Topic: Which region developed first? Was it Lower Egypt, Upper Egypt or Both?
supercar
unregistered
posted
Ancient Egypt is generally talked about as one nation state, which is true throughout most of it's history, but this has not always been the case. There were brief periods when Ancient Egypt was threatened to become disunited, but through armed struggle (sometimes with the assistance of outside forces), the victors assumed control of power and maintained unity. However, before the dynastic or Egyptian Pharaonic period, Egypt was divided into two kingdoms, namely the Lower (North Egypt) and Upper (South Egypt)Egyptian kingdoms. It is universally acknowledged that rulers of each kingdom focused on their respective regions, until after a major battle in which the Upper Egypt prevailed and the ruler of that Kingdom united the two regions to form a dynasty. However, it is rarely discussed how the Upper kingdom prevailed and what developments allowed for this to happen. Did one kingdom have an upper hand in development over the other, or were there simultaneous developments and the luckier kingdom just so happened to prevail over the other in the battle? Some say that the unique flow of the Nile river from the south to the north, must have enabled the development predominantly in the south to spread to the north. Others disagree, and say that the development of the North spread to the south. But one has to understand that besides the direction of the flow of the Nile, other factors such as trade and access to certain natural resources must have also played an important role in the developments in each region!
[This message has been edited by supercar (edited 23 June 2004).]
posted
There really was no Upper Egypt and Lower Egypt IMO
They were city states or small city like kingdoms along the nile and One conquered the others in Upper Egypt...as a result Upper Egypt developed into a nation under one ruler and then they moved on the city states in Lower egypt. Lower Egypt was never united IMO until Upper egypt did it for them
quote:Originally posted by Obenga: There really was no Upper Egypt and Lower Egypt IMO
They were city states or small city like kingdoms along the nile and One conquered the others in Upper Egypt...as a result Upper Egypt developed into a nation under one ruler and then they moved on the city states in Lower egypt. Lower Egypt was never united IMO until Upper egypt did it for them
This is true. I'm not sure why but Upper Egypt was able to unite into one nation while lower Egypt still had the city state system. What is interesting is that lower Egypt somewhat fell back into the city state system in different periods throughout dynastic history, specifically during the Hyksos' reign, and between dynasties 20 and 25. For a country with such a strong sense of nationalism, ancient Egypt seems to have had difficulty with maintaining unity...
quote:Originally posted by neo*geo: This is true. I'm not sure why but Upper Egypt was able to unite into one nation while lower Egypt still had the city state system...
I think part of the reason Upper Egypt was able to unite into one nation state, lies in its military strength. You see, Upper Egypt was able to get the necessary metals for making effective weaponry from Lower Nubia, with whom they traded. "Nubia" as we know meant 'gold', due to the abundance of that metal,copper, and other useful metals in that region. On top of that, the Nubians developed methods for smelting those metals, and made them readily available for trading with Upper Egypt. Upper Egypt took advantage of those resources to build strong military and therefore consolidate their control over the region. Once you have a strong military, maintaining control and organizing a region to bring it under one power becomes less problematic. But again, this is just one reason, but an important one not to overlook.
posted
When talking about the conflicts between Upper and Lower Egypt, it has to be kept in mind that contact between them were at times initiated through mostly trade.
IP: Logged |
posted
The mediator between Upper and Lower Egypt during antiquity was the Maadi culture. Maadi is located just outside Cairo in a modern suburb.
Posts: 8675 | From: Tukuler al~Takruri as Ardo since OCT2014 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
supercar
unregistered
posted
quote:Originally posted by ausar: The mediator between Upper and Lower Egypt during antiquity was the Maadi culture. Maadi is located just outside Cairo in a modern suburb.
Naturally, the southern Egyptians traded with this mediator. Did Maadi have it's own ruler or what, because as we understand it there were small states along the Delta?
I think another developement the Southern Egyptian ruler had going for him, was that through their trade with Lower Nubia, both trading parties influenced one another with some aspects of their culture. Archeological studies thus far have shown that the concept of Pharaoh was being practiced in Nubia well before Egypt. Of course later on Nubia , particularly lower Nubia, borrowed various practices from Egypt, when it came under Egyptian control!
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic