Reconstruction of Tutankhamun's brother

[Tutankhaten-pasheri]

Tired of waiting for the DNA results for the prince previously sleeping between Queen Tye and Tutankhamun's mother in KV35, I stick my neck out, probably to get chopped off, and say that he is not Prince Thusmosis as I think he is too young, but he is Tutankhamun's younger brother. Saying he was older would make him Smenkhare, and I do not believe he is, though....

Anyway, he should have a name, so while it is unknown, and may always be unknown, why not call him Tutankhamun - pasheri. BTW, I deliberately misconstructed my forum name for supersticious reasons

The best quality photo to work from is that by G.E. Smith, yet I think it is a distorted image, I think it is not taken from directly level with the face, but from slightly below. Not being an artist, or expert with photoshop, I cannot correct this, so what I have done here is not as exact as I would like. In the left image I have clearly "repaired" the damage done by the tomb robbers. In the right image is what I think he may have looked like. I have tried to rectify as much of the damage done by mummification as I could, for instance the typical scrawny neck, shrivelled lips and shrunken and distorted nose. His left ear was mostly missing, so I reconstructed it from the right ear. I have not tried to bring his ears to life, but if you look at the other two photos (Tutankhamun as Khonsu and Nefertem) you will see a remarkable similarity. I cannot offer any concrete evidence to support what I think, it is only a very strong feeling that it is so. Perhaps one day SCA will tell us......

Tutankhamun as Khonsu, though thought by Loret to be based on the KV35 prince

Tutankhamun as Nefertem. I chopped the top of the head of because it is deliberately distorted to fit Armana artistic conventions, and can now be compared more realistically as it is the face that matters.

[+OverSword]

Interesting that the statue shows his skin was brown and his eyes were blue isn't it?

[Tutankhaten-pasheri]

Slightly amended version to make some small correction to ears and to correct the "smearing" effect on the lips during mumification. His lips are too wide on the original reconstruction. I will not enter debates about skin colour, I work from original monochrome photo and my limited skills as an artist only make any tinting look dreadful and very false. Clear

This is a very large image that can be downloaded to see better

Edited April 11, 2013 by Atentutankh-pasheri

[kmt_sesh]

Love the idea, Atentutankh. It inspired me to give it a shot myself, so here's what I came up with:

I found the eyes to be the most difficult. They are what bring something like this to life. What I discovered is that Elisabeth Daynes I am not! She's the renowned Parisian forensic artist who did the most famous bust of King Tut, and she's done a number of fantastic hyper-realistic reconstructions for the Field Museum here in Chicago.

In fact, I used the eyes from Tut's bust and performed some modifications to accommodate the size and features of a young child. For the lips and mouth I borrowed from the wooden mannequin of Tut, with the same modifications. The mummy's actual mouth is frozen in a rictus of death and doesn't look right, so I attempted to give my recreation a smaller and more pouty mouth. The mummies of the bodies of males from this royal line sometimes reveal a largish nose, so I carried that through with this boy. I added some bling from Tut's tomb for the boy to wear and threw in a generic background. I also gave the image a sepia effect in coloration for that "vintage" look. I wanted to make the skin color darker because the royal line to which this boy and Tut belonged (the Tuthmosides) originated from southern Egypt and were probably fairly dark skinned, but I couldn't make it work and left it as is.

This was fun, and if I've learned one thing, it's that it is damn hard to make a 3,300 yeard old dead body look lifelike!

[kmt_sesh]

Now, I'll add my two cents about this mummified boy since Atentutankh brought it up. The short answer is, we don't know for certain who in the hell he was. For some bizarre reason he was not subjected to the extensive DNA analyses conducted on the Amarna mummies in 2007 to 2009, despite the fact that the mummies on either side of him in the side chamber of KV35 were part of the testing. That's an important avenue of evidence we're lacking, so there are many people hoping this mummy's DNA will be analyzed at some point.

Examinations of his body show that this boy was probably around eleven when he died. I am not in possession of a single report on this mummy, so I'm not sure how they gaged his age but I imagine it was through the standard approach: X-rays revealing the status of his epiphyses, dental growth, and the like at the time of death. His identification with Prince Tuthmose, eldest son of Amunhotep III and older brother of Akhenaten, is very popular in many circles, professional historians included. This is only a theory, mind you, so for the time being we cannot corroborate it.

I would have to disagree with Atentutankh about the age of this prince at death. For a long time I doubted the youthful demise of Prince Tuthmose, too. Now I see it differently. The fact is, for a crown prince, there are exceedingly few monuments that can be connected with Prince Tuthmose, so that does in fact argue for a young death. This does not befit the status of a prince who lived longer and who was part of a powerful and renowned court such as that of Amuhotep III's, so the overall evidence would seem to fit (as scant as it is).

This mummified boy almost certainly lived in Dynasty 18, and he is the only unaccounted-for prince who survives from the monuments of Amunhotep III. Therefore, the theory that this mummy is indeed the body of Tuthmose is fairly reliable. However, it is of course not the only possibility. We have no idea how many princes and princesses down through pharaonic history went unrecorded or only minimally recorded—or whose records (monuments) did not survive or are yet to be found. Amunhotep III reigned for a long time and had numerous wives and concubines, so it's also possible that this boy is someone else altogether.

I personally doubt that he was the brother of Tutankhamun, per Atentutankh's hypothesis, but neither I nor anyone else can dismiss it altogether. There's always a possibility—it's just that there's no evidence to support it.

That's one of the appeals of Egyptology, however: it's like an endless detective mystery.

[SpiritWriter]

I went to tutankhaman exhibit like 5 months ago I liked it emensly and bought the book. Dna findings are incredible

[Tutankhaten-pasheri]

Now, I'll add my two cents about this mummified boy since Atentutankh brought it up. The short answer is, we don't know for certain who in the hell he was. For some bizarre reason he was not subjected to the extensive DNA analyses conducted on the Amarna mummies in 2007 to 2009, despite the fact that the mummies on either side of him in the side chamber of KV35 were part of the testing. That's an important avenue of evidence we're lacking, so there are many people hoping this mummy's DNA will be analyzed at some point.

Ah, but he was probed by Hawass in 2010

Excellent reconstruction you made! , better nose, lips and eyes than mine. I cheated on the eyes and make up as it is lifted directly from Tutankhamun's mask, with a few tweaks to fit properly. I think probably you may have access to better photos than me. I don't subscribe to KMT, and by the time I realised there was a big article about the KV35 mummies in the last issue, it was sold out One thing I found, was that doing this makes you think much more harder about who they were, what they really looked like. I was never properly satisfied with any of the reconstructions of Tutankhamun. I would have been more convinced if the various artists who did several versions, could all have been given a cast of his skull and told nothing about who it was. But too late now and we all see the controvesy.... I looked closely at the Thusmosid noses and clearly they had big noses in profile, almost like some Native American noses. I think here about the images of Red Cloud. And no, I don't suggest some link!

This princes nose has been squashed, but on the above photo you can see it would have been very similar to his ancestors, and I think, perhaps slightly snub at the end. I know Tutankhamun has a rather oriental, to me, ending of his nose in profile, but there is something about this prince's nose, even damaged, that suggest a different shape at the end, not radically, perhaps more like Thusmosis IV seems to be. But it is not certain because of the damage. I tried not to be too swayed by how Tutankhamun looked, because it would have been too easy to make this prince look exactly like him, and perhaps that would be a cheat too far, though without doubt he does look very closely related. I think I made him not look close enough like Tutankhamun and perhaps more like Nefertiti. I only realised this after I had made my reconstruction, and I'm not sure anybody else will see a likeness. Oh what a can of worms Armarna can be!

About who he is. Well, I think we will at least know if he is a brother of Tutankhamun when SCA decide to tell us. Perhaps when they eventually manage to secure all the sites and have time.... I certainly rule him out as Webensenu as I think the priests who placed him between Queen Tye and Tutankhamun's mother knew exactly who he was and placed him by his mother, which ever of the two it was ..... To an extent it is like tossing a coin to decide if he was Prince Thutmose, or an unknown. Certainly he could have been given all those titles, yet I wonder about the sarcophagus of Ta-miu being found at Memphis, and I believe no funeral goods, shabtis, anything connected with Prince Thutmose have been found at any of the Theban burial grounds. If he had lived, presumably, mostly at Malkata if a son of Amunhotep III, I cannot see him at that age in some role at Memphis, dying and being buried there, only to be removed to Thebes some decades later, or even to Akhetaten and then to Thebes. Somebody hurry and invent a time machine!

Edited April 12, 2013 by Atentutankh-pasheri

[Tutankhaten-pasheri]

There are known knowns; there are things we know that we know.

There are known unknowns; that is to say, there are things that we now know we don't know.

But there are also unknown unknowns – there are things we do not know we don’t know.

I think Rumsfeld actually had Armarna in mind when he made this statement

However, I should perhaps have posted this picture first, as not all will have an image in their mind of the real condition of the KV35 prince. Also I made a comment about Nefertiti having some family likeness, so I should show her picture as well for comparison. From the front there does seem to me some similarity, particulary the ears, mouth and nose, but not the jawline and she does not have the characteristic round face, and I admit that in profile she is very un-Thutmosid (I consistantly misspelled that name in the other posts ) Though the mummies, particulary, Thutmosis IV do not always look like their statues from frontal aspect, though at death he was clearly emaciated. Perhaps if a better photo of his son prince Amenemhat, lying in a heap of rubbish in KV43, was published we could get a better idea of Thutmosid features as his mummy seems in good condition, apart from the chest being ripped out, as usual. Anyway, I make no claim to Nefertiti being a blood relative of the KV35 prince or Tutankhamun, I just point out some important similarities. I have this strange sense of even now sinking into the Armarna swamp......

Another huge image I am afraid

[Tutankhaten-pasheri]

For the sake of completeness and leaving anybody wondering about persons mentioned but not shown. Here are the very poor quality photos of Prince Amenemhat. The first one shows him as he is now, unless moved recently, and even with such a bad photo it can be seen that his face seems in good condition. The second photo is of him as he was originaly found in KV43. I think this is the saddest photo of any mummy I have ever seen. Propped up against a wall like firewood for over 3,400 years, and now laying in rubbish. Mostly remains of cows for funeral feast of Thutmosis IV. They may be long dead, but this offends me....

He would be the KV35 prince's uncle or great uncle. And of note is that like KV35 prince, his left hand is clenched and the right extended. Queen Tye has her left hand clenched and across her chest, so I wonder if the left hand postion of these two princes indicates one level of importance below a queen. Prince Amenemhat was crown prince until his early death. Perhaps KV35 prince was also a crown prince if the hand positions are that important. This would push the argument more to him being crown prince Thutmose. But there are not that many examples to get a correct idea of this

Edited April 13, 2013 by Atentutankh-pasheri

[Tutankhaten-pasheri]

Probably indulgent to resurect my own thread, but didn't want to start a new one when what I have to say fits here better than more recent topics.

However, I began by saying "Tired of waiting the DNA results....". Well unfortunately still no results, but hope on the horizon. I know there is bitter rivalry between different camps in the world of DNA studies, some saying it is impossible to obtain DNA from Egyptian mummies more than the required, at minimum, 70 strands length, and others who say it is possible. There had been no meeting point between these two opposing camps. However, it now seems that new techniques by Albert Zink, involving DNA from mummies hair, were it is protected within the core of the hair, may be the answer. It is said that it may even be possible to obtain a complete genome from this. This is not the technique used to give the highly contested DNA findings on the Armarna mummies that we use at this moment. I have gone with these findings, generally, as there was nothing else. This new technique is very expensive though, beyond what Egypt would want to afford at this time, unless with help probably from big TV company, as we know was often the case until the revolution. But it seems these new techniques may give the "wrong" results, as we have now depending on your POV, ethnic/racial background, but these results would probably nail these questions down firmly and finally. There is a situation like the three bears for the Egyptian government. Results showing origins too far South would not be acceptable, just as results from too far North would be unacceptable. Seems only a result to show them in the middle, from Egypt, would be "just right". I think the results would be "just right", but a pity the Egyptians are scared to put this to the test. For those not getting heated by these debates about origins, it is dissapointing as we simply want to know conclusively about the Armarna familial relationships. I think all the mummies in question have hair, the prince who was the reason for this thread has plenty enough for testing. Though there are two major exceptions, the skeleton from KV55 and KV35YL. These are, IMO, the two crucial bodies, and they have no hair.....

[kmt_sesh]

To be fair I don't think the actual scientists involved in the original Amarna mummy studies cared one whit about race or ethnicity. It was not relevant to their research. It was only people out on the fringe—and generally people not terribly well informed to begin with—who tried to make this an issue. The one main change toward the positive, at least in this instance, might be the absence of Zahi Hawass. He tended to overshadow the original Amarna tests too much. That's how we ended up being fed the line about KV55 being Akhenaten, which is something I flatly do not buy to this day.

Let's be brutally honest here: legitimate scientists and historians really don't give a crap what afrocentrists, eurocentrists, and fringies in general have to say, so they will go on being ignored.

As for hair, you forgot about Tut himself—bald as a baby's butt. There is also Amunhotep III, who is more skeletal than flesh. Lastly, there is the mummy which might be Ankhesenamun (designated KV21A, see at left in this image). The original studies are hesitant to identify this mummy because of uncertain results relating to the genetics between it and the two still-born girls found in Tut's tomb, but they'll definitely get no hair from her—considering she has no head! Bummer. Oh, and as far as that goes, the two still-born girls are baldies, too.

Incidentally, I recently read a new article in Smithsonian magazine in which Hawass was interviewed. It's a fairly long and rather entertaining piece. Hawass spent the entire interview insisting he doesn't even want his old position back...but in the subtext you can just tell he's desperate to get his old position back.

[Tutankhaten-pasheri]

That's how we ended up being fed the line about KV55 being Akhenaten, which is something I flatly do not buy to this day

Yes, I still think that his body was destroyed, and possibly that of Nefertiti as well.

I had forgotten the two KV21 mummies, but was taking the bald Tutankhamun as a sort of fixed point as we know who he is by name 100%.

What prompted my post was the new book "The Shadow King" by Jo Marchant. She has interviewed people and had access to material that we do not normally get to know about, including interview with Hawass, who clearly now thinks he has some "divine mission" to save Egypt. We have not seen the last of him. Without plagiarism or serious spoilers, there is some startling revelations in this book, such as deliberate interference with Tutankhamun's jaws and skull beyond the rough treatment we know he was subjected to, and appaling nonsense done to one of his feet, the one now proclaimed to be a "club foot"............ However, this is a book that also demolishes, again, the fringe nonsense surrounding Armarna, Osman comes in for a severe lashing. And there is a complete chapter in some detail about the DNA aspects, and another startling revalation about the documentary that started all the fighting between Afros and Euros off. I probably said enough and am sounding like an advert

Edited June 23, 2013 by Tutankhaten-pasheri

[Tutankhaten-pasheri]

Well, seeing what has already appeared in other places online, a bit more. Tutankhamun's left foot, which we have been told is essentially lame, hence all the walking sticks, had, by a member of Carter's team, a blowtorch put to it to clear away all the resin! More startling is the revelation that the scene in the Tut unwrapped documentary, the scene were the DNA sequences could be clearly seen on a monitor, well, this scene was not "live", it was some reconstruction staged later and edited into the documentary that we saw broadcast. So, all the people, Afro and Euro, who have made various youtube videos and very many disgusting comments on these videos, should have a rethink, as should we all. There are other revelations of course, and if she is correct, and so far there is nothing to say she is not, then she has exposed very sloppy work at the least, and perhaps a heap of lies as well.........

[Tutankhaten-pasheri]

A bit further. His footwear shows no signs of unusual wear, on all sandals the wear is equal and in the same places on left and right sandal. If he had such a problem at his young age to need a stick to assist in walking, then it can be reasonably presumed that he would have favoured his right foot more than the "damaged" left. This would show in greater wear to the right sandal, and a pattern of wear to the left that would be different to the right. But all are the same. Parts of his mummy were removed to Liverpool, small parts, but still parts. His head and underside of jaw was partially "reconstructed" by Carter's team to cover damage greater than we already knew about. Even Christiane Desroches Noblecourt did not suspect this in her "expose". There is of course no doubt cast on the identity of the mummy (Don't want to go there again....), only on it's treatment and subsequent interpretation of his health and possible cause of death.