Cross-Cultural Analysis

The Ancient Egyptian and Chinchorro cultures differed dramatically in terms of societal organization, cultural evolution and political ideologies. They did, however, share one significant trait in common: they believed in the importance of mummifying their dead. Our cross-analysis focused on illustrating some of the differences and similarities between these two cultural approaches to preserving the dead.

(Status) Differentiation:

The Ancient Egyptians had more hierarchal societies with a pharaoh king who embodied the deity Horus. Originally it was believed that only the pharaoh should go to the afterlife while everyone else would be reincarnated. These beliefs slowly changed to allow the higher elite and finally the poor to be allowed access to the judgement for the afterlife (Stevens and Cockitt 2015). They were given the cheapest form of mummification where their bodies were left to lie in natron salt for 30 days before being returned to their relatives (Bard 2008). As can be seen, beliefs driving Egyptian mummification were thus at first highly class based. While pharaohs were made large single tombs, the mummies of poor individuals could be found in large burial grounds. For example, in Bahariya Oasis, 10,000 mummies have been found buried together (Bard 2008).

The Chinchorro also perhaps had some status differentiation but to a much lower extent. Their children were likely the first to be mummified (Arriaza 1995a), suggesting that the initial beliefs driving mummification were in relation to length of life and grief, not class or status. However, there may be some reason to believe there was some status differentiation based upon differences in who was allowed the larger effort of artificial mummification versus the easier natural mummification (Arriaza et al. 2005). But there are many other variables which might account for this difference besides a status hierarchy; some individuals may have seen artificial mummification as less necessary, while some may have had less time for the ritual or less access to a specialist with the skills.

In short, the Ancient Egyptians had more identity differentiation around mummification practices. Mummification in the case of the Ancient Egyptians can be seen as at first being used to enforce the status of the pharaoh, while for the Chinchorro, mummification likely first acted as a method of mourning which allowed the lengthening of the lives of children.

Mummification and replicating the image of the living:

It is interesting to note that while the Chinchorro have been categorized as having distinct mummification periods, the Ancient Egyptians are described more in terms of a slow progression of mummification practices.

Though the Ancient Egyptians had been preserving their dead since the Old Kingdom (2686-2181 BCE), they did not begin to fill their mummies until the New Kingdom (1550-1069) where they began to use sawdust, butter, linen, and mud (David 1978). It is surprising that this practice did not occur earlier given that the main belief driving mummification for the Ancient Egyptians was the desire for the Ka (the individual’s physical vital life force) and the Ba (the individual’s personally characterized spirit) to be able to recognize the body. When an individual died, the Ba and Ka would travel away from the body. It was necessary for the Ka and Ba to be able to recognize the body in order for them to return to it. The final unification of souls within the body allowed the individual to enter judgement for the afterlife (Andrews 1984). One of the hypotheses put forth for explaining Chinchorro practices of mummification is that the preservation of the body in the individual’s image helped call forth the individual’s essence which then acted as a mediator between the spiritual and living world (Arriaza 1995a). To this end, the Chinchorro filled their mummies with grass, ashes, soil, or animal hair as early as 5050 BCE (Arriaza 1995b). Why, then if the Ancient Egyptians and Chinchorro had a similar belief driving the preservation of the body (that they wanted the body to continue to look like the individual for whatever purpose) did the Ancient Egyptians take so long to begin filling their bodies?

The Old Kingdom (2686-2181 BCE) period of Ancient Egyptian mummification is characterized by the heavy use of plaster soaked linens. The linen was believed to help individuals mummify, while the plaster worked to shape but also stiffen the body to the point it appeared statue-like (David 1978). This plaster would have taken the place of Chinchorro filling. The Middle Kingdom (1991-1786 BCE) next made mummification available to the elite other than the pharaoh. Natron salts began to be used to preserve the body. The salt allowed the Egyptians to use less plaster linens, leading to thinner mummies (David 1978). But this period also marked the use of cartonnage death masks, made of plaster linen and resin, which were placed on the faces of mummies (David 1978), more strongly calling forth the individual’s image. In the New Kingdom (1550-1069), the filling of Egyptian mummies appears, some 4,000 years after the Chinchorro took up the practice, with both likely seeking the same goal: to more closely replicate the image of the deceased. The lack of filling in Egyptian mummies can than likely be attributed to the use of plaster in Egyptian culture. It is also interesting to note that while the Ancient Egyptians preserved many of the internal organs in different ways throughout their reign (Stevens and Cockitt 2015), the Chinchorro discarded the organs (Arriaza 1995b), perhaps with ceremony, as unimportant to the mummy’s purpose.

Grave goods:

The Chinchorro had no differences in the lavishness of their grave goods, nor was age/sex differentiation when it came to grave goods apparent (Arriaza 1995a). The earliest Chinchorro mummies rarely had grave goods (Arriaza 1995a), in contrast to the earliest Egyptian mummies which were pharaohs (David 1978). Examples of Chinchorro grave goods include harpoons, fish hooks, weights for fish hooks, lithic knives, basketry materials, lanceolate lithic points, throwing sticks, and darts (Arriaza 1995a); things which would have been useful to subsistence to the afterlife, though little theorizing seems to have been done around Chinchorro beliefs in this matter in the English literature. Common Ancient Egyptian grave goods, even for the poor, were food and pottery to hold food, as the Ka soul would need to eat before the individual was transferred to the afterlife or reincarnation (David 1978). Therefore, at least for a period both cultures added items to burials to potentially aid in the afterlife, though the Chinchorro may not have placed as much importance on grave goods.

Environment:

Ancient Egyptians lived along the Nile (Bard 2008) in similar desert conditions to the Chinchorro who lived along the Atacama desert (Arriaza 1995a). Both could have possibly seen natural mummies and been inspired to replicate this practice (Arriaza 1995a).

Conclusion:

In short, the importance of preserving the dead to the Chinchorro began demonstrably earlier and applied to everyone in their culture, but it was not until thousands of years later that what was once seen as a ritual fit for a god became accessible to the Ancient Egyptian people. If nothing else, this cross-cultural comparison shows how perceptions of death and burial are closely tied to societal structures. Mummification in both cases was likely used as a means of obtaining eternal life, but while the Ancient Egyptians perceived themselves as taking up the benefits of gods, the Chinchorro may have desired the form of extended life once granted to children or else believed that bodily preservation allowed one to be of benefit to one’s family from the spiritual realm. Despite the fact that both cultures sought to preserve their dead, the beliefs around and purposes of such a mortuary ritual were likely perceived very differently.

Finally, it is interesting to wonder whether any of the Ancient Egyptians and Chinchorro who lived within the same time period were ever aware of each other’s mortuary practices, even indirectly, as within the period the Chinchorro abandoned mummification (around 1700 BCE) (Arriaza 1995b), the Ancient Egyptians still viewed it as a high status, godly rite of passage.

Image credit: Arriaza 1995a.

Image credit: History Channel.

Image credit: History Channel.

Representation of Ba

Image credi: Aseptemberblog (Wordpress)

Representation of the Akh

Image credit: Aseptemberblog (Wordpress)

Image credit:Arriaza 1995a.

Image credit: Richard Nowitz / National Geographic

Image credit: Carlos G. Museo Momias Chinchorro / Trip Advisor.