posted
Tutankhamun's Family: Five generations revealed by DNA testing..Images ...Source:Ancient Egypt Magazine; Apr/May2010, Vol. 10 Issue 5, p52-55, 4p, 2 Color Photographs, 2 Black and White Photographs. Document Type:Article. Subject Terms:*TOMBS DNA TOMOGRAPHY MUMMIES PARASITES MALARIA. Geographic Terms:VALLEY of the Kings (Egypt) EGYPT. People:TUTANKHAMEN, King of Egypt AKHENATON, King of Egypt TIYE, Queen of Egypt. Abstract:The article discusses the DNA and computed tomography (CT) scan analysis of the mummy of Tutankhamun, Eighteenth Dynasty pharaoh in Egypt and the mummies of his immediate family which reveal his lineage and cause of death. It notes that the body of Akhenaten, Tutankhamun's father, is identified with the mummy from the tomb KV55 in the Valley of the Kings. It further states that his mother's body is buried in the tomb of Amenhotep II and the body of his grandmother Queen Tiye is found in the mummy of the Elderly Lady from the same tomb. Moreover, it emphasizes that Tutankhamun died due to the parasite that causes malaria..
Tutankhamun's Family: Five generations reveaied by DNA testing In the middle of February, the long-awaited results of the DNA tests made on some of the royal mummies in the Egyptian Museum in Cairo, specifically on the family of Tutankhamun, were announced. Perhaps not surprisingly they received much media publicity on television, radio and especially in the newspapers. However, most of the reports I saw were summaries of the history of the period and included only edited extracts from the official Press Release, which itself is only a précis of the scientific findings published elsewhere. It wouid seem that many people have suddeniy become DNA and royal mummy experts, with many comments and criticisms even in advance of the Press Release. To criticise the science and techniques used, one would need to see and understand the full scientific report, though for most of us the Press Release contains as much information as we need to know. Some of the comments questioned the accuracy of DNA extraction from mummies and the veracity of the results. Suffice it to say that I am reliably informed by experts in the fieid that it is possible to extract DNA from mummies, if done carefully, and that the DNA so extracted can then be analysed. The extraction of DNA from ancient remains is, however, not an easy process and great care is needed. Small tissue samples are taken, in the case of mummies, often from inside the body using any openings caused by embalming or subsequent ancient damage to the body. The samples often need to be surface-decontaminated to remove any contamination that has resulted from handling or exposure to the environment. Bones are especially good, as their mineral content protects the DNA. It is good practice for samples to be sent to two independent laboratories who each conduct their tests and then compare notes afterwards. Only if the results agree can the tests prove to have been a success. Ancient DNA does not always survive well, but when successfully extracted, it can help to differentiate between very close relationships, such as parents and siblings, and more distant relations such as grandparents/grandchildren and other more remote family members. There follows the SCA Press Release, which is clear and concise. I have added my own comments (in blue) on the mummies in question and on previous problems with their identification: DNA and CT-scan analysis of the mummy of the Eighteenth Dynasty pharaoh Tutankhamun {ca. 1333-1323 BC) and of mummies either known or believed to be members of his immediate family have revealed startling new evidence for the young king's lineage and cause of death. An additional outcome of the new study, in which DNA analysis was able to be used eficctively on ancient Egy])tian mummies for the first time, is that several previously unidentified mummies can now be given names. These studies were carried out by Egyptian scientists and international consultants as part of the Family of Tutankhannm Project, under the leadership of Dr. Zahi Hawass. These findings have been published byJAVlA, the Journal of the American Medical Association, in their February 17, 2010, edition (XWume 303, no. 7). The principal conclusions made by the team are that: Tutankhamun's father was the 'heretic' king, /\klienaten, whose body is now almost certainly identified with the mummy from tomb KV55 in the Valley of the Kings. His mother, who still cannot be identified by name, is the 'Younger Lady' buried in the tomb of Amenhotep II (in the Valley of the Kings, KV35). The mummy of the 'Elder Lady' from tlie same tomb can now be conclusively identified as Tutankhamun's grandmother, Queen Tiye. New light was shed on the cause of death for Tutankliamun with the discovery of DNA from the parasite that causes malaria; it is likely that the young king died from complications resulting from a severe form of this disease. The primary analysis was carried out in a newly-buüt DNA laboratory at the Egyptian Museum, Cairo dedicated to ancient DNA; this was donated to the project by Discovery. Two types of DNA analysis were performed on samples taken from the bones of these mummies — analysis of specific nuclear DNA sequences from the Y-chromosome, which is passed directly from father to son, to study tlie paternal line; and genetic fingerprinting from the autosomal DNA of the nuclear genome that does not directly decide a person's sex. To autlienticate the DNA results, the analyses were repeated and independently replicated in a newly equipped ancient-DNA laboratory staffed by a separate group of personnel. The CT-scans were carried out with a movable multislice CT unit C130 KV, 124-130 ms, 014-3 mm sUce thickness, Siemens Somatom Emotion 6., donated to the project by Siemens and the National Geographic Society. Both the Y-chromosome analysis and genetic fingerprinting were performed successfully, and have allowed the creation of a five-generation kindred for the young king (see a family tree overleaf). ANCIUNT EGYPT Apnl/May ZO I O The analysis proves conclusively that Tutankhamun's father was the mummy found in KV55. The project's CT-scan of this mummy provides an age at death of between 45 and 55 for this mummy, showing that this mummy (previously thought to have died between the ages of 20 and 25) is almost certainly Akhenaten himself, as the Egyptological evidence from the tomb has long suggested (see photo above left of the badly preserved mummy). In support of this lineage, the DNA also traces a direct line from Tutankhamun through the KV55 mummy lo Akhenaten"s father Amenhotep III (see photo left of the also badly-preserved mummy). DNA shows that the mother of the KV55 mummy is the 'Elder Lady' from KV35. This mummy is the daughter of Yuya and Thuya, and thus definitively identified as Amenhotep Ill's Great Qi-ieen, Tiye (see photo left). Another important result from the DNA analysis is that the 'Younger Lady' from KV35 (see photo below left) has been positively identified as Tutankhamun's mother. The project is not yet able to identify her by name, although the DNA studies also show that she was the daughter of Amenhotep III and Tiye and thus Akhenaten's full sister. Thus Tutankhamun's only grandparents, on both his paternal and maternal sides, were Amenhotep III and Tiye. Two stillborn foetuses were found mummified and hidden away in a chamber of Tutankhamun's tomb. Preliminary DNA analysis supports the Egyptological belief that these were children of the young king. This analysis has also suggested a mummy known as K\'2iA, a royal female whose identity was previously eomjiletely unknown, as the most likely mother of these children and thus as Tutankhamun's wife, Ankhesenamun. The projeet studied the CT-scans of the family care- IliUy to look for inherited disorders, such as Marfan syndrome and gynaecomastia/craniosynostoses syndromes, that have been previously postulated based on representations in Egyptian art. No evidence was found for any of these diseases, thus the artistic conventions followed by the Amarna period royal family were most likely chosen for religious and political reasons. Another important result of the DNA studies was the discovery of material from Plasmodium falciparum.^ the protozoon that causes malaria, in the body of Tutankhamitn. The CTscan also revealed that the king had a lame foot, caused by avascular bone necrosis. The project believes that Tutankhamun's death was most likely a result of the malaria coupled with his generally weak constitution (see photo above right of the mummy of Tutankhamun). The CT-scan of the pharaoh earüer confirmed the presenee of an unhealed break iji the king's left thigh bone; the team speculates that the king's weakened state may have led to a fall, or that a fall weakened his already fragile physical condition. *THE FAMILY OF TUTANKHAMUN' PROJECT PERSONNEL PROJECT DIRECTOR: Dr. Zahi Hawass, Secretary General, Supreme Council of Antiquities, Cairo, Egypt. Ancient DNA (aDNA] Lab 1; Egyptian Museum, Cairo: Yehia Z Ciad, National Research Center, Cairo, Egypt; Somma Ismail, National Research Center, Cairo, Egypt; Dina iathalla, .American University in Cairo, Cairo, Egypt; Amal .'\hmcd. National Research Center, Cairo, Eg"ypt; Rabab Khairat, National Research Center, Cairo, Egypt; Institute of Human Cenetics, Division of Molecular Genetics, University of Tubingen; Naglaa Hasan, National Research Center, Cairo, Egypt. Ancient DNA (aDNA) Lab 2; Kasr Al Ainy: Sally Wasef, Kasr Al Ainy Faculty of Medicine, Cairo University, Learning Resource C'enter, El Maniai, Cairo, Egypt; Mohamed Fatcen, Kasr Al Ainy Faculty of Medicine, Cairo University, Learning Resource Center, El Maniai, Cairo, Egypt; Fawzi Gaballah, Kasr Al Ainy Faculty ol" Medicine, Cairo University, Learning Resouree Center, El Mania!, Cairo, German Consultants: Carsten Pusch, Institute of Human Genetics, Division of Molecular Genetics, University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany; •Albert Zink, Institute for Mummies and the Ieeman, Bolzano, Italy. Radiology Team: A.shral' Stlim, Kasr M Ainy Faculty of Medicine, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt; Hany Amer, National Researeh Center, Cairo, Eg)pt; Sahar Seleem, Faculty of Medicine, Cairo University, Project Administrator: Hisham Klleithy. Dr. Zahi Hawass, Secretary General, Cairo, Lgypt. ANCILNT E-GYfT 2010 YUYA and THUYA The mummies of Yuya and Thuya have always been securely identified as they were found in their tomb in the Valley of the Kings (KV46) in 1 905, complete with much of their funerary equipment. Texts clearly state that they were the parents of Tiye, Great Royal Wife of Amenhotep III. TIYE and AMENHOTEP III The mummy of Tiye was found in Amenhotep ll's tomb (KV35) in 1 898, as was the mummy of Amenhotep HI. Amenhotep III was found lying in a re-used coffin which bore his name. The identity of this mummy as Amenhotep has been questioned over the years, because of the use of embalming techniques unusual for this period, which included packing of some of the body to restore a more lifelike appearance - the king was clearly obese when he died. The mummy is not well preserved. The mummy of Tiye was found with no coffin or identification and was known as the "Elder Woman" for many years. Tests on her hair compared with a lock of hair presumed to belong to Queen Tiye, from the Tomb of Tutankhamun, appeared to confirm her identity; but this was still disputed by many and the mummy was also attributed to Nefertiti. AKHENATEN and a DAUGHTER of AMENHOTEP III The badly preserved mummy of Akhenaten was found in Tomb KV55 in the Valley of the Kings in 1907. The identity of this mummy has been disputed over the years, with some wanting it to be Akhenaten, whilst others attributed it to Smenkhkara. The problem was that no one could agree on the age of the body at death and this affected any identification. The mummy of Akhenaten's sister was found in the Tomb of Amenhotep II, un-coffined and unnamed and also has been the subject of much debate, with some identifying her as Nefertiti. TUTANKHAMUN and ANKHESENAMUN The mummy of Tutankhamun was found in his virtually intact tomb in 1922, so the identification has never been in question. Various examinations over the years have tried to establish the cause of his death. Until now it was not known that the mummy of Ankhesenamun had survived. The damaged body was found, with other mummies (all presumed to be royal and from tombs in the immediate area) in KV21 in the Valley of the Kings. Ankhesenamun was the daughter of Akhenaten and Nefertiti and, hence, Tutankhamun's half-sister. STILLBORN CHILDREN of TUTANKHAMUN The mummies of two stillborn children were found in the Treasury of the Tomb of Tutankhamun, each enclosed in a set of coffins, but bearing no identification. It has long been debated if these were indeed, as suspected, children of Tutankhamun, or some form of offering. Apnl/May 2010 Some Thoughts and Observations Invariably these results, whilst answering some of the questions, pose others and only further discoveries and examinations will fill in the missing or misplaced pieces of the jigsaw. Sadly, DNA cannot give us the names of the individuals. I have already seen it argued that the body found in KV55, whilst now undoubtediy a son of Amenhotep III and father of Tutankhamun, could still be another royal prince and not Akhenaten. In this instance, the evidence from the tomb and the fact that whoever placed this body in the tomb clearly believed that it was Akhenaten, should remove any confusion. Similarly, the female mummy known as the 'Younger Lady' for so many years is clearly a daughter of Amenhotep til, but again, we cannot know which one. The possibility that it could be Nefertiti has now been removed as it is not thought that she was a daughter of Amenhotep III. If the mummy of Ankhesenamun has been identified by DNA, then clearly any link to the 'Younger Lady' has not been established, and we know that Nefertiti was Ankhesenamun's mother. Identifying the remains of Ankhesenamun is perhaps unexpected. Donald Ryan re-examined many of the tombs in the Valley of the Kings which still contained human remains. In most cases the bodies were very badly damaged and fragmentary, but it is likely that there may be yet other surviving remains of members of the royal family of the late Eighteenth Dynasty. The presence of such remains in the Valley of the Kings may indicate, too, that the Queens of the Eighteenth Dynasty were buried there, although no such tombs haye yet been identified. The most surprising thing is the brother-sister marriage of Akhenaten, something that was not expected. No one seems to have noticed the possible religious implications here, as yet. If Amenhotep III was the Living Sun and the personification of the Aten or the creator Cod Atum, then the first divine couple were Shu and Tefnut, brother and sister (as depicted in the colossi from this time found at Karnak). In which case the brother-sister union perhaps reflected the origins of the gods of Egypt. ! am sure we will hear more on this argument in the future. So ... the DNA results have removed some of the confusion and misinterpretations of the complex history and family relationships at the end of the Eighteenth Dynasty, though I am sure that some debate will continue. The possibility of more discoveries in the Valley of the Kings and more results from DNA tests may clarify the situation further - we will have to wait and see. As for the immediate future of DNA testing, the family of Rameses II is next in line. That should be interesting too. RP All colour images: courtesy of the SCA. Archive black-and-white images frotn Elliot Smith's Royal Mummies. Sepia image by Loret. Foetus mummy photos: courtesy of the Griffith institute, Oxford. AMERICAN RESEARCH CENTER IN EGYPT The American Research Center in Egypt is committed to helping Egypt preserve its rich cultural heritage for the benefit of future generations worldwide through scholarship, documentation, conservation, training, and publication. The scope of our work has included more than 100 major conservation projects throughout Egypt that span the entire range of the country's rich cultural history, from prehistory to the late Ottoman period, including masterpieces of pharaonic, Graeco-Roman, Coptic, Jev/ish, and Islamic art and architecture. BECOME AN ARCE MEMBER AND JOIN US IN OUR DEDICATED EFFORTS TO PRESERVE EGYPT'S PAST. A R C E AMERICAN RESEARCH ¿EN'tER IN EGYPT , . . .T I arce.org ANCILNTLGYrr 2010 Copyright of Ancient Egypt Magazine is the property of Ancient Egypt Magazine and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.
Near Member # 18223
posted
quote:Originally posted by Near: Tutankhamun's Family: Five generations revealed by DNA testing..Images ...Source:Ancient Egypt Magazine; Apr/May2010, Vol. 10 Issue 5, p52-55, 4p, 2 Color Photographs, 2 Black and White Photographs. Document Type:Article. Subject Terms:*TOMBS DNA TOMOGRAPHY MUMMIES PARASITES MALARIA. Geographic Terms:VALLEY of the Kings (Egypt) EGYPT. People:TUTANKHAMEN, King of Egypt AKHENATON, King of Egypt TIYE, Queen of Egypt. Abstract:The article discusses the DNA and computed tomography (CT) scan analysis of the mummy of Tutankhamun, Eighteenth Dynasty pharaoh in Egypt and the mummies of his immediate family which reveal his lineage and cause of death. It notes that the body of Akhenaten, Tutankhamun's father, is identified with the mummy from the tomb KV55 in the Valley of the Kings. It further states that his mother's body is buried in the tomb of Amenhotep II and the body of his grandmother Queen Tiye is found in the mummy of the Elderly Lady from the same tomb. Moreover, it emphasizes that Tutankhamun died due to the parasite that causes malaria..
Tutankhamun's Family: Five generations reveaied by DNA testing In the middle of February, the long-awaited results of the DNA tests made on some of the royal mummies in the Egyptian Museum in Cairo, specifically on the family of Tutankhamun, were announced. Perhaps not surprisingly they received much media publicity on television, radio and especially in the newspapers. However, most of the reports I saw were summaries of the history of the period and included only edited extracts from the official Press Release, which itself is only a précis of the scientific findings published elsewhere. It wouid seem that many people have suddeniy become DNA and royal mummy experts, with many comments and criticisms even in advance of the Press Release. To criticise the science and techniques used, one would need to see and understand the full scientific report, though for most of us the Press Release contains as much information as we need to know. Some of the comments questioned the accuracy of DNA extraction from mummies and the veracity of the results. Suffice it to say that I am reliably informed by experts in the fieid that it is possible to extract DNA from mummies, if done carefully, and that the DNA so extracted can then be analysed. The extraction of DNA from ancient remains is, however, not an easy process and great care is needed. Small tissue samples are taken, in the case of mummies, often from inside the body using any openings caused by embalming or subsequent ancient damage to the body. The samples often need to be surface-decontaminated to remove any contamination that has resulted from handling or exposure to the environment. Bones are especially good, as their mineral content protects the DNA. It is good practice for samples to be sent to two independent laboratories who each conduct their tests and then compare notes afterwards. Only if the results agree can the tests prove to have been a success. Ancient DNA does not always survive well, but when successfully extracted, it can help to differentiate between very close relationships, such as parents and siblings, and more distant relations such as grandparents/grandchildren and other more remote family members. There follows the SCA Press Release, which is clear and concise. I have added my own comments (in blue) on the mummies in question and on previous problems with their identification: DNA and CT-scan analysis of the mummy of the Eighteenth Dynasty pharaoh Tutankhamun {ca. 1333-1323 BC) and of mummies either known or believed to be members of his immediate family have revealed startling new evidence for the young king's lineage and cause of death. An additional outcome of the new study, in which DNA analysis was able to be used eficctively on ancient Egy])tian mummies for the first time, is that several previously unidentified mummies can now be given names. These studies were carried out by Egyptian scientists and international consultants as part of the Family of Tutankhannm Project, under the leadership of Dr. Zahi Hawass. These findings have been published byJAVlA, the Journal of the American Medical Association, in their February 17, 2010, edition (XWume 303, no. 7). The principal conclusions made by the team are that: Tutankhamun's father was the 'heretic' king, /\klienaten, whose body is now almost certainly identified with the mummy from tomb KV55 in the Valley of the Kings. His mother, who still cannot be identified by name, is the 'Younger Lady' buried in the tomb of Amenhotep II (in the Valley of the Kings, KV35). The mummy of the 'Elder Lady' from tlie same tomb can now be conclusively identified as Tutankhamun's grandmother, Queen Tiye. New light was shed on the cause of death for Tutankliamun with the discovery of DNA from the parasite that causes malaria; it is likely that the young king died from complications resulting from a severe form of this disease. The primary analysis was carried out in a newly-buüt DNA laboratory at the Egyptian Museum, Cairo dedicated to ancient DNA; this was donated to the project by Discovery. Two types of DNA analysis were performed on samples taken from the bones of these mummies — analysis of specific nuclear DNA sequences from the Y-chromosome, which is passed directly from father to son, to study tlie paternal line; and genetic fingerprinting from the autosomal DNA of the nuclear genome that does not directly decide a person's sex. To autlienticate the DNA results, the analyses were repeated and independently replicated in a newly equipped ancient-DNA laboratory staffed by a separate group of personnel. The CT-scans were carried out with a movable multislice CT unit C130 KV, 124-130 ms, 014-3 mm sUce thickness, Siemens Somatom Emotion 6., donated to the project by Siemens and the National Geographic Society. Both the Y-chromosome analysis and genetic fingerprinting were performed successfully, and have allowed the creation of a five-generation kindred for the young king (see a family tree overleaf). ANCIUNT EGYPT Apnl/May ZO I O The analysis proves conclusively that Tutankhamun's father was the mummy found in KV55. The project's CT-scan of this mummy provides an age at death of between 45 and 55 for this mummy, showing that this mummy (previously thought to have died between the ages of 20 and 25) is almost certainly Akhenaten himself, as the Egyptological evidence from the tomb has long suggested (see photo above left of the badly preserved mummy). In support of this lineage, the DNA also traces a direct line from Tutankhamun through the KV55 mummy lo Akhenaten"s father Amenhotep III (see photo left of the also badly-preserved mummy). DNA shows that the mother of the KV55 mummy is the 'Elder Lady' from KV35. This mummy is the daughter of Yuya and Thuya, and thus definitively identified as Amenhotep Ill's Great Qi-ieen, Tiye (see photo left). Another important result from the DNA analysis is that the 'Younger Lady' from KV35 (see photo below left) has been positively identified as Tutankhamun's mother. The project is not yet able to identify her by name, although the DNA studies also show that she was the daughter of Amenhotep III and Tiye and thus Akhenaten's full sister. Thus Tutankhamun's only grandparents, on both his paternal and maternal sides, were Amenhotep III and Tiye. Two stillborn foetuses were found mummified and hidden away in a chamber of Tutankhamun's tomb. Preliminary DNA analysis supports the Egyptological belief that these were children of the young king. This analysis has also suggested a mummy known as K\'2iA, a royal female whose identity was previously eomjiletely unknown, as the most likely mother of these children and thus as Tutankhamun's wife, Ankhesenamun. The projeet studied the CT-scans of the family care- IliUy to look for inherited disorders, such as Marfan syndrome and gynaecomastia/craniosynostoses syndromes, that have been previously postulated based on representations in Egyptian art. No evidence was found for any of these diseases, thus the artistic conventions followed by the Amarna period royal family were most likely chosen for religious and political reasons. Another important result of the DNA studies was the discovery of material from Plasmodium falciparum.^ the protozoon that causes malaria, in the body of Tutankhamitn. The CTscan also revealed that the king had a lame foot, caused by avascular bone necrosis. The project believes that Tutankhamun's death was most likely a result of the malaria coupled with his generally weak constitution (see photo above right of the mummy of Tutankhamun). The CT-scan of the pharaoh earüer confirmed the presenee of an unhealed break iji the king's left thigh bone; the team speculates that the king's weakened state may have led to a fall, or that a fall weakened his already fragile physical condition. *THE FAMILY OF TUTANKHAMUN' PROJECT PERSONNEL PROJECT DIRECTOR: Dr. Zahi Hawass, Secretary General, Supreme Council of Antiquities, Cairo, Egypt. Ancient DNA (aDNA] Lab 1; Egyptian Museum, Cairo: Yehia Z Ciad, National Research Center, Cairo, Egypt; Somma Ismail, National Research Center, Cairo, Egypt; Dina iathalla, .American University in Cairo, Cairo, Egypt; Amal .'\hmcd. National Research Center, Cairo, Eg"ypt; Rabab Khairat, National Research Center, Cairo, Egypt; Institute of Human Cenetics, Division of Molecular Genetics, University of Tubingen; Naglaa Hasan, National Research Center, Cairo, Egypt. Ancient DNA (aDNA) Lab 2; Kasr Al Ainy: Sally Wasef, Kasr Al Ainy Faculty of Medicine, Cairo University, Learning Resource C'enter, El Maniai, Cairo, Egypt; Mohamed Fatcen, Kasr Al Ainy Faculty of Medicine, Cairo University, Learning Resource Center, El Maniai, Cairo, Egypt; Fawzi Gaballah, Kasr Al Ainy Faculty ol" Medicine, Cairo University, Learning Resouree Center, El Mania!, Cairo, German Consultants: Carsten Pusch, Institute of Human Genetics, Division of Molecular Genetics, University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany; •Albert Zink, Institute for Mummies and the Ieeman, Bolzano, Italy. Radiology Team: A.shral' Stlim, Kasr M Ainy Faculty of Medicine, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt; Hany Amer, National Researeh Center, Cairo, Eg)pt; Sahar Seleem, Faculty of Medicine, Cairo University, Project Administrator: Hisham Klleithy. Dr. Zahi Hawass, Secretary General, Cairo, Lgypt. ANCILNT E-GYfT 2010 YUYA and THUYA The mummies of Yuya and Thuya have always been securely identified as they were found in their tomb in the Valley of the Kings (KV46) in 1 905, complete with much of their funerary equipment. Texts clearly state that they were the parents of Tiye, Great Royal Wife of Amenhotep III. TIYE and AMENHOTEP III The mummy of Tiye was found in Amenhotep ll's tomb (KV35) in 1 898, as was the mummy of Amenhotep HI. Amenhotep III was found lying in a re-used coffin which bore his name. The identity of this mummy as Amenhotep has been questioned over the years, because of the use of embalming techniques unusual for this period, which included packing of some of the body to restore a more lifelike appearance - the king was clearly obese when he died. The mummy is not well preserved. The mummy of Tiye was found with no coffin or identification and was known as the "Elder Woman" for many years. Tests on her hair compared with a lock of hair presumed to belong to Queen Tiye, from the Tomb of Tutankhamun, appeared to confirm her identity; but this was still disputed by many and the mummy was also attributed to Nefertiti. AKHENATEN and a DAUGHTER of AMENHOTEP III The badly preserved mummy of Akhenaten was found in Tomb KV55 in the Valley of the Kings in 1907. The identity of this mummy has been disputed over the years, with some wanting it to be Akhenaten, whilst others attributed it to Smenkhkara. The problem was that no one could agree on the age of the body at death and this affected any identification. The mummy of Akhenaten's sister was found in the Tomb of Amenhotep II, un-coffined and unnamed and also has been the subject of much debate, with some identifying her as Nefertiti. TUTANKHAMUN and ANKHESENAMUN The mummy of Tutankhamun was found in his virtually intact tomb in 1922, so the identification has never been in question. Various examinations over the years have tried to establish the cause of his death. Until now it was not known that the mummy of Ankhesenamun had survived. The damaged body was found, with other mummies (all presumed to be royal and from tombs in the immediate area) in KV21 in the Valley of the Kings. Ankhesenamun was the daughter of Akhenaten and Nefertiti and, hence, Tutankhamun's half-sister. STILLBORN CHILDREN of TUTANKHAMUN The mummies of two stillborn children were found in the Treasury of the Tomb of Tutankhamun, each enclosed in a set of coffins, but bearing no identification. It has long been debated if these were indeed, as suspected, children of Tutankhamun, or some form of offering. Apnl/May 2010 Some Thoughts and Observations Invariably these results, whilst answering some of the questions, pose others and only further discoveries and examinations will fill in the missing or misplaced pieces of the jigsaw. Sadly, DNA cannot give us the names of the individuals. I have already seen it argued that the body found in KV55, whilst now undoubtediy a son of Amenhotep III and father of Tutankhamun, could still be another royal prince and not Akhenaten. In this instance, the evidence from the tomb and the fact that whoever placed this body in the tomb clearly believed that it was Akhenaten, should remove any confusion. Similarly, the female mummy known as the 'Younger Lady' for so many years is clearly a daughter of Amenhotep til, but again, we cannot know which one. The possibility that it could be Nefertiti has now been removed as it is not thought that she was a daughter of Amenhotep III. If the mummy of Ankhesenamun has been identified by DNA, then clearly any link to the 'Younger Lady' has not been established, and we know that Nefertiti was Ankhesenamun's mother. Identifying the remains of Ankhesenamun is perhaps unexpected. Donald Ryan re-examined many of the tombs in the Valley of the Kings which still contained human remains. In most cases the bodies were very badly damaged and fragmentary, but it is likely that there may be yet other surviving remains of members of the royal family of the late Eighteenth Dynasty. The presence of such remains in the Valley of the Kings may indicate, too, that the Queens of the Eighteenth Dynasty were buried there, although no such tombs haye yet been identified. The most surprising thing is the brother-sister marriage of Akhenaten, something that was not expected. No one seems to have noticed the possible religious implications here, as yet. If Amenhotep III was the Living Sun and the personification of the Aten or the creator Cod Atum, then the first divine couple were Shu and Tefnut, brother and sister (as depicted in the colossi from this time found at Karnak). In which case the brother-sister union perhaps reflected the origins of the gods of Egypt. ! am sure we will hear more on this argument in the future. So ... the DNA results have removed some of the confusion and misinterpretations of the complex history and family relationships at the end of the Eighteenth Dynasty, though I am sure that some debate will continue. The possibility of more discoveries in the Valley of the Kings and more results from DNA tests may clarify the situation further - we will have to wait and see. As for the immediate future of DNA testing, the family of Rameses II is next in line. That should be interesting too. RP All colour images: courtesy of the SCA. Archive black-and-white images frotn Elliot Smith's Royal Mummies. Sepia image by Loret. Foetus mummy photos: courtesy of the Griffith institute, Oxford. AMERICAN RESEARCH CENTER IN EGYPT The American Research Center in Egypt is committed to helping Egypt preserve its rich cultural heritage for the benefit of future generations worldwide through scholarship, documentation, conservation, training, and publication. The scope of our work has included more than 100 major conservation projects throughout Egypt that span the entire range of the country's rich cultural history, from prehistory to the late Ottoman period, including masterpieces of pharaonic, Graeco-Roman, Coptic, Jev/ish, and Islamic art and architecture. BECOME AN ARCE MEMBER AND JOIN US IN OUR DEDICATED EFFORTS TO PRESERVE EGYPT'S PAST. A R C E AMERICAN RESEARCH ¿EN'tER IN EGYPT , . . .T I arce.org ANCILNTLGYrr 2010 Copyright of Ancient Egypt Magazine is the property of Ancient Egypt Magazine and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.
posted
Very nice Near, but I am such a poor reader, I seem to have missed the entire point of the exercise. Could you please tell me what Tut's Y-dna and Mtdna haplogroups are?
Near Member # 18223
posted
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: Very nice Near, but I am such a poor reader, I seem to have missed the entire point of the exercise. Could you please tell me what Tut's Y-dna and Mtdna haplogroups are?
Characterization of Mycobacterium tuberculosis Complex DNAs from Egyptian Mummies by Spoligotyping Albert R. Zink,1 Christophe Sola,2 Udo Reischl,3 Waltraud Grabner,1 Nalin Rastogi,2 Hans Wolf,3 and Andreas G. Nerlich1* Division of Palaeopathology, Institute of Pathology, Academic Teaching Hospital München-Bogenhausen, D-81925 Munich,1 Institute of Medical Microbiology and Hygiene, University Regensburg, D-93053 Regensburg, Germany,3 Unité de la Tuberculose et des Mycobactéries, Institut Pasteur, F-97165 Pointe-à-Pitre Cedex, Guadeloupe2
Received 13 March 2002/ Returned for modification 8 July 2002/ Accepted 26 September 2002
Bone and soft tissue samples from 85 ancient Egyptian mummies were analyzed for the presence of ancient Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex DNA (aDNA) and further characterized by spoligotyping. The specimens were obtained from individuals from different tomb complexes in Thebes West, Upper Egypt, which were used for upper social class burials between the Middle Kingdom (since ca. 2050 BC) and the Late Period (until ca. 500 BC). A total of 25 samples provided a specific positive signal for the amplification of a 123-bp fragment of the repetitive element IS6110, indicating the presence of M. tuberculosis DNA. Further PCR-based tests for the identification of subspecies failed due to lack of specific amplification products in the historic tissue samples. Of these 25 positive specimens, 12 could be successfully characterized by spoligotyping. The spoligotyping signatures were compared to those in an international database. They all show either an M. tuberculosis or an M. africanum pattern, but none revealed an M. bovis-specific pattern. The results from a Middle Kingdom tomb (used exclusively between ca. 2050 and 1650 BC) suggest that these samples bear an M. africanum-type specific spoligotyping signature. The samples from later periods provided patterns typical for M. tuberculosis. This study clearly demonstrates that spoligotyping can be applied to historic tissue samples. In addition, our results do not support the theory that M. tuberculosis originated from the M. bovis type but, rather, suggest that human M. tuberculosis may have originated from a precursor complex probably related to M. africanum.
Near Member # 18223
posted
Evidence-based palaeopathology: Meta-analysis of PubMed-listed scientific studies on ancient Egyptian mummies.Authors:Zweifel, L. Buni, Th. Ruhli, F.J.. Source:HOMO - Journal of Comparative Human Biology; September 2009 60 (5): 405-427. Document Type:Article. Abstract:There is a plethora of published scientific studies on ancient Egyptian mummies. Surprisingly, hitherto there is no systematic review of this research, which would help to assess the quality of this vast body of published literature and thus to increase ''evidence'' in palaeopathological research. The aim of this study was to review all PubMed-listed scientific studies performed on Ancient Egyptian mummies. A total of 131 studies were found in the database for the selected time period, 1977-2005. Our ''meta-analysis'' showed that the number of publications per year varies enormously. The majority of mummies examined date to the third intermediate and Ptolemaic periods; data from other time periods were lacking. Identification of the cause of death and 14C-dating of the mummy or funeral goods were rarely addressed. There was a tendency towards an increased use of non-invasive examination methods in more modern times. Our meta-analysis addressed both scientific content (e.g. palaeopathological findings/examination methods) and publication issues (e.g. location of the first author or year of publication) in these studies. Based on our experience, we recommend some minimum publication standards for palaeopathologic studies on ancient mummies, which shall improve evidence-based research in palaeopathology in general.
The reality that King Tut carried the y-chromosome R1b does not make him Western European.
Although R-V88 (Rlb1a) is predominate R-M173 among Central Africans like the Chadic speakers and Bantu groups.
The frequency of R1b among West African groups: Fulani, Mandekan,and Pygmy range between 86-100% according to Crusiani et al,2010.
This means that King Tut can be Rb1 and still be African.
This adds additional support to Wally's evidence that many Egyptians were West Africans. .
Clyde Winters Member # 10129
posted
King Tut was African. In fact the Kushites probably took y-chromosome R1 to Eurasian.
The phylogenetic profile of R-M173 supports an ancient migration of Kushites from Africa to Eurasia as suggested by the Classical writers. This expansion of an African Kushite population probably took place over 5kya.
" We analyzed the craniometric , linguistic, archaeological and y-chromosome sequences of African and Eurasian populations from the literature relating to these diverse fields.
This literature provides us with a critical examination of the distribution of R1*-M173 . It presents a genetic pattern of this haplogroup from Africa to Eurasia, and the dispersal of a significant African male contribution to Eurasia.
The pristine form of R1*M173 is found only in Africa (Cruciani et al, 2002, 2010).The frequency of Y-chromosome R1*-M173 in Africa range between 7-95% and averages 39.5% (Coia et al,2005). The R*-M173 (haplotype 117) chromosome is found frequently in Africa, but rare to extremely low frequencies in Eurasia. The Eurasian R haplogroup is characterized by R1b3-M269. The M269 derived allele has a M207/M173 background.
In Figure 1 we provide the frequencies of y-chromosome M-173 in Africa and Eurasia. Whereas only between 8% and 10% of M-173 is carried by Eurasians, 82% of the carriers of this y-chromosome are found in Africa."
Coia et al (2005) provides substantial data that the presence of R1*-M173 did not follow the spread of mtDNA haplogroup U6, which is found in North Africa (Coia et al, 2005).This supports the view that its presence in Africa is not the result of a back migration.
Characterization of Mycobacterium tuberculosis Complex DNAs from Egyptian Mummies by Spoligotyping Albert R. Zink,1 Christophe Sola,2 Udo Reischl,3 Waltraud Grabner,1 Nalin Rastogi,2 Hans Wolf,3 and Andreas G. Nerlich1* Division of Palaeopathology, Institute of Pathology, Academic Teaching Hospital München-Bogenhausen, D-81925 Munich,1 Institute of Medical Microbiology and Hygiene, University Regensburg, D-93053 Regensburg, Germany,3 Unité de la Tuberculose et des Mycobactéries, Institut Pasteur, F-97165 Pointe-à-Pitre Cedex, Guadeloupe2
Received 13 March 2002/ Returned for modification 8 July 2002/ Accepted 26 September 2002
Bone and soft tissue samples from 85 ancient Egyptian mummies were analyzed for the presence of ancient Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex DNA (aDNA) and further characterized by spoligotyping. The specimens were obtained from individuals from different tomb complexes in Thebes West, Upper Egypt, which were used for upper social class burials between the Middle Kingdom (since ca. 2050 BC) and the Late Period (until ca. 500 BC). A total of 25 samples provided a specific positive signal for the amplification of a 123-bp fragment of the repetitive element IS6110, indicating the presence of M. tuberculosis DNA. Further PCR-based tests for the identification of subspecies failed due to lack of specific amplification products in the historic tissue samples. Of these 25 positive specimens, 12 could be successfully characterized by spoligotyping. The spoligotyping signatures were compared to those in an international database. They all show either an M. tuberculosis or an M. africanum pattern, but none revealed an M. bovis-specific pattern. The results from a Middle Kingdom tomb (used exclusively between ca. 2050 and 1650 BC) suggest that these samples bear an M. africanum-type specific spoligotyping signature. The samples from later periods provided patterns typical for M. tuberculosis. This study clearly demonstrates that spoligotyping can be applied to historic tissue samples. In addition, our results do not support the theory that M. tuberculosis originated from the M. bovis type but, rather, suggest that human M. tuberculosis may have originated from a precursor complex probably related to M. africanum.
Take not they had the most common strain of tuberculosis that is found in WEST AFRICA :
quote: They all show either an M. tuberculosis or an M. africanum pattern, but none revealed an M. bovis-specific pattern.
Characterization of Mycobacterium tuberculosis Complex DNAs from Egyptian Mummies by Spoligotyping Albert R. Zink,1 Christophe Sola,2 Udo Reischl,3 Waltraud Grabner,1 Nalin Rastogi,2 Hans Wolf,3 and Andreas G. Nerlich1* Division of Palaeopathology, Institute of Pathology, Academic Teaching Hospital München-Bogenhausen, D-81925 Munich,1 Institute of Medical Microbiology and Hygiene, University Regensburg, D-93053 Regensburg, Germany,3 Unité de la Tuberculose et des Mycobactéries, Institut Pasteur, F-97165 Pointe-à-Pitre Cedex, Guadeloupe2
Received 13 March 2002/ Returned for modification 8 July 2002/ Accepted 26 September 2002
Bone and soft tissue samples from 85 ancient Egyptian mummies were analyzed for the presence of ancient Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex DNA (aDNA) and further characterized by spoligotyping. The specimens were obtained from individuals from different tomb complexes in Thebes West, Upper Egypt, which were used for upper social class burials between the Middle Kingdom (since ca. 2050 BC) and the Late Period (until ca. 500 BC). A total of 25 samples provided a specific positive signal for the amplification of a 123-bp fragment of the repetitive element IS6110, indicating the presence of M. tuberculosis DNA. Further PCR-based tests for the identification of subspecies failed due to lack of specific amplification products in the historic tissue samples. Of these 25 positive specimens, 12 could be successfully characterized by spoligotyping. The spoligotyping signatures were compared to those in an international database. They all show either an M. tuberculosis or an M. africanum pattern, but none revealed an M. bovis-specific pattern. The results from a Middle Kingdom tomb (used exclusively between ca. 2050 and 1650 BC) suggest that these samples bear an M. africanum-type specific spoligotyping signature. The samples from later periods provided patterns typical for M. tuberculosis. This study clearly demonstrates that spoligotyping can be applied to historic tissue samples. In addition, our results do not support the theory that M. tuberculosis originated from the M. bovis type but, rather, suggest that human M. tuberculosis may have originated from a precursor complex probably related to M. africanum.
Take note they had the most common strain of tuberculosis that is found in WEST AFRICA :
quote: They all show either an M. tuberculosis or an M. africanum pattern, but none revealed an M. bovis-specific pattern.
^^Indeed. It is not surprising that there is a link to West Africa. Other studies of disease vectors show similar linkages of Egyptians with peoples further south. For example, the presence of the L. donovani pathogen in Egypt implies trade or population contacts with other African regions since the vector for spreading this pathogen (a particular biting African sandfly) is absent in Nile Valley.
quote- bold headings added for clarity:
[Malaria:] "Several attempts were made to identify the DNA of Plasmodium falciparum in the human remains, one of the parasites responsible for malaria. Rabino Massa et al. (2000) used immunological tests to screen 80 mummies from the site of Gebelen near Luxor, Egypt dated to 3200 BCE. Th e Plasmodium antigen (histidine-rich protein PfHRP-2) was found in 43% of samples (and in 92% of samples with porotic hyperostosis). Such a high frequency of cases caused doubts concerning the specifi city of the antigen based test (Nerlich et al. 2008).
A positive Plasmodium identifi cation via immunological methods was also reported for a Granville 50 Mateusz Baca, Martyna Molak mummy—a 50 year old woman from the site of Gurna, Egypt dated to 700 BCE (Miller et al. 1994). Reexamination of this specimen using PCR-based methods yielded negative results. Th ese results could be due to the diff erential preservation of DNA and proteins in this individual, but serious doubt concerning the reliability of the immunological test arose (Taylor et al. 1997). A recent survey of Nerlich et al. (2008) yielded more realistic results. 91 specimens were screened for Plasmodium DNA, 7 from the Predynastic to Early Dynastic site of Abydos (3500–2800 BCE), 42 from a Middle Kingdom tomb in Th ebes West (2050–1650 BCE), and 42 from other tombs also from Th ebes West, dated from the Middle Kingdom until the Late Period. PCR of a fragment of a pfcrt gene (P. falciparum chloroquine-resistance transporter gene) was attempted and resulted in two positive amplifi cations. Th e specifi - city of the obtained PCR products was confi rmed by carrying out the sequencing in two independent laboratories.
[Diptheria:] Zink et al. (2001c) screened 450 individuals from Th ebes West searching for Corynebacterium diphtheriae, the pathogenic bacteria responsible for diphtheria. Of the 40 samples that yielded amplifi able DNA, one positive PCR result was obtained with starters targeting eubacterial 16S rDNA. Th e presence of Corynebacterium spp. DNA was confi rmed in only one specimen, the head of a woman buried in Dra Abu el Nega (Th ebes West) dated to 1580–1080 BCE. A specifi c identifi cation of Corynebacterium diphtheriae species was not possible. However, in conjunction with inscriptions found in the tomb describing the treatment of a disease bearing resemblance to diphtheria, the presence of C. diphtheriae seems likely. Th e presence of Corynebacterium diphtheriae in the ancient mummy was not surprising, since diphtheria is common even in contemporary Egypt.
[Leishmaniasis:] Another parasite detected in human remains via aDNA analysis is the Leishmania donovani complex; the parasite causing leishmaniasis. Zink et al. (2006) searched for L. donovani DNA in 91 bone samples from the above-mentioned Egyptian sites of Th ebes West and Abydos and in 70 samples from Nubian sites at Kulubnarti, Sudan. Th ese sites were early Christian cemeteries dated from 550 to 750 CE and from 750 to 1500 CE. DNA sequences specifi c to Leishmania spp. were PCR amplifi ed from 4 Egyptian and 9 Nubian samples. Based on frequencies of bacterial presence, the authors conclude that leishmaniasis was endemic in Nubia during the 6th–8th centuries CE. An examination of earlier samples would most likely have led to similar results since Sudan (or East Africa in general) is considered as a place of origin of visceral leishmaniasis (Zink et al. 2006). As all the Egyptian samples containing L. donovani DNA came exclusively from a Middle Kingdom tomb and no samples from earlier periods yielded bacteria-positive results, the authors suggest that the introduction of leishmaniasis to Egypt may have taken place during the Middle Kingdom.
Th e presence of L. donovani in Egypt implies close trade contacts between these countries as the distribution of L. donovani is closely associated with its vector the phlebotomine sandfl y, which is absent in Nile Valley. Zink et al. (2000) described a single case of bacteremia discovered when an infant mummy from the Th ebes West cemetery was studied. Th e mummy was dated to 1000–750 BCE. Genetic analysis revealed the presence of the DNA of several bacterial species, including Escherichia coli, Frateuria auranta, and Halobacillus spp. Post mortem spread of E. coli through the body was ruled out."
From: --Bioarchaeology of the Near East, 2:39–61 (2008) Research on ancient DNA in the Near East Mateusz Baca*1, Martyna Molak2
Near Member # 18223
posted
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
The reality that King Tut carried the y-chromosome R1b does not make him Western European.
Although R-V88 (Rlb1a) is predominate R-M173 among Central Africans like the Chadic speakers and Bantu groups.
The frequency of R1b among West African groups: Fulani, Mandekan,and Pygmy range between 86-100% according to Crusiani et al,2010.
This means that King Tut can be Rb1 and still be African.
This adds additional support to Wally's evidence that many Egyptians were West Africans. .
Thanks. Didn't Cruciani associate this with a back migration though? From the initial article atop this thread, I found it strange that they never mentiond Tut an co's Y and mtDNA haplogroups, even though they did have them.
In regards to mummies: Does anybody have a link to An X-Ray Atlas of the Royal Mummies, where it speaks of Egyptian head shape being similar to that of Mesolithic Nubians? I couldn't find it in the book, so I assumed it is in Journal of Physical Anthropology 56, issue 2. Which I'm getting at the NorthEastern library. So far, I've only been able to get access to two of the book reviews written about it, and none speak of this.
Truthcentric Member # 3735
posted
The comparisons between Egyptian mummies and Mesolithic Nubians come not from Harris and Wente but from an analysis of their data by another scholar named Paul Kekai Manansala.
Near Member # 18223
posted
quote:Originally posted by Truthcentric: The comparisons between Egyptian mummies and Mesolithic Nubians come not from Harris and Wente but from an analysis of their data by another scholar named Paul Kekai Manansala.
Ah, really? I'll try to find that. Otherwise, the 1 Basic Database of Nile Valley studies is misleading when in this quote:
"In terms of head shape, the XVIV and XX dynasties look more like the early Nubian skulls from the mesolithic with low vaults and sloping, curved foreheads.The XVII and XVIII dynasty skulls are shaped more like modern Nubians with globular skulls and high vaults." (An X-ray atlas of the royal mummies. Edited by J.E. Harris and E.F. Wente. (The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1980.) Review: Michael R. Zimmerman, American Journal of Physical Anthropology, Volume 56, Issue 2 , (1981) Pages 207 - 208)
Or maybe it is actually in that issue. Either way, I'm getting the said issue just to be sure. [LIST]
astenb Member # 14524
posted
^ its not really misleading. When you look at all the data UNPOOLED you can see that what is considered "Nubian" and what is "Egyptian" are equally mixed. The larger you make the pool the easier it is that you will have one group that is clearly "Egypto-Nubian". Further pooling the data you would probably come to a generic grouping of North East African. An unpooled sample can be seen here:
It is obvious some Dynastic material will be closer to "Nubian" groups, this will not be the case for others. I am not sure if these are ROYAL mummies but if they are it could just be easily explained as certain ruling families coming from certain areas.
This is not NEW info, Goedde et al. two years ago came to the same conclusion:
quote: A plot of the distance scores revealed only one cluster; the Nubian and Egyptian groups clustered together. The grouping of the Nubians and Egyptians indicates there may have been some sort of gene flow between these groups of Nubians and Egyptians.
quote:Originally posted by Truthcentric: The comparisons between Egyptian mummies and Mesolithic Nubians come not from Harris and Wente but from an analysis of their data by another scholar named Paul Kekai Manansala.
Ah, really? I'll try to find that. Otherwise, the 1 Basic Database of Nile Valley studies is misleading when in this quote:
"In terms of head shape, the XVIV and XX dynasties look more like the early Nubian skulls from the mesolithic with low vaults and sloping, curved foreheads.The XVII and XVIII dynasty skulls are shaped more like modern Nubians with globular skulls and high vaults." (An X-ray atlas of the royal mummies. Edited by J.E. Harris and E.F. Wente. (The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1980.) Review: Michael R. Zimmerman, American Journal of Physical Anthropology, Volume 56, Issue 2 , (1981) Pages 207 - 208)
Or maybe it is actually in that issue. Either way, I'm getting the said issue just to be sure. [LIST]
Yeap- Astenb has it right. The X-Ray data only confirm what he says about the pooled/unpooled samples and the Godde study- the closest match with ancient Egyptians is Nubians. So you have cranial, x-ray and limb studies all saying the same thing. This defeats attempts to create bogus "racial" differences between the two peoples.
Also the cultural and historical data shows how closely the 2 peoples are linked:
Conservative mainstream Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt shows ancient Egypt derived from an African cultural sub-stratum
[QUOTE:]
"The evidence also points to linkages to other northeast African peoples, not coincidentally approximating the modern range of languages closely related to Egyptian in the Afro-Asiatic group (formerly called Hamito-Semetic). These linguistic similarities place ancient Egyptian in a close relationship with languages spoken today as far west as Chad, and as far south as Somalia. Archaeological evidence also strongly supports an African origin. A widespread northeastern African cultural assemblage, including distinctive multiple barbed harpoons and pottery decorated with dotted wavy line patterns, appears during the early Neolithic (also known as the Aqualithic, a reference to the mild climate of the Sahara at this time). Saharan and Sudanese rock art from this time resembles early Egyptian iconography. Strong connections between Nubian (Sudanese) and Egyptian material culture continue in later Neolithic Badarian culture of Upper Egypt. Similarities include black-topped wares, vessels with characteristic ripple-burnished surfaces, a special tulip-shaped vessel with incised and white-filled decoration, palettes, and harpoons...
Other ancient Egyptian practices show strong similarities to modern African cultures including divine kingship, the use of headrests, body art, circumcision, and male coming-of-age rituals, all suggesting an African substratum or foundation for Egyptian civilization.." [endquote] --Source: Donald Redford (2001) The Oxford encyclopedia of ancient Egypt, Volume 3. Oxford University Press. p. 28
Note what the dental study says below"
As for Tut- 'biodiversity' fantasies re his "Nordic" blood have been debunked thoroughly:
Near Member # 18223
posted
quote:Originally posted by astenb: ^ its not really misleading. When you look at all the data UNPOOLED you can see that what is considered "Nubian" and what is "Egyptian" are equally mixed. The larger you make the pool the easier it is that you will have one group that is clearly "Egypto-Nubian". Further pooling the data you would probably come to a generic grouping of North East African. An unpooled sample can be seen here:
It is obvious some Dynastic material will be closer to "Nubian" groups, this will not be the case for others. I am not sure if these are ROYAL mummies but if they are it could just be easily explained as certain ruling families coming from certain areas.
This is not NEW info, Goedde et al. two years ago came to the same conclusion:
quote: A plot of the distance scores revealed only one cluster; the Nubian and Egyptian groups clustered together. The grouping of the Nubians and Egyptians indicates there may have been some sort of gene flow between these groups of Nubians and Egyptians.
I didn't mean the information itself was misleading, only the source that is provided for the information. That is, if the source provided in the 1 basic database of Nile Valley studies doesn't have that quote
Near Member # 18223
posted
quote:Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova:
quote:Originally posted by Near:
quote:Originally posted by Truthcentric: The comparisons between Egyptian mummies and Mesolithic Nubians come not from Harris and Wente but from an analysis of their data by another scholar named Paul Kekai Manansala.
Ah, really? I'll try to find that. Otherwise, the 1 Basic Database of Nile Valley studies is misleading when in this quote:
"In terms of head shape, the XVIV and XX dynasties look more like the early Nubian skulls from the mesolithic with low vaults and sloping, curved foreheads.The XVII and XVIII dynasty skulls are shaped more like modern Nubians with globular skulls and high vaults." (An X-ray atlas of the royal mummies. Edited by J.E. Harris and E.F. Wente. (The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1980.) Review: Michael R. Zimmerman, American Journal of Physical Anthropology, Volume 56, Issue 2 , (1981) Pages 207 - 208)
Or maybe it is actually in that issue. Either way, I'm getting the said issue just to be sure. [LIST]
Yeap- Astenb has it right. The X-Ray data only confirm what he says about the pooled/unpooled samples and the Godde study- the closest match with ancient Egyptians is Nubians. So you have cranial, x-ray and limb studies all saying the same thing. This defeats attempts to create bogus "racial" differences between the two peoples.
Also the cultural and historical data shows how closely the 2 peoples are linked:
Conservative mainstream Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt shows ancient Egypt derived from an African cultural sub-stratum
[QUOTE:]
"The evidence also points to linkages to other northeast African peoples, not coincidentally approximating the modern range of languages closely related to Egyptian in the Afro-Asiatic group (formerly called Hamito-Semetic). These linguistic similarities place ancient Egyptian in a close relationship with languages spoken today as far west as Chad, and as far south as Somalia. Archaeological evidence also strongly supports an African origin. A widespread northeastern African cultural assemblage, including distinctive multiple barbed harpoons and pottery decorated with dotted wavy line patterns, appears during the early Neolithic (also known as the Aqualithic, a reference to the mild climate of the Sahara at this time). Saharan and Sudanese rock art from this time resembles early Egyptian iconography. Strong connections between Nubian (Sudanese) and Egyptian material culture continue in later Neolithic Badarian culture of Upper Egypt. Similarities include black-topped wares, vessels with characteristic ripple-burnished surfaces, a special tulip-shaped vessel with incised and white-filled decoration, palettes, and harpoons...
Other ancient Egyptian practices show strong similarities to modern African cultures including divine kingship, the use of headrests, body art, circumcision, and male coming-of-age rituals, all suggesting an African substratum or foundation for Egyptian civilization.." [endquote] --Source: Donald Redford (2001) The Oxford encyclopedia of ancient Egypt, Volume 3. Oxford University Press. p. 28
Note what the dental study says below"
As for Tut- 'biodiversity' fantasies re his "Nordic" blood have been debunked thoroughly:
I know. What I'm saying is that the quote is said to be in Journal of Physical Anthropology Volume 56, Issue , however I'm not so sure it is. I'm getting Volume 56, Issue 2 to see if the quote exists in that issue, and if it doesn't, where can I find it? Other than that, I agree that it only reinforces recent research.
Near Member # 18223
posted
Oh btw, I have a question about blood types; I have heard Euro-centrists claim that blood group A2 originated in Armenia (or something like that) even though D'Adamo says it is an adaption to local parasites in Africa. My question is, do blood types originate within one region, or have they arisen in several different regions around the world, without admixture? Sources would be appreciated.
Thanks
zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova Member # 15718
posted
^^Paul Kekai Mansala seems to have gotten an actual quote from the book X-Ray Atlas of the Royal Mummies, by Harris and Wente. A REVIEW of the book is given in the Journal, showing the scope and importance of the massive X-ray project which basically documented almost every mummy in the some of the most important Egyptian collections. His detailed analysis is shown here: http://asiapacificuniverse.com/pkm/mummies.htm
[note below that the actual data quote is from the book, not the Journal Review:]
"In terms of head shape, the XVIV and XX dynasties look more like the early Nubian skulls from the mesolithic with low vaults and sloping, curved foreheads.The XVII and XVIII dynasty skulls are shaped more like modern Nubians with globular skulls and high vaults." (An X-ray atlas of the royal mummies. Edited by J.E. Harris and E.F. Wente. (The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1980.) Review: Michael R. Zimmerman, American Journal of Physical Anthropology, Volume 56, Issue 2 , (1981) Pages 207 - 208) -------------------------------------------------------------------
Also, here is another quote from Harris and Weeks on X-ray analysis of the pharaoh Seqenenre compared to his son Ahmose, showing how the X-Ray data suggested Nubian affinities for several royals:
"His entire facial complex, in fact, is so different from other pharaohs (it is closest to that of his son Ahmose) that he could be fitted more easily into the series of Nubian and Old Kingdom Giza skulls than into that of later Egyptian kings. Various scholars in the past have proposed a Nubian-that is, non-Egyptian-origin for Seqenenre and his family, and his facial features suggest this might indeed be true." -- Harris J, and Weeks K (1973) X-Raying the Pharoahs. pg 127
Seqenenre is one of a number of New Kingdom pharaohs also held to be of Nubian origin by conservative Egyptologists such as Donald B. Redford (History and Chronology of the Eighteenth Dynasty of Egypt, pgs 33-36, 69.)
As for blood types there is plenty on GoogleBooks.
In seems that assorted 'Aryan" proponents, from continued ferment on the web, are still upset that their main plank of a "white" King Tut, blood type A2, has been comprehensively dismissed and debunked. Like Odinists awaiting the latest 'word' from Valhalla, they have switched to the chimera of the "accidental" Discovery Channel "revelation." But it will do them no good. See: http://knol.google.com/k/blood-types-debunking-the-appropriation-of-ancient-egyptian-heritage-by-neo#
A Google search on some of your questions leads to a forum where assorted "biodiversity" claimants are advancing the bogus claim of a white King Tut - supposedly "accidentally" revealed on the Discovery channel. Al-Takuri has already dealt with this in detail on another ES thread.
Assorted "biodiversity" proponents fail miserably, whether they try to spam bogus "white history" in assorted forums or via insertion on Wikipedia pages. No one is being fooled. More accurate data is widely available on ES and elsewhere.
quote:Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova: ^^Paul Kekai Mansala seems to have gotten an actual quote from the book X-Ray Atlas of the Royal Mummies, by Harris and Wente. A REVIEW of the book is given in the Journal, showing the scope and importance of the massive X-ray project which basically documented almost every mummy in the some of the most important Egyptian collections. His detailed analysis is shown here: http://asiapacificuniverse.com/pkm/mummies.htm
[note below that the actual data quote is from the book, not the Journal Review:]
"In terms of head shape, the XVIV and XX dynasties look more like the early Nubian skulls from the mesolithic with low vaults and sloping, curved foreheads.The XVII and XVIII dynasty skulls are shaped more like modern Nubians with globular skulls and high vaults." (An X-ray atlas of the royal mummies. Edited by J.E. Harris and E.F. Wente. (The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1980.) Review: Michael R. Zimmerman, American Journal of Physical Anthropology, Volume 56, Issue 2 , (1981) Pages 207 - 208) -------------------------------------------------------------------
Also, here is another quote from Harris and Weeks on X-ray analysis of the pharaoh Seqenenre compared to his son Ahmose, showing how the X-Ray data suggested Nubian affinities for several royals:
"His entire facial complex, in fact, is so different from other pharaohs (it is closest to that of his son Ahmose) that he could be fitted more easily into the series of Nubian and Old Kingdom Giza skulls than into that of later Egyptian kings. Various scholars in the past have proposed a Nubian-that is, non-Egyptian-origin for Seqenenre and his family, and his facial features suggest this might indeed be true." -- Harris J, and Weeks K (1973) X-Raying the Pharoahs. pg 127
Seqenenre is one of a number of New Kingdom pharaohs also held to be of Nubian origin by conservative Egyptologists such as Donald B. Redford (History and Chronology of the Eighteenth Dynasty of Egypt, pgs 33-36, 69.)
As for blood types there is plenty on GoogleBooks.
In seems that assorted 'Aryan" proponents, from continued ferment on the web, are still upset that their main plank of a "white" King Tut, blood type A2, has been comprehensively dismissed and debunked. Like Odinists awaiting the latest 'word' from Valhalla, they have switched to the chimera of the "accidental" Discovery Channel "revelation." But it will do them no good. See: http://knol.google.com/k/blood-types-debunking-the-appropriation-of-ancient-egyptian-heritage-by-neo#
A Google search on some of your questions leads to a forum where assorted "biodiversity" claimants are advancing the bogus claim of a white King Tut - supposedly "accidentally" revealed on the Discovery channel. Al-Takuri has already dealt with this in detail on another ES thread.
Assorted "biodiversity" proponents fail miserably, whether they try to spam bogus "white history" in assorted forums or via insertion on Wikipedia pages. No one is being fooled. More accurate data is widely available on ES and elsewhere.
Blood Types: Reading D'Adamo, after he states many A variants arose in Africa due to adaption to local parasites, he says the original mutation occurred in Armenia. Does this mean blood types arose independantly in different regions at different times? It doesn't seem probable Europeans migrated into Africa and spread blood types.
2) I heard that the book doesn't compare Mesolithic Nubians so I got it just to be sure. Am looking through it now, but either way, modern research shows the same thing (as you and Astenb noted). Thanks for the links and reply
Near Member # 18223
posted
Just got the book, but am unable to find the quote.
I did find a few interesting quotes so far:
"Generally, the definition of each New Kingdom pharaoh and queen represents a unique combination of dental characteristics, such as overbite, overjet, interincisal relationship, and molar relationship, which permits the identification of each mummy from x-rays of the definition alone. The observation is not surprising since the teeth or dentition remains one of the most formidable tools available to Forensic specialists. Dental alveolar prognathism, an inherited trait which is normal for Nubian people, ancient and modern, may be observed in pharaohs Thutmose I, Thutmose II, Siptah, and Merenptah, and most of the queens of the 21st dynasty (fig 9.10). Other Royal Mummies such as Seti I, Thutmose IV, and Amenhotep III had a very straight dental profile or large interincisal angles characteristic of North Mediterranean people or the Western world (fig 9.11). In summary, then, the pharaohs and queens of the New Kingdom- a period of almost 500 years-- were heterogeneous from the viewpoint of facial profile dental occlusion" (An X-Ray Atlas of the Royal Mummies- pg 332-333)
"In fact, during the New Kingdom, the so-called empire period, there were many princes and priincesses of other conquered nations from Nubia to Mesopotamia, representing great cultural and genetic heterogenity" (pg 350)
"Thutmose has a much more rounded cranium (than Amenhotep), and prognathism of the maxilla and mandible as well as of the dentition. His skull is most similar to that of Nubians from the ancient cemetaries of Gebel Adda examined by the Michigan expedition. Measurable variables also confirm similarities between Thutmose I and Thutmose II ( Appendix Table A1)
Truthcentric Member # 3735
posted
quote:Originally posted by Near: Just got the book, but am unable to find the quote.
I'm pretty sure the quote in dispute comes from Paul Kekai Manansala's commentary on Harris et al's findings, not from Harris et al themselves.
Near Member # 18223
posted
quote:Originally posted by Truthcentric:
quote:Originally posted by Near: Just got the book, but am unable to find the quote.
I'm pretty sure the quote in dispute comes from Paul Kekai Manansala's commentary on Harris et al's findings, not from Harris et al themselves.
Zaharan did post his analysis. However, I'm confused now. She said the data quote was from the book, not the review in the journal of physical Anthropology, but on pages 207-208 of the book, it's just tables of the age details from the x-ray film. The source provided for the quote however, is Journal of Physical Anthropology Volume 56, Issue 2. Why isn't Paul Manansala listed as the source for the quote?