(3) Hathor was the "cow of the western hills" of Thebes. It is in these hills that the temple Dêr el-Bahari lies; and this temple, if oriented originally to Sirius, would have been founded about 8000 B.C., when Sirius at rising would have an amplitude of 20° S. of E.
(4) A temple was built or restored later at Denderah, and Sirius with the cow's horns and disk became the great goddess there; and when her supremacy all over Egypt became undoubted, her birthplace was declared—at Denderah—to have been Denderah.[84]
(5) In the month-list at the Ramesseum the first month is dedicated to Sirius, the third to Hathor. This is not, however, a final argument, because local cults may have been in question.
(6) "Set" seems to have been a generic name applied to the northern (? circumpolar) constellations, perhaps because Set = darkness, and these stars, being always visible in the night, may have in time typified it. Taurt, the hippopotamus, was the wife of Set. The Thigh was the thigh of Set, etc. γ Draconis was associated therefore with Set, and the symbolism for Set-Hathor was the hippopotamus with horns and disk. Now if, as is suggested, Sirius replaced γ Draconis, and the cow replaced the hippopotamus, the cult of Set might be expected to have declined; and as a matter of fact the decline of the worship of Set, which was generally paramount under the earlier dynasties, and even the obliteration of the emblems on the monuments, are among the best-marked cases of the kind found in the inscriptions.
(7) The Isis temple of Denderah was certainly oriented to Sirius; the Hathor temple was as certainly not so oriented. And yet, in the restorations in later times (say, Thothmes III.—Ptolemies), the cult has been made Sirian, and the references are to the star which rises at the rising of the Nile.
So far, then, mythology is with me; but there is a difficulty. According to the orientation theory, the cult must follow the star; this must be held to as far as possible. But suppose the processional movement causes the initial function of a star to become inoperative, must not the cult—which, as we assume, had chiefly to do with the heralding of sunrise at one time of the year or other—change? And if the same cult is conducted in connection with another star, will not the old name probably be retained?
I do not see why the Egyptians should have hesitated to continue the same cult under a different star when they apparently quite naturally changed Orion from a form of Osiris (Sah-Osiris) and a mummy (as he was represented when the light of his stars was quenched at dawn at the rising of Sirius) to that of Sah-Horus (when in later times the constellation itself rose heliacally).
And, moreover, the antagonism of rival priesthoods has to be considered. It is extremely probable that the change of a Set temple at Denderah into a Theban Hathor-temple was only one example of a system generally adopted, at least in later times.
CHAPTER XXX.
THE TEMPLE-STARS.
The two preceding chapters should have suggested that if there be any truth in the astronomical and mythological views therein put forth, there should be other stars to deal with besides Sirius and γ Draconis, and other temples besides those at Annu, Denderah and Thebes which have to be studied.