Editorial Note

There is no doubt that irresponsible journalism gave the name of “mummies” to the human remains found in the cave near Salamaua, New Guinea, and that there is no scientific justification for the term.

The popular meaning of “mummy” is a body that has been preserved for very many centuries by special treatment of the body itself (and the ancient Egyptians had developed a marvellous technique in this regard) and (this more especially) by wrapping the body tightly in great rolls of fabric.

So far as we know, there is not the slightest indication that the New Guinea bodies had been wrapped. They had, apparently, been preserved in a remark able manner; but only experts of great skill will be able to say whether, in this respect, there is any indication of an Egyptian technique. The chances seem to be overwhelmingly against it. It is much more likely that the bodies are pre served, partly by drying and native treat ment (a common enough thing among those peoples) and partly by natural chemical action in the cave in which they were placed.

“Mummification” —mostly of the corpses of royal personages—was a common practice of the Egyptians, between 3000 B.C. and 1000 8.C.; and, if it were proved that the custom had been employed in New Guinea, it would be a discovery of outstanding scientific importance. But nothing of this kind can be expected.

Interest, abroad, was stirred only by the

Australian journalists’ use of the term “mummy”—a careless and unjustified use which clearly was the result of ignorance.

The manner in which the Pacific lands were settled —and, more especially, the mystery of those queer racial fragments, like the Tasmanians, found in remote and isolated places—has been a subject of speculation among scientists and well informed travellers for nearly a century; and a report of the discovery of some thing establishing relationship with ancient Egypt naturally aroused intense interest.

But the incident can be forgotten.

It may be found that the racial types, dis covered in Central New Guinea and Central Papua recently by the Leahy brothers and by the Hides’ expedition, are a more fruitful subject of inquiry. It is a job for skilled anthropologists: but it would not surprise this writer if scientific data proved a relationship between some sec tions of the New Guinea natives, and certain definite racial types of south-west (not south-east) Asia.