The Egyptian Book of the dead
kind. The text becomes more certain though perhaps not either more true
or more intelligible, and the notes and explanations have here reached
their fullest extent.
It would take an entire volume to give the translations of all the forms
the chapter has assumed. It must be sufficient here to give the earliest
forms known to us of the text and of the first commentaries. These are
printed in characters which show the difference between text and later
additions; all of which, it must be remembered, are of extreme
antiquity—some _two thousand years_ before any probable date of Moses.
Explanations or other interesting matter occurring in the manuscripts of
the later Empire will be referred to in the notes.
The title in the early copies is the simple one here heading the
chapter. In those which begin at the XVIIIth dynasty the title is very
like that given for the first chapter. The chief additions are that the
deceased person “_takes every form that he pleases, plays draughts, and
sits in a bower, comes forth as a soul living after death, and that what
is done upon earth is glorified_.”
1. It would be difficult for us to imagine that the very remarkable
opening of the chapter is an addition. Yet it is unknown to the
primitive recension on the walls of Horhotep’s tomb, though found
everywhere else. The texts however which contain it do not agree. “I am
He who closeth, and He who openeth, and I am but One.” ‘He who closeth’
is ⁂⁂ _Tmu_, ‘He who openeth’ ⁂ _Unen_. As the god who closes
and who opens is one and the same, ‘I am but One,’ is a very natural
ending of the sentence, and for its sense the whole may appeal to
classical, and higher than classical, authority.
“Modo namque Patulcius idem
Et modo sacrifico Clusius ore vocor.”[25]
“I am Alpha and O, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord.”[26]
The meaning of the Egyptian is quite plain, but the readings most
probably through the absence of determinatives in the oldest style are
somewhat different. Horhotep and other texts have ⁂⁂⁂⁂,
apparently as one word (compounded of _tmu_ and _unen_), which may
signify the ‘closer and opener,’ but Sebek-āa and later texts have
⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂. The papyrus of Nebseni has ⁂⁂, in the
third person, which does not alter the meaning, but this is quite an
isolated reading. The later recension, as represented by the Turin
_Todtenbuch_ and the Cadet papyrus, has ⁂⁂, which only prominently
brings forward, what is implied in all the other texts, that the Opener
is a god.[27] The absence of the determinative ⁂ after ⁂ is no
objection to the sense ‘opener,’ especially after ⁂⁂. It is
absolutely necessary when dealing with mythology to look to physical
rather than to metaphysical meanings. I have sufficiently discussed the
meanings of the word ⁂ in my essay on the Myth of Osiris Unnefer.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
PLATE III.
BOOK OF THE DEAD.
CHAPTER XV.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The later recensions add an interpolation (not without very different
readings) to the effect that the Sun made his first appearance when Shu
raised the Sky from the height of Chemennu, where he destroyed the
‘Children of Failure’ ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂.
The raising of the Sky by Shu is very frequently represented in
pictures. Seb (the Earth) and Nut (the Sky) have been sleeping in each
other’s arms during the night; Shu (Daylight at sunrise) parts them, and
the sky is seen to be raised high above the earth.
⁂⁂⁂, Shu, who is of course the son of Râ, is in consequence of
this act called ⁂⁂ _Ȧn-ḥeru_, ‘The Lifter up of the Heaven.’
_Chemennu_ is the geographical name of the town called by the Greeks
Hermopolis. The mystical Chemennu, however, is alone referred to in this
place. The word itself means Eight, and Lepsius sees here a reference to
eight elementary deities. (We must remember that the passage itself is
an interpolation, of which there is no trace in the older texts.)
The ‘children of _Failure_’ (⁂⁂⁂⁂, ⁂⁂⁂ _deficere_,
_dissolvi_, _deliquium_[28]) are the elements of darkness which melt
away and vanish at the appearance of Day. This mythological expression
here found in an interpolated passage is met later on in a genuine
portion of the older text.
2. It would be impossible to find a more emphatic assertion of the
doctrine of _Nomina Numina_; and that more than 3000 years before
Christ.
The _Names_ of Râ, the Sun-god, are said, when taken together, to
compose ‘the cycle of the gods.’ ⁂⁂. Or the names which he has
created, to which he has given rise, that is the names of all the solar
phenomena, recurring as they do, day after day, to the eyes of all
beholders, compose “the cycle of the gods,” who are also called the
limbs or members of Râ.
The scholia contained in the papyri of the XVIIIth and later dynasties
explain the text as follows:—
“It is Râ as he creates the _names_ of his _limbs_ (⁂) which _become_
the gods who accompany him.”
And the present chapter later on says of Chepera, the rising Sun, that
the “cycle of the gods is his body.”
The god who has hitherto been spoken of is Râ. In glaring contradiction
to the whole text, a later note states that the resistless god is “the
Water, which is _Nu_”; that is Heaven.[29] ⁂⁂⁂ _Nu_ is not
alluded to at all in the primitive text, but the papyrus of Nebseni
already exhibits the corruption of the fine passage, “I am he who
closeth and he who openeth, and I am but One.” This is itself an
addition, the true meaning of which was afterwards destroyed by the
interpolation of the words ⁂⁂⁂⁂. These are ambiguous. They
might mean that the god was alone ‘in heaven,’ or that he was alone
‘_as_ Heaven.’ The papyrus of Ani has ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂, “I was
born from Nu.” These attempted improvements do not give a favourable
impression of the exegetical acumen of Egyptian theologians.
But the mention of ‘Water’ in the scholion has nothing whatever to do
with the doctrine of Thales, and to suppose that it has implies a
confusion between two very different realms of human thought.
3. ‘The kinsman of the Morrow,’ literally ‘I know the Morrow.’ The word
⁂ signifies _can_, _ken_, and _kin_.
The papyrus of Nebseni and all the subsequent texts give the explanation
that Yesterday means Osiris, and the Morrow means Râ. And the vignette
in the papyrus of Ani gives the name of Yesterday to one of the Lions
and of Morrow to the other.
4. The earliest texts have either ⁂ ‘speak,’ or ⁂⁂ ‘command.’
The meaning is the same in both readings. Strife arose among the gods at
the bidding of Râ: that is every force in nature began its appropriate
career of activity, necessarily coming into contact and conflict with
the other forces. And of all this collision the first cause, the origin
of all activity and motion, is the Sun.
This mythological cosmology reminds one of the saying of Heraclitos that
“Strife is the father and the king of all things,” and the doctrine that
all becoming must be conceived as the product of warring
opposites—παν´ντα κατ’ ἔριν γίνεσθαι.
5. The Heron is the bird called ⁂⁂⁂ _bennu_, the numerous
pictures of which enable us to identify it with the Common Heron or
Heronshaw. The reason for connecting this bird with the Sun-god has to
be sought in the etymology of its name. ⁂⁂ _ben_ is a verb of
motion, and particularly of ‘going round.’ ⁂⁂ _benenu_ is a ring,
also a ‘round pill.’ The Sun therefore is very naturally called _bennu_,
an appellative like κυκλοέλικτος in the Orphic hymns.
⁂⁂, ‘of that which is, and of that which cometh into being.’ Here,
as in many other places, ⁂, which is a verb of motion, and really
signifies ‘rise up, spring forth,’ is pointedly distinguished from ⁂,
that which (is). So far from signifying ‘being, that which is,’ it very
much more nearly corresponds to ⁂ in the frequent expression
⁂⁂, ‘that which is and that which is not yet.’ The sense of ‘good
being’ so commonly given to the divine name Unnefer is utterly
erroneous.
6. The reading of the name ⁂ is proved by the numerous variants of
this passage to be _Ȧmsu_. In M. Naville’s edition, II, pl. 41, the
name, as written in _Ce_, would seem to be ⁂⁂⁂ _ȧm._ But I
already in _Zeitschr._, 1877 (p. 98) pointed out, that in this
manuscript the last sign ⁂ is at the top of a column, and that at the
foot of the preceding column there is a space where the signs ⁂,
following ⁂⁂ (_as they still do in the next passage_), have been
obliterated. No one from merely looking at M. Naville’s copy would guess
that there was any interval between ⁂ and ⁂.
The god’s name is written ⁂⁂⁂ on a tablet, Denkm. III, 114 i.
And the name is also written ⁂ or ⁂, which are ligatures of ⁂
and ⁂.
7. Note that in this scholion Horus, ‘the avenger of his father,’ calls
his father not Osiris but Tmu. In the more recent texts there are many
interpretations of the two Feathers. One is “his two _Eyes_F are the
Feathers.” But the favourite one is “Isis and Nephthys, who have risen
up as two kites” ⁂⁂⁂⁂.
8. The ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂ _reḫit_, by whom the oblation is made, the
_present_ generation as contrasted with the ⁂⁂⁂ _pāit_, the
_past_, and ⁂⁂⁂⁂ _hammemit_, the _coming_ generations.
9. ⁂⁂⁂⁂ _Māāāait_ is supposed to be nitre or salt, or some
other substance used in the process of embalming.
The more recent recensions thus answer the question about the lakes.
“_Eternity_ is the name of one, and the _Great green one_ that of the
other, the lake of Natron and the lake of Māāt.”
10. See the picture of this gate on the Vignette, which shows the
Sun-god passing through. One of the later explanations is that from this
gate Shu raised up Heaven. Another is that it was the gate of the Tuat.
_Haukar_, ⁂⁂⁂⁂, means “behind the Shrine.”
11. _Hu_ and _Sau_, sons of Tmu, and his companions in the Solar bark,
are, like so many other gods, Solar appellatives. ⁂⁂⁂⁂ _Hu_
is the Nourisher, ⁂⁂⁂⁂ _Sau_, ‘the Knowing One.’ The god is
also called ‘the Seer’ ⁂, ‘He who heareth’ ⁂⁂. These names are
not personifications of the senses but, as in all cases, appellatives
expressing attributes.
12. See Note 2 on Chapter 4.
13. The Eye (⁂⁂⁂⁂) being the Sun or Moon, the period of
distress (⁂⁂) is that of obscuration or eclipse, and the hairy net
(⁂⁂) which is removed is the shadow which passes for a time over
the heavenly body.
The explanation which M. Maspero has recently given (P.S.B.A. XIV, 314)
of the word ⁂⁂⁂⁂, as connected with ⁂⁂⁂⁂
‘health,’ receives confirmation from the scholia in the papyri,
according to which Thoth not only delivered the Eye from the
veil of darkness which oppressed it, but carried it off
⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂ ‘in life, health and strength,
without any damage.’
14. Mehurit is explained in the ancient scholion as ‘the Eye,’ but it is
really the Sky, from which the Sun is born daily. The sign of plurality
after Mehurit (if it means anything) only indicates the daily succession
of the skies whence Râ is born.
15. The ‘coffined One’ ⁂⁂⁂ is of course Osiris, as it is
plainly stated in the later scholia, which further add that the ‘Seven
glorious ones’ who follow the coffin, or, as they read it, “their Lord,”
are to be sought in the constellation of ‘the Thigh in the northern
sky,’ that is in the seven stars of the Great Bear.
These stars never set, but are perpetually revolving round the Pole. It
is therefore evidently with the Polar Star that we must identify the
coffin of Osiris. The names of the Seven Glorious ones vary according to
the different authorities. And these Stars themselves receive other
mythical forms; that of the Seven Cows and their Bull is recorded in the