Running head: Ancient Egyptian Courts 1

Ancient Egyptian Court Systems: King Menes & King Bocchoris Gordon Tunstall

Ancient Egyptian Courts Abstract Ancient Egyptian laws, legislation, and administrative regulations were never codified. However, evidence of their existence has been found on the walls of palaces

and temples. Major differences exist between the court systems of King Menes in the 1st Dynasty, King Bocchoris in the 24th Dynasty, and the current judicial system in the United States. These differences include dissimilar court structure, jurisdictional hierarchy, and appellate practices, particularly with regard to human rights.

Ancient Egyptian Courts The ancient Egyptians forged their own laws, legislation, and administrative

regulations. These laws were never codified; legal and legislative text were found on the walls of palaces and temples or papyri hieroglyphics written in the Demotic, Coptic, Greek, Latin, Hebrew, Aramaic, and Arabic languages. The 1st Dynasty was founded by King Menes when he united Upper & Lower Egypt into one state. He is credited with establishing the oldest legislative system. In the 24th Dynasty, Egypt was split and ruled as two separate states. King Bocchoris ruled Lower Egypt and is credited with writing the first laws governing loan contracts. Major differences in the courts structure, jurisdictional hierarchy, and appellate practices existed between the judicial systems of King Menes and King Bocchoris. Literature Review Reisner (1939) believes that the Egyptians viewed their king as a living god and the executor of justice on Earth. According to Verbrugghe and Wickersham (2001), King Menes united Upper and Lower Egypt and founded the 1st Dynasty in ancient Egypt. Wigmore (1928) and Savage (2001) credit Menes with establishing the oldest legislative system. According to Grimal (1992), the king in the 18th Dynasty made considerable changes to the Ancient Egyptian judicial system. This Dynasty marks the first appointment of professional judges to rule the courts. Clayton (1994) believes that the second king of the 24th Dynasty, King Bocchoris, ruled Lower Egypt from the city of Sais. According to Wilson (1959), Bocchoris was very wise and was praised for the judicial decisions he made as king. According to Siculus (1933), the king wrote all of the laws that governed the people in his administration. During his reign, King Bocchoris

Ancient Egyptian Courts abolished the death penalty. According to Baines (2001), King Bocchoris wrote the first laws in recorded history governing contracts involving loaning or borrowing money. Egyptian Ancient History King Menes of the 1st Dynasty. In the Early Dynastic Period in Egypt (circa 3050 BC 2890 BC), the 1st

Dynasty was founded by King Menes (Edwards, 1971; Beck, et al., 1999). Menes, whose birth name was Horus Aha, came from the Thinite province in Upper Egypt (Lloyd, 1994). Menes is the royal nebty-name meaning he who endures (Edwards, 1971, p. 11). In the 1st Dynasty, the Horus name was used for living pharaoh kings, the nebty-name Menes was used to honor this pharaoh when writing about him after his passing (Lloyd, 1994). There were a total of seven pharaoh kings that ruled during the 1st Dynasty. The people of Egypt did not refer to the kings as pharaohs; this word was used by the Greeks and Hebrews. King Menes led the army across the frontier and won great glory, uniting Upper and Lower Egypt (Verbrugghe & Wickersham, 2001, p. 131). Unification of Egypt took place around 3050 BC, at the beginning of this Dynasty. Upper and Lower Egypt had been separate for hundreds of years and could not settle their differences (Millet, 1990; Cervell-Autuori, 2003). The two separate states could never function properly because various individuals vied for power and both states being separate were prone to invasions (Huzayyin, 1939). Menes made Memphis the capital of Egypt which did not favor either Upper or Lower Egypt. The capital city was on an island on the Nile that was fortified so it could be easily defend from attacks or invasions (Cervell-Autuori, 2003). The king

Ancient Egyptian Courts combined the red crown of Lower Egypt with the white crown of Upper Egypt creating one crown showing the Egyptian people that both lands were united as one. This became the first unified and centralized state in history, with an organized

system of government, administration, judiciary, education, police, and army (Fairservis, 1991). King Menes is credited with laying down the oldest legislative system in human history when he issued the law of Tehut, god of wisdom, as the only law that was applicable over all of Egypt (Wigmore, 1928; Savage, 2001). The law of Tehut was based on ancient moral codes and outlined the basic understanding of what was considered right and wrong (Emery, 1949). During these times, moral codes had a religious quality; religion and government were never separate in the ancient Egyptian world (Emery, 1949). King Menes also made a single religion for all Egyptians to follow and built the city Crocodopolis, where he established a place of worship for the god Ptah. (Budge, 1969). The god Ptah was believed to have brought the world into being (Morenz, & Keep, 1980). Menes had temples built all over Egypt for his people to have easily accessible places to worship (Huzayyin, 1939). King Menes used religion and law to help unite the people of Egypt (Redford, 2002). He issued edicts designed to improve food production and distribution, guard the rights of the ruling families, improve education, and enhance knowledge of the natural world through geometry and astronomy (Bard, 1992). The king controlled the executive and judicial powers and exercised his executive powers with the assistance of many civil servants. In choosing the civil servants, the king abided by the legal rules of seniority and took into account their literacy level (Brown, 1981). Menes spent most of his time as king ruling from Memphis. The king collected taxes and managed all of Egypt from the

Ancient Egyptian Courts capital city. Most of the government officials also resided in the capital city (Millet, 1990). After all of Egypt was united under one king, one government, and one religion, Menes invaded Nubia to the south of Egypt. Before the king unified Egypt, the Nubians controlled a portion of Upper Egypt. King Menes invaded Nubia to expand Egypts borders so the Nubians would not attempt to invade Upper Egypt and occupy this land again (Ward, 1969). After the invasion of Nubia, the king sent his ambassador to Canaan and Byblos in Phoenicia to establish diplomatic relations and to establish trade routes. The country flourished with the trade policies established under these meetings. Under King Menes,

the government controlled the army and the treasury which allowed for the strengthening of its armed forces. The Egyptian military was provided the necessary funds to employ more officers and the forces were equipped with the necessary weapons to defend the country (Ward, 1969). King Menes had a child with a woman named Neithotepe, but his wife during his rule was Queen Berenib. King Menes ruled Egypt until he died at 63 years of age. When his child Djer was old enough, he became the next king of Egypt (Ward, 1969). Overview of the 1st through 24th Dynasties (circa 3050 AD 720 AD). The king was the Head of State who appointed the Great Treasurer, who was responsible for collecting taxes from the people. The king controlled the executive and judicial powers and exercised his executive power with the assistance of many civil servants. The king established the laws, controlled the people, government, and the countrys economy. The legal system was obligatory and binding to the king whose powers in selecting and promoting civil servants were restricted (Meltzer, 1990).

Ancient Egyptian Courts Throughout the twenty-four dynasties, the Egyptian legal and legislative system provided its people with the rights to purchase property (Grimal, 1988). The disposition of any owned property was a guaranteed right of its owner. Each Egyptian man had the right to marry only one woman (Dodson, 2004). A woman was considered equal to a man, and was able to own or sell property (Davies, 2004). Every Egyptian was able to make their own will, but upon their death, the inheritance had to be distributed equally among all siblings (Fisher, 1913). Slavery was not sanctioned by Egyptian law, but foreigners living in Egypt did own slaves (El Amir, 1969). Egyptian water rights laws allowed for water to be shared by all for drinking, bathing, and watering of crops. In the

3rd Dynasty, a decree was issued limiting the amount of hours farmers were to work their crops (Breasted, 1906). Royal Court. The royal court handled legal matters concerning religion as well as civil, judicial, criminal, and military issues. The royal court also served as the notarizing agency where land transfers and import contracts could be formally recorded (Bates, 1907). Court scribes would authenticate legal documents on behalf of a mostly illiterate population (Meltzer, 1990). Council of the big ten. In the beginning of the 3rd Dynasty, the Council of the Big Ten was established. This was the highest council of the government which was comprised of senior state officials, army commanders, and one of the royals sons. This council controlled Egypts administrative functions and ensured the enforcement of legislative and royal decrees. In the 5th Dynasty, this council assumed judiciary functions (Meltzer, 1990).

Ancient Egyptian Courts Vizier. By the beginning of the 3rd Dynasty, the position of the vizier was established. (Morenz & Keep, 1992; Breasted, 1916). Some of the viziers duties included dealing

with complaints brought by citizens concerning other public officials. He punished these officials if necessary and his punishments were based on common law, customs, and precedence (Wigmore, 1928). Police. The prevention of crime and apprehension of criminals was the duty of local police and local officials. Special guards were posted at tombs to prevent looting. Investigations were conducted by the police, usually after a citizens complaint. Suspects whose guilt was apparent were held for trial or ordered by police to make amends (Breasted, 1916). Heads of Police and district representatives had to keep the vizier informed of activities occurring in the districts they managed. Any government official who was not enforcing the laws or managing their departments well would be replaced by the vizier (Breasted, 1916). In ancient Egypt, the police collected evidence, checked public records, and organized reenactments of crime scenes (Smith, 1955). In the earlier Dynasty period, police applied physical coercion through beatings of suspects to obtain a confession to a crime. Some suspects were flogged until they confessed or provided the authorities with information about others involved in the crime (Maspero, 1898; Pritchard, 1969). Suspects were held by police until trial. In the earlier dynasties there were no jail facilities. Suspects were placed into pits or deep wells, deep enough to hold the offender

Ancient Egyptian Courts to prevent any escape and the prisoners were not fed by during their incarceration. In later dynasties, prisoners were held behind locked gates in temples (Breasted, 1906). Administrators as judges.

In the early dynasties, there were no professional judges for the Royal Court. All civil and criminal cases were tried before administrators consisting of scribes, priests, and high officials (Smith, 1958). They were responsible for evaluating the merits of a petition that came before them and rendering a decision. These administrators were appointed by and answered to the vizier (Smith, 1958). In the 4th Dynasty, a civilian administrator was appointed to oversee legal matters concerning the royal shipping ports. Judicial changes and public freedoms. In the 18th Dynasty (circa 1330 BC), King Horemheb issued laws to reestablish order in Upper and Lower Egypt, divided legal power, and appointed another vizier to manage the city of Thebes. Now there were two viziers, one in the city Thebes, and one in the city of Memphis (Grimal, 1992). The king also reestablished the peoples law by appointing ten judges to the courts in Thebes and ten judges for the courts in Memphis. He selected fair-minded and honest legal scholars as judges. This was the beginning of the appointment of legal professionals by the king. Previously, kings were limited in their selection by the laws of seniority and administrators for the courts were chosen from a group of clerics, elders, oracles, and sages who were not legal scholars. King Horemheb also set up regional tribunals to deal with legal issues on a localized level. He also reestablished religious authority so the clerics, elders, oracles, and sages could help deal with local moral, civil and legal issues with the authority of the king (Allam, 1991).

Ancient Egyptian Courts

10

King Horemheb also issued several decrees to end corruption and mistreatment of citizens by public officials. He decreed that Royal Officers, guards, police officers, and soldiers would be penalizedwith flogging, compensation to the victim, or cutting off of the nose or earfor any mistreatment or theft of person or goods, stealing of boats, kidnapping of female servants, intimidating citizens for food, stealing of crops from private farms, and false or fraudulent taxation of citizens. Under the kings decree, stolen religious items were returned to the temples, stolen property was returned to its rightful owners and virtually all corruption by state officials ended (Allam, 1991). Judicial changes in the 18th Dynasty: judges, vizier, and the courts. In the 18th Dynasty, court judges were legal scholars and the position became a profession. From this period forward, administering the law ran in families: sons of judges grew up to become judges (Shaw, 2000). The viziers were at the top of the judicial hierarchy. The vizier also performed judicial functions and became the chief justice over the Royal Court. The vizier wore a pendant with the insignia of Maat, the ancient Egyptian Goddess of truth, balance, order, law, morality, and justice. Maat represented the spirit of truth and fairness in which justice was to be applied (Morenz & Keep, 1992). Toward the end of the 18th Dynasty, however, Maat lost importance as a symbol of truth, balance, order, law, morality, and justice. Loyalty towards King Horemheb became paramount, and he became the symbol of truth and justice for the Egyptian people. There were courts at different levels; the highest six courts of justice were the Six Great Houses. The vizier served as the Chief of the Six Great Houses. Additionally, the Tribunal of Thirty was established to deal with issues of the dead and the afterworld as

Ancient Egyptian Courts well as issues of the living in regards to property rights, land measurement, and compensation issues regarding the sale of grain (Breasted, 1906). Citizen courts were

11

also established with juries, where foremen, artisans, scribes, and workers sat in judgment over their peers. These courts generally dealt with minor local offenses. In complicated cases where a decision could not be reached, the people appealed to an oracle. The punishment the citizen courts could impose ranged from fines, beatings, or the removal of a tomb-workers name from the tomb he was working ona punishment Egyptians believed would prevent life after death and which was, therefore, considered worse than a death sentence (Breasted, 1906). Serious criminal cases were handled by one of the courts in the Six Great Houses with the state as prosecutor. Serious crimes included crimes against the state, the king, the gods, and against persons, such as murder or bodily harm (Weeks, 2001). The accused was presumed guilty unless proven innocent during trial. However, the courts gave special protections and consideration to widows, orphans, and the timid who were accused of a crime. The courts viewed these individuals as being incapable of looking after their own interest (Breasted, 1906). In court cases for the crimes of robbery, theft, and sexual aggression, the victim had to bring the case before the court themselves. The accused could have a professional barrister or lawyer represent them during the trial. Judgment was based on written and oral evidence. Documents were generally composed by official scribes and witnesses gave testimony under oath. Judges were expected to be impartial during the trial and when handing down their sentence. Punishment handed down by a judge was not to be too lenient or too harsh. Potential punishments included restitution, fines, confiscated

Ancient Egyptian Courts property, imprisonment, beatings, mutilation, banishment, or death. Death sentences were very rare but, when imposed, the person was burned to death while strapped to a stake (Ocernoy, 1937). The convicted could appeal their sentence to the vizier. The vizier was under strict legal time requirements to review the case and respond to the appeal. The time frames were based upon travel time from one point to another within Egypt (Breasted,

12

1906). The vizier could override the sentence, make a new judgment, or let the sentence stand. Regardless of the viziers decision on an appeal, the vizier was obligated to explain his decision in detail to the petitioner (Shaw & Nicholson, 1995). The Six Great Houses, Tribunal of Thirty, priest, or private referees dealt with civil matters. Most civil matters involved property rights, inheritance, prenuptial agreements, and other civil disputes (Breasted, 1906). If a person was found in breach of an agreement, they were required to rectify the matter and pay a fine on a specific day ordered by the court. If they failed to pay the fine and rectify matters, the fine was either doubled or they were beaten in public (Quirke & Spencer, 1992). Not even the king was above the law in Egypt. Regardless of a persons social class status, the law was supposed to be fair but this was not always the case. Individuals who were rich or well connected with government officials did not always follow the chain of command if they ran into legal issues. Some would appeal directly to the vizier or the king in an attempt to circumvent the legal process to avoid conviction (Teeter & Larson, 1999). Additionally, sometimes criminal investigators were killed so suspects could avoid any prosecution (Lichtheim, 1973).

Ancient Egyptian Courts At the end of the 21st Dynasty, Egypt was split again and there were separate states of Upper and Lower Egypt. It remained split throughout the 24th Dynasty. The 24th Dynasty was in the Ptolemaic period of Egypt (circa 724 BC 712 BC). King

13

Bocchoris was the second king that ruled in this Dynasty (Redford, 2002). Even though his reign as king was very short, his law involving contracts for loaning and borrowing money shaped future contract laws. King Bocchoris of the 24th dynasty. King Bocchoris was the second king of the 24th Dynasty. His royal name was Wahkare which means Spirit of Re (Clayton, 1994, p. 188). He ruled Lower Egypt from the city of Sais which was located in the region of the western delta of the Nile River. Under his rule, he controlled the Nile Delta and he ruled from circa 725 BC to 720 BC; this period is known as the Sais Dynasty (Clayton, 1994). King Bocchoris was very wise and was praised for his judicial decisions and the laws he enacted during his reign (Wilson, 1959). He wrote all of the laws that governed the people in his administration. He also wrote the laws for all of the citizens of Lower Egypt (Siculus, 1933). He abolished the death penalty and punished the condemned through the use of forced labor. The convicted were placed on chain gangs where they worked building dykes and digging canals. In the eyes of the citizens, this showed the kings humility. Additionally, the work done by the prisoners benefited the communities immensely by providing water to citizens and farmers for their crops (Siculus, 1933). Bocchoris wrote laws governing contracts which involved the loaning or borrowing of money. These contract laws are the first laws of their kind in recorded history (Baines, 2001). Under the Bocchoris contract laws, anyone who borrowed money

Ancient Egyptian Courts

14

without signing a contract could deny their indebtedness by taking an oath claiming they did not owe the debt. The purpose of this law was to establish the importance of oaths before the gods. This law also established for those who abuse the oath, that confidence in lending money would be lost to the abusers of the oath but not to the process of lending and borrowing money as a whole. The king believed that basing the law on a persons honor would encourage everyone to be virtuous in their character and pay their debts accordingly (Siculus, 1933). Additionally, the king wrote in his law governing loan contracts that creditors were forbidden to increase the interest on the principle debt in excess of double the original amount of the principle loan amount. If a debtor defaulted on the terms of the loan, and a creditor attempted to recover their losses, the creditor could only recover the property of the debtor, they could no longer take property that was owned by other family members. Also, creditors could no longer subject debtors or their family members to bondage or imprisonment for defaulting on a loan (Siculus, 1933). King Bocchoris wrote these laws to protect all citizens, especially the soldiers in his military. The citizens could be required to enlist in the military and be sent to defend Lower Egypt. Bocchoris did not want any of his current or potential military force to be imprisoned as a result of defaulting on a debt, either as a result of their own doing or as a result of being sent off to war (Theodorides, 1971). King Bocchoris was captured by his rival Shabaka who executed him by burning him to death at the stake. Bocchoris was forty-four years old when he died and was the last king of the 24th Dynasty. Shabaka became the king of the 25th Dynasty (Clayton, 1994). Even though his reign as king was short-lived, King Bocchoris made the first recorded law in history involving contracts. His law set the foundation for future contract

Ancient Egyptian Courts

15

laws. Societies all over the world depend on the free exchange of goods and services in the marketplace and the ability to borrow and lend money to buy those goods and services. These transactions depend upon contracts and contract laws. Discussion Ancient Egyptian Dynasties Judicial System Compared to the United States Judicial System There are major differences between the court systems of the 1st and 24th Dynasties of ancient Egypt. There are differences in the two dynasties jurisdictional hierarchies, their appellate practices, and in their approaches to human rights. When comparing these two ancient Egyptian court systems to the United States judicial system, there are also stark differences in the courts structure, the appellate procedures, and concepts concerning human rights. 1st dynastys judicial system. During the 1st Dynasty, the laws for all of Egypt were based on the moral and religious ideology of the time and were written by King Menes with the aid of a vizier (Wigmore, 1928). There is no record that the ancient Egyptians codified their laws or provided equality to their citizens under their laws (Bard, 1992). In the 1st Dynasty, there was only one Royal Court that served all of Egypt, and the court heard both civil and criminal cases. The king had limited authority in appointing judges to the courts. The king had to follow the laws of seniority when picking from a group of scribes, priests, and high officials (Ward, 1969). The judges were not educated in law (Brown, 1981). The accused were considered guilty until proven otherwise and were not represented by any sort of legal counsel. Elders and religious members acted as judges,

Ancient Egyptian Courts

16

heard the legal cases and issued their judgments. Egyptians believed that if mortal judges were not impartial, the offender would be judged correctly in the afterworld (Lichtheim, 1976). Decisions and sentences were final and could not be appealed; there were no appellate procedures or appellate courts in place during the 1st Dynasty. Criminal sentences were often brutal and included beatings, mutilation, banishment, and death. 24th dynastys judicial system. During the 24th Egyptian Dynasty, the laws for Lower Egypt were based on moral and religious ideology and legal precedence (Clayton, 1994). Most of the laws created in the 18th Dynasty that established equality for the citizens and judicial fairness were still in effect during the 24th Dynasty (Wilson, 1959). King Bocchoris wrote all the new laws for Lower Egypt and he is known for writing the first laws involving loan contracts (Siculus, 1933). In the 24th Dynasty, there were several local tribunals and multiple courts to serve the people of Lower Egypt. The local tribunals dealt with most of the civil matters and the higher courts dealt with some of the civil matters and all of the criminal cases. The king had the authority to appoint professional judges who were educated legal scholars. The accused were considered guilty until proven innocent and they could be represented by a barrister as their legal counsel (Meltzer, 1990). Judges heard the legal cases and issued their judgments. Their decisions and sentences could be appealed to the vizier. If the accused was not satisfied with the viziers decision, they could appeal to the king. Thus, there were two levels of appellate review: appeal to the vizier and then to the king. Criminal sentences were often fair and fit the crime. Punishments included fines, forced-labor, beatings, mutilation and banishment (Breasted, 1906).

Ancient Egyptian Courts

17

United States judicial system. The judicial system in the United States includes a codified set of laws and rules. The United States Constitution and Bill of Rights provides for equality for all citizens under the law. There are several court systems at the local, city, county, state, and federal levels. The civil courts and criminal courts are separated (Harr & Hess, 2002). Judges are voted in to position by citizens or they are appointed by legislators. Federal judges are appointed by the President of the United States and approved by Congress. Most judges are highly educated in the field of law or possess a law degree. An accused is presumed innocent until proven guilty. A person accused of a criminal offense is entitled to a jury of their peers and to have legal representation by an attorney. If they cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed by the state or federal government at no cost (Harr & Hess, 2002). Litigants can hire legal counsel in civil matters. There is an appellate process in place for both criminal and civil cases and at both the state and federal levels. Criminal sentences are fair and based upon the crime committed. Punishments can range from fines, home arrest, probation, jail sentences of a year or less, prison sentences of a year or more, to death (Harr & Hess, 2002). The first ten amendments to the United States Constitution are known as the Bill of Rights and afford the citizens fair and equal treatment and protect human rights under the law. The ancient Egyptians in both the 1st and 24th Dynasties did not have the same protections as citizens have under the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Seventh, and Eighth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution.

Ancient Egyptian Courts The Fourth Amendment protects citizens from unreasonable searches or the seizing of property (U.S. Const. Amend. IV). The police in ancient Egypt did not have these restrictions and suspects and their property could be searched (Maspero, 1898, & Pritchard, 1992). The Fifth Amendment sets forth several restrictions on how the government may treat a person suspected of a crime, including the right not to be a

18

witness against ones self (U.S. Const. Amend. V). In ancient Egypt, many suspects were beaten or flogged into a confession (Maspero, 1898; Pritchard, 1992). The Sixth Amendment describes the requirements for a fair trial (U.S. Const. Amend. VI). In both the 1st and 24th Dynasties, trials were not necessarily fair and, in the earlier dynasties, the judges were administrators with no legal background or education (Breasted, 1906). Egyptians believed that people who were judged incorrectly on Earth would be judged correctly in the afterworld (Lichtheim, 1976). The Seventh Amendment preserves the right to a trial by jury (U.S. Const. Amend. VII). The ancient Egyptians were not afforded a jury by choice (Quirke & Spencer, 1992). In the 1st Dynasty, there were no juries; people were judged by an administrator. In the 24th Dynasty, citizen courts which dealt with minor civil matter had juries of peers, but there were no juries in criminal cases and in some complicated civil cases (Quirke & Spencer, 1992). The Eighth Amendment prohibits excessive bail, excessive fines, and cruel and unusual punishment (U.S. Const. Amend. VIII). Ancient Egyptians who were suspected of a crime were placed in pits and in later Dynasties locked in rooms in temples and were not fed while incarcerated (Breasted, 1906). They did not have a bail process and fines that were imposed could be excessive, in the discretion of the administrator or judge (Breasted, 1906).

Ancient Egyptian Courts Conclusion The ancient Egyptians created laws, legislation, and administrative regulations which evolved over time. Major differences existed in the courts systems of the

19

Dynasties of King Menes and King Bocchoris. When comparing these two court systems to the United States judicial system many differences can be found concerning court structure, jurisdictional hierarchy and the appellate practices. There were very few laws found in Ancient Egypt that dealt with human rights issues.

Ancient Egyptian Courts References Allam, S. (1991). Egyptian law courts in Pharaonic and Hellenistic times. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology. 77: 10921.

20

Baines, J. (2001). Egyptian letters of the new kingdom as evidence for religious practice. Journal of Ancient Near Eastern Religion. 1: 131. Bard, K.A. (1992). Toward an interpretation of the role of ideology in the evolution of complex society in Egypt. Journal of Anthropologic Archaeology. 11: 124. Bates, O. (1907, June). Sculptures from the excavation at Giza, 1905-1906 . Bulletin of the Museum of Fine Arts. 26: 2021. Beck, R.B., Black, L., Krieger, L.S., Naylor, P.C. & Shabaka, D.I. (1999) World history: Patterns of interaction, Evanston: McDougal, L. Breasted, J.H. (1916). Ancient times, a history of the early world: An introduction to the study of ancient history and the career of early man. Boston: Ginn & Company. Breasted, J.H. (1906). Ancient records of Egypt: Volume II. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Brown, J.A. (1981). The search for rank in prehistoric burials: The archaeology of death. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Budge, E.A.W. (1969). The gods of the Egyptians: Studies in Egyptian mythology. New York: Dover Publication, Inc. Cervell-Autuori, J. (2003). Narmer, Menes, and the seals from Abydos Egyptology at the dawn of the twenty-first century: Proceedings of the eighth international congress of Egyptologist, Cairo, 2000. Cairo: The American University in Cairo Press.

Ancient Egyptian Courts

21

Clayton, P.A. (1994). Chronicle of the pharaohs: The reign-by-reign record of the rulers and dynasties of ancient Egypt. London: Thames & Hudson. Davies, W.V. (2004, December). The Egyptian inscription at Jebel Dosha. British Museum SAES. 4: 120. Dodson, A. (2004). Thutmosis III, the family man. The Ostracon. 15: 37. Edwards, I.E.S. (1971), Early history of the Middle East: Volume 1 Part 2., Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. El Amir, M. (1969). Further notes on the demotic papyri in the Turin museum. The Bulletin of the French Institute of Oriental Archeology. 68: 85120. Emery, W.B. (1949). Great tombs of the first dynasty I: Excavations at Saggara. Cairo: Cairo University. Fairservis, W. (1991). A revised view of the narmer palette. Journal of Archaeological Research, 28, 120. Fisher, C.S. (1913, April). The Harvard-university-museum of fine arts Egyptian expedition. Bulletin of the Museum of Fine Arts. 62: 1922. Grimal, N. (1988). A history of ancient Egypt. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers Ltd. Grimal, N. (1992). The Oxford history of ancient Egypt. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers Ltd. Harr, J.S. Hess, K.M. (2002). Constitutional law and the criminal justice system (2nd ed.). Bellmont, CA: Wadsworth Thomson Learning. Huzayyin, S. (1939). Some new light on the beginning of Egyptian civilization. Bulletin of the Geographic Royal Society. 20: 20373.

Ancient Egyptian Courts Lichtheim, M. (1973). Ancient Egyptian literature: Volume 1. Berkeley: University of California Press. Lichtheim, M. (1976). Ancient Egyptian literature: Volume 2. Berkeley: University of California Press. Lloyd, A.B. (1994). Herodotus: Book II, Leiden: E.J. Brill

22

Maspero, G. (1898). Studies of mythology and Egyptian archaeologies: Volume 3. Cairo: Egyptian publicans of Mariette. Meltzer, E.S. (1990). Letters from ancient Egypt. Atlanta: Scholar Press. Millet, N.B. (1990). The Narmer macehead and related objects. Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt. 27: 539. Morenz, S. & Keep, A.E. (1992). Egyptian religion. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. Ocernoy, J. (1937). Restitution of, and penalty attaching to, stolen property in Ramesside times. Chicago: University of Chicago Piccione, P. (1980, July-Aug). In search of the meaning of Senet. Archaelogy. 33: 5558. Pritchard, J.B. (1969). Ancient near eastern texts relating to the old testament (3rd ed.). Princeton: Princeton University Press. Quirke, S. & Spencer, J. (1992). The British museum book of ancient Egypt. New York: Thames & Hudson. Redford, D.B. (2002). The ancient gods speak: A guide to Egyptian religion. New York: Oxford University Press. Reisner, G.A. (1939, April). A family of royal estates stewarts of Dynasty 5. Bulletin of the Museum of Fine Arts. 220: 2935.

Ancient Egyptian Courts

23

Savage, S.H. (2001). Some recent trends in the archaeology of predynastic Egypt. Journal of Archaeological Research, 9: 17 Shaw, I. (2000). The Oxford history of ancient Egypt. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Shaw, I. & Nicholson, P. (1995). The British museum dictionary of ancient Egypt. London: British Museum Press. Siculus, D. (1933). The library of diodrus siculus: Egyptian judicial system, volume 1. Loeb Classical Library. Smith, W.S. (1955, Winter). A late reflection of an old kingdom relief . Bulletin of the Museum of Fine Arts. 294: 8081. Smith, W.S. (1958, Summer). The judge goes fishing. Bulletin of the Museum of Fine Arts. 304: 5663. Teeter, E. & Larson, J.A. (1999). Gold of praise. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Theodorides, A. (1971). The concept of law in ancient Egypt: The legacy of Egypt (2nd ed.). ed. J. R.. Harris, Oxford: Clarendon Press. U.S. Const. amend. IV. U.S. Const. amend. V. U.S. Const. amend. VI. U.S. Const. amend. VII. U.S. Const. amend. VIII. Verbrugghe, G.P. & Wickersham, J.M. (2001). Berossos and manetho. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press. Ward, W.A. (1969). The supposed Asiatic campaign of Narmer. Mlanges de l 'cole franaise de Rome [journal], 45: 20521.

Ancient Egyptian Courts Weeks, K.R. (2001). Valley of the kings. Fairfax: Friedman. Wigmore, J.H. (1928). A panorama of the worlds legal systems: Volume 1. Saint Paul: West Publishing. Wilson, J.A. (1959). Authority and law in ancient Egypt. Journal of the American Oriental Society.

24