With his chariots and horsemen and foot-soldiers Ra embarked on the Great River and came to Edfû, where Horus of Edfû joined him.

” O Ra,” said Horus, “great are thine enemies, and cunningly do they conspire against thee ! “

“My son,” answered Ra, ” arm thee and go forth against mine enemies, and slay them speedily.”

Thereupon Horus sought the aid of the god Thoth, the master of all magic, by whose aid he changed himself into a great sun-disk, with resplendent wings outstretched on either side. Straight to the sun he flew, and from the heavens he looked so fiercely upon his enemies and Ra’s, that they neither heard nor saw aright. Each man judged his neighbour to be a stranger, and a cry went up that the foe were upon them. Each turned his weapon against the other, the majority were slain, and the handful of survivors scattered. And Horus hovered for a while over the battle-plain, hoping to find Set, but the arch-enemy was not there; he was hiding in the North Country.

Then Horus returned to Ra, who embraced him kindly. And Horus took Ra and the goddess Astarte, and showed them the battlefield strewn with corpses.

Ra, king of the gods, said to those in his train: “Come, let us voyage to the Nile, for our enemies are slain.” But Set still had a large following, and some of his associates he commanded to turn themselves into crocodiles and hippopotami, so that they might swallow the occupants of the divine barque and yet remain invulnerable by reason of their thick hides. Horus, however, had gathered his band of smiths, each of whom made for himself an iron lance and a chain, on which Thoth bestowed some of his ever-powerful magic. Horus also repeated the formulae in the Book of Slaying the Hippopotamus. So that when the fierce animals charged up the river the god was ready for them; many of them were pierced by the magic weapons and died, while the remainder fled. Those who fled to the south were pursued by Horus, and were at length overtaken. Another great conflict ensued, wherein the followers of Set were again vanquished. According to the desire of Ra, a shrine was raised to commemorate the victory, and his image placed therein. Yet another encounter, however, was to take place in the South Land ere the followers of Set were utterly destroyed.

Then was Set very greatly incensed, and decided to come forth in person to do battle with Horus. Horrible indeed were his cries and curses when he heard the losses his army had sustained. And Horus and his followers went out to meet the army of Set, and long and furious was the battle. At length Horus took a prisoner whom he believed to be Set. The wretched being was dragged before Ra, who gave him into the hands of his captor, bidding the latter do with him what he would. Then Horus killed his prisoner, cut off his head, dragged him through the dust, and cut his body in pieces, even as Set had done to Osiris. But, after all, it was only one of Set’s associates who had perished thus miserably. The Evil One himself was still at large, vowing vengeance on his enemies. In the form of a large snake he hid himself under the earth, while his followers took courage from the knowledge that he had eluded his enemy. Yet again, however, were they defeated by Horus, who slew great numbers of them. The gods remained for six days on the canal, waiting for the reappearance of the foe, but none were to be seen. Then Horus scattered abroad his followers to destroy the remnant of Set’s army.

The last two battles were fought at Thalû (Zaru), and at Shaïs, in Nubia. At Thalû, Horus took the form of a fierce lion, and slew a hundred and forty-two enemies. At Shaïs he appeared once more in the shape of a great shining disk with wings of splendid plumage, and with the goddesses Nekhbet and Uazet on either side of it in the shape of the crowned snakes. On these occasions also Horus was victorious.

There are various endings to this myth. It is said that the prisoner whom Horus caused to be decapitated was none other than Set, whose fate, however, did not hinder him from living again and taking the form of a serpent. According to this version Horus of Edfû was accompanied by Horus the Child, son of Isis and Osiris. In the same inscription which gives an account of the battles Horus the Elder and Horus the Child are utterly confused at the end. So while Horus the Elder fights the battles, Horus the Child kills Set. They are looked upon as one and the same. On capturing Set, therefore, Horus, according to one account, delivered him into the hands of Isis, who cut off his head.

Another version, again, has it that the decisive battle has not yet been fought, and that Horus will finally destroy his enemy, when Osiris and the gods once more return to earth.

Leo Szilard, a Hungarian scientist who fled from Nazi Germany, figures most prominently in the birth of the bomb. In 1932, spurred by Ernest Rutherford’s success in splitting the atom, Szilard realizes that a nuclear chain reaction produces an immense amount of energy. Furthermore, “In certain circumstances it might become possible to set up a nuclear chain reaction, liberate energy on an industrial scale, and construct atomic bombs. However, Szilard’s theories are largely regarded as “moonshine” and the stuff of science fiction. Despite the lack of support, Szilard forges on and files for a patent in 1934. In this patent, he names beryllium, uranium and thorium as the ideal candidates to be used in nuclear chain reactions. The latter two are currently the only elements capable of supporting these reactions. Szilard further expounds upon the commercial uses of the atom, as well as its potential for massive destruction. By 1936, Szilard issues two more patents, which contain correct plans for the assembly of the atomic bomb.

Meanwhile, across the ocean, Dr. Otto Hahn, Director of the Kaiser Willhelm Institute for Chemistry in Germany and Dr. Lise Meitner, professor extraordinary of the University of Berlin, begin experimenting with an uranium atom by directing neutrons at it. However, Meitner’s Jewish religion results in her flight from Hitler’s regime in 1938. She flees to Sweden, where she continues her laboratory work. Hahn’s experiments nevertheless continue, and ultimately produces a much lighter barium atom from uranium. Such a result is puzzling to Hahn, for it defies all known nuclear physics.

Meitner’s correspondence with Hahn does not end with her transfer, and she begins to investigate the mysterious appearance of barium. Her nephew, Otto Frisch, who left Austria before the Nazi insurrection, comes and aides her. These two recognize that the uranium had indeed been split, a phenomenon termed nuclear fission. The difference in mass between the barium and uranium is accounted for by Albert Einstein’s equation, E = mc^2, where the mass (m) lost is directly proportional to the energy (E) produced. Despite the minuscule amount of mass lost, a vast amount of energy is produced, since the speed of light (c) is so great.This connection, according to Einstein himself, is a most crucial step in the formation of the bomb. In Out of My Later Years , Einstein relates that he had theorized that atomic energy was plausible, but never believed that it could be harnessed in his lifetime. “It was discovered by Hahn in Berlin, and he himself misinterpreted what he discovered. It was Lise Meitner who provided the correct interpretation.

Frisch returns to Copenhagen and formulates the basic configuration of the atomic bomb. The fission of a uranium atom also creates additional neutrons, which in turn will produce more nuclear fission, a chain reaction. Based on Einstein’s equation, the resultant energy would be so tremendous that it would dwarf conventional explosives. Now, the worlds’ scientists begin to take notice, for now, experimental evidence is presented, which to them is more valid than the theoretical ideas of Leo Szilard. Major research on the potential of the atom ensues.

France and Britain realize the significance of such a finding, and begin to investigate the possibility of such a grand weapon. In England, where enthusiasm is muted, much of the low funded nuclear research are done by German refugee scientists. Most of the British scientists are engaged in radar work, and because these refugee scientists represent a security threat, were practically the sole group available for nuclear investigation. Two of these refugee scientists are Frisch and Rudolph Peierls. They hypothesize that instead of using an indefinite amount of a certain isotope of uranium to fission, this isotope rather be purely extracted from a larger uranium isotope. Published in the Frisch-Peierls Memorandum, this theory convinces the British government to finance a bomb project. Called the Maud Committee, and staffed by the aforementioned refugee scientists, significant advances are made. The scientists make the crucial distinction between the utilization of fast over slow neutrons, show that a nuclear weapon is indeed realistic, Frisch and Peierl’s theory is proven correct, and perhaps most importantly, is the first country to commit to building a nuclear weapon. However, Britain finds that she cannot support this expensive research, and sends the Maud Committee report to the United States government.

Meanwhile, Szilard continues his work on the possibility of a nuclear chain reaction with Enrico Fermi, an Italian Nobel Laureate and refugee from fascist Italy. He campaigns tirelessly for private funding for his experiments. By 1939, Szilard is alone in his research, for Fermi leaves. Szilard then endeavors to persuade the government that a nuclear bomb would be beneficial to develop. He remains unsuccessful, and ultimately calls upon the revered Albert Einstein to utilize his clout to bring attention to the President. Despite Einstein’s pacifist nature, he realizes the importance of developing a bomb before the Germans do. Thus, he writes a letter to President F.D. Roosevelt, urging for government interaction, to fund research, and to actively secure a site of uranium. Questioned as to how much initial research would cost, Szilard replies $6,000, which is readily supplied. This amount, however small, is a source of pride for Szilard, for it is the first funds given by the government for any type of nuclear research.

Concurrently, Szilard keeps an eye on the world stage, and realizes that any scientific advancement in nuclear physics must be kept secret. He urges world wide censorship of scientific finding of nuclear physics to prevent any of this knowledge from reaching German Nazi scientists. The United States agrees to keep a veil of silence around any matter relating to nuclear chain reactions and uranium, and the rest of the Allied states follow suit. Through this act, the race to build an atomic bomb is slowed – in part owing to Szilard’s efforts.

In spite of all of Szilard’s endeavors, the American government remains generally apathetic towards the notion of nuclear weapons. However, this apathy would soon change to active participation. The Maud Committee report arrives in the United States, and draws the attention of the government. They become eager to utilize the findings of the Committee, and after many meetings with the British, assumes the pursuit of the nuclear bomb.

The rest is history. The Manhattan Project is founded, which churns out the first atomic bomb in 1945. No small feat indeed, for its creation changes the face of warfare and ushers in a new era of nuclear technology. However, frequently lost in all of American’s glory are the efforts of those scientists who were forced out of homes simply because of the religion they were faithful to. It is truly ironic that the very people that were the target of intolerance and hatred of the Nazi’s played an integral role in ending the war that resulted from these fascist beliefs.

In the myth of the battles of Horus it is easy to discern what is perhaps the most universal of all mythological conceptions–the solar myth. Horus (called in the Edfû text Horbehûdti, i.e. Horus of Edfû) was originally a sun-god, and as such was equivalent to Ra, but in time the two gods came to be regarded as separate and distinct personages, Ra being the highest, and Horus serving him as a sort of warcaptain. The winged disk, therefore, and all his train represented the powers of light, while the wicked Set and his companions symbolized darkness. Thus it is that while Horus was always victorious over his enemies, he never succeeded (according to the most widespread form of the tradition) in destroying them utterly.

When Horus had routed the enemy in the form of a winged disk, that symbol came to be regarded as an excellent protective against violence and destruction. It was therefore repeated many times–especially in the New Kingdom–in temples, on monuments, stelae, and so on, and it was believed that the more numerous the representations of it, the more efficacious did the charm become. In its simplest form the image is merely that of a winged disk, but at times there is a serpent on either side of the disk, representing the goddesses Nekhbet and Uazet.

The principal version of the myth, dealing with Hor-Behûdti, or Horus of Edfû, was really a local form belonging to Edfû, though in time it gained a wider acceptance. In other forms of the legend other gods took the chief role as destroyer of the enemies of Ra.

With this legend of light and darkness came to be fused another, that which relates how Horus avenged the death of Osiris. It is noticeable that in this second myth there exists some confusion between Horus the Elder and Horus the Child, respectively brother and son of Osiris. No mention is made of Osiris in the Edfû text, but that this myth is a sequel to the legend of Osiris is implied by the circumstance that Set is handed over for punishment to Isis and Horus the Child. In the later form of the story the conflict is not properly between light and darkness, but rather between the forces of good and evil.

In this legend one of the most noteworthy circumstances is that the followers of Horus were armed with weapons of metal. His followers are called in the Egyptian text Mesniu, or Mesnitu, which in all probability signifies ‘workers in metal,’ or ‘blacksmiths.’ The worshippers of Horus of Behudet continually alluded to him as ‘Lord of the Forge-city,’ or Edfû, where tradition asserted he carried on the work of a blacksmith. At Edfû, indeed, the great golden disk of the sun itself had been forged, as we see from a certain inscription, and in the temple of that city was a chamber behind the sanctuary called Mesnet, or ‘the foundry,’ where the blacksmith caste of priests attended upon the god. From sculptures upon the walls of the temple we see that these are arrayed in short robes and a species of collar which is almost a cape, that they carry their spears head downward, and a weapon of metal resembling a dagger. Horus of Behudet, who accompanies them, is dressed in a similar fashion, and is represented as spearing a hippopotamus, round which he has wound a double chain of metal. This illustrates the story of the defeat of Set by Horus of Behudet, and we may be justified in believing that the legend possessed a more or less historic basis. Here we have a tribe or caste of metal-workers at war with what is obviously a more primitive race, whom they defeat with their weapons of metal and bind with their chains, afterward slaughtering them at leisure. It is significant that they do not slay them out of hand. For what, then, do they reserve them ? Obviously for human sacrifice. They are a caste of sun-worshippers, and human blood was as necessary to the sustenance of the sun in early Egypt as it was in ancient Mexico, where the military caste, living under the patronage of the sun, always refrained from slaying an enemy in battle if they could make him prisoner, to be sacrificed at leisure. The circumstances of the legend would appear to indicate that we are here following the adventures of some West Asiatic invader who, with followers armed with metal, landed on the soil of Egypt, made himself master of Edfû, and, marching northward, established himself in the land by force of arms. This story, or portion of history, probably became amalgamated, perhaps by priestly influence, with the legend of Horus, the god of heaven in the earliest times.

Another important form of Horus was that known as Horus, son of Isis, and of Osiris. He represented the rising sun, as did several other forms of Horus, and possessed many aspects or variants His shrines were so numerous that at one epoch or another he was identified with all the other Horus-gods, but he chiefly represented the new sun, born daily, and he was son and successor of Osiris. He was extremely popular, as being a well-marked type of resurrection after death. As Osiris represented ‘yesterday,’ so Horus, his son, stood for ‘to-day’ in the Egyptian mind. Although some texts state that Osiris was his father others claim this position for Ra, but the two in this instance are really one and the same and interchangeable.

Osiris became the father of Horus after he was dead; such is the origin of several sun-heroes. As has been said, the birth of such is usually peculiar and obscure. Isis, while tending the infant Horus and in fear of the persecutions of Set, took shelter in the swamps of the Delta, and hid herself and her child amidst a dense mass of papyrus plants. To the Egyptian of the Delta it would of course seem as if the sun took its rise from amidst the papyrus-covered swamps which stretched on every side to the horizon, so we may regard this part of the myth as allegory pure and simple. The circumstances of the escape of Isis from Set have already been detailed in the myth of Osiris.

The filial respect which Horus displayed for the memory of his father Osiris won him much honour from the Egyptians. He it was who fixed the details of the god’s mummification, and who set the standard for the pious Egyptian son. In this respect he was regarded as a helper of the dead, and was thought to mediate between them and the judges of the Taut. In his work of caring for the deceased he had a number of helpers, known as the followers of Horus, who were regarded as gods of the cardinal points. They are given positions of great importance in the Book of the Dead, and shared the protection of the body of the deceased, as has been mentioned in the paragraph concerning the mummy. They were four in number and were named Hapï, Tuamutef, Amset, and Qebhsennuf.

Horus, son of Isis and Osiris, was regarded as of such importance that he absorbed the attributes of all the other Horus-gods, but in certain texts he is represented as a child, with forefinger to lip, and wearing the lock of hair at the side of the head which indicates youth. In later times he was figured in a great many different fanciful forms.

While scholars debate whether the Egyptian resurrection mythology derived from earlier worship focused on vegetational seasons or solar and lunar cycles, they agree the mythology took the general meaning of the struggle between good and evil and between truth and error. Ra is the sun god, Rhea the sky goddess, Osiris the moon god. Both Ra and Horus are depicted with the head of a falcon. In battle scenes between Horus and Set painted on temples, Horus was sometimes pictured with a falcon in flight above his head. The flying falcon was generalized in a more stylized form as a winged disk, representing the sun’s passage through the day. Horus also acts as the usher guiding deceased persons to the land of the dead. Horus therefore represents the triumph of light over darkness, or truth over error; as we would say, more simply, Horus represents the victory of science over superstitution.

The following discussion is extracted from Lewis Spence, Ancient Egyptian Myths and Legends, 1915, reprint edition (New York: Dover Publications, 1990), pp. 84-85, 86-97.

Although Harvey was but a single Aristotelian amongst a sea of Galenists, there were still a few close friends and colleagues who supported him in his work and his discovery of the motion of the heart and blood. True, his allies were few, but without them, Harvey may never have had the courage to publish his ideas. It cannot be denied that he had many opponents. Due to the number of people who are involved when reporting on the reception of Harvey’s doctrine during his lifetime, it will be easiest to consider them, whether ally or opponent, in chronological order.

In 1629, Robert Fludd accepted Harvey’s doctrine. Fludd was a member of a group known as the “Brothers of the Rosy Cross (Rosicrucians) which was a Protestant organization. “In Fludd’s hands the essential feature of Rosicrucian thinking was a rejection of school natural philosophy as pagan and the adoption of a Mosaic, cabalistic and hermetic philosophy.Fludd’s philosophical and religious beliefs led him to accept Harvey’s theory of circulation. In fact, Fludd’s book Medicina catholica, which was printed in 1629, was the first publication to mention Harvey’s work.

In 1630, James Primrose, a Galenic physician, published his book entitled Exercitationes et animadversiones in librium G. Harveii de motu cordis et circulatione sanguinis. This was to be the first opposing voice to Harvey’s doctrine. According to Primrose, Harvey had made an error in estimating the amount of blood pumped by the heart in half an hour. Another of his arguments was that “in the olden days patients were healed without the knowledge of the circulation, and that therefore, this doctrine, even if true, would be useless.

Perhaps one of Harvey’s greatest opponents was Caspar Hofmann. His criticism of Harvey’s doctrine in 1636 arose from the belief that the blood was perfected or concocted in the heart. Hofmann said, “If Harvey’s idea of the circulation was correct, there would be many concoctions of the blood, an unlikely phenomenon, especially if one upheld the philosophical principal that in nature, simplicity and perfection remain inviolate.This argument caused Harvey many problems for some time, because he was not able to refute it at first. The reason for this was that he could not deny that the blood was concocted in the heart, because this was a vital piece of his theory of the motion of the blood within the heart.

In 1637, the famous mechanist, René Descartes accepted Harvey’s doctrine, but he had a few important reservations. Descartes agreed with Harvey’s ideas about the circulation of the blood, because they agreed with his own ideas about man as a machine. He also did not believe that the heart contracted, but rather that it expanded. Descartes believed that the heart acted as a furnace; it heated up the blood until it was gaseous, and it was recondensed into a fluid in the cool lungs. From this time on, Descartes never stopped praising Harvey and giving him credit for discovering the circulation of the blood.

In 1648, Harvey’s greatest opponent, Jean Riolan, published Enchiridium anatomicum, in which he criticized Harvey’s doctrine. Riolan was a Regius Professor in Paris as early as 1613, so he had a lot of experience before he tried to take on Harvey. However, it seemed that Riolan was no match for Harvey intellectually, because Harvey was always able to refute Riolan’s claims successfully. Riolan continued to be a thorn in Harvey’s side until 1653, when he apparently gave up.

In 1655, Harvey’s work was accepted by a pupil of Caspar Hofmann’s, Helvius Dieterich.This is ironic, considering that Hofmann himself never fully accepted Harvey’s ideas. In this same year, Thomas Winston, who was a lecturer at Gresham College and a colleague of Harvey’s, failed to mention or assist in demonstrating Harvey’s doctrine.This was an open act of denial, because of the fact that Winston and Harvey had worked together for years as members of the esteemed College of Physicians; by not helping Harvey to prove his theory, Winston was, in effect, showing that he did not accept it as true.

It is evident, from looking at the responses to Harvey’s doctrine during his lifetime that it must have remained controversial until well past the date of his death in 1657. He was finally laid to rest at Hempstead Church, which was near Winslow Hall, the manor that Eliab Harvey had chosen to make the family centre. “In 1655 Eliab Harvey built a chapel on the north side of Hempstead Church with a vault below.He had built this so that all of the bodies of the members of the family could lie there together, and monuments to them could be displayed on the walls of the chapel above.It is here that one of the greatest physiologists of all times has found his final resting place.

In the question of who just might be reading Galileo’s letter in today’s time, the answer could be just be anyone that holds high political or religious authority in the world. Galileo’s letter was directed more for religious peace between the scientists and the church. For example, Galileo could be writing to the President of the United States in efforts to find some agreement between him and the government about his new-found physics. President Clinton would probably accept Galileo’s proposal in the event that he has proven his position with evidence; which Galileo has done so brilliantly. But this letter is more directed to those in religious power to show that science is not here to oppose religion, but to lend a helping hand.

One person Galileo could have written this letter to is the Pope in Rome. Galileo, a Catholic, is trying to ask for acceptance from those who claim to be devout Catholics. He’s seeking to protect himself from those who claim to know the Bible. Galileo goes on to say that his new findings about the universe originally came from Copernicus. “They pretend not to know that its author, or rather its restorer and confirmer, was Nicholas Copernicus; and that he was not only a Catholic, but a priest and a canon.” Galileo goes on to say that those who are against him are trying to put the total blame on him when they haven’t done their research to find where it originally came from.

The conflict really began when Galileo tried to bring back atomism into his new discoveries. In the church, atomism is deemed as heretical, but Galileo is attempting to show that the two can coexist with each other. When he speaks about Copernicus, he states that “Copernicus never discusses matters of religion or faith… He stands upon physical conclusion pertaining to the celestial motion, and deal with them by astronomical and geometrical demonstration… He did not ignore the Bible, but he knew very well that if his doctrines were proved, then it could not contradict the Scriptures when they were rightly understood.” Galileo goes back to Copernicus to show that he, as a scientist, has instituted many things into the church and has been widely accepted. For example, the church calendar was reformed by him and tables of planetary motion were all put together by him also. Galileo is questioning why now, when he is attempting to reiterate what has already been there, why is he being seen as a heretic. The church itself would be heretical in the first place.

“People who are unable to understand both the Bible and the sciences far outnumber those who do understand.” Galileo finds that the common people have some or no understand of what the Bible is really about. They have taken what they’ve read in the Bible and interpreted it for their own personal meaning. That shouldn’t be the case. Galileo is not saying that he has the perfect knowledge of the Bible, but he does have knowledge of the truth behind the Holy Scriptures. “…these men have resolved to fabricate a shield for their fallacies out of the mantle of pretended religion and the authority of the Bible.” These people were less followers of the Bible and were uneducated in the truths of the Scripture.

Galileo is also trying to show that science and religion should not be opposed to each other, but they are to work together to find answers by using what each has. “That the intention of the Holy Ghost is to teach us how one goes to Heaven, not how heaven goes.” This clearly underlines the point the Galileo is attempting to get across. Science isn’t contradicting the Bible. What science is doing is providing a way to use our God given senses and intellect to find the answers about the world we live in. Many still can’t see his point because they’re still clouded with his discovery that the sun is motionless and the earth rotates around the sun. They are confused with what they read in the Bible stating that the sun is moving from east to west. But Galileo is pointing out that they aren’t supposed to take biblical writings as literal meaning. “…It appears that nothing physical which sense experience sets before our eyes… ought to be called in question upon the testimony of biblical passages which may have some different meaning beneath their words.” He backs up this assertion by quoting St. Jerome, where he remarks that people are mixing things in the Bible to match their own fancy as if it was the original way of teaching, not something false. The Bible did not answer all questions. Because if it did, there would be no reason for Galileo to go through all this.

In the question of if the Pope of today would accept or reject this letter, he would most likely accept it for the fact being that Galileo has done his research in proving that there should be no one who should oppose him. Science and religion can live together as long as they don’t overstep their respected boundaries. The Pope should look especially close at what Copernicus did with religion and science. He never explicitly put science and religion together, but if one looks deeper, it’s there. Galileo posed the question, “Can an opinion be heretical and yet have no concern with the salvation souls?” Galileo was concerned about the salvation of souls. He wouldn’t be writing about this in the first place if he didn’t. Also, his opinion was not to be taken as heretical. He is only stating facts he observed which happen to be true.

A second and brief question that is asked is what countries today will receive this in positive light? If this was posed to the United States, they’d probably take this with great regard since it’s something in the advancement of technology and it seems that’s what the Untied States are about right now. Don’t forget that this letter is about his new discovery where he holds “…the sun to be situated motionless in the center of the revolution of the celestial orbs while the earth rotates on its axis and revolves about the sun.” To be ahead in the technology race is what it’s about. The religious substance of the letter doesn’t really take hold in the American mind. This could be due to the many religions that take residence in America.

Now if this letter was sent to somewhere like England, both topics of technology and religion may take hold quite equally. They look for what may make a scientific advancement in the nation, but the religious subject matter can hold a little more weight. Galileo does such a good job of backing up his claims, that there shouldn’t be a problem for England to accept his assertion of the universe.

On the opposite side of the spectrum, a country like Ireland may take this with mixed feelings. Galileo’s new discovery will probably have not much to do with in Ireland. Their main concern probably will be of the religious context of the letter. Ireland is known for it’s bitter conflicts between the Protestants and Catholics in the land. Many have died because of this “war” between the two religious groups. A letter like this could have the possibility to incite a major religious war in the country. The Catholics will accept it and the Protestants will turn away from it. It all comes down to the matter of convincing who is right.

Galileo has done a miraculous job at proving his case for the way science and religion can coexist without stepping on each other’s toes. He obviously knows what goes on in the church and has not dismissed his religion just because of his findings. The last thing he would ever want is to do is make a total separation from science and religion. This letter is a plea for help also to those that understand his situation and will back it up with him. Another way this letter can be seen is that the church had it all wrong in thinking that he has trying to challenge their power. It wasn’t a matter of what was said, but who he was as the type of person to challenge the church.

One day Horus sought Ra with a request to be allowed to read the future in his eyes. This request Ra granted willingly because of his love for Horus, the beloved of gods and men. Whilst they conversed there passed them a black hog, a huge, sinister animal, ferocious of aspect, and with eyes that glinted with cunning and cruelty. Now, though neither Ra nor Horus was aware of the fact, the black hog was Set himself, who had the power to take upon him the shape of any animal he chose.

” What an evil monster !” cried Ra, as he looked upon the animal.

Horus also turned his gaze in the direction of the black hog, in whom he still failed to recognize his enemy. This was set’s opportunity. He shot a bolt of fire straight into the eye of the god. Horus was half crazed with the violence of the pain. ‘( Set hath done me this evil,” he cried; “he shall not go unpunished.” But Set had vanished, and was not to be found anywhere. Yet for the evil that had come upon Horus Ra cursed the pig.

When the young god recovered his sight Ra gave to him the city of Pé, whereat he was much delighted; and at his smile the cloud of darkness passed away, and all the land rejoiced.

A Greek version of the myth has it that the black hog tore out the eye of Horus and swallowed it, but was forced by Ra (Hellos) to restore it. The eyes of Horus are of course the sun and moon, one of which is swallowed or destroyed by the ‘black hog’ during an eclipse. The restoration of light to the earth is occasioned by the joy of Horus on being presented with the city of Pé .