Mediterranean Archaeology and Archaeometry, Vol. 11, No. 2, pp. 129-150 Copyright © 2011 MAA Printed in Greece. All rights reserved. A REVIEW ON THE MATERIALS USED DURING THE MUMMIFICATION PROCESSES IN ANCIENT EGYPT Gomaa Abdel-Maksouda, Abdel-Rahman El-Aminb aConservation Department, Faculty of Archaeology, Cairo University, Giza, Egypt bHuman Remains Lab. Conservation Centre, The Grand Egyptian Museum, Ministry of Antiquities affairs, Egypt Received: 13/01/2011 Accepted: 29/05/2011 Corresponding author: [email protected] ABSTRACT Mummification is considered one of the most important in the history of ancient Egyptian civili- zation. The artificial mummification process started in the Fourth Dynasty during the Old Kingdom reached its peak in the New Kingdom. This review focuses on the usage of mummification materi- als such as Natron salt, Coniferous resin, Mastic, Myrrh, Beeswax, Bitumen, Cassia, Onions, Lichen, Henna and Gum Arabic in ancient Egypt to determine their effectiveness in the preservation of the body. For each material, the chemical formula, the history, and the role in the preservation of the body are presented. It is shown that natron salt was the most important material to desiccate a corpse, and that the vegetable materials mentioned above have anti-bacterial properties that pro- tected the body from microbial attack. KEYWORDS: Mummification, Natron salt, vegetable materials, beeswax, bitumen, lichen 130 ABDEL-MAKSOUD & EL-AMIN 1. INTRODUCTION fied stomach and intestines were drained out with the oil (Hamilton-Paterson & Andrews, Ancient Egyptian civilization was distin- 1978; Abdel-Maksoud, 2001). In the third and guished by a clearly defined belief in a human cheapest method, the body was purged so that existence which continued after death, but this the intestines came away, and the body was individual immortality was considered to be then treated with natron (David, 2001). dependent in part on the preservation of the It can be said that most authors have agreed body in as lifelike a form as possible (David, on the description of three methods of mummi- 1990). Their religious concepts concerning the fication, but they differed among themselves in afterlife made it necessary to preserve the body the description of the mummification materials. as a place for the `soul' to return to (Jansen et Some authors described the mummification ma- al., 2002). This belief came from observations terials depending on the description of old ref- that the dry sand of the desert acted to preserve erences and this may be due to the lack of anal- buried bodies. Such beliefs were extant as early ysis tools. All these references were in the first as the Neolithic and Predynastic periods of half of the twentieth century. Other authors de- 5000–4000 B.C. scribed these materials depending on the analy- An example of the importance of the preser- sis and investigation. Most analysis has oc- vation of the body is seen in the invocation curred from the end of the twentieth century to from the ancient Egyptian mortuary texts re- present day. Since the end of the twentieth cen- ferred to as the “Book of the Dead”: ‘My body is tury, archaeologists have long found them- everlasting, it will not perish and it will not de- selves faced with the difficult problem of identi- cay for ages’ (Kłys et al., 1999). Even though fying unknown materials used with mummies. mummification was practiced in Egypt for near- Most analyses were done on resinous materials. ly 3500 years, from the Old Kingdom, ca. 2600 This may be due to: (1) most authors have ana- BC to the Christian Period, an end was put to lyzed wrapped mummies; (2) most resinous this practice only after the Arab conquest of materials have been used on the bandages; (3) Egypt in the 7th century AD (Maurer et al., from a conservation point of view, it was diffi- 2002). cult to remove bandages of mummies (to look According to the Greek historian Herodotus, for other mummification materials) because this three main types of mummification were avail- will lead to the deterioration of mummies. In able, and the client chose the method he could this study, some materials of mummification afford (David, 2001). The most important ele- were identified through analyses and investiga- ments of mummification, which were crucial to tions and other materials were written through arresting the decomposition of the body were literatures. evisceration and dehydration of the tissues. In recent years, Egyptian mummies have Some authors (Smith & Dawson, 1924; Lauer & been the subject of a fairly large number of sci- Iskender, 1955; Leek, 1969; Iskander & Shahin, entific studies (Maurer et al., 2002), but at the 1973; Hamilton-Paterson & Andrews, 1978; Is- same time have always been a matter of contro- kander, 1980; D’Auria, 1988; Taylor, 1995; Ikram versy. The analyses were based on high per- and Dodson, 1998; Aufderheide, 2003; Salter- formance liquid chromatography (HPLC) and Pedersen, 2004; Taconis, 2005; Sivrev et al., gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC- 2005; Dunand & Lichterberg, 2006) have written MS). However, most of these methods are di- on the ideal technique and most expensive rected to the identification of a few of the sub- method of mummification, which involved stances that are simultaneously present in the many stages. sample, and thus only partial information can In the second method, oil of cedar was in- be obtained (Colombini et al., 2000). Gas chro- jected into the anus, which was plugged to pre- matography-mass spectrometry (GC/MS) and vent the escape of the liquid, and the body was other analysis studies allowed the elucidation then treated with natron. Once this was com- of a great number of clearly separated com- plete, the anal plug was removed and the lique- pounds found in ancient embalming materials. REVIEW ON MUMMIFICATION MATERIALS IN ANCIENT EGYPT 131 Phenols, guaiacols, naphthalenes, monoter- ping of the body and the third method was the penes, sesquiterpenoids, oxidised diterpene res- cheapest of all (Iskander, 1980). in acids and triterpenoids were identified; The first method of mummification can be through these intergradients, the materials used summarized as follows: in mummification could be determined. These 1- The body was stripped of its garments, compounds also have antibacterial and antifun- laid out on the embalming couch and purified. gal effects and also prevent against deteriora- This was performed in a temporary structure tion caused by insects. Meanwhile analytical close to the Nile or a canal (Taconis, 2005). investigations have revealed a reasonably clear 2- An incision was then made in the left side picture of the process of mummification and the of the abdomen with a knife of obsidian or oth- materials used (Maurer et al., 2002). er kind of stone (Lauer & Iskender, 1955; Is- This study aims to focus on the mummifica- kander & Shahin, 1973). Once the embalmers tion types and to discuss the materials used in inserted their hand through the incision and the mummification processes (history, chemical removed the liver, stomach and intestines, they composition, and their effectiveness in the cut the diaphragm and pulled out the lungs preservation of the body). (Ikram and Dodson, 1998). The heart wasn't removed as the heart was believed to be 2. TYPES OF MUMMIFICATION weighed in the afterlife to determine the good- ness of the individual (Iskander, 1980). It is Naturally or artificially preserved bodies, in thought that the kidneys were also left in the which desiccation (drying, dehydration) of the body. The liver, stomach, intestines and lungs tissues has prevented putrefaction, have been were washed and rinsed out with spices and discovered in Egypt (David, 2001). Most proba- palm wine (Sivrev et al., 2005). The spices were bly, the natural preservation of the body was probably used as a deodorant (Hamilton- noticed by the proto-dynastic people, perhaps Paterson & Andrews, 1978), and a sterilizing when they were burying a new corpse in the material (Iskander, A.E, Shahin, 1973; Taconis, sand near a previously buried one and it might 2005). Each of these organs was then individu- have inspired them to believe that the body ally dried, wrapped in linen and placed in a could be preserved and could more or less re- canopic jar. Each jar held a different organ and tain its human likeness (Iskander, 1980). True in later periods, the jar lids were shaped to rep- mummification (artificial methods) can be iden- resent one of the four sons of Horus (Aufder- tified as a method, which incorporates several heide, 2003). sophisticated techniques, making use of chemi- 3- The brain was not believed to have any cal and other agents. Many years of experimen- importance, so it was cut into small pieces to tation would be required to perfect such meth- facilitate removal and discarded (D’Auria, ods. The artificial preservation of the corpse 1988). An examination of ancient Egyptian was practiced in Egypt from the Old Kingdom skulls in the Macalister Collection at Cambridge to the Christian era (David, 1990). According to showed that 56 percent had a hole made in the Herodotus account, there were a set of men base of the skull through the plate of the eth- who practiced the true mummification method moid bone. In 5 percent it had been made and made it their business. When a body was through the left nostril, and in 3 percent brought to them, the embalmers showed the through the right one. In others the nasal sep- family of the deceased wooden models of tum had been wholly or partially removed, corpses, so that they could choose the level of which resulted in significant perforation to the mummification they wanted. The mummifica- base of the skull (Leek, 1969). Brain removal tion techniques were classified into three types.