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 

Nicholas Reeves : The Burial of Nefertiti? (2015)
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 32, 33, 34  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Egyptian Dreams Forum Index -> Evidence from Amarna
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Lutz
Pharaoh
Pharaoh


Joined: 02 Sep 2007
Posts: 4098
Location: Berlin, Germany

PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2019 9:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

" Possible Unmapped Chambers Discovered Near Tutankhamun’s Tomb " (The Art Newspaper - Garry Shaw, 09.05.2019)
_________________
Ägyptologie Forum (German)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Lutz
Pharaoh
Pharaoh


Joined: 02 Sep 2007
Posts: 4098
Location: Berlin, Germany

PostPosted: Sat Jul 20, 2019 9:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

" Ministry of Antiquities Surveys the Tomb of Tutankhamun in Search of Nefertiti’s Tomb " (Egypt Forward, 11.07.2019)
Quote:
Egyptian and British researchers conducted a survey using the radar on the Tomb of the Pharaonic King Tutankhamun, looking for a secret room believed to be where Queen Nefertiti was buried, according to British Egyptologist Nicholas Reeves. In 2015, Reeves suggested that the tomb of queen Nefertiti could be concealed behind the north and west wall paintings of Tutankhamun’s burial chamber.

Under the supervision of the Ministry of Antiquities, a three-day survey of the cemetery will be conducted over the next three weeks ...

Greetings, Lutz.
_________________
Ägyptologie Forum (German)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Montuhotep88
Priest
Priest


Joined: 12 Dec 2008
Posts: 570
Location: Central Ohio

PostPosted: Mon Jul 22, 2019 5:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I was just reading about this recently. I know that re-tests using GPR have cast some doubt on the initial favorable findings, but I don't think there's anything inherently improbable about another chamber or two.

The business about the burial of Nefertiti, though-- I'm very skeptical. I think it's much more likely that we either have her mummy already, in one of the anonymous 18th-dynasty female mummies, or that it was destroyed, either deliberately or naturally. We are so spoiled in having so many of the New Kingdom royals that we may forget how astonishing it is to have any of them at all!

If I were placing a wager, I'd bet on an unfinished or just-barely-started chamber with not much of anything inside it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Lutz
Pharaoh
Pharaoh


Joined: 02 Sep 2007
Posts: 4098
Location: Berlin, Germany

PostPosted: Wed Jul 24, 2019 6:47 am    Post subject: The Burial of Nefertiti? II (2019) Reply with quote

Nicholas Reeves releases a sequel to his document from 2015 :

The Decorated North Wall in the Tomb of Tutankhamun (KV 62) - The Burial of Nefertiti? II. - With A Review of the Geophysical Data By George Ballard. - [ARTP 3]. - 13.07.2019. - [PDF - 34,6 MB]. - 83 S., 40 Fig. :

Quote:
This paper revisits an earlier discussion, The Burial of Nefertiti? (ARTP Occasional Paper No. 1), to consider in greater detail the painted north wall in the Burial Chamber (room J) of Tutankhamun’s tomb (KV 62). The changes imposed upon this wall’s three separate scenes are here identified and analysed, and the conclusions found to support the view that KV 62 – architecturally the sepulchre of a queen – had been both intended and employed for the burial of Nefertiti in her capacity as Akhenaten’s heir, Smenkhkare-djeserkheperu. The manner in which this tomb’s outer chambers were adapted and pressed into service for Tutankhamun’s use a decade later – leaving its original occupant in place and undisturbed – is clearly established.

In a supplement to this study, George Ballard – a leading authority on the use of radar and other remote-sensing technologies in the investigation of historic buildings and structures – provides an independent review of the principal geophysical investigations carried out within and around KV 62 since 2015. Contrary to earlier assessments, Ballard is able to conclude that the data collected is both broadly consistent and essentially in line with archaeological indicators and expectations.

Gruß, Lutz.

The Decorated North Wall in the Tomb of Tutankhamun (KV 62) - The Burial of Nefertiti? II. - With A Review of the Geophysical Data By George Ballard. - [ARTP 3]. - 13.07.2019. - [PDF - 34,6 MB]. - 83 p., 40 Fig. :
Quote:
This paper revisits an earlier discussion, The Burial of Nefertiti? (ARTP Occasional Paper No. 1), to consider in greater detail the painted north wall in the Burial Chamber (room J) of Tutankhamun’s tomb (KV 62). The changes imposed upon this wall’s three separate scenes are here identified and analysed, and the conclusions found to support the view that KV 62 – architecturally the sepulchre of a queen – had been both intended and employed for the burial of Nefertiti in her capacity as Akhenaten’s heir, Smenkhkare-djeserkheperu. The manner in which this tomb’s outer chambers were adapted and pressed into service for Tutankhamun’s use a decade later – leaving its original occupant in place and undisturbed – is clearly established.

In a supplement to this study, George Ballard – a leading authority on the use of radar and other remote-sensing technologies in the investigation of historic buildings and structures – provides an independent review of the principal geophysical investigations carried out within and around KV 62 since 2015. Contrary to earlier assessments, Ballard is able to conclude that the data collected is both broadly consistent and essentially in line with archaeological indicators and expectations.


Greetings, Lutz.
_________________
Ägyptologie Forum (German)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Montuhotep88
Priest
Priest


Joined: 12 Dec 2008
Posts: 570
Location: Central Ohio

PostPosted: Wed Jul 24, 2019 12:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Idea

Suppose conclusive evidence were gathered to indicate another chamber... is it at all practical to consider a new excavation from the surface to get to it, as opposed to knocking holes in the wall of Tut's burial chamber? I'm imagining a shaft sunk adjacent to the hypothetical chamber and then horizontal entry from there.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ikon
Scribe
Scribe


Joined: 09 Jul 2012
Posts: 311

PostPosted: Wed Jul 24, 2019 2:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Taking about knocking holes in the wall, on a careful reading of the article it seems that Reeves is accusing Carter of doing just that, and then, as he was a very good painter, covering up his work. If true, and he does present good evidence, that's a surprise. Reeves does state that the presumed wall area was not along the North wall, but in another area which Reeves says was clearly bedrock, and so makes no sense to probe for hidden chambers, hm....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Lutz
Pharaoh
Pharaoh


Joined: 02 Sep 2007
Posts: 4098
Location: Berlin, Germany

PostPosted: Tue Aug 06, 2019 9:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ikon wrote:
... Reeves does state that the presumed wall area was not along the North wall, but in another area which Reeves says was clearly bedrock, and so makes no sense to probe for hidden chambers, hm....

Small note ... It was / is on the north wall, but not in the area where Reeves suspects the passage (right side if you stand in front). Carter searched on the left, in the area of the wall where in other royal tombs in the Valley an (originally closed and over-painted) passage from the so called shaft room into the following chambers can be found.

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


Joined: 02 Sep 2007
Posts: 4098
Location: Berlin, Germany

PostPosted: Fri Dec 27, 2019 5:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

"Nefertiti in the tomb of Tutankhamun" by Dr Nicholas Reeves

Fitzwilliam Museum, Trumpington St, Cambridge CB2 1RB

Date : 29 April 2020 ; 17:30 - 18:30
Place : Lecture Room 9, Mill Lane Lecture Rooms, Cambridge
Costs : Free, but booking is required; Email to <mailto:glanville@fitzmuseum.cam.ac.uk>

Quote:
This year’s lecture will be given by Nicholas Reeves, PhD FSA, the well-known expert on the archaeology of the Valley of the Kings in Egypt. Dr Reeves has held curatorial positions at The British Museum, Eton College and The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York. In his talk, he will discuss the hidden presence of Nefertiti within the tomb of Tutankhamun.

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


Joined: 02 Sep 2007
Posts: 4098
Location: Berlin, Germany

PostPosted: Thu Feb 20, 2020 8:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

" Is this Nefertiti's tomb? Radar clues reignite debate over hidden chambers " (Nature News - Jo Marchant, 19.02.2020)

Quote:
A radar survey around the tomb of Tutankhamun in Egypt’s Valley of the Kings has revealed possible evidence of further hidden chambers behind its walls. ...

... Researchers led by archaeologist Mamdouh Eldamaty, a former Egyptian minister of antiquities, used ground-penetrating radar (GPR) to scan the area immediately around Tutankhamun's tomb. They report that they have identified a previously unknown corridor-like space a few metres from the burial chamber (see ‘Chamber of secrets’). Their finding was presented to Egypt’s Supreme Council of Antiquities (SCA) earlier this month. ...

_________________
Ägyptologie Forum (German)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
karnsculpture
Scribe
Scribe


Joined: 27 May 2010
Posts: 314

PostPosted: Thu Feb 20, 2020 8:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Looks like a possible separate tomb to me rather than one linked to KV62. I can understand Hawass’ reservations but we can’t ignore his long history with Reeves.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
irt-akhu
Citizen
Citizen


Joined: 28 Nov 2019
Posts: 43

PostPosted: Thu Feb 20, 2020 3:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I thought Nefertiti was found in KV21 (KV21B) with half her face missing, along with King Tut's OL Ankhesenamun (KV21A)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Lutz
Pharaoh
Pharaoh


Joined: 02 Sep 2007
Posts: 4098
Location: Berlin, Germany

PostPosted: Thu Feb 20, 2020 10:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

karnsculpture wrote:
Looks like a possible separate tomb to me rather than one linked to KV62. ...

Another change of direction would be possible, 90 degrees to the right ... For example, in KV 43 - Thutmes IV the direction changes twice, each time 90 degrees, to the left.
_________________
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: 80

PostPosted: Thu Feb 20, 2020 10:52 pm    Post subject: extended tomb of Tut Reply with quote

Well at least it seems that Tut was buried in a larger tomb than was known so far.
I've been wondering why everyone is jumping to Nefertiti to be buried there. As we know that there is an option that the mummy of the pharaoh who was Tut's biological father may not be that of Achnaten but that of Smenkhkare. In that case we might also get the heretic pharaoh behind the walls of Tut's grave or possibly both Achnaten and Neferititi assuming she ruled alone. If she was not the mysterious female pharaoh that reigned before Tut the discovery might very well be of either Meritaten or whoever was the mysterious female pharaoh. Without any name found it's a bit early in my view to jump to just one name. We might even find out it was just a grave for several people related to the court or family of Tut that were the original occupants of the tomb and when Ay and/or Anchesenamen choose the grave to bury Tut in opted for this one.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
irt-akhu
Citizen
Citizen


Joined: 28 Nov 2019
Posts: 43

PostPosted: Fri Feb 21, 2020 4:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Right, current theory has KV55 as Smenkhare (Tut's father). Nefertiti, KV21B; Akhesenamun (KV21A) (Tut's wife). KV35YL Meritaten. (Tut's mum/Smenkhare's wife)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
karnsculpture
Scribe
Scribe


Joined: 27 May 2010
Posts: 314

PostPosted: Fri Feb 21, 2020 5:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

irt-akhu wrote:
Right, current theory has KV55 as Smenkhare (Tut's father). Nefertiti, KV21B; Akhesenamun (KV21A) (Tut's wife). KV35YL Meritaten. (Tut's mum/Smenkhare's wife)


Whose current theory? The official line from Egypt (Hawass et al) is that KV55 is Akhenaten = Tut’s father, KV35 younger lady an unknown sister of Akhenaten = Tut’s mother and KV21A and B as unknown but part of the family.

From what I’ve read including the official JAMA 2010 publication KV21A might be the mother of the foetuses but might not as the DNA of both is incomplete. If KV21A is Ankhensenamun then KV55 is unlikely to be Akhenaten.

We are still missing too many pieces of the puzzle to be certain of the identification of KV55, KV35YL or the KV21 mummies.

I’m leaning towards 2 options right now:

1) KV55 is Akhenaten as indicated by his parents and grandparents being identified and the magical bricks and mummy case inscriptions having his epithets. KV35YL is Nefertiti but for some reason we don’t have evidence yet of her parentage. KV21A and B are unknowns but that opens up cans of worms because although related to Tut they are not daughters of KV55 or KV35YL or sisters of Tut. That means Tut had unrecorded wives. This scenario is also difficult because we have no record of Nefertiti as a princess, unless she changed her name and the woman named as her sister is yet another royal daughter.

2) KV55 is Smenkhkare not Akhenaten whose mummy we don’t have yet. That could account for the KV21A discrepancy and allow that mummy to be Ankhensenamun, also possibly KV21B to be Nefertiti or one of her daughters. KV35A in this scenario is one of the daughters of Amenhotep III. This scenario is difficult because we have no record of a Prince Smenkhkare.
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 ... , 32, 33, 34  Next
Page 33 of 34

 
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