'Pyramids were built by leadership skills, not slavery'

Press Trust of India ^ | May 23, 2011 | Staff Reporter

[Forward the Light Brigade]

It wasn’t leadership skills or slavery—it was Religion that built the Pyramids. Those who worked on the monuments got better food, all the beer they could drink, pizza like food, the best medical care in the world (at that time). Workers didn’t have to pay taxes. Last but not least—they got Eternal Life! That’s a big deal! The Pharaoh promised he would remember them in the life to come—Everyone who worked on the monuments would party with the Gods in the Life-To-Come in the land of the west. Not a bad deal. I believe that by accident, the Ancient Egyptians created a national identity. Villagers from all over labored together for 3 months a year, talked and got to know each other—they were no longer just inhabitants of a village or State (nome) but Egyptians. Their unity helped their nation become one of the richest in the Ancient World.

[SunkenCiv]

;’)

[SunkenCiv]

Well said. Also, the fact that there was a gov’t village near the construction site where lots of beer and bread was made doesn’t make the labor not slavery — slaves had to be fed, and the food was made by still other slaves. Imagine how great it must have felt to get a job making bread all day instead of hauling crap up ramps.

[SunkenCiv]

Weird coincidence. ;’)

[SunkenCiv]

That was in “Ben Hur”. :’)

[SunkenCiv]

[singing] The Israelites...

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/2239286/posts

[Beowulf9]

AND religion...albeit an antiquidated, false religion, but still, religion.

[RegulatorCountry]

It boils down to enmity toward the Biblical account, as far as disputing the nature of labor utilized to build the pyramids in ancient Egypt. What, were they supposed to be some sort of proto-GenX slackers, working 20 hours a week and kayaking the Nile the rest of the time?

Bondage and servitude was a fact of life for many and even sometimes the majority up to at least the 19th century, and still is in much of the world. We live in a time and a place with no slavery, which is a rare luxury and in fact an oddity in the grand sweep of history.

[Moltke]

Indonesia-based Arthur Carmazzi will soon come out with a book arguing how the leadership skills of the rulers of Egypt were responsible for building the giant structures regarded as one of the Seven Wonders of the World.

No wonder this guy is based in Asia. The Chinese et al. slave masters must love his theories. (= big $$$ for good old Artie.)

[Moltke]

To add to my previous comment: This has nothing to do with the pyramids or ancient Egypt. It's a thinly veiled ploy to justify/facilitate Chinese/East Asian business practices of TODAY. JMHO, of course.

Carmazzi, ranked as one of the top ten most influential Global Leadership Gurus by Gurus International.

LOL. See what I mean?

[bert]

Even more likely, the work was accomplished by various contractors who had specific specialties and were hired to accomplish the tasks at which they were expert.

The simple solution is the likely solution.

[chickenlips]

Is to day April 1?

[SeeSharp]

The Root is the Latin word "Villa": a country dwelling.

LOL - Not quite. That's a very colloquial late Latin usage. The word villa, from the Indo-European "weik", actually means farm.

And the concept of the villein, technically a freeman owing labour service to his Lord as rent for his land, only arrived with the Normans.

The word "villein" is from the Latin "villanus", which originally meant farm worker, but which later (after Diocletian) came to mean serf, and serfs are what villeins in Britain were. They were not a free man paying rent with their labor. They were not free to leave.

The word probably came to Britain with the Romans. They certainly practiced serfdom. Neither the word nor the legal institution were introduced by the Normans though. Villeinage was already well established among the Saxons. The Normans certainly continued it though.

[DoughtyOne]

Boy do you know how to misread everything. Like you got a chip or something waiting on it to be knocked off.

Misread what?  This?  It points to a single class of people who appear to have arrived as free people, overstayed their welcome, and ended up as slaves.

I don't recall reading in the Bible that the Isrealites/Jews overstayed their welcome.  Could you please refresh my memory, and inform me where that exact text is located?

The Isrealites/Jews moved to Egypt, were accepted there and lived there peacably.  A new ruler came to power that didn't like the Jews.  We've seen that happen in modern times too.  Should we just reference the modern day Jews as overstaying their welcome too?  Just how long should Israelites/Jews be able to stay in a region before they have to move on to avoid hardship, slavery, persecution, and death?  I'm sure modern day Jews would appreciate the heads-up.

Don't get into a contest with anyone on the net about who is more Jewish BTW. You'd be surprised.

My biggest surprise would be, that someone doesn't know didly about their ancestry.  Where did you come up with this tripe?

In a lightly populated world where you could just run down the river a few miles and totally disappear slavery would be a difficult institution to maintain. Imagining that Egypt could be run as a gigantic slave camp is bizarre.

And yet, the pharoh was told to 'let my people go', and he didn't.  In fact he became so angy with them that he cut in half the supply of straw for the making of bricks, and demanded they keep up production levels or else.  So how easy was it in those days for people to just run down the river a few miles and totally disappear?  Evidently, your glib comments and the reality of the day don't match up.

The basic story is the Hebrews went to Egypt. They stayed 400 some years. They ended up enslaved. They rebelled. They left. Pharoah drowned.

Well, I may not be Jewish, but the story of Joseph, his success at winning the Pharoh and God's favor, Moses, the plagues, the Passover night, a Pharoh's promise to let God's children go, and a renegging of that promise, and God Himself interceeded on behalf of his chosen people wouldn't get such short shrift in my non-revisionist version.

Judaism begins with MOSES according to some, yet others argue that it begins with ABRAHAM. Take your pick.

Whether Judasim officialy begins at either point, it's still God's people we're talking about here.  I'm not going to talk about them overstaying their welcome.  That is just ridiculous.

NOBODY ELSE in Egypt is identified as having been enslaved at that time.

Yep, that's right.

Nothing short of God's personal intervention could break the Isrealites free from Egypt.  That's why I read your comment with such dismay.  Some of them are unhinged from the Biblical account.

The only record we have of the Israelites actually leaving, led to the army of Egypt led by the Pharoh following in hot persuit after them.  Thus, your account of how easy it would be to escape slavery in ancient Egypt left my jaw on the floor.

You and I probably have a lot closer understanding of what took place than our conversation here intimates, but wow fella, you're comments sure don't reflect it.

[muawiyah]

Yet, Pharoah let them go ~ whoever they were ~ and they went.

He did that because their presence bothered him ~ 'cause, among other things, plagues of frogs were sent, the first-born were killed, people got boils, the river ran red, .......

Someday you just gotta' read the whole story!

[DoughtyOne]

I believe that’s a much better response than slamming the idea that Israelite slavery existed at all.

Weren’t the larger pyramids dating back as far as 2,000bc anyway? (Actually I just looked it up. The Egyptian hay day of Pyramid building started around 2,700 bc and lasted about 1,000 years, until about 1,700 bc.)

I appreciate the response. I read too much into the pyramid/Israelite connection as it relates to the slavery Biblical accounts (issue).

[blueunicorn6]

Another leadership/management book from a dumbass, yawn.

[DoughtyOne]

The whole army of Egypt was sent out to bring back the Israelites, with the Pharaoh at their helm, and you term this as Pharaoh letting them go. Then you tell me, I need to read the whole account?

Wow.

The Pharaoh had seen ten plagues leveled on his people. His own son had been struck down during Passover night. Even then he hardened his heart and refused to let the Israelites remain free. This you refer to as him letting them go, as if it was a done deal.

If so, then how is it that he wound up on the bottom of the Red Sea being destroyed with the army of Egypt?

Later...

[muawiyah]

Hey, in the story in the Bible, if not Cecil B. D'Mille, the Pharoah lets them go, then changes his mind and goes after them where he is drowned.

Interesting story about a large chamber discovered several decades ago that was full of mummies of the time. Later research proves that all the royals but Seti were present. He was missing.

Many analysts argue Seti is the pharoah who drowned which neatly explains his absence.

But yes, read carefully, he lets them go and reneges. Hence he is destroyed by God.

That's another one of those yin-yan things in the Bible. In the end all is complete and there are no loose ends.

BTW, this is a story about a large group that was tributary to the Egyptian ruler. Sure, it's slavery, but it wasn't individual mano y mano slavery ~ think of it more like the Iroquois among the Hurons. They paid in corn and dogs. Then, one day, they ran away to Central New York, climbed to the tops of the highest hills and dared the Huron to come after them.

The Hebrews were paying tribute in bricks.

[count-your-change]

That's exactly what an old boss told me when I said I wasn't a slave but a leader. He said I should lead myself to a stack of lumber and lead the re-stacking of it properly.