Animals in the Ritual Landscape

at Abydos: A Synopsis1
Salima Ikram
American University in Cairo

lthough Abydos is famous for its New Kingdom temples and its Early Dynastic royal burials,
few people realize that during the Late Period a considerable part of the site was dedicated to
animal burials (Fig. 1). The majority of such burials were linked to the worship of the local gods
as well as the kings who were buried there, and took the form of sacred animals or votive offerings associated with these divine cults (Kessler 1986; Ikram 2005a: 1, 514). In addition to these
interments, more secular animal burials of pets are also found at Abydos (Ikram 2005a: 1-4), and
the earliest of these might have inspired the later sacred animal cemeteries at the site. This article
provides a preliminary exploration of the different types of animal burial found at the site, with
an emphasis on the ibis burials at the Shunet es-Zebib.
The earliest animal burials at Abydos date at least to the start of Pharaonic history when rulers of the Protodynastic and Early Dynastic periods were buried surrounded by donkeys, lions,
and dogs, animals that they presumably owned (Dreyer et al. 1993: 59; M. Adams, S. Rossel, L.
Bestock, personal communications). In these early periods, it is possible that all of these creatures
were not just regarded as pets, but also had totemic and cultic significance (Ikram 2005a: 6;
Kessler 1989; Kessler and Nur Ed-Din 2005: 12730). In addition to being the main means of land
transport, donkeys were considered to be Sethian in nature and their burial around the king might
also be interpreted as a mechanism of control by the king over the wild forces of nature. Lions,
sovereigns of wild beasts, were fit avatars of kingship, and as such might have been kept as pets
and symbols of royal power (as was recently the practice in Ethiopia by Haile Selassie and the
Imams of Taiz in Yemen). Dogs alone seem to have been regarded as conventional pets, with their
individual identities preserved on stelae marking their burials, as was the case with the hounds of
Den (Dreyer et al. 1993: 59). Certainly non-royal pets were also buried at Abydos. One Hapimen,
buried during the Late Period/30th Dynasty, was buried with his pet dog, also mummified, placed
at his feet (Petrie 1902: 3940), as is seen on tomb-carvings of medieval knights.

417

Ikram

Fig. 1: Map of
Abydos showing
location of primary
votive animal cemeteries.

The majority of the animal burials at Abydos are, however, not of pets, but rather of mummified sacred or votive animals. These are located in graveyards scattered all over the site (Ayrton,
Currelly and Weigall 1904: 12; Peet 1914: 6; Petrie 1902: 168).2 These cemeteries take a variety
of forms: simple interments in desert sand and tafla, hypogea excavated in the bedrock or tafla,
built mudbrick tombs, burials in pottery jars or limestone sarcophagi placed in sandy depressions.
The diverse species so far discovered at Abydos include dogs (and perhaps other canids), raptors,
shrews, serpents, cats, ibises, and a few ovicaprids and cattle. Some of the cemeteries are devoted
to one type of animal, but most contain a variety of creatures, buried in no discernable order.
It is sometimes difficult to differentiate between the burials of sacred animals and those of
votive mummies. A sacred animal is thought to be creatures that was an incarnation of a god, or
of a particular aspect of a divinity, identified by a set of defined markings, and worshipped as a
deity during its life, and then mummified and buried as a god after its death. When the animal
died, the divine spirit moved into the body of another similar creature (as is believed happens
with many of the Tibetan lamas), which was then identified by the priests and taken to the temple.
The sacred Apis Bull of Memphis was one such creature. These animals were not only associated with their particular god, but also with aspects of Osiris and linked to the divine apotheosis
of the king (Kessler website: 11; Kessler 1989: Chapter 3). At any given time only one creature
was revered as the god incarnate; in temples these animals acted as oracles and played a part in
dream interpretation (Kessler 1986; Ikram 2005a: 414; Kessler and Nur ed-Din 2005; Redford
and Redford 2005; Kurth 1986). In most animal necropoleis only a limited number of individuals
fit this category. They can be identified either by a specific burial place, such as the Serapeum
at Saqqara, or by funerary equipment, such as special stone sarcophagi, gilding, or other outward displays of their divinity. Thus far, it has been difficult to isolate such burials at Abydos,
although it is possible that a tomb with a pyramidal superstructure and chapel containing 17 cat
skeletons with offering pots of milk found by W. M. F. Petrie (see Malek 1993: 52) might have
been dedicated to divine creatures.3

418

Animals in the Ritual Landscape at Abydos

The burial of divine animals is closely tied to the practice of offering votive mummies. The
mummies of votive animals differed, however, from those of their divine counterparts as they
did not have the special markings associated with the divinity. A votive mummy was a specific
animal that was mummified and given to its corresponding deity so that the prayers attached
to it were heard immediately and eternally by the god (an excellent long-term insurance for the
pilgrim) (Ikram 2005a: 10-11; cf. Kessler 1989; Kessler and Nur ed-Din 2005).4 Thus, ibises were
offered to Thoth, raptors to aspects of Re, and canids to Anubis (Houlihan and Goodman 1986: 48;
Meyer 1904).5 These votive offerings seem to only have been made at sites where actual incarnations of the god in his/her animal form were worshipped in the form of sacred animals. These
mummies were prepared en masse in embalming houses (wabet) and sold to pilgrims by the gods
priests (Martin 1981: 9; Ikram 2005a: 9-11; Kessler 1989; Kessler and Nur ed-Din 2005).6 Once
the mummy had been consecrated to the god, it was buried in tombs located near the temple,
often in catacombs called Houses of Rest (Ray 1976: 140). Thus far, only a single instance of
formal catacombs, such as those located at Saqqara and Tuna el-Gebel, has been found at Abydos
(a dog hypogeum [Peet 1914: pl. XVIII]). Generally, the animals of Abydos are buried in pits or
mass graves (see below).
The popularity of these cults with visible animal avatars was rooted in their accessibility to
the public and the upsurge of personal piety that occurred after the New Kingdom. This sort of
cultic activity reached its apogee in the Late Period, and continued well into the Roman period
until Christianity prevailed over Egypt and the last Egyptian temples were closed under the Edict
of Theodosius (CE 391).7 The dates for most of the animal cemeteries at Abydos (other than those
clearly belonging to the early Egyptian rulers) fit neatly into this time frame.
While several groups of burials of votive and/or sacred animals have been discovered, specific
temples or ritual structures normally associated with this type of cultic activity are curiously
absent. Perhaps future excavations might reveal these, or maybe they have been lost forever to
the sebbakhin or to the enthusiastic digging of early excavators who failed to identify them. The
lack of these temples makes it more difficult to interpret these animal cemeteries. However, in
some instances, it is possible to link the different species to aspects of the various gods whose
cults are well established at Abydos. Thus, the dog (and perhaps other canid) burials attest to the
popularity of Anubis, or more likely, a conflation of Khentamentiu, Wepwawet and Anubis. Most
other species found at Abydos can be related to gods (and rulers-as-gods) that were represented
in the chapels of the New Kingdom temple of Seti I. Raptors, shrews, and serpents, were all
related to different aspects of the sun god. Cat burials might attest to a Bastet cult, or more probably in the Abydene context, might have associations with Re. Ibises were dedicated to Thoth,
but also connected to Osiris, various manifestations of Horus (and thus the king), Re, Ptah, and
even Nephthys (Zivie 1980: 116118; Kessler and Nur ed-Din 2005). Just as different gods were
intertwined in their ba forms (e.g., Khnum, represented by a ram, was the ba of Re and of Osiris),
so were their animal avatars. A discussion of the different animals found at Abydos, and their
possible significance in the sacred landscape follows.

Canids

Canids are associated with a variety of divinities, all of whom are associated with death, cemeteries, and voyages, particularly between this world and the next. Wepwawet, the Opener of
the Ways; Khentamentiu, the Foremost Among the Westerners; and Anubis, Lord of the Sacred
Lands, were all represented by jackal-like creatures. All of these divinities are attested at different sites within Abydos. The earliest inscriptions found in the temple area cleared by Petrie date

419

Ikram

to the reign of Neferkare Pepi, and suggest that it was originally dedicated to Khentimentiu and
Wepwawet (Petrie 1903: 29). A stela belonging to a man called Sabef tentatively dated to Dynasty
I, gives him a title that has been provisionally translated as Priest of Anubis in the Divine Abode
(Petrie 1900: 45). A form of Anubis also appears on Early Dynastic ebony and ivory tablets in
close relationship with the dead king (Petrie 1901: 20), and is of course firmly attested in New
Kingdom contexts (Peet 1914: 109) and later.
Canid burials occur in many parts of the site. This may suggest the presence of several shrines,
perhaps active at different periods, or dealing with different aspects of these canid divinities. The
animal that represents these divinities is neither a dog nor a jackal, but a super-canid. This creature was a melange of jackal, dog, wolf, and hyena, all creatures that had the potential to disturb
the body during embalming and disinter burials. They inhabited the liminal spaces between the
desert and the cultivation, and by extension, the transitional area between the land of the dead
and that of the living.
Perhaps the largest canid cemetery, and the one most architecturally similar to the large scale
animal hypogea found elsewhere in Egypt, is a hypogeum located in the Middle Cemetery next to
the Sacred Well (Peet 1914: 98101; Haddon 1914: 4042). This well, located near the dig-house of
the Egypt Exploration Fund, was set within a rectangular pit and approached by stairs. The west
corner of the pit was roughly walled, and led to a rock-cut catacomb filled with canine burials.
The dogs were buried in chambers leading off a central corridor. In each chamber the animals
were laid in layers, eight to ten deep, which would mean that the entire hypogeum contained
tens of thousands of dogs. They were stacked with their heads facing the same direction for convenience of balance. Some of these were found as piles of bones and decayed mummy wrapping,
perhaps due to robbers, while others were more complete.
Very little or no bitumen/pitch was used in the manufacture of these dog mummies, which
are, on the whole, not well embalmed, and fragile and difficult to handle. The excavators suggested that the animals were possibly macerated in a natron bath, then dried slowly and wrapped
in linen (Haddon 1914: 40; Lortet and Gaillard 1905: 1). There is no mention of evisceration.
However, they could merely have been desiccated with natron or salt, before being wrapped in
white linen. For wrapping, the animals were put in a very typical position, almost as if the dogs
were begging on their haunches with the tail pulled through and resting on the belly, the front
legs extended down along the chest, and the head at right angles to the body. Quite possibly
many of the dogs were killed deliberately by strangulation (Lortet and Gaillard 1905: 1, and
quoted in Haddon 1914: 41), as is the case with other votive mummies (Zivie and Lichtenberg
2005: 106119; Armitage and Clutton-Brock 1981; Ikram 2005a: 13; Charron 1990: 20913), or
perhaps by poison. A few had probably died of old age. Haddon examined several specimens from
here, and identified all of them as Pariah Dogs, save for one jackal. Haddon believed the dogs to
have been cross-bred with wild dogs and jackals in the past. The animals were of all ages, ranging
from puppies to old dogs (1914: 402; Peet 1914: 98101).8
The excavators dated the well possibly to the Nineteenth Dynasty, but the dog hypogeum was
certainly a later intrusion. A group of pottery lamps that were found in situ with the dogs date
that deposit to between to the first century BC and the fourth century AD (Peet 1914: 98101).
Other dog burials are scattered throughout the site (Peet 1914: 7).9 Concentrations have
been found in various shallow graves in the Middle Cemetery, and are clearly intrusive and
later than the original cemetery. They date to no earlier than the 26th Dynasty, and quite probably to the Graeco-Roman Period. All the animals coming from the Middle Cemetery that the
author examined by the kind invitation of Dr. Janet Richards were dogs. The majority of the

420

Animals in the Ritual Landscape at Abydos

animals examined were mature, many with worn-down teeth. These animals were prepared by
evisceration and then desiccation with natron or salt, prior to being wrapped. There is little
evidence of resin in the mummies. Not all of the dogs from this area were positioned in the
usual begging pose; some of them had been prepared with all four of their legs straight out, as
if they were standing. Such positions are known from other sites (Zivie and Lichtenberg 2005:
106119). Additionally, Cemetery E contained a burial of two young puppies in a jar, as well as
four dogs buried in a small brick enclosure (Peet and Loat 1913: 41), amongst other creatures
(see below).
Canid burials are also located near the forecourt of the portal temple of Ramesses II. Some
work was carried out here by the University of Pennsylvania-Yale University team in 1968 (Kemp
1975: 36). Closer to the temple of Seti I, toward the edge of el-Araba el-Madfuna, Labib Habachi
excavated a tomb full of dogs (1939: 77374). The tomb had been disturbed, so no complete
mummies were recorded. The canids had been buried in an underground brick chamber that
measured 2.85 x 1.65 metres, and was oriented north to south. Due to the size of the bricks used
in constructing the tomb (0.8 .12 x .26 m) and its proximity to Late Predynastic/Early Dynastic
burials that employed the same sized brick, Habachi provisionally assigns this dog cemetery a
contemporary date. Although several Predynastic canid cemeteries have been recorded throughout Egypt (Flores 2003: 6, 9, 10, 16, 33, 423, etc.), it is more probable that this mass grave
dates to the Graeco-Roman period, in keeping with those found in other areas at Abydos. Other
human graves of the Graeco-Roman Period were found interspersed among those dating to the
Predynastic/Early Dynastic (Habachi 1939: 767), and it is quite plausible that those people reused
the older tombs, or their bricks, for dog burials. The state of the animals was such that the excavator did not comment on whether or not they had been mummified, and could not determine
on the cause of death.
Recently, Dr. Stephen Harvey discovered a significant deposit of dog burials, probably of the
Roman Period, at a corner of the enclosure wall of the Tetisheri complex. Layers of dogs (some
wrapped in linen) covered by reed and palm mats were found in a large hole (Harvey, personal
communication). Thus far over 70 individuals were counted, although many more still remain in
the pit. All ages of animal are represented. The dogs, like others at Abydos, seem to have been
prepared with natron after being eviscerated (in some cases). A thorough excavation and investigation, planned for the near future, of this deposit should shed significant light on the canid cult
and the role that Tetisheris complex played in the Roman Period.
Canid cults were popular throughout the Nile Valley (e.g. Saqqara, Suares near Maghagha,
Rda, and Tell el-Amarna), with a concentration in Middle Egypt, particularly in the regions of
Asyut and Abydos where the cult of Anubis/Wepwawet was strongest. These contained not only
dogs, but jackals and hyaenas. Some of the Asyut examples are now in a school museum at Asyut
and at the Agricultural Museum (Lortet and Gaillard 1905: VVI, 118). It is interesting that the
canid cult, complete with its votive mummies also spread to Kharga Oasis. The Roman fortress site
of el Deir (Dunand and Lichtenberg 2005: 7487) is home to mummified canids, as is the temple
site of Ain Dabashiya that has two separate concentrations of canid burials (Ikram and Rossi
forthcoming). The cults popularity is probably due to a variety of reasons, one being the obvious
attraction of a desert god in such an area. Furthermore, some of the main routes that connected
Kharga to the Nile Valley originated at Abydos and Asyut, home of Anubis/Wepwawet. Also, in
the Roman Period (the era of the Kharga mummies) the cult of Anubis-Wepwawet, Opener of the
Ways and guardian of travellers, became the mascot of many soldiers, especially those venturing
onto the dangerous paths leading through the desert.10

421

Ikram

Cats

Several cat burials have come to light in Abydos, although their volume is far surpassed by those
of other animals (Peet 1914: 7).11 However, it should be noted that there is no Old or Middle
Kingdom evidence for any of these cults (possibly an accident of survival), and the New Kingdom
Seti temple had no chapel for any of these divinities save for Re. A great many deities are associated with cats or felines of some variety: Bastet, Pakhet, Sekhmet, Mut, and Re, to name but a
few. The majority of cat cemeteries found in Egypt from the Late Period onward seem to be related
to shrines of the first two goddesses, so it is possible that the cult of one or both of these (if not
other feline-related divinities) was celebrated at Abydos.
Naville reports the discovery of several cat burials in Cemetery E, in an area some 300 metres
north of the temple of Ramesses II, and above the valley that was the road to Umm el-Qaab. A
mastaba-like superstructure presided over a series of Late Period/Ptolemaic tombs consisting of
shafts leading through an arched doorway to large vaulted chambers made of mud-brick. A large
vase, over a metre in height, containing seventy-three mummies of cats and kittenswas buried
in the sand against the outer wall of one of them (Naville et Al. 1914: 26, pl. II.2). Although the
vase is not clearly visible in the photograph, it does seem to be of a later, rather than earlier date.
This deposit is clearly some sort of ex votos, and not the burial of pets.
In other instances, however, it is more difficult to determine the precise nature of an animal
burial. Isolated finds of single individuals (Peet 1914: 10009) do not seem to fit into the votive
mummy category, and the poverty of some of these burials argues against their being divine
creatures. Some burials where cats and humans are found together (a vaulted brick tomb, E 422,
and R 11) are more difficult to fathom. Tomb E 422 (Peet 1914: 92) contained a mummified cat
lying next to the head of a child and a packet of food (?) wrapped in cloth. This would seem
to have been a pet. Tomb R 11 (Peet 1914: 94) consisted of a human burial together with three
mummified cats. Were these all pets, or were they votive offerings, or were they votive offerings
buried with a priest? Unfortunately the evidence is inconclusive. Another confusing cat burial is
one mentioned already: Petries discovery of the mud-brick pyramidal tomb and chapel with 17
cat skeletons and their milk-pots (Malek 1993: 52)were they pets, sacred creatures, or votive
mummies? That they were sacred animals is a distinct possibility, but this difficulty underlines
the necessity of trying to more closely define what constitutes each of these categories. Naturally,
archaeological evidence, such as whether this was a single deposit made at one time, and whether
the wrappings were the same, might help in defining the nature of burial; however, without these
details one can only speculate. Occasional cat burials are also found amongst those of other
creatures (see Ibis, below).

Raptors

In general, raptors are related to solar deities, with Re, Horus, Montu (particularly in his later
incarnations linked with Re), Sokar, and Sopdu, being the most significant. To varying degrees
all of these divinities played a role at Abydos, whether in their relationship to Osiris, or to resurrection. A surprisingly large number of raptor mummies have been found at Abydos. These
birds are loath to breed in captivity, so, for the most part, must be gathered, dead or alive, for
mummification. Thus, throughout Egypt, many of the mummies that seem to be of raptors are
in fact ancient fakes consisting of a few raptor bones or feathers, or even mud or the bones of
other animals, wrapped up to look like raptors. No such fakes have been reported in the Abydos
publications, although it is quite possible that they did exist. No single species of raptor dominates
the mummies. This might be due to diverse reasons, including the fact that several different raptors

422

Animals in the Ritual Landscape at Abydos

were used to produce individual divine avatars (see note 5), as well as the paucity of available
specimens.
Several raptors, together with other animals (see below), were found in Cemetery E. The
raptors included peregrine falcons (Falco peregrinus), hobbys (Falco subbuteo), kestrels (Falco
(Cerchneis) tinnunculus), and sparrowhawks (Accipiter nisus) (Peet and Loat 1913: 41, pl. 20).
The west chamber in the tomb of Djedhor located near the Shunet ez-Zebib (G 50, Dynasty XXX)
contained a well-wrapped mummified hawk. As it was headless the excavators were unable to
identify the species (Petrie 1902: 389, pl. LXXX). The northern flank of the Middle Cemetery
also hosted several raptor (and shrewsee below) burials, although the species have not been
identified (Garstang 1901: 136).
During the 20002001 season, a workman excavating with the University of PennsylvaniaInstitute of Fine Arts Team field-directed by Dr. Matthew Adams made an accidental discovery
while leaving the dig house: he stumbled upon a small animal cemetery. This area was first briefly
investigated by Adams and then by archaeologists from the Supreme Council of Antiquities.12
The site contained several large open-mouthed pottery jars that, in many cases, were sealed
with cloth and plaster or ceramic lids, limestone boxes, and open burials of animals interspersed
with a few humans. Many of the pottery jars contained groups of raptor mummies. Some raptors enjoyed individual burials in limestone coffinswere these the bodies of sacred rather than
votive birds? Unfortunately, these birds have also yet to be identified to species. No doubt there
are other similar deposits of raptor mummies scattered about Abydos, either undiscovered or
undocumented testaments to a solar cult.

Diverse Animals

Other animals that definitely belong to the group of votive mummies buried at Abydos include
shrews, snakes, and scarabs. All of these creatures are associated with either the diurnal or nocturnal manifestation of the sun god, and by extension the king. Shrew burials often occur in
conjunction with those of raptors (e.g., at Saqqara), sometimes even in the same receptacles (Paul
Nicholson and Derrick Russell, personal communications).
The animal cemetery located near the American excavation house contained shrews as well
as raptors. Many of the shrews were buried in individual limestone coffins, some of which were
surmounted by a carved image of a shrew. In the case of a few of these carved coffins the shrew
had been gilded, thereby underlining its solar connection (Ikram 2005b: 33540).13 Although this
deposit of creatures sacred to the sun god is sizeable, no obvious structure associated with cult or
embalming activity has been found as yet. Another concentration of shrew (and raptor) burials
was found in the northern flank of the Middle Cemetery (Garstang 1901: 136). According to the
excavators (Peet and Loat 1913: 41, pl. 20), Cemetery E also included shrews (Crocodura spp.) and
the Egyptian Spiny Mouse (Acomys cahirinus spp.). Although the Spiny Mouses habits are not
quite like those of the shrew, it no doubt became conflated with the shrew due to the similarity
in their appearance (Osborn and Helmy 1980: 293309). These tiny creatures were wrapped in
groups of 2030 individuals in oblong or square packages, and placed in ceramic jars, together
with raptors and ibises (see below). Some of the bandaging was elaborate (coffered), but for the
most part, the bundles were plain.
In addition to housing dogs, raptors and shrews, Cemetery E also contained mummies of
snakes, scarabs (most probably Scarabaeus sacer), and ibises (see below). The snakes and scarabs
were wrapped in circular bundles and placed in jars with other creatures (Peet and Loat 1913: 41,
pl. 20). These creatures were also associated with various aspects of the sun god (dung beetles

423

Ikram

with Khepri, snakes with the risen Re or his eye, or with Mehen, one of the protectors of Res
barque), and their mummified remains have been found elsewhere (e.g., Saqqara, Abu Roash,
Thebes).
Other larger mammals were also buried in Cemetery E. Four dogs (see above) and several
sheep (Ovis aries) were found in small mud-brick enclosures scattered among the jars. An ox (Peet
and Loat 1913: xi)14 was also found buried near some of the jars (Peet and Loat 1913: 41). Other
burials of larger mammals are scattered throughout the site (e.g. burials of gazelle, ovicaprids,
cattle, and generic birds) (Petrie 1902: 1719, pl. 49),15 but it is sometimes difficult to ascertain
whether these are food offerings, or served some other votive or sacred purpose. In 2001 some
ovicaprid bones were found in the Shunet ez-Zebib (Op. 9, L. Bestock, personal communication),
but they did not seem to come from a particular burial. My examinations showed that they were
from different individuals. Other areas of the Shunet ez-Zebib yielded the bones of cattle, mouse
(Mus musculus), ducks (Anas spp.), all of which seem to be intrusive.

Ibis

The animal that is most plentiful at Abydos is the ibis, with various concentrations of ibis burials
scattered throughout the site. Both Sacred (Threskiornis aethiopicus) and Glossy (Plegadis falcinellus) ibises are represented in the various assemblages. The Sacred Ibis is primarily associated
with the god Thoth, god of wisdom, literacy, and the moon, the heavenly body that was equivalent to the sun at night and known as the silver Aten in the Late Period (Wilkinson 2003: 216;
Kurth 1986: 498509). Although at first Thoth does not seem to be directly related to Abydos, he
has a close connection to the main gods of the site as well as probably having areas dedicated
exclusively to himself. He is considered an attendant god of Osiris for a variety of reasons. Thoth
plays the pivotal role of scribe in the Hall of Judgement (e.g. BD 17, 18, 20, 125, 182), and is
frequently mentioned in funerary books, such as the Book of the Heavenly Cow. In the Pyramid
Texts (PT 59496), the king ascends to heaven on Thoths wings. He is also connected with Osiris
through Horus. Thoth mediated between Horus and Seth when they fought, and laid the foundation of all offerings by giving Horus the wedjat, which was then passed over to Osiris.16 Thoth is
also closely associated with Re as he navigated his boat through the sky, acted as his messenger,
and is sometimes called the soul or heart of Re. Thoth himself is sometimes dubbed the son of
Re, although there is another story of his origins (in the Contendings of Horus and Seth) where
he is the son of Horus, emerging from the forehead of Seth. Thoth also presided over the mystical union of Re with Osiris that permitted the dead to be reborn or reanimated, a key feature in
rebirth and resurrection, and the main theme of the site of Abydos.
One of the larger Ibis cemeteries was part of Peet and Loats Cemetery E, located to the east of
the wadi leading to Umm el-Qaab. The cemetery contained both human and Sacred Ibis burials.
The majority of humans and ibises were interspersed among Sixth Dynasty tombs, and buried
quite close to the surface; these apparently date to the Roman Period (30 BCE to CE 379). The
mummified ibises were placed in large pottery jars of slightly varying shapes that were placed
upright in the sand and sealed. Peet and Loat record at least 93 such jars containing multiple ibis
bundles in each (1913: 40; pls. 1617).
Some vessels were made of sun-dried clay, and others were fired. They contained from two
to 108 ibis bundles (Whittemore 1914: 248). Some of the vessels were roughly barrel shaped, and
made of unbaked clay, built up in sections. Their mouths were sealed with mud-bricks measuring
on average 35 18 10 cm placed on top. They were placed in an apparently random order,
close to one another (Peet and Loat 1913: 4042, pl. 26). A unique dome shaped jar (Peet and

424

Animals in the Ritual Landscape at Abydos

Loat 1913: 42, pl. XXII) had a large capacity, containing 15 adult ibises and a false ibis mummy
made of feathers and bones, wrapped to resemble a human mummy. The excavators also found
groups of pear-shaped, roughly baked jars, each containing a single bird (Whittemore 1914: 248).
Most of the jars were sealed with lime plaster. Other vessel shapes included bowls, flat bottomed
barrels, narrow-mouthed jars, short necked oval jars, and zir-types (Peet and Loat 1913: pls.
XVIXVII, XXIIXXV). Some of these bore rope impressions, while others had pot-marks, some
showing ibises (Peet and Loat 1913: 41, fig. 21). A remarkable piece, Jar 1022, was adorned with
a drawing of a man and a woman facing one another over a vine (convolvulus?)perhaps it had
been reused.
The jars were filled to different levels, some containing only a layer or two of mummies
(about five to eight), while others were two-thirds full (some containing as many as 94 mummies). Prior to wrapping, the birds had been preserved with bitumen17 and perhaps natron. The
wrappings varied; some are plainly (and often carelessly) wrapped (Whittemore 1914: 248), while
others are more elaborately prepared. The more complicated ones were wrapped in linen bandages
with the external set of bandages, meant to be viewed only from the front, woven in elaborate
patterns using brown and white bandages: herringbones, coffers, diamonds, zigzags, and chequer
boards. Some had heads and elaborate atef crowns made of reinforced linen (Peet and Loat 1913:
4045, pls. XVIIIXXI). Images of Thoth or the god in ibis form appear as appliqus on some of
the mummies found in the area (Peet and Loat 1913: pls. XVIII.7, XX.6). The backs of all of these
elaborately bandaged mummies were plain. As with other ornately wrapped mummies found
elsewhere, many were ancient fakes containing mud or a few feathers, eggs, or bones (Peet and
Loat 1913: 40; Ikram 2005a: 14; Ikram and Iskander 2002).18 The birds were mummified in two
positions: the beak on the belly, creating a central line, or the head and bill along the left side
close to the wing as if the creature were asleep (Peet and Loat 1913: 40). A few were wrapped
so as to represent a human mummy (Peet and Loat 1913: 42). In addition to the birds, their eggs
were also discovered. Three small jars with narrow mouths contained broken ibis eggs (Peet and
Loat 1913: 41). Other jars filled with eggs were more elaborate: some had yellow and purple bands
painted around them and contained from 40 to 200 ibis eggs, and a few raptor eggs. Some of
the ibis eggs were wrapped in linen, and had a scarab placed over them, as if the sun god was
presiding over the birth/egg (Whittemore 1914: 24849). This emphasizes the symbolism of the
egg of creation, wherein the yolk is identified with the sun. A few small pots were found...near
the large jars, containing mud and traces of wheat (Whittemore 1914: 248). This leads one to
speculate that these deposits might have been food for the ibises in their afterlife, or perhaps had
some other ritual function.
The ibises ranged in age from eggs/embryos to old birds (Peet and Loat 1913: 4347). The
latter showed no obvious signs of strangulation or any indication as to how they died; perhaps
they met their end naturally or were poisoned? The majority of burials in the jars were of Sacred
Ibises, about 90% of the burials, although other creatures were also mixed in: a few dogs (jars
1002, 10051007), more notably raptors and shrews, and possibly Glossy Ibis (Peet and Loat
1913: 4347).19 The vast number of these mummified creatures argues for an elaborate breeding
system for ibises, perhaps with accompanying hatcheries (Bresciani 2005: 199206; Davies and
Smith 1997; Ikram 2005a: 12).
One of the largest concentrations of ibis mummies comes from within the Shunet es-Zebib,
the funerary enclosure for King Khasekhemwy. The name, Shunet es-Zebib translates as storehouse of currants/raisins, a name that might have its origins in a later use of the edifice or due
to an assumption by the Arabs that such a large enclosure could only have been used for storage.

425

Ikram

Rochemontix, however, has another explanation for this name. He believes it to be a corruption
of the ancient name shenut djebat/tjebet heby, meaning The place/enclosure of the ibises (vases/
coffins), as from the 22nd Dynasty onward this area was used as a cemetery for these birds (1894:
80; Ayrton, Currelly and Weigall 1904: 1).
Auguste Mariette (1880a: 579, 580-82; 1880b; 1869: 46; pl. 68) records the presence of a
vast number of ibis burials in pots (often torpedo shaped) throughout the Shuneh, together with
the burials of children in the walls of the edifice. In the northern part of the Shuneh several
hundred large oblong pots containing embalmed ibises, dated to the Late Period were found.
All of the birds were poorly mummified. The southern part also contained similar ibis burials,
while the jars found in the eastern section were elaborately and colourfully decorated, and often
sealed with falcon headed lids. The lids are links between Thoth and Horus, both of whom were
concerned with the purification of the king and the uniting of the two lands, as well as being
tied to Re. These jars were tentatively dated to the Late Period, if not earlier (Mariette 1880a:
579, 58082; Mariette 1869: 46, pl. 68). Some of the painted jars discovered by Mariette are
now in the Egyptian Museum, with one in the Agricultural Museum (CG 29808-12; see Ikram
and Iskander 2002; Gaillard and Daressy 1905). Some of these contained complete ibis, but the
majority were filled with linen bandages, feathers and assorted ibis bones. A few fragments of
these painted jars have been found in later excavations, notably those headed by David OConnor
and Matthew Adams (in 2001).
Later excavations within the Shuneh uncovered a ruined mud-brick building in the southwest of the enclosure. A room (chamber G) was filled with feathers and charred remains of ibises
and their vases dating from the Twenty-second to Twenty-sixth dynasties (Ayrton, Currelly and
Weigall 1904: 3). This is either another burial place for the mummified ibises or one that was
used in their preparation. In the Shuneh proper these excavators also uncovered bronze objects
associated with an ibis cult, such as images of ibises on wooden stands (Ayrton, Currelly and
Weigall 1904: 51). One of these is whitewashed and appears to have been inscribed in black ink
(Ayrton, Currelly and Weigall 1904: pls. 3435).
Aside from Mariettes work, the greatest number of ibis burials to be unearthed in the Shuneh
came from the work of David OConnor (1986 on) and Matthew Adams (2001 on). They found a
variety of burial styles for the ibises. Some were crudely mummified and placed directly in the
sand, others were placed in wooden boxes (Adams and Bestock, personal communication), and
the majority were found in pots of different shapes and sizes. The majority of pots were of the
torpedo jar variety, dating to the late 8th century BC onward. A few jars were round (type 31
in the Abydos corpus), and several were long (c. 80 cm) with vertical lug handles (type 33 in the
Abydos corpus). With very few exceptions the pots were made of Nile Silt.20 The majority of the
pots were found laid in multiple rows within a later sand dune, and are dated approximately from
the Twenty-sixth dynasty onward, with some forms commencing earlier. Some pots were placed
in pits or in brick-lined cavities. The pots and boxes generally contained more than one bird.
Very little information has been recorded about the ibis mummies themselves from the
Shuneh. Thus, in 2001 I was graciously invited by David OConnor to examine some of the ibis
mummies that had come to light during his excavations and those with Matthew Adams as
field-director. I examined a small sample of ibis mummies and jars (nine vessels) with a view to
carrying out a larger study at a later date.21
The jars were not uniform in their contents or in how they had been filled. If there is a pattern in how the jars were treated a larger sample must be analysed. Many of the jars examined
contained fragments of textile and a lot of mud (mainly at the bottom of the vessel) in addition

426

Animals in the Ritual Landscape at Abydos

to the ibis mummies. The mud may have been intended to create a base upon which to place the
mummies,22 or been included to make it appear as if the jar was filled with more ibises than it
really was. Snail shells (from the mud?) were found loose within the jars. The mud made the jars
quite heavy (e.g. ANC 3071 weighed 6 kg, and its contents 5.5 kg). Some vegetal material (chaff,
twigs, etc) had also been placed in the jars, perhaps as a packing material. Fragments of charcoal
were also found in many of the jars. Whether this was accidental detritus or a deliberate inclusion is unclear. All the jars had originally been sealed. Many had mud stoppers, some placed on
the mouth over a piece of linen, and others over a bowl or shallow plate. In some instances tiny
chips of limestone had been mixed in with the mud sealing. A few had a lime plaster coating
over the mud (ANC 4447 and 4448).
Only one of the jars examined contained a single ibis mummy (ANC 2761). All the others
contained at least two complete birds and often extra bones, beaks, and feathers from additional
incomplete ibises. Some of the extra bones, beaks and feathers had been wrapped as mummy
bundles in their own right, but a few were clearly placed loose in the jars. Two of the jars examined
(ANC 306970; ANC 3080-81) contained ibis eggs in addition to the hatched and mature birds.
The quality of mummification was very poor in all the samples examined. The mummies had
been prepared in a cursory manner and probably not adequately dried before being wrapped and
enjarred, thus causing them to turn to powder. Most of the birds had apparently been lying dead
and unattended, or were prepared with a minimum of natron as many of the heads and chest
cavities were filled with the remains of maggots and other insect larvae. This is not consistent
within a jar, one ibis may be maggoty and the other fine (ANC 3071). In some jars beetles and
their larvae were found, suggesting that the birds had been wrapped and put into the jars before
they had been properly desiccated (e.g. ANC 4448). It is possible that in some instances dead and
partially dried birds had been put into the jars without the benefit of wrapping. A minority of
the ibises had clearly been carefully desiccated, presumably with natron, before being wrapped,
although this was patently not the case with all specimens.
A few mummies showed evidence of being treated with resin that would have deterred the
proliferation of bacteria. Some might also have been prepared using oils, as is attested by some
of the stained bandages.23 Four of the ibis skulls seem to have resin, pitch or bitumen dribbled
over themcould this be due to defleshing, or did the hot resinous substance burn through the
fragile dried skin and feathers to affix itself to the bone?
Some of the ibises were still well wrapped in bandages, although in the case of the majority,
the linen wrappings had fallen off or turned to dust. Two of the ibises examined looked as if they
had first been tied with linen thread to keep the wings in position, before being wrapped (ANC
3301). The quality of linen used varies from fine to coarse, often within one mummy bundle. For
the most part the wrapped ibises had been wrapped spirally in bandages ranging from three to
six centimetres wide. In general the bandages were secured with a knot (ANC 3069-70), although
there are some examples where linen thread had been wound around the bandages to secure them
(ANC 4448). The number of reeds found with the mummies, and their juxtaposition (ANC 3071),
suggests that some of the ibises might have been further enveloped in portions of reed mats.
Further work would establish whether this is indeed the case. Ibises from Abydos and elsewhere
that have been x-rayed have shown no evidence for being provided with amulets or other accoutrements. However, one jar (ANC 4448) contained a faience amulet in the form of a dark blue
wadjet eye; it had presumably been tied around one of the mummies found therein.
The ibises were mummified in different positions. Some had their heads and necks to one side
of the body (ANC 3071), others had the head tucked under or put beside the wing (ANC 2761), and

427

Ikram

yet others were mummified in a seated position with the head lying on the belly/sternum (ANC
4448 and Op. 7, locus 16, lot 63). The latter position makes for the most convenient bundle and
is the most common position for ibis mummies throughout Egypt. The mummies had been put
into the jars in a haphazard way, most often with their beaks pointing downward, which might
have been most convenient, although this was not always consistent. A few of the ibises showed
evidence of strangulation (ANC 2761), although this is not conclusive due to the poor quality of
mummification.
Birds of all ages were found from eggs to juveniles (ANC 306970, 3301, and possibly 4448)
to mature adults. The range of ages suggests a hatchery of some sort. Certainly one of the ibises
(ANC 306970) showed some evidence of pathology on a leg boneperhaps it had broken and
been set? The fact that the bone had healed indicates that the bird had been kept in captivity and
cared for by someone.
The jars contained, for the most part, Sacred Ibis (Threskiornis aethiopicus), although it is
highly likely that some examples of Glossy Ibis (Plegadis falcinellus) were also mummified (see
note 19). Some fake mummies were made of human humeri, and a cat mummy was once found
amongst the ibises (Adams, personal communication). Several rodent bones were also found in
the jarsprobably these were not deliberate inclusions, but foragers who had been accidentally
sealed into the jars (ANC 3301 and Op. 7 locus 16, lot 63), except for one example (ANC 4447)
where a rodent bone appears to be deliberately wrapped in linen. Other curious bones found in
the jars belong to fish. Fish bones, some identified as Synodontis sp. were found in several of
the jars, together with what appear to be scales (ANC 3301; ANC 4448; Op. 7 locus 16, lot 63).
Whether the fish were deliberately interred as food for the ibis, were already in the birds belly,
were a complimentary offering, were accidentally included as they were in the mud, or were
buried with the birds for ritual reasons is unclear. Certainly, bronze images of fish were found in
the Shuneh (Ayrton, Currelly and Weigall 1904: 51, pl. 21), as well as in the surface sand and
rubbish in Cemetery T (Peet 1914: 6, 96, pl. XXXIX). These fish seem to be either a Mormyrus
spp. or possibly a Schilbe sp., and are generally associated with Hat-Mehyt or Isis. Perhaps the
area contains fish cemeteries that are yet to be found. No doubt, further work in the Shuneh will
elucidate the tradition of ibis and other animal offerings at Abydos.

Discussion

From the number of species found and their far-ranging distribution, it is clear that Abydos was
the site of significant animal cemeteries from the Late Period onward, with some of these cemeteries possibly originating during the Third Intermediate Period. Given the absence of clearly
identified cult places for different gods near these cemeteries, one can only hypothesize as to why
this was the case. Could they be related to the celebration of the cult of the divine king and his
relationship to the gods (Kessler 1986, 1989; Ikram 2005), as was observed during the twilight of
Egyptian history? Quite possibly it is the royal burials that are the reason for the diversity of cults
in this area, coupled perhaps by Abydos role as a gate to the otherworld. Certainly the temples
already at the site were all connected to divine kingship and its eternal continuance. The memorial complexes for the kings of the earliest dynasties (inextricably linked to the tomb of Osiris),
the tomb/cenotaph of rulers such as Senusert III and the founders of the New Kingdom, and the
cult temples built by Seti and Ramesses II, are all focussed on the rebirth and resurrection of the
king, his eternal longevity, and the establishment of his rule for eternity.
The locations of these animal cemeteries are also noteworthy. Although they are distributed
throughout the site, the majority that have been thus far identified are concentrated around the

428

Animals in the Ritual Landscape at Abydos

route leading to Umm el-Qaab, or located in the precincts of a royal monument (e.g., Tetisheris
dogs). Conceivably the route to Umm el-Qaab was lined by shrines to different divinities that were
associated with the cult of the king and his rebirth and resurrection. The cemeteries may have
been associated with these divinities, or may have been just created along the route as a tribute
to the cult of divine royalty. Certainly, the animals found here fit this pattern: canids to protect
and lead the mummy to the next world; raptors, shrews, serpents, scarabs, and ibises to assist in
(re)creation through their association with Re, Sokar, and Osiris.
Although, animal cemeteries are found all over Egypt (Kessler 1986; Ikram 2005) there is a tendency for most of these to focus on a single species.24 The notable exception to the rule is Saqqara;
this is the most obvious example of a multiple species large-scale burial place. From the Late Period
onward Saqqara supported a huge number of animal necropoleis: the Anubeion, the Bubasteion,
the Serapeum, the burial places for the Mother and Brother of Apis, the Falcon and Baboon galleries, the Ibis galleries, and so on. Saqqara is perhaps unique in Egypt not only for the diversity
of species, but also for the volume of mummified animals buried there (Kessler and Nur ed-Din
2005).25 Perhaps these animal cemeteries are another parallel between the two royal cemeteries of
Abydos and Saqqara, and have some connection, not only with the different gods that were surely
worshipped here, but also with the cult of the king (Reeves and Wilkinson 1996; Ikram and Iskander
2002).26 Thus, even in the matter of animal burials, Abydos and Saqqara act as mirror images (the
gateway to the underworld and its ka), keeping a balance between the Two Lands.

Notes:
1 I would like to thank David OConnor for a number of things: first, for his teaching (I only had one class
with him, but that, together with his publications sufficed to inspire me), second, for sensibly urging me
to go to Cambridge to work with Barry Kemp, third, for digging up Malqata which was the lynch-pin of
my dissertation, and fourth, for inviting me to Abydos to work on the ibis mummies. My apologies that
this report took so long to arrive!
2 Animals that were or might have been buried as part of foundation deposits (e.g., the six oval foundation
pits found in the hosh associated with the Senusert IIIs funerary complex, discussed in Ayrton, Currelly
and Weigall, or those discovered as food offerings in tombs (e.g. E 4811, 4181 discussed in Peet, and M 12,
13, 14, 15, 16, 18 included in Petrie) are not discussed in this paper.
3 Although it is not beyond the realm of possibility that these were well-loved pets, given the number of
cats this interpretation seems less sensible than identifying them as sacred or votive creatures.
4 Among some others, Kessler notably contests this idea.
5 Some animals that signified certain divinities do not have exact parallels in nature as they are made up of
composites of a type, and are thus super-canids or super-hawks, discussed by Houlihan and Goodman,
manifesting the best and most prominent characteristics of all such animals. Meyer discusses the Anubis
animal.
6 Kessler and Kessler and Nur ed-Din discuss the disagreement among some scholars who are not convinced
that the mass burials are of votive offerings.
7 Although the Edicts date is firm, some temples, such as that of Isis at Philae, continued to function on a
diminished level well into the mid-fifth century AD.
8 Peet gave a set of mummified dogs to the Egyptian Museum, some of which were moved to the agricultural museum.

429

Ikram
9 Dog and fox bones have been recovered from tomb and settlement contexts, but most of these seem incidental or are pet burials.
10 It is interesting that some Coptic saints are shown as cynocephalic, a trait that was associated with the
Eastern version of St. Christopher, patron saint of travellers, and a modern day version of Anubis.
11 Other cats (Felis maniculata) have also been identified in non-votive mummy contexts.
12 A variety of people were involved with the work, including Atif Waleem Jad al-Rab, Mohammed Ali Abu
al-Yazid, Ali Abdul el-Halim Abdallah, Ahmed El-Khattibb, and the then Chief Inspector, Yahia Al-Masry.
Their report is still to be published.
13 Ikram gives a recent discussion of the symbolism of the shrew.
14 It is interesting to note that several ox skulls were found under the floors of Coptic houses. The excavators
hypothesize that these might have been a foundation deposit that insured good fortune and luck for the
inmates; however, they might also have been older and related to a nearby tomb.
15 Petrie reports that Burial M 12 contained part of an ox knee; M 13 two heads of calves and bird bones; M
14 part of the shoulder blade of an ox as well as a possible gazelle skull; M 16 an ovicaprid; and M 18 a
possible gazelle skeleton. According to him some of these might have been used for sympathetic magic,
although this author thinks that they were all food offerings. Also see n. 2.
16 It should be noted that with eye offerings it is unclear whether they are of Re or of Horus unless labelled.
17 This may have been pitch, oils, or resin, but as no scientific tests were carried out on the material it is
difficult to identify it.
18 A sampling of these mummies is now in the Egyptian Museum, Cairo, notably CG 2986668.
19 The bones of the Sacred and Glossy ibis are morphologically very similar; the main difference is one of
size. Thus, it is quite easy to confuse identification as bone size is not only due to species, but is influenced
by sex, age, and to a lesser extent, diet.
20 I am indebted to Carla Gallorini and Sylvie Marchand for information on the ceramics.
21 The jars were excavated as stratigraphically as was possible, the contents were sieved, and the mummies
examined in the field. As there were no comparative skeletons available, ibis identification was done
through images. The jars examined came from the following areas: Op. 4, 1.38, ANC#3071.4 (H 62 cm;
minimum of two birds); Op. 9, locus 16, lot 41 (not opened); Op. 4, locus 3, lot 22, ANC 2761 (broken;
1 bird and some feathers); Op. 9, locus 26 lot 51, ANC 447 (H 80 cm; one incomplete ibis wrapped as a
mummy); Op. 4, locus 4, lot 40, ANC 3301 (H 81 cm; probably three birds, juvenile); Op. 4, locus 4, lot
38, ANC 3069-70 (broken; five to six birds of different ages); Op. 4, locus 4 lot 38, ANC 308081 (broken;
three adult ibises and one juvenile); Op. 9, locus 26, lot 51, ANC 4448 (H 83 cm; three mature ibises and
one juvenile); and Op. 7, locus 16, lot 63 (broken; three mature ibises).
22 I have seen such platforms inside jars from the Metropolitan Museum of Arts excavations at Dahshur
where they served as bases for Middle Kingdom victual mummies.
23 It is impossible to discern between resins and oils without careful residue testing.
24 If not a single species, then a coherent grouping such as canids or creatures that look canine. Also, in cases
when more than one creature is identified with a particular god (e.g. baboons and ibises with Thoth), then
there are multiple species buried in that gods precinct.
25 Although Tuna el-Gebel boasts a several animal species, the vast majority of animal burials are of ibises
and monkeys/apes. The other creatures found there are not numerous, and in fact, in some instances, only
one or two examples of each are found. Perhaps these anomalies are due to accidental deaths within the
sacred areas, causing these animals to be buried in the catacombs.
26 It is interesting to note that the Valley of the Kings also contains occasional burials of different species
(I have also examined shrew and raptor mummy bundles from KV10 and other areas in the Valley); the

430

Animals in the Ritual Landscape at Abydos

number of these burials is paltry, however, in comparison with what is found particularly at Saqqara and
Abydos.

References Cited:
Armitage, P. L. and J. Clutton-Brock.
1981 A Radiological and Histological Investigation into the Mummification of Cats from Ancient Egypt.
Journal of Archaeological Science 8: 18596.
Ayrton, E., C. T. Currelly, and A. Weigall.
1904 Abydos 3. Egypt Exploration Fund 25. London.
Charron, A.
1990 Massacres danimaux la Basse Epoque. Rd 41: 20913.
Davies, S. and H. Smith.
1997 Sacred Animal Temples at Saqqara. In: S. Quirke (ed.), The Temple in Ancient Egypt, 11231. London.
De Rochemonteix, M.
1894 Oeuvres Diverses 3. Paris.
Dreyer, G. et al.
1993 Umm el-Qaab: Nachuntersuchungen im frhzeitlichen Knigsfriedhof, 7./8. Vorbericht. MDAIK 52:
1181.
Dunand, F. and R. Lichtenberg.
2005 Les chiens momifis El-Deir. Oasis de Kharga, BIFAO 105, 7587.
Flores, D. V.
2003 Funerary Sacrifice of Animals in the Egyptian Predynastic Period. BAR 1153. London.
Gaillard, C. and G. Daressy.
1905 Catalogue Gnral des Antiquits gyptiennes du Muse du Caire: La Faune Momifie de lAntique
gypte. Cairo.
Garstang, J.
1901 El Arabah. London.
Habachi, L.
1939 A First Dynasty Cemetery at Abydos. ASAE 39: 76774.
Haddon, K.
1914 Report on a Small Collection of Mummy Dogs. In: E. Naville et Al., The Cemeteries of Abydos 1,
4048. London.
Houlihan, P. and S. Goodman.
1986 The Birds of Ancient Egypt. Cairo/Warminster.
Ikram, S.
2005a Divine Creatures: Animal Mummies in Ancient Egypt. Cairo.
2005b. A Monument in Miniature: The Eternal Resting Place of a Shrew. In: P. Jnosi (ed.), Structure and
Significance: Thoughts on Ancient Egyptian Architecture, 335340. Vienna.
Ikram, S. and C. Rossi et al.
Forth- North Kharga Oasis Survey (NKOS) 2004 Preliminary Report: Ain Tarakwa, Ain Dabashiya, & the
coming Darb Ain Amur. MDAIK.
Ikram, S. and N. Iskander.
2002 Catalogue Gnral of the Egyptian Museum: Non-Human Remains. Cairo.

431

Ikram
Kemp, B. J.
1975 Abydos. In: W. Helck and E. Otto (eds.), L I: 2841.
Kessler, D.
1986 Tierkult. In W. Helck and E. Otto (eds.), L VI: 571587.
1989 Die Heiligen Tiere und Der Konig 1. Wiesbaden.
Website http://www.fak12.uni-muenchen.de/aegyp/tuna.html
Kessler, D. and A. H. Nur Ed-Din
2005 Tuna al-Gebel: Millions of Ibises and Other Animals. In S. Ikram (ed.) Divine Creatures: Animal
Mummies in Ancient Egypt, 12063. Cairo.
Kurth, D.
1986 Toth. In W. Helck and E. Otto (eds.), L VI: 497523.
Loat, W. L. S.
1914 The Ibis Cemetery at Abydos. JEA 1: 40.
Lortet, C. and C. Gaillard.
1903-9 La faune momifie de lancienne Egypte. Lyon.
Malek, J.
1993 The Cat in Ancient Egypt. London.
Mariette, A.
1869 Abydos: Description des Fouilles 2. Paris.
1880a Catalogue Gnral des Monuments dAbydos. Paris.
1880b Abydos, Dscription des Fouilles. Paris.
Martin, G. T.
1981 The Sacred Animal Necropolis at North Saqqara. London.
Meyer, E.
1904 Die Entwickelung der Kulte von Abydos und die sogenannten Schakalsgtter. ZS 41: 97107.
Naville, E.
1914 Abydos. JEA 1: 28.
Naville, E. et al.
1914 The Cemeteries of Abydos I. London.
Osborn, D. and I. Helmy.
1980 The Contemporary Land Mammals of Egypt (Including Sinai). Chicago.
Peet, T. E.
1914 The Cemeteries of Abydos II. Egypt Exploration Fund 34. London.
Peet, T. E. and W. L. S. Loat.
1913 The Cemeteries of Abydos 3, Egypt Exploration Fund 35. London.
Petrie, W. M. F.
1900 The Royal Tombs of the First Dynasty 1, Egypt Exploration Fund 20, London.
1901 The Royal Tombs of the Earliest Dynasties 2. Egypt Exploration Fund 21, London.
1902 Abydos 1. Egypt Exploration Fund 22. London.
Ray, J.
1976 The Archive of Hor. London.
Reeves, N. and R. Wilkinson
1996 The Complete Valley of the Kings. London/Cairo.
Whittemore, T.
1914 Ibis cemetery at Abydos. JEA 1: 246249.

432