i, CosmoGony.—(A) Creation of the world.—(1) From the earliest times from which we possess Egyptian religious texts down to the period when the ancient polytheism gave way to the Christian faith, the relation between Divinity and humanity was thought of by the inhabitants of the Nile valley as reciprocally conditioned. Man dedicates to the Deity food, drink, clothing, a dwelling-place—the things which the Deity, who shares in all earthly qualities and needs, requires for comfort. The Deity gives in return such benefits as he can dis- pense —long life, endurance, joy, victory over enemies, health, and the like. If either party neglects his duty, the other is at once set free from any counter obligation. Man offers only to that god who shows himself helpful to him; the god favours only that man who does him some service. Thus in the inscriptions the god says to the king, ‘I give thee victory in proportion to thine offer- ings,’ and the king threatens to discontinue his wor- ship if the god will not bestow long life upon him.
8 in every instance where similar notions are cherished, this way of thinking led in Egypt to the continuance of a polytheistic system. Upon the assumption that only one or only a few gods existed, or that their supremacy was universal, it was difficult to conceive how, in view of the conflicting interests of different individuals, any decisive pressure could be exerted on the Divine will by a particular suppliant. This was more practicable if a man could apply to special gods who had to be considered in relation to only one or only a few individuals. Then, when he had obtained the good graces of these, he could leave it to them to accomplish their will in the cirele of their fellow-gods, or to bring it at the proper moment under the notice of a higher god. The kings of the gods were accessible, if necessary, to the Pharaohs and their court; the sphere of their activity was far too exalted to permit of their rendering continuous help to ordinary mortals.
In this way the notion that every family and every locality or province possesses and must re- tain for itself its special deities, persisted for thousands of years, and was never absolutely suppressed, At no time was there a religious system in which every Egyptian was bound to believe ; the belief in the gods always exhibits a particular form and development in the different divisions of the country, the so-called nomes (see below, p. 182»). :
It is quite recently that historical science has come to recognize the above characteristic of the Egyptian religion. Only some thirty years ago it began to be urged and demonstrated that, in order to obtain a correct view of the faith of the ancient Egyptians, we must examine individual conceptions and individual deities, instead of set- ting up @ priori principles. Up till then it had
Introduction.—In studying the religion of ancient Egypt we encounter a phenomenon which it has in common with almost all religions. Two forms of conception may be distinguished, which started from the same principles and exercised a perma- nent influence upon one another, but which at the same time exhibit a number of radical differences in the view they take of Divine things. These two are, respectively, the official religion of the upper classes, and the popular faith. It is true that the difference is not so pronounced in the Nile valley as elsewhere, since the Egyptian religion was never subjected to a systematizing process and a logical establishing of its various dogmas, but always remained in a fluid condition, so that even the official religion was thus permanently exposed to powerful influence from the side of the popular conceptions.
The sources of information of which modern investigation can avail itself in seeking to arrive at a knowledge of the official religion of ancient Egypt are very copious. It is the subject of the inscriptions on temples, and of almost all the texts found in tombs and on monuments (including the religious papyri) dedicated to the worship of the dead. Far fewer materials have to be taken account of in estimating the popular religion. Its adherents belonged in general to the poorer classes, who were not in a position to erect any fine monuments. Besides, in the texts they destined for publicity, such persons almost uniformly em- ployed the terminology and the formule of the official monuments, even in cases where they understood the dogmas in view differently from the priestly colleges of the great sanctuaries. In order to recover this realm of ideas belonging to the popular faith, our main resources are a series of ill-executed sepulchral steles and rock-inscriptions, sporadic passages in the temple texts and those concerning the dead which show traces of popular influence, and in which, notably for instance in the so-called Book of the Dead, the popular doctrine could occasionally not be passed over. When referred to, this doctrine is, strangely enough, spoken of as a great secret. Lastly, we have to take account of the statements of the classical writers, who, like their countrymen that were settled in the Nile valley, were brought into con- tact less with the priests and the upper classes than with the great mass of the people proper, so that their accounts reproduce primarily the notions of the latter. What holds good of these Greeks applies also to the Israelites, who, if they EXTRA VOL.—I2