Historical Archaeology in the Ancient Mediterranean

Homer and Hesiod Written Assignment

For the first written assignment in Classical Mythology students are required to write a 2-3 page paper on either the two depictions of Prometheus in Hesiod's Works and Days and Theogony or the role of the Gods in the Trojan War based on Book IV of the Iliad.  It is always interesting to read an undergraduate's perspective on these works.  I was particularly pleased by two things.  First, several students related the the actions of the Gods to contemporary pop culture.  It is great to see students thinking about the material in this way.  Second, some students went beyond the basic "description essay" and asked why the Gods acted the way they did or why Hesiod's two Prometheus accounts differ.  I realize that at times dealing with ancient sources can be difficult so it is nice seeing a budding interest in the classics in this course. 

Participation in a 150-Student Course

As noted in an earlier post, I am TAing Classical Mythology this semester.  Typically this course has discussion sections where, like the Egyptian Civilization last year, students are divided into small groups.  These smaller classes are led by TAs and promote student interaction, discussion, and participation.  This year the Classical Myth class does not have discussion sections so Dr. Berman, the class prof, asked the TAs to think of activities that would generate student participation amenable to a large class.  After meeting last week, Dr. Berman suggested the we hold a mock trial.  Since the class will be reading the Iliad for the next two weeks, we decided to use Achilles' rage as the trial topic.  The class will be divided into two groups, one supporting Achilles' side and one supporting Agamemnon's side, and besides a few "character" witnesses (ie Achilles, Agamemnon, Agamemnon's messengers etc) the rest of the class will serve as the jury.  Provided that the activity goes well, we will switch up student roles in future mock trials.  We'll see how it goes... 

New TA Assignment

After TAing Egyptian Civilization for a year, I now have a new assignment.  For the Fall 2008 semester I am assigned to CAMS 045 Classical Mythology.  The class size of Classical Myth is much smaller than Egyptian Civ and there are no Friday discussion sections.  I am not sure of my TA duties but I look forward to the experience.

Grading Done

Just another short post.  Today another graduate student and I administered the final for Egyptian civ.  I just finished grading my 60 tests.  Now back to that literacy paper, only 4 days left!  Is it time to go to Cyprus yet? 

The Harem Conspiracy of Ramesses III

One of my TA duties is to attend each lecture and take notes.  As I have mentioned in previous posts, I am a TA in CAMS 020 Egyptian Civilization with Dr. Don Redford.  Last semester I TAed the same course but with Dr. Susan Redford (Don's wife).  The Redfords begin the course with the Pre-Dynastic period and end with the collapse of the Bronze Age, though we may enter the Persian period this semester.  As a Roman archaeologist/historian, there are a few topic and events that capture my attention.  One event, completely unrelated to Roman studies, amazed me.  During the 20th Dynasty (1200-1090 BC) Egypt suffered prolonged warfare, low Nile levels, an economic depression, and labor strikes.  In year 29, Ramesses III traveled to Thebes (modern Luxor) to celebrate the anniversary of his succession.  During the trip his harem plotted to assassinate him.  The topic is near and dear to Dr. Susan Redford who wrote a book on the event entitled: The Harem Conspiracy: The Murder of Ramessess III.  My interests are on Dr. Redford's use of evidence.

The primary source for the conspiracy is the Judicial Papyrus of Turin.  The papyrus is a trial transcript concerning the males involved with the conspiracy.  Redford combined the trial transcript with the basic history of the 20th Dynasty and Egypt to determine the following:

1.  The women of the King's harem plotted and instigated the conspiracy.

2.  A woman named Teya was the leading figure.  She was one of Ramesses III's queens who had a son named "Pentawer."  Redford argues that at one time Teya was the first wife and queen of Ramesses III but he later deposed her.  Pentawer's real name, Redford contends, was originally Sety.  She argues that certain Egyptian dynasties employed a specific naming scheme.  The king would name his first son after his father.  In the 18th dynasty, and others, we see a series of kings with a similar nominal patterns (Amenhotep, Thutmose, Amenhotep, Thutmose, etc).  The traditional argument for two successive kings with the same names is that the heir apparent predeceased his father.  Ramesses III's heir apparent was Ramesses IV.  Redford argues that Pentawer at one time was the heir apparent before his mother's deposition. 

3.  The harem planned the plot because of the economic and social depressions of the country and for issues surrounding the current queen Isis, mother of Ramesses IV, who was a Canaanite.  Teya had substantial support for the conspiracy.  She must have held a high status within the harem and her fellow conspirators must have thought that the people would accept her son as a legitimate successor.

4.  The Egyptian court found at least 32 people guilty.  They were all executed including Pentawer.  The papyrus, however, does not indicate if the harem successfully assassinated the king.  What we do know is that Ramesses III died before the trial.

With one historical source and a deep knowledge of the material, Dr. Redford brought a great "murder mystery" to the public.  She bases her conclusions on solid evidence and when she does speculate, the evidence appears to support the claims.  It just goes to show that a comprehensive knowledge of the basic historical narrative of one's study area will support and enhance the historical and archaeological evidence, which will always strengthen one's arguments.   

                            

Student Presentation

I mentioned in a previous post that one of the primary assessments for the Egyptian Civilizations class that I am TAing is a student presentation.  Both of my sections have 30 students and based on the number of weeks in the school year coupled with test days, three students have to present each week.  The first test was scheduled for last Friday but due to inclement weather, the test was canceled.  This threw off the presentation schedule.  Now I have to determine whether I want to have 4 presentations for a few weeks, which would really cut into discussion time, or allow students to pair-up.  I am leaning towards group presentations because it would allow more flexibility in the schedule. 

Since class was canceled last week, I have had only one set of presentations.  The presentation topics were the sites of Hierakonpolis, Umm el-Gaab (or Qaab), and Kafr Hassan Dawood (or Daoud).  Based on the presentations from last semester and the first set this semester, two issues have continued to pop up.  First concerns the difficulties of the alternate spelling for site names.  I explained in both classes this possibility.  Obviously this is a problem originating from translation and/or transliteration.  Despite my warnings, I consistently receive a barrage of emails, usually Thursday evening (class is on Friday morning), from students complaining that they cannot find any information on their site.  To fix this problem I will attempt to provide the presenters with as many alternate names for the site I can find.  Well see how that goes.  The second issue is the preference for presenting unconventional interpretations of the site.  Each student receives a handout with specific questions they must address in their presentation.  For the most part, students answer the questions but also present crazy information.  For example students from both classes mentioned that there were zombies at Hierakonpolis and a pharaoh might have been gay because he was buried near another male.  Granted some students express their apprehension towards certain theories.  This information is entertaining and funny but, for the most part, not scholarly.  Moreover, students tend to associate the sites and kings with this type of information because it sticks in their mind.  In the next section I will reiterate the value of critically evaluating sources.  Despite these minor issues the presentations have proved to be a valuable exercise.   

CAMS 020 Student Presentations

As stated in earlier posts I am the TA for Egyptian civilization with Dr. Don Redford.  He is one of the premier Egyptologists in the U.S. and loves his subject.  The daily lectures are filled with interesting information and delivered with great enthusiasm.  Each Friday I am responsible for teaching two 30 student seminars.  The two primary components of the seminars are discussion of the material from the lectures and a presentation.  Each student will give a 10 minute presentation on an archaeological site in Egypt.  Each week Dr. Redford provides the site and I assign the topic a week in advance.  The presentation is primarily an internet based assignment.  Most of the sites assigned have up to date websites with all the relevant information for their presentations.  Students are required to present the major archaeologists associated with the site, the archaeologist's academic affiliation, interpretations of the site, the significance of the site in Egyptian history, and what they found most interesting when researching their particular sites.  I believe it is a good exercise because it allows students to practice their researching skills and interact with the subject matter on a more personal level.  I am in the process of grading the first presentations and will provide periodic updates throughout the semester.