Oxfordhb 9780199686476 e 30 PDF

Animals in ancient Egyptian religion: belief, identity, power, and economy
Oxford Handbooks Online

Animals in ancient Egyptian religion: belief, identity,
power, and economy
Salima Ikram
The Oxford Handbook of Zooarchaeology
Edited by Umberto Albarella, Mauro Rizzetto, Hannah Russ, Kim Vickers, and Sarah Viner-
Daniels
Print Publication Date: Mar 2017

Subject: Archaeology, Scientific Archaeology, Environmental Archaeology, Egyptian
Archaeology
Online Publication Date: Apr 2017 DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199686476.013.30
Abstract and Keywords
In addition to providing food, companionship, and raw materials for clothing, furniture,
tools, and ornaments, animals also played a key role in religious practices in ancient
Egypt. Apart from serving as sacrifices, each god had one or more animal as a totem.
Certain specially marked exemplars of these species were revered as manifestations of
that god that enjoyed all the privileges of being a deity during their lifetime and which
were mummified and buried with pomp upon their death. Other animals, which did not
bear the distinguishing marks, were mummified and offered to the gods, transmitting the
prayers of devotees directly to their divinities. These number in the millions and were a
significant feature of Egyptian religious belief and self-identity in the later periods of
Egyptian history.
Keywords: Egypt, mummy, deity, sacred animal, votive offerings, ibis, dog, Theban tombs
Introduction
ANIMALS play an important part in religious rituals throughout the world. This was no
more so than in ancient Egypt and Nubia, where animals were vital to religious practices.
The most obvious and significant feature of Egyptian religion was that most divinities
were theriomorphic, either completely or partially (Fig. 29.1), and that specific living
animals, such as the Apis Bull, were, during their lifetime, revered as manifestations of
particular deities on earth, with oracular powers (Kessler, 1986; Ikram, 2015a). Upon
their death, these sacred animals were prepared for burial and interred with great pomp.
Page 1 of 14
PRINTED FROM OXFORD HANDBOOKS ONLINE (www.oxfordhandbooks.com). © Oxford University Press, 2018. All Rights
Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a title in
Oxford Handbooks Online for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).
Subscriber: Universidad de Chile; date: 09 April 2019

In addition to being potential manifestations of gods, animals also served deities. The
flight of birds was used to celebrate certain festivals (Kessler and Nur el-Din, 2015: 128–
9) and possibly for divination (Murnane, 1980: 37). Animals provided the raw materials,
such as hides, shell, fur, guts, bones, ivory, and feathers, used to fabricate a variety of
objects including amulets, regalia, furniture, and musical instruments for use in temple
cults, as well as in private religious life. The foundation of temples and tombs was also
sanctified through animal sacrifice, with bucrania and forelimbs of cattle deposited at the
buildings’ corners (Weinstein, 1973). Bucrania were also used in the external adornment
of early Egyptian tombs (Emery, 1949; 1954; 1958; 1974), as well as playing a part in
Nubian burials (Grant, 1991; Chaix and Grant, 1992; Davis, 2008; Ikram, 2012) as
manifestations of wealth, offerings to the deceased, and for protection. Funerary
offerings included meat and poultry, as attested both by texts and funerary (p. 453)
remains, which sustained the deceased throughout eternity (Barta, 1963; Ikram, 1995;
2009; 2011; 2012).
Living animals played a

crucial role in temple cult,
and by extension, the
Egyptian economy. There
were hundreds of animals,
primarily cattle (Bos
taurus) and birds (for
example Anas spp., Anser
spp., and Columba spp.),
although sheep (Ovis
ammon f. aries) and goat
(Capra aegagrus f. hircus)
Figure 29.1 The raptor-headed god Horus, also feature in offering
associated with solar worship and divine kingship,
and the crocodile headed god Sobek, also a solarlists and were sacrificed
deity, as well as a fertility god, from Kom Omboon a daily basis as
temple, near where mummified raptors and
offerings in temples
crocodiles were found.
throughout Egypt. After
Author’s own image.
consecration, much of this
meat was redistributed as
payment to temple personnel, who then either consumed it or used it for barter, thus
making such offerings a significant component of the economic engine of Egypt (Posener-
Kriéger, 1976; Ikram, 1995; Lehner, 2000; Warburton, 2000; Posener-Kriéger et al., 2006;
Rossel, 2007). Huge herds of cattle, goats, and sheep had to be purpose-raised for this,
with the temples having enormous holdings of livestock (Ghoneim, 1977).
Offerings did not only take the form of food; in later Pharaonic history, during the seventh
century BC through the third century AD (Late and Graeco-Roman periods), a curious new
type of animal offering came into prominence, associated with the formal sacred animal
cults: votive animal mummies (Ikram and Iskander, 2002; Ikram, 2015a). (p. 454)
Page 2 of 14

Studying animal use in religious contexts binds together many diverse strands of inquiry,
allowing one to investigate the relationships between Ancient Egyptian society and
culture and its fauna. These include:
• the human impact on the environment and ecology of an area;

• animal husbandry/management of animal resources;
• a study of society and social change;
• forms of ethnic identity and acculturation;
• cultural contacts;
• manifestation of political power;
• the economy and the role of trade within it;
• and religious constructs.
This brief essay focuses on the animal cults that reached their apogee in Late and
Graeco-Roman Egypt, and the implications that these had for the relationship between
humans and animals.
Animal Cults
The Romans derided the Egyptians for their reverence of animals (Smelik and Hemelrijk,
1984), with Juvenal writing in his Satires (XV) ‘Who has not heard, Volusius, of the
monstrous deities those crazy Egyptians worship? One lot adores crocodiles, another
worships the snake-gorged ibis … you’ll find whole cities devoted to cats, or to river-fish
or dogs …’ (Juvenal Satires 15.1, Rudd trans., 1991). For the Egyptians, however, animals
seemed to be endowed with supernatural powers and gifts, with intimate access to the
gods, and these attributes, together with their ‘otherness’, provided the basis for many
Egyptian religious beliefs that linked specific animals to certain deities that shared their
attributes and strengths (Dunand et al., 2005; Ikram, 2015a). Most gods had at least one
totemic animal that exemplified his or her attributes, and often the heads of these
animals were shown on human bodies as manifestations of the gods (Fig. 29.1). Thus, cats
were identified with Bastet, goddess of love, beauty, and self-indulgence—all
characteristics seen in living cats. Dogs and other canines were associated with Anubis,
god of cemeteries, embalming, and travel, because these creatures frequented
embalming houses (no doubt lured by the scent of flesh) and cemeteries, and were adept
at navigating the desert. Raptors were associated with the sun god as they flew high into
the sky, able to see even the smallest creature from their lofty height, as well as due to
their coloration, and the way in which their eyes are evocative of the sun. The sacred ibis
was an avatar of Thoth, the god of writing and wisdom, no doubt because the beak of the
ibis took the form of a reed pen, and the bird was seen bent over, ever questing with its
beak, in search of some truth—or at least a true lunch! However, despite their
associations with divinities, the Egyptians did not worship all cats, dogs, and birds,
although acknowledging their link with the gods. (p. 455)
Page 3 of 14

Certainly, animals played a prominent role in religion in Egypt by the second century AD,
when Juvenal knew the country, but the employment of living and dead creatures had not
always been manifested as he saw them. Until about the seventh century BC, animal cults
were limited in scope, with single sacred animals, recognized by special markings, being
revered as the avatar of a particular deity at a particular location. It was believed that
each god could manifest him- or herself in that specific creature during its lifetime, and
after its death the spirit of the god would move to a different animal of its species,
recognizable by identical markings, a concept not dissimilar to the manifestation of the
Dalai and other Tibetan lamas. Upon their death, such animals were, at least from the
middle of the New Kingdom (fourteenth century BC), elaborately mummified and buried
in catacombs with considerable splendour (Kessler, 1986; Ray, 2001; Ikram, 2015a).
Examples of sacred animal interments survive in the bull cemeteries at Saqqara,
Heliopolis, and Armant, and of the rams at Elephantine. It was only from the seventh
century AD onward that the cult of the living animals became widespread, as previously
such cults seem to have been limited to only a few sites: Memphis/Saqqara, Heliopolis,
and Thebes and its environs. It is at this time that large-scale votive mummies started to
be offered to the animal manifestations of divinities, with cults appearing all over the
country, from Alexandria to Aswan, as well as in the oases of the Western Desert (Fig.
29.2). Individual pilgrims apparently purchased mummies of animals associated with a
particular deity, and dedicated it to its corresponding divinity so that the donor’s prayers
would reach the god through the medium of the deities’ own animal. It may be that
animal mummies, perhaps because they had once been alive, were deemed more effective
intercessors than offerings of a statue or stela, and once transformed by mummification
into a semi-divine state, they could interact eternally with the gods.
Thus far, there is no incontrovertible explanation as to why this era saw a massive
expansion of animals employed in cults. No doubt a variety of factors fed into this
phenomenon. Perhaps primarily, this was a manifestation of the uniqueness of Egyptian
religion and a way of separating and defining Egyptians from other ethnic groups. The
26th Dynasty (c.664–525 BC) was a time when Egypt was recovering from foreign rule
(first Nubian, then Assyrian) and struggling to re-establish its independence and reassert
its former greatness. As a result, the rulers (probably in conjunction with the higher-
ranking priesthood) consciously established a culture that hearkened back to times when
Egypt was great. Archaism is apparent in art, literature, rhetoric, and modes of
presenting the king and the gods. Religion was also key to uniting the country and
reasserting the domination of kings and priests. It is probable that animal cults and votive
mummies were a major part of this propagandistic programme, creating a unique way in
which people could engage with the gods, recalling the earliest times of Egyptian history
when the animal aspects of deities were emphasized. These cults, with their animal votive
offerings, provided a more accessible route to the more important deities of the Egyptian
pantheon, such as the sun god, who had hitherto been the preserve of rulers rather than
the populace. Texts found inside catacombs suggest that a greater number of people had
direct contact with these gods than with the deities who resided as statues within a
temple (Kessler and Nur el-Din, 2015; Ray, 2011; 2013; Smith et al., 2011). (p. 456) (p. 457)
Page 4 of 14

This ‘democratization’ of religion allowed for a more intimate relationship between

people and gods, particularly as access to the living animal deities was more possible
than access to the images of gods that were kept in close seclusion within a temple. No
doubt this accessibility was significantly responsible for the success of these cults.
Subsequently, when the

Persians seized Egypt in
525 BC, animal cults
united the Egyptians and
provided a very distinct
way for them to define
themselves religiously as
separate from the Persians
—an aspect of this cult
that persisted through the
Roman domination. The
Macedonian dynasties
(332–30 BC) seem to have
embraced animal cults
(Dodson, 2015; Kessler and
Nur el-Din, 2015), which
Figure 29.2 A map showing the major animal
mummy cemeteries and sacred sites in Egypt. were extremely active
Drawing by N. Warner. during this time. The
popularity of the cults also
served to support the associated temples and local shrines, which burgeoned during this
time, seemingly serving an increasing number of cities and towns throughout the country,
as can be seen by the proliferation of sites that contain animal mummies (Fig. 29.2). As
the temples and the rulers were allied (albeit in an uneasy alliance at times), it was in
their interest to maintain and encourage popular cults that ultimately benefited the state,
forming part of the economic (and social) web between state, temple, and the people. In
the Roman period the practice continued, but with less state support; however, it
maintained a way for Egyptians, and those who embraced their religion (Smelik and
Hemelrijk, 1984), to forge and maintain a distinct and separate identity for themselves,
and maybe even created a power-base from which to defy, in a small way, their
conquerors periodically.
The Votive Mummies
Although sacred animals were buried throughout the course of Egyptian history, it is the
votive mummies that make up the majority of animal mummies that are found in
museums today, as well as excavated in catacombs and other tombs throughout the Nile
Valley and the oases of the Western Desert. The number of species represented in these
cults of the Late Period onward include almost all animals, with the notable exceptions of
hippopotami and donkeys, both of which were associated with Seth, an inimical god in
charge of deserts, among other things (Wilkinson, 2003: 197–9). Thus, cats, dogs, foxes,
Page 5 of 14

jackals, mongooses, sheep, goats, gazelles, shrews, monkeys, rodents, snakes, crocodiles,
lizards, fish, raptors, ibises, other birds, scarab beetles, and even their dung balls are
offered to various deities (Lortet and Gaillard, 1903–1909; Daressy and Gaillard, 1905;
Kessler, 1986; Ikram and Iskander, 2002).
What is most striking about these mummies is their vast number. Unfortunately, it is only
recently that a systematic approach to the study of animal mummies from excavations has
been established, thus it is difficult to calculate the number of mummies that might have
existed in each catacomb. However, some estimates are available. The Catacomb of
Anubis at Saqqara contained some 7.8 million canine mummies (Ikram et al., 2013); five
hundred canines were identified at el-Deir (Dunand et al., 2015); the Ibis Galleries at
Saqqara yielded at least 4 million ibises (Ray, 1976); well over 1.8 million ibises were
offered in Tuna el-Gebel (von den Driesch et al., 2005; Kessler and (p. 458) Nur el-Din,
2015); more than five thousand ibises were discovered at Abydos (Loat, 1914; Ikram,
personal observation); in a single chamber of a much larger burial complex associated
with Theban Tomb (TT) 12, ten thousand ibises and two thousand raptors were identified
(Ikram et al., in prep.); more than six hundred monkeys of different sorts were found at
Tuna el-Gebel (Kessler and Nur el-Din, 2015); and at least one thousand cat mummies
were recovered from the Bubasteion at Saqqara (A. Zivie, personal communication); at
Tebtunis in the Fayum a deposit of ten thousand crocodiles is estimated (Bagnani, 1952).
These figures represent a small proportion of the votive animal mummy deposits found
throughout Egypt (Table 29.1), and do not, save for the estimates for the Catacomb of
Anubis and the chamber in TT 12, provide an accurate estimate for the total number of
animals in any single catacomb. If one were to be able to calculate the true number of
votive animal mummies from all the known cemeteries in Egypt, the number for each
species would be well into the millions.
Table 29.1 Table showing the MNI of votive mummies from diverse cemeteries dating
from c.600 BC to c. AD 300
Species Site MNI
Canine Saqqara 7,800,000
Canine el-Deir 500
Ibis diverse cemeteries 5,815,000
Baboons Tuna el-Gebel 600+
Raptors Thebes TT 12 2,000
Cats Saqqara 1,000+
Page 6 of 14

Crocodiles Tebtunis 10,000+
Implications of the Production of Votive Mummies
Clearly, the huge amount of mummification materials needed to produce millions of

mummies had a marked impact on the economy, both national and international (Ikram,
2015a: 16–43). Natron, the prime ingredient in mummification, used to desiccate and de-
fat, came from two places in Egypt: the Wadi Natrun and el-Kab. This had to be processed
and transported in vast quantities throughout the country in order to carry out basic
mummification; at least 400 kg of natron are necessary to properly mummify a sheep
(Ikram, 2015b); thus a single dog would need c.200 kg, while smaller creatures would
require less. Oils (lettuce, castor, sesame) were locally produced, but resins for anointing
the animals were imported from the Levant and East Africa as well as, possibly, Arabia. At
least thousands of kilometres of linen had to be used for wrapping (p. 459) the animals,
though these were locally available, and were often reused. More striking, though, is the
sheer number of animals that were mummified. These had to play a major role in the
economy, particularly providing revenue for temples and their dependents.
All the animals offered as ex-votos were indigenous to Egypt, save for baboons. Although
once native, by the seventh century BC they were long extinct within Egypt, having
retreated further south, and thus had to be imported for cult purposes. Quite possibly
attempts at breeding them took place, but there is no evidence for a successful breeding
programme. Osteological evidence from the extensively studied baboon mummies from
Tuna el-Gebel (von den Driesch and Boessneck, 1985; von den Driesch, 1993; Nerlich et
al., 1993) and from Saqqara (Goudsmit and Brandon-Jones, 2000), indicate that many of
the animals showed pathologies indicative of ill health, some due to being kept in
constrained spaces and poor diet, which most scholars think is due to the time the
animals spent in the temple areas. Indeed, poor living conditions and care by people who
were unversed in what these animals needed to survive and thrive might have been
largely responsible for their condition, but responsibility for this did not lie solely with the
care-takers associated with the temples. The long journey from sub-Saharan and northern
East Africa, often taking months, even in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries when
camels were commonly used (Walz, 1978), necessitated that the animals be kept in
confined spaces, most probably with a restricted and often insufficient diet. Thus, these
creatures probably arrived, at great expense, in Egypt, already malnourished and prone
to disease. Perhaps this is one reason why breeding groups could not be established
successfully, thereby accounting for the limited number of baboon mummies in
comparison with those of animals that were indigenous.
Given their number, the native animals must have been bred for the purpose as it was
impractical to think of trapping so many animals, particularly those that could be easily
bred, such as ibises, dogs, and cats. It is more likely that creatures such as raptors were
trapped, although they too could be bred in captivity, albeit less effectively than the other
Page 7 of 14

animals. Indeed, if all these animals had been trapped and killed, rather than reared
especially for their fate, it quite likely would have resulted in the extinction of these
species (Ikram et al., 2015). The vast number of animals in the catacombs is not the only
argument to support the idea of breeding programmes to supply the cult. Eggs (Lortet
and Gaillard, 1903–1909; Ray, 1976; Bresciani, 2015; Ikram, personal observation from
Sharuna, Thebes, and Abydos), particularly of ibises, feature amongst the votive
offerings, with crocodile hatcheries being posited in association with temples dedicated
to the crocodile god, Sobek (Bresciani, 2015).
Furthermore, the number of immature individuals found in animal cemeteries is

remarkable, and argues for breeding programmes. In the Galleries of the Catacombs of
Anubis at Saqqara 75% of the number of identified specimens (NISP) of 6,034 bones
belonged to immature animals (Ikram et al., 2013) (Fig. 29.3). At el-Deir, out of five
hundred individuals, 25% were puppies between 1 and 2 months of age, and 36% were
juveniles between 6 and 14 months (Dunand et al., 2015). (p. 460)
(p. 461)
At TT 12, a subterranean
chamber measuring 9 m2
was filled with the remains
of disarticulated and
somewhat-burnt bird
Figure 29.3 Distribution of the ages at death of the mummies. In order to
dogs from the Catacombs of Anubis at Saqqara. sample the remains, a
Prepared by L. Bertini. four-litre container was
filled with bones chosen
from three of the nine square metre contexts; the sample was taken at random, and was
examined in detail. The samples were scooped up by hand and thus some anatomical
elements escaped inclusion as we did not want to dig down too violently and grasp the
bones too firmly lest they break. Each sample was analysed to obtain an overall idea of
species represented, minimum number of birds placed in the room, their ages, and
whether entire birds had been mummified or just specific portions. Information recorded
also included pathologies, anatomical element and portion thereof, side, approximate age,
and degree of burning. In addition, ‘cherry-picked’ bones (those not belonging to ibises)
from the sieved remains of the chamber, extraneous to the four litre samples, were also
analysed with a view to gaining a better perspective of the non-sacred ibis remains that
were given as offerings. This yielded a total of 3,867 bones. Of these, a total of 756
immature/juvenile bones were noted, about 20% of the total number of bones. It is
difficult to differentiate species in bones belonging to such young birds (including
fledglings), but the general impression is that at least six hundred of these bones were
from ibises, while the rest were of raptors (Ikram et al., in prep.). Although neither
numbers nor percentages are currently available from the other ibis catacombs, it is
likely that a large percentage of young or even eggs comprised their population.
Page 8 of 14

The amount of disease and trauma found on the dog bones from the Anubis Catacomb
also argues for their being kept in confined spaces (breeding pens) and not being well
looked after. Out of the 3,867 bones examined, 266 of the canid bones (c.5%) showed
evidence of pathology (Ikram et al., 2013). Another canine cemetery at Saqqara also
yielded evidence for dogs being housed in a closely confined space, and poorly fed and
looked after (Hartley et al., 2011).
It would seem that the puppies found in these cemeteries had been deliberately killed to
supply the demand for animal mummies (Ikram et al., 2013; Dunand et al., 2015), as has
been found in the case of kitten mummies recovered from similar catacombs at Saqqara
and elsewhere (Armitage and Clutton-Brock, 1980; 1981; Charron, 1990; Zivie and
Lichtenberg, 2015). Other votive animals probably also were deliberately killed in order
to meet the demand of the thousands of pilgrims who required them. Quite possibly birds
such as ibises had their necks broken (strangled), although this is difficult to determine
due to the twisted position of the necks necessitated by the way in which they were
wrapped. Some young crocodiles with dented skulls appear to have been killed by blows
to the head, while it has been posited that others were dispatched by the slitting of their
nostrils (E. Bresciani, personal communication; Bresciani, 2015).
Clearly, animals such as dogs and cats were being farmed in dedicated spaces in order to
support the temples and their pilgrims (Ikram et al., 2013). Such large-scale animal
farming might well have extended beyond the immediate confines of temple personnel,
and be part of the larger village/town/city economy, or even include a wider regional
catchment area for people to supply the temples. Non-domesticates such as ibises and
crocodiles were probably kept in environments such as pools or lakes where they were
fed regularly and maintained by temple personnel, and thus were managed, and
(p. 462)
to some extent, one might say that they were ‘farmed’ (Strabo, Falconer trans., 1912;
Preisigke and Spiegelberg, 1914; Ray, 1976; Herodotus, Gould trans., 1989; Bresciani,
2015). It is also possible that ibises were acquired by enterprising folk who lived near ibis
breeding areas and thus could capture birds or raid nests and supply the temples with
even more sacrificial victims. Thus, it is clear that the sourcing and maintenance, to
whatever degree, of the animals was a major component of economic activity in animal
cults. Further work on animal catacombs will elucidate exactly how significant a role they
played in both the cult and the economy.
Discussion
There is no doubt that animals played a major role in Egyptian religious and economic
life, particularly as sacrificial victims. While one is accustomed to the idea of a single or
even several animals being killed as food offerings to a deity (Posener-Kriéger, 1976;
Posener-Kriéger et al., 2006), it is the vast scale of animal mummies that gives one pause.
Unlike the meat from offerings, which was redistributed, animal mummies played no
further role in the economy or the physical life of either the priests or the populace.
Indeed, it is curious that creatures that were linked so closely with the gods were
Page 9 of 14

paradoxically bred (or imported) specifically to be killed, often brutally by strangulation,

having their skulls bashed in, or their nostrils slit. Paradoxically, the continuations of
these cults also guaranteed the local survival for many species, such as the Sacred Ibis,
which is now extinct in Egypt.
One can take the cynical view that for the priests at least, the production of animal
mummies as ex-votos was a way of wielding economic and social power: it provided
employment for themselves and the villagers around them in terms of breeding, caring
for, and feeding the animals and preparing the mummies; the sale of the mummies was a
way of enriching temple coffers, as well as tying their donors and producers to the
temples, the gods, and the state (Ikram, 2015c). However, the vast number of these votive
mummies indicates a heartfelt belief in their efficacy on the part of their givers, and
provided the donors with a mode of self-expression, identification, and interaction with
the divine that was uniquely Egyptian. For the donors, probably, the animals not only
conveyed prayers to the gods, but were themselves given a chance at an immortal
existence in close proximity to their gods, and thus were achieving a state of grace and
immortality that the donors themselves sought, and could only properly achieve with
their own death.
References
Armitage, P. L. and Clutton-Brock, J. (1980) ‘Egyptian mummified cats held by the British
Museum’, MASCA, Research Papers in Science and Archaeology, 1, 185–8.
Armitage, P. L. and Clutton-Brock, J. (1981) ‘A radiological and histological

(p. 463)
investigation into the mummification of cats from ancient Egypt’, Journal of

Archaeological Science, 8, 185–96.
Bagnani, G. (1952) ‘The great Egyptian crocodile mystery’, Archaeology, 5(2), 76–8.
Barta, W. (1963) Die Altägyptische Opferliste von der Frühzeit bis zur Griechisch-
Römischen Epoche, Berlin: Hessling.
Bresciani, E. (2015) ‘Sobek, Lord of the Land of the Lake’, in Ikram, S. (ed.) Divine
Creatures: Animal Mummies from Ancient Egypt, pp. 199–206. Cairo: American
University in Cairo Press.
Chaix, L. and Grant, A. (1992) ‘Cattle in ancient Nubia’, in Grant, A. (ed.) Les animaux et
leurs produits dans le commerce et les échanges/Animals and Their Products in Trade
and Exchange: actes du 3éme colloque internationale de l’homme et l’animal, Société de
Recherche Interdisciplinaire (Oxford 8–11 Novembre 1990). Anthropozoologica 16, pp.
61–6. Clichy: L’Homme et L’Animal, Société de Recherche Interdisciplinaire.
Charron, A. (1990) ‘Massacres d’animaux à la Basse Epoque’, Revue d’Égyptologie, 41,

209–13.
Page 10 of 14

Daressy, G. and Gaillard, C. (1905) La faune momifiée de l’antique Égypte, Cairo: Institut
Français d’Archéologie Orientale.
Davis, S. J. M. (2008) ‘‘Thou shalt take of the ram … the right thigh; for it is a ram of
consecration …’: some zoo-archaeological examples of body-part preferences’, in
D’Andria, F., De Grossi Mazzorin, J., and Fiorentino, G. (eds) Uomini, piante e animali
nella dimensione del sacro, pp. 63–70. Lecce: Università degli Studi di Lecce/Consiglio
Nazionale delle Ricerche.
Dodson, A. M. (2015) ‘Bull cults’, in Ikram, S. (ed.) Divine Creatures: Animal Mummies
from Ancient Egypt, pp. 72–105. Cairo: American University in Cairo Press.
Driesch, von den, A. (1993) ‘The keeping and worshipping of baboons during the Later
Phase in Ancient Egypt’, Sartoniana, 6, 15–36.
Driesch, von den, A. and Boessneck, J. (1985) ‘Krankhaft veränderte Skelettreste von
Pavianen aus altägyptischer Zeit’, Tierärztliche Praxis, 13, 367–72.
Driesch, von den, A., Kessler, D., Steinmann, F., Berteaux, V., and Peters, J. (2005)
‘Mummified, deified and buried at Hermopolis Magna—the sacred birds from Tuna El-
Gebel, Middle Egypt’, Ägypten und Levante, 15, 203–44.
Dunand, F., Lichtenberg, R. and Charron, A. (2005) Des animaux et des hommes: une
symbiose égyptienne, Paris: Rocher.
Dunand, F., Lichtenberg, R., and Callou, C. (2015) ‘Dogs at el-Deir’, in Ikram, S., Kaiser, J.,
and Walker, R. (eds) Egyptian Bioarchaeology: Humans, Animals, and the Environment,
pp. 169–76. Amsterdam: Sidestone.
Emery, W. B. (1949) Great Tombs of the First Dynasty I, Cairo: Service des Antiquités.
Emery, W. B. (1954) Great Tombs of the First Dynasty II, London: Egypt Exploration
Society.
Emery, W. B. (1958) Great Tombs of the First Dynasty III, London: Egypt Exploration
Society.
Emery, W. B. (1974) Archaic Egypt, Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Ghoneim, W. (1977) Die ökonomische Bedeutung des Rindes im alten Ägypten, Bonn:
Habelt.
Goudsmit, J. and Brandon-Jones, D. (2000) ‘Evidence from the Baboon Catacomb in North
Saqqara for a west Mediterranean monkey trade route to Ptolemaic Alexandria’, Journal
of Egyptian Archaeology, 86, 111–19.
Grant, A. (1991) ‘Economic or symbolic? Animals and ritual behaviour’, in Garwood P.,
Jennings, D., and Toms, J. (eds) Sacred and Profane: Archaeology, Ritual and Religion, pp.
109–14. Oxford: Oxford University Committee for Archaeology.
Page 11 of 14

Hartley, M., Buck, A., and Binder, S. (2011) ‘Canine interments in the Teti Cemetery
North at Saqqara during the Graeco-Roman period’, in Coppens, F. and Krejsi, J. (eds)
Abusir and Saqqara in the Year 2010, pp. 17–29. Prague: Czech Institute of Egyptology.
(p. 464) Herodotus, trans. by Gould, J. (1989) The Histories II, III, New York: St. Martin’s
Press.
Ikram, S. (1995) Choice Cuts: Meat Production in Ancient Egypt, Leuven: Peeters.
Ikram, S. (2009) ‘Funerary food offerings’, in Barta, M. (ed.) Abusir XIII, Abusir South 2.
Tomb Complex of the Vizier Qar, His Sons Qar Junior and Senedjemib, and Iykai, pp. 294–
8. Prague: Dryada/Czech Institute of Egyptology, Charles University.
Ikram, S. (2011) ‘Food and funerals: sustaining the dead for eternity’, Polish Archaeology
in the Mediterranean, 20, 361–71.
Ikram, S. (2012) ‘From food to furniture: animals in ancient Nubia’, in Fisher, M.,
Lacovara, P., Ikram, S., and D’Auria, S. (eds) Ancient Nubia: African Kingdoms on the
Nile, pp. 210–28. Cairo: American University in Cairo Press.
Ikram, S. (ed.) (2015a) Divine Creatures: Animal Mummies in Ancient Egypt, Cairo:
American University in Cairo.
Ikram, S. (2015b) ‘Experimental Archaeology: From Meadow to Em-baa-lming Table’, in

Graves-Brown, C. (ed.) Egyptology in the Present: Experiential and Experimental Methods
in Archaeology, pp. 53–74. Swansea: The Classical Press of Wales.
Ikram, S. (2015c) ‘Speculations on the Role of Animal Cults in the Economy of Ancient
Egypt’, in Massiera, M., Mathieu, B., and Rouffet, Fr. (eds) Apprivoiser le sauvage/Taming
the Wild (CENiM 11), pp. 211–28. Montpellier: University Paul Valéry Montpellier 3.
Ikram, S., Bosch, C., and Spitzer, M. (in prep.) ‘Offerings to Thoth and Horus: the avian
deposit of Theban Tomb 12, the Chapel of Hery’, Journal of the American Research Center
in Egypt.
Ikram, S. and Iskander, N. (2002) Catalogue Général of the Egyptian Museum: Non-
Human Mummies, Cairo: Supreme Council of Antiquities Press.
Ikram, S., Nicholson, P. T., Bertini, L., and Hurley, D. (2013) ‘Killing man’s best friend?’,
Archaeological Review from Cambridge, 28(2), 48–66.
Ikram, S., R. Slabbert, I. Cornelius, A. du Plessis, L. C. Swanepoel, and H. Weber. (2015)

‘Fatal force-feeding or Gluttonous Gagging? The death of Kestrel SACHM 2575’, Journal
of Archaeological Science, 63, 72–7.
Juvenal, trans. by Rudd, N. (1991) The Satires—Juvenal, Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Kessler, D. (1986) ‘Tierkult’, in Helck, W. and Westendorf, W. (eds) Lexikon der

Ägyptologie VI, pp. 571–87. Weisbaden: Otto Harrassowitz.
Page 12 of 14

Kessler, D. and Nur el-Din, A. (2015) ‘Tuna El-Gebel: millions of ibises and other animals’,
in Ikram, S. (ed.) Divine Creatures: Animal Mummies from Ancient Egypt, pp. 120–63.
Cairo: American University in Cairo Press.
Lehner, M. (2000) ‘The fractal house of pharaoh: ancient Egypt as a complex adaptive
system, a trial formulation’, in Kohler, T. A. and Gumerman, G. G. (eds) Dynamics in
Human and Primate Societies, pp. 275–353. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Loat, W. L. S. (1914) ‘The ibis cemetery at Abydos’, Journal of Egyptian Archaeology, 1,

40.
Lortet, L. C. and Gaillard, C. (1903–1909) La faune momifiée de l’ancienne Egypte, Lyon:

Archives du Muséum Histoire Naturelle de Lyon VIII.
Murnane, W. J. (1980) United with Eternity: A Concise Guide to the Monuments of

Medinet Habu, Chicago/Cairo: Oriental Institute, University of Chicago/American
Nerlich, A. G., Parsche, F., Driesch, von den, A., and Löhrs, U. (1993) ‘Osteopathological
findings in mummified baboons from Ancient Egypt’, International Journal of
Osteoarchaeology, 3, 189–98.
Posener-Kriéger, P. (1976) Les archives du temple funéraire de Neferirkare-Kakai, 1–2,

Cairo: Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale.
(p. 465) Posener-Kriéger, P., Verner, M., and Vymazalova, H. (2006) Abusir X: The Pyramid
Complex of Raneferef, the Papyrus Archive, Prague: Czech Institute of Egyptology.
Preisigke, F. and Spiegelberg, W. (1914) Die Prinz-Joachim Ostraka, Strasbourg: K. J.

Trübner.
Ray, J. D. (1976) The Archive of Hor, London: Egypt Exploration Society.
Ray, J. D. (2001) ‘Animal cults’, in Redford, D. B. (ed.) The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient
Egypt, pp. 345–8. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ray, J. D. (2011) Texts from the Baboon and Falcon Galleries: Demotic, Hieroglyphic and
Greek Inscriptions from the Sacred Animal Necropolis, North Saqqara, London: Egypt
Exploration Society.
Ray, J. D. (2013) Demotic Ostraca and Other Inscriptions from the Sacred Animal
Necropolis, North Saqqara, London: Egypt Exploration Society.
Rossel, S. (2007) ‘The Development of Productive Subsistence Economies in the Nile

Valley: Zooarchaeological Analysis at El-Mahasna and South Abydos, Upper Egypt’.
Unpublished PhD dissertation, Harvard University (Cambridge, MA).
Page 13 of 14

Smelik, K. A. D. and Hemelrijk, E. A. (1984) ‘‘Who knows not what monsters demented
Egypt worships?’ Opinions on Egyptian animal worship in antiquity as part of the ancient
conception of Egypt’, in Haase, W. (ed.) Aufstieg und Niedergang der Römischen Welt
17(4), pp. 1853–2000. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
Smith, H. S., Andrews, C. A. R., and Davies, S. (2011) The Sacred Animal Necropolis at
North Saqqara: The Mother of Apis Inscriptions 1–2, London: Egypt Exploration Society.
Strabo, trans. by Falconer, W. (1912) The Geography of Egypt, Vol. 17, London: G. Bell
and Sons.
Walz, T. (1978) Trade Between Egypt and Bilad-as-Sudan, 1700–1820, Cairo: Institut
Français d’Archéologie Orientale.
Warburton, D. (2000) ‘State and economy in ancient Egypt’, in Denemark, R., Friedman,
J., Gills, B. K., and Modelski, G. (eds) World System History: The Social Science of Long
Term Change, pp. 169–84. London: Routledge.
Weinstein, J. M. (1973) ‘Foundation Deposits in Ancient Egypt’. Unpublished PhD

dissertation, University of Pennsylvania (Philadelphia).
Wilkinson, R. (2003) The Complete Gods and Goddesses of Ancient Egypt, London/Cairo:
Thames and Hudson/American University in Cairo Press.
Zivie, A. and Lichtenberg, R. (2015) ‘The cats of the goddess Bastet’, in Ikram, S. (ed.)
Divine Creatures: Animal Mummies in Ancient Egypt, pp. 106–19. Cairo: American
Salima Ikram
Salima Ikram is Distinguished University Professor of Egyptology at the American

University in Cairo and has worked throughout Egypt on faunal assemblages as well
as animal mummies, in addition to working as a mortuary archaeologist. Her
research interests focus on the changing role that animals played in the diet and
economy of ancient Egypt. She has published extensively on these and other topics.
Page 14 of 14

Oxfordhb 9780199686476 e 30 PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Oxfordhb 9780199686476 e 30 PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Animals in ancient Egyptian religion: belief, identity, power, and economy

Oxford Handbooks Online

Print Publication Date: Mar 2017

Abstract and Keywords

Subscriber: Universidad de Chile; date: 09 April 2019

Living animals played a

Subscriber: Universidad de Chile; date: 09 April 2019

• the human impact on the environment and ecology of an area;

Subscriber: Universidad de Chile; date: 09 April 2019

Subscriber: Universidad de Chile; date: 09 April 2019

This ‘democratization’ of religion allowed for a more intimate relationship between

Subsequently, when the

The Votive Mummies

Subscriber: Universidad de Chile; date: 09 April 2019

Species Site MNI

Canine Saqqara 7,800,000

Canine el-Deir 500

Ibis diverse cemeteries 5,815,000

Baboons Tuna el-Gebel 600+

Raptors Thebes TT 12 2,000

Cats Saqqara 1,000+

Subscriber: Universidad de Chile; date: 09 April 2019

Crocodiles Tebtunis 10,000+

Implications of the Production of Votive Mummies

Clearly, the huge amount of mummification materials needed to produce millions of

Subscriber: Universidad de Chile; date: 09 April 2019

Furthermore, the number of immature individuals found in animal cemeteries is

Subscriber: Universidad de Chile; date: 09 April 2019

Subscriber: Universidad de Chile; date: 09 April 2019

paradoxically bred (or imported) specifically to be killed, often brutally by strangulation,

Armitage, P. L. and Clutton-Brock, J. (1981) ‘A radiological and histological

investigation into the mummification of cats from ancient Egypt’, Journal of

Charron, A. (1990) ‘Massacres d’animaux à la Basse Epoque’, Revue d’Égyptologie, 41,

Subscriber: Universidad de Chile; date: 09 April 2019

Emery, W. B. (1974) Archaic Egypt, Harmondsworth: Penguin.

Subscriber: Universidad de Chile; date: 09 April 2019

Ikram, S. (2015b) ‘Experimental Archaeology: From Meadow to Em-baa-lming Table’, in

Ikram, S., R. Slabbert, I. Cornelius, A. du Plessis, L. C. Swanepoel, and H. Weber. (2015)

Juvenal, trans. by Rudd, N. (1991) The Satires—Juvenal, Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Kessler, D. (1986) ‘Tierkult’, in Helck, W. and Westendorf, W. (eds) Lexikon der

Subscriber: Universidad de Chile; date: 09 April 2019

Loat, W. L. S. (1914) ‘The ibis cemetery at Abydos’, Journal of Egyptian Archaeology, 1,

Lortet, L. C. and Gaillard, C. (1903–1909) La faune momifiée de l’ancienne Egypte, Lyon:

Murnane, W. J. (1980) United with Eternity: A Concise Guide to the Monuments of

Posener-Kriéger, P. (1976) Les archives du temple funéraire de Neferirkare-Kakai, 1–2,

Preisigke, F. and Spiegelberg, W. (1914) Die Prinz-Joachim Ostraka, Strasbourg: K. J.

Ray, J. D. (1976) The Archive of Hor, London: Egypt Exploration Society.

Rossel, S. (2007) ‘The Development of Productive Subsistence Economies in the Nile

Subscriber: Universidad de Chile; date: 09 April 2019

Weinstein, J. M. (1973) ‘Foundation Deposits in Ancient Egypt’. Unpublished PhD

Salima Ikram is Distinguished University Professor of Egyptology at the American

Subscriber: Universidad de Chile; date: 09 April 2019

You might also like