In Salima Ikram’s article, Some Thoughts on the
Mummification of King Tutankhmun, she looks at the ways in which King Tut’s
burial and mummification process differed from other kings, and what this might
mean. Anomolies in King Tut’s tomb
include, the excessive amounts of resin placed on the body, the abnormal
placement of the hands, missing ribs (possibly taken by Carter), and his
mummified erect penis ( Ikram, 293-95). Additionally, scans of Tutankhmun’s
body has revealed that his heart was removed, while his diaphragm is intact
(typically it is cut through to reach the lung, (Ikram, 296). These findings
are interesting as the lacerations on the body are consistent with an embalming
process, but the chest was apparently wide open, leading Ikram to ask, “why
bother?” (Ikram 296).
Ikram notes
that the removal of the heart is strange, as it is a key part of the
resurrection process (296). Often a
scarab would be placed beside the body as well as a way of providing safe
passage to the afterlife; however, this grave good is absent as well.
The main discussion in Ikram’s
article surrounding these anomalies suggests that, rather than a series of
unfortunate mishaps, the strange way in which tut was buried and mummified, was
part of a theological process (298). The central theory in the article is that
the mummification process was to personify him as Osiris. Egyptologists believe that for most kings, the
living king was Horus and the dead, Osiris, this is seen in many tombs as a
king being offered up to Osiris (Ikram, 298).
 |
| Osiris |
However this seems to be
emphasized more in Tut’s tomb, and tut is portrayed as the embodiment of him
(Ikram 298). Ikram attempts to explain the abnormalities in Tut’s grave as signals
to this. For example, the excessive resin (which is black in colour) could be homage
to Osiris as the lord of the Egyptian land, “dark with the rich soil of the
inundation, and the source of fertility and regeneration” (Ikram, 299).
Essentially, the purposeful mummification differences Tut experienced are
possibly part of his deification to Osiris.
Ikram’s article raises many
questions about a subject that is difficult to track. Ikram makes a point to
consistently label the evidence as theory and not fact. With that said Ikram
seems to dismiss many claims that Carter’s original research may have had
flaws. Nevertheless, that we are still able to pose new ideas about a
discovery made 92 years ago speaks to the complexity of the tomb.
N.d. File:Osiris-tomb-of-Nefertari. Web. 28 Mar. 2014.
<http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Osiris-tomb-of-Nefertari.jpg>.
No comments:
Post a Comment