Diepholz mummy

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Diepholz mummy was found at the end of July 2013 during renovation work in an attic in Diepholz , Lower Saxony , and sparked media interest across Germany in the following months. While its sarcophagus and the additions could be identified as modern Egyptian pieces , probably created around 1950, shortly after their discovery , it was initially unclear whether the mummy itself was of ancient Egyptian origin or whether it was a modern forgery. At the end of September, the mummy was opened, and the alleged corpse turned out to be a prepared plastic skeleton, which, however, was combined with a real human skull.

discovery

The "mummy" was found at the end of July 2013 by the ten-year-old son of a Diepholz dentist in his grandmother's house. As a result of repair work on the roof, an area in the attic had been cleared in which the boy came across three boxes that had previously gone unnoticed for decades. When the boxes were opened, a wooden sarcophagus was found in the largest , and a death mask and a jug in the two smaller ones . Inside the sarcophagus was a six-foot-tall, bandaged human-like mummy with arms crossed over her chest.

examination

Shortly after the discovery became known, the Egyptologist Alexander Schütze , who was working in Munich at the time , expressed doubts about the authenticity of the mummy. He reiterated the finder's suspicion that the sarcophagus and additions were of modern origin. He also pointed out that the position of the mummy's arms with folded hands was not typical for any period in ancient Egyptian history. The position and proportions of the upper arms also made him doubt whether there was actually a human body under the bandages.

At the end of August the first examination was carried out by an Egyptologist friend of the finder from the Free University of Berlin . However, since no X-ray examination was possible at this time , it had to be limited to superficial examinations. It was confirmed that the mummy was made in the 20th century, as its bandages could be identified as machine-woven linen. It was impossible to remove the bandages without damaging the mummy.

An examination using computed tomography on August 29 in Diepholz yielded further findings . If the finder had previously considered the possibility that the mummy could only be a doll, now apparently human bones were shown under the bandages. The mummy had a human skull with the lower jaw down. Around her forehead she wore a metallic band that at the time was believed to be made of gold . An arrowhead was discovered in the left eye socket . The cervical spine was missing. The bones of the rib cage and hips appeared to be squeezed together and were only blurred on the CT scans, which indicated that they had been treated with a metallic material. The back of the mummy was fixed on a wooden board, on which the examining radiologist thought he saw a painting with hieroglyphics .

The head of the Institute for Mummies at the European Academy of Bolzano, Albert Zink, and the deputy director of the East Frisian State Museum in Emden, Wolfgang Jahn , expressed doubts about the Egyptian origin of the mummy on the basis of the CT images. According to them, the headdress and the metal objects in the trunk area are atypical for the ancient Egyptian mummification practice. Their main indication, however, was the arrowhead, which they identified as a type that was used from the 6th century AD throughout Europe and in the Arab world, but not in Egypt.

On September 4, it became known that the public prosecutor's office in Verden had opened a death investigation to clarify the age and cause of death of the mummy. The examinations are to be carried out by forensic medicine in Hamburg . The publication of the first results was initially announced for mid-October, but after the mummy bandages were opened, a first report was submitted on September 25th. According to the Verden prosecutor Lutz Gaebel, the removal of the bandages showed that only the skull actually came from a person. In contrast, the objects in the chest area were not human bones, but plastic bones. The mummy also contained filling material such as kitchen paper . The suspicion expressed after the CT examination that the supposed bones in the chest area had been treated with an as yet unidentified substance was confirmed by the public prosecutor's office. The arrowhead, initially regarded as early medieval, turned out to be a children's toy. The supposed headband was also just a metal-containing adhesive tape. Only the skull should be subjected to further final examinations, but according to Gaebel it is very likely that it is a preparation skull, as it is used in medical training.

origin

The finder suspects that his father, who has now died, acquired the mummy on a trip to North Africa. As a student, he visited a friend in the Libyan city ​​of Darna in the 1950s . However, the exact details of the trip and the acquisition of the mummy are unknown. At least no large sums of money could have been spent on the acquisition and transport, as the finder's father only had modest financial means during his studies.

According to a statement made by the Egyptologist Regine Schulz , director of the Roemer and Pelizaeus Museum in Hildesheim , at the beginning of August, this theory of origin could well be plausible. Until the 1950s, it was common practice in Egypt to improve ancient Egyptian mummies for the European market and also to assemble parts of different mummies into a whole. Occasionally, as with the Persian mummy , forgeries are made with dead people from modern times.

Prosecutor Lutz Gaebel expressed a completely different assumption when the first examination results of Hamburg forensic medicine were announced on September 25th: In view of the skull, which was probably used as a teaching specimen, he believes it is possible that the production of the complete mummy was merely a student joke .

In a post on bild.de on October 10th, the assumption was made that the finder Kettler could have made the mummy himself in a workshop directly adjacent to his dental practice. The finder denied these allegations.

Reactions

The cultural council of the Egyptian embassy in Germany, Mamdouh Eldamaty, considered it very likely shortly after the discovery became known that the actual corpse was actually an ancient Egyptian mummy. He assumed that she had come to Germany illegally in the 1950s and spoke out in favor of her return to Egypt. Eldamaty still considered it possible, based on the arrowhead found and the presumably golden headband, which was only worn by high-ranking personalities, that the deceased was a murdered prince.

A few days after the publication of the CT examinations, pre-astronautics author Erich von Däniken spoke up and claimed that the mummy was a hybrid of humans and animals created by aliens .

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ Mysterious attic find: Diepholz mummy turns out to be a plastic skeleton. Spiegel Online , September 25, 2013, accessed on 25 September 2013 .
  2. ↑ Eberhard Jansen: Enigmatic Mummy: Authenticity put to the test. Kreiszeitung.de, July 31, 2013, accessed on September 11, 2013 .
  3. ^ Sybille Möckl: Mummy find in the attic. Senseless hieroglyphs: Egyptologist doubts the authenticity of Diepholz's mummy. Focus Online , August 2, 2013, accessed September 27, 2013 .
  4. ↑ a b murder or ritual? Mummy boy with arrow in his head. Kreiszeitung.de, August 31, 2013, accessed on September 11, 2013 .
  5. ↑ Holger Bloethe: Diepholzer Mummy. Ötzi expert is faced with a puzzle. The arrow comes from the Middle Ages. bild.de , September 11, 2013, accessed on September 13, 2013 .
  6. ↑ Rainer Leurs: Mysterious attic find: Diepholz mummy is autopsied. Spiegel Online , September 4, 2013, accessed September 11, 2013 .
  7. ↑ Mummy from the attic: real skull with plastic bones. (No longer available online.) Nachrichten.de, September 25, 2013, archived from the original on September 29, 2013 ; Retrieved September 25, 2013 . Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.nachrichten.de
  8. ↑ The "Curse of the Mummy". The attic mummy is made of plastic. orf.at, September 25, 2013, accessed on September 25, 2013 .
  9. ↑ A. Pauly, M. von Schade and K. Wolf: So all of Germany was glued. The truth about the mummy from the attic. bild.de , October 9, 2013, accessed on October 23, 2013 .
  10. ↑ Hendrik Ternieden: Mummy find in Diepholzer attic: "Doesn't look like the shop around the corner". Spiegel Online , August 2, 2013, accessed September 11, 2013 .
  11. ↑ Sarcophagus find in Diepholz. Mummy pieced together from several corpses? Focus Online , August 7, 2013, accessed September 11, 2013 .
  12. ↑ Martin Sommer: Diepholzer Mummy poses new riddles: Student gag or souvenir? Children's arrow, plastic bones and a real skull. Kreiszeitung.de, September 25, 2013, accessed on October 23, 2013 .
  13. ↑ In the dentist's workshop. Was the mummy assembled here? bild.de , October 10, 2013, accessed on October 23, 2013 .
  14. ↑ Chantal Schäfer: Illegal in Germany? Does the mummy from the attic have to go back to Egypt now? bild.de , August 6, 2013, accessed on September 11, 2013 .
  15. ↑ M. v. Schade, K. Wolf, C. Schäfer, T. Winterstein: The children's mummy from the attic. Erich von Däniken sure: "It is a hybrid". bild.de , August 5, 2013, accessed on September 11, 2013 .