.
Just how well-looked after is the Ka Nefer Nefer mummy mask in St Louis Art Museum? I was struck by an old photo of the object, which gave the face a very apprehensive look. I then tried to find out where it had come from and found another photo, similar but not the same on Zahi Hawass' blog. But then I noticed something else about Hawass' photo. Take a look at the official SLAM photos accompanying the joyous news that they will (for the moment at least) continue to take care of this object for the Egyptian people - to whom it rightfully belongs in their building-site-which-was-a-museum. Take a look at the mask's right shoulder (on our left) which is perfectly well-lit in Hawass' photo. Notice what appears to be a missing chunk of gesso (resin)? Note on the Hawass photo the clear signs of scraping on the wrist on the right hand side which is where the hieratic inscription, "the Osiris Neferu" has been scraped off (Johnston says its the "left" hand, but the scraping is visible on the right)
Just how well-looked after is the Ka Nefer Nefer mummy mask in St Louis Art Museum? I was struck by an old photo of the object, which gave the face a very apprehensive look. I then tried to find out where it had come from and found another photo, similar but not the same on Zahi Hawass' blog. But then I noticed something else about Hawass' photo. Take a look at the official SLAM photos accompanying the joyous news that they will (for the moment at least) continue to take care of this object for the Egyptian people - to whom it rightfully belongs in their building-site-which-was-a-museum. Take a look at the mask's right shoulder (on our left) which is perfectly well-lit in Hawass' photo. Notice what appears to be a missing chunk of gesso (resin)? Note on the Hawass photo the clear signs of scraping on the wrist on the right hand side which is where the hieratic inscription, "the Osiris Neferu" has been scraped off (Johnston says its the "left" hand, but the scraping is visible on the right)
It looks to me like a pre-existing crack that can be seen in the wig has made its way to the end of the wig (the missing chunk) and also to the face. There appears to have been some restoration in the mask's forehead and left cheek as well, so what are they doing to it?
ReplyDeleteLook at the extent of the white plaster on the left side of the head (our right), it may be the angle the shot is taken from, but does it not look as if quite a bit of the wig has gone missing ?
ReplyDeleteI couldn't tell if it was the angle or not, but I do agree that it at least appears to have lost quite a bit more of the wig. It looks like a couple of extra inches at the bottom and about 1 inch the area closer to the face has gone. I used to go to this museum often when I attended Washington University in St. Louis, and I must say that I am ashamed of what the SLAM has done and I would discourage anyone from having anything to do with it until they do the right thing and return it as well as own up to what appears to be extra damage to the mask.
ReplyDeleteI am just curious, bearing in mind the iconic site over the river to the east, how much native American art does this museum have?
ReplyDeleteIt was a long time ago when I was visiting that museum, so it wouldn't be fair for me to comment on it. But it wasn't something that stood out for me at the time, though I did focus on the exhibitions related to the Art History classes I was taking at the time. It should have a lot there though, especially since St. Louis always makes a bit deal out of the fact that it was the "Gateway to the West".
ReplyDeleteI had a look on their site, and they have scenes from the tomb of Montuemhat. Interestingly enough, the provenance (in my admittedly amateur eye) appears to have a big hole in it. Maybe it's just me...
ReplyDeleteYou can see it on this page: http://www.slam.org/emuseum/code/emuseum.asp?emu_action=collection&collection=6827&collectionname=Ancient%20Art