工作台1

年輕女性的木乃伊畫像，2世紀，巴黎羅浮宮。

法尤姆木乃伊畫像（Fayum mummy portraits）是一個現代術語，用來表示一種在科普特時期（Coptic period），覆蓋於木乃伊的木板上的寫實繪畫畫像。在分類上屬於傳統的鑲版畫，是最受到關注的古典時期藝術形式之一。事實上，法尤姆畫像是同時期唯一僅存的大型人型藝術。

木乃伊畫像的出土處遍佈整個埃及，但最多的地方是法尤姆盆地，尤其是在哈瓦拉及安提諾波里斯，因此「法尤姆畫像」這個常見的名詞，一般是從字面上來描述，而非從地理上。雖然在法老時期就有繪畫的木乃伊盒，而法尤姆木乃伊畫像是更新的作法，屬於羅馬佔領埃及的科普特時期產物。

木乃伊畫像起源於羅馬時期，從西元前1世紀晚期或者西元1世紀早期開始。尚不清楚這些創作於何時停止，但最近的研究認為到3世紀中期才終止。這些畫像是極少數現存高知名度的古典時期鑲版畫中，為數最龐大的一群。後來在後古典時期演變為拜占庭及西方藝術的起源，包含當地在埃及的科普特藝術。

畫像覆蓋在要埋葬的木乃伊的臉部。現存的出土物說明了畫像是安附在用來包裹屍體的捆綁麻布上。現在幾乎所有的畫像都已和木乃伊分離了。 這些畫像通常描繪一個人物正面的的臉部，亦或包含上半身。在藝術方面，畫的風格明顯地源自希臘-羅馬的成分較多，而源自埃及的較少。

畫像的材質分為兩種，透過技術可以分辨出來：一種是蠟畫，另一種是蛋彩畫，蠟畫的品質通常較蛋彩畫高。

現今將近有900幅木乃伊畫像出土。主要在法尤姆的墓穴中被發現。由於埃及乾熱的氣候，畫像幾乎都保存的非常好，通常還留着鮮豔的色彩，似乎沒有因為時間而褪色。

研究的歷史

想像中但不真實的木乃伊發現過程的描繪，作者皮耶特羅•德拉•瓦雷（Pietro Della Valle）。

19世紀前

意大利探險家皮耶特羅•德拉•瓦雷，在1615年前往薩卡拉-孟菲斯的旅行中，成為第一個發現及描述木乃伊畫像的歐洲人。他將一些帶有畫像的木乃伊運回歐洲，現存放於阿爾伯提努姆藝術館（德累斯頓藝術收藏機構）。

19世紀的收藏家

雖然人們對古埃及的興趣在古埃及之後是穩定的增長的，但是對木乃伊畫像的更進一步發現在19世紀早期之前並非熱門的議題，首次新發現的出處並不清楚，可能也來自薩卡拉或者底比斯。1820年，米諾圖里男爵（Baron of Minotuli）獲得數個木乃伊畫像要交給一位德國收藏家，但這些木乃伊畫像與其他一整艘船貨的埃及工藝品一起沉沒於北海之中。1827年，萊昂•德•拉沃爾德（Léon de Laborde）買了兩幅據稱在孟菲斯發現的畫像回歐洲，一幅現在可以在羅浮宮看到，另一幅在大英博物館。讓-弗朗索瓦•商博良組成的1828年-1829年的探險隊的其中一員伊波利托•羅塞里尼，買了更深層的畫像回到佛羅倫斯。德•拉沃爾德與伊波利托•羅塞里尼兩者的例子由於非常相似而被認為是同一個根據。 在1820年代期間，英國的駐埃及領事亨利•紹特遣送數個更深層的畫像到巴黎與倫敦。其中有些長期被認為是底比斯執政官波利歐斯•索特（一個以編寫歷史聞名的歷史人物）的家族畫像，但這已經被證明是錯誤的。

蓋耶（Gayet）的木乃伊畫像單一標本，來自安提諾波里斯，可以從中得知它的考古背景。這幅上了濃烈金色的畫像於1905年到1906年的冬季被發現，1907年賣到柏林。柏林，埃及博物館。

再一次，在更多的木乃伊畫像重見天日之前，間隔了一段長時期的消沉。1887年，丹尼爾•馬利•富凱（Daniel Marie Fouquet）聽說一個洞穴發現了許多的木乃伊畫像。幾天之後他前往勘察這些畫像，但他太晚抵達了，發現者為了度過之前三天寒冷的沙漠夜晚，把繪有畫像的木板當作柴火燒掉了。富凱得到原本五十五幅畫像中剩下的兩幅。然而這次發現的確切地點並不清楚，可能的來源是（er-Rubayat）。 在同一個地點，富凱勘察後的沒多久，維也納藝術商人西奧多•葛拉夫（Theodor Graf）找到數個更深層的畫像，他想要盡可能的賺取利益。於是接觸了以萊比錫為根據地的知名埃及學家格奧爾格•埃伯斯來出版他的發現。他印製了展示會的傳單，發送到全歐洲以宣傳他的個人發現。雖然這些畫像的考古發現經過所知甚少，葛拉夫竭盡所能的透過與其它的藝術品（主要是錢幣的繪畫）比擬，將畫像描述成知名的托勒密法老王的畫像。這些推想全部都沒有受到爭論，也不具說服力，但使他增加許多的關注，很重要的是因為他得到知名學者如魯道夫•菲爾紹的背書。因此，木乃伊畫像成為許多關注的焦點。 到了19世紀晚期，木乃伊畫像非常獨特的藝術性使得它們成為受歡迎的收藏品，在全世界的藝術貿易中散佈開來。

考古學研究：弗林德斯•彼特利

同一時期，更多科學與畫像的接觸也開始進行。18897年，英國考古學家弗林德斯•彼特利，展開在哈瓦拉的挖掘工作。在他第一年的挖掘中，發現了一個羅馬的墓穴藏有81具帶有畫像的木乃伊。在一次的展覽會上，吸引了大批的群眾。隨後幾年，彼特利持續在同一地點挖掘，但現在遭受到來自一位德國人及一位埃及商人的競爭。彼特利在1910年到1911年的冬季回國，這段期間總共挖到70具帶有畫像的木乃伊，其中有些的保存情形非常差。 憑着非常少量的例外完好畫像，彼特利的研究仍舊是到目前唯一有系統的挖掘及正確公開的木乃伊畫像樣本。雖然已公開的研究並非完全都被現代標準接受，但這些畫像仍舊是木乃伊畫像發現過程的最重要來源。

19世紀晚期與20世紀早期的收藏家

1892年，德國考古學家馮•考夫曼（von Kaufmann）發現了所謂的「艾琳墓穴」，內部藏有三幅木乃伊畫像；是今日最知名的其中之一。其他重要的來源在如安提諾波里斯及阿卡赫米姆等地發現。法國考古學家阿爾伯•蓋耶（Albert Gayet）在安提諾波里斯工作，並發現了許多相關的材料，但他的研究，如同許多其他當代的研究一樣，無法符合現代的標準。他的文件是不完整的，許多他的發現沒有背景資料。

博物館

今日，木乃伊畫像在全世界重要的考古博物館被當作代表展品。世界各地許多博物館都有良好的法尤姆木乃伊畫像標本在展覽中，尤其是大英博物館、蘇格蘭皇家博物館、紐約的大都會藝術博物館以及巴黎的羅浮宮。 由於這些畫像幾乎都是經由不正當及非專業的方式收入各個博物館，事實上全都非經由考古挖掘，造成一再地降低這些畫像所蘊含的考古品質及歷史文化資訊。因此，這些畫像整體的意義及它們獨特的詮釋依舊存在極高的爭議。

材質與技術

連着木乃伊包裹麻布的畫像細節，大都會藝術博物館。此畫像由弗林德斯•彼特利於1911年在一處墓葬室內發現。

大多數的繪畫整齊一致的表現出一位單一人物的畫像，臉部及表情朝向觀畫者，通常從一個可以稍微看到全臉的角度描繪。人物呈現出半身畫搭配單一色調的背景，有些例子的背景含有裝飾。畫中的主角為男女皆有，年齡下至幼童，上至老人。

繪畫的表面

大多數保存的木乃伊畫像是在木板或鑲板上作畫的，由不同種類的進口硬木製成，包含橡樹、椴樹、懸鈴木、雪松、柏木、榕樹及柑橘樹。樹木先被裁切成薄的矩形木板再經過磨平。完成的畫板會被放入包裹的布層來蓋住身體，再用裹身的麻布圍繞營造出窗戶的效果，彷彿可以從中一窺逝者的面貌。有時候畫像是直接畫在包裹木乃伊用的帆布或麻布上（木乃伊盒繪畫）。

繪畫技術

有時候木頭表面最初要先上一層石膏再來作畫。可以從某些例子的表層得知繪畫的準備動作。共有兩種繪畫的技術被使用到：蠟畫及以蛋液為基礎的蛋彩畫。蠟畫的畫面較引人注目，因為生動和豐富的色彩形成強烈的對比，以及比較大面積的刷筆方式，形成一種「印象派」的效果。蛋彩畫擁有較細緻的色調層次感及較偏白堊色的色系，給予人一種更拘謹的表象。 在某些例子中，會使用金箔來描繪珠寶首飾及花圈。也有些例子使用了混合的技術或變形的主要技術。

法尤姆畫像展現了廣泛的畫家專業技術，以及顯示栩栩如生畫面的技巧。畫像的自然性經常展現在組織結構的知識，及藉由光線和陰影所形成的造型技巧，使的大多數的畫像擁有三維的畫面。定向光源指引所形成的陰影和亮點增強了漸層的形體色調。

繪畫的主題及社會背景

法尤姆的人民

在希臘羅馬的統治之下，埃及建立了數個希臘人的據點，大多數集中於亞歷山卓，但也有少數其他的城市，希臘移民者與大約七百萬到一千萬的本土埃及人比鄰而居。法尤姆最早的希臘居民是托勒密王朝國王在新開拓的土地上安置的退役軍人和精英軍事官員。土生的埃及人也從國家的四面八方移入法尤姆 ，尤其是從尼羅河三角洲、上埃及、俄克喜林庫斯及孟菲斯，從個人姓名、本土宗教及復原的莎草紙中得知，他們從事進行土地開墾的勞力工作。托勒密時期估計最多有百分之30的法尤姆人口為希臘人，以及其他的土生埃及人。 在羅馬時期，多數的希臘人口由希臘化的埃及人或是希臘埃及混血的人民組成。

然而一般相信希臘移民者作為代表埃及的主體， 法尤姆畫像反而反映出城市中主流的埃及文化與上層少數的精英希臘文化之間複雜的融合。 根據蘇珊•沃克（Susan Walker）的說法，托勒密時期初期的希臘移民者娶本土的埃及女性並接受埃及的宗教信仰，而到了羅馬時期，他們的後代被羅馬的統治者視為土生的埃及人，儘管他們自認為自己屬於希臘人。 羅馬時期法尤姆木乃伊的牙體形態學（dental morphology）也與早期埃及居民的做過比較，並且發現跟希臘及其他歐洲族群相比，「更加接近」古埃及人的族群。

畫中人物的年齡概況

大部分的畫像描繪的逝者為相對年輕的年紀，並且很多為兒童。根據沃克（2000年）的說法，「電腦斷層掃描掃描了全部完整的木乃伊樣本，顯露出木乃伊與畫像之間年齡的一致性，以及在一些適當的案例中包含性別的一致性。」沃克推論年齡的分佈反映出該時期對壽命的預期程度低。通常相信蠟製畫像完成於人們獨居的時期並展示在他們的家中，一種屬於希臘藝術傳統的習俗， 但是這個觀點在電腦斷層掃描技術掃描法尤姆木乃伊提出證據之後不再被廣泛的支持，羅馬人口普查的復原也是相同。另外，一些畫像是直接作畫於棺材之上；例如在裹屍麻布或其他部份之上。

背着劍帶的男子，大英博物館。

社會地位

畫像中的主角顯然屬於軍事相關人員的富裕上層階級、城市的公務員及重要的宗教人士。並非每個人都能夠擁有一個木乃伊畫像；許多木乃伊被發現沒有使用畫像。弗林德斯•彼特利說明他挖掘到的木乃伊只有百分之一到二的比例有用畫像裝飾。 雖然無法得知木乃伊畫像的實際比例，但是可以假設物質造成比勞動還高的成本，在古典時代，畫家被視為工匠而不是藝術家。在這一方面，艾琳墓穴的情形引起眾人的關注。 墓穴中含有四具木乃伊：一具是艾琳，兩具是她的子女及一具她的丈夫。不像艾琳及她的子女，艾琳的丈夫並沒有畫像的裝飾，而是配戴了一個鍍金的立體面具。或許石膏面具是他們負擔不起的首選。

目前尚不清楚這些繪畫是否起源自埃及、希臘或是羅馬，也不清楚這些畫像是否普遍地被各個族群使用。其中某些畫中主角的名字可從畫上得銘刻得知，他們是屬於埃及、希臘及羅馬血統。髮型及服飾完全受到羅馬流行的影響。女性及幼童通常描繪成穿戴貴重的首飾及穿着品質好的衣服，男性則常常穿着特殊而精緻的服裝。以希臘文銘刻的名字相對而言較常見，有些銘刻包含職業名稱。目前並不明白這些職業的銘刻是否全部皆反映真實，或者它們是否可能表達理想中的情形或志向而非真正的情況。 一個單獨的銘刻事例被認為真正明確地表明了死者的職業（一位船東）。一具名叫赫米歐妮（Hermione）的女性木乃伊也包含一個詞「語法」（grammatike，希臘文：γραμματική）。有很長一段時間，人們假設這代表她的職業是一名教師（因此，弗林德斯•彼特利將此畫像捐贈給劍橋的劍橋大學格頓學院，英國第一所寄宿的女子大學學院），但在今日，人們推估這個詞指的是她的教育水準。一些男性的畫像展現出劍帶或者甚至劍柄，一般推測他們是羅馬軍隊的成員。

文化-歷史背景

喪葬習俗的改變

托勒密埃及的喪葬習俗大部分遵循古老的傳統。上層階級成員的遺體屬於木乃伊化的，配有裝飾過的棺材及用來覆蓋頭部的木乃伊面具。在希臘人進入埃及的時期大致上沿用他們自己的習俗。亞歷山卓及其他地點有證據指出他們實行希臘的火葬傳統。這大致上反映了希臘化埃及的普遍情形，雖然統治者宣稱自己為法老，然而除此之外卻生活在一個全然的希臘文化世界，加上只有非常稀少的的本土文化元素。相反地，在亞歷山大的征服之後，埃及人對支配着東地中海的希臘文化的興趣只有得到緩慢的發展。羅馬人來到之後，這種情勢的發生大幅的改變。幾個世代之內，埃及全部的文化元素從日常生活中消失殆盡。像卡拉尼斯或奧克西林庫斯這樣的城市為主要地希臘-羅馬據點。有清楚的證據證明這是在羅馬的埃及統治階級下，不同種族融合的結果。

宗教連續性

Only in the sphere of religion is there evidence for a continuation of Egyptian traditions. Egyptian temples were erected as late as the 2nd century. In terms of burial habits, Egyptian and Hellenistic elements now mixed. Coffins became increasingly unpopular and went entirely out of use by the 2nd century. On contrast, mummification appears to have been practised by large parts of the population. The mummy mask, originally an Egyptian concept, grew more and more Graeco-Roman in style, Egyptian motifs became ever rarer. The adoption of Roman portrait painting into Egyptian burial cult belongs into this general context.

Link with Roman funeral masks?

Some authors suggest that the idea of such portraits may be related to the custom among the Roman nobility of displaying imagines, images of their ancestors, in the atrium of their house. In funeral processions, these wax masks were worn by professional mourners to emphasize the continuity of an illustrious family line, but originally perhaps to represent a deeper evocation of the presence of the dead. Roman festivals such as the Parentalia as well as everyday domestic rituals cultivated ancestral spirits (see also veneration of the dead). The development of mummy portraiture may represent a combination of Egyptian and Roman funerary tradition, since it appears only after Egypt was established as a Roman province.

"Salon paintings"?

The images depict the heads or busts of men, women and children. They probably date from c. 30 BC to the 3rd century. To the modern eye, the portraits appear highly individualistic. Therefore, it has been assumed for a long time that they were produced during the lifetime of their subjects and displayed as "salon paintings" within their houses, to be added to their mummy wrapping after their death. Newer research rather suggests that they were only painted after death, an idea perhaps contradicted by the multiple paintings on some specimens and the (suggested) change of specific details on others. The individualism of those depicted was actually created by variations in some specific details, within a largely unvaried general scheme. The habit of depicting the deceased was not a new one, but the painted images gradually replaced the earlier Egyptian masks, although the latter continued in use for some time, often occurring directly adjacent to portrait mummies, sometimes even in the same graves.

Realism and convention

Together with Greek vases and frescoes from Pompeii and Herculaneum, Macedonia and elsewhere, they are the best preserved paintings from ancient times and are renowned for their remarkable naturalism. It is, however, debatable whether the portraits depict the subjects as they really were. Analyses have shown that the painters depicted faces according to conventions in a repetitive and formulaic way, albeit with a variety of hairstyles and beards. They appear to have worked from a number of standard types without making detailed observations of the unique facial proportions of specific individuals which give each face its own personality.

Style

In the virtual absence of other panel paintings from the period in question, it is difficult to make firm statements about the stylistic context of the portraits. While it seems clear that they are not in continuity from Egyptian precedents, the same cannot be said for the northern shores of the Mediterranean, where such material is less likely to have survived, due to climatic conditions there. Evidence from frescoes, mosaics and other media suggests that stylistically, the mummy portraits broadly fit within the prevailing Graeco-Roman traditions then dominant around the Mediterranean.

Coexistence with other burial habits

The religious meaning of mummy portraits has not, so far, been fully explained, nor have associated grave rites. There is some indication that it developed from genuine Egyptian funerary rites, adapted by a multi-cultural ruling class. The tradition of mummy portraits occurred from the Delta to Nubia, but it is striking that other funerary habits prevailed over portrait mummies at all sites except those in the Faiyum (and there especially Hawara and Achmim) and Antinoopolis. In most sites, different forms of burial coexisted. The choice of grave type may have been determined to a large extent by the financial means and status of the deceased, modified by local customs. Portrait mummies have been found both in rock-cut tombs and in freestanding built grave complexes, but also in shallow pits. It is striking that they are virtually never accompanied by any grave offerings, with the exception of occasional pots or sprays of flowers.

End of the mummy portrait tradition

Portrait of a young boy, early 3rd century, Antikensammlung Berlin.

Portrait of an Egyptian man

For a long time, it was assumed that the latest portraits belong to the end of the 4th century, but recent research has modified this view considerably, suggesting that the last wooden portraits belong to the middle, the last directly painted mummy wrappings to the second half of the 3rd century. It is commonly accepted that production reduced considerably since the beginning of the 3rd century. Several reasons for the decline of the mummy portrait have been suggested; no single reason should probably be isolated, rather, they should be seen as operating together.

• In the 3rd century the Roman Empire underwent a severe economic crisis, severely limiting the financial abilities of the upper classes. Although they continued to lavishly spend money on representation, they favoured public appearances, like games and festivals, over the production of portraits. Other elements of sepulchral representation, like sarcophagi did, however, continue.
• There is evidence of a religious crisis at the same time. This may not be as closely connected with the rise of Christianity as previously assumed (the earlier suggestion of a 4th century end to the portraits would coincide with the widespread distribution of Christianity in Egypt. Christianity also never banned mummification). An increasing neglect of Egyptian temples is noticeable during the Roman imperial period, leading to a general drop in interest in all ancient religions.
• The Constitutio Antoniniana, i.e. the granting of Roman citizenship to all free subjects changed the social structures of Egypt. For the first time, the individual cities gained a degree of self-administration. At the same time, the provincial upper classes changed in terms of both composition and inter-relations.

Thus, a combination of several factors appears to have led to changes of fashion and ritual. No clear causality can be asserted. Considering the limited nature of the current understanding of portrait mummies, it remains distinctly possible that future research will considerably modify the image presented here. For example, some scholars suspect that the centre of production of such finds, and thus the centre of the distinctive funerary tradition they represent, may have been located at Alexandria. New finds from Marina el-Alamein strongly support such a view. In view of the near-total loss of Greek and Roman paintings, mummy portraits are today considered to be among the very rare examples of ancient art that can be seen to reflect "Great paintings" and especially Roman portrait painting.

Mummy portraits as sources on provincial Roman fashion

Depiction of a woman with curly hair, wearing a violet chiton and cloak and pendant earrings. British Museum.

Provincial fashions

Mummy portraits depict a variety of different hairstyles. They are one of the main aids in dating the paintings. The majority of the deceased were depicted with hairstyles then in fashion. They are frequently similar to those depicted in sculpture. As part of Roman propaganda, such sculptures, especially those depicting the imperial family, were often displayed throughout the empire. Thus, they had a direct influence on the development of fashion. Nevertheless, the mummy portraits, as well as other finds, suggest that fashions lasted longer in the provinces that in the imperial court, or at least that diverse styles might coexist.

Hairstyles

Since Roman men tended to wear short-cropped hair, female hairstyles are a better source of evidence for changes in fashion. The female portraits suggest a coarse chronological scheme: Simple hairstyles with a central parting in the Tiberian period are followed by more complex ringlet hairstyles, nested plaits and curly toupées over the forehead in the late 1st century. Small oval nested plaits dominate the time of the Antonines, simple central-parting hairstyles with a hairknot in the neck occur in the second half of the 2nd century. The time of Septimius Severus was characterised by toupée-like fluffy as well as strict, straight styles, followed by looped plaits on the crown of the head. The latter belong to the very final phase of mummy portraits, and have only been noted on a few mummy wrappings. It seems to be the case that curly hairstyles were especially popular in Egypt.

Depiction of a woman with a ringlet hairstyle, an orange chiton with black bands and rod-shaped earrings. Royal Museum of Scotland.

Clothing

Like the hairstyles, the clothing depicted also follows the general fashions of the Roman Empire, as known from statues and busts. Both men and women tend to wear a thin chiton as an undergarment. Above it, both sexes tend to wear a cloak, laid across the shoulders or wound around the torso. The males wear virtually exclusively white, while female clothing is often red or pink, but can also be yellow, white, blue or purple. The chiton often bears a decorative line (clavus), occasionally light red or light green, also sometimes gold, but normally in dark colours. Some painted mummy wrappings from Antinoopolis depict garments with long sleeves and very wide clavi. So far, not a single portrait has been definitely shown to depict the toga, a key symbol of Roman citizenship. It should, however, be kept in mind that Greek cloaks and togas are draped very similarly on depictions of the 1st and early 2nd centuries. In the late 2nd and 3rd centuries, togas should be distinguishable, but fail to occur.

Jewellery

With very few exceptions, only women are depicted with jewellery. It generally accords to the common jewellery types of the Graeco-Roman East. Especially the Antinoopolis portraits depict simple gold link chains and massive gold rings. There are also depictions of precious or semi-precious stones like emerald, carnelian, garnet, agate or amethyst, rarely also of pearls. The stones were normally ground into cylindrical or spherical beads. Some portraits depict elaborate colliers, with precious stones set in gold.

There are three basic shapes of ear ornaments: Especially common in the 1st century are circular or drop-shaped pendants. Archaeological finds indicate that these were fully or semi-spherical. Later tastes favoured S-shaped hooks of gold wire, on which up to five beads of different colours and materials could be strung. The third shape are elaborate pendants with a horizontal bar from which two or three, occasionally four, vertical rods are suspended, usually each decorated with a white bead or pearl at the bottom. Other common ornaments include gold hairpins, often decorated with pearls, fine diadems, and, especially at Antinoopolis, gold hairnets. Many portraits also depict amulets and pendants, perhaps with magical functions.

Art-historical significance

Tondo with images of Septimius Severus and his family. Antikensammlung Berlin.

The mummy portraits have immense art-historical importance. Ancient sources indicate that panel painting (rather than wall painting), i.e. painting on wood or other mobile surfaces was held in high regard. But very few ancient panel paintings survive. One of the few examples besides the mummy portraits is the Severan Tondo, also from Egypt (around 200), which, like the mummy portraits, is believed to represent a provincial version of contemporary style. Some aspects of the mummy portraits, especially their frontal perspective and their concentration on key facial features, strongly resemble later icon painting. A direct link has been suggested, but it should be kept in mind that the mummy portraits represent only a small part of a much wider Graeco-Roman tradition, the whole of which later bore an influence on Late Antique and Byzantine Art. A pair of panel "icons" of Serapis and Isis of comparable date (3rd century) and style are in the Getty Museum at Malibu; as with the cult of Mithras, earlier examples of cult images were sculptures or pottery figurines, but from the 3rd century reliefs and then painted images are found.

Gallery of images

• 
  Faiyum mummy portrait of a young man. Antikensammlungen Munich.
• 
  Portrait of a boy from Faiyum, National Museum in Warsaw.
• 
  Portrait of a woman, on display at the Museo Egizio.
• 
  Portrait of a man holding a plant, Musée des Beaux-Arts, Dijon.
• 
  Portrait of a woman, Louvre.
• 
  Portrait of a boy, identified by inscription as Eutyches, Metropolitan Museum of Art.
• 
  Portrait of a man, Metropolitan Museum of Art.
• Reconstruction based on the skull found in the mummy Edinburgh, MoS 1911.210.1 in the Royal Museum of Scotland
  Reconstruction based on the skull found in the mummy Edinburgh, MoS 1911.210.1 in the Royal Museum of Scotland
• 
  Portrait of bearded man Edinburgh, MoS 1911.210.1, Royal Museum of Scotland

See also

• Panel painting
• Ancient Roman art
• Faiyum
• Coptic art
• Coptic Museum
• Pitsa panels

Bibliography

(chronological order)

• W. M. Flinders Petrie: Roman Portraits and Memphis IV, London 1911 (online:[2])
• Klaus Parlasca: Mumienporträts und verwandte Denkmäler, Wiesbaden 1966
• Klaus Parlasca: Ritratti di mummie, Repertorio d'arte dell'Egitto greco-romano Vol. B, 1-4, Rome 1969-2003 (Corpus of most of the known mummy portraits)
• Henning Wrede: Mumienporträts. In: Lexikon der Ägyptologie. Bd. IV, Wiesbaden 1982, column 218-222
• Barbara Borg: Mumienporträts. Chronologie und kultureller Kontext, Mainz 1996, ISBN 3-8053-1742-5
• Susan Walker, Morris Bierbrier: Ancient Faces, Mummy Portraits from Roman Egypt, London 1997 ISBN 0714109894
• Barbara Borg: "Der zierlichste Anblick der Welt ...". Ägyptische Porträtmumien, Mainz 1998 (Zaberns Bildbände zur Archäologie/ Sonderhefte der Antiken Welt), ISBN 3-8053-2264-X; ISBN 3-8053-2263-1
• Wilfried Seipel (Hrsg.): Bilder aus dem Wüstensand. Mumienportraits aus dem Ägyptischen Museum Kairo; eine Ausstellung des Kunsthistorischen Museums Wien, Milan/Wien/Ostfildern 1998; ISBN 88-8118-459-1;
• Klaus Parlasca; Hellmut Seemann (Hrsg.): Augenblicke. Mumienporträts und ägyptische Grabkunst aus römischer Zeit [zur Ausstellung Augenblicke - Mumienporträts und Ägyptische Grabkunst aus Römischer Zeit, in der Schirn-Kunsthalle Frankfurt (30. Januar bis 11. April 1999)], München 1999, ISBN 3-7814-0423-4
• Nicola Hoesch: Mumienporträts in: Der Neue Pauly, Vol. 8 (2000), p. 464f.
• Susan Walker (ed.): Ancient Faces. Mummy Portraits from Roman Egypt. New York, 2000. ISBN 0-415-92744-7.
• Paula Modersohn-Becker und die ägyptischen Mumienportraits...Katalogbuch zur Ausstellung in Bremen, Kunstsammlung Böttcherstraße, 14.10.2007-24.2.2008, München 2007, ISBN 978-3-7774-3735-4
• Jan Picton, Stephen Quirke, Paul C. Roberts (Hrsg): Living Images, Egyptian Funerary Portraits in the Petrie Museum, Walnut Creek CA 2007 ISBN 978-1-59874-251-0

External links

• Mummy portraits in the Petrie Museum
• Proportion and personality in the Faiyum Portraits, A.J.N.W Prag, November 2002
• History of Encaustic Art
• Petrie's report from 1911
• Detailed discussion of mummy portraits