268 Observations on Ancient Egyptian Crania. 



Art. V. — Observations on a Second Series of Ancient Egyptian 

 Crania ; by Samuel George Morton, M. D. 



[From the Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, for 



October, 1844.] 



Towards the close of the year 1842, Dr. Lepsius, the distin- 

 guished head of the Prussian Scientific Commission in Egypt, 

 reopened several very ancient tombs in the vicinity of the Pyra- 

 mids of Ghizeh. These tombs date with the third and fourth 

 dynasties of Egyptian chronology, as is proved by their inscrip- 

 tions ; but having been the receptacles of wealthy individuals, they 

 were no doubt plundered in very remote times ; and whenever 

 succeeding generations have again devoted them to sepulchral 

 purposes, avarice has renewed its desecrations in the search for 

 treasure. Thus, the Hykshos, Persians, Greeks, Romans and 

 Saracens, have probably each in turn violated these tombs ; leav- 

 ing it a question of entire uncertainty, whether the embalmed 

 bodies now found in them belong to the earlier or later epochs of 

 Egyptian history. I make these remarks to show that I do not 

 infer the age of these mummies from the date of the tombs ; but 

 at the same time it may be observed, that in the mere search for 

 plunder, there was no occasion to destroy or eject the bodies of 

 the dead ; and mutilated as they are, it is possible and even pro- 

 bable, that some of them pertained to a very remote age. 



My friend Dr. Pickering, writing to me from Cairo about the 

 time of these explorations, observes that Dr. Lepsius expected to 

 find " the veritable remains of the primeval Egyptians ; but it 

 was discovered that they had been displaced by Greeks, &c., and 

 that there was nothing of this sort older than Psammeticus." 

 (B. C. 550.) The bodies that retained their legends may have 

 been of Greek and other comparatively modern inhabitants of 

 Egypt ; but with respect to the seventeen skulls before us, I have 

 no hesitation in declaring, that but two of them could have be- 

 longed to persons of Greek, or any other Indo-European lineage. 

 The others may have borne Greek inscriptions, but that would 

 not make them Greeks ; for the language of the latter people 

 was the compulsory vernacular tongue during most of the Ptole- 

 maic epoch. Moreover, the skulls in question are entirely denu- 

 ded of bandages and even of integuments ; whence it seems 



