From a Small Village to the Great Land of Egypt - Literature review Example

December 7, Ancient Egypt: From a Small Village to the Great Land of Egypt The hot and arid climate of Egypt affects not only present times, but also its ancient civilizations. Hassan, in the article “Desert Environment and Origins of Agriculture in Egypt,” discussed the relationship between climate, topography, and agriculture in Ancient Egypt. He argued that the dry weather of the Holocene period significantly influenced the domestication of cattle and the development of early agriculture, and that the desertification in the Sahara promoted immigration to the Nile Valley. Kemp studied the role of el-Amarna in the urbanization of Ancient Egypt in “The City of el-Amarna as a Source for the Study of Urban Society in Ancient Egypt.” In another essay, “Temple and Town in Ancient Egypt,” Kemp proposed that temples became an active shaper of towns during this time. This paper explores the economic development of Ancient Egypt that it attained through its agricultural and population expansion, which were illustrated as cultural outcomes of its religion, climate, and geology. The paleoclimate of the Sahara during the Holocene was characterized as having highly variable wet conditions with dry seasons (Hassan 64). Hassan reviewed the radiocarbon determinations of geological phenomena that had geological importance. He found out that eastern Sahara was wet during the beginning of the Holocene, while it dried out for the past 4,500 years (Hassan 64). Arid conditions occurred from 7,100 to 6,900 bp, which dried further during 4,500 bp (Hassan 64). Throughout the Late Holocene, moist season intervals happened (Hassan 65). Hassan further determined the conditions of the land from the fossils of animals. Hares lived on grassy lands, while Dorcas gazelle lived in flat dunes with stones, for instance (Hassan 65). During this time, East Sahara was arid enough to force people to live in the Nile Valley. Moreover, the climate was significantly erratic across Egypt. The variability of rainfall in Khartoum was around 34%, where rainfall reached 163 mm per year; while in Siwa, rainfall variability reached 83%, as it received 9 mm of rainfall (Hassan 69). These arid phases must have inspired the people to domesticate animals and plants, so that they could survive the unpredictable weather conditions (Hassan 69). Prehistoric studies of agricultural practices and production in Ancient Egypt revealed the planting of cereal and barley, domestication of animals, and innovation in agricultural tools during the early Holocene period, due to the effects of the changing climate on the availability of resources in Ancient Egypt. Several species of barley were recorded to be planted and harvested at around 8,000 bp (Hassan 68). Hassan described the planting of wild cereals too, which was related to the discovery of grinding stones and sickle blades in the Nile Valley (63). Domesticated cereal grains were dated at 18,000 bp (Hassan 63). Because of the severe drought in the east Sahara, Hassan asserted that the domestication of cattle happened 12,000 to 8,000 years ago (Hassan 64). From the 7th to the 6th Millennium, evidence of cattle and goats were collected in Ti-n-Torha North (Hassan 68). Hassan concluded that the domestication of cattle and the development of agriculture was a result of the cultural adjustment to arid and variable weather conditions in Egypt (68-69). Despite the development of agriculture, hunting continued, since the variability of rain did not provide full assurance of food source. Hassan hypothesized the emergence of “mixed extractive-productive economy” (70) from the existence of bows and microliths in the Neolithic settlements (Hassan 70). Hassan supported the argument of Clark that the Neolithic Saharan people combined hunting and gathering with planting to survive their erratic weather circumstances (70). They were seasonally mobile with a diverse diet (Hassan 70). Their groups were small, at around 25 to 75 individuals (Hassan 70). Hassan pointed out that as the land deteriorated further in the Sahara, many people went to the Nile Valley to start the great civilization of Egypt. The desertification of the environment promoted the immigration to the Nile Valley. The earliest dated time of Neolithic settlements was around 7,000 to 6,000 bp (Hassan 70). The mobile patterns of nomadic settlers and early communications indicated a strong preference to live in the Nile Valley, where rains and water resources were more reliable (Hassan 70). Instead of arguing that agriculture independently developed in the Nile, Hassan maintained that the developers of the Nile came from neighboring communities. Like other archeologists, he supported the thesis that these people started and came in small groups. To support his claims further, Hassan described the similarities in the artifacts of pottery, hunting tools, and jewelry between Neolithic communities in Nile and those in eastern Sahara (71). Hence, the immigration of the people to the Nile was a reaction to their climate and geological constraints. To delve in further into the daily life of Ancient Egyptians requires making inferences from tomb paintings, reliefs, and tomb objects that they used in everyday existence Artifacts from some towns that have been excavated and hundreds of documents of ancient Egyptians provided additional information also. The nuclear family was the basic social unit of Ancient Egypt. The father attended to the economic welfare of the family, while the mother managed the household and took care of their children (“Daily Life”). Egyptian children played with toys, but they were mostly prepared for their roles and responsibilities as adults (“Daily Life”). For instance, the sons of craftsmen acted as apprentices to their fathers, while privileged children were often educated to be scribes and officers (“Daily Life”). Ancient Egyptians adorned their normally plain clothing with intricate costume jewelry. Both men and women used jewelry like “earrings, bracelets, anklets, rings, and beaded necklaces” (“Daily Life”). They designed their jewelry with precious gems, such as “amethyst, garnet, jasper, onyx, turquoise, and lapis lazuli as well as copper, gold, and shells” (“Daily Life”). The Egyptians were superstitious and had many forms of amulets. Cosmetics were included in Egyptian attire, but served personal and medical purposes too (“Daily Life”). Oils and creams protected them from the sun and arid winds. Green and black eye paint was possibly the most distinguishing of the Egyptian cosmetics (“Daily Life”). These make-ups both have hygiene and ornamental functions (“Daily Life”). Hence, the lives of Ancient Egyptians had traditional social structures, while they used objects for diverse beliefs and functions. Aside from agriculture, the development of Ancient Egypt as a great civilization can also be rooted from its religious centers. The Egyptian theology during the New Kingdom combined universalism and pantheism, although the people generally believed that the statues representing their gods bore the latter’s powers (Kemp 658). Temples were made to house and feed these gods, and so the priests had economic sources too (Kemp 658). In essence, the gods became “landed nobility” with permanent and variable sources of income (Kemp 658). The temples owned cultivated land, which may be as far as 200 miles away, and their development depended on slave labor (Kemp 658). New Kingdom temples might have practiced share-cropping systems with fifty-fifty allocation of produce (Kemp 658). The Wilbour Papyrus provides evidence of large numbers of land tracts that belonged to temples, which were cultivated by different social classes, from farmers to viziers (Kemp 658). Kemp explored papyrus writings that suggested that temples had access to minerals, such as gold, metals, and precious stones (Kemp 658). Temples had other agricultural holdings too, such as cattle and other agricultural products (Kemp 658). The management of these temples and its payment of taxes may differ across Ancient Egypt, although Kemp hypothesized that temples paid taxes on farmed grain (659). The direct manager of the temples vary because at times, the vizier was the overseer, while for other communities, titled officials administered them (Kemp 659). Clearly, the temples were active economic centers or supporters. They were employers of workers, including permanent administration and production workforce, and active traders (Kemp 661). As centers or supporters of economic activity, temples provided “motive for settlement” among its employees and traders (Kemp 661). Dispersed settlements might have also mushroomed from dealing with the economic activities of temples, aside from its religious happenings (Kemp 661). Kemp discussed the evidence for two kinds of scenarios for temples. On the one hand, it served as the “foundation on a hitherto non-urban site” and where it served as the main or singular reason of the establishment of a settlement (Kemp 661). On the other hand, it can be a part of the community that had other economic purposes (Kemp 661). The royal mortuary temple fitted the first scenario, from the evidence of grid layout that allowed fast expansion for a growing population in Kahun during the Twelfth Dynasty (Kemp 661). From this example, it is shown that temples provided a strong economic incentive for expansion from a town to a great civilization. The religious practices of Ancient Egyptians are related to its cultural and religious beliefs. Ancient Egyptians strongly believed in the afterlife and spent their lifetime preparing for it. Pharaohs constructed the most expensive tombs, accumulated the most complicated funerary equipment, and were mummified in the most luxurious process (“Funerary Customs”). Ordinary people used part of their incomes to prepare for their death too (“Funerary Customs”). However different their incomes and social status were, they thought of the afterlife as the glorified version of their realities (“Funerary Customs”). The Egyptians considered that all people had a ba, or soul, and a ka, an “invisible twin of the deceased person,” which escapes the body after they die (“Ancient Egypt: Burial Customs”). The ba visited family and friends and the ka went back and forth from the earth to the underworld (“Ancient Egypt”). For people to live eternally, the ba and the ka had to distinguish the body when they went back to it every night (“Ancient Egypt”). The procedure of mummification was a critical practice for the Ancient Egyptians because it ensured the survival of the spirit, hence, promising an everlasting life (“Ancient Egypt:”). To guard the spirit of the deceased, scenes and inscriptions were added on the coffins and the walls of tombs (“Funerary Customs”). These texts mostly adapted the myth about the death of Osiris and had spells to shelter the deceased on his or her hazardous journey to the underworld (“Funerary Customs”). People called shabtis acted as servants for the dead (“Funerary Customs”). The last step in the journey to the afterlife was the judgment by Osiris, god of the underworld, through the ritual called the “Weighing of the Heart” (“Funerary Customs”). If a person had lived an upright life, he or she would be judged as worthy of never-ending life (“Funerary Customs”). Because of this belief, numerous spells and rituals were intended to guarantee a good judgment (“Funerary Customs”). From these town settlements, the great Egyptian Kingdom arose. The New Kingdom is comprised of the Eighteenth to the Twentieth Dynasties, after Ahmose ejected the Hyksos and reunified the country. The New Kingdom was described as an age of prosperity in Egypt. Kemp studied the city of el-Amarna and its urban characteristics. He argued that this city signified changes in urbanism, away from tightly packed towns that preceded it (Kemp 126). Kemp noted the homogeneity of types of houses, mostly one-storey in height, for both rich and poor Egyptians (126). Identical housing units were also excavated at Deir el-Medina at Western Thebes (Kemp 127). The whole community of el-Amarna expanded outwards, instead of upwards, as less affluent members might have sold off their properties (Kemp 127). Despite the similarities in housing units, detailed diversity in scale, room arrangements, and ancillary buildings were found (Kemp 127). These differences could be correlated with personal preferences, social class, and social relationships (Kemp 127). Thus, urban revival came with expansion through simple settlements, but with variations that still had class distinctions. Ancient Egypt started small, but transformed into a great civilization through the domestication of animals and plants. Agriculture provided revenues that allowed people to own and cultivate lands. Trade also helped, while hunting continued. In terms of religious practices, Ancient Egyptians believed in gods and aimed for their protection. These people dedicated their lives to preparing for their afterlife. Moreover, religion played a key role in organizing and influencing economic life. Thus, from these interconnected dimensions, Ancient Egyptians arose to build one of the greatest civilizations in human history. Works Cited “Ancient Egypt: Burial Customs.” The Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago. 2012. Web. 4 Dec. 2012. . “Daily Life.” Carnegie Museum of Natural History. 2012. Web. 4 Dec. 2012. . “Funerary Customs.” Carnegie Museum of Natural History. 2012. Web. 4 Dec. 2012. . Hassan, Fekri A. “Desert Environment and Origins of Agriculture in Egypt.” Norwegian Archaeological Review 19.2 (1986): 63-76. Print. Kemp, Barry J. “Temple and Town in Ancient Egypt.” 657-680. Print. ---. “The City of el-Amarna as a Source for the Study of Urban Society in Ancient Egypt.” 123-139. Print. Read More