Zobia Ibrahim Sheikhani

HADA – Final Research Paper

Often times we tend to have a certain set of ideologies, a certain way of perception of the

world. Our understanding has become wildly affected by the pressuring knowledge

embedded in our minds, we are made to think it is the only possible narrative to exist. An

example I would mention is here of how we naturally seem to believe that the ‘West’ is

always right. It’s a thinking so deeply rooted that we never begin to question it. In relation to

this, authoritative bodies (the West) advantage from this by further rooting favorable

ideologies in our minds. This procedure is more so carried out in the most common of ways;

through education, internet, TV and movies, political constitutions, and public figures.

Another example I have in relation to this is of how ancient civilizations have been

represented by the West time and time again. The astuteness of colonialism, racism, and

inferiority reflecting in their representations influencing us to be pro-West and accept them as

the ultimate hegemonic entity. Through the time, ancient civilizations and parallel cultures

have been represented in modern world with a heterogeneous and conflicting nature. Hence

this paper will be an attempt to ‘unlearn’ what we had previously considered universal and

look through situations from a possibly different; a rather parallel narrative. Ancient Egyptian

civilization is one of the oldest and long-lasting civilizations in known history. In this paper

my focus will be on the Egyptian civilization and its site; its misconceptions, representations

and stereotypes in modern culture. My correlating visual sources will be the two movies from

Hollywood; “The Mummy” (1999) and “The Mummy Returns” (2001).

Source 1: The Mummy (1999)

The Mummy (1999) is an Action horror film written by Stephen Sommers and directed by

Alex Kurtzman. It is set in a fictitious city;

Hamunaptra. This movie, in a number of ways,

stereotypes and misinterprets Ancient

Egyptian space, time and culture. The movie’s

opening scene shows the Pyramids of Giza

right behind the city Thebes. The site has been misrepresented as Giza and Thebes are miles

apart. Moving on Doreen Massey, in her paper, "Introduction," For Space explains space as a

meetup of histories. She give a subjective meaning to space, as where multpile histories are

written and remain 1.

In the movie, the priest, namely Imhotep, and the Pharaoh's wife, Anck-Su-Namun are

shown together in time. In real Egyptian history however, Imhotep and Anck-Su-Namun's

lives were a millennia apart. She came much later than Imhotep. In this regard the movie

misinterprets time and the meet-up of histories is incorrectly knitted in itself. Imhotep is also

in a way painted as a negative character who kills the Pharaoh. In reality though Imhotep was

a great architect, astronomer, and was worshipped as a god 2. The movie depicts incorrectly

the character of great importance to Egyptians. Considering how Ancient Egypt excelled in

areas of astronomy, medicine and mathematics, there is little to no presentation on any such

topic. This movie is yet another notion which embeds into our thinking of how every other

great ancient civilisation was somehow evil and had

minimal participation in areas of knowledge, wisdom and

sophistication. This is potrayed through extreme cultural

stereotyping towards thn as a beautiful but betraying

1
Doreen Massey, “Introduction”, For space (2005), 1-8
2
Laurie Schneider Adams, “Chapter 5 - Ancient Egypt,” in A History of Western Art, n.d., p. 54.
woman, the name-less prison warden is shown as greedy and foul mouthed. At one point he

has also been give the impersonification of a camel. He is also given a horrific death as to

conclude and justify it with his personaltiy. In constrast though, the British are shown as the

saviours and intelligent explorers. The movie

further potrays Ancient Egypt as beautiful, rich

and royal, however modern day Egypt is shown as

a barren land with people from lower class

roaming around in rags. This is a potrayal that that begs for the audience to notice how this

land hoplessly awaits the West to come in and bring modernisation and globalisation and

low-key colonise their land. This also poses that the once great civilization has come to a

dreadful decline and is reduced to ruins and easily accessible sites. This is a representation

rooted in narratives of colonial exploration and discovery, providing again that westerners are

the superior being and rulers of the world.

Moving on, the way exploration has

been represented in this movie is

impractical. Archeologists spend years

in discovering a heritage sites, but in

the movie the characters were able to

enter the sites and find the mummy cases in a matter of a couple days. This depiction paints

the site and Egypt as it has been left unattended and the locals have no care or value for its

heritage, treasures and worthwhile history. Shelly Errington in he Anthropology recounts that

Egyptian Pyramids were constructed as burial mounds and they have inner chambers, but

they sealed off precisely to prevent people from entering or using them 3. They were distant

markers of greatness, but as spaces they did not invite the viewer to approach or interact with

3
Shelly Errington, "Making Progress on Borobudur", Visual Antropology
Review 9 (1993): 32-59.
them4. Contrary to this, the movie shows how the tombs were open to public access and

exploration and it devalues the Egyptian heritage sites compelling the audience to believe it

could very well be easily explored and plundered.

Another representation I saw in the movie was the implication that Ancient Egyptians set up

traps in their tombs from letting people knowing their secrets. However, after death, priests

and family members brought food offerings to the tomb chapel to feed the souls of the

deceased. The burial chamber was effectively the eternal ‘home’ for the deceased, where

their soul would reunite with their mummy, not somewhere you would think to put a booby

trap 5.

Furthermore, the mummification process explained during the beginning of the movie is also

incorrect and is showed as a horrifying process (Imhotep’s mummifying process) in reality

however it was a sacred ritual that played an important part in their beliefs.

Lastly,

Source 2: The Mummy Returns (2001)

The Mummy Returns (1999) is an Action horror film, a sequel to The Mummy (1999) written

and directed by Stephen Sommers. This movie, too as its sequel, misinterprets, misrepresents

and stereotypes space, time and culture of

Ancient Egypt as well as modern day Egypt.

There a few problematic portrayals I found in

the movie. Firstly, when the present day scene

rolls, the two main protagonists are shown inside a tomb. Evy is an Egyptologist however

4
Ibid.
5
Posted by thenilescribes, “Common Misconceptions about Ancient Egypt,” Nile Scribes, April 20, 2019,
https://nilescribes.org/2019/04/13/common-misconceptions-egypt/.
still, she has no regard for the Egyptian artefacts and goes on exploring and ‘dissecting’ the

tomb because of her past dreams. This represents that Egyptian culture is not so valuable as

to be preserved but anyone (Westerners) could just go on plundering them. Portrayals like

these create misconceptions and depreciate the mightiness of historical sites.

In the movie, characters, mainly British, are shown reading out and pronouncing ancient

hieroglyphs and books pretty easily. In reality though the language only became alive again

in 1800s. The hieroglyphs are understandable but still

there is no explanation on how to pronounce the ancient

words.6 Egyptian language has no vowels, so the

specialists in ancient languages try to add them in the

best possible way7. It is necessary to remember that it is uncertain how ancient Egyptians

spoke8. This is a misrepresentation and misinterpretation of Egyptian culture because there is

a huge chance of error in pronouncing how actually the Ancient Egyptians did. This shows

how Hollywood would have little or no regard while making a movie on such an ancient

civilization, molding their traditions, cultures and even people according to their own

stereotypes.

Further in the movie, there is a scene when in Evy’s vision Anck-Su-Namun and herself are

sword-fighting. Upon research I found out there has not been any history of Acient Egyptian

women fighting. People back in those days had

separate role. And women did not involve in fighting.

Additionally they are shown using Japanese martial art

weapons called Sais, didn’t exist in Ancient Egypt9.

6
Natalia Klimczak, “Hidden in the Hieroglyphs: Is Ancient Egyptian a Lost Language?,” Ancient Origins (Ancient
Origins, September 15, 2016), https://www.ancient-origins.net/artifacts-ancient-writings/hidden-hieroglyphs-
ancient-egyptian-lost-language-006653.
7
Ibid.
8
Ibid.
9
Amy Harlib, The Mummy Returns, accessed May 28, 2020, https://www.rambles.net/mummy_returns.html.
The stunts too, were in those times used for entertainment, not actual combats. This is yet

another misrepresentation of Egyptian culture at large.

Stuart Hall, in The Question of Cultural Identity, explains about cultural representation. He

writes that national identities are not things a person is born with rather, is formed by the

representations associated with them10. This is the affect that misrepresentations like in the

movie have. For viewers who have are not exposed to Egyptians or Ancient Egypt, will build

a rather biased perception of them from these sources. And this is how a particular narrative

is then set.

Regardless of the problematic points though, these movies caused an uplift in tourism

industry of Europe11.

Word count: 1552

Bibliography

Adams, Laurie Schneider. “Chapter 5 - Ancient Egypt.” Essay. In A History of Western Art, 54, n.d.
10
Stuart Hall, The Question of Cultural Identity (1998), 611-615.

11
Hakan Murat Arsalan, in InTraders 2019: Academic Studies in Social, Human and Administrative
Sciences (Hyperyaym, n.d.), https://books.google.com.pk/books?
id=_xvhDwAAQBAJ&pg=PT94&lpg=PT94&dq=has+the+movie+the+mummy+affected+tourism+in+egypt&sourc
e=bl&ots=bgAlsaPwQO&sig=ACfU3U2Y2IgvkIBgzXGmf8SF678yNEHViQ&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjStPj9ndbp
AhWrAGMBHRX-DWkQ6AEwAHoECAkQAQ#v=onepage&q=has%20the%20movie%20the%20mummy
%20affected%20tourism%20in%20egypt&f=false.
“A History of Western Art by Laurie Schneider Adams.” Accessed May 28, 2020.
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/188912.A_History_of_Western_Art.

thenilescribes, Posted by. “Common Misconceptions about Ancient Egypt.” Nile Scribes, April 20,
2019. https://nilescribes.org/2019/04/13/common-misconceptions-egypt/.

Klimczak, Natalia. “Hidden in the Hieroglyphs: Is Ancient Egyptian a Lost Language?” Ancient
Origins. Ancient Origins, September 15, 2016. https://www.ancient-origins.net/artifacts-
ancient-writings/hidden-hieroglyphs-ancient-egyptian-lost-language-006653.

harlib, amy. The Mummy Returns. Accessed May 28, 2020.

https://www.rambles.net/mummy_returns.html.

Arsalan, Hakan Murat. “InTraders 2019: Academic Studies in Social, Human and Administrative
Sciences.” Essay. In InTraders 2019: Academic Studies in Social, Human and Administrative
Sciences. Hyperyaym, n.d. https://books.google.com.pk/books?
id=_xvhDwAAQBAJ&pg=PT94&lpg=PT94&dq=has+the+movie+the+mummy+affected+to
urism+in+egypt&source=bl&ots=bgAlsaPwQO&sig=ACfU3U2Y2IgvkIBgzXGmf8SF678y
NEHViQ&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjStPj9ndbpAhWrAGMBHRX-
DWkQ6AEwAHoECAkQAQ#v=onepage&q=has%20the%20movie%20the%20mummy
%20affected%20tourism%20in%20egypt&f=false.

Errington, Shelly. “Making Progress on Borobudur: An Old Monument in New Order.” Visual

Anthropology Review 9, no. 2 (1993): 32–59. https://doi.org/10.1525/var.1993.9.2.32.

Hall, Stuart. “Introduction: Who Needs ‘Identity’?” Questions of Cultural Identity, n.d., 1–17.
https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446221907.n1.

Werner, Marian, Rebecca Lave, Brett Christopher’s, and Jamie Peck. “Introduction.” The Doreen
Massey Reader, 2018, 205–10. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv5cg7pq.20.

The Mummy, n.d.

The Mummy Returns, n.d.