Myth and Magic: Towards an understanding of ritual efficacy in ancient Egypt Rune Nyord, Christ’s College, Cambridge The problem of ritual efficacy ‘“ritual” is our (post enlightenment) term, and it reflects our problem – how to classify a certain set of apparently nonrational acts. Or perhaps I should say “apparently ineffective acts,” for (...) the popular understanding of ritual is not so much that it is nonrational but rather that it is ineffective’ (Sax et al. 2010: 4, emphasis in original) Dominant Egyptological models of ritual efficacy • Heka (Ritner and others) • ‘Sacramental interpretation’/‘sakramentale Ausdeutung’ (Assmann) Ritner on HkA Emic ‘magic’: ‘If magic is to be retained as a category in the study of Egyptian thought, it is because the Egyptians themselves gave a name to a practice which they – not others – identified with the Western concept of magic: ϨΙΚ [hik]’ (Ritner 1993: 14) Etic ‘magic’ ‘For the purpose of this study, any activity which seeks to obtain its goal by methods outside the simple laws of cause and effect will be considered “magical” in the Western sense. To what extent this “working definition” of magic conforms to the Egyptian understanding of HkA will, it is hoped , become clearer in the course of the investigation.’ (Ritner 1993: 69) Empirical(?) ‘magic’: ‘However magic may be defined, in Egypt the practice was in itself quite legal’ (Ritner 1993: 13) Ritner on HkA Pharaonic Greek HkA μαγεία Coptic Latin ϨΙΚ magia Modern English magic Ritner on HkA ‘As the pre-eminent force through which the creator engendered and sustained the ordered cosmos, it was necessarily the dynamic “energy” which Egyptian religious ritual sought to channel that it might effect its identical goal, the preservation of the creator’s universe’ (Ritner 1993: 247) ‘The use of HkA could hardly be construed in Egyptian terms as “activity outside the law of natural causality” since HkA is itself the ultimate source of causality, the generative force of nature’ (Ritner 1993: 249) Problems with the HkA-approach - HkA can only be treated as an emic concept, and must thus be studied according to its ancient usage – which does not corroborate the theological importance of the concept as underlying every ritual - Modern definitions are perhaps less problematic than Ritner indicates (as long as they are distinguished as etic and used accordingly), but are of no use for exploring Egyptian conceptions of efficacy. Assmann on sacramental interpretation ‘The uttering of this divine speech projects the action being carried out in this world into the divine realm. (…)The relationship is effected through words, explicitly in the descriptive comment on a scene (“a cultic act is performed, this means: an occurrence in the divine realm”), and implicitly in the recitation as words of the god to be spoken while performing the cultic act’ (Assmann 2001: 89f) Problems with Assmann’s approach - By presupposing the primacy of ritual, Assmann’s view entails a mythological interpretation of an otherwise disenchanted world – whereas by all appearances the Egyptians experienced it the other way around - This makes it inherently unlikely that Assmann’s interpretation will correspond to that of the Egyptians (whatever advantages it may have as an etic framework) What should an interpretation of ritual efficacy in ancient Egypt do? - Cover the ‘full’ range of Egyptian rituals (no need to impose modern distinctions such as religion vs. magic) - Conform to general features of the Egyptian worldview, preferably building on explicit, emic articulation Dramatic Ramesseum Papyrus, 66–67: The process of lifting the offering table by the wtpriests: It is the Children of Horus catching his eye for him. Horus → the followers of Seth. Recitation: ‘My eye has been lifted up to [my] face’ Eye of Horus – Lifting to his face – Lifting the offering table – Ibis nome (Sethe 1928: pl. 17) xpr n fAt xAjt jn wtjw msw ¡r pw jH=sn n=f jrt=f General pattern xpr n [RITUAL] [MYTH] pw The [MYTH] is the xpr of the [RITUAL] Pattern found in a number of other texts Pyramid Texts Spell 477 (6th Dyn) ‘as you, Seth, said “In fact, he attacked (jk) me” – that is the coming into being of his name (xpr rn=f pw) Bent-(to)-the-Ground (jkw-tA)’ Myth of the Heavenly Cow (18th Dyn) ‘The Majesty of this god said “Stay far (Hr) from them! Lift me up! Look at me!” That is her coming into being (xpr=s pw) as the sky (Hrt)’ pSalt 825 (Ptolemaic) ‘Then Horus wept, water fell from his eye on the ground, and it grew. That is the coming into being of dry myrrh (xpr antjw Sw pw)’ Coffin Texts spell 154 (“Knowing the Lords of Heliopolis”), II, 274c-281c: It is Re when he contended with (Ra pw Hr mdt Hna) the serpent Who-is-in-his-flame concerning the division of Heliopolis. His mouth was injured, and that is the xpr of the reduction (xpr xbt pw) in the monthly festival. The serpent Who-is-in-his-flame said, “I will take my harpoon (mabA) and I will inherit this city”, and that is the xpr of the (division into) 30 (mabA). Re said, “I will erect my flagpoles (snwt) against him, and I will drive him off”, and that is the xpr of the snwtfestival From a hymn to the god Osiris: Hail to you, Osiris, Foremost of the Westerners, Son of Nut (...) for whose sake the Sun rises to see his ‘beauty’ (nfrw) on earth, and he sets likewise to behold you in the ‘becomings’ (xprw) of the Underworld. On earth In the Underworld ‘Beauty’ (nfrw) ‘Becomings’ (xprw) Stela of Wepwawet-Hotep, British Museum, EA 1367 A basic deployment of a mythological ‘precedent’ Protective spells for mother and child (Papyrus Berlin 3027), spell G Another one I conceived in Weryt, I give birth to you in Netjeru. I purified myself while you were in the Lake of the Kings of Lower Egypt. My property is for me and for you. My property is in [...]. Recitation for not letting Meskhenet give a child over to bad things. Good. Consequences How does this approach change our understanding of the workings of Egyptian rituals? Funerary texts as (ordinary) ritual texts? Pyramid Texts, spell 278 ‘Awake, awake, my father Osiris! I am your son who loves you: I am your son Horus who loves you. Look, I have come bringing you that which he (sc. Seth) had acquired from you’ General hypotheses • Mythological references in ritual can be understood as a technical language for conceptualising (and manipulating) the world’s coming into being • There is no need to treat funerary texts as a special case where mythological references should be understood as a literal description of the afterlife Myth and Magic: Towards an understanding of ritual efficacy in ancient Egypt Rune Nyord, Christ’s College, Cambridge