The Tut Report

I coughed up the 15 bucks and got access to Tut's "lab report". Here's the skinny:

1) Genetics definitely show Yuya and Tuya as parents of Queen Tiye.

2) Yuya is probably not the father of Amenhotep III. Only six of the expected eight markers match. Tuya is quite clearly not the mother of Amenhotep III.

3) The mummy of Amenhotep III appears to have been labeled properly by the priests that reburied him. Genetics do not suggest that this mummy could have been Akhenaten instead.

3) Queen Tiye and Amenhotep III are very strongly the parents of the mummy in KV55. They are also very strongly the parents of the "Younger Lady".

4) The mummy in KV55 is not likely to have been Akhenaten, as concluded by the Hawass study. The leading candidate is still Smenkhkare. (See further comments on this below.)

5) The "Younger Lady" is very strongly the mother of Tutankhamun. The leading candidate for the "Younger Lady" is Nefertiti. The similarity of her names and titles at Amarna and those of Smenkhkare appear to be linked to their role (as biological parents) in the birth of Tut.

The basis for identifying the KV55 mummy as Akhenaten was presented in the 2007 documentary, "Nefertiti and the Lost Dynasty". However, this documentary is not cited in the "Tut Report". In fact, no reference is given to support the attribution. It is simply stated that recent anthropological analysis (raising the estimated age of the KV55 mummy) outweighs previous radiological studies (assigning an age of about 20 years to the KV55 mummy). The 2007 documentary did not convince many people, including Egyptologists, so I don't expect anyone to be swayed now (without any further proof being offered).

Nefertiti and the Lost Dynasty:
http://www.domainofman.com/forum/index.c...
http://www.domainofman.com/forum/index.c...
http://www.monstersandcritics.com/smalls...
http://www.amazon.com/National-Geographi...

The "Tut Report" proposes that Beketaten or Nebetiah, younger daughters of Queen Tiye, could have been the mothers of king Tut. (Mutnodjmet was not mentioned as a candidate for the same reason as Nefertiti - these older daughters of Aye are NOT considered closely related to Akhenaten.) However, Beketaten was too young, possibly even younger that Tut himself. I don't have any information about Nebetiah, but Nebat was a Biblical epithet of Aye! See:

http://www.domainofman.com/book/chap-20....

Other older daughters of Queen Tiye and/or Amenhotep III are Sitamun B (who we have mentioned previously), Iset C, and Henut-taneb. Henut-taneb is of the same form as Nesi-taneb-tashru. The suffix tashru is a variant of -tasherit, which was appended to the names of Kiya's (Nefertiti's?) daughters.

The report contains more assurances that members of the royal family were not really genetic mutants/freaks. It is also claimed that there is no genetic basis for Tut's effeminate physique (other than his sedentary lifestyle). It is finally admitted that Tut was not an athletic youngster, and that he actually needed those canes found in his tomb. However, Hawass once again rejects any suspicion that Tut was murdered. His fractured femur can only be viewed as accidental. That's his scientific opinion and he's sticking to it.

Here are the links to the "Tut Report", but I don't know if they can be accessed without paying.

http://jama.ama-assn.org/

Mummies in the Test Group:
http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/ful...
(Click on the tab "Kingship Analysis" if it will let you.)

Genealogical Rationale:
http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/ful...

We're currently discussing this topic at DomainOfMan:
http://www.domainofman.com/boards/index....

Comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Greg's picture
Member since:
30 April 2004
Last activity:
14 min 31 sec

Thanks for the info Charles. I've been meaning to dig into this news, but absolutely mad week here. So appreciate the blog post as a point of departure (when I finally get around to it!).

Kind regards,
Greg
-------------------------------------------
You monkeys only think you're running things
@DailyGrail

Charles Pope's picture
Member since:
23 October 2009
Last activity:
6 hours 35 min

Hi Greg,

My expectations for these DNA results were quite low, but they are proving to be revealing and highly controversial. For example, the genetic chart indicates that the parents of Tut were the KV55 mummy and the Younger Lady, and that they were "consanguinial in the first degree" (full brother/sister relationship)! That's a huge finding, and one that has me scrambling to adjust my own working model of that time period.

The relationships above are considered to be over 99.99% accurate. The extent of inbreeding would seem to lower that figure a bit, but it still seems conclusive.

There will obviously be considerable debate over the KV55 mummy. Is it Smenkhkare, Akhenaten, or somebody else? If it is Akhenaten, then that poses other problems. For example, it indicates that Akhenaten was the father of Tut by a full-sister, and that full-sister was probably Nefertiti. That, in turn, suggests that the relationship between Aye (father of Nefertiti) and Amnehotep III (father of Akhenaten) was extremely close. In fact, it suggests that Aye and Amenhotep III could have been the same person. They were both married to a woman named Tiye. The wife of Aye is called Tey to avoid confusion, but the names are identical. It's not something that mainstream Egyptology will want to consider, but the rest of us are free to do so!

Delaiah's picture
Member since:
1 May 2004
Last activity:
1 day 3 hours

Somebody really ignored that "Don't hit your sister!" line, didn't they?

I wonder how this will affect Zahi. If this revelation inclines him to be open minded, there are all sorts of incredible discoveries he can have a hand in bringing to light. Alternately, fear of negative press for Egypt could cause him to shut down investigation further.

Charles Pope's picture
Member since:
23 October 2009
Last activity:
6 hours 35 min

Yes, Hawass has been known to hit the panic button when he thinks that research might be supporting unwanted conclusions.

Scientists are already reacting to the journal article:

http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100216/f...

Charles Pope's picture
Member since:
23 October 2009
Last activity:
6 hours 35 min

For those interested, I posted the DNA markers used to determine Tut's family relationships.

http://www.domainofman.com/boards/index....

Charles Pope's picture
Member since:
23 October 2009
Last activity:
6 hours 35 min

Discovery Channel special airs tomorrow night (Sunday, Feb. 21) at 8 pm (EST) and continues the following night at the same time:
http://dsc.discovery.com/videos/king-tut...
http://dsc.discovery.com/videos/king-tut...

The Media Frenzy:
http://www.monstersandcritics.com/smalls...
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/20/arts/t...
http://dsc.discovery.com/egypt/tut-inves...
http://news.discovery.com/archaeology/ki...
http://technorati.com/entertainment/tv/a...
http://news.discovery.com/archaeology/ki...
http://www.csmonitor.com/Science/2010/02...

Hawass Rules out Nefertiti (and “foreign consort” Kiya) as Mother of Tut.
http://www.smh.com.au/world/riddle-of-ki...

Tut's Dirty Little Secret, He was Inbred:
http://www.reporternews.com/news/2010/fe...

Tut’s Manhood Restored:
http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/thehumanc...

“Tut Unwrapped” on DVD:
http://store2.discovery.com/detail.php?p...

Charles Pope's picture
Member since:
23 October 2009
Last activity:
6 hours 35 min

The Hawass team has changed the KV55 mummy's age at death from 18-22 years to 40-60 years. This is creating quite a buzz on Egyptology forums. The following page includes relevant excerpts from previous anthropological examinations of the KV55 mummy, which determined that the remains were those of a young man.

http://forum.egyptiandreams.co.uk/viewto...

The above thread also contains the full journal (JAMA) article for discussion:

http://forum.egyptiandreams.co.uk/viewto...