Here is my paper that I wrote for my Ancient Near Eastern History class I had this semester. I really enjoyed the class and enjoyed writing this paper.

More Than Just A Myth: The Existence Of Sodom And Gomorrah  

When it comes to Old Testament stories, many people find a detachment between the Bible and archaeology – especially with the more unbelievable stories. The account of Sodom and Gomorrah is a tale that many people see as a myth rather than historically accurate. The idea of fire and brimstone raining down from heaven to destroy wicked cities is far-fetched and unbelievable. However, as new discoveries are being made in archaeology every day, the evidence for proving the historicity of biblical events are coming more and more into the light. “Archaeologists often find themselves hooted and hollered out of town when they first suggest things like, ‘I found Troy,’ or, ‘Look we have found Sodom and Gomorrah. But history has shown, that, in fact, the more you dig, the more you find. It’s amazing how accurate the Bible sometimes turns out to be.”[1]

The reason the biblical account of Sodom and Gomorrah is so hard to believe is because of the way the cities were destroyed. Also, the lack of archaeological proof over the years caused many scholars to believe that the cities never even existed, and that they were just fictional cities. However, recent archaeological evidence has come to light showing that the cities could have very well existed. The most prominent archaeological find for the existence of Sodom and Gomorrah are the sites of Bab Edh-Dhra and Numeira. “Taken in conjunction with our archaeological survey of the southern Dead Sea valley, the Bab ed-Dra fortress and camp provide us for the first time with a chronological basis for fixing the date of the destruction of the Early Bronze culture of Sodom and Gomorrah, so vividly recounted in Genesis 19.”[2] Even though other archaeologists and scholars have had their theories on the location of these sinful cities, none of the discoveries tie in with Sodom and Gomorrah as well as Bab Edh-Dhra and Numeira do. The location of the cities, the date, the archaeological evidence, and the fact these cities were destroyed at the same time, makes them the most likely candidates for being the sin cities of Sodom and Gomorrah.

Bab Edh-Dhra has undergone frequent excavations throughout the last century, and scholars have found that it was one of the largest civilizations that flourished during the Early Bronze Age. “The results of this [Bab Edh-Dhra] and numerous other expeditions made by the writer into the Jordan Valley have definitively established the correctness of the very early Biblical tradition that the valley was very prosperous and densely peopled when Abraham came into the country.”[3] William F. Albright led the first expedition into the Jordan Valley in 1924, and there they discovered the momentous find of a large city that once inhabited the land. However, excavations on the area did not occur until the 1960s when Paul W. Lapp led teams to uncover the secrets of the land. The expedition by Albright in 1924 led to the discovery of hundreds of pieces of pottery that dated to the Early Bronze age, while Lapp’s excavations uncovered numerous cemeteries. However, “One problem left unanswered by Lapp: If Bab Edh-Dhra is Sodom, where is Gomorrah?”[4]

Eight years after the discovery of the mass tombs at Bab Edh-Dhra by Paul Lapp, excavations were made to further uncover the secrets of this great city and to see if a sister city could be found. Walter Rast and Thomas Schaub led this excavation in 1973, and they discovered something amazing – the sister city Numeira. “The second site at which work has been conducted by the expedition is Numeira, located 13 km south and slightly southwest of Bab Edh-Dhra.”[5] The discovery of Numeira adds support to the theory that these are the modern sites for the wickedest cities mentioned in the Bible. The pieces to the puzzle seem to be falling into place as Bab Edh-Dhra and Numeira are looking more and more like the cities of sin mentioned in the Old Testament.

Another thing about Bab Edh-Dhra and Numeira that match up with the Biblical text is the date and location of the cities. Both of these are very important for archaeologists because it could mean the difference to finding a treasure or not. If these two cities were indeed Sodom and Gomorrah than their date and location would match the Biblical story. Bab Edh-Dhra and Numeira are both dated to the Early and Middle Bronze ages, which runs from about 3200 to 1550 BCE. It was Albright’s discovery of the pottery in Bab Edh-Dhra that gives us this date, “Albright himself wrote a very significant short piece on pottery from the site, identifying it for the first time as a site from the Early Bronze age. And that became very important for all subsequent work.”[6] Most scholars agree that there is evidence of Abraham living during this time, “Such stories [Patriarchal narratives] and many others—stories that have no parallels in the Mosaic tradition or in later Israel—actually do contain correct reminisces of the Bronze Age.”[7]

There is an artifact that was discovered that has helped to place the location of the cities of the plain mentioned in Genesis 13:12. A mosaic map was found in Madaba in 1884, but the item was reported and than left to collect dust until in 1896 when it was found in the remains of the ancient church when the new one was being completed. The Madaba map is a one of a kind because it is, “the only extant cartographical representation of ancient Palestine…”[8] The map is intricately detailed showing many of the civilizations that once prospered in ancient Palestine, as well as places mentioned in the Bible such as Lot’s cave. One of the most interesting places on the map that can be clearly seen is the location of the city of Zoar, which is the same city Lot fled to when fleeing Sodom. However, Lot did not stay in the city, “Then Lot went up out of Zoar and dwelt in the mountains, and his two daughters were with him; for he was afraid to dwell in Zoar. And he and his two daughters dwelt in a cave” (Genesis 19:30 [NKJV]). The location of Lot’s cave and the city Zoar on the map are exactly where the Biblical account places them on “the southern end of the Dead Sea.”[9] “Jewish tradition…as well as Christian sources place Biblical Zoar at the south end of the Dead Sea and connect it with the area of Sodom.”[10]

The location of Zoar on the Madaba map was the thing that encouraged expeditions in the area to search for the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah. Albright searched the site of Zoar portrayed on the Madaba map, but he didn’t find anything of importance that the site was the Biblical city and came up with a theory on the subject. “In Roman, Byzantine, and Arabic times there was a little city, which still bore the ancient name Zoar, near the Seil el-Qurahi, at the southern end of the sea; its site, which we examined and sounded, exhibits no traces of pre-Christian occupation. It follows, of course, since the situation of Zoar in the extreme south is testified by several Biblical passages, that the later site, at the foot of hills, lies upstream from the Biblical site, and that the latter, like the former oasis of the Seil en-Numeirah, has been buried by the advancing waters of the Dead Sea.”[11] Despite the possible covering of Zoar by the Dead Sea, it did not stop the discovery of what could very well be the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah.

There are many archaeological connections found in Bab Edh-Dhra and Numeira for people to believe that they are the modern sites for Sodom and Gomorrah. One comparison that is made between the Biblical account of Sodom and Gomorrah and the sites at Bab Edh-Dhra and Numeira, is the prosperity of the cities. The Biblical text portrays the cities of the plain to be like Egypt – which was a large, prosperous civilization at that time. “And Lot lifted his eyes and saw all the plain of Jordan, that it was well watered everywhere (before the Lord destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah) like the garden of the Lord, like the land of Egypt as you go toward Zoar” (Genesis 13:10). The archaeological finds at Bab Edh-Dhra show that it was one of the largest cities during its time, “As a result of this season’s work [the 1970 excavations], it seems that the most impressive urban period at Bab Edh-Dhra was EB III.”[12] Other places during this age had well-established civilizations, but it was uncommon in the Jordan Valley.

Rast and Schaub who excavated the area in the 70’s saw that the location went through three different periods, which run from the Early Bronze I to Early Bronze IV. “Bab Edh-Dhra experienced three principle occupational periods with sub-phases: an initial pre-urban one during EB I, followed by a lengthy urban settlement during EB II and III, and finally a post-urban period in EB IV.”[13] There are three things that determine the occupational history of the city: how long it was in use, the size of its architectural structures, and the amount of people living there. When the mass number of cemeteries and tombs found at Bab Edh-Dhra were properly dated, the results showed that the city was in existence for about 1,000 years. “Of the three paleobotanical assemblages, the one from Bab Edh-Dhra is the most instructive, not only because of the larger sample size, but also due to the fact that this assemblage spans 1000 years.”[14]

During the 1000-year span of the city of Bab Edh-Dhra, the urban period (EB II and III) was the most fruitful. “Based on the assumption that Bab Edh-Dhra could have supported 250 people per hectare…approximately 1,500 individuals may have inhabited the site at any one time in the EBII-III, and it is in EBIII (around 2550 BC) that Bab Edh-Dhra is believed to have supported the greatest number of people (Rast and Schaub, 2003).”[15] Having this large of population was uncommon in this area during the Early Bronze age, and to accommodate the population the construction of the town was also unique to its time and location. The common structures seen among a civilization of this size includes walls, houses, and cemeteries. “Although it cannot be deemed an urban center, there is abundant evidence for a number of factors associated with incipient urbanism, including increased population density, the construction of municipal and administrative buildings, the development of irrigation structures in the wadis, and a fortified town wall.”[16]

Another example of how prosperous and fruitful the five cities of the plain were that connects with the Biblical text is the bounty of the land. In Genesis 13:10 the author describes the five plain cities to be “like the garden of the Lord” which this means that there was an abundance of the land. Archaeological discoveries at Bab Edh-Dhra and Numeira give evidence for making this comparison. There were numerous plant remains found at both sites that give insight into what kind of agriculture was grown on the Jordan Valley. The plants recovered at both sites were similar, which this could give evidence for why Numeira may have been created as a sister city. “Given the proximity of the sites and the longer history of Bab Edh-Dhra, it seems reasonable to hypothesize that Numeira did not experience the gradual cultural and agricultural ‘evolution’ that Bab Edh-Dhra underwent in EB I-II, but was rather established as a satellite community of Bab Edh-Dhra during the EBIII Period, complete with a broad spectrum agricultural industry that included cereal, vegetable and fruit production.”[17] The land was flourishing when Lot decided to dwell in Sodom; however, the prosperity of the land was completely opposite of how the people were. “But the men of Sodom were exceedingly wicked and sinful against the Lord” (Genesis 13:13).

According to the Biblical text, it was this sin and wickedness that eventually brought the prosperous cities of the plain to an end. The story of God striking the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah with fire from heaven has always been seen as a myth, and has been disregarded. However, the archaeological evidence from the sites of Bab Edh-Dhra and Numeira provides the most important connection between the Biblical account and modern discovery. There was a fire that burned away parts of the cities, which is clearly seen by the burnt remains found at both sites. Surprisingly, the Bible mentions two incidents happening that brought destruction upon the cities of the plain.

First was the siege of Sodom and Gomorrah by the four kings of Mesopotamia, “Then they took all of the goods of Sodom and Gomorrah, and all their provisions, and went their way” (Genesis 14:11). The kings of Mesopotamia plundered Sodom and Gomorrah, which would have left the cities in shambles. The second account of destruction being brought on the land is Genesis 19, and the final destruction by fire and brimstone. Amazingly, the evidence uncovered at the sites of Bab Edh-Dhra and Numeira can match perfectly with the Biblical account. “It would appear to be a combination of either military siege or earthquake, which brought the towns and thriving culture of those towns to an end.”[18]

Throughout the sites of Bab Edh-Dhra and Numeira there are numerous discoveries of burnt structures, clothing, and layers of ash on the ground. Evidence for destruction by fire goes from the center of the cities out toward even the wall. “Wall 33 in field XI.2 was a solid mudbrick wall standing six courses high…Against it were layers of fallen brick and ashes.”[19] The ash inside the burn areas by the walls or in the cemeteries was found to be deep in some areas, “The ash in this burn area was 0.35 m deep at some points.”[20] Some of the most extensive burn areas are in the cemeteries, and the tombs and charnel houses are burnt either a little or completely. Just a few examples of how much burn damage there is in the cemeteries at Bab Edh-Dhra and Numeira include the charnel houses A 8, A 41, and A 22.

Charnel house A 8 had all of the bones and objects inside the house buried under a decent layer of ash, “All bones, skulls, and objects lay on the floor, or were embedded in burn layers as much as 0.20 m above the floor.”[21] The house was also found to have the most damage out of any of the other tombs, which shows the severity the fire did to it. “Evidence showed that it suffered the most severe destruction by fire of all the charnel houses excavated during 1965-67.”[22] Another charnel house that also shows how severe the fire was that destroyed Bab Edh-Dhra and Numeira is house A 41. The damage on this tomb can be clearly seen with parts of the building being charred black, “This final phase was characterized by the sizeable burn area at the doorway and over the central part of the building, which was often charcoal black, containing charred wood chunks, burnt cloth, and ashy bone and brick.”[23]

The last charnel house that has extensive fire damage to it is also the most unique and fascinating discovery found, and this is due to the way it was burned. Up until the discovery of charnel house A 22, numerous tombs had signs of burning but it was never discovered in which way they became damaged. Many people used the fact that the tombs weren’t burned from top to bottom as proof for why Bab Edh-Dhra and Numeira are not likely candidates for Sodom and Gomorrah. Because the Biblical account talks about the fire coming from heaven, so the houses should be burnt from top to bottom. However, the remarkable thing about charnel house A 22 is that it does have evidence for being burnt from the top to bottom. “The extensive burn is clear evidence of the tomb’s destruction by fire. Burning was concentrated along the interior wall in the center of both sectors, where the majority of posts and beams were uncovered. Along the south wall impressions of desiccated beams angled down toward the interior transverse wall, indicating that they had collapsed in the center across the interior wall.”[24]

After the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah the Bible does not mention what happens to the cities after that, but it would be realistic to theorize that the cities were destroyed to a degree where settlement in the area was near impossible. After the destruction of Bab Edh-Dhra and Numeira in the Early Bronze III age, there was another period after that where people tried to settle once again in the area. However, after a severe catastrophe like the one the cities went through – evidenced by the state of the tombs – it would be almost impossible to cultivate the land. It was in the Early Bronze IV age when people tried to settle in the land again, but it eventually led to them abandoning the area completely. David W. McCreery has a theory about why the people of EB IV could not continue the once thriving city, “A combination of factors probably led to the final abandonment of the EBIV settlement of Bab Edh-Dhra. Although local horticulture survived the demise of the city, the collapse of urban culture throughout the region would have had a devastating impact on intercity trade, depriving local farmers of the market for which their products were so well suited. If soil salinity was as serious a problem as it appears to have been, local farmers may have found it increasingly difficult to grow cereals, especially wheat, as well as flax and pulses, thus being forced to rely more heavily on orchard crops for subsistence.”[25]

With the archaeological evidence given here it no wonder why the modern sites of Bab Edh-Dhra and Numeira are the most likely candidates to being the Biblical sin cities of Sodom and Gomorrah. However, there is still skepticism, even among the conservative scholars, that we should never jump to conclusions. Albright even warns that it might be best if the cities are never found, “That it probably would have been best if these sites are never found because of the evil that is associated with these sites in the Biblical tradition.”[26] However, if Bab Edh-Dhra and Numeira are Sodom and Gomorrah the problems with the EB IV settlement show how far God’s wrath can go. Because the destruction of the sin cities were so immense that no one would ever be able to settle in area, or rebuild the cities, again.   

Works Cited

Ackroyd David, Fontaine Carol, Rast Walter E., and Schaub R. Thomas. History’s Mysteries: Sodom and Gomorrah, DVD. Directed by Damian Weyand (New York: History Channel, 2001).

  Albright, William F. 1974. The Archaeology of Palestine and the Bible. Cambridge: The American Schools of Oriental Research.

———. 1966. Archaeology, Historical Analogy, and Early Biblical Tradition. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press.

Avi-Yonah, Michael. 1953. The Madaba Mosaic Map: With Introduction and Commentary. Jerusalem: Hadassah Apprentice School of Printing.

McCreery, David W. 2002. “Bronze Age Agriculture in the Dead Sea Basin: The Cases of Bab Edh-Dhra, Numeira and Tell Nimrin,” ‘Imagining’ Biblical Worlds: Studies in Spatial, Social and Historical Constructs in Honor of James W. Flanagan, ed. David M. Gunn and Paula M. McNutt. New York: Sheffield Academic Press.

Rast Walter E., Schaub R. Thomas, McCreery David W., Donahue Jack, and McConaughy Mark A. 1980. “Preliminary Report of the 1979 Expeditions to the Dead Sea Plain, Jordan,” Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research, no. 240.

Rast, Walter E. 1980. “The Southern Dead Sea Valley Expedition, 1979,” Biblical Archaeologists 43, no. 1.

Rast Walter E., Schaub R. Thomas. 1978. “A Preliminary Report of Excavations at Bab edh-Dhra, 1975,” in The Annual of the American Schools of Oriental Research, vol. 43, ed. David Noel Freedman. Cambridge: The American Schools of Oriental Research.

———. 1981. “The Southeastern Dead Sea Plain Expedition: An Interim Report of the 1977 Season,” in The Annual of the American Schools of Oriental Research, vol. 46, ed. Joseph A. Callaway. Cambridge: The American Schools of Oriental Research.

———. 1989. “Bab edh-Dhra: Excavations in the Cemetery Directed by Paul W. Lapp (1965-67),” in Reports of the Expedition to the Dead Sea Plain, Jordan, vol. 1. Winona Lake, Ind: The American Schools of Oriental Research.

Ullinger, Jaime Marie. 2010. Skeletal Health Changes and Increasing Sedentism at Early Bronze Age Bab edh-Dhra, Jordan. PhD diss., Ohio State University. In OhioLink ETD Center, http://etd.ohiolink.edu/send-pdf.cgi/Ullinger%20Jaime.pdf?osu1275258919 (Accessed April 24, 2013).

---

[1] Carol, Fontaine. History’s Mysteries: Sodom and Gomorrah, DVD. Directed by Damian Weyand (New York: History Channel, 2001).

[2] William F., Albright. The Archaeology of Palestine and the Bible (Cambridge: The American Schools of Oriental Research, 1974). 48.

[3] Ibid, 48.

[4] David, Ackroyd. History’s Mysteries: Sodom and Gomorrah, DVD. Directed by Damian Weyand (New York: History Channel, 2001).

[5] Walter E. Rast, Thomas Schaub. “The Southeastern Dead Sea Plain Expedition: An Interim Report of the 1977 Season,” in The Annual of the American Schools of Oriental Research, vol. 46, ed. Joseph A. Callaway (Cambridge: The American Schools of Oriental Research, 1981). 35.

[6] Walter E., Rast. History’s Mysteries: Sodom and Gomorrah, DVD. Directed by Damian Weyand (New York: History Channel, 2001). 

[7] William F., Albright. Archaeology, Historical Analogy, and Early Biblical Tradition (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1966). 25.

[8] Michael, Avi-Yonah. The Madaba Mosaic Map: With Introduction and Commentary (Jerusalem: Hadassah Apprentice School of Printing, 1953). 9.

[9] Ibid, 42.

[10] Ibid, 42.

[11] William F., Albright. The Archaeology of Palestine and the Bible (Cambridge: The American Schools of Oriental Research, 1974). 135.

[12] Walter E., Rast. “The Southern Dead Sea Valley Expedition, 1979,” Biblical Archaeologists 43, no. 1 (Winter 1980): 60-61.

[13] Walter E. Rast, R. Thomas Schaub, “A Preliminary Report of Excavations at Bab edh-Dhra, 1975,” in The Annual of the American Schools of Oriental Research, vol. 43, ed. David Noel Freedman (Cambridge: The American Schools of Oriental Research, 1978). 2.

[14] David W., McCreery, “Bronze Age Agriculture in the Dead Sea Basin: The Cases of Bab Edh-Dhra, Numeira and Tell Nimrin,” ‘Imagining’ Biblical Worlds: Studies in Spatial, Social and Historical Constructs in Honor of James W. Flanagan, ed. David M. Gunn and Paula M. McNutt (New York: Sheffield Academic Press, 2002). 254.

[15] Jaime Marie, Ullinger. 2010. Skeletal Health Changes and Increasing Sedentism at Early Bronze Age Bab edh-Dhra, Jordan. PhD diss., Ohio State University. In OhioLink ETD Center, http://etd.ohiolink.edu/send-pdf.cgi/Ullinger%20Jaime.pdf?osu1275258919 (Accessed April 24, 2013).

[16] Ibid.

[17] David W., McCreery, “Bronze Age Agriculture in the Dead Sea Basin: The Cases of Bab Edh-Dhra, Numeira and Tell Nimrin,” ‘Imagining’ Biblical Worlds: Studies in Spatial, Social and Historical Constructs in Honor of James W. Flanagan, ed. David M. Gunn and Paula M. McNutt (New York: Sheffield Academic Press, 2002). 257.

[18] Thomas R., Schaub. History’s Mysteries: Sodom and Gomorrah, DVD. Directed by Damian Weyand (New York: History Channel, 2001). 

[19] Walter E. Rast, Thomas Schaub. “The Southeastern Dead Sea Plain Expedition: An Interim Report of the 1977 Season,” in The Annual of the American Schools of Oriental Research, vol. 46, ed. Joseph A. Callaway (Cambridge: The American Schools of Oriental Research, 1981). 19.

[20] Walter E. Rast, R. Thomas Schaub, “A Preliminary Report of Excavations at Bab edh-Dhra, 1975,” in The Annual of the American Schools of Oriental Research, vol. 43, ed. David Noel Freedman (Cambridge: The American Schools of Oriental Research, 1978). 19.

[21] Walter E. Rast, R. Thomas Schaub, “Bab edh-Dhra: Excavations in the Cemetery Directed by Paul W. Lapp (1965-67),” in Reports of the Expedition to the Dead Sea Plain, Jordan, vol. 1 (Winona Lake, Ind: The American Schools of Oriental Research, 1989). 325.

[22] Ibid, 326.

[23] Ibid, 344.

[24] Walter E. Rast, R. Thomas Schaub, David W. McCreery, Jack Donahue and Mark A. McConaughy, “Preliminary Report of the 1979 Expeditions to the Dead Sea Plain, Jordan,” Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research, no. 240 (Autumn 1980). 37.

[25] David W., McCreery, “Bronze Age Agriculture in the Dead Sea Basin: The Cases of Bab Edh-Dhra, Numeira and Tell Nimrin,” ‘Imagining’ Biblical Worlds: Studies in Spatial, Social and Historical Constructs in Honor of James W. Flanagan, ed. David M. Gunn and Paula M. McNutt (New York: Sheffield Academic Press, 2002). 260.

[26] Walter E., Rast. History’s Mysteries: Sodom and Gomorrah, DVD. Directed by Damian Weyand (New York: History Channel, 2001).  

Howard Carter

Dear Readership,

I have been away due to my current jobs, and I work as an independent contractor for online writing jobs. Basically, I write articles to advertise clients businesses and products, and I have about seven clients that I work for -- so I am ever busy. I cannot wait for the day when I will return to blogging on the things I am passionate about, but for now I must work. I would like to share with you a news article I came across talking about Google's picture of the day, which was remembering a famous archaeologist and Egyptologist Howard Carter. Of course I could not pass up reading about the picture on Google when I saw it, and since I use the search engine as my ultimate tool for my online research to write my articles. It was evident that I would see the picture and inquire about it (yes, I am praising Google for their unique pictures they put up). Anyways I thought you might like the article. Enjoy!

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2012/05/120509-howard-carter-google-doodle-tutankhamun-tomb-king-tut-science/?source=link_fb20120509news-carter

Current News

Dear readership,

Sorry I have been away for so long, but I am currently working a few advertising jobs at the moment and have not had any time to read and blog. I hate that I haven't had the chance to write for my blogs, but I am on my own and I need to work to take care of myself. I just read a recent News article from Yahoo.com and wanted to share it with you. I hope I can get back to writing soon because I really do enjoy it, and I enjoy reading and writing on anything to do with archaeology. Enjoy!

Winged structure found

Egypt’s Monuments Part X: The Rule Of Ra Part I: “The Fifth Dynasty – When The Sun Ruled”

Miroslav Verner’s next chapter deals with the Fifth Dynasty and the shift in the religious views as well as in the political ones. The ruler’s of the Fifth Dynasty were mostly made up of the priesthood, and if not, those who ruled were put into place because of the priesthood. This was the Dynasty with which the priesthood, and religion, started to take a significant role within Egyptian politics. In former Dynasties the monarchs were the ones in charge of the economic and political state, and they would only place their family members over the official offices. In the early Dynasties the priesthood played an insignificant part within the Egyptian state, and were only in charge of the religious factors of Egyptian life; they worked under the monarchs and only focused on their religious tasks. But in the Fifth Dynasty the religious officials started to take on more than their religious duties. This could have been because of the economic instability at the end of the Fourth Dynasty. The first ruler of the Fifth Dynasty may very well have had royal blood in him but he was also a High Priest. Before this dynasty the religion and state were separate, but the fall of the economy in the end of the Fourth Dynasty could have made the priesthood decide to intervene in state affairs.

A major political figure in the end of the Fourth Dynasty, and the beginning of the Fifth, was Queen Khentkaues I. Who is believed to have reigned for a short period during the gap between the Fourth and Fifth Dynasties. Her fame was not present during her time, but after. Rulers who came years after her famed her as being the mother of the sun kings. There is a papyrus displaying, what is believed to be, her story: “And ultimately the queen mother Khentkaues probably went down in ancient Egyptian literature as the heroine of the myth of the divine birth of the kings of the Fifth Dynasty. The account given in the Westcar papyrus was written a thousand years after these events, in the era of the Hyksos kings. In it Rudjedjet appears as the consort of a sun-cult priest from the city of Sakhebu and as the mother of the sun kings, whose father was supposed to be the sun god Re himself.” (Miroslav Verner, The Pyramids: Their Archaeology and History. New York: Grove Press, 1997, p. 265). But like her supposed second husband, Userkaf, there is many more mysteries surrounding her than facts. Some Egyptologist believe that Userkaf could have been one of Menkaure’s sons: “His origin remains for the time being obscure, but he may have been, along with Shepseskaf, one of Menkaure’s sons. During his reign the sun cult seems to have reached its apogee, since from then on the title ‘son of Re’ became an inseparable part of the royal titulature. On the other hand, it is striking that in both Shepseskaf’s and Userkaf’s names the name of the sun god Re is lacking.” (Miroslav Verner, The Pyramids, p. 265). There are chief events surrounding Userkaf’s name that entitles him to be the first ruler of the Fifth Dynasty, but other than that his origin and other main factors about him are unknown. He not only undertook campaigns in the typical country of Nubia, which his predecessors did as well, but also set up trade with other foreign countries; one of them being Greece. “He undertook a further campaign in Nubia, and during his reign renewed commercial contacts with foreign lands were developed, including contacts with the distant Greeks islands, as a stone vessel bearing his name and found on the island of Cythera shows.” (Miroslav Verner, The Pyramids, p. 266). His successor was Sahure who continued the political strength and religious cult that Userkaf had set up.

The rulers of the Fifth Dynasty went down in ancient Egypt as the start of a new era and new religious ideals. But despite the impact that the Fifth Dynasty rulers had on Egyptians in later dynasties there was mystery shrouding all of the royals in power during that century. The only well known fact is that they had changed religion into a political office and the priesthood began to rise as a part of the state, instead of separate from it. There were a few rare ruler’s in the Fifth Dynasty who did not take on the recent religious ideals that had been set up, the sun cult, and one of these was King Djedkare. “At this time religious ideas and practices were spreading that had earlier played a role only at the highest level of society. The cult of the god Osiris, the ruler of the realm of the dead and the symbol of the eternal cycle of life and death, moved into the foreground. Shifts in religious ideas or economics or both were the basis for Djedkare’s decision not to have a sun temple built.” (Miroslav Verner, The Pyramids, p. 272). Religion was not the only shift that occurred during this time, and like we saw with the first King of the Fifth Dynasty trade was established and both trade and crafts were prospering. “Crafts and trade were flourishing in the country, and additional expeditions were sent to Byblos, Nubia, and distant Punt, from whence the expedition’s leader, Baurdjed, even brought back a dancing dwarf to entertain the king. The fact that these expeditions did not always involve peaceful trade is shown by a unique scene of conquest preserved on the walls of Inti’s tomb in Deshasha in Middle Egypt.” (Miroslav Verner, The Pyramids, p. 272). Another moderation that was established and prosperous during this era was writing: “Writing also flourished. In this period the famous work later known as The Maxims of Ptahhotep attributed by some scholars to Djedkare’s vizier of the same name. Its goal was to educate young men in absolute accord with the ancient Egyptian worldview and especially with the needs of the state.” (Miroslav Verner, The Pyramids, p. 273).

The change from the end of the Fourth Dynasty to the beginning, and continuing on through, the Fifth Dynasty was as different as night and day. The Fourth Dynasty started off by prospering but in the end the political leaders, the monarchs, were not able to hold up the economy. Then it seems that once the priesthood changed its status from just a religious practice away from the state to becoming a political factor within the state; the economy was once again under stable rule. But was it truly the priesthood becoming part of the state that allowed the Fifth Dynasty rulers to flourish? So far this seems like the only possible solution to how Egypt’s economic stability was able to prosper after faltering in the last part of the Fourth Dynasty. For the religious officials of Egypt to combine with the state is not an uncommon act within civilizations. Many countries only prospered because of the funds that were brought in when religion became part of the state, but it is unclear if this is what happened in Egypt. Miroslav Verner focuses more on the pyramids in his book, and their construction, instead of state affairs and issues. But Egypt’s religion does play a major role within the Egyptian state and we can see it playing even a larger role during the Fifth Dynasty. Pyramids were created the way they were because of religion, and because many costs, materials, and manual labor went into building the pyramids we can make the hypothesis that the religion, indeed, did drive the Egyptian state.

A Break From Egypt’s History: An Introduction To Another Passion Of My Heart

I am going to take a small break from Miroslav Verner’s book to update my readership on the things that are going on. I want to introduce to another blog that I have started because of another passion I have. When I was young I was not only interested in history and archaeology, but I would spend hours reading and studying Animals, insects, and plants. How they lived, what they ate, their environments, and every other fact about them I could research. I believe that God created the animals and insects for specific purposes and through studying them I came to see that. I also saw another amazing thing, and that is through the animals and insects God is revealed. For Theologians, this is called general revelation; where an intelligent being is revealed through the things we see around us and even ourselves. But general revelation can only go so far, and this is why so many civilizations worshiped a god of some kind because they saw the things around them and knew it had to be created. But to learn and know who the true God is, the God of the Bible, we need to shown what is called “Special revelation,” which is what Paul used to tell the gentiles in Acts 17:23-32. Jesus was his message and he preached: “In the past God overlooked such ignorance, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent(v. 30).” Those who worshiped gods went through a time of ignorance, but because of Jesus there is no longer ignorance and the true God is shown. Because if he was not God he would not have risen from the dead, only God could have power over death. So through the general revelation of this world I wish in this blog to show how it can lead to proof that there is an intelligent designer, and that we know who He is and what He has done. That He came to this earth walked among us, was put to death, and then rose again on the third day. The creatures of the earth show the glory of God and that is why scripture says: “You will go out in joy and be led forth in peace; the mountains and hills will burst into song before you, and all the trees of the field will clap their hands. (Isaiah 55:12).” Because all of creation in the way God made it gives glory unto the Lord. The blog address is science-generalrevelation.blogspot.com and in this blog I desire to demonstrate that through the studies of Zoology, entomology, and botany the general revelation of God, an intelligent being, is clearly shown. Furthermore, by proving the existence of God, I wish to enlighten people to who God is, and encourage those who already know him to see how the creatures of earth proclaim his glory.

Enjoy,

Nicole Bittle

Egypt’s Monuments Part IX: The Pyramids Part VI; The Last Monarchs Of The Fourth Dynasty

In this post I will be finishing off Miroslav Verner’s chapter The Fourth Dynasty – The Greatest Of The Great and the last monuments mentioned are the third pyramid in Giza, the Mastabat Fara’un, and Queen Khentkaues I’s Step Pyramid. All of the monarchs responsible for the end of the Fourth Dynasty play significant roles in fall and economic instability in the end of the Fourth Dynasty. As stated in an earlier post the beginning of the Fourth Dynasty brought on much improvement from the Third, but in the end of the Fourth Dynasty the monarchs couldn’t keep this stability. One of these final rulers was a Queen who possibly ruled after her husband’s death, and was married to the first ruler of the Fifth Dynasty. Unlike Snefru, and even Khufu and Khafre, the last rulers of this era did not live long lives and died early. All three monarchs did not have sufficient supplies and resources to build as extravagant of tombs like their predecessors. This just shows how the end of the Fourth Dynasty differs from the beginning, with the Great Builder Snefru. The final pyramid at Giza is not as grand as the other two, although Khafre’s pyramid is a lot grander on the outside than inside, it is still a significant monument in Egypt’s history. This final pyramid took not one, but both of the final male ruler’s, to finish constructing it. Because of this many Egyptologist’s believe Shepseskaf built a mastaba instead of a pyramid. I will give a brief history of all three rulers and their accomplishments.

The first of these three rulers in the end of the Fourth Dynasty was the builder of the third pyramid in Giza; King Menkaure. The three pyramids of Giza are sometimes called the “great troika” and Menkaure’s pyramid is the smallest, and Verner states that this is where the start of the decline of the Fourth Dynasty was. “The smallest pyramid of the ‘great troika’ in Giza stands not far from the Nile and is called ‘Menkaure is divine.’ One might almost think that it anticipated, in its dimensions and partly unfinished state, the approaching decline of the Fourth Dynasty.” (Miroslav Verner, The Pyramids: Their Archaeology and History. New York: Grove Press, 1997, p. 242). Menkaure was not able to finish his masterpiece and that task was left for his successor, but while working on it he tried to follow after the designs of Khufu and Khafre. He used pink granite mostly as well and in fact the entire outward casing was meant to be pink granite. “As in the case of Khafre’s pyramid, here too it was necessary to thoroughly prepare the rock subsoil, especially around the northeast corner. The difference in elevation between the base levels of the two pyramids is slight: Menkaure’s is only two and a half meters higher. Its core consists of limestone blocks quarried nearby. Up to a height of about fifteen meters, its casing is made of pink granite, while farther up it was probably made of limestone.” (Miroslav Verner, The Pyramids, p. 242). One of the most fascinating objects within the pyramid was Menkaure’s sarcophagus, which differed from Khufu’s and Khafre’s, and was not made of pink granite: “On the burial chamber’s west wall Vyse [Richard W. H.] found a beautiful basalt sarcophagus decorated with niches and a lid ornamented with a concave cornice. Ricke [Herbert] saw a certain parallel between these decorations and those of the shrine of the god Anubis, and he interpreted them as an expression of the effort to increase the protection of the tomb by means of that divinity.” (Miroslav Verner, The Pyramids, p. 245). Sadly the sarcophagus was lost in a ship wreck when it was being brought to Great Britain. Menkaure started on his pyramid complex, mortuary temples and all, but because of his early death his successor had the task of finishing these projects.

Shepseskaf’s reign was much shorter than that of Menkaure’s, and this may be why he was not able to build a pyramid but instead a mastaba. Egyptologists first thought the Mastabat Fara’un belonged to the last ruler of the Fifth Dynasty, but then through research and a fragmented stela found in the tomb it was accredited to Shepseskaf. The local people call the giant Mastaba tomb Mastabat Fara’un which means “Pharaoh’s Bench” and it is one of Egypt’s most puzzling tombs. One question is: why did he build this mastaba, a First Dynasty Pre-Dynastic era tomb, instead of the Fourth Dynasty pyramids that changed Egypt’s architecture forever? One of the answers to this is that Egypt’s economic stability was diminished in the end of the Fourth Dynasty. Unlike the pyramids of his predecessors Shepseskaf built his tomb out of mostly Limestone, which shows that he did not have the same materials accessible for building: “The casing consisted primarily of soft white limestone; only its lower level was made of pink granite.” (Miroslav Verner, The Pyramids, p. 255). The mastaba opens up into a single corridor, or hallway, and then splits off into three big halls which hold the chambers and corridors of a typical tomb. Most scholars believe that the reason for why Shepseskaf built this mastaba is because he finished off all the available resources on Menkaure’s pyramid, and so resorted to making his tomb a mastaba. But there are those who have other ideas for why Shepseskaf built Mastbat Fara’un. One of these ideas is offered by Gustave Jequier: “He was convinced that Shepseskaf had intentionally chosen the unusual form of his royal tomb. As a protest against the increasing influence of the priesthood of the sun god Re, he rejected a tomb in the form of a pyramid, considered as a symbol of the sun, and decided to build a mastaba-like structure for himself. According to Jequier, the break with earlier tradition was emphasized by the fact that Shepseskaf did not have his tomb erected in the old cemetery at Giza, but rather in a distant place in modern South Saqqara. Jequier sees further evidence for his theory in the ruler’s name, which did not include the component re.” (Miroslav Verner, The Pyramids, p. 257). But most Egyptologists go with the common idea that he didn’t have the materials to build a pyramid because of the fall in the economy at the end of the Fourth Dynasty.

The last ruler of the Fourth Dynasty was also one of the first Queens of the Fifth Dynasty. Queen Khentkaues I has a lot of mystery and uncertainty surrounding her. She is one of the rare queens who are thought to have ruled in Egypt, who is believed by some to have been the wife of Shepseskaf and then was remarried to the first king of the Fifth Dynasty, Userkaf. “He [Selim Hassan] considered Khentkaues I to be Shepseskaf’s consort and believed that after Shepseskaf’s death she ruled for a short time but was ultimately forced to yield power to the priesthood. The result was her marriage with Userkaf, the high priest of the sun god Re from Heliopolis and the later founder of the Fifth Dynasty. She refused, however, to be buried next to either her first or her second husband, and decided instead to have her own tomb built in Giza, near her royal predecessors.” (Miroslav Verner, The Pyramids, p. 263). Her tomb was once considered to be the fourth pyramid at Giza and is said to resemble her first husband’s tomb; which would be the Mastabat Fara’un. Like her predecessors she used pink granite and limestone for the materials, and she tried to make both steps completely square. An interesting fact is that the tomb was altered: “Not long after it was completed, the tomb was substantially altered, probably during the first half of the Fifth Dynasty. Over the west half of the tomb, a limestone structure with an oblong plan that resembled a mastaba was built. It was intentionally not placed over the center of the tomb, since its weight might have ruptured the ceilings of the chambers in the lower part.” (Miroslav Verner, The Pyramids, p. 260). The alteration on Khentkaues tomb is theorized to be because of the change of religion because where in the beginning of the Fourth Dynasty only those of the royal family ruled, during the time of Khentkaues the priesthood began to rule. Her second husband, a high priest, founded the Fifth Dynasty and this shows in the changes made to her tomb. “The transformation of the tomb, which probably took place at the beginning of the Fifth Dynasty, seems to have been intended to express a fundamental conceptual change connected with a later elevation of Khentkaues’s status and that of her cult. Only concern about the stability of the original rock-cut tomb prevented the construction of a pyramid with two or possibly three steps.” (Miroslav Verner, The Pyramids, p. 261-262).

These last monarchs who ruled in the end of the Fourth Dynasty show through their tombs and building materials that the economy had plummeted from where it once was. Under the first King of this era, Snefru, the economy was flourishing, but like with all civilizations there are seasons of plenty and then seasons of hardship. Not only did the Fifth Dynasty bring about economical changes but the monarchy was changed as well. In the Fourth Dynasty those born of royal blood were the only ones who ruled Egypt, and many kings placed their royal family members in charge of the official offices. But the first ruler of the Fifth Dynasty was not a royal but instead a High Priest, and so the priesthood began to take a higher status then in the eras before. This began an inward fight that is commonly seen in civilizations, a battle of the monarchs and the priesthood. In some cases the monarchs win out and in others the priesthood does, and the first ruler of the Fifth Dynasty is proof of this type of instability. Many civilizations of the past have dealt with the same inward fighting, although it is mostly a political fight and blood is rarely shed over this type of warring. But nonetheless the instability of Egypt’s economy at that time shows that there was another hidden type of instability occurring; a political one.