Doug M Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Katherine, the crowns and serpents are
> specifically referred to as being "magical" in the
> pyramid texts, giving the King power to slay his
> enemies in the underworld. That is what Greg is
> referring to.

I am not talking about the Pyramid Texts here: I am talking about the scene in the Chapel of Seti I at Abydos in the Osirian Complex. There is a specific purpose to that scene, and I have given both translations and other analyses why they state what they do, and what that means. Now, if Greg has another view, it's his own opinion, but I see no reason for you to quote non-relevant material into this discussion.

This scene has nothing to do with what is stated in the references you give, which, as outdated and biased as they are (I mean, really: Breasted's works are over 100 years old and have been overtaken by more recent translations, for example, while your other source is the Rosicrucian Order website, which has its own axe to grind*), they are practically worthless in reference to this scene.

Until you can get a better grasp of what ancient Egyptian scenes in art are about, and about the intricacies ancient Egyptian thought and how they changed over the millennia (and you have been countless citations on this), I really see little use in discussing these issues with you.

---

* It's rather ironic for a reference to Naydler's work here, who is a prime example of a modern theosophist. Naydler, as with Freemason and Roscicrucians, are, in the terms of Hornung, Egyptosophists. In Naydler's own article here, he notes Hornung distinction between this belief system and Egyptology:

"To this end, Hornung makes a distinction between “Egyptosophy” and Egyptology proper. For Hornung, “Egyptosophy” involves projecting onto ancient Egypt an ill-founded wish to see it as a repository of spiritual knowledge.

Egyptology, by contrast, shows us that there were no mysteries, no esoteric or initiatory teachings or practices in ancient Egypt. Western esoteric streams like Alchemy,Gnosticism, the Hermetic Tradition, Rosicrucianism, which in their different ways see their roots as going back to ancient Egypt, are all dealt with by Hornung in a summary and deadpan manner. Chapter by chapter he sets out to demonstrate that their understanding of Egyptian religion has been tainted by illusory fantasies and fails to correspond with the facts as revealed to us by modern scholarship.

Hornung’s stance is that Egyptology studies real Egypt, whereas “Egyptosophy” constructs an “imaginary Egypt” which bears only a rather “loose relationship to historical reality.” Hornung’s approach is very much that of the modem rationalist for whom what is real and what is imaginary form two sides of an irreconcilable opposition." (Naydler 2007: 30-31 (PDF))

What Naydler is referring to is this work by Hornung:

Hornung, E. 2001. The Secret Lore of Egypt: Its Impact on the West. D. Lorton, transl. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

In this work, Hornung carefully distinguishes what is known about ancient Egyptian deities, "books of wisdom," and so on, and show that most of the traits associated with Thoth, for example, as a 'magician,' comes about during the Late Period (when the epithet "twice great" is first attested in the reign of Apries in the 26th Dynasty, while the epithet "thrice great" is not seen until the Ptolemaic Period, in the 2nd century BCE (Hornung 2001: 9-11)). As Hornung points out, the concept of the epithet of "Hermes Trismegistus" being applied to Thoth does not appear until well after the post-pharaonic period, in the 3rd century CE (Horung 2001: 11).

Prior to this, Thoth as a deity was lauded for his wisdom, his peace-making abilities, and for his loyalty as vizier to Ra (Hornung 2001: 9; Bleeker 1973: 118-121), where he serves as secretary of Ra's (and the king's) reign, as well as a divine vizier and herald of Ra's will to mortals, such as the king.

In carrying out his legislative functions for Ra and the king, Thoth reckons the years of a king's reign as given by Ra and the gods, which he writes upon the Ished tree of Heliopolis (and another representation). This reckoning is done as a means of legitimating a king's reign, as a sign of divine approbation - not magic (more explanation on this function can be found here).

So, it's not merely my interpretation of the Abydos scene as a political function of Thoth, it appears: it shows up in other imagery in ancient Egypt during the New Kingdom, and has been interpreted in the same political fashion by other scholars, such as Redford (1986).

Reference:

Bleeker, C. J. 1973. Hathor and Thoth: Two Key Figures of the Ancient Egyptian Religion. Studies in the History of Religion (Supplements to Numen) 26. Leiden: Brill.

Hornung, E. 2001. The Secret Lore of Egypt: Its Impact on the West. D. Lorton, transl. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

Redford, D. B. 1986. Pharaonic King-lists, Annals and Day-books: A Contribution to the Study of the Egyptian Sense of History. SSEA Publication IV. L. M. James. Mississauga: Benben Publications.

Katherine Griffis-Greenberg

Doctoral Candidate
Oriental Institute
Doctoral Programme in Oriental Studies [Egyptology]
Oxford University
Oxford, United Kingdom