What do you think?
Rate this book
The Mummy
Dr. Armiston, middle-aged bachelor and general practitioner, has his quiet and routine life interrupted when he is called in to consult on the deaths of two young men. One case seems to be a tragic accident, the other the result of natural causes, but they have one strange thing in common: the presence of the same ancient Egyptian mummy case in both men's homes. When Armiston learns that the sarcophagus is inscribed with a terrible curse promising vengeance on anyone who disturbs the mummy's repose, and as the series of deaths continues, the doctor will risk his own life to unravel the mystery and find out whether the mummy - or something or someone else - is responsible.
As Mark Valentine argues in his new introduction to this edition, Riccardo Stephens's exceedingly scarce The Mummy (1912) is a fine piece of storytelling, an inventive weird mystery that bears comparison with the works of Conan Doyle and Robert Louis Stevenson. This edition follows the text of the 1923 Hutchinson edition.
"Belongs to that unusual type of book which not only propounds a riddle of remarkable ingenuity, but also is admirably written." - Sydney Morning Herald
"A clever plot well handled and the mystery is sustained, even for the best picker of conclusions and reader of riddles ... extremely entertaining." - Evening Post (Wellington, N.Z.)
"It reminds one very much of Wilkie Collins." - Evening Standard
As Mark Valentine argues in his new introduction to this edition, Riccardo Stephens's exceedingly scarce The Mummy (1912) is a fine piece of storytelling, an inventive weird mystery that bears comparison with the works of Conan Doyle and Robert Louis Stevenson. This edition follows the text of the 1923 Hutchinson edition.
"Belongs to that unusual type of book which not only propounds a riddle of remarkable ingenuity, but also is admirably written." - Sydney Morning Herald
"A clever plot well handled and the mystery is sustained, even for the best picker of conclusions and reader of riddles ... extremely entertaining." - Evening Post (Wellington, N.Z.)
"It reminds one very much of Wilkie Collins." - Evening Standard
223 pages, Kindle Edition
First published January 1, 1912
3 people are currently reading
111 people want to read
About the author
Riccardo Stephens
11 booksRiccardo Stephens was a Cornish physician, writer and student of the occult who settled in Edinburgh, Scotland, where he frequented Patrick Geddes' University Hall, at Ramsay Garden.
Stephens was secretary of Geddes' Edinburgh Summer School in 1895 and contributed poetry to The Evergreen (1895) and Elizabeth A. Sharp's Lyra Celtica (1896). His first novel, The Cruciform Mark (1896) is a Conan Doyle style mystery thriller which draws on his involvement with the Geddes circle.
Stephens was secretary of Geddes' Edinburgh Summer School in 1895 and contributed poetry to The Evergreen (1895) and Elizabeth A. Sharp's Lyra Celtica (1896). His first novel, The Cruciform Mark (1896) is a Conan Doyle style mystery thriller which draws on his involvement with the Geddes circle.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews
April 3, 2016
An ancient Egyptian mummy. An ominous and deadly curse. A growing collection of fatalities in the mummy’s presence.
It is a familiar, and intriguing, plot for horror novels. But one of the earliest of such novels has gone unread for quite some time: Riccardo Stephens’ The Mummy (1912). Now my favorite publisher, Valancourt Books, has released the first new edition in nearly 100 years.
Straddling the line between mystery and horror, Stephens presents an intriguing tale of death and obsession that is reminiscent of the exploits of Arthur Conan Doyle’s Sherlock Holmes.
Read the whole review.
It is a familiar, and intriguing, plot for horror novels. But one of the earliest of such novels has gone unread for quite some time: Riccardo Stephens’ The Mummy (1912). Now my favorite publisher, Valancourt Books, has released the first new edition in nearly 100 years.
Straddling the line between mystery and horror, Stephens presents an intriguing tale of death and obsession that is reminiscent of the exploits of Arthur Conan Doyle’s Sherlock Holmes.
Read the whole review.
November 25, 2024
It may come as some surprise, as indeed it did to me, that this isn’t a horror story. Rather, it is a detective mystery with a flavour of the occult and a random mad scientist thrown in, which all makes for an entertaining read and a memorable experience.
The narrator is one Doctor Armiston, an elderly (at 50..) bachelor, living with his faithful manservant, Mudge, who becomes involved in a professional capacity with the deaths of two men who have died in suspicious circumstances. Both were looking after an Egyptian mummy after they had lost, or perhaps won, the dubious pleasure in a card game. The curse attached to the corpse is being intentionally mocked. The dead men were members of a social group called the Plain Speakers, whose affluent membership has the purpose of uninhibited truthful conversation on any subject; they come over as arrogant and pretentious, as Stephens intends.
Oddly for its time, the plot is of secondary importance, the theme more concerned with medical ethics and the desire for eternal youth.
Published in Edinburgh in 1912, Stephens was a contemporary of Arthur Conan-Doyle, and also a doctor. Certainly his protagonist, Armiston, could be one from the same pen as wrote Sherlock Holmes. It’s just a pity that this was his solitary ‘case’.
It’s a really interesting book, because not only does it not fit into a genre, but also it heads in unexpected directions.
The narrator is one Doctor Armiston, an elderly (at 50..) bachelor, living with his faithful manservant, Mudge, who becomes involved in a professional capacity with the deaths of two men who have died in suspicious circumstances. Both were looking after an Egyptian mummy after they had lost, or perhaps won, the dubious pleasure in a card game. The curse attached to the corpse is being intentionally mocked. The dead men were members of a social group called the Plain Speakers, whose affluent membership has the purpose of uninhibited truthful conversation on any subject; they come over as arrogant and pretentious, as Stephens intends.
Oddly for its time, the plot is of secondary importance, the theme more concerned with medical ethics and the desire for eternal youth.
Published in Edinburgh in 1912, Stephens was a contemporary of Arthur Conan-Doyle, and also a doctor. Certainly his protagonist, Armiston, could be one from the same pen as wrote Sherlock Holmes. It’s just a pity that this was his solitary ‘case’.
It’s a really interesting book, because not only does it not fit into a genre, but also it heads in unexpected directions.
April 13, 2016
More soon on this book. Right now I'll say that the blurb about it being a love child between Stevenson and Conan Doyle is about right, and it was truly an entertaining read. It's high on my shrieks of delight meter in terms of creepy, fun story and lovely pulpy aesthetic. But as I said, more to come.
Just as an FYI: this is NOT in any way shape or form even remotely connected to the old films (or the crappy, more modern remakes). However, it would make a fun movie!
Update: thoughts posted: http://www.crimesegments.com/2016/04/...
Just as an FYI: this is NOT in any way shape or form even remotely connected to the old films (or the crappy, more modern remakes). However, it would make a fun movie!
Update: thoughts posted: http://www.crimesegments.com/2016/04/...
June 21, 2019
Solid Edwardian (1912) mystery with a suggestion of supernatural agency.
September 13, 2021
Enjoyable Edwardian mystery.
November 3, 2019
If Sherlock Holmes' Watson met the Mummy...
Many novels and films over the last three centuries have the same title, and though this story seems to retread some familiar ground for modern readers, it actually feels quite original and surprisingly ahead of it's time in places. Another great discovery by Valancourt!
I can't help but wonder if the author had in mind Dr. Watson from the Sherlock Holmes stories when he developed the main protagonist, a Dr. Armiston, for this radium-age scifi horror mystery, because this easily feels like a solo spinoff adventure for the physician sleuth in tone and content. Armiston is a deliciously sarcastic and bitter personality, a confirmed bachelor who prefers his cigars and books over the company of others, who gets dragged into a weird mystery. A group of high London society intellectuals have been meeting regularly to make bets that they can survive the night with an ancient Egyptian mummy in their house. They take turns bringing the sarcophagus to their respective abodes, and each in turn ends up dead.
This particular story point is what prevents it from getting a higher rating. After the first death or two, the fact that these so-called intellectuals keep making the same bet goes beyond believability, and took a great deal of my initial goodwill and investment out of the book. Also, I didn't understand what made Dr. Armiston so special that he would be purposefully invited to join in on the macabre betting, and when the inevitable death would occur, why he was allowed by police to poke his nose around the investigation. It just seemed like at many points in the book, decisions could have been made that would have been a lot more believable but which would have cut the story in half.
There are some elements of wit and dramatic timing that feel very modern in this author's writing, however, which makes this a pleasure to read. Sometimes this felt like a book written in the last two decades as a period piece, rather than actually being a literary product from the first two decades of the 20th century. Sure, it has its pacing problems at times, but those issues are easily forgiven when it gets good.
I was torn between giving this Valancourt find a 3/5 vs a 4/5, but I think the overall quality of the writing, and the fact that it is kind of a rediscovered missing link in the evolution of the modern thriller, elevates the rating for a reading audience who would be attracted to this title.
Many novels and films over the last three centuries have the same title, and though this story seems to retread some familiar ground for modern readers, it actually feels quite original and surprisingly ahead of it's time in places. Another great discovery by Valancourt!
I can't help but wonder if the author had in mind Dr. Watson from the Sherlock Holmes stories when he developed the main protagonist, a Dr. Armiston, for this radium-age scifi horror mystery, because this easily feels like a solo spinoff adventure for the physician sleuth in tone and content. Armiston is a deliciously sarcastic and bitter personality, a confirmed bachelor who prefers his cigars and books over the company of others, who gets dragged into a weird mystery. A group of high London society intellectuals have been meeting regularly to make bets that they can survive the night with an ancient Egyptian mummy in their house. They take turns bringing the sarcophagus to their respective abodes, and each in turn ends up dead.
This particular story point is what prevents it from getting a higher rating. After the first death or two, the fact that these so-called intellectuals keep making the same bet goes beyond believability, and took a great deal of my initial goodwill and investment out of the book. Also, I didn't understand what made Dr. Armiston so special that he would be purposefully invited to join in on the macabre betting, and when the inevitable death would occur, why he was allowed by police to poke his nose around the investigation. It just seemed like at many points in the book, decisions could have been made that would have been a lot more believable but which would have cut the story in half.
There are some elements of wit and dramatic timing that feel very modern in this author's writing, however, which makes this a pleasure to read. Sometimes this felt like a book written in the last two decades as a period piece, rather than actually being a literary product from the first two decades of the 20th century. Sure, it has its pacing problems at times, but those issues are easily forgiven when it gets good.
I was torn between giving this Valancourt find a 3/5 vs a 4/5, but I think the overall quality of the writing, and the fact that it is kind of a rediscovered missing link in the evolution of the modern thriller, elevates the rating for a reading audience who would be attracted to this title.
October 19, 2025
Going into this in a state of ignorance (there is very little about the novel online and even less about its author), I had assumed that it was the source material for any or all of The Mummy films (1932, 1959, 1999), but soon realized it wasn’t. I felt disappointed, but of course that is not the fault of the book.
In fact, it’s the story of a wager undertaken by the members of a secret club, the Open Minds, to take turns in cohabiting with a sarcophagus and its mummified inhabitant. Unfortunately, the first two men to do so are found dead in ambiguous circumstances. Is the explanation for these events supernatural, or merely natural but wicked? I enjoyed it: the narrator is an endearing grump and I liked his relationship with his independent-minded manservant Mudge. However, the pacing does seem a bit off at times: after the initial deaths, we get a lot of rather suspenseless tarradiddle about the Open Minds and its parent organization the Plain Speakers before the next annihilation; and the solution to the mystery takes a great many pages to hove into view in the latter section.
I didn’t read Mark Valentine’s introduction until afterwards, and was gratified that my hunch about the book’s 1923 reissue being due to the huge public interest in the discovery of Tutankhamun’s tomb the year before was probably correct. Valentine also provides what biographical information there is about the author, and confirms that the tropes of Ancient Egypt had been a feature of popular fiction from at least the 1890s, the first printing of The Mummy dating from 1912.
In fact, it’s the story of a wager undertaken by the members of a secret club, the Open Minds, to take turns in cohabiting with a sarcophagus and its mummified inhabitant. Unfortunately, the first two men to do so are found dead in ambiguous circumstances. Is the explanation for these events supernatural, or merely natural but wicked? I enjoyed it: the narrator is an endearing grump and I liked his relationship with his independent-minded manservant Mudge. However, the pacing does seem a bit off at times: after the initial deaths, we get a lot of rather suspenseless tarradiddle about the Open Minds and its parent organization the Plain Speakers before the next annihilation; and the solution to the mystery takes a great many pages to hove into view in the latter section.
I didn’t read Mark Valentine’s introduction until afterwards, and was gratified that my hunch about the book’s 1923 reissue being due to the huge public interest in the discovery of Tutankhamun’s tomb the year before was probably correct. Valentine also provides what biographical information there is about the author, and confirms that the tropes of Ancient Egypt had been a feature of popular fiction from at least the 1890s, the first printing of The Mummy dating from 1912.
September 10, 2018
Another murder mystery with a supernatural tinge, this time in the form of a supposed cursed mummy. I wasn't overly disappointed though, as the narrator protagonist was reasonably likeable if long-winded.
Warning for period-accurate racism and racist language in one part towards the end, for those who find it difficult to overlook.
Warning for period-accurate racism and racist language in one part towards the end, for those who find it difficult to overlook.
November 6, 2025
Starts off promising enough with a cantankerous old doctor who has lots of sarcastic quips for anyone who disturbs his solitude or breakfast.
Like this one in the first chapter:
“Poor fellow,” I said, leaving the paper-knife to mark my place in the magazine. “Are you sure he’s dead?” “I’m afraid there’s no doubt about it.” “Poor fellow,” I said again. “If he’s dead, I may as well finish my breakfast,” and I took another mouthful.
After which we learn of a ‘cursed mummy’ that aristocrats like to take turns hosting in their homes and continue to do so after 3 people die.
Then it gets really boring for a long time before the finale where it’s revealed that one of these aristocrats was bumping off all the others so he could court the woman of his dreams and it never had anything to do with the mummy.
FYI, there’s some jarring, of the time, racism towards the end of the book.
While there’s some funny lines here and there, they aren’t worth searching for in the sea of boredom. Only finished it since I’d already made it half way through. I’d skip this one.
Go read Dracula or Frankenstein.
Like this one in the first chapter:
“Poor fellow,” I said, leaving the paper-knife to mark my place in the magazine. “Are you sure he’s dead?” “I’m afraid there’s no doubt about it.” “Poor fellow,” I said again. “If he’s dead, I may as well finish my breakfast,” and I took another mouthful.
After which we learn of a ‘cursed mummy’ that aristocrats like to take turns hosting in their homes and continue to do so after 3 people die.
Then it gets really boring for a long time before the finale where it’s revealed that one of these aristocrats was bumping off all the others so he could court the woman of his dreams and it never had anything to do with the mummy.
FYI, there’s some jarring, of the time, racism towards the end of the book.
While there’s some funny lines here and there, they aren’t worth searching for in the sea of boredom. Only finished it since I’d already made it half way through. I’d skip this one.
Go read Dracula or Frankenstein.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews