Marianne Luban
re: Thutmose I
Thu Nov 9, 2017 10:14

I also forgot to mention that the mummy in question had no identifying docket, which is strange in itself for a kingly mummy--if it were one. It is true that the remains were found in one of the coffins of Thutmose I, but I wonder if the reburial commission even realized that at the time to make it deliberate. After all, the coffin had already been usurped for use by Pinudjem I. Careful examination in modern times detected the original owner. My guess is the living prince looked something like a Facebook friend of mine, an Upper Egyptian tour guide named Hanna Anis.

  • re: Thutmose IMarianne Luban, Thu Nov 9 10:00
    Tory wrote: "I believe Maspero was right about this mummy and its age being 50+. I do not trust the CT-scan since the ages keep changing depending on who is being quoted, and Hawass changed it from... more
    • re: Thutmose ITory, Thu Nov 9 17:54
      Two different radiologists can examine a CT-scan and walk away with two completely different conclusions. That's my point. The no crossed arms is not significant since the arms were disturbed by... more
    • re: Thutmose I — Marianne Luban, Thu Nov 9 10:14
Click here to receive daily updates