MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY PUBLICATION FOR EDUCATORS VOLUME 33 NO. 1 SPRING 2012 ANTHRONOTES? ? ? ? CREATURES OF THE GODS: ANIMAL MUMMIES FROM ANCIENT EGYPT by Salima Ikram SPECIAL ISSUE CELEBRATING ETERNAL LIFE IN ANCIENT EGYPT AT THE NATIONAL MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY If you?re a pet lover, you might want to take a timemachine back to Ancient Egypt where you couldarrange to keep your pet with you ? forever! Al-though mummies are synonymous with ancient Egypt,few people realize that the ancient Egyptians also mum-mified animals, including their pets. Pet mummies are the kind of mummy that reso-nates most closely with us now. From the Old Kingdom(c. 2663-2195 BC) onward, Egyptians are pictured intheir tombs with their beloved pets, thus ensuring theircontinued joint existence in the Afterlife. Occasionallythe pets would even have their names carved above theirimage, providing further insurance for their eternal life.This was particularly true of hunting dogs that were im-mortalized with their names such as ?Swifter than theGazelle? or ?Slayer of Oryx?. Devoted pet-lovers buried their animals withthem. If the animal died during its owner?s lifetime, itwas mummified and kept safely until the owner?s death,perhaps even in the tomb that was begun quite early in aperson?s life. If the animal died after its owner?s demise,it could be mummified and placed in the tomb with itsmaster, or in the courtyard just outside, as was the casewith a pet monkey excavated outside a tomb in Thebesor a horse associated with the family of Senenmut, thearchitect of the magnificent funerary temple of QueenHatshepsut built at Deir el-Bahari. Some pets, like hu- mans, enjoyed splendid burials, complete with elaboratecoffins and food offerings. Pets were only one of several kinds of animalmummies, which actually far outnumber human mum-mies. Mummification was carried out in order to pre-serve the body for eternity so that the soul (ka and ba)could inhabit it in the Afterlife. A large range of animalspecies were mummified, including cattle, baboons, rams,lions, cats, dogs, hyenas, fish, bats, owls, gazelles, goats,crocodiles, shrews, scarab beetles, ibises, falcons, snakes,lizards, and many different types of birds. Even croco-dile eggs and dung balls were wrapped up and pre-sented as offerings. Animals were mummified throughout Egyp-tian history; however, the majority of animal mummiesdate to the Late and Graeco-Roman Periods. These pe-riods saw an upsurge in animal cults perhaps becausethis was a time when Egypt was being invaded by otherworld powers. Such invasions caused the Egyptians toseek a variety of ways in which to express their ownsense of identity, individualism, and nationalism. Animalcults might also have been a call to local divinities toprovide succour during times that were difficult for theEgyptians. [For a discussion of chronology and a list ofEgyptian dynasties and dates, go to page 23.] Page 2 AnthroNotes Volume 33 No.1 Spring 2012 Animal Mummies: Five Categories Pets occupy one clear category of animal mummies; food,sacred, votive, and ?other? make up the four other basicanimal mummy categories. Food mummies are very pe-culiarly Egyptian. These consist of mummified foodsor victuals, such as beef ribs, steaks, ducks, and geese,which were placed in tombs so the tomb owners wouldnever go hungry. The meat and poultry were prepared asif all ready to be cooked: meat was skinned, poultry wasplucked and eviscerated, wing tips and feet removed. Afterdesiccation the liver and giblets were returned to the bodycavity. Some of the mummies are colored brown; it ispossible that a roasted appearance (browning) was givento such mummies by the application of very hot resin onthe bird that slightly cooked/seared the mummy?s exte-rior surface. Tests show they were preserved using saltand natron similar to the way in which beef jerky is pre-pared. Most of these bandaged meats were placed in in-dividual sycamore-wood ?coffinets? shaped to the meat?sform and dimensions ? all ready to be consumed bythe deceased. Tutankhamun had more than 25 such meatmummy coffinets buried with him. Some animals were worshipped during their life-times as sacred animals, the third mummy category. It wasbelieved that certain gods would send their ?essence? intothe body of a chosen animal that was distinguished bybeing patterned or colored in a specific way. After theanimal?s death, the god?s spirit would enter the body ofanother similarly marked animal. This idea is similar to theidea of the eternal soul of the Dalai (and other) Lamawhose soul is eternal, but remains on earth in a series ofdifferent bodies. During the animal?s lifetime it was wor-shipped and treated as a god, and after its death, it wasmummified and buried with great pomp. The most fa-mous sacred animals are Apis Bulls and the Rams of El-ephantine. The Smithsonian?s collection includes two sa-cred bull mummies ? the only such in all of the Ameri-cas. However, these bulls are probably not Apis Bulls thatwere dedicated to the god Ptah, but rather, were sacredto the sun god, Re. The fourth category, votive animal mummies, arethe most plentiful of all mummies. These consist of mum-mified animals that were dedicated to specific deities. Eachgod had a specific animal that was his or her totem orsymbol: cats were sacred to the goddess Bastet, goddess of self-indulgence and pleasure; ibises and baboons tothe god Thoth, god of writing and knowledge; raptorsand shrews were given to the diurnal and nocturnal mani-festations of the sun god Re. These mummified animalswere purchased and offered by pilgrims at shrines dedi-cated to these gods, a custom that was particularly popu-lar during the first millennium BC. The mummified ani-mals would present the pilgrim?s prayers to the godthroughout eternity, much in the way that votive candlesare purchased and burned in churches. Once consecrated,during a special festival, the mummified animals wouldbe taken in procession, and buried en masse in vast cata-combs that housed millions of such creatures. Many ofthese animals were deliberately killed due to high demandand because they were considered sacrifices to the god ?i.e. they were going to a better, eternal life, united withtheir deity. The majority of animal mummies in museumcollections today belong to this category of animalmummy. Some of these were also placed in his/her owncoffin. For example, the Smithsonian has a hawk mummyhoused in a wooden image of a hawk. Among this group The cat is beautifully wrapped in a complex coffered diamond pat- tern with its facial features mod- elled in linen and enhanced by paint. Radiographs show that this relatively young cat might have been killed by strangulation. NMNH Department of Anthropol- ogy, A381569. Page 3 AnthroNotes Volume 33 No. 1 Spring 2012 one might also place the ?false? mummies. These weremummy bundles that appeared to contain a bird or cat ordog, but when examined have proven to be formedaround a bit of mud or a bone from some other crea-ture, or even to be filled with feathers or bits of fur. Thepriestly embalmers might have made them to deceive pil-grims intentionally; to be less cynical, these mummies couldhave been made when there was a scarcity of the appro-priate animals. In the latter case, the priests may have usedthe idea that a part symbolized the whole, and with thecorrect spells and incantations, the fragments of an animalwould become complete offerings for the gods. Alterna-tively, these bundles might actually contain the detritus ofmummification, and as that too was sacred, it had to beinterred in a holy place. The fifth and final category of animal mummy,?other,? covers those animal mummies that do not fit com-fortably into any of the other four categories. A group offive ducks and geese, which were mummified and placedas a foundation offering at the funerary temple of KingThutmoses III (1479-1424 BC) in Thebes, represents anexample of such mummies, as does another group ofanimals (ibis, dog, and monkey) found in a tomb sur-rounding the body of the deceased. It is hoped that fu-ture work will allow us to better understand and decodethis group of mummies. Methods Used for Mummification Mummification methods varied, but perhaps the mostcolorful was saved for large mammals. In the case of acow, for example, its internal organs might have been dis-solved by a cedar oil enema that was introduced into thebody via the anus and the hole then plugged up. The cowwould then be buried in natron for at least 40 days and,once dry, flushed of the cedar oil by pressing the dis-solved internal organs out of the anus, which were thenwrapped in the usual manner. But this was only one of alarge number of different approaches. The variety in the methods used might be due tothe different requirements for various creatures (differ-ences engendered by fur, feathers, or fins), economic con-straints, the preferences of specific embalming houses,preferences of different towns/cities/villages, or changesin technology over time. Insufficient research has beencarried out to explain fully and satisfactorily the reasonsfor these variations in mummification. The main purpose of mummification was topreserve the body so that it could act as a vehicle for thesoul. Thus, the central focus of the preparation was todehydrate and de-fat the body, particularly relevant formammals. Natron, a naturally occurring mixture of so-dium carbonate and sodium bicarbonate, was the key in-gredient in both animal and human mummification. Thebody was eviscerated through a cut (generally) in the ven-tral surface; the body cavity was then packed with packetsof natron wrapped up in linen; and the body was buriedin the powdered natron. For humans this lasted for 40days; for animals this probably varied with the type ofanimal. It is also possible that mass immersions of crea-tures took place in order to fulfil the demand for votivemummies. Once desiccated, the animals were removedfrom the natron, dusted off, and rubbed with sacred oils When this bundle that is wrapped in the dis- tinctive form of a ba- boon was CT-scanned (see below), it was found to be an ancient fake (filled with linen rags and a stick). By the Late Period baboons and other primates had to be imported into Egypt from sub-Saharan Africa. Thus monkey mummies were expen- sive and prone to being falsified. NMNH De- partment of Anthropol- ogy, (A542222). Page 4 AnthroNotes Volume 33 No.1 Spring 2012 in order to provide some flexibility to their limbs prior tobeing wrapped. In some instances hot resin mixed withoil was applied to the animals. This mixture sometimesburned through the fur/feathers/scales and fixed itselfto the bones. After the anointing with oils and resins, theanimal was wrapped in linen. During the Graeco-Romanera the outermost wrappings could be very elaborate, tak-ing the form of varied shapes or different color stripes.Some raptors and cats even had masks made ofcartonnage (a sort of papier mach?) placed over their heads.Sacred animals were adorned with amulets prior to beingwrapped, with more amulets spread throughout the wrap-pings. Some of the bird mummies might have beenproduced in a simpler way: the bird was eviscerated,dipped into a mixture of oil and resin, or resin and bitu-men, and then wrapped up. A few bird mummies thathave obviously been treated with resin and oil mixtureswere gilded, either entirely, or on the heads. No doubtthis stressed the association of these birds with the sungod, Re. Other birds show no sign of any application ofoils ? they simply were desiccated and then wrapped. Mummification as a Business The production of animal mummies ? from obtainingthe animals to mummifying them ? was a major part ofthe Egyptian economy, particularly during the first mil-lennium BC. Masses of animals had to be bred and caredfor, engendering ibis, puppy, and kitten farms. Specificpriests were assigned to care for the votive animals, and ahigher rank of priests cared for the Sacred Creatures; allthese priests had to be supported by temple income. Theembalmers enjoyed a booming business, and skilled work-ers, such as those who mixed the resins and oils or cre-ated the elaborately patterned bandaging, had to be paid especially highly. Resins, including frankincense and myrrh,were imported from distant places, such as Syria, Ethio-pia, Somalia, and Arabia, which contributed to interna-tional trade, while the trade in the tons of natron neededto mummify large numbers of animals fostered the localeconomy. Certainly animal mummification contributed tothe wealth of the temples, the embalmers, and all thoseinvolved in animal cults. Despite the vast number of animal mummiesfound in Egypt, they have only been studied in a holisticway at the end of the 20th century. For much ofEgyptology?s history, most scholars viewed animal mum-mies as mere curiosities and collected them more as con-versation pieces or as manifestations of strange religiousrituals than for any more scientific purpose. However,there were some exceptions to this. Naturalists were very interested in animal mum-mies and from the very end of the 18th through the 19thand early 20th centuries, they collected mummies in orderto analyze their bones and identify the species that werefound. The late 20th century saw a resurgence of interestin animal mummies when scholars realized just how muchinformation they could glean from these artifacts if theywere studied holistically. By identifying species, mode ofdeath, method of mummification, and signs of disease, This wooden case carved in the shape of a raptor contains a mummified falcon. NMNH Department of Anthropology, A423000. This ceramic vessel is roughly made in the shape of an egg and contains a mummified ibis that is handsomely wrapped. In this way, the ibis can hatch from its ?egg? and then be reborn and live forever. NMNH Department of Anthropology, A279283. Page 5 AnthroNotes Volume 33 No. 1 Spring 2012 one can obtain a wealth of information on ancient Egyp-tian environment, religion, veterinary practices, mummifi-cation technology, trade, and culture. Scholars started touse sophisticated imaging technologies on animal mum-mies, including x-rays and CT-scans, hitherto reserved forhuman mummies. These scans are used to identify andexamine the animals within the wrappings without dis-turbing the contents, while embalming materials can beidentified using high temperature gas chromatography(HTGC) and gas chromatography-mass spectrometry(GC-MS) GCS. Large-scale DNA studies are being un-dertaken to find and trace changes in the genome of cer-tain animals, such as ibises; or to trace the geographic dis-persal of animals, such as cats; or to document multiplesites for the domestication of cattle. These and other studies emphasize the impor- tance of animal mummies, not just to the ancient Egyp-tians, but also to us today. Such studies provide not onlysources of information about animals, the ancient envi-ronment, and Egyptian technology and culture, but alsoserve as a window into the complex and close relation-ship between humans and animals in ancient Egypt. Further Reading Armitage, P. L. and J. Clutton-Brock. 1981. ?A Radiological andHistological Investigation into the Mummification of Cats fromAncient Egypt.? Journal of Archaeological Science 8: 185-96. Daressy, G. and C. Gaillard. 1905. La Faune Momifi?e de l?Antique?gypte. Cairo: IFAO. Ikram, S., ed. 2005. Divine Creatures: Animal Mummies in AncientEgypt. Cairo: American University in Cairo Press. Salima Ikram is Department Chair and Professor ofEgyptology at American University in Cairo and Guest Cu-rator of the exhibition ?Eternal Life in Ancient Egypt.? ? ? ?The recently opened exhibit, Eternal Life in Ancient Egypt, atthe National Museum of Natural History, was developedunder the leadership of Melinda Zeder, senior scientist andcurator of Old World Archaeology in the Smithsonian?sDepartment of Anthropology. Physical anthropologistDavid Hunt co-curated the exhibit with assistance fromBruno Frohlich and guest curators Salima Ikram (Ameri-can University, Cairo) and Lana Troy (Uppsala University,Sweden). Visit the exhibition website at http://www.mnh.si.edu/exhibits/eternal-life/. The Radiograph of the bull, below, shows that it contains a somewhat jumbled skeleton of a bovid. The animal was relatively young when it died.NMNH Department of Anthro- pology, A413942. A lizard coffin that was probably suspended in the temple or in catacombs. The lizard was sacred to the god Atum, one of the creator gods. NMNH Department of Anthropol- ogy, A129627. Page 6 AnthroNotes Volume 33 No.1 Spring 2012 The new National Museum of NaturalHistory?s exhibition Eternal Life in Ancient Egypt in-cludes a physical anthropological research study ofa child?s mummy. To recreate a biological profile of thechild, Smithsonian scientists applied modern CT scanningtechniques to learn about the child?s sex, age, health, andpossible ancestral origins. They also employed facial recon-struction techniques to gain a fuller visual understanding ofthe child. The museum?s collections records indicate that thischild?s mummy was collected from Thebes by JohnHamilton Slack in 1856. Sometime after 1860, the mummywas transferred to the Wistar Institute in Philadelphia, whereit was curated until 1958, when the mummy was trans-ferred to the National Museum of Natural History. An initial visual assessment of the mummy identi-fied various features that could be used for evaluating theremains. For example, the child?s body is dehydrated, the tissues treated with a drying agent evidenced by differentialcoloration and the remnants of crystalline and resinousmaterial. In the embalming procedure, the body wouldhave been dried by placing it in a mound of natron (a typeof salt) for 20-30 days. After that time, the natron wouldhave been removed and the body would have beencleansed with unguents (ointments). A bitumen mixturewould have been applied as a sealing layer to the tissue. The child?s chest and abdominal region are col-lapsed, indicating that no apparent packing of this areawas done to fill out the body. The body is not wrapped inlinen strips; the lack of evidence of any strip-type wrap- pings adhering to the body suggests that they had beenremoved in the past. The body ? lying on layers of linensheets with the head tilted downward and with the chinresting on the upper chest ? is typical of burials for com-mon (or lower) social class Egyptians from the very latedynastic and Greco-Roman period. The bodies of evencommon Egyptians were preserved since mummificationwas an integral part of the Egyptian religion; there had tobe a place for the ?ba? spirit to reside. In the early 20th century, necropsy was regularlyperformed to study a mummified body, but in the processthe dissection severely damaged the mummy. With the ad-vancements in radiographic methods, the internal featuresof the mummy now can be well illustrated without dam-age, using plain film radiography and Computer AssistedTomography (CT) to produce a 3-dimensional image. CTwas developed in the 1970s, and, like the x-ray machine, ? ? ? A CHILD?S MUMMYby David Hunt Egyptian child mummy. Photographs by Don Hurlbert. NMNH Department of Anthropology, P381235. Page 7 AnthroNotes Volume 33 No. 1 Spring 2012 was used on Egyptian mummies almost from its incep-tion (Petrie, 1898; Lewin 1978). In Ancient Egypt there were no coolers, so bod-ies might begin decomposing before the embalmers be-gan their work on them. In this particular mummy, theback of the head had been fractured, perhaps as part ofthe method of removal of the brain. But it is more likelythat the cranial bones had been fractured when the bodywas being moved and stored before embalming. This frac-ture and the probable slight decomposition of the bodyrequired that the embalmers install a small wooden peg (or dowel) in the neural canal of the neck vertebrae to re-po-sition the neck and the head for the mummification. Oneinteresting artifact from the use of x-rays is the imaging ofthe old catalog numbers placed on the mummy?s head.The numbers are written on the mummy with lead-basedpaint. Despite the significant drying of the soft tissuesby the mummification procedure, there is evidence of ex-ternal genitalia in the groin area that identifies the body asmale, and the length of the mummified body indicatesthis is a child. Without this soft tissue evidence, it would beimpossible to identify the sex of the mummy by the skel-etal remains alone. But how old was this young boy? The two mostdiagnostic ways to determine age from the skeleton are bydental development and long bone growth. CT scans of Wood peg or dowl was placed in neural canal of the neck vertebrae. Displaced bone from a skull fracture can be seen on left side of the cranium. The child mummy being CT scanned. Child mummy face showing the catalog number written on the head. Page 8 AnthroNotes Volume 33 No.1 Spring 2012 dentition reveal the developmental stages of the decidu-ous and permanent teeth in the child?s mouth. From the CT image it is evident that all the de-ciduous teeth are fully erupted (in occlusion), from the cen-tral incisors to the last deciduous molar. Above and belowthe deciduous dentition are the crowns and roots of thepermanent teeth forming. As is illustrated in the image, thepermanent maxillary (upper) incisors have their crownscompletely formed. The mandibular (lower) canines havethe crown about two thirds formed, and the first perma- nent maxillary (upper) molar has the crown completelyformed. The root has just begun to form. Comparingthese stages of dental growth to a standardized chart ofdental growth, it can be seen that the tooth development isat about three and one half years old +/- 12 months (Bass2005: 303-4). Radiographs of the boy?s lower legs also helpedscientists conclude that the child died at approximately 3-4years of age based on long bone development standards(Sheuer and Black, 2000:416). However, teeth provide thebest estimate of a child?s age since tooth eruption is morestrongly controlled by genetics, whereas the long bonesand overall body growth are affected by environment ornutritional fluctuations. Since the age estimation of the child?sdentition and long bones are equivalent, and there is noother evidence of pathological conditions in the skeleton,it can be concluded that this three- to four-year-old child was not suffering from excessive nutritional or chronic ill-ness. Most likely the child died of some acute illness suchas pneumonia or another illness that killed the individualquickly. To what population might the child have belonged?Ancient Egypt was a very cosmopolitan society, especiallyin the latter parts of the dynastic periods and in the Greco-Roman occupation. A broad range of population groupswere living and interacting during this time and the co-mingling of different population groups would have of- Comparison of European, African, and West Asian skulls. Stages of tibial diaphysis and epiphysis growth and related ages. The mummy?s tibia length is approx. 3 ? to 3 ? years old. Tibial growth image from Ubelaker (1999). CT images of the dentition of the child mummy. Page 9 AnthroNotes Volume 33 No. 1 Spring 2012 ten occurred. Examining the cranial features of the Egyp-tian child ? the shape and height of the nose, shape ofthe eye orbits, amount of forwardness of the face (prog-nathism), and length and breadth of the cranial vault?hisancestry appears to be intermediate between the West Asianand African. This is not surprising since the Egyptian popu-lations of that time would have been an amalgam of Af-rican populations from the previous Nubian rule and theinflux of Middle Eastern groups occurring at the sametime that the Greeks and Romans had political control. Though no longer living, this young boy still speaksto us across thousands of years, thanks to the new analysesof his mummified remains made possible by recent scien-tific advances. The case study thus provides us with one ofthe strongest arguments for the retention of museum col-lections ? one simply never knows when scientific break-throughs will bring us new knowledge and insight aboutour world, past and present. References Bass, W.M. 2005. Human Osteology: A Laboratory and Field Manual.Special Publication No. 2. Missouri Archaeological Society. Lewin, P.K. 1978. Whole body scan of an Egyptian mummy using X-ray computed axial tomography. Paleopathology Newsletter 22: 7-8. Petrie, F. 1898. Deshasheh. 15th Memoir of the Egyptian ExplorationFund. Gilbert & Bitington. Sheuer, L. and S. Black 2000. Developmental Juvenile Osteology. AcademicPress. ANTHRONOTES WILL SOON MOVE TO AN EXCLUSIVELY ONLINE VERSION. SEND YOUR EMAIL ADDRESS TO: ANTHROUTREACH@SI.EDU IN ORDER TO RECEIVE OUR FALL ISSUE ONLINE AND IN COLOR. The application of forensic anthropology and new x-ray tech- nologies has enabled forensic artist and sculptor Joe Mullins to reconstruct the boy?s head based on the assessed ances- try and age. Using the 3D CT image, he virtually built layers of muscle and skin onto the skull, ultimately building facial features using FreeForm Virtual 3D modeling software. Skull of the child mummy compared to anterior and lateral views of European, African and Asian ancestry skulls (previ- ous page). Ubelaker, D.H. 1999. Human Skeletal Remains: Excavation, Analysis and Interpretation. Manuals in Archeology, No.2. Taraxacum. David Hunt is a physical anthropologist in the Smithsonian?sDepartment of Anthropology and co-curator of the exhibi-tion, ?Eternal Life in Ancient Egypt.? WATCH A CAREER VIDEO INTERVIEW WITH PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGIST DAVID HUNT AT http://anthropology.si.edu/video_interviews.html Page 10 AnthroNotes Volume 33 No.1 Spring 2012 ? ? ? THE EGYPTIAN AFTERLIFE: WHAT TO TAKE WITH YOU AND WHY by Betsy M. BryanThree thousand two hundred years ago a mancomposed a letter to his wife, named Ankhiry,complaining that she was causing trouble for him and announcing a legal suit. ?What have I done against you wrongfully for you to change into this bad temper in which you are? ... I shall dispute at law with you .?? Following a brief summary of what a good husband he had been to her over many years of his military career and an assertion of his fidelity, he mentioned her death, after which ?I spent a number of months not eating or drinking like a [normal] person?. I cried greatly together with my family in the presence of my neighborhood. I gave fine quality linen for your wrapping, and I had many clothes made. I did not omit a good thing or prevent one being done for you.? [Noting that he had not married in the three years since her passing, he then again accused his deceased wife of not being equally caring, but at the end of the letter indicates that he may believe Ankhiry held a sexual grudge:] ??Now look! You do not know good from ill, and one will judge you and me. Look! The sisters in my house ? I have not entered [sexually] one of them!? This ?letter to the dead? ? written more than one thousand years after the great pyramids of Giza ? tells us much about Egyptian beliefs. For the Egyptians, the afterlife was real; it had a place, a time, and a corporeality. Despite the sadness of losing one?s loved ones on earth, most Egyptians believed that proper tomb preparations and burial rituals could keep families intact over timeless eras. Death did not break social and private relationships that were usually thought to remain harmonious, but as this letter indicates, a relationship that existed on earth could develop estrangements beyond the tomb. Funerary Artworks The objects made for and placed in a burial were a significant part of a proper entombment, and some had a nearly indispensable function. Although they might not be intended to be seen or admired by the living after their deposit, Egyptian funerary artworks embodied both aesthetic sense and religious function. Such artworks were intended to be seen, because they were produced for the tomb owners during their lifetimes, paid for with their assets and constructed to their own specifications. Scenes of burial processions shown on tomb walls illustrate the objects (or types of them) deposited, and these include not only purely funerary artifacts but also personal items such as mirrors, cosmetics and scribal equipment, along with jewelry and clothing. During the travel to the tomb and over their lifetimes, Egyptians acquired and displayed their wealth for eternity. The arts, funerary and other, flourished in Egypt within a highly status-conscious elite society focused on winning the favor of those in superior Theban Tomb of Ramose, no. 55, ca. 1350 BC. Painted limestone. Friends and family carry the vizier?s (highest official to the king or pharaoh) personal furniture acquired during his lifetime to his tomb on the west side of the Nile. Page 11 AnthroNotes Volume 33 No. 1 Spring 2012 position, whether in this life or the next. As we survey a handful of the types of art that were placed in Egyptian burials through time, we will consider their function in ritual and art. [For a discussion of chronology and a list of Egyptian dynasties and dates, go to page 23.] The Mummy as Art Object Although the husband of Ankhiry does not mention the array of funerary objects that may have been deposited with her, her burial having been three years in the past, he does mention linens used for wrapping. The fundamental preparation for burial was that of the body itself. As early as the Neolithic period, elements of mummification were practiced to preserve the corpse as a spiritual container. During the Old Kingdom (2686-2181 BC), skulls and bodies were sometimes plastered to maintain their shape and to provide an image of the physical person. The physical identity was important not only as a container but as a form of the person that was recognizable to his or her mobile spirit (ba) and to others ? living and deceased. Mummification was therefore intended to preserve the entire body and create it as a new image of the deceased. The linen wrapping used in that part of the procedure was called the wt and came later to designate coffins in anthropoid form. The coffin had a function similar to that of mummification itself and particularly of bandaging ? the collection and union of the body parts to ensure all functions in the next life and the representation of the deceased. Already in the Pyramid Texts spells were provided to guarantee the body?s integrity: ?O flesh of this Teti (king?s name), do not decay, do not rot, do not let your odor stink. Your step shall not be passed (by another); your stride shall not be strode past (by another); you shall not tread upon the bodily fluids of Osiris.? (PT 412) Once wrapped the mummy had this first order of protection, and the coffin, whether of box or anthropoid shape, was additional physical protection. Because burials were vulnerable to violation, the security of the body in its coffin might still be a concern for those who wished to ensure the afterlife. Tomb Statues The creation of images of the deceased began early in Egyptian history. By the first dynasty (ca. 3000 BC), tomb statues were clearly part of elite burials. A statue of the deceased, the twt in Egyptian, could act as an alternate container for the person, and already in the Old Kingdom, a statue was an important part of the burial ritual, being frequently represented on tomb walls in scenes of art production and transport. Statues were placed in special rooms of Old Kingdom mastabas [platforms with multiple chambers for burials] and received purification rites such as libation and incensing in parallel with the mummy itself. The enlivening of statues was accomplished through the ?opening of the mouth? ritual from the Old Kingdom on, the text of which is known from the New Kingdom (1550-1069 BC). Even entire tombs or temples might be enlivened by this ritual, ensuring that the scenes on walls and the statues erected within could magically act as real spiritual containers. Statues normally did not portray a realistic image of the deceased; rather they supplied a healthy and strong Plastered skull from a Fourth Dynasty burial at Giza, ca. 2500 BC. Plastering bodies created an image of the deceased and helped preserve the corpse as a vessel for the spirit. Page 12 AnthroNotes Volume 33 No.1 Spring 2012 body type and a face that was believed to be readily identifiable in the divine afterlife. In practice, with the exception of a brief period in the Fourth Dynasty (2613- 2494 BC) when important royal family members left personalized images of themselves, most elite statues were equipped with faces similar to the official portrait of the ruling king. This practice continued off and on for more than two thousand years. It may have originated with the Old Kingdom funerary beliefs in the exceptional divinity of the deceased king with whom others hoped to reside after death. Those recognizable as the king?s followers might better hope to be provided for by him in the next world. This practice persisted in periods when the kingship itself was strong ? in parts of the Old, Middle, and New Kingdoms, and portions of the first millennium (1000 to 1 BC) as well. Tomb statues combined the chosen physical shapes with poses, clothing, hairstyles, and attributes that conveyed the tomb owner?s status and elements of his lifestyle. Statues of men seated cross-legged could also show a hand fisted to hold a scribal reed pen, while panther skin clothing could identify the wearer as a priest. In many eras of Egyptian history, even elites did not build large tombs that could house stone carved images, and the need for tomb statues became almost nil during the Third Intermediate Period (1069-656 BC) and the later Ptolemaic (310-30 BC) and Roman eras (30 BC - AD 395). Figures of Osiris and later Ptah-Sokar-Osiris, inscribed for the deceased, may have served in part as vessels for the spirit, and together with the numerous images on coffins, supplied the ritually required alternative to the mummy. Coffins, Mummy Masks, Canopic Jars and Shabtis The faces shown on coffins and mummy masks were often less specific than those on statues that recalled the kings. It has been suggested that this was due to the fact that all blessed deceased persons were gods in the afterlife. Thus a more generic idealizing facial type might be desirable. Yet there are elite faces in the Middle Kingdom (ca. 2000- 1773 BC), and even more later, that bear datable features. While stone statues were affordable only for the wealthy, coffins were a necessary expense and were produced for a wide range of consumers. To provide for the variety of coffins very likely required an equally broad range of artisans, including those outside the ?royal workshop? environment. Materials could sometimes be used to elevate a rapidly produced commodity into a more elite category. For example, in the Ptolemaic (Greek) era the gilded faces on coffins and masks that represented the incorruptible flesh of gods were more common than ever for a large number of people. In that period the royal portrait was so removed from the public that the masks may well have been intended to portray the deceased in a beatific state. Canopic jars (containing the body?s organs) were also commonly placed in tombs at the time of the Old Kingdom onward. Preservation of the abdominal organs separate from the body was part of the means of protecting the human vessel. With the knowledge that the organs would rot and further damage the body while it was being dried with salts, the Egyptian embalmers from the Middle Kingdom on generally removed these parts and separately preserved them. These represented the precious ?fluids of Osiris? referred to in the Pyramid Texts and later, and the canopic jars that held the organs themselves recalled libations offered to the deceased. Jars Tomb statue of Mesehty from Assiut. Eton College 2167. Twelfth Dynasty. Page 13 AnthroNotes Volume 33 No. 1 Spring 2012 of ointments, perfumes, and oils were often represented beneath depictions of coffins and items of mummification. These were important additions to the overall aim to maintain the body, as were incense burners and pellets of precious resin for fumigation. Like the sarcophagi in which coffins were placed and dragged to the tomb, the canopic jars were often set into boxes with pitched shrine-shaped lids. The similarity of these parts of the burial outfit reflected that they were two parts (the mummy and the jars) of the same central element ? the body of the deceased. Beyond this central aspect of burial preparation, the tomb owner considered his or her destination, where life was expected to be similar to that on earth, but perhaps more extreme. Wheat grew larger, fish were more plentiful, and everything was increasingly both enormous and accessible. Yet the need to work was a constant, and since people were called to work as conscripts, from the First Intermediate Period (2181-2000 BC) onward, people might take along small magical figures, easily held in the hand, that could be enlivened by spells and set to work as a substitute. These shawabti or shabti or ushabti (all actual spellings) mummiform figures were made of a number of materials, including wood, stone, ceramic, and faience and continued to be produced throughout the pharaonic eras. In the New Kingdom specific figures dressed in kilts were created to represent overseers for the growing number of workers, and eventually boxes full of some 401 of these were placed in tombs to include 365 annual workers and 36 overseers. Although there was no requirement as to numbers of shabti figures, from the late Middle Kingdom through the Ptolemaic era, shabtis frequently bore the spell that became Chapter 6 of the Book of the Dead, which invokes the figure to do manual labor on behalf of the named deceased. Funerary Books and Coffin Texts Funerary books were another important category of art fashioned for and placed in the burial. Spells to preserve the body, to provide sustenance for the deceased, and to empower him or her as a divinity in the after life made up these books. Beginning with the Pyramid Texts written on the walls of royal tombs in the Old Kingdom (including queens), those entombed might have some portion of the spells prescribed for afternlife with them. The Coffin Texts were painted and carved into wooden coffins in the First Intermediate Period and through the Middle Kingdom but were accessible to the broad category of Egyptians who prepared for the afterlife. From the late Second Intermediate Period (1650- 1550 BC) through the Ptolemaic era, the Book of the Dead could be part of one?s tomb equipment, but probably it was always a very expensive element of it. Papyrus was an expensive commodity, and some were embellished with polychrome painted vignettes to accompany each chapter of the Book. Additional compositions were available to people in the Ptolemaic and Roman eras, such as the Book of Breathings or Traversing Eternity, and these might be alternatives to full Books of the Dead. It will hardly surprise anyone that tombs were provided with actual food and drink for the afterlife. Yet these also were supplied with the recitation of offering texts carved or painted on walls, on statues, on stone reliefs, or small boxes and other tomb gifts. Visitors might speak the words seen on these tomb items, and magically the deceased received ?a thousand of bread, beer, ox, fowl, linen, etc.? Although scenes of estate life appeared as early as the Fourth Dynasty (2613-2494 BC) on tomb walls, by the late Fifth Dynasty (2494-2345 BC), tomb owners were Mummy mask from the Ptolemaic era, ca. 200- 100 BC. Cartonnage (plastered linen, gilded and painted) shaped to cover the wrapped mummy?s head. Body may have also been placed in a coffin or covered with bead netting. Page 14 AnthroNotes Volume 33 No.1 Spring 2012 dependent upon visitors to their tombs to recite spells for them. Entrance ways were embellished and decorated to encourage visitors. Artisans were employed to carve and paint elaborate processional scenes of offerers that were intended perhaps to inspire whoever entered. Funerary wall scenes that depicted musicians, dancers, and singers were among those designed to entertain and involve the friends and family who came into the tomb. The best crafted and well-proportioned figures would certainly have gained the attention of visitors more easily than cruder artworks. Thus the dependency of the deceased tomb owners upon the prayers of the living was another encouragement for high quality artistic production. Personal Tomb Objects Among the more varied objects placed in tombs were personal items used during the tomb owner?s lifetime. Furniture ? chairs, stools, beds, and clothing chests ? was stored in the burial shaft, together with linen sheets, lamps, equipment for personal adornment, writing implements, and even amusements such as board games. For those whose lives had been affluent, the addition of such objects might be impressive in type and amount, but for those with lesser means such highly personal tomb deposits would have been far fewer. Occasionally the inclusion of ?heirlooms? that could have been in the family for generations were added to the tomb goods, but in practice such valued pieces were probably retained for continued use or status. By the late New Kingdom (ca. 1100 BC), burial practices were changing to reflect more dire economic realities; large burial outfits, as well as decorated family tombs, became more rare. Tomb and cemetery violation was on an upswing, and the impetus to place a large proportion of one?s personal wealth below ground ? where it was no longer thought to be secure ? was lessened. Those funerary art works that were essential to effective afterlife remained part of burials through the end of pharaonic Egyptian culture. A wrapped mummy peppered with protective amulets, coffins, canopic jars (even when the viscera themselves might be placed within the mummy), and shabtis were a staple of internments until the Ptolemaic era. Some form of the required offerings of ?bread, beer, oxen, fowl, linen, and every good and pure thing,? whether by inscription on the coffin or on a painted wood figure of Ptah-Sokar-Osiris ? intended to identify with and ensure the resurrection of the blessed deceased ? was also an important addition. In the final centuries of ancient Egyptian burial practices, mummification and some sort of coffin or cartonnage remained of primary importance, but other ritual objects did not. Families often participated in associations that sponsored funerals and proper rituals for the deceased and supported a group tomb location, perhaps influencing the decrease in burial items. However, it is interesting that in Roman era Egypt, the deposit of personal objects ? mirrors, combs, and small jewel boxes ? became more common again, perhaps reflecting a meditation on the loss of life. Although the Egyptian tradition of ?taking it with you? had greatly changed since the earlier days of the pyramid builders and the great elites of the New Kingdom, it was still true that through the carefully written and illustrated funerary books and the rituals recited and left with the mummy, the afterlife, always available, was magical still. Betsy M. Bryan is the Alexander Badawy Professor of Egyptian Art and Archaeology at Johns Hopkins University. *** Page 15 AnthroNotes Volume 33 No. 1 Spring 2012 ? ? ? ANCIENT EGYPT IN OUR MIDST by Lana Troy The Smithsonian?s National Museum of NaturalHstory (NMNH) recently opened a new exhibition, Eternal Life in Ancient Egypt. Here, as in museums all over the world, visi-tors crowd around not only images and objects but thelong dead Egyptians themselves. Now equipped with cata-logue numbers, these were people who left behind monu-ments and tomb equipment. They also gifted us with theirconcerns, reflections, and imaginations inscribed in stoneand set down on papyrus. No other ancient culture is pre-served in such multi-perspective detail, spanning a periodclose to 5,000 years. Beyond the final demise of all forms of hieroglyphicwriting in the 4th century AD, ancient Egypt lived on, firstin tradition, then in collective memory, and finally in theimagination that transformed it to meet the needs of dif-ferent ages in, for example, the works of Shakespeare andVerdi. With Champollion?s decipherment of hieroglyphsin 1822, a new reality was revealed peopled by real menand women. For the larger public, a meeting point wasfound in the emergence of the museum as a preserver andnarrator of the human experience embedded in the ob-jects they left behind. Collecting Ancient Egypt From fragments of stone walls to the smallest of amulets,ancient Egyptian artifacts have always held a cherished placewith collectors. Beginning in the 1600s, the ?curiosity cabi-net,? the precursor of the modern museum, inevitably in-cluded the funerary figures we call shabtis, a ?fragment ofthe Great Pyramid,? and most likely a mummified limb ortwo. These objects also made their way into the earliestAmerican collections. The acquisition of these objects quickly becamepart of the politics of the day. The Rosetta Stone, discov-ered in 1799 by the French army but displayed today inLondon, is a footnote in the history of the Napoleonicwars. A number of the Egyptian objects in the NMNHcollection relate to, in a less dramatic way, the political andcultural climate and events of the 19th century. The British-born George Robins Gliddon (1809-1857) is sometimes referred to as the first ?American?Egyptologist. After serving as the US consul in Alexan-dria, Gliddon arrived in the US in the 1830s and embarkedupon a career as lecturer and author. Fourteen collectionnumbers are attributed to a Gliddon donation (or perhapspurchase), including the Neshor cartonnage coffin lid frag-ment, now on display. Gliddon did not limit his efforts toEgyptology, however, but also authored a book on cot-ton production in Egypt and more notably, co-authoredTypes of Mankind. This book advocated the ?polygenesis?or multitude origins for mankind and fed into the idea ofthe hierarchy of the ?races? that offered an excuse for sla-very. The presence of a ?high civilization? in Africa becamea point of contention in this discussion. The Union General Charles Pomeroy Stone (1824-1887) was among the Civil War veterans to sign up for astint in the Egyptian Army. Functioning as chief of staff,he stayed on until the revolt of the Egyptian officer corpsthat led to the deposal of the Khedive Ishmail in 1879.During his stay, he acquired a collection of ?squeezes? (ac- cession 3289) ? impressions of stone monuments madewith thick moistened paper that he donated to the Na-tional Museum in 1874. The 89 numbers represent a mix-ture ranging from Old Kingdom tomb reliefs to Latininscriptions. Samuel Sullivan ?Sunset? Cox (1824-1889) had a suc-cessful career as diplomat and congressman. In 1886 Presi-dent Cleveland appointed him ?Envoy Extraordinary and Fragment of a carton- nage coffin lid belong- ing to Neshor. Dynasty 26, 664-525 BC. NMNH Department of Anthro- pology, (A1415). Photo courtesy Lana Troy. Page 16 AnthroNotes Volume 33 No.1 Spring 2012 Minister Penipotentiary to Turkey?. Serving only 17 months,the first winter was spent in Greece and Egypt, where heacquired two mummies and an unknown number of otherantiquities. One of the mummies was immediately donatedto the National Museum; it was dubbed Minister Cox andis currently on exhibit. The 1880s and 90s was a pivotal period for Egyp-tian archaeology and the storage space available in Cairo?sBulaq Museum was quickly filled with new discoveries. Babel-Gasus, a large collective tomb excavated at Deir el Bahriin 1892, with its 153 coffin sets and other grave goods,proved too much for the remaining space in the flood-damaged museum. The solution was to use a portion ofthe wonderfully decorated coffins as diplomatic gifts. Fe-verish communiqu?s put the diplomatic community inCairo and Alexandria on alert as 17 countries applied forconsideration. The coffins, along with a large number ofshabtis and some boxes, were divided into numbered lotsand a drawing was held. Lot 10, consisting of six coffins,three mummy boards, two boxes, and some 80 shabtis(accession nos 27543 and 123711) arrived at the NationalMuseum in Washington some months later. Today, thesecoffins and the objects that accompanied them, unique inNorth America, are central to the NMNH?s Egyptian col-lection. While it is easy to see the significance of the largeand more opulent donations with easily identifiable do-nors, many of the smaller objects have more muted butstill compelling backgrounds. Olive Risley Seward (1844-1908) was the adopted daughter and companion of Will-iam Henry Seward, Lincoln?s Secretary of State. AfterSeward?s retirement in 1870, the two spent fourteen monthstravelling the world, returning just before his death in 1872.In 1892, Olive Seward donated three shabti figures ofImhotep (A154538), apparently acquired on this trip, thatwere displayed from 1976 until 2010. Tombs: Ancient Egypt Showcased Egyptian artifacts, familiar from many collections, can comefrom villages, workplaces, and temples but most often itis the tomb that has been their point of origin. The physi-cal preservation of the body was the tomb?s primary pur-pose for more than 4,000 years until Christianity finallyedged out native practices in the 4th century AD. The corpse,it was believed, was a source of power for the differentcomponents of the potentially eternal ?persona? of thedead. The body, confined to the tomb, provided energyfor the birdlike ?ba? who was free to leave the tomb,partake of the offerings, fly to heaven, and return to thetomb and its owner. The head, in particular, was essential,so much so that during a short period around 2300 BC ?Minister Cox,? mummy in coffin with a cartonnage body covering, 150 BC- AD 50. Photo by Chip Clark, NMNH, A126790. The inner coffin of Amenhotep, from the Bab el-Gasus tomb, Deir el-Bahri, Dynasty 21, 1064- 940 BC. NMNH Department of Anthropology, A154959. Page 17 AnthroNotes Volume 33 No. 1 Spring 2012 an extra replacement head sculpted in stone was placed inthe tomb. The face functioned as a key element of identity.The eye with which to see, the mouth with which to eatand speak, and the ears with which to hear were all impor-tant in order for the deceased to maintain a physicality,interact with the living, and participate in the rituals thatsustained existence in the tomb. The peak of mummification techniques was notreached until the 21st dynasty, around 1000 BC. As de-scribed by Herodotus back in the fifth century BC, mum-mification required, in essence, the removal of all liquidfrom the body. The internal organs, liver, lungs, stomach, and intestines ? all recognized as having a function in the living person ? were specially preserved in four charac-teristic ?canopic? jars, associated with four deities calledthe sons of Horus. By about 2000 BC, these jars becamepersonifications of these deities, who were represented bythe heads sculpted on the jar lids. These were first giventhe face of the tomb owner with the custom graduallyshifting to identify these gods as a man (Imsety), a baboon(Hapy), a jackal (Duamutef) and a falcon (Kehebsenuef).These gods also protected the body in the form of amu-lets on the body and images on the coffin. As an affirma-tion of the mummy as a living being, the moisture, takenaway in death, was returned by a water offering, equatedwith the annual flooding that returned life to the fields. The wrapping of the mummy, accompanied by ritualprayer, included placing protective amulets between thelayers of linen. There was found a heart scarab referringto the heart that would testify to the innocence of the deadat his trial before Osiris and hieroglyphs such as the wadj-pillar that confirmed the body?s ability to ?green? (wadj)or regenerate itself. The djed-pillar reinforced the identityof the dead as Osiris, the first to ever experience deathand, by defeating it, introduced an immortality no longerconfined to the gods. Every amulet contributed to the pro-tective shield of the wrappings. The mummy?s continued life in the tomb was de-pendent upon the successful transformation of the de-ceased into a spirit of light called an ?Akh,? achieved byfollowing the path of the sun. Called before a court ofthe gods to account for his or her life on earth, the deadwas interrogated: ?Have you ever denied food to the hun-gry, drink to the thirsty, clothing to the naked.? A denial ofwrongdoing was followed by the heart being weighed against ?truth? in the form of a feather or goddess. A liemeant a second death, an absolute annihilation. Only thosejudged ?true of voice? could continue on a journey thatemulated the sun traveling through the dangers of the nightto reach the sunrise that ended the darkness of death. The deceased was assisted on this journey by manyof the objects in the tomb. A text, Chapter 30 of the Bookof the Dead, inscribed on a large scarab that was placed onthe breast, called upon the heart to tell the truth: ?Do notwitness against me in the tribunal!?; ?Do not tell lies aboutme!?; ?How good are the good things that you say!? Bythe 3rd century BC, chapters from the Book of the Deadwere being inscribed on narrow strips of linen that madeup the final wrappings of the mummy. The coffin was also conceptualized as an aid in therebirth of the dead. It was not merely a container for thebody, but also the mother of the newborn soul. The Egyp-tians saw theological truths in analogies. The coffin, associ- Portrait lid from a canopic jar. 18th dynasty, 1550- 1398 BC. NMNH Department of Anthropology, A439853. Carnelian heart amulet. NMNH Department of Anthropology, A454209. Page 18 AnthroNotes Volume 33 No.1 Spring 2012 ated with the sky goddess Nut (mother of both Osiris andthe sun god Re) contained the body just as the womb con-tained the child, and the night sky Nut, the sun before itsreappearance at dawn. The primary wood used for thecoffin was the native sycamore, a tree often depicted asNut nourishing the dead. Changing form through the ages,by c. 1000, the coffin had also become a canvas, insideand out, that charted the successful transformation of thedead, often expressed using the winged scarab, a multilay-ered image combining the scarab?s hieroglyphic meaning?to become? with its role as the manifestation of themorning sun. The happy ending of this journey is found in thesimultaneous experience of new life of the many compo-nents of the dead: the light-spirit, the Akh, joins the gods;and the bird-soul, the ba, travels back and forth betweenthe body in the tomb, the offerings, and the stars in heaven.Yet another part of the persona arrives at the Green Fields,an idealized agricultural life, where all labor is carried outby the funerary figures known as the shabtis, also identi-fied by yet another chapter from the Book of the Dead. Abill of sale tells us that these came (ideally) in a set of 365workers plus 36 overseers, so the new owner of this fineestate could count on leisure time. The body, however, continued a life in the tomb,that in its ideal form, contained the necessities of life and alittle more. There was access to perfumed oils, jars of kohl eye-paint, tweezers, razors, combs, and mirrors. Boxes, andsometimes baskets of linen sheets and sometimes finishedclothing, were often the targets of plunderers, as they,among the tomb objects, had the highest resale value. Meatcould itself be mummified and placed in appropriatelyshaped containers for the next life. Repeated images of the owner, in the form of thecoffin and additional statues, made sure that the wander-ing ba-soul could recognize its home. The survival of the?persona? was further ensured by the repeated writing ofhis or her name and titles. Furniture such as beds, chairs,and storage containers furnished the tomb as a home. Theleisure of family life was replicated with musical instru-ments and board games. The earthly existence of the ownermight be preserved in an idealized narrative inscribed incolumns of hieroglyphs. The funerary procession itself,ending with the restoration of the senses in the ritual ofthe Opening of the Mouth, is repeatedly enacted in eter-nity with its inclusion. And the heavens to which the suc-cessful spirit would ascend could be found on the tomb?sceiling. Two essential texts connected the worlds of the deadand the living. Inserted in the walls of an outer room in thetomb could be a slab, formed either as a rectangular ?door,?a so-called ?falsedoor,? or with a rounded top, a ?stela.?Written on the slab was a formula intended to transferofferings given by the king to a god, to the tomb owner. Osiris as Djed pillar, from the inte- rior of the outer coffin of Tentkhonsu, Bab el-Gasus, Deir el-Bahri, Dynasty 21, 1064-940 BC. NMNH Depart- ment of Anthropology, A154953. Shabti of Ameneminet from Deir el- Medina. Dynasty 19, 1292-1190 BC. NMNH Department of Anthropology, A553172. Page 19 AnthroNotes Volume 33 No. 1 Spring 2012 A gift that the king gives to Osiris, Foremost of theWesterners, that he may give a going forth of thevoice consisting of bread and beer, beef and fowl,alabaster and linen, and all good and pure thing uponwhich a god lives to the ka-spirit of (tomb owner?sname). These words, as time goes by, were inscribed on many ofthe tomb?s objects, their existence was enough to perpetu-ate the provisioning listed in the text. However, it was better if the words and the tombowner?s name were pronounced. On an outside wall, thepasser-by could be asked to stop and ?listen to the words?of the dead and pronounce his or her name. This, theycould read, was an act beneficial for both. Furthermore,the failure to do so, or worse, desecrating the tomb, wouldresult in punishment. Some examples of this text genre areespecially poignant, bringing the idealized world of thehope for eternal life into the reality of human loss. Outsidethe Middle Egyptian tomb of Petosiris (c. 300 BC), hisyoung son Thothrekht, now interred, speaks to the living. ?O living who are on earth, who will come to thisdesert tomb to make an offering, may you pro-nounce my name. It is a good thing to act for onewho cannot. The one who hears my words willgrieve. I was a child seized by force, a little one seizedquickly as if by sleep. I was only a few years oldwhen I was taken to the city of eternity. I was rich infriends but no one could protect me. All of thetownspeople, men and women, lamented greatlywhen they saw what had happened to me. Fatherand Mother pleaded with Death and my brothersand sisters despaired. But since I have reached thisland of loss, where people are held accountablebefore the Lord of the Gods, no fault has beenfound with me and I have been given bread in theHall of Justice and water from the sycamore, likeone of the ba-souls of the necropolis.? The grief of loss is followed by an affirmation of a suc-cessful journey to an eternal life. The ancient Egyptians have left behind a myriadof archeological sites, artifacts, and texts and not least theirown physical remains. Although far away and long ago,they remain familiar in their humanity and are, indeed, stillin our midst. Further Reading Brewer, D.J. and E. Teeter 2007. Egypt and the Egyptians.2nd ed. Cambridge University Press. Taylor, J.H. 2001. Death & the Afterlife in Ancient Egypt. Brit-ish Museum Press. Trafton, S. 2004. Egypt Land. Race and Nineteenth CenturyAmerican Egyptomania. Duke University Press. Wolfe, S. J. 2009. Mummies in Nineteenth Century America. Ancient Egyptians as Artifacts. McFarland and Co. Lana Troy is professor of Egyptology at the University of Uppsala, Sweden and Guest Curator for the exhibition ?Eter- nal Life in Ancient Egypt? at the National Museum of Natural History in Washington, DC. Visit the exhibition website at http://www.mnh.si.edu/exhibits/eternal-life/. READY TO TEACH? Become the most effective teacher you can by usingthe American Anthropological Association?s Teaching Materials Exchangehttp://www.aaanet.org/customcf/syllabi/search_form.cfm Give back and help others by submitting yourmaterials to the exchangehttp://www.aaanet.org/resources/Teaching-Materials-Exchange-Submission-Form.cfm Thanks to the AAA Resource Development Committee and thedonors and members who contributed to the Teaching MaterialsExchange. Page 20 AnthroNotes Volume 33 No.1 Spring 2012 THE FUTURE OF EGYPT?S PAST by Alison S. Brooks In March we issued a Call To Action. We recruited col-leagues and interested parties from all over the world tojoin an ?International Coalition to Support Protection ofEgyptian Antiquities.? The call to action requested the Presi-dent and Congress to take certain steps to protect againstthe import of illicit antiquities from Egypt. We issued theStatement on a Friday night and by Monday morning wehad 77 signatures. Eric: Actually the first signature was less than one minuteafter we posted the initial request. Eventually we got 400more signatures, but forwarded the proposal to the WhiteHouse and State Department with the original 77, as wellas to the Congress; we followed up with visits to multipleofficials in the Administration. But we needed more thanjust actions by the US government; we needed to helpEgypt develop a plan. By this time, there was a new gov-ernment and Dr. Zahi Hawass was out. We needed to makeour case that we were here to help. Deborah: Signatories represented professional societiesfrom the academic, museum, and tourist worlds; tourismorganizations; museums; literary figures such as ElizabethPeters; and professors from universities across the globeincluding Salima Ikram, American University in Cairo, andBetsy Bryan, Johns Hopkins University, (both are authorsin this issue of AnthroNotse). Some prominent signatoriesincluded heads, presidents, and section heads from, forexample, the National Geographic Society, ArchaeologicalInstitute of America (AIA), American Schools of OrientalResearch (ASOR), the Oriental Institute at the Universityof Chicago, the Society for Archaeological Science, TheMetropolitan Museum, the Brooklyn Museum, the Bos-ton Museum of Fine Arts, the Australian ArchaeologicalAssociation, the Society for American Archaeology, theWorld Archaeological Congress, the German Archaeologi-cal Institute, the American Society of Travel Agents, andmore than 25 universities. What happened next? Deborah: We realized that this was not enough. With sev-eral of our core group having served in government, wedecided to develop a ?white paper? that would outlinesteps that could be taken to better protect the antiquities inEgypt. We created an ? International Coalition to Support In January 2011, as the revolutionary fires raged in Cairo?sTahrir square, Egypt?s long-serving head of the Su-preme Council of Antiquities, Dr. Zahi Hawass, be-came concerned about the fate of Egypt?s antiquities. Fa-miliar to US television audiences through his appearanceson the Discovery and National Geographic channels, Dr.Hawass is an archaeologist in his own right who recog-nized that saving Egypt?s rich patrimony from looters wascentral to the nation?s future as a major tourist destination,as well as to the world. In late January and early February,he determined that several items had already been stolenduring the looting of the National Museum, thefts thatwere widely reported in the news media to hinder theirsale on the black market. The revolutionaries were equallyconcerned ? and a cordon of protestors risked their livessurrounding the museum to try to prevent further lootingand destruction. Less well-known and more dire, perhaps, has beenthe looting of sites that followed the breakdown in gov-ernment control. The following interview with ProfessorEric Cline, director, and Deborah Lehr, chairman, of thenewly-formed Capitol Archaeological Institute (CAI) atGeorge Washington University, (which Hawass had helpedto inaugurate in October 2010) documents some of theInstitute?s efforts to bring the looting to the world?s atten-tion and search for a solution. How and when did you realize that this looting was going on? Eric: We started hearing reports of looting right after theRevolution started. Professor Selima Ikram at the Ameri-can University in Cairo reported the story that site lootingwas going on, and the Archaeological Institute of Americahad issued a press release deploring the looting. Deborah: After seeing the Egyptian people stand up toprotect the Cairo Museum against the looters, we believedour Institute, whose mission is to view archaeology as atool of diplomacy, needed to take action. Our first stepwas to review what actions the US Government couldtake to help stop the looting and, at least, to prevent illicitantiquities from being sold in the US market. ? ? ? Page 21 AnthroNotes Volume 33 No. 1 Spring 2012 Protection of Egyptian Antiquities.? The AIA, ASOR andNational Geographic were early supporters. Eric: The white paper outlined a series of steps, includingdocumenting the problem, requesting emergency importrestriction on imports of Egyptian antiquities, providingtraining and funding to increase the policing of Egypt?sarchaeological sites, and providing training and technologicalsupport to increase inspection of archaeological sites andregions. In the longer term, the coalition proposed creat-ing and maintaining a database, in English and Arabic, ofEgypt?s archaeological sites. The paper also proposedlaunching an international educational campaign to protectthe region?s antiquities, fostering the creation of small busi-nesses tied to cultural tourism, a training program for stateantiquities inspectors, and even an effort to promote?green? tourism in conjunction with Egyptian sites. Deborah: To obtain proof that the looting was indeedoccurring, we obtained satellite imagery of the key touristsites in Egypt, from before the revolution, right after therevolution, and in May 2011. The company GeoEye verygenerously worked with us to provide the imagery. Eric: We invited Professor Sarah Parcak, an Egyptologistat the University of Alabama, Birmingham, to analyze theimagery for us. She is known as the ?Space Archaeologist?for her use of satellite photography to find and study sites.She possessed some analysis from before the revolutionand was able to compare it to the latest imagery. Her analysisshowed significant looting at Abusir and Saqqara. We sharedthis analysis, along with the white paper, with the EgyptianEmbassy here in Washington. How did the Egyptian Government react? Deborah: As a result of our presentation and the whitepaper, the Egyptian Government invited us to Cairo todiscuss how our Coalition might support their efforts dur-ing this difficult time. They realized, as we did, that thisissue of looting was not just harming their cultural heritagebut hitting at their most important industry ? Tourism. Sothere is a key economic component to our recommenda-tions as well as to their interest in our assistance. Eric: In May 2011, we headed to Cairo for negotiationswith the Egyptian Government. Our delegation includedDeborah and myself; Peter Herdrich, the CEO of theArchaeological Institute of America; Claire Buchan, formerDeputy Press Secretary for the White House and Chief ofStaff at the Commerce Department (who handled publicrelations and congressional outreach for the Initiative); and Ted Greenberg, a former senior official at the US De-partment of Justice, who was a leading expert on moneylaundering. Deborah: It was a fascinating time to be there. The tripwas not easy: There were still protesters in Tahrir Square,and the key government meetings were surrounded bytanks and anti-personnel carriers. The Egyptian Foreign Ministry hosted an interagency meet-ing with all the key government ministries involved in anyaspect of protecting cultural heritage sites. As a result ofthese negotiations, we agreed upon a public-private part-nership with the Egyptian Government covering immedi-ate, long-term, and short-term goals. Eric: In addition to presenting the satellite imagery to thekey government ministers, some of whom were incred-ibly moved by the imagery of the destruction, we also didsome ground-truthing ? matching the satellite photos toactual pictures of looting pits. So what now? Deborah: We are waiting for the new President of Egyptto be elected before taking the next step. All indicationsare that the government wishes to proceed with imple-menting this agreement to help protect these importantsites. Looting pit at Saqqara. L-R: Peter Herdrich, Chief Executive Officer AIA; State Antiquities Official; Sarah Parcak Founding Director, Laboratory for Global Observation; State Antiquities Official; Deborah Lehr, Chairman, CAI; Theodore S. Greenberg, Senior Advisor, CAI; Claire Buchan, and Senior Advisor, CAI. Photo courtesy Eric Cline, Director, Capitol Archaeological Institute (CAI). Page 22 AnthroNotes Volume 33 No.1 Spring 2012 Eric: In the meantime, we stand ready to help. We contineto work closely with the Egyptian Embassy, which hasbeen supportive of our Coalition?s efforts. We have alsocontinued to work to raise the profile within the UnitedStates of the issues of continued looting around the world.The template that we developed for Egypt is also appli-cable to any country in crisis. Our concern is that with gov-ernment transitions occurring across the Middle East, loot-ing has increased in many countries. It is our goal to workwith many of these governments to protect these preciousantiquities as well as preserve their economic well being. Dr. Zahi Hawass, reinstated in May, wrote the follow-ing account of the May meeting but was out of govern-ment again by June. I am very happy to see how much the rest of the worldcares about Egyptian heritage. It means a great deal to the peopleof Egypt as well as to me personally that other nations are willingto offer their support. What those brave people who protectedthe Egyptian Museum in Tahrir Square on January 28 did caughtthe attention of the world?s media. It brought renewed respect toour country, and we all take our hats off to them for the pride theybrought to us. It is a tribute to them that the international com-munity now recognizes how deeply the Egyptian people wish tosafeguard their antiquities, so thank you to everyone who is tryingto help. Excitingly, many of the Coalition?s proposals will meanthat lots of young Egyptians will have new employment oppor-tunities at the Ministry of State for Antiquities. WEBSITES ON ANCIENT EGYPT National Museum of Natural History. Eternal Life in Ancient Egypt.http://www.mnh.si.edu/exhibits/eternal-life/ The British Museum. Ancient Egypt.http://www.ancientegypt.co.uk/menu.html Egyptian Museum in Cairo. Rigby?s World of Egypt. http://homepage.powerup.com.au/~ancient/museum.htm Museum of Fine Arts, Boston. The Giza Archives. http://www.gizapyramids.org/code/emuseum.asp National Geographic Classics. At the Tomb of Tutankhamen.http://www.nationalgeographic.com/features/98/egypt/Search NG website for other videos on Ancient Egypt. The Petrie Museum of Egyptian Archaeology. Digital Egypt forUniversities.http://www.digitalegypt.ucl.ac.uk/ University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthro-pology. Egyptian Section.http://www.penn.museum/about-our-collections/224-egyptian-section.html Oriental Institute Research Archives, University of Chicago. Sitesfor students and teachers. http://oi.uchicago.edu/OI/MUS/ED/TRC/EGYPT/egypthome.html Egyptology News (blog). http://egyptology.blogspot.com/ Theban mapping project. www.animalmummies.com The Rosicrucian Egyptian Museum and Planetarium.http://www.egyptianmuseum.org/discoveregypt#timeline Metropolitan Museum of Art. http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hi/te_index.asp?i=14 Brooklyn Museum of Art. http://www.brooklynmuseum.org/kiosk/egyptian/ancient-egypt/Seattle Art Museum (curriculum guide).http://www.seattleartmuseum.org/Learn/SchoolTeacher/pdf/teacherlessonpdf/Egyptlessons.pdf National Museums Liverpool.http://www.liverpoolmuseums.org.uk/kids/make-and-colour/egyptian-draw.aspx?theme=jungle Mr. Yasser Elnaggar, Deputy Chief of Mission, Embassy of the Arab Republic of Egypt, Wash- ington, DC, issued the following statement: The Egyptian embassy worked very closely with theCAI at George Washington to address the looting activities ofEgyptian Antiquities that were taking place. Reports of suchactivities were very alarming indeed. Deborah and Eric sharedwith us samples from the satellite imagery that were taken ofthe looting. The embassy promptly alerted the authorities inCairo and we arranged a visit by a delegation from the Coali-tion to meet with the relevant authorities there. We under-stand that looting activities still occur. It is important for theinternational community to continue to address this problemin all its aspects. We don?t want the common human heritageof the Antiquities to be smuggled out of Egypt. We appreci-ate the assistance from CAI and the Coalition in raising theprofile of the issue of looting. We need a coordinated effortfrom all concerned, including international organizations, gov-ernments and civil and educational societies, to combat thecrime of looting from all its aspects. We need to preserve theheritage of humanity for the coming generations. Page 23 AnthroNotes Volume 33 No. 1 Spring 2012 DATING ANCIENT EGYPT by Lana Troy ? ? ?Ancient Egyptian events, sites, and artifacts are datedin two basic ways: historical period and absoluteyear date according to the modern calendar. The Historical Periods The division of ancient Egyptian history into periods has its own background. The Egyptian record of the names of kings, the order in which they ruled, and the number of years of each reign goes back to the beginning of the Egyptian history. Examples of this record are known from different periods, such as the Palermo Stone, covering up to mid-Dynasty 5 (c. 3050-2442 BC) and the Turin Papy- rus, up to Ramses II of Dynasty 19 (reigned c. 1279- 1212 BC). In the early years of the Ptolemaic rule, the king, Ptolemy II (reigned 285-246 BC), commissioned a history to be written by the Egyptian, but bilingual, priest Manetho. With obvious access to ancient records, Manetho?s history of ancient Egypt, written in Greek, grouped the various reigns into ?dynasties?. This provided the basis for the ear- liest reconstructions of the list of reigning kings. In the 19th century, with the establishment of Egyptology has a discipline, the dynasties were grouped into larger historical periods, setting up a structure that has been periodically revised as evidence has become available. For the modern Egyptologist, the outline of Egyp- tian history begins with the Predynastic period, consisting of regional Neolithic ?cultures?, identified by specific ar- chaeological components. The development of writing and gradual accumulation of power by the southern Naqada culture leads to the beginning of the central state, divine kingship, and the ?historical? period. The division into his- torical periods makes an overview of each segment?s char- acteristics possible. The period of initial establishment is termed the Archaic or Early Dynastic Period (Dyn. 1-2). This is followed by three historical phases referred to as ?Kingdoms?, (Old, Dyn. 3-6; Middle, Dyn. 12-13 and New, Dyn. 18-20) representing periods of centralized rule. These are interspaced with three ?Intermediate? periods, when more than one dynasty rules at the same time. These are also times when foreign rulers can be found: the Levantine Hyksos during Dynasty 15 and possibly 16, the descen- dents of Libyan settlers during Dynasties 22-24, and the Nubian chieftains from the fourth cataract during Dynasty 25. The Third Intermediate (Dyn., 21-25) is followed by the distinctive Saite Period (Dyn. 26, 664 BC), once again a centralized rule, with its political center in the Delta city of Sais. By this time, the Libyan rulers no longer had dis- tinctively foreign names, and the remaining ?Egyptian? dy- nasties (Dyn. 29-30) are comprised of Egyptianized Delta Libyans. The Persian conquest (525 BC) introduces the Late Period (Dyn. 27 to 30), ending the ?Pharaonic Period? of Egyptian history. The second incursion into Egypt by the Persians, some- times referred to as Dynasty 31 (342-332 BC), was short- lived and followed by the conquest of Egypt by Alexander the Great in 332 BC. This marks the beginning of the Greco-Roman Period, which includes the ?Macedonian Interlude? (332-305 BC), comprised of Alexander and his relatives, the Ptolemaic Period (305-30 BC) that ends with the death of Cleopatra VII, and the following Roman Rule. The end date of ancient Egypt can be debated, with vari- ous events, such as the introduction of Christianity as the state religion (380 AD), the last hieroglyphic inscription (August 24, 394 AD), and the closure of the last Egyptian temples (535 AD) cited as significant. Year Dates The use of modern methods, such as C-14, provide an important framework for dating the Predynastic period. Attaching absolute dates (in terms of years, BC and AD) to the historical periods and the reigning kings, and thus to the archaeological sites and objects, is not entirely straight forward. Conclusions are drawn from a combination of Egyptian traditions and the written dates on individual monuments and documents. This is then overlaid and Page 24 AnthroNotes Volume 33 No.1 Spring 2012 ameliorated with a range of astronomical dates and other factors. An example of the way the ancient Egyptians wrote out the date would be ?Regnal year 2, third month of Peret, day 5?. The Egyptian year consisted of three seasons: Akhet (?flooding?), Peret (?going forth?= planting) and Shemsu (?summer? = harvest). Each season had four months of 30 days each. To these 360 days were added five additional days, that, being outside the calendar, were dangerous tran- sitional days. Ideally the New Year would coincide with the beginning of the yearly flooding and the appearance of ?Sothis?, the star Sirius, at dawn, sometime around the end of June, beginning of July. The lack of the addition of an extra day every fourth year as we do, to keep the calendar in sync with the solar year, meant that the calendar seasons did not usually line up with the actual occurrence of flooding, planting and harvest. Scholars have specu- lated how this problem was resolved, without coming up with a satisfactory solution. It has been noted however that the Egyptians had two names, and perhaps two cel- ebrations, of the New Year. The few records of the ?heliacal (same time as the sun) rising? of Sirius, called ?the going forth of Sothis?, do how- ever provide a range of absolute year dates. A papyrus from the Middle Egyptian Fayum oasis cites the heliacal rising occurring on Year 7, 4th month of Peret, day 16 of the reign of Sesostris III (Middle Kingdom, Dynasty 12), which is 1870 BC (+/- 6 years), with Memphis, near Cairo, as the observation point. During the reign of Amenhotep I (New Kingdom, Dynasty 18) another observation gives the date 1544-1537 BC, if observed from Memphis, or 1525-1517 BC if from Thebes. A record from the reign of Tuthmosis III (New Kingdom, Dynasty 18) provides 1469 BC (+/- 4 years) from Memphis or 1451 BC (+/- 4 years) from Thebes. The so-called Sothic cycle, which is the time it took for the solar year to align with the 365 day calendar, is 1460 years. The beginning of new cycles are estimated to 2781-2773 and 1321-1317 BC. This is calcu- lated using the one known record of the heliacal rising falling on the calendar New Year in 139 AD. These few astronomically fixed dates are combined with a number of other factors in order to insert approxi- mate year dates into the system of kings, dynasties and historical periods. Dated contemporary documents, that include things as mundane as wine-jar labels, can be im- portant when determining the length of specific reigns. With the approximation of the length of each reign, it is possible to link the kings together in a chronological chain. There are however variables that allow the construction of alternative chronologies. The Sothic dates, when the observation point is known, allow a range of four years. When the possibility of observation from Elephantine in the south to Memphis in the north is taken into account, the difference can be as much as c. 40 years. In addition, scholars have different opinions with regards to co-regen- cies and their length. Individual pieces of evidence for the length of a reign can reopen discussions and suggest revi- sions. Over the years, different standard chronologies have emerged, with the focus point being the beginning of the 18th dynasty, dated to as early as 1560 BC and as late as 1505 BC. Although differing in detail, all of these chro- nologies provide a good orientation with regard to an overview of Egyptian history. With the beginning of the 26th dynasty however (664 BC), Egypt enters a phase of interaction with its Mediterranean neighbors and absolute dates are established by combining Egyptian with foreign, primarily Greek, evidence, so that dates after this point are no longer treated as approximate. [See the next page for a reference chronology of dates anddynasties for Ancient Egypt provided by Professor Troy.The chronology has been adapted from the book TheMummy in Ancient Egypt: Equipping the Dead for Eternity bySalima Ikram and Aidan Dodson (Thames & Hudson1998, pp. 8-12).] Page 25 AnthroNotes Volume 33 No. 1 Spring 2012 Predynastic PeriodBadarian c. 5000?4000 BCNagada I c. 4000?3500 BCNagada II c. 3500?3150 BCNagada III c. 3150?3050 BC Early Dynastic periodDynasties 1?2 c. 3050?2663 BC Old KingdomDynasties 3?6 c. 2663?2195 BCSubdivided into Early Old KingdomDynasties 3?4 c. 2663?2471 BC Late Old KingdomDynasties 5?6 c. 2471?2195 BC First IntermediateDynasties 7?8 (Memphis) c. 2195?2160 BCDynasties 9?10 (Herakleopolis) c. 2160?2040 BCDynasty 11 (Thebes) c. 2160? 2066 BC Middle KingdomDynasties 11?13 c. 2066?1650 BCDyn. 11 c. 2066?1994 BCDyn. 12 c. 1994?1781 BCDyn. 13 c. 1781?1650 BC Second Intermediate PeriodDynasties 14?17 c. 1650?1550 New KingdomDynasties 18-20 c. 1550?1064 BCDyn 18 c. 1550?1298 BCDyn 19 c. 1298?1187 BCDyn 20 c. 1187?1064 BC Third Intermediate PeriodDynasty 21 (Thebes ? Tanis) c. 1064?940 BCDynasties 22?24 (Bubastis, Leontoplis, Sais) c. 940?717 BCDynasty 25 (Napata, Nubia) c. 752?656 BC Saite PeriodDynasty 26 664?525 BC Late PeriodDynasties 27?31 525?332 BC Hellenistic PeriodThe Macedonian Dynasty 332?310 BCThe Ptolemaic Dynasty 310?30 BC The Roman period 30 BC?AD 395 Anthropology Explored The Best of Smithsonian AnthroNotes Revised and Expanded. (2004). Edited by Ruth Osterweis Selig,Marilyn R. London, and P. Ann Kaupp (SmithsonianBooks). Foreword by David W. McCurdy; illustrations by Robert L. Humphrey. To order: ISBN #9781588340931. http://www.randomhouse.com/academic/examcopyIf you have adopted this book as required reading, goto: http://www.randomhouse.com/academic/deskcopy Sections: Investigating our Origins and Variation; OurArchaeological Past; and Exploring Our Many Cultures. A free INSTRUCTOR?S GUIDE is available athttp://anthropology.si.edu/outreach/anthropology_explored.htm Page 26 AnthroNotes Volume 33 No.1 Spring 2012 HAVE YOU MOVED RECENTLY? Please don?t forget to notify AnthroNotes editors.Pleasesend your email address as soon as possible by emailing:Anthroutreach@si.edu. ? ? ? AnthroNotes? offers in-depth articles on current anthropo-logical research, teaching activities, and reviews of new resources.AnthroNotes was originally part of the George Washington Uni-versity/Smithsonian Institution Anthropology for Teachers Pro-gram funded by the National Science Foundation. It is publishedfree-of-charge twice a year. A compendium of AnthroNotes articlesis available as Anthropology Explored: The Best of SmithsonianAnthroNotes http://anthropology.si.edu/outreach/instructorsguide.pdf ? ? ? AnthroNotes? has a three part mission: 1. To more widely disseminate original, recent research inanthropology in order to help readers stay current in the field;2. To help those teaching anthropology utilize new materi-als, approaches, and community resources, as well as integrate an-thropology into a wide variety of subjects; and3. To create a national network of anthropologists, archae-ologists, teachers, museum and other professionals interested inthe wider dissemination of anthropology, particularly in schools. This publication may be reproduced and distributed free-of-chargeby classroom teachers for educational purposes. AnthroNotes isnow available on the WEB: http://anthropology.si.edu/outreach/outrch1.html ANTHRONOTES STAFF: P. Ann Kaupp, managing editor;Ruth O. Selig, Alison S. Brooks, Carolyn Gecan, editors. Presorted StandardPostage & Fees PaidSmithsonian Institution G-94Anthropology Outreach OfficeNational Museum of Natural History Washington, D.C. 20560 Official BusinessPenalty for Private Use $300 To be added to the electronic mailing list, send your email address to: anthroutreach@si.edu