The Petrie Gift in the Kelsey Museum of Archaeology Diana Ng Fig. 1. Necklace of faience beads with carnelian amulet, ca. 1570– 1293 BCE (Eighteenth Dynasty), from Gurob, Egypt, 12.2 × 2 cm. William Flinders Petrie Donation, 1921, KM 1879. 65 In 1921 Sir William Flinders Petrie, the eminent English Egyptologist, presented fifty-four Egyptian artifacts to the University of Michigan. This group of objects forms what is now referred to as “The Petrie Gift,” and it stands as one of the earliest sets of scientifically excavated artifacts in the collection of the Kelsey Museum of Archaeology. In this article I trace the route of the Petrie Gift from Egypt to Michigan, a path shaped in some part by the nature of the funding of archaeological work in Egypt in the early twentieth century and in large part by the personal connections between Sir Flinders Petrie and the dynamic Michigan Professor of Classics Francis W. Kelsey. I will then provide a survey of the material that comprises the Petrie Gift, focusing on such artifacts as an Eighteenth Dynasty necklace from Gurob (fig. 1), and their significance as evidence for the mortuary practices of non-elite Egyptians. Sir Flinders Petrie and British William Matthew Flinders Petrie, better known as Flinders Archaeological Work in Egypt Petrie, was born in England in 1853, and by the end of his life at the Dawn of the Twentieth in 1942 he was known as the “father of scientific archaeol- Century ogy” (Bratton 1967, 84, 81). His father, William Petrie, was an engineer and inventor of measuring equipment (Drower 1985, 9; Wortham 1971, 114), and his maternal grandfather, Captain Matthew Flinders, was “a famous explorer who circumnavi- gated Australia and surveyed many of the islands in the region” (Trope, Quirke, and Lacovara 2005, xiii ). Petrie’s parents met at a meeting of the Mutual Information Society, an organization founded by Petrie’s mother Anne to promote scholarship and discussion of scientific and historical topics (Drower 1985, 8). Due to childhood illness, Petrie spent many of his early years reading and developed an interest in coins, which may have contributed to his lifelong belief in the importance of small finds (Trope, Quirke, and Lacovara 2005, xiii). Coming from a line of explorers and amateur surveyors, Petrie learned the techniques of surveying from his father while still a teenager (Wortham 1971, 114–115). In 1877, he published a treatise titled Inductive Metrology based on the surveying and measur- ing he undertook with his father at Stonehenge (Bratton 1967, 81). In 1880 Petrie set off to Alexandria in order to carry out a project—planned with his father—to measure the Great Pyra- mid at Giza in an effort to understand the principles behind its construction (Wortham 1971, 114; Trope, Quirke, and Laco- vara 2005, xiii). This trip marked the beginning of Petrie’s four decades of exploration in Egypt. During his years in Egypt, from 1880 to 1923—interrupt- ed by a 1890 season in Palestine, during which he recorded the first archaeological stratigraphic section, and again by World War I (Trope, Quirke, and Lacovara 2005, xvii )—Petrie worked at sites that are among the best known in Egyptology. He discov- ered the Greek trading post of Naukratis and the Roman town 66 at Tanis (Bratton 1967, 84; Wortham 1971, 118–120),1 exca- vated the pyramid at Meidum (Bratton 1967, 82), and trained a young Howard Carter during excavations at the Valley of the Kings. Petrie also worked at Thebes, and at Abydos, salvaging the archaeology of the site from the careless work of a prede- cessor (Trope, Quirke, and Lacovara 2005, xvii; Wortham 1971, 124–125). In his first two seasons in Egypt after World War I, he concentrated his attention on several sites in the Fayum, and it is to this period of his career that the artifacts of the Petrie Gift belong. As his career in Egyptology progressed, Petrie devel- oped a new, scientific approach to archaeology in Egypt, which emphasized methodical excavations and documentation as well as the careful preservation of all artifacts, whether they be the large statuary or inscriptions favored by most Egyptologists of his time or small pottery, beads, and household goods (Bratton 1967, 80–82; Wortham 1971, 113–114). Indeed, it was only his methodical preservation and study of excavated pottery from Egypt that made possible Petrie’s most famous contribution to scientific archaeology—seriation, or “sequence dating,” in which changes in pottery styles over time were used to create a chron- ological sequence for the pottery and the artifacts excavated in association with them (Bratton 1967, 82; Guide 1977, 3). Petrie’s fieldwork campaigns and their publication were supported financially by independent, nongovernmental and sometimes nonacademic entities. The first organization to finance Petrie’s Egyptian fieldwork was the Egyptian Explora- tion Fund (EEF), which sponsored his 1884–1886 campaigns (Drower 1985, 68–104; Trope, Quirke, and Lacovara 2005, xiv– xv).2 This organization was spearheaded by Amelia Edwards, a popular novelist and Egyptology enthusiast who greatly admired Petrie’s approach to archaeology. Upon her death in 1892, Ed- wards bequeathed to University College London (UCL) her li- brary and artifact collection—enriched by Petrie’s excavations— and endowed a chair in Egyptian Archaeology that Petrie held for the next forty years (Wortham 1971, 106–109; Drower 1985, 199–202; Trope, Quirke, and Lacovara 2005, xiv).3 After assuming the Egyptian Archaeology chair at UCL 1 For a fuller account of Petrie’s excavations at Naukratis and Tanis, see Drower 1985, 65–104. 2 Both of these sources detail the EEF’s internal struggles about whether to support Petrie or Edouard Naville, a traditional French archaeologist mainly interested in inscriptions. Ultimately the EEF supported Naville, leading Petrie to seek other sources of funding for his work. Wortham 1971, 106–112 gives an account of the early history of the EEF and its support for the work of Naville. 3 Trope, Quirke, and Lacovara 2005, xvii–xviii also provide informa- tion on Amelia Edwards’s publicity work for the EEF in America and its toll on her health. 67 in 1892, Petrie parted ways with the EEF and formed the Egyptian Research Account (ERA) (Drower 1985, 202–203). In 1905, after another several years of affiliation with the EEF from 1896 to 1905, he formed the British School of Archaeol- ogy in Egypt (BSAE) (Drower 1985, 295–298). These fund- ing organizations relied on the subscriptions of institutions and wealthy individuals for their fieldwork and publication budgets, and in return subscribers were given a portion of the season’s finds that had been allocated to the organization by the Egyptian government.4 Although modern legislation related to cultural heritage and archaeological research generally calls for excavated artifacts to remain in their countries of origin, in late nineteenth- and early twentieth-century Egypt, the established practice permitted researchers to take archaeological artifacts back to their own countries. The Egyptian Antiquities Service—headed by a series of French scholars at the time of Petrie’s activity—selected what objects remained in the Na- tional Museum in Cairo and what objects traveled with Petrie back to Europe. This process was known as “division” (Trope, Quirke, and Lacovara 2005, xiv–xx; Guide 1977, 1).5 All objects with royal names and outstanding items were generally reserved for the National Museum in Cairo, but often small objects would also be retained by the Antiquities Service and would sometimes end up in the “Salle de Vente” of the museum for sale to tourists and dealers (Drower 1985, 84). The Kelsey Mu- seum in fact may have acquired more Petrie-excavated objects through purchases in the 1920s and 1930s from the Cairo Department of Antiquities itself as well as from the prominent Egyptian artifact dealer Phocion Tano (J. Richards, pers. comm., 8 January 2008). The “gold treasure of Lahun” provides a nice illustra- tion of the division and distribution of artifacts. Discovered in 1913 at the Fayum site of Lahun, the gold treasure of Lahun belonging to Princess Satharthoriunet consisted of a 4 In a pamphlet published by the American Branch of the ERA lo- cated in Boston, dating to no earlier than 1914, it is explicitly stated that one of the missions of the American Branch was “the acquisi- tion by the American museums of the antiquities thus discovered in Egypt, which are assigned to the communities subscribing accord- ing to the amount subscribed” (“Excavations” after 1914). This was also the practice of the home branch of the ERA, and of the EEF and the BSAE, although Petrie often offered objects to the British Museum first. 5 Throughout Drower’s archaeological biography of Petrie, there are examples of divisions by the Egyptian Antiquities Service. One of Petrie’s great frustrations at the end of his career in Egypt was the increasing lack of cooperation from the Antiquities Service in divisions and tensions between Petrie and various directors of the Antiquities Service (Drower 1985, 363–364). 68 gold crown, two pectorals, some necklaces and armlets of gold and precious stones, and some gold collars placed in an ivory box, along with a silver mirror and other cosmetic items such as razors and obsidian bottles (Drower 1985, 328–329). This remarkably preserved trove was taken to Cairo at the end of the season for divisions. Petrie was concerned that the entire find might be held in Cairo, but Gaston Maspero, head of the Egyp- tian Archaeological Service and a good friend of Petrie, de- cided to continue the “half-and-half” policy of object division. To Petrie’s surprise, Maspero kept for the National Museum in Cairo only the crown, mirror, and one pectoral. Petrie was then allowed to take the rest of the golden treasure back with him to England (Drower 1985, 328–329). Though this treasure was first offered to the British Museum, it was finally distributed to the Metropolitan Museum in New York, which pledged a grant in the amount of £8,000 to the BSAE (H. Petrie 1919, 6). Large financial contributors to Petrie’s excavations, whether they were private persons or public institutions, were awarded with proportionally more or finer artifacts (see above, n. 4). During the years when he ran the BSAE, Petrie distrib- uted his Egyptian finds to many universities and museums in England, the Commonwealth, Europe, and the United States so that the objects would be available for study. His own vast study collection was sold to UCL in 1913 (Guide 1977, 1), and his library and remnants of his collection were given over to the same institution on the centenary of his birth in 1953 (Trope, Quirke, and Lacovara 2005, xxv). These personal collections of Petrie and his early patron Amelia Edwards allowed for the formation of the Petrie Museum at University College Lon- don, which now has extensive holdings of Egyptian and Near Eastern artifacts displayed so as to highlight their archaeological contexts (Guide 1977, 1). Francis W. Kelsey and the The Antiquities Service’s and the BSAE’s practice of artifact Arrival of the Petrie Gift at division and distribution made possible a donation of objects the University of Michigan like the Petrie Gift, but the actual process through which this group of objects was acquired owes a great deal to the per- sonal energies of Francis Willey Kelsey, Professor of Latin at the University of Michigan from 1889 until his death in 1927. Previous publications of the Kelsey Museum have related the biography and tireless activities of Francis Kelsey, whose interests were wide-ranging and whose academic output was immense. Kelsey’s shadow looms large over classical studies and archaeology at the University of Michigan, especially at the archaeological museum that was named in his honor. He was also a driving force in the formation of classical archaeol- ogy in America and in the shaping and popularization of the Archaeological Institute of America at the turn of the last century (Dyson 1998, 185–189, 45–50). Kelsey was tireless 69 in promoting classical education and in attracting the popular imagination to the worlds of antiquity, and he saw archaeology as a great aid in his efforts to make classical literature and culture come to life for his students at the University of Michigan (Dy- son 1998, 45–50).6 In his appreciation for artifacts of daily life as a window into ancient society, Kelsey was not unlike Petrie in seeing value in the mundane. Kelsey cultivated a broad range of contacts and traveled widely to collect materials for the collection of the University of Michigan.7 The written correspondence of Francis Kelsey, now housed at the Bentley Historical Library at the University, indicates that he and Petrie became acquainted with each other from at least 1918, when Petrie wrote to Kelsey to discuss several topics, including the delay in publishing the treasure of Princess Satharthoriunet from Lahun because of wartime re- strictions on unnecessary printing (letter from Petrie to Kelsey, 1 June 1918). Letters from after 1918 indicate that Petrie and Kelsey enjoyed a friendly personal and professional relationship. When in residence at the American Academy in Rome, Kelsey offered to host Petrie and his wife Hilda on several occasions (draft of letter from Kelsey to M. Murray, 14 December 1920), and Petrie in turn invited Kelsey and his wife to visit him at his home in Hampstead, England (postcard from Petrie to Kelsey, postmarked 23 September 1920). In that year, as part of a longer Near Eastern trip, Kelsey visited Lahun, where Petrie and his team served as gracious hosts. It was then and there that Kelsey requested some dupli- cates—that is, examples of vessels and other finds whose types had already been established and were well represented numer- ically—for the study collection of the Classics Department at Michigan (unsigned, unmailed draft of letter from Kelsey to Petrie, 26 March 1920). The University was not, at the time, a subscriber to the work of the BSAE, though Kelsey himself was a modest financial contributor to Petrie’s School (receipt for subscription to BSAE in the amount of £2:2:0, dated 14 December 1920). Nevertheless, Petrie readily agreed to Kelsey’s request, as recorded in the archives of Francis Kelsey, and began to arrange for the transfer to the University of a selection of objects excavated from the Fayum. In a letter from Petrie to Kelsey of 26 September 1921 (fig. 2), Petrie wrote, Dear Prof. Kelsey, You asked for pieces of alabaster vases, so we send some, and 6 L. E. Talalay, Associate Director and Curator of the Kelsey Mu- seum, includes a lengthy discussion of Kelsey’s life and work at the University of Michigan in her forthcoming book about the collections of the Kelsey Museum. 7 See T. Thomas 1990 for Kelsey’s trip to the Near East in 1919– 1920. 70 Fig. 2. Letter of William Flinders also some whole vases and some small objects. I trust that your Petrie to Francis W. Kelsey, 26 university museum may be able to help the work of the School in September 1921. Bentley Historical return. I enclose the list of objects, and a copy of our exhibition Library, University of Michigan. catalogue which will give some details. We had nine in our party last winter, and are having out ten this winter. I cannot expect to have so fat a season as the last, but we shall see. Pray let us know if you are coming to this side again. After 20 Nov. my address will be post office Cairo. With our sincerest remembrance of your kindness Yours cordially, W. M. F. Petrie This letter is interesting in several respects. First, the cata- logue mentioned in the letter and enclosed with it (along with the pencil-written object inventory that is the basis for the 71 Fig. 3. Bill for shipping of Petrie artifacts to Francis W. Kelsey via the SS Maine, 30 September 1921. Bentley Historical Library, University of Michigan. 72 Fig. 4. Receipt for University of Michigan's subscription to the British School of Archaeology in Egypt and Egyptian Research Account, 2 March 1922. Bentley Historical Library, University of Michigan. current catalogue of individual objects of the Petrie Gift) illus- trates the standard practice for fieldwork projects funded by the EEF, ERA, and the BSAE. Upon the completion of one or two seasons’ excavations, the objects that were allotted to Petrie in the division process were put on display in London (at Univer- sity College after Petrie assumed the Egyptology chair in 1892) before being distributed among the contributors to the funding organizations. Second, it shows that Kelsey had made specific requests for alabaster (now identified by the Kelsey registry as calcite) vessels and that Petrie provided objects beyond Kelsey’s original request. Finally, the letter is evidence that Petrie acted not entirely out of friendship for Kelsey, as Petrie explicitly solicited the financial support of the University of Michigan in return for this gift of artifacts. The crate containing the Petrie Gift was shipped from Southampton at the end of September 1921 (fig. 3),8 and it ar- rived at the University of Michigan in time for a small exhibi- tion in the University Library, which ran from Christmas 1921 through January 1922, “in honor of the Archaeological Institute of America, which met [at the University of Michigan] in con- junction with the American Philological Association” (“Rare Specimans [sic]” 1922). In 1922 Kelsey wrote to Petrie to thank him again for his gift and to let him know of the University Regents’ official expression of thanks and of their approval of a $100 contribution to the BSAE (fig. 4). Kelsey was aware that, in comparison to the $8,000 subscription of the Metropoli- tan Museum in 1917, $100 was quite modest, but it was what the University could manage in what was a financially “dif- ficult” time (draft of letter from Kelsey to Petrie, 9 February 1922). The relationship between Kelsey and Petrie continued in subsequent years, but attention turned to the acquisition of papyri, rather than objects, for the collection of the University of Michigan. 8 Packing slip from W. Wingate & Johnston, Ltd., London office, 30 September 1921. 73 Since their arrival at the University of Michigan, the objects of the Petrie Gift have been shown in several Kelsey Museum exhibitions, although they have not been shown all together as a group since 1922. An extensive selection of Petrie objects will be included in the new Egyptian installation in the Upjohn Wing of the Kelsey Museum. The Artifacts and Archaeology The Petrie Gift is comprised of fifty-four objects excavated of the Petrie Gift from three sites in the Fayum area of Egypt—Gurob, Lahun, and Sedment—by teams led by Petrie in 1920 and 1921. Petrie had worked at each of these sites prior to World War I but returned to them after the war to see whether they would yield more finds and information. During the 1920 and 1921 seasons, Petrie was based at the main camp at Sedment, where he had hoped to excavate the cemetery of Herakleopolitan kings, while his associ- ates Guy Brunton and Reginald Englebach worked the nearby sites of Gurob and Sedment. The results of these campaigns were published quickly, a hallmark of Petrie’s work (Wortham 1971, 113–114), in volumes produced by the BSAE in the 1920s. lahun Lahun, in Petrie’s records and publications, encompasses Middle Kingdom pyramids and tombs, a town that Petrie called “Ka- hun” where officials and workers associated with the pyramids lived, as well as a site called “the cemetery of Bashkatib” (Petrie, Brunton, and Murray 1923, 21). Petrie had returned to Lahun after World War I to see whether more of the gold treasure could be recovered (Drower 1985, 349). The finds from Lahun show that the site was occupied from the Predynastic Period to at least the Roman Period (Drower 1985, 349).9 Lahun is represented in the Petrie Gift by thirteen vessels of different shapes and materials excavated from the tombs of the Bashkatib cemetery. This cemetery, located at the farthest end of Lahun, yielded finds that were significantly earlier than those from the rest of the site (Petrie, Brunton, and Murray 1923, 21). These Lahun artifacts date to the First Dynasty (3100–2900 BCE), with the exception of two ceramic vessels (KM 1917–1918), which were tentatively dated to the First Intermediate Period (2260–2040 BCE). The majority of the vessels, ten of the thirteen, are made of calcite. Among these are one broken tabletop (KM 1919); four large, shallow bowls and fragments of a fifth shallow bowl (KM 1911–1913, 1915–1916; 1913 illustrated in figs. 5–6); one deeper bowl (KM 1891); two kohl jars (KM 1893–1894), and one jar of a shape similar to the kohl jars but with a larger diameter (KM 1892). The noncalcite finds from Lahun include 9 The gold treasure of Princess Satharthoriunet is published in G. Brunton’s Lahun I: The Treasure, BSAE, 1920. 74