Nineteenth Dynasty
That for Egypt herself the reign of Ramesses II was a period of great
prosperity cannot be doubted. Monuments of the period, dated and
undated, are very numerous, but are mostly memorials of individual
persons throwing little or no light upon the state of the country as a whole.
The value of recent attempts to construct a coherent picture out of the titles
born by such individuals need not be denied, but the results thus obtained
are too speculative to receive more that a passing glance in the present
book. To mention here only the highest functionaries of the administrative
and the priestly orders respectively, it may be noted that the vizierate was
usually in the hands of a single dignitary, though as the ousts there was one
vizier for Upper Egypt and another for Lower Egypt. The High-priest of
Amen-Re' at Thebes certainly retained his pre-eminence in his own
sphere, but his office was not yet hereditary, and we have no means of
knowing to what extent the wealth of the god's estate had increased or
diminished since the religious revolution. Two of these pontiffs are
interested only to tell us by what steps and at what ages they climbed to
the top of the priestly ladder. An exception to such tedious information is
found on the walls of a tomb at Saqqara belonging to a no more exalted
personage than a scribe of the treasury in the Memphite temple of Ptah.
Here are set forth at length the proceedings in a trial in which matter at
stake was the ownership of a tract of land in the neighborhood of
Memphis. This estate, the plaintiff Mose maintained, had been given by
King Amosis as a reward to his ancestor Neshi, a ship's captain. Much
litigation arose in subsequent generations. In the time of Haremhab, the
Great Court sitting the Heliopolis and presided over by the Vizier sent a
commissioner the locality where the property was, whereupon a lady
named Wernero was appointed to cultivate the land as trustee for her
brothers and her sisters. Objection to this arrangement having been raised
by a sister named Takharu, a new division was made whereby the estate,
hitherto indivisible, was parceled out between the six heirs. Against this
decision Mose's father Huy appealed together with his mother Wernero,
but Huy died at this juncture, and when his widow Nubnofre set about
cultivating her husband's inheritance she was forcibly ejected by a man
named Kha'y. As a consequence Nubnofre brought an action, dated to year
of 18 of Ramesses II, went against hr, and it was only later that Mose, by
this time presumably grown to manhood, appealed for the verdict to be
reversed. His deposition was immediately followed by that of the
defendant Kha'y, and it is from their combined statements that we learn
what had happened. When the Vizier came to examine the title-deeds he
could not fail to perceive that there had been forgery on one side or the
other. Nubnofre then proposed that a commissioner should be sent with
Kha'y to consult the official records of Pharaoh's treasury and granary at
the northern capital of Pi-Ra'messe. To her dismay her husband's name
was not found in the registers which the two, acting in collusion, brought
back with them, and accordingly the Vizier, after further inquiry, gave
judgment in favor of Kha'y, who received in consequence 13 arouras of
land. To Mose, determined to recover his rights, no alternative was now
open but to establish with the help of sworn witnesses the facts of his
descent from Neshi and of his father's having cultivated the estate year by
year and having paid the taxes on it. The testimony afforded by the men
and women cited by him, taken together with the written evidence
previously used, no longer left any uncertainty as to the rightness of his
cause, and though the end of the hieroglyphic inscription is lost we cannot
doubt that the Great Court together with the lesser one at Memphis
delivered a final verdict re-established Mose in his inheritance. The
colorful and vivid story here told, though dealing with only a small estate
and relatively unimportant litigants, is so illuminating that it cannot be
studied with too great care. One point of importance that emerges is the
equality of men and women as regards both proprietorship and
competence in the law-courts.
The second half of Ramesses II's reign seems to have been free from
major wars. Khattusilis's son and successor Tudhaliyas IV was too much
absorbed with his western frontier and with his religious duties to give
control to any aggressive intentions, and indeed the once so powerful
Hittite Empire was already moving towards it decline. However, in
keeping the peace with Khatti Egypt, was merely exchanging one
adversary for another still more formidable? It was no longer a question
of Egypt's upholding her sovereignty in a distant province, now her own
borders were seriously threatened. It is unnecessary to suppose that
Sethos I's conflict with the Tjehnu depicted as at Karnak was a very big
affair, but it foreshadowed the trouble which was to come from that
quarter before long. There is written evidence that the north-west corner
of the Delta was protected from Libyan invasion by a chain of fortresses
extending along the Mediterranean coast. Many stele of the time of
Ramesses II have come to light near El-'Alamein and others even still
farther to the west. At Es-Sebua' in Lower Nubia, an inscription of year
44 tells of Tjemhu captives employed in the building of the temple there.
It was in the fifth year of Mereptah that the danger came to a head, the
ringleader being Maraye, son of Did, the king of that tribe of Libu
(Libyans) which here makes its first appearance. Among the allies of his
won race were the already mentioned Kehek and Meshwesh, but he had
also summoned to his aid five 'peoples of the sea'; forerunners of the great
migratory movement about to descend on Egypt and Palestine from north
and west. The names of these confederates are of the utmost interest since,
like the Dardanians and Luka (Lycians) who supported the Hittites at the
battle of Kadesh, they introduce us, or seem to introduce us, to racial
groups familiar from the early Hellenic world. The Akawasha mentioned
here but never again hereafter are as a rule confidently equated with the
Achaeans of Mycenaean Greece, but the writing does not quite square
with that of the much disputed Ahhiyawa of the Hittite tablets, who at all
events have an equal claim. The Luka appear to have played only a minor
part, and occur in the Egyptian records only once again in the name of a
slave. To identify the Tursha with the Tyrsenoi, often asserted to be the
ancestors of the Etruscans, is too tempting to be dismissed out of hand,
like the Shekresh or Sheklesh who so irresistibly recall the name of the
Sikeloi or Sicilians. The presumption that some of the Tursha and the
Sheklesh fought on the side of the Egyptians is certainly due to a
mistranslation. Unhappily there are no reliefs to illustrate the appearance
of these enemies of Mereptah. The only clue to their identity, beyond their
names, is the indication that the Libu were uncircumcised; therefore, they
were made to suffer the dishonor of having the genitals of their slain piled
up for presentation to the king. The Sherden, Sheklesh, Akawasha and
Tursha, being circumcised as the Egyptians themselves had been from
time immemorial, received only the lesser disgrace of their hands being
cut off and presented instead. However, this indication complicates the
problem rather than the reverse. We may perhaps sum up the probabilities
regarding these 'peoples of the sea' by saying that since all their names so
readily find affinities in the Hellenic world, some at least of the proposed
identifications are likely to be correct. However, there is no guarantee
that the tribes in question were already located in the places where they
ultimately settled down.
The details of Merenptah's great victory over the invaders were recounted
in a long inscription carved on a wall of the temple of Karnak. The
topmost blocks of the vertical columns of hieroglyphs having disappeared,
not enough remains to slake our curiosity; nor is the situation remedied by
some equally defective narratives from elsewhere. What we do glean,
however, is highly interesting. It was no mere excursion in quest of
plunder that had been attempted, but permanent settlement in a new home.
Maraye and his allies had brought their women and children with them, as
well as cattle and a wealth of weapons and utensils which were
subsequently captured. Yet, it was want that had prompted them to this
venture.
Such was the nature of the Libyans as it appeared to Merenptah on hearing
of the graver attack that now confronted him. The attack must have come
from pretty far west, from Cyrenaica or even beyond, since Maraye's first
move was to descend upon and occupy the land of Tjehnu. It was not long
before they had plundered the frontier fortresses, and some of them had
even penetrated to the oasis of Farafra. The Great River or Canopic
branch of the Nile marked, however, the limit of their advance, and the
decisive battle, when it came, seems to have been at an unidentified
locality named Pi-yer, doubtless well within the Delta. It is plain that
Merenptah himself took no part in the struggle. He must have been already
an old man when he came to the throne. Still the victory was naturally
credited him, after he had seen in a dream a great image of the god Ptah
who handed him a scimitar saying 'Take hold here and put off the faint
heart from thee'. Six hours of fighting sufficed to rout the enemy, the
wretched Maraye escaping capture by fleeing homeward at dead of night.
The total of Libyans killed exceeded 6,000, not counting many hundreds of
the allies, and of prisoners taken there seem to have been more than 9,000.
These at least are the figures which emerge form the two damaged sources
at our disposal, but of course we must make allowance for the usual
exaggeration.
The mention of Israel in Egyptian writing is unique, and could not fail to
be disturbing to scholars who at the time of the discovery in 1896 mostly
believed Merenptah to have been the Pharaoh of the Exodus. The
explanations now given are numerous. Actually, the name does not occur
again in non-Biblical sources until after the middle of the ninth century
BC, when Mesha King of Moab is said to have fought with Israel. That
Merenptah actually did put forth some military activity in Palestine is
confirmed by the epithet 'reducer of Gezer' which he receives in an
inscription at Amada. Otherwise, conditions on the north-eastern front
appear to have remained peaceful and normal. Extracts from the journal of
a border official, dated in Merenptah's year 3, enumerate the successive
sendings of dispatches to different garrison-commanders and other
persons, among them the prince of Tyre. A literary papyrus, probably
written in Merenptah's reign, contains a composition which is as
instructive as it is amusing. This professes to be the reply by a scribe,
Hori, to a letter just received from his friend the scribe Amenemope.
After the elaborate greetings and compliments, Hori expresses his
disappointment and then launches out on a long ironic demonstration of
Amenemope's incompetence. The helpers, whom he has called to his aid,
have not improved matters. Various situations are cited in proof of the
criticisms: Amenemope has failed in his tasks of supplying the troops with
rations, of building a ramp, of erecting a colossal statue, and so forth. But
it is his ignorance of northern Syria which comes in for the severest
condemnation. Many well-known places are named which this pretender
to the rank of maher has never visited or where some trouble or other has
befallen him. He has never reached Beisan or crossed the Jordan. He
knows nothing about Byblos or Tyre. His horse has run away and his
chariot has been smashed. Even towns as near at hand as Raphia and Gaza
are unknown to him. Needless to say, one of the chief reasons for writing
this strange work has been to give the author the chance of airing his own
knowledge. Historically the text is enlightened inasmuch as there must
have been a class of able scribes who had an intimate acquaintance with
Palestine and Syria and were accustomed to travel there without mishap.
It is under Ramesses II, at latest, that an entirely different source of
cultural and historical information begins to assume outstanding
importance. Whether or not the Pharaoh now lived at and governed from
one or other of the Delta capitals, he always aspired to burial in the
ancestral necropolis of skilled workmen was continuously engaged upon
the excavation and decoration of his tomb in the Biban el-Moluk. These
men and their families formed a special community dwelling in the village
of Der el-Medina high up in the desert above the great funerary temple of
Amenophis III and every aspect of their lives and interests is revealed in
the writings found either here or in the actual place of their daily work.
Papyrus being comparatively rare, expensive and perishable, most of
what has survived is inscribed on the scraps of limestone and the
pot-shreds which lay on the ground only asking to be used and which
Egyptologists known under the somewhat inappropriate name of 'ostraca'.
Thousands have been published and thousands more await publication in
our museums or in private hands. Besides literary, religious, and magical
fragments there are records of barter, payment of wages in corn or copper,
hire of donkeys for agricultural purposes, lawsuits, attendance at and
absences from work, visits of high officials, model and actual letters, in
fact memoranda of every kind. No synthesis can be here attempted, but it
was necessary to mention a mass of material through which a restricted,
but not significant, picture of Ramesside life can be brought before the
eyes of the modern reader.
Merenptah was an old man when he died, bald and obese. His end may
have been thought to be approaching as early as his eighth year, when the
preparations for his funeral were being actively pursued. Nevertheless, he
lingered on for two years more. No doubt he was buried in the granite
sarcophagus of which the beautiful lid is still to be seen in this tomb in the
Biban el-Moluk, but at some later period his mummy was moved to the
tomb of Amenophis II, where Loret discovered it in 1898. With his death,
we enter upon a series of rather short reigns, the sequence of which has
been much debated. The problem is of the kind at once the joy and the
torment of Egyptologists. Prominent here again is the question of
superimposed cartouches, another royal name being substituted for one
that has been chiseled out. Arguments based upon this procedure are, as
has been already said, highly uncertain. Apart from the difficulty of
deciding which name lies uppermost, there always remains the possibility
that this belonged to the earlier of the two kings, having been restored as
the result of some loyalty or animosity which cannot now be understood.
Here the reader must rest content with a bare statement of what seems the
most probable course of events. There is little doubt but that Merenptah
was followed by his son SetI-merenptah, mostly known as Sethos II.
Memoranda on ostraca mention both the date of his accession and that of
his death, this latter occurring in his sixth year. In the meantime, a certain
Neferhotep, one of the two chief workmen of the necropolis, had been
replaced by another named Pneb, against whom many crimes were alleged
by Neferhotep's brother Amennakhte in a violently worded indictment
preserved in a papyrus in the British Museum. If Amennakhte can be
trusted, Pneb had stolen stone for the embellishment of his own tomb from
that of Sethos II still in course of completion, besides purloining or
damaging other property belonging to that monarch. Also he had tried to
kill Neferhotep in spite of having been educated by him, and after the
chief workman had been killed by 'the enemy' had bribed the vizier
Pra'emhab in order to usurp his place. Whatever the truth of these
accusations, it is clear that Thebes was going through very troubled times.
There are references elsewhere to a 'war' that had occurred during these
years, but it is obscure to what this word alludes, perhaps to no more than
internal disturbances and discontent. Neferhotep had complained of the
attacks upon himself to the vizier Amenmose, presumably a predecessor
of Pra'emhab, whereupon Amenmose had punished Pneb. This
trouble-maker had then brought a complaint before 'Mose', who had
deposed the vizier from his office. Evidently this 'Mose' must have been a
personage of the most exalted station, and it seems inevitable to identify
him with an ephemeral king Amenmesse whose brief reign may have
fallen either before or within that of Sethos II. A tomb belonging to
Amenmesse exists in the Biban el-Moluk, but it is a relatively poor affair
in which most of the decorations have been erased, though enough of the
inscriptions remains to furnish us with the name of his mother Takha'e,
possibly a daughter of Ramesses II. The monument of Sethos II are scanty,
the most imposing being a small temple in the forecourt at Karnak, and
nothing more is known about the events of his reign. In his well-decorated
tomb his cartouches have been erased and later replaced, the erasure
being perhaps the handiwork of Amenmesse. Elliot Smith, describing his
mummy found in the tomb of Amenophis II, speaks of him as a young or
middle-aged man.
His immediate successor was a son who was at first given the name
Ra'messe-Siptah, but who for some mysterious reason changed it to
Merenptah-Siptah before the third year of his reign. He is closely
associated in most of his few inscriptions with an important functionary
named bay, who boasts of having been 'the great chancellor of the entire
land'. There is good reason for thinking that Bay was a Syrian by birth,
possibly one of those court officials who in this age frequently rose to
power by the royal favor. In two graffitis, he receives the highly
significant epithet 'who established the king upon the seat of his father' and
it is almost certain that he was in fact the actual 'king-maker'. The epithet
in question implies that Siptah was a son of Sethos II, but it is unknown of
his accession since he was still young when he died after a reign of
perhaps not more than six years. There now comes upon the scene a
remarkable woman of the name of Twosre. Jewelry discovered by
Theodore Davis in a nameless cache of the Biban el-Moluk shows her to
have been Sethos II's principal wife. A silver bracelet depicts her
standing before her husband and pouring wine into his outstretched goblet.
It is a strange and unprecedented thing that three contemporaries should
all have possessed tombs in the Valley of the Tombs of the Kings. The
tomb of Bay is small and unadorned, but still its location testifies to the
power which he must have exercised. Siptah's tomb, in which his mummy
doubtless lay until shifted to that of Amenophis II, is much more imposing,
but the cartouches on its walls have been cut out and later replaced, like
those in the tomb of Sethos II. Twosre's tomb is even more intriguing.
Here she bears the title King's Great Wife by virtue of her marriage to
Sethos II, but an isolated scene shows her standing behind Siptah who is
offering to the earth-god. Siptah's name has been destroyed and that of
Sethos II substituted for it. Since there are excellent reasons for thinking
that Sethos was the earlier of the two kings, this replacement must have
been due to Twosre's later preference to be depicted with the king who
had been her actual husband. Subsequently Sethnakhte, the founder of Dyn.
XX, took possession and possibly destroyed Twosre's mummy, after
someone had removed, to a place of safety, the jewelry above mentioned.
The sole hypothesis, which seems to account for these complicated facts,
supposes that when Bay forced the youthful Siptah onto the throne,
Twosre was compelled to accept the situation. She still retained sufficient
power to insist on having her own tomb in the Valley, an honor previously
accorded to only one other royalty of female sex, namely Hashepsowe,
Tuthmosis III's aunt. Like Hashepsowe, Twosre ultimately assumed the
titles of a Pharaoh and possibly reigned alone for a few years. Siptah had
caused a small funerary temple to be built for himself to the north of the
Ramesseum at Thebes, and here the name of Bay figures with his own on
the foundation deposits, a startling fact that goes far towards
demonstrating the interpretation here given. Of Twosre only one stray
intrusive scarab was found there. Twosre's separate funerary sanctuary to
the south of the Ramesseum may have been begun at the same time or else
may be somewhat later. Here she assumed a second cartouche which is
also found combined with the first on a plaque said to come from Kantir
in the Delta, and there are a few more traces of her reign in the north, and
even at the turquoise mines of Sinai. Manetho ends Dyn. XIX with a king
Thuoris said to have reigned seven years, and there can be but little doubt
that the distorted name and erroneous sex recall the existence of the third
woman in Egyptian history who had possessed ability enough to wrest to
herself the Double Crown, but whose power had been insufficient to
secure the perpetuation of her dynastic line.
|