Book Chapter Review

Cooney, K.M., (2008), “The Problem of Female Rebirth in New Kingdom Egypt: The Fragmentation
…. of the Female Individual in her Funerary Equipment”, in Graves-Brown, C. (ed.), Sex and
………Gender in Ancient Egypt, Swansea, pp. 1-25.

Written by Kathlyn M. Cooney, this chapter in Graves-Brown’s Sex and Gender in Ancient
Egypt examines the intentionally modified identities of female bodies in burials and the
influence of the ancient Egyptian belief system and gendered mythologies. The central
purpose of the chapter is to analyse the addition of typically masculine features to female
funerary equipment, and the author proposes several reasons as to why feminine features
were altered, and why it occurred in a funerary context.

Part 1: PURPOSE

As explained in Cooney’s chapter, deceased females and their coffins were modified to
include male names and features to suit the ancient Egyptian belief of rebirth in the afterlife.
Rebirth and creation were considered masculine roles whereas females were more akin to
vessels, and so, as stated by Cooney, “the Egyptian woman’s real chance to be reborn was to
take on the male gender”.1 The author analyses the strong influence of these gender roles on
the funerary representation of women, both in society and in mythologies, and why it was
important for women to achieve a masculine Osirian appearance to ensure their rebirth. This
central theme is discussed in depth with frequent references to an extensive list of literary
sources and physical evidence. The author uses examples of funerary material from various
dynasties throughout the New Kingdom and provides a brief overview of beliefs surrounding
female rebirth and identity from the Old Kingdom to the First Intermediate Period, giving a
semi-chronological timeline of the development of ‘fragmented’ female identities.

Part 2: DEVELOPMENT

Cooney makes use of a variety of sources to solidify the research and the arguments she
presents; however she makes little use of ancient sources except for references to and quotes
from ancient texts such as the ancient Egyptian Book of the Dead and the Pyramid Texts. The
majority of literary sources used in this chapter are contemporary publications, although more

1
Cooney (2008: 6).

1
than a dozen of them were written before the mid-20th Century and the information they
present is therefore likely to be outdated or flawed. Cooney largely relies on secondary
sources but does include her own research where relevant and references her own
publications. A substantial amount of the chapter is about the significance of the creator gods,
and Cooney explains in detail how Atum was able to create himself and other elder gods on
his own through masturbation and ejaculation and how, as the elder sun god, he is reborn
every morning by entering the mouth of his mother Nut, the goddess of the sky. The tale of
Osiris being dismembered and reassembled by his sister-wife Isis is also recounted, and there
is a large emphasis on Osiris’ image and name being used in a funerary context regarding
both male and female burials. The descriptions of the creator gods and their stories are
lengthy but necessary to validate Cooney’s reasoning that the fragmenting of female bodies
and their alteration is a way of being likened to the body of Osiris, and so being reborn in the
afterlife as he was. Cooney also cohesively explains the significance of the masculine
pronoun ⸗f being included in funerary texts in reference to females, indicating that a deceased
woman would be named Osiris, regardless of gender.

Part 3: CRITIQUE

The author’s perspective is clearly established and is consolidated through the inclusion of
multiple literary sources, images of funerary equipment, and relevant quotes from ancient
texts. The images used by Cooney are well-chosen as they show an assortment of
traditionally masculine, feminine, and androgynous coffins and funerary equipment which
complement her analysis of the combination of masculine-feminine features in various
burials. Cooney competently makes use of archaeological, philological, and iconographical
evidence to support her statements and to stress the necessity of fragmenting a deceased
female’s image to associate them with the creator gods and so guarantee their rebirth. Cooney
predominantly leans towards religious or mythological reasons for the alteration of female
bodies with little consideration for political or societal motivations. She does, however, state
that rebirth in ancient Egypt is seen as a “sexual transformation” and that funerary texts and
equipment belonging to both genders “utilize [the] power of masculine creativity” (i.e. self-
creation) to ensure the rebirth of the individual.2 One issue in Cooney’s chapter is the
occasional lack of citation or reference for statements made. For example, she states that the
transformation of the deceased from female to male was a “mysterious and secret affair” that

2
Cooney (2008: 1).

2
could have only happened in a private context, but she fails to include a reference or evidence
for this comment.3 Additionally, she writes in the same paragraph that between the 18th and
22nd Dynasties female coffins were continuously adapted to present an androgynous or
masculine representation of the deceased, but again doesn’t cite this information. However,
as Cooney is a professor of Egyptian Art and Architecture at UCLA and specialises in coffin
production, it can be assumed that her statements about gender flexibility and transformation
in coffins and funerary equipment are accurate despite the lack of cited sources.4 The chapter
in its entirety is written with clear and engaging language, divided into reasonably sized
paragraphs, and the approach is more analytical and explanatory than argumentative.
However without sections or subheadings the writing becomes quite dense and is only
relieved by the few images in the second half of the chapter. The chapter would also benefit
from having a more thematic layout, as the themes and subject matter do not follow a
sequential order in the current format which consequently disrupts the flow of the writing.

In conclusion, Cooney’s chapter has achieved her aim of interpreting and analysing the
fragmentation and addition of masculine features to the female identity in a funerary context.
The concept of female rebirth is thoroughly discussed and made clear using contemporary
and ancient literary sources, images, and philological, archaeological, and mythological
evidence.

3
Cooney (2008: 6).
4
Kara Cooney, Los Angeles (2021) Kara Cooney Egyptologist, accessed on 27 August 2021,
http://karacooney.squarespace.com/about.

3
References:

• Cooney, K.M., (2008), “The Problem of Female Rebirth in New Kingdom Egypt: The
Fragmentation of the Female Individual in her Funerary Equipment”, in Graves-
Brown, C. (ed.), Sex and Gender in Ancient Egypt, Swansea, pp. 1-25.
• Kara Cooney, Los Angeles (2021) Kara Cooney Egyptologist, accessed on 27 August
2021, http://karacooney.squarespace.com/about.

4
Book Chapter Review Self Evaluation:
Book Review Very Poor - 0 Poor - 1 Good - 2 Very good - 3 Excellent - 4

Knowledge Demonstrates Demonstrates Demonstrates sound Demonstrates Demonstrates

unsatisfactory satisfactory knowledge of the thorough knowledge extensive and
30% knowledge of the knowledge of the purpose and of the purpose and detailed knowledge
purpose and purpose and development of the development of the of the purpose and
development of the development of the relevant article/book relevant article/book development of the
relevant article/book relevant article/book chapter. chapter. relevant article/book
chapter. chapter. chapter.

Critical review Identification of the Identification of the

Identification of the Identification of the
Identification of the central points central points
central points central points
40% central points derived from the derived from the
derived from the derived from the
derived from the article/book chapter article/book chapter
article/book chapter article/book chapter
article/book chapter is thorough; is extensive and
is unsatisfactory; is satisfactory;
is sound; evaluation evaluation and detailed; evaluation
little to no evaluation and
and critique of the critique of the and critique of the
evaluation and critique of the
author’s argument author’s argument author’s argument
critique of the author’s argument
and approach to the and approach to the and approach to the
author’s argument and approach to the
research question is research question is research question is
and approach to the research question is
sound. thorough but not accurate, extensive
research question. limited.
extensive. and detailed.

Structure and The paper has no Structure and

Structure and Structure and
Organisation structure or organisation is Structure and
organisation is organisation is
organisation and/or generally clear and organisation is clear.
unclear and/or the generally clear.
15% the paper illustrates appropriate. Some Excellent transitions
transitions between Weak transitions
no transitions unclear transitions between sentences/
sentences /ideas/ between sentences/
between sentences between sentences/ ideas/ topics.
topics are confused. ideas/ topics.
/ideas/ topics. ideas/ topics.

Logic and Ideas flow logically;

Argument is clear
development Ideas are the argument is very
Lacks idea Ideas and argument and usually flows
undeveloped and/or clear, reasonable,
development and is unclear and may logically. Occasional
15% the paper contains and sound. Makes
includes irrelevant also contain insightful
mostly irrelevant innovative
information. contradictions. connections to
information. connections to
evidence are made.
evidence.

What do you like best about your review?

I am most happy with the structure and organisation of my review as I think the layout is clear and
the transitions between sentences and themes are easy to follow. I am also happy with the
‘Purpose’ section of the review as I think I was able to identify the key themes and main
purpose of Cooney’s chapter successfully.

What do you like least about your review?

I am least happy with the ‘Critique’ section as I found it quite difficult to critique the chapter as it
was written an Egyptologist and professor of Egyptian Art and Architecture, so I struggled to
find issues with the chapter in terms of accuracy and validity. I ultimately found little to
critique in the chapter apart from a few uncited statements.

5
What would you modify if you had an extra 24 hours to spend on your review?

I would spend the extra 24 hours working on the ‘Critique’ section and refining the ‘Development’
section as I found that I often got the two categories and their content mixed up, and I think I
could write each section better with more time. I would also like to make better use of the
word count as I struggled to stick to the suggested word limits in the Book Review Guideline
PDF, and chose to lengthen the ‘Development’ paragraph and shorten the ‘Critique’ paragraph
instead as I felt I could make better use of the content that way.