New King. Egpt. - Explain the"Warrior Pharaoh"image&its sgnifcance during this period (1 Viewer)

[Lil Mis Temptin]

hi, i was just wondering whether anyone had any answers to this question? or if you would prefer whether anyone knows of any good sites where i can get info for this question?
thankyou

 

[xeuyrawp]

The resource section is here, and whilst there may not be anything titled "Warrior Pharaoh", pretty much any other notes would help you.

It would have been good if you posted your period, too, but there are some general things that can help you structure your essay.

-Propaganda: Is essential to the Warrior Pharaoh image; presenting oneself in the Blue Crown of War, holding the traditional khopesh whilst smiting the foreigners shows the world that you're a great warrior.

-Military: It can also be useful if they are a good warrior, and military leadership and victory is essential to this.

-Buildings & Religion: The Pharaoh is only a warrior because he's part of the devine plan of keeping maat, and dedicating buildings to the gods and then honouring them is necessary to be a good warrior pharaoh.

-Women: It's important to note how the chief wife of Pharaoh is presented, and whether she's in on the action. A lot of the time, the woman will be a tool for furthering her husband's cause- he makes her a deity, and by deduction he's greater than a deity because he's married to her. Is she displayed as a priest?

They are a few central points that you'd structure your essay around, but it's really hard to be specific without your period.

Also important to note is that ever point links back to propaganda.

 

[angelduck]

-Military: It can also be useful if they are a good warrior, and military leadership and victory is essential to this.

Well, um, der, nice work there, being a warrior pharaoh and all, i believe the egyptians probably wouldnt have followed a pharaoh into battle if said pharaoh couldnt throw a stick further than a metre or kill a guy with a sword

 

[xeuyrawp]

Well, um, der, nice work there,

Actually, propaganda is more important for a warrior pharaoh than the ability to be a warrior

 

[angelduck]

but ud still need to be able to use a sword, besides most pharaohs did stints in the army whilst their father was pharaoh to prepare them - propaganda is most impostant for Hatshepsut, although there is also one source spomewhere (ithink it was on one of her obelsisks) that says the army followed her into battle indicating she too was a warrior)

 

[xeuyrawp]

but ud still need to be able to use a sword, besides most pharaohs did stints in the army whilst their father was pharaoh to prepare them

I highly doubt that they did real service. Somewhere along the lines of Prince Charles serving in the navy

- propaganda is most impostant for Hatshepsut, although there is also one source spomewhere (ithink it was on one of her obelsisks) that says the army followed her into battle indicating she too was a warrior)

I'm of the personal opinion that the pharaoh never went into battle at all, and if he did, he was at the far back.

My reasoning is that 1. Of all the mummies we have, none were obviously killed in war. A Pharaoh really wouldn't have retreated to come home scared with himself, his bodyguards, and no other army- Imagine the disgrace! Hence if he was in battle (and Egypt did lose battles), there would be evidence of ones being killed there; not only a mummy but also written evidence.

2. The Pharaoh was a god, and how do you propose that a man shows no fear, no uncertainty, and utter bravery on the battlefield? He would have been militarily in charge, but any hint of ungodliness would be very damaging to him. That's why a lot of people think he'd charge right into the battlefield, when he was much more needed at home.

3. Yes he was a military figure, but he would be much more needed back in Egypt. A lot of people don't know that the Pharaoh heard a lot of court cases, as well as doing a lot of religious and general admin stuff. He was their version of a High Court and frequently passed judgements on cases he wasn't involved in (ie, give a "signature" to a death sentence, so to speak).

although there is also one source spomewhere (ithink it was on one of her obelsisks) that says the army followed her into battle indicating she too was a warrior)

Don't believe anything you read. Apparently Ramses won the Battle of Kadesh with himself, his horse, and his chariot driver.

 

[angelduck]

Ramses II served in the army before he was pharaoh, and was a proper warrior

 

[xeuyrawp]

Ramses II served in the army before he was pharaoh, and was a proper warrior

Why do you think he was a proper warrior?

He had a sort of leadership role when he was in the army, the head of the x`eta, a kind of general with the horsemen is the proper term dubbed to him at that time. He would have been sitting at the back of the battlefield, and would have probably charged in when it was safe and to inspect the goings-on.

Edit: oops, it's 'x`eta' not 'h`eta'

 

[angelduck]

a proper warrior as in he served in the army

And on ur point about pharaohs not dying in battle - there is a chance sekenenrae Tao could have (or sekenenrae Tao II - don't quite remember) with the bix axe slit in his head

 

[xeuyrawp]

a proper warrior as in he served in the army

Well there's no point continuing this, I've asked you the same questions several times, and I got no response.

 

[angelduck]

warrior = can fight, and therefore served in the army... thats what i said before u idiot

 

[xeuyrawp]

warrior = can fight, and therefore served in the army... thats what i said before u idiot

Oh dear, you're calling me an idiot when you take a piece of 3500 year old Egyptian sovereign propaganda as historicity.

Furthermore, your premise is falible at best. 'A warrior is a person who can fight' is probably the worst definition, and doesn't fit in with either Ancient or modern concepts of a warrior. A warrior is a person who fights, not a person who can fight.

But, let's continue...

He didn't fight, and I doubt he could fight. It's been shown that archery was really the only militarial training a young prince would have gotten- for hunting. He never would have crossed swords with anyone. I would say there's a 50% change of him actually being at any of the Battles, let alone anywhere near the enemy.

You're an idiot and make no real argument- 'he faught, Karnak says so' is the weakest argument I've ever heard. Oh wait, you didn't even cite your source, but I'm sure that's what you mean (Karnak).

But please, continue to enlighten us with your astounding knowledge of the sources of Egypt.

 

[angelduck]

lol, as per my knowledge of ramses II - i didnt study him - he wasn't the oldest son of Seth II and was therefore not first in line for throne, and was sent to the army for military training

 

[xeuyrawp]

Seqenere Tao II was before Thutmose I, and Thutmose I was the one who started the whole Warrior Pharaoh image.. even though there were pharaohs that were quite militaristic before him, speaking in context of Warrior Pharaohs i dont consider any pharaohs before the Thutmosides as Warrior Pharaohs..
and i believe that propaganda is more important to the warrior pharaoh image then the military skills, like Hatshepsut, i highly doubt she actually went out to the battle field, though she is claimed to have went on military campaigns.. this is seen more for propaganda, like she showed herself as a warrior pharaoh when she depicted herself in the war crown and as a sphinx trampling the enemy.. and she is considered to be a pharaoh who did somewhat epitomise the image of a "warrior pharaoh"

YES! I WIN!

jkjk

 

[xeuyrawp]

lolz, i dunno how much of what i said was right.. but thats just what i reckon.

It's so true, though

 

[silvermoon]

lol. it's not ducks fault. we were brainwashed by an evil ancient teacher who knew stuff all. for once, pwaryeux, i agree with you. ange: perhaps you could include a little more evidence in this argument? harpy's obsession with showing stele detailing pharaohs and their involvement in battles really means jack all.

 

[xeuyrawp]

for once, pwaryeux, i agree with you.

how comforting.

Bad teachers suck so much wang, and I'm glad that the stigma towards teachers 'not being able to do' is changing.

I go to uni with a few want-to-be teachers and they're really smart and would make great teachers.

Sorry, that was a digression, but you get the idea.

 

[angelduck]

Military: It can also be useful if they are a good warrior, and military leadership and victory is essential to this.

Well, um, der, nice work there, being a warrior pharaoh and all, i believe the egyptians probably wouldnt have followed a pharaoh into battle if said pharaoh couldnt throw a stick further than a metre or kill a guy with a sword

- note, i never said anything about focusing soley on being a warrior, just that of course you would have to say something about it, and that basically when phwaryuex said "military" i thought that would have been a fairly obvious thing to include

 

[silvermoon]

perhaps - however, as ppl have already said, for the pharaohs it's doubtful whether many of them were the warriors they claimed to be. You are right in one sense: it was very important to the Egyptian armies to be fighting for a pharaoh they believed was a great warrior, however the key word there is BELIEVED. it's all about image, obviously they are going to minimise their own exposure to any fighting but they must have the right image. obviously all the stele talking about pharaohs winning battles single handedly, being bale to fire arrows through 3 double thickness copper plates etc. is all complete bs.

 

[xeuyrawp]

perhaps - however, as ppl have already said, for the pharaohs it's doubtful whether many of them were the warriors they claimed to be. You are right in one sense: it was very important to the Egyptian armies to be fighting for a pharaoh they believed was a great warrior, however the key word there is BELIEVED. it's all about image, obviously they are going to minimise their own exposure to any fighting but they must have the right image. obviously all the stele talking about pharaohs winning battles single handedly, being bale to fire arrows through 3 double thickness copper plates etc. is all complete bs.

Look, we can't even begin to understand their mentality. Their religious beliefs are totally different to ours- and saying that the Pharaoh was their god isn't going far enough. The Egyptian religion included everyone- the bad guys, the peasants, the Pharaoh. They all had their own place, and this is what the soldiers would keep in their mind. Dare I use the worn out cliche that paradise awaited them, but to say that every soldier had a place in upkeeping maat and essentially stopping the universe from destructing ('stopping the sun from not rising tomorrow') is not an exaggeration.