Some Remarks on the Ritual of “Striking the Ball”

8/12/2019 Some Remarks on the Ritual of “Striking the Ball”

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/some-remarks-on-the-ritual-of-striking-the-ball 1/20

KÖNIGTUM, STAAT UND GESELLSCHAFT

FRÜHER HOCHKULTUREN

3.1

6. ÄGYPTOLOGISCHE TEMPELTAGUNG

Leiden, 4.–7. September 2002

Funktion und Gebrauch

altägyptischer Tempelräume

Herausgegeben von

Ben Haring und Andrea Klug

Harrassowitz-Verlag



KÖNIGTUM, STAAT UND GESELLSCHAFT

FRÜHER HOCHKULTUREN

3.1

Herausgegeben von

Rolf Gundlach, Detlev Kreikenbom

und Mechthild Schade-Busch

2007

Harrassowitz-Verlag · Wiesbaden



6. ÄGYPTOLOGISCHE TEMPELTAGUNG

Leiden, 4.–7. September 2002

Funktion und Gebrauch

altägyptischer Tempelräume

Herausgegeben von

Ben Haring und Andrea Klug

2007

Harrassowitz-Verlag · Wiesbaden





Inhalt

Preface ....................................................... ............................................................... ...... VII

Joanna Aksamit

Room C in the temple of Tuthmosis III at Deir el-Bahari .............................................. 1

Petra Andrássy

Der Löwentempel von Musawwarat es Sufra –Zu Funktion und Raumstruktur eines meroitischen „Einraumtempels“................... ....... 11

Hans-Georg Bartel

„Ich bin dieser große Phönix.“Zu den Inschriften in den Kapellen des Memorialtempels Sethos’ I. in Abydos(Über den „Spruch beim Fortziehen der Riegel“in Sanktuaren des Tempels Sethos’ I. in Abydos, Teil II)................... ............................ 35

Edith Bernhauer

Die Hathorkapitelle von Bubastis...................................... .............................................. 53

Monika Doliń

skaTemples at Deir el-Bahari in the New Kingdom........................................................... .. 67

Dieter Eigner

Design, Space and Function:The Old Kingdom Temple of Tell Ibrahim Awad.................. ......................................... 83

Ulrike Fauerbach

Architektur, Licht und Schatten.Pylon und Hof von Edfu als Sonnenkalender?............ .................................................... 105

Jochen Hallof

Der Tempel von Esna – ein Tempel für zwei Götter....................................................... 119

Dieter Kessler

Die Tempel von Tuna el-Gebel .................................................................. ..................... 131

Panagiotis I.M. Kousoulis

Some remarks on the ritual of “striking the ball”in the liturgical environment of the Ptolemaic temples ................................................... 153



InhaltVI

Alexandra von LievenBemerkungen zum Dekorationsprogramm des Osireion in Abydos............................... 167

Benoît Lurson

Des relations spatiales dans la conception du décor des templesde l’époque pharaonique................................... .............................................................. 187

René Preys

Espaces de circulation et portes d’accès:architecture et décoration du temple........... .................................................................... 205

Joachim Friedrich Quack

Die Götterliste des Buches vom Tempelund die überregionalen Dekorationsprogramme.......................................................... ... 213

Akiko Sugi

Iconography and usage of an anx-vessel in New Kingdom temple ritual ....................... 237

Alexandra Verbovsek

Befund oder Spekulation?Der Standort privater Statuen in Tempeln des Alten und Mittleren Reiches.................. 257

Harco Willems

Die Theologie der Innenräume des Schenhurtempels..................................................... 277

Index

Sachindex ...................................................... ........................................................... ..... 291Gottheiten und verwandte Begriffe ......................................... ...................................... 297Könige, Königinnen, Kaiser .............................................................. ............................ 298Toponyme und Völker .................................................. ................................................. 299Museen und Sammlungen ............................................................................................. 300Ägyptische Wörter .............................................................. ........................................... 300



Some remarks on the ritual of “striking the ball”

in the liturgical environment of the Ptolemaic temples1

Panagiotis I.M. Kousoulis

1 Introduction

The ritual of “striking the ball” (sor HmA)2 appeared initially on the walls of the New King-dom temples at Deir el-Bahari3 and Luxor,4 and it has been recorded more explicitly in theLate Period temples of Edfu,5 Dendera6 and Philae.7 The basic motif is essentially the same

1 This paper is a revised version of my presentation at the 6th “Ägyptologische Tempeltagung” (LeidenUniversity, 4–7 September 2002) and falls within the scope of an extended monograph on Apophis andhis ritual execution in preparation. I would like to thank the organisers of the Symposium, Dr. B.J.J.Haring and Dr. A. Egberts, for their warm hospitality and the successful outcome of the Symposium. Iam most grateful to Dr. C.J. Eyre (University of Liverpool) and Dr. P. Wilson (University of Durham)for valuable suggestions on preliminary drafts of this paper.

2 LÄ I, 608–609, s.v. Schlagen des Balles. The basic study on the sor HmA ritual still remains the article by J.F. BORGHOUTS, The Evil Eye of Apopis, in: JEA 59, 1973, 114–150, who presents a translation ofall the passages and a brief discussion of their context; for an opinion supportive of the sporting ratherthan the apotropaic/ritual character of the rite see C. DE VRIES, A ritual-Ball Game, in: Fs Wilson, 25– 35; brief references can also be found in P. DERCHAIN, Le sacrifice de l’oryx, Brussels 1962, 28; F.DAUMAS, Dendera et le temple d’Hathor, Cairo 1969, 76 and 78; S. CAUVILLE, Essai sur la Théologiedu Temple d’Horus à Edfou 1, Cairo 1987, 79 and 173. The rite is also presented in W. D ECKER ,Sports and Games of Ancient Egypt, transl. by A. GUTTMANN, Cairo 1993, 111–116; W. DECKER /M.HERB, Bildatlas zum Sport im Alten Ägypten 1, Leiden 1994, 132–137; the sor HmA scenes at the exte-rior of the naos at Edfu have also been studies by B. W ATTERSON in her unpublished Ph.D. thesis “Anancestral ritual from Edfu Temple: an investigation of inscriptions on the Naos exterior”, Liverpool1976, 380–383.

3 Shrine of Hathor, Hall, eastern wall (right of the entrance) = Deir el-Bahari IV, 4 and pl. c; PM II, 351,(38).

4 Birth Room (room no XIII), north wall, second register (fourth scene); Chapel of Mut (room no. II),west wall, second register; Chapel of Mut (room no. II), east wall, second register. See GAYET, Templede Louxor, pl. 68 (no. 74), fig. 213; PM II, 327 (153); PM II, 319 (111); Wb III, 93/12 and Wb, Be-legst. III, 26; see J.F. BORGHOUTS, in: JEA 59, 1973, 123; quoted in Wb III, 93/12 and partly in Wb,Belegst. as a variant of the former; see BORGHOUTS, op.cit., 125.

5 Five examples are known: a. exterior of the sanctuary, west wall, b. interior of the Library, north wall,first register, c. exterior of the Naos, west wall, fourth register, d. exterior of the Naos, east wall, fourthregister and e. interior of the eastern enclosure wall, third register.

6 Eight examples are known: 1. eastern wall of the Court room XII, second register, 2. eastern wall of thechamber B, eastern crypt no. 2, 3. eastern wall of the chamber C, eastern crypt no. 2, 4. Room F, west





Some remarks on the ritual of “striking the ball” 155

denoting thus the total destruction of the enemy.12 So, the caption above the priests could betranslated as follows: “Being destroyed by the priest, after he has stricken them (sw , i.e. the balls)”. More than one ball was actually used in the rite.13

The appearance of the two priests, however, need not be of primary importance for ex- plaining the character of the rite prior to the Late Period. Their presence is confined only inthe scene from Deir el-Bahari, and their role is secondary compared to the main action ofthe striking of the ball by the king. It does however play a partial role in defining and justifying the material of the ball, as will be shown later in this paper. The revealing of thetrue motives behind the ritual action of the striking of the ball can only be achieved if theritual is examined as a performative unity throughout the different chronological periods, besides the minor differentiation that exists in each one of them. Such an examinationshould be based on the analysis of the wordings of the ritual texts, seeking a common ritual

pattern that defines the nature and supports the contextual continuity of the reliefs. More-over, the performative identity of the ritual within the cultic environment of the temple precinct, as well as the possible overlap with other ritual ceremonies that make use of simi-lar formulae and techniques – use of ball and stick – and convey related apotropaic attrib-utes should also be considered.

2 Material of the ball

Clear reference to the material of the ball does not occur anywhere in the texts. Its defini-

tion, however, is quite important for revealing the semantics of the rite. De Vries supports a ball made from clay, while Borghouts believes that the ball was made from wood for twomain reasons. The first is related to his interpretation assigned to the appearance and func-tion of the two prophets, discussed above. A certain repetition of action that could not befulfilled if the ball was made from clay, because of the vulnerable nature of this specificmaterial: it would presumably shatter when hit. His second argument derives from the read-

ing of the term HmA. Taking into consideration the plant determinative of the word ( or ), Borghouts associates the HmA-ball with the Hm or Hmm-plant, as the latter appears on afragmentary spell from Papyrus Leiden I 348. In that spell the Hmm-plant is identified as the place where Seth hid the eye of Horus after their fight. The Hmm-plant could be, thus,equated with the dnw or Tnw -plant attested in the funerary texts.14 Therefore, the former

12 Compare, for example, Edfou VI, 64/7: “to taking away the breath of the enemy”; “you (scil. divinefalcon) have torn out (xnp; lit. taken away) the hearts of your enemies (royw.k )” (VI, 270/11–12); xnp equally applies to names and characteristics of gods or protective genii at Edfu: one of the names ofSakhmet is xnp.n.s HAtyw.sn “she who has torn out their hearts” (VI, 266/7); the name of a protectivegeni is he “who seizes the body (in fighting) he kills the foe with his knife” (VI, 330/4; translation afterP. WILSON, A Ptolemaic Lexikon. A Lexicographical Study of the Texts in the Temple of Edfu, Leu-ven 1997, 732).

13 That is also clear from the extra balls in the priests’ hands at the Deir el-Bahari relief.14 See, for example, Pyr. 133a and 695a and Book of the Dead, spell 174.



Panagiotis I.M. Kousoulis156

could acquire hostile “Sethian” characteristics and, thus, it could have been used as the basic constructive material for the ball, symbolising the eye of Apophis, assimilated in theLater Period texts with Seth.

A ball made from wood cannot be sustained, however, if one takes into considerationthe verbalistic formula used in the sor-HmA texts to describe the royal activity. The term sor ‘strike, hit’ conveys a destructive meaning since its first attestation in the Pyramid Texts.The object of destruction could be either an enemy’s head or a ball. This basic meaningcarries on to the Late Period and it is often used in Edfu to denote the ceremonially strikingof foes by the king.15

3 Balls and vessels as apotropaic objects

Clay was quite prevalent prime material for the making of inscribed or non-inscribed an-thropomorphic figurines, vessels or balls used as substitutes in execration rituals.16 This can be explicitly related to the activities of the creator god Khnum, as he fashioned mankind ona potter’s wheel.17 The magical properties of clay are best emphasised in a cursing spelldating from the Ramesside period, which identifies an enemy as a lump of clay, malleableand helpless in the hand of the magician.18 The apotropaic power of clay objects was en-hanced by recitations and it was released during the ritual procedure through the techniquesof “breaking” or “burying underground.”19

15 The relevant references are to be found in execration texts or offerings of meat portions symbolisingthe enemies, representing the destruction and butchery of the enemies. See, for example, Edfou VI,142/13; IV, 30/6; Edfou II, 74/14; Edfou VI, 112/4; Edfou V, 53/7; Edfou VII, 62/10; 201/5–6; compare, also, the term sor-anx, which indicates the prisoner brought for ceremonial execution, lit. “Theone who is for striking – alive” (Wb IV, 307/12–19); A.R. S CHULMANN, Ceremonial Execution andPublic Rewards, Göttingen 1988, 8 ff.; cf. P. WILSON, A Ptolemaic Lexikon, 939–940.

16 The bibliography behind the construction, function, symbolism, and magical attributes of the clayapotropaic figurines throughout the Egyptian magico-religious tradition is plentiful; for a more recentdiscussion see P. ESCHWEILER , Bildzauber im Alten Ägypten. Die Verwendung von Bildern undGegenständen in magischen Handlungen nach den Texten des Mittleren und Neuen Reiches, Göttingen1994, 89 ff.; R.K. R ITNER , The Mechanics of Ancient Egyptian Magical Practices, Chicago 1993, 136–

42; Y. K OENIG

, Magie et Magicians dans l’Égypte Ancienne, Paris 1994, Chapter 4; S. QUIRKE

, Fig-ures of clay: toys or ritual objects?, in: IDEM, Lahun Studies, Surrey 1998, 141–151.17 This tradition is described very clearly in the temple of Esna: Esna III, no. 250/6–21 (text); V, 94–107;

cf. also M. LICHTHEIM, Ancient Egyptian Literature III, Berkeley 1980, 111–115.18 See A.W. SHORTER , A magical ostracon, in: JEA 22, 1936, 165; cf. R.K. R ITNER , The Mechanics,

138–139, n. 614.19 For breaking see references in n. 72 below; for “burial” as execration formula in general, see R.K.

R ITNER , The Mechanics, 172–178; S. SCHOTT, Totenbuchspruch 175 in einem Ritual zur Vernichtungvon Feinden, in: MDAIK 14, 1956, 181–89; IDEM, Drei Sprüche gegen Feinde, in: ZÄS 65, 1930, 41;for the use of this technique in the Apophis ritual see pBremner-Rhind, cols. 28/16–18 and 29/14.




Clay vessels were ceremonially broken during the sD dSrw (“breaking of the red vases”)execration rite since the Old Kingdom.20 The pots were usually small and they were carried by the Xryw dSrw (“bearers of the red pots”) during the ritual, and broken at its termina-tion.21 The breaking of the pots was obtained by the use of a mortar and pestle. 22 The ritewas fully adapted within the ceremonial framework of burial practices and mortuaryliturgies inscribed on the walls of the Old Kingdom tombs and in the frieze of purificationutensils on Middle Kingdom coffins.23 It was closely associated with the funerary offeringmeal,24 and formed part of rituals such as the “reversion of divine offerings,” “pouring coolwater” and “burning incense.”25 From the New Kingdom onwards, the funerary applicationof the “breaking of the red vessels” ritual was combined with its first annexation into thedivine liturgy.26 The king breaks the vessels by dashing them against each other, withoutusing any kind of pestle, as in the Old Kingdom version of the rite. A third technique im-

plied the throwing of the two objects on the ground.27

The archaic application of the ritual carried on well into the Late Period. dSrt -vesselsare mentioned in the inscriptions on the walls of the Ptolemaic temples as being carried in purification ceremonies.28 The basic formula reads: “going round four times ( pXr HA sp-4)

20 Pyr. § 249b (spell 244). The most recent discussion on this rite can be found in R.K. R ITNER , TheMechanics, 144–147 with additional references; also J. ASSMANN, Spruch 23 der Pyramidentexte unddie Ächtung der Feinde Pharaos, in: C. BERGER /G. CLERC/N. GRIMAL (eds.), Hommages à Jean Le-clant I, Cairo 1994, 45–59; for a general overview of the ritual see LÄ VI, 1389–1396, s.v. Zerbrechender roten Töpfe.

21 See A. GARDINER , A unique funerary liturgy, in: JEA 41, 1955, 16; cf. R.K. R ITNER , The Mechanics,145 and 58, nn. 267 and 269; for the magical meaning of the action implied by the term pXr seeR ITNER , op.cit., 57–67.

22 According to the determinative of the word “break”; see discussion in R.K. R ITNER , The Mechanics,144–145.

23 R.K. R ITNER , op.cit., 145.24 Meir IV, 50–51.25 R.K. R ITNER , The Mechanics, refers to a Fifth Dynasty coffin of NN-xft-kA from Deshasheh. H.

ALTENMÜLLER (Die Texte zum Begräbnisritual in den Pyramiden des Alten Reiches, Wiesbaden 1972,98–100) has shown that the Sd-dSrwt ritual was also carried out simultaneously with the slaughtering ofa bull in the slaughterhouse of the pyramid temple; cf. LÄ VI, 1392–1396, s.v. Zerbrechen der rotenTöpfe; A. WILKINSON, Evidence for Osirian rituals in the tomb of Tutankhamun, in: S. I SRAELIT-GROLL (ed.), Pharaonic Egypt: the Bible and Christianity, Jerusalem, 1985, 334.

26 At the temple of Luxor, Amenhotep III is depicted striking together two pots. The scene occurs on thewall enclosing the door that gives access to the offering room for the cult image of Amun. See A.MORET, Le rite de briser les vases rouges au temple de Louxor, in: RdE 3, 1938, 167; cf. H. B RUNNER ,Die südlichen Räume des Tempels von Luxor, AV 18, Mainz 1977, pl. 16, and see p. 79 ff. for the

function of this room as “Speisetischsaal für das Kultbild”. Cf. also R.K. R ITNER

, The Mechanics, 146.27 See R.K. R ITNER , op.cit., 146, n. 655.28 See Edfou I, 170/16–171/15; 428/2–7; II, 264/7–265/2; III, 338/14–17; IV, 59/14–60/12; VII, 53/10–

54/7; Wilson refers also to Edfou I, 48/10–15; III, 22/11–23/11 and 122/6–17, as possible referencesfor red vessel purification through the identification of the dSrt with Sayt or nmst vessels; cf. Kasr el-Agoûz, 75; this evidence overrides VAN DIJK ’s assumption that the “breaking of the vessels” ritual had been abandoned in the Late Period, for it is not mentioned among the apotropaic formulae found inLate Period papyri and magical texts (LÄ VI, 1391); in fact, the purification with four dSrt -vessels intemples is first attested from the Eighteenth Dynasty temple at Deir el-Bahari; see K EES, Opfertanz, 56,although the identification of the sign as dSrt or nmst is quite vague.




with four vessels of water (m 4 dSrt nt mw )”29 or “making purification (ir wab) with four redvessels of water (m 4 dSrt n mw ).”30 Usually the four vessels were associated with protec-tive divinities, as in the purification ceremony shown on the west wall of the exterior of thenaos at Edfu.31 The red vessels containing the floodwater may represent the unification ofLower and Upper Egypt and once the water is poured out an imbalance in the order is cre-ated, so that the red vessel has to be destroyed.32 The purification is performed by the kingin praise of Horus who, in return, rewards the performer with either the destruction of hisenemies,33 or with the purification of his body.34 Thus, the apotropaic aspect of the ritual isstill present in the Ptolemaic cultic environment, and it is fulfilled with the breaking of thevases after the termination of the ceremony.35

A similar apotropaic function is served by the casting of the clay balls in prophylacticrites in praise of Amun, initially, and later of Osiris, as described in papyri and temple

inscriptions from the New Kingdom onwards.36

Four balls, each of them inscribed with thename of a protective deity, were thrown towards the four cardinal points. A cultic version ofthe rite in favour of the god Amun appears in the Edifice of Taharka at Karnak.37 The pri-vate adoption of the rite has been recorded in a spell to avert a snake’s threat from theBrooklyn papyrus.38 The ritual action is identical in both occasions, besides the differen-tiation in the target or the ultimate purpose of the specific operation. 39 This action is de-

29 Edfou III, 338/14.30 Edfou I, 428/2 and pl. CCCIL.31 “Purification with four red vessels of water. Recitation: Sayt come to your majesty, purifying your form

with what is in them, one is the nurse in Heliopolis, the second is Mehenet, the third is Bastet and thefourth is the eye of Horus, Wedjat” (Edfou IV, 59/14–60/1 and pl. LXXXVI).

32 P. WILSON, A Ptolemaic Lexikon, 1211.33 Edfou I, 170; IV, 59.34 Edfou I, 428; IV, 59.35 Note that the apotropaic function of the “breaking of the red vases” rite has also been related to the

“Play of Horus” by A.M. BLACKMAN/F.W. FAIRMAN, The myth of Horus at Edfu – II, in: JEA 28,1942, 37–38, as well as with the rtH pat rite, “subjugating humanity”, by M. ALLIOT, Les rites de lachasse au filet, aux temples de Karnak, d’Edfou et d’Esneh, in: RdE 5, 1946, 106–110.

36 The main sources are (after J.-C. GOYON, Textes mythologiques II. « Les révélations du mystère desquatres boules », in: BIFAO 75, 1975, 349–352 and R. PARKER et al., The Edifice of Taharqa, Provi-dence, 1979, 61–65 and n. 17): pBerlin 3037, cols. 1–3; pBrooklyn 47.218.138, col. XII, 15–25, to col.XIII, 1–16; pLouvre 3237 and 3239; pNew York MMA 35.9.21, cols. 26–32.

37 “Recitation: Let the king (?) himself [throw] the four balls toward the south, the north, the west, and theeast in front of this god, [during his solemn procession to Kôm-Djemê, when he goes (there) to make ahalt at the Mound of Osiris, at the side of Mut, the mistress of the sky, according to the fact he is thelord of the month for whom is celebrated the beginning [of the decade], (when) he comes out of theOpê-of-the-South to take care of his temples, in which he rests every day, like Re in the sky” (transla-

tion after R. PARKER

et al., The Edifice of Taharqa, 65).38 pBrooklyn 47.218.138, XIII, 14–16: “Another formula for closing the mouth of all the Ddft -snake(s).Recitation upon [four] balls of clay (bnnw [4] n<w>t sin). To be thrown (xAa ) to the south, north,west (and) east. Recite this spell tied as a papyrus roll, (and) place at his neck, so that it will save him(nH[m].f sw ) from the disaster in the water and on earth. See, it is a great protection in truth”. CompareJ.-C. GOYON, Un parallèle tardif d’une formule des inscriptions de la statue prophylactique de RamsèsIII au Musée du Caire (Papyrus Brooklyn 47.218.138, col. X+13, 9 à 15), in: JEA 57, 1971, 154–159;IDEM, in: BIFAO 75, 1975, 350; R. PARKER et al., The Edifice of Taharqa, 62–63; similar formula oc-curs also in the pNew York, 26/1 ff. and 32/16 ff. (J.-C. GOYON, in: BIFAO 75, 1975, 366 and 398).

39 Surely, the casting of four balls was closely associated with the four cardinal points.






each of these rites with a cultic and liturgical environment, that of itself does not seem toemphasise the significance of the apotropaic technique of breaking, the latter is present andquite specifically in all the phases of the rites. The breaking of objects consists of a multi-functional and multipurpose execration act, the results of which could fluctuate from simplyimposing terror upon one’s enemies, or inducing the magical repulsion and destruction ofthe enemy through the complete smashing of the clay objects.48

4 Application of the stick and anti-snake allegory

The king uses a rod to hit the ball, which is depicted as a straight stick of a standard lengthand form.49 It is described as xt n bAo “the club made from bAo-wood”,50 which has grown“from the eye of Re”.51 There is here a clear opposition between the ball/eye of Apophis andthe bAo-stick originating from the eye of Re, as Borghouts very clearly pointed out.52 Theword xt (“mace, lance or harpoon”)53 has strong polemical functions, used in a variety ofcontexts as the principal weapon against divine or human enemies.54

The use of sticks or rods as defensive weapons against snakes55 could be traced as far back as the funerary texts of the Middle Kingdom.56 They are usually made from wood,

48 For the magical technique of “breaking” see R.K. R ITNER , op.cit., 148–53.49 It seems to be slightly longer in the New Kingdom relief at Luxor.50 Compare for example Edfou I, 62/8; IV, 149/11; 305/13; Dendara V, 67/1; VI, 134/5 = J.F.

BORGHOUTS, in: JEA 59, 1973, 133; Dend., Mam., 175/4.51 Edfou I, 62/9. J.F. BORGHOUTS, in: JEA 59, 1973, 125; the author points out that something similar is

said about the bAo-oil in the laboratory text of the Edfu temple: “I bring you the moringa-oil (bAo), pleasant of smell, from the drops (Dfdw ) of the eye of Rea ”; see also, pSalt 825, col. 2/2 ff. and EdfouIII, 185/15 for the divine origin of certain perfumes or oils.

52 J.F. BORGHOUTS, in: JEA 59, 1973, 138–140.53 Wb III, 340/19; P. WILSON, A Ptolemaic Lexikon, 753; cf. also Wb III, 339/10–341 xt “tree, wood”.54 Compare for example its appearance and the use of the stick in a harpoon text at the exterior of the

naos at Edfu: “Bringing the harpoon. Recitation: This harpoon (xnt ) is the stick/weapon (xt ) to pierce (wnp) your foes (wn-mw.k ; lit. Those who are disloyal to you)” (Edfou IV, 230/6–7), and below

in the same text: “He (scil. Horus of Edfu) is the protector with his lance/stick (xt )” (231/4); in the

XXVII LE nome Horus is addressed by the king as the one “who throws (wd ) his stick/lance (xt ) tooverthrow (sxr ) the wbr -snake, to strike (Hw ) the enemies of ? (and) to burn the r -snake” (Edfou VI,27/6). Compare, also, the expression a-xt , which literally means “state (rA-a ) of the stick” (Wb II,394/11–395/5) but which in general means “combat, fighting, war” (Wb II, 394/12; P. WILSON, APtolemaic Lexikon, 572; J.-C. GOYON, Les Dieux-Gardiens et la Genèse des Temples, Cairo 1985, 15,n. 6). It often applies to Horus as the “lord of the fighting” (see, for example, Edfou V, 43/4–5; III,251/4), or Hathor, as for example in Edfou V, 90/7; there is also a book in the sacred library of Edfuentitled “all the writings (sS<w> nb<w>) of war (rA-a-xt )” (Edfou III, 351/8 and not 351/7 as cited by WILSON, op.cit., 572).

55 I am not concerned here with the other possible interpretations and functions of these rods, as listed byB. GEORGE, Drei altägyptische Wurfhölzer, in: Medelhavsmuseet Bulletin 15, 1980, 7–15.

56 For throwsticks functioning as votive offerings to Hathor, see G. PINCH, Votive Offerings to Hathor,Oxford 1993, 295–298, fig. 6 and pl. 62, with references; C. L OEBEN, A throwstick of princess Nfr-




imitating a snake form with a “single” eye and a line that looks like a snake’s mouth ontheir broad part.57 An application of such sticks is observed in the so-called harvest or agri-cultural rites, as for example the ceremony of driving the calves (Hwt bHsw ritual), whichArno Egberts has so extensively and clearly analysed in his monograph.58 The basic motif presents the king in front of a divine figure driving four calves held by four tethering ropesto their legs. He holds a wavy rod in his left hand and a straight rod terminating in a snake’shead in his right. According to Egberts, the function of this rod would be that of any type ofgoad for beating the animals or just urging them on.59 Yet, in two cases it is used as aweapon for chasing away snakes or worms, which constituted a fatal threat for the grain:

“I cut up the worm (dm) which destroys the grain, I split it into two. I grasp its head in my righthand, I grip its tail together with the rope(s).”

60

“I have hacked (wsf ) at the pHdty-snakes … the aHa -snakes, I have severed their heads and cut off(stf ) their tails …”61

The term wsf does not appear in the Wörterbuch. It might have a similar meaning to eitherthe verb ws(i) “cut”, and consecutively “destroy”,62 or wsH “cut down”.63 Yet, both mean-ings serve the destructive application conveyed in the text. The reading of the word dm as“worm” follows Egberts’ argumentation in favour of a worm’s rather than snake’s appear-

Nfrw-Rea , with additional notes on throwsticks of faience, in: ASAE 71, 1987, 143–159 suggests thatthe object depicted under Osiris’ funeral bed at Abydos protects the god from Seth and his companion. Note, also, W.J. CHERF, The function of the Egyptian forked staff and the forked bronze butt: a pro- posal, in: ZÄS 109, 1982, 86–97, who discusses the function of the Egyptian forked staff and theforked bronze butt as the principal instrument for immobilising and catching snakes.

57 See G. DARESSY, Fouilles de la Vallée des Rois (1898–1899), Cairo 1902, pl. 27, nos. 21332–2133; forfaience parallels in a similar snake form, see two Ramesside fragments, one from Serabit el-Khadim(London BM 41817, as cited by G. PINCH, Votive Offerings, 295) and two from Timna (in B. R OTHEN-BERG, The Egyptian Mining Temple at Timna, London 1988, fig. 45/5, 6 (= colour pl. 6), and 7(characterised by the author, p. 309, as a magical wand); also, M. EATON-K RAUSS and E. GRAEFE, Thesmall golden shrine from the tomb of Tut-ankh-amun, Oxford 1985, 37–38. The throwstick that isdepicted on the second register of the side B of the golden shrine of the king is a short wavy staff whichends in a snake’s head. It is similar to the one that appears in Ay’s royal tomb KV 23 (J. BOURRIAU,Pharaohs and Mortals. Egyptian art in the Middle Kingdom, Cambridge 1988, 114–115).

58 For a complete translation, commentary and analysis of the scenes, see A. EGBERTS, In Quest of Mean-ing: A Study of the Ancient Egyptian Rites of Consecrating the Meret Chests and Driving the Calves, 2vols., Leiden 1995.

59 See G.M. JÉQUIER , Matériaux pour servir à l’établissement d’un dictionnaire d’archéologie Égyp-tienne, in: BIFAO 19, 1922, 73–74; A. EGBERTS, In Quest of Meaning I, 373; Egberts further interpretsthe symbolism behind the snake-headed end of the rod as an ornament with purely pastoral connota-

tions: “by making the straight rod the symbol of a snake, it was felt to be more efficient means of driv-ing the calves, which were considered to run for their lives” (op.cit., 373).60 A. EGBERTS, In Quest of Meaning I, 285.61 Edfou III, 168/12–13.62 Wb I, 358/11–14; P. WILSON, A Ptolemaic Lexikon, 255–256; cf. Edfou VI, 217/12–15: wDAw wsi m

wAt … wrw ws m ir.n.f “the wadju animals are cut from the way … and the great hippopotamus is de-stroyed for what he has done”.

63 Wb I, 3646–3648, which mentions the Book of the Dead where it is used for cutting off the hair andkilling rebels; this translation is introduced by Fairman and followed by P. WILSON, A PtolemaicLexikon, 255.




ance and a threat in the Hwt bHsw ritual texts. Egberts, acknowledging Kees,64 justifies his preference on the basis of the nature of the worm, as a destroyer of the grain.65 Neverthe-less, the appearance of snakes in the texts of “driving the calves” must not be totally ex-cluded. Snakes are closely associated with the fields and harvest and constitute a serioushazard to the harvesters and working/grazing animals altogether. Various types of snakesare referred to under the terms pHdty, Hnpt , iart or aHa . Yet, the Egyptians did not clearlydifferentiate between snakes and worms, which means that both of these last terms could pertain to worms as well as snakes.

Now, the method of destroying reptile species by cutting or splitting them apart makesfrequent appearances in the magico-religious corpus. The first text, which is discussed byEgberts, comes from Dendera and it is related to the Osiris Mystery:66

“The consecration of the mrt -chests and the driving of the calves are performed from the 23rd to

the last day of the fourth month of Axt … The four calves of the children of Horus are with them,treading above the cave of this god. There is an Apophis snake in two pieces behind them duringthe treading and the dragging of the mrt -chest.”

67

Τhe mention of a snake called Apophis (HfAw n app), a name which could have either prag-matic or symbolic connotations,68 in a text about the rituals of “driving the calves” and“consecrating the mrt -chests” is purely descriptive and does not have any implications forthe character of both of these rituals.69 What the text presents here is an indirect allusion tothe familiar concept of a snake split into two parts. This allusion has already been expressed by the use of the verbs wsf and stf in the passage from the Hwt bHsw rite presented above.The continuity of this concept is evidenced in a spell from a Greco-Roman papyrus thatdescribes a similar action undertaken against a snake personified with Apophis’ name:

“If you want to kill a snake say: ‘stay, for you are Apophis’. And taking a green palm branch andholding its heart, split it [longways] into two, saying the name over it seven times. At once thesnake will be split (or will break open).”

70

The term viyān hlor ān (green palm) in this text implies a stick made from a bay staff. Thus,the two parts of the rod held by the practitioner could be regarded as a symbolic iconicrepresentation of a snake cut into two: the left-hand rod clearly represents the tail portion ofa snake and the straight rod the head part.

64 Farbensymbolik in ägyptischen religiösen Texten, Göttingen 1943, 476.65 See A. EGBERTS, Python or worm? Some aspects of the rite of driving the calves, in: GM 111, 1989,

44, n. 2; IDEM., In Quest of Meaning I, Leiden 1995, 287, n. 6, for a collection of references that pre-

sent dm as worm. He stresses emphatically that “… snakes are predators and accordingly do not dam-age corn” (GM 111, 1989, 38).66 See É. CHASSINAT, La Mystère d’Osiris au mois de Khoiak 1, Cairo 1966, 126–127 = col. 83–85.67 Translation after A. EGBERTS, In Quest of Meaning I, 381.68 It could either refer to the mythological enemy of the sun god or to a real species of snake; cf. the term

HfAw aA n app “great Apophis snake” which occurs in pBrooklyn 47.218.48 and 85 (S. SAUNERON, UnTraité Égyptien d’Ophiologie, Cairo 1989, 148–149) and refers to a species of snake appearing withthat name.

69 A. EGBERTS, In Quest of Meaning I, 343.70 PGM XIII, 261–264 = H.D. BETZ, The Greek Magical Papyri in Translation, Chicago 1986, 180.




5 The wording of the sor-HmA ritual – Orality as performance

The composer of the sor-HmA texts makes extensive use of the standard literary devices ofthe Egyptian literary craft: puns and paranomasia, homophony, alliteration and wordplayson meaning. The realisation of these techniques is not confined only to the ritual underdiscussion. They are well known from the funerary texts of the Old Kingdom and continuedto be an important feature of funerary and temple texts, until the end of the Egyptian lan-guage, when Coptic magical texts continued the tradition. The exceptional environment ofthe Ptolemaic rituals is encrypted in the way these techniques are used contextually and per-formatively to justify new words or to manipulate the existing ones in order to hide orexplain in a more subtle manner the notion behind the phrase. Especially in the sor-HmA ritual texts, these literary devices are used to create a standard imagery analogous to that

expressed by the execration technique of striking the ball. In order to achieve this phoneticimagery successfully the ritualist must have a wide understanding of the way in which simi-lar sounding words actually differ, and then be able to construct sentences or phrases inwhich they can be used without making the sentence unintelligible.

5.1 Alliteration/homophony

a. Edfou IV, 305/6–8

Dd-mdw iT n=k nTrt n n(i)k m npD Df=s im=s m tStS

Recitation: Receive for yourself the divine eyes of the nik -snake, as something cut out, itsiris and its pupil as something pounded.

A constant alliteration is created by the use of the n-sound as in the words nTrt , n, nik , npD .The verb npD ‘cut, slaughter’ consists of a n-formation which explains its frequent usagewith such terms as NbD , niAw , nhs, nfrw .71 The action acquires also a more emphatic denota-tion from the reduplicated form of tS as tStS ‘cut to pieces, pound’.72

b. Edfou IV, 305/9–10

ptpt.n=i ptrty n pfy

I have destroyed the eyes of that one.

71 Compare Edfou V, 169/13; 173/8; VII, 148/11; 269/5; 308/6–7; V, 94/16 (with nbD as object); V, 293/8(nhs); I, 565/3 (niAw ).

72 For Edfu examples see P. WILSON, A Ptolemaic Lexikon, 1154.




Although the original meaning of ptpt is “tread on something, trample”,73 it is often deter-mined, as in our text here, by a knife sign, thus becoming gradually an alternative for “kill-ing, destroying” concepts. Again, repetition of homophonous words here – ptpt , ptry, pfy.74

c. Dendara IV, 194/1–2

Wbt wbr sw nsrt aAt sxm.tw m pHty=s aD n aApp

The wbr -snake is on fire. She ( scil . Hathor) is the flaming goddess, the great one. She is powerful through her strength, slaughtering Apophis.

5.2

Paranomasia/homophony

a. Edfou IV, 305/10–11

Hnw n=T i nb(t) hy nb(t) hnw Hnty Hnt m sAxt=i

Praise to you, o Lady of Rejoicing, Lady of Praise! The Hnty-snake is slaughtered with myknife.

There is a constant repetition of the h-sound through the double repetition of hnw . To myknowledge, the word Hnty with a snake determinative does not occur outside Edfu. Artificialcreation of a demonic name/being through the homophonic manipulation of words and phonetics.

b. Edfou IV, 149/7

r-Daf Daf n wn-mw.n=f sfTx sTrt=f sfT

The r-Daf -snake is burnt (and) the sfTx-snake shall not be anymore, because his gleamingeyes are cut off.

4fT “slaughter” is especially used in a butchery context and it often appears as a punishmentof the deceased in the funerary compositions of the New Kingdom.75 Here, it forms the arti-ficial Apophis name of the sftx-snake.

73 Wb I, 563/9–16; P. WILSON, A Ptolemaic Lexikon, 379–380.74 Edfou IV, 395/9; compare also Edfou V, 47/7: ptpt – pfy (after P. WILSON, A Ptolemaic Lexikon, 380).75 Wb III, 443/15–24; P. WILSON, A Ptolemaic Lexikon, 837; cf. J. ZANDEE, Death as an Enemy accord-

ing to Ancient Egyptian Conceptions, Leiden 1960, 151.




5.3 Symbolism/homophony

a. Edfou I, 62/5–7

Df n wDAt wDA m st=s

The iris of the wDAt -eye is safe in its place.

In the above example there is a clear confrontation of the evil eye of the nik -snake with thedivine eye (wDAt ).

b. Edfou I, 62/8–9

NSd DfD n wAmmty

(The king) tears up the iris of the wAmmty-enemy.

The verb nSd is derived from the verb Sd “cut, take away, remove” with the addition of the prefix n.76 It often appears with alliteration of n or even nS , indicating the total destructionof the enemies of the pharaoh by Horus through the use of his ‘claws’ (agAt , ant ).77 There is aclear parallelism here between the recitative destructive meaning of nSd and the action of‘splitting a snake into two’ undertaken by the private practioner of the ritual in the spellfrom the Greek magical papyrus presented above. Similarly, in the text that accompaniesthe burning of offerings rite on the second register of the eastern wall of the room IX atEdfu, the king “tears up (nSd ) the eyes of the raging one (nSn), burning the enemies ofMehyt, the great one who dwells in Behdet”.78

6 Conclusions

Summarising the above, one could argue that the frequent use of rods/sticks as defensiveweapons against any type of snake indicates that the utilisation of the rod/stick in the sor-

HmA ritual is not accidental or recreational, but is part of a series of applications that arecharacterised by their strong and destructive power against Apophis, the snake par excel-

lence. The result of the action undertaken through the use of the stick could vary from the“smashing off the head” of the snake or “cutting its body into two”, to its complete destruc-tion by the striking and breaking of the clay ball which symbolises its evil glance.

76 P. WILSON, A Ptolemaic Lexikon, 550–551; the prefix n is a common word-building element thatcreates standard formations; cf. OSING, Nominalbildung I, 324; W. SCHENKEL, Zur Rekonstruktion derdeverbalen Nominalbildung des Ägyptischen, Wiesbaden 1983, 226–227.

77 See Edfou I, 270/13; 381/10; 575/3; II, 20 (66); VIII, 106/1.78 Edfou I, 313/15–16; those words are uttered by the king who performs the rite in praise of the gods,

and not by Mehyt as stated by P. WILSON, A Ptolemaic Lexikon, 550–551.




At the same time, the phonetic performative imagery of destruction is expressedthrough the constant repetition of certain polemical verbs and verbalistic conjugations, themeaning of which are re-enhanced with the presence of different names and epithets thatdesignate implicitly or explicitly Apophis’ malevolent nature. Such verbs as nSd , xbxb, npD ,tStS , khb, ptpt , or sfT complete and strengthen the initial formula of destruction of the ball/eye of Apophis, introduced with the verb sor . They also contain certain threat formulae ad-dressed to Apophis and his evil glance in the mythological sphere by visualising and ap- plying them in the course of the ritual action. Yet, these verbal expressions seem to justifyto a great extent, through the extensive use of punning and paranomasia, the use of certainnames and epithets, which would not have any solid ontological character outside this speci-fic ritual framework. The inner magical mechanism of the latter, especially through the ex- ploitation of sounds and recited formulae, artificially creates and manipulates names and,

thus, divine or demonic beings, since the former are indelibly connected to the essence ofthe latter.79

79 See P.I.M. K OUSOULIS, The Double Persona of the Demonic: the case of the four Apophian Snakes, in:P.I.M. K OUSOULIS/M.A. COLLIER (eds.), Magic and Demonology in Ancient Egypt, Swansea, in press.

Documents

Some Remarks on the Ritual of “Striking the Ball”