Something that many of my classmates may have noticed along with myself is that as the eras move forward through time the communities become more complex, which is as to be expected. I find it amazing that in just a short period of time [in retrospect it seems like a short period of time, that is] the dynamics of the community as a whole changed.

It is interesting how with Memphis is one of the first pharaoh and the breakdown of the nomes [provinces] is a ‘key feature in the empire itself’. The politics must have been interesting and extremely dynamic. You can see links to the Upper and Lower Egypt along with links to the dynastic and the predynastic periods of Egypt [as mentioned in the video lectures].

Continue reading →

One idea that really sort of resonated with me during this week’s material was the notion  presented by Prof. Watrall that what was really noteworthy of the construction of monumental mortuary architecture such as the pyramids was not their physical engineering and construction (although that is certainly noteworthy), but the social, cultural, political, economic, and religious institutions and complexity that had to be in place in order for such monuments to be built.

One hugely important thing that I think must have contributed a great deal to creating social environment in which the pyramids could be built is the ancient Egyptian’s cultural and religious beliefs and practices surrounding death and the afterlife. As we have progressed from discussing the predynastic to our current discussions of the Old Kingdom we have seen the complexity of mortuary customs increase.

Continue reading →

Growing up in a Christian faith church it was always mentioned that you can’t bring material things to heaven with you. One song from my faith is entitled “Have you ever seen a U-Haul behind a hearse”? The Egyptian people religion however preached otherwise. The mortuary practices of the Egyptian people caught my attention in this week lecture. Similar to practices today the patterns and structure of your tomb reflects your social status in society. For instance, how today some people can afford the granite headstone that won’t deteriorate easily while others can’t afford one at all. I will focus however on the structure of the royal tombs.  In Egypt the royal burials differed from the subsidiary graves and all other Egyptians graves. From the map first I observed that the royal tombs were in the center. When I saw that I immediately drew back to previous lectures highlighting how important, how much power, and control over others that these rulers had in their society. In The subsidiary graves held queens, those second in command and palace retainers. Also in the graves were pots and carved stone vessels. All these things tie into the main reason for the structure of these graves. The religious belief of the Egyptians is the reason for these specific mortuary practices. They believed that these placed burials set them up for easy transition to the underworld. The underworld here is considered, the afterlife. That is why they took their pots and vessels, to maintain their status. The palace retainers were “probably people who were sacrificed at the time of the burial to serve the pharaoh in the afterlife.” Religion was also probably used as cohesion. For example how the United States used Religion-Christianity- to support the enslavement of Africans. The burials connection to Religion made sense ideologically.

I enjoyed learning about the Pyramid Age during the Old Kingdom.  What I found most interesting is how much the ancient Egyptian culture is surrounded around the ruling dynasties. Over time, as funerary complexity increased, the ultimate projects of building monumental pyramids had to come next.  Everything in a city would revolve around this cult, as Professor Watrall described it in the lecture.  The Pharaoh and his family had the privilege to be interred into a pyramid that required a labor party of 10,000 people to construct.  It is most interesting that as soon as someone was appointed new Pharaoh during the Old Kingdom, it was necessary to start planning the build of a grand tomb.  With such a high amount of resources and power, the construction and time put into building the pyramids was counterproductive for people as a whole, during the Old Kingdom.  With a city at the Pharaoh’s whim, it had to do whatever was necessary to keep the king happy in his afterlife.  The Pyramid of Sneferu was commissioned to be built when a new Pharaoh came into power and didn’t like the one that he claimed.  In some of the tombs, hundreds of people consisting of the Pharaoh’s servants, body guards, and wives were sacrificed and were placed in the corridors of kings’ tombs.  Even thousands of cattle were slaughtered for sacrifice for the cause of a good afterlife.   Life during this time must have not been all too great if every one’s mind was focused on the afterlife during his/her time on Earth.  I haven’t come across this information yet and I will inquire further, but I wonder if there have been Pharaohs that are killed right after the tomb/pyramid was built, so that they can make a quicker journey into his afterlife.

This week, I thought I’d comment on the pyramids. After listening to the lecture about them, I came away amazed at what the pyramids represented to the ancient Egyptians. Just in terms of labor, it amazes me how many men it would take (10,000) to build one pyramid. To think that whole cities came into existence around the pyramid, just to house the workers building it. Do we have anything in our modern day world that could compare to it? Another thing that I find amazing is the engineering/physics of building a pyramid. It would be pretty easy with today’s technology to figure out that if you were building something in a horizontal shape, and you wanted the building to be so tall, how far apart you would have to build the walls, and at what angle you’d have to build them at so that they all came together at the same point. But for the ancient Egyptians to figure that out without any of our modern technology, and to be able to get it right…that’s amazing.

It’s also interesting to think about, how the Egyptians considered the pyramids to be literal homes for their spirits to reside in, in the afterlife, and would stock the pyramids with all sorts of goods (food, furniture, servants (or rather, the bodies of dead servants)).

I also think the fact that more than a hundred pyramids are still standing today, thousands and thousands of years after they were built is a real testament to the planning, preparation and construction abilities of the ancient Egyptians. That they could create something with their primitive technology, that would last for so long is a real testament to their skills. And, just as a point of comparison, do you think there’s any structures that we’ve built in our modern time that will still be standing, thousands  and thousands of years in the future?

The aspect of the reading in Chapter 5: The Rise of Complex Society and Early Civilization that I found to be most interesting is early writing and formal art found in ancient Egypt.  It turns out that hieroglyphic writing was invented in Egypt before the 1^st Dynasty and that its earliest stages are unknown.  The earliest known writing sample is the labels related to the mortuary context from late Predynastic Tomb U-j at Abydos.  Early Dynastic writing, similar to the writing that can be found on the late Predynastic Tomb U-j at Abydos, is very much related to the earliest hieroglyphs.

But what encouraged Ancient Egyptians to transform their hieroglyphics into an early form of writing?  Anthropologists believe that this change may have been for economic and administrative purposes.  Hieroglyphics have been known to appear in a variety of objects commonly used in everyday life in ancient Egypt such as, labels, seal impressions and potmarks that were used to identify the goods and materials of the king or state.  Labels from the Abydos royal tombs that are dated to Dynasty 0 and the 1^st Dynasty allow archaeologists to learn more about the earliest evidence of recording “year names” of a king’s reign.  It has also been suggested that these “year names” represent a royal annals system.  Although there has not been evidence from excavations to support “evidence of state taxation based on agricultural surplus, such as granaries, recording years by a king’s reign would also have been useful to officials who collected taxes and levies (119).  However, we do know that the king directly owned large land-holdings throughout Egypt because of the evidence found on/near the royal tombs.

Early writing has also been known to appear on royal arts, such as the Narmer Palette, and has been integrated into representational art.  Writings found in variety forms of art confirm beliefs in the mortuary cult, which later achieved a much fuller expression in tombs and pyramid complexes of the Old Kingdom.  In conclusion, hieroglyphics were changed to a more formal writing style for economic and administrative purposes and early forms of writing can teach us a lot about life in ancient Egypt.

Death was an important part of Egyptian culture.  They had gods dedicated to it and buildings built to house those that died.  The richest members of society had the grandest tombs, with the Pharaohs building giant pyrimids to show their glory in death. Death was not seen as an ending but as the beginning of a new journey.  Because they had this view, Egyptian dead were buried with everything that was though to be needed in the next life.  Grave goods included pots of food and wine, jewelry, and even servants and animals (including lions) to accompany the departed into the underworld. Based on what was buried with the person scholars can tell who they were and how important they were in life. The rulers and elites are buried with riches and sometimes even servants, while the poorer citizens (although they were still rich enough to afford a formal burial) were buried with simpler goods such as decorated pots and ceramics. Both kinds of graves provide a look into these peoples lives. 

It is lucky for us that they were so interested in preserving their dead and the grave goods that were buried with them because it provided scholars with much of the information needed to piece together the lives that ancient Egyptians lived. Paintings and incriptions on tomb walls allow archeologists a way to look at written record of ancient Egypt that have stood the test of time. Studying the objects inside the graves can tell scholars what kind of food the people ate to who the patron god of the region is. Because the Egyptians took such care to preserve thier dead, archeologists are able to find relics that are in incredible condition to study. The tombs protected objects from decay, grave robbers, and destruction, preserving them for archeologists to discover now and in the future and giving us clues to the lives of the great people that lived and died in different regions of Egypt. The tombs also held pieces of great importance to scholars, such as the Narmer palet and the differnet King’s Lists. These were crucial peices in understanding the chronology of the rulers of ancient Egypt.

Death was important to Egyptian religion. There were gods that ruled the underworld as well as gods that helped Egyptians on their journey to the underworld. Dying was considered just another part of the journey, one which your family was responsible to prepare you for. Some places, such as Abydos, were chosen as burial places not for political reasons but because of ideological reasons.  Abydos was one of the most important late Predynastic centers in Upper Egypt.  The cemetery Umm el-Qa’ab is where many first Dynasty kings constructed their tombs.  Abydos was thought to be an entrance to the underworld.  Pictures on the tombs depict the Hall of Judgment in the underworld and Abydos was considered an entry point into the Hall.  Because of this is was thought that to be buried in this location would help ease the transition to the afterlife for that person.

I was interested to find out that Upper Egypt pretty much took over lower Egypt.  I was interested in how the archeologists figured out the Upper Egypt was the dominant culture in the unification of Egypt.  I also learned that there were different crowns for pharohs of upper and lower Egypt.  The Narmer tablet showed Narmer wearing the white crown of Upper Egypt on one side and the red crown of Lower Egypt on the other side of the tablet.  This showed that he, at least at one time, ruled both Upper and Lower Egypt.  He is shown about to kill a man from Lower Egypt on the side where he is wearing the crown from Upper Egypt.  This shows that he was from Upper Egypt and was dominating Lower Egypt in his take over.

The unification of Upper and Lower Egypt was not just one of military take over.  Before they were united Lower Egypt copied the ceramic style of Upper Egypt and after the unification Upper Egyptian pottery was found in Lower Egypt probably becasue of trade.  This made me think that Upper Egypt was more advanced culturally than Lower Egypt was.  I wonder why this was?  Do you think that Upper Egypt was more involved with trade with other nations and so learned more from them?  Or was the pottery not actually more advanced but Lower Egypt was the part that was more taken over in the unification?  I know that eventually pharhos came from both Upper and Lower Egypt but did the first Pharohs come from Upper Egypt and this was why Upper Egyptian pottery was found in Lower Egypt.  Also,I wonder if Lower Egyptian Potter was found in Upper Egypt?  Did the spread of culture go both ways or just from Upper to Lower Egypt?  And if it was only one directional, why?

I really enjoyed how multiple times Kohler talked about the social makeup of Early Egyptian civilization.  I have a huge interest in how people lived before our time.  Since this time period lacks a understandable written language it makes it challenging for scholars to understand how people functioned day to day.  Kohler simply takes us through her interpretation of how Egypt became one kingdom.

In the beginning people were most likely nomadic and the typical layout of these small groups of people had very little complexity with status.  In most societies the oldest members are considered more wise and therefore more respected.  The settling in a location allowed for the people to specialize in certain activities.  Kohler writes that increasing social segmentation is possibly indicated by specialized activities (pg 43).  This is a reasonable prediction given that the people are settled and are able to make a legacy for themselves that doesn’t have to do with hunting and gathering.  As people began to create names for themselves, leadership positions become important and respected similar to that of elders. Although the author did not address this point I do believe she would somewhat agree.

As groups of people became more populated in a location, a new and more defined society evolved.  Kohler describes it as one that has more access, control, and distribution of resources in the hands of high-status people, the elites (pg 43).  Those traits create what many refer to as a chiefdom society.   Once this society has been formed it seems like it would only take a few generations for one family to takeover the populated location and then gradually increase the size of the region controlled.

I found it remarkable that in the south, chiefdom societies were so popular.  The popularity is evident because of the large tomb sizes and the types of goods found within them.  A good example of this is the extremely large U-j tomb from Abydos that had hundreds of imported wine bottles form Syria-Palestine (pg 44). Both characteristics suggest that the owner of the tomb was wealthy, highly respected and powerful.

I am disappointed that not more was discussed about the day to day atmosphere of these societies but not much can really be configured since much of the information is based off of basic artifacts.  I hope that more information of the daily life of the people will be discussed as a written language increases in popularity.