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 -

Amarna, Before and After


Wistman

Recommended Posts

@Wepwawet  I still am wondering if any testing for plague was done on Queen Tiye, as she may have died of it.  Can't find any confirmation of it.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Wistman said:

@Wepwawet  I still am wondering if any testing for plague was done on Queen Tiye, as she may have died of it.  Can't find any confirmation of it.

Yes, and all the other mummies in the 2007 - 2009 programme. The only disease they found was malaria, and none of the mummies had buboes. This sort of thing survives as Ramesses V shows clear pockmarks from smallpox.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Still unknown as to her cause of death, correct?  Hawass's 2010 papers don't include it anyway; the scans must not have revealed much about that.

Edited by Wistman
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Wistman said:

Still unknown as to her cause of death, correct?  Hawass's 2010 papers don't include it anyway; the scans must not have revealed much about that.

Nothing known. G.E. Smith could find nothing, the University of York could find nothing and Hawass and Saleem could find nothing. Unless she had an obvious injury from a violent death, such as the YL, then I guess there's not much that can be ascertained. With her entire body cavity gone she could have been gored by a bull but we could never know, or ever know about  a systemic illness such as pneumonia.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a rather morbid question that I've wondered about over the years, and that is how long it takes a mummy to become as friable as they are today.

What got me thinking was the right arm of the YL which seems to have been ripped off. Many mummies have robber damage, and she has that, but unless the mummy has been hacked up, they often still have their limbs and head attached. So, and ignoring the wound to her face, the hole in her head and the damage to her chest cavity, it doesn't look to me that the arm is necessarily robber damage. It could have been ripped off in transit from tomb to tomb, but I don't really see that either. There is also good indication that when they were moved for the last time in ancient times, and unwrapped as well, they must have been far more pliable than they are now, for I think if not then they would be missing all sorts of bits, fingers, hands, feet, hair. The boy's feet were still attached when Loret found the tomb in 1898, but had both come off by the time the 2007 scans were made, and his hair is now apparently in a bad way, which it was not in 1898.

So, ignoring obvious robber damage, I would say that to survive being unwrapped and then shunted around in antiquity without bits falling off them as happens now, they must have still had some flexibility or they would have been found in a far worse condition that they actually were. This then comes back to the right arm of the YL. It has not fallen off, it has not been hacked or cut off, something that would have been done while still wrapped as a quicker way of getting to the jewelry, but it has been wrenched off, a very deliberate act that I think has nothing to do with robbery or bad handling. The University of York examination of the boy also found that when the robbers cut a large hole in the left side of his chest, they were able to roll the flesh back from his ribs and up to his collar bone, something that would be impossible now as the skin would just fall apart and crumble to dust. See photo in this post

Therefore, and as esoteric as it probably sounds, the right arm of the YL seems to have been deliberately wrenched off when her skin was still pliable, leaving the questions of why, and how long after mummification would they have been able to do this before the mummy had fully dried out, decades? putting this damage into the reign of Horemheb, or centuries, making it possible for this damage to have been done around the time the caches were made. I can imagine there might be some reason, though what I have no idea, in the decades after her death, or even months, but not after several centuries. And the spare arm?

Edited by Wepwawet
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thread cleaned again

@Thanos5150 - enough with the off-topic posts please, if you want to discuss something different, start a new thread.

Thank you.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sekhmet moves in mysterious ways, as did the Amarna mummies, so, I wonder if trying to work out which tombs they were playing musical chairs in is just too mysterious to work out, and perhaps it might be more helpful to try and work out why they were moved. Though I think the two aspects may be so linked that it is impossible to disentangle it all. But at least a start can be made at Amarna, the only place were we are on more or less firm footing as we know a number of personalities were, or should, have been buried there, and we have a "should" and an immediate issue due to needing some guesswork.

So, I think without any doubt we have the three daughters, Meketaten, and her sarcophagus was found in the tomb to re-enforce her presence on the tomb walls, Neferneferure and Setepenre. I wonder if the last two would have had a sarcophgus each as they may have been too young, and just had a coffin. Tiye's sarcophagus was found, so as she died around year 12 it's reasonably cerrtain that she was buried in the royal tomb, likewise with Akhenaten as his sarcophagus was there and he died before Amarna was abandoned. Smenkhkare does not get included as a potential inhabitant of the royal tomb, though if, and that will always be an if, he is the KV35 boy, then he may well have also been buried in TA26, and besides, even if the boy is not Smenkhkare he has to be a candidate to be buried there, if, another if, he died at Amarna.

They are all then moved at some point, but what point that is nobody knows except to say that the sealing of KV55 and it's burial under a flash flood at a point not long after the death of Tutankhamun, maybe into the reign of Horemheb, is perhaps a cut off point, for instance, Akhenaten must have been moved by that point. I'm not sure the reason for their removal from TA26 is as clear cut as is usually suggested, that as the capital had moved then they could not be protected. Let's look at that. Memphis was the capital after the move from Amarna, and Memphis is closer to Amarna than Thebes is. Is it a case of them being able to be better protected at Thebes though as that is were the royal necropolis is, quite likely, but as the tomb builders were also the tomb robbers, just how safe were they presumed to be, in fact, for the most part, not safe at all. And I'll leave it at this point until tomorrow.

Edited by Wepwawet
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, continuing. If for the sake of argument there are around from five to seven mummies in TA26 when Amarna is abandoned, would they all be moved at the same time. Akhenaten expresses the wish on the boundary stelae that he and his family should all be buried in Amarna, but when you are dead you loose control of events. As it is his own family in the form of Tutankhamun re-burying them, I think it could be expected that he would keep them all together in the same tomb, and this would not be that different to any previous 18th Dynasty royal burials, though I'm not sure of any mother of a king being buried with them. Though small, KV55 could fit all of them, and most will be children in small coffins anyway. The issue then is if all the mummies from TA26 were moved to KV55, why were they all moved out except Akhenaten, and I think we can safely say that at least Tiye had been in KV55 due to her shrine being found there, probably left dismantled in the process of being moved out, and then a "stop order".

I cannot think of a reason why any of the mummies in KV55 would be removed as this tomb is no more unsafe for them as any others in the VoK, and in retrospect, apart from flood damage, would have been an ideal burial, but that is with our 20/20 vision hindsight of course. So, and while this suppostion, it has to be, if all of them had been in KV55, why then split them up, with three in KV35 and the three daughters still missing, clearly because they had been placed in another tomb, either still to be found, or wrecked so badly that their mummies have probably been destroyed, or become fragments that nobody has any interest in, and unfortunately that is the more likely outcome I think.

As Tiye was known, with reasonable certainty, to be in TA26 and then KV55, she is a good indicator of movement, and that she is with two other Amarna mummies in KV35, and no others, none of the three daughters, poses the issue of not just why they are there, but why no others, why spilt them up, unless of course they had been split up on the move from Amarna, but how can we ever know, and it still leaves the question as to why. And I'll continue later.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Wepwawet said:

So, continuing. If for the sake of argument there are around from five to seven mummies in TA26 when Amarna is abandoned, would they all be moved at the same time. Akhenaten expresses the wish on the boundary stelae that he and his family should all be buried in Amarna, but when you are dead you loose control of events. As it is his own family in the form of Tutankhamun re-burying them, I think it could be expected that he would keep them all together in the same tomb, and this would not be that different to any previous 18th Dynasty royal burials, though I'm not sure of any mother of a king being buried with them. Though small, KV55 could fit all of them, and most will be children in small coffins anyway. The issue then is if all the mummies from TA26 were moved to KV55, why were they all moved out except Akhenaten, and I think we can safely say that at least Tiye had been in KV55 due to her shrine being found there, probably left dismantled in the process of being moved out, and then a "stop order".

I cannot think of a reason why any of the mummies in KV55 would be removed as this tomb is no more unsafe for them as any others in the VoK, and in retrospect, apart from flood damage, would have been an ideal burial, but that is with our 20/20 vision hindsight of course. So, and while this suppostion, it has to be, if all of them had been in KV55, why then split them up, with three in KV35 and the three daughters still missing, clearly because they had been placed in another tomb, either still to be found, or wrecked so badly that their mummies have probably been destroyed, or become fragments that nobody has any interest in, and unfortunately that is the more likely outcome I think.

As Tiye was known, with reasonable certainty, to be in TA26 and then KV55, she is a good indicator of movement, and that she is with two other Amarna mummies in KV35, and no others, none of the three daughters, poses the issue of not just why they are there, but why no others, why spilt them up, unless of course they had been split up on the move from Amarna, but how can we ever know, and it still leaves the question as to why. And I'll continue later.

Yes, I agree with what you said here and in the previous post.  Tutankhamun assuredly moved his family out of the Amarna cliffs, reasons easily being that they couldn't be kept secure there and maybe there had already been some robberies, and he probably wanted to restore the family, his family, to it's traditional royal necropolis under the auspices of a renewed Amun orthodoxy.  KV55 could have held most of them, but it isn't that large of a space.  So yes the thee princesses may have been put into another cache.  I wonder how much funerary equipment they actually had at TA26, the afterlife notions of Atenism may not have required so many magical objects and afterlife necessities.  The shrine of Tiye indicates there were grand items of royal splendor, as well as the necessary coffins and sarcophagi, but maybe not as many items as we might think.  In any case most of it all has been lost so it's just guessing on that score.

It's puzzling about the movements of the royal mummies, and why the KV55 king and his coffin was left there defaced and desecrated.  I can't understand why Horemheb would have a grudge against that individual, probably Akhenaten.  My understanding, such as it is (mostly from the epigraphic evidence in his earlier Saqqara tomb), is that he respected the Thutmosid royal authority but his gripe was with Ay, and possibly his family (Horemheb did appoint many of his military cohorts to high government positions during his reign, supplanting the Akhmins.)   I suppose all the iconoclasm and such political demagoguery was meant to cement his own claim to the throne, as TIII had done to Hatshepsut's images; but maybe it was personal.   In any case somebody made the decision to single out the KV55 king and it must have been done under his authority.  Who else?  Paramessu?  He was the Northern Vizier and would succeed Horemheb, and start a new dynasty.  Funny that Horemheb, after so long and successful a reign, had no heirs of his own.

To where would the royal mummies in KV55 have been moved?  And why weren't they re-wrapped and docketed in KV35 (I suspect they were meant to get the same treatment as the other mummies in there, but didn't for some reason.)  Maybe they went into KV22 with AIII which might have had some room for them, and then moved with him into KV35 for restoration, but were curiously left out of that ultimate process.  Maybe they were left for last and just ran out of time?

 

edit: clarity

Edited by Wistman
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Wistman said:

I wonder how much funerary equipment they actually had at TA26, the afterlife notions of Atenism may not have required so many magical objects and afterlife necessities.  The shrine of Tiye indicates there were grand items of royal splendor, as well as the necessary coffins and sarcophagi, but maybe not as many items as we might think.  In any case most of it all has been lost so it's just guessing on that score.

 

For some reason, probably the excitement of this thread lately, I said that Tiye's sarcophagus was found in TA26, it wasn't of course, and I was thinking of her shrine in KV55. However, while TA26 does not have the usual four storage chambers around the burial chamber, I think it did contain burial goods, not least because of the size of the chamber. Fragments of the decoration show burial goods, so if they appear on the wall they are likely to have actually been there and not just be magical, likewise the decoration of the tomb of Huya shows a full array of goods, chariots, beds, chairs etc, so I think having a lot of burial goods was still a thing. I would think though that the nature of them would be different to what we find in KV62, perhaps just personal items as there would be no shrines with statues of gods, and no Anubis, but canopic shrine probably yes, and there are the canopic jars in KV55.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, Wepwawet said:

For some reason, probably the excitement of this thread lately, I said that Tiye's sarcophagus was found in TA26, it wasn't of course, and I was thinking of her shrine in KV55. However, while TA26 does not have the usual four storage chambers around the burial chamber, I think it did contain burial goods, not least because of the size of the chamber. Fragments of the decoration show burial goods, so if they appear on the wall they are likely to have actually been there and not just be magical, likewise the decoration of the tomb of Huya shows a full array of goods, chariots, beds, chairs etc, so I think having a lot of burial goods was still a thing. I would think though that the nature of them would be different to what we find in KV62, perhaps just personal items as there would be no shrines with statues of gods, and no Anubis, but canopic shrine probably yes, and there are the canopic jars in KV55.

Yes, the royals were all mummified, so the canopics and their shrines would be a necessary adjunct.  The KV55 canopic jars are particularly beautiful as these thing go, the others must have been so too.  Maybe many things were smashed and pilfered before the move to VotK.  We can also imagine, based on Tiye's and Neferneferuaten's/Tutankhamun's shrines, that there were more of these bulky glittering structures crowded in TA26, maybe not for all of the family members, but surely the principal ones.  Tiye's and Nefertiti's made it back to Thebes, but the others couldn't all have been contained in KV55, even if the mummies went there.  It's a curious thing about all the Amarna royal funerary goods, which no doubt were glorious.  Were they pilfered in situ before the relocation, or during it?  Were the sarcophagi already smashed and reported back to Memphis?  Were shrines damaged to get inside them?  Were the mummies already ripped open and their jewelry stolen?   There may have been major security lapses after Tutankhamun moved back to Memphis.  Even likely.  And many things could easily have gone missing while warehoused or during the move.  King Nefertiti had died and the regular order of state enterprises, such as they were during her reign, may have been poorly supervised during that transition of authority and state.

Maybe the KV55 king's coffin and goods were looted and wrecked back in TA26, thus the necessity of using Kiya's (stored) goods, some of which also made it into Tut's tomb (the canopic jars).

Edited by Wistman
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Wistman said:

 

Maybe the KV55 king's coffin and goods were looted and wrecked back in TA26, thus the necessity of using Kiya's (stored) goods, some of which also made it into Tut's tomb (the canopic jars).

Speculating, I have an idea that Akhenaten's inner coffin was melted down and not reused. What makes me think this is Fletcher's proposal that Amunhotep III's body had been encased in gold in some way, sort of "gold plated". Whether or not this "gold statue" was mounted like a ka statue is another matter. Though even if Akhenaten was not "gold plated" and the KV55 mummy was in fact a normal mummy, I would not be surprised if his coffins were not normal at all, and not usable for a traditional Osirian burial, or even able to be converted. The KV55 coffin gives us no real clues here as it was never made for a king, only converted. And why did he need a converted coffin? surely because his own were not available. It would be understandable that he was not buried in his original innergold  coffin, but as he was not buried in either of the two wooden outer coffins does to me indicate that they had gone, dismantled, melted down, whatever. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Wepwawet said:

Speculating, I have an idea that Akhenaten's inner coffin was melted down and not reused. What makes me think this is Fletcher's proposal that Amunhotep III's body had been encased in gold in some way, sort of "gold plated". Whether or not this "gold statue" was mounted like a ka statue is another matter. Though even if Akhenaten was not "gold plated" and the KV55 mummy was in fact a normal mummy, I would not be surprised if his coffins were not normal at all, and not usable for a traditional Osirian burial, or even able to be converted. The KV55 coffin gives us no real clues here as it was never made for a king, only converted. And why did he need a converted coffin? surely because his own were not available. It would be understandable that he was not buried in his original innergold  coffin, but as he was not buried in either of the two wooden outer coffins does to me indicate that they had gone, dismantled, melted down, whatever. 

Well, if that's the case, all that gold maybe went straight into Tutankhamun's coffins and mask, at least the parts that weren't adapted or reused.  I wonder if Ay could have managed to keep the details of the operation secret from Horemheb.  Maybe he didn't know how much gold was buried with Tutankhamun, nested deep inside the sarcophagus and shrine.  Just a thought.

Edited by Wistman
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you think the TA26 mummies would have received the full burial ceremonial when re-interred in VotK?  Opening of the mouth and all the rest?

eta:

A page on YL in the current issue of Archaeology Magazine has Hawass saying this:

Quote

“We know that it is unlikely that either of Akhenaten’s known wives, Nefertiti or Kiya, was Tutankhamun’s mother, as there is no evidence from the sources that either was Akhenaten’s sister,” says Hawass. (Tut’s mother is known to have been one of Akhenaten’s sisters.) “Just which of his many sisters the Younger Lady is may never be known—he seems to have had almost forty sisters.”

Forty sisters he says.  Full sisters, like the YL?  Suddenly AIII's family is huge!  Oh he meant half sisters.  :no:  tsk-tsk  He funny.

Edited by Wistman
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Wistman said:

Do you think the TA26 mummies would have received the full burial ceremonial when re-interred in VotK?  Opening of the mouth and all the rest?

eta:

A page on YL in the current issue of Archaeology Magazine has Hawass saying this:

Forty sisters he says.  Full sisters, like the YL?  Suddenly AIII's family is huge!  Oh he meant half sisters.  :no:  tsk-tsk  He funny.

No, the first time is the only one that counts, for instance, the intial opening of the mouth frees the ba, and that's it, it does not need freeing again. I'm sure that some sort of ritual would have taken place though, and the magic bricks in KV55 are evidence of this.

I read that comment by Hawass about forty sisters, but I've never seen this number suggested by anybody else, so would like to know what his evidence is that nobody else seems to have found. It's not impossible, and there's Ramesses II with 100 children, and fifty sons in KV5, oddly only two, I think, skeletons discovered though, and they may be intrusive.

I think the thing with the YL though is that as a daughter of Tiye she ought to be more prominent, and of course we may well have her name, but just cannot know which is the right one. Henuttaneb and Nebetah are the only ones whose age is either not too old, such as Sitamun and Iset, or probably too young such as Beketaten. As no other daughters of Amunhotep III exist in surviving records, we really should only look to them, otherwise we are inventing daughters, and that includes Nefertiti, clearly a real person, but with no known origin, and that goes for Kiya, just like Nefertiti never being named as a king's daughter, but, does she have to be when her main title is wife of the king, for instance, Akhenaten is not styled as a king's eldest son because he IS the king.

Edited by Wepwawet
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Wepwawet said:

No, the first time is the only one that counts, for instance, the intial opening of the mouth frees the ba, and that's it, it does not need freeing again. I'm sure that some sort of ritual would have taken place though, and the magic bricks in KV55 are evidence of this.

I read that comment by Hawass about forty sisters, but I've never seen this number suggested by anybody else, so would like to know what his evidence is that nobody else seems to have found. It's not impossible, and there's Ramesses II with 100 children, and fifty sons in KV5, oddly only two, I think, skeletons discovered though, and they may be intrusive.

I think the thing with the YL though is that as a daughter of Tiye she ought to be more prominent, and of course we may well have her name, but just cannot know which is the right one. Henuttaneb and Nebetah are the only ones whose age is either not too old, such as Sitamun and Iset, or probably too young such as Beketaten. As no other daughters of Amunhotep III exist in surviving records, we really should only look to them, otherwise we are inventing daughters, and that includes Nefertiti, clearly a real person, but with no known origin, and that goes for Kiya, just like Nefertiti never being named as a king's daughter, but, does she have to be when her main title is wife of the king, for instance, Akhenaten is not styled as a king's eldest son because he IS the king.

Yes, I think Kiya could possibly be YL, a full sister of Akhenaten, but with name changed for Atenist reasons.   We've discussed it before.  What I dislike about Hawass's cagey statement is that he throws out the 40 number as if it were a possibility that any of them could be YL and therefore we can't ever know which one is Tut's mother because there's just too many options!!!  Well that's pretty deceptive of him and I guess he's just throwing out pablum for the general audience because we know the YL must be a full sister of Akhenaten, and they are few.  And, as you note, from where exactly does he derive that number to begin with?

There are so many data gaps re the Amarna mummies my head is swimming trying to think of a reasonably coherent narrative.  Where did the missing princesses go.  When did the disbursement from KV55 occur.  Sheesh.

Edited by Wistman
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Wistman said:

Yes, I think Kiya could possibly be YL, a full sister of Akhenaten, but with name changed for Atenist reasons.   We've discussed it before.  What I dislike about Hawass's cagey statement is that he throws out the 40 number as if it were a possibility that any of them could be YL and therefore we can't ever know which one is Tut's mother because there's just too many options!!!  Well that's pretty deceptive of him and I guess he's just throwing out pablum for the general audience because we know the YL must be a full sister of Akhenaten, and they are few.  And, as you note, from where exactly does he derive that number to begin with?

There are so many data gaps re the Amarna mummies my head is swimming trying to think of a reasonably coherent narrative.  Where did the missing princesses go.  When did the disbursement from KV55 occur.  Sheesh.

Kiya could fit to be the YL using the same arguments as for any sister of Akhenaten, the problems being we don't know who she is, and her name. But, speculating, it could go like this. The last date for Kiya is year 11, she could have lived longer of course, with no evidence surviving, but to avoid to many inventions I'll keep to year 11. If she is the YL, then even at the youngest age estimate at death of twenty she will have been aged nine in year 1. She does not appear until the move to Amarna in year 5, and by then be fourteen, old enough in their times for marriage and birth. She would have been seventeen by the birth of Tutankhaten in about year 8, and there are more than enough years before and after that in order to have two daughters. This then brings us to her death in year 11 aged twenty, but as that is the lowest age, if she were, say, twenty five, this still fits, and puts her at age fourteen in year 1, not far behind the presumed age of Akhenaten. The story that she had been banished, a sloppy invention I think, and one which fell flat on it's face with Nefertiti, could then become one of an accident, the horse kick to the face. This would also put paid to fantasies that Nefertiti killed her out of jealousy. That Kiya's depictions have been appropriated, the cause of the unfounded fantasies, is nothing more than their usual practice, it's not malice, just making best use of something to fit a change in circumstances.

Of course there are all sorts of issues, and it is just speculation. Why, if the canopic jars and coffin in KV55 were originally hers was she not using them, why has she been turfed out of her coffin. But this is a minor matter compared to the fact that only Tutankhamun was found in his own coffin, and the rest of his family left laying about unwrapped, except KV55, and none of them with a name. Why, with a seeming lack of coffins, do we have a stash of unused coffins from that period in KV63, filled with pillows of all things. Mystery upon mystery upon mystery.

Edited by Wepwawet
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I was rambling on about how long it took mummies to become as brittle as they are today, and in relation to how the YL has lost her right arm, I may have missed the forest for the trees, and perhaps we all have. This comes down to the injury to her face, which is either going to be caused by a horse kick or a weapon, I cannot think of any other reason. If this is a blow from a weapon, an axe or sword, and the end of a khepesh is rather axe like, then I question this as being an assasination. The wound by it's angle looks like a wound sustained in a mele, not what ought to be a clinical assassination, such as cutting your throat as happened to Ramesses III. If this blow was delivered while she was, say asleep, why not hit her right on her cranium to ensure death, why hit her mouth. Of course the injury did cause death, but while swift, probably not instant and if assassination it looks really sloppy, even if successful, and, no follow up wound to make sure. I think if caused by human action this wound was caused perhaps by a lone loony swinging wildly and with no regard to him making his escape, an ancient "postal" by a man driven to distraction by the destruction of his orthodox religion, possible.

This wound being caused by a horse gets around having to essentially make stuff up, assassinations and lone wolf attacks, which all look exciting of course. Her injury is, by the judgement of a vet who has seen this before, typical of a horse kick. There are of course differences in the heights of humans and horses, but the human head is generally just at the right height for a typical horse kick. The YL is very short by modern standards, but horses were a bit shorter then as well. A horse kick will explain the angle and severity of the blow, and there being no follow up blow that might be expected by a human hand. So, the missing right arm. Horses can kick out with either one or both rear legs, and when kicking out with both, one hoof tends to be a bit lower than the other, and I've looked at a load of videos on Youtube showing horses kicking. I have not read an account of the condition of the exposed bone of the stump of her right arm, the only the mention it gets is that the arm is missing with no attempts made to explain why it could be missing. While in a previous post I used the term "wrenched off", it actually looks more like it was smashed off. Now of course robbers could have done this, but as the rest of her limbs are intact I'm not sure as they usually hack mummies to pieces, cutting off limbs rather than smashing them off. So, has this horse kicked out with both rear legs and hit her face and smashed her right arm?. I have no idea, but I think it does provide a rational explanation for both injuries that does not involve inventing nefarious human activity, no matter now much more exciting that would be, not for the YL and her family of course.

150811165139-nefertiti-mummy-discovery-c

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Wepwawet said:

When I was rambling on about how long it took mummies to become as brittle as they are today, and in relation to how the YL has lost her right arm, I may have missed the forest for the trees, and perhaps we all have. This comes down to the injury to her face, which is either going to be caused by a horse kick or a weapon, I cannot think of any other reason. If this is a blow from a weapon, an axe or sword, and the end of a khepesh is rather axe like, then I question this as being an assasination. The wound by it's angle looks like a wound sustained in a mele, not what ought to be a clinical assassination, such as cutting your throat as happened to Ramesses III. If this blow was delivered while she was, say asleep, why not hit her right on her cranium to ensure death, why hit her mouth. Of course the injury did cause death, but while swift, probably not instant and if assassination it looks really sloppy, even if successful, and, no follow up wound to make sure. I think if caused by human action this wound was caused perhaps by a lone loony swinging wildly and with no regard to him making his escape, an ancient "postal" by a man driven to distraction by the destruction of his orthodox religion, possible.

This wound being caused by a horse gets around having to essentially make stuff up, assassinations and lone wolf attacks, which all look exciting of course. Her injury is, by the judgement of a vet who has seen this before, typical of a horse kick. There are of course differences in the heights of humans and horses, but the human head is generally just at the right height for a typical horse kick. The YL is very short by modern standards, but horses were a bit shorter then as well. A horse kick will explain the angle and severity of the blow, and there being no follow up blow that might be expected by a human hand. So, the missing right arm. Horses can kick out with either one or both rear legs, and when kicking out with both, one hoof tends to be a bit lower than the other, and I've looked at a load of videos on Youtube showing horses kicking. I have not read an account of the condition of the exposed bone of the stump of her right arm, the only the mention it gets is that the arm is missing with no attempts made to explain why it could be missing. While in a previous post I used the term "wrenched off", it actually looks more like it was smashed off. Now of course robbers could have done this, but as the rest of her limbs are intact I'm not sure as they usually hack mummies to pieces, cutting off limbs rather than smashing them off. So, has this horse kicked out with both rear legs and hit her face and smashed her right arm?. I have no idea, but I think it does provide a rational explanation for both injuries that does not involve inventing nefarious human activity, no matter now much more exciting that would be, not for the YL and her family of course.

150811165139-nefertiti-mummy-discovery-c

All true of course and probably likely, but...

We've all read the histories of royal and powerful families through the ages, and the goings on to achieve certain ends.  For us to now see the injuries of YL and add the injuries of the YM, one with a deadly horse kick and the other with a deadly fall, respectively, supposedly, it all looks suspicious to me.  We would be suspicious if it were a Byzantine or Italian Renaissance royal or aristocratic family and we, I think, can't discount the possibility here.  It has to be an option.  It may be convenient to find mundane causes, but it is not a surety when so much power and wealth is at stake.  But I'm of course not married to the notion.  It's possible they were both deadly accidents.  The royal palace must have been a dangerous place in which to live.

 

Edited by Wistman
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What the University of York say is interesting, and a little more so now in view of what Hawass may announce. As regards injuries to the YL they point to a 12cm cut in the left side of her thorax, which they say is "problematic"  in that it cannot be associated with the wound to her face. They have not mistaken this for the embalming incision as that is covered separately. In "Scanning the Pharaohs" by Hawass and Saleem, in the section about her torso they make no reference to this injury, only the embalming incision, so it seems, by reading to that point, that the UofY have made an error, but no. In the section "Manner and cause of Death", while a kick from a horse is discussed as a possibility for the face wound, they also say this, "The skull defect on the front of the skull and the defect in the anterior wall of the body might have been inflicted by the same accident that caused the facial injury" I have to assume that the anterior wall defect is in fact the same injury to the thorax that the UofY described. A pity that there is this vagueness. The skull defect they mention is that they say, "The soft tissues adjacent to the wound are thickened in comparison to the corresponding tissues on the right side". I have no idea what the implications of this are, but will comment that whatever hit her face caused the flesh and bone of the left upper jaw to be displaced up and out, and this can be seen on the photo.

As regards similarities between the three KV35 mummies I'll quote from the UofY report. "Although the X-rays revealed some similarity between the Younger Woman and the two individuals buried with her, the likeness was not as marked as it was between the Elder Woman and the Boy." As they made this report in 2003 they would not have been swayed in any way by the future DNA results. Others who had seen these three mummies in the past had remarked that the boy shows some similarities with Tiye, particularly their noses. I assume that Tutankhamun will due to an incestuous marriage be 50% Akhmin if both his parents are also 50% Akhmin. IF Nefertiti is 100% Akhmin, and this is of course speculation, then the KV35 boy will take 50% Akhmin blood from her, and 25% ? from Akhenaten I don't know, but he could well have more Akhmin blood that the YL even though she is a daughter of Tiye, and so may carry an Akhmin nose due to having more Akhmin genes for this to happen. Did that make sense? probably not and I'm sure there are some gross inaccuracies :)

Edited by Wepwawet
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Wepwawet said:

As regards similarities between the three KV35 mummies I'll quote from the UofY report. "Although the X-rays revealed some similarity between the Younger Woman and the two individuals buried with her, the likeness was not as marked as it was between the Elder Woman and the Boy." As they made this report in 2003 they would not have been swayed in any way by the future DNA results. Others who had seen these three mummies in the past had remarked that the boy shows some similarities with Tiye, particularly their noses. I assume that Tutankhamun will due to an incestuous marriage be 50% Akhmin if both his parents are also 50% Akhmin. IF Nefertiti is 100% Akhmin, and this is of course speculation, then the KV35 boy will take 50% Akhmin blood from her, and 25% ? from Akhenaten I don't know, but he could well have more Akhmin blood that the YL even though she is a daughter of Tiye, and so may carry an Akhmin nose due to having more Akhmin genes for this to happen. Did that make sense? probably not and I'm sure there are some gross inaccuracies :)

How, in your opinion, is science able, by any means, to pinpoint if someone is from any given city from their blood or DNA?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Aldebaran said:

How, in your opinion, is science able, by any means, to pinpoint if someone is from any given city from their blood or DNA?

You are very well aware that calling a person an "Akhmin" is not the same as saying that they were born and bred in the city of Akhmin, but that it refers in broad terms to the family of Yuya and Thuya, who had come from Akhmin. The term is used as shorthand to describe people who are, or who are speculated to be blood relatives of theirs. When the latest results are announced, maybe next week, we will all hopefully get a better picture of whom is related by blood to who. As long as the results are accepted by the scientific community, then with new information we can move forward, even if it means discarding previously held opinions, for everybody, and, IMO, the slate should also be wiped clean so that fresh dialogue can begin using the new results as a base line.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Wepwawet said:

What the University of York say is interesting, and a little more so now in view of what Hawass may announce. As regards injuries to the YL they point to a 12cm cut in the left side of her thorax, which they say is "problematic"  in that it cannot be associated with the wound to her face. They have not mistaken this for the embalming incision as that is covered separately. In "Scanning the Pharaohs" by Hawass and Saleem, in the section about her torso they make no reference to this injury, only the embalming incision, so it seems, by reading to that point, that the UofY have made an error, but no. In the section "Manner and cause of Death", while a kick from a horse is discussed as a possibility for the face wound, they also say this, "The skull defect on the front of the skull and the defect in the anterior wall of the body might have been inflicted by the same accident that caused the facial injury" I have to assume that the anterior wall defect is in fact the same injury to the thorax that the UofY described. A pity that there is this vagueness. The skull defect they mention is that they say, "The soft tissues adjacent to the wound are thickened in comparison to the corresponding tissues on the right side". I have no idea what the implications of this are, but will comment that whatever hit her face caused the flesh and bone of the left upper jaw to be displaced up and out, and this can be seen on the photo.

As regards similarities between the three KV35 mummies I'll quote from the UofY report. "Although the X-rays revealed some similarity between the Younger Woman and the two individuals buried with her, the likeness was not as marked as it was between the Elder Woman and the Boy." As they made this report in 2003 they would not have been swayed in any way by the future DNA results. Others who had seen these three mummies in the past had remarked that the boy shows some similarities with Tiye, particularly their noses. I assume that Tutankhamun will due to an incestuous marriage be 50% Akhmin if both his parents are also 50% Akhmin. IF Nefertiti is 100% Akhmin, and this is of course speculation, then the KV35 boy will take 50% Akhmin blood from her, and 25% ? from Akhenaten I don't know, but he could well have more Akhmin blood that the YL even though she is a daughter of Tiye, and so may carry an Akhmin nose due to having more Akhmin genes for this to happen. Did that make sense? probably not and I'm sure there are some gross inaccuracies :)

Pity the KV21B mummy's head and face are now so incomplete, we can only partially make visual comparisons with her family, such as they are revealed to be.  And the Berlin head is now thought to be idealized, though only a little.  I like that the prince looks so like his grandmother (supposing Tiye is his grandmother, of course), somewhat for personal reasons though:  I look like my maternal grandfather, though my mom scarcely did.  ^_^  It's a fair point you make about the complex incision of the Akhmin bloodlines into the royal line.  Catastrophic for them that, at 19, Tut had no living offspring by any wife - which is another mystery to which we'll surely never know the answer.  Ay's taking of the throne was nothing more than a swan song before the family's doom.

Whatever delivered that blow to YL's face, it must have been a powerful strike.  And it sounds like there was massive swelling: she didn't die immediately.  Poor lady.

  • Like 3
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/14/2022 at 4:40 PM, Wepwawet said:

 

What got me thinking was the right arm of the YL which seems to have been ripped off. Many mummies have robber damage, and she has that, but unless the mummy has been hacked up, they often still have their limbs and head attached. So, and ignoring the wound to her face, the hole in her head and the damage to her chest cavity, it doesn't look to me that the arm is necessarily robber damage. It could have been ripped off in transit from tomb to tomb, but I don't really see that either. There is also good indication that when they were moved for the last time in ancient times, and unwrapped as well, they must have been far more pliable than they are now, for I think if not then they would be missing all sorts of bits, fingers, hands, feet, hair. The boy's feet were still attached when Loret found the tomb in 1898, but had both come off by the time the 2007 scans were made, and his hair is now apparently in a bad way, which it was not in 1898.

So, ignoring obvious robber damage, I would say that to survive being unwrapped and then shunted around in antiquity without bits falling off them as happens now, they must have still had some flexibility or they would have been found in a far worse condition that they actually were. This then comes back to the right arm of the YL. It has not fallen off, it has not been hacked or cut off, something that would have been done while still wrapped as a quicker way of getting to the jewelry, but it has been wrenched off, a very deliberate act that I think has nothing to do with robbery or bad handling. The University of York examination of the boy also found that when the robbers cut a large hole in the left side of his chest, they were able to roll the flesh back from his ribs and up to his collar bone, something that would be impossible now as the skin would just fall apart and crumble to dust. See photo in this post

Therefore, and as esoteric as it probably sounds, the right arm of the YL seems to have been deliberately wrenched off when her skin was still pliable, leaving the questions of why, and how long after mummification would they have been able to do this before the mummy had fully dried out, decades? putting this damage into the reign of Horemheb, or centuries, making it possible for this damage to have been done around the time the caches were made. I can imagine there might be some reason, though what I have no idea, in the decades after her death, or even months, but not after several centuries. And the spare arm?

people had a sense of humor back then, right?   I'm picturing a couple grave robbers looting the tomb and one of them rips the arm off in order to tap the other guy on the shoulder with it.   Just to scare him.  Ha ha.

  • Like 1
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.