Go to the Egyptian Dreams shop
Egyptian Dreams
Ancient Egypt Discussion Board
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Bolton Museum mummy found to be royalty
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Egyptian Dreams Forum Index -> Pharaohs and Queens
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Rozette
Vizier
Vizier


Joined: 21 Jul 2005
Posts: 1185
Location: Belguim

PostPosted: Mon Mar 03, 2008 2:39 pm    Post subject: Bolton Museum mummy found to be royalty Reply with quote

Bolton Museum mummy found to be royalty
Quote :
A member of royalty has been in Bolton for the last 78 years - in the shape of an Egyptian mummy which is more than 3,000 years old.

Experts carried out a series of examinations - including CT scans at the Royal Bolton Hospital - on two mummies from Bolton Museum.

And the results for one of the relics were unexpected.

For they revealed that the Eygptian mummy, originallly thought to be an Egyptian temple dancer, was in fact a member of the Egyptian royal family from the 19th dynasty, related to Ramesses the Second.

http://www.theboltonnews.co.uk/search/display.var.2086238.0.mummys_the_word_for_museum_staff.php


According to the article the mummy had a " pronounced over-bite ".

I always thought that the pronounced overbite was characteristic for the Thutmosid royal family and not for the family of Ramses II.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Seshat
Scribe
Scribe


Joined: 03 Feb 2008
Posts: 132

PostPosted: Tue Mar 04, 2008 9:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

It's probably Smenkhare.


Yeah. The overbite is from the Thutmosides. Maybe someone was confused. Maybe that was a characteristic of the rammesides, too?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Daughter_Of_SETI
Divine Adoratrice


Joined: 09 Mar 2006
Posts: 2558
Location: Hull, UK

PostPosted: Tue Mar 04, 2008 11:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The characteristic overbite was definitely from the Tuthmoside line, but I guess that an overbite doesn't necessarily have to be genetic, so maybe it's just a coincidence?? Unless this mummy was in fact related to the Tuthmoside in some way?? I don't see how an overbite should be used as a way of dating the mummy, though. Confused

Interesting article, Rozette. Very Happy
_________________


In ancient times cats were worshipped as gods; they have not forgotten this - Terry Pratchett.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Segereh
Pharaoh
Pharaoh


Joined: 22 Apr 2004
Posts: 2934
Location: Bruges

PostPosted: Mon Mar 10, 2008 3:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Seshat wrote:
It's probably Smenkhare.

#Rofl

Maybe Zahi Hawass could go take a look?
I remember a NGC report in which he "validated" Ramesses I's mummy.
Claiming he could enter a room and feel if the mummy was royal.
Sounds like crack to me.
_________________
"Leave him in error who loves his error."
"Learn politeness from the impolite."

Feel free to visit my site in construction:
-- www.enks.net --
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
kmt_sesh
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 13 Nov 2004
Posts: 7099
Location: Chicago, IL

PostPosted: Thu Mar 13, 2008 6:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I would also be suspicious of findings based purely on physical characteristics. The severed genitals is striking--and unpleasant!--but I don't see much else of substance to identify this as a royal mummy from the Ramesside line. It could be that there's additional evidence the article doesn't mention or to which the author did not have access.
_________________


Visit my blog!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Segereh
Pharaoh
Pharaoh


Joined: 22 Apr 2004
Posts: 2934
Location: Bruges

PostPosted: Thu Mar 13, 2008 7:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

kmt_sesh wrote:
I would also be suspicious of findings based purely on physical characteristics.

"Tests, including the CT scan and carbon dating,
revealed the mummy's genitalia had been removed,
that he had a pronounced over-bite
and different size eyes,
all indicating he was a member of the Egyptian royal family
who was mummified between 1295 and 1186 BC."

So if you look like a freakshow eunuch, you're royalty?
Sounds about right.

But what troubles me most here is
"Hopefully this will really put Bolton Museum on the map."
Hopefully not as providers of unfounded theories. Confused
I'd love to hear more about this.
_________________
"Leave him in error who loves his error."
"Learn politeness from the impolite."

Feel free to visit my site in construction:
-- www.enks.net --
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
kmt_sesh
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 13 Nov 2004
Posts: 7099
Location: Chicago, IL

PostPosted: Fri Mar 14, 2008 12:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
So if you look like a freakshow eunuch, you're royalty?
Sounds about right.


Sounds like a lot of the clients I have to work with. I guess they're royalty, too. Razz
_________________


Visit my blog!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
burlgirl
Citizen
Citizen


Joined: 01 Feb 2008
Posts: 69
Location: Corinth, New York

PostPosted: Fri Mar 14, 2008 3:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Segereh,
I have to agree with you. I take a lot of what Zahi Hawass says with a grain of salt when I hear him say stuff like that. I remember when he commented on the possible mummies of Hatshepsut and he was looking at the more attractive one that he commented something like, she had to be the queen. She felt like a queen and she had such a queenly prescence. Just because we want something to be so doesn't make it so, no matter how much we want it. If that was the case, KV 63 would have had some Amarna mummies!!

Hawass rubs me the wrong way. I want to like the guy so much, but every time I see him on tv I end up thinking "Puh-leese! How did you get in your position making statments like that!" Sometimes I feel like I know more about some of this stuff and have a better "feel" for it than he does. Okay, I'll turn the rant off now and go back to lurking.

Jo
_________________
To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which
he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.

Thomas Jefferson
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Segereh
Pharaoh
Pharaoh


Joined: 22 Apr 2004
Posts: 2934
Location: Bruges

PostPosted: Fri Mar 14, 2008 6:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

burlgirl wrote:
Just because we want something to be so doesn't make it so, no matter how much we want it.

I think I've recently met Hawass's little nephew.

burlgirl wrote:
Hawass rubs me the wrong way.

Too easy.

burlgirl wrote:
Sometimes I feel like I know more about some of this stuff and have a better "feel" for it than he does.

Trust me, I think the majority of Egyptologists and Egyptomaniacs feel that way.
But a genuine archeologist simply cannot afford to express that.
He has done a lot for his country, even if he has too much of an ego.
Enough people like that to go around, just too bad he's an influential persona.
_________________
"Leave him in error who loves his error."
"Learn politeness from the impolite."

Feel free to visit my site in construction:
-- www.enks.net --
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
kmt_sesh
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 13 Nov 2004
Posts: 7099
Location: Chicago, IL

PostPosted: Sat Mar 15, 2008 12:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The average person knows nothing of Hawass beyond his public persona--which means his frequent appearances on things like the Discovery Channel. It's really a one-dimensional platform for one to form an opinion.

Many people I meet in my work with the Field and O.I. regard him as something of a folk hero and think he's peachy-keen. Yet they have very little to go on to form an accurate impression of him, and even less familiarity with ancient Egypt to recognize the many bizarre things Hawass has said in public appearances.

Some of the Egyptologists I know can't stand him. Others have nothing but the highest regard and have learned to forgive him for his obsession for self-publicity.

Segereh is right that Hawass has done great work for his country and its antiquities. And although many of us long ago gave up trying to defend him, he's the man in charge and Segereh is right about that, too. I guess we all just have to "deal with it."
_________________


Visit my blog!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Lutz
Pharaoh
Pharaoh


Joined: 02 Sep 2007
Posts: 3538
Location: Berlin, Germany

PostPosted: Sun Mar 16, 2008 2:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Here are some new / more informations :

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/03/15/wmummy115.xml

http://www.dnaindia.com/report.asp?newsid=1156159

Greetings,

Lutz
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
isisinacrisis
Pharaoh
Pharaoh


Joined: 17 Jan 2004
Posts: 2228
Location: London, UK

PostPosted: Sun Mar 16, 2008 12:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Telegraph article is much more thorough-mentioning similarities between the facial features as being more likely to reveal possible connections with Ramses II. They also mention expensive embalming materials which were used on royal mummies, not temple dancers. No mention of Hawass and his 'my mummy senses are tingling' powers in the article either.

Maybe they could try DNA testing? though I doubt that 'you-know-who' would allow it as he only wants Egyptians to carry out such tests these days. But RII's mummy is so well preserved and the Bolton one seems to be very well preserved too, so it would be possible to compare the two...though the best mummy DNA is in the bones so it might be a little bit intrusive to extract samples.
_________________
High-Priestess of Isis, Hereditary Princess, Lady of Philae, Favourite of Osiris, the Lord of Abydos, Daughter of Horus, Chantress of Bastet, Superior of the Kitty Litter Wink
<---Check out my av-I made it myself Very Happy
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Lutz
Pharaoh
Pharaoh


Joined: 02 Sep 2007
Posts: 3538
Location: Berlin, Germany

PostPosted: Sun Mar 16, 2008 1:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have no idea how they can say it is a member of the royal family of the 19-th dynasty (And if you read all this stuff really, they don`t do so ... Very clever !).

isisinacrisis wrote:
Maybe they could try DNA testing? ... But RII's mummy is so well preserved ...

After all what was done with the mummy of Ramses II. I can`t imagine that there is still DNA of him to find. For example he was X-rayed dozens of times. And in Paris, France the mummy was radioactive radiated to kill bacteria and moulds.

Quote:
... though the best mummy DNA is in the bones so it might be a little bit intrusive to extract samples.

The securest place for DNA is a tooth. Enamel is the hardest and robustest material in the human body.

Greetings,

Lutz
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Segereh
Pharaoh
Pharaoh


Joined: 22 Apr 2004
Posts: 2934
Location: Bruges

PostPosted: Sun Mar 16, 2008 1:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lutz wrote:
I have no idea how they can say it is a member of the royal family of the 19-th dynasty

I was thinking the same: it's still awefully shady.

Lutz wrote:
The securest place for DNA is a tooth.
Enamel is the hardest and robustest material in the human body.

But even then the risk of getting "contamined" data is extremely high.
I can't see how they could be able to compare DNA-samples with such a light argumentation.
_________________
"Leave him in error who loves his error."
"Learn politeness from the impolite."

Feel free to visit my site in construction:
-- www.enks.net --
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Lutz
Pharaoh
Pharaoh


Joined: 02 Sep 2007
Posts: 3538
Location: Berlin, Germany

PostPosted: Sun Mar 16, 2008 1:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Segereh wrote:
Lutz wrote:
The securest place for DNA is a tooth.
Enamel is the hardest and robustest material in the human body.

But even then the risk of getting "contamined" data is extremely high.
I can't see how they could be able to compare DNA-samples with such a light argumentation.

Thats the other problem : You never know if you found the DNA of the mummy or that of an Ancient Egypt priest, a member of the Abd el-Rassul family from Qurna or from Brugsch and Carter, Zahi Hawass or Mr.Iskander ... Very Happy

Greetings,

Lutz
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Egyptian Dreams Forum Index -> Pharaohs and Queens All times are GMT
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
Page 1 of 3

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group