Comments on: Covering the mummies

By: lara

lara — Mon, 21 Sep 2009 22:34:46 +0000

hello i just want to say i really enjoyed the exhibits.
some people may not like them and find them disrespectful. i think its nice to see, so fascinating! i dont think couples and people who were buried together should be split up though. and unwrap a few of them, so we can observe more and learn more. but i think most should be kept wrapped and preserved. excellent and also excellent that photography is allowed.

lara x

By: Joseph

Joseph — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 21:32:58 +0000

I think this is a good move personally.

The public display of Mummies is utterly disrespectful to the mummies themselves. Some of these mummies were gods and what is most important, people! Not only do we have the permission to take all their goods out of their tombs but we even go as far as to unwrap them and display them out like a carnivals “wonder of the world”. Through our chase for knowledge of the glorious Egyptian people, we forget that in the process we are spitting on their entire ideas of afterlife, and at how they perceived the world. One will never learn anything about a people, if you cant put yourself on their level. And on their level they would not want to be put on display, its messing with their afterlife.

Think about it. What if Pope John Paul II or JFK or Gandhi somehow managed to be mummified and was displayed in a glass case for everyone to see. There would be an absolute uproar. Just because someone is 3000 years older doesn’t make it any less wrong.

Without respect there can be no understanding.
You might be able to understand the process of mummification in the way we treat mummies now but you wont quite be able to understand their unique view of the world, which is much more important.

By: Adam and Keeli Cadwell

Adam and Keeli Cadwell — Wed, 01 Apr 2009 17:10:45 +0000

In response to Lisa:
We are fully aware of the intentions ancient Egyptians had in mummifying their dead. And mummification didn’t take place so a “dead person would be recognised by Anubis at the weighing of the heart ceremony.” The body needed to remain intact so that the ka and ba could also recognize the body, and after death, life continues, thus the need for an whole body and things like ka statues; it’s the only way one could receive spiritual sustenance. It was your link to the earthly plane. To the ancient Egyptians, the body was just as important as anything else that made up their being. What we are implying is that people know the individual, by name, and by appearance, thus giving them immortality. Without a name, you don’t exist. Why do you suppose the ancient Egyptians had an obsession with the proliferation of their names?
And yes, “even the Victorians wouldn’t be so abashed” is in reference to how silly the whole notion is. Surely you are aware that the ancient Egyptians weren’t exactly what one would call “prudish,” hence our comments on applying 21st century standards of decency to an ancient person with different cultural norms. The ghastly things Victorians did to ancient Egyptian mummies is completely irrelevant to the statement, although I guess the sentiment of the statement wasn’t so clear to you.
And as for you pointing out Weston Park Museum’s wonderful scientific approach – the last time I checked, Djedma’atiuesankh was standing up instead of laying down against advice on preservation, and there had been visible damage done to her cartonnage since the renovation, and I (Adam) would know because I spent ages staring at the coffin to translate the text for the museum. Maybe that has changed since I visited, but I doubt it. And scans may be able to tell you about the individual during life, but does it give you a real appreciation for those who had a skill in preserving people in death? Djedma’at has never been completely unwrapped, however, we are not suggesting for one minute to do so and put her on display. What we are suggesting is that already unwrapped mummies should be on display in order for visitors to gain a true appreciation for the skills of embalming, and actually being able to see the features of a once living human being, thus giving more impact to the encounter. We are pleased to see Manchester Museum has come to some sort of reasonable arrangement.
I hope that clears things up for you.

By: Lisa

Lisa — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 18:09:13 +0000

I would like to respond to Adam and Keeli Cadwells statement that ‘in displaying mummies we are providing the individual what they wanted to achieve in death’ (to be known and recognized and never forgotten). Actually, the purpose of mummification was to preserve the body as close to what it had been in life so that the dead person would be recognised by Anubis at the weighing of the heart ceremony and would ultimately be able to life forever in the aterlife with Osiris etc etc. Ancient Egyptians believed in an afterlife just like many religions today hold the belief that there is something after death. I very much doubt that Ancient Egyptians thought for one second that thousands of years later they would be in glass cases being stared at. Also, Adam and Keeli, you talk about how ‘even the Victorians weren’t so abashed’ do you know that it was the Victorians who had ‘mummy unwrapping parties and used the exposed body as kindling?

You do not need to show a body for it to be educational. The scans of the mummies at Weston Park Museum which were displayed next to the case (before the redevelopment) showed far more about how they had lived and died that could be gleaned from just exposing the body.

Tsk tsk..

By: Andrew Baxter

Andrew Baxter — Wed, 25 Feb 2009 00:04:42 +0000

P.S. My donation at the entry/exit would have been less if I had known about this.

By: Andrew Baxter

Andrew Baxter — Tue, 24 Feb 2009 23:46:38 +0000

I visited the museum a few years ago when my son who would have been around 8 years old at the time was being taught about ancient Egypt and we saw the unwrapped mummy of Asru.

We visited again a week ago and saw the mummy covered in some kind of sheet.

I thought at the time, “I can’t remember this last time we visited” and presumed it was some kind of measure to preserve the specimen.

However, having visited the site this evening and realised that it is some sort of “respect” issue… the mind boggles.

If that is the problem, take the mummy from the museum and re-inter it where it was found.

Either leave a person to RIP or display them for all to see in a museum… displaying their body in a museum but covering the parts between their chin and their toes is hardly “respect”.

Get a grip.

By: Jean S

Jean S — Sat, 13 Dec 2008 11:56:12 +0000

I was also in favour of displaying mummies to the general public -until i went to the Cairo Museum – as other posters have noted – people giggle and laugh, make rude remarks, some let their chidren run up and down shouting at the top of their voices, people knock on the glass and so on. I can’t go into the mummy room anymore – the sight of rulers such as Rameses II and his father Seti I being gawked at and laughed at turns my stomach.
But if they have to be displayed, cover them as has been done at the Cairo museum – and leave just their faces and extremities for the curious to gawk at.
I agree with Nicole Hansen – they need to be returned to their tombs – stripped of their valuables as they are they would probably be left in peace.

By: STEPHANIE

STEPHANIE — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 03:53:39 +0000

UHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!?????????????????

By: bernard mcauliffe

bernard mcauliffe — Sat, 13 Sep 2008 15:02:28 +0000

I have only recently become aware of this controversy after reading an article in” Ancient Egypt”, having looked arround the mummey room at the Cairo museum it sadend me to see these ancient kings who where responsible for some of the most beautiful art and architecture striped of there dignity by the cold hand of academia. There friends and children mourned them as we mourn our loved ones, let them rest in peace, without all and sundry gawping at them. B Mc Auliffe.

By: Bob Partridge

Bob Partridge — Sat, 23 Aug 2008 11:23:06 +0000

OK… my final post on this subject (!)

I do understand the problems with Asru and it is nice to be able to see her again, which I did yesterday.

The covering still looks a little odd to my mind and it took me a while to work out why.

I don’t know what sort of material is used to cover Asru (is it linen?) but is just looks too new and does not fit. The Egyptian Museum in Cairo faced the same problem when redisplaying the royal mummies (which also have mainly just heads and feet exposed) and they decided to use some some antique linen, which does look a lot better.

Perhaps when the gallery is redisplayed and Asru needs to be moved, the opportunity could be taken to find some suitable linen, which hopefully the musem will have in its reserve collection.

And finally, perhaps when the new gallery has been finished, the Museum might like to consider a guide book, or some publication on the collection, which is really long overdue.