Discussion of Kemp

Thoughts on Kemp (1995)

Thu, 19 Feb 2026 17:51:37 GMT

by Jack Brooker.

I think Kemp misses the point of his own argument here, and does so mostly as the result of a deficient, vague (and constantly shifting) definition of 'religion'. Kemp seems to build his argument around the idea that 'religion' involves a "detailed religious knowledge", that it involves ritual (esp. votive) practices at clearly designated 'religious' locations, and that 'religion' stands in contrast to 'secular' life - that you are not religious unless you are doing something religious.

I would argue that (if we are to see 'religion' as a discreet area of life, which seems increasingly difficult to justify), 'religion' is the set of approaches by which we attempt to manage our relationships with 'supernatural' agents (I prefer Sahlins' term 'metapersons'). In that sense, detailed knowledge of a formal canon of knowledge is unnecessary, and managing ones own relationship with deities may require only irregular ritual activity, performed in whatever manner is deemed fit. The objections to certain practices evidenced at Deir el-Medina (cited by Kemp) are not necessarily indicative of a lack of 'religiosity', but merely of a different approach to managing relationships with metapersons (or to preference for relations with different metapersons).

Kemp also seems to assert on several occasions (e.g. the small Hathor shrines) that absence of evidence is evidence of absence (which is bad historical practice), and his argument ranges too wildly across different geographical and temporal settings without fully justifying why the situations in (e.g.) Old Kingdom Abydos, Middle Kingdom Nubia, and New Kingdom Deir el-Medina are sufficient to paint a picture of what 'the Egyptians' believed - there is no reason to suspect that this was a uniform pattern across space and time (and good reason to suspect otherwise).

Re: Discussion on Kemp

Sun, 15 Feb 2026 21:29:12 GMT

by Katharina Zinn.

Dear Carol,
you are right, he does not answer his own question - unfortunately. He once mentioned that this was to stir the critique not even further, but he was really criticised for the article (especially the title), so he could have gone the whole mile.
Private religion / piety shines through material culture (see the ear stela, the finds of former gods in the workmen's village at Amarna, votive offerings in temples and shrines, ancestor busts and more - and even these sources are often elite bound). The lack of evidence in the textual record was indeed the reason why earlier scholars much moved beyond focus on the state religion enacted on behalf of the population and Egypt as a whole.

Re: Discussion on Kemp

Sun, 15 Feb 2026 21:23:25 GMT

by Katharina Zinn.

Dear Rufus, as I replied to Silvia - Kemp indeed starts with a narrow understanding of religion, but this what he is questioning, especially base don his findings from Amarna. The incorporation of spiritual aspects rather than a narrow understanding of religion in a monotheistic viewpoint is indeed what enriched the discussion of ancient religions.
I would argue against Herodot being initiated. He spoke to priest, but he did not get the sacred truths / facts (as we can see with his description of the Ramesseum and especially the library in this temple.