Subscription Center
This three-dimensional CT scan has unraveled a number of mysteries surrounding a two-millennia-old mummy—although not the mummy itself. Back in 1989 Sarah Wisseman, an archaeologist at the University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign, took the mummy to the university's veterinary school for x-rays and the hospital for CT scans. From these initial scans she was able to determine that inside the tightly wrapped cloth was a child from the Fayum region of Egypt around A.D. 100. She also saw that the mummy still had many of its organs inside, including the brain, heart and intestines, and that the child's skull was fractured.
But Wisseman had several unanswered questions about the child, and since the original scans in 1989 the resolution of medical imaging technology has vastly improved. "Everything is spectacularly clearer," she says. Based on dental growth revealed in the new scans, she determined that the child was probably about eight and a half years old. From bone growth patterns, she concludes that the child probably went through a period of malnutrition. The organs appeared much clearer, and the skull fracture she initially detected was far more severe than she originally thought. Using this new data, Wisseman's team has been able to create a three-dimensional reconstruction of the face and body using software employed by the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children and a supercomputer on campus.
Still, there are some things you just can't find out without a full autopsy. Wisseman still doesn't know whether this mummy is a boy or girl, for example. To find out, she would need DNA, which she would most likely find in a tooth. But getting that tooth would involve drilling into the side of the mummy's head. "Mummies are a precious resource," Wisseman says. "We don't have that many left and nobody wants to sacrifice them."
--Rose Eveleth
See what we're tweeting about
Deadline: Jul 15 2013
Reward: $5,000 USD
SciBX: Science-Business eXchange, a joint publication from the makers
Deadline: Jul 25 2013
Reward: Varies
This challenge provides an opportunity for Solvers to build a web-based or mobile “app” to explore data relationships in scholarly conte
Powered By: 
YES! Send me a free issue of Scientific American with no obligation to continue the subscription. If I like it, I will be billed for the one-year subscription.
10 Comments
Add CommentThe article mentions that the child's remains indicated of a period of malnutrition and a fractured skull. I am assuming that the fractured skull was suffered while she was alive? If so, this paints stark picture of life in Fayum 100 AD - especially considering that this person was someone thought highly enough of to be mummified.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSince you have such incredible ct scans, can't you just scan, or x-ray, a little further down to tell if it is a boy or girl...the imprints in the cloth still should be there.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisOn a similar note, I seem to recall a recent Scientific American article on the subject of significant secondary sexual differences in skull shape. But perhaps that age is too young to show the differences.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhat about pelvic measurements?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this@letxequalx - The skull fracture was actually sustained after the child was already dead. They think the body might have been sitting around for a while before it was embalmed, and may have been mishandled.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this@Tortoise77 - Good question! Because the mummy is so old, the pelvic bones have relaxed and softened, which makes distinguishing between the sexes based on pelvic measurements impossible.
I'm curious as to how she arrived at an age of 8.5 yrs. Root formation of the lower lateral incisor is typically completed at around age 10. The root of this child's lateral incisor is complete, suggesting an age of 10 or older. The fact that the first maxillary premolar is erupting would also suggest an age of 10-11. The lower canine might indicate a slightly younger age. It normally emerges at 9-10 yrs, and while it's debatable as to whether this child's has erupted yet or not, if it hasn't it's very close (the gingiva attaches to the tooth just below the base of the crown; so, estimating the level of the gingiva based on the adjacent incisor and the primary molar, the canine is either through the gingiva or will be very soon). Based on this image, I'd say the child is at least 9 and probably closer to 10.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this1900 years old and still a child? Sheesh! Spare the rod (or crook and flail) and spoil the child!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisEven if the child's skull had been fractured in life, that doesn't necessarily have any negative implications about the child's conditions of life, or conditions of life in the child's community, at all. A death by skull fracture could occur completely accidentally to a child that was loved but bad luck came along.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisLikewise re the evidence for malnutrition. How do we know the parents of this child didn't sacrifice their own well-being to give it everything they could, even though that wasn't enough?
Don't let yourself be driven to read the worst into evidence. Doing that says more about you than it does about the past.
A little nit-picking. For years I worked to get my science students to treat the word "data" as the plural form it is (sing. datum.) I have noted that this is often not done in newspapers, TV, etc., but, surprisingly, it also occurs in science publications! Therefore, in this article, "the data" should be "these data. Thanks for letting me vent.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisLeaping to my usual in-depth question: Did anyone ask Bill Clinton if he thought she was "hot?"
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHe likes mummies.
.