I just finished presenting a paper titled
The Narration of Egyptian Mythology: Wilhelm Max Müller through a Postcolonial Lens at the 21st Annual British Commonwealth & Postcolonial Studies Conference (February 17 - 18, 2012 at Hilton Savannah Desoto Hotel in Savannah, Georgia USA.
The Abstract:
The Narration of Egyptian Mythology: Max Müller through a Postcolonial Lens
Friedrich Max Müller in his
Introduction to the Science of Religion proposed what he referred to as “the science of religion.” Like his father, Wilhelm Max Müller supported a less partisan approach to religion in which scholars would seek those elements, patterns, and principles that could be found uniformly in the religions of all times and places. The proposal came at a time when many in Europe held that Christian faith could never mix with a program of study devoted to experiment, revision and change. Müller’s proposal was groundbreaking. However, when scrutinized under a postcolonial lens, the work reveals that both senior and junior Müller never moved away from the generally held principle that insisted that Christian ideals and values expressed the highest in human moral and cultural achievement. Both Friedrich and Wilhelm Max Müller likewise remained squarely in the European triumphant intellectualism.
When one considers W. Max Müller’s work on
Egyptian mythology in The Mythology of All Races: Egypt, it becomes apparent that the seemingly innocent and objective use of science in the representation of the “Other” is not as transparent as it appears. As one studies Müller’s
Mythology, several questions come to mind. Why was Müller quick to remind that even though Egyptian civilization is beyond question, its religious life remained rudimentary without acquiring the sophistication of other “pagan” religions? Why was he quick to trace animism as the principle force from which Egypt mythology evolved? What role did racism and continental chauvinism pointed out by Martin Bernal play in shaping the study of Egyptian mythology and religion? Does Müller’s study of Egyptian mythology masks a connection between European Romanticism and the tensions between Egyptian religion and Christianity that requires unraveling?
In this paper I propose to show first that W. Max Müller’s study masks a construction of ancient Egyptians in which he takes upon himself the power to describe, name, define, and represent the “Other”. Müller’s oversimplification of Egypt mythology denies its complexity. Secondly, the use of animism as a theoretical tool to analyze Egyptian religious experiences forms the basis for Müller’s
Orientalism and his idea of
henotheism. Thirdly, Müller’s classification of ancient Egyptians as animists follows Hegelian view of Africa as representing the world of “Nature” in its raw state, as opposed to that of Culture or “Spirit”. Animism helps reinforce the stereotypical reading of Egyptian religion and mythology. Fourthly, use of animism reveals a certain level of anxiety that threatens to destabilize the very claim to objectivity as well as any claim to unified notion of history.
