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 

Tutankhamun and Ankhesenamun cousins?
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Egyptian Dreams Forum Index -> Pharaohs and Queens
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
LadyOsiris
Account Suspended


Joined: 22 Oct 2011
Posts: 70

PostPosted: Sat Jan 14, 2012 2:02 am    Post subject: Tutankhamun and Ankhesenamun cousins? Reply with quote

I did believe they were half brother and sister aparently not? Now i am confused ... Razz
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Merithathor
Citizen
Citizen


Joined: 29 Sep 2011
Posts: 12

PostPosted: Sat Jan 14, 2012 3:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

From what I understand, all that they can determine with any level of certainty is that Tutankhamun is the son of KV55 and KV35YL. KV55 is the son of KV35EL (thought to be Queen Tiye) and Amenhotep III; likewise, DNA evidence supports that KV35YL is also the daughter of these same two people. Thus, KV55 and KV35YL are most likely brother and sister.

Now, whether or not KV55 is Akhenaten or the relatively obscure Smenkhare cannot yet be proven empirically because they cannot irrefutably prove the age of the mummy. The JAMA article (by Hawass, et. al.), from what I understand, theorizes that KV55 is Akhenaten, but this is not yet attested. In fact, this conclusion has been challenged; see this discussion.

I don't have the credentialed sources to back up my summary, other than to point you to the comments posited by neseret here on these boards at this thread here. This member has the training and access to reputable sources to add significant weight to her comments.

In conclusion, Ankhesenamun and Tutankhamun *may* have been half-sister/brother, but this has not been proven irrefutably. Another reasonable conclusion, based on evidence, is that KV55 is Smenkhare, and thus they could have been cousins.

I hope this helps!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Merithathor
Citizen
Citizen


Joined: 29 Sep 2011
Posts: 12

PostPosted: Sat Jan 14, 2012 3:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I mistakenly call KV55 a mummy, which is inaccurate; I should have said the skeletonized mummy, but cannot edit my post. Sorry about that Smile
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
LadyOsiris
Account Suspended


Joined: 22 Oct 2011
Posts: 70

PostPosted: Sun Jan 15, 2012 10:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I just had soem clarity....
Let's not talk DNA for a moment...
let's talk common sense! For a long time I have strongly believed that Tutankhamun was Ankhesenamun's half brother! I didn't see any other alternative!
Though I have a few dead ends to suggest and question while the opputunity is available!

Neferteti and Ankhenaten had six obsoluetly known children, which were all girls! Meritaten, Meketaten, Ankhesenaaten, Neferneferuaten tasherit, Neferneferure and Setepenre! Smenkhkare is still in question wether or not he was Ankhenaten's son or brother I believe? and Tutankhamun is still questionable!

I do believe all six daughters of Ankhenaten were depicted in amarna art! Why not depict your most probable male heir? Yet I do believe that Tutankhamun is not depicted in any Amarna art work? Actually I don't think he's depicted until he becomes pharoah and marries Ankhesenpaaten/Ankhesenamun?
Infact I don't think he was mentioned in any historicall records until he was placed as pharaoh of Egypt.

I read somehere that Tutankhamun was approximately five years younger than Ankhesenamun! So I would't imagine his age would prevent him from being depicted in any Amarna art works? (If he was actually the son of Akhenaten)
Perhaps because his mother wasn't Neferteti!?
Though most probably because he wasn't the son of Ankhenaten to begin with!?

So if Tutankhamun was Ankhesenamun cousin! Then you could imagine the need for a close related male heir for Egypt!? Ankhenaten is dead and so is Smenkhkare! Seeming Tutankhamun was put out on the throne at such a young age! 8-9 years old! The desperation for a male heir becomes aparent! So it makes sense to make a cousin succeed the throne of Egypt? Does it not?

In any case.. DNA will tell all soon enough hopefully!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
kylejustin
Vizier
Vizier


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

PostPosted: Sun Jan 15, 2012 11:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

they've already done the DNA tests. so those questions not resolved by those, will need archaeology to solve them.

as has been said, tuts parents were brother and sister. his grandparents were amenhotep III and tiye. tiye's parents were confirmed in the DNA studies as thuya and yuya. the babies in tut's tomb are highly likely to be his, as thought all along. their mother could be kv21a, who is not a daughter of kv55. therefore kv55 is not akhenaten if you insist kv21a is ankhesenamun, who is the only known wife of tut.

children in general were not really shown in public monuments during the 18th dynasty. it is thought that sons specifically were not shown, so no one was sure how many heirs there actually were. i believe amenhotep III is the first king of the dynasty to prolifically portray his daughters on public monuments. prince thutmose and akhenaten were never shown on records prior to akhenaten's accession. though i believe there are some monuments showing thutmose as a priest of ptah or the apis bull.

there is a block from a relief showing tut as a king's son, opposite a king's daughter. i can't remember if the princesses name was ankhesenpaaten, or if they came to the conclusion by fragments of a name. the block was from hermopolis think.
_________________
heaven won't take me.......hell's afraid i'll take over.....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
LadyOsiris
Account Suspended


Joined: 22 Oct 2011
Posts: 70

PostPosted: Sun Jan 15, 2012 12:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thankyou for your reposnses Kylejustin and Merihathor does clear up a few things....
I do wish to find out more in the future! Very Happy
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Orwell
Scribe
Scribe


Joined: 16 Feb 2012
Posts: 441
Location: Victoria, Australia

PostPosted: Thu Feb 16, 2012 6:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

It seems to me both feasible and likely that Akhenaten is the mummy in KV55.

(1) The mummy in KV55 and the one in KV35 are siblings according the DNA.

(2) The two appear according to Hawass to be Tutankhamen's parents (via DNA evidence).

(3) Akhenaten and Tiye were buried originally in Amarna. Then items of both Akhenaten and Tiye's original burial turn up in KV55. I presume because both were moved to KV55 after the Amarna experiment failed and their successors decided it prudent to remove them to there.

(4) Someone, later again, moved Tiye to be with her husband Amenophis III in KV35, possibly thinking it more appropriate she be with her husband and not her son anymore. I think that's quite a reasonable hypothosis.

(5) That Tiye should be found with her daughter, the mother of Tutankhamen, seems quite natural.

(6) Maybe Tutankhamen's mother, Tiyer's daughter, Akhenaten's wife, was originally in KV55 with Akhenaten and Tiye as well? 'Smenkhare' seems a very periferal figure if she/he ever existed other than as an alternate name for one of Akhenaten's sisters? If so, which one?

(7) If Akhenaten fathered a male child with a sister, but not with his chief wife Nefertiti, then it would seem natural he would be a candidate for Ankhsenemun's husband; the marriage confirming his own right to the throne.

Just some thoughts.
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 16, 2012 10:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

1) the mummy of kv 55 is 25 yo at the extreme latest. an age of 18-22 is what i have seen evaluated by most experts, harrison, filer and smith thought the mummy to be around 20 as well. the 'experts' who go with an age in the mid 30's or older all have obvious agendas for it to be akhenaten, specially hawass, who just wants publicity.

2) the only item in kv 55 that belonged to akhenaten was a magic brick (may have been more than 1). the other items mentioned him, but were not his. tiye's gold shrine, in which his names and image were hacked out, kiya's coffin, where his name was hacked out.

3) smenkhkare was a male ruler, who may have been co regent with akhenaten. he was married to meritaten, and is attested. there are scenes from noble's tombs in amarna, wine dockets and i believe an inscription in a graffito or a private tomb that mention him. there is a similarity with one of his names, ankhkheperure, and that of his successor neferneferuaten: ankheTkheperure, which has a feminine 't' in it.

so, you have a young male king, who is also the father of tutankhamun. since akhenaten is ruled out by archeological and biological evidence, what other king in the time frame fits? smenkhkare. i see no reason why it cant be him, why he isn't a younger brother, that had a child with an unknown younger sister. she dies before he accedes the throne, and he marries his niece. he dies, his wife meritaten is regent (or donns a hatshepsut) for tutankhamun. seems for once, the amarna period could be very clear.
_________________
heaven won't take me.......hell's afraid i'll take over.....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Orwell
Scribe
Scribe


Joined: 16 Feb 2012
Posts: 441
Location: Victoria, Australia

PostPosted: Thu Feb 16, 2012 2:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks for reply Kylejustin.

(1) I think I've read that the age at death of the KV55 mummy is by no means fixed and different authorities have suggested different ages.

(2) I think it was all 4 magic bricks that usually go with a burial. At least I think more than one. Even one is very suggestive though.

(3) I'm aware that the name Smenkhare has several attestations. His/her identity is far from established and could readily be Nefertiti or Meritaten. I'm considering Nefertiti and Meritaten because of the feminine 't' you mention and they both being prominent females. The 't' also comes up in one of Nefertiti's name/titles: Neferfruaten or similar.


Kylejustin said: "so, you have a young male king, who is also the father of tutankhamun. since akhenaten is ruled out by archeological and biological evidence, what other king in the time frame fits? smenkhkare. i see no reason why it cant be him, why he isn't a younger brother, that had a child with an unknown younger sister. she dies before he accedes the throne, and he marries his niece. he dies, his wife meritaten is regent (or donns a hatshepsut) for tutankhamun. seems for once, the amarna period could be very clear."

Your Amarna theories are 'clear' but it's not at all clear that your guesses are correct. Not that I'm suggesting they're wrong, just not necessarily the best guesses based on available ebvidence.

A couple of questions come to mind about this period.
(1) Was it Ankhsenemun who sent for a Hittite Prince to marry?
(2) Is 'Nefertiti' a mistranslation, and should her name be "Chetite" = 'Hittite Queen'?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Meretseger
Priest
Priest


Joined: 02 Jan 2010
Posts: 588

PostPosted: Thu Feb 16, 2012 3:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

As Kylejustin says those 'experts' who have assigned an age older than the mid-twenties are to a man strong proponents of the KV55 is Akhenaten theory. Quite frankly I believe it is unlikely that Akhenaten's mummy survived the reaction against his heresy. Smenkhkara on the other hand began the move back to orthodoxy and would not have been hated as his brother was.

The brick may indicate that Akhenaten was once in KV55, as apparently was Tiye. It may have been a cache for all the Amarna royalties buried in the royal tomb. Tiye was later removed, possibly to her husband's tomb, and Akhenaten may have been destroyed at the same time.

The existence of a male prince named Smenkhkara and his accession as Akhenaten's immediate successor is NOT questionable in the least. Nor is the existence of a female Pharaoh called Nefer-Neferu-Aten Ankhetkheperure is also not questioned but her identity is highly debateable. I personally favor Meritaten. Nefertiti is unlikely as in all probability she predeceased her husband.

Which queen sent for a Hittite Prince is also uncertain. Ankhesenamun is the favored candidate but I personally prefer Nefer-neferu-Aten as a desperate ploy to hold onto power. Whoever she was her actions skated close to treason considering the tensions between Egypt and Hatti. I very much doubt Nefertiti's name is a mistranslation.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Orwell
Scribe
Scribe


Joined: 16 Feb 2012
Posts: 441
Location: Victoria, Australia

PostPosted: Thu Feb 16, 2012 7:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

"As Kylejustin says those 'experts' who have assigned an age older than the mid-twenties are to a man strong proponents of the KV55 is Akhenaten theory."

And there would be those who strongly advocate it being a Pharaoh called Smenkhare and would argue from that standpoint, even though there were no magic bricks (funerary items) with his name on them. It seems just a question of defending one's theory. The Akhenaten proponents might be fully correct. And there seems more evidence for their case than against it as far as I can see so far. Akhenaten's identity and existence is "unquestionable" as we are confident who he was. Smenkhare's identity is open to all sorts of speculation. We still ask who he/she was?

"Quite frankly I believe it is unlikely that Akhenaten's mummy survived the reaction against his heresy. Smenkhkara on the other hand began the move back to orthodoxy and would not have been hated as his brother was."

I frankly have doubts about Akhenaten's mummy being destroyed by anyone in power until after his Successors were no more. Someone moved the four magic bricks, and I can't think why anyone would unless Akhenaten was moved too.

"Smenkhkara on the other hand began the move back to orthodoxy and would not have been hated as his brother was."

Is this your assumption or is it in the record somewhere?


"The brick may indicate that Akhenaten was once in KV55, as apparently was Tiye. It may have been a cache for all the Amarna royalties buried in the royal tomb. Tiye was later removed, possibly to her husband's tomb, and Akhenaten may have been destroyed at the same time."

There were four bricks, though only two were had readable references to Akhenaten. I agree Meretseger that KV55 may very well have been a cache for the Amarna burials. Moved when Akhetaten was abandoned. This is very feasible to me. Unprotected Amarna tombs would not have been seen as a good option for whoever moved the mummies to the Valley of the Kings. Why move any of Akhenaten's funeral goods if he was already 'hated' by those in a position to remove all knowledge of him? I think that came quite a while later, though the movement back to more traditional religious forms - for purely politcal purposes, perhaps - could very well have began the minute Akhenaten was dead. This would mean Akhenaten's Successor/s were pragmatic to popular grievances, not that they reviled his beliefs.

"The existence of a male prince named Smenkhkara and his accession as Akhenaten's immediate successor is NOT questionable in the least."

I think it is, though how questionable I'm not willing to guess. I'm not saying you're wrong, I just question how certain one can be about it.

"Nor is the existence of a female Pharaoh called Nefer-Neferu-Aten Ankhetkheperure is also not questioned but her identity is highly debateable. I personally favor Meritaten. Nefertiti is unlikely as in all probability she predeceased her husband."

I wonder if Nefertiti or Meritaten is not the Queen Ancherres (?) who ruled for twelve years after Akhenaten (?)(according to Josephus quoting Manethos).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Orwell
Scribe
Scribe


Joined: 16 Feb 2012
Posts: 441
Location: Victoria, Australia

PostPosted: Thu Feb 16, 2012 7:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

"Which queen sent for a Hittite Prince is also uncertain. Ankhesenamun is the favored candidate but I personally prefer Nefer-neferu-Aten as a desperate ploy to hold onto power. Whoever she was her actions skated close to treason considering the tensions between Egypt and Hatti."

I prefer Anksenemun. Makes perfect sense to me as she was the last of Akhenaten's direct descendants. Ay married her and claimed power through her.

"I very much doubt Nefertiti's name is a mistranslation."

Just something I read on a website. If she was "Chetiti" and so the "Hittite Queen", then her daughter Ankseneum might have sought her 'relatives' as a last resort, rather than marrying Ay. Just a thought.

Another question. Were the ruling elite in Mittani at this time actually from the Hittite nobility themselves? A bit like Scottish Kings being of Norman stock. I only ponder this because it might show that a Mitanni Princess, Tadukhipa (I think it was), was actually "Nefertiti", as was theorized at one time by some authorities. If her name is translatable as Chetiti "Hittite Queen" then this might throw some light on things.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Sesen35
Citizen
Citizen


Joined: 03 Feb 2012
Posts: 19

PostPosted: Thu Feb 16, 2012 11:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

"Quite frankly I believe it is unlikely that Akhenaten's mummy survived the reaction against his heresy."

Wouldn't it be a sign that whom ever the body of KV55 is, may have been throwned upon or did something to upset the people and the Gods? considering the fact the mummy isn't mummified and I don't think it shows any indications of ever being mummified? Which on it's own could suggest it was Akhenaten?

Please correct me if I'm wrong?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
neseret
Vizier
Vizier


Joined: 10 Jul 2008
Posts: 1031
Location: United Kingdom

PostPosted: Thu Feb 16, 2012 11:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Orwell wrote:
"As Kylejustin says those 'experts' who have assigned an age older than the mid-twenties are to a man strong proponents of the KV55 is Akhenaten theory."

And there would be those who strongly advocate it being a Pharaoh called Smenkhare and would argue from that standpoint, even though there were no magic bricks (funerary items) with his name on them. It seems just a question of defending one's theory. The Akhenaten proponents might be fully correct. And there seems more evidence for their case than against it as far as I can see so far. Akhenaten's identity and existence is "unquestionable" as we are confident who he was. Smenkhare's identity is open to all sorts of speculation. We still ask who he/she was?


There is no doubt that there was once a king named Ankhkheperure Djeserkheperu Smenkhkare: his name and titles as king are attested in several different places. That he was attached to Meritaten, likely as spouse, is attested from the tomb of Meryre at Akhetaten/Amarna.

There is also no doubt of an ephemeral king named Ankhkheperure Neferneferuaten. It is strongly arguable that this "king" was female. As Allen (1994) has noted, it would ridiculous to argue for one over the other, based upon the information we have of both kings.

The various well-defined medical examinations of the KV 55 mummy (Derry 1931, Harrison 1966, and Filer 2000) indicate the individual is male and no older than 25 years of age at death, and most likely younger. This argues against the body being that of Akhenaten, who had a 17 year reign, and fathered 6 daughters in at least a 10 year period. Those who have claimed an older age for the KV 55 remains have not supplied as definitive support for their claim as have Derry, Harrison, and Filer.

Orwell wrote:
"Smenkhkara on the other hand began the move back to orthodoxy and would not have been hated as his brother was."

Is this your assumption or is it in the record somewhere?


Aldred (1988) mentions a renovation of a cult temple to Amun during the reign of Smenkhkare.

Orwell wrote:
"The existence of a male prince named Smenkhkara and his accession as Akhenaten's immediate successor is NOT questionable in the least."

I think it is, though how questionable I'm not willing to guess. I'm not saying you're wrong, I just question how certain one can be about it.


I think there is ample evidence - as noted by Allen (1994) - that there are two kings after Akhenaten - one being Smenkhkare.

Reference:

Aldred, C. 1988. Akhenaten, King of Egypt. New York: Thames and Hudson.

Allen, J.P. 2006/2009. The Amarna Succession. In Causing His Name to Live: Studies in Egyptian Epigraphy and History in Memory of William J. Murnane. (also published in 2009 by E. J. Brill).

Allen, J. P. 1994. Nefertiti and Smenkh-ka-re. GM 141: 7 - 17.

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.

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


Joined: 16 Feb 2012
Posts: 441
Location: Victoria, Australia

PostPosted: Fri Feb 17, 2012 5:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

neseret and Sesen35, I have tried to reply but kerep getting blocked for some unknown reason. I'll keep this response short and hope to get it through.

neseret, your contention about the 'established' age at death of the KV55 mummy is by no means a fact. Hawass's scientists findings are every bit as plausible as your quoted findings. The Hawass view also marries up very nicely with the evidence found in the tomb, and as also the DNA evidence. Not saying you're wrong, but I tend to the belief you are on this score. I think Akhenaten is the most likely candidate as 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 -> Pharaohs and Queens All times are GMT
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
Page 1 of 3

 
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