Background History
The grave robbery described in the Amherst-Leopold document came during the 20th Dynasty of Ancient Egypt and “a background of economic trouble and incipient national disunity.” This was a difficult time for Egypt and one that certainly was not prosperous. Egypt was no longer able to control its foreign territories and lost them, whilst foreign powers, such as Libya, would trouble Egypt with raids into Egyptian territories. During this period regional leaders, foreign dignitaries and administrative representatives found themselves with more power as Pharaohs attempted to control civil order. Civil order and administrative power was at a low, whilst economic conditions in Egypt had faltered due to inflation: “in the late Twentieth Dynasty, a period for which we have a wealth of documentary evidence about tomb-robbing, the practice was clearly encouraged by economic factors.” As such tomb-robbing became a lucrative and more appealing way to get riches during a weak period of Ancient Egypt. “Intact burials are frequently very poor ones, the ancient plunderers having known well that they were not worth the trouble of investigation.”
Tomb-robbing was a common feature in the Ancient World, and was very common in Egypt in particular: “it is a sad fact that the vast majority of ancient Egyptian tombs have been plundered in antiquity.” Efforts had been made in the past to discourage tomb-robbers, but it only served to increase their ingenuity and craft. At first the coffins themselves were made harder to open, and went from being made out of wood to stone, whilst entrances were sealed in a way to make it difficult for robbers to enter, secret burial chambers were then used to hide the bodies. Despite all the measures to stop these robbers, the lure of potential treasures during the hard times can be seen to have led to robberies like those described in the Amherst-Leopold Papyrus.
Read more about this topic: Amherst Papyrus
Famous quotes containing the words background and/or history:
“I had many problems in my conduct of the office being contrasted with President Kennedys conduct in the office, with my manner of dealing with things and his manner, with my accent and his accent, with my background and his background. He was a great public hero, and anything I did that someone didnt approve of, they would always feel that President Kennedy wouldnt have done that.”
—Lyndon Baines Johnson (19081973)
“Considered in its entirety, psychoanalysis wont do. Its an end product, moreover, like a dinosaur or a zeppelin; no better theory can ever be erected on its ruins, which will remain for ever one of the saddest and strangest of all landmarks in the history of twentieth-century thought.”
—Peter B. Medawar (19151987)