This week you learned about artists, laborers, craftsmen, and soldiers. The primary source material includes the Satire of the Trades, the PDFs of McDowell, the Kamose Texts, Capture of Joppa, Victory Stela of Piye, and PDFs of the solider autobiographies.
Since there is so much material to cover for Tuesday I want to make sure you all have at least one text you know very, very well. This also means that we can hear many voices in class on Tuesday as at least a few of you will be experts on one of the texts.
With this in mind...please pick one of these texts (for McDowell you can look at several of the shorter texts if you wish) and provide some commentary on what you think are the main aspects of the Egyptian cultural identity embedded in them.
This will involve a close reading of the text and some critical thought to how these texts fit with information you have gathered so far in other readings and the lectures.
Numerous aspects of the Egyptian culture are dispersed throughout the reading, the "Biography of Ahmose, son of Abana." Emphasis is placed on the importance of the braveness of a soldier. Ahmose proudly claims, "I was taken to the ship 'Northern', because I was brave"(Biography of Ahmose 1). Ahmose then describes his own gallant fighting in front of the King, stating, "I fought bravely on foot in his majesty's presence. Thereupon I was appointed to the ship khaemmennefer" (1).
ReplyDeleteAhmose, who apparently is an admiral, declares that the King presents him with the gold of valour several times, either after Ahmose held an enemy captive or after he "carried off a hand" (2). The admiral claims several times that "I was given the gold of valour once again" (2). Modesty among the admirals does not seem to be an important aspect in Egypt.
Throughout the biography, there are also many tales of Ahmose or the King bringing back captives from the battles. Ahmose describes the aftermath of the King's victory, proclaiming, "Countless were the living captives which his majesty brought back from his victories" (4). It seems like in Egyptian culture, captives brought back from a victorious battle contributes to part of the honor of the victory. Captives also provide proof of the conquest, as well as the free labor that they might be forced to provide, such as working on farms.
Another aspect prominent throughout the biography is Ahmose's resolve to be remembered long after he passes away. In the beginning of the biography, Ahmose declares, "The name of the brave man is in that which he has done; it will not perish in the land forever" (1). Ahmose then makes several references to how brave he himself was during his life as an admiral. It can be inferred that a large reason for Ahmose's courage is due to the fact that Ahmose wants to be remembered long after he dies. In a way, this is Ahmose's method of ensuring his immortality--as long as he is remembered on Earth after he passes away, he can never really die. This again demonstrates the importance of immortality to the Egyptians.
The soldiers' readings are very interesting to me in their similarities and differences; since Ashley already talked about Ahmose, I'll try to go into more detail about Amenemhab. What I found interesting was the difference in focus between Ahmost and Amenemhab. Ahmose seemed to emphasize the gold and slaves he received, without going into much detail about the battles; he focused on the physical rewards he received, which were surely signs of his success. Amenemhab, on the other hand, seems to focus more on the non-physical things, particularly towards the end - his honor, serving the king, etc.
ReplyDeleteAmenemhab's text in general shows a serious devotion to the king; his introductory post is praising, lavishing, very flattering to the king. This is unsurprising but less verbose than Ahmose's, so perhaps suggests a change in times or a closer relationship between Amenemhab and his leader. Amenemhab also emphasizes his captures, but rather than suggesting them as a reward for his victories, emphasizes that he brought them to the king. The gold, slaves, etc., are not rewards for him, but gifts to his king. He does repeat that he was given gold many times, often 'for [his] valour'; the gold shows his courage in battle and desire to bring victory to his king.
Amenemhab does get a bit cockier later on, calling himself 'the most valiant'. He then reminds his reader that the king is the one rewarding him, because he is pleasing the king with his valor and victories in battle. The final three paragraphs draw away from delineating military victories and instead give praise to the king, relating him to the gods and the afterlife. This is a common thread throughout Egyptian history, the focus on the afterlife and the gods, and so it is no surprise that Amenemhab wants to show that his life and the king's were in preparation for this afterlife. He is greatly honored by being re-ascended to the presence of the king; how he says this still being alive is a mystery.
Dua-Khety’s attack upon professions stems from his belief that any job which can be categorized as laborious, unclean, or unstable should be deemed inferior to that of the scribe. He tries to appeal to the senses in order to create a vision of foulness for every profession. He begins with the stoneworker, who he claims has never been on an “important errand” and then describes the vile scent a coppersmith acquires when on duty to demonstrate its unappealing nature (433). Similarly, he casts the “furnace-tender” into the same category as he describes his fingers as “foul” and “the smell thereof is as corpses” (435). He associates the tasks of a carpenter, jeweler, barber, mason-bricklayer, weaver, and weapon-maker as all having to “work excessively in his activity” (433). Any slight uncertainty in acquiring food for oneself agitates Dua-Khety, as he describes the barber as having to wander around to find customers in order to feed himself for the day (433). He is also concerned about the conditions of one’s workplace, as he states that the weaver “cannot breathe the air” while the fisherman is at a constant state of fear, for he can be devoured by a crocodile at any moment (435). Lastly, maintenance of an individual’s hygiene concerns Dua-Khety as he describes the potter’s clothes as being “stiff with mud”, the mason-bricklayer as washing himself “once a day”, and the washerman as having “his food mixed with filth” as well as “no part of him which is clean” (433-435).
ReplyDeleteWhen analyzing this text there is a definite distinction between who is superior according to his respective career. Dua-Khety is able to make such extreme convictions because he is above these people on a social hierarchy and he is literate while they are not, minimizing the already slim chances of receiving any criticism from them. He uses these examples to essentially ward his son away from these possible careers and makes certain of it by depicting them all in a state of suffering and lowliness. According to tradition and lifestyle his son is required to follow in his father’s footsteps, but it seems like the father is affirming that no other options are even worth considering.
Throughout all the primary sources for soldiers, there are many common occurrences and trends. Soldiers take pleasure in stating their exact histories and prizes won, very evident in Amenemhab and Ahmose’s texts. In the retelling of their heroic tales, they receive the pride of helping their country but also the satisfaction of achievements. As Donadoni stated, “What emerges from these texts is the pride of veteran soldiers, the satisfaction of having played a part in the flow of historical events…” (171).
ReplyDeleteUpon further analysis of the Victory Stela of Piye, the readers get a clear sense of what a “war” was actually like. The stela recounts the journeys of the king Piye. The first notable aspect of this piece is the repetition of “His Majesty” in reference Piye. This shows the immense respect that people had for the king as well as the focus on religion. The king even spoke, “I am the one fashioned in the womb and created in the egg of god, with the seed of god within me! As his ka-spirit endures…” (376). The king will live forever through his ka, as he is “the Majesty of the Kings of Upper and Lower Egypt, Piye, beloved of Amon, living forever” (368). The concept of eternal life is a main theme in Egyptian history, as all the kings’ actions have an impact on their so-called afterlives. The devotion and respect for the king can also be seen in Amenemhab’s text. However, as Madeline pointed out, there seems to be less devotion in Ahmose’s text, which is evidence of this shift to the “new-style model of the king” which Donadoni explains. With the king directly in battle, the soldiers sometimes developed a relationship with the king, as though “he were a brother-in-arms” (Donadoni 171).
During the king’s journeys, he traveled throughout Lower Egypt, conquering lands. The other rulers would pay the king respect with gifts and would throw themselves “upon his belly.” The ruler of Heracleopolis gave the king “gold, silver, every sort of gemstone, and the pick of the horses of the stable” (376). This listing of prizes is also present in the other texts, when speaking of prizes won in war. This repetition clearly indicates to the readers that Egyptians took great pride in victorious warfare.
One curious aspect of the stela is that in each of the king’s stops, he usually presents offering to the different gods. Perhaps the king believed that by offering the gods gifts, they would help guide him to an inevitably victory. The offerings seemed to work, as Piye eventually sailed home with people chanting, “You are eternal, your victory enduring, O ruler beloved of Thebes!” (385).
It is interesting to note, in “The Capture of Joppa” the relationship between the soldiers and the pharaohs and how religion and mythology tied in to the aspect of war. At the beginning of the text the Rebel of Joppa tells Djehuty that he wishes to see “the great baton of King Menkheperre.” It is later explained that the king’s baton usually accompanied the army under Djehuty’s command, which symbolized the pharaoh’s presence in the battlefield, meaning that he was usually never present. This also shows how much the ruler was revered.
ReplyDeleteFurthermore, at the end when Djehuty’s tactic wins over Joppa, he sends a message to King Menkheperre, which is described as his “lord.” The message tells the pharaoh, “Be of good cheer! Amon, you good father, has delivered to you the Rebel of Joppa… Send men to take them away captive that you may fill the Estate of your father Amon-Re, King of the Gods, with male and female slaves, who have fallen beneath your feet forever and ever.” Djehuty here shows reverence towards his king. Evidently, the King is seen as a deity or as being the sun of Amon. The fact that Djehuty says “forever and ever” also displays the king’s immortality and his godly status. Another mythological aspect in battle can be seen when someone says that “Seth has delivered Djehuty…” One can easily denote that the Egyptians saw their victory as an act of goodwill from the gods, and how important religion was in Egyptian life.
After reading the Kamose Texts a few times the idea of Egyptian supremacy has really cemented for me. This “invasion” by foreign peoples, the Asiatics, was utterly destroyed by Kamos, but the invasion was about more than territory or wealth to Kamos. After reading both stela, it seemed Kamos was emotionally hurt from this insult made by foreigners. After Kamos liberates Avaris, which seems to be land (town?) in Egypt occupied by the bulk of the Asiatic forces, he lays waste to everything in sight. Kamos says his actions are justified since this land has betrayed their mistress Egypt. So, even the land can be duplicitous and receive punishment. No one is safe from persecution.
ReplyDeleteI would also like to note that I think the stela are written in the style of “Bible meets Tom Clancy”.
I quite enjoyed reading the accounts of Amenemhab and Ahmose and was amazed that both have been through many battles. One can see what are the values held most dear to Egyptians by looking at these two soldiers. One obvious cultural identity that can be seen in the accounts of Amenemhab and also the Donadoni's book is the act of holding the king to high esteem. At the end of Amenemhab's biography he writes about how he is honored to serve under the king, and in the Donadoni's book, Sinhue praises the king as "a god" and "without peer" (160). The soldiers are proud to be praised by the king and are very happy to receive the gold of honor.
ReplyDeleteAnother subject that was elucidated in the biographies of Amenemhab and Ahmose was how a soldier's family was able to provide from themselves while the soldier is off to fight battles. One can see that soldiers are compensated very well for their efforts during the war. The biographies of Amenemhab and Ahmose are more of a list of bounty plundered by each soldier and the reward given by the king to each soldier. They are given quite a lot of land, gold and slaves. These biographies are a great example of how Egyptians seemed to be very focused on keep a record, probably to emphasize their glory for the people reading their biography after they have passed on.
While reading the biographies, I was wondering if all soldiers were compensated so well?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading the McDowell excerpts, I noticed the importance of community and economic success in the Egyptian culture. Even though Egyptian society was separated by different social classes, in the end, individuals still interacted with one another in order to make sure their country’s economy strived. The concept of gift giving was interesting. “It list individuals together with small quantities of foodstuffs which appear to be their contributions to a feast- a common practice in peasant societies where the host cannot otherwise assemble the necessary quantities of food” (McDowell 78). It’s interesting because peasants usually suffered from hunger, yet practices like gift giving occurred. Even though, the purpose of gift giving was for economic significance, we still witnessed a sense of tightness within the Egyptian society.
ReplyDeleteThe texts also described the Egyptians way of life through the manufacturing of goods for trade and the handling of donkeys to make profit. These activities help Egyptians boost their income. We learned from previous lectures and readings that there was a sense of togetherness found within the farming community through their shared times in the fields and through different celebrations during the farming season. However, farmers’ reliance of one another was not as strong as the craftsmen’s co-operation. “Since the draughtsmen needed wooden objects to decorate and the carpenters had wooden objects that required decoration, there was an opportunity for co-operation between the two main groups of craftsmen in the village” (80). It made me questioned if peasant-farmers were to trust one another and work together, would their economic success be as great as craftsmen’s success? In addition to the Egyptian meticulous ways to producing, redistributing, and trading goods, the donkey business was also a vital source of revenue. I found it interesting that donkey renting “provide our only information about leasehold arrangements in the village (86). There were many aspects of the donkey business. Regulations about breaking the lease, borrowing, and guaranteeing, and responsibilities of borrowers were recorded about this business. This shows that the Egyptians were very particular about success. They had a goal, and they worked for it. It’s remarkable how Egyptians used the same practice as we do today in business. “Like the seller of a house today, a person transferring ownership of a donkey guaranteed that there were no outstanding claims on the property” (88). The truthful interactions between sellers and buyers/borrowers were important. Even though there were loopholes in the business, individuals had the common goal to strive economically.
These texts also made me realized how documentation of business and lifestyle was so important to Egyptians. It is fascinating how organized and detailed their works were.
I found both “The Capture of Joppa” and the passage in Donadoni’s text about soldiers to be interesting. The two explicitly showed a high importance of the relationship between the king, soldiers, and army high army officials. I noticed this too, like Adam said, was parallel to the strong importance of cultural identity. Soldiers were very proud to fight for and in honor of the king and were proud to receive recognition for it. “His majesty sent me at the head of this army…” (p.154). This is just one of the many examples of the military official's references to the king's importance to him. In the passage on p.154, the speaker speaks with high pride, for the king had sent him to lead his army. I agree with what Jonathan stated above, to be praised by the king was an honor and soldiers would often boast of this praise. Soldiers would treat the king as if he were divine, speaking often of how the king had sent them to fight and kept the army safe.
ReplyDeleteI found it interesting in Professor Morris’ lecture today that she mentioned that the king actually fought along side the rest of the army. Although he was sheltered of course compared to the other soldiers in battle, it is interesting to see that he was actually at the scene of the fights.
I’m curious to know how exactly so many soldiers were given food, water, shelter and other necessities and how certain things like these were stored.
I found the role of craftsmen very interesting. When reading the Donadoni section on the birth and evolution of craftsmanship and the excepts of Daily Life from McDowell I found myself impressed by their ability to produce high quality pieces in such draining and rudimentary circumstances.
ReplyDeleteMuch like we are all suppose to focus on one of the readings, craft, labor or solider life readings, the Egyptians organized their society through specialization. Each craftsman was trained to execute a specific trade and focus “exclusively on that one activity” (Donadoni, 31). I thought it was interesting that much of the work done in Deir-el-Medina was highly personalized and made on commission, but there were still often co-ops between the craftsmen in order to get the end result. “Since the draughtsman needed wooden objects to decorate and the carpenters had wooden objects that required decoration, there was an opportunity for co-operation between the two main groups of craftsmen in the village” (80).
I read about how the levels of craftsmen had a hierarchy and wonder if the master sculptors and craftsman that were in service to the King in the New Kingdom would only collaborate with individuals recognized as equally talented in their chosen discipline? How did these co-ops form? Was it through word-of-mouth and reputation that people found those they would co-op with? I also wonder if there were ever co-ops with the Nubian and Palestinian workers that were noted to be present during the New Kingdom.
The type of craftsman that I am most interested by is the ones whose craft specialization requires the initialization of several materials and technologies to produce.
The goldsmiths and jewelers, for example, who sometimes accompanied the prospectors of gold to the Wadi Hammamat fascinated me. I wished that more of the craftsmen’s names had survived since art was such a common expression of daily life in Egypt. I like that art was not exclusive and didn’t become a privilege of the deities and royals. Instead, all levels of social life were participating –even the craftsmen that create the piece were involved, often saying that the talent they had, or masterpiece they created was their love of the pharaoh made visible. If they saw the magnificence of their monument as their devotion to the gods they felt spiritually connected to their work that meant that everyone could feel included in these tasks which had layers of value.
But this life was not easy, clean or looked upon as elevated. Dua-Khety describes the potter’s clothes as being “stiff with mud”, the mason-bricklayer as washing himself “once a day”, and the washerman as having “his food mixed with filth” as well as “no part of him which is clean” (433-435). While some master sculptors were living quite well the commoners without special talent or means lived poorly.
I completely agree with what Amy said. It was interesting to see that although there is a strong distinction in the society because of the social status, the economy allowed everyone to interact with each other. The market place, specifically, sold a variety of items that ranged from simple sandals to more grandiose items like statues as detailed in McDowell's excerpt.
ReplyDeleteIt was also interesting to see how detailed and organized and specific each recording of trade was in McDowell's excerpt. It seemed as though the Egyptians were very cautious and concerned with matching prices and having fair trades. There were many times when the values of items had to be negotiated, which made me wonder and question who gets the final say in setting these final prices?
I also felt that the Egyptians were very advanced with their economic processes. They had policies that were similar to what we know as contracts. In McDowell's excerpt, there was a focus on the Donkey Rental process at the end of passage. It was interesting to see the consequences of "breaking a lease" and seeing that they considered "loopholes" as well when the animal would get sick, and the lease would be terminated earlier.
Workmen spend most of their lifetime in their studio to manufacture commodities. The craftsman and artists are specialized in certain skills; therefore they only know how to make specific products. So they exchange the extras for other products or give them as gifts. The commodities are also for trade. The tradesmen bring the goods abroad for sale.
ReplyDeleteThe lives of workmen are easier than those of peasants. They rarely face the risk of becoming slaves of the landlord. Some high level professional craftsmen even have their own tombs after they die. There are more and more records of craftsmen as Egypt develops. Their positions in society raised year after year, and they receive more and more respect. According to Simpson’s “The Literature of Ancient Egypt”, among many types of artists, the scribbles is a relaxing job to do. No officials hurry them and beat them; they don’t have to worry about working condition because what they do all day is copy articles.
I must say, among other materials in this course, I enjoyed reading McDowell’s reading the most. It may be because of the organized and detailed documentations of the Egyptians. Recording seems to be a big part of Egyptian society, and especially in its economy: “The fact that these gifts were recorded suggests that they were not mere tokens of affection but of economic significance.” Seems like one of the reasons why Egyptians kept record of everything is to settle the disputes that may arise. It is interesting that they kept a written document of “guarantee” such as “I shall not dispute about this donkey; no one else will dispute about it. If he does, it will be against me double.”
ReplyDeleteOne part I am interested to know more about is the part about the Oracle. To quote McDowell, “he felt he had overpaid and the question of price was submitted to the oracle. The god valued the statue at only 8 deben.” How does this exactly work?
I find the role of the Egyptian soldier particularly fascinating. It was interesting to read the two biographies of the soldiers, especially after reading the Donadoni reading on soldiers and comparing these first-hand accounts to the more historical take on the lives of the soldiers. “The Biography of Amenemhab” gives us a look into the life of a very devoted and hardworking soldier. Right off the bat, Amenemhab sings great praises of his king, and in mentioning his many victories he makes sure to claim them in the name of the king and for “his valour”. While reading the “Biography of Ahmose, son of Abana”, it was hard not to notice how greatly Ahmose prided himself in being a soldier. He constantly mentioned how many times he received gold, servants, and land for his acts of valor and loyalty to the king, as opposed to Amenemhab who focused primarily on the actual art of war rather than its benefits.
ReplyDeleteOne aspect that I find particularly interesting is how individuals within the military system are the only individuals who are able to move up and down within their social class. For example, through multiple efforts and acts of brilliance in battle, Ahmose was promoted twice, being given the titles of “Warrior of the Ruler” as well as “crew commander” (Ahmose 4).
From the McDowell texts I’ve found that although the merchants were not as educated as scribes, they still retained the ability to record transactions and even perform them to very finely detailed measurements. We’ve learned that scribes go to school to learn to do what they do so it always intrigues me and scratches the surface of my curiosity when I read that low class people are actually using the three r’s (reading, writing, and arithmetic). From the readings I’ve come to see that merchants in particular don’t really take joy in harming their customers. In fact, whenever they take back a “donkey” (a key animal in the trade), they give it back later on. It’s as if they have their own code or union laws to adhere to.
ReplyDeleteOn the flip side, I found the importance of donkeys in trade particularly interesting. Is there a reason that they were used so often or was it just because they were the cheapest animals that people could get their hands on? Additionally I love the way that each transaction is heavily detailed and the records are never lost. However, I would still like to know why they lenders don’t place their own names on the records. All in all, I felt that the McDowell texts showed the Egyptians as having a culture of simplistic intellectuality. Although 90% are uneducated they are still educated where it matters and in matters that concern them personally (i.e. you don’t have to be educated to know the worth of your donkey).