posted
Scans of Tutankhamun’s mummy (left) and the bones from KV 55 seem to show similar elongated shape.
Mystery of the Mummy from KV55 Dr. Zahi Hawass
Our CT scan put Akhenaten squarely back in the running for the identity of the mummy from KV55. Our team was able to determine that the mummy may have been older at death than anyone had previously thought. Dr. Selim noted that the spine showed, in addition to slight scoliosis, significant degenerative changes associated with age. He said that although it is difficult to determine the age of an individual from bones alone, he might put the mummy’s age as high as 60. The jury is still out, but it is certainly tempting to think that Akhenaten has finally been found.
The Valley of the Kings still holds many mysteries. This coming year, we will begin DNA studies of the mummy from KV55, along with those of Tutankhamun and others, with hopes that DNA evidence will add even more to our understanding of this period.
There are still more royal tombs yet undiscovered. The tomb of Amenhotep I, for example, is unknown, although it may lie in the area of Deir el-Bahri. There are also many mummies that have never been identified: The remains of Nefertiti, Tutankhamun’s wife Ankhsenamun and many others may still await discovery or identification.
Almost a hundred years after its discovery, KV 55 remains a subject of controversy. The evidence uncovered in the tomb is especially difficult to interpret because no one living today can be certain of exactly how things were found when Theodore Davis, Edward Ayrton, Arthur Weigall, and Gaston Maspero first entered the tomb. The written accounts produced by these men all contain discrepancies which make it impossible to formulate a clear, unambiguous version of the discovery. Worse, no one can even be sure of exactly what was found in KV 55 because some of the smaller objects were stolen by Davis's workers when the tomb was first opened, and were never included in Daressy's catalogue of the tomb's contents printed in Davis's The Tomb of Queen Tiyi (London, 1910.) Still other valuable artifacts (including the coffin basin which contained the much-discussed KV 55 mummy) were later stolen from the Cairo Museum, or misplaced and forgotten within its labyrinthine expanse of galleries, storage rooms and offices.
Over the years, some of these priceless relics of the Amarna period have resurfaced. Others, however, remain elusive. It is possible to trace their movements through the hands of various collectors up to a certain point, and then the trail abruptly ends. In what follows, some of the more rewarding trails are charted. They lead the traveler through a strange world of antiquities dealers, secretive collectors, old diaries, forgotten museum ledgers, and elite auctions. ( Link)
.
.
Posts: 1549 | From: California, USA | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Looking at the shape of Tut/Akh crania and prognathism, how can anyone deny AE were anything other than Black African?
Posts: 148 | From: Sirius | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Actually, you'd be surprised at the depths of denial many Eurocentrics had. Thus, it wasn't long ago that Westerners accepted the very dak (black) skin color of the ancient Egyptians and so labeled them as 'Hamites' i.e. extremely dark/black 'caucasoids'.
Posts: 26307 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ That may be, but the belief was that all three progenies-- Japheth, Shem, and Ham were 'caucasoid' and therefore a different 'race' from "true negroids".
Posts: 26307 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Looking at the shape of Tut/Akh crania and prognathism, how can anyone deny AE were anything other than Black African?
You have an inferiority complex. Every time i try to read something about egypt one of you has to try and add something about the BLACK RACE. Or some equivilent rubbish.
And another thing....DNA testing is not as accurate as you may think. Atleast when it comes to differentiating one person from another it is marginally better than finger prints but repeats are possible. Not only this but same dna can have different morphology in the being. The DNA test only helps in determining a relationship between the skulls but even if they don't match it does not essentially mean they are not related.
Posts: 104 | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic