posted
Revising Egypto-Nubian Relations in New Kingdom Lower Nubia: From Egyptianization to Cultural Entanglement van Pelt, W Paul. Cambridge Archaeological Journal23.3 (Oct 2013): 523-550.
Revising Egypto-Nubian Relations in New Kingdom Lower Nubia: From Egyptianization to Cultural Entanglement W. Paul van Pelt
aBSTRACT Building on recent criticisms of Romanization, this contribution formulates a systematic critique of the concept of Egyptianization and suggests a different theoretical approach to cultural process in New Kingdom Nubia that benefits from the insights of ‘cultural entanglement’. This approach emphasizes multidirectional and interactive perspectives that allow for a variety of acculturative outcomes rather than one-sided assimilation. A useful epistemological framework for its application in archaeology is illustrated through two case studies, focusing respectively on representations of Egyptianized Nubians in Egyptian art and Lower Nubian burial customs. The outcomes of the case studies argue for a provocative re-reading of cultural process in New Kingdom Lower Nubia, and may help to clarify the general picture of Nubian history by explaining why and how Nubian traits re-appeared in the Napatan-Meroitic Kingdom of Kush. Finally, the article considers some broader methodological and theoretical issues relating to cultural mixture in the archaeological record.
Conventional accounts of Egyptian New Kingdom ( c. 1550–1069 bc ) colonialism and its cultural influ -ences in Lower Nubia 1 tell the story of a unidirectional transfer and modification of one set of lifestyles over another. According to these accounts, Lower Nubian styles of administration, material culture, cults and customs were side-lined and eventually completely substituted by Egyptian forms over the course of the New Kingdom. (e.g. Brugsch 1891, 2–3; Reisner 1910, 340–42; 1918, 236–7; Firth 1912, 27; 1915, 20–21; 1927, 25; Griffith 1921, 71; Junker 1925, 37, 43–4; Emery & Kirwan 1935, 4; Säve-Söderbergh 1941, 129–35, 184–90; 1967–1968; 1969, 12–20; Emery 1965, 177–8; Trigger 1976, 110, 131–5; Kemp 1978, 34–5; Leclant 1978, 70; O’Connor 1978, 56; 1982, 910–12; Frandsen 1979, 169–70; Adams 1984, 235; Zibelius-Chen 1988, 63; Smith 1991, 84, 91–4; 1995, 148–54; 1997, 71; 1998, 260, 277–9; 2001a, 156; Taylor 1991, 32–3; Redford 1992, 192; 2004, 44–5; Morris 2005, 96–7). This pattern of cultural change is referred to as ‘Egyptianization’. In the absence of indigenous written records from Nubia, scholarly perceptions of the coloniza -tion of the area have been largely based on Egyptian historical sources. However, the results of archaeo -logical fieldwork in Nubia are increasingly enabling archaeologists to tell the story from a different per -spective. Even though some forays into this research have already suggested that traditional notions of Egyptianization are not appropriate for all contact situations in Nubia (Säve-Söderbergh 1991a; Sinclair & Troy 1991; Cohen 1992; Edwards 2003; Fuller 2003; Smith 2003; Buzon 2006; Török 2009), no one has hith -erto attempted to formulate a systematic critique of the theoretical and ideological foundations of Egyptiani -zation, nor has anyone formally proposed to replace the concept with something more sophisticated. Egyp -tianization therefore still dominates the analysis of cul -tural process and change in Egypt’s foreign territories.
Building on recent critiques of the similar concept of Romanization (Hingley 1995; 1996; 1997; Woolf 1997; Webster 2001; Pitts 2008), this contribution aims to demonstrate that Egyptianization is a simplistic and unconvincing model of cultural change that glosses over cultural diversity and transculturation phenomena in New Kingdom Lower Nubia. 2 It adopts a somewhat unusual framework by first tackling nineteenth- and twentieth-century reconstructions of Egypto-Nubian relations in order to draw attention to some of the ideological prejudices and assump -tions that have coloured past views of the wholesale Egyptianization of the area. It is important to empha -size these attitudes as they have deeply affected subsequent perceptions of Nubian cultures and are still apparent in a number of Egyptological writings (cf. Morkot 2003, 168). A different theoretical approach is then suggested to better describe the nuances of cultural contact and change in New Kingdom Lower Nubia, benefitting from the insights of ‘cultural entanglement’ (Stockhammer 2012a,b,c)..
END EXCERPT
Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Illuminating the Nubian ‘Dark Age’- A bioarchaeological analysis of dental non-metric traits during the Napatan Period Abstract
The origins of one of the most powerful sociopolitical entities of the Nile Valley, the Napatan State (850–650 BCE), are debated. Some scholars have suggested local development of this influential Nubian State, while others propose foreign involvement. This study uses a bioarchaeological approach to examine the biological affinity of these Ancient Nubians. The focal site of this research, Tombos, is one of few non-central Napatan Period sites that have been excavated and can, therefore, shed light on the broader Napatan populace. Dental non-metric trait frequencies were examined in the Tombos sample as well as in 12 comparative samples to elucidate the biological affinities of these populations.
Analyses indicate that Tombos dental non-metric trait frequencies were not significantly different from the majority of Egyptian and Nubian samples examined here. Therefore, we propose that gene flow, encouraged by long-term coexistence and intermarriage in Nubia, created an Egyptian/Nubian transcultural environment. These findings suggest the Napatan population at Tombos included descendants of Egyptians and Nubians. The Napatan Tombos sample was found to significantly differ from the latter Kushite and Meroitic samples; however, these samples are so temporally removed from the Napatan Period, we suspect subsequent episodes of population movement may have contributed to this variation. Introduction
Beginning in the 9th century BCE, a strong and unified sociopolitical front, known as the Napatan State, emerged in ancient Nubia. Centered at the capital city of Napata (Fourth Cataract), the Napatan State quickly became expansive and conquered Egypt (c. 760 BCE). Napatan rulers initiated the 25th Dynasty of Pharaohs and legitimized their foreign rule by portraying themselves as the ‘saviors’ of Egyptian culture ( Morkot, 2000). These pharaohs are known for complexly interweaving both Egyptian and Nubian cultural characteristics into their burials, architecture, art, and dress/jewelry ( Patterson, 2004 and Smith, 1998). At this time, the Napatan State was the largest polity to have existed in the Nile Valley, extending from the Mediterranean to what is today Central Sudan; it would continue to hold this designation until the Medieval Period (c. 500; O’Connor, 1993)."
--Schradera et al. 2014. Illuminating the Nubian ‘Dark Age’- A bioarchaeological analysis of dental non-metric traits during the Napatan Period. HOMO - Journal of Comparative Human Biology. Volume 65, Issue 4, Pages 267–280
-------------------- Note: I am not an "Egyptologist" as claimed by some still bitter, defeated, trolls creating fake profiles and posts elsewhere. Hapless losers, you still fail. My output of hard data debunking racist nonsense has actually INCREASED since you began.. Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic