posted                      

quote:

---

Archaeology of Egypt and the Near East: a Comparative Approach

This module emphasises the comparative study of archaeological, written, environmental, and art historical sources from Egypt, the Near East, and neighbouring regions.

landscape

Our attachment to Egypt and the ancient Near East as the 'birthplace of civilization', where the foundations of modern societies were laid, remains as strong today as it has ever been. Yet our current picture of how prehistoric and ancient societies actually developed in those regions could not possibly have been predicted by earlier generations of scholars.

Processes leading to the origins of farming, cities, states, literacy, and empires - all of which developed first in these regions - are currently being rethought in the light of new archaeological data. And our understanding of early relationships between the societies of Middle East, North East Africa, South and Central Asia, and the Mediterranean are being transformed by new evidence for patterns of cultural interaction that cut across traditional frontiers of research. The emerging synthesis constitutes a radical challenge to conventional theories of social and cultural evolution, which this module sets out to explore.

Students enrolling for this module, whether as a core or option, will develop advanced perspectives on current debates in the archaeology of these areas. They will encounter evidence from across a large part of Western Asia and North East Africa, spanning Egypt, Sudan, Mesopotamia, Iran, Anatolia, Arabia & the Gulf, and the Eastern Mediterranean seaboard, as well as parts of Central and South Asia.

Each taught session uses applied case studies to address general issues of archaeological interpretation, with an emphasis on 1) new theoretical perspectives, 2) the understanding of long-term social change through comparative study of neighbouring civilisations, 3) the interpretation of interregional processes operating at a large scale. Case studies will range chronologically from the end of the last Ice Age (c. 10,000 BC) through the Neolithic and Bronze Ages to the Iron Age (c. 500 BC).

Topics to be covered include:

Egypt and the ancient Near East in world history
Holocene environments, climate change, and human impact
Neolithic transformations: worlds of the earliest farmers
Global villages: the later prehistory of Egypt and the Middle East
Origins of cities and states: a comparative perspective
Emergence, functions, and development of writing systems
Commerce, cosmology, and sacrifice: the movement of goods
Ancient empires and imperialism: current themes and perspectives
Between archaeology and art history: the transmission of images
Body, gender, and power: changing constructs in Egypt and the ancient Near East

Aims of the module

To provide students with an advanced understanding of patterns and processes in the archaeology of the Egypt and the Near East
To situate those processes within a broader comparative understanding of World Archaeology
To familiarise students with new evidence for interconnections and cultural exchanges between the early Middle East and other parts of Asia, Africa, and Europe
To familiarise students with the scientific methods now used to reconstruct processes of technological, economic, and environmental change

To explore the implications of Egypt and the Near East for the writing of global history, including its relevance to contemporary social theory and cultural heritage studies

Learning Outcomes:

To prepare students to undertake original research in world archaeology with an informed perspective on the archaeology of Egypt and/or the Near East
To enhance students' ability in reading and debate through assessment and evaluation of alternative interpretations, and presentation of reasoned conclusions
Recognition of the linkages between data, methods and ideas
Application of the methods and theories of inter-disciplinary analysis
Skill in integrating a variety of evidence from different disciplines into overall interpretations
Proficiency in the setting out information and ideas clearly in written form
Preparation for designing and operationalising research topics in this field, including the development of meaningful links between different scales of analysis (from the microscopic to studies of artefacts, landscapes, distribution patterns, and remote sensing from space)

---

Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doug M:
Just wanted to point out that to this day, the study of ancient Egypt is considered by many institutions to be part of Near Eastern Studies, even though none of Egypt is in the "Near East".....

[QUOTE]
Archaeology of Egypt and the Near East: a Comparative Approach

This module emphasises the comparative study of archaeological, written, environmental, and art historical sources from Egypt, the Near East, and neighbouring regions.

https://www.ucl.ac.uk/archaeology/study/graduate-taught/courses/archaeology-egypt-and-near-east-comparative-approach

---

Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doug M:


https://arth.sas.upenn.edu/fields-study/ancient-near-east-and-egyptian

---

Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                         

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doug M:


Unfortunately, the similarities in some aspects of ancient culture between the Nile Valley and Sumer caused some to identify a common origin for both cultures primarily somewhere in "Eurasia". This is why Flinders Petrie thought thought that there was an invading "race" from somewhere in the Red Sea of Upper Egypt that created the culture of the Nile. And that has influenced the direction of Egyptology every since where the ancient kingdom of KMT has been seen as an extension of the "Near East" and not Africa. This also is due to the fact that one of the primary definitions of civilization had to do with the origins of writing which at that time were said to have started first in Mesopotamia.

---

quote:

---

To cut the long story short, there were some similarities between ancient Egyptian and Sumerian Civilizations. In term of geography feature, the two arose near the river thank to the agriculture and trade. The people of the both nation were polytheistic and born for serving the gods and goddesses. About the both societies, they had the similarity of social classes: king, priests, scribes, nobles, and normal citizens. Meanwhile, many differences have found between the both civilizations. Natural barriers and the interpretation of great flood were quite different. The most important point that we should notice was the belief in the afterlife. The Egyptian thought the afterlife in positive way, but the Sumerian thought gloomy. Moreover, Egyptian government was led by only Pharaoh, while in Sumer there were many independent city-states led by their own kings.

Ancient Egypt was the birthplace of one of the world’s first civilization, which arose about 5,000 years ago. It emerged in the northeastern Africa near the Nile River. However, beside this, there was another civilization, Sumerian Civilization, which occurred in the southern Mesopotamian, now southeastern Iraq. This began 3,500 B.C. until 2,000 B.C. The two civilizations arose independently, and did not contact with each other, but later on. If we compared ancient Egypt with Sumer, we maybe see some similarities and some differences. Thus, what are the similarities? and the differences? In this essay, I have divided it into three parts in term of geography, religion, and government to make it easy to understand.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
Lioness, has a point. 'Near East' is subjective, which is why not only is Egypt included but I've even read some sources where Sudan is also included. Not to mention the whole MENA designation.

---

Pure insanity

--------------------
"Nothing hurts a racist more than the absolute truth and a punch to the face"

Posts: 101 | From: United States | Registered: Aug 2020  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

The origin of the term "Middle East" is considered to be in the British India Office during the 1850s. It was popularized by Alfred Thayer Mahan, an American naval strategist who was referring to the region between Arabia and India in 1902. Mahan's definition of the Middle East was the area around the Persian Gulf.

[…]

Countries of the Middle East

Countries classified as being part of this region are Iraq, Iran, Cyprus, Oman, Egypt, Bahrain, Turkey, United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Palestine, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, Israel, Syria, Kuwait, and Jordan. Some countries are occasionally added in the definition such as Azerbaijan, Georgia, and Armenia. Other nations are quoted in the affairs of the Middle East such as Pakistan, Afghanistan, Morocco, Tunisia, and Algeria.

---

quote:

---

First used in 1856, the term “Near East” was defined specifically against the Far East and referred to the region in Asia that’s west of India. Today, the region of the Near East is imprecise and overlaps with the Middle East. It typically refers to southwest Asia, particularly Turkey, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Israel, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and other nations of the Arabian Peninsula. It is not as commonly used as “Middle East.”

So where is the Middle East? Well, it depends on who you ask. The phrase “Middle East” was first used in 1876 as a synonym for “Mesopotamia,” which literally meant “between rivers” in Ancient Greek, specifically between the Tigris and Euphrates in modern-day Iraq. Over time, it has come to describe the region stretching from Egypt and Sudan in Africa to Turkey in the north to Iran. Oddly, in Asia, what we call the “Middle East” is called “Western Asia.” If you look at a map, that makes sense.

---

Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by HeartofAfrica:
Meaning finder believed that a "race" or a group connected to the Sumerians built Egypt on the Nile? That's a lot of leaping.

---

Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by HeartofAfrica:


What was this supposed "common" origin or similarity identified as a link? In terms of culture. I'm not seeing cross pollution between Sumer and Egypt.

---

Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by zarahan aka Enrique Cardova:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:

...Ironically the very origins of Greek civilization and its people make it clear that Greece not Egypt is a much better candidate to be labeled "Near Eastern".

---

Break that down more. In what way are the Greeks a better
candidate to be labeled "Near Eastern"?

---

Posts: 26236 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tehutimes:

@ Djehuti Eurocentrics being moody & obfuscating again as usual. Both Middle East & Far East are illogical geographic terms that only indoctrinate geographically challenged US & Euro minds even more haha.

---

Posts: 26236 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:

quote:

---

Originally posted by zarahan aka Enrique Cardova:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:

...Ironically the very origins of Greek civilization and its people make it clear that Greece not Egypt is a much better candidate to be labeled "Near Eastern".

---

Break that down more. In what way are the Greeks a better
candidate to be labeled "Near Eastern"?

---

Unlike Egypt, whose cultural roots were indigenous to Africa, Greek culture is the one that should really be thought of as a byproduct of the so-called 'Near East'. Both archaeology and genetics prove that after the initial habitation by Paleolithic European hunter-gatherers, there were at least 3 main waves of migration to Greece through the Aegean islands from Asia-- the 1st of course being the Neolithic migrants who brought farming and permanent settlements which was the largest wave, the 2nd being the Bronze Age migrants who brought bronze and brass metallurgy which was a smaller wave, and the 3rd wave being the smallest during the Archaic Period who brought artistic styles from Cyprus and the Levant hence the Archaic is also known as the 'Orientalizing' period.

This is why ancient Greek culture itself holds way more similarities with Near-Eastern cultures than ancient Egyptian culture ever had! Western scholars have known this for centuries but only a handful have been blatant about it. These Asiatic features of Greek culture are too many to list and deserves a thread of its own. I will say these features definitely include Greek religion both practices and some of the myths. It has been touched upon in this forum multiple times on past threads though:

Classic Greece and its population's origins

This pretty much says it all

Ancient Greece, the Middle East and an ancient cultural internet


This is why Eurocentrics are total hypocrites when they dare label Egypt as 'Near Eastern' but not Greece!

---

Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                         

quote:

---

Another World (10000–2584 BCE)

Twelve thousand years ago, there was no Egypt and no Nubia, no
borders or nations, just an expanse of land in north-east Africa,
where people spent their lives hunting and gathering food. Their
world consisted of the land along the banks of the Nile and, further west, the
lakes and grasslands fed by sporadic torrential rains in what today is entirely
desert. Wandering this savannah, in small groups, people hunted animals
using weapons of stone, wood, and bone, fished, and gathered plants to eat.
They moved with the seasons, covering great distances, and probably shared
whatever food they gathered among the group. Lions, elephants, ostriches,
and giraffes still roamed the vast plains.

During the ninth millennium BCE, the people of south-west Asia learnt
how to domesticate animals – sheep and goats, then cattle and pigs. Although
exchange contacts existed between Egypt and the Levant from at least 11000
BCE, the Egyptians only adopted animal domestication sometime between
7000 and 5000 BCE. Still, better late than never, once they’d taken up
breeding and herding sheep and goats – both species previously unknown
in Egypt – as well as cattle, they never looked back to their hunter-gatherer
ways. To the people of Nubia, south of Egypt, however, animal domestication
was nothing new: archaeologists have found evidence for domesticated
cattle in the region as early as 8400 BCE at Bir Kiseiba, and from 7750 BCE
at Nabta Playa.

Life in Egypt might have continued this way indefinitely if climatic
change hadn’t intervened. From around 5300 BCE, the savannah west of the
Nile started to become increasingly arid. The lakes dried up. People had to
adapt. Some chose to move east and settle on the banks of the Nile. Others
travelled south into Nubia, to live in the fertile zone around Kerma, near
the Nile’s Third Cataract. Established in their new environment, these early
people of the Nile now adopted another south-west Asian innovation (one
known there since the tenth millennium BCE): plant cultivation. With the
introduction of domesticated grains – emmer wheat and barley – in around
5000 BCE, many Egyptians settled down to sedentary lives of farming. They
founded settlements along the thin band of cultivable land flanking the Nile,
following its course, causing these villages, despite their distance from one
another, to become part of an interconnected chain. This brought challenges:
notably, each village had to get on with its neighbours –


Let’s All Meet Up in the Year 5000 (BCE)

By the fifth millennium BCE, the disparate tribes living along the Nile had
merged to form distinct cultural groups, marking the start of a phase known
as the Predynastic Period (i.e. a time before successive dynasties of kings
came to rule the whole of Egypt). In northern Egypt alone, three separate
cultures co-existed: Lake Qarun in the Faiyum Oasis; the
western edge of the Delta [] Merimde Beni-Salame; the el-Omari
Culture - east bank of the Nile.

Further south, in Middle Egypt, another cultural group had developed
in the region of modern el-Badari – referred to as ‘Badarians’ by scholars.
From 4400 to 4000 BCE, Badarian material culture, including their distinctive
pottery, could be found at sites dotted across Upper Egypt, south of
their heartland.

---

Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                         

quote:

---

Badarians
also had access to copper, probably gained this copper directly from Levantine groups mining across
the Red Sea in the Sinai; the Badarians placed Red Sea shells in their graves
and sometimes buried their dead in the Wadi Hammamat – a route through
the Eastern Desert, connecting the Nile Valley with the Red Sea – showing
that they knew this region well; it was therefore probably somewhere along
the Red Sea coast that they met and traded with these Levantine miners.

At the same time, the increasing aridity of the Western Desert continued
to force people eastward, out of the dying savannah and into Middle
Egypt; these settled among the Badarians, bringing along their own material
culture, which the Badarians adopted. Nubians of the Abkan Culture
(see below) travelled north too, and had a similarly strong influence on the
Badarians; for one, the Badarians started producing black-topped pottery,
characteristic of Nubian material culture, and adopted Abkan stone tools.

The Abkan Culture flourished in Nubia between the Nile’s Second and
Third Cataracts from the start of the fifth millennium BCE. They relied
mainly on fishing and gathering to sustain themselves, and so built their
settlements close to the Nile. They may have bred and raised goats on a
small-scale too. Though producing their own distinctive pottery and stone
tools, the Abkan Culture was connected with another Nubian group, who
lived further south along the Nile: the people of the Khartoum Neolithic
(ca. 4900–3800 BCE). Unlike the Abkan people, these kept domesticated
cattle and grew crops.

As the years passed, each of these cultures continued to evolve, expanding
their territory, merging, developing their technology, and influencing one
another. In fact, by 4000 BCE, they had changed so radically that north-east
Africa’s cultural map had been rewritten. The various cultures of Egypt’s
north had by now coalesced into one dominant group: the Lower Egyptian
Culture (also referred to by scholars as the Maadi-Buto Culture); in Middle
Egypt and Upper Egypt, the Badarians had given way to the Naqada Culture
(named after the settlement of Naqada); and in Lower Nubia, a Nubian
culture called the A-Group lived concurrently with, and then replaced (or
developed from), the Abkan Culture in the Second Cataract region. To the
west, other distinct cultures continued to live in the oases and around the
increasingly dry water sources of the expanding Sahara.

---

Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                         

quote:

---

The Rise of Naqada Culture and Its Connections with the A-Group

While the Lower Egyptian Culture was busy developing their relations with
the Levant, in southern Egypt, around 4000 BCE, another distinct culture
had developed, with major centres at Abydos, Naqada, and Hierakonpolis,
and associated settlements a little further north and south; as a whole, this is
referred to as the Naqada Culture. The Naqadans appear to have co-existed
with the Badarians before absorbing their territory, and may even have been
a related culture. Just like the Badarians, the early Naqadans continued to
use copper, hammering it into shape to make harpoons and bracelets, among
other objects, and sourced gold and electrum from Nubia and the Eastern
Desert. Their other trade connections were far more wide-reaching: the
owner of Tomb 1863 at Naqada, from around 3600 BCE, was buried with
a cylinder seal, probably from Mesopotamia, and a tomb dated from 4000–
3500 BCE contained lapis lazuli from Afghanistan; these foreign prestige
goods probably entered Egypt via Buto, brought on ships from the northern
Levant. (Indeed, it is perhaps through this route that various Mesopotamian
motifs entered the Naqadan artistic repertoire.) The Naqadans’ fondness
for luxury goods – and particularly foreign imports – led to their society
becoming highly stratified by around 4000 BCE; basically, ownership of the
right items flaunted your status for all to see, separating the haves from the
have-nots. And in death, you made sure to take it with you.

Early in the fourth millennium BCE, the Naqadans shared many aspects
of their culture with that of the A-Group, a Nubian people, living just north
and south of the Nile’s First Cataract. Culturally, however, the two slowly
separated as the centuries passed: the A-Group moved south of the First
Cataract, and eventually expanded down to the area around the Second
Cataract (although some continued to live north of Aswan too). Living in
a semi-nomadic and stratified society, A-Group Nubians travelled from
campsite to campsite, and buried their dead in oval or rectangular graves,
along with items reflecting their personal wealth: pottery, jewellery, female
figurines, and Naqadan imports.

In exchange for Naqadan beer, wine, flint knives, cosmetic palettes, and
stone vessels (among many other items), A-Group Nubians traded ebony
and ivory, animal skins, ostrich eggs, and – perhaps most importantly – gold,
sourcing many of their luxury goods from further south in Upper Nubia. To
facilitate the movement of these items, the Egyptians and A-Group Nubians
established trading outposts along the Nile, with one important outpost constructed
at Elephantine in around 3300 BCE; this area would be closely associated
with trade for the rest of Egyptian history (in fact, the Ancient Egyptian
name for the nearby town of Aswan was swenet, meaning ‘trade,’ from which
the modern name derives). Another outpost, active from around 3500 BCE,
and for 500 years afterwards, was at Khor Daoud, close to the Wadi Allaqi in
Nubia; this outpost had 578 storage pits, seemingly for oil, wine, and beer.

---

Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                         

quote:

---

The Expansion of Naqada Culture: 3500 BCE

By around 3500 BCE, Naqadan culture had already spread across Upper
Egypt and into Lower Nubia. Northern Egypt would be their next target.
Probably motivated by the desire to control access to Levantine prestige items,
over the following centuries the Naqadans came to be the dominant culture in
the region. Lower Egyptian Culture vanished from existence, perhaps in part
due to their peaceful acceptance and assimilation of southern material culture,
and in part because of forceful domination. Although there’s little evidence
for warfare between the north and south, the Naqadans certainly enjoyed celebrating
violence. Symbols of strength and power were an important aspect of
Naqadan art: they produced ceremonial mace-heads, for example, and among
the painted decoration of Tomb 100 at Hierakonpolis, there’s an early scene
of a man smiting an unfortunate victim (imagery known as ‘smiting scenes’).

The Naqadan expansion can be neatly illustrated by returning to Tell
el-Farkha. After an increase in Naqadan goods – and thus interaction –
by around 3300 BCE, the village was totally dominated by their southern
neighbours. An extensive domestic area, including the massive brewery,
was destroyed, and upon its ruins, the Naqadans built a huge residence and
storage area – a complex that would often be rebuilt over the coming years.
Levantine pottery, seal impressions, and tokens – all evidence of the building
having a major role in trade between the east and south – were kept
there. This building was eventually destroyed by fire, and replaced by an
administrative-cultic centre; nevertheless, this new complex continued to
serve as a storage area for Levantine imports.

The main imports from the Levant at Naqadan-controlled Tell el-Farkha
were wine, olive oil, copper, and bitumen. In return, the Naqadans offered
grain, meat, and probably also beer and pork. The only pig bones found by
archaeologists at Tell el-Farkha were the parts with the least meat, suggesting
that the Naqadans sent the meat-rich parts of the pigs elsewhere. The
Naqadans may also have exported Nile fish to the Levant: archaeologists
found copper harpoons at Tell el-Farkha, as well as other evidence for a fishing
industry, but – curiously – no fish bones. Nile fish bones have, however, been
discovered in the Levant, contemporary with this phase of Tell el-Farkha.

---

Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                         

quote:

---

Interactions with Nubia and the Levant at Unification

Towards the end of the fourth millennium BCE, Egypt as a whole became
politically and culturally unified under a single king. This marks the end
of the Predynastic era and the first phase of Egypt’s Pharaonic Period: the
Early Dynastic Period, covering the 1st and 2nd Dynasties (ca. 3100–2584
BCE). However, it still isn’t exactly clear when, and under whom, unification
occurred, a matter further complicated by the identification of a number of
obscure yet powerful ‘proto-kings’ that precede the traditional 1st Dynasty,
referred to by Egyptologists as ‘Dynasty 0.’ Typically, however, Egypt’s first
true king is thought to be King Narmer, last ruler of Dynasty 0, with Hor
Aha normally cited as the first king of the 1st Dynasty.

One Dynasty 0 ‘proto-king’ was buried within Tomb U-j at Abydos, a
large burial that contained a great number of imported goods, emphasizing
its owner’s importance: among them was a large obsidian bowl – the obsidian
probably imported from Ethiopia – and 500 wine vessels, many possibly
imported from the Levant. The tomb also contained the earliest known
hieroglyphs, inscribed on small labels once attached to grave goods; although
there’s currently no consensus on how these labels should be read, it’s possible
that they refer to the royal estates from which the goods were sent.

While the Egyptians were consolidating their territory, a centralized
kingdom was also developing in northern Nubia under the A-Group. By
this time, A-Group Nubians had settled at Dakka and Afia, as well as at
Qustul, near the Second Cataract of the Nile, where they built the largest
and wealthiest graves in A-Group Nubia, either for rich members of
the elite or for their kings. The graves of these late A-Group Nubians, and
in particular those at Qustul, included large amounts of imported pottery
and stone vessels from Egypt. Among the Egyptian imports unearthed at
Qustul, for example, archaeologists found a breccia-mace head, a copper
spearhead, cosmetic palettes, and maces with handles sheathed in gold. The
A-Group also imported some items from the Levant, which probably passed
through Egyptian traders. Markings made by the A-Group on official seals,
placed on goods, might connect these items with individual Nubian chiefs,
and so could represent the first steps towards a Nubian writing system.

---

Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                         

quote:

---

At this point, late in the fourth millennium BCE, the Egyptians and the
A-Group Nubians still enjoyed friendly relations. Egyptian and A-Group
traders continued to meet at Elephantine to exchange goods, and the typically
A-Group practice of cattle burial is attested at Hierakonpolis in Upper
Egypt. Archaeologists have also excavated an A-Group grave at Abu Sir
el-Malaq in Middle Egypt, showing that at least one Nubian lived and died
far from home. Despite the increasing cultural separation between them, for
the time being, ideas and goods continued to flow between Egypt and Nubia.

_________________________________________________________________

Inventing Enemies

At the close of the fourth millennium BCE, the Egyptians suddenly developed
a more aggressive attitude towards their neighbours to the south and
east. Why this happened, we can only speculate, but it was perhaps a result of
the Egyptians wanting to remove the ‘middlemen’ from the trade networks.

From the south, the Egyptians craved the exotic items of Upper (southern)
Nubia and beyond, so they aggressively expanded their sphere of
influence deeper and deeper into Lower Nubia, creating conflict with the
A-Group. Glimpses of what happened next can be seen in two rock carvings
at Gebel Sheikh Suleiman, just south of Abu Simbel: the first carving
shows the serekh of an Egyptian king (a royal symbol, normally containing
a king’s name) holding a Nubian prisoner by the neck, while to the right, a
further prisoner, with an arrow in his chest, is tied to a boat. Four drowned
enemies are beneath. In the second carving, there’s a large scorpion, probably
representing an Egyptian king, and three figures: one bound, one holding
a weapon, and the other holding a bow and arrow. As these carvings
show, Egypt’s friendly relationship with Lower Nubia had ended. Violent
raids must have become common. In a desperate attempt to save themselves,
the A-Group abandoned Qustul – the probable capital of their emerging
kingdom that would never be – but it was a futile move: by 2800 BCE, the
A-Group, as a distinct cultural entity, had disappeared from existence, leaving
Lower Nubia depopulated for the next 400 years. The Egyptians and
Nubians, up until this point culturally intertwined, now firmly parted ways.

The people of the southern Levant – the Egyptians’ trading partners for
many centuries – received equally hostile treatment; with most of Egypt’s
eastern trade imports now arriving directly by ship from the northern
Levant, the Egyptians saw no reason to treat their former allies as friends:
Just as they’d done with the A-Group in Nubia, the Egyptians had
removed the pesky ‘middleman’ of the southern Levant.


By the end of the Early Dynastic Period in around 2584 BCE, Egypt had
already risen as a state, wiped out a unique Nubian culture, ruined relations
with the southern Levant, solidified relations with Upper Nubia and the
northern Levant, and had woven itself into the long distance trade networks
of the then known world. Prestige items – commonly agreed symbols of status,
marking the high from the low – flowed into Egypt from the south and
east, feeding the insatiable hunger of the newborn state’s developing elite for
the exotic. The Egyptians had tasted power, invented enemies, and asserted
themselves on the world stage. Their actions over the following centuries
would expand and strengthen their growing State, develop their sense of
identity, and ensure that their civilization would be remembered forever.
Enter the Old Kingdom.

---

Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011  |  IP: Logged |