Roman/ancient history: Checkmate, Atenists

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Ask/Tell > Roman/ancient history: Checkmate, Atenists

Arglebargle III: Feb 21, 2006

If you took a DVD of Microsoft excel back to Roman times you could amaze them by having a diffraction grating. You'd advance the science of optics by hundreds of years overnight. These modern cloud copies are useless by comparison, at least in the context of traveling back in time to ancient Rome to demonstrate modern optical devices.

# ? Dec 8, 2023 15:52

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 25, 2024 14:57

Squizzle: Apr 24, 2008

they would call it “microsoft forty”

# ? Dec 8, 2023 15:54

zoux: Apr 28, 2006

Squizzle posted:

they would call it “microsoft forty”

lmao

# ? Dec 8, 2023 16:00

the yeti: Mar 29, 2008; memento disco

Squizzle posted:

they would call it �microsoft forty�

# ? Dec 8, 2023 16:01

BrainDance: May 8, 2007; Disco all night long!

LITERALLY A BIRD posted:

The Shipwrecked Sailor! I posted about that one in here this summer, while people were indulging me sharing a bunch of Egyptian literature You can click through for my full post, but here is what I have thought the point to be --

This is also incredibly satisfying. I would imagine you're right, it makes sense to me, a whole lot more sense than anything I had thought up which, being honest, was basically nothing.

But it's not obvious at all, right? And that's what earns it an exploration of what it could possibly mean. On the surface you get a story of a guy saying "look, don't worry because magic snake in a completely different scenario" that if taken as is seems pointless but is clearly written in a way where the point should be there.

And maybe that point is obvious to an ancient audience even if not to us?

When I first read Gilgamesh way back in college that's what really interested me in it. So many of the choices were treated as if they were obvious but to me made no sense. Maybe I've changed (probably, I've gotten more used to reading ancient texts) or maybe translations have gotten better because I reread it as a part of this "read everything from the ancient world, especially their religions" and it didn't seem as bizarre to me, but it's still there. Just more and more evidence of how they weren't dumber than us but they were very different.

And that's also led to the opposite feeling when reading Latin texts. They feel weirdly modern, and so you can kinda see that divide between culturally alien and directly culturally connected.

Is there an equivalent to the Context of Scripture or Before the Muses for Roman texts? Maybe it would be too much for one book. Something that's sorta just the collection of everything that wouldn't otherwise get its own book all in one place?

# ? Dec 8, 2023 16:05

Arglebargle III: Feb 21, 2006

Squizzle posted:

they would call it “microsoft forty”

# ? Dec 8, 2023 16:21

Bourricot: Aug 7, 2016

Squizzle posted:

they would call it “microsoft forty”

The current thread title owns and it's too soon to change it, but that's a strong candidate.

# ? Dec 8, 2023 16:26

Fuschia tude: Dec 26, 2004; THUNDERDOME LOSER 2019

Arglebargle III posted:

If you took a DVD of Microsoft excel back to Roman times you could amaze them by having a diffraction grating. You'd advance the science of optics by hundreds of years overnight. These modern cloud copies are useless by comparison, at least in the context of traveling back in time to ancient Rome to demonstrate modern optical devices.

"OK, so you got a weird polished slice of a geode somewhere. Yes I see it's shiny, very pretty, looks like a circle, so what"
___/
:agesilaus:

# ? Dec 8, 2023 16:50

Mighty Eris: Mar 24, 2005; Jolly good show, eh old man?

What if the Roman Legions had powerpoint.

What if Cicero had powerpoint

# ? Dec 8, 2023 17:51

zoux: Apr 28, 2006

Cato would've had something else to delenda est

# ? Dec 8, 2023 17:52

WoodrowSkillson: Feb 24, 2005; *Gestures at 60 years of Lions history*

Mighty Eris posted:

What if the Roman Legions had powerpoint.

What if Cicero had powerpoint

just google "the biggest logistics powerpoint presentation"

# ? Dec 8, 2023 17:59

FAUXTON: Jun 2, 2005; spero che tu stia bene

Mighty Eris posted:

What if the Roman Legions had powerpoint.

What if Cicero had powerpoint

what if augustus had youtube

# ? Dec 8, 2023 18:20

Jazerus: May 24, 2011

FAUXTON posted:

what if augustus had youtube

Publius Quinctilius Varus Did WHAT With My Legions!?!? (part 54)
1,546,921 views

# ? Dec 8, 2023 19:24

CrypticFox: Dec 19, 2019; "You are one of the most incompetent of tablet writers"

BrainDance posted:

Is there an equivalent to the Context of Scripture or Before the Muses for Roman texts? Maybe it would be too much for one book. Something that's sorta just the collection of everything that wouldn't otherwise get its own book all in one place?

As the Romans Did: A Sourcebook in Roman Social History is the best place to look for Roman documents recording daily life, but it doesn't contain much literature. The subject of Roman literature is huge, and there are hundreds of places to look for that, but if you want to dip your toe into the water and get a good sampling of a lot of different authors, the Oxford Anthology of Roman Literature would be a good place to start.

CrypticFox fucked around with this message at 19:29 on Dec 8, 2023

# ? Dec 8, 2023 19:27

Squizzle: Apr 24, 2008

FAUXTON posted:

what if augustus had youtube

I HAVE IRRUMATED VBER CHARIOTEER??

# ? Dec 8, 2023 19:28

zoux: Apr 28, 2006

Teutoborg Forest HIDDEN EASTER EGGS

# ? Dec 8, 2023 19:29

Judgy Fucker: Mar 24, 2006

Restore the Republic with this one weird trick. Would-be kings hate it!

# ? Dec 8, 2023 19:36

Nessus: Dec 22, 2003; After a Speaker vote, you may be entitled to a valuable coupon or voucher!

It is not like an aqueduct, Secundus, carried from place to place within an enclosed space; but rather as if there were many ships bearing grain to your slave, each bid according to protocol.

# ? Dec 8, 2023 19:55

LITERALLY A BIRD: Sep 27, 2008; I knew you were trouble
when you flew in

BrainDance posted:

This is also incredibly satisfying. I would imagine you're right, it makes sense to me, a whole lot more sense than anything I had thought up which, being honest, was basically nothing.

But it's not obvious at all, right? And that's what earns it an exploration of what it could possibly mean. On the surface you get a story of a guy saying "look, don't worry because magic snake in a completely different scenario" that if taken as is seems pointless but is clearly written in a way where the point should be there.

And maybe that point is obvious to an ancient audience even if not to us?

When I first read Gilgamesh way back in college that's what really interested me in it. So many of the choices were treated as if they were obvious but to me made no sense. Maybe I've changed (probably, I've gotten more used to reading ancient texts) or maybe translations have gotten better because I reread it as a part of this "read everything from the ancient world, especially their religions" and it didn't seem as bizarre to me, but it's still there. Just more and more evidence of how they weren't dumber than us but they were very different.

Yeah! I totally get that! My relationship to Egyptian religion and literature started as a kid who just thought it was all really cool, and then the more I read and became capable of understanding the more it all began appealing to me on a deep personal level for a multitude of interrelated reasons. The Tale of the Shipwrecked Sailor is a great example, when I read it as a teenager I was like "okay, cool snake :confused:

" and then I re-read it last year, with twenty years of trying to develop a modern relationship with this ancient religion and its perception of the world under my belt, and was just like "oh it's about good speech, of course." Having a much deeper understanding both of the Egyptian ontology and a bit more abstractly, the sorts of things they found important enough to write wisdom literature about, made it just make immediate sense to me in exactly the way it did not when I tried reading it without having spent so much time practicing an ability to access the appropriate perspective.

You might enjoy a bunch of my post history in here, I am not an Egyptologist but as I say I have developed a very personal relationship with the religion and its literature, and my desire to experience the/my religion in ways that could be considered authentic or at least, "not hideously misguided" has led me down some very interesting paths, recently especially. Let me find a couple posts on magical rhetoric I made in another thread and reproduce them here, I don't think these two threads have a huge amount of reader overlap; the paper I discuss in them supports the way we can interpret the sailor's story as a parable on the power of effective speech, and I am pretty sure it will be interesting to more people than just you and me.

# ? Dec 8, 2023 19:59

LITERALLY A BIRD: Sep 27, 2008; I knew you were trouble
when you flew in

I am just going to copy/paste this whole-rear end post (and its sequel post) in here without revising my commentary because I am just not that ambitious today :lmao:

I mentioned this paper in here this summer but never ended up getting into it so... here we are! Please forgive the tone of my commentary having more emphasis on modern metaphysics than ancient history, the topic of this paper blurs those lines quite effectively, don't judge me too hard.

quote:

well my big problem is they are both paywalled and I don�t have pdfs to share right now (maybe later, when my partner who is the one possessed of a JSTOR login returns home). But I am talking about Edward Karshner�s paper Thought, Utterance, Power: Toward a Rhetoric of Magic and Vincent Tobin�s paper Mytho-Theology in Ancient Egypt (this one is particularly interesting if you pair it with some of the thoughts theologians of modern religions have put out about the importance of myth and symbol in personal life and faith; I am thinking of the corresponding chapter in Paul Tillich�s Dynamics of Faith, particularly. �For there is no substitute for the use of symbols and myths: they are the language of faith.�). While I don�t have pdfs I have some very lovely printouts that I made, on colorful paper so they�re harder for me to lose

Here is the abstract for the former:

Thought, Utterance, Power: Toward a Rhetoric of Magic posted:
To the ancient mind, magic was a powerful force to be subjected to or to control. Egypt, more than any other early culture, stressed the importance of intellectual agency as the antidote to the imperfection perceived between foundational thinking and anti-foundational speaking. Just as rhetoric seeks to express the conceptual ideal pursued by philosophical inquiry, these earlier thinkers stressed magical language as the key to unlocking the power of the cosmos. This article will explore the Ancient Egyptian concept of rhetorical magic as a practical wisdom that allows an individual to function fully within the boundaries established by a perceived cosmic order. The Ancient Egyptians applied rhetorical magic to ease the dissonance felt between intellectual engagement and the semiotically saturated cosmology in which they dwelt. These same ancient rhetorical practices hold promise in assisting our own attempts to navigate a world inundated with information.

And the latter does not have an abstract but here is an excerpt that can provide a similar function:

Mytho-Theology of Ancient Egypt posted:
Egyptian religion was marked by an exceedingly high degree of freedom of belief, and, except for the short-lived Amarna period under the heretic pharaoh Akhenaten, the concept of religious heterodoxy was totally unknown to the Egyptians. All of the symbols and expressions of the various local cults and traditions were regarded as valid and correct expressions of religious faith, and internal contradictions in articulation were seen as both acceptable and natural. Egypt�s complex mythological system has been aptly described as being �completely free of those logics which eliminate one of two contradictory concepts and press religious ideas into a system of dogmas.� [R. Anthes, �Egyptian Theology in the Third Millenium BC,� JNES XVIII (1959) 170.] Such an approach to the content of a religion can only be possible when it is quite obvious that the concrete expressions of that religion are indeed mythic and symbolic in nature and are not intended to be taken as factual dogmatic statements of a literal �truth.� Such a flexible approach to the realm of the spiritual appears to be the most positive feature of the religion of ancient Egypt, for this approach enabled it to encompass virtually any religious symbol as a valid expression of abstract reality.

For the purposes of this post I will focus on the Karshner paper. The Tobin one is a great companion for it but I have such a passion for this Karshner paper. It starts like this:

quote:
Going back as far as the Old Kingdom (2450�2300 BCE), ancient Egyptian speculative thinkers had already developed a complex understanding of the relationship between personal agency, power, and the role of magic. What is more, these early philosophers saw that this world (individual and social) and the other (cosmological) operated according to the same principles. The rules by which one secured power were the same whether one was a peasant or a god. Through perception, the heart/mind would design an idea, the mouth would speak it and, as if by magic, the task would be accomplished. Thoughtful, reasoned speech was the mechanism for reestablishing the order that was manifested in the reasoned creation of the universe. Power and magic were not mysterious or esoteric to the Egyptians. Instead, power and magic were a part of an individual�s very existence.

This paper explores the parallel epistemological roles magic and mysticism share with rhetoric and philosophy within the Egyptian metaphysical system.The rhetoric of Egyptian magic was based on the idea that deeper foundational truths were expressed in a highly figurative, mythical language as a means to avoid an antifoundational emphasis on language only. Truth and the expression of truth were not seen as mutually exclusive. Rather, to reconnect with the higher reality of truth, the Egyptians stressed, through the very structure of their complex symbol system, an intense, epistemic interaction with words and symbols as maps to truth� not truth itself.

I further illustrate that the ancient Egyptians understood the dissonance between foundationalist epistemology and antifoundationalist rhetoric. Yet they still believed that within this uncertainty a coherent order was to be found. Magic, operating as an epistemic rhetoric, sought to reconnect the practitioner, through reasoned speech, to the ethical truth of the universal mind. This reconnection was made possible by the ethical epistemology agents gained from a life spent seeking maat (truth) in every given situation. Through the full utilization of magio-rhetoric, an individual could arrange experience in such a way as to express ethical knowledge. Understanding, then, occurred epistemically through the close observation of the cosmos and through an accurate and rational articulation of the knowledge gained from that observation. In short, it was intense individual effort directed toward the apprehension and expression of the seemingly inaccessible realm of the mystical that elevated the profane word to sacred truth in the end.

You�re still with me? You follow this, it seems interesting? Okay, great. Just checking. I have shared this paper with a few friends now and the word �dense� appears in everyone�s reviews I don�t know if it�s helpful or interesting to keep in mind while reading that while this is a historic/academic paper, it is discussing components of a religion that is extremely real and present and alive for me. I have very much �spent my life seeking ma�at,� and I think this paper is just exceptional in its examination of this aspect of Egyptian religion and metaphysics. I am going to continue directly into the next section, titled �Mysticism as Philosophy: The Foundational Scene of Utterance.�

quote:
The most basic assumption of rhetorical discourse is that an utterance is a reaction to a certain exigency, directed toward a particular audience who is seen as being capable of mediating the exigency. This process of mediating disorder through discourse requires that the speaker and audience share a set of philosophical beliefs about a foundational order that is a priori to the recognized ontological order. Philosophy, as the foundational scene of rhetoric, represents a specific kind of knowledge and speaking that comes through close observation of and engagement with the world and other meaning-seeking agents. This experiential knowledge allows speakers to apply, in each case, a set of knowable contexts that not only express their worldview but speak to the specific worldview of the individual or group they hope to persuade. Rhetoric, then, is more than persuasive speech. It is also an expression of a linguistically constructed worldview.

In The Mind of Ancient Egypt, Jan Assman identifies this belief in the relationship between the perception and expression of existence as being characteristic of a �cosmological society.� He writes that a cosmological society �lives by a model of cosmic forms of order, which it transforms into political and social order by means of meticulous observation and performance of rituals� (2002, 205). According to Assman�s definition, a cosmological society creates meaning based on the close observation of foundational forms in a manner that closely references the original forms or order. Assman goes on to explain that meaning emerges from the ability to �adapt the order of the human world to that of the cosmos [and] to keep the cosmic process itself in good working order� (2002, 205). The cosmos itself becomes a heuristic revealing mystical knowledge that establishes the local, personal, and social order at the same time that the local, personal, and social order serves as a heuristic in establishing magical practices that maintain the cosmological order. In other words, while the agent is speaking from a social scene to a human audience, he or she is simultaneously addressing deities in the cosmological realm. The disputants and the discourse, then, speak from and to a complex, multilayered situation.

In magical utterances, there is an appeal to another set of circumstances outside the immediate scene of the agent. This rhetorical scene of magic is characterized by Mircea Eliade as a life lived �on a two-fold plane; it takes its course as human existence and, at the same time, shares in a transhuman life, that of the cosmos of the gods� (1957, 167). Symbolically, this twofold existence is represented by what Eliade terms a homology. Simply defined, a homology is a correspondence between macrocosm and microcosm. It is within this homology that the relationship between mysticism and magic is made apparent. Kenneth Burke quotes James Baldwin in the Dictionary of Philosophy and Psychology as defining mysticism as embracing �those forms of speculative religious thought which profess to attain an immediate apprehension of the divine essence or the ultimate goal of existence� (1969a, 287). In other words, mysticism is belief in and the desire to achieve what Eliade called the �transhuman life.� That is, mysticism expresses the human desire to identify with and articulate, through symbolic expression, the innate knowledge of the cosmos.

This rhetorical perspective suggests that a text not only expresses a purposeful and meaningful point of view but also provides the framework by which hearers and readers understand the function of that text. Mysticism as philosophy, from this perspective, reflects a foundationalist perspective. Scott Consigny writes that foundational rhetoric �maintains that there is an order or truth in the world that we may approach or apprehend if we use the appropriate faculty or are inspired and that we may communicate this truth if we speak in the proper manner� (2001, 63�64). Belief in a foundationalist context leads speakers to construct a text according to a mystical understanding in order to reflect that understanding using language. This epistemological stance requires ontological experience and, consequently, knowledge not just of the �proper manner� but an ability to speak in that proper manner. From the audience�s perspective, the apprehension of this truth likewise requires knowledge of the appropriate faculties. Speakers and audiences thus must have knowledge of a shared experience in order for the truth of rhetorical texts to be experienced, understood, and expressed.

The ancient Egyptians articulated this shared, epistemic experience through their highly complex and symbolic onto-cosmological narratives. An onto-cosmological narrative expresses the fundamental beliefs of its cultural background and reveals the ontological concerns of a group situated in a specific time and place. In short, the onto-cosmological narrative seeks to express what is possible and what is ideal and how what the group desires can be accomplished by it within the cultural paradigm (Berlin 1993, 148�49). These narratives create the essential rhetorical situation by explaining both philosophically and semantically �those contexts in which speakers or writers create rhetorical discourse� (Bitzer 1968, 1) in order to be fully involved with the creation and maintenance of a world.

Essentially, these onto-cosmological narratives are foundationalist in that mystical truth is presented as �an independent goal or starting point or origin that is ontologically, logically and temporally prior to human inquiry and knowledge; that is independent of the contingencies of human life, culture and language; and that serves as a criterion for claims to knowledge and meaningful speech� (Consigny 2001, 61). Because of the strong emphasis on all the metaphysical elements, creation stories stress an individual�s participation in the coming into being of knowing. Encoded in the narrative is the nature of truth as both goal and means. Once again, however, there must not be a hard distinction made between the cosmology of the gods and the ontology of human beings. What separates the cosmological truth from the ontological goal of truth is a mere matter of location.

Here we begin touching upon what smarxist and Squizzle were saying, and what the Tobin paper goes into much more deeply: onto-cosmological narratives and reflection of truth. Organizing what is perceived and experienced in the individual and social world in attempts to truthfully reflect and communicate the workings of the greater ontology and cosmology � and vice versa. Understanding the truth of the cosmos and the patterns that it takes over millenia of myth and exigency allows us to view the unfolding patterns of human social and cultural reality, because they are one and the same.

Let�s talk (or let Karshner talk) about language.

quote:
Over Egypt�s long history, many creation stories evolved to explain the onto-cosmological situation of those living on the banks of the Nile. Each creation story addressed the particular exigency of its area and people. What this myriad of stories share is that they are primarily etiological. An extraordinary exception is the �Memphite Theology�, a religious treatise that emphasizes the role of reason and language in constituting reality. In this story, Ptah emerges as the divine reason that creates and maintains the universe. Ptah is characterized as he �who has given [life] to all the gods and their kas through his heart and his tongue� (Lichtheim 1975, 54). The Ennead (the council of gods), according to this text, functions as the limbs informed by the intellect (heart) and performative speech (tongue). Likewise, while Ptah�s intelligent speech is formative, the gods, cattle, and humans (interestingly lumped together) function through their speech and actions as agents of definition. The Memphite text declares �thus all the faculties were made and all qualities determined, they that make all foods and provisions, through this word. � Thus Ptah was satisfied after he had made all things and all divine words� (Lichtheim 1975, 55). Humanity finds itself in a world of linguistic construction. Consequently, to participate fully in this reality, an action is required to determine one�s proper function in context. In other words, one exists only as fully as one�s �command of the word.�

To have command of the word, an individual must know the formative and performative power of speech reflected in the magical vocabulary that emerges from the onto-cosmological narrative. An illustration of the creative power of words is further revealed in the vocabulary of Egyptian magic. For the ancient Egyptians, the primary creative force in the universe was heka, usually translated as �magic�. According to the Coffin Texts (spell 261), heka is the first created force, and consequently, the divine force that �empowered the creation event� (Wilkinson 2003, 110). Heka, then, is not merely �hocus-pocus� but the vitality behind the process of invention and production that establishes the order of existence.

The power of heka was found in its close association with language. In fact, the whole of Egyptian mysticism and magic is encoded in the metaphysics of its linguistics. Therefore, before explicating the word heka, it is necessary first to clarify the complexities of the Egyptian writing system. Despite the philological advances in hieroglyph research, many lay people still believe that the ancient Egyptian writing system was purely pictographic. In reality, this system of writing was far more complex in that the signs used fall into three categories. First, signs could be used to represent consonant sounds. Here, the signs could further represent monoconsonant, biconsonant, or triconsonant sounds. Second, there was a group of ideograms that did function as picture writing. For example, a representation of the heart meant �heart� and carried with it the corresponding sound for �heart� (ib). These signs came with a strike mark underneath to show that they were being used as a word sign and not merely a sound sign. Finally, a type of ideogram called a �determinative� could be used in the writing of a word. This sign came at the end of a word to determine the meaning but did not have a sound value. In this case, the word �day� (hrw) is spelled with the monoconsonant signs for h, r, w and is followed by the determinative of the sun disk (aten) to determine the meaning of the word. This may seem like a complex or even convoluted writing system, but it gave the scribe great leeway in the way ideas were transmitted visually.

The sign for heka is made of three characters. The first is the pictograph of twisted flax. It is a unilateral sign for an emphatic h sound and is there purely for its phonetic value. The second sign is where this etymological dissection becomes really interesting. The Egyptians now insert the word sign for ka. They could have continued to use unilateral signs: a basket for the k sound and the vulture sign for the short a sound. Instead, they use the ideogram for ka which, in simple terms, is the word for the soul; however, the ka is a far more significant ontological concept. The ka represented the �essential self of an individual� (David 2002, 117). Moreover, the ka was the power of creation that allowed an individual to be an active agent in the physical world. Finally, the last sign in heka is the determinative representing a rolled scroll meaning �writing�. Essentially, the sign for heka could be translated as �soul writing�. Robert Ritner describes it better as �at the strike of a word, magic (heka) penetrates the ka or �vital essence� of any element in creation and invests it with power� (1993, 25). In this case, the element is �writing� or the �word�, and heka reflects the creative power of the word. It is important to note that heka refers to the vital power of the word and not the word itself � that is, heka �resides in the word itself� (Ritner 1993, 17). A word possesses its own function and performative soul.

The powerful word that is conjured by the power of heka is hu. Within Egyptian metaphysics, hu is defined as the �authoritative utterance, that speech which is so effective that it creates� (Wilson 1977, 57). What imbues hu with effectiveness is heka, which, preceding it, imparts to hu the very creative vitality that structured the universe. James Henry Breasted links this idea of the creative word to the agency of creation �by which mind became creative force. � The idea thus took on being in the world of objective existence� (1933, 37). Both Wilson and Breasted link this to the concept of logos found in the Gospel of John. Like logos, hu manifests the intangible intent of the creative mind in the tangible world of existence � creative intent yields creative process yields created product. Each of these events is linked by the vital reasoning principle heka.

Hu is most often paired with sia. In a word, sia is perception. Within the context of Egyptian metaphysics, it is further defined as �the cognitive reception of a situation, an object or idea� (Wilson 1977, 56). In the words of the Memphite Theology, sia is that which has been �devised by the heart.� The connection between sia and hu is that hu �repeats what the heart has devised� (Lichtheim 1975, 52). Hu and sia combine to reflect a cognitive process that, through perception and expression, establishes order. John A. Wilson describes this process as �a system which employs invention by the cognition of an idea in the mind and the production through the utterance of creating order by speech� (1977, 56). This cognitive process that moves from perception to speech eventually leads to the knowable order of the universe brought into being through the essential power of heka.

This ability to determine function with speech reflects the power of the divine order. At the root of the power of speech, shared by creator and created, is the ability to reason. Articulated here is the idea of an epistemic rhetoric through which �man could know because he was identified with the substance of God, that is, the universal mind. From the universal mind (logos), man�s mind (logos) can reason (logos) to bring forth speech (logos). This wonderful ambiguity of logos retains the identity, that is, truth� (Scott 1994, 314). Deeper than language is the power of reason that connects humankind to the universal mind. The culmination of intelligent, articulated speech, rooted in perception, was manifested in the ability to form and influence reality. This magio-rhetorical process of reasoning is what links the universal participants together and situates the individual within the onto-cosmological homology.

Okay, but you can�t just willy-nilly say anything and have it fruit magic, right? Right. That�s because magic, heka, is the flip side of the foundational underpinning of the Universe: ma�at. Or, you know, the Source, the Ground-of-Being, All-That-Is, the Divine Spirit� ma�at is the essential nature of reality, and while it is personified at times as a Goddess it is a concept far vaster and more present and more necessary than mere divinity. It is order, justice, truth, balance, harmony, reciprocity, what is Right. If it is the waters that fill the panentheistic aquarium in which we the little fishies all swim, heka is recognizing and making use of currents and waves and whirlpools and eddies that we encounter there within it. But it is ma�at that creates this environment to begin with.

quote:
For the ancient Egyptians, the foundational truth that results from this cognitively created system was maat. Maat was the universal idea of order, justice, or truth. More fundamentally, maat was the onto-cosmological principle that connected the divine order of the cosmos with the social order of justice and the ethical reality of human beings. In short, maat, at once, can translate as both an ethical and a metaphysical concept. Henri Frankfort characterizes maat as �a divine order, established at the time of creation,� an order that �is manifest in nature in the normality of phenomena . . . in society as justice and . . . in an individual�s life as truth� (1961, 63). This natural, social, and individual order is manifested in one�s direct use of perception (sia), reason (heka), and articulation (hu). Just as Ptah in the Memphite Theology transformed chaos into order, the king was expected to preserve or reestablish justice within the kingdom, while the everyday Egyptian was to do �what was loved� (ethical) over what was hated (unethical) as had been established since the beginning of time.

For both gods and humans, maat was �the very basis of one�s speech and actions: �Do maat . . . speak maat� (Morenz 1992, 117). Another text declares �hu is in thy mouth, sia is in thy heart, and thy tongue is the shrine of Justice [Maat]� (qtd in Wilson 1977, 84). Order is the only true outcome of intelligence. What is perceived and spoken must reflect what is true. Just as word is a manifestation of mind, justice or truth is a product of them both. Their power is found in the articulate expression of concepts. When heart and tongue are in agreement, all faculties are �made and all qualities determined. � Thus justice is done to him who does what is loved, and punishment to him who does what is hated. Thus life is given to the peaceful, death is given to the criminal� (Lichtheim 1975, 54-55). The power of conscious expression is not just revealed in the metaphysical order but in the ethical order as well. The recognition of maat in the expressed order of the universe becomes the sia of the human/social order. The language of human beings must also express this order in a terrestrial sense. This is precisely why Ptah is in �every mouth of all gods and all men.� There is no cognitive difference between the maat of men and gods; the difference is one of location only.

Rosalie Davis nicely summarizes this cognitive, cosmological process: �The two divine principles of perception [sia] and creative speech [hu] are the rational forces by which creation is achieved, when the creator god first perceives the world as a concept and then brings it into being through this first utterance. To achieve this, the creator uses the principle of magic [heka], a force that, according to Egyptian belief, could transform a spoken command into reality� (2002, 86). Egyptian metaphysics was rooted in the idea of developing an awareness of concepts and then correctly expressing those concepts so as to create a �right dealing� and just order. At the most essential level, this cognitive process relied on the correct word and phraseology to reflect the idea that had the power to determine order.

Now, there are an additional ten pages of this paper to go and this is already a behemoth of a post. But since smarxist�s posted thoughts also brought up the Babel myth I will finish up this section, which touches on related ideas, before calling it quits.

quote:
While maat was the fundamental principle of order in the Egyptian cosmos, the Egyptian metaphysician recognized that order was not something created and fixed but rather something to be created and that consequently a break in the sameness of order was necessary for true action. Like their Hebrew neighbors, the Egyptians believed that the paradise of maat was threatened by an adversary determined to upset the reasoned, linguistic order that had been established at the beginning of time. Lurking in the netherworld of the Egyptian cosmos was the demon serpent Apophis. According to the mythology, Apophis was the �embodiment of the powers of dissolution, darkness and non-being� (Wilkinson 2003, 221). Essentially, Apophis was the nemesis of the sun god Re. In the �Book of Gates,� Re sails across the sky and through the underworld, governing the world as well as bringing it light and life. Apophis, as the enemy of order, threatens to overturn the divine barque at sunrise and sunset with the intention of preventing the journey that not only symbolizes maat but is the cosmic act of enforcing maat. Aiding Re on this journey is Heka.

In this myth, Heka is linked to Re as his protector. As Robert Ritner notes, �Heka protects the passage of the sun through the netherworld he defends the very created order itself � (1993, 19). R.T. Rundle Clark underlines the importance of this pairing of Re and Heka, pointing out that �the solar barque is the centre of the regulation of the universe, so it is suitable that it should be manned by the personifications of intellectual qualities� (1959, 249�50). Re represents the agent of maat. As its agent, he must meet the challenges of disorder with the instruments of order. Without the intelligent awareness and proper utilization of Heka, he is helpless in the face of disorder. The agent of order (be it Re, the king, or the average Egyptian) must seamlessly match his or her intentions and actions to the metaphysical demands of cosmic order. The onto-cosmological narrative makes it clear that only intelligent action is true action.

This connection between rhetoric, heka, and Apophis is drawn even more clearly by Ludwig D. Morenz. In his essay �Apophis: On the Origin and Nature of an Egyptian Anti-God,� Morenz moves beyond mythology and netherworlds to explore the etymological meaning of the name Apophis. Morenz identifies two elements in this demon god�s name.The first element �3 means �great� and the second element, pp, translates as �roar, babbler, babble.� Morenz believes that pp is �an onomatopoeic word imitating the inarticulate or even nonverbal sound of this mythological water snake� (2004, 203). This construction is similar to the Greek root for barbarian� barbar, which is onomatopoeic for the inarticulate speech of foreigners.

Putting these elements together, Apophis comes to mean �great babbler,� an onto-cosmological concept for gibberish and confused speech. Morenz writes that Apophis is understood to be evil because �language endows meaning and relation, and Apophis is the negation of precisely these ideas� (2004, 204). Yet Apophis was more than a mere symbol of a distant, cosmic crisis. Assman sees Apophis as denoting a �danger that threatens life on all its semantic levels and can attack at any time and in any form� (1995, 54). Because the Egyptian cosmos was based on the intelligent articulation of perception, Apophis threatens it by confusing language and, therefore, wisdom. He is the very antithesis of reasoned speech and order.

In their onto-cosmological writings, the Egyptians clearly illustrate the role of rhetoric as defined by Burke:

quote:
Let us observe, all about us, forever goading us, though it be in fragments, the motive that attains its ultimate identification in the thought, not of the universal holocaust, but of the universal order�as with the rhetorical and dialectic symmetry of the Aristotelian metaphysics, whereby all classes of being are hierarchally arranged in a chain or ladder or pyramid of mounting worth, each kind striving towards the perfection of its kind, and so towards the kind next above it, while the striving of the entire series head in God as the beloved cynosure and sinecure, the end of all desire. (1969b, 333, emphasis his)

We all seek order rather than chaos, and then we desire to express that order in some way. Yet it is in chaos, or in the face of disorder, that the power of formative and performative speech is found. The desire to express order is secondary to the need to recognize possibility in the epistemological crisis. Therefore, reasoning- and language-using agents find themselves going from a situation in which �no point of reference is possible and hence no orientation can be established� (Eliade 1957, 21) to one in which they �must consider truth not as something fixed and final but as something to be created moment by moment in the circumstances� that they find themselves in and that they must cope with (Scott 1994, 318). It is within this context of uncertainty that rhetorical magic becomes necessary.

The latter half of the paper is subtitled, �Antifoundationalist Rhetoric and the Demands of Ethical Magic,� so if anybody asks me to share with them what qualifies as demands of ethical magic I will post that half too. But this post is already uhhhhhhhhh of significant length, so despite my interest in demonstrating The Demands of Ethical Magic I must also tend to the demands of ethical posting and abbreviate the journey here to minimize the scrolling necessary for those uninterested in its contents. Also we are probably close to a page break by now and I should get this in at the bottom of an existing page rather than the tippy-top of a new one I hope that this was enjoyable and informative, typhus et al

I don't think I have quite enough room to stitch the second post in here without running afoul of the character limit, so... it is forthcoming.

# ? Dec 8, 2023 20:12

LITERALLY A BIRD: Sep 27, 2008; I knew you were trouble
when you flew in

quote:

Okay I�m back.

quote:
The duality of language explored by the �Memphite Theology� and the Apophis legend clearly illustrate that the ancient Egyptians believed, like Kenneth Burke, that language was capable of both �putting things together and taking things apart� (1969c, 49). These onto-cosmological narratives also reveal Ptah as a symbolic representation of the foundationalist perspective that truth is objectively present in the world and can be apprehended and expressed through logocentric discourse. Apophis, on the other hand, shows that purposefully inarticulate language can hinder the movement toward truth. In both cases, Egyptians recognized rhetoric as a purposeful attempt to secure cooperation through words carefully chosen to appeal to a particular audience in a particular situation. While rhetoric must reference the truth (that is, must not be created from whole cloth), the goal of rhetoric is to construct a text that �directs the attention into some channels rather than others� (Burke 1969a, 45). A text is meant to reflect only what the speaker wishes the audience to perceive. Therefore, the text reflects exigency, not truth.

It is this dissonance between the apprehended and spoken truth that intrigued the ancient Egyptians. While they did not reject the idea of an objective reality (maat remains maat regardless of human attempts to thwart it), they clearly understood that a discourse about reality is �itself a human construct, articulate in a language that is inevitably situated in a particular time, place, and culture� (Consigny 2001, 64). This attitude, in fact, is not a departure from the �Memphite Theology� at all. The homology between the logocentric reasoning of Ptah and the tongues of �gods and men� shows that human speech, like divine speech, is capable of expressing order based on what is observed. The tongue speaks, after all, what the heart has devised. The heart, then, will base its thoughts on two sets of exigency: the desire of the agent and the particular situation of an audience.

Therefore, if the ancient Egyptians were foundational in their thinking about the epistemology of rhetoric, they were antifoundational in their attitudes toward the expression of that knowledge. An antifoundational position is skeptical about the existence of a one-to-one relationship between truth and the expression of truth. Consigny writes that antifoundationalists �characterize discourse as a form of social behavior in which words acquire meaning not by referring to independent entities in the world, but by playing a role in ... language games ... They thus reject the notion that any use of language is able to provide an impartial, unbiased account of the true nature of things� (2001, 64). The Egyptians never saw truth and language as synonymous. Truth was to be sought and a relationship with it maintained. Language, on the other hand, was to be scrutinized and controlled. So, language was not truth, but, rather, an attempt to express the multiple perspectives of truth.

This is precisely the rhetorical magic William Covino defines as �the practice of disrupting and recreating articulate power: a (re)sorcery of spells for generating multiple perspectives� (1994, 90). The articulate expression of multiple perspectives is the natural outcome from an utterance spoken from within a �two-fold plane.� As Robert L. Scott notes, rhetoric is epistemic because one must actively seek to know what �truth� is being presented for consideration. He writes that �at best (or least) truth may be seen as dual: the demands of the precepts one adheres to and the demands of the circumstances in which one must act� (1994, 318). Truth, then, emerges in two ways: cosmologically as foundational belief and ontologically as an antifoundational linguistic act. Both speaker and audience must be willing to discover the difference.

The ability to create the perception of being through language was the magic the Egyptians saw in rhetoric. Covino nicely summarizes magic�s rhetoricity as �the process of inducing belief and creating community with reference to the dynamics of a rhetorical situation� (1994, 11). Covino makes two points here. In the same way that rhetoric exemplifies the seeking out and demonstration of truth, magic represents the human means of discovering and expressing the divine truth of the cosmos. Further, just as rhetoric is the counterpart of the dialectic, so magic directly references mysticism. For while mysticism is clearly situated in cosmology and magic in ontology, both come together as apodictic speech when they establish the �definition of a phenomenon by tracing it back to ultimate principles, or archai� (Grassi 1980, 19). It is at this point that rhetoric and magic begin to converge. In the same way that rhetoric demonstrates truth, the magic reveals mysticism. In this manner, magic is the microcosm of mysticism�s macrocosm.

For the ancient Egyptians, the tension between mystical belief and magical expression was revealed in their mode of discourse. They made a clear distinction between the idea of truth and representations of truth. The mystical experiences that revealed truth were expressed through magio-rhetoric, a highly symbolic discourse filtered through social expectations and personal exigency. Truth was to be experienced in the cosmological realm of the gods and expressed to those in the ontological social realm. Magio-rhetoric, then, was the epistemic process of tracing an expression back to its foundational principles as revealed in the onto-cosmological narrative of a culture. These logocentric myths illustrate that, for the ancient Egyptians, the magio-rhetorical situation from which an agent spoke was marked by uncertainty. It is this imbalance between apprehension and expression that creates the exigency for rhetoric. Intuitively and linguistically, an agent knows that something is wrong. The question is, what can be done?

Again, the ancient Egyptians relied on myth to answer this question. Stories about the gods supplied a specific structure for converting uncertainty into meaningful action. Assman suggests that �regularity, recurrence, and predictability attained significance against the background of the contingent, unique, and deviant,� and that this was the means by which magio-rhetorical texts mediated onto-cosmological exigency (2002, 205). Just as Ptah created order from chaos through experience, inquiry, and utterance, so each speculative narrative supplied a heuristic meant to instruct in the mediation between mystical truth and magical expression. These narratives were not magical merely because they recounted the adventures of the gods but also because they supplied human beings with rhetorical strategies for investigating the elements of each unique rhetorical situation that made possible the expression of maat as revealed in isfet (disorder/chaos).

Mytho-theology, bitches. Let�s take a look at one of the most famous pieces of Egyptian literary mythology: The Contendings.

quote:
In Egyptian literature, this onto-cosmological exigency is explored in �The Contendings of Horus and Seth,� a story that recounts the events following Osiris�s murder at the hands of his brother Seth. According to this narrative, the murder of the great god king is followed by a less-than-epic eighty-year court case to determine who, Horus or Seth, will ascend to the throne of Egypt. The Ennead is split on who is the rightful heir. The Horus group sees the son as being the legitimate heir. Toth, the god of wisdom and writing, asks, �Shouldn�t we ascertain who is the imposter? Is the office of Osiris to be awarded to Seth even while his son Horus is still about?� (Wente 2003, 93). The group supporting Seth counters by asking �Is this office to be awarded to the lad even while Seth, his elder brother, is still about?� (Wente 2003, 95). This is political theater we easily recognize today. The rule of law, what is right, is being restructured and redirected to meet changing agendas and preferred outcomes. Both parties to the debate make their case in the means best suited to achieve their agendas. The Horus group bases its case on law and order. The god Shu reasons that �justice [maat] is a possessor of power. [Administer] it [maat] by saying �Award the office to [Horus]�� (Wente 2003, 92). Further, the Seth group is admonished for �exercising authority alone� (Wente 2003, 92). According to the �Memphite Theology,� thought and action (speech) must reflect maat. The Seth group�s claim is a mere exercise of authority, then, because it is devoid of an ethical position. Instead, its exigency is based entirely on a desire to pursue personal concerns and political agendas.

Not having the authority of maat, the group loyal to Seth use personal attacks in place of reasoned argument. The issue, the group claims, is not that Seth is a better leader but that Horus�s youth disqualifies him from the throne. As the �Universal Lord� tells Horus, �You are despicable in your person, and this office is too much for you, you lad, the odor of whose mouth is bad� (Wente 2003, 94). Thus although Horus is qualified for the throne because he holds the power of maat, his critics object to his kingship based on his age and his bad breath. These objections are absurd, but the politics of personal destruction is sufficient enough to cloud the issue. Through its satirical tone, �The Contendings of Horus and Seth� illustrates that the ethical demand of maat can be obscured by subjective interpretations and presentations meant to misdirect an audience from the issue of justice.

Despite clever arguments and wishful thinking, the reality of maat cannot be altered. Isis illustrates the essential nature of truth when she tricks Seth into evaluating the situation with maat rather than his ambition. Disguised as a beautiful young woman, Isis seeks an audience with Seth. Finding him alone, she testifies that �I was the wife of a cattleman to whom I bore a son. My husband died, and the lad started tending his father�s cattle. But, then a stranger came and settled down in my stable. He said thus speaking to my son, �I shall beat you, confiscate your father�s cattle, and evict you�� (Wente 2003, 96). Seth, distracted from his own agenda, responds to this intrigue with �Are the cattle to be given to the stranger even while the man�s son is still about?� (Wente 2003, 96). Isis then reveals herself and admonishes Seth, saying �Be ashamed of yourself ! It is your own mouth that has said it. It is your own cleverness that has judged you� (Wente 2003, 96). Isis shows that Seth�s mouth has expressed ethical knowing and, consequently, justified him.

This rebuke is taken directly from the �Memphite Theology.� The text instructs that �sight, hearing, breathing� �report to the heart, and it makes every understanding come forth� and that the mouth repeats what is in the heart� (Lichtheim 1975, 54).The heart takes what is seen and arranges that information in accordance with the foundational qualities of justice. Thoughts and words reflect justice only when they express maat. In fact, it is in the best interest of an agent to participate in the doing of maat. To ignore ethical justice is to step outside the established ontological framework. As �The Memphite Theology� states, only one who does maat actually lives.

�The Contendings of Horus and Seth� illustrates that maat is the natural consequence of reasoned thought. It actually takes effort and planning to distract one�s self and others from the reality of ethical justice. Magic, as epistemic rhetoric, functions to distract an agent from subjective, anti-foundational agendas in order and thereby refocuses the cognitive energies of him or her in such a way as to encourage the syncretization of his or her behavior with cosmic truth. When distracted from his own subjective position, even Seth responds with maat. The point of the story is clear. We cannot alter maat with the clever arrangement of words. Although humans possess, through reasoned speech, the power to create possibilities and explore them, these alternate views are not maat. Therefore, it is not maat that must be preserved or protected or maintained but rather one�s relationship to maat.

underlines last few words several times, circles, looks back up at you to be sure you are still paying attention.

Our relationship to the Source. We must remain guided by, and perform action in accordance to, Cosmic Truth and Justice, to be functioning members of onto-cosmological society.

quote:
The dualistic nature of discourse as illustrated in the onto-cosmological narratives manifested itself in the day to day lives of the ancient Egyptians. In everything from pharaonic victory steles to court cases to letters to the dead, this culture�s rhetoric struggled to apprehend and express truth, cosmologically to the gods and ontologically to each other, through a complex linguistic system. These complexities, however, were clarified through a speaker�s adherence to maat. Maat, rhetorically speaking, becomes an organizing principle a speaker follows in order to structure both the investigation of phenomena and the expression of the particular knowledge he or she arrives at. In the scheme of Egyptian magic, language not only expresses maat, but stresses that the most powerful speech is that which comes nearer to approximating the reality of maat. One knows maat by doing and speaking maat. Conversely, it is maat that an audience or reader will respond to in communication. Maat, then, is the preferred method of rhetorical arrangement.

For the ancient Egyptians, no single event characterized the need for maat as mode like the passing from life to death. The Egyptian funerary cult believed that the deceased required care in the afterlife just as the living did in life. Therefore, before death, an individual set out to establish an endowment for his/her mortuary cult that was �designed to perpetuate the owner�s name among the living and his divine status among the dead� (Ritner 1997, 140). Daily food and water offerings as well as prayers and the speaking of the dead�s name performed by a ka-priest or family member were required if one were to live forever. The real fear for the soon-to-be-departed was not the inevitability of death but the eternal death that would result should these rituals cease to be carried out. In �The Man Who Was Weary of Life,� the writer laments:

quote:
Even those who built with stones of granite,
Who constructed the magnificent pyramids,
Perfecting them with excellent skill,
So that the builders might become gods,
Now their offering stones are empty,
And they are like those who die on the river bank with no survivors.
(Tobin 2003, 181�82)

This passage clearly expresses the pessimism Egyptians felt regarding the possibility of an eternal life that relied on the devotion of a funerary cult. If the builders of the pyramids could be forgotten, what hope could there be for a simple farmer or fisherman?

Once again, the goals of magic and rhetoric converge. In the hopes of countering the forgetfulness of the living, the Egyptians relied on the logological precepts of their metaphysics to induce ontological action. Cosmologically, the magic of image and word was used to ensure that �the deceased would be provided with the full range of necessary items. Actual menus are often inscribed beside the altar within the tomb chapel, in association with the standard funerary prayer� (Ritner 1997, 141). When visitors entered the funerary chapel of the tomb, they would see the images of food, speak the name of the food and thereby �magically� transform the word back to the ideal form in the cosmological realm. The prayer would likewise contain the name of the deceased. By reciting the prayer and the name, the visitor would ensure the continued existence of the departed.

The problem, then, became enticing visitors into the tomb. Here, the Egyptians relied on the ontology of rhetoric. Ritner writes that �the elaborate decorations and inscriptions of the open chapel were intended to entice visitors, who might leave offerings, pour water, or recite the funerary prayer, thereby acting themselves as ka-priests and extending the life of the cult� (1997, 141). Because their mysticism was clearly metaphysical, the Egyptians were able to examine and express this cosmological scene ontologically with magio-rhetoric. As Kenneth Burke observes, what connects rhetoric and magic is the way both rely on symbols to �get things done.� He writes that �the realistic use of addressed language to induce action in people became the magical use of addressed language to induce motion in things� (1969b, 42). Within the scene of ancient Egyptian metaphysics, this world and the one beyond still operated under the same symbol system; therefore, by Burke�s definition, this magic, rather than being irrational, was actually quite realistic. By arranging language in the appropriate manner, speakers were able to identify and cooperate with the higher, intelligible order and persuade others to do likewise.

In �Rhetoric and Identity: A Study of Ancient Egyptian Non-Royal Tombs and Tomb Autobiographies,� Carol Lipson similarly characterizes tomb chapels not only as magical places but as rhetorical texts. She writes that �in the tomb, the owner created and presented a performance of the self in visual, textual and material form. The stylized performance presented the best self, not the full reality, but the version of the self one would want to live as forever[,] ... a self deemed to be worthy, by its actions in society, to warrant permanent existence in the afterlife� (2009, 95). She concludes her argument by observing that �such persuasion to influence attitudes and actions are fundamentally rhetorical� (2009, 121). In the textual performance of the tomb, the ancient Egyptians illustrated that magio-rhetoric functioned on two levels. On the one hand, the structure of the text reflected the epistemology that referenced what was so. That is, the tomb as text existed as a demonstration of maat in that it was seen as right and just to maintain an individual in his or her eternal retirement in the west (the ancient Egyptian euphemism for the afterlife). Construction of the tomb and the awareness of its purpose required knowledge of both the cosmological workings and an understanding of the necessity of the funerary cult. On the other hand, the presentation of the text sought to illustrate what was possible. Specifically, the deceased sought to illustrate through the complex rhetoric of temple construction (the appearance of the tomb and the wording of the mortuary autobiography) that he or she was indeed worthy of an elite afterlife.

However, like our own revisionist history, these mortuary texts only represent one possible reading of past events. The ultimate test of a worthy life rested on the visitors and their own reading and understanding of the tomb. History shows that even the most extravagantly decorated tombs were not persuasive enough to prevent desecration, defacement, or dismantling. Despite the artistic and rhetorically sound arrangement and presentation of a life, it was ultimately left to the discernment of the audience whether a departed individual would live forever in the west or simply cease to exist.

The final section is our conclusion. It is titled, Ancient Egyptian Magic for the Modern Rhetorical Situation.

quote:
This paper has examined the role magic and mysticism played in the onto-cosmological belief system of ancient Egypt. Egyptian speculative thinkers conceived the relationship between magic and mysticism in much the same way Aristotle conceived the relationship between rhetoric and philosophy. Just as rhetoric serves as the counterpart to the dialectic in the demonstration of truth, so too magic functioned as a means to apprehend and express the mystical. In the course of this process, the universal mind and the human mind became one. Acting as a balance in the middle of this process was maat, the fulcrum of the onto-cosmological narrative. To discover what was possible, one needed to be able to epistemically fuse individually motivated action with what was morally right. Magic was no less than the apprehension and expression of the mystical realm through individual, ethical action.

It is clear that the ancient Egyptians took discourse about truth very seriously. Reason, language, and ethics were at the very heart of their metaphysics. In fact, �The Memphite Theology� goes so far as to portray reason as the ethical expression of the divine will. The seriousness with which they attended to onto-cosmological matters extended to the way they approached their epistemology as well. How �effective� one was was determined by his or her ability to not only speak the truth but also apprehend the truth (or lack thereof ) in the speech of another. Their magic was a practical, epistemic rhetoric meant to realign personal ambition with maat. In other words, as revealed in the essential narratives of their culture, magic was epistemic rhetoric in that it stressed the active pursuit of justice through thinking and speaking.

In my study of ancient Egypt, this emphasis on metacognition, semiotics, and ethics has intrigued me more than pyramids, mummies, or golden sarcophagi. Yet little attention has been paid to how the Egyptians expressed their metaphysics with rhetoric. Ancient Egypt was a culture that saw effective rhetoric as active rhetoric. Its rhetoric was a mode of discourse that stressed an interactive understanding of maat on the part of speakers and their responsibility to express maat through the construction of texts. In a highly stratified culture with a nearly incomprehensible bureaucracy, a subordinate, as Lipson rightly argues, could rebuke a superior with the ethical demands of maat using maat as function, form, and proof. Clearly, in a culture that had the same word for truth and justice, epistemic action was not only required but was also a moral imperative.

The greatest lesson these ancient metaphysicians have to teach is seemingly the most esoteric. Yet, like most aspects of Egyptology, the surface esotericism obscures a humanistic pragmatism that speaks across time to reveal the promise of our own existential exceptionalism. Whereas the Egyptians mystified discourse, our culture has demystified the use of language to the point where the matter of whose metaphysics is more primitive is debatable. We live in a world of information saturation rather than of semiotic saturation. Our situation should demand the same deep level of interaction that ancient Egyptian metaphysics required. Instead, what is �true� has been reduced to easy taxonomies and �-isms� that require only the belief in the belief of another. When a radio talk show host can promise his listeners �I think about this stuff so you don�t have to,� and those listeners respond with emphatic �mega dittos,� the ethical relationship to the truth has been clearly surrendered.

To be sure, the ancient Egyptians have a great deal to teach us. For me, however, it is their demand that talking points not be spoken until they have been fully investigated using the cosmological gift of reason given to all human beings, that one�s ethical loyalty and duty is to the truth not individuals or institutions, and, finally, that when confronted with isfet (the opposite of maat), we are required to speak�not in the shrill discourse of partisanship but in the calm, reasoned speech of justice (which is loved)� that teach us the most about how we can become vindicated souls.

I did also talk about that Mytho-Theology paper for a little bit in one additional post, but maybe I won't vomit out three giant reposted effortposts in a row so that I can share interesting things on another day too :lol:

anyway there is my gamble of a :justpost:

rather than being coy and asking first if people here would like to read it, since I have yet to hear "no, absolutely loving not, why would you even ask that, you idiot" in reply when I do ask if I should post things like this

LITERALLY A BIRD fucked around with this message at 20:35 on Dec 8, 2023

# ? Dec 8, 2023 20:15

Hieronymous Alloy: Jan 30, 2009; Why! Why!! Why must you refuse to accept that Dr. Hieronymous Alloy's Genetically Enhanced Cream Corn Is Superior to the Leading Brand on the Market!?!; Morbid Hound

LITERALLY A BIRD posted:

Yeah! I totally get that! My relationship to Egyptian religion and literature started as a kid who just thought it was all really cool, and then the more I read and became capable of understanding the more it all began appealing to me on a deep personal level for a multitude of interrelated reasons. The Tale of the Shipwrecked Sailor is a great example, when I read it as a teenager I was like "okay, cool snake " and then I re-read it last year, with twenty years of trying to develop a modern relationship with this ancient religion and its perception of the world under my belt, and was just like "oh it's about good speech, of course."

This is similar to how I feel about Jane Austen. When I first tried to read her I found her unutterably inane and boring. After I had watched enough regency films and took a few college courses, though, once I actually understood the social context and knew the difference between a dog cart and a barouche-landau, I realized she was one of the great writers of the world.

# ? Dec 8, 2023 20:33

galagazombie: Oct 31, 2011; A silly little mouse!

Jazerus posted:

Publius Quinctilius Varus Did WHAT With My Legions!?!? (part 54)
1,546,921 views

The thumbnail is Augustus making a �soy face� with the text �GIVE THEM BACK!� written diagonally in giant block letters.

# ? Dec 8, 2023 20:40

FAUXTON: Jun 2, 2005; spero che tu stia bene

AUGUSTUBE #38 Kids These Days (again!) UPDATE: sent my daughter into exile

# ? Dec 8, 2023 22:01

Strategic Tea: Sep 1, 2012

Augustus posted:

At the age of nineteen, on my own initiative and with a small loan of a million talents from my father, I raised an army by means of which I restored liberty to the republic, which had been oppressed by the tyranny of a faction. For which service the Senate, with complimentary resolutions, enrolled me in its order, in the consulship of Gaius Pansa and Aulus Hirtius, giving me at the same time consular precedence in voting; it also gave me the imperium. As propraetor it ordered me, along with the consuls, "to see that the republic suffered no harm." In the same year, moreover, as both consuls had fallen in war, the people elected me consul and a triumvir for settling the constitution (1/35) .

# ? Dec 8, 2023 22:11

Tree Bucket: Apr 1, 2016; R.I.P.idura leucophrys

LITERALLY A BIRD posted:

I am just going to copy/paste this whole-rear end post (and its sequel post) in here without revising my commentary because I am just not that ambitious today

A Good Post.
We could start referring to ai-generated "art" as The Great Babbler

# ? Dec 9, 2023 00:25

LITERALLY A BIRD: Sep 27, 2008; I knew you were trouble
when you flew in

I realized that although My Favorite Paper illustrates well the perceived relationship between skillful rhetoric and magical effect, it does not explicitly discuss or confirm the thing I was actually trying to provide evidence for, the part where people would invoke ma'at to navigate fraught social situations. I am sure papers have been written on this specifically but I don't have any to hand, I guess. I really would like to emphasize why the sailor's story can be understood the way we are understanding it though, so I will use two opposite extremes to support me.

Wikipedia, on "ma'at as a rhetorical concept":

quote:

James Herrick states that the major objective of rhetoric is for a rhetor to persuade (to alter) an audience's view to that of the rhetor; for example, an attorney uses rhetoric to persuade a jury that his/her client is innocent of a crime.[58] Maat in letters written to subordinates to persuade allegiance to them and the pharaoh; subordinates would evoke Maat to illustrate a desire to please.[59] To directly disagree with a superior was considered highly inappropriate; instead, inferior citizens would indirectly evoke Maat to assuage a superior's ego to achieve the desired outcome.[59]

And a primary source, an excerpt from the wisdom text "The Maxims of Ptahhotep" (Literature of Ancient Egypt, 3rd Ed):

quote:

State your business without concealing (anything),
Proffer your opinion in the council of your lord.
If you can speak fluently and easily,
It will not be difficult as an agent to give your account,
And no one will answer, 'What does he know of it?'
Even an official whose property has fared poorly,
If he thinks about reproachment concerning it,
Will be silent saying (only), 'I have no comment.'

The Maxims/Instructions/Teachings of Ptahhotep were largely a collection of etiquette texts, offering guidelines for correct speech and conduct in various potentially difficult situations. Compassion, fair-mindedness, and knowing when and how to speak and when to hold your silence are themes throughout the text.

quote:

Be painstaking all the time that you are speaking,
So that you may say things of importance.

I was not quite painstaking enough before making those previous posts in here. Alas. :lmao:

# ? Dec 9, 2023 00:52

LITERALLY A BIRD: Sep 27, 2008; I knew you were trouble
when you flew in

Tree Bucket posted:

A Good Post.
We could start referring to ai-generated "art" as The Great Babbler

Aah! Bless you lol, thank you, I started beating myself up over posting something less relevant than intended just before you posted this I think. I am glad it was not a total mistake :buddy:

also I love your avatar. :3:

# ? Dec 9, 2023 00:54

Ghost Leviathan: Mar 2, 2017; Exploration is ill-advised.

The idea of truth and sincerity in word and deed is quite important to a lot of ancient culture, philosophy and religion. There's a lot said on the story of the shipwrecked sailor who makes friends with a snake, but it seems like a point of the ending is basically the captain assuring him that if he speaks the truth with confidence and conviction, then he'll believe him no matter how crazy it is.

Probably makes a lot of sense considering the ancient world- there's a lot of weird poo poo out there that people don't necessarily understand, both dangerous and wonderful.

# ? Dec 10, 2023 15:16

LITERALLY A BIRD: Sep 27, 2008; I knew you were trouble
when you flew in

Ghost Leviathan posted:

The idea of truth and sincerity in word and deed is quite important to a lot of ancient culture, philosophy and religion. There's a lot said on the story of the shipwrecked sailor who makes friends with a snake, but it seems like a point of the ending is basically the captain assuring him that if he speaks the truth with confidence and conviction, then he'll believe him no matter how crazy it is.

You know, you're right, obviously I have a particular area of focus but ancient Persian religion (for example) also believed in Truth as an ultimate force, didn't it? That's so interesting. The emphasis on the protective, justifying power of Telling The Truth was a huge part of why modern day teenage me started feeling such a yearning toward this very un-modern religion. We shouldn't have forgotten about Truth imo

# ? Dec 10, 2023 18:30

Swing State Victim: Nov 8, 2012

Slightly late to the discussion re: public baths, but parts of the US actually did have a revival in public baths around the turn of the century, often with neoclassical elements. This is what passes for surviving ancient history around here, and I used to walk by one that is now a residence. They were only ever really stopgap measures for the urban poor and disappeared as indoor plumbing became legally required/widely accessible in residences. Appropriately, one of the baths pictured here is just a few buildings down from a literal poo poo fountain.

http://forgottenchicago.com/articles/public-bath-houses/

# ? Dec 12, 2023 07:17

Cast_No_Shadow: Jun 8, 2010; The Republic of Luna Equestria is a huge, socially progressive nation, notable for its punitive income tax rates. Its compassionate, cynical population of 714m are ruled with an iron fist by the dictatorship government, which ensures that no-one outside the party gets too rich.

Can I ask for some help and recommendations.

I'm looking for some history books to read that people can buy me for Xmas. Definitely on the lighter side, so pop history but ideally not awful from a history standpoint.

Not super fussed on period or coverage, more interested in reading interesting stuff about history. This extends all the way to the now times, I just don't wanna post in mil hist thread cause I'm way behind on reading it.

Main requirements, interesting light reading, not historically awful.

Edit- for reference I quite liked Tom Holland's Rubicon

Thank you!

Cast_No_Shadow fucked around with this message at 18:56 on Dec 13, 2023

# ? Dec 13, 2023 18:44

WoodrowSkillson: Feb 24, 2005; *Gestures at 60 years of Lions history*

Cast_No_Shadow posted:

Can I ask for some help and recommendations.

I'm looking for some history books to read that people can buy me for Xmas. Definitely on the lighter side, so pop history but ideally not awful from a history standpoint.

Not super fussed on period or coverage, more interested in reading interesting stuff about history. This extends all the way to the now times, I just don't wanna post in mil hist thread cause I'm way behind on reading it.

Main requirements, interesting light reading, not historically awful.

Thank you!

https://www.amazon.com/SPQR-History-Ancient-Mary-Beard/dp/1631492225 Mary Beard is great and approachable Roman history and she always highlights regular people as much as she can.

# ? Dec 13, 2023 18:51

euphronius: Feb 18, 2009

Caution, she is explicitly anti communist and Stalin

Also her Pompeii book is really good

# ? Dec 13, 2023 18:52

PittTheElder: Feb 13, 2012; Yes, it's like a lava lamp.

Cast_No_Shadow posted:

Can I ask for some help and recommendations.

I'm looking for some history books to read that people can buy me for Xmas. Definitely on the lighter side, so pop history but ideally not awful from a history standpoint.

Not super fussed on period or coverage, more interested in reading interesting stuff about history. This extends all the way to the now times, I just don't wanna post in mil hist thread cause I'm way behind on reading it.

Main requirements, interesting light reading, not historically awful.

Edit- for reference I quite liked Tom Holland's Rubicon

Thank you!

If you liked Rubicon, I'd definitely recommend Duncan's Storm Before the Storm as a compliment to that, it's all about the dysfunction of the previous generation.

# ? Dec 13, 2023 19:05

Hieronymous Alloy: Jan 30, 2009; Why! Why!! Why must you refuse to accept that Dr. Hieronymous Alloy's Genetically Enhanced Cream Corn Is Superior to the Leading Brand on the Market!?!; Morbid Hound

Cast_No_Shadow posted:

it.

Main requirements, interesting light reading, not historically awful.

Edit- for reference I quite liked Tom Holland's Rubicon

Thank you!

Any "landmark edition" of the classics but especially Xenophons Anabasis

_Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds_

Theodore Rex by Edmund Morris

Peter the Great by Robert K. Massie

# ? Dec 13, 2023 19:05

Siivola: Dec 23, 2012

A popular blogger/professor's book rec list: https://acoup.blog/book-recommendation-list/

# ? Dec 13, 2023 19:26

Gaius Marius: Oct 9, 2012

Cast_No_Shadow posted:

Can I ask for some help and recommendations.

I'm looking for some history books to read that people can buy me for Xmas. Definitely on the lighter side, so pop history but ideally not awful from a history standpoint.

Not super fussed on period or coverage, more interested in reading interesting stuff about history. This extends all the way to the now times, I just don't wanna post in mil hist thread cause I'm way behind on reading it.

Main requirements, interesting light reading, not historically awful.

Edit- for reference I quite liked Tom Holland's Rubicon

Thank you!

The Guns of August and A Distant Mirror are very readable histories that are pretty deprecated at this point, but it's not like it matters to a layman.

# ? Dec 13, 2023 19:31

Edgar Allen Ho: Apr 3, 2017; by sebmojo

euphronius posted:

Caution, she is explicitly anti communist and Stalin

Also her Pompeii book is really good

Stalin moonlighted as a roman historian?

# ? Dec 13, 2023 19:39

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 25, 2024 14:57

PittTheElder: Feb 13, 2012; Yes, it's like a lava lamp.

Oh, 1491 and 1493 by Charles C. Mann are both excellent pop history books as well (not to be confused with Menzies' travesty 1421).

Looking East from Indian Country is also great (or if you happen to be Canadian, Clearing the Plains).

E: old but still great: Rhodes' Making of the Atomic Bomb and Dark Sun. Also in that vein is cold war thread favorite Command and Control.

# ? Dec 13, 2023 19:40

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Ask/Tell > Roman/ancient history: Checkmate, Atenists

«‹›1316 »