I am pleased to say that I shall again be leading the Daughters of Isis tour for AWT in November 14-24th 2104. We have the numbers, but there are probably still a few places before we hit the limit, which is set by those allowed in to enter Nefertari’s tomb on one Special Opening. The itinerary has again been adapted to fit circumstances, but has come out rather well, I think. What follows is just a brief list, lacking in detail: Giza; Cairo Museum; Dahshur; Faiyum – Illahun; Hawara; Qasr el Sagha, Dimei of the Lions; Karanis; Luxor – Karnak – inc. Open Air Museum; Luxor Temple; Abydos – Seti & Ramesses Temples; Dendera; Kharga Oasis – Lebekha fortress; Hibis Temple (truly dazzling this); fortified temples at Ghueita and Dush; Luxor – Valley of the Kings; Hatshepsut’s Deir el Bahari temple; Deir el; Medina tombs & temple; Valley of the Queens including NEFERTARI’S TOMB; & Medinet Habu. Optional day trip to El Kab; Moalla; and Tod.
Yet more news on the Talks front, prompted initially by a check of the UK Events Diary in the latest issue of Ancient Egypt Magazine, 15.1, Issue 85 (Aug/Sept 2014).
Just to confirm that my talk to the Manchester Ancient Egypt Society on Monday September 8th is Empires in Parallel?, Egypt & Rome – NOT Rome and Greece as listed there - hardly likely at an Egyptology meeting!
Also just confirmed (and therefore not listed in Ancient Egypt magazine) is my talk to the Poynton Egypt Group on Friday October 24th (evening), which will be a new talk: For Whom the Sun Doth Shine: Nefertari Beloved of Mut.
Note also that my talk to the Wessex Ancient Egypt Society at Bournemouth Uni, on October 4th – Hidden Treasures of Ancient Egypt, is not listed in the Events Diary.
The Wessex Ancient Egypt Society unfortunately lost their venue at Bournemouth University on September 6th and so asked if I could now give my talk – Hidden Treasures of Ancient Egypt – at the same venue on October 4th. Fortunately this presents no problems and so I shall be exploring the fascinating wonders hidden in familiar monuments in Luxor and elsewhere on the new date.
This has the benefit of freeing me up to get along to the Ancient World Tours Conference at the Brompton Oratory in London on September 6th, where I hope to meet many friends old and new, and to hear some fascinating talks.
My talk to the Essex Egyptology Group – The Valley of the Kings in the Amarna Period – remains unchanged at the Spring Lodge Community Centre, Witham on Sunday September 7th.
Similarly, my talk to the Manchester Ancient Egypt Society – Egypt & Rome, Empires in Parallel – is still scheduled for the evening of Monday September 8th.
See the Talks section on this site for details.
Below is a chapter guide for the forthcoming volume with the working title of An Ancient Egyptian Case Book. Each chapter tackles a topic about which there is uncertainty and debate, and offers explanations/solutions based upon a close analysis of the evidence. The work is currently being set out for publication hopefully by the end of 2014.
AN ANCIENT EGYPTIAN CASE BOOK
The Royal Burials
A brief history of the royal cemeteries of ancient Egypt, and the discovery of royal mummies and tombs in the modern era.
DEDUCTIONS FROM DISCOVERY
The Tomb of Akhenaten and the Golden Ring of Nefertiti
Shortly after the Royal Tomb was discovered in a remote wadi at Amarna, writers began to claim that burnt fragments of the mummy of Pharaoh Akhenaten had been found in rubble outside the entrance. Was it true? Indeed, was the Royal Tomb ever used for burials, and if so, whose? Who were the other tombs in the royal wadi intended for? What is the significance of jewellery, including a golden ring of Nefertiti, found around the same time as the Royal Tomb? Nothing is ever quite as it seems in this strange case where fact and rumour have become inextricably mixed.
An early version first appeared in The Heritage of Egypt 3.1, Issue 7 (January 2010), 11-31. Also an illustrated lecture.
The Enigma of Kings Valley Tomb 58, and the Post Amarna Period
How did KingsValley tomb 58 (KV58) come to contain gold foil depicting King Tutankhamun, and his successor Ay, both as a private individual and as king? Who is represented by the beautiful calcite shabti figure found on the floor of the tomb? This tomb has much to tell us about events in the strange and turbulent times following the death of Tutankhamun, and the seizure of the throne by men who were not of royal blood.
Based upon the article which appeared in KMT 21.3 (Fall 2010), 35-44.
The Mysterious Mr. Carter, and the Troubling Case of the Lotus Head.
The story of the discovery of the tomb of Tutankhamun has been told and retold in countless books and articles, and yet there is much about it that remains unexplained – such as why Carter spent so little time searching in the area where he believed the tomb to be, and when exactly he first entered the burial chamber of the tomb. If there is one thing that epitomises our suspicions over the discovery, however, it is the fact that it took a government inspection to reveal one of its greatest treasures: the exquisite Lotus Head. Where did Carter find it, and why had he hidden it?
Substantially edited from the chapter in Finding the Pharaohs: Part 1 of Refugees for Eternity: The Royal Mummies of Thebes (forthcoming).
KV63, Embalming Caches, and the Clues to Lost Royal Tombs
In 2006 the first discovery was made in the Valley of the Kings since Tutankhamun’s tomb (KV62) in 1922. Numbered KV63, it contained a curious mixture of rags, natron, pillows, and broken pottery stashed away in coffins and large storage jars. It was therefore, almost certainly, an embalming cache. What were these caches, and what clues do they offer to the location of lost tombs in the KingsValley? The most famous example of an embalming cache is that of Tutankhamun, discovered in 1907, and it seems that the contents of KV63 were buried not long after Tutankhamun was laid to rest. So who did this cache belong to?
Developed from the article first published in KMT 18.2 (Summer 2007), 46-53.
TALES TOLD BY ENIGMATIC MUMMIES
The King is Dead : How Long Lived the King? Did the Pharaohs All Die Young?
Was life in ancient Egypt nasty, brutal and short? Perhaps for the privileged few life was not quite so nasty and brutal, but surely it was still pretty short! But why should it have been? Why do we think that people in the past died so young? We have some idea of the likely lifespan of the pharaohs from historical records, but when anatomists examined their mummies they found them to have died much younger than expected. What was wrong? Were the ancient records unreliable? Did the pharaohs really all die young?
Adapted from the article first published in KMT 21.2 (Summer 2010), 38-44.
Pharaoh Salt-Meat And the Mummies of the Old Kingdom kings.
One of the more bizarre stories told about the royal mummies of the New Kingdom era is that when they arrived in Cairo – following the clearance of their tomb (TT/DB320) – they were passed through customs as salted fish. Though this is not quite true, the mummy of a king did pass through customs as salted meat that same year. This mummy was, however, of an Old Kingdom pharaoh, and when the neglected remnants of royalty surviving from that period are brought together, they begin to suggest exciting prospects for future research.
Considerably extended and developed from a brief article, which told the ‘salt meat’ story, published in The Heritage of Egypt 1.3, Issue 3 (September 2008), 12-14.
Can the Niagara Falls Mummy Really be Pharaoh Ramesses I?
What made experts decide that a mummy in the museum at Niagara Falls, Canada, was actually Pharaoh Ramesses I? Why were they almost certainly wrong? Who else might this mummy be? In answering these questions it transpires that this man, laid to rest in the ‘pose of a king’, has much to tell us about ancient mummification and the way we identify royal mummies.
Revised and updated from the chapter in Identifying the Royal Mummies (2009). Earlier articles appeared in KMT 17.4 (Winter 2006-07), 26-34; and Ancient Egypt 6.2, Issue 32 (Oct/Nov 2005), 42-48. Also an illustrated lecture.
Pharaoh’s Magic Wand? What Have DNA Tests Actually Told Us About the Amarna Royal Family?
Did the recent DNA tests really clear up the relationships in ‘Tutankhamun’s Family’? Have Pharaoh Akhenaten, Queen Tiye, and perhaps Tut’s wife, Ankhesenamun, really turned up amongst unidentified mummies found in the Valley of the Kings? When the story of DNA research on Egyptian mummies is traced, and the recent, high-profile, high-tech investigations of royal mummies investigated, an interesting light is thrown on the identifications apparently reached in the Cairo DNA laboratories.
Some preliminary comments, drawing attention to reservations over the findings announced in the JAMA report, were posted on www.dylanb.me.uk in March 2010, with further observations appearing in Ancient Egypt 13.2, Issue 74 (Oct/Nov 2012); 10-15. Also an illustrated lecture.
The Resurrected Mummy of the Deified Queen
Following her death the greatly revered queen Ahmose Nefertari became elevated to the status of Goddess. The mortal remains of this divine figure seemed about to disappear forever, however, when she was unwrapped in 1885. As her mummy was unwrapped she ‘fell into putefaction’, releasing a foul-smelling, black ooze. How is it then that she ‘resurrected’ and is today one of the best preserved of the royal mummies?
Revised and extended from the article that first appeared in Ancient Egypt 5.6, Issue 30, (June/July 2005), 13-15.
The Strange Death of Unknown Man E
Found buried alongside some of the most famous kings and queens of ancient Egypt was the well-preserved mummy of a man who appeared to have died in the most hideous agony. Wrapped in a sheepskin – ritually unclean to the ancient Egyptians – he was buried without any form of identification. It appeared to some that he had been castrated, and buried alive. Who was this man, and why was he preserved like this?
Extensively revised (including new theories for the identity) from the section in Identifying the Royal Mummies, Part 4 of Refugees for Eternity: The Royal Mummies of Thebes (Canopus Press 2009), 122-148 & 178-184 (notes). Initial conclusions appeared as ‘Hidden in Plain Sight: The Facts Concerning Unknown Man E’, KMT 10.1 (Spring 1999), 68-76.
UNRAVELLING THE TEXTS: ANCIENT TRUE STORIES
Poison, Forgery and Voodoo The Harem Conspiracy against Ramesses III
Arguably Egypt’s last truly great Pharaoh, Ramesses III beat back concerted attacks by Libyans and Sea Peoples and ruled long enough to celebrate his 30 year Heb Sed festival. So why did his reign end in an attempted coup? Here we examine the ancient sources to discover who the key players were, how much magic played a part, and find uncanny modern parallels in the way access was gained to the private quarters of the king.
Edited and revised from the chapter planned for Refugees for Eternity, Part 2 (forthcoming). Also an illustrated lecture.
The Tombrobbers of No-Amun. Power Struggles Under Ramesses IX.
Many books refer to the trials of tomb-robbers during the reign of Ramesses IX. There is, however, much more to this story than is generally appreciated. By examining the evidence closely the motives of the Vizier, the High Priest, and the two Mayors in Egypt’s Southern capital, Nō-Amun, the ‘City of Amun’, can be uncovered. Known to the Greeks as Thebes, this is modern Luxor, and the events take us to many familiar sites on the East and West banks of the Nile as the tale of deception and double-dealing unfolds.
Updated and revised from the chapter planned for Refugees for Eternity, Part 2 (forthcoming). Also an illustrated lecture.
Death in the Nile. The Birth of Egypt’s Last God: Antinous
The visit of the Roman emperor Hadrian to Egypt was clouded with tragedy when his ‘favourite’, Antinous, drowned in the Nile. Hadrian is said to have been devastated by the loss, but the death was suspicious, especially because Antinous died at just the right place and time to become a god.
Earlier versions appeared in KMT 19.2 (Summer 2008), 74-82; and Ancient Egypt 9.4, Issue 52 (Feb/March 2009), 34-40. Also an illustrated lecture.
The Fury of Amun. The Cursed Play in the Valley of the Queens
In January 1909 a play was due to be staged in the Valley of the Queens in front of a virtual Who’s Who of famous Egyptologists. The author was Antiquities Inspector, Arthur Weigall; the stage manager was American artist, Joseph Lindon Smith; and the subject, the rehabilitation of Akhenaten into the realm of the Gods after thousands of years in limbo. The starlit drama under the cliffs of Thebes never got further than the rehearsal, however, as an uncanny series of events culminated in the wives of both men being mysteriously struck down by severe ailments. Was it the curse of the vengeful god Amun?
An earlier version appeared in KMT 19.3 (Fall 2008), 76-83. Also an illustrated lecture.
Yesterday I went down to deliver my Separated at Birth talk to the Rameses Society in North Kent. I took the train this time owing to the horrendous experience I had previously queuing in my car for 90 minutes to get over the Dartford Crossing. However, the train had travelled only from Loughborough as far as Kettering when we were told it would terminate there owing to problems with overhead cables at Bedford. It rapidly became clear that replacement buses were not going to appear for hours, but the option of returning north (and then trying to drive to Kent) became impossible firstly because it was decided that the train would not stop at Loughborough on its return run, and secondly because it could not leave until a train manager was found to replace the original one (who did not want to travel back north). In the end I joined a group who hired a cab to Northampton where we got a train to Euston. I legged it from there to St Pancras where I eventually caught a train to Strood (which is where the Ramessides had arranged to collect me owing to engineering work at Rochester preventing a straight run through to the venue at Newington). In the end my talk started about 3.30 rather than 2pm, and had to be given all in one go without a break. It went down well under the circumstances, and people were not so fed-up that they couldn’t laugh at the jokes, or engage with the ideas (in what is quite a speculative talk).
Fortunately the return journey was more straightforward, the problem at Bedford apparently having been solved and I was able to sleep in my bed that night rather than on the cold bench of a lonely, rain-lashed platform somewhere.
I’m sure that many other speakers could tell similar horror stories.
I remember waiting to meet Aidan Dodson at Leicester Railway Station for a talk he was due to give at the local New Walks Museum, and hearing first that the he been forced to catch a replacement bus from Birmingham, and then a series of incredulous messages as the bus driver followed the instructions on his (no doubt brand new) Sat Nav to negotiate every minor road and muddy track on an As-the-Crow-Flies route to Leicester. It was fascinating to finally observe the wild-eyed and desperate passengers rush from the coach lest they be carried off anywhere else by the driver from hell.
I first gave the talk Separated at Birth? Egypt, Crete and The Levant to the AEMES Society in 1999. I felt it was too long and unwieldy, especially as it occupied two-and-a-half carousels of slides, but I never stopped receiving requests to repeat it. Recently I bowed to the pressure and undertook the huge task of converting the material to Powerpoint, and implementing a number of changes and improvements at the same time.
The new version of the talk will premiere at the RAMASES (North Kent Egyptology) Society at Newington Village Hall, on May 10th. Please note that the UK Events Diary in Ancient Egypt magazine has wrongly listed this date and venue as Charlotte Booth on the Art of the Hyksos!
I am happy to give this talk to other societies but please note that it lasts up to 2 hours, and a half-time break is essential.
Why were bulls, vultures, and snakes such prominent symbols in the cultures of ancient Egypt and Minoan Crete? The Egyptian king was a ‘mighty bull’, and there were cults in Egypt for the Apis, Buchis, and Mnevis bull. In Minoan Crete votive bull figurines were placed in shrines; numerous images depicted scenes of bull leaping; and several myths and legends focussed on bulls – not least the mighty man-bull, or Minotaur. But this theme may also be found in extremely ancient cultures in the Levant, Mesopotamia, and Anatolia – and here, too, were the common symbols of vultures, and snakes.
Images of totemic animals are just one of several artistic themes which we will see paralleled in these ancient cultures.
THE HATSHEPSUT PROJECT
This is an extract from An Ancient Egyptian Case Book which is currently in the process of being set-out for publication. Notes appear at the foot.
The project to identify the mummy of Hatshepsut was prompted by the idea that she might be one of two female mummies discovered in tomb KV60 by Howard Carter in 1903. Both mummies lay with the left arm bent across the chest and the right arm placed straight down by the side – a pose sometimes believed to be associated with queens – and the connection with Hatshepsut was made because one of the mummies lay in a coffin-base bearing the title and name, ‘Great Royal Nurse, In’, who might be the same In-Sitre, a wet-nurse of Hatshepsut, known from a statue discovered nearby in her mortuary temple at Deir el Bahari.17 This association – coupled with the fact that KV60 lies only about 50 metres in front of Hatshepsut’s tomb (KV20) – had previously led Elizabeth Thomas to make the suggestion, with the ‘utmost temerity’, that the other KV60 mummy, (without a coffin) might, in fact, be Hatshepsut herself, anciently re-interred alongside her wet nurse.18 The mummy in the coffin base had been removed and placed in storage at the museum in Cairo sometime prior to 1916,19 and the other, coffin-less mummy was removed in 2007 to take part in the study.
As revealed in the Discovery Channel TV documentary Secrets of Egypt’s Lost Queen,20 the study employed modern technology in the form of CAT scans and DNA tests, but the identification announced was, in fact, made using just the first of these two techniques in what was essentially a ‘family likeness’ test. CAT scans were made of the skulls of the mummies of Hatshepsut’s half-brother (and husband), Thutmose II; Thutmose II’s son by another wife, Thutmose III; and the unidentified man sometimes thought to be Hatshepsut’s father, Thutmose I; to produce a composite, generic, ‘Thutmoside’ profile and frontal view. These two composite views were then compared to the profiles and frontal scans of six unidentified female royal mummies, who were put forward as potential candidates for Hatshepsut. The six included: the two mummies from KV60; the Elder Lady and Younger Lady from KV35;21 Unknown Woman ‘A’ (actually not ‘unknown’ as she was originally identified on her wrappings as Meritamun); and Unknown Woman ‘D’.22 The closest match was found to be the obese mummy without a coffin from KV60 (KV60-A). However, the weakness of the ‘family likeness’ test was shown by the fact that whilst Thutmose II and Thutmose III were found to share a number of characteristic features, the so-called Thutmose I was unlike them in several respects. In fact the mummy KV60-A:
‘…resembled ‘Thutmose I’ in some features, and Thutmose II and Thutmose III in others…Thus the scans pointed towards KV60-A as the most likely Hatshepsut, but did not allow us to reach any firm conclusions.’23
The identification of this mummy with Hatshepsut was then claimed to have been proved when the jewel-box labelled for Hatshepsut (found in the Royal Cache, TT320) was CAT scanned. It appeared likely that the wrapped item in the box was indeed a visceral organ (not certainly a liver), but the interesting discovery was that the box also contained a tooth with one root missing. This tooth was identified as a seventh upper right molar, and shown by computer reconstruction to fit into the upper right jaw of KV60-A where just one root remained of a missing tooth. Unfortunately for this theory it was later pointed out by a dentist that upper molars have three roots, and the tooth in the box was almost certainly a lower first molar, for which there was no gap in the mouth of the KV60-A mummy.24 However, it scarcely needs pointing out that neither the tooth nor the visceral organ found in the jewel-box need necessarily have anything to do with the person named on it.25
Samples for DNA testing by the new laboratory were taken from the mummies of KV60-A, KV60-B, ‘Thutmose I’, Thutmose II, Thutmose III, and Queen Ahmose Nefertari.
Tests actually concentrated on a comparison of the KV60 mummies (particularly KV60-A) with ‘Thutmose I’ and Ahmose Nefertari, who were said to be Hatshepsut’s father and maternal grandmother respectively. However, as noted above, the ‘Thutmose I’ mummy is not especially likely to be that king; and Ahmose Nefertari’s relationship to Hatshepsut is entirely uncertain.26 Nuclear DNA was not extracted from any of the samples at this point, but mitochondrial DNA was obtained from KV60-A and Ahmose Nefertari, leading to the observation that there appeared to be, ‘significant similarity between the two women, but it is too early to draw any conclusions.’ Later it was said that nuclear DNA had been obtained from the two KV60 mummies, but not from ‘Thutmose I’.27 However, although Dr. Angelique Corthals, of Manchester’s KHN Centre for Biomedical Egyptology, who assisted in the work in Cairo, was confident enough to state that:
“When the DNA of the mystery mummy [KV60-A] was compared with that of Hatshepsut’s ancestors, we were able to scientifically confirm that the remains were those of the 18th dynasty queen.”28
it has to be concluded that neither the CAT scan comparisons nor these DNA tests identified either mummy from KV60 as Hatshepsut, and this attribution remains entirely speculative.
THE HATSHEPSUT PROJECT – Notes
17. A note of caution should perhaps be sounded by the recent discovery of Coffin ‘A’ in KV63 (dated to the end of the Eighteenth Dynasty) which is inscribed for a ‘Royal Nurse, Iny’. Was this a common pet name for nurses?
18. E. Thomas, The Royal Necropoleis of Thebes (Princeton 1966), 138.
19. It may have been removed by Edward Ayrton in 1906 when he was working on the nearby tomb of Montuherkhopshef (KV19). The recent ‘rediscovery’ of this mummy is recounted in Zahi Hawass, ‘Quest for the Mummy of Hatshepsut. Could She Be the Lady in the Attic of the EgyptianMuseum, Cairo?’, KMT 17.2 (Summer 2006), 40-43.
20. First screened in the U.S. July 15th 2007.
21. Hawass, KMT 18.3, 21; notes that these two had been previously scanned in 2005. Although not noted there, the pose of the Elder Lady had once led to suggestions that she might have been Hatshepsut, see H. Rider Haggard, ‘The Debris of Majesty. Plundering the Graves of Kings’, The Daily Mail (4 June 1904), as reproduced in Shirley M. Addy, Rider Haggard and Egypt (Accrington 1998), 49-50; and James E. Harris and Kent R. Weeks, X-Raying the Pharaohs (London 1973), 135-6.
22. Hawass, KMT 18.3, 21; acknowledges that this mummy (CCG 61082, who is often considered to be the late Nineteenth Dynasty female pharaoh, Twosret), was included in error for CCG 61056, Unknown Woman ‘B’, sometimes thought to be Tetisheri of the early Eighteenth Dynasty.
23. Hawass, KMT 18.3, 22-3. Another weakness of such comparative techniques is that it is not impossible for men to resemble the males in their mother’s family!
24. Dr. J. L. Thimes, ‘Readers’ Forum’, KMT: A Modern Journal of Ancient Egypt 19.3 (Fall 2008), 6-7. My point in Bickerstaffe, Identifying the Royal Mummies, 92-6; that matches made using x-rays or CAT scans are not strong evidence, is borne out here.
25. I point out in talks that if you knock out one of my teeth and throw it in a box named ‘Hitler’, that does not make me Hitler!
26. Aidan Dodson and Dyan Hilton, The Complete Royal Families of Ancient Egypt (London 2004), 124-133. As shown in Charts illustrating the 18th Dynasty Parts 1 and 2, Hatshepsut may have had Ahmose Nefertari as a great aunt on the side of her father Thutmose I, and possibly also on the side of her mother, Ahmes-B, if she was a sister-wife of Thutmose I. The ancestry of Hatshepsut’s mother, Ahmes-B, would be otherwise unknown.
27. Hawass, KMT 18.3, 25. ‘The lab staff, led by Dr. Yehia Zakaria Gad of the EgyptianNationalResearchCenter, received extensive training in the use of the Applied Biosystems 3130 Genetic Analyzer donated by the Discovery Channel. Applied Biosystems application specialists Elias Arnaout, Dr. Pieter Van Oers, and Dr. Nicola Oldenroyd, as well as Dr. Angelique Corthals, lecturer in Biomedical and Forensic Studies at the KHN Centre for Biomedical Egyptology at the University of Manchester, instructed the lab staff in the use of the equipment and assay kits needed to perform DNA analysis of the mummies. One of the latter, called the Minifiler, is a state-of-the-art kit developed especially for the analysis of highly degraded samples.’
28. ‘Pharaoh DNA Analysis: Preliminary Results Support Positive Identification Of Egyptian Queen’, Science Daily (July 17, 2007), http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/07/070716133119.htm
On Saturday March 1st (2014) I set off very early to drive down to Plymouth and deliver a Day School on the Amarna Period. I gave four talks specifically focussed on the history as revealed through burials.
Firstly, we looked at the tale of the Tombs in the Royal Wadi at Amarna in The Tomb of Akhenaten and the Golden Ring of Nefertiti – in which we rescued the probable truth from a mass of myth and misinformation.
Secondly, in Starving for the Aten?, we looked at the excavations by Barry Kemp in the Southern Cemetery at Amarna, and compared these burials to those discovered in Workmen’s Villages at Amarna, Deir el Medina, Illahun etc.; and whilst despairing of finding useful parallels, found interesting insights into how food and goods were distributed amongst the populace in the City of Akhet-Aten.
Thirdly, we turned to Luxor to look at the history of The Valley of the Kings in the Amarna Period, with insights as to why so many of the interesting and important discoveries were made by Theodore Davis in the King’s Valley date to this period.
Fourthly, in Pharaoh’s Magic Wand?, we critically examined just how much (or little) the recent studies employing DNA and CAT scans on royal mummies have added to our knowledge of the Amarna Royal family, and how questionable were other identifications, such as that supposedly made of Hatshepsut.
This was a well-attended event, which generated a lot of questions from an involved audience.
I would like to again thank everyone at the Plymouth Society for the fabulous welcome and wonderful hospitality I received.
I have recently updated and improved two of my talks.
Why Sinuhe Ran Away: Conspiracies at the Middle Kingdom Court was, in any case, a quite a new talk, but I found a number of new images to illustrate the story, and was able to confirm at Worthing (Sussex Egyptology Society) on Saturday 23/2/2013 that it now runs a little more smoothly.
The Tale of Sinuhe is arguably the greatest of all ancient Egyptian literary works, and may be admired for the many subtle literary devices employed in it’s composition, but it has an additional layer of interest in the light it throws upon real events.
Specifically these relate to the fate of the last 11th Dynasty king, Mentuhotep IV, and the untimely demise of his successor, Amenemhet I, founder the 12th Dynasty. Sinuhe is but one of a number of texts that bear upon this period, and offers a great deal of additional insight through the layers of meaning built into the story, and offering clues through subtle innuendo.
Seekers of the Sacred Stone was previously only available as a slide show, but – after some considerable labour – has now been revamped as a Powerpoint presentation with much additional material, and was successfully (re)launched at Plymouth (Plymouth and District Egyptology Society) on 2/3/2013.
The talk examines the work of ancient expeditions into the Egyptian Eastern desert to extract special stones – in particular, the purple porphyry (prized by the Romans), and the sacred Bekhen stone (greywacke), revered from the earliest times. The images are largely drawn from visits to the sites in recent times, which uncover many intriguing puzzles along the way.
PREMIERE. To what extent have DNA tests supported or superseded existing techniques in identifying royal mummies? This new talk will be given for the first time at The Library, Beetwell Street, Chesterfield, Derbyshire, UK, at 7pm on June 13th 2011.
The recent published findings will be placed in the context of previous work on the royal mummies, and the methods by which identifications were arrived at through DNA will be demonstrated. You will be able to decide for yourself how strong you believe the identifications of various relatives of Tutankhamun really are!
I look forward to seeing you there.