Ramesses, Thutmose or Nerfertiti? The Search for KV64

ExcavationThe designation KV is part of the naming convention used for tombs in the Valley of the Kings in the necropolis across the Nile from Luxor.  Tombs discovered in the King’s Valley are given a KV number, in the order of their discovery, and tombs found in the West Valley receive a WV number.  The most recent royal tomb, KV62, is that of King Tutankhamun, discovered in 1922 by Howard Carter.

So why do we skip from KV62 to KV64?  That can be chalked up to an embarrassing lesson on how early one should summon the international press, detailed below.  The story of KV64 begins with a survey conducted by the Amarna Royal Tombs Project (ARTP) from 1998 to 2002 in the central area of the Valley of the Kings.  The location is fertile ground for Eighteenth Dynasty tombs, and Nicholas Reeves, director of the project, was specifically looking for the Tomb of Nefertiti, along with other family members of the heretic king, Akhenaten

Are two tombs to be revealed - some as-of-yet unnamed royal in October (KV64), and Nefertiti in the winter (KV65)?
In the autumn of 2000 Reeves appeared to hit the jackpot.  During surveys conducted with ground-penetrating radar (GPR) his team discovered no less than nine anomalies that showed the tell-tale signs of being tombs.  Unfortunately, before Dr. Reeves could begin excavating his discoveries in earnest he suffered the first of a series of discouraging setbacks.  False charges of antiquities smuggling were leveled against him and in 2002 his license to survey and excavate was suspended. 

Reeves decided to hold off on publishing his discovery until he returned to the Valley of the Kings, but it was never to be.  Although he was cleared of all charges by the Supreme Council of Antiquities in 2005, he was denied permission to resume his work.

Good Storage, but no Tomb

Meanwhile, another dig was underway in the area of Reeves’ survey.  Dr. Otto Schaden of the University of Memphis was conducting excavations in the central valley as part of his Amenmesse Tomb Project.  Schaden’s team was clearing the rubble away from some Nineteenth Dynasty workers’ huts when they found a straight edge that could only be worked stone.  The edge turned out to be the opening of a vertical shaft.  Without knowledge of Dr. Reeves’ survey, the team had independently discovered an entryway exactly where Reeves had detected one of his anomalies.

zahi hawass in the valley of the kings

The discovery occurred on March 10, 2005, which was too late in the digging season for excavation.  The following year, however, work resumed and sure enough Dr. Schaden had discovered an underground chamber.  On February 8, 2006, with the international media in attendance, Zahi Hawass visited the site and credited Dr. Schaden with discovering the first tomb in the Valley of the Kings since Carter found Tutankhamun. 

The finding was dubbed KV63, but its declaration as a tomb was premature.  Although seven wooden coffins were found in the chamber, all were empty but one, which was packed with… pillows.  There were also embalming tools and jars of natron, the salt used in mummification, and so it was determined that KV63 was actually a storage room.  The trophy for the most recent tomb discovery would remain with Howard Carter.

The Buzz Begins

At this point Reeves decided to reveal that his survey had indicated that a tomb, or in this case, a storage room, would be exactly where KV63 was found.  According to an August 3, 2006, interview with Archaeology Magazine ("Another New Tomb in the Valley of the Kings?"), Reeves claimed that his decision to come forward was to protect the site itself:  “I don't want to see it damaged in a random, aimless hunt for more tombs.”  In other words, he knew the discovery of a storage room would raise expectations of finding a tomb, and rather than have the site destroyed by willy-nilly treasure hunting, he hoped his maps would urge caution.

Dr. Reeves revealed his own detailed analysis of the 2000 survey when he posted it to his website in 2008.  His maps showed the anomalies, labeled Features 1-9, with KV63 being labeled Feature 6.  The area where he believed KV64 would be discovered was labeled Feature 5.

Nicholas Reeves wasn’t the only person to suggest that the location of his favorite anomaly, Feature 5, might conceal a tomb.  In February 2006 a geologist named Stephen Cross was studying ancient flood patterns in the Valley of the Kings.  Judging from concentrations of flood debris, Cross determined that a good place to look for undiscovered tombs would be the area east of Tutankhamun’s tomb, close to where Reeves claimed KV64 should be located.

The Buzzkill - More Storage Buildings

Since 2007 Zahi Hawass has been working with the first all-Egyptian archaeological team in an effort to locate the tomb of Ramesses VIII.  His focus is the area between the tombs of Ramesses II (KV7) and Merenptah (KV8), but in the 2008-09 digging season he decided to divert some of his resources to exploring Reeves’ Feature 5 anomaly.  The dig succeeded in unearthing the foundations of several small storage buildings dating from the Ramessid Period, but no tomb. 

The excavation also revealed that the floor of the valley in that area was about six meters down, which is probably too deep for the GPR used by Reeves.  Dr. Hawass concluded that the anomalies detected in that area were “nothing more than a reflection of one or more of these [storage buildings’] stone foundations.”  After examining more of Reeves’ anomalies, Hawass concluded that his analysis failed to account for naturally occurring geological formations and interference from such modern artifacts as electrical wires.  (For the full story, read In Search of the Truth About KV64, by Zahi Hawass.)

The Search Continues

Berlin

For now, the placard of KV64 remains reserved and unclaimed.  Potential contenders would include other Eighteenth Dynasty personalities such as Thutmose II, or the Twentieth Dynasty pharaoh Ramesses VIII, but one intriguing possibility is Nefertiti.  In his August 7th lecture at Clowes Hall in Indianapolis, Zahi Hawass stated that a new tomb would be revealed in October, 2009, and the location of Nefertiti would be disclosed sometime in the winter of 2009-10. After all, this whole story began with a search for the elusive queen and her family. 

The ambiguity (possibly intentional) of these statements has lit the fires of conjecture and speculation.  Are two tombs to be revealed - some as-of-yet unnamed royal in October (KV64), and Nefertiti in the winter (KV65)?  Or will KV64 and Nefertiti’s tomb be one discovery stretched out over two press conferences?  Only time, and Dr. Hawass, will tell.

Images (top to bottom):  "Excavation" by drewnoakes;   "Zahi Hawass in the Valley of the Kings" by FAMSF; and "Berlin" by rachie5.  All rights reserved.

Read 5 comments, or leave your own

About The AuthorKeith Payne
Keith Payne is a freelance writer whose subject matter has ranged from Appalachian culture and history to Ancient Egypt. He holds a B.A. in Sociology and has completed the coursework for an M.A. in the same, specializing in sociology of religion and the nature of belief.

Comments

Great piece as always, Keith. It's pretty terrible that despite being cleared of the charges brought against him, Reeves couldn't shake off his exclusion from excavating the area again. Whatever happened to innocent after being proven innocent? On a personal note I hope it's Nefertiti, one half of the coolest power couple in ancient history.

Thanks, Sean!

This entire episode is rife with irregularities.  Dr. Schaden, for example, the gentleman who rediscovered KV63 shortly after Dr. Reeves was barred from returning to the site, is still allowed by the SCA to work in the Valley of the Kings, even though he has severed relations with the University of Memphis.  He is allowed to continue his work even though he is unaffiliated with any university, which to my understanding, is in violation of the SCA's own policy.

This is not to disparage Dr. Schaden, who is one of the finest Egyptologists in the field today, but it does raise a brow, given the circumstances of the rest of the story.

As for me, I am hoping that the "mystery tomb" revealed in October is not Nefertiti, simply because Zahi hopes to reveal her tomb in the winter.  That way we get two new tombs this season!  Ramesses VIII wold be great because he has been in Dr. Hawass' crosshairs for the last few years, and I want him to go out with as many victories as possible when he retires.  

Somebody should blog about that--what do we think Zahi will do after retirement?  I propose a National Geographic reality show.  "In the Sand, with Zahi Hawass!"  Have a camera crew follow him and his team through an entire excavation season.  I'd watch! 

Correction:

Oops!  I listed Ramesses VIII as an "Eighteenth Dynasty" personality.  That would be news to him, since he is a Twentieth Dynasty pharaoh!

Sorry, folks.  :-\

 

 

 

Dr Schaden not being affiliated with a university is not a contradiction of the SCA rules,
because his team is now working for the SCA - The Amenmesse Project
[KV-10 and KV-63] A Supreme Council of Antiquities Mission. In the past, all finds were numbered as
'tombs' in the Valley.  Some now may be re- looked at as serving the same purpose
as the embalming cache KV63, recently discovered. (Tutankhamun's cache is numbered 'tomb'  KV54).

The discovery of a tomb, near or under the Rest House, will be from the direct input of Stephen Cross who 
gave his paper (The Cross Flood Theory) to Zahi Hawass, who used the information to immediately start
to dig in the Central Valley.  Although Hawass likes to claim that the team is for the first time,  "all Egyptian", 
the location came from a theory of an Englishman and the new scans done last year were by done by
an American team using their equipment.   Unfortunately for Nicholas Reeves, his scans done 9 years ago
were then only able to penetrate a short distance, and the new scans done this time, with state of the art
equipment, found each of his anomalies to be just holes, pipes, a cave, no new tombs.
 
Hawass talks of the announcement of a tomb this year, and the discovery of Nefertiti the next - not her tomb.
KV64 should hold the re-burial of the Princesses and ladies from AkhetAten/Amarna.
The discovery of Nefertiti should be the confirmation that the Younger Lady, long sleeping in a side
chamber of KV35, is indeed her.
How Zahi Hawass will  do this without giving any credit to Joann Fletcher will be interesting to  see.
After Fletcher made her announcement that she had identified Nefertiti, everyone seems to have forgotten
that Hawass produced a medical report that "proved" the Younger Lady's mummy was that  of a man,
which it wasn't. Then when Hawass wanted her to be Kiya, (another wife of AkhenAten)  she magically
became female again, with no explanation.
There is no discovered proof that Kiya was Tutankhamun's mother, yet Hawass continually speaks of her as such. 
Likewise, there is no discovered proof that Horemheb's wife Mutnodjmet was the sister of Nefertiti. Their
names are just similar. 
The DNA testing being done on several known and unknown mummies will be revealed in a grand
announcement, soon.  It is hoped that scientists other than Egyptians, will be given the opportunity to
study the results.
Jan  Bailey
 

Hi Jan, thanks for your comments!

Regarding your statement that Hawass talks of discovering Nefertiti, not her tomb, Dr. Hawass did say at his lecture in Indianapolis that he specifically hopes to announce the discovery of Nefertiti's tomb this winter.  He also hopes to discover her mummy.

Steve Cross has also given me some clarification regarding the order of events concerning the dig under the leadership of Afifi Ghoname around the Central Area.  Ghoname's decision to dig in the current location was based on Cross' article, "The Hydrology of the Valley of the Kings," published in the Journal of Egyptian Archaeology no. 94, 2008, and on a copy of the paper on which the article was based that Cross had provided to Hawass, who forwarded it to Ghoname. 

Cross had proposed that the tombs in the Central Area (KV55, KV62, and KV63) were not looted because they were obscured under a sediment deposit resulting from a flash flood that occurred shortly after the burial of Tutankhamun.  Based on his analysis, Cross stated that KV64 would be found on the east side of the Central Area. 
According to Cross, on March 31, 2006, he sent a letter to Nicholas Reeves telling him that KV64 would be found on the east side of the area, and asked Reeves if he could find any anomalies there.  Five months later Reeves announced that he had discovered KV64.
 
I have also learned since writing the above that the jury is still out on KV63, and while it may have served as a storage area, that may not be all that it was.  There are certainly more questions regarding KV63 than answers at this point, and I didn't do the discovery justice above.  Sounds like a good subject for another blog entry!  It will be interesting to watch this story develop.
 

Post new comment

Your Name?
E-mail address?
Your e-mail address is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
URL? (optional)
Interesting Publications
The Complete Valley of the Kings: Tombs and Treasures of Egypt's Greatest Pharaohs
Purchase this product from Amazon.comPurchase this product from Amazon.co.uk
Thames & Hudson (2008)
by Nicholas Reeves, Richard Wilkinson
The Valley of the Kings: The Tombs and the Funerary Temples of Thebes West
Purchase this product from Amazon.comPurchase this product from Amazon.co.uk
Friedman/Fairfax Publishing (Oct 2001)
by Kent R. Weeks
Atlas of the Valley of the Kings
Purchase this product from Amazon.comPurchase this product from Amazon.co.uk
American University in Cairo Press (1 Apr 2004)
by Kent Weeks

find Heritage Key on Flickr, YouTube, Facebook, Twitter or Subscribe to RSS for the Latest News