Some thoughts pertaining to the Egyptian roots of the words “Mary” and the concepts associated with “Mary” and “Mary Magdalene”.
The gentle reader can be assured that this interest doesn’t spring from Mr. Dan Brown’s novel “The Da Vinci Code”, though I have read the novel, and seen the film.
Mr. Dan Brown is perfectly entitled to his own opinion, and has his own reasons to write his novel – which is certainly a gripping, action-packed, suspenseful thriller – but my interest in Mary Magdalene has nothing much to do with that novel.
My point of departure was Gerald Massey, and his dogged – almost fanatical – but profoundly informed attempts – to trace almost everything in the Bible, and in Indian mythology, to Ancient Egypt – and thence, to Africa.
I shall reiterate that I do not accept Massey’s theory per se – it’s not something which can be “proven”, in my opinion – but he offers an astounding quantum of data and insights, which not only compels one to rethink everything known about world cultures, but also gives myriad intriguing clues & insights which help us in understanding our past, and all the whys & wherefores of world myths, religions, and cultures.
The immediate point which I sought to bring out was that the Resurrection of Lazarus by Jesus was heavily inspired by the resurrection of Osiris {i.e. Asar} by Horus.
That led to the discovery that Hathor {often the mother of Horus, and the sister-wife of Osiris} was known as Meri.
Alvin Boyd Kuhn says that Isis was known as Meri.
The two Egyptian sister-goddesses Isis-Nephthys – who feature in the Osiris-Resurrection scene – were together known as “Merti”.
This, according to both Massey and Kuhn, led to the name & character of “Martha”.
Within that context, I noted the probable origins of the names of “Mary” and “Marta” to the Egyptian words “mer”, “meri”, “merit”, “mer-t”, “meriti” etc.
That said, I’ll quickly move on to a few points which I’ll mention only cursorily, and which can either be examined and built upon later, or be outright rejected by anybody as he pleases.
It is upto the reader.
These ideas came to me, and I thought I could jot them down on the blog.
In the post before the Lazarus-Asar post, I noted down connections between the legends of the founders of Rome, Romulus & Remus – and those of Moses & Jesus, and many other famous quasi-historical and mythical gods, demigods and heroes – Sargon, Kṛṣṇa, Karṇa, Zeus, Dionysus, Herakles, Apollo etc..
It occured to me, while thinking about the Egyptian roots of “Mary”, that the word “Rome” itself may be derived from the Egyptian “mer”.
The origin of the words “Rome”, “Romulus”, and “Remus”, have never been satisfactorily traced, identified, or explained.
There are, of course, many plausible explanations – and they have been made – and they may be true.
But thinking about the deeper connection of things, I’m inclined to think that “Rome” or “Ruma” {or whatever it was originally} – is nothing but Meru, or probably “Mer”.
I noted that the Egyptian word
· “mer” means “mountain, pyramid, tomb”
and the Egyptian
· “meru” means “mountain”.
Try as I might, I can’t quite dismiss the glaring parallel between the Egyptian “meru” and the Indian-Sanskrit “Meru” – the most important mountain of Ancient Indian literature – the centre of the Earth – the home of the gods – the golden mountain which is the great symbol of constancy & stability in Buddhism.
Now whether “Rome” is a later, Latinized version of “mer” or of “Meru” – or some variation of “mer” – it’s very likely the city, or habitation of people, was named, not after a water-body, but after the mountain.
This suspicion is reinforced by the fact that one of the brothers is Remus.
Remus is Remu – or Meru.
There’s no absolute “proof” of this, as there is no absolute proof of anything – but this is a strong suspicion in my mind.
Remu could be a variation of the Egyptian “Mer” too.
The reference here needn’t be to the mountain, because in Egyptian, “mer” means a lot of things.
Whatever the precise significance, if Remu is Meru, Romulus would mean “Meru-ur” or “Mer-ur”, i.e. “The Great Meru” or “The Great Mer”.
We have noted, in the Lazarus-post, that there were two prominent bull-worshipping cults in Egypt – i.e. two cults in which, literally, bulls were worshipped.
One was the cult of Apis – in Egyptian, Hāpi.
The other was called, by the Greeks, the cult of Mnevis – in Egyptian, Mer-ur.
I also noted in the passing, that it’s not possible that Early Christians didn’t know of this {in selecting the name for Mary}.
It’s known that Apis was the much more important and famous Bull-deity.
Curiously enough, there isn’t much information about Mnevis or Mer-ur, but the cult was apparently very ancient.
Sir Ernst Wallis Budge writes, in “The Gods of the Egyptians” Volume 2:
“As Apis was the sacred Bull of Memphis and symbolized the Moon, so Mnevis was the sacred Bull of Heliopolis and typified the Sun, of which he was held to be the incarnation.
The ancient Egyptians called the Bull of Heliopolis Ur-mer, and described him as the “life of Ra”; he is usually depicted in the form of a bull with a disk and uraeus between his horns, but sometimes he appears as a man with the head of a bull.
According to Manetho, the worship of Mnevis was established in the reign of Ka-kau, a king of the IInd Dynasty, together with that of Apis and the Ram of Mendes, but there is no doubt that it is coeval with Egyptian civilization, and that it was only a portion of the great system of adoration of the bull & cow as agricultural gods throughout Egypt.”
Further:
“Strabo mentions (xvii.1, §22) that the people of Momemphis kept a sacred cow in their city just as Apis was maintained at Memphis, and Mnevis at Heliopolis, and adds, these animals are regarded as gods, but there are other places, and these are numerous, both in the Delta and beyond it, in which a bull or a cow is maintained, which are not regarded as gods, but only as sacred.
Mnevis, like Apis, was consecrated to Osiris, and both Bulls were reputed as gods generally by all the Egyptians; Diodorus explains (i. 24, 9) this fact by pointing out that the bull was of all creatures the “most extraordinarily serviceable to the “first inventors of husbandry, both as to the sowing of corn, and other advantages concerning tillage, of which all reaped the benefit”.””
Indeed, like all the great Devas of the Ṛg Veda, Osiris is very often imaged as a Bull, or called a Bull.
The connection between Mer-ur and Osiris is logical.
I also noted, passingly, that Mer-ur or Mnevis was worshipped at Heliopolis, which in Egyptian was known as “Annu”, “Anu”, “An”, “On” or “Iunu” – and that “Anu” is where Osiris was resurrected by Horus.
According to Massey, this “Anu” is nothing but the “Bethany” or “Beth-Anu” where Lazarus was brought back to life by Jesus.
There is thus, another apparently innocuous connection between the Egyptian facts and the Gospel account {Mer in Anu = Mary in Beth-Any}.
I would extent some basic elements of this theory to the legends woven around Romulus and Remus.
The inversion of words is very common in the Ancient world, and reveals an astonishing number of relations, which prove that there once existed a common, universal culture in the world, and – apparently – a common language.
The story of the Tower of Bable may not be an idle fib at all.
It is a symbolic allegory.
The once-universal language was later fragmented, and turned & twisted in such a way that people could not longer understand each other – but the initiates did.
Whether or not that makes sense, I’m sure that the relation between various letters and consonants indubitably exists.
In many cases, the words are inverted or anagrams of each other.
Keb can become Bek or Bekh.
In the present context, “r” often interchanges with “l”.
“Mer-ur” becomes “Mer-ul” which then becomes “Rem-ul” – and then “Romulus”.
His twin {i.e. the other half of the same one unit} is “Mer” which becomes “Rem” or “Remus”.
Mer-ur, being the greater, more powerful, more successful one, is denoted by the “ur” which in Egyptian means “great”.
In Sanskrit, “uru” means “great”.
We also have:
Meru-ur {the great mountain} = Meru-ul = Remu-ul = Romulus
and
Meru = Remu = Remus
Both are “Mer” or “Meru”, and the greater one has the suffix “ur” – and becomes “Romulus”.
The question that comes to mind is: What is the connection between the Egyptian “Mer/Meru”, as the Bull, and “mer” as water?
Mnevis is supposed to be associated with the Sun – but it maybe said that the Sun was invariably imaged as a Bull.
We have to understand “Bull” as “Giver of Water” or “Giver of Rain”.
Vṛṣan, or Bull, is a name of Indra {who is also the Sun} – as well as the storm-rain gods, the Maruts.
Sūrya-Soma is called Bull {Vṛṣabha} in the Shukla Yajur-Veda 8.49.
Also Mnevis was associated with Osiris, and Osiris was often identified as a water-deity, even the Nile itself.
At least in India, the Bull, as vṛṣabha, vṛṣa, vṛṣan etc., was always the “Showerer”.
It is in this sense that Indra is called “Bull” repeatedly in the Ṛg Veda: he is the “Showerer” – and the giver of rain.
Albeit a very primitive conception, Rain and/or Water was often understood as the urine or semen of the virile, fertilizing Sky-God, or some God.
We read, in the Sumerian text called “Enki and the world order”:
“After he had turned his gaze from there, after father Enki had lifted his eyes across the Euphrates, he stood up full of lust like a rampant bull, lifted his penis, ejaculated and filled the Tigris with flowing water.
He was like a wild cow mooing for its young in the wild grass, its scorpion-infested cow-pen.
The Tigris ...... at his side like a rampant bull.
By lifting his penis, he brought a bridal gift.
The Tigris rejoiced in its heart like a great wild bull, when it was born .......
It brought water, flowing water indeed: its wine will be sweet.
It brought barley, mottled barley indeed: the people will eat it.
It filled the E-kur, the house of Enlil, with all sorts of things.”
The Bull was one of the great symbols of the masculine power of fecundation, male fertility, of virile insemination, of the impregnating prowess.
This imaged the rain-giver i.e. Indra, Agni, Parjanya, Sūrya or Āditya.
That’s how there’s also an intimate relation between the Bull & the source of rain & water, the Cloud.
That maybe how “bull” gets connected to “flood, stream, river, water, ocean”.
The Bull was the “Sprinkler, Moistener, the one who wets” —the one who fertilizes, floods, inundates.
Ukṣan, which means Bull or Ox in Sanskrit, is a name for the Sun as well as Agni.
This is to be understood as the entity
who sends rain,
who releases the waters,
who unleashes the fertilizing, invigorating floods,
who frees the rivers to wash over a parched, thirsty world,
who makes the Earth fertile, and enlivens the whole world of the living with fresh, vibrating life.
In the Ṛg Veda 2.12.12, we read of Indra:
“Who with seven guiding reins, the Bull {vṛṣabha}, the Mighty, set free the Seven great Floods {sapta-sindhu} to flow at pleasure;
Who, thunder-armed, rent Rauhiṇa in pieces when scaling heaven, He, O ye men, is Indra.”
“Seven guiding reins” has been understood by Sāyaṇa as “seven-rayed”, and he says: “The seven-rayed: the seven rays, raśmayaḥ = seven forms of Parjanya (Taittirīya Āraṇya
Indra, the Bull, is the Rain-Cloud.
We see a direct correlation between “Bull” and “water” here.
{Also note the connection between the “rays” and “clouds”.}
The Bull is the Giver or Showerer of Water {and Light}.
Parjanya – the Rain-Cloud or God of Rain – is called Bull {RV 5.83.1}:
“Sing with these songs thy welcome to the Mighty, with adoration praise and call Parjanya.
The Bull, loud roaring, swift to send his bounty, lays in the plants the seed for germination.”
According to the Commentary by Sāyaṇa:
“Parjanya is Indra, as the sender of rain;
Nirukta 10.10 provides a number of etymologies:
· par, derived from tṛp, to satisfy (with a reversal of the final consonant),
· janya = a victor,
· jetā or genitive rator janayith, or impelleer prajayitā, of fluids, rasānām;
unādi derivation refers it to vṛṣ, to rain (p substituted for v; r. becoming the guṇa, ar; and s’ being changed to j; anya is the affix)”
This is as important as it’s fascinating.
It reinforces the connection between the Bull {& Cow} and Water-Rain-River-Flood.
Massey does tell us – and I shall give the quote – that in Egyptian Meru meant “cow”.
This fits in with the Sun-Bull being called “Mer-ur”, the Great Mer.
For now, we shall keep aside the highly probable connection of Romulus-Remus-Rome with the mountain Meru.
For some unfathomable reason, I’ve not come across a single Indian explanation of the word “Meru”.
But Massey has one, and I’ll come to it later.
Returning to Romulus and Remus, the Mer/Meru and Mer-ur connection is reinforced by the association of the twins with Mars.
They are the children of Mars & Rhea.
Romulus and Remus are the sons of Mars.
Romulus was himself identified with Mars.
And here is the most important, striking, astonishing point of all:
HOW HAS NOBODY EVER MADE THE CONNECTION BETWEEN MAR-S AND MAR-Y?
They are again, both, rooted in the Egyptian “mer” or “meru” or “mera” or “meri”.
Mars /Mar is Mer = Meru
Romulus is Mer-ur = Mer the Great = Meru-ur
Remus is Mer = Meru
Rome is Mer = Meru
Mary is Mer
The original etymology of Mars is also, unsurprisingly, not to be found, has not been decided upon with any degree of certitude – like almost everything that modern scholars have been arguing about for the past 200 years.
Here I would like to emphasize upon one important point.
The precise meaning underlying a particular word, though the same, may change, with the character or place.
“hari” when applied to Indra is not the same as “hari” applied to a monkey.
“mer” can mean “sea” or “stream” – or “mountain” – or “pyramid” {which was an image of the mountain} – or “chief” – or even “servant”.
The “mer” underlying the word Mars doesn’t have to be the exact same as the “mer” underlying the word “Remus”.
We cannot be sure – they may be – and if one digs, all sorts of connections do emerge.
Also, the Egyptian root of Mars maybe “mer” and that of “Remus” maybe something like “meru”.
The root-words are not the same, but similar – they’re different, but intimately connected and inseparable, like “Mary” and “Marta” – or “Mer” and “Merti”.
A more important point, in my opinion, is that the vowels are irrelevant.
The shifting and changing and replacing of vowels is common.
The consonants – in this case, the group mr – are crucial.
The confusion is created by the change & shifting of vowels, which is how the initiates preserved their mysteries & the uninitiated stayed befuddled.
To get the first most pertinent objection out of the way: could Mars possibly have anything to do with the sea, or water?
Depends on how you understand the term “sea” or “ocean”, and what all concepts you associate with it – or for that matter, the term “Water”.
Not to mention: do we know what all did Mars represent?
Was Mars once upon a time a fertility god – and a god of rain?
It shouldn’t be forgotten that Mars was often paired along with Venus – who can pretty much be seen as a Sea-goddesses or the Sea herself.
That the Son of Mars is Amor – that Amor may be related to Roma/Rome – which was founded by the Sons of Mars – shouldn’t come as a big surprise.
Venus’s son, Cupid, was always associated with the Dolphin, or Sea-Fish – like the later Christ.
Why would Cupid be associated with a sea-creature?
At the very basic level of obvious symbolism, Cupid is the Fish or Dolphin – because he is the son of the Ocean-goddess.
Like Joshua is the Son of Nun — or Jesus the Ichthys-Fish is the Son of Mary.
And if Venus, the Mother, is the Ocean-goddess – then the Father, Mars, must be the Ocean-God, in other words traceable to the Egyptian and Indo-European “mer”.
Remember, neither in case of Venus, nor in case of Mary, does “Water” or “Ocean” refer to our terrestrial salty brine – even Venus might have been philosophically the Ocean of “Ether”.
On the other hand, Venus might also be a Goddess of Rain, the ultimate symbol of sexual intercourse, fertility, abundance, and the birth of new life.
Please do not retain just one or two literal ideas of “sea” & “water” in your mind.
Here I would need to digress for a moment.
The consonantal group – mr – has many meanings or concepts.
One of them is, as we’ve seen – the Ocean.
There are at least 6 significances of the words pertaining to “water” or “ocean”:
1. The terrestrial oceans or seas full of salty, undrinkable water, but teeming with mysterious creatures & weird monsters.
2. The realm of the air – called antarikṣa in Vedic literature.
3. Heaven itself – the realm of the Sun – though this mostly isn’t the case.
4. There is a realm which can be called “ocean” above the heaven.
5. The Body, as the image of the waters into which the soul has sunk.
6. Material, manifested existence or the cosmos, which is merely the macrocosmic concept of which the Body is the microcosmic counterpart.
There can be rampant confusion between the 1st, 2nd, and 4th Oceans.
Usually, Heaven itself is not imaged as an Ocean – rather, the whole wide realm of Space is.
The 2nd & 4th oceans are clearly delineated by the Bible:
“And God said, “Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters
{the Waters of Space, the so-called “chaos” or “deep” or “abyss”},
and let it divide the waters from the waters”.
And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament {the firmament is “Heaven”, called div or dyu or sūrya-loka in India;
the “waters” beneath it is the realm of air, called antarikṣa in the Vedas}
from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.
{there is an “ocean” above Sūrya-Āditya too, though this seems to be a much more esoteric doctrine}
And God called the firmament Heaven.
{= dyu = Āditya-loka = svar = svarga}
And the evening and the morning were the second day.
And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so.
{This means that our terrestrial sphere, which maybe called Pṛthivī, was created from out of the Antarikṣa-ocean – which is the true Vedic doctrine}
And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called the Seas {this refers to our terrestrial, salty sea}: and God saw that it was good.”
The word “ocean” or the words relating to “water”, “flood”, “rain” etc. can have many other meanings, but “ocean/sea” refers to the above 6 at a less intellectual-spiritual level.
Now, the Ocean can be seen as Life as well as Death.
It is the source of all life {or existence, or manifestation} as the “primal watery abyss” or “the deep” {the waters above the firmament, & the waters below it, i.e. the antarikṣa are the source of all our existence} – and also the element which denotes death, chaos, negation, the end of life.
Man survives because of water, but he cannot survive in water.
Life emerges from “water” called “Chaos” – and then sinks into water, in which the breath of man is extinguished, which is also “Chaos”.
Semen & menstrual-blood were both “watery”.
The ocean is – to use a much-used simile – both “womb” and “tomb”.
The “death” aspect of the ocean-water-element has always been expressed by the root mr – and this is found across the world.
In fundamental, simple terms: Air meant “Breath” – water meant “Death”.
The exact relation between “water” and “death” is not necessarily obvious and I’m working my way through it.
The soul’s “fall into matter” and “incarnation in the body” was seen as a Death – a spiritual death of the divine, immortal fragment – and was imaged as a deity drowning & dying in the Ocean.
The realm of material, temporal existence – the world of mortality – was seen as a gigantic ocean.
Then comes the association of “water” with “war”.
The “war” may be understood as war upon drought, famine, infertility, unfruitfulness – a war against emaciation, hunger, misery, and death.
In countries like Egypt and India, it would also mean war against the scorching, blistering heat of the sun – the drying up of all rivers, lakes & ponds with their silvery fish & blooming lotuses – the disappearance of prolific life – and the withering of life.
There being an intimate analogy between the flooding of rivers & the falling of rain – and the flooding of light and the spreading of the rays of the Sun – this was also a war against darkness, both material & spiritual – against the Night, the Chaos which disintegrated all form & all manifestation – a war against everything that threatened to dissolve, disjoint, swallow, suppress, destroy, and kill, Man.
The giver of rain & the giver of light was a fighter, a warrior, a slaughterer, a slayer, a subduer, a hero.
Thus, all words which denote “water” also denote “death” & “mortality” or some aspect related to death.
These other aspects usually pertain to war, killing, destruction & even disease.
But most of all to war, and all its derivative concepts of masculinity, heroism, nobility, and bravery.
This in turn leads to the concepts of intercourse, fertility, impregnation, parturition, birth, and the generation of life.
The hero-warrior was also seen as the vigorous Bull or Lion or Ram or Elephant or Stallion, who frolicked with & impregnated his harem of females, and generated a whole legion of progeny that perpetuated his line & expanded his power & influence.
This was the fundamental principle of survival & success.
Thus, we can see something like:
Rain = Flood = War = Impregnation
This is very important to the whole discussion, and nothing can be understood properly without grasping these fundamental connections.
I wouldn’t get into the analogies between killing-slaughtering and sexual intercourse, but part of it is obvious to all: the phallus is always compared to weapons of war, destruction, hunting & killing – particularly the spear, the sword, the club, and the thunder-bolt.
The phallus is what pierces, penetrates, enters {makes} a hole, rends, breaks, and divides.
It is also compared to a churning-stick in Vedic psychology, used in the generation of fire.
Here I’d like to stress 2 strange transitions from the alphabet “m”.
1. “m” often turns into “n”
2. “m” may also turn into “b”, and thus, into “v”, “p”, and “f”
Also remember:
1. “r” turns into “l”
2. “n” turns into, or interchanges with, “r”
On the one hand, “mer” can turn into “mel” – on the other hand, it turns into “bel”.
And that is how we get the name of the most famous of all Middle-Eastern gods, Bel, Bal, Baal, Belus etc.
Ultimately, remember, these all connect to the word “Mary”, a master choice of the brilliant Christian thinkers.
On the one hand, “mer” can change into “ner” – on the other hand, it turns into {“gar” and then} “gal”.
In my humble opinion,
· the Egyptian Nar-mer –
· the Mesopotamian Ner-gal –
· the Roman Mar(s) –
· the Middle Eastern Bel –
and ultimately,
· the Hebrew-Semitic-Christian Mar(y) –
are, at the root, the same word & the same god, associated with the same cluster of concepts.
They are all rooted in
· the Ocean as Source of Life & Creation &
· the martial, heroic, warrior-aspect of Death.
Both have a death-aspect, as well as a life-giving aspect: these have never been fully dissociated.
Now please note this in relation to deities like Nergal and Mars.
The Egyptian word mer {also} means “to die, end, death”.
This is identical to the “Proto-Indo-European” root “mer” which also means “to die”.
Except that “mer” is neither Egyptian nor “Proto-Indo-European”.
It is a linguistic root which belongs to the entire world, and the oldest, most primeval, pre-historical mankind.
Thus, in Egyptian:
· “mer-t” means “sickness, illness, pain, sorrow, cruelty, grief, fatal disease”,
· “merti” means “the dead, damned”, and
· “merḥ” means “to destroy, to wipe out, to delete or obliterate, to perish”.
Similarly, in Sanskrit:
· “mṛ”means “to die, decease”, “to cause to die, kill, slay”
· “mara” means “dying, death”, “the world of death”, “killing”
· “mṛta” means
è “dead, deceased, death-like, torpid, rigid”,
è “departed, vanished (as consciousness)”,
è “vain, useless”,
è “a grave”.
· “marta” means
è a mortal
è man {i.e. the being who is subject to death vis-a-vis the Gods, who are called amara, i.e. Deathless}
I find it almost impossible to believe that the Sanskrit mṛta and the Egyptian merti are NOT related – they are almost identical – and that these words are not related to words like mortal and mortality – and are not related to the Biblical Marta.
This way or that, all these words are related.
Mary and Marta – both are also associated with Death.
In Proto-Italic, “mortis” means “death”.
In Latin, “mors” means
· “death = Egyp. mer
· corpse = Egyp. merti
· annihilation” = Egyp. merḥ
In Egyptian, “mer-t” means
· “sickness, illness,
· pain, sorrow,
· cruelty, grief,
· fatal disease”.
All this ties into Ner-gal – which is a permutation of Mer-gal – being the god of war, death, and disease.
{In my opinion, Ner-gal = Mer-gal = Mer-mal = Mar-mar}
Now we need to take a look at the concept of being martial.
The word martial itself is traced to Mars.
As indicated above, I’m inclined to think that “martial” and “Mars” come from the death-dealing, fighting, slaying, killing, slaughtering, war-like aspects of the word “mer”, “mṛ”, “mara” etc..
He who destroys & subjugates, reduces & conquers, dismembers & decapitates, and deals out pain, punishment & death, is Mara – is Mars.
This is exactly what the soldier or warrior does – and this is what the King or Chief of a tribe or community or state primarily did.
He who gives death – he who kills – is also the one
who controls life & death,
who upholds & perpetuates the law, and
who protects & defends the city-kingdom-clan.
This is how the word “Mars” is derived from both
« “the death-dealer” or one who metes out, regulates & controls death & life – and
« water {“mer”} as Death & as the Source of all Life.
He is the Lord of Death – mer, mṛ, mara, mors – so to speak.
The warrior – his power, his energy, his courage, his majesty – is precisely known & measured by his ability to kill, to destroy, to annihilate.
The word “war” itself is a permutation of the word “mer”, since m interchanges with w, v, b & p.
mer = war = vere = vīra
This is how we get the term for “man” which is “were”.
“wer” in Old English means “man, husband, hero, warrior”.
We see how mr or mer changes into nr or ner in India.
In Sanskrit, nara {pronounced nar} means a man, a male, a person, husband, hero.
All this has the same significance as mer in Egyptian and bel in the Middle East.
nara & its root nṛ have a distinct heroic, virile, martial significance – associated with strength & lordship.
The Devas are repeatedly addressed as “Nara” in the Ṛg Veda.
The word is often used in the same sense as vīra – which, as I indicated, also belongs to the mr cluster.
nṛtama means “most manly or strong”.
nṛmṇa means “manhood, power, strength, courage”.
The mortality of men may be included in the word “nara”, but it doesn’t seem to be the primary conception.
The primary conception is that of the fighting, slaying, death-dealing warrior – {probably the Rain-giving Sun in Heaven, or even the Moon which was the source of water & amṛta} – from which came all ideas of masculinity, virility, and manhood.
On the other hand, it’s important that in Sanskrit, nara also means water.
This has somehow been lost sight of, but is preserved in Medhātithi’s commentary on the Manusmṛti – in which he derives the word “Nārāyaṇa” not from the usual “nāra”, but from “nara”.
The 1st Book, 10th verse says:
āpo nārā iti proktā āpo vai narasūnavaḥ
tā yadasyāyanaṃ pūrvaṃ tena nārāyaṇaḥ smṛtaḥ
“Water is called ‘nara,’—water being the offspring of nara; since water was the first thing created by (or, the original residence of) that being, he is, on that account, described as ‘nārāyaṇa.’”
According to Medhātithi:
“How this is (i.e. how Brahmā is the same as ‘Nārāyana’) is explained ... Water is called Nara’—described under the name of—‘Nara.’
In answer to the objection—“There is no such usage current among experienced persons; nor is it generally known that water is called Nara,”—the Author adds: ‘Water being the offspring of Nara’—the supreme Being (Hiraṇyagarbha, described in verse 8 as having created water) might well be known under the name ‘Nara,’ Person; and water is his ‘offspring;’ hence water is spoken of as ‘Nara,’ the name of the father is often applied to the child, e.g., the ‘sons of Vaśiṣṭha,’ the revered sages Tāvabhru, Maṇḍu and Lomaka, are spoken of as ‘Vaśiṣṭhāḥ’; and such usage is based upon the
figurative identification of the child with the father.—‘Since’ because—‘Water,’ known as ‘Nara,’ was ‘the first thing created by’—or it was his container when he lay in the womb (egg)—‘he is, on that account, described as Nārāyaṇa.’”
In other words, “water” is usually denoted by the word nāra – but in his commentary, Medhātithi says that the word nara may also be used for “water”.
This makes perfect sense, as a matter of fact.
I’m inclined to think that nara, at one point of time, did mean water – and there was always a connection between Man & Water.
But – the fact that water is usually denoted by the term nāra – pronounced naar – is equally important – and is linked to the “Indo-European” roots “mer” & “mori” – and the Egyptian “mer”.
I can only hope all this data is not confusing.
§ No.1: Mer means water in Egyptian.
§ No. 2: M interchanges with N.
§ No.3: Ner, Nar, Nara, or Nāra, means water – in Sanskrit.
This is found in Europe too, where:
1. the Ner-eids are the nymphs of the Ocean; and their father is
2. Ner-eus who is
· the “Old Man of the Sea”,
· the son of Pontus {the Sea}
· exchanges with, or is replaced by, the Oceanic Triton
· also called the husband of Aphrodite,
and who has a son called
3. Ner-ites who
· was loved by Aphrodite
· was loved by Poseidon, the Ocean-god
· was said to have been turned into a shell-fish.
Last but not the least,
4. Nerio was the consort of Mars.
The concepts have been split up, and “shared” between different personages & characters.
Thus, the concepts of valour, strength, power, and heroism, are retained in the the idea of Mars’s wife, Nerio.
According to Wikipedia,
“The consort of Mars was Nerio or Neriene, “Valor.”
She represents the vital force (vis), power (potentia) and majesty (maiestas) of Mars.
Her name was regarded as Sabine in origin and is equivalent to Latin virtus, “manly virtue” (from vir, “man”).
{As pointed out, in the Ṛg Veda, the words nṛ and nara are used in the same sense as the Sanskrit vīra – the man of strength, might, power, masculinity, puissance, & virile energy.
Remember: mr – nr – and vr – are all permutations of each other.}
In the early 3rd century BCE, the comic playwright Plautus has a reference to Mars greeting Nerio, his wife.
A source from late antiquity says that Mars and Neriene were celebrated together at a festival held on March 23.
In the later Roman Empire, Neriene came to be identified with Minerva.
Nerio probably originates as a divine personification of Mars’s power, as such abstractions in Latin are generally feminine.
Her name appears with that of Mars in an archaic prayer invoking a series of abstract qualities, each paired with the name of a deity.
The influence of Greek mythology and its anthropomorphic gods may have caused Roman writers to treat these pairs as “marriages.””
That Mer-Mars is the consort of Ner-Nerio is perfectly logical.
Nerio is just another form of Aphrodite-Venus.
Mer is Ner.
It’s also to be noted that in Sanskrit nārī means:
· “a woman, a wife,
· a female or any object regarded as feminine”.
And with perfect consistency, in India, in Sanskrit, nīra – pronounced neer – is “water”.
There has been tremendous debate about the origin of the word “Nile”.
It was called “Nile” by the Greeks, not the Egyptians.
Massey writes, in the 1st chapter of “A Book of The Beginnings”:
““The origin of the word Nile,” says M. Brugsch, “is not to be sought in the old Egyptian language, but as has been lately suggested with great probability, it is derived from the Semitic word Nahar or Nahal, which has the general signification of river.
So good an Egyptologist should have remembered that aur or aru (Eg.) is the river and that nai is the definite plural article The which gives all the Egyptian significance to the River as the double stream, the two waters or waterer of the two lands north and south.
Naiaru interchanges with Naialu, whence the Nile.
But for this combination of nai (plural the) and aru, earlier Karu river, extant in Aethiopic as Nachal, for the Nile, the Semites would have had no such Nahar or Nahal.”
Needless ingenuity and hair-splitting, on the part of Massey.
I have a simpler explanation: that nr, nar, ner or nira meant water in the Indo-European languages.
This is simply a permutation of mr, mer, mar, mir, etc.
Nile is directly derivable from the Sanskrit nīra.
The Hebrew Nahar is directly derivable from the Sanskrit nara—nāra—nīra.
Massey has a strong, valid point in trying to trace the “h” of “Nahar” to something like N’Karu—N’Kal—N’hal.
He writes:
“The mythology of Egypt as shown in the Ritual, obviously originated in a land of lakes, the lake being and continuing to a late time to be the typical great water which dominated after they were aware of the existence of seas.
The water, or rather mud of source is a lake of primordial matter placed in the north.
Another hint may be derived from the fact that aru is the river in Egyptian, and the anterior form of the word, karu, is the lake or pond.”
If “Merå” was a name of Ancient Egypt, this makes good sense because “mer” means “lake”.
However, I’m inclined to think that the “h” in many Hebrew names is a later Israelite or Rabbanical addition to more ancient words.
Abram becomes Abra-h-am
Sarai becomes Sara-h.
Jesus is not Jeshua but Je-ho-shua.
Judea is Ye-hu-da.
Enoch is rendered Hanokh and even Khanokh.
Eve or Ava is Hava or Khava.
Ieue becomes Yahweh.
I don’t think “h” featured in all the original words, and that the “h” – or every “h” –needs to be tracked down to a “k”.
“Nile” or “Nahar” doesn’t have to be traced to N’Karu – it is directly & simply another form of Sanskrit nīra and nara/nāra.
There’s a possibility that Nile may-be connected to the India nīla, which means blue – but this is unlikely, because rivers and oceans were almost never identified with the colour blue, in India.
But it’s not altogether impossible.
Scholars are determined to keep the “Indo-European”, “Semitic”, and “Afro-Egyptian” separate and distinct, but the truth is that there’s no such thing.
All the words are connected one way or the other.
To return to the original topic, permit me to be bold enough to say that the word Nile is also, ultimately, related to Mer—Mary.
Before concluding this sub-topic, I’ll note that according to the Monier-Williams Dictionary, Nārī is supposed to be a daughter of Meru!
It all fits in perfectly!
Mer-Mar-Meri etc. will also turn into Mel-Meli.
We see this in the Phoenician deity Melkart – who had been associated with Hercules.
Melkart is probably derived from Mel-Kart or the Egyptian Mer-Khart.
In Egyptian, khart means Child –– so Mer-Khart would mean “Son of Mer” – which may be rendered “Son of the Ocean” or “Ocean-Child”.
Do remember that the Egyptian mer doesn’t always mean “water”.
Melqart may well be traceable to something like “Son of the Master” or “Son of the Mountain” or “Son of the Bull” {Mer as the bull Mnevis}.
But in my opinion, the Mel in Melkart is the Egyptian Mer.
Since “m” interchanges with “b” and “r” with “l” – there being no “L” in Egyptian – we see that Mel-kart is the son of Baal or Bel!
As in:
Mer-Khart = Mel-Khart = Bel-Khart = Child of Bel
The oceanic or marine connotations of the name – as well as the Child-assocations – are preserved in the Greek figure of Melicertes, who, for some reasons known best to themselves, modern scholars do not connect with Melkart.
The obvious identity of the two names cannot possibly be accidental, and isn’t.
Melicertes is a sea-god, and his mother, Ino a sea-goddess.
Meli-certes or Mer-khart – son of Mer or the Mer-child – is simply another form of Amor or A-Mer.
He is also shown riding a dolphin, exactly the same as Cupid.
His mother and he were said to have jumped into the ocean, and become a goddess and god of the ocean.
“She {Ino} is called Leucothea, and her son is Palaimon: these names they receive from those who sail, for they help sailors beset by storms”
– Pseudo-Apollodorus, Bibliotheca 3. 28 (Greek mythographer 2nd century CE)
According to Pausanius:
“Cadmus made a brilliant marriage, if, as the Greek legend says, he indeed took to wife a daughter of Aphrodite & Ares {i.e. Mars}.
His daughters too have made him a name;
Semele was famed for having a child by Zeus,
Ino for being a divinity of the sea.”
Pal-aimon = Par-aimon = Mar-aimon.
This “Pal” is nothing but “Bal” who is the Father of Mel-kart in Phoenicia.
Melicertes = Melkart = Palaimon is also Bacchus or Dionysus.
Ino is said to have nursed Dionysus as well as her own son, Melicertes.
A similar story is told of Dionysus – who was persecuted by Lycurgus, and who then jumped into the Sea – in some versions with his nurses – and was received by the Sea.
{Nothing will ever be comprehended without realizing that:
1. All “sons” are one god
2. All “mothers” are one goddess
3. All “fathers” are one god
4. All gods will ultimately resolve into a primal couple, or a primal mother, or a primal father.}
Ino is said to be the daughter of Cadmus of Thebes, but Cadmus is simply the Phoenician Cadmus who introduced the alphabet into Greece.
Melicertes is the grandson of Cadmus of Phoenicia, and hence, the Phoenician connection has been preserved.
Unsurprisingly, Cadmus is said to be the grandson of the Ocean-god, Poseidon, and of Libya.
Libya is in Africa – and this lady Libya is the daughter of a King of Egypt – so Cadmus is actually partially African & Egyptian.
In other words, the Egypto-African root of the Phoenician root of the Greek god Melicertes has been maintained intact.
He is
· the great-great-grandson of Poseidon, the Ocean-god par excellence
· the great-great-grandson of the African-Egyptian Libya
· the great-great-great-grandson of Epaphus, an Egyptian King
· the grandson of the Phoenician Cadmus
· the son of a Sea-goddess Ino-Leucothea
· himself a Sea-god.
May Ino be “Iunu” or “Annu” or “Anu” – i.e. Heliopolis, the great center of the worship of Mer-ur?
Heliopolis was the main center of the worship of Atum-Ra.
Ino’s husband is said to be Athamas – who seems to be the Egyptian Atum/Atem/Tem.
It’s also possible that “Ino” comes from the Egyptian “Nu” – the “watery abyss” or the “primal waters” – or the Ocean of Space – or the Sea of the Sky.
Thus, she might be traceable to the Egyptian deities “Nut” & “Nun”.
It seems as if –
· as “Ino and Melicertes” the mother & son are the the Evening-Sky and the setting Sun – and
· as “Leucothea and Palaemon” they are the Morning-Sky and the newly-rising Sun.
It’s a wild guess, but altogether not without foundation.
This is reinforced by the fact that Athamas-Atem is himself the setting Sun.
Melicertes then is something like the embryo or seed of the setting sun which, sinking into the ocean of the night, or the ocean at night, becomes the sun in the morning.
He might also refer to the Evening & Morning Star, i.e. Venus.
Ino becomes Leucothea or the Dawn – amongst the Romans, Mater Matuta – akin to the Vedic Ushā.
This is both the Sky-Ocean or Heaven-Ocean – and Dawn, the bringer of light.
The “Pal” element in “Palaemon” may be the equivalent of the Sanskrit “bāla”, child, infant, new-born – as we call the newly-risen Sun Bāla-Āditya – and this corresponds to the Semitic “Bar” which also means Son.
{This is another connection with the mr group, which needs to be examined.}
At dusk, the setting Sun, Atem-Athamas goes “mad”, i.e. loses control, force, power, and his solar-masculine virility.
The idea is evidently derived from Egypt, as Budge writes about Tem/Atem in the 1st book of “The Gods of the Egyptians”:
“Tem, or Temu, or Atem, was originally the local god of the city of Annu, or Heliopolis, and in the dynastic period at all events he was held to be one of the forms of the great Sun-god Ra, and to be the personification of the setting sun.
In the predynastic period, however, he was, as M. Lefebure has pointed out, the first
man among the Egyptians who was believed to have become divine, and who was at his death identified with the setting sun; in other words, Tem was the first living man-god known to the Egyptians, just as Osiris was the first dead man-god, and as such was always represented in human form and with a human head.”
Do note that the Greeks seem to lay special emphasis on the fact that Ino and Melicertes were human, and only after their “death” became divine.
Somewhere, one can see a faint original of Jesus and Mary and their apotheoses.
There might be occult meanings to all this, but, from a simpler, more prosaic perspective too, “human” probably means lesser & weaker, & associated with darkness, with dissolution, with powerlessness – and this maybe said of the Evening Sun and Evening Sky.
The Evening Sky Ino and the embryo-child of the Sun or potential future-sun, Melicertes, in terror plunge into the Ocean of the Night & “die” {usually Melicertes is said to be killed, or die first, i.e. the Sun-child – or maybe the planet Venus – sinks into darkness, maybe said to be “killed” by the darkening Sky} – and then are turned into Leucothea and Palaemon, i.e Dawn/Morning-Sky and the Newly-risen, young Sun.
I do not want to focus too much on these two relatively unimportant figures – but maybe they are not exactly unimportant?
What I want to show is that the root word “Mer” – in connection with the Christian “Mary” – actually interchanges with, permutes into, and influences – a multitude of names and gods and mythic figures of the Ancient World.
There is a certain set of concepts {say, “water”} associated with a certain cluster of consonants {say, “mer, mar, mir, mur, meri, mer-t” etc.}.
This cluster of consonants {“mr”} permutes into another cluster of consonants {say, “nr”}, but very often, the associated sets of concepts remain the same {“water”}.
The Greek sea-god Melicertes retains all the associations with the cluster-consonants “mer” – “mel” – “bel” – “pel”.
Indeed,
Melicertes = Melkart = Mer-Khart or Meri-Khart = Son of Mer/Meri
In addition to the above, it should be realized that there are often multiple clusters of concepts {“child”, “warrior”, “death”, “water”} associated with a specific consonantal-cluster {“mr”}.
And these concept-clusters may also shift along with the shift in consonantal-clusters {thus, “warrior” as “mer” can become “warrior, hero, master” as in clusters of “bel” or “ner”}.
This isn’t as confusing as it appears to be.
The exact relation between the concepts as well as the consonant-clusters should always be remembered.
“Mary” becomes “Molly” just as “Mer” become “Meli”.
{Indeed, according to Massey, the English word “child” should be traceable to the Egyptian “khart” as in khart = khalt = khald = child.}
The derivation of Melqart from Mlk – as in Melech or Malik – may not be in direct opposition to the “Mer” element.
As noted in the Lazarus-post, the Egyptian “mer” means “overseer, chief officer, head, superintendent, director, foreman”.
The word is used in a wide variety of compounds which means: “sheikh”, inspector, captain etc.
“mer nut” means “governor of town, mayor”.
“merā” possibly means “chief of caravans”.
This obviously ties in to the Semitic “malk” or “mer-k” which means “king, prince, lord, master”.
There may be more indirect and complex pathways connecting words—I’m just touching upon some of the most obvious relations.
It’s difficult to dissociate the Semitic malk from the Sanskrit mṛga – which means “a forest animal or wild beast, game of any kind, (esp.) a deer, fawn, gazelle, antelope, stag, musk-deer”.
To get the obvious out of the way, every Ancient god and hero was either symbolized by, or associated with, or called, some or the other animal – mostly all of them.
It’s perfectly normal for a god or hero to be called “Lion”, “Bull”, “Stallion”, “Ram”, “Jaguar” or “Serpent/Dragon”.
Most of the Ancient Gods were endowed with the heads, limbs, and bodies, of all sorts of animals – whether the boar, the crocodile, or hippopotamus, or cat.
This was done by way of admiration, often out of fear & awe – and invariably to convey some powerful, majestic, terrific, or dreadful & terrifying quality – or certain typical attributes or characteristics – which was to be found in the animal or creature.
Thus, the association of the Semitic “malk” and the Sanskrit “mṛga” is not only convincing, but also profoundly logical.
The King, Master and Overlord is like a mighty, grand and unassailable beast – a mṛga – which kills & subdues all his enemies, protects & guards his own, is endowed with pulsating energy & blazes with terrifying prowess.
Kings in the Ancient world invariably wore all sorts of animal-skins as clothes – wore ornaments shaped as animals – wore crowns with horns – and in Egypt, even wore the tail of animals {cow, lion}.
The throne – or seat of the King – was almost universally a lion-throne.
It was so in Egypt, and it was so in India, where the throne is called “siṁhāsana”, or lion-seat.
This was done to simulate the beast – i.e. the King was the supreme beast – the supreme Bull or Lion.
As Budge tells us, in the 1st Volume of Gods of The Egyptians:
“The great strength of the bull, and his almost irresistible attack in fighting and headlong rush, excited the fear and admiration of primitive man, and his fecundating powers made him at a very early period the type of the generative principle in nature.
For thousands of years the kings of Egypt delighted to call themselves “mighty bull,” and the importance which they attached to this title is evinced by the fact that many of them inscribed it upon their serekh, or cognizance, which displayed their name as the descendant of Horus; in fact, it formed their Horus name.
...
The warrior kings of the 18th & 19th Dynasties were pleased when the court scribes related in commemorative inscriptions how their lords raged and roared like lions as they mounted their chariots and set out to crush the foolish enemy who had the temerity to defy them, but they preferred to be likened to the “mighty bull,” who trampled opposition beneath his hoofs, and gored and destroyed with his horns that which his hoofs had failed to annihilate.
Out of the reverence which was paid to the bull in predynastic times grew the worship of two special bulls, Hap & Mer-ur, which names the Greeks modified into Apis & Mnevis, the sacred animals of the ancient cities of Memphis & Heliopolis respectively.”
Though in India “mṛga” is used most emphatically for deer or antelope, the word neither necessarily means deer/antelope nor is it always used in this sense, in the Ṛg Veda.
{Besides, the deer was, and has always been, one of the most important of all animals in world mythology, and is found universally in all art from all over the world.
Though the hunted and more tender, even romantic, aspects of the deer have been emphasized, in India and elsewhere, the fact is that the deer is not only one of the most important animals in India {perhaps after only the lion & elephant}, but also associated with power & terror.
One of the most common species of deer referred to is the Ruru deer, and the word ruru comes from “to roar, bellow, howl, yelp, cry aloud”.
Not sure if this deer makes such terrifying or impressive sounds, but there is apparently a connection between the deer and these concepts.
But does ruru simply mean a certain species of deer?
ruru is the roarer or bellower or howler – in the sense of being terrifying, terrible, and terrific.
Hence, ruru also means “any savage beast” – as in mṛga.
Hence, Ruru is also a form of the dread Bhairava.
The point is that the deer was not just seen as something that was hunted, but also as something powerful, swift, and beautiful {otherwise why would one of the better-known deer species be called ruru}?
That’s at least one reason why the word mṛga was specially applied to it.
And yet, I don’t think mṛga originally meant “deer” – it meant a gigantic, powerful, untamable, ferocious, wild beast.
There is also the meaning of “ranger” & “rover”: a predator & hunter that ranges the forests & mountains looking for game, fearlessly, inviting risks & dangers, overcoming all threats to life, proving his prowess, instilling terror into one & all, establishing his dominance, his territory.
We read in a hymn to Indra in the Ṛg Veda {1.173.2}:
“Let the Bull {vṛṣan} sing with Bulls whose toil is worship,
with a loud roar like some wild beast {mṛga} that hungers”.
Here we do see how the word mṛga may be related to the word ruru – and both are applied to the deer.}
The Sanskrit “mṛga” has also been interpreted simply as “wild”.
But it’s just as likely that it means “powerful, terrible, dreadful, awe-inspiring” {hence, it is uncontrollable & unsubduable – it is what dominates & subdues other}
Thus we read in a hymn to the Maruts in the Ṛg Veda {1.64.7}:
“Mighty {mahiṣa}, with wondrous power and marvellously bright,
selfstrong like mountains, ye glide swiftly on your way.
Like the wild {mṛga} elephants {hastina} ye eat the forests up
when ye assume your strength among the bright red flames.”
Here, mṛga cannot mean “deer” – and though “wild” makes good sense, it might be better to interpret it as “mighty, awful, puissant”.
It is said of Agni {1.145.5}:
“He is a wild thing {mṛga} of the flood {ap} and forest {vana}:
he hath been laid upon the highest surface {tvaca}.
He hath declared the lore of works to mortals, Agni the Wise {vidvān},
for he knows Law, the Truthful.”
This is Ralph TH Griffith’s translation.
“mṛga of the flood” certainly doesn’t mean “antelope” of the flood – but something like a locus of great power – or a powerful being or – a center or mass of blazing might & energy – within the “flood” – which could mean div {as the Sun} or antarikṣa {as lightning}.
{It’s also possible likely that
· “forest” refers to the Earth or Pṛthivī {associated with Agni, the fire} –
· “flood” to the realm of Air or Antarikṣa {associated with Vāyu, the air, or lightning} – and
· “highest surface” to the Sky or Dyu-loka {associated with Āditya, the Sun}.
Here then mṛga would be used to mean the three great fires, or three forms of Agni.}
Remember, the objective is to connect the word “mṛga” to the Semitic “malk”.
And here we may take an important turn in interpretation.
The same passage has been translated differently, in which “mṛga” is understood as “the Searcher”.
This is because the root of “mṛga”, i.e. “mṛg”, means “to seek, search for or through, investigate, examine”.
“mṛga” thus becomes he who seeks, searches, investigates, and examines.
That is, the Sage, the Philosopher, the Seer, the man of knowledge and wisdom – as the verse says, the “vidvān”.
In the same sense, “mṛg”, means “to chase, hunt, pursue”.
So “mṛga”also means He who hunts, chases, and pursues.
The King, the Chief, the Head of the tribe or kingdom or people, is always the symbol & epitome of power & majesty.
One of the origins, and expressions, of this power & energy was that he was a great hunter, engaged in “the chase”, and pursued & killed wild beasts like he’d pursue & slaughter all his enemies.
Budge tells us about Amenhetep III {the father of the notorious Akhenaten} in “Tutankhamen, Amenisn, Atenism”:
“During the early years of his reign Amenhetep spent a great deal of his time in hunting, and to commemorate his exploits in the desert he caused two groups of large scarabs to be made.
On the bases of these were cut details of his hunts and the numbers of the beasts he slew.
One group of them, the “Hunt Scarabs”, tells us that a message came to him saying that a herd of wild cattle had been sighted in Lower Egypt.
Without delay he set off in a boat, and having sailed all night arrived in the morning near the place where they were.
All the people turned out and made an enclosure with stakes and ropes, and then, in true African fashion, surrounded the herd and with cries and shouts drove the terrified beasts into it.
On the occasion which the scarabs commemorate 170 wild cattle were forced into the enclosure, and then the King in his chariot drove in among them and killed 56 of them.”
And also:
“The great independent chiefs of Babylonia, Assyria, and Mitanni vied with each other in seeking his friendship, and probably the happiest times of his pleasure-loving life were the periods which he spent among his Mesopotamian friends and allies.
His joy in hunting the lion in the desert south of Sinjar and in the thickets by the river Khabiir can be easily imagined, and his love for the chase would gain him many friends among the shekhs of Mesopotamia.”
Heroism, valour, masculinity, and manly power, could never ever be detached from hunting.
The ability to fight, to chase, to run, to overpower, and to kill, was one of the pillars which held up the life of an individual, family, or society in the Ancient World.
Survival depended upon hunting & killing.
The importance of this can never be underestimated.
This was also written into the war between Rain & Famine – between Light & Darkness – between Life & Death – between Knowledge & Ignorance – between Good & Evil – between Bliss & Pain – between Immortality & Death.
Lion or snake, deer or boar, crocodile or elephant – the God or Hero was always known, and worshipped, as a hunter-killer-slayer – both as these animals, and of these animals.
Every great hero or god is known from his hunting & slaughter of some “monster” or “dragon” or terrific beast.
The Hunter
= the Slaughterer
= the Hero
= the Master
= the Potent, Prolific Male
= the Lord
= the Warrior
= the Impregnator
= the Lover
Thus has Nimrod been called a great hunter: “the first on earth to be a mighty man {gibbowr – or “mighty one”}. He was a mighty hunter {gibbowr tsayid} before the Lord” {Genesis 10.8-9}
The word “tsayid” means:
· “hunting, game
è hunting
è game hunted
· “provision, food”
It’s root is “tsud”:
· “to hunt
è (Qal) to hunt
è (Poel) to hunt, hunt eagerly or keenly
è (Hithpael) take provision”.
This word means the same as the Sanskrit “mṛga”.
In my estimation, “mṛga”also means “hunter”, and might mean “powerful hunter”.
This is how it’s connected to the Semitic malk.
There are other possible meanings too.
The Semitic malk, which becomes the terrible god Molech for instance, is said to derive from a root meaning “to counsel” or “to take counsel”.
However unconvincing the derivation, this does tie in to the Sanskrit words mṛg and a derivative, mārga.
The Semitic malak means “to counsel, to advise”.
It is said to be a primitive root which, amongst others, means “to take counsel”.
Thus, malak means either to give guidance, or to take guidance.
To be shown the right direction
– to show or be shown the right path
– to indicate or be shown the right destination.
As we’ve seen, the Sanskrit “mṛg” means “to seek, search for or through, investigate, examine”.
This leads to mārg which means
· “to seek, look for;
· to search through;
· to seek after, strive to attain” – and also
· “to request, ask, beg, solicit anything from any one”.
In other words, to look or ask for, the right direction
– to search for the right path
– to enquire about, or look for, the right destination.
Thus, as
· the Semitic malak means “to give counsel” & “to take counsel”,
· the Sanskrit mārga means “pointing out the way, indicating how anything is to take place”, and
· the Sanskrit mṛga means “search, seeking, asking, requesting”.
The words are literally identical, both in form & content.
This is one of the primary functions of the King, the Chief, the Head, and the Master – but perhaps the taking of counsel comes from the fact that Kings were not in a position to be intellectuals & thinkers—the vigorous, exhausting, excitable & violent military-warrior life did not allow for calm reflection, profound investigation of abstract truths, & prolonged scrutiny & examination of facts.
On the contrary, though well-trained in polity, they always had a coterie of sages, philosophers, priests, ministers, and advisers, who guided & counselled them in various matters of governance, justice, war, and intelligence.
Most Kings would act after a collective consultation with these ministers, priests, and sages versed in law etc., but technically, the King was the upholder of the Law, and also the Guide and Source of all knowledge & truth – because law, knowledge, truth & justice ultimately depended on his strength, on how formidable he was, on how he wielded the rod & the rule.
The hunter after the animal is also the huntsman after truth.
The investigator is one who enters an unknown territory like a hunter penetrates a dark forest, and looks for truth or for knowledge like a hunter looks for a wild beast – looks for the true significance of things, searches out the hidden meaning, chases or pursues it, and then hunts it down, i.e. understands it, imbibes it intellectually, and assimilates such knowledge.
The hunter, the finder, the seeker – is also the seeker of Bliss, or Knowledge, or Liberation, or Salvation.
{Added on 5th July, 2022 — Something which I read, today, in Rumi’s Mathnawi {also Masnawi, 2nd Book}:
}
These words & concepts can be further examined, but that would take us far from the topic of the post.
I’m inclined to think that the Semitic malk or malak is related to the Egyptian mer – that the Sanskrit mṛg or mārga is related to the Sanskrit mṛ — and that deep down, all these words are connected.
In Arabic,
· malaka means “to own” – and
· mālik means “owning, possessing, holding”.
We’ve seen that the Egyptian
· mer means “overseer, chief officer, head, superintendent, director, foreman”
– which titles rightfully {if not exclusively} belong to the Owner, Master, and Possessor.
We see a clear reflection of this in the Aramaic
· “martā” which means – “lady, mistress, ruler” as well as “owner”.
The root of the Aramaic “martā”is the Aramaic “mara”, which means
· “lord, master, ruler”
· “owner”
as well as
· “pickaxe”.
This takes us back to the Egyptian “mer”.
Somewhere, all this has to do with the infliction of death, the control over death, and mastery of death {and by implication, Life}.
The warrior is one who kills – or is killed.
No King is King without the power to inflict death & punishment.
On his Commentary on the Manusmṛti 7.11, Medhātithi writes:
“When he {the King} is pleased at service rendered to him, he grants wealth; when he is angry, he inflicts death.
Hence he who desires wealth should serve him with care.
When he is pleased with a man, he does not merely bestow wealth on him, but also subdues and destroys his enemies.
For this reason also, if a man desires the destruction of his enemy, he should try to please the King.”
The power of death – the power over death – determined Captaincy, Supremacy, and Chieftancy.
This is how “Kingship”, “ownership”, and “mastery” – are related to death, dying, war, and hunting.
He who could take away – could inflict pain & punishment – who could kill & destroy – was the Master, the Head, the King.
At this point of our little thesis, this is how “mer, mṛ, mara, mṛt” etc. connect to “malk, mṛg, marg” etc.
I would add that like the heroic warrior & master-slayer, the “hunter” would also be considered a euphemism for a sexually vibrant, potent, virile, energetic male.
The sexual game is very much a “chase” – the woman being the “game” and the male being the “hunter”.
The phallic connotations of hunting are lost on none.
I think “Moloch” or “Molech” comes from the Hunter, the wild-beast, the alpha-male, “the boss”, the ferocious & indomitable “manimal” as predator-hunter-&-slayer – hence, the bloody connotations of the deity associated with the name Molech-Moloch-Melech.
A Sumerian hymn to the Sun-god Utu reads:
“Emerging ...... below and gazing upwards, Utu, great physician, father of the black-headed, wearing a lapis-lazuli beard in the E-babbar!
Utu, great hero, focus of the assembly, king, bison running over the mountains!
Utu, bison running over the mountains!
... The lord, the son of Ningal, holds the 50 ...... in his hand and thunders over the mountains like a storm.
He has lifted his head over the Land.
My king Utu, you cross all the shining mountains like an eagle!
He has lifted his gaze over the mountains.”
And yet another:
“Youthful Utu ......, ...... from Urac;
brilliant light,
great lion, ......,
hero emerging from the holy interior of heaven,
storm whose splendour covers the Land and is laden with great awesomeness;
Utu, king of justice that befits the true offspring, made Culgi,
the trustworthy shepherd,
glorious in the battle.
The great wild bull, youthful Utu, who like a torch illuminates the Land from the holy heavens...”
The Sun-God has been compared to a bison running over mountains, to an eagle flying & crossing over shining mountains, to a great lion, and a great wild bull.
Utu is a mṛga.
Indeed, mṛga is also defined as “a large soaring bird”.
Melek or Malik is simply the mṛga.
Another point: as I said, the “mer” component of “Melek” needn’t necessarily be in opposition to the “mlk”.
Ancient words had multiple etymologies and multiple meanings.
Melek may be related to Melkart or Melicertes, or maybe an abraded form of those names.
The “mer” component may refer to the Bull – as in the Bull of Heliopolis, Mer-ur or Mnevis.
Maybe Melech is Mnevis.
Meri was a name of Isis as well as Hathor.
Melqart-Melicertes is the Son of Meri – the Son of Isis – the Son of Hathor.
Massey tells us that the Egyptian meru meant “cow”, and Hathor as the Cow-headed goddess.
Do remember, I’ve tried to connect Remus & Romulus to Mer and Mer-ur, which may refer to the Bull, the Mountain {Meru}, Water – and as the Bull, to the source & giver of rain & water {Sun, Moon, Cloud, Antarikṣa, the Waters of the Firmament, River, Ocean etc.}.
And Molech was depicted as a Bull-headed deity.
To end this post.
Please connect this to all the figures mentioned:
1. Mary
2. Rome – i.e. Mero, Meru, or Mer
3. Remus – i.e. Meru, Mer
4. Romulus – i.e. Meru-ur, Mer-ur
5. Mars
6. A-Mor – i.e. Cupid
7. Marta – i.e. Mer-t, Mer-it, Mer-iti, Mer-ti
8. Mel-kart
9. Meli-certes
The “M” interchanges with “N”:
10. Nereus
11. Nereid
12. Neritus
13. Nero
14. Nerio
15. Ner-gal
16. Nara, Nṛ, Nāra, Nīra in Sanskrit
17. Nahar in Hebrew
18. Nile in Greek {refering to the Egyptian river}
Then “M” changes into “B”, “P” and “V”:
19. Bel, Bal, Baal, Belus in the Middle East
20. Pal-aemon, i.e. Meli-kertes, the son of Ino-Leucothea
I will extend this logic further, in the future.
The words “mortal”, “marry”, “merry”, and “mercy” all can be traced to this consonantal-cluster of mr.
After starting from Rome-Romulus-Remus being nothing but Mer/Meru, we finally landed up in ideas pertaining to war, hunting, killing, rulership, mastership, being head or chief, being sovereign, ruler and lord.
I’ll finish off with this quote from A Book of The Beginnings by Gerald Massey, and I’m sure anybody who has read the post to the end will get my point {remember the name “Mars” has been traced to “marmar”}:
“The MARMOR was a style of high nobility among the Gael; he was a great officer of justice.
Mor, great;
MAOR (Gael), officer of justice.
The MERE is the Mayor, and there is an English MER, who is a bailiff or superintendent.
This is the Egyptian MER, a superintendent, prefect, overseer, or governor.
An official called the MER governed the people of the quarries at Turuau, the mountain-quarry in Egypt.
The MER was not only an overseer and superintendent, but an architect.
The architects of the Egyptian Pharaohs, who were the royal sons and grandsons, were called the MER-ket.
And we are told by the Barddas that “MORION lifted the stone of the Kettai.”
MORION is said to have been the architect of Stonehenge, Gwath Emrys, or the MUR Ior.
MUR (Eg.) means the circle, as does the KETUI.
KET (Eg.) denotes the builder, and the Kettai are the builders.
MORIEN was chief of the KETTAI.
Now, as a negro, is still known as a MORIEN in English, may not this indicate that
MORIEN belonged to the black race, the Kushite builders?
The name of the MARMOR himself appears in the Travels of an Egyptian, where the question is asked, “Didst thou not meet the MARMAR?”
...
MERU (Eg.) is a cow, a goddess, and a form of Hathor, the cowheaded
genitrix.
With the feminine terminal the Mer is MER-T, and the MART is still a Gaelic name for the cow.
The MERT (Eg.) is a female attached;
MAR-T denotes feminine relationship and office.
MER (Eg.) is love, and the MER-T are persons attached, the lovers.
This, in English, is married; but in Egyptian the female MER (mer-t) was the person attached as consort in the divine (or the pre-monogamous) marriage.
The great goddess Pasht is designated MER-Ptah, Ptah’s beloved ; she was literally his MORT.
And the poor vagabond’s “MORT” that trails after him, dog-like, on tramp as a female attached, has the same name and is the living representative of the goddess, the divine MER-T.
She is also called his Doxy.
In Egyptian TEK means to attach, and Tekai is a name for the adherer or person attached.
Tekhi (the Doxy) was a goddess of the months.
This is sadly typical of the old divinities, when we find them in modern dress, and the divine names in current usage.
The MER has become the MORT and MERETRIX, and with a change of terminal the MARQUE of the French Argot; the FILLE, the FEMME PUBLIQUE, the MARCA, MARQUIDA, MARCONA of slang phraseology.
The MERT has got be-mired, and the MUT, the divine mother, has had a like descent into the mud. Her living representative is the English “MOT,” the harlot.”
