quote:While many people brand cattle and other livestock with a burning iron, slaves in ancient Egypt also suffered the same fate.
According to new archaeological evidence, slaves would be forcibly branded to show they were the property of the Pharaoh. Not only were these people depicted as property, but they were branded in order to show their status was "as low as cattle" in ancient society.
A recent study in The Journal of Egyptian Archaeology revealed that texts from ancient Egypt referred to the sale and transfer of cattle and single out those that have a mark or stamp and those that don’t. Were those texts entirely referring to animals, or could they have been referring to slaves on the same level as their livestock?
A series of small branding irons were uncovered that were seen as "potentially too small for livestock," and were believed to be used on humans. This collection of 10 branding irons, dating back to roughly 1292 BC, until 656 BC, Egypt's 19th to 25th dynasties, were most likely used to mark the skin of human slaves as they were too small to use on livestock.
According to researchers, these branding irons were roughly the same size as those used on slaves traded by Europeans in the 19th century.
Why do researchers think the brands were used on people?
"They are so small that it precludes them from being used on cattle or horses," study author Ella Karev told Live Science in a recent interview. "I'm not excluding the possibility, but we have no evidence of small animals like goats being branded, and there is so much other evidence of humans being branded."
The expert also identified that slaves had different "markings" than the religious-based tattoos and body art of the time. Egyptian texts referred to some evidence of "slave marking," which provided insight contrary to the previous belief that tattoos were used to mark slaves.
Ancient Egyptian dynasties were known to hold three types of slaves: Slaves who were prisoners of war, slaves who sold themselves or their children into slavery to settle debts and slaves who were owned by the state but received wages.
The Bible also tells the story of the Israelites who were enslaved by the Pharoah who feared their spreading across the land and taking over control.
posted
^ Very interesting, though not that surprising. There had to some sort of system in place to keep track of slaves.
A series of small branding irons were uncovered that were seen as "potentially too small for livestock," and were believed to be used on humans. This collection of 10 branding irons, dating back to roughly 1292 BC, until 656 BC, Egypt's 19th to 25th dynasties, were most likely used to mark the skin of human slaves as they were too small to use on livestock.
The time period in question dates from the Rammeside dynasty, the Tanite dynasty, Libyan dynasty, and Kushite dynasty. So obviously it wasn't just Egyptians who participated in the practice.
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26249 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
Several of the ancient Egyptian branding-irons — actually made of bronze — were too small for large animals like cattle and were probably used to brand human slaves. Branding people Some of the ancient Egyptian branding irons are almost exactly the same size as branding irons used by Europeans on African enslaved people during the trans-Atlantic slave trade many centuries later, Karev said. "Human branding-irons from the mid- and late 19th century parallel the size and shape of the smaller branding irons discussed here," she wrote in the study.
Ancient Egyptian writings also talk about "marking" slaves, which was assumed to be a reference to the practice of tattooing, Karev told Live Science. For instance, branding is seen in a depiction of prisoners of war in a carving at Medinet Habu near Luxor in Upper (southern) Egypt dated to the 20th dynasty, perhaps around 1185 B.C.
An Egyptian carving from about 1185 B.C. shows the "marking" of prisoners-of-war, and was thought to depict tattooing. But the new study argues it depicts branding instead. But research shows that tattooing in ancient Egypt was almost exclusively performed on women and for religious purposes, she said, and the marking of prisoners of war in the Medinet Habu carving is unlikely to be tattooing.
"Practically speaking, 'hand-poking' a tattoo [without a tattoo machine] takes quite a lot of time and skill — and if you're doing that on a large scale, it's not easily replicable," Karev said. "It would make much more sense for this to be branding."
Moreover, the tools used to mark the prisoners in the Medinet Habu carving look different from the cattle brands used in ancient Egyptian paintings. It's been suggested that's because they were needles for tattooing, and that the carving shows them placed in a bowl of pigment. But Karev argues that the depiction instead shows small brands being heated to red hot in a portable heater known as a brazier.
Nebamun Supervising Estate Activities, Tomb of Nebamun, men branding cattle while the tomb owner, Nebamun, looks on and a scribe records the proceedings Branding irons for cattle are typically four inches wide or larger. Any smaller than this and the mark becomes illegible as a calf grows. But a collection of small branding irons from ancient Egypt are only one third of that size – the same size as branding irons used by Europeans on human slaves in the 19 th century.
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26249 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ancient Egypt comes across as less violent, brutal and bloodthirsty than most Ancient civilizations. However, when you do your research, you discover it's darker side. In spite of this grim aspect of Ancient Egyptians, they were nonetheless rather tame compared to the extremely cruel Assyrians. The thing is, that being a technically advanced and sophisticated people doesn't translate into being humane, kind and compassionate. For instance, the Khoisans with their simple Hunter-Gatherer lifestyle don’t display such kind of cruelty and appear to be "docile" positively. The truth of the matter is, that basically all high civilizations, and Rome in particular, were built on the blood, sweat, and tears of slaves.
Posts: 102 | From: private | Registered: Jul 2021
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ How cruel a civilization is depends on the culture and how that culture views violence or rather the use of it. In this case, we are discussing slavery which was an institution practiced by many societies across the world. Egypt was not a slave state the way Greece and Rome was meaning that their economy was not depended on slavery, instead slavery was a form of punishment they imposed on enemies of war and criminals. In other words, it was a form of economic reparations! I know it sounds very funny in this modern era where here in the U.S. some black Americans talk about reparations for the enslavement of their ancestors. But in Egypt like many African societies slavery was originally a form of reparations for harm done to the state by foreign foes or criminal miscreancy. Similar systems exist today with labor imposed on criminals.
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26249 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Let's not forget branding was introduced only after so-called Sea Peoples tried to conquer 19th dynasty New Kingdom Egypt and was only applied to them, right?
As for attitude towards violence, citizens were beaten for slacking off on the job, laxity of taxes, etc. Soldiers in training were regularly beaten "just for kicks".
posted
The article seems entirely speculative. "The brands were too small for cattle, but there is no evidence that smaller animals like goats were branded. So it must have been humans that were branded."
Posts: 288 | From: Asia | Registered: Mar 2016
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic