[ SECRET POST #2809 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2809 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.









Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 012 secrets from Secret Submission Post #401.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 1 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

i think they'd come out as the villains by the end anyway, considering slavery and all

[(Anonymous)]

MMmmmm. I can see it. I mean, the elite would not be able to. But you figure some poor Egyptians who don't really have any input on what is going on. Suddenly all this terrible shit starts happening to them, culminating in the death of their son.

[a_potato]

And that's the thing: it'd have to be from the POV of the common people, who've got little say in what the Pharaoh is doing. And that actually could be a really good, thought-provoking story.

[(Anonymous)]

Yeah, thinkin' you can't really make a sympathetic story where the "villain" barely survived a mass infanticide because the "heroes" decided the undesirables were breeding too much.

[(Anonymous)]

If it was from the POV of Ramses, and not his father, then he wouldn't be responsible for the infanticide.

[(Anonymous)]

This is a fair point.

[philstar22]

Yup. This particularly movie is a very sanitized version of the story that creates a brother angle that wasn't in the original story (Moses was adopted by the pharaoh's daughter, making Rameses his uncle if, indeed, Rameses was the guy since there is debate as to the time period it actually took place in).

[(Anonymous)]

Jews had slaves too, so I'm not sure that counts as proof of villany in this case.

[diet_poison]

I can't tell if you're serious or not.

Jews had slaves, but not until much later than this story took place.

[(Anonymous)]

If I remember my classes correctly, we had indentured servants, kind of, later on? You weren't allowed to keep anyone a slave longer than seven years, and if they wanted to stay for longer you had to pierce their ears (or nose?) because they were too stupid to embrace freedom. And then you had to review every seven years.

Of course, this is what I remember from when I was about seven, so I may have made some of that up. I could also swear there was something about hurling a goat off a mountain to see if The Almighty was Displeased. (But first you had to look at a string that changed colors? Or something? I really have got to sit down and read the Talmud one of these days.)

[(Anonymous)]

All of this is accurate. :)

[(Anonymous)]

AYRT

Holy crap!

[(Anonymous)]

Your class sounds a hell of a lot more interesting than my Sunday school. *envies*

[ketita]

Only semi-accurate, really.
The Jewish concept of indentured servitude was pretty dang cushy compared to actual slavery in most places (for example, the fact that you have to release them). And upon release, they need to be presented with lots of expensive gifts etc. Also, often those sold into indentured servitude were people who had for example committed a crime they were unable to pay off, so this was a way for them to atone for it.
At least, according to what is passed down, this form of slavery was so "nice" to the slaves that the sages say that to buy a slave was to buy a master for yourself.

The stuff with the goat and the string all relates to the ceremonies on the Day of Atonement, and you've got a bunch of details wrong there. I mean the goat existed, but it was a type of sacrifice.

Also, pretty much none of what you mentioned appears in the Talmud, which by the way takes 7 years to learn... it's all in the Torah.

[(Anonymous)]

I remember reading, though, that the pyramids actually weren't built through use of slaves. They were kind of an early government project meant to put people to work. Wikipedia has this to say:

"The tombs' proximity to the pyramids and the manner of burial supports the theory that they were paid laborers who took great pride in their work and were not slaves, as was previously thought. The commonly held belief of slaves building the pyramids was likely to have been popularized by Hollywood films based on the original archaeological and anthropological opinion that they could not have been built without forced labor. Evidence from the tombs indicates that a workforce of 10,000 laborers working in three-month shifts took around 30 years to build a pyramid."

So, I don't know…I think a film with heroic Egyptian leads would be possible.

[(Anonymous)]

The way they told the story in my Hebrew school, they weren't building pyramids, they were just building buildings.

But they were doing it on quicksand and every day they'd come and find most of their work lost. I guess the idea was that the Hebrews had to be put to endless work to keep them too low to rise up.

I'm not saying it's much more than whacky apocryphal shit, but it is kind of an explanation.

[dahli]

Wasn't there recent evidence that they where being paid to work, or am I thinking of something else?

[(Anonymous)]

No, you're correct.

But it's the Bible canon, where it's historically inaccurate.