Jaime O
re: the age of kv55
Sat Sep 3, 2016 07:52

Hi Joe,

thank you for your comments.

I appreciate your remarks on Meryre II and they do make sense. To some extent. You and me seem to agree that Meritaten was likelier than not Ankhkhe(t)perure Neferneferuaten, but if she was Akhenaten's coregent, how do you explain that she was a mere Great Royal Wife when Smenkhkare appears in this said tomb? Or seeing the stelae I mentioned as posthumous allows Meritaten to be crowned after Akhenaten and Smenkhkare?

"They are thus from the one year period following the death of Akhenaten while his queen/daughter Meritaten was waiting for the arrival of Smenkhkare - that is the name that the Egyptian had provided for the Hittite prince Zannanza [...] Yes I am not one who dogmatically holds to the notion that an Egyptian princess/queen could not marry a foreigner because the whole Taḫamunzu (the Hittite rendition of Egyptian tȝ-ḥmt-nzwt, “the king’s wife”) incident proves that such a notion is wrong."

This is okay, but Dakhamunzu was in a different situation: if a princess was to marry a foreigner, one would expect their fathers (or whoever was on the throne) to make the arrangements. This was Amenhotep III's position when he denied any of his daughters to outsiders. Dakhamunzu was on her own here, and was already a queen.

"Berlin 20716, which is not inscribed, and Berlin 17813, where the cartouches are blank, were posthumous stelae supporting Meritaten’s claim to kingship as ḥmt-wife (not sꜣt-daughter) of Akhenaten. The triple cartouche intended for Meritaten on BM 17813 is the same form she used on the posthumous Carter 001k - see my post

You must have copied the wrong link, because the one you sent gives directly the forum's home page. I browsed on the archives and I believe you wanted to send this http://disc.yourwebapps.com/discussion.cgi?id=177754;article=12389;search_term=Carter+001k. Carter 001k is very interesting on its own, but if Meritaten was Neferneferuaten, why isn't her name included on the nomen besides Neferneferuaten like her mother's was? You certainly are familiar with this http://www.griffith.ox.ac.uk/gri/carter/001k-c001k-3.html. This stings me when we already know Burnaburiash II apparently regarded Meritaten as his equal (otherwise, why was he sending her gifts?) and the said Coregency Stele has the names of Nefertiti and Meritaten replaced by those of Neferneferuaten Akhet-en-hyes and Ankhesepaaten (if Nefertiti was Neferneferuaten, why not replace her name alone?). Among other things.

"No the (erased) name Smenkhkare only appears on that vase. [...]Do not confuse the presence of the name Ankhkheperure as proof of the presence of Smenkhkare. This incorrect juxtaposition (especially in almost all older literature and even in recent literature) is why his name appears over and over again, even thought its actually attestation is quite rare in monumental inscriptions. Whenever you see his name in the literature you have to be very careful."

My eye mislead my memory: check the link I sent and you'll see Carter 001k is identified by the project as Wooden box of Smenkhkare. It is not.

"I find your position that Smenkhkare was the father of Tutankhamun and the mummy in KV 55, quite strange in that Tutankhamun would have reburied his father but failed to record his name or give him any grave goods that contained his name and in Tutankhamun’s own tomb he erased his name."

Not really that strange. Most of Tutankhamun's burial goods were originally from Neferneferuaten's, and this is where I believe objects with Akhenaten inscribed came from.

" Agree. Therefore, like you I make a choice. I choose the most recent CT scan and previous X-ray studies and even those physical examinations which concluded 30+ (although not the one that said up to 60)."

Problems begin when people want to see what they want to see, which was the case of Hawass, who was championing the identification of KV55 as Akhenaten for years and proudly trumped the genetic evidences pointed in that direction (which they don't), and new examinations founded the mummy could be as older as 60. That moment I became suspicious of Akhenaten being Smenkhkare. This is why I stick to Darrey, who was later corroborated by R. G. Harris, that KV55 is that of a man in young 20s. Marianne also wrote: "Yes, and I am not so certain that any forensic examiner could ever distinguish so positively between 25 and 30."; but can't a skilled forensic examiner distinguish a 20-23 year old from a 30 year old man?


  • Re: the age of kv55Joe Baker, Fri Sep 2 05:15
    Hi Jaime Meryre II's tomb has the last appearance of the royal Amarna family dated to Year 12 and these representations are followed by Smenkhkare's debut with Meritaten by his side. I too think the... more
    • re: the age of kv55 — Jaime O, Sat Sep 3 07:52
      • re: the age of kv55Kim Sargerson, Mon Sep 5 07:59
        Hi Jaime, Joe I think too much is made of "erasure". There are not always political overtones to this. The calcite jar which apparently had the cartouches of Smenkhkare and Akhenaten side by side,... more
        • re: the age of kv55Marianne Luban, Mon Sep 5 12:23
          Kim: Just a few responses... "It should be remembered that most of Tutankhamun's gravegoods come from a small window of time at the end of the Amarna period. There is one winejar from Amunhotep III... more
          • re: the age of kv55Kim Sargerson, Mon Sep 5 19:05
            Hi Marianne Thank you for your comments. I wrote "(and no objects attesting to a coregency of Amunhotep III and Akhenaten)." Perhaps I could have phrased that better. What I am trying to say is that... more
            • re: the age of kv55Marianne Luban, Tue Sep 6 09:30
              I wrote: "So it is Neferneferuaten on that box element and she did not need a wife. Akhenaten did--and that Great Royal Wife was now Meritaten" Kim: "Yes it is Neferneferuaten, female pharaoh, which... more
              • re: the age of kv55Marianne Luban, Tue Sep 6 09:48
                This site gives information as to how cranial sutures are used in determining age of skeletal remains:... more
    • Re: the age of kv55Marianne Luban, Fri Sep 2 10:17
      Hello Joe, Jaime "Meryre II's tomb has the last appearance of the royal Amarna family dated to Year 12 and these representations are followed by Smenkhkare's debut with Meritaten by his side." "I too ... more
      • CorrectionMarianne Luban, Fri Sep 2 10:47
        Joe: "Phantom children only ever depicted/mentioned in illustrations/texts from the Kiya dedicated Meru-Aten. Her original inscriptions were later reinscribed to represent the older surviving... more
Click here to receive daily updates