This past week we focused on two groups that had access to various types of information: scribes and priests. These professional identities overlap in many ways as they required specialized knowledge bound up in literacy and in some cases, communication through supernatural channels.
For this week I want you to try focusing on one or two lines from one of the primary sources and using your chosen evidence as a platform for discussing a larger theme talked about in class thus far. This will be good practice for your final papers in which you will tackle broad subjects like ethics or religion and have to support your arguments with details from several types of texts. You can also uses primary texts quoted in the Donadoni volume and Pinch PDF as well.
Feel free to tackle whichever topics spark your interest but here are some suggestions if you are feeling stuck:
access to wisdom/knowledge
overlap between scribes and priests (ie lector priests)
relationship between these professions and the king
social hierarchy as evidenced by these professions
importance of the written word and names
relationships between religion and politics
and many, many more....
Scribes in ancient Egypt had access to all information, and had overlapping professions. In Papyrus Anastasi I, the writer, whose name is Hori "who was both a scribe and a squire attached to the royal stables", writes to a senior "command-writing scribe of the victorious army" (Wente 98). Hori addresses his senior as "elite scribe and Maher-warrior, who know how to use your hands, a leader of Naarin-troops at the head of the soldiery" (109). Firstly, it is obvious that the senior is a scribe - an elite scribe, which suggests that he is at a high position of the hierarchy of scribes. Secondly, from Hori's referral to the senior as a warrior and the leader of Narrin-troops at the head of the soldiery, it becomes clear that the senior scribe has a high position in the military. Throughout the text, it becomes more and more evident that the senior scribe controls large troops, leading them to battle and winning. As Professor Morris mentioned in the lectures, scribes were able to attain high social statuses since they were respected for being literate. Hence, it was natural for a scribe to be appointed as a leader of troops. Additionally, scribes were needed to record the number of kills during battles; perhaps the senior scribe started out as one of those scribes on battlefields and worked his way up the social ladder to reach the position he was as an elite scribe, or he could have been born in an upperclass household and was raised to become an important figure from the beginning, and entered the military as an elite scribe to join other upperclass scribes who also maintained important military positions.
ReplyDeleteAlthough the quote does not directly address this, throughout Papyrus Anastasi I, Hori continues to mention the king and the scribe's religious and social role within the royal circle. In ancient Egypt, as Professor Morris said, writing was mainly restricted to royal business; thus it was natural for scribes to have connections to kings.
In Anastasi I, the author introduces the difficult cerebral journey one must undertake: "a leader of his class like whom there is non; of whom an example is made for every young man, one who has advanced through his own efforts and whom his fingers have aggrandized; a precocious child who has attained his maturity, versed in intellectual pursuits and astute because of them; discreet in his character, one beloved in people's hearts and not rebuffed; whose friendship one longs for and never gets tired of; who bestirs himself in inscribing blank sheets of papyrus; youthful, of distinguished appearance and pleasant demeanor, who can interpret difficult passages in past records just as the one who wrote them,whose every utterance is so steeped in honey that hearts are restored thereby as through a ready potion..."
ReplyDeleteI selected this passage to examine closely because it outlines the superiority that the scribes had over other professions. Different from the Satire of the Trades, this satirical letter (as introduction puts it), seems to be defensive against an older and wiser scribe, and later challenging as the author proposes several word problems for the audience to solve. As Professor Morris said, this papyrus was copied as an educational tool, and certainly young pupils were challenged to solve the problems as well. However, this leads me to question whether this was a real letter or a mere document simply produced for the purpose of education. Several portions of this letter led me to believe that it was written to a real person who most likely degraded the author and this letter acted as an intellectual retort. Even so, the structure of the letter, particularly the toward the end, suggests that the letter was written with the scribal school in mind.
To me, this passage seemed significant as it addresses not only how prestigious the profession of scribes is but also the process of becoming one. The author does not only glorify the attainable future but also mentions that success indeed results from hard work. This to me is more convincing than the Satire of the Trades because it acknowledges the harsh reality of schooling and thus a more solid argument for why one should bear the challenges of scribal schools. Further, the author touches upon the fact that scribes do indeed have access to "difficult passages in past records", which becomes exclusive to those who are literate. This was mentioned as if it were a privilege and seems to attest to the scholarly nature of scribes.
Herodotus once observed that “Egyptians are religious to excess,” and that “[they] are meticulous in their observance of everything which concerns their religion.” Indeed, almost all aspects of daily life in Egypt were dictated by religion. Priests, scribes, and royal officials all harnessed this religious influence to maintain hierarchy. They instilled the belief in Egyptians that a good life, and afterlife, awaited those who followed their rules and maintained maat. High Priest of Thoth, Petosiris, claimed ‘great is the joy on earth of him in whose heart is a great fear of god!’. Similarly, in Setna II, we see those who acted always in the name of religion during their time on earth being rewarded with an afterlife near Osiris himself, no matter their class or occupation. A good afterlife was so important to Egyptians that insurance of it by complying with elite orders seems like the easiest way to maintain hierarchy and social order.
ReplyDeleteElite scribes and priests also harnessed religion to maintain order by claiming divine fate. Petosiris mentions that he is chosen (by god) as a priest for his temple, implying that the gods have assigned elite occupations, so hierarchy is a product of divine fate. For lower and middle class Egyptians, a majority of whom are religious, this is a hard concept to even consider arguing against. The Pharaoh also utilizes his ‘divine fate’ to control Egypt and maintain order. Donadoni shows that Egyptians saw the hereditary structure of the Pharaohs as another product of divine fate and regarded the Pharaoh as a god. This gave him the power to intervene if he didn’t like a high priest’s son or wanted to promise the position to a friend. Once again, we see the extreme religious observance of Egyptians coming into play, because the Pharaoh wouldn’t be able to control them and maintain order unless they truly believed they were following a ‘god’s’ orders.
To conclude, nearly all Egyptians abided by any religious orders in hopes of a good afterlife. Because of the high influence religion had, scribes, priests, and even the Pharaoh himself utilized it, both by promising a good afterlife to those who followed rules and by claiming divine fate, to maintain social hierarchy and maat.
Caroline Miller
As mentioned many times in lecture and in the readings, Egyptian religion was integrated with the lives of the people to a great extent. They had contact with the divine often, as kings were considered avatars of gods on earth. Considering the fact that only a tiny fraction of the population was literate, most of which were priests and scribes, it means that the vast majority of the lore and wisdom of the educated Egyptians was only available to those who could access it. Priests and royals were mostly family affairs, in that no common person could attain that status, or gain access into the religious workings of Egypt. However, becoming a scribe could give a middle class citizen exactly that - a look into the past wisdom and religious text written by generations of Egyptians before him. In the Papyrus Anastasi I, it was written that,
ReplyDelete"The scribe of superior intellect, with sound advice, over whose utterances there is rejoicing when they are heard, so skilled in God's Words that there is nothing of which he is ignorant, who is an able champion in the occupation of Sheshat and a servant of Thoth in his writing chamber;..." (Wente, 99)
This highlights the fact that being able to understand the written literature was a great privilege in Ancient Egypt, which the scribes enjoyed after their arduous training. This understanding inherently put them at a higher status level than the illiterate, even if many of the religious texts were nothing but myths and procedures concerning festivals and rituals. However, these rituals and other religious artifact were so important in the daily lives of the Egyptians, religiously affiliated scribes were boosted in stature. In this way, the Egyptians admired access to knowledge, as it was a rare occurrence.
[The palace steward came,] and Pharaoh [said to be him]: “Palace steward, let Ihweret be taken to the house of Naneferkaptah tonight. Let everything that is beautiful be take with her, omitting nothing.”
ReplyDeleteIn the beginning of “Setna Khaemaus and the mummies” the Pharaoh is irritated with the palace steward. In the midst of his frustration, he says, “Palace steward, let Ihweret be taken to the house of Naneferkaptah tonight. Let everything that is beautiful be take with her, omitting nothing” (455). In this context, Naneferkaptah is a mummy. Because Egyptians place such a high importance on the afterlife, it is essential that they treat the dead with respect. We can see this respect in the quotation above. In visiting Naneferkaptah, “everything that is beautiful” must be present in order to show respect. (I do have a question though – is the house of Naneferkaptah a temple? Or a tomb?)
Later in the passage Setna writes, “my menstrual cycle came, and I did not menstruate. It was reported in the presence of Pharaoh and his heart became exceedingly happy” (455). Without knowing anything about Egyptian culture, this quotation may seem a bit confusing. However, after learning about priests and temples, we now know that women menstruating are considered impure because it is excess. Priests, Pharaohs, and other higher ups are told to avoid sex and menstruating women. Because Setna did not menstruate, the Pharaoh can consider her pure, and in turn, this is what made him “exceedingly happy.” Purity is of extreme importance in Egyptian culture. The phrase “Be pure, Be pure, Be pure” hangs over doorways and priests shave their entire body to rid themselves of any impurities. However, I wonder to what extent this idea of purity holds true within the entire Egyptian community? Are farmers and people of the lower classes as concerned with it as priests and the elite class?
From “Setna Khaemuas and the Mummies”:
ReplyDelete“About the perimeter [of the chest] where the scroll was he found a schoinos of snakes, scorpions, and all manner of reptiles. [...] He recited a spell to the schoinos of snakes, scorpions and all manner of reptiles that were about the perimeter of the chest. He prevented them from flying up.” (from 3/30, p.458)
Pinch mentions the role of priests in vanquishing particular animals in Egypt, and in particular the continuing need for specific rituals in order to ward them off. He mentions that even in modern-day Egypt families of scorpion charmers are often employed to clear land of the dangerous animals.
What I find most interesting about this passage, with regards to wider themes about Egyptian religion, is the relation between everyday observations and mythology. Snakes and scorpions, as Pinch suggests, both posed a very real threat to the average Egyptian. Their adoption as a metaphor for dangerous forces in the tale of Setna suggests something very interesting about the development of Egyptian religious beliefs. Were gods all linked directly to those aspects that Egyptians encountered in their everyday life, and in this respect does it mean that we can extrapolate much more about Egyptian life by paying closer attention to particular religious beliefs? Or perhaps those beliefs became more removed from everyday life - venerated as relics of the past whilst society itself was changing.
Above all, this passage suggests that knowledge of these specific rituals, which were presumably also useful in everyday life, was also admired in a religious sense. Naneferkaptah was able to recite the spell before reaching the scroll, and in fact it is his prior knowledge that enables him to retrieve the scroll at all. Thus there seems to be a second suggestion that, useful as written knowledge may be, traditional knowledge can also be essential for priests.
From "Reminder of the Scribe's Superior Status"
ReplyDelete"But a scribe, he is the taskmaster of everyone. There is (no) taxing of the work of the scibe. He does not have dues. So take note of this." (Simpson 439)
I picked this passaged because it focuses on the elevation of the scribal position. The whole passage is about how the scribe is the best profession. The farmer works all day tending to the fields, get his money taxed, and it beaten if he doesn't have grain, but the scribe's job is much less labor intensive. The scribe however, has much more training. Scribal school is intensive, and a potential scribe might even have to leave his family. Scribal school takes years. This is much different than schooling for any other profession in Ancient Egypt. The was some military training, but only for the elites who could afford their own equipment such has armor, chariots, ect. The training of the military elites is probably the only training comparable to the schooling of the scribes.
Another thing this passage really brought focus to was the class difference. We have discussed this in depth in lectures, but this is a first hand account. It is saying that scribes are better that farmers and how scribes are their "taskmasters". This may be true, but without the farmers the scribes (and all of Egypt) would starve. The scribes, because they are literate and can read texts, have a definite advantage over people. The scribes are most important to us as scholars, because they preserved the history of Egypt.
The third over reaching theme I would like to touch on is religion and religious experience. This a huge scribal advantage. The scribes are capable of reading the religious texts and recording them. They also record the contents of the temple after each new group of rotating priests. The only people who have a more well rounded religious experience is the literate priests. They can read the scripture and they are allowed into the sanctuary of the temple. The most elite people are allowed into the courtyard of the temple and get to experience this aspect of religion, while once again the farmers, widows, ect. have the biggest disadvantage. They can't enter the temple and only get to see the deity at times of celebration. They do still however have to make donations. I definitely agree with the passage that it would have been better to be a scribe than a farmer. All in all, the scribes were well off.
Pinch's description on the use of magic in Ancient Egypt depicts the social hierarchy that resulted from the knowledge of such material.
ReplyDeleteThe term "Sau" is used to describe someone who practices medicine or magic, and it is said that the term was used interchangeably to refer to individuals that practiced physical medicine or spiritual healing. This word is also used for both men and women. Furthermore, women were called "rekhet" or "knowing one" for there perceived knowledge of the dead and of sick children. Individuals with this kind of knowledge held a higher social standing than those who did not. This would lead one to believe that a woman "rekhet" would have some prestige in society. Would it then be feasible to suggest that woman could become very powerful in society and even hold some sort of public office?
At the same time, Pinch explains how women are unclean in the eyes of the temple. Their menstruation is impure and having intercourse with a woman renders a man unclean. This evidence suggests that women could only climb so high on the social ladder and that the most-notable positions in society were reserved for males. We then must assume that even the social prestige that was associated with medicine and magic could only aid a woman so much.
The same could be said of men who practiced magic. Any magician with no "official ties to the temple" were held with regard, but were also feared by the townsfolk. Although "ritual magicians" were respected in society, "secular magicians" were feared and "disliked". With this in mind, we can see that any individual, a man or a woman, could only rise so high in society with spiritual knowledge unless they were affiliated with the state or the temple. Unofficial professions were looked down upon and indeed can be seen as sort of "black market" jobs.
There seems to be an interesting overlap between the professions of a scribe and a priest. Although they are different (scribes who record and are masters of writing and priests who are the servants of the gods), they seem to have unique traits in common. Both a scribe and a priest are able to climb higher on the social ladder, increase their approval from the gods, and are able to gain prestige from knowing written word. The following quote was taken from Donadoni’s writing on priests. It is about a priest who served his master to the best of his ability, a sort of autobiography that was found in his tomb at Saqqara:
ReplyDelete“The devoted Servant of Ptah-Sokar-Osiris... he who is prudent in his speech above all others, he who shows indulgence neither toward nobles nor toward his great ones, he who is praised by the gods, he who is stable in the good name of the temples” (Donadoni 127).
This quote, however simple, says a lot about the similar characteristics of a scribe and a priest. Scribes start at a relatively young age with schooling. They learn to read and write; something that most Egyptians were not able to do. From there, they take a step higher than the rest of society, and may keep climbing. They may become of noble standing, working for a member of the elite, or even the king. Scribes are also depicted frequently in tombs, suggesting the status they have in the afterlife and how their knowledge is in favor with the gods. That summary of a scribe’s timeline is similar to a priest. They go to school at a young age, roughly 6 to 10 like scribes, learning to read and write, then keep ascending the “priestly ladder” with a goal of being a High Priest. There are even special priests with the title lector priests who were skilled in reading religious texts and were trained in other areas such as medicine and astronomy. Of course they are in greater standings with the gods due to their profession, and when they reach a level such as High Priest and have access to the scriptures and texts, they are of high noble status. Priests and Scribes are both looked upon with respect and honor. Their prestige comes from their knowledge of reading and writing and their services to others and those above them.
I think the one thing that really binds the profession of Scribes and Priests is the fact that they have knowledge that only a small percentage of Egyptians have. They can read and write and have access to privileged information; sometimes not even the king has this skill. They are also one of the few professions where one may be on the bottom of social pyramid, but if taking up these jobs, they can climb to the top, raising their own social status. This underlying theme of status and prestige has been talked of throughout class and is frequent throughout Egyptian culture.
I think that the practice of magic is very interesting, concerning priests. In today's lecture on priests, magic was not mentioned with reference to the priests and their duties. Pincher writes, "After Egypt was united in around 3100 BC, kings were credited with magical powers. In 'The Pyramid Texts,' the king is referred to as a 'hekau' - a possessor of magic" (50). My question is: if the high priest represents the king, then does he possess magic, too?
ReplyDeleteWe know that the Egyptians thought their kings were divine, but what about their priests? Based on the above quote, one cannot say that priests practiced magic at all; it seems to be attributed solely to the king. We know that the king always replaces the high priest, based on artwork of the time. Can we say that, perhaps, a king was thought to have been able to do magic based on artwork that later Egyptians saw? If this is the case, then it was indeed the high priest who was a hekau, and not the king himself. Such ideas would most likely have been considered either blasphemous or treasonous, but probably explain why kings were thought to have been able to do magic outside of their alleged divinity. --Melanie Zelikovsky
Petosiris was the high priest of the god Thoth at Hermopolis. In Tuna el-Gebel, upon the walls of his tomb, Petosiris inscribed his autobiography. Due to his autobiography, Petrosiris is believed to be a man who was constantly submitting to “the will of god, in observance with the moral code” (Donadoni, 148).
ReplyDeleteHe writes:
“I will lead you along the path of life, the good path of those who follow god. Happy is he whose heart leads him toward this path! Certain is the life on earth of him whose heart is steadfast on the path of god, and great is the joy on [this] earth of him in whose heart is a great fear of god!”
The idea that fearing god ultimately leads a person to their happiness is an interesting one. The Egyptian priests spent their days tending to statues of the deities and creating an environment suitable for the actual godly spirits to descend and inhibit their statues. Their lives were full of ritual and nurturing these statues for the entire purpose of inviting the god into the temple and to grace the priests with their presence. It seems strange to think that all of this careful planning, incessant ritualizing, creating ambiance, and offering sacrifices were done so as to invite a spirit they feared into their presence rather than a spirit they loved and wanted to be around. However, because a high priest advised to fear god in his autobiography, his legacy, the advice cannot be taken lightly.
Perhaps Petosiris’s advice is a simple reformulation of Machiavelli’s classic inquiry of whether it is better to be feared than loved. It is possible that if priests were driven solely by love for their god, they would fall behind or even give up on their religious routine. If god knows their dedication and love for him, would he really want them to work themselves to the bone? Of course not! However, if the discipline and purity of Egyptian priests were soiled then respect for them would be greatly diminished if not lost entirely and if this were to happen then the reputation of the man in charge would undoubtedly be ruined as well. That man would have been the high priest. It may very well have been a good thing for Petosiris to promote the fearing of god in return for a smooth walk down the path of life. It allowed order and custom to be maintained, and upheld a sense of balance and security. On the other hand, the thought that he only advised this to keep order while he was in charge is an intriguing viewpoint.
From this week’s reading, the notion about literacy among ancient Egyptians certainly has fascinated me. Papurus Anastasi says, “In society where literacy was rare, the ability to read and write most have seemed almost magical itself. All written words had power so all authors might acquire a reputation for knowledge” (49). Because common people firmly believed in magic and the gods, ability to read and write, which can be seen as a totally normal thing, was perceived as “the words of god.” Also, it was interesting to see that literate was equivalent to having magical powers, and so both the scribe and priests were highly respected. However, I also see a downfall of this situation: because priests were believed to be magical, they were able to amass huge wealth from religion donations. It surely is possible that they might have abused their authority to use in worldly ways. It eventually broadens out to unfairness in Egypt where only few people were privileged, actually over-privileged, over everyone else.
ReplyDeleteI do not have a religion, but I have seen many religious fanatics; those who truly believe in God, and everything that happen in the world is God’s will. Egyptians are worse, or are just alike those of today. Though understandable, because the stories of all those deities that explain the natural phenomenon sounded very convincing without the scientific technologies and knowledge to explain them otherwise, I cannot help but think it is awkward how the religion in Egypt was so powerful. And simultaneously, so were the priests. They believed (some still do today) in word such as magic, in a society where magician and priests had power, supported by their pharaohs. They were believed to speak the words of Gods, as their messengers, whom the ‘normal’ people sought the wise words for their good being that they believed to have come from the Gods. Also by not allowing the normal people into the temples, not abling them to see the religious practices of the priests and magicians, they were able to maintain their status as somewhat magical and untouchable. Not only the limited access for commoners into the temple helped the priests maintain their status but also the ability to write and read did, just like what happened during the Dark Age in the Medieval Era, when church burnt all the books and made the commoners illiterate. With less ability to read, and thus understanding the world and matters in general, they would believe more in some things that are otherwise ridiculous, such as magic and all the myths.
ReplyDeleteThe writings on Padineit’s tomb shows us a unique characteristic of Egyptian religion. A small fraction of his titles are as followed: “noble, prince,…sem-priest, prophet of Ptah and servant of Horus wer-wagety,…great governor of Neteret and prophet of Horus of Pe, governor of the city, judge of the gate, and vizier Padineit…” In just this fragment of the complete inscription, you have a variety of positions held by this one man. What’s so special about this though is the fact that they both include the religious and secular. In fact, Donadoni points out that there was no clear distinction between the two. On one side, texts tell us about certain rituals they performed such as changing the clothing on the statues of their deities and re-adorning them daily. They also went to great lengths to preserve their purity such as “[shaving] their bodies all over every other day” and “[bathing] in cold water twice a day and twice every night” (Herodotus, 2.37.2-5). These customs bear resemblance to those of contemporary religions for example when Catholic priests washing their hands before commencing the Eucharistic ceremony. Then on the other hand, we get these same figures side-by-side military and civil descriptions. One of the religious titles a general by the name of Potasimto had acquired was “great warrior, lord of triumph” (Donadoni 138) which further proves that both seemed to overlap easily. Some temples were even in charge of economy-related duties. As one can see in the case of Montuemhet, his rank among the priests could have possibly provided a jumping board for a career in the political world. Another activity Egyptian priest took part in was playing a role in the justice department. “People with minor legal disagreements went to the gate of the temple, where a priest, or priests, rapidly resolved the issue” (Donadoni 145). Egyptian priests not only carried out rituals in their temples but they also were able to be part of other aspects of society such as in combat serving Pharaoh, politics, and as a substitute for a judge. The combination of religion and secular posts overall is an odd concept especially in today’s society where it’s usually one or the other.
ReplyDeleteAlways being one to enjoy writing, and the culture sounding “the writer,” I found our research on scribes and the scribal studies to be very interesting. The idea that has caught my interest the most, perhaps, is the esteem and admiration awarded to the scribes. Telling nearly anyone that I’m majoring in English at New York University has always been followed by a, “why?” or “what can of job can you even get with that?” In Ancient Egypt, however, the scribe is the barer of God’s word, a paradigm of intelligence, and an upstanding citizen. I have chosen the following excerpt to showcase “scribedom” as the ultimate career and as “an avenue toward social advancement:”
ReplyDelete"The scribe of superior intellect, with sound advice, over whose utterances there is rejoicing when they are heard, so skilled on God’s Words that there is nothing of which he is ignorant…. the first of his colleagues and foremost among his associates; a leader of his class like whom there is none; of whom an example is made for every young man, one who has advanced through his own efforts and whom his fingers have aggrandized; a precocious child who has attained his maturity, versed in intellectual pursuits and astute because of them; discreet in his character, one beloved in people's hearts and not rebuffed; whose friendship one longs for and never gets tired of; who bestirs himself in inscribing blank sheets of papyrus; youthful, of distinguished appearance and pleasant demeanor, who can interpret difficult passages in past records just as the one who wrote them, whose every utterance is so steeped in honey that hearts are restored thereby as through a ready potion..." (100-101).
This passage seems to portray all of the characteristics in which scribes are customarily granted: intellect, wisdom, social power, diligence, and a great fondness for their craft. Phrases like “nothing of which he is ignorant” and “the scribe of superior intellect, with sound advice,” showcase that wisdom; and the scribe’s innate ability to recognize and record those societal systems and ideals in a way that others cannot. “A leader of his class like whom there is none” illustrates the status granted upon scribes; their high authority and social supremacy endowed on behalf of their writing abilities. This passage also gives word on the challenges involved in becoming a scribe, describing the writer as mature, but also one whom “attained his maturity” through the difficult and rigorous training (so the scribe is also hardworking enough to achieve this title). Because of their hard-work and natural writing abilities, they are given to benefits of status, freedom from manual labor, they are their own bosses, and are allotted the ability to become immortal through their work. It seems to me that I would have benefited, as a writer, a lot more living in Ancient Egypt than in Contemporary America.
Although we know there was a great deal of significance to the written word and names, we are unsure of where such inspiration came from besides that from Mesopotamia. What parts of the Mesopotamian language did the Egyptians take from them and why? Does this mean that if Egyptians were to have been in greater contact with other ethnic groups outside of the Mesopotamians, they would have taken on their respective languages instead? As seen in Professor Morris' example of the horned viper and how its sign was intentionally broken up to ensure there was no cause for mischief, hieroglyphs were entirely complex in their storytelling abilities that to not know how the language developed would be a surefire crime to the linguist. As Morris said, "Writing is an exotic, restrictive form of power"; hieroglyphs were "words of the gods." The Egyptians admirably systematically and thoroughly kept records on just about everything, from tax collections to the number of those executed by the king. At the same time, it seems to be almost a shame that such comprehensive knowledge was acquired only by the minds of the few and prestigious. It brings into question what the effects would have been if all citizens were given the opportunity of schooling--that is, from the studies of other cultures, we can guess that ancient Egyptian civilization would have been far more developed (the more people know, the more inspiration there is for cultural developments) but at the same time much more prone to disorder (the more people know, the more room there is for protest and revolt), something highly frowned upon in their culture. Balance was constantly sought after in ancient Egypt, so perhaps the Egyptians viewed the esoteric aspect to knowledge as a means of achieving balance within the social hierarchy. Indeed, scribal schools were closely linked with the court, translating the state into a bureaucracy. Additionally, as mentioned in lecture, it is important to note that historians, anthropologists, archaeologists and the like are able to identify sites today where schooling occurred not by their architecture, but rather by the scraps of literary works present at the sites. In this sense, the importance of the written word is also found in its being a gateway to the past--more specifically, how cities were structured (scribes lived among the king and elite in cultural centers like Thebes) and, of course, the sanctity of writing (writing was often found on stone tablets as opposed to papyrus). This, in turn, translated to the sanctity of the spoken word: "How precious your tongue is when you speak! A single maxim issues from your mouth worth three debens" (Anastasi I 103).
ReplyDelete