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 

Marc Gabolde Looks on DNA Test of Tutankhamuns Family...
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Egyptian Dreams Forum Index -> Evidence from Amarna
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
SidneyF
Banned


Joined: 16 Sep 2011
Posts: 431

PostPosted: Wed Oct 16, 2013 3:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

kylejustin wrote:


SidneyF wrote:
I'm not sure what you're saying. Shu and Tefnut were the children of Ra. The Aten was a manifestation of Ra. Are you saying that Akhenaten did not believe in any of this? That it was all just "stories" to him? Whatever it is you are trying to assert--one thing is clear. All the king's of Egypt claimed divinity and "nTr nfr" [good god] was among their titles. So was "sA ra" or "son of Ra". Akhenaten's way of claiming divinity was as the personification of Shu, son of Ra. If Nefertiti hadn't been his sister and of equal royal status, how could she be Tefnut personified? Tefnut was a goddess and a female twin to Shu.


Quote:
all the pharoahs of egypt claimed to be the son or daughter of some god or goddess. this would logically make any wife their 'sister' depending on which goddess she was the counterpart of. all deceased pharoahs were considered to be osiris. following your logic their queens are all isis, therefore making them blood siblings in life. if you follow your logic i mean. now this is an absurd idea, so why is the one that because akhenaten and nefertiti chose to be depicted as shu and tefnut (thereby 'proving' they were blood siblings) be any less ridiculous?


Take my word for it. The wives of dead kings didn't call themselves "Isis".
Akhenaten and Nefertiti were the only royal couple to atyle themselves in writing as Shu and Tefnut. You should know why by now. I've repeated often enough. Because AKhenaten was a monotheist, he could only assume divinity by associtating himself with a god, Shu, who formed a "holy trinity" with Ra and Tefnut. They were separate but inseperable.

Quote:
one thing all the advocates for this idea forget, is nefertiti's lack of royal titles. even the children of concubines held royal titles. this rules her out as being of royal blood. maybe she did descend from pharoahs, highly likely if she came from a noble family, but she is not the daughter of the king.


So you say--but you don't know. For the final time, this is not about what royal children were called at this point in the 18th Dynasty. It was about queens--what they were called--and not.

SidneyF wrote:
Or maybe it does. Nefertiti and Akhenaten are still the best candidates for the parents of Tutankhamun, historically. I don't think we need to rehash all that again. Gabolde's assertion of "cousins" is not compelling according to what the DNA says.


really? smenkhkare and a younger sister don't sound plaiusible at all?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
kylejustin
Vizier
Vizier


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

PostPosted: Wed Oct 16, 2013 3:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

MY point, which you missed entirely btw, is even children by concubines held royal titles. ergo, if nefertiti was the daughter of a king, even by a lesser wife, she would have held the title of 'king's daughter' or 'king's sister' and she most certainly never held the title 'king's mother'. the lack of such titles in the titulary of arguably one of the best attested queens in egyptian history just supports an argument she was not of royal blood.

the only 'evidence' you are suggesting that she is akhenaten's sister is that they depicted themselves as shu and tefnut. flimsy 'evidence' and needs a lot more study to even be considered plausible. many times in egyptian history the royal family claimed to be certain deities or were depicted as them. it's ridiculous to take every image of a royal as a god and assume the mythological family tree was copied in every instance.
_________________
heaven won't take me.......hell's afraid i'll take over.....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Lutz
Pharaoh
Pharaoh


Joined: 02 Sep 2007
Posts: 3748
Location: Berlin, Germany

PostPosted: Wed Oct 16, 2013 11:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

neseret wrote:
... So, to sum up,

- the /rt-pa.t/ title was, prior to the post-Hatshepsut period, usually held by /sAt nsw/ title holder, with only one instance of a /rt-pa.t/ holder not being a daughter of a king (Udjebten, wife of Pepi II, in Dynasty 6).

- Not all /sAt nsw/ title holders during this period held the title of /rt-pa.t/, but after Udjebten, there were no royal women who held the title of /rt-pa.t/ alone.

- During the post-Hatshepsut period of the Thutmosid 18th Dynasty, the title of /rt-pa.t/ alone was held by those royal women who did not possess the title of /sAt nsw/, while those royal women who did possess the title of /sAt nsw/ did not possess the title of /rt-pa.t/.

The /rt-pa.t/ title holders of this period were:

- Merytre Hatshepsut - Daughter of the Adoratrice Huy (Gitton 1984), wife of Thutmose III and mother of Amenhotep II;

- Tiia - wife of Amenhotep II, mother of Thutmose IV;

- Mutemwia - wife of Thutmose IV and mother of Amenhotep III;

- Tiye - wife of Amenhotep III, mother of Amenhotep IV/Akhenaten;

- Nefertiti - wife of Amenhotep IV/Akhenaten;

- (Nebethat - possible wife of Amenhotep IV/Akhenaten ...

Now here we have probably the close marriages over some generations that explain the similarities in the DNA?! Nothing further is probably ultimately suspected by Gabolde (and others before him) ... And to my knowledge, this scenario to explain the molecular biological results has not been considered by DNA experts as impossible (lecture at Harvard - University).

Serve with the archaeological evidence of a royal palace in Achmin with evidence for all the kings of the 18th Dynasty (Reisner / Lythgoe, 1903-04) and also the results of Woodward's studies from the nineties. He could a very limited gene pool for the 18th Dynasty establish, which allows little scope for third or fourth families as suppliers.

Greetings, Lutz.
_________________
Ägyptologie - Forum (German)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
SidneyF
Banned


Joined: 16 Sep 2011
Posts: 431

PostPosted: Wed Oct 16, 2013 2:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lutz wrote:
... So, to sum up,

Now here we have probably the close marriages over some generations that explain the similarities in the DNA?! Nothing further is probably ultimately suspected by Gabolde (and others before him) ... And to my knowledge, this scenario to explain the molecular biological results has not been considered by DNA experts as impossible (lecture at Harvard - University).


But not very likely at all. We don't get our autosomal DNA from generations but only from two people, our parents. Gabolde has suggested that, for Nefertiti and Akhenaten to be cousins, both parents of Nefertiti had to be a sibling of not only Tiye but Amenhotep III, as well.

Our siblings share only about half of our DNA. The KV35YL and the KV55 person share half of each other's DNA--but their numbers at the loci are exactly the same as those of Amenhotep III and Queen Tiye. There is not one different number involved in the 8 loci presented. For this to be the case, the parents of Nefertiti, for her to be a cousin of a son of this couple--her own parents would have had to be TWINS of both Tiye and Amenhotep III, have all their same alleles [numbers] at the loci. Are you following me now? Otherwise, the odds that other numbers, not present in the STRs of Tiye and Amenhotep, would be present in a cousin of their son would be VERY, VERY high. Could a twin of Tiye have married a twin of Amenhotep III? It's not impossible--but how likely do you think it is?

Tiye and Amenhotep III are cousins, but share very little DNA.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SidneyF
Banned


Joined: 16 Sep 2011
Posts: 431

PostPosted: Wed Oct 16, 2013 3:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

If you don't want to believe me, perhaps you'll accept the answer of this person, who I can tell knows what he's talking about:

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100906065507AAaidYQ

"Well, it is a bit complicated because the other-family spouses will have some DNA in common with the siblings, simply because a truckload of DNA is common to being human. That is, it is likely that the two cousins will have some genetic material in common from the non-sibling parents just because a lot of human DNA is common to us all.

When you start talking the portion of DNA that is highly variable among individuals, the part of the code that is unique to the individual, the odds are that non-twin siblings will have about 50% in common, and the first cousins will have about 25% in common.

In some freaky circumstances with a huge unlikelihood, it is possible that the (first cousin) children of identical twins could have as much as 50 % common genetic material. This would require a genetically identical sperm or egg from each twin, and that is really unlikely, effectively impossible.

But for sure first cousins will have quite a bit of common genetic material, could be fairly easily identified as probable cousins if you were to compare their individual DNA patterns without knowing of the relationship beforehand."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
kylejustin
Vizier
Vizier


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

PostPosted: Thu Oct 17, 2013 2:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

children of identical twins are technically half siblings. so i get what your saying, in order for the mummies to be first cousins but have almost identical DNA they must be the children of identical twins.

i have always wondered why they did not include thutmose IV in tut's DNA study. surely he would help anchor amenhotep III firmly in position? unless they wanted his mother as well, as that would be the only way to prove the relationship?

i have always wondered about the legitimacy of woodward's claims. he claimed to have extracted DNA from the mummies long before modern science could get good enough to extract ancient DNA. why has his results not been widely publicised?
_________________
heaven won't take me.......hell's afraid i'll take over.....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Lutz
Pharaoh
Pharaoh


Joined: 02 Sep 2007
Posts: 3748
Location: Berlin, Germany

PostPosted: Thu Oct 17, 2013 3:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

SidneyF wrote:
... Gabolde has suggested that, for Nefertiti and Akhenaten to be cousins, both parents of Nefertiti had to be a sibling of not only Tiye but Amenhotep III, as well. ...

I understand this different:
Quote:
"... In a lecture at Harvard University, he set Nefertiti as a possible mother of the boy king. Akhenaten's chief wife was not his sister, but a first cousin. ... The close genetic relationship between the two parents can not be explained solely by a brother-sister relationship, but can also be created because previously three generations had married her respective cousins ​​of the first degree : "The consequence of these marriages is that the DNA between the third generation cousins ​​looks like that between brother and sister", he said in his presentation. ...

(Source, among others ... : Spiegel Online - Tutanchamuns geheimnisvolle Mutter)

If this is displayed differently in the original article (ENiM 6. - 2013. - pp. 177 - 203), I ask for the passage together with translation please (I do not speak French).

Greetings, Lutz.
_________________
Ägyptologie - Forum (German)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
kylejustin
Vizier
Vizier


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

PostPosted: Thu Oct 17, 2013 9:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lutz wrote:
"The consequence of these marriages is that the DNA between the third generation cousins ​​looks like that between brother and sister"


which doesn't make sense. they only have evidence of one generation of cousin marriage. amenhotep III and tiye appear to be first cousins. they can't prove it without mutemwia's mummy.

and they don't have nefertiti, so they can't prove she is akhenaten's cousin (though it is likely).

so who is this third generation he is talking about? thutmose IV and mutemwia, yuya being first cousins?
_________________
heaven won't take me.......hell's afraid i'll take over.....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Thieuke
Citizen
Citizen


Joined: 11 Aug 2012
Posts: 74

PostPosted: Thu Oct 17, 2013 12:54 pm    Post subject: 3 generations Reply with quote

The third generation is in MG's theory not a generation but a marriage between double first cousins:

1 AIII married Tiye they were first cousins (his mother, her father being full siblings) and parents of Achnaten
2 A full sibling of AIII is the parent (most likely father) of Nefertiti
3 A full sibling of Tiye is the other parent (most likely mother) of Nefertiti

that would provide enough closeness in the family relations to give Achnaten and Nefertiti DNA that is like that of siblings.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Lutz
Pharaoh
Pharaoh


Joined: 02 Sep 2007
Posts: 3748
Location: Berlin, Germany

PostPosted: Thu Oct 17, 2013 1:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

kylejustin wrote:
Lutz wrote:
"The consequence of these marriages is that the DNA between the third generation cousins ​​looks like that between brother and sister"

which doesn't make sense. they only have evidence of one generation of cousin marriage. amenhotep III and tiye appear to be first cousins. they can't prove it without mutemwia's mummy. ...

It's not that firstonce. At first Gabolde deals with and offers an alternative interpretation of the results of the DNA tests.

The archaeological evidence speaks not opposed (see my comments on the archeology of Achmin in my previous posts). On the contrary, the theory of a priestly family from Achmin connected over generations by marriage with the royal house of the 18th Dynasty is not really new and is represented by various Egyptologists for longer. It is supported by the name and title analogies of the members of this family and also offers an logical and understandable explanation for the prominent position of this family and especially Queen Tiye (and Nefertiti?).

Greetings, Lutz.
_________________
Ägyptologie - Forum (German)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Thieuke
Citizen
Citizen


Joined: 11 Aug 2012
Posts: 74

PostPosted: Thu Oct 17, 2013 1:57 pm    Post subject: Links between Akhmin family and Thutmosid dynasty Reply with quote

There is the scenario that Tiye's mother Thuya was related to or even descending from Ahmose Nefertari. If so the links would be even longer.

Younger brothers of a Pharaoh are never mentioned during his reign, only during the period that they were the son of the reigning pharaoh. If a crownprince had children but died before becoming Pharaoh he was not replaced by his son but by a brother. It is very well possible that younger sons and grandsons did have descendants. Mutemwiya, Yuya and Thuya could all have belonged to that group of descendants from younger lines.

By having siblings of AIII and Tiye being the parents of Nefertiti she and her husband have the 4 same grandparents:

Thut IV + Mutemwiya & Yuya + Thuya. Of these 4 two are siblings and all 4 may have additional family links.

The ancestry of Thut IV's mother Tiaa is unknown. She could be related to the Akhmin family as well.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SidneyF
Banned


Joined: 16 Sep 2011
Posts: 431

PostPosted: Fri Oct 18, 2013 6:28 pm    Post subject: Re: 3 generations Reply with quote

Thieuke wrote:
The third generation is in MG's theory not a generation but a marriage between double first cousins:

1 AIII married Tiye they were first cousins (his mother, her father being full siblings) and parents of Achnaten
2 A full sibling of AIII is the parent (most likely father) of Nefertiti
3 A full sibling of Tiye is the other parent (most likely mother) of Nefertiti

that would provide enough closeness in the family relations to give Achnaten and Nefertiti DNA that is like that of siblings.


No. Didn't you see what I wrote and quoted just above about twins? Just being a full sibling of anybody does not give you all their same DNA. You only get about half of the DNA of your non-twin sibling.

What is so hard about this? At each locus, you have the potential of inheriting FOUR different combinations of alleles [numbers] from your parents. Let's say one parent has 11/12 at one marker and the other parent has 10/16. A child could potentially inherit

10/11
10/12
11/16
12/16

But will only inherit one set of numbers. Let's say one child gets 11/16 and the other non-twin child gets 10/12. Those are the only numbers each child can possibly pass down to his or her own children at that locus.

Can you see that each of the original children has no two numbers alike at the same locus? And it would likely be the same story at other loci, too, although not at all. Amenhotep III and Queen Tiye were cousins but it is not possible to say from present information just how. It is not possible to discern whether Yuya was the uncle of A III on the maternal or paternal side from the information of the JAMA paper. Regardless, as you can seem, AIII and Queen Tiye have hardly any DNA in common and---IF--the sister of one married the brother of another, there would be the same story there. There are so many variables in that situation that it would be next to impossible for a cousin of Akhenaten, born of the latter union, to have ALL the DNA of AIII and Queen Tiye at every locus.

Anyone who believes otherwise is just plain wrong.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Lutz
Pharaoh
Pharaoh


Joined: 02 Sep 2007
Posts: 3748
Location: Berlin, Germany

PostPosted: Fri Oct 18, 2013 8:06 pm    Post subject: Re: 3 generations Reply with quote

SidneyF wrote:
... There are so many variables in that situation that it would be next to impossible ...

The same (and more) you can say about life on earth ... But it exists.

I repeat, Gabolde offers an alternative explanation for the interpretation of the DNA results, no more and no less. And this is from serious scientific side (again: see lecture Harvard University) not objected in principle - as you that doing here with, for me not comprehensible, absolute certainty - without any real arguments but with structures and probabilities, where you can face other structures and probabilities against them in order to overturn.

As long as the DNA research does not provide further, more detailed information, it is only the archaeological research in a position to substantiate the likelihood of different interpretations or to disprove them.

Lutz
_________________
Ägyptologie - Forum (German)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
SidneyF
Banned


Joined: 16 Sep 2011
Posts: 431

PostPosted: Fri Oct 18, 2013 9:27 pm    Post subject: Re: 3 generations Reply with quote

Lutz wrote:
SidneyF wrote:
... There are so many variables in that situation that it would be next to impossible ...

The same (and more) you can say about life on earth ... But it exists.

I repeat, Gabolde offers an alternative explanation for the interpretation of the DNA results, no more and no less. And this is from serious scientific side (again: see lecture Harvard University) not objected in principle - as you that doing here with, for me not comprehensible, absolute certainty - without any real arguments but with structures and probabilities, where you can face other structures and probabilities against them in order to overturn.

As long as the DNA research does not provide further, more detailed information, it is only the archaeological research in a position to substantiate the likelihood of different interpretations or to disprove them.


I can't understand what is meant by any of the above except "Gabolde offers an alternative explanation". Do you even really know what his arguments are? Regardless, in the area of DNA there really are some things that are not possible and your glib "life on earth" analogy doesn't alter that one bit. How can you get a cousin for Akhenaten out of all this [although it's not what Gabolde suggested, himself]? You could have Nefertiti being born from a union of Amenhotep III and a twin sister of Queen Tiye. The twin sister would have the same DNA as Tiye. But that would be strange--two sisters, twins, one becomes a great royal wife and the other relegated to complete obscurity. But, even so, Nefertiti would have still been a king's daughter. A twin brother of Amenhotep III presumably wouldn't have had any children with Queen Tiye. Unlike their husbands, the queens of Egypt were monogamous. There you go. There just is no "alternative explanation" that works or makes any sense. And I don't care if the lecture was given at Harvard or someplace else. What difference could that possibly make?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Lutz
Pharaoh
Pharaoh


Joined: 02 Sep 2007
Posts: 3748
Location: Berlin, Germany

PostPosted: Fri Oct 18, 2013 10:00 pm    Post subject: Re: 3 generations Reply with quote

SidneyF wrote:
... Do you even really know what his arguments are? ...

Feel free to communicate them. But please, with the exact point in the original article. Like I said, I can not speak French and I am relay with the text on machine translation and secondary sources.

SidneyF wrote:
... How can you get a cousin for Akhenaten out of all this [although it's not what Gabolde suggested, himself]? ...

As you say yourself, neither Gabolde yet I say something like that. I have no idea where you get that from...

SidneyF wrote:
... And I don't care if the lecture was given at Harvard or someplace else. What difference could that possibly make?

The difference is in the audience and in the public attention. The probability that a geneticist at Harvard University opposition rises is probably higher than if he had kept the lecture at an elementary school in the midwest?

Lutz
_________________
Ägyptologie - Forum (German)
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, 8  Next
Page 5 of 8

 
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