The Egyptian Mummies and Coffins of the Denver Museum of Nature & Science

Michele L. Koons and Caroline Arbuckle MacLeod, eds., The Egyptian Mummies and Coffins of the Denver Museum of Nature & Science (Louisville: University Press of Colorado, 2021). 9781646421367.

Reviewed by Sarah E. Wenner, Cincinnati Art Museum, sarah.wenner@cincyart.org.

In the introduction to this small but fantastically detailed collection of papers about the Egyptian mummies and coffins at the Denver Museum of Nature & Science (DMNS), Michele Koons states that the book’s goal is to provide “a guide for other institutions or individuals who wish to perform holistic studies on extant museum collections” (p. 4). To say that they succeeded in doing so is an understatement. As a curatorial fellow at the Cincinnati Art Museum, I mined their book for approaches to the mummified human remains and coffins that we steward. I finished this review of their book with not only clarity about a period in which I am not an expert (as a Roman archaeologist from a Classics department) but also a realistic path forward in my own museum research and interpretation.

The Egyptian Mummies and Coffins of the Denver Museum of Nature & Sciences investigates five mummies and coffins that had been standing ready “to tell and retell their stories” (p. 3) since the Denver Museum of Nature & Science began its stewardship in the 1970–80s. The project originated in 2016 when the editors and their collaborators found themselves with an unusual opportunity following the temporary closure of the gallery for renovation. The closure allowed the mummies and coffins to be transported to the museum’s conservation center for treatment, after which additional analyses were undertaken at Children’s Hospital Colorado. A note before proceeding: the authors and editors use “mummies” throughout. While I find myself increasingly more comfortable with the term “mummified human remains,” I follow their lead within this review, not in the least because it is more concise—a concern they most assuredly shared as editors. I also note that the book is careful to recognize the humanity of the mummified individuals, never accidentally implying that they are objects or art rather than people. 

The first chapter, authored by Koons, introduces the mummified remains of two women, two complete coffins, and a third lid that were removed from Cairo in the early 1900s and are now on permanent loan from the Rosemount Museum in Pueblo, Colorado.

Chapter two is a thorough review of the provenance information, along with color photography of the individuals and objects in question. Koons and Arbuckle MacLeod trace their itineraries—from Cairo to the McClelland library in Pueblo to the John A. Thatcher residence (a.k.a. the Rosemount)—and provide the various names given to the individuals (the most eye-catching of which were “Porgy” and “Mes”). They end the chapter with a review of the 2016 radiocarbon dating that proved neither of the female occupants belongs with the coffin with which she is now associated. The first mummy (EX1997-24.1) was around thirty years old at her death and was mummified during the Third Intermediate Period (likely the Twenty-Second Dynasty). Her coffin (EX1997-24.2), too large for her five-foot-tall frame, was originally intended for a man named Mes or Mose sometime in the Twenty-Fifth Dynasty, and the authors helpfully include an early twentieth-century Italian expedition photo of the coffin in the reused tomb of Khaemwaset, Valley of the Queens. It remains unclear if the coffin’s original occupant was replaced in antiquity, in the early twentieth century, or sometime after. The second mummy (1997-24.3) was also around thirty years of age when she died in the Late Period or the Ptolemaic period, when the practice of mummification was on the decline. Her coffin (1997-24.4) likely dates to the Twenty-First or Twenty-Second Dynasty, approximately 600 years before she lived. As with the first mummy, it is also unclear when the Late/Ptolemaic Period mummy was placed in the older coffin. The final coffin lid belonged to Ankhefenkhonsu, a Twenty-First Dynasty priest of Amun at Karnak. The authors only provide a single-paragraph description of this object before closing the chapter with a brief, diachronic overview of ancient Egyptian mummification practices and coffin manufacturing that lays the foundations for the book’s later observations.

Chapter three reviews the thirty-four-year history of conservation treatments at the DMNS that guided the 2016 team in their conservation and stabilization efforts. Southward and Fletcher are forthcoming about the challenges they faced due to the location of the exhibition in an area without humidity control. While the team notes that previous conservators made the best decisions available to them at the time, their honesty about the conditions should be lauded as there are certainly other institutions that face similar situations.

Chapter four discusses the use of paleoradiography on mummified remains in the field of Egyptology as a whole and on the mummies stewarded by the DMNS before discussing the most recent findings. In the eighteen years between the previous scans and the 2016 analysis, significant advances were made in CT scanner technology. Both mummies were scanned using at least three different methods and several times at that. EX1997-24.1 was found to be approximately four feet nine inches tall, between thirty and thirty-five years of age at her death, and with significant wear on her teeth, likely due to the amount of sand she ingested with her food. Perhaps of more interest, though, is the result of the semiautomatic segmentation that the team used to identify the objects within EX1997-24.1’s wrappings—including low density figurines, likely made of wax and representing the Four Sons of Horus. The figurines identified the woman’s desiccated organs, which had been removed through the left side of her stomach, wrapped in linen, and reinserted. The color photographs included of the figurines and other scans clearly illustrate the results for non-specialists, while the chart of Hounsfield units is surely useful for paleoradiography experts. Unlike EX1997-24.1, whose mummification process was traced almost completely, EX1997-24.3’s findings were complicated due to the mummy’s comparatively poor condition. The scan revealed that she had been approximately five feet tall, between thirty and forty years at the time of her death and that her internal organs had not been removed during the mummification process. With the results of the two sets of scans, the authors were able to put to bed the previous interpretations of EX1997-24.1 and EX1997-24.3 as the “Rich Mummy” and the “Poor Mummy,” respectively, instead noting that the differences in mummification resulted from the different burial practices during the periods in which they died.

In Chapter five, Caroline Arbuckle MacLeod combines results from a CT scan, takeaways from the subsequent four chapters, and her own visual analysis to author one of the most comprehensive and compelling contributions. The author explains that during the period in which coffin EX1997-24.4 was constructed, the Third Intermediate Period, economic pressures made the reuse of funerary materials more common. As Egyptian consumers and manufacturers understood burials were unlikely to remain untouched for all eternity, attention was instead given to the detailed decoration that masked “rushed work” (p. 75). Arbuckle MacLeod explains that craftspeople lightly reshaped sycamore timber that was likely harvested a hundred years prior for the creation of coffin EX1997-24.4. Fragments of the harder acacia wood, preferable for joint work, were then employed as dowels. Arbuckle MacLeod then escorts readers through the manufacturer’s construction process, reinserting the ancient carpenter, their tools, and even their movements into the coffin’s history. Her argument that competent craftspeople, not inexperienced apprentices, constructed the coffin is both compelling and returns status to a perhaps falsely maligned object. She notes that the original craftspeople likely labored under the assumption that the coffin would not survive intact for more than a few generations. They chose not to invest excessive labor, especially as the decoration process would mask the wood, allowing the coffin’s owners to undergo the complete religious process and engage in social competition. As in previous chapters, Chapter five’s detailed color photos and diagrams are immensely useful in illustrating the ephemeral but critical steps the craftspeople used to manufacture and decorate the coffin. 

Chapters six, seven, and eight present the results of the wood and pigment analyses through both destructive and non-destructive methods, including dendrochronology, portable X-ray fluorescence, gas chromatography combined with mass spectrometry, and X-ray diffraction. These analyses are presented alongside contextualizing discussions, such as the availability of wood or select colors throughout the periods in question. These chapters include dense scientific analyses primarily aimed at specialists, but the discussions and conclusions present the implications for general readers. 

The final analytical chapter (Chapter nine), authored by Kathryn Howley, Caroline Arbuckle MacLeod, and Pearce Paul Creasman, presents the artistic and textual analyses of the DMNS’s three coffins. When available, the transliteration and translation of the coffin texts are provided. The result is a thorough and readable account of each coffin individually. Moreover, and as the authors so deftly note in the chapter’s conclusion (p. 192), the three together document decoration development across the Third Intermediate Period as trends swung from innovation to archaism and back again. If, in the future, the book’s collaborators knit all the scientific and artistic analyses together and consider the three coffins as an assemblage, albeit one created in the modern era, the result would be an even more comprehensive discussion about how the socio-economic and religious shifts from the Twenty-First to Twenty-Fifth Dynasties were imprinted on Egyptian burial traditions. What is informative alone becomes entirely more powerful in conversation.

The concluding chapter (Chapter ten), authored by the book’s editors, reiterates their original goal of activating their extant collection (p. 197), which they did masterfully. They do not shy away from discussion of the challenges they faced, nor do they assume that their process can be universally applied in every instance. They close with an important reminder of how effective the cooperation between museum professionals and academics can be when all parties collaborate to overcome the challenging circumstances of delicate materials, tight time constraints, and other unforeseen concerns.

The one thing this small but powerful book does not do is reveal if and how this research informed the gallery interpretation and/or educational programming. Museum interpretation is a deceptively difficult art, and based on this new research, the DMNS curators now have several new stories they can present to visitors. These include everything from ancient recycling practices and the connection between the availability of natural resources and religious practices to “post-life” object biographies and ongoing scientific research. An exhibit like that at the DMNS, which will bring forward the field of museum studies and encourage best practices, is a perennial interest to other museum professionals. Moreover, the public, encouraged by mainstream press coverage, seeks more museum transparency, intentionality, and specificity about the ethics of stewarding human remains. A discussion as to how the studies’ results shaped new DMNS narratives may assist other institutions similarly in activating their extant collections. That said, Koons and Arbuckle MacLeod were clear about the volume’s analytical purpose from the start. That I want more from the team, having witnessed how capably and deftly they deal with a complicated and sensitive subject, is perhaps yet another recommendation for this publication.

Michele L. Koons and Caroline Arbuckle MacLeod deserve credit not just for the book but for effectively creating a powerful new subgenre in museum scholarship, one that takes a comprehensive look at a small set of objects and attempts to tell their more complete histories. I very much look forward to seeing other books of a similar type. As the DMNS has shown, mid-sized and regional museums undertake some of the most daring projects. They can be nimble, experimental, and exploratory. I hope the next few decades of museum publications follow the lead of the DMNS, giving the objects worthy of intensive scientific analysis and provenance research their turn in the spotlight. 

Table of Contents

1. Old Friends, New Tales: The Mummies and Coffins of the Denver Museum of Nature & Science / Michele L. Koons (3–12)
2. Contextualizing the Denver Museum of Nature & Science Mummies and Coffins: A History of Research and Exploring New Narratives / Michele L. Koons and Caroline Arbuckle MacLeod (13–34)
3. Understanding the Current Condition of a Group of Egyptian Coffins and Mummies by Examining the Past: A Case Study on Four Decades of Conservation Treatment / Judith A. Southward and Jessica M. Fletcher (35–51)
4. Evolution of Paleoradiology in Colorado: The Experience of Two Egyptian Mummies / Kari L. Hayes, Jason Weinman, Stephen Humphries, David Rubinstein, and Michele L. Koons (52–71)
5. The Creation of a Third Intermediate Period Coffin: Coffin EX1997-24.4 in the Denver Museum of Nature & Science / Caroline Arbuckle MacLeod (72–92)
6. Coffin Timbers and Dendrochronology: The Significance of Wood in Coffins from the Denver Museum of Nature & Science / Caroline Arbuckle MacLeod, Christopher H. Baisan, and Pearce Paul Creasman (93–110)
7. Portable X-Ray Fluorescence (pXRF) Analysis of Egyptian Mortuary Practices: A Case Study / Farrah Cundiff, Bonnie Clark, and Keith Miller (111–38)
8. Considerations in the Technical Analysis of Ancient Egyptian Material Remains: Destructive and Non-Destructive Methods / Robyn Price, Vanessa Muros, and Hans Barnard (139–69)
9. Artistic and Textual Analyses of the Third Intermediate Period Coffins at the Denver Museum of Nature & Science / Kathryn Howley, Caroline Arbuckle MacLeod, and Pearce Paul Creasman (170–96)
10. Final Thoughts: Opportunities and Challenges of Research on Exhibited Objects / Michele L. Koons and Caroline Arbuckle MacLeod (197–200)

Discussion

1. I have seen more and more museums and individuals grapple with the term “mummy” in recent years, but there has been no clear consensus (that I have seen) around embracing or abandoning the term. The book uses the term “mummy.” Did you discuss what term you were going to use? What considerations did you take into account?

Carrie Arbuckle (CA): This is a great question. The debate surrounding whether Egyptologists should continue to use the term “mummy” generally comes down to whether it is dehumanizing or not. Personally, I think the use of the term “mummy” is here to stay as it already has a long history, and because it designates a very specific type of human remains; however, much more education about mummies is necessary for the public. We need to emphasize that mummies are not objects, but the mummified remains of deceased individuals, and need to be treated with the respect that they deserve. We were very conscious about this while working on the book, and a major motivation for the project was to provide more context and history to the mummies housed in the museum, who had been largely disconnected from their original context. We tried to use language that humanized the mummies, and to remind the readers that they are not the same as artefacts. The introduction (Old Friends, New Tales) and Conclusion (Final Thoughts) especially, open and close with a reminder that the approaches in the book are an attempt to reconstruct the histories of the two “women who now reside at the Denver Museum of Nature & Science”. 

Michele Koons (MK): I echo and agree with everything Caroline says. I also would add that the debate over using the term “mummy” is mainly in academic circles and among museum professionals well versed in the historic significance and potential harm of this term. The general public, which is the main audience of the Denver Museum of Nature & Science, is largely unaware of this debate. This book is meant to be academic, but it also is a resource for the Denver community who have come to know and love these individuals. In order for this book to remain accessible to a broad audience, it was necessary for us to use familiar terms alongside respectful, humanizing, and inclusive language.

2. Can you talk a bit about how you assembled your team? Was it difficult to find individuals to perform the various analyses or institutions interested in participating or donating the use of their equipment? Were there any analyses that you had originally intended to perform but were unable to do?

CA: Michele is responsible for assembling the team, and she invited me (Caroline Arbuckle MacLeod) to be both contributing expert and co-editor due to my background as an Egyptologist and experience working with coffins from both an artistic and materials analysis perspective. What immediately enticed me to accept the invitation was the opportunity to work with museum professionals and other experts who understood the need to complete interdisciplinary analyses in an attempt to build as complete a history as possible, while protecting the dignity and integrity of the objects and mummies. 

MK: It was, in fact, very easy to assemble the team of experts responsible for the different book chapters. I think the opportunity to learn more about these women from many angles was exciting and, in many ways, rare. The study came about because the DMNS was repainting and re-carpeting the Egyptian Hall in 2016 and the mummies had to be taken off display and moved into a new conservation lab that has lots of space for analyses. This remodel afforded us to make some necessary changes to the prior narratives in the Hall that were nearly two decades’ old. The chance to work on a project that was to immediately be incorporated into a permanent exhibit at a large museum is unusual and exciting, as was the chance to give new voices to these women who rarely leave display. It was really wonderful to see how so many people across institutions came together to make this work possible. The Hall was only closed for a limited time, so of course more analyses could have been done if we had more time. However, we were also mindful of being as minimally invasive as possible, so this limited some of what was attainable. For example, we thought about Ancient DNA analysis, but ultimately decided that it was too invasive, expensive and would not necessarily yield results.

3. The book beautifully lays out a number of different narratives over the course of ten chapters, but gallery labels are typically fairly short—maybe only 150 words. Did the results of your study change the gallery interpretation? If so, what new narratives do you highlight and how did you decide to tell those stories? What stories did you have to leave on the cutting-room floor?

MK: The results of the various studies were really incredible, and one would need to read the book to truly appreciate all of the new and exciting things that were revealed. However, for the revamp of the gallery, we decided to focus on a new overarching story, which reframed the old narrative that was in the Hall before the remodel. Previously, the women were known as “Rich Mummy” and “Poor Mummy,” since the one mummy has more amulets and was in better condition than the other. This designation was based purely on what was identified within the wrapping of CT scans done in the 1990s and ignored all other historical factors. Along with the updated CT scans, detailed analysis of the coffins and radiocarbon dating allowed us to show that the women were mummified 500 years apart and neither were in their original coffin. Instead of one being rich and the other poor, the story became one of the changes that occurred in mummification practices over time. We also wanted to highlight that coffins were moved around in both the ancient past and in more recent times. Overall, we tried to highlight that by using multiple lines of evidence gathered by numerous techniques—both through instrumental and historical analysis—we can be more holistic in our attempts to understand and interpret the past. Of course, much more could go in the gallery based on what we found—such as the significance behind the different amulets identified in the wrappings, or more on the pigments on and construction of the coffins. If we had more time, money, and space, it would be wonderful to include everything. But, alas, in the world of museums you have to make choices that will hopefully resonate with your audience. Since the DMNS has a lot of repeat visitors and caters mostly to the local general populous, we thought it best to clearly update the old story and take a high-level, synthetic approach to the new story we uncovered; a story that I think is more representative of the lives these women lived and more reflective of the historical and cultural circumstances of how they came to reside in Denver.

4. This book effectively creates a subgenre of museum scholarship, one which tells the stories of a select group of objects from their creation through to the modern day using scientific, historical, and artistic analyses. This kind of deep investigation also reveals how much we still have to learn about objects in museum collections. What do you hope other museums and researchers take away from this book, besides that this type of thorough research is possible?

CA: One element that I hope is understood through this book is how different elements of society are revealed through a holistic analysis of coffins, mummies, and museum artefacts more generally. In this case we learned not only about the mummified individuals, but the original owners of the coffins (who it turns out, were not the mummies), the woodworkers who constructed the objects, the artists who completed their decoration, and the religious beliefs of Egyptian society more generally. This is only possible when each different element is assessed and contextualized, often requiring an interdisciplinary team. In the “Final Thoughts” chapter, we note that it is often difficult to gain complete access to objects in museum collections. While I do agree that objects and mummies need to be protected and respected, I hope that in seeing these types of analyses, museum personnel will understand that minimally invasive studies are worth the minimal impact when they can bring about a much deeper understanding of the objects, the deceased individuals, and the associated societies more broadly. Providing these publications in museum gift shops also provides that additional level of education for the public, who so often are interested in learning more, but who would not know where to start in searching for this information.  

MK: As a museum curator and an active field archaeologist, I am very aware of the tension between ensuring that no harm is done to a collection and allowing the specialists to do their research. I am of a mindset that museums offer incredible opportunities for engaging with collections that can never be created again and that locking these behind closed doors limits the potential of human knowledge. I think a balance can be achieved between analytical research and preservation and that we need to figure out the diversity of ways to do this work—which varies significantly depending on the cultures and materials in question. This volume is one example of keeping an open mind in collaboration and seeing where that can take you. I think this is a valuable lesson for museum professionals, who historically have been more inclined to say “no” to any potentially destructive work. Fortunately, things are changing and today there is increasingly more acceptance of the idea that there are multiple ways of knowing and that accessibility and collaboration can really forward our thinking on how we care for, present, interpret, or even return museum collections. One of the reasons I asked Caroline to co-edit the volume with me is because she is an Egyptologist and I am not and we offer different perspectives. By working together, we were able to highlight the challenges of working with museum collections and exhibit deadlines, as well as highlight the scholarship that can enhance our understanding of the tangible pieces (and in this case mummied human remains) that have been in museums for generations. 

The answers that Arbuckle MacLeod and Koons provide clarify, in a compelling way, the care and sincerity with which they approached their subjects. Their responses to my inquiries reflect the book itself, and implicitly and explicitly return the humanity to the two women stewarded by the DMNS. Part of this success seemingly originates from the interdisciplinary nature of the team that Koons references—herself a museum professional and active field archaeologist, and Arbuckle MacLeod an Egyptologist. With the two ancient women firmly centered, the two modern women successfully negotiated the push and pull between preservation and research, and public curiosity and academic discourse that has the potential to force the different disciplines to opposite sides. That collaboration and the returning of the mummies’ humanity seemingly comes through in the new gallery revamp, which Koons notes follows the overarching story of the book, not the individual study results. The individuals and their coffins are not so much rescued from their old interpretations but allowed to grow into their fuller, more complex histories meant specifically for those DMNS visitors who have loved them for decades.  If that isn’t what people-centered museum narratives, as well as public facing scholarship, are supposed to do, nothing is.