1. Introduction: An unexpected find

28-29 A few days before the inauguration of the new permanent exhibition Materia. Forma del tempo (“Materials: The Shape of Time”) at the Museo Egizio in Turin on October 4, 2024, I took a brief look inside the newly organised stone storage area, set up alongside the displays dedicated to stone and stone working. A dark statue fragment caught my attention (Fig. 1). I had seen it before in its previous storage location, but only now did I realise that it was the lower section – comprising the base, feet, and lower legs – of a statue of the goddess Sekhmet.

The fragment closely resembled the lower parts of the standing Sekhmet statues in Museo Egizio’s collection, which were to be reinstalled in the redesigned Galleria dei Re (“Gallery of Kings”) for the museum’s 200^th anniversary in November of that year. Checking its inventory number (Provv. 3864) in the database, I found it described as a large granodiorite statue fragment, dated to the Middle Kingdom. After consulting with several curators and colleagues, my identification was collectively confirmed: the fragment matches the material, dimensions, and stylistic features of a standing Sekhmet statue’s lower portion.

As a result, it was decided to place fragment Provv. 3864 alongside the other standing Sekhmet statues in the redesigned King’s Gallery, where it is now on display (Fig. 2).

2. The fragment: Object data and description (Fig. 3)

Name: Fragment of a statue of the goddess Sekhmet

Material: Granodiorite

Measurements: 50 cm (height); 55 x 35 x 15 cm (base, width, depth, height)

Date: New Kingdom, Dynasty 18, reign of Amenhotep III (1390–1353 BCE)

Provenance: From Luxor, Karnak (?)

Acquisition: Drovetti collection (1824) (?)

Inventory number: Provv. 3864

Description: The fragment, consisting of two parts, can be identified as the base and feet of a standing Sekhmet statue. The base is overall rectangular, but with a slight curvature at the rear. Its underside is irregular, featuring a wide indentation at the front and 30 smaller ones along the lower front and rear edges. Its surface is smooth. Its top is slightly uneven, rising gently toward the feet and back pillar. The back pillar, averaging 18 cm in width, rises seamlessly from the base. It has a damaged area along its right edge.

The Sekhmet figure’s left foot is placed forward, resulting in an angled leg, while the right foot remains at the rear with a straight leg. The transition between the base and the soles is not indicated. Both feet, measuring 29–30 cm in length and 10 cm in width, are well modelled, with only summary indication of the toenails. The second toe on the right foot is slightly longer than the hallux.

The break between the two parts of the fragment, concealed by a dark band of protruding restoration material, is at ankle level on the right. From there, it extends down to just above the toes of the right foot and runs diagonally through the back pillar.

The ankles are smoothly contoured. The vertical element between the legs can be identified as the lower part of a long wꜣḏ-scepter. Its front surface is damaged, and it flares slightly at the end.

31-33 An angled, recessed line marks the lower hem of the goddess’s tight-fitting dress. It begins at the damaged part of the wꜣḏ-scepter (16 cm above the base) and extends toward the inner side of the right leg. This hem does not continue onto the surface of the legs, which are slender and preserved up to the break, which is diagonal and irregular. At the center of the break is a vertical hole with an upper diameter of 3.3–5 cm, tapering toward its bottom.

While the statue had received its final polish, it lacks the engraved details found on many other standing Sekhmet figures, such as anklets or the scale-leaf decoration at the base of the wꜣḏ-scepter.

View 3D model

3. Discussion: The story of the fragment at the Museo Egizio

The vertical hole in the upper break and the dark restoration material protruding along the lower fracture suggest that the fragment was once repurposed 34-36 as a substitute for the missing feet of another statue, creating a pastiche of two unrelated objects. Among the statues in the Museo Egizio’s collection, Cat. 694, a statue of Hathor or Isis, immediately emerged as the most likely candidate.1 This statue is missing precisely the section that could have been replaced by our Sekhmet fragment.

To test this hypothesis, a scaled digital reconstruction was created, aligning the wꜢs-sceptre of the Hathor/Isis with the stem of the wꜢḏ-scepter of the Sekhmet fragment (Fig. 4). In terms of size and proportion, the two pieces align remarkably well. If attached directly to the 1.53 m tall Hathor/Isis statue – without any compensatory filling – the Sekhmet fragment would increase the former statue’s total height by approximately 50 cm, bringing the composite figure to around 2.10 meters.

However, certain mismatches remain: the lower and upper edges of the respective dresses do not align, and the widths of the statues’ back pillars differ (Hathor/Isis: 25–26 cm; Sekhmet: 18 cm). Potentially, these discrepancies may in the past have been concealed with compensatory material to create the illusion of a seamless and original assemblage.

To verify whether the Sekhmet fragment was used as a substitute for the missing feet of the Hathor/Isis statue Cat. 694, a brief review of the latter object’s history in the Museo Egizio is necessary. Only recently, Beppe Moiso clarified its provenance: contrary to long-held assumptions, the statue is not part of the collection of Vitaliano Donati and thus was not acquired by the Italian botanist at Koptos.2 Instead, it appears to have been found by Jean-Jacques Rifaud at Karnak and, consequently, belongs to the Drovetti collection, which arrived in Turin in 1824.3

Identifying the Hathor/Isis statue in the early inventory lists of the Drovetti collection is challenging, as the object descriptions therein are brief and vague. In the so-called Inventory X,4 likely compiled between 1830 and 1852, a statue listed as number 46 – identified as Isis and recorded as being 2.1 m tall – is described as follows (Fig. 5):

Statua di donna colla gamba sinistra avanti in atto di camminare – essa ha sul capo il disco con la corna – il serpentello in fronte: i capelli le pendono divisi sul seno colla destra pendente impegna la chiave a manico; colla sinistra si tiene davanti al petto lo scettro a testa di concoupha.5

Based on this brief description, the statue can be confidently identified as the Hathor/Isis Cat. 694.

The Hathor/Isis statue appears in two other inventory lists from around the same period.6 In section A: Monumenti religiosi (“Religious Monuments”) of the Inventario dei monumenti Egizii delle Sale a pian terreno (“Inventory of Egyptian Monuments in the Ground Floor Rooms”), it is listed as number 6. The entry records its material as black granite and its height as 2 meters, and describes it as “Statua di donna ritta in piedi, Mut, od Athor” (Fig. 6).7

Similar information appears in the Inventario minuto delle antichità Egizie. Monumenti al pian terreno (“Detailed Inventory of Egyptian Antiquities: Monuments on the Ground Floor”), where the sculpture is listed with the same number (6°), height (2 m), and material (black granite). However, its description is slightly modified to “Statua della Dea Mut col disco in capo” (Fig. 7).8 The final column, Provenienza (“Provenance”), attributes the statue to the Drovetti collection,9 while a vertical note on the left references pages 41–46 of the Monumenti religiosi section in Pier-Camillo Orcurti’s 1855 catalogue. This catalogue was indeed based on the preparatory work done with the Inventario dei monumenti Egizii delle Sale a pian terreno and the Inventario minuto delle antichità Egizie. Monumenti al pian terreno.10 In the published Orcurti catalogue, the Hathor/Isis statue retains the same number (6°), height, and material. It is described as “Statua di donna ritta in piedi, col disco in capo; […]. Essa rappresenta la Dea Mut, oppure anche Athor, che talora porta la stessa divisa” (Fig. 8).11

In the 1882 object catalogue by Ariodante Fabretti, Francesco Rossi, and Ridolfo Vittorio Lanzone, the statue of Hathor/Isis is listed under its still current inventory number, Cat. 694, and described as “Statua in diorite, alta m. 2,10, rappresentante una dea che tiene nella mano sinistra piegata al seno lo scettro a testa di veltra, e nella destra distesa lungo il corpo la croce ansata: sul capo porta il disco solare fra due grandi corna” (Fig. 9).12

All the above references to the statue describe it as standing, with a height of 2.0 or 2.1 m, implying the presence of a base and feet. The discrepancy between this height and the current size of Cat. 694 (1.53 m) can now be explained with the aid of various statements by Silvio Curto regarding restoration work at the Museo Egizio, presented here in order of publication:

Così ancora la statua Donati di regina di Amenofi III (Teje?), in basanite, diademata del disco solare tra corna di bovina, Cat. 694, mancante delle gambe, venne reintegrata con la parte inferiore d’una statua di Sekhmet: fu liberata da tale aggiunta dal Farina e appoggiata direttamente su zoccolo in muratura. Il Catalogo la descrive alta m 2,10, attualmente misura m 1,52.13 (1976)

La statua con diadema hathorico, appare guasta nelle braccia e mani; è la N. Cat. 694, ivi descritta siccome alta m 2,10, in quanto restaurata falsamente nel tempo, sostituendo le gambe mancanti, con un pezzo non pertinente e cioè un frammento, ossia parte inferiore di statua di Sekhmet.14 (1976)

[E]ra stata integrata – forse attorno al 1830 – con la parte inferiore di una statua diversa, ben commisurata, ma distinguibile a causa della pietra, un granito nero, e della terminazione dello scettro fatta a tondo, pertanto non del uas, ma del uadhit, « vigore », papiriforme e proprio di Sekhmet (probabilmente tal parte era giunta a Torino con altre numerose Sekhmet della drovettiana); successivamente la figura era stata restituita al netto dallo Schiaparelli, intorno al 1930. Di qui la misura della medesima, segnata in m. 2,10 nei due primi cataloghi del Museo, del 1852 e ’82, e in realtà di m. 1,52. Comunque l’altezza originaria doveva toccare quella dell’antico restauro.15 (1980)

Una terza statua, della regina Teie in figura della dea Hathor (Cat. 694), mancante pure delle gambe, era stata completata con un frammento che costituiva la parte inferiore della statua di un’altra dea. Ne fu liberata nel 1930 e collocata su zoccolo.16 (1989)

37 These four statements are consistent in their main theme: the lower part of a Sekhmet statue – described in the last statement as “the lower part of another goddess” – was used as the base and feet of the Hathor/Isis statue. Although Curto does not mention the inventory number of the Sekhmet fragment, based on my current knowledge of the Museo Egizio’s collection, it can only be Provv. 3864. These provisional numbers were, after World War II, from 1948 onwards, assigned to objects whose original inventory IDs were lost or which had not been assigned an object number upon their arrival at the museum.17

Returning to the statements by Curto mentioned above, there are some minor inconsistencies in their content. While the first quote cites Giulio Farina’s tenure as director of the Museo Egizio (1928–1946) as the period when the Hathor/Isis and Sekhmet feet were separated,18 the third quote attributes this derestoration to Ernesto Schiaparelli in 1930. The final quote only mentions the year 1930. Since Schiaparelli passed away in 1928,19 it seems that Curto, while certain of the year 1930, mistakenly attributed the separation of the two statue parts to Schiaparelli instead of Farina. However, in 1912, Pietro Barocelli had – in his discussion of Donati’s travels and works – already credited Ernesto Schiaparelli as the one responsible for the separation of the two parts.20

While the history of the Sekhmet fragment Provv. 3864 in the Turin museum is now clear, the question of its provenance warrants brief consideration. In 1980, Curto deliberated that it might have come from the Drovetti collection.21 However, no clear mention of a fragmented Sekhmet statue appears in the known inventory lists of this collection.22 That said, there is, however, some indirect evidence suggesting that the fragment could have been part of the Drovetti collection.

Laura Donatelli recently referenced a letter from Giulio Cordero di San Quintino, who was responsible for inventorying Drovetti’s collection in Livorno and overseeing its transport to Turin before becoming the museum’s first keeper in 1825.23 In the letter, Cordero mentions that some statues arrived in Turin so broken that he was unable to identify them.24 It is thus plausible that the Sekhmet fragment now known as Provv. 3864 came to Turin as part of the Drovetti collection but was either not deemed significant enough to be individually catalogued or simply overlooked during the inventorying process, in either case due to its fragmentary state.

If fragment Provv. 3864 is indeed part of the Drovetti collection, a Theban provenance is highly likely.25 Furthermore, it can be hypothesised that it was among the standing Sekhmet statues found by Jean-Jacques Rifaud in front of the Temple of Ptah at Karnak in 1818.26 Rifaud, working on behalf of Bernardino Drovetti, found 16 such statues there, 11 of which are now in the Museo Egizio’s collection. However, the temple of Mut at Karnak, from where Rifaud extracted the seated statues of Sekhmet in 38 Museo Egizio’s collection, would also be a possible place, albeit less likely, since Rifaud is known to have selected only well preserved, i.e. not fragmented, statues for Drovetti. Either way, in 1818, Provv. 3864 was apparently not identified as a part of a Sekhmet statue, but still sent to Turin.

The exact date when the Hathor/Isis statue Cat. 694 and the Sekhmet fragment were joined is unknown. Curto, considering the Sekhmet section as part of the Drovetti collection, suggests it might have occurred “forse attorno al 1830”.27 This is a period when Cordero di San Quintino was the museum’s keeper, and he is known to have modified and “over”-restored many artefacts for their first display in the museum.28 Further research into archival materials related to Rifaud, the Drovetti collection, and the formative years of the Museo Egizio di Torino may one day provide more insight into the fragment’s history.29

4. Final remarks

The “new” statue fragment is now part of the display of standing Sekhmet statues in the recently redesigned Galleria dei Re. It was placed there shortly after its rediscovery in order to put it in context alongside the other, fully preserved statues of the goddess. Besides being on display, the fragment is now also part of the interdisciplinary “Progetto Sekhmet”, which aims at a comprehensive study of the sculptural production of the Sekhmet statues.30 In the forseeable future, the “new” fragment will undergo cleaning and conservation treatment, during which the historical conservation methods and materials used will be studied and compared with those found on other statues from the Drovetti collection that were restored or reassembled in the early years of the Museo Egizio, likely under Cordero di San Quintino. This will help to gain further insight into past restoration materials and practices.31

5. Acknowledgements

I am deeply grateful to my colleagues Paolo Del Vesco, W. Raymond Johnson, Alessandro Girardi, Cédric Gobeil, Federico Poole, Martina Terzoli, Krisztián Vértes, and Marco Rossani for their invaluable help and enthusiastic support in identifying the fragment. I extend my sincere thanks to Beppe Moiso and Tommaso Montonati for their guidance through the Museo Egizio’s archival data and their early insights into the Hathor/Isis + Sekhmet fragment assemblage. Last but not least, I am thankful to Federico Taverni for providing the 3D models, orthophotographs, and digital statue joining.

Bibliography

Amenta, Alessia, “‘Progetto Sekhmet’: First Results of an Interdisciplinary Team Project’”, in: Ola el-Aguizy, Khaled el-Enany and Burt Kasparian (eds.), ICE XII: Proceedings of the Twelfth International Congress of Egyptologists, 3^rd–8^th November 2019, Cairo, Egypt, Vol. 1, Cairo 2023, pp. 355–64.

Barocelli, Pietro, “Il viaggio del Dott. Vitaliano Donati in Oriente (1759–62)”, Atti Tor. 47 (1912), pp. 411–25.

Borgi, Elena and Laura Donatelli, “Drovetti e la raccolta di antichitá: Scavi, acquisti e viaggi nell’Alto e Basso Egitto (1816–1821)”, in: Laura Donatelli, Alessandro Roccati, Silvia Einaudi, Rita Binaghi, Elena Borgi and Pierangelo Gentile (eds.), Quando l’Egitto venne a Torino: la collezione, il viaggio, gli uomini e l’Accademia delle Scienze, Torino 2019, pp. 79–90.

Cafici, Giorgia, “Rediscovering the Nineteenth-Century Display of the Museo Egizio’s ‘Statuario’”, RiME 5 (2021), pp. 57–86. https://doi.org/10.29353/rime.2021.3720.

Cincotti, Silvana, “‘Les fouilles dans le musée’ : La collection égyptienne de Turin et le Fonds Rifaud”, CahKarn 14 (2013), pp. 279–85.

Curto, Silvio, “Appendice H: Le attivita di restauro nel Museo Egizio di Torino”, in: Anna Maria Donadoni Roveri (ed.), Passato e futuro del Museo Egizio di Torino: dal museo al museo (Archivi di Archeologia), Torino 1989, pp. 161–64.

Curto, Silvio, “Una statua di dea con diadema di Hathor nel Museo Egizio di Torino”, in: Studi di Archeologia dedicati a Pietro Barocelli, Torino 1980, pp. 15–20.

Curto, Silvio, Storia del Museo Egizio di Torino, Torino 1976.

Curto, Silvio, Storia del Museo Egizio di Torino, 3rd revised ed., Torino 1990.

Donatelli, Laura, “Introduzione al Catalogue della Collezione Drovetti”, in: Alessandro Roccati and Laura Donatelli (eds.), Alle origini dell’Egittologia e del primo Museo Egizio della storia: Torino 1820–1832 (MATur 4, Vol. 43), Torino 2019, pp. 29–78.

Donatelli, Laura, “Rassegna dei reperti egizi elencati nelle 106 pagine del manoscritto”, in: Alessandro Roccati and Laura Donatelli (eds.), Alle origini dell’Egittologia e del primo Museo Egizio della storia: Torino 1820–1832 (MATur 4, Vol. 43), Torino 2019, pp. 79–118.

Fabretti, Ariodante, Francesco Rossi and Ridolfo Vittorio Lanzone, Regio Museo di Torino. Antichità Egizie, Vol. 1 (Catalogo generale dei musei di antichità e degli oggetti d’arte), Torino 1882.

Giorgi, Giorgio, Un archeologo piemontese dei primi dell’ottocento: la vita e l’opera del Cavaliere Giulio Cordero dei Conti di Sanquintino attraverso l’epistolario, Lucca 1982.

Greco, Christian (ed.), Memory Is Our Future: 200 Years of the Museo Egizio, Modena 2024.

Ministero della Pubblica Istruzione (ed.), Documenti inediti per servire alla storia dei musei d’Italia. Vol. III, Firenze 1880.

Moiso, Beppe (ed.), Ernesto Schiaparelli e la Tomba di Kha, Torino 2008.

Moiso, Beppe, La Storia del Museo Egizio, Modena 2022.

Moiso, Beppe, “Vitaliano Donati e la Iside di Coptos”, in: Gianluca Miniaci, Paolo Del Vesco, Christian Greco, Mattia Mancini and Cristina Alù (eds.), Digging for Ancient Egypt and Egyptology in the Archives: Studies presented to Marilina Betrò, Pisa 2024, pp. 39–46.

Moiso, Beppe and Tommaso Montonati, “The 19th-Century Inventories of the Museo Egizio, Turin: How to Get Lost in Them and How to Find Your Way Back”, RiME 8 (2024), pp. 1–34. https://doi.org/10.29353/rime.2024.5505.

Montonati, Tommaso, “I primi anni di vita del Museo Egizio di Torino: Giulio Cordero di San Quintino”, in: Gianluca Miniaci, Paolo Del Vesco, Christian Greco, Mattia Mancini and Cristina Alù (eds.), Digging for Ancient Egypt and Egyptology in the Archives: Studies presented to Marilina Betrò, Pisa 2024, pp. 57–64.

Montonati, Tommaso, “Riconsiderazioni sulla figura di Giulio Farina, direttore del Museo Egizio di Torino (1928–1946), Aegyptus 104 (2024), pp. 201–33. https://doi.org/10.26350/001217_000136.

Morecroft, Angela Scattolin, The Enlightenment Rediscovery of Egyptology: Vitaliano Donati’s Egyptian Expedition, 1759–62, London 2018.

Orcurti, Pier Camillo, Catalogo illustrato dei monumenti Egizii del R. Museo di Torino: sale al pian terreno, Torino 1852.

Roccati, Alessandro, “Riscoperta e scavi delle antichità in Egitto”, in: Alessandro Roccati and Laura Donatelli (eds.), Alle origini dell’Egittologia e del primo Museo Egizio della storia: Torino 1820–1832 (MATur 4, Vol. 43), Torino 2019, pp. 7–26.