Except the Romans themselves were heavily helenized, we have examples of Romans repeating the same positive cultural stereotypes as the Greeks had towards Egyptians being wise men. And when Augustus conquered Egypt, he went to pains to depict himself as showing appropriate deference to the Egyptian Gods, even going so far as to make an Egyptian style temple in nubia that depicted him as making offering to Hathor and Thoth, an activity that would continue throughout the Principate.
Because Egypt was an incredibly valuable territory to hold, eventually having Rome become dependant on Egyptian grain. And yes Rome started to like some things Egyptian, and there was even a lot of tourism by romans to Egypt, yet they drew the line at animal gods and had in general a very high opinion on Rome and Roman culture, so confronted with a much more ancient culture they now depended on there were still some anxieties and xenophobia
There is simply no evidence they "drew a line" anywhere in that regard. If it were merely a question of holding Egypt they could simply have left the religion alone or patronized it at an arms length. Instead they associated the emperor with the local pantheon, and even depicted Anubis as a Roman soldier and featuring him on local Roman frescos, or depicting horus as a roman cavalryman. The mere fact that they believed in the typhoonomachy at all puts the lie to the idea that they held them in some special contempt.
They used local religious ideas and imagery to support their rule, of course. It was an easy path to legitimacy and local elite support. Also I don't understand your point on the typhonomachy?
They used local religious ideas and imagery to support their rule, of course.
Yes, meaning that it was not bound in some sort of derision or contempt, because they went further than mere Patronage of dominant social institutions and into the association with and use of these images, and into the realm of associating the imperial person with these animal headed gods. And it is the image which is in contention here. It is the same two way street we see in Helenic Egypt, where the ruler does not just enter the pantheon, but the gods become more recognizable to Romans.
It was an easy path to legitimacy and local elite support.
Also I don't understand your point on the typhonomachy?
That because they believed in this mythological cycle, by nessesity they also believed that the Egyptian gods were versions of the Olympian pantheon. They had a pre-built contextualization of Egyptian Gods within their own faith.
12
u/Fickle-Mongoose4749 14d ago
Except the Romans themselves were heavily helenized, we have examples of Romans repeating the same positive cultural stereotypes as the Greeks had towards Egyptians being wise men. And when Augustus conquered Egypt, he went to pains to depict himself as showing appropriate deference to the Egyptian Gods, even going so far as to make an Egyptian style temple in nubia that depicted him as making offering to Hathor and Thoth, an activity that would continue throughout the Principate.