Chapter 8: Egypt
Durant devotes 80 pages to Egypt in this first volume. One wonders what richness he had to leave unwritten in this brief summary. Yet Durant himself warned us (and perhaps comforted himself) at the outset of this project that writing such a Story is bigger than the work of a lifetime, and that experts in each period and civilization would surely find fault in commission, omission, currency, and detail. As Durant himself would later note, in the first chapter (titled Hesitations) of his brilliant Lessons of History: “It is a precarious enterprise, and only a fool would try to compress a hundred centuries into a hundred pages of hazardous conclusions. We proceed.”
Egypt as we remember her spans at least a third of those hundred centuries if we, as Durant, decide to count the dividing of Alexander’s empire amongst his generals and the awarding of Egypt to Ptolemy as her end. Doing so certainly opens one to argument, as one must uncomfortably end Egypt with the founding of one of her greatest cities – Alexandria. So it goes. Lines of demarcation, if they are ever obvious, are only so in retrospect.
She was a civilization measured not by kings, as with England, the names of whose rulers school children can recite; or by form of government, as with Rome; but measured by dynasty, a claim probably only approached by China. The dynasties are so numerous (no fewer than 26), that to unburden the memories of historians, they had to group them further into periods. Egypt is the grandest civilization we yet remember.
Geographically, there are two Egypts – the lower, being the Egypt of the Nile delta and the great Pyramids, and the upper being the Egypt of Memphis, Karnak, and Luxor. Politically, they started separate, merged, separated again. Ancient geographers believed that all of Egypt had once been under the sea; the delta having once been a great bay. Alexandria herself, at least the Alexandria founded by the great Macedonian, and the spot where Caesar was presented with the head of his great rival Pompey, has been rediscovered underwater by modern archaeologists. At that moment of Caesar’s dismay, Egypt was more ancient to Caesar than Caesar is to us.
You who after long years shall see these monuments, who shall speak of what I have done, you will say, “We do not know, we do not know how they can have made a whole mountain of gold.” … To gild them I have given gold measured by the bushel, as though it were sacks of grain… for I knew that Karnak is the celestial horizon of the earth.
Queen Hatshepsut, 1501-1479 BC, inscription on obelisks at Karnak
Indeed, it seems that the Egyptians themselves understood their place in history, even as they lived it. Or was it just an illusion, the Pharaoh as living God, transformed by lucky happenstance of time and the forgetting of other cultures, that has made it seem so? The former is certainly the more pleasing story. And since “most history is guessing, and the rest is prejudice” (SoC, V1, 12), are we not richer for imagining it that way?
Our knowledge of Egypt is owed almost solely to Napoleon, who led an expedition there in 1798, and, convinced of his own historical greatness and immortality, saw fit to assemble a team of brilliant engineers and scholars to document their findings, producing the first study of Egypt. If any of these scholars can be deemed the most important, surely it is Champollion, who led a 20+ year effort to unlock the mysteries of Egypt’s carvings, culminating in the translation of the Rosetta stone and the deciphering of the hieroglyphs.
We knew in Durant’s time that Egypt had been settled since as far back as 10,000 BC, reflecting again the slow progression from rough to polished stone tools. Evidence of agriculture in the region is known to at least 4000 BC. With the obsession of the historian, Durant again asks where the first Egyptians came from, and guesses that they are a combination of people from adjoining and distant regions. More modern archaeology suggests a dual answer. We continually find remains that push back the dates of first settlement at nearly every geographically significant spot where a civilization might be supported, so on the one hand it seems that the best answer might be: they were always there. On the other hand, we also continue to discover evidence of trade, immigration, migration, and simple wanderlust going back just as far. So I must conclude that there are two factors at play in the establishment of any great civilization: people were always there; they were always mixing with neighbors near and far, in encounters both friendly and hostile; and that some spark caused by the collision of the old with the new serves to ignite the flame of a new civilization.
Whatever the spark, we count the beginning of Egypt as the beginning of the Old Kingdom. And we find already at the Temple of Zoser (~3150 BC) art forms fully developed in architecture and sculpture. History once again rhymes and we almost paradoxically find the highest levels of mastery in the oldest of art. In the pyramids of Khufu, we know already of man’s belief in and quest for immortality. In the sculpture of Khafre (3067-3011 BC), we are reminded that “nature had long since learned how to make men, and art had long since learned how to represent them.” (SoC, Vol 1, p 148) In the many pyramid burials we see all of human nature, along with its evolution, preserved for our eyes and transported nearly intact to the present. Early rulers had been buried with the wives, mistresses, servants, and animals (all alive) needed to care for them and appease the gods for eternity. As wives, mistresses, and servants became weary of the practice, artists substituted life-like representations carved in bas-relief, and priests cast blessings and spells to ensure the adequacy of the substitution. While engineers sought to ensure the tombs remained untouched through clever disguise and traps, man’s greed for objects with both inherent and symbolic value, along with perhaps his jealousy, resentment and need for retributive justice, propelled thieves and vandals, archaeologists and historians to outwit the engineers.
The Old Kingdom ended following the death of Pepi II (who ruled 94 years) when Egypt settled into four centuries of tumultuous local rule by feudal barons. “… this alternation between centralized and decentralized power is one of the cyclical rhythms of history, as if men tired alternatively of immoderate liberty and excessive order.” (SoC, V1, 151) The man who re-unified Egypt, Amenemhet, survived conspiracy and rebellion, and, exhausted by the effort, left this advice for his son:
Hearken to that which I say to thee…
Amenemhet I (2212-2192 BC) to his son, Senusret I
harden thyself against all subordinates-
The people give heed to him who terrorizes them;
Approach them not alone.
Fill not thy heart with a brother,
Know not a friend…
When thou sleepest, guard for thyself thine own heart;
For a man hath no friend in the day of evil.”
We can feel his immense burden across 42 centuries, yet the administrative changes he made endured for a five centuries. His son built a canal from the Nile to the Red Sea, repelled more invaders, built temples at Heliopolis and Karnak. His descendent Senusret III annexed Palestine, drove back the Nubians, and erected a marker at the frontier to the south: “not from any desire that you should worship it, but that you should fight for it.” At the end of the period, Hyksos invaders conquered Egypt and ruled for 200 years as the “Shepherd kings.” I wonder what it was like to live during those 200 years, especially in the middle to late part of them. Did it seem that old Egypt was dead, and this was the ‘new normal?’ Or did they have a sense that conditions were temporary, but prolonged? What would we think if marauding invaders from the north had been ruling the US since, say, the end of the Lincoln Presidency? In the end (or the middle), the Hyksos grew fat and lazy and were overthrown from within, ushering in the Empire. History rhymes.
The Empire would give us what Durant describes as the Zenith of Egypt – the rule of Queen Hatshepsut, who pushed aside the designated successor to Thutmose II, assumed the mantle of King, determined her own gender and divinity, and “became one of the most successful and beneficent of Egypt’s many rulers. She maintained internal order without undue tyranny, and external peace without loss.” (SoC, V1). She restored temples damaged by the Hyksos, and on her death she established the Valley of the Kings.
When Hatshepsut died, Syria revolted, and her successor, Thutmose III, only 22 years old, launched a military campaign to put down the rebellion at a place called Har-Megiddo (Armageddon), where 3397 years later the British under Allenby would defeat the Turks (Thutmose was faster). Building on the internal stability secured by Hatshepsut and the momentum of Har-Megiddo, Thutmose III unleashed at least 15 campaigns on the Mediterranean world, and built a naval fleet to enforce his gains and help exact tribute. The riches he generated gave Egypt a new era of wealth, leisure, trade and the arts. Then Thutmose retired and set himself to the relative ease of administering his empire. “His Majesty was one who knew what happened; there was nothing of which he was ignorant; he was the god of knowledge in everything; there was no matter that he did not carry out.” (Vizier to Thuthmose III, quoted in SoC, V1, 155). I am reminded here of the brilliant scene between Alexander and Raj Porus in Pressfield’s The Virtues of War. In it, Alexander and Porus are treating on Porus’ barge in the middle of the Indus river. Alexander seeks passage across India, desiring above all to glimpse the sea at the end of the world. Between Alexander and his desire are a raging river and an Army that vastly outnumbers his own. The older Porus, greatly enjoying his conversation with Alexander and impressed with his youthful genius and energy, offers safe passage to the Macedonians. He asks in return only that Alexander take his most beautiful daughter as wife, and having become Porus’ son-in-law, that Alexander allow Porus to teach him how to be a King. Alexander is outraged! Does Porus not understand the magnitude of his conquest? Porus replies that there is a vast difference between conquering and ruling. In order to be a King, Alexander must learn how to rule. In his youthful arrogance, Alexander is enraged and hastily departs the treaty to prepare for battle. Porus has taken the measure of Alexander and found that he is not ready to rule. Might Thutmose III have been that rare ruler who successfully made the transition from conqueror to King? How amazing it would be to meet this rare man and hear his experience over a feast on the royal barge on the Nile? We can see his wise face still…
Having given us the briefest tour of the timeline of Egypt, Durant now falls back on his familiar themes Agriculture, Industry, Government, Manners, Letters, Literature, Science, Art, Philosophy, and Religion, before returning to the timeline with the Heretic King and the Decline and Fall. I shall try to explain… no there is too much, let me sum up.
Agriculture was well-developed in Egypt. Herodotus describes them in 450 BC: “They gather in the fruits of the earth with less labor than any other people.” (SoC, V1, 156). The coolest fact in this section: the ancient Egyptians trained apes to pick fruit from the trees!
Industry was as fully developed as it would become until the advent of steam power. Rivers were diverted, canals were dug, metals were alloyed, there was a modern postal service, taxes were collected, money was loaned, interest charged, and debts collected. Oddly, in an advanced economy with credit, there was no coinage.
Government was in most ways modern, and in some ways superior to modern practice. The oldest legal document known when Durant wrote was a legal brief regarding a complex inheritance case. All cases were made in writing; perjury was punishable by death. The Pharaoh was the final authority for appeal, and many government bureaucrats were sworn to office by an oath.
Morals. For the common people, monogamy was practiced widely. For the royal family, incest was common, as it would be in Europe until as late as the last century. Egypt in practice was largely matriarchal, with a husband’s property and future earnings being made over to his wife as part of the marriage agreement.
Manners. Durant describes the Egyptians as the Americans of antiquity (remember he wrote in about 1930): “enamored of size, given to gigantic engineering and majestic building, industrious and accumulative, practical even in the midst of many ultramundane superstitions.” (SoC, V1, 167)
Letters. Egypt and Babylon developed, more or less at the same time, the first school systems in history. Heiroglyphs developed slowly into alphabetic characters, first appearing between 2500-1500 BC, but never fully made the transition to completely alphabetic writing.
Literature. In Egypt we find the first known telling of the Story of the Shipwrecked Sailor (Robinson Crusoe), the tale of a lone wanderer struggling to return to his homeland, the first known version of Cinderella, a set of fables that suggest Aesop, poetry, odes, love-poems, and historians who accompanied Pharaohs to document their triumphs. And we find the age-old lamentation that there is nothing new left to be said:
I wish that I had words that are unknown, utterances and sayings in a new language… that hasn’t already been said repeatedly– not an utterance that has grown stale, that the ancestors have already said.”
Khekheperre-Sonbu, ca 2150 BC
Science. Nearly all ancient historians credit Egypt with developing geometry; its pyramids, temples, Nile meters and great canals attest to it. They calculated pi as 3.16; within 1% of the true value. Their calculations of time seem to have started with the Nile rather than the sky, though they counted a year as 365 days, and they knew it was 365.25, over their millennia, they never bothered to correct the accumulated error. Medicine was well-developed and the importance of public sanitation was well-known. The people fasted regularly and avoided excessive consumption of food as contrary to good health.
Art. Durant calls the Egyptians the greatest builders in history, and credits them with giving the Greeks all they knew of architecture and statuary. Ceramics, especially tile, and painting were everywhere, including in the homes of common citizens. Textiles and jewelry were as fine as any other era in history.
Philosophy. Ptah-Hotep, in providing advice to his son, passes on wisdom found in many self-help books of today. Seek to learn from everyone, beware strange women, be kind, stick to the truth, value silence more than words… He seems a curious combination of the Stoic wisdom of Aurelius, with the sense of historic grandeur of the Pharaohs. Later, we find lamentations of a society gone to decadence and decay and wishing for a philosopher-king to redeem her. And from 2200 BC, we hear the admonition that life a short and that every day should be seized, for once it passes, it is gone forever.
Religion. Egypt was, but for one brief interlude, polytheistic throughout its history. Across her many centuries, we find local deities, eventually merging to become national ones. We find gods who act as men and men (and women) who become gods. We hear the tale of the Garden of Eden. We see man as fallen from perfection, and alternately as evolved from brute. We meet father sky (Ra) and mother earth (Isis), and encounter the first holy trinity, Ra, Amon, and Ptah. We see the concept of resurrection and meet the boatman who carries one across the river to the afterlife. We see the emergence of the priestly class, their gradual ascent to power, and their eventual corruption and control over nearly all aspects of life. The priests oversaw the temples and the donations to those temples were exempt from taxes. Frequently the largess went directly into the coffers of the priests, as did the fair women meant to be the courtesans of the gods go to the beds of the priests.
Heretic King. It was this corruption of the priests that, at least partially, drove Ikhnaton (Akhenaten) to announce that there was in fact only one god – Aton – and to take the name Ikhnaton, “Aton is pleased.” By all accounts Ikhnaton would have a been seen as a good and likable ruler, even by today’s standards. Faithfully devoted to his wife, against blood-sacrifices, and against the abuses of the priests. A young man who saw the world in black and white, and who grew up in the knowledge that he was a living god, he lacked the patience and subtlety to let change happen gradually. Instead he moved the capital from Thebes to the new city of Akhetaton, caused the word -Amon to be cut from every temple in the land, declared all other religions illegal, and closed the old temples. In a stroke, he angered and dispossessed the richest, most powerful class in Egypt. While they schemed behind his back, he remained faithfully devoted to his wife Nefertete, who bore him seven daughters and no sons. Breaking from tradition, Ikhnaton didn’t seek to produce a male heir through a concubine. Soon turmoil within the empire was sensed without, and the Hittites moved on Syria. Receiving their pleas for help, Ikhnaton hesitated, not wanting to be responsible for unnecessary bloodshed. When all of the dependencies of empire saw this, they ceased paying tribute to Egypt and started forming alliances closer to home. The treasury, dependent on tribute and foreign mines, quickly emptied. The man who envisioned himself as saving the empire from the corruption of its priestly class, “…found himself penniless and friendless in a world that had seemed all his own. Every colony was in revolt, and every power in Egypt was arrayed against him… He was hardly thirty when… he died, broken with the realization of his failure as a ruler, and the unworthiness of his race.” (SoC, V1, 212).
His successor, Tutenkhamon, did little in his reign, except to undo all of Ikhnaton’s changes (including removing all the ‘Aton’s and replacing them again with ‘Amon’s) and setting the stage for his general, Harmhab, to restore its external colonies. If one raids a tomb too soon after the death of its occupant, one is a thief or tomb-raider. If one waits enough centuries to do it, one becomes an archaeologist or historian. Tutenkhamon’s engineers and builders were good enough to allow the transition, and his tomb became perhaps the most famous archaeological discovery of all time.
Ramses II (probably the Pharaoh of the old testiment) was the last great ruler in Egypt. After him, Ramses III sought to appease the priests, giving more and more to the gods at the expense of less and less for the people, until finally, the kings were again less powerful than the priests. Assyria, Babylon, and Persia grew in power. The Phoenicians, Dorians, and Achaeans took control of the Mediterranean. Over the centuries Egypt was assaulted by Libya from the west, Ethiopia from the south, Assyria from the north, and Persia from the east, until finally in 332 BC Alexander made Egypt a province of Macedon.
Egypt continued to echo through the centuries, but her civilization (“social order promoting cultural creation”) had long since passed. She lives now in our collective memory as “the spectacle of the greatest civilization that has yet appeared on the earth.” (Faure)
“We shall do well to equal it.” (SoC, V1, 217)
What a queen, and what kings! Perhaps this first great civilization was the finest of all, and we have but begun to uncover its glory.
SoC, Vol 1, p 143
Best movie i have ever seen !