Ancient Egyptian Administration

Edited by
Juan Carlos Moreno García

LEIDEN • BOSTON
2013

© 2013 Koninklijke Brill NV ISBN 978-90-04-24952-3

 CONTENTS

The Study of Ancient Egyptian Administration ........................... 1

Juan Carlos Moreno García

The Organisation of a Nascent State: Egypt until the

Beginning of the 4th Dynasty ..................................................... 19
Eva-Maria Engel

The Central Administration of the Resources in the

Old Kingdom: Departments, Treasuries, Granaries and
Work Centers ................................................................................. 41
Hratch Papazian

The Territorial Administration of the Kingdom in the

3rd Millennium .............................................................................. 85
Juan Carlos Moreno García

Kings, Viziers, and Courtiers: Executive Power in the Third

Millennium B.C. ............................................................................ 153
Miroslav Bárta

The Administration of the Royal Funerary Complexes .............. 177

Hana Vymazalová

Balat, a Frontier Town and Its Archive ......................................... 197

Laure Pantalacci

Setting a State Anew: The Central Administration from

the End of the Old Kingdom to the End of the
Middle Kingdom ........................................................................... 215
Wolfram Grajetzki

The Royal Command (wd̠-nsw): A Basic Deed of

Executive Power ........................................................................... 259
Pascal Vernus

© 2013 Koninklijke Brill NV ISBN 978-90-04-24952-3

 viii contents

Nomarchs and Local Potentates: The Provincial Administration

in the Middle Kingdom ................................................................ 341
Harco Willems

The Organisation of the Pharaonic Army (Old to

New Kingdom) .............................................................................. 393
Anthony Spalinger

Categorisation, Classification, and Social Reality: Administrative

Control and Interaction with the Population .......................... 479
Katalin Anna Kóthay

Crisis and Restructuring of the State: From the Second

Intermediate Period to the Advent of the Ramesses .............. 521
JJ Shirley

The Rising Power of the House of Amun in the New

Kingdom ......................................................................................... 607
Ben Haring

Coping with the Army: The Military and the State in the
New Kingdom ................................................................................ 639
Andrea M. Gnirs

The Administration of Institutional Agriculture in the

New Kingdom ................................................................................ 719
Sally L.D. Katary

A Bureaucratic Challenge? Archaeology and Administration

in a Desert Environment (Second Millennium B.C.E.) .......... 785
John Coleman Darnell

The Ramesside State .......................................................................... 831

Pierre Grandet

Administration of the Deserts and Oases: First

Millennium B.C.E. ......................................................................... 901
David Klotz

© 2013 Koninklijke Brill NV ISBN 978-90-04-24952-3

 contents ix

From Conquered to Conqueror: The Organization of Nubia

in the New Kingdom and the Kushite Administration
of Egypt ........................................................................................... 911
Robert Morkot

The Saite Period: The Emergence of a Mediterranean Power ...... 965

Damien Agut-Labordère

The ‘Other’ Administration: Patronage, Factions, and

Informal Networks of Power in Ancient Egypt ....................... 1029
Juan Carlos Moreno García

Index .................................................................................................... 1067

Kings and Queens ......................................................................... 1067
Divinities ......................................................................................... 1070
Individuals ...................................................................................... 1071
Toponyms ....................................................................................... 1078
Egyptian Words and Selected Titles .......................................... 1085
Thematic Index .............................................................................. 1090

© 2013 Koninklijke Brill NV ISBN 978-90-04-24952-3

 THE STUDY OF ANCIENT EGYPTIAN ADMINISTRATION

Juan Carlos Moreno García

The study of ‘Egyptian administration’ during the Pharaonic period

raises both a structural and a methodological problem. In the first
case, it may appear to presuppose the existence of certain overarch-
ing structural principles pervading the entire history of Pharaonic
Egypt, as if the basic mechanisms underlying the organization of the
bureaucracy and the implementation of governmental decisions were
constant and stable, with an absolute monarch at the top of the admin-
istrative hierarchy and an army of efficient, all-controlling scribes at
the base. However, such an illusion risks perpetuating the myth of
‘eternal Egypt’ and its allegedly unchanging organization over the mil-
lennia, and thus providing a prêt-à-porter narrative where any his-
torical dynamism remains dwarfed by the overwhelming continuity
of the Egyptian state. However, ‘continuity’ is not synonymous with
‘similarity’, and any study of Egyptian administration should be atten-
tive to the disruptions, innovations, changes in the balance of power,
and limits in the exercise of executive power (including corruption),
all of which hamper the administrative stability of any state, ancient
or modern. All the more so in the case of ancient Egypt, which passed
through several cycles of expansion and contraction of the state and
its political apparatus, but which, quite significantly, never suffered
the consolidation of any alternative, durable ‘feudal’ power capable
of contesting and replacing the authority of the state when the united
monarchy collapsed.
This has important consequences at the methodological level. Hav-
ing in mind the well-rooted image of ancient Egypt as a paradigmatic
bureaucratic, almost ‘despotic’ society, it may be tempting to ascribe to
its administrative structure qualities and characteristics typical of such
structures in modern societies. Nevertheless, such an anachronistic
approach can hardly prove appropriate in the context of a Bronze/Iron
Age society. Well-defined powers, hierarchies, activities, and spheres
of intervention between officials and between administrative divi-
sions may in fact turn out to be rather illusory. Even worse, the mere
fact of focusing our analysis on these alleged characteristics, and in

© 2013 Koninklijke Brill NV ISBN 978-90-04-24952-3

 2 juan carlos moreno garcía

so doing taking their existence for granted, risks underestimating the

significance of key factors, like patronage, informal networks of power
and authority, proximity to the king and the court, the self-interests of
potentates and institutions, even the possession of individual organi-
zational skills, which may have been decisive in the promotion of both
careers and of transversal interventions, with the effect that the bound-
aries between hierarchies and areas of competence become blurred.
The use of documents might also become rather selective and limited
to certain activities (accounting, records of property and transactions,
letters with instructions), while in other cases it might be less system-
atic or rely more heavily on oral procedures and ad hoc decisions than
on formal procedures (the case of the administration of justice being
the most evident case in view). Even the border between ‘public’ and
‘private’ might be rather difficult to establish, especially in the case
of activities carried out by powerful dignitaries who, in some cases,
mobilized their own resources in order to discharge the duties typical
of the posts they held. Overlapping activities, relying on the support or
the acquiescence of powerful patrons and local authorities, royal favor,
duplication of channels of authority (official and informal ), corruption
and bribery, are also inseparable aspects of ancient bureaucracies.
Consequently, the myth of an overwhelming, exceptionally effi-
cient, all-encompassing bureaucracy requires a considerable amount
of clarification, and the same can be said for the idea of the Pharaoh
and state as sources of unlimited authority and unfettered executive
power. Traditional interpretations of Pharaonic history and organiza-
tion have tended to over-emphasize the extent and efficiency of the
royal government to the point that it appears surprisingly unique in
history, thereby fuelling the enduring myth of the alleged ‘Egyptian
exception’. Nevertheless, more recent historical interpretations tend to
support an alternative and contrary view. From this perspective, the
limits imposed by communication difficulties, deeply entrenched local
powers, and dense social networks virtually impenetrable to outsiders,
coupled with a relative scarcity of means and a lack of interest in local
matters by the central government, should have limited the role of the
state and its apparatus of power, too distant and inefficient to have any
real impact on local affairs and provincial social organization. Such a
view, inspired by the study of colonial experiences, may explain the
conditions prevailing in dominated areas, while at the same time be
wholly irrelevant to the reality within the mother countries them-
selves. Moreover, this view ignores the fact that the resources at the

© 2013 Koninklijke Brill NV ISBN 978-90-04-24952-3

 the study of ancient egyptian administration 3

disposal of the state (economic, social, political, symbolic) enabled it to

interfere with, modify, and, in the end, to shape local constituencies of
elites and, consequently, to effect a shift in the local balance of power
to its own advantage. Finally, what appears superficially to be loose
control over subject territories may in fact turn out to be the manifes-
tation of an astute political choice to show respect towards local elites,
whose support and collaboration were essential in order to preserve
the imperial structure.
What results from the analysis of the scope and intensity of the
ancient Egyptian administration is that it evolved within a frame-
work consisting of genuine executive possibilities, royal initiatives,
and preexisting in situ interests, sometimes instigated by self-serving
institutions or divisions within the administration itself, whose mem-
bers sought greater autonomy irrespective of any raison d’état. Royal
decrees are a useful illustration of the strategies at stake, especially
when dispositions repeatedly enacted suggest that their actual imple-
mentation met with resistance and interests reluctant to carry out
the measures promoted. In other cases, the renewal of privileges and
rewards granted to certain institutions by means of a succession of
decrees reveals that some kind of protest, usurpation, or interference
was expected or, at least, remained a latent possibility, while the actual
efficiency and legitimacy that such royal orders conveyed was consid-
ered temporary and in constant need of reinforcement. It is for this
reason that, from a historical point of view, reforms and royal initia-
tives should be analyzed within the governmental and political con-
text and possibilities of their time. Of course, the scarcity of Egyptian
sources means that such a desideratum remains almost unattainable.
Yet it should nevertheless be kept in mind, and this in order to avoid
granting to Pharaonic power capacities a degree of political efficacy
that could be at odds with the rather limited scope for their actual
implementation. To put it in another way, royal reforms and decrees
did not take place in a political vacuum devoid of any form of resis-
tance or competing interests, as if the royal will ruled absolutely and
would be carried out immediately and efficiently by means of a perfect
chain of command. Königsnovelle and iconography convey an ideal,
unrealistic image of sovereignty surely quite different from day-to-day
realities. The famous assertion by general Piankh at the end of the 20th
dynasty is a good illustration of such contrast: “as for Pharaoh—life,
prosperity, health—whose superior is he after all?”. As for Bay, the
powerful chancellor of pharaoh Siptah, he boasted in an inscription

© 2013 Koninklijke Brill NV ISBN 978-90-04-24952-3

 4 juan carlos moreno garcía

about his king-making abilities: “he who put the king [on] the throne
of his father”.
Such a balanced approach can prove to be quite valuable in the
analysis of governmental reforms, especially with the realization that
they constitute invaluable evidence concerning the interests, goals,
structure, and balance of power within Egyptian society at a given
moment and, especially, among the ruling elite (or, at least, its domi-
nant sectors, i.e., those which are best documented). The impact of
such reforms is obvious in aspects like the allocation of resources and
the structure of the elite itself (it may be useful to consider such fac-
ets as the resistance encountered by other actors in social and politi-
cal life, the co-opting of emerging and formerly neglected sectors of
the elite, the search for new allies, deeper intervention in areas previ-
ously ignored, etc.). Such measures had the potential to alter the global
hierarchy and organization of bureaucracy significantly at any given
moment, depending on the needs of the state, the limits of its author-
ity, and the current balance of power. The language in which they were
couched in the limited documentary record available (depending on
the dominant cultural traditions and values at a given time) can be a
significant source of trouble for modern researchers, especially if polit-
ical conflict was expressed in, say, religious terms. For example, should
the Amarna episode be interpreted as an exclusively religious reform
and as proof of a particular royal initiative? Or, rather, should it be
seen as a genuine and rare sign of deep-seated change in the interests
and the balance of power between competing sectors within the ruling
elite, and even between regions, expressed in new and original terms,
from which only the artistic and religious results have survived? Gov-
ernmental reforms thus provide a further argument against the view
that ancient Egyptian administration was a monolithic, essentially
unchanging structure over the centuries. Rather, a social, political,
historical, and diachronic perspective is indispensable in any analysis,
even within individual, well-defined historical periods like, say, the
Old or the New Kingdom.
Another limit to the efficiency of the bureaucracy was that the accu-
mulation of reforms, the creation of new divisions, the incorporation
of new sectors of the elite into the governmental apparatus, and the
expansion of the court and its factions could lead to a gradual paralysis
in decision-making and to the emergence of autonomous institutions
and spheres of influence more concerned with their own immediate
interests than with the effectiveness and the smooth working capacity

© 2013 Koninklijke Brill NV ISBN 978-90-04-24952-3

 the study of ancient egyptian administration 5

of the entire system. In fact, administrative complexity could give rise

to three undesired consequences in the long term. First, an increas-
ingly dense structure of divisions, functions, and officials might slow
the circulation of information, burden the chain of command, limit the
capacity of reaction, and promote duplication of responsibilities, thus
complicating decision-making and hindering both the exercise of
authority and the implementation of administrative decisions. Sec-
ond, the development of the administration could also bring about
the consolidation of institutions and groups of power jealous of their
own prerogatives, concerned primarily with their own institutional
interests, and thus leading to the consolidation of autonomous spheres
of power within the structure of the state. Finally, as the structures
became denser, the interest in showing mutual respect (in order to
avoid conflicts and intrusions by nearby spheres) also increased and
could lead to the gradual slowing down and eventual standstill of
the whole system. New divisions and new appointments would only
exacerbate the problems they intended to solve. The fact of Egypt’s
complex bureaucratic organization, so often considered as proof of
efficiency, can thus be seen to be rather misleading and may in fact
point to increasing difficulties in the exercise of power and authority.
In this respect, factions and titles take on new significance. Conflicts
involving the murder of the king are not infrequent in the literary
and administrative records, and the cases of Teti, Amenemhat I, and
Ramesses III are good examples from different periods. Also examples
of usurpers, even of trials of queens, are attested in Egyptian sources,
and the establishment of the 6th dynasty provides a good case in point
involving trouble in the court, the incorporation of provincial magnates
into the central administration, the destitution of senior palace officers
and a ‘dynastic’ marriage policy linking the royal family to powerful
potentates in both Memphis and the nomes. Such evidence provides
for a more accurate glimpse into the realities of power and court life,
with competing factions of nobles and pretenders to the throne vying
for power. Nevertheless, it is also possible that, at a deeper level, such
conflicts point to diverging interests among the members of the rul-
ing elite concerning specific policies to follow. The consequences for
the administration would involve strategic aspects like influencing the
appointment of high dignitaries in key positions, seeking close access
to the king, building networks of officials connected to key institu-
tions, supporting certain candidates to the throne, and so on. But
those very conflicts may also have involved the periodic reorganization

© 2013 Koninklijke Brill NV ISBN 978-90-04-24952-3

 6 juan carlos moreno garcía

of government priorities and royal policies, which necessarily left their

mark on the administrative structure and in the organization of elites,
but which, quite unfortunately, have left almost no trace in the official
record. For instance, the official incorporation of provincial magnates
into the administrative structure of the kingdom from the very end of
the 5th dynasty on was accompanied by the development of the gov-
ernmental apparatus in the nomes (creation of the function of overseer
of Upper Egypt, development of the network of royal administrative
and economic centers called ḥ wt), and by marriages between kings and
ladies of provincial background, thus making it difficult to imagine that
these events were not closely related. Another example is the Amarna
episode, followed by the rise of the army as a powerful institution,
the foundation of a new capital in the Eastern Delta, and the resump-
tion of an aggressive military policy in the Levant, a policy which,
at least apparently, departed from that followed by Amenhotep III
and Akhenaton.
As for titles, their nature has been debated, as has the distinction
between ‘titles of function’ and ‘titles of rank’. Such a distinction might
prove again rather misleading, suggesting as it does that titles of func-
tion involved a true cursus honorum, whereas titles of rank and honorific
titles granted no real executive power. The illusion that the Phara-
onic bureaucracy was an almost perfect instrument of government,
and that divisions like the Double Granary or the Double Treasury
worked like modern governmental departments, with precise powers
and administrative hierarchies, may underlie such interpretations. In
fact, it is safer to assume that titles, especially in the case of high dig-
nitaries, only approximately convey the extent of the authority and
power wielded by their holders and that a combination of the two sets
of titles expresses not only the activities effectively carried out, but also
the actual authority borne by their holders, their position at the court,
their closeness to the king, their proximity to the most influential rul-
ing faction of the elite, their degree of implication in court rituals and
feasts, and the network of officials to which they belonged. Thus, even
the most apparently banal of titles, such as ‘hairdresser of the king’,
still implies a closeness to the Pharaoh that could have made their
holders ideal intermediaries between the king and the inner court, and
perhaps also influential in decision-making. In other cases, reliability,
experience, loyalty, and appropriate family, patronage, and courtly
links could have provided an official with significant administrative
authority and influence well beyond the actual titles he held. In fact, it

© 2013 Koninklijke Brill NV ISBN 978-90-04-24952-3

 the study of ancient egyptian administration 7

should be remembered that ancient Egypt was a pre-industrial monar-

chy, in which royal favor, proven skill, and good connections probably
played a greater role than an official cursus honorum. The processions
of officials depicted, for instance, in the funerary temple of Pepy II
usually employ a rather limited set of courtly prestige titles in order to
present their holders and to place them within the palatial ruling elite,
instead of evoking the designations of their day-to-day administrative
activities. Stephen Quirke has convincingly shown in his studies that
certain titles corresponded to specific tasks, while others indicated a
position within broad branches and areas of the administration; addi-
tional titles (like quarry titles) were used only in seasonal activities and
are found nowhere else, and still others appear only in administrative
papyri, but not on monuments or in the epigraphic record.
The evolving meaning of individual titles must be also considered.
Not only could the taste for archaism and titles no longer in use for
centuries have deprived them of their original meaning and function,
but so too could they be used as a source of prestige in a completely
new context. They could even be employed as programmatic expres-
sions of an ideal return to a glorious past, especially after periods of
political turmoil and division. Consequently, the deliberate reintro-
duction of old titles conveyed the potent ideological message that an
efficient state apparatus was in the process of reestablishment, so as
to demonstrate that the new administrative system being put in place
was the direct heir of the ordered world of the past to be imitated. This
explains why some titles reappeared in the course of history, usually
associated with an intentional use of archaic language and formulae, as
well as with imitations of former epigraphic styles and the emulation
of the art of the historical period chosen as a prestigious precedent for
present times, as happened during the Saite Period. In other cases, the
changes in meaning of some titles refer to completely different activi-
ties while retaining the basic sense of reliability and proximity to the
king. Such is the case of the title ‘son of the king’, which marked a spe-
cial courtly status in Old Kingdom times, only to be held by military
officials in key localities loyal to the Theban kings during the Second
Intermediate Period. Titles related to very specific tasks and divisions
(say, ‘Overseer of the Granary’) may prove to be more precise but,
once again, only the general administrative and governmental con-
text provides a reliable key for understanding the scope, real activities,
links to other administrative divisions, and position within the overall
administrative structure of their holders at a given moment.

© 2013 Koninklijke Brill NV ISBN 978-90-04-24952-3

 8 juan carlos moreno garcía

Ranks, honorific titles, and court titles raise similar problems. To

begin with, such a classification is a modern and rather arbitrary one,
as it simply implies that it is difficult to ascribe them functionally
well-defined and immediately evident tasks, for which reason they
are relegated to the confused category of ‘honorific’ and ‘rank’ titles,
which, it is assumed, stand in stark contrast to titles of function, which
are reputedly more accurate. This, of course, could only be valid if
the organization of the Egyptian court, the subtle hierarchies ranking
their members alongside formal and informal channels of power and
authority, even the quality and nature of the power (in a very broad
sense) inherent to each specific title, were sufficiently understood.
Once again, the problem of power and authority in a pre-industrial
society is probably more linked to personal connections, patronage,
and proximity to the king than to the display of a full array of titles
and honors perhaps devoid of any real meaning. It is for this reason
that the meaning of many titles is rather difficult to translate in pre-
cise terms. Thus the title ḥ ¡tj-ʿ was bestowed upon high dignitaries in
Old Kingdom times, only to designate some kind of local authority
towards the end of the 3rd millennium, before finally becoming a syn-
onym of ‘mayor’, governor of a locality, during the 2nd millennium.
Other titles, like jrj pʿt, convey the notion of being part of the royal
family and of the high elite of the kingdom, but the precise meaning
still remains shadowy. Preference for the employment of titles like smr
w ʿtj ‘Unique Friend’ on many private monuments and in the scenes on
royal mortuary temples, instead of other designations perhaps more
glamorous from our point of view, also suggests that it nevertheless
conveyed highly regarded honorific nuances, difficult for us to define
precisely, but of sufficient significance for their holders to be numbered
among the elite. Judging from the biographies of many dignitaries, it
involved some kind of formation in the capital, in the context of the pr
nzwt ‘the house of the king’, and it represented the first step towards
a career of a certain importance. Not surprisingly, its display in, say, a
provincial environment could be charged with a highly symbolic and
honorific ethos, making it preferable to the use of other ostensibly
more important titles. In other cases, Quirke has stressed that titles
like h̠rj-ḥ b ‘lector-priest’, when used in provincial environments, also
conveyed notions that went beyond the ritual sphere, so as to mark
literacy and membership in the intelligentsia. These nuances are rather
difficult to trace and define, but nevertheless played an important role
in the use of titles and in the self-presentation of officials.

© 2013 Koninklijke Brill NV ISBN 978-90-04-24952-3

 the study of ancient egyptian administration 9

But titles and officials are only one aspect of Egyptian adminis-
tration, and it would be a mistake to ignore the fact that power and
administrative capacities were also held by informal authorities, whose
collaboration with the administration was essential for the operation of
the system. Local potentates, governors of villages, ‘patrons’, ‘big men’,
chiefs, and men of influence were necessary intermediaries on behalf
of the crown and its agents when dealing with local affairs, like imple-
menting orders emanating from the court to evaluate local resources,
to mobilize manpower, or to quell protests or forestall potential resis-
tance. The organization of teams of workers in Old and Middle King-
dom times reveals that, in many cases, the manpower came from the
domains and districts controlled by such powerful men. In other cases,
they provided the means necessary to cultivate the crown or temple
fields in a given area. However, the fact that they were not members
of the administration, and that in many cases they probably lacked any
formal scribal training, made it difficult for them to produce written
evidence or to have access to the prestige monuments and goods which
symbolized the fact of being part of the ruling elite. A related problem
is that the sophisticated cultural values dominant among officials and
members of the court were also alien to them, especially in the local
environment where they lived, worked, and exerted their influence.
Thus it is quite difficult to find any trace of them in the archaeological
record, as they were not buried in the cemeteries of the high elite and
they did not usually own statues, decorated tombs, inscribed objects,
or the kind of precious items produced by royal or highly special-
ized workshops and proudly displayed by dignitaries, courtiers, and
high officials. But they nevertheless constituted an ‘invisible’ sub-elite,
only marginally evoked in texts and, in some occasions, visible thanks
to the exceptional possession of monuments usually reserved for the
elite. They represented the ‘other’ administration and any study of the
Egyptian administration would be incomplete without referring to
them.
This leads to another common assumption about ancient Phara-
onic administration, the widespread use of writing and documents,
as well as the existence of some kind of ‘administrative rationality’
comparable to our own. So, for instance, it has been posited that a
true justice system was operative in ancient Egypt, a system which
included specific divisions, appointed judges, adhered to formal proce-
dures, and produced juridical documents. In fact nothing proves that
it was the case, and what some Egyptologists call somewhat abusively

© 2013 Koninklijke Brill NV ISBN 978-90-04-24952-3

 10 juan carlos moreno garcía

“justice department” and “judge” corresponds, in fact, to dignitaries

whose authority also enabled them to settle disputes and form courts,
thus acting as ad hoc ‘judges’ and justice courts, while the so-called
“justice departments” were concerned instead with a much broader set
of administrative responsibilities, from collecting information and set-
tling conflicts to advising. Ramesside examples, like the trial of Mose,
the murder conspiracy against Ramesses III, or the investigation of
the royal tomb robberies, are good illustrations of the usual proce-
dure followed when administering justice. In other cases, the docu-
mentary record shows that officials, even queens, were taken to the
vizier’s office in order to ensure that their trial be adjudicated by a
trusted official and not by a formal ‘judge’. As for evidence for a wide-
spread use of documents, as may be inferred from some inscriptions,
it should be remembered that famous cases like that of Mose (and
the ability of the parties involved to produce documentary proof sup-
porting their respective claims) are perhaps exceptional because of the
very particular nature of the dispute (a royal donation of land, prob-
ably being considered crown land, to a military ancestor as reward for
his services, a transaction that was probably subject to careful scribal
scrutiny), not because judicial archives were commonly preserved over
centuries. The rarity of true contracts until later periods in Pharaonic
history, as well as the fact that writing was usually restricted to trans-
actions and records between members of the elite (like wills, jmjt-pr
acts, sales of property, not to mention priestly and governmental posi-
tions, private archives, and letters), suggest that the use of documents,
even within the administrative sphere, was rather selective. From
this perspective it is not surprising that the wider use of writing in
private ordinary activities in the 1st millennium (land leases, matri-
monial contracts, wills, etc.) nevertheless continued to be rare and
restricted to the elite, to the point that some of them were recorded
in stone but in cursive writing (like sales of tombs, donations of fields,
and people’s self-sale into serfdom). In other cases oral claims had
the same value as written documents (as expressed in some clauses
in abnormal hieratic and early demotic sales and leases of land, etc.,
referring to potential demands against the buyer). Quite significantly,
legal documents involving the sale of a piece of land include not only
the ‘contract’ strictly speaking but also the complete story of the field
(list of previous owners, transactions, divisions of the land, etc.), with
the aim of clearing up any legal doubt about the property rights of
the buyer; that such practice would be later replaced, under Ptolemaic

© 2013 Koninklijke Brill NV ISBN 978-90-04-24952-3

 the study of ancient egyptian administration 11

rule, by formalized notarial procedures (as official archive-keeping and

legal validation of private transactions) reveals, in contrast, the rather
elementary nature of legal confirmation in previous Pharaonic times,
when contracts were primarily matters of the private sphere, with little
official interference, relying heavily on oral information (like lists of
witnesses). In the event of conflict, from the late 2nd millennium on,
oracles, not legal procedures, were usually invoked. What is more, in
those cases in which detailed administrative archives have survived in
sufficient quantities (e.g., royal mortuary cults of the Old and Middle
Kingdom, inventories of fields and taxes in the New Kingdom, etc.), it
seems that only very specific activities involved a consistent and abun-
dant use of documents, mainly concerning reckoning, classifying, and
storing selective data (e.g., inventories, lists and records of priestly or
other services, stages of boats for tax collecting, etc.), complemented
by letters giving precise instructions about how to act in specific
situations. As stated before, royal decrees were intended to regulate
activities and implement governmental measures, often to confirm
decisions enacted by former decrees. This points once more to the
somewhat precarious nature of administrative decision-making, when
turning directly to the king instead of invoking formerly produced
documents was preferred (or necessary) in order to assert authority,
to solve misinterpretations, and to confirm previous decisions. Once
again, formal procedures, well defined hierarchies, spheres of author-
ity, and domains of activity seem to a great extent to have been alien to
the current Egyptian administrative organization, thus leaving plenty
of scope to personal initiatives and oral agreements in an overwhelm-
ingly illiterate world. Even the formal training and competence of
scribes could be rather primitive and consist mostly of the ability to
collect and record very specific pieces of information but without a
thorough knowledge of writing, as the Old Kingdom archive of Balat
shows. The common practice of washing papyri for their reuse, the
abandonment of the diplomatic archive known as the Amarna Letters
once the settlement was deserted, and the abundant discarded papyri
and ostraca at Deir el-Medina, also reveal the fragile nature of true
archives once the immediate utility of the documents vanished.
That control and storage of information was rather selective fits well
with an administrative organization where personal skill and contacts
were more important than fixed hierarchies, where the circulation of
information was not quite fluid, and where decentralization was inevi-
table because of distance, the influence of local authorities and networks

© 2013 Koninklijke Brill NV ISBN 978-90-04-24952-3

 12 juan carlos moreno garcía

of power, and the relatively scarce number of trained scribes (per-

haps about one to two percent of the total population). Consequently,
the control and management of resources was inefficient (from our
contemporary perspective), but probably sufficient in a pre-modern
state, where the stability of any central government depended on col-
laboration between the central/palatial elite and local powers and on
the mutual respect of their own interests and spheres of authority. Of
course, the volume of resources that the Pharaonic administration was
able to mobilize was certainly impressive, but it had also to cope with
well-documented practices of (at least in some cases) more-or-less tol-
erated corruption, abuses of power, and informal networks of power
able to turn resources aside. Nevertheless the political importance of
such practices is obvious. All of them represented informal channels
of authority, remuneration, and redistribution of wealth, provided that
they did not run counter to the fundamental economic, political, and
symbolic interests of the ruling elite and the central administration
(once again the case of the tomb robberies is quite representative).
The tolerance towards these informal channels was probably a pre-
requisite for gaining the support of local authorities, of powerful fac-
tions of the elite, of local populations or, more generally, for making
the system function. In a somewhat cynic way, such ‘irregular prac-
tices’ can be reinterpreted as a peculiar and probably inevitable form
of reinvestment of resources greasing fidelities, alliances, and service
to the king. Mentions of corruption are quite frequent in Egyptian
sources, but it would be overly simplistic to regard them only in terms
of inefficiency and decadence. Their importance for the continuity and
stability of the kingdom, for the cohesion of the ruling elite, and for
the adherence of more or less significant sectors of the population
to their rulers should not be underestimated. This also made it pos-
sible to increase tax pressure when needed because, as stated before,
resources incorrectly estimated in administrative accounts, diverted by
rapacious agents, or simply stored up in temples and domains, were
not completely inaccessible to zealous agents of the king. Thus the
control and management of resources in a pre-modern state followed
a logic not always comparable to that of modern (mainly) Western
states. Their efficiency should then be judged not in narrow terms of
(contemporary) competence and rationality, but in their contribution
to the (re)establishment and stability of power in the long run. Even
today, when modern technologies allow for an exhaustive measure-
ment and control of wealth, fiscal evasion and informal economic

© 2013 Koninklijke Brill NV ISBN 978-90-04-24952-3

 the study of ancient egyptian administration 13

activities remain common practices. They are often morally unjustifi-

able and economically irrational, but sometimes rational, even nec-
essary, in political terms. Administration always depends on politics.
And, even in modern times practical realities may differ greatly from
the solemn juridical principles and practices invoked, thus making it
necessary to avoid a narrow juridical perspective which has contrib-
uted, especially in the past, to the view that the Pharaonic administra-
tion was an almost perfect machinery led by specialists and inspired
by the quest for the maat.
Such characteristics seem more evident in light of New Kingdom
documents, when temples appear as true managerial agencies, assum-
ing administrative tasks which usually devolved to state officials. Tem-
ples administered not only their own resources but also, for instance,
crown land, and employed and/or rewarded state personnel (e.g., mili-
tary personnel). Such a delegation of tasks could give rise to rather
intricate structures, with secondary institutions (like other temples, or
even mayors and rich peasants) administering goods which formally
belonged to the crown, but had been entrusted to other temples that,
subsequently, put other institutions and people in charge of them. As
stated above, the administrative practices and the role played by insti-
tutions changed over time and led to different possibilities, adminis-
trative structures, and, in the end, distribution of power and tasks that
make it impossible to posit the existence of a single Egyptian adminis-
tration having preserved a single basic structure and its organizational
principles unchanged over millennia.
This brief overview about the problems that arise in the study of
ancient Egyptian administration would certainly be incomplete with-
out any reference to territorial administrative units. An anachronistic
perspective posits the existence of provinces as operative adminis-
trative units in the 3rd and 2nd millennia B.C., and thus as precur-
sors of the well-known nomoi structure of late 1st-millennium Egypt.
However, towns and their districts, and in some cases the domains
(or areas of influence) of local potentates, frequently appear in the
sources as the basic units of territorial organization. Administrative
and geographical units should thus be carefully distinguished in order
to avoid considering, for instance, an Old Kingdom ‘great chief of a
nome’ a ‘nomarch’. Perhaps such local titles simply served to enhance
the prestige and denote the status of the dominant local leader, with-
out any further administrative consideration, like, for instance, being a
true ‘local governor’ with clearly defined functions and powers within

© 2013 Koninklijke Brill NV ISBN 978-90-04-24952-3

 14 juan carlos moreno garcía

a ‘nomarchal’ administrative structure. The authority they enjoyed in

the areas under their influence made local leaders ideal intermediar-
ies for the crown and their collaboration was in fact indispensable if
the demands of the central authority were to be asserted locally. The
fact that such ‘nomarchs’ were unevenly distributed both geographi-
cally and chronologically over Egypt (especially in the South) during
the 3rd and 2nd millennia B.C. shows that they were not part of a
formal nomarchal institution. On the other hand, some local poten-
tates extended their influence well beyond their own towns and prov-
inces and even exerted authority in other nomes. Furthermore, the
borders of some provinces appear as imprecise and ill-defined areas
even in relatively late periods in Egyptian history, like the end of the
3rd millennium, especially in the Eastern Delta, the area of Fayum and
Middle Egypt. Finally, highly formalized ideal and/or ritual geographi-
cal terms fulfilled a precise role in ‘religious geography’ sources from
the 2nd and 1st millennium B.C., but may be of little use—and may
even induce error—for an accurate description of the real landscape
of a given area. To sum up, whether provinces existed as geographical
units and are evoked as such in the artistic record (like the proces-
sions of ‘funerary domains’), in royal decrees, and in local titles from
a very early date, their mechanical interpretation as regular, operative
administrative units bears careful scrutiny and seems hardly applicable
to the whole of Egypt until a very late date.
Consequently, chronology pervades any analysis of the administra-
tive organization of Pharaonic Egypt and prevents regarding its struc-
ture as a rigid, everlasting one over the centuries. Politics, the balance
of power between competing sectors of the elite, even between regions,
determined the possibilities as well as the limits of its sphere of inter-
vention. And this is also true even when focusing on the territorial
administration of the kingdom. That is why when the sources are
apparently abundant, as in the second half of the 3rd millennium, sig-
nificant administrative differences may be discerned between regions
(Upper and Lower Egypt), while specific reforms sought to improve
the governmental management of specific areas (like the creation of
the position of Overseer of Upper Egypt), sometimes in an ephemeral
way (like the ‘middle provinces’ of Old Kingdom texts), and even the
titles and the scope of activities of ‘great chiefs of the nome’ within
restricted areas (like southern Upper Egypt) differed greatly from one
province to another. Also noteworthy is the fact that entire sectors
of Egyptian society (like the urban underworld, informal occupations,

© 2013 Koninklijke Brill NV ISBN 978-90-04-24952-3

 the study of ancient egyptian administration 15

prostitution, mobile populations in marginal areas, itinerant trade,

and so on) were very unlikely to have produced documents of their
own in spite of their economic and social impact.
A final problem concerns the sources available. In despite of the
reputation of ancient Egypt as a bureaucratic and ‘papyrus-turned’
state, the fact of the matter is that sources are relatively rare and in
many cases so exceptional because of the nature of their contents or
their very local origin, that in many instances it turns out rather dif-
ficult to sketch the main outlines of the administrative organization
at a given moment or to flesh out the information provided by titles
or by brief biographical statements. While titles and institutions may
be formally attested over long periods of Egyptian history, their spe-
cific nature, scope, and meaning may vary greatly from one period to
another, as part of their activities could have been transferred to new
institutions or be controlled by newly appointed officials outside the
very institution itself. The relationship between particular administra-
tive activities and specific institutions may have been a rather vari-
able one depending on a multitude of factors, thus making it difficult
to ascertain the true continuity of institutions outside the simple fact
that a single term continued in use over long periods. So any study of,
say, the ‘vizier’, the ‘treasury’, the ‘provincial governor’, not to men-
tion more obscure institutions like the pr-ḥ rj-wd̠b or some ephemeral
ones, should take into account the overall structure at a given period
in order to outline the scope of their activities within it. It may be quite
tempting to use better-documented periods in order to cast some light
on the less-well-documented ones in order to reconstruct the history
of a title or an institution but, once again, chronology and structural
changes over time warn against an indiscriminate use of sources in
order to fill the gaps. The same can be said about archives. Their num-
ber is frustratingly small until the second half of the 1st millennium,
even in the case of privately held sets of documents, so entire admin-
istrative institutions and sectors of activity can be only very broadly
understood thanks to the combined analysis of titles, autobiographi-
cal information, monumental epigraphy, and some scattered pieces of
genuine administrative documents.
Bearing in mind all these considerations, especially the scanty infor-
mation available, the task of devoting a volume to the study of ancient
Egyptian administration may seem premature. Nevertheless, a starting
point, however precarious and incomplete it may be, appears to be
quite necessary in order to stimulate further research, refine problems,

© 2013 Koninklijke Brill NV ISBN 978-90-04-24952-3

 16 juan carlos moreno garcía

terminology, and perspectives, and to progress towards a better struc-

tural and sectorial analysis of the Egyptian administration. The absence
of sufficiently detailed studies covering the main institutions and func-
tions throughout the entire Pharaonic history persuaded me that, in
many cases, what could be gained was at best an unbalanced summary
if the research were to focus on a single institution (say ‘the vizirate’)
or official division. Not only may the documentary gaps prove to be
quite formidable, but so too may be the absence of sufficient sources
and even research on specific topics, titles, and divisions, even within
a single historical period, like, for instance, the New Kingdom, not to
mention 1st-millennium Egypt. So I have preferred a more traditional
perspective, where topics are dealt with within the main periods of
Egyptian history while chapters are arranged in a chronological frame-
work. I hope that this choice will be of some use in helping to under-
stand the basic outlines of Egyptian administration at a given period.
Also, I have chosen to focus the chapters on general themes, rather than
on institutions. Such a choice has an obvious disadvantage, because
of the different perspectives, qualities, and numbers of the sources
and the research traditions involved in the study of each of these
themes for different periods. It is not the same thing to analyze the pro-
vincial administration during the 3rd millennium, when the sources
are relatively abundant, and to apprehend its main outline in the New
Kingdom. Another problem, too vast to be evoked in a few lines,
is what exactly should be included under the heading of ‘Egyptian
administration’. As this volume should be only considered a first step
towards the writing of a true administrative history of ancient Egypt,
I have limited the analysis to the management of people, resources,
spaces, and information from the perspective of the monarchy and
its interests. In order to cope with this choice, I have organized the
book into two categories of chapters. The first one is composed of
‘structural’ articles, centered on vast administrative branches, like the
army, the territorial administration, and the central departments dur-
ing the traditionally accepted ‘main’ periods of Egyptian history (e.g.,
the Old, Middle, and New Kingdom as well as the Saite period), thus
making it possible for researchers to compare the basic outlines of
the central administration over 2500 years. The second category con-
cerns very specific topics, selected because of the survival of abundant
documents which provide detailed insights into particular practices
and institutions within a single period. The 3rd-millennium archives

© 2013 Koninklijke Brill NV ISBN 978-90-04-24952-3

 the study of ancient egyptian administration 17

from Balat or the 2nd-millennium temple administration records are

obvious candidates which deserved a thorough attention.
I hope that this choice proves judicious given the issues—analytical,
theoretical, and documentary—that still limit our understanding of the
main outlines of Pharaonic administration. The specialists who have
contributed to this volume have attempted to provide state-of-the-art
descriptions in their respective domains of research.1 I thank them
warmly for their work when dealing with problems and documents
which still raise so many difficulties of comprehension and evaluation.

1
Unfortunately, the planned chapter on the administration of the Third Interme-
diate Period and the organizational, scribal and executive changes occurred then was
never delivered by the author who had accepted to produce it.

© 2013 Koninklijke Brill NV ISBN 978-90-04-24952-3