Hubbry Logo
Persian PrincessPersian PrincessMain
Open search
Persian Princess
Community hub
Persian Princess
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Persian Princess
Persian Princess
Persian Princess
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

The Persian Princess or Persian Mummy is a mummy of an alleged Persian princess who surfaced in Pakistani Baluchistan in October 2000. After considerable attention and further investigation, the mummy proved to be an archaeological forgery and possibly a murder victim.

Discovery

[edit]

The mummy was found on 19 October 2000. During a murder investigation, Pakistani authorities were alerted to a videotape recorded by Ali Aqbar, in which he claimed to have a mummy for sale. When questioned by the police, Aqbar told them where the mummy was located; at the house of tribal leader Wali Mohammed Reeki in Kharan, Baluchistan, near the border of Afghanistan. Reeki claimed he had received the mummy from an Iranian named Sharif Shah Bakhi, who had said that he had found it after an earthquake near Quetta. The mummy had been put up for sale in the black antiquities market for 600 million rupees, the equivalent of $11 million. Reeki and Aqbar were accused of violating the country's Antiquities Act, a charge which carries a maximum sentence of ten years in prison.[1]

Misidentification

[edit]

In a press conference on 26 October, Pakistani archaeologist Ahmad Hasan Dani of Islamabad's Quaid-e-Azam University announced that the mummy seemed to be a princess dated circa 600 BC. The mummy was wrapped in ancient Egyptian style, and rested in a gilded wooden coffin with cuneiform carvings inside a stone sarcophagus. The coffin had been carved with a large faravahar image. The mummy was atop a layer of wax and honey, was covered by a stone slab and had a golden crown on its brow.[2] An inscription on the golden chest plate claimed that she was the relatively unknown Rhodogune, a daughter of king Xerxes I of Persia and a member of the Achaemenid dynasty.[3][4]

Hasan Dani speculated that she might have been an Egyptian princess married to a Persian prince, or a daughter of the Achaemenid king Cyrus the Great. However, because mummification had been primarily an Egyptian practice, they had not encountered any mummies in Persia before.[2]

Ownership

[edit]

The governments of Iran and Pakistan soon began to argue about the ownership of the mummy. The Iranian Cultural Heritage Organization claimed her as a member of Persian royal family and demanded the mummy's return. Pakistan's Archaeological Department HQ said that it belonged to Pakistan because it had been found in Baluchistan. The Taliban of Afghanistan also made a claim. People in Quetta demanded that the police should return the mummy to them.[5] The Awan tribe in Balochistan also claimed ownership by saying that according to the inscription, the mummy might be a member of The House of Hika Munshi - an Awan royal family and demanded that it should be moved to Kallar Kahar Fossil Museum (Kallar Kahar is considered the primary settlement of Awan tribe).[6]

In November 2000, the mummy was placed in display in the National Museum of Pakistan.

Investigation

[edit]

News of the Persian Princess prompted American archaeologist Oscar White Muscarella to describe an incident the previous March when he was shown photographs of a similar mummy. Amanollah Riggi, a middleman working on behalf of an unidentified antiquities dealer in Pakistan, had approached him, claiming its owners were a Zoroastrian family who had brought it to the country. The seller had claimed that it was a daughter of Xerxes, based on a translation of the cuneiform of the breastplate.[2]

The cuneiform text on the breastplate contained a passage from the Behistun inscription in western Iran.[7] The Behistun inscription was carved during the reign of Darius, the father of Xerxes. When the dealer's representative had sent a piece of a coffin to be carbon dated, analysis had shown that the coffin was only around 250 years old. Muscarella had suspected a forgery and severed contact. He had informed Interpol through the FBI.[2]

When Asma Ibrahim, the curator of the National Museum of Pakistan, studied the item in police custody, she realised that the corpse was not as old as the coffin. The body had shown signs of decomposition fungus on the face,[8] a sign of a recently deceased body, and the mat below the body was about five years old. During the investigation, Iran and the Taliban repeated their demands.[citation needed] The Taliban claimed that they had apprehended the smugglers who had taken the mummy out of Afghanistan.

The inscriptions on the breastplate were not in proper grammatical Persian.[9] Instead of a Persian form of the daughter's name, Wardegauna, the forgers had used a Greek version Rhodugune.[10] CAT and X-ray scans in Agha Khan Hospital indicated that the mummification had not been made following ancient Egyptian custom – for example, the heart had been removed along with the rest of the internal organs, whereas the heart of a genuine Egyptian mummy would normally be left inside the body. Furthermore, tendons that should have decayed over the centuries were still intact.[3]

Ibrahim published her report on 17 April 2001. In it, she stated that the "Persian princess" was in fact a woman about 21–25 years of age, who had died around 1996, possibly killed with a blunt instrument to the lower back/pelvic region (e.g., hit by vehicle from behind).[11] A subsequent accelerator mass spectrometry dating also confirmed the mummy's status as a modern fake.[12] Her teeth had been removed after death, and her hip joint, pelvis and backbone damaged, before the body had been filled with powder. Police began to investigate a possible murder and arrested a number of suspects in Baluchistan.[3]

Fate

[edit]

The Edhi Foundation took custody of the body, and on 5 August 2005, announced that it was to be interred with proper burial rites.[13] However, police and other government officials never responded to numerous requests, and it was not until 2008 that the foundation finally carried out the burial.[14]

Representations in contemporary art

[edit]

The Persian Princess is the name of an exhibition presented in August 2016 in Jerusalem, by artist Hili Greenfeld. The exhibition functions as a tribute to the anonymous woman who, in an instant, went from the status of a princess in a gold-plated coffin displayed in a national museum, to the victim of a vicious murder in whom everyone quickly lost interest. The extreme transformation of the perception of the archeological object – from an honored Princess to a woman who was murdered – is what interests Greenfeld.[citation needed]

Greenfeld picked up the signs and symbols used by the forgers, such as engraved rosettes, cypress gold, the icon of Ahura Mazda, and gold crowns. She painted the symbols on artificial grass, and created a hybrid of lyrical abstract paintings, Persian rugs and graffiti murals. The works that are shown on the walls and on the floor seem to be graffiti murals and then seem to be rugs, but in both cases they are synthetic imitations of the original.[15][16][17]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Persian Princess

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
The Persian Princess, also known as the Persian Mummy, is a mummified female body that surfaced in in 2000 and was fraudulently presented as the 2,600-year-old remains of an Achaemenid-era princess, purportedly the daughter of , complete with a plaque bearing a forged inscription. Discovered during a local investigation in the residence of tribal leader Mohammad Reeki in , , the artifact was initially hyped by archaeologist as a significant historical find from around 600 BCE, blending Egyptian mummification techniques with Persian elements, and valued at up to $11 million on the illicit antiquities market. Scientific examinations swiftly unraveled the deception: a 2000 CT scan at Hospital revealed a young , approximately 20–21 years old at death, with evidence of a broken spine but no ancient mummification; Iranian forensic experts in 2001 detected modern petrochemical residues, detergents, and embalming fluids indicating creation within the prior two years. Further analysis by curator Asma Ibrahim of Pakistan's National Museum in April 2001 confirmed the through carbon dating of the and reed matting to no earlier than 250 years ago, alongside a cuneiform inscription exhibiting 1930s-era syntax errors inconsistent with ancient Persian script, as noted by epigraphist Oscar White Muscarella. findings pointed to a young woman approximately 20–21 years old who likely died around 1996 from blunt force trauma, prompting suspicions of foul play in the forgery's production, though no perpetrators were identified despite an ongoing investigation. The case exemplifies vulnerabilities in the global , fueling black-market forgeries amid high demand for rare artifacts, and sparked international disputes over custody—Pakistan retained control under its Antiquity Act, rejecting claims from and briefly the regime in —before the remains were buried unceremoniously in 2008 following seven years of scrutiny. Legal charges were filed against Reeki and associate Ali Akbar for antiquities violations, with involvement highlighting systemic issues in verification and the ethical handling of unverified "discoveries."

Discovery and Initial Claims

Surfacing on the Antiquities Market

In March 2000, four Polaroid photographs of the mummified remains in a stone , adorned with artifacts and a cuneiform-inscribed plaque, were mailed to Oscar White Muscarella, a research associate at the in New York, by Amanollah Riggi, a Pakistani-American dealer based in . Riggi offered the artifact for sale on behalf of a Pakistani contact, presenting it as an ancient Persian royal potentially worth millions. By mid-October 2000, Pakistani authorities in received a tip from local resident Ali about a video purportedly showing the mummy, prompting a police investigation into illegal trading. directed officers to in Baluchistan province, where the was seized during a raid on the home of tribal leader Mohammad Reeki. Reeki, arrested alongside , claimed the mummy had been acquired from an Iranian contact named Shah Bakhi, who allegedly obtained it following an in a nearby Iranian town; however, Bakhi could not be located to verify this account. The artifact was offered for sale at an asking price of 600 million Pakistani rupees, equivalent to approximately $11 million USD at the time, with a lower bid of 60 million rupees ($1.1 million) reportedly received from an anonymous foreign buyer. Following the seizure, the mummy was transported to the National Museum in for safekeeping, where it drew immediate international media attention as a purported 2,600-year-old relic. On October 26, 2000, Pakistani archaeologist held a , endorsing its authenticity as the remains of a princess from either ancient Persia or , dating to around 600 BCE, which fueled of its high black-market value—estimates later cited in reports reached up to $20 million. This emergence highlighted vulnerabilities in Pakistan's enforcement of the of 1975, as the operation involved cross-border networks attempting to launder the item through informal tribal channels before broader export.

Promotion as an Ancient Royal Mummy

The , presented in an ornately carved stone , was marketed on Pakistan's black market as the remains of a 2,500-year-old Achaemenid royal, specifically Rhodugune, daughter of King (r. 486–465 BC). Accompanying artifacts included a gold crown and a plaque inscribed with script translating to "I am Rhodugune, daughter of Xerxes," which traffickers used to assert its authenticity as the first known mummified Persian princess from the . These elements, combined with the body's wrapping in gold-embroidered cloth, positioned the artifact as a rare cultural treasure potentially worth up to $50 million on the international market. Tribal leader Wali Mohammed Reeki, based in Baluchistan's , spearheaded the promotion after acquiring the item, claiming it originated from an unmarked tomb near the -Pakistan border. He approached potential buyers, including dealers in and collectors via intermediaries, emphasizing its royal provenance to justify demands exceeding $20 million, though initial offers reached only $1.1 million before seizure by Pakistani police on October 25, 2000. The narrative of an intact Achaemenid —unprecedented given ' typical sky burials rather than mummification—fueled media speculation and diplomatic tensions, with asserting ownership based on the claimed heritage while Pakistani officials initially endorsed preliminary authenticity reports from local experts.

Scientific Examinations and Debunking

Preliminary Authenticity Tests

Upon seizure in October 2000, Pakistani authorities initiated preliminary non-invasive examinations of the purported mummy, focusing on its sarcophagus, inscriptions, and wrappings to assess claims of Achaemenid-era origins. Archaeologist Ahmed Hasan Dani's initial inspection at Quaid-e-Azam University noted Egyptian-style linen wrappings and a wooden coffin adorned with cuneiform script and Zoroastrian symbols, but subsequent analysis of the gold breastplate inscription by cuneiform expert Oscar White Muscarella revealed it to be a modern fabrication, copying text from Darius I's Behistun inscription (ca. 520–519 BCE) with anachronistic phrasing and execution consistent with 20th-century forgeries. A computed (CT) scan conducted in November 2000 at Hospital in imaged the body, indicating a female aged 20–21 years with possible spinal trauma, but lacking typical ancient mummification features such as patterns expected from millennia-old remains. curator Asma Ibrahim's investigations further scrutinized the reed mat beneath the body, identifying synthetic fibers and modern weave patterns suggestive of recent manufacture, estimated at less than 50 years old. An Iranian delegation from the Cultural Heritage Organization (), dispatched in January 2001 amid territorial claims, detected petrochemical residues, laundry detergents, and graphite pencil markings on the wrappings during visual and basic chemical inspections, concluding that the mummification process involved contemporary techniques, including organ removal and cavity stuffing with unspecified powders applied within approximately two years of preparation. These findings collectively undermined the artifact's antiquity before advanced methods, highlighting inconsistencies in materials and craftsmanship attributable to .

Forensic and Radiocarbon Analysis

of bone and tissue samples from the mummified remains yielded a date of death between 1994 and 1996, confirming the body was modern rather than ancient. (AMS) analysis specifically measured the ¹⁴C content, aligning the results with a post-20th-century origin and debunking claims of Achaemenid-era . These findings contrasted sharply with initial assertions of a 2,500-year-old , as the isotopic signatures indicated recent biological activity cessation. Forensic examination, including an , estimated the deceased woman's age at approximately 21 to 25 years at the time of death, based on skeletal and dental indicators. (CT) scans—totaling around 200—revealed no evidence of ancient mummification processes, such as desiccation artifacts or residues typical of Persian or Egyptian practices; instead, the scans showed a body preserved through modern wrapping and possible chemical treatment. The noted potential trauma to the neck but could not conclusively determine if it resulted from deliberate breakage or postmortem handling, leaving open questions about the . Additional forensic tests on associated artifacts, such as the and , corroborated the contemporaneity, with radiocarbon results from wrappings aligning closely with the body's dating. These analyses collectively established the remains as a fabricated antiquity, likely assembled in the late for illicit sale, rather than a genuine .

Evidence of Forgery Techniques

The forgery of the "Persian Princess" involved the use of a recently deceased body, artificially desiccated to simulate ancient preservation, wrapped in modern synthetic and cotton fabrics rather than authentic ancient textiles. Fiber analysis conducted as part of the investigation revealed that the wrappings consisted of contemporary materials, including machine-made cloths inconsistent with Achaemenid-era fabrics, indicating deliberate rather than genuine antiquity. The and associated were constructed from recently sourced wood and stone, with of samples confirming ages of mere centuries or less, far short of the claimed 2,500 years. Carvings on the wooden mimicked Persian motifs but exhibited tool marks and suggestive of modern handiwork, as noted in examinations by Pakistani National Museum curator Asma Ibrahim, whose 2001 report detailed the recent origin of these structural elements. The enclosing and reed mat beneath the body were similarly non-ancient, with the mat estimated to be only a few years old at the time of seizure, betraying hasty assembly for market deception. Inscriptions in faux , including a plaque purporting to identify the mummy as Rhodugune, daughter of , were fabricated with grammatical errors and anachronistic script forms unrecognizable to experts in Achaemenid paleography. These elements, combined with and adornments likely produced in contemporary Iranian workshops, echoed techniques in other regional antiquities scams, where forgers blend mismatched cultural styles—such as Egyptian-style bandaging on a purported Persian remains—to exploit collector ignorance. The overall method relied on sourcing a real for credibility, superficial aging via chemicals or exposure, and packaging in a hybrid container to command high black-market prices, as evidenced by the mummy's initial $20 million valuation.

Territorial Claims Between and

The "Persian Princess" , seized by Pakistani authorities in on October 26, 2000, during an attempted sale for $20 million, prompted competing territorial assertions from and based on its purported ancient origins and location of discovery. Promoters claimed the remains belonged to a 2,500-year-old Zoroastrian princess from the , interred with gold artifacts inscribed in ancient identifying her as the daughter of a ruler akin to , which aligned with 's historical claim to Persian heritage. Iranian officials, viewing the artifact as part of their national cultural patrimony, demanded its , arguing that any genuine Persian relic inherently pertained to 's territorial and civilizational legacy despite the lack of archaeological context linking it to Iranian soil. Pakistan, however, maintained sovereignty over the mummy under its Antiquities Act of 1975, asserting jurisdiction because the body had surfaced in province—specifically near the town of Kharan, close to the ian border but firmly within Pakistani territory—where it was allegedly unearthed by smugglers or locals. Pakistani authorities, including the , emphasized that the item's recovery and interception occurred domestically, rejecting extraterritorial claims and prioritizing national control to investigate potential antiquities trafficking networks operating across the porous - frontier. This standoff escalated into diplomatic tensions, with pressing for forensic access to verify authenticity and cultural ties, while Pakistan stored the remains in a under tight security to prevent or foreign interference. The dispute highlighted broader frictions in , a resource-rich border region with longstanding cross-border tribal ties and smuggling routes, where undefined provenance often fuels heritage rivalries between the two nations. Even the regime in briefly staked a claim, citing shared regional antiquity, though this was dismissed by both primary contenders as opportunistic. These assertions subsided following preliminary scientific scrutiny in 2001, which indicated modern forgery through (placing death around 1996–2000) and inconsistent mummification, rendering the artifact ineligible for ancient heritage under international conventions like the 1970 . Nonetheless, the episode underscored vulnerabilities in bilateral agreements on illicit , with no formal resolution or extradition of claims post-debunking. In October 2000, Pakistani authorities in province intercepted efforts to sell the mummified remains on the after a surfaced showing the body in a wooden adorned with gold artifacts and a forged inscription identifying it as the daughter of . Two individuals, camel trader Asif Reki and associate Maqsood Akbar, were arrested in connection with the attempted sale, which was priced at up to $20 million initially, with Reki later confessing to seeking $50 million on the international market but receiving offers as low as $1.1 million. Reki and Akbar faced charges under Pakistan's of 1975, which prohibits the sale, export, or transfer of without government authorization and carries a maximum penalty of ten years' imprisonment, regardless of the item's authenticity. The remains were seized by police and transferred to the National Museum in for examination, prompting a preliminary announcement of its potential historical value despite lacking excavation context. Reki claimed the mummy originated from Sharif Shah Bakhi, an Iranian national who allegedly supplied it and subsequently vanished, highlighting cross-border elements in the smuggling attempt. The case underscored links to broader trafficking networks operating between , , and international buyers, where forgeries are often peddled as ancient relics to exploit demand for rare Persian artifacts. Bakhi's evasion prevented further prosecution of upstream suppliers, and while Reki and Akbar's trial proceedings advanced on statutory violations, no public record details convictions or sentences, with the focus shifting to forensic debunking after placed the death in the late . This incident exemplified how trafficking operations fabricate to bypass export controls, contributing to 's challenges with illicit flows amid porous borders with and .

The Human Remains and Homicide Inquiry

Profile of the Deceased Woman

The deceased woman was a mature adult female estimated to be between 21 and 25 years old at the time of death, based on analysis showing closed pelvic epiphyses indicative of skeletal maturity in that age range. Her height was approximately 4 feet 7 inches (1.4 meters), as determined from the same imaging. Accelerator mass spectrometry radiocarbon dating of bone, skin, and muscle tissue samples placed her death between 1994 and 1996 CE, confirming the remains were modern rather than ancient. Forensic examinations, including CT scans conducted at Aga Khan University Hospital in Karachi, further revealed post-mortem removal of teeth and absence of internal organs, consistent with hasty mummification processes applied after death. The woman's likely geographic origin was the border region between and , inferred from the trafficking context and regional forensic characteristics, though no definitive identification has been achieved. Physical evidence suggested she was of petite build, with no signs of chronic or nutritional deficiency evident in the scans prior to mummification alterations.

Indications of Recent Death and Possible Murder

Forensic examinations, including scans conducted in 2000, revealed that the remains exhibited characteristics inconsistent with ancient mummification, such as the presence of soft tissues and absence of typical expected in a 2,600-year-old body, indicating death had occurred relatively recently. of the mummy's tissues, performed by the , estimated the time of death to approximately 1996, confirming the body was not of Achaemenid Persian origin but rather from the late 20th century. CT scans further identified a fractured spine, attributed to trauma from a blow with a blunt instrument, providing of perimortem . Subsequent results pointed to a violent , with Pakistani authorities registering a case on April 17, 2001, based on these findings, though the investigation classified it as a possible rather than definitively resolving the . These indicators collectively suggest the woman was either murdered or her body was exhumed shortly after to facilitate the , as the wrappings and appeared to have been applied postmortem but without prolonged .

Ongoing Efforts to Identify the Victim

Following the forensic determination that the mummified remains were those of a modern woman, likely killed by blunt force trauma to the neck around 1996–1997, Pakistani authorities initiated a murder inquiry in 2001. Investigators re-examined suspects from the ring, including those arrested during the mummy's seizure, probing theories that the body was either stolen from a recent , used to conceal an unrelated , or deliberately killed for the . However, mummification processes had obscured facial features and other identifying markers, complicating matches to missing persons reports in or neighboring regions, and no or advanced genetic tracing was publicly reported as part of the probe. The case stagnated without arrests or breakthroughs, remaining unresolved as a cold case despite intermittent media attention. In 2005, custody transferred to the Edhi Foundation, which sought public appeals for identification but received no viable leads; the remains were buried in 2008 in an unmarked grave in a Kharan cemetery for unidentified bodies, precluding further exhumation for analysis without new evidence. As of 2021, no renewed forensic initiatives, such as isotopic or genetic studies on surviving samples, have been documented, leaving the woman's age (estimated 16–25), origin, and killer unidentified amid limited regional records and trafficking-related obfuscation.

Cultural Impact and Broader Implications

Representations in Media and Art

The case of the Persian Princess has been prominently featured in television, particularly in the Horizon episode "The Mystery of the Persian Mummy," aired on September 20, , which documented the initial archaeological excitement surrounding the artifact's discovery in , the claims of its Achaemenid origins, and the emerging of through expert analysis of the and inscriptions. The program highlighted forensic examinations revealing inconsistencies, such as modern materials in the wrappings and anachronistic script, while interviewing experts like Oscar White Muscarella, who identified fabrication techniques linked to known hubs. Print and online journalistic coverage has emphasized the hoax's implications for the illicit , with Archaeology magazine publishing a detailed special report in January 2001 titled "Saga of the Persian Princess," which traced the mummy's path from black-market dealers to Pakistani authorities and critiqued the emotional appeal driving such frauds. Subsequent articles in outlets like Atlas Obscura (2014) and Ancient Origins (2021) have revisited the story, focusing on placing the remains to the 1990s and speculating on links to homicide, portraying it as a of modern criminality masquerading as ancient heritage. In , the narrative gained renewed traction through viral content, including a 2021 TikTok video that amassed significant views by framing the as intertwined with an unsolved murder, prompting discussions on platforms like Reddit's r/UnresolvedMysteries. Educational videos, such as those from The Infographics Show, have depicted the case to illustrate archaeological , often using animations to reconstruct the mummification and forensic discrepancies. No notable representations in visual art, such as paintings or exhibitions dedicated to the , have been identified in credible sources; the case's portrayal remains confined primarily to factual media recounting its forensic and legal dimensions rather than fictional or artistic reinterpretations.

Lessons for and Market Regulation

The case exemplifies the sophistication of modern antiquities forgeries, where perpetrators utilized genuine remains—likely from a murdered between 1994 and 1996—to create a convincing artifact mimicking Achaemenid-era mummification, complete with fabricated artifacts and inscriptions. and forensic analysis, including dental records and tissue examination, ultimately exposed the after initial media hype positioned it as a 2,500-year-old relic valued at up to $11 million on Pakistan's . This incident underscores the challenge of distinguishing fakes from authentic items without rigorous scrutiny, as visual and stylistic assessments by dealers proved inadequate against techniques like chemical mummification and aged sarcophagi. A primary lesson is the necessity for mandatory pre-sale authentication protocols in antiquities markets, including , , and isotopic analysis of wrappings and artifacts, to prevent the circulation of hazardous fakes that may involve or body trafficking. In this case, the absence of such standards allowed dealers to evade Pakistan's of 1975, which prohibits unlicensed sales but lacks enforcement mechanisms for black-market transactions originating in regions like . Post-discovery, Pakistani authorities charged suspects under the Act, but the fraud's links to broader criminal networks highlighted regulatory shortcomings, such as insufficient verification and cross-border tracing. Governments and auction houses must shift from treating seized fakes as genuine —potentially leading to repatriation disputes, as seen in Iranian claims over the mummy—to pursuing dedicated prosecutions, which deter forgers more effectively than antiquities trafficking charges alone. The case prompted calls for international frameworks, akin to Interpol's database on stolen , to include forgery alerts and standardized forensic guidelines, reducing market opacity where unprovenanced items command premiums. Enhanced collaboration between archaeologists, , and chemists could mitigate recurrence, as the Persian Princess eroded trust in the trade and diverted resources from legitimate excavations. Ultimately, the episode reveals systemic vulnerabilities in unregulated markets, where high demand incentivizes ethical violations; reforms like digital ledgers for artifact histories and penalties scaled to fraud scale—beyond mere fines—offer pathways to safeguard integrity without stifling scholarly access.
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.