I wrote to this particular Egyptologist because I found that Daniel Richard McBride, the author of 'The Egyptian Foundations of Gnosis', had been a postgraduate student of his. McBride's work is truly extraordinary, and approaches the nature of Neoplatonic philosophy in a way no-one ever has before. Or at least since the Neoplatonists themselves, who, in late antiquity, understood ancient religion in both Egypt and Assyria as the product of philosophical thought. Iamblichus, author of the
The Mysteries of the Egyptians, Chaldeans, and Assyrians, was the most explicit exponent of this idea.
Is this a viable understanding of the evidence? It is. And McBride's work associates ideas in Neoplatonic thought with the various Egyptian priestly colleges and their views on the divine. It is an extraordinary achievement, which (so far), has not been taken on board or even discussed, by any tenured scholars of the ancient world in the West (to my knowledge at least).
Daniel McBride used to have a website, from which it was possible to download his thesis. That disappeared a long time ago. It is still possible to find his thesis online (there is a link to the PDF file on my site), but he himself seems to have disappeared. I continue to wish to make contact with him to discuss his work and its implications.
The Egyptologist did not reply.
TY, June 26, 2019.
November 3, 2016
Subject: Is the history of human thought upside down?
Dear ****,
Weve not met, but we may have trod something of the same path, or similar paths over the past twenty plus years.
I published a book a year ago about the idea that our intellectual history, for one reason and another, is actually upside down (The Sacred History of Being). And that the earliest history of the human race can only be understood if we understand that there was a very sophisticated level of abstract thought at the beginnings of civilisation.
My background is a heavy engagement with philosophy, both ancient and modern, from age fifteen onwards (I am now sixty years old). I was also interested in art, religion, history, and some other subjects. Eventually, in the early eighties, I noticed that there were concepts present in texts from the second millennium B.C.E. (principally in Akhenaten's 'Hymn to the Sun') which were embedded also in the philosophical writings of the Greeks from nearly a thousand years later. I understood that they shouldn't be there, if there was no sophisticated philosophical thought present in the second millennium. Iconography was also particularly revealing.
I decided in the end to major in ancient history at university (as a mature student of thirty or so), rather than philosophy, though I did some of that too. I wanted to know if I was barking up the wrong tree (I didn't think I was).
So I spent three years studying Greece, Egypt, Mesopotamia, and also Assyria, in great detail at UCL and SOAS in London (1989-92). Finding abundant evidence for the heretical idea that the human race had a profound capacity for abstract thought from the earliest times. And I became increasingly perplexed at the fact that scholars could not see what was before their eyes, or understand what the evidence actually meant.
Sometime before moving to London (I lived in Edinburgh in the eighties) I had read On the Mysteries by Iamblichus. So I was aware that the Neoplatonists had the idea that there was a common intellectual system underpinning both Assyrian and Egyptian theology. Which, by itself, suggested that there was an immense level of abstraction involved, stretching back thousands of years. And that I might, just possibly, be on the right track.
I found myself focusing on ancient Assyria while I was in London. I had already noticed the continuities between Greek and Egyptian ideas, but if Iamblichus was right, I should find the same intellectual system underpinning their theology, and the structure of their divine pantheon. I thought of that as a check on the idea that a high level of abstraction was present in both cultures.
I was not at all disappointed. And there were also direct connections between Greek and Mesopotamian thought. None of which made any sense to the historians.
[.......]
And then, in 1997 (I think), I discovered the thesis of Daniel Richard McBride, on The Egyptian Foundations of Gnosis. That had a huge impact on me.
So, if philosophy could draw on Egyptian theology, then Egyptian theology necessarily was essentially based on a series of philosophical arguments. Otherwise none of it would have made sense to the Neoplatonists.
I could go in several directions from here, but some of them might be conversations for the future. So I will confine myself to the suggestion that the Egyptians were philosophical, and concerned with abstractions, and everything around these abstractions, and that, given the antiquity of Egyptian religion, these ideas are of immense antiquity.
I have tried to contact Daniel McBride. He had a website at one point, now gone. He is referenced often, but he seems to be impossible to contact. As the supervisor of his thesis, it occurred to me that what he was writing about was something which interested you.
I know how tight Egyptology is, not least in avoiding any conflict with the classicist view that the Greeks invented philosophy. You are a working and eminent Egyptologist - I have no intention of making problems for you [....]. But I would be interested to know if we are sharing the same heresy.
My website is at: http://shrineinthesea.blogspot.co.uk/
Best regards,
Thomas Yaeger
Weve not met, but we may have trod something of the same path, or similar paths over the past twenty plus years.
I published a book a year ago about the idea that our intellectual history, for one reason and another, is actually upside down (The Sacred History of Being). And that the earliest history of the human race can only be understood if we understand that there was a very sophisticated level of abstract thought at the beginnings of civilisation.
My background is a heavy engagement with philosophy, both ancient and modern, from age fifteen onwards (I am now sixty years old). I was also interested in art, religion, history, and some other subjects. Eventually, in the early eighties, I noticed that there were concepts present in texts from the second millennium B.C.E. (principally in Akhenaten's 'Hymn to the Sun') which were embedded also in the philosophical writings of the Greeks from nearly a thousand years later. I understood that they shouldn't be there, if there was no sophisticated philosophical thought present in the second millennium. Iconography was also particularly revealing.
I decided in the end to major in ancient history at university (as a mature student of thirty or so), rather than philosophy, though I did some of that too. I wanted to know if I was barking up the wrong tree (I didn't think I was).
So I spent three years studying Greece, Egypt, Mesopotamia, and also Assyria, in great detail at UCL and SOAS in London (1989-92). Finding abundant evidence for the heretical idea that the human race had a profound capacity for abstract thought from the earliest times. And I became increasingly perplexed at the fact that scholars could not see what was before their eyes, or understand what the evidence actually meant.
Sometime before moving to London (I lived in Edinburgh in the eighties) I had read On the Mysteries by Iamblichus. So I was aware that the Neoplatonists had the idea that there was a common intellectual system underpinning both Assyrian and Egyptian theology. Which, by itself, suggested that there was an immense level of abstraction involved, stretching back thousands of years. And that I might, just possibly, be on the right track.
I found myself focusing on ancient Assyria while I was in London. I had already noticed the continuities between Greek and Egyptian ideas, but if Iamblichus was right, I should find the same intellectual system underpinning their theology, and the structure of their divine pantheon. I thought of that as a check on the idea that a high level of abstraction was present in both cultures.
I was not at all disappointed. And there were also direct connections between Greek and Mesopotamian thought. None of which made any sense to the historians.
[.......]
And then, in 1997 (I think), I discovered the thesis of Daniel Richard McBride, on The Egyptian Foundations of Gnosis. That had a huge impact on me.
So, if philosophy could draw on Egyptian theology, then Egyptian theology necessarily was essentially based on a series of philosophical arguments. Otherwise none of it would have made sense to the Neoplatonists.
I could go in several directions from here, but some of them might be conversations for the future. So I will confine myself to the suggestion that the Egyptians were philosophical, and concerned with abstractions, and everything around these abstractions, and that, given the antiquity of Egyptian religion, these ideas are of immense antiquity.
I have tried to contact Daniel McBride. He had a website at one point, now gone. He is referenced often, but he seems to be impossible to contact. As the supervisor of his thesis, it occurred to me that what he was writing about was something which interested you.
I know how tight Egyptology is, not least in avoiding any conflict with the classicist view that the Greeks invented philosophy. You are a working and eminent Egyptologist - I have no intention of making problems for you [....]. But I would be interested to know if we are sharing the same heresy.
My website is at: http://shrineinthesea.blogspot.co.uk/
Best regards,
Thomas Yaeger
It is a shame he didn't respond. He is/was a fascinating man and scholar when I met him. I think he would have enjoyed the conversation.
ReplyDelete