Many mummies, such as this one from Savoca in Sicily, are on the verge of disappearing because there are inadequate resources to protect them. Photo courtesy of Dario Piombino-Mascali.

One of National Geographic's iconic topics is mummies. Whether it’s
King Tut or frozen Inca children, National Geographic brings you their
stories. In poll after poll, readers demonstrate a fascination with
mummies. Yes they can be macabre, and I suppose that’s part of their
lure, but there is something noble about them as well. Nothing
connects us with the past so much as these people of the past, these
mummies.

Despite our fascination with mummies, remarkably little thought is
given to what happens to mummies after the media buzz is over. The
answer is, unfortunately, that the majority are not receiving the care
they deserve.

Thousands of mummies all around the world are decaying because of poor
storage conditions. The basement of the Cairo museum has hundreds of
mummies in need of attention. In Siberia and in the Andes, mummies are
defrosting because of warming temperatures at high latitudes and
altitudes.

I'm pleased we presented the story of mummy scientists Dario
Piombino-Mascali, Albert Zink, and Arthur Aufderhide in the February
issue. Scholars like these are highly trained in anatomy, forensics,
pathology, radiology and related specializations. To them, mummies are
a unique opportunity—there is simply no better way to study a
society’s diet, health, and life span. The story also illustrates the
critical condition of these Sicilian mummies. Some have been
vandalized and all are at risk of disappearing if left in their
current conditions.

I met Piombino-Mascali, Zink, and Aufderhide at a conference in the
Canary Islands in 2007. The February article on the Sicilian mummies
came out of that conference. The mummy scientists will be meeting
again soon. This time we will talk about raising awareness about the
future of mummies world-wide.  It seems to me that if scientists can
dig mummies up and the media can run stories about them, then together
we can find ways to raise awareness about mummy conservation. Mummies
might have a lot more secrets to reveal in the future and it’s the
least we can do for our ancestors.

Do mummies deserve a better deal? What cultural dimensions should
scientists and the media should consider ? What do you think about the
future of mummy studies?

Archaeologist Patrick McGovern in 1980 holding up a juglet discovered at one of the largest early Iron Age (ca. 1200-1050 B.C.) burial caves in the Holy Land. The excavations were funded by the National Geographic Society. The undisturbed cave was located by a cesium magnetometer and yielded some of the earliest low-carbon steel artifacts found anywhere in the world. Photo by Helen Schenck, courtesy of Dr. Patrick McGovern.

In his inaugural speech President Obama called for putting science in its rightful place. This was music to the ears of many scientists and science-supporters. Science needs to be nurtured for the sake of the long term benefits, not short term goals. In the entry below, guest columnist Dr. Christina Elson points to one place that apparently did not get the message.-CS

While America and Britain ramp up programs to show science in action, the University of Pennsylvania Museum has taken what most people consider a big step backwards by threatening to strangle out of existence the positions of eighteen of its researchers. They include archaeology’s reigning crime scene detectives.

The American economy is suffocating from job losses, home foreclosures, and a dissolving financial sector yet newly elected President Obama is prioritizing our role as a world leader in science and technology. Great Britain just launched a massive new initiative called “Science: so what? so everything” to make science and scientists more accessible. Too often people in both countries see science as elitist and incomprehensible. Making it more accessible shows why our economy and national security benefit when we invest in science education and research.

For decades the Penn museum provided a home for world class scientists. The Museum’s archaeology detectives use all manner of techniques to discover fascinating things about the way ancient people lived and died, used plants and animals, and created and shared technologies. For example, Dr. Patrick E. McGovern (whose work has been reported by this organization) analyzed chemicals in ancient pot sherds to discover the origins and spread of wine making in the Near East and China. His colleague Dr. Naomi Miller recently figured out what King Midas might have had for dinner by providing archaeobotanical evidence for the chemical analyses of beverage and food residues found inside vessels.

The Museum’s director Dr. Richard Hodges insists that Penn is not making a financial decision. Rather, it’s finding a strategic balance between research and public outreach. People like Dr. McGovern are supposed to be supported with grants, not the institution’s operating budget. Come June, if they don’t have funding they’ll get taken off life support.

The Penn Museum also has self-esteem issues. How do you reach out when it sounds like most Philadelphians visit you only once in a lifetime? An expensive facelift and more amenities might do the trick. After all, getting people to the museum for any reason, if only because you can get a good cheesesteak there, greatly strengthens opportunities for outreach. In London you can walk into the overwhelming British Museum for free, get some coffee, and admire the Elgin marbles. In Philadelphia they ask you for a ten dollar “Admission Donation” and there’s a mummy.

If Penn wants to ramp up public outreach it might be exactly the wrong thing to let these scholars go. National Geographic is a massive organization that funds exacting research and has a powerful media arm. It succeeds in making science accessible in part because people here work hard to engage in meaningful conversations with scientists (and yes, as a scientist I’ve had any number of fun, funny, frustrating but ultimately meaningful conversations with “creative types”).

The kinds of discoveries Penn researchers make are incredibly appealing and picked up by news outlets that broadcast far beyond the city of Philadelphia. More excitingly, the work is tangible, tactile, and ideal for creating visualizations showing science in action. One hopes Penn’s facelift isn’t just about building more exhibit cases full of “stuff”  but also investing in a media-rich environment that can broadcast its in-house research locally and internationally. Shouldn’t Penn be excited to have such great assets? My colleagues and I can only wonder why Penn isn’t trumpeting plans to make it’s scientists as accessible as a cup of coffee or gourmet meal. After all, they are the exhibits.

What do you think about the future of science research in the US? Is science it too elitist? How can scientists and the public connect better?   

For NG new coverage of some of Dr. McGovern’s
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/07/0721_040721_ancientwine.html
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/07/0718_050718_ancientbeer.html
For more information about the layoffs at Penn
http://pennmuseumpetition.wordpress.com/
For information on Great Britain’s new science initiative
http://sciencesowhat.direct.gov.uk/