Christiane Sourvinou-Inwood was an international authority in the field of Ancient Greek religion and one of the most prolific and influential Hellenists of her generation.
She was remarkable for her penetrating and uncompromising intellect and for her astonishing range of scholarly interests, which spanned almost every area of Ancient Greek culture from Minoan iconography to Greek tragedy.
She was born in Volos, Greece, in 1945, but grew up in Corfu. Her father was a colonel in the Greek Army, her mother a teacher. Sourvinou-Inwood studied as an undergraduate at the University of Athens, and began research in the young and exciting field of Mycenology in Rome and later in Athens.
Coming to England in 1969, she graduated from Oxford in 1973 with a doctorate on Minoan and Mycenaean beliefs in the afterlife, and went on to a junior research fellowship at St Hugh’s College, Oxford. She then worked as a lecturer at Liverpool (1976-78), as a senior research Fellow at University College, Oxford (1990-95), and as Reader in Classical Literature at the University of Reading (1995-98). She turned down many more foreign invitations than she accepted, but she did cross the Atlantic to give the Carl Newell Jackson lectures at Harvard in 1994, and she gave the Martin P. Nilsson lecture in the Swedish Institute at Athens in 1997.
The focus of her early work was the Bronze Age and its iconography; experts still cite her brilliant defence of the authenticity of one particularly beautiful Minoan ring in the Ashmolean Museum in Oxford – about which later discoveries proved her right. But in time her interests gravitated to the Classical period, and she was as adept at using textual sources as at using images and material culture – something which few classicists achieve.
She was particularly interested in rituals relating to young women and devoted a book to some of the interpretative problems connected with the sanctuary of Artemis at Brauron near Athens, where young girls danced as bears (Studies in Girls’ Transitions, 1988).
Another interest, sustained since her doctorate, was Greek representations of the afterlife, her definitive statement on which was Reading Greek Death (1994). Perhaps most significant of all was her examination of the ways that Ancient Greek religion was determined by the political structure of the city state, set out in a paper What is Polis Religion? (1990), which bristles with insights in every paragraph. She explored literary aspects of the same theme in her provocative reading of Sophocles’ tragedy Antigone (1989), and at greater length in her Jackson lectures which were published as Tragedy and Athenian Religion (2003).
Methodology was a vital concern and she developed a repertory of technical terms such as “reading” (roughly, “methodologically rigorous interpretation”); “schema” (an ideologically significant narrative pattern); and “zooming” (the effect of bringing the world of the text or image nearer to the world of the viewer or listener). It was, and still is, unusual for classicists to be so explicit about methodology, and reviewers often commented on the style, length or frequency of her methodological pronouncements. She was unrepentant. In the first chapter of her Reading Greek Culture (1991) she explained that she aimed to produce a “neutral” interpretation by rigorously eliminating all modern assumptions and “perceptual filters” derived from unreflective common sense or traditional scholarly baggage.
Her “reading” of the texts or images could then begin, and an important part of it was the identification (or “recovery”) of ideological “schemata”. The result was sometimes to show that texts believed to have specific historical reference were better understood as ideological constructions, but if that meant we now knew less about history, we at least knew more about ideology.
Sourvinou-Inwood insisted that her aim was to establish “ancient realities and perceptions”. Thus, just as naive empiricism was her early target, so, later, she was anxious to combat extreme scepticism about the past, “nihilism” as she called it in her final book, Hylas, the Nymphs, Dionysos and Others (2005).
Her approach shares a lot with the structuralism of the French scholars Jean-Pierre Vernant and Pierre Vidal-Naquet, both associated with the École des Hautes Études, and in its later formulation it owed something to semiotics and even poststructuralism. But she was no follower of academic fashion, and her approach should be seen as an independent response to her own interpretative experience.
Those who knew her only from her publications were likely to form the impression of a certain intellectual defensiveness and a tendency to devote more space and ingenuity to demolishing her critics’ arguments than was strictly necessary. But to those who experienced her in the lecture room, she was an inspiring teacher and a warm-hearted mentor, convinced that even the least promising undergraduate was capable of brilliance if given enough encouragement.
Her own sense of being an outsider had given her a heightened empathy. That she taught formally for only brief periods is a great loss to the institutions that could have employed her, and to the profession.
Ill-health restricted her movement in the last decade of her life, but she still made herself available to friends, disciples and awed fans who visited her in Oxford, usually to be entertained over lunch in an Italian restaurant. To younger scholars facing uncertainty in the early stages of their careers, she could be a tower of support.
Her own tower of support was her husband, Mike Inwood, philosophy tutor at Trinity College, Oxford, whom she married in 1971.
Considering the volume of her publications, it is remarkable that she also wrote a series of detective novels. One appeared in Greek in 2003 as Enas polu klassikos phonos under the pseudonym Christiana Elfwood (the English version is to appear imminently).
She married first J. P. Olivier (divorced). Her second husband survives her.
Christiane Sourvinou-Inwood, Classical scholar, was born on February 26, 1945. She died of cancer on May 19, 2007, aged 62
From "The Times".
.
Hate you, Christ, I do not, or seek. I believe.
In you as in the others gods, your elders.
I count you as neither more nor less
Than they are, merely newer.
I do hate, yes, and calmly abhor people
Who seek you above the other gods, yours equals.
I seek you where you are, not higher
Than them, not lower, yourself merely.
Sag god, needed perhaps because there was
None like you: one more in the Pantheon, nothing
More, not purer: because the whole
Was complete with gods, except you.
Take care, exclusive idolater of Christ: life
Is multiple, all days different from each other,
And only as multiple shall we
Be with reality and alone.
(09.10.1916)
'Selected Poems', translated by J.Griffin.
Diviners, Serpents and Staves
Melampous and Teiresias
Several Greek mythological characters attain mantic capacity because of their contact with serpents. Melampous and Teiresias are exemplary, illustrating two different ways in which to reach the transmutation of common human nature into a superior one (the conversion into diviners, mediators between gods and men).
The serpents lick the ears (note 2) of Melampous (note 3), he obtains the comprehension of bird language and guesses the future. He later becomes a iatromantis, a healer using sacred dances (he is a girls' initiator (note 4) ) but also other physical (perhaps his own name is a reference to the use of plants in healing (note 5)) or supernatural methods.
Teiresias obtains mantic power in two different ways which differ according to the classical sources we use. In the first version that starts with Hesiod (fr. 275 M/W = Dichaiarchos fr. 37 Wehrli = Callimachus fr. 576 Pfeiffer Phleg. 257 F 36 Jacoby-) and is transmitted for example by Apollodorus (III[70] 6,7), Hyginus (75) and Ovid (Met. III, 322ff.), (note 6) the gift of divination is conferred by Zeus because of the mediation in the controversy against Hera to decide which of the sexes find more pleasure in copulation. Teiresias has been man and woman and was thus qualified to answer that the greater pleasure is perceived by the woman. Zeus, the feminine secret unveiled, attains the victory; but Hera, vexed, blinds Teiresias. Teiresias' change of sex is motivated by the fact that he had touched or wounded with his staff two serpents entwined in sexual intercourse. The other version (note 7), transmitted by Pherekydes (3 F 92a Jacoby Apollod. III[70], 6,7-), Callimachus (H. V, 5,75ff.) and Nonnos (D. V, 337ff.) states that Athena, seen naked by Teiresias, was obliged to punish him with blindness, but to compensate Chariclo, mother of the diviner and loyal servant of the goddess, she purified his ears and bestowed on him the gift of understanding the language of birds. Furthermore she offered him a staff that allowed him to walk like a sighted person.
Despite the differences observed, the background of both versions is similar in essence:
The Serpentine Staff
In the version transmitted, for example, by Ovid (Met. III, 316ff.) or Hyginus (75) (note 8)Teiresias touches the copulating serpents with his staff, triggering the metamorphosis. Evidently Teiresias' action momentarily creates a figure whose iconographical shape is a staff with intertwined serpents. Such a staff already existed in the Hellenic culture, taking the technical name kerykeion (note 9), and was used by Hermes on the divine level and the heralds on the human level, as can be seen in iconography (note 10) (illustration 1). An interesting text of Hyginus (Astron. II,7,2) (note 11) narrates the manner in which Hermes obtains the serpentine staff, in circumstances identical with those originating Teiresias' sexual mutation (only the interpretation differs, the separation of the serpents is understood as a pacification, according to the major function of the kerykeion as staff of the mediator). The link between both evidences is clear (note 12) , and we believe that the meaning must be similar.
All the bearers of the serpentine staff (Teiresias included in the group) have a common link: they are mediators; the heralds on the political level, Teiresias between genders and later between gods and men. Hermes, the most interesting, in a holistic field, uniting with his presence the underworld, the sky and the earth, moving between the kingdoms of the gods and the land of humans, linking divergent and opposed spaces (note 13).
Branchos: The Diviner Without Serpent
An episode in the life of Branchos, the mythical founder of the Didyma's oracle and ancestor of the priestly lineage of the Branchidai, is significant for our purposes and determines the name of the character. According to Cono, while Brancho's mother was in labour, she had a vision in which the sun penetrated by his mouth, and passing through the stomach, ended the path in sex (note 14) (evidently an "experience of light" (note 15)). Because of this visionary experience (the sun passed through the bronchial tubes) she named her son Branchos. Later, his homosexual love for Apollo leads to the conversion of Branchos into a powerful diviner (Branchios is one of the epithets of the god).
In an attempt to explain the vision of Branchos' mother, the episodes of Melampous and Teiresias and the serpentine head of the kerykeion we have resorted to a religious tradition that displays in a structured manner most of the elements that scattered throughout Greek mythology are incoherent.
Serpentine Power and Tantric Mystical Physiology (note 16)
The Origin and Antiquity of Tantrism
The major drawback to using Tantrism in comparative religion is the lack of literary evidence of the movement prior to the sixth century CE (note 17). But the literary transmission, or even the generalization of a doctrine does not imply the nonexistence of previous strong and long-dated roots. On the one hand, the significance of the cult to Shiva-Shakti (note 18), the basis of Tantrism, exhibits an evident archaism in some aspects. On the other hand, Tantrism does not seem to be a movement of rupture, and does not display elements of radical innovation. Tantrism is a religious movement that elaborates concepts pre-existing in the Vedic tradition, combining them with religious practices from different sources. The historical sociology of Tantrism is still impossible to outline (the difficulty increases the farther back), all these uncertainties making it increasingly difficult to detect the role of Prearian and popular tradition in the formation of Tantrism. The fact that the greatest development is observed in contact zones (northern India), open to foreign influences, may indicate that in these ambits the rigidity of traditional religion was surpassed, and the priestly elite embraced alternative (foreign or sociologically different) practices. Thus, we could delimit the three major roots of Tantrism, the Vedic one, the autocthonous (Prearian but perhaps popular also) and the aloctone (Asiatic Chamanic techniques, perhaps even Gnostic influences, as Mircea Eliade suggests (note 19)). In spite of the hypothetical basis of the analysis, it seems acceptable that Tantrism is not a modern phenomenon in its roots even if the literary formulation and the major expansion were developed towards the end of the first millenium and during the first part of the second. The archaism of some Tantric practices allows us to justify the comparison with the Greek practices (we are not comparing religious forms with more than thousand years between them, but possibly practices of a similar antiquity).
The Tantric Mystical Physiology
The basis of Tantric esoterism is the experience of liberation revealed in the adept's body (note 20) in which two powers coexist in a latent stage, one situated in the lower part of the trunk (the feminine principle or Shakti), the other in the upper part of the head (masculine principle or Shiva). Joining both we find a number of channels (named nadis), the three major ones being Sushumna (in a straight line and the main channel), Ida (left channel, lunar and feminine) and Pingal (right channel, solar and masculine). The last two nadis are entwined round Sushumna , meeting at a number of centres, named cakra, where subtle energy gathered. In the most usual system called acakra (six-centred) they are seven in number (the six cakra and the seventh in the upper part of the skull). The lower centre, named Muladhara cakra or cakra root of the nadis, placed in the intermediate region between genitals and anus is the seat of the personal Shakti that appears coiled among common men (named kundalini: the coiled one), in repose and with the appearance of a serpent. The following are Svadhisthana cakra, over the genitals, Maipra cakra or centre of the region of the navel, Anahata cakra or centre of the heart, Vishuddha cakra or centre in the region of the throat, Ajna cakra or centre between the eyebrows where the nadis unite to ascend to Sahasrara or the lotus with a thousand petals placed in the upper part of the skull (perhaps in the fontanelle in spite of the fact that we are summarizing a subtle or mystical physiology with no real correspondence in organs or regions of the common physiology). The masculine power or Shiva settles in this centre and seems not to be included in the acakra system being in essence supracorporeal.
The purpose of the system is to make the serpentine power ascend from Muladhara cakra to Sahasrara; whoever reaches this union becomes a jivanmukta (note 21), a person who has attained liberation of the limitations of the human condition (achieving release from the wheel of reincarnation---Samsara). Serpentine power (Kundalini) must ascend exclusively by the central channel (Sushumna) to produce the alchemy of liberation.
Elements of Comparison
Summarizing, Tantrism shows the following elements for the comparison:
Comparative Religion:
Teiresias, Melampous, Branchos and Tantric Mystical Physiology
We find a number of coincidences between the experiences of Teiresias, Melampous and Branchos and the Tantric initiates:
Hermes, The Kerykeion and Gorgo
The intertwining of the three nadis creates a figure very similar in essence to the Greek serpentine staff named kerykeion. The god Hermes is normally shown bearing it in the iconography (note 27), this being one of the definitive attributes to assure identification. It seems worthwhile to analyse briefly the tasks of the god to clarify his role in the mystical physiology that we are endeavouring to unravel (note 28). A deity of ambiguity, he is the lord of the lands with diffused frontiers. He is epitermios, divinity of all the limits, not only the frontiers of the social topography but also the psychic or mythical one. He is the support of the traveller who crosses the frontier of the known country, of the foreigner far from his fatherland; he indicates the ambiguous point of confluence of the territory of two poleis; he helps thieves (note 29), working on the fringe of the social system. He is also psychopompos, helping the dead to find the way from the world of the living to the underworld (note 30). His son (daughter) Hermaphroditos (note 31) and a number of his archaic representations (note 32) show that he moves in the sexual indetermination or even in androginy. As herald of Zeus he unifies the human world with the reigns of the gods. He is the central divinity in the space construction of the Greeks, as pointed out by Vernant (note 33), he determines the links among the different ambits that give structure to the social and religious Greek imaginary. A deity of transitions (including, evidently, the "rites of passage" (note 34)) he is the perfect candidate for presiding over practices that include a transition to a different sort of existence and an ascensional ritual. Iconography could assist in illustating this. In one of the earliest images of the god, in the olpe of the Gorgon painter (circa 600-590 BE) in the National Museum of Athens (note 35) (illustration 2), Hermes is portrayed with the kerykeion held aloft his right hand and flanked by two winged sphinxes. The image is included in a series of representations dated between 600 and 560 in which Hermes is flanked by mythical winged creatures (sphinxes or sirens) (note 36). The meaning of the scenes does not seem to be completely clarified (the interpretation of the master of animals seems much too simple). The scene can be interpreted by comparison with the relief of the Cretan bronze helmet in the Norbert Schimmel Collection (New York) (note 37) (illustration 3 not in this article, see cited ref.) showing two winged youths holding intertwined serpents. Hermes in the first case fulfills the same role as the serpents in the second and the kerykeion in the centre of the image seems to emphasize this significance. To control the serpentine power is the task of the god and the winged beings are a represention of the ascension included in the rite. Seen from this point of view, we could almost risk an attribution to the pair of winged genies of the New York helmet. This doublet is in essence only one (with the same significance as the ambiguous god who presides over the serpentine power), being like a double Hermes.
Another mythical being, whose meaning is lately being investigated by a number of researchers (note 38) and who is shown as possessing similar attributes (wings, serpents) is Gorgo. In the oldest iconography his/her sex is undetermined (note 39), and this being is represented like a terrible strength, the control of which determines a superior power. His/her head surrounded by serpents in a number of images (note 40), his/her body entwined with reptiles (for example in the pediment of the temple of Artemis in Corcyra where the serpents form a girdle (note 41) (illustration 4-), Gorgo seems a candidate to symbolize among the Greeks the radical alterity named Kundalini in Tantric tradition, a terrific power mastered by a select group of special men, transformed into heroes.
Thanks to the Indian parallel we can better understand the subtle role of Hermes, the god in the Greek pantheon who best symbolizes the ritual of ascension and change to a new reality that is the experimentation of serpentine power, the alterity and strength of which are reflected in the hypnotic and terrifying glance of Gorgo.
Conclusions
Among the Greeks a knowledge seems to be attested of subtle or mystical physiology having a number of elements comparable with Indian Tantrism. The symbols (serpent, light, ascension) and the experience (importance of sex, access to a greater personal development) are similar. In the Greek case the information is hidden in the mythical language (in the literary or iconographical transmission), reelaborated and transmitted in most cases by authors who are unaware of the real dimension of the facts they are relating. Without the instruments of the comparative method the sole interest of the vicissitudes of diviners such as Teiresias, Melampous or Branchos, heroes like Perseus or gods like Hermes is to show the ravings of mythical creation; in the light of the Indian example, the Greek myth grows in meaning and could be explained, in part. It is hard to agree with the idea that both traditions draw on a common source (because of the paucity of documentation) and difficult to affirm that a lending relationship exists between both countries (note 42) and cultures in the archaic period or even earlier; it seems more acceptable to defend that we are dealing with similar models to characterize extraordinary religious experiences. But the result is different and exemplifies the cultural adaptation produced in the social mentality in each country that seems to illustrate the archaism of the practices and permits us to refute a recent loan. Heroes, kings or diviners in the Greek case or creatures liberated from the bonds of human nature in the Indian case are two ways to represent the man who had developed potentialities beyond the reach of common human beings.
Notes
The mysterious rune stone found under a church floor in western Norway has been identified.The stone, found under the floor at Hausken church in Rennesøy, Rogaland, was used as part of the foundation when the church was built in 1856.
Archeologists at first believed they had found a new rune stone that was nearly 1,000 years old, but they now have identified it as part of a large tombstone that was previously reported in 1639 and 1745.
The stone lay outside the door of the old stave church, and the remains of this stone have now been found under the floor, beneath the pulpit.
"We thought at first that we had found a completely unknown stone, and we misread one of the runes," archeologist Helge Sørheim told Aftenposten.no.
James Knirk at the Rune Archive at the University of Oslo's Museum of Cultural History correctly identified the 'new' find. One of the unclear runes can be read as an 'f' and not as a 'k' as first thought.
By examining the text on the stone identified in the 17th and 18th centuries, one inscription can be formed, reading: "Åsolv on Helland's requiem is 4 nights after Hallvard's mass".
This means that Åsolv, who lived on the farm Helland, near the church, died on the 19th of May. The feast of St. Hallvard was celebrated on May 15 in medieval times, and Åsolv died four days later. Knirk believes that Åsolv died in the 13th or 14th century.
"We don't know who Åsolv was because the village records do not go so far back, but he must have been quite a prosperous farmer since he got a tombstone. It was not very common to have relatives who could write runes then either," Sørheim said.
The archeologists now hope to find the first part of the tombstone, which disappeared after being recorded in the 17th and 18th centuries.
"Now we are making a cast of the stone we have found and trying to find the first part, which perhaps was also used in building the foundation of the new church," Sørheim said.
A ritual is a complex of actions effected by, or in the name of, an individual or a community. These actions serve to organize space and time, to define relations between men and the gods, and to set in their proper place the different categories of mankind and the links which bind them together. [1]
The main type of ritual in Hellenism is the sacrifice, in which material things are offered to the gods to assure their goodwill and blessings, or to thank them for the gifts they have already given us. From the earliest phases of Hellenic religion, "the bond between man and the sacred is consummated in the continuous exchange of gift for gift." [2] Just as human social bonds are reaffirmed by gift-giving, the voluntary aid of the gods is sought through sacrifice.
Jan Bremmer writes:
...we reach a better understanding when we consider the relationships between gods and mortals as analogous to those between princes and commoners. Although gods did uphold the rules of justice, their obligations to kin and friends had priority. [4]
The goal of sacrifice, then, is to establish the bonds of friendship between gods and humans, and so encourage divine goodwill.
How do Hellenes imagine the gods responding to their offerings? Since the gods are in a wholly different order of being from mortals, it is apparent that their needs are different from ours. Homer tells us that the gods enjoy ambrosia and nectar, not human food and drink. Indeed, human blood does not run in their veins, but a substance called ikhor. We may further imagine that even this anthropomorphism, which scholars tell us is so characteristic of Hellenic religion, is one of the greatest "true lies" of myth: Few moderns truly believe that Zeus is sitting in the clouds taking deep, appreciative whiffs of the roasted barley on our sacrificial fires, and many thoughtful ancient people arrived at the same conclusion.
Looking at what we can surmise of divine nature, we can say that
...the sense in which men need the gods is quite different from the sense in which the gods need men. Men live by the hope of reciprocal favour, charis. 'It is good to give fitting gifts to the immortals'--they will show their gratitude. But it is never possible to count on this with certainty. The ritual, it is true, is attended by the expectation that it will produce certain effects, but the Homeric gods can always say no without giving any reason. [4]
Does this mean that ritual is a waste of time, an exercise in futility? Hardly. The human spirit needs a point of focus in order to fulfill its potential, and religious ritual provides just such a focal point. In ritual we express, with potent symbols, our understanding of our place in the world and how that place relates to the state of being we call "divine." We give voice to feelings of eusebeia, piety: We display our gratitude, our hopes, our fears, our joy in life, all in a context that sanctifies our human experience. This we do as a community, a community of mortals:
This is not an exchange of gifts celebrated by a hierarchical society of gods, priests, and commoners: together at the same level, men and women stand here about the altar, experience and bring death [in animal sacrifice], honour the immortals, and in eating affirm life in its conditionality: it is the solidarity of mortals in the face of the immortals. [5]
The centerpiece of Hellenic worship is an offering of food—formerly animals, now primarily grain, fruit, and other bloodless foodstuffs—and its common counterpart, libation (drink-offerings or spondai). The offering of food, some of which is normally burned, is called thusia, and is the typical form of sacrifice to the Olympians.
A sacrifice can be as simple as a little barley meal or incense prayerfully cast into the fire [6] and a few drops of wine poured out onto the ground, or as elaborate as the hecatombs (hundreds) of cattle that the ancients offered on special feast days. (Of course, today we would substitute wheat cakes or loaves of bread for the cows!) Since most modern Hellenic ritual is performed on a small scale, our sacrifices will consist of common foodstuffs—bread, fruit, wine, milk, honey, olive oil—and incense. We may also dedicate our own handicrafts to sacred use. This is in keeping with the fundamental practice of "first-fruit" offerings: "The pious man takes to a sanctuary a little of everything which the seasons bring, seasonal gifts (horaia), ears of corn or bread, figs and olives, grapes, wine, and milk." [7]
Whatever is offered should be of the highest quality possible given our circumstances: This is our gift to the gods and expresses our esteem for them. It should be, in fact, a sacrifice: a giving of your life energy, whether in the form of time, effort, or money. Although a few organic apples might cost the same as a big bag of potato chips, the former is an appropriate offering, and the latter, most people would agree, is not. Just as you make special efforts to please guests with a pretty table with flowers and your best linens, tasty food and drink, and a comfortable, inviting atmosphere, so in sacrifice we show our hospitality to the gods, our honored guests.
In addition to festival sacrifices which occur on a regular basis and on behalf of the whole community, individuals may make private offerings to the gods. One common type is a votive offering, one made as the result of a previous vow. [8] Who has not prayed in desperation, "If you get me out of this mess, I promise I'll pay you back!" For Hellenes, such a prayer is an oath and places a sacred obligation on the one who so swears. For this reason we find monuments to military victories that consist of votive offerings of weapons—war making prayers in desperation a daily necessity—and healing sanctuaries full of thank-offerings from successfully healed patients. Today, we may promise a special ritual, a new home-shrine, a change of lifestyle, or many other things should our prayers be answered.
So far we have been discussing sacrifices made to the Olympian gods. But there is another type of sacrifice, that offered to chthonic (earthly or underworld) deities, to the heroes, and to the dead. There are a number of signficant differences between the two types of sacrifice, although it should be borne in mind that usage varies enough that these distinctions cannot be considered absolute. The primary differences are as follows:
Ancient Hellenic worship consisted of more than just straightforward sacrifice. In fact, one of its unusual features were the agones, or contests, held in honor of the gods. These might be athletic contests, such as the famous Olympic Games, or dramatic, poetic, or musical contests. It may be difficult for modern people to imagine a sports event as a religious service—although we certainly bring enough fervor to them today!—but this notion was intrinsic to the Hellenic idea of worship.
Today, sadly, our numbers are still too few to revive the agones on a grand scale, but we can integrate the idea into our worship in small ways. Instead of writing and acting full-scale dramas, we can memorize and present a single speech from one of the great dramatists at the City Dionysia. We can tell jokes instead of acting in comedies. [10] In place of extensive torch races, young people can run a short course with a lit candle. Where there are not enough children for a chorus, individuals can sing solo or in small ensembles. Poets may offer their best efforts to the gods. In Hellenism, personal achievement, when dedicated to the glory of the Immortals, is a cause for celebration, and a celebration in itself.
| Event | Horus | Yeshua of Nazareth, a.k.a. Jesus |
| Conception: | By a virgin. There is some doubt about this matter | By a virgin. 8 |
| Father: | Only begotten son of the God Osiris. | Only begotten son of Yehovah (in the form of the Holy Spirit). |
| Mother: | Meri. 9 | Miriam (a.k.a. Mary). |
| Foster father: | Seb, (Jo-Seph). 9 | Joseph. |
| Foster father's ancestry: | Of royal descent. | Of royal descent. |
| Birth location: | In a cave. | In a cave or stable. |
| Annunciation: | By an angel to Isis, his mother. | By an angel to Miriam, his mother. 8 |
| Birth heralded by: | The star Sirius, the morning star. | An unidentified "star in the East." |
| Birth date: | Ancient Egyptians paraded a manger and child representing Horus through the streets at the time of the winter solstice (typically DEC-21). | Celebrated on DEC-25. The date was chosen to occur on the same date as the birth of Mithra, Dionysus and the Sol Invictus (unconquerable Sun), etc. |
| Birth announcement: | By angels. | By angels. 8 |
| Birth witnesses: | Shepherds. | Shepherds. 8 |
| Later witnesses to birth: | Three solar deities. | Three wise men. 8 |
| Death threat during infancy: | Herut tried to have Horus murdered. | Herod tried to have Jesus murdered. |
| Handling the threat: | The God That tells Horus' mother "Come, thou goddess Isis, hide thyself with thy child." | An angel tells Jesus' father to: "Arise and take the young child and his mother and flee into Egypt." |
| Rite of passage ritual: | Horus came of age with a special ritual, when his eye was restored. | Taken by parents to the temple for what is today called a bar mitzvah ritual. |
| Age at the ritual: | 12 | 12 |
| Break in life history: | No data between ages of 12 & 30. | No data between ages of 12 & 30. |
| Baptism location: | In the river Eridanus. | In the river Jordan. |
| Age at baptism: | 30. | 30. |
| Baptized by: | Anup the Baptiser. | John the Baptist. |
| Subsequent fate of the baptiser: | Beheaded. | Beheaded. |
| Temptation: | Taken from the desert of Amenta up a high mountain by his arch-rival Sut. Sut (a.k.a. Set) was a precursor for the Hebrew Satan. | Taken from the desert in Palestine up a high mountain by his arch-rival Satan. |
| Result of temptation: | Horus resists temptation. | Jesus resists temptation. |
| Close followers: | Twelve disciples. There is some doubt about this matter as well. | Twelve disciples. |
| Activities: | Walked on water, cast out demons, healed the sick, restored sight to the blind. He "stilled the sea by his power." | Walked on water, cast out demons, healed the sick, restored sight to the blind. He ordered the sea with a "Peace, be still" command. |
| Raising of the dead: | Horus raised Osirus, his dead father, from the grave. 10 | Jesus raised Lazarus from the grave. |
| Location where the resurrection miracle occurred: | Anu, an Egyptian city where the rites of the death, burial and resurrection of Horus were enacted annually. 10 | Hebrews added their prefix for house ('beth") to "Anu" to produce "Beth-Anu" or the "House of Anu." Since "u" and "y" were interchangeable in antiquity, "Bethanu" became "Bethany," the location mentioned in John 11. |
| Origin of Lazarus' name in the Gospel of John: | | Asar was an alternative name for Osirus, Horus' father, who Horus raised from the dead. He was referred to as "the Asar," as a sign of respect. Translated into Hebrew, this is "El-Asar." The Romans added the prefix "us" to indicate a male name, producing "Elasarus." Over time, the "E" was dropped and "s" became "z," producing "Lazarus." 10 |
| Transfigured: | On a mountain. | On a high mountain. |
| Key address(es): | Sermon on the Mount. | Sermon on the Mount; Sermon on the Plain. |
| Method of death | By crucifixion. | By crucifixion. |
| Accompanied by: | Two thieves. | Two thieves. |
| Burial | In a tomb. | In a tomb. |
| Fate after death: | Descended into Hell; resurrected after three days. | Descended into Hell; resurrected after about 30 to 38 hours (Friday PM to presumably some time in Sunday AM) covering parts of three days. |
| Resurrection announced by: | Women. | Women. |
| Future: | Reign for 1,000 years in the Millennium. | Reign for 1,000 years in the Millennium. |
| Characteristics | Horus | Yeshua of Nazareth, a.k.a. Jesus |
| Nature" | Regarded as a mythical character. | Regarded as a 1st century CE human man-god. |
| Main role: | Savior of humanity. | Savior of humanity. |
| Status: | God-man. | God-man. |
| Common portrayal: | Virgin Isis holding the infant Horus. | Virgin Mary holding the infant Jesus. |
| Title: | KRST, the anointed one. | Christ, the anointed one. |
| Other names: | The good shepherd, the lamb of God, the bread of life, the son of man, the Word, the fisher, the winnower. | The good shepherd, the lamb of God, the bread of life, the son of man, the Word, the fisher, the winnower. |
| Zodiac sign: | Associated with Pisces, the fish. | Associated with Pisces, the fish. |
| Main symbols: | Fish, beetle, the vine, shepherd's crook. | Fish, beetle, the vine, the shepherd's crook. |
| Characteristics | Horus | Yeshua of Nazareth, a.k.a. Jesus | ||||||||||||||||
| Criteria for salvation at the place of judgment: | "I have given bread to the hungry man and water to the thirsty man and clothing to the naked person and a boat to the shipwrecked mariner." 11 | "For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in: Naked, and ye clothed me..." Matthew 25:35-36 (KJV). | ||||||||||||||||
| "I am" statements |
|
(From the Gospel of John) |
Whatever we make of the original myth�Isis seems to have been originally a virgin (or, perhaps, sexless) goddess, and in the later period of Egyptian religion she was again considered a virgin goddess, demanding very strict abstinence from her devotees. It is at this period, apparently, that the birthday of Horus was annually celebrated, about December 25th, in the temples. As both Macrobius and the Christian writer [of the "Paschal Chronicle"] say, a figure of Horus as a baby was laid in a manger, in a scenic reconstruction of a stable, and a statue of Isis was placed beside it. Horus was, in a sense, the Savior of mankind. He was their avenger against the powers of darkness; he was the light of the world. His birth-festival was a real Christmas before Christ. 13,14
Acharya S. mentions a number of other references to Egyptian virgin births in his essay on Horus. 14.
James Frazer's writes in The Golden Bough: 15
The ritual of the nativity, as it appears to have been celebrated in Syria and Egypt, was remarkable. The celebrants retired into certain inner shrines, from which at midnight they issued with a loud cry, "The Virgin has brought forth! The light is waxing!" The Egyptians even represented the new-born sun by the image of an infant which on his birthday, the winter solstice, they brought forth and exhibited to his worshippers. No doubt the Virgin who thus conceived and bore a son on the twenty-fifth of December was the great Oriental goddess whom the Semites called the Heavenly Virgin or simply the Heavenly Goddess." 16
On the other hand, Christian theologian Ward Gasque surveyed twenty contemporary Egyptologists. He asked them about the relationship whether Horus experienced a virgin birth. Ten responded, They all agreed that there is no evidence that Horus was born of a virgin 2
Glenn Miller wrote:
...my research in the academic literature does not surface this fact. I can find references to four "disciples"--variously called the semi-divine HERU-SHEMSU ('Followers of Horus'). I can find references to Sixteen human followers. And I can find reference to an unnumbered group of followers called mesniu/mesnitu ('blacksmiths') who accompanied Horus in some of his battles. ... But I cannot find twelve anywhere." 17
Of course, the early Christian movement might have imported the concept of disciples from Egypt and changed the number so that the number of Jesus' disciples matched the number of the tribes of Israel.
Again, Gasque's survey came up blank on the matter of Horus' disciples as well.
