper it is reported as almost completely missing so that a further examination was not possible. There is no further comment or question on how this could have happened.


I think it's shown to be missing in the 2005 CT scans as well:


It looks like the hip bones are gone. I wonder if it's part of the destruction of the front of the mummy. The rib cage is missing and it looks like the front of the pelvic area as well.

This is a picture from Brunton at the time of the excavation:
http://www.griffith.ox.ac.uk/gri/carter/256-p0786.html

I can't quite tell, but the pelvic area looks somewhat small? But the skin looks intact, so not sure how the hip bones could be missing.

There are supposedly x-ray photographs from 1968, taken by a Dr Harrison. I have seen pictures of the head, but not of the main body. It would be interesting to see if the pelvic area was missing back then as well.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Osiris II
Vizier
Vizier


Joined: 28 Dec 2004
Posts: 1752

PostPosted: Mon Mar 08, 2010 7:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Actually, the only explanation of the missing heart (and it does seem as if it is missing!) would be that put forth earlier.
It is quite clear that at sometime AFTER the discovery by Carter, the mummy was robbed--hence, the missing necklace. At that time, to get the necklace, the chest and rib cage were sawn through to remove. For some reason, perhaps thinking it was an amulet that could be valuable, or accidentally, the heart was removed also.

Thanks, anneke, for the picture of the scan. I don't think I've seen the entire body before this time.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
stephaniep
Scribe
Scribe


Joined: 20 Feb 2010
Posts: 266
Location: RI

PostPosted: Tue Mar 09, 2010 12:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

thanks
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Egyptian Dreams Forum Index -> Mummification All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

 
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