New Content - August 10

[EmperorJay]

They're early today :) . Haven't checked everything yet but the Baker is a nice character I didn't expect and the design article looks interesting.

[Ineti]

Great update material! This game is looking better and better the more I read about it. Still waiting to hear about the Luminaries. ;) :D

[Spitze]

I wish people would start running when a raiding party comes.

[EmperorJay]

I've read all now, let's see.

Very nice article on the Design. I think I've said it before but this game is just common sense it seems!

I do have a question...

The bakery is a government workshop where raw wheat and barley are baked into bread for government workers. Bakeries also distribute vegetables and other foodstuffs. Unlike private shopkeepers, government workers don't sell their wares commercially, so the bakery is their only source for farm-grown food. Educated, elite workers in your government’s employ also take their bread from bakeries. The city's whole economy would come apart without well-supplied bakeries to pay these important workers. Baker distribute food.
Private shopkeepers get paid with grain.
Government workers depend on Bakeries for farm-grown food.

Does that mean that Private shopkeepers have to visit the Bakery if they need vegetables or does that mean that Private shopkeers can ask for vegetables as currency? I guess it's the first option but I'm not sure.

Also, this does seem to imply that only elites buy bread, other people make it themselves.

First screenshot involving military things too. Not too much details but the walls do look impressive!

[Jaguar]

Great new stuff. I guess we can add Basalt to our list of raw materials for the sculptor.

Just one quick question: The overseers' wife works in the bakery? I think the three items should be under places she visits, not places she works in.

[Wen Kha-Ne]

I have checked all day (well, since 9:00 AM GMT) for this, and when I first saw it, I immediately clicked on the link containing 'Keith Zizza' because I knew that would be something to do with music.

The download is not finished yet, but I can tell it will be great, and judging by the description, ambient. Now we just need some more avatars. :p

[Wen Kha-Ne]

Yet again I click edit and it doesn't allow me. Sometimes it still says I had, but anyway. I noticed this about the new article.

TM says there are no gods in CotN. Do they mean actually IN the city (like the Zeus aspect) or not there at all?

It would be a little confusing to me when somewhere has said there would be something like 14 deities in CotN, and now TM says there will be none. Can someone find me the source for the 14 gods thing? I am probably imagining it.

[Reed]

Just one quick question: The overseers' wife works in the bakery? I think the three items should be under places she visits, not places she works in.Yep, you're right - that was a mistake in the db, it's correct now.

[EmperorJay]

Yet again I click edit and it doesn't allow me. Sometimes it still says I had, but anyway. I noticed this about the new article.

TM says there are no gods in CotN. Do they mean actually IN the city (like the Zeus aspect) or not there at all?

It would be a little confusing to me when somewhere has said there would be something like 14 deities in CotN, and now TM says there will be none. Can someone find me the source for the 14 gods thing? I am probably imagining it.
The Gods section (http://www.immortalcities.com/cotn/gameinfo/gods.php)

There will be 14 gods but you will never notice them directly. No wraths, no blessings, no visits. Only angry people when access to a particular god is not good enough.

[Miut]

Of course, if we've done things right, the game operates organically, like the real world… and therefore you may not believe that there are no gods, just as maybe the ancient Egyptians wouldn't. Maybe you "Want to Believe." Maybe you'll be convinced that the poor flood two years running was the result of your failure to dedicate enough temples to Osiris. That's ok. It's not what you believe that matters, after all. What you'll find to be much more important, crucial in fact, is how your peoples' faith in you and in your ability to maintain order and balance in the universe is negatively affected by such catastrophes, and what you do to mitigate this. It's bad enough that your people are starving as the result of the failed crop, so they rush to the temple to make offerings to Osiris… uh… what!?!? You didn't build any temples to Osiris!?!?! What kind of a leader are you, no wonder the flood failed two years in a row!! Keep this up and we'll toss your butt out.

No gods. No appeasement. No wrath-suffering.

Just had time to read this new article cos I teach a writing class on Tuesday's.
WOW, is all I can say! A game that actually takes the real Egytian Pharonic concept of the "Rule of Ma'at" and employs it in a game? WOW.... (add in a breathless sigh here, folks) Bliss!
This concept was at the vbase root of everything Pharaoh did. That's why he built temples, did everything - to keep the balance, to prevent chaos returning.

This has the feel of being more than a game, of being something analagous to creating your own small corner of the world and watching it evolve with your helping and guiding hand.

I may be going out on a limb here, but am I right in saying there is almost an element of the Creatures idea in this? Meaning that in Creatures you had a system that was based on real science and gene splicing and evolution, that was also used for a game. (the system was used in universities to create and study a kind of evolving artificial life - I'm not talking AI type life here)
There was only so much control you had over the Creratures then they went their own ways - you could affect it to a degree by being kind or nasty to them, and they took on that and treated the others they met in your world similarly.

Is CoTN like this in that respect? That they almost take on a Life of their own? Is that why it is called Children of the Nile, because they are almost literally your children, both as Pharaoh and as the person playing it?

http://www.sff.net/people/lisanne/Viking/images/Miut.gif

[hjarg]

Well, the more i read, the more i like it :)

After the interview, the game seems more real and even more appeasing...

Grrr, they should stop the updates... or i'll be sick of waiting by November :p

[tobing]

Noooo - not stop the updates please! It is really nice to get all this infos about the game, and I'm already really eager to be able to play it.

BTW the site update is not yet available in german...

[NeilV]

The more I find out about this game the more I think great can’t wait to play.

Also everyone wants to compare a game to another one but this game is starting to look unique perhaps it will start the trend of this type of game.

PS no more having to please gods :D :D :D

[Spitze]

But you still have to please the gods to please the people right? :confused:

[EmperorJay]

I'm not sure, but I don't think so. You build temples and that pretty much ends your part in the worship of the gods AFAIK.

[tobing]

You build temples not to please any god but to please your people who believe in that god.

Somehow this seems to be a little bit cynical to me...

[NeilV]

You build temples not to please any god but to please your people who believe in that god.

Somehow this seems to be a little bit cynical to me...

But just like real life.

If you have happy peeps they work harder ;)

[tobing]

But just like real life.
That's why it is cynical.

If you have happy peeps they work harder ;)
I strongly doubt that. Have people be really lucky, why should they work at all? I think it's the opposite: Keep them unhappy and make them work hard a little luck and a little hope...

[Miut]

That's more cynical!

[tobing]

That's more cynical!
Maybe. But that's how the middle age worked in europe, isn't it?

[Miut]

Which particular one? What's been redefined as the Early Middle Ages and now takes in the 9th and 10th C Norse invasions and their peaceful settlemets, or do you mean 1066 Norman invasion where for William the Conqueror and his son William Rufus we were ruled by the Norman French, then reverted to the Saxons when he died, or... You get my drift I am sure. The Middle Ages was very long and very diverse, in Britain at least, and I'm sure in Europe. ;)

http://www.sff.net/people/lisanne/Viking/images/Miut.gif

[Spitze]

I wanna build Rome in 3D like COTN. Good Roman city-building ended years ago with Caesar III.

So all you need is temples right?

And as far as I read you can't keep people happy. You can just keep them from being unhappy.

[Keith]

I wanna build Rome in 3D like COTN. Good Roman city-building ended years ago with Caesar III.
You are not alone:

http://www.tiltedmill.com/forums/showthread.php?t=12

[tobing]

Which particular one? What's been redefined as the Early Middle Ages and now takes in the 9th and 10th C Norse invasions and their peaceful settlemets, or do you mean 1066 Norman invasion where for William the Conqueror and his son William Rufus we were ruled by the Norman French, then reverted to the Saxons when he died, or... You get my drift I am sure. The Middle Ages was very long and very diverse, in Britain at least, and I'm sure in Europe. ;)

Well, I always think of a later period of the middle ages, that is when inquisition was strong and Europe (esp. France ,Germany, Italy) was shattered by various religious wars - fights - thing. Grrr, words are lacking...

[NeilV]

Maybe. But that's how the middle age worked in europe, isn't it?

Yes But you need religion to tell them that they are not allowed to be happy as happiness is a sin and if they work hard now when they die they go to heaven.

[tobing]

Yes But you need religion to tell them that they are not allowed to be happy as happiness is a sin and if they work hard now when they die they go to heaven.
That's what I intended to say actually. In the middle ages (the later ones) it was the role of religion to make people unhappy and make them work, nowadays it is the industry making us unhappy by telling us what else we shall buy to be happier (all advertising is precisely this, nothing else) - and we have to work hard to earn enough money to afford all these (luxury) things. The modern religion is capitalism (more precisely: neo-liberal capitalism or should it be neo-liberalism).

In the past they said 'cogito ergo sum' - 'I think so I am'. Nowadays it should read 'I buy so I am'.

Puh, again pretty cynical, but I fear this is a realistic way to look at things in the world...

[Miut]

No, it is the role of state religions - and Egypt had no State religion as the common people were NOT allowed past the entrance pylon to the temples - to engender a mix of fear at not attending church will have you ex-communicated, an acceptance of your lowly lot in life is ordained by a Just god, and so is that of your Betters cos they are Better than you, and keep the economic and social divisions as an accepted Status Quo.

The Church and State were hand in glove for most of their history for a reason - each shored up the other and kept the rich, be they rich churchmen who enjoyed their life of luxury, or rich land owners, rich and the poor downtrodden.

Temples were built to show that the law of Ma'at was strong, that Oder ruled, not Chaos, to affirm the pharaoh's connection with the gods and the universe, not for something as simple as people to worship in. They had their shrines or the contra-temples which were stelae dedicated to specific gods and bought by ordinary people then officially placed at the rear of temples where they could go to worship - it is all in my looong 5 part Post on the Cat in ancient Egypt and in its religion.

All the medieval period was one long time of fear and superstition, so being threatened with hell scared em spitless. Did you know there were lepers entrances to the Cathedrals in England, and ones for witches too? They ALL had to go, even if no one wanted to mix with them! And it was enforced by the lord of the land too. Turn up to church or be punished.

What I think has happened today is that once again we see the cyclical nautre of all things be it fashion, or religions, back to a concept of a personal spiritual jouney through life for many people. That's what the New Age stuff is really about - people searching for a spiritual meaning in their own lives that means something to them as the accepted religions, often state ones, don't do it for them any more. We're better educated and that means less likely to be superstitious about hellfire damnation threatened by Christianity if we don't at least make lip service to it.

We want meaning in our lives, and a religion that says Turn the other cheek, accept what God gives you and don't fight it, is just not enough for an educated person who knows he did improve his lot in life, get out of the ghetto, off Welfare etc by getting that education. There is no longe an acceptance of a lowly staus anymore.
http://www.sff.net/people/lisanne/Viking/images/Miut.gif

[mouse]

Ahhhhhhhh all the interviews make CotN sound like the game I've been looking forward to playing :D Organic city building (the way real cities are), people driven instead of number/formula driven (bet I'll be screaming at those people) :p Think a whole city of market ladies that don't obey what you want but what they want to do :D

[Miut]

Hi Mouse - sounds like a mix of herding cats, the men in one's life... and herding one's kids, doesn't it? In which case, we should do well as we have the XP! :D

[GillB]

Think a whole city of market ladies that don't obey what you want but what they want to do :D
That's not fair, mouse. I really didn't need that thought in my head ;)

[wodinoneeye]

Maybe. But that's how the middle age worked in europe, isn't it?


No a serf was unlikely to ever get 'ahead'.

More like the understanding that what they do is what their forefathers did before them. And that life is a test you endure to get into heaven.

[wodinoneeye]

No, it is the role of state religions - and Egypt had no State religion as the common people were NOT allowed past the entrance pylon to the temples - to engender a mix of fear at not attending church will have you ex-communicated, an acceptance of your lowly lot in life is ordained by a Just god, and so is that of your Betters cos they are Better than you, and keep the economic and social divisions as an accepted Status Quo.

The Church and State were hand in glove for most of their history for a reason - each shored up the other and kept the rich, be they rich churchmen who enjoyed their life of luxury, or rich land owners, rich and the poor downtrodden.

Temples were built to show that the law of Ma'at was strong, that Oder ruled, not Chaos, to affirm the pharaoh's connection with the gods and the universe, not for something as simple as people to worship in. They had their shrines or the contra-temples which were stelae dedicated to specific gods and bought by ordinary people then officially placed at the rear of temples where they could go to worship - it is all in my looong 5 part Post on the Cat in ancient Egypt and in its religion.

All the medieval period was one long time of fear and superstition, so being threatened with hell scared em spitless. Did you know there were lepers entrances to the Cathedrals in England, and ones for witches too? They ALL had to go, even if no one wanted to mix with them! And it was enforced by the lord of the land too. Turn up to church or be punished.

What I think has happened today is that once again we see the cyclical nautre of all things be it fashion, or religions, back to a concept of a personal spiritual jouney through life for many people. That's what the New Age stuff is really about - people searching for a spiritual meaning in their own lives that means something to them as the accepted religions, often state ones, don't do it for them any more. We're better educated and that means less likely to be superstitious about hellfire damnation threatened by Christianity if we don't at least make lip service to it.

We want meaning in our lives, and a religion that says Turn the other cheek, accept what God gives you and don't fight it, is just not enough for an educated person who knows he did improve his lot in life, get out of the ghetto, off Welfare etc by getting that education. There is no longe an acceptance of a lowly staus anymore.
http://www.sff.net/people/lisanne/Viking/images/Miut.gif



The priesthoods in egypt had alot of power (rivaled Pharaoh's) and their own lands and built their own temples. They were very much in the same Church and State situation that existed in the middle ages. They leveraged the peoples need for religion to support their greed for power. Since there were more than one priesthood, there were powerplays between the factions
(same as in middle ages in a larger scope -- Orthodox vs Catholic, the various Heresies, Protestantism later etc...)

You will probably find that social mobility in egypt and europe in the middle ages were not that much different. For the most part people did what their
parents did before them, and the people on top made sure it stayed that way.

[Miut]

Wodinoneeye, I am sorry but I have to disagree totally with you likening the part Egyptian religion played with the common people to the medieval church in Europe.

Waht you actually had by the New Kingdom, and what part of Akhenaten's rebellious new religion of the Aten was about, was that the temples and priesthood rivalled the Pharaoh in power and land ownership, thus grain and herds ownership - those were the hard currency of the time - land, and thus grain and livestock. Also the Temples got the lion's share of any loot for wars, and any tribute from vassals, ostensibly to decorate the temples and glorify the gods for Pharaoh.

It was, pure and simple, a power struggle between state and religion - not at all what happened in the middle ages. In Britain we didn't have that till Henry 8th wanted a divorce!

Everything I have read has always said the same thing - there was no state religion. Temples were not built for people to enter and worship in, only for the priests and Pharaoh, to promote the Rule of Ma'at and keep Chaos of the Universe at bay. The ordianry person wasn't even allowed through the outer pylons (gateways) of the temples throughout most of Egyptian history.

Very occasionally the priesthood etc saw an advantage in promoting one of the peasant beliefs and elevating it to a higher level, thus you got the Bast festivals etc.

If you really want to know what it was like, read the article I did based on the History of the Cat in Ancient Egypt - particualrly the last 3 posts which deal with the religion and how Bast, aka the cat, was brought into it.

I'll reproduce a relevant piece here.
It has to be understood that the term religion for Egyptians covered more than we consider religion today: it covered the state ideology and theory of kingship, and the king and his relationship with the gods. It was the ideological property of the minority - only priests associated with the temples could read the inscriptions there, and see the representations becuse the majority of people were not allowed beyond the temple's monumental gateway - the pylon. Temples then were not places to spread and reaffirm religious dogma with the ordinary people as they are for us. A great diversity existed between the various sections of Egyptian society: the personal beliefs of the owners of large decorated tombs were not those of the poor. This divide was deepened as many high officials also held priestly functions.

There was a certain amount of interchange, like when the temple images were brought out and carried in procession. The lowliest peasant could see that. The beliefs of the poor were usually went unrecorded, but were sometimes promoted and received official recognition so they became part of the religion and were recorded for us to read.
There are 4 dimensions of ancient Egyptian religion - the first three belong to the restricted official sphere such as those concerning local deities and their temples, cosmic events and the maintenance of order in the universe, nature and society, and primitive mythology, then finally the religious beliefs of individuals - personal piety.

To the Egyptian there was no division between people, animals and gods - they were all living beings. Deities were worshipped primarily in their visible manifestation as a cult image. Animals were chosen to act as a god's image for the length of its natural life because of special external characteristics, like the markings on the Apis bull. This has nothing to do with zooaltry - animal worship - and to talk about the deification of cats misses the point. Thus the fact a deity could manifest itself in the form of a particular animal did not stop them exploiting others of the same type - though likely the cow that bore the Apis bull, and his offspring, would be treated differently. The Egyptians were a practical people.

This is not my personal opinion here, this is the paraphrased words of the author himself. I summarized it faithfully for here as it is a long book.

The book was The Cat in Ancient Egypt by Jaromir Malek, pub by British Museum Press. Featured on Tour Egypt site.

As I said, I have read this in all of the books on Egyptian religion that I either own or have borrowed.

However, if you do know different, and can point me to some reliable information on this, I will happily go look at it as I enjoy learning more - and yes, even if it proves what I had previously believed was wrong. ;)

http://www.sff.net/people/lisanne/Viking/images/Miut.gif

[wodinoneeye]

I will try to draw comparisons and similarities from the following which was
supposed to be proof of the difference between religion in Medieval Europe
and religion in Ancient Pharaohic Egypt ::::

----------------------------


It has to be understood that the term religion for Egyptians covered more than we consider religion today:

[except we are talking about a comparison with medieval Europe]





it covered the state ideology and theory of kingship, and the king and his relationship with the gods.

[as it did in M.E. kings being god's anointed and protector of the faith and such -- coronations done by bishops etc... ]




It was the ideological property of the minority - only priests associated with the temples could read the inscriptions there,


[Many prients in middle ages couldnt read and many were barely literate and the populace even more so (many nobles couldnt read either and used clerics for paperwork) High Theology in Europe was the domain of the highly educated.]


and see the representations because the majority of people were not allowed beyond the temple's monumental gateway - the pylon.

[European religion may have been more public (egyptians still had some mass ceremonies outside the temples didnt they?? Multitudes of small temples accessible to populace, funeral services etc...). Various parts of the churches (and certainly the homes of rich clerics in Europe) werent accessible to anyone who walked in)]


Temples then were not places to spread and reaffirm religious dogma with the ordinary people as they are for us.

[ No?? Their magnificence was just self-agrandizement (remember many great cathederals were prestige items as well a places of worship...).
Was the show to impress just the gods or also to show the populace that it was getting its moneys worth (placating gods instead of being expensive
parasites??). Dogma such as the gods require placating/worship etc... ???]


A great diversity existed between the various sections of Egyptian society: the personal beliefs of the owners of large decorated tombs were not those of the poor. This divide was deepened as many high officials also held priestly functions.

[Royal tombs in europe, rich mens tombs, poor peoples graves/burial pits etc... What difference between egypt and M.E. .... none???]




There was a certain amount of interchange, like when the temple images were brought out and carried in procession.

[ Yep lots of those too in Catholic and Orthodox church]



The lowliest peasant could see that. The beliefs of the poor were usually went unrecorded,

[Backwater (rural) areas in Europe where often pretty lax in the practices
of Catholicism. The high clergy rarely went near the ordinary folk.
Pagan superstitions were long prevelant. ]



but were sometimes promoted and received official recognition so they became part of the religion and were recorded for us to read.

[(You must have read somewhere that a large number of Saints were adopted pagan entities...) ]




There are 4 dimensions of ancient Egyptian religion - the first three belong to the restricted official sphere such as those concerning local deities and their temples, cosmic events and the maintenance of order in the universe, nature and society, and primitive mythology, then finally the religious beliefs of individuals - personal piety.


[The Catholic church was not monolithic either. Local saints received greater
emphasis. Different ceremonies/variations in different regions.
Alot of the practices werent standardized until the 1500s and even then
acceptance of local variation was still recognized.
The rural churches/shrine were a whole different situation from higher up the hierarchy. ]


To the Egyptian there was no division between people, animals and gods - they were all living beings.

[ God in everything, every aspect of life - a similar idea in Christianity ]


Deities were worshipped primarily in their visible manifestation as a cult image.


[remember those protestants denounced images of Saints as idolatry...]


Animals were chosen to act as a god's image for the length of its natural life because of special external characteristics, like the markings on the Apis bull.

[Symbolism is all thru Christianity too. Might not have been as Animal-Centric -- more Artwork etc.. ]


This has nothing to do with zooaltry - animal worship - and to talk about the deification of cats misses the point.

[ Outsides have alot of problems with Christain symbols too. Worshiping
torture implements and lambs and chunks of bone....]


Thus the fact a deity could manifest itself in the form of a particular animal did not stop them exploiting others of the same type - though likely the cow that bore the Apis bull, and his offspring, would be treated differently. The Egyptians were a practical people.


[ Relics of saints something similar -- not even a piece of one, often something the saint touched, or a place that they once stood etc....]



--------------


Very small differences when you look at it.

[wodinoneeye]

Wodinoneeye, I am sorry but I have to disagree totally with you likening the part Egyptian religion played with the common people to the medieval church in Europe.

...

It was, pure and simple, a power struggle between state and religion - not at all what happened in the middle ages. In Britain we didn't have that till Henry 8th wanted a divorce!



Henry II and Beckett 1170AD


There were huge powerplays between churchmen and the nobility in Europe.

The church held ownership of huge areas of land .
(Henry VIII sweetener was getting his hands on those by reorganizing the church with him as its leader)

Were not the High Clergymen even members of the House of Lords (even up to this day in England).

The church had enough influence to have its own judicial system for its members (seperate from the kings justice). One of the reasons Beckett was
killed was his defense of this right.

Excomunication by the church could cause major repercussions to a monarch. Lack of support by the church lost many a nobleman his chance to be king.

Several of the crusades to the Holylands were organized by the Church.
Monies raised by Rome went to fighting the Turks, and conversions of pagan/orthodox regions in eastern europe.

Holy orders like Templars, Hospitalars held significant secular and military power.

Some bishops frequently lead troops in battle (If it counts even a Rennaisance
Pope did)

[Miut]

OK, my reply. Sorry, has to be over 2 posts to get your Comments in.
I will try to draw comparisons and similarities from the following which was
supposed to be proof of the difference between religion in Medieval Europe
and religion in Ancient Pharaohic Egypt ::::

It has to be understood that the term religion for Egyptians covered more than we consider religion today:
[except we are talking about a comparison with medieval Europe]

I'm not, you are trying to justify it to me. You said they were similar.

[as it did in M.E. kings being god's anointed and protector of the faith and such -- coronations done by bishops etc... ]

The Cult of king, worship of king as god on earth was paramount. Tell me the name of one sane monarch in medieval times who thought he was god on earth? Tell me the name of one church, abbey, cathedral, built solely to worship that monarch?

[Many prients in middle ages couldnt read and many were barely literate and the populace even more so (many nobles couldnt read either and used clerics for paperwork) High Theology in Europe was the domain of the highly educated.]

That's why they decorated the insides of churches with pretty pictures of the Stations of the Cross and other relevant things which anyone was capable of understanding just by looking at them.
Egyptian carvings etc showed scenes but it was texts that were written on the insides of the temples, not pretty pictures.

[European religion may have been more public (egyptians still had some mass ceremonies outside the temples didnt they?? Multitudes of small temples accessible to populace, funeral services etc...). Various parts of the churches (and certainly the homes of rich clerics in Europe) werent accessible to anyone who walked in)]

May have been more public? Try being accurate and saying that everyone was compelled to go to church on pain of punishment, not just from their overlord, but the church, and you might be more accurate! That's why they had Lepers doors to keep them isolated from the rest and prevent them infecting anyone else - but even they had to go to church!
No, not multitudes of small temples, from my reading they were outdoor shrines marked by stone tablets at the rear of temples only, or maybe wayside shrines. And there is a heck of a big difference bewtween medeval churches demanding everyone attend services, and Egyptian temples which refused the people entry at all!
You have a poor base from which to argue if you have to add in that peasant folk weren't allowed into the private houses of clerics, dear! That's a pathetic argument. What was the point of it?

[ No?? Their magnificence was just self-agrandizement (remember many great cathederals were prestige items as well a places of worship...).
Was the show to impress just the gods or also to show the populace that it was getting its moneys worth (placating gods instead of being expensive
parasites??). Dogma such as the gods require placating/worship etc... ???]

Stop confusing real Egyptians with games and you might gain a little understanding.
And stop changing my points here and saying they weren't relevant in my previous post because you have now redefined your points.
Cathedrals and churches were built for the patrons to be sure of a place in heaven. That's bribery. I lately lived in a town with a church for every week of the year and two cathedrals, the majority of which were built, I was told by one of the expert guides at the Norwich Cathedral, (the Norman one that is) not for anyone to worship in, but for a group of priests, monks and nuns to live in and pray for the souls oof those who built it - buying a place in heaven. There were far too many churches for the size of the population in Norwich at any time.

Egyptians didn't build temples to be assured of an after life. They didn't build to show how mighty they were alone, there were other reasons. Some monuments, but usually stelea and obelisk type things, were erected in newly conquered areas to proclaim Pharaoh's might over his enemies - the temple at Aswan was to remind the Nubians who ruled them among other reasons.

Worship of Pharaoh as the presence of the divine on earth was paramount in the royal court, and outside too. Yes, they had funerary temples and cults for the pharoaos, but that was only extra insurance.

Dogma - a religious doctrine proclaimed as true without proof, a doctrine or code of beliefs accepted as authoratative. Hmm, from what I can see only Christianity fits that bill.
Why? Because there was no state religion or religions in Egypt. There was no dogma unifying all the people. And where do you get the concept of a pantheon of gods equating to the monotheistic medieval church?
As for getting their money's worth, until you see life in Egypt through the eyes of the people of the time, you will never have any understanding of it. You are a cynic of the 21st C trying to reinterpret it for your own agenda, not someone really trying to understand the people or culture of that time.

The Pharaoh's job was to ensure the Rule of Ma'at was preserved - that means Order. To do that he built temples, paid homage to the gods in the right way and at the right time, protected Egypt's interests at home and abroad. Because he did that, the people knew he was doing his job and were satisfied Egypt would have good harvests and be protected from the powers of Chaos.

[Royal tombs in europe, rich mens tombs, poor peoples graves/burial pits etc... What difference between egypt and M.E. .... none???]

Relevance? Tell me of any tombs you have mentioned with religous texts about life after death inscribed on them.
That snippet of mine is taken out of context, again, on purpose. What it refers to is that the nobility believed something entirely different from the peasants, not that they had better graves! If that was all you got from what I wrote, you really missed the point.
----------------------------------------
[ Yep lots of those too in Catholic and Orthodox church]

You like being confrontational, don't you? Again, out of context. The text refers to the fact that the Egyptian peasants could only join in celebrations held outside the church - give me any medieval corollary where the peasants were denied entrance to the church and could only join in the procession outside!

[Backwater (rural) areas in Europe where often pretty lax in the practices of Catholicism. The high clergy rarely went near the ordinary folk.
Pagan superstitions were long prevelant. ]

Your point is? Again out of context - what was said is that the beliefs of the powerful are recorded, but not those of the common people. The peasants were recorded by historians, reputable ones at various ages in the history of Ancient Egypt, and Roman historians too, as being the most pious they had ever seen. This comes under the realm of 'personal piety' mentioned i the original article. Not comparable.

Just for the record, personal piety says it all - it confirms there was no state wide relious dogma.

[(You must have read somewhere that a large number of Saints were adopted pagan entities...) ]

As I understand it, they adopted the names and times of year, but tied them to martyrs where possible.

http://www.sff.net/people/lisanne/Viking/images/Miut.gif

[Miut]

The rest of the reply to Wodinoneeye.

[The Catholic church was not monolithic either. Local saints received greater emphasis. Different ceremonies/variations in different regions.
Alot of the practices werent standardized until the 1500s and even then
acceptance of local variation was still recognized.
The rural churches/shrine were a whole different situation from higher up the hierarchy. ]

So? I am not concerned with catholicism of any period in history. I am talking about Ancient Egypt. Local saints do not equate to local gods by any definition you care to name.

[ God in everything, every aspect of life - a similar idea in Christianity ]

No, please, don't make me laugh! Animals have no soul in christian beliefs and dogma, but perhaps you haven't heard that.
To try and liken the belief that there was no difference in value between a god, a person and an animal with the non-canonical comment of yours of god in everything is silly. I've had many an argument with churchmen on that topic alone. I have never heard it said or written that god was present in a dog, or that a person is the equal of god! The Egyptians did believe that, though. ;)

[remember those protestants denounced images of Saints as idolatry...]

Yes, we did, so what? What has that to do with Ancient Egypt? Animals were chosen to act as a god's image for the length of its natural life because of special external characteristics, like the markings on the Apis bull.

[Symbolism is all thru Christianity too. Might not have been as Animal-Centric -- more Artwork etc.. ]

What has what the Protestants thought of idols got to do with Ancient Egypt? Or the fact other religions have symbolism? Most christian symbolism has to do with the trinity and the pascal lamb, which is Jewish anyway, not god being present in the lamb. Please try to keep on track with your arguments.

[ Outsides have alot of problems with Christain symbols too. Worshiping
torture implements and lambs and chunks of bone....]

Again, please stay on track with your arguments. What has worshiping a deity represented by an animal got in common with your comments about torture implements and lambs?

[ Relics of saints something similar -- not even a piece of one, often something the saint touched, or a place that they once stood etc....]

Sure... Once the Apis bull died it was split up and sold off in pieces wasn't it, just like chritians did with the bodies of their saints - are these the pagan saints by the way? Wait, no they didn't. The Egyptians mummified the Apis bull with ceremonies as great as those of a Pharaoh, and buried him in the Serapeium...exactly what christians did with saints. :D
And now I think of it, tell me about the sacred lamb who was actually worshipped by Christians, as the Christian god, and lived a life of luxury till it died. Now that would be a similarity indeed.

Very small differences when you look at it.

Sure they are. ;)
Meanwhile, try these texts on Egyptian religion.

"At court, devotion was due first to the ruler and the king protected the weak directly, pre-empting in theory the need for any other divine intervention."
and,
"The pre-eminence of kingship in the surviving record should illustrate clearly that all cult in Egypt as royal cult; it was part of a cosmic pact in which the king offered up to heaven the fruits of the earth, in exchange channeling down to earth the blessings of heaven. Any tempole in Egypt is a monument to the kingshipthat created it as much as to the deity for whom it was created."
"Since all monumental work in the name of a king contributed to the cult of that king, the change from one to the other focus of production is more one of form than of content; the emphasis passes from the image of the reigning king to the image of the local deity, but remains and depends on kingship."

and most importantly,

"The Egyptians conceived of the world asa solar process from sunset through sunrise to sunset endlessly repeated, a harmony that had been disturbed by the murder of Osiris by Seth. The damage to creation could be contained as long as the sun-god was represented on Earth by a king who caused Right to exist, and so long as Right was raised up to her lord the sun-god by the gods Thoth or Inheret, 'he who brings back the distant goddess', by their earthly counterpart the king andf by his substitutes in the different localities of Egypt, the priests. Only this framework of Right caused to exist and raised to the creator could provide the space in which human beings might in their turn participate in the task of preserving the cosmos by saying and doing Right. The conception of the universe as a fragile entity that was perpetually threatened with obliviongave to the Egyptian cult of the gods an urgency and an extension beyond the bounds of what the Christian and Isklamic traditions hold proper to worship. The most important differences are, first, the localisation of deities as separat entities in each separate place, and, second, the offerings of not only words and hymns but also material food, drink and clothing. The closest analogy to the Egyptian temple thus becomes not the church or mosque in which faithful congregate to offer prayers and hymns but the poewr station in whihc society produces the energy it needs to function and survive.
The Egyptian temple is a machine for the preservation of the universe, a technical operation that requies technical staff and knowledge and threby excludes the great majority of the poulation in order to ensure that the crucial task of survival is never impaired.
The maintenance of order in the face of chaos reached every part of the land, the difference between localitises being expressed in the differences between the deities. The notion of 'gods of provinces' and 'gods of towns' formed a crucial binding medium in Egyptian society, specified in the Bersha funerary text - 'I made their hearts not to forget the West, from the wish that divine offerings be made to the local deities'."

Taken from Ancient Egyptian Religion by Stephen QuirkePub for the Trustees of the British MNuseum by British Museum Press. He works in the Department of Egyptian Antiquities at the British Museum.

You want a bibliography, I can do it, but it takes up a page in the book. :D

So you see, the temples were power houses to promote the Rule of Ma'at, otherwise known as Right or Order, and totally unlike any churches.
You can also see from the above that only the king could sanction building temples and monuments, not the priesthood, as it was a sign of his divinity. I can't understand why you think priests would want to build temples anyway. They would glorify the king, not them, they couldn't claim them as theirs, they would have the king's name plastered all over them, along with that of the deity.
Not just that, the government paid the workers on monuments, not the temples. All in all you have a rather strange outlook on what it was like then, Wodinoneeye - I think you are applying too much of a modern interpretation, and by modern I mean anything later than 1 AD. Any anthropologist will tell you that you can only study an ancient culture within the context of its own times, not outside it because it is the dynamics of the land, the climate, the politics of its neighbours etc that shape it.

Anyway, I'm done. This is my proof, you're totally free to believe what you want.

http://www.sff.net/people/lisanne/Viking/images/Miut.gif

[mouse]

Miut and Gill we might have a great advantage with the people :D
Gill really sorry about planting that image in your mind but it's the first one that came to my mind ;) Anyone who hasn't played C3 won't understand what dealing with those market ladies could do to one's peace of mind. Now we'll have a city full of them only they won't be market ladies but the entire population :D

[Granite Q]

Gill really sorry about planting that image in your mind but it's the first one that came to my mind ;) .. Now we'll have a city full of them only they won't be market ladies but the entire population :D
And thanks, mouse, for planting that image in my head :p
** sings 'Lady in Red' **

I'm sure the good people at Tilted Mill wouldn't do that to us :D

[NeilV]

Just to throw my two pence worth in

I thought Egyptian Monuments were built to prove the latest pharaoh was better and more impressive than the last but had to do something to be able to build it (Like a glorious battle etc)

Christian Monuments At least medieval cathedrals were built to atone for sins past present and to give a bit of leeway in the future which is why a lot of them are extremely large as rich people sin more than poor people (at least back then) the local parish church would have been smaller normally seating about 20 people and were built by the local peasants as a place to worship and were believed by many to be more holy than any cathedral as to give what you can afford was ok but to give what you could not was better.

Most peasants would use their own church so not to get caught up in the sin of the nobles and used their own church services which they all could remember which is why we still now have high church (only really used in cathedrals and set by Rome) and low church used in parish churches and was localised to each area to get the people to come which is why a lot of pagan festivals and rituals have been included. and continues to day to include localised rituals
;)

[mouse]

Ahhhhhhhhhh GQ sorry about that seems I have a strong influence on HG staff :D Guess I wanted company since I've been having those images of a whole city of market ladies running wild while I scream nasty things at them ;)

[wodinoneeye]

One of your original statements :


Wodinoneeye, I am sorry but I have to disagree totally with you likening the part Egyptian religion played with the common people to the medieval church in Europe.




I offered multiple examples demonstrating that there are many similarities between the relation of religion to the culture of Ancient Egypt and the relation religion had in Medieval Europe.

If you wish to deny the similarities I mention, that is your freedom of opinion.

[wodinoneeye]

OK, my reply. Sorry, has to be over 2 posts to get your Comments in.


I'm not, you are trying to justify it to me. You said they were similar.



The Cult of king, worship of king as god on earth was paramount. Tell me the name of one sane monarch in medieval times who thought he was god on earth? Tell me the name of one church, abbey, cathedral, built solely to worship that monarch?




What proof of any Pharaoh actually thinking (knowing) that they were actually a God ???? Did they prove to themselves that they had Godlike powers (floating around/ bringing things back to life/ hurling lightning bolts at people) or did they just buy into the story and took up the role??

How can you prove this? Personal writings?? Tomb inscriptions?? All that is part of the role and the scam.

Maybe gods represenative on earth? (Many European Kings were refered to as such and some even took it seriously)

Kings in Europe could have people killed too. They could defy the Church (and God supposedly). They knew they werent God (or gods) yet they
could exercise the equivalent power to a Pharaoh (and often more than many).

[wodinoneeye]

That's why they decorated the insides of churches with pretty pictures of the Stations of the Cross and other relevant things which anyone was capable of understanding just by looking at them.
Egyptian carvings etc showed scenes but it was texts that were written on the insides of the temples, not pretty pictures.




And the christain writings were in books which few people in the kingdom could read (frequently not even the Nobles). The iconism and simple illustrations of the stories were inspirational symbols , the writings (sermons/gospels etc.. presented in the mass and other ceremonies )themselves are magnitudes more definitive of the religion AND the High Theology (which very small portions of the population were ever exposed to) was magnitudes greater yet.

Big fancy picture on the outside of the egyptian temples.
Big fancy picture on outside and inside of churches.

Both were for the benifit of the populace who could see the pictures and even the grand temples or churches themselves as a sign of the significance of the religion.

Difference ????

[wodinoneeye]

May have been more public? Try being accurate and saying that everyone was compelled to go to church on pain of punishment, not just from their overlord, but the church,



[As I said before in more rural parts of europe, things were much more lax than in the great cities. Frequently people went to church once or twice a year and some not at all. Friars went places where churches didnt exist
and tried to reach the people. Not one carried an axe or sword to execute those he found who refused his ministrations.


Loyalty to Pharaoh (the god). Why was Pharaoh your leader??
Because he was a god (protector against Chaos or whatever)? If you refused to give your loyalty to Pharaoh what happened?? Compulsion on pain of Death ??? This might apply directly to only certain strata of society, but indirectly any man's superior got his power from the top down and disloyalty to Pharaoh's represenative was disloyalty to Pharaoh.
(The Church in Europe sanctioned a King's power the same way)

What choice to a peasant on some lords land to whom Pharaoh was almost a myth (much like kings in dark ages europe). Beaten up as an example or driven out to starve. Compulsion by Church/State like a serf in Europe.]






and you might be more accurate! That's why they had Lepers doors to keep them isolated from the rest and prevent them infecting anyone else - but even they had to go to church!


[ Remember that the City population in Europe was a fraction of the rural (and thus total) population. Multitudes of small Churches had one set of doors. Do not use a great cathederal as the definition of a religion.

Remember also that churches are not the only facility that Christianity had.
Hospitals, Convents, Abbeys, Monastaries, Castles, Pilgrim Hostels (not to mention residences of the rich churchmen and all the vast lands they controlled.]







No, not multitudes of small temples, from my reading they were outdoor shrines marked by stone tablets at the rear of temples only, or maybe wayside shrines. And there is a heck of a big difference bewtween medeval churches demanding everyone attend services, and Egyptian temples which refused the people entry at all!


[Votive offerings (remember the hundreds of thousands of kitty mummies
found in the Bast(or which ever) religious center and like numbers of Ibis in another.
Ive seen the thousands of votive offerings on display at the Met in NewYork.
Did the people just drop these in a slot at the temples outer doors?
What ceremonies accompanied these offerings?? (Who handled the 'donations'
that went with them??) Are these religious interactions with ordinary citizens what you call exclusion?


BTW Have you ever seen the plan of a Medieval Church that has a grill about 1/4 of the length from the altar ?? Ordinary people were not allowed past that point. Ordinary people were not generally allowed in the Church Sacristy either. A more indirect example might be the tradition of
sanctuary in the christian church (the state was prohibited from bringing
its soldiers (power) into the church property). This is a type of exclusion.

Yes the Catholic church was more public in just about all of its ceremonies.

But in Egypt, why bother with the great monuments, with the fancy pictures
covering the outsides of those temples if it was all so secret??
Why the propaganda (when you come down to it)? For who's benefit was it all constructed at great cost??

Public religious processions in Egypt mentioned?? Were the common folk driven away lest their presence taint all the ceremonies??? Or were they truly part of it (many of the ceremonies)?

Obviously there were publiic functions and private functions.]









You have a poor base from which to argue if you have to add in that peasant folk weren't allowed into the private houses of clerics, dear! That's a pathetic argument. What was the point of it?


[ No its just that I have a view of the larger scope of religion in a society.
State and Church were thoroughly intertwined and overlapping in Europe
as it appears to also been in Ancient Egypt.
Private houses of those clerics (BTW the Pope had his own private chapel, as did Bishops and Kings) ARE part of the church/state conglomeration that existed in Europe and the fact that the riffraff were excluded parallels Egyptian temples where the non-clerics were excluded .
Christian Monasteries/Convents frequently excluded outsiders as well -- they had strict rules and routines as part of their worship. I wont even get into Hermitages...]

[wodinoneeye]

Stop confusing real Egyptians with games and you might gain a little understanding.



Be careful assuming what I base MY arguments on and likewise what you base yours on.




And stop changing my points here and saying they weren't relevant in my previous post because you have now redefined your points.
Cathedrals and churches were built for the patrons to be sure of a place in heaven.



What did I redefine. I continue to illustrate similarities between the two.

Cities built churches not just individuals or families.
Propagada for a city's prestige often had much to do with this.
Expression to the Glory of God did too.
The Church itself raised money to build most of them (tithing).
Great Cathederals often took centuries to finish and had to be maintained.
Kings often built churches to ingratiate themselves with the Catholic Church, for their own glory and sometimes out of piety.
Yes many were partially funded and built as an attempt to buy a way
into heaven (but so were hospitals).
Some became or enhanced pilgrimage sites that often made alot of money
for the locals.







That's bribery. I lately lived in a town with a church for every week of the year and two cathedrals, the majority of which were built, I was told by one of the expert guides at the Norwich Cathedral, (the Norman one that is) not for anyone to worship in, but for a group of priests, monks and nuns to live in and pray for the souls oof those who built it - buying a place in heaven. There were far too many churches for the size of the population in Norwich at any time.



So you base the entire definition/motivation of the Christain church in Europe on one example of a local Cathederal??? Anectdotal evidence doesnt cut it.

As I said before in other posts, the churches (even moreso the Big Churches)
were only a small part of the assets and extent of the Christian church.

Add another to my previous list -- Schools (yes, middle/upper class only for non-religious instruction). Libraries -- yep church again.....

Clerks in all government institutions (because they could read write and figure) came from the clerics or church run schools.

[wodinoneeye]

Just to throw my two pence worth in

I thought Egyptian Monuments were built to prove the latest pharaoh was better and more impressive than the last but had to do something to be able to build it (Like a glorious battle etc)

Christian Monuments At least medieval cathedrals were built to atone for sins past present and to give a bit of leeway in the future which is why a lot of them are extremely large as rich people sin more than poor people (at least back then) the local parish church would have been smaller normally seating about 20 people and were built by the local peasants as a place to worship and were believed by many to be more holy than any cathedral as to give what you can afford was ok but to give what you could not was better.

Most peasants would use their own church so not to get caught up in the sin of the nobles and used their own church services which they all could remember which is why we still now have high church (only really used in cathedrals and set by Rome) and low church used in parish churches and was localised to each area to get the people to come which is why a lot of pagan festivals and rituals have been included. and continues to day to include localised rituals
;)


Yes to try to generalize periods of history of the extent in time (counted in thousands of years) and broad geographic regions (and cultures) can be a mistake.

I remember reading somewhere of religious monuments in Ancient Egypt
(and some in Roman Rome) where the language written on them was actually
no longer known to anyone living -- and AT that time. Here we are trying to piece together a culture looking at details the bulk of which are lost to history. Building theories with shreads of well eroded evidence (much of which was official propaganda).

[AncientPaul]

Just had time to read this new article cos I teach a writing class on Tuesday's.


Does the above quote not scare the hell out of anyone else as indicating the dire state of the edcuational system in this country?

At first I wanted to send it to Jay Leno for his "headlines" bit, but the more I thought about it, it's more scary than funny.

Should this guy be teaching writing to anyone?

My God, I hope he's just pretending to be a teacher.

[Son of Moose]

I am absolutely sure that SHE is just being ironic. :D Anyway, I am sure that all our forum posts do not always employ optimal grammar, etc.

Please visit Miut's webpage to learn more about her and her writing skills. :)

With kindest regards

[Ineti]

Does the above quote not scare the hell out of anyone else as indicating the dire state of the edcuational system in this country?

Confucius say: Spell-check own posts before pointing out errors of others.

;)

As an aside, this is a multinational forum. You might want to specify which country you're referring to, just for clarity's sake.

[EmperorJay]

Read some of her novels and articles on this forum and then tell me if you still wish to ask this question ;) .

[mouse]

If your talking about the state of US education it could hardly be her fault that teaching is considered to be a career choice of last resort. Second the lady would be a real benefit to any school where she was teaching as she is wonderful published author of a number books that show a mastery of the english language that most could only envy.

[AncientPaul]

If your talking about the state of US education it could hardly be her fault that teaching is considered to be a career choice of last resort. Second the lady would be a real benefit to any school where she was teaching as she is wonderful published author of a number books that show a mastery of the english language that most could only envy.

Understood all.

[Azeem]

Erm, exactly what does all of this have to do with "New Content"? :rolleyes:

[Miut]

Oops... :o Sorry. Thanks for the support, though, folks.

It was 4 am, I was relaxing for a few minutes before collapsing into bed after spending the bulk of the day/night Editing 3 student manuscripts on a computer determined to mess them up, and struggling to make sense of Word 97-2000 and WP 11 with their various styles of Tracking Changes/Document reviewing. I ended up having to duplicate the Edits on one m/s by hand eventually because I got 1 page m/s and 5 pages of changes and comments for it. Meaning a 10 page m/s would have printed out at 50 pages! Argh!

I also have a problem where every now and then I manage to hit more than one key at a time - I'm not a touch typist, I have to keep looking at the keyboard - and my keyboard being cordless, I often hit the cap lock and end up with it all in caps as I am watching keys not the screen - then I have to redo it! For those who don't know, cordless ones have no blinking lights to tell you that caps lock is engaged - they flash the words on screen or put up a tiny task bar icon next to the clock - fine if you're a touch typist. :(

I was on a visit to the US last year and got home to find someone had spilled orange juice over my $150 normal ergonomically split and curved keyboard. All I could find to replace it was this black cordless one. I need a specific level of curve and split keyboard or I get carpal tunnel pain badly - comes from working at a keyboard on average for 14 hours a day.
All keyboards have their own problems, but I wish Logitech would wake up to the fact black may look a cool color, but it ain't one for working on! (catches all the dust too. Bleh.)

But the cat article was funny. :)

[vovan]

I also have a problem where every now and then I manage to hit more than one key at a time - I'm not a touch typist, I have to keep looking at the keyboard - and my keyboard being cordless, I often hit the cap lock and end up with it all in caps as I am watching keys not the screen - then I have to redo it! For those who don't know, cordless ones have no blinking lights to tell you that caps lock is engaged - they flash the words on screen or put up a tiny task bar icon next to the clock - fine if you're a touch typist.

Miut, MSWord has a bunch of functions to let you not redo that. :) If you accidentally type something in all-caps, then you can select the text, and then go Format -> Change Case. That will allow you to change case to all-lower case, or sentence case, where only the first word of the sentence is capitalized, or whatever else you might want. Also, I, personally, hate to take my hands off the keyboard to use the mouse when I am typing, so you can select the text, and then go Shift-F3, and that will change the case of the selected text too. :D

I wish Logitech would wake up to the fact black may look a cool color, but it ain't one for working on!

Weird. I perfer white text on black background much more to gray keyboards...

EDIT: I only read the last couple posts in this thread, so sorry if this is terribly out of place. :D