|
Egyptian Mummification Recent Findings Based on CT Scan Data from Egyptian Mummies (Ptolemaic Period) By Jonathan Elias, Ph.D., Director, Akhmim Mummy Studies Consortium This discussion is
based upon current research on Egyptian mummies of the period 700 - 200 BC. The Akhmim Mummy Studies Consortium has performed
CT examinations of over a dozen mummies since 2001, and presents a summary of its findings on mummies of the later part of
this timeframe, corresponding to the early Ptolemaic Period (approximately 305-200 BC) in an effort to clear up misconceptions
regarding Egyptian mummification which still inhabit much of the literature. The reader is urged to refer to the Consortium's
PDF-format reports on individual mummies for more detailed information on the subject. Treatment of the Heart in Egyptian Mummification The term “mummy” in its Egyptian context refers
to a corpse which has been artificially embalmed according to a set of procedures and rituals handed down since the earliest
periods of Egyptian history. An Egyptian mummy (in contrast to other kinds of mummy) was produced through the removal of all
internal viscera, except for the heart. CT examination of Early Ptolemaic mummies (305-200 BC) indicates that Egyptian
embalmers made concerted efforts to avoid cardiac tissue in the course of removing the other organs. Nevertheless, the complexity
of doing the various organ extractions (generally via a small incision in the lower left flank of the abdominal wall)
resulted in uneven success in preserving the heart itself. In some mummies, only remnants of the pericardium and nearby bronchus
are in place; in others, CT scans reveal that much of the chambered structure of the heart has been left intact, although
it is reduced in size as a result of the drying process which formed the preliminary phase of the Egyptian mummification method.
Brain Removal in Egyptian Mummification (Excerebration) To mummify properly, brain tissue was nearly always removed, and this was
done by inserting hooked rods (often of bronze, 25.0-30.0 cm long) into the nasal passages, perforating the cribriform plate
of the ethmoid bone to provide an exit for brain tissue. There appears to have been a preference for insertion of excerebration
tools into the right nostril, but left nostril placement is also seen in CT scans of Egyptian mummies. It is
currently thought that the brain was allowed to decompose to a semi-liquid state prior to its evacuation from the cranium.
The head and neck were probably strongly manipulated by the embalmers to speed this process. Dissociation of the cervical
vertebrae when it occurs is sometimes seen as indicating damage from the brain removal process, but the patterns vary widely
and need to be examined carefully. Fragmentation of the base of the skull is possibly the most reliable evidence
of excerebration-related damage. Desiccation and Use
of Unguents in Egyptian Mummification Herodotus,
writing in the latter half of the 5th century BC tells us (The Histories, Book II, chapter 86) that the entire process of
mummification lasted for seventy days, and modern research confirms this. While removal of the organs from thorax and
abdomen occurred within the first few days of the process, at least thirty-five to forty days were required to properly dry
(desiccate) the body inside and out by means of natron salts (a mixture of sodium carbonate, sodium bicarbonate and other
chemicals). Herodotus describes the natron as if embalmers applied it in a liquid state, but archaeological remains show it
to have been packaged in small linen bags; It is believed that these bags were inserted inside the thoracic and abdominal
cavities and piled up around the body during a desiccation period which lasted about thirty-five to forty days. While the
body was being dried out, it is also evident that the viscera that had been removed from the corpse were desiccated, and coated
in resinous unguents. Canopic Jars and Visceral Packets
in Egyptian Mummification In the Old, Middle and
New Kingdoms, these preserved viscera were placed within so-called Canopic jars which had lids in the form of protective deities
known as the Four Sons of Horus (the human Imsety [for the liver], jackal Duamutef [for the stomach], baboon Hapy [for the
lungs] and falcon Qebehsenuef [for the intestines]). After 650 BC, the use of Canopic jars for organ storage declined in frequency;
the jars were increasingly reduced to “statues of themselves” having a symbolic rather than a containing function.
Instead, the various organs were coated in resin, and rolled up within linen packets. These “visceral packets”
become a common feature of mummies during the Saite Period (665-525 BC) and the succeeding Late Period (525 – 305 BC)
and Ptolemaic era (305 – 30 BC). During the first hundred years of the Ptolemaic era proper the visceral packets found
within mummies are generally cylindrical and vary in size. Those found in the pelvic cavity tend to be small (around 9.0-10.0
cm long). Those found in the thoracic cavity fall into two size classes (one ranges from 15.0 – 20.0 cm long; the other
is 25.0-30.0 cm long). Research on the adhesive and aromatic substances used in mummification is progressing steadily. While
Herodotus is certainly correct when he mentions frankincense and myrrh in connection with mummification, other materials were
also used, including bees wax, and bitumen (a semi-solid mineral asphaltic tar available anciently as seepages from the Dead
Sea). The Arabic term for “bitumen” is in fact the origin of the term “mummy” (Arabic: mumiye).
Bitumen appears to have been prevalent in the very latest periods of embalming science. Botanical resins derived from cedar
and pistachio species were also used, and were favored as insecticidal agents (poured into body cavities and applied to the
skin surface) through most of the time periods in which mummies were produced. Semi -solid rosins derived from the same species
are sometimes also found in the interior cavities of Ptolemaic mummies, but the specific conditions of rosin-use remain to
be determined. Mummies were wrapped in linen following desiccation and application of resin. In Ptolemaic times the limbs
were separately wrapped, prior to the creation of a generalized mummy bundle, by repeated layering of transverse bandages.
The linen used in wrapping appears to form distinct layers, with resin adhesives poured on to it at various stages in the
wrapping process to tack things down. As many as fifteen layers of pasted bandage have been counted in the Ptolemaic mummies
under study. After a final generalized pouring of resin, the embalmers draped a winding sheet or shroud on the body, embellishing
it with prefabricated cartonnage plaques and a mummy mask, usually with a gilded face. Arm Positions of Egyptian Mummies Recent CT scans of Egyptian mummies of the Ptolemaic Period shows that in preparation for final wrapping,
the arms of mummified persons were frequently crossed in emulation of the pose of Osiris, lord of eternity (this position
was in earlier periods reserved for royalty). Interestingly the prevailing style of “arm crossing” is right over
left, and it is not unusual to find the left hand on the right shoulder positioned as if clasping, while the right hand remains
relaxed and pronate on the left shoulder or against the crook of the arm. This should caution researchers from supposing that
a mummy with crossed arms necessarily means that the person is royal. The crossing of the arms of the mummies of non-royals
occurs at least as early as the Saite period (664-525 BC, e.g. see Lee and Stenn 1978, radiographs of Harwa in the Field Museum
of Natural History, Chicago), when it may have been a prerogative of members of the clergy. It was more common at that period
to inter mummies with arms uncrossed and descending to the abdomen and resting on the inner aspect of the thighs. This practice
persists into the Ptolemaic Period, at which time it is conceivable that younger persons were interred in this way.
|
|
The
crossed arm body position was common in Ptolemaic mummies from Akhmim as this CT reformat of Pahat, son of Horresnet
(Berkshire Museum 1903.7.44) shows. The preferred mode seen in priestly burials was for the right forearm to cross the left
(as seen here). The fingers of the left hand typically are posed as if to hold an object. The right hand fingers are typically
relaxed. © 2008 Akhmim
Mummy Studies Consortium. All Rights Reserved.
|
Ptolemaic
mummies frequently contain cylindrically shaped packets with preserved viscera within. These occur in groups of four,
often embedded or just above insecticidal resin which had been poured into the eviscerated body cavities prior to wrapping.
Pahat's mummy shows one such packet in the pelvic cavity surrounded by resin. Three other packets are located higher up, both
in the abdomen and thorax. ©2008
Akhmim Mummy Studies Consortium. All Rights Reserved.
|
|
List of References Chan, S., Elias, J., Hysell, M.and Hallowell, M. (2008) Computed Tomographic Examination of a Ptolemaic Period Mummy from the Anceint Egyptian City
of Akhmim. RadioGraphics Vol. 28, Issue 7, November, pp. 2023-2032. Cockburn, A. et al. (1975) Autopsy of an Egyptian Mummy. Science 187, no. 4182, 1155-1160.
Elias, J. and Lupton, C. (2005) The Role of Computed
Axial Tomography in the Study of the Mummies of Akhmim, Egypt. In E. Rabino-Massa, (ed.), Proceeding V World Congress on Mummy
Studies. Journal of Biological Research, LXXX, N. 1, pp. 34-38. Elias,
J. (2007) Preliminary CT Scan Analysis of an Egyptian Mummy in the Putnam
Museum, Davenport, Iowa (Putnam 1/AR 21190) (AMSC-17 Study 1, October). R. Germer. (1997) Mummies, Life after Death in Ancient Egypt. (Munich
and New York: Prestel Verlag). Harrell J. A. &
Lewan M. D (2002) Sources of mummy bitumen in ancient Egypt and Palestine Archaeometry Volume 44 (May) p. 285. Kaup, Y., Baumer U., Koller J., Hedges, R.E.M., Werner H., Hartmann
H.-J., Etspüler H. and Weser, U. (1994) Zn2Mg Alkaline Phosphatase in an Early Ptolemeic [sic] Mummy, Zeitschrift für
Naturforschung. Abt. C 49, 489-500. Lee, S. and Stenn,
F. (1978) The Characterization of Mummy Bone Ochronotic Pigment . JAMA Vol. 240, No. 2, 136-138.
|
|
|
|