The Merneptah Stele, also known as the Israel Stele or the Victory Stele of Merneptah, is a granite slab inscribed with hieroglyphs that was discovered in 1896 by Flinders Petrie in the ancient Egyptian capital of Thebes. The stele, which dates back to the 13th century BC, is one of the oldest known inscriptions that mentions the name "Israel."
The stele is dedicated to the Pharaoh Merneptah, who ruled Egypt from 1213 to 1203 BC. It describes a military campaign that Merneptah conducted in the western region of Egypt and in neighboring lands, including a victory over a group called "Israel." The stele reads: "Israel is laid waste, his seed is not." This is the first time that the name "Israel" appears in an ancient Egyptian inscription, and it provides important historical evidence for the existence of the Israelites in the land of Canaan during the late Bronze Age.
The Merneptah Stele is significant for several reasons. First, it is one of the few surviving inscriptions that mention the name "Israel" in an ancient Egyptian context. This helps historians to understand the historical and cultural context of the Israelites in the late Bronze Age. Second, the stele provides evidence for the military activities of the Pharaoh Merneptah and his campaigns in the western region of Egypt and in neighboring lands. Third, the stele is an important artifact for the study of ancient Egyptian religion, as it contains references to the gods Amun, Ra, and Horus.
Despite its importance, the Merneptah Stele is not without controversy. Some scholars have questioned the accuracy of the stele's account of the military campaign and the extent of Merneptah's control over the western region of Egypt. Others have argued that the reference to "Israel" in the stele may not refer to the Israelites as we know them today, but rather to a group of people or a place with a similar name.
In conclusion, the Merneptah Stele is an important historical and cultural artifact that provides valuable insights into the history of ancient Egypt and the Israelites. While it is not without controversy, it remains a valuable resource for historians and scholars studying the ancient world.
"Strange Meeting" by Wilfred Owens
I did not rush towards him but walked jerkily into the cabin--all my limbs stiff and slow to respond. But, for the poet it was a hall of death. Or, discontent, boil bloody, and be spilled. I think you capture this very well in your performance. Then, when much blood had clogged their chariot-wheels, I would go up and wash them from sweet wells, Even with truths that lie too deep for taint. So in effect, the worse he can describe the pain of hell, even more so can he protest against war.
Wilfred Owen
Now men will go content with what we spoiled. As Owen himself put it, the poetry is in the pity. Analyzing the poem Strange Meeting, one can realize it expresses the futility and horror of war. The word titanic further suggests widespread destruction and massive damages caused. Courage was mine, and I had mystery; Wisdom was mine, and I had mastery: To miss the march of this retreating world Into vain citadels that are not walled. For by my glee might many men have laughed, And of my weeping something had been left, Which must die now.
A Short Analysis of Wilfred Owen’s ‘Strange Meeting’
In his poem entitled Futility; the poet describes the death of the soldiers who will not wake up to the touch of the sun. The speaker and the "sleeper" are both soldier-poets. It is a dark, deep, gloomy chamber where he meets men who are either asleep or dead and can be considered to be Hell. For by my glee might many men have laughed, And of my weeping something had been left, Which must die now. Then, when much blood had clogged their chariot-wheels I would go up and wash them from sweet wells, Even with truths that lie too deep for taint. This reflects the confusion that war causes to the persona.
Poem of the week: Strange Meeting by Wilfred Owen
There are no signs of hatred in his heart and he addresses the poet as a friend. I parried; but my hands were loath and cold. Through the use of irony and diction, Owen points out the hopelessness of war. Poet realizes the truth that the war that follows will be certainly more ferocious and violent and its results would be deterioration to barbarism or extreme savagery. This other man tells the narrator that they both nurtured similar hopes and dreams, but they have both now died, unable to tell the living how piteous and hopeless war really is. The general setting of the poem as well as this leads me to the conclusion that Wilfred Owen is proposing that enemies at war can be friends outside of it. Then, as I probed them, one sprang up, and stared With piteous recognition in fixed eyes, Lifting distressful hands, as if to bless.
