Astrological scene found on Egyptian tomb ceiling: (ineresting)

Originally posted by Heliocentric
Check your egyptology. Start with the beginning of the Egyptian creation myths, the Zep Tepi (first time), a golden age when gods descended from the sky in flying 'boats', mixed with humans together with half-divine offspring of gods and humans.

Tell you what, you "check your Egyptology" and come back with a reference about "gods descended from the sky in flying 'boats', mixed with humans together with half-divine offspring of gods and humans."
Please provide a reference to a legitimate, reliable Egyptological source.

Thanks.

Harte

Originally posted by Heliocentric
Check your egyptology. Start with the beginning of the Egyptian creation myths, the Zep Tepi (first time), a golden age when gods descended from the sky in flying 'boats' mixed with humans together with half-divine offspring of gods and humans. Then work yourself forward...

The Zep Tepi is part of the "Building Texts" at the Temple of Edfu and actually isn't that old. Parts of it were rebuilt from a temple of Ramses II, but most of this was built during the time of the Ptolemys: en.wikipedia.org...

Zep Tepi ONLY shows up on this building from 300 BC. It doesn't show up in any other manuscript or temple wall or tomb painting or anything else before then -- and it doesn't show up after, either. The list of "demigod rulers" actually may have originated n 1700 BC when the Sumerians were promoting THEIR historical origins with a long line of demigod rulers and the Hebrews were beginning to promote a long line of Biblical Elders who lived to unusual ages. Somewhere around here is a discussion I was having with Scott Creighton which eventually came to the conclusion that there was no reference to "gods living among humans" and so forth in Egypt before 1700 BC or thereabouts.

You can find more about this with Wikipedia which goes over it VERY briefly:
en.wikipedia.org...
and here:
en.wikipedia.org...

Originally posted by Byrd

Originally posted by Heliocentric
Check your egyptology. Start with the beginning of the Egyptian creation myths, the Zep Tepi (first time), a golden age when gods descended from the sky in flying 'boats' mixed with humans together with half-divine offspring of gods and humans. Then work yourself forward...

The Zep Tepi is part of the "Building Texts" at the Temple of Edfu and actually isn't that old. Parts of it were rebuilt from a temple of Ramses II, but most of this was built during the time of the Ptolemys: en.wikipedia.org...

Zep Tepi is the creation myth with a chronological record the Ancient Egyptians gave their own civilization. Even if the Temple of Horus at Edfu dates from the Ptolemaic period, it doesn't mean that the texts were written at the same time.

If the only remaining version of the Bible was a King James Bible, it doesn't mean that the Bible was written in the 17th century,

alvidk.tripod.com...

Originally posted by Heliocentric
Zep Tepi is the creation myth with a chronological record the Ancient Egyptians gave their own civilization. Even if the Temple of Horus at Edfu dates from the Ptolemaic period, it doesn't mean that the texts were written at the same time.

But it's the only reference (and there's millions of pieces of reference out there) to that particular story.

If the only remaining version of the Bible was a King James Bible, it doesn't mean that the Bible was written in the 17th century,

You're actually reinforcing my point, here. Since the Bible is an important document to Europe, even if the only copy we had of the Bible was from the 17th century, we would have other things (prayers, music, statuary, paintings, letters from monks and abbots and archbishops, reports from the church to kings and to others, letters from the popes ... and more... all of which would confirm bits and pieces. Some would talk about the Garden of Eden, others about the Crucifixion, and so on and so forth.

If (for the sake of argument) the Bible was written in the 17th century, there wouldn't be any earlier material about it.

We have millions of documents and tombs and statues and writings from Egypt (and the closer we get to the Ptolemaic period, the more there is of it.) The gods mentioned in the Zep Tepi are NOT the oldest gods mentioned in Egypt (those would be Horus, Hathor, and Bast -- Re comes in fairly early as well.) Another clue that this whole story isn't from the early times is that Isis and Osiris are also included in the line up:
en.wikipedia.org...

What's confusing is that the Ennead changes over time:
en.wikipedia.org...

As I said, there are many other forms of the story which don't mention gods living among humans and demigods. The Ogdoad (at the same time) has at least two different founding stories, including one of the egg and one of the lotus:
en.wikipedia.org...

The benben (primal mound) is a part of almost every creation story in Egypt. But the only reference to gods as kings or semi-divine children really is from the Ptolemaic times and one list from Ramses II:
en.wikipedia.org...

Hey Byrd, great post, an interesting read.

Nevertheless, I feel that the main objective with your reasoning is to belittle or reduce the significance of the Zep Tepi.

You generally get the same attitude from egyptologists when you confront them with the 'problem' of the Zep Tepi. After all, how could they take it seriously? It talks about a history that spans back more than 8500 years, to the "Time of Horus", when Egypt was ruled by 'gods' who lived for hundreds of years. When you bring up the subject of Zep Tepi in egyptologist forums, they generally start cracking jokes, and then go on the defense, in case you're a New Age crackpot who actually believes what the Ancient Egyptians said about their own history (or at least is not willing to discard as pure fantasy). As John Anthony West so unerringly pointed out; "Egyptologists always know more about ancient Egyptian history than the ancient Egyptians themselves".

But the Zep Tepi should reasonably be an important text, since it is to be found in the temple of Horus at Edfu, the second largest temple ever built in the whole of Egypt. As indicated by the link I posted in my earlier post, there was certainly another temple (of Horus) on the exact same place... and another one before it? The ancient Egyptians did destroy old temples, only to re-construct them. It is constructed in an archaic style, embodying a desire to preserve ancient traditions and knowledge, perhaps at danger during the Ptolemaic reign of 'foreigners'.
It is normal that we find the Zep Tepi here, since this is the temple of cosmogony. I do not know if the Zep Tepi can be found elsewhere or not (who knows what's left to be found? Zahi Hawass once estimated that less than 10% of ancient Egypt has been dug up so far), but I know that the "Time of Horus" is referenced in other places, such as Denderah and Abydos. Perhaps it is normal that the Zep Tepi is only to be found here. After all, knowledge, whether it concerned religion, cosmology or history, was in the hands of the priests, and was only shown to a chosen few, The Greek Solon (640-558 BC) did travel to Egypt, where he met a priest from Sais (Sa el-Hagar) who told him the history of Egypt, starting with the "Time of Horus". This is the same source Plato later used to tell us the story of Atlantis by the way.

You're right about the fact that there are several different creation myth versions. Perhaps that is normal for a culture that has been around for so long as Ancient Egypt. But am I prepared to discard the Zep Tepi as some obscure text thought up by a marginal clan of imaginative priests? Nope, I think it is exactly what it claims to be, a record. To what extent it is correct I do not know, neither do egyptologists. But I do know one thing, regardless of the Zep Tepi, there are gods, demi-gods and anthropomorphic creatures in ancient Egyptian culture, which brings us back to the original question asked by the OP.

Originally posted by Heliocentric
As John Anthony West so unerringly pointed out; "Egyptologists always know more about ancient Egyptian history than the ancient Egyptians themselves".

Well, West should certainly know, right? I mean, any playwright/tourguide should obviously know more about ancient Egypt than people that have been involved in research in that area for their entire lives.

Originally posted by HeliocentricBut am I prepared to discard the Zep Tepi as some obscure text thought up by a marginal clan of imaginative priests?

Yet you are doing exactly this with the other, older and far more prevalent creation myths in Egypt. All because of one single instance that greatly varies from the rest of the entire body of known Egyptian mythology.

A logical person can only conclude that you do this because you want this particular myth to be the preferred one, not because of anything you know about Ancient Egypt.

Hence, the joke-cracking on Egyptology boards.

Harte

reply to post by Harte


Could one not make the argument that the Zepi Tepi version was a version kept secret because it went against most other myths? How do we know the Ancient Egyptians themselves were just as confused as we are about their deep past, and were attempting to put together what records they had to reconstruct their history?

Originally posted by bigbomb456
reply to post by Harte

 

Could one not make the argument that the Zepi Tepi version was a version kept secret because it went against most other myths? How do we know the Ancient Egyptians themselves were just as confused as we are about their deep past, and were attempting to put together what records they had to reconstruct their history?

One may argue anything, I suppose.

However, a valid argument must include evidence.

One cannot argue with validity in the absence of evidence. That's just speculation.

Now, we have all manner of evidence for what the Egyptians believed concerning their creation. We have both extremely ancient and relatively new evidence for these systems of belief.

We have only a single, Greek-era stela concerning the other creation belief, and it varies widely from the (primarily) stable and long-espoused one for which we have reams of evidence and examples.

That is the point I was making. Heliocentric said:

Originally posted by Heliocentric
You're right about the fact that there are several different creation myth versions. Perhaps that is normal for a culture that has been around for so long as Ancient Egypt. But am I prepared to discard the Zep Tepi as some obscure text thought up by a marginal clan of imaginative priests? Nope, I think it is exactly what it claims to be, a record. To what extent it is correct I do not know, neither do egyptologists. But I do know one thing, regardless of the Zep Tepi, there are gods, demi-gods and anthropomorphic creatures in ancient Egyptian culture, which brings us back to the original question asked by the OP.

My point was that to consider this single writing from the temple of Edfu to be a record is to discard the other, far more evidenced mythos concerning the Egyptian belief about their creation.

Heliocentric, then (IMO) appears to prefer to believe the Zep Tepi myth and that appears to be the only reason he does so.

Back to your point, it is certainly possible that the Zep Tepi myth was kept secret, just not likely. There's no evidence it was kept secret at the Temple of Edfu, for example. And why would it be secret anyway? Ancient Egyptians believed their gods were real - the Pharaoh was one of them, after all. Toward what end would such a secret be kept? They had a great many truly strange beliefs about their creation, the one in the Zep Tepi writings was no odder than any other. Why would it be secret?

Harte

i propose that the symbolic star field painted on the tomb ceiling was nothing more than
to help create a familiar journey in death to the departed soul...

the burial chambers included other stuff to use in the afterlife like foods & wines and companionship & servants and most everything to make the departed comfortable in the afterlife... so why not painted skies, symbolic pools to bathe in, luxurious dwellings with abundant everything and of course a cloudless sky to be awed by the seeming infinity of a star canopy.
while at eye level the radiant glow of gold objects & decoration to symbolize the world of wakefulness all about the (mummified) departed

Originally posted by St Udio

i propose that the symbolic star field painted on the tomb ceiling was nothing more than
to help create a familiar journey in death to the departed soul...

the burial chambers included other stuff to use in the afterlife like foods & wines and companionship & servants and most everything to make the departed comfortable in the afterlife... so why not painted skies, symbolic pools to bathe in, luxurious dwellings with abundant everything and of course a cloudless sky to be awed by the seeming infinity of a star canopy.
while at eye level the radiant glow of gold objects & decoration to symbolize the world of wakefulness all about the (mummified) departed

You know, I like that concept very much, and your reasoning is consistent with the tomb's purpose. I know we don't always agree on stuff (and I certainly don't have any documents or whatevers to back up my words here) but I find it charming and plausible.