Predynastic (3500-2950 BCE): Old and middle pre-Kerma
Thinite Period (2950-2780 BCE): Recent pre-Kerma
Old Kingdom (2635-2140 BCE): Old Kerma (2450-2050 BCE), 2400 BCE founding of Nubian town of Kerma with religious precinct
First Intermediate Period (2140-2020 BCE): Old Kerma
Middle Kingdom (2022-1750 BCE): Middle Kerma (2050-1750 BCE), Royal palaces; audience chamber; founding of a second city; Large princely tumuli
Second Intermediate Period (1750-1550 BCE): Classic Kerma (1750-1450 BCE), Construction of Deffufa; Great royal tumuli and funerary temples; Kerma monarchs occupy forts on second cataract
New Kingdom (1550-1080 BCE): 1500 BCE: end of Kerma kingdom and foundation of Egyptian city of Pnubs on site of Doukki Gel, 1 km north of Nubian town (Thutmosid, Amarnian, and Ramessid temples)
Third Intermediate Period (1080-715 BCE): Several independent but Egyptianize Kushite kingdoms; scant Egyptian documentation; contacts maintained between Egypt and Nubia
Late Period (715-330 BCE): Shabaqo's temple; Taharqa's stature; Tanutamun's statues; Statues of Senkamanisken, Analmani, Aspelta; 593 BCE: Psamtik II's campaign in Egypt; Destruction of statues at Kerma and Gebel Barkal; Napatan temples at Doukki Gel; town extends toward river
Greek Period (330-30 BCE): Kerma scant information
Roman Period (30 BCE onward): Meroitic temples at Doukki Gel
Destruction of statues at Kerma and Gebel Barkal; excavated in 2003, which are soon to be exhibited in the new museum in Kerma.
.
kenndo Member # 4846
posted
Predynastic (3500-2950 BCE): Old and middle pre-Kerma
a pre-kerma WAS built or goes back further to 5000 b.c.,i am surprised that this new info is not in that book and the info was told to us or at least i first learn it in the wonders of the african world on pbs tv.
Mr gates tv show before 2006.
Myra Wysinger Member # 10126
posted
quote:Originally posted by kenndo: Predynastic (3500-2950 BCE): Old and middle pre-Kerma
a pre-kerma WAS built or goes back further to 5000 b.c.,i am surprised that this new info is not in that book and the info was told to us or at least i first learn it in the wonders of the african world on pbs tv.
Mr gates tv show before 2006.
page 16:
Human populations settled in the Kerma basin at a very early date, as witnessed by several Mesolithic and Neolithic sites. The earliest traces of a human presence in the region date back some eight hundred thousands years. From 7500 BC onward the remains become more significant: semi-buried dwellings, various objects and tools, and graves. The Neolithic phrase, from the late sixth to the fourth millennium BC, is much better known and allows us to follow the stages of the spread of agriculture and the domestication of cattle in this period. Around 3000 BC a town grew up not far from the Neolithic dwellings place.
The Nubian Town and Its Necropolis
In the past thirty years, systematic excavation of Nubian Kerma has presented a picture of a capital city in the third and second millennia BCE. The evolution of the residential area is highly complex, yet it is possible to identify social differences and a marked hierarchy. Furthermore, we might speculate about the general nature of this town, which seems to correspond above all to a protected zone reserved for an elite population. Whereas elsewhere in the kingdom we find towns that centralized agricultural products and villages that we situated alongside fields of crops, here in the capital we find spacious homes inhabited by dignitaries who monitored the trade in merchandise arriving from far-off lands, and who supervised shipments dispatched from administrative buildings.
In the Old Kerma (2450-2050 BCE), religious buildings and special workshops for preparing offerings were built using trunks of acacia trees, and roofed with palm fibers. These plant-based materials, once encased in hardened clay, could be painted in lively colors. The round huts were usually made of wood and clay. This method of construction, inspired by traditions dating back to prehistory, is still being used today.
Around 2200-2000 BCE, the builders began using unfired mud-bricks. Later, the use of fired bricks constituted a significant change, because such material remained almost unknown elsewhere along the Nile Valley until the Late Period.
.
Amun-Ra The Ultimate Member # 20039
posted
Nubia was a never a term used by Ancient Egyptians to refer to Kushite people or their territory. It never appeared in any Ancient Egyptian text. Ancient Egyptians used to refer to the Kushite territory and people as Ta-Seti (Land of the Bow) since the Old Kingdom. During the Middle Kingdom (12th Dynasty), the word Kush began to be used alongside Ta-Seti. Nubia, a term often used by modern egyptologists, was first used to refer to people and territory by Strabo a Greek geographer and has no relation to Kush or Ta-Seti. Kush is also a word Kushites used for themselves. King Kashta, of the 25th Kushite Dynasty, is an example (in Africa kings often goes by various names).
Here's another chronology of the Kushite Kingdoms:
Tukuler Member # 19944
posted
quote:Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
Nubia was a never a term used by Ancient Egyptians to refer to Kushite people or their territory. It never appeared in any Ancient Egyptian text. Ancient Egyptians used to refer to the Kushite territory and people as Ta-Seti (Land of the Bow) since the Old Kingdom.
.
Well for that matter Egypt was a never a term used by Ancient Egyptians to refer to Egyptian people or their territory.
Kush would be Upper Nubia. Ta-Seti is southern Upper Egypt & Lower Nubia Ta-Seti was never used for Kush.
Kush however did conquer Ta-Seti/Wawat as it did Egypt.
As with Nubia, Kush can be very non-specific * Kerma kingdom * Napata kingdom * Meroe kingdom.
Amun-Ra The Ultimate Member # 20039
posted
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler:
quote:Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
Nubia was a never a term used by Ancient Egyptians to refer to Kushite people or their territory. It never appeared in any Ancient Egyptian text. Ancient Egyptians used to refer to the Kushite territory and people as Ta-Seti (Land of the Bow) since the Old Kingdom.
.
Well for that matter Egypt was a never a term used by Ancient Egyptians to refer to Egyptian people or their territory.
Kush would be Upper Nubia. Ta-Seti is Lower Nubia and was never used for Kush.
Kush however did conquer Ta-Seti/Wawat as it did Egypt.
As with Nubia, Kush can be very non-specific * Kerma kingdom * Napata kingdom * Meroe kingdom.
What you say is mostly not true. Modern egyptologists often translate into the word Nubia the terms like Ta-Seti, Wawat and even Kush. There's not any global convention and each books has it's own convention. It's confusing and I don't use the term Nubia most of the time, Ancient Egyptians or Kushites never used that term to designate any people or territory . Since the word Kush and Kushite is very well known (including in the bible) I see no reason to not use the proper term for Kushite people (Meroitic Nilo-Saharan speakers behind the Kerma, Napata and Meroitic empires).
Even if Ancient Egypt is not the best name to designate Ancient Egyptians, at least there's no confusion about the word. It is also by itself not the good reason to repeat the same error with Kush. All the contrary. Kush is a well known name to designate Kushite people. It's both well known and a word they also used for themselves.
Tukuler Member # 19944
posted
In the sandstone regions of the Nile Valley the Nehhesyw we know as the A-Group had various polities in the Middle Nile Valley. TaSeti is a term that covers all those separate polities. A few of those polities appear to have confederated by territory into three states. Eventually those three states formed a nation with, and named after, Wawat. TaSeti once extended from Nag el Hasaya, Edfu in what became T3wy's 2nd sepat (nome), to the Batn el Hagar (just above the 2nd cataract).
TaShema[u/w], the southern of the Two Lands (T3wy) took over the sandstone region from Edfu (Djeba/Nesen) to the 1st cataract. This area became the southern half of the 2nd sepat (Heru's Throne) and all of the 1st sepat (TaSeti.nwt). The area between the 1st and 2nd cataracts retained the name TaSeti.x3st and was an active part of Wawat (the "Conspirators"). How far Wawat extended south of the 2nd cataract is unknown but probably only to the Batn el Hagar (Rocky Belly).
Yam may've began just south of the Batn el Hagar and was the next state above Wawat. Sai may've been a northern polity under Yam. Yam probably extended as far as the 4th cataract judging from the fact that "Ancient Urban Kerma" artifacts have been unearthed from the 3rd to at least the 4th cataracts. At this period in time Kush was the next territory upriver. Kerma appears to have been Yam's capital. Yam enjoyed a most favorable trade relationship with T3wy.
"Urban Kerma" was a magnet for populations west and east of the Nile as well as those south upriver in the Upper Nile Valley. At some point in time Yam disappears from the record as the Keshli took over "Middle Urban Kerma" and toughened up terms of trade with T3wy. Resentful of a situation it was powerless to overturn, the Kmtyw label the nation of Kesht as "Kesh keshyt" (Kush the contemptible).
As far as I can gather, Kesh proper was a nation located at least between the 4th and 5th cataracts with Gebel Barkal (Napata)as an important politico-religious center for all the Nile Valley. As a kingdom on its way to empire Kesh began to control provinces all the way upriver to the Butana and all the way downriver to somewhere between the 2nd and 1st cataracts. "Classic Urban Kerma" was a capital of Kush. So during Hyksos times Kerma cannot be juxtaposed to Kush. In its heyday Kush was the most far flung ancient world empire. Its borders were the Butana (confluence of the White and Blue Niles) way in the south and the city of Megiddo (in the Levant) far to the north.
Kush is a well known name to designate Kushite people. It's both well known and a word they also used for themselves.
.
Ta-Seti never called themselves Kush Why would they when Ta-Seti is the name they used for themselves?
You only show your lack of knowledge and that you've only just begun to study this ancient Sudan.
It's been explained Southern Nubia = above 4th or 5th cataract Upper Nubia = 5th - 3rd cataracts Lower Nubia = Batn el Hajr - 1st cataract
Kush can be as confusing as Nubia. When does it mean * Kerma's kingdom * Napata's kingdom or empire * Meroe's kingdom
Amun-Ra The Ultimate Member # 20039
posted
^^^It's obvious to anybody who read about AEians and Kushites history that the boundaries were not fixed like you try to say. It varies depending on the book or egyptologist.
I still don't understand why you use the word Nubia?
Tukuler Member # 19944
posted
Well, if you looked at my Ancient Sudan(ese) threads, I once tried being specific, which always works best, but the board was lost.
And as your posts prove, some still don't understand to specify which Nubia region they mean or which Kush polity they are talking about not to mention variance over time periods (check my chart).
TaSeti/Wawat was never a Kush. TaSeti/Wawat was/is Lower Nubia.
Kush proper was/is Upper Nubia.
It's obvious to me that you never bothered to see I'm not the first or the only ESer to spell out the three Nubias southern, upper, and lower as defined by the academe.
And I really don't care whether you know it or like it or not. The readership is here to learn even if you refuse to.
Amun-Ra The Ultimate Member # 20039
posted
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: Kush proper was/is Upper Nubia.
As I said the use of the term varies. For example, the word Ta-Seti and the word Kush itself, is often translated as Nubia by egyptologists. It varies from books to books.
The part I don't understand is in the quote above why use the word 'Nubia'.
Why not say: Kush proper was "insert original name"?
Tukuler Member # 19944
posted
Because Kush refers to more than just one polity.
If I just say Kush who knows what I mean Do I mean Kerma Do I mean Napata Do I mean Meroe Do I mean the empire
The only Sudan that isn't Kush is TaSeti/Wawat.
For the last time Kush can be as confusing as Nubia. Without a context who knows what's meant.
Over and out.
Amun-Ra The Ultimate Member # 20039
posted
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: For the last time Kush can be as confusing as Nubia.
It still doesn't explain why you use the word Nubia. Since Nubia is as confusing as Kush (according to you) why not use a name Kushite people used themselves?
Just because we're not using the proper word for Ancient Egyptians does that mean we must not use a proper AEian and Kushite word to designate Kushite people? Is that your logic?
Tukuler Member # 19944
posted
I'll let the readership decide especially those who need stuff for term papers, theses, and so on.
I've broke down the specifics and you're still stuck on generalities. It is all right there in my posts to this thread.
Thing is YOU don't wanna understand. And understand doesn't mean accept. I understand the one confusion you want to introduce to replace some other confusion, but it still leaves confusion whereas
posted
You're being ridiculous and I think it's on purpose. It's not generalities. It's obvious to any reader that the main difference between you and me is related to the preservation of native names to designate territories and people . This is the fundamental difference between you and me.
In your logic because we don't use one of the proper native name for Ancient Egypt (like Kemet), we must replicate the same mistake for Kush.
It's ridiculous because Kush is interchangeable with the term Nubia. It's already used that way by egyptologist, is well known and even included in the bible. Kush has the avantage of being the native name.
Kush was used in new kingdom documents(and Kushite people themselves) to designate what many modern egyptologists often call Nubia (lower and upper). Many modern egyptologists often used Kush of course, as did the Bible.
Ancient Egyptians also used the word Wawat for lower nubia and as well as Kush for upper nubia. Ancient Egyptians, in some documents, also used the word Kush to designate both upper and lower nubia.
For Wawat:
quote: By the end of the 6th Dynasty, only Wawat remained [others Irjet, Setju], suggesting that its ruler had absorbed the others and by then had created a single Lower Nubian 'kingdom'.
- from The Egyptian World edited by Toby Wilkinson
For Kush
quote: Geographically the term [Kush] is interchangeable with the term Nubia.
quote: The extension of the term Kush over Lower as well as Upper Nubia in New Kingdom Egyptian documents apparently preserved the memory of a native state occupying the whole of this area in the Second Intermediate Period.
So here Ancient Egyptians in some documents use Kush to designate both Wawat and Kush as a whole.
So basically, the native terms for those global regions (which are fluid and also encompass smaller entities like Yam, Setju, etc) is Wawat for Lower Nubia and Kush for Upper Nubia.
Kush is interchangeable with Nubia and is also used at a certain time by AEians to identify what modern egyptologists call Nubia (Lower and Upper Nubia). Although modern egyptologists usually use 'Southern Kush', or similar formula, to designate the southern part of Kush (not Upper Kush).
Of course, people can always invent new names or use names like Nubia invented in the past by modern egyptologists but I prefer to use native names like Wawat and Kush to designate those territories. Southern Kush can also be used. Those terms are all used in that matter by both natives Ancient Egyptians and Kushite as well as modern egyptologists.
Wawat = proper term for lower Nubia Kush = proper term for upper Nubia Kush = term for both lower and upper Nubia like Nubia
Brada-Anansi Member # 16371
posted
If I may interject, Ta-Seti was supposed to be from a different language group so-called Afroasiatic they formed themselves into the first possible kingdom on the Nile not unlike the Kemites themselves,Kush were Nilo Saharans,Ta-setian were supposed to be A-group culture Kush were supposed to be C-group culture, however they over lapped,Kush absorbed Ta-seti and Wawat when it became an empire and I am not talking about when they took over the entire Nile during the 25th dynasty for they were already an empire before then, so one really have to be sensitive to time and geography.
typeZeiss Member # 18859
posted
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: Because Kush refers to more than just one polity.
If I just say Kush who knows what I mean Do I mean Kerma Do I mean Napata Do I mean Meroe Do I mean the empire
The only Sudan that isn't Kush is TaSeti/Wawat.
For the last time Kush can be as confusing as Nubia. Without a context who knows what's meant.
Over and out.
could it be that Kerma was a empire, and within that empire there were kingdoms? We saw the same thing with Ancient Ghana, Ancient Mali, Susu, Songhai etc. Not saying this is a fact, but one way of interpreting the data.
DD'eDeN Member # 21966
posted
Perhaps of interest:
Russian term for sledge/sleigh: volokush
Tukuler Member # 19944
posted
Not sure if Kerma itself was an empire but it did become the first capital of the Kingdom of Kush.
I am sure TaSeti/Wawat was at least a multiethnic nation at times because there are primary documents (Weni) attesting to unification of several polities united under TaSeti and later (Huy) apparent records a united Wawat under the king of Mi'am.
quote: It is entirely appropriate to note that when the international salvage efforts began, there was virtually no information available on the prehistoric development anywhere in Nubia, and even in Egypt little was known concerning prehistoric materials beyond a few scattered and rolled pieces found in ancient deposits along the Nile. From this limited evidence, archaeologists had concluded that the Nile Valley, both Nubia and Egypt, has been a culturally conservative cul-de-sac where the technological and typological attributes of the Middle Paleolithic survived relatively unchanged until near the end of the Pleistocene. The lithic industries of Late Paleolithic age along the Nile Valley were believed to be limited to a few simple tool types, usually made on flakes, and with a high frequency of the Levallois technology which elsewhere is characteristic of the Middle Paleolithic. Those diagnostic elements of the Late Paleolithic -the blade technology and the associated complex of tools emphasizing end-scrapers, burins, and backed pieces -were believed to be absent. These simple flake industries were seen as persisting long after com pound tools, indicated by the presence of geometric microliths, had appeared in Europe and southwest Asia.
At a still later date, the role of the Nile Valley in the origin and development of food production was also discounted as it became fashionable to regard the upland areas around the Tigris and Euphrates rivers as the probable center for the origins of agriculture.
Perhaps the major result of the Nubia prehistoric campaign was to lay to rest these concepts of Nilotic cultural conservatism. The Nubian work not only disclosed the presence of numerous rich prehistoric living sites ranging in age from Early Paleolithic to the beginning of written records, but these sites yielded convincing evidence that they had been occupied by groups whose lithic technology and typology were fully as complex and as progressive as those from other parts of the world.
There is no evidence that these early efforts to use grain for food resulted in a corresponding primary development of food production, but they were an important first step which may ultimately have led to the crucial achievement of food production, either along the Nile or elsewhere in the Near East.
The Combined Prehistoric Expedition surveyed and located several hundred prehistoric sites within the assigned concession areas, and of these, 102 sites were excavated and studied systematically. These range from Early Paleolithic to Neolithic. The final reports on these studies have been published in several volumes (Wendorf, 1965 and 1968; Marks, 1970). The Prehistoric sites in Nubia have been grouped into five broad cultural stages, and within each stage several distinct lithic industries were defined.
The stages may be summarized as follows:
Nubian Early Stone Age:
The sites of this stage are typologically and technologically within the range of the Acheulean complex and share many resemblances with the Middle and Late Acheulean from further south, especially Klor Abu Anga near Khartoum, Sudan. No living sites of this group are known, only quarries and workshops. Ferrocrete sandstone was preferred for tool production, although quartz was also important in some sites. Bifaces were the most common tools, while cleavers, trihedral forms, and para-Levallois flakes are rare. Levallois technology appears during the middle phase of this stage and becomes increasingly important thereafter. Nubian Early Stone Age sites occur only in the Older Pediments. None are known to occur within the silts of the river.
Nubian Middle Stone Age: This stage is generally equivalent to the Middle Paleolithic elsewhere. It contains four distinct industries the Nubian Mousterian, Denticulate Mousterian and the Nubian Middle Paleolithic and the Khormusan. The latter has affinities with the Sangoan-Lupemban of central and west Africa; the first two are more similar to the Mousterian complexes of the Near East and Europe. The first three of these industries share the following features: a nearly complete absence of handaxes (these are replaced by biface foliates or flake tools); a strong preference for ferrocrete sandstone for tools; and a frequent use of Levallois technology (although this varies among the three industries of this stage). Sites of these three industries occur only in the Older Pediments. The Khormusan sites occur imbedded in the oldest Nile silts known in the part of the Valley and are believed to date between 65,000 and 55,000 years old. Khormusan sites record a diverse food economy.
They contain an abundance of fish remains as well as numerous bones of wild cattle, gazelle and hartebeest. In addition to the typical wide, flat Levallois flakes, the Khormusan sites contain numerous burins (a kind of engraving tool), scrapers and perforators.
Nubian Upper Stone Age:
Three distinct industries are also included in this stage: the Khormusan, the Gemian, and the Sebilian. Each of these industries is markedly different from the others, but as a group they share an emphasis on medium-sized flakes for the manufacture of tools; the biface foliates of the preceding stage are gone, and there are no true geometric, microlithic, or backed microblade tools characteristic of later stage. Except for the Sebilian, which differs sharply from all other known lithic assemblages in Nubia, sites of this stage yield increasing frequencies of artifacts made on Nile pebbles, while burins, endscrapers, and retouched points occur commonly in one or the other industries. The Sebilian retains the emphasis on ferrocrete sandstone preferred during the earlier stages, and the tools of this industry emphasized various kinds of truncations. These differences have led to the suggestion that the Sebilians were an outside, non-Nilotic group who briefly intruded into the area. In some respects they have close affiliations to some of the industries known farther south in central Africa -especially the Tshitolian.
Nubian Final Stone Age:
This stage contains four distinct industries: the Halfan, the Qadan, the Arkinian, and the Shamarkian. All of these industries share a tendency for the retouched tools to be microlithic, suggesting extensive use of composite tools. They also all make frequent use of microblades and bladelets in the manufacture of finished tools, and Nile chert pebbles were used almost exclusively as raw material for these tools. The Nile and its resources, especially fish, become increasingly important, and it is during this stage that the first use of ground grain occurs. There is an overlap in time between the Nubian Final Stone Age and the preceeding Nubian Upper Stone Age. The earliest Nubian Final Stone Age sites (the Halfan) occur in situ in Nile silts and have radiocarbon dates of around 17,000 B.G., while the Nubian Upper Stone Age probably begins before 20,000 B.G., but survives as a technological stage represented by the Sebilian, as late as 9,000 B.G.
Nubian Ceramic Age:
This stage includes at least three distinct lithic industries in Nubia. Pottery, the diagnostic feature of this stage, first appears in the final phase of the Shamarkian industry, and is also present in two distinct and seemingly contemporary groups named the Abkan and Khartum Variant. Both the Shamarkian and Abkan ceramics appear to be stimulated by Egyptia sources; however, the Khartum Variant pottery clearly is similar to that of Shaheinab in central Sudan. All three industries share an emphasis on large flake tools, and the Abkan and Shamarkian sites are dramatically larger than those known previously in Nubia. This change of settlement size may indicate the appearance in Nubia of a new economic resource -possibly cultivation.
The Swiss team, now under the direction of University of Neuchatel archaeologist Matthieu Honegger, gradually started to piece together the history of that previously unknown world. They found that beginning around 3100 B.C., driven in part by an increasingly arid climate, people began to settle on the island in the Nile where Kerma would rise. These new arrivals lived in small settlements and used red brushed ceramics of a type that their descendants at Kerma would also use, and placed their huts in a distinctive semicircular pattern.
Fortifications that had been unearthed by Bonnet’s team showed that around 2500 B.C., the people of Kerma constructed a large fortress, and that a dense urban landscape quickly grew up around it. The city’s residents built circular huts, larger communal wooden structures, bakeries, and markets. Large ceramic vessels throughout Kerma seem to have provided public drinking water, likely for both citizens and visitors. A small chapel was constructed where the Deffufa would later stand, and the entrance to the city was marked by a mudbrick-and-wood gate built in a style still evident in Nubian houses today. Royal quarters with an elaborate courtyard were constructed near the city center. Around this time, nobles were first entombed in the necropolis to the east of the site. In several ceramic workshops nearby, artisans created a style of ornate dining ware only found in the nobles’ tombs. Bonnet believes these dishes were used during funeral rituals that involved meals held between mourning families and the recently deceased. The discovery of ceramic Egyptian trade seals, faience artifacts, and ivory and jewelry from southern Sudan, shows that Kerma was growing into an important trade center. Farmers contributed to the economy during this time by raising cattle and planting legumes and grain in irrigated ditches surrounding the city walls. Bonnet’s team uncovered well-preserved evidence of this in traces of wooden plowshares, holes dug in the soil for as-yet-unplanted crops, and the footprints of both people and of oxen teams, along with thousands of domesticated cattle prints pressed into the hardened mud as if they had been made only a few weeks before.
In addition to evidence of ambitious building projects and a growing economy, finds dating to early in the city’s history indicate the arrival of the C-Group identified by Reisner, possibly from Darfur in western Sudan or modern-day South Sudan. Their emergence in Nubia, marked by the sudden appearance of incised black-and-white ceramics and distinctive grave decorations, suggests that they immigrated quickly into the region. Shortly after their arrival, these new people rapidly integrated with the local Nubians and began to assimilate into the city’s culture, while maintaining a number of their own traditions.
posted 
