THE SACRED CAT IN ANCIENT EGYPT

 

 

THE PIETISTIC ROLE AND PRECIPITATED DEMISE

OF THE SACRED CAT IN ANCIENT EGYPT

 

by   JODY NEAL

 

 

( This article was published in RSUE 23, 2006, 13-21 )

 

 

RESUMEN EN ESPAÑOL - "El papel piadoso y el fin anticipado del gato sagrado en el antiguo Egipto" por Jody Neal – La naturaleza de las relaciones entre estos felinos y la religión egipcia antigua y diferentes aspectos de las manifestaciones de esa relación, constituye el tema principal de este artículo, en el que, entre otras cosas, se sugiere que muchos de los gatos sagrados en los templos eran sacrificados y momificados para satisfacer la demanda de los piadosos devotos de la diosa Bastet.

 

 

 

 

The goddess Bastet and the reverence for the cat in ancient Egypt have, in modern literature, received a wealth of scholarly and popular attention.

Within this area of research, a topic that is gradually coming to the forefront, as its importance and impact on cultic activities is realised, is the study of mummified cat remains.

This field of study purports to the personal piety aspects of the cult, and indeed infers as to how this aspect of the faction functioned and benefited within the state.

The mummified cats indicate the level of piety expressed by the people, the opportunity for profit recognized by the state and on a deeper level, the contradictory circumstances that the cult invoked.

In the earlier periods of Egyptian history, the state regulated the relationship between the deity and the people and there remains little or no evidence for individual worship. It is speculated that the rationale behind this is that it was simply not allowed by the rules of decorum; individuals could not depict themselves so closely with the gods. This notion however gradually broke down and by the Late Period personal piety was at its zenith.

The mummified remains of cats were offered as gifts to the gods by pious worshipers, for whom they were believed to act as messengers. This method of communication offered a unique and direct intermediary between man and the gods, and served as a method through which to convey prayers. This communication inspired a prevalent industry of animal mummy production, whereby large estates became devoted to the raising and slaughtering of such animals.

Professor Dominic Montserrat has commented that in the Late Period animal mummification was a "combination of religion, culture and money". The mass of evidence will suggest that the growth of personal piety at this period was readily recognized as a lucrative scheme by the priesthood and the government.

In support of this theory, Dr. D. Kessler presented a thesis on his deduction that the expansion of animal cults was a conscious and deliberate movement, unquestionably founded by the state and that they were closely linked to the cult of the divinized king, a theory which the majority of academics now agree with. He further infers however, that popular belief and usage had no significant role to play.

One must assume that the state recognized the potential gain from such worship and as such encouraged the more pietistic approach to prayer. It is as such viable to speculate that at the temple of Bubastis, and at other pivotal shrines dedicated to the goddess, the state erected stalls for the sale of objects of piety, where visitors could buy replicas of sacred objects for home worship, decoration or as offerings. At least, the evidence so far strongly suggests thus. It would appear however, that akin to the bronze statuettes of Bastet, the majority of offerings did not incorporate an accompanying text, as evidently the mere act of offering seemed substantial enough.

In a research conducted by S. Davies & H. S. Smith, it was concluded that the private dedicators to a deity do not appear to have held any public or priestly office of importance, and quite often bore no title at all. When they do adopt such a title, it is related to the sacred snimal deities, e.g. ‘the servant of the living Apis’. Thus Kessler’s idea that the cult offerings were made to the sacred animals mainly by highly placed persons at festivals to show their loyalty to the royal cult (Kessler 1989, 143-9, 299-303) does not appear to correlate to the available evidence (DAVIES & SMITH).

Davies & Smith highlight that the reason why, in their deliberation, this proliferation and growth in importance occurred under the Saite and fourth century BC Pharaohs is uncertain, yet they suggest that it could have been the result of a resurgent Egyptian national pride after periods of foreign government (DAVIES & SMITH).

A pertinent query when one studies the status of the sacred cats, or any deified animal in Ancient Egypt, is to enquire whether there existed the equivalent of an Apis Bull to this form of worship. It is reasonable to assume that not all cats were deities, even though the species was believed to be divine. Therefore what and when was the distinction between a ´normal´ domestic cat, and one believed to be sacred? If the procedure of identifying a sacred bull were to be given as an example, a cat would become sacred only after special rituals were performed, and in the belief that the deity Bastet dwelt within the animal, which was perhaps identified by certain markings, deemed divine (EVANS). A temple cat must therefore have been a compliment to cat worship, and possibly like the Apis bull, was used for oracular purposes. However, there is presently no evidence to imply that a singular, feline counterpart to the Apis bull existed at any time in ancient Egypt.

As J. Capart sums it up: ‘Je comprends que le pélerin venant à très bien maintenant Bubaste et obtenant la maman qui serait la perpétuation a, dans le temple, sa caution pour obtenir toutes les faveurs; « les inscriptions qui sont souvent des gravées sur la base des images: la "filasse de Deésse donne la vie, santé, une existence heureuse a tels, fils de tels »’. (CAPART, p. 37)

The classical scholar Diodorus (translated by C. H. Oldfather, 1946) relates his observation that a portion of land for the ‘sacred cats [of the Bastet cult]’ was consecrated and fecund, which therefore provided for their upkeep and made them self-supporting (DIODORUS). Whilst this surveillance explains a part of how the sacred felines existed, it also indicates a social and religious distinction between the free ‘domesticated’ cat and those at the temple.

A cognisant development to segregate the temple cats from the free or domestic kind seems probably to have occurred; the question is to what extent? If the tales of Diodorus and the worship of domestic pet cats are to be believed -whereby the Ancient Egyptians would suffer themselves into a deep grief at the loss of a beloved pet cat-, it is a stark contrast to the thousands of temple cats that were dispatched at often a young age to be bestowed as offerings to the goddess Bastet.

Diodorus recounts an incident in which (approx. 59 BC, during the reign of Ptolemy XI Auletes) a visiting member of a Roman delegation accidentally killed a cat and was thus lynched by an angry mob. We may therefore be led to assume that the ancient Egyptians recognised the ‘temple cats’ as those serving an exalted purpose to be retained as imminent offerings to Bastet, and as such were a separate entity to the domestic or free kind, which they so fervently loved and defended. Conspicuously, the Egyptians viewed this as a glorious duty for the temple cats, as often once a beloved pet cat had died, the owner would, where affordable, have the animal mummified and offered to Bastet in the same manner.

These conclusions may however be too intricate in their entirety, and we may perhaps also assume, from an economic perspective, that the self-sufficient and therefore procreative cat population within the temples would often simply exceed a hospitable amount. Perchance therefore they were more readily disposed of and given as offerings in an attempt to curtail their burgeoning numbers.

In the relevant documented evidence that has survived to the present day, the ancient Egyptians make frequent reference to the carers and ‘servants’ of the cats; a reference that is replicated in other animal cults such as that of the ibis. S. Davies & S. H. Smith (1997) purport their belief that titles such as ‘servant of the ibises’ (and therefore the ‘cat carers’ within the Bastet cult) refer to the mummification and burial of these sacred mammals and not to their care before being put to death. This is in direct contradiction to what W. F. Petrie (1907) conjectured when he named certain (by his verification, female) staff of the Bastet sanctuary as ‘Temple Maidens", and indicated his belief that their primary function was to tend to the cats that lived within the temple grounds. Petrie (1907) has remarked on his further deduction that the basket frequently depicted as being carried by Bastet in her artistic rendition may be a representation of the same form of basket in which the sacred cats were carried throughout the temple. As Petrie speculates in ‘Hyksos and Israelite Cities" (p. 32); "the open-work basket was a special attribute of Bast. She carries it on her arm and there is sometimes a figure of a cat in it. This may be the form of basket in which the sacred cats were carried about in the temple of Bubastis".

N. Langton (2002) supports Petrie’s conclusive scrutiny of ‘temple maidens’; "A Zenon papyrus (No.440) tells us that the feeders of the sacred cats were exempt from liturgical services; the cat-carrying "temple-maidens", so named by Petrie, are suggestive and in the same group may perhaps be placed the bronze man carrying a cat on his shoulders (MacGregor sale, lot 1233). (LANGTON)". The ‘bronze man’ here however need not be more than the representation of a cat-owner, rather than a worker who cared for the cats within the temple.

My deductions thus far lead me to assume that the sacred cats, whether on consecrated ground or not, would have received care and possible affection from the liturgical staff of the temple. Yet such demotic writings as the Archive of Hor and other records of the animal cults as to be discussed later, suggest that there was, or was intended to be, strict guidelines of how to care for the mummified sacred cats and a liturgical body appointed to do so. In the archive of Hor, referring to the cult of the ibises, it appears that there was a regular census for the mummified corpses: "They are to come (to) Hepnebes (at) every counting, and shall perform the investigation (of) the gods".

The research evidence of the mummified cat remains indicates that the majority of temple cats had their necks wrung or broken as the method used for dispatching them. Such evidence and research also indicates that a variety of the cat mummies were young kittens of about two years of age when they were eradicated and mummified (EVANS).

A conclusive study of over 192 cat mummies, conducted by the late Mr. Oldfield Thomas of the British Museum (MORRISON-SCOTT) found that the majority of the cat remains belonged to the feline family Felis silvestris libyca -a small African wild cat likely being the ancestor of the modern domestic cat- Felis silvestris familiaris or the felis maniculata; that was most prevalent in Egypt as a domesticated, household and temple cat. (EVANS). At the cemetery of the cats of Bubastis, the remains were predominantly found to be that of felis maniculata (BULTE).

In 1833, C. Ehrenberg (1833) was one of the earliest scholars to discuss the physical appearance of these mummified cats from Bubastis. He described them as being intermediate in size and having a long snout and a medium length tail. He named the species Felis Bubastis, adding that felis maniculata was also sacred and that both felis Bubastis and felis maniculata were domesticated. (T.C.S. Morrison-Scott).

The 192 skulls from Giza are all young adults, and do not exceed two years of age. Three of the 192, judging by the size of their teeth, appear to be Felis chaus (a type of jungle cat).

In 1903 Lortet and Gaillard (1903) examined over 50 skulls of mummified cats from the site of Sabl-Antar. These they divided into two separate forms, a larger one, analogous to the wild F.maniculata Cretzschmar of Tunisia and a smaller one, which they referred to as F.maniculata var. domestica and which they compared to the modern domestic cat of Europe and Egypt. The importance of this study was the conclusive theory advanced by Lortet and Galliard that the larger form was only loosely domesticated, living amongst human habitations but finding its own food, whereas the smaller form was truly domesticated (Lortet and Gaillard 1903).

It is interesting to note that the cat remains from Tell Basta were found to be of a notably younger age at their time of death than those found elsewhere in Egypt (El-Sawi 1977). This is perhaps due to an understandably higher demand for votive icons at the focal point of the goddess Bastet, and, one can imagine, especially more so perhaps at the time of the festival of Bastet.

As with the study of the full-length mummified cats from Bubastis, the sex of the species was found to be indiscernible by a skull study alone.

The conclusive substantiation of these studies suggests that there is no irrefutable evidence towards a specific, or more than one, species of cat having been domesticated and held sacred by the ancient Egyptians (MORRISON-SCOTT).

The archetypal resting place of the mummified cats were in scattered cat cemeteries –typically catacombs or pits encasing a sizable amount of mummified felines– and include those at Saqqara and Dra Abu el-Nagga at Thebes, as well as those on a lesser scale, such as at Abydos, Dendera and the Dakhla Oasis.

The method of burial at Bubastis has, thus far, been found to be unique in comparison to the residual cat cemeteries in Egypt. (El-Sawi1977) The manner of interment showed the cat mummies to be complete skeletons in an extended position, although at present the rationale behind this is unclear.

In a variety of cases, cat remains were found to have been buried with the dancers of the cult, this may well correlate to the connotation of Bastet as a goddess of music and dance. A demotic piece dated to the Ptolemaic period tells of a dancer named Pipes, who was a dancer of Bubastis: t3 s.t n p3y-ps p3 tnf Hn' n3 nty Htp irm=w Hn' p3 s-Htp n n3 imy(.w), "the tomb of Pipes the dancer and those who rest there and the resting place of the cats" (CLARYSSE).

A controversial aspect of the excavations in the cat cemetery at Bubastis, yet one that recurrently transpires, is the notion of cremation. This is a portion of my research that I had hoped to avoid, yet with continuing investigation I have found myself with a need to address this subject.

In 1888 Édouard Naville carried out a study and excavation at Bubastis, where he found the remains of cats that had been buried in pits, the walls of which were made up of bricks and clay. Near each pit lay a furnace, its bricks blackened from fire. On the evidence of the nearby ashes and charcoal, Naville assumed that the cats had been cremated.

Setting aside the presumption that the very idea of cremation would have been abhorrent to the Egyptians and their religious beliefs, one must also enquire why this did not occur elsewhere in Egypt for other animal cults, and why there is no evidence of human cremation, for instance.

Kessler (1991) and P.F. Houlihan (1996) however, are of the opinion that cat cremation did indeed occur. Both authors draw attention to the apparent evidence at Bubastis (and perhaps the one as yet undiscovered at other sites too) and expressed the opinion that during the Late Dynastic and Graeco-Roman periods, the Egyptians cremated cats.

In the Protogeometric (1100–900 BC) period of Greek history, they began the practice of cremation. One may argue that the Greek influence on Egypt during this period could have made them adopt or attempt the act of cremation, yet it is in my view far too long a leap to draw such conclusions, as the Egyptians would not have readily adopted such a (in their view) contemptible act into their religious practice, after such a long time ascertaining their views on the connection with the ka, the body and the afterlife.

Citing the ambiguous written passage 2.66 from Herodotus "The Histories" (1998 - R. Waterfield´s translation), Houlihan makes the connection of the felines reported behaviour towards fire to that of the supposed cremation at Bubastis. Herodotus writes (2.66); "...if a house catches fire, what happens to the cats is quite extraordinary. The Egyptians do not bother to try to put the fire out, but position themselves at intervals around the house and look out for the cats. The cats slip between them, however, and even jump over them, and dash into the fire". Houlihan progressively considered that this was perhaps Herodotus’ vague explanation or correlation to the cremation of the cats. Whilst this passage is certainly intriguing and somewhat unfathomable, and on its own merits needs to be understood further, it seems an unlikely conclusion. One oddity does not necessarily explain another.

My averse conclusions thus far when considering the puzzlement of this topic are in concurrence with E.A. Evans (2001), who suggests that the act of burning may have been an extreme part of the cat mummification process; to burn the animal down to skeletal form and thus for it to be more easily and hastily wrapped in linen. As an explanation to the beguiling evidence at Bubastis, this idea is perhaps not entirely implausible, given the apparently overwhelming demand for mummified votive offerings during the Late Period, and perhaps more so in this fundamental location. The practice may have developed at the later stages of the cult, when exceeding demand was perhaps to overshadow official funerary ritual.

The prevalent method of presentation varied in its final form, with a quantity of cat mummies found to have been wrapped with the creatures’ legs and tail flat against the body and the whole animal swathed in a single sheath. However, in other examples the legs and tail are wrapped apart, which respect the original appearance of the animal, what was therefore perhaps more expensive for the buyer (G. Andreu, M-H Rutschowscaya & C. Ziegler ‘L’Egypte ancienne au Louvre’, 1997). Typically, the cat mummy was then placed in decorated cartonnage coffins or life-sized wooden statues.

In the more rare cases, a cat mummy would be encased in a plaster cast that had been fashioned into the shape of various parts of the human anatomy. These ‘anatomical donaria’, of predominantly Ptolemaic date, could possibly have been used as medical votive offerings left by pilgrims, either to induce the gods to grant cures, or as tokens of gratitude for healing (DAVIES & SMITH).

As previously cited, there have been numerous cases brought to light of the apparent discrepancies within the animal mummification process. Archives from the Ptolemaic period hint at corruption within the mummification industry, and in collaboration to such reports, evidence of other animal bones have been found hidden inside the mummified form of a cat, to presumably create the appropriate feline appearance (Evans and Ziegler).

In the demotic ‘Archive of Hor’, a case of deceptive practice and negligence is extensively recorded within the cult of the ibis. This text is in reference to the upkeep of the sacred ibises in Saqqara, where Bastet had a large cemetery and presence as the ‘Lady of Ankhtawy’. Within the text, the history of the cult is related: efficiency and order had prevailed until about the year 205 BC whereupon, for a reason not stated, abuses had set in and offending staff were imprisoned. Whether these ‘abuses’ referred to the negligence of the mummified ibis, or to the hurried and even ‘faked’ methods of mummification is unclear. However, based on the findings of the University of Michigan and Dr. Ziegler it can be assumed that the process of faking mummies was perhaps widespread at certain periods in the cult of Bastet.

A notably conspicuous text from the Archive of Hor tells us: "they are to impart regularity into it when he is buried (and) bandaged, one god (in) one vessel" (Archive of Hor, P86, 12) this therefore indicates that the abuses occurred due to not following these rules and, akin to correlative discrepant evidence of the cat mummies, that the responsible priests were placing more than one ibis body or none at all into each vessel.

In parallel to the practices of the ibis cult, the liturgical staff of the cult of Bastet would have been subject to occasional human apathy and this may explain part of the fraudulent business practices. At the pinnacle of the Bastet cult however, it is very likely that the demand for votive mummified cat offerings grew, and as the evidence suggests, increased the need to such an extent that a number of mummies had to be faked in order to meet the demand.

If sacred animals were an innate vehicle for direct appeals to the divine, such a direct approach might have involved a desire, or need on the part of the worshipper, to express the personal relationship between him/herself and his/her god in a tangible way.

Capart was drawn to a similar conclusion in his research; «Le magicien tue un animal sacré dans l'espoir d'être utile lui-même, a son avantage, de la relation sympathique qui existe entre cet animal et le dieu » (CAPART)

The dedication of a mummified cat would have given a flagrant, resolute expression to the bond between man and god, and for modern purposes providing edifying information on the cult of Bastet and the goddess herself, through which can be grasped a more heightened understanding of her station in the Egyptian Pantheon.

 

 

 

 

 

BIBLIOGRAPHY

 

 

  • ANDREU, G., RUTSCHOWSCAYA, M-H. and ZIEGLER, C. ‘L’Egypte ancienne au Louvre’, Paris 1997.

  • BONNET, H. ‘Reallexicon der Ägyptischen Religionsgeschichte’, Berlin 1952.

  • BOESNECK, J., ‘Ein altägyptisches Pferdeskelett’, in Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts in Kairo’ 26, 1970, pp. 43-47.

  • BULTÉ, Jeanne, ´Talismans égyptiens d'heureuse maternité. "Faïence" bleu vert à pois foncés´. Préface de Jean Yoyotte, Paris, Éditions du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, 1991. (22 x 28 cm; 136 p., tables, pl.).

  • CAPART, J., `Chats Sacrés’, CdE 17, Paris 1943, pp. 35-37.

  • CLARYSSE, W. and SIJPESTEIJN, P., ‘A Letter from a Dancer of Boubastis’, Archiv für Papyrusforschung, Stuttgart - Leipzig 41 (1995), pp. 56-61.

  • DAVIES, Sue and H.S. SMITH, Sacred Animal temples at Saqqara, in: The temple in Ancient Egypt. New discoveries and recent research. Edited by Stephen Quirke, London 1997.

  • EVANS, J in the KELSEY Museum newsletter, Fall 2002, University of Michigan.

  • el-SAWI, Ahmed, ´Some Objects Found at Tell Basta (Season 1966-67)´, ASAE 63 (1979), pp. 155-159, 10 pl. (1 folding).

  • GAHLIN, Lucia ‘Egypt; Gods, Myths and Religion’ London 2002.

  • GRIFFITH, F. Ll., ‘Beni Hassan, Pt. IV; Zoological and other details’, in Archaeological Survey of Egypt, 7th Memoir, London 1900, EES.

  • HABACHI, L. & GHALIOUNGUI, P. ‘The "House of Life" of Bubastis’, Paris 1971, CdE 91.

  • HART, George ‘A Dictionary of Egyptian Gods and Goddesses’ London 1986.

  • HERODOTUS (translated by R.Waterfield), ‘The Histories’, Oxford 1998.

  • HOULIHAN, P.F. ‘The Animal World of the Pharaohs’, London 1996.

  • JAMES, T.G.H ‘Excavating in Egypt’, The Egypt Exploration Society 1882-1982, published 1982, The University of Chicago Press.

  • KESSLER, D. `Herodot II, 65-67 Über Heilige Tiere in Bubastis’, SÄK 18, Hamburg 1991.

  • KESSLER, D.‚ ´Die heiligen Tiere und der König´. Ägypten und Altes Testament 16.’, Wiesbaden (1989; pp. 291–8).

  • LANGTON, N. & B., ‘The Cat in Ancient Egypt’, Publisher Kegan Paul, London, 2000.

  • LANGTON, N., ‘Further notes on some Egyptian figures of cats’, JEA 24, London 1938.

  • LANGTON, N., ‘Notes on some small Egyptian figures of Cats’, JEA 22, London 1936.

  • LORTET, L. And GAILLARD, C., ‘La Faune Momifiée de l’Ancienne Egypte (première série) ; Chats’, in Arch. Mus. Hist. Nat. Lyon 8, 19 (1903).

  • LORTET, L. And GAILLARD, C., ‘La Faune Momifiée de l’Ancienne Egypte (deuxième série) ; Chats’, in Arch. Mus. Hist. Nat. Lyon 9, 51 (1907).

  • MALEK, J., ‘The Cat in Ancient Egypt’, London 1997.

  • MALEK, J., ‘Egyptian Art’, London (printed in Singapore), 1990.

  • MORRISON-SCOTT, T.C.S., ‘The mummified cats of ancient Egypt’ in Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London 121, 1951-2, pp. 861-7.

  • PETRIE, W. M. F., ‘Gizeh and Rifeh’ London School of Archaeology in Egypt, London 1907.

  • RAY, J. D., ‘The Archive of Hor’, Egypt Exploration Society, Texts from Excavations 2, London 1976.

  • UPZ II 157 and 180, from the online database of the University of Heidelberg,http://www.rzuser.uniheidelberg.de/~gv0/Texte/UPZ/UPZ_II.html

  • VELDE, te H. ‘A few remarks upon the religious significance of animals in Ancient Egypt’ in Numen xxvii, 1980, pp. 76-82.

  • WATERFIELD, R., ‘Herodotus’, London 1998.

  • ZIEGLER, C. ‘A Propos du rite des quatre boules’, BIFAO 79, Paris 1979.

 

 

RSUE - Revista de la Sociedad Uruguaya de Egiptología

 

 

PRESIONE AQUÍ PARA IR A NUESTRA PÁGINA PRINCIPAL