Stele of Revealing has been moved
-
Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law.
The Stele of Revealing (along with many other items in the same display area) has been removed from its century-old housing in the Cairo Museum. We believe we know where it is going, and have every reason to believe it is safe. Partly to support its continued safety, i'm not disclosing any details about the relocation until I get permission.
Temple of Thelema has an Egyptologist/archeologist on site in Egypt - the person who discovered the unannounced relocation. I'm going to rely on that person's judgment on what to report. They may want to make the full announcement themselves.
-
More or less
It's been enclosed in locked glass for decades, and presumably will be again.
-
No time or date available. it was recently. The archeologist discovered it gone when visiting the museum.
In case someone is thinking of contacting officials in Egypt, I discourage it. The government has little or no idea of its importance to us. If that changes, the safety (or, at least, its public availability) could be in peril. I encourage very low profile attention.
-
Interesting.
One thing: in Liber AL, the verse says, "I will make easy to you the abstruction from the ill-ordered house in the Victorious City."
The Victorious City is obvious - Cairo, Al-Qahira, which means "Victor".
But "ill-ordered house" doesn't seem to be a perfect fit for the Boulaq museam, IMHO. After all 666 as the catalog number for the Stele would seem to encourage the description "aptly-ordered house" or something similar.
It'll be interesting to learn the relocation details (whether it's staying in Cairo, how organized the new location will be, etc), and see if they shed light on the context on the verse.
-
One of our Chiefs has documented that Crowley didn't find it at Boulak. it had been in the Cairo Museum since 1903. And the CM was, indeed, a hort waplk frlm where the Crowleys were staying.
-
@Jim Eshelman said
"One of our Chiefs has documented that Crowley didn't find it at Boulak. it had been in the Cairo Museum since 1903. And the CM was, indeed, a hort waplk frlm where the Crowleys were staying."
Giving me a subject of confusion and contradiction is like showing a bird something glittery.
According to the site below (which mostly matches and expands upon Wikipedia's info) the Museum of Egyptian Antiquities, known commonly as the Egyptian Museum, was built near Azbakeya gardens in 1835, moved to Boulaq in 1858, was moved temporarily to Giza around 1890 (due to flood damage at Boulaq), and finally everything is moved (including items still stored at the previous locations) to Tahrir square in 1902.
www.guardians.net/hawass/articles/a_celebration_of_100_Years_of_the_Egyptian_Museum.htm
Crowley's descriptions all match the Egyptian Museum near Tahrir square.
Those two points make it pretty clear that, as you say, the Stele has likely been at the Egyptian Museum in Cairo since 1903.
The confusion is that Crowley calls it the Boulak museum repeatedly, and there's not really any contemporary evidence to show that the Egyptian Museum was known casually as the "Boulak Museum".
Then I found something interesting:
I found mention of William J Myers, who met with Emile Brugsch, assistant curator of the "Boulaq Museum" in the 1880s
www.nicholasreeves.com/item.aspx?category=Events&id=250Crowley also mentions meeting Emile Brugsch.
So.....
I think I would conclude that it's quite likely that Brugsch, and thus Crowley, would have continued to refer to the collection as being part of the Boulaq Museum, even though the collection had been moved to Tahrir square in 1902.
And...
to return to the point about "ill ordered"... from what I've read, that was a good description for the Egyptian Museum in Cairo at the time, with a huge collection of items freshly moved from at least three separate locations.
-
Thanks
-
@Jim Eshelman said
"If that changes, the safety (or, at least, its public availability) could be in peril."
Beyond its historical importance to Thelema, is the idea (whether going by Liber AL or common belief) that the physical stele possesses some power? And, supposing it were destroyed, what then
-
It possesses no power beyond that attributed to it. Recent scientific evidence showed a 100x increase in testosterone after males handled a gun
men.webmd.com/news/20060728/guns-up-testosterone-male-aggressionWhat do you think caused that rise? Obviously the meaning and ideas attributed to or projected onto the device -- Semiotics tells us this much. So then when we are referring to a more obscure item such as the Stele, there is nothing more magickal than the meaning attributed to it by a Thelemite -- which DOES make it magickal, but only to them. The essence of the Stele precedes it's existence.
-
There are many people who disagree with the essentialist perspective (such as Sarte, who flipped it around), but I consider Martin Heidegger a goddamn genius and regard his phenomenology and essentialist perspective to trump any others I've read.
-
@Dar said
"
There is never a 'trump' to play in Philosophy... it's a temporary game.
" yeah, that's what Heidegger said too (using his own concepts and terms, of course)... -
Just saw that Egyptian Minister of Antiquities Zahi Hawass was fired. Don't know if it has an impact on the situation.
-
It's probably good news. If I understand local politics correctly, this removes the biggest risk that certain things will mysteriously come up missing and not be reported
-
Very interesting.
If I remember correctly, the Cairo museum has had problems with security, so this is probably a good thing.
Keep us updated.
"In case someone is thinking of contacting officials in Egypt, I discourage it. The government has little or no idea of its importance to us. If that changes, the safety (or, at least, its public availability) could be in peril. I encourage very low profile attention."
I couldn't agree more.
-
Was there ever any news on where it went to?
-
@Cygnus said
"Was there ever any news on where it went to?"
Not yet public information. It likely will be many months - or as much as a year and a half - before this becomes public.
-
I read once, at alt.magick probably, that some stelae and statues were taken occasionally to the rooves of museums to expose them to sunlight. Sounds possible.
-
93,
Sunlight tends to bleach pigments, and UV rays also tend to break down carbon-bonds in organic materials. Any paint on ancient art, which would probably use vegetable dyes, would be damaged by sunlight. No responsible museum curator would take valuable ancient artworks onto a roof. Maybe the writer at alt.magick was nuts...?
93 93/93,
Edward
-
"
-
Get the stele of revealing itself; set it in thy secret temple -- and that temple is already aright disposed -- & it shall be your Kiblah for ever. It shall not fade, but miraculous colour shall come back to it day after day. Close it in locked glass for a proof to the world.
-
This shall be your only proof. I forbid argument. Conquer! That is enough. ...
"
Just curious; has there every been any 'before and after' comparisons of the colors of the stele?
Seems that if it's 'the only proof', someone would have examined this claim by now? -
-
@Edward Mason said
"Maybe the writer at alt.magick was nuts...?"
Maybe the writer didn't realise that these 6000 year-old artefacts were so fragile that they couldn't stand an hour a year of sunshine.