DOI article:
Smith, Grafton Elliot: A contribution to the study of mummification in Egypt: with special reference to the measures adopted during the time of the 21st dynasty for moulding the form of the body
DOI Page / Citation link: https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.11325#0014
_ 4 —
time added far more that is inaccurate and misleading ; so that
the errors of observation and inference utterly obscure the few
new facts.
We have no definite information as to the time when the
practice of mummification was first attempted : nor is there much
chance of ever being able to speak decisively on this subject.
For it is only natural to suppose that the earliest attempts at the
artificial préservation of the body would yield crude and imperfect
results, which would be the least likely to persist and give us
the information we need.
We can assert without any fear of reasonable contradiction that
there is no évidence whatever to suggest the idea that the
excellent state of préservation of many bodies buried during the
earlier part of the Ancient Empire and in predynastic times is
anything else than the resuit of the action of natural agencies
unaided by art. Nor have we any certain évidence that any
attempts were made at any period of the Ancient Empire to resist
by artificial means the natural decay of the body. I am well
aware that there is a well preserved body in the Cairo Muséum
said to be the "Momie du roi Mihtimsaouf— Métésonphis 1er, fils
de Papi 1er découverte à Sakkarah dans sa pyramide (VIe dy-
nastie ) " 1 ; but no definite reasons have yet been given for
regarding this body as a mummy or for excluding the possibility
that it may not have been put in the pyramid at a much later
time than that assigned to it. Until such information is forth-
coming concerning this spécimen and other supposed early mum-
mies mentioned in the catalogue of the British Muséum their value
as évidence must be ignored.
With référence to the body (now in the Cairo Muséum) found
in a 5th dynasty conîn at Deshasheh by Professor Flinders Pétrie,
1 G. Maspero, "Guide du Visiteur au Musée du Caire," 1902, p. 397.
time added far more that is inaccurate and misleading ; so that
the errors of observation and inference utterly obscure the few
new facts.
We have no definite information as to the time when the
practice of mummification was first attempted : nor is there much
chance of ever being able to speak decisively on this subject.
For it is only natural to suppose that the earliest attempts at the
artificial préservation of the body would yield crude and imperfect
results, which would be the least likely to persist and give us
the information we need.
We can assert without any fear of reasonable contradiction that
there is no évidence whatever to suggest the idea that the
excellent state of préservation of many bodies buried during the
earlier part of the Ancient Empire and in predynastic times is
anything else than the resuit of the action of natural agencies
unaided by art. Nor have we any certain évidence that any
attempts were made at any period of the Ancient Empire to resist
by artificial means the natural decay of the body. I am well
aware that there is a well preserved body in the Cairo Muséum
said to be the "Momie du roi Mihtimsaouf— Métésonphis 1er, fils
de Papi 1er découverte à Sakkarah dans sa pyramide (VIe dy-
nastie ) " 1 ; but no definite reasons have yet been given for
regarding this body as a mummy or for excluding the possibility
that it may not have been put in the pyramid at a much later
time than that assigned to it. Until such information is forth-
coming concerning this spécimen and other supposed early mum-
mies mentioned in the catalogue of the British Muséum their value
as évidence must be ignored.
With référence to the body (now in the Cairo Muséum) found
in a 5th dynasty conîn at Deshasheh by Professor Flinders Pétrie,
1 G. Maspero, "Guide du Visiteur au Musée du Caire," 1902, p. 397.