Lives of the Ancient Egyptians

Toby Wilkinson

• Publisher: Thames and Hudson Ltd
• Year: 2013
• eBook ISBN: 9780500771624
• Topic: History
• Subtopic: Middle Eastern History
• Index: History

What was it really like to live in ancient Egypt? Lives of the Ancient Egyptians is packed with one hundred personal stories of ambition and intrigue, of triumph, despair and love, that compelling recreate the world of the pharaohs. here are famous pharaohs, from Khufu, builder of the Great Pyramid, to Akhenaten and Ramesses II but also the ordinary men and women, so often ignored in histories of ancient Egypt: a doctor, a sailor, a housewife and a serial criminal. Note: The ebook edition includes the complete text of the printed book without illustrations

PART 1

Foundations

Early Dynastic Period

Around 3000 BC, the first nation-state in history was born – in Egypt. In the Nile Valley and Delta (known to the Egyptians themselves as the Two Lands), the various rival kingdoms and territories which had developed over a period of a thousand years were unified into a single country ruled over by a single king who claimed divine authority. This process, known as the unification, seems to have occurred fairly quickly, taking a few generations at most to complete. Although the precise course of events remains a little hazy, the outcome is clear: the kings of This (ancient Tjeni), one of two or three proto-kingdoms in Upper Egypt (the southern Nile Valley), emerged supreme. They overcame not only their rivals in the south of the country, but also the rulers of towns and cities throughout the marshlands of the Delta. The king known to us as Narmer (no. 1) is the first monarch who can be said with confidence to have ruled over the whole of Egypt, from the First Cataract in the south to the shores of the Mediterranean in the north. He was recognized by his near-contemporaries as a founder figure, and has a special place in Egyptian history as the first king of the 1st Dynasty.

The challenge for Narmer and his immediate successors (nos 2–4) was to develop and prescribe the means for ruling their new, geographically vast realm. Egypt was certainly not lacking in cultural dynamism: two distinctive and vibrant traditions had grown up, in the Nile Valley and Delta, respectively, during the millennium or more preceding the unification. Technologically superior and more in tune with the conspicuous consumption favoured by Egypt’s early ruling class, Upper Egyptian culture had supplanted its northern counterpart in the Delta during the late predynastic period, mirroring the process of political unification that was likewise driven from the south. The kings of the 1st Dynasty took this cultural tradition, and refined and codified it as an expression of the court’s own power. Art and architecture were carefully deployed to enhance the prestige of the monarchy as an institution, allowing it to overcome challenges such as the regency under Merneith (no. 2) or all-out civil war in the early years of Khasekhemwy’s reign (no. 4). The barrage of propaganda worked spectacularly well: kingship swiftly became the ideological glue that bound Egypt together; government without monarchy was unthinkable. One of the great achievements of Egypt’s early rulers was thus to develop an iconography and ideology of royal rule that survived, virtually unchanged, for the next 3,000 years.

Relatively little is known about the early kings as individuals, since hieroglyphic writing was still at an early stage of its development and, in any case, monarchy thrived best behind a veil of secrecy and mystery. But the political, economic and religious programmes of these rulers can be deduced from scraps of textual and archaeological evidence. The first three or four centuries following unification – known as the Early Dynastic Period – were a time of great innovation and of rapid developments in Egyptian civilization, when all the major building blocks of pharaonic culture were put in place. Some of the techniques used to extend and maintain the state’s power would be familiar to us today. While expounding a creed of strident nationalism to bolster its own legitimacy, the government quietly increased formal contacts with foreign lands, using the revenue from trade to fund increasingly elaborate royal projects (notably the king’s tomb). Internally, the state tightened its grip on all areas of administration, in particular ensuring that every aspect of the national economy was subject to state regulation, if not direct control. The inauguration of a regular census of the country’s wealth combined with meticulous record-keeping set the pattern for Egypt’s enduring love-affair with bureaucracy.

The two interlinked policies – of economic and political centralization, and an obsession with monumental architecture – came together in the reign of Djoser (no. 5) with the construction of the first Egyptian pyramid. The enormous feat of engineering required to erect a mountain of stone high on the Saqqara plateau was matched by the logistical operation needed to quarry and transport the blocks, and recruit, house, feed and direct the massive workforce. The sheer administrative complexity of pyramid-building necessitated a more professional bureaucracy, rather than the small cabal of royal relatives with shifting areas of responsibility which seems to have characterized government in the first two dynasties. Men like Hesira (no. 6) and Metjen (no. 8) show the changing nature of high office under Djoser. The titles lovingly recorded on their funerary monuments allow us a glimpse of individual careers, for the first time. The most famous official of the king’s inner circle, Imhotep (no. 7), achieved even greater prominence and was venerated as a god of learning and wisdom by later generations of Egyptians. His great creation, the Step Pyramid complex, dominates the 3rd Dynasty, and marks it out as a transitional era, when the achievements of Egypt’s formative period were consolidated and the scene set for future glories.

1 | Narmer

EGYPT’S FIRST KING

Who is the first ancient Egyptian known to us by name? The origins of hieroglyphic writing have now been pushed back, beyond the beginning of the 1st Dynasty, into an era when Egypt was still a collection of competing kingdoms, not yet unified into a single nation-state. There are combinations of signs from this early period which may be names, but we cannot be sure, and in any case they are difficult to read. The rulers of Egypt’s predynastic period must, for the moment, remain anonymous. The first king whose ‘name’ is readable, and consistently written on objects ranging from simple sherds of pottery to a decorated stone mace-head, belongs at the very start of the dynastic sequence. His most famous artifact, a ceremonial palette from the temple at Hierakonpolis (ancient Nekhen), stands in the entrance hall of the Egyptian Museum in Cairo, welcoming visitors at the start of their tour through 3,000 years of pharaonic culture. It has become an icon of the foundation of a great civilization; the king for whom it was made is recognized as the first in Egyptian history.

His name is Narmer – except that the reading ‘Narmer’ is almost certainly wrong. The two signs used to write the name, a catfish and a chisel, did indeed have the phonetic values ‘nar’ and ‘mer’ in later phases of hieroglyphic writing, but there are compelling reasons to think that they represented different sounds at this early period. Indeed, the ‘name’ Narmer may not be a name at all, rather, a combination of symbols associating the king with the fierce forces of nature (catfish) and their striking power (chisel). As such, it would belong within the dominant mode of expression found in prehistoric royal iconography. This explanation of Narmer’s name would support his identification as a transitional figure, whose reign spanned the predynastic past and the dynastic future, whose lasting achievement was to recast the ideology and iconography of royal power into new, lasting forms that would endure for the next three millennia.

What do we know about Narmer the man? He became king around 3000 BC and was almost certainly from the Upper Egyptian city of This (ancient Tjeni, near modern Girga); this was one of the early centres of Egyptian civilization and the capital of a kingdom which, by the closing years of the predynastic period, encompassed the northern part of Upper Egypt, most of Middle Egypt and parts of the Delta. Whether by diplomacy or force, Narmer extended his rule over the whole of Egypt, from the First Cataract to the fringes of the Delta. A key step in this process of territorial consolidation may have been Narmer’s marriage to a woman named Neithhotep. Judging from the location of her tomb, she was descended from the old royal family of Nagada (ancient Nubt), one of This’s rival centres in Upper Egypt which it may have conquered some years earlier. A strategic alliance between these two royal families would have been a good basis for building a wider political consensus. In this same vein, Narmer took pains to venerate the shrine of Horus at Hierakonpolis, the third major centre of Upper Egyptian power. Horus was not only the city’s local god, but was also the god of kingship. So paying homage to his cult served the dual purpose of reinforcing Narmer’s royal credentials while satisfying the elite of Hierakonpolis that their new ruler, if not a local man, intended to respect their traditions.

The two most impressive objects donated by Narmer to the temple of Horus were consummate examples of royal iconography, and powerful statements about the extent of royal power. The ceremonial macehead showed the king, enthroned beneath a canopy, watching a parade of prisoners and tribute, and observing rituals associated with the two localities – Buto (ancient Djebaut) in the northwestern Delta and Hierakonpolis itself in southern Upper Egypt – that symbolized the geographical extremes of his new realm. The decorated palette carried scenes of a similarly symbolic nature: the king smiting a bound captive, inspecting ranks of slain and decapitated enemies, tearing down the walls of a rebel stronghold. Whether the enemy was intended to represent a Delta chieftain or a foreign tribesman, the message was the same and crystal clear: as king of all Egypt, Narmer would brook no opposition. He would defend Egypt’s borders, but the quid pro quo was the unswerving loyalty of the entire populace. This uncompromising message was reinforced at Egypt’s southern frontier by the construction of a massive fortress on the island of Elephantine (ancient Abu) which both guarded the river approach from Nubia and towered over the local community. The authoritarian character of divine kingship had already been firmly established.

The xenophobia of state propaganda – on a cylinder seal from Hierakonpolis, Narmer is shown beating a group of Libyans, while an ivory fragment from his tomb shows a bearded Asiatic stooping in homage to the king – masked a more pragmatic attitude to foreign relations. The discovery of Egyptian pottery from the reign of Narmer at sites throughout the northern Delta and southern Palestine suggests active trade between the two regions. The royal court went to great lengths to obtain the valuable commodities it required to maintain its economic and political dominance. A series of inscriptions carved on an isolated rock outcrop in the heart of Egypt’s eastern desert bear witness to an expedition sent by Narmer to this remote region, probably in search of gold or high-quality stone.

Objects bearing Narmer’s name have been found at sites the length and breadth of Egypt, indicating a king whose authority was recognized over a greater area than any of his predecessors. Modern scholars have debated whether he, or his immediate successor Aha, should be accorded the position at the head of the 1st Dynasty. For the kings who came after Narmer, there was no such debate. The necropolis seals of both Den (no. 3) and Qaa, from the middle and end of the 1st Dynasty respectively, put Narmer first in the list of Egypt’s rulers. To them, Narmer was the undoubted founder figure. Five thousand years later, it seems churlish to disagree.

2 | Merneith

THE FIRST WOMAN TO HOLD THE REINS OF POWER

The king was a unique figure in ancient Egypt. Ideologically, he was above the rest of humanity and was considered the earthly incarnation of the celestial god Horus. Politically, he was head of state and government; he ruled by decree, and all departments of government were answerable to him. Without a king, Egypt – in both ideological and political terms – would founder. This created a problem when, as happened on occasions, a new monarch came to the throne as a child. Although religious tenets could accommodate a minor as a channel between human and divine spheres, the business of government needed direction by an adult individual. The solution was a regency. In practical terms, it was dangerous to entrust such power to one of the king’s male relatives, since such a figure might then go one step further and usurp the throne. It was far safer to appoint as regent the person who could have no such ambitions and who, in any case, symbolized the transition between the old and new reigns: the king’s mother.

The earliest attested regency in Egypt took place in the middle of the 1st Dynasty. The old king, Djet, had died, leaving the throne to his successor Den (no. 3). Since the new monarch was still a child, his mother Merneith governed in his place. She was the wife and mother of a king and may also have been a king’s daughter, born to the second ruler of the dynasty, Djer. Merneith’s period of office is the first certain instance of a woman holding the reins of power in Egypt. Of course, all official documents bore the name of the reigning king, despite his minority, so she is only sparsely attested by name: on three vessel fragments and a small ivory vessel from the Saqqara region. However, as de facto ruler of Egypt, Merneith was granted the privilege of a full mortuary complex in the ancestral royal burial-ground at Abydos (ancient Abdju). Her tomb was marked on the surface in the traditional manner, with a pair of large funerary stelae bearing the owner’s name in raised relief.

This architectural acknowledgment of Merneith’s regency seems to have been a decision taken personally by her son, Den, when he reached adulthood. His name features prominently on objects from Merneith’s burial and his recently discovered necropolis seal lists ‘the king’s mother Merneith’ alongside the previous rulers of the 1st Dynasty, starting with Narmer (no. 1). By contrast, the seal of Qaa, the last king of the dynasty, omits Merneith, indicating that, after her son’s reign, she was no longer accorded equal status with the de jure rulers of the period. But during her regency and for the remainder of her life as king’s mother, Merneith and Den clearly developed a strong bond. The son repaid his mother’s loyalty and support in the most suitable manner, with a tomb fit for a king.

3 | Den

REFORMING RULER OF THE 1ST DYNASTY

Den is the best-attested king of the 1st Dynasty. Even taking into account his accession as a child, he enjoyed a lengthy reign: a recently discovered fragment of a limestone vessel from the southwest annex of his tomb mentions ‘the second occasion of the sed(-festival)’; the sed-festival was the royal jubilee, usually celebrated after thirty years of a reign and thereafter at more frequent intervals. Of course, a long tenure as king is not noteworthy in itself; but Den’s time on the throne was a period of exceptional innovation, of major cultural and material developments in almost every sphere, that helped Egypt take a further, decisive step on the path from nascent state to great civilization.

He declared his reforming agenda from the outset, starting with the royal titulary. Kings had previously been designated as being the incarnations of Horus and ruling under the protection of the Two Ladies, the patron goddesses of Upper and Lower Egypt. To these two established titles, Den added a third, nesut-bity, literally ‘he of the reed and bee’. Best translated as Dual King, it signified the many dualities over which the monarch presided – divine and human, sacred and secular, Nile Valley and Delta, floodplain and desert, east and west – emphasizing that the harmony of opposites inherent in created order depended upon the person of the king for its continuation. This elaboration of the ideology of kingship was further reflected in the adoption of a new crown combining the white headdress of Upper Egypt and the red of Lower Egypt. Den signalled that he was going to be a king of both, of all.

Looking beyond the borders of Egypt, Den also inaugurated a new policy with regard to neighbouring lands. One of his secondary names, Zemti, means ‘of the desert’, and he seems to have taken a special interest in Egypt’s arid, northeastern frontier zone. There is evidence from his reign for military activity in southern Palestine (whether actual or ritual) and trade expeditions using the coastal route from the Delta. The fruits of such sustained contact can be seen in the large number of Syro-Palestinian vessels – presumably containing valuable oils and unguents – imported into Egypt during Den’s reign.

An intensification of foreign activity was matched by administrative reforms at home. An apparent increase in the number of high officials at Den’s court may reflect changes in the structure of government. Tighter royal control over the affairs of state required not just able administrators but also an accurate assessment of the country’s population and resources. Den saw to this as well: an entry from the middle of his reign, in the royal annals compiled in the late Old Kingdom (the so-called Palermo Stone), records a ‘census of all the people of the north, west and east’. To be of use, all this information had to be recorded and archived. It may be no coincidence that the earliest roll of papyrus from Egypt was found among the grave goods of Den’s Chancellor, Hemaka.

The end result of all this effort – increasing foreign trade, streamlining government, and improving the management of the economy – was the ability to devote greater resources to promoting kingship by fulfilling the sovereign’s traditional duties. Hence, the Palermo Stone records Den’s foundation of a new temple called ‘thrones of the gods’, while the king also engaged in other religious activities such as visiting important shrines, dedicating new cult images, and promoting rituals such as the running of the Ap...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Title
• About the Author
• Other titles of interest
• Dedication
• Author’s Note
• Contents
• Introduction
• Part 1 Foundations: Early Dynastic Period
• Part 2 The Pyramid Age: Old Kingdom
• Part 3 Civil War and Restoration: First Intermediate Period and Middle Kingdom
• Part 4 A Golden Age: Early 18th Dynasty
• Part 5 The Great Heresy: Amarna Period
• Part 6 Imperial Egypt: Ramesside Period
• Part 7 Twilight of the Gods: Third Intermediate Period, Late Period and Ptolemaic Period
• Chronology and King List
• Map
• Sources of Quotations
• Further Reading
• Index
• Copyright