How realistic are the so-called Fayum mummy portraits, and why?

Egyptian provinces were multicultural and multiethnic regions of the empire throughout their Roman
occupation (30 BCE). This began prior to Roman influences in 305 BCE, with the introduction of
many Greeks under the Macedonian Ptolemaic Dynasty. Thus, throughout the 1st century AD, the
social and ethic groups of Romans, Greeks, and Egyptians interacted at settlements like those of the
Fayum Basin, approximately 250 kilometres southwards down the Nile. Settlements at Fayum, like
Hawara, are well-known for the many Fayum painted mummy portraits excavated there. These
portraits are images of individual’s faces painted onto a thin wooden panel with coloured wax, and
have commonly been dated between the 1st and 3rd centuries AD. The artistic style of these images is
certainly Greco-Roman. Prag (1998) emphasises its descent from Hellenistic images like those of the
Vergina tombs, and individuals are adorned with the hairstyles, jewellery, and clothing of the latest
Roman fashions. However, these painted wooden panels were inserted into the outer cartonnage of
sarcophagi where the deceased’s face would be underneath. Thus, such artifacts have been heralded as
emerging from interactions between Roman and Egyptian cultures, either as markers of cultural
fusion, or as markers of difference; the attempts of Romans and Greeks to distinguish themselves
from Egyptians with a different kind of sarcophagi. An important way to determine the role such
artifacts played is to discuss whether they were intended to be realistic images of the deceased.
If the Fayum mummy portraits were intended to distinguish ethnic identity, and thus “designed to say,
‘Greek speaker’, or ‘non-Egyptian’” (Hallet 2019), then we would expect them to realistically
resemble the deceased. Otherwise, the intended social distinction and praise would fail if the
individual trying to designate themselves as distinct was unrecognisable. Some evidence supports this
explanation. Gold leaf decoration applied to images in the form of crowns or backgrounds would
suggest that these items emphasised wealth and its corresponding social class, which likely would
have been that of Greek-speaking individuals in the provinces of Roman Egypt. Furthermore, over a
thousand different examples of mummy portraits have been excavated from sites like Hawara,
showing young and old individuals with blonde, brunette, grey, or no hair, and with wrinkles, a
broken nose, prominent ears, a dark complexion, or pale. This extreme level of diversity would
suggest the lack of an overarching desirable ‘type’ for representation, and instead highlights that the
purpose of such portraits was the realistic representation of individuals in ways that made them
recognisable, and thus, could make claims about them.
Regardless of whether these portraits functioned as ethnic or social markers, the funerary context of
Roman Egypt provides other reasons for them to provide realistic representations of the deceased.
Egyptian spiritual beliefs designated that every individual had a ‘ka’ (roughly equivalent to a ‘life
force’) and a ‘ba’ (soul or spirit) which survived after their death and remained in the mundane realm.
The ka stayed in the tomb and resided in the mummy or an image of the dead person, while the ba
could leave the body to find food, but had to return to the tomb each night and reunite with the ka in
order to nourish it. Therefore, it was vital for the ka to be recognisable in order for the ba to reunite
with it, hence the money and effort poured into the creation of elaborate and tailored sarcophagi
throughout Egyptian prehistory. If the influx of different cultures into the provinces of Roman Egypt
had turned these regions into something like a ‘cultural melting-pot’, then we might expect the Fayum
mummy portraits to be a particular Greco-Roman adaption of the ka and ba. Thus, we might expect
these portraits to have been intended to resemble their patrons as realistically and recognisably as
possible. Furthermore, as Dash states, mummies “were probably placed in a family mausoleum at
first, and visited regularly for religious ceremonies, being finally buried only several generations
later” (2014). Sites such as the necropolis at Marina El Alamein provide examples of how these
funerary practices and temporary exhibitions would have taken place. Here, tombs and banqueting
areas featured niches for the upright display of sarcophagi, encircling the feasting of the living almost
as if the dead were in attendance. If sarcophagi were to be ritually visited and interacted with in this
way, it would be important for the portraits of the deceased to be realistically recognisable to their
relatives.
However, scholars like Prag (1998) have alternative opinions and have claimed that these portraits
only display the illusion of diversity. He argues that they are not diverse and actually are standard
‘types’: the same ovular face shape and position replicated across the majority of mummy portraits,
onto which the artist would then paint facial features. Therefore, seemingly “‘individual’ traits are in
the end simply the quirks of a workshop or a painter”, and rather than being realistic representations
of the deceased, portraits would more likely be realistic enough so that they are just about
recognisable by relatives. Examples like Figure 1 highlight this. The two female portraits utilise the
exact same face shape, on top of which the artist has placed similar features to produce two different
generic portraits which could arguably be of the same woman.

Figure 1. Left: Portrait of a woman, 170-190 AD, Kunsthistorisches Museum Wien. Right: Portrait of a woman, 190-210
AD, The British Museum.

Manchester University’s reconstruction of two faces from the skulls of painted mummy sarcophagi
has further highlighted that these portraits only partially resembled the deceased. The two portraits
excavated at Hawara have overemphasised facial features like eyes, noses, and mouths, when their
reconstructed features are far more understated and realistic (Figure 2, Figure 3).

It is clear that the Fayum portraits only loosely resemble the reconstructions; the prominence of
unrealistic overemphasised features serving to relate to the deceased’s appearance and make the
portraits somewhat more recognisable. Therefore, one might conclude that realism was not a priority
of the Fayum mummy portraits.
Alternatively, many scholars have highlighted the almost universal, sideways slanted posture of the
Fayum portraits, and claimed that this may elucidate their function. The pose is candid and open, as if
the viewer has just approached the portrait’s subject in the street. Thus, it feels extremely mundane
and casual, far from emphasising the tragedy of death. The portraits’ place less emphasis on the face
and more on the feeling of aliveness of the subject. In other words, the purpose of the portrait is not
realism, but to present the deceased as if they were still alive, positively highlighting the new life and
immortality of the afterlife. These references to the afterlife further explain the choices to represent
the deceased in unrealistic ways. For example, Egyptians thought that the eyes were the windows to
the soul, and if images like these were to be the meeting ground between the ka (soul) and ba, the
unnatural largeness of these features becomes a more explainable design feature. Furthermore, the
“Egyptians of this period [believed] that images [like these] could influence the forms that souls took
in the afterlife” (Dash 2014). Therefore, as the soul’s permanent abode it is likely that such images
were not intended to be realistic representations of real people, but ideals of them, the way they
wanted to be eternally in the afterlife. Though some Fayum mummy portraits were of older people,
this point would explain why the vast majority of portraits are of younger adults in the prime of youth.
The deceased might by much older than their portrait, yet in such youthfulness is how they want to
spend eternity. Montserrat’s (1993) investigation of young male mummy portraits concluded that the
inclusion of features like thin moustaches, wreathes, and nakedness in portraits was a conscious
choice to highlight the portrait’s ephebic attributes, rather than reflective of the real appearance of the
deceased. As Montserrat says, “whether or not the young men actually wore moustaches is
immaterial…Depicting the deceased man thus would have helped in the process of ensuring that he
survived after death to be reborn… in a perfect and vital form… as a member of an elite social group
at his physical peak”.
In conclusion, despite reasonable arguments that Fayum mummy portraits intended to depict the
deceased as realistically as possible so that they could be recognised by their relatives, by the
returning ba, or as a member of a particular social group, I argue it is more likely that realism was not
the main priority of such portraiture. Rather, these mummy portraits related to the afterlife and the
appearance of the deceased in the afterlife, serving as idealistic appearances for the soul to take. In
this regard, Fayum mummy portraits were not particularly realistic and instead functioned as a
chthonic due diligence.

Minority choice for mummifaction, people with more money spending much more on sarcophagi etc.
encaustic, melted wax mixed with pigment. Thick oil paint. Tempura painting, water soluble binding
medium like egg yolk. Much more like watercolour and you cannot mix the colour together. Much
less naturalistic.
Remind of actors etc, but actual comparison, resemblance is very superficial.
Greeks and Egyptian fluidity. Egyptian adopted Greek names. Intermarriage. Not necessarily different
ethnic groups. Romans are not either. Do not have distinction between Roman and Greek. Painted
portraits were widespread, not necessarily a Roman or Greek only image. Survives here and not
elsewhere.
Different social identities, and labels.
Using symbols to make statements about identity rather than realism. Young men belong to the
gymnasium, not just exercise but a Greek cultural institution.
Walker, good benefit for defining oneself as Greek because of tax reasons in Roman Egypt.
Aligning with Greek, imperial, cut above the natives.
Consider the whole mummy, connection to Osiris. Not just an artwork.