If the archæologists are right in attributing the granite temple of Osiris (?), near the sphinx, to a date anterior to, or even contemporaneous with, the second pyramid, we have evidence that in the early dynasties the temple building in stone, and even in granite brought from Aswân, was as perfect in the matter of workmanship as in the eighteenth dynasty; and that it was not then the fashion to inscribe walls, but only statues and stelas. May it possibly be that the fashion in question came in, or reached its greatest development, during the eighteenth dynasty, and that on this account so many temples are ascribed to that period, whereas they were actually in existence before?
If the prior dynasties built no temples, why did they not do so? and if they did, where are they, if some of those inscribed by the eighteenth dynasty be not they?
In the absence of final archæological evidence—that is, admitting Mariette's own doubt as to the mere existence of inscriptions—are there any astronomical considerations which may possibly help us? Assuming that the temples were astronomically oriented, we have one registering for us the time elapsed since the original direction of the axis was laid down, in terms of the change in the obliquity of the ecliptic.
We have others registering time in like manner in terms of the change due to precession, if we can get any light as to the stars towards which the temples were oriented.
I have already dealt with the temple of Amen-Rā in Chapter XI., and we found a foundation date of 3700 B.C. for the original shrine, so far as the rough observations already available can be trusted. Assuming the accuracy of this determination, it is clear that we must look for stars with appropriate amplitudes between that date and say 2500 B.C.
Let us take the temple of Mut (X of Lepsius); its amplitude is 72½ N. of E. This was the amplitude of γ Draconis about 3500 B.C. This temple, then, bore the same relation to M as T did to L! We have two cases of two temples erected at different dates to the same star.
Although it has been convenient to begin with Thebes for the reasons given, the records concerning any one temple there are far more restricted than those which relate to some temples elsewhere; while the cult can only be determined in few instances. I propose, therefore, for the present to content myself with the above general considerations showing the first application of the method of investigation adopted, and to pass on to Denderah, where we are sure of the cult and where many particulars are given.
CHAPTER XIX.
THE PERSONIFICATION OF STARS—THE TEMPLE OF ISIS AT DENDERAH.
We have now to pass from the building ceremonials and a general consideration of the temples at Karnak, to the worships to which the various temples were dedicated. And to do this we must face the problems of Egyptian mythology, so far as the names and origins of the various gods and goddesses are concerned.
