Manchester Memoirs, Vol. lix. (191 5), No. 10. 41 



trayal of the features enabled any one, including the 

 deceased's own ka, to identify the owner. Every circum- 

 stance of the making and the use of these heads bears 

 out this interpretation, and no one has explained these 

 facts more lucidly than Junker himself. 



[Since the foregoing paragraphs have been put into 

 print a preliminary report has come to hand from Professor 

 Reisner, to whom I am indebted for most of my informa- 

 tion regarding these portrait heads — Museum of Fhie Arts 

 Bulletin, Boston, April, 191 5.] 



At a somewhat later period in the Old Kingdom the 

 making of these so-called "substitution-heads" was dis- 

 continued, and it became the practice to make a statue of 

 the whole man (or woman), which was placed above- 

 ground in the megalithic serdab within the mastaba (see 

 94). But even when the complete statue was made for 

 the serdab the head alone was the part that was modelled 

 with any approach to realism. In other words, the 

 importance of the head as the chief means of identification 

 was still recognised. Moreover, this idea manifested itself 

 throughout the whole history of Egyptian mummification, 

 for as late as the first century of the Christian era a por- 

 trait of the deceased was placed in front of the face of 

 the mummy. 



Thus in course of time the original idea of converting 

 the wrapped body itself into a portrait-statue of the 

 deceased was temporarily" abandoned and the mummy 

 was stowed away in the burial chamber at the bottom of 

 a deep shaft, the better to protect it from desecration, 

 while the portrait-statue was placed above ground, in a 

 strong chamber {serdab'), hidden in the mastaba (94) 



H How insistent the desire was to make a statue of the mummy itself is 

 shown by the repeated attempts made in later times; see the account of the 

 mummies of Amenophis III. (86) and of the rulers and priests of the Wist 

 and XXIInd Dynasties (78 and 87). 



