Egypt’s Monuments Part V: The Pyramids Part II; The Construction Behind Egypt’s Pyramids

Unlike in my last post I will be going back a few steps to explain how the pyramids were built. So before we go on with other famous kings of Egypt, like I did with King Djoser, we will be looking at the effort, time, and work labor behind the making of the pyramids. One thing that we will find out through Miroslav Verner’s chapter The Construction of The Pyramds is that there is little known about the process of building the pyramids. The amount of workers used to do the building is always disputed, and whether they used pulleys or ramps is debated also. In general many things surrounding the building process of the pyramids is theoretical. A pyramid wasn’t just built in a day or two. A lot of work went into the construction plus gathering the materials, and lastly making the pyramid geometrically precise. Because a pyramid wasn’t constructed in just one year, a pharaoh would work on it through his entire lifetime and sometimes it wasn’t finished before his death. There is one known Pharaoh who built four pyramids throughout his lifetime, Snefru, and this shows that it wasn’t impossible to finish more than one pyramid but as a pharaoh your reign and lifetime had to be quite extensive. Snefru is the next great King of Egypt, like Djoser, that I will deal with in my next post. But for now we’re going to focus on the building, materials, and workers used for constructing Egypt’s pyramids.

I have some experience with construction because my family built our own log cabin. Unlike the ancient Egyptians, today you can buy a kit to build your house and you don’t have to draw up your own blueprints and plans, they’re already drawn up and all you have to do is pick the best fit. It took us two years until the house was livable, and even after we moved in we had many more things to do to finish it up. So having had a little experience with building I still can’t imagine how long, and how many workers, it must have taken for a pyramid to be completed. Much about the construction of the pyramids is unknown and often disputed. The amount of workers used for a single pyramid, whether they were paid or forced, and lastly the inventions they used for construction are all debated and theoretical. Miroslav Verner shows us the many theories behind the amount of workers used on one of the world’s greatest wonders, the Great Pyramid of Giza, because if the amount of laborers used for the largest pyramid constructed the amount for all other pyramids can be easily estimated. But because the ancient Egyptians didn’t keep records, or they were destroyed, the amount of workers used is all left up to hypotheses. For the Great Pyramid of Giza the range of workers has been disputed from 100,000 to 300,000, but no archaeologist or historian has given the correct amount. We would have to go back in time to know the exact sum of personnel used. Even the ancient historian’s, Herodotus, sum of 100,000 doesn’t fit. (Miroslav Verner, The Pyramids: Their Archaeology and History. New York: Grove Press, 1997, p. 76-78). When looking at the Great Pyramid from the outside it seems almost inhumanly impossible to make such a gargantuan object, but an interesting discovery made recently shows that the Great Pyramid holds secrets, not only in its mass chambers, but also in the construction itself. Verner talks about a 1980 discovery led by French and Egyptians researchers who used ultrasound technology on the pyramid: “Their measurements showed that in the core of the Great Pyramid large cavities had been filled with pure sand. During construction the ‘chamber method’ was probably used, which significantly accelerated the work and made it easier and less expensive.” (Miroslav Verner, The Pyramids, p. 78). So the difficult process we assume by looking at just the outside of the Great Pyramid is all but an illusion. So taking this in account the estimate of the workers used is still theoretical and unknown, but Verner goes on to say that Egyptologists place the sum at 30,000. “In the case of the Great Pyramid at Giza, the current consensus among Egyptologists sets the figure at a little more than 30,000.” (Miroslav Verner, The Pyramids, p. 81).

But one thing that can be known about the workforce handling Egypt’s pyramids is the organization. There were those assigned to gathering the materials for the pyramid, and those who worked on the pyramid itself. Plus many other personnel like the overseers, specialized workers, and architects. Whatever the sum of workers, they were split up into five teams which were called “Phylia.” This word is taken from the Greek word “Phyle” which means tribe, group, and brother-hood. This root word is used in the Bible to distinguish “Brotherly love.” These five “Phylia” were then divided into four more groups but only three teams worked on a project at a time. This manner of organization is most commonly seen on ancient vessels and is used to direct a ship’s crew. (Miroslav Verner, p.79). Every team of “Phyle,” and the groups inside them, were directed and overseen by a leader. The thing that is disputed about is what work did they do? It is assumed that these were the workers assigned to gathering the materials needed for the pyramid. These materials were usually a far distance away from the construction site, and many Pharaohs had their pyramids far from where the materials were. Mostly because the Pharaohs built their pyramids in the place they resided, so that when they passed on they didn’t have to be moved far. The most used material in the pyramids, from the time of Djoser on, was limestone and it was used for many of Egypt’s structures; they called it “White stone” because of the color. “White stone” had to be mined and was brought to the construction site in large chunks, which made moving it, from the mines to the site, difficult. Expeditions had to be made to gather the proper materials, and even though it’s debated, the most thought of method for moving the stone blocks to the working area was the use of the Nile river. “When the stone was not available close to the building site, it sometimes had to be brought down the Nile as far as several hundred kilometers away. This was the fastest and least difficult mode of transportation, and written and pictorial evidence proves that it was quite often used, taking advantage of a network of artificial canals, and especially the annual floods, which caused the Nile’s level to rise several meters so that its water flowed far out over the land, right up to the foot of the desert plateau chosen as a construction site.” (Miroslav Verner, The Pyramids, p. 65).

Also besides these teams that worked on gathering the materials to be used for the pyramids, there were other working teams that worked on the pyramid itself. “In addition to the ‘team’ system, another system was used in construction, which involved dividing up workers according to the cardinal compass points, north, south, and west. An eastern group is nowhere documented, and another term was used in its place, perhaps because in Egyptian eastern, like left, meant ‘bad.’” (Miroslav Verner, The Pyramids, p. 80). The last thing I’ll deal with about the workers is it’s often wondered if the labor force was paid or forced? Verner give answers this question with a Sixth Dynasty papyrus text from an overseer: “In his letter, the foreman complains that clothes for his workers have not been received on time and that time has been lost waiting for them; thus he indirectly draws attention to the resulting delays in the planned work schedule. This text also suggests that the work party was staying near the royal residence. It can therefore be assumed that the state not only provided clothing for the workers, but also fed and lodged them.” (Miroslav Verner, The Pyramids, p. 81). So from this we can conclude that the workers were well taken care of and possibly paid, but there may have been Pharaohs who did use forced labor; like in the case of the Israelites who were under slavery (Exodus 1:11-14).

In this next paragraph I will be dealing with the last argument that surrounds the making of the pyramids; what technique did they use to raise the pyramids? The two types of methods that are assumed to be used are either pulleys or ramps. Throughout the years archaeologists have debated over which one was used, and both objects have been found around the remains of the pyramids. The ancient historian, Herodotus, who claims he was there to see the Great Pyramid built, says that they used short wooden scaffolding and lifting devices provided for each step. Another ancient historian, Diodorus Siculus, says that they used ramps. (Miroslav Verner, The Pyramids, p. 82). In the 1930’s what looked like to be stone pulleys were found by Selim Hassan: “He found a large stone object that looked like a nail in whose hammered head three parallel notches had been cut.” (Miroslav Verner, The Pyramids, p. 83). The question is how could something so small raise stone blocks that weighed tons? And this is often unanswered. But the most favored view is Diodorus’, and ramps have been discovered as well among the pyramids: “Today, most conceptions of pyramid construction are based on Diodorus’ account, which describes the use of inclined planes or ramps. His account has been lent some support by archaeologists’ discovery of the remains of ramps, which have been found in Medium, Dashur, Abu Ghurab, and Abusir.” (Miroslav Verner, The Pyramids, p. 85-86). Within this view of ramps being used Verner goes through nine archaeologists’ theories on how the ramps were used. (Miroslav Verner, p. 86-93). Some say that they were elongated to be put on the first and last section without making another ramp and others claim that they made a ramp for each section. One of the best rounded solutions to how the ramps were used comes from A world-renowned expert on the pyramids, Jean-Philippe Lauer. “He suggests that during construction a whole system of cleverly combined ramps of various sizes and gradients was built. At the same time, of course, additional tools and lifting devices were used – wooden levers, round beams, poles, and ropes.” (Miroslav Verner, The Pyramids, p. 89). Lauer uses the Great Pyramid to support his theory and ramps were used along with the blocks being put into place by a counter-weight system that used sand bags. In the end Verner answers the question to which technique was used in the construction of the pyramids: “To the question of whether lifting devices or ramps were used, we may reply simply: both.” (Miroslav Verner, The Pyramids, p. 89).

In conclusion we see that the ancient Egyptians did not just throw the pyramids together. There was a large amount of work put into it and not only the labor, but the planning, and the gathering of materials as well. The Egyptians did all that they could to make the pyramids precise mathematically and geometrically, and this shows that they had vast knowledge of mathematics and used it to construct their buildings. They are not very different from the architects of our time and the math used is the same although they had a few things off. But what the ancient Egyptians accomplished through their architecture and construction is known to be one of the highly advance in ancient civilizations. Verner explains that many documents record the Egyptians mathematics and I will leave you with this quote: “The Rhind papyrus and the Moscow papyrus, for example, contain various mathematical procedures and problems that show that although ancient Egyptians were not able to formulate mathematical laws with precision, they possessed sound practical knowledge and knew how to make the fullest use of it. They worked with a decimal system and were able to use fractions. They could calculate the area of a triangle, a rectangle, a circle, and even the surface area of a hemisphere; they could determine angles and the volumes of geometrical shapes, including pyramids, cylinders, and cones.” (Miroslav Verner, The Pyramids, p. 69).           

Egypt’s Monuments Part IV: The Pyramids Part I; The Djoser Step Pyramid

Since the last post I did on the first pyramid of Egypt I have been reading more on the King Djoser and his step pyramid. Miroslav Verner deals Djoser’s step pyramid in the fourth chapter of his book, and because I just posted on the reconstruction of the Step Pyramid I have decided to devote some time on King Djoser and his pyramid complex. I will also be dealing with the religious festivals and how they connect to Djoser’s pyramid. King Djoser started a new “fad” among Egyptian kings and all rulers after him made their tombs in a similar fashion. These were the first pyramids of Egypt and not only did the tombs evolve but the range of land surrounding the tomb, the social economy, and government administration: “Djoser’s monumental edifices testify to a powerful upswing in the Egyptian economy at the beginning of the Third Dynasty and to a rise in the productivity of agriculture, crafts, and building. At the same time, writing was developing, along with astronomy, mathematics, land measurement, and – of course – governmental administration.” (Miroslav Verner, The Pyramids: Their Archaeology and History. New York: Grove Press, 1997, p. 106). His Step Pyramid made such an impact of Egyptian life since and the famous pyramids of Giza used Djoser’s form of architecture. “Later generations also considered this to be an important epoch in Egypt’s history.” (Miroslav Verner, The Pyramids, p 106). The religious factor behind the tombs evolved as well, because of how much land surrounded the pyramid. Djoser’s pyramids had two temples around it which was each filled with priests and people to upkeep them: “The basic echelon of priests employed at the pyramid complex consisted of the ‘god’s servants’ and those who bore the ambiguous title of khentiu-she. The latter were responsible for various kinds of agricultural and technical work, the transportation of goods into the temple, and guard duty; they also took part in the ceremonies……A relatively small proportion of the temple personnel consisted of the priests who were known as ‘the pure.’ The lector priests constituted a very small and in many respects exclusive group that was not expected to perform any economic or guardian function but was responsible solely for the conduct of the ritual; they organized the ceremonies in accord with the principles of the temple cult.” (Miroslav Verner, The Pyramids, p. 59).

In this paragraph I will present the history behind the king who established the first Pyramid in the world. The illustrious Djoser ruled in the early Third Dynasty of Egypt. It wasn’t until the Third Dynasty that Egypt started to transform and become a stable society. “The culminating phase of Egypt’s economic, political, and cultural ascent, known to modern historians as the Old Kingdom, began with the Third Dynasty.” (Miroslav Verner, The Pyramids, p. 105). So King Djoser played an important part in the rise of Egypt, to what we think of ancient Egypt today. King Djoser is believed by some scholars to be the son of one of Egypt’s key figures of that era; Queen Nimaathap I. But it is unclear about the lineage of the first rulers of the Third Dynastic period. Although the king of the first Step Pyramid is commonly known as King Djoser his name is sometimes recorded as King Netjerikhet. It is still unclear what connection he had with Queen Nimaathap I and is debated among all scholars, but it s still thought that he was her son. “Egyptologists agree that the key figure in the murky dynastic situation of this time [Third Dynasty] was Queen Nimaathap I, but it is unclear exactly what role she played. Some scholars believe that Nimaathap was Khasekhemwy’s daughter, Sanakht’s consort, and the mother of Netjerikhet.” (Miroslav Verner, The Pyramids, p. 105). Verner goes on to mention the impact King Djoser had on the Third Dynastic period and also how a German excavation discovered that it was King Netjerikhet (Djoser) who buried Queen Nimaathap I: “They make it clear that King Netjerikhet arranged Queen Nimaathap I’s funeral, and that he may also have been the founder of the Third Dynasty. In any case, Netjerikhet, more commonly known under his later name, Djoser, was the most impressive figure in the early years of this dynasty. Researchers have found the ruins of temples Djoser built in Heliopolis in Lower Egypt and in Gebelein in Upper Egypt. Djoser’s most significant work, however, is his tomb, the famed Step Pyramid in Saqqara, the first example of this kind of tomb and an architectural milestone.” (Miroslav Verner, The Pyramids, p. 106). This give us some insight behind the man who built the first pyramid of Egypt.

Finally, I will cover the Egyptian festivals and how it connects with Djoser’s tomb. As I said before King Djoser’s pyramid complex did not just include his tomb, the Step Pyramid, but had acres of land around it with buildings surrounding the pyramid. The ground plan of Djoser’s complex consists of: “1. pyramid; 2. entry colonnade; 3. south tomb; 4. south courtyard; 5. ‘T’ temple; 6. Sed festival complex; 7. south pavilion; 8. north pavilion; 9. mortuary temple; 10. west mounds.” (Miroslav Verner, The Pyramids, p. 108). You don’t have to be an architect or a topographer to know that this is a lot of land surrounding Djoser’s tomb, and that there are more than just one building sitting on that land. The ground plan of King Djoser’s complex shows us how beautiful it must have been when it was first built. It is one of the most outstanding monuments in our history: “Few monuments hold a place in human history as significant as that of the Step Pyramid in Saqqara……It can be said without exaggeration that his pyramid complex constitutes a milestone in the evolution of monumental stone architecture in Egypt and in the whole world as well.” (Miroslav Verner, The Pyramids, p. 108-109). Let us focus on one the many buildings with Djoser’s complex, the Sed festival complex, because this is a structure with a very unique purpose. The Sed festival complex consisted of building that were sandwiched between the “T” temple and the Step Pyramid. Its entire meaning is only symbolic. The Sed festival is a festival that the meaning behind it is still debated: “The precise meaning of the word sed is not known, and not much is known about the meaning of the festival, which is generally seen as a celebration of the king’s accession to the throne and a ceremony of renewal intended to strengthen the ruler’s power.”(Verner, p. 129). But this is only one view to why the Sed festival was held. “The whole festival may have a distant echo of a harsh prehistoric ritual in which the ruler had to prove his physical strength or be ritually killed and replaced by a younger successor.”(Miroslav Verner, The Pyramids,  p. 129-130). This festival was not the only festival that occurred throughout the year the Egyptian priests held many religious festivals during the year. Today we hold celebrations or festivals because of our religious background. As Christians we celebrate religious and non-religious festivals during the year, and sometimes we celebrate them just for remembrance of an historical event; Like Veterans Day. But we also celebrate Good Friday, Easter, and Christmas which are all religious holidays. In conclusion I am going to end with a quote from Verner about the Djoser Step Pyramid and its unique functions and structure:

“Because of its originality, the group of buildings constituting Djoser’s tomb is very difficult to interpret. It is sure to remain a subject of debate among Egyptologists for a long time and to give rise to various, often conflicting theories. In general, researchers agree that the complex manifests the consolidation of the political and economic situation in Egypt after the turbulent and often strife-ridden period of the Second Dynasty.” (Miroslav Verner, The Pyramids, p. 137).       

The World’s First Pyramid Under Restoration

I saw this article on Biblical Archaeology Review’s site and had just been reading about it and so I decided to share it with my readership. The first pyramid in Egypt was the step pyramid created by a king of the Third Dynasty; King Djoser. Before him the tombs of Egypt that held their rulers were like those I mentioned in my first post. So from the Zero Dynasty through to King Djoser pyramids were unheard of. Miroslav Verner talks about the design of this first pyramid: “The oldest pyramid, that of King Djoser of the Third Dynasty, was surrounded by structures whose meaning is still debated. Egyptologists nevertheless generally agree that they were supposed to represent the ruler’s death residence, which might have been inspired to some extent by parts of his earthly residence. In this complex, the mortuary temple was placed – as it was in all the other known step pyramids of the Third Dynasty – in front of the north side of the pyramid. Here was located the entrance to the underground rooms, which also served as the exit from the inner part of the pyramid and the burial chamber, through which the dead pharaoh went north to become one of the eternal stars around the North Star that never set.” (Miroslav Verner, The Pyramids: Their Archaeology and History. New York: Grove Press, 1997, p. 45).

Here is the article from Biblical Archaeology Review:

World’s First Pyramid to Be Restored

Bible and archaeology news

Biblical Archaeology Society Staff   •08/10/2011

Egypt’s new antiquities chief, Mohammad Abdel-Maksoud, announced this week that the Supreme Council of Antiquities will take steps to fund the restoration of the Step Pyramid at Saqqara. The pyramid, the oldest in Egypt, was built to be the eternal resting place of Djoser (2630–2611 B.C.E.), the second pharaoh of Egypt’s third dynasty (2630–2611 B.C.E.). Egyptian media reported that the inside of the pyramid is falling down and in disrepair, as planned conservation and reconstruction efforts have been delayed because of lack of payments. Abdel-Maksoud said payments for the project will be restarted soon.

Egypt’s Monuments Part III: The Birth of The Pyramids Part III; The Religious Aspect And How It Connects With It’s Ancient Society Part II

In my last post the focus was on the god-hood of the pharaoh and kings of Egypt, and I kind of got stuck (not in a bad way though) on the resurrection of Jesus compared to the deaths, and non-resurrection, of those who over history have claimed themselves as god. In this post I will finally cover Miroslav Verner’s chapter The Way To Eternity: Ritual And Cult which deals with the religion behind the Pyramids and the cultic rituals used. Many ancient cultures had specific death rituals and funerary rites because many of cultures believed in some sort of afterlife. It was common to believe in something after death, and each culture had their own rituals to secure the deceased in the world beyond. The Egyptians had elaborate funeral rituals and when a king or pharaoh passed on the death rituals became twice as elaborate. Some of these rituals consisted of lengthy funeral processions, the skill of mummification, and the elaborate artwork decorating the tombs and pyramids. I will focus on the funerary rituals, the view of the afterlife, but will deal with how Egypt’s society was affected by their religion in my next post.

Death has been around since the time of Adam and Eve, and it is because of sin, which entered the world when they sinned (Gen. 3:6-24), that death began and has reigned ever since. It has been a custom since to either bury or burn the person who has passed and to ease their passing from this life to the next with funerary rituals and ceremonies. Every culture had some form of rituals and ceremonies for their dead and today we still have funerals. The Greeks would burn their deceased with two coins over their eyes. The coins were used on the deceased’s voyage to the afterlife. In Judaism those who died were buried in a tomb of some kind. The Egyptians buried their dead as well but their rituals and ceremonies are of the most unique within the worlds cultures. Even though preservation of the body was used by many cultures the Egyptians used a different form of it; mummification. Mummification was used because of the Egyptians view of the afterlife; which is the reason that the dead were buried in all cultures. I will go over afterlife in my next paragraph and we will see how the view of their afterlife connects with the burial rituals. It would take quite some time for a body to go through the mummification process plus all the other ceremonial rituals that came with Egypt’s worship of the dead, and it took twice as long if the deceased was a pharaoh. Miroslav Verner goes into the graphic way the Egyptians did the mummification: “The embalmers laid the body on a wooden or stone table, cut open the abdomen, and remove all the entrails, including the liver and the lungs. The heart was, as a rule, left in the body. Then they broke the nasal septum and removed the brain by that route. They placed the liver, lungs, stomach, and intestines in four canopic vessels, special stone jars under the protection of the divine sons of Horus.” (Miroslav Verner, The Pyramids: Their Archaeology and History, p. 32). The heart was where the soul was kept and so this is why it wasn’t removed in the mummification process, because the soul was to be used for the final judgment. One myth is that the deceased’s soul was to be weighed against a feather. The embalmers then would sprinkle natron, which is a form of salt, to preserve the body for about five weeks, and then they would fill in the body with cloth and sew it up (Miroslav Verner, The Pyramids, p. 33). Next came the wrapping of the body and Verner explains how extravagant this was in some cases: “Finally, they wrapped the body, which might in some cases be richly decorated with jewels, in linen, laying amulets and small ornaments between the layers of the windings. It has been shown that in one case some 375 square meters of linen were used for the filling and winding of a single mummy.” (Miroslav Verner, The Pyramids: Their Archaeology and History, p. 33-34). The initial ceremony of the burial ritual took more than a day to secure: “The whole burial ritual, including the mummification, was generally expected to last seventy days, but it sometimes took the better part of a year to complete.” (Miroslav Verner, The Pyramids: Their Archaeology and History, p. 36). A burial ritual for a pharaoh took twice as long to complete than for the normal people of Egypt that would pass away.

Another death ritual used by the Egyptians was that when a pharaoh was buried all of their possessions were stored in their tomb with them. These objects were to be used in the afterlife. The pharaoh while alive prepared not only his tomb or pyramid for his death, but also prepared the objects and artifacts that would be buried with him, inside his tomb, upon his death. “The deceased was offered everything he needed in the form of offerings and gifts. This was not a unique event, but rather a ritual regularly repeated throughout the year, especially on important feast days. To the pharaoh’s alter flowed the products of his lands and workshops. In this way, during his own lifetime, the ruler was able to furnish the materials for his workshop in times to come. To guarantee that these supplies would be regularly provided in perpetuity, ‘eternal’ scenes of the delivery of sacrifices and long lists of the victims were carved in stone at the cult sites.” (Miroslav Verner, The Pyramids: Their Archaeology and History, p.38). While in life the pharaoh extravagantly decorated his own tomb. Not only on the outside but inside as well with beautiful hieroglyphics portraying many things, and sometimes even portraying his journey to the afterlife. Also he would make sure that the inner rooms of his tomb were filled with more than enough supplies, most of them were filled with riches. All these things, and even the design of the tomb or pyramid, were to be a part of his journey to the afterlife. As I stated in an earlier post the Vikings used a similar ritual for burying their dead, especially the clan leader. Most times the leader was buried or burned in his boat with all his possessions, plus his livestock and horses, and even wives, slaves, and sometimes children. It is unsure if the Early Dynastic kings of Egypt used the same ritual of killing their wives and slaves upon their death.

But why were these death and burial rituals so important for the Egyptians? Because their view of the afterlife drove these rituals. Like most views of an afterlife, the Egyptians believed that depending on how a person lived they would either wind up in an eternal paradise or an eternal hell. “The green, fertile Nile Valley was the ‘beloved land’ of the ancient Egyptians, the world in which they lived and wanted to die. Its polar opposite was the boundless, inhospitable desert that stretched out to the west. This was the place where the sun died every evening, the realm from which no one returned, and which was ruled by the god Osiris. The dividing line between life and death was as distinct as that between the flourishing valley and the endless desert. The gods created man and gave him life. Depending on his conduct while he was on earth, after death he experienced either eternal bliss or eternal damnation.” (Miroslav Verner, The Pyramids: Their Archaeology and History, p. 30). So like all cultures that held to an afterlife you would either spend eternity in a heaven or a hell. The Egyptian view of afterlife is different from the Christian view. Even though the Egyptians believed in a sense of a heaven and a hell they didn’t believe in it the way Christians do. The Egyptians believed that according to how you lived in this life you would end up in paradise or hell. But for the Christian view-point it’s not how you live that will determine if you’ll spend eternity in either heaven or hell. There is one condition and that is to accept Jesus Christ as your personal Lord and Savior. Accepting Christ or rejecting him is the determining factor on where you will go in the end. The imagery of heaven and hell has always been similar in all cultures. Heaven is the paradise you always wanted and hell is the place that you don’t wish you worse enemy to go; this is the typical imagery of the afterlife. The Bible doesn’t give us many details of what heaven is like, but it does describe hell more thoroughly. There is a parable that Jesus tells about a rich man and a man named Lazarus who both pass away, and Lazarus who was poor on the earth goes to heaven while the rich man goes to hell: “There was a certain rich man who was clothed in purple and fine linen and fared sumptuously every day. But there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, full of sores, who was laid at his gate, desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man’s table. Moreover the dogs came and licked his sores. So it was that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels to Abraham’s bosom. The rich man also died and was buried. And being in torments in Hades, he lifted up his eyes and saw Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom. Then he cried and said, ‘Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus that he may dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame.’ But Abraham said, ‘Son, remember that in your lifetime you received your good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things; but now he is comforted and you are tormented. And besides all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed, so that those who want to pass from here to you cannot, nor can those from there pass to us.’” This story gives us a small description of heaven and hell in the Judaism and Christianity worldview. Heaven is to be a literal paradise where hell is a place of never ending fire, torment, and pain.

Today in our society we hold to similar traditions that the Egyptians held to. Although we do not practice the skill of mummification we do have embalmers today, and their job is to preserve the body of the deceased. We hold funeral ceremonies that are similar to those that the Egyptians held to. A body is brought to the funeral home, and if it is not to be cremated there the mortician will work on the body. In ancient Egypt when a person died there were many different ceremonies that happened and sometimes those ceremonies lasted seventy days or more, but in our culture the burial only takes one day. But the preparation of the body still takes longer than the initial burial ceremony. Today there are different funeral services that the family can choose to do. The traditional service consists of a viewing, a funeral service either at the church or the funerary home’s chapel, and the burial which is called the graveside committal service. But these services vary because of whether the deceased is buried or cremated, whether there can be an open casket service or a closed casket one, and depending on the family’s and deceased’s wishes. But one thing is for sure; no matter if the deceased had any religious background the funeral service is always performed by a Reverend, Priest, Pastor, or any other religious official. This was the same for the ancient Egyptians the priests of the gods would always perform the ceremonies surrounding the deceased. Prayer, scripture reading, and other Christian rituals are used at most funerals today even if the deceased never went to church once in their life. Religion has always been an aspect surrounding a person’s death, not only today, but in all the cultures of the world. There has been a view of an afterlife, and the performing of religious ceremonies of the dead since people first began to pass away. Could this be, as a dear friend of mine says, because eternity is written in our hearts. This phrase suggests that even though cultures have had the wrong view of the afterlife they still held to it and believed that there was something beyond this life, and most cultures even believed that there were only two places to go in the afterlife; heaven or hell. Because of the intellect that God has given us it is inbuilt in us to look at the things of this world, the nature around us, and question where it came from. For centuries it was always a god that created the things of this world, and all cultures believed in either a god or many gods; but nonetheless the world was indeed created by an intelligent being.

Egypt’s Monuments Part II: The Birth of The Pyramids Part II; The Religious Aspect And How It Connects With It’s Ancient Society Part I

In this post I will be continuing with Miroslav Verner’s book The Pyramids: Their Archaeology and History, and this time we will be looking at the religion behind the Pyramids and how the burial rituals of the kings in the Early Dynastic era, before the pyramids, carried on throughout the History of Egypt. The second chapter of Verner’s book is called The Way To Eternity: Ritual And Cult and by the title we see that Verner deals with the religion behind the Pyramids and the cultic rituals used. Many ancient cultures had specific death rituals and funerary rites because many of cultures believed in some sort of afterlife. It was common to believe in something after death, and each culture had their own rituals to secure the deceased in the world beyond. The Egyptians had elaborate funeral rituals and when a king or pharaoh passed on the death rituals became twice as elaborate. Some of these rituals consisted of lengthy funeral processions, the skill of mummification, and the elaborate artwork decorating the tombs and pyramids.

The Pharaoh, or king during the Early Dynastic periods, was looked on as more than just the ruler of Egypt. They were religiously viewed as god on earth. When they were alive they were not only respected and revered as most rulers, but they were worshiped. When they died their god-hood was never questioned, and the pharaoh’s reign on this earth was done and he went on to reign in the afterlife. Even though they would physically die like every other “mortal” they were stilled looked on as “immortal” and were worshiped in their death as much as in their life. “The king and “great god” was immortal, but he was unable to escape the transitory nature of his physical being or to achieve immortality on his own. After his death, the pharaoh returned to be with the other gods.” (Miroslav Verner, The Pyramids: Their Archaeology and History, p. 37). It is interesting that even though the pharaoh was looked on as a god, and even worshiped as one, he could not receive immortality on his own and he died the same physical death as every mortal. There were many men throughout history that claimed themselves as gods and all of them died as mortal men and their bones can be found today. But there was one man in history that has differed from these. Jesus Christ was also killed and died as a mortal man, But those who followed him claimed that they saw him after he was in the grave for three days. Many people look at the resurrection of Christ as a made up fairy-tale. But is it really? Here are three typical responses to the resurrection of Jesus Christ: the first one is always a favorite of mine “The disciples stole Jesus’ body,” “It was mass hallucination,” and lastly “The body and bones have disintegrated by now.” To deal with all of these responses I would ask a few questions in return: “How is that illiterate and unlearned fisherman, who made up more than half of the followers of Christ, could come up with such an intricate plan of stealing Jesus’ body?” “Also, weren’t the disciples and followers of Christ terrified during the time of his death? Because they were afraid the Romans would be coming for them next?” So was it truly possible for the disciples of Jesus to take his body, behind the Romans backs, and hide it? They would’ve had to come up with a fool-proof plan, and get away without being caught; which is difficult for criminals even today. Wouldn’t the body have been found by now? It’s not like the disciples are still hiding it from us? To the second response I would reply “How can five-thousand people, who were first-hand witnesses claiming to see Jesus alive three days after his death, all be hallucinating?” With this one question we see that the second response is irrational. It is illogical to think that this many people, who saw Jesus alive, were all hallucinating. Lastly, to the third response I would respond with “How is it that we have found the bones, which are not disintegrated mind you, of many people before the time of Christ, but yet his two thousand year old bones are disintegrated?” How is this possible? Our museums hold bones of deceased persons thousands of years older than Christ, but two thousand years before our time Jesus’ bones have “vanished” and the only “logical” answer is that they’ve disintegrated.

I didn’t want to spend too much time on this topic but now it seems that the rest of my post will deal with this, but I will do a second part to this post and will deal with the topics I mentioned in the opening paragraph. The above responses to the resurrection of Jesus Christ are not the only “excuses” given. People will make up anything, logical or not, to negate the idea that Jesus actually rose from the dead. Because if he had truly risen from the dead this makes him not just a good man or a prophet, but it makes him God. Unlike the Egyptian pharaohs and kings, plus many other men across history who’ve claimed to be gods, Jesus rose from the dead, was seen by multitudes of people, and even physically ate and drank before he ascended up to heaven. No other person in the world did this. The pharaohs were looked on as gods, but were they truly? The people of Egypt believed that when a pharaoh, their god mind you, physically died (as every other human) they would rise, not in this world but the one to come, and reign with the other gods in the afterlife. But did any one of them actually rise from the dead in this world? In fact has anyone who has ever claimed themselves as god risen in this world after their death? There is only one who has been claimed to, and that is Jesus Christ. Not only did Jesus show himself to masses of people three days after his death (Mat. 28:1-10, 16-20, Mark 16:9-20, Lk. 24:13-53, Jhn. 20:11-17, 19-31, 21:1-14, 1 Cor. 15:3-8), but he physically sat down and ate a meal which is recorded twice in the Bible. “But they constrained him [Jesus], saying, Abide with us; for it is toward evening, and the day is far spent. And he went in to tarry with them. And it came to pass, as he sat at meat with them, he took bread, and blessed it, and brake, and gave to them (Luke 24:29-30, NKJV).” “Jesus saith unto them, Come and dine. And none of the disciples durst ask him, Who art thou? knowing that it was the Lord. Jesus then cometh, and taketh bread, and giveth them, and fish likewise (John 21:12-13, NKJV).” How can a dead man, a hallucination, or a spirit (as some may think) eat meals with his disciples after his death? To do this Jesus must have fully risen from the dead.

Another factor we must look at is that Jesus’ body still held the wounds that he received through his crucifixion, and he showed not just one, but many, people this: “Now Thomas, called the Twin, one of the twelve, was not with them when Jesus came. The other disciples therefore said to him, We have seen the Lord. So he said to them, Unless I see in His hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and put my hand into His side, I will not believe. And after eight days His disciples were again inside, and Thomas with them. Jesus came, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said, Peace to you! Then He said to Thomas, Reach your finger here, and look at My hands; and reach your hand here, and put it into My side. Do not be unbelieving, but believing (John 20:24-28, NKJV).” So Jesus not only appeared to many people, including his disciples, but ate with them and lived with them as if he had not died. Jesus has been identified as an actual historical figure and even those who do not claim themselves as Christians have come to see this fact. So we cannot deny that there was a man named Jesus who did indeed tick-off the religious leaders of his time, was sentenced to be crucified, and was put to death on a cross. History shows that Jesus lived and died, but because of the fact that he lived again, rose from the dead, is so unbelievable and mind-boggling it is never considered to be true. The four Gospel writer’s give first-hand accounts of Jesus’ life and death, but that is all most historians take as truth from these writer’s. But why take only part of the recorded information and not all? If you believe that Jesus lived, upset certain higher-ups, and was put to death. Then you must take the rest of the story as truth. These men who wrote these Gospel accounts lived with Jesus, talked with him, ate the same food as him, and saw him put to death. Then why can’t we believe that the four writers are recording correct information when they say that Jesus rose from the dead? Was there some kind of hallucinogen in their wine or bread?

Jesus appeared to one more person after his ascension. Paul, who was Saul, was one of those religious officials that Jesus disturbed, and he went about putting to death anyone who claimed to be a follower of Christ. But then something happened that changed his life forever: “Then Saul, still breathing threats and murder against the disciples of the Lord, went to the high priest and asked letters from him to the synagogues of Damascus, so that if he found any who were of the Way, whether men or women, he might bring them bound to Jerusalem. As he journeyed he came near Damascus, and suddenly a light shone around him from heaven. Then he fell to the ground, and heard a voice saying to him, ‘Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting Me?’ And he said, ‘Who are You, Lord?’ Then the Lord said, ‘I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting. It is hard for you to kick against the goads.’ So he, trembling and astonished, said, ‘Lord, what do You want me to do?’ Then the Lord said to him, ‘Arise and go into the city, and you will be told what you must do.’ And the men who journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice but seeing no one. Then Saul arose from the ground, and when his eyes were opened he saw no one. But they led him by the hand and brought him into Damascus (Acts 9:1-8, NKJV).” Saul who persecuted and killed Christians becomes Paul, and he goes on to become one of the most influential leaders of the early Christian churches, and the first missionary. Paul talks about the resurrection of Jesus in one of his letter to the Corinthians, and he tells them that if his story doesn’t convince them that Jesus truly rose from the dead. That there are those still alive who were there at Jesus’ death and witnessed his resurrection; Peter was one of these. “For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures, and that He was seen by Cephas, then by the twelve. After that He was seen by over five hundred brethren at once, of whom the greater part remain to the present, but some have fallen asleep. After that He was seen by James, then by all the apostles. Then last of all He was seen by me also, as by one born out of due time (1 Corinthians 15:3-8, NKJV).” Paul gives us a role call of all the people who saw Jesus alive three days after his death and this evidence is very convincing that Jesus truly was God.

Christians put a lot of focus on the death of Christ but for Paul, and for many others (including myself), the basis of the Christian faith and belief is the resurrection. “Now if Christ is preached that He has been raised from the dead, how do some among you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? But if there is no resurrection of the dead, then Christ is not risen. And if Christ is not risen, then our preaching is empty and your faith is also empty. Yes, and we are found false witnesses of God, because we have testified of God that He raised up Christ, whom He did not raise up—if in fact the dead do not rise. ¹⁶ For if the dead do not rise, then Christ is not risen. And if Christ is not risen, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins! Then also those who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished. If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men the most pitiable (1 Corinthians 15:12-19, NKJV).”  

Egypt’s Monuments Part I: The Birth of The Pyramids Part I; The History of The Early Dynastic Tombs

This next series will be from a book that I am reading through at the moment called The Pyramids: Their Archaeology and History by the Egyptologist Miroslav Verner. This series is going to be a little different from the posts I usually write, but I hope my readership will enjoy it nonetheless. I won’t be able to go through the entire book, it is a four-hundred and so page book, but I will be dealing with key chapters. In the first part of Verner’s book he deals with the birth of the pyramids and the early history of Egypt. This post will be looking at that history and the start of tombs among the rulers of Egypt.

The first chapter of Miroslav Verner’s book, Before The Pyramids, deals with the unstable history of Egypt before it became the developed Egypt that we read so much about. There are many key factors that made Egypt what it was during the Dynastic period of Egypt, and we must survey these factors if we wish to learn the full purpose of the pyramids; and why they were created. Before the Dynastic period of Egypt the country was split and you had the upper portion of Egypt fighting against the lower portion. The Dynastic period started with the uniting of both Upper and Lower Egypt, but who was the royal who accomplished this task? There is a Palette of a king, dating to about 3000 B.C., that tells of his victory in doing this, but like most archaeological finds the recent discoveries claim that this king was not the only one to try to unite Egypt. “Recent Archaeological research suggests, however, that Narmer [The King of the palette] was not the first king to unify Upper and Lower Egypt. In particular, the German excavations in the cemetery at Umm El-Qaab, near Abydos, have shown that the fourteen predecessors of Narmer buried there, who constituted the so-called Zero Dynasty, must have reigned over all Egypt at least part of the time, so that the true era of unification had already begun some two centuries earlier.” (Miroslav Verner, The Pyramids: Their Archaeology and History. New York: Grove Press, 1997, p. 15). Even though many ruler’s attempted to unite both portions of Egypt many couldn’t keep the two parts unified, because there was no set city in those times and you only had an Agricultural society; besides the royals. Both parts of Egypt, the Southern and Northern parts, had different forms of lively-hood. So throughout the first three Dynastic periods the kings of that time had difficulties uniting Upper and Lower Egypt. The first real developed city arrived in the Fist Dynasty period with King Aha who was one of Narmer’s sons. “Construction of the White Walls, the fortified residence of the Egyptian kings, began in the age of unification, and was located on the boundary between the Nile Valley and the delta. The city that gradually grew up around the fortification was later known as Mennefer (Greek Memphis) and ultimately extended over several square miles.” (Miroslav Verner, The Pyramids: Their Archaeology and History, p. 16).

Even though the royals now had a residence it was not permanent, and they would have to travel to secure their status and govern their people. “Until well into the First Dynasty Egyptian rulers had no permanent residence. In the biennial “Horus-procession” they crossed the whole country with their retinue, in order to collect taxes, administer justice, and show themselves to the people.” (Miroslav Verner, The Pyramids: Their Archaeology and History, p. 17). According to Verner this was similar to the monarchs of Europe in Medieval times: “European rulers did the same thing in the early Middle Ages, thus creating the system of Palatinates.” (Miroslav Verner, The Pyramids: Their Archaeology and History, p.17). This instability of the first three Dynastic periods occurred until in the end of the Second Dynasty:

“During the early or Thinite period (as the reign of the first two dynasties is also known), the prolonged, complicated, and often conflictual process of shaping the ancient Egyptian state that had begun toward the end of the prehistoric era, around the middle of the fourth millennium B.C.E, was finally brought to a conclusion. The fusion of the fundamentally different cultural groups of the delta and the Nile Valley played a major role in this process……In contrast to the predynastic monarchs from Hierakonpolis, the princes of the great cities in the delta were probably not able to extend their rule beyond the local level. Consequently they could not avoid military subjection to the king. Initially, the violently created bond between Upper and Lower Egypt was not very stable, being threatened by various political, economic, and religious interests.” (Miroslav Verner, The Pyramids, p. 20-22).

This type of rule caused a lot of problems for the monarchs and for Egypt itself. There were a lot of Rebellions, cues, and overall instability of the economy and government. But, finally, after years of kings and rulers attempting to unite and join the two portions of Egypt, one king succeeded to actually do what many before him had tried……The unification of Upper and Lower Egypt, and this became known as the Old Kingdom era. King Khasekhem was the monarch who finally unified Egypt so it became the prosperous Old Kingdom, and those after him furthered the development of Egypt as a whole and the Upper and Lower parts never went back to the ways of the Thinite age. “This time, it seems he [Khasekhem] was successful. The subsequent long period of internal stability and relative shelter from outside influences was the crucial precondition that allowed the Old Kingdom (from the Third Dynasty to the Sixth Dynasty) to flourish.” (Miroslav Verner, The Pyramids: Their Archaeology and History, p. 22). This is the history of Egypt’s instability before the Old Kingdom was created, and from this time one most “Pharaohs,” although this word wasn’t adopted by royalty until the New Kingdom, wore the two crowns of Upper and Lower Egypt together. Upper Egypt rulers wore the white crown while Lower Egypt rulers wore the red crown, and they were combined in the Old Kingdom era. Until towards the end of the Middle Kingdom era and through the New Kingdom different types of crowns were worn but the Uraeus (the rearing cobra) is almost always seen worn with the headdresses.

Lastly I will go over the design and outline of the tombs with which the rulers of the Zero Dynasty to the Second Dynasty were buried. These tombs can be compared and contrasted to the tombs that we typically see the Pharaohs of Egypt buried in; the pyramids. The Early Dynastic tombs were completely different from the pyramids in size, but not in the amount of chambers and storage. “These tombs already consisted of entire complexes of rooms and were located in the desert. In the late Zero Dynasty, a tomb’s underground portion consisted of a burial chamber and one or more storerooms for accessories to be used by the dead pharaoh in the beyond.” (Miroslav Verner, The Pyramids: Their Archaeology and History, p. 24). When a royal was buried everything that they owned was buried with them for the afterlife. Tombs and pyramids were built for religious reasons and I will go into the religion behind them in my next post, because it is interesting to see the rituals and worship of the Pharaoh and how his tomb was to send him on to the afterlife. Tombs always had statues, artwork, and all other kinds of decorations outside the entrance: “Two stone Stelae stood in front of the faced of the tomb.” (Miroslav Verner, The Pyramids: Their Archaeology and History, p. 24). Another ancient ritual that was used in many different cultures was that not only would the deceased bring all of their possessions with them but they would also bring their household: wives, servants, and even pets. Viking rulers would be buried within their boats with their wives, servants, and even their dogs and horses. Egyptians would mummify their dogs and pets as well. Verner states that the tombs of the Early Dynastic era the wives were buried in their own secondary tombs, and it is unknown if these wives were buried at the same time of the king or not. “From the time of King Aha onward, the royal tombs were surrounded by so-called secondary tombs, the number of which came to 338 under King Djer. The royal cemetery in Abydos was later plundered and burned, and its original form is now virtually impossible to reconstruct. However, the rulers’ servants and wives seem to have been buried in the secondary tombs. We do not yet know whether they were killed during the burial ceremony and immediately interred with the ruler.” (Miroslav Verner, The Pyramids: Their Archaeology and History, p. 24). So even though these Early Dynastic tombs were similar to the pyramids with the storerooms and secondary tombs they are different in size and ceremonial decorations. Later rulers of Egypt decorated created their tombs as extravagant as they wanted and we can see this with tombs such as the Giza pyramids and the Valley of the Kings. In my next post I will be dealing with the religion side of these Early Dynastic tombs and how it connects with the ancient society. The rituals and ceremonies used in the Thinite era were passed on all throughout the Dynastic periods, so through the Old Kingdom, Middle Kingdom, and the New Kingdom.

The Epic Tragedy Part III: The Beginning of Athenian Law As Shown In The Oresteia

This will be my final post on Aeschylus’ trilogy the Oresteia. I really enjoyed going through this Greek classic and showing that in these classics we can see Greek culture, lifestyle, and thought. Through the stories, epics, and myths used in all cultures we are able to see how people in that culture truly lived, worshiped their gods, and even their habits and thoughts. We see that just from their artwork and writing how the Egyptians truly lived, and we see the same thing from the Greek classics. We can come to learn everything about their culture, even how they ate and dressed, through these classics and also through the Mythology. This can be seen in many ancient cultures other than Greece, but going through Aeschylus’ work we are able to see this clearly.

Here I will give a synopsis of the last play in the Oresteia tragedy, The Eumenides. Unlike the other two plays where the gods are only mentioned in The Eumenides the gods play significant roles. The play begins with the oracle of Apollo praying, giving us a hint of what is to come, and when she leaves we find Orestes and the furies at the temple. Orestes is not bothered by the furies because they had been put to sleep by the god Apollo, and as we saw in the second play of the Oresteia it was Apollo who had drove Orestes to avenge his father. So Apollo kept his word that he wouldn’t fail Orestes in the fact that he is protecting Orestes from the Furies here. Apollo tells Orestes that he must keep moving until he reaches the citadel of Pallas, which is another name used for Athena, and Apollo sends Hermes with Orestes. Orestes follows Apollo’s orders and leaves following Hermes. After they leave the ghost of Clytaemnestra arrives and tries to wake the Furies, which takes some time, but when the Leader of the Furies finally awakes she awakes the rest. Apollo comes out from his sanctuary and is infuriated at the Furies for desecrating his temple and they leave, not because his threats, but to continue their hunt for Orestes. They find him at the citadel of Pallas hugging the knees of the goddess and praying. The Furies circle around him getting ready for the kill while Orestes prays to Athena for help. Athena shows up to see the Furies poised to kill Orestes who is hugging her knees. The Leader of the Furies tells Athena That Orestes killed his mother and Athena listens to the Fury respectfully but then says “Two sides are here, and only half is heard.”(Aeschylus The Eumenides, p. 250. Lines 440). She then turns to Orestes to hear his side of the story, and when hearing both sides of the story she then decides that the case should be properly judged. She tells both sides to call for their witnesses to come forth, and also to gather their evidence, while she would gather ten citizens of Athens to judge the matter. In the end Orestes is found not guilty and is let free. Athena persuades the Furies to give up their occupation of hunting and killing to work under her as peace-makers. Justice becomes what it was truly meant to be and the Furies become the rightful protectors of justice, which is what they were truly meant to be. So in this three part tragedy the ending turns out for the better. Orestes is let free to go back to Argos and rule, the Furies become the protectors of justice in the way they were meant to be, and “justice” itself evolves from its circular form into what would become one of the most developed judicial systems in the ancient world.

In the next two paragraphs I am going to deal with the idea of “justice” in the last play of Aeschylus’ trilogy, The Eumenides. We saw in my last post that in the first two tragedies “Justice” was circular in the fact that anyone who wanted revenge could call that revenge just, whether their intentions were truly just or not. We saw that Clytaemnestra, who killed Agamemnon for sacrificing their daughter, had other intentions than just this for killing her husband. Also the circular form of justice is seen with Clytaemnestra killing Agamemnon because he killed their daughter, and then Orestes killing Clytaemnestra to avenge his father, and the Furies chase Orestes to kill him for killing his own mother. In this last play of the Oresteia an example of how justice and law are viewed differently from the last two plays is shown, and also Aeschylus shows us that this was the start of a judicial system that become one of the most developed in ancient history. The court scene in The Eumenides takes place when the Furies find Orestes hugging the knees of the Athena’s statue in the citadel of Pallas. Athena comes into the citadel to find the Furies circled around Orestes, who is hugging the knees of her statue, and after hearing both sides of the story she tells them that the matter needs to be judged correctly. The Furies then ask Athena if she would judge the issue and she  states: “You would turn over responsibility to me, to reach the final verdict?” (p. 251. Lines 446-47). and the Leader of Furies answers by saying “Certainly. We respect you. You show us respect.” (p. 251. Lines 448-49). This court scene is very similar to our court of law today and I will be comparing the court scene in The Eumenides to our society’s judicial system. Athena informs the Furies that she will obtain ten of the best citizens in Athens to judge over the case: “Too large a matter, some may think, for mortal men to judge. But by all rights not even I should decide a case of murder – murder whets the passions. But since the matter comes to rest on us, I will appoint the judges of manslaughter, swear them in, and found a tribunal here for all time to come. My contestants, summon your trusted witnesses and proofs, your defenders under oath to help your cause. And I will pick the finest men of Athens, return and decide the issue fairly, truly – bound to our oaths, our spirits bent on justice.” (p.252-253. Lines 484-87, 497-505). We see here that Athena sets up the court room scene: both the Furies and Orestes are to bring their witnesses and evidence, Athena is the judge, and the ten men of Athens are the jury.

Athena first separates the Furies and Orestes and she stands in between them and the two urns which are to be used for the ballots for the final vote at the end of the trial. Athena tells all that are present: “And while this court of judgement fills, my city, silence will be best. So that you can learn my everlasting laws.” (p. 256. Lines 576-78). From the sentence above and this sentence “and found a tribunal here for all time to come.” (p. 253. Lines 498-99). Aeschylus is showing that this was the beginning of the new law and justice system in Athens that the Greeks would use for years to come, and that would be carried on into the Roman empire. The trial begins and Athena shows us that Orestes is the defendant, Apollo comes in as his witness (but also plays some major parts as Orestes attorney), she is the judge, and the Leader of the Furies is the prosecutor. “The trial begins! Yours [The Furies] is the first word – the prosecution opens. Start to finish, set the facts before us, make them clear.” (p. 256. Lines 588-90). The Furies start by questioning Orestes and they ask if he killed his mother, the woman that bare him, and their case is that it was unjust for him to kill his mother. Orestes doesn’t deny that he killed his mother, and that Apollo was the one to drive him on in avenging his father, but he brings up a valid point; the fact that he didn’t kill an innocent woman. “She had two counts against her, deadly crimes. She killed her husband – killed my father too.” (p. 258. Lines 606-08). So was it truly unjust for him to kill his mother, who was also a killer, to avenge his father? Orestes asks Apollo if what he did was just or not. Apollo replies by saying: “Just, I say to you and your high court, Athena.” (p. 259. Lines 620-21). He claims that the command to avenge Agamemnon came from Zeus, “This is his justice – omnipotent, I warn you. Bend to the will of Zeus. No oath can match the power of the Father.” (p. 259. Lines 626-28). The Furies issue is the “power” or “rank” of the mother, the fact that she was the one who bore Orestes, but Apollo’s case is the “power” and “position” of the father. So in a sense it is a trial of the matriarch vs. the patriarch, and who holds the highest status. The Leader of the Furies asks: “You’d force this man’s acquittal? Behold, justice [she says this mockingly]! Can a son spill his mother’s blood on the ground, then settle into his father’s halls in Argos?” (p. 260. Lines 660-62). Apollo answers the Fury with a key piece of evidence that turns the scales and aids in favor of Orestes. “The woman you call the mother of the child is not the parent, just a nurse to seed, the new-sown seed that grows and swells inside her. The man is the source of life – the one who mounts.” (p. 260. Lines 666-69). Apollo’s proof for this claim is Athena who was born out of Zeus himself without a mother. “The father can father forth without a mother. Here she [Athena] stands, our living witness. Child sprung full-blown from Olympian Zeus, never bred in darkness of the womb but such a stock no goddess could conceive.” (p. 261. Lines 673-77). Even though women were highly respected in Greek culture they were still seen as lower than the man, and this thought-frame is seen in this myth of Zeus giving birth to Athena; who was fully grown when she was born. But there are different versions of this story and in one of them Zeus wound up eating Athena’s mother while she was pregnant. From inside his belly Athena grew and one day Zeus had a “splitting” headache and told Hephaestus to split open his skull; and out comes Athena fully garbed in her war regalia. In this version of the myth we see that even though Zeus bore Athena into the world, he did not initially give birth to her. This was the turning point in the trial and after Apollo brings this piece of evidence before the court Athena calls for the votes from the “jury.” Orestes is acquitted and Athena offers the Furies a different form of occupation then the one they had, and they become what Athena calls the “guards of Athens,” (p. 273. 960). and instead of hate and fury they bring joy and peace; they become the Eumenides.

Different cultures had some form of law and justice within it, and that law was the basis of these societies and civilizations; whether it was monarchical or democratic like with Athens. Here I will show a good example of a judicial system used in another ancient society; Judaism. In the book of Exodus after the Israelites were let go from Egypt and after the parting of the sea, Moses led them to Mount Sinai and the wilderness. While there his Father-in-law, Jethro, came to meet him and the children of Israel. Jethro observed that people would line up from dawn to dusk to see Moses and have him judge their matters (Exodus 18:13). Jethro asks Moses about this and why he is the only one to judge the people, and Moses’ replies: “When they have a matter, they come unto me; and I judge between one and another, and I do make them know the statutes of God, and his laws (Ex. 18:16, KJV).” Jethro tells Moses that this is not good and he offers him some advice on how to make judging easier for him: “Listen now to my voice; I will give you counsel, and God will be with you: Stand before God for the people, so that you may bring the difficulties to God. And you shall teach them the statutes and the laws, and show them the way in which they must walk and the work they must do. Moreover you shall select from all the people able men, such as fear God, men of truth, hating covetousness; and place such over them to be rulers of thousands, rulers of hundreds, rulers of fifties, and rulers of tens. And let them judge the people at all times. Then it will be that every great matter they shall bring to you, but every small matter they themselves shall judge. So it will be easier for you, for they will bear the burden with you. If you do this thing, and God so commands you, then you will be able to endure, and all this people will also go to their place in peace (Ex. 18:19-23, NKJV).” Moses takes his father-in-laws advice and sets this up as the way the nation of Israel is to take care of matters. This was the form of law and justice until the time of Saul when the people decided that they wanted to follow other culture’s footsteps and have a king to rule over them. The book of Judges deals with this form of judicial system that Moses set up, and the judges were placed to “rule” over the people of Israel. Here is an example of the judicial system that was put over Israel before the time of kings and the law turned monarchical.