Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt: Perceptions and Reality 9781474226233, 9781780932156, 9781472554550, 9781472502148

Citation preview

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

Bloomsbury Egyptology Series editor: Nicholas Reeves Ancient Egyptian Technology and Innovation, Ian Shaw Archaeologists, Tourists, Interpreters, Rachel Mairs and Maya Muratov Burial Customs in Ancient Egypt, Wolfram Grajetzki Court Officials of the Egyptian Middle Kingdom, Wolfram Grajetzki The Egyptian Oracle Project, edited by Robyn Gillam and Jeffrey Jacobson Hidden Hands, Stephen Quirke The Middle Kingdom of Ancient Egypt, Wolfram Grajetzki Performance and Drama in Ancient Egypt, Robyn Gillam

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt Perceptions and Reality Phyllis Saretta

Bloomsbury Academic An imprint of Bloomsbury Publishing Plc

LON DON • OX F O R D • N E W YO R K • N E W D E L H I • SY DN EY

Bloomsbury Academic An imprint of Bloomsbury Publishing Plc

50 Bedford Square London WC1B 3DP UK

1385 Broadway New York NY 10018 USA

www.bloomsbury.com BLOOMSBURY and the Diana logo are trademarks of Bloomsbury Publishing Plc First published 2016 Paperback edition first published 2017 © Phyllis Saretta, 2016 Phyllis Saretta has asserted her right under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, 1988, to be identified as Author of this work. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage or retrieval system, without prior permission in writing from the publishers. No responsibility for loss caused to any individual or organization acting on or refraining from action as a result of the material in this publication can be accepted by Bloomsbury or the author. Library of Congress Cataloging-­in-Publication Data Saretta, Phyllis, author. Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt: perceptions and reality/Phyllis Saretta. pages cm. — (Bloomsbury Egyptology) includes bibliographical references. ISBN 978-4742-2623-3 (hb) — ISBN 978-1-4725-0213-1 (epub) — ISBN 978-1-4725-0214-8 (epdf) 1. Egypt—History—Middle Kingdom, ca. 2180-ca. 1551 B.C.  2. semites—History.  3. Egypt—Ethnic relations.  4. Egypt—Antiquities.  I. Tittle. DT85.S26 2015 305.892’032009013—dc23 2015018680

ISBN: HB: 978-1-47422-623-3 PB: 978-1-78093-215-6 ePDF: 978-1-47250-214-8 ePub: 978-1-47250-213-1 Series: Bloomsbury Egyptology Typeset by RefineCatch Limited, Bungay, Suffolk

This book is dedicated to Dr. Murray H. Lichtenstein, with gratitude.

And, to the Memories of: My, Parents, Sam and Sophie Saretta * Bobby Farrah (Robert A. Farrah) * Bernard V. Bothmer * Donald P. Hansen

nh j rn.k hr rmt- hpr rn.k hr nt-rw ˘ ˘ ˘ ˘ “your name shall endure with people even as your name comes to be with the gods”

Contents Preface Acknowledgments List of Abbreviations 1

Introduction: The Scope, Methodology and Purpose of the Present Study

viii ix xi

1

2

ꜤꜢmw: Etymology, Usage and Synonyms

11

3

West Semites in Egyptian Art of the Old and Middle Kingdoms

43

4

West Semites and the Economic Life of Egypt

109

5

Conclusion and Prospects for Further Study

189

Notes Bibliography Chronological Tables Sources of Illustrations Index

203 261 285 293 307

Preface This book is a revised, updated and expanded version of my doctoral dissertation, Egyptian Perceptions of West Semites in Art and Literature During the Middle Kingdom: An Archaeological, Art Historical and Textual Survey (New York University) 1997.1 The study investigated Egyptian attitudes toward Asiatics, particularly West Semites, as reflected in art, textual sources, and in material culture. The study concluded that changing Egyptian perceptions of cultural difference were attested and reflected in all of the areas studied. The evidence brought to bear on the question of cultural perceptions ranged from everyday pottery, to gold jewelry richly inlaid with semi-­precious stones; from terse inscriptions to sophisticated literary texts; from simple mud figurines to exquisite stone sculptural reliefs, statuary and painting. The present volume incorporates new material of particular significance for determining the possible roles played by Asiatic women living in Egypt (Chapter Four). Also beyond the scope of the original dissertation is the inclusion in the present work of a number of new images, as well as additional textual evidence drawn from more recent finds from the Middle Kingdom capitals at Lisht and Dahshur, and sites such as Tell el-Dab’a in the Delta. The new material adds significantly to our study of foreign relations and inter­cultural connections. A new approach applied here is the investigation of possibly “concealed” messages in Egyptian visual imagery. While the interpretation of this kind of evidence is necessarily speculative, our discussion is intended primarily to stimulate further investigation into this area. The main focus of this study is on the Middle Kingdom, a period of transformation and change within Egypt’s own borders, and the ancient Near Eastern world as well. Although foreigners had been filtering into Egypt since Predynastic times, their cultural impact was particularly evident during the Middle Kingdom. Characteristic of this period is the exchange of ideas, goods and artistic motifs, as well as the emergence of a more global economy.

Acknowledgments First and foremost, I would like to thank Nick Reeves, who set this book in motion, and Alice Wright and Anna MacDiarmid at Bloomsbury for facilitating its production. I am also obliged to Charlotte Loveridge, Deborah Blake, and Dhara Patel who were involved in various stages of the publication. I would like to express my sincere gratitude to Mary Chipman for providing a readable digitized facsimile of my original typewritten text. I am indebted to the entire staff of the Egyptian Department at the Metropolitan Museum of Art for their support, particularly Dorothea Arnold and Diana Craig Patch. Without their professional sustenance, this book would not exist. Acknowledgment is also given to Dieter Arnold for allowing me to use his personal photographs, and for sharing his ideas with me. I am grateful to Marsha Hill, who informed me of sources of which I was unaware. I also thank Morena Stefanova, Adela Oppenheim, Catharine Roehrig, Isabel Stuenkel, Janice Kamrin, Gustavo Camps, and Heather Masciandaro, for their cooperation in various ways. I am grateful to Sara Chen for her drawings. My deep appreciation goes to Hana Navratilova who read parts of the manuscript, and for her stimulating comments. Discussions with Kei Yamamoto and Niv Allon were always inspiring. Helena Pereira’s assistance was always forthcoming, and I am extremely grateful to her. I would like to acknowledge the following scholars, colleagues and friends for their inspiration, help and encouragement in writing this book: James P. Allen, Joan Aruz, Kim Benzel, Manfred Bietak, Rita Freed, Ogden Goelet, Jr., Orly Goldwasser, Sarah B. Graff, Stephen P. Harvey, Sharon R. Keller, Baruch A. Levine, Murray H. Lichtenstein, Christine Lilyquist, David O’Connor. Any errors, oversights and conclusions are mine alone. I would like to acknowledge the following individuals and institutions for their cooperation in regard to photos and images: Minna Lonnqvist, Jebel Bishri

x

Acknowledgments

project; Tessa Rickards; Edward Bleiberg, The Brooklyn Museum; Felix Arnold German Archaeological Institute, Cairo; Eleni Tourna, National Archaeological Museum, Athens; Joan Aruz, The Metropolitan Museum of Art; Sarah Graff, The Metropoliltan Museum of Art; Rita Freed, The Museum of Fine Arts, Boston; Nanette Kelekian; Andreas Dorn; Licia Romano; Paolo Matthiae, Missione Archeologica Italiana in Siria – Tell Mardikh Excavation Project; Manfred Bietak, Professor Emeritus of Egyptology, University of Vienna; Carolyn Budow Ben-David, Bible Lands Museum Jerusalem; Irit Ziffer, Eretz Israel Museum, Tel Aviv; William Parkinson, The Field Museum, Chicago; Alice Stevenson, Petrie Museum of Egyptian Archaeology, UCL; Peter Lacovara, Michael C. Carlos Museum; Peter Pfalzner, Qatna project, University of Tübingen; Thomas Urban, Oriental Institute, University of Chicago; Joshua Donovan, Oriental Institute of Chicago; Margaret Maitland, National Museums Scotland; Luc Delvaux, Museés Royaux d’Art et d’Histoire; Sylvia Schoske, Staatliches Museum Ägyptischer Kunst; Roxane Bicker, Staatliches Museum Ägyptischer Kunst; Geoffrey Martin, Professor Emeritus, University College, London; The British Museum, London.

Abbreviations AEO

Ancient Egyptian Onomastica I, II

AFO

Archiv fur Orientforschung

AIA

Archaeological Institute of America

AJA

American Journal of Archaeology

AJSL

American Journal of Semitic Languages and Literature

ANET

Ancient Near Eastern Texts relating to the Old Testament

ANOC The Terrace of the Great Gods at Abydos: The Offering Chapels of Dynasties 12 and 13 AOAT

Alter Orient und Altes Testament

APAW Abhandlungen der königlich preusischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin, philosophisch historische Klasse ARES

Archivi Reali di Ebla Studi I

ARM

Archives Royales de Mari

ARMT Archives Royales de Mari Transcrites et Traduites BACE

The Bulletin of the Australian Centre for Egyptology

BAH

Bibliotheque Archéologique et Historique

BASOR Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research BDB

The New Brown–Driver–Briggs–Gesenius Hebrew and English Lexicon

BES

Bulletin of the Egyptological Seminar of New York

BIN

Babylonian Inscriptions in the Collection of James B. Nies

Abbreviations

xii

BiOr

Bibliotheca Orientalis

BMMA Bulletin, Metropolitan Museum of Art BZAW Beiheft zur Zeitschrift fur die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft CAD

The Assyrian Dictionary of the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago, 21 vols.

CAH

The Cambridge Ancient History

CDME A Concise Dictionary of Middle Egyptian E&L

Egypt and the Levant

HUCA Hebrew Union College Annual IEJ

Israel Exploration Journal

JAEI

Journal of Ancient Egyptian Interconnections

JAOS

Journal of the American Oriental Society

JARCE Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt JCS

Journal of Cuneiform Studies

JEA

Journal of Egyptian Archaeology

JEOL

Journal jaarbericht van het Vooraziatisch–Egyptische Genootschap (Gezelschap) “Ex Oriente Lux”

JESHO Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient JPOS

Journal of the Palestine Oriental Society

JPS

Jewish Publication Society

JSOT

Journal for the Study of the Old Testament, Supplement Series, 49

JSS

Journal of Semitic Studies

JSSEA

Journal of the Society for the Study of Egyptian Antiquities

KTU

Keilalphabetische Texte aus Ugarit

Abbreviations

MARI

xiii

Annales de recherches interdisciplinaires

MDAIK Mitteilungen des Deutchen Archäologischen Instituts Abteilung Kairo MMA

The Metropolitan Museum of Art

NARCE Newsletter of the American Research Center in Egypt OAW

Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften

OBO

Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis

Or

Orientalia

RA

Revue d’assyriologie et d’archeologie orientale

RANE

Religions of the Ancient Near East

RdE

Revue d’Egyptologie

RDSO

Rivista Degli Studi Orientali

RLA

Reallexikon der Assyriologie

SIMA

Studies in Mediterranean Archaeology

UF

Ugarit Forschungen

URK

Urkunden des ägyptischen Altertums, Urkunden des Alten Reiches

VT

Vetus Testamentum

Wb

Wörterbuch der ägyptischen Sprache

YOS

Yale Oriental Studies

ZAS

Zeitschrift fur ägyptische Sprache und Altertumskunde

1

Introduction: The Scope, Methodology and Purpose of the Present Study The ancient Egyptians had very definite views about their neighbors, some positive, some negative. These ideas were subject to constant change. This study intends to trace the development of Egyptian attitudes with respect to West Semites living in and out of Egypt as they appeared in art, literature and inscriptions, and as the attitudes were reflected in material culture. The study will attempt to correlate changes in Egyptian art, as well as perceptions and representations of West Semites diachronically in response to specific changes in socio-­economic and political conditions. Further, the relationship of Egyptians to West Semites will be viewed against the background of the increasing familiarity and personal contact. In order to determine the nature of Egyptian perceptions of and attitudes toward West Semites, this study will consider a number of different areas including: 1. Egyptian nomenclature for West Semites; 2. descriptive epithets applied to West Semites in Egyptian literature and inscriptions; 3. characteristic postures and gestures, costuming and physical characteristics attributed to West Semites in Egyptian art; 4. depictions in art and texts of specific professions typically associated with West Semites. For example, the famous “caravan scene” at Beni Hasan showing smiths, music, clothing manufacture, including the Asiatic weaving and dyeing industry. In the course of this study a number of subsidiary issues will necessarily have to be developed, such as:

2

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

a. the relationship between such ethnographic and geographical terms as Egyptian ꜤꜢmw, Styw, Rt-nw; b. such commonly used designations as Amorite, Canaanite and West Semite. The approach here will involve both the identification of these respective terms and the establishment of correspondences which may exist between them. Particularly critical in this regard is the determination of the relationship, if any, between the ethnographic terms ꜤꜢmw and Amorite, so that the overly vague and misleading English term “Asiatic” may be replaced by a more accurate designation in subsequent discussions of the subject. Until recently, scholars have been dependent upon rather subjective and unreliable evidence in seeking to determine the nature of Egyptian views of foreign neighbors especially West Semites. Thus investigators relied heavily on what they assume to be political ideology which conditioned Egyptian perceptions of themselves and others. This study does not rely only on Egyptian ideology, but will go into a well-­detailed account of who these people are and how they were integrated into Egyptian society.

Methodology The broad scope of this study necessitates an integration of a wide body of materials from Egypt, Mesopotamia, Syria/Canaan and peripheral areas. The correlation of the evidence include: a. Textual: Egyptian royal literary and hieroglyphic inscriptions, and documents in Akkadian/Sumerian cuneiform, and Northwest Semitic languages including Amorite, Ugaritic, and Hebrew. b. Art historical: visual sources from a variety of media, i.e. large-­scale works in three-­dimensional sculpture, relief and painting, and images on smaller objects including furniture inlays, figurines, cylinder seals, and jewelry. c. Archaeological data: settlement patterns and burial customs, and other material remains such as weaponry and textiles. The wealth of information obtained by combining diverse disciplines and applying them to a broad geographical area adds a new dimension to the

Introduction

3

panoramic picture. It has been noted, however, that “while most scholars have largely ignored a holistic approach, others have recognized its significance.”1 In addressing this problem, Baines remarks that “scholars need to exploit as much evidence as possible in relation to any problem” and points out that “often whole categories have been omitted, the most striking among these being art.”2

Previous studies One could say that one of the major impulses behind the field of Egyptology was Egypt’s connection with the biblical world. The study of interconnections is as old as the field itself. However, this brief discussion of previous studies will dispense with nineteenth-­century literature and give a survey of the developments which took place during the twentieth century. One could say therefore, that a very large percentage of books in the formative stages of Egyptology, at least in background, were dealing with Egypt’s interconnections. The major English publication in the field was the Proceedings of the Society for Biblical Archaeology (PSBA). All of the late nineteenth- and early-­twentiethcentury people working in the field wrote with biblical interconnections in hand. In recent years, however, the biblical aspect has retreated, and the ancient Near East as a discipline in itself has come to the forefront. By way of review, the University of Chicago did pioneering work in the study of ancient Egypt. The crowning publication of their endeavors was J. H. Breasted’s multi-­volumed text, Ancient Records of Egypt I–V (1906). Typical of the work of his time, Breasted’s study of Egypt was inspired in part by the desire to explore the culture and history of what were then considered to be biblical lands. In this way, Breasted made available information that was previously inaccessible to most scholars. W. M. Müller’s work, Egyptological Researches: Results of a Journey in 1904 (1906), focuses on the monuments recording the relations of ancient Egypt to foreign countries, especially Asia and Europe – monuments which are mostly contributions to biblical studies – a goal very much in vogue during the early part of the twentieth century. The photographic record made by the Eduard Meyer Fremdvolker Expedition in 1912–13 resulted in the publication of his Bericht über eine Expedition nach Ägypten zur Erforschung der Darstellungen der Fremdvolker, SPAW (1913).

4

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

Photographs were taken of 17 Theban tombs containing representations of foreign peoples. While his photographic survey is thorough, it is limited in both temporal scope and textual analysis.3 This work served as a major influence for many studies until it was supplanted by Norman de Garis Davies’s facsimiles of wall decoration of primarily New Kingdom tombs, (including some Middle Kingdom monuments as well) produced by the Graphic Section of the Metropolitan Museum of Art’s Egyptian Expedition between 1907 and 1937. Much of this material can be found in the Metropolitan Museum’s Robb de Peyster Tytus Memorial series (1917–1927) and Theban tomb series. W. F. Petrie’s pioneering work, Researches in Sinai, London (1906), was a major survey of the Sinai, and provides a wealth of information regarding the antiquities of all the sites examined by the expedition. Petrie’s publication was also influenced by a desire to find biblical connections. His work was superseded by studies in two editions, by A. H. Gardiner and T. Eric Peet (2nd edn revised and augmented by J. Černý), The Inscriptions of Sinai Part I (1952) and Part II (1955). This work is important for the study of the Sinai, but focuses on different areas, namely inscriptions with translations and commentary. It also contains plates. The first decade of the twentieth century saw much pioneering work in the field. These early works provided source materials for future scholarship. Similar works have been accomplished for the Aegean, but are not of concern here. J. Vercoutter’s publication, L’Égypte et le monde égéen prehellenique (1956), touches upon the discipline included in the present study, but it is overwhelmingly focused on the Mediterranean and the Aegean worlds. The discovery of the Minoan frescoes by M. Bietak at Tell el-Dab’a in the Egyptian Delta has shown that sometimes it is very hard to separate Egypt from the Aegean side of the fence. Wolfgang Helck’s comprehensive work, Die Beziehungen Ägyptens zu Vorderasien im 3 und 2. Jahrtausend v. Chr. (2nd edn, 1971) marks the first post-­war cumulative study of an attempt at a synthesis of Egyptian–Asiatic connections. Nevertheless, this work does not deal with art, and is heavily focused on Egypt. The material presented here looks at these aspects from the Mesopotamian view, as well. With Helck’s important article, “Ägyptische Statuen im Ausland: Ein Chronologisches Problem,” Ugaritic Forschungen 8 (1976), 101–15, the idea of an Egyptian empire in Palestine during the Middle

Introduction

5

Bronze Age faded into the background. Ever since this article appeared, the critical issue concerning the extent of Egypt’s role in Canaan during the Middle Kingdom took on a more modest point of view. In the United States, W. F. Albright’s work The Vocalization of the Egyptian Syllabic Orthography, American Oriental Series Vol. 5 (1934), remains a major but somewhat outdated reference. His study offers an inductive solution of the problem of the vocalization of the Egyptian writing of foreign names and words primarily of the New Kingdom. Most recently, Albright’s system of syllabic orthography was expanded upon by B. Sass in his Studia Alphabetica (1991), which also focuses on Middle Kingdom transcription. The question of how trustworthy the Theban tomb paintings are for our knowledge of the costume of the peoples to the northeast of Egypt was addressed by James B. Pritchard in “Syrians as Pictured in the Paintings of the Theban Tombs,” BASOR 122 (April 1951). He gives a tabulation of the distribution of the various types of dress during the New Kingdom, which is a valuable resource for further study into the costume of the contemporary Near East. The imagery and artistic motifs that are common to Egypt, the Aegean, and Western Asia were studied by W. S. Smith in his Interconnections in the Ancient Near East (1965). O. Tufnell and W. A. Ward’s, “Relations between Byblos, Egypt, and Mesopotamia at the end of the Third Millennium B.C.: a study of the Montet Jar,” Syria 43 (1966) discusses the deposit at the Obelisk Temple at Byblos. This find with its associated seals has provoked a great deal of discussion concerning the contact between Byblos, Egypt, and Mesopotamia, and their overlapping chronologies. To date, the chronology has not been firmly fixed. The social position of West Semitic Asiatics living in Egypt was discussed by W. C. Hayes in A Papyrus of the Late Middle Kingdom in the Brooklyn Museum (1972, reprint of the 1955 edn). This publication includes a list of Asiatic servants from an Egyptian household which also provides a valuable discussion of names, many of which were Semitic in origin. Few Semitic names from Egyptian records of the Twelfth and Thirteenth Dynasties were known aside from those listed in the Execration Texts; this new list provided new source material. These names were subsequently studied by both Albright in “Northwest-Semitic Names in a List of Egyptian Slaves from the Eighteenth

6

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

Century B.C,” JAOS 74,4. (1954), 222–33, and Posener, in “Les Asiatiques en Egypte sous les XIIe et XIIIe dynasties,” Syria 34 (1957) 145–63. The archaeological and historical evidence of excavations from Egyptian and Palestinian sites during the Middle Bronze Age are thoroughly analyzed by J. M. Weinstein in “The Chronology of Palestine in the Early Second Millennium BCE,” BASOR 288 (1992) 27–8. Here he also deals with the vexing problem of high, middle, and low chronologies. Excavations of major sites in the Egyptian Delta, particularly at Tell el-Dab’a resulted in several publications of the finds by M. Bietak. There he traced a continuous Asiatic occupation from the late Twelfth Dynasty through the end of the Second Intermediate Period. Middle Bronze Age materials yielded from this site makes it a major source of information for the comparative chronology of Egypt and the Levant. Bietak’s publications summarizing the results of these excavations are found in Avaris: the Capital of the Hyksos, Recent Excavations at Tell el-Dab’a, London (1996), and Pharaonen und Fremde Dynastien im Dunkel, Exhibition Catalogue, Rathaus Vienna 8 Sept.–23 Oct (1994). This publication has much of value in it. Its most important contribution is that it brings together an international team of experts who lent their own specialized expertise to the discussion of the objects from this period. The publication Ägypten und Levante, Egypt and the Levant: International Journal for Egyptian Archaeology and Related Disciplines, Verlag Der Osterreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Manfred Bietak, editor (2000 to present), was initially conceived as a means of relaying information about the groundbreaking excavations at the Hyksos capital of Tell el-Dab’a and Qantir. It has, however, developed into an international journal for articles on the archaeology history and chronology of Egypt, the ancient Near East and the Levant. So far, twenty volumes have been published and it has become a discussion platform for researchers and scholars around the world. Many of the studies of the interconnections have derived from the examination of the Egyptian Execration Texts, which seem to show the gradual moving away from a tribal structure toward city life in Canaan. Posener’s Princes et pays d’Asie et de Nubie (1940) introduced a change into the discussion of the chronology and interpretation of similar texts published by K. Sethe in Die Achtung feindlicher Fursten, Volker und Dinge auf Altägyptischen Tongefiissscherben des Mittleren Reiches, Berlin (1926). Helck, in his Die

Introduction

7

Beziehungen (cited above) posed a new interpretation of the Execration Texts. He picked up on the works of Posener and Sethe and took the study further by focusing on trade relations rather than on politics. In general, the publication of the Execration Texts opened up new vistas for the understanding of Egyptian international relations. Looking at the topic of the present study from the Near Eastern point of view, three detailed treatments analyzing Amorite personal names were published by G. Buccellati, I. J. Gelb, and H. B. Huffmon. Buccellati’s work, The Amorites of the Ur III Period (1966), is an invaluable reference which lists and analyzes Amorite names and their geographical distribution in Sumerian cities as well as a study of Amorite occupations in Mesopotamia. Gelb’s ComputerAided Analysis of Amorite, Assyriological Studies No. 21 (1980), is a quantitative documentation of source material of Amorite names. Huffmon’s work, Amorite Personal Names in the Mari Texts: A Structural and Lexical Study (1965), is an investigation of Amorite personal names assembled from a homogenous group of documents originating at Mari. The lengthy review article by I. J. Gelb, “The Early History of the West Semitic Peoples,” JCS 15, No.1 (1961)27–47, of Kupper’s important work Les nomades en Mesopotamie au temps des rois de Mari, deals with a detailed treatment of the appearance and successive history of a group of peoples who are nomads or are assumed to have been nomads at one time in their past history, i.e. West Semites who are conventionally called Amorites in the Mari publications. As Gelb points out, there is no reference in Kupper’s work to Egyptian sources concerning Amorites.4 The present study picks up on this oversight and shows that the Egyptian record does indeed yield insights into the lifestyle of the Amorites. The lifestyle discussed in this book is reflected in A. F. Rainey’s treatment of the Sinuhe narrative and the Egyptian Execration texts in his article, “The World of Sinuhe,” Israel Oriental Studies 2 (1972), 369–408. Rainey’s article is important for the insight it allows into the type of society present in the Levant as seen in both the historical novel and administrative lists. Thomas Schneider’s two-­volume study, Ausländer in Ägypten während des Mittleren Reiches und der Hyksoszeit (1998) is an essential resource for the study of the social structure and acculturation of foreigners in Egypt during the Middle Kingdom and Hyksos Period. His exhaustive catalogue of foreign

8

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

personal names and genealogies is a useful reference. While there is some visual imagery, the book is largely philological in scope. The Metropolitan Museum of Art’s Beyond Babylon: Art, Trade, and Diplomacy in the Second Millennium B.C., edited by Joan Aruz, Kim Benzel and Jean M. Evans (2008), is an important catalogue which accompanied the exhibition of the same title. It documents the art and cultural history of the period, discussed by more than eighty-­five scholars who, in essays and in catalogue entries on each of the objects in the exhibition, emphasize global exchange and connectivity. It is a valuable contribution which focuses on the cultural and diplomatic relations between Egypt, Mesopotamia, Syria, Anatolia, Cyprus, and the Aegean, and the artistic creativity which resulted in works of the highest artistry. David A. Aston and Manfred Bietak’s Tell el-Dab’a VIII: The Classification and Chronology of Tell el-Yahudiya Ware, ÖAW XII (2012) is an ambitious monograph intended to produce a chronologically workable typology of this widely distributed ceramic ware. The analysis is based on previous research and, a cataloguing of more than 650 pieces found in controlled stratigraphic excavations at Tell el-Dab’a. The study of this family of pottery which disseminated from the Levant, and spread to Cyprus, Egypt, and Nubia, allows for a reconstruction of trade and cultural relationships in the first half of the second millennium BCE. A word should be said about a few secondary, but important sources for the study of the interconnections between Egypt and Western Asia. These include: ●

J. B. Pritchard’s Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament (3rd edn, 1969) made available a large collection of important extrabiblical texts relevant for the understanding of the Hebrew Bible. These texts were translated by specialists within their respective fields, i.e. the fields of Assyriology, Sumerology, Egyptology, Hittitology, Northwest Semitic, and south Arabian languages. The companion volume, The Ancient Near East in Pictures Relating to the Old Testament (1954), provides a catalogue of photographs of significant antiquities which complement the texts. These two books are an ever popular resource not only for studying the biblical

Introduction

●

●

●

9

text in its Near Eastern context, but for understanding the people of the ancient Near East and their cultures. T. L. Thompson’s The Historicity of the Patriarchal Narratives (1974) is actually a review of the central arguments held in favor of the historicity of the patriarchs in the biblical book of Genesis. Nevertheless, his discussion of “Egypt and the Amorite Question” gathers much material and includes a thorough survey of the Middle Kingdom evidence, many aspects of which appear in this book. D. B. Redford’s stimulating book Egypt, Canaan, and Israel in Ancient Times (1992) gives an overview of the relations between Egypt and Western Asia spanning a period of over 3,000 years. This book essentially agrees with many points in this study, but for the purposes of this study I’ve found it to be a source of secondary importance. H. Klengel’s Syria 3000 to 300 B.C. (1992) presents a comprehensive survey of political history of Syria from the Early Bronze Age through to the period of Alexander. He discusses in detail the archival material relevant to his topic. His discussion of these sources underscores their importance in determining the history of the ancient Near East and provides a source for further study. While the groundwork laid by such studies enables further research into the area of Egyptian–Western Asiatic cultural connections, to date there has been no work dealing with updated diachronic observations with a view toward determining elements of both change and constancy in the Egyptian perception of, and attitude towards West Semites.

This study has relied heavily on the resources of the Department of Egyptian Art at the Metropolitan Museum of Art, especially the archives and tomb cards from excavations at Lisht. The data retrieved from these sources has proved to be an invaluable source for this topic since Lisht plays such an important role in our developing knowledge of Asiatics in the Twelfth Dynasty into the Second Intermediate Period. Moreover, the comprehensive collection of objects spanning a 3,000-year time period is a crucial resource for studying and identifying any distinguishing marks or features of differentiation of iconographic details in the representation of foreigners in works produced over several hundred years.

2

ꜤꜢmw: Etymology, Usage and Synonyms

In order to understand the Sitz-­im-Leben of the peoples termed ꜤꜢmw in Egyptian texts of the first half of the second millennium BCE, the term has to be studied in context. In this chapter the etymology of the term will be explored. It will be argued that the term ꜤꜢmw is a West Semitic loanword in Egyptian, deriving from an Amorite dialect,1 rather than a native Egyptian word. The interpretation of this term is a crucial factor in determining the distinctions made by the Egyptians when referring to Asiatics. The tendency in the literature to translate the term ꜤꜢmw loosely, by the all too general and misleading term “Asiatic,” has resulted in a distorted and narrow view of the actual historical situation.2 Clarification of the term ꜤꜢmw will bring into sharper focus the identification of West Semitic Asiatics in Egyptian texts, as distinct from the identity of other groups from Mesopotamia, Syria and Canaan. Before proceeding, a word should be said about the usage of the terminology adopted here, because these terms are often used in more than one way in different scholarly contexts. For the purposes of this study, at times overlapping terms will be used to denote the populations of Syria/Canaan and Mesopotamia. West Semite is used here as a very broad linguistic term which, depending on the period, can encompass Amorites and Canaanites, as well as Israelites, Phoenicians, Moabites, etc. Amorites denote Middle Bronze IIA West Semites living in what would later be called Canaan. The term reflects their ethnic, linguistic, and cultural identity with West Semites of the Lebanese coast, North Syria, and Northwest Mesopotamia. The southward movement of these West Semites brings with it into Canaan elements of the material culture of Anatolia, Northwest Mesopotamia, Central Syria, and Byblos. The progressive southward

12

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

movements of identifiably northern pottery styles is a direct reflection of the demographic expansion of Amorites during this period. There is at this time no practical distinction to be made between indigenous Canaanites and migrating Amorites, since “Canaanite” culture is, in fact, only originating and beginning to take on its distinctive character with the gradual and successive Amorite migrations. That is, Amorite culture becomes Canaanite culture since there does not seem to have been a distinct indigenous West Semitic culture in Canaan before its infusion by Amorites.3 Indeed, the precursors of the Amorites in Canaan do not seem to have been Semitic, let alone West Semitic. Amorite movements and the accompanying transmission of culture seem to have been going in more than one direction at this time. That is, Western culture was conveyed Northward and Eastward to Mesopotamia via Amorite migration. Thus, the scene which appears on a silver goblet found at ‘Ain Samiya4 has been plausibly identified by Yadin and others5 as depicting the cosmological mythic motif of the storm god vanquishing the serpentine sea monster. Further complicating this cultural interplay is the fact that the Western ‘Ain Samiya goblet with its typically Western mythological content is executed in an artistic style replete with Mesopotamian conventions. In addition, on independent literary grounds, T. H. Jacobsen determined that this central motif of the “Mesopotamian” Enuma Elish was of western “Amorite” origin and provenience.6 Thus, the language spoken in Canaan in MBIIa cannot be distinguished in any meaningful way from the “Amorite” dialect attested at Mari. This observation is especially self-­evident when comparing the identity of Amorite personal names at Mari with the West Semitic names attested, for example, in Egyptian documents from the Middle Kingdom.7 Thus, for example, the West Semitic ruler of Byblos is named Yep-shemu-­ib, which may be directly compared to proper names from Mari having as their initial element Yaphu/ ˘ Yapah “shining, manifest” (ex: Ugaritic and Heb. YPꜤ).8 ˘ The term “Canaanite” is also linguistic, referring to the division of Northwest Semitic into “Canaanite” as well as “Aramaic” sub-­dialects. Just as “Canaanite” is, in effect, a meaningless cultural designation in the early Middle Bronze Period, when Amorite culture permeates the region, so too “Canaanite” as a linguistic term does not become relevant until a distinctive “Canaanite” dialect has crystallized and separated out of Amorite–West Semitic speech. This

ꜤꜢmw: Etymology, Usage and Synonyms

13

development, as observed above, hardly began during MBIIA, at which time West Semitic is Amorite (as known from Mari), and Amorite is West Semitic. (In addition to the PN from Byblos, Yep-šhemu-­ib, note also the Amorite formation of proper names in the older Berlin Execration Texts, e.g. the ruler of Jerusalem Yaqar – ‘Ammu.9) “Canaanite” is used here primarily as a geographical term corresponding to what the Egyptians called Retenu (Canaan) during the Middle Bronze Age, i.e. the southern areas of Syria and Palestine.10 The earliest reference that we have to a place called Canaan is from the Late Bronze Age.11 It is maintained here that all indigenous Canaanites are West Semites, but other Semitic speakers such as Amorites and, in a later period, non-Semitic speakers such as Hurrians also came to occupy the geographical area termed Canaan. “Asiatic” and “Western Asiatic” are terms that are standard in the field and include the lands which now comprise Turkey, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Israel the Arabian gulf, and the Caucasus. Strictly speaking the terms are somewhat vague, and they are sometimes lumped together. Though chiefly used to describe the geographical areas from a modern perspective, these terms are not without value and are used here in relation to various peoples for matters of convenience of description. They are also used in this study to refer to Asiatics who are unidentifiable, including Asiatics who are not West Semites. This chapter also discusses the nuances of the Egyptian term h-sy,“miserable,” “wretched” or “defeated”; the use of the term h-sy is also considered in detail as a qualifying adjective conventionally associated with the ethnographic term ꜤꜢmw. The attestation and absence of this qualifying term is demonstrated as significant for gauging Egyptian perceptions of West Semites. This chapter also defines the meaning of other terms which the Egyptians used to designate Asiatics. Some of them may be related to ꜤꜢmw, or may overlap with it. While terms of less primary importance will be cited, the relationship between the designation ꜤꜢmw, Styw, and Rt-nw, terms most relevant to our discussion, will be explored. The hypothesis expressed here is that these terms overlap, and refer to a uniform division of “Asiatic” peoples in the early second millennium BCE. The underlying assumption of the last section of this chapter is that the peoples designated as “MAR.TU/Amurru” in the Sumerian and Akkadian

14

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

texts are the direct counterpart to those Asiatics designated as ꜤꜢmw “Asiatics” in the Egyptian record. This hypothesis is based upon conclusions which have emerged from data contained in the cuneiform literature, as well as from contemporary Egyptian literary sources from Egypt. A survey of the historical, ethnic, and geographical identity of West Semites based upon the information derived from the cuneiform literary documents from Mesopotamia is also explicated with an eye toward determining whether the Egyptian texts comport with the data under discussion.

The term ꜤꜢmw The etymologies of the vocable ꜤꜢmw (= amu/h ammu), run the gamut ˘ from ingenious to fantastic, no one of them inspiring more confidence than another. The two major explanations are that the word has either a native Egyptian origin or else that it is a West Semitic loan word. Müller,12 later followed by Thompson,13 explained ꜤꜢmw “Asiatic” in Egyptian texts as a term deriving from Egyptian ꜤꜢmw, “boomerang” or “throwing stick.” He came to this conclusion based on the use of the throwstick determinative14 in the Egyptian writing of ꜤꜢmw (and also on the basis of homophony). He postulated that the term ꜤꜢmw “Asiatic” is to be equated with “boomerang throwers” and that in later texts the boomerang sign is extended to designate barbarians of various sorts: for example, boomerang + m = ꜤꜢmw, boomerang + s = nh.s “negro,” and boomerang + nw = T- h.nw “Libyans.” It is true that the Egyptians identified other foreigners according to their weapons, for example Pd-ty 9, the “Nine Bows,” Egypt’s traditional enemies, or “Bowmen.”15 Redford, however, correctly points out that “the presence of the throwstick determinative with ꜤꜢmw can be more easily explained as the observation of a cultural characteristic, not through linguistic relationship, (or homophony)”.16 The term ‘m(m) is no less problematic in the Semitic languages.17 Interpretations of ‘m range from the name of a deity18 to a kinship term. In classical Arabic, nominal forms denote “paternal uncle,” and can also denote “cousin,” etc.,19 as well as “people,”“company,”“community.”20 In Biblical Hebrew, the vocables h.m “father in law” and ‘m “people,” “kin,” would likewise seem to

ꜤꜢmw: Etymology, Usage and Synonyms

15

be different realizations of the same proto-Semitic lexeme denoting, in the most general sense, kinship connections. The same dichotomy is to be observed between Akkadian emu “father-­in-­ law” (“son-­in-­law”)21 (=Biblical Hebrew h·m) and what appears to be Amorite ‘ammu).22 The latter appears in the prologue to the Code of Hammurabi23 as the object of the verb šūšuru, “to lead into success or prosperity.”24 In this context, the vocable ‘ammu, and its variant hammu25 are little different from ˘ the more typically employed nišu “people.”26 Further complicating the posited relationship between Akkadian emu “father-­in-­law”, and Amorite ‘ammu/ “people,” “folk,” is the Akkadian term hammu, presumably denoting “master” or ˘ “head of a family.”27 Thus, Gilgamesh renders homage to his father, Lugalbanda (presumably deceased, since he is deified), by presentation of oil and the horn from the slain Bull of Heaven as a trophy. Lugalbanda is first referred to by name and then by the term hammutišu: ˘ Six vats of oil, the contents of the two he gave as ointment to his (personal) god Lugalbanda He brought the horns in and hung them in the bedroom of the family head (Lugalbanda)28 ušēribma italal ina urši hammūtišu (“the bedroom where he lives as master”)29 ˘ In this context, the term hammu refers either to the living head of the family, ˘ or the spirit of the deceased head of the family. In the latter sense of ancestral spirit, one may productively compare Ugaritic ‘m, which appears together with ilib, “ancestral”: ns.b skn ilibh bqdš ztr ‘mh30 “Who sets up the stelae of his ancestral spirits,31 in the holy place the protectors of his clan.”32

To be noted is the fact that the more socio-­politically oriented term for “people” in Ugaritic is lim, not ‘m. In Ugaritic, lim means “people,” “nation,” not ‘m, which is restricted to kinfolk.33 In any event, hammu, like emu (father-­in-­law) and ˘ ‘ammu, “folk,” belongs to a constellation of etymologically related kinship terms.34 Hence, hammu/‘ammu is frequently employed as an element of West ˘ Semitic personal names. For example, names such as Hammurabi and ˘

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

16

Ammiditana, kings of the First Dynasty of Babylon, etc., are Amorite. Since ‘m has a wide range of proposed meanings and nuances, variant translations of names containing the ‘m element have been proposed. For instance, Hammurabi/Hammurapi could be translated as “the people are great,” “the god ˘ ˘ hammu heals,” “the Rapiu are (my) kinsmen,” etc.35 Lipinski translates the ˘ Amorite name Ammiditana composed of the elements ammi “headman (of)” and the place name Ditanu.36 The large corpus of Old Babylonian personal names that appear at Mari and which contain the ‘ammi element are Amorite. The East Semitic Akkadian spelling with h for hammu instead of ‘a, as in ‘Ammu, indicates a borrowing of the ˘ ˘ word from a West Semitic dialect. For example the name ‘Ammurapi, (a King of Ugarit of the Late Bronze Age), employs the West Semitic “A” for the ‘ammu element of the name, while the Akkadian dialect employs an “h” for Hammurapi. ˘ ˘ Related to the Amorite names are the following Ugaritic, and Hebrew parallels: Ugaritic ‘mys

2089:5

‘mlbi/ ‘m td-l ‘mnr ‘mt-tmr

2097:5,6 2089:3–4 1009:237

Hebrew am(m)i ndb am(m)i šdy am(m)i el am(m)ihwd am(m)i zbd38

The importance of phonetic shifts which cause dialectal differences in the Semitic languages cannot be underestimated when it comes to determining which groups of Western Asiatics the Egyptians refer to in their texts. For instance, the chief of Upper Retenu, ‘Ammunenshi, in the Egyptian story of Sinuhe, has an Amorite-­type name.39 Thus, we know that the land to where Sinuhe traveled was a West Semitic cultural area. As summarized by Huffmon, the word hmm/‘m in West Semitic dialects ˘ suggests the sense “kindred people (Heb., Aram., Ugar.).”40 Albright also

ꜤꜢmw: Etymology, Usage and Synonyms

17

translates the word ammu as “kindred.”41 Now approaching the evidence from the Egyptian point of view, the term ꜤꜢmw in the Egyptian texts most likely derives from Semitic hammu/‘ammu, a term denoting “kinship.”42 Posener’s ˘ objection to the reading ꜤꜢmw derives from the use of the Ꜣ “a” in the Egyptian term ꜤꜢmw43 However, it is proposed here that the Ꜣ “a” can be explained as a matre lectiones, i.e. a helping vowel utilized as a phonetic aid to the pronuncia­ tion of the word.44 This term was probably used by West Semitic peoples in Egypt themselves to address one another or, through personal names, to stress their lineage, blood ties, and inner homogeneity of the group that is perceived as biologically and/or socially related. They were in an oral stage, rather than a written one, and this term, like their culture, was transported with them. The Egyptians may have adapted the native terminology of the folk to which they were referring (hammu=h.m = ꜤꜢmw). The term clearly correlates with West Semitic ˘ usage in Syria/Canaan during the Middle Bronze Age and in Middle Kingdom in Egypt in its pure form. The priority of chronological factors is more pertinent to the Egyptian term during the Middle Kingdom when it had not yet become contaminated by anachronisms of later usage.

Usage of term in context in Egyptian texts with h-sy the wretched Asiatic The epithet h-sy first appears in conjunction with the term ꜤꜢmw in the Instructions of Merikare.45 The term has generally been translated in the literature as “wretched” or “miserable”: “Behold the miserable Asiatic, difficult is the place where he is.”46 The term has a variety of nuances ranging from “weak,” “feeble,” “vile,” “wretched,” and “cowardice,” to “ritual impurity.”47 But as Lorton points out, there is ambiguity in the term h-sy; in the context of Merikare, it could mean “suffering from misery or wretchedness,”48 describing the hardships of the lifestyle of the Asiatics. In this sense, the term would be used as a neutral description rather than a hostile castigation, the “civilized” Egyptians perceiving this lifestyle as barbaric, and thus looked upon with disdain. The Egyptian point of view toward ꜤꜢmw derives from the perception of the hopeless situation of these people. The Egyptians were being affronted by something

18

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

distasteful and the Asiatics are being judged by their condition. They wander around, and live in abject poverty. They are “professional losers.” The Egyptians were settled farmers and there are always these cultural gaps between sedentary people and nomads.49 Sinuhe does not use the term h-sy in connection with ꜤꜢmw, nor is it used50 in connection with Retenu, a place where ꜤꜢmw live. The descriptive term h-sy is first used with Rt-nw (Retenu) in the historical stela of Khu Sobek,51 in connection with an Egyptian military victory of a foreign country Skmm, and of the Rt-nw h-st from the reign of Senwosret III. Here Lorton proposes the term h-st to mean defeated.52 It appears from the above examples that the term h-sy is used with ꜤꜢmw during the Middle Kingdom in the sense of a potentially hostile people. They are an underclass of “have nots” who do not own land. They are shiftless, suffering from economic deprivation, and thus constitute a source of anxiety to the rest of the population. While the term becomes conventional, it is by no means an indication that Egyptians in this period are incapable of envisioning ꜤꜢmw as anything other than “wretched.” Thus, in the Sinuhe narrative, we find positive descriptions of ꜤꜢmw, stressing their material wealth, well-­being, and at times, their noble character.

Degree of overlap in the Egyptian terminology for Asiatic During the Old and Middle Kingdoms there is attested a wide variety of descriptive terms referring to the population of the Eastern Desert, which specifically includes the hill country of Canaan. The geographic distribution of this population corresponds to that of the people we call Amorites. Significant for our study is the fact that a good number of these ethnographic designations overlap, and may be used interchangeably with the term ꜤꜢmw. This further suggests that a more precise translation of ꜤꜢmw would be “Amorite,” rather than the overly generalized term “Asiatic” currently in favor. We will return to this broader question of historical identification below, but for the present it will suffice to catalog the Egyptian designations for ꜤꜢmw.53 The wide variety of terms which seem to designate Asiatics, and which overlap with the term ꜤꜢmw, will be cited here, but only those most relevant to our discussion will be examined. Special attention will be given to the terms

ꜤꜢmw: Etymology, Usage and Synonyms

19

Rt-nw and Styw. Note that, while ꜤꜢmw is ethnographic, Rt-nw is a primarily geographic term. hꜢstyw  “foreigners,” “desert dwellers,” “those who belong to the hill country”  (“hillbillies”).54 In the Middle Kingdom (or First Intermediate Period) we can see in Egyptian texts a marked tendency toward associating sharp differences between native Egyptians and this population. The tribes (h-Ꜣstyw) of the desert have become Egyptians everywhere.55 h.ryw šꜤy  “sand-­dwellers”56 literally, (those who are upon the sand). His majesty made war on (punished) the Asiatic Sand-­dwellers ꜤꜢm-h.ryw šꜤ.57 In this Old Kingdom text, containing the earliest mention of the term, ꜤꜢmw is already associated with this warlike population centered, it is believed, in southern Palestine, which is presumably in Amorite country. The impression here is that the ꜤꜢm(w), the “Amorite sand-­dwellers,” are part of the same groups that came down from hꜢst ꜤꜢm, the hill country of ˘ Palestine into Egypt. Thus, as Goedicke states, although ꜤꜢm (n) h.ry-šꜤ is ambiguous in its geographical implication “the term ꜤꜢm of the (n) h.ry-šꜤ appears to have a different meaning in the Old Kingdom. Urk. I 134, 13–15 makes it quite certain that ꜤꜢm and hꜢst ꜤꜢm were located at the ˘ Red Sea . . .”58 Thus, they were geographically restricted terms. Contra Goedicke, it is here proposed that the term ꜤꜢm is an ethnic term, “Amorite,” and that hꜢst ꜤꜢm (land of the Amorites) refers to the hill ˘ country of Canaan, and not the Red Sea. Furthermore, Ben-Tor rightly argues that Weni’s inscription mentions the destruction of walled enclosures and the cutting down of fig trees and vines, features which are not known to appear on Egypt’s eastern borders and, therefore, the location cannot possibly be at the Red Sea.59 The Egyptian term hꜢst can mean “hill country,” “foreign land,” or ˘ “desert.”60 Line 33 of Neferty states that the ꜤꜢmw will descend into Egypt, hꜢ r kmt.61 Line 35 says, desert flocks will drink at the river of Egypt,62 The term used for “desert” is hꜢst, showing that the usage of this term is better ˘ phrased as “steppe.” In other words, “grazing flocks (from Canaan) will drink at Egypt’s river.”63 mnt-w  “bedouin” – when used with Stt – “Bedouin of Asia,”64 “Smiting the Mentju and all foreign lands.”65

20

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

nmἰw šꜤ  “sandfarers”, “bedouin”, literally (those who) traverse the sand,66 Thus was my squalor returned to the foreign land, my dress to the sandfarers.67 ꜤꜢmw hosts of Sinuhe accompany him. fnhw  Name of a Syrian people.68 ˘ Rt-nw  “Part of Syria.”69 The first mention of the term in the Egyptian sources occurs in The Story of Sinuhe. It is accompanied by the epithet h.rt, usually translated in the literature as “Upper.” “Then Ammunenshi, the ruler of Upper Retenu, took me to him, saying to me: ‘You will be happy with me; you will hear the language of Egypt.’ ”70 After traveling from land to land, Sinuhe spends a year and a half at Kedem and eventually finds a home with the prince of Upper Retenu. Gardiner notes that h.rt, when attached to Rt-nw, signifies “upland,” “highland,” and locates Kedem at “no very great distance from the Lebanon.”71 Sinuhe first comes to Kpny = Gebal> Byblos) and then turns back to Kedem. Since Hebrew q.dm, and Akkadian qadmu connote “East,” Kedem is probably northeast of Byblos. It is within the cultural orbit of northern Syria (or northwest Mesopotamia72). However, another mention of Retenu occurs in the later stela of Khusobek (time of Senwosret III), which couples it with Skmm, probably Shechem in central Canaan.73 As Gardiner rightly states, “We seem to see that Retjnu was used generically, as it were, for both Palestine and Syria, or for particular districts therein; at the level of the Lebanon, it was called Upper Retjnu/down in the south it received no qualifying adjective.”74 In the Story of Sinuhe, Upper Retenu is a place where ꜤꜢmw live, though the terms may be used interchangeably, other groups also inhabited Rt-nw. Thus, the term must be studied semantically in order to determine its meaning and correlation with the term ꜤꜢmw. Styw  “Asiatic,”75 this term is used to denote Asiatics; however, its usage in the Middle Kingdom overlaps to a great degree with the the term ꜤꜢmw.76 When Sinuhe returns home to Egypt, from the desert, after travelling from Upper Retenu, the king exclaims: “Here is Sinuhe, come as an Asiatic ꜤꜢm, a product of nomads (styw)!”77 The term styw may best be construed as a socio-­economic term used for the (semi-) nomadic, unstable elements within society. It is thus a further qualification of the broader ethnic designation, ꜤꜢmw. The

ꜤꜢmw: Etymology, Usage and Synonyms

21

difference between the two is attitudinal. The pejorative associations of the nomadic lifestyle go beyond the more neutral description of a foreign population. One can compare it to the term gypsy, often used pejoratively to describe an unstable lifestyle. Thus, gypsy, when used alone, can refer to any individual or group who leads an unstable, non-­sedentary lifestyle, but when used together with a particular people, such as “Hungarian gypsy,” “Indian gypsy,” or the like, the term gypsy becomes part of the ethnic identification of the group. So, when styw is used alone it can refer to nomads in general. However, when it is used with ꜤꜢmw, we are talking about the unsettled members of the ꜤꜢmw population. An analogous model for the above concept of gypsy can be seen in the Akkadian term Hab/piru,78 also a socio-­economic term for the unstable elements of society. It is used as a pejorative for Amurru, as an ethnic and geographic designation, while Hab/piru may also refer to a lifestyle.79 Thus, the Egyptian term styw may represent the non-­sedentary portion of the ꜤꜢmw people, cf. the Akkadian term, Nawûm of Mari, and other Old Babylonian expressions like nawûm ša karkamiš, nawû ša Larsa, Sippar u nawêšu, inferring nomadic or semi-­nomadic encampments, which leaned upon urban centers and enjoyed their protection.80 In addition to this list of ethnographic terms for ꜤꜢmw, other lexical and onomastic associations link ꜤꜢmw and the Amorites of Rt-nw. These will be discussed in Chapter Four. Chronological factors will also be considered in determining the identity of people referred to by terminology, since terms change in the second half of the second millennium BCE. For example, in the Nineteenth Dynasty, the term Rt-nw was replaced by hꜢrw, but survived as an ˘ anachronism.81

Who were the ꜤꜢmw? In the following section, we will examine a variety of ancient documents from Mesopotamia and Syria which present us with highly specific descriptions of Amorites, as well as historical, administrative, or economic texts which shed light more generally on the social background of these people. The following examples are presented with the following agenda in mind:

22

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

1. to define some of the problems and limitations in reconstructing the history and social background of the West Semitic peoples in the Near East; 2. to suggest a methodology suitable for the interpretation of the available texts, determining their validity as historical evidence; 3. to correlate textual evidence from Mesopotamia and Syria with Egyptian sources; 4. to correlate the documentary sources with archaeological evidence. As a way of facilitating and enhancing the study of Egyptian attitudes toward West Semitic peoples, it is necessary to present comparative material on the Amorites as it appears in contemporary Mesopotamian and Syro-Canaanite sources. The social milieu of the Amorites may be traced back to their ancestral homeland, and examined through the eyes of the Mesopotamian and indigenous Canaanite populations into whose lands they migrated and moved about. In this way we may evaluate the Egyptian characterizations of these outsiders in broader perspective vis-à-­vis the documented reactions of others to the same population group at approximately the same point in time. Our documentary evidence consists of: a. literary materials representing various genres such as epic, mythological-­ religious texts, lamentations; b. historical, administrative, and economic texts from Mesopotamia and Canaan. Indeed, were we to take only the literary texts into consideration, we would be left with a distorted view of the situation. The latter texts tell us only what their authors want us to know. They represent a deliberate attempt on the part of their authors to make the data conform to existing beliefs and ideologies.

The historical, geographical and ethnic background of the Amorites The difficulty in attempting to reconstruct the early historical, geographical, and cultural background of the Amorite people lies in the fact that the Amorites themselves left behind no record of their origins. No written texts exist in an

ꜤꜢmw: Etymology, Usage and Synonyms

23

Amorite language, with the exception of lists of Amorite personal names, and the archaeological record thus far has yielded no material remains of a people referred to specifically as Amorites. Art historical evidence has produced nothing that is designated as Amorite. In fact, the only direct evidence regarding their enigmatic origins comes from peoples to whom the Amorites were considered foreigners. This is amazing when we realize that in the early part of the second millennium BCE the Amorite dynasties were to change the face of Mesopotamia forever.

Geography and origins: the background of the Amorites Early studies on Amorite origins reveal that, in all probability, the original Amorite homeland was located in northeastern Syria, perhaps near the modern Jebel Bishri, a low mountain range situated west of the Euphrates in the direction of Palmyra82 (see Fig. 2.183).

Figure 2.1  Map showing the location of Jebel Bishri.

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

24

Thus, Shar-Kali-Sharri (2223–2198 BCE), the fifth king of the Sargonic line of the “Empire” of Agade, states that he defeated the MAR.TU/Amurru84 at Mt. Basar: [i]n 1 MU Šar-­kā-­li-LUGALri’ MAR.TUam in B-sa-­arKUR’ [iš11-­a-­ru]85

Additional identification of Basar as the mountain of the Amorites comes from a group of incantations of a later date equating the two: KUR Ba-šár KUR A-mur-­r-­i. mount Basar, mountain of Amorites . . .86

Gudea, ensi of the southern Sumerian city-­state of Lagash (ca. 2144–2124 BCE) writes that he caused large stones to be brought down to Lagash from Ba sal-­la. He also states that his alabaster was brought from Ti-­da-­num. Both of these terms are Sumerian names for the mountain of the Amorites (ḫ ur-­sag MAR.TU): ba-­sal-­la ḫ ur-­sag-­mar-­du-­ta ti-­da-­num [hur]-sag-­mar-­du-­ta87

Basala, the first of these two mountains, has in fact been identified with the previously mentioned Mount Basar.88 From an inscription of the fourth year of Šu-Sin, the fourth ruler of the Third Dynasty of Ur, it is apparent that the MAR.TU were troublesome intruders, since one of Šu-Sin’s year names was Muriq-Didnum, “one which keeps the Didnum distant.” This refers to the construction of a fortress built as a protection against the MAR.TU. u bad-­mar-­du mū-­ri-­iq ti-­id-­ni-­im mu-­du (=NI) (a) -a u ne-­mar-­du ma-­da-­ni-­e 89

ꜤꜢmw: Etymology, Usage and Synonyms

25

Didnum is thought to have been situated in the area between the Euphrates and Syria.90 Buccellati proposes that the peoples of this area were perhaps Amorite. He discusses the Dida¯num as the name of a western tribe, or group of tribes, whose territory was within the area of the Jebel Bishri (Fig. 2.1) or near the bend of the H abur river, northeast of Jebel Bishri. Falkenstein notes that ˘ the name Ti-­dā-­num which occurs in a Sumerian text, means “people of Tida¯num . . .”91 Therefore, Tida¯num and MAR.TU can refer to the populace of these areas, an instance where a toponym becomes an ethnonym. Di-­ta¯-­nu is an eponym of a West Semitic tribal group. It appears in the genealogy of the Hammurapi dynasty as the sixth name.92 It also appears in the Assyrian King lists as “the seventeen kings who lived in tents,” the ancestors of Šamši Adad. Numerous Amorite personal names have the element “ditan” as a component, for example, Ammi-Dita¯na, a royal name of the First Dynasty of Babylon. Thus, as Astour notes,“Amorites were highly conscious of their ancestry and kept the memory of their tribal origins long after their sedentarization.”93 In the Ugaritic text KTU 1-161, in order to assure the legitimacy of the royal succession of Ammurapi III, the last king of Ugarit, the ancestors of the new king were summoned. They include the Rephaim of the Netherworld and their council of Didanites: qritm rpi ars. You summon the Rephaim of the Netherworld You command the council of the Didanites94 qbitm qbs.. ddn So the Ugaritians trace their ancestry back to the Ditanum people.

While the home of the Amorites may well have been northeastern Syria, the earliest textual reference to them happens to come from southern Mesopotamia. In the archaic tablets of Fara (ancient Shuruppak – ca. 2600 BCE), we hear of an individual named e-­ag-­gid, whose name is qualified by the ethnocon MAR.TU, i.e. an Amorite.95 Amorites occur more frequently in records of the Dynasty of Agade, where their names are qualified by both Sumerian MAR.TU and Akkadian Amurru.96 Thus the Amorites began to make their appearance in the south in small numbers over 600 years before the rise of the great Amorite dynasties of the Old Babylonian period. Evidence from administrative documents suggests that some Amorites had successfully assimilated into the indigenous population of Sumer, while others were still reckoned as foreigners. Buccellati has shown in his study of the

26

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

geographical distribution of the Amorites of this period that their greatest concentration is to be found in the southern Sumerian city states of Drehem, Isin and Lagash. The documents from Lagash demonstrate that almost all of the proper names identified as MAR.TU are either Sumerian or Akkadian.97 This shows that these people, possibly of north Syrian origin, by this time seem to be fully assimilated into the population at Lagash and are not looked upon as outsiders. Documents from Umma show a similar situation, whereas in Drehem, Ur, Isin, and Larsa, Amorites retain typically Amorite names, indicating a stronger, more distinctive ethnic identity.98 This gradual infiltration of Amorites into Sumer evidently paved the way for the MAR.TU to come down in force upon the northwestern quarter of Babylonia during the reign of Šu-Sin. Finally, under Šu-Sin’s successor, Ibbi-Sin, the last king of the Third Dynasty of Ur, the city collapsed. Internal economic and political weakness left Ur powerless, allowing for migrations of desert Amorites to enter into Babylonia and take over each city. Not long afterward, the documents show that persons bearing West Semitic names begin to appear as kings and rulers of the dynasties of Larsa, Babylon, and Eshnunna.99 Thus we see Amorites playing two quite distinct roles in Sumerian and Akkadian texts: a. largely assimilated and acculturated members of the local population in prosperous times; b. intrusive, troublesome nomads who enter en masse during a period of political weakness.

The early history of the Amorites: their geographical, cultural, and ethnic background The people termed MAR.TU/Amurru in the Sumerian and Akkadian texts were distinct because of their West Semitic dialect which stands out in sharp contrast with the East Semitic Akkadian. Our knowledge, however, of the Amorite language is almost completely based on the analysis of personal names, plus a scattering of geographical names, and names of divinities.100 Gelb and Huffmon in two major studies have analyzed the personal names relying on the grammar of other Semitic languages and the comparison with the structure of Semitic personal names in general.101 Diagnostic traits in separating Akkadian and Amorite names are: consistent phonological,

ꜤꜢmw: Etymology, Usage and Synonyms

27

morphological, and semantic contrasts, e.g. Semitic Ꜥ is represented in Akkadian as h – thus Akkadian bēl, “lord,” is cognate to West Semitic Ba‘l. ˘ In cuneiform writing, the West Semitic word appears as ba-(ah-) lu. ˘ Another characteristic of these names is the divinities that appear in theophoric names. The divine name of dH.A-NA-AT (West Semitic ‘Anat), or Lim, the patron deity of the Yagid-Lim dynasty of Mari, are tentatively classified as Amorite.102 However, as Huffmon points out, a major weakness of this type of argument is that divine names are misleading in that such names represent religious acculturation rather than any linguistic phenomenon.

Cultural background The grassy steppes of the middle Euphrates Valley were a feeding ground for flocks belonging to semi-­nomadic or nomadic pastoralists. During seasonal migrations these groups, in search of more fertile ground for grazing, exploited the outskirts of sedentary zones. The Amorites thus migrated to Mesopotamia and Canaan in their quest for alternate pasture lands where they lived on the fringes of the sedentary society. Personal names and administrative documents reveal that MAR.TU/Amurru were part of this group. Rowton has shown that nomadism during the Bronze Age was one of pastoral transhumance on the part of groups belonging to a “dimorphic” society which was both agrarian and pastoral. The Amorites belonged to this dimorphic society, with the various groups living in symbiosis with one another, in a blend of both modes of existence under one roof. Together they formed one ethnic unit. They also followed certain trades, working as smiths and metallurgists, and they were engaged in leather production.103 Therefore, their social organization included much more than the nomadic, pastoral way of life. The site of Ebla, modern Tell Mardikh, a large tell situated about 55 kilo­ meters south-­southwest of Aleppo in northern Syria,104 has yielded texts of the great Eblaite civilization, in which MAR.TU appears as the seat of an autonomous kingdom. It is mentioned at least twice with reference to a raid on sheep, and elsewhere refers to a battle that took place in the mountains. Administrative texts report that Ebla received sheep in exchange for exported materials to MAR.TU, but evidence of a social structure similar to Ebla’s shows that the MAR.TU were a settled people, as well as breeders of animals.

28

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

A valuable type of handcrafted Amorite dagger, which is often cited in the texts, suggests that the MAR.TU knew how to work with metal.105

Stereotypes of Amorites in Sumerian and Akkadian literature We hear no comments about Amorites who are fully acculturated. As stated above, Amorites were engaged in other professions, but the social institution by which they were most commonly associated was that of semi-­nomadic pastoralists, and in association with cattle. Thus, perceptions of Amorites by other groups with whom they came into contact was initially based on a limited relationship, with little knowledge of the overall culture of these foreigners. And, although as we have seen there were some MAR.TU people working in the Sumerian cities, the perception of them was that of barbaric nomads, who at times made raids into the territory of the sedentary population, and seasonally lived on the fringes of society. An early example comes from a Sumerian text, entitled Enki and the World Order, which states: To the Amorite who has neither city nor house Enki presented livestock.106

The Curse of Agade, a literary composition of the Sumerian city-­lament and historiographic genres, is the story of the rise and fall of the Akkadian Empire.107 Although the reliability of this type of literature for the reconstruction of history is questionable, certain elements can be isolated to reflect some historical and cultural reality. We read of the various peoples who came to Agade and presented Inanna with offerings. There is a definite distinction made in the association of what each of these groups brought with them: the Meluhhans brought exotic wares. Elam and Subir carried goods to her. But, ˘˘ mar.tu kur-­ra lú še nu-­zu gu du-­máš du-­da mu-­un-­na-­da-­an-­ku-­ku “the highland Amorites, people ignorant of agriculture, came before her (Inanna) there with spirited bulls and spirited bucks.”108 Another text describes the Amorites as a people who will eat anything:

ꜤꜢmw: Etymology, Usage and Synonyms

29

They have prepared wheat (and) gu-­nunuz (grain) as a confection (but) and Amorite will eat it without (even) recognizing what it contains. He knows not of eating and drinking – a putdown. It is a way of describing an uncultivated person.109

Yet another inscription from the reign of Šu Sîn110 describes attacks by the MAR.TU. They are described as “. . . a ravaging people, with instincts of a beast . . . a people who does not know grain . . .” But apparently Šu Sîn quells their attack for the: hur-­sag-­gal-­ga[l] ˘ hu-­rí-­in-­g’in ] ˘    gú ki-[šè]    ba-­an-­da-­ab [gar] uru ki â-­dam gar-­gar-­ra-­b [i] du-­du-­du mi-­n    i[gar]111

big mountains were subdued as if by an eagle;

the towns, the population (and) their settlements, were turned into ruins.

Here again we receive a varied view of the MAR.TU. On one hand, the hur-­ ˘ sag-­gal-­gal (big mountains) were subdued. On the other hand, the uru ki (towns) are turned into ruins.112 The two terms appear to reflect two distinct life-­styles: dwelling in mountains and in towns. Further literary descriptions of the MAR.TU occur in Sumerian epic tales. These heroic narratives celebrate the deeds and exploits of kings and princes. The extant copies of these epics date from the first half of the second millennium BCE. A major protagonist, the hero Enmerkar, probably lived more than a millennium earlier, about 3,000 BCE.113 Thus, it is likely that these texts contain anachronisms. Kramer suggests, however, that it is not unjustifiable to conclude that there is at least a core of historic truth in the events which these tales narrate, and in the socio-­political background which they depict.114 Here Lugalbanda embarks on a dangerous journey to the far-­off land of Aratta to ask for help by Inanna, Enmerkar’s sister. Enmerkar is Lugalbanda’s lord and it is on his behalf that he delivers the message to Inanna that the MAR.TU have been ravaging both Sumer and Akkad and are now laying siege to Uruk itself.115 The text describes the MAR.TU:

30

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

Ke-­en-­gi ki-­uri ningin-­na-­a-­ba mar-­du lu-­se-­nu-­zu hu-­mu-­zi116 Verily – Should in the confines of Sumer and Akkad Mardu bedouins, who know no grain; rise up The city wall of Uruk lies stretched like a bird snare in the desert!117

BS 14061, a tablet belonging to the Temple Library of Nippur, and which Chiera termed “An Amorite Creation Story,” represents the god Martu as building the first temple for the city Ninab. Before the building of this temple no cultivated plants existed. Amorites are described as having no established courts of justice. But now the Amorites have settled down and taken up agriculture. Previous to this they are described as follows: gur-­sag gis-­ku-­e tam-­ma . . . For the mountaineer (i.e. the Amorite) the weapon (is his companion . . . . lu uzu-­dirig kur-­da mu-­un-­ba-­al-­la he digs the kamunu by the side of the mountain, he knows no submission. dug-­gam nu-­zu-­am uzu nu-­izi-­ga al-­ku- he eats uncooked meat, ud-­ti-­la-­na e nu-­tuku-­a through his whole life he does not possess a house, tam-­ma us-­a-­na ki nu-­tum-­mu-­ his dead companion he does not dam bury. ma-­la-­mu MAR-TU ta-­am an-­tuku- (Now) Martu possesses a house, tuku-­un ma-­la-­ga-­ni AD-GAR Towards his house Adgaruddug -UD-DUG mu-­n[I-ib]-­gi-­gi turns, dMAR-[TU s]e-­ba an-­tuku-­tuku (Now) Martu possesses grain O ni-­na-­abki lum-­a lam-­ma Ninab, grow luxuriantly

It is interesting that the Amorites portray themselves as having been a barbarous people, thus fitting in with the MAR.TU stereotype of the Mesopotamians. But, unlike the texts about them by outsiders who retain this view of them, the Amorites have broken their stereotype by letting us know that: “yes, we were this way, but we are not anymore!” Note a beautifully crafted gold, bronze, and silver statuette of a kneeling worshipper,118 said to have come from a metal workshop at Larsa, was dedicated by an inhabitant of that Amorite city to the god Martu/Amurru for the life of Hammurabi, though

ꜤꜢmw: Etymology, Usage and Synonyms

31

apparently it was produced before Hammurabi’s rule. Both sides of the base are decorated – one with a praying figure similar to the praying figure of the worshipper himself,119 and the other side with a recumbent ram, an animal associated with Amurru. It was most likely intended for a temple of that god (Fig. 2.2).120 The worshipper has one knee bent, and two fingers of his right hand point to his face (or nose) – a gesture of reverence. In the Marriage of

Figure 2.2  Worshipper of Larsa.

32

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

Martu, the deity is described as one who does not know how to “bend the knee” (in worship).121 This visual representation of the statue from Larsa, showing the worshipper in a bent-­knee position, correlates with the text which ends with a view of the Amorites as “civilized.” It is a “flattering image which reflects the rise of local Amorite dynasties in southern Mesopotamia, and by the First Dynasty of Babylon, was almost entirely under the rule of an Amorite Royal House.” The god Amurru has now been fully accepted and integrated into the Mesopotamian pantheon, just as the Amorites, his human counterpart, have found their place in Mesopotamian society. Amurru is often represented in Mesopotamian art as a god in long robes, who carries a crook or scimitar and is depicted with his foot upon a gazelle, a fitting image for a god associated with shepherds and the steppe (Fig. 2.3).122

Figure 2.3  The god (dMAR.TU) Amurru.

ꜤꜢmw: Etymology, Usage and Synonyms

33

Stereotypic depictions as a reflection of historic and socio-economic realities Though the above citations derive from mythological texts, and a literary work of the lamentation genre, it is obvious that these stereotypes were embedded into the consciousness of the peoples with whom the MAR.TU came into contact. How did these views develop in the first place? Economic documents from Puzrish-Dagan (the modern mound of Drehem, a few miles southeast of Nippur),123 in a large government complex established by Shulgi (2093–2046 BCE), the second ruler of the Third Dynasty of Ur, attest that the Amorites appeared there mostly as suppliers of sheep and goats.124 Drehem was the central administrative complex set up for the maintenance and disposal of livestock from various regions, and their care. This livestock was collected as a tax from the people, or as gifts to the kings for offerings to the temples of Nippur, Ur, and Uruk. The deliveries seem to point to a seasonal pattern. Liverani thinks that this could mean that the presence of a population in the area was due to a practice of periodical transhumance125 suggesting that perhaps people would appear in great numbers, and then be gone as quickly as they came. We possess a record of various fish brought to Drehem by several individuals, among whom there is an unnamed Amorite interpreter (eme.bal MAR.TU).126 Buccellati has suggested that an interpreter might have been assigned in Drehem to serve the Amorites who came through the area for a short period of time. The sporadic presence of Amorites in Drehem would correlate with their nomadic way of life as shepherds.127 However, the Amorites doing business in Drehem were numerous enough to justify assigning an Amorite interpreter to Drehem.128 The foregoing discussion has sought to define the geographical origins and social structure of the early wave of Amorite peoples who migrated into Mesopotamia, and the reaction to them by the indigenous population of Sumer and Akkad. The analyses and conclusions given here are based upon examples presented in the literature, and on surviving administrative and historical documents: 1. The largest amount of descriptive material regarding the social characteristics of Amorites is found in the surviving literary texts. These

34

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

generally speak of Amorites in a negative tone, describing them as barbaric, uncouth nomadic or semi-­nomadic groups in specific association with livestock or cattle. However, the views that we get in the literary texts are often biased and their reliability for reconstructing social realities must be questioned. This does not diminish the importance of these materials as reflecting genuine existing political and religious realities in a given period. 2. By examining the surviving historical and administrative documents, we have seen that, in contrast to the view that the Amorites were barbaric nomads, their social structure was dimorphic in that they were part of a sedentary group who were city dwellers and engaged in other professions involving crafts and agriculture. 3. The Amorite peoples were assimilated into the Sumero-Akkadian population of southern Mesopotamia. Buccellati’s study has shown that some of them were engaged in the same professions as the Sumerians themselves. It is interesting to note that the places in which Amorites maintained their ethnic identities most strongly, such as Ur, Isin, and Larsa129 (the places where they were looked upon most blatantly as foreigners), later became their power bases, facilitating their rise to power elsewhere in Mesopotamia. 4. All of the literary examples above view the Amorites as nomadic, or breeders of cattle. The one exception, which hints at their dimorphic organization, is the Sumerian Creation Myth which dates from ca. 2000 BCE. While the text provides a long description of their origins as a non-­sedentary people, it also states that they eventually settled down. Thus, we can see here that the view of the Amorites as nomadic shepherds was set in the mythological world of the gods, and fixed at a very early time not only in the mindset of the peoples foreign to the Amorites, but also to the Amorites themselves, who traced their origins back to this time. It seems reasonable to conclude that these stereotypes derived from the initial contact between Amorites and the indigenous Mesopotamian population. This contact was due to the needs of pastoral transhumance, with the Amorites going back and forth between Sumer and their own land, probably since time

ꜤꜢmw: Etymology, Usage and Synonyms

35

immemorial. It was only at a later period that Amorites began to assimilate into the Sumerian population and were engaged in other trades as merchants involved in the caravan trade as well. But it was on the basis of their first contact that they were remembered in the textual record, even though this group of people with their flocks represented only part of the social makeup of the Amorites. It was this frequent violation of the Sumerian borders that alienated them and conjured up the hostility toward them by the Sumerians – this attitude permeating their literature.

ꜤꜢmw in Egypt Old Kingdom to the Early Middle Kingdom Old Kingdom It is the aim of the present discussion to correlate the chronological appearance of the ꜤꜢmw in the Egyptian records, and descriptions of their origins and lifestyles, with that of the MAR.TU/Amurru in the cuneiform texts of Mesopotamia. It is the premise here that the ꜤꜢmw and the MAR.TU/Amurru represent the groups of early West Semites from northern Syria who migrated to other lands because of climactic changes, and pastoral needs. These early groups of West Semites, as outlined above, paved the way for the Amorites to take over southern Mesopotamia, and later become the powerful rulers during the Isin-Larsa and Old Babylonian periods in Mesopotamia. Examining the perception of ꜤꜢmw (Amorites) from the Egyptian viewpoint, we sense a tone similar to the one expressed in cuneiform literature. The textual descriptions in Egyptian sources regarding the Asiatic foreigners who cause trouble in Egypt, correlate well with Mesopotamian (Sumerian and Akkadian) source material. It is in the beginning of the Egyptian Sixth Dynasty, which roughly corresponds to the Sargonic period, when references to MAR.TU/Amurru begin to appear more frequently in the Mesopotamian sources, that the ꜤꜢmw first appear in the Egyptian sources. The very first mention of the ꜤꜢmw Asiatics occurs during the reign of King Pepi I (2350 BCE) and is related in the Inscription of Weni. Weni, a courtier of Pepi I, organized an army for a

36

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

campaign against the Bedouin north of Sinai, and he was sent out five times to quell revolts in this region. He finally pushed up into southern Canaan, which is the first Egyptian invasion of that country known in history: “His majesty made war on the Asiatic Sand-­dwellers (ꜤꜢmw h.rı᾽w-­sꜤ).”130 According to the chronology adopted here, the expedition of Pepi I, paralleled the period when Šar-­kali-šarri fought the MAR.TU/Amurru. Pepinakht, a nobleman of high rank, carried out important commissions during the reign of King Pepi II. One was an expedition against the country of the Asiatics (ꜤꜢmw (h.r(y)w-šꜤ).131 It seems that the MAR.TU/Amurru in Mesopotamia and, likewise, the ꜤꜢmw in Egypt were a constant nuisance to the kings of both of these two great civilizations. So, toward the end of the Old Kingdom, we read in the Egyptian historical texts, about a people called ꜤꜢmw as was the case in the early Sumerian historical texts, where they are called MAR.TU/Amurru. However, Šar-kali-šarri claims to have defeated them at Mt. Basar. In the case of Weni and Pepinakht, they also claim to have defeated the ꜤꜢmw in their own country; only this time their country is not the Jebel Bishri, but southern Canaan

First Intermediate Period Lo the miserable Asiatic ᾽ı s ꜤꜢmw h-sy He is wretched because of the place he is in k. sn pw n bw ntf ἰm Short of water, bare of wood Ꜣhw mw štꜢw m ht ꜤšꜢ ˘ Its paths are many and painful wꜢwt ἰry m-Ꜥ because of mountains d-ww He does not dwell in one place n h.ms.f m st wꜤt Food propels his legs132 stšw phr rdwy.fy He fights since the time of Horus ἰw.f h.r Ꜥh.Ꜣ d-r h.r Not conquering nor being conquered n k. n (ἰ).n.f n gr(w) k. n(ἰ).tw.f 133 Like a thief who darts about a group n smἰ.f rꜤ m ꜤhꜢ     mἰ -tꜢ šnꜤ n smꜢyt134

The above passage from The Instructions of Merikare,135 a Middle Kingdom didactic work with historical allusions, records events which took place during the First Intermediate Period during the reigns of Achtoes III (approximately 2130–2040 BCE, Tenth Egyptian Dynasty or Ninth), the father of Merikare.

ꜤꜢmw: Etymology, Usage and Synonyms

37

These lines allude to foreign enemies of the eastern delta, whose incursions into Egypt represented a source of danger to the Egyptians. This text was intended as an instruction given by the presumably departing King Khety (Achtoes), to his young son Merikare, and it embodies a treatise on kingship.136 Although the text belongs to the “Instructions” genre, and was meant to be a royal instruction, certain passages reveal the historical background of the time, in this case the troubled First Intermediate Period. For the first time we are given an Egyptian text with a character sketch of people termed ꜤꜢmw, whose nomadic way of life is looked upon with disdain by the Egyptians. The lifestyle described in the above passage fits the characterization of a nomadic or semi-­nomadic people, most probably pastoralists, whose specialization lies in breeding livestock for their subsistence. These pastoralists followed patterned migration routes, exploiting marginal environments for grazing, necessary because of the very low rainfall in their own territory. Apparently, the eastern province of the delta constituted one of these environments during the rule of the Herakleopolitan house as alluded to in the following passage from Merikare: But as I live and shall be what I am When the Bowmen were a sealed wall, I breached [their strongholds]. I made lower Egypt attack them, I seized their cattle Until the Asiatics abhored Egypt, Do not concern yourself with him, The Asiatic is a crocodile on its shore, It snatches from a lonely road, It cannot seize from a populous town . . .137

Posener points out that, although it is tempting to hypothesize that the MAR.TU of the cuneiform sources are the same group people with whom Achtoes had to deal, no positive assertion to that effect can be made.138 This chapter attempts to draw a closer connection between the two groups named, and show the likelihood that it was, indeed, the same ethnic group or geographical entity that is being spoken about in these negative terms. Posener has already noted the existence of a counterpart to this text in cuneiform literature.139

38

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

Posener also notes that this text does not give a picture of living conditions in Syria and Palestine as a whole. It is suggested here that the Egyptians are describing the Styw members of the ꜤꜢmw groups,140 and that the Egyptians simply referred to them as ꜤꜢmw, stereotyping all of these Asiatics as nomadic. If we compare the location of the homeland, and the descriptions of life­ styles of ꜤꜢmw as they appear in the Egyptian texts, and then compare them with the attitude evident in the Sumerian literature toward the MAR.TU/ Amurru, we find some striking similarities as follows: In the Mesopotamian texts, the MAR.TU are referred to as “the one who does not know grain.”141 This leads to the belief that if these people are not agriculturalists, then they are nomadic or semi-­nomadic pastoralists whose subsistence depends upon cattle herding or breeding. It is known that in the Near East, because of certain climactic situations, these pastoralists made seasonal migrations – thus, the above description of them in Merikare. Both passages make reference to mountains: Merikare: šꜤ wꜢwt ἰry m-Ꜥ d-ww142 Its paths are many because of mountains The Sumerian: MAR.TU kur-­ra;143 lu-­lil-­la hur-­sag ga tus--a;144 ˘ MAR.TU kur bi-­ta145 “the Amorite of the mountains”;146 “the awkward man living in the mountains”;147 “the Amorite from their mountain”148

The above passages show that there is little doubt as to where the Amorites are coming from. Their origins are associated with mountains in both Mesopotamian and Egyptian literature. The MAR.TU/Amurru = ꜤꜢmw are bothersome nomads. One can argue that the topos of the uncivilized nomad is a common literary motif in Sumerian and Egyptian literature. However, as Jerrold S. Cooper shows,149 within the Sumerian literature, ethnic slurs on Amorites, and Guti as well, are almost unique in the Mesopotamian literary documents. The Guti were a people from the mountains bordering Babylonia to the east, and represented a permanent danger to the disintegrating Empire of Akkad. They carried out savage attacks against Akkad, and they eventually ruled the

ꜤꜢmw: Etymology, Usage and Synonyms

39

northern half of Babylonia. Perhaps these descriptions are accurate due to the fact that these two groups had a major effect upon the fall of the Akkadian empire – thus indicating an intimate knowledge and relationship with these people. Likewise, the ꜤꜢmw had a significant effect upon Egyptian civilization,150 and for the first time we are given details of the lifestyle of the group who was until now described only by an epithet. No doubt the Egyptians got a closer look at them when the ꜤꜢmw at Egypt’s borders took advantage of the situation of the chaotic First Intermediate Period and made invasions into Egypt. This now closer contact between the two groups allows for a more accurate and detailed description of the ꜤꜢmw Amorites with whom they came into contact. The Prophecies of Neferti151 a work probably composed in the reign of Amenemhet I, but placed in the court of King Sneferu of the Fourth Dynasty, prophesies that “a king will come from the south, Ameny, the justified, by name.”152 Ameny will restore order to the land. He is described as: One will build the Walls-­of-­the Ruler, To bar Asiatics (ꜤꜢmw) from entering Egypt;153 They shall beg water as supplicants, So as to let their cattle drink Then Order (mꜢꜤt) will return to its seat154

It is interesting that the building of a wall to keep the Asiatics out correlates with Mesopotamian inscriptions from the Third Dynasty of Ur in that ShuSin, the fourth ruler of Ur, was compelled to build a wall to keep out the Didnu – peoples who occupied the same land as the MAR.TU, possibly referring to the same group. The fact that this project accounts for his year name shows that the building of this wall was a significant event. The ᾽ı nbw-h.kꜢ, “walls of the ruler,” is also known from the Sinuhe narrative,155 where Sinuhe clearly states: “Then I made my way northward. I reached the ‘Walls of the Ruler,’ which were made to repel the Asiatics and to crush the Sandfarers.”156 The wall was built particularly for the safety and defense of the easternmost Delta, in particular the Wadi Tumilat.157 Thus, this is the same time period as the Shu Sin inscription mentioning the muriq didnum referring to the wall “which keeps the Didnum distant.”

40

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

The instruction of King Amenemhet 1 for his son Senwosret I Amenemhet’s rule ended with his assassination, and it is the general belief among scholars that the text was composed during the reign of his son, Senwosret I. In this text, which belongs to the “Instructions” genre, Amenemhet warns his son to not trust anyone. The text corroborates certain events which are told in the Story of Sinuhe, and in the Prophecy of Neferty. One is the assassination of the king and the other records that the King subdued, repressed and captured his enemies. Of the Asiatics he states: “I made the Asiatics (Styw) do the dog walk.”158 The Admonitions of Ipuwer,159 a product of the Twelfth Dynasty but referring to the events of the First Intermediate Period has the sage declaring what is happening in the land and instructs the King to mend his ways and advises the course he should follow. One of the problems he mentions is the Styw,160 foreigners who have been plundering the land and again we are confronted by Asiatics, who are marauding Bedouin.

Summary and analysis of Egyptian texts from Dynasty Six to Early Dynasty Twelve (the reign of Amenemhet I) with reference to ꜤꜢmw Information gleaned from the scanty material contained in the Egyptian textual record tells us that: 1. During the Old Kingdom, as seen in the inscriptions of Pepi I and II, the use of the term ꜤꜢmw to qualify a particular group of people who made forays into Egypt’s borders shows that we are dealing with West Semites, as explained earlier in this chapter. These first appear in the written records in the reign of Pepi I. The only thing we are told is that the Egyptians made war on the Asiatic sandfarers, the ꜤꜢmw h.ryw šꜤ. So from the very beginning we hear that they are Bedouin and a force to be reckoned with. However, elsewhere in the inscription of Pepi I, we hear about the h.Ꜣst ꜤꜢm, “land of the Amorites.”161 Obviously the Egyptians were aware that the ꜤꜢmw lived elsewhere than in the sand šꜤ.

ꜤꜢmw: Etymology, Usage and Synonyms

41

Nevertheless, the Sinai desert was where the Egyptians set them, portraying them as desert dwellers, since it is there that they were confronted by the warlike ꜤꜢmw h.ryw (šꜤ), and where they had the first significant contact with them. Thus, the ꜤꜢmw are stereotyped in this way from the start. 2. The literary texts which describe the situation in Egypt during the chaotic First Intermediate Period during the Heracleopolitan rule, as seen in The Instructions of Merikare, speak of ꜤꜢmw as “miserable Asiatics,” who live a nomadic lifestyle. This lifestyle is looked upon by the Egyptians as an unfavorable one. We are also told that the ꜤꜢmw come from a mountainous area. Khety (Achtoes) relates that he made lower Egypt attack the Asiatics and seized their cattle. The ꜤꜢmw in association with cattle fits the stereotype of these Asiatics as herders or pastoralists that we get from these early texts. As we will see later, this association of Asiatics with cattle continues in Egyptian textual record. 3. The Prophecy of Neferty, purported to be composed during the reign of Sneferu, in reality was probably commissioned by Amenemhet I in order to support his seizure of the throne. The sage Neferty foretells the misery that will overtake the land, but prophesies that a King named Ameny (Amenemhet I) will arise and set all in order again.162 During this discourse, it is told that the new king built a wall to keep the Asiatic ꜤꜢmw from entering Egypt. Here again, Asiatics are seen as Bedouin raiding the land. The text implies that they are pastoralists in that they need water to allow their cattle to drink.

Conclusion The characterizations of the Asiatic ꜤꜢmw, as seen in the Egyptian literary texts of the Old to early Middle Kingdom, correlate with descriptions of the MAR.TU/Amurru in the contemporary cuneiform texts from Mesopotamia. These texts portray Amorites as warlike, uncivilized people, nomads or breeders of cattle. The textual record of the Ur III period, and earlier in Mesopotamia, shows that the portrayal of these peoples as nomadic in the written record is only

42

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

partially accurate. Sumerian and Akkadian economic and administrative texts reveal that the MAR.TU/Amurru were sedentary as well as nomadic. Contrary to the dual lifestyle of MAR.TU/Amurru as gleaned from the cuneiform texts, we do not get a hint of the ꜤꜢmw as being anything other than nomadic in Egyptian texts of the Old or the Early Middle Kingdom. While Egypt remained fairly homogenous and isolated during the Old Kingdom, the movement of various population groups in western Asia is well documented, suggesting a closer relationship between peoples. Egypt’s contact with these foreigners was limited, occurring mainly on the borders. It is therefore not surprising that the Egyptian textual record, from the Old to the Early Middle Kingdom, fails to reveal the sedentary aspects of life in the hꜢst ꜤꜢm, “land of ˘ the Asiatics,” because of this remote contact.163 It is only after the collapse of Egypt’s Old Kingdom, and the chain of events that followed during the First Intermediate Period, that a clearer and more accurate view of the ꜤꜢmw foreigners in Egyptian texts may be seen.

3

West Semites in Egyptian Art of the Old and Middle Kingdoms This chapter will deal with visual images of West Semites and other Asiatics who are unidentifiable. Egyptian artists have given us rich information regarding the appearance of the diverse peoples with whom they came into contact, and evidence from Egyptian art effectively complements information retrieved from the textual data. Representations also supply us with information otherwise not available in textual or archaeological sources. We must keep in mind, however, that Egyptian art was largely traditional, prescribed and formatted since its origins. Therefore, the historical value of artistic representations must be looked upon with discretion, for much of Egyptian iconography is symbolic. Nonetheless, pictorial information is a tool of paramount importance in examining the ways in which Egyptians perceived their West Semitic neighbors, and furnishes unique information regarding the appearance and cultural characteristics of Amorites. As mentioned earlier in this study, Mesopotamian and Syrian art in their earliest periods does not provide pictorial documentation of West Semites as they would have appeared in actuality. The reason for this is that the Amorites who ruled Mesopotamia during the Middle Bronze Age wished to become part of the quintessential classical culture of Mesopotamia, and represented themselves in the Mesopotamian tradition. In this way, their original native appearance is, in effect, camouflaged. A somewhat similar situation occurs with the Hyksos (Amorite) rulers, who took over northern Egypt during the Second Intermediate Period and ruled as kings. These foreign rulers represented themselves visually as Egyptians, and it is mostly by their names that we know of their West Semitic ancestry.1 In the latter half of their occupation, the Hyksos, however, worked within the framework of pharaonic institutions.

44

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

They just filled the slots of their Egyptian predecessors rather than setting up an Amorite political kingdom as they did in Mesopotamia where, while they assimilated and adapted Mesopotamian customs, they changed the political and socio-­economic institutions.2 The foremost provider of contemporary information about West Semitic Asiatics are the provincial Egyptian tombs of the Middle Kingdom. The paintings in these private tombs reflect the immediate impressions of the artists of the Middle Kingdom who saw the foreigners and provide unique data regarding their appearance. They do not simply duplicate earlier images found in royal tombs and temples, which were selected because of royal symbolism and political propaganda. Consequently, it is to the artistic skill and keen observation of details by Egyptian artists that we owe our debt for the rich information they provide regarding the appearance of contemporary western Asiatic Amorites. Thus, a famous scene from the tomb of Khnumhotep II at Beni Hasan is the only detailed pictorial record in the Egyptian sources which represents Middle Bronze IIA Amorites, and is the main source for the visual study of West Semites during the early Middle Bronze Age. This scene will be discussed in detail later on in this study. Whereas the main concentration of this book focuses on Amorites in Egyptian sources of the Middle Bronze Age, it is necessary to first discuss the mindset of the peoples who created these works, and to begin with the Old Kingdom, the formative period which set the stage of Egyptian thought and canonical tradition which lasted for 3,000 years. Egyptian ideology must be dealt with in order to determine the reliability of Egyptian art regarding the appearance, and culture of West Semitic Amorites over time.

The Old Kingdom Ideology To perceive the ideology which fostered the manner in which Egyptians portrayed West Semites visually and verbally, an understanding of Egypt’s attitude toward foreigners in general is essential. The Egyptians believed that there were four divisions of humankind:3 the Egyptians themselves, the

West Semites in Egyptian Art of the Old and Middle Kingdoms

45

Nubians, the Libyans, and the Asiatics (Fig. 3.1).4 It comes as no surprise that the Egyptians defined humankind in this way, since geographically, those “others” were the peoples who inhabited Egypt’s borders. The Egyptians, as people so often do, distinguished themselves as culturally superior to the other peoples about their land. Geographically, Egypt was a relatively isolated and self-­contained land. The Nile, crucial for Egypt’s sustenance, created a narrow strip of cultivated land, forming a river oasis surrounded by deserts.5 Egypt’s stability was due largely to a fair amount of isolation from her neighbors, a situation which kept her population a homogenous one. At Egypt’s southern boundary was Upper Nubia, where a people termed Nh.syw lived along the river, and another group, the Md-Ꜣyw, were the desert dwellers.6 To Egypt’s west, was the Libyan desert, where two peoples were distinguished, the Tjemhu and the Tjehnyu. The Tjehnyu frequented the oases of the western desert and are thought to have been originally identical, both ethnically and culturally, with the Egyptians of the western delta. They were, however, always regarded as foreigners.7 To the northeast, Egypt was most

Figure 3.1  The four divisions of humankind: from r. to l., Egyptian, Asiatic, Nubian, Libyan.

46

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

vulnerable. It was here, in the sandy waterless waste,8 which lay across the northern part of the Sinai peninsula, the route that led to or from Canaan, where Egypt was confronted by Asiatic Bedouin, or, as the Egyptians referred to them, the Styw. To Egypt’s north is the Mediterranean,9 the area where Egypt had contact with the Minoan civilization and Crete. At various times in Egypt’s civilization successful attempts were made by nonEgyptians to invade Egypt’s borders. Thus, the Egyptians became contemptuous of her nearest neighbors,10 perceiving them to be wild and vile. They considered themselves as culturally superior to the barbarian chieftains, who made forays into Egypt and upset the order and stability which the Egyptians termed maat. This mindset propagated pictorial images of foreigners as subjugated peoples under the domain of the Egyptian king.11 From relief work on temple facades, and as inlays for architectural elements employed as decoration on a large scale within the palace of the king (Fig. 3.2), to small slate palettes, and decorations on furniture (Fig.  3.3), jewelry and other minor arts, foreigners were continually represented as captives, or as supplicants before the Egyptian king. This was the

Figure 3.2  Faience wall tile depiction of an Asiatic captive, New Kingdom.

West Semites in Egyptian Art of the Old and Middle Kingdoms

47

Figure 3.3  Ivory furniture element of an Asiatic captive, New Kingdom.

official view of non-Egyptians: outsiders are inconsequential. Their images can be used as sculptural elements for door sockets, or painted on the sides of a footstool, crushed beneath the feet of the king.12 This is how they fit into the hierarchical scheme of things within the Egyptian world view. The placement of foreigners in inferior positions clearly transmits the message as to who is and who is not Egyptian. These stereotypic postures of foreigners continued to be part of the official artistic repertoire. The motifs persisted to be utilized even during times of peaceful interaction between Egyptians and non-Egyptians and held steadfast for a period of at least 3,000 years. In order to understand the nature of the representation of the foreigner in Egyptian art, it is necessary to elaborate a bit further on the Egyptian mindset,

48

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

and look at the art within the social context of its creation. Henry Fischer, quoting Sir Alan Gardiner, noted that “the logicality of the Egyptian mind is one of its most striking aspects with regard to the religious beliefs of that ancient civilization.” Certainly, the notion of truth and logic permeated all aspects of Egyptian life. In Egyptian religion, the king was perceived as having superhuman power. He was conceived to be of divine character – a god on earth, so to speak. It was the king’s responsibility to keep order in the land against the forces of disorder. Thus, when incursions into Egypt’s borders by nomadic Bedouin threatened her security, it was the king’s duty to set things right again. There was no room in Egypt’s structured society for interference from outside the Egyptian sphere of life. Thus, the the foreigner was officially perceived as a contamination. As pointed out by Megan Cifarelli, the notion of cultural identity and differentiation exists within virtually every society throughout history, whether expressed in terms of xenophobia, ethnocentrism or exoticism.13 This notion is put forth quite clearly when we read Egyptian literary texts such as historical lamentations. The Admonitions of an Egyptian Sage, a work which is discussed elsewhere in this study, clearly expresses the ideology that the Egyptian word rmt- (people) is used only to describe Egyptians.14 This is not an indicator that foreigners were considered to be subhuman; it simply illustrates the cultural identity of the Egyptian as primary, and distinct from other peoples. Anyone who was non-Egyptian was considered to be an outsider. Thus, when the Egyptians wanted to express the idea that their land was topsy-­turvy in times of political and social upheaval, they say that foreigners have become rmt- – people – everywhere,15 that is positions held formerly by Egyptians have been taken over by a foreign element: others are now functioning as Egyptians.

“Official” representations of foreigners in the Old Kingdom With regard to visual representations of foreigners in Egypt during the Old Kingdom, it is only possible to discuss the images of foreigners in general, i.e. the foreigner as non-Egyptian. Specific ethnic groups cannot be identified with certainty due to the vague terminology in accompanying inscriptions.

West Semites in Egyptian Art of the Old and Middle Kingdoms

49

Suggestions can only be made according to our knowledge of later material where specific cultural groups are identified by epigraphical information.16 Thus, while we can suggest that certain groups represent Asiatic peoples, we only have very general information about them from the art of the Old Kingdom. The following discussion is by no means an exhaustive study of representations of foreigners in Egypt during the Old Kingdom. Rather, selected examples are employed as a foundation for understanding the development, constancy, and change in iconographic expression with regard to Egyptian depictions of foreigners over time. Moreover, it will serve to highlight the changes which occur in the later Middle Kingdom during which the formerly vague terminologies and enigmatic representations employed for the foreigner in the Old Kingdom become more specific. In fact, during the Middle Kingdom, extended character sketches are found in both verbal and visual images of strangers, which allow us to distinguish and identify one group from another with considerably more certainty.

Three-dimensional sculpture In light of the attitudes of the Egyptians toward non-Egyptians as delineated above, it becomes clear why images of foreigners in Old Kingdom sculpture in the round, or three-­dimensional sculpture, conform so consistently to a particular type. Bound by the conventions of Egyptian ideology, they are shown in statuary as captives of the “State” and set along the courts of the pyramid temples of the Egyptian Kings. Prisoner statues of the type referred to above, are almost life-­size, and it is possible that they reflect groups of actual prisoners who were bound and lined up in the open altar court or avenue approach in the pyramid temples of the King.17 In this way they were visible to artists who were commissioned by the king to portray them, perhaps as substitutes for the actual captives themselves. The faces of the subjugated prisoners are lined and naturalistically portrayed, in contrast to the mainly idealistic rendering given to Egyptian subjects. But, while no two look alike, they are not true portraits. They show no identifiable features as to specific ethnic groups. Rather, the intention, it seems, was to display their un-Egyptian character. By limiting facial flaws to the foreigners, the Egyptian artists showed

50

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

that these outsiders were in all respects distinct from and less perfect than the inhabitants of the Nile valley.18 It is important to note, however, that the artists may not have had an intimate knowledge of the various tribes which inhabited the deserts surrounding the Nile valley since actual skirmishes probably did not take place in Egypt proper. The texts mention the fringes of the deserts north, south, and west for these encounters. Living in the capital, the sculptors may have gone by hearsay. This may explain while such master craftsmen, capable of rendering a faithful ethnic portrait, did not do so. What is striking about these works is the great care taken to depict the sadness and pain of prisoners. Two statues of this type in the Metropolitan Museum of Art19 exhibit great sensitivity by the artists who created them. These statues are said to have been found in the vicinity of Saqqara, and datable to the time of Pepi II of Dynasty VI (Figs.  3.4, 3.5).20 Created as a freestanding statue, completely modeled on all sides and mounted on a base of its own, the figure of the conquered enemy in Fig. 3.4 is portrayed kneeling, slightly bent forward, with bowed head. The arms are bound by a cord which is executed in raised relief and wound four times around the elbows extending across the back of the figure. The face is modeled in great detail, the nasolabial furrow executed in deep lines around the mouth. Traces of a beard remain on the right side of the chin. The eyes slant, showing an oriental character. Traces of a reddish-­brown paint remain on the face and on the hair above the forehead.21 The foreigner is dressed in an Egyptian kilt. The second statue (Fig. 3.5) is leaner, but of the same form. He too wears an Egyptian kilt, but sits more upright than the first example. The torsos show little differentiation, but the heads are remarkable for their individuality. They wear different hairdos. On one hand, the hair on the figure in Fig. 3.4 is caplike and full. But the statue in Fig. 3.5 suggests a wavy-­ haired individual. It is obvious that they represent two different ethnic groups, but their identity eludes us. It has been suggested that Fig. 3.4 is a tribesman of the Eastern Desert, while Fig. 3.5 represents the people inhabiting the lands adjacent to the Western Desert.22 Again, of most importance to the Egyptian mind is that these works express the notion that foreign foes are subservient to the Egyptian king, who, like the gods, confronts and controls chaos. Since the foreign captives were considered to be part of the forces of chaos, these sculptures were found with the heads severed from their torsos. In other words they were killed twice – once during battle, and once again as a ritual killing.23

West Semites in Egyptian Art of the Old and Middle Kingdoms

Figure 3.4  Limestone statue of a kneeling captive, Old Kingdom.

51

52

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

Figure 3.5  Limestone statue of a kneeling captive, Old Kingdom.

West Semites in Egyptian Art of the Old and Middle Kingdoms

53

Relief Smiting scenes Images of foreigners appear in Egyptian monumental relief at the beginning of the Old Kingdom. The earliest representation comes during the reign of Sekhemkhet,24 a king of the early Third Dynasty (Fig.  3.6).25 High above

Figure 3.6  Relief of Sekhemkhet at Sinai, Wady Magharah, Old Kingdom.

54

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

the Wadi Maghara in the Sinai Peninsula and cut into the rock, the ruler is shown in a symbolic scene commemorating his triumph over his enemies.26 On the left side of the scene, the king, wearing the white crown of Upper Egypt, stands with legs astride about to smite a subjugated foreigner. In his upraised right hand he holds a mace. With his left hand he seizes the enemy by the hair, while holding a stick in the same hand. The prisoner, who is seen kneeling at the feet of the king, raises his right hand in a protective gesture, perhaps begging for mercy.27 His body is turned away from the king, but his head faces him. He is bearded, and holds a short stick in his left hand. These early depictions, largely propagandistic in nature, set the stage for the continuation of this motif throughout Egypt’s history. Who were the foes portrayed in these reliefs? The inscriptions fail to identify them. They are classified as Mnt–w, Iwntyw, hꜢstyw: Bedouin, nomads, and ˘ hill country peoples respectively. The inscriptions are as elusive as the representations, and no definite conclusions can be drawn from the evidence.

Foreigners as captives In the Fifth Dynasty, a new motif appears in the iconography of foreign captives. From the north wall of the funerary temple of Sahure at Abusir comes a relief showing a procession of prisoners, not in the act of being smitten by the Egyptian king, but as bound captives led in a single file by various gods on a rope (Fig. 3.7). The scene is depicted in five registers. Above the prisoners, in the first and third registers, two gods stand on a ground line. They each hold two prisoners by a rope which is attached to their waists. The figures enter from the right and fill the registers to the left. Although the relief is broken at the top register, and at the end of the scene on the right, affecting all four registers, the cultural divisions of the captives are more easily definable than in the earlier reliefs at Sinai. The third figure from the left in the second register, with arms bound at the elbows and held above him, is presumably an Asiatic. He is recognizable by his full beard and long hair, which is held in place by a fillet. In the third register, the gods appear again. The divinity on the right is depicted as Sopdu, the god of the East, represented in human form with an Asiatic beard and high feathers on his headdress. It is curious that

West Semites in Egyptian Art of the Old and Middle Kingdoms

55

Figure 3.7  Foreign captives represented on the north wall of the funerary temple of Sahure at Abusir.

56

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

one of the captives he holds is an Asiatic with the exact same features as the god.

Siege and battle scenes Another new motif is introduced in the tomb of Inti at Deshasheh (Fig. 3.8),28 the first governor of Deshasheh who was sent there from the capital late in the Fifth Dynasty, possibly under Djedkare.29 The scene represents an Egyptian campaign, probably in Asia and shows Egyptians attacking a fortified town.30 The lively scenes which are carved and painted on the north half of the east wall of the upper chamber of Inti’s tomb depict the pandemonium of war between the Egyptians and a foreign enemy.31 The scene shows women and children along with the males of a city inside the town surrounded by the wall. The vivid depictions of bearded men with long hair held by a fillet, reminiscent of the images of Asiatics depicted on the Sahure reliefs discussed below, are seen losing the battle. Their appearance contrasts sharply with Egyptian infantrymen, whose hair is short cropped. The foreign women, who are seen in various postures, tearing their hair in desperation, and attending to the injured men, wear long dresses which widen at the bottom, typical of Asiatic women in

Figure 3.8  Egyptians attacking a fortified town; from the north half of the east wall of the upper chamber of Inti’s tomb at Deshasheh.

West Semites in Egyptian Art of the Old and Middle Kingdoms

57

earlier and contemporary Egyptian iconography.32 The scene displays a great amount of movement. Once again, the ideology here is clear: the Egyptians are the victors. While they are actively engaged in combat, their foes are represented wounded, dying or losing the battle. The theme of siege and battle will appear again in tomb paintings of the later Middle Kingdom, and on temple reliefs of the New Kingdom.33

Famine A quite different motif carved in relief from around the same time period, depicts foreigners not as prisoners, but as pathetic Bedouin, from the Eastern Desert,34 coming to seek help from the Egyptian king. From the causeway of Unas at Saqqara comes one of the most unique and touching scenes in all of Egyptian art. It depicts groups of famine-­stricken men and women, emaciated and weak (Fig. 3.9),35 some of the figures are nude, or wearing only narrow girdles.36 The realism they exhibit contrasts sharply with the traditional theme of plenty in Egyptian ideology. Although inscriptions accompanying the scene to date have not been found, scholarly consensus is that the persons represented are not Egyptians. Also, the notion of Egyptian “plenty” vs. foreign “dearth” supports the identification of these desperate people as nonEgyptian. This theory is quite plausible since it is highly unlikely that the Egyptian King would depict his own people in so wretched a manner. It would be an admission of failure and maladministration. That they are desert Bedouin seeking food in Egypt during a period of famine is probable, and it is likely that the scene illustrates the generosity of the Egyptians to lesser persons under their domain. Details of the scene, a woman eating lice from her own hair, a starving child with a swollen stomach begging a woman for food, and the general appearance of persons represented with prominent ribs with hardly any skin covering them, suggest firsthand observation by the artist. Yet again, their precise identity remains as much in doubt as that of the sculptures of captives found in the Fifth and Sixth Dynasty courts.37 The main objective was to show their un-Egyptian character, and utter dependence on the mercy of the Egyptian king who was the incarnate god on earth, making order out of chaos and replacing want with plenty.

58

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

Figure 3.9  Starving Bedouin (detail); limestone with faint remains of paint. Causeway of Unas at Saqqara, Old Kingdom.

Commerce Special attention must now be given to the remains of a scene from the east wall of the west passage38 of the mortuary temple of King Sahure of Dynasty V at

West Semites in Egyptian Art of the Old and Middle Kingdoms

59

Abusir, for it is here that a subtle change occurs in the representation of Asiatics. This scene may well depict a historical event. Both sides of the wall are divided into four registers. In the upper two registers men on shore are seen bowing and raising their hands in a gesture of adoration, presumably to the king whose figure must have been carved on both sides of the wall by the entrance.39 The fragmentary inscriptions tell us they are “Giving praise to Sahure.” The lower two registers on the north side of the wall are occupied by four sea-­going boats.40 The lower two registers on the south side show eight boats filled with a number of foreign men, women and children.41 This scene is thought to portray a trading-­expedition to the coastal cities of Syria,42 and that the vessels on the north side represent the moment of departure from Egypt, while the eight boats on the south side indicate their return.43 The men in the scene are wearing kilts and full beards, their long wavy hair held in place by a fillet. This group of traits identifies the local inhabitants as ones of Syrian or Asiatic origin. Helene Kantor correctly observed that the Syrians who appear in the ships are not bound like captives,44 and Gaballa concludes that the expedition was peaceful rather than military.45 If this interpretation is correct, this scene represents, for the first time, a pictorial record of commercial interaction between the king of Egypt and Asiatics. This interpretation is quite plausible since the kings of the Old Kingdom needed timber for shipbuilding, tomb construction, and funerary ritual. The coniferous trees from the mountains of Lebanon provided them with the wood they needed.46 Egypt maintained a trade with Byblos as early as the predynastic period, though large-­scale wood imports from Syria commenced only at the beginning of the Old Kingdom.47 “Egyptian relations with Syria are also attested by the discovery of Egyptian stone vessels bearing names of Egyptian kings of the Fourth to Fifth dynasties at Ebla, the most important commercial center of Syria at that time.”48 “Relations between the two countries were effected exclusively by sea, the goods being carried by the kbnt, or Byblos ships, the city of Byblos serving as the maritime gateway for Syrian exports.”49 In fact, throughout the Old Kingdom, Egypt and Byblos had a permanent relationship. Egyptian stone vessels, bearing royal names, were discovered at Byblos, and a community of Egyptian merchants resided permanently at Byblos and worshipped a local deity taking the Egyptian form of Hathor, Lady of Byblos. The “Syrian Expedition” depicted on the wall of the mortuary temple of king Sahure may well be an expression in art of those relations.

60

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

The archaeological record for the period of EB IVA in both Syria and Egypt, attests to lively interaction between Egyptians and Syrians. The visual representation of the Syrians portrayed in the boats of the Temple of Sahure may further complement the archaeological data with regard to the historicity of the scene. Subtle details, exhibited in the hairstyle of the foreigners which distinguish them from Egyptians in the so-­called “Syrian Expedition” reveal characteristics which may reflect contemporary realities. Contrasting with the stereotypical scenes of bound prisoners in the same temple of Sahure, in which the long hair on the Asiatics represented shows vertically straight striations (Fig.  3.10a), the hair of the people represented in the boat scene are wavy-­

Figure 3.10a  (Detail of Fig. 3.7) Captive, represented with straight-­striated hair, scene from the east wall of the west passage of the mortuary temple of King Sahure of Dynasty V at Abusir.

West Semites in Egyptian Art of the Old and Middle Kingdoms

61

haired individuals (Fig. 3.10b). That the observation here is accurate is attested by stone hairdresses found in the Syrian site of Ebla of the same period. From Royal Palace G of the Late Early Dynastic to Early Akkadian period (2400– 2300 BCE,50 or Early Bronze IVA comes a hairdress of dark gray-­green stone, which exhibits the same characteristics (Fig. 3.10c).51 It is made up of a mass of hair, divided in large wavy locks which fall loose on the shoulders.52 The hairdress, which was assembled from ten parts, was intended for a composite statue or head that was almost life-­size, perhaps belonging to images of kings or high officials of Ebla.53 Did the artists of the Fifth Dynasty have firsthand observation of Western Asiatics due to a now closer relationship with her Syrian neighbors? Or did the Egyptian artisans come into contact with Syrian conventions influenced by Eblaitic art? In other words, was the Egyptian art style influenced by the way the Eblaites depicted themselves?54 At the end of the Sixth Dynasty, Pharaonic power declined, and Egypt experienced the rise of power of local hereditary princes. The stability and order of the Old Kingdom as reflected in the notion that the king was the god incarnate, were now replaced by the chaos manifest in a series of shadowy kings. The years subsequent to the political collapse which ended the Old Kingdom have been characterized by scholars as time of weak central administration and civil war. This so-­called First Intermediate Period lasted over two hundred years. Very little is known about this era in Egyptian history and it has been designated a dark period by Egyptologists. Literary texts such as Admonitions of an Egyptian Sage and the Teachings of Merikare, tell us that nomadic tribesmen made significant incursions into the country during this time.55

By way of summary, the depiction of West Semites and/or Amorites, i.e. the peoples more generally termed “Asiatics” in the art of the Old Kingdom may be characterized as follows: (a) long, shoulder level, or slightly longer straight or wavy black hair with headband tied behind the head; (b) long or medium length beard, the point turning inwards, or sometimes outward, sometimes rounded, sometimes more pointed; (c) hooked or straight nose; (d) male apparel usually consists of white kilts which reach to the above the knee, while women are shown with long, almost ankle-­length garments which widen slightly at the bottom. It is of interest that while Asiatics were differentiated

62

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

Figure 3.10b  Wavy-­haired Asiatics. Scene from a Syrian expedition, from the mortuary temple of King Sahure at Abusir, Old Kingdom.

Figure 3.10c  Hairdress from Ebla, divided in large wavy locks, Early Bronze Age.

West Semites in Egyptian Art of the Old and Middle Kingdoms

63

from Egyptians by their beards and hairstyle, they were consistently portrayed wearing only Egyptian kilts. This feature may be due to the fact that the relationship between the two groups was not close enough to allow for accurate, first-­hand observation of clothing styles. This suggestion gains in probability in light of the more precise representation of Libyans, who lived in closer geographical connection with Egyptians. The specific features of their garments such as cross-­straps and unusual long necklaces with a single row of vertical beads shows the details of their dress with keen observation.56 Being farther removed geographically, Egyptians could not bring to the depiction of Asiatics during the Old Kingdom such detailed information.

The Middle Kingdom Verbal and visual perceptions of ꜤꜢmw The Eleventh Dynasty While the Egyptian sources of the Old Kingdom lack any precise correlation between verbal and visual designations of foreigners, in the Eleventh Dynasty we observe for the first time the depiction and identification of Asiatic foreigners. The ethnographic designation ꜤꜢmw goes back to the Sixth Dynasty, but it is only in the Eleventh Dynasty, during the reign of Nebhepetre Mentuhotep, that the term may be confidently construed as referring to people pictorially identifiable as West Semites/Amorites. Nebhepetre Mentuhotep was the reunifier of Egypt in the First Intermediate Period (2040 B.C.).57 Relief blocks carved with battle scenes thought to have come from the lower colonnade of Mentuhotep’s temple at Deir el-Bahari58 may actually record incidents in the long and bitter struggle conducted by this king in reuniting and reorganizing Egypt.59 Although only fragments of battle scenes remain, the inscriptions label some of the enemies as ꜤꜢmw. The reliefs carved in the temple of Mentuhotep echo in art, Old Kingdom sentiments as reflected in texts, i.e. ꜤꜢmw, are a source of annoyance to the Egyptian population.60 But there the people designated ꜤꜢmw are depicted with the telltale pointed beards, long hair and fillet (Figs. 3.11a, b).61 Similar battle scenes are recorded in the tomb of Intef, a general who lived under Nebhepetre Mentuhotep and built his tomb at Thebes. These scenes may represent the same events of warfare

64

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

Figure 3.11a  Limestone relief fragment of a battle scene with defeated Asiatics.

against the ꜤꜢmw,62 since in style and iconography they are comparable to the paintings in the tomb of Intef (Fig. 3.12).63 The scenes in Intef ’s tomb represent a siege of an Asiatic fort; warriors are in combat with the Egyptians, while women and children flee. “The Asiatics are recognizable by their beards and shoulder length hair held in place by fillets. They wear multi-­colored, striped, spotted or crisscross decorated kilts of red, white, turquoise and blue.”64 Though the foes portrayed in the tomb of Intef are not labeled as ꜤꜢmw, we can infer that identification from the Mentuhotep reliefs and accompanying inscriptions to which the tomb paintings are so closely related. The reliefs from the reign of Mentuhotep are “official” views of foreigners, and exhibit the same themes and subjects of temple decoration of the Old Kingdom. However, although the iconography of the siege scene where Asiatics battle Egyptians

West Semites in Egyptian Art of the Old and Middle Kingdoms

65

Figure 3.11b  Part of a painted limestone temple relief depicting a bowing foreigner, Temple of Mentuhotep.

is known from the Old Kingdom, the Eleventh Dynasty example shows some new elements, chief among which is the depiction of Western Asiatics clad in brightly decorated textiles, rather than conventional white Egyptian kilts for men, or undecorated garments seen on women. This rendering of multicolored garments on West Semites appears again in the Twelfth Dynasty. Two interrelated questions now come to mind: what accounts for the changes in the representations of these people, and are these accurate realistic

66

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

Figure 3.12  Asiatic foreigners in a siege and battle scene from the tomb of Intef wearing kilts of multicolored designs, the women wear dresses of multicolored patterns.

portrayals? It is difficult to find an exact parallel in Near Eastern art for the designs on the garments in the Intef painting. This perhaps is largely due to the lack of preservation of paintings in monuments of the Near East. However, patterned textiles are represented in the paintings of the palace of Zimri-Lim at Mari in northern Syria.65 Designs on garments in the famous investiture scene of room 106 of the palace at Mari may be used as a comparison. However, caution must be exercised, and due attention should be paid to the cultic and mythological nature of the scene. Thus, one must be cognizant of what is reality and what is convention, since the Mari painting uses conventional forms of Mesopotamian art. Allowing for the phenomenon of form in the depiction of the garments, the scene may not show a realistic representation of the actual

West Semites in Egyptian Art of the Old and Middle Kingdoms

67

garments themselves. On the other hand, they may possibly reflect the colors and patterns worn at the Amorite court.66 As stated above, the garments shown in the Mari paintings are patterned and at least one of these patterns is similar in appearance to a dress worn by one of the female figures in the Egyptian Intef scene. This garment is seen on the goddess, and is patterned with vertical lines arranged on a horizontally tiered costume While there is a great difference between the form and function of the Mari painting, and the Egyptian Mentuhotep reliefs and Intef painting, Mari is a quintessentially Amorite cultural milieu in the Middle Bronze Age, and thus may be utilized for the unique data it supplies with regard to the physical appearance of Western Asiatics, including Amorites, during the Middle Bronze Age. The Eleventh Dynasty tomb of Intef, shows foreigners in a siege and battle scene. The theme is repeated from Old Kingdom prototypes, yet some new innovations appear in composition of the figures67 and in iconographical details. While the men wear short kilts, they are now rendered with unEgyptian multicolored or striped designs. Women are still depicted wearing long garments which flare out slightly at the bottom as in the Old Kingdom examples, but the dresses are now patterned with multicolored patterns.

The Twelfth Dynasty Because of the closer relationship between Asiatics and Egyptians during the Twelfth Dynasty, Egyptian representations of Asiatics became more accurate and detailed. The Twelfth Dynasty marked an era of change in Egyptian society and Egypt experienced increased contacts with her neighbors. A new king, Amenemhet I, ascended the throne, and moved the royal residence away from Thebes in the south to Itj Tawy68 in the north, after a period of internal strife within Egypt. The change in location of the court necessitated new building projects. Large workforces were established, the control of which became the responsibility of the Middle Egyptian hereditary princes who governed the outlying districts of the capital.69 Building projects were also undertaken abroad. The projects within Egypt helped to bring about increased exposure by Egyptians to West Semites, as foreigners filtered into Egypt on a more frequent basis. Egyptian officials were sent abroad to administer Egyptian posts in the Levant. The interchange and closer contact between Egypt and Canaan led to firsthand observation between the peoples of both lands. A fragment of a

68

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

papyrus (Fig.  3.13), found by the Egyptian expedition of the Metropolitan Museum of Art between 1906 and 1909 may provide information that relations with Byblos continued during the Middle Kingdom as they had during the Old Kingdom.70 On the recto of the papyrus, “there is a description of the outfitting of a Byblos-­boat from a place near the Residence,” the residence being ltjet-­ touie of the kings of the Twelfth Dynasty. In any event, the reading “Byblos boat,” kbnt, and kbnt nt pr nsw, “a Byblos boat of the palace,” illustrate the situation whereby foreign commerce was carried on as a royal monopoly. “Byblos boat” is also inscribed on a sealing with a flat wooden base from Lisht South, which names a [sailor of a] Byblos ship (Fig. 3.14).71

Figure 3.13  Papyrus Lythgoe: two papyrus fragments mentioning a Byblos boat.

Figure 3.14  A clay sealing inscribed “Byblos boat,” Lisht South.

West Semites in Egyptian Art of the Old and Middle Kingdoms

69

After a period of internal strife, Amenemhet I, set upon reestablishing the Egyptian state, and restored Old Kingdom ideals of royal sovereignty. The close proximity of Lisht to the royal cemeteries at Giza and Saqqara allowed the artists responsible for the decoration of the temple of Amenemhet I to imitate the style, content, and composition of the monuments of earlier periods.72 The artists of the new administration, looking back to Old Kingdom prototypes continued the traditional canonical forms depicting foreigners as captives. However, though the subject matter is the same, minor details show a closer relationship between Egyptians and their Asiatic foes. One of the most pronounced features of the representation of foreigners in the Twelfth Dynasty is the different types of hairstyle that first appear at this time. These hairstyles appear, for example, in relief scenes on blocks from the pyramid temple of Senwosret I. They represent the bringing in of foreign prisoners, showing the king’s victories over foreign lands, which continued to be placed around the entrance to the temples (Fig. 3.15). The first new hairstyle we are going to discuss can be illustrated by an example from the above-mentioned fragments of the relief now in the Metropolitan Museum.73 The scene is executed in sunk relief, characterized by the deep outline and modeled detail as in the raised relief of the period.74 Since sunk relief reflects light more easily than raised relief, it is usually reserved for exterior walls in strong sunlight.75 Thus the carving of the block in sunk relief suggests its placement had been around the entrance to the temple. The top part of the fragment76 shows two figures, originally part of a larger scene, of a procession of captives.77 The inscription above them reads: “Ꜥnt sqr Ꜥnh,” “brought in, smitten alive,” or “living captives brought in,” an ˘ expression known from a relief representing Libyan captives from the temple of Sahure.78 The figure on the left represents a man from Punt, a land south of Egypt. The curled hair with a fillet tied around the top, hair ending at the nape of the neck, the short square beard at the chin is typical of the iconography of peoples from the land of Punt in the earlier Old Kingdom. The second captive, dressed in the kilt of the Old Kingdom,79 is represented with an unusual hairstyle. The identification of this figure is problematic. The skin is painted yellow, and the red hair, caplike on top, curves downward and pulls up ending in a sharp point. The hair does not rest on the shoulder of the figure, rather there is a space in

70

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

Figure 3.15  Block of relief – captives (upper half and lower half of the scene). Lisht South, pyramid temple of Senwosret I, altar court, limestone, paint.

the area between the neck and the left shoulder. To my knowledge, this hairstyle does not appear in Egyptian art earlier than this example.80 Unfortunately, the relief is broken at the nose and chin, though traces of a pointed beard remain. Since foreigners were widely represented in kilts, and since beards alone are not always a reliable criterion,81 the most single telling feature for designating foreigners in Egyptian art is a distinctive hairstyle, even if this feature is not always completely reliable. It may be noted that during the reigns of Amenemhet I and Senwosret I foreigners are often shown with hairstyles that are new and

West Semites in Egyptian Art of the Old and Middle Kingdoms

71

not based upon Old Kingdom examples. This innovation may well be a reflection of a greater exposure of Egyptians to non-Egyptians, and, con­­ sequently, attempts at their more realistic depiction (Figs. 3.16 a–d). An attempt has been made here to identify the figure of the captive shown in the Senwosret relief based on hairstyle. Parallels for this hairstyle appear in tombs of the New Kingdom and Late Period as well. In the New Kingdom tomb of Puimre, an official of Tuthmosis III,82 there is a scene depicting foreign chiefs “coming in peace.” The scene represents a Syrian contingent bringing gold to Puimre. One member of the Syrian contingent wears a hairstyle similar to the prisoner in the relief of Senwosret (Fig. 3.16b), though it is shorter and exhibits more of a curve before ending in a sharp point. The hair is also bound by a fillet, which is absent on the figure in the Senwosret relief (Fig.  3.15). However, there is enough of a similarity between the two examples to suggest that it is meant to represent one and the same hairstyle. This New Kingdom figure is bearded and wearing a kilt which is fringed at the center of the hem. His skin is painted yellow. Another example of a similar hairstyle from New Kingdom painting is from the tomb Pehsukher Tjenenu.83 It shows a figure of a worker sitting and plucking a goose (Fig. 3.16c). He is a laborer in the official’s estate. The hairstyle is very similar to the one seen in the figure in Senwosret relief, and in the tomb of Puimre, though it is longer, the point extending beyond the right shoulder. He is bearded and wears a kilt. In the Late Period tomb of Ankh-Hor,84 an offering bearer dressed in a kilt and wearing a collar has the same hairstyle as the above three examples (Fig.  3.16d). He carries a vessel on his head. Bietak believes that the two offering bearers from the tomb of Ankh-Hor were copied directly from the tomb of Puimre where merchants were represented. He thinks this hairstyle is a simplification and stylization of the usual coiffure of the oases people. Since Ankh-Hor was a governor of the Bahriya Oases, it follows that oases figures are among the offering bearers in his tomb. Even though a fillet is a characteristic feature of the representation of Asiatics during the Old Kingdom and Eleventh Dynasty, during the Twelfth Dynasty no fillet is seen on male Asiatics, yet women are wearing them. But we can still consider them as Asiatics because of other typical iconographic features. The lack of fillet on the captive in the Senwosret I relief conforms to representations

72

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

Figure 3.16a  (Detail of Fig. 3.15) Asiatic captive from relief of the altar court of Senwosret I. Figure 3.16b  Detail of a Syrian in the New Kingdom painting from the tomb of Puimre. Figure 3.16c  Detail from a New Kingdom painting from the tomb of Pehsukher Tjenenu. Figure 3.16d  Detail from the Late Period tomb of Ankh-Hor.

West Semites in Egyptian Art of the Old and Middle Kingdoms

73

of Asiatics in Middle Kingdom private tomb paintings, where women, but not men, are wearing fillets.85 It seems possible, therefore, that the figure portrayed in the Senwosret temple relief could represent an Asiatic captive. On the other hand, perhaps this particular hairstyle was used to connote foreigners in general; thus when an Egyptian laborer is seen wearing this coiffure in a tomb painting, the implication may very well be that this is an assimilated foreigner, differentiated from native Egyptians by this hairstyle. Indeed, the above examples typify the difficulties involved in determining the differentiation of alien social groups living within Egyptian society during the early part of the Twelfth Dynasty. The second type of hairstyle illustrated by the early Twelfth Dynasty examples occurs during the reigns of Amenemhet I and Senwosret I at Lisht, and Senwosret III at Dahshur. It is also not represented earlier than the Middle Kingdom. For example, a relief of a foreigner with a long pointed beard about to hurl a spear which comes from the pyramid complex of Senwosret I has been identified as a Semitic warrior (Fig. 3.17). His thick hair, the top of which extends over the front of his forehead is not a traditional depiction of any particular ethnic group.86 Further, he does not wear a fillet, the lack of which is elsewhere typical of Twelfth Dynasty representations of male Asiatics. While traces of red pigment appear on the hair of the warrior, black is the more common hair color painted on Asiatics in Egyptian art. Nevertheless, the use of red pigment for the coloring of the hair may also serve as a useful tool for the identification of Asiatics in Egyptian art. As pointed out below, the coiffure seen on the statue of an ꜤꜢmw Semite from Tell el-Dab’a is also painted red (Fig.  3.18),87 as well as the Asiatic ꜤꜢmw seen in the reliefs of Mentuhotep (Figs.  3.11a, b).88 The rendering of the red hair on an Asiatic foreigner holding an axe in Tomb 2 at Beni Hasan has led the excavators to remark that “the reddish color of the hair in these people is remarkable” (Fig.  3.19).89 Note also that the Asiatic warriors seen in the tomb of Intef also have red hair (Fig. 3.12). The use of red pigment on the hair of the Asiatics is one of the ways in which the Egyptians differentiated “others.”90 This feature may also be seen on other foreigners as well, for example it is used as the color for Libyans in the Middle Kingdom tomb of Khnumhotep at Beni Hasan.91 While it certainly is possible that the Egyptians observed red hair on Asiatics, Libyans, and even Nubians, there may have been another, more symbolic, reason for the rendering of red hair on some foreigners,

74

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

Figure 3.17  Fragment from a battle scene depicting a foreigner throwing a spear and holding a a distinctive shield, limestone.

particularly in the case of Asiatics. Here we may perhaps rely on textual information from the ancient Near East. Red color applied to the body before battle is a feature which is described in Ugaritic literature. Could this use of red color for battle also be extended to apply to the hair? Thus, in the Ugaritic tale of King Keret, Krt rouges himself before a military campaign, as per the instructions of the god El: “He washed himself and rouged himself,” “yrths. wy’ adm.”92

West Semites in Egyptian Art of the Old and Middle Kingdoms

Figure 3.18  Fragmentary head of an Asiatic dignitary from Tell el-Dab’a, Second Intermediate Period.

75

76

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

Figure 3.19  Asiatic soldier with red hair. Tomb 2 of Amenemhet, Beni Hasan.

An even more explicit connection is attested in the Ugaritic poem of Aqht, in which Pughat, the daughter of Dan’ el, rouges herself after she dons the garb of a warrior: She wash[ed (her) hands] and shoulder(s), She rouged with the (extract of) sea-­mollusk, She donned the garb of a warrior, She placed a da[gger] in her girdle, A poniard she placed in her belt; And on top she donned a woman’s dress93

trth. [s. ydm]. w{.} -tkm tidm. bg´lp (.)ym . . . tlbš nps g´zr tšt h [lpn] bnšgh ˘ h.rb tšt bi’r[th] w’l tlbš nps. Ꜥt-t

West Semites in Egyptian Art of the Old and Middle Kingdoms

77

Within the context of the daily life of semi-­nomadic “Asiatics,” the color red has additional associations. In the biblical book of Genesis, Esau, is described as follows: “The first one emerged red, like a hairy mantle all over; so they named him Esau . . .94 When the boys grew up, Esau became a skillful hunter, a man of the outdoors.”95 Esau is also described as a nomadic warrior, “one who lives by the sword,” not unlike the styw group of the ꜤꜢm-Amorites: Your home shall be far from the earth’s riches And the dew of heaven above, By your sword you shall live96

Indeed, Esau’s characterization is not unrelated to that of his father-­in-law Ishmael: He will be a wild ass of a man [i.e. a denizen of the unpopulated wilderness)] His hand against one and all, and their hands against him; He will occupy areas in the presence of his kinsmen [i.e. he will occupy frontier or border areas].97

It has been noted that the description of Esau comprises several allusions: a. That the hairy mantle of Esau is a sign of uncouthness (the image of Esau may be compared to that of Enkidu in the Gilgamesh epic whose body is also described as being covered with hair).98 b. The habitat of Esau99 was the land of Seir, which may allude to the Hebrew word Se‘ar, “hair.” That Esau is described as an ’dmny red, is a word play with the land of Edom (which has a ruddy, shaggy terrain), which is another name for Esau.100 The image of Esau as uncouth may be compared to the textual images of the Styw people described in Egyptian sources.101 The description of Esau as hairy (red or other), may perhaps shed light on the Egyptian representation of the spear thrower from Lisht (his abundant hair and beard may be an allusion to an Egyptian perception of Asiatics as being grubby and hairy). The Egyptian use of the color red for the hair may also allude to the rouging of the skin as well, since, generally in Egyptian art, Asiatics are represented with yellow skin. The same interpretation may also be applied to the Asiatic mercenaries with

78

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

similar hairstyles in the tombs at Beni Hasan mentioned above. Further, in the Mentuhotep reliefs and Intef painting, although the hairstyle is based on Old Kingdom prototypes, the men in these scenes are represented with red skin and red hair! The color red is sometimes used for Egyptian deities. For example, a procession of gods appears in a painted limestone relief from the Pyramid Temple of Senwosret II at Lahun, excavated by Petrie and now in the Metropolitan Museum of Art.102 It shows a bull-­headed god on the left, and a ram-­headed divinity on the right. Between them, the East Delta god Sopdu, a deity associated with Asiatic foreigners, is represented with yellow skin and red hair (Figs. 3.20a, b).103 It may be noted that the color red was also connected with the Egyptian god Seth, and that Seth was associated with aggression. He is described in Egyptian spells as . . . “Seth, haughty, red-­haired, ruddy complexioned” (h.Ꜣ-k štš k.Ꜣ h.r dšr.t fꜤy mrš ἰnm).104 Seth was known as the Egyptian god of the desert and of foreign lands.105 So, the Egyptians associated red with: a. the desert (note too that the Egyptian term Dšrt for desert, denotes the color red); b. foreigners; c. warlike behavior.

Figure 3.20a  Relief of a procession of deities.

West Semites in Egyptian Art of the Old and Middle Kingdoms

79

Figure 3.20b  (Detail of Fig. 3.20a) Sopdu.

It is not unlikely, therefore, that the depiction of figures with red hair may reflect a broader association between the color red and uncouth, nomadic or otherwise belligerent foreigners.

80

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

Middle Kingdom provincial tombs at Beni Hasan Eleventh Dynasty The above discussion focused largely on Middle Kingdom official representations of Western Asiatics and/or Amorites found in royal monuments. We will now turn to the provincial tombs of the Middle Kingdom, briefly mentioned earlier, and examine this material separately since it reflects a different attitude on the part of the tomb owner or artists in preparing the tomb decoration. The paintings in these tombs seem to present a more accurate representation of the appearance, and a kind of commentary on the relations between contemporary Egyptians and Amorites. More specifically, it is the informal nature of these representations in the provincial tombs which presents a different perspective on foreigners from that of the official depictions considered above. Foremost are the tombs, i.e. nos. 2, 3, and 14, at Beni Hasan (ancient Menat Khufu), which is situated in Middle Egypt, 15 miles above the modern village of Minyeh, on the east bank of the Nile.106 The site is famous for its tombs belonging to the nomarchs, or provincial governors, of the Eleventh and Twelfth Dynasties who cut their burial places into the rock cliffs bounding the eastern edge of the Nile valley.107 These tombs are decorated with paintings and inscriptions depicting events and scenes in the daily lives of the high officials who lie within them (Figs. 3.21a, b, c). However, before we consider the indisputable representations of Asiatics in the Twelfth Dynasty tombs at Beni Hasan, mention should be made of some possible examples of Asiatics from the tomb of Baqt III (Tomb 15) and Khety (Tomb 17) at Beni Hasan,108 which probably date to the Eleventh Dynasty (Figs. 3.21a, b).109 Scenes in both of these tombs show Egyptians fighting other Egyptians. These scenes are perhaps representative of the civil war which befell Egypt. Among the Egyptian troops are a file of soldiers who appear to be nonEgyptians, and were probably mercenaries110 of indeterminate origin. Their short kilts, with wavy horizontal lines, seem un-Egyptian, and are more closely linked with the patterned garments of Asiatics, as we have seen in the Eleventh Dynasty tomb of Intef. Their hair, however, is short and they are beardless, distinguishing them from typical representations of Asiatics.

West Semites in Egyptian Art of the Old and Middle Kingdoms

Figure 3.21a  Asiatic mercenaries from Tomb 15 of Baqt III. Beni Hasan, main chamber east wall. Figure 3.21b  Mercenaries from Tomb 17 of Khety, east wall, Beni Hasan. Figure 3.21c  Mercenaries from Tomb 14 of Khnumhotep I, Beni Hasan.

81

82

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

Twelfth Dynasty provincial tombs Asiatics are more readily identifiable in the battle scenes represented in the tombs of the nomarchs of the Twelfth Dynasty. These scenes may represent the domestic strife with which Amenemhet had to deal. The General Nesumontu reports the destruction of the nomad Bedouin and the Asiatic “sand-­dwellers,” and mentions the destruction of fortresses.111 As in the Eleventh Dynasty tombs at Beni Hasan, the tomb of Khnumhotep I (Tomb 14), Administrator of the Eastern desert during the reign of Amenemhet I and a contemporary of Nesumontu,112 shows scenes of war, amongst which are seen three figures who are un-Egyptian in appearance. All three are carrying weapons. They appear to be Asiatics, and are probably mercenaries in the Egyptian army (Fig. 3.21c).113

Description The first figure wears a short pointed beard; his hair is caplike at the top, falling down and reaching the nape of the neck. It is full and rounded at the bottom. He is dressed in a kilt which reaches from the waist to above the knee. It has a pattern of wavy horizontal lines. The border of the hem ends in a narrow straight horizontal double line. A tab, or flap hangs down from the center, also designed with short horizontal lines. The top half of the body shows a band which crosses his bare chest114 over the right shoulder (perhaps it holds a quiver). He is barefoot, and wears ankle bands. He also has bands on his wrists. He carries an eye axe and a bow.115 The second figure following him has a short pointed beard. His hairstyle resembles that of the first figure at the top, but no separation is shown between the hairline and the neck. The space between the hair and the shoulder is greater than that of the previous figure. He also wears a short kilt which ends above the knees. The waistband, however, differs from that of the first figure in that it has a double line and another narrow double line above, leaving a wide space between them (a belt). He too is bare chested, and has a band extending diagonally across the chest which crosses over the right shoulder. Another band crosses diagonally down the chest, reaching from the center of the shoulder band and past the waist behind him. He too carries a bow, and he also carries a club. The pattern of the kilt differs from that of the first figure.

West Semites in Egyptian Art of the Old and Middle Kingdoms

83

It is divided into three vertical sections, filled with diagonal lines. Each section is separated by double vertical lines. He too is barefoot and wears ankle bands and wrist bands. Note that only the archers are wearing wrist bands, which are probably meant to represent wrist guards. They bring to mind the leather bracers found on the wrist of one of the archers of King Nebhepetre Mentuhotep.116 The third figure appears to have long hair extending to the shoulder, but there is no line here to demark where the bottom part of the hair ends. He wears a short unpatterned kilt, with a low waistband indicated by three lines. He too wears a strap which runs diagonally from the left shoulder (instead of right, as the two figures preceding him) and continues behind the waist on his right side. In his right hand he carries a club, while in the left is a sword dagger blade. He is also barefoot, but does not wear wrist or ankle bands. While closer in hairstyle and beards to the later Middle Kingdom examples, the garments hark back to the Eleventh Dynasty examples, except for the pattern of the kilt pictured in the second figure. Perhaps, these Asiatics represent the Styw of ꜤꜢmw peoples. Three of these possible Styw appear as mercenaries in this military scene. Three figures of Asiatic type also appear in the tomb of Amenemhat (Tomb 2) which dates from the time of Senwosret I (Fig. 3.22a).117 They also

Figure 3.22a  Mercenaries from Tomb 2 of Amenemhat at Beni Hasan, east wall.

84

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

appear to be mercenaries. As in the tomb of Khnumhotep I (Tomb 14), all three wear short pointed beards, are dressed in kilts and carry weapons. However, they differ from the representation in the tomb of Khnumhotep as follows: the hairstyle on all three figures, rather than being caplike at the top, extends slightly over the front of the head. The hair on the first figure stops before reaching the shoulder, but, instead of being rounded at the bottom, the part closer to the neck extends out in slightly diagonal line before it meets the rest of the hair. (The hair portrayed on the mercenaries is striking in its resemblance to one of the “slain soldiers of Nebhepetre Mentuhotep” (see Figs. 3.22b, c). Whether this warrior was a foreigner or not has not been determined, but it remains a possibility).118 In his left hand, he holds a socketless eye axe and a hurling stick.119 He wears a kilt with wavy, horizontal lines; the waistband is executed with a black diagonal line. The hem is executed in an uneven horizontal line. He is barefoot, and his left heel is raised above the ground line (or register) to indicate movement. The hair of the figure behind him, although similar, is fuller and more rounded at the bottom. His kilt is not patterned, and ends in a diagonal uneven line. He is barefooted and carries a spear and what appears to be a throwstick. The hair of the third figure ends at the left shoulder. His kilt has a narrow, double horizontal line at the waist, followed by wavy, horizontal lines. These garments flare out wider at the bottom than the above examples. He holds a spear in his left hand, and what might be a throwstick in his right hand. His left heel is raised above the ground. Thompson has described the Styw allies portrayed in Tomb 14 as remarkably resembling the ꜤꜢmw represented in Tomb 3 (Fig. 3.23a), and the warriors in Tomb 2 (Fig. 3.22a), as being of the same type.120 The differences in appearance between the Asiatics in Tomb 14 (Fig. 3.21c) and Tomb 3 (Fig. 3.23a) are as follows: 1. While the kilt on the first figure reaches from the waist to above the knee in Tomb 14, the two bare chested figures in Tomb 3 wear garments which reach from the waist to below the knee. 2. Whereas the decoration of the kilt in figure one, in Tomb 14 displays wavy horizontal lines, the pattern on the kilts of the Asiatics in Tomb 3 differ markedly in what they wear. A tab, or flap hangs down from the kilt

West Semites in Egyptian Art of the Old and Middle Kingdoms

85

Figure 3.22b  Slain soldier of Nebhepetre Mentuhotep.

Figure 3.22c  Mercenary from Tomb 2 of Amenemhat at Beni Hasan, east wall (detail).

86

3.

4.

5. 6.

7.

8. 9.

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

in the center on figure one; the border of the hem ends in a straight double line. Fringes appear on the hems of the garments of the last two figures in the Asiatics of Tomb 3. The top half of the body shows a band which crosses over the chest and over the right shoulder, leaving the left one free. It is probably a quiver. A similar band crosses over the chests of the group in Tomb 3 which also passes over the left shoulder. The hair on the Asiatic in Tomb 14 is rounded and caplike at the top, and comes down reaching the nape of the neck. It is full and rounded at the bottom. The hairstyle in Tomb 3 is shorter, and fuller, slightly conical at the base of the skull. It is cropped short and ends in a straight line, rather than rounded. The first figure in Tomb 14 wears ankle bands and wrist bands, but is barefooted; the two figures in Tomb 3 wear sandals. The figure in Tomb 14 carries an eye axe and a bow, and a club and a bow; the Asiatics in Tomb 3 carry a double bow and a duckbill axe. The second figure carries a lyre and water skin. Figure 2 in Tomb 14 wears a kilt which has a straight double line and another double line above it. A band crosses the chest over the right shoulder. Attached to it is another band which crosses it diagonally downward. In his left hand he carries a sword dagger. Figure 3 in Tomb 14 wears a short unpatterned kilt. The belt has three lines across, and is slightly diagonal. The figure in Tomb 14 has hair which ends at the shoulder, is barefooted, carries what might be a club in his right hand and a sword dagger blade in his left hand.

While all the groups mentioned carry weapons and other paraphernalia, and wear kilts, there are differences between them as we have just shown.121 Furthermore, Thompson brings out the fact that “it is hard to avoid the conclusion that we are dealing with at least closely related groups who lived somewhere in the Eastern Desert or Highlands.”122 It is here suggested that the distinctions between the mercenaries, and the ꜤꜢmw depicted in Tomb 3 described below, are different because of their lifestyles, which are reflected in their garments and accouterments.

West Semites in Egyptian Art of the Old and Middle Kingdoms

87

Amorite foreigners in the tomb of Khnumhotep II (Tomb 3) at Beni Hasan during the reign of Senwosret II The most famous scene in Egyptian art regarding the appearance of Asiatics in Egypt during the first half of the second millennium B.C. is painted in the tomb of Khnumhotep II who was the provincial governor of the town of Menat Khufu (modern Beni Hasan), and Administrator of the Eastern Desert, during the reign of Senwosret II (Fig.  3.23a). The scene of the Asiatics appears in the third register of the north wall of Tomb 3 which is filled with scenes from Khnumhotep’s life and administration. As discussed above, the importance of this painting lies in the fact that, since we have no Amorite self-­portraits detailing their native garb, the depiction of them as recorded in the tomb of Khnumhotep constitutes the major pictorial evidence for their appearance. Indeed, the plethora of minute details as to clothing, hairstyle, beard, and paraphernalia borne by men, women and children in the group suggests firsthand observation of Asiatics by Egyptians. The painting depicts ꜤꜢmw not as prisoners or mercenaries, but, for the first time, we see them in a different light, specifically as part of a peaceful trade mission to Egypt. Further, this novel depiction includes a change in

Figure 3.23a  Caravan scene of ꜤꜢmw Asiatics from Tomb 3 of Khnumhotep II, Beni Hasan.

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

88

the iconography of Western Asiatics in Egyptian art, with regard to the clothing, hairstyle, facial hair, and the association with items illustrative of daily life.

Description and comparanda The painting portrays a group of fifteen Asiatics who are being presented to Khnumhotep, by an Egyptian scribe and overseer of hunters. The procession of the Asiatics, whose skin is painted lighter than the Egyptians, moves from left to right. To the right is a figure of Khnumhotep who is drawn to a larger scale than the other figures. The inscription adjacent to the first figure of the group of Asiatics identifies him as Ἰb šꜢ, here construed as an Amorite proper name, Abishai, “My father is a nobleman.”123 He is apparently the chief, bearing the title h.k.Ꜣ hꜢst, “ruler of the foreign land.” He bends over slightly guiding an ˘ antelope with a short staff (Fig.  3.23b).124 The garment and the features of Abishai are unmistakably un-Egyptian. A general inscription accompanies the entire scene. It reads: “The arrival, bringing stibium, which thirty-­seven Asiatics brought to him.” An Egyptian scribe, Neferhotep, holds a docket in his hand introducing the group to Khnumhotep.125 The document reads: Year 6, under the majesty of the Horus: Leader of the Two lands; the King of Upper and Lower Egypt: Kha-­kheper-Re (Senwosret II). List of the Asiatics whom the son of the Count Khnumhotep brought on account of stibium, Asiatics of Šw(t). List thereof: 37.126

The hieroglyphic determinative for the term ꜤꜢmw in the inscription above shows a bound prisoner. This representation contrasts sharply with the rest of the scene which is one of a peaceful interaction. Thus, while the motif of the bound captive is anachronistic, the coiffure on the Asiatic prisoner correlates with the contemporary Amorite hairstyle as depicted in Egyptian art of the Middle Kingdom discussed above.

Ἰb ŠꜢ, the Amorite sheikh Garment Ἰb ŠꜢ is clothed in a colorful, fringed robe which covers him from shoulder to below the knee. The right shoulder is exposed. The garment is decorated

West Semites in Egyptian Art of the Old and Middle Kingdoms

89

Figure 3.23b  Detail of caravan scene from Tomb 3 at Beni Hasan showing Ib-Sha, ruler of the foreign land.

with wide vertical stripes which contain two kinds of designs: chevron design and wavy lines. The bottom hem and top border are decorated with horizontal wavy lines. The colors are red, white, and blue. Ἰb ŠꜢ is the figure leading the delegation. His garment is the most elaborate in the scene, thus indicting his social status and function as head of the group as opposed to the kilts worn by men of action.

90

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

Hairstyle and facial features The nose of Ἰb ŠꜢ is hooked, and he wears a short pointed beard. His hair is cropped short, mushroom shaped, with a concave rather than rounded top.127 This is the first time such a hairstyle appears in Egyptian art, and it may well be that it designated ꜤꜢmw Asiatics (i. e. the Amorites ꜤꜢmw of the MB II age) of a particular class Ἰb ŠꜢ does not wear a fillet. Prior to the Twelfth Dynasty, the wearing of a fillet was a characteristic feature of the representation of Asiatic men. The short pointed beard, here and elsewhere in the painting differs from the long pointed beards of Asiatics of the old and early Middle Kingdoms which disappear in the Twelfth Dynasty tombs at Beni Hasan.

Comparanda Garment While the garment is typically Syrian in style, a parallel for the exact patterns themselves has not been found in Near Eastern art. Perhaps the Egyptian artist took some liberties with the patterns, the colors being more significant than the designs themselves.128 The multicolored material was probably what struck the Egyptian artist most of all.129 The patterned textile in Ἰb ŠꜢ’s garment, however, is the most elaborate of the group. Although it is impossible to tell, it is most likely woven of dyed wool, since dyes take much better on wool than on linen. That elaborate dyed garments indicated prestige and wealth among West Semitic peoples is demonstrated by reputedly ancient biblical passages which associate well-­todo Canaanites with materials of this type. Thus, in Judges 5:30 rich booty from the Canaanites is described: “Spoil of dyed cloths (seba’im)130, for Sisera, Spoil of embroidered cloths, A couple of embroidered cloths, round every neck as spoil.”131 So, too, in another ancient poem, “the Blessing of Jacob,” Genesis 49, the dying of clothing is more obliquely referred to as: “He [Judah] launders his garment in wine, in the blood of grapes his raiment.” Hairstyle Our previous suggestion that the mushroom hairstyle designated ꜤꜢmw Asiatics is corroborated by the later representations of Asiatics. It may well be

West Semites in Egyptian Art of the Old and Middle Kingdoms

91

that this hairstyle was a means of distinguishing ꜤꜢmw from other Asiatics. Parallel representations for this hairstyle are seen on: a. The wig of an Asiatic dignitary (Fig. 3.18) found at the site of Tell el-Dab’a in the eastern Nile delta where remains of an extensive Canaanite colony was found with strata of Middle Bronze IIA and IIB culture. The site is currently being excavated by the Austrian Archaeological Institute in Cairo and the Institute of Egyptology of the University of Vienna. A colossal statue, almost twice lifesize, and sculpted in limestone, depicts an Asiatic dignitary with a mushroom-­shaped coiffure and a throwstick held at his left shoulder. The coiffure is red132 and “the color of the skin, yellow – the traditional color applied to Asiatics.”133 b. Head from a limestone statue of an east Delta dignitary (Fig. 3.24).134 The wig is rendered in the same mushroom shape seen on the Tell el-Dab’a statue, only without the striations. Dorothea Arnold has convincingly shown that both of these statues were carved by Egyptian sculptors.135 c. The gold pectoral from Dahshur of Queen Mereret136 (Fig. 3.25) from the time of Amenemhet III. It shows a typical smiting scene, with the king holding the topknot of a foreign captive. This motif is copied from earlier prototypes. The inscription tells us it is the Bedouin of Asia, Mnt-w st-t who is the prisoner, the terminology echoing Old Kingdom phraseology and sentiment. However, while we know that during the reign of Amenemhat III Asiatics were working peacefully with Egyptians, the scene on the pectoral is one of both visual and verbal propaganda, a reminder of the king’s power and his role as a controller of the forces of chaos. This type of composition and inscription follows the earlier versions. The most significant feature on the representation of the captives depicted on the pectoral is the new appearance of the Asiatics. The long hair shown on Asiatics of the Old Kingdom, and Eleventh Dynasty, was now replaced by the contemporary mushroom-­shaped hairdo. Asiatics who wear this hairstyle were not generally portrayed as Egyptian enemies,137 but

92

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

Figure 3.24  Limestone statue head of an Asiatic foreigner (from Tell el-Dab’a).

they appear here as prisoners for reasons of propagandistic ideology.138 This coiffure designates ꜤꜢmw. The captives are shown wearing a kilt rendered in vertical stripes. While the motif and inscription convey one message, the representation of the prisoner is in actuality an image of an Asiatic ꜤꜢmw type, some of whom have now assimilated into the Egyptian population, or are having peaceful, commercial or economic relations with Egypt.

West Semites in Egyptian Art of the Old and Middle Kingdoms

93

Figure 3.25  The gold pectoral of Queen Mereret from Dahshur.

Male figure with ibex Description The male figure following Ἰb ŠꜢ stands erect, and is shown with the same hairstyle and beard, but wears a patterned kilt separated by vertical lines. His chest and arms are bare. His garment appears to be tied at the waist, and the waistband is scalloped, rather than cut straight. The hem is obscured by the animal he tends, but it is probable that it reaches below the knee, as with the other kilted figures in the scene, and likewise it was probably fringed. Like Ἰb ŠꜢ the figure depicted here is also barefooted. With his right hand he holds a gazelle by the horn, and with his left hand holds a rope which goes around the neck of the animal. Next comes a group of four men who overlap one another, covering one another’s arms and clothing. They wear full length off-­the-shoulder garments. Two are patterned with vertical lines filled in by a zigzag design. The other two

94

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

wear full-­length undyed garments hanging from both shoulders. They are wearing sandals. The men wear sandals (probably made of leather), some of which have a heel strap and cross straps holding the foot, whereas the other type of sandal consists of cross straps and one or several long straps running from the ankle high strap over the front of the foot.

Comparanda The off-­the-shoulder garment, leaving the right shoulder and arm bare is a typically Syrian style and corresponds to the fashion in Mesopotamia at this time.139 This feature can be seen on the sculptures of the Shakkanakku (governors) of the Ur III period at Mari (Fig. 3.26).140 The possible influence of this style of dress upon Mesopotamia begins with the reign of Gudea141 and is followed by Ur-Ningirsu (Fig.  3.27). It should be noted, however, that garments thrown over one shoulder, leaving the other bare are known from the Early Dynastic period in Mesopotamia, but are chiefly worn by warriors, or women. For example, King Eannatum of Lagash is represented wearing a garment draped over one shoulder and ready for battle on the Stela of the Vultures. Female votive statues are also depicted wearing a cloak thrown over one shoulder, leaving the other bare. This same feature also appears on the small statue (found at Mari) of Lamgi-Mari, high priest of Enlil who is shown wearing a ceremonial garment.142 That Asiatics normally wore leather sandals143 is verified at the site of Jericho where processed leather survived in two tombs. In one of them, leather fragments were found around the feet of two children.144 More specifically, however, documents from Mesopotamia show that Amorites were involved in the leather industry.145 Buccellati states that the Amorites attested in the texts of Isin are recipients of finished leather products. Among the products received by Amorites are sandals.146 Description Following the four male figures, two children ride a donkey. Their clothes and shoes are hidden. They wear hairstyles which are similar to the ones worn by the adults. The saddle placed over the donkey is patterned, and colored blue and white. The donkey carries bellows, the handles of which point upward. A

West Semites in Egyptian Art of the Old and Middle Kingdoms

95

Figure 3.26  Diorate statue of Ishtup-Ilum, from Mari, Mesopotamian (eighteenth century BC).

third child, also with a similar hairstyle, walks. This child wears the same shoes as the women, and carries a spear in his left arm. All four women wear garments colored red, white and blue (but white predominates in the 1st and 3rd women). The garments reach down to the

96

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

Figure 3.27  Chlorite statue of Ur-Ningirsu, son of Gudea. Neo-Sumerian date: ca. 2080 BCE Mesopotamia, probably from Girsu (modern Tello), inscribed.

West Semites in Egyptian Art of the Old and Middle Kingdoms

97

Figure 3.28  Toggle, Tell el-Dab’a (Avaris), gold, glass inlay.

calves. Although they all wear garments that extend from the shoulder, three of them wear those garments as if they were fastened, presumably with toggle pins over one shoulder (Fig.  3.28). The other wears a garment which hangs down from both shoulders.147 So far as the actual patterns of the garments, H. J. Kantor has observed that “Although the Egyptian artist was depicting Asiatic peoples here, it is likely that he filled in the details of their costume with simple Egyptian designs.”148 Thus, Kantor dismisses the significance of the patterns as being truly indicative of the appearance of either Egyptian or Amorite textiles. She notes, however, that the angular pattern of lines bent at right angles on the dress of one of the Bedu women (Fig. 3.29a) is paralleled by the decoration on a stamp seal (Fig. 3.29b).149 This motif may also be compared to a similar stepped pattern depicted on the garment of a proto-Elamite silver bull from southwestern Iran, now in the Metropolitan Museum of Art (Fig. 3.29c),150 indicating that the pattern is attested in the ancient Near East 1,000 years earlier than the Beni Hasan example. The women wear headbands over their long hair, the strands of which separate at the bottom and extend over the shoulder in the front and behind.151 The second donkey carries a spear, a throwstick and bellows, the handles of

98

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

b

a

c

Figure 3.29a  Detail of women from the tomb painting of Khnumhotep II at Beni Hasan. The step pattern appears on the dress of the third woman from the right (center). Figure 3.29b  Seal with step pattern design. Figure 3.29c  Proto-Elamite silver bull holding a spouted vessel.

which point backward. This donkey also wears a patterned saddlecloth, yellow, and bordered in orange.152 The two male figures following the donkey are wearing knee-­length patterned kilts. Their hair and beard style is the same as the rest of the male figures. They too wear sandals of the same type as the four other figures. The first of these last two males carries a lyre and wears a water skin. The second figure carries a double bow, wears a quiver over his right shoulder, and, in his right hand, carries a Middle Bronze IIA fenestrated duckbill axe with a curved handle.153

West Semites in Egyptian Art of the Old and Middle Kingdoms

99

Comparanda While representations of horsemen and riding exist in Egyptian art of the New Kingdom154 only two examples of this motif are known from Middle Kingdom Egypt. Both examples depict Asiatic foreigners.155 The first, cited above, are the children borne by the donkey at Beni Hasan; the other portrayal occurs four times in relief scenes on stelae at Serabit el-Khadim dating to the reign of Amenemhet III (see Fig.  3.30a). This representation shows an Asiatic transporting himself on the back of a donkey.156 In one of the inscriptions he is labeled as the Khebdedem, the brother of the Prince of Retenu.157 The Beni Hasan painting and the relief at Sinai shows that, unlike Egyptian practice, donkeys were typically ridden by peoples in Syria and Palestine at the time of the Middle Kingdom. Visual, verbal, and archaeological evidence reveals counterparts to donkey-­riding in ancient Near Eastern–Canaanite sources. The Asiatic, but apparently nonEgyptian practice of riding on the back of a donkey may be documented from a number of sources: 1. Bronze Statuette of a Rider on a Donkey, now in the Bible Lands Museum, of the early second millennium BCE (Fig. 3.30b).158 The theme and stance of the rider is similar to the example at Serabit el-Khadim, but the hairstyle differs dramatically. While the Serabit figures have short-­ cropped hair, the hair on this example forms a smooth cap with sharp angles on either side of the forehead, but at the back it is gathered into a

Figure 3.30a  Serabit el Khadim – Asiatic transporting himself on the back of a donkey, Sinai Stele 495, South East Face (detail).

100

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

Figure 3.30b  Rider on a donkey.

long plait. The only indication of a garment is a belt just above the hips. The left arm is extended and the right arm bent. The rider’s clenched fists indicate that he may have held an object at a angle over his right shoulder, another vertically in his left fist.159

West Semites in Egyptian Art of the Old and Middle Kingdoms

101

Figure 3.30c  Scarab – female figure on a donkey.

2. The scarab in the Berlin Museum (Fig. 3.30c)160 depicts a female figure seated upon a donkey. A figure which follows behind her wears a knee-­ length kilt which is separated down the middle into two sections by curved lines going in opposite directions. This figure wears a belt with two shoulder straps. He carries a weapon (a spear) in his left hand, the arm of which is slightly bent at the elbow. The woman seated on the donkey is seen in profile. She wears a long hairstyle which stops at the right shoulder. Her nose is large, and the mouth is not defined. She wears a belt and the top part of her garment consists of two shoulder straps. She wears a long skirt, obscured by the donkey, and erosion on the seal. The decoration of her garment is executed by cross-­hatching.161 The body of the donkey is executed with the same cross-­hatching design as the woman’s garment. Does this woman represent a goddess? Perhaps it represents a mythological scene. The depiction of a female Asiatic astride a donkey like that of the Hyksos scarab, and, like that of the children on a donkey in the Beni Hasan tomb painting (Tomb 3), calls to mind analogous representations in early Canaanite literature as preserved on the tablets of Ugarit. Thus, in the Baal myth cycle, generally held to belong to the oldest stratum of Ugaritic literature (estimates range from the eighteenth to the fifteenth century BCE), El’s wife, the goddess Ashera, is depicted as follows (KTU 2, 1.4; IV 9:13–15):

102

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

yh.bq qdš wꜤ᾽mrr162 Qdš-­wamrr clasps, yšt-n ’at-rt/t-rt lbmt ‘r Sets Ashera astride a young donkey, lysmsmt bmt ph.l Upon the beautiful (i.e. beautifully adorned back) of a donkey

In true epic style the adornments with which the donkey is equipped is described in some detail: mdl ‘163 s.md ph.l št gpnm dt ksp dty yrq nqbnm Ꜥdb gpn ’tnt [y]

Harness a young donkey Fasten the trappings to a donkey, Put in place the saddle of silver, The straps (7) of yellow gold Ready the saddle of [my] she-­ass

Elsewhere, a mortal, Pg´t, Danel’s dutiful daughter is shown as equipping her donkey and being hoisted upon its likewise richly adorned back (KTU 2,1.19, II; 8–11). While no saddle reins are depicted in the Beni Hasan riding scene, or elsewhere, the children are depicted riding the donkey on top of a cushion-­like bundle which rests on a brightly colored decorative saddle blanket. While this arrangement is a far cry from the gold and silver of the Ugaritic portrayal, the use of beautifully decorated materials to cover the back of the donkey does seem to echo, albeit prosaically, the poetic motif of “the beautiful back of the donkey.” The second donkey likewise sports an ornate saddle blanket. So, too, Biblical echoes of this early Canaanite literary topos or “type scene” are not wanting in number.164

Bronze beaker from Mesopotamia The bronze beaker [Figs. 3.31a, b], of repousse and trace work decoration165 is divided into two registers. In the lower register, a figure sits on the back of an ass. He holds what appears to be a throwstick in his right hand, and guides the ass with rope reigns.166 Three female figures follow behind him. To the right, two goats flanking a tree, one of which is being attacked by a lion. They are followed by two male figures. The first one holds a fenestrated axe with his right hand which is raised, and he holds an animal with his left hand. While the kilts on the first four figures on the top registers are separated into two parts with a single-­hatched border going round the curved portion of

West Semites in Egyptian Art of the Old and Middle Kingdoms

103

the wraparound, the other figures wear kilts with a straight single border and appear to be belted. Short vertically-­hatched lines fill in the border on the kilt of the last figure on the top register, and the figure holding the fenestrated axe in the register below. The top register shows a procession of male figures dressed in kilts moving to the right and bearing gifts to a seated male figure. This figure is perhaps a king or a ruler. He is dressed in a long garment with a single hatched border running down the front and another along its lower edge. He is enthroned and holding a cup in his right hand. The first two figures are bald and beardless. The first figure has two upward curling locks. They wear short skirts with single-­hatched borders. The third figure has a beard and striated hair. The rest of the male figures have the same hairstyle and beard. The last three figures could be associated with a form of the god Amurru.167 The various features on this beaker have antecedents in Mesopotamia, and the style of the striated hair and beard has wide currency on Mesopotamian, Iranian and Cappadocian monuments. The closest parallels to the background for this vessel are the Assyrian colony period (1940–1920 BCE) seals.168

Byblos dagger sheath from the Obelisk Temple at Byblos The Near Eastern custom of riding can also be seen on a dagger sheath of local craftsmanship169 from Byblos (Fig. 3.31c). A rider sits on the back of a donkey. He holds a throwstick in his right hand, and grasps the ears of the donkey with his left hand, arm extended. He is bare chested, but wears a short tight-­fitting kilt. While W. S. Smith mentions the fact that the manner of the drawing is adopted from Egyptian methods of representation, D. P. Hansen remarks that the “gold dagger from the Obelisk Temple at Byblos both iconographically and stylistically reveals a combination of elements derived from both Egypt and Mesopotamia.”170 The rendering of the hair (or tightfitting cap) and kilt of the rider is executed in cross-­hatching, similar to that on the skirt of the female rider represented on the Hyksos seal. This artistic practice seems to be Asiatic in style. The lyre was introduced into Egypt from Western Asia. It is known from the Early Dynastic II and III periods in Mesopotamia.171 This is the first time it is represented in Egyptian art (Fig. 3.32a)172 (Once in Egypt, it became part of

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

104

Figure 3.31a  Bronze beaker (man riding a donkey).

b

c

Figure 3.31b  Bronze beaker (detail). Figure 3.31c  Dagger sheath from the Obelisk Temple at Byblos (donkey rider).

West Semites in Egyptian Art of the Old and Middle Kingdoms

105

Figure 3.32a  Lyre player from the tomb of Khnumhotep II at Beni Hasan.

its instrumentarium, Fig. 3.32b173).174 L. Manniche notes that its very accurate drawing includes the arrangement of a group of strings running at an angle to the strings being played.175 The Egyptian term knnwr176 is a foreign loanword. It is also a foreign loanword into Akkadian – kinnāru, possibly Amorite, since it is found at Old Babylonian Mari,177 cognate to West Semitic – Hebrew, kinnōr, Ugaritic knr, etc.178 The biblical description of the lifestyle and activities of the Midianites in the Patriarchal Period who brought balm from Canaan into Egypt (Gen. 37) doubtless represents continuity with earlier Amorite activity, namely going between urban centers carrying their goods, services and culture.179 The duckbill axe carried by the Beni Hasan warrior is well-­known in the ancient Near East and occurs in the area from northern Mesopotamia to Cyprus and Anatolia. It is significantly found on the eastern shores of the Mediterranean, especially at Byblos and Ugarit.180 The warrior in tomb Z122 at Baghouz (5 miles from Mari) was found in a flexed position, with a duckbill

106

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

Figure 3.32b  Partially restored oblique lyre, Thebes, el-Asasif.

axe facing the skull which parallels the one in the Beni Hasan painting.181 Fenestrated and duckbill axes were produced at the workshops of the Assyrian merchant colony of Karum Kanesh after prototypes were introduced into Anatolia probably by the Assyrians, who made their way to Anatolia via Syria.182

Overall analysis of the Beni Hasan “caravan” scene The scene of the Asiatic ꜤꜢmw painted in the tomb of Khnumhotep II at Beni Hasan has been the subject of several studies and interpretations.183 Though the reader is referred to the various discussions, a brief overview will be given here. Goedicke sees the ꜤꜢmw as immigrants in the employ of the Egyptian government and under the control of the centralized government of Senwosret II at Lisht. The fact that they are bringing eye paint has led Goedicke to suggest that they were working in the galena mines in the Egyptian desert. Kessler, looking at the scene in the context of the tomb as a whole, and in relation to the other scenes on the same wall as well, proposes that the Asiatic group be seen as part of the celebration of the wpt-­rnpt184 festival, and also views them as migrant workers. Seen within the context of other scenes, J. Kamrin points out that eye paint appears as one of the determinatives for the invocation offering formula in this

West Semites in Egyptian Art of the Old and Middle Kingdoms

107

tomb (and in many other offering formulae and offering tables) and is also found on Khnumhotep’s II’s cult menu. Thus the bringing of this item by the Asiatics insures a continual supply of this valuable commodity.185 She also sees the effect of the scene as parallel to royal iconography in Egyptian mortuary temples where bound prisoners are represented186 – thus representing the subservience of the foreigners and showing the king’s domination of earth outside Egypt. In this way it can be read as a statement of order over chaos.187 Other scholars have taken the accompanying inscription at face value and viewed the scene as representing part of a caravan of traders who came to Beni Hasan to bring eye paint.188 It is curious, however, that, although the inscription states that the reason for this commercial venture was for the bringing of eye paint, msdmt, nowhere is the galena depicted. Obviously the main point of interest to the artist was the appearance of these people, rather than their merchandise.

Interpretation The Egyptian rendering of the ꜤꜢmw Asiatics at Beni Hasan reads like an index to determining a Middle Bronze IIA West Semitic lifestyle. The Egyptian description shows that the ꜤꜢmw Asiatics represented in the tomb of Khnumhotep II are itinerant traders/tinkers, bringing goods from afar, and that the objects they are bringing affiliates them with urban centers.189 Though they themselves are on the move, they carry the accouterments of their higher Amorite culture with them. The biblical story of Joseph, as well as the Egyptian story of Sinuhe makes it clear that there was traffic between the ꜤꜢmw and the Delta. Some ꜤꜢmw go as far as the Delta, and go back to Retenu. Some stay in the Delta and move about Egypt, but are carrying goods from their cousins who stopped in the Delta and then went back to Retenu. In the biblical text, Midianites (or Ishmaelites) bring balm from Gilead to Egypt.190 The representation shows that they wear clothes deriving from a place where wool is abundant.191 The garments feature artistic design and show that they are from a place where the raising of sheep for shearing comes together with weavers and dyers, suggesting an urban settlement. So, too, leatherworking implies the process of tanning, which in turn implies the availability of the requisite chemicals. Thus it shows a lifestyle of fringe Amorites who have roots in a sedentary culture;192 the sedentary groups have not severed their roots

108

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

from those that are not sedentary. In the Beni Hasan painting we can see the symbioses of nomads wearing and carrying the products of their sedentary kinsmen – woven and dyed garments, music, metallurgy, and leatherworking. All of these features have roots in that segment of Amorite culture that is sedentary, but is moved about by the segment of the ꜤꜢmw that are nomads. A comparison here might be made with the tradition preserved in the biblical book of Genesis,193 where the genealogy of Cain suggests a close association between musical craft, metallurgy, and nomadism. Yet the figure of Cain is also credited as the first city builder. Behind these biblical traditions stands a socio-­ economic reality, itself given pictorial representation in the Beni Hasan painting. There is an interrelationship. Thus Cain is a prototype of sedentary peoples with higher material culture194 who trace their roots to and maintain connection with nomadic elements. Cain and his descendants are the literary counterpart of the Beni Hasan painting, where different elements are combined and are thus shown to be intimately related.195 The Beni Hasan group carry the badge of city life on their clothing and their weaponry. Their nomadic association is communicated by the representation of the first two male figures shown with desert animals (the gazella dorcas and ibex nubiana),196 which associates them with a steppe environment.197 The inscription adjacent to Ἰb šꜢ labels him as the h.k. Ꜣ hꜢst – a prince or chief of a foreign desert/steppe country. ˘ Thus the inscription correlates with the visual representation. The emphasis in this scene seems to be on the animals.198 The donkeys with saddle packs show the travelling aspect of the group. Donkeys are beasts of burden and are associated with caravans,199 and also used as an indication of status.200

4

West Semites and the Economic Life of Egypt

In this chapter, sites where West Semites lived and worked will be examined and the nature of their presence there will be determined. Reactions by Egyptians to the presence of the Asiatic foreign element will be analyzed. We will determine whether or not the changing context of their interaction is manifest in Egyptian material culture, as well as literary and artistic depictions of West Semites. Do these depictions follow the stereotypical traditionalism of the loathsome Asiatic, or do the attitudes reflect new political and social realities? Although the topic of the social stratification of Asiatic foreigners living in Egypt has been dealt with in the literature to some degree, these studies have for the most part been limited to a particular region, village, town, or site.1 This chapter will attempt to synthesize the data from the various studies, add new material to the existing corpus, open new lines of investigation, and assess the character of the Asiatic presence in Egypt during the Middle Kingdom. It has been noted previously in the literature that during the Middle Kingdom, weavers, dancers, and other professionals from abroad were living in Egypt.2 It also has been stated that “Asiatics were appreciated as workers inside and outside of Egypt in the second half of Dynasty XII.”3 While it is true that ꜤꜢmw Asiatics were placed in all levels of employment in Egyptian society, comparative materials from the Near East may illuminate the nature of the presence of a large number of the resident aliens in Egypt during the Middle Kingdom. It is suggested here that Asiatics were engaged in the same professions they held in their native lands, either as servants or as free men or women. We will examine each area where the evidence points to this hypothesis.

110

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

Evidence of Asiatics as weavers in the Egyptian sources during the Middle Kingdom comes from a papyrus said to have come from the area of Thebes in the south, which shows that Asiatic servants were attached to the households of provincial officials and other non-­royal persons; and from various texts of the pyramid town of Kahun in Middle Egypt which documents that Asiatics were temple weavers. The papyrus, now in the Brooklyn Museum (Figs. 4.1a, b), is one of the most precious pieces of evidence for understanding the social position of ꜤꜢmw in Egypt during the late Middle Kingdom. It lists a group of servants (hmnw) who were transferred to a new owner from the household of

Figure 4.1a  Late Middle Kingdom papyrus mentioning female Asiatic servants who were mostly weavers.

West Semites and the Economic Life of Egypt

111

Figure 4.1b  Handwritten copy of the papyrus mentioning female Asiatic servants who were mostly weavers.

an official.4 The entries listed on the papyrus give the name and title of a servant, or a child of a servant, and their particular trade or occupation. For example, of the seventy-­nine servants listed, forty-­five were Asiatics (ꜤꜢmw), thirty-­three were Egyptians and one was of undetermined nationality. About thirty names from the list of the Asiatic servants were labeled as Northwest Semitic by those who examined them. These names were analyzed by W. F. Albright,5 and also discussed by Hayes,6 who noted that the Semitic names suggested that these ꜤꜢmw Asiatics were recent importations. In addition to the Semitic names borne by these Asiatics, Egyptian names were also bestowed upon them.7 A principal occupation of the Asiatic female servants imported from Asia was the production of linen cloth, a trade requiring some skill. Of the nineteen servants who were weavers, only one was Egyptian, the rest comprising only Asiatics.8

112

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

The probable Theban provenance of the Brooklyn papyrus may be evidence that the Asiatics, who were generally settled in the north, particularly in the area of the Delta (as shown by excavations at Tell el-Dab’a), had become assimilated enough into the Egyptian populace to be working in the south. The presence of two female Asiatic weavers is also attested at Kahun,9 so Middle Egypt is represented in this group as well. Barber, in her study of textiles, notes that in early societies the making of textiles was predominantly a female occupation, since it is an occupation which can be carried out concurrently with child care.10 She also points out that in Egypt, the labor force for textile manufacture is almost exclusively female until the Eighteenth Dynasty. Thus, it is not surprising that Asiatic female servants would be placed in an occupation typical of “women’s work.” But, perhaps there was another reason. It is feasible that the Asiatic weavers were brought to Egypt for this purpose since so many of the Asiatic women were utilized as weavers.11 Perhaps they were considered to be “cheap labor,” or that their weaving was of a special nature. It is possible that the western Asiatic immigrants, now in Egypt, were employed in tasks requiring special skills – perhaps various skills reflecting professions in which they were engaged in their Mesopotamian or Canaanite homelands, in this case as weavers. As a matter of fact, the making of textiles is an industry well documented in the ancient Near East. A Mesopotamian contract tablet attests that during the Old Babylonian period, the technique of weaving linen was known.12 Metal figurines of the Third Millennium used as foundation deposits at sites in Mesopotamia such as Lagash showed remains of the cloths in which these objects were wrapped.13 The production of textiles is also known from textual evidence from Sumer in southern Mesopotamia, and at Aššur in the north from documents found at the Assyrian trading colony in Cappadocia. Textual sources also document a textile industry at Ebla and at Mari in Syria. In addition, records which come from the Temple of Inanna at Nippur during the Ur III period, for example, show that a weaving establishment was set up here14 and was staffed in large part by women and children (male and female). One document lists twenty-­ three women and children, specifically described as female weavers.15 Another document characterizes nineteen women and children, including some who had run away, as weavers; another lists cloth garments given to various goddesses.16 At Lagash, weavers are known from pre-Sargonic and Ur III texts. Lagash remained an important center of the woolen textile industry throughout the

West Semites and the Economic Life of Egypt

113

latter half of the third millennium, and an Ur III text lists 6406 or 6466 female weavers in the district of Lagash.17 Female weavers and their children produced large quantities of cloth in the workshops of Lagash which played a key role in both local economies and long-­distance trade.18 Sippar was also a center of the wool industry.19 Large groups of weavers were employed by the palace.20 Our knowledge of the manufacture and trading of textiles at Aššur in northern Mesopotamia comes from Levels II and Ib of the karum area at the site of Kultepe Kanesh in Anatolia. The documents, written in the Old Assyrian dialect, show that textiles were an important commodity during the early part of the second millennium and was part of the ongoing trade between Aššur and the central Anatolian plateau. The texts reveal that the Assyrians reflect a dual origin. Many of the names, although Assyro-Babylonian in construction, are West Semitic.21 Whereas some of the cloth was manufactured at Aššur, the majority of it seems to have come from Babylon. It was brought to Aššur by Babylonian merchants.22 The most commonly attested type of textile was the linen-­cloth, the tug/kutānum23 and was one of the principal exports mentioned from Aššur. A private letter from Kanesh, written in Old Assyrian, is only one example of the many letters dealing with the transport and payment of textiles. In a letter to Puzur-Aššur, lines 9–18 we read: We shall send 100 Kutānum-textiles and 4 donkeys with Šu-Bēlum to Wahšušana for purchases and we send Idi-Adad along with Šu-Bēlum. ˘ He will receive the price of your textiles, namely the 100 pieces that Šu-Bēlum brings to Wahšušana, in silver when you arrive.24 ˘

Administrative documents from Ebla point to a textile industry at this important Syrian center.25 Matthiae considers that the preponderant role assumed by trade in textiles at Ebla “developed in quantity and quality to the point where it became characteristic of the city.”26 He notes that the importance of trade in textiles is documented in the Mardikh IIB1 State Archives which “was still flourishing in the following phase (Mardikh IIB2), to judge from Mesopotamian economic texts of the Second Lagash Dynasty recording the arrival of textiles from Ebla.”27 He notes the “astounding size of the geographical area concerned in distribution of cloth from Ebla” which extended (besides many centers of the Syrian region) “from the Mediterranean coast in the west to the Tigris valley in

114

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

the east, and from Central Anatolia in the north to Palestine in the south.” In the coastal area substantial consignments had Byblos as their destination.28 Matthiae suggests that a reason for the appearance of Byblos in this context “may well have been its central importance in the Egypt trade, of which there seems to be no direct evidence in the Ebla documents.”29 Further, given the overwhelming number of texts which deal with textiles, I. Gelb has described the mainstay of the local economy of Ebla as sheep raising, supplying the wool for the production of textiles, the main export product of Ebla. He states that “wool was the basis of Ebla’s commercial prosperity and political power.”30 Texts show that sheepherders from Mardu sent their wool to Ebla and the skilled Eblaites wove it and made the clothing for the leaders of Mardu. The trade in textiles between Gubla (Byblos) and Mari are attested by several documents from Mari.31 The foregoing examples concerning weaving in Mesopotamia and the Levant spring from areas of an Amorite cultural orbit. Although, from the Egyptian point of view, weavers were thought to be of a lower level of society,32 it is likely that there were different strata amongst the weavers themselves. A temple weaver, or one of a royal or even an official household, must have had quite a bit of skill, and would surely have been considered superior to those weaving for the average laborer.33 Hayes notes that the Asiatic servants in the list of weavers were more highly regarded than their Egyptian co-­workers, as their trades required more skill. The evidence from the New Kingdom is perhaps more telling in textual and material sources. R. Hall states that: the annals of Tuthmosis III report that Syrian captives were cloth makers on the estate of Amun at Karnak, possibly instructing the Egyptians in the Asiatic art of tapestry weaving. The same pharaoh presented one hundred and fifty Asiatic weavers to one official.34

In the tomb of Rekhmire at Thebes, vizier to Tuthmosis III, an inscription above a scene showing Rekhmire making an inspection of the workshops in Karnak, in which foreigners are represented reads:35 [Rekh-­mi-Re making an inspection of the workshops] in Karnak [and the serfs] whom His Majesty [had brought away] from his victories in the southern and northern lands as the pick of the booty, [he] the Good God,

West Semites and the Economic Life of Egypt

115

the lord of Egypt, Men-­kheper-Re – blessings on him – for the manufacture of king’s linen, bleached linen, fine linen, . . . linen, close-­woven linen, [serfs] who [now] present their cloth for [Amun] at all [?] his festivals corresponding in their number [tnwt?] to the millions of years of the sovereign . . .

Davies concludes from the layout of the scene that “the serfs were allocated to two main departments, the weaving of cloth and the tending of cattle, and that in the former case, women are counted on more than the men.” He also points out that among the women who include Hittites and Nubians, Syrians with flounced skirts are represented. Children are also represented in the scene.36 During the New Kingdom, a vertical loom was introduced in Egypt from abroad. A few depictions of men are seen weaving in tomb reliefs, and at the same time new decorative textile techniques turn up in the Egyptian repertoire.37 Barber states that both the loom and techniques seem to have come from Syria or thereabouts at least partly as a result of Tuthmosis III bringing home Syrian war captives to work in his workshops. Tuthmosis III records bringing home foreign textiles and workers as part of the booty from the sack of Megiddo, so we have some guarantees that Syrian textiles were well-­known in Egypt by the mid-Eighteenth Dynasty. Barber notes that the gala tunic of Tutankhamun, with its wide embroidered band of mixed Egyptian and Syrian motifs, was clearly produced specifically for that pharaoh, but by foreign craftspeople. She concludes that the tunic must have been made in Egypt by a combined effort of Syrian and Egyptian artisans, the art of embroidery associated specifically with Syria and notes that “typically Syrian designs appear on the tunic, such as the ‘predator biting prey’ motif, winged griffins and beasts in a flying gallop.”38 However, given the “internationalism” of the New Kingdom–Late Bronze Age, these designs were now part of the Egyptian repertoire, and far more importance should be placed on the foreign technique of embroidery which was now introduced into Egypt. Evidence for complete assimilation can perhaps be seen in the tomb paintings at Beni Hasan, which records the industry of the production of cloth in the hands of the nomarch. (The nomarchs may have supplied the royal capital at Lisht.) Although all of the women depicted in these scenes appear as Egyptians in every way, perhaps some of them are actually Asiatics (Fig. 4.2). There is no inscription to confirm this deduction, but inference can be made that they were so fully assimilated into this community, they were considered

116

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

Figure 4.2  Painting of weavers from the tomb of Khnumhotep II at Beni Hasan.

“residents,” and were not differentiated as foreigners.39 This aspect occurs in the tomb of Rechmire, where the caption says the workers are captives of war, but yet their appearance is Egyptian. Syria and Mesopotamia engaged in long-­distance trade with garments. While Egyptians were certainly skilled in the fine arts of weaving, the lands of the Near East were famous for it, as their industry extended outside of their own territories. For such a diverse clientele, it would seem that the Egyptians might wish to consult the Near Eastern resident immigrants, who perhaps by now in some cases had become assimilated into the Egyptian populace, and would call upon their technical and artistic expertise.

Dyeing In the previous section it was concluded that weavers of foreign Asiatic extraction, most probably Amorites, plied their trades once in Egypt. Dyeing, a process closely associated with textile production, is a commonly attested profession in the coastal region of the Levant.40 Thus it is not unlikely that dyers

West Semites and the Economic Life of Egypt

117

from these areas who migrated to Egypt would have pursued their professional skills in their new surroundings. Support for this assumption comes from the pyramid town of Kahun, a large mud brick settlement which housed the professional personnel and construction laborers for the construction of Senwosret II’s pyramid at el-Lahun. Kahun is located in the province of Faiyum and is a prime example of an urban Middle Kingdom settlement.41 Material remains, supported by textual evidence from this site, reveal that foreigners lived and worked at Kahun during the time of Senwosret II, and that among the immigrant population at Kahun there was a West Semitic component. As mentioned above, the textual evidence from Kahun shows that among these West Semitic Asiatics were female weavers who were specifically identified by the female gentilic ꜤꜢmt. During the Old Kingdom, various Egyptian terms were used to describe particular types of linen. One of these terms, ἰdmy, is understood to refer to a red-­colored linen.42 Another term employed for red linen is ἰnsw or ἰnsy. The term ἰnsy is generally used in conjunction with funerary and religious rites.43 The two terms, ἰdmy and ἰnsy, known from the Old Kingdom, show that the Egyptians were coloring cloth at an early date. It will be observed that these terms are used specifically with linen.44 The production of wool is usually associated with the ancient Near East. This is not to say that the Egyptians did not produce wool. Sheep were reared in Egypt, but the preferred material for clothing, domestic textiles, and religious purposes was undyed linen. Wool has been found in Egypt, but it is a rare find and is usually confined to such early sites as Nagada.45 However, wool was also found during excavations of Middle Kingdom date at the pyramid town of Kahun, mentioned above as a locus for West Semitic weavers. Petrie, who excavated the site, reports the discovery: “Wool was also spun, a handful of weaver’s waste is mainly made up of blue worsted ends and ends of blue wool with some red and green ends. A lump of red dyed wool, not yet spun, was found.”46 The presence of both dyed wool and West Semitic weavers at Kahun is most suggestive. Thus E. J. W. Barber states that there is no reason to believe that the Egyptians were skilled in either weaving or dyeing wool during the Twelfth Dynasty, or were even raising the appropriate types of sheep (those depicted are all of the hairy varieties).47 While the Egyptians obviously knew how to use pigments for dyeing linen during the Middle Kingdom, very little is known about the technique. A red

118

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

dye which contained pure haematite was found on mummy wrappings from one of several tombs near the pyramid-­complex of Amenemhet II at Dahshur.48 Another rare actual example is the red dyed linen used in the wrapping of Wah’s mummy (Fig. 4.3a).49 Wah was the overseer of the estate of the wealthy Egyptian official Meketre at Thebes. A model of Meketre’s funeral procession shows one of the offering bearers supporting a board carrying linen sheets piled on his head, all of which are white, except for one, which was dyed red,

Figure 4.3a  Red dyed linen of the treasurer Wah.

West Semites and the Economic Life of Egypt

119

Figure 4.3b  Offering bearers of the royal chief steward Meketre, carrying white linen with one red bolt.

like the one wrapped around Wah’s mummy (Fig. 4.3b).50 Since only a handful of dyed textiles have survived from the Pharaonic period, and since the use of wool was not the Egyptian norm, the question arises as to whether or not the Egyptians themselves were responsible for the unspun red wool and dyed scraps of spun wool discovered at Kahun. Rather, a more likely source was the West Semitic professional population living and working at that location. It was noted above that the Egyptians did dye their linen red. Barber points out that red was one of the most popular colors from very early times, found among the first surviving examples of dyed textiles or fibers in every area: Mesopotamia, the Levant, Egypt, Anatolia, the Caucasus, and various parts of Europe. She also states that the “simplest way of coloring cloth a reddish hue is to soak it or its yarn in iron-­bearing – i. e. red-­brown – mud, and suggests that it seems likely that such would have been the first common pigment for cloth.”51 Local Egyptians were certainly aware of colorful garments worn by the Amorite foreigners, judging from their representation in the tomb paintings of

120

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

Khnumhotep II at Beni Hasan.52 It is not unreasonable to assume that like garments were actually bought and sold. As mentioned above, one of the terms the Egyptians used for red-­dyed linen was ἰdmw or ἰdmy. It hardly seems coincidental that the Semitic root ’adm denotes the color red and more specifically, in the Amorite language, the term adammu refers to a “red garment.”53 Further, the Old Babylonian term adamātu, means “dark red earth (used as a dye).”54 The term da’mu in Akkadian is also used for a dark red earth used as a dye, and is likewise applied to red-­dyed wool in particular.55 J. R. Harris noted that the Assyrians recognized three different shades of red: sāmu, ranging from the red of red ochre and blood to the brown of opium and alum (and also the tint of red gold); sându, ranging from the red of cinnabar, blood and litharge to a rose color; and ruššû, the russet of corn and gold.56 Since none of these well-­attested Akkadian terms are cognate to the Semitic root ’dm, the terms adammu and adamātu may well be West Semitisms or an Amorite loanword into Akkadian. In the West Semitic of the Hebrew Bible, the term adm appears in connection with the red clay from which “Adam,” the first man, was formed. Likewise, the nation “Edom” takes its name from the red clay earth typifying its terrain. The term adm is used repeatedly in the Biblical text with reference to red dyed clothes and animal skins. In the wilderness accounts57 the Hebrew god Yahweh instructs Moses to bring him offerings from the children of Israel for the wilderness tabernacle. The term used is me’oddam, a pual participle qualifying red-­dyed ram skins.58 This well-­attested West Semitic usage may well be reflected in the Egyptian term ἰdmy/w especially as an Amorite loanword in Egyptian. Egyptians highly valued and associated the red dye with Amorite technology.59 Moreover, it appears that the term ἰdmy refers to dye composed of red earth. Thus Egyptian ἰdmy, referring to red dye (derived from red earth), is a Kulturwort, which Egyptians themselves directly associated with the dying techniques of Amorite professionals working in their midst, and a term which Egyptians would have most likely adopted from them. It was noted above that another Egyptian term, ἰnsy, was used to denote the color red.60 The latter vocable may conceivably be related via metathesis61 to the Hebrew term šny, which denotes crimson or scarlet dyed fabric, or thread.62 Thus the ἰnsy linen presented to various Egyptian gods in the temple of Sety I in Abydos was, in fact, bright red.63 The same term has been recognized in Ugaritic tn.64 ˉ

West Semites and the Economic Life of Egypt

121

The Hebrew term šny appears together with tola’at, “worm,” presumably the source of the šny-colored dye. This, in term, suggests a means of distinguishing between Hebrew šny – red dye produced by worms – and ’adōm – red dye derived from ferrous clay. The identical distinction would then, logically, be applicable to the contrastive Egyptian terms ἰnsy and ἰdmy. Thus both the terminology and the lexical distinction based on the derivation of the pigment reflect West Semitic usage. Clearly the most plausible means of transmitting this usage would have been the West Semitic, i.e. Amorite, professionals to whom these items were not only native, but in daily use. Although no direct evidence establishes that foreigners were employed as dyers at Kahun, such a possibility may be indirectly inferred. Thus the cumulative weight of a number of different factors must be taken into consideration: the presence of dyed wool at Kahun; the presence of Amorite weavers at the same site; and the Semitic etymology proposed here for some Egyptian terms for dying cloth. Another possibility, however, to account for the presence of woolen dyestuffs in Middle Kingdom Egypt is the result of trade with visiting Asiatics. Since no dye installations have been discovered at Kahun (Amorite or otherwise) commerce rather than local production affords a simple solution. J. A. McDowell has suggested that perhaps the people living at Kahun purchased dyed wool or wool products from itinerant tribes of the Eastern or Western Desert.65

Herders of cattle or cattle administration One particularly fertile source for Egyptian views of “Asiatics,” i.e. Amorites and others in Canaan, is the Middle Kingdom narrative of Sinuhe. When the courtier Sinuhe first fled Egypt, he is saved by an Asiatic as he leaves Egyptian territory and enters that of Canaan. The text relates: I raised my heart and collected myself when I heard the lowing sound of cattle and saw Asiatics [Styw]. One of their leaders who had been in Egypt recognized me. He gave me water and boiled milk for me. I went with him to his tribe.66

This passage from Sinuhe attests to the stereotype of the Egyptian view of the Asiatic nomad in association with cattle raising.67

122

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

As the story continues, Sinuhe moves progressively in a northern direction, heading east at the site identified as Kedem. He then settles in the land of Upper Retenu, which is presumably somewhere between Kedem and Northwest Mesopotamia.68 Ammunenshi, the ruler of Upper Retenu, gave him a fiefdom possessed of a richly varied economy. In describing his new surroundings, Sinuhe says: Figs were in it and grapes. It had more wine than water. Abundant was its honey, plentiful was its oil. All kinds of fruit were on its trees. Barley was there and emmer, and no end of cattle of all kinds.69

The impression here is of an agricultural area where the cattle belong to a sedentary, rather than to a nomadic population, or perhaps one midway between the two.70 This population is termed ꜤꜢmw. Thus, the Sinuhe story gives us a picture of two different lifestyles which the Egyptians associate with Asiatics. One is sedentary, ꜤꜢmw, and the other nomadic, both of which lifestyles require the rearing of cattle. Cattle also played an important role in the economy of Egypt, and taxes on cattle constituted a significant source of state revenue.71 Scenes in Middle Kingdom tomb paintings show Egyptian nomarchs overseeing the counting of the cattle herds.72 It has been noted that, since officials bore titles connected with stock rearing, that occupation must have carried with it some measure of prestige.73 Cattle, privately owned, was a sign of high standing. It was more common, however, for plow oxen to be rented from a large state or temple institution.74 While cattle were bred in Egypt, Middle Kingdom Egyptian textual and pictorial sources reveal that the Egyptians had a connection with foreign cattle as well. An inscription in the tomb of Ukh-Hotep and Mersi at Meir, identifies some of the cattle as “Asiatic” or as coming from “Asiatic” lands, i.e. Retenu. A scene shows a row of fattened oxen led by a Beja (?) herdsman, and followed by a group of small cattle above which is written: “Bulls of the ꜤꜢmw brought from . . .”75 Unfortunately, the end of the inscription is destroyed. Blackman poses the question as to whether the bulls were imported into Egypt from Canaan, forming perhaps the spoils of a raid. Giveon suggests that Canaanite cattle was being controlled by Egyptians, and that some of it may have been brought to Egypt by way of trade, or as tribute.76 In the tomb chapel of Djehutyhotep at El Bersheh, a scene depicts Djehutyhotep overseeing the periodical counting of his cattle herds. In the

West Semites and the Economic Life of Egypt

123

fourth register an inscription reads: “cattle of Rt-nw.”77 A fragmentary inscription reads: “Utterance of . . . the cattle of Rt-nw during the counting. Ye trod on sand, ye walk (now on) herbage and browze on snw . . .” Newberry suggests that this is a comparison between the hard life of these cattle in Syria and their present luxurious existence in Egypt. Djehutyhotep’s sons are mentioned in his tomb as superintendents of cattle. At Megiddo, a fragmentary statuette was found of this same Djehutyhotep, Nomarch of el-Bersheh. A scarab from Megiddo, bears the inscription of an Egyptian official78 which reads: “imy-­r pr hsb ἰh.w ἰwf snb [Steward, reckoner of cattle] Ἰwfsnb.”79 Giveon concludes from these examples, that the administration of cattle was an important part of the Pharaonic economy.80 Posener was under the impression that the Egyptian government exploited the resources of the plains of Jezreel, which was rich in cattle – perhaps representing requisitions in subject territories.81 He suggested that livestock from Asia may have been captured as booty, or that the expedition of Khusobek82 may have brought back booty from Shechem which included herds. The inscriptions at Bersheh and Meir which refer to Canaanite cattle imply relations with a settled population in Canaan, since it is unlikely that the Egyptian government would have formal economic ties with such unstable elements as fringe nomads. In the biblical story of Joseph (Genesis 47:1), Joseph reports to Pharaoh that his father and brothers have come from the land of Canaan, with their flocks and herds. In Genesis 47:3, after introducing several of his brothers to Pharaoh, the king asks them what is their occupation. They reply that they are shepherds, the same as their fathers were. Because there was a famine in Canaan, Pharaoh gives them permission to stay in the region of Goshen for the pasturing of their flocks, and then he says to Joseph: “And if you know anyone of them to be suitable, you may put them in charge of my own livestock.” Were Asiatics involved in the “cattle business” once they were on Egyptian soil? Evidence for Asiatics in positions of cattle herding or administration in the Middle Kingdom is scant. However, the following inscription, which has until recently gone unnoticed,83 may shed some light on the situation. The inscription, made up of four lines of hieroglyphic text, was inscribed on a diorite statue base belonging to an Overseer of Cattle, named Ameny (Fig. 4.4).84 The inscription is of the formulaic Htp di nsw type,85 and belonged to an official at Lisht. His title reads: “ Ἰmny ἰmy-­r ἰh.w ms.n ꜤꜢmt, [Overseer of Cattle, Ameny, born of] ꜤꜢmt, [The Asiatic (Woman)].” Contrary to some interpretations, the term ꜤꜢmt

124

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

Figure 4.4  Diorite statue base of the overseer of cattle, Ameny from Lisht.

is best taken here as a gentilic, even if her son was, in fact, Egyptian born.86 Unfortunately, only the base of the statuette remained with part of the left foot planted upon it. Statuettes with inscriptions of this type were not uncommon during the Middle Kingdom. A statuette in the British Museum, belongs to a certain User,87 born of ꜤꜢmt. Based on such examples, it is likely that Ameny would have been depicted as an Egyptian in every way. Although the context of grave goods found at Lisht are confusing because of tomb plundering and secondary burials, it may be of no small consequence that a small Canaanite jar (Figs. 4.5a, b) was found in the same tomb as the statue base.88 This type of jar (one- or two-­handled) is typical of the pottery of Middle Bronze Age Canaan. A possible parallel can be seen in examples of pottery from the site of Tell Beit Mirsim. It is not unreasonable to assume that the pot is of the same date as the

West Semites and the Economic Life of Egypt

Figure 4.5a  Small Canaanite jar from Tomb 499, Lisht.

Figure 4.5b  Drawing of the small Canaanite jar, Tomb 499, Lisht.

125

126

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

diorite statue base, since it did come out of the same tomb.89 Ameny’s inscription states that he is the son of an ꜤꜢmt, an Asiatic woman, and perhaps the pot belonged to his mother who brought it with her from her native land. The earliest Middle Kingdom representation of a Canaanite jar appears in a relief fragment from the Lisht North Cemetery (Figs. 4.6a, b, c). It depicts men pouring water (or wine) into two-­handled Canaanite jars. These vessels were apparently made of clay. Two-­handled stone vessels found in Egypt are imitations of Canaanite clay imports. These are used only in the afterlife for water, but in reality they held only oil or unguents90 Another example of ꜤꜢmw in association with cattle comes from the site of Meir in Middle Egypt, where a scene from a relief in the tomb chapel of UkhHotep and Mersi,91 shows a general inspection of the nomarch’s cattle. In the 2nd register, Ukh-­em-saf presents to the nomarch two underlings with clearly non-Egyptian features, including a beard. Blackman believed that in view of the inscription above a group of bulls on Fig. IV, the foreigners must be ꜤꜢmw. His title reads: “(member) of a department of the cattle farm.” Another bit of pictorial and inscriptional evidence is afforded by a stela from Abydos and now in Liverpool which depicts oxen being used for

Figure 4.6a  Relief of scene showing water being poured from jar in the tomb of Rehuerjdsen at Lisht (detail).

Figure 4.6b  Drawing of scene showing water being poured from jar in the tomb of Rehuerjdsen at Lisht.

Figure 4.6c  Toilet vase with two handles, inscribed for the Seal Bearer Kemes.

128

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

ploughing. On the reverse an Asiatic named Sobkiry is seen sowing seed from a bag. He follows the priest of Onuris who is ploughing (the oxen and plough are lost). The oxen in this scene would be draught animals. Although he is identified as an ꜤꜢmw Asiatic, he appears on the stela as an Egyptian.92 In view of the above discussion, it appears that Asiatic ꜤꜢmw were involved in cattle administration or herding in Egypt. This is not surprising since Amorites generally played a large role in the stock-­breeding systems elsewhere in the ancient Near East during the Middle Bronze Age, and earlier. Ur was prominent as a herding center in the late Third Millennium.93 Documents of the early second millennium deal with the herding of sheep and goats. Large cattle are mentioned in the same texts dealing with sheep and goats, the same people managing both kinds of animals. An enormous number of animals were owned by the Nanna-Ningal temple complex, and the herds were a very important economic asset to the temple complex.94 An Ur III text, apparently from Drehem,95 describes the growth of a herd of cattle in ten years; it is believed to be from the last year of Shulgi’s reign.96 This text demonstrates the recognized expertise of Amorite herdsmen, a reputation which may well have subsequently followed them into Canaan and even to Egypt. During the Old Babylonian period, Mesopotamian herding contracts show that a shepherd might work on his own, or, if he accepted more sheep than he could pasture himself, he might employ “under-­shepherds.” The owner of the sheep might be a private individual, but it could also be a temple or the palace (i.e. the state administration).97 An Akkadian account tablet from Canaanite Hebron, in the late Old Babylonian period, has been interpreted as a list of ovidae collected as taxes by women. The sheep and he-­goats are qualified as offerings, perhaps sacrificial animals. Of the five names mentioned in the tablet, four are West Semitic.98 This text would seem to link together the Amorite cattle breeders of Mesopotamia and Canaan, using Akkadian language to record the property of West Semites. It was noted previously in this study that Amorites appeared at Drehem mostly as suppliers of sheep and goats.99 Texts exist also which refer to the Amorites as recipients of animals. One hundred and thirteen texts from Drehem contain references to the Amorites.100 One of them indicates the existence of formal ties between the Amorites and the central government,

West Semites and the Economic Life of Egypt

129

since the incoming animals were stated to be “for the king” (i.e. Shulgi). Yet another text records incoming animals as belonging to Amorites, and taken as spoils of war raids against them (nam-­ra-ag kur MAR.TU). The references to Amorite cattle-­breeding in these texts are anticipated by similar mention in the Ebla archives, thus providing ample documentation for the long-­standing association of Amorites and their characteristic profession.

ꜤꜢmw as artisans at Sinai Scholars have long been aware that, during the Middle Kingdom, foreigners worked peacefully alongside Egyptians at Serabit el-Khadim in the Sinai where the Egyptians mined turquoise.101 What the foreigners were doing there is unclear. Information concerning them is carved on stelae which were set up in the chambers of a temple dedicated to the goddess Hathor, the patron deity of the Sinai.102 The hieroglyphic inscriptions list the various personnel who participated in the expeditions; occasionally, a few pieces of biographical information were also included. The inscriptions show that West Semitic Asiatics held different jobs among the work gang of the mining organization, but do not clearly state the occupations of the Semitic workmen; thus, their function within the expeditions to the Sinai, cannot be positively ascertained. Nonetheless, this close commercial interaction between Egyptians and Asiatic foreigners is a striking change from the hostile Old Kingdom visual and verbal images in the Wadi Maghara where the Egyptian ruler is depicted in the act of smiting a foreign interloper. While the evidence shows that some Asiatics rose to positions of high status, it is difficult to ascertain just what tasks were assigned to the other Asiatics at Sinai. Material remains, however, have made it possible for scholars to reconstruct the circumstances of the West Semitic workmen at Serabit el-Khadim, which will be discussed later. In addition, lexical evidence from inscribed stelae, may also shed light upon the nature of their employment. First, a few remarks about the areas of excavation in the Sinai so that we can better understand the nature of the material found. The turquoise mines at Serabit el-Khadim were excavated in 1935 under the auspices of Harvard University. Exploration of the turquoise mines at Serabit was renewed in 1977 by the Ophir Expedition of the Institute of Archaeology of Tel Aviv University.

130

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

Early excavations in these mines revealed inscriptions which were associated with the Semitic Asiatic workmen who accompanied the Egyptian workforce. The excavators were looking for material remains that could assist in dating inscriptions found in the previous excavations in two of the mines.103 The finds of the Ophir Expedition revealed an intact metallurgical workshop which was found in one of the mines104 attesting that casting activity was done at the site. The excavators were of the opinion that some of the tools cast from the moulds found such as axe heads105 and chisels were used by the miners for extracting turquoise.106 They believe that the mining implements were made by the copper workers who also wrote the Proto-Sinaitic inscriptions in the mines at Serabit el-Khadim.107 The implements were found only in the mines which bore inscriptions. Typologically, the hoard dates to the New Kingdom. However, coppersmiths are attested in the inscriptions on stelae of the Middle Kingdom workforce at Serabit el-Khadim. Thus, the confusion arises due to the fact that two sets of miners from the same place were doing the same things at different times. Thus, the excavators posit that the coppersmiths of the Middle Kingdom were of the same ethnic origins of the New Kingdom smiths, and that they were of Semitic Asiatic stock. In order to understand this, it is necessary to understand the scope of the materials found. Among the objects found at Serabit, were stone foot bellows, one of the principal tools of the Serabit smiths. These were identical to two stone bellows found in Israel – a fact that points to an identical technological tradition. Beit-Arieh mentions that similar objects to the Serabit bellows were found in late Middle Bronze Age contexts in Canaan, two in Stratum D at Tell Beit-Mirsim and another from the same period at Lachish, their geographical chronological distribution indicating a northern origin and a slow dispersal southwards.108 The metallurgical finds were found only in inscription bearing mines. Beit-Arieh concludes that, since it is natural for metalsmiths to migrate to mining centers, of all the possible professions of the Canaanites in Sinai the most logical would be metalworking. He notes that there is a long tradition in the Levant of tribes wandering with their tools through large areas when need arose for a source of their livelihood. Furthermore, he points out that the earliest Near Eastern source of copper production was the northern Levant, Mesopotamia, and Anatolia, where a metallurgical technology was developed and from where the knowledge spread to southern countries.109

West Semites and the Economic Life of Egypt

131

The “men of the ἰmnw” The term s ἰmnw which appears on five stelae at Sinai can perhaps further elucidate the position of the Semitic Asiatic workers at Serabit el-Khadim. Although a vocable ἰmn exists in Egyptian denoting something “secret” or “hidden,”110 (as in the divine name Amun) such a meaning is not appropriate in the context of the lists of workers and their titles at Sinai. Černý-Gardiner translate it as men of the ἰmnw (building) on the basis of the house determinative accompanying the term ἰmnw.111 Seyfried sees it as a term used for turquoise because of its hidden quality.112 He thinks the s ἰmnw are not particularly specialized because of their large number; they even need an ἰmy-­r, an overseer. The term s ἰmnw is mentioned on five stelae as follows: 106: where it is used in the same context as the coppersmiths (who we take to be Semitic Asiatics) (Fig. 4.7a); 114: where it is used in association with: coppersmiths; 10 Asiatics (hꜢstyw = ˘ foreigners) of Retenu; (Fig. 4.7b); 284 donkeys; 85: coppersmiths and Asiatics (ꜤꜢm) (Fig. 4.8a + b.);

Figure 4.7a  Sinai Inscriptions 106 (right). Figure 4.7b  Sinai Inscription 114 (left).

132

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

Figure 4.8a  Sinai Inscription 85 (left). Figure 4.8b  Sinai Inscription 85, n. edge (right).

West Semites and the Economic Life of Egypt

133

’ 110: Asiatics (ꜤꜢm) of h.Ꜥmἰ; Imnw 75 (restored) (Fig. 4.9a); 32: (At Wadi Maghara – mentioned in context with an interpreter, ’ indicating the foreign status of the Imnw) (Fig. 4.9b). Since there has been no satisfactory derivation of ἰmnw in terms of normal Egyptian usage, it is not unreasonable to view it as a word of foreign origin. Western Asiatics worked alongside Egyptian personnel at Serabit el-Khadim suggesting that the Egyptians may well have adopted the term that their foreign co-­workers used to identify themselves in terms of class or occupation. What comes to mind is the term ummânu “artists or artisans,” attested from the Old Akkadian period on, including Old Babylonian Mari, The term mare ummâni, “guild of artists or artisans,” designates persons of technical competence (but not specifically artistic competence).113 At Mari, the ummânu lived in a certain quarter of the city. Quarters were also set aside for foreign artisans residing in Mari. A text from Mari114 groups together skilled workers from Hazor, Yamhad, Carchemesh, and Emar. The ummâni at Mari could be assigned to caravans of visiting dignitaries. For example, when Zimri-Lim traveled to Yamhad, his retinue includes artisans.115 As Sasson points out, “a diffusion of artisans may help to create an atmosphere in which foreign practices, ideas, and traditions were able to find easier acceptance.”116 Returning now to Serabit el-Khadim, we can examine its pictorial evidence in light of our discussion. Thus, the depiction of Khebded, a dignitary from Retenu who traveled from his homeland to Serabit quite possibly also represents the presence of artisans in the caravan, although the depiction shows only two other persons.117 Perhaps the men of the ἰmnw were artisans who had left their native lands to work in Egypt, and were then engaged by the Egyptian government for building and repairing the temple at Serabit elKhadim. Their sheer number suggests the activity of a guild of workers on the order of the “guild” of Asiatic cultic singers attested at Lahun.118 The term adopted to designate these craftsmen was ummânu, to which the native Egyptian scribes simply supplied appropriate determinatives. Therefore, the Egyptian word ἰmnw – “hidden or secret” – and the Semitic word ummânu “artisans” – are distinct vocables, the one being native Egyptian, the other being a Sumerian loanword in Akkadian. The scribes being native Egyptians simply transferred the determinatives to the foreign term.119

Figure 4.9a  Sinai Inscription 110 (left). Figure 4.9b  Sinai Inscription 32 (right).

West Semites and the Economic Life of Egypt

135

Looking at the evidence, there is a much more logical explanation for the meaning of the term ἰmnw at Sinai. Since the term ἰmnw is used in association with foreigners, and we believe that the ꜤꜢmw at Serabit el-Khadim were not employed in mining, but served some other function, it is not unlikely that they served as artisans, that is as ummânu. This assumption gains in probability when we consider the orthography of the Egyptian inscriptions themselves. It will be recalled that on the Egyptian stelae at Serabit el-Khadim the term ἰmnw is written in close proximity to the designation ꜤꜢmw “Amorite.” In at least two inscriptions, ἰmnw is actually written directly above the designation Retenu (northern Syria and central Canaan). Further, the marked lack of uniformity in the writing of ἰmnw suggests that we are dealing with an unusual term, not part of the scribes’ everyday working vocabulary.120

Ἰmnw at Lisht When Amenemhet I, founder of the Twelfth Dynasty, moved the royal residence from Thebes to the previously unoccupied site of Itj-Tawy (modern Lisht), the move to the north necessitated new building projects at the new capital. Thus, laborers were recruited by the Egyptian government for the construction of the pyramid complex of Amenemhet I. As it was pointed out in several places above, at this time Egypt also expanded contacts with her neighbors abroad. This new situation allowed foreigners to come into the land in large numbers and join the workforce, many by their own free will. Expeditions to the Sinai for the mining of turquoise were also continued, as in the Old Kingdom.121 Amenemhet’s son and successor, Senwosret I, also built his pyramid complex at Lisht. Once again, a large workforce was needed for the new building construction. Mining activity continued in Sinai during the reign of Senwosret I as evidenced by several inscriptions with this king’s name found at Serabit el-Khadim.122 The pyramids of Senwosret I and Amenemhet I have been excavated by the Metropolitan Museum of Art.123 During the course of excavation at Lisht, short texts written by workmen on the building stones used for the construction of the pyramid complex of Senwosret I at Lisht were discovered.124 The marks and notes on the stones, the so-­called “control notes,” were made during their transportation from the quarry to

136

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

the construction site and later they were either excised or hidden in the masonry. In five instances the notes written on the building stones included the term ἰmnw,125 the same word inscribed on stelae at Serabit el-Khadim in connection with workmen during the later reign of Amenemhet III discussed above. Although the texts are brief and may raise more questions than they answer, they shed light on the enigmatic term ἰmnw inscribed on the Sinai stelae vis-à-­vis the same term written on the building stones of Senwosret I at Lisht. Since it was stated earlier that the term ἰmnw found at Sinai may reflect a foreign term meaning a “guild” of artisans, the presence of the same term ἰmnw at Lisht is significant because this shows that artisans belonging to an organization of ἰmnw/ummânu in Sinai were also utilized in the capital. If taken as a foreign word, the appearance of the term ἰmnw/ummânu at Sinai is not surprising, since foreigners were among the workmen at Serabit el-Khadim. However, the use of the term ἰmnw in the earlier Twelfth Dynasty may indicate the presence of foreign workmen at Lisht as well. Three examples of the term ἰmnw at Lisht have a (foreign) “land” determinative, and the fourth has a “town” or “city” sign.126 The fifth shows a “man” determinative,127 which comports well with the earlier cited evidence for interpreting ἰmnw as a professional designation. The toponymn ἰmnw is otherwise unknown, but a location near the border of Egypt is possible.128 Since it was stated above that there is a tradition of tribes of artisans in the Levant wandering with their tools to large areas when the need arose, it is not impossible that the stone workers may have been recruited from the border areas which they frequented.129

Foreign workers at Dahshur? There is no concrete evidence that foreign workers were involved in building projects at the Egyptian capital of Dahshur during the Middle Kingdom. However, since the expeditions to the Sinai were projects of the Egyptian government,130 it would be surprising if foreigners were not part of the workforce at Dahshur as well. Although the term ἰmnw is not attested at Dahshur, another line of evidence linking foreign artisans at the capital to

West Semites and the Economic Life of Egypt

137

those at Sinai involves the typology of personal names. R. Ventura has observed that many of the workmen at Sinai had names composed with Sneferu’s name.131 Ventura has suggested that perhaps these workmen, or trained members of their family, were sent to Sinai from Dahshur, where a cult of Sneferu had arisen during the Middle Kingdom. This cult may have risen because of the visible presence of two pyramids of Sneferu in the neighborhood, a factor often influential in the process of deification. He states that the workers, who spent long periods of time at Dahshur for the construction of the pyramids of Amenemhet II, Senwosret III and Amenemhet III, were probably responsible for the revival of the cult of Sneferu, who had become a local deity at Dahshur during the Old Kingdom. Sneferu had become a patron god in the distant past at Sinai also, and Ventura suggests that the workers would be all the more compelled to mention him in their inscriptions. Although we cannot say whether or not workmen with the Sneferu element in their names were foreigners, their proximity in texts of the Sinai stelae close to the term ἰmnw is highly suggestive. Sinai 32, mentioned above (time of Amenemhet III), which bears the title “overseer of the ἰmnw,” mentioned just after “the interpreter Nehy,” also mentions a “stonecutter” Snofru. Thus, these names link the workmen in the royal necropolis of Dahshur to the workmen at Sinai and the possibility exists that at least some of them may have been foreigners.132

Figural graffiti under the pyramid of Senwosret III When Jacques DeMorgan excavated the pyramid of Senwosret III at Dahshur (Fig. 4.10a) in 1894–95, he made a remarkable discovery on the walls of the tunnel leading to the serdab under the pyramid.133 “Sketched” on the wall were images of men whose features appear to be un-Egyptian (Fig. 4.10b).134 These figural graffiti suggest the presence of foreigners at Dahshur, and its vicinity.135 Before examining these images, it should be noted that during the reign of Senwosret III, there was a greater knowledge of the Levant than at any time previous. Military actions in Canaan are reported by inscriptions of the military officer Khusobek, who fought against ꜤꜢmw and refers to raids in the area of Shechem and the “vile Retenu.”136

138

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

Figure 4.10a  Pyramid of Senwosret III.

Figure 4.10b  A section of the figural graffiti under the pyramid of Senwosret III at Dahshur.

The high official Khnumhotep (lll) who built his mastaba near the pyramid of Senwosret III at Dahshur, refers to a journey to Byblos (Fig. 4.11).137 This Khnumhotep was the son of the nomarch Khnumhotep II at Beni Hasan and was depicted in the Asiatic caravan scene discussed earlier. As a court

West Semites and the Economic Life of Egypt

139

Figure 4.11  Mastaba of Khnumhotep III at Dahshur.

official, he was responsible for trade with Egypt’s Eastern neighbors in the reign of Senwosret II. At the end of his life, in the time of Senwosret III, he became a vizier and high steward. With the movement of peoples, through trade, employment and/or military expeditions, both Egypt and the Near East were open to foreign influences; it is not known whether some of the changes in material culture, or the innovation of realism in the portraits of Senwosret III, were due to closer contact with Western Asia, The statue heads of both Hammurabi and Senwosret III depict a person of advanced age, with lines on their faces, and bags under their eyes. They represent individuals (Figs. 4.12a, b).138 Like his predecessors, Senwosret III sent out mining expeditions to Sinai, Wadi el-Hudi, and Wadi Hammamat, areas in which the workforces included non-Egyptian peoples. Thus, it is not unreasonable to assume that there were a large number of foreigners in Egypt in the late Middle Kingdom, and that the influx of Asiatics did not suddenly occur during and after the Hyksos period. Who were the subjects of the graffiti? Do the images represent foreign workers who dug the tunnel which led to the serdab of the pyramid of Senwosret III, as DeMorgan had suggested? Or did they come later, as Dieter and Dorothea Arnold have recently posited?139 Were they drawn by Egyptians,

140

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

Figure 4.12a  Statue head attributed to Hammurabi.

or by the subjects themselves? It is more likely that this was the work of the foreigners, since generally Asiatics are shown as subjugated peoples in official contexts; for example in the roughly drawn Middle Kingdom images from the amethyst quarries at Wadi el-Hudi a man appears holding an enemy

West Semites and the Economic Life of Egypt

141

Figure 4.12b  Face of Senwosret III (red quartzite).

by the neck. The inscription reads: sh ꜤꜢmw “overthrowing the Aamu.”140 There is no indication of banishment or subjugation in the representations at Dahshur. Central to our discussion is the identification of these personages. Their hairstyles, tonsures, and, in one or two cases, their dress, appear to be of Western Asiatic origin. Though it is highly speculative to make a definitive

142

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

statement as to the identity of the cultural group seen in the graffiti, a few observations may be in order.

Comparanda At least three hairstyles depicted in the Dahshur graffiti relate to a similar coiffure depicted on the image of a “warrior” represented in painted relief, most likely from the court, of the pyramid complex of Senwosret I at Lisht, where the top of the abundant hair extends over the front of his forehead (Figs. 4.13a, b).141 This style cannot be traced with certainty to any particular ethnic group. Marsha Hill has interpreted the image on the Lisht relief as a representation of an Asiatic. If the image on the relief is meant to portray an Asiatic, then perhaps the image connotes a type belonging to the styw group, defined earlier in this study.142 It may be recalled that the styw, like the Hāpiru of the Late Bronze Age, ˘ could function as mercenaries, stone workers, public workers, as well as professional artisans. The Hāpiru were of mixed Asiatic origin. ˘ The coiffure portrayed on one of the other images under the Pyramid, is reminiscent of the “bowl cut” like one seen on the bronze statuette of Hepu dated to the early Eighteenth Dynasty (Figs. 4.14a, b). This style also dates earlier and Marsha Hill has convincingly demonstrated that the hairdo represents a “professional and social dimension,” such as one of military status, and suggests that Hepu was likely to have been a soldier. She compares it to the representations of Western Asiatic soldiers holding duckbill axes on a small obelisk from Serabit el-Khadim, again connoting military and expedition activities.143 (Cf. the hair of a slain soldier allegedly of King Nebhepetre Mentuhotep (Fig. 4.14c). While some of the hairstyles are large and bushy, others appear to be closely cropped to the head (Fig. 4.15a; Dahshur graffito). Some people might see in the latter a kind of helmet, perhaps used as a protective element while tunneling (though of course, there is, at present, a lack of supporting evidence); or it may be an image in the minds of the graffiti carvers of something they had seen or experienced. What comes to mind is the remains of an alabaster statue head of a warrior found on the palace stairs at the (Old Babylonian period) site of Mari in Syria (Fig. 4.15b; warrior from Mari with helmet). The figure is portrayed wearing a tight-­fitting cap with a chin strap, possibly made of leather. This city

West Semites and the Economic Life of Egypt

143

Figure 4.13a  Detail of Dahshur graffito.

Figure 4.13b  Dahshur graffito.

was dominated by Amorites in the period contemporary with the rule of Senwosret III. Dieter Arnold concludes that the tunnels were added during the reign of Senwosret III. He thinks that they are connected with the god Sokar who ruled

144

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

a

c

b

Figure 4.14a  Dahshur graffito, detail. Figure 4.14b  Copper alloy funerary-­votive figurine of Hepu. Figure 4.14c  Slain soldier of Nebhepetre Mentuhotep with uncurled hair to the nape of the neck from Thebes.

as Lord of the qrrt caverns over the underground corridors of quarries, mines and cemeteries. Dorothea Arnold concludes that the graffiti were done in the Thirteenth Dynasty, based on the style of a sole Egyptian male figure represented on the wall, and also because of a utensil left in the tunnel, and that those represented in the graffiti are not the tunnelers, but later visitors. Could the later visitors have been employed as workmen on one of the numerous building projects in the Memphite area, such as that of Khendjer at Saqqara?144 Could they have been foreign workmen from the settlement at

West Semites and the Economic Life of Egypt

a

145

b

Figure 4.15a  Graffito of a figure possibly wearing helmet-­like apparel. Figure 4.15b  Head of a warrior statue from Mari wearing a helmet.

Lisht? Perhaps they were artisans who were engaged in the work of the pyramid of Ameny Qemau at Dahshur.145 It may be recalled that King Sneferu was deified at Dahshur. Senwosret III was also deified.146 So the visit to the underground caverns in the pyramid may have been a religious experience for those wishing to encounter the deities. Another figure depicted in the graffiti is shown wearing a longer garment that is plain, except for the shoulder area, which reveals a portion of a dotted design (Fig.  4.16a). A parallel may be seen in the near-­contemporary self-­ depictions of Asiatics from the fragmentary wall paintings of a Middle Bronze Age palace at the site of Tell Sakka147 near Damascus in Syria,148 which show a garment with a similarly dotted design (Fig. 4.16b).149 It should be noted, that new elements appear in the physical appearance of Asiatics in Syro/Mesopotamian self-­representations, which differ from the earlier Egyptian representations, at Beni Hasan. For example, a figure in the Tell Sakka painting wears a v-­necked garment, the borders of which are outlined with dark lines. The garment is dotted, and lacks other designs.150 The hairstyles and beard-­shapes on the “Amorites” at Tell Sakka also differ from those shown on the ꜤꜢmw at Beni Hasan, and other representations of

146

a

c

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

b

d

Figure 4.16a  Graffito from Dahshur showing a man dressed in a garment, with a partially dotted design. Figure 4.16b  Painting of “Amorites” from Tell Sakka (Syria). Figure 4.16c  Statue of King Yarim-Lim of Yamhad, from Alalakh, ca. 1750 BCE. Figure 4.16d  Basalt ancestor statues from Qatna of Middle Bronze Age manufacture, found in Late Bronze Age context.

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt. Rather, the style of the beard conforms to a similar shape represented on the basalt statue of King Yarim-Lim of Yamhad, ca. 1750 BCE, (Fig.  4.16c) and on two basalt ancestor statues from Qatna (Fig. 4.16d),151 which are of a smooth and compact style. The hair on all three

West Semites and the Economic Life of Egypt

147

statues is pulled up high with a band on top of the head, though Yarim-Lim’s hair is striated, and the Sakka figures have long hair. Presumably, their tonsures represented an elite stratum of society; in all likelihood, Egyptian artists would not have had exposure to their appearance first-­hand, which could explain the absence of this Asiatic fashion in Egyptian art. In summary, the graffiti “artists” were most likely to have been of mixed Asiatic origin, and/or workers of different social rank (for example, a figure of action depicted in a long and more elaborate garment,152 which plausibly designated his status as foreman of the artisans or ἰmnw, the same groups mentioned on the stelae at Sinai and also in the control notes of Lisht). It is therefore tenable that the Asiatic foreigners whose images were represented on the walls of the underground corridors of the pyramid of Senwosret III were those of workers retained in the construction of other pyramids and tombs in the Memphite area. Their proximity to the site of Dahshur may have compelled them to make a “pilgrimage” to this sacred area, and, while visiting the underground chambers of the pyramid of Senwosret III, paid homage to this king and the god Sokar, an act which provided them with protection. During exploration of the underground corridors, they hastily sketched one another’s image, leaving their “signature” as a testimony of their visit.

Asiatics at Lisht The large Middle Kingdom necropolis of Lisht, which includes the pyramids of Amenemhet I and Senwosret I, plus a late Middle Kingdom settlement, has yielded no Canaanite burials and it is generally assumed that foreigners did not play a role in the Egyptian Twelfth Dynasty capital itself. In addition, “official” literary/epigraphic, and visual sources which have emerged from the site, and other areas under control of the Middle Kingdom capital, show negative attitudes towards Asiatics. For example: a. Temple reliefs from the pyramid complex of Senwosret I showing Asiatic captives (Figs. 3.15a, b), and an Asiatic warrior (Fig. 3.17). b. Execration texts, or magical figurines from Lisht (Figs. 4.17). These magical figurines were created to protect individuals against evil forces

148

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

within the Egyptian community. A group of ninety-­six of these small mud tablets, with crudely modeled human faces, were found in the surface debris near the mastaba of Senwosret-Ankh.153 A brief hieratic inscription, in red ink, was written on the front of each below the face.154 Most of the inscriptions begin with the words, “the deceased, the rebel, . . .” followed by an Egyptian personal name of Middle Kingdom type, followed by the sign used in the verb “die” and in the word for “enemy.” Fragments of a model coffin discovered in the midst of the tablets is presumed to have contained one or more of them.155 By burying the figurines of the enemy in their own coffin they were considered to magically render them dead. Though most of the names that appear on these figurines are Egyptian, three of them are qualified as Asiatic ꜤꜢmw.156 A similar Egyptian practice of magical cursing is known as early as the Old Kingdom157 and continues to the Late Period.158 These were routine rituals where fragments or whole pottery bowls were inscribed with names of actual or potential enemies and then smashed. Figurines were also used for this purpose (though not all of them were inscribed).159 The Middle Kingdom Execration Texts in Berlin and Brussels are perhaps the most famous of the magical texts due to the insight they offer into the relations between Egypt and the Levant, the geography of Syria–Palestine, settlement patterns therein, and details of social stratification.160 In the Berlin texts, rulers of West Semitic towns are cursed on fragments of pottery. It is significant that the ruler of

Figure 4.17  Model coffin and magical figures, unfired clay, from Lisht.

West Semites and the Economic Life of Egypt

149

(Kpny) Byblos, a town located on the Syrian coast (modern Lebanon) is not one of those cursed.161 A. F. Rainey posits that it may be that the ruler of Kpny–Byblos was so closely allied with the Egyptian throne that his loyalty was unquestioned.162 However, it is the ꜤꜢmw nbw “all the Asiatics”163 who are imprecated. In the Brussels group the texts are all on figurines and it is the wh.yt nt Kpny, “clans of Byblos who are cursed.”164 Regarding the cursing of the ꜤꜢmw nbw, Rainey suggests that the populace may not have always been content with their pro-Egyptian overlords, and therefore subjected to execration just as certain elements in the Egyptian population were also suspect.165 The names of the foreigners and cities of the Execration Texts from Thebes and Saqqara are for the protection of the Egyptian community from outside forces. It is the “official” aspect. Obviously, local “suspect” elements, both Egyptian and Amorite were the targets of the Lisht magical figurines. c. The Hymn to Senwosret I in The Story of Sinuhe:166 The Sinuhe narrative in which the Egyptian courtier Sinuhe fled Egypt and went to the Land of Upper Retenu reflects a truly favorable attitude toward Asiatics, but tones of “official” stereotypical phraseology still persist.167 These “official” tones appear in a poetic interlude which does not fit into the narrative and which was inserted into the text for the purpose of glorifying the Egyptian king. The hymn appears in the story after Sinuhe is questioned by Ammuenshi (note that Ammunenshi can speak Egyptian), the ruler of Upper Retenu as to the cause of the courtier’s flight. Sinuhe answers by telling of Amenemhet’s death, and of the accession of his son. After a long, laudatory description of the new ruler (Senwosret I), the passage closes with the words: . . . Enlarger of frontiers, He will conquer southern lands, While ignoring northern lands, Though made to smite Asiatics and tread on Sandfarers!168

Perhaps we may see the same official overtones expressed on the magnificent seated (headless) statue of Sensworet I in the collection of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, where the king nonchalantly plants his feet on the images carved on the base representing the Nine Bows, Egypt’s traditional enemies (Figs. 4.18a, b).169

Figure 4.18a  Headless statue of Senwosret I stepping on the Nine Bows.

Figure 4.18b  Detail Nine Bows.

West Semites and the Economic Life of Egypt

151

Interestingly enough the text says that Senwosret I would not be active in the region although this king was. Earlier in the text, the same expression is employed when Sinuhe recounts the route he took to the Levant. In sharp contrast to the stereotypical “official” propagandistic representations we have encountered in Egyptian art and literature derived from the Egyptian capital, other, more non-­symbolic materials have come to light revealing a presence of Asiatics at Lisht. This new information shows that Asiatic foreigners: a. may have participated in building projects in the Egyptian capital; b. were assimilated into the middle class segment of the population and assigned positions in which they were thought to have expertise; c. practiced a personal or domestic Canaanite religion while residing in Egypt. At the same time, imported Canaanite pottery appears at the site, beginning in the Twelfth Dynasty, i.e. MBIIA and MBIIB, and increases to full scale in the Thirteenth Dynasty.170 The first two observations above regarding an Asiatic presence at Lisht have been discussed in the previous section. In view of the fact that we are assuming Asiatics lived and worked at Lisht, then it would not be surprising if some of the foreign workers practiced a personal (Canaanite) religion once in Egypt. It is widely known that after the domination of Lower Egypt by the Asiatic Hyksos, and Egypt’s subsequent domination of Syria and Palestine during the New Kingdom, foreign gods and religious cults were brought into Egypt.171 Evidence of this kind of religious cultural interchange during the Middle Kingdom, however, is unclear.172 A statuette of unbaked clay found by the Egyptian Expedition at Lisht may attest to the existence of practices of a foreign element there (Fig. 4.19). Though the excavators have interpreted the object as a representation of the Egyptian king, the figurine, reminiscent of a type of statue found in the Levant,173 may actually represent a Canaanite goddess!174 It was “found in the surface clearing a considerable distance westwards from the pyramid” of Amenemhet 1.175 The excavators were of the opinion that it was meant to represent a king (due to the high conical crown upon its head), but, because of its crude workmanship and “grotesque” quality, they felt that it certainly could not have been made as a serious piece of work to the king’s order, or for his temple.176 They concluded that it may have belonged “to the

152

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

Figure 4.19  Mud figurine from Lisht.

town period of occupation or again it may have been fashioned in an idle moment by one of the craftsmen who were employed in the construction of the pyramid.”177 While the figure was probably made by craftsmen in Egypt engaged in the construction of the pyramid, it is possible that the craftsman was of Asiatic origin. In other words, the figurine may be a local attempt to create something after a Canaanite model and may reflect a belief in the potency of household gods; therefore, it could have been used for cultic purposes and dedicated to a Canaanite goddess by an Asiatic in his new locale.

The mud figurine from Lisht: description The figurine represents a standing female goddess, nude except for the conical crown which bulges at the top upon her head.178 It is made of mud and is intact

West Semites and the Economic Life of Egypt

153

except for the loss of the left arm, right hand, right foot (a fragment of which was retrieved), a large portion of the left ear, and the bulge on the crown. The face shows no indication of eyebrows and the staring eyes are crudely formed with raised rims. Small holes indicate the eyeballs (pupils). The right eye has eroded with time. The mouth is formed by two raised horizontal bands (the left side of the lip is broken). The raised oval-­shaped head creates an upward gaze and is held by a strong neck. The form of the head and body is rounded. The large ears project outward. Though no attempt has been made to show musculature, there is an indication of breasts, and a fully rounded buttock. There is a delineation between the two legs, but there is no space between them. There is no indication of the pubic triangle or any other indication of genitals. The hips are ambiguous. The feet are large and flat. The right arm hangs down at the side of the body, a space exists through an indentation at the waist. The left arm is broken off at the shoulder, though a small portion of the upper part of the shoulder is still visible. Green pigment mixed with a small amount of blue is distributed on the upper half of the front of the figure.179 It is a well-­known fact that the art of contemporary Canaanite Syria– Palestine was greatly influenced by the art of Egypt and that Egyptian artistic conventions were utilized in both the pictorial and plastic arts of the Levant.180 This Lisht statuette is reminiscent of a type of figurine found on the Levantine coast, particularly those found at Byblos. Syro-(Canaanite) Phoenician figurines in particular are depicted wearing high crowns, and are evidently an Egyptianization based on statues of Egyptian kings wearing the white crown of Upper Egypt. Whereas the Lisht statuette is obviously made in the Egyptian style, certain features of the face and head stand out as being unmistakably Canaanite such as the raised head and the manner in which the mouth is executed and compare with pieces found in the Levant. In discussing these figurines, Donald Hansen emphasizes that181 “even the most Egyptianized specimens from depot 14840 and jarre 14433 in the ‘Temple aux obélisques’ at Byblos are of Levantine craftsmanship.” He states that these specimens which “partly adopted the Egyptian canon of proportion, but also approach the Syrian manner of representation are based fundamentally upon Syrian style with which certain characteristics derived from Egyptian art have been fused.”182

154

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

L. Badre has pointed out that female terracotta figurines from Lebanon and Syria are usually found in domestic settings, though often in situations where a “magical” significance is apparent. Readily available terracottas provided for the rituals of home and private daily life, commonly expressing the hopes and fears of the female members of the household.183 I suggest that the strange figurine found at Lisht was used for just such a purpose. The theory that this figurine was dedicated to a foreign goddess is strengthened when taken together with religious practices of immigrants at the pyramid town of Kahun.

Canaanite imports at Lisht and the settlement Foreign connections of the people buried at Lisht North and living in the settlement are attested in the material record by Levantine ceramics, a stamp made by a Levantine scarab, a hematite Syrian cylinder seal from the area of the Lisht North pyramid [Figs. 4.20a–e]; a clay sealing with the impression of an Old Babylonian cylinder seal,[184] and Middle Minoan pottery.185

The hematite seal is divided into fields, with a kneeling figure, human heads, gazelles, and birds.186 During the mid-Twelfth Dynasty, Canaanite pottery begins to make its way to the Capital, following a hiatus after the Sixth Dynasty (Early Bronze Age); by the Thirteenth Dynasty, an astounding amount of Canaanite imports surface. The vessels comprise Levantine Painted Ware (Figs. 4.21a, b)187 and Tell el-Yahudiyeh types. This proliferation of foreign ceramics coincides with the influx of foreigners at Tell el-Dab’a in the Delta, which was also a trading center for foreign goods. The remains of an ancient settlement (with well-­preserved houses) (Fig.  4.22a), were unearthed at Lisht during excavations carried out by the Metropolitan Museum of Art.188 The settlement areas were apparently an extension of a large town which is now buried underneath the modern cultivation. The houses had several phases. The residents who lived here presumably were of a middle class social stratum, which included lower ranking officials and craftsmen. One house constructed during the Thirteenth Dynasty was at first interpreted by the excavators as a faience factory on the basis of workshop debris they found scattered over the area (Fig. 4.22b).189

West Semites and the Economic Life of Egypt

a

c

155

b

d

Figure 4.20a  Hemaetite cylinder seal from Lisht with a kneeling figure depicted in one field. Figure 4.20b  Hemaetite cylinder seal, Lisht, with animals depicted in a second field. Figure 4.20c  Hemaetite cylinder seal, Lisht, with heads depicted in a third field. Figure 4.20d  Hemaetite cylinder seal, Lisht, with birds depicted in a forth field.

156

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

Figure 4.20e  Modern impression of the Hemaetite Syrian cylinder seal from Lisht North Pyramid Area.

A bipartite unit (or “snail” room, as they are referred to at Tell el-Dab’a) was discovered in the domestic center of the house. Religious objects are sometimes found in or near such side rooms at Lisht, and may have provided magical protection190 as did possibly the mud figurine discussed above. An infant was buried below the floor of a square back room of the house. The practice of constructing tombs within houses during and after their occupation is frequently attested at Lisht beginning in Phase IIb. Burials in houses and within settlements occur in Egypt, and may have been introduced by Asiatic foreigners, like at Tell el-Dab’a. As stated earlier, the settlement at Kahun revealed intramural burials, and Rosalie David suggested that it may have been a foreign influence. It is difficult to judge, given the small number of excavated settlements in ancient Egypt; it is possible that the custom was also practiced by Egyptians. W. S. Blackman states that, until the present day, intramural burial for infants has been practiced by the rural Coptic population in Egypt. It is believed that such burials prevent the death of the next child of the family.191 Manfred Bietak has found such child burials in a Christian settlement in Sayala, Nubia dating to the tenth or eleventh century AD.192 During a third building phase of the above-­mentioned house, a secondary entrance with two entrance rooms were added on. In the center of one of

Figure 4.21a  Levantine painted ware, juglet, Lisht North, tomb of Senwosret (758).

Figure 4.21b  The “Dolphin Vase”, Lisht North, below House A1:3.

158

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

Figure 4.22a  Group of houses built against the pyramid of Amenemhet I, Lisht.

Figure 4.22b  Floor plan of a house at Lisht showing the area where the Dolphin jar was found.

West Semites and the Economic Life of Egypt

159

the entrance rooms, a shaft (tomb) was cut from the floor level of the house into a late Twelfth Dynasty dump. It is in this shaft tomb (879), which contained at least three burials, where the well-­known “Dolphin Jar” was found (Fig.  4.22b).193 One of these burials revealed a coffin of Debeni, overseer of faience workers. The slightly piriform shape and triple handle of the Lisht vase, are Levantine, and are related to pottery types in the Syro-Canaanite area toward the end of MBIIA and continuing into MBIIB. A possible source of the location for the clay has been identified in southern Canaan, while the technique of decoration is similar to, but not the same as, the one used on the “Tell elYahudiyeh” pottery. The realistic portrayal of the three dolphins appears to be of Minoan inspiration. A Thirteenth Dynasty date is proposed for the jar, by other objects found in the same tomb shaft. It is difficult to say whether the jar was originally part of the burial equipment in that shaft or used in the house. Regarding the Tell el-Yahudiyeh pottery produced in Egypt, it has been suggested that “they were manufactured in Egypt by Canaanite potters in Egypt using foreign techniques, vessel shapes and decorative styles, but Egyptian clays, or by Egyptians copying Canaanite prototypes and tech­niques.”194

Asiatics at Kahun West Semites are known to have dwelled at the pyramid town of Kahun. Their presence is attested in the archaeological remains by pottery, jewelry, weights and measures, and, possibly, by intramural burials (the practice of interring the deceased members of the family within the construction of the house) and wool.195 Details of legal, medical, and religious practices written on papyri discovered at Kahun indicate that non-Egyptians, namely ꜤꜢmw, were participants in temple festivals, as well as in the police and military units. A. R. David points out that the ꜤꜢmw were present in sufficient numbers in the town to warrant the existence of an “officer in charge of ‘Asiatic troops’ and a ‘Scribe of the Asiatics’. ”196 Texts and objects from the site show that there were two types of reli­gious  observances in the community – “official” standard mortuary and

160

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

cultic practices put up by the State or ruling classes in temples, and also household practices.197 The household or domestic cult practices suggest that some religious customs may have been introduced by the immigrants. One of the most unusual customs at Kahun was the practice of intramural burials. The discovery of boxes containing baby burials of two or three infants several months of age were found under the floors of some of the houses at Kahun. The custom of intramural burials was also practiced at the Egyptian site of Tell el-Dab’a in the Delta where a vast Middle Bronze Canaanite site of the late Middle Kingdom was discovered.198 While pyramid towns are of utmost importance for the study of urbanization in ancient Egypt, actual settlement sites in Egypt have not survived due to their mud brick construction.199 To date, Kahun is the most extensively excavated pyramid town of the Middle Kingdom. Thus, it is an exemplary site of this period available for analysis,200 but it cannot be said with any certainty that intramural burials were a foreign practice and not a local tradition.201 It should also be noted that excavations at the settlement site of Abydos have uncovered “six human burials (of infants or young juveniles) which were found inside houses.” Several of the burials were in jars placed under the floors, while others were in shallow pits.202 These burials date to the First Intermediate Period, a time when foreigners began to filter into Egypt. Thus, it does not seem unreasonable to suggest that the intramural burials indicate either a foreign presence or a foreign influence at Abydos. It is interesting that divine cults at Kahun were Sobek, Hathor and Sopdu. Hathor and Sopdu in particular had foreign connections. They were worshipped in the other communities where there was a non-Egyptian presence, such as Deir el-Medina and the copper mining centers in Sinai. Hathor was worshipped at Sinai and in Canaan in the Twelfth Dynasty.203

Craftsmen and artisans at Kahun Although there is no direct evidence, some of the artisans and craftsmen residing at Kahun may also have been brought from elsewhere.204 A group of objects found in a house in the workmen’s quarter at Kahun suggest that the

West Semites and the Economic Life of Egypt

161

occupants may have been foreigners from Western Asia. One of these objects, the torque, is un-Egyptian, but was commonly worn in areas of Mesopotamia and the Levant.205 It apparently belonged to the wife of one of the workmen. It was found with a Hathor mirror, and showed signs of wear.206 The torque may have been an import or a gift, or it could have been made by local Egyptian craftsmen imitating Near Eastern design.207 The dating of the mirror is dubious,208 but it is not an unreasonable inference that the mirror was of Middle Kingdom date since Hathor was worshipped by Asiatics both in Canaan and in the Sinai during the Middle Kingdom. A fragment of a lapis lazuli cylinder seal in the Metropolitan Museum is inscribed in Egyptian hieroglyphs and Old Babylonian cuneiform where Sehetep Ib R’ was described as beloved of Hathor, Mistress of [Byblos] Yakin-­ilum, a servant: (Figs. 4.23a, b).209 Hathor mirrors found at Serabit el-Khadim210 were dedicated to the goddess by Egyptians and most likely Asiatics as well. It is possible that the foreigners at Kahun also adopted the worship of the Egyptian goddess. The god Sopdu, another god associated with foreigners, was also worshipped here.211 While there is no direct evidence showing that there were foreign craftsmen at Kahun, an Egyptian stela, probably from Abydos, shows that there were foreign craftsmen in Egypt during the Middle Kingdom.212 Abydos was thought to be the burial site of the god Osiris. It became a sacred religious and funerary center in Upper Egypt, and was throughout history the place where important people in the country wished to be buried, or wanted to make a tribute or offering. Stelae were set up here as part of the decoration of the person’s offering chapel, either tomb chapel or cenotaph.213 The stelae were usually inscribed with the names of the donor, his family, and personnel. The stela mentioning the Asiatic craftsmen belonged to a man named Karu. Three chief craftsmen are listed (and depicted). Two of them appear to be of West Semitic origin. One is called the Asiatic ꜤꜢm. The others are designated as “᾽Apir, born of Ibi – justified; the Asiatic and Chief craftsman Tuti.” In the literary texts, Egyptians considered foreigners to be outsiders because they were not Egyptians. But, judging from the stelae, and the list of Asiatic servants mentioned, once the outsiders become resident aliens and settled within the Egyptian populace, they seem to be looked upon in a different light. Information from these stelae show that Egyptians considered the foreigners to

162

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

Figure 4.23a  Bilingual lapis cylinder seal with Old Babylonian cuneiform text.

be part of the Egyptian community. These people took on Egyptian names, but sometimes they are referred to as so and so, son of so and so which gives away their ethnic identity. It is only by their foreign name, or by the Egyptian appellative, ꜤꜢmw, that we know they are not native Egyptians. In fact, not much care is given to detail or to differentiation in the representation of the Egyptians

Figure 4.23b  Bilingual lapis cylinder seal with Egyptian hieroglyphic text.

West Semites and the Economic Life of Egypt

163

and the foreigners. The foreigners are represented as Egyptians. This seems to be an indication of the assimilation of foreigners into the Egyptian population.

Foreign female offering bearers, and ritual dancers/attendants at Meir Dorothea Arnold has recently suggested that scenes of female offering bearers shown participating in a ritual performance to the goddess Hathor in the tomb of Ukhotep III (high priest of Hathor at Meir), include Asiatic foreigners (Figs.  4.24a, b). She concludes that the identifying marker on the women shown in the scenes are their odd hairstyles, and objects which are represented in close proximity to them.214 Arnold has observed that their coiffures appear to be of West Asiatic origin, and are connected to a fashion in third millennium Mesopotamia and Mari, where the swept up hair is kept in place by bands or a fillet. “The result is a caplike coiffure with a thick ‘bun-­like’ part protruding at the back and a bulge above the forehead.”215 While there is no evidence of direct contact between Mesopotamia and Egypt during the Middle Kingdom,216 Arnold suggests that the hairstyles were depicted on inlays of shell and ivory from Mari, Kish and other sites in Mesopotamia and may have reached Egypt via trade.217 One of them can be discerned on a Mesopotamian plaque of unknown provenance. It shows a female with hair bound up and kept in place by a comb or pin. The woman represented on the plaque is shown playing a lyre, an instrument closely associated with the Goddess Ishtar. Ishtar is a Mesopotamian counterpart to the Egyptian goddess Hathor, and images often show attendants, dancers or priestesses of these goddesses with either hair bound up (or in a pigtail). Arnold has observed that the wedge-­shaped object projecting from the hairstyles of the women at Meir, and those seen on images from Mesopotamia, represent something reminiscent of an ornamental Spanish comb; she suggests that it is this same type of “comb” which would have been inserted into holes drilled on the heads of two Middle Kingdom statuettes of foreign women (Figs. 4.25a, b, and 4.26).218 (The painted wood statuette of the Asiatic woman and her child in Figs. 4.25a and b, was found in a shaft tomb at Beni Hasan. The small ivory figurine in Boston, Fig. 4.26, unfortunately has no provenance, but

164

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

Figure 4.24a  Foreign female offering bearers from the tomb chamber of Ukhotep III at Meir.

the fringe along the bottom and vertical seam in front mark it as foreign).219 Consequently, the females portrayed in Ukhotep’s tomb, could have worn archaizing hairstyles, or were depicted as such, in order to continually define their role and ritual function in society. While it is reasonable to assume that images on objects were the inspiration for an archaic Near Eastern hairstyle to appear in Egyptian art, another possibility may also be considered: the transmission could have occurred by an exchange of, and/or movement of peoples. Since the Early Dynastic period in Mesopotamia, musicians and singers from Sumer traveled to Mari in Syria.220 For example, the singer Ur Nanshe of Lagash traveled to Mari, where his (or her) exceptional statue was found in the Ishtar temple. There is no reason to assume that this practice did not continue in the second millennium BCE. Moreover, if they traveled from Sumer to Mari, they may have continued to Egypt. This would mean that if the women did not come directly

West Semites and the Economic Life of Egypt

165

Figure 4.24b Detail of a foreign female offering bearer from the tomb chamber of Ukhotep III at Meir.

Figure 4.24c Mesopotamian moulded terracotta plaque (fragment) showing the face and hair of a woman.

166

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

Image removed for copyright reasons

Figure 4.25a  Wood statue of a female foreigner with a baby from Beni Hasan.

from Mesopotamia, they may have traveled to Egypt from places like  Mari, Apum, or some other city in Syria and we may have some idea about their hair. It is possible that Egyptian artists at Meir depicted contemporary hairstyles of a certain class of Syro-Mesopotamian women who were residing in Egypt. The suggestion that the Meir hairstyles might have been also inspired by near-contemporary Syro-Mesopotamian counterparts has further support. The “bouffant” coiffure worn by the female offering bearers in the Meir painting221 resembles a similar full-­bodied hairstyle carved on the head of a woman depicted on a near-­contemporary Mesopotamian moulded terracotta plaque now in the Metropolitan Museum of Art (Figs. 4.24b, c).222 Though the image on the plaque is shown frontally, and the Egyptian representation is seen in profile, a characteristic trait they share is a puffed out hairstyle, the top of

West Semites and the Economic Life of Egypt

167

Image removed for copyright reasons

Figure 4.25b  Profile view of wood statue of a female foreigner with a baby from Beni Hasan.

which is flattened. The flattened area in the terracotta mould is due to Near Eastern decorative architectural elements carried above the head of the woman, while the depression in the Egyptian version of the coiffure is caused by the comb. The terracotta plaque in the Metropolitan Museum dates from 2100–1750 BCE, and is but one example of a large corpus of this type of object: Plaques of this kind are ubiquitous in Mesopotamia; many were made from the same mold and replicated over and over again. Females appear in a variety of elaborate hairstyles; a large portion of them represent popular genre scenes. Generally, the women are bare of clothing, adorned only in jewelry; others are clothed, or partially clothed and some hold a tambour. The plaques are particularly widespread in the Isin/Larsa-Old Babylonian periods.223

168

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

Figure 4.26  Female foreigner with a baby, ivory.

Who were they? The function of the females who appear on the terracotta plaques (and the purpose of the plaques themselves224) has elicited much debate. The women are widely depicted in a carefully carved coiffure – some of them exhibit details which imply curls. Some scholars have associated them with a class of women termed kezertu (based upon the Akkadian verb kezēru, which means “to curl the hair”) in the cuneiform texts.225 They have inferred the meaning of kezertu to be “a woman with curled hair,” i.e. a hairdo characteristic of a certain status. This interpretation has led some scholars to suggest that the term implies, among other things, “hairdressers.”226

West Semites and the Economic Life of Egypt

169

In his study on kezrētu at Kish, Yoffee has suggested that: these women were apparently of low status, based upon fragmentary lists of women in the court of the Old Babylonian period at Mari, where in a letter to a woman, probably the wife of a potentate, the King Zimri Lim promises to send a “fair” [high quality] kezertu woman to her when he can obtain one in a future campaign.

We know from the scattered evidence, that kezrētu performed ritual rites and were associated with the goddess Ishtar. For instance, in one letter, King Hammurabi of Babylon requested that his agent in the south, Sin-­iddinam of Larsa, send women in the cult of Ishtar (ištaratum) and kezertu women to Babylon.227 Yoffee states, Kezertu women appear in Kish only in the last part of the Old Babylonian period, having moved to Kish from Uruk, along with the cult of Ishtar of Uruk, including its retinue of priests and attendants, and various functionaries.228

We notice that, among the many uncertainties surrounding kezrētu, the one certainty is that they are connected to Ishtar and to women. In the cuneiform lists from Kish (and some from other areas), kezertu women performing in the cults are attested as being assigned to or generally acquired by other women. In one document, eight kezrētu are assigned, each one to a woman or women who were brides, daughters or wives of high ranking men. Some of the women are from towns and villages near Kish. One kezertu woman is assigned to three women.229 As gleaned from the economic texts and letters regarding kezertu women, their ritual services were contracted for by other women (or by their husbands). Though suggestions have been made as to the exact character of their occupations, no definitive conclusion has been determined. One could reflect on the lives of these ancient women, but we can only indistinctly perceive their roles, and the nature of their ceremonies. Aside from being installed as ritual dancers and attendants of the goddess, they could have served as magical– religious functionaries, hairdressers, or even midwives, in both their native lands and in Egypt. It is tempting to draw a parallel between kezertu women and the foreign females represented in the cultic scenes at Meir. The Hathoric scenes in the tomb chapel of Ukhotep emphasize a “world of women” who perform tasks

170

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

usually executed by males; the female musicians, dancers, and attendants all perform in the cult of the goddess, Hathor.230 Though devoid of inscriptional material which would indicate their origins, and the “institutions” to which they were attached, the Asiatic women depicted in the Egyptian wall painting at Meir may be akin to like females who were involved in Syro-Mesopotamian cultic “establishments.” The elaborate coiffures of the Asiatic (ꜤꜢmwt) women originated in southern Mesopotamia and later were embellished in a Syrian manner. Though it is a point of speculation, the foreign women who inspired the representations at Meir may have originally come from Syro-Mesopotamian cities such as Babylon, Kish, Larsa, or Mari. These city-­states were of an Amorite cultural milieu beginning in the early part of the second millennium BCE, at the same time people of Asiatic stock were filtering into Egypt.

But not too foreign It is not surprising that foreigners might have participated in Egyptian ritual activity at Meir when one considers the papyri found at the site of Lahun which reveal that foreign dancers and singers (ꜤꜢmw) were associated with cultic activities there.231 It is also possible that those trained in the “arts” were dispersed to other sites in Egypt.232 And there is more evidence to consider. As noted above, Hathor was worshipped at Byblos, and at sites in Egypt where foreigners lived. At Qusiya (Cusae), Ukhotep III was an overseer of priests of the local goddess, Hathor. At this site, Hathor was worshipped in her sevenfold form.233 The seven Hathors played a major role in the birth of a child. Not only were they present at the birth but they determined the fate of a new human life. They are shown in art as playing a tambour and wearing the headdress of Hathor. The notion of the seven goddesses may not have been unfamiliar to the alien female cultic personnel at Cusae, since equivalent goddesses occur in Western Asia in the form of the seven kathira¯tu.234 The Seven kathira¯tu, were a group of Northwest Semitic goddesses appearing in Ugaritic texts as divine midwives. They also predict the destiny of the newborn.235 The Egyptian and Canaanite divine figures have parallel roles in their respective cultures, but they are not necessarily historically related. In the case of the Hathors,

West Semites and the Economic Life of Egypt

171

they derive from the goddess of the same name, who was closely associated with protecting women, while the kathiratu may mean “skillful ones.”236 It cannot be said whether or not their parallel roles are directly related historically, but these divine figures shared similar functions. The relations between cultures are multi-­layered. As people mix and cultures merge, we often expect that they would adopt and adapt each other’s ideas. But they might not necessarily borrow; they may simply look for a recognizable equivalent of their own beliefs. They are related to the beginning of a human life, and its protection at this particularly vulnerable stage.237

Encoded messages in Middle Kingdom stelae Middle Kingdom stelae are a mass of signs and symbols. They are a manifestation of unconscious and conscious cultural codes . . . . they are monuments as well as memorials and make visible context in all its facets: cultural history, archaeology, religion and rites, sociology and administration, art, style and technology, language and writing, and history. It is a challenge for the Egyptologist to do justice to these petrified encoded messages and to the multiplicity of approaches they offer.238

Detlef Franke’s remarks accurately describe the important role that Middle Kingdom stelae play in the study of ancient Egyptian society. The subtleties expressed in the pictorial evidence, plus the hieroglyphic inscriptions on these monuments, offer information not provided elsewhere.

Case study The Stela of Reniseneb The Stela of Reniseneb (Fig. 4.27a) in the Metropolitan Museum of Art may contain one of those unseen messages discussed above. It is carved in five registers, wherein representations appear of the deceased and his wife, his sons and daughters, six servants, parents, a brother (?), and four other men.239 One of the female servant girls carries a basket on her head that she holds with her left hand; in her right hand, which falls down at her side, she holds lotus blossoms. She wears a long skirt or dress, held by one diagonal strap (Fig. 4.27b). She is labeled ꜤꜢmt (the female Asiatic), Snb-Rn(ἰ)-snb. H. Fischer

172

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

Figure 4.27a  Stela of Reniseneb from Abydos, Thirteenth Dynasty.

Figure 4.27b  Detail of Reniseneb stela from Abydos, Thirteenth Dynasty.

West Semites and the Economic Life of Egypt

173

has commented that “the girl is exceptionally labeled ꜤꜢmt, rather than ‘servant.’ ” Her unusual hairstyle tapers upward, and a lock of hair falls from the high upswept conelike coiffure. Representations of this coiffure occur rarely in Egyptian art. Some examples include the following: Stelae MMA 69.30 (Fig. 4.28)240 This particular hairstyle also appears on a female servant labeled bꜢkt.241 She is kneeling and wears a strapless skirt, leaving her breasts exposed. She offers two ointment jars (held one in each hand).

Figure 4.28  Stela from a chapel niche of Anu showing a kneeling figure wearing a pigtail, Twelfth–Thirteenth Dynasty.

174

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

Moscow (I.1.a.1136)242 This stela shows a servant with a similar strapless skirt; the hair is banded by incised lines. It is possible that the servant is wearing a head covering. The youthful figure is standing with arm extended forward. British Museum EA 226 The lower sub-­register shows four kneeling children; two of them are girls and they both wear a comparable coiffure with hair pulled up and a pendant tress. British Museum 162 Chief commander of Soldiers Ameni. His wife is a priestess of Hathor; their daughter, who wears the same hairstyle, is represented in small scale. Cairo CG 20747243 A small figure of a servant girl wearing a shorter skirt and the same coiffure, appears on this stela. Louvre E2533 Figured Ostracon from Deir el-Medina, women in pavilion or outdoor location (Fig. 4.29). Statuary The Brussels head (Fig. 4.30): indurated limestone Fischer speculated that the detailed rendering of the coiffure and the large scale of the head may not have been confined to servants. Torso of a small steatite figurine (Figs. 4.31a, b) The same hairstyle is also found on a tiny steatite bust of a girl, in a private collection. Both arms are missing. The head is turned to the right, while the torso is frontal. Since the hairstyle in question is not a common one for Egyptian women, Fischer sought to find a representation of it in Western Asia, but could not find any definite parallels linking it to one of Asiatic origin.

Interpretation I would suggest that if the hairstyle is not Near Eastern, and at the same time seems to be exceptional in Egypt, then it is a “identifying marker” associated with a particular activity in which both Egyptian and foreign women could be involved.

West Semites and the Economic Life of Egypt

175

Figure 4.29  Figured ostracon, Deir el-Medina, woman in pavilion or outdoor location.

Considering that household servants in ancient Egypt could have multiple roles, it is plausible that the distinctive coiffure of Snb-Rn(ἰ)-snb signified another one of her responsibilities. Since I know of no parallel sources from the Middle Kingdom which would explain the significance of the unusual coiffure, the answer may lie in materials of later or earlier periods. What strikes a note is a restored New Kingdom painting of a birth arbor from a house in Deir el-Medina, which shows a mother, naked except for a

176

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

Figure 4.30  Statuette of indurated limestone.

West Semites and the Economic Life of Egypt

177

Figure 4.31a  Torso and head of a small steatite figurine.

broad collar and anklets, and wearing an elaborate wig, nursing a child. She is attended by three other figures, illustrating the events of childbirth. Two of the standing figures, birth or post-­birth attendants, offer a mirror244 and what appears to be a kohl holder with stick. They wear their hair pulled up high with a pendant lock or pigtail.245 They may be servants participating in the festivities of birth. Could they have also functioned as midwives? A similar scene which appears on an ostracon of painted limestone shows a woman breastfeeding her baby while a servant girl offers her a mirror and a kohl holder with sticks (Fig. 4.29).246

178

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

Figure 4.31b  Torso and head of a small steatite figurine (alternate view).

There is no known word in Egyptian for “midwife,” though Henry Fischer has suggested that the term “ἰn‘t” inscribed on an Old Kingdom mastaba could be interpreted as midwifery. The determinative shows a seated woman holding a rectangular object, and her hair is tied back. He suggested that the object may represent one or both of the pair of blocks that served as a birthstool. The woman is a rht nsw, “known to the king.” The same determinative appears on ˘ an offering table of another woman where the hair is also tied back, though in a different manner. The inscription says that she is an overseer of ἰnꜤwt, i.e. “overseer of midwives.” This woman is also a rht nsw, as is another woman ˘ overseer of midwives found on a second offering table.

West Semites and the Economic Life of Egypt

179

There is another term, however, “hnmt,” the determinative of which again ˘ shows a woman with bound hair. Like the Egyptian term “mnἰt,” it is taken to concern nursing. In the late period, hnmt shared the determinative of a woman ˘ nursing a child.247 Perhaps the large Brussels head discussed above can be compared to the image which Henry Fischer perceived to be a midwife in an Old Kingdom mastaba; he suggested that a midwife, like a doctor can save lives, and, therefore, can be given a large image.248 One may also compare the Twelfth Dynasty figure of the Egyptian nurse, Sitsneferu found in Adana, whose likeness was commemorated with a high quality statue (Fig. 4.32).249

Figure 4.32  Granodiorite statue of the nurse Sitsneferu, found in Adana (Turkey).

180

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

Could the subject of the Brussels head represent a “midwife,” or even an “overseer of midwives?” Snb-Rn(ἰ)-snb could then have also been a midwife, or at least a servant trusted to provide service in the decisive moment of childbirth. There might have been many aspects to that role, besides practical care for the mother and child. The same hairstyle is also found on a tiny steatite bust in a private collection.250 Both arms are missing; the head is turned to the right, while the torso is frontal. She appears to be nude, except for an incised line below her waist that may indicate a belt (Fig. 4.33a). This small torso belongs to a certain class of figurine which commonly carry jars or hold musical instruments, for example, a charming wood figure of a harpist from Gurob (Fig. 4.33b).251 They

Figure 4.33a  Torso and head of a small steatite figurine (3/4 back view).

Figure 4.33b  Abu Gurob harpist figurine.

are usually associated with the goddess Hathor. What is striking is the asymmetrical line of the shoulders, which shows movement (Fig. 4.34). Could this small statue be that of a dancer, or a dancer holding a jar? Recently, a series of ostraca have been discovered in the Valley of the Kings which show nude women dancing while holding wine jars (Fig. 4.35).252 They are accompanied by ape and goat. They are thought to be Syrian based upon their strange hairstyles, which resemble the head covering of the Asiatic god Reshep. Their hair is pulled up in the conelike shape, but it differs from our Middle Kingdom examples in that, while the hair is piled, there is more than one lock of hair hanging down. While it cannot be ascertained if this much later representation relates to the Middle Kingdom examples, it does demonstrate that dancing with vessels occurred.253 Returning to the Middle Kingdom representations, the tiny statue with the braid, may represent a dancer in a ritual “performance” or cultic activity for the protection of a mother in the course of an oncoming birth. This dance would most likely have been tied to the Egyptian goddess Hathor – the girl’s unusual hairstyle may be an evocation of one of Hathor’s epithets: “lady of the braided tress”.254 The expression on the face of the small figurine appears to be trance-­like, in an altered state,255 which exhibits a sense of self-­possession. Her long narrow,

182

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

Figure 4.34  Torso and head of a small steatite figurine (front view).

Figure 4.35  Syrian dancers, ostracon, New Kingdom.

West Semites and the Economic Life of Egypt

183

Figure 4.36  Statuette of dancing pygmy from the burial of Hepy, Lisht South, mastaba west of Senwosretankh, Pit 3.

horizontally set eye, with curved upper lid and deep canthi, evokes a sense of tranquility. Perhaps she is shown in the climactic stage of an ecstatic dance; the dancing god Bes had an apotropaic function as well, especially in the protection of women and children.256 Small figurines, like the ivory dancing dwarves found outside the sealed chamber of the girl Hepy at Lisht must certainly have had a similar and magical purpose (Fig. 4.36).257 It is possible that this small scale steatite torso belonged to the same class of magical/protective objects.

(He of?) Ꜣpἰm and (He of?) ŠkꜢm Sinai Inscription 405 (Fig. 4.37a) Identifiably Semitic names are written on the lists of the workforce at Serabit el-Khadim in the Sinai attesting to West Semitic peoples working peacefully alongside the Egyptians. Particularly illuminating are those inscriptions in

184

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

Figure 4.37a  The Inscriptions of Sinai II, 206, Fig. 17, bottom of southeast face of stela 405.

which the proper names are accompanied by pictorial depictions. One particular inscription, accompanied by a scene on stelae at Serabit el-Khadim, designates these persons as coming from the land of Rt-nw (Retenu), an Egyptian term denoting the region of northern Syria and central Canaan,259 grouping its inhabitants together without distinguishing specific town of origin. Based on the names of the two people represented, this stela, which dates from the time of Amenemhet III, may allow for a more specific identification of individual locales. The scene represents a man riding on a donkey. He holds an axe with yellow blade and crooked red handle in his left hand.260 No inscription appears above him, but on the basis of his representation on Sinai 112, he is reminiscent of the figure designated as the Brother of the Prince of Retenu, Khebdedem. There, an attendant called (k. k. bἰ) Kekbi stands behind him and carries a Canaanite jar and a stick (Fig. 4.37b).261 On the basis of his inscription on four different stelae, Khebdedem was a participant in several expeditions in the reign of Amenemhet III. The donkey is led by another man who carries a spear over his left shoulder. Above this figure are hieroglyphic signs which identify him as ŠkꜢm. Following the donkey is a man who carries a spear, and a throwstick. He is designated as Apim. It is suggested here that the figures of these two individuals may be taken as determinatives for man.262 The skin of all three men are painted yellow (the usual color used for Asiatics), and the

West Semites and the Economic Life of Egypt

185

Figure 4.37b  The Inscriptions of Sinai I, PL. XXXVII.

hair is black. They wear short white kilts with horizontal red stripes.263 Černý states that the hieroglyphic groups above the men leading and driving the donkey clearly gives their names, and, further, that these names are Semitic. However, he was unable to trace the Semitic etymology for all of the names.264 With respect to inconsistencies in Egyptian spelling,265 a variety of possibilities present themselves in the interpretation of these names. Thus, for example, the proper name ŠkꜢm may represent an orthographic variant of Skmm, the spelling of the Canaanite city of Shechem in the Execration Texts, and stela of Khusobek. In other words, the persons leading and following the donkey might be named or referred to by the name of their cities. Such eponyms are not uncommon in the cuneiform texts of the ancient Near East. As a matter of fact, names of this type are found in Egyptian hieroglyphic texts as well.266 In terms of the orthography, one would have to posit a free variation between the representation of Semitic s. It may be noted that the New Kingdom spelling of Shechem which occurs in the Amarna letters is Šakm(i).267 If indeed the city of Shechem is represented on the stela at Sinai, the negative sentiments expressed in the Execration Texts, and Khu-sobek stela contradict the scene of peaceful commercial interaction on Sinai #405 at Serabit el-Khadim. It is suggested here that the name Ꜣpἰm written above the figure following behind the donkey is also an eponym, and represents Ἀ ¯ pum, the ancient term applied to the city now known as Damascus and its environs in the early second

186

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

millennium BCE.268 Albright, identified Ἀ ¯ pum (spelled a-­p-w-­m in the Execration Texts) with “A-pi, U-pi or U-pe of the Amarna Tablets . . .”269 He noted that in the Amarna age the nominative was Ὀ ¯ pu, genitive Opi, written U-pi, except in the north under “Amorite” influence where the form Apu(i) survived. The name also appears in the Mari tablets in the form Āpum, written in the genitive A-pi-­im KI as well as ma-­a-at A-pi-­im KI “the land of Ἀ ¯ pum.” Ἀ ¯ pim would be the Akkadian genitive, designating this person as belonging to the region of Damascus.270 Such gentilics are commonly found in texts from Mari, Ebla, and Sumer. For example, at Mari we can even find an exact parallel where a certain individual is designated in one text as LU A pa-­ai-yu ki (Man from Apu).271 The Execration Texts mention a prince of Ἰpwm (vocalized Ἀ ¯ pum by 272 Albright). Here, the phoneme a in Ꜣpum is represented by the Egyptian hieroglyphic ἰ (i) reed sign which can indicate the sound a, ι, or u. This sign is the one most frequently used to denote a Semitic aleph a in Egyptian during the Middle Kingdom. However, in our Sinai inscription the reed sign does not appear in the word Ꜣpἰm; the vulture or aleph bird sign is utilized instead to express the same sound. Posener suggested the name Ꜣpἰm is actually the Semitic name Rpim, since an r commonly interchanges with a in the Semitic–Egyptian interchange. However, we see more of a historical development by the end of the Twelfth Dynasty where there is an almost total abandonment of Egyptian Ꜣ to represent Semitic r during the Thirteenth Dynasty, as observed by Sass in Papyrus Brooklyn, though it does not yet show the use of Ꜣ to transliterate Semitic a as was customary in the syllabic writing of the New Kingdom.273 Nevertheless, I would like to propose a different reading preferable to that of Ꜣpἰm. The New Kingdom form of the definite article, pꜢ, appears occasionally in the Middle Kingdom,274 and, although rare, is also demonstrated in the Old Kingdom.275 So there is no reason why the New Kingdom usage of Semitic Ꜣ = Egyptian a could not have been put to use as early as the Middle Kingdom at Sinai. It is suggested here that Ἀ¯pum and Shechem lie within the confines of the general term Retenu – the man on the donkey representing the domain of Retenu.276 Palestine and Syria were divided politically into many units and it is reasonable to assume that the small states grouped themselves into a confederation led by more powerful members, an arrangement for which there is evidence in the archives at Mari. Could Shechem possibly have been part of a confederation with Ἀ¯pum?

West Semites and the Economic Life of Egypt

187

There are several pieces of evidence that shows that Damascus and Shechem were connected politically by way of caravans. The Biblical story links Abraham’s journey with the route that goes from Harran to Damascus and Egypt. Abraham reached Shechem, an important caravan station which according to the Biblical sources was connected with donkey traditions. In fact, the family that rules Shechem was that of “Hamor, the father of Shechem.”277

Conclusion Up to now we have conducted an inductive study of typical Amorite West Semitic occupations especially as reflected in Egyptian consciousness, i.e. typical occupations Egyptians associated and or identified with Amorites. As a reinforcement, and in some measure a control on these observations, we conclude this section with a brief discussion of these occupations in documents originating from an Amorite or assimilated Amorite cultural milieu, i.e. the Mari letters. These terms in fact turn up in the vocabulary, nomenclature, and references to technology associated with such crafts. Below is a sampling of the relative terms to two of the crafts or occupations discussed above.

Herding re’û “to pasture,” “to graze” (Gelb, 291); r’y “pasture,” (Huffmon, 260), also a personal name: l-­la-­ra-­hi-ya (ι-la-ra-hi-­e). The Amorite provenance of the text and occupation in the text is suggested by the Amorite personal name, i.e. rahiya instead of Akkadian re’û. A kind of sheep labeled as MAR.TU or a-­mu-ur-­r u is mentioned twice in the Mari texts.278

Artisans The Old Babylonian texts from Mari reveal that Amorite smiths were prominent in the working of metal. Several texts record that silver and gold were given to certain craftsmen for the making of animal-­headed cups279 bearing, for the most

188

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

part, unmistakably Amorite names.280 They are: Yašûb-Ašar, a well-­known goldsmith at Mari;281 Yar’ip-Abba;282 Rimsi-ili;283 Idin-­dIGI.KUR;284 and Ana’is.285 While the terminology does not apply a technical term to these smiths, Akkadian epēšu, a verb that has various technical meanings, is applied to the work done by these artisans. These craftsmen worked in the workshop of Mukannišum. A Mari priestess with the name Bahlatum sent a letter to the jeweler Ili-­ ˘ iddinam286 complaining that she had paid the jeweler four years earlier to buy stones for a necklace. She complains that while the jeweler287 took gold and silver, toggle-­pins have yet to be made. Bahlatum is an Amorite name,288 cf. ˘ bahulatum (bahlatum instead of presumably Akkadian bēltum). ˘ ˘ Shamshi-Adad offers the god Itūr-Mēr a throne that was “carefully crafted according to differing techniques of the goldsmith’s art,” ša ina hurās.im u mârê ˘ ummenūtim šumšu šutašbat.289 The deity name Itūr-Mēr is Amorite,290 crafted by the mârê ummenūtim. In a letter from Mukannišum to King Zimri-­lim, there is a reference to architectural elements in an area within the palace at Mari called the “Court of the Palms.”291 It is in this area wherein a railing is to be made by the metalworker Ibbi-­addu (an Amorite name). Terminology reflects the actual life situation of a people. The variety of native terms applied to specific occupations, prove that herding, and metallurgy were among the various occupations in which Amorites were engaged. Thus Egyptian sources reflect the true cultural situation of Amorites, both within and outside of Egypt. The association of typically ꜤꜢmw crafts with Amorites in Mesopotamia/ Syria–Canaan probably holds for the other professions such as weaving and dyeing.

5

Conclusion and Prospects for Further Study

The main focus of this book has centered on the early second millennium BCE, since the terminology, rich archaeological data, art historical evidence and textual material has much to contribute to our topic during this time period. This study has sought to demonstrate that changing attitudes and socio-­economic realities find an accurate reflection in Egyptian artistic, epigraphical and archaeological sources. The cumulative results show that the textual, art historical and archaeological components basically validate one another and serve to impart an improved understanding of a complex situation. The various chapters of this book may be seen as an extended commentary of a sort on the painting in the tomb of Khnumhotep II at Beni Hasan which encapsulates so many aspects of West Semitic–Egyptian relations in the Middle Kingdom. Thus, the scene of the Asiatic ꜤꜢmw, Abishai and his “caravan,” may serve as a concrete embodiment to the points brought out in this study. In Chapter One, the Egyptian term ꜤꜢmw was defined as a term for kinship and that this term corresponds to the West Semitic term h.m. While a correlation between the two terms has been previously noted, an in-­depth study of this term from the Egyptian point of view vis-à-vis the Semitic meaning was lacking. Thus an investigation and analysis of a variety of Egyptian terms for Asiatics and their nuances may serve as a tool for a more efficient interpretation of the textual evidence. For example, the interpretation suggested here of the Egyptian term Styw as socio-­economic rather than ethnic, shows that the Egyptians differentiated Asiatics according to their lifestyle. With this information in mind, further investigations into this topic can be more rigorously developed. Following this interpretation, a fuller

190

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

understanding of Egypt’s attitudes toward her northern neighbors emerges for consideration by scholars in any number of disciplines, such as history, art history, philology, anthropology, etc. Contemporary literary and economic texts in cuneiform, however, make it clear that despite the stereotype prevalent in Mesopotamia itself of the MAR.TU/Amurru was that of a group of nomadic “barbarians”, the reality is that they were actually a sophisticated agricultural, or even urban group assimilated into the population of southern Mesopotamia. This study has attempted to open an avenue of cross-­cultural exploration by looking at Amorites not only from the Egyptian point of view, but also in light of Mesopotamian perceptions as well. While other investigators have hypothesized that the MAR.TU/Amurru of Mesopotamia represent the same cultural strain as the Egyptian ꜤꜢmw, this has been done for the most part by Egyptologists working with Egyptian data alone. This understanding has been further refined in the present study by a full analysis of both Egyptian and ancient Near Eastern materials. By transcending conventional geographical boundaries and all too insulated disciplines one attaches a fuller appreciation of Egyptian attitudes toward West Semites. It is hoped that other scholars will further expand the scope of this study, and build upon the integrative–synthetic approach developed here. Chapter Two was devoted to the representations of Asiatics in Egyptian art. This kind of evidence proved to mirror and complement the textual depictions. We can trace developing perceptions of West Semites in Egypt first as captives, then, with increasing contacts, as workers and eventually as professional craftsmen. The evidence reveals that the more important the West Semites become in the economy of everyday life, the less likely the Egyptians are to depict them in a derogatory manner. As with the textual analysis, the study of artistic depictions especially from a comparative Egyptian– Mesopotamian/Canaanite point of view forms an essential part of this study. The results of the artistic analysis are significant in that the study of artistic depictions underscore the changes in a graphic manner. Moreover, the changes witnessed in Egypt were paralleled by similar changes in perceptions elsewhere in the contemporary Near East. One insight emerging from this study is the degree of close contact between Egyptians and ꜤꜢmw/Amorites as reflected in the realism and naturalism of their non-­stereotypical depiction by Egyptian artists.

Conclusion

191

In Chapter Three, it was shown that the Asiatic presence was felt in Egypt in a myriad of ways. Even though the ꜤꜢmw participated in a variety of occupations, the evidence points to the fact that the occupations they were trained for in their native lands were the trades that they most often practiced while in Egypt. Their skills not only were transferable, but also eventually to become an economic necessity in the land. Thus, despite initial Egyptian xenophobia, the ꜤꜢmw were able to assimilate into Egyptian society and soon were in a position to disseminate some of their culture into the Egyptian sphere. In addition, Chapter Three presents a new interpretation of various Egyptian terms and toponyms, providing fresh material for further assessment of the Asiatic presence in Egypt. The translation proposed and defended in this chapter shows that Amorite artisans, crafts, and technologies can be detected in the Egyptian record during the Middle Kingdom with greater clarity at both the royal capital and the Sinai peninsula. For example, the previously held view that Asiatics were not significantly present at the Twelfth Dynasty capital at Lisht should be reassessed in light of the evidence presented in this study. It is hoped that this treatment of the Amorite/Canaanite West Semitic component will complement work done with Libyans,1 Nubians,2 and other groups, and contribute to the larger picture of how Egyptians perceived their neighbors. Further, the methodology of our study of Egyptian perceptions of West Semites during the Middle Kingdom may be profitably applied to consideration of the same issue in later periods, such as the New Kingdom. By synthesizing three separate, but related disciplines – philology, art history and archaeology – this study has introduced a more comprehensive approach to the historical and cultural problems addressed. While the scope of this present work does not allow for treatment of the subject during the New Kingdom, a few representative examples will serve to demonstrate the applicability of our methodology to Late Bronze Age evidence. Thus, in later Middle Kingdom times, during the Thirteenth Dynasty, the influx of Asiatics into the Delta in large numbers and their assimilation into Egyptian culture allowed them to rise to positions of importance.3 In fact, some of the Thirteenth Dynasty kings may actually bear Semitic names.4 Between the Middle

192

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

and New Kingdoms, the takeover of Lower Egypt by the foreign Amorite Hyksos5 came initially as a peaceful ethnic infiltration, but was no doubt made possible because of the expansion of the Amorite population arising from the proliferation of Egyptianized Amorites. At the same time, the progressive Egyptianization of Asiatics in the Middle Kingdom can be detected in the following ways: 1. Middle Kingdom Stelae: As mentioned in Chapter Three, these stelae were set up in tomb chapels at Abydos. They depict an individual and his family or an extended family, i.e. non-­family members who are living in the household as either servants or minor officials.6 Often the extended family members include ꜤꜢmw. 2. Burials: An Egyptian Twelfth Dynasty coffin inscribed, “this ꜤꜢmw possessor of reverence” from the site of Harageh,7 showing that Amorites were buried in the Egyptian manner. 3. Names on papyri such as the list of servants in the Brooklyn Papyrus discussed in Chapter Three. The foreigners listed in the papyri complement those listed and depicted on the stelae; they are given Egyptian names but are designated as ꜤꜢmw, some along with their Asiatic names as well. 4. Material remains, especially at Tell el-Dab’a in the Delta, show an expansion of the Twelfth Dynasty town,8 inhabited by Canaanites. This is evidenced by various Canaanite (or Amorite) architectural features, one of which includes the Syrian “Mittelsaalhaus” (middle room house) and of a “Breitraumhaus” (broad room house). Bietak points out the Syrian prototypes of these houses, and notes that a “Mittelsaalhaus” was an element of the palace at Mari which was approximately contemporary with the settlement of Tell el-Dab’a.9 Eventually, these Canaanites went through a process of Egyptianization which showed in the material culture and funerary customs. T. Schneider has calculated through the study of funerary stelae and other sources of the period, that among 2,600 people who appear on the objects, 800 of them were either themselves ꜤꜢmw or had ꜤꜢmw relatives, or some job-­ related connection to them.10

Conclusion

193

Survivals and transformations of the Asiatic image in Egypt of the New Kingdom During the Late Bronze Age the takeover of northern Syria by the Mittanian and Hittite Empires transformed Syria into an ethnic and cultural melting pot. This change in political power from the Middle Bronze Age to the Late Bronze Age in Canaan was picked up by the Egyptians during the New Kingdom. A new culture had begun, and correlated with this transition was a change in Egyptian terminology for Asiatics and other subtle transitions. D. B. Redford has studied the development of the costume and coiffure of Asiatics from the time of Tuthmosis III 11 and following, and W. H. Hayes has studied the various costumes of foreigners as represented during the period of Ramesses II.12 When compared to Middle Kingdom representations of Asiatics, a major change occurs in the appearance of Asiatics as seen through the eyes of Egyptian artists.13 While some of the visual characteristics of West Semitic Asiatics formed during the Old and Middle Kingdoms, such as the kilt, and tonsure continue during the New Kingdom, a significant difference is seen in the decoration and style of garments (and hairstyles) worn by Asiatics. These garments most likely are realistic representations of the garments worn and represent an assimilated ideal.14 Redford has suggested that these changes in representation reflect the presence of new cultural groups who took over and settled in certain areas in Mesopotamia and Syria–Canaan. During the Late Bronze Age, Syria was a syncretic culture in which Amorites and Hurrians lived.15 The blending of diverse cultural groups that shared a common territory made for certain areas of culture to be widespread; thus it is difficult to clearly define the distinct ethnic divisions which were now integrated into the Levantine and Near Eastern populations. 1. Tuthmoside period: The changes occurring in the terminology and physical appearance of Asiatic foreigners in the New Kingdom are prominent just before and during the reign of Tuthmosis III. Textual: A Hieratic ostracon from the Tuthmoside age discovered at Deir elBahri by MMA excavations near the entrance of the tomb of Senenmut in the shale quarry or borrow pit, east of Hatshepsut’s temple at Deir el-Bahri was inscribed in hieratic and written in black ink.16 The inscription (on the recto)

194

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

mentions the estate of Queen Hatshepsut as well as her coregent Tuthmosis III (referred to here only as “the Great House” (pr ‘3)).17 The verso of the ostracon records monthly contributions of workmen and lists the names of four persons who brought in edged tools (mtnw) presumed to be used either in cutting the tomb or in carving the sculptured decoration of its antechamber. One of these workmen is designated p3-‘3m, “the Asiatic.” It is fitting that he is associated with the tools (perhaps made of copper). One can infer a continuity in the New Kingdom in the craft specializations of ꜤꜢmw Asiatics with tools and Asiatic ἰmnw with artisans and stone cutting at Serabit el-Khadim in Sinai during the Middle Kingdom and at Lisht.18 The information gleaned from the ostraca shows that ꜤꜢmw were still differentiated from other Asiatics during the Tuthmoside age in the Egyptian sources. Another ostracon dealing with the building operation of Tuthmosis III lists 60 Kharu,19 a term originally meaning “Hurrians,” but by now comprising virtually all Syrians. The mention of Kharu is chronologically appropriate and it correlates with the mention of Khurru in the Asiatic campaigns of Tuthmosis III. Both of these sources bring to light the different cultures which have now made themselves felt in Syria–Canaan. Stelae recording the Asiatic campaigns of Tuthmosis III and his son and successor, Amenhotep II, lists the plunder they carried off from these regions. In addition to princes of Retenu are mentioned, among others, Kharu, the settled people of Syria and Palestine at this time.20 In connection with metalworking, an intriguing, though unprovenanced, bronze openwork stand now in the Field Museum in Chicago bears an inscription which may be translated “What the rower of his majesty, p3-‘3m made” (Fig.  5.1).21 The tall flask which it supports carries the exact same inscription, above which are partially erased remains of a possibly earlier dedication.22 The motif on the stand shows two goats on their hind legs flanking a palmette, and nibbling on the blossoms of the “tree.” The image is a popular one in Near Eastern art, and Egyptian representations of similar scenes are of Near Eastern inspiration.23 The iconography, the working of metal, and the identification of p3-‘3m as the one who made the stand are indicative of the realia of West Semites as metallurgists working in Egypt. In regard to the inscription on the base of the stand, the term mtnw used in connection with p3-‘3m of the ostracon (see above) is certainly suggestive.

Conclusion

195

Figure 5.1  Bronze openwork stand, New Kingdom.

While the term embodies the stem tn dn, “to cut,” it can also have the meaning “inscribe.”24 Semitic names of three foreign wives of Tuthmosis III indicate that they were possibly daughters of Syrian vassals.25 Their names, Manhata, Manuwai, and Maruti are incised on three silver libation vessels now in the Metropolitan Museum of Art (Fig.  5.2).26 Although these ladies were equipped in Egyptian style, their names, plus certain elements of their jewelry such as rosettes, and the gazelle diadem (Fig.  5. 3a), which comes out of Canaanite iconography, all reveal their Asiatic origins,27 cf. gold Hyksos diadem (Figs 5.3b, c). Tuthmosis III lists “the daughter of a chief, together with her ornaments of gold and lapis lazuli of her land and the retainers belonging to her, male and female slaves, thirty of them.” C. Lilyquist maintains that the home of one of the queens buried at the Wady Qirud could have been Kamid el-Loz (Lebanon), ancient Kumidi (Retenu) mentioned in place-­names list of Tuthmosis III.28 A technical study of a marbleized goblet found in the tomb of the three foreign

196

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

Figure 5.2  Silver libation vessel of Manhata, New Kingdom.

Figure 5.3a  Diadem with two gazelle heads, New Kingdom.

Conclusion

197

Figure 5.3b  Headband with heads of gazelles and a stag between stars or flowers, Second Intermediate Period..

wives (Fig.  5.4) shows that the glass was not made in Egypt, but was imported from a Near Eastern place of manufacture.29 The swirled marbleized pattern of the MMA vessel is un-Egyptian, but finds a close parallel in pattern, as well as shape and fabric from Nuzi (Level II) in northern Iraq.30 At this time a change occurs in the appearance of Asiatics in Egyptian art. With regard to clothing, one of the changes is a long white tight-­fitting garment with blue or red stitching bordering the hems and a drawstring around the neck (Fig. 5.5).31 These garments, worn by chiefs of Mittani and Tunip, appear in the tombs of Rekhmire32 and Menkheperresonb.33 As stated above, this garment was common to a large region under the Mittanian (Hurrian) sphere of influence in which several distinct peoples dwelled. It is suggested, therefore, that the hairstyle should be considered the most reliable means of identifying the ethnic group of the wearer of these garments.

198

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

Figure 5.3c  Detail of Fig. 5.3b, Second Intermediate Period.

Amenhotep III During Amenhotep III’s reign Egypt was at a pinnacle of her cultural achievements. Amenhotep III was a great builder and patron of the arts. With this reign the international contacts dramatically increased; luxury objects and technologies traveled throughout the Near East and Egypt. This was a period of great internationalism.34 Apparently no major battles took place at this time, although there was a campaign in Nubia. Amenhotep III’s peaceful relations with his allies are camouflaged by expressions of prowess and representations of himself as a mighty warrior. Scarabs made during his reign have the epithet “great of valor who smites the Asiatics.”35 On his Konosso stela the stereotypical

Conclusion

199

Figure 5.4  Marbleized goblet, New Kingdom.

Figure 5.5  Battle relief, New Kingdom.

phrase as one “who smites the Asiatics,” and his representation with upraised battle axe about to smite an Asiatic chieftain in the panel from a throne in the tomb of the chief steward Amunemhet Surere36 surely reflects the ideology of

200

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

Figure 5.6  Painting in the tomb of Anen (detail), New Kingdom.

the king as a world leader who maintains order in the cosmos. Also represented in this tomb is a dais decorated with long rows of bound figures personifying conquered foreign states.37 A similar scene comes from a frieze adorning the thrones of Amenhotep III and Queen Tiye painted in the tomb of Anen (the queen’s brother) (Fig. 5.6). The painting depicts foreigners kneeling and bound and attired in native costumes. They represent subject nations of Egypt and reflect contemporary cultural reality in the Near East. Among the captives tied together by a papyrus stem are hieroglyphic inscriptions which label the various peoples represented. Among them are Sangar (Babylon), Naharin38 (Mittani), and (Shasu) Bedouin to the south of Palestine. All of them wear a common garment – a long robe covered by cape, broad belt, and girdle varying slightly in color and pattern. Their complexions are flesh tone. Do these costumes reflect the vogue of a large cultural area? While the Egyptian artists may indeed have been depicting an Asiatic type by repeating the garments, there is a sharp differentiation in hairstyle. The Babylonian is shown with long hair which falls below the shoulder and is separated at the ends into five curls. The fillet which holds the hair is tied in a knot, the ends of which hang down. His beard is long and full. The Mittanian is shown with a shaved pate, and he too wears a beard. The bushy hair of the Shasu is clubbed and bound at the top by a fillet. He too is shown with a long beard. None of these hairstyles appear in the Middle Kingdom, but are typical for New Kingdom representations of Asiatic types. Since like garments are seen worn by the different groups inhabiting a particular geographical area, the impression here is that the costume is not always a reliable tool for distinguishing the specific cultural groups who are represented.39 Thus, it is suggested that since the most obvious difference is in the hairstyles, it is the characteristic which we can rely on the most.40

Map A  The Ancient Near East.

202

Map B  Ancient Egypt.

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

Notes Preface   1 I would like to take this opportunity to acknowledge my adviser, Baruch A. Levine, and dissertation committee members: Ogden Goelet, Jr., and Donald P. Hansen (Bernard V. Bothmer was involved in the initial stages of the study). Readers were David O’Connor and Dorothea Arnold.

1  Introduction: The Scope, Methodology and Purpose of the Present Study   1 R. Zettler, “Written Documents as Excavated Artifacts and the Holistic Interpretation of the Mesopotamian Archaeological Record” in The Study of the Ancient Near East in the 21st Century, The William Foxwell Albright Centennial Conference, J. S. Cooper and G. M. Schwartz, eds., Winona Lake (1996) 81–101; K. A. Kamp and N. Yoffee, “Ethnicity in Western Asia During the Early Second Millennium B. C: Archaeological Assessments and Ethnoarchaeological Prospectives” BASOR 237 (1980) 85–104; M-H Gates, “Dialogues Between Ancient Near Eastern Texts and the Archaeological Record: Test Cases from Bronze Age Syria,” BASOR 270 (1988) 63–91.   2 J. Baines, “Contextualizing Egyptian Representations of Society and Ethnicity,” in The Study of the Ancient Near East in the 21st Century, The William Foxwell Albright Centennial Conference, J. S. Cooper and G. M. Schwartz, eds., Winona Lake (1996) 344.   3 The material contained in the 756 negatives taken by the expedition has never been fully published. The Egyptian Department of the Metropolitan Museum of Art has a complete file of the prints of these negatives; W. Wreszinski used the more important of these photographs in his Atlas zur altägyptischen Kulturgeschichte.   4 Although the Egyptian Execration Texts referring to West Semitic names are discussed: Gelb, “Early History,” 29.

204

Notes to pp. 11–13

2  ꜤꜢmw: Etymology, Usage and Synonyms   1 As opposed to other Semitic dialects such as Akkadian which is East Semitic; for a good overview of the term, see T. Schneider, Ausländer, II, pp. 5–14.   2 The term “Asiatic,” is after all, primarily geographical in meaning, and represents a clear anachronism when applied to Egyptian perceptions of their neighbors.   3 See W. G. Dever who believes that Amorites = the introduction of MBIIA culture in Syria–Palestine; F. M. Cross et al., eds., Magnalia Dei, The Mighty Acts of God. Essays on the Bible and Archaeology in Memory of G. Ernest Wright, Garden City (1976), 3–38, figs 1–2. Note especially, 15 with n. 110.   4 The village of ‘Ain-Samiya lies at the edge of the mountainous region overlooking the Jordan Valley where an extensive cemetery covers three hills. B. Shantur and Y. Labadi, “Tomb 204 at ‘Ain-Samiya,” IEJ 21, (1971) 73.   5 Y. Yadin, “A Note on the Scenes Depicted on the ‘Ain-Samiya Cup,” IEJ 21, (1971) 82–5. See too R. Grafman, “Bringing Tiamat to Earth,” IEJ 22 (1972) 47–9; for a discussion of the motif on the cup see Z. Yeivin, “A Silver Cup from Tomb 204a at ‘Ain-Samiya,” IEJ 21, (1971) 78–81; cf. also discussion by R. Gophna in The Archaeology of Ancient Israel, ed., A. Ben-Tor, New Haven; London (1992) 154–5.   6 T. Jacobsen, “The Battle Between Marduk and Tiamat,” JAOS 88, 1 (1968) 104–8.   7 G. Posener, CAH 1, Part 2A (1971), 558, “the names as far as it has been possible to explain them, belong to the North-West Semitic dialects; they are of the same type as the names found in the cuneiform texts of Mesopotamia and northern Syria at about this period. Egyptian texts therefore indicate how far the Amorite movement had advanced westwards and they confirm its basic unity throughout the Fertile Crescent.” For a further discussion of the Amorite dialect of Canaan, see G. Posener, CAH I, Part 2A (1971) 564–5; see also, A. Mazar, Archaeology of the Land of the Bible, New York, (1990) 189, “judging from the forms of personal names which appear in the Egyptian documents . . . in the royal cemetery of Byblos, and in the Mari archive of the early eighteenth century, we can infer that the population of Syria and Palestine was West Semitic, ‘Amorite.’ ”   8 H. Huffmon, Amorite Names, (1965) 45, 212–3; cf. Byblos Scimitar for the PN, Yep-shemu-­ib “Count” (h.Ꜣty-Ꜥ) written in hieroglyphs, ANET 229 with n. 5 for bibliography.   9 ANET 329. 10 See infra. 11 It is inscribed on the the statue of Idrimi from Alalakh 1475–1460 BCE, see S. Smith, The Statue of ldrimi (1949), 14. The term “Canaanite” is known from a Mari letter of the Eighteenth Century B.C.; see G. Dossin, “Une mention de

Notes to pp. 13–15

205

Cananeens dans une lettre de Mari,” Syria 50 (1973), 277–82. This shows that the Amorites at Mari distinguished themselves from another group of people by their use of the term Canaanite. 12 W. M. Müller, Asien und Europa nach altägyptischen Denkmälern (1893) 121–5. 13 T. L. Thompson, “The Early West Semites of Mesopotamia and the Patriarchal Period,” The Historicity of the Patriarchal Narratives, BZAW 133, Berlin; New York (1974) 122. 14 A. H. Gardiner, Grammar, sign-­list T 14, 513. 15 See Eric Uphill, “The Nine Bows,” JEOL 19 (1965–6) 393–420. Also, D. Valbelle, Les neufs arcs: l’Égyptien et les étrangers de la préhistoire à la conquête d’Alexandre, Paris (1990). 16 D. B. Redford, “Egypt and Western Asia in the Old Kingdom,” JARCE 23 (1986) 127. See also, discussion by U. Luft, “Asiatics in Illahun: A Preliminary Report,” Sesto Congresso Internazionale Di Egittologia Atti II Torino (1993) 291–7 for the problem of the Egyptian term ‘3m. 17 For a recent survey in convenient form see Richard S. Tomback, A Comparative Semitic Lexicon of the Phoenician and Punic Languages, SBL Dissertation Series 32, Missoula (1978) 249, “West Semitic ‘amm denotes ‘people,’ ‘fold’: in Phoenician it has a more specialized meaning as ‘personnel’; it has also been claimed that the vocable ‘amyt ‘friend,’ ‘fellow,’ ‘kinsmen’ as derived from the root ‘amm as a back formation from a root ‘mm ‘to join together’; ‘connect’.” E. Klein, A Comprehensive Etymological Dictionary of the Hebrew Language for Readers of English, New York (1987). 18 As argued by J. Lewy, “The Old West Semitic Sun-God H.ammu,” HUCA 18 (1943–4) 429–88. 19 R. McClive Good, The Sheep of His Pasture, A Study of the Hebrew Noun ‘Am(m) and Its Semitic Cognates, Harvard Semitic Monographs 29, Chico, Cal., 42 and passim; McClive Good’s thesis that the noun ‘am(m) represents the sound made by caprine beasts and originally signified “flock,” is doubtful, and highly speculative, ibid., 2. 20 R. S. Tomback, (1978) 249; J. Hoch, Semitic Words in Egyptian Texts of the New Kingdom and A Comparative Semitic Lexicon of the Phoenician and Punic Languages, Missoula (1978) 249; J. Hoch, Semitic Words in Egyptian Texts of the New Kingdom and Third Intermediate Period, Princeton (1994) sees the term as “(paternal) uncle,” and gives Amorite names which contain the ammi or h.ammi element, 493, E23. 21 CAD E, 154–6 with final note to entry. 22 (var. hammu note: RA 45, 75, iv: 10) denoting people (Biblical Hebrew h.m) (note ˘ CAD A, Pt. II, 77).

206

Notes to pp. 15–16

23 CH iv, 53. 24 Lit., to keep straight. 25 CAD A, Pt. II, 77. 26 Contrast CAD E357s.v.sušuru. 27 CAD E. 70. 28 Gilg. VI, 175, Kovaks, 56. 29 CAD, H, X70. 30 KTU 1. 17, 1: 27–8. 31 Lit. “god of his father” or the like. 32 Ginsberg, Aqht A, ANET, 150. 33 I thank Dr. Murray Lichtenstein for reminding me of this passage. 34 A. Malamat has observed that Hebrew “ ‘m” came to denote “people” in the widest sense, but originally meant “kinfolk,” “Aspects of Tribal Societies in Mari and Israel,” XVe rencontre assyriologique internationale – La civilisation de Mari, Liege (1967) 129. Further, Malamat’s arguments can be strengthened by noticing that ‘m is distinctly a family clan in Leviticus 21, and in the Book of Ruth it connotes a similar, but smaller social organization. It may be noted that in Biblical Hebrew, ‘am is never used to designate an individual, but is employed as a collective term. In other words, it is used for an individual only in conjunction with his belonging to a larger group. B. A. Levine, Leviticus, 142, and personal communication. The Hebrew term ‘m, “people,” has several nuances. For example, when used with bny “sons,” ‘mw signifies members of one’s people, compatriots, fellow countrymen, etc., F. Brown, S. R. Driver, and C. A. Briggs, A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament, Oxford, 768. 35 For discussions on the etymology and translation of the name Hammurabi, see W. F. Albright, “The Amorite Form of the Name Hammurabi,” AJSL 38 (1922),  140–41; A. T. Clay, “The Empire of the Amorites,” YOS 6 (1919) 113–15; “Le Nom ‘Hammurabi,’ ” A. David, RA XXIe, (1924) 151–4; D. D. Luckenbill, “The Name  Hammurabi,” JAOS 37, 250–53. 36 McClive Good, Sheep, 21; for a discussion of Ditanu regarding the ancestry of Amorites, see above. Other ways to translate this term would be, “the people are strong,” or “wild ox.” 37 F. Gröndahl, Die Personennamen der Texte aus Ugarit, Studia Pohl 1, (1967) 109. 38 A. Even-Shoshan, ed., A New Concordance of the Bible, (in Hebrew), vol. 3 (1977). 39 Note the various transliterations and interpretations of this name; A. H. Gardiner, Notes on the Story of Sinuhe (Paris 1916) 155 no. 30, “Nenshi the son of Amu,” M. Lichtheim, AEL 234, n. 4 who quotes K. Baer’s reading “Ammulanasi”, “God is verily (my) prince,” but retains the reading “Ammunenshi,” and “Amusinenshi,” W. K. Simpson, ed., The Literature of Ancient Egypt, New Edition, Va. (1972) 60 and

Notes to pp. 16–18

207

n. 7. “Ammi-­enshi,” Amu’s son Enshi, J. A. Wilson in J. B. Pritchard, ed., ANET 19 and n. 11; “Ammu-­inshi,” A. F. Rainey, “The World of Sinuhe,” Israel Oriental Studies 2 (1972) 369–408, 373, and n. 24. 40 H. Huffmon, Amorite Personal Names in the Mari Texts, Baltimore (1965) 196. 41 W. F. Albright, “The Land of Damascus Between 1850 and 1750 B.C.”, BASOR (1941). 42 Contra Redford, following Yeivin, that this term is derived from West Semitic ‘lm, meaning “boy,” “youth,” D. B. Redford, JARCE XXIII (1986) see A. F. Rainey, “Remarks on Donald Redford’s Egypt, Canaan, and Israel in Ancient Times,” BASOR 295 (1994), 81–2, where he negates the proposed etymology on the grounds that phonologically, the use of Semitic ‘ayin in ‘elem, “youth,” as corresponding to the Egyptian ‘ayin, of ꜤꜢmw in the Third Millennium B.C. is untenable, since Semitic ‘ayin was the stronger guttural, “ghain” in the original and more ancient form of this word, and therefore would not have inspired the Egyptian transcription with ‘ayin. Further, Rainey raises the question as to why the Egyptians should borrow a word meaning “youth” or “lad” and apply it to a whole race of people, 82. Semantically, I know of no parallel for West Semites (or any other Semites) designating themselves by the term ‘elem. 43 G. Posener, Princes et pays, 42. 44 See H. Goedicke, Protocol, 145, n. 84 who thinks that “Ꜣ probably serves as a vowel indicator and is thus insignificant.” 45 Ἰs ꜤꜢmw h-sy, A. Volten, “Die Lehre für König Merikare” Zwei altägyptische politische Schriften, Analecta Aegyptiaca 4 Copenhagen (1945), 91. This text is set in the First Intermediate Period, but was written down in the later New Kingdom. A. Volten, Zwei altägyptische politische Schriften: Die Lehre für König Merikare (Pap. Carlsberg 6) und Die Lehre des Königs Amenemhet. 46 M. Lichtheim translation, AEL I, 103–4. 47 R. O. Faulkner, CDME, 204. 48 D. Lorton, “The So-­called ‘Vile’ Enemies of the King of Egypt (in the Middle Kingdom and Dyn., XVIII),” JARCE 10 (1973) 69. 49 Note, however, that the ꜤꜢmw do not figure among the groups of Egypt’s traditional enemies (the nine bows). The ꜤꜢmw nbw “all of the Asiatics,” of the Execration Texts is used in a more general sense of enemies or potential enemies. 50 Lorton, The So-Called Vile Enemies, 67. 51 This stela was found at Abydos and is now in the Manchester Museum, England, no. 3306. It was published by Garstang, El Arabeh London (1901) I. 4–5, 32, and also published by T. E. Peet, The Stela of Sebek-­khu, Manchester. 52 A. H. Gardiner, AEO I, Oxford (1968 [1948]) 143 “Rt-nw does not occur in the Execration Texts published by Sethe and Posener.”

208

Notes to pp. 18–20

53 For the various discussions, see W. M. Muller Asien; W. Helck, Die Beziehungen Ägyptens zu Vorderasien im 3. und 2. Jahrtausend v. Chr, Ägyptologische Abhandlungen 5 Wiesbaden (1971). 54 R. O. Faulkner, CDME, 185; Wb, III, 234.13, 236.2; Adm. 15, 2. 55 A. H. Gardiner, Admonitions, 20. 56 R. O. Faulkner, CDME, 262. 57 URK I, Inscription of Weni 311, 1.42; but see H. Goedicke, “The Alleged Military Campaign,” RDSO 38 (1963), 189, n.5 who doubts the meaning “sand” for šꜤ. 58 H. Goedicke, Protocol (1977) 92. 59 A. Ben-Tor, “The Relations Between Egypt and the Land of Canaan during the Third Millennium B.C.” in G. Vermes and J. Neusner, eds., Essays in Honour of Yigael Yadin, Oxford Centre for Postgraduate Studies (vol. 33 (1982), The Journal of Jewish Studies). Totowa, N. J., 13; see also Helck (1971) 19, who makes the same claim as Goedicke. 60 R. O. Faulkner, CDME 185; for hꜢst, a hilly, foreign land, contrasting with the ˘ characteristic representation of Egypt, Kmt as the flat Nile Valley, see O. Goelet, “Kemet and Other Egyptian Terms for Their Land,” in Ki Baruch Hu: Ancient Near Eastern, Biblical, and Judaic Studies in Honor of Baruch A. Levine. Robert Chazan, William W. Hallo, and Lawrence H. Schiffman, eds, Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns: (1999) 23–42. 61 Golénischeff, Papyrus Hiératiques, 24. 62 M. Lichtheim, AEL I, 141. 63 Although today in Egypt, some vegetation and wildlife exists, due to climactic changes, the desert and steppe environment of ancient Egypt no longer can be found since the animals of the desert grazed there in ancient times. See D. Arnold, An Egyptian Bestiary, The MMA Bulletin (1995) 7, where she points out that “During the prehistoric period and Old Kingdom, the areas bordering the Nile valley on the east and west were steppe rather than barren wasteland, supporting patches of grass, shrubs, and even occasional trees.” 64 R. O. Faulkner, CDME 110. 65 Gardiner-Peet, Černý, The Inscriptions of Sinai II, 8, 58 large tablet of Sahure; D. B. Redford, following Kees states that the term Mntw derives from the same root “to be wild,” as produced the divine name Montu. The Egyptians could refer to their northern neighbors as “wild men”, “Egypt and Western Asia in the Old Kingdom,” JARCE 23 (1986) 126, n. 15. 66 R. O. Faulkner, CDME, 133. 67 Sin. B292, M. Lichtheim, ‘The Story of Sinuhe,” AEL I, 233. 68 Wb I, 577, (1961); R. O. Faulkner, CDME, 98. For this term see also J. Leclant, “T. P. Pepi Ier, VII: Une Nouvelle mention des FNHW dans les Textes des

Notes to pp. 20–21

209

Pyramides,” SAK 11 (1984) 455–60; J.Vercoutter, L’Egypte et le monde pre-­ hellenique (1956) 161. 69 Wb II, 460, R. O. Faulkner, CDME, 154. 70 M. Lichtheim, AEL I, 224. 71 A. H. Gardiner AEO I, 142. 72 cf: Genesis 29.1 where Jacob travels from Bethel in Canaan, to Harran in Mesopotamia. Harran is Northeast of Bethel. The term used for East is (K.dm). “Jacob resumed his journey and came to the land of the sons of the East.” See also, Genesis 25:5–6: “Now Abraham gave all that he had to Isaac: 6 but to the sons of his concubines, Abraham gave gifts while he was still living. and sent them away from his son Isaac eastward, to the land of the east.” Note H. G. Fischer, Inscriptions from the Coptite Nome Dynasty VI–XI AnOr40, Rome (1964) who shows that K.dm lands are mentioned in an Eleventh Dynasty inscription of Mentuhotep II. The text is written in the genre known as “Königsnovelle.” The king plans to attack the southern lands and his principal goals seem to be the annexation of Lower Nubia and the oasis regions adjacent to Egypt, 105. Lines X+8 and 9 speak of impassible routes to the eastern (K.dm) lands and of the sea, 108. Line 8, fig. 16(b), 113, reads: “the ways (Mt-nw) were blocked and the qedem lands were closed.” See p.114, X+8 and note “q” where the foreign Semitic origin of this word is noted. A. F. Rainey, The World of Sinuhe, cites K. Sethe, Ubersetzung und Kommentar zu den altägyptischen Pyramidentexten, vol. IV (Gluckstadt, 1939) 373, note 21, and notes that Qedem is an geographical entity known to the Egyptians from Old Kingdom times, 373. H. Goedicke suggests that K.dm is an early designation of the Negev, “The End of the Hyksos in Egypt,” in L. Lesko ed., Egyptological Studies in Honor of Richard A. Parker, Hanover, NH (1986), 45. 73 See Chapter 4 below. 74 A. H. Gardiner, AEO I,143*. 75 R. O. Faulkner, CDME, 253 Wb. 4, 328. 76 Goedicke overstates the case when he says the styw are completely unconnected with the ꜤꜢmw, Neferyt, 90. 77 M Lichtheim, AEL I, 232. 78 M. Greenberg. Hab/piru and Hebrews, “Patriarchs,” B. Mazar, ed., World History of the Jewish People. First Series, Vol. 2 (1970), Chapter X 188–200. Hab/piru exchange a settled for an unsettled, migrant existence. For a recent discussion of Hab/piru see D. Fleming, “People Without Town: The ‘apiru in the Amarna Evidence,” SAOC 67 (2012) 39–50. 79 The SA.GAZ/Hab/piru do not come from the desert but from the town. They are not nomadic encroachers upon the settled, but outcasts from civilized society, though there is evidence that persons of nomad extraction were among the

210

Notes to pp. 21–25

Hab/piru. The Hab/piru do not have roots in any given locality. They are dependents of the local authorities. They are opposite from Styw who eventually settle down and become ꜤꜢmw. Styw are not the same as Hab/piru, who are more military in nature, but can be more closely related to the Akkadian and Hebrew terms nawû, see below. 80 A. Malamat, “Aspects of Tribal Societies in Mari and Israel,” XVe rencontre assyriologique internationale – La civilization de Mari, Liege (1967), 36. 81 See A. H. Gardiner, AEO I, 149, who points out this fact, adding that “true to Egyptian habit, {Rt-nw} continued to be employed in antiquarian fashion.” 82 This assumption is based on the identification of Jebel Bishri with ancient Ba-­sa-ar, a site associated with the Amorites in ancient inscriptions. See I. J. Gelb, “The Early History of the West Semitic Peoples,” JCS 15 (1961) 30. 83 I am grateful to Minna Lonnqvist for sharing her satellite map and for sending me her photographs of the Jebel Bishri. For her recent work on the Jebel Bishri, see bibliography. 84 IM.MAR. TU/Amurru are the Sumerian and Akkadian terms for “West,” one of the four cardinal points of the compass to be contrasted with IM.KUR “East,” named after the mountain range east of the Tigris, ibid. For the term Amurru, see CAD A, I, pt. II, 92. More recently, see, P.-A. Beaulieu, “The God Amurru as Emblem of Ethnic and Cultural Identity,” in W. H. Van Soldt, ed., in cooperation with R. Kalvelagen and D. Katz, Ethnicity in Ancient Mesopotamia, Papers read at the 48th Rencontre Assyriologique International, Leiden 1–4 July 2002, Netherlands (2005) 31–45. 85 I. J. Gelb-B. Kienast, Die Altakkadischen Königsinschriften des Dritten ]ahrtausends V. Chr., FAS 7 (1990) 53–54. 86 E. Reiner, “Lipsur Litanies,” JNES 15 (1956), 134 (line 39). 87 Gudea Statue B, 6. 5–6, H. Steible, Neusumerischen 2, 164; lines 13–14, 166. 88 The identification of Ba-­sal-la with Ba-­sa-ar was first suggested by F. Bohl, and the identification of Ba-­sa-ar with Jebel Bishri was first proposed by E. Unger, RLA I, 430 (1932). 89 Šu Suen 9, lines 20–25; H. Steible, Neusumerischen 2, 166. 90 I. Gelb notes that one of the peaks of Jebel Bishri is called Jebel Diddi which may have been assimilated from Didni, “Early History,” 30; G. Buccellati, Amorites, 244, note 54. 91 A. Falkenstein, AFO 14, (1941–4) 129. 92 See J. J. Finkelstein, “The Geneology of the Hammurapi Dynasty,” JCS 20 (1966) 95–118. 93 M. Astour, “A North Mesopotamian Locale of the Keret Epic,” UF 5 (1973) 37; the Ugaritic text of King Keret states that Keret was a member of the Ditanu tribe.

Notes to pp. 25–28

211

  94 See discussion by B. A. Levine, Jean Michel De Tarragon “Dead Kings and Rephaim: The patrons of the Ugaritic Dynasty,” JAOS 104 (1984) 649–59, where it is noted that “The Rephaim are long departed kings (and heroes) who dwell in the netherworld, which is located deep beneath the mountains of that far away eastern region where the Ugaritians originated.” They also state that “reference to the Council of the Didanites in the liturgy, in parallelism with the Rephaim of the netherworld, links this ritual to the area of origin of the Amorites, and returns us to the late third millennium” 652. See also, W. Pitard, “A New Edition of the Rapi’uma Texts: KTU 1:20–22”, BASOR 285 (1992) 33, who points out that “The Ugaritic rapi’ūma have been identified as minor deities, cultic functionaries, a tribal group, an elite warrior group, or the shades of dead nobility.”   95 C. Deimel, Die lnschriften von Fara, Leipzig (1922–4), 4.   96 J. Bottero, “Syria during the Third Dynasty of Ur,” CAH, Vol. I, Part 2A (1971) 563.   97 G. Buccellati, Amorites, 253. Not much later, persons bearing Amorite names at Lagash are listed among the witnesses regarding the settlement of a claim against a man named BUR-Sin who was in the livestock business and who lost 100 sheep which were given to him for guarding. These names occur on an Old Babylonian contract tablet with a seal impression and were found in a pot with two other tablets forming the archive of BUR-Sin. The Amorite names read Ia-­ah PI-DINGIR, la-­mu-ut-Li-­im, and Ma-­ah-nu-­ub, R. D. Biggs, Inscriptions From Al-Hiba-Lagash, Bibliotheca Mesopotamica, Vol. 3, Malibu (1976) 8, No. 36. See also D. P. Hansen, Artibus Asiae 32, Fig. 17 for the pot in which the tablets were found.   98 G. Buccellati, Amorites, 255.   99 This situation is summed up excellently by W. W. Hallo and W. K. Simpson, The Ancient Near East: A History, New York (1971) 77 ff. 100 I. Gelb, Computer-Aided Analysis, 1. 101 Idem, and H. Huffmon, Amorite Names. 102 H. Huffmon, op. cit. 15. 103 M. B. Rowton, “Dimorphic Structure and Typology,” Or An 15 (1976) 2–30; “Autonomy and Nomadism in Western Asia,” Orientalia 42 (1973) 247–8. 104 P. Matthiae, Ebla: An Empire Rediscovered (1981) 40. 105 G. Pettinato, “Mardu in the Ebla Texts,” Or. 54 (1985) 7–13. 106 J. S. Cooper, The Curse of Agade, Baltimore and London, (1983) 32. 107 Ibid., 20 108 Lines 46–47 J. S. Cooper, op. cit. 53; this is the typical way of describing a primal, more primitive form of humanity in Sumerian and Akkadian literature; cf. Enkidu, a primitive man living among wild animals in the Gilgamesh epic. Tablet I, 89–93, who is portrayed as one “who knew neither people nor settled living,

212

Notes to pp. 28–33

but wore a garment like Sumukan (the god of wild animals)”: M. G. Kovacs, The Epic of Gilgamesh, Stanford, CA (1985) 6. 109 E. I. Gordon “A new Look at the Wisdom of Sumer and Akkad,”Bi Or 17 (1960) 131; cf. Enkidu “He ate grasses with the gazelles, and jostled at the watering hole with the animals; as with animals, his thirst was slaked with (mere) water.” M. G. Kovacs, Gilg. 6, 91–93. 110 M. Civil “Šu-Sîn’s Historical Inscriptions” Collection B, JCS 21 (1967), 24–48. 111 W. F. Leemans, Šu Sîn inscription, lines 42–48; contra Kupper-Leemans that these ālāni were camps. “The Contribution of the Nomads to the Babylonian Population,” review of J. R. Kupper, Les nomads en Mésopotamie au temps des rois de Mari JESHO I (1958) 139, Paris. 112 lines 42 and 43. 113 S. N. Kramer, Enmerkar and the Lord of Aratta, University Museum, University of Pennsylvania, Museum Monographs; Philadelphia (1952) 3. 114 Idem. 115 Idem. 116 11.370, C. Wilcke, Das Lugalbandaepos, Wiesbaden (1969), 124–5, 11.370. 117 T. Jacobsen, The Harps That Once . . . : Sumerian Poetry in Translation, New Haven; London (1987) 342. 118 Now in the Louvre. 119 Self-­referential art. 120 Beyond Babylon, p. 21, for description and bibliography. The inscription in Sumerian reads: “For the god Martu, his god, for the life of Hammurabi, king of Babylon, Lu-Nanna, [. . .], son of Sin-­le’i, fashioned for him, for his life, a suppliant statue of copper, [its] face [plat]ed with gold. He dedicated it to him as his servant.” 121 For the different interpretations of this phrase, see J. H. Tigay, The Evolution of the Gilgamesh Epic, 201, note 10. 122 See H. Frankfort, Cylinder Seals, p. 164, and Pl.XXVIIIe 123 W. W. Hallo, W. K. Simpson, The Ancient Near East: A History, New York (1971) 81; For studies on Drehem see S. Kang, Sumerian Economic Texts from the Drehem Archive, Sumerian and Akkadian Cuneiform Texts in the Collection of the World Heritage Museum of the University of Illinois, I, Urbana, Chicago, London (1972); M. Sigrist, Drehem, Bethesda, (1992). 124 M. Liverani, “The Amorites,” in Peoples of Old Testament Times, ed., D. J. Wiseman, Oxford (1973) 104. 125 Ibid., 105. 126 M. Buccellati, Amorites, 328. 127 Ibid., 326.

Notes to pp. 33–39

213

128 Ibid., 329. 129 Ibid., 302, 319, 321. 130 Line 13 = Urk. I 101, 9. 131 J. H. Breasted, Ancient Records of Egypt I New York (1962), 165, no. 360. For a more recent translation of this text see A. Roccati, La Littérature historique sous l’Ancien Empire égyptien, Paris (1982) 210–11, par. 21. 132 By not living in one place, the writer of the Egyptian text states that food is what propels the ꜤꜢmw. By traversing strange lands, the implication is that they are eating food that is foreign to them. Compare the Sumerian putdown of the MAR.TU/Amurru: “They have prepared wheat (and) gu-­nunuz (grain) as a confection (but) an Amorite will eat it without (even) recognizing what it contains.” 133 M. Lichtheim, AEL I, 103–4. 134 The transliteration is that of the author. Hieroglyphic Text, Les Papyrus Hieratique, 12, lines 91–4. For a commentary, see Helck, Kleine ägyptische Texte, Die Lehre für König Merikare, Wiesbaden (1988) 55–6. 135 M. Lichtheim, AEL I, 97–109. 136 Ibid., 97. 137 M. Lichtheim, AEL 104. 138 G. Posener, “Syria and Palestine c. 2160–1780 B. C.,” CAH I, 2A, 3rd edn, Cambridge (1980), 535. 139 Op. cit., 535 140 See above. 141 M. Lichtheim, AEL I, 104. 142 transliteration is that of the author. 143 See M. Buccellati, Amorites, 331 with note 41. 144 Ibid., note 42. 145 Ibid., note 42a. 146 lbid., note 41. 147 Ibid., note 42. 148 Ibid., note 42a. 149 J. S. Cooper, The Curse of Agade, Baltimore (1983) 30. 150 Their continued presence paved the way for the later Hyksos foreigners who eventually ruled the North. 151 P. Leningrad 1116B, publication: W. Golenishchev, Les papyrus hiératiques, nos.1115, 1116A et 1116B de l’Ermitage impérial à St. Péterbourg (1916), plates 23–5. 152 M. Lichtheim, AEL I, 143, lines 15 and 145, n. 15. 153 W. Golenishchev, Papyrus hiératiques, Line 66, plate 25. 154 M. Lichtheim, AEL I, 143, line 18.

214

Notes to pp. 39–42

155 Sinuhe B 17, R. Koch, “Die Erzählung des Sinuhe,” Bibliotheca Aegyptiaca XVII, Bruxelles (1990) 17. 156 M. Lichtheim, AEL I, 224. 157 As H. Goedicke has noted, this “apparently was not the first installation of its type in the area but was preceded by an earlier fortification system.” The Protocol of Neferyt, Baltimore, (1977) 179, and 37 for a discussion of this fortification. 158 M. Lichtheim, AEL I, 135–7. For hieroglyphic text and commentary, see A. Volten, Zwei altägyptische politische Schriften, Analecta Aegyptiaca lV, Copenhagen (1945) 104–28. 159 A. H. Gardiner, The Admonitions of an Egyptian Sage, Leipzig (1909), reprint Hildesheim (1969). Gardiner views Admonitions as a work of the Twelfth Dynasty, but lamenting the calamities of the First Intermediate Period, contra Lichtheim, who believes the text has no bearing on the First Intermediate Period nor any other historical situation, AEL I, 150. For other discussions on the dating of this text, see the remarks of J. Van Seters, “A Date for the ‘Admonitions’ in the Second Intermediate Period,” JEA 50 (1964) 13–23, and G. Posener who takes the view that the work is contemporary with the events it describes, namely the turmoil referring to the anarchy prevailing before the rise of the Heracleopolitan kingdom, rev. of “Littérature et politique dans l’Egypte de la XIIe dynastie,” by R. O. Faulkner, JEA 43, 1957, 123. For an updated literary analysis and detailed study of this text, see R. Enmarch, A World Upturned (2009). 160 Lines 14, 11, compare someone with the Asiatics (Styw) A. H. Gardiner, Admonitions, 91. 161 Line 10, Urk. I 134, 13. 162 See R. O. Faulkner, JEA 43 (1957) 122–3 review of G. Posener, Littérature et politique dans l’Egypte de la XIIe dynastie, Paris (1956) where it is stated that the most openly propagandist of all the texts under consideration is the Prophecy of Neferty. See also J. A. Wilson, JNES, 275–7 review of Posener, who notes that this was official propaganda and that the setting of the court shows the literary mechanism called the Königsnovelle, which would become a standard device from then on. 163 For a more recent discussion on the Amorite social mileau, see M. A. Lönnqvist, “ ‘Were Nomadic Amorites on the Move?’ Migration, Invasion and Gradual Infiltration as Mechanisms for Cultural Transitions,” eds., H. Kühne, Rainer Maria Czichon, Florian Janoscha Kreppner, Otto Harrassowitz Verlag, 4 ICAANE, Proceedings of the 4th International Congress of the Archaeology of the Ancient Near East, Vol. 2., Cultural Social and Transformation. The Archaeology of Transitional Periods and Dark Ages, Excavation Requests, Harrassowitz Verlag (2008).

Notes to pp. 43–48

215

3  West Semites in Egyptian Art of the Old and Middle Kingdoms   1 Although the pottery associated with them, the so-­called Tell el-Yahudiyeh ware, has also been used as criteria for their native ancestry. For this pottery see, Tell el-Dab’a VIII, The Classification and Chronology of Tell el-Yahudiya Ware, ÖAW XII (2012) David A. Aston and Manfred Bietak; M. F. Kaplan, “The Origin and distribution of Tell el Yahudiyeh Ware” SIMA, LXII Gothenburg (1980); R. S. Merrillees, “El-Lisht and Tell el-Yahuda Ware in the Archaeological Museum of the American University of Beirut,” Levant 10 (1978) 75–98.   2 For an overview of the material and the processes of acculturation of the Asiatic population at Tell el-Dab’a, see, E. Bumann, The Hyksos and Acculturation, Ph.D Thesis, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem (2009).   3 E. Hornung, The Valley of the Kings: Horizon of Eternity (1990) 4.   4 Book of Gates, the four human races in the 5th hour, copy by Minutoli in 1820 Die vier Menschenrassen aus der 5. Stunde des Pfortenbuches, kopiert 1820 von Minutoli.   5 J. Baines and J. Malek, Atlas of Ancient Egypt, Oxford (1980) reprint New York (1993) 12.   6 A. H. Gardiner, Egypt of the Pharaohs, 1961; Oxford (1964) 34; G. Posener, ZÄS 83 (1958) 38–43.   7 A. H. Gardiner, op. cit. 35; This topic is beyond the scope of this study.   8 Ibid., 36.   9 Ibid. 10 Ibid., 37. See chapter II of this study for a discussion of the Egyptian term h-sy “vile.” 11 A discussion of the patterns and forms used by the Egyptian artists to represent foreigners will be presented at length in the next section. 12 For depictions of foreign captives shown in subjugated and humiliating positions as elements of decoration and executed in different media see K. M. Kroeper, Das Bild Des Feindes in Der Rundplastik des Pharaonischen Ägypten (1981) passim. Ludwig-Maximilians-Universitat, Munich, unpublished Master’s Thesis. For a recent study of the topic in the New Kingdom, see M. D. Jansen, The Iconography of Humiliation: The Depiction and Treatment of Bound Foreigners in New Kingdom Egypt, Ph.D Dissertation, The University of Memphis (2013). 13 M. Cifarelli, Enmity, Alienation and Assyrianization: The Role of Cultural Difference in the Visual and Verbal Expression of Assyrian Ideology in the Reign of Assurnasirpal II (883–859 B.C.), 13. Doctoral dissertation, Columbia University (1995).

216

Notes to pp. 48–53

14 A. Erman and H. Grapow, Wb. 421–4; A. H. Gardiner, AEO. 15 people = “Egyptians,” see M. Lichtheim, AEL I (1973, 1975) 161. 16 For example, in the New Kingdom tomb of Anen (T. 120), see M. Hill, Egyptian Wall Paintings, New York (1983) 125 and 26–7 for a color illustration of this painting; see Fig 5.6 in this study for a detail of the scene. 17 Fragments of kneeling prisoners have been found in the pyramid temples of the kings of the Fifth and Sixth dynasties. For example, at Abusir, see M. Verner, “Les Statuettes de Prisonniers en Bois d’Abousir,” RdE 36 (1985) 145–52 and Plates 6–8. 18 On the other hand, subtleties in facial features may suggest that cultural difference is being represented, and that perhaps artists made an unconscious effort toward this end. It is possible that the characteristics are so subtle as to be indecipherable to us, but enough to communicate with their own civilization. For example, the Third Dynasty sculptures of heads of prisoners found at the Step Pyramid precinct of King Zoser at Saqqara. B. V. Bothmer, “On Realism in Egyptian Funerary Sculpture,” Expedition 24 (1982) 29. 19 MMA 47.2; MMA 64.260; for 47.2, see, A. Lansing, The Metropolitan Museum of Art Bulletin V, New York (1947) 149–52; W. C. Hayes, Scepter I, New York, 1953, Revised (1990) 115; for 64.260, see Do. Arnold, When the Pyramids Were Built, (1999) 128. 20 MMA website http://www.metmuseum.org/Collections/search-­thecollections/100000015; http://www.metmuseum.org/Collections/search-­thecollections/100000064 21 For a discussion of the occasional and symbolic use of the color red on the skin and hair of Asiatic foreigners, infra. 22 MMA accession cards. 23 J. Ph. Lauer and J. Leclant, “Découverte de statues de prisonniers au temple de la pyramide de Pépi I,” RdE 21 (1969) 55–62, pl. 8; the necks of the two MMA statues show a break between the head and the torso. 24 See R. Giveon, “A Second Relief of Sekhemkhet in Sinai,” BASOR 216 (1974) where he explains the source of confusion between the names of Semerkhet of the First Dynasty, and Sekhemkhet of the Third Dynasty, and the incorrect attribution of Pl. 1 to Semerkhet in A. H. Gardiner, T. E. Peet, The Inscriptions of Sinai I (London) 1917. 25 The earliest smiting scenes appear during the Archaic Period on objects which include ivory cylinders, or slate palettes, The first formal statement of the pharaoh smiting the enemy occurs on the Narmer slate-­palette of Dynasty I, E. S. Hall, The Pharaoh Smites his Enemies. Fig. 8. Also, J. Sliwa “Some Remarks Concerning Victorious Ruler Representations in Egyptian Art,” Forschungen und Berichte 16 (1974) 98. The smiting of the enemy motif becomes so enmeshed in Egyptian visual and verbal images, that even during times of peaceful interaction, foreigners

Notes to pp. 53–59

217

are portrayed in the same manner. The ideology is simple: to demonstrate the pharaoh’s superhuman strength and to emphasize the divine character of his authority, J. Sliwa, op cit. 101. 26 J. Sliwa, op cit. 85. 27 As suggested by J. Sliwa, op cit. 100. 28 A modem village about 80 miles south of Cairo. 29 N. Kanawati, BACE 5 (1994) 45. 30 This theme occurs again in the Fifth Dynasty tomb of Kai-­em-heset at Saqqara, J. E. Quibbell and A. G. K. Hayter, Excavations at Saqqara Teti Pyramid, North Side, Cairo (1927), frontispiece, and is perhaps a record of the same event. 31 The wall is damaged, but the scenes have been reconstructed by the excavators. For a complete description, see W. M. Petrie, Deshasheh, London (1898). See too N. Kanawati, BACE 5 (1994) 47–9, and Fig. 2, 46. 32 Cf. H. Goedicke, Re-Used Blocks from Lisht, New York (1971) 148 and pl. 91, 147; P. Piacentini, “Deshasheh, Egiziani e Asiatici su un rilievo della VI dinastia a Deshasheh,” SEAP 1 (1987) 7–30. 33 Yet scenes in the tomb of the governor Shedu, the last governor known at Deshasheh and dated to the reign of Teti, founder of Dynasty 6, (N. Kanawati, BACE 5 (1994) 51), show a variety of themes and scenes of daily life such as fowling and workshop activities. A Canaanite jar is visible in one of the scenes (Pl. XVI), indicating a relationship of trade at this time. (Or the Egyptians knew Canaanite type vessels and imitated them in stone.) 34 Do. Arnold, When the Pyramids Were Built, 92, pl. 82, New York (1999). 35 Musée du Louvre, Paris, E17381. 36 S. Hassan, The Causeway of Wnis at Sakkara, ZÄS 80 (1955) 139. 37 Although G. A. Gaballa, Narrative in Egyptian Art, 25, suggests they are Asiatics. 38 Ibid., 24. 39 Ibid. 40 Smith, Interconnections. 41 C. A. Gaballa, Narrative, 24. 42 Smith, Interconnections, 7; Gaballa, Narrative, 24; L. Borchardt. Das Grabdenkmal des Königs Sah.u-­re, II, Leipzig (1913) PL. 11–12, 40. 43 C. A. Gaballa notes that “the orientation here is clear since Syria is to the north of Egypt . . .” Narrative, 24. 44 JNES 3, 120–24. 45 C. A. Gaballa, Narrative, 24; M. Bietak, believes that this scene depicts Syrians in the employ of the Egyptians. “Zur Marine Des Alten Reiches,” Pyramid Studies and Other Essays Presented to I. E. S. Edwards, London (1988) 35; see also P. Montet, who concludes that it had been sent to bring back a Syrian wife for Sahure, Le Roi

218

Notes to pp. 59–63

Sahurê et la Princese lointaine, Mélanges Syrians offert a Monsieur René Dussaud I (1939) 191–5. 46 See A. Lucas and J. R. Harris, Ancient Egyptian Materials and Industries 1989 reprint of 4th edn (1962) 432; for imports of cedar wood from the Lebanon into Egypt assumed to be Cedrus Libani, see A. Nibbi, “Some Remarks on the Cedar of Lebanon,” Discussions in Egyptology 28 (1994). The wood from Egypt’s own trees was not suitable for long wooden beams needed for shipbuilding and doors for the royal palace, N. Jidejian, Byblos Through The Ages (1968) 17; P. T. Nicholson and Ian Shaw, eds., Ancient Egyptian Materials and Technologies, Cambridge University Press, UK (2000). 47 A. Ben-Tor, “The Relations Between Egypt and the Land of Canaan during the Third Millennium B.C,” Essays in Honour of Yigael Yadin, The Journal of Jewish Studies, 33 (1982) 3–18. 48 Ibid., 12. 49 A. Ben-Tor, op cit. (1954) see also A. Nibbi, “Some Remarks on the Cedar of Lebanon,” Discussions in Egyptology 28 (1994), 48, who challenges the equation of Kpny with Byblos. 50 H. Weiss, ed., Ebla to Damascus, Art and Archaeology of Ancient Syria, Exhibition Catalogue, Washington, D.C. (1985) 166–7, Fig. 73. 51 Dated by the excavators to Mardikh IIB1, mature Early Syrian style; found in the South Portico L 2862 of the inner court L 2913 of the administrative quarter (area G) scattered on the floor mostly in front of the larger door leading to the wide hall L 2866 of the big complex. P Matthiae “Fragments of Early Syrian Sculpture from Royal Palace G of Mardikh-Ebla,” JNES 39 (1980) 258. 52 P. Matthiae, op. cit. 264; See also P. Matthiae, Akkadica 17 (1980) 43, Fig. 5. 53 Although the excavators infer that this is from the head of a female personage, and part of a pair and that these images had commemorative or celebrative aim, op. cit. 268. We can see the same kind of curvilinear treatment of the hair at Mari, for example in the statue of Ur-Nanshe, see J. Aruz, R. Wallenfels, The Art of the First Cities, The Third Millennium B.C. from the Mediterranean to the Indus, The Metropolitan Museum of Art (2003) page 152, 91a and b. 54 Note also a black stone hairpiece from a composite statue of Shulgi, that also exhibits a curvilinear treatment of the hair which is bound by a fillet holding a cuneiform inscription, see D. Collon, Ancient Near Eastern Art (1995) 85, plate 65. This statue dates about 300 years later than the Eblaite example when Syrian features begin to appear in Mesopotamia. 55 As discussed by Donald Spanel, Orientalia 58 (1989) 301–14. 56 See p. 23 and Plate XIII2, in E. Naville, The XIth Dynasty Temple at Deir El Bahari, Part III, The Egypt Exploration Fund.

Notes to pp. 63–67

219

57 For this king’s place in history, see L. Habachi, “King Nebhepetre Menthuhotep: His Monuments, Place in History, Deification and Unusual Representations in the Form of Gods,” MDAIK 19 (1963) 16–52. 58 Now in the British Museum. 59 G. A. Gaballa, Narrative, 37. 60 Note, however the unusual spelling of ꜤꜢmw which differs from Middle Kingdom examples but which is similar to the spelling of the ꜤꜢmw h․ryw š’ of Pepinakht of the Old Kingdom. 61 Although others wear feathers; E. Naville, The XIth Dynasty Temple at Deir-­eI Bahari I, London (1907). 62 The political changes and upheavals of the First Intermediate Period may also be reflected in the literature. Perhaps the ꜤꜢmw hsy recorded in Merikare, and the ¯ ꜤꜢmw in the Mentuhotep reliefs refer to the same groups. 63 On pillar II of the portico at the west end of the sunken court of the tomb of Intef are painted war scenes in four registers, which divide into two groups. C. A. Gaballa, Narrative, 38; see B. Jaros-Deckert, Das Grab des ini-­jti.f, Die Wandmalereien Der Xl Dynasty, Nach vorarbeiten von Dieter Arnold und Jürgen Settgast, Mainz (1984), 37ff. PL. 17; D. Arnold and J. Settgast, “Erster Vorbericht über die vom Deutschen Archäologischen Institut Kairo im Asasif unternommenen Arbeiten, 1.und 2. Kampagne” MDAIK 20 (1965), 47–61, fig. 2. 64 A. R. Schulman, ‘The Battle Scenes of the Middle Kingdom,” JSSEA 12 (1982) 168. 65 For discussions of this scene, see A. Parrot, Le palais; peintures murales MAM II/2, BAH 69, Paris (1958); M. T. Barrelet, “Une peinture de la cour 106 du palais de Mari,” Studia Mariana (1950) 9–36; Y. Tomabichi, “Wall Paintings and Related Color Schemes of the Old Babylonian Mari Architecture,” Sumer 36 (1980) 139–45; A. Haldar, “On the Wall Painting from Court 106 of the Palace of Mari,” Or. Su. I (1952) 50–65; A. Parrot, “ ‘Ceremonie de la main’ et reinvestiture,” Studia Mariana (1950) 37–40; M. T. Barrelet, “Un inventaire de Kar-Tukulti-Ninurta: textiles decores assyriens et autres,” RA 71 (1977) 74–5, n. 5. 66 While Near Eastern seals and sculpture of the Middle Bronze Age may also be used for comparison in style of garments, the lack of color makes it a less viable tool when comparing it with painted remains from Egypt, see M. T. Barrelet, “Une Peinture de la cour 106 du palais de Mari,” Studia Mariana (1950) 9–36. Thus, the paintings at Mari, although later than the Intef scene, and chronologically more applicable to the Twelfth Dynasty scenes at Beni Hasan, are about all we can rely on for comparison. 67 Beyond the scope of this study. 68 The site of el-Lisht, ancient Itj-­tawy is located approximately forty miles south of Cairo, H. Goedicke, Re-Used Blocks from the Pyramid of Amenemhet I at Lisht,

220

Notes to pp. 67–69

Metropolitan Museum of Art Egyptian Expedition, 20 (1971) 1, where under the reigns of Amenemhet I and his successor, Senwosret I, the capital of Egypt flourished. For modern excavations at Lisht see D. Arnold The Pyramid of Senwosret I, The South Cemeteries of Lisht I, Publications of the The Metropolitan Museum of Art Egyptian Expedition 22, New York (1988); The Pyramid Complex of Senwosret I, The South Cemeteries of Lisht, III, The MMA Egyptian Expedition 25 New York (1992). 69 See W. Grajetski, The Middle Kingdom of Ancient Egypt (2006) 28, for the responsibilities of the hereditary princes, and Court Officials of the Egyptian Middle Kingdom (2009) for a thorough study of the roles and lives of the king’s close advisors. 70 MMA 09.180.535; based on paleographical details, W. K. Simpson dates the manuscript to the latter half of the middle of the Twelfth Dynasty. Papyrus Lythgoe: “A Fragment of a Literary Text of the Middle Kingdom From El-Lisht,” JEA 46 (1960) 65–70 (but on p. 70, n. 2, he says “one cannot assume however as a matter of course that the destination of every Byblos-­boat was the Levant”), Simpson believes that the text may be a portion of a previously unknown literary text of the Middle Kingdom, and may be a predecessor of the New Kingdom tale of Wenamun. (The papyrus was found in the cemetery S. W. of the pyramid of Amenemhet I at el-Lisht in front of pit 526 and near pit 524.) M. Bietak maintains that part of the population at the site of Tell el-Dab’a in the Delta during the Twelfth Dynasty originated from the region around Byblos and that a large part of the population had an urban background, Avaris, The Capital of the Hyksos, Recent Excavations at Tell el-Dab’a, London (1996) 14. 71 J. Aruz, “The Sealings of the Middle Bronze Age” (2000) 134; G. T. Martin, Egyptian Administrative and Private-Name Seals, Principally of the Middle Kingdom and Second Intermediate Period, Oxford (1971) 1827, Pl. 2. 18. 72 H. Goedicke, Re-­used Blocks from the Pyramid of Amenemhet I at Lisht (1971) 5. In fact, Amenemhet transported blocks from the monuments of his predecessors of the Old Kingdom twenty to thirty-­five miles downstream from Lisht for re-­use in the interior of his pyramid and foundations of his temple. These royal reliefs of the Old Kingdom belong to the middle of the Fifth Dynasty and the end of the Sixth Dynasty. 73 MMA 09.180.54 (combined with MMA 09.180.50). Lisht South, Pyramid Temple of Senwosret I, Altar Court (see Pl. 3.15). 74 R. E. Freed, The Development of Middle Kingdom Egyptian Relief Sculptural Schools of Late Dynasty XI With An Appendix on the Trend of Early Dynasty XII (2040–1878 B.C.), NYU Doctoral Diss. (1984) 213, for remarks concerning the relief style of this period.

Notes to pp. 69–73

221

75 C. Aldred, Egyptian Art in the Days of the Pharaohs, 3100–320 B.C. New York, (1980) 27. 76 Pl. 3.15, MMA 09.180.54 77 A fragment showing donkey’s heads, may be part of the same scene and represents the herds of the smitten foreigners taken as booty by the Pharaoh. See W. C. Hayes, The Scepter of Egypt I, 188. 78 Most of the color is gone, and is not visible with the naked eye. I am grateful to Ann Heywood, Conservator in the Sherman Fairchild Center for Objects Conservation of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, who examined the relief and was able to determine the colors. 79 Remains of paint on the kilt show a yellow background, with vertical red stripes running down the front. 80 Though this may be because of lack of preservation of Old Kingdom examples. 81 Occasionally there is confusion between an Asiatic and a Libyan regarding beard shape. 82 T39, B. Porter and R. Moss, Topographical Bibliography of Ancient Egyptian Hieroglyphic Texts, Reliefs and Paintings I, 2nd ed., part 1, Oxford (1960) 72 (12) II. 83 T88 dated to Tuthmosis III or Amenhotep II, J. Baines and J. Malek, Atlas, (1993) 106–7. 84 Ankh-Hor, 255 and Pl. XV Abb. II, Tafel 61A. 85 For example, at Beni Hasan, discussed in the next section. 86 Ibid. 87 Perhaps the throwstick held by the “dignitary” was meant to convey a heroic stature. A similar figure of a seated dignitary with a throwstick held against the shoulder, contemporary with the Tell el-Dab’a fragment (Eighteenth Century B.C.E.), was found at the Syrian site of Ebla. For this statue see P. Matthiae “Nouvelles fouilles a Ebla en 1987–1989,” Academie des Inscriptions et Belles Lettres, Comptes rendes des seances de l’annee 1990,” Fasc. II, Paris (1990) 425, Fig. 21; P. Matthiae, “Masterpieces of Early and Old Syrian Art: Discoveries of the 1988 Ebla Excavations in a Historical Perspective,” Proceedings of the British Academy LXXV, Mortimer Wheeler Archaeological Lecture (1989) 51–2 and PL. XIa; R. Schiestl, “The Statue of an Asiatic Man From Tell el-Dab’a, Egypt,” EAL XVI (2006). 88 The fragment from the Mentuhotep reliefs now in the British Museum (Pl. 3.11b) shows an Asiatic with yellow skin and yellow eye-­pupil, red hair and red loin cloth, see G. Posener, CAH I, Part IIA, 536. 89 P. E. Newberry, Beni Hasan, IV, Zoological and other Details, London (1900). For more recent color photographs of the paintings from the tombs at Beni Hasan see A. G. Shedid, Die Felsgräber von Beni Hassan in Mittelägypten, Zaberns Bildbande zur Archäologie 16 (1994).

222

Notes to pp. 73–78

  90 An indicator perhaps, of the identity of the captive in the Senwosret relief from the altar court of Senwosret I discussed earlier.   91 Red hair is also seen on Nubians in the New Kingdom tomb of Huy (T40), see M. Hill, Egyptian Wall Paintings (1983) Pl. 42, MMA facsimile, 30.4.21.   92 M. Dietrich et al., KTU 2 (1995) 1.14, III:52. See too J. Gray, The KRT Text in the Literature of Ras Shamra, Leiden (1964) 15, line 156.   93 KTU 2 1.19, 4:42–6; B. Margalit, The Ugaritic Poem of Aqht (1989) 140, line 42. Note also that the biblical David is characterized as ruddy (I Samuel 16:12, 17:42), which is, however, more indicative of his good looks than of any specifically military prowess.   94 Genesis 25:24; although N. Sarna, The JPS Commentary, Genesis (1989) 180, does not think the term is likely to mean redheadedness.   95 Genesis 25:27; here the text contrasts Esau’s outdoor lifestyle with that of Jacob who is described as a “mild man who stayed in camps, lit. ‘lived in tents’. ” These two lifestyles may be contrasted with the interpretation given in Chapter II of this study of the contrast between the Egyptian terms for Asiatics, ꜤꜢmw and Styw.   96 Gen. 27:40; see N. Sarna, Genesis (1989) 181.   97 Gen. 16:12; this translation was suggested by Dr. M. H. Lichtenstein, personal communication.   98 “shaggy with hair was his whole body,” Gilg., Tablet I, Column ii. line 36; see also N. Sarna, Genesis (1989) 196.   99 N. Sarna, Genesis 180; Gen. 48, 36:1; see above for the equation of Edom with the color red. 100 N. Sarna, Genesis 180; Esau very much continues the tradition of his relative Ishmael who is also a hunter. They are both negative characters and use the bow. Genesis 26:20–21, “He (Ishmael) lived in the desert and became a skilled bowman. His home was in the wilderness of Paran,” trans., E. A. Speiser, Genesis, The Anchor Bible, New York (1964), 154. Ishmael’s lifestyle is similar to that of Esau; they both fit the description of an unstable, roving, non-­settled element. Both of these figures fit the lifestyle of the Styw in the Egyptian sources. 101 See Chapter 2 of this book for the interpretation of the Egyptian term Styw. 102 MMA 14.125. 103 W. H. Hayes, Scepter I (1953) 200. See infra for a further discussion of this piece, and for the representation of Sopdu. 104 Cf. Pap. MMA 35.9.21, col. 29/9–10 as pointed out by R. K. Ritner, The Mechanics of Ancient Egyptian Magical Practice, Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilization 54, Chicago (1993) 662 p. 147. He notes that “underworld demons are also

Notes to pp. 78–82

223

referred to as ‘red one’: ‘red-­haired’: ‘red-­eyed’: and even with red eyelashes”; BD spells, 147. 105 J. G. Griffiths, JEA, Review of R. Stadelmann, “Syrisch-­palastinensische Gottheiten in Ägypten, Probleme der Ägyptologie,” 5, ed., W. Helck, 22; (1967) Excavations of the Pyramid Temple of Senwosret III by the MMA Egyptian Expedition at Dahshur, unearthed a relief fragment depicting a large figure of a Goddess with reddish-colored hair, see Adela Oppenheim, Aspects of the pyramid temple of Senwosret III at Dahshur: The pharaoh and deities, Dissertation, New York University (2008) p. 153, pl. 65 who suggests that the figure represents a goddess associated with Libyans; see too, pp. 166–7 for comments on red-­haired deities; note that in Ugaritic Literature, the Canaanite goddess Anat rouges herself. However, a horn protruding from the brow of the female goddess seen in the Dahshur relief, is not a characteristic generally associated with the portrayal of West Asiatic goddesses. 106 J. Garstang, The Burial Customs of Ancient Egypt, London (1907). 107 “The tombs are excavated in two ranges about halfway up the hill . . . The lower range possibly represents the necropolis of one or more large cities at various epochs, or may perhaps be the last resting-­places of the retainers and humbler members of the great families who were interred in splendor above,” see P. E. Newberry, Beni Hasan London (1893) 1. 108 P. Newberry, Beni Hasan, Part II, London (1893), Pl. XV and p. 60; See infra for discussion of these tombs. 109 D. Spanel, “The Herakleopolitan Tombs of Kheti I (jt(.j)jb(.j) and Kheti II at Asyut,” Orientalia 58 (1989) 308 and n. 28, dates these tombs either to the Herakleopolitan Period or to the post-­reunification Eleventh Dynasty. 110 Although Nubian mercenaries are known during this period, this is the first appearance of Asiatics in this role. For Nubian mercenaries see H. G. Fischer, “The Nubian Mercenaries of Gebelein during the First Intermediate Period,” Kush 9 (1961) 63–7. 111 Louvre C1, K. Sethe, Ägyptische Lesestücke, Leipzig (1928) 82, 12–15; see D. B. Redford, Egypt, Canaan, and Israel in Ancient Times (1992) 77; Ward suggests that Nesumontu may also have been involved in clearing the eastern Delta of foreigners, JEA 55 (1969). 112 For the date of Nesumontu, see C. Obsomer, “La date de Nesou-Montou (Louvre C1),” RdE 44 (1993) 103–40. 113 P. E. Newberry, BH I, PL. XLVII; The inscription in this tomb states the submission of foreign foes, including the Asiatics in the North; J. H. Breasted, Ancient Records of Egypt, New York (1962) 224.

224

Notes to pp. 82–88

114 The lines outlining the torso extend to the shoulders, giving the appearance of a tight fitting garment. Judging from the other figures, however, this is probably a mistake on the part of the artist or copyist. 115 Y. Yadin, The Art of Warfare in Biblical Lands (1963) 59. 116 See note 112 infra – H. E. Winlock, Slain Soldiers, Pl. IV and W. C. Hayes, The Scepter of Egypt, I, p. 281, Fig. 184. 117 P. E. Newberry, Beni Hasan, Part I, East Wall, Plate XVI. 118 H. E. Winlock, The Slain Soldiers of Neb-­hepet-re Mentu-Hotpe, Publications of The Metropolitan Museum of Art Egyptian Expedition, Vol. XVI, New York (1945) Plate IX A. See page 8 for a possible foreign element in the ancestry of the soldiers. The feasibility that the soldiers date to a time later than Mentuhotep II is suggested by some of the names written on the sheets in which the soldiers were found that are of Twelfth Dynasty type. See C. Vogel, “Fallen Heroes? – Winlock’s ‘Slain Soldiers’ Reconsidered,” JEA 89 (2003). 119 Y. Yadin, Warfare (1963). 120 T. L. Thompson, Historicity (1974) 128. 121 These differences could be due to military rank, or as in the cases of the figures depicted in Tombs 15 and 17, due to chronological differences. 122 R. L. Thompson, Historicity, 128. 123 Contra Albright, who suggested that the name is a defective writing for Abi-šar, “My father is king,” The Vocalization of the Egyptian Syllabic Orthography, New Haven (1934) 8. One would expect an Amorite to use the native term malkum rather than Akkadian šarru. Note, that an inscription dating to Khnumhotep III at Dahshur, whose father’s tomb is at Beni Hasan, reveals that a malku ruled at Byblos, during the time of Senswosret III. The newly discovered fragments are being translated by James P. Allen, see “The Historical Inscription of Khnumhotep at Dahshur: Preliminary Report,” BASOR 352, (Nov. 2008) 29–39. Goedicke proposed that Ib ŠꜢ is the same as biblical Abi-Sha(i), the name of Zeruiah’s oldest son in I Chr. 2:16, JARCE 21(1984). J. Greenfield in his study of the Ugaritic epic of King Keret, “Some Glosses on the Keret Epic,” Eretz-Israel 9 (1969) 60–65 has shown that the Hebrew term šjy when studied in context designates a person of exalted rank. He compares this term with the problematic -t j in the Keret epic, and shows that this is a rare epithet for Keret, meaning noble. While the phonetic value of the Egyptian pool sign with flowers can be either š or sa (Gardiner Grammar M8, 480), B. Sass notes that during the Middle Kingdom it was likely that Egyptians transcribed foreign names as they heard them, so that different phonemes with a similar pronunciation or with no exact parallel in Egyptian would be written with the same sign, though these are exceptional cases, Studia Alphabetica, OBO 102, (1991) 20. Thus, it is proposed here that Ibšj = abu (abi)- -t j

Notes to pp. 88–91

225

is an epithet meaning “my father is a nobleman.” This usage would be in accordance with the rules of Egyptian in that when an adjective appears as an epithet, the suffix pronoun appears directly after the noun, see Gardiner, Grammar, 47, par. 48. The occurrence of this name on a Palestinian scarab seal with a representation of a male figure whose title reads ἰmy-­r pr. The seal is illustrated and discussed in O. Keel, Studien zu den Stempelsiegeln aus Palästina/Israel, OBO 135, 4 (1994) 244, Abb. 19 and 214ff. The various interpretations of the name is discussed by T. Schneider Ausländer, Teil 1, 147. 124 W. H. Shea, “Artistic Balance Among The Beni Hasan Asiatics,” BA 4 (1981) 219–28, who suggests that this gesture is one of humility and respect to Khnumhotep who appears at the right in the scene. See also, Janice Kamrin, “The Aamw of Shu,” JAEI, (July 2009), 26, who also agrees with this interpretation, and J. Kamrin in “The Procession of ‘Asiatics’ at Beni Hassan,” in Joan Aruz, Sarah B. Graff, and Yelena Rakic, eds., Cultures in Contact: From Mesopotamia to the Mediterranean in the Second Millennium B.C. (2013) 22–36. 125 BH I, Pl. XXXVIII, 2. 126 Translation, J. A. Wilson, ANET, 229. It has been suggested that the land of Shut is in Transjordan (Moab?), but this location is uncertain. 127 This hairstyle corresponds to the coiffure of a statue of an Asiatic dignitary, found at Tell el-Dab’a, and on the head of a statue in Munich; it is also worn by an Asiatic on a pectoral from Dahshur, see infra. 128 Chapter 4, infra, shows that Amorites were associated with expertise in dyeing wool. 129 See Chapter 4 for a discussion of dyes. Could the term ps be the same term used in the Hebrew Bible to describe Joseph’s garment, a ktnt psym, i.e. “a dyed garment,” (one that has been boiled)? (See C. H. Gordon, Ugaritic Textbook 236, text 1112.5, lbš psm.) The precise meaning of the term psym remains unclear. Suggested translations of this term as “ornamented tunic,” “robe of many colors,” or a “sleeved tunic,” see JPS, 255. A pas garment was found in a list of various articles of clothing from Ugarit, lbš psm, JPS, 255 UT 1112.5, 236. 130 cf. Akk. s.abû “to soak,” s.ubitп “dyeing,” CAD 5,45,228. 131 JPS translation, 387. 132 Regarding the red hair, as noted earlier, this feature appears on an Asiatic at Deir el-Bahri: the tomb of Khety, a foreigner from Lisht and the tomb of Intef (Hayes, CAH, 536). Red hair also appears on a Syrian in the New Kingdom tomb of Rechmire, vizier to Tuthmosis III, whose garment and hairstyle are completely different from the representations of the Old and Middle Kingdoms. 133 Bietak, Avaris (1996) 20. R. Schiestl, “The Statue of an Asiatic Man from Tell el-Dab’a, Egypt,” 173–85, Fig. 3.

226

Notes to pp. 91–94

134 Munich AS 7171, Staatliche Sammlung Ägyptischer Kunst. 135 Do. Arnold, “Image and Identity: Egypt’s Eastern Neighbors, East Delta People and the Hyksos,” The Second Intermediate Period (Thirteenth-Seventeenth Dynasties) Current Research, Future Prospects, Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta, ed., M. Maree (2010) 183–222. 136 C. Aldred, Jewels of the Pharaohs (1971) 194 and Pl. 42. 137 That these people were ꜤꜢmw who had peaceful commercial and economic relations with Egypt is suggested by their representation in the Beni Hasan painting, and the statue from Tell el-Dab’a. 138 Although Hayes was of the opinion that the scene on the pectoral “suggests that the royal parties still had to defend themselves occasionally against the wild tribes of the neighboring deserts,” CAH, Vol. 1. Part II 2A, 510. The image of an Asiatic captive with the same mushroom-­shaped hairstyle is represented on a “magic wand”, H. G. Fischer, “The Ancient Egyptian Attitude towards the Monstrous,” Monsters and Demons in the Ancient and Medieval World. Papers Presented in Honor of Edith Porada The Franklin Jasper Wells Lectures 10, Mainz am Rhein (1987) 13–26. A. Farkas and P. O. H. Harper eds. 139 The third figure in the upper register of the painting in the tomb of Khnumhotep which shows the left arm and shoulder bare as opposed to the right is obviously rendered in this manner due to the artistic balance of the composition. For a discussion of artistic balance in the painting, see W. H. Shea, “Artistic Balance Among the Beni Hasan Asiatics,” BA 4, (1981) 219–28. 140 Ishtup-Ilum is represented in a robe which reveals his shoulder and right arm. It is bordered on the long and short sides with a fringed braid. In the Gudea statues, the fringe appears only on the vertical panels and not on the low neckline. For a chronological synchronism between the Šakkanakku and the rulers of Akkad and the Third Dynasty of Ur, see J-M. Durand, “La Situation Historique Des Šakkanakku: Nouvelle Approche,” MARI 4, Paris (1985) 156. 141 CAH, Part IIB, 629, “Under the Amorite dynasties, the costume remains much as it was under the kings of Ur, save that there is an increasing tendency to decoration; the robe is more richly ornamented.” 142 For Lamgi-Mari see D. P. Hansen in W. Orthmann, ed., PropyläenKunstgeschichte 14, 167, Fig. 30. 143 Note that leather sandals were also worn in Egypt since the Old Kingdom. 144 Tomb PI9. 145 V. Crawford, Sumerian Economic Texts from the First Dynasty of Isin, BIN IX. Babylonian Inscriptions in the Collection of James B. Nies, Yale University, New Haven (1954) 3. Crawford studied 535 documents which originated in the

Notes to pp. 94–99

227

early first years of the First Dynasty of Isin (dated near the beginning of the twentieth century BCE), reigns of Ishbi-Erra and Shu-ilishu (a period of about 36 years). Over 400 of these texts deal with the leather industry. Crawford remarks that “While the Third Dynasty of Ur materials, plus some records both earlier than Ur III and later than the First Dynasty of Isin, were utilized in this study, the present volume contains far more texts related to the leather business than do all other published sources combined. Examination of the personal name list reveals varied ethnic groups. Sumerian and Akkadian names, quite naturally are predominant. ‘Amurrite’ names are present in considerable numbers. Other groups may be represented to a very small degree,” ibid., 4–5. 146 However, A. Haldar, Who Were The Amorites?, Leiden (1971) 75–76, states that “it would indeed be strange, if no Amorites were occupied with production of leather objects.” 147 W. H. Shea, Artistic Balance, 224. 148 H. J. Kantor, The Aegean and the Orient in the Second Millennium B.C., AIA Monograph Number I (1947) 29, note 89. 149 For this stamp seal see Petrie, Buttons and Design Scarabs, Pl. IV, 237, 239 (no provenience). While the origins of the designs of these button and design scarabs have been the subject of much debate, see W. A. Ward, Egypt and the East Mediterranean World 2200–1900 B.C. (1971) 41–3, Petrie long ago observed that “the use of spots for filling in corners was foreign to the Egyptians and notes that the ꜤꜢmw dresses are covered with spots in every space and even along the bars and stripes of color,” W. F. Petrie, Egyptian Decorative Art, (1895), reissued, New York (1972) 15. Thus, while exact parallels to the designs in the ꜤꜢmw garments may be lacking, certain elements within the patterns point to a Near Eastern origin. See also infra, a dotted garment on one of the male Asiatics from Tell Sakka, and garments on the Asiatics from the tomb of Intef. 150 66.173, Egypt and the Ancient Near East, The Metropolitan Museum of Art, p. 129, pl. 93; D. P. Hansen, “A Proto-Elamite Silver Figurine in the Metropolitan Museum of Art,” Metropolitan Museum Journal, Vol. 3, (1970). 151 Found also at Jericho, see I. Ziffer, At that Time, p. 52. 152 For further comments on this painting, see R. Germer, Ägyptologische Abhandlungen, Band 53, Wiesbaden (1992) 99–104. 153 Yadin, Art of Warfare. 154 See A. R. Schulman, “Egyptian Representations of Horsemen and Riding in the New Kingdom,”JNES 16 (1957) 263–71. 155 Archaeological evidence from the ancient Near East also shows that humans rode equids. A man found buried with an equid at the site of al-Hiba in southern Iraq (ancient Lagash) in an EDIIIB context has been interpreted by D. P. Hansen

228

Notes to pp. 99–102

as a rider with his mount, “AI-Hiba 1970–71: A Preliminary Report,” Artibus Asiae 35, New York (1973) 70 and Fig. 26, cited also in J. Zarins, “Equids Associated with Human Burials in Third Millennium B. C. Mesopotamia: Two Complementary Facets,” in Equids in the Ancient World, R. H. Meadow and H-P. Uerpmann, eds., Wiesbaden (1986) 171. 156 Gardiner and Peet, The Inscriptions of Sinai. See Chapter 4 infra for an interpretation of the iconography and the inscriptions which appear above the figures. 157 See Chapter 4 infra for a full discussion of this scene. 158 R. Merhav, ed., Treasures of the Bible Lands, the Elie Borowski Collection, Tel Aviv Museum (1987) 101. 159 See also, I. Ziffer, At That Time the Canaanites Were in the Land (1990) 81, Fig. 88. 160 See M. Bietak, I. Hein et al. Pharaonen und Fremde Dynastien im Dunkel, Exhibition Catalogue, Rathaus Vienna 8 Sept.–23 Oct (1994) 165, Kat. Nr. 151, discussion by D. Wildung. 161 A garment with cross-­hatching or netted design appears on a seated copper figurine of Syro-Anatolian type, published by Negbi, p. 92. D. P. Hansen dates the figure to MB IIB contra Negbi. The netting pattern also appears on Egyptian representations of females during the Middle Kingdom; W. S. Smith, Interconnections in the Ancient Near East, New Haven and London (1965) 24, states that “an Ugaritic poem describes the richly caparisoned ass being saddled for Asherah (sic!) to ride”, and that “in Egypt, the first known of many depictions of Astarte on horseback is on a stela of Tuthmosis IV in the last quarter of the fifteenth century.” Smith points out that the text is later than the Middle Kingdom, however, since mythological texts are often the results of a long oral tradition, it is not impossible that the seal could relate to Asherah. 162 M. Held, “Philological Notes on the Mari Covenant Rituals,” BASOR 200 (1970) 37, note 48. 163 As indicated by Held, ibid., Ugaritic ‘r and Hebrew ‘yr donkey foal is cognate to Amorite ha¯yarum – (aya¯rum). ˘ 164 Donkey riding appears in several passages in the Hebrew Bible as follows: Exodus 4:20: So Moses took his wife and his sons and mounted them on a donkey, and he returned to the land of Egypt. In Joshua, 15:18, it is told that Achsah, the daughter of Caleb is mounted upon a donkey. And it came about that when she came to him, she persuaded him to ask her father for a field. So she alighted from the donkey, and Caleb said to her, “What do you want? ” I Samuel 25:23. When Abigail saw David, she hurried and dismounted from her donkey, and fell on her face before David, and bowed herself to the ground. For other examples, see also, Genesis: 24:61, 63, 64; 31:17, 34.

Notes to pp. 102–105

229

165 O. W. Muscarella, ed., B. L. Schlossman, Ladders To Heaven, Canada (1981) 107. 166 Ziffer, At That Time, 82. 167 Ladders (1979). 168 Schlossman notes that the stone cult basin found at Ebla shows a close relationship with Colony period cylinder seals. O. W. Muscarella, ed., B. L. Schlossman, Ladders To Heaven, Canada (1981) 107. The striated hairstyles seen on the dignitaries on the basin of Temple N (around 1800 B.C.) P. Matthiae, Ebla in the Period of the Amorite Dynasties and the Dynasty of Akkad, Malibu (1979) XI (and also the basalt fragment of relief with warrior’s head from the Cella of Great Temple D) P. Matthiae, Ebla, TM.65.D.227 strikingly resemble the hairstyles of the figure on the gold beaker. Note, however, the authenticity of this vessel is not universally accepted. 169 S. W. Smith, “Influence of the Middle Kingdom of Egypt in Western Asia, Especially in Byblos,” AJA 73 (1969) 279. 170 D. P. Hansen, “Some Remarks on the Chronology and Style of Objects from Byblos,” AJA 73 (1969) 282–3, “in particular the standing antelopes on the side of the hilt opposite a king plus the heraldic scene of two animals standing back to back with their heads turned toward each other, inherently Sumerian or Akkadian,” 283. Note, the king’s crown is rendered in crosshatching. 171 See J. Rimmer, Ancient Musical Instruments of Western Asia in the British Museum (1969), 13–14. 172 “Ancient Egyptian Paintings,” Vol. I, Plates X and XI, by Nina M. Davies and Alan H. Gardiner which was published in 1936, University of Chicago Press. 173 Partially restored oblique lyre, New Kingdom, Dynasty 18, early ca. 1550–1458 B.C, Thebes, el-Asasif, Courtyard CC 41, Pit 1, Chamber A debris, MMA 1915–1916, Wood (frame), bronze or copper alloy, (staple) Bronze, Rogers Fund, 1916, Accession Number: 16.10.504. 174 P. Saretta, “Of Lyres, Lions, Light and Everything New Under the Sun: An Amarna Relief in the Metropolitan Museum of Art,” BES 19 (forthcoming). 175 L. Manniche, Music and Musicians in Ancient Egypt, London (1991) 37. 176 J. E. Hoch, Semitic Words in Egyptian Texts of the New Kingdom and Third Intermediate Period (1994) 324, #467. 177 CAD, K. 178 Foreigners may have also introduced other new instruments in the Middle Kingdom. M. Bietak discovered a set of three hand drums at Tell el-Dab’a, in a dwelling which was built in the ruins of an old palace. M. Bietak, “Eine ‘Rhytmusgruppe’, ” 3–18. The instruments were found in an Amorite context (M. Bietak, personal communication). The drums are made of clay and are a type that corresponds to the modern darabukka. A bone scraper was found with the

230

Notes to pp. 105–107

drums which Bietak suggested may have been used in a ritual context; see also L. Manniche for a discussion of these instruments, Music and Musicians, 38–39. 179 In Gen. 39:1, the same caravan of traders are termed “Ishmaelites” reflecting the seminomadic lifestyle associated with their eponymous ancestor. 180 See I. Ziffer, At that Time, 70. 181 R. M. Engberg, “Tombs of the Early Second Millennium from Baghuz on the Middle Euphrates,” BASOR 87 (1942) 17–22. 182 As noted by Oren, cited in Ziffer, At That Time, no. 14. Also see Chapter 4 infra for discussion of metallurgy of West Semites at Serabit el-Khadim. 183 For the various hypotheses, see D. Kessler, “Die Asiatenkarawane von Beni Hassan,” SAK 14 (1987) 147–65; H. Goedicke, “Abi-Sha(i)’s Representation in Beni Hasan,” JARCE 21 (1984) 203–10; J. Kamrin, “Monument and Microcosm: The 12th Dynasty Tomb Chapel of Khnumhotep II at Beni Hasan,” (1992) 147, Ph.D Dissertation, University of Pennsylvania. 184 New Year’s Day and its festival. 185 J. Kamrin, Monuments and Microcosm, 147. See also, “The Aamw of Shu in the Tomb of Khnumhotep II at Beni Hassan,” Journal of Ancient Egyptian Interconnections, Vol. 1:3 (2009) 22–36, https://journals.uair.arizona.edu /index. php/jaei/article/view/28/29 and “The Procession of ‘Asiatics’ at Beni Hasan in Joan Aruz, Sarah B. Graff, and Yelena Rakic, eds, Contacts in Culture, From Mesopotamia to the Mediterranean in the Second Millennium B.C. (2013) 156. 186 J. Kamrin, Cosmos, 147. 187 J. Kamrin, Monuments and Microcosm, 147. See also, J. Kamrin, The Cosmos of Khnumhotep II at Beni Hasan, (1999). 188 H. Goedicke “Abi-Sha(i)’s Representation in Beni Hasan,” 204, notes that galena, the material from which eye paint was extracted could be mined on Egyptian territory, and thus believes that the Asiatics were in the employ of the Egyptian government. However, tests from remains in kohl containers in the MMA of New Kingdom date show that the kohl, translated as either “stibium” or “galena,” was of foreign origin (Dorothea Arnold, personal communication). It is possible that the Egyptians may have considered the Asiatic kohl as an “exotic” product, and considered more desirable than their own. See too, J. Kamrin, Journal of Ancient Egyptian Interconnections, http://jaei.library.arizona.edu Vol. 1:3, (2009) 22–36 for a thought-­ provoking discussion of the possibility that the ore (galena) may have been used for the production of silver or, for its lead content, have been used in copper working. 189 The Egyptian Story of Sinuhe confirms the authenticity of the details in the painting exhibiting characteristics of this lifestyle. Minute and realistic details such as social organization, tribal structure, customs and personal names in the literary depiction of West Semites suggest also that it is founded on true

Notes to pp. 107–108

231

firsthand observation. Sinuhe is describing life in an urban center and not just a grazing area. This is a Middle Bronze IIA culture. Why does Sinuhe skip over (Canaan) the middle part of Israel? He mentions only Byblos and Kedem. As an Egyptian he would be interested only in cultural centers such as on the Phoenician Coast and North and Central Syria. The interior of Israel is not yet settled. Furthermore, Kedem and Byblos are urban and have contacts with Egypt. The area Sinuhe goes to is a politically centralized community and not a tribal one. He is not a sheikh. He is one managing agricultural groves as well as sheep herding. It is a whole enterprise. Amminenshi is not like Hammurabi of Babylon or Zimri-Lim of Mari. He is not like a sheikh with a lot of tents. It’s something in-­between. So here the term ꜤꜢmw does not refer to nomads only. Urban and nomadic divisions of society are living in symbiosis with one another. 190 In Gen. 37:25, “Joseph’s brothers looked up and saw a caravan of Ishmaelites coming from Gilead, their camels laden with gum, balm and myrrh, en route to Egypt.” In Jer. 46:11; cf. Judges 8:2. This is alluded to by the prophet Jeremiah who cries out “go up to Gilead and get balm, O Virgin daughter of Egypt! Vainly do you try many remedies; there is no healing for you”; see also D. B. Redford, A Study of the Biblical Story of Joseph, VT 20 (1970) 192–3. 191 It is assumed here that the multi-­colored garments are of wool due to the fact that wool takes dye much more easily than linen, as discussed above. 192 As are also seen at Mari. 193 Genesis 5. 194 See The New American Bible, (1970) 4, notes for 4:17–22. 195 Genesis 4:17–22: Cain also became the founder of a city . . . His descendant, Jubal was the ancestor of all who dwell in tents and keep cattle. His brother’s name was Jubal: he was the ancestor of all who play the lyre and the pipe. Zillah on her part, gave birth to Tubalcain, the ancestor of all who forge instruments of bronze and iron. 196 gh.s and nἰꜢw, respectively. See Paton, Animals of Ancient Egypt. 197 Note the discussion of the Asiatic “nomads” in the Beni Hasan painting by T. Staubli, Das Image der Nomaden im Allen Israel und in der lkonographie seiner sesshaften Nachbarn, OBO 107 (1991) 33–5. But, as A. Haldar points out, there is a difference between Amorites’ activity as travelling traders or envoys with their supposed nomadic character, Who Were The Amorites?, 77. 198 Beni Hasan was the Oryx nome, where it is likely that these animals roamed the Eastern Desert. In fact, other scenes on this wall also show animals associated with the steppe. Since Khnumhotep is Overseer of the Eastern Desert, the representation of desert animals is not surprising. The arrival of the foreigners are shown registered by the scribe as passing through his domain, but not

232

Notes to pp. 108–112

necessarily working for him. For the artist to have captured the minute details of the appearance and accoutrements of these people, the Asiatics must have stayed at Menat Chufu for at least a few days, perhaps selling their wares. 199 cf: Akkadian, emārum s.allāmum (black donkeys) of the Assyrian caravan trade, see K. R. Veenhoff, Aspects of Old Assyrian Trade and its Terminology (1972) 1. 200 See Chapter 4 infra for a discussion of the representations at Serabit el-Khadim in the Sinai that show the brother of the prince of Retenu riding a donkey.

4  West Semites and the Economic Life of Egypt   1 For example, Deir el-Medina, L. H. Lesko, ed., Pharaoh’s Workers, Ithaca; London (1994); A. R. David, The Pyramid Builders of Ancient Egypt, London (1986).   2 L. H. Lesko, ed., Pharaoh’s Workers, 61.   3 Luft, U. “Asiatics in Illahun: A Preliminary Report,” in, Atti VI Congresso II, Turin (1993) 291–7.   4 The papyrus is thought to have come from Thebes and is dated to the reign of Sebekhotep III, W C. Hayes, A Papyrus of the Late Middle Kingdom in the Brooklyn Museum (1955) 87, (Brooklyn 35.1446).   5 W. F. Albright,”Northwest-Semitic Names in a List of Egyptian Slaves from the Eighteenth Century B.C.,” JAOS 74 (1954) 222–33.   6 Hayes, Papyrus, 92–98; see also G. Posener, “Les Asiatiques en Égypte sous les Xlle et XIIIe dynasties,” Syria 34 (1957) 145–63 for a discussion of these names; and W. Helck, Die Beziehungen Ägyptens Zu Vorderasien lm 3. Und. 2. Jahrtausend v. Chr. (1971) 77–81.   7 Hayes, Papyrus, 99.   8 Ibid., 105.   9 Associated with the temple, Kahun 32.5, 75–6. 10 E. J. W. Barber, Prehistoric Textiles: The Development of Cloth in the Neolithic and Bronze Ages, with Special Reference to the Aegean, Princeton (1991) 289. 11 It is beyond the scope of this work for a lengthy discussion on how this foreign element got to Egypt. Redford, in a discussion of the position of Asiatics at Sinai shows that “the Asiatics who appear in the roster of workers at the Sinai mines seem to be there because of their specialized skills, . . . this bespeaks co-­operation between Egyptians and Asiatics, not the enslavement of the latter by the former.” He interprets textual evidence as showing that Egypt showed a “readiness to organize and administer the foreign labor force.” He points out that “Asiatics from southern Palestine . . . sought employment in Egypt without coercion.” He also

Notes to pp. 112–114

233

states that in “view of the prevalence of voluntary servitude in ancient times, it is not surprising that many of these turn up as domestic servants on Egyptian estates.” D. B. Redford, A Study of the Biblical Story of Joseph, Supplements to VT, 20 Leiden (1970) 197. 12 E. J. W. Barber, Prehistoric Textiles, 164. 13 D. P. Hansen (1970), 14 and n. 25, cited also by Barber, Prehistoric Textiles, 164. 14 R. L. Zettler, The Ur III Temple of lnanna at Nippur, Berlin (1992) 138. 15 geme-­us -ba-­me, ibid. Unfortunately, evidence is lacking which would tell us whether or not the workers were Amorites. 16 Ibid. 17 K. Maekawa, “Female Weavers and Their Children in Lagash – Pre-Sargonic and Ur III “Acta Sumerologica 2 (1980) 81. For discussions of women and children personnel in Mesopotamia, including weavers at Lagash, see I. J. Gelb, “The Arua Institution,” RA 66 (1972) 1–32 where he deals with sources of information on temple labor. Also, I. Mendelsohn, “Free Artisans and Slaves in Mesopotamia,” BASOR 89 (1943) 25–9. 18 C. Bier, Textile Arts, 10. 19 W. F. Leemans, The Old Babylonian Merchant (1950) 2–3. 20 R. Harris, Ancient Sippar, Nederlands (1975) 52. 21 L. L. Orlin, Assyrian Colonies in Cappadocia (1970) 27. See also F. J. Stephens, “Personal Names from Cuneiform Inscriptions of Cappadocia”, YOS XIII (1928). P. Gerstenblith. “The Levant at the Beginning of the Middle Bronze Age”, ASOR, Dissertation Series 5, Winona Lake (1983) 9. 22 M. T. Larsen, Old Assyrian Caravan Procedures, Istanbul (1967) 153. 23 Hebrew ctonet, Genesis 10, for Joseph’s coat – ctonet psym; L. L. Orlin, Assyrian Colonies, 57 – Greek chiton, Roman tunica. Although Larsen, Old Assyrian Caravan Procedures, translates kutānu as a garment of linen, see CAD K, 608, where it can also mean “wool.” 24 I. Spar, Cuneiform Texts in The Metropolitan Museum of Art I, 94. 25 See E. Sollberger, “Administrative Texts Chiefly Concerning Textiles,” ARET 8, Rome (1986). 26 P. Matthiae, Ebla: An Empire Rediscovered, (1977) 179. 27 Ibid. 28 Ibid., 180. 29 Ibid., 179–80. 30 See I. J. Gelb, “Ebla and Lagash: Environmental Contrast,” in H. Weiss ed., The Origins of Cities in Dry-Farming Syria and Mesopotamia in the Third Millennium B.C. (1986) 158. 31 H. KlengeI, Syria 3000 to 300 B.C. Berlin (1991) 79.

234

Notes to pp. 114–116

32 Based upon the description of weavers in P. Sallier II (in the British Museum) in the Egyptian “Satire on the Trades”: “The weaver in the workshop, He is worse off than a woman; With knees against his chest, He cannot breathe air;. If he skips a day of weaving, He is beaten fifty strokes; He gives food to the doorkeeper, To let him see the light of day.” As Lichtheim notes, this text “achieves its satirical effects by exaggerating the true hardships of the professions, and by suppressing all their positive and rewarding aspects.” M. Lichtheim, AEL I, 184. The term here for weaver denotes specifically a “mat weaver,” (Lichtheim, 192), and even if one takes the text as a serious characterization, as does Helck (cited in Lichtheim, 184), the negative description does not refer here to a weaver of fine linen. Petzel mentions that weaving was linked to Egyptian deities. Neith was a weaver and was represented with the shuttle symbol on her head. Also, in early times, Isis was connected with the invention of linen weaving and was depicted holding a shuttle. She was believed to have helped her husband, Osiris, by teaching women to spin flax. She also points out that Isis and Nephthys wove clothing for Osiris. Seth put his sister, Isis, in a spinning mill with bondwomen, F. E. Petzel, Textiles of Ancient Mesopotamia, Persia and Egypt, Corvallis, Oregon (1987) 141. 33 The fine quality of linen from the royal storerooms is a testament to the skill of the Egyptian weavers themselves. Examples found in the tomb of Hatnufer (most likely from the storerooms of Hatshepsut) and bolts of linen from the tomb of Meketre in the Egyptian collection of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, bear witness to this achievement. See C. Roehrig, “Life Along the Nile: Three Egyptians of Ancient Thebes,” The Metropolitan Museum of Art Bulletin, New Series, Vol. 60, No. 1, Summer (2002) Fig. 4, 39, 42. 34 Rosalind Hall, Egyptian Textiles, UK (1986) 18. 35 N. de Garis Davies, The Tomb of Rekhmire at Thebes 1, 47. 36 Davies, Rekhmire, 48. 37 Barber, Prehistoric Textiles, 290. 38 Ibid., 161. 39 Note that the loom is horizontal, as seen from above, Egyptian Wall Paintings, M. Hill, The Metropolitan Museum of Art (1983) 51, Pl. 50 40 The Eastern Mediterranean coast was famous for its purple dye in antiquity. During the 15th to 13th centuries BCE, murex shells, from a purple-­bearing mollusk were found on the shore of the port of Ugarit, at Minet el Beida, on the north coast of Syria, C. F. A. Schaeffer, “Les fouilles de Ras-Shamra (Ugarit),” Syria 16 (1935) 141ff (1951) 188–89 and fig. 1. Texts from Ugarit also give evidence of commerce in purple wool and purple cloth. Thureau-Dangin (1934); Schaeffer (1951) 190–2. Albright states that the Canaanites of Palestine were already dyeing their cloth with murex in the Middle Bronze Age, but does not give the source of

Notes to pp. 116–120

235

his evidence—The Archaeology of Palestine, (1960) 96. Barber relates that a Minoan purple dye industry existed on the small island of Kouphonisi, south of East Crete where murex shells were found with Middle Minoan II Kamares ware, and at the contemporary site of Palaikastro on the East Side of Crete, 228. And in the first millennium the dye industry continued to flourish on the coast of the Levant. Albright reports finding dye-­works installations at the 8th to 7th century BCE town at Tell Beit Mirsim in southern Israel. Note, however, that the interpretation of dye works has been refuted, see V. Fritz, The City in Ancient Israel (1998) 181 note 13, and for references. The excavations show that the town must have been devoted largely to the weaving and dyeing of textiles (Barber) 241. 41 W. M. F. Petrie, Kahun, Gurob and Hawara, London (1890). 42 The terminology for various types of Egyptian linen is not completely understood. See W. S. Smith: “The Old Kingdom Linen List,” ZÄS 71 (1935) 134–49. 43 Barber, Prehistoric Textiles, 230. 44 For which Egypt was famous; J. A. McDowell in A. R. David, Pyramid Builders, London (1986) 244, notes that linen does not take dye easily. 45 Ibid., 243. 46 W. M. F. Petrie, Kahun, Gurob and Hawara, London (1890) 28; cf. also, A. R. David, The Pyramid Builders, 243. 47 E. J. W. Barber, Prehistoric Textiles, 351; the ram, Ovis playtyora aegyptiaca was introduced into Egypt from Western Asia at around 2000 BCE, and had a long and thick fleece. See Do. Arnold, An Egyptian Bestiary, MMA Bulletin (Spring 1995) 56. 48 J. Wouters, L. Maes and R. Germer, “The Identification of Haematite as a Red Colorant on an Egyptian Textile from the Second Millennium B.C.” Studies in Conservation 35 (1990), 89–92. For other discussions of dyes in ancient Egypt, see G. Vogelsang-Eastwood, The Production of Linen in Pharaonic Egypt, 36–9. 49 Metropolitan Museum of Art, accession no. 20.3.203a. 50 It may have had an apotropaic purpose. 51 Barber, Prehistoric Textiles, 230. 52 See Chapter 3 above. 53 I.J. Gelb, Computer-­aided Analysis of Amorite, Chicago (1980). 54 CAD I, 94. 55 CAD D, 75. 56 J. R. Harris, Lexicographical Studies in Ancient Egyptian Minerals (1961) 227. 57 Exodus 25:5; see also Exodus 35:7, 35:23, 26:14, 36:19, 39:34. 58 Exodus 25:5. 59 A. Ember also equated the term Egyptian term ἰdmy (red linen) with Hebrew adom. Egypto-Semitic Studies, veröffentlichungen Der Alexander Kohut Memorial

236

Notes to pp. 120–123

Foundation Philologische Reihe 2 (1930), 3. While most Asiatic loanwords make their appearance in Egyptian vocabulary during the Middle Kingdom, the term ἰdmy appears in Old Kingdom linen lists. This occurrence does not seem to pose a problem since the trading of Canaanite pottery can be traced back to the Old Kingdom and even earlier. 60 See M. Alliot, “Une Famille De Motts Redconstituée: ins, “être rouge,” RdE 10 (1955) 1–7. 61 The “i” may be explained as a prothetic ‘a which is especially common preceding sibilants. 62 Landsberger has suggested that šny may be connected to Akkadian šanu, šinı¯tu – colorful, JCS 21 (1967) 139–173. 63 A. H. Gardiner, AEO I, 65–6. 64 In Ugaritic, lbš -tn is a scarlet garment, see C. H. Gordon, Ugaritic Textbook, UT 1108. (Note that the term -tn could also be translated as a “second” garment). 65 In A. R. David, Pyramid Builders, 244. 66 Line 24B; Lichtheim translation, AEL I, Berkeley (1975) 224. 67 See above. 68 See above. K.dm may possibly be a proper name indicating what was a well-­known site. 69 M. Lichtheim translation, AEL I, 226. 70 Oxen were also used as draught animals in Canaan by the sedentary agricultural population. 71 R. and J. Janssen, Egyptian Household Animals, 28. 72 For example, the tomb of Djehuty-Hotep at el-Bersheh; models from the tomb of the royal chief steward Meketre, who began his career under King Nebhepetre Mentuhotep II of Dynasty 11 and continued to serve successive kings into the early years of Dynasty 12, give a graphic, three dimensional view of cattle rearing, MMA 20.3.9. 73 J. Baines and J. Malek, Atlas of Ancient Egypt (1993 [1980]) 192. See W. A. Ward, Index of Egyptian Administrative and Religious Titles of the Middle Kingdom (1982) 25, par. 160, ἰmy-­r hsb ih.w – cited in R. Giveon, “Cattle Administration in Middle Kingdom Egypt and Canaan,” Hommages à François Daumas 1 (1986) 279–84. 74 Do. Arnold, “An Egyptian Bestiary,” The MMA Bulletin Spring (1995) 51. 75 A. L. Blackman, The Rock Tombs of Meir III London (1915), Tomb Chapel of Ukh-Hotep – and Mersi, North Wall of Outer Room of Tomb, Chapel B, No.4. 76 See R. Giveon, “Cattle Administration in Middle Kindom Egypt and Canaan,” Hommages à François Daumas 1 (1986) 1. 77 See P. E. Newberry, El Bersheh I, Pl. 27 (n II), 38. 78 Tomb 5067 (1780–1739 or 1744–1730 B.C).

Notes to pp. 123–128

237

79 See Loud, Megiddo II, Chicago (1948) Pl. 149, 32; J. A. Wilson, AJSL 58 (1941) 225–36. 80 See R. Giveon, “Cattle Administration in Middle Kingdom Egypt and Canaan,” Hommages à François Daumas I (1986) 284, note 27, for references. Note that the ruler of Megiddo employed an Egyptian for the counting of cattle. 81 G. Posener, CAH I, Part 2 (1971) 542–3. 82 Idem. 83 P. Saretta, Egyptian Perceptions, 155–6 84 MMA 15.3.585, Museum negative number 30800 LS, Expedition Negative Number L 13–14.535–6; it was found in the radim of Tomb no. 499 at Lisht, North during the Metropolitan Museum of Art Expedition at Lisht between 1913–14 in the cemetery complex surrounding the pyramid of Amenemhet I. It was de-­ accessioned by the Metropolitan Museum of Art in 1957. I am indebted to James Allen who first noticed and translated this inscription from the MMA archives, and to Dorothea Arnold for bringing this object to my attention. 85 A. Gardiner, Grammar, 170–3. 86 W. A. Ward in Pharaoh’s Workers, 63, in his study of foreign names at the New Kingdom site of Deir el-Medina, is of the opinion this this type of name does not necessarily denote a person of immediate foreign origin. If this be the case, then Ameny may have been born in Egypt of an Asiatic mother. 87 T. G. H. James, “The Statuette of User” (BM30457) Pyramid Studies; unfortunately, User’s title is not inscribed or written on the statuette. But it shows that people of Asiatic-Amorite descent were among officials of the middle class at this time. 88 LN 499. 89 Now in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, 16.3.10, possibly from the funerary chapel of Rehuerdjsen, D. Arnold, Middle Kingdom Tomb Architecture at Lisht, plates, 125–126; Based upon excavations of the Metropolitan Museum of Art at the North Pyramid of Amenemhet I at Lisht, imports of Canaanite pottery of the MBIIA period start most probably in the early years of the Twelfth Dynasty, “Canaanite Imports at Lisht: The Middle Kingdom Capital of Egypt,” EAL (1995) 24. See infra 90 Dorothea Arnold, personal communication; see for example, the toilet vase with two handles, inscribed for the Seal Bearer Kemes (MMA 44.4.2). 91 Time of Amenemhet II. 92 See K. A. Kitchen, “An Unusual Stela from Abydos,” JEA 47 (1961). 93 An extensive weaving industry, based on locally obtained wool, is documented in textile texts found at the site, see M. Van De Mieroop, “Sheep and Goat Herding According to the Old Babylonian Texts from Ur,” Bulletin on Sumerian Agriculture 7 (1993) 1.

238

Notes to pp. 128–130

  94 lbid., 30.   95 See above.   96 I. J. Gelb, “Growth of a Herd of Cattle in Ten Years,” JCS 21 (1967) 64–9.   97 J. N. Postgate (with a contribution by S. Payne), “Some Old Babylonian Shepherds And Their Flocks,” JSS 20 (1975) 2.   98 M. Anbar and N. Na’aman, “An Account Tablet of Sheep from Ancient Hebron,” Tel Aviv 13–14 (1986–7) 3–12.   99 G. Buccellati, Amorites, 302, states that the Amorites at Drehem are mentioned in the majority of cases together with foreigners coming from different cities including Mari, Ebla, Marhaši, and Zidanum. ˘ 100 G. Buccellati, The Amorites of the Ur III Period (1966) 274. 101 A. H. Gardiner, T. E. Peet, and J. Černý, The Inscriptions of Sinai, 2nd edn. Egyptian Exploration Society Memoir, 45, London (1952) Two Volumes. 102 The Temple of Hathor at Serabit el-Khadim, located at the Eastern end of the plateau, began in about the 19th Century BCE. Later two rooms were added and dedicated to the local god, Sopdu. Hathor and Sopdu were Egyptian gods who were either worshipped by, or associated with Asiatics. Most of the stelae at Serabit el-Khadim date to the reigns of Amenemhet III and Senwosret III. 103 In mine L and mine G. For an interpretation of these inscriptions see W. F. Albright, The Proto-Sinaitic Inscriptions and Their Decipherment, Cambridge, Harvard University Press; London, Oxford University Press (1969). It is believed that the Canaanite alphabet came from this script, which itself developed from Egyptian hieroglyphs. Possible dates for the inscriptions include the Eighteenth Dynasty or toward the end of the Twelfth Dynasty in Sinai, see B. Sass, The Genesis of the Alphabet and its Development in the Second Millennium B.C., Ägypten und Altes Testament 13, Wiesbaden (1988) 136. For a more recent, and detailed study of the Proto-Sinaitic inscriptions, see Orly Goldwasser, “Canaanites Reading Hieroglyphs: Horus Is Hathor?—The Invention of the Alphabet in Sinai,” Egypt and the Levant 16 (2006) 121–60. 104 Mine L. 105 Forty casting moulds for bronze mining axes. 106 Beit-Arieh, 115. 107 Proto-Sinaitic Inscriptions, 143. 108 Since in northern Syria they are known in the second half of the third millennium, L Beit-Arieh, “Canaanites and Egyptians at Serabit el-Khadim” in Egypt, Israel, Sinai, A. F. Rainey, ed, Tel Aviv (1987) 63. The earliest appearance of foot bellows in Egypt are known from wall paintings (from the tomb of Rekhmire) 800 years after they first appeared in North Syria. It will be recalled

Notes to pp. 130–133

239

that the bellows of the metalworkers represented in the Beni Hasan painting are clearly associated with Asiatic Semites, not Egyptians, see above. 109 Beit-Arieh, 115. 110 Wörterbuch III, 131, 29. 111 Gardiner, Peet, Černý, Inscriptions II, 231. 112 Seyfried, K-J, Beiträge zu den Expeditionen des Mittleren Reiches in die Ost-Wüste (1981). Only two of the inscriptions, 106 and 114 utilize the determinative for a secret thing. 113 Jack M. Sasson, “Artisans . . . Artists: Documentary Perspectives from Mari” in Investigating Artistic Environments in the Ancient Near East, ed., Ann C. Gunter, Washington, D.C. (1990) 23, but see Hebrew Oman “expert”: “master craftsman” in Proverbs 8:30–31 and translation by T. H. Gaster, Myth, Legend, and Custom in the Old Testament, “Then was I [Wisdom] beside him like a master craftsman; I was his daily playmate, making merry before him every moment.” 114 ARM XII 747. 115 J. M. Sasson “Artisans . . . Artists: Documentary Perspectives from Mari” in Investigating Artistic Environments in the Ancient Near East, ed., Ann C. Gunter (1990) 27, n. 12. Note too that Shamshi-Adad tells his son to set up a caravan which included seven artisans. 116 J. M. Sasson, “Instances of Mobility Among Mari Artisans,” BASOR 190 (1968) 54; The temple at Serabit el-Khadim was a sanctuary for the gods Hathor and Sopdu. It was built starting with a small cave and then was slowly enlarged to a bigger place. The temple, which followed the natural landscape, is unusual for Egyptian architecture. It consisted of a processional approach and every few meters a stela was standing. This temple was influenced by temples of Canaan in the use of stelae, wash basins and different cult practices than the Egyptians as evidenced by huge layers of ash. The rites were carried out by local people who used foreign practices. These “Semitic” features, noted by W. F. Petrie, Researches in Sinai, London (1906) 100, were refuted by Gardiner, Inscriptions of Sinai II, 51, as mere speculation, who concludes that there is “no reason whatever to suppose that the manner of their worship was other than purely Egyptian.” For a more recent discussion of the Temple of Hathor at Serabit el-Khadim, see D. Arnold, Die Tempel Ägyptens, Göttervohnungen, Kultstätten, Baudenkmäler, Zurich (1992) 222–4. 117 Cf. the Beni Hasan painting where only fifteen persons are represented, rather than the thirty-­seven ꜤꜢmw that the inscription tells us arrived there (or was the depiction of the Beni Hasan Asiatics copied from another tomb?). 118 U. Luft, “Asiatics in Illahun: A Preliminary Report,” Sesto Congresso lnternazionale Di Egittologia Atti II (1993) 295, who notes that in P. Berol, 10002, “50 singers have been enrolled whose greater part or all of them are Asiatics.”

Notes to pp. 133–136

240

119 Employment of the different determinatives could perhaps be explained as a hieratic problem, see Müller, Hieratische Paläographie. See too, A. Spalinger, “A Garland of Determinatives,” JEA 94 (2008) 139–64. 120 Contra Schneider, Ausländer II, 241, who suggests that the term could mean “locals.” While both the author’s translation, and that of Schneider’s are hypothetical, he does not explain the different determinatives. One would think that if such a common expression as “locals” existed, it would be unlikely to be so complicated to a scribe, that he would use a different determinative each time. 121 As shown by the remains of a base of a statuette inscribed with the names and titles of Amenemhet I in a large cartouche. It was left in the temple at Serabit el-Khadim, and is now in Philadelphia, see The Inscriptions of Sinai I and II, 63 (Pl. XIX), and 84. 122 Gardiner, Peet, Černý, Inscriptions II, 84–6 and I, plates 19–22. One of the inscriptions appears on the lower part of a statuette of a seated figure of King Snofru which reads: A monument which the son of Rē ‘Senwosret made, a monument which Kheperkerē’ made for my [sic] father, the Horus, “Nebma ‘et” Snofru, 85, 67. King Snofru was deified at Dahshur and in Sinai during the Old Kingdom. This practice continued in the Middle Kingdom, as evidenced by the large number of personal names containing the “Snofru” element found at both of those sites. 123 See MMA Bulletin, 1906 to 1934. The site was re-­excavated by Dieter Arnold and published in The Pyramid of Senwosret I: The South Cemeteries of Lisht I, with contributions by Dorothea Arnold and an appendix by Peter F. Dorman, Metropolitan Museum of Art, Egyptian Expedition XXII (1988). 124 See F. Arnold, The Control Notes and Team Marks: The South Cemeteries at Lisht, II, Publications of the MMA Egyptian Expedition XXIII (1990). 125 The notes appear on building stones from the North Side of the pyramid as follows:   N 27 N 30 N 49 N 51 M4

“Third month of summer, day 8. Which ἰmnw brought.” ᾽ı mnw, “Year 10, first month of summer, day 23. The porters (?) of ἰmnw.” “Year 10, first month of summer, day 25. The porters (7) of ᾽imnw” The following text is from the Eastern gateway of the tomb of the official Mentuhotep, west of ramp: “First month of . . . day 20. ἰmnw”

126 Gardiner, Grammar (Sign-­list O 49). 127 Sinai 106, S. Edge uses a man determinative (following a determinative for a “secret thing”), Sinai I, Pl. 35; See also Sinai 85 which uses a man determinative (following a “building” determinative), Sinai II, Pl. 23.

Notes to pp. 136–142

241

128 This sign often represents a foreign land, but occasionally merely indicates a hilly place. Gardiner, Grammar (Sign list N 25). 129 All of the Sinai inscriptions cited above (except for 110 where six lines are completely lost) include stone carvers or stone cutters in the list of participants in the expedition. 130 Successors of Senswosret I – Amenemhet II, Senwosret III and Amenemhet III – built their pyramids at or near Dahshur during the Twelfth Dynasty. 131 R. Ventura, “Snefru in Sinai and Amenophis I at Deir El-Medina” in S. I. Groll, ed., Pharaonic Egypt: The Bible and Christianity, (1985) 278–88. 132 The quarryman tends to be a rather skilled trade in Egypt, and one that is easily transferable from one site to another. Indeed the closest equivalent to the Egyptian word for “art” is derived from their occupation. 133 DeMorgan, Dahchour II,  93–6, fig. 137–40; See also D. Arnold, The Pyramid Complex of Senwosret III at Dahshur: Architectural Studies (2002), 42–3. 134 “. . . apparently produced with sharp pieces of yellow marl, (tafl),” D. Arnold, The Pyramid Complex of Senwosret III at Dahshur,  42. 135 This king built two funerary complexes, one at Dahshur, and another at Abydos; He was probably buried at the latter site; the Dahshur pyramid was more likely to have been a cenotaph, see J. Wegner, “Burial Place of the Third Senwosret? Old and New Excavations at the Abydene Complex of Senwosret III,” KMT 6, Summer 1995, 69–71; see also J. Wegner, The Mortuary Temple of Senwosret III at Abydos, New Haven (2007). 136 Originally set up at Abydos, Khu Sobek inscription, lines 23 and 24. Manchester Museum 3306. 137 James P. Allen, “The Historical Inscription of Khnumhotep at Dahshur: A Preliminary Report,” Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research No. 352, (Nov. 2008) 29–39. 138 See Beyond Babylon, 18, Fig. 9. The statue head attributed to Hammurabi was most likely carved at an earlier period. 139 Dieter Arnold believes that the graffiti may have been the work of groups who entered the pyramid in the Ramesside period, in connection with the dismantling of the pyramid, see The Pyramid Complex of Senwosret III, 43, and personal communication. 140 Ahmed Fakhry, The Inscriptions of the Amethyst Quarries at Wadi el-Hudi, Cairo (1952) fig. 39. 141 M. Hill, “Relief of a Foreigner Throwing a Spear” (1995). 142 P. infra. 143 Marsha Hill, “Hepu’s Hair,” BES 17 (2007) 118. The statue was dedicated to Hepu by his brother, the gold worker, Tchenena. This and a group of related names may

242

Notes to pp. 142–148

have had a foreign origin, probably Nubian, though an Asiatic meaning has also been suggested, p. 110, idem. Metalworkers were a common profession of West Asiatics, see infra. 144 It has been speculated that Khendjer was an Asiatic general who took over the Egyptian throne, and that his name is derived from a Semitic word, W. Grajetski, The Middle Kingdom of Ancient Egypt, 69. 145 This name has also been read as Ἰmny ꜤꜢmw, see A. Dodson, “The Tombs of the Kings of the Thirteenth Dynasty in the Memphite Necropolis,” ZAS 114 (1987) 36–45, p. 40, note 7. See also T. Schneider, Ausländer in Ägypten I (1998) 156, V. 2 for a discussion of this name. 146 In a New Kingdom temple at Semna, the deified Senwosret III appears together with the Nubian god, Dedwen, see A. Oppenheim, Aspects (2008) 347. 147 Tell Sakka was under an Amorite cultural sphere. 148 Level IV, MB II (1900–1600 BC) revealed a royal palace, the walls of which were decorated with paintings that show Egyptian influence. See A. Taraqji, “Nouvelles découvertes sur les relations avec l’Egypte à tel Sakka et à Keswé, dans la region de Damas,” Bulletin de la Societé Française D’Egyptologie, (March 1999) 27–43, p. 37. 149 These paintings are Egyptianized, thus the use of Canaanite artistic self-­ depictions as a means of comparison against Egyptian representations of Canaanites is complicated. 150 Though the painting is fragmentary, and there may have been more patterns. 151 Beyond Babylon, Art, Trade and Diplomacy, 218, Fig. 72. 152 Pl. 14a. 153 Senwosretankh was High Priest of Ptah in Memphis. His mastabeh tomb was located around the royal enclosure of Senwosret I at Lisht, see D. Arnold, “Tomb of Senwosret-Ankh,” Middle Kingdom Tomb Architecture at Lisht (2008) 13–24, The figurines were probably thrown out from pits by plunderers, see W. C. Hayes, “The Egyptian and Persian Expeditions 1932–1933,” MMA Bulletin, 25 and fig. 32. See too, W. H. Hayes, The Scepter of Egypt I, New York (1990), rev. edn, 183. 154 Note the use of the color red for ink used to write the names of the enemies; the red colored hair of foreign enemies is discussed in Chapter 3 above. See also R. K. Ritner, The Mechanics of Ancient Egyptian Magical Practice, Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilization 54, Chicago (1993) 147, who notes the use of red clay pots or figurines, as well as red as the preferred color for ink in Execration Texts. See also, G. Posener, “Les Empreintes Magiques de Gizeh et les Mort Dangereux,” MDAIK 18 (1958) 252–70. See, too, G. Pinch, “Red things: the symbolism of colour in magic,” in W. V. Davies, ed., Colour and Painting in Ancient Egypt, London: The British Museum Press (2001) 182–5, p. 184.

Notes to pp. 148–149

243

155 W. H. Hayes, Scepter, 329 and Fig. 217. 156 These texts were studied by G. Posener, Figurines En Argile (unpublished). I am indebted to Dorothea Arnold for giving me access to the unpublished manuscript. See D. Redford, 89, note 103, who suggests the persons named in these texts may be fugitives. 157 Small crude figurines from the Sixth Dynasty of the Old Kingdom were found inscribed with a proper name sometimes preceded by an ethnic notation, J. Y. Koenig, “À propos des textes d‘envoûtement de Mirgissa,” Magia in Egitto, 301–12 and 301 for bibliography of Old Kingdom references. See also R. K. Ritner, Mechanics (1993) 137, n. 611 for further references. For a detailed discussion of the early Twelfth Dynasty Middle Kingdom texts found in situ at Mirgissa (in Nubia, and next to a fortress of the Middle Kingdom), see Y. Koenig, “Les Textes De’Envoutement de Mirgissa,” RdE 41 (1990) 101–25. 158 R. K. Ritner, Mechanics, 137. 159 Ibid., n. 611. This act might be connected to the ritual of “Breaking the Red Vases” (sd d sr.w) attested in Pyramid Texts, spell 244, R. K. Ritner, Mechanics, ¯¯ 144, whereby breaking the red vases was thought to inflict terror upon one’s enemies, Ritner, Mechanics. 146. For a discussion and references to this ritual, 144–7. 160 The major studies are K. Sethe, Die Achtung feindlicher Fürsten, Völker und Dinge auf Altägyptischen Tongefässcherben des Mittleren Reiches, APAW 5, Abhandlungen der Preussischen Akademie Der Wissenschaften, Berlin (1926) on the pottery fragments purchased in Thebes and now in Berlin. G. Posener published figurines excavated at Saqqara and now in Brussels, in Princes et pays d’Asie et de Nubie, Brussels (1940). The Berlin texts date from the reign of Senwosret III and (early) Amenemhet 1II, see D. B. Redford, Egypt, Canaan and Israel in Ancient Times, Princeton (1992) 88. (For English translations of some of the Berlin texts see Pritchard, ANET, 328–9). The Brussels figurines date one or two generations after the Berlin bowls, Redford, 88; so the texts date from the nineteenth to the eighteenth centuries BCE. For a lengthy discussion of the Execration Texts see T. L. Thompson, “The Early West Semites of Mesopotamia and the Patriarchal Period,” The Historicity of the Patriarchal Narratives, 67–143 (for the Execration Texts, 98–117; BZAW 133, Berlin; New York (1974). 161 Mentioned above, infra. 162 A. H. Rainey, “The World of Sinuhe,” Israel Oriental Studies 2 (1972) 382. 163 Not only at Byblos, but at other sites as well, see A. H. Rainey op. cit. 401–8 for a convenient graph of these towns and their rulers. 164 Ibid. 165 A. H. Rainey, Sinuhe, 75–6.

244

Notes to pp. 149–153

166 See M. Lichtheim, AEL 225–6. 167 Though the text was not actually found at Lisht, Sinuhe would have began his career at Itj-­tawy, the ancient Egyptian capital during the Twelfth Dynasty. 168 The terms used for Asiatics are Styw and nmἰw-­š῾ see infra. 169 MMA 25.6 (Greywacke). For the nine Bows see E. Uphill (1965–66) and D. Valbellc, (1990). 170 D. Arnold, F. Arnold, and Susan Allen, “Canaanite Imports at Lisht, the Middle Kingdom Capital of Egypt,” Ägypten und Levante V (1995) 13–32, 30. 171 R. Stadelmann, Syrisch-­palästinensische Gottheiten in Ägypten, Probleme der Ägyptologie 5. See too, J. Gwyn Griffiths, JEA 229–30 review of Stadelmann. 172 A cylinder seal at Tell el-Dab’a shows that “Baal Zaphon, the Northern Syrian weathergod, was established in Egypt as early as the first half of the Eighteenth Century B.C.,” see Bietak, Avaris, 29. The Egyptian site of Kahun has yielded some tantalizing speculation as to the religious practices of the Asiatic ꜤꜢmw at the pyramid town during the Middle Kingdom. 173 Major studies include O. Negbi, Canaanite Gods in Metal, Tel Aviv (1976); H. Seeden, The Standing Armed Figurines in the Levant, Prähistorische Bronzefunde, Abteilung I. Band I, Munich (1980); L. Badre, “Les figurines anthropomorphes en terre cuite à l’âge du Bronze en Syrie”; A. Spycket, La statuaire du Proche-Orient ancien, Leiden (1981). For a lengthy discussion, see also P. R. S Moorey, “Problems in the Study of the Anthropomorphic Metal Statuary from Syro-Palestine Before 330 B.C.,” Levant 16 (1984) 67–90. See also, D. P. Hansen, “A Bronze in the Semitic Museum of Harvard University,” BASOR 146 (1957) 13–19. 174 This suggestion was put forth by Dorothea Arnold in a lecture, 9/94. I am grateful to Dr. Arnold for permitting me to examine the figurine and discuss it here. It is possible, however, that the figure could represent a male deity, but the lack of genitalia makes the identification complicated. 175 H. E. Winlock, “The Egyptian Expedition (1921–22),” MMA Bulletin, Supplement, Dec. (1922) 13, Fig 7. 176 Idem. 177 The Egyptian Expedition 1921–22, 13. Given the fact that the figurine comes from a disturbed context, the dating is unclear. 178 The piece which formed the bulge no longer exists, but can be seen in the original excavation photo in the text (Pl. 19a). 179 Radiographed by Deborah Schorsch, The Sherman Fairchild Center for Objects Conservation, The Metropolitan Museum of Art, and examined visually under magnification. Interdepartmental Memorandum dated May 11, 2006. I would like to thank Christine Lilyquist for her assistance, and thoughts about this object.

Notes to pp. 153–159

245

180 H. A. Liebowitz, “The Impact of the Art of Egypt on the Art of Syria and Palestine,” in Immortal Egypt, subtitled “Invited Lectures on the Middle East at the University of Texas at Austin,” ed., D. Schmandt-Besserat. 181 D. P. Hansen, “Some Remarks on the Chronology and Style of Objects from Byblos,” AJA 73 (1969) 284. 182 Idem. 183 Badre, cited in P. R. S. Moorey “Problems in the Study of the Anthropomorphic Metal Statuary from Syro-Palestine Before 330 B.C.,” Levant XVI (1984) 77. 184 With an image of a smiting lion-­demon, 22.1.1657, Aruz, 125, Fig. 2b, drawing of 22.1.1657 (drawing by Barry Girsh). 185 J. Aruz, “The Sealings of the Middle Bronze Age: A Preliminary Look at Lisht in Egypt,” in E. Perna, ed., Administrative Documents in the Aegean and their Near Eastern Counterparts (2000) 125–40, p. 125; J. Aruz, “Siegel als Zeugnisse des kulturellen Austausches,” in Mit Sieben Siegeln versehen, 138–43. 186 The seal is of North Syrian/Levantine style with Anatolian elements, ibid., p. 140. 187 Early Middle Kingdom; for a study of this ware, see T. Bagh, Tell el-Dab’a XXIII, Levantine Painted Ware from Egypt and the Levant, ÖAW (2013). 188 By Mace in 1920, and Arnold in 1991, See F. Arnold, “Settlement Remains.” 189 Shaft tomb 879; J. Bourriau, “The Dolphin Vase from Lisht,” Studies, Vol. II (1996) 101–16, p. 110. 190 F. Arnold, “Settlement Remains at Lisht North,” House and Palace in Ancient Egypt, ÖAW, Band XIV (pp. 13–20), see especially p. 15, note 18 with references. 191 W. S. Blackman, The Fellahin of Ancient Egypt, (1927) 101. I thank Manfred Bietak for this reference. 192 M. Bietak and M. Schwarz, “Nag’a el-Sheima, eine befestigtechristliche Festung und andere christliche Denkmäler,” in Sayala-Nubien,Teil I, die österreichischen Grabungen (1965–1969) Berichte des Österreichischen Nationalkomitees der UNESCO-Aktion für die Rettung der Nubischen Altertümer VIII, Denkschriften der Philosophisch-­historischenKlasse der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Bd. 184, Vienna (1986). In this case the number of such burials was very small compared to the expected burials which should amount to 40–50 percent of all the burials together. M. Bietak, personal communication. 193 Metropolitan Museum of Art 22.1.95. For discussions about this unique import, see, J. Bourriau, “The Dolphin Vase from Lisht,” Studies in Honor of William Kelly Simpson, . . . D. Arnold, F. Arnold, S. Allen, “Canaanite Imports at Lisht,” EAL V, (1994), P. E. McGovern, J. Bourriau, G. Harbottle, “The Archaeological Origin and Significance of the Dolphin Vase as Determined by Neutron Activation Analysis,” BASOR 296 (1994). S. Allen, “Vessel with Dolphins and Waterbirds,” in

246

Notes to pp. 159–160

J. Aruz, K. Benzel and J. M. Evans, eds., Beyond Babylon, Art, Trade and Diplomacy in the Second Millennium B.C. (2008) 62–3. 194 See D. Arnold, “Canaanite Imports at Lisht,” 108, note 6; A large, rare, Tell Yahudiyeh jar (of a different form) was discovered in a snail-house type of building at Tell el-Dab’a. M. Bietak has suggested that at Tell el-Dab’a, it may have been used as a ritual object. 195 W. M. F. Petrie. lllahun, Kahun and Gurob 1889–90. London (1891) 9–15. 196 A. R. David, “Religious Practices in a Pyramid Workmen’s Town of the Twelfth Dynasty,” BACE 2 (1991) 33–40. For a recent overview of Asiatics at Lahun, see P. Mate, “Foreign Groups at Lahun During the Late Middle Kingdom,” From Illahun to Djeme, A. Gulyás, A. Hasznos and E. Bechtold, eds., Festschrift Dedicated to Ulrich Luft on the Occasion of His 70th Birthday, London, BAR International Series (2011) 211–26. 197 This type of household religion can also be seen at the New Kingdom workmen’s villages at Tell el-Amarna and Deir el-Medineh. References to the old gods by the Egyptian people were found at Amarna show that the masses were untouched by Akhenaten’s religious reforms (CAH, Vol II, Part IIA, 89). Votive stelae found at the the workmen’s village at Deir el-Medineh in Western Thebes reveal the religious attitudes of the Egyptian people. These stelae show the development of a direct personal relationship between persons of the secular community and their individual gods. See Egypt’s Golden Age: The Art of Living in the New Kingdom 1558–1085 B.C., Museum of Fine Arts Boston (1982). For a discussion of individuals’ expressions of need for help in daily living at Deir el-Medineh, see F. Friedman, “Aspects of Domestic Life and Religion” in L. Lesko, ed., Pharaoh’s Workers, Ithaca; London (1994) 95–117. 198 See above, infra for discussion of the house burial at Lisht. M. Bietak, the excavator, notes that house burial is an old urban tradition in the ancient Near East and that this feature is an indication of the Near Eastern urban background of the majority of the population at Tell el-Dab’a, M. Bietak, Avaris. He states that Middle Bronze Age house burials were also found at important sites in the Levant, especially at Megiddo; see also Dever, “The Beginning of the Middle Bronze Age in Syria Palestine,” Magnalia Dei: Essays in the History and Religion of Israel, the G. E. Wright Festschrift, eds., F. M. Cross, Jr., W. Lemke and P. D. Miller, Garden City (1976) 3–38, for this type of grave in both Syria and Palestine. 199 Other important town sites which have been excavated are the New Kingdom workmen’s villages at Tell el-Amarna, and Deir el-Medina. Burials under pavements of private houses known from the ancient Near East are found in ordinary dwelling houses of the Larsa period in Mesopotamia, contemporaneous

Notes to pp. 160–161

247

to the Egyptian Middle Kingdom. These house burials are represented at contemporary levels at sites in the Diyala, and at Ur in southern Mesopotamia, see S. Lloyd, The Archaeology of Mesopotamia (1978) 162–3; L. Woolley and M. Mallowan, Ur Excavations 7, The Old Babylonian Period. Publications of the Joint Expedition of the British Museum and of the Museum of the University of Pennsylvania to Mesopotamia, London, Chapter 2, 33ff. 200 The partially excavated Middle Kingdom site of Wah-­sut at South Abydos is a smaller scale town mirroring the one at the site of Lahun, see J. Wegner, “The Town of Wah-Sut at South Abydos: 1999 Excavations,” MDAIK 57 (2001). See too infra, excavations at the settlement of Lisht. 201 For discussions of urbanism and town sites in ancient Egypt, see Egyptology and the Social Sciences, ed., Kent Weeks (1979); M. Bietak, “Urban Archaeology and the ‘Town Problem’ in Ancient Egypt,” 95–144; B. J. Kemp, “Temple and Town in Ancient Egypt,” Man, Settlement and Urbanism, ed., Peter Ucko et al. (1972) 657–79; D. O’Connor, “Cities and Towns,” in Egypt’s Golden Age: The Art of Living in the New Kingdom 1558–1085 B.C. (1982). It is unfortunate that so few towns of this type exist in the archaeological record. The data gleaned from such town sites yields information that is not available elsewhere. 202 M. D. Adams, “Community and Societal Organization in early Historic Egypt,” NARCE 158/59, (1992) 6 which dates to the First Intermediate Period. 203 See infra. 204 A. R. David, The Pyramid Builders. 205 David, ibid., 135, suggests that the “torque wearers may have been an ethnic group who came from elsewhere and settled at Byblos and Ras Shamra on the coast of Palestine at the beginning of the Middle Bronze Age. Torques were thereafter produced locally at Byblos.” 206 Idem. 207 Elsewhere in Egypt, foreign technologies in the art of jewelry-­making may be evident. For instance, granular jewelry found at the site of Dahshur suggests the presence of foreign craftsmen in Egypt. The technique of granulation, whereby hundreds of tiny gold or, less often, silver granules were attached to the surface of precious metalwork to form patterns makes its earliest appearance in Egypt in the jewelry of Khnumet at Dahshur and dates to the 12th Dynasty. This technique was known in Mesopotamia more than a half a millennium earlier than it appeared in Egypt. The earliest examples of granulation known from the ancient world are two tiny examples thought to be from the Royal Cemetery at Ur, ED IIIA, ca. 2550–2500 BCE, C. Lilyquist, “Granulation and Glass,” BASOR 290–1 (1993) 33; C. Aldred, Jewels of the Pharaohs, New York, London (1971) 187, points out that “the star-­shaped pendant is a distinctly Syrian motif.

248

Notes to pp. 161–163

Khnumet’s suite of gold jewelry has a distinctly un-Egyptian appearance in its design and techniques.” C. Lilyquist thinks that the style, techniques and manufacture of the Dahshur jewelry point to Crete-Anatolia, “Granulation and Glass,” BASOR 290/291 (1993) 37. 208 The mirror was dated to the Twelfth Dynasty by C. Lilyquist, Ancient Egyptian Mirrors, From the Earliest Times Through the Middle Kingdom, Münchner Ägyptologische Studien 27, Munich; Berlin (1979) 35, n. 396, based on the copper torque. But J. Bourriau, Pharaohs and Mortals, 160–61, points out the fact that the town existed for about 200 years, and that the sequence of building was not recorded by Petrie who excavated the site. He treated each room in the houses of Kahun as a single archaeological unit. Thus, since the objects do not come from a closed deposit, the torque may or may not be relevant to the date of the mirror. 209 Hayes, CAH (Sehetepibre II) Yakin-­ilum of Byblos was the father of a king, Yantin-‘Ammu of Byblos. MMA 26.7.21 “Byblos” was restored by Howard Carter. 210 I. Beit-Arieh “Serabit El-Khadim: New Metallurgical and Chronological Aspects,” Levant, Vol. XVII (1985) 103: “The discovery of mirror molds as an everyday utensil in Mine L seems unusual in an assemblage that consists mostly of tools. At the same time, one cannot separate the Egyptian mining activity in the area from the temple dedicated to Hathor, which was situated in the mining area. There is no doubt that production of mirrors by the metal smiths, as offerings in the temple was one of the facets of the worship of Hathor. The mirrors could have served as grave offerings.” 211 Perhaps this could explain the appearance of a temple dedicated to Sopdu at Kahun. For studies on the God Sopdu, see “Der Gott Sopdu, der Herr der Fremdländer,” by Inke W. Schumacher, Review by: Hans Goedicke, JNES Vol. 53, No. 1(Jan., 1994), pp. 59–61. 212 K. A. Kitchen, Catalogue of the Egyptian Collection in the National Museum, Rio de Janeiro (1990) Stela of Karu CAA I, Text, II, Plates, Stela 21, PL. 45. For the main study of the offering chapels at Abydos, see W. K. Simpson, The Terrace of the Great Gods at Abydos: the Offering Chapels of Dynasties 12 and 13 (1974); see also M. Lichtheim, Ancient Egyptian Biographies Chiefly of the Middle Kingdom, (1988); “Review of ANOC,” O. Berlev, BiOr 33 (1976), 24–326; R. J. Leprohon, “The Personnel of the Middle Kingdom Funerary Stelae,” JARCE 15 (1978). 213 O. Berlev, “Review of ANOC,” BiOr. 33 (1976). 214 Do. Arnold, “Foreign and Female,” Offerings to a Discerning Eye: An Egyptological Medley in Honor of Jack A. Josephson, ed. Sue D’Auria, Brill (2010) 24. 215 Ibid., 23.

Notes to pp. 163–170

249

216 Toby Wilkinson, Egypt and Mesopotamia, The Egyptian World, Routledge, (2007), 449–58, for a discussion of three phases of contact between the two civilizations. 217 Ibid., 29. 218 Do. Arnold, “Foreign and Female,” 17, p. 24 which includes a description and references. For a full description of the statue, see too, J. Bourriau, Pharaohs and Mortals, “An Asiatic Woman and Her Child,” 108–9, Pl. 97; The long garment seen on the woman in Pls. 25a–25b is similar to those worn by three foreign women dressed in long garments with skirts that widen at the bottom in a relief fragment from Lisht, see, H. Goedicke, Re-­used Blocks from the Pyramid of Amenemhet I at Lisht, Metropolitan Museum of Art Egyptian Expedition, Vol. XX (1971) 146–7 (Record Number L20–21:241). 219 Do. Arnold, “Foreign and Female,” 20. 220 P. Saretta, “Of Lyres, Lions, Light and Everything New Under the Sun, An Amarna Relief in The Metropolitan Museum of Art,” BES 19, 2010 (forthcoming). 221 Detail from the North Wall of Ukhotep III’s tomb chamber. Metropolitan Museum of Art archival photograph. 222 1974.347.2. Note that the mold for this plaque could have been made earlier. 223 For the dating of Mesopotamian terracotta plaques, see the different opinions of R. Opificius, Das altbabylonische Terrakottarelief: Untersuchungen zur Assyriologie und vorderasiatischen Archäologie 2, Berlin: DeGruyter (1961), and M.T. Barrelet, Figurines et reliefs en terre cuite de la Mesopotamie antique, vol. 1: potiers, termes de métier, procedes de fabrication et production, Paris, Geuthner (1968). 224 This topic is beyond the scope of this study. 225 They equate one of the other hairstyles in the pictorial evidence with the term Kezertu, but it seems logical that the term can also include variations of “curled” coiffures. 226 Finkelstein as cited by N. Yoffee, “The Economics of Ritual in Old Babylonian Kish,” JESHO 41 (1998) 312–43, p. 318. 227 Rosettes are often depicted surrounding the females in the plaques. The rosette is a symbol of the goddess Ishtar. 228 The ruling families of Babylon and Uruk were of the same Amorite lineage. 229 Yoffee, ibid; Could these women have had several roles: that of ritual attendant, entertainer, hairdresser or even midwives? Some scholars have suggested that they are prostitutes. 230 A similar phenomenon occurs in the Eleventh Dynasty tomb of Nefru, where women attendants appear carrying large storage jars, a task usually performed by men. The women appear with the Menit, an instrument associated with Hathor; Queen Nefru was a priestess of this goddess, Arnold, “Foreign and Female,” 31.

250

Notes to pp. 170–177

231 Papyrus UC 32191, www.digitalegypt.ucl.ac.uk/lahun/festivallistmk.html 232 The practice of including foreigners in ritual activities, continued into the New Kingdom as temple relief carvings at Tell el-Amarna, show Asiatic musicians actively participating in a ceremony to the Egyptian deity, see P. Saretta, “Of Lyres.” 233 Geraldine Pinch, Magic in Ancient Egypt, 56, University of Texas Press, (2010). 234 In the Ugaritic “Poem” of Aqhat: The King Danel “. . . summons the swallow-­like daughters – the Kotharot.” He feasts them for seven days so that he can have a child. 235 In Akkadian, another group of goddesses, the Šassūru (from the Old Babylonian period on, Sumerian SA. TUR) could mean womb or birth goddesses. Šassūru is represented by an image of the uterus of a cow. A cattle pen for birthing. Like Hathor, the Šassūru are associated with a cow. 236 Strikingly, the name of one of the Seven Hathors is “Your name flourishes through skill.” G. Hart, A Dictionary of Egyptian Gods and Goddesses, Routledge (1998) 37. 237 In the Westcar Papyrus, we encounter goddesses with a similar function; they help with childbirth, and prophesize the fate of the newborn. See, M. Lichtheim, AEL, Three Tales of Wonder, “The Birth of the Royal Children,” 220–2. 238 Detlef Franke, The Middle Kingdom Stelae Publication Project, 7–8. 239 For a full description and commentary on the stela, see, H. G. Fischer, “A Shrine and Statue of the Thirteenth Dynasty,” 123–30, Varia Nova, Egyptian Studies III, The Metropolitan Museum of Art, NY (1996). 240 Fischer, “A Shrine and Statue of the Thirteenth Dynasty,” 134, Plate 21. 241 Admittedly, the hairstyle of the figure labeled ꜤꜢmt on the stela of Reniseneb, though swept upward is not as high or cone-­like as some of the other examples given above. Fischer understood it as being one and the same coiffure and they are being treated here in that way; however, this interpretation is still an open question. 242 Hodjash and Berlev, Egyptian Reliefs, no. 40, 86–9. Berlev has commented elsewhere that this style with a headcovering was worn by those involved in food preparation, and in depictions of them presenting food. Social Relations in Middle Kingdom Egypt (Russian), Moscow (1978) 298–9. I thank Stephen Quirke for this reference. 243 Lange and Shäfer, op. cit., pl. 41. 244 Dancers wearing a disk-­weighted tress, holding mirrors and clappers, appear in the Old Kingdom pyramid of King Teti. This so-­called “mirror dance” is connected to the goddess Hathor, a hymn to whom appears above the dancers. See Lesley Kinney, Dance, Dancers and the Performance Cohort in the Old

Notes to pp. 178–179

251

Kingdom, BAR International Series 1809 (2008) 164, Fig. 10.1. By holding objects directly associated with the goddess, they could assume her form, Kinney, pp. 38 and 39; the New Kingdom female figure in the ostracon is depicted offering a mirror and kohl tube, and is plausibly associated with Hathor as well, though the Old Kingdom hairstyles are different. 245 Florence D. Friedman, “Aspects of Domestic Life and Religion,” in Leonard H. Lesko, ed., Pharaoh’s Workers, 106, Fig. 6. The image is from a restored wall painting of a birth arbor, after an illustration by Emma Brunner-Traut in Mitteilungen des Instituts fur Orientforschung 3 (1955) 15, Fig. 5; however, see Louvre ostracon (fig. 4.29) for a similar representation of female “servants” offering a kohl holder and mirror. 246 ©Musée du Louvre, Paris, E 2533. 247 Fischer, Women, p. 27. Perhaps one could compare the Biblical text of Exodus 1:15 where there are midwives in Egypt who are Hebrew women, or who tend to Hebrew women – but not necessarily exclusively. Note that the King knew these midwives – rhwt nsw.t? (The names of the two midwives, Pu’ah whose name is ˘ probably Canaanite, cf. Ugaritic pgt “maiden, young woman,” while Shiprah may be Aramaic, “nice, fine.”) Note that Sprh is also the name of one of the ꜤꜢmt weavers in the Brooklyn Papyrus mentioned earlier infra. 248 L. Delvaux has recently suggested that this head may represent the daughter from a statue of a family group, thus an explanation as to why a non-­royal woman would have a statue executed in a fine indurated limestone. Fl. Morfoisse & G. Andreu-Lanoë, Eds., Sésostris III. Pharaon de légende, Lille, Musée des Beaux-Arts (2014) 182. 249 MMA 18.2.2. It is unclear how the statue reached Turkey, or if it was sent there in antiquity; it is possible that the statue was brought to Adana in modern times. 250 CDK182 (Charles D. Kelekian) Collection of Nanette Kelekian. I am indebted to Nanette Kelekian for her generosity and graciousness in allowing me to examine this object and for permitting me to use the images here. 251 UC 16670, excavated by Petrie, and dated to the New Kingdom. See catalogue entry 64 by P. Lacovara, Excavating Egypt, 83, who notes that the peg on the bottom suggests it was attached to another object. Petrie Museum, University College London; Drawing, William Matthew Flinders Petrie, Kahun, Gurob and Hawara, London (1890) 41, pl. XVIII, 38. 252 A. Dorn, Workers’ Huts in the Valley of the Kings. (Arbeiter hutten) Text and Catalog volume 2011. I thank Andreas Dorn for his willingness to share his own personal photo of the image with me. 253 Dancing with jars occurs in present-­day Egypt; Raqs al-Ballas is a character dance; if there is any connection with an ancient religious ritual, its meaning is

252

Notes to pp. 180–182

completely lost. A relief carving on a ceremonial limestone mace fragment of Dynasty 1 from Hierakonpolis shows a male figure dancing and holding a lugged vessel and wearing a similar type of hairstyle! This appears to be part of a scene which included dancing offering bearers. See Teasley-Trope, Quirke, Lacovara, Excavating Egypt (2005) 43, 52ff. 254 A. M. Blackman, “The Story of Sinuhe and other Egyptian Texts”, JEA 22 (1936). 41; G. Posener, “La legende de la tresse d’Hathor”, Egyptological Studies in Honor of Richard Parker (1986) 11–117; E. Staehelin, “Zur Hathorsymbolik in der aegyptischen Kleinkunst,” ZÄS 105 (1978) 76–84. Hathor was a goddess of love, dance, music and joy, and in Asia, it is said that she traveled in the company of musically talented monkeys and grotesque dwarves; craftsmen created many themes for objects in her honor; Arielle P. Kozloff and Betsy M. Bryan with Lawrence M. Berman and an essay by Elisabeth Delange, Egypt’s Dazzling Sun, The Cleveland Museum of Art in cooperation with Indiana University Press (1992) 341; A “side lock” pendant now attached to a girdle in the British Museum, EA 3077 most likely represents the braided tress of Hathor, see too, C. Andrews, Amulets of Ancient Egypt (1994) Pl. 69. The Book of the Dead papyrus of Nebseni evokes a similar image: “Your head, my lord, is as deep, sailing down as the braid of the Syrian, the woman.” S. Quirke, Going Out in Daylight – prt m hrw, The Ancient Egyptian Book of the Dead, translations, sources, meaning, GHP Egyptology 20, 2013, 428. . . . a motif of the Syrian woman might be taken as evidence that the combination reflects the fuller Egyptian encounter with West Asia from East Mediterranean trade and mid 18th dynasty military occupation of the Levant, p. 428. 255 There are only a few parallels in Egyptian sculpture where the features are treated in such a manner. A good likeness for the face of the torso, with its broad face and long thin mouth, is that of the gray basalt seated statue of Mentuhotep from Karnak and now in the Egyptian Museum (JE 43269). He is the father of King Sobekhotep III. Note that the list of Asiatic weavers in the papyrus mentioned earlier in this study, dates from the time of Sebekhotep III. For the dating of the statue of Mentuhotep, see J. R. Romano, “A Statuette of a Royal Mother in The Brooklyn Museum,” MDAIK 48 (1991) 131–41, 137. 256 An ancient magical spell prescribes that a dwarf figure should be placed on the body of a woman giving birth, see, J. F. Borghouts, The Magical Texts of Papyrus, Leiden I 348,12:2–6, 1st edn, Leiden: Brill (1971). 257 The realism of the period is exemplified by this remarkable figure in the intense contorted grimace in the facial expression; Ivory Statuette of a Dancing Pygmy from the Burial of Hepy, MMA 34.1.130, BMMA, The Egyptian Expedition

Notes to pp. 182–185

253

1933–34, November 1934, pp. 36, 37, Figs. 31, 32, 33. For a recent discussion on the Dancing Pygmies from the Burial of Hepy, see Nicholas Reeves, “A Rare Mechanical Figure from Ancient Egypt” (in press), Metropolitan Museum Journal 50 (2015). 258 Inscriptions II, 206, Fig. 17, bottom of southeast face of stela 405. 259 See above. 260 According to the description given in Inscriptions II, 206. 261 Inscriptions II, 114 and Inscriptions I, PL. XXXVII; For a new interpretation of this scene, and its correlation with archaeological data, see O. Goldwasser, “Out of the Mists of the Alphabet – Redrawing the ‘Brother of the Ruler of Retenu,’ ” Ägypten und Levante 22–3 (2013) 353–74. 262 Gardiner Grammar (Sign-­list AI). 263 Inscriptions II, 206. 264 J. Černý, “Semites in Egyptian Mining Expeditions to the Sinai,” Archiv Orientalni 7 (1935) 384–9. In the case of šk3m, he posits MꜢ(?)kꜢm, after Sethe, which occurs in “Die Achtungs . . .” as the name of the ruler of a place called Inhia. However, Černý cautions that the unclear writing of the first radical there does not allow for a definitive decision as to whether this sign should be read as an s z or an m, the hieratic script being defective. 265 W. F. Edgerton “Egyptian Phonetic Writing, From Its Invention to the Close of the Nineteenth Dynasty,” JAOS 60 (1940) 473–506. 266 For example, He of Nhb, (El Kab), Urkunden IV. 32ff. ˘ 267 W. F. Albright, “The Egyptian Empire in Asia in the 21st Century B.C.,” JPOS 8 (1928) 233–53; the city of Shechem derives its name from Semitic Ugaritic Takm. ¯ 268 W. Pitard, Ancient Damascus, 10. 269 “It follows that there was a long a in ’Āpum (the um is the nominative ending with the old mimation) and that this a was obscured to a between the eighteenth and fifteenth centuries, along with all other normal cases of accented long a in ‘South Canaanite.’ ” 270 The figure designated as Kekbi mentioned above who is represented following the donkey in Sinai 112 may in fact have an attested Amorite name from the region of Apim-Damascus. Proposed here is Amorite kbkb “star,” Akkadian kakkabu, H. B. Huffmon, Amorite Personal Names in the Mari Texts, 220; kabkabum. I. Gelb, Computer-Aided Analysis of Amorite, 22; Ugaritic kbkb; Hebrew bkwk k(w)kb, also noted by D. Fowler, Theophoric Personal Names in Ancient Hebrew (1988) 303. The kabkab element is attested in the Amorite name of Ahu-­kabkabu, the prince of northern Apum mentioned in the Egyptian ˘ Execration Texts, G. Posener, Princes et pays d’Asie et de Nubie (1940) E 34, 81.

254

Notes to pp. 185–186

Note, however, that Albright, (1941: 35 n. 18, Pitard, 36) read the name as ’hwkbkb, pointing out that the hieratic signs for b and 3 are often ˘ indistinguishable. Posener read the name of the prince in E34 as ’h wk3k3, but ˘ noted the possibility that it could be read ’h wkbkb. The kbkb element also occurs ˘ in the name ilu kabkabi at Ebla. Usually, Egyptian k corresponds to West Semitic q (Gardiner Gr. 27). Thus, the Egyptian spelling of k.k.bi with k. rather than k may reflect an orthographic anomaly or differences in pronunciation of the Semitic term kbkb/kkb, in which the phonemes q and k are free variants, see E. E. Knudsen “Cases of Free Variants in the Akkadian q Phoneme,” JCS XV (1961). Thus, the usual confusions that one finds in the representation of Semitic phonemes in Egyptian are here exacerbated by the ambivalent treatment of k-­q-g in Semitic writing of this period. I. J. Gelb “Mari and the Kish Civilization,” 121–202, states that the sign inventory of the administrative texts of Mari show “standard syllabic values that do not indicate the distinction between voiced, voiceless, and emphatic phonemes, such as GA with the values of ga, ka, and qa. Inherited from Old Akkadian, they are used at post-Ur III Mari, and also in Old Assyrian,” 172. Gelb, Glossary of Old Akkadian (1957) indicates a variant of K K B, 142, in a geographical name KUR Ga-­ga-ba-­an KI, 14 which shows that k can interchange with g; For this geographical term (and bibliography) mentioned in texts from Ebla see M. Bonechi, I Nomi Geographici dei testi di Ebla, Repertoire Geographique des Textes Cuneiformes XII/1, Beihefte Zum Tübinger Atlas Des Vorderen Orients Reihe B Nr. 7. Wiesbaden (1993) 142. J. E. Hoch maintains that Egyptian k/g/q correspondences with Semitic phonemes are difficult, Semitic Words in Egyptian Texts of the New Kingdom and Third Intermediate Period (1994) 428. Note that the name or epithet kakkabum appears as part of the Amorite milieu of the Mari letters where it is attested. 271 ARMT XVII/15 W. Pitard, Ancient Damascus, 47, notes, however, that there were two areas in Syria known as ’Āpum and that the ’Āpum mentioned in the Mari texts may not refer to the Damascene ’Āpum, but rather to a land located somewhere along the Habur River Valley in northern Syria. 272 Posener, Princes, 81. 273 B. Sass, Studia Alphabetica, Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis 102 (1991) 24. 274 In the Kahun Papyri and Pap. Lythgoe cited above. 275 See Edel. 276 Asses are mentioned frequently in the inscriptions of Sinai. This would also fit in with ’A ¯ pum, Damascus being a caravan route (ša imērušu, in later Neo-Assyrian texts). Although, perhaps a bit far-­fetched, Pitard proposes that the name “Land

Notes to pp. 187–191

255

of the Ass” could have referred to Damascene commercial importance in the sense of “The land filled with caravans of asses.” See the various discussions in Pitard, Ancient Damascus, 15. 277 H. mwr is the Hebrew form of the Akkadian imēru (donkey) Genesis 32:2; Joshua 24:32; Judges 9:28; see also I. Ziffer, At that time Canaanites were in the Land, 64. 278 ARM 9.242.12, and ARM 9.247.2, cf. Huffmon, 280 and note 3 where he cites Kupper Nomades 194–5. See also HhXIII 18 for udu-­martu=im-­me-ri, “sheep of the Amorites,” CAD 94 (c). 279 S. Dunham, “Metal animal headed cups at Mari,” To the Euphrates and Beyond, Archaeological Studies in Honour of Maurits N. van Loon; eds., O.M.C. Haex, H. H. Curvers and P.M.M.G. Akkermans (1989) 213–20. For a possible survival of this Amorite artistic tradition, cf. the following Ugaritic phrase: “gorgeous bowls shaped like small beasts like those of Amurru,” KTU 1. 280 Yas ub-Ašar, see Gelb 227, Ia-­su-ub-Dingir, Asar, 14. Yar’ip-Abba, Gelb, 13; ˘ Huffmon, 260 and 46. Rimsi-­ili, Gelb, 633. Idin-dIGI.KUR, Gelb, 590. Ana’is 281 XXV:18. 282 XXII:251. 283 XXV: 730. 284 H. Limet, Textes Administrafs Relatifs Aux Metaux, Paris, (1986), ARMT XXV:18, Dunham, 214, w (šūbultum, mu-­tu, terditum, amhur). ˘ 285 XXII:253; 13. 286 ARMT 10: 109, cf. J. M. Sasson, “Artisans . . . Artists: Documentary Perspectives from Mari,” Investigating Artistic Environments in the Ancient Near East, ed., A. C. Gunter, Washington, D.C. (1990) 24. 287 kutimmu (ARMT 10 109: 11), a gold- or silversmith. This term is attested from OB on, CAD K, 608. 288 Huffmon, Names, 174; Bahlatum is an Amorite feminine personal name derived ˘ from the root b‘l. 289 Published by D. Charpin (supra n. 1), 42–4. Also A. K. Grayson, Assyrian Rulers, 5; cf. J. M. Sasson, 22 and n. 2. 290 I. J. Gelb, A Computer-Aided Analysis of Amorite, 21, Jatūr-Mēr or Jitir-Mer (imp., to return – Twr, p. 34). Mēr or Mirūm is a deity name. 291 ARMT XIII; 16, 10; cf. J. M. Sasson, 26; see too Y. M. Al-Khalesi, The Court of the Palms: A Functional Interpretation of the Mari Palace, Bibliotheca Mesopotamica 8, Malibu (1978) 7.

256

Notes to pp. 191–193

5  Conclusion and Prospects for Further Study   1 D. O’Connor, “The Nature of Tjemhu (Libyan) Society in the Later New Kingdom,” in A. Leahy, ed., Libya and Egypt c. 1300–750 B.C, SOAS Centre of Near and Middle Eastern Studies and Society for Libyan Studies, London: (1990) 66–89.   2 D. O’Connor, “The Locations of Yam and Kush and Their Historical Significance,” JARCE 23 (1986) 27–50; S. T. Smith, Wretched Kush: Ethnic Identities and Boundaries in Egypt’s Nubian Empire, Routledge, London (2003); S. T. Smith, “Ethnicity and Culture,” in T. Wilkinson, ed., The Egyptian World, London (2009) 218–41; S. T. Smith, “Revenge of the Kushites: Assimilation and Resistance in Egypt’s New Kingdom Empire and Nubian Ascendancy over Egypt,” in G. E. Areshian, ed., Empires and Diversity: On the Crossroads of Archaeology, Anthropology, and History, Cotsen Institute of Archaeology, UCLA (2013) 54–107.   3 C. Posener, “Les Asiatiques en Egypte Sous Les XIIe Et XIIIe Dynasties,” Syria 34 (1957) 145, names such as Ameny ꜤꜢmw (for example), or Khendjer 163.   4 For example, Khendjer and Ameny ꜤꜢmw. The latter is known from his pyramid at Dahshur, see V. Maragioglio and C. Rinaldi, “Note sulla piramide di Ameny ‘Aamu” Or. 37, fasc. 3 (1968) 325–38. D. Arnold and R. Stadelmann, “Dahschur,” MDAIK 31 (1975) 174; A. Dodson, ZÄS 113 (1987) 36–45; N. Swelim and A. Dodson: “On the Pyramid of Ameny-Qemau and its Canopic Equipment,” MDAIK (1998) 319–34. Note, however, remarks by S. Quirke, “Royal Power in the 13th Dynasty,” Middle Kingdom Studies, S. Quirke, ed. (1991) 123, who reads the name of this king a Qm3w (Qemau) rather than Aamu. See also J. Van Seters, “A Date for The Admonitions In the Second Intermediate Period,” JEA 50 (1964) 21, 129. I thank Dieter Arnold for his helpful comments, references and personal photograph of this pyramid. As noted, not all scholars read the name of this king in the same way. For a summary of the controversy, see T. Schneider, Aüslander, 7–14.   5 Possibly mixed with Hurrians, see Helck, Die Beziehungen, 103.   6 See below for some of these stelae. For a comprehensive study of the Abydos stelae see W. K. Simpson, The Terrace of the Great Gods at Abydos (1974). For an exhaustive catalogue of the stelae which mention ꜤꜢm or ꜤꜢmt, see T. Schneider, Aüslander in Agypten, Vol. 2.   7 Tomb 246, PI. LXXV, I. Also at Harageh, a hieratic inscription with the name ἰm ‘abim. seems to be a personal name and a foreign one (Semitic?). It is written in alphabetic signs and not in the syllabic writing. Box coffin, Tomb 173, R. Engelbach, Harageh; British School of Archaeology in Egypt and Egyptian Research Account Twentieth Year, 1914, London (1923). Pis. LXXIV, LXXVII, 25.

Notes to pp. 193–194

257

  8 Excavated by the Archaeological Institute of Austria; see above.   9 M. Bietak, Avaris, 10. 10 T. Schneider, Ausländer, Vol. 2, 335. 11 D. B. Redford, The Akhenaten Temple Project, Vol. 2, Toronto (1988). 12 W. C. Hayes, Glazed Tiles From a Palace of Ramesses II at Kantir, Papers, No. 3, The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York (1937). 13 Recent excavations at Abydos, however, show changes in the appearance of foreigners as early as the reign of Ahmose as a foreunner to the later New Kingdom appearances, see S. Harvey (1994). 14 These popular costumes need not be the only garments worn for it is reasonable to assume that native garb did not completely disappear. 15 E. Paltiel, “Ethnicity and State in the Kingdom of Ugarit,” Abr-Nahrain, 19 (1980–81) 43. 16 MMA Field No. 27057.4, potsherd. W. C. Hayes, “A Selection of Tuthmoside Ostraca From Deir El-Bahri,” JEA 46 (1960) 41, 14, verso. 17 W. C. Hayes, “A Selection of Tuthmoside Ostraca From Deir El-Bahri,” JEA 46 (1960) 42. 18 See above. 19 W. H. Hayes, “A Selection of Tuthmoside Ostraca From Deir El-Bahri,” p. 44, Verso, line 3, Plate XIIa, 17 verso (transcription), JEA 46 (1960) 29–52. 20 J. B. Pritchard, ed., ANET 1969, 247. 21 © The Field Museum, Catalog Number 217.30177. PꜢ ꜤꜢm is a “royal oarsman,” cf. hnw nswt, “oarsman of the king,”, See, Dilwyn Jones, “A Glossary of Ancient ¯ Egyptian Nautical Titles and Terms,” Titles, 97, no. 209. In addition to soldiers and craftsmen, seamen and shipbuilders must have been in much demand, apparently for their seagoing navy. Since the Old Kingdom, Egypt employed people from the Near East, most probably from the coast of Lebanon, both as crew and shipbuilders, see M.Bietak, “From Where Came the Hyksos and Where Did They Go?” The Second Intermediate Period, (Thirteenth-Seventeenth Dynasties) Current Research, Future Prospects, M. Maree, ed. (2010) 139–80. “pa-­aam is like some other names such as pA-nHsi (Panehesi) and pA-xArw (Pakharu) one encounters from the NK onwards, i.e. definite article + toponym, literally ‘He of . . . ’, sometimes tA + toponym for women, but there is always an equal possibility that the person was simply known as ‘the Asiatic’ as a nickname, rather than by his or her actual foreign name.” I am grateful to Ogden Goelet for his comments on the name pa-­aam. It should be noted that mention of a maker’s (artisan’s) name would be unusual on a work. It may have referred not to the piece’s physical manufacturer but to its being (an offering) made by X. If that be the case, then PꜢ ꜤꜢm may have

258

Notes to pp. 194–197

had connections with other Asiatics who were artisans working in Egypt, and commissioned the piece to be made in a Near Eastern style. However, in regard to titles, a certain Mry of the Old Kingdom left a graffito in the Wady Hammamat which records his titles as a “ship’s captain and sculptor”, see L. Bell, J. H.Johnson and Donald Whitcomb, “The Eastern Desert of Upper Egypt: Routes and Inscriptions,” in JNES 43, 1 (Jan. 1984) 36, 27–46; individuals in ancient Egypt were often designated by several titles which were not always used together. 22 See Catharine H. Roehrig, with Renee Dreyfus and Cathleen A. Keller, eds, Hatshepsut from Queen to Pharaoh, 248, catalogue, 178. where pa-­aam’s title is translated as “helmsman.” 23 The dating of this object ranges from 1550 to 1295 BCE. For further bibliography see idem. Also, L. Spalinger, Egypt’s Golden Age (1982) 119, 120 no. 106. G. Steindorff, ZAS 73 (1937) 122–3, Pl. XXI, was of the opinion that both the iconography and craftsmanship are Egyptian and he cites two other objects from Aniba which uses the same technique; C. Lilyquist interprets p3 ‘3m (“the Asiatic One”) as the owner of the stand and flask, C. Lilyquist, “Treasures from Tell Basta: Goddesses, Officials, and Artists in an International Age,” Metropolitan Museum Journal, Vol. 47, No. 1 (2012) 9–72, 21. It is important to note that the inscription can be read either jr.n h-n n h.m.f pꜢ-ꜤꜢm “what the rower of His Majesty Pa-­aam, made” or jr n h-n n h.m.f pꜢ-ꜤꜢm “made for the rower of His Majesty, Pa-­aam,” personal communication, James P. Allen, who translates the term “rower” rather than helmsman. 24 W. C. Hayes, “Tuthmoside Ostraca . . .”, JEA 46 (Dec. 1960) 41, n. 3. 25 H. E. Winlock, The Treasure of Three Egyptian Princesses, Metropolitan Museum of Art, Department of Egyptian Art, 10, New York (1948); Christine Lilyquist With contributions by James E. Hoch and A. J. Peden, The Tomb of Three Foreign Wives of Tuthmosis III, New York (2003) 329. 26 C. Lilyquist, The Tomb of Three Foreign Wives of Tuthmosis III with contributions by J. E. Hoch and A. J. Peden, The Metropolitan Museum of Art, N.Y, Yale University Press, New Haven and London (2003), 329-32. Though Manuwai may possibly be a Hurrian name, idem, 329. 27 Particularly the gazelle’s heads. C. Aldred, Jewels of the Pharaohs, 204,59. C. Lilyquist has suggested that “perhaps they were created for these women and then taken up by Egyptian women.” (lecture). 28 C. Lilyquist, Lecture; for place name see W. Helck, Die Beziehngen Ägyptens zu Vorderasien, 130. For Khamid el-Loz, see Hachmann, Kamid el-Loz, 1963–1981, German Excavations in Lebanon, Part I, 7 (1989) 91. 29 C. Lilyquist and R. H. Brill, with M. T. Wypyski and contributions by H. Shirahata, R. J. Koestler, and R. D. Vocke, Jr, Studies in Early Egyptian Glass, New York (1993). 62. A microscopic examination, compositional analysis, and lead-­isotope ratios

Notes to pp. 197–200

259

combined with evidence of shape, fabric and color show that the Wady Qirud goblet originated in the Near East and not in Egypt, ibid., 12. See too, C. Lilyquist, “Granulation and Glass: Chronological and Stylistic Investigations at Selected Sites, ca. 2500–1400 B.C.E.,” BASOR 290 (1993) 29–94, 57. 30 Lilyquist and Brill, Studies in Early Egyptian Glass, 21, Figs. 11 and 12. Examples of a similar pattern occurs on a beaker base from Susa in Iran, ibid., Figs. 13 and 14. 31 See J. B. Pritchard, BASOR 122 (1951) 38; Redford, Talatat, 21; P. Brand in The American Discovery of Ancient Egypt, ed., N. Thomas, 74. 32 The Tomb of Rekhmire, PI. Xl. Note the figure with strange hairstyle and red hair, see above. See also M. Hill, Facsimiles. 33 This garment also appears in a Tuthmoside battle relief (formerly attributed to the reign of Ramesses II); Hayes, Scepter of Egypt II, 339–40; see also P. Brand who notes features in the the physiognomy of the figures is rendered in a manner consistent with art during the reign of Amenhotep II, P. Brand in N. Thomas, The American Discovery of Ancient Egypt (1995) 74, MMA 13.180.21. The figure wearing the long garment is perhaps the chief of the Syrians. He possibly represents a Mittanian overlord (as in the tomb of Menkheperresonb mentioned above bringing tribute and who is represented wearing this garment). He is shown with a closely cut capped hairstyle, a coiffure associated with the Hurro-Mittanian peoples. His skin is painted yellow, the common color for Asiatics in Egyptian art. The hair and long pointed beards is painted black on all of the figures, but the soldiers wearing short kilts with red embroidered hems and blue and white checked diagonal cross strap running across their bare chests have shoulder length, full hairstyles and fillets, are painted red, another color used for foreigners, particularly in battle, see infra. Perhaps they represent ‘3mw. Could this be a scene depicting the battle described by Amenhotep II in his Asiatic campaigns in Retenu?, see Pritchard, “Syrians as Pictured in the Paintings of the Theban Tombs,” BASOR 122 (1951), 36-41. 34 As a general source for much of this discussion see A. P. Kozloff and B. M. Bryan, Egypt’s Dazzling Sun, Cleveland Museum of Art (1992). In the later Eighteenth Dynasty an increase in these trends reaching a particularly high point occurs during the Amama Period. 35 W. H. Hayes, Scepter II, 231–2. 36 MMA 30.4.218, see M. Hill, Egyptian Wall Paintings (1983), 123. 37 Scepter II, 243. 38 The Egyptian term Nhrn (Naharin) occurs in the Egyptian records beginning in the Eighteenth Dynasty, and eventually supplants the term Rt nw (Retenu). It ¯ occurs from the period of Tuthmosis I (where it occurs with the term Retenu), down to that of Ramesses III, see R. T. O’Callaghan, Aram Naharaim, A Contribution to the History of Upper Mesopotamia in the Second Millennium B.C.,

260

Notes to p. 200

An. Or. 26 (1948) 132. This term is a direct borrowing of the Semitic name Amorite Nah(a)ren(a), Hebrew Naharaim (Gen. 24:10). It may be translated as “Land of the Two Rivers.” Note the translation in the LXX (Septuagint), Mesopotamian, and in the Eighteenth Dynasty identified politically with Mitanni. For a full study of this term see R. T. O’Callahan, ibid., passim. 39 See for example S. Wachsmann’s study, Aegeans In The Theban Tombs, Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta 20 (1987) PI. III, where he points out that “a clearly hybrid figure is composed by combining the red skin color and skirt of an Aegean and the bearded head with head band of a typical Syrian” in the tomb of Menkheperresonb from the time of Tuthmosis III. 40 Note also that this was true even during the Old Kingdom; see, for example, the prisoner statues discussed in Chapter 3 where the distinction between the two figures is marked by hairstyle (but facial features as well).

Bibliography Adams, M. D., “Community and Societal Organization in Early Historic Egypt,” NARCE 158/59 (1992). Al-Khalesi, Y. M., The Court of the Palms: A Functional Interpretation of the Mari Palace, Bibliotheca Mesopotamica 8, Malibu (1978). Albright, W. F., “The Amorite Form of the Name Hammurabi,” AJSL Vol 38, (Jan. 1922).  —— The Archaeology of Palestine, London and Baltimore: Penguin Books (1956). —— “The Egyptian Empire in Asia in the 21st Century B.C.,” JPOS 8 (1928) 233–53. —— The Excavation of Tell Beit Mirsim, vol. 1 The Annual of the American Schools of Oriental Research XII for 1930–31, New Haven (1932). —— “The Land of Damascus Between 1850 and 1750 B.C.,” BASOR 83 (1941) 30–36. —— “Northwest-Semitic Names in a List of Egyptian Slaves from the Eighteenth Century B.C.,” JAOS 74, 4 (1954) 222–33. —— The Proto-Sinaitic Inscriptions and Their Decipherment, Cambridge; London (1969). —— The Vocalization of the Egyptian Syllabic Orthography, New Haven (1934). Aldred, C., Egyptian Art in the Days of the Pharaohs, 3100–320 B.C., New York (1980). —— Jewels of the Pharaohs, New York (1971). Allen, James P., “The Historical Inscription of Khnumhotep at Dahshur: Preliminary Report,” BASOR (Nov. 2008) 29–39. Allen, S. “Vessel With Dolphins and Waterbirds ,” Beyond Babylon, Exhibition Catalogue, The Metropolitan Museum of Art (2008) 60. Alliot, M., “Une Famille de mots reconstituée: Pyr., Gr. ins ‘etre rouge’ ,” RdE 10 (1955) 1–7. Amiet, P., Art of the Ancient Near East, New York (1980). Anbar, Moshe, Les tribus amurrites de Mari, Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis 108, Switzerland (1991). Anbar, M. and N. Na’aman, “An Account Tablet of Sheep from Ancient Hebron,” Tel Aviv, 13–14, 1 (1986–7). Andrews, Carol, Amulets of Ancient Egypt, New York (1994). Archi, A. Eblaite Personal Names and Semitic Name-Giving, Rome: ARES I (1988). Arnold, D., Die Tempel Ägyptens: Götterwohnungen, Baudenkmäler, Kultstätten, Zurich (1992).

262

Bibliography

—— Middle Kingdom Tomb Architecture at Lisht, With an Appendix by James P. Allen, Metropolitan Museum of Art Egyptian Expedition Vol. 28, New Haven and London: Yale University Press (2008). —— The Pyramid Complex of Senwosret I: The South Cemeteries of Lisht, III, Metropolitan Museum of Art Egyptian Expedition Vol. 25, New York (1992). —— The Pyramid Complex of Senwosret III at Dahshur, Metropolitan Museum of Art Egyptian Expedition, With Contributions and an Appendix by Adela Oppenheim and Contributions by James P. Allen, New York (2002). —— The Pyramid of Senwosret I: The South Cemeteries of Lisht, I, Metropolitan Museum of Art Egyptian Expedition, Vol. 22, New York (1988). —— When the Pyramids Were Built, Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York (1990). Arnold, D. and J. Settgast, “Erster Vorbericht über die vom Deutschen Archaologischen Institut Kairo im Asasif unternommenen Arbeiten,” 1. und 2. Kampagne, MDAIK 20 (1965) 47–61. Arnold, D. and R. Stadelmann, “Dahschur Erster Grabungsbericht,” MDAIK 31 (1975) 169–74. Arnold, Do., An Egyptian Bestiary, Metropolitan Museum of Art Bulletin (Spring 1995) 7. —— “Foreign and Female,” Offerings to the Discerning Eye: An Egyptological Medley in Honor of Jack A. Josephson, ed. Sue D’Auria, Brill (2010) 17. —— “Image and Identity: Egypt’s Eastern Neighbors, East Delta People and the Hyksos” The Second Intermediate Period (Thirteenth-Seventeenth Dynasties) Current Research, Future Prospects,” Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta, ed. Marcel Maree (2010) 183–222. Arnold, Do., F., Arnold and S. Allen, “Canaanite Imports at Lisht: The Middle Kingdom Capital of Egypt,” Ägypten und Levante 5, ed. M. Bietak (1996) 13–32. Arnold, F., The Control Notes and Team Marks: The South Cemeteries of Lisht, II, Metropolitan Museum of Art Egyptian Expedition, Vol. 23, New York (1990). —— “Settlement Remains at Lisht North,” House and Palace in Ancient Egypt, ÖAW, Band XIV, (1996) 13–20. Aruz, J., “The Sealings of the Middle Bronze Age: A Preliminary Look at Lisht in Egypt,” in E. Perna, ed., Administrative Documents in the Aegean and their Near Eastern Counterparts (2000) 125–40. Aruz, J., with R. Wallenfels, eds., Art of the First Cities: The Third Millennium B.C. from the Mediterranean to the Indus, New Haven: Yale University Press (2003). Aruz, J., K. Benzel and J. M. Evans, Beyond Babylon: Art, Trade, and Diplomacy in the Second Millennium B.C., New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art (2008).

Bibliography

263

Aruz, J., S. B. Graff and Y. Rakic, eds., Cultures in Contact: From Mesopotamia to the Mediterranean in the Second Millennium B.C., New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art (2013). Assyrian Dictionary of the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago, Chicago (1956). Astour, M. C., “A North Mesopotamian Locale of the Keret Epic,” UF, Band 5 (1973). —— “Toponymy of Ebla and Ethnohistory of Northern Syria: A Preliminary Survey,” JAOS 108 (1988). Backhouse, J., “Figured Ostraca from Deir el-Medina,” eds., Heba Abd el Gawad et al., Current Research in Egyptology, Oxford (2012) 25–39. Badre. L., Les figurines anthropomorphiques en terre cuite à l’Age du Bronze en Syrie, B.A.H., LXXXV, Paris: P. Geuthner (1980). Baines, J., “Color Terminology and Color Classification: Ancient Egyptian Color Terminology and Polychromy,” American Anthropologist, New Series, Vol. 87, No. 2 (Jun., 1985) 282–97. —— “Contextualizing Egyptian Representations of Society and Ethnicity,” in The Study of the Ancient Near East in the 21st Century: The William Foxwell Albright Centennial Conference, J. S. Cooper, G. M. Schwartz, eds., Winona Lake (1996) 339–84. Baines, J. and J. Malek, Atlas of Ancient Egypt, Oxford (1980) (1993 reprint, New York). Barber, E. J. W. ,“New Kingdom Egyptian Textiles: Embroidery vs. Weaving,” AJA 86 (1982) 442–5. —— Prehistoric Textiles: The Development of Cloth in the Neolithic and Bronze Ages, with Special Reference to the Aegean, Princeton (1991). Barrelet, M. T., “Un Inventaire de Kar-Tukulti-Ninurta: textiles decores assyriens et autres,” RA 71 (1977) 51–92. —— “Une peinture de la cour 106 du palais de Mari,” in Studia Mariana, ed. André Parrot, Leiden: Brill (1950) 9–35. —— Figurines et reliefs en terre cuite de la Mesopotamie antique, vol. 1: potiers, termes de métier, procedes de fabrication et production, Paris: Geuthner (1968). Beaulieu, P.-A., “The God Amurru as Emblem of Ethnic and Cultural Identity,” in W. H. Van Soldt, ed., in cooperation with R. Kalvelagen and D. Katz, Ethnicity in Ancient Mesopotamia, Papers read at the 48th Rencontre Assyriologique International, Leiden 1–4 July 2002, 31–45, Netherlands (2005). Beckerath, J. V., Handbuch der Ägyptischen Königsnamen, Mainz (1984). Beit-Arieh, I., “Canaanites and Egyptians at Serabit el-Khadim,” in Egypt, Israel, Sinai, A. F. Rainey, ed., Tel Aviv (1987). —— “Serabit El-Khadim: New Metallurgical and Chronological Aspects,” Levant Vol. XVII (1985).

264

Bibliography

Bell, L., J. H. Johnson and D. Whitcomb, “The Eastern Desert of Upper Egypt: Routes and Inscriptions,” Journal of Near Eastern Studies, Vol. 43, No. 1 (Jan., 1984) 27–46. Ben-Tor, A. “The Relations Between Egypt and the Land of Canaan during the Third Millennium B.C.” in Essays in Honour of Yigael Yadin, Oxford Centre for Postgraduate Studies, The Journal of Jewish Studies 33 (1982), eds. G. Vermes and J. Neusner, Totowa, N.J. 3–18. Benz, F. L., Personal Names in the Phoenician and Punic Inscriptions, Rome (1972) (Studia Pohl 8). Berlev, O., The Egyptian Reliefs and Stelae in the Pushkin Museum of Fine Arts, Moscow (1982). —— “Review of ANOC,” Bi Or XXXIII No. 5/6 (1976) 324–6. Bietak, M. Avaris: The Capital of the Hyksos Recent Excavations at Tell el-Dab’a, London (1996). —— “Eine ‘Rhythmusgruppe’ aus der Zeit des späten Mittleren Reiches: ein Beitrag sur Instrumentenkunde des Alten Ägypten,” in Jahresheften des Österreichischen archäologischen Institutes, Bd. LVI (1985) 3–18. —— “ ‘From Where Came the Hyksos and Where did they go?’ The Second Intermediate Period, (Thirteenth-Seventeenth Dynasties) Current Research, Future Prospects,” Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta, ed. Marcel Maree (2010) 139–82. —— “Urban Archaeology and the ‘Town Problem’ in Ancient Egypt,” in Kent Weeks, ed., Egyptology and the Social Sciences, Cairo (1979) 97–144. —— “Zur Marine des Alten Reiches,” in Pyramid Studies and Other Essays Presented to I. E. S. Edwards, J. Baines et al., eds., London (1988) 35–40. Bietak, M., I. Hein et al., Pharaonen und Fremde Dynastien im Dunkel, Exhibition Catalogue, Rathaus Vienna, 8 Sept.–23 Oct (1994). Bietak, M. and E. Reiser-Haslauer, Das Grab Des ‘Anch-Hor, Vol. I, Wien: Untersuchungen der Zweigstelle Kairo des Österreichischen Ärchäologischen Institutes 4–5, (1978). Bietak M. and M. Schwarz, “Nag’a el-Sheima, eine befestigtechristliche Festung und andere christliche Denkmäler,” in Sayala-Nubien, Teil I, die österreichischen Grabungen (1965–1969) Berichte des Österreichischen Nationalkomitees der UNESCO-Aktion für die Rettung der Nubischen Altertümer VIII, Denkschriften der Philosophisch-­historischen Klasse der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Bd. 184. Vienna (1986). Biggs, R. D., Inscriptions from Al-Hiba-Lagash, Malibu: Bibliotheca Mesopotamica, 3, (1976). —— Inscriptions From Tell Abu Salabikh, OIP Vol. XCIX, Chicago (1974). Black, J. and A. Green, Gods, Demons and Symbols of Ancient Mesopotamia, London: British Museum Press (1992).

Bibliography

265

Blackman, A. M., The Rock Tombs of Meir III, London (1915). —— “The Story of Sinuhe and other Egyptian Texts,” JEA 22 (1936) 41. Blackman, W. S., The Fellahin of Upper Egypt, London (1927). Bonechi, M., I Nomi Geographici dei testi di Ebla, Repertoire Geographique des Textes Cuneiformes XII/1, Beihefte Zum Tübinger Atlas Des Vorderen Orients Reihe B Nr. 7. Wiesbaden (1993). Borchardt, L., Das Grabdenkmal des Königs Sahu-­re II, Leipzig (1913). Borghouts J. F., The Magical Texts of Papyrus Leiden I 348,12:2–6, 1st edn, Leiden: Brill (1971). Bothmer, B. V., “On Realism in Egyptian Funerary Sculpture,” Expedition 24 (1982) 29. Bottero, J., “Syria During the Third Dynasty of Ur,” CAH I, Pt. 2A (1971). Bourriau, J., “The Dolphin Vase from Lisht,” in Studies in Honor of William Kelly Simpson, Vol. I, Boston: Museum of Fine Arts (1996) 101–16. Bourriau, J., with S. Quirke, Pharaohs and Mortals: Egyptian Art in the Middle Kingdom, Exhibition catalogue, Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge (1988). Brand, P. in N. Thomas (ed.), The American Discovery of Ancient Egypt, Los Angeles County Museum of Art, 1995. Breasted, J. H., Ancient Records of Egypt I, New York (1962). Bresciani, E. and Mario Del Tacca, eds., Arte medica e cosmetica alla corte dei Faraoni/ Medicine and Cosmetics at Pharaohs’ court, Pisa (2005). Brown, F., S. R. Driver and C. A. Briggs, The New Brown-Driver-Briggs-Gesenius Hebrew and English Lexicon (BDB), Reprint, Lafayette (1979). Buccellati, G., The Amorites of the Ur III Period, Naples (1966). Buccellati, G. and M. K. Buccellati, “Archaeological Survey of the Palmyrene and the Jebel Bishri,” Archaeology 20 (Oct. 1967). Bumann, E. The Hyksos and Acculturation: Processes of Acculturation of the Asiatic Population at Tell el-Dab’a (Avaris) during the Late Middle Kingdom and the Second Intermediate Period, Jerusalem: The Hebrew University (2009). Černy´ , J., “Semites in Egyptian Mining Expeditions to Sinai,” Archiv Orientalni 7 (1935) 384–9. Chiera, E., “An Amorite Creation Story,” Sumerian Religious Texts, Crozer Theological Seminary – Babylonian Publications I, Upland (1924). Cifarelli, M., Enmity, Alienation and Assyrianization: The Role of Cultural Difference in the Visual and Verbal Expression of Assyrian Ideology in the Reign of Assurnasirpal II (883–859 B.C.), Doctoral dissertation, Columbia University (1995). Civil, M., “Šu-Sin’s Historical Inscriptions: Collection B,” JCS 21 (1967) 24–38. Clay, A. T., The Antiquity of the Amorite Civilization, New Haven (1924). —— The Empire of the Amorites, YOS 6 London (1919).

266

Bibliography

Cohen, S. L., Canaanites, Chronologies, and Connections: The Relationship of Middle Bronze Age IIA Canaan to Middle Kingdom Egypt, Studies in the Archaeology and History of the Levant 3. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Semitic Museum Publications (2002). Collon, D., Ancient Near Eastern Art, Berkeley (1995). Cooper, J. S., The Curse of Agade, Baltimore; London (1983). Crawford, V., Sumerian Economic Texts from the First Dynasty of Isin, BIN IX (Babylonian Inscriptons in the Collection of James B. Nies), New Haven (1954). Dalley, S., Mari and Karana: Two Old Babylonian Cities, London and New York (1984). Dalley, S., C. B. F. Walker and J. D. Hawkins, The Old Babylonian Tablets from Tell Al-Rimah, British School of Archaeology in Iraq (1976). David, A., “Le Nom Hammurapi,” RA Vol. 21, No. 3 (1924) pp. 151–4.  David, A. R., The Pyramid Builders of Ancient Egypt, London (1986). —— “Religious Practices in a Pyramid Workmen’s Town of the Twelfth Dynasty,” BACE 2 (1991) 33–40. Davies, N. de Garis, The Tomb of Rekh-mi-Re- at Thebes Volume I, The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York (1973). Davies, N. M., Ancient Egyptian Paintings Selected, Copied, and Described, Vol. I, Nina M. Davies, with the editorial assistance of Alan H. Gardiner, Chicago (1936). Deimel, G., Die Inschriften von Fara, Leipzig (1922–4). DeMorgan, J., Fouilles a Dahchour II en 1894–1895, Vienna (1903). Dever, W., “The Beginning of the Middle Bronze Age in Syria Palestine,” in Magnalia Dei: The Mighty Acts of God, Essays in the History and Religion of Israel (the G. E. Wright Festschrift), eds. F. M. Cross, Jr., W. Lemke and P. D. Miller, Garden City (1976) 3–38. Di Biase-Dyson, C., Foreigners and Egyptians in the Late Egyptian Stories, Probleme der Ägyptologie 32, Leiden: Brill (2013). Dodson, A., “The Tombs of the Kings of the Thirteenth Dynasty in the Memphite Necropolis,” ZÄS 114 (1987) 36–45. Dorn, A., Arbeiterhütten im Tal der Könige: ein Beitrag zur altägyptischen Sozialgeschichte aufgrund von neuem Quellenmaterial aus der Mitte der 20. Dynastie (ca. 1150 v. Chr.) Ægyptiaca Helvetica, Bd. 23 (2011). Dossin, G., “Une mention de Cananeens dans une lettre de Mari,” Syria 50 (1973) 277–82. Dunham, S., “Metal Animal Headed Cups at Mari,” in To the Euphrates and Beyond, Archaeological Studies in Honour of Maurits N. van Loon, eds., O. M. C. Haex, H. H. Curvers and P. M. M. G. Akkermans (1989) 213–20. Durand, J.-M., “La Situation Historique Des Sˇakkanakku: Nouvelle Approche,” MARI 4, Paris (1985) 147–72.

Bibliography

267

Ebeling, E. B. et al, Reallexikon der Assyriologie und vorderasiatischen Archäologie, Berlin (1932). Edgerton, W. F., “Egyptian Phonetic Writing: From Its Invention to the Close of the Nineteenth Dynasty,” JAOS 60 (1940) 473–506. Ember, A., Egypto-Semitic Studies, Vertiffentlichungen der Alexander Kohut Memorial Foundation Philologische Reihe Band 2 (1930) 3. Engberg, M., “Tombs of the Early Second Millennium from Baghuz on the Middle Euphrates,” BASOR 87 (1942). Engelbach, R., Harageh: British School of Archaeology in Egypt and Egyptian Research Account Twentieth Year, 1914, London (1923). Enmarch, R., A World Upturned: Commentary on and Analysis of The Dialogue of Ipuwer and the Lord of All, Oxford: Oxford University Press (2009). Erman, A. and H. Grapow, Wörterbuch der ägyptischen Sprache, 5 vols. (+ Belegstellen), Berlin (1982). Even-Shoshan, A., ed., A New Concordance of the Bible (in Hebrew), Vol. 3 (1977). Falkenstein, A. “Zu ‘Inannas Gang zur Unterwwelt’,” AFO 14 (1941–44) 113–48. Farkas, A. and P. O. H. Harper, eds., “The Ancient Egyptian Attitude towards the Monstrous,” Monsters and Demons in the Ancient and Medieval World: Papers Presented in Honor of Edith Porada, The Franklin Jasper Wells Lectures 10, Mainz am Rhein (1987) 13–26. Faulkner, R. O., A Concise Dictionary of Middle Egyptian, Oxford (1976 [1962]). —— “rev. of G. Posener ‘Littérature et politique dans l’Egypte de la XIIe dynastie’, ” JEA 43 (1957) 122–3. Feldman, M. H., Diplomacy by Design: Luxury Arts and an “International Style” in the Ancient near East, 1400–1200 BCE (2006). Fleming, D., “People Without Town”: ‘apiru in the Amarna Evidence,” SAOC 67 (2012) 39–50. Finkelstein, J. J., “The Geneology of the Hammurapi Dynasty,” JCS 20 (1966) 95–118. Fischer, H. G., Egyptian Studies II: The Orientation of Hieroglyphs, Part 1. REVERSALS, New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art (1977) 3. —— Egyptian women of the Old Kingdom and of the Heracleopolitan period, New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art (2000). —— Inscriptions from the Coptite Nome Dynasty VI-XI, An Or 40 Rome (1964). —— “The Nubian Mercenaries of Gebelein during the First Intermediate Period,” Kush 9 (1961) 63–7. —— “A Shrine and Statue of the Thirteenth Dynasty,” in H. G. Fischer, Egyptian Studies III: Varia Nova, New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art (1996) 130–33. Fowler, J. D., “Theophoric Personal Names in Ancient Hebrew: A Comparative Study,” JSOT (1988).

268

Bibliography

Franke, D., Egyptian Stelae in the British Museum from the 13th to 17th Dynasties, Vol. 1, Fascicule 1: Descriptions, ed. M. Maree, with a contribution by Janet Ambers, London: The British Museum Press (2013). —— “The Middle Kingdom Stelae Publication Project,” available at http://www. britishmuseum.org/pdf/1b%20The%20Middle%20Kingdom.pdf Freed, R., The Development of Middle Kingdom Egyptian Relief Sculptural Schools of Late Dynasty XI (2040–1878 B.C.), Dissertation, New York University (1984). Friedman, F., “Aspects of Domestic Life and Religion,” in L. Lesko, ed., Pharaoh’s Workers, London: Ithaca (1994) 95–117. Fritz, V., The City in Ancient Israel, Sheffield (1998). Gaballa, G. A., Narrative in Egyptian Art, Mainz am Rhein (1976). Gardiner, A. H., Admonitions of an Egyptian Sage, Leipzig (1909, reprint Hildesheim; Zurich; New York 1990). —— Ancient Egyptian Onomastica, 2 vols., Oxford (1947). —— Egypt of the Pharaohs, Oxford (1961). —— Egyptian Grammar, 3rd rev. edn, Oxford (1957). —— Notes on the Story of Sinuhe, Paris (1916). Gardiner, A. H., T. E. Peet and J. Černy´, The Inscriptions of Sinai, 2nd edn, London (1952) Egyptian Exploration Society Memoir, 45. Garstang, J., The Burial Customs of Ancient Egypt, London (1907). —— El Arabeh, London (1901). Gaster, T. H., Myth, Legend, and Custom in the Old Testament: A comparative study, with chapters from Sir James G. Frazer’s “Folklore in the Old Testament,” New York (1969). Gates, M., “Casting Tiamat into Another Sphere: Sources for the ’Ain Samiya Goblet,” Levant 18 (1986) 75–81. Gelb I. J., “The Arua Institution,” RA 66 (1972) 1–32. —— “Ebla and Lagash” : Environmental Contrast. In H. Weiss, ed., The Origins of Cities in Dry-Farming Syria and Mesopotomia in the Third Millennium B.C. (1986) 157–67. —— Computer-­aided Analysis of Amorite, Chicago (1980). —— “The Early History of the West Semitic Peoples,” JCS 15 (1961) 27–47. —— Glossary of Old Akkadian, Chicago (1957). —— “Growth of a Herd of Cattle in Ten Years,” JCS 21 (1967) 64–9. —— “La Lingua degli Amorite,” RANL, Serie VIII, Vol. XIII, fasc. 3–4 (1958) 143–64. —— “The Language of Ebla in the Light of the Sources From Ebla, Mari, and Babylonia:’ EBLA 1975–1985, Atti Del Convegno Internazionale, Luigi Cagni, Napoli, 9–11 (ottobre 1985) Instituto Universitario Orientale Dipartimento di Studi Asiatici Series Minor XXVII, 49–74.

Bibliography

269

—— “Mari and the Kish Civilization,” in Mari in Retrospect: Fifty Years of Mari and Mari Studies, ed. G. D. Young, Winona Lake (1992) 121–202. —— “An Old Babylonian List of Amorites,” in Essays in Memory of E. A. Speiser, ed. W. Hallo, New Haven: AOS (1968) 39–46. Gelb, I. J. and B. Kienast., “Die Altakkadischen Konigsinshriften des Dritten Jahrtausends Chr.,” Freiburger Altorientalische Studien 7, Stuttgart (1990) 53–4. Germer, R., Ägyptologische Abhandlungen, 53, Wiesbaden (1992). Gerstenblith, P., “The Levant at the Beginning of the Middle Bronze Age,” ASOR Dissertation Series 5, Winona Lake (1983). Giveon, R., “Cattle Administration in Middle Kindom Egypt and Canaan,” in Hommages a Francois Daumas I, Universite de Montpellier (1986) 279–84. —— “A Second Relief of Sekhemkhet in Sinai,” BASOR (1974) 216. Goedicke, H., “Abi-Sha(i)’s Representation in Beni Hasan,” JARCE 21 (1984) 203–10. —— “The Alleged Military Campaign in Southern Palestine in the Reign of Pepi I,” RDSO 38 (1963) 187–97. —— “Egyptian Military Actions in ‘Asia’ in the Middle Kingdom,” RdE 43 (1991) 89–94. —— “The End of the Hyksos in Egypt,” Egyptological Studies in Honor of Richard A. Parker, ed. L. Lesko, Hanover, NH (1986) 37–47. —— The Protocol of Neferyt, Baltimore (1977). —— Re-Used Blocks from the Pyramid of Amenemhet I at Lisht,” New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art Egyptian Expedition, Vol. 20 (1971). —— “Review of Der Gott Sopdu: Der Herr der Fremdländer,” by Inke W. Schumacher in JNES 53 (1994) 59–61. Goelet, O., “Kemet and Other Egyptian Terms for Their Land,” in Ki Baruch Hu: Ancient Near Eastern, Biblical, and Judaic Studies in Honor of Baruch A. Levine, eds. Robert Chazan, William W. Hallo and Lawrence H. Schiffman, Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns (1999) 23–42. Goetze, A., “Amurite Names in Ur III and Early Isin Texts,” JSS 4 (1959) 193–202. —— “Diverse Names in an Old-Babylonian Pay-List,” BASOR 95 (Oct. 1944). —— “Is Ugaritic A Canaanite Dialect?,” Language 17 (1941) 127–38. —— “Review of J. R. Kupper, ‘Les nomades en Mesopotamia au temps de rois de Mari’,” JSS 4 (1959). Goldwasser, O., “Canaanites Reading Hieroglyphs: Horus Is Hathor? – The Invention of the Alphabet in Sinai,” Ägypten und Levante 16 (2006) 121–60. —— “Out of the Mists of the Alphabet: Redrawing the ‘Brother of the Ruler of Retenu’,” Ägypten und Levante 22–3, Osterreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften Wien (2013) 353–375.

270

Bibliography

Golenishchev, V., Les papyrus hieratiques, nos. 1115, 1116A et 1116B de l’Ermitage imperial a St. Petersbourg, St. Petersburg (1916). Good, R. M., The Sheep of His Pasture: A Study of the Hebrew Noun ‘Am(m) and Its Semitic Cognates, Harvard Semitic Monographs 29, Chico, CA (1983). Gophna, R., “The Intermediate Bronze Age,” in The Archaeology of Ancient Israel, ed. A. Ben-Tor, New Haven and London (1992) 126–58. Gordon, C. H., Ugaritic Textbook: Texts in Transliteration, Cuneiform, Selections, Glossary, Grammar, 3rd edn, Rome: Analecta Orientalia, 38 (1965). Gordon, E. I., “A New Look At the Wisdom of Sumer and Akkad,” Bi Or 17 (1960). Grafman, R., “Bringing Tiamat to Earth,” IEJ 22 (1972) 47–9. Grajetzki, W., Court Officials of the Egyptian Middle Kingdom, London: Gerald Duckworth (2009). —— The Middle Kingdom of Ancient Egypt, London: Gerald Duckworth (2006). —— Tomb Treasures of the Late Middle Kingdom: The Archaeology of Female Burials, Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press (2014). Gray, J., The KRT Text in the Literature of Ras Shamra: A Social Myth of Ancient Canaan, Leiden (1964). Greenberg, M., The Hab/piru, New Haven: AOS 39, (1955). —— “Hab/piru and Hebrews,” in Patriarchs: World History of the Jewish People, ed. B. Mazar, First Series, Vol. 2, (1970) chapter 10, 118–200. Greenfield, J, “Some Glosses on the Keret Epic,” Eretz-Israel 9 (1969) 60–65. Griffiths, J. G., “The Symbolism of Red in Egyptian Religion,” in Ex Orbe Religionum, Studio GeoWidengren XXIV Mense Apr. MCMLXXII Quo Die Lustra Tredecem Feliciter Explevit Oblata Ab Collegis, Discipulis, Amicis, Collegae Magistro Amico Congratulantibus, opars Prior, eds. J. Bergman, K. Drynjeff and H. Ringgren, Leiden (1972) 81–90. Grondahl, F., Die Personennamen der Texte aus Ugarit, Rome: Studia Pohl, 1 (1967). Habachi, L., “King Nebhepetre Menthuhotep: His Monuments, Place in History, Deification and Unusual Representations in the Form of Gods,” MDAIK 19 (1963). Hachmann, R., Kamid el-Loz, 1963–1981, German Excavations in Lebanon, Part I, 7 (1989). Haldar, A., “On the Wall Painting from Court 106 of the Palace of Mari,” Or. Su. I, (1952) 50–65. —— Who Were The Amorites?, Leiden (1971). Hall, E. S., The Pharaoh Smites his Enemies: A comparative Study, Berlin: Münchner Ägyptologische Studien 44 (1986). Hall, R., Egyptian Textiles, Oxford: Osprey (1986). Hallo, W. and W. K. Simpson, The Ancient Near East: A History, New York (1971).

Bibliography

271

Hansen, D. P., “A Bronze in the Semitic Museum of Harvard University,” BASOR 146 (1957) 13–19. —— “Al-Hiba 1968–69: A Preliminary Report,” Artibus Asiae 32, New York (1970). —— “Al-Hiba 1970–71: A Preliminary Report,” Artibus Asiae 35, New York (1973) 62–70. —— “Some Remarks on the Chronology and Style of Objects from Byblos,” AJA 73 (1969) 281–4. Hansen, D. P. et al., “The Chronology of Mesopotamia, ca. 7000–1600 B.C.,” in Chronologies in Old World Archaeology, ed. R. W. Ehrich, 3rd edn (1992) 77–121. Harris, R., Ancient Sippar: A Demographic Study of an Old Babylonian City (1894–1595 B.C.), Lėiden: Nederlands Instituut voor het Nabije Oosten (1975). Harris, J. R., Lexicographical Studies in Ancient Egyptian Minerals, Berlin: Akad.Verlag (1961). Hart, G., A Dictionary of Egyptian Gods and Goddesses, London: Routledge (1998). Harvey, S., “Monuments of Ahmose at Abydos,” Egyptian Archaeology 4 (1994) 3–5. Hassan, S., “The Causeway of Wnis at Sakkara,” ZÄS 80 (1955) 136–9. Hayes, W. C., “The Egyptian and Persian Expeditions 1932–1933,” BMMA Bulletin 28 (1933) 4–38. —— Glazed Tiles From a Palace of Ramesses II at Kantir, Papers No. 3, New York: The Metropolitan Museum of Art (1937). —— The List of Servants on the Verso from a Papyrus of the Late Middle Kingdom in the Brooklyn Museum, New York (1972). —— “The Middle Kingdom in Egypt,” in The Cambridge Ancient History, 1, 2, eds. I. E. S. Edwards, C. Gadd and N. Namond, Cambridge (1971) 464–523. —— The Scepter of Egypt I, New York (1990). —— “A Selection of Tuthmoside Ostraca From Deir El-Bahri,” JEA 46 (1960). Helck, W., Die Beziehungen Ägyptens zu Vorderasien im 3. und 2. Jahrtausend v. Chr. Ägyptologische Abhandlungen 5 Wiesbaden (1971). —— Kleine Ägyptische Texte: Die Lehre Fur Konig Merikare, Wiesbaden (1988) 55–6. Held, M., “Philological Notes on the Mari Covenant Rituals,” BASOR 200 (1970). Hill, M. Egyptian Wall Paintings: The Metropolitan Museum of Art’s Collection of Facsimiles, New York (1983). —— “Hepu’s Hair: A Copper-Alloy Statuette in the National Archaeological Museum, Athens,” BES 17 (2007) 109–34. —— “Relief of a Foreigner Throwing a Spear,” in N. Thomas, ed., The American Discovery of Ancient Egypt, Los Angeles and New York (1995). Hoch, J. E., Semitic Words in Egyptian Texts of the New Kingdom and Third Intermediate Period, Princeton (1994). Hornung, E., The Valley of the Kings: Horizon of Eternity, New York (1990).

272

Bibliography

Huffmon, H. B., Amorite Personal Names in the Mari Texts: A Structural and Lexical Study, Baltimore (1965). Jacobsen, T., “The Battle Between Marduk and Tiamat,” JAOS 88 (1968) 104–8. —— The Harps That Once . . . Sumerian Poetry in Translation, New Haven and London (1987). James, T. G. H., “The Statuette of User (BM 30457),” in Pyramid Studies and Other Essays Presented to I. E. S. Edwards, J. Baines et al., eds., London (1988) 1–53. Janssen, R. and J., Egyptian Household Animals, Aylesbury, UK (1989). Janzen, M. D., The Iconography of Humiliation: The Depiction and Treatment of Bound Foreigners in New Kingdom Egypt, Ph.D Dissertation, The University of Memphis (2013). Jaros-Deckert, B., Das Grab des lni-­iti.f, Die Wandmalereien der XI. Dynastie, Nach vorarbeiten von Dieter Arnold und Jurgen Settgast, Mainz (1984). Jean, F., “Les noms propres de personnes dans les lettres de Mari,” in A. Parrot, ed., Studia Mariana, Leiden (1950) 63–98. Jidejian, N., Byblos Through The Ages, Beirut: Dar el-Machreq Publishers (1968). Jones, D., A Glossary of Ancient Egyptian Nautical Titles and Terms: Studies in Egyptology, London and New York: Kegan Paul International (1988). Kamp, K. A. and Yoffee, N., “Ethnicity in Ancient Western Asia During the Early Second Millennium B.C: Archaeological Assessments and Ethnoarchaeological Prospectives,” BASOR 237 (1980) 85–104. Kamrin, J., “The Aamu of Shu in the Tomb of Khnumhotep II at Beni Hassan,” Journal of Ancient Egyptian Interconnections, Vol. 1:3, (2009) 22–36, available at http://jaei. library. arizona://jaei.library.arizona.edu. —— The Cosmos of Khnumhotep II at Beni Hasan, London and New York: Kegan Paul International (1999). —— Monument and Microcosm: The 12th Dynasty Tomb Chapel of Khnumhotep II at Beni Hasan, Ph.D Dissertation, University of Pennsylvania (1992). Kanawati, N. and A. McFarlane, with contributions by N. Charoubim, N. Victor and A. Salama, “Deshasha: The Tombs of Inti, Shedu and Others,” Bulletin of the Australian Centre for Egyptology (BACE) 5 (1994). Kang, S. T., Sumerian Economic Texts from the Drehem Archive: Sumerian and Akkadian Cuneiform Texts in the Collection of the World Heritage Museum of the University of Illinois, Vol. 1, Urbana: University of Illinois Press (1972). Kantor, H. J., The Aegean and the Orient in the Second Millennium B.C., AIA Monograph Number 1 (1947). Kaplan, M. F., “The Origin and Distribution of Tel el Yahudiyeh Ware,” Gothenburg: SIMA LXII (1980).

Bibliography

273

Keel, O., Studien zu den Stempelsiegeln aus Palastina/lsrael, Band 4, Fribourg: OBO 135 (1994). Kemp, B. J., “Temple and Town in Ancient Egypt,” in Peter Ucko et al., eds., Man, Settlement and Urbanism, London (1972), 657–79. Kenyon, K., Amorites and Canaanites, London (1966). Kessler, D., “Die Asiatenkarawane von Beni Hasan,” SAK 14 (1987) 147–65. Kinney, L., Dance, Dancers and the Performance Cohort in the Old Kingdom, BAR International Series 1809 (2008). Kitchen, K. A., “Byblos, Egypt, and Mari in the Early Second Millennium B.C.,” Or. 36 (1967) 39–54. —— Catalogue of the Egyptian Collection in the National Museum, Rio de Janeiro, Vol. 1, Text, Vol. 2, Plates, Oxford: Aris & Phillips (1990). —— “An Unusual Stela from Abydos,” JEA 47 (1961). Klein, E., A Comprehensive Etymological Dictionary of the Hebrew Language for Readers of English, New York (1987). Klengel, H., Syria 3000 to 300 B.C., Berlin (1991). Knudsen, E. E., “Cases of Free Variants in the Akkadian q Phoneme,” JCS XV (1961). Koch, R., Die Erzählung des Sinuhe, Bibliotheca Aegyptiaca XVII, Bruxelles (1990). Koenig, J. Y., “I Testi di Esecrazione di Mirgissa (Nubia),” in La Magia in Egitto, Modena: Franco Cosimo Panini (1985) 301–12. —— “Les Textes De’Envoutement de Mirgissa,” RdE 41 (1990) 101–25. Kovacs, M. G., The Epic of Gilgamesh, Stanford (1985). Kramer, S. N., Enmerkar and the Lord of Aratta, University Museum Monographs, Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania (1952). Kroeper, K. M., Das Bild des Feindes in der Rundplastik des Pharaonischen Ägypten, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität, Munich (1981) unpublished Master’s Thesis. Kupper, J., Les nomades de Mesopotamie au temps des rois de Mari, Paris (1957). Landsberger, B., “Amorites,” in Encyclopaedia Britannica, (1965) 809–10. —— The Fauna of Ancient Mesopotamia, Rome (1960). Larsen, M. T., Old Assyrian Caravan Procedures, Istanbul (1967). Lauer, J.-Ph. and J. Leclant, “Decouverte de statues de prisonniers au temple de La Pyramide de Pepi I,” RdE 21 (1969) 55–62. Leahy, A., ed., Libya and Egypt c. 1300–750 B.C., London: SOAS Centre of Near and Middle Eastern Studies and Society for Libyan Studies (1990). Leemans, W. F., The Old Babylonian Merchant, Leiden (1950). —— “The Trade Relations of Babylonia and the Question of Relations with Egypt in the Old Babylonian Period,” JESHO 3 (1960) 21–37.

274

Bibliography

Leprohon, R. J., “The Personnel of the Middle Kingdom Funerary Stelae,” JARCE 15 (1978). Lesko, L. H., ed., Pharaoh’s Workers, Ithaca and London (1994). Levine, B. A., Leviticus: The Traditional Hebrew Text with the New JPS Translation, Philadelphia (1989). Levine, B. A. and J. M. De Tarragon, “Dead Kings and Rephaim: The Patrons of the Ugaritic Dynasty,” JAOS 104 (1984) 649–59. Lewy, J., “The Old West Semitic Sun-God, H · ammu,” HUCA, 18 (1943–4) 429–88. Lichtheim, M., Ancient Egyptian Biographies Chiefly of the Middle Kingdom, Heidelberg: Universitätsverlag (1988). —— Ancient Egyptian Literature, 3 vols., Berkeley (1973–80). Liebowitz, H. A., “The Impact of the Art of Egypt on the Art of Syria and Palestine,” in D. Schmandt-Besserat, ed., Immortal Egypt: Invited Lectures on the Middle East at the University of Texas at Austin, Malibu: Undena (1978). Lilyquist, C., Ancient Egyptian Mirrors, From the Earliest Times Through the Middle Kingdom, Munich and Berlin: Münchner Ägyptologische Studien 27 (1979). —— “Granulation and Glass: Chronological and Stylistic Investigations at Selected Sites, ca. 2500–1400 B.C.E.,” BASOR 290–1 (1993). —— “Treasures from Tell Basta: Goddesses, Officials, and Artists in an International Age,” Metropolitan Museum Journal, Vol. 47, No. 1 (2012) 9–72. Limet, H., Textes Administrafs Relatifs Aux Metaux, Paris, (1986). Liverani, M., “The Amorites,” in D. J. Wiseman, ed., Peoples of Old Testament Times, Oxford (1973) 100–133. Lloyd. S., The Archaeology of Mesopotamia, London (1978). Lonnqvist, M. A., “Were Nomadic Amorites on the Move? Migration, Invasion and Gradual Infiltration as Mechanisms for Cultural Transitions,” in H. Kühne, Rainer Maria Czichon, Florian Janoscha Kreppner and Otto Harrassowitz Verlag, eds., 4 ICAANE, Proceedings of the 4th International Congress of the Archaeology of the Ancient Near East, Vol. 2, Cultural Social and Transformation. The Archaeology of Transitional Periods and Dark Ages, Excavation Requests, Harrassowitz Verlag (2008) 195–214. Lonnqvist, M. et al., “Jebel Bishri in Focus: Remote Sensing, Archaeological Surveying, Mapping and GIS Studies of Jebel Bishri in Central Syria by the Finnish Project SYGIS,” BAR International Series 2230 (2011). Loprieno, A., Topos and Mimesis, zum Ausländer in der Ägyptischen Literatur, Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz (1988). Loretz, M. D. O. and J. Sanmartin, Keilalphabetische Texte aus Ugarit, AOAT 24, Kevelaer and Neukirchen-Vluyn (1976).

Bibliography

275

Lorton, D., “The So-­called ‘Vile’ Enemies of the King of Egypt (in the Middle Kingdom and Dyn. XVIII),” JARCE 10 (1973) 65–70. Loud, G., Megiddo II, Chicago (1948). Lucas, A. and J. R. Harris, Ancient Egyptian Materials and Industries, 4th rev. edn, London (1962). Luckenbill, D. D. “The Name Hammurabi,” JAOS 37 (1917) 250–3. Luft, U., “Asiatics in Illahun: A Preliminary Report,” Sesto Congresso Internazionala Di Egittologia Atti II (1993) 291–7. Maekawa, K., “Female Weavers and Their Children in Lagash – Pre-Sargonic and Ur III,” Acta Sumerologica 2 (1980) 81. Malamat, A., “Aspects of Tribal Societies in Mari and Israel,” in XVe rencontre assyriologique internationale: La civilisation de Mari, Liege (1967) 42. Manniche, L., Music and Musicians in Ancient Egypt, London (1991). Maragioglio, V. and D. Rinaldi, “Note sulla piremide di Ameny ‘Aamw,” Or. 37 (1968) 325–8. Margalit, B., The Ugaritic Poem of Aqht: Text, Translation and Commentary, Berlin and New York (1989). Martin, G. T., Egyptian Administrative and Private Name Seals, Oxford (1971). Mate, P., “Foreign Groups at Lahun During the Late Middle Kingdom,” in A. Gulyás, A. Hasznos and E. Bechtold, eds., From Illahun to Djeme: Festschrift Dedicated to Ulrich Luft on the Occasion of His 70th Birthday, London (2012) 211–26. Matthiae, P., Ebla: An Empire Rediscovered, London (1980). —— Ebla in the Period of the Amorite Dynasties and the Dynasty of Akkad: Recent Archeological Discoveries at Tell Mardikh 1975, Malibu (1979). —— “Fouilles à Tell Mardikh-Ebla, 1978: le bâtiment Q et la nécropole princière du Bronze Moyen II,” Akkadica 17 (1980) 1–52. —— “Fragments of Early Syrian Sculpture from Royal Palace G of Mardikh-Ebla,” JNES 39 (1980). —— “Masterpieces of Early and Old Syrian Art: Discoveries of the 1988 Ebla Excavations in a Historical Perspective,” Proceedings of the British Academy LXXV, Mortimer Wheeler Archaeological Lecture (1989). —— “Nouvelles fouilles a Ebla en 1987–1989,” Academie des Inscriptions et Belles Lettres, Comptes rendes des seances de l’annee 1990,” Fasc. II, Paris (1990) 384–431. Mazar, A., Archaeology of the Land of the Bible 10,000–586 B.C.E., New York (1992). Mendelsohn, I., “Free Artisans and Slaves in Mesopotamia,” BASOR 89 (1943) 25–9. Merhav, R., Treasures of the Bible Lands: The Elie Borowski Collection, Tel Aviv Museum (1987).

276

Bibliography

Merrillees, R. S., “El-Lisht and Tell el-Yahudia Ware in the Archaeological Museum of the American University of Beirut,” Levant 10 (1978) 75–98. Montet, P., Le roi Sahure et la princese loiniaine: Melanges Syriens offert a Monsieur Rene Dussaud I (1939) 191–5. Moorey, P. R. S., “Problems in the Study of the Anthropomorphic Metal Statuary from Syro-Palestine Before 330 B.C.,” Levant XVI (1984). Morfoisse, Fl. and G. Andreu-Lanoë, eds., Sésostris III: Pharaon de légende, Lille, Musée des Beaux-Arts, du 10 octobre au 26 janvier (2014). Müller, W. M., Asien und Europa nach Altägyptischen Denkmalern (1893). —— Hieratische Palaographie, Leipzig (1909–36). Muscarella, O. W., ed., Ladders To Heaven: Art Treasures from Lands of the Bible, Exhibition Catalogue Royal Ontario Museum June 23–October 28 (1979), Toronto (1981). Naville, E., The XIth Dynasty Temple at Deir-­El-Bahari, Part I, London: The Egypt Exploration Fund (1907). —— The XIth Dynasty Temple at Deir El-Bahari, Part III, London: The Egypt Exploration Fund (1913). Negbi, O., Canaanite Gods in Metal, Tel Aviv (1976). Newberry, P. E., Beni Hasan I, London (1893). —— Beni Hasan, IV: Zoological and other Details. London (1900). —— El Bersheh, I. (1895). Nibbi, A., “Some Remarks on the Cedar of Lebanon,” Discussions in Egyptology 28 (1994). Nicholson, P. T and I. Shaw, eds., Ancient Egyptian Materials and Technologies, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press (2000). Obsomer, C., “La date de Nesou-Montou (Louvre C1),” RdE 44 (1993) 103–40. O’Callaghan, R. T., Aram Naharaim: A Contribution to the History of Upper Mesopotamia in the Second Millennium B.C., An. Or. 26, Rome (1948). O’Connor, D., “Cities and Towns,” in Egypt’s Golden Age: The Art of Living in the New Kingdom 1558–1085 B.C., Catalogue of the Exhibition Museum of Fine Arts, Boston (1982). —— “Egypt’s View of Others,” in J. Tait, ed., Never Had the Like Occurred: Egypt’s View of its Past, London: UCL Press (2003) 155–86. —— “The Locations of Yam and Kush and Their Historical Significance,” JARCE 23 (1986) 27–50. —— “The Nature of Tjemhu (Libyan) Society in the Later New Kingdom,” in A. Leahy, ed., Libya and Egypt c.1300–750 B.C., London (1990) 29–33.

Bibliography

277

Opificius, R., Das altbabylonische Terrakottarelief: Untersuchungen zur Assyriologie und vorderasiatischen Archäologie 2, Berlin: DeGruyter (1961). Oppenheim, A., “Aspects of the Pyramid Temple of Senwosret III at Dahshur: The Pharaoh and Deities,” New York University Dissertation (2008). Oppenheim, A., Do. Arnold, D. Arnold, K. Yamamoto, eds., Ancient Egypt Transformed, The Middle Kingdom, Exhibition Catalogue, The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York (2015). Orlin, L., Assyrian Colonies in Cappadocia (Studies in Ancient History 1), The Hague and Paris (1970). Orthmann, W., ed., Propyläen Kunstgeschichte 14, Berlin (1975). Paltiel, E., “Ethnicity and State in the Kingdom of Ugarit,” Abr-Nahrain 19 (1980–81). Parrot, A., “Cérémonie de la main et réinvestiture,” Studia Mariana (1950) 37–40. —— Le palais: peintures murales MAM II, Bibliothèque archéologique historique, LXIX Paris (1958). Parrot, A. and F. Dossin, eds., Archives royales de Mari, Paris (1950). Paton, D., Animals of Ancient Egypt, Princeton (1925). Peet, T. E., The Stela of Sebek-­khu: The Earliest Record of an Egyptian Campaign in Asia, Manchester (1914). Petrie, W. M. F., Buttons and Design Scarabs, London (1925). —— Deshasheh, London (1898). —— lllahun, Kahun and Gurob 1889–90, London (1891). —— Kahun, Gurob and Hawara, London (1890). —— Researches in Sinai, London (1906). Pettinato, G., Ebla: A New Look at History, trans. F. Richardson, Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press (1991). —— “Mardu in the Ebla Texts,” Or. 54 (1985) 7–13. Petzel, T. F. E., Textiles of Ancient Mesopotamia, Persia and Egypt, Corvallis, OR (1987) 147–8. Piacentini, P., “Egiziani e Asiatici su un rilievo della VI dinastia a Deshasheh”, SEAP I (1987). Pinch, G., “Red Things: The Symbolism of Colour in Magic,” in W. V. Davies, ed., Colour and Painting in Ancient Egypt, London: The British Museum Press (2001) 182–5. Pitard, W. T., Ancient Damascus, Winona Lake (1987). —— “A New Edition of the Rapi’uma Texts: KTU 1:20–22,” BASOR (1992) 285. Poo Mu-Chou, Enemies Of Civilization: Attitudes Toward Foreigners in Ancient Mesopotamia, Egypt, and China, New York: State University of New York Press (2005).

278

Bibliography

Porter, A., Mobile Pastoralism and the Formation of Near Eastern Civilizations: Weaving Together Society, reprint edn, Cambridge University Press (2014). Porter, B. and R. Moss, Topographical Bibliography of Ancient Egyptian Hieroglyphic Texts, Reliefs and Paintings, 2nd edn, part I, Oxford (1960) (1992). Posener, G., “Les Asiatiques en Égypte sous les XIIe et XIIIe dynasties,” Syria 34 (1957) 145–63. —— “Les Empreintes Magiques de Gizeh et les Mort Dangereux,” MDAIK 18 (1958) 252–70. —— “La legende de la tresse d’Hathor”, in L. H. Lesko, ed., Egyptological Studies in Honor of Richard Parker, Hanover, NH and London: University Press of New England (1986) 111–17. —— “Nh· syw et Mdzyw,” ZÄS 83 (1958). ¯ —— Princes et pays d’Asie et de Nubie, Brussels (1940). —— “Syria and Palestine c. 2160–1780 B.C.: Relations with Egypt,” in I. E. S. Edwards, C. J. Gadd and N. G. L. Hammond, eds., The Cambridge Ancient History: Early History of the Middle East, I, Part 2A, 3rd edn, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press (1980). Postgate, J. N., with a contribution by S. Payne, “Some Old Babylonian Shepherds and their Flocks,” JSS 20, No. I (1975) 1–21. Prag, K., “Ancient and Modern Pastoral Migration in the Levant,” Levant 18 (1985). Pritchard, J. B., ed., Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament, 3rd edn, with Supplement, Princeton (1969). Quibbell, J. E. and A. G. K. Hayter, Excavations at Saqqara: Teti Pyramid, North Side, Cairo (1927). Quirke, S., “Colour vocabularies in Ancient Egyptian,” in W. V. Davies, ed., Colour and Painting in Ancient Egypt, London: The British Museum Press (2001) 186–92. —— Going out in Daylight – prt m hrw: The Ancient Egyptian Book of the Dead – Translations, Sources, Meaning, London: GHP Egyptology 20 (2013). —— ed., Middle Kingdom Studies, New Malden, Surrey, England: SIA (1991). Rainey, A. F., Remarks on Donald Redford’s Egypt, Canaan, and Israel in Ancient Times, BASOR 295 (1994) 81–2. —— “The World of Sinuhe” Israel Oriental Studies 2, Jerusalem (1972). Ranke, H., Die Personennamen in den Urkunden der Hammurabi dynastie: Ein Beitrag zur Kenntniss der Semitischen Namensbildung, München (1902). Redford, D. B., The Akhenaten Temple Project, Vol. 2, Toronto (1988). —— “Egypt and Western Asia in the Old Kingdom,” JARCE 23 (1986) 127. —— Egypt, Canaan, and Israel in Ancient Times, Princeton (1992). —— A Study of the Biblical Story of Joseph, Supplements to Vetus Testamentum XX, Leiden (1970).

Bibliography

279

Reiner, E., “Lipšur Litanies,” JNES 15 (1956). Reeves, N., “A Rare Mechanical Figure from Ancient Egypt” (in press), Metropolitan Museum Journal 50 (2015). Rimmer, J., Ancient Musical Instruments of Western Asia in the British Museum, London (1969). Ritner, R. K., The Mechanics of Ancient Egyptian Magical Practice, Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilization 54, Chicago: Oriental Institute (1993). Roccati, A., La Littérature Historique Sous l’ Ancient Empire Égyptien, Paris (1982). Roehrig, C., Life Along the Nile: Three Egyptians of Ancient Thebes, The Metropolitan Museum of Art Bulletin, New Series, Vol. 60, No. 1, Summer (2002). Roehrig, C. H., with Renee Dreyfus and Cathleen A. Keller, eds., Hatshepsut: From Queen to Pharaoh, Exhibition Catalogue, New York (2006). Romano, J. R., “A Statuette of a Royal Mother in The Brooklyn Museum,” MDAIK 48 (1991) 131–43. Rowton, M. B., “Autonomy and Nomadism in Western Asia,” Orientalia 42, Fasc. 1–2 (1973) 247–58. —— “Dimorphic Structure and Topology,” Oriens antiquus XV, Fasc. 2, (1976) 17–31. Ryholt, K. S. B., Political Situation in Egypt During the Second Intermediate Period c. 1800–1550 BC, Copenhagen: Carsten Niebuhr Institute Publications (1998). Saretta, P., Egyptian Perceptions of West Semites in Art and Literature: An Archaeological, Art Historical and Textual Survey During the Middle Kingdom, New York University Dissertation (1997). —— “Of Lyres, Lions, Light and Everything New Under the Sun: An Amarna Relief in the Metropolitan Museum of Art,” BES 19 (forthcoming). Sarna, N., The JPS Commentary: Genesis, Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society (1989). Sass, B., Studia Alphabetica: On the Origin and Early History of the Northwest Semitic, South Semitic and Greek Alphabets, Fribourg and Göttingen: Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis, 102 (1991). Sasson, J. M., “Artisans . . . Artists: Documentary Perspecives from Mari,” in Ann C. Gunter, ed., lnvestigating Artistic Environments in the Ancient Near East,” Washington, DC (1990) 21–7. —— “Instances of Mobility Among Mari Artisans,” BASOR 190 (1968). Schaeffer, C. F. A., “Les fouilles de Ras Shamra (Ugarit),” Syria 16 (1935) 141ff. Schiestl, R., “The Statue of an Asiatic Man from Tell el-Dab’a, Egypt,” Egypt and the Levant XVI (2006). Schlossman, B. L., “Two North Mesopotamian Bronze Beakers of the Early Second Millennium B.C.,” Archiv für Orientforschung, 25. Bd. (1974/1977) 143–60.

280

Bibliography

Schneider, T., “Asiatische Personennamen,” in Aegyptischen Quellen des Neuen Reiches, Fribourg: Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis 114 (1992). —— Ausländer in Ägypten während des Mittleren Reiches und der Hyksoszeit: Teil I, Die ausländischen Könige, Teil 2, die Ausländische Bevölkerung (1998). Schoske, S. and D. Wildung, “Das Münchner Buch der Ägyptischer Kunst,” Staatliche Museum Ägyptischer Kunst (2013). Schulman, A. R. “The Battle Scenes of the Middle Kingdom,” SSEA 12 (1982) 165–83. —— “Egyptian Representations of Horsemen and Riding in the New Kingdom,”JNES 16 (1957). Seeden, H. The Standing Armed Figurines in the Levant: Prähistorische Bronzefunde, Abteilung I. Band I, Munich (1980). Segert, A., A Basic Grammar of the Ugaritic Language, Berkeley (1984). Sethe, K., Ägyptische Lesestücke, Leipzig (1928). —— Urkunden des alten Reichs, I. II. Leipzig (1903). —— Die Achtung feindlicher Fürsten, Völker und Dinge auf Altägyptischen Tongefässscherben des Mittleren Reiches, Berlin: APAW 5 (1926). —— Beiträge zu den Expeditionen de Mittleren Reiches in die Ost-Wüste, Hildesheim (1981). Shantur, B. and Y. Labadi, “Tomb 204 at ‘Ain-Samiya,” IEJ 21 (1971) 73–7. Shea, W. J. H., “Artistic Balance Among the Beni Hasan Asiatics,” BA 4 (1981) 219–228. Shedid, A. G., Die Felsgräber von Beni Hassan in Mittelägypten, Zaberns Bildbände zur Archäologie, Band 16, Mainz: Zabern (1994). Sigrist, M., Drehem, Bethesda (1992). Simpson, W. K., The Terrace of the Great Gods at Abydos: The Offering Chapels of Dynasties 12 and 13, (ANOC) New Haven and Philadelphia (1974). Sliwa, J., “Some Remarks Concerning Victorious Ruler Representations in Egyptian Art,” Forschungen und Berichte 16 (1974) 97–116. Smith, S. The Statue of Idrimi, London (1949). Smith, S. T., “Ethnicity and Culture,” in T. Wilkinson, ed., The Egyptian World, London: Routledge (2009) 218–41. —— “Revenge of the Kushites: Assimilation and Resistance in Egypt’s New Kingdom Empire and Nubian Ascendancy over Egypt,” in G. E. Areshian, ed., Empires and Diversity: On the Crossroads of Archaeology, Anthropology, and History, Los Angeles: Cotsen Institute of Archaeology (2013) 54–107. —— Wretched Kush: Ethnic Identities and Boundaries in Egypt’s Nubian Empire, London: Routledge (2003). Smith, W. S., “Influence of the Middle Kingdom of Egypt in Western Asia, Especially in Byblos,” AJA 73 (1969) 277–81.

Bibliography

281

—— Interconnections in the Ancient Near East, New Haven and London (1965). —— “The Old Kingdom Linen List,” ZÄS 71 (1935) 134–49. Sollberger, E., Administrative Texts Chiefly Concerning Textiles, Rome: ARET 8 (1986). Spanel, D., “The Herakleopolitan Tombs of Kheti I Jt(.j)jb(.j) and Kheti II at Asyut,” Orientalia 58 (1989) 301–14. Spar, I., Cuneiform Texts in The Metropolitan Museum of Art, Vol. I: Tablets, Cones, and Bricks of the Third and Second Millennia B.C., New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art (1988). Speiser, E. A., Genesis: The Anchor Bible, Garden City (1964). Spycket, A., La statuaire du Proche-Orient ancien, Leiden (1981). Stadelmann, R., Syrisch-­palästinensische Gottheiten in Ägypten, Probleme der Ägyptologie, 5, Leiden: Brill (1967). Staehelin, E., “Zur Hathorsymbolic in der aegyptischen Kleinkunst,” ZÄS 105 (1978) 76–84. Staubli, T., Das Image der Nomaden im Alten Israel und in der Ikonographie seiner sesshaften Nachbarn, OBO, 107 (1991) 33–5. Steible, H., Die neusumerischen Bau-­und Weihinschriften, Freiburger Altorientalische Studien 9, 2 vols., Stuttgart (1991). Stephens, F. J., Personal Names from Cuneiform Inscriptions of Cappadocia, YOS 13, New Haven: Yale University Press (1928). Stewart, H. M., Egyptian Stelae, Reliefs and Paintings from the Petrie Collection, Vol. 2, Warminster: Aris and Phillips (1976). Teasley-Trope, B., S. Quirke and P. Lacovara, eds., Excavating Egypt: Great Discoveries from the Petrie Museum of Egyptian Archaeology, University College, London, Atlanta: Michael C. Carlos Museum (2005). Thompson, T. L., The Historicity of the Pariarchal Narratives, Berlin and New York: BZAW (1974). Tigay, J. H., The Evolution of the Gilgamesh Epic, Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press (1982). Tomabichi, Y., “Wall Paintings and Related Color Schemes of the Old Babylonian Mari Architecture,” Sumer 36 (1980) 139–45. Tomback, R. S., A Comparative Semitic Lexicon of the Phoenician and Languages, Missoula: SBL Dissertation Services 32 (1978). Tyloch, W., “The Evidence of the Proto-Lexicon for the Cultural Background of Semitic Peoples,” Hamito-Semitica (1975) 55–61. Uphill, E., “The Nine Bows,” JEOL 19 (1966) 393–420. Valbelle, D., Les neufs arcs: l’égyptien et les étrangers de la prehistoire à la conquete d’Alexandre, Paris (1990).

282

Bibliography

Van De Mieroop, M., The Ancient Mesopotamian City, Oxford: Oxford University Press (1997). —— “Sheep and Goat Herding According to the Old Babylonian Texts from Ur,” Bulletin on Sumerian Agriculture 7 (1993). Van Seters, J., “A Date for the Admonitions in the Second Intermediate Period,” JEA 50 (1964) 13–23. Veenhof, K. R., Aspects of Old Assyrian Trade and its Terminology, Leiden: Brill (1972). Ventura, R., “Snefru in Sinai and Amenophis I at Deir El-Medina,” in S. I. Groll, ed., Pharaonic Egypt: The Bible and Christianity, Tel Aviv: Hebrew University (1985) 278–88. Vogel, C., “Fallen Heroes? Winlock’s ‘Slain Soldiers’ Reconsidered,” JEA 89 (2003). Vogelsang-Eastwood, G., The Production of Linen in Pharaonic Egypt, Leiden (1992) 36–9. Volten, A., “Die Lehre für König Merikare,” Zwei altägyptische politische Schriften, Copenhagen: Analecta Aegyptiaca 4 (1945) 104–28. Wachsmann, S., Aegeans In The Theban Tombs, Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta 20, Leuven: Peeters (1987). Ward, W. A., Index of Egyptian Administrative and Religious Titles of the Middle Kingdom, Beirut (1982). Wegner, J., “Burial Place of the Third Senwosret? Old and New Excavations at the Abydene Complex of Senwosret III,” KMT 6, Summer (1995). —— The Mortuary Temple of Senwosret III at Abydos, New Haven (2007). —— “The Town of Wah-Sut at South Abydos: 1999 Excavations”, MDAIK 57 (2001). Weeks, K., ed., Egyptology and the Social Sciences, Cairo (1979). Weiss, H., ed., Ebla to Damascus: Art and Archaeology of Ancient Syria, Exhibition Catalogue, Washington, DC (1985). —— The Origins of Cities in Dry-Farming Syria and Mesopotamia in the Third Millennium B.C., Guilford, CT (1986). Wilcke, C., Das Lugalbandaepos, Wiesbaden (1969). Wilkinson, Toby, “Egypt and Mesopotamia,” in T. Wilkinson, ed., The Egyptian World, London and New York: Routledge (2007) 449–58. Wilson, J. A., “The Egyptian Middle Kingdom at Megiddo,” AJSL 58, (1941) 225–36. —— “rev. of G. Posener, ‘Littérature et politique dans l’Égypte de la XIIe dynastie,’ ” JNES (1957) 275–77. Winlock, H. E., “The Egyptian Expedition, 1921–22,” Metropolitan Museum of Art Bulletin, II, New York (1922). —— The Slain Soldiers of Neb-­hep-et-Rē’Mentu-­hotpe, New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art (1945).

Bibliography

283

—— The Treasure of Three Egyptian Princesses, New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art (1948). Wiseman, D. J., “rev. of Buccellati, The Amorites of the Ur III Period,” JSS XVI (1971) 86–8. Woolley, L. and M. Mallowan, Ur Excavations 7, The Old Babylonian Period, London: Publications of the Joint Expedition of the British Museum and of the Museum of the University of Pennsylvania to Mesopotamia (1976). Wouters, J., L. Maes and R. Germer, “The Identification of Haematite as a Red Colorant on an Egyptian Textile from the Second Millennium B.C.,” Studies in Conservation 35 (1990). Yadin, Y., The Art of Warfare in Biblical Lands in Light of Archaeological Study, New York (1963). —— “A Note on the Scenes Depicted on the ‘Ain-Samiya Cup,” IEJ 21 (1971) 82–5. Yeivin, Z., “A Silver Cup from Tomb 204a at ‘Ain-Samiya,” IEJ 21 (1971) 78–81. Yoffee, N., “The Economics of Ritual in Late Old Babylonian Kish,” JESHO, Vol. 41, Issue 3 (1998) 312–43, p. 318. Zarins, J., “Early Pastoral Nomadism and the Settlement of Lower Mesopotamia,” BASOR 280 (Nov. 1990) 31–64. —— “Equids Associated with Human Burials in Third Millennium B.C. Mesopotamia: Two Complementary Facets,” in R. H. Meadow and H.-P. Uerpmann, eds., Equids in the Ancient World, Wiesbaden: Beihefte Zum Tübinger Atlas Des Vorderen Orients, Reihe A (Naturwissenschaften) Nr. 19/1 (1986). Zettler, R., “Written Documents as Excavated Artifacts and the Holistic Interpretation of the Mesopotamian Archaeological Record,” in J. S. Cooper and G. M. Schwartz, eds., The Study of the Ancient Near East in the 21st Century: The William Foxwell Albright Centennial Conference, Winona Lake (1996) 81–101. Ziegler, C., Catalogue des stèles, peintures et reliefs égyptiens de l’Ancien Empire et de la Première Periode Intermédiaire vers 286–2040 avant J.-C., Paris: Musee du Louvre (1990). Ziffer, I. At that Time the Canaanites were in the Land: Daily Life in Middle Bronze Age Canaan, 2000–1550 BCE, Exhibition Catalogue, English and Hebrew, Tel Aviv (1990).

Chronological Tables* Egypt Based on J. Baines; J. Malek, compiled by Dieter Arnold, Scepter of Egypt I. (Revised 1990); Dynasty XIII follows W. Grajetzki, The Middle Kingdom of Ancient Egypt (2006); Dynasty XIV follows R. Kraus, Sothis-und Monddaten (1985).

EARLY DYNASTIC PERIOD

2920–2649BC

Dynasty I   Menes (Narmer) Dynasty II   Raneb   Khasekhemwy

2920–2770

OLD KINGDOM Dynasty III   Djoser

2649–2150 2649–2575

Dynasty IV   Snefru   Khufu (Cheops)   Djedefra   Khafra (Chephren)   Menkaura (Mycerinus)   Shepseskaef

2575–2465

2770–2649

* All dates are approximate and have been compiled from various sources. As new evidence comes to light, the chronologies continue to be reassessed. Thus, the dates may not reflect the most current state of scholarly discussion.

286

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

Dynasty V   Userkaef   Sahura   Neferirkare Kakai   Neuserra Iny   Djedkara Izezi   Unis

2465–2323

Dynasty VI   Teti   Pepi I   Merenra I   Pepi II

2323–2150

FIRST INTERMEDIATE PERIOD 2150–2040 Dynasties VII/VIII–XI   (Up to unification) MIDDLE KINGDOM Dynasty XI   Inyotef I   Inyotef II   Inyotef III   Mentuhotep Nebhepetra    Unification   Mentuhotep Seankhkara   Mentuhotep Nebtawyra

2040–1640 2134–1991 2134–2118 2118–2069 2069–2061 2061–2010 2040 2010–1998 1998–1991

Dynasty XII   Amenemhat I   Senwosret I   Amenemhat II   Senwosret II   Senwosret III   Amenemhat III

1991–1783 1991–1962 1971–1926 1929–1892 1897–1878 1878–1841? 1844–1797

Chronological Tables

  Amenemhat IV   Nefrusobek

1799–1787 1787–1783

Dynasty XIII (1759–1685 BC)   Khutawyre Wegaf   Sekhemkare Amenemhat (V) Senebef   Ameny Qemau [Aamu]   Hetepibre Qemau Sa-Hornedtjef   Iufni   Seankhibre Amenemhat Intef Ameny   Semenkare Nebnun   Sehetibre   Sewadjkare   Nedjemibre   Khaankhre Sobekhotep I   Amenemhat Renseneb   Auibra Hor   Sedjefakare Amenemhat Kay   Sekhemre-Khutawy Amenemhat Sobekhotep II   Userkar-Nimaatre Khendjer   Semenkhare Mermesha   Sehetepkare Intef   Meribre Seth   Sekhemre Sobekhotep III   Khasekhemre Neferhotep (I)   Sahathor   Khaneferre Sobekhotep (IV)   Khahotepre Sobekhotep (V)   Wahibre Ibjau   Merneferre Iy Dynasty XIV

ca. 1710–1640?

SECOND INTERMEDIATE PERIOD   (Hyksos Period)

1640–1532

287

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

288

Dynasties XV–XVII NEW KINGDOM Dynasty XVIII   Ahmose   Amenhotep I   Tuthmosis I   Tuthmosis II   Hatshepsut   Tuthmosis III   Amenhotep II   Tuthmosis IV   Amenhotep III   Amenhotep IV   (Akhenaten)   Smenkhkara   Tutankhamun   Aja   Horemheb

1550–1070 1550–1307 1550–1525 1525–1504 1504–1492 1492–1479 1473–1458 1479–1425 1427–1401 1401–1391 1391–1353 1353–1335 1335–1333 1333–1323 1323–1319 1319–1307

MESOPOTAMIA-Chronological Table Compiled from E. Porada, D. P. Hansen, S. Dunham, S. H. Babcock,   Chronologies of Old World Archaeology (1993) AKKADIAN PERIOD              

Sargon Rimush Manishtushu Naram Sin Shar-Kali-Sharri Dudu Shu-Turul

2334–2279 BC 2278–2270 2269–2255 2254–2218 2217–2193 2189–2169 2168–2154

Chronological Tables

(The Second Dynasty of Lagash)   Gudea 2150–2100   Ur-Ningirsu UR III          

Ur-Nammu Shulgi Amar-Su’ena Shu-Sin Ibbi-Sin

2112–2095 2094–2047 2046–2038 2037–2029 2028–2004

ISIN                        

Ishbi-Erra Shu-ilishu Iddin-Dagan Ishme-Dagan Lipit-lshtar Ur-Ninurta Bur-Sin Lipit-Enlil Enlil-bani Zambiya lter-pisha Sin-magir

2017–1985 1984–1975 1974–1954 1953–1935 1934–1924 1923–1896 1895–1874 1873–1869 1860–1837 1827–1817 ˝ ˝

LARSA            

Naplanum Emisum Samium Zabaya Gungunum Abisare

2025–2005 2004–1977 1976–1942 1941–1933 1932–1906 1905–1895

289

Asiatics in Middle Kingdom Egypt

290

                   

Sumu’el Nur Adad Sin-Iddinam Sin-Eribam Sin-Iqisham Warad-Sin Rim-Sin Rim-Sin II (Sealand) Ili-man

1894–1866 1865–1850 1849–1843

1834–1823 1822–1763

OLD BABYLONIAN PERIOD BABYLON   Sumuabum   Sumula’el   Sabium   Apil-Sin   Sin-muballit   Hammurabi   Samsu-iluna   Abi-eshuh   Ammi-ditana   Ammi-s· aduqa   Samsu-ditana

1894–1881 1880–1845 1844–1831 1830–1813 1812–1793 1792–1750 1749–1712 1711–1684 1683–1647 1646–1626 1625–1594

SYRIA-Chronological Table EBLA (Based on P. Matthiae Ebla, An Empire Rediscovered English Translation (1980)   Mardikh I   Mardikh IIA   Mardikh IIBI

ca.3500–2900 2900–2400 2400–2250

Chronological Tables

         

Mardikh IIBII Mardikh IIIA Mardikh IIIB Mardikh IVA Mardikh IVB

2250–2000 2000–1800 1800–1600 1600–1400 1400–1200

MARI based on Durand, Mari 4 (1985)   Shakkanakku (governors)   Ishtup Ilum   Idi-Ilum   Puzur-Ishtar Kings   Yaggid-Lim   Yahdun-Lim   (Yasmah-Adad)   Zimri-Lim

2147–2136 2090–2085 2050–2025

ca. 1830 ca. 1825–1810 1782–1759

BYBLOS Based on Kitchen, Orientalia 36 (1967) ‘Middle’ Dates                  

Ib-dadi Abishemu I Yapi-shemu-abi Yakin (-ilu) Yantin (-’ammu) Ilima-Yapi(?) Abishemu II Yapa’ -shemu-abi ‘Egel / ‘Egliya

2050 1820–1795 1795–1780 1780–1765 1765–1735 1735–1720 1720–1700 1700–1690 1690–1670

291

Sources of Illustrations 2.1

2.2 2.3

3.1 3.2

3.3

3.4

3.5

3.6 3.7

Map showing the location of Jebel Bishri. Drawing by Sara Chen, satellite image from from Google Earth; based on satellite mapping, Minna Lonnqvist, Jebel Bishri project. Worshipper of Larsa. Musée du Louvre, Paris, France, #AO 15704 Material: Bronze, gold. DEA / G. DAGLI ORTI, Getty Images. The god Amurru. Gods, Demons and Symbols of Ancient Mesopotamia, British Museum Press, Jeremy Black, Anthony Green (1992) P. 130, fig. 106 Reproduced with kind permission of Tessa Rickards. The Four Divisions of Humankind. Book of Gates, the four human races in the 5th hour, copy by Minutoli in 1820. Wall Tile Depicting an Asiatic Captive. The Metropolitan Museum of Art. Purchase, Edward S. Harkness Gift, 1926 Accession Number: 26.7.969. Image © The Metropolitan Museum of Art. Ivory Furniture Element of an Asiatic captive, New Kingdom. The Metropolitan Museum of Art. Purchase, Fletcher Fund and The Guide Foundation Inc. Gift, 1966. Accession Number: 66.99.50. Image © The Metropolitan Museum of Art. Limestone Statue of a Kneeling captive. The Metropolitan Museum of Art. Purchase, Louis V. Bell Fund, 1964 Accession Number: 47.2. Image © The Metropolitan Museum of Art. Limestone Statue of a Kneeling Captive. The Metropolitan Museum of Art. Purchase, Louis V. Bell Fund, 1964 Accession Number: 64.260. Image © The Metropolitan Museum of Art. Relief of Sekhemkhet at Sinai, Wady Magharah. Gardiner, T. E. Peet, The Inscriptions of Sinai I, Second Edition, PL. Ia (1952). Foreign Captives Represented on the North Wall of the Funerary Temple of Sahure at Abusir. L. Borchardt, Das Grabdenkmal des königs S’ah· u-Re, Band II, Die Wandbilder, Leipzig (1913) Plate 5.

294

3.8

Sources of Illustrations

Egyptians attacking a fortified town, from the North half of the East wall of the upper chamber of Inti’s tomb at Deshasheh. W.M. F. Petrie, Deshasheh, Fifteenth Memoir of The Egypt Exploration Fund (1898), Pl. IV. 3.9 Starving Bedouin, Fifth Dynasty, Famine Stricken Women, (detail) reign of Unas. Limestone with faint remains of paint. Causeway of Unas at Saqqara, Old Kingdom. Musee du Louvre, Paris E 17381, (c) Werner Forman, Getty Images. 3.10a (detail of Fig 3.7) Captive, represented with straight-striated hair. Scene from the east wall of the west passage of the mortuary temple of King Sahure of Dynasty V at Abusir. L. Borchardt, Das Grabdenkmal des königs S’ah ․u-Re, Band II, Die Wandbilder, Leipzig (1913) Plate 5 (detail). 3.10b Wavy-haired Asiatics. Scene from a Syrian Expedition, from the mortuary tmple of King Sahure at Abusir. Detail of fig. 8,. L. Borchardt, Das Grabdenkmal des königs S’ah ․u-Re, Band II, Die Wandbilder, Leipzig (1913) Detail of Plate 13. 3.10c Headdress from Ebla, divided into large wavy locks. Matthiae 1980: 262, Fig. 14 (© MAIS). Missione Archeologica Italiana in Siria – Tell Mardikh Excavation Project. 3.11a Limestone relief fragment of a battle scene with defeated Asiatics; Trustees of the British Museum, EA732. 3.11b Part of a painted limestone temple relief depicting a bowing foreigner, Temple of Mentuhotep. EA730, Trustees of the British Museum. 3.12 Asiatic Foreigners in a siege and battle scene from the Tomb of Intef, D. Arnold and J. Settgast, “Erster Vorbericht über die vom Deutschen Archäologischen Institut Kairo im Asasif unternommenen Arbeiten, 1.und 2. Kampagne” MDAIK 20 (1965), 47–61, fig. 2. 3.13 Papyrus Lythgoe, Two papyrus fragments, The Metropolitan Museum of Art, Rogers Fund, 1909 Accession Number: 09.180.535. Image © The Metropolitan Museum of Art. 3.14 A clay sealing inscribed: “Byblos boat”, Lisht South. G. T. Martin, Egyptian Administrative and Private-Name Seals, Principally of the Midde Kingdom and Second Intermediate Period, Oxford (1971) 1827, Pl. 2.

Sources of Illustrations

295

3.15 Block of Relief – Captives (upper half and lower half of the scene). Accession Numbers: 09.180.54; 09.180.50. Lisht South, Pyramid Temple of Senwosret I, Altar Court, Limestone, paint, The Metropolitan Museum of Art, Rogers Fund, 1909. Image © The Metropolitan Museum of Art. 3.16a Detail, of fig. 3.15, Asiatic captive from relief of the Altar Court of Senwosret I. 3.16b Detail of a Syrian in a New Kingdom painting from the tomb of Puimre, M. Hill, Egyptian Wall Paintings: The Metropolitan Museum of Art’s Collection of Facsimiles, New York (1983). 3.16c Detail from a New Kingdom painting from the tomb of Pehsukher Tjenenu. J. Baines and J. Malek, Atlas (1993) 106. 3.16d Detail from the Late Period tomb of Ankh-Hor. Bietak, M. und E. Reiser-Haslauer, Das Grab Des ‘Anch-Hor I, Untersuchunger der zweigstelle Kairo des Österreichischen Archäologischen Institutes IV, Wien (1978) 255 and Pl. XV, Abb 11 6. 3.17 Fragment from a battle scene depicting a foreigner throwing a spear and holding a distinctive shield, Limestone, The Metropolitan Museum of Art, Rogers Fund, 1913. Accession Number: 13.235. Image © The Metropolitan Museum of Art. 3.18 Fragmentary head of an Asiatic Dignitary from Tell el-Dab’a. M. Bietak, Avaris, The Capital of the Hyksos (1996) Figure 17. 3.19 Asiatic Soldier with red hair – Tomb of Amenemhet (tomb 2) Beni Hasan. P. E. Newberry, Beni Hasan, IV, Zoological and other Details. London (1900), Pl. XXIII. 3.20a Relief of a Procession of Deities. The Metropolitan Museum of Art, Rogers Fund, 1914, Accession Number: 14.125a, b. Image © The Metropolitan Museum of Art. 3.20b Detail of 3.20a, Sopdu. The Metropolitan Museum of Art, Rogers Fund, 1914, Accession Number: 14.125a, b. Image © The Metropolitan Museum of Art. 3.21a Asiatic Mercenaries from the Tomb of Baqt III, Tomb 15, P. E. Newberry, Beni Hasan II, Plate VI, Main Chamber East Wall. 3.21b Mercenaries from the Tomb of Khety, Tomb 17, East Wall, P. E. Newberry, Beni Hasan II, London 1893, Pl. XV and p. 60.

296

Sources of Illustrations

3.21c Mercenaries from the Tomb of Khnumhotep I, Tomb 14, P. E. Newberry, Beni Hasan I, Pl. XLVII. 3.22a Mercenaries from the Tomb (no. 2) of Amenemhat at Beni Hasan, East Wall; P. E. Newberry, Beni Hasan I, Plate XVI. 3.22b Slain soldier of Nebhepetre Mentuhotep. H. E. Winlock, The Slain Soldiers of Neb-hepet-re Mentu-Hotep Publications of The Metropolitan Museum of Art Egyptian Expedition, Volume XVI, New York, 1945, Plate IX A. Archival Photo, courtesy of The Metropolitan Museum of Art. 3.22c Mercenary from the Tomb (no. 2) of Amenemhat at Beni Hasan, East Wall (Detail) P. E. Newberry, Beni Hasan I, Plate XVI. 3.23a Caravan Scene of ꜤꜢmw Asiatics from the Tomb of Khnumhotep II, Tomb No. 3 at Beni Hasan. P. E. Newberry, Beni Hasan I, (1893) pl. XXXI. 3.23b Detail of Caravan Scene from Tomb no. 3 at Beni Hasan showing Ib-Sha, Ruler of the Foreign Land. P. E. Newberry, Beni Hasan I, (1893) pl. XXX. 3.24 Limestone Statue Head of an Asiatic Foreigner (from Tell Dab’a) The Staatliches Museum Ägyptischer Kunst (State Museum of Egyptian Art) Munich AS 7171. 3.25 The Gold Pectoral of Queen Mereret from Dahshur, The Egyptian Museum, Cairo, CG 52003. 3.26 Diorite Statue of Ishtup-Ilum, (Mari), Mesopotamian, (18th century BC) National Museum, Aleppo, Syria. 5000 Years of the art of Mesopotamia. E. Strommenger. Photographs by, Max Hirmer. H. N. Abrams (1964). Pl. 154. 3.27 Chlorite statue of Ur-Ningirsu, son of Gudea, Neo-Sumerian Date: ca. 2080 B.C. Mesopotamia, probably from Girsu (modern Tello) NeoSumerian Inscribed, Rogers Fund, 1947 and Lent by Musée du Louvre Accession Number: 47.100.86+L.2006.29. Image © The Metropolitan Museum of Art. 3.28 Toggle. Second Intermediate Period. Dynasty 15 Date: ca. 1648–1540 B.C. Eastern Delta. Tell el-Dab’a (Avaris), Gold, glass inlay. Purchase, Lila Acheson Wallace Gift, 1968. Accession Number: 68.136.2. Image © The Metropolitan Museum of Art.

Sources of Illustrations

297

3.29a Detail of women from the tomb painting of Khnumhotep II at Beni Hasan, Ancient Egyptian Paintings, Vol. I, Plates X and XI, by Nina M. Davies and Alan H. Gardiner University of Chicago Press (1936), courtesy of the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago. 3.29b Seal With Step Pattern design. Petrie, Buttons and Design Scarabs, Pl. IV, 237, 239. 3.29c Proto-Elamite silver bull holding a spouted vessel. The Metropolitan Museum of Art, Purchase, Joseph Pulitzer Bequest, 1966. Accession Number: 66.173. Image © The Metropolitan Museum of Art. 3.30a Serabit el Khadim – Asiatic transporting himself on the back of a donkey, Sinai Stele 495, South East Face (detail) Gardiner and Peet, Sinai II, 206. 3.30b Rider on a donkey, BLMJ 2044, Courtesy of the Bible Lands Museum Jerusalem, Photographer: A. Hay. 3.30c Scarab in Berlin – female figure on a donkey. Bietak, M, I. Hein et al. Pharaonen und Fremde Dynastien im Dunkel Exhibition Catalogue, Rathaus Vienna 8 Sept. – 23 Oct (1994), 165, Kat. Nr. 151. 3.31a Bronze Beaker BLMJ 2045 (man riding a donkey), Courtesy of the Bible Lands Museum Jerusalem, Photographer: B. Robertson. 3.31b Bronze Beaker (detail) BLMJ 2045, Illustration by C. Richards. 3.31c Byblos Dagger Sheath from the Obelisk Temple at Byblos (donkey rider). I. Ziffer At that time the Canaanites were in the Land: Daily Life in Canaan in the Middle Bronze Age 2, 2000–1550 B.C.E., (Exhibition Catalogue, English and Hebrew) Tel Aviv (1990), p. 80, fig. 89, drawing by Eli Luria © Irit Ziffer. 3.32a Beni Hasan Lyre player. Ancient Egyptian Paintings, Vol. I, Plates X and XI, by Nina M. Davies and Alan H. Gardiner, published in 1936, University of Chicago Press, courtesy of the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago. 3.32b Partially restored oblique lyre. New Kingdom, Dynasty 18, early ca. 1550–1458 B.C, Thebes, el-Asasif, The Metropolitan Museum of Art, Rogers Fund, 1916. Accession Number: 16.10.504. Image © The Metropolitan Museum of Art. 4.1a Historical Papyrus in Five Pieces. Accession Number: 35.1446a-e. Brooklyn Museum, Gift of Theodora Wilbour.

298

Sources of Illustrations

4.1b Verso, lines 1–16, Handwritten copy of papyrus in 1a). W C. Hayes, A Papyrus of the Late Middle Kingdom in the Brooklyn Museum (1955) 87. 4.2 Painting of Weavers from the Tomb of Khnumhotep II at Beni Hasan. Accession Number: MMA 33.8.16. The Metropolitan Museum of Art, Rogers Fund, 1933. Image © The Metropolitan Museum of Art. 4.3a Red-Dyed Linen. Accession Number: MMA 20.3.203a. The Metropolitan Museum of Art, Rogers Fund and Edward S. Harkness Gift, 1920. Image © The Metropolitan Museum of Art. 4.3b Model of Meketre’s funeral procession; group of offering bearers. Accession Number: MMA 20.3.8. The Metropolitan Museum of Art, Rogers Fund and Edward S. Harkness Gift, 1920. Image © The Metropolitan Museum of Art. 4.4 Diorite Statue Base, Fragment, Lisht North, Dynasty 12, radim, Tomb 499. The Metropolitan Museum of Art 15.3.585 (de-accessioned). Museum negative number: 30800 LS. Expedition Negative Number: L 13-14.535-6. Image © The Metropolitan Museum of Art. 4.5a Small one-handled Canaanite jar from tomb 499, Lisht. MMA Archival photograph. Image © The Metropolitan Museum of Art. 4.5b Archival tomb card drawing of the small Canaanite jar from tomb 499, Lisht; Courtesy of The Metropolitan Museum of Art. Image © The Metropolitan Museum of Art. 4.6a Detail of relief showing water being poured from a jar in the tomb of Rehuerjdsen at Lisht. MMA 16.3.10. Arnold, D. Middle Kingdom Tomb Architecture at Lisht, With an Appendix by James P. Allen, Publications of the Metropolitan Museum of Art Egyptian Expedition Volume XXVIII, Yale University Press, New Haven and London (2008), plate 126. Image © The Metropolitan Museum of Art. 4.6b Drawing of scene showing water being poured from jar in the tomb of Rehuerjdsen at Lisht. Arnold, D. Middle Kingdom Tomb Architecture at Lisht, With an Appendix by James P. Allen, Publications of the Metropolitan Museum of Art Egyptian Expedition Volume XXVIII, Yale University Press, New Haven and London (2008), plate 125b. Image © The Metropolitan Museum of Art.

Sources of Illustrations

299

4.6c Toilet vase with two handles, inscribed for the Seal Bearer Kemes. Accession Number: MMA 44.4.2. Rogers Fund, 1944. Image © The Metropolitan Museum of Art. 4.7a Sinai Inscriptions – 106 (right). Gardiner, A. H., T. E. Peet, and J. Cerny, The Inscriptions of Sinai I, 2nd ed. London (1952) Egyptian Exploration Society Memoir, 45. Pl. XXXV. 4.7b Sinai Inscription 114 (left). Gardiner, A. H., T. E. Peet, and J. Cerny, The Inscriptions of Sinai II, 2nd ed. London (1952) Egyptian Exploration Society Memoir, 45. Pls. XXXVIII and XXXVI. 4.8a Sinai Inscription 85. Gardiner, A. H., T. E. Peet, and J. Cerny, The Inscriptions of Sinai II, 2nd ed. London (1952) Egyptian Exploration Society Memoir, 45. Pl. XXIII. 4.8b Sinai Inscription 85, N. Edge. Gardiner, A. H., T. E. Peet, and J. Cerny, The Inscriptions of Sinai II, 2nd ed. London (1952) Egyptian Exploration Society Memoir, 45. Pl. XXIII. 4.9a Sinai Inscription 110. Gardiner, A. H., T. E. Peet, and J. Cerny, The Inscriptions of Sinai II, 2nd ed. London (1952) Egyptian Exploration Society Memoir, 45. Plate XXXVA. 4.9b Sinai Inscription 32. Gardiner, A. H., T. E. Peet, and J. Cerny, The Inscriptions of Sinai I, 2nd ed. London (1952) Egyptian Exploration Society Memoir, 45. Plate XII. 4.10a Remains of the Pyramid of Senwosret III at Dahshur. Photo: Dieter Arnold. 4.10b Figural Graffiti under the Pyramid of Senwosret III at Dahshur. Jacque De Morgan, Dahchour II, pp. 93–96, fig. 137–40; See also D. Arnold, The Pyramid Complex of Senwosret III at Dahshur Architectural Studies (2002), 42–43. 4.11 Mastaba of Khnumhotep III at Dahshur. Computer modeling by David Johnson. 4.12a Statue Head attributed to Hammurabi. Musée du Louvre, Paris Sb 95. (c) DEA / G. DAGLI ORTI, Getty Images. 4.12b Face of Senwosret III. Accession Number: MMA 26.7.1394. The Metropolitan Museum of Art, Purchase, Edward S. Harkness Gift, 1926. Image © The Metropolitan Museum of Art.

300

Sources of Illustrations

4.13a Detail of Dahshur graffito. Jacques De Morgan, Dahchour II, pp. 93–96, fig. 137–40; See also D. Arnold, The Pyramid Complex of Senwosret III at Dahshur Architectural Studies (2002), 42–43. 4.13b Dahshur Graffito. Jacques De Morgan, Dahchour II, pp. 93–96, fig. 137–40; See also D. Arnold, The Pyramid Complex of Senwosret III at Dahshur Architectural Studies (2002), 42–43. 4.14a Dahshur Graffito. Jacques De Morgan, Dahchour II, pp. 93–96, fig. 137–40; See also D. Arnold, The Pyramid Complex of Senwosret III at Dahshur Architectural Studies (2002), 42–43. 4.14b Hepu. National Archaeological Museum, Athens, 3365, (photographer G. Fafalis). Copyright © Hellenic Ministry of Culture and Sports / Archaeological Receipts Fund. 4.14c Slain soldier with uncurled hair to the nape of the neck. H.E. Winlock, The slain soldiers of Neb-hep-et-Rē’Mentu-hotpe, New York, The Metropolitan Museum of Art, (1945), Plate VI, No. 10. 4.15a Graffito (helmet-like apparel). Jacques De Morgan, Dahchour II, pp. 93–96, fig. 137–40; See also D. Arnold, The Pyramid Complex of Senwosret III at Dahshur Architectural Studies (2002), 42–43. 4.15b Remains of an alabaster statue head of a warrior with helmet found on the palace stairs at the (Old Babylonian period) site of Mari in Syria. Aleppo Museum. E. Strommenger, 5000 years of the art of Mesopotamia, Photographs by, Max Hirmer. Publisher, H. N. Abrams, 1964, pl. 166. 4.16a Graffito from Dahshur showing a man dressed in a garment, with a partially dotted design. Jacques De Morgan, Dahchour II, pp. 93–96, fig. 137–40; See also D. Arnold, The Pyramid Complex of Senwosret III at Dahshur Architectural Studies (2002), 42–43. 4.16b Tell Sakka Wall Paintings. Drawing by Sara Chen, after A. Taraqji, “Nouvelles decouvertes dur les relations avec l’Egypte a Tel Sakka et a Keswe, dans la region de Damas,” Bulletin de la Société Française d’Égyptologie (March 1999) 27–43, p. 37. 4.16c Basalt head of Yarim-Lim, King of Yamhad or Aleppo, from the Palace of Alalakh or Tell Atchana, Turkey. Aruz, Joan, Kim Benzel, and Jean Evans, eds. Beyond Babylon: Art, Trade, and Diplomacy in the Second

Sources of Illustrations

301

Millennium B.C. 2008, Fig 64, p. 197. Antakya, Hatay Muzesi (Archaeological Museum) 10022. 4.16d Basalt Ancestor Statues, Beyond Babylon, p. 218, Qatna project, University of Tübingen, permission by Peter Pfälzner. Aruz, Joan, Kim Benzel, and Jean Evans, eds. Beyond Babylon: Art, Trade, and Diplomacy in the Second Millennium B.C. 2008, p. 197, fig. 64. 4.17 Model coffin and magical figures from Lisht. Accession Number: MMA 33.1.66a, b. The Metropolitan Museum of Art, Rogers Fund, 1933. Image © The Metropolitan Museum of Art. 4.18a Seated Statue of King Senwosret I stepping on the Nine Bows. Accession Number: MMA 25.6. The Metropolitan Museum of Art, Gift of Jules S. Bache, 1925. Image © The Metropolitan Museum of Art. 4.18b Detail of 4.18, King Senwosret I stepping on the Nine Bows. Accession Number: MMA 25.6. The Metropolitan Museum of Art, Gift of Jules S. Bache, 1925. Image © The Metropolitan Museum of Art. 4.19 Mud Figurine from Lisht. Accession Number: MMA 22.1.1625a. The Metropolitan Museum of Art, Rogers Fund and Edward S. Harkness Gift, 1922. Image © The Metropolitan Museum of Art. 4.20a–d Hemaetite Old Babylonian Cylinder Seal, North Pyramid, Lisht. Accession Number: MMA 20.1.150. The Metropolitan Museum of Art, Rogers Fund and Edward S. Harkness Gift, 1920. Image © The Metropolitan Museum of Art. 4.20e Modern impression of the Hemaetite Syrian Seal from Lisht North Pyramid Area. Accession Number: MMA 20.1.150. J. Aruz, “The Sealings of the Middle Bronze Age: A Preliminary Look at Lisht in Egypt” in E. Perna, ed., Administrative Documents in the Aegean and their Near Eastern Counterparts (2000), 125–140, p. 125. 4.21a Juglet, Middle Kingdom. Accession Number: MMA 15.3.1581. The Metropolitan Museum of Art, Rogers Fund, 1915. Image © The Metropolitan Museum of Art. 4.21b The “Dolphin Vase.” Accession Number: MMA 22.1.95. The Metropolitan Museum of Art, Rogers Fund and Edward S. Harkness Gift, 1922. Image © The Metropolitan Museum of Art. 4.22a A Group of Houses Built Against the Pyramid of Amenemhet I. MMA archival photo. Image © The Metropolitan Museum of Art. C. Mace, “The

302

Sources of Illustrations

Egyptian Expedition 1920–1921: I. Excavations at Lisht” from The Metro­politan Museum of Art Bulletin, Volume 16, no. 11 (1921), p. 5, fig. 2. 4.22b Floor Plan of a house at Lisht showing the area where the Dolphin jar was found. F. Arnold, “Settlement Remains at Lisht North,” House and Palace in Ancient Egypt, ÖAW, Band XIV (pp. 13–20), p. 15. 4.23a Bi-lingual Lapis Cylinder Seal, view of the Cuneiform text. Accession Number: MMA 26.7.21. The Metropolitan Museum of Art, Purchase, Edward S. Harkness Gift, 1926. Image © The Metropolitan Museum of Art. 4.23b Bi-lingual Lapis Cylinder Seal, view of the Egyptian text. Accession Number: MMA 26.7.21. The Metropolitan Museum of Art, Purchase, Edward S. Harkness Gift, 1926. Image © The Metropolitan Museum of Art. 4.24a Foreign Female Offering Bearers from the Tomb of Ukhotep III, tomb chamber. Aylward M. Blackman, The Rock Tombs of Meir, Part VI, Plate XVIII, Tomb Chapel C, No. 1, Room B, North Wall: Lower Scene. 4.24b Detail from the North Wall of Ukhotep III’s tomb chamber. The Metropolitan Museum of Art, archival photograph, negative number C 68, detail of 24a, showing a female offering bearer. 4.24c Molded plaque: female head. Accession Number: 1974.347.2. Gift of Mrs. Elias S. David, in memory of Elias S. David and Edward S. David, 1974. Image © The Metropolitan Museum of Art. 4.25a Female Foreigner with a Baby, painted wood, © National Museums of Scotland, Edinburgh, A1911.260, from shaft tomb 181 at Beni Hasan. 4.25b Female Foreigner with a Baby, painted wood, profile view © National Museums of Scotland, Edinburgh, A1911.260, from shaft tomb 181 at Beni Hasan. 4.26 Female foreigner with baby, ivory. Accession Number: 54.994. Gift of the Class of the Museum of Fine Arts, Mrs. Arthur L. Devens, Chairman. Photograph © The Museum of Fine Arts, Boston. 4.27a Stela of Reniseneb. Accession Number: 63.154. The Metropolitan Museum of Art, Purchase, Joseph Pulitzer Bequest, 1963. Image © The Metropolitan Museum of Art.

Sources of Illustrations

303

4.27b Detail of Reniseneb Stela. Accession Number: 63.154. The Metropolitan Museum of Art, Purchase, Joseph Pulitzer Bequest, 1963. Image © The Metropolitan Museum of Art. 4.28 Stela from a Chapel Niche of Anu. Accession Number: 69.30. Purchase, Lila Acheson Wallace Gift, 1969. Image © The Metropolitan Museum of Art. 4.29. Figured ostraca, Deir el-Medina, woman in pavilion or outdoor location. Accession Number: E 2533. © Musée du Louvre, Paris. 4.30 Statuette of Indurated Limestone, Brussels, No. E6749. Courtesy Museés Royaux d’Art et d’Histoire © KMKG-MRAH; Egyptian Studies III Varia Nova By Henry George Fischer The Metropolitan Museum of Art, “A Shrine and Statue of the Thirteen Dynasty,” p. 136, pl. 23. 4.31a Torso and Head of a figurine. KN13 Steatite. Egypt, Middle Kingdom, 13th Dynasty, ca. 1800–1650 B.C., H. 4 cm. Bibliography: Charles D. Kelekian, CDK182, Courtesy of Nanette Kelekian and The Metropolitan Museum of Art. 4.31b Torso and Head of a figurine, (alternate view). KN13 Steatite. Egypt, Middle Kingdom, 13th Dynasty, ca. 1800–1650 B.C., H. 4 cm. Bibliography: Charles D. Kelekian, CDK182, Courtesy of Nanette Kelekian and The Metropolitan Museum of Art (rear view). 4.32 Statue of the nurse Sitsneferu, Granodiorite. Accession Number: 18.2.2. The Metropolitan Museum of Art, Rogers Fund, 1918. Image © The Metropolitan Museum of Art. 4.33a Torso and Head of a figurine, (3/4 back view). Egypt, Middle Kingdom, 13th Dynasty, ca. 1800–1650 B.C., H. 4 cm. Bibliography: Charles D. Kelekian, CDK182, Courtesy of Nanette Kelekian and The Metropolitan Museum of Art. 4.33b Abu Gurob harpist figurine. Accession Number: UC 16670. Petrie Museum, University College London. Drawing :Petrie, William Matthew Flinders. Kahun, Gurob and Hawara. London (1890)p. 41 pl.XVIII, 38. Photo:Trope, Betsy Teasley. Excavating Egypt. Great Discoveries from the Petrie Museum of Egyptian Archaeology. Atlanta (2005) p. 83. 4.34 Torso and Head of a figurine. Egypt, Middle Kingdom, 13th Dynasty, ca. 1800–1650 B.C., H. 4 cm. Bibliography: Charles D. Kelekian, CDK182,

304

Sources of Illustrations

Courtesy of Nanette Kelekian and The Metropolitan Museum of Art. (front view with head in profile). 4.35 Syrian dancers, Ostracon. New Kingdom. Photo by Andreas Dorn. Copyright: Andreas Dorn, Basel. 4.36 Statuette of Dancing Pygmy from the Burial of Hepy. Memphite Region, Lisht South, mastaba west of Senwosretankh, Pit 3, Burial of Hepy. Dynasty 12, early, ca. 1950–1900 B.C. Accession Number: 34.1.130. The Metropolitan Museum of Art, Rogers Fund, 1934. Image © The Metropolitan Museum of Art. 4.37a Gardiner, A. H., T. E. Peet, and J. Cerny, The Inscriptions of Sinai, 2nd ed. London (1952) Egyptian Exploration Society Memoir, 45. Part II, 206, Fig. 17, bottom of Southeast face of stela 405. 4.37b Gardiner, A. H., T. E. Peet, and J. Cerny, The Inscriptions of Sinai, 2nd ed. London (1952) Egyptian Exploration Society Memoir, 45. Part I, PL. XXXVII 5.1 Bronze Openwork stand. G. Steindorf. ZÄS 73 (1937) 122–23, Pl. XXI. © The Field Museum, Catalog Number 217.30177. 5.2 Silver libation vessel of Manhata. The Metropolitan Museum of Art: Rogers Fund, 1918 Accession Number: 18.8.22a, b. Image © The Metropolitan Museum of Art. 5.3a Diadem with two gazelle heads. The Metropolitan Museum of Art. Purchase, George F. Baker and Mr. and Mrs. V. Everit Macy Gifts, 1920. Accession Number: 26.8.99. Image © The Metropolitan Museum of Art. 5.3b Headband with Heads of Gazelles and a Stag Between Stars or Flowers. The Metropolitan Museum of Art, Purchase, Lila Acheson Wallace Gift, 1968 Accession Number: 68.136.1. Image © The Metropolitan Museum of Art. 5.3c Detail of the Headband in 5.3b. The Metropolitan Museum of Art, Purchase, Lila Acheson Wallace Gift, 1968 Accession Number: 68.136.1. Image © The Metropolitan Museum of Art. 5.4 Marbleized goblet, The Metropolitan Museum of Art, Purchase, Edward S. Harkness Gift, 1926 Accession Number: 26.7.1175. Image © The Metropolitan Museum of Art. 5.5 Block from a relief depicting a battle. The Metropolitan Museum of Art, Purchase Rogers Fund and Edward S. Harkness Gift, 1913.

Sources of Illustrations

305

Accession Number: 13.180.21. Image © The Metropolitan Museum of Art. 5.6 Detail of a painting from the Tomb of Anen. The Metropolitan Museum of Art, Nina de Garis Davies (1881–1965), Purchase Rogers Fund, 1933, Accession Number: 33.8.8. Image © The Metropolitan Museum of Art. Map A The Ancient Near East. A composite rendering based on site maps of The Oriental Institute Map Series. Drawing by Sara Chen. Map B Ancient Egypt. Drawing by Sara Chen.

Index Page numbers in italics refer to figures. Abishai/’Ib-š3 88–90 Abusir: temple of Sahure 54–6, 58–63, 69 Achtoes III (King Khety) tomb 36–7, 41, 80, 81 admoni 77 The Admonitions of an Egyptian Sage 48, 61 The Admonitions of Ipuwer 40 Agade Empire/Dynasty 24, 25 The Curse of Agade 28 ’Ain Samiya goblet 12 Akkadian and Sumerian literature (MAR.TU) 25–7, 28–35 terms 15, 16, 20, 21 Albright, W.F. 5–6, 16–17, 111, 186 Amenemhet I 39, 40–1 pyramid of 135, 147, 151 Story of Sinuhe 149 temple of 69 see also Twelfth Dynasty Amenemhet II 118, 137 Amenemhet III 91, 99, 136, 137, 184 Amenhotep III, reign of 198–200 Ameny from Lisht, diorite statue base of 123–4, 125–6 ammi element 16 Ammiditana 16, 25 ‘Ammurapi/Hammurapi 15–16, 25 Amorites 21–2 and Canaanites 11–13 cultural background 27–8 in Egypt 35–9 summary and analysis of texts 40–1 geography and origins 23–6 history 26–7 and socio-economic realities 33–5 sheikh (Abishai/’Ib-š3) 88–90

stereotypes in Sumerian and Akkadian literature (MAR.TU) 28–35 Amurru see MAR.TU/Amurru Amurru (god) 32 ‘Anat (dH.  A-NA-AT) 27 Anatolia 8, 11, 105, 106, 130 textiles and dyes 113–14, 119 Ankh-Hor, tomb of 71, 72 Aqht, poem of 76 Aramaic sub-dialects 12 Arnold, Dieter 139, 143–4 Arnold, Dorothea 91, 139, 144, 163 artisans 129–30, 160–3, 183–8 see also ἰmnw Aruz, Joan et al. 8 Aššur, Mesopotamia 113 Assyriology 8 Aston, D.A. and Bietak, M. 8 Astour, M.C. 25 Avaris 6 toggle 97 Babylon/Babylonian periods 16, 21, 25, 26, 32, 38–9 chronology 290 cuneiform text 161, 162 Mari 133, 169 taxes 128 textiles and dyes 112, 113, 120 Badre, L. 154 Baghouz, warrior tomb of 105–6 Barber, E.J.W. 115, 117, 119 battle and siege scenes 56–7, 63–5, 67, 73 red color 74, 76–9 Beni Hasan see Khety (Achtoes III) tomb; Khnumhotep tombs biblical sources 77, 108, 120, 123, 187 Bietak, M. 6, 156, 192 Breasted, J.H. 3

308

Index

“Breitraumhaus” 192 Bronze Age 27 Early 154 Late 13, 16, 115, 142, 193 Middle 6, 13, 17, 43–4, 67, 124, 128, 130, 145, 193 bronze beaker from Mesopotamia 102, 104 bronze openwork stand 194–5 Buccellati, G. 7, 25–6, 33, 34, 94 Byblos boat, papyrus Lythgoe 67–8 dagger sheath for Obelisk Temple 103–6 figurines 153 Kpny 148–9 textiles 114 Cain 108 Canaan (Rtnw/Retenu) 20, 21, 107, 122–3, ¯ 186 Canaanites and Amorites 11–13 pottery and settlement, Lisht 124–6, 154–9 caravan scene see Khnumhotep II tomb cattle herding and administration 121–9 commerce 58–63 Cooper, J.S. 38 The Curse of Agade 28 Cyprus 8, 105 Dahshur Artisans (ἰmnw) at 136–7 gold pectoral of Queen Mereret 91–2 Senwosret III pyramid, figural graffiti under 137–47 Damascus and Shechem 185–7 David, A.R. 159 Deir el-Bahri 193–4 DeMorgan, J. 137, 139 Deshasheh, tomb of 56–7 Debeni (overseer of faience workers) 159 Ditanu 16 Djehutyhotep, tomb of 122–3 “Dolphin Jar” 157, 159 donkey/donkey-riding figures 94–5, 97–8, 99–102 double bow 86, 98 Drehem 33, 128–9

duckbill axe 86, 98, 105–6 dyes/dyeing 116–21 Eastern Desert 18, 50, 57, 86 Ebla (Tell Mardikh) 27–8, 61, 113–14, 129, 186 Edom 77, 120 Eleventh Dynasty 63–7, 80–1 emu 15 Enki and the World Order 28 Enkidu 77 Enlil, high priest of 94 Enuma Elish 12 Esau 77 Eshnunna 26 Execration Texts 5–7, 147–9, 185–6 eye paint 106–7 faience (factory) 154, 159 famine 57, 58 fillets 54, 56, 59, 63, 64, 69, 71–3, 90, 163, 200 First Intermediate Period 36–9, 40, 286–7 Fischer, H. 48, 174, 178 fnhw 20 ˘ galena 106–7 Gardiner, A.H. 20, 48 and Peet, T.E. 4 gazella dorcas 108 Gelb, I.J. 7, 26, 114 Gilgamesh 15, 77 Goedicke, H. 19, 106 gold pectoral of Queen Mereret 91–2 graffiti 137–47 guild of artisans 133, 136 Hab/piru 21 “hairdressers” (kezertu) 168–70 Hall, R. 114 hammu 14, 15–16, 17 ˘Hammurabi/‘Ammurapi 15–16, 25 ˘ Hansen, D.P. 103, 153 Hathors 59, 129, 160, 161, 163, 169–71, 181 Hayes, W.C. 5, 111 Hebrew 14–15, 16, 20, 77, 120–1 Helck, W. 4–5, 6–7 hemaetite/hematite seals 154, 155, 156 Hepu, bronze statuette of 142, 144

Index herding 187 cattle 121–9 hmnw 110–11 house burials, infant 156, 160 h∙rywš‘y 19 hsy 13, 17–18 ˉ Huffmon, H.B. 7, 16, 26, 27 humankind, four divisions of 44–6 Hurrians 13, 193, 194, 197 Hykos 6, 7–8, 43–4, 101, 103, 139, 151, 192 ibex, male figure with 93–4, 108 ἰdmy (red linen and dye) 117–21 ἰmnw at Dahsur 136–7 at Lisht 135–6 “men of the ἰmnw” 131–6 The Instructions of Merikare 36–7, 38, 41 Intef, tomb of 63–4, 66–7, 73, 78, 80 Ishtar (goddess) 163, 164, 169 Jacobsen, T.H. 12 Jericho 94 Kahun 117, 121, 156 craftsmen and artisans 160–3 texts and objects 159–60 Kamrin, J. 106–7 Kantor, H.J. 97 Karnak: textiles 114–15 Karum Kanesh 106, 113 Kathira-  tu (goddesses) 170 Kedem 20, 122 kezertu (“hairdressers”) 168–70 Kharu/Khurru 194 Khety (Achtoes III) tomb 36–7, 41, 80, 81 Khnumhotep I tomb 81, 82, 84 Khnumhotep II tomb caravan scene 87–93 elements 93–106 overall analysis/interpretation 106–8 weavers 115–16 Khnumhotep III tomb 138–9 Klengel, H. 9 kohl holder 177 Kpny (Byblos) 148–9 Lagash 24, 112–13 Lamgi-Mari statue 94

309

Larsa statue 30–2 leather industry 94, 107 Levant 6, 7, 8, 67, 137, 151, 153, 161, 193 and Egypt, relations between 148–9 ἰmnw at 130, 136 imports 154, 157, 159 textiles and dyes 114, 116, 119 Libyans (Tjemhu and Tjehnyu) 45 limestone statue head 91, 92 Lisht 9, 147–59 ἰmnw at 135–6 Rehuerjdsen tomb 126–8 lyre 103–6 magic/religion 147–9, 151–4, 159–60, 161, 169–71 marbleized glass 195–7, 199 Mari 163, 164–6 artisans at 133 palace of Zimri-Lim 66–7 textiles 114 texts 169, 186, 187–8 MAR.TU/Amurru 13–14, 24, 25, 26–8, 30–2, 35–6, 38, 41–2, 190 Matthiae, P. 113–14 Meir: female offering bearers and ritual dancers/attendants 163–71 Meketre funeral procession 118–19 Menkheperresonb tomb 197 Mentuhotep temple 63–5, 67 Mesopotamia 11–12, 43–4, 288–90 Aššur 113 bronze beaker 102, 104 cattle herders/breeders 128 copper production 130 duckbill axe 105 garments 94 hairstyles 163–7, 170 lyre 103 MAR.TU/Amurru 13–14, 24, 25, 26–8, 30–2, 35–6, 38, 41–2, 190 textiles and dyes 112, 113–14, 116, 119 torque 161 Metropolitan Museum of Art 8, 9 exhibits 50, 78, 97, 149, 166, 171, 195 expeditions/excavations 4, 68, 135, 154 Midianites 105, 107 midwives/birthing attendants 170–1, 175–83

310 ‘m/‘mm/h∙m 14–17 mntw 19 msdmt 107 mtnw 194 mud figurine, Lisht 151–4 Muller, W.M. 3, 14 Naharin Bedouin 200 New Kingdom, survivals and transformations 193–200 nmἰwš‘ 20 Northwest Semitic goddesses 170 languages 2, 12–13 names 5–6, 111 Nubians (Nh.   syw) 45 Old Kingdom 285–6 ideology 44–8 “official” representations of foreigners 48–63 to Early Middle Kingdom 35–9 O’Tufnell, O. and Ward, W.A. 5 p3-‘3m 194–5 Palestine 6, 19 Syria and 13, 20, 38, 99, 148, 151, 153, 186, 194 papyri 67–8, 110–12, 159, 170, 192 Pehsukher Tjenenu tomb 71, 72 Pepi I 35–6, 40 Pepi II 36, 50 Petrie, W.F. 4, 117 Phoenician figurines 153 Posner, G. 6–7, 17, 37–8, 123, 186 prisoners/captives 49–50, 51, 52, 54–6, 60–1, 69, 88 Pritchard, J.B. 5, 8–9 The Prophecies of Neferti 39, 40, 41 proto-Elamite silver bull 97, 98 Qatna 146–7 Rainey, A.F. 7, 149 red hair and skin 73–4, 76–9, 91 red linen (ἰdmy) and dye 117–21 Redford, D.B. 9, 14, 193 Rehuerjdsen tomb, Lisht 126–8 Rekhmire tomb 114–15, 197

Index relief representations 53–8, 69–75 religion/magic 147–9, 151–4, 159–60, 161, 169–71 Reniseneb, Stela of 171–4 research previous 3–9 scope and methodology 1–3 summary and prospect for futher 189–202 Rtnw (Retenu/Canaan) 20, 21, 107, 122–3, ˉ 186 Sahure, temple of 54–6, 58–63, 69 Sangar Bedouin 200 Sass, B. 5 Sasson, J.M. 133 Schneider, T. 7–8, 192 sculpture, three dimensional 49–52 Second Intermediate Period 6, 43, 75, 287–8 sedentary culture 107–8 Sehetep Ib R’ 161 Senwosret I instructions of Amenemhet I 40 pyramid of 135–6 seated headless statue stepping on Nine Bows 149–51 temple of 69 Senwosret II pyramid of 117 reign of 87–93 Senwosret III pyramid: figural graffiti under 137–47 Serabit el-Khadim 129–30, 131, 133, 135 workforce names 183–7 Shasu Bedouin 200 Shechem and Damascus 185–7 siege scenes see battle and siege scenes Sinai artisans in 129–30 “men of the ἰmnw” 131–6 see also Serabit el-Khadim Sinuhe/Story of Sinuhe 7, 16, 18, 20, 39, 40, 121–2 Hymn to Senwosret I 149–51 Sippar 113 Smith, W.S. 5, 103 smiting scenes 53–4 Sneferu 39, 41, 145

Index cult of 137 Sokar (god) 143–4, 147 stelae 131–3, 161, 162, 192 encoded messages 171 Stela of Reniseneb 171–4 Styw 20–1, 38, 40, 46, 142, 189–90 Sumerian and Akkadian literature (MAR.TU) 25–7, 28–35 Sumerian city-states 24, 26, 112–13 Syria 5, 8, 9, 11–12, 13, 23, 25 chronology 290–1 donkey-riding 99 Ebla (Tell Mardikh) 27–8, 61, 113–14, 129, 186 hairstyle and dress 71, 72, 94, 145–6 and Palestine 13, 20, 38, 99, 148, 151, 153, 186, 194 Rtnw (Retenu/Canaan) 20, 21, 107, ˉ 122–3, 186 textiles and dyes 112, 113–16, 120 Trade (“Syrian Expedition”) 59–61, 62 see also Byblos; Mari

Thompson, T.L. 9, 14, 84, 86 Tjemhu and Tjehnyu 45 torque 161 tug/kutaˉnum (linen-cloth) 113 Tunip 197 turquoise mining 129–30 Tuthmosis III annals of 114–15 period 193–7 Twelfth Dynasty 67–79 provincial tombs 82–6

Tell el-Dab’a 4, 6, 8 intramural burials 156, 160 material remains 192 objects 73, 75, 91, 92, 97, 154 Tell el-Yahudiya ware 8, 154, 159 Tell Mardikh (Ebla) 27–8, 61, 113–14, 129, 186 Tell Sakka 145–6 Temple aux obélisques 153 terminology (C3MW) 14–17 overlapping and interchangeable 18–21 usage with hsy 17–18 textile industry and trade 110–16 dyes/dyeing 116–21

Wadi el-Hudi 139 Wadi Hammamat 139 weavers see textile industry and trade Weinstein, J.M. 6 West Semites see Amorites; Canaanites; terminology (C3MW) women 95–8 offering bearers and ritual dancers/ attendants 163–71 weavers 110–13 wpt-rnpt festival 106

Ugaritic language 2, 15–16 Ugaritic texts 25, 74–7, 101–2, 170 Ukhotep III tomb 163, 164, 165, 169–70 ummânu 133, 135, 136 Ur III period 7, 41–2, 94, 112–13, 128 Uruk 29–30, 33, 169 Ventura, R. 137 verbal and visual perceptions 63–79

Yamhad 133, 146–7 Yarim-Lim 146–7

311