The Forgotten Scholar: Georg Zoëga (1755–1809) At the Dawn of Egyptology and Coptic Studies Edited by Karen Ascani, Paola Buzi and Daniela Picchi LEIDEN | BOSTON This is a digital offprint for restricted use only | © 2015 Koninklijke Brill NV Contents Preface xi The Organizing Committee Introduction 1 Karen Ascani, Paola Buzi, Daniela Picchi Zoëga and His Time 1 Georg Koës and Zoëga’s Manuscripts Preserved in The Royal Library in Copenhagen 15 Ivan Boserup 2 Relics of a Friendship. Objects from Georg Zoëga’s Estate in Thorvaldsens Museum, Copenhagen 25 Kristine Bøggild Johannsen 3 Georg Zoëga in lettere Karen Ascani 36 4 Georg Zoëga und Christian Gottlob Heyne Daniel Graepler 44 5 Zoëga e la ijilologia 57 Alessandro Bausi 6 Georg Zoëga as Art Critic Jesper Svenningsen 67 7 An Antiquarian Depicted. The Visual Reception of Georg Zoëga Anne Haslund Hansen 77 8 Georg Zoëga and Friedrich Münter. The Signiijicance of Their Relationship 87 Tobias Fischer-Hansen This is a digital offprint for restricted use only | © 2015 Koninklijke Brill NV viii contents Zoëga and Numismatic Studies 9 Zoëga studente di numismatica. Il soggiorno a Vienna (1782) e i contatti con Joseph Eckhel 101 Daniela Williams and Bernhard Woytek 10 Zoëga, pionnier de la numismatique alexandrine Laurent Bricault 111 Zoëga and the Origins of Egyptology 123 11 On the Origins of an Egyptologist Thomas Christiansen 12 In visita alla ‘Grande Galleria’: l’antico Egitto a Firenze Maria Cristina Guidotti 13 The Egyptian Antiquities in Bologna and Venice at Zoëga’s Time 140 Daniela Picchi 14 Georg Zoëga and the Borgia Collection of Egyptian Antiquities: Cataloguing as a Method 151 Rosanna Pirelli and Stefania Mainieri 15 A Concealed Attempt at Deciphering Hieroglyphs Paul John Frandsen 16 “Covered with the Rust of Egyptian Antiquity”: Thomas Ford Hill and the Decipherment of Hieroglyphs 174 Patricia Usick 17 De origine et usu obeliscorum: Some Notes on an Eighteenth-century Egyptological Study 185 Emanuele M. Ciampini 132 160 This is a digital offprint for restricted use only | © 2015 Koninklijke Brill NV ix contents Zoëga and the Origins of Coptic Studies 195 18 Gli studi copti ijino a Zoëga Tito Orlandi 19 Chénouté et Zoëga : l’auteur majeur de la littérature copte révélé par le savant danois 206 Anne Boud’hors 20 The Catalogus codicum copticorum manu scriptorum qui in Museo Velitris adservantur. Genesis of a masterpiece 216 Paola Buzi Zoëga and Rome 227 21 Il collezionismo di orientalia nella Roma di Pio VI Beatrice Palma Venetucci 22 Georg Zoëga e gli scavi nel territorio laziale Beatrice Cacciotti 23 Friederike Brun, Elisa von der Recke and Georg Zoëga: Members of the ‘Universitas of Rome’ 248 Adelheid Müller Index 237 259 This is a digital offprint for restricted use only | © 2015 Koninklijke Brill NV chapter 14 Georg Zoëga and the Borgia Collection of Egyptian Antiquities: Cataloguing as a Method Rosanna Pirelli and Stefania Mainieri1 The Borgia Collection of Egyptian Antiquities Georg Zoëga was the ijirst scholar who studied the Borgia collection of Egyptian antiquities, one of the two main groups of artifacts which constitute the Egyptian section of the National Archaeological Museum of Naples (mann),2 the other one being a private collection sold by Giuseppe Picchianti in 1827. After Cardinal Borgia’s death, his nephew and heir Camillo tried to sell the Egyptian antiquities to the Danish King,3 but Pope Pius vii opposed this; Camillo was thus obliged to ijind a new buyer, and proposed the collection to Joachim Murat, king of Naples, in 1814. Due to the critical political situation, however, the transaction was concluded one year later and the artifacts were not transported to Naples before 1817. In 1821, Michele Arditi, director of the Real Museo Borbonico established the Egyptian section exhibiting the Borgia antiquities together with few Egyptian artifacts from the Farnese collection and some ijindings from the Flaegrean and Vesuvian areas: the section was arranged in the eastern wing of the Museum. When, between 1827 and 1857, Picchianti sold his collection to the Museum and some small private groups of artifacts were also added, changes became 1 The two authors have discussed and agreed on the general content of this paper, where the ijirst paragraph was edited by Rosanna Pirelli and the latter by Stefania Mainieri. 2 C. Barocas, “La storia della Collezione Egiziana del Museo”, in Civiltà dell’Antico Egitto in Campania. Per un riordinamento della Collezione Egiziana del Museo Archeologico Nazionale di Napoli, (Napoli: Tempi Moderni, 1983), 9–15; R. Cantilena, P. Rubino (a cura di), La collezione egiziana del Museo Archeologico Nazionale di Napoli, (Napoli: Arte Tipograijica, 1989); C. Cozzolino, D. d’Errico, R. Di Maria, R. Pirelli, F. Poole, “La storia della Collezione Egiziana del Museo Archeologico Nazionale di Napoli, in L’Egitto fuori dell’Egitto. Dalla Riscoperta all’ Egittologia, a cura di C. Morigi Govi, S. Curto, S. Pernigotti, (Bologna: clueb, 1991), 341–345; M.R. Borriello, T. Giove, (a cura di), La Collezione Egiziana del Museo Archeologico Nazionale di Napoli. Guida alle collezioni, (Napoli: Electa, 2000). 3 According to his words recorded in the volume Documenti inediti per servire alla storia dei musei d’Italia, i, (Roma: Ministero della Pubblica Istruzione, 1878), xiv. © koninklijke brill nv, leiden, 2015 | doi 10.1163/9789004290839_016 This is a digital offprint for restricted use only | © 2015 Koninklijke Brill NV 152 Pirelli and Mainieri necessary and two new expositions were realized: one in 1848 by the Minister of Education, Paolo Emilio Imbriani, and the latter by a new curator, Luigi Vassalli, in 1861. Finally, in 1864, the section was moved by Giuseppe Fiorelli to the basement of the Museum, where the artifacts were hosted until the end of 2007. During this long period, however, the exposition underwent several changes and was closed for long periods. In 1983, the exhibition Civiltà dell’Antico Egitto in Campania gave birth to a joint project between the Soprintendenza Archeologica per le Province di Napoli e Caserta and the chair of Egyptology of the University of Naples, “l’Orientale”: the artifacts, although stored in the same rooms in the basement, had not been displayed for 25 years, and all their museological information had been forgotten. After taking quite a bit of time and effort to reconstruct the history of the various groups of artifacts and to study most of them, the ijirst almost complete catalogue of the Egyptian collection was published4 and a new exhibition was inaugurated on the 14th December 1989. As it was the ijirst catalogue of the whole collection, priority was given to the main Egyptological information, and archives were consulted only with the purpose of attributing an inventory number and the original provenance collection of the artifacts. At that time, moreover, we had not yet met the precious archive documents kept in The Royal Library in Copenhagen.5 As we mentioned above, in 2007 the collection was closed again (and it is still closed today) as rooms and showcases needed to be refurbished and adapted to new safety criteria. The Soprintendenza Archeologica decided to use this occasion to update the whole catalogue of the collection and to make a new plan for its exposition. The project (which started a few months ago) is again a joint project between the Soprintendenza Archeologica and the University of Naples “l’Orientale”, which assigned a regional scholarship for a PhD research on this topic. Before approaching the main subject of this paper, i.e. the great work of Georg Zoëga on the Egyptian collection, it is appropriate to say a few words on the personality of Cardinal Stefano Borgia.6 4 Cantilena, Rubino, La collezione egiziana. 5 The authors of this paper express their gratitude to Daniela Picchi for involving them in the project for the study of Zoëga’s manuscripts. 6 F. Münter, “Il Cardinale Stefano Borgia”, in Stefano Borgia e i Danesi a Roma, Centro Internazionale di Studi Borgiani—Quaderni 1, a cura di R. Langella, (Velletri: Edizioni tra 8 & 9, 2000), 63–76. This is a digital offprint for restricted use only | © 2015 Koninklijke Brill NV Cataloguing as a Method 153 In fact if Zoëga was among the most rigorous scholars who prepared the bases for the scientiijic study of Egyptian antiquities, much of what he did must be evaluated also in the light of his relationship with Cardinal Stefano Borgia.7 Despite his traditional and rigid education, Borgia developed a peculiar attitude both towards his duties as a senior prelate and towards his scientiijic interests and social life. His biographers describe him as a tireless defender of the Church and the Pope, even when (for instance) his difijicult relationship with Pius vi caused him great disappointment and frustration; but they also deijine him as a generous supporter of talented young scholars. Although his residence in Velletri was conceived as a ‘casa-museo’,8 in conformity with a common taste of the eighteenth century, his scientiijic interests brought him much beyond his current attitude towards the cabinets de curiositées. He greatly enlarged his collection, ijinally dividing it into ten categories of artifacts, and assigned each of them to a specialist, also paying for publication and popularization of their discoveries and scientiijic results. It was on these bases that Zoëga’s work started, allowing him to give his fundamental contribution to the study of Egyptian antiquities. Cataloguing as a Method The results of Zoëga’s studies on the Borgia Egyptian collection are to be found in the Catalogo dei monumenti egiziani nel Museo Borgiano composto ed ordinato dal Sig. Giorgio Zoega dotto Danese nel mese di Ottobre del 1784, of which we have two unpublished copies, one at The Royal Library of Copenhagen9 and the other one at the Municipal Library in Velletri.10 The catalogue kept in The Royal Library in Copenhagen11 is composed of unbound sheets with the detailed description of 628 objects partially sorted 7 8 9 10 11 K. Ascani, “Georg Zoega, il suo epistolario e il Cardinale Stefano Borgia”, in Stefano Borgia e i Danesi a Roma, 19–22; Ø. Andreasen, “Il Cardinale Borgia e i Danesi a Roma”, in Stefano Borgia e i Danesi a Roma, 23–61. S. Cravero, “’Non è da tutti il maneggio delle antichità’: la casa-museo di Stefano Borgia dalle sue lettere”, in Le quattro voci del mondo: arte, culture e saperi nella collezione di Stefano Borgia 1731–1804, a cura di M. Nocca, (Napoli: Electa, 2001), 108–115; Ead:, “L’organizzazione del Museo Borgia a Velletri”, in Stefano Borgia e i Danesi a Roma, 95–97. nks 357b fol., iii, i. Biblioteca Comunale di Velletri (henceforth bcv), iv, 21. We made a digital copy of it in order to organize the huge amount of information it contains. This is a digital offprint for restricted use only | © 2015 Koninklijke Brill NV 154 Pirelli and Mainieri in ascending order according to the inventory number. Among the pages some more leaves are inserted with different kinds of notes among which are some notes of Petrini and Thomson about different materials. Unlike the previous catalogue, the Catalogo dei monumenti egiziani nel Museo Borgiano is composed of 99 bound pages, numbered and well organised, containing only the descriptions of the objects and, sometimes, their sizes. Due to their different features, it is likely that the Copenhagen catalogue is the rough copy, while the Velletri catalogue is the ijinal version which is organised in eight parts corresponding to different periods.12 The objects are in other words the same, although the information of the Copenhagen catalogue is much richer and is accompanied by drawings, copies of the texts and several notes, some of which were added also after 1790. In a letter to Stefano Borgia,13 Zoëga writes to have been in Velletri again to measure those objects of the collection whose sizes he had not yet recorded in the catalogue, and to correct errors and some inaccurate copies of hieroglyphic texts.14 All these annotations and a list of measures are in the Copenhagen catalogue and not in the Velletri one. A third version of the Catalogo dei monumenti egiziani nel Museo Borgiano was compiled by Camillo Borgia around 1814 and was then published by the Italian Ministry of Education in Documenti Inediti per servire alla Storia dei Musei d’Italia in 1878.15 It is based on Zoëga’s catalogue but it is organised in a different way: the objects here are not sorted on the basis of their inventory number but are gathered on the basis of their material: wood, stone, bronze, faience and so on. The catalogue includes only 583 objects, that is the artifacts which were sold to the Museum of Naples: 8 of them never arrived in Naples and were deposited in Palazzo Farnese;16 while 53 more ijinds, missing from the original catalogue, might have been donated to the Museum of de Propaganda Fide in 12 13 14 15 16 October 1784 (nn. 1–179); February 1785 (nn. 180–192); May 1785 (nn. 193–205); October 1785 (nn. 206–257); May 1787 (nn. 258–273); October 1787 (nn. 274–299), October 1788 (nn. 300–333); May 1790 (nn. 334–628). Ø. Andreasen, K. Ascani (hrsgg.), Georg Zoëga: Briefe und Dokumente, iii, (Kopenhagen: Gesellschaft für dänische Sprache und Literatur, 2013), 488–490, letter n. 646 (4 November 1794). We would like to thank Karen Ascani for having made available to us her work, even before its publication. Ibid. “Catalogo dei Monumenti egiziani—Tratto da quello composto dal ch. cav. Giorgio Zoega danese nell’Ottobre del 1784 e seguenti”, in Documenti Inediti, i–xxiv, 275–427. Documenti Inediti, xii. This is a digital offprint for restricted use only | © 2015 Koninklijke Brill NV Cataloguing as a Method 155 Rome.17 Moreover the catalogue of the Egyptian collection,18 published in 1989, records only 464 objects as belonging to the Borgia collection, that is 111 artifacts less than the list of Camillo. By comparing the catalogue of Camillo Borgia with the old inventories of the Museum,19 it was possible to understand that this numerical difference is due to different reasons: the elimination of some rotting organic materials,20 the transfer of some ijinds to other collections21 and the fact that a few objects are still kept in the store-rooms. We are trying to identify all the missing objects, and the high quality of the work done by the Danish scholar more than 200 years ago is a fundamental help for this identiijication. One of the basic investigations is to check those items which, in Zoëga’s catalogue, were recorded with a single inventory number as belonging to the same assemblage, while, in the inventory of the Museum written in 1884, each object was catalogued as an independent ijind involving a gradual loss of their original collocation. An interesting case of this is a damaged mummy with its cofijin that, according to Zoëga’s words, came from Saqqara via Alexandria and Venice; this mummy arrived in Rome in May 1785 after two years of travelling.22 Thanks to the information given by Zoëga it was possible to: 1. 2. 3. 17 18 19 20 21 22 recompose its decorations, identifying cartonnage fragments pertaining to it, assembling them and suggesting their original positions and identifying the missing part; associate the cartonnage decoration to its cofijin; reconstruct the history of its mummy. The authors have just contacted the responsible of the Propaganda Fide Museum in order to verify this information. We are grateful to Alessia Amenta, curator of Department of Oriental Antiquities of the Vatican Museum who helped us in this phase of the research. Cantilena, Rubino, La collezione egiziana. Arditi (1822) Archivio storico della soprintendenza di Napoli (henceforth Assan) Antico Inventario n. 12; Sangiorgio (1849) Assan Antico Inventario n. 85; Fiorelli Inv. gen. (1884). The project also includes the study of those ijinds not studied in 1989 but that are still kept in the store-rooms. For example two mummies of children with their cofijins (Zoëga n. 230—mann inv. n. 1090 and Zoëga n. 332—mann inv. n. 1091) were already decaying at the end of 1800. Such as a small leaden board (Zoëga n. 248—Sangiorgio n. 205) transferred in 1849 in the Arabic collection or an handle of sistrum (Zoëga n. 560—mann inv. n. 2390) moved in the hall of “Bronzi minuti”. nks 357b fol., iii, i. This is a digital offprint for restricted use only | © 2015 Koninklijke Brill NV 156 Pirelli and Mainieri In the Egyptian collection there are currently two anthropoid cofijins dated to the Ptolemaic period23 and 10 fragments of cartonnage24 attributed to the Late Period25 without any further information. Six of them were already recognised as belonging to the same assemblage,26 while the others were catalogued apart. In Zoëga’s description, the cofijin is a simple brown and undecorated cofijin (n. 229),27 containing a mummy with several colored and gilded pictures and decorations, described as follows: • • • • 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 a gilded mask (Zoëga n. 252)28 with a long blue headgear, nine rows of floral and geometric motifs between the frontal bands; a double pectoral (Zoëga n. 253): the upper one with falcon heads located on the mummy shoulders and the lower one until the navel;29 from the navel to the knees: a hieroglyphic column (Zoëga n. 254)30 and seven separate pictures (Zoëga 254 numbered from n. 1 to n. 7).31 These pictures are described by Zoëga as being found around the mummy and not on the body.32 But the presence of some holes on their edges led Zoëga to suggest that they were ijixed to the body by strings and he also tried to imagine their position on the body, by comparing the composition on another cartonnage in the collection (ijig. 14.1b);33 from knees to the ankles an apron composed of rows of pendant and floral elements (Zoëga 256)34 and a foot cover not well described by Zoëga.35 Cantilena, Rubino, La collezione egiziana, 68: 6.1, 6.2, 7.1, 7.2, ijigg. 10.1, 10.2. Mask (mann inv. n. 1366), apron (mann inv. n. 1105), collar (mann inv. n. 1357), inscription (mann inv. n. 1358), Duamutef (mann inv. n. 1359), Isis (mann inv. n. 1360), Nephtys (mann inv. n. 1361), Isis (mann inv. n. 1362), Nephtys (mann inv. n. 1363), Duamutef (mann inv. n. 1364), Amset (mann inv. n. 1365). Cantilena, Rubino, La collezione egiziana, 90–91: 9.94, 9.95, 9.96, 9.97, 9.98, 9.99, 9.100, 9.101, 9.102, 9.103, 9.104. Mask (mann inv. n. 1366), inscription (mann inv. n. 1358), Duamutef (mann inv. n. 1359), Isis (mann inv. n. 1360), Nephtys (mann inv. n. 1361); Ibid., 90. Ibid., 68: 7.1–7.2, ijig. 10.2. mann inv. n. 1366. mann inv. n. 1357. mann inv. n. 1358; this inscription is described as a long whole strip, but now it is split into two parts. Duamutef (mann inv. n. 1359), Isis (mann inv. n. 1360), Nephtys (mann inv. n. 1361), Isis (mann inv. n. 1362), Nephtys (mann inv. n. 1363), Duamutef (mann inv. n. 1364) nks 357b fol iii, i. mann inv. 1092 (Zoëga n. 164). Cantilena, Rubino, La collezione egiziana, 91–92: 9.105 mann inv. n. 1105. This footcover has been identiijied with Naples inv. n. 1106 but it has not yet been found, maybe it is one of the rotting organic materials. This is a digital offprint for restricted use only | © 2015 Koninklijke Brill NV Cataloguing as a Method 157 Zoëga’s description let us suppose that part of the cartonnage elements36 and the female cofijin corresponding to mann inv. 2342–2346 (ijig. 14.2b) are to be considered as belonging to the same assemblage, which can be attributed to the Ptolemaic period. Comparisons can be made either with items from Saqqara,37 or from Akhmim.38 Some doubts have to be expressed, however, on Zoëga’s reconstruction (ijig. 14.1a and 14.2a), based on three considerations: ijirst of all style, colors, and dimensions of the decorations suggest that they may belong to two different assemblages,39 secondly it would be difijicult to justify the contemporary presence of two wsḫ-colliers;40 ijinally the central position on the navel (that according to Zoëga was occupied by one of the four sons of Horus) usually was reserved for the god Osiris. About the mummy, Zoëga wrote that it was donated in 1789 by Borgia to the Museum of Collegio Nazareno in Rome,41 thus the cofijin came to Naples empty.42 But currently it includes a female mummy wrapped in strips of cloth opened on the face and on the chest. According to some documents of the Archivio di Stato in Naples, this body comes from the pharmacy of the Monastery of 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 Mask, collar, inscription, Duamutef, Isis and Nephtys. R. Cortopassi, S. Pagès-Campagna, Les cartonnages du puits F17 de Saqqâra, bifao 108 (2008), 45–68; J.H. Taylor, Death and the Afterlife in Ancient Egypt, (London: The British Museum Press, 2001). A. Schweitzer, “L’évolution stylistique et iconographique des parures de cartonnage d’Akhmim du début de l’epoque ptolémaïque à l’époque romaine”, bifao 98 (1998), 325– 352; a similar mummy from a private collection (Stevens) is also kept in the National Archaeological Museum of Naples (mann inv. n. 114.313; ijig. 3) and is recorded as coming from Akhmim, mann. Cantilena, Rubino, La collezione egiziana, 185–186: 23.1, 23.2, 23.3, ijig. 24.2. Zoëga himself notes this, and it is conijirmed by the custom in 1700–1800 to collect different ijinds belonging to different origins in order to increase the importance of the good to sell or donate. An example of this is the cofijin of the Egyptian Museum in Florence inv. nn. 2158, 2154–2155, 2156–2157. P.R. Del Francia, “Le mummie del Museo egizio di Firenze e i loro contenitori lignei”, in Le Mummie del Museo egizio di Firenze, a cura di M.C. Guidotti, (Firenze: Giunti, 2001), 6–9. Mummy of Djed-Hapi Penn Museum E 3413, Third Intermediate Period, University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology; Hermitage Museum Inv. n. 18421b, see A.O. Bolshakov, “Unusual Late Period cartonnage mummy case in the Hermitage Museum”, bseg 16 (1992), 5–18. nks 357b fol., iii, i. This gift is quoted in G. Petrini, Gabinetto Mineralogico del Collegio Nazareno descritto secondo i caratteri esterni e distribuito a norma de’ principj costitutivi, i, (Roma: presso i Lazzarini, 1791–1792), 347–348, clxi c.v. 1, 16–23. Archivio di Stato Napoli (henceforth asn), Min. Int. ii, cont. 1973, un. 277. This is a digital offprint for restricted use only | © 2015 Koninklijke Brill NV 158 Pirelli and Mainieri S. Francesco di Paola.43 When the latter was closed, the mummy was moved to the Real Museo Mineralogico44 and then, between 1821 and 1823, to the Real Museo Borbonico45 with other human remains coming from the Farmacia SS. dell’Annunziata.46 The research is still ongoing in the archives of SS. Annunziata and Museo Mineralogico and in the Archive of Monasteri Soppressi to identify S. Francesco di Paola’s mummies and reconstruct their story. These are only some preliminary results of a research in progress, but Zoëga’s work is giving us interesting information to ijill the gaps present in the Museum documents about the Borgia collection and it will help to propose new exposition criteria for the Egyptian collection in Naples. figure 14.1 43 44 45 46 a: Zoëga’s reconstruction of cartonnage n. 254: on the top ( from left to right), Nephtys (mann inv. n. 1361), Duamutef (mann inv. n. 1359) and Isis (mann inv. n. 1360); on the left hand of hieroglyphic inscription (mann inv. n. 1358), Duamutef (mann inv. n. 1364) and Isis (mann inv. n. 1362); on the right hand Nephtys (mann inv. n. 1363). b: mann inv. n. 1092 used by Zoëga to organize the position of the cartonnage elements. Ibid. Ibid. Assan iv B 10,1. Ibid.; asn, Min. Int. ii, cont. 1973, un. 277. Considerable quantities of Egyptian mummies were imported to Europe during Renaissance and could be found in the shops of apothecaries as a drug for prescriptions. About the use of Egyptian mummies in medical science: K.H. Dannenfeldt, “Egyptian Mumia: The Sixteenth Century Experience and Debate”, The Sixteenth Century Journal 16.2 (1985), 163–180; S. Marinozzi, G. Fornaciari, Le mummie e l’arte medica nell’evo moderno, (Roma: Università “La Sapienza”, 2005). This is a digital offprint for restricted use only | © 2015 Koninklijke Brill NV Cataloguing as a Method figure 14.2 a: Zoëga’s reconstruction of the position of the whole cartonnage decoration. b: the Ptolemaic cofijin mann inv. nn. 2342–2346. figure 14.3 Cartonnage from Akhmim, xxvi dynasty, Stevens collection, mann inv. n. 114.313. 159 This is a digital offprint for restricted use only | © 2015 Koninklijke Brill NV