Mummy's Wrap

A Scribe's Scribbles About Ancient Egypt
  • .: Welcome to the Mummy’s Wrap! :.

    Here you can find articles about the wonders of ancient Egypt. From the ancient gods and goddesses to the everyday life of the ancient citizens, everything can be found here! Learn how to wrap a mummy, study the pharaohs of old, and discover the medicines of the ancients. Don't see something you want to know? Feel free to Ask the Scribe!
  • .: Find the Scribe :.

  • .: Search the Wrap :.

  • A Condensed History of the Dakhleh Oasis – Part 2

    Posted By on January 25, 2012

    Neolithic (7200-2500 BC)

    Like the Nile Valley, the Dakhleh Oasis sported some of the oldest evidence of civilization. Three cultures appear in the archaeological record through this period. The first is the Masara culture. The second are the two Bashendi cultures, Bashendi A and B. The third is the Sheikh Muftah culture, which extends into the Nile Valley period of the Old Kingdom.

    The Masara culture appears to be nomadic, the archaeological record consisting only of some small stone rings and lithic scatters. The stone rings are interpreted as the bases of huts. After the Masara culture disappears, there is a gap in the archaeological record of five hundred years before the next culture, the Bashendi culture, appears.[1]

    There are a number of petroglyphs in the Dakhleh Oasis, and though they are difficult to date, they are attributed to the Neolithic in general. Many of these petroglyphs, or carved rock art, are unidentifiable, while others show people, anthropomorphic images, and animals. Some of these animals are indicative of the climate in the predynastic periods, such as the giraffe.[2] There are also bovine figures, indicating either domesticates or wild herds.[3] These petroglyph sites are occasionally related to artifacts or structures, such as sites with potsherds, lithic artifacts, and shelters.[4]

    The earliest cultural materials found in Dakhleh date from approximately 6000 B.C., however there is a break of a few hundred years of cultural data around 4800 B.C. and could indicate two unique cultures occupying Dakhleh at different times.[5] These two cultures, known as Bashendi A and Bashendi B are different also in their cultural patterns. The Bashendi A culture appears to have nomadic indicators. The sites attributed to Bashendi A are mostly lithic scatters with the occasional hearth. A few Bashendi A sites include stone slab structures. These have been identified as hut foundations.[6] The lithics used include bifaces such as arrowheads, knives, and scrapers, though the latter two items were fewer in number. Grinding stones were also found, indicating a knowledge of grain-based food production. Items such as beads, shells, and labrets, a type of body jewelry, were also found. Very few ceramics are attested to this time period, and most of those pieces that have been found are of a non-local manufacture, indicating trade. The few local ceramics that have been found are fired, thick-walled vessels, often without decoration. Those vessels that were decorated sported geometric designs.[7]

    The Bashendi B culture is much the same, though concentrated in a smaller area within the oasis than the Bashendi A culture, and with evidence they may have engaged in animal husbandry. In addition to these differences, the pottery production seems to focus on thinner walled vessels, though the designs are the same.[8] These two cultures are so distinctly similar, yet are separated by a few hundred years, which prompted scientists to classify them as A and B, indicating they are the same culture but different time periods.[9]

    The culture following Bashendi B is known as Sheikh Muftah. Bashendi B and Sheikh Muftah both coincide with Neolithic periods Badarian and the Naqada periods in the Nile Valley, whereas Bashendi A is unique with no contemporary culture in the Nile Valley.[10] The Sheikh Muftah period is identified by shale-tempered pottery wares and works from Hierakonpolis.[11]



    [1] Bard, Kathryn A. Encyclopedia of the Archaeology of Ancient Egypt. New York: Routledge, 1999. p. 268.

    [2] Butzer, Karl W. “Desert Environments” The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt (e-reference edition). Ed. Donald B. Redford. Oxford University Press. University of Memphis Libraries. 29 November 2011. http://www.oxford-ancientegypt.com/entry?entry=t176.e0183.

    [3] Kuciewicz, Ewa. “Section 1. Petroglyphs” in Dakhleh Oasis Project Prehistory Group: 2008 Final Report. 2008. p.2

    [4] Kuciewicz, Ewa. “Section 1. Petroglyphs.” p. 3.

    [5] Warfe, Ashten R. “Cultural Origins of the Egyptian Neolithic and Predynastic: An Evaluation of the Evidence from the Dakhleh Oasis (South Central Egypt)” in The African Archaeological Review Vol. 29. Springer, 2003. p. 178.

    [6] Warfe, Ashten R. “Cultural Origins of the Egyptian Neolithic and Predynastic…” p. 179.

    [7] Warfe, Ashten R. “Cultural Origins of the Egyptian Neolithic and Predynastic…” p. 180-182.

    [8] Warfe, Ashten R. “Cultural Origins of the Egyptian Neolithic and Predynastic…” p. 182-183.

    [9] Warfe, Ashten R. “Cultural Origins of the Egyptian Neolithic and Predynastic…” p. 178.

    [10] Warfe, Ashten R. “Cultural Origins of the Egyptian Neolithic and Predynastic…” p. 179.

    [11] Warfe, Ashten R. “Cultural Origins of the Egyptian Neolithic and Predynastic…” p. 193.

    Be the first to like.

    That's a Wrap!

    Questions? E-mail the Scribe!
    Share

    A Condensed History of the Dakhleh Oasis – Part 1

    Posted By on January 18, 2012

    Introduction

    Often overlooked by the mainstream, the oases in the Western Desert of Egypt offer a unique view to the history of ancient Egypt. The history of the oases parallels the history of the Nile Valley, but there is a more rustic view. Of the oases, the Dakhleh Oasis, one of the furthest oases from the Nile Valley, shines as an archaeological star, presenting to the world an almost uninterrupted chronology of ancient Egypt stretching from the Predynastic period through modern times. This paper will touch upon each ancient Egyptian era until the Graeco-Roman period, bringing together a number of sources, but focusing mostly on the archaeological records supplied by the scientists working in Dakhleh.

    Two teams of archaeologists currently work in Dakhleh. Monash University in Australia excavates at the sites of Deir Abu Metta, Muzawwaqa, Ismant el-Kharab or ancient Kellis, and Mut el-Kharab.[1] New York University (NYU) has recently taken over the American work in Dakhleh from Columbia University.[2] NYU is excavating the sites Amheida and Ain el-Gedida. The archaeological site records produced by both these institutions were invaluable to the following research.

    Before it is possible to view a snapshot of ancient Egyptian history through the lens of the Dakhleh Oasis, the oases must be first examined from the perspective of the Nile Valley, albeit briefly. When viewing the entirety of Egypt from afar, the oases are undoubtedly part of the realm of Egypt. To the Egyptians of the oases, they view themselves as Egyptians. From the viewpoint of the ancient Egyptians of the Nile Valley, the oases were beyond the backwater part of Egypt, closer to the chaotic realm of the desert, something most ancient Egyptians feared as the realm of Seth.[3] Indeed, one of the greatest differences between the Nile Valley and the oasis is the deities worshipped. While the people of the oasis recognized the more mainstream deities such as Amun and Thoth, they added to their particular deities Seth and Tutu, the latter a Graeco-Roman god not associated at all with the Nile Valley. Both Seth and Tutu were protective deities to the Egyptians of the oasis; a sensible role for both deities as the people of the oasis needed protection from the ever-encroaching desert.[4]

    The following research will be presented in chronological order from the Neolithic period through the Graeco-Roman period. Each period will be touched upon briefly. This will be a short overview only, with only the barest of descriptions from each time period. There is enough information, even when it is scant, as it is during the Middle and New Kingdoms, to write an entire book, a project best kept for later.



    [3] Mills, Anthony J. “Western Desert” The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt (e-reference edition). Ed. Donald B. Redford. Oxford University Press. University of Memphis Libraries. 24 November 2011. http://www.oxford-ancientegypt.com/entry?entry=t176.e0767.

    [4] Mills, Anthony J. “Western Desert.”

    1 person likes this post.

    That's a Wrap!

    Questions? E-mail the Scribe!
    Share

    Patrons, Prayers, and Piety: Part 12

    Posted By on November 30, 2011

    Conclusion

    The theory of increasing piety in the Ramesside period is a difficult topic considering the number of assumptions that must be made. The first assumption is that piety can be defined from the standpoint of an ancient Egyptian. Piety, and religion, for that matter, is a complicated term in the modern sense, and to compound thousands of years of history to the term adds to the complexity of defining it. Looking at the physical evidence, there is evidence of piety, but the increase of piety is more difficult to ascertain.

    There is an increase in the evidence of piety during the Ramesside period, but even this is fraught with variables. It is possible to compare the number of such things as votive stelae from the Ramesside period to previous periods. Such variables in this case could include the number of literates, as there was likely an increase in literacy in the Ramesside period. Another variable would be the location of these stelae, whether they were found in one general location, such as Upper Egypt, or not. Should they be located only in one area, it may be that other stelae were not so well preserved, or they never existed.


    From the Predynastic period onward, the ancient Egyptian religion grew and evolved, becoming more and more complex as time passed. When scrutinizing the events leading up to the Ramesside period, specifically the events of Akhenaten’s reign and religious revolution, it is easy to assume an increase in piety. After Akhenaten’s reign, representations of deities increased in the mortuary aspect of the religion and more people had access to the gods. While this increase was possibly the result of natural religious evolution, it appears, however, that there was a greater increase than the result of simple evolution. Due to a number of factors during the reign of Akhenaten, ideas about religion changed, from the fear of the gods abandoning Egypt to the ability to procure a favorite or a patron deity. This research then indicates that there was an increase in piety during the Ramesside period, both as a result of natural religious evolution and from the memories of the Atenist time period.


    Bibliography

    Assmann, Jan. Of God and Gods: Egypt Israel, and the Rise of Monotheism. University of
        Wisconsin Press. Madison: 2008.

    Assmann, Jan. Trans. David Lorton. The Search for God in Ancient Egypt. Cornell University
        Press. New York: 2001.

    Assmann, Jan. Trans. Anthony Alcock. Egyptian Solar Religion in the New Kingdom: Re, Amun
        and the Crisis of Polytheism. Kegan Paul International. New York: 1995.

    Hornung, Erik trans. David Lorton. “Akhenaten and the Religion of Light.” Cornell University
    Press, Ithica; 1999.

    Ikram, Salima. Death and Burial in Ancient Egypt. Pearson Education. 2003.

    Kemp, Barry. “The Amarna Workmen’s Village in Retrospect” in The Journal of Egyptian
    Archaeology. Vol. 73. Egypt Exploration Society: 1987. pp. 21-50.

    Lichtheim, Miriam. Ancient Egyptian Literature: The New Kingdom. UCLA Press. 2006.

    Foster, John L. Hymns, Prayers, and Songs: An Anthology of Ancient Egyptian Lyric Poetry.
    Society for Biblical Literature. Georgia: 1995.

    “Morality.” Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary. 2011. <http://www.merriam-webster.com/
    dictionary/morality>

    Morenz, Siegfried. Trans. Ann E. Keep. Egyptian Religion. Cornell University Press. New York:    1973.

    Moret, Alexandre. Trans. M.R. Dobie. The Nile and Egyptian Civilization. Barnes and Noble.
        New York: 1972.

    Ogdon, J. R. “A Bes Amulet from the Royal Tomb of Akhenaten at El-‘Amarna” in The Journal
        of Egyptian Archaeology. Vol. 67. Egypt Exploration Societh: 1981. pp. 178-179.

    Petrie, W. F. Religions and Conscience in Ancient Egypt. Benjamin Blom, Inc. London: 1898.    New York: 1972

    Petrie, W. F. Religious Life in Ancient Egypt. Cooper Square Publishers, Inc. New York, 1991.

    “Piety.” Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary. 2011. <http://www.merriam-webster.com/
    dictionary/piety>

    Reeves, Nicholas. Akhenaten: Egypt’s False Prophet. Thames and Hudson. New York: 2001.

    Richards, Janet E. Society and Death in Ancient Egypt: Mortuary Landscapes of the Middle
        Kingdom. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge; 2005.

    Shafer, Byron E. Religion in Ancient Egypt: Gods, Myths, and Personal Practice. Cornell
        University Press: 1991.

    Shaw, Ian. The Oxford History of Ancient Egypt. Oxford University Press. Oxford: 2000.

    Silverman, David P. Ancient Egypt. Oxford University Press. New York: 1997.

    Szpakoska, Kasia. Daily Life in Ancient Egypt. Blackwell. Massachusetts: 2008.

    Stevens, Anna. “Domestic Religious Practices” in UCLA Encyclopedia of Egyptology.
    Wendrich, Willeke and Jacco Dieleman. 2009. <http://escholarship.org/uc/item/7s07628w>

    Wildinson, Richard H. The Complete Gods and Goddesses of Ancient Egypt. Thames and
    Hudson. New York: 2003.

    Wagenvoort, Hendrik. Pietas: Selected studies in Roman religion. The Netherlands: n.p., 1980.
    7-12.

    Be the first to like.

    That's a Wrap!

    Questions? E-mail the Scribe!
    Share

    Patrons, Prayers, and Piety: Part 11

    Posted By on November 23, 2011

    Putting a god into one’s heart

    One of the most compelling pieces of evidence that there was a rise in personal piety comes from Jan Assmann. According to Assmann, the aspect of god in the Ramesside period cannot be defined as merely a cosmic deity, nor as a personal deity, but one that is both. The gods were cosmic, but they also served the basic needs of the people (Assman, 1995; 191). In this way, at least, the religion had changed, allowing for an increased number of people to become pious. A good number of individual blessings are found dating to the Ramesside period, solidifying this theory (Assman, 1995; 192). During the Ramesside period, individuals would form a special affinity for a certain deity and would express that attraction in prayers inscribed on stelae and on tomb walls. This formula was to “put god X into one’s heart” or “walking (or acting) on the water of god X” (Assmann, 2008; 80). The history of this formula has its origins in the First Intermediate Period when a king and an official would form a new bond. The official would “put the pharaoh into his heart” showing loyalty to that monarch (Assmann, 2008; 80).

    The patronage of deities was not relegated to the royal or elite classes. As seen in the battle of Kadesh, Ramses II became surrounded by the enemy, and, acting through divine intervention, Ramses II’s troops deliver him safely from his plight (Assmann, 1996; 242). Though Ramses II works under the guidance of Amen, as was common throughout the Middle and early New Kingdoms, a change is perceived when in regards to the common soldiers. These men were also acting under the guidance of Amen, a type of divine intervention not seen in previous periods (Assmann, 1996; 242-243).


    This idea of a patron deity, a remnant from the Amarna period as seen earlier, allowed the ancient Egyptians to protect themselves against misfortune. Whereas for many cultures misfortune was the result of an angered deity to be appeased, the ancient Egyptians viewed misfortune as stemming from chaos or evil (Assmann, 1996; 239). Assmann’s statement here of a deity being consulted to reverse or prevent misfortune not of a deific nature is contradictory to a prayer seen earlier when a blind man from Deir el-Medina seeks to make peace with the god Ptah, whom he had angered by falsely swearing fealty to that god (Lichtheim, 2006; 109). Assmann is thus unaware of prayers attempting to placate angered deities or chooses to ignore that information.

    Be the first to like.

    That's a Wrap!

    Questions? E-mail the Scribe!
    Share

    Patrons, Prayers, and Piety: Part 10

    Posted By on November 16, 2011

    Piety in the Popular Religion


    Every aspect of the ancient Egyptian life was infused with religion, and religion was infused with magic (Szpakowska, 2008; 123). Small shrines have been found in common households throughout Egypt, as well as cultic images of protective deities (Szpakowska, 2008; 125). Petrie sheds more light on what these shrines could have looked like: small niches carved into the west walls of the main household hallway, often painted with sacred images. These niches are dated, according to Petrie, to the New Kingdom, seen mostly in the Ramesseum and Tell el-Amarna (Petrie, 1972; 34). The shrines were home to figurines representative of gods and goddesses associated with the household, such as the protective deities Tawaret and Bes. Amulets were also made in the likeness of protective deities and symbols, often worn by individuals (Szpakowska, 2008; 125).


    Rituals or spells were common amongst the populace, though knowledge of the correct words and motions was required for these to be effective (Szpakowska, 2008; 130). These spells required, not only words and motions, but ritual figurines and generic objects, as well (Szpakowska, 2008; 131). Everyday artifacts were also used in ritual context during the daily lives of the ancient Egyptians (Szpakowska, 2008; 133-135). Cups, lamps, and mirrors all had ritualistic as well as functional aspects to them. Many of these objects were available to all Egyptians, making them a common part of religious rituals within ancient Egypt (Szpakowska, 2008; 135).

    Be the first to like.

    That's a Wrap!

    Questions? E-mail the Scribe!
    Share