Erik Hornung (1933–2022)

Erik Hornung is one of the great modern Egyptologists, and this book is probably his most important. However, it’s a fairly dense read, and I would recommend Jan Assmann’s The Search for God in Ancient Egypt, (written around the same time in the early 1980’s), as a more accessible in-depth view into ancient Egyptian thought.

Still, Hornung is clearly expert in his knowledge and applies it with a subtle mind. His primary purpose seems to be to argue against previous generations of show more Egyptologists who thought they saw a monotheistic cognitive framework in ancient Egyptian thought. Hornung’s argument is that, in fact, Egyptian cosmological thinking was polytheistic in its very essence. He believes that it’s easy to misinterpret many Egyptian invocations to gods that, in effect, flatter the god in question by asserting that he’s “the only one.” It’s a little like someone saying to his/her lover “To me, you’re everything.” That’s not a statement you’re meant to take literally, but it can still be true on a different level.

Hornung, however, goes well beyond that particular point. He describes Egyptian thought as pre-logical, a mode of cognition where if something is a, that doesn’t mean that it’s not also b. This, he argues, is a mode of thought that’s virtually unattainable for Western minds brought up on Aristotelian logic. If we could get there, he claims,

we shall be able to comprehend the one and the many as complementary propositions, whose truth values within a many-valued logic are not mutually exclusive, but contribute together to the whole truth: god is a unity in worship and revelation, and multiple in nature and manifestation.

That is, a god can be the only one in the cosmos, and at the same time be one of many. Consequently, Hornung sees monotheism, not as a stage along a continuum from polytheism, but as a “transformation”, accompanying the cognitive revolution to Aristotelian-style logic, a world of binary opposites, where the answer can be “yes” or “no” but not “yes and no.”

Although Assmann states that he disagrees with Hornung’s view of Egyptian polytheistic thought, I see their views as largely compatible. They both discuss the Akhenaten revolution – the short-lived imposition of true monotheistic worship on Egypt – as a hiatus utterly incompatible with the Egyptian worldview. But more than that, I think Hornung’s view of monotheism as a “conceptual transformation” fits in with Assmann’s view of the transition in Egypt’s history towards a kind of “cognitive dissonance”, with a “pantheistic theology of transcendence” which set the stage for later monotheistic thought. Under Assmann’s model, we’re still looking at a complete transformation between polytheism and monotheism - Assmann, in my view, goes further than Hornung by describing the transformative phase of post-Amarna Egyptian cosmology.

The most valuable take-away I get from Hornung is his emphasis on seeing the shift from polytheism to monotheism as a transformative stage in human consciousness. As he says, “Both of these worlds are consistent within their own terms of reference, but neither transcends historical space or can claim absolute validity.” I think this is an important frame of reference, which I elsewhere categorize by stages of the pfc’s advance in its power over human consciousness. In my categorization, there’s another shift from monotheism to scientific method, which has taken place over the past few hundred years. And most importantly, I think our world is ready for the next stage in the development of our global consciousness. show less

I love this book because unlike many other books (and websites for this matter), it is mostly comprised of material about the Book of the Dead and other tomes of the ancient Egyptian pantheon. This is to the point, that in researching for an essay in which I cited this book, online sources were citing this book as well. I appraise it to be a solid text on the subject, and easily accessible in its content.

Quite useful companion guide to the touring museum exhibition of the same name. Lavishly illustrated, and pretty good prose.

Hornung is niet echt geïnteresseerd in de man Echnaton en de mysteries die hem omringen. Waarom stichtte hij een religie en een nieuwe stad? Wat gebeurde er juist met Nefertiti? Wie was Smenchkare, zijn mysterieuze opvolger? Wat is zijn relatie tot Toetanchamon. Die vragen - vele andere - laten Hornung koud. Waar andere archeologen hun theorieën ontwikkelen en verdedigen, de ene al met wat meer vuur dan de andere, haalt hij zijn schouders op: we weten het niet.

Het resultaat is verrassend show more genoeg een dun maar bijzonder helder boek, niet zozeer over de man dus, maar wel over zijn ideeën. Dat levert een veel coherenter verhaal op dan veel andere boeken over de meest fascinerende figuur uit de oude geschiedenis. Zo worden zowel de kracht als de fatale beperkingen van de Atoncultus opeens begrijpelijk. Hornung staat ook stil bij de brede scoop van de hervormingen. Echnatons radicale ideeën over godsdienst mogen hem dan niet overleefd hebben, zijn hervorming op domeinen zoals taal en kunst zijn wel blijven nazinderen en zelfs de religie is nadien niet meer hetzelfde.

Geen historische situering, geen lange uiteenzetting over zijn voorgangers of opvolgers, gewoon, recht naar de essentie. show less