Preface.
Part I. The Religion Of Ancient Egypt.
Part II. The Religion Of The Babylonians.
Preface.
The
subject of the following Lectures was “The Conception of the Divine
among the ancient Egyptians and Babylonians,” and in writing them I
have kept this aspect of them constantly in view. The time has not
yet come for a systematic history of Babylonian religion, whatever
may be the case as regards ancient Egypt, and, for reasons stated in
the text, we must be content with general principles and fragmentary
details.It
is on this account that so little advance has been made in grasping
the real nature and characteristics of Babylonian religion, and that
a sort of natural history description of it has been supposed to be
all that is needed by the student of religion. While reading over
again my Hibbert Lectures, as well as later works on the subject, I
have been gratified at finding how largely they have borrowed from
me, even though it be without acknowledgment. But my Hibbert Lectures
were necessarily a pioneering work, and we must now attempt to build
on the materials which were there brought together. In the present
volume, therefore, the materials are presupposed; they will be found
for the most part either in my Hibbert Lectures or in the cuneiform
texts which have since been published.We
are better off, fortunately, as regards the religion of ancient
Egypt. Thanks more especially to Professor Maspero's unrivalled
combination of learning and genius, we are beginning to learn
what the old Egyptian faith actually was, and what were the
foundations on which it rested. The development of its dogmas can be
traced, at all events to a certain extent, and we can even watch the
progress of their decay.There
are two facts which, I am bound to add, have been forced upon me by a
study of the old religions of civilised humanity. On the one hand,
they testify to the continuity of religious thought. God's light
lighteth every man that cometh into the world, and the religions of
Egypt and Babylonia illustrate the words of the evangelist. They
form, as it were, the background and preparation for Judaism and
Christianity; Christianity is the fulfilment, not of the Law only,
but of all that was truest and best in the religions of the ancient
world. In it the beliefs and aspirations of Egypt and Babylonia have
found their explanation and fulfilment. But, on the other hand,
between Judaism and the coarsely polytheistic religion of Babylonia,
as also between Christianity and the old Egyptian faith,—in spite
of its high morality and spiritual insight,—there lies an
impassable gulf. And for the existence of this gulf I can find only
one explanation, unfashionable and antiquated though it be. In the
language of a former generation, it marks the dividing-line between
revelation and unrevealed religion. It is like that “something,”
hard to define, yet impossible to deny, which separates man from the
ape, even though on the physiological side the ape may be the
ancestor of the man.
Part I. The Religion Of Ancient Egypt.
Lecture
I. Introduction.It
was with a considerable amount of diffidence that I accepted the
invitation to deliver a course of lectures before this University, in
accordance with the terms of Lord Gifford's bequest. Not only is the
subject of them a wide and comprehensive one; it is one, moreover,
which is full of difficulties. The materials upon which the lectures
must be based are almost entirely monumental: they consist of
sculptures and paintings, of objects buried with the dead or found
among the ruins of temples, and, above all, of texts written in
languages and characters which only a century ago were absolutely
unknown. How fragmentary and mutilated such materials must be, I need
hardly point out. The Egyptian or Babylonian texts we possess at
present are but a tithe of those which once existed, or even of those
which will yet be discovered. Indeed, so far as the Babylonian texts
are concerned, a considerable proportion of those which [pg 002] have
already been stored in the museums of Europe and America are still
undeciphered, and the work of thoroughly examining them will be the
labour of years. And of those which have been copied and translated,
the imperfections are great. Not infrequently a text is broken just
where it seemed about to throw light on some problem of religion or
history, or where a few more words were needed in order to explain
the sense. Or again, only a single document may have survived to us
out of a long series, like a single chapter out of a book, leading us
to form a wholly wrong idea of the author's meaning and the object of
the work he had written or compiled. We all know how dangerous it is
to explain a passage apart from its context, and to what erroneous
conclusions such a practice is likely to lead.And
yet it is with such broken and precarious materials that the student
of the religions of the past has to work. Classical antiquity can
give us but little help. In the literary age of Greece and Rome the
ancient religions of Babylonia and Egypt had passed into their
dotage, and the conceptions on which they were founded had been
transformed or forgotten. What was left of them was little more than
an empty and unintelligible husk, or even a mere caricature. The
gods, in whose name the kings of Assyria had gone forth to conquer,
and in whose honour Nebuchadrezzar had reared the temples and palaces
of Babylon, had degenerated into the patrons of a system of magic;
the priests, who had once made and unmade the lords of the East, had
become “Chaldæan” fortune-tellers, and the religion and science
of Babylonia were remembered only for their connection with
astrology. The old tradition had survived in Egypt with less apparent
alteration, but even there the continuity of religious belief and
teaching was more apparent than real, external rather than internal;
and though the [pg 003] Ptolemies and early Roman emperors rebuilt
the temples on the old lines, and allowed themselves to be depicted
in the dress of the Pharaohs, making offerings to gods whose very
names they could not have pronounced, it was all felt to be but a
sham, a dressing up, as it were, in the clothes of a religion out of
which all the spirit and life had fled.Both
in Egypt and in Babylonia, therefore, we are thrown back upon the
monumental texts which the excavator has recovered from the soil, and
the decipherer has pieced together with infinite labour and patience.
At every step we are brought face to face with the imperfections of
the record, and made aware how much we have to read into the story,
how scanty is the evidence, how disconnected are the facts. The
conclusions we form must to a large extent be theoretical and
provisional, liable to be revised and modified with the acquisition
of fresh material or a more skilful combination of what is already
known. We are compelled to interpret the past in the light of the
present, to judge the men of old by the men of to-day, and to explain
their beliefs in accordance with what seem to us the common and
natural opinions of civilised humanity.I
need not point out how precarious all such attempts must necessarily
be. There is nothing harder than to determine the real character of
the religion of a people, even when the religion is still living. We
may describe its outward characteristics, though even these are not
unfrequently a matter of dispute; but the religious ideas themselves,
which constitute its essence, are far more difficult to grasp and
define. Indeed, it is not always easy for the individual himself to
state with philosophical or scientific precision the religious
beliefs which he may hold. Difficult as it is to know what another
man believes, it is sometimes quite as difficult to know exactly [pg
004] what one believes one's self. Our religious ideas and beliefs
are a heritage which has come to us from the past, but which has also
been influenced and modified by the experiences we have undergone, by
the education we have received, and, above all, by the knowledge and
tendencies of our age. We seldom attempt to reduce them into a
harmonious whole, to reconcile their inconsistencies, or to fit them
into a consistent system. Beliefs which go back, it may be, to the
ages of barbarism, exist with but little change by the side of others
which are derived from the latest revelations of physical science;
and our conceptions of a spiritual world are not unfrequently an
ill-assorted mixture of survivals from a time when the universe was
but a small tract of the earth's surface, with an extinguisher-like
firmament above it, and of the ideas which astronomy has given us of
illimitable space, with its millions of worlds.If
it is difficult to understand and describe with accuracy the
religions which are living in our midst, how much more difficult must
it be to understand and describe the religions that have gone before
them, even when the materials for doing so are at hand! We are
constantly told that the past history of the particular forms of
religion which we profess, has been misunderstood and misconceived;
that it is only now, for example, that the true history of early
Christianity is being discovered and written, or that the motives and
principles underlying the Reformation are being rightly understood.
The earlier phases in the history of a religion soon become
unintelligible to a later generation. If we would understand them, we
must have not only the materials in which the record of them has
been, as it were, embodied, but also the seeing eye and the
sympathetic mind which will enable us to throw ourselves back into
the past, to see the world as our forefathers saw it, and to share
for a time [pg 005] in their beliefs. Then and then only shall we be
able to realise what the religion of former generations actually
meant, what was its inner essence as well as its outer form.
“
“
“
“
“
“
“
“
“
“
“
“
“
“
“
“
“
“
“
“
“
“
“
“
“
“
“
“
“
“
“
“