http://SaturnianCosmology.Org/ mirrored file For complete access to all the files of this collection see http://SaturnianCosmology.org/search.php ========================================================== BLINKING BACK: EYEBALL TO EYEBALL WITH ED KRUPP by JOANNE CONMAN © copyright 2002 In an article entitled "The Sphinx Blinks ,"^1 <#ftn1> Edwin C. Krupp attempts to dispute a claim of Graham Hancock and Robert Bauval: that the Great Sphinx of Giza is meant to represent Leo and that it dates itself and the Giza complex to 10,500 BCE, when the spring equinox was in Leo. This claim of Hancock and Bauval is unlikely for several reasons, but, oddly, Krupp does not deal with many facts in his attack on their claim. If anyone has promoted the notion that the ancient Egyptians practiced some form of astronomy, it is Robert Bauval. There is little, if any evidence to support the idea that astronomy was practiced in ancient Egypt before the Late Period. It is ironic that Ed Krupp, in attempting to debunk Bauval, ignores this important point. It appears that Krupp himself has bought into the popu lar myt h that ancient Egyptians practiced astronomy. Krupp repeatedly gives the impression he believes this, with phrases like "indigenous Egyptian astronomy" and repeated references to alleged constellations. The authors of the definitive work on Egyptian "astronomical" texts, Otto Neugebauer and Richard A. Parker both said throughout their careers that there is very little actual astronomy that can be documented in Egypt prior to the Greco-Roman times.^2 <#ftn2> They rejected the idea the Egyptians engaged in astrology until that time, as well. The title of their three-volume set is unfortunate since most of the "astronomical" texts deal with the Egypt's astral religion, which was simply not early astronomy. There is no mention in Krupp's piece of the obvious evidence that raises doubts about or refutes the claims of Hancock and Bauval. For example, there is plenty of factual material that Mesopotamian texts have given us about Leo.^3 <#ftn3> We have attested records of the constellation Leo, which later became the astrological sign of Leo.^4 <#ftn4> Mesopotamian texts first list Leo about 1000 BCE, some 1500 years after the Giza pyramids. There is also the fact that nothing has been found that attests to any interest in equinoxes in ancient Egypt. No Egyptian religious festival can be definitely linked with either the spring or the fall equinox.^5 <#ftn5> Yet, Krupp ignores a fairly large body of factual material that argues against Hancock and Bauval's claims. Instead, he curiously relies on his own culturally biased knowledge of the sky and his own untrained opinion of Egyptian art to debunk the two. The problem with Krupp's relying on his own visual inspection is that what he is inspecting is not natural phenomena, but culturally specific religious material, very likely created with intentional ambiguity. A doctor of astronomy and director of the Griffith Observatory, Krupp appears to be a proponent of the Otto Neugebauer-inspired school of thought that seeks to identify the "roots of science" in the religious ideas of ancient civilizations. Krupp does not appear to be specifically trained in art history, anthropology, or Egyptology. Within Egyptology, there are experts in various periods in over 3000 years of history. Egyptian art must be understood within its own cultural context. To understand art properly, particularly symbolic, religious art, w e must know what the artistic conventions in a given culture are. We must understand the symbols. This is even more important in ancient Egypt where writing in ideographs blurs the line between pictures and written messages. Krupp appears to accept a number of unsubstantiated guesses as facts, as when he writes: "Intentionally aligned toward cardinal east, the Sphinx reflects the ritual significance of the cardinal directions in the Old Kingdom period (2686-2181 B.C.)." What we know factually is that the sphinx faces due east. We do not know to what, if anything, the sphinx was "intentionally aligned." We cannot assume anything about the "ritual significance" of cardinal directions in the Old Kingdom of ancient Egypt based on speculation that the sphinx was intentionally aligned due east. The Egyptians did not distinguish left and east or right and west linguistically.^6 <#ftn6> The Egyptians equated north with west and south with east for certain purposes. Thus, Krupp's conclusions, while obvious to modern thinking, cannot be assumed to be compatible with what is known of ancient Egyptian thought on directions. On this point, Krupp is indistinguishable from Bauval. Krupp goes on to refer to the north celestial pole as a "location of high interest to the ancient Egyptians." This additional claim has not been established concerning the Egyptians of the Old Kingdom. With respect to later periods, it is accepted by a number of people, but that does not make it correct. It is challenged in a to-be-published paper of mine. Leaping from his assumption of intentional alignment, Krupp goes on to claim his supposed alignment combined with the sphinx's name of Horus in the Horizon "reflect Egyptian ideas about the cyclical celestial renewal and its affiliation with the divine destiny of the dead pharaoh." In fact, we do not know what the Old Kingdom Egyptians called the sphinx. The names we have for the sphinx date to the New Kingdom, some one thousand to fifteen hundred years /after/ the Giza pyramids were built. We cannot assume from later texts what earlier people may have believed. There are significant cultural and religious changes between the New Kingdom and the Greco-Roman times, so this point must be emphasized further. We simply do not know what the builders of the sphinx believed about it or why they built it. Krupp states that "the zodiac is really a gift from the Greeks, primarily rooted in Mesopotamian star lore." In fact, "our" Greek zodiac is really a gift from the Babylonians.^7 <#ftn7> The Egyptians had a zodiac of their own with 36 decans. What the Greeks did was add Egyptian elements with some original ideas of their own to what the Babylonians had. Krupp describes the round zodiac ceiling from the temple of Hathor at Dendera as "a circular Egyptian relief that maps the constellations [and] includes Egyptianized (sic) images of the 12 zodiacal constellations, including Leo." Built about 50 BCE, the temple has two famous zodiacs that both show unmistakably Babylonian/Assyrian depictions of the astrological zodiac signs familiar to us. These zodiacs should not be understood as a literal representation of the sky. They are probably not portraying constellations, but rather, the astrological signs that bear the same names as the constellations. The Hellenistic astrolog ical signs, like the Egyptian decans, are mathematical constructions used to measure time. Like the Egyptian decan zodiac, the Mesopotamian/Hellenistic zodiac was used to determine when the influence of particular gods was in effect. The Dendera zodiacs appear to be reconciling the traditional Egyptian decan zodiac with the Mesopotamian/Hellenistic zodiac.^8 <#ftn8> The ceiling also depicts a number of deities who could easily be misunderstood to be constellations. Works of art need to be examined within their own cultural tradition. There are difficulties inherent in attempting to use works of art, particularly religious art, as proof of some scientific knowledge. Science as we know it did not exist in the minds of the ancient Egyptians who understood the universe as sacred, not mechanical. The Dendera zodiacs need to be seen through the eyes of the people who created them to be properly understood. The same is true of earlier Egyptian art involving images linked to the sky, commonly, but erroneously called "astronomical" ceilings. Krupp writes: "A lion constellation is depicted on the astronomical ceilings of pharaonic tombs of the New Kingdom, but that lion is not Leo. It is part of Egypt's indigenous Northern Group of constellations, and the paintings show a crouched lion near what we now recognize as the stars of the Big Dipper." While it is true that a number of New Kingdom tombs and coffins show a composite lion/crocodile creature among the astral deities, there is no evidence whatsoever that the lion-like creature is meant to portray /any/ constellation. We have no Egyptian texts confirming the existence of any lion constellation in ancient Egypt. Based on ancient Egyptian writings, Heinrich Brugsch recognized five ancient Egyptian constellations. There was no lion. Brugsch's "Astronomical and Astrological Inscriptions on Ancient Egyptian Monuments," commissioned by George R. Chamberlain, translated by Joseph Miller was serialized in /Griffith Observatory/, April 1978-January 1980, so Krupp should certainly know that there is no evidence of any lion constellation. Egyptian tombs have paintings that show a number of figures in the sky: deities and spirits of stars. We must be careful about assuming which, if any, figures are constellations. The concept of constellations itself is a culturally specific phenomena. There is nothing attesting to the existence of constellations from the Egyptians. Because there are those who would agree with the conjecture that a certain group of figures on the tomb ceilings is a group of circumpolar constellations, Krupp can probably get away with making this questionable claim. However, in addition to the fact that support for Egyptian constellations is lacking from Egyptian sources, no one has ever identified which stars creating which patterns these figures are supposed to represent. The figures are not depicted in any standard way and the reasons for the variations are not known. Unfortunately, many astronomers who play at Egyptology write from their own modern knowledge of the skies rather than focusing on what Egyptian texts a ctually say.^9 <#ftn9> Most attempts to assign figures to asterisms are unsuccessful,^10 <#ftn10> and some are even laughable.^11 <#ftn11> There are invariably leftover, orphan figures that are reluctantly acknowledged as probable gods.^12 <#ftn12> Since there is no question that many of the figures on the ceilings are deities, why shouldn't all the figures in the astral art be deities? Krupp argues correctly that the Dendera round zodiac "does not tell us the Sphinx is Leo." He goes on to explain that Leo is shown on the Dendera round zodiac and points out that the Mesopotamian zodiac is not attested as such in Egypt prior to the Late Period. Had Krupp stopped there, with a perfectly acceptable and accurate statement, there would be no problem. But there is zealotry at work here. Krupp is guilty in this piece of doing exactly what he accuses those he attacks of doing: exemplary pseudo-science. Krupp identifies the Foreleg of the traditional Egyptian funerary art on the round zodiac and then writes, "Just beneath the bull's 'knee' is the curved shape of a small crouching feline." This is not established fact. Neugebauer and Parker identify the figure as "a small lion (?)"^13 <#ftn13> while others have seen the figure as ram or lamb.^14 <#ftn14> Neugebauer and Parker do not discuss the identifications of the Dendera ceiling, although they do refer the reader to their own sources. It may be that the two researchers read that it was a lion and did not agree, or perhaps they did not agree between them. Writing alone several years later, Parker asserts that the figure is "a lion."^15 <#ftn15> But Krupp goes much further into thoroughly unsubstantiated speculation when he writes of the little creature perched on the Foreleg in the round zodiac: "This is the lion that does appear in early Egyptian images of the northern constellations near the celestial pole." That same crouched lion appears next to the Bull's Leg (the Big Dipper) on the Dendera zodiac, which also features Leo." Krupp offers nothing to support his claim but his own personal belief. Even if one were to accept the notion that the earlier tomb art depicted constellations (which is doubtful) and even if one accepts the ambiguous little creature on the Foreleg at Dendera as a lion (though it appears not to be), Krupp would still be in error. He has failed to demonstrate any connection whatsoever between these two figures. In contrast, there is good evidence that Krupp's claim is false, something he ignored in his article and something he continued to ignore when confronted with criticism of that article. The lion-like creature that appears in the earlier Egyptian astral funerary art more often than not has a large, fully extended crocodile tail.^16 <#ftn16> In at least one tomb, that of Ramses III, the creature appears to be all crocodile, or possibly a lion-headed crocodile.^17 <#ftn17> The creature is /always/ shown in a distinctive sphinx-like pose, its forelegs straight out in front of it. The creature always looks directly at the Hippo. The small creature that is portrayed curled up on the Foreleg on the round zodiac ceiling from the temple at Denderah is something of a puzzle, since it is not seen in other astral art. Whether lion, lamb, or composite, the little creature is clearly looking over its shoulder, in a very un-sphinx-like pose, with its forelegs tucked beneath it. Its forelegs appear to bend like a sheep's or goat's leg, not a lion's. The unknown little creature also lacks the large, fully extended crocodile tail most commonly found on the other figure. Perhaps most significantly, as it looks over its shoulder, it is /not/ facing the Hippo. It looks back at the zodiac in the area between Aries and Taurus. It bears no resemblance to the crocodile-tailed lion of the earlier art at all. Heter's coffin In a discussion that was underway on this topic on the Internet bulletin board of the Ma'at site, I pointed out an image from the coffin of Heter (dated to 125 CE) as a possible problem for Robert Bauval's new contention that that crocodile-tailed lion of earlier Egyptian astral funerary art is actually Leo. Heter's coffin shows the crocodile-tailed lion in its classic pose with other figures from the earlier funerary art in addition to the 12 astrological signs of the Greeks, including Leo. The coffin can be dated accurately because it is portrays Heter's horoscope. It shows the planets Jupiter and Saturn in Leo.^18 <#ftn18> There are no planets shown near the crocodile-tailed lion, though the planets are listed twice on the coffin. The art of Heter's coffin argues against the crocodile-tailed lion of Egypt's ancient astral cult bein g Leo, as Robert Bauval would now like to claim. The coffin shows that Late Period Egyptians did not identify the crocodile-tailed lion as Leo. But the portrayal of the crocodile-tailed lion on Heter's coffin, perhaps two hundred years after the Dendera temple ceiling was carved, is equally problematic for Krupp. It offers clear, convincing evidence that in the Late Period, the Egyptians were continuing to portray the distinctive sphinx-postured, crocodile-tailed lion with other traditional figures associated with the funerary art of the Egyptian astral religion. This crocodile-tailed lion appears consistently in Egyptian funerary art for over two millennia, from as early as the coffin of Heny, dated around 2000 BCE, to the Roman era coffin of Heter, dated to the second century CE. The creature was portrayed in exactly the same way for over 2000 years. The art of Heter's coffin offers good evidence that the crocodile-tailed lion of the earlier astral cult never morphed into the ambiguous little figure perched on the Dendera Foreleg. In response to criticism of his article and to valid evidence cited by Robert Bauval concerning the small creature perched on the Foreleg, Krupp took a disturbing stance by insisting that his own opinion is actual fact. When challenged on what he wrote, Krupp did not investigate further into what is factually known about the figures on Dendera ceiling or the figures of the earlier funerary art. Instead, it appears he simply looked at the little Dendera figure again and concluded that he was right. In emails that he allowed others to post on the Ma'at board on his behalf, Krupp focused on his reasons (personal opinion) for concluding the Dendera figure is a lion, while ignoring the two unsupported claims he made in his article: 1) that the Dendera figure was in fact the earlier crocodile-tailed lion, and 2) that therefore the crocodile-tailed lion of the funerary art is not Leo. Krupp's methodology in this article and his response to criticism of it is neither good science nor good scholarship. According to the Web site of the Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal (CSICOP), Krupp is member of the Council for Media Integrity, the thought police arm of CSICOP. This group has assembled "an email database of 'media watchdogs' willing to exert grassroots pressure on media conglomerates in response to paranormal and pseudoscientific programming." Taking inspiration from the late Carl Sagan's 1996 work, /The Demon Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark/, the group has established "the 'Candle in the Dark Award' to honor and publicize accurate and inspiring views of science in the media." The group has also awarded a "snuffed candle" award to those promoting views that CSICOP wishes to abolish. On their Web site, the group states, "In an era of tabloid news, pleas for accuracy and balance must become more insistent and pervasive. The Council for Media Integrity can actively promote the importance of scientific literacy, and the appreciation of the scientific method and critical thinking." Is Krupp's "Sphinx Blinks" piece truly meant to pass as an example of scientific literacy or to promote the appreciation of the scientific method or critical thinking? Scientific literacy suggests researching the known facts and discussing them all, including those that do not support one's own particular hypothesis. In a paper that pre-dates "The Sphinx Blinks" by four years, Donald V. Etz does link the lion-like creature of the astral art with the constellation Leo.^19 <#ftn19> Yet, there is no mention of this in Krupp's article when it should have been discussed. Critical thinking means clearly differentiating fact from conjecture and speculation. The scientific method does not build supposition upon unsupported conjecture. Krupp's assertion that an ambiguous figure that others have seen as a lamb or ram is in fact a lion because that's what he sees should have been clarified as his personal (untrained) opinion, not put forth as an established fact. Other opinions should have been acknowledged in his article, since the question is not settled. Krupp's further arguments that the ambiguous figure he speculates is a lion is actually a particular lion that is found in earlier Egyptian funerary art and that that "lion" is a constellation (other than Leo) do not evidence critical thinking. The earlier figure is most often a composite creature, not a lion, which Krupp neglects to mention. It may well represent a deity, not a constellation, another point never considered by Krupp. Perhaps Ed Krupp ought to be this year's recipient of CSICOP's "snuffed candle" award for his neglect of scientific literacy, the scientific method, and critical thinking in this instance. contact me who is in time 1. Krupp, Edwin C., "The Sphinx Blinks," /Sky and Telescope/, March, 2001, 86-88 <#ref1> 2. Parker, R.A. "Egyptian Astronomy, Astrology, and Calendrical Reckoning," /Dictionary of Scientific Biography/, XV Supplement 1 (Scribner's Sons, New York, 1978) 727; see also Gray, J., "Otto Neugebauer (b. 1899)," /European Mathematical Society Newsletter/ Volume 34, 1999, 24 <#ref2> 3. Rochberg-Halton, F., "New Evidence for the History of Astrology" /Journal of Near Eastern Studies/ Volume 43, 1984, 115-140; see also Koch-Westenholz, Ulla, /Mesopotamian Astrology: An Introduction to Babylonian and Assyrian Celestial Divination/ (CNI Publications, Copenhagen, 1995); and Hunger, Hermann and David Pingree, /Astral Sciences in Mesopotamia/ (Brill, Leiden, 1999) <#ref3> 4. Parpola, Simo, /Letters from Assyrian Scholars to the Kings Esarhaddon and Assurbanipal, Part I: Texts/ (Neukirchen-Vluyn, Germany, 1970); and Parpola, Simo, /Letters from Assyrian Scholars to the Kings Esarhaddon and Assurbanipal, Part II: Commentary and Appendices/ (Neukirchen-Vluyn, Germany, 1983) <#ref4> 5. Schott, Siegfried, /Altägyptische Festdaten/ (Akadamie der Wissenschaften und der Literatur, Weisbaden, 1950) <#ref5> 6. Allen, James, /Middle Egyptian/ (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 2000), 21; see also Lesko, Leonard H., "Ancient Egyptian Cosmogonies and Cosmologies," /Religion in Ancient Egypt: Gods, Myths, and Personal Practice/, Byron E. Shafer, editor (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1991), 117 <#ref6> 7. Rochberg-Halton, F., "Elements of the Babylonian Contribution to Hellenistic Astrology," /Journal of the American Oriental Society/ Volume 108, 1988, 51-62; also see Hunger, Hermann and David Pingree, /Astral Sciences in Mesopotamia/ (Brill, Leiden, 1999) <#ref7> 8. Neugebauer, Otto and Parker, Richard A., /Egyptian Astronomical Texts Vol. I/ (Brown University Press, Providence, RI, 1960), 97 <#ref8> 9. Böker, R., "Über Namen und Identifizierung der ägyptischen Dekane," /Centaurus/, Volume 27, 1984, 190-1 <#ref9> 10. Davies, Virginia Lee, "Identifying Ancient Egyptian Constellations," /Archaeoastronomy/ number 9, 1985, S102-S104 <#ref10> 11. Locher, Kurt, "Probable Identification of the Ancient Egyptian Circumpolar Constellations," /Archaeoastronomy/ number 9, 1985, S152-S153; see also Locher, Kurt, "The Ancient Egyptian Constellation Group of the Lion between the Two Crocodiles and the Bird," /Archaeoastronomy/ number 15, 1990, S49-S51 <#ref11> 12. Etz, Donald V., "A New Look at the Constellation Figures in the Celestial Diagram" /Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt/ Volume 34, 1997, 161 <#ref12> 13. Neugebauer, Otto and Parker, Richard A., /Egyptian Astronomical Texts/ Vol. III (Brown University Press, Providence, RI, 1969), 200 <#ref13> 14. De Santillana, Giorgio and Hertha von Dechend, /Hamlet's Mill/, (David R. Godine, Boston, 1998), 405 <#ref14> 15. Parker, R.A. "Egyptian Astronomy, Astrology, and Calendrical Reckoning," /Dictionary of Scientific Biography/, XV Supplement 1 (Scribner's Sons, New York, 1978) 721 <#ref15> 16. Neugebauer, Otto and Parker, Richard A., /Egyptian Astronomical Texts Vol. III/ (Brown University Press, Providence, RI, 1969) see plates 1, 5, 19, 26, 28, 50 <#ref16> 17. Neugebauer, Otto and Parker, Richard A., /Egyptian Astronomical Texts Vol. III/ (Brown University Press, Providence, RI, 1969) see plate 11 and figure 5 <#ref17> 18. Neugebauer, Otto and Parker, Richard A., /Egyptian Astronomical Texts Vol. III/ (Brown University Press, Providence, RI, 1969), 94 and plate 50 <#ref18> 19. Etz, Donald V., "A New Look at the Constellation Figures in the Celestial Diagram" /Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt/ Volume 34, 1997, 143-61 <#ref19> *RETURN TO THE SECRET CHAMBERS OF THE SANCTUARY OF THOTH* * *