^^^ looks like an interesting intoduction to the book also. haven't read it yet
_________________________________________________
wiki:
The Third Intermediate Period of Ancient Egypt begins with the death of Pharaoh Ramesses XI in 1070 BC, ending the New Kingdom, and ends with the start of the Late period, for which various points are offered, though it is most often regarded as dating from the foundation of the Twenty-Sixth Dynasty by Psamtik I in 664 BC, following the expulsion of the Nubian rulers of the Twenty-Fifth Dynasty by the Assyrians under King Assurbanipal.
The period was one of decline and political instability, marked by division of the state for much of the period and conquest and rule by foreigners. But many aspects of life for ordinary Egyptians changed relatively little.
posted
Psamtik I, the founder of the 26th dynasty was likely a descendant of Bakenrenef, the last ruler of the 24th dynasty who was brutally executed by the founder of the 25th dynasty Shabaka. When Psamtik I's father Nakau I was appointed as regent of Egypt by the Assyrians who then left, the Kushite king Tanutamani rose up to reconquer Egypt and killed Nakau. Psamtik fled Egypt seeking refuge in Assyria who then returned with the aid of Ashurbanipal to retake Egypt and drive Tanutamani back to Kush. The 26th dynasty proved to be even weaker than their 24th dynasty ancestors let alone the stronger 25th dynasty. The Libyan pharaohs of the 26th dynasty were nothing more than puppet rulers of the Assyrian Empire, and their authority was not taken seriously in Upper Egypt. The dynasty ended with Psamtik III when their Assyrian masters were defeated by the Achaemenid Persians who then defeated Psamtik. This was why the lives of ordinary Egyptians changed little-- because the only upheavals were political ones at the federal level. Most of the Egyptian sepati (nomes) remained autonomous.
This is why of all the late dynasty foreign rulers, the 25th dynasty of Kush was the best one. It was the Kushites whose authority was accepted by all the sepati of Egypt and was recognized as official via the Amun priesthood. Their centers of authority stretched from Jebel Barkal to Siwa and from Napata to Menefer (Memphis). The federal system remained tied to the nome-system and then local governments. But as soon as the Assyrians entered the scene forcing the Kushites to leave and installing puppet rulers via the 26th dynasty, the Egyptian people lost faith in the rulers (literally, since pharaohs were supposed to be gods incarnate).
Posts: 26286 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The Funny part is that just because they are "Lybian" many Egyptologists will try to over portray the 26th Dynasty as one of super Stability and prosperity and downplay the Economic and cultural renewal and revival of the 25th Dynasty.
Posts: 8805 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ LOL "Stability" maybe. I mean when the 26th dynasty ruled there was no conflict because all the sepati were largely autonomous, especially those in Upper Egypt. The sepati rulers just gave the puppet pharaoh a nod if anything. I don't see how there was any prosperity. At least in the 25th dynasty there was a renaissance type movement ushered in. What did the 26 dynasty kings do for Kemet overall except keeping the Assyrians from overrunning them by paying tribute?
Posts: 26286 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Psamtik I, the founder of the 26th dynasty was likely a descendant of Bakenrenef, the last ruler of the 24th dynasty who was brutally executed by the founder of the 25th dynasty Shabaka. When Psamtik I's father Nakau I was appointed as regent of Egypt by the Assyrians who then left, the Kushite king Tanutamani rose up to reconquer Egypt and killed Nakau. Psamtik fled Egypt seeking refuge in Assyria who then returned with the aid of Ashurbanipal to retake Egypt and drive Tanutamani back to Kush. The 26th dynasty proved to be even weaker than their 24th dynasty ancestors let alone the stronger 25th dynasty. The Libyan pharaohs of the 26th dynasty were nothing more than puppet rulers of the Assyrian Empire, and their authority was not taken seriously in Upper Egypt. The dynasty ended with Psamtik III when their Assyrian masters were defeated by the Achaemenid Persians who then defeated Psamtik. This was why the lives of ordinary Egyptians changed little-- because the only upheavals were political ones at the federal level. Most of the Egyptian sepati (nomes) remained autonomous.
This is why of all the late dynasty foreign rulers, the 25th dynasty of Kush was the best one. It was the Kushites whose authority was accepted by all the sepati of Egypt and was recognized as official via the Amun priesthood. Their centers of authority stretched from Jebel Barkal to Siwa and from Napata to Menefer (Memphis). The federal system remained tied to the nome-system and then local governments. But as soon as the Assyrians entered the scene forcing the Kushites to leave and installing puppet rulers via the 26th dynasty, the Egyptian people lost faith in the rulers (literally, since pharaohs were supposed to be gods incarnate).
I'm not surprised that the Kushites were the best foreign rulers for Egypt. They had a lot more in common with the native Egyptians as a culture than anyone outside the Nile area.
You mention that the Amun priesthood gave the Kushite rulers credibility in the native Egyptians' eyes. Are you aware of the argument that the entire cult of Amun may have first germinated in Kush before it spread throughout Egypt? (link)
Posts: 7083 | From: Fallbrook, CA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic