Armarna Dynasty

[m***@hotmail.co.uk]

After watching the documentry last night on National Geographic I have
to say I am not convinced that this mummy is not that of Nefertiti. It
may well be that it is that of Ankesenamun or Kiya. But I don't
think that the straight royal arm can rule out the fact that this is
Nefertiti. Even if this was Ankhesenamun she too would have been
mummified with her arm bent as she was also a Queen the wife of
Tutankhamun. Looking at the facial wound, this mummy recieved she was
probably murdered and who's to say that under those circumstances she
was not afforded the right to be mummified as befits a queen! It's
just a suggestion

There is an awful lot of conjecture on this period in Egyptian
history, but it certainly seems that the powers that be are in no
hurry to move this debate forward
Would be intersted to hear anyone else's thoughts on the matter.

[JTEM]

Post by m***@hotmail.co.uk
There is an awful lot of conjecture on this period in
Egyptian history, but it certainly seems that the
powers that be are in no hurry to move this debate
forward Would be intersted to hear anyone else's
thoughts on the matter.

I think the problem is that this is one of those rare
instances where a debate would be useful, and not
necessarily an example of the 'Old Guard' protecting
their idea of the truth.

Well, okay, Hawass regularly inflicts his personal
ideas on the world, tries to enforce them. But I
think that most people -- real archaeologists and
historians -- aren't so much used to a debate as
they are with working with the evidence. And because
of that they're uncomfortable with anyone who wants
to label a mummy on the basis of good debating
skills.

I'd say that Joann Fletcher was on to something when
she set out to identify Nefertiti. Oh, sure, he laid it
heavy with the speculation, but she was thinking outside
the box. After all, she is one of the few that set idea the
idea that hieroglyphic inscriptions record the absolute
truth & must be interpreted literally.

Then again, that is a bit of a slippery slope...

[heremon]

Post by JTEM

Post by m***@hotmail.co.uk
There is an awful lot of conjecture on this period in
Egyptian history, but it certainly seems that the
powers that be are in no hurry to move this debate
forward Would be intersted to hear anyone else's
thoughts on the matter.

I think the problem is that this is one of those rare
instances where a debate would be useful, and not
necessarily an example of the 'Old Guard' protecting
their idea of the truth.
Well, okay, Hawass regularly inflicts his personal
ideas on the world, tries to enforce them. But I
think that most people -- real archaeologists and
historians -- aren't so much used to a debate as
they are with working with the evidence. And because
of that they're uncomfortable with anyone who wants
to label a mummy on the basis of good debating
skills.
I'd say that Joann Fletcher was on to something when
she set out to identify Nefertiti. Oh, sure, he laid it
heavy with the speculation, but she was thinking outside
the box. After all, she is one of the few that set idea the
idea that hieroglyphic inscriptions record the absolute
truth & must be interpreted literally.
Then again, that is a bit of a slippery slope...

Would somebody like Nefertiti still be given the crossed forearm,
under the possible circumstances under which her reign ended? Even if
she'd held onto power as Smenkhare after Akhenaten's passing, there
would still have been some question as to her legitamacy.

If that facial wound were inflicted before death, it is likely that
her attacker was aligned with those who took power afterwards. They
might have been inclined to downgrade her status by denying the
crossed arm.

One thing that arises when appraising this mummy--the bandages inside
the exposed mouth. Was the mouth typically filled with a rolled
bandage, or only in the case of a gaping gash across the cheek?

[JTEM]

Post by heremon
Would somebody like Nefertiti still be given the
crossed forearm, under the possible circumstances
under which her reign ended?

It wasn't as uniform as some imply.

Post by heremon
If that facial wound were inflicted before death,
it is likely that her attacker was aligned with
those who took power afterwards.

She appears to have vanished some time before
Akkenaten. So, unless you buy into the Smenkhare
stuff, there was no real change in power.

[Katherine Griffis]

Post by heremon
Would somebody like Nefertiti still be given the crossed forearm,
under the possible circumstances under which her reign ended? Even if
she'd held onto power as Smenkhare after Akhenaten's passing, there
would still have been some question as to her legitamacy.

The problem you have is the right arm, bent or straight, does not
imply the female was a ruler.

The Elder Lady (also buried in KV 35) also has a bent right arm, and
has been thought to be Queen Tiye. Yet, it IS known that royal wives
often held a foral style sceptre in their right hand as part of their
"badge of office" (Stricker 1960). This means that the "Younger Woman"
of KV 35, whom Fletcher is determined to claim as Nefertiti AND as a
ruler (because of the various Samson/Harris/Krauss/Gabolde theories of
a female regent after Akhenaten (though contra, see Allen 1994)),
could simply be a queen of the New Kingdom, even of the Amarna period,
and still NOT be a "ruler."

Post by heremon
If that facial wound were inflicted before death, it is likely that
her attacker was aligned with those who took power afterwards. They
might have been inclined to downgrade her status by denying the
crossed arm.

All evidence points to the facial injury being made post-mortem -
whether political or tomb robber (more likely), it was not the cause
of death.

Post by heremon
One thing that arises when appraising this mummy--the bandages inside
the exposed mouth. Was the mouth typically filled with a rolled
bandage, or only in the case of a gaping gash across the cheek?

Bandages were used to "fill out" a face during the New Kingdom
mummifcation techniques. Mummification tends to draw the skin of the
face inward so it appears very gaunt, so embalmers fill in the mouth,
and sometimes the nose, with fabric such as rolled linen to make the
face appear more fleshy. This is also true of embalming today, BTW.
Ramses I's CT scan showed bandages were used throught his torso to
"fill out" his body, wracked by age and ill health.

The most extravagant use of facial filling was in the case of Queen
Hennatawy, wife of Psuennes I (21st Dynasty), where embalmers went to
such lengths to stuff the face with bandages to make her appear
"lifelike" that, upon dessication and contraction of the facial tissue
after interment, her face "exploded" from the pressure of the bandages
within her mouth. For an image of this phenomenon, see

Loading Image...

References:

Allen, J. 1994. Nefertiti and Smenkh-ka-re. Göttinger Miszellen 141:
7-17.

Gabolde, M. 1998. _D'Akhenaton à Tutânkhamon_. Collection de
l'Institut d'Archaeologie et d'Histoire de l'Antiquite 3. Lyon/Paris:
Universite Lumiere-Lyon 2, Institut d'Archaeologie et d'Histoire de
l'Antiquite/Diffusion de Boccard.

Harris, J. R. 1973. Nefertiti rediviva, AcOr, [Copenhagen] 35: 5-13.

_________. 1973. Nefernefruaten. Göttinger Miszellen 4: 15-17.

Krauss, R. 1978. _Das Ende der Amarnazeit. Beiträge zur Geschichte
und Chronologie des Neuen Reiches_. Hildesheimer Ägyptologische
Beiträge 7. A. Eggebrecht. Hildesheim: Gerstenberg Verlag, (Arguing
that Meritaten, not Nefertiti, was the female regent after Akhenaten -
position also held by Gabolde, above)

Samson, J. 1978. _City of Akhenaten and Nefertiti. Nefertiti as
Pharaoh._ Warminster: Aris & Phillips Ltd.

_________. 1985. _Nefertiti and Cleopatra. Queen-Monarchs of Ancient
Egypt_. London: Rubicon Press,

Stricker, B. H. 1960. Graeco-Egyptische private sculptuur. OMRO 41:
18-30.

HTH.

Regards --

Katherine Griffis-Greenberg, M. A. (Lon)
Member, International Association of Egyptologists
ARCE, BANEA, EES, ASOR

Doctoral Program (Egyptology)
Oriental Studies
University of Oxford
Oxford, United Kingdom

http://www.griffis-consulting.com