At the height of the ancient Nile civilization, Osiris was regarded as the primary deity of a henotheism. Osiris was not only the merciful judge of the dead in the afterlife, but also the underworld agency that granted all life, including sprouting vegetation and the fertile flooding of the Nile River. Beginning at about B. The origin of Osiris's name is a mystery, which forms an obstacle to knowing the pronunciation of its hieroglyphic form. The majority of current thinking is that the Egyptian name is pronounced aser where the a is the letter ayin i.
Origin of name The name was first recorded in Egyptian hieroglyphs only as ws-ir or os-ir because the Egyptian writing system omitted vowels. It is reconstructed to have been pronounced Us-iri oos-ee-ree meaning 'Throne of the Eye' and survives into the Coptic language as Ousire. Early mythology Father of Anubis Earlier, when the Ennead and Ogdoad cosmogenies became merged, with the identification of Ra as Atum Atum-Ra , gradually Anubis, the god of the underworld in the Ogdoad system, was replaced by Osiris, whose cult had become more significant.
In order to explain this, Anubis was said to have given way to Osiris out of respect, and, as an underworld deity, was subsequently identified as being Osiris' son. Abydos, which had been a strong centre of the cult of Anubis, became a centre of the cult of Osiris.
However, as Isis , Osiris' wife, represented life, in the Ennead, it was considered somewhat inappropriate for her to be the mother of a god associated with death, and so instead, it was usually said that Nephthys, the other of the two female children of Geb and Nut, was his mother.
To explain the apparent infidelity of Osiris, it was said that a sexually frustrated Nephthys had disguised herself as Isis to get more attention from her husband, Set, but did not succeed, although Osiris then mistook her for Isis, and they procreated, resulting in Anubis' birth. Father of Horus Later, when Hathor's identity from the Ogdoad was assimilated into that of Isis, Horus, who had been Isis' husband in the Ogdoad , became considered her son, and thus, since Osiris was Isis' husband in the Ennead , Osiris also became considered Horus' father.
Attempts to explain how Osiris, a god of the dead, could give rise to someone so definitely alive as Horus, lead to the development of the Legend of Osiris and Isis, which became the greatest myth in Egyptian mythology. The myth described Osiris as having been killed by his brother Seth who wanted Osiris' throne. Osiris was subsequently resurrected by Anubis. Osiris and Isis gave birth to Horus. As such, since Horus was born after Osiris' resurrection, Horus became thought of as representing new beginnings.
This combination, Osiris-Horus , was therefore a life-death-rebirth deity, and thus associated with the new harvest each year. Ptah-Seker who resulted from the identification of Ptah as Seker , who was god of re-incarnation, thus gradually became identified with Osiris, the two becoming Ptah-Seker-Osiris rarely known as Ptah-Seker-Atum , although this was just the name, and involved Osiris rather than Atum.
As the sun was thought to spend the night in the underworld, and subsequently be re-incarnated , as both king of the underworld, and god of reincarnation, Ptah-Seker-Osiris was identified as the sun during the night. This aspect of Osiris was referred to as Banebdjed also spelt Banebded or Banebdjedet , which is technically feminine which literally means The ba of the lord of the djed , which roughly means The soul of the lord of the pillar of stability. The djed, a type of pillar, was usually understood as the backbone of Osiris, since the Egyptians had associated death, and the dead, as symbolic of stability.
As Banebdjed, Osiris was given epithets such as Lord of the Sky and Life of the sun god Ra , since Ra, when he had become identified with Atum, was considered Osiris' ancestor, from whom his regal authority was inherited. Ba does not, however, quite mean soul in the western sense, and also has a lot to do with power, reputation, force of character, especially in the case of a god.
Since the ba was associated with power, and also happened to be a word for ram in Egyptian, Banebdjed was depicted as a ram, or as Ram-headed. A living, sacred ram, was even kept at Mendes and worshipped as the incarnation of the god, and upon death, the rams were mummified and buried in a ram-specific necropolis.
Later, when Horus became identified as the child of Osiris in this form Horus is known as Harpocrates in greek and Har-pa-khered in Egyptian , Banebdjed was consequently said to be Horus' father, as Banebdjed is an aspect of Osiris. In occult writings , Banebdjed is often called the goat of Mendes , and identified with Baphomet; the fact that Banebdjed was a ram sheep , not a goat, is apparently overlooked.
Mystery religion The Cult of Osiris The cult of Osiris had a particularly strong interest towards the concept of immortality. According to the myth surrounding the cult, Set Osiris's evil brother fooled Osiris into getting into a coffin, which he then shut, had sealed with lead and threw into the Nile.
Osiris's wife, Isis, searched for his remains until she finally found him embedded in a tree trunk, which was holding up the roof of a palace. She managed to remove the coffin and open it, but Osiris was already dead.
She used a spell she had learned from her father and brought him back to life so he could impregnate her. After they finished, he died again, so she hid his body in the desert. Months later, she gave birth to Horus. Whole words. Toggle Sidebar. Zoom Out. More Information Less Information. Enter the password to open this PDF file:. Cancel OK. File name: -. File size: -. Title: -. Author: -.
Joachim Quack has demonstrated convincingly that the main theme of these compositions is not the union of Re and Osiris. Rather, they are concerned with the beings the solar deity encounters in the underworld and how he interacts with them. The sun god is all-important, and Osiris much less so. The texts never speak of the union of the two divinities. A number of passages that have been interpreted as references to this union are simply references to the sun god.
It has been claimed that the end of this text describes how Osiris leaves the underworld merged with Re in the form of the great god. In fact, this does not happen. Re and Osiris are clearly distinguished throughout the Book of Caverns. The former is said to perform various services for the latter. Osiris is in the following of Re and adores him. At the conclusion of the text, Osiris requests and is given a place in the bark of the sun god, just as the deceased hoped they would be given one.
But his position is clearly that of a dependent. Those who tow the bark acknowledge only Re as their passenger. They make no reference to Osiris or to any composite form involving him and the solar deity. He is very much the dominant figure, the main actor, and features in every scene.
Osiris is important but he is only one of a number of beings that the sun god encounters in the underworld. Osiris continues to exercise his traditional functions in relation to the dead in these texts, but the solar deity seems to act in a supervisory capacity, with Osiris subordinate to him.
It is this emphasis upon the primacy of Re, rather than any new conception of the nightly union between him and Osiris, that characterises the underworld guides and other sources of the New Kingdom. As a result, he is not just the ruler of the underworld and judge of the dead, but a deity on whose continued well-being and daily rejuvenation the entire cosmos is dependent.
Is this concept an innovation of the New Kingdom? We are unable to say, mainly owing to uncertainty over the original date of composition of the underworld guides. What does seem innovatory is the fact that they begin to be inscribed in tombs at this time, and references to the concept start to appear in other sources like the Book of the Dead. So perhaps what is new is that these texts begin to be linked with the deceased more regularly. How do they benefit from the link between Osiris and the sun god?
In the lecture, four benefits were identified. First, the fact that the cosmos continues to function is obviously a precondition for the continuity of the afterlife. Second, the relationship between Re and Osiris provides a model for that between the ba and the body of the deceased. The ba alights upon the body and regenerates it each night just as Re meets with Osiris.
Fourth and finally, knowledge of what happens in the underworld is important. What is beneficial for the deceased is not just that this cycle takes place, but that they know about it as well, since such knowledge is a means of gaining admittance to the entourage of Osiris. But the connection between Osiris and the sun god does not affect the basic relationship between Osiris and the deceased.
What happens instead is that this relationship, like every other aspect of life in the underworld, is placed under the supervision of the sun god. This focused upon the consequences of the establishment of the Ptolemaic dynasty at the end of the fourth century BC. Two questions were investigated : did the change from native Egyptian rule to Greek rule have an impact on Egyptian ideas about the afterlife, and did it have an impact on the way in which the Egyptians conceived of Osiris and his relationship with the deceased?
In connection with the second question, particular attention was devoted to the introduction of a new god, Sarapis, who was sometimes identified with Osiris. Did this influence ideas about Osiris and the dead and, if so, how?
Osiris was still regarded as the ruler of the underworld. The judgement of the dead remained an essential rite of passage. Mummification and its attendant rituals continued to be important for the posthumous well-being of all. Egyptian conceptions of the various aspects in which the dead were supposed to continue their existence in the next world, akh , ba , and ka , stayed the same as well. There was also a significant amount of continuity in terms of the texts used to ensure a happy afterlife for the dead.
Several works composed prior to the beginning of the Ptolemaic Period remained in use. Although a large number of new texts were introduced at this time, many of these were clearly based on earlier models. In terms of how tombs were provisioned to supply the needs of the dead in the next world, there was little change, if any, between the Late Period and the Ptolemaic Period, so much so that it is sometimes difficult or impossible to determine whether a particular burial belongs to the end of the former or the beginning of the latter.
In the sphere of funerary art, some innovations do begin to appear, for example, the dead are sometimes depicted in a more naturalistic way, or with non-Egyptian modes of dress and adornment.
But these do not represent a new way of conceptualising life after death so much as the adoption of new artistic conventions to express an older symbolism. How an individual chose to be portrayed on items of burial equipment or how relatives chose to have that individual portrayed had nothing to do with the nature of his or her hopes and expectations for the next world.
Some have argued that this reflects belief in a closer connection between the god and the deceased than before, which arose under Greek influence. As noted in the first lecture, this designation identifies the deceased as a follower of Osiris in the afterlife. The Osirian form of each individual is unique, just as each individual is unique. It has been argued that this may have been introduced as a result of Hellenistic influence. According to one view, the use of this designation reflected a desire to create a closer relationship between deceased and divinity.
Linking a deceased woman with a goddess rather than a god supposedly made it possible to avoid the barrier that gender imposed between her and the male deity. Another view is that this was done to maintain in the afterlife the gendered role, identity, and body that individuals assumed in Egyptian society. Both continued to be used side by side, in some instances even interchangeably within the same manuscript to refer to the same person.
The real function of the former was to identify the deceased as followers of Hathor, just as the latter identified them as followers of Osiris. One could be a follower or devotee of more than one divinity, which explains why the two statuses were not mutually exclusive.
This deity was sometimes identified with Osiris. Some think that, as a result of this identification, Osiris acquired new attributes and characteristics which had an impact on how his relationship with the deceased was envisaged. In the lecture it was noted that most of the Ptolemaic evidence for the identification of Sarapis with Osiris comes from the middle or late Ptolemaic Period, not the early part.
In fact, the bulk of the evidence actually comes from the Roman Period, and only then do we find for the first time texts that record what the dead wished for or expected from Osiris in this form. We no longer see a passive Osiris, one who needs to be protected from his foes, but an active deity, a king who exerts himself in defence of others. Since Sarapis is himself a royal god, some think this image of Osiris and what he was expected to do for the deceased was influenced by his association with the Greek divinity.
As noted by scholars like Laurent Coulon and Didier Devauchelle, the concept of Osiris as a royal god became increasingly prominent during the first millennium BC, even before the Ptolemaic Period, and there was a growing tendency at this time to portray him not just as the ruler of the underworld but the ruler of this one as well.
Connected with this was an increased tendency to see in Osiris as much a god of the living as of the dead. Thus, it was not so much that in the Ptolemaic Period Osiris was identified with Sarapis and acquired new powers and attributes as a result. It was rather that the new image of Osiris which arose in the first millennium BC, itself building upon earlier ideas, and the powers and roles that were attributed to him as a consequence, facilitated and led to his identification with Sarapis.
To be sure, in fostering the association between Osiris and Sarapis as symbols of kingship, the Ptolemies were exploiting this for political purposes, but as Coulon has pointed out, many earlier rulers of the first millennium did the same. The first was the need to look at all the evidence pertaining to a particular phenomenon. When we fail to do so, we may overlook precedents for what otherwise appears to be an innovation. Far from being an invention of the Ptolemaic Period, it can be traced back as far as the Coffin Texts of the Middle Kingdom.
The second point was that political change does not invariably bring about change in other spheres. As we saw, the imposition of Ptolemaic rule over Egypt does not seem to have resulted in fundamental changes in Egyptian conceptions of the afterlife.
The third point was that we should not think of the Graeco-Roman Period as a cultural unity. There were significant differences between its two halves, not least in the sphere of religion.
Thus it was only in the Roman Period that the popularity of Sarapis reached its peak, even though the cult of the god had been established centuries earlier when the Ptolemies first took control of Egypt. This serves nicely to illustrate the fourth and final point, which is that the ability of the state to influence developments in the religious sphere was limited. Personal names derived from or incorporating that of Sarapis enjoyed their greatest vogue in the second century AD, to judge from the onomastic record.
Fewer people bearing such names are attested from the third century BC than they are from the seventh century AD, when Christianity was the dominant religion in Egypt. From this we may conclude that introducing the cult of Sarapis was one thing ; persuading the populace to venerate him was quite another.
The lecture began with some general remarks on method and approach. It was argued that the end of belief in the Osirian afterlife should be investigated in the context of the end of traditional Egyptian religion as a whole, but we should remember that the two are not identical. Not all features of Egyptian religion came to an end at the same time. Some survived longer than others.
Equally, we should be prepared to separate belief in the Osirian afterlife from belief in Osiris himself. It is possible that the latter could have persisted after the former had died out. In one, the conflict and triumph model, temples and other venues for traditional cultic activity continued in operation until destroyed or turned into churches. In the other, the gradual end model, temples fell out of use over a period of time ; some may have been abandoned and stood empty for a while before Christianity became dominant.
Re-use or destruction was not necessarily motivated by religious feelings. Some temples were converted for secular purposes or exploited as sources of building material. Proponents of the first model rely heavily upon literary sources, most of them later than the period they purport to describe, as evidence to support their view. Proponents of the second model give more weight to contemporary documentary and archaeological evidence.
Thus, in assessing which model is superior, one first needs to establish which type of evidence is more reliable. This was done partly for practical reasons, since there was insufficient time to investigate the phenomenon in every part of Egypt. But it was also done to emphasise the importance of looking closely at local and regional developments. We should not assume that belief in the Osirian afterlife disappeared at the same time in every part of Egypt.
It may have survived longer in some places than in others. Each city or town had its own distinctive local pattern of religious development that could have had a bearing upon this.
The three places selected for investigation in the lecture are all sites from which abundant evidence pertaining to the cult of Osiris has been recovered, and this evidence has been the subject of considerable discussion.
Thus they are well-suited for use as case studies.
0コメント