soy mienbro de la EEF
el dia 17/11/2008 recibi un correo por parte de dicha lista de correo, que la National Geographic habia emitido un nuevo documental sobre King Tut and the Lost Dynasty¨. Y comentaban sus impreciones sobre lo expuesto en dicho documental.
Como me imagino que tu quieres ver por tus propios OJOS, copio y pego el comentario.
This evening the National Geographic Channel treated North
American viewers to a documentary with the title "King Tut
and the Lost Dynasty". Once again, CT-scans was the focus
and unidentified mummies came under scrutiny. Most attention
was paid to the "Younger Lady" from KV35. The mummy is
definitely a female and a wide age-at-death range was assigned,
that being 22-45. The lady was determined to have borne children,
seemingly scotching the "nulliparous" theory of another investigator.
Not only that but it was suggested that the "Younger Lady" had
probably been murdered, this being indicated by signs that the severe
damage to her face was antemortem and also a wound on her torso.
The mouth was packed with linen, in this case, in order to "seal off the
wound" and fix up the face somewhat. I am still left wondering how
the entire flesh of the cheek was removed from the living person.
Axed-off? Quite a gruesome demise, in that case, and an
unnecessarily brutal way to get rid of a royal woman when there are
other, perhaps "neater", ways to murder someone if that is the intent.
But the "Younger Lady" was most emphatically declared by Zahi
Hawass not to be Queen Nefertiti. The only reason given was
that a loose right arm with a clenched hand "did not fit to the body"
when the break was examined. I suppose I'm not certain, given
the rest of the information, why that should disqualify this female
mummy from being Nefertiti. Thus far, we have only seen *left*
arms being raised in a queenly pose. The left arm of the "Younger
Lady" is not raised--but now there appears to be *no* right arm
that originally belonged to her. In this program the theory was
advanced that this could be Kiya on account of a skull anomaly
like that of Tutankhamun. However, I have noticed that, on a
relief depicting Kiya and subsequently altered for Meritaten, the
elongated head seems not to have been there originally but
corrected to fit to the head-shape of the eldest Amarna princess
beneath a wig. Regardless, Kiya supposedly required no raised
arm at all.
Also scanned was the "Elder Lady" from KV35 but, even though
Susan James was onhand with her theory that this is Nefertiti, that
doesn't pan out according to the examiners. Much was made of the
beauty of the features of this mummy, but her age was concluded to be
from 40-60 due to mild degeneration of the spine and other joints. In
other words, too old to be Nefertiti and probably still Queen Tiye.
The KV55 skeleton received its share of radiological attention--a
male of "at least 25" with a dolicephalic skull like that of Tutankhamun
and also a cleft palate--like Tut's. The program stated there was "only
a fraction of a centimeter" difference in the two skulls--but I, personally,
wonder if this is really so, since Derry measured them and came up with
a bit more of a variation. At any rate, conclusion--Akhenaten, himself.
I don't know why the "Little Prince" from KV35 was not scanned.
Something to learn there, too, perhaps.
NOTA : si alquiere puedo traducirlo.
Tambien quiero hacer constar que en dicha lista de correo tambien se ha comentado sobre los 2 fetos que se encontraron en la tumba de Tut de los cuales se estan haciedo las pruebas de ADN, una de las conluciones que han llegado pero todavia no es definitivo es que los 2 fetos son gemelos. Tamien debo de hacer constar que parece que se ha encontrado 2 tumbas en el Valle de los relles, pero una de ellas es lo mas posible que sea la de nefertiti y lo bueno es que con toda probabilidad este intacta, lo sospechan porque la tierra en la entra de la tumba no esta removida no asi la otra tumba que si lo esta.Estadísticas: Publicado por josebaton — 21 Nov 2008, 10:43
]]>