CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 10Ancient Egypt and ArchaeologyPaleopathology and ancient diseasesForensic Anthropology and Bioarchaeology Studies

Identifications of ancient E gyptian royal mummies from the 18th Dynasty reconsidered

Open access
Habicht, M.E., Bouwman, A.S., Rühli, F.J.·2016·American Journal of Physical Anthropology
DOI 10.1002/ajpa.22909
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

For centuries, ancient Egyptian Royal mummies have drawn the attention both of the general public and scientists. Many royal mummies from the New Kingdom have survived. The discoveries of the bodies of these ancient rulers have always sparked much attention, yet not all identifications are clear even nowadays. This study presents a meta‐analysis to demonstrate the difficulties in identifying ancient Egyptian royal mummies. Various methods and pitfalls in the identification of the Pharaohs are reassessed since new scientific methods can be used, such as ancient DNA‐profiling and CT‐scanning. While the ancestors of Tutankhamun have been identified, some identities are still highly controversial (e.g., the mystery of the KV‐55 skeleton, recently most likely identified as the genetic father of Tutankhamun). The meta‐analysis confirms the suggested identity of some mummies (e.g., Amenhotep III, Thutmosis IV, and Queen Tjye). Am J Phys Anthropol 159:S216–S231, 2016. © 2016 American Association of Physical Anthropologists

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/ajpa.22909

Cites

69 of 69 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 62

  1. Bickel S., 2013, Ein neues Grab im Tal der Könige, Antike Welt, 1, 75
  2. Bickel S, 2012, A New Tomb in the VOK: KV 64, KMT, 23, 8
  3. Bickerstaffe D., 2006, Examining the Mystery of the Niagra Falls Mummy. Was He from the Royal Mummies Cache? And Is He Ramses I?, KMT, 17, 26
  4. Bickerstaffe D., 2009, Identifying the Royal Mummies. Refugees For Eternity: The Royal Mummies of Thebes
  5. Brugsch E, 1881, La trouvaille de Deir‐el‐Bahari
  6. BuckleyS.2012. Lecture at Ancient World Tours Conference. University College London 18. August 2012.
  7. Carter H, 1903, Procès‐Verbal D'Examen Du Corps Du Pharaon Aménothes II, ASAE, 3, 120
  8. Clayton PA., 1995, Die Pharaonen
  9. Daressy G., 1909, Cercueils des cachettes. Catalogue général des antiquités égyptiennes du Musée du Caire/Service des Antiquités de l’Égypte; 61001/61044
  10. Davis TM., 1907, The Tomb of Ioiya and Touiyou
  11. Decker W., 1971, Die physische Leistung Pharaos: Untersuchungen zu Heldentum, Jagd und Leibesübungen der ägyptischen Könige
  12. Derry DE., 1927, The Tomb of Tut.ankh.Amen, Vol. 2, 143
  13. Derry DE., 1931, Note On The Skeleton Hitherto Believed To Be That Of King Akhenaten, ASAE, 31, 115
  14. Derry DE., 1940, An Examination Of The Bones Of King Psusennes I, ASAE, 40, 967
  15. El‐Aref N., 2014, Almost 60 royal mummies discovered in Egypt's Valley of the Kings, Ahram Online [Internet].
  16. von Falk M., 2012, Zwischen Echnaton und Tutanchamun, Sokar, 25, 86
  17. Felske C., 2014, Fast 60 königliche Mumien im Tal der Könige gefunden, Selkets Blog [Internet].
  18. Fletcher J., 2004, The Search for Nefertiti
  19. Forbes D., 1998, Tombs, Treasures, Mummies: Seven Great Discoveries Of Egyptian Archaeology
  20. Gabolde M., 2013, L'ADN de la famille royale amarnienne et les source égyptiennes, ENiM [Internet], 6, 177
  21. Germer R., 2001, Das Geheimnis des goldenen Sarges. Echnaton und das Ende der Amarnazeit, 58
  22. Gohar R., 2015, Interview with Nicholas Reeves: The archaeologist on brink of solving mystery of Queen Nefertiti's burial, Ahram Online [Internet].
  23. Graefe E, 2010, The Royal Cache TT 320: a re‐examination
  24. Grimm A, 2001, Das Geheimnis des goldenen Sarges. Echnaton und das Ende der Amarnazeit
  25. Habicht ME., 2011, Nofretete und Echnaton: Das Geheimnis der Amarna‐Mumien
  26. Habicht ME., 2012, Das Geheimnis der Amarna‐Mumien. DNA‐Untersuchung klären Verwandschaftsverhältnisse auf, Antike Welt, 6, 21
  27. Habicht ME., 2014, Semenchkare ‐ Phantom‐König(in) von Achet‐Aton
  28. HabichtME GalassiFM WettengelW RühliFJ.2015. Who else might be in Pharaoh Tutankhamun's tomb (KV 62 c. 1325 BC)? [online]. Academia [Internet]. Available at:https://www.academia.edu/16769699/Who_else_might_be_in_Pharaoh_Tutankhamun_s_tomb_KV_62_c._1325_BC. Accessed on December 12 2015.
  29. Harris JR., 2004, En sag om forveksling, Papyrus, 24, 4
  30. Harrison RG., 1971, Post Mortem on Two Pharaohs. Was Tutankhameńs Skull Fractured?, Buried Hist, 4, 114
  31. Hawass Z., 2006, Quest for the Mummy of Hatshepsut. Could She Be the Lady in the Attic of the Egyptian Museum, Cairo?, Kmt, 17, 40
  32. Hawass Z., 2007, The Scientific Search for Hatshepsut's Mummy, Kmt, 18, 20
  33. Helck W., 2001, Das Grab Nr. 55 im Königsgräbertal
  34. Hessler P, 2015, Radar Scans in King Tut's Tomb Suggest Hidden Chambers, Natl Geograpic [Internet]
  35. Hornung E., 2008, Grundzüge der Ägyptischen Geschichte
  36. IbrahimM.2014. Egyptologists’ Electronic Forum: EEF Bulletin Board. Minist State Antiq Aff [Internet]. Available at:http://www.egyptologyforum.org/bbs/MSA_Asasif_Feb2014.pdf.
  37. James TGH., 2000, Tutanchamun
  38. Krauss R., 1986, Kija, die ursprüngliche Besitzerin der Kanopen aus KV 55, MDAIK, 42, 67
  39. Lucas A., 1931, The Canopic Vases from the ‘Tomb of Queen Tîti’, ASAE, 31, 120
  40. Maciejewski F., 2012, Nofretete. Die historische Gestalt hinter der Büste
  41. J Marchant, 2013, The Shadow King: The Bizarre Afterlife of King Tut's Mummy
  42. Marchant J., 2014, Tutankhamun's Blood. Why everyone from the Mormons to the Muslim Brotherhood is desperate for a piece of the Pharaoh, Matter [Internet].
  43. Maspero G., 1889, Les momies royales de Déir el‐Baharî
  44. Nagel G., 1949, Le linceul de Thoutmès III, ASAE, 4, 317
  45. Reeves NC., 2002, Echnaton. Ägyptens falscher Prophet
  46. Reeves NC., 2015, The Burial of Nefertiti?, Amarna Royal Tombs Proj Occas Pap [Internet], 1, 1
  47. Reeves NC., 2015, The Burial of Nefertiti? Addenda and Corrigenda (2015), Academia [Internet].
  48. Rose M., 2002, Who's in Tomb 55?, Archaeology, 5, 22
  49. Schlögl HA., 2014, Königin Nofretete, Sokar [Internet], 29, 46
  50. Schnabel D., 1980, Wer waren Tut‐ench‐Amuns Eltern?, Altertum, 26, 89
  51. Schneider T., 1996, Lexikon der Pharaonen
  52. Schott K., 2012, Streit um Tutanchamun, epoc, 4, 76
  53. Smith GE., 1912, The Royal Mummies
  54. Stanglmeier GFL., 2012, Der Fall Nofretete
  55. Thimes JL., 2008, A Dental Observation, Kmt, 19, 6
  56. Tyldesley J., 2008, Die Königinnen des Alten Ägypten. Von den frühen Dynastien bis zum Tod Kleopatras
  57. Perre A., 2012, Im Licht von Amarna. 100 Jahre Fund der Nofretete, 195
  58. Valentín FJM., 2014, Proof of an Amenhotep III/IV Coregency Found in Assasif Tomb 28, Kmt, 25, 17
  59. Virchow R., 1888, Sitzungsberichte der königlich preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin (1888) XXXIV, 767
  60. von Beckerath J., 1997, Chronologie des Pharaonischen Ägypten
  61. Wente EF., 1995, Who Was Who Among The Royal Mummies, Orient Inst News Notes, 144
  62. Wente EF, 1992, After Tut'ankhamūn. Research and Excavation in the Royal Necropolis at Thebes, 2

Cited by

Still being checked.

Related

Authors
Habicht, M. E., Bouwman, A. S., & Rühli, F. J.
Affiliations
University of Zurich (CH)
Corresponding author
Rühli, F.J.
ORCID
Venue
American Journal of Physical Anthropology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2016-01
Volume
159
Issue
S61
Pages
216-231
ISSN
  • 0002-9483 (ISSN-L)
  • 1096-8644
DOI
10.1002/ajpa.22909
OpenAlex
W2270585996
Semantic Scholar
69ce1f801b44095b5ac4bfeee79778e29eb00f9e
Cited by
10
References
69
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 2
FWCI
9.30
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor, 24 d)
Locations
  • American Journal of Physical Anthropology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich) (acceptedVersion)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Mäxi Foundation Zurich
  • The Cogito Foundation Zurich
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Archeology › Ancient Egypt and Archaeology
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Archeology › Paleopathology and ancient diseases
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Archeology › Forensic Anthropology and Bioarchaeology Studies
Keywords
Eighteenth Dynasty, New Kingdom Egypt, Tutankhamun, Amenhotep III, Thutmose IV, computed tomography, Pharaoh
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Egypt, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Mummies, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review