Regarding interpreting the cosmological meanings of a myth, there isn´t many ways to interpret this, but just ONE. You just have read the myth and it´s contents and context. If you for instants read of an Egyptian goddess which is said to resemble the Milky Way, you have to take this literary and by reading of the qualities and attributes of the goddess, you can make your conclusions.
Just one? Really?
Egyptians don’t agree with other, so they often write their own versions of myths, so they have interpreted different from their neighbors (eg different cult centres, like Heliopolis, Thebes, Elephantine, etc), or interpreted the myths different from those before them (eg Old Kingdom, Middle Kingdom, New Kingdom, Late Period, etc).
You are giving modern twist to the ancient myths.
The minimal interpretation of a Milky Way goddess is to conclude that this myth deals with the Milky Way, right?
So? I don’t deny that.
But I am not arguing about the myths of the Milky Way.
What I am arguing about, is with your interpretations to the myths. I am arguing about your personal opinion, which I think you are misinterpreting the myths. And worse still, you think you know more about the Milky Way than modern astronomers and astrophysicists.
But even the myth part, I don’t think you fully grasp it.
In one Heliopolitian version, it begin with Re or Atum, coming from the primeval water, Nu, to create the first land, a mound, which is Heliopolis itself, before other land emerge from the water, follow by birth of Shu and Tefnut, through his nose or through the sun god mastubating (in another version of myth, Tefnut was his Eye). From his tears, produced humans. And then these new deities gave birth to Geb (Earth) and Nut (sky). And they (Geb and Nut) in term, brought forth Osiris, Horus, Set, Isis and Nephthys.
Here, the myth is told in one papyrus, but two very similar versions. And no Hathor.
In art works, often Shu, Nut and Geb are depicted together. With Geb reclining on his back, with Nut on the tips of her fingers and toes, and her woman-like body and limbs, sometimes with stars depicted on them, and other times without stars. And Shu underneath her holding and separating the siblings, Earth and Sky.
In other images, we have Nut in cow form, with stars depicted on her belly, and we know it isn’t Hathor, because again, her father is underneath her again, holding her.
In both images, whether Nut is in woman or cow forms, the Milky Way is represented by Nut, not Hathor.
In one story, where Hathor appeared, is one the same depicted celestial cow in a number of tombs, which include Tutankhamun, Seti I, Ramesses II, III and VI, known as the Book of Heavenly Cow, which begin with humans rebelling against ancient Re’s rule, and their destruction. Hathor as the Eye of Re, emerged in the form of lioness Sekhmet, began slaughtering these rebellious men, but Re didn’t want to have them all killed, but could stop her, until he had beer dyed red, to resemble blood, pour in a valley. Hathor got so intoxicated from the red beer that she transformed into beautiful woman. The next part of the story is that Nut again appeared in cow form again, carrying aged Re on her back,as they ascend to heaven (flying) with Shu’s assistance.
When Hathor does appear in cow form, she is like Nut, the stars of the Milky Way.
My points is your clumsy attempt at modern cosmology, like where you say the solar system was created from Milky Way’s centre, before being spat out, and moved to the current position. And you think the Egyptians tell this story.
If what you believe to be true, then the Milky Way should exist before the sun and solar system. Instead, we have the order different from yours, where we have the goddess Hathor being created by Re, most often via the Eye of Re (other goddesses were said to be the Eye of Re, eg Tefnut, Sekhmet, etc). In versions, where Nut is the sky goddess and the Milky Way, she was Re’s grandkid; so she exist AFTER the Sun.
That should not possible, if you believe the sun and the solar system emerged from the galactic centre.
No I don´t have my own interpretations. I just take the myths seriously and hope to find the collective interpretation and meaning. And in order to underline the cosmological myths, I´m trying to underline these cosmological myths with some discoveries and cosmological ideas from modern science, which isn´t a crime is it?
That’s a load of BS.
Of course, you have your own interpretations. That’s what you have been doing, since your first reply that mentioned Egyptian myths.
How would you know this if/since you apparently don´t take the ancient myths for granted???
Why would I take myths “for granted”?
That seemed a silly question to ask. What do you mean by this?
Read my reply again on the Hathor Goddess example again. If a myth CLEARLY speaks of astronomical and cosmological topics, you of course have to hold onto this context in order to understand the myth. If an ancient myth deals with Milky Way issues, it is anybody's right also to compare this myth with modern science:
IMO you can easily put all kinds of modern cosmological ideas into ancient myths of creation (and vise versa) and see how ancient knowledge and modern science support, differ or even contradicts each other.
You can compare modern science to the Egyptian myths if you like. But only fools think the ancient Egyptians know far more about the Milky Way.
What science do, is to explain, and provide the methodology of how to test any explanation and any prediction, to determine the validity of that explanation.
Myths really don’t explain.
Myths provide stories that often high symbolic, and make attribution to what spirits or deities were responsible for the what events that they don’t really understand. And they worshipped this spirit or that deity. This is nothing more than superstition.
They have no real understanding about the Solar System, let alone the Milky Way.
I am not saying Egyptians are stupid. They are just like every other ancient civilisations, limited by their knowledge and limited by their technology...and limited by the religious stories they believed in.
But if I were to compare contemporary civilisations, regarding to knowledge on astronomy, I would say that Babylonian astronomers were more advanced. But like, the Egyptians, the Babylonian counterpart were limited by the time and technology.
The problem is not them. It is you.
Your are trying to modern concepts to ancient astronomy, and you don’t seem to know it, but you are failing to understand modern astronomy. So basically you are using your flawed logic to bolster belief in the myth.
