|
|
|
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 >>
|
|
|
