Civ III and archaeology dissertation, can you help?

I believe that's the wrong question. You're substantiating his claim. A better question would be can you prove this? And I don't mean being pointed to a book written by some academic who was enlightened by Alla or God or his Fairy Godmother. Ask him if he can prove it.

Not that I disagree because ten years from now they will be saying the exact opposite, but my point being, even if it is true, how is the supposed scenario different from slavery? I'm not saying the Egyptians are worse than feudal obligations or indentured servitude. There are even similarities to jury duty thought there are a lot of problems with that correlation.

The point being is that (in this proposed scenario) they did not have the option to refuse. They couldn't say 'nah, I'd like to go work on the Hanging Gardens' or 'let’s change this into a Statue of Zeus so we can attract some cool ancient cavalry'. Or even 'I'd rather flip burgers'. In this case they were forced to perform the service whether they wished to do so or not, had no alternative and the likely consequences would have been something not very nice for them and probably their family.

And no, I don't think the Pharaoh would have given a second though to dealing out harsh punishments to anyone that tried to buck the system.

Of course the real question is why we are still talking about this. CommandoBob made a joke. Nothing more.

P.S. While being a well-cared for slave is better than being a no-so-well cared for slave, the treatment of the slave is hardly a redeeming quality for the slave holder. The moral corruption is being in a position to having to decide how you want to treat a person that is your 'property'. The distinction to the enslaved person is probably secondary to their desire for freedom. This is about as ridiculous as portraying Mel Gibson as a 'good' slave holder in the Patriot. Umm, yep. Make sense to me.
 
I agree with you on all points, basically. I just didn't want to see any weight thrown into a claim of worker administration and well-being. Not that what cujo4ever says is incorrect, it just seems very unlikely compared to the history of the world. Plus it doesn't mesh with the way I personally feel about it. ;) So I thought a discussion was called for.

I've just seen too many people put a stick in the mud and because of the way they do it, others will build on it, until it becomes viable option for fact. Uh, WHY are we still talking about this? =8^)
 
@Raliuven 'on what if they refused...'

I not sure,,,I don't think there was an option. The family member needed for this period of time was well cared for, fed and housed. It probably was a great adventure for them. It would have just been a normal thing, like be drafted to the Army. Remember the Pharaoh was "God on Earth", and nothing was to much to ask from the populous.

I think the hard labour slavery probably started with the Barbarian Romans. [??].

I'm not sure if or how it would affect changes in a scenario. But I think Labour given for the purposes of a loved God [Pharaoh] might be a happier group of workers than those workers forced into it through the hardship of slavery.[??]
 
I believe that's the wrong question. You're substantiating his claim. A better question would be can you prove this? And I don't mean being pointed to a book written by some academic who was enlightened by Alla or God or his Fairy Godmother. Ask him if he can prove it.


I'll just e-mail 'Khufu' and ask him to back me up. Books is a great place to start, but seems that that won't do. But this is our only source.
I agree with you about, "written by an academic who was enlightened by ... ...". Most ancient Historical Academic Literature is just opinion, gathered from an opinion for a projecting opinion. As I have found out over the years, this is quite often a wrong opinion, in my opinion.
Some Academic writings have been so false that have corrupted historical fact for ever, such as the term, 'The Aztec'. Never was there ever, a tribe or a race of peoples called 'The Aztec', well not from Central America anyway. But this is now an accepted academic term. But is still termed "wrongfully".

What I wrote was my opinion, what I class as 'Educated Opinion'. I got this from years of study and ear bending lectures to achieve me getting my BA..
I'm sure there are many books out there that will dispute my claims. That's the nature of Historical Literature.
 
A couple of things to keep in mind regarding the discussion of Herodotus and the Pyramids. Herodotus was in Egypt over 2100 years AFTER the Pyramids were completed. Think about that a minute in the year 2012 AD. His tour guides were are far in time from the Pyramids as today's tour guides in Rome are from the building of the Colosseum, and had far less knowledge of them as well.

Secondly, I would have to get out some of my reference books on Ancient Egypt to give you the exact sites, but we do have the archaeological remains of workman villages built by the Egyptian rulers to house those working on monument projects. They were not slaves, but were paid with housing and food for their services. Much of the work on the Pyramids had to be done during the Nile flood to make it easier to get the stone blocks closer to the building site. This was also when surplus labor was available. The Pharaoh of Egypt really could not afford to have a large number of slaves sitting around in Memphis, nor is there evidence for it. In exchange for food and housing, the peasants from the surrounding area and nomes worked on the Pyramids. When the flood ended, the workers return to their villages and farmed the now moist and fertile fields, while the stone masons both at the site and at the quarry prepared stones for the next building season.

The other problem with the slave idea is that the period of the building of the Pyramids occurred about 1,000 years prior to the major expansion of Egypt during the Middle Kingdom period, beginning with Thutmose III, around 1480 BC or so. There was no massive source of foreign slaves to draw on. Slavery clearly existed, but not in the sense of having very large numbers of slaves concentrated in a small area, and not all slaves were engaged in doing simply manual labor. Many slaves in the ancient world were skilled craftsmen and women, and during the period of Roman dominance, Greeks slaves serving as tutors for the children of the upper class were common.
 
None of which answers the basic question of what happens when they refuse to work on the god-king's pet project? For example, if my worker consistently fails to do what I told him, I disband his butt and use his bones to build a local library. :D

Being blinded by a supposed god-king into liking slavery is a pretty thin defense. What you are describing is a depressed economic situation that required a public works project to support. So the pharaoh, in his enlightened generosity, just had those homeless and starving subjects build a huge tomb to benefit just him (and to serve as a religious icon for those that he fooled into thinking he was a walking god unless, of course, someone is going to defend the pharaoh and claim he actually was a walking god). In exchange he gave them what the 'government' had control of (or the resources to provide) - such as food and housing. It just happens that this worked out pretty well for the Pharaoh because it enabled the creation of the next generation of homeless and starving subjects. This sounds like a self-perpetuating arrangement the goal of which was not to make a better life for his subjects but for himself (or at least his afterlife).

Or it could describe a tax or science farm, both of which are vastly more acceptable than building on overpriced wonder 1 shield at a time that we can capture with Ancient Cavalry later).

But to be fair, any government founded on the premise that their leader's authority is derived from divinity (or divine bloodline) was really no better. The very premise of royalty is that they rule by divine right because their blood extends back to some Greek, Roman, Christian god like figure or modded start location. Take your pick. The people were there to serve their master/Pharoah/king/immortal civ leader head/whatever.

I just don't get why we need to romanticize it. It was what it was. I call it slavery. (So does Civilization, by the way, which is the ultimate authority around here. :p) You call it bonded workman or whatever. How about we all agree they had no choice except to build the darn thing, it required a lot of granaries to bake the bread, and we can drop it.

Side note - Slaves in the south were fed, clothed and housed and may even have owed material goods of nominal value. Even treated well and used as servants and teachers by some (such as Mel Gibson). I personally keep them all in stacks by my capital which is by far the best land on the map. So that's not slavery? It sounds so great I want to give it a try . . . not.

Like I said before, the corruption is OWNING the person in the first place. Everything else is a secondary consideration which, while important to the slave no doubt, took a back seat to being free for most (unless you like being kept as a pet, that is). Saying "oh, it wasn't so bad for the slave" sounds ridiculous. Stop saying it.

And I will accept a written article/book as proof. Point me to the absolute authority on the ancient life and the construction of the pyramids that states that slaves were not used (or at least says who did definitively build them and how) and we are good. We can then argue about whether those particular people were actually slaves or not after you provide the source. When historians stop changing their minds every 10 years or can actually agree on anything, I'll trust them. Until then, I'll keep an open mind.
 
Amen!... I mean :hammer2: ... Hallejulah!... I mean :hammer2: Good post!
 
@ timerover51

Well written. Stating that the Egyptian Empire didn't expand to its Full Greatness in till the 18th Dynasty [ Thutmosis III ] is correct. [ Although certain advances towards this Empire during the 17th Dynasty may have some foundation]. The taking of Palestine and the removal of the Hykos rulers by Thut III sealed the dominance of Egypt. The Book of Chronicles and Book of Kings in the Old Testament backs this up. The collection of "El Amarna Letters" collected from the ruins of Aken-Aten' Palace structures [ Amen-Hotep IV ] also states this.

PS: Never will I quote 'Herodotus' without a note of my concerns over his accuracy.
 
None of which answers the basic question of what happens when they refuse to work on the god-king's pet project? For example, if my worker consistently fails to do what I told him, I disband his butt and use his bones to build a local library. :D

Being blinded by a supposed god-king into liking slavery is a pretty thin defense. What you are describing is a depressed economic situation that required a public works project to support. So the pharaoh, in his enlightened generosity, just had those homeless and starving subjects build a huge tomb to benefit just him (and to serve as a religious icon for those that he fooled into thinking he was a walking god unless, of course, someone is going to defend the pharaoh and claim he actually was a walking god). In exchange he gave them what the 'government' had control of (or the resources to provide) - such as food and housing. It just happens that this worked out pretty well for the Pharaoh because it enabled the creation of the next generation of homeless and starving subjects. This sounds like a self-perpetuating arrangement the goal of which was not to make a better life for his subjects but for himself (or at least his afterlife).

Or it could describe a tax or science farm, both of which are vastly more acceptable than building on overpriced wonder 1 shield at a time that we can capture with Ancient Cavalry later).

... ... ...

I just don't get why we need to romanticize it. It was what it was. I call it slavery. (So does Civilization, by the way, which is the ultimate authority around here. :p) You call it bonded workman or whatever. How about we all agree they had no choice except to build the darn thing, ...

... ... ...

And I will accept a written article/book as proof. Point me to the absolute authority on the ancient life and the construction of the pyramids that states that slaves were not used (or at least says who did definitively build them and how) and we are good. We can then argue about whether those particular people were actually slaves or not after you provide the source. When historians stop changing their minds every 10 years or can actually agree on anything, I'll trust them. Until then, I'll keep an open mind.

#I think I did answer your question on what would happen if they refused to work,,,"they had no choice",,, I have no doubts they would be executed for this failure.

#I don't know about a depressed 'economic' situation or homeless subjects. These great work projects were for the benefit of just not only the rulers, but the whole Empire. "What was the level of awe felt towards these great structures by neighbouring States?

#("Which was not to make a better life")- I disagree with this. Those who went to do public work projects bettered their lives and their greater family lives a lot. Some did learn while away, they learnt a trade. very much like today. Others at the very least saved their Family having to feed 1 more mouth. Seems in the Old World of Egypt you were 1 of 6 things. A Ruler, a Mother, a farmer, an Artisan (trade), a Soldier or a member of a Vassal State.

#"economic,tax,overpriced".... remember there was no currency in Egypt, or anywhere in the "Known World". Currency first arrived onto any mainland in 586BC into Greece, same year that ancient Athens was raze by a mercenary army, no surprises there![$$]

#Yes maybe it is Slavery. Is been drafted into the Army Slavery??? - "probably"

#If you want written evidence. I listed 3 sources in my previous reply. But reading the Bible is not so easy,, even Christians still find complete differences in the same text. But go to the library and pick 10 books,,, select the index pages you need and read. Not all will be the same...lol
I would give you a list of books but I'm in Asia at the present period of life and finding Written English is a rare thing. But I will try. Check out the 4th Dynasty they built the Great Pyramids.

#I don't mean to change your game,,, but i do think that Hard Slavery was less rewarding to an Empire than "Public Workings". - I don't know how anything could be changed here.....good luck.
 
#I think I did answer your question on what would happen if they refused to work,,,"they had no choice",,, I have no doubts they would be executed for this failure.

I think this post should have ended here. We have come full circle. Admitting this fundamental organizing principle of the society will prevent you from making a logical argument that slaves were not used. Every commoner was a slave. Commoners built the pyramids. The pyramids were built by slaves.

That the Pharaoh did not wholesale abuse his subjects was a matter of preference (and conjecture); he had every right to do this. It just made sense not to do it most of the time. A correlation to this is that I own my car and I can take a bat to it any time I want. No one can stop me. It’s not illegal. But it is not productive either. Extending this concept to another human being is the essence of slavery.

The remainder of the arguments against slavery will fall apart hinged on this premise. If you can argue against the Pharaoh’s right to kill, without repercussion, anyone commoner he wished, then you have an interesting and persuasive argument. I'm not picking on Egypt. Any society that has this as an organizing principle fits the mold. The difference is that you can say one society treated their slaves better than others. While useful in putting them on a scale of 1-to-10, you'll find the line of people waiting to sign up for slavery is rather short nonetheless.

#I don't know about a depressed 'economic' situation or homeless subjects. These great work projects were for the benefit of just not only the rulers, but the whole Empire. "What was the level of awe felt towards these great structures by neighbouring States?

This argument fails considering the number of times that Egypt was invaded. They did stop Alexander from conquering Egypt though. Oh wait . . .

This comment is completely unquantifiable and did not stop Egypt's neighbors from waging war on them. Arguably they might have benefitted more from paved roads, higher city walls, better docks and expanded trade influences. Of course hindsight is 20/20. The purpose of the pyramids is, at its heart, religious. Religion is used to inspire and control the native population, not to awe your neighbors. The Germanic and Asiatic hordes that destroyed Rome didn't give any consideration to the wrath of the Roman gods they were incurring by sacking Roman cities.

Give one legitimate citing of a battle in ancient Egypt where the pyramids played a distinctive role. I've read lots of historical accounts and not one of them mentioned them even as a landmark. The pyramids were given as much consideration by the neighboring states as the Eiffel Tower was given by the Germans.


#("Which was not to make a better life")- I disagree with this. Those who went to do public work projects bettered their lives and their greater family lives a lot. Some did learn while away, they learnt a trade. very much like today. Others at the very least saved their Family having to feed 1 more mouth. Seems in the Old World of Egypt you were 1 of 6 things. A Ruler, a Mother, a farmer, an Artisan (trade), a Soldier or a member of a Vassal State.

Sure, they learned a trade. So they could build the next pyramid or pet project. I'm sure the slaves in the south were excellent at picking cotton. Your point?


#"economic,tax,overpriced".... remember there was no currency in Egypt, or anywhere in the "Known World". Currency first arrived onto any mainland in 586BC into Greece, same year that ancient Athens was raze by a mercenary army, no surprises there![$$]

I didn't use the word currency that I recall. If I did, it was meant as commerce, not the coins you are talking about. Economy and tax are independent concepts of currency. I don't think I need to go into detail on this. Overpriced was a joke in the context of the game which, after all, is what this forum is about.

#Yes maybe it is Slavery. Is been drafted into the Army Slavery??? - "probably"

Probably not if you are talking the modern equivalent as opposed to Ancient Egypt. Perhaps this was encouraged by my jury duty comment. This is a deeply flawed comparison and I won't take the issue to task here other than say I completely disagree.

#If you want written evidence. I listed 3 sources in my previous reply. But reading the Bible is not so easy,, even Christians still find complete differences in the same text. But go to the library and pick 10 books,,, select the index pages you need and read. Not all will be the same...lol
I would give you a list of books but I'm in Asia at the present period of life and finding Written English is a rare thing. But I will try. Check out the 4th Dynasty they built the Great Pyramids.

This is where you shift the burden to me to support your crumbling argument under the guise of me not doing my homework instead of you not doing yours. You have presented a logically inconsistent argument and have fallen back upon academia for support. If you do this, it is your responsibility to prove the authenticity and legitimacy of the sources. I have read many books on Egypt and one thing is pretty clear - they are all based upon opinion to some extent and they don't agree on all but the hardest of historical facts. It is the nature of the profession and why the History Channel can run back-to-back theories on the pyramids for a week straight without replaying the same show twice. You are picking which ones you want to believe. No harm in that. I do the same thing. Pointing at a college lecture/text is like rolling out the color wheel and saying that you now know everything needed about Picasso.

As was said, short of a TARDIS we'll never know for sure. If you are going to claim your way is right and only your way, you have the responsibility of supporting that positive claim with undeniable facts. So far, you have not. I will not make your argument for you. I have enough work making my argument.
 
Back
Top Bottom