228 CHAPTER 5: OSIRIS IN THE PREDYNASTIC PERIOD In her research for What This Awl Means, Janet Spector accessed the written records left by white settlers (traders, missionaries, government workers), which described to some extent the culture of the native peoples in the area she investigated. She also consulted members of remaining related tribes still living in the area. Comparable sources of information are obviously not available for the Egyptians of 4000 to 3000 BCE. Instead, ethnographic data can be obtained only from obliquely related sources, such as the Nilotic tribes discussed in the previous chapter. Historical, written data is found only in the records and iconography of the Dynastic Egyptians. The first written material, the Pyramid Texts, separated from Predynastic mortuary culture by approximately 400 years, provides the closest possible written link to the mortuary rituals and spells of the Predynastic people. Their grave culture suggests the performance of well-established mortuary rituals at the graveside, and these undoubtedly included spells, offering verses, incantations, and professions — perhaps the precursors of the Pyramid Texts. Using the example of Mesopotamia, Ucko stated that, in cases of continuity of culture from prehistoric to historic times, the beliefs and practices of the historic culture "may be important and legitimate" (Ucko 1962: 43). In the case of Egypt, the historic mortuary culture focused on a belief in the immortality of the king, addressed frequently in the Pyramid Texts as an "Osiris" or intimately related to Osiris, god of the Underworld. Evidence of the Osirian beliefs does not appear until the written Pyramid Texts in the late 5th and 6th Dynasties. Symbols associated with Osiris, such as the djed pillar, are not found amongst Badarian or Nagada iconography. Hence it seems as though the early Dynastic priesthood developed the Osirian cycle as a religious framework and legitimation for the rituals and beliefs surrounding the immortality and divinity of their dead king. In this chapter, however, I argue the case for the presence of an Osiris-like mortuary deity and concomitant set of beliefs and practices in the Predynastic as a prerequisite for placing at least some of the figurines within the Osirian system. 229 PREDYNASTIC MORTUARY CULTURE The Egyptian emphasis on mortuary beliefs forms the basis for much of their historic art, literature, and architecture. That the Minoans constructed elaborate palaces, the Mesopotamians massive temples, and the Egyptians extensive tombs and mortuary temples attests to their respective cultural differences and philosophical beliefs, at least at the official, state level. Only 7% of the Mesopotamian figurines come from graves and the rest come from domestic circumstances, whereas nearly all of the Egyptian figurines are found in graves or the mortuary environment. Therefore, the method of interpretation for the figurines of each culture must be entirely different. For example, it would be illogical to examine the mortuary practices of the historic Mesopotamians for insight into the use of the hundreds of domestic figurines found throughout the Neolithic and Chalcolithic. All that can be tentatively concluded is that perhaps, like the historic Mesopotamian religion, the focus of prehistoric religion may have been on the living rather than the dead. I n the case of Egypt, the historic religious pre-occupation with personal immortality and the after- death experience is prefigured in the Predynastic archaeological record. Little remains of the domestic environment of the Predynastic Egyptians, whereas thousands of graves have been excavated. The widespread presence of grave goods demonstrates a belief in some form of continuation in the afterlife, and with the increase of wealth and centralisation of power, these beliefs became so important that today we remember the resultant state-based culture more for its mortuary than for its secular accomplishments. Even for the average Egyptian during the historic period, the afterlife seemed of great importance, for they lived in mud brick housing but, if possible, were buried in stone tombs. Anyone who could afford to, made elaborate preparations for the afterlife (Baines 1991c: 147) and built a tomb in the desert (ibid 144). If any sense can be made of the Predynastic figurines, it must be within the context of mortuary beliefs, and significant clues as to the nature of these beliefs should be evident in the religious beliefs and practices of the historic Egyptians. I emphasise the word "clue". The state-based mortuary religion of historic Egypt converged, at least in the Early Dynastic Period and Old Kingdom, on the 230 elite, particularly the king. The Predynastic grave goods display a more egalitarian approach to the afterlife and demonstrate the enactment of rituals for perhaps all classes, with some differentiation of burial practice for special individuals, such as those in the Armant bed burials. As class differences became more pronounced when the various cultures approached unification and state-based hierarchy under one "divine" leader, the mortuary cult came to focus increasingly on the elite, as reflected in the appearance of a small number of very wealthy brick-lined tombs by the end of Nagada III. The end of the Predynastic saw a major shift of wealthy burials to Abydos, where later Dynastic Egyptians believed Osiris to be buried. Egyptologists widely hold the belief that only after the Old Kingdom were commoners admitted to the afterlife on their own merits. Certainly after the First Intermediate Period (2181-2040 BCE), the written texts begin to include nobles and other commoners and these texts begin to appear on their coffins and tombs. Perhaps even before this, during the late Old Kingdom, this process of "democratisation" began (Lesko 1991: 101). This process does not necessarily demonstrate that, after the First Intermediate Period, commoners themselves began to believe in the afterlife and take steps to ensure the necessary requirements for the preservation of their bodies and hence their souls. Rather it suggests that, for political reasons foIlowing the disturbances of the First Intermediate Period, the elite began to accept commoners into their version of the afterlife, perhaps in order to gain their support for their ruling position. For while kings built pyramids, nobles organised their tombs, and priests developed liturgies, spells, and rituals, the average person still lived in Predynastic style, with Predynastic-style graves (Baines 1991c: 132 n24), suggesting little had changed for ordinary Egyptians since the Predynastic period. Old Kingdom documents regarding the power of the dead to inflict harm on the living (ibid 152-155) also testify to a more general, widespread belief in the afterlife than the elite texts would suggest. Since the royal cult served the king, his priests, and the elite (perhaps 5% of the population) (ibid 126-7), leaving the rest of the population to serve their own religious needs, these graves and documents of the ordinary Dynastic Egyptians demonstrate the continuation of Predynastic beliefs and practices, the predecessors of the royal mortuary cult. 231 Although the official rituals and beliefs grew out of those of the Predynastic, they did not mirror them, for the historic official rituals concentrated entirely on the soul of the king. Therefore, the historic texts, iconography and architecture can provide only clues to the possible reasons for the presence of grave figurines, as this study discovered them not to be found in the graves of ruling or elite members. The historic material might also provide clues to help explain the great variety of figurine styles, and some of the lesser emphasised iconography of the historic period can perhaps be traced to various figurine styles of the Predynastic, such as the sexually ambiguous fecundity figures and the Nile god, Hapy. The afterlife, for the Dynastic Egyptians, kings and commoners (at least after the First Intermediate Period), focused on the eschatological beliefs surrounding the god Osiris. The deceased king, from the earliest records, was believed to be the god Osiris, while the living king was Osiris son, Horus. As the "democratisation" process developed, everyone became an Osiris after death and gained immortality in the "Land of the Westerners". The origins of Osiris are obscure, and no agreement has been reached on his existence prior to his appearance in the Pyramid Texts. The collection of spells and scraps of mythology from various sources including the Pyramid Texts52 tells a story of the god Osiris, who was murdered and dismembered by his rival, Seth. His sisters, Isis and Nephyths, found him lying by the river. Isis reassembled him, revived him, and engendered their son Horus by copulating with the revived god before he entered the Underworld as immortal king and judge. The elements of this collection of myths can be interpreted in a number of ways: a legitimation of inherited power; a demonstration of the divinity of the ruling king; a declaration of the immortality of the king and hence his divine authority; a metaphor for the resurrection of the human soul, particularly the kings, in the after-life; and a metaphor for the cycle of the seasons and vegetation as determined by the annual inundation of the Nile. 52 The most comprehensive collection of the Osirian myths was eventually compiled by Plutarch in his book, De !side et Ositide, in the second century AD. 232 This chapter demonstrates the possibility, or perhaps the probability, that Osiris, or a god very much like him, was the focus of the Predynastic mortuary beliefs as well as those documented from the Dynastic. In the absence of textual evidence directly from the period in question, and in the absence of any material evidence which can be identified unequivocally as Osirian, my argument relies on clues from the earliest mortuary texts, examples from comparative ancient and contemporary religion, and the religious implications of the natural phenomena most significant for a settled, agricultural people living along the upper Nile.