Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

KV62 Alternative History


kmt_sesh

Recommended Posts

This discussion is meant to explore the new theory that 3,300 years ago, in Dynasty 18, at the height of ancient Egypt's hegemony, Tutankhamun and Nefertiti produced an alien-hybrid lovechild. The proof is in the infant girl's mummified visage:

bf5023a66520391b3d1a23d05de5a3b8.jpg

This is all the proof I need...

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can't argue with a picture.

Or the massive amounts of inbreeding royal bloodlines suffered.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hadn't known that Tutankhamun produced any kids. I thought he died a teenager. I thought Nefertiti was his mom, or step mom.

Edit: Apparently Tut didn't have any kids that lived to be born, but two fetuses found in him tomb may have been his. It this one of those fetuses?

Edited by DieChecker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ha! Now that I have your attention, let me assure you I have not suddenly lost my senses. Some would say it occurred long ago. There is a real purpose to this thread, although I know it will be to the dismay of many at UM that aliens are not involved. But at least it is an unusual alternative theory.

The theory is not mine but that of Nicholas Reeves, a prominent and widely published Egyptologist most recently with the University of Arizona. His theory derived from the work of Factum Arte, a Madrid-based artistic reproduction agency which was charged with the recent construction of a facsimile tomb for Tutankhamun. The boy-king's real tomb, discovered by Howard Carter in 1922 and designated KV62, was closed a couple of years ago due to damage caused by ever-increasing tourist traffic. Factum Arte's creation, located near the Valley of the Kings and Howard Carter's old dig house, is what tourists will see from now on.

In the process of preparing to create the replica of KV62, Factum Arte took super-high-resolution photographs of every inch of the interior of the tomb, to capture every last detail. You can visit their website and see their images here.

Nicholas Reeves subsequently poured over the agency's photographs and noticed some tantalizing things. He recently published a paper on his findings, which is available free for download on his Academia.edu page. That page can be reached with the following link:

Nicholas Reeves — The Burial of Nefertiti? (2015)

You need an account to get the paper, but it's free to sign up at Academia.edu and I highly recommend it to anyone who likes to follow current research. Numerous prominent Egyptologists have accounts there. I see Reeves has already uploaded an Addenda to his KV62 paper. I haven't read that yet but the main report is well worth the read.

I provide you the link to his report so that you, the reader, can digest it for yourself, if interested. It's not terribly long. And Reeves will explain it to you better than I can. It's my intent to summarize his findings only—to keep it as short as possible, in other words. I'm already enough of a gasbag as it is. I will keep the images to a minimum, mostly in deference to Reeves and the work he put into his paper.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Damn, I can't believe I've already had a couple of responses to my joke-OP. But, yes, two stillborn fetal girls were found in his tomb, one at five months gestation and the other at eight months. The genetic testing the SCA did back in 2007-10 showed they were most likely Tut's daughters. He died at around eighteen years of age, so he would've been capable of producing children for several years before that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Below is a standard ground plan for Tutankhamun's tomb (Reeves 2015):

KV62-Plan_zpsrhz6fgjn.jpg

From the time of the tomb's discovery in 1922, its small size has been noted. The long-standing theory is that the tomb began as the Entrance Stairs (A), Entrance Corridor ( B), and Antechamber (I). The Antechamber may have extended in a straight line at the same width into what would eventually become the Burial Chamber. But Tut died at an early age, a tomb was not ready for him, so this one was put to use. A typical private tomb was expanded to serve the young king. Added to the original plan for Tut's sake was the Annexe (Ia), Burial Chamber (J), and Treasury (Ja). This was the only way all of the king's burial goods (numbering almost 5,400 objects) could be fit into his final resting place.

Reeves is arguing for a radically different purpose to the tomb. In his examination of Factum Arte's high-resolution photos, Reeves saw what he believes to be traces of two other doorways in the current Burial Chamber: one leading off the west wall and the other off the north wall. The traces of these sealed doorways can be seen in the photos through the thick plaster the craftsmen applied over 3,000 years ago. You can see the details quite well in Reeves's paper and in the images on Factum Arte's website, but here's a color-coded example of the supposed doorway in the west wall of the Burial Chamber:

WestWall-Door_zpsrytoewit.jpg

This possible entrance is low and narrow, very much like the one leading off the Antechamber into the Annexe, which suggests if a room exists to the west of the Burial Chamber, it might be another storage room similar in purpose to the Annexe.

A larger doorway is possible for the north wall of the Burial Chamber. It is entirely covered over by plaster, and further by painted images above the floor:

NorthWall_zpsqnokhd32.jpg

This dorrway, if it exists, strikes Reeves as very similar in composition to the false wall the ancient craftsmen had erected between the Antechamber and the Burial Chamber. In fact, the west edge of this supposed door matches the width of the Antechamber along its west side. If Reeves is correct, it would seem the corridor we know as the Antechamber originally extended deeper to the north, past the painted wall there now.

This is how Reeves sees the original plan of KV62 (the yellow portions are Reeves's proposed original plan):

Tomb-Extended_zpsclavmhay.jpg

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, if KV62 was originally larger, for whom was it actually cut? Reeves is arguing for Nefertiti, the great queen of the heretic king Akhenaten. Without delving too much into the Amarna Period tar pits, there are numerous theories about who succeeded whom after Akhenaten died. The most striaght-forward theory is that after Akhenaten came the ephemeral and short-lived Smenkhkare, and then Tutankhamun. But that is hardly the only theory. Did Akhenaten and Smenkhkare rule as co-regents late in Akhenaten's reign, with Smenkhkare to predecease him or outlive him? Did Akhenaten and Nefertiti co-rule, with Nefertiti to predecease him or outlive him? Did Nefertiti outlive AKhenaten, rule independently, and act as coregent for a short time for Tutankhamun?

The latter was expressed as a theory by another prominent Egyptologist, Aidan Dodson, some years ago. Nicholas Reeves has his own spin on it, which comes from an old theory that Nefertiti and Smenkhkare were actually the same person. Reeves argues that Nefertiti took the name Smenkhkare after the death of her heretic husband, when she became sole monarch, and went on to rule for only a very short time (less than a year). Tutankhamun succeeded her upon her death, when he was only about eight years old.

So Reeves's theory behind KV62 is that it was originally cut for Nefertiti (in her guise as Smenkhkare). Based on Reeves's proposed original plan for the tomb, it does indeed have the right-turn plan as seen for Dynasty 18 queens (e.g., Hatshepsut's tomb prior to her seizure of the throne). Her burial, then, would lie past the sealed north wall. But Tut died unexpectedly, there was no tomb for him, so KV 62 was retrofitted for his burial. As further argument Reeves's points to very interesting evidence that the north wall was largely repainted for Tut's purpose—it follows a different canon or proportions from the painted scenes on the other three walls of the Burial Chamber.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'll close with a few brief thoughts on my part. In my opinion Reeves has shown a strong possibility that there's more to KV62 than anyone has ever known. It's possible the traces of doorways he sees behind the plaster are nothing but lines slathered by the ancient plasterers, but it's also possible that they are in fact doorways. In the very least Egypt's ministry of antiquities needs to go in there with ground-penetrating radar. Are there large voids behind the west and north walls, or is there nothing but solid limestone?

Where I'm not convinced is Nefertiti's place in all of this. I fully understand Reeves is an Egyptologist and I am not, but from my own years of research I am not convinced that Smenkhkare and Nefertiti were the same person. In fact, personally, I believe Smenkhkare was indeed a man and possibly Akhenaten's brother; I further believe his are the skeletal remains discovered in 1907 in KV55. Respectfully, I do not think the evidence for Smenkhkare=Nefertiti is as firm as Reeves argues it is. But he's the Egyptologist. And he's a damn fine historian.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I hope some of you will choose to download and read Reeves's paper. It's very interesting and well illustrated.

As always, I welcome questions and comments. Thanks for reading.

Edited by kmt_sesh
Clarification
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would also seem to me that IR scanning should detect subtle differences in the surface temperatures between solid walls and walls with hollows behind them, even if the walls were fairly thick.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would also seem to me that IR scanning should detect subtle differences in the surface temperatures between solid walls and walls with hollows behind them, even if the walls were fairly thick.

No, that won't work because it's all underground stone. Everything's the same temperature.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For the record, I agree with Hawass that there's no compelling reason why Nefertiti should be there - and also with his reasoning that the tomb has been extensively investigated before (and they found other hidden entrances at that time.) I understand that the changes are subtle, and that the design suggests there might be more rooms.

Nefertiti was not his mother nor his adoptive mother, and she does not predate him by a significant amount of time (making her tomb ripe for reuse.) I would expect (if the chamber is there) to find a wife or a mother or some family member who died before Tut.

I don't know if I buy into the changed proportions idea. I agree that they're there and that the wall covering the possible entrance to Nefertiti's tomb was painted at a different time and by a different set of artists than the other walls.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, that won't work because it's all underground stone. Everything's the same temperature.

All you need is a few degrees difference with modern IR gear. They could set up a space heater, run it for an hour, while IR scanning all the walls. If there are any hollows, they will show up, since the thinner walls should heat up faster and cool faster then the solid bedrock walls.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The best tool for the job would be GPR (ground penetrating radar). This has been used a quite a lot in Egyptology, including in the Valley fo the Kings. I believe it was one of the tools used by Otto Schaden when KV63 was discovered some years ago. Perhaps it was also involved with the discovery of KV64 after that. GPR should work well.

Alternatively, they could just knock on the wall where they think a hidden door is. Wouldn't it be something if someone knocked back? :whistle:

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Could be he named Nefertiti to spur interest in the project.

This wasn't a knock against the Egyptologist, but I'd imagine it would be pretty hard to get backing to try to reexamine the tomb. Linking it to Nefertiti helped get a lot of press for this idea.

Wasn't trying to offer offense there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know... King Tut.... The next generation... Has some marketing potential. Given there is anything in those rooms to go on tour.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If there is a deeper burial chamber hidden behind the north wall, it could contain the final resting place of any number of people. Sticking to Reeves's position that the original plan for KV62 was for that of a queen, this could be the burial of Meritaten. In the tomb of Meryre, who was overseer of the royal harem and superintendent of Nefertiti, there is a wall scene showing Smenkhkare and Meritaten together and she is described as his Great Royal Wife. She is also a candidate for Tutankhamun's mother (putatively the mummy designated KV35YL, although her precise identity remains unknown).

Another possibility is Sitamun, daughter of Amunhotep III, the putative grandfather of Tutankhamun. Sitamun may have been Amunhotep's daughter but, during I believe his first Jubilee, he married her and made his own daughter his queen. Sitamun is another candidate for Tut's mother.

I'm not saying that if there is a royal woman buried deeper in KV62, it had to have been Tut's mom. The point is simply that there are other possibilities. For that matter it could've been a harem queen unknown to us but one who found favor in her king and was allowed to be interred in the Valley of the Kings. And for that matter we can't say with certainty that KV62 was originally cut for a royal woman, so it remains possible that if there is another burial in there, it belongs to a male.

It makes one think. But it wasn't for the alien-hybrid lovechild of Tutankhamun and Nefertiti. I made that up. People get that, right?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This wasn't a knock against the Egyptologist, but I'd imagine it would be pretty hard to get backing to try to reexamine the tomb. Linking it to Nefertiti helped get a lot of press for this idea.

Wasn't trying to offer offense there.

I know it wasn't a knock against Reeves, but the guy is a serious researcher. I may not agree with some of his conclusions on this matter, but I don't doubt his motivations. If he's arguing the supposed burial might be for Nefertiti. he's writing what he sincerely believes. You can be sure of it.

And Reeves is no fringie with bizarre New Age beliefs. He doesn't believe in aliens or levitation or geysers or other falderal real historians will ignore. He is a serious and legitimate Egyptologist. I have to think that if his theory catches enough attention in the Egyptological community, the ministry of antiquities would be open to allowing some GPR investigation. Only time will tell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have no doubt he is a serious researcher, and I certainly don't think hes a fringie.

I do wonder though if while he is serious, hes trying to get hype so he can get funding and permission.

Honestly, I wonder even if there are more rooms if it wouldnt be like Geraldos vault.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have no doubt he is a serious researcher, and I certainly don't think hes a fringie.

I do wonder though if while he is serious, hes trying to get hype so he can get funding and permission.

Honestly, I wonder even if there are more rooms if it wouldnt be like Geraldos vault.

LOL Let's have Geraldo do a live TV opening of the walls! No, on second thought let's not. That would condemn it to failure.

The Valley of the Kings is replete with walled-off secret chambers. Nearly all had been penetrated and rifled by ancient tomb robbers. Sometimes they've yielded interesting finds, like the side chambers in KV35 in which were stacked the secondary burials of famous royals. So chances are good that if there are at least a couple of more chambers in KV62, they would contain artifacts, if not another burial. There is no evidence the plaster in those walls was ever breached.

And DieChecker is right. If there are more chambers loaded with bling and all manner of artifacts, it's perfect fodder for another traveling Tut exhibit! I'm always up for that.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good point, maybe if they get enough artifacts they'll toss em over to my neck of the woods.

Yeah, I do hope there is something, renarkable or not to be found. Bit of a cynic, I guess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, that won't work because it's all underground stone. Everything's the same temperature.

Lightly heat the wall for a couple hours then look with a thermal imager. If it is a door plastered over the the grout outline of the door will be noticeably different than the plaster over solid limestone. Or mist with clean water and just blow an exhaust fan at the surface. Plaster filling in voids will hold moisture longer than the thinner large coats on the wall.

Of course neither of these methods may be the best for preserving the plaster...

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lightly heat the wall for a couple hours then look with a thermal imager. If it is a door plastered over the the grout outline of the door will be noticeably different than the plaster over solid limestone. Or mist with clean water and just blow an exhaust fan at the surface. Plaster filling in voids will hold moisture longer than the thinner large coats on the wall.

Of course neither of these methods may be the best for preserving the plaster...

They would probably be even worse for preserving the paint, which has suffered from mold in recent years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.