'Where the swords met bone': Archaeological evidence found of Ancient Egyptian rebellion mentioned on the Rosetta Stone
https://www.theartnewspaper.com/2023/01/27/where-the-swords-met-bone-archaeological-evidence-found-of-ancient-egyptian-rebellion-mentioned-on-the-rosetta-stone
Thanks, Jim, interesting. Shame that access to the original article isn't open.
Is the implication that the destruction was caused by the rebels, do you think?
Quote from: Duncan Head on Jan 29, 2023, 06:03 PM
Thanks, Jim, interesting. Shame that access to the original article isn't open.
Is the implication that the destruction was caused by the rebels, do you think?
I was left wondering. Looking at the bit where it says "Over the course of several years, the team uncovered the remains of burned buildings, weapons, stones thrown by a siege engine, coins hidden beneath the floor of a house, a broken divine statue near a temple, and unburied bodies strewn among the ruins or dumped in mounds of rubble and refuse. The skeleton of one young man was discovered with his legs sticking out of a large kiln, where he had perhaps hoped to hide from his attackers. A man in his 50s, whose body displayed earlier healed wounds, appears to have died defending himself. He may have decomposed sitting upright" I would tend to think it was the rebels who took the place.
I've no problems with them having siege engines. After all a proportion of them would have been regulars. So at the very least they could have used a captured one.
For me the fact that the place was taken, sacked, and abandoned seems to be more like the activity of rebels rather than a government which would be likely to use a fortified centre as a base for control.
But like you I would like to see the original article
Another report says, "However, Littman says it's yet unclear whether the residents of Thmouis allied with the rebel forces or with the pharaoh."
I presume that the bodies were unable to be removed due to rubble etc. or that this part of the town had its population removed, if only because of the disease risk. My guess is that a royal army retakes the city and leaves it partly populated, perhaps just a garrison. I think a rebel army would be more likely to have to keep it more fully occupied, so a clean-up operation would be more vital.
Another article at https://www.livescience.com/rosetta-stone-ancient-egyptian-battle-site
I wonder whether the article in the Journal of Field Archaeology linked by the news story has become open access since Jim's original post. I managed to download it from Taylor and Francis Online here:
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/epdf/10.1080/00934690.2022.2158569?needAccess=true&role=button
or here:
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00934690.2022.2158569?cookieSet=1
Good find, thanks.
Quote from: Duncan Head on Feb 08, 2023, 03:43 PM
Good find, thanks.
Yes, all I have to do is find time to read it :)