0,99 €
Mehr erfahren.
- Herausgeber: Reading Essentials
- Kategorie: Fachliteratur
- Sprache: Englisch
- Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2019
Empire and Communications is Innis's important contribution to the debate about how media influenced the development of consciousness and societies. In this foundational work, he traced humanity's movement from the oral tradition of pre-literate cultures to the written word to electronic media of recent times. Along the way, he presented a sweeping historical survey of how communications media influence the rise and fall of empires. He traced the effects of media such as stone, papyrus, parchment and paper from ancient to modern times, including the effects of the printing press today. All communication scholars and anyone interested in communication should have this classic book on their shelves.
Das E-Book können Sie in Legimi-Apps oder einer beliebigen App lesen, die das folgende Format unterstützen:
Ähnliche
Empire and Communications
by
Harold A. Innis
PREFACE
In this preface I must express my thanks to Sir Reginald Coupland for his kindness in extending to me an invitation to deliver the Beit lectures on Imperial economic history. I am grateful to him for his consistent encouragement. To his name I must add those of Professor W. K. Hancock, Sir Henry Clay, and Humphrey Sumner, Warden of All Souls College, for innumerable kindnesses. I have been greatly encouraged also by Professor and Mrs. John U. Nef and the Committee on Social Thought and Professor F. H. Knight of the University of Chicago. An interest in the general problem was stimulated by the late Professor C. N. Cochrane and the late Professor E. T. Owen. Professor Grant Robertson, Professor W. T. Easterbrook, Mr. R. H. Fleming, and Mr. D. Q. Innis have read the manuscript in whole or in part. I am under heavy obligations to Mr. W. S. Wallace and his staff in the library of the University of Toronto and to my colleagues in the department of political economy.
No one can be oblivious to the work of Kroeber, Mead, Marx, Mosca, Pareto, Sorokin, Spengler, Toynbee, Veblen, and others in suggesting the significance of communication to modern civilization. I have attempted to work out its implications in a more specific fashion and to suggest the background of their volumes. The twentieth century has been conspicuous for extended publications on civilization which in themselves reflect a type of civilization. It is suggested that all written works, including this one, have dangerous implications to the vitality of an oral tradition and to the health of a civilization, particularly if they thwart the interest of a people in culture and, following Aristotle, the cathartic effects of culture. ‘It is written but I say unto you’ is a powerful directive to Western civilization.
H. A. I.
I
[1]
A. INTRODUCTION
The twentieth century has been notable in the concern with studies of civilizations. Spengler, Toynbee, Kroeber, Sorokin, and others have produced works, designed to throw light on the causes of the rise and decline of civilizations, which have reflected an intense interest in the possible future of our own civilization. In the title of these lectures on imperial economic history it is clear that in our civilization we are concerned not only with civilizations but also with empires and that we have been seized with the role of economic considerations in the success or failure of empires. Recognition of the importance of economic considerations is perhaps characteristic of the British Empire and it will be part of our task to appraise their significance to the success or failure of the British Empire and in turn to the success or failure of Western civilization. We may concede with Mark Pattison that
‘....In one department of progress the English development has indeed been complete, regular, and from within. In commerce and manufactures England may be said to have conducted, on behalf of the world, but at her own risks and perils, the one great commercial experiment that has yet been made. Our practice has been so extended and diversified, that from it alone, with but little reference to that of the other trading nations of antiquity, or of modern times, the laws of economics have been inferred, and a new science constructed on a solid and indisputable basis....’[1]
We are immediately faced with the very great, perhaps insuperable, obstacle of attempting in this University, located[2] so near a centre which has been the heart of an economic empire, to appraise economic considerations by the use of tools which are in themselves products of economic considerations. A citizen of one of the British Commonwealth of Nations which has been profoundly influenced by the economic development of empires, who has been obsessed over a long period with an interest in the character of that influence, can hardly claim powers of objectivity adequate to the task in hand. It is an advantage, however, to emphasize these dangers at the beginning so that we can at least be alert to the implications of the type of bias. Obsession with economic considerations illustrates the dangers of monopolies of knowledge and suggests the necessity of appraising its limitations. Civilizations can survive only through a concern with their limitations and in turn through a concern with the limitations of their institutions including empires.
We shall try to take heed of the warning of John Stuart Mill who
‘believed that, though the science's method of investigation was still applicable universally, “it is, when not duly guarded against, an almost irresistible tendency of the human mind to become the slave of its own hypotheses; and when it has once habituated itself to reason, feel, and conceive, under certain arbitrary conditions, at length to mistake these convictions for laws of nature”.’[2]
And we shall try to escape his strictures on English political economists whom he felt were in danger of becoming enemies of reform.
‘They revolve in their eternal circle of landlords, capitalists, and labourers, until they seem to think of the distinction of society into those three classes, as if it were one of God's ordinances, [3]not man's, and as little under human control as the division of day and night. Scarcely any one of them seems to have proposed to himself as a subject of inquiry, what changes the relations of those classes to one another are likely to undergo in the progress of society; to what extent the distinction itself admits of being beneficially modified, and if it does not even, in a certain sense, tend gradually to disappear.’[3]
I shall perhaps find sympathy in these warnings in this University though it is perhaps easier for one trained in the universities of North America to be alert to them, but this is scarcely the time to appear boastful.
In paying heed to these warnings I do not intend to concentrate on microscopic studies of small periods or regions in the history of the British Empire, important as these are to its understanding. Nor shall I confine my interest to the British Empire as a unique phenomenon, since it is to an important extent a collection of odds and ends of other empires represented by the French in Quebec and the Dutch in South Africa. I shall attempt rather to focus attention on other empires in the history of the West, with reference to empires of the East, in order to isolate factors which seem important for purposes of comparison. Immediately one is daunted by the vastness of the subject and immediately it becomes evident that we must select factors which will appear significant to the problem.
It has seemed to me that the subject of communication offers possibilities in that it occupies a crucial position in the organization and administration of government and in turn of empires and of Western civilization. But I must confess at this point a bias which has led me to give particular attention to this subject. In studies of Canadian economic history or of the economic history of the French, British, and American empires, I have been influenced by a phenomenon[4] strikingly evident in Canada which for that reason I have perhaps over-emphasized. Briefly, North America is deeply penetrated by three vast inlets from the Atlantic—the Mississippi, the St. Lawrence, and Hudson Bay, and the rivers of its drainage basin. In the northern part of the continent or in Canada extensive waterways and the dominant Precambrian formation have facilitated concentration on bulk products the character of which has been determined by the culture of the aborigines and by the effectiveness of navigation by lake, river, and ocean to Europe. Along the north Atlantic coast the cod fisheries were exploited over an extensive coast-line; decentralization was inevitable; and political interests of Europe were widely represented. The highly valuable small-bulk furs were exploited along the St. Lawrence by the French and in Hudson Bay by the English. Continental development implied centralization. Competition between the two inlets gave the advantage in the fur trade to Hudson Bay, and after 1821 the St. Lawrence region shifted to dependence on the square timber trade. Monopoly of the fur trade held by the Hudson's Bay Company checked expansion north-westward from the St. Lawrence until Confederation was achieved and political organization became sufficiently strong to support construction of a transcontinental railway, the Canadian Pacific, completed in 1885. On the Pacific coast the discovery of placer gold was followed by rapid increase in settlement, exhaustion of the mines, and the development of new staples adapted to the demands of Pacific Ocean navigation such as timber. The railway and the steamship facilitated concentration on agricultural products, notably wheat in western Canada and, later on, products of the Precambrian formation such as precious and base metals and pulp and paper. Concentration on the production of staples for export to more highly industrialized areas in Europe and later in the United States had broad[5] implications for the Canadian economic, political, and social structure. Each staple in its turn left its stamp, and the shift to new staples invariably produced periods of crises in which adjustments in the old structure were painfully made and a new pattern created in relation to a new staple. As the costs of navigation declined less valuable commodities emerged as staples—precious metals, dried fish exported to Spain to secure precious metals, timber to support defence, in the words of Adam Smith ‘perhaps more important than opulence’, and finally wheat to meet the demands of an industrialized England. An attempt has been made to trace the early developments elsewhere but little has been done to indicate clearly the effects of the development of the pulp and paper industry. The difficulty of studying this industry arises partly from its late development and partly from the complexity of the problem of analysing the demand for the finished product. Concentration on staple products incidental to the geographic background has involved problems not only in the supply area but also in the demand area, to mention only the effects of specie from Central America on European prices, the effects of the fur trade on France, of wheat production on English agriculture, and of pulp and paper production on public opinion in Anglo-Saxon countries. The effects of the organization and production on a large scale of staple raw materials were shown in the attempts by France to check the increase in production of furs, in the resistance of English purchasers to the high price of timber ending in the abolition of the Navigation Acts, in the opposition of European agriculture to low-cost wheat, and in the attempt to restrain the sensationalism of the new journalism which followed cheap newsprint.
In this reference to the problem of attack it will be clear that we have been concerned with the use of certain tools which have proved effective in the interpretation of the[6] economic history of Canada and the British Empire. It may seem irreverent to use these tools in a study of public opinion and to suggest that the changing character of the British Empire during the present century has been in part a result of the pulp and paper industry and its influence on public opinion, but I have felt it wise to proceed with instruments with which I am familiar and which have proved useful. The viewpoint is suggested in a comment of Constable to Murray: ‘If you wish to become a great author your chance will be bye and bye when paper gets cheaper.’[4] In any case I have tried to present my bias in order that you may be on your guard.
I shall attempt to outline the significance of communication in a small number of empires as a means of understanding its role in a general sense and as a background to an appreciation of its significance to the British Empire. Bryce has stated that
‘from the time of Menes down to that of Attila the tendency is generally towards aggregation: and the history of the ancient nations shows us, not only an enormous number of petty monarchies and republics swallowed up in the Empire of Rome, but that empire itself far more highly centralized than any preceding one had been. When the Roman dominion began to break up the process was reversed and for seven hundred years or more the centrifugal forces had it their own way.... From the thirteenth century onwards the tide begins to set the other way ... neither Democracy nor the principle of Nationalities has, on the balance of cases, operated to check the general movement towards aggregation which marks the last six centuries.’[5]
In attempting to understand the basis of these diverse tendencies, we become concerned with the problem of[7] empire, and in particular with factors responsible for the successful operation of ‘centrifugal and centripetal forces’. In the organization of large areas communication occupies a vital place, and it is significant that Bryce's periods correspond roughly first to that dominated by clay and papyrus, second to that dominated by parchment, and third to that dominated by paper. The effective government of large areas depends to a very important extent on the efficiency of communication.
The concepts of time and space reflect the significance of media to civilization. Media which emphasize time are those which are durable in character such as parchment, clay, and stone. The heavy materials are suited to the development of architecture and sculpture. Media which emphasize space are apt to be less durable and light in character such as papyrus and paper. The latter are suited to wide areas in administration and trade. The conquest of Egypt by Rome gave access to supplies of papyrus which became the basis of a large administrative empire. Materials which emphasize time favour decentralization and hierarchical types of institutions, while those which emphasize space favour centralization and systems of government less hierarchical in character. Large-scale political organizations such as empires must be considered from the standpoint of two dimensions, those of space and time, and persist by overcoming the bias of media which over-emphasize either dimension. They have tended to flourish under conditions in which civilization reflects the influence of more than one medium and in which the bias of one medium toward decentralization is offset by the bias of another medium towards centralization.[6]
We can conveniently divide the history of the West into the writing and the printing periods. In the writing period[8] we can note the importance of various media such as the clay tablet of Mesopotamia, the papyrus roll in the Egyptian and in the Graeco-Roman world, parchment codex in the late Graeco-Roman world and the early Middle Ages, and paper after its introduction in the western world from China. In the printing period we are able to concentrate on paper as a medium, but we can note the introduction of machinery in the manufacture of paper and in printing at the beginning of the nineteenth century and the introduction of the use of wood as a raw material in the second half of that century.
It would be presumptuous to suggest that the written or the printed word has determined the course of civilizations, and we should note well the warning of Mark Pattison that ‘writers with a professional tendency to magnify their office have always been given to exaggerate the effect of printed words’. We are apt to overlook the significance of the spoken word and to forget that it has left little tangible remains. We can sense its importance[7] even in contemporary civilization and we can see its influence in the great literature of the heroic age[8] of the Teutonic peoples and of Greece and in the effects[9] of its discovery in the sagas of Europe in the late eighteenth century on the literature of the north. Prior to the introduction of writing music played its role in emphasizing rhythm and metre which eased the task of memory. Poetry is significant as a tribute to the oral tradition. Sapir has noted that ‘many primitive languages have a formal[9] richness; a latent luxuriance of expression that eclipses anything known to languages of modern civilization’. The written tradition has had a limited influence on them.
It is scarcely possible for generations disciplined in the written and the printed tradition to appreciate the oral tradition. Students of linguistics have suggested that the spoken word was in its origins a half-way house between singing and speech, an outlet for intense feelings rather than intelligible expression.[10] Used by an individual, it was in contrast with language described as the sum of word-pictures stored in the mind of all individuals with the same values. In the words of Cassirer[11] language transformed the indeterminate into the determinate idea and held it within the sphere of finite determinations. The spoken word set its seal on and gave definite form to what the mind created and culled away from the total sphere of consciousness. But the speech of the individual continued in a constant struggle with language and brought about constant adjustment. ‘The history of language when looked at from the purely grammatical point of view is little other than the history of corruptions’ (Lounsbury).[12] Herbert Spencer wrote that ‘language must be regarded as a hindrance to thought, though the necessary instrument of it, we shall clearly perceive on remembering the comparative force with which simple ideas are communicated by signs’.[13] Perhaps it is a tribute to the overwhelming power of printed words that Maeterlinck could write: ‘It is idle to think that, by means of words, any real communication can ever pass from one man to another ... from the moment that we have something to say to each[10] other we are compelled to hold our peace.’[14] ‘Ils ne se servent de la pensée que pour autoriser leurs injustices, et n'emploient les paroles que pour déguiser leurs pensées’ (Voltaire).
The significance of a basic medium to its civilization is difficult to appraise since the means of appraisal are influenced by the media, and indeed the fact of appraisal[15] appears to be peculiar to certain types of media. A change in the type of medium implies a change in the type of appraisal and hence makes it difficult for one civilization to understand another. The difficulty is enhanced by the character of the material, particularly its relative permanence. Pirenne has commented on the irony of history in which as a result of the character of the material much is preserved when little is written and little is preserved when much is written. Papyrus has practically disappeared whereas clay and stone have remained largely intact, but clay and stone as permanent material are used for limited purposes and studies of the periods in which they predominate will be influenced by that fact. The difficulties of appraisal will be evident, particularly in the consideration of time. With the dominance of arithmetic and the decimal system, dependent apparently on the number of fingers or toes, modern students have accepted the linear measure of time. The dangers of applying this procrustean device in the appraisal of civilizations in which it did not exist illustrate one of numerous problems. The difficulties will be illustrated in part in these six lectures in which time becomes a crucial factor in the organization of material and in which a lecture is a standardized and relatively inefficient method of communication with an emphasis on dogmatic answers rather than eternal questions.
I have attempted to meet these problems by using the[11] concept of empire as an indication of the efficiency of communication. It will reflect to an important extent the efficiency of particular media of communication and its possibilities in creating conditions favourable to creative thought. In a sense these lectures become an extension of the work of Graham Wallas and of E. J. Urwick.
Much has been written on the developments leading to writing and on its significance to the history of civilization, but in the main studies have been restricted to narrow fields or to broad generalizations. Becker[16] has stated that the art of writing provided man with a transpersonal memory. Men were given an artificially extended and verifiable memory of objects and events not present to sight or recollection. Individuals applied their minds to symbols rather than things and went beyond the world of concrete experience into the world of conceptual relations created within an enlarged time and space universe. The time world was extended beyond the range of remembered things and the space world beyond the range of known places. Writing enormously enhanced a capacity for abstract thinking which had been evident in the growth of language in the oral tradition. Names in themselves were abstractions. Man's activities and powers were roughly extended in proportion to the increased use and perfection of written records. The old magic was transformed into a new and more potent record of the written word. Priests and scribes interpreted a slowly changing tradition and provided a justification for established authority. An extended social structure strengthened the position of an individual leader with military power who gave orders to agents who received and executed them. The sword and pen worked together. Power was increased by concentration in a few hands, specialization of function was[12] enforced, and scribes with leisure to keep and study records contributed to the advancement of knowledge and thought. The written record signed, sealed, and swiftly transmitted was essential to military power and the extension of government. Small communities were written into large states and states were consolidated into empire. The monarchies of Egypt and Persia, the Roman empire, and the city-states were essentially products of writing.[17] Extension of activities in more densely populated regions created the need for written records which in turn supported further extension of activities. Instability of political structures and conflict followed concentration and extension of power. A common ideal image of words spoken beyond the range of personal experience was imposed on dispersed communities and accepted by them. It has been claimed that an extended social structure was not only held together by increasing numbers of written records but also equipped with an increased capacity to change ways of living. Following the invention of writing, the special form of heightened language, characteristic of the oral tradition and a collective society, gave way to private writing. Records and messages displaced the collective memory. Poetry was written and detached from the collective festival.[18] Writing made the mythical and historical past, the familiar and the alien creation available for appraisal. The idea of things became differentiated from things and the dualism demanded thought and reconciliation. Life was contrasted with the eternal universe and attempts were made to reconcile the individual with the universal spirit. The generalizations which we have just noted must be modified in relation to particular empires. Graham Wallas has reminded us that writing as compared with speaking[13] involves an impression at the second remove and reading an impression at the third remove. The voice of a second-rate person is more impressive than the published opinion of superior ability.
Such generalizations as to the significance of writing tend to hamper more precise study and to obscure the differences between civilizations in so far as they are dependent on various media of communication. We shall attempt to suggest the roles of different media with reference to civilizations and to contrast the civilizations.
FOOTNOTES:
[1]Essays by the late Mark Pattison, collected and arranged by Henry Nettleship (Oxford, 1889), ii, pp. 400-1.
[2] Francis Edward Mineka, The Dissidence of Dissent (Chapel Hill, 1944), p. 278.
[3]Monthly Repository, 1834, p. 320. Cited ibid., pp. 278-9.
[4] Thomas Constable, Archibald Constable and His Literary Correspondents (London, 1873), p. 270.
[5] James Bryce, Studies in History and Jurisprudence (London, 1901), pp. 254-5.
[6] For a discussion of the background of political organization see F. J. Teggart, The Processes of History (New Haven, 1918).
[7] This does not refer to the mechanical spoken word which apparently Hitler had in mind in Mein Kampf. ‘I know that one is able to win people far more by the spoken than the written word. The greatest changes in the world have never been brought about by the goose quill. The power which set sliding the great avalanches of a political and religious nature was from the beginning of time, the magic force of the spoken word.’
[8] See H. M. Chadwick, The Heroic Age (Cambridge, 1926).
[9] See Emery Neff, A Revolution in European Poetry 1660-1900 (New York, 1940), ch. ii.
[10] See Otto Jesperson, Mankind, Nation and Individual from a Linguistic Point of View (Oslo, 1925), pp. 5-13.
[11] Ernst Cassirer, Language and Myth (New York, 1946), p. 38.
[12] Cited Jesperson, Mankind, Nation and Individual (Oslo, 1925), p. 139.
[13] Herbert Spencer, Philosophy of Style; An Essay (New York, 1881), p. 11.
[14] Cited Graham Wallas, The Great Society (London, 1914), p. 263.
[15] For a discussion of conditions favourable to historical writing see F. J. Teggart, Theory of History (New Haven, 1925).
[16] See C. L. Becker, Progress and Power (Stanford University, 1936); see also A. C. Moorhouse, Writing and the Alphabet (London, 1946).
[17] Edwyn Bevan, Hellenism and Christianity (London, 1921), p. 25.
[18] See Christopher Caudwell, Illusion and Reality: A Study of the Sources of Poetry (London, 1937), p. 51.
B. EGYPT
The Nile, with its irregularities of overflow, demanded a co-ordination of effort. The river created the black land which could only be exploited with a universally accepted discipline and a common goodwill of the inhabitants. The Nile acted as a principle of order and centralization, necessitated collective work, created solidarity, imposed organizations on the people and cemented them in a society. In turn the Nile was the work of the Sun, the supreme author of the universe. Ra—the Sun—the demiurge was the founder of all order human and divine, the creator of gods themselves. Its power was reflected in an absolute monarch to whom everything was subordinated. It has been suggested that such power followed the growth of astronomical knowledge by which the floods of the Nile could be predicted, notably a discovery of the sidereal year in which the rising of Sirius coincided with the period of floods. Moret has argued that as early as 4241 B.C. a calendar was adopted which reconciled the lunar months with the solar year, and that the adoption marked the imposition of the authority of Osiris and Ra, of the Nile and the Sun on Upper Egypt. The great gods of the fertile delta imposed their authority on the rest of Egypt and their worship coincided with the spread of political influence. Universal gods emerged in certain centres, their influence was extended by theologians, and diffusion of worship supported the growth of kingdoms. The calendar became a source of royal authority. Detachment of the calendar from the concrete phenomena of the heavens and application of numbers which provided the basis of the modern year has been described by Nilsson as the greatest intellectual fact in the history of time reckoning.
[14]Achievement of a united monarchy by material victories and funerary beliefs and practices centring in the person of the king produced a social situation of which the invention of writing was the outcome. The position of the monarch was strengthened by development of the idea of immortality. The pyramids and the elaborate system of mummification carried with them the art of pictorial representation as an essential element of funerary ritual.
The divine word was creative at the beginning of the universe and acted on gods, men, and things in a fashion reminiscent of Genesis and the Gospel of St. John. ‘I created all shapes with what came out of my mouth, in the time there was neither heaven nor earth.’[19] In fixing the tradition of magic rites and formulae in the Old Kingdom the God Thoth,[20] as the friend, minister, scribe, and keeper of the divine book of government, of Ra became the Lord of ritual and magic. He represented creation by utterance and production by thought and utterance. The spoken word possessed creative efficiency and the written word in the tomb perpetuated it.[21] The magical formulae of the pyramids[15] assumed the productive and creative power of certain spoken words.
In the handbooks of temple structure and adornment of sacred shrines which probably made up a large part of temple libraries, Thoth was the framer of rules of ecclesiastical architecture. No essential difference existed between pictorial decorations and hieroglyphic script. Thoth represented intelligence and was ‘Lord of the Divine Word’. He was the unknown and mysterious, the lord of scribes and of all knowledge, since the setting down of words in script suggested the possession of mysterious and potent knowledge in the scribe who ‘brought into being what was not’. Formulae of sacred ritual, collections of particularly effective formulae, and books of divine words were attributed to Thoth as the inventor of language and script. Beginning with drawing and literature in the decoration of temples and tombs in the use of figures as definitions of living beings and objects, the pictorial principle was extended and adapted to the need of expressing non-pictorial elements into a hieroglyphic system by 3500 B.C. Hieroglyphics was the Greek name for sacred engraved writing. From about 4000 B.C. the names of kings, wars, political events, and religious doctrines were written. The earliest documents were names and titles on sealings and vases, notes of accounts or inventories, and short records of events. Seals and wooden tablets with primitive script recorded the outstanding events of the Abydos reign. Writing gradually developed toward phoneticism and by the time of Menes (about 3315 B.C.)[22] many picture signs had a purely phonetic value and words were regularly spelled out.
As the founder of the first dynasty at Thinis, Menes developed the theory of the absolute power of kings. A new capital was built at Memphis at the balance of the two lands[16] to the north and to the south. As the successor of Horus and Osiris and as their living image the king was identified with them in every possible way in order to ensure eternal life. From about 2895 B.C. to 2540 B.C. autocratic monarchy was developed by right divine. The pyramids of about 2850 B.C. suggested that the people expected the same miracles from the dead as from the living king. All arable land became the king's domain. After 2540 B.C. royal authority began to decline and the power of the priests and the nobles to increase. The difficulties of the sidereal year in which a day was gained each year may have contributed to the problems of the absolute monarch and hastened the search for a solar year possibly discovered by the priests. The Sun Ra cult was exalted to the rank of chief God and the king was lowered from the Great God to the Son of Ra and to the Good God. The king as a Sun-god was a man who did not work with his hands but merely existed and, like the sun, acted on environment from a distance. The Sun was law and imposed it on all things, but law was distinct from the Sun as it governed even him. Recognition of this fact has been described as implying the discovery of government.[23] In Heliopolis as the centre of priestly power, the doctrine was developed in which God was conceived of as an intelligence which has thought the world and expresses itself by the word, the organ of government, the instrument of continuous creation, and the herald of law and justice. An order of the king was equivalent to an act of creation of the same kind as that of the demiurge. The command of the superior obeyed by dependents was reinforced by the mystery of writing as a reflex of the spoken word. Centralization of the gods favoured the growth of political ideas.
After a period of political confusion from 2360 B.C. to 2160 B.C. a new political order emerged in which the absolute[17] monarch was replaced by the royal family. The clergy of Heliopolis established a new calendar and imposed it on Egypt. Extension of privileges to the priestly class brought a transition to oligarchy. The royal domain was broken up in favour of a feudal clergy and royal officials. The Theban kings (2160-1660 B.C.) restored order and prosperity. After 2000 B.C. religious equality was triumphant. The masses obtained religious rights and corollary political rights. The Pharaohs gave up their monopoly and accepted the extension of rights to the whole population. Admission of the masses to religious rights and to everlasting life in the next world was recognized along with civic life in this world. Power was essentially religious and extension of direct participation in worship brought increased participation in the administration of stock and the ownership of land. The management of royal lands was farmed, partial ownership of houses and tombs was permitted, and free exercise of trades and administrative offices was conceded. Peasants, craftsmen, and scribes rose to administrative posts and assemblies.
The profound disturbances in Egyptian civilization involved in the shift from absolute monarchy to a more democratic organization coincides with a shift in emphasis on stone as a medium of communication or as a basis of prestige, as shown in the pyramids, to an emphasis on papyrus. Papyrus sheets dated from the first dynasty and inscribed sheets from the fifth dynasty (2680-2540 B.C. or 2750-2625 B.C.). In contrast with stone, papyrus as a writing medium was extremely light. It was made from a plant (Cyperus papyrus) which was restricted in its habitat to the Nile delta and was manufactured into writing material near the marshes where it was found. Fresh green stems of the plant were cut into suitable lengths and the green rind stripped off. They were then cut into thick strips and laid parallel to each other and slightly overlapping on absorbent cloth. A similar layer was[18] laid above and across them and the whole covered by another cloth. This was hammered with a mallet for about two hours and the sheets welded into a single mass which was finally pressed and dried. Sheets were fastened to each other to make rolls, in some cases of great length. As a light commodity it could be transported over wide areas.[24] Brushes made from a kind of rush (Juncus maritimus) were used for writing. Lengths ranging from 6 to 16 inches and from 1/16 to 1/10 of an inch in diameter were cut slantingly at one end and bruised to separate the fibres.[25] The scribe's palette had two cups, for black and red ink, and a water-pot. He wrote in hieratic characters from right to left, arranging the text in vertical columns or horizontal lines of equal size, which formed pages. The rest of the papyrus was kept rolled up in his left hand.[26]
Writing on stone was characterized by straightness or circularity of line, rectangularity of form and an upright position, whereas writing on papyrus permitted cursive forms suited to rapid writing. ‘When hieroglyphs were chiselled on stone monuments they were very carefully formed and decorative in character. When written on wood or papyrus they became simpler and more rounded in form.... The cursive or hieratic style was still more hastily written, slurring over or abbreviating and running together ... they ceased to resemble pictures and became script.’[27] ‘By escaping from the heavy medium of stone’ thought gained lightness. ‘All the circumstances arouse interest, observation,[19] reflection.’[28] A marked increase in writing by hand was accompanied by secularization of writing, thought, and activity. The social revolution between the Old and the New Kingdom was marked by a flow of eloquence and a displacement of religious by secular literature.
Writing had been restricted to governmental, fiscal, magical, and religious purposes. With increase in use of papyrus, simplification of hieroglyphic script into hieratic characters in response to the demands of a quicker cursive hand, and growth of writing and reading, administration became more efficient. Scribes and officials charged with the collection and administration of reserves and of rents and tributes from the peasants became members of an organized civil service, and prepared accounts intelligible to their colleagues and to an earthly god, their supreme master. After 2000 B.C. the central administration employed an army of scribes, and literacy was valued as a stepping-stone to prosperity and social rank. Scribes became a restricted class and writing a privileged profession. ‘The scribe comes to sit among the members of the assemblies ... no scribe fails to eat the victuals of the king's house.’[29] ‘Put writing in your heart that you may protect yourself from hard labour of any kind and be a magistrate of high repute. The scribe is released from manual tasks.’[30] ‘But the scribe, he directeth the work of all men. For him there are no taxes, for he payeth tribute in writing, and there are no dues for him.’[31][20]
The spread of writing after the democratic revolution was accompanied by the emergence of new religions in the immortality cult of Horus and Osiris. Ra worship had become too purely political, and individuals found a final meaning and a fulfilment of life beyond the vicissitudes of the political arbitrator.[32] Osiris, the god of the Nile, became the Good Being slain for the salvation of men, the ancestral king and model for his son Horus. As an agricultural god he had faced death and conquered it. His wife Isis, the magician, made codes of law and ruled when Osiris was conquering the world. She persuaded the Sun-god Ra to disclose his name, and since knowledge of a person's name[33] gave to him who possessed it magical power over the person himself she acquired power over Ra and other gods. In the twelfth dynasty Osiris became the soul of Ra, the great hidden name which resided in him. With Ra he shared supremacy in religion and reflected the twofold influence of the Nile and the Sun. Night and day were joined as complementary—Osiris,[21] yesterday and death, Ra, to-morrow and life. Funerary rites invented by Isis were first applied to Osiris. Conferring immortality they have been described by Moret as ‘the most precious revelation which any Egyptian god had ever made to the world’.
Osiris was served by Thoth as vizier, sacred scribe, and administrator. As the inventor of speech and writing, ‘Lord of the creative voice, master of words and books’, he became the inventor of magic writings. Osiris became the centre of a popular and priestly literature to instruct people in the divine rights and duties. Words were imbued with power. The names of gods were part of the essence of being, and the influence of the scribe was reflected in the deities. Since religion and magic alike were sacred they became independent. The priest used prayers and offerings to the gods, whereas the magician circumvented them by force or trickery. Family worship survived in the Osirian cult, and because of a practical interest magic was used by the people. Since to know the name of a being was to have the means of mastering him, to pronounce the name was to fashion the spiritual image by the voice, and to write it especially with hieroglyphics was to draw a material image. In the manifold activity of the creative word magic permeated metaphysics. Polytheism persisted, and names were among the spiritual manifestations of the gods. Magical literature and popular tales preserved the traditions of the great gods of the universe.
The king gained from the revolution as the incarnation of the king gods, Falcon, Horus-Seth, Ra, Ra-Harakhti, Osiris, Horus, son of Isis, and Amon-Ra, who ruled Egypt. The king's devotion created a great wave of faith among the people. Ritual enabled him to appoint a proxy to act as prophet. Power was delegated to professional priests who first incarnated themselves in the king and performed the ceremonies in every temple every day. The worship of Ra and[22] the celestial gods was confined to priests and temples. The priests of Atum condensed revelation in the rituals of divine worship, and a cult supplied the needs of living images in statues in the temple.
