|
|
|
Pages in this article: [ UNRAVELLING
THE MUMMY ]
[ IDENTIFYING THE MUMMIES ] [ X-RAYING THE MUMMIES ] [ USING DNA ]
X-raying the mummies
So, is there another method to ascertain the true identity of the royal
mummies?
| The
obvious answer to the question would be to actually compare facial features and
cranial morphology. In 1912 Grafton Elliot Smith, an English anatomist
carried out such an examination. Unable to unwrap or use intrusive procedures,
he carried out superficial anatomical examinations of the bodies, giving
estimates of ages of death and family relationships. Smith concluded saying "Examination
with the aid of an x-ray machine would, no doubt, have provided much additional
information –and I hope that this will be done some time in the future."
[x] |
|
The
first x-ray study of the royal mummies was carried out by Dr James E. Harris
and his team in 1967. The use of x-rays is not only useful in determining the
age, but also in helping, in some cases, to determine the cause of death.
The relationship between two individuals can not be determined by simply
comparing two x-rays.
A great number of factors have to be taken into consideration,
particularly in obtaining precise lateral measurements of the skull, known as cephalometric
measurements. |
Using
a powerful computer program, these measurements are converted into 177 x-y
digital mathematical co-ordinates. The computer is then able to generate a highly
accurate schematic map of the skull, allowing for various tracings to be
compared with one another with a high degree of accuracy. The use of
cephalometric reconstructions positively prove that members from a closely
related ancestry - all display similar cranial morphology, enabling experts to
distinguish changes in the facial features from father to son for many
generations.
[x]
The Royal Mummies. G E Smith. Pages iii-iv
Above, shows the superimposed cephalometric tracing
of Amenhotep III (?) against on the left, Thutmose IV and on the right,
Tutankhamun. [xi]
|
Professor
Wente pooled his findings with those of Professor Harris, concluding that it
was quite apparent that some of the identifications of the mummies were showing
discrepancies between certain mummies that were supposed to have a father to son
relationship.
There
were a number of anomalies, the first being the identification of Thutmose I,
who according to textual evidence should have been in the region of 50 years of
age at death. However, x-ray evidence of this mummy refutes this, suggesting
that the body is that of a young man, no older than 20, and that there was no
direct relationship between them [xii]
leaving two possibilities:
|
|
Either Thutmoses I suffered from a clinical disorder
that delayed normal maturation, or more acceptable, that the mummy had been
incorrectly identified whilst being re-wrapped. The latter is supported by
Smith, who wrote "Physically he was different from his brother-in-law
Amenhotep I." [xiii] In fact Wente goes
even further, saying "In the case of Thutmose I mummy at best it can be
said that the individual was a member of the Thutmoside family, but not a
king" [xiv]
In addition to Thutmose I,
Seti II's tracing also showed that this body had also been incorrectly
identified. His tracing was found to be a very close match to those of Thutmose
II and Thutmose III – proving that the mummy labelled as Seti II was not Seti
II.
|
In conclusion, Professors Wente and Harris concluded that the correct
arrangement should be that the mummy of Thutmose II was Thutmose I; and that of
Seti II was Thutmose II, whilst Thutmoses III was probably correctly identified.
Based solely on their cranial biological findings, Professors Wente and
Harris reached a controversial sequence theory, suggesting "on the basis of
the biologic evidence of craniofacial variation that the mummy labelled as
Amenhotep III by the restorers was not a likely father, or even grandfather, of
Tutankhamun." [xv] Shown below is one
of their proposed sequences. [xvi]
|
|
|
| SEQUENCE OF KINGS |
|
ROYAL MUMMIES |
| DYNASTY
18 |
|
SCHEME
3 |
|
|
|
| Thutmose I |
= |
Thutmose II |
| Thutmose II |
= |
Seti II |
| Thutmose III |
= |
? Thutmose III |
| Amenhotep II |
= |
? Thutmose III |
| Thutmose IV |
= |
Thutmose IV |
| Amenhotep III |
= |
Amenhotep II |
| Akenaten |
= |
Amenhotep III |
| Smenkhkare |
= |
KV55 |
| Tutankhamun |
= |
Tutankhamun |
| Aye |
= |
--- |
| |
References for this page: |
| [xi] |
Wente. op. cited |
| [xii] |
X-Raying the pharaohs. 1973
J. Harris pages 131-132 |
| [xiii] |
Smith op. cited |
| [xiv] |
Wente op. cited |
| [xv] |
Wente op. cited |
| [xvi] |
For a detailed sequence see Wente op.
cited - 1995 |
Next: using DNA >> |
|
|
