Der Eine und die Vielen. Ägyptische Gottesvorstellungen by Erik HornungReview by: Dieter MuellerJournal of the American Oriental Society, Vol. 93, No. 3 (Jul. - Sep., 1973), p. 400Published by: American Oriental SocietyStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/599569 .

Accessed: 14/06/2014 23:05

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

American Oriental Society is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal ofthe American Oriental Society.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 195.78.108.60 on Sat, 14 Jun 2014 23:05:25 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Journal of the American Oriental Society 93.3 (1973) Journal of the American Oriental Society 93.3 (1973) Journal of the American Oriental Society 93.3 (1973)

ance long before Akhenaten, and that a similar connection exists between his famous monotheism and the solar henotheism that marks the theological thinking of much of the 18th Dyn.; in this respect, Aldred's conclusions

agree strikingly with those of E. Hornung, whose work on Der Eine und die Vielen (Darmstadt, 1971) appeared too late to be included in the bibliography. W. Westen- dorf's theory that the grotesque features of Akhenaten's colossal statues from Karnak are not symptoms of a

disease, but characterize him as a primeval androgynous deity (Pantheon, 21 [1963], 269-77) would have deserved a brief reference.

DIETER MUELLER UNIVERSITY OF LETHBRIDGE

Der Eine und die Vielen. Agyptische Gottesvorstellungen. By ERIK HORNUNG. Pp. viii + 280, 20 fig. and 5 pl. Darmstadt: WISSENSCHAFTLICHE BUCHGEMEINSCHAFT. 1971. DM 19.80.

If supreme power is an essential quality of God, then the belief in a multitude of gods is irreconcilable with the very nature of divinity. The ostensible contradic-

tion between these two concepts is of particular import in the polytheistic religion of Ancient Egypt, where

attributes like "sole god," "greatest god" or "Lord of

the Universe" are applied, seemingly at random, to a

whole variety of supreme beings. To find a solution to

this apparently unsolvable dilemma is the purpose of

E. Hornung's book. He approaches his subject through a re-examination of the old question what Egyptian gods are. His quest does not end with a definition, but with

a description, i.e., a meticulously assembled collection

of Egyptian statements about God and the gods. The

flexibility of this approach affords him enough latitude

to accept the contradictory nature of the gods of Egypt:

they are eternal, yet have come into being and die; their power is supreme, but not absolute; the Egyptian can appeal to God, yet believe in numerous gods; etc.

These contradictions are not a result of the gradual decline of an originally monotheistic religion (de Rouge); nor do they attest a trend that eventually culminated

in the emergence of truly monotheistic beliefs (Drioton).

Accepting them as integral to Egyptian thinking, E.

Hornung traces their origin to Egyptian ontology, which

conceived of the universe as an orderly world surrounded

by primeval chaos. The chaos, or state of complete non-

existence, is absolute, inasmuch as it is infinite and

marked by a total lack of differentiation. Creation is

an act of separation that brings a temporary order into

a limited area within the chaos: the creator-god "begins existence" when he "comes into being" and creates the

ance long before Akhenaten, and that a similar connection exists between his famous monotheism and the solar henotheism that marks the theological thinking of much of the 18th Dyn.; in this respect, Aldred's conclusions

agree strikingly with those of E. Hornung, whose work on Der Eine und die Vielen (Darmstadt, 1971) appeared too late to be included in the bibliography. W. Westen- dorf's theory that the grotesque features of Akhenaten's colossal statues from Karnak are not symptoms of a

disease, but characterize him as a primeval androgynous deity (Pantheon, 21 [1963], 269-77) would have deserved a brief reference.

DIETER MUELLER UNIVERSITY OF LETHBRIDGE

Der Eine und die Vielen. Agyptische Gottesvorstellungen. By ERIK HORNUNG. Pp. viii + 280, 20 fig. and 5 pl. Darmstadt: WISSENSCHAFTLICHE BUCHGEMEINSCHAFT. 1971. DM 19.80.

If supreme power is an essential quality of God, then the belief in a multitude of gods is irreconcilable with the very nature of divinity. The ostensible contradic-

tion between these two concepts is of particular import in the polytheistic religion of Ancient Egypt, where

attributes like "sole god," "greatest god" or "Lord of

the Universe" are applied, seemingly at random, to a

whole variety of supreme beings. To find a solution to

this apparently unsolvable dilemma is the purpose of

E. Hornung's book. He approaches his subject through a re-examination of the old question what Egyptian gods are. His quest does not end with a definition, but with

a description, i.e., a meticulously assembled collection

of Egyptian statements about God and the gods. The

flexibility of this approach affords him enough latitude

to accept the contradictory nature of the gods of Egypt:

they are eternal, yet have come into being and die; their power is supreme, but not absolute; the Egyptian can appeal to God, yet believe in numerous gods; etc.

These contradictions are not a result of the gradual decline of an originally monotheistic religion (de Rouge); nor do they attest a trend that eventually culminated

in the emergence of truly monotheistic beliefs (Drioton).

Accepting them as integral to Egyptian thinking, E.

Hornung traces their origin to Egyptian ontology, which

conceived of the universe as an orderly world surrounded

by primeval chaos. The chaos, or state of complete non-

existence, is absolute, inasmuch as it is infinite and

marked by a total lack of differentiation. Creation is

an act of separation that brings a temporary order into

a limited area within the chaos: the creator-god "begins existence" when he "comes into being" and creates the

ance long before Akhenaten, and that a similar connection exists between his famous monotheism and the solar henotheism that marks the theological thinking of much of the 18th Dyn.; in this respect, Aldred's conclusions

agree strikingly with those of E. Hornung, whose work on Der Eine und die Vielen (Darmstadt, 1971) appeared too late to be included in the bibliography. W. Westen- dorf's theory that the grotesque features of Akhenaten's colossal statues from Karnak are not symptoms of a

disease, but characterize him as a primeval androgynous deity (Pantheon, 21 [1963], 269-77) would have deserved a brief reference.

DIETER MUELLER UNIVERSITY OF LETHBRIDGE

Der Eine und die Vielen. Agyptische Gottesvorstellungen. By ERIK HORNUNG. Pp. viii + 280, 20 fig. and 5 pl. Darmstadt: WISSENSCHAFTLICHE BUCHGEMEINSCHAFT. 1971. DM 19.80.

If supreme power is an essential quality of God, then the belief in a multitude of gods is irreconcilable with the very nature of divinity. The ostensible contradic-

tion between these two concepts is of particular import in the polytheistic religion of Ancient Egypt, where

attributes like "sole god," "greatest god" or "Lord of

the Universe" are applied, seemingly at random, to a

whole variety of supreme beings. To find a solution to

this apparently unsolvable dilemma is the purpose of

E. Hornung's book. He approaches his subject through a re-examination of the old question what Egyptian gods are. His quest does not end with a definition, but with

a description, i.e., a meticulously assembled collection

of Egyptian statements about God and the gods. The

flexibility of this approach affords him enough latitude

to accept the contradictory nature of the gods of Egypt:

they are eternal, yet have come into being and die; their power is supreme, but not absolute; the Egyptian can appeal to God, yet believe in numerous gods; etc.

These contradictions are not a result of the gradual decline of an originally monotheistic religion (de Rouge); nor do they attest a trend that eventually culminated

in the emergence of truly monotheistic beliefs (Drioton).

Accepting them as integral to Egyptian thinking, E.

Hornung traces their origin to Egyptian ontology, which

conceived of the universe as an orderly world surrounded

by primeval chaos. The chaos, or state of complete non-

existence, is absolute, inasmuch as it is infinite and

marked by a total lack of differentiation. Creation is

an act of separation that brings a temporary order into

a limited area within the chaos: the creator-god "begins existence" when he "comes into being" and creates the

dimensions of time and space, the other gods and thus the world by "making himself into millions." At the end of time, when he makes himself into one again, all dif- ferentiation will disappear, and the world will sink back into the absolute "non-existence" from which it had come. The Egyptian gods are therefore supreme, inas- much as they rule the entire world in eternity; but they are not absolute, because neither world nor eternity are infinite. By the same logic, an Egyptian can invoke God as supreme manifestation of the divine, yet reject monotheism: where differentiation into separate entities is considered the very essence of existence, the repudia- tion of polytheism would be tantamount to a denial of God's reality. Only Akhenaten attempted to break with these principles by introducing a genuine mono- theism, and the eventual failure of his revolution shows how much his new concepts ran counter to traditional

Egyptian thinking. It is hardly possible to overestimate the significance

of E. Hornung's contribution. He who can overlook the odd inappropriate comparison (magic as the "atomic

energy of early mankind" p. 205) and some moralizing overtones not only finds himself rewarded with an ex-

ceptionally rich collection of material and innumerable

stimulating observations; he is also confronted with a

radically new approach to the intricacies of pre-Greek thinking. A reviewer should beware of superlatives; still, this is probably the most important book on Egyp- tian religion that has appeared in the last twenty-five years.

DIETER MUELLER UNIVERSITY OF LETHBRIDGE

The Akkadian of Alalah. By GEORGE GIACUMAKIS.

(Janua Linguarum: Studia Memoriae Nicolai van

Wijk Dedicata, edenda curat C. H. van Schooneveld, Indiana University, Series Practica 59.) Pp. 119. The Hague and Paris: MOUTON. 1970. Fl. 32.-

This reviewer was extremely disappointed with Prof. Giacumakis' book inasmuch as the skimpy discussions of the Akkadian dialect as written in Alalakh in two distinct historical periods (represented by levels VII, Old Babylonian, and IV, Middle Babylonian) are not

only replete with errors, but also neglect many syntactical points that should have been included in any proper discussion of the Alalakh brand of peripheral Akkadian.

One other reviewer has already noted carefully many of the inaccuracies found throughout the book (Review of M. Tsevat, JBL 90 [1971], 350-352). To catalogue additional mistakes and omissions here would amount to re-writing the book, a task that someone should

dimensions of time and space, the other gods and thus the world by "making himself into millions." At the end of time, when he makes himself into one again, all dif- ferentiation will disappear, and the world will sink back into the absolute "non-existence" from which it had come. The Egyptian gods are therefore supreme, inas- much as they rule the entire world in eternity; but they are not absolute, because neither world nor eternity are infinite. By the same logic, an Egyptian can invoke God as supreme manifestation of the divine, yet reject monotheism: where differentiation into separate entities is considered the very essence of existence, the repudia- tion of polytheism would be tantamount to a denial of God's reality. Only Akhenaten attempted to break with these principles by introducing a genuine mono- theism, and the eventual failure of his revolution shows how much his new concepts ran counter to traditional

Egyptian thinking. It is hardly possible to overestimate the significance

of E. Hornung's contribution. He who can overlook the odd inappropriate comparison (magic as the "atomic

energy of early mankind" p. 205) and some moralizing overtones not only finds himself rewarded with an ex-

ceptionally rich collection of material and innumerable

stimulating observations; he is also confronted with a

radically new approach to the intricacies of pre-Greek thinking. A reviewer should beware of superlatives; still, this is probably the most important book on Egyp- tian religion that has appeared in the last twenty-five years.

DIETER MUELLER UNIVERSITY OF LETHBRIDGE

The Akkadian of Alalah. By GEORGE GIACUMAKIS.

(Janua Linguarum: Studia Memoriae Nicolai van

Wijk Dedicata, edenda curat C. H. van Schooneveld, Indiana University, Series Practica 59.) Pp. 119. The Hague and Paris: MOUTON. 1970. Fl. 32.-

This reviewer was extremely disappointed with Prof. Giacumakis' book inasmuch as the skimpy discussions of the Akkadian dialect as written in Alalakh in two distinct historical periods (represented by levels VII, Old Babylonian, and IV, Middle Babylonian) are not

only replete with errors, but also neglect many syntactical points that should have been included in any proper discussion of the Alalakh brand of peripheral Akkadian.

One other reviewer has already noted carefully many of the inaccuracies found throughout the book (Review of M. Tsevat, JBL 90 [1971], 350-352). To catalogue additional mistakes and omissions here would amount to re-writing the book, a task that someone should

dimensions of time and space, the other gods and thus the world by "making himself into millions." At the end of time, when he makes himself into one again, all dif- ferentiation will disappear, and the world will sink back into the absolute "non-existence" from which it had come. The Egyptian gods are therefore supreme, inas- much as they rule the entire world in eternity; but they are not absolute, because neither world nor eternity are infinite. By the same logic, an Egyptian can invoke God as supreme manifestation of the divine, yet reject monotheism: where differentiation into separate entities is considered the very essence of existence, the repudia- tion of polytheism would be tantamount to a denial of God's reality. Only Akhenaten attempted to break with these principles by introducing a genuine mono- theism, and the eventual failure of his revolution shows how much his new concepts ran counter to traditional

Egyptian thinking. It is hardly possible to overestimate the significance

of E. Hornung's contribution. He who can overlook the odd inappropriate comparison (magic as the "atomic

energy of early mankind" p. 205) and some moralizing overtones not only finds himself rewarded with an ex-

ceptionally rich collection of material and innumerable

stimulating observations; he is also confronted with a

radically new approach to the intricacies of pre-Greek thinking. A reviewer should beware of superlatives; still, this is probably the most important book on Egyp- tian religion that has appeared in the last twenty-five years.

DIETER MUELLER UNIVERSITY OF LETHBRIDGE

The Akkadian of Alalah. By GEORGE GIACUMAKIS.

(Janua Linguarum: Studia Memoriae Nicolai van

Wijk Dedicata, edenda curat C. H. van Schooneveld, Indiana University, Series Practica 59.) Pp. 119. The Hague and Paris: MOUTON. 1970. Fl. 32.-

This reviewer was extremely disappointed with Prof. Giacumakis' book inasmuch as the skimpy discussions of the Akkadian dialect as written in Alalakh in two distinct historical periods (represented by levels VII, Old Babylonian, and IV, Middle Babylonian) are not

only replete with errors, but also neglect many syntactical points that should have been included in any proper discussion of the Alalakh brand of peripheral Akkadian.

One other reviewer has already noted carefully many of the inaccuracies found throughout the book (Review of M. Tsevat, JBL 90 [1971], 350-352). To catalogue additional mistakes and omissions here would amount to re-writing the book, a task that someone should

400 400 400

This content downloaded from 195.78.108.60 on Sat, 14 Jun 2014 23:05:25 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions