Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Modern Technology Reveals Mummy's Past

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the keep-him-shackled-or-protect-your-children dept.

mamamia writes "The baby mummy had a European mom, and likely came from a wealthy family. But where he lived and why he died — and at such a young age — remain a mystery. The mummy, exhibited for the first time Thursday at the Saint Louis Science Center, has been the year-long focus of an international team of investigators. The museum said it may be the most extensive research project ever undertaken on a child mummy."

12 of 36 comments (clear)

  1. Re:mortality by brassman · · Score: 4, Funny

    Nonsense.
    "What's the death rate here?"
    "Same as everywhere - one each."

    --
    "Ain't no right way to do a wrong thing."
  2. Probably why they revered cats by Mostly+a+lurker · · Score: 4, Funny

    I assume everyone died a lot more often back then.

    While I know of no evidence that people died more often than once each, we do know that they worshipped cats. Thus, you may be right. Perhaps they learned the secret and had nine lives each.
  3. OK, so we can get the dirt on Mummy... by bcat24 · · Score: 3, Funny

    ...but what about Daddy? I'm sure he's got quite a history.

    1. Re:OK, so we can get the dirt on Mummy... by WombatDeath · · Score: 5, Funny

      Q: Why was the Egyptian boy confused?
      A: Because his daddy was a mummy. ...fine, I'll get my coat.

  4. Oh that's easy by metlin · · Score: 2, Funny

    Daddy was a Goa'uld and baby was Harcesis.

    Too bad Mommy Desala wasn't around to ascend the kiddo.

  5. European mother is not surprising by ucblockhead · · Score: 5, Informative

    Given that this mummy died well after the time of Alexander the great, having a mother with European ancestry is not at all surprising. Since the Ptolomies, who ruled Egypt from Alexander's conquest to the time of Cleopatra were all descended from a Macedonian general, one would expect lots of Macedonian genes in the Egyptian aristocracy. This would only be interesting of the mummy was from before the time of Alexander, i.e. before 323 BCE. Hell, given how much inbreeding those guys did, it'd be more surprising if there were Egyptian genes.

    This is not to say that the proofs are impressive...this sort of testing is cool stuff. But the results are pretty much what you'd expect knowing the history of the area.

    (The death at a young age is also hardly surprising given the mortality rates for children in that era.)

    --
    The cake is a pie
    1. Re:European mother is not surprising by saforrest · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Given that this mummy died well after the time of Alexander the great, having a mother with European ancestry is not at all surprising.

      Yes, it would not be surprising, but I have to question the conclusions. It is impossible, yes, impossible to conclude from genetic evidence that the mother was European. There is simply too much gene exchange between Europe and Egypt over the preceding centuries for mitochondrial genes to be so perfectly segregated.

      Presumably the child had a mitochondrial haplotype associated with Europe, such as H or V, and that is where the "Europe" label comes from. But even if this haplotype is associated with Europe and not with Egypt, no one can say for sure whether it was this child's mother, grandmother, or great-great-great-45-times-over-grandmother who emigrated from Europe to Egypt.

      There were many documented historical interactions between Egypt and the Middle East prior to the Ptolemaic period, including the time when it was ruled by the Hyksos. As well I recall some suggestion that the ancient Minoans might have had connections with Egypt, and certainly the Greeks did even before Alexander's conquest of Egypt. And all it takes is one migration to leave a "foriegn" genetic signature.

    2. Re:European mother is not surprising by sgtrock · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And all it takes is one migration to leave a "foriegn" genetic signature.

      Migration isn't even all that necessary. All it takes is one sweet talking sailor and a careless bar maid. :)
  6. History: Science or Fiction ? by Delifisek · · Score: 2, Informative

    There are some guy named Anatoly Fomenko. He was Mathematician. Somehow he try to resolve dates of Ancient Egyip Zodiac's then found interesting dates. Most of them shown after 1000 A.D.

    If we believe thim, entire choronogical history was Fiction...

    He says,
    Jesus born 1053 and Died 1086 A.D. First Crusade was punishement action against his death and so...

    Even he says, Real Jarusalem was Constatinopole...

    Scared, so scared...

    --
    [My english is better than most other people's Turkish, so please point out mistakes politely. Thank you.]
  7. Re:mortality by Fex303 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Nonsense. "What's the death rate here?" "Same as everywhere - one each."
    If recent documentaries such as The Mummy Returns have taught us anything, it's that those who are mummified actually likely to come back to life (and die again) many, many times.

    Please, try to keep up with modern Egyptology.

  8. A bleak piocture by mattpointblank · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Is this our future? Our corpses will be discovered in thousands of years, only for science to experiment and announce that our mothers were just Eurotrash? For shame, anthropology.

  9. Re:A bleak picture by hcdejong · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I was just thinking the opposite. What is it with this 'respect for the dead' nonsense? It's not as if the dead body minds, or will even notice.

    I mean, I can understand the mantra to a certain extent when it's about recently-deceased people, although in practice that's more about respect for the next-of-kin (and incredibly annoying even then, at least that's my reaction to the CSI scenes where they ask for permission to do an autopsy and the family refuses). But a 3-ky old mummy? Who cares?