Presented by 
Wm. Max Miller, 
M. A.
Click on Anubis to learn about our logo and banners.

About Our Project

Project Updates
See what's new at the T. R. M. P.

Quickly Access Specific Mummies With Our  
Mummy Locator 

XVIII'th Dynasty Gallery III
Learn about the 18'th Dynasty.

Yuya (c. 1386-1349 B.C. Dated to reign of Amenhotep III.)
18'th Dynasty
Provenance: KV 46
Discovery Date: February 5, 1905 by James Quibell/Theodore Davis
Current Location: Cairo Museum

Biographical data about Yuya

Details: The mummy of Yuya was found along with that of his wife, Tuyu, in their tomb in the Valley of the Kings. (For more data about the contents of KV 46, click on The Treasures of Yuya and Tuyu on the navigation bar at left.) KV 46 was one of the few non-royal burials in the Valley, and indicates the high esteem in which Yuya and Tuyu were held by Amenhotep III, their son-in-law. 
    When found, Yuya was still in his coffins, but the lids had been removed and the mummy had been rifled by thieves in search of valuables. In spite of this, Yuya's mummy was not substantially damaged, and a few objects remained on the body or in the torn bandages. Quibell and Davis both mention a gold plate, which had been used to cover the embalming incision. Davis goes on to describe "numerous valuable religious symbols, several scarabs, and various objects of interest and beauty," including "a necklace of large beads made of gold and of lapis lazuli, strung on a strong thread" which were found on the mummy. Quibell further notes that Yuya had gold finger stalls covering his fingers, and X-rays taken by Harris show finger-rings still in place on Yuya's hands. The Cairo Museum also has an amulet (CG51167) and some beads (CG51184, perhaps the ones referred  to by Davis above) deriving from Yuya's mummy.
    G. E. Smith describes the mummy of Yuya as one of the finest examples of the embalming practices of the 18'th Dynasty. The mummy is that of an old man, and Maspero stated that Yuya was probably in his sixties when he died. His thick, wavy hair is a yellowish color, and was probably bleached by the embalming materials rather than being naturally blonde. Smith says the hair was white when Yuya died. (Click here for a color photo of Yuya's well-preserved face.) His body cavity was packed with balls of linen soaked in resins, and his perineum is thickly coated with resinous material to such an extent that his genitals are completely covered. Yuya's arms were crossed over his chest, with the fingers of the hands extended. His eye sockets were packed with linen and the eyelids had been pulled closed. 
    Yuya's mummy, like that of his wife, was equipped with an openwork cartonnage "cage," coated with a thin layer of plaster, inscribed and covered with gold foil (see photo on right.) This device was designed to fit over the shroud of the mummy as a means of holding it in place. (Source Bibliography: DRN, 150, fig. 57, 161, no. 109 and 111; EM, 97; IT, xxi, xxix; TTAA, 39, 68; XRA, 169f.; XRP, 141-142.)

Other Burial Data:
Original Burial: In KV 46. Based on differences in embalming techniques used on the two mummies, Maspero believed that Yuya predeceased his wife. Reeves adds that stylistic comparisons of the funerary equipment employed in the two burials (especially the canopics) supports the conclusion that Yuya and Tuyu died at different times. As noted above, Maspero's theory that Yuya died first is still accepted.

Post Interment Activity: Both Quibell and Maspero believed that KV 46 had been robbed only once. Reeves, however, discerns evidence of  three separate intrusions by thieves into KV 46. The first probably occurred soon after the burial of Tuyu, who died later than her husband. Reeves deduces the early date of the first intrusion from the absence of perfumes, scented oils, and unguents, all of which would decompose quickly and would, therefore, only be stolen if they were relatively fresh. KV 46 was situated between a tomb dating to the time of Ramesses III (KV 3) and the tomb of Ramesses XI (KV 4) and was probably entered at the times when these tombs were being quarried. Reeves notes that seal impressions of Ramesses III were found in the tomb. Although these had been discounted as intrusive deposits by Elizabeth Thomas, Reeves points out that Quibell considered them important enough to include in his catalogue of objects found in KV 46. If they are associated with the burial, Reeves interprets them as indicating a restoration of KV 46 at the time of Ramesses III, necessitated by a robbery which probably occurred during the construction of KV 3. Reeves feels that a final robbery occurred during the construction of KV 4, and that this was also followed by a hasty restoration, evidenced by the facts that (i.) Tuyu's mummy had been covered with a sheet; (ii.) some boxes had been carelessly refilled; and (iii.) a breach in the outer stone blocking to the entrance corridor had been filled in. For a detailed evaluation of Reeves's reconstruction of events in KV 46, click here. (Source Bibliography: CVK, 177; DRN, 149-151; EEFAR, 1904-1905, 27; GCM [1908] 496.)    
                               
Photo Credit: Top photo of Yuya: Fayoumer/Twitter; photo of Yuya in display case: NG (May, 1923,) p. 487; bottom photo of Yuya in his coffin from Fayoumer/Twitter.

Source Abbreviation Key

Tuyu (c. 1386-1349 B.C. Dated to reign of Amenhotep III)
18'th Dynasty
Provenance: KV 46
Discovery Date: February 5, 1905 by James Quibell/Theodore Davis
Current Location: Cairo Museum
Biographical data: Biographical data about Tuyu.

Details: Like that of her husband, the mummy of Tuyu was found in an excellent state of preservation. G. E. Smith notes a number of unusual features about this mummy. Tuyu's embalming wound was almost vertical, and had been sewn up with string, which Smith describes as "a quite exceptional feature for this time" (i.e. the late 18'th Dynasty.) The packing material inserted under Tuyu's eyelids had been painted in an attempt to provide artificial eyes in another unusual anticipation of embalming practices of future dynasties. (See the mummies of Ramesses III and Ramesses IV [in the XX'th Dynasty Gallery], and the mummy of Nodjmet [in the XXI'st Dynasty Gallery] for other examples of artificial eyes.) Still other peculiar features of Tuyu's mummy are the position of her arms (which are fully extended with the palms on the thighs, in a reversion to earlier embalming practices) and the gold covered sandals made of mud which were found on her feet. Smith notes that Tuyu was quite old when she died, and that she had been almost bald. (Click here for a color photo of Tuyu's mummy.)

          A cartonnage "cage," similar to the one prepared for Yuya, had been made for the mummy of Tuyu (see photo at right.) Percy Newberry, in his "Description of the Objects Found in the Tomb" published by Theodore M. Davis in The Tomb of Iouiya and Touiyou, describes these "mummy straps" as being in place on both mummies. However, the language which Newberry uses in his descriptions implies that he is describing the arrangements of objects as they would have traditionally been placed in tombs and on mummies by the necropolis officials in charge of burials. He is describing ideal arrangements of objects, not their actual positions when discovered by the excavators. Joseph Lindon Smith's diagram of the tomb and its contents shows that Tuyu's "cage" (CG 51011) was found lying on top of a pile of vessels at the end of the burial chamber. (See KV 46 Diagram, item "Q" highlighted in red.) Either it had never been put in place on Tuyu's mummy, or it had been removed by thieves when they robbed the tomb. (Source Bibliography: EM, 97-98; IT, 10, 22.)

Other Burial Data: 
Original Burial: In KV 46. Evidence indicates that she and her husband died at different times. Maspero theorizes that Tuyu died after her husband. 
Post Interment Activity: The same as with Yuya above, but some interesting observations can perhaps be ventured about Tuyu's burial. Lindon Smith's diagram of the burial chamber of KV 46 clearly shows that Tuyu's mummy had been found in only one of her coffins, the innermost of a set of two. This, in turn, was found in the large wooden sarcophagus of Tuyu (which Smith refers to incorrectly as the outermost coffin.) Her outer coffin's trough lay atop the pile of pottery vessels at the end of the room, and its lid lay across the chamber, resting on some bedsteads and the lid and side panel of her sarcophagus. (See KV 46 diagram, outer coffins highlighted in red.) The positions of the outer coffin lid and basin could be explained as the work of thieves, but this poses some interesting questions. Assuming that Tuyu had been buried in both coffins, and that these were both placed in her wooden sarcophagus, perhaps robbers had removed the coffins from the sarcophagus, opened and separated them, and rifled Tuyu's mummy as it lay in her inner coffin basin. When the burial was restored, Tuyu's mummy and innermost coffin were returned to the sarcophagus, and the outer coffin basin and lid were left at the positions indicated on Smith's diagram, where the thieves had discarded them. 
    There are several problems with this account. First, why would thieves go to the strenuous effort of removing two nested coffins from a sarcophagus when they could easily have removed only the lids in order to reach the mummy? If the coffins were removed, why would the thieves have separated them when, again, only the lids would need to be removed to get to the mummy inside? And why would the necropolis officials who restored the burial replace Tuyu's mummy only in her inner coffin when the outer coffin was so close to hand?
    Perhaps Tuyu's outer coffin was never used, but measurements of her inner coffin (which is 1.945 m in length, 53 cm in width, and 65 cm in height) would seem to show that it could fit into the outer coffin (which measures 2.185 m in length, 66 cm in width, and 94 cm in height) without difficulty. Thus the outer coffin would not have been abandoned on the day of Tuyu's burial because it was too small to contain the inner coffin (as in the case of one of Maihirpre's coffins.) The reason for the position of Tuyu's expensive outer coffin lid and basin as found in KV 46 poses interesting questions for the reconstruction of events in KV 46. For a more detailed analysis of the plundering of KV 46 which attempts to answer these questions, click here. (Source: DRN, 150, fig. 57.)
    
Photo Credit: Top photo: IT, pl. III; Center photo: from Margaret Maitland at The Eloquent Peasant; Bottom photo: The Florida Post, 6/14/19.

Source Abbreviation Key

Amenhotep III (c. 1386-1349 B.C.)
18'th Dynasty
Provenance: KV35
Discovery Date: March 9, 1898, by Victor Loret
Current Location: National Museum of Egyptian Civilization in Fustat JE34560; CG61074

Click here for biographical data about Amenhotep III.

Details: The mummy of Nebmaatre-Amenhotep was unwrapped by G. E. Smith and the delightfully named Dr. Pain on September 23, 1905. It had been badly damaged in antiquity. Its head had been broken off, the back had been broken, and the entire front wall of the body was missing. Nebmaatre-Amenhotep's right leg had been detached from his body, and his thigh was detached from the leg. His left foot was also damaged. The 21'st Dynasty restorers had been somewhat careless when gathering parts for rewrapping, for included in Nebmaatre-Amenhotep's bandaging were found the bones of two different birds which Smith theorizes had originally been placed in the king's tomb as part of the funerary food offerings. He and Dr. Pain also discovered a big-toe bone, an ulna, and a radius, all from the body of another person. 
    The embalmers had packed the skin of the deceased king with a resinous material, and Smith's description of this as being "analogous" to embalming techniques used in the 21'st Dynasty led Douglas Derry to question the identification of the mummy as being that of Amenhotep III. Edward Wente, however, points out that the resinous material used here for packing was quite unlike the materials employed by 21'st Dynasty embalmers. Long before the controversy regarding the identity of this mummy had arisen, Smith himself had noted (in the same report in RM that caused Derry's uncertainties) that the method of packing used in Nebmaatre-Amenhotep's mummy is altogether unique, and takes special care to distinguish it from 21'st Dynasty practices which, he goes on to explain, utilized linen, mud, sand, sawdust, or mixtures of fat and soda for packing materials, but not resins. Therefore, there is nothing about this mummy that would point to the 21'st Dynasty as the time of its original embalming. 
    Smith expresses the interesting theory that the novel style of embalming used on the mummy of Amenhotep III (whose identity he doubts not in the least) was part of the general cultural revolution sweeping Egypt toward the end of the 18'th Dynasty and which culminated during the reign of Amenhotep IV-Akhenaten. That resin-packing was not employed during the 19'th and 20'th Dynasties is explainable in terms of the anti-Amarna reaction that set in after Akhenaten's death.
    There were numerous inscriptions on the shroud and wrappings of the mummy. A Type "A" docket on the shroud and its retaining bands clearly identifies the mummy as Amenhotep III (See Linen Docket translation below.) A sheet found several layers beneath the shroud had very indistinct red lines and black hieroglyphs inscribed upon it, which may have been a spell (or spells) from The Book of the Dead. Smith also notes that a bandage wrapped in a spiral around the neck and head of the mummy was inscribed with hieratic characters in black ink. Reeves reports that this inscription has never been published, and so no comment about it can be made. 
    Smith also states that several inscriptions, in addition to the single Type "A" Coffin Docket noted by Reeves (see Coffin Docket translation below) appeared on the coffin lid which "record inspections of the mummy in the reigns of the priest-kings." However, only two inscription are discernable in the photo of the coffin lid which appears in Smith's Royal Mummies (see plate XXXI below.) Reeves notes that the lid of the coffin had originally belonged in the funerary ensemble of Seti II and that its original decorations had been painted over in yellow. Although clearly inscribed for Seti II in a vertical line of hieroglyphs down the center,  a hastily inscribed cartouche with the name "Nebmaatre"  appears to the left of the central inscription, written horizontally. To compound the confusion of burial equipment, the coffin box containing Amenhotep III had originally belonged to Ramesses III (whose mummy had ended up in the coffin of Ahmose-Nofretiri in DB 320.) An inscription in hieroglyphs with the names of Ramesses III can be clearly seen on the inner-bottom of the coffin box, behind and above the head of Amenhotep III, in plate XXXII of Smith's work. (See plate XXXII below.)   Reeves notes that the coffin lid had been docketed in the same manner and style as the coffins of Ramesses IV and Siptah, indicating that the docketing had been done by the same person on the same occasion. 
    For Smith's highly detailed report concerning this unusual mummy, click on the highlighted links in the Source Bibliography below to access the University of Chicago's Electronic Open Stacks copy of Smith's The Royal Mummies (Cairo, 1912) Call #: DT57.C2 vol59. (Source Bibliography: BIE, [3 ser.] 9 [1898], 111 [2]; CCR, 217f., 218 n. 61; DRN, 196-197, 204, 210, 215, 226-227, 232, 235, 245; EM, 94-95; EMs, 39; JNES 31 [1972] 139; MiAE, 40, 84, 88, 98, 101, 127, 170, 212, 214, 258, 260, 289, 315, 316, 318, 324, ills. 191, 363, 364, pl. XVII, XIX; MMM, 39, 54, 87, 88, 90, 135; RM, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, and 51; XRA, 1F11-1G9; XRP, 112, 140, 145.)

Other Burial Data: 
Original Burial: In WV 22
Restorations: A restoration, which Reeves states was "most probably" an example of whm krs, was recorded on the shroud of Amenhotep III, and probably occurred in Year 12 or 13 of Smendes 4? prt 6? (the exact dates are uncertain.) (See Linen Docket translation below.) 
Reburials: In KV 35, side chamber Jb (see diagram.) (Source: DRN, 245.)

 Coffin Docket: "Nebmaatre-Amenophis" (Source Bibliography: BIE, [3 ser.] 9 [1898], 111, [2]; CCR, 218, pl. 61 [transcr., ph.]; DRN, 232; RM, pl. XXXI.)

Linen Docket: Year 12/13 4? prt 6? of Smendes/Pinudjem I: "Yr 12/13 4? prt 6? On this day renewing the burial (?) (whm krs?) of king (nsw) Nebmaatre l.p.h. by the high priest of Amon-Re king of the gods Pinudjem son of the high priest of Amon-Re king of the gods Piankh...(by?)...Wennufer (?)" (Source Bibliography: BIE, [3 ser.] 9 [1898], 109; DRN, 235 [cf. 226 for slightly different interpretation]; GPI, doc. 9; RM, pl. XXXII, C, CI, CII, CIII [see links to plates below]; RNT, 250 [13a]; TIP, 418 [22].)
                            
Photo Credits: Color photo: NG, Kenneth Garrett; B&W photo: RM, (Cairo, 1912,) composite of pl. XXXI & XXXII.
For high resolution photos of Amenhotep III  see the University of Chicago's Electronic Open Stacks copy of Smith's The Royal Mummies (Cairo, 1912,) Call #: DT57.C2 vol59, plates XXXI (which shows one of the Coffin Dockets), XXXII (which shows one of the Linen Dockets), XXXIII, XXXIV, XXXV. For larger photos of the Linen Docket, see plates C, CI, CII, and CIII.

Source Abbreviation Key

Tiye (c. 1386?-13349? B.C. Dated to reign of Amenhotep III.)
18'th Dynasty
Provenance: KV35
Discovery Date: March 9, 1898, by Victor Loret
Current Location: National Museum of Egyptian Civilization in Fustat

Click here for biographical data

Details: Discovered in side-chamber Jc of KV 35 (see photo from TVK, 162--mummy on far left--see also KV 35 diagram) this unwrapped, unidentified mummy was named the "Elder Woman" in lieu of more positive identification. It had been extensively damaged by thieves: the whole front of the abdomen and part of the thorax were broken away. G. E. Smith describes the mummy as that of a middle aged woman. The right arm of the mummy is extended vertically at the side with the palm of the right hand placed upon the right thigh. The left arm is crossed over the chest, and the left hand is tightly clenched, as though it had originally been holding something. Smith records that two ulcers were found on the mummy's left heel. He also noted that the mummy's teeth were worn, but otherwise in good condition. 
      Those who had left the mummy in KV 35 had made no attempt to rewrap it or place it in a coffin, and none of the (mostly broken) grave goods found in KV 35 seem to be associated with this mummy. 
      In the early 1970's, Edward F. Wente suggested that the "Elder Woman" might be Hatshepsut or Queen Tiye. In 1975, James Harris x-rayed the mummy and measured its skull. These measurements indicated a very close similarity between the skulls of the "Elder Woman" and that of Tuyu, the mother of Queen Tiye. Subsequent analysis of hair from the "Elder Woman," performed with an electron probe, revealed it to be identical to hair samples taken from a miniature coffin inscribed with Tiye's cartouche from the tomb of Tutankhamen. (Click here to see a photo of the miniature coffin [the innermost of a nested set of four] and the lock of hair that matched hair samples taken from the KV35 "Elder Woman." [GI(HCA), Carter no. 320d].) On this evidence, the "Elder Woman" was identified as Queen Tiye, although the validity of the hair analysis was questioned, most notably by Dr. Renate Germer. In an End Paper written for Kmt (Fall, 1993,) Dr. Susan E. James pointed out that blood group testing indicated that the "Elder Woman" could not have been the daughter of Yuya and Tuyu. Additionally, Dr. James argued that it was "too speculative" to conclude that the hair found in KV 62 was Tiye's just because the miniature coffin which contained it bore Tiye's cartouche. (It must be noted that this line of reasoning, if consistently applied, would render most mummy identifications "too speculative," since most of them are also based on coffin inscriptions.) Dr. James proposed that the KV 62 hair sample came from Ankhesenamen and that the "Elder Woman" from KV 35 is consequently Tutankhamen's queen.
     In a letter published in Kmt (Spring, 1994,)  W. Good of the University of Sydney responded to Dr. James by saying that she did not adequately consider the context in which the KV 62 lock of hair was found. Good noted that the elaborate care taken to preserve both the lock of hair and the coffin in which it was placed clearly showed that it was more than a mere "keepsake" and that it obviously bore the same ritual significance as the burial of a person. This, he believed, lended support to accepting the cartouche identification found on the miniature coffin as accurate. Herbert Winlock once wrote that ancient inscriptions should be accepted as accurate unless there is very good reason to doubt them, and there seemed to be no valid reason for questioning the accuracy of the tiny coffin's cartouche. Majority opinion favored the conclusion that the lock of hair was Tiye's, and that the KV 35 "Elder Woman" was indeed Tiye herself. DNA tests conducted between 2007-2009 by the Family of King Tutankhamun Project corroborated the hair analysis conclusion by identifying the "Elder Woman" as the daughter of Yuya and Tuyu, the mother of the KV 55 mummy and the KV 35 "Younger Lady," and the grandmother of Tutankhamen. When combined with her 18'th Dynasty style of mummification, the close similarity of her skull measurements to those of Tuyu, and the results of the earlier hair analysis, these DNA test results put the identification of the "Elder Woman" as Queen Tiye on very solid ground. ( JAMA , 2/17/10; Kmt, [21:2], Summer, 2010, p. 21.) (Source Bibliography: BIE, [3 ser.] 9 [1898], 103; DRN, 197, 205, 211, 246; JAMA, 2/17/10; Kmt, [Fall, 1993,] 86-87, [Spring, 1994,] 5-6, [Summer, 2010,] 21; MiAE, 122, 123, 324, ill. 127; RM, 38, 39, pl. XCVII; SAK 11, 85ff.; Sci 200 [1978] 1149ff; XRA, 4C5-4D1; XRP, 135f .)

Other Burial Data:
Original Burial: W. C. Hayes placed the original burial of Queen Tiye in one of the side chambers of WV22, the tomb of her husband, Amenhotep III. Reeves disagrees, and argues that Tiye was probably originally buried at Akhetaten in the tomb prepared by her son, Akhenaten, for the burial of himself and his family members.
Reburials: Reeves argues that Tiye was reburied in KV 55 following Tutankhamen's abandonment of the Amarna capitol. She was then removed from KV 55 sometime during the reign of Ramesses IX, and transported to another tomb which Reeves cannot identify from current data. (WV 22? cf. Hayes above.) He is also unable to date the exact time at which Tiye was moved into side chamber Jc of KV 35. However, since her bandages showed signs of having been adzed off by the same group of individuals who hacked through the wrappings of Merenptah, Seti II, Ramesses IV, (and perhaps also the mummies of V, and VI), her mummy (along with her two other mummified companions in side chamber Jc) probably entered KV 35 at the same approximate time as these other mummies. Reeves argues that event, although it cannot be dated precisely, probably occurred around the same time as the restoration of the mummy of Amenhotep III during Year 12 or 13 of Smendes. (Source Bibliography: DRN, 197-199, 246, 233 n. 143, 246 n. 41.)
                         
Photo Credit: Top photo: NG/Kenneth Garrett; center photo: gettyimages; bottom photo: Pinterest/Angela Jaffray. For a high resolution photo of Tiye see  the University of Chicago's Electronic Open Stacks copy of Smith's The Royal Mummies (Cairo, 1912,) Call #: DT57.C2 vol59, plate XCVII.  

Source Abbreviation Key