Posted by Kate Phizackerley on Sunday, March 14, 2010

[Fans of Bones may get the references]

The identification of the Elder Lady as Queen Tiye and the Younger Lady as the probable mother of Tutankhamun has focused attention on the boy who lay between them in the side room of KV35.  Tim has written a really great article about about this mummy and also about the mummy which is widely believed to be King Sethnakht but whom Tim wonders if it is Prince Webensenu.  It's hard to interpret KV35 as it contains the consolidation of many tombs in the Valley of the Kings many of which had probably been robbed. 

Tim wonders whether the boy from the side room  could be the Pharaoh Smenkhare.  (He uses the spelling Smenkhara, others use Smenkhkare.  We can't even agree on the spelling of this king's name!)  I doubt it because I beleieve KV55 is Smenkhare but anybody who disagrees with my logic and believes KV55 to be Akhenaten may find Tim's arguments interesting.

Tim argues that KV35 was probably robbed before being used as a cache.   I doubt this.  Amenhotep was found in his own sarcophagus.  We should also perhaps consider what made the priests choose KV35 above other tombs?  They must have believed that the mummies placed in there stood a chance of escaping further plunderers.  Surely they would have chosen a largely intact tomb - unless of course all known tombs had been plundered by then.

Anyway, it's a great article so I'd encourage you to read it yourself and make your own mind up.

6 comments:

Parag said...

Many of the questions and uncertainties surrounding Akhenaten's co-regent and successor revolve around the names attested for this individual (or individuals). There appear two closely similar yet distinct sets of names in the records available for the late Amarna period.
Valley of The Kings

rymerster said...

I'm pretty sure the prince's mummy could be Tuthmosis (son of Amenhotep III and Tiye) who died before Year 30 of his father's reign. The resemblance to the mummies of Tiye and Thuya is noteable, and the age fits the evidence we have of that prince. He was old enough to hold titles that Ramesses II did when Crown Prince yet young enough to have been portrayed as a juvinile in relation to his father (Apis burial) and in relation to the sarcophagus of his pet cat.

Anonymous said...

I am not sure if a 10 or 11 years old boy would be old and capable enough to bear the title of a Commander of Troops,a title which is attested for a Prince Thutmose on a whip from Tutankhamen`s tomb.
Or could it be that the inscription on this whip refers to Thutmose IV as Prince instead of a son of Amenhotep III?
I really don`t believe that the boy could be Semenkhkare. He definitely died as a king and would have been mummified in the traditional king`s pose with arms crossed over the chest which is not the case. Whatever the reason for the obvious deviation from this tradition seen in the KV55 mummy,
there is evidence that King Semenkhkare initiated the return to the old ways and religion, so he was surely buried according to tradition.

s. stockwell said...

It may be he was murdered? i never noticed the huge gash in the top of his head and since the YL is now considered murdered it will be interesting to see if they find that this damage was done before death or not? Since all three are together it looks as though they were brought together from Ankhetaten after the fall? It may have been a very violent overthrow where all were killed except for Tut and Ankesenamen who were able to carry on dominated by the Priests?

tim said...

Hi Kate

Thanks for the post!

Cheers

V.A. Kuznetsov said...

Well, I'm four years late to the party, but I hope to have something to add. This prince did have his DNA tested and was also scanned. Why no results have been announced is rather a mystery, and I know many still think he was never tested and scanned. (There is video evidence of this). However, I am skeptical about him being Crown prince Thutmose because of his age, probably 11 or 12. While true that any number of high sounding titles can be given to anybody, even a baby, one of his titles was high priest of Ptah at Memphis. There is the small mummiform bier showing him as a high priest of Ptah. But it is not right, imo, for a child. This figure has a wig and a sidelock, the sidelock in this case does not indicate youth, it is a symbol of Ptah. Why then, if this does represent a youth, if the KV35 mummy, does it have a wig? The wig represents nothing except it is the fashion, for adults, not youth. Also, I believe that every object associated with Prince Thutmose, was found in the area of Memphis. The bier, the scarcophagus of his cat, a figurine and other bits and pieces. This, to me, argues for a burial near Memphis, not Thebes. This does not preclude his body being brought down to thebes at some later time, but it all just seems wrong. Until we finally get given all his results, I suspect the KV35 boy to be an undocumented relative of Tutankhamun, whether brother, cousin or uncle. I often see sited as "evidence" for him being prince Thutmose, is that he was found laying beside Queen Tiye. Well, yes, but also beside the mother of Tutankhamun. An interesting subject I never see mentioned is the positiion of his hands, the right extended and the left closed. This is the same as Crown prince Amenemhat in KV 43. Yet mummies of juvenile crown princes are rather rare, these, to my knowledge being the only two. Can we extrapolate anything from two examples. Would the hand positions indicate a crown prince, or just a prince...

Search

Admin Control Panel