Rebirth and Rejuvenation: The Mummification Case at the Egypt Centre

This blog post has been written by Syd Howells, the Volunteer Manager at the Egypt Centre. He has been in post since 2012 and is the first point of contact for anyone wishing to volunteer at the museum.

In 2015, as part of my distance learning Museum Studies MA at Leicester University, I was tasked with ‘curating’ a display at the Egypt Centre. Consideration was taken as to what the museum needed to give the exercise some value, and following discussions it was decided the most useful course of action was to design a display concerned with the process of mummification.

Why did we choose mummification? The reason was simple. Within the House of Death gallery, the case close by to the mummification activity originally contained objects related to pharaohs, hence its unofficial title of the ‘King’s Case’. Its purpose however was to illustrate ‘state religion’, created as a juxtaposition to the case directly opposite, which was concerned with personal religion, hence the images of Bes, Hathor, Taweret etc. On reflection, it made more sense to have a case close to the activity where volunteers and staff carrying out mummification could point out actual objects related to the process, engaging visitors with not only the activity, but also genuine artefacts from a relatively wide timeframe of Egyptian history (fig. 1). With approval and guidance from Wendy Goodridge, our current Museum Manager (and at the time our Assistant Curator), I began to make plans.

Fig. 1: The Mummification Case

The main question looked at how we illustrate the process of mummification considering the objects within our collection, whether loaned or permanent and how these objects would tell the story when placed together. Obviously, time and thought are required when creating a display and with Wendy’s guidance I selected the following objects from within our collection:

 

EC71: Three bandages & mummified snake package (Late Period–Ptolemaic)

At the time these items were chosen, we had no idea the package also contained a mummified snake (that was a later discovery by Ken Griffin when he was photographing them for the online catalogue)!

 

EC151: Canopic jar lid of Hapy (Late Period)

Canopic jars were used to store the organs removed from the body during the mummification process. The four jars represent the Four Sons of Horus, and the lids indicate these. The Baboon-headed Hapy protected the lungs.

 

EC152: Figure of Anubis (Late Period)

Unlike the wooden figure of Anubis, which can be seen in our ‘Gods Case’, this example does not feature replica ears made of plasticine!      

                                   

EC388: Canopic jar lid of Qebehsenuef (Late Period)

The falcon-headed Qebehsenuef protected the intestines (fig. 2).

Fig. 2: Head of Qebehsenuef

EC389: Canopic jar lid of Duamutef (Late Period)

The jackal-headed Duamutuef protected the stomach.

 

EC727: Model vessels (Graeco-Roman Period)

Jars containing water were used for purification rituals during the Opening of the Mouth ceremony. Models of jars made of materials such as faience were placed in tombs and temples and may have been intended to perpetuate the Opening of the Mouth ritual for all eternity to animate the deceased as well as the gods.

 

W220: Wadjet eye plaque (Late Period)

Wadjet eye plaque made of green faience. Items like this would be placed over the incision made to remove the organs from the deceased on the left side of the torso. The wadjet eye is a symbol of healing.

 

W498: Canopic jar of Qebehsenuef (Late Period)

While this jar has an inscription mentioning Qebehsenuef, the human head is usually associated with Imsety, who protected the liver. While it is possible that the jar and lid were grouped together to sell to a tourist or collector in more modern times, during the Late Period it is not unknown for complete sets of canopic jars to have human heads on each one.

 

W548: Mummy label (Graeco-Roman)

If a person died away from their home during the Graeco-Roman Period, these items were used to identify them while their body was returned. This example belonged to an individual called Ammonari(on).

 

W920: Cartonnage mask fragment (Graeco-Roman Period)

A mummy mask constructed of cartonnage, a material that is a mixture of plaster and bandages, then gilded (fig. 3). Upon the headband you can see an ancient Egyptian spell (the presence of this was initially pointed out to us by a researcher to the museum when the object was on display in the House of Life Gallery, long before its lighting was upgraded).

Fig. 3: Golden mummy mask

W1024: Canopic jar lid [now thought to be a statue head] (New Kingdom)

Research by Ken Griffin in 2019 indicates that rather than being an Imsety canopic jar lid, it more likely originated as the head of a block statue. It remains in the case for the present.

EA7900: Heart scarab (New Kingdom)

This Heart Scarab is made of green schist. To the ancient Egyptians, the heart was the essence of the person, their intellect, and emotion, as opposed to the brain. This example features Chapter 30B of the Book of the Dead inscribed upon its base, which calls upon the heart not to say bad things about the person when they are judged in the afterlife during the Weighing of the Heart ritual. Un-pierced and placed, not sewn, over the heart within the wrappings of the deceased.  

This item is owned by the British Museum and came here as part of the original loan in 2005, which was organised through their British Museum Partnership where objects from their collection are loaned to local museums. As part of the agreement with the British Museum (for a fuller explanation see Offerings from the British Museum by Wendy Goodridge and Stuart Williams – available from the Egypt Centre Shop), permission had to be sought to move two of the objects. These being EA64973, the Cylinder Seal that was to be moved from the new ‘Mummification Case’ to the new ‘Kings Case’, and EA7900, the heart scarab, to be moved from the ‘Amulets Case’ and into the new ‘Mummification Case’. Figure 4 shows part of our request to the British Museum. Therefore, there was a short delay before we could proceed as we waited for their permission. Thankfully, they said yes.

Fig. 4: Detailing the movement of objects

As the cases within the museum are only allowed to be opened by curatorial staff, it was essential that Wendy was involved in assessing the condition of the objects and ensuring we could move the objects (figs. 5–6). At the time the most convenient and safest space to check the objects, make condition reports etc., was the Museum Gift shop on a Monday (as the museum is open to the public Tuesday to Saturday). On Monday 24^th August 2015, we checked all the objects to be moved and by the end of the day everything was done besides the final labels.

Fig. 5: The objects being prepared for their new display

 

Fig. 6: Wendy Goodridge undertaking condition checks of the objects

In keeping with Egypt Centre policy, the labels within the case are bilingual in both Welsh and English. As anyone who knows me well will understand, it took a short eternity for me to replace the original temporary labels, much to the consternation of other staff members. I offer my belated apologies…

In conclusion, it was felt by volunteers, staff, and visitors that the case was a useful addition to the House of Death and particularly the mummification activity. However, we did receive one complaint. A volunteer was displeased by the display of wrappings from a mummified individual/animal in the case and remarked on the “tatty bandages”. Whether this was due to ideological beliefs or a general feeling it made the case look untidy is unknown. However, should you visit the museum today you can still see them (and the unexpected mummified snake) in the case.    

Thank you to Wendy Goodridge, Dr Carolyn Graves-Brown, and Dr Ken Griffin.

Bibliography:

Goodridge, Wendy and Stuart Williams [2005]. Offerings from the British Museum. Swansea: The Egypt Centre.

Griffin, Ken (2019). A canopic jar stopper or a head from a statue? Available at: https://egyptcentrecollectionblog.blogspot.com/2019/03/a-canopic-jar-stopper-or-head-from.html

Cataloguing the Blue-painted Pottery at the Egypt Centre

This blog post has been written by Katie Morton, a third-year Egyptology student at Swansea University. Katie is currently undertaking dissertation research on the blue-painted sherds based at the Egypt Centre. Her key area of interest is ancient Egyptian pottery and its production. Once she graduates, Katie will pursue an MA in conservation at Cardiff University and hopes to get more hands-on with different types of pottery from around the world.

Whilst deciding what I wanted to do for my undergraduate dissertation, I knew I wanted to do some physical research and get hands-on with the items held at the Egypt Centre. I was first introduced to blue-painted pottery during my second year when I completed CLE214: Introduction to Egyptian Archaeology, taught by Dr Christian Knoblauch. During this module, we were able to select an item for study. As my key area of interest is the Amarna Period, I chose W1029, a complete blue painted jar (fig. 1). This sparked a love for this type of pottery, and I was lucky enough to help with measuring the pieces on display at the Egypt Centre for the Swansea University Pottery Project (SUPP). This is where I found out that the Egypt Centre holds a large collection of blue-painted sherds, excavated by the EES at Amarna.

Fig. 1: Blue-painted jar

Blue-painted pottery was made for roughly 500 years during the New Kingdom, from the mid-Eighteenth to the Twentieth Dynasty (Hope 1991, 13). This type of pottery is named as such for its use of blue pigment, alongside black and red, in order to create a wide variety of motifs. Whilst blue-painted pottery has been found in New Kingdom sites over Egypt, there are two key places where the majority of vessels and sherds have been found: Malkata and Amarna. This limited production period and the use of colour is what really drew me into wanting to research these items further (fig. 2). Research and publications on blue-painted pottery are largely dominated by three academics: Colin Hope, Pamela Rose, and David Aston. These authors have extensively written about blue-painted vessels found across Egypt. It was through the work of Colin Hope that I was inspired to write my dissertation on blue-painted pottery. In his article Blue-painted and polychrome decorated pottery from Amarna: a preliminary corpus, Hope states that the sherds based at the Egypt Centre had not been researched or included in his corpus. From this, I decided I wanted to research the pieces in the collection.

Fig. 2: Closely inspecting W1029

My dissertation will be a catalogue of the sherds and vessels based at the Egypt Centre, continuing on from the work of Colin Hope and following a similar format for continuity. In addition, I will be analysing my results and comparing them to the work of Hope, Rose, and Aston, and commenting on any similarities or differences I have found. This is important and valuable research as the more data available on blue-painted vessels, the more we can learn about the decorative motifs and production methods. For the whole of the first term of the 2022–23 academic year, I have been doing the physical research for my dissertation. It has been a lot of work but thanks to the help from Dr Ken Griffin and Dr Meg Gundlach I was able to do my research much faster than expected. After all my research was completed, Ken, Meg, Dr Olga Zapletniuk (a current Egyptology PhD student), and I were able to bring all the sherds out into one room to see if we could make any further matches in addition to the ones I had already made (fig. 3). This was a really valuable experience and one that not all museums would be able to facilitate, so I am extremely thankful to Ken and Meg for allowing me to do this.

Fig. 3: Laying out all the blue-painted pottery from Amarna

I am excited to write up my dissertation and tell people what I have discovered through doing this research. I hope this research will be useful to the Egypt Centre as well as to the continuing knowledge of blue-painted pottery. I am especially thankful that Christian and Swansea University for having the faith in me to complete this research, something that is not always possible to undertake as an undergraduate student!

Fig. 4: Sometimes teamwork is essential!

Bibliography:

Aston, David A. 2011. Blue-painted pottery of the late Eighteenth Dynasty: the material from the tomb of Maya and Merit at Saqqara. Cahiers de la céramique égyptienne 9, 1–35. 

Hope, Colin A. 1991. Blue-painted and polychrome decorated pottery from Amarna: a preliminary corpus. Cahiers de la céramique égyptienne 2, 17–92.

Rose, Pamela J. 2007. The Eighteenth Dynasty pottery corpus from Amarna. Egypt Exploration Society, Excavation Memoir 83. London: Egypt Exploration Society.

Review of ‘25 years of the Egypt Centre: History and Highlights’: a Zoom course by curator Ken Griffin

The blog post for this week has been written by Dr Dulcie Engel, a regular contributor. Dulcie is a former lecturer in French and linguistics and has been volunteering at the Egypt Centre for the last eight years. She is a gallery supervisor and associate editor of the Volunteer Newsletter. Dulcie has a particular interest in collectors and the history of museums.

This course launched the Egypt Centre’s twenty-fifth anniversary year and ran from January 8^th/11^th for 5 weeks (10 hours), presented live on Sunday evenings and Wednesday mornings. There were 52 participants in total, including me! The course covered the history and highlights of the museum, from its origins with the Wellcome loan in 1971 to its online engagement during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Ken pointed out that the Egypt Centre holds around 6000 objects, of which c. 2000 are currently on display. Ken used 3D models for most of the objects, which enabled Zoom participants to see them in amazing detail, and in particular to observe the backs and sides of objects that are normally hidden from view in the cases or in 2D images. This is what was covered:

Week 1: The History of the Egypt Centre: From Wellcome to Swansea

In week 1, we found out many interesting details about Henry Wellcome and his collection, with the aid of wonderful archival photos and documents. We also learnt that his company was an early user of Egyptian imagery in its advertising (fig. 1). He was a truly prolific collector: by 1936, the year of his death, Wellcome’s collection was five times bigger than that of the Louvre, with over one million objects. We also heard about the collectors ‘collected’ by Wellcome, such as Rustafjaell and MacGregor, and the cataloguer Boscawen. We had a close look at the work of Kate Bosse-Griffiths, the first honorary curator of the Wellcome Collection in Swansea, including her transcribed daybooks, and finished with a fascinating black and white film of the Swansea collection in 1976, narrated by Gwyn Griffiths.

Fig. 1: Historical Medical Exhibition cover (© Wellcome Collection)

Week 2: Highlights of the Egypt Centre

Ken chose twenty objects from the Thirty Highlights of the Egypt Centre booklet, ten from each gallery. As well as describing the object and its history, for most of them we also saw 3D models of the objects, and where there were inscriptions, translations of these. Among the interesting points which arose, we heard that W1013, the mummified foetus, may not in fact be genuine. It is possible that it is a Victorian fake, particularly because of the rather “fresh” layer of paint and the pseudo-hieroglyphs. On the other hand, a genuine cartonnage may have been repainted in Victorian times. It is not unknown for Victorians to have turned deceased babies into fake Egyptian mummies to sell! A Raman Spectrometer scan could determine whether this is genuine or not, and this might be possible as Swansea University has the equipment. Another favourite object has a more modern provenance: the miniature prayer book AR50/3540 containing chapters from the Quran is probably from the nineteenth century, possibly the early twentieth century (fig. 2). During the First World War, the British army distributed such prayer books to Egyptian soldiers serving in the British army. It was excavated at Armant in the 1930s by the Egypt Exploration Society. Various other pieces were matched up with items in other collections, particularly ones which were divided up when Wellcome’s collection was dispersed. Some of these could be re-united for special exhibitions in the future.

Fig. 2: Miniture prayer book

Week 3: The House of Death

Ken gave us a virtual tour around the gallery, with a view of each case, and then analysis of one or two objects (a total of twenty-two): utilising a combination of photos, descriptions, and 3D models. These were items not featured last week; some of which one might easily pass by without a second thought. One example of this is W2037C/b2; a small faience amulet of Bes, which was one of over one hundred objects donated to the Egypt Centre in 1983 by Cardiff Museum. It is of particular interest as it has two colours on it: a blue background with applied decoration in pale green (fig. 3). What is more, a 3D printout has been made, with the hope that eventually the mummification activity can use such replicas of amulets in our own collection. Another small and easily missed object is W760, a wooden shabti of the scribe Nedjem. It is one of the earliest shabtis we have, dating from the Eighteenth Dynasty. At this period, it was common for the deceased to have just one shabti with them in the tomb, so each one is all the more special. There are traces of gilding on the face, hands, and lappets of the wig. Other items included the first object to be published from our collection, in 1973 (W549, a Greek mummy label); AB129, a fragment of an ancestor stela, one of only around ninety known; a Fayum portrait, which seems to be composed of two (or possibly three) pieces of different faces stuck together (W646), and a canopic jar belonging to a person called Psamtek (W498). From stelae in other collections belonging to Psamtek, we know his dates of birth and death, and that the embalming process took thirty-two days (not the usual seventy)!

Fig. 3: Bes amulet

Week 4: The House of Life

Following a similar format to week three, we studied twenty-five objects in this gallery. One of the earliest items was W415, a pottery vessel from the Naqada II Period with a unique decoration of antelope-type animals around the body of the pot and a net decoration around the neck. We also saw a delightful fired clay horse figurine from Cyprus, W229a, which would have been part of a chariot model. This is another good candidate for 3D printing. EC2018 is a model faience scribal palette, which is possibly the rarest object we have as it is the only known depiction of the Third Intermediate Period pharaoh Djehutiemhat (fig. 4). W2044c is a pottery spindle bottle, imported into Egypt in the Eighteenth Dynasty from Cyprus or the Levant. It is a type of pottery known as Red Lustrous Wheelmade (RLWM) ware, and probably used for transporting oil of some sort. It is unique in having a hieroglyphic inscription on it, but this could have been added later. W157 is a beautiful fragment of a limestone double statue from the Ramesside period. The depiction of folds of cloth is particularly fine. Although we only have part of the man, we can see the woman’s hand on his shoulder and part of her inscription on the back. We do not have any names, but the combination of titles given would suggest the man is an important official, such as a vizier. EC2002 is a carnelian scarab ring dating from the fourth century BC. It is Etruscan, and the base of the scarab depicts Heracles fighting Cerberus. It is yet another example of the links between Egypt and its neighbours, with Egyptian symbols being adopted all over the Mediterranean and Near East.

Fig. 4: Model scribal palette of Djehutiemhat

Week 5: Treasures in Storage

Twenty-nine stunning objects, large and small, were packed into the final week of this course. The very first one we saw, W1287, was a rattle made from a small New Kingdom pottery vessel covered with a lid of decorated cartonnage, possibly reused during the Coptic era, and containing some small items which make a sound when shaken. Not many examples of these have been found. A larger piece that struck me was a faience incense holder, EC2042, in the shape of an arm ending in a hand closed into a fist (fig. 5). This arm would be held by the priest/pharaoh, and the fist would hold the incense. It probably dates from the Late Period and possibly comes from Meroe. One other faience example is known and is in a private collection in France. W5295 is part of a large stone statue depicting the body of a Thirteenth Dynasty official. We know this from the typical Middle Kingdom kilt depicted. It is very similar in pose and in dress to the replica of the statue of Senebtyfy (W1012) held in the fakes case (the original is in the British Museum). W304 is a wooden coffin fragment dating from the Middle Kingdom and originating from Deir el-Bersha. It comes from the Berens collection and one aspect that is really fascinating is a note written about it by Randolph Berens on the back of a dinner menu from the Savoy Hotel in Cairo, dated 16^th March 1910. Berens writes that he obtained the piece from a Mr Parvis, a well-known Cairo antiques dealer and furniture maker, who regularly recycled sections of Ancient Egyptian coffins to create his furniture pieces! Other coffin fragments, W1051 and W1055, this time from the Twenty-first Dynasty, join with pieces in Rio de Janeiro, which is very exciting. Perhaps the most beautifully decorated item we saw was a damaged Ptah-Sokar-Osiris figure, W2050, badly affected by woodworm, and currently undergoing conservation in Cardiff. It is finely carved and beautifully embellished with gold leaf on a deep red background. Part of the face has also been found in store, so it can be re-attached. Like many other of the pieces featured this week, Ken hopes that it can eventually be put on display.

Fig. 5: Faience incense holder

It is wonderful to see these artefacts and hear their fascinating histories. Above all, to appreciate the enormous amount of research (primarily by Ken), which has gone into telling their stories. Thank you, Ken!

While this course is now finished, the next one on the Early Dynastic Period will be starting in just a few weeks. Details available via the museum’s Eventbrite page. 

The Amulets Case

This blog post has been written by Wendy Goodridge, the Egypt Centre’s Museum Manager who has worked at the museum since 1997, first as a volunteer. Wendy worked with the Curator Carolyn Graves-Brown and a few other eager volunteers to transform the empty museum spaces into displays highlighting the collection ready for the grand opening in 1998. She was employed at first as a Museum Assistant in 1998, and in 2003 was appointed Assistant Curator. Just a few weeks ago, she was appointed Museum Manager. Wendy took the lead on developing the school programme and spends a lot of her time on museum administration. Wendy is interested in the extraordinary collector Sir Henry Wellcome and her favourite objects in the museum are amulets!

I have thoroughly enjoyed Ken’s course and exploring the Egypt Centre collection. In particular, the best case in the museum – the Amulet case! I will attempt to explain why this case is my favourite!

In 1997 I spent a lot of time sorting through the objects for display with Carolyn, Egyptology consultant Anthony Donohue, who knew the collection exceptionally well, and the designer from the company Silver Knight, who were appointed to design the galleries and cases. As a volunteer and having this amazing opportunity to help set up a brand-new museum, I thought I had died and gone to heaven! The icing on the cake came late one evening. We were working in the old Wellcome Museum in North Arts (now called Kier Hardie) and had been discussing the Gods case for quite a few hours. As Anthony was a ponderer and liked everything to be perfect, we were rapidly running out of time to make the deadline before the grand opening. Anthony had to delegate some cases and went into the back room and produced a Sainsbury’s carrier bag and handed it to me explaining he needed me to research the contents and finish the Amulets case. I slowly opened the bag and gazed in wonder at the assortment of amulets!

For the next few weeks, Amulets of Ancient Egypt by Carol Andrews, and Petrie’s Amulets became my constant companions as I ploughed through the carrier bag! Following on from this literature, I decided to theme the amulets into the following subsections: human-headed gods, animal-headed gods, animal gods, amulets of assimilation, amulets of powers, amulets of offerings, possession, and property, and protective amulets. I proceeded to research and write labels, pin each small amulet safely to the back board (very scary at times!) and write an information booklet to accompany the display. My favourite part of the case design was arranging the wadjet eyes in the shape on an eye! The Amulets case, twenty-five years later, is largely the same design, although I really would love to have a new case with clear stands and a ‘floating amulet’ effect rather than amulets pinned to the board (fig. 1).

Fig. 1: The Amulets case

All went well and the museum was ready for the grand opening in September 1998. The Amulets case was well-used by schools as part of the hands-on mummification activity as children practiced placing replica amulets in the correct place on the dummy mummy! However, in 2001 we received a phone call from the VC’s office to say the person who had loaned a collection of amulets for the launch of the museum would like their nineteen amulets returned! Sadly, the collection to be returned comprised some of the more important pieces on display and I admit I did cry while I was taking them off display!

However, not all was lost, Dr Kasia Szpakowska, Egyptology lecturer at the Dept of Classics, Ancient History, and Egyptology, suggested asking the British Museum for a loan to replace them. So, on 2^nd October 2001, I wrote to Vivian Davies, Keeper of Egyptian Antiquities, who asked Dr John Taylor to arrange a suitable loan. Carolyn and I very excitedly went along to the British Museum to meet John who showed us around the vast stores, whilst making suggestions to fill gaps in our amulet collection. I did feel like a kid in a sweet shop especially when John asked if we wanted other objects too! I asked if we could have things connected with food and drink and costume as new activities had been introduced for schools. It was agreed we could have forty-two objects on long-term loan, for which we had a special launch and published a booklet (Goodridge & Williams 2005) to accompany the loan (fig. 2). The amulet case is the reason why the majority of items were amulets. As there are many amulets in the case, I will highlight one or two from each subsection.

Fig. 2: British Museum booklet

Amulets are an expression of the ancient Egyptians’ belief in magic/heka. They are a charm or talisman to give the wearer power, capabilities, or protection by magical means. The ancient Egyptian word for amulet was meket, nehet or, sa or wedja. The first three mean to guard or protect, and the last means well-being.

The living wore amulets for magical power or protection, while the dead had them wrapped up in their mummification bandages or laid on the outer surface to protect and aid them on the journey to the afterlife. Sometimes amulets were drawn on the bandages themselves, which in turn became protective amulets. Some amulets, such as the Four Sons of Horus and Anubis were particularly used for mummies, but other amulets, such as Bes and Taweret, could also be worn in life. Even a drawing of an amulet on linen, papyrus, or painted on a coffin would become endowed with the magical power of the amulet. For example, the Coffin Texts and Book of the Dead were placed in the tomb or in the compartment of a Ptah-Sokar-Osiris figure. Amulets drawn on the skin and licked off meant the magical essence of the amulet would then be taken into the body for a more powerful effect!

We know a bit about the different amulets and their intended use from spells in the Pyramid Texts, Coffin Texts and Book of the Dead. There is a list of amulets on a doorway in a room dedicated to Osiris on the roof of the Ptolemaic temple to Hathor at Dendera. Some Late Dynastic funerary papyri show how amulets were placed on mummies and where a particular amulet is placed on the body was important. However, there is a dilemma! Amulet positions were not always recorded when mummies were unwrapped. However, X-rays and modern techniques are helping to establish that New Kingdom mummies, and up until the Ptolemaic period, the positioning of amulets on the body appears to follow a certain pattern. After this period, they are more randomly scattered.

Amulets occur as early as Predynastic times (c. 5500 BC) and were made of many different types of materials such as stone, metal, glass, or more commonly faience. Very often the material from which the amulets were made was important to their use. For example, the red-coloured carnelian amulets are connected with blood, aggression, energy, and power. Many of the amulets in the case are made out of faience, which was easily moulded into a variety of shapes. It also had a religious significance as it is shiny like the blessed dead and the gods.

Human-headed god amulets were worn to place the wearer under the protection of a particular god or to gain access to their power or characteristic. Wearing a particular amulet depicting a deity showed your patronage and devotion to this particular god, which may be a local god associated to the area where you are from.

Neith (fig. 3) is the most ancient warrior goddess, often referred to as ‘mistress of the bows’ and ‘ruler of the arrows’. Her earliest emblem is a shield with crossed arrows. She is also a creator and mother goddess and was worshipped as the mother to all gods, particularly the crocodile god Sobek. Her cult centre was Sais in the Delta, and the elaterid beetle was her sacred creature. She is depicted as a woman wearing the Red Crown from the Fifth Dynasty (2494–2345 BC), as the most important goddess of Lower Egypt. From the Old Kingdom (2686–2181 BC) she was believed to watch over the deceased Osiris along with Isis, Nephthys, and Serqet. Together, the four goddesses guarded the sides of the coffin (Neith at the east side). They also watched over one of the canopic guardians, the Four Sons of Horus. Neith protected Duamutef while he guarded the stomach of the deceased.

Fig. 3: Amulet of Neith

Animal-headed god amulets were made in the likeness of only a small proportion of the hundreds of gods of Egypt. The Egyptians believed most of their gods could take animal form and some are represented as more than one type of animal. For example, Thoth could take the form of an ibis or baboon.

Horus the Elder is an ancient falcon-headed creator god whose eyes were the sun and moon and who battled with Seth for 80 years. EA54222 (fig. 4) depicts him wearing a shendyt kilt, the Double Crown, and the body of a man. This type of amulet first appeared only in royal burials, while crowned falcon-type amulets were seen in non-royal graves as early as the Middle Kingdom (2055–1650 BC). Horus the Elder would protect the wearer against the evil god Seth.

Fig. 4: Amulet of Horus the Elder

 

Animal gods. The worship of deities in the guise of animals survived in Egypt for thousands of years. The abundance of sacred animals found shows how important and well thought of they were.

The vulture was the manifestation of the goddess Nekhbet who was a protective mother goddess of Upper Egypt. The earliest standing vulture amulets were found in late Old Kingdom burials (2686–2181 BC) and were made of ivory, bone, copper, and faience. The goddesses Isis and Hathor were associated with the precious metal gold. An amuletic vulture of gold (fig. 5) was placed around the mummy’s neck during the New Kingdom (1550–1069 BC) and Late Period (747–332 BC). It was connected with Isis and believed to impart her protection. Vultures were a threat to the corpse and the amulet would also serve an apotropaic function protecting the very object of their desire.

Fig. 5: Amulet of a vulture

 

Amulets of Assimilation are Egypt’s earliest form of amulet. Parts of the human body and animals are meant to endow the wearer with the characteristic powers or capabilities of the represented form. For example, an eagle’s feather could endow the wearer with enhanced vision, or a leopard’s claw would provide fleetness of foot. Only part of the creature was sufficient to represent the whole. Amulets representing parts of the human body also act as substitutes in case the real part was damaged or destroyed.

The fly, afef, first appeared in Predynastic burials (before 3100 BC) and was made of stone. Later materials included lapis lazuli, carnelian, faience, glass, and gold. Golden flies were believed to be given to honour individuals for military valour. The ‘order of the golden fly’ was given by the pharaohs of the New Kingdom (1550–1069 BC). We cannot be certain as to the meaning of the fly amulet. Flies may have bestowed the wearer with fertility and persistence or protected them from disease, or even functioned apotropaically to ward off the creature they represented. EA30564 (fig. 6) is a blue-glazed fly that has a cartouche-shaped base inscribed with the name of Amenhotep II (1427–1400 BC).

Fig. 6: Amulet of a fly

 

Amulets in the form of a greyhound-type breed may have been worn to enable the wearer to run fast. In the Graeco-Roman Period (332 BC–AD 395), dog amulets appear depicting the dog in profile with its head turned, which may symbolise a guard dog worn for protection. However, it is also possible that amulets of dogs serve as a reminder of a beloved pet in the afterlife (fig. 7).

Fig. 7: Amulet of a dog

Amulets of Power are objects of authority and power, many of which have royal connections. Their appearance marks the democratisation of funerary religion in Egypt; what had once been available exclusively for royals and their favourites was now available for all.

The White Crown, hedjet, is a symbol of Upper Egypt, the land south of the Delta (fig. 8). It is a tall conical headdress with a bulbous top and is sometimes called Nefer or White Nefer. All amulets found of this type are green in colour, reflecting the close association of nefer with the colour green. The amulet is meant to infuse the wearer with the authority and power associated with the royal crown. Due to democratisation of funerary religion in Egypt, amulets in the form of royal regalia were not exclusive to royalty and their favoured subjects.

Fig. 8: Amulet of the White Crown

Amulets of Offerings, Possession, and Property represent possessions of the living, which were taken to the tomb for use in the afterlife. Funerary goods and food offerings were made in amulet form in case these items were destroyed, stolen, or not presented and could act as magical substitutes. It didn’t matter how small they were as they were representations of the real thing.

Instead of pillows, the Egyptians used headrests of wood or stone, which were placed in the tomb for use in the afterlife and have been found in tombs from the beginning of the Old Kingdom (2686–2181 BC). Usually, they consist of a curved upper piece on which the head rested, mounted on a pillar and set in a supporting base. The importance of the headrest is shown by the fact that even the poorest graves at Giza had a brick or rough stone block beneath the head of the dead person. Headrest amulets (fig. 9) are found only in royal tombs from the Eighteenth Dynasty (1550–1295 BC) until the Late Period (747–332 BC) when they are more commonly used. Most amulets are made of dark stone but some red, blue, and green amulets, colours associated with regeneration, have been found. The headrest is a symbol of rebirth and was connected with the sun, which like the head was lowered in the evening and arose in the day. The headrest also represents the hieroglyph for the sun in the horizon. This amulet may have been used as a substitute, but it is also mentioned in the Coffin Texts and Chapter 166 of the Book of the Dead, which states the headrest provides physical comfort and protects the deceased from being decapitated!

Fig. 9: Headrest amulet

Protective amulets were worn to offer the wearer protection and good luck in life as well as death.

The Girdle of Isis (also known as a ‘tie’ or ‘tit’ amulet) is closely connected with the Osiris myth and was worn in life as well as death (fig. 10). It is mentioned in Chapter 156 of the Book of the Dead and was to be made of red jasper, the colour of the blood of the goddess. If this amulet was placed on the neck of the mummy, “the power of Isis will be the protection of his body”. This may represent a cloth worn by women during menstruation. Such amulets date from the New Kingdom onward.

Fig. 10: Girdle of Isis

Lastly, we come to my all-time favourite object in the case, the heart scarab of Padiamun (W233). The heart scarab was meant to ensure the heart was “good and true of voice” in order to pass the weighing of the heart and to allow the deceased an afterlife. The Egyptians believed they would be held accountable in the afterlife, being judged before Osiris for any bad actions in this world. They worried the heart would fail the test. To counter this, the heart scarab was inscribed with Chapter 30B of the Book of the Dead, which ensures the heart would remain silent and “would not tell lies in the presence of the God” about the owner. The Book of the Dead also specifies the scarab should be made out of a “green stone” (nemehef), but this has not been identified. Examples found have been made from a wide range of green or dark-coloured stones. W223 (fig. 11) was unpierced and placed, not sewn, within the mummy wrappings. It is inscribed with the opening words of spell 30B of the Book of the Dead: ‘Words spoken by the Osiris, Padiamun, true of voice. My heart, he says: my heart of my mother, my fore-heart of my forms, do not stand”. Due to a lack of space, the rest of the chapter has been omitted. The name of the owner is Padiamun, a common name of the Third Intermediate Period.

Fig. 11: Heart scarab of Padiamun

I am sure we all have different favourites, but I do believe that when you spend time researching your very first artefacts this investment becomes imprinted and holds a special place in your heart. This is why, for me, the amulet case is the most wonderful case in the museum!

On behalf of all those who took the five-week course, I want to say a big thank you to Ken for such interesting sessions, encouraging and patiently answering so many questions. Additionally, to Sam Powell who co-hosted and worked very hard to ensure the sessions ran smoothly. We look forward to the next one!

Bibliography:

Andrews, Carol 1994. Amulets of ancient Egypt. London: British Museum Press.

Goodridge, Wendy R. & Stuart J. Williams 2005. Offerings from The British Museum. Swansea: The Egypt Centre.

Petrie, W. M. Flinders 1914. Amulets: illustrated by the Egyptian collection in University College, London. London: Constable.