Summarize Sources

Egypt Exploration Society

A New Case of Ancient Restoration on an Egyptian Mummy Author(s): Valentina Giuffra, Gino Fornaciari and Rosalba Ciranni Source: The Journal of Egyptian Archaeology, Vol. 92 (2006), pp. 274-278 Published by: Egypt Exploration Society Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40345917 Accessed: 17-04-2016 11:07 UTC

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at

http://about.jstor.org/terms

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted

digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about

JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Egypt Exploration Society is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Journal of Egyptian Archaeology

This content downloaded from 140.198.64.41 on Sun, 17 Apr 2016 11:07:25 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

274 BRIEF COMMUNICATIONS JEA 92

now in Klagenfurt.16 In other Late Period burials, the funerary papyrus was instead placed besides the body, e.g. a Saite Period papyrus placed in the innermost coffin directly above the head of the mummy.17 It is not clear what dictated where the papyrus was placed (local tradition?). Concerning the positioning of the funerary texts, it is perhaps also worth mentioning the custom attested from the first century BC onwards of including funerary texts - the Book of Breathing - in pairs, with one to be placed at the head of the mummy, the other at the feet. The hieratic Books of Breathing often have a brief note on the reverse indicating their intended position.18 In some cases this note is written in Demotic, although the funerary text itself is written in hieratic, e.g. P. Cairo CG 501 5819 and P. Haun. Hierat. 2 (unpublished). In addition, the short Demotic Books of Breathing may sometimes have been produced in pairs to be placed at either end of the body. This is indicated by a drawing of a face on the reverse of P. Haun. Demot. 1 (unpublished) and a pair of legs on the reverse of P. Florence 3676. 20 Other Books of Breathing, however, give explicit instructions for the placing of the document within the bandages under the mummy's crossed arms.21

(vii) The word qs has a wide variety of meaning, including burial, mummy and funerary outfit.22 In our example we have translated it by 'mummy', as the text says that the papyrus roll was to be placed within the qs, which would argue in favour of 'mummy' rather than the nomen actionis. Although 'burial-place' might also be considered as a possible translation, qs only appears to have this latter meaning when it is preceded by r.wy (which is a feature of texts from Memphis).

Cary J. Martin and Kim Ryholt

excavated, the fact that it is in such perfect condition sug- gests that it had been discovered by the finders (presum- ably the local inhabitants) either directly on top of the mummy or wrapped in the outermost bandages (which would be 'within' the mummy, in accordance with Nesmin's instruction).

16 Cf. U. Horak and H. Harrauer, Mumie-Schau'n: Totenkult im hellenistisch-romerzeitlichen Agypten (Linzer Archaologische Forschungen 29; Linz, 1999), 13 and 61-2.

17 U. Verhoeven, Das saitische Totenbuch der Iahtesnacht. P. Colon. Aeg. 10207 (Bonn, 1993), I, 1 (refer- ence courtesy of Stephen Quirke). In the Eighteenth Dynasty funerary papyri were either placed alongside, on top of or close to the mummy and post-Amarna actually laid right across ('from the head to the feet') and stuck to the body; cf. A. Niwiriski, Studies on the Illustrated Theban Funerary Papyri of the 11th and 10th Centuries B.C. (OBO 86; Gottingen, 1989), 6-7. Further references to notes on funerary papyri indicating where on the mummy they should be placed may be found in C. L. Goyon, Le papyrus du Louvre N. 3279 (BdE 42; Cairo, 1966), 83. These include brief notes in hieratic and Greek, as well as the drawing of a face.

18 F. R. Herbin, Le livre de parcourir Veternite (OLA 58; Leuven, 1994), includes several examples from the Theban Soter family tomb.

19 W. Golenischeff, Papyrus hieratiques (CGC; Cairo, 1927), 74-80 and pls. 17-18.

20 G. Botti, Testi demotici, I (Florence, 1941), 32-5 and pl. vi. The short Demotic Books of Breathing have been discussed most recently by M. A. Stadler, 'Funf neue funerare Kurztexte (Papyri Britisches Museum EA 10121, 10198, 10415, 10421a, b, 10426a) und eine Zwischenbilanz zu dieser Textgruppe', in F. Hoffmann

and H. J. Thissen (eds), Res Severa Verum Gaudium: Festschrift fiir Karl-Theodor Zauzich zum 65. Geburtstag am 8. jfuni 2004 (Studia Demotica 6; Leuven, 2004), 551-71 and pls. xlviii-li, although without reference to the aspect considered here.

21 Cf. R. K. Ritner, '"The Breathing Permit of Hor" among the Joseph Smith Papyri', JNES 62, 2003, 167-8 and 169-70 ('the Breathing Document ... shall be wrapped in royal linen and placed (under) his left arm in the midst of his heart').

22 The word is discussed by R. L. Vos, 'Demotic Mummy Labels Containing Permission to Bury, Addressed to Totoes, a hry ssf of the Sacred Buchis at Hermonthis', in E. Boswinkel and P. W. Pestman (eds), Textes grecs, demotiques et bilingues (P. L. Bat. 19; Leiden, 1978), 265 § 4 'The Meanings of the Word ks.t\ but cf. the important qualifications by Smith, The Mortuary Texts of Papyrus BM 10507, 27-8. We would like to take this opportunity to thank Maria Cannata for providing us with her extensive notes on the range of meanings of qs.

A new case of ancient restoration on an Egyptian mummy*

A new example of restoration performed by the ancient Egyptian embalmers on a mummified body is reported. An imaging study of the mummy labelled 2343 in the Archaeological Museum of Naples has revealed the substitution of an artificial wooden 'prosthesis' for missing feet. The mummy probably dates to the Ptolemaic-early Roman Period, when other examples of prosthetics occur.

The imaging study carried out on Egyptian mummies preserved in Italian museums and collections within the framework of the Anubis Project1 has revealed a new and interesting case of restoration

* Valentina Giuffra, Gino Fornaciari and Rosalba Ciranni work in the Section of Paleopathology, Division of Surgical, Molecular and Ultrastructural Pathology, Department of Oncology, University of Pisa and Pisa University Hospital, Pisa, Italy. This work was supported by grant MURST No. 981024672-002: 'Malattie, salute e condizioni socio-economiche nell'antico Egitto: un pro- getto multidisciplinare'.

1 In 2000-01 the Section of Paleopathology of the University of Pisa, directed by Prof. Gino Fornaciari, and the Section of Egyptology, directed by Prof. Edda Bresciani, carried out a multidisciplinary project named Anubis; its aim was to study the Egyptian mummies stored in Italian museums, both from the Egyptological and the paleopathological points of view. A team of

This content downloaded from 140.198.64.41 on Sun, 17 Apr 2016 11:07:25 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

2006 BRIEF COMMUNICATIONS 275

Fig. 1 . X-ray of the femurs with the right hand not belonging to the body visible (courtesy of the Division of Paleopathology,

University of Pisa).

Fig. 2. Lateral projection of the lower limbs with the missing feet replaced with a wooden

'prosthesis' (courtesy of the Division of Paleopathology, University of Pisa).

Fig. 3. Anterior projection of the lower limbs (courtesy of the Division of Paleopathology, University of Pisa).

This content downloaded from 140.198.64.41 on Sun, 17 Apr 2016 11:07:25 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

276 BRIEF COMMUNICATIONS JEA 92

made by ancient Egyptian embalmers on a mutilated corpse. The mummy, totally unpublished, is stored at the Archaeological Museum of Naples (inventory number 2343) in a not pertinent wooden anthropoid coffin.2 The place of origin and year of its discovery are unknown and, even though it is difficult to assign a date to the mummy, certain details (see below) suggest that the mummy can be dated to the Ptolemaic-early Roman Period. In modern times the bandages have been longitudinally cut from skull to knee, in order to perform a partial external examination.

Radiographically the mummy is that of a 35-40 year-old man and is in a very bad state of preservation. The body lies on its back, with the arms crossed on the chest, the right hand on the left shoulder and the left hand on the right one. The skull is completely skeletonized and edentulous; the skin of the thorax and abdomen is partially present and of a pitch-black colour. The skull seems to be empty; the ethmoid bone was broken to permit removal of the brain through the nostrils, according to the traditional procedure of excerebration. A slight arthritis involves the odontoid process and the spinal column shows osteoarthritic changes with compression of the fourth lumbar vertebra. Thoracic and abdominal cavities have been filled with earthy material, and a round-shaped package is visible in the pelvis. A severe bilateral coxarthritis has deformed the femural heads. The fracture of the left acetabulum is certainly the result of post mortem damage. Both menisci are calcified and the left fibula is missing.

A remarkable discovery made during the recent imaging was the revelation of an unsuspected, detached hand placed between the femurs (fig. 1). The phalanges, middle phalanges and terminal phalanges seem to be in anatomic connection, but the carpal and metacarpal bones are scattered around. Since the mummy has both its hands, this third hand certainly belongs to another individual and we can only speculate on how it reached this position.

Despite the intact appearance of the mummified body below the knees, lateral and anteroposterior X-rays unexpectedly revealed the total absence of both feet. They have been replaced by a single 'prosthesis' in two parts: a rectangular piece of wood resting transversely on the bottom of the coffin and a piece of rather sharply pointed, wedge-shaped wood (figs. 2-3). The two parts were fixed together by three metal nails set at a uniform distance from each other (fig. 3).

The presence of a prosthesis on Naples 2343 helps to date the mummy: the practice of 'restoring' mummified bodies, replacing missing limbs with dummies, seems to be typical of the Ptolemaic Period.3 After the excellent results reached by the ancient Egyptian embalmers during the New Kingdom and continuing through the Twenty-first Dynasty, the Twenty-second Dynasty saw the start of a slow decline in the embalming method, which became more marked with time.4 In particular, a greater care is noticeable for the external aspect of the mummies, while the preservation treatments of the corpses themselves are in general neglected.

The creation of 'false mummies' is peculiar to the Ptolemaic Period.5 Radiological investigation makes it possible to identify where the anthropomorph wrapping contained a mass of disjointed bones, sometimes belonging to different individuals. Probably in these cases the body of the deceased was destroyed or lost, and the embalmers prepared a false mummy in order to return a corpse to the family for burial.6 In other cases the embalmers used coffins originally created to contain another individual. The limbs were detached and amputated if the body was too big for the coffin; otherwise bones were added if the body was too short to fill the available space.7 More relevant to Naples 2343, it was not infrequent that a corpse reached the embalmers laboratory with some part mutilated, such as the limbs, hands or feet. It was opportune to restore the missing parts with an artificial prosthesis, to give back to the body its original integrity and to permit the deceased to accomplish his journey in the Afterlife with all his attributes.

researchers travelled around Italy, visiting the museums where the Egyptian human remains were collected. This material, mostly still unpublished, was properly surveyed and catalogued; X-rays were performed in situ, using a portable X-ray apparatus Minibloc 100/70. See R. Ciranni, D. Pangoli, V. Giuffra, D. Caramella, E. Bresciani, F. Silvano and G. Fornaciari, 'The Anubis Project. An Inventory and Paleopathological Study of the Egyptian Mummies Collected in Italian Museums', Paleopathology Newsletter 129 (March 2005), 6-11, and Taleopathological Study of the Egyptian Mummies Collected in Italy: the Anubis Project', Journal of Biological Research 80/1 (2005) (= Proceedings of the V World Congress on Mummy Studies, Turin (Italy) 2nd-5th September 2004) , 255-7.

2 The mummy is not cited in the catalogue ot the Museum of Naples: S. De Caro (ed.), La Collezione

egiziana del Museo Archeologico Nazionale di Napoli (Naples, 1989). A photograph of the entire mummy is not available.

3 P. H. K. Gray, 'Embalmers' "Restorations'",^^ 52 (1966), 138-40.

4 S. Ikram and A. Dodson, The Mummy in Ancient Egypt (London, 1998), 118-30.

5 The reference is here to human 'false mummies', but in the Graeco-Roman Period, when the use of votive ani- mal mummies flourished, examples of animal 'false mum- mies', composed of cloth, feathers, odd bones, brick or pottery, are also frequent. These fakes were perfectly wrapped and then sold as true mummies to pilgrims.

6 F. Dunand and R. Lichtenberg, Les momies et la mort en Egypte (Paris, 1998), 101.

7 Gray, J^^ 52, 138.

This content downloaded from 140.198.64.41 on Sun, 17 Apr 2016 11:07:25 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

2006 BRIEF COMMUNICATIONS 277

There are several well-known cases of restoration carried out by the embalmers of the Ptolemaic Period,8 with some interesting examples not dissimilar to Naples 2343. Mummy 1770 in the Manchester Museum, probably found in Hawara, is that of a fourteen-year-old girl in a poor state of preservation.9 It was at first attributed to the Ptolemaic era, but radiocarbon results demonstrated that while the bandaging could be dated to this period, the body itself appears to be some hundred years older.10 The right leg of the girl was amputated at the distal portion of femur, 10 cm above the knee, while the left leg was amputated at the proximal portion of tibia, 10 cm below the knee. Since there is no trace of reparative activity, it is hypothesized that the legs were amputated at the time of death or later.11 The embalmers probably fabricated the missing parts of the mummy with various materials, to return its integrity to the body, at least externally. The lower part of the left leg was replaced with a piece of wood covered with mud and wrapped in linen. Removal of the bandages around the feet revealed a structure of mud and reeds making up the right foot; an irregular mass of mud substituted for the distal part of the left femur.12

In several cases, the artificial prostheses were made by modelling linen in the form of hands and feet with the aid of resin to confer more resistance to the textiles. A beautiful example is that of a male mummy of unknown origin, now at the Durham Oriental Museum, dated to the Ptolemaic Period and fitted with an artificial arm.13 The left forearm and hand are made entirely of cloth, laid around the remaining bones, modelled to simulate wrist, fingers and thumb, and soaked in resin. The structure appears roughly built up, but not unrealistic, with the fingers partly flexed and the thumb extended.

Four other examples were found in Nubia, in cemetery 24 near Dabod, and are all dated to the Ptolemaic Period. The mummy 24:1 :K was that of an old man and displayed a linen dummy in the place of the missing right hand.14 A similar solution is shown in the female mummy 24:1:1, on which both hands were lacking and were replaced with dummies made of linen and resin. In this case the anatomical shape of fingers was only roughly reproduced.15 The mummy 24:1 :L was that of a woman, whose greater part of the right foot and all the bones of both hands were placed in the abdominal cavity, while the radii were inverted, with the lower ends uppermost. The hands and foot were replaced with dummies made entirely of linen.16 In a similar example, the female mummy 24:1 :U had the tarsal, metatarsal and metacarpal bones scattered in the body cavities, and the radii were again inverted. Dummies made of linen and resin substituted for her feet and great care was given to the correct anatomical shape, with the toes made of pieces of reeds. The hands were replaced with dummies made of linen, resin and a few bones.17 On the last two mummies cited, it can be supposed that the extremities had been pulled off and were inserted by the embalmers in the body cavities, making it necessary for them to provide a restoration.

The use of wood to fabricate dummy feet is limited to the mummy 2343 in Naples and to the Manchester mummy 1770, while in the other examples hands and feet have been modelled in linen. It can be hypothesized that the embalmers preferred to use cloths soaked in resin instead of wood because it was easier to build up prosthetics and to obtain the desired shape with linen. This explanation seems to be confirmed by the fact that wood, which as well was a more rare and costly material, was employed to make up big and simple anatomical parts, such as a leg and both feet; in contrast, to fabricate single feet and hands, which have a more complicated structure, cloths were consistently preferred.

The kind of intervention performed by the ancient embalmers can provide a well-grounded basis to suggest a dating for the mummy. According to the literature consulted, restoration of mutilated

8 The Leiden mummy AMM 14a, belonging to a child of uncertain sex and dated to the end of the Ptolemaic or the Roman Period, cannot longer be cited here as an example of prosthetic use. According to the Gray exami- nation (see P. H. K. Gray, Radiological Aspects of the Mummies of Ancient Egyptians in the Rijksmuseum Van Oudheden, Leiden (Leiden, 1966), mummy n. 24, 25-6, pls. xxi.1-2, xxx. 3) both hands were clearly dummies, but the recent catalogue of the Leiden mummies renders this interpretation invalid, by showing that the mummy in question does not have dummy hands. See M. Raven and W K. Taconis, Egyptian Mummies: Radiological Atlas of the Collections in the National Museum of Antiquities in Leiden (Turnhout, 2005), 169. We thank the JEA referee for this reference.

9 I. Isherwood, H. Jarvis and R. A. Fawcitt, 'Radiology of the Manchester Mummies', in A. R. David (ed.), Manchester Museum Mummy Project (Manchester,

1979), 32. 10 Isherwood, Jarvis and Fawcitt, in David (ed.),

Manchester Mummy Project, 146. 11 Isherwood, Jarvis and Fawcitt, in David (ed.),

Manchester Mummy Project, 53, fig. 28. 12 E. Tapp, 'The Unwrapping of 1770', in A. R.

David (ed.), Science in Egyptology (Manchester, 1986), 53-5.

13 Gray, JEA 52, 139-40, pl. xxxiv. 14 G. E. Smith and F. Wood-Jones, Report on the

Human Remains, Archaeological Survey of Nubia for 1907-1908, II (Cairo, 1910), 214; Gray, JEA 52, 138.

!5 Smith and Wood- Jones, Report II, 214; Gray, JEA 52,139.

16 Smith and Wood-Jones, Report II, 214; Gray, JEA 52, 138.

17 Smith and Wood-Jones, Report II, 214; Gray, JEA 52, 139.

This content downloaded from 140.198.64.41 on Sun, 17 Apr 2016 11:07:25 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

278 BRIEF COMMUNICATIONS JEA 92

corpses by embalmers with the use of dummies seems to be virtually limited to the Ptolemaic Period, although exceptions are attested.18 The suggestion that the Naples mummy can be dated to the same period is further corroborated by the fact that the body has been treated with a certain carelessness, as shown by the almost complete state of skeletonization in which the corpse was found and particularly by the unassociated hand from another body found between the femurs. Other evidence is provided by the position of the arms, which are crossed over the chest; in the Ptolemaic Period the arms lay generally along the sides of the body with the hands on the thighs, while the crossed position is more often seen in Roman times. In any case, the excerebration and evisceration performed on Naples 2343, as attested by the radiological examination, exclude a dating later than the second century AD, when these practices were abandoned. In conclusion, the mummy could be reasonably dated to the Ptolemaic-early Roman Period.

It is impossible to be certain how the feet of Naples 2343 were lost. It can be hypothesized that the body was already mutilated when it reached the embalmers' workshop. In this case the corpse may have been found several days after death, in an advanced state of decomposition. The intervention of necrophagous animals should be excluded, since the distal epiphysis of the tibiae are intact. It seems more likely that the body, lying for an indefinite time without treatment, began to lose its anatomical connection. The distal bones of the feet, the joints of which are known to be weak, were probably the first to be detached, followed by the proximal parts of the feet; the ankle joint is more resistant and requires a longer period to lose its connection.19 Alternatively the loss may have occurred during the mummification process, owing to negligence or scant care on the part of the workers by whom the corpse was treated. At all events, the embalmers promptly found a remedy for the injury, providing the deceased with the necessary integrity for his Afterlife journey.

Valentina Giuffra, Gino Fornaciari and Rosalba Ciranni

18 See, for example, the case of a right big toe prosthe- sis in a female mummy from Thebes dated back to the Twenty-first Dynasty: W. A. Wagle, 'Toe Prosthesis in an Egyptian Human Mummy', American Journal of Radiology 162 (1994), 999-1000.

19 H. Duday, 'L'antropologia "sul campo", una nuova dimensione deirarcheologia della morte', in F. Mallegni and M. Rubini (eds), Recupero dei materiali scheletrici umani in archeologia (Rome, 1994), 99.

The Vitaliano Donati collection at the Turin Egyptian Museum

Preliminary announcement of the discovery of a manuscript found in Turin which lists the collection of ancient artefacts and scientific specimens sent by Vitaliano Donati from Alexandria to Turin on 20 February 1761. Donati's collection was one of the founding elements of the original Egyptian collection in the Regio Museo di Antichita, University of Turin. Today, the bulk of the collection is unidentified and only three statues attributed to Donati are on display at the Egyptian Museum in Turin. In addition, there is no published evidence that confirms the size of the collection or describes the objects.

WHILE studying records and catalogues about Donati's collection for a recent research project,1 I discovered a previously unknown list of all the objects that Donati collected during his expedition to Egypt in 1759-62. The list was found at the Biblioteca Civica in Turin, where a multi-volume Bosio Collection is kept in the Library archives. The Bosio Collection consists of 355 volumes, which contain a variety of manuscripts related to historical facts, poems, and drawings.2 Examination of one volume, MSB23, revealed a copy of a list originally compiled by Donati, describing the full extent of his original collection. The list comprises seventeen pages and each page is subdivided into two columns. Each column lists the item number sequentially for each container, always starting from number 1, as shown in figures 1 and 2.

The list describes a consignment of 1689 items that were sent by Donati from Alexandria to Turin on 20 February 1761. This quantity is far in excess of the 300 objects that had been estimated by scholars.3 At the time of its arrival at the Turin Museum of Antiquity, in November 1763,4 Donati's collection was the first to be acquired specifically for a museum and as such it was a founding element

1 A. Morecroft, Vitaliano Donati Egyptian Collection at the Turin Egyptian Museum, (MPhil thesis, University of Cambridge, 2005; available for consultation at the Faculty of Oriental Studies, Cambridge).

2 Bosio Collection, Biblioteca Civica, (Torino). Sezione manoscritti e rari.

3 P. Barocelli, 'II viaggio del dottor Vitaliano Donati in Oriente (1759-1762) in relazione colle prime origini del Museo egiziano di Torino', in Atti della Reale Accademia delle Scienze di Torino, XLVII (Turin, 1912), 411-25, and S. Curto, Storia del Museo Egizio di Torino (Turin, 1990), 88-9.

4 The cost of transporting Donati's crates from the customs post to the Regio Museo di Antichita is recorded in an expenses document kept at the University of Turin, Archivio Storico, Mandati, II-C4.

This content downloaded from 140.198.64.41 on Sun, 17 Apr 2016 11:07:25 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms