The migrations of early culture: A study of the significance of the geographical distribution of the practice of mummification as evidence of the migrations of peoples and the spread of certain customs and beliefsSmith, Grafton Elliot
History
The migrations of early culture: A study of the significance of the geographical distribution of the practice of mummification as evidence of the migrations of peoples and the spread of certain customs and beliefs
Smith, Grafton Elliot
Ethnology; Human beings -- Migrations; Mummies
independently in different parts of the area of distribution.
“A second mode of treatment is preservation of the body, either in the
house or on a stage often covered with a roof. Some kind of mummification
is usually practised in these cases, by continual rubbing with oil,
drying by means of a fire, and puncture of the body to hasten the
disappearance of the products of decomposition.”
“In some parts of Samoa there is a definite process of embalming in
which the viscera are removed and buried. A body thus treated lies on a
platform resting upon a double canoe, and in many other places a canoe
is used as a receptacle for the body while it is undergoing the process
of mummification” (p. 269). This association of the use of a canoe with
a method of preservation obviously Egyptian in origin naturally provokes
comparison with the use of boats in the Egyptian funeral ceremonies.
An instance is the boat found in the tomb of Amenophis II. (=81=). The
platform is probably a type of bed found elsewhere in the region under
consideration (see, for instance, Roth’s account of the Queensland
sleeping-platform) and represents the bier found so often elsewhere
(_vide supra_). This is in no way inconsistent with Rivers’ view that
“exposure of the dead on platforms is only a survival of preservation in
a house” (p. 273).
Earlier in this memoir I have explained why the Egyptians came to attach
special importance to the head, and how the less cultured people of
Africa, when faced with the difficulties of preserving the body, saved
the skull (or in some cases the jaw). When it is recalled how widespread
this custom is in other parts of the “heliolithic area,” and how
deep-rooted were the ideas which prompted so curious a procedure, Rivers’
independent inference in regard to this matter is fully confirmed. “Many
practices become intelligible as elements of a single culture if we
suppose that a people imbued with the necessity for the preservation
of the body after death acquired ... the further idea that the skull
is the representative of the body as a whole; if they came to believe
that the purpose for which they had hitherto preserved the body could
be fulfilled as well if the head only were kept” (p. 273). This is
unquestionably true: but I dissent from Rivers’ qualification that this
modification happened “perhaps in the course of their wanderings towards
Oceania,” because it has already been seen that it had occurred before
the wanderers set out from the East African coast. There is, of course,
the possibility that Africa may have been influenced by a cultural reflux
from Indonesia, such as has been demonstrated in the case of Madagascar;
but there are reasons for believing that the facts under consideration
cannot be explained in this way.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account