THE OXFORD HANDBOOK OF ANCIENT NUBIA 2020022666, 9780190496272, 9780197521830, 9780190496296

Citation preview

T h e Ox f o r d H a n d b o o k o f

A NCI E N T N U BI A

T h e Ox f or d H a n db o o k of

ANCIENT NUBIA Edited by

GEOFF EMBERLING and

BRUCE BEYER WILLIAMS

1

1 Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide. Oxford is a registered trade mark of Oxford University Press in the UK and certain other countries. Published in the United States of America by Oxford University Press 198 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10016, United States of America. © Oxford University Press 2020 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press, or as expressly permitted by law, by license, or under terms agreed with the appropriate reproduction rights organization. Inquiries concerning reproduction outside the scope of the above should be sent to the Rights Department, Oxford University Press, at the address above. You must not circulate this work in any other form and you must impose this same condition on any acquirer. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Emberling, Geoff, editor. | Williams, Bruce, 1943- editor. Title: The Oxford handbook of Ancient Nubia / edited by Geoff Emberling and Bruce Beyer Williams. Description: New York : Oxford University Press, [2020] | Includes bibliographical references and index. Identifiers: LCCN 2020022666 | ISBN 9780190496272 (hardback) | ISBN 9780197521830 (epub) | ISBN 9780190496296 (ebook) Subjects: LCSH: Nubia—Civilization. | Nubia—Antiquities. | Excavations (Archaeology)—Nubia. Classification: LCC DT159.6.N83 O94 2020 | DDC 939/.78—dc23 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2020022666 1 3 5 7 9 8 6 4 2 Printed by Integrated Books International, United States of America

Contents

List of Contributors

Nubia, a Brief Introduction Bruce Beyer Williams and Geoff Emberling

xi

1

PA RT I   C ON T E X T S F OR N U B IA N S T U DI E S 1. History of Archaeological Work in the Middle Nile Region Salah Mohamed Ahmed

7

2. Past, Present, Future: The Archaeology of Nubia Claudia Näser

29

3. Geology of Nubia and Surrounding Regions James A. Harrell

49

4. Holocene Environments in Northeast Africa Martin Williams

63

PA RT I I   N U B IA : A DE E P H I STORY 5. Paleolithic Hunter-Gatherers of Nubia Mirosław Masojć 6. From Foraging to Food Producing: The Mesolithic and Neolithic of the Middle Nile Valley Donatella Usai

81

101

7. The A-Group and 4th Millennium bce Nubia Maria Carmela Gatto

125

8. The Pre-Kerma Culture and the Beginning of the Kerma Kingdom Matthieu Honegger

143

vi   contents

9. The C-Group People in Lower Nubia: Cattle Pastoralists on the Frontier between Egypt and Kush Henriette Hafsaas

157

10. Kush in the Wider World during the Kerma Period Bruce Beyer Williams

179

11. The Cities of Kerma and Pnubs-Dokki Gel Charles Bonnet

201

12. The Eastern Cemetery of Kerma Charles Bonnet and Matthieu Honegger

213

13. Pan-Grave and Medjay: At the Intersection of Archaeology and History Kate Liszka and Aaron de Souza 14. From Hunters to Herders: The Libyan Desert in Prehistoric Times Friederike Jesse

227 251

15. Egyptian Fortresses and the Colonization of Lower Nubia in the Middle Kingdom Laurel Bestock

271

16. Nubians in Egypt from the Early Dynastic Period to the New Kingdom Georg K. Meurer

289

17. Human Adaptation to Environmental Change in the Northern Dongola Reach Derek A. Welsby

309

18. Egyptian Conquest and Administration of Nubia Dominique Valbelle

327

19. The Amun Cult and its Development in Nubia Luc Gabolde

343

20. The Nubian Experience of Egyptian Domination during the New Kingdom 369 Stuart Tyson Smith 21. History and the Kushite Royal Inscriptions Jeremy Pope

395

contents   vii

22. The Napatan Neo-Kushite State 1: The Intermediate Period and Second Empire Bruce Beyer Williams

411

23. The Napatan Neo-Kushite State 2: Eclipse and Revival in the Later Napatan Period; Conditions in the State Bruce Beyer Williams

433

24. Jebel Barkal: “Karnak” of Kush Timothy Kendall and El-Hassan Ahmed Mohamed

449

25. Nubians in Egypt during the 25th Dynasty Julia Budka

475

26. Kushites in Egypt, 664 bce–14 ce: Egypt and Kush in the Borderlands of Lower Nubia Kathryn Howley

491

27. The Meroitic Heartland Pawel Wolf and Ulrike Nowotnick

511

28. The City of Meroe Krzysztof Grzymski

545

29. The Royal and Elite Cemeteries at Meroe Janice W. Yellin

563

30. Death and Burial in the Kingdom of Meroe Vincent Francigny

589

31. Prolegomena to the Study of Meroitic Art Janice W. Yellin

605

32. Language and Writing in the Kingdom of Meroe Claude Rilly

653

33. The Eastern Desert in the 1st Millennium bce and 1st Millennium ce 671 Andrea Manzo 34. Greek and Roman Views of Ancient Nubia Stanley M. Burstein

697

viii   contents

35. The X-Group Period in Lower Nubia Rachael J. Dann

713

36. Post-Meroe in Upper Nubia Mahmoud El-Tayeb

731

37. The History of Medieval Nubia Giovanni R. Ruffini

759

38. Nubian Texts, Nubian Lives Giovanni R. Ruffini

773

39. Language Use and Literacy in Late Antique and Medieval Nubia Adam Łajtar and Grzegorz Ochała

787

40. The Topography of Power in Medieval Nubia Bogdan Żurawski

807

41. The Archaeology of Medieval Nubian Kingdoms Artur Obłuski

829

42. Arts and Crafts of the Medieval Kingdoms of Nubia Dobrochna Zielińska

847

43. Islam in the Funj and Ottoman Periods in Sudan: A Historical and Archaeological Approach Intisar Soghayroun 44. Islamic Nubian Kingdoms Jay Spaulding

875 893

PA RT I I I   P E R SP E C T I V E S ON N U B IA 45. Cattle Cultures in Ancient Nubia Jérôme Dubosson

909

46. Savanna on the Nile: Long-term Agricultural Diversification and Intensification in Nubia Dorian Q. Fuller and Leilani Lucas

927

47. Exploitation of Geological Resources: Ancient Mines and Quarries in Nubia James A. Harrell and Abdelrahman Ali Mohamed

955

contents   ix

48. Iron Production at Meroe Jane Humphris

975

49. Trade in Ancient Nubia: Routes, Goods, and Structures Mahmoud Suliman Bashir and Geoff Emberling

995

50. Women in Ancient Kush Angelika Lohwasser and Jacke Phillips

1015

51. Perspectives on the Body in Ancient Nubia Rachael J. Dann

1033

52. Bioarchaeology of Nubia Michele R. Buzon

1051

53. Landscape Archaeologies in Nubia and the Middle Nile David N. Edwards

1071

54. Nubian Rock Art Henryk Paner

1091

55. Archaeological Practice in the 21st Century: Reflecting on Archaeologist-Community Relationships in Sudan’s Nile Valley Jane Humphris, Rebecca Bradshaw, and Geoff Emberling

1127

Index

1149

List of Contributors

Abdelrahman Ali Mohamed formerly National Corporation for Antiquities and Museums, (Sudan). Laurel Bestock  Brown University. Charles Bonnet  Institut de France, Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres. Rebecca Bradshaw  SOAS, University of London. Julia Budka  Ludwig Maximilian University. Stanley M. Burstein  California State University, Los Angeles. Michele R. Buzon  Purdue University. Rachael J. Dann  independent scholar. Aaron de Souza  Institute for Oriental and European Archaeology, Austrian Academy of Sciences. Jérôme Dubosson  University of Neuchâtel. David N. Edwards  University of Leicester. Geoff Emberling  University of Michigan. El-Hassan Ahmed Mohamed National Corporation for Antiquities and Museums (Sudan). Vincent Francigny  Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique. Dorian Q. Fuller UCL. Luc Gabolde  Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique. Maria Carmela Gatto  University of Leicester. Krzysztof Grzymski  Royal Ontario Museum and University of Toronto. Henriette Hafsaas  Volda University College. James A. Harrell  University of Toledo. Matthieu Honegger  University of Neuchâtel. Kathryn Howley  New York University.

xii   list of contributors Jane Humphris British Institute in Eastern Africa and McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research, University of Cambridge. Intisar Soghayroun  University of Khartoum. Friederike Jesse  University of Cologne. Timothy Kendall  independent scholar. Adam Łajtar  University of Warsaw. Kate Liszka  California State University, San Bernardino. Angelika Lohwasser  University of Muenster. Leilani Lucas  College of Southern Nevada. Mahmoud El-Tayeb  University of Warsaw. Mahmoud Suliman Bashir National Corporation for Antiquities and Museums (Sudan). Andrea Manzo  Università “L’Orientale”. Mirosław Masojć  University of Wrocław. Georg K. Meurer  independent scholar. Claudia Näser UCL. Ulrike Nowotnick  German Archaeological Institute. Artur Obłuski  University of Warsaw. Grzegorz Ochała  University of Warsaw. Henryk Paner  Gdańsk Archaeological Museum and University of Warsaw. Jacke Phillips  SOAS, University of London. Jeremy Pope  College of William & Mary. Claude Rilly  Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique and École Pratique des Hautes Études. Giovanni R. Ruffini  Fairfield University. Salah Mohamed Ahmed  Qatar-Sudan Archaeological Project. Stuart Tyson Smith  University of California, Santa Barbara. Jay Spaulding  retired from Kean University. Donatella Usai  independent scholar. Dominique Valbelle  Sorbonne University. Derek A. Welsby  retired from the British Museum.

list of contributors   xiii Bruce Beyer Williams Polish Center of Mediterranean Archaeology, University of Warsaw and the University of Chicago. Martin Williams  University of Adelaide. Pawel Wolf  German Archaeological Institute. Janice W. Yellin  Babson College. Dobrochna Zielińska  University of Warsaw. Bogdan Żurawski  Polish Academy of Sciences.

N u bi a, a Br ief I n troduction Bruce Beyer Williams and Geoff Emberling

The cultures of Nubia built the earliest cities, states, and empires of inner Africa, but they remain relatively poorly known outside their modern descendants and the community of archaeologists, historians, and art historians researching them. The earliest archaeological work in Nubia was motivated by its role as neighbor, trade partner, and enemy of ancient Egypt. Increasingly, however, ancient Nile-based Nubian cultures are recognized in their own right as the earliest complex societies in inner Africa. As agropastoral cultures, Nubian settlement, economy, political organization, and religious ideologies were often organized differently from those of the urban, bureaucratic, and overwhelmingly agricultural states of Egypt and the ancient Middle East. Nubian societies are thus of great interest in comparative study, and are also recognized for their broader impact on histories of the eastern Mediterranean and the Middle East, as well as of neighboring areas. Although the archaeology and history of Nubia remains incompletely known (Salah ed-Din Mohamed Ahmed, this volume), the pace of research on Nubia has increased significantly in the last fifteen years. This is partly because of new dam construction and resulting salvage excavation, partly because other areas of the Middle East and North Africa have become less accessible to research, and partly because of generous funding from the Qatar-Sudan Archaeological Project for about forty archaeological projects in Sudan from 2014 to 2020. The most recent survey of ancient and medieval Nubia— David Edwards’s The Nubian Past (2004)—remains a thought-provoking and insightful overview, but does not take account of more recent research.1 This volume therefore gathers new research and analytical perspectives on these cultures in the hope that it will make them more accessible to scholars and the broader public.

2   Bruce Beyer Williams and Geoff Emberling

Nubia: Geography, Language, People, and Time Nubia itself is an elusive term. In a geographical sense it includes several areas of northeastern Africa: the Middle Nile from the confluence of the Blue and White Niles at modern Khartoum; the regions to the east from the Ethiopian Plateau to about the Wadi Hammamat in Egypt; and the regions to the west, including the Bayuda and the south Libyan Desert, roughly from the modern Egyptian border southward. Except for the sea, the boundaries are vague. To the south, archaeology commonly includes sites far upstream between the White and Blue Niles, although the cultures differ from those in any region farther north, but the paucity of research there is an important factor. To the west, boundaries are equally uncertain, also substantially because of limited research. In the northern part, Jebel Uweinat and Gilf Kebir have been studied and their rich visual cultures would be considered distinct from historical Nubia or Egypt despite some strong relationships. Even the most explicit boundary, Aswan, has not been hard and fast, for Egyptian and Nubian people and polities spilled over on either side (Gatto, this volume; Hafsaas, this volume; B. Williams, Chapter 10, this volume; B. Williams, Chapter 22, this volume). The core of Nubia is the Middle Nile from Aswan to Khartoum. In language, the bounds of what is Nubian are, as might be expected, matters of discussion. There are not one but several Nubian languages scattered from the Ethiopian borderlands to Darfur (Rilly, this volume). The two largest areas where Nubian languages are used are in Kordofan and along the Middle Nile, from north of the High Dam at Aswan to the southern tip of the Great Bend. Currently, research indicates that speakers of this language group were already found in the area of Kerma by 1800 bce or so, but the evidence derives from a few names (Rilly, this volume). Otherwise, we are not really sure what languages were actually used by persons whose remains we study down to the Meroitic period, although there are some fairly strong suggestions made by various authors in this volume. Ethnic identity is a far more difficult problem, partly because almost no ancient, medieval, or early modern people made any attempt to formalize the usage of identifiers that would apply to all situations (for example Liszka and de Souza, this volume; Manzo, this volume) and partly because such formalizations are contingent in any case. So the term Nubian as applied to people should be understood according to the context in which it is used. Thus there are three competing and complementing Nubias to introduce confusion into all discussions found herein, a confusion compounded by the fact that the usages of the word have not been formally developed with mathematical precision. It may be fortunate, for such things are fantasies as false as the opportunistic chaos they pretend to replace. Chapters in the volume covers a vast chronological expanse, from the Acheulian to the Islamic Funj and Ottoman Empires—from about 600,000 bp to the 18th century ce,

Nubia, a Brief Introduction   3 and focuses particularly on the empires of Kush and the medieval (Christian) Nubian kingdoms. We do not yet have a completely agreed upon set of chronological terms for all this range—and it was not the project of this volume to develop or impose ­uni­form­ity—but the contributions are internally consistent.

Continuity and Change, Unity and Diversity As presented in this volume, the study of Nubia is carried almost to the present day, despite the fact that great religious and cultural change has taken place. Looking backward from the present, there are at least three great Nubias: the Islamic Nubia from the 16th century forward, the Christian Nubia from the 6th century ce, and the Nubias that came before (cited just above). The relationship among these Nubias is among the central questions of this volume, not perhaps answered here, or even raised in many contributions, but the question haunts this book as surely as Hamlet’s ghost. Earlier in research on Nubia there was a definite preference for seeing the differences from phase to phase as announcing the arrivals of new peoples. Later, there was a reaction and the direct assertion that there was only one. At the outset, there are two interesting realities to confront. First, Sudan, both before and after its breakup in 2011, was and is diverse with, for example, a vast number of languages and dialects. If true now, why would the past be any different, especially before the broad conversions to Christianity and Islam imposed widespread conformity in belief and culture? On the other hand, there are recurring, telling cultural phenomena that seem to indicate the presence of reservoirs of belief and culture within the “Nubia of the archaeologists” (Spaulding, this volume). One constant through much of this volume is the presence of Egypt, Nubia’s northern neighbor. Indeed early research on Nubia viewed its cultures as simply peripheries of Egypt (Näser, this volume), although the work presented here has largely disentangled itself from that Egyptocentric perspective. All the same, interactions with ancient Egypt had significant ramifications for the cultures of Nubia, from migration and trade, to selective adoption of cultural practices and religious beliefs, to military incursions and occupations.

The Structure of the Volume This volume brings together some fifty-five chapters by an international group of scholars on a wide variety of topics that relate to the history and archaeology of Nubia. After important introductory chapters on the history of research in Nubia and on its climate and physical environment, the largest part of the volume is the sequence of cultures that lead almost to the present day (Chapters 5–44). Several cross-cutting themes are woven through

4   Bruce Beyer Williams and Geoff Emberling these chapters, including essays on desert cultures (Jesse; Manzo) and on Nubians in Egypt (Meurer; Budka; Howley). Eleven final chapters synthesize subjects across historical phases. In the pages that follow, the reader will find many opposing opinions and conclusions, sometimes closely juxtaposed, posed sometimes quietly, sometimes less so. Authors present here conclusions, opinions, and even reasoning that one or both editors do not agree with. This is an accurate representation of the condition of the field, ever-­changing, and always ready for a good argument, often with surprising results. Contributions were written between 2015 and 2019. As we editors have read the assembled chapters, we have also noted that some important features of past cultures have been given more complete consideration than others. Pottery and burials, for example have been given prominent discussion in almost every phase, which matches their remarkable, even essential importance in the history of Nubian cultures. On the other hand, settlements and domestic architecture, while reviewed here to some extent, are not treated consistently or in great depth despite their interest, complexity, and enduring significance. Any volume of this size requires a large number of decisions about the degree of editorial involvement in the individual chapters. We have posed questions and commented extensively on chapters but naturally have not imposed changes on authors. We have, however, standardized spelling of names of people and places as much as possible to enhance the accessibility of the research presented here. We have minimized the use of abbreviations that are familiar to researchers working on Nubia but which can pose obstacles to non-specialists. We have generally chosen to cite Sudanese authors using full names (following the recent practice of the journal Sudan & Nubia) rather than last name only, since the latter practice can result in considerable confusion. We have generally transliterated Arabic terms phonetically according to local pronunciation. Finally, we note that chapters were written between 2015 and 2018 and that it has not always been possible to update them to include more recent research.

Acknowledgments A volume of this size and complexity requires the assistance of many people. We editors are first grateful to our colleagues who wrote chapters and generously engaged in discussions that have improved the volume and even raised some new questions for future research. We are also grateful to Oxford University Press and particularly to our editor, Stefan Vranka, who patiently supported us through the long process of creating the volume. Financial support for different aspects of the book’s production has been provided by the Fondation Michela Schiff Giorgini, the University of Michigan Office of Research (UMOR), the University of Michigan African Studies Center, and Dr. Bala Iyer, Dean of Faculty, Babson College. The editing of the volume has been made possible by support from Ms. Kathleen Picken. The base maps are in the public domain at www.naturalearthdata.com.

Note 1. We note with pleasure the recent publication of Handbook of Ancient Nubia, edited by Dietrich Raue. That Handbook and the present volume are complementary as they address different audiences.

Pa rt I

C ON T E X T S FOR N U BI A N ST U DI E S

chapter 1

History of A rch a eol ogica l Wor k i n th e Middl e N il e R egion Salah Mohamed Ahmed

Introduction Sudan, once the biggest country and currently the third in size in Africa, is also one of the richest regions of this continent in archaeological remains. The human presence in this part of the Nile valley has been traced back over thousands of years. The position of Sudan on the southern frontier of Egypt and its extension to the heart of sub-Saharan Africa (southwards), to the Red Sea Coast (eastwards) and into the Sahara (westwards) have turned the country into a meeting place for many populations and cultures. Sudan represents today a harmonic marriage between the Arabo-Islamic culture and traditional Africa. This unique situation, especially the location of the country immediately to the south of Egypt with its great civilization, roused the curiosity of Classical writers (Adams 1977:68–70, 685), travelers, adventurers, and early pioneer archaeologists. The archaeological relics of the country have long been treated as an extension of Pharaonic Egypt. Today, Nubiology or the archaeology of the Middle Nile region, is a discipline on its own.

Classical Writers and Early Explorers Sudan was known to the outside world long before its exploration in the context of the European colonial project starting from the 18th century onwards. Early knowledge of

8   salah Mohamed ahmed this part of Africa was acquired from the writings of Greek, Roman, Byzantine, and  Arab authors. The ancient Greeks knew the country located to the south of Egypt as “Ethiopia” without defining a specific group of people or delimiting a clear geographic space. The populations of this region were summarily designated as the people with “burned faces” living to the south of the First Cataract of the Nile. The term “Ethiopia” is regularly mentioned in works of Classical writers starting with Herodotus (ca. 430 bce), and followed by Diodorus of Sicily, Strabo, and Pliny the Elder (Shinnie 1967:23). Many ecclesiastical authors narrated the Christianization of Nubia in the 6th century. The writings of John of Ephesus are particularly important in this respect (Vantini 1970). The Arab conquest of Egypt in 641 ce also introduced Nubia as a subject of study to Arab historians. The eventual conversion of Sudan to Islam and the rise of the Funj Kingdom in the 16th century ce resulted in a remarkable increase of written documents in the fields of politics, religion, and economy (Yusuf Fadl Hasan 1967, 1973). Knowledge about the region acquired from Classical writers and other sources aroused the curiosity of many Europeans and encouraged them to visit the country in the 18th and 19th centuries. The Scot James Bruce visited some monumental sites on his return trip from Ethiopia in 1772. He was the first European to visit the ruins at Begrawiya and to consider them as a possible location of ancient Meroe mentioned by Classical writers (Bruce  1813, v. 6:453ff.). Four decades later, the Swiss Jean Louis Burckhardt visited the country and described many of its ethnic groups and antiquities (Burckhardt 1819).

Explorers during the Turkiyya and the Mahdiyya Periods Mohamed Ali Pasha, viceroy of Egypt, invaded the Funj Kingdom of Sinnar (Sudan) in 1821. The annexation of the country to Turkish rule in Egypt opened the country to European scholars and adventurers. Two French explorers, Louis Linant de Bellefonds and Frédéric Cailliaud, traveled up the Nile directly in the aftermath of the Turkish invasion. Many of their descriptions and drawings remain the only testimony of monuments that have deteriorated or completely disappeared since their passage more than two hundred years ago. Linant de Bellefonds’s description of the sites of Musawwarat es-Sufra and Naga was the first documentation of these sites (Linant de Bellefonds 1821–22:114–30). The work of Cailliaud (Fig. 1.1) is particularly interesting. His admiration of the archaeological relics of the Middle Nile is clearly shown in his description of the pyramids of Meroe: “la joie que j’éprouvai en découvrant les sommets d’une foule de pyramides, dont les rayons du soleil, peu élevé encore sur l’horizon, doraient majesteusement les cimes!” [“. . . the joy that I experienced in discovering the summits of a group of pyramids, majestically gilded by the sun’s rays, just above the horizon!”] (Cailliaud 1823–27, v. 2:142).

History of Archaeological Work in the Middle Nile Region   9

Figure 1.1  Pyramids at Meroe in 1821. Cailliaud 1823–27, Atlas v. 1, pl. XXXVI.

Sudanese monumental sites were visited by the English travelers George Waddington and Barnard Hanbury, coming with the Turkish army, in 1821 (Waddington and Hanbury 1822) and by George Alexander Hoskins in 1832–33 (Hoskins 1835). The Italian adventurer Giuseppe Ferlini destroyed many pyramids at Meroe after his discovery of a treasure in pyramid Beg. N 6 of Queen Amanishakheto in 1834 (Ferlini 1837). However, most important for the archaeology of the Middle Nile valley in the 19th century was the Royal Prussian Expedition led by Karl Richard Lepsius who traversed Sudan in 1844. The scientific exploration and documentation undertaken by this mission covered almost all the visible archaeological monuments between the Egyptian frontier and the region south of Khartoum (Lepsius 1849–59). Other German travelers were also present, like Count Pückler-Muskau, who inscribed his name on the walls of the Great Enclosure at Musawwarat. During the Mahdiyya uprising in the second part of the 19th century, Sudan remained isolated from the outside world, without seeing any archaeological research.

Archaeological Explorations during the 20th Century It was only after the reoccupation of Sudan by the Anglo-Egyptian troops in 1898 that the country was reopened to European and American researchers. Major rescue projects

10   salah Mohamed ahmed and individual missions conducted in the early 20th century contributed greatly to our knowledge of the country’s history. Three great salvage projects were organized in response to the construction and heightening of dams at Aswan near the First Cataract of the Nile. The first dam at Aswan was constructed in 1902 and heightened in 1907. This heightening endangered the inhabitants, the monuments, and the archaeological sites between the First Cataract and the village of Wadi es-Sebua. An international campaign directed by George Andrew Reisner and Cyril Mallaby Firth was organized to save the archaeological heritage of the region (Reisner 1909, 1910; Firth 1912, 1915, 1927). Between 1907 and 1911, more than forty cemeteries were excavated during this campaign. Moreover, several fortresses were investigated, including those of Ikkur and Kubban. Based on the results of this work, Reisner established a typological and chronological sequence of the historic cultures of the region. In the absence of direct parallels with the trajectory in neighboring Egypt, Reisner developed an independent terminology and designated the newly discovered cultures in alphabetical order (A-Group, B-Group, C-Group, and X-Group). The University of Pennsylvania started excavations at the sites of Areika (RandallMacIver and Woolley 1909), Karanog and Shablul (Woolley 1911; Woolley and RandallMacIver 1910) during the First International Salvage Campaign of Nubia (1907–11). At the same time, Geoffrey Mileham (1910) conducted a survey of medieval churches in Lower Nubia. A team from the Vienna Academy of Sciences, led by Hermann Junker, excavated the C-Group cemetery at Kubbaniya North (Junker 1920) before exploring the burial grounds of the same period at Toshka and Arminna (Junker 1925, 1926). A second heightening of the Aswan Dam extended the endangered region further to the south up to Adindan. Another international campaign to save the antiquities of Nubia was then organized between 1929 and 1934. Under the direction of Walter B. Emery and Laurence P. Kirwan, this salvage campaign confirmed and expanded the results of the first campaign (Emery and Kirwan 1935). Perhaps its greatest success was the exploration of the royal Post-Meroitic tombs at Ballana and Qustul (Emery and Kirwan  1938). Georg Steindorff, with the Ernst von Sieglin Expedition of Leipzig University, worked at Aniba in the Egyptian fortress and the cemetery of the Middle and New Kingdoms, as well as in the Nubian cemeteries (Steindorff 1935–37). Although both campaigns were limited to Egyptian territory and did not touch Sudan, the cultural sequence established from this work remain largely in use by researchers for the whole region. In 1959, the Egyptian government decided upon the construction of the so-called High Dam at Aswan. This new dam endangered a vast region of the Nile valley, stretching from Aswan to Dal—the area south of the Second Cataract. UNESCO launched an appeal to the international community to contribute to the rescue project in order to save the antiquities of Nubia in Egypt and Sudan before the complete flooding of the area. The response to this appeal was immense and dozens of archaeological missions, attracted by the monumental nature of the archaeological remains of the region, took up work in the affected area. The teams who joined the efforts on Sudanese territory were from the Democratic Republic of Germany, the Federal Republic of Germany,

History of Archaeological Work in the Middle Nile Region   11 Argentina, Belgium, USA, France, Great Britain, Ghana, the Netherlands, Poland, the Scandinavian countries, Switzerland, and Yugoslavia. The operation in Sudan had two tasks. The first was the systematic prospection and excavation of sites on both banks of the Nile and on the islands in the region between the Egyptian frontier and Dal. The second task was the dismantling of the most important monuments and their re-erection in the garden of the newly built Sudan National Museum in Khartoum (Säve-Söderbergh  1987). Most of the efforts of the UNESCO campaign had been devoted to the rescue of monumental temples. The dismantling, transportation, and re-erection of the temple of Abu Simbel and many other Nubian/ Egyptian temples can be considered as the main masterpiece of civil engineering realized during the 20th century (Säve-Söderbergh 1987). The achievements of the campaign in Egypt are well illustrated in the collections of the Nubian Museum in Aswan. A number of scholars also worked during these years away from the dam projects. E.A. Wallis Budge of the British Museum worked at several sites during the period from 1898 to 1905. In addition to large-scale prospections, he conducted limited excavations at Jebel Barkal and Meroe. He published his seminal two-volume work, The Egyptian Sûdân, in 1907 (Budge 1907). The contributions of British scholars to the archaeology of Sudan during these early days also include the works of John  W.  Crowfoot (Crowfoot 1911), Philip David Scott-Moncrieff (Scott-Moncrief 1907, 1908), but most significantly the excavations of John Garstang at the City of Meroe (Garstang 1910, 1911, 1912, 1913, 1914–16; Garstang and George 1914). Sir Henry Wellcome worked in the area of Jebel Moya (Southern Gezira Region) from 1911 to 1914 (published later by Addison 1949; Crawford and Addison 1951). Francis Griffith from Oxford University excavated at Faras from 1910 to 1912 (Griffith 1923), at Sanam Abu Dom (Griffith 1926), and Kawa (Macadam 1949–55). However, the real father of Sudanese archaeology is George Andrew Reisner working on behalf of the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston and Harvard University. Reisner inaugurated the First Nubian Salvage Campaign in 1907–1908. Later, he became the director of the Harvard-Boston Expedition (1913–32), with which he excavated at Kerma, in the temples and pyramids of Jebel Barkal, Nuri, El-Kurru, and Meroe, as well as at the Egyptian fortresses of the Second Cataract (Fig. 1.2). His excavations at Kerma resulted in the discovery of one of the most important kingdoms of ancient Africa (Reisner 1923). Although he erroneously attributed most of his discoveries at Kerma to Egyptian occupants of the Middle Kingdom, the precision of his documentation enabled later researchers to prove the indigenous Nubian character of this culture. Reisner’s extensive explorations of the royal tombs of El-Kurru (Dunham 1950), Nuri (Dunham 1955), Jebel Barkal (Dunham 1957), and Meroe (Dunham 1963) permitted him to establish the chronological sequence of the Napatan and Meroitic Kingdoms with an almost uninterrupted sequence of rulers from the 9th century bce to the 4th century ce. From 1928 to 1932, Reisner was engaged in the exploration of the Egyptian fortresses of the Second Cataract at Shalfak, Uronarti, Mirgissa, Semna, and Kumma (Dunham and Janssen 1960; Dunham 1967).

12   salah Mohamed ahmed

Figure 1.2  George Reisner’s field camp at Nuri. Photograph © Museum of Fine Arts, Boston.

The Great Depression and the Second World War resulted in the interruption of much research during the 1930s and 1940s, after the termination of the Second International Campaign for the rescue of the antiquities of Nubia in 1934. At the same time, U. Monneret de Villard (1938) completed the reconnaissance of Nubian Christian Churches started by Mileham at the beginning of the century. The 1940s witnessed important achievements in prehistoric research. Anthony Arkell, the then-commissioner for archaeology and anthropology of the Anglo-Egyptian Sudan, explored Paleolithic remains at Khor Abu Anga (Arkell 1949a), Mesolithic remains at the site of Khartoum Hospital (Arkell  1949b), and Neolithic remains at Shaheinab (Arkell 1953). At the same time, Oliver Myers of Gordon Memorial College of Khartoum started his prehistoric excavations at ‘Abka (Shinnie and Myers 1948). After the Second World War, archaeological research in Sudan saw a remarkable development. Peter Shinnie excavated the monastery of Ghazali (Shinnie and Chittick 1961), the Post-Meroitic burial mounds of Tanqasi (Shinnie 1954:66–85), and the capital of the Christian Kingdom of Alwa at Soba East (Shinnie 1955). In the region of Shendi, the Sudan Antiquities Service conducted extensive excavations at the site of Wad ban Naga under the direction of Jean Vercoutter and Thabit Hassan Thabit (Vercoutter 1962). Humboldt University of Berlin undertook an extensive reconnaissance of the Butana region and started excavations at the site of Musawwarat es-Sufra (Hintze 1960, 1962, 1971). This activity was followed by research into the prehistory of

History of Archaeological Work in the Middle Nile Region   13 the Butana conducted jointly by the universities of Texas and Khartoum (Marks and Abbas Mohamed Ali 1991). Shinnie also commenced, with the universities of Khartoum and Calgary, excavations of the City of Meroe (Shinnie and Bradley 1980). In the north, research continued with the French excavations at Mirgissa (Vercoutter 1970) and on the Island of Sai, the expedition of Michaela Schiff Giorgini at Soleb, and the Blackmer Foundation and the University of Geneva on the Island of Argo (Maystre 1967–68, 1986). These activities continued uninterrupted by the administrative and legislative development related to the management of antiquities in the country. The first legislation for the protection of archaeological heritage was issued by the British administration in 1905 and since then re-edited twice in 1952 and 1999. The later version is still in force: The Antiquities Protection Ordinance 1999. At the beginning (during the colonial administration), archaeological affairs were managed by a high official of the Ministry of Education. The post of “commissioner for archaeology” was created in 1939 and occupied successively by Anthony Arkell and then Peter Shinnie during the British colonial period. Jean Vercoutter, Thabit Hassan Thabit, Negm eldin Mohamed Sherif, Usama Abdelrahman El-Nour, Ahmed Mohamed Ali l-Hakem, Hassan Hussein Idris, Abdelrahman Ali Mohamed Rahman, and, at present, Hatim el-Nour, were the successive directors of antiquities and museums since the independence in 1956. The administration was previously known as the “Sudan Antiquities Service” and now the “National Corporation of Antiquities and Museums” (or NCAM). After the end of the UNESCO campaign around 1970 and up to the close of the 20th century, more than forty foreign and national missions took the field every year. The work of these missions has contributed a lot to our understanding of the country’s past and has thrown more light on questions raised by the work of previous investigations. Apart from the UNESCO Nubian Salvage Campaign, the most important event in the 1960s was the founding of the French Archaeological Unit as the first and, up to present, the only permanent foreign archaeological institute in Sudan. Since the dawn of the UNESCO Campaign, the National Corporation for Antiquities and Museums has cooperated with more than forty-five missions coming from more than ten nationalities.

Explorations at the Beginning of the 21st Century Archaeological activities in the Middle Nile valley at the end of the 20th century and the first years of the 21st century were mainly characterized by salvage operations related to the construction of dams. In 2013, a large-scale project funded by Qatar opened a completely new chapter in the archaeological exploration of Sudan and the management of its archaeological heritage.

14   salah Mohamed ahmed

Dams In the last three decades, the government of Sudan started to revive and implement old dam projects and to plan the construction of additional ones. These projects have tremendous consequences for the antiquities of the country. Altogether nine dams have been built, are under construction, or are in the planning stage (Fig. 1.3).

Merowe Dam In the 1980s the government of Sudan reactivated the project of building a dam at the Fourth Cataract, a plan that had originally been developed in 1942. It was first known as Hamdab Dam and later renamed Merowe Dam, after the capital of the province which is the actual location of the dam site. The authorities of the National Corporation for Antiquities and Museums as well as Sudanese and international archaeologists were aware of the destruction that threatened the archaeologically unknown region of the Fourth Cataract. Numerous sites would be completely or partially destroyed by the engineering activities at the dam site itself. Thousands of sites, over a distance of 170 km of the river valley, including many islands, would be completely flooded. The irrigation projects and the construction of houses of the resettlement schemes were to affect sites in other regions of the country, too. This concerned primarily four main resettlements: El-Multaga (New Hamdab) near Ed-Debba, New Amri at the mouth of Wadi Muqaddam near Korti, Keheila East near Abu Hamad, and Wadi Mukabrab at the confluence of the Atbara River and the Nile. Moreover, thousands of kilometers of power transmission lines as well as areas for the construction of new roads, bridges, and other infrastructure measures had also to be investigated. In view of this massive task, the National Corporation for Antiquities and Museums tried to attract the attention of archaeologists to that region. Several missions undertook surveys and excavations in the downstream area of the future lake: • In 1986, an archaeological mission of the University of Rome, directed by Sergio Donadoni and Isabella Caneva, conducted a two-week reconnaissance on the Island of Boni (Caneva 1988). • A UNESCO mission, directed by Jean Leclant and assisted by Usama Abdel Rahman El-Nour and Jacques Reinold, visited the area of the future reservoir and produced a report for the attention of UNESCO in 1989 (Ossama El-Nur and Hassan Bandi  1994). In 1990, Krzysztof Grzymski produced his report “Meroe Multi-purpose Hydro-project, International Development Association” upon request of the Canadian consultancy firm Monenco Agra and the Sudanese Ministry of Irrigation and Water Resources (Grzymski 2010:67–70). • In 1991, part of the future reservoir was surveyed by teams of the National Corporation for Antiquities and Museums (Ahmed  M.  Ali el-Hakem 1993:1–25).

History of Archaeological Work in the Middle Nile Region   15

Nile

Major Dam Projects in Sudan Source: International Rivers

Aswan First Cataract

Philae

Aswan Dam EGYPT

Kalabsha

Ballana Faras Second Cataract

Wad i el-A llaqi

Qasr Ibrim Gebel Adda Qusful Gemai

g ab

iG ad W

Dal Dam

a ab

Firka

Third Cataract

SUDAN

Kajbar Dam Tabo Kawa

Old Dongola

Gebel Barkal Napata El-Kurru

Fourth Cataract

Merowe Dam

Nuri Sanam Tanqasi

Fifth Cataract

Shereik Dam At ba ra

Meroe

Proposed Completed

Sixth Cataract

Wad Ban Naga Musawwarat es-Sufra Naqa Soba

Africa

Khartoum ile te N Whi

ile eN Blu

Upper Atbara Project

Roseires Dam

Figure 1.3  Map of Sudan showing location of existing and planned dams, https://www. internationalrivers.org/campaigns/kajbar-dam-sudan (accessed 1/10/2019).

16   salah Mohamed ahmed • Between 1995 and 1998, the Department of Archaeology of the University of Dongola and the National Corporation for Antiquities and Museums undertook many survey and excavation campaigns on the left bank of the Nile, few kilometers upstream from the site of the future dam. Their main work concentrated on the Post-Meroitic cemetery of El-Haraz at Jebel Kulgeli (Abdel Rahman Ali Mohamed and Kabashy Hussein 1999:67–70). Two other missions were also early to join the salvage work: the mission of the Archaeological Museum of Gdańsk (Poland), which surveyed 130 km on the right bank of the Nile (Paner 1998, 2003; Paner and Borcowski 2005a, b), and the mission of the Sudan Archaeological Research Society (UK), which conducted the survey of the left bank (Welsby 2003). Engineering works started in 2001 at the dam site and in the first resettlement area at El-Multaga, New Hamdab. Consequently, these areas were given priority by the authorities of NCAM, with one team working at the dam site on the left bank, while another team joined the French Archaeological Section (SFDAS) at New Hamdab. The mission of the Archaeological Museum of Gdańsk was involved in the salvage of the area affected by the engineering activities on the right bank. In 2003 (at the SARS annual meeting at the British Museum in London), the National Corporation for Antiquities and Museums launched an international appeal inviting institutions and scientists to contribute to the salvage operations (Salah Mohamed Ahmed 2003). The response was very encouraging. Eventually eighteen missions from nine countries joined the project. They include: Great Britain The Sudan Archaeological Research Society (with the British Museum as a main partner) directed the work of several missions and many specialists from different nationalities in a concession on the left bank about 40 km upstream of the dam site. The archaeological teams of SARS were directed by Derek Welsby, Dorian Fuller, Pawel Wolf, John Payne, Andrew Ginns, and Cornelia Kleinitz (for the rock art survey). France The French Archaeological Section (SFDAS) worked in collaboration with NCAM in the resettlement schemes of El-Multaga (New Hamdab), New Amri (Wadi Muqaddam), and Wadi Mukabrab. Their field activities were directed by Francis Geus, Vincent Rondot, and Yves Lecointe. Germany Humboldt University of Berlin worked in a concession on the left bank and on a series of islands, namely Us, Sur, and Sherari, in the center of the reservoir area. Project directors were Claudia Näser and, for an initial period, Frank Kammerzell; for the latter Julia Budka directed work in the field. Due to the delay in solving the resettlement issues between the local population and the government, the mission was not able to work on

History of Archaeological Work in the Middle Nile Region   17 Shirri Island. Instead, Claudia Näser conducted two very fruitful seasons on Mograt Island which is also endangered by the plans for another dam. A mission of the University of Cologne, directed by Hans-Peter Wotzka, worked on the Island of Boni. Hungary A mission of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences in Budapest, directed by Gabor Lassányi, worked in two concessions on the left bank. Peru A mission of the Centro Mallqui–The Bioanthropology Foundation (Peru), directed by Gerardo Carpio and Rosío Díaz, excavated medieval cemeteries on the left bank in the concession of SARS and undertook anthropological research on the recovered skeletal material. Poland A mission of the Archaeological Museum of Gdańsk, directed by Henryk Paner, started the survey of the right bank of the Nile in the area affected by the dam the future reservoir lake in 1996 and excavated sites of all the periods of the country’s history in the downstream part of this concession. A mission of the Polish Centre of Mediterranean Archaeology of the University of Warsaw, directed by Włodzimierz Godlewski, explored the Polish concessions on the left bank, making a great contribution. A mission directed by Bogdan Żurawski of the Polish Academy of Sciences, undertaken within the framework of the Polish Centre of Mediterranean Archaeology, worked on the Island of Saffi and studied several medieval fortresses in the region. Later on, they participated in the salvage activities on the left bank at the uppermost part of the prospective flood area in collaboration with a mission of the Museum of Poznan and the Centre of Mediterranean Archaeology of the University of Warsaw. A mission of the Museum of Poznan and the Polish Academy of Sciences, directed respectively by the late Lech Krzyzaniak and then, Marek Chłodnicki, worked in the most upstream concession on the left bank. They conducted excavations on many sites, most importantly the Post-Meroitic elite cemetery of Hagar el-Beida. Sudan Several missions of NCAM worked on the left bank at the dam site, surveying the area between El-Kab and Khor el-Daghfaly on the right bank. It also worked in several areas affected by the newly constructed power transmission lines, at road sites related to the dam project, in the resettlement area of Keheila East and, in collaboration with the SFDAS, at the resettlement sites of New Hamdab, New Amri, and Wadi Mukabrab. In addition, Sudanese university teams worked in the salvage area. The University of Dongola worked in collaboration with NCAM at the dam site. The University of Khartoum worked in collaboration with NCAM at the dam site and with the SFDAS and

18   salah Mohamed ahmed NCAM in the resettlement project of New Amri. Finally, the University of Wadi en-Neel worked with the SFDAS and NCAM at the resettlement area of Wadi Mukabrab. The Sudanese activities were funded by the Dams Implementation Unit (D.I.U.). USA A mission of the University of California, Santa Barbara, directed by Stuart Tyson Smith, was active in the uppermost concession on the right bank, along with a team from Arizona State University directed by Brenda Baker. A mission of the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago, directed by Geoff Emberling and Bruce Williams, worked in a part of the concession of the Archaeological Museum of Gdańsk, at El-Widay and Hosh el-Guruf, on the right bank. A mission of the University of Delaware, directed by Steven Sidebotham, was not able to work on their concession on the right bank due to delay in solving the resettlement issues between the local population and the government. Instead they worked on the left bank in the area located immediately downstream of the dam, then endangered by the building of a road. Italy NCAM was generously assisted by the Italian companies IVECO and New Holland, with the participation of Alfredo and Angelo Castiglioni, the directors of the Eastern Desert Research Center, in the salvage of several blocks with rock art (blocks) and the remains of a Kushite granite pyramid. They were dismantled and taken to Merowe. They are now stored at the Museum of Jebel Barkal. Summary: Merowe Dam The Merowe Dam Archaeological Salvage Project (MDASP) was supposed to be concluded at the end of August 2008, but due to delays in the schedule of filling the lake, rescue operations continued in the upper reaches of the reservoir area to the end of 2009. The generation and distribution of electricity from the dam was inaugurated on March 3, 2009. On the same day, a museum financed by the Dam Implementation Unit (D.I.U.), was opened at the town of Merowe. Some finds recovered during the rescue operations are now exhibited in this museum. Another museum devoted exclusively to the memory of the Fourth Cataract is also planned to be built in Merowe by the D.I.U. and NCAM (in the same town). It is frequently said that salvage archaeology contributes very little to our knowledge about the history of the targeted area. Indeed, with the exception of preliminary reports, the materials and documentation gathered from MDASP and the other rescue missions listed above have not yet been studied and published in detail. But despite all the potential negative aspects of dam building, the Merowe Dam did attract specialists who otherwise would never have ventured to work in this inhospitable region. Despite many data still awaiting full publication, MDASP has widely expanded archaeological knowledge of the region. As usual, we can notice more cemeteries than settlement sites. This is certainly due to the vulnerable location of settlements both in

History of Archaeological Work in the Middle Nile Region   19 antiquity and in modern times. People used to settle along the banks of the Nile for access to and exploitation of agricultural and other resources. This implies exposure to the fluctuations of the river and destructive floods. This is in addition to the effect of repeated human activities through the centuries. Hence, the first excavations in the area focused on sampling cemeteries and tomb monuments of various types. Later work of several missions concentrated on the study of settlement sites. A picture of the prehistory of the Fourth Cataract is being drawn for the first time. The earliest known occupation of the region dates back to more than 150,000 years ago. Few prehistoric cemeteries (graves) have been identified and partly excavated, while the record of settlement sites of this period is much richer. A noteworthy exception to this is the record from one of the resettlement areas, El-Multaga (New Hamdab), where a considerable number of graves could be located and studied. These are mostly gravel mounds covering burials of Neolithic date. Some of the rich rock art sites in the cataract area seem to date from the prehistoric period. At least, depictions of animals such as giraffes and ostrich are generally considered to be related to the more humid periods of the early Holocene. The work of many missions revealed a considerable occupation of the region during Kerma times. Kerma remains were found as far as Mograt Island (Näser 2006, 2008; Näser and Tsakos 2014; Weschenfelder 2015), extending the known frontiers of this civilization over more than 200 km southwards. Graves deprived of any archaeological materials and dated to the beginning of the 2nd millennium bce have been excavated in the resettlement area of Mukabrab, at the junction of the Atbara with the Nile (Lecointe 2006). It is now the task of archaeologists to investigate the potential extension of this most important Bronze Age culture of the Middle Nile region into the region south of the Fifth Cataract. Ceramics of clearly Egyptian manufacture were found on some sites of the 2nd and 1st millennia bce in the Fourth Cataract and beyond (Weschenfelder  2015). This disproves the former assumption that the region of the Fourth Cataract was a barren and widely depopulated stretch between the Pharaonic sites at Jebel Barkal and Kurgus. Sites of the subsequent Napatan and Meroitic periods are far less numerous than those of earlier and later eras. The most important single discovery of this date is a small pyramid that was explored by the mission of SARS, on the left bank (Welsby 2004). It indicates the existence of a Napatan elite in this region. Meroitic features and pottery are less frequent. Handmade pottery with comb-impressed decoration has sometimes been found in settlements close to the Nile. Wheelmade pottery has very rarely been documented on the different sites. The area lacks kaolin clay, the raw material of the Meroitic fine ware. Typical Meroitic patterns are almost absent from pottery decoration, which points to a local community which was not greatly influenced by the sophisticated symbols of the Meroitic elites in the habitation centers further upstream and downstream. The islands with their agricultural potential and their naturally protected strategic locations have always been more attractive to human settlements than the main river banks. Therefore, it is not unusual that the most extensive habitation remains of the Meroitic period were found on an island, namely Umm Murri (Payne 2005:12, pl. 4).

20   salah Mohamed ahmed The most extensive occupation of the Fourth Cataract region is related to the PostMeroitic and medieval periods. Huge cemeteries of the Post-Meroitic period with monumental tumuli and stone ring superstructures were found all over the area. The study of these graves has uncovered funerary rites unknown both in Nubia and Central Sudan during this period. But the main contribution of the Fourth Cataract to the study of the Post-Meroitic period is the investigation of many settlement sites (Paner  2003:180, fig. 20; Wolf and Nowotnick 2005:26, pls. 6–7; Welsby 2007, pls. 5–6). This adds a new dimension towards the understanding of this period, which was almost exclusively known from the study of its cemeteries until now. The record of the subsequent medieval period encompasses several fortresses, large box-grave cemeteries and numerous settlement sites. They suggest that the area supported a substantial population in this era. A church excavated on the Island of Sur even produced a large corpus of medieval manuscripts and book bindings (Näser and Tsakos  2014). Should we perhaps think of this region as the political entity of ElalAbwab, mentioned by the Arab geographers? Only a few early Islamic sites have been investigated. It is clear that the modern population of the Fourth Cataract, prior to resettlement, was occupying the same locations as their immediate ancestors. With the fieldwork being over and much of the area being covered by the new reservoir lake, it remains a task for the present and the future to analyze and publish the rich records of the MDASP in full detail. The most important result of this will be the writing of a “rural version” of Sudanese history, which will supplement and enrich earlier versions developed from the study of royal and elite centers in the earlier part of the 20th century (Anderson and Welsby 2014).

Roseires Dam Another project concerned the heightening of the existing dam at Roseires on the Blue Nile. About 75 km on both banks of the river were endangered by the expanding lake. Teams from NCAM conducted several campaigns of surveys and rescue excavations between 2009 and 2012. A total of sixty-nine sites were partially or completely studied. These include cemeteries, settlements, forts, and rock gongs. They are dated to the prehistoric, Post-Meroitic, and early Islamic (Funj) periods (Inaam Abdelrahman Magzoub 2016:95–111).

Upper Atbara and Setit Dams This is a project of a double dam at the junction of two tributaries of the Nile, Atbara and Setit. About 55 km on the both banks of the two rivers and the area between them are endangered. Teams from NCAM conducted several seasons of surveys and rescue excavations during the period from 2010 to 2013. A total of forty-one sites were located on the east bank of Setit River. These are settlements and burial sites of prehistoric, Islamic, and undefined date. Twenty-seven sites were studied on the west bank of Atbara River. These are mainly burial grounds, settlements, prehistoric workshops, concentrations of fossil wood and concentrations of cultural material of undefined date. The gezira (“island”) between the two rivers yielded only six sites of prehistoric, Islamic and

History of Archaeological Work in the Middle Nile Region   21 ­ n-identified date. A vast agricultural scheme, extending over 80 × 45 km, which is planned u to be irrigated from the two dams was also surveyed. It produced a total of 137 sites. These are mostly settlements, burial sites, and workshops of prehistoric date (Inaam Abdelrahman Magzoub 2016:111–39).

Dal and Kajbar Dams The construction of the dams at the Dal and Kajbar cataracts of the Nile, upstream of the Second Cataract, will affect an area of about 1500 km2 on both river banks as well as dozens of islands. The inventory of archaeological sites prepared by NCAM after initial surveys in 2008 comprises 509 sites representing all types of sites and periods of the country’s history (Inaam Abdelrahman Magzoub:140–41). A team from the British Museum conducted a preliminary assessment of the monumental sites and the resources needed for their preservation in the two affected areas in 2011 (Welsby 2011).

Dagash Another dam is planned to be constructed at Dagash in Abu Hamad Vicinity. The surveys conducted by NCAM in the affected area in 2011 resulted in the recording of 313 sites. These include burial grounds, settlements, rock art stations, rock gongs, and military sites of the colonial period (Inaam Abdelrahman Magzoub 2016:141–42).

Mograt Another dam has been projected in the area of Mograt, the largest island in the Nile, below the Fifth Cataract. Mograt has been the target of several salvage seasons of the Humboldt University Nubian Expedition (Näser  2006,  2008), the Mograt Island Archaeological Mission (www.mogratarchaeology.com), and a mission of NCAM (Inaam Abdelrahman Magzoub 2016:141–42) since 2006. Thousands of sites have been recorded on the island until now. Both survey and excavation work are being continued.

Sabaloqa A small dam which is planned at Sabaloqa in area of the Sixth Nile Cataract, will affect about 40 km on both river banks. The region was inspected by NCAM in 2011, and 114 sites were located. These are cemeteries, settlements, and rock gongs, mostly dated to the prehistoric, Post-Meroitic, and Islamic periods (Inaam Abdelrahman Magzoub 2016:142–43).

Shereiq Dam The area which will be affected by this dam has not yet been surveyed by NCAM.

Qatar-Sudan Archaeological Project (QSAP) At the beginning of the 21st century, the archaeology of Sudan received a second decisive and very positive impulse in the form of the Qatar-Sudan Archaeological Project. This

22   salah Mohamed ahmed project is a Qatari initiative with the objective of promoting the rich archaeological heritage in the Republic of the Sudan. Initiated from the highest governmental levels, it is conducted within the framework of the Nubian Archaeological Development Organization, a Qatari-funded NGO, and covers the fields of archaeological research and heritage conservation and presentation.

Archaeological Missions The project (QSAP) covers the funding of forty-one archaeological missions (M. Honegger 2018): • Thirty-nine of these missions are working on archaeological sites in the Northern and River Nile States of the Republic of the Sudan. Their work consists of surveys, excavations, protection, restoration, presentation, and the establishment of the basic infrastructure on these sites. The sites represent the complete history of Sudan covering a period ranging from early prehistoric times (about 300,000 years ago) down to the 19th century ce. • One mission for the detailed mapping of monumental sites; an essential step towards a scientific management of the archaeological heritage of the country. • One group working on the study of texts written in Meroitic; one of the few languages of the ancient world which has not yet been deciphered.

Pyramids The Qatari Mission for the Pyramids (QMPS) of Sudan have been constituted for: • The conservation and presentation of the pyramids of Begrawiya (ancient Meroe), Jebel Barkal, Nuri, and El-Kurru. • Investigations in the four pyramid fields for the discovery of new tombs. • Solving of the problem of sand erosion an accumulation at the pyramids of Begrawiya. • Work has already started at the pyramids of Begrawiya/Meroe (Fig. 1.4). Two camps have been built at Begrawiya/Meroe and Jebel Barkal. They are respectively named Dohat Meroe and Dohat el-Barkal. The aim of these camps is to serve as accommodation and working stations for the missions. They will be used in the future (after the end of the project) for the promotion of tourism in the two main concentrations of pyramids at Meroe and in the Napatan region; both areas contain sites inscribed on the UNESCO World Heritage List.

Museums Two projects on museums will be funded: • The Sudan National Museum: this is one of the oldest museums of Africa. The first exhibition dates back to the beginning of the 20th century. The actual building,

History of Archaeological Work in the Middle Nile Region   23

Figure 1.4  Qatar Mission for the Pyramids of Sudan project: re-excavation and study of burial chambers of pyramid Begrawiya S 503.

located near the confluence of the Blue and White Niles, was inaugurated in 1971. It hosts over 100,000 archaeological objects. The building itself needs maintenance and repair as well as the modernization of the exhibition concept. This rehabilitation project aims to bring the Sudan National Museum to international modern standards. • Building a new museum at Naga, one of the most spectacular sites of the Meroitic civilization (4th century bce–4th century ce).

Conclusion It is now almost two hundred years since the first European travelers came to explore the antiquities of the country. Since then, archaeological investigations have continued, sometimes as a compulsory task necessitated by the threats caused by major development projects or individual research initiatives. The main lines and general chronology of the country’s history are a result of the salvage operations in connection with the construction and heightening of dams at Aswan in Egypt. This can be criticized as the work

24   salah Mohamed ahmed was limited to the extreme north and does not reflect the geographical and cultural diversity of the country. However, recent salvage operations related to the construction of dams have encouraged archaeologists to work in regions outside the classical territory of archaeological interest such as the Fourth Cataract (Merowe Dam), Eastern Sudan (Upper Atbara and Siteit Dams) and the Southern Gezira Region (Roseires Dam). The work of major missions has greatly contributed to our understanding of the prehistory of the country, to the discovery and interpretation of the remains of Kerma civilization (3rd–2nd millennia bce) and to the royal succession of the Kushite Dynasty (8th century bce–4th century ce). More interest in Christian and Islamic periods is witnessed in recent activities. It is also noticeable that the post-colonial era and recent years are characterized by increased national contribution to the archaeological explorations. The generous Qatari funding is a major impulse for the conservation of the country’s antiquities and a statement of an Arab awareness of the nation’s cultural history.

References Cited Abdel Rahman Ali Mohamed and Kabashy Hussein 1999 Two Seasons in the Fourth Cataract Region: Preliminary Results. Sudan & Nubia 3:60–70. Adams, W.Y. 1977 Nubia Corridor to Africa. Princeton University Press. Addison, F. 1949 Jebel Moya. The Wellcome Excavations in the Sudan 1–2. Oxford University Press. Ahmed M. Ali al-Hakem 1993 Merowe (Hamadab) High Dam and its Impacts. Kush 16:1–25. Anderson, J.R. and D.A. Welsby eds. 2014 The Fourth Cataract and Beyond: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference for Nubian Studies. British Museum Publications on Egypt and Sudan 1. Peeters. Arkell, A.J. 1949a The Old Stone Age in the Anglo-Egyptian Sudan. Occasional Papers 1. Sudan Antiquities Service. ——— 1949b Early Khartoum. Oxford University Press. ——— 1953 Shaheinab. Oxford University Press. Bruce, J. 1813 Travels to Discover the Source of the Nile, in the Years 1768–73, 3rd edition. Alexander Murray. Budge, E.A.W. 1907 The Egyptian Sûdân: Its History and Monuments. Kegan Paul, Trench, Trübner. Burckhardt, J.-L. 1819 Travels in Nubia. John Murray. Cailliaud, F. 1823–27 Voyage à Méroé, au Fleuve Blanc . . . à Syouah, et dans cinq autres oasis; fait dans les années 1819;1820; 1821 et 1822. Paris: Imprimerie Nationale. Caneva, I. 1988 A Prospection of the Fourth Cataract. Nubian Letters 10:1–9. Crawford, O.G.S. and F.  Addison 1951 Abu Geili and Saqadi & Dar el Mek. The Wellcome Excavations in the Sudan 3. Oxford University Press. Crowfoot, J.-W. 1911 The Island of Meroë. Archaeological Survey of Egypt 19:1–41. Dunham, D. 1950 El Kurru. Royal Cemeteries of Kush 1. Harvard University Press. ——— 1955 Nuri. Royal Cemeteries of Kush 2. Museum of Fine Arts (Boston). ——— 1957 Royal Tombs at Meroë and Barkal. Royal Cemeteries of Kush 4. Museum of Fine Arts (Boston).

History of Archaeological Work in the Middle Nile Region   25 ——— 1963 The West and South Cemeteries at Meroë. Royal Cemeteries of Kush 5. Museum of Fine Arts (Boston). ——— 1967 Uronarti, Shalfak, Mirgissa. Second Cataract Forts 2. Museum of Fine Arts (Boston). Dunham, D. and J. M. A. Janssen 1960 Semna, Kumma. Second Cataract Forts 1. Museum of Fine Arts (Boston). Emery, W.B. and L.P. Kirwan 1935 The Excavations and Survey between Wadi es-Sebua and Adindan, 1929–1931. Mission Archéologique de Nubie 1929–1934. Government Press (Cairo). ——— 1938 The Royal Tombs at Ballana and Qustul. Mission Archéologique de Nubie 1929–1934. Government Press (Cairo). Ferlini, G. 1837 Cenno sugli scavi operati nella Nubia, e catalogo degli oggetti ritrovati. Tipografia Nobili. Firth, C.M. 1912 The Archaeological Report of Nubia. Report for 1908–1909. Government Press (Cairo). ——— 1915 The Archaeological Report of Nubia. Report for 1909–1910. Government Press (Cairo). ——— 1927 The Archaeological Survey of Nubia. Report for 1910–1911. Government Press (Cairo). Garstang, J. 1910 Preliminary Note on an Expedition to Meroë in Ethiopia. Liverpool Annals of Archaeology and Anthropology 3:57–70. ——— 1911 Meroë: The City of the Ethiopians. Clarendon Press. ——— 1912 Second Interim Report on the Excavations at Meroë in Ethiopia. Part I— Excavations. Liverpool Annals of Archaeology and Anthropology 4:45–52. ——— 1913 Third Interim Report on the Excavations at Meroë in Ethiopia. Liverpool Annals of Archaeology and Anthropology 5:73–83. ——— 1914–16 Fifth Interim Report on the Excavations at Meroë in Ethiopia. Liverpool Annals of Archaeology and Anthropology 7:1–10. Garstang, J. and W.S.  George 1914 Fourth Interim Report on the Excavations at Meroë in Ethiopia. Liverpool Annals of Archaeology and Anthropology 6:1–21. Griffith, F.L. 1923 Oxford Excavations in Nubia. The Cemetery of Sanam. Liverpool Annals of Archaeology and Anthropology 10:73–171. ——— 1926 Oxford Excavations in Nubia. Meroitic Antiquities at Faras and Other Sites. Liverpool Annals of Archaeology and Anthropology 13:17–37. Grzymski, K. 2010 The 1989–1992 Merowe Dam Feasibility Study, an Archaeological Perspective. Gdańsk Archaeological Museum African Reports 7:67–69. Hintze, F. 1959 Preliminary Report of the Butana Expedition 1958. Kush 7:171–96. ——— 1960 Vorbericht über die Butana-Expedition 1958 des Instituts für Ägyptologie der Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin. Forschen und Wirken 3:361–99. ——— 1962 Preliminary Report on the Excavations at Musawwarat es Sufra, 1960–61. Kush 10:170–202. ——— 1971 Der Löwentempel. Musawwarat es-Sufra 1(2). Akademie Verlag. Honegger, M. ed. 2018 Nubian Archaeology in the XXIst Century: Proceedings of the Thirteenth International Conference for Nubian Studies. Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta 273. Peeters. Hoskins, G.A. 1835 Travels in Ethiopia, above the Second Cataract of the Nile. Longman, Rees, Orme, Brown, Green, & Longman. Inaam Abdelrahman Magzoub 2016 The Dams’ Salvage Projects: Present and Future. Unpublished MA Dissertation (in Arabic), University of Khartoum.

26   salah Mohamed ahmed Junker, H. 1920 Bericht über die Grabungen . . . auf den Friedhöfen von El-Kubanieh-Nord. Akademie der Wissenschaften in Wien Philosophisch-historische Klasse Denkschriften 64(3). Alfred Hölder. ——— 1925 Ermenne. Bericht über die Grabungen . . . auf den Friedhöfen von Ermenne (Nubien) im Winter 1911/12. Akademie der Wissenschaften in Wien, Philosophisch-historische Klasse, Denkschriften 67(1). Hölder-Pichler-Tempsky. ——— 1926 Toschke. Bericht über die Grabungen . . . auf dem Friedhof von Toschke (Nubien) im Winter 1911/12. Akademie der Wissenschaften in Wien, Philosophisch-historische Klasse, Denkschriften 68(1). Hölder-Pichler-Tempsky. Lecointe, Y. 2006 Preliminary report on NCAM/SFDAS salvage work at Wadi Mukabrab. Unpublished report, NCAM, Khartoum. Lepsius, K.R. 1849–59 Denkmaeler aus Aegypten und Aethiopien. Nicolaische Buchhandlung. Linant de Bellefonds, L.-M.-A. 1821–22 Journal d’un voyage à Méroé dans les années 1821 et 1822, ed. M. Shinnie. Sudan Antiquities Service Occasional Papers 4 (1958). Macadam, M.F.L. 1949–55 The Temples of Kawa. Oxford University Press. Marks, A.E. and Abbas Mohamed-Ali 1991 The Late Prehistory of the Eastern Sahel: The Mesolithic and Neolithic of Shaqadud, Sudan. Southern Methodist University Press. Maystre, C. 1967–68 Excavations at Tabo, Argo Island, 1965–1968: Preliminary Report. Kush 15:193–99. ——— 1986 Tabo I. Georg Éditeur. Mileham, G. 1910 Churches in Lower Nubia. Eckley  B.  Coxe Junior Expedition to Nubia 2. University Museum (Philadelphia). Monneret de Villard, U. 1938 Storia della Nubia cristiana. Orientalia Cristiana Analecta 118. Pontificium Institutum Orientalium Studiorum. ——— 2006 Die Humboldt University Nubian Expedition 2006: Arbeiten auf Us und Mograt. Der Antike Sudan. Mitteilungen der Sudanarchäologischen Gesellschaft zu Berlin 17:89–116. Näser, C. 2008 Die Humboldt University Nubian Expedition 2008: Arbeiten auf der Insel Mograt. Der Antike Sudan. Mitteilungen der Sudanarchäologischen Gesellschaft zu Berlin 19:47–51. Näser, C. and A. Tsakos 2014 From Bits and Pieces. A Corpus of Medieval Manuscripts from the Humboldt University (H.U.N.E.) Concession in the Fourth Nile Cataract. In The Fourth Cataract and Beyond: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference for Nubian Studies, ed. J.R. Anderson and D.A. Welsby, pp. 977–84. British Museum Publications on Egypt and Sudan 1. Peeters. Ossama El-Nur and Hassan Bandi 1994 The Potential of the IVth Cataract Archaeological Project I. Mound Graves at Umm Ruweim and Khor al-Greyn. In Hommages à Jean Leclant 2: Nubie, Soudan, Éthiopie, ed. C. Berger, G. Clerc, and N. Grimal, pp. 323–31. Bibliothèque d’Étude 106(2). Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale. Paner, H. 1998 The Hamdab Dam Project: Preliminary Report of Results from Work in the Fourth Cataract Region, 1996–1997. Gdańsk Archaeological Museum African Reports 1:115–32. ——— 2003 Archaeological Survey on the Right Bank of the Nile between Karima and Abu Hamed: A Brief Overview. Sudan & Nubia 7:15–20. Paner, H. and Z. Borcowski 2005a Gdańsk Archaeological Expedition (GAME) Report on the 2002 Season. Gdańsk Archaeological Museum African Reports 3:203–215. Paner, H. and Z. Borcowski 2005b Gdańsk Archaeological Museum Expedition: A Summary of Eight Seasons’ Work at the Fourth Cataract. Gdańsk Archaeological Museum African Reports 4:89–115.

History of Archaeological Work in the Middle Nile Region   27 Payne, J. 2005 Excavations of the Late Kushite and Medieval settlement on Umm Muri. Sudan & Nubia 9:9–13. Randall-MacIver, D. and C.L.  Woolley 1909 Areika. Eckley  B.  Coxe Junior Expedition to Nubia 1. University Museum (Philadelphia). Reisner, G.A. 1909 The Archaeological Survey of Nubia. The Archaeological Survey of Nubia Bulletin 3:5–20. ——— 1910 The Archaeological Survey of Nubia. Report for 1907–1908, v.1: Archaeological Report. National Printing Department (Cairo). ——— 1923 Excavations at Kerma. Harvard African Studies 5–6. Peabody Museum of Harvard University. Salah Mohamed Ahmed 2003 Merowe Dam Archaeological Salvage Project (MDASP). Sudan & Nubia 7:11–14. Säve-Söderbergh, T. 1987 Temples and Tombs of Ancient Nubia: The International Rescue Campaign at Abu Simbel, Philae and Other Sites. Thames and Hudson and UNESCO. Schiff Giorgini, M. 1971 Soleb 2: Les nécropoles. Sansoni. Scott-Moncrieff, P.D. 1907 Some Notes on the XVIIIth Dynasty Temple at Wady Ḥalfa. Proceedings of the Society of Biblical Archaeology 29:39–46. ——— 1908 The Ruined Sites at Masawwarat es-Sufra and Naga. Proceedings of the Society of Biblical Archaeology 30:192–203. ——— 1965 Soleb 1: 1813–1963. Sansoni. Shinnie, P.L. 1954 Excavations at Tanqasi, 1953. Kush 2:66–85. ——— 1955 Excavations at Soba. Sudan Antiquities Service Occasional Papers 3. ——— 1967 Meroe: A Civilization of the Sudan. Frederick A. Praeger. Shinnie, P.L. and R.J. Bradley 1980 The Capital of Kush 1: Meroe Excavations 1965–72. Meroitica 4. Akademie Verlag. Shinnie, P.L. and H.N.  Chittick 1961 Ghazali—A Monastery in the Northern Sudan. Sudan Antiquities Service Occasional Papers 5. Shinnie, P.L. and O.H. Myers 1948 Archaeological Discoveries during Winter 1947–48. Sudan Notes and Records 29:128–29. Steindorff, G. 1935–37 Aniba. Mission Archéologique de Nubie 1929–34. J.J. Augustin. Vantini, J. 1970 The Excavations of Faras: A Contribution to the History of Christian Nubia. Museum Combonianum 24. Editrice Nigrizia. Vercoutter, J. 1962 Un palais des “candaces,” contemporain d’Auguste (Fouilles à Wad-banNaga 1958–1960). Syria 39:263–99. ——— 1970 Mirgissa 1. Direction Générale des Relations Culturelles, Scientifiques et Techniques. Waddington, G. and B. Hanbury 1822 Journal of a Visit to Some Parts of Ethiopia. John Murray. Welsby, D.A. 2003 The Amri to Kirbekan survey: The 2002–2003 season. Sudan & Nubia 7:26–32. ——— 2004 The Merowe Dam Archaeological Salvage Project. The SARS Amri to Kirbekan Survey. Excavations at the Pyramid, Site 4-F-71. Sudan & Nubia 8:2–3. ——— 2007 The Merowe Dam Archaeological Salvage Project: Survey and Excavations in the Vicinity of ed-Doma (AKSE) and Tereif (AKSCW), 2006–2007. Sudan & Nubia 11:11–19. ——— 2011 Assessment of the Impact of the Dal and Kajbar Dams on the Archaeological Heritage of Northern Sudan-Mission 6th–18th March 2011. Unpublished report. Weschenfelder, J. 2015 Preliminary Report of the Second and Third Field Seasons at the Bronze Age Cemetery MOG034 on Mograt Island, Sudan. Der Antike Sudan. Mitteilungen der Sudanarchäologischen Gesellschaft zu Berlin 26:153–68.

28   salah Mohamed ahmed Wolf, P. and U. Nowotnick 2005 The Second Season of the SARS Anglo-German Expedition to the Fourth Cataract. Sudan & Nubia 9:23–31. Woolley, C.L. 1911 Karanòg. The Town. Eckley B. Coxe Junior Expedition to Nubia 5. University Museum (Philadelphia). Woolley, C.L. and D.  Randall-MacIver 1910 Karanòg: The Romano Nubian Cemetery. Eckley B. Coxe Junior Expedition to Nubia 3–4. University Museum (Philadelphia). Yusuf Fadl Hasan 1967 The Arabs and the Sudan, from the 7th to ca. 16th Centuries. Edinburgh University Press. ——— 1973 Tabaqat Wad Deifallah. University of Khartoum Press.

Website Nubian Museum, Aswan, UNESCO: unesco.org/new/en/culture/themes/museums/museumprojects/nubia-museum-aswan/.

chapter 2

Past, Pr esen t, Fu t u r e The Archaeology of Nubia Claudia Näser

. . . no history of archaeology is innocent of perspective or purpose. Every history has different emphases. Tim Murray 2007:xx History is the past we choose to remember. Drewal 1996:112 To the memory of Khidir Abdelkarim Ahmed who is missed.

Introduction The archaeology of Nubia1 and its practitioners are guided by the aim of revealing the history of the Middle Nile valley from the earliest prehistory up to (sub)recent times— and by the belief of being well equipped to do so. The archaeology of Nubia is not a coherent discipline, but a complex conglomerate of differing research traditions. Outlining the topics, sources, and methods applied in this field will therefore best follow a history of research approach, as the decisions about which sources are tapped for the study of the Nubian past, which methods are used in their analysis, and which questions are asked depend on the social context in which these inquiries are situated as well as on the historical genesis of the discipline and the intellectual traditions in which their protagonists live and work (Trigger 1994, 2006; Murray 2007). This chapter aims to reflect on how the construction of the Nubian past(s) is embedded in these wider settings of academic practice and knowledge production. The history of Nubia as it is represented in the contributions to this volume as well as the categories and methods of archaeological research from which this history derives are not natural givens, but constructs and results of specific discourses and practices of

30   Claudia Näser envisioning and investigating the past. There are other ways of looking into the Nubian past and other narratives about it, like those related by members of Nubian ethnicities themselves2 or those produced within the Afrocentric movement (e.g., Monges 1997; Harkless 2006). But geopolitics of the last two hundred years has made the narrative of Western3 academia the privileged one. If this narrative is to become a valid and fruitful base for future engagement with the subject, it is vital to de-essentialize this discourse and to critically engage with its own history, the conditions of its formation, and the role it plays in the current production of knowledge about the Nubian past in academic and wider social contexts.4

Shaping Research Traditions: The History of Archaeology in the Middle Nile Valley Mapping the World: The Quest for Origins and Empires The archaeological investigation of Nubia started in 1821, when Turco-Egyptian forces invaded the Middle Nile valley and made it a Turco-Egyptian province. This rendered the region easily accessible to outsiders, and in the wake of the conquest, a stream of scholars, adventurers, antique dealers, and diplomats—in disciplinary histories usually subsumed under the heading “early travelers”—set out to explore this recent addition to the colonial world.5 Up to that point, classical writers had been the main source for making sense of the history of the Middle Nile valley. It was the travelers and researchers of the first half of the 19th century who turned the archaeological monuments themselves into the most important resource for reconstructing the history of Egypt and Nubia. In a veritable race up the Nile, Frédéric Cailliaud and Louis M.A. Linant de Bellefonds were among the earliest, traveling up to the area of Sinnar on the Blue Nile. Their goal was to record and classify the historic monuments along their way and find the sources, not of the Nile,6 but of the “civilizations” that created the monuments on its banks. The travelers strove for knowledge as well as for images and objects to illustrate their discoveries back home. Travel journals were a major literary and scientific genre of that day (Pratt 2008; Regard 2009). Tim Murray (2007:129) called this phase “the archaeology of origins, nations, and empires.” Many also had outright mercenary intentions, collecting antiquities to sell them in the booming European market. One of the most notable figures in this respect in Nubia was Giuseppe Ferlini, who lifted an assemblage of golden jewelry, the so-called Ferlini treasure, from one of the royal pyramids at Meroe in 1834 and successfully sold it to the kings of Bavaria and Prussia (Priese 1992). Access to the Middle Nile valley was usually through Egypt, which had started to experience a scramble for antiquities only two decades earlier. The Napoleonic

Past, Present, Future: The Archaeology of Nubia   31 Expedition of the years 1798 to 1801 had “brought Egypt to Europe” (Scham 2003:173), making its heritage known to a wider public all over the continent and provoking a wave of interest in the Pharaonic past. The travelers who went to Nubia were familiar with Egyptian monuments and the exploding efforts to unravel ancient Egyptian culture. Their aim was not only to explore the archaeological landscape of Nubia and document its monuments for a European audience; they were also searching for discoveries that could live up to or even rival their Egyptian counterparts—therefore their primary interest was in sites with monumental architecture and rich finds. The climax of this pursuit was the Royal Prussian Expedition under the direction of Karl Richard Lepsius. From 1843 to 1847, this enterprise investigated the archaeological monuments of the Nile valley, both in Egypt and Nubia. The declared aim of the expedition’s expansion into the Middle Nile region was to explore the relationship between the Pharaonic “history and civilization” and the cultures south of Egypt (Lepsius 1849:8–9). When Lepsius reached the area of Meroe on the evening of 28 January 1844, he instantly rushed to the pyramids, examining them by moon and candle light. His disappointed conclusion that they were of “relatively very late” date (Lepsius 1852:145–48) effectively put an end to the theory that the origins of Pharaonic culture lay in the south, an idea that had been favored by several “early” travelers and scholars, including François Champollion, through their reading of the Classical sources (Trigger  1994:325; cf. Burstein 1995:29–30). From this conclusion, Lepsius moved on to establish the historical culture of Nubia as an entity separate from Egypt and in consequence published the results of the “Nubian” part of the expedition in a separate section, while all Egyptian monuments were organized chronologically in the previous four sections (Lepsius 1849–59). With this, Lepsius introduced topography and chronology—distribution and dating—as guiding principles in the ordering of the archaeological monuments in the Nile valley. It is worth noting that race did not figure in his interpretations. Instead, Lepsius’s understanding of Nubia was largely informed by historical readings of the monuments which he recorded and the distribution of past and present languages which he studied—in the case of the Middle Nile valley, above all the Nubian languages (Fitzenreiter 2011). By defining this corpus of material and these principles of classification, Lepsius laid the foundations for the conceptual world which the archaeology of Egypt and Nubia has come to inhabit ever since (Fitzenreiter  2011). His framework exerted a strong normative force and many of the perspectives, valorizations, interests, and boundaries introduced by Lepsius tacitly inform the discipline to the present day. Lepsius’s ordering not only separated the monuments of the Middle Nile valley from their Egyptian counterparts, but also established the view of the Nubian culture(s) as the Other, a late reflection of Egyptian Pharaonic culture (Fitzenreiter 2011). The devaluation inherent in this perspective may not have been in the intention of Lepsius, for whom the history and particularly the languages of Nubia were important research interests. But the appreciation that wider Western audiences showed for travel reports and antiquities from Egypt translated into pejorative assessments of the Nubian monuments and objects. Employing Edward Said’s concept of the construction of Self and Other in an orientalist discourse (Said 1978), one could even argue that this perception

32   Claudia Näser of Nubia helped to move ancient Egypt closer to its 19th-century appreciators—distancing the Middle Nile valley turned Egypt into a non-Other, a part of the Self, thus assisting its appropriation and inclusion into the Western cultural canon. This onset of the archaeological exploration of Nubia unfolded in two wider political and social contexts. The first was the Anglo-French competition over political and strategic domination in Europe and in colonial projects in North America, Africa, the Pacific, and the Far East, which led to a geopolitical interest and exertion of influence in Egypt and, in consequence, the regions further up the Nile (Murray 2007:167–70). The second was the rise of the middle classes in the wake of enlightenment and industrialization in Western Europe in the course of the 18th and 19th centuries. The social value system and the world view with which these classes bolstered their newly won privileges and ambitions of domination encompassed an emerging understanding of history as an evolutionary process towards “civilization” and a growing interest in the ancient counterparts of modern “civilizations” and their social, technological, and cultural “achievements” (Trigger  1994:325; Murray  2007:139–45). Within this framework, Western Europeans laid claims on the archaeological heritage of the Nile valley, as they saw themselves as the heirs of the “civilizing achievements” of Pharaonic Egypt. The “early travelers” and the great expeditions realized these claims, establishing the Nile valley as an arena of Western scientists and naturalizing their presence in territories they considered theirs. Exploring, mapping, and classifying the world were ways of appropriating it. Through these configurations and practices, if not through intention, the Egyptian and Nubian past became a field of imperialist aspiration and colonial domination, and the colonizing societies have “controlled cultural production about it ever since” (Scham 2003:173). In sum, the archaeological exploration of the Middle Nile valley in the first half of the 19th century was firmly rooted in the imperialist and colonialist agendas of that time. Archaeological research in Nubia unfolded as an offspring of the emerging field of Egyptology. Both disciplines were tied together in a dialectic of opposites: The archaeology of Nubia was primarily viewed in relation to Egypt, and Egyptocentric perspectives governed professional practices, topics, and interpretations (Edwards  2004:7–8)—a constellation that resonates in many academic institutionalizations down to the present day. Egyptocentrism also influenced much subsequent research, until archaeologists with other disciplinary backgrounds entered the scene almost a century later (see below).

Institutionalizing the Archaeology of Nubia and Sudan In the 1870s Egypt became an informal British protectorate when the English sought a greater role in the region to safeguard their interests regarding the Suez Canal. They assumed responsibility for managing most of Egypt’s internal and external affairs and with this, Sudan effectively became part of the British Empire, too. From 1885, the Mahdist movement fought for and temporarily achieved liberation from colonial rule.

Past, Present, Future: The Archaeology of Nubia   33 After its suppression in 1898, Britain and Egypt formally shared the governance of Sudan, but on the ground Sudan was a British colony. With this, also the administration of the Sudanese past passed into the hands of British colonial officers (Ahmed M. Ali Hakem 1978). The first Antiquities and Museums Ordinance for Sudan was drafted in 1905. It provided for the establishment of a Board of Museums and the appointment of an Acting Conservator of Antiquities. But practically, archaeological affairs played a minor role and employees of the Department of Education fulfilled the named position besides other tasks. As they were usually also staff members of Gordon College Khartoum, then Sudan’s prime institution of higher education, this was the obvious place for a modest museum of antiquities to be established in 1904 (Addison 1934). Much of the archaeological and museum work depended on the commitment and the genuine curiosity of individual protagonists, to whom an interest in the past was a side effect of the canonical education of Western colonial officers.7 This is exemplified by Anthony J. Arkell who had been a member of the Sudan Political Service since 1920. He held several administrative posts and was deputy governor of Darfur before he was appointed Commissioner for Archaeology and Anthropology in 1938. One year later, the Sudan Antiquities Service was officially established and Arkell became its head for almost a decade (Ahmed M. Ali Hakem 1978:42). As a keen scholar in prehistory, he established this field of research in Sudan. He was followed in office by Peter L. Shinnie (1948–55), who was also responsible for drafting the Second Antiquities Ordinance of 1952, and Jean Vercoutter (1956–60). In 1960, four years after Sudan’s political independence, Thabit Hassan Thabit became the first Sudanese Commissioner for Archaeology. The minor importance that the colonial administration attached to the management of archaeology in Sudan, and in consequence the limited resources allocated to it, differed widely from conditions in Egypt. There, a first decree banning the unauthorized export of antiquities had been issued as early as 1835 (Reid 2002:55–57; Colla 2007). The Egyptian Service d’Antiquités was founded in 1858 with Auguste Mariette as its first director. Its upper echelons stayed in French hands until 1953, when Mostafa Amer became the first Egyptian director of the then re-named Department of Antiquities.8 In comparison to this trajectory, the archaeology of Sudan was institutionalized much later, en passant, and without much oversight with regard to regulating the investigation and management of its monuments and sites. This institutional downplay stands in contrast to the increased attention that archaeological sites in the Middle Nile valley received from international missions at that time. After the suppression of the Mahdist movement in 1898, European and North American scholars were fast to return to Sudan and resume work. Most of the expeditions were funded by museums, while universities and private sponsors were involved at a lesser degree. A particularly influential publication, which was widely read and also had a major impact on the public imagination of the region, was The Egyptian Sûdân by E.A. Wallis Budge. The book appeared in 1907 and presented the results of a series of travels and eclectic excavations that the Keeper of Egyptian Antiquities in the British Museum had undertaken in Sudan between 1897 and 1905.

34   Claudia Näser While Budge’s work was still tied to the spirit of the 19th century in many ways,9 the archaeology of Nubia received a major impulse through the salvage campaigns connected with the heightening of the Aswan Dam. A first barrage at Aswan had been built between 1898 and 1902 without any archaeological supervision. The first heightening, realized between 1907 and 1912, was accompanied by a systematic archaeological exploration organized by the Egyptian antiquities service, as the surveyed area lay completely on Egyptian territory. Starting in 1904, this campaign is considered the global birth of salvage archaeology (Adams 1977:90; Khidir Abdelkarim Ahmed 2012:254). It comprised several fact-finding missions, a preliminary survey of the prospective flood zone (Weigall  1907), a survey dealing with the affected Pharaonic temples (Maspero 1911a, 1911b, and further volumes in this series) and an archaeological survey that started under the direction of the American Egyptologist George Andrew Reisner in 1907. Reisner’s year with the survey revolutionized archaeological fieldwork in Nubia. He gave systematic attention to non-monumental remains, particularly cemeteries, introduced a standard recording system—for the first time systematically including drawing and photography in the documentation process (Manuelian  1992)—and employed a multidisciplinary team. This allowed him to collect and synthesize a huge corpus of data: During the first season in Nubia alone, his team excavated more than five thousand graves in fifty-five burial grounds. Based on this record, Reisner drew up a cultural sequence spanning 4,500 years of Nubian (pre)history from the Terminal Neolithic/ Chalcolithic to Late Antiquity (Reisner 1910). He used similarities and differences in the morphology of burial practices and their material repertoire, primarily pottery, to differentiate a series of archaeological cultures, which he called “groups,” using letters (A, B, C, etc.) for their designation. He thought that the individual “groups” represented succeeding peoples of potentially different ethnicity. Thus, his work is a classic example of the culture-historical approach that had started to supplant earlier evolutionist theories in the later 19th century (Trigger 1994:326–35). With his innovative methodology and his magisterial analysis, Reisner established himself as the founding father of scientific archaeology in Nubia. Cornerstones of his chronological sequence as well as several of his cultural entities, namely A-, C-, and X-Groups, are still in use today. Two points, however, need critical mention: the way he employed physical anthropological research and his overarching interpretive paradigm (cf. Trigger 1994:331–35). By enlisting the eminent anatomist Grafton Elliot Smith and his colleague Frederic Wood Jones for the Archaeological Survey to Nubia, Reisner had broken new ground, too (Buzon, this volume). While Smith’s advances in field methods and paleopathology (Smith and Wood Jones  1910) have been praised (Murray 2007:343–44; Baker and Judd 2012:212–15), his racist and hyper-diffusionist interpretations have been condemned (Adams 1977:91–92; Trigger 1994:329–31) and ultimately brought his work into wide disrepute. Reisner himself followed similar preconceptions, as when he described the ancient peoples of Lower Nubia as “a negroid Egyptian mixture fused together on a desert river bank too far away and too poor to attract a stronger and better race” (Reisner 1910, v. 1:348). He saw the “infusion”

Past, Present, Future: The Archaeology of Nubia   35 of new “racial” elements, “use or neglect by Egypt” and “changes of the Nile and the climate” as the prime sources for cultural change (Reisner 1910, v. 1:347–48). These statements echo stereotypes that characterized much of the culture-historical colonial archaeology of that day. Bruce Trigger mused whether the widespread adherence to these racist tenets reflects the inherent power of a paradigm to influence the interpretation of archaeological evidence, the commitment of all Egyptologists who worked in the Sudan to a colonial ideology, or the lack of enough data to call into question the relevance of accepted ideas about how the past, and more specifically the African past, should be interpreted. (Trigger 1994:335)

While disciplinary histories still largely shy away from critically engaging with this question and the heroes of their respective fields, postcolonial studies have shown that the colonial project lives off internal ambiguities and contradictions, oscillating between compassion and suppression, assimilation and segregation (e.g., Spivak 1999). How racist prejudices thrive next to, and eventually overbear, the clear-sighted reading of the archaeological record as well as a personal “attach[ment] to the Sudan and its people” is apparent from the biographies of several of Reisner’s colleagues, too (see, e.g., Trigger 1994:333–35 for Anthony J. Arkell). This illustrates the pervasive powers of the racist paradigm and the wider arrays of colonial ideology. Reisner resigned from the Archaeological Survey of Nubia during its second campaign, leaving the reminder of the work to Cecil M. Firth (1912, 1915, 1927). But he continued his activities in Nubia for almost two decades, from 1913 to 1932, under the umbrella of the Harvard University-Museum of Fine Arts Boston Expedition. Having almost free choice, he picked the most promising sites in terms of data and objects— with many of the latter going to the Museum of Fine Arts (Boston). Working at great pace and moving on almost every year, he managed to excavate at a dozen sites, including the main burial ground at Kerma, all royal cemeteries of the Napatan and Meroitic eras, the Barkal temples and five Middle Kingdom fortresses in Lower Nubia. Other contemporary missions employed similar strategies of exploration and exploitation, which led William Y. Adams (1977:89–90) to characterize this period as the “selective” phase, as opposed to the 19th-century “random” phase, in the archaeology of Nubia. In a way, this era came to a close with the Second Archaeological Survey of Lower Nubia which was conducted between 1929 and 1934 in the wake of the second heightening of the Aswan Dam (Emery and Kirwan  1935,  1938; Batrawi  1935). Generally operating within the framework established by Reisner, it was enriched by a component dedicated specifically to the medieval remains (Monneret de Villard 1935). With this, the three main fields in the archaeology of the Middle Nile valley—namely prehistory, “historical” archaeology which dealt with the periods from the Bronze Age up to Late Antiquity, and medieval archaeology—had been spelled out. Feeding into the traditions which had been inherited from earlier periods of research, this differentiation

36   Claudia Näser was to characterize disciplinary developments and the organization of fieldwork in the subsequent decades up to the present day.

The Globalization of the Nubian Past: The UNESCO Campaign The third major period in the archaeology of Nubia was heralded by Sudan’s in­de­ pend­ence in 1956, the Nile Waters Agreement between Sudan and Egypt in 1959, and the subsequent International Campaign to Save the Monuments of Nubia, which was launched by UNESCO in 1960. The campaign was a child of its time and a highly political enterprise. It advertised the universal nature of cultural, and natural, heritage and made its preservation a global affair, enlisting international solidarity to that end. This was a powerful vision amidst the Cold War and at a time when the European colonial hegemony broke down.10 Unprecedented on a global scale, the campaign took effects in several directions. Promoting the political message, it paved the way for the 1972 UNESCO World Heritage Convention which lastingly valorized heritage and its preservation for humankind (e.g., Keough  2011:393–45; Harrison  2013:56–61). At the same time, it also established the archaeological heritage of Nubia as a global “property”—proclaiming the world’s duty, and right, to study and rescue the monuments of the Nubian past. Next to the political dimension, there were immediately scientific factors that influenced the trajectory of the UNESCO campaign. The 1960s saw a stormy development within some archaeologies, primarily in the United States, which was later summarized under the label New Archaeology (for this see, e.g., Trigger  2006:392–444; Johnson 2010:12–34). It aimed at the advancement of archaeological methods and theories in order to bring the discipline closer to being an objective science, with accountable data generation and a rigorous analytical framework following law-governed deductive principles. To that effect, proponents of the New Archaeology favored areas of research where quantitative approaches could best be applied. Within this climate emerged what William Y. Adams (1977:89) labeled the “comprehensive” phase of Nubian archaeology, which according to him started when archaeologists turned attention “from the great monumental remains to smaller and less dramatic sites, and a region-wide effort [was] made to sample sites of every type and of every historic period.” Coincidentally, some of the protagonists of the New Archaeology were also involved in the Nubian Campaign. One of them was Arthur Saxe who worked with the University of Colorado’s Nubian Expedition in the Wadi Halfa region. The data he collected from an Early Holocene cemetery (6-B-36) were incorporated into a paper which he contributed to a widely read volume, The Social Dimensions of Mortuary Practices edited by James A. Brown in 1971. This volume became a classic in the methodology of funerary archaeology as it heralded the advent of a systematic use of data from funerary contexts to explore the organizational patterns of past societies (Chapman 2003). In his paper, Saxe discussed several hypotheses developed in his PhD research. His main argument

Past, Present, Future: The Archaeology of Nubia   37 was that formal cemeteries emerged when social groups started to legitimize control of resources through reference to their ancestors. In all, the Nubian Campaign merged very different approaches to and ideas of archaeology. Still it was not a melting pot of these influences, as individual missions worked side by side rather than developing a common language, methodology, and vision. The focus was on getting as much fieldwork done as possible, while resources often did not suffice to cover subsequent analyses and publications. Consequently, much of the work did not see final publication until many years later, or was only published in preliminary reports. By 1970, after three extensive salvage campaigns, the archaeology of Lower Nubia may have been the most intensively documented in the world. But in many respects the record was painfully incomplete—and after its drowning, any chance to remedy this situation has gone. The UNESCO campaign was decisive in setting the profile of archaeology in the Middle Nile for subsequent decades. Once more, salvage provided momentum for archaeological exploration. The focus was on rescuing monuments and data. Indeed, data acquisition was expansive, with many new sites being identified and documented in the general chronological framework established by Reisner in the first Nubian Survey. Major advancements were made in the field of prehistory and the study of medieval Nubia. The discovery and rescue of the wall paintings in the cathedral of Faras deserve a specific mention in this respect (Michałowski 1967). But the campaign also cemented the global seizure on the archaeology of Nubia, translating colonial power relations into a discourse of international solidarity (for a critique of this rhetoric see Carruthers 2016:41–46). Many of the resources spent in the UNESCO campaign came from outside Sudan and Egypt, and much of the expertise rested with institutions in the Western world. Several of the most spectacular objects, among them five small temples, shrines, and architectural assemblages, were given to major donor countries as “grantsin-return” (Allais  2012). They have been taken to signify what perhaps is the most important outcome of the UNESCO campaign: it firmly established Nubia as a “protointernational” land (Allais 2012), its archaeology as an international affair, and its past as a global property. In the public presentations and repercussions of the campaign in the 1970s and 1980s, it became a model for what a new international cooperation for the preservation of world heritage should be. However, the campaign largely bypassed local audiences and stakeholders, first of all the Nubian communities themselves. Also the chance to boost academic expertise in the two receiving countries, Egypt and Sudan, went largely unused. A remarkable exception in this respect was the founding of the Sudan National Museum in Khartoum, which was built between 1964 and 1971. It not only became the home of the monuments relocated from the Sudanese part of Lower Nubia, but also comprised new premises for the Sudanese antiquities service, the National Corporation for Antiquities and Museums. This improved working facilities and enhanced the resources of this administrative body. The Nubia Museum in Aswan was realized only decades later, opening in 1997. Following concepts of the New Museology, it was conceived as a community museum and recent research suggests that

38   Claudia Näser it fulfills this role in a way unprecedented in the landscape of museums in Egypt and Sudan (Kamel 2009:191–98).

The Last Fifty Years The years after the termination of the UNESCO campaign were determined by the efforts to master its outcomes. This concerned outstanding publications as well as the task of synthesizing the results obtained in Lower Nubia and put them into a wider perspective. In 1977, William Y. Adams who had served as the organizer and director of the salvage program on the Sudanese side published his magisterial Nubia: Corridor to Africa which is the everlasting milestone of this period of research. Another prominent topic of the 1970s and 1980s was the representativity of the Lower Nubian data in relation to the record from the more southerly regions of the Middle Nile valley (e.g., Adams 1976). Fieldwork increasingly turned to these parts, and several long-term projects were started, including at Old Dongola, Kerma, and Meroe. In sum, the concentrated efforts in the analysis of the Lower Nubian data and renewed, research-oriented fieldwork massively expanded the knowledge about the (pre)history in the Middle Nile valley. Consequently, new questions and fields of research emerged. Periods that had been under-represented in previous work, such as the prehistoric, the Post-Meroitic, and the medieval Christian eras, came to the fore. At the same time, methods and approaches to the individual topics diversified. Present-day archaeology of the Middle Nile valley unites practitioners, not from all over the world, but from all major Western contexts (Europe and North America) as well as from Sudan itself. They bring the academic traditions and educational backgrounds of their respective home countries to the field, which has made for a conglomerate of methodological approaches regarding all aspects of scientific practice, from very straightforward issues of excavation and recording strategies, to analytical agendas and interpretive paradigms. This internal diversity is a characteristic of many archaeologies in former colonial territories. In a sense the other side of the coin is that these archaeologies often have become microcosms of their own, formed along former political boundaries and administrative lines. Members of these small scientific communities may entertain only loose ties to the disciplinary developments in their countries of origin and other regional archaeologies around them. This adds a degree of self-referentiality, conservatism, or even isolationism to their practice (cf. Moreno García  2015 on Egyptology). In the case of Nubian archaeology, this is even more acute as its object of study is at the geographical and disciplinary periphery of the major conventional units of research: Africa, the circum-Mediterranean, the medieval Christian, and the Arab world. In addition, the archaeology of Nubia faces a particularly strange, perhaps unique situation. Many of the sources that served to define the outlines of its chronological and culture-historical framework, namely the Lower Nubian sites investigated in the three salvage surveys, have been irretrievably lost. There is no chance to return to and possibly amend the basis upon which much of the subsequent research was founded. This truncation—being constantly thrown back on a corpus of source material that only survives

Past, Present, Future: The Archaeology of Nubia   39 in a widely outdated form of documentation and presentation—has effects on both current research agendas and the narratives about the Nubian past resulting from them. The last two decades have seen a tremendous boost in fieldwork activities. Towards the end of the 1990s, a new challenge arose with the Merowe Dam, then Africa’s largest hydropower project under construction. The projected reservoir lake was to flood 170 km of the Middle Nile valley above the Fourth Cataract. The archaeological salvage started under conditions which differed markedly from the previous Lower Nubian campaigns. Although the participating missions, one dozen in all, were formally or­gan­ ized under the umbrella of the Merowe Dam Archaeological Salvage Project (Salah M. Ahmed, this volume), this was of no practical consequence in terms of support for their work. All international missions had to come up with their own funding. The salvage campaign and its protagonists became part of a conflict arising from the contested nature of the overall dam project, with local residents eventually halting the archaeological work to lend weight to their demands in connection with the resettlement and the conditions of their compensation (Näser and Kleinitz 2012). This trajectory heralded a new era with regard to the role of archaeology in the negotiation of wider social issues, involving archaeologists, local communities, and other stakeholders (Kleinitz and Näser 2013). A second major impetus for fieldwork in the Middle Nile valley came from the Qatar-Sudan Archaeological Project which started in 2013 (Salah M. Ahmed, this volume). It not only provided substantial resources for archaeological research and the management of archaeological sites, it also changed the terms of this support. For the first time, major funding came from a non-Western donor, the Emirate of Qatar, which thus also set the agenda of the project. It is difficult to evaluate the present state of archaeological research in the Middle Nile valley in terms of its future position in disciplinary history. However, the Merowe Dam Archaeological Salvage Project and the Qatar-Sudan Archaeological Project outline what may emerge as a central theme of the current period of research, namely the ongoing effort to accommodate the academic discipline of Nubian archaeology and the narratives it generates in the increasingly complex and contested socio-political realities of their production. The challenge comprises both, to come to terms with the looming legacies of the discipline’s colonial past and to engage in a meaningful way with the full range of its many and diverse audiences in the present.

The Archaeology of Nubia and Sudan Today Dominant Legacies and New Perspectives The fields of research that characterize the archaeology of the Middle Nile valley today reflect the disciplinary history discussed in the previous sections, and they do bear its marks. At the outset, interest in Nubia was primarily relational, privileging Pharaonic

40   Claudia Näser monuments and the testimonies of the Napatan-Meroitic era which were studied to establish the relative chronological position of these two “civilizations.” The reverse side of this formative history is that Nubian archaeology from its beginnings was widely set apart from Africa in the minds of most of its practitioners (ditto already Crawford 1948). Nubia belonged to Egypt, and Egypt was part of Europe.11 Today, many researchers come to the field with disciplinary backgrounds in Egyptology, European, North American, or Near Eastern archaeologies. Most recently, the shrinking of fieldwork options across North Africa and the Middle East due to social unrest and armed conflict has led to another such influx. In contrast, Nubian archaeology is not fed by disciplinary movements in African archaeology. Still, a growing number of contributions from within Nubian archaeology shows how an African perspective can enrich understanding of the Middle Nile cultures, for example with regard to the rise and the trajectory of the Meroitic state (Edwards 1996) or the symbolic investment into domesticated animals in the Bronze Age (see chapters by Hafsaas and by Dubosson, this volume). Another major influence on the archaeology of Nubia came from the salvage projects connected with the Aswan Dam and, more recently, other dam projects throughout the Middle Nile valley (Näser and Kleinitz 2012). On the upside, they favored a comprehensive fieldwork profile, widening attention to sites of all periods and physical appearance. On the downside, the specifics of the salvage context, primarily the truncation of the overall record, have severely restricted interpretative options and potentials—a fact that the “salvage euphoria” (the rhetoric commonly surrounding these projects) has not sufficiently acknowledged. To recognize and embrace it as one of the main methodological challenges in the archaeology of Nubia, both with regard to past salvage missions and upcoming projects, is one of the major tasks in the future development of the discipline. Today, fieldwork in the Middle Nile valley, both research- and salvage-oriented, is thriving. Topics and methodologies brought to the field have never been so wide and diverse. The multiplication of actors, interests, and approaches that have characterized the past two decades shows no signs of slowing down. The impact which the QatarSudan Archaeological Project (Salah M. Ahmed, this volume) alone has had on the disciplinary landscape shows the degree to which external factors like political conditions, funding, and the requests that go with it influence the direction of archaeological work. Other developments mirror more widespread trends. Thus, in the Middle Nile valley as in many other parts of the world, scholars, national authorities, and funding bodies have started to put a stronger focus on conservation, site management, and presentation in the past two decades. After the archaeology of Nubia has primarily catered for a Western audience in its first 150 years, it has recently started dialogues with local audiences, too. Initiatives in the field of collaborative archaeology are taking root (Tully and Näser 2016; Näser and Tully 2019; see Humphris et al., this volume). The latter turn was accelerated, if not actually triggered by a bitter lesson—the halting of archaeological salvage by local residents in connection with the Merowe Dam (see previous paragraph; Näser and Kleinitz 2012). The way that project was conducted and promoted had resulted in the impression that archaeological heritage received more attention than the living communities. By taking the archaeological sites hostage and turning them into a political

Past, Present, Future: The Archaeology of Nubia   41 weapon, affected residents hoped to lend weight to their demands with regard to their resettlement and compensation (Kleinitz and Näser 2013). The incident was a forceful reminder for archaeologists to review their priorities and their role in present-day society. With a stronger emancipation of local communities and a growing interest and influence of other audiences, we can expect that the justification and the social relevance of archaeology, its tasks and its modes of knowledge production will increasingly be challenged by a diverse range of stakeholders. Whether archaeologists like it or not, this will continue to change their disciplinary practice and the narratives they generate in the future.

Sudanese Archaeology: Between Authority and Participation One interesting point is how the dynamics outlined in the previous section will affect the role and the professional practice of Sudanese archaeologists. Reviewing current archaeologies in Africa, Peter R. Schmidt warned that the post-liberation period must not be equated with postcolonial conditions, and that political independence and national self-determination have “not resulted in a miraculous release . . . from colonial hegemonies” (Schmidt  2009:3). Indeed, “it is astounding how archaeologists moved into the post-colonial period with so little reflection of how much colonial baggage they were carrying in their books, packs, and heads” (Schmidt 2009:19)—and, I would add, in their academic and institutional self-organization. While archaeology was a domain of almost exclusively Western actors until the national independence of Sudan in 1956, there now is a strong force of Sudanese colleagues. Archaeology is taught at a number of universities in Khartoum and throughout the country. Apart from this, however, the institutional structure of archaeology is completely different from that in much of Europe and North America. Like in other former colonial territories (cf. Chakrabarti 2012), it converges in one administrative body, the antiquities service, which in the case of Sudan is the National Corporation for Antiquities and Museums (NCAM). The employees of NCAM shoulder much of the everyday business of archaeology in Sudan. In many Western countries, the documentation and preservation of archaeological sites was integrated into the legislation and planning regulations on a systematic basis in the last twenty-five years, and this in turn led to the development of a vast sector of commercial archaeology. While a similar ethic in the handling of archaeological heritage, at least in the case of large-scale infrastructure and development projects, is gaining ground in Sudan and has also been anchored in the current Antiquities Ordinance of 1999, the step towards commercialization has not been taken. Instead, archaeology has remained a monopoly of the state. Thus, NCAM single-handedly is responsible for managing the protection of sites and monuments, coordinating the activities of international missions, and conducting those salvage projects for which they cannot enlist international participation. In a way, this concentration of authority and the focus on control represent a continuation of colonial power relations, only by inverting them. The problems that arise from

42   Claudia Näser this setup are obvious, not least since they are magnified by a lack of resources on the part of NCAM which severely limits their capacity to fulfill the tasks ascribed to them. One could even see this as a vicious circle: Archaeology in Sudan is still dependent on calling in foreign experts, which means that vital resources are kept within these missions, and much of the knowledge about the Sudanese past continues to be produced in  the Western world. The present volume illustrates this situation—of its fiftysix authors, only six are Sudanese.12 The stark imbalance of these conditions is also the basic ingredient for their constant reproduction: the perpetuation of the lack of resources which would allow local academics to participate in the discipline on equal terms. This concerns for example the quality of education on all levels, career opportunities, and the access to literature, equipment, and skills which are necessary to master the advanced techniques of recording and analyzing data and publishing research results.13 In addition, Arabic is not a recognized language in the international discourse on the subject, not least since most Western practitioners cannot read and write it.14 It is symptomatic for the pervasiveness of this situation that until today learning Arabic is not considered a requirement in Western curricula training future archaeologists for working in the region (cf. Hansen 2008). William Carruthers (2016) analyzed the multilateral discourse that was used to negotiate and regulate access to resources in terms of funding and sites in post-World War II Egyptology and in the run-up to the UNESCO Nubian campaign. He deconstructed the internationalist rhetoric, showing how it was developed and employed to further interests of several stakeholder groups, including Egyptian Egyptologists. Against this background we must be aware that any change in power relations will not result in the emergence of a pristine “indigenous Nubian archaeology” (cf. Narayan 1993). Sudanese archaeologists are as much part of the complex issues of access to and control over resources and prestige as their international colleagues and other stakeholders. No critical discussion has been directed toward this point so far, but it may be a start to acknowledge that the colonial past still permeates the supposedly independent present—and that to overcome its legacy and the looming power imbalances in today’s disciplinary practices is another major challenge in the future of Nile valley archaeology.

Outlook The history of archaeology in the Middle Nile valley is a textbook example of the pervasive mechanisms of colonial and imperialist acquisition of the past and its academic spin-offs in the 20th century. Despite being propelled by curiosity, the longing for knowledge and a range of other ostensibly politically correct motifs (cf. Spivak 1999), its protagonists from the outset were voluntarily or involuntarily deeply entrenched in the processes of colonization. In consequence, the archaeology of Nubia until today occupies two arenas: the territory of its object of study (the Middle Nile valley) and the territory of scientific production (Western academia). The resulting representations of the past follow Western narrative forms and objectives. This certainly is why they “continue

Past, Present, Future: The Archaeology of Nubia   43 to appear so foreign” in many social contexts in present-day Sudan and “so attached to [their] European origins” (paraphrasing a statement on India by Trigger 1994:368). Bruce Trigger (1994:345) concluded his survey of Sudanese archaeology with the resigned statement that “the time when the findings of archaeology will be of interest to most Sudanese seems far off.” In order to identify at least some benefit, he states that “Western archaeologists must derive what satisfaction they can from having exorcized the most baleful influences of racism and colonialism from their profession and presenting a more accurate and dynamic view of African history to the world.” This unsparing view deserves credit, not least since it stands alone in the otherwise applauding rhetoric which unfolded in the wake of the UNESCO Nubian campaign. Two decades later, there may be reason for optimism. Archaeologists working in the Middle Nile valley explore a wider range of topics and venture further into archaeological method and theory than ever before. They have started to critically examine their disciplinary history and to confront the looming legacies of its colonial past. They began to engage with local communities in a meaningful way, searching for a more inclusive voice and dialogues with a widening range of publics. They have gone some way to not only accept, but actually embrace the fact that their research cannot be divorced from the socio-political conditions in which it is undertaken, from the realities of human life which surround it and from the interests of the publics which take up, use or even reject archaeological interpretations. It will be a continuous task to critically reflect upon the position which archaeologists and their narratives take in the contemporary world, particularly in ­former colonial contexts, and to explore approaches which invite and facilitate dialogue between archaeologists and the full range of their (potential) audiences. In case of success, this may actually be rated as the most important contribution of the current period of research to the archaeology of the Middle Nile valley in the long run.

Acknowledgments I thank Herman Bell, Stanley Burstein, David Edwards, Geoff Emberling, Salaheldin Mohamed Ahmed, and Todd Whitelaw for engaging discussions and advice on individual aspects of this chapter. I owe glimpses on possible postcolonial futures in archaeological practice to Ahmed Ali, Khidir Abdelkarim Ahmed, Mohamed Mohamed Eltayeb Badri, and Osman Khaleel Elawad Karrar, to all of whom I am grateful for this experience.

Notes 1. In my use, the term “Nubia” refers to the area of Egyptian and Sudanese Nubia as characterized by the presence of Nubian-speaking groups in the present and the recent past, plus the wider Middle Nile valley up to the regions south of the confluence of the Blue and the White Niles in present-day Khartoum, i.e. the territories occupied by the medieval Nubian kingdoms. This also represents the area onto which archaeological enquiries discussed in this paper have focused. 2. As Adams (1994:19) remarked “the chronicling of history as such has never been a Nubian literary tradition,” but see, e.g., Mohamed Jalal A. Hāshim 2014.

44   Claudia Näser 3. I use the terms “West” and “Western” to denote a common cultural background in the industrialized countries of Europe and North America which has been shaped by the traditions of Christianity, European enlightenment and the expansive colonialism and imperialism of the past five hundred years. While I acknowledge that there is a wide internal diversity within the “West” as defined in this way, my discussion concerns social and political configurations which have evolved, and arguably still function, along these lines. 4. With this perspective my contribution supplements the chapter of Salah M. Ahmed, this volume, which relates the history of archaeology in the Middle Nile valley as the story of an emerging national archaeology, whose evolvement is signaled by the continuously widening scope and diversity of its fieldwork activities. 5. The presumed previous impenetrability is relativized, e.g., by the fact that the Swiss Johann Ludwig Burckhardt had visited the area already earlier, in 1812 and 1814, in the disguise of Sheikh Ibrahim. See also the next note. 6. James Bruce, who had actually traveled to “discover the source of the Nile,” had passed the Middle Nile valley several decades earlier, in 1772. He re-identified the town site of Meroe which he knew from classical sources (Bruce 1790, IV:538–39). 7. See Kirke-Greene  2000:164–201 for the idiosyncratic institution of the Sudan Political Service and the biographical and educational background of its agents. 8. With this, the French managed to assert their imperialist interests in Egypt vis-à-vis British and Turco-Egyptian forces at least in the realm of archaeology (Reid  2002; Colla 2007). 9. For an appraisal of Budge’s scientific frame of mind and his contributions to the study of Egypt’s and Sudan’s past, see Reade 2011. 10. In 1960 alone, about one-third of the former African colonies became independent. Another third achieved this status in the decade before and after 1960. 11. For an analysis and critique of the Eurocentric perspective on ancient Egypt see, e.g., Reid 2002; Scham 2003; and O’Connor and Reid 2003:1–6. 12. The recent De Gruyter Handbook of Ancient Nubia (Raue 2019) does not have a single Sudanese, or Egyptian, contributor among its 45 authors. 13. For thorough analyses and a forceful critique of current working conditions and power relations in which native archaeologists operate in a range of African contexts, see the contributions, and particularly the introduction, to Schmidt ed. 2009. 14. A notable exception in this context is the translation of Adams’s magisterial Nubia: Corridor to Africa of 1977 into Arabic by Mahgoub El-Tigani Mahmoud (Adams 2004).

References Cited Adams, W.Y. 1976 Meroitic North and South: A Study in Cultural Contrasts. Meroitica 2. Akademie Verlag. ——— 1977 Nubia: Corridor to Africa. Princeton University Press. ——— 1994 The Invention of Nubia. In Hommages à Jean Leclant, v. 2: Nubie, Soudan, Éthiopie, ed. C. Berger, G. Clerc, and N. Grimal, pp. 17–22. Bibliothèque d’Étude 106(2). Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale. ——— 2004 ‫[ النوبة رواق إفريقيا‬Nubia: Corridor to Africa, translated by Mahgoub El-Tigani Mahmoud]. Al-Fatima Brothers. Addison, F. 1934 A Short Guide to the Museum of Antiquities, Gordon College, Khartoum. Sudan Department of Antiquities.

Past, Present, Future: The Archaeology of Nubia   45 Ahmed M. Ali Hakem 1978 A History of Archaeological Research in Nubia and the Sudan. In Africa in Antiquity, v. II: The Arts of Ancient Nubia and the Sudan, ed. S. Hochfield and E. Riefstahl, pp. 36–45. Brooklyn Museum. Allais, L. 2012 The Design of the Nubian Desert: Monuments, Mobility, and the Space of Global Culture. In Governing by Design: Architecture, Economy, and Politics in the Twentieth Century, ed. The Aggregate Architectural History Collaborative, pp. 179–215. University of Pittsburgh Press. Baker, B.J. and M.A. Judd 2012 Development of Paleopathology in the Nile Valley. In The Global History of Paleopathology: Pioneers and Prospects, ed. J.E. Buikstra and C.A. Roberts, pp. 209–34. Oxford University Press. Batrawi, A.M. 1935 Report on the Human Remains. Mission archéologique de Nubie 1929–1934. Government Press (Cairo). Bruce, J. 1790 Travels to Discover the Source of the Nile, in the Years 1768, 1769, 1770, 1771, 1772 and 1773. G.G.J. and J. Robinson. Budge, E.A.W. 1907 The Egyptian Sûdân: Its History and its Monuments. Kegan Paul, Trench, Trübner & Co. Burstein, S.M. 1995 Graeco-Africana: Studies in the History of Greek Relations with Egypt and Nubia. Aristide D. Caratzas. Carruthers, W. 2016 Multilateral Possibilities: Decolonization, Preservation, and the Case of Egypt. Future Anterior 12:36–48. Chakrabarti, D.K. 2012 Archaeology and Politics in the Third World, with Special Reference to India. In The Oxford Handbook of Public Archaeology, ed. R. Skeates, C. McDavid, and J. Carman, pp. 116–32. Oxford University Press. Chapman, R. 2003 Classics Revisited: Death, Society and Archaeology: The Social Dimensions of Mortuary Practices. Mortality 8(3):305–12. Colla, E. 2007 Conflicted Antiquities: Egyptology, Egyptomania, Egyptian Modernity. Duke University Press. Crawford, O.G.S. 1948 People without a History. Antiquity 22:8–12. Drewal, H.J. 1996 Past as Prologues: Empowering Africa’s Cultural Institutions. In Plundering Africa’s Past, ed. P.R. Schmidt and R.J. McIntosh, pp. 110–24. Indiana University Press and James Currey. Edwards, D.N. 1996 The Archaeology of the Meroitic State: New Perspectives on its Social and Political Organisation. BAR International Series 640. Cambridge Monographs in African Archaeology 38. Tempus Reparatum. ——— 2004 The Nubian Past: An Archaeology of the Sudan. Routledge. Emery, W.B. and L.P. Kirwan 1935 The Excavations and Survey between Wadi es-Sebua and Adindan 1929–1931. Mission archéologique de Nubie 1929–1934. Government Press (Cairo). ——— 1938 The Royal Tombs of Ballana and Qustul. Mission archéologique de Nubie 1929–1934. Government Press (Cairo). Firth, C.M. 1912 The Archaeological Survey of Nubia, Report for 1908–1909. Government Press (Cairo). ——— 1915 The Archaeological Survey of Nubia, Report for 1909–1910. Government Press (Cairo). ——— 1927 The Archaeological Survey of Nubia, Report for 1910–1911. Government Press (Cairo). Fitzenreiter, M. 2011 Abt. I Bl. 1 und “Historischer Saal.” Karl Richard Lepsius definiert die Ägyptologie und separiert die Sudanarchäologie. Der antike Sudan. Mitteilungen der Sudanarchäologischen Gesellschaft zu Berlin 22:43–56.

46   Claudia Näser Hansen, N.B. 2008 Arabic and its Role in Egyptology and Egyptian Archaeology. Archaeologies 4(1):171–74. Harkless, N.D. 2006 Nubian Pharaohs and Meroitic Kings: The Kingdom of Kush. AuthorHouse. Harrison, R. 2013 Heritage: Critical Approaches. Routledge. Johnson, M. 2010 Archaeological Theory: An Introduction, 2nd edition. Wiley-Blackwell. Kamel, S. 2009 Egypt—Ägypten. In Museum Islands—Museumsinseln, ed. L. Guzy, R. Hatoum, and S. Kamel, pp. 138–205. Panama Verlag. Keough, E.B. 2011 Heritage in Peril: A Critique of UNESCO’s World Heritage Program. Washington University Global Studies Law Review 10:593–615. Khidir Abdelkarim Ahmed 2012 From Dam to Dam: Encounter at the Cataracts. In “Nihna nâs al-bahar—We Are the People of the River”: Ethnographic Research in the Fourth Nile Cataract Region, Sudan, ed. C. Kleinitz and C. Näser, pp. 253–68. Meroitica 26. Harrassowitz. Kirke-Greene, A. 2000 Britain’s Imperial Administrators, 1858–1966. Macmillan. Kleinitz, C. and C. Näser 2013 Archaeology, Development and Conflict: A Case Study from the African Continent. Archaeologies 9(1):162–91. Lepsius, K.R. 1849 Vorläufige Nachricht über die Expedition, ihre Ergebnisse und deren Publikation. Nicolaische Buchhandlung. ——— 1849–59 Denkmaeler aus Aegypten und Aethiopien. Nicolaische Buchhandlung. ——— 1852 Briefe aus Aegypten, Aethiopien und der Halbinsel des Sinai. Wilhelm Hertz, Bessersche Buchhandlung. Manuelian, P.D. 1992 George Andrew Reisner on Archaeological Photography. Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt 29:1–34. Maspero, G. 1911a Documents sur l’etat des monuments. Les temples immergés de la Nubie. Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale. ——— 1911b Rapports relatifs à la consolidation des temples. Les temples immergés de la Nubie. Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale. Michałowski, K. 1967 Faras. Die Kathedrale aus dem Wüstensand. Benziger. Monges, Miriam Ma’at Ka Re 1997 Kush, the Jewel of Nubia: Reconnecting the Root System of African Civilization. Africa Research & Publications. Monneret de Villard, U. 1935 La Nubia Medioevale. Mission archéologique de Nubie 1929–1934. Government Press (Cairo). Moreno García, J.C. 2015 The Cursed Discipline? The Peculiarities of Egyptology at the Turn of the Twenty-First Century. In Histories of Egyptology: Interdisciplinary Measures, ed. W. Carruthers, pp. 50–63. Routledge. Mohamed Jalal A. Hāshim 2014 ‫ قضايا التنمية والتهميش يف بالد النوبة‬:‫ قصة الحضارة‬- ‫[ جزيرة صاي‬Ṣāy Island— The Story of Civilization: The Issues of Development and Marginalization in Nubia]. ‛Abd al-Karīm Mirghanī Centre. Murray, T. 2007 Milestones in Archaeology: A Chronological Encyclopedia. ABC-Clio. Narayan, K. 1993 How Native is a “Native” Anthropologist? American Anthropologist 95:671–86. Näser, C. and C. Kleinitz 2012 The Good, the Bad and the Ugly: A Case Study on the Politicisation of Archaeology and its Consequences from Northern Sudan. In “Nihna nâs al-bahar—We Are the People of the River”: Ethnographic Research in the Fourth Nile Cataract Region, Sudan, ed. C. Kleinitz and C. Näser, pp. 269–304. Meroitica 26. Harrassowitz. Näser, C. and G. Tully 2019 Dialogues in the Making: Collaborative Archaeology in Sudan. Journal of Community Archaeology & Heritage 6(3):155–71. O’Connor, D. and A. Reid 2003 Introduction—Locating Ancient Egypt in Africa: Modern Theories, Past Realities. In Ancient Egypt in Africa: Encounters with Ancient Egypt, ed. D. O’Connor and A. Reid, pp. 1–21. Routledge.

Past, Present, Future: The Archaeology of Nubia   47 Pratt, M.L. 2008 Imperial Eyes: Travel Writing and Transculturation. Second edition. Routledge. Priese, K.-H. 1992 Das Gold von Meroe. Philipp von Zabern. Raue, D. ed. 2019 Handbook of Ancient Nubia. De Gruyter. Reade, J. 2011 Retrospect: Wallis Budge—For or Against? In Wallis Budge: Magic and Mummies in London and Cairo, by M. Ismail, pp. 444–63. Hardinge Simpole. Regard, F. ed. 2009 British Narratives of Exploration: Case Studies of the Self and Other. Pickering & Chatto. Reid, D.M. 2002 Whose Pharaohs? Archaeology, Museums, and Egyptian National Identity from Napoleon to World War I. University of California Press. Reisner, G.A. 1910 The Archaeological Survey of Nubia, Report for 1907–1908: Archaeological Report. National Printing Department (Cairo). Said, E.W. 1978 Orientalism. Pantheon. Saxe, A.A. 1971 Social Dimensions of Mortuary Practices in a Mesolithic Population from Wadi Halfa, Sudan. In Approaches to the Social Dimensions of Mortuary Practices, ed. J.A. Brown, pp. 39–57. Memoirs of the Society for American Archaeology 25. Scham, S.A. 2003 Ancient Egypt and the Archaeology of the Disenfranchised. In Views of Ancient Egypt since Napoleon Bonaparte: Imperialism, Colonialism and Modern Appropriations, ed. D. Jeffreys, pp. 171–78. Taylor & Francis. Schmidt, P.R. 2009 What Is Postcolonial about Archaeologies in Africa? In Postcolonial Archaeologies in Africa, ed. P.R. Schmidt, pp. 1–20. School for Advanced Research Press. Schmidt, P.R. ed. 2009 Postcolonial Archaeologies in Africa. School for Advanced Research Press. Smith, E.G. and F. Wood Jones 1910 The Archaeological Survey of Nubia, Report for 1907–1908: Report on the Human Remains. National Printing Department (Cairo). Spivak, G.C. 1999 A Critique of Postcolonial Reason: Toward a History of the Vanishing Present. Harvard University Press. Trigger, B.G. 1994 Paradigms in Sudan Archaeology. The International Journal of African Historical Studies 27:323–45. ——— 2006 A History of Archaeological Thought, 2nd edition. Cambridge University Press. Tully, G. and C. Näser 2016 Discovering Mograt Island Together— ‫هيا بنا نستكشف معاً جزيرة مقرات‬. Golden House Publications. Weigall, A.E.P. 1907 A Report on the Antiquities of Lower Nubia (The First Cataract to the Sudan Frontier) and their Condition in 1906–7. Oxford University Press.

chapter 3

Geol ogy of N u bi a a n d Su r rou n di ng R egions James A. Harrell

Introduction Nubia is generally considered to include the Nile River valley and adjacent deserts between Aswan in southern Egypt and Khartoum in central Sudan, an area extending about 1,000 km north to south and nearly as far from east to west. The region is well defined by its physiography and the geology of its bedrock and surficial deposits. Ongoing volcanism and seismicity attest to its location in a tectonically active part of the world. The dominant feature of Nubia, however, is the Nile River and it is this aquatic artery that sustained the many cultures inhabiting this region over the course of the Holocene. The best exposition on the geology of Sudan and the immediately surrounding regions is that of Vail (1978), which is largely an updated summary of Whiteman (1971). Other useful sources of geological information are Yassin et al. (1984) and GRAS-RRI (1995) for Sudan, and Said (ed. 1990), Said (1993), and Embabi (2004, 2008) for Egypt. Geological maps of the two countries include DOS (1974), GMRD (1981), and GRASRRI (1988) for Sudan, and EGSMA (1981) and Klitzsch et al. (1987) for Egypt. The synthesis that follows draws heavily from these sources. For geological resources and their exploitation in antiquity, see Harrell and Abdelrahman Ali Mohamed, this volume.

Physiography The interior of Sudan and southern Egypt is characterized by a low, uneven plain that varies in elevation mostly between 200 and 500 m above sea level (asl) with a slight

50   James A. Harrell

Figure 3.1  Generalized topographical map of Nubia and surrounding regions. Topography is derived from GTOPO30, a 30 arc-second digital elevation model available from the US Geological Survey’s EROS Data Center in Sioux Falls, South Dakota, with the data contoured by the author using ArcGIS/Map 10.2 software.

decline in average elevation toward the north (Fig. 3.1). The Nile River flows across the lowest part of this plain, dropping from 378 m at Khartoum to 91 m at Aswan. The plain is bordered by higher ground on all sides except the north. In eastern Egypt and Sudan the Red Sea Hills extend along the west coast of the Red Sea with summit elevations commonly over 1,000 m and reaching up to about 2,200 m asl. The hills, which in places spread inland for 200 km, are separated from the sea by a narrow coastal plain with a

Geology of Nubia and Surrounding Regions   51 width of commonly 10–20 km. To the southeast is the high plateau of Eritrea and Ethiopia (the Ethiopian Highlands) where the headwaters of the Atbara and Blue Nile Rivers arise. This region is mostly between 1,000 and 2,000 m in elevation but in places soars to over 4,000 m asl. The high ground continues south of Sudan through Kenya and Uganda, where the headwaters of the White Nile are found, and then extends across western Sudan and southwestern Egypt. Within these regions the elevations are above 500 m and commonly fall between 1,000 and 2,000 m asl. The highest elevation reached in western Sudan is 3,088 m asl for the volcanic Jebel Marra, and to the northwest, where Egypt, Libya, and Sudan join, Jebel Uweinat rises to 1,934 m asl. From Aswan north to the Mediterranean Sea the Nile flows over a sediment-filled, bedrock canyon that was cut during the late Miocene desiccation of the Mediterranean to –172 m (below modern sea level) at Aswan and –2,500 m just north of Cairo (Said 1993:38). In contrast, south of Aswan and across northern Sudan the Nile occupies a shallow valley where bedrock islands populate numerous stretches of the river (Fig. 3.2). The valley deepens and narrows as the river slices through igneous rocks in the Sabaloka Gorge at the Sixth Cataract and again north of the Egypt-Sudan border, when it cuts into sandstone. The Nubian reach of the Nile River, between Aswan and Khartoum, is bordered by alternately sandy and rocky, hyperarid deserts that are dissected by shallow wadis choked with windblown sand. In Egypt’s Western Desert there are several depressions and within these are closed basins lacking external drainage (Fig.  3.1; Said  1990a:10–15; Embabi  2004:145–211). During wetter climatic (pluvial) intervals of the Quaternary, the basins held lakes and their desiccated remnants are the desert playas of the present day (Jesse, this volume). Oases are present where the depressions are well wetted by groundwater seepage. Only the largest depressions are shown in Fig. 3.1 and these descend to minimum elevations of 109 m asl in Dakhla, 25 m asl in Farafra, and 2 m asl in Kharga (Embabi 2004: table 5–3).

Bedrock Geology and Tectonic Development Basement Complex Rocks of the Basement Complex are exposed at the surface across most of Sudan and the Ethiopian Highlands, and about a tenth of Egypt (Fig.  3.2) (Whiteman  1971:11–47; Vail 1978:7–24; Yassin et al. 1984:11–23; El Gaby et al. 1990; Hassan and Hashad 1990; Morgan 1990:91–95; Richter and Schandelmeier 1990; GRAS-RRI 1995:3.1–3.4, 5.1–5.5). Most are Precambrian in age and consist of deformed (folded) metamorphic schists and gneisses of mainly granitic to granodioritic composition plus minor marble, quartzite, serpentinite, amphibolite, and other meta-sedimentary and meta-volcanic rocks (see

52   James A. Harrell

Figure 3.2  Generalized bedrock geology map of Nubia and surrounding regions. Based on information from UNESCO (1972–75), DOS (1974), EGSMA (1981), GMRD (1981), and GRAS-RRI (1988).

Table 3.1 for the geologic time scale). The oldest metamorphic rocks are Archean in age with the only definite occurrence in the basement inlier at Jebel Uweinat. The metamorphics are intruded by igneous rocks of late Proterozoic, Paleozoic, and, to a minor extent, Mesozoic age. These include granitic to granodioritic batholiths, ring complexes and stocks, gabbroic stocks, and dikes and veins of dolerite, aplite, pegmatite, and

Geology of Nubia and Surrounding Regions   53 Table 3.1  Geologic Time Scale EON

ERA

PERIOD Quaternary

EPOCH Holocene Pleistocene

Neogene Cenozoic Tertiary Phanerozoic

Paleogene

present–0.0117 0.0117–2.58

Pliocene

2.58–5.33

Miocene

5.33–23.0

Oligocene

23.0–33.9

Eocene

33.9–56.0

Paleocene

56.0–66.0

Cretaceous

66.0–145.0

Mesozoic Jurassic Triassic

145.0–201.3

Paleozoic

Precambrian

MILLION YEARS BEFORE PRESENT*

201.3–252.2

Permian

252.2–298.9

Carboniferous

298.9–358.9

Devonian

358.9–419.2

Silurian

419.2–443.7

Ordovician

443.7–485.4

Cambrian

485.4–541.0

Proterozoic

541–2,500

Archean

2,500–4,000

Hadean

4,000–4,600

* Ages taken from the International Chronostratigraphic Chart, version 2016/04; International Commission on Stratigraphy.

quartz. The Basement Complex in Sudan is at the core of the so-called Arabian-Nubian Shield, a relatively stable part of the continental crust underlying Africa. This pastiche of metamorphic and igneous rocks is the by-product of the Pan-African Event or Orogeny, which occurred largely between 650 and 550 million years ago (mya) with the waning stages lasting until about 450 mya (i.e., straddling the Proterozoic-Paleozoic boundary). During this episode, earlier metamorphic rocks were re-metamorphosed and intruded by magma bodies.

Phanerozoic Sedimentary Rocks After the Pan-African Event concluded, there was a period of general erosion that produced a peneplained surface across much of Sudan and southern Egypt. It was on this surface that Phanerozoic sediments were deposited (Whiteman  1971:47–109; Vail  1978:24–29; Yassin et al.  1984:24–30; Klitzsch  1986; Kerdany and Cherif  1990; Klitzsch 1990; Morgan 1990; Said 1990b; GRAS-RRI 1995:3.5–3.8, 5.6–5.13). Intervals of

54   James A. Harrell erosion following episodes of sedimentation during the Paleozoic removed most of the sediments. The surviving sedimentary rocks date to the Cambrian through Carboniferous periods and are found in the western border regions of Egypt and Sudan (Fig.  3.2). These rocks consist of sandstone with minor conglomerate, siltstone, and mudstone, all clastic sedimentary rocks that were originally sediments deposited by rivers and occasionally in shallow seas. From early through middle Paleozoic times, the Arabian-Nubian Shield had a north-northwest dip. The resulting alluvial plains thus advanced northward across the region and, at times of subsidence, the sea transgressed southward over the same surface with deposits from the two environments stratigraphically interbedded. The region was mostly erosional in late Paleozoic due to general uplift to the north, which also gave the shield a south-southwest dip. Erosional conditions prevailed in Sudan and southern Egypt in the early part of the Mesozoic era and then during the Jurassic and especially the Cretaceous periods a thick sediment cover was laid down. By this time, the Arabian-Nubian Shield resumed its north-northwest tilt and so the same sedimentation pattern that prevailed earlier in the Paleozoic was reestablished—northward-flowing streams and southward-transgressing seas leaving deposits across a broad, alternately inundated and emergent coastal plain. The resulting sedimentary rocks cover much of Sudan and southern Egypt (Fig. 3.2). The principal Mesozoic deposit is the Nubian Sandstone Formation (Whiteman 1971:52–74; Vail 1974; Vail 1978:25–26; Omer 1983). Within the region this unit varies in age from early to late Cretaceous, and although sandstone is the dominant lithology, there is also minor conglomerate (especially near the base), siltstone, and mudstone, as well as rare lignite (near Dongola), gypsum (near Shendi), and, in southern Egypt, limestone and phosphorite. Locally the sandstone can be highly ferruginous (becoming siliceous ironstone) and contain fossilized (silicified) wood. The formation is highly variable in its preserved thickness with a maximum of about 500 m, although it is usually much thinner. Where largely removed by erosion, there are occasional outliers of Nubian Sandstone that form flat-topped mesas and buttes. In most of Sudan the formation consists of river-laid sediments but in southern Egypt and northernmost Sudan there were intervals of shallow marine deposition in the Tethys Sea, the precursor to today’s Mediterranean Sea. Earlier Mesozoic rocks are found only in southern Egypt and the Ethiopian Highlands (Fig. 3.2). Beginning in the Eocene epoch, the Arabian-Nubian Shield split along the Red Sea Rift, allowing marine incursions along Sudan’s east coast that left clastic, carbonate, and evaporite sedimentary formations (Fig. 3.2). Continental deposition dominated Sudan’s interior during the Tertiary with the principal surviving rock the Hudi Chert Formation, which formed from silicified lacustrine sediments (Whiteman 1971:90–97; Vail 1978:27–28). It has been mostly removed by erosion with the largest surviving outcrops near Atbara. An early Tertiary limestone caps the Abyad Plateau west of Dongola (Fig. 3.2), demonstrating that the Tethys Sea at this time extended into northern Sudan (Barazi 1985). Major uplift and crustal thickening due to volcanism in the Eritrea-Ethiopia and Kenya-Uganda regions began during the Eocene, coinciding with the onset of East African and Red Sea rifting. Concomitant with uplift in the headwater regions of the

Geology of Nubia and Surrounding Regions   55 Nile, there was down-warping and faulting in the Sudan interior, creating the central lowlands over which the Blue, White, and main Niles and Atbara rivers now flow.

Surficial Geology: Quaternary Processes and Deposits Weathering and Erosion Nubia’s high temperatures with marked diurnal changes cause high rates of physical weathering through the thermal expansion and contraction of rocks. Salt crystallization is another active weathering process near the Nile and other water sources where high evaporation rates produce saline groundwater just below the surface. The principal erosional agent in Nubia is the wind, which deflates both by entrainment of loose weathering debris and by abrasion from suspended sand. The rare rainfall events tend to be short, violent storms with rapid runoff causing wadi flash floods, a secondary erosional agent in Nubia. These are the dominant processes today, but chemical weathering and stream erosion were important during earlier pluvial intervals. The depressions in Egypt’s Western Desert have been excavated through early Tertiary limestone into the underlying Nubian Sandstone. The origin of the depressions is still debated, but the current consensus is that they are primarily the result of wind deflation during the Quaternary with the overlying limestone first breached by karstic (dissolution) processes, which then allowed the wind to erode the weakly cemented sandstone underneath (Embabi 2004:202–11) . Meteorite impacts are a rare but spectacular geologic process affecting Nubia. The number of such events is unknown because the resulting craters tend to be rapidly eroded and buried. A well-preserved impact crater does exist, however, about 100 km east of Jebel Uweinat (Fig. 3.3) (Folco et al. 2011). Kamil Crater, as it is known, has a diameter of 45 m and an average depth of 16 m. It is estimated that it was created by an iron meteorite with a diameter of about 1.3 m. This is too small for the impact to have an effect outside the local area, but the fiery trail left by the incoming meteorite would have been visible across much of Nubia. The date of this event is not well established but is thought to be sometime within the last 5,000 years.

Sedimentation Much of the bedrock in Sudan and southern Egypt is buried under deposits of unconsolidated sediments dating to the late Tertiary and mainly Quaternary periods (Fig. 3.3) (Whiteman 1971:109–45; Vail 1978:29–32; Yassin et al. 1984:30–33; Said 1990c; GRASRRI 1995:5.14–5.15). Alluvial and lacustrine sediments are especially extensive and thick

56   James A. Harrell

Figure 3.3  Generalized surficial geology map of Nubia and surrounding regions. Based on information from DOS (1974), Vail (1978: fig. 8), EGSMA (1981), and GMRD (1981).

in southern and central Sudan with those bordering the Blue and White Niles recognized as the Umm Ruwaba and Gezira Formations. Significant deposits of alluvial sediments are also found along the main Nile between the Basement Complex outcrops, and in this river’s tributary wadis. Sedimentation in hyperarid Nubia, however, is dominated by windblown sand. The eolian deposits occur in broad sheets (ergs) and in long, narrow ribbons with mainly barchan and seif dunes. The crescent-shaped barchan dunes are oriented transversely to the wind direction with their curved ends pointing downwind whereas the larger seif dunes are long, sharp-crested ridges of sand that parallel the wind. These sand bodies migrate, under the impetus of the prevailing winds, to the south and southwest. The greatest of the seif dunes is Egypt’s 550 km-long Ghard Abu

Geology of Nubia and Surrounding Regions   57 Mubarik (Fig. 3.3). Much of the sand is derived from weathered, wind-scoured outcrops of Nubian Sandstone.

Nile River Cataracts The 1,780 km-stretch of the Nile River between the First Cataract at Aswan and the Sixth Cataract 70 km north of Khartoum is commonly referred to as the Cataract Nile. There are six numbered and another eleven named cataracts and rapids with all except the first one in Sudan (Fig. 3.4). Along these reaches the river is either populated with rocky islands separated by turbulent, swift-flowing channels (the cataracts) or beset by shallowly submerged rock reefs (the rapids), both of which have historically posed navigational hazards, especially at low water (Gleichen 1905). Within the cataract region, the Nile originally flowed over the Nubian Sandstone and this formation was eroded away in many places to uncover rocks of the Basement Complex (Fig. 3.2). Where these are exposed, the twists and turns in the main Nile’s course are controlled by the strike of the structural trends within the rocks (i.e., the directions of fractures, fold axes, and intrusive dikes). The river mostly parallels these trends, thus following the path of least resistance, and where it flows across the structural grain there are cataracts and rapids (DOS 1974; Vail 1978:3–4, fig. 5; Stern and Abdelsalam 1996:1696). The greater resistance to erosion of some basement rocks is another factor in the formation of these features. River gradients are steeper in the cataract reaches and lower between them where the river is cutting through the softer Nubian Sandstone.

Course Changes and the Great Bend By the late Pliocene in Egypt, after a final episode of marine transgression, the ancestral Nile occupied its present-day valley north of Aswan (Said 1993:39–41). This river only drained Egypt’s Eastern Desert and, to a lesser extent, northern Nubia, but in the early or middle Pleistocene (but no later than about 0.7 mya) the Egyptian Nile for the first time carried water and sediment originating in the Ethiopian Highlands (Williams and Williams 1980:221; Said 1993:41–42). The integration of the Egyptian and Sudanese Niles was the result of both tectonic uplift and increased rainfall in the headwater regions. In Sudan, the co-joined Blue and White Niles and Atbara River probably originally followed a stretch of the modern Nile’s course between Khartoum and Abu Hamed and then continued north through Wadi Gabgaba and thence along Wadi Allaqi to the Nile valley in Egypt (Fig. 3.1; Vail 1978:4; Stern and Abdelsalam 1996:1698). It is also possible that Wadi Muqaddam carried a portion of the early Nile’s flow north across the Bayuda Desert (Vail 1978:4). Whatever the early drainage pattern in Sudan, it was rearranged at some point in the Pleistocene. It has been suggested that volcanic up-doming in the Bayuda Desert caused the branches of the Nile to coalesce and wrap around the Bayuda Dome to create what has been called the Great Bend between Atbara and Ed-Debba (Almond et al. 1969:550–51; Vail 1978:4). Stern and Abdelsalam (1996) and Thurmond

58   James A. Harrell

Figure 3.4  Map of cataracts, rapids, and paleochannels along the Nubian reach of the Nile River. Based on information from Gleichen (1905), DMA (1967, 1973), GRAS-RRI (1988), and 1930s-vintage 1:250,000 topographic maps from the Sudan Survey.

Geology of Nubia and Surrounding Regions   59 et al. (2004) have convincingly argued, however, that the effect of Bayuda up-doming would be to deflect the Nile to the north or east, not to the southwest. They suggest instead that the southwestward deflection was caused by uplift in the Pleistocene along what they call the “Nubian Swell,” an east-west zone of intermittently active crustal uplift that extends across southern Egypt and northern Sudan between the latitudes of the First and Third Cataracts. The only obvious expression of this structural feature today is the formerly continuous early Tertiary limestone now removed by erosion from the swell’s crest but remaining to the south on the Jebel Abyad plateau and to the north in Egypt (Fig. 3.2; Stern and Abdelsalam 1996:1697). In late Pleistocene the connection between the Egyptian Nile and its central African headwaters became tenuous and sporadic due to both climatic fluctuations and uplift along the Nubian Swell (Said 1993:45–46) and so it may have been at this time that the river was diverted from Wadi Gabgaba to its present course through the Fourth Cataract, thus creating the Great Bend. This proposition is supported by two observations. First, the Fourth Cataract has the steepest gradient of any of the cataract reaches and thus appears to be the youngest (Said 1993:28–29). And second, the several undated but apparently Quaternary paleochannels on the north side of the Nile between Abu Hamed and Ed-Debba (Fig. 3.4) are consistent with the Nile being forced to a more southerly course by uplift to the north (Stern and Abdelsalam 1996:1696; Thurmond et al. 2004:404–405; and observations by the present author). The Holocene paleochannels downstream from Ed-Debba occur on the Nile floodplain (Fig. 3.4) (Macklin and Woodward 2001; Williams et al. 2010:1129, fig. 3; see also M. Williams, this volume) and are probably the result of normal avulsion processes during floods with no relation to the Nubian Swell.

Volcanism Volcanic activity began in southern Egypt, Sudan, and the Ethiopian Highlands in late Cretaceous and continued through the Cenozoic up until the present day (Whiteman  1971:96–106; Vail  1978:39–43; Francis et al.  1973; Williams and Williams 1980:213–14; Meneisy 1990; Siebert et al. 2010:58, 62). Most of this volcanism is associated with tectonic rifting in East Africa and the Red Sea from the Eocene onward. There are volcanic centers (or fields) throughout this region with the main ones in Sudan at Jebel Marra and the Meidob Hills, and in the Bayuda Desert (Fig. 3.2). All of these experienced eruptions of basaltic magma during the Quaternary with this activity leaving cinder cones, explosion craters, lava flows, and pyroclastic (tephra) layers on the surface, and dolerite dikes and plugs in the subsurface. Continuing activity today is indicated by the presence of hot springs at Jebel Marra and the Meidob Hills as well as fumaroles at the former. Sulfurous hot springs are found in the Nile valley at Hammam Akasha (Fig. 3.2). Such thermal features have not been reported from the Bayuda Desert but are likely to exist there. The fresh, uneroded appearance of some of the Bayuda cinder cones suggests that volcanic eruptions happened during the Holocene and possibly as recently as 1,000 years ago (Almond et al. 1984:234–35). Minor Tertiary volcanism

60   James A. Harrell occurred in southern Egypt just west of the Nile between Aswan and the Sudan border and also in other parts of the Western Desert, especially in the vicinities of Jebel Uweinat and the Gilf Kebir Plateau.

Seismicity Nubia and the surrounding regions experience many earthquakes and this seismic activity is mainly related to East African and Red Sea rifting (Vail  1978:43, fig. 10; Kebeasy 1990). The majority of earthquakes during the past century had epicenters near Juba in South Sudan with these mostly less than magnitude (M) 6 in strength (Ambraseys et al. 1994:120–38). Earthquakes originating elsewhere in Sudan and southern Egypt are rarer and weaker; all are below M 5 with most less than M 4. Although great numbers of earthquakes occur in the East African and Red Sea rift zones, these are mostly less than M 6 with all the largest ones (up to about M 6.5) located in the EthiopiaEritrea-Somaliland region. The largest earthquake recorded in or around Nubia since 1899 was M 7.2 near Juba in 1990 (Ambraseys et al. 1994:137). Since the 1850s, ten earthquakes have been reported with epicenters in Nubia and these may reflect continuing uplift along faults within the Nubian Swell (Thurmond et al. 2004:404). With their strengths recorded mostly in general terms rather than as magnitudes, these seisms were near the Second Cataract (1980 and 1988, felt), the Third Cataract (1906 and 1923, felt), Dongola (1945, M 4.5), Merowe (1906, felt), the Fifth Cataract (1860, strong), and Khartoum (1854, 1922, and 1944, felt) (Ambraseys et al. 1994:100–38). Two additional earthquakes with epicenters near Lake Nasser (1981, M 5.5; 1982, M 4.5) are probably related to crustal stresses resulting from the weight of impounded water. The frequency and intensity of seismic activity in ancient Nubia was probably no different from what has been observed in recent centuries. Although the earthquakes would have been mainly of low magnitude, they were probably at times sufficiently strong to damage rigid structures like stone temples and pyramids.

Hydrology The main aquifers (water-bearing formations) in Nubia are the Nubian Sandstone and unconsolidated surficial sediments (Whiteman  1971:181–204; Vail  1978:53–56; Thorweihe 1990). Groundwater is shallow and plentiful in alluvial sediments along the Nile and its tributaries, but away from the river the principal source of groundwater is the Nubian Sandstone, although the water table is usually too deep for hand-dug wells. Groundwater recharging in Nubia is largely from the Nile. Much of what little rain falls runs off into the river with the rest infiltrating either the surficial sediments or Nubian Sandstone. Most of the water in the Nubian Sandstone, however, is “fossil groundwater” that entered the formation during the wetter climatic intervals earlier in the Quaternary.

Geology of Nubia and Surrounding Regions   61 There is a regional northward movement of groundwater within the Nubian Sandstone from northern Sudan into southern Egypt. In Egypt’s Western Desert, the groundwater discharges within the depressions as springs.

References Cited Almond, D.C., F. Ahmed, and B.E. Khalil 1969 An Excursion to the Bayuda Volcanic Field of Northern Sudan. Bulletin of Volcanology 33:549–65. Almond, D.C., O.M.  Kheir, and S.  Poole 1984 Alkaline Basalt Volcanism in Northeastern Sudan: A Comparison of the Bayuda and Gedaref Areas. Journal of African Earth Sciences 2(3):233–45. Ambraseys, N.N., C.P. Melville, and R.D. Adams 1994 The Seismicity of Egypt, Arabia and the Red Sea: A Historical Review. Cambridge University Press. Barazi, N. 1985 Sedimentologie und Stratigraphie des Abyad-Beckens (NW-Sudan). Berliner geowissenschaftliche Abhandlungen. Reihe A. Geologie und Paläontologie 64:1–3. DMA 1967 Operational Navigation Chart ONC J–5 (1:1,000,000). US Defense Mapping Agency. DMA 1973 Operational Navigation Chart ONC K–5 (1:1,000,000). US Defense Mapping Agency. DOS 1974 Geological Map: The Democratic Republic of Sudan and Adjacent Areas (1:2,000,000; north and south sheets). Directorate of Overseas Surveys and Institute of Geological Sciences, London. EGSMA 1981 Geologic Map of Egypt (1:2,000,000). Egyptian Geological Survey and Mining Authority. El Gaby, S., F.K. List, and R. Tehrani 1990 The Basement Complex of the Eastern Desert and Sinai. In The Geology of Egypt, ed. R. Said, pp. 175–84. A.A. Balkema. Embabi, N.S. 2004 The Geomorphology of Egypt: Landforms and Evolution, v. 1: The Nile Valley and the Western Desert. The Egyptian Geographical Society. ———— 2008 The Geomorphology of Egypt: Landforms and Evolution, v. 2: The Eastern Desert and Sinai. The Egyptian Geographical Society. Folco, L., M.  Di Martino, A.  El Barkooky, M.  D’Orazio, A.  Lethy, S.  Urbini, I.  Nicolosi, M. Hafez, C. Cordier, M. van Ginneken, A. Zeoli, A.M. Radwan, S. El Khrepy, M. El Gabry, M. Gomaa, A.A. Barakat, R. Serra, and M. El Sharkawi 2011 Kamil Crater (Egypt): Ground Truth for Small-Scale Meteorite Impacts. Geology 39(2):179–82. Francis, P.W., R.S.  Thorpe, and F.  Ahmed 1973 Setting and Significance of Tertiary-Recent Volcanism in the Darfur Province of Western Sudan. Nature, Physical Sciences 243:30–32. Gleichen, E. 1905 The Anglo-Egyptian Sudan: A Compendium Prepared by Officers of the Sudan Government, v. 1. Wyman and Sons. GMRD 1981 Geological Map of the Sudan (1:2,000,000). Geological and Mineral Resources Department, Ministry of Energy and Mining, Khartoum. GRAS-RRI 1988 Geological Atlas of the Republic of the Sudan (1:1,000,000). Khartoum/London: Geological Research Authority of the Sudan and Robertson Research International Ltd. GRAS-RRI 1995 Accompanying Geological Notes to the 1:1,000,000 Scale Geological Atlas of the Republic of the Sudan. Geological Research Authority of the Sudan (Bulletin No. 40) and Robertson Research International Ltd. Khartoum University Press. Hassan, M.A. and A.H.  Hashad 1990 Precambrian of Egypt. In The Geology of Egypt, ed. R. Said, pp. 201–45. A.A. Balkema. Kebeasy, R.M. 1990 Seismicity. In The Geology of Egypt, ed. R. Said, pp. 51–59. A.A. Balkema. Kerdany, M.T. and O.H. Cherif 1990 Mesozoic. In The Geology of Egypt, ed. R. Said, pp. 407–49. A.A. Balkema.

62   James A. Harrell Klitzsch, E. 1986 Plate Tectonics and Cratonal Geology in Northeast Africa (Egypt, Sudan). Geologische Rundschau 75(3):755–68. ———— 1990 Paleozoic. In The Geology of Egypt, ed. R. Said, pp. 393–406. A.A. Balkema. Klitzsch, E., F.K.  List, and G.  Pöhlmann eds. 1987 Geological Map of Egypt (1:500,000; 20 sheets). Egyptian General Petroleum Corporation, and Conoco Coral. Macklin, M. and J. Woodward 2001 Holocene Alluvial History and the Palaeochannels of the River Nile in the Northern Dongola Reach. In Life on the Desert Edge: Seven Thousand Years of Settlement in the Northern Dongola Reach, Sudan, v. 1, ed. D.A. Welsby, pp. 7–13. Sudan Archaeological Research Society Publication 7. BAR International Series 980. Archaeopress. Meneisy, M.Y. 1990 Vulcanicity. In The Geology of Egypt, ed. R. Said, pp. 157–72. A.A. Balkema. Morgan, P. 1990 Egypt in the Framework of Global Tectonics. In The Geology of Egypt, ed. R. Said, pp. 91–111. A.A. Balkema. Omer, M.K. 1983 The Geology of the Nubian Sandstone Formation in Sudan: Stratigraphy, Sedimentary Dynamics, Diagenesis. Geological and Mineral Resources Department, Ministry of Energy and Mining, Khartoum. Richter, A. and H.  Schandelmeier 1990 Precambrian Basement Inliers of Western Desert: Geology, Petrology and Structural Evolution. In The Geology of Egypt, ed. R. Said, pp. 185–200. A.A. Balkema. Said, R. 1990a Geomorphology. In The Geology of Egypt, ed. R. Said, pp. 9–25. A.A. Balkema. ———— 1990b Cenozoic. In The Geology of Egypt, ed. R. Said, pp. 451–86. A.A. Balkema. ———— 1990c Quaternary. In The Geology of Egypt, ed. R. Said, pp. 487–507. A.A. Balkema. ———— 1993 The River Nile: Geology, Hydrology and Utilization. Pergamon Press. Said, R. ed. 1990 The Geology of Egypt. A.A. Balkema. Siebert, L., T. Simkin, and P. Kimberly 2010 Volcanoes of the World, 3rd edition. Smithsonian Institution. Stern, R.J. and M.G. Abdelsalam 1996 The Origin of the Great Bend of the Nile from SIR-C/XSAR imagery. Science 5293:1696–98. Thorweihe, U. 1990 Nubian Aquifer System. In The Geology of Egypt, ed. R. Said, pp. 601–11. A.A. Balkema. Thurmond, A.K., R.J. Stern, M.G. Abdelsalam, K.C. Nielsen, M.M. Abdeen, and E. Hinz 2004 The Nubian Swell. Journal of African Earth Sciences 39:401–407. UNESCO 1972–75 Geological World Atlas (1:10,000,000; sheet 8). UNESCO. Vail, J.R. 1974 Distribution of Nubian Sandstone Formation in Sudan and Vicinity. Bulletin of the American Association of Petroleum Geologists 58(6):1025–36. ———— 1978 Outline of the Geology and Mineral Deposits of the Democratic Republic of the Sudan and Adjacent Areas. Overseas Geology and Mineral Resources No. 49, Institute of Geological Sciences, London. Whiteman, A.J. 1971 The Geology of the Sudan Republic. Clarendon Press. Williams, M.A.J. and F.M. Williams 1980 Evolution of the Nile Basin. In The Sahara and the Nile: Quaternary Environments and Prehistoric Occupation in Northern Africa, ed. M.A.J. Williams and H. Faure, pp. 207–24. A.A. Balkema. Williams, M.A.J., F.M. Williams, G.A.T. Duller, R.N. Munro, O.A.M. El Tom, T.T. Barrows, M. Macklin, J. Woodward, M.R. Talbot, D. Haberlah, and J. Fluin 2010 Late Quaternary Floods and Droughts in the Nile Valley, Sudan: New Evidence from Optically Stimulated Luminescence and AMS Radiocarbon Dating. Quaternary Science Reviews 29:1116–37. Yassin, A.A., F.A. Khalil, and A.G. El Shafie 1984 Explanatory Note to the Geological Map at the Scale of 1:2,000,000 of the Democratic Republic of the Sudan. Geological and Mineral Resources Department Bulletin No. 35. Ministry of Energy and Mining, Khartoum.

chapter 4

Hol ocen e En v ironm en ts i n Northeast A fr ica Martin Williams

Introduction This chapter concerns Holocene environments in NE Africa but mention is also made of late Pleistocene environments to provide a broader temporal context (Table 4.1). The Holocene Epoch spans the last 11,700 years (11.7 ka)1 of geological time. It follows the Pleistocene Epoch (2.58 Ma to 11.7 ka). Pleistocene and Holocene together comprise the Quaternary Period. A proposal exists to divide the Holocene Epoch into three: Early, Middle, and Late, with suggested boundaries at 8.2 ka and 4.2 ka (Williams 2014:32), a proposal we follow here (Table 4.1). Our primary geographical focus is the Nile valley between Khartoum and Aswan, but we also discuss the deserts west and east of the main Nile because there were close prehistoric links between river and desert. Butzer (1976) provided an early, comprehensive, and still useful analysis of the interactions between human occupation and environmental changes in the region north of Aswan, in which he wisely cautioned against over-facile attempts at environmental determinism. The Nile is the longest river in the world (6,670 km). Three major tributaries provide the Nile with water and sediment: the Blue Nile, the Atbara, and the White Nile (Fig. 4.1). The Blue Nile joins the White Nile at Khartoum to form the main Nile, which then flows north through the eastern Sahara until joined by the Atbara 320 km downstream, after which no additional tributaries contribute to the Nile’s flow during its 2,689 km journey until it reaches the Mediterranean 256 km north of Cairo.

64   Martin Williams Table 4.1  Pleistocene Epoch and Holocene Epoch Sub-divisions (after Williams 2014) Pleistocene: 2.58 Ma to 11.7 ka Early Holocene: 11.7–8.2 ka Middle Holocene: 8.2–4.2 ka Late Holocene: 4.2–0 ka

The White Nile flows from the lake plateau of Uganda into the vast Sudd swamps of South Sudan where about half of its water is lost to seepage and evaporation. Despite these losses, the White Nile still provides nearly 85 percent of total Nile discharge during the months of lowest flow (Fig. 4.2). Before dams were built on the Nile and its tributaries, the White Nile was responsible for maintaining perennial flow in the main Nile during years of severe drought in the Ethiopian headwaters of the Blue Nile and Atbara. In terms of their overall contribution to Nile discharge and sediment yield, the Blue Nile and Atbara respectively provide 68 percent and 22 percent of the peak flow and 72 percent and 25 percent of the annual sediment load (Fig.  4.2). Padoan et al. (2011) and Garzanti et al. (2015) provide a detailed account of the origin and nature of present-day sediments throughout the Nile basin. The Nile basin comes under the influence of three distinct climatic systems (Nicholson 1996, 2011). In the far north, the coastal strip receives sporadic rain when the Mediterranean westerly air masses shift to the south in winter. As we show later, at intervals during the Early and Middle Holocene the winter rains extended further south, allowing plants, animals, and human groups to occupy now arid localities (Arz et al. 2003; Bubenzer and Riemer 2007). The Ethiopian headwaters of the Nile receive heavy rainfall during the African monsoon, which lasts from June to September, and is responsible for the Nile summer floods. During much of the Early and Middle Holocene the African monsoon was more intense, so that floods in the Nile lasted longer and were more widespread than during the Late Holocene, when summer precipitation diminished in Ethiopia and Sudan (Lamb et al. 2007; Marshall et al. 2011). The Ugandan headwaters of the White Nile lie astride the equator, and receive heavy rainfall during the seasonal migrations of the Inter-tropical Convergence Zone (ITCZ). During the summer months the northward movement of the ITCZ brings strongly seasonal rainfall to the valleys of the White Nile and lower Blue Nile. The ITCZ seldom extends north of latitude 19°N today, but in the Early Holocene it appears to have reached 500–600 km further north in the summer, bringing rain to presently arid areas in northern Sudan, southern Egypt, and southern Libya such as Wadi Howar, Kerma, Selima Oasis, and Oyo (Ritchie et al.  1985; Haynes  1987; Ritchie and Haynes  1987; Hoelzmann 1993; Kröpelin 1993; Pachur and Altmann 1997, 2006; Zerboni 2005). Before we discuss Holocene environments in northeast Africa in detail, it is useful to consider the types of evidence that have been used to reconstruct past environmental

Holocene Environments in Northeast Africa   65 30°E

40°E

MEDITERRANEAN SEA IV cataract marshes

EGYPT

Nile

LIBYA

II

Laqiya

ar ow iH

CHAD

W ad

i el-M elk

d Wa

SEA

El-Qaab III Kerma Basin Seleim Dongola Basin

20°N

RED

I Aswan

V

IV

At ba ra

VI

KHARTOUM EI Khiday Semien Mts

Jebel Marra

So ba

SOUTH

l

ETHIOPIA

SUDAN

SUDD Ba

o Om

el-Jeb e l hr

CENTRAL AFRICAN REPUBLIC

UGANDA Lake Albert

0

250 km

500

Lake Edward

Lake Turkana KENYA

Lake Victoria

Mt Kilimanjaro Lake Challa

Figure 4.1  The Nile basin, showing localities discussed in the text.

SOMALIA

CONGO

0°N

Lake Tana

e Nil

10°N

e Blu

White Nile

SUDAN

66   Martin Williams (a)

(b) 800

millions of cu m per day

A Input from White Nile

C

B Input from Blue Nile

600

Mean water discharge 2800 m3 s–1

C Input from Atbara B

400

200

0

Suspended sediment load 120 × 108 yr–1

F

M

A

M

J

J

A

S

O

Atbara 25%

Blue Nile 56%

Blue Nile 72%

White Nile 30%

A J

Atbara 14%

N

White Nile 3%

D

month

Figure 4.2  (a) Mean monthly discharge of the Blue Nile, the White Nile, and the river Atbara, and total discharge for the main Nile, based on 1912–36 averages. After Hurst, 1957, fig. 16. (b) Mean annual suspended sediment loads and discharge for the Blue Nile, the Atbara, and the White Nile. After Woodward et al. 2007, fig. 13.11.

changes in this region Williams (2014). It is unwise to place too much confidence in only a single line of evidence, and evidence that lacks a precise and rigorous chronology is best avoided. Ideally, we need proxy evidence that is reasonably continuous through time—such as deep lake or alluvial sediments—well dated, and investigated using several independent lines of enquiry, such as isotopes, fossils, and geochemistry (see, for example, Hoelzmann et al. 2004; Williams et al. 2006; Williams 2009; Macklin et al. 2013; Woodward et al. 2015). Interpreting alluvial deposits correctly can often be difficult. For example, do the late Pleistocene gravel terraces in northern Sudan and southern Egypt indicate a more competent Nile (i.e., a river able to carry a greater and coarser sediment load) with higher rainfall in Ethiopia during the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM) (ca. 19–23 ka), as inferred by Butzer and Hansen (1968)? Or was the LGM in the Nile basin even more arid than today, as hypothesized by Fairbridge (1962, 1963, 1965), using similar alluvial evidence from Nubia? Adamson et al. (1980) resolved this dilemma by careful evaluation of the alluvial record of both the Blue Nile and the White Nile, to which we now turn.

Holocene Flood History of the Blue and White Nile Rivers In order to understand the Holocene flood history of the main Nile we need to have a very clear grasp of the flood history of the Blue and White Nile, since these rivers have long controlled floods in the main Nile. With rare exceptions (Macklin et al.  2013;

Holocene Environments in Northeast Africa   67 Woodward et al. 2015), the Holocene alluvial record in the main Nile valley is fragmentary and often poorly dated. The Blue Nile alluvial record suffers from the same problems, but to a lesser extent. However, the Holocene alluvial sediments in the lower White Nile valley are remarkably well preserved, largely because the very gentle flood gradient of that river, amounting to one cm per km, has helped to minimize post-depositional erosion. During the very late Pleistocene the Ugandan lakes that fed the upper White Nile were very low or dried out altogether (Gasse et al. 2008). As a result, there was no overflow into the White Nile, the Sudd swamps dried out, and that once great river was reduced to a seasonal trickle. Desert dunes blocked the lower course of the White Nile over a distance of nearly 400 km along both sides of the present-day channel. Previously fixed and vegetated dunes along the southern margins of the Sahara were reactivated and the southern limit of active desert dunes extended over 500 km beyond its modern limit. Since this limit roughly coincided with the 150 mm isohyet, there was a drastic reduction in precipitation across the entire southern Sahara and Sahel zone at this time, indicative of a much weaker tropical atmospheric circulation system and limited northward movement of the ITCZ. Peak aridity seems to have been synchronous with the Last Glacial Maximum (21 ± 2 ka) and soils developed at this time on the exposed lake floor sediments in both Lake Albert and Lake Victoria (Williams et al. 2006). The formation of a soil on the bed of a former lake implies that the lake remained dry for the time needed for a soil to form, in this case at least a thousand years. Lake Challa, a crater lake on the eastern flanks of Mt Kilimanjaro in Tanzania, near the White Nile Ugandan headwaters, was dry at this time (Verschuren et al. 2009). In Ethiopia, Lake Tana was also dry during the LGM (Lamb et al. 2007; Marshall et al. 2011), so that flow in the Blue Nile was severely curtailed. There were small mountain glaciers in the Semien Highlands of Ethiopia near the headwaters of the Tekezze-Atbara rivers, the moraines of which have yielded 36Cl exposure ages of 18.1 ± 0.9 ka and 15.3 ± 0.7 ka on two of the highest peaks, indicating the presence of ice at those times (Williams et al. 2015a, table 3). The mapped lower limits of cold climate periglacial solifluction deposits in the Semien Highlands of Ethiopia indicate a lowering of the upper timber line by 1,000 m and a summer temperature lowering of 4–8°C at this time (Williams et al. 1978; Hurni 1982). Periglacial solifluction is movement of soil and weathered rock downslope under the influence of episodic freezing and thawing. The hill slopes in the sparsely vegetated Semien Highlands were highly unstable at this time, providing the Blue Nile and Tekezze-Atbara with an abundance of coarse sediment in their upper catchments. The African monsoon was also much weaker at this time, so that the Blue Nile had an even more seasonal flow regime than it has today, and was probably more akin to the modern Atbara, which dries out in its lower reaches for over half the year (Fig. 4.2a), or at least did so until the Khashm el-Girba dam was completed in 1964. We can therefore envisage a late Pleistocene Blue Nile (and therefore also a late Pleistocene main Nile) very much as depicted on Fig. 4.3a: a braided bed-load stream carrying a large traction load of sand and gravel, much of which it deposited in northern Sudan and southern Egypt. The prehistoric inhabitants of Nubia later used

68   Martin Williams (a)

GLACIERS ABOVE 4200m WINTER 4°–8°C COLDER HILLSLOPES UNSTABLE FAN AGGRADATION

EROSION

TREE-LINE AT 3000m

SHORTER WET SEASON & REDUCED SUMMER RAINFALL ZERO FLOW IN WINTER WINTER DEFLATION OF CHANNEL SANDS TO FORM SOURCEBORDERING DUNES

arry ods c s u mmer flo

SOLIFLUCTION ACTIVE

nt da un b a sit epo &d

d san

SAVANA GRASSLAND REPLACES WOODLAND PEAK EROSION OF VALLEY SLOPES DURING SUMMER

MAXIMUM SOUTHWARD AND UPWARD EXTENSION OF DESERT SCRUB

NW

SE

(b)

STABLE SLOPES PROVIDE SUSPENDED-LOAD OF CLAY AND SILT

CLAY DEPOSITION ON GEZIRA FAN

EXPANSION OF MONTANE FOREST

y WEATHERING OF cla BASALTS & TUFFS nt da PES n abu LLSLO t i s I o H dep FORMATION OF RED AND

& arry ods c TATED o fl r e s u mm EGE V

BLACK CLAY SOILS

EXPANSION OF LOWLAND FOREST

SAVANA GRASSLAND

NW

SE

Figure 4.3 (a) The late Pleistocene Blue Nile. (b) The early Holocene Blue Nile. After Williams 2014, figs. 10.12 and 10.13.

some of the cherts and agates found within these gravels to fashion stone tools and ornaments such as lip plugs and pendants. The summer monsoon returned fairly suddenly to E Africa towards 15 ka. The Ugandan lakes rose and overflowed. The ice melted in Ethiopia. Lake Tana overflowed once more into the Blue Nile. The former vegetation cover became re-established in the Ethiopian Highlands. Soils developed as the volcanic rocks became rapidly weathered. The Blue Nile underwent a remarkable metamorphosis and now became a sinuous suspension load river, carrying a substantial amount of silt and clay (Fig. 4.3b). During the height of the floods the Blue Nile and main Nile overtopped their banks and levees and laid down an annual increment of silt and clay across their flood plains. Karl Butzer (1980:272–74) called this phase the “wild Nile.” At the height of the Blue Nile flood, the White Nile became ponded for some 300 km upstream of its confluence, creating a long and narrow seasonal lake.

Holocene Environments in Northeast Africa   69 The first postglacial evidence of such a lake is recorded in a widespread and now buried shell bed with radiocarbon ages of 15–14 ka (Williams et al. 2006; Williams 2009). This seasonal lake attained an elevation of 382 m, equivalent to 4.5 m above the unregulated historic high flood level of the White Nile. The Blue Nile and main Nile began to cut down into their flood plains from Middle Holocene times onwards, a process reflected in the more gradual but progressive entrenchment of the lower White Nile, whose floods attained successively lower elevations during the Middle and Late Holocene (Williams et al. 2015b). As a result of this incision, the point bars of the main Nile and its upstream tributaries were left high and dry, to provide suitable sites for prehistoric settlers, as noted below.

Holocene Environments in the Main Nile Macklin et al. (2015) provide a revealing study of Nile floods based upon a meta-analysis of the Holocene fluvial archive (floodplain and paleochannel deposits) in the entire Nile valley including the Nile delta. A comparison of cumulative probability density frequency (CPDF) plots of floodplain and paleochannel units showed an inverse relationship during the Holocene, reflecting abrupt (< 100 years) climate-related changes in flooding regime. They interpreted the CPDF plot of dated floodplain units as a record of overbank river flows within the Nile catchment, while higher values in the CPDF plot of paleochannel units they considered likely to reflect periods associated with channel abandonment and contraction, as well as transitions to prolonged, multi-centenniallength episodes of low river flow and greater aridity. Their analysis revealed a series of major changes in river discharge and channel dynamics in the Nile catchment. The White Nile alluvial record is now reasonably well dated by both radiocarbon and luminescence dating methods (Williams 2009; Williams et al. 2010, 2015a, 2015b). The Blue Nile flood record is less complete (Talbot et al.  2000; Williams  2009). Recent archaeological work led by Donatella Usai and Sandro Salvatori at El-Khiday just west of the lower White Nile has added further detail to this record (see Fig. 4.4 and Williams et al. 2015b). Since the less complete Blue Nile alluvial flood record matches the more complete flood record of the lower White Nile, we can with some confidence expect that the main Nile would have had a similar flood record. Intervals between high flood episodes would have been somewhat drier and probably characterized by channel incision, allowing better access to former swampy areas by Neolithic herders and farmers from about 8 ka onwards in Nubia. In the Sahara, the Holocene transitions from wet to dry and dry to wet climates were often very abrupt (Fontes et al. 1985), as were the lake level fluctuations recorded at Lake Challa in Tanzania, which provides a useful proxy for times of low White Nile flow (Verschuren et al.  2009). Similar sudden climatic and hydrological changes were most likely also characteristic of the Nile. The periodicity of

70   Martin Williams Ka White Nile 0

Williams et al., 2015

Blue Nile

Sh

H

H W

L

4

8 10

H W H W H W

Tropics L

2

6

L. Challa

K

H

JB K

T

Sh W W Sh W WM

H

L. Tana

H

D D

L

D

H L D

L. Albert

D

D

H

H

L. Victoria

D

H

E

L H W D W D

H L H

H

H W

12 14 16 18

L H

H

D W

W

P

ES L

D

H P

20 22

Figure 4.4  Phases of high White, Blue, and Desert Nile floods in relation to dated intervals of high and low lake levels in the Nile headwaters and evidence of drier and wetter intervals in the lower White Nile valley. H is high, L is low, D is dry phase or event, W is wet phase, E is erosion gap, and P is paleosol. Modified from Williams et al. 2015b, fig. 9.

these high flood events or phases was about 1,500 years, with shorter temporal fluctuations superimposed upon them. During the Late Holocene the Nile delta sediments show periodicities in accumulation related to El Niño Southern Oscillation events (Marriner et al.  2012), as does the historic record of Nile flows (Williams and Nottage 2006). During successive phases of reduced Nile flooding and channel incision, small bands of Mesolithic hunters, fishers, and gatherers occupied former point bars along the lower White Nile and main Nile during the wetter and warmer Early Holocene. These sandy and gravelly point bars provided well-drained seasonal occupation sites during the wet season, when the surrounding plains were waterlogged and swampy. They also provided

Holocene Environments in Northeast Africa   71 ready access to fish (especially catfish: Clariidae) trapped in the dwindling pools and swamps later in the year, and to shellfish, notably the large amphibious snail Pila wernei, which is common in many Mesolithic sites (Williams et al. 2015b). Armed with barbed bone harpoons, the hunters also caught Nile perch (Lates niloticus) as well as occasional hippos (Hippopotamus amphibius) and crocodiles (Crocodylus niloticus). Towards the end of the Early Holocene summer wet season, the seeds of many wild grasses would have been available for harvesting and grinding (Clark 1980), including Panicum turgidum, Digitaria spp., Echinochloa esculentis, and the prickly Cenchrus biflorus—a reliable famine food today in times of drought along the southern Sahara. A savanna fauna was also present in northern Sudan at this time. The far north of Sudan in the region south of the Third Cataract (Fig. 4.1) and just east of Kerma has yielded an excellent record of past environmental changes ranging in age from 10.5 ka to 3.5 ka (Honegger and Williams 2015). This region is today one of the hottest and driest areas in Sudan. The area investigated consists of a late Quaternary alluvial plain 15–20 km wide bounded to the west by the present-day channel of the Nile and to the east by the highly dissected remnants of the Mesozoic Nubian Sandstone plateau. The alluvial sediments include clays laid down during former Nile floods, local sands and gravels carried from the sandstone plateau during local flood events, and Nile sands indicative of breaches in the levees during times of extreme Nile floods. The clays contain an assemblage of freshwater Nile gastropods. The Holocene alluvial chronology is based upon Accelerator Mass Spectrometry radiocarbon (AMS 14C) ages obtained on shell and charcoal and optically stimulated luminescence (OSL) ages obtained on quartz grains. The archaeological sequence is based on over one hundred AMS 14C dates. Initial occupation in this region began about 10.5 ka, or well after the onset of a more humid climate in North Africa (Hassan  1997; deMenocal et al.  2000; Gasse  2000; Hoelzmann et al. 2004). Between 10.5 ka and 7.3 ka prehistoric settlements were confined to the eastern margins of the alluvial plain at a time of wetter regional climate evident in the soils and fauna. The first evidence of Neolithic culture appears dated to 8 ka. From 7.3 ka onwards, human pastoral groups began to settle on the alluvial plain, which had become less swampy. The population density increased throughout the 5th millennium. Towards the close of the 4th millennium, the economy evolved to include cultivation and herding, a precursor to the inception of urbanization in this region. Honegger and Williams (2015) identified two periods of relatively dense human occupation in the earlier part of the Holocene from 10 ka to 8 ka and from 7 ka to 6 ka. They recognized two significant gaps in the archaeological record at 7.5–7.1 ka and 6.0–5.4 ka, which they attributed to increasing aridity at those times. These gaps do not appear to reflect site destruction or burial, but to reflect changes in Nile flow regime linked to increased aridity. Both of these gaps were times of very low lake levels at Lake Challa, near the White Nile Ugandan headwaters (Verschuren et al. 2009). Dongola lies 40 km south of Kerma on the west bank of the Nile. The alluvial plain lying east of the North Dongola Reach of the Nile has been the focus of detailed recent

72   Martin Williams archaeological and geological enquiry. During the Early to Middle Holocene the Nile was a multi-channel system with a series of large alluvial islands. Two anabranching Nile channels (i.e., dividing and rejoining) located east of the present river conveyed high flows throughout the year and supported abundant Neolithic and later settlements scattered across the alluvial plain. These two anabranches, termed the Hawawiya and Alfreda Nile channels, joined further north (in what is today the Seleim basin) to form the Seleim Nile (Macklin et al. 2013). At intervals during the Early and Middle Holocene, the main Nile near Dongola overflowed westwards into a lake in the Qa’ab basin, which was full and relatively fresh between 9.5 ka and 7.5 ka (Williams et al. 2010). This was also a time when shallow ponds and seasonal wetlands were common west of the lower White Nile just south of Khartoum at a time when local rainfall amounted to at least 400–500 mm, or three times the present total (Ayliffe et al. 1996; Williams and Jacobsen 2011). During the Neolithic, settlements were scattered across the flood plains and across each of the anabranching Nile channel belts, indicating that flowing channels occupied a much greater area of the valley floor prior to about 5.5 ka than thereafter. The enhanced Nile flows would have encouraged widespread floodwater farming. There is some evidence in the form of an eolian unit with an OSL age of 8.2 ka intercalated between Nile flood plain clays that the end of the Early Holocene was marked by a brief reduction in Nile flow. Nile discharge remained high thereafter until about 5.5 ka when a progressive decline set in, with a major trend towards more arid conditions at about 4.4 ka. This also heralded the inception of the Kerma period, which was associated with a change in the location of occupation sites to along the channel margins rather than out on the alluvial plains as Nile flow diminished and the climate became drier (Macklin et al. 2013). As the climate became drier and Nile flow diminished during the Late Holocene these channels were progressively abandoned and became silted up with a mixture of alluvial and eolian sediments. Detailed analysis of the strontium and neodymium isotopic composition of alluvial and eolian sediments within this area has revealed that local wadis were active during the Early and Middle Holocene, while reworked eolian sand and dust became an increasingly important component of the Nile alluvial load during the Late Holocene (Woodward et al. 2015). These results have been independently confirmed by Ehrmann et al. (2016) who analyzed the changes in clay mineral composition in sediments from a core in the eastern Mediterranean. The isotopic composition of the Nile flood plain sediments has varied throughout the Holocene in response to major changes in sediment sources and regional climate. During the Early Holocene, local wadis along the main Nile provided up to and sometimes in excess of half the sediment load transported by the Nile north of Khartoum. As the climate became drier, most notably during the Late Holocene from about 4.2 ka onwards, the local wadis provided less and less sediment to the Nile and the influx of eolian sands and dust increased. Throughout the Holocene there was always a significant sediment supply from the Ethiopian headwaters of the Blue Nile and Atbara.

Holocene Environments in Northeast Africa   73 The Lower Wadi Howar flowed through a region with abundant groundwater springs and local lakes between 9.5 ka and 4.5 ka, and supported a varied savanna fauna (Pachur and Kröpelin, 1997). Throughout the Holocene there was always a significant sediment supply from the Ethiopian headwaters of the Blue Nile and Atbara. A large lake remained full and fresh north of Middle Wadi Howar between 9400 and 3800 14C yr BP (Hoelzmann et al. 2004; these dates are uncalibrated because of large and variable reservoir effects). It is probable that Wadi Muqaddam and Wadi el-Melik also ceased to flow to the Nile by about 4.5 ka, as, no doubt, did the now dry wadis which rise in the Red Sea Hills and once brought water and sediment to the Nile. The White Nile does not appear to have contributed very much to the Nile sediment load, for which there are several reasons. The primary reason is that the Sudd swamps in South Sudan operate as a gigantic biogeochemical filter, so that much of the White Nile sediment load remained trapped within the swamps, just as it does today. A second reason concerns the flood dynamics of the White Nile. During the onset of the Blue Nile floods, water in the unregulated White Nile was ponded for several hundred kilometers upstream, leading to sediment deposition within the seasonal lake. Finally, when unrestrained White Nile flow to the main Nile resumed late in the wet season, the flood level of the Nile would be lower and overbank flooding limited, with the result that any White Nile sediments would be carried through to the Nile delta and the Mediterranean, rather than deposited on the flood plains of the main Nile.

Holocene Environments West and East of the Main Nile The eastern Sahara is crisscrossed by a series of long defunct Late Cenozoic drainage channels, some of which were briefly re-activated during wetter phases in the Early and Middle Holocene, when they were occupied by small bands of Mesolithic and Neolithic people (McHugh et al. 1989). Kuper and Kröpelin (2006) have since reviewed all the radiocarbon ages from 150 prehistoric archaeological sites located in the now hyper-arid eastern Sahara (Egypt, Sudan, Libya, Chad) that span the last 12 ka. They plotted the sites of different ages in a series of maps and concluded that initial human occupation in this region was associated with the rapid inception of humid conditions by 10.5 ka, followed in due course by a movement away from the desert into the Nile valley triggered by gradual climatic desiccation in the eastern Sahara after 7.3 ka. They inferred that the end of what they termed the Holocene Humid Optimum was diachronous, with wetter conditions persisting much later in the more southerly latitudes of the Sahara, as in the Laqiya area and in Wadi Howar. The concept of a time-transgressive advance and

74   Martin Williams retreat of the ITCZ is not new, and was proposed by Haynes (1987) over three decades ago, but Kuper and Kröpelin (2006) were the first to provide such detailed archaeological site evidence from a wide geographical region of the eastern Sahara. One anomalous feature of their fig. 2 is the apparent absence of sites dating from 10 ka to 7 ka to the south of latitude 20.7°N, which does not appear to reflect the true state of affairs at that time (Williams et al. 2010; Williams and Jacobsen 2011; Williams et al. 2015b). Hamdan and Brook (2015) provide new information on late Pleistocene and Holocene wetter periods in the Sinai Desert and Eastern Desert of Egypt, based on radiocarbon dating and stable isotopic analysis of spring tufa deposits. Tufas are deposits of calcium carbonate that form at the outlet of springs or along waterfalls. Their presence denotes wetter conditions during their time of formation. This study contains important new data from a region bordering the lower Nile basin from which there are relatively few well-dated late Quaternary sites, in contrast to the better-studied Western Desert region of Egypt. The tufas were deposited by springs draining perched ground water bodies. They concluded that the tufas developed during two distinctly wetter phases in the Early to Middle Holocene (12–6.7 ka) and Late Pleistocene (31–22.5 ka). The late Pleistocene tufas have δ18O values that are more depleted than the corresponding Holocene values. The authors infer from this and other data that during the late Pleistocene the tufas were fed by shallow ground waters replenished from precipitation derived from the Mediterranean at a time when colder temperatures over Europe had driven the westerly wind belt further south. They conclude that the Holocene precipitation was associated with the Indian Ocean summer monsoon.

Summary and Conclusions During the Early (11.7–8.2 ka) and Middle Holocene (8.2–4.2 ka) the climate was far less arid than today across the Nile basin, including Nubia, albeit with sporadic dry phases. Climatic desiccation set in during the Late Holocene (4.2 ka to present), with minor wet phases. White Nile flood levels were high at 14.7–13.1 ka, 9.7–9.0 ka, 7.9–7.6 ka, 6.3 ka, and 3.2–2.8 ka. The less continuous Blue Nile record shows high flood levels at 13.9–13.2 ka, 8.6 ka, 7.7 ka, and 6.3 ka. Intervals when the Nile flow regime was apparently shifting from high to low flow and flood plain incision have provisional ages of ca. 8.15–7.75 ka, 6.4–6.15 ka, 5.7–5.45 ka, 4.7–4.25 ka, 3.35–2.9 ka, 2.8–2.55 ka, and 1600 ce. In the Kerma area of Nubia there were two periods of relatively dense human occupation in the earlier part of the Holocene from 10 ka to 8 ka and from 7 ka to 6 ka, with two significant gaps in the archaeological record at 7.5–7.1 ka and 6.0–5.4 ka, that coincided with very low levels in Lake Challa, a maar lake on the eastern flank of Mt Kilimanjaro, near the Ugandan headwaters of the White Nile.

Holocene Environments in Northeast Africa   75

Note 1. Ages are cited as ka, equivalent to thousands of calendar years. 14C ages are given as calibrated ages before present, where present is 1950. Luminescence ages are calendar years.

References Cited Adamson, D.A., F. Gasse, F.A. Street, and M.A.J. Williams 1980 Late Quaternary History of the Nile. Nature 287:50–55. Arz, H.W., F. Lamy, J. Pätzold, P.J. Müller, and M. Prins 2003 Mediterranean Moisture Source for an Early-Holocene Humid Period in the Northern Red Sea. Science 300:18–121. Ayliffe, D., M.A.J.  Williams, and F.  Sheldon 1996 Stable Carbon and Oxygen Isotopic Composition of Early-Holocene Gastropods from Wadi Mansurab, North-Central Sudan. The Holocene 6:157–69. Bubenzer, O. and H. Riemer 2007 Holocene Climatic Change and Human Settlement between the Central Sahara and the Nile Valley: Archaeological and Geomorphological Results. Geoarchaeology 22:607–20. Butzer, K.W. 1976 Early Hydraulic Civilization in Egypt: A Study in Cultural History. University of Chicago Press. ——— 1980 Pleistocene History of the Nile Valley in Egypt and Lower Nubia. In The Sahara and the Nile: Quaternary Environments and Prehistoric Occupation In Northern Africa, ed. M.A.J Williams and H. Faure, pp. 253–80. A.A. Balkema. Butzer, K.W. and C.L. Hansen 1968 Desert and River in Nubia: Geomorphology and Prehistoric Environments at the Aswan Reservoir. University of Wisconsin Press. Clark, J.D. 1980 Human Populations and Cultural Adaptations in the Sahara and Nile ­during  Prehistoric Times. In The Sahara and the Nile: Quaternary Environments and Prehistoric Occupation in Northern Africa, ed. M.A.J Williams and H. Faure, pp. 527–82. A.A. Balkema. deMenocal, P., J. Ortiz, T. Guilderson, J. Adkins, M. Sarnthein, L. Baker, and M. Yarusinsky 2000 Abrupt Onset and Termination of the African Humid Period: Rapid Responses to Gradual Insolation Forcing. Quaternary Science Reviews 19:347–61. Ehrmann, W., G. Schmiedl, M. Seidel, S. Krüger, and H. Schulz 2016 A Distal 140 kyr Sediment Record of Nile Discharge and East African Monsoon Variability. Climate of the Past 12:713–27. Fairbridge, R.W. 1962 New Radiocarbon Dates of Nile Sediments. Nature 196:108–10. ——— 1963 Nile Sedimentation above Wadi Halfa during the Last 20,000 years. Kush 11:96–107. ——— 1965 Eiszeitklima in Nordafrika. Geologische Rundschau 54:399–414. Fontes, J.-C., F. Gasse, Y. Callot, J.-C. Plaziat, P. Carbonel, P.-A. Dupeuple, and I. Kaczmarska 1985 Freshwater to Marine-like Environments from Holocene Lakes in Northern Sahara. Nature 317:608–10. Garzanti, E., S.  Andò, M.  Padoan, G.  Vezzoli, and A.  El Kammar 2015 The Modern Nile Sediment System: Processes and Products. Quaternary Science Reviews 130:9–56. Gasse, F. 2000 Hydrological Changes in the African Tropics since the Last Glacial Maximum. Quaternary Science Reviews 19:189–211.

76   Martin Williams Gasse, F., F. Chalié, A. Vincens, M.A.J. Williams, and D. Williamson 2008 Climatic Patterns in Equatorial and Southern Africa from 30,000 to 10,000 Years Ago Reconstructed from Terrestrial and Near-shore Proxy Data. Quaternary Science Reviews 27:2316–40. Hamdan, M.A., and G.A. Brook 2015 Timing and Characteristics of Late Pleistocene and Holocene Wetter Periods in the Eastern Desert and Sinai of Egypt, based on 14C Dating and Stable Isotope Analysis of Spring Tufa Deposits, Quaternary Science Reviews 130:168–88. Hassan, F.A. 1997 Holocene Palaeoclimates of Africa. African Archaeological Review 14:213–30. Haynes, C.V., Jr. 1987 Holocene Migration Rates of the Sudano-Sahelian Wetting Front, Arba’in Desert, Eastern Sahara. In Prehistory of Arid North Africa: Essays in Honour of Fred Wendorf, ed. A.E. Close, pp. 69–84. Southern Methodist University. Hoelzmann, P. 1993 Holozäne Limnite im NW-Sudan. Doctoral dissertation, Freie Universität, Berlin. Hoelzmann, P., F. Gasse, L.M. Dupont, U. Salzmann, M. Staubwasser, D.C. Leuschner, and F. Sirocko 2004 Palaeoenvironmental Changes in the Arid and Subarid Belt (Sahara-SahelArabian Peninsula) from 150 kyr to Present. In Past Climate Variability through Europe and Africa, ed. R.W. Battarbee, F. Gasse, and C.E. Stickley, pp. 219–56. Springer. Honegger, M. and M. Williams 2015 Human Occupations and Environmental Changes in the Nile Valley during the Holocene: The Case of Kerma in Upper Nubia (Northern Sudan). Quaternary Science Reviews 130:141–54. Hurni, H. 1982 Hochgebirge von Semien: Äthiopien. Klima und Dynamik der Höhenstufung von der letzten Kaltzeit bis zur Gegenwart. Geographica Bernensia G 13, Beiheft 7 zum Jahrbuch der Geographischen Gesellschaft von Bern. Hurst, H.E. 1957 The Nile: A General Account of the River and the Utilisation of its Waters, 2nd edition. Constable. Kröpelin, S. 1993 Zur Rekonstruktion der spätquartären Umwelt am Unteren Wadi Howar (Südöstliche Sahara/NW Sudan). Berliner Geographische Abhandlungen 54:1–193. Kuper, R. and Kröpelin, S. 2006 Climate-controlled Holocene Occupation in the Sahara: Motor of Africa’s Evolution. Science 313:803–807. Lamb, H.F., C.R. Bates, P.V. Coombes, M.H. Marshall, M. Umer, S.J. Davies, and E. Dejen 2007 Late Pleistocene Desiccation of Lake Tana, Source of the Blue Nile. Quaternary Science Reviews 26:287–99. Macklin, M.G., W.H.J Toonen, J.C.  Woodward, M.A.J.  Williams, C.  Flaux, N.  Marriner, K. Nicoll, G. Verstraeten, N. Spencer, and D. Welsby 2015 A New Model of River Dynamics, Hydroclimatic Change and Human Settlement in the Nile Valley Derived from Metaanalysis of the Holocene Fluvial Archive. Quaternary Science Reviews 130:109–23. Macklin, M.G., J.C. Woodward, D.A. Welsby, G.A.T. Duller, F.M. Williams, and M.A.J. Williams 2013 Reach-scale River Dynamics Moderate the Impact of Rapid Holocene Climate Change on Floodwater Farming in the Desert Nile. Geology 41:695–98. Marriner, N., C. Flaux, D. Kaniewski, C. Morhange, G. Leduc, V. Moron, Z. Chen, F. Gasse, J.-Y. Emereur, and J.-D. Stanley 2012 ITCZ and ENSO-like Modulation of Nile Delta Hydrogeomorphology during the Holocene. Quaternary Science Reviews 45:73–84. Marshall, M.H., H.F. Lamb, D. Huws, S.J. Davies, R. Bates, J. Bloemendal, J. Boyle, M.J. Leng, M. Umer, and C. Bryant 2011 Late Pleistocene and Holocene Drought Events at Lake Tana, the Source of the Blue Nile. Global and Planetary Change 78:147–61.

Holocene Environments in Northeast Africa   77 McHugh, W.P., G.G. Schaber, C.S. Breed, and J.F. McCauley 1989 Neolithic Adaptation and the Holocene Functioning of Tertiary Palaeodrainages in Southern Egypt and Northern Sudan. Antiquity 63:320–36. Nicholson, S.E. 1996 A Review of Climate Dynamics and Climate Variability in Eastern Africa. In The Limnology, Climatology and Paleoclimatology of the East African Lakes, ed. T.C. Johnson and E.O. Odada, pp. 25–56. Gordon and Breach. ——— 2011 Dryland Climatology. Cambridge University Press. Pachur, H.-J. and N. Altmann 1997 The Quaternary (Holocene, ca. 8000a BP). In PalaeogeographicPalaeotectonic Atlas of North-Eastern Africa, Arabia and Adjacent Areas: Late Neoproterozoic to Holocene, ed. H. Schandelmeier and P. O. Reynolds, pp. 111–25. A.A. Balkema. ——— 2006 Die Ostsahara im Spätquartär: Ökosystemwandel im größten hyperariden Raum der Erde. Springer. Padoan, M., E. Garzanti, Y. Harlavan, and I.M. Villa 2011 Tracing Nile Sediment Sources by Sr and Nd Isotope Signatures (Uganda, Ethiopia, Sudan). Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 75:3627–44. Ritchie, J.C., C.H. Eyles, and C.V. Haynes 1985 Sediment and Pollen Evidence for an Early to Mid-Holocene Humid Period in the Eastern Sudan. Nature 314:352–55. Ritchie, J.C. and C.V.  Haynes 1987 Holocene Vegetation Zonation in the Eastern Sahara. Nature 330:645–47. Talbot, M. R., M. A. J. Williams, and D. A. Adamson 2000 Strontium Isotope Evidence for Late Pleistocene Reestablishment of an Integrated Nile Drainage Network. Geology 28:343–46. Verschuren, D., J.S.  Sinninghe Damsté, J.  Moernaut, I.  Kristen, M.  Blaauw, M.  Fagot, G.H. Haug, CHALLACEA project members 2009 Half-precessional Dynamics of Monsoon Rainfall near the East African Equator. Nature 462:637–41. Williams, M.A.J. 2009 Late Pleistocene and Holocene Environments in the Nile Basin. Global and Planetary Change 69:1–15. ——— 2014 Climate Change in Deserts: Past, Present and Future. Cambridge University Press. Williams, M.A.J., G.A.T.  Duller, F.M.  Williams, M.G.  Macklin, J.C.  Woodward, O.A.M.  El Tom, R.N. Munro, Y. El Hajaz, and T.T. Barrows 2015a Causal Links between Nile Floods and Eastern Mediterranean Sapropel Formation during the Past 125 kyr Confirmed by OSL and Radiocarbon Dating of Blue and White Nile Sediments. Quaternary Science Reviews 130:89–108. Williams, M.A.J. and G.E. Jacobsen 2011 A Wetter Climate in the Desert of Northern Sudan 9900–7600 years ago. Sahara 22:7–14. Williams, M.A.J. and J. Nottage 2006 Impact of Extreme Rainfall in the Central Sudan during 1999 as a Partial Analogue for Reconstructing Early Holocene Prehistoric Environments. Quaternary International 150:82–94. Williams, M.A.J., F.A. Street, and F.M. Dakin 1978 Fossil Periglacial Deposits in the Semien Highlands, Ethiopia. Erdkunde 32:40–46. Williams, M.A.J., M. Talbot, P. Aharon, Y. Abdl Salaam, F. Williams, and K.I. Brendeland 2006 Abrupt Return of the Summer Monsoon 15,000 years ago: New Supporting Evidence from the Lower White Nile Valley and Lake Albert. Quaternary Science Reviews 25:2651–65. Williams, M.A.J., D. Usai, S. Salvatori, F.M. Williams, A. Zerboni, L. Maritan, V. Linseele 2015b Late Quaternary Environments and Prehistoric Occupation in the Lower White Nile Valley, Central Sudan. Quaternary Science Reviews 130:72–88.

78   Martin Williams Williams, M.A.J, F.M. Williams, G.A.T. Duller, R.N. Munro. O.A.M. El Tom, T.T. Barrows, M. Macklin, J. Woodward, M.R. Talbot, D. Haberlah, and J. Fluin 2010 Late Quaternary Floods and Droughts in the Nile Valley, Sudan: New Evidence from Optically Stimulated Luminescence and AMS Radiocarbon Dating. Quaternary Science Reviews 29:1116–37. Woodward, J., M. Macklin, L. Fielding, I. Millar, N. Spencer, D. Welsby, and M. Williams 2015 Shifting Sediment Sources in the World’s Longest River: A Strontium Isotope Record for the Holocene Nile. Quaternary Science Reviews 130:124–40. Woodward, J.C., M.G. Macklin, M.D. Krom, and M.A.J. Williams 2007 The Nile: Evolution, Quaternary River Environments and Material Fluxes. In Large Rivers: Geomorphology and Management, ed. A. Gupta, pp. 261–92. Wiley. Zerboni, A. 2005 Cambiamenti climatici olocenici nel Sahara central: nuovi archive paleoambientali. Doctoral dissertation, University of Milan.

pa rt I I

N U BI A : A DE E P H ISTORY

chapter 5

Pa l eolithic H u n terGather ers of N u bi a Mirosław Masojć

Introduction Nubia is a geographical region situated in Sudan and Egypt, between Aswan and Khartoum, cut in the middle by the Nile (Fig. 5.1). Even though this study is devoted to Nubia, frequent references to the neighboring areas, especially Upper Egypt (north of the First Cataract), are necessary due to the coherence of the occurring phenomena. This chapter briefly discusses the history of presence of the Homo species in Nubia in the Pleistocene (cf. Table 3.1 in this volume). The turning point for the studies of the Pleistocene/Paleolithic in Nubia was the Nubia Salvage Campaign in the 1960s, when the Combined Prehistoric Expedition (CPE) excavating the area between the First and Second Cataracts proved its significance for the prehistory of the Old World (Wendorf ed. 1965, 1968a).1 Yet a number of monographs devoted to the Old Stone Age in that area were published even earlier. The most important are Arkell’s work (1949) devoted to Sudan and Caton-Thompson’s study (1952) of Upper Egypt. Further work carried out by the CPE and a Belgian research team headed by P. M. Vermeersch and P. Van Peer both in Nubia and Upper Egypt resulted in a number of monographs considerably expanding our knowledge of hunter-gatherers in this area and the paleo-environment in which they functioned (Wendorf and Schild 1976, 1986; Schild and Wendorf 1981; Wendorf et al. 1993; Gamal el Deen Idris 1994; Van Peer et al. 2010; Vermeersch ed. 2000, 2002). Field studies of the Paleolithic in Nubia continue (e.g., Abbate et al.  2010; Masojć  2010; Gautier et al.  2012; Osypiński and Osypińska 2015; Osypińska and Osypiński 2016; Masojć et al. 2017; Olszewski et al. 2017; Kobusiewicz et al. 2018; Spinapolice et al. 2018; Beyin et al. 2019; Usai 2019; Garcea 2020; Masojć et al. 2020; Usai 2020).

82   Mirosław Masojć

Figure 5.1  Main Palaeolithic sites from Nubia and Upper Egypt mentioned in the text. Map: Samuel Burns.

Pre-Acheulean Even though East Africa is considered the cradle of civilization with its core in the East African Rift where the oldest Plio-Pleistocene Oldowan (Semaw et al.  2003) and Lomekwian (Harmand et al. 2015) sites have been identified, archaeological sites from Nubia chronologically preceding younger phases of Acheulean (older than 0.6 Ma) have only occasionally been reported. Artifacts collected on the surface identified by R. Schild as possibly Oldowan come from the southern part of the Western Desert of Egypt. Several heavily abraded choppers, bifacial discoidal specimens as well as a dozen flakes were collected from a thin mantle of lag gravel covering the remnant pediment sandstone ridge near Gebel Nabta. The assemblage’s age precedes early Acheulean, which is substantiated by geomorphological evidence of the site’s location and the artifacts’ morphology (Schild 2009).

Paleolithic Hunter-Gatherers of Nubia   83 Three sites from the area of Kaddanarti and Kabrinarti in the vicinity of the Third Cataract also yielded stone finds and bone remains discovered in coarse pebble layers, which were determined to be Lower Paleolithic and as such preceding Acheulean (Chaix et al. 2000). However, their stratigraphic position was not precisely recorded and the discoverers themselves determined it as secondary. The excavated bones, belonging to, for example, hippopotamus, large bovid, and antelopes, are considerably mineralized. The accompanying collection of eroded stone products from brown flint and petrified wood consists of many flakes and tools, of which choppers are especially interesting. The discoverers determined the finds as potentially related to the Developed Oldowan, but considering the uncertain stratigraphic situation and the fact that pebble tools occur in Africa practically throughout prehistory, their thesis needs to be verified. This is also corroborated by the presence of a Levallois core of Nubian type (a core related to the Middle Stone Age) in the assemblage from Kaddanarti. The choppers discovered in the upper reaches of the Atbara River in the area of Khashm el-Girba, such as site no. 102 in Khor Turk (Chmielewski 1987), are much better documented. Subsequent excavations in the area resulted in further discoveries of pebble tools predominating over hand-axes, like site 047 (Abbate et al. 2010). However, the choppers from the sites in the area of Khashm el-Girba seem to be connected with Acheulean, even more so that the so-called Developed Oldowan B (of the separated phases A, B, C) is recently interpreted as practically Acheulean (Semaw et al. 2009). To sum up, in Nubia there is no convincing evidence of Plio-Pleistocene hominin activity preceding Acheulean, that is, that connected with Mode 1 of Clark (1969) (compare also modified techno-typological characterization for Sahara of Clark’s “Mode” nomenclature by Cancellieri et al. 2016).

Acheulean Industrial Complex Hand-axes, cleavers, and other large cutting tools represent typical Acheulean products (i.e., Mode 2 of Clark 1969). Acheulean is present across most of Africa. A recently proposed division of Acheulean arbitrarily divides it into three phases: Early (1.75–1.0 Ma), Middle (~1.0–0.6 Ma), and Late (~0.6–0.3 Ma) (Sahnouni et al. 2013), but younger sites dated to 0.3–0.2 Ma are also registered. The period of functioning of Acheulean corresponds to the time of functioning of H.  erectus (ergaster) and H.  Heidelbergensis in Africa. Early Acheulean sites with paleolontological remains are situated barely several hundred kilometers south of Nubia. The skull from Buia, dated to ca. 1 Ma and related to Homo ergaster found surrounded by numerous Acheulean sites (Abbate et al.  1998), comes from Eritrea neighboring with Nubia. To the north of the East African Rift and numerous sites in Kenya, Ethiopia, and Eritrea, Acheulean sites are few and rarely dated. Dated Acheulean from Nubia belongs to the late phase, or possibly the end of the middle phase. Older Acheulean sites are estimated on the basis of direct techno-typological premises or the condition of their artifacts. Eroded surficial collections predominate.

84   Mirosław Masojć The site in Khor Abu Anga (Arkell 1949) discovered in the 1940s represents classic sites of Nubian Acheulean in the Nile valley. Some of the products from the many thousands of the collection’s artifacts were found in the stratigraphic context, which was corroborated by subsequent research (Carlson and Sigsted 1967). Stratigraphic sequence is also displayed by site 8-B-11 on Sai Island, which contains a Late Acheulean assemblage with fresh large lanceolate hand-axes interstratified with Sangoan horizons from the Middle Stone Age (MSA) (Van Peer et al. 2003). The Acheulean horizon was covered by eolian sands dated by OSL to ca. 220 ka. Following the Nile, in the vicinity of the Second Cataract, where intensive rescue excavations were carried out in connection with the construction of the Aswan High Dam, a number of late Acheulean sites were excavated in the area of Wadi Halfa; unfortunately the sites were not dated and lacked appropriate context (Wendorf ed. 1968a). Site Arkin 8 with a dense collection of artifacts deposited in situ under a thick layer of sandy gravel wadi deposits (Chmielewski 1968) is exceptional among them. It yielded the main concentration of Acheulean artifacts determined as a “living floor” surrounded by a few sub-concentrations. Chmielewski perceived the absence of cleavers and a wide range of chopping tools or ovates (20 percent of the assemblage) as essential for determining the site’s character. None of the remaining Nubian Acheulean sites from the Nile valley (e.g., Nag Ahmed el-Khalifa) is situated in its original position (Vermeersch et al. 2000; Vermeersch 2010). The forming of the Atbara River considerably contributed to the dispersion of Acheulean tradition towards the north during the Middle Pleistocene. The Acheulean sites from the region of Khashm el-Girba in the upper reaches of the river were already mentioned by Arkell (1949). Their stratigraphic context was presented by Chmielewski (1987) and later by Abbate (Abbate et al. 2010). Abbate’s research shows that a 50 m thick Pleistocene fluvial succession is extensively exposed in the area along the Atbara River from Khashm el-Girba to Halfa el-Jadida. Vertebrate remains and many Acheulean artifacts were found in the sediments from late Early Pleistocene to early Middle Pleistocene (before MIS 72). Site 047 yielded hand-axes, retouched choppers, flakes and blanks. The occurrence of E. recki recki (a large elephant species, now extinct) and H. cf. gorgops (a large hippopotamus species, also now extinct) along with associated Acheulean artifacts point to an Early Pleistocene date. The Atbara Acheulean artifacts are similar to those found in Buia in Eritrea (Martini et al. 2004), and could be associated with African Homo erectus/ergaster, while younger, MSA lithic industries were manufactured by H. sapiens. It is possible that throughout the Pleistocene, both hunter species were using the Atbara area and its northward prolongation along the Nile valley as a wide settlement territory and a bridgehead towards Eurasia. In the deserts surrounding the Nile, Acheulean was identified in oases and near paleolakes and water springs. In the north of Nubia, pioneering research was carried out in Kharga Oasis (Caton-Thompson 1952) and Dakhla Oasis (Schild and Wendorf 1981). In Dakhla Oasis, the Acheulean material was found around artesian springs, which originally were lakes surrounded by vegetation and filled with warm water. Acheulean settlement around the lakes was permanent and may have lasted for millennia. The artifacts (sites E-72-1 and E-72-2) were deposited on the surface around the wells and in their

Paleolithic Hunter-Gatherers of Nubia   85

Figure 5.2  Rhyolite Acheulean artifacts from EDAR sites: (a–c) cleavers from EDAR 6; (d–f) handaxes (d–e) and massif flake (f) for cleaver production from EDAR 133. (A) EDAR 135, trench within miner's shaft. Exploration of an Acheulean horizon dated by OSL to MIS 7. (B) Acheulean artifacts in situ within Unit I at EDAR 7 within a gold mine. Photographs: M.  Jórdeczka, M. Masojć.

shafts. Late Acheulean from a spring conduit, named K-10 from Kharga Oasis, displays considerable similarities to assemblage E-72-1 from Dakhla Oasis, with backed and double backed bifaces. Substantial differences, mainly consisting in absence of ovates, bifaces, and chopping tools, may be seen in relation to site Arkin 8 (Chmielewski 1968),

86   Mirosław Masojć which points out distinct taxonomic differences in the Nubian material. Analogous Acheulean evidence was discovered in the Bir Sahara depression, where artesian wells with the accompanying Acheulean material occurred at site BS-14 (dated to ca. 310 ka). The co-occurring faunal remains, which included ostrich and donkey or zebra, point out to the savanna landscape (Schild and Wendorf 1981; Hill and Schild 2017). Acheulean sites situated in the original stratigraphic contexts were recently discovered by the EDAR (Eastern Desert Atbara River) project in the exposed areas of the gold mines in the Eastern Desert in the lower reaches of the Atbara. Preliminary results of the excavations carried out in the sites situated ca. 70 km from the town of Atbara identified the settlement as Late Acheulean occurring in the fluvial environment of many braided river channels (Masojć et al. 2019). As far as typological features are concerned, a numerous group of cleavers among the bifacial tools is of interest (Fig. 5.2). The sites are situated within big Wadi el-Arab stretching from the Red Sea Mountains. This newly discovered agglomeration of stratified Late Acheulean sites, dated so far to MIS 9-7 by OSL method, is perhaps the evidence of one of the directions of hominins migration towards Eurasia, which may have run downstream along the Atbara towards the Red Sea and then either along the coast towards the north to the Sinai Peninsula or southwards to the Bab-el-Mandeb Strait.3 The Acheulean in Nubia is still poorly researched. Individual excavated sites are styl­ is­ti­cally diversified. The sites discovered on the Atbara constitute a link between Nubia and the cradle of Acheulean and possibly determine the routes of its expansion along the still forming Atbara northwards and perhaps eastwards towards the Red Sea. The Acheulean in Nubia is dated to its late phase, possibly the end of the middle phase in the case of the sites from the area on the upper reaches of the Atbara. In terms of paleomagnetic chronology, the Nubian Acheulean belongs to the Brunhes period (not older than 0.78 Ma).

Middle Stone Age The Middle Stone Age (MSA) includes flake tool industries, which succeed Acheulean but precede blade-based microlithic industries of the Upper/Later Stone Age. The absence of hand-axes and cleavers and the employment of the Levallois prepared core technique as well as a variety of flake-tool forms are some of the dominant features of these cultures. According to the latest research, the emergence of the oldest African MSA assemblages (i.e., Mode 3 of Clark 1969) coincides with the appearance of anatomically modern humans. So far it was thought that the moment of appearance of H. sapiens should be dated to ca. 200 ka–ca. 100 ka later than the oldest MSA assemblages known from East Africa (Schild and Wendorf  2005; McBrearty and Tryon  2006). Thermoluminescence dating of the layers containing the remains of H. sapiens as well as the accompanying Levallois artifacts from Jebel Irhoud in Morocco indicate the range of 350–300 ka and overlap with the oldest dating of Levallois sites in Ethiopia, Kenya, and

Paleolithic Hunter-Gatherers of Nubia   87 southern Africa (Richter et al. 2017). The layers did not yield the forms characteristic for Acheulean, which proves that ca. 300 ka ago Levallois technology was present in various parts of Africa and was a product of the oldest anatomically modern Homo. The distribution of the culture package by early H. sapiens on the supra-regional scale was possible due to humid periods considerably reducing the Sahara and forming “green corridors” in Middle Pleistocene ca. 330 ka ago and also periodically later, in 285, 240, 215, 195, and 170 ka (Larrasona et al. 2013). There are dated sites determining the oldest phases of the Middle Stone Age in two regions of Nubia. In the island of Sai in northern Sudan (site 8-B-11) there is evidence of concurrently existing Acheulean groups and early MSA groups identified as Sangoan. These two material cultures were produced contemporaneously by the groups who occupied the same land surfaces in the period around 200 ka ago (Van Peer et al. 2003). Sangoan is primarily characterized by the presence of bifacial technology in the form of core-axes (symmetric, oval forms made with a hard hammerstone), which differ distinctly from hand-axes (Van Peer 2016). Three horizons with the Sangoan material were identified in the horizons dated to 220–150 ka ago. Subsequent, younger horizons contained the artifacts attributed to the Lupemban-related Nubian Complex assemblages containing characteristic thin bifacial foliates. Presence of red and yellow ochre in the Sangoan horizons may constitute the evidence of extra-utilitarian activity. A long sequence of occupation by MSA communities, beginning in the first humid period after the Acheulean settlement was recorded in the Egyptian part of Nubia, in the Bir Tarfawi and Bir Sahara East depressions situated ca. 400 km west of Aswan (Wendorf and Schild 1992). Both in Bir Tarfawi (sites E-86-1 and E-87-1) and in Bir Sahara East (site E-88-1), the oldest MSA settlement precedes Middle-Pleistocene lakes and it may be dated to 240–250 ka (Wendorf et al.  1993). An MSA “Lower Levallois” site from Kharga Oasis is dated similarly—ca. 220 ka (Churcher et al.  1999). The oldest MSA assemblages are considerably morphologically diversified (e.g., presence or absence of bifacial foliates, core-axes), while the age of the oldest MSA sites (Jebel Irhoud in Morocco, Gademotta in Ethiopia) and the youngest Acheulean sites (BS-14 and Dag Dag in Egypt, Sai Island in Sudan) indicates their contemporaneity in the MIS9–MIS7 period, that is ca. 340–190 ka (Schild and Wendorf 2005). A number of taxonomic units demonstrating diversification of technology and tool structure of the collections were identified among the developed MSA assemblages. They include Mousterian (including N-group and K-group), Aterian, Nubian Middle Stone Age, and Khormusan (Van Peer 1991; Wendorf and Schild 1992). Two basic groups were identified: the Nubian Complex and the Lower Nile Valley Complex (Van Peer and Vermeersch  2000). In Nubia early MSA assemblages were replaced by the Nubian Complex during the last interglacial (MIS 5). The Nubian Complex represents a specific variant of Northeast African MSA. It stretches out along the Nile and the surrounding deserts from Egypt and Libya from the north to Ethiopia and the Horn of Africa to the south. The eastern border of the Nubian MSA appears to be the Sinai and south-eastern Arabia (Rose et al. 2011). The Nubian Complex is a distinctive type of Levallois reduction strategy intended for the production of Nubian points from triangular Nubian

88   Mirosław Masojć cores of type 1 and type 2 (Marks 1968a; Van Peer 1992). Although the evidence is still not sufficient, the early phase of the Nubian Complex appears to feature leaf-shaped foliates and Nubian end-scrapers while in the later phase Nubian cores of type 1 for the production of Nubian points are more frequent than cores of type 2 (Van Peer  2016). The Nubian Complex is commonly present in the vast areas of the Bayuda desert. Two Nubian Complex horizons dated to ca. 60–20 ka were recorded at site BP177 (Masojć et al. 2017; Masojć 2018). In the Nile valley, the Nubian Complex is accompanied by the Lower Nile Valley Complex, which differs from the Nubian Complex in the absence of the Nubian Levallois method and presence of the Safaha method (Van Peer 1998). Apart from the episodes of the Acheulean and early MSA settlement, Bir Tarfawi and Bir Sahara mentioned above include the settlement connected with the lakes functioning in these depressions during the period of 170–70 ka. The area around the lakes was at that time arid savanna or steppe, followed by the hyper-arid period lasting until ca. 11 ka (Wendorf et al.  1993). An important site for north-western Africa is Sodmein Cave located in the Eastern Desert, in the areas neighboring Nubia in the Red Sea Mountains (Vermeersch et al. 1994). A number of Nubian Complex occupation levels were identified within a sequence that extends from late Middle Pleistocene to Middle Holocene (Mercier et al. 1999; Schmidt et al. 2015). In Wadi Umm Rahau on the Fourth Cataract in Sudan, a recurrent occupation by Paleolithic hunters was confirmed on the site HP766 during the final aggradation of a Late Pleistocene silt terrace of the Nile. The hunters left behind well-preserved lithics attributable to the late MSA as well as animal remains of game killed and butchered on the site. The recovered bone remains derive almost all from large and very large game, with only a few remains of medium-sized mammals (Gautier et al. 2012). A group identified as Khormusan from type-site 1017 from Khor Musa (Marks 1968b) was separated among the numerous MSA sites from the area of Wadi Halfa in the vicinity of the Second Cataract. It is assumed that this unit, characterized by Levallois technique and widespread presence of denticulates and burins, displays close links with the assemblages from East Africa (Goder-Goldberger  2013). Several direct and indirect dates place Khormusan within MIS 3-2 (Wendorf et al.  1979) although GoderGoldberger (2013) also proposed earlier dates. Unlike the Khormusan, which utilized the Nile valley environment, another unit—identified as Aterian—tended to occupy arid areas of what is now the Sahara avoiding the Nile valley (Garcea 2012, 2013). Aterian comprises Levallois debitage, often on blades, end-scrapers, and tanged tools, including points. The presence of Aterian is confirmed in Bir Tarfawi and Bir Sahara and well documented on Nubia’s northern border in Kharga Oasis (Caton-Thompson  1952). Although the Nubian desert is considered as an eastern boundary of Aterian in Africa, there is one small concentration of Aterian lithics known from the Egyptian Nile valley from Wadi Kubbaniya (site E-78-11) (Singelton and Close 1980). Significant cultural phenomena connected with raw material exploitation took place at that time in the Nile valley, north of today’s Aswan in the vicinity of Luxor and Qena. Northeast Africa abounds in rock raw material, which was easily accessible in large

Paleolithic Hunter-Gatherers of Nubia   89 quantities for local communities. There is evidence of mining stone raw material in gravel terraces in the Nile valley at late MSA sites Nazlet Safaha and Taramsa 1, which may be generally dated to ca. 50 ka ago (Vermeersch ed. 2002). Rock was acquired in this way because high-quality material was expected, but it may also have been a consequence of demographic pressure. Extraction features in these sites reached 2 m in depth. They provided chert pebbles, which were processed at the place of their extraction. The pits were gradually widened, which with time resulted in the emergence of irregular network of trenches filled with debitage. The exploitation area at these two sites is estimated to have comprised 2 hectares and the number of extracted pebbles as several million. Considering the fact that many remains of similar extraction workshops were discovered in a stretch of several dozen kilometers on the Nile’s terrace, the number of the extracted chert blocks must have been several times greater. According to the authors, this fact proves that in the late MSA the Nile valley was densely populated (Van Peer 1998; Vermeersch 2010).

Upper/Late Paleolithic The Upper Paleolithic (i.e., Mode 4 of Clark 1969) is characterized by the onset of the blade technology with the debitage technique of the volume reducing type, replacing surface Levallois reduction that appeared ca. 40 ka ago. However, in Northeast Africa this phenomenon began earlier, possibly caused by natural phenomena enclosing on the already densely populated ecumene in the Nile valley and resulting in population pressure. This brought about the emergence of transitory assemblages at site Taramsa 1 increasing efficiency of Levallois cores and specializing in blade production. This phenomenon was determined as Taramsan (Van Peer et al.  2010). Fully fledged Upper Paleolithic assemblages were identified in Nazlet Khater 4 (Fig. 5.3), where there were places of exploitation of chert pebbles from the terraces of the Nile analogous to the mines in Nazlet Safaha and Taramsa 1 dated to the MSA. Vertical shafts, trenches, and underground galleries filled with Upper-Paleolithic flake artifacts dated to ca. 38–33 ka were identified in Nazlet Khater 4 and 7. This is the oldest evidence of underground mines in the world. They are accompanied by single and opposed platform cores (Vermeersch ed. 2002). The Upper Paleolithic in this part of Africa is practically limited to the Nile valley and has not been identified in the surrounding deserts (Vermeersch 1992). Bladelet technology and production of microliths characteristic of Late Paleolithic (i.e., Mode 5 of Clark 1969) began ca. 25 ka in the Nile valley and Nubia. This was a time when the world of Nubian hunters-gatherers became limited to the Nile valley. The deserts around the Nile became hyper-arid and even oases dried out. The White Nile practically disappeared, while the Atbara and the Blue Nile became periodic rivers. During the dry periods, the Nile was a drying-out braided river and in flooding periods it filled practically the whole valley, leaving no space for people and animals (Schild and

90   Mirosław Masojć

Figure 5.3  On the left above: Nazlet Khater 4. Stratigraphy and extraction systems of the Upper Palaeolithic exploitation (a) greenish silts; (b) Nile gravels; (c) brown granuliferous silts and fine sands; (d) local limestone gravels) (© Pierre Vermeersch). On the right above: one of the shafts from Nazlet Khater 4 during excavations (© Pierre Vermeersch). On the left below: Grave 102 and 103 from Jebel Sahaba cemetery (© British Museum). On the right below: Plan of the Jebel Sahaba cemetery (© British Museum).

Wendorf 2010). Faunal remains are limited to only three species: wild cattle, hartebeest, and dorcas gazelle. Instead, a tremendous emphasis on fish is evident in Nubia and Upper Egypt at that time. The recovery of over 130,000 fish bones from site E-78-3 in Wadi Kubbaniya suggests use of very effective fishing techniques. Most of the fishes were taken during the spawning seasons. From Makhadma there are known features used for drying or smoking fishes. An important factor for diet was the use of wetland plants, particularly nut-grass tubers evidenced in Wadi Kubbaniya, where they were probably processed on numerous grinding stones (Wendorf and Schild  1989; Vermeersch ed. 2000). These harsh climatic conditions lasted for more than ten thousand years, in response to which a specific cultural mosaic emerged in the Nile valley. Most industries were

Paleolithic Hunter-Gatherers of Nubia   91

Figure 5.4  Qurta, Egypt. Upper photograph: A detail of a rock art panel at the Qurta II site, showing several naturalistic drawings of wild bovids (Bos primigenius or aurochs) with forward pointing horns (© RMAH, Brussels). Lower photograph: A detail of a rock art panel at the Qurta II site, showing a powerfully built humped bovid (Bos primigenius or aurochs) with strongly incurved forward pointing horns (© RMAH, Brussels).

identified during the rescue excavations between the First and Second Cataracts in the 1960s (Wendorf ed. 1968a). Some of them, mainly those older than 20 ka (e.g., Gemaian and Halfan) as well as possibly younger Sebilian, still utilized Levallois methods. Other based on non-Levallois methods, becoming bladelet industries, such as Qadan, Ballanan-Silsilian, Arkinian. Another group of industries, non-Levallois in its entirety, was identified north of the First Cataract: Fakhurian, Afian, Isnan, Idfuan-Shuwikhatian, and Kubbaniyan (Wendorf and Schild 1989; Vermeersch 1992; Schild and Wendorf 2010; Leplongeon 2017). Evidence for the presence of yet other groups of humans was found in Affad, situated hundreds of kilometers to the south (Osypiński and Osypińska 2015). Numerous postholes were discovered in Affad, which testifies to the existence of various light structures in the encampments. The assemblages from Affad, with their large group of denticulates and burins, seem to be similar to Khormusan industry (Vermeersch 2010). The youngest of the industries, potentially Arkinian, which survived till the end of Pleistocene

92   Mirosław Masojć and re-colonized the desert with the onset of the rainy phase ca. 10.5 ka ago, probably earlier also domesticated cattle in the Nile valley (Schild and Wendorf 2010). Climate change from the beginning of Holocene resulted in cultural changes and the emergence of Nubian communities identified as Mesolithic and Early Neolithic (Kuper and Kröpelin 2006; Wendorf and Schild  2001; Usai  2016; see also chapters by M. Williams and by Usai, this volume). Several rock art locations, panels, and individual figures have been identified in Qurta—exceptional in the North African context—situated close to Aswan (Huyge et  al.  2011), yielding nearly two hundred images (Fig.  5.4). Naturalistically drawn aurochs (Bos primigenius) predominate, followed by birds, hippopotami, gazelle, fish, and hartebeest along with some indeterminate creatures and several highly stylized representations of human figures. On the basis of the inherent characteristics of the rock art, its patination, and degree of weathering as well as archaeological and geomorphological context, an attribution of these petroglyphs to Late Paleolithic period (ca. 19–18 ka) was suggested, possibly connected with the Ballanan-Silsilian bladelet industries (Huyge and Vandenberghe 2011).

Pleistocene Human Remains from Nubia Few sites in Nubia yielded Pleistocene human remains, without exception attributed to H. sapiens from the period MIS 6-2 (Harcourt-Smith et al. 2012; Kuykendall, HeyerdahlKing 2014; Grine 2016). The only Middle Pleistocene find is a considerably mineralized partial human cranium from Singa discovered in 1924 together with the artifacts eroding out of a calcrete deposit in the west bank of the Blue Nile, ca. 320 km south east of Khartoum. It was enclosed in a block of limestone calcrete (Woodward  1938; Arkell et al. 1951). The calcrete matrix that encrusted the cranium was dated by U-Th to ca. 133 ka, confirmed by less precise dates from isochron analyses of other samples of calcrete and from the ESR measurements on indirectly associated animal teeth (McDermott et al. 1996). Because the calcrete formed on the cranium after it was deposited, the cranium itself is older—its most probable age is within the range of 145–133 ka (MIS 6) (Millard 2008; Grine 2016). Morphological studies indicated a mixture of archaic and more modern human traits, but such analyses are complicated by the possibility that the vault is pathologically deformed (Spoor et al. 1998). Associated fauna and artifacts were collected at both Singa and at the comparable site of Abu Hugar, ca. 15 km to the south (Arkell et al. 1951). The artifacts from Singa and Abu Hugar have been variously interpreted as non-diagnostic (Marks 1968b), Middle Paleolithic (Lacaille in Arkell et al. 1951; McBurney 1977), or perhaps even Acheulean (Bräuer 1984) in affinities. Subsequent discoveries were made in the area adjacent to Nubia in the north, where two burials attributed to the Upper Paleolithic chert-mining site of Nazlet Khater 4 (Vermeersch ed. 2002) were identified. The first of the graves contained a very poorly preserved skeleton of an adult female associated with fetal bones, while the other was an

Paleolithic Hunter-Gatherers of Nubia   93 almost complete adult male skeleton (Vermeersch et al. 1984). Both burials were dated with the use of several methods to the end of MIS 3, ca. 37 ka ago (Vermeersch 2002). Taramsa situated nearby yielded a heavily weathered skull and a partial skeleton of a child found in a seated position in a collapsing ancient extraction trench (Vermeersch et al. 1998). The OSL dating of the burial is quite problematic, ranging between 70 and 40 ka, but the date of 24 ka ago also cannot be ruled out (Van Peer et al. 2010). Subsequent discoveries are connected with MIS 2. Two partial human skeletons, dated to ca. 17–18 ka, were found in Deir El-Fakhuri in Egypt, weathering out of the western side of Fakhurian site E71K1 (Wendorf et al.  1970; Butler  1974). Human cranial and frontal bones dated to ca. 13 ka were discovered on Gebel es-Silsila near Kom Ombo and related to the Sebilian industry (Reed 1965). Apart from these individual finds, cemeteries were also discovered in Nubia. Three penecontemporaneous cemeteries situated on both sides of the Nile within a few kilometers from each other were discovered in the vicinity of Wadi Halfa. Toshka, site 8905, Locality A, yielded very fragmentary remains of twelve adults and one child. The cemetery situated nearby in Wadi Halfa, site 6B36, provided the remains of thirty-seven people (thirteen men, fifteen women, and three children). The graves were not dated directly, but they are attributed to Qadan industry and considered as contemporary of another cemetery Jebel Sahaba (site 117), where the graves containing fifty-eight skeletons (nineteen men, twenty-four women, a few unidentified ones and the remaining ones at the juvenile age) were discovered. The cemetery is famous for the fact that many skeletons displayed evidence of violence and testifies to one of the first documented conflicts in prehistory, dated to ca. 12–14 ka (Wendorf 1968b; Wendorf and Schild 2004). The dead were placed in oval graves with flattened bases and covered with thin stone slabs. Individual tombs as well as graves with two or more individuals were observed. The bodies were commonly placed in the grave with the legs bent, resting on their left side with the heads tilted to the east and facing south. Ca. 40 percent of them displayed traces of various blows, injuries, and cut-marks—projectile points were often found stuck between the bones. The fragments found next to the human remains were probably stuck in the flesh (Guilaine and Zammit  2005; Schild and Wendorf  2010). Jebel Sahaba is the evidence of a prolonged conflict in the Nile valley—probably a usual phenomenon at that time caused by the fact that human communities were enclosed in the narrow river valley for millennia. The grave of a ca. 20-year-old man from Wadi Kubbaniya, killed with sharp flint weapons ca. 25 ka ago, is yet another proof of that phenomenon (Wendorf and Schild 1986).

Out-of-Africa from Nubian Perspective According to the Out-of-Africa theory, early hominins originated in Africa, subsequently dispersing into Eurasia. At least two dispersal events are documented, during which Pleistocene hominins left the African continent. Out-of-Africa 1 refers to the

94   Mirosław Masojć early hominin dispersal prior to Homo sapiens (e.g., Homo erectus/ergaster) (Bar-Yosef and Belfer-Cohen 2001), while Out-of-Africa 2 (2a, 2b) (Garcea 2012) deals with the dispersal of H. sapiens. The genetic evidence has also suggested a Back-to-Africa migration by some modern humans who had interbred with the Neanderthals outside Africa before resettling in North Africa (Garcea 2016). Different routes have been suggested for the migration of humans out of Africa, including the Mediterranean coast of North Africa, the Sahara, the Nile valley, the Red Sea coast, and the Bab-el-Mandab. At least one of these possible routes crossed Nubia. The most recent discoveries of Acheulean and MSA sites on the Red Sea coast (Beyin at al. 2019), in the Red Sea Hills (Kobusiewicz et al. 2018), and the Eastern Desert (EDAR; Masojć et al. 2019) seem to confirm the coastal route. The analyses of the role of Nubia and the Nile valley in this process have been an element of the general debate of the migration from Africa (Van Peer 1998; Kleindienst 2000; Vermeersch 2001; Rose 2004; Abbate and Sagri 2012; Garcea 2012; Wurz and Van Peer 2012).

Notes 1. Studying the prehistory of Nubia involves excavation of sites in the desert in a difficult ­climate and uncomfortable accommodation conditions—frequently in desert camps. The specific nature of this work and a greater part of the history of the research in Nubia have been described lately in the autobiography of one of the giants of the research of Nubia’s prehistory, Fred Wendorf (2008). 2. MIS—Marine Isotope Stages; compare also Pleistocene chronostratigraphical correlations: http://www.stratigraphy.org/upload/QuaternaryChart1.JPG. 3. The ongoing work in the EDAR area, Eastern Desert, as well as this chapter is funded by the National Science Centre, Poland, a government agency supervised by the Ministry of Science and Higher Education (NCN 2015/19/B/HS3/03562).

References Cited Abbate, E., A. Albianelli, Amel Awad, P. Billi, P. Bruni, M. Delfino, M.P. Ferretti, O. Filippi, G.  Gallai, M.  Ghinassi, S.-E.  Lauritzen, D.  Lo Vetro, B.  Martínez-Navarro, F.  Martini, G.  Napoleone, G.  Omar Bedri, M.  Papini, L.  Rook, and M.  Sagri 2010 Pleistocene Environments and Human Presence in the Middle Atbara Valley (Khashm el Girba, Eastern Sudan). Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 292:12–34. Abbate, E., A.  Albianelli, A.  Azzaroli, M.  Benvenuti, Berhane Tesfamariam, P.  Bruni, N. Cipriani, R.J. Clarke, G. Ficcarelli, R. Macchiarelli, G. Napoleone, M. Papini, L. Rook, M. Sagri, Tewelde Medhin Tecle, D. Torre, and I. Villa 1998 A One-million-year-old Homo Cranium from the Danakil (Afar) Depression in Eritrea. Nature 393:458–60. Abbate, E. and M. Sagri 2012 Early to Middle Pleistocene Homo Dispersals from Africa to Eurasia: Geological, Climatic and Environmental Constraints. Quaternary International 267:3–19. Arkell, A.J. 1949 The Old Stone Age in the Anglo-Egyptian Sudan. Sudan Antiquities Service Occasional Papers 1. Arkell, A.J., D.M.A. Bate, L.H. Wells, and A.D. Lacaille 1951 The Pleistocene Fauna of Two Blue Nile Sites. Fossil Mammals of Africa 2:1–50.

Paleolithic Hunter-Gatherers of Nubia   95 Bar-Yosef, O. and A. Belfer-Cohen 2001 From Africa to Eurasia—Early Dispersals. Quaternary International 75:19–28. Beyin, A., P.R. Chauhan and A. Nassr 2019 Reconnaissance of Prehistoric Sites in the Red Sea Coastal Region of the Sudan, NE Africa. Journal of Field Archaeology 44(3):147–64. Bräuer, G. 1984 A Craniological Approach to the Origin of Anatomically Modern Homo sapiens in Africa and Implications for the Appearance of Modern Europeans. In The Origins of Modern Humans: A World Survey of the Fossil Evidence, ed. F.H. Smith and F. Spencer, pp. 327–410. A.R. Liss. Butler, B.H. 1974 Skeletal Remains from Late Paleolithic Site near Esna. In The Fakhurian: A Late Paleolithic Industry from Upper Egypt, ed. D. Lubell, pp. 176–83. Geological Survey of Egypt Paper 58. Cancellieri, E., M. Cremaschi, A. Zerboni, and S. di Lernia 2016 Climate, Environment, and Population Dynamics in Pleistocene Sahara. In Africa from MIS 6-2: Population Dynamics and Paleoenvironments, ed. S.C. Jones and B.A. Stewart, pp. 123–45. Springer. Carlson, R.L. and J.S. Sigsted 1967 Paleolithic and Late Neolithic Sites Excavated by the Fourth Colorado Expedition. Kush 15:51–58. Caton-Thompson, G. 1952 Kharga Oasis in Prehistory. Athlone Press. Chaix, L., M.  Faure, C.  Guérin, and M.  Honegger 2000 Kaddanarti, a Lower Pleistocene Assemblage from Northern Sudan. In Recent Research into the Stone Age of Northeastern Africa, ed. L. Krzyżaniak, K. Kroeper, and M. Kobusiewicz, pp. 33–46. Studies in African Archaeology 7. Poznań Archaeological Museum. Chmielewski, W. 1968 Early and Middle Paleolithic Sites near Arkin, Sudan. In The Prehistory of Nubia, ed. F. Wendorf, v. 1:110–47. Fort Burgwin Research Center and Southern Methodist University Press. ——— 1987 The Pleistocene and Early Holocene Archaeological Sites on the Atbara and Blue Nile in Eastern Sudan. Przegląd Archeologiczny 34:5–48. Churcher,  C.S., M.R.  Kleindienst, and H.P.  Schwarcz 1999 Faunal Remains from a Middle Pleistocene Lacustrine Marl in Dakhleh Oasis, Egypt: Palaeoenvironmental Reconstructions. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 154:301–12. Clark, J.G.D. 1969 World Prehistory. Cambridge University Press. Gamal el Deen Idris 1994 Die Altsteinzeit im Sudan. Archäologische Berichte 4. Deutsche Gesellschaft für Ur- und Frühgeschichte. Garcea, E.A.A. 2012 Successes and Failures of the Human Dispersals from North Africa. Quaternary International 270:119–28. ——— 2013 Hunter-gatherers of the Nile Valley and the Sahara before 12,000 Years Ago. In The Oxford Handbook of African Archaeology, ed. P. Mitchell and P. Lane, pp. 419–30. Oxford University Press. ——— 2016 Dispersals Out of Africa and Back to Africa: Modern Origins in North Africa, Quaternary International 408, 79–89. ——— 2020 The Prehistory of the Sudan. Springer. Gautier, A., D. Makowiecki, H. Paner, and W. Van Neer 2012 Palaeolithic Big Game Hunting at HP766 in Wadi Umm Rahau, Northern Sudan. Journal of African Archaeology 10:165–74. Goder-Goldberger, M. 2013 The Khormusan: Evidence for an MSA East African Industry in Nubia. Quaternary International 300:182–94. Grine, F.E. 2016 The Late Quaternary Hominins of Africa: The Skeletal Evidence from MIS 6-2. In Africa from MIS 6-2: Population Dynamics and Paleoenvironments, ed. S.C. Jones and B.A. Stewart, pp. 323–81. Springer. Guilaine, J. and J. Zammit 2005 The Origins of War: Violence in Prehistory. Blackwell.

96   Mirosław Masojć Harcourt-Smith,  W.E.H., V.  Francigny, and A.  de Voogt 2012 Northern Sudan and Paleoanthropology: Historical Perspectives and Preliminary Results from the 2011 AMNH survey. Der Antike Sudan. Mitteilungen der Sudanarchäologischen Gesellschaft zu Berlin 23:29–33. Harmand, S., J.E.  Lewis, C.S.  Feibel, C.J.  Lepre, S.  Prat, A.  Lenoble, X.  Boës, R.L.  Quinn, M. Brenet, A. Arroyo, N. Taylor, S. Clément, G. Daver, J.-P. Brugal, L. Leakey, R.A. Mortlock, J.D. Wright, S. Lokorodi, C. Kirwa, D.V. Kent, and H. Roche 2015 3.3-million-year-old Stone Tools from Lomekwi 3, West Turkana, Kenya. Nature 521:310–15. Hill, C.L. and R. Schild 2017 Paleohydrology and Paleoenvironments at Bir Sahara: Pleistocene Lithostratigraphy and Sedimentology in the Southern Egyptian Sahara. Journal of African Earth Sciences 136:201–15. Huyge, D. and D.A.G. Vandenberghe 2011 Confirming the Pleistocene Age of the Qurta Rock Art. In Egyptian Archaeology: The Bulletin of The Egypt Exploration Society 39:21–24. Huyge, D., D.A.G. Vandenberghe, M. De Dapper, F. Mees, W. Claes, and J.C. Darnell 2011 First Evidence of Pleistocene Rock Art in North Africa: Securing the Age of the Qurta Petroglyphs (Egypt) through OSL Dating. Antiquity 85:1184–93. Kleindienst, M.R. 2000 On the Nile Corridor and the Out-of-Africa model. Current Anthropology 41:107–109. Kobusiewicz, M., P. Bobrowski, M. Jórdeczka, and M. Chłodnicki 2018 Gebel Karaiweb and Bir Nurayet (Sudan): The Oldest Settlement in the Red Sea Mountains. In Desert and the Nile: Late Prehistory of the Nile Basin and the Sahara, ed. J. Kabaciński, M. Chłodnicki, and M. Kobusiewicz. Studies in African Archaeology 15. Poznań Archaeological Museum. Kuper, R., S. Kröpelin 2006 Climate-controlled Holocene Occupation in the Sahara: Motor of Africa’s Evolution. Science 313:803–807. Kuykendall, K.L. and I.S. Heyerdahl-King 2014 Modern Human Origins in Africa: A Review of the Fossil, Archaeological, and Genetic Perspectives on Early Homo sapiens. In The Oxford Handbook of the Archaeology and Anthropology of Hunter-Gatherers, ed. V. Cummings, P. Jordan, and M. Zvelebeil, pp. 214–51. Oxford University Press. Larrasona, J., A. Roberts, and E. Rhling 2013 Dynamics of Green Sahara Periods and their Role in Hominin Evolution. PLOS ONE 8(10):1–12. Leplongeon, A. 2017 Technological Variability in the Late Palaeolithic Lithic Industries of the Egyptian Nile Valley: The Case of the Silsilian and Afian Industries. PLoS ONE 12(12):e0188824. Marks, A.E. 1968a The Mousterian Industries of Nubia. In The Prehistory of Nubia, ed. F. Wendorf, v. 1:194–314. Fort Burgwin Research Center and Southern Methodist University Press. ——— 1968b The Khormusan; an Upper Pleistocene industry in Sudanese Nubia. In The Prehistory of Nubia, ed. F. Wendorf, v. 1:315–91. Fort Burgwin Research Center and Southern Methodist University Press. Martini, F., Y.  Libsekal, O.  Filippi, A.  Ghebreher, H.  Kashay, A.  Kiros, G.  Martino, D. Okubatsion, A. Segid, T. Solomon, Z. Teka, D. Yosief, and S. Yamane 2004 Characterization of Lithic Complexes from Buia (Dandiero Basin, Danakil Depression, Eritrea). Rivista Italiana di Paleontologia e Stratigrafia 110:99–132 Supplement. Masojć, M. 2010 First Note on the Discovery of a Stratified Palaeolithic Site from the Bayuda Desert (N-Sudan) within MAG Concession. Der Antike Sudan. Mitteilungen der Sudanarchäologischen Gesellschaft zu Berlin 21:63–70. ——— 2018 Lithic Materials from a Late Nubian Complex Middle Stone Age Site in the Bayuda Desert: Goat Mountain. In Proceedings of the First International Conference on the Archaeology of the Bayuda Desert in Sudan, ed. A. Lohwasser, T. Karberg, and J. Auenmüller, pp. 503–36. Harrassowitz.

Paleolithic Hunter-Gatherers of Nubia   97 Masojć, M., J. Kusiak, K. Standzikowski, H. Paner, M. Kuc, M. Parafiniuk, and M. Szmit 2017 OSL/IRSL Estimation for Nubian Complex Middle Stone Age Settlement from Bayuda Desert in Sudan. Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports 16:391–96. Masojć, M., N.  Nassr, J.Y.  Kim, J.  Krupa-Kurzynowska, Y.K.  Sohn, M.  Szmit, J.  Ch. Kim, J.S. Kim, H.W. Choi, M. Wieczorek, and A. Timmermann 2019 Saharan Green Corridors and Middle Pleistocene Hominin Dispersals across the Eastern Desert, Sudan. Journal of Human Evolution 130:141–50. Masojć, M., A.H. Gismallah, G. Michalec, A. Gałaś, M. Jórdeczka 2020 Acheulean Bifaces from Khor Shaba, Omdurman (Sudan), Comparative Studies in the Nubian Context. Archaeologia Polona 58:39–62. McBrearty, S. and C.  Tryon 2006 From Acheulean to Middle Stone Age in the Kapthurin Formation, Kenya. In Transitions before the Transition: Evolution and Stability in the Middle Paleolithic and Middle Stone Age, ed. E. Hovers and S.L. Kuhn, pp. 257–77. Springer. McBurney, C.B.M. 1977 Archaeology and the Homo sapiens sapiens Problem in Northern Africa. Netherlands Museum for Anthropology and Prehistory. McDermott, F., C.  Stringer, R.  Grün, C.T.  Williams, V.K.  Din, and C.J.  Hawkesworth 1996 New Late Pleistocene Uranium-Thorium and ESR dates for the Singa Hominid (Sudan). Journal of Human Evolution 31:507–16. Mercier, N., H. Valladas, L. Froget, J. Joron, P. Vermeersch, P. Van Peer, and J. Moeyersons 1999 Thermoluminescence Dating of a Middle Palaeolithic Occupation at Sodmein Cave, Red Sea Mountains (Egypt). Journal of Archaeological Science 26 (11):1339–45. Millard, A.R. 2008 A Critique of the Chronometric Evidence for Hominid Fossils I. Africa and the Near East 500–50ka. Journal of Human Evolution 54(6):848–74. Olszewski, D.I., S. Rempel, B. Arikan, and B.J. Baker 2017 Early and Middle Stone Age Survey in the Upper Reaches of the Fourth Cataract, Sudan. PaleoAnthropology 2017:A1−A41. Osypińska, M. and P. Osypiński 2016 Animal Exploitation and Behaviour of the Latest Middle Stone Age Societies in the Middle Nile Valley: Archaeozoological and Taphonomic Analysis of Late Pleistocene Fauna from the Affad Basin, Sudan. African Archaeological Review 33(2):107–27. Osypiński, P. and M. Osypińska 2015 Optimal Adjustment or Cultural Backwardness? New Data on the Latest Levallois Industries in the Nile Valley. Quaternary International 408:90–105. Reed, C.A. 1965 A Human Frontal Bone from the Late Pleistocene of the Kom Ombo Plain, Upper Egypt. Man 65:101–104. Richter, D., R.  Grün, R.  Joannes-Boyau, T.E.  Steele, F.  Amani, M.  Rué, P.  Fernandes, J.-P. Raynal, D. Geraads, A. Ben-Ncer, J.J. Hublin, and S.P. McPherron 2017 The Age of the Homo sapiens Fossils from Jebel Irhoud (Morocco) and the Origins of the Middle Stone Age. Nature 546:293–96. Rose, J. 2004 New Evidence for the Expansion of an Upper Pleistocene Population out of East Africa, from the Site of Station One, Northern Sudan. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 14(2):205–16. Rose, J. I., V.I. Usik, A.E. Marks, Y.H. Hilbert, C.S. Galletti, A. Parton, J.M. Geiling, V. Černy, M.V. Morley, and R.G. Roberts 2011 The Nubian Complex of Dhofar, Oman: An African Middle Stone Age Industry in Southern Arabia. PLoS ONE 6:1–22. Sahnouni, M., S. Semaw, and M. Rogers 2013 The African Acheulean. In The Oxford Handbook of African Archaeology, ed. P. Mitchell and P. Lane, pp. 307–23. Oxford University Press. Schild, R. 2009 Possible Oldowan Traces in the Gebel Nabta Area, Egypt. In Understanding the Past: Papers Offered to Stefan K. Kozłowski, ed. M. Burdukiewicz, K. Cyrek, P. Dyczek,

98   Mirosław Masojć and K. Szymczak, pp. 315–20. Center for Research on the Antiquity of Southeastern Europe, University of Warsaw. Schild, R. and F. Wendorf 1981 The Prehistory of an Egyptian Oasis. Ossolineum. ——— 2005 Gademotta and Kulkuletti and the Ages for the Beginning of the Middle Paleolithic in Africa. Journal of the Israel Prehistoric Society 35:117–42. ——— 2010 Late Palaeolithic Hunter-Gatherers in the Nile Valley of Nubia and Upper Egypt. In South-Eastern Mediterranean Peoples Between 130,000 and 10,000 Years Ago, ed. E.A.A. Garcea, pp. 89–125. Oxbow. Schmidt, C., K. Kindermann, P. Van Peer, and O. Bubenzer 2015 Multi-emission Luminescence Dating of Heated Chert from the Middle Stone Age Sequence at Sodmein Cave (Red Sea Mountains, Egypt). Journal of Archaeological Science 63:94–103. Semaw, S., M.J.  Rogers, J.  Quade, P.R.  Renne, R.F.  Butler, M.  Dominguez-Rodrigo, D.  Stout, W.S. Hart, T. Pickering, and S.W. Simpson 2003 2.6-million-year-old Stone Tools and Associated Bones from OGS-6 and OGS-7, Gona, Afar, Ethiopia. Journal of Human Evolution 45:169–77. Semaw, S., M.  Rogers, and D.  Stout 2009 The Oldowan-Acheulian Transition: Is There a “Developed Oldowan” Artifact Tradition? In A Sourcebook of Paleolithic Transitions: Methods, Theories, and Interpretations, ed. M. Camps and P. Chauhan, 173–90. Springer. Singelton, W.L. and A.E. Close 1980 Report on Site E-78-11. In Loaves & Fishes: The Prehistory of Wadi Kubbaniya, ed. F. Wendorf, R. Schild, and A.E. Close, pp. 229–37. Department of Anthropology, Institute for Study of Earth and Man, SMU. Spinapolice, E.E., A. Zerboni, M. Meyer, and D. Usai 2018 Early Human Occupation at al-Jamrab (White Nile Region, Central Sudan): A Contribution to the Understanding of the MSA of Eastern Africa. Journal of African Archaeology 16:193–209. Spoor, F., C.B. Stringer, and F. Zonneveld 1998 Rare Temporal Bone Pathology of the Singa Calvaria from Sudan. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 107:41–50. Usai, D. 2016 A Picture of Prehistoric Sudan: The Mesolithic and Neolithic Periods. Oxford Handbooks Online (doi: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199935413.013.56). ——— 2019 The Palaeolithic/Stone Age. In Handbook of Ancient Nubia, ed. D. Raue, pp. 155–70. De Gruyter. ——— 2020 The Qadan, the Jebel Sahaba Cemetery and the Lithic Collection. Archaeologia Polona 58:99–119. Van Peer, P. 1991 Interassemblage Variability and Levallois Styles: The Case of the Northern African Middle Palaeolithic. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 10:107–51. ——— 1992 The Levallois Reduction Strategy. Monographs in World Archaeology 13. Prehistory Press. ——— 1998 The Nile Corridor and the Out-of-Africa Model: An Examination of the Archaeological Record. Current Anthropology 39:115–40. ——— 2016 Technological Systems, Population Dynamics, and Historical Process in the MSA of Northern Africa. In Africa from MIS 6-2: Population Dynamics and Paleoenvironments, ed. S.C. Jones and B.A. Stewart, pp. 147–59. Springer. Van Peer, P., R.  Fullagar, S.  Stokes, R.M.  Bailey, J.  Moeyersons, F.  Steenhoudt, A.  Geerts, T. Vanderbeken, M. De Dapper, and F. Geus 2003 The Early to Middle Stone Age Transition and the Emergence of Modern Human Behaviour at Site 8-B-11, Sai Island, Sudan. Journal of Human Evolution 45:187–93. Van Peer, P. and P.  Vermeersch 2000 The Nubian Complex and the Dispersal of Modern Humans in North Africa. In Recent Research into the Stone Age of Northeastern Africa, ed. L. Krzyżaniak, K. Kroeper, and M. Kobusiewicz, pp. 47–60. Studies in African Archaeology 7. Poznań Archaeological Museum.

Paleolithic Hunter-Gatherers of Nubia   99 Van Peer, P., P. Vermeersch, and E. Paulissen 2010 Chert Quarrying: Lithic Technology and a Modern Human Burial at the Palaeolithic Site of Taramsa 1, Upper Egypt. Egyptian Prehistory Monographs 5. Leuven University Press. Vermeersch, P.M. 1992 The Upper and Late Palaeolithic of Northern and Eastern Africa. In New Light on the Northeastern African Past: Current Prehistoric Research, ed. F. Klees and R. Kuper, pp. 99–153. Heinrich Barth Institut. ——— ed. 2000 Palaeolithic Living Sites in Upper and Middle Egypt. Leuven University Press. ——— 2001 “Out of Africa” from an Egyptian Point of View. Quaternary International 75:103–12. ——— ed. 2002 Palaeolithic Quarrying Sites in Upper and Middle Egypt. Leuven University Press. ——— 2010 Middle and Upper Palaeolithic in the Egyptian Nile Valley. In South-Eastern Mediterranean Peoples Between 130,000 and 10,000 Years Ago, ed. E.A.A. Garcea, pp. 66–88. Oxbow. Vermeersch, P.M., E. Paulissen, G. Gijselings, M. Otte, A.B. Thoma, P. Van Peer, and R. Lauwers 1984 33,000-yr-old Chert Mining Site and Related Homo in the Egyptian Nile Valley. Nature 309:342–44. Vermeersch, P., P. Van Peer, J. Moeyersons, and W. Van Neer 1994 Sodmein Cave Site, Red Sea Mountains, Egypt. Sahara 6:31–40. Vermeersch, P., E. Paulissen, S. Stokes, C. Charlier, P. Van Peer, C. Stringer, and W. Lindsay 1998 A Middle Palaeolithic Burial of a Modern Human at Taramsa Hill, Egypt. Antiquity 72(277):475–84. Vermeersch, P.M., E. Paulissen, M. Otte, and G. Gijselings 2000 Acheulean at Nag Ahmed el Khalifa. In Palaeolithic Living Sites in Upper and Middle Egypt, ed. P.M.  Vermeersch, pp. 57–74. Leuven University Press. Wendorf, F., ed. 1965 Contributions to the Prehistory of Nubia. Fort Burgwin Research Center and Southern Methodist University Press, Dallas. ——— ed. 1968a The Prehistory of Nubia v. 1–2. Fort Burgwin Research Center and Southern Methodist University Press. ——— 1968b Site 117: A Nubian Final Palaeolithic Graveyard near Jebel Sahaba, Sudan. In The Prehistory of Nubia, ed. F.  Wendorf, v. 2:954–95. Fort Burgwin Research Center and Southern Methodist University Press. ——— 2008 Desert Days: My Life as a Field Archaeologist. Southern Methodist University Press. Wendorf, F., S. Said, and R. Schild 1970 Egyptian Prehistory: Some New Concepts. Science 169:1161–71. Wendorf, F. and R. Schild 1976 Prehistory of the Nile Valley. Academic Press. ——— 1986 Conclusions. In The Prehistory of Wadi Kubbaniya, ed. F. Wendorf, R. Schild, and A. Close, v. 1:71–74. Southern Methodist University Press. ——— 1989 Summary and Synthesis. In The Prehistory of Wadi Kubbaniya, ed. F. Wendorf, R. Schild, and A. Close, v. 3:768–824. Southern Methodist University Press. ——— 1992 The Middle Palaeolithic of North Africa: A Status Report. In New Light on the Northeastern African Past: Current Prehistoric Research, ed. F. Klees and R. Kuper, pp. 39–80. Heinrich Barth Institut. ——— 2001 Holocene Settlement of the Egyptian Sahara. Kluwer Academic/Plenum. ——— 2004 Late Paleolithic Warfare in Nubia: The Evidence and Causes. Adumatu 10:7–28. Wendorf, F., R. Schild, and A.E. Close eds. 1993 Egypt during the Last Interglacial: The Middle Paleolithic of Bir Tarfawi and Bir Sahara East. Plenum.

100   Mirosław Masojć Wendorf, F., R. Schild, and H. Haas 1979 A New Radiocarbon Chronology for Prehistoric Sites in Nubia. Journal of Field Archaeology 6(2):219–23. Woodward, A.S. 1938 A Fossil Skull of an Ancestral Bushman from the Anglo-Egyptian Sudan. Antiquity 12:193–95. Wurz, S. and P. Van Peer 2012 Out of Africa, the Nile Valley and the Northern Route. The South African Archaeological Bulletin 67(196):168–79.

chapter 6

From For agi ng to Food Produci ng The Mesolithic and Neolithic of the Middle Nile Valley Donatella Usai

Introduction The Middle Nile valley represents a key region for the study of Early Holocene/ Mesolithic foraging communities relying on hunting, gathering, and fishing, and then for studying the mechanisms that led to the formation of food producing Neolithic societies in the whole Nile valley. At the moment the archaeological data indicate this region as the core area for these developments, which follow a trajectory different from that of the Middle East. Anyone approaching the late prehistory of Nubia and central Sudan (Fig. 6.1) cannot but start with reading two volumes that, even if now written nearly seventy years ago, remain the stronghold of the discipline: the reports of the excavations carried out by A.J.  Arkell at the Mesolithic site Khartoum Hospital (1949) and the Neolithic site Shaheinab (1953); they provide the first glimpse of these ancient communities that occupied the valley as well as the adjacent regions for several millennia. Since then archaeological-anthropological research has proceeded, producing a quantity of information, unfortunately however often characterized by patchiness, lack of pragmatism, and abundant in the (ab)use of ethnographic analogies (Usai  2014, 2016a). New evidence from the region and the overall Nile valley is now producing substantial changes to our knowledge and may raise discussion and fruitful critiques.

102   Donatella Usai

Figure 6.1  Map of the Nile valley including sites mentioned in the text.

From Foraging to Food Producing   103

The Mesolithic During the Mesolithic, a period embracing roughly the 9th to 5th millennium bce, Nubia and central Sudan as well as the adjacent desert areas to the west and east of the Nile (Fig. 6.1) saw the progressive emergence of hunter-gatherer-fisher communities, nearly sedentary, sharing some common traits in the economic as well as in the cultural material sphere, facilitated in this by the peculiar geographic location, within a vast territory with a similar landscape and crossed by a unifying element, the Nile River. Within this picture, however, some differences can already be detected; others could possibly appear if a more detailed, diachronically and synchronically fine-grained picture of these four millennia were available. Since the excavation at Khartoum Hospital, the faunal remains of wild mammals, gazelle, hippo, and fish (Arkell 1949) identified the populations that produced them as hunters and fishers. An overwhelming number of grinding stones and grinders pointed to a plant gathering activity, even if scarcely supported by the recovery of macro remains (Ryan et al. 2016, table 9.2). The most peculiar characteristic of this community was its use of pottery technology. Two of the most common decorative patterns, Wavy Line (incised) and Dotted Wavy Line (impressed), became indicative, for long, of two assumed chronological phases, the Early and Late Mesolithic (Arkell 1953) (Fig. 6.2). Wavy Line Mesolithic pottery is characterized by a very hard fabric including angular/sub-angular grains of quartz and feldspar (Dal Sasso et al. 2014). It is generally uniformly fired, very hard and compact, signifying a good pyro-technological control. The surfaces are decorated with a comb dragged onto them to create long wavy lines, but the final design can be quite varied (Fig. 6.2; Salvatori 2012). Although complete vessels are  missing, large fragments suggest they were quite big containers, ovoid in shape (Salvatori 2012). The Dotted Wavy Line (Fig. 6.2) was previously considered characteristic of the Late Mesolithic period and also as an exogenous element demonstrating contacts with Saharan groups responsible for the emergence of pastoralism in the Nile valley (Caneva 1996; contra Jesse 2004; Usai 2004). More recently, studies on Mesolithic pottery document the presence of Dotted Wavy Line decoration from the early phases of the Mesolithic (Fig. 6.2) and suggest that it developed locally (Jesse 2003; Salvatori 2012). Between the 1960s and 1980s some variants of this pottery were discovered in the Second Cataract (Shiner  1968a; Nordström  1972) and south of the Fourth Cataract regions (Marks et al. 1986; Shiner ed. 1971). The pottery recovered in the Second Cataract region was labelled, in view of its similarity with the one discovered at Khartoum Hospital, Khartoum Variant (Fig. 6.3; Shiner 1968a; Nordström 1972) but misleadingly considered in toto as the production of a Neolithic community, although recent work at an important group of sites, near Kerma, has highlighted that only part of the Khartoum Variant pottery production may properly be attributed to the Neolithic phase and most is produced by the hunter-gatherer-fishers of the Mesolithic phase (Honegger 2012).

104   Donatella Usai

Figure 6.2  Wavy Line (a–h) and Dotted Wavy line (i–r) decorative patterns from El-Khiday 3 and 10-W-4 sites. Wavy Line pattern examples a-b-c are recorded in the Early Mesolithic levels. Among the Dotted Wavy Line examples i-l-m are recorded in levels dating at 7,000 bce; q and r are typical of Late Mesolithic.

The idea of the Khartoum Variant being made exclusively during the Neolithic has also been fed by the periodization established for the southern Egyptian Western Desert (Wendorf and Schild 1980, 2001; Wendorf et al. 1984), an area that gravitated under the same cultural influence (Gatto 2002, 2006a; Usai 2005, 2008) and that is of great interest for the understanding of the process of transition to a food-producing economy. At Nabta and Kiseiba, noteworthy spots in the Western Desert, archaeologists backed up by archaeozoologists (Gautier 2001) claimed to have found the first and most ancient evidence of domestic cattle (9th millennium bce) and, later on, associated ovicaprids. This evidence has long been debated (Ascunce et al. 2007; Ho et al. 2008; Stock and Gifford-Gonzales 2013; Pérez-Pardal et al. 2010; Decker et al. 2014; Linseele 2013) and

From Foraging to Food Producing   105

Figure 6.3  Fragments of pottery from Khartoum Variant site 16-U-22 in the Second Cataract (unpublished material, Khartoum National Museum) that cover a chronological sequence corresponding more or less to that recognized at Wadi el-Arab and El-Barga sites (from top row: Mesolithic I, II, III, IV). Photographs: D. Usai.

has now little support (Brass 2018). But still, for some archaeologists, any pottery that resembles the assemblages of Early Neolithic Nabta and Kiseiba sites is therefore Neolithic (Osypiński 2010; Edwards and Ali Osman 2011; Edwards and Sadig 2011; Dittrich and Gessner 2014). The main problem with Second Cataract Khartoum Variant assemblages is that they mostly pertain to surface collections where admixture of different occupations is highly possible due to strong erosion affecting cultural material production as well as faunal remains. In fact, faunal remains from Khartoum Variant sites are extremely rare (Table 6.1) and very fragmented allowing for a very limited set of observations (Wendorf 1968). A similar situation is recorded for more or less contemporaneous evidence from the region of Ed-Debba and the Fourth Cataract. Mesolithic sites discovered in this area in 1970s (Shiner ed. 1971; Marks et al. 1986) and more recently during the salvage campaign

106   Donatella Usai Table 6.1  Faunal Remains from Excavated Khartoum Variant and Abkan Sites Site   A B K A N

  K H A R T O U M V A R  

Preservation

Cultural material

Exotic m.

Fauna

Reference

2002

Deflated

Pottery/lithics

absent

Shiner 1968a

1029

Deflated

Pottery/lithics

Egypt. flint

absent

Shiner 1968a

604

Deflated

Pottery/lithics

Egypt. flint

absent

Shiner 1968a

629

Deflated

Lithics

Egypt. flint.

absent

Shiner 1968a

absent

Shiner 1968a

Egypt. flint

absent

Shiner 1968a

2007

Deflated

Pottery/lithics

94

Deflated

Pottery/lithics

1001

Deflated

Pottery/lithics

scarce1

Shiner 1968a

303

Deflated

Pottery/lithics

scarce

Nordstrom 1972

Pottery/lithics

321

Deflated

332

Fireplace

429

Deflated

408

Deflated

2

absent

Nordstrom 1972

absent

Nordstrom 1972

Pottery/lithics

present3

Nordstrom 1972

Pottery/lithics

absent

Nordstrom 1972

370

Deflated

Pottery/lithics

?

Nordstrom 1972

414

Deflated

Pottery/lithics

present4

Nordstrom 1972

366

Deflated

Pottery/lithics

absent

Nordstrom 1972

8-B-81

Stratified

Pottery

absent

1045

Garcea 2016

Deflated

Pottery/lithics

Egypt. flint

present

2006

Deflated

Pottery/lithics

Egypt. flint

absent

Shiner 1968b

227

Deflated

Pottery/lithics

Egypt. flint

absent

Shiner 1968b

2016

Fireplace

Pottery/lithics

Egypt. flint

absent

Shiner 1968b

a

5

Shiner 1968b

1022

Deflated

Pottery/lithics

Egypt. flint

absent

Shiner 1968b

626

Deflated

Pottery/lithics

Egypt. flint

absent

Shiner 1968b

628

Deflated

Pottery/lithics

Egypt. flint

absent

Shiner 1968b

DIW5

Deflated

Pottery/lithics

Egypt. flint

absent

Shiner 1968b

Egypt. flint

absent

Shiner 1968b

1039

Deflated

Pottery/lithics

18A

Deflated

Pottery/lithics

present2

Nordstrom 1972

428

Deflated

Pottery/lithics

present

Nordstrom 1972

Deflated

Pottery/lithics

absent

a

413 360

Deflated

Pottery/lithics

Abka V

Stratified (?)

Pottery/lithics

Egypt. flint

6

Nordstrom 1972

absent

Nordstrom 1972

absent

Nordstrom 1972

From Foraging to Food Producing   107 Table 6.1  Continued   K V A B K

89

Stratified (?)

Pottery/lithics

absent

352

Deflated

Pottery/lithics

absent

371

Deflated

Pottery/lithics

present

7

387

Deflated

Pottery/lithics

Egypt. flint

present

8

Abka IX

Stratified

Pottery/lithics

Egypt. flint

?

369

Stratified (?)

Pottery/lithics

absent

365

Stratified (?)

Pottery/lithics

present

Pottery Pottery

present10 present11

8-B-10C Stratified 8-B-76 Stratified

Nordstrom 1972 Nordstrom 1972 Nordstrom 1972 Nordstrom 1972 Nordstrom 1972 Nordstrom 1972 9

Garcea 2016 Garcea 2016

 The site is the same but was excavated by Scandinavian Expedition and Combined Prehistoric Expedition. 1 Fish bones, mammals relatively scarce (Shiner 1968a). 2 One Equus molar, one Equus metapodial, one canid skull (Nordstrom 1972). 3 Sample not studied (Nordstrom 1972). 4 Sample not studied (Nordstrom 1972). 5 Mammal and fish bones are reported but not studied (Gautier 1968; Greenwood 1968). 6 A few hundred fragments found but not studied (Nordstrom 1972). 7 Animal bones present but no fish bones (Nordstrom 1972). 8 Fish bones (Synodontis) and mammal bones not specified (Nordstrom 1972). 9 Three hundred fragments including fish bones, no details (Nordstrom 1972). 10 Included only shells Pila, Lanistes, and Limicolaria (Garcea 2016). 11 Faunal remains were badly preserved except of a lower molar of cattle (Garcea 2016). One more site among those described by Shiner (1968a), site 605, may actually have been a mixed Qadan-Abkan site (Pers. observ.). a

for the Merowe Dam (Chłodnicki et al. 2006; Dittrich and Gessner 2014; Dittrich et al. 2007; Edwards and Fuller 2005; Osypiński 2010; Usai 2003) includes pottery with classical Wavy Line decoration but manufactured in a very peculiar method characterized by a distinctive vegetal temper (Fig. 6.4; Gatto 2006b). This group has been labeled “Karmakol” (Hays 1971, 1976). More similar to the eponymous Khartoum Hospital site is pottery production from sites located on the Nile near Atbara and north of Khartoum, although some differences are detectable (Haaland and Anwar Abdul Magid 1995). It is reasonable to interpret these differences in pottery production, especially when associated to differences in decorative motives (Gatto 2002, 2006a, 2006b; Usai 2004), as reflecting regional group identities and this seems suggested also by diversities in lithic production (Usai 2004). The most striking, for example, is reflected in the choice of raw material, where quartzite appears absolutely the most preferred by groups in central Sudan, while northern groups seem to favor flint/chert. Around the Second Cataract also an exotic material occurs that originates in the Eocene Limestone outcrops of the Western Desert: Egyptian flint (Table 6.1; Usai 2005, 2008, 2016a).

108   Donatella Usai

Figure 6.4  Mesolithic pottery of the Karmakol facies from the Letti basin, in the Southern Dongola Reach area, it is characterized by a wide use of vegetal temper. Photographs: D. Usai.

These hunter-gatherer-fisher groups also occupied niches that are nowadays nearly devoid of life. This happened more or less in concurrence with a favorable reversal in climate, from arid to wet, during the so-called Holocene African humid period (M. Williams, this volume). The most impressive examples of this phenomenon are the sites located along the Wadi Howar, the so-called Yellow Nile (Klees and Kuper 1992; Keding 1996; Jesse 2003). Evidence of occupations and burials spanning from the 6th until the 4th–3rd millennium bce were here recovered. The link between these populations and those inhabiting the Nile valley is provided by pottery and lithic production. The Wavy Line and Dotted Wavy Line are present and associated to a predominant quartzite lithic industry including geometrics and especially lunates (Jesse 2003).

Mesolithic Inter-site and Intra-site Overview, Cemeteries, Subsistence The archaeological evidence left by the Mesolithic groups along the Nile valley and along its tributaries is quite distinctive. Sites in Nubia appear as surface concentrations or scatters, while in central Sudan they are made of thick deposits incorporating an ­enormous amount

From Foraging to Food Producing   109 of artifacts. This can be partially explained by a differing incidence of erosive phenomena, but it can be otherwise related to different residential mobility patterns. Hunting-gathering and fishing seem to have characterized the economy of these groups in the north, the south, as well as in the west (Van Neer and Uerpmann 1989; Peters 1995; Gautier et al. 2002). However, it is impossible to analyze diachronically and synchronically this phase of 3,000 years (Honegger 2012), or to decipher any possible evolution to the food-producing stage. If we, in fact, exclude the many Mesolithic sites that have not provided any structural evidence, or stratified and closed contexts, and have been massively destroyed by post-depositional agents (Salvatori 2012; Usai 2014) there are two areas left that provide potential data for dealing in future with this problem: Kerma in Nubia, and El-Khiday in central Sudan. New and interesting data are being acquired also from the Sabaloka region although the fact that the settlement deposits, as many others in central Sudan (Usai 2014), lack a clear stratigraphic succession makes them weakly supported (Suková and Varadzin  2012; Suková et al.  2014; Varadzinová and Varadzin 2017). The burial ground located in this same area is instead an important one for understanding the peopling process of the region as well as diet, lifestyle, and paleopathology (Varadzinová, L. and L. Varadzin 2020).

Kerma and El-Khiday Areas Sites in the Kerma area, of which Wadi el-Arab and El-Barga are the most representative, cover a period spanning from 8300 to 5400 bce and include settlements and cemeteries of the Mesolithic and Neolithic periods. At Wadi el-Arab, the most ancient occupation levels date between 8300 and 7800 bce (Honegger 2013), corresponding to a Mesolithic I phase. A following Mesolithic phase II (7800–7200 bce), III (7200–6300 bce), and IV (6300–6000 bce) have been here recognized (Honegger 2012). The structures recovered at Wadi el-Arab consist of several pitdwellings and, from a more recent occupation, of two huts of semi-subterranean type, as those brought to light at El-Barga (Honegger 2005), dating at 7300 bce. The most recent levels at Wadi el-Arab date between 6500–5400 bce, partially contemporaneous to the earliest evidence of neolithization of the valley attested at the early Neolithic cemetery of El-Barga. At this last site, in one of the 105 graves excavated (Crèvecoeur 2012), a domestic cattle skull was found covering an infant grave associated with an adult male (Honegger 2005, fig. 17). Overall the cemetery, dating in the first half of the 6th millennium bce, shows substantial changes in the social as well as in the material culture in line with the evidence provided by Middle Neolithic cemeteries dotting the landscape in the Wadi el-Khowi, immediately south of Kerma (Reinold 2000, 2001, 2004, 2006), and the Northern Dongola Reach (Welsby ed. 2001; Salvatori and Usai eds. 2008) with polished stone axes, palettes, jewels, and other offerings (Honegger 2005). The pottery production and decorative patterns change during the four Mesolithic phases (Fig. 6.3) and that recovered in the Early Neolithic cemetery is still linked to this tradition. However at Wadi el-Arab, the most recent levels produced also a certain amount of pottery undecorated or with rocker impressed zig-zag decoration and burnishing, a type that will become common in the Middle Neolithic (Nordström 1972; Salvatori and Usai eds. 2008), a phase called Abkan in the Second and Third Cataract areas (Shiner 1968b; Nordström 1972).

110   Donatella Usai The pottery associated with the ancient Mesolithic phases, the main cultural i­ndicator on which we can base our observations, is related to the production we know from the Second Cataract (Fig.  6.3) and the nearby Western Desert in Egypt (Gatto 2006b, 2013): the Khartoum Variant (Shiner 1968a; Nordström 1972). At the moment, nothing similar for the corresponding very ancient levels has been found in the valley along the main Nile, south of Nubia, and the White and Blue Niles. Sites with similar ancient dates are located at junction between the Nile and the Atbara (Haaland and Anwar Abdul Magid 1995), north of Khartoum, Sarurab 2 (Khabir 1987) and, it seems, at Sabaloka (Suková and Varadzin 2012; Suková et al. 2014) but they are not associated with definite features or cultural remains (Salvatori 2012; Usai 2014) or are not yet fully documented. Nearly contemporaneous to Mesolithic III phase at Wadi el-Arab/El-Barga is, instead, the evidence brought to light at El-Khiday sites, in central Sudan, on the western bank of the White Nile. This is a group of sites with stratified anthropic deposits preserving structural remains and well defined pottery assemblages (Salvatori et al. 2011, 2014). The deposit in the sites of El-Khiday, spanning from the beginning of the 7th millennium bce through the mid-6th millennium bce, then re-occupied by a Neolithic community (around 4500 bce) and much later by Meroitic and Post-Meroitic groups, revealed structural remains left by a mobile group of hunter-gatherer-fishers, in the form of dumping areas, small pits, and post-holes (Salvatori et al.  2011,  2014; Salvatori 2012) dating to a local early Mesolithic phase (site El-Khiday 1) evolving into a more stable village with semi-subterranean huts with low pisé walls and perishable cover (El-Khiday 1 and 2) and a vast functional area with nearly 150 pits with different function (El-Khiday 2 and 2B), fireplaces, garbage pits, and others whose use is still being investigated. This evidence covers two distinct stages (A and B) of the Middle Mesolithic period (Usai 2016a; Usai and Salvatori 2019). The evidence of a further phase (Middle Mesolithic C) is represented by an impressive shell midden on top of a stratified sequence embracing a millennia since the 7th millennium bce (site El-Khiday 3) (Salvatori et al. 2018). This deposit may witness a further evolution in the Mesolithic economy and lifestyle with an increase in the exploitation of gastropods (Pila wernei) as a food resource. The vast functional area of sites El-Khiday 2 and 2B is of great importance not only because of the number of Mesolithic closed contexts but also for its being the locus of a burial ground that produced until now 197 graves dating at least to three chronological phases: pre-Mesolithic, Neolithic, and Meroitic (Usai et al.  2010; Salvatori et al. 2011,  2014). The pre-Mesolithic graves, whose dating could only be established via stratigraphic observations as preceding the 6750–6500 functional pits installation, are very characteristic for the observed ritual, being most of the individuals (> 90 percent) buried extended and face down (Usai et al. 2010; Salvatori et al. 2011, 2014; Jakob 2014). The Neolithic burials can be dated to the Shaheinab phase (second half of the 5th ­millennium bce) based on the grave goods associated with some of them (Chłodnicki

From Foraging to Food Producing   111 et al. 2011; Salvatori et al. 2016). Meroitic burials represent the last burial phase at the cemetery (Usai et al. 2014). To fill the gap in the Mesolithic sequence of El-Khiday there is a late Mesolithic site, dated to about 5400 bce located some kilometers inland also producing ­evidence of semi-subterranean structures but in an unstratified site, similar to what is recorded in the north of Sudan, probably because related to a resumption of a more mobile lifestyle.

Reconstructing the Subsistence System The Kerma and El-Khiday sites are the only well preserved ones so far recovered along the long Nile stretch, within the Sudanese territory, if we exclude some features recovered at Sai Island1 (Garcea 2016). These sites’ structures show a plan like that of the village recovered in the Western Desert in Egypt, at Nabta Playa (Wendorf et al. 2001) and dating at the beginning of the 7th millennium bce. The data on faunal remains recovered at Nabta Playa, if we exclude the few questionably domestic cattle bones (see above), suggest more a Mesolithic economy based on hunting, gathering, and fishing on the Nile (Gautier 2001:613–15) with a later introduction of domestic sheep and goats much in agreement with the picture that is coming out from the entire Nile valley (Linseele 2013; Linseele et al. 2014). An overall similar subsistence system emerged for the groups inhabiting the Kerma region (Linseele 2012) even if differences have been underlined between the Wadi el-Arab assemblage and that of El-Barga, with Nile perch (Lates niloticus) predominating at Wadi el-Arab and clariid catfish at El-Barga (Linseele 2012). Mammals are represented by bovids (Madoqua saltiana, Hippotragus equinus, and Syncerus caffer) and other very large species, hippo, giraffe, and rhinoceros. Gathering, for what is actually known, can be applied to widely consumed freshwater molluscs. Shell gathering, Pila shells, was practiced in all Mesolithic phases recorded at elKhiday with a substantial increase at the end of the 7th millennium bce as suggested by the shell midden at el-Khiday 3 site; but what gathering meant in terms of plants is not yet clearly understood. No botanical macro-remains, nor micro-remains, can yet be associated to the numerous grinding stones recovered in the numerous pits, some reused as fireplaces. On the contrary, analysis of the deposits filling the pits and of the shell-midden demonstrated the potential of phytoliths that preserved better than any seeds, probably due to taphonomic processes typical of arid environments. A preliminary study reports the presence of panicoid grasses (Zerboni et al.  2015; Usai and Salvatori 2019) but a cross-check with grinding equipment is needed to establish whether they were really used as staple food. Previously information on plants used by Mesolithic groups in the Sudanese Nile valley was mainly based on plant impression on pottery (Ryan et al. 2016, table 9.2). Hunting was practiced by El-Khiday population but fishing seems to have been the most intense foraging activity (Salvatori et al. 2014; Linseele 2020).

112   Donatella Usai

Precursory to Neolithization: A Challenge From an objective analysis, it appears clear that the data on faunal remains available at the moment do not show any variation in the subsistence system that could be read as a transition to a food-producing economy, as illustrated by the emblematic record of some sites in the Levant (Sapir-Hen et al. 2016). The available archaeozoological data from Nubia and central Sudan are also too exiguous to investigate phenomena such as broadening of the subsistence base of Late Pleistocene hunter-gatherers groups (Broad Spectrum Revolution: Flannery 1969), as an expression of resource depletion (Optimal Foraging Theory: B. Smith 1983) or simply resource diversification in a rich environment (Niche-construction: B. Smith 2007). These can be seen as paving the road from residential mobility to sedentism and then to the adoption of a food-producing economy (Bettinger et al. 2015). A potential source of data is now offered by the El-Khiday sites and, especially by the sites of Kerma that cover the required chronological span. In the Kerma area the transition to the Neolithic can be placed chronologically between 6500 and 6000 bce, but it is very unfortunate that the faunal remains dating to this period are not well preserved. Unfortunately this situation occurs for most of contemporaneous sites in the region (Table 6.1), except for the cemeteries (Pöllath 2008). It seems therefore premature to talk of pastoralism as the main activity of the “neolithicized” group of the Sudanese Nile valley and of the co-existence of hunting-gathering-fishing Khartoum Variant groups and “pastoral” Abkan groups (Garcea 2016; Salvatori and Usai 2019). We would, in fact, need much more data (cf. Table 6.1) to deal properly with this important phase, while the bulk of information available to us is mainly from cemeteries (Reinold 2000, 2001, 2004, 200 6; Salvatori and Usai eds. 2008; Salvatori et al. 2016). It is mainly from them that scholars (Wengrow 2006; Garcea 2016) tend to consider the Neolithic society of the Nile valley as made of groups of pastoralists, because of the frequent ritual of depositing one or more bucrania as grave offerings. This view is not only unbalanced for the unjustified transposition of a symbolic and ideological act linked to a funerary context into a mode of production, but also for the calculated omission (Garcea  2016) or the reduction to “exotic trade item” (Hildebrand and Schilling 2016:5) of consistent data pointing to cultivation as another important symbolic trait present in the same cemeteries (Reinold  2001; Madella et al.  2014; Out et al. 2016; Salvatori et al. 2016).

Neolithic Evidence By the end of the 6th millennium bce populations living along the Nile valley had all, more or less, homogeneously acquired a food-producing economy. Our knowledge of

From Foraging to Food Producing   113 these societies and of this period comes mainly from the many cemeteries known from surveys and excavations (Welsby ed.  2001; Reinold  2000,  2001,  2004,  2006,  2007; Salvatori and Usai eds. 2008; Salvatori et al. 2016; Chłodnicki et al. 2011). From them we can appreciate the level of social complexity, passing throughout the inequality in individual ritual treatment, use of a symbolic language, technological development, and different productions that are put on display (Salvatori et al. 2016). Peculiarities in pottery production help to distinguish Nubia from central Sudan and identify different chronological phases thanks mainly to decoration patterns that, sometimes, also account for relationships between different groups (Salvatori and Usai eds.  2008; Salvatori et al. 2016). Fully decorated surfaces on open semi-circular bowls to ovoid jars dominate the Nubian assemblages in the phase that can be called Middle Neolithic A (Salvatori 2008); these are supplanted by plain surfaces with decoration limited at the rim and more complex shapes, cylindrical, bi-conical, carinated, in the Middle Neolithic B phase (Salvatori 2008), also known as the “Multaga phase” (Geus and Lecointe 2003). A brown pottery with plain rocker zig-zag design, such as the one described from the late Wadi el-Arab levels (Honegger 2012) and that recalls material from the area between the Third and Second Cataract called Abkan (Shiner 1968b; Nordström 1972) has also been recovered in graves of the R12 cemetery (Welsby ed. 2001; Salvatori and Usai eds. 2008). Generally this pottery is more roughly made or seems to have had a longer use compared to the majority of pottery offerings; it appears to be a cooking vessel finishing its lifecycle and entering the symbolic world of the dead. A similar difference in surface treatment, but not as sharp in shapes, is identifiable between the Ghaba phase of the Early Neolithic of central Sudan and the following Shaheinab phase at the Ghaba cemetery (Salvatori 2016). The plain rocker or evenly spaced zigzag is a trait common to both regions as is the very characteristic vessel shape called the caliciform beaker (Fig. 6.5), a form that recurs also in burial contexts of the Western Desert in Egypt as well as in the Tasian (Friedman and Hobbs 2002; Gatto 2010). Graves are also furnished with polished stone axes, granite and sandstone palettes, jewels made of exotic materials (amazonite and/or Red Sea shells), stone mace-heads indicating a range of additional activities, sometimes carried out at a standardized level of specialization (Usai 2016b). Ivory bracelets and pendants, from elephant and hippo, as well as artifacts made from gazelle bones, all indirectly point to hunting continuing to play an important role in the economy. Some materials, sea shells and amazonite, for example, point to a long-distance trade network (Zerboni et al. 2018). However the most symbolic of the elements that we find in graves of these cemeteries are the cattle bucrania, including one or more specimens, according to the status of the individual (Dubosson, this volume). As said, this has prompted many scholars to label the Sudanese Neolithic society as pastoral, probably under-evaluating other evidence such as cereal spikes (Reinold 2000) and grinding equipment, which is also present as grave goods. Furthermore, thin lenses found mainly under the skulls of some individuals in Nubia cemetery R12 and the cemetery of Ghaba in central Sudan appear to have been pillows made of plant remains (Madella et al. 2014; Out et al. 2016; Ryan et al. 2016).

114   Donatella Usai

1

4 2

10 cm

3

6

5

7

Figure 6.5  Caliciform beakers from R12 (1–5) and Ghaba (6–7) cemeteries.

Interestingly the R12 pillows were mainly composed of phytoliths of genera triticae and have been dated to 6260±40 bp (5320–5080 2σ cal. bce), thus ante-dating the presence of domestic wheat in the Nile valley (Madella et al. 2014; Out et al. 2016; Ryan et al. 2016). These deposits are more common at Ghaba cemetery in central Sudan, where bucrania occur less frequently than at R12 (3 percent compared to 24.1 percent) and restricted only to graves of the oldest phase. Bucrania are absent in the Shaheinab phase graves at Ghaba as well as the Shaheinab phase cemetery at Kadero (Chłodnicki et al.  2011). Keeping in mind that these offerings are strongly permeated with symbolic meaning, they nevertheless suggest that the Sudanese Nile valley in the Neolithic period was a much more complex world than previously thought. This evidence makes the more frustrating the fact that no settlement of this period in relatively good condition has been discovered so far that could provide information on the many activities we can look at only through the symbolic mantle that surrounds them in the “cities of the dead.”

From Foraging to Food Producing   115 We would need thousands of faunal remains from closed contexts, lithic tools and grinding equipment in sealed deposits, workshops for specialized production of stone objects, jewels and ivories to reconstruct the chaines operatoire, and the many subsystems that characterize this very dynamic and complex period. At the moment the only scanty evidence of a Neolithic occupation, not in the form of surface scatter, is that of the Kerma area, with pits and post-holes in circular arrangements that the excavator describes as “having systematically been washed away by the Nile floods” (Honegger 2013:17). At Kerma this Neolithic evidence is considered as the successive encampments of a pastoral population (Honegger 2013:17), an interpretation that is not further explicated. The destructive strength of the river should not be undervalued and most Neolithic evidence along the Nile is located within the flood plain. Water can be devastating, as shown by very recent events, and mud-brick or pisé houses can be completely washed away. It is most likely that Neolithic communities along the Nile valley practiced a wide range of activities, cultivating, herding, hunting, and even fishing, if we consider the shell hooks preserved at Shaheinab and harpoons found at Kadero cemetery (Arkell  1953; Chłodnicki et al.  2011). The prevalence of one activity over the other depended on the local environment in terms of land availability, pasture for the animals, a bay for easy access to fishing, and so on. These societies can be probably at best defined as agro-pastoral as other societies in the Mediterranean area (Fowler et al. 2015) but, again, the reality is that the quantity and quality of data we possess at the moment are still incomplete.

The Neolithization of the Sudanese Nile Valley There are finally some objective facts that must be considered when confronting the problem of the neolithization of the Nile valley. The primary fact is that the domesticates are mostly non-local (Linseele 2013; Madella et al. 2014). The introduction of these elements in the valley happened at least at about 6000 bce (Linseele et al. 2014) for the animals and at least at about 5300 bce for the plants (Madella et al. 2014). It is not possible to say whether the spread of domesticates in the valley was initiated by groups coming from the Middle East, whether it was sudden or gradual, patchy or complete. Similarly, we are not able to appreciate what the reaction of the local communities of huntergatherer-fishers was to these developments. However, observations on the human remains from El-Barga Neolithic cemetery highlight a significant difference from the preceding El-Barga Mesolithic population, which was extremely robust, with strong muscular attachment on the cranium and the infra-cranium, with dental avulsion of  upper incisors present in 35 percent of the adults and with severe dental wear (Crèvecoeur 2012). The former, on the contrary, was much more gracile with substantial differences in mandible and dental dimension (Crèvecoeur 2012). These differences recall those registered between the pre-Mesolithic and Neolithic populations at El-Khiday (Jakob 2014). The distance between the pre-Mesolithic and

116   Donatella Usai Neolithic populations at El-Khiday has also been underlined by Irish and De Groote (2016) as well as the distance between all Nubian Neolithic populations and Late Paleolithic ones of Jebel Sahaba (Anderson 1968; Irish 2008). The El-Barga Mesolithic population is said to be similar to that of Jebel Sahaba (Crèvecoeur 2012) however here no tooth avulsion is recorded (Anderson 1968) while at El-Khiday it is present in 70 percent of individuals (Jakob 2014) and in the Neolithic examples, it is still recorded but much less frequently. Whether the differences between the Mesolithic (or pre-Mesolithic) and Neolithic populations should be read as the result of in situ evolution fostered by changes in the diet and deteriorations of environmental conditions or to a new gene pool is hard to say without genetic studies on ancient human remains. The presence of Asian elements has been suggested based on studies on dental morphology (Irish 2005) and genetic ones (A. Smith 2013). Tangible archaeological traces left by Middle Eastern communities may have been minimal if “traders” of the Neolithic innovation were the representative of the Pre-Pottery Neolithic. In conclusion, we have just enough information for inferences about the Neolithization of Nubia and central Sudan, but the “big picture” is surely subject to future major revisions.

The Neolithic: Concluding Remarks To summarize the process of Neolithization of the vast territory of Nubia and central Sudan, it seems that a transition to food production occurred first in Nubia and, within a short period in central Sudan, probably triggered by groups moving up the Middle Nile valley forced by a series of contributing factors among which were demographic increase (Bocquet-Appel and Bar-Yosef 2008) and environmental change (Usai 2004; Salvatori and Usai 2016). The deterioration of the climate that started with the worldwide crisis of 6200 bce (Walker et al. 2012; Zerboni 2013) affected the northern and southern regions in different ways. The radiocarbon dates associated with Neolithic sites having evidence of domestic animals indicate a cline with a north-south direction (Salvatori and Usai 2016; Usai 2016a) and a hunter-gatherer-fisher subsistence economy seems to have persisted for a longer period in central Sudan. There are not much data to speculate on the reaction of Mesolithic communities about this possible colonization; among the possible resilient behaviors they could have adopted were relocation in more southern areas (Haaland 1987) and/or a gradual integration. Both answer cannot be easily assessed under the present state of knowledge, unless we want to take as integration markers the persistence of wild plants in the diet of the Ghaba Neolithic population or the presence in calculus samples of El-Khiday Neolithic individuals of oral bacteria typical of hunter-gatherer populations (Weyrich et al. 2017, Extended Data Figure 2). The neolithization of Nubia and central Sudan was influenced by many and complex internal and external factors; the picture that has been here traced is a bit of an oversimplification aiming at representing the state of art and, it is hoped, to suggest the direction and depth of archaeological research in the future.

From Foraging to Food Producing   117

Note 1. Some features recovered at Sai Island have been also interpreted as hut floors but seem quite small; furthermore huts do not seem regularly associated with the post-holes to form an intelligible pattern (Garcea 2016).

References Cited Anderson, J.E. 1968 Late Palaeolithic Skeletal Remains from Nubia. In The Prehistory of Nubia, ed. F. Wendorf, pp. 996–1040. SMU Press. Ascunce, M.S., A. Kitchen, P.R. Schmidt, M.M. Miyamoto, and C.J. Mulligan 2007 An Unusual Pattern of Ancient Mitochondrial DNA Haplogroups in Northern African Cattle. Zoological Studies 46(1):123–25. Arkell, A.J. 1949 Early Khartoum: An Account of the Excavation of an Early Occupation Site Carried Out by the Sudan Government Antiquities Service in 1944–5. Oxford University Press. ——— 1953 Shaheinab. Oxford University Press. Bettinger, R.L., R. Garvey, and S. Tushingham eds. 2015 Hunter-Gatherers: Archaeological and Evolutionary Theory, 2nd edition. Springer. Bocquet-Appel, J.-P. and O. Bar-Yosef eds. 2008 The Neolithic Demographic Transition and its Consequences. Springer. Brass, M. 2018. Early North African Cattle Domestication and its Ecological Setting. Journal of World Prehistory 31:81–115. Caneva, I. 1996 The Influence of Saharan Prehistoric Cultures on the Nile Valley. In The Prehistory of Africa. Colloquium 15: The Concept of the “Neolithic” in Africa with Particular Reference to the Saharan Region, ed. G. Aumassip, J.D. Clark, and F. Mori, pp. 231–39. Forlí. Chłodnicki, M., M. Kobusiewicz, and K. Kroeper eds. 2011 The Lech Krzyżaniak Excavations in the Sudan: Kadero. Archaeological Museum Poznań. Chłodnicki, M., M.  Lemiesz, A.  Longa, P.  Osypiński, and M.  Sip 2006 Fourth Cataract. Excavations at es-Sadda and Hagar el-Beida, Survey between es-Sadda and Shemkhiya: Two Seasons of Work in 2005. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean 17:337–47. Crèvecoeur, I. 2012 First Anthropological Insights on the Early Holocene Funerary Assemblages from El-Barga. Documents de la mission archéologique Suisse au Soudan 4:19–28. Dal Sasso, G., L. Maritan, S. Salvatori, C. Mazzoli, and G. Artioli 2014 Discriminating Pottery Production by Image Analysis: A Case Study of Mesolithic and Neolithic Pottery from Al Khiday (Khartoum, Sudan). Journal of Archaeological Science 46:125–43. Decker, J. E., S.D. McKay, M.M. Rolf, J. Kim, A. Molina Alcalá, et al. 2014 Worldwide Patterns of Ancestry, Divergence, and Admixture in Domesticated Cattle. PLoS Genetics 10(3):e1004254. Dittrich, A. and K.  Gessner 2014 Early Holocene Landscapes on Mograt Island (Sudan): Perspectives and First Results of the Late Prehistoric Survey 2014. Der Antike Sudan. Mitteilungen der Sudanarchäologischen Gesellschaft zu Berlin 25:127–44. Dittrich, A., K. Gessner, and B. Gabriel 2007 A Mesolithic Occupation Site near Umm Klait at the Fourth Cataract, Sudan. In Proceedings of the Second International Conference on the Archaeology of the Fourth Nile Cataract, ed. C. Näser and M. Lange, pp. 43–52. Meroitica 23. Harrassowitz.

118   Donatella Usai Edwards, D.N. and D.Q. Fuller 2005 Excavations and Survey in the Central Amri-Kirbekan Area, Fourth Cataract, 2003–2004. Gdańsk Archaeological Museum African Reports 4:21–30. Edwards, D.N. and A.  Osman 2011 Survey in the Mahas Region. In The Archaeology of a Nubian Frontier: Survey on the Nile Third Cataract, Sudan, ed. D.N.  Edwards, pp. 1–36. Mauhaus. Edwards, D.N. and A. Sadig 2011 The Later Prehistoric Archaeology. In The Archaeology of a Nubian Frontier: Survey on the Nile Third Cataract, Sudan, ed. D.N. Edwards, pp. 37–58. Mauhaus. Flannery, K.V. 1969 Origins and Ecological Effects of Early Domestication in Iran and the Near East. In The Domestication and Exploitation of Plants and Animals, ed. P.J. Ucko and G.W. Dimbleby, pp. 73–100. Duckworth. Fowler, C., J. Harding, and D. Hofmann eds. 2015 The Oxford Handbook of Neolithic Europe. Oxford University Press. Friedman, R.F. and J.J. Hobbs 2002 A “Tasian” Tomb in Egypt’s Eastern Desert. In Egypt and Nubia: Gifts of the Desert, ed. R. Friedman, pp. 178–91. British Museum. Garcea, E.A. 2016 Multi-stage Dispersal of Southwest Asian Domestic Livestock and the Path to Pastoralism in the Middle Nile Valley. Quaternary International 412, DOI: 10.1016/j. quaint.2016.01.026. Gatto, M.C. 2002 Early Neolithic Pottery of the Nabta Kiseiba Area: Stylistic Attributes and Regional Relationships. In Holocene Settlement of the Egyptian Sahara 2: The Pottery of Nabta Playa, ed. K. Nelson, pp. 65–78. Kluwer Academic/Plenum. ——— 2006a The Khartoum Variant Pottery in Context: Rethinking the Early and Middle Holocene Nubian Sequence. Archéologie du Nil Moyen 10:57–72. ——— 2006b The Most Ancient Pottery from the Dongola Reach (Northern Sudan): New Data from the SFDAS Survey Related to the Construction of the Merowe Dam. Archéologie du Nil Moyen 10:73–86. ——— 2010 Pottery from Gebel Ramlah. In Gebel Ramlah: Final Neolithic Cemeteries from the Western Desert of Egypt, ed. M. Kobusiewicz, J. Kabaciński, R. Schild, J.D. Irish, M.C. Gatto, and F.  Wendorf, pp. 123–57. Institute of Archaeology and Ethnology, Polish Academy of Sciences, Poznań Branch. ——— 2013 Preliminary Report on the Most Ancient Pottery from the Kerma Region. Documents de la mission archéologique Suisse au Soudan 5:4–10. Gautier, A. 1968 Mammalian Remains. In Prehistory of Nubia, ed. F. Wendorf, pp. 80–99. SMU Press. ——— 2001 The Early to Late Neolithic Archaeofaunas from Nabta and Bir Kiseiba. In Holocene Settlement of the Egyptian Sahara, v. 1: The Archaeology of Nabta Playa, ed. F. Wendorf and R. Schild, pp. 609–35. Kluwer Academic/Plenum. Gautier, A., V. Linseele, and W. Van Neer 2002 The Fauna of the Early Khartoum Occupation on Jebel Umm Marrahi (Khartoum Province, Sudan). In Tides of the Desert, ed. Jennerstrasse 8, pp. 337–44. Heinrich-Barth-Institut. Geus, F. and Y. Lecointe 2003 Survey and Excavations at El Multaga (Northern Sudan): A New Aspect of the Neolithic in the Upper Main Nile. Nyame Akuma 60:36–42. Greenwood, P.H. 1968 Fish Remains. In Prehistory of Nubia, ed. F. Wendorf, pp. 100–109. SMU Press. Haaland, R. 1987 Socio-Economic Differentiation in the Neolithic Sudan. BAR International Series 350. Archaeopress.

From Foraging to Food Producing   119 ——— 1991 Specialized Pastoralism and the Use of Secondary Products in Prehistoric Central Sudan. Archéologie du Nil Moyen 5:149–55. Haaland, R. and Anwar Abdul Magid 1995 Aqualithic Sites along the Rivers Nile and Atbara, Sudan. Alma Mater. Hays, T.R. 1971 The Karmakol Industry: Part of the “Khartoum Horizon-Style.” In The Prehistory and Geology of Northern Sudan, Report to National Science Foundation, ed. J.L. Shiner, pp. 84–153. National Science Foundation. ——— 1976 An Examination of the Sudanese Neolithic. In Proceedings of the Panafrican Congress of Prehistory and Quaternary Studies, VII Session, Addis Ababa 1971, ed. B. Abébé, J. Chavaillon, and J.E.G. Sutton, pp. 85–92. Ministry of Culture, Addis Ababa. Hildebrand  E.A. and T.M.  Schilling 2016 Storage amidst Early Agriculture along the Nile: Perspectives from Sai Island, Sudan. Quaternary International 412:81–95. Ho, S.Y.W., G. Larson, C.J. Edwards, T.H. Heupink, K.E. Lakin, P.W.H. Holland, and B. Shapiro 2008 Correlating Bayesian Date Estimates with Climatic Events and Domestication using a Bovine Case Study. Biology Letters 4:370–74. Honegger, M. 2005 Kerma et les débuts du nèolithique africain. Genava 53:239–49. ——— 2012 Archaeological Excavations at Kerma (Sudan). Preliminary Report to the 2011–2012 Season. Documents de la mission archéologique Suisse au Soudan 4:1–9. ——— 2013 Archaeological Excavations at Kerma (Sudan). Preliminary Report to the 2012–2013 Season. Documents de la mission archéologique Suisse au Soudan 5:1–47. Irish, J. 2005 Population Continuity versus Discontinuity Revisited: Dental Affinities among Late Paleolithic through Christian Era Nubians. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 128:520–35. ——— 2008 Dental Morphometric Analyses of the Neolithic Human Skeletal Sample from R12: Characterizations and Contrasts. In A Neolithic Cemetery in the Northern Dongola Reach: Excavation at Site R12, ed. S. Salvatori and D. Usai, pp. 105–12. BAR International Series 1814. Archaeopress. Irish, J. and I.  De Groote 2016 The Human Skeletal Remains from Ghaba: A Physical Anthropological Assessment. In Ghaba: An Early Neolithic Cemetery in Central Sudan, ed. S. Salvatori, D. Usai, and Y. Lecointe, pp. 85–108. Africa Magna Verlag. Jakob, T. 2014 A Bio-archaeological Appraisal of the Human Skeletal Remains from ­el-Khiday 2, Central Sudan. In The Fourth Cataract and Beyond: Proceedings of the 12th  International Conference for Nubian Studies, ed. J.R.  Anderson and D.A.  Welsby, pp. 271–77. Peeters. Jesse, F. 2003 Rahib 80/87. Ein Wavy-Line-Fundplatz im Wadi Howar und die früheste Keramik in Nordafrika. Africa Praehistorica 16. Heinrich-Barth-Institut. ——— 2004 No Link between the Central Sahara and the Nile Valley? (Dotted) Wavy Line Ceramics in the Wadi Howar, Sudan. In Nubian Studies 1998: Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference of Nubian Studies, ed. T.  Kendall, pp. 296–308. Department of African-American Studies, Northeastern University. Keding, B. 1996 Djabarona 84/13: Untersuchungen zur Besiedlungsgeschichte des Wadi Howar anhand der Keramik des 3. Und 2. Jahrtausends v. Chr. Africa Praehistorica 9. Heinrich-Barth-Institut. Khabir, A.M. 1987 New Radiocarbon Dates for Sarurab 2 and the Ages of the Early Khartoum Tradition. Current Anthropology 28(3):377–80. Klees, F. and R. Kuper 1992 New Light on the Northeast African Past. Africa Praehistorica 5. Heinrich-Barth-Institut.

120   Donatella Usai Linseele, V. 2012 Animal Remains from the Early Holocene Sequence at Wadi el-Arab. Documents de la mission archéologique Suisse au Soudan 4:16–18. ——— 2013 Early Stock Keeping in Northeastern Africa: Near Eastern Influences and Local Developments. In Neolithisation of Northeastern Africa, ed. N. Shirai, pp. 97–108. Studies in Early Near Eastern Production, Subsistence, and Environments 16. Ex Oriente. Linseele, V. 2020 A Diachronic Overview of Aquatic Adaptations at al-Khiday. In Tales of Three Worlds. Archaeology and Beyond: Asia, Italy and Africa. A Tribute to Sandro Salvatori, ed. D. Usai, S. Tuzzato, and M. Vidale, pp. 289–301. Archaeopress. Linseele, V., W. Van Neer, S. Thys, R. Phillipps, R. Cappers, W. Wendrich, and S. Holdaway 2014 New Archaeozoological Data from the Fayum “Neolithic” with a Critical Assessment of the Evidence of Early Stock Keeping in Egypt. PLOS ONE 9(10):e108517. Madella, M., J.J. García-Granero, W.A. Out, P. Ryan, and D. Usai 2014 Microbotanical Evidence of Domestic Cereals in Africa 7000 Years Ago. PLOS ONE 9(10):e110177. Marks, A.E., T.R. Hays, and J. De Heinzelin 1986 Preliminary report of the Southern Methodist University Expedition in the Dongola Reach. Kush 15:165–92. Nordström, H.-Å. 1972 Neolithic and A-Group Sites. The Scandinavian Joint Expedition to Sudanese Nubia 3. Scandinavian University Books. Osypiński, P. 2010 Lithic Assemblage Analysis from Early-Neolithic Sites 3-J–26 and 3-O–3 Fourth Nile Cataract. Draft Report available http://www.sudarchrs.org.uk/wp-content/ uploads/2013/09/SARS_draft_lithics.pdf (accessed May 11, 2016). Out, W.A., P. Ryan, J.J. García-Granero, J. Barastegui, L. Maritan, M. Madella, and D. Usai 2016 Plant Exploitation in Neolithic Sudan: A Review in the Light of New Data from the Cemeteries R12 and Ghaba. Quaternary International 412:36–53. Pérez-Pardal, L., L.J.  Royo, A.  Beja-Pereira, S.  Chen, R.J.C.  Cantet, A.  Traoré, I.  Curik, J. Sölkner, R. Bozzi, I. Fernández, I. Álvarez, J.P. Gutiérrez, E. Gómez, F.A. Ponce de León, and F. Goyache 2010 Multiple Paternal Origins of Domestic Cattle Revealed by Y-specific Interspersed Multilocus Microsatellites. Heredity 105:511–15. Peters, J. 1995 Mesolithic Subsistence between the 5th and 6th Nile Cataract: The Archeofauna from Abu Darbein, El Damer and Aneibis (Sudan). In Aqualithic Sites along the Rivers Nile and Atbara, Sudan, ed. R. Haaland and Anwar Abdul Magid, pp. 178–244. Alma Mater. Pöllath, N. 2008 Tools, Ornaments and Bucrania: The Animal Remains. In A Neolithic Cemetery in the Northern Dongola Reach: Excavations at Site R12, ed. S.  Salvatori and D. Usai, pp. 59–77. BAR International Series 1814. Archaeopress. Reinold, J. 2000 Archéologie au Soudan. Les civilisations de Nubie. Errance. ——— 2001 Kadruka and the Neolithic in the Northern Dongola Reach. Sudan & Nubia 5:2–10. ——— 2004 Kadruka. In Sudan: Ancient Treasures, ed. D.A. Welsby and J.R. Anderson, pp. 42–48. British Museum. ——— 2006 Les cimetières préhistoriques au Soudan—coutumes funéraires et systèmes sociaux. In Acta Nubica, ed. I.  Caneva and A.  Roccati, pp. 139–62. Istituto Poligrafico e Zecca dello Stato. Libreria dello Stato. ——— 2007 La nécropole néolithique d’el-Kadada au Soudan central, v. 1: Les cimetières A et B (NE–36-O/3-V–2 et NE–36-O/3-V–3) du kôm principal. Éditions Recherches sur les Civilisations. Ryan, P., W.A. Out, J.J. García-Granero, M. Madella, and D. Usai 2016 Plant Microremains from the White Deposits and Skeletons of Ghaba and R12 Cemeteries. Identification and Implications. In Ghaba: An Early Neolithic Cemetery in Central Sudan, ed. S.  Salvatori, D. Usai, and Y. Lecointe, pp. 109–20. Africa Magna Verlag.

From Foraging to Food Producing   121 Salvatori, S. 2008 Relative and Absolute Chronology of the R12 Cemetery. In A Neolithic Cemetery in the Northern Dongola Reach: Excavations at Site R12, ed. S.  Salvatori and D. Usai, pp. 139–46. BAR International Series 1814. Archaeopress. ——— 2012 Disclosing Archaeological Complexity of the Khartoum Mesolithic. African Archaeological Review 29(4):399–472. ——— 2016 Ghaba Cemetery Seriation and Radiometric Chronology. In Ghaba: An Early Neolithic Cemetery in Central Sudan, ed. S. Salvatori, D. Usai, and Y. Lecointe, pp. 49–57. Africa Magna Verlag. Salvatori, S. and D.  Usai eds. 2008 A Neolithic Cemetery in the Northern Dongola Reach. Excavations at Site R12. BAR International Series 1814. Archaeopress. Salvatori, S. and D. Usai 2016 Ghaba in Context. In Ghaba: An Early Neolithic Cemetery in Central Sudan, ed. S. Salvatori, D. Usai, and Y. Lecointe, pp. 121–34. Africa Magna Verlag, Frankfurt. Salvatori, S. and D. Usai 2019 The Neolithic and ‘Pastoralism’ along the Nile: A Dissenting View. Journal of World Prehistory 32:251–85. Salvatori, S., D.  Usai, M.A.  Faroug, A.  Di Matteo, P.  Iacumin, V.  Linseele, and M.  Khalid Magzoub 2014 Archaeological Evidence at Al Khiday: New Insight on the Prehistory and History of Central Sudan. In The Fourth Cataract and Beyond: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference of Nubian Studies, ed. J.R. Anderson and D.A Welsby, pp. 243–57. Peeters. Salvatori, S., D. Usai, and Y. Lecointe eds. 2016 Ghaba: An Early Neolithic Cemetery in Central Sudan. Africa Magna Verlag. Salvatori, S., Usai, D., and A. Zerboni 2011 Mesolithic Site Formation and Palaeoenvironment along the White Nile (Central Sudan). African Archaeological Review 28:177–211. ——— 2018 New Evidence from the Prehistoric Sites at Al Khiday and Al Jamrab, Central Sudan. In Desert and the Nile. Prehistory of the Nile Basin and the Sahara. Papers in Honour of Fred Wendorf, ed. J. Kabaciński, M. Chłodnicki, M. Kobusiewicz and M. Kabacińska, pp. 71–94. Poznań Archaeological Museum. Poznań 2015 African Symposium Proceedings. Sapir-Hen, L., T.  Dayan, H.  Khalaily, and N.D.  Munro 2016 Human Hunting and Nascent Animal Management at Middle Pre-Pottery Neolithic Yiftah’el, Israel. PLOS ONE 11(7):e0156964. Shiner, J.L. 1968a The Khartoum Variant Industry. In The Prehistory of Nubia, ed. F. Wendorf, pp. 768–90. SMU Press. ——— 1968b The Cataract Tradition. In The Prehistory of Nubia, ed. F. Wendorf, pp. 535–629. SMU Press. Shiner, J.L. ed. 1971 The Prehistory and Geology of Northern Sudan. Report to the National Science Foundation. Smith, A.C. 2013 Unraveling the Prehistoric Ancestry of the Present-day Inhabitants of Northeast Africa: An Archaeogenetic Approach to Neolithisation. In Neolithisation of Northeastern Africa, ed. N. Shirai, pp. 121–48. Studies in Early Near Eastern Production, Subsistence, and Environments 16. Ex Oriente. Smith, B.D. 1983 Anthropological Applications of Optimal Foraging Theory: A Critical Review. Current Anthropology 24:625–51. ——— 2007 Niche Construction and the Behavioral Context of Plant and Animal Domestication. Evolutionary Anthropology 16:188–99. Stock, F. and D. Gifford-Gonzales 2013 Genetics and African Cattle Domestication. African Archaeological Review 30:51–72.

122   Donatella Usai Suková, L. and L.  Varadzin 2012 Preliminary Report on the Exploration of Jebel Sabaloka (West Bank), 2009–2012. Sudan & Nubia 16:118–31. Suková, L., L. Varadzin, and P. Pokorný 2014 Prehistoric Research at Jebel Sabaloka, Central Sudan (2011–2014). The Dolní Věstonice Studies 20:149–53. Usai, D. 2003 The Lithic Industries. In Survey above the Fourth Nile Cataract, ed. D.A. Welsby, pp. 79–110. Sudan Archaeological Research Society Publication 10. BAR International Series 1110. Archaeopress. ——— 2004 Early Khartoum and Related Groups. In Nubian Studies 1998: Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference of Nubian Studies, ed. T. Kendall, pp. 419–35. Department of African-American Studies, Northeastern University. ——— 2005 Early Holocene Seasonal Movements between the Desert and the Nile Valley: Details from the Lithic Industry of Some Khartoum Variant and Some Nabta/Kiseiba Sites. Journal of African Archaeology 3(1):103–15. ——— 2008 Tracing the Movements of the Western Desert Dwellers: Site 11-I-13 in Wadi Karagan, Sudanese Nubia, Closely Akin to El Ghorab or El Nabta. Journal of African Archaeology 6(2):219–32. ——— 2014 Recent Advances in Understanding the Prehistory of Central Sudan. In The Fourth Cataract and Beyond: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference for Nubian Studies, ed. J.R.  Anderson and D.A.  Welsby, pp. 31–44. British Museum Publications on Egypt and Sudan 1. Peeters. ——— 2016a A Picture of Prehistoric Sudan: The Mesolithic and Neolithic periods. Oxford Handbook Online. www.oxfordhandbooks.com/view/10.1093/oxfordhb/ 9780199935413.001.0001/oxfordhb–9780199935413-e–56?rskey=M35FR0&result=1. ——— 2016b Bead-making in Neolithic Sudan. In Ghaba: An Early Neolithic Cemetery in Central Sudan, ed. S. Salvatori, D. Usai, and Y. Lecointe, pp. 59–70. Africa Magna Verlag. Usai, D. and S. Salvatori 2019 The Mesolithic Period on the White Nile Region and the al-Khiday Sites. Azania 54(4):445–67. Usai, D., S. Salvatori, P. Iacumin, A. Di Matteo, T. Jakob, and A. Zerboni 2010 Excavating a Unique Pre-Mesolithic Cemetery in Central Sudan. Antiquity 84:323. http://www.antiquity. ac.uk/projgall/usai323/. Usai, D., S. Salvatori, T. Jakob, and R. David 2014 The Al Khiday Cemetery in Central Sudan and its “Classic/Late Meroitic” Period Graves. Journal of African Archaeology 12(2):183–204. Van Neer, W. and H-P. Uerpmann 1989 Palaeoecological Significance of the Holocene Faunal Remains of the B.O.S.-Mission. In Forschungen zur Umweltgeschichte der Ostsahara, ed. R. Kuper, pp. 309–41. Heinrich-Barth-Institut. Varadzinová, L. and L. Varadzin 2017 Exploration of the Site of Sphinx (SBK.W-60): Findings of the 2014 and 2015 field seasons. Sudan and Nubia 21:23–33. Varadzinová, L. and L. Varadzin 2020 The First Notes on the Second Khartoum Mesolithic Cemetery at Jebel Sabaloka (Sudan). Archeologia Polona 58:121–33. Walker, M.J.C., M. Berkelhammer, S. Björck, L.C. Cwynar, D.A. Fisher, A.J. Long, J.J. Lowe, R.M. Newnham, S.O. Rasmussen, and H. Weiss 2012 Formal Subdivision of the Holocene Series/Epoch: A Discussion Paper by a Working Group of INTIMATE. Journal of Quaternary Science 27(7):649–59. Welsby, D.A. ed. 2001 Life on the Desert Edge: Seven Thousand Years of Settlement in the Northern Dongola Reach, Sudan. Sudan Archaeological Research Society Publication 7. BAR International Series 980. Archaeopress.

From Foraging to Food Producing   123 Wendorf, F. 1968 Summary of Nubian Prehistory. In The Prehistory of Nubia, v. 2, ed. F. Wendorf, pp. 1041–59. SMU Press. Wendorf, F., A.E.  Close, and R.  Schild eds. 1984 Cattle-Keepers of the Eastern Sahara. The Neolithic of Bir Kiseiba. SMU Press. Wendorf, F. and R. Schild 1980 Prehistory of the Eastern Sahara. Academic Press. Wendorf, F. and R. Schild 2001 Holocene Settlement of the Egyptian Sahara. Kluwer Academic/ Plenum. Wengrow, D. 2006 The Archaeology of Early Egypt: Social Transformations in North-East Africa, 10,000 to 2650 BC. Cambridge University Press. Weyrich, L.S., S. Duchene, J. Soubrier, L. Arriola, B. Llamas, J. Breen, A.G. Morris, K.W. Alt, D. Caramelli, V. Dresely, M. Farrell, A.G. Farrer, M. Francken, N. Gully, W. Haak, K. Hardy, K. Harvati, P. Held, E.C. Holmes, J. Kaidonis, C. Lalueza-Fox, M. de la Rasilla, A. Rosas, P.  Semal, A.  Soltysiak, G.  Townsend, D.  Usai, J.  Wahl, D.H.  Huson, K.  Dobney, and A. Cooper 2017 Neanderthal Behaviour, Diet, and Disease Inferred from Ancient DNA in Dental Calculus. Nature 544:357–61. Zerboni, A. 2013 Early Holocene Palaeoclimates in Northern Africa: An Overview. In Neolithisation of Northeastern Africa, ed. N. Shirai, pp. 65–82. Studies in Early Near Eastern Production, Subsistence, and Environments 16. Ex Oriente. Zerboni A., D. Usai, S. Salvatori, J.J. Garcia Granero, M. Madella, 2015 A Mesolithic Continental Shell-midden from Central Sudan: Subsistence Strategies of People at the Margin of the Nile Valley. Abstracts book of the XIX INQUA Congress—Quaternary Perspectives on Climate Change, Natural Hazards and Civilization. Zerboni, A., S. Salvatori, P. Vignola, A.A. Mohamed, and D. Usai 2018 The Long Distance Exchange of Amazonite and Increasing Social Complexity in the Sudanese Neolithic. Antiquity 92(365):1195–1209.

chapter 7

The A- Grou p a n d 4th Millen n ium BCE N u bi a Maria Carmela Gatto

Introduction The earliest known complex polities of Africa developed during the 4th millennium bce along the river Nile, in Egypt and Nubia. The Nubian polity, archaeologically known as the A-Group, reached its peak at the time of the Egyptian unification, ca. 3100 bce, to collapse soon after, around 2900 bce. Less famous than its northern neighbor, the A-Group is characterized by a distinctive pathway to complexity and power, which deviates in many respects from that followed by ancient Egypt, despite their contemporaneity, common roots, and interaction. This makes the A-Group a case study of extreme interest to consider in comparative archaeologies of complexities and early political systems. Current knowledge of 4th millennium bce Nubia is based on an abundance of archaeological data that has been collected over more than one hundred years of field research. Yet, due to a great variability in research timing, scope, and nature, such data is considerably biased. As a matter of fact, the leitmotif behind most of the fieldwork in the region has been the construction of dams along the Nile resulting in archaeological investigations suffering from time constraints and a lack of a comprehensive methodological approach. In the past decades, however, there have been a growing number of archaeological projects, both along the Nile in Egypt and Sudan and in the desert hinterland, with research agendas finally going beyond the recording of endangered archaeological sites. Alas, results are still impaired by limitations that hinder scientific applications in Egypt due to current antiquity laws. Scholarship on the late prehistory of Nubia has long relied on approaches formulated within paradigms of archaeological interpretation that have subsequently been challenged. For instance, an intra-site and intra-regional approach to spatial distribution and settlement pattern has prevented unfolding the range of complexity in Nubian society, only recently brought to light by the discovery of Nubian sites in the deserts. Likewise, an in-depth understanding of Nubian socio-economic and political systems

126   Maria Carmela Gatto has been stopped for a long time not only by the assumption of an Egyptian exceptionalism and superiority within the Nilotic scene but by the expectation to find in the archaeological record comparable evidence between the two cultures. Exemplary, in this respect, is the debate that followed the publication in 1980 by Bruce Williams of a report on Cemetery L of Qustul. The unmistakably rich graves of this small cemetery located just north of the modern border between Egypt and Sudan, and excavated by the Oriental Institute of Chicago in the 1960s, were unique in the A-Group funerary panorama. Some of the tombs had unusual architecture and incredibly large size; there was a wealth and variety of funerary offerings, including rare imports from Egypt and even from the Levant; and there were a few objects decorated following Egyptian royal iconography of the Naqada III period, thus preceding the 1st Dynasty. To Williams, tombs with such size and wealth in Egypt would have been recognized as royal (Williams 1980:16), and because they pre-dated any royal graves known at that time in Egypt, he proposed Qustul was “a birthplace of pharaonic civilization several generations before the rise of the first historic Egyptian dynasty” (Williams 1980:12). His words were understood by many scholars, among others William Adams, as suggesting “nothing less than a Nubian origin for the immemorial pharaonic monarchy of Egypt (Adams 1985:185)” and for this were highly criticized. Williams replied that “no such claim was made” (Williams  1987:15) by him, and that his intention was to “raise the strong possibility that Egypt’s founding dynasty originated near Qustul and that the unification was accomplished from Nubia” (Williams 1986:177). Whatever the claim, the (for some scholars) inconceivable idea of a primary role for Nubia in the rise of the Egyptian monarchy has been reconsidered after more recent finds in Upper Egypt, dating back to the Naqada I period the early manifestations of elite iconography. That the tombs found in Qustul were exceptional and comparable to those of the earliest Egyptian rulers remains, nevertheless, a fact. Defining the complexity of the Nubian A-Group has been a challenging issue. In fact, although recognized as complex, it has never been considered to be as complex as ancient Egypt. In other words: if Predynastic Egypt developed into a state, the Nubian A-Group, at most, could have reached a proto-state level, more likely a chiefdom according to some scholars (Nordström 2001; Gatto 2006; Török 2009). Such an approach, based on an inward-looking tendency of Egyptology as a discipline and a now muchchallenged neo-evolutionist paradigm, did not consider the distinctive socio-economic organization of the Nubian A-Group. The spatial distribution of A-Group sites, found both along the Nile and in the deserts (Gatto 2006; Lange 2006), the former with evidence of fishing and cultivation, the latter with abundant remains of domesticated animals, points to a society with a certain degree of mobility and an opportunistic and fluid economic pattern that included more than one subsistence activity (Gatto 2006). It is however the social value that herding had within the society, often displayed in ritual settings such as elite burial grounds, that supports its definition as pastoral. The ability of pastoral groups to develop alternative forms of socio-political complexity has been recognized by scholarship from other areas of the world and of Africa, and as a matter of fact it has been recognized also for historic periods in Nubia (Edwards  1998; Emberling 2014), and there is no reason not to recognize it for earlier times. Therefore, the inquiry to address is not whether the A-Group was as complex as ancient Egypt, but

The A-Group and 4th Millennium bce Nubia   127 how it was complex and how it differed in its complexity. This changing perspective helps interpreting the Qustul evidence in its proper socio-political setting and ultimately reconstruct the historical process (series of facts, changes, and developments) behind the origin of the earliest Nubian complex polity. The present overview is informed by the application of this theoretical approach, drawing upon a much wider dataset, to include archaeological and paleo-environmental records from the greater Nile valley. Terminology and chronology are both issues to consider. The term A-Group, introduced by George Reisner at the beginning of the past century and retained by Hans-Åke Nordström in his seminal work dated to 1972, conveys a monolithic and outdated definition that misrepresents the cultural complexity now inferred from the archaeological record. Although throughout the years there have been many attempts to challenge the term, no conclusive agreement has been achieved. The A-Group is not the only culture identified in 4th millennium Nubia. The term Abkan defines a culture already known from the Neolithic phase (Usai, this volume), geographically distributed from the Second to the Third Cataract and chronologically covering the first half of the millennium. With the term Pre-Kerma is indicated a third culture, originally identified in the Kerma region and dated from the end of the 4th millennium to the first half of the 3rd (Honegger, this volume). As such, there seems to have been more than one culture contemporaneously present in the region, when in fact that is not the case. The discrepancy encountered in the archaeological record should be read as an expression of an intracultural variability that, as previously stated, needs to be addressed on a supra-regional level, taking also into consideration the alternative type of socio-economic structuring and power organization that characterized Nubia. In this paper, I retain the term “A-Group” only to define the political entity that arose at the end of the 4th millennium bce. As for chronology, radiocarbon dates currently available are too few to establish a firm temporal framework, which still mainly relies on cross-referencing with Predynastic and Early Dynastic Egypt. Future research agendas should include a program of systematic radiometric dating of Nubian sites, as it has been recently done for Predynastic/Early Dynastic Egypt (Dee et al. 2014). The Egyptian chronological model established through Bayesian analysis of radiocarbon estimates shows that the process toward state-formation was not linear but consisted of a series of overlapping clusters of development, the nature of which fluidly shifted through time and space as the scale and orientation of social assemblages was negotiated (Stevenson 2016:4). A similar process is to be expected for Nubia and in this account the linear reading currently given to the archaeological data is re-evaluated accordingly. A final comment on spatial distribution and territoriality needs to be addressed. There has been an endless discussion on spatial distribution of A-Group sites along the Nile, particularly challenging the cultural affiliation of those from the First Cataract region (Nordström 1972; Gatto 2006). The expectation of sharp boundaries between cultures has revealed to be inaccurate. Boundaries are indeed socially charged areas were new cultural constructs can emerge by entangling elements of both original traditions. Thus, it is in a way pointless to keep discussing whether the sites in the First Cataract are to be defined as Egyptians or Nubians. As attested by the material culture, they are part of the Naqada cultural system, but (at least part of) the population living there had a Nubian heritage.

128   Maria Carmela Gatto This chapter briefly discusses in a temporal flux the archaeological data from Nubia and its interregional setting (Fig. 7.1), also debating the interplay with Egypt that strongly shaped the Nubian pathway to complexity and power at its early stage.

Figure 7.1  Map of the Middle Nile region with location of sites mentioned in the text. Map: Samuel Burns. 1: Abydos 2: Armant 3: Adaima 4: Elkab 5: Hierakonpolis 6: Er-Riqa 7: Korosko 8: Afyeh

9: Tunqala 10: Qustul 11: Serra 12: Saras 13: Batn el-Haggar 14: Kerma 15: Mograt 16: Shabaloka

17: Wadi Khashab 18: El-Arib 19: Nabta Playa 20: Bir Sahara 21: Laqiya 22: Nag el-Qarmila 23: Nag el-Hamdulab 24: Elephantine

25: Siali 26: Gerf Hussein 27: Dakka 28: Khor Dawd 29: Sayala 30: Naga Wadi 31: Wadi Allaqi

The A-Group and 4th Millennium bce Nubia   129

New Cultural Constructs Due to a climatic deterioration (see Gatto and Zerboni  2015, with references), from around 5400 bce deserts on both side of the Nile became unsuited for long seasonal occupations. This created, on the one hand, a higher population density in favorable areas along the river, with a proliferation of sites in Middle Egypt and between the Third and the Fourth Cataracts, and, on the other hand, a (seasonal) specialization into nomadic pastoralism of those staying in the desert. This is particularly true in the Nubian deserts and is well attested by the shift in settlement pattern recorded in the Nabta Playa region, where the large semi-permanent villages dated to the 8th–7th millennia bce are replaced by ephemeral installations where remains of domesticated animals are frequent (Wendorf and Schild 2001). The spatial distribution of such desert sites proves pastoral nomads were engaged in seasonal movements involving large areas to include Egypt and the Central Sudan. Those mobile communities were fundamental in expanding, during the 5th millennium bce, the superregional sphere of cultural contact, creating a shared Nubian-related cultural background in the greater Nile valley, from where at the beginning of the 4th millennium bce the Naqada culture arose (Gatto 2011a, 2011b, 2019; Wengrow et al. 2014). The Naqada culture consisted of a novel ideological system based on a shared set of beliefs and practices instrumental in creating a unique Egyptian identity that would support a new socio-economic network and eventually the rise of political power in the Lower Nile region. The initial evidence of Naqada material culture (corresponding to phase Naqada IA–B, 3800–3750 bce), was found in the Abydos region (Hartmann 2011), spreading as far south as Lower Nubia (Dakka-Sayala region) soon after (Gatto 2011b). A dense settlement system was established, for the first time, both in Upper Egypt and northern Lower Nubia, and habitation and funerary sites were placed at points where cultivable land was available. A three-tier settlement hierarchy developed in Upper Egypt since the beginning of the phase (Naqada IC–IIB). In Lower Nubia, settlements of this period, although poorly studied, also seem to display hierarchical differentiation; in addition, they are more varied, including rock shelters and architecture with remains of stone hut foundations, found alongside post-holes of wattle-and-daub structures (Nordström 1972:20–21; Gatto 2006). The hamlet of Nag el-Qarmila, north of Aswan, located at what would soon become the southern frontier of the Egyptian state, provides insight into community identity. It consists of a sequence of occupations with hearths, post-holes, pots built in as installations, small plastered pit basins, and a sand floor. Radiometric determinations from two hearths dated the site at ca. 3800–3600 bce, corresponding to Naqada IC–IIB (Gatto et al. 2009; Gatto 2014, 2016). The cemetery was located nearby and according to the pottery was in use for longer time, suggesting that it also served a settlement contemporary to its latest phase (Naqada IIC–D) closer to the river and now lost under the modern cultivation. Tombs were either shallow depressions dug into the sand with no visible

130   Maria Carmela Gatto cover, or pits (the most recent having a lateral niche) dug into the alluvium and covered by stone slabs. Such funerary architecture, typical of Nubia, is rarely found in Upper Egyptian contexts (e.g., in Adaima and Elkab: Hendrickx and van Rossum  1994; Crubezy et al. 2002). Most of the ceramics and lithic artifacts are of Naqadan tradition, while others are local productions, such as the shale tempered wares (Friedman 1994; Buchez 2004). Also objects typical of the Nubian tradition are found, such as blacktopped rippled wares and lunates made of quartz or agate used as arrowheads or sickle blades (Gatto  2014). Hybrid objects, like Naqada red polished bowls with a Nubian milled rim decoration, were additionally reported, displaying an ongoing process of cultural entanglement in the area. Contrary to Upper Egypt where the number of Nubian or hybrid objects is consistently limited, in Lower Nubia there is a direct link between the number of Naqada objects found and the geographical location of the site, with the higher percentage being recorded on the northernmost sites (Gatto 2006). The farther from the core of the Naqada culture, the more Nubian identity was retained by local communities. At Nag el-Qarmila, several storage pits were found on top of the lowest spur overlooking the valley, away from the main occupation area at the bottom (Fig. 7.2). The location of storage units separated from the main settlement is a feature known in Egypt since the Neolithic (Caton-Thompson and Gardner  1934; Williams  1982; Wendrich and Cappers  2005). In Lower Nubia similar locales, dated to the A-Group period, were found in Serra West (Nordström 2014:19) and in Qustul (Williams 1989), while many more are known from the Pre-Kerma period (see below and Honegger, this volume, for further details). This data argues for a reconsideration of the complex of 578 storage pits found in the 1960s at Khor Daoud, on the opposite bank of the Dakka Plain (Piotrovsky 1964, 1967), previously understood as a trade- or market place (Nordström 1972:26). The evidence presented above suggests that the storage facilities at Khor Daoud may have been part of the local domestic installations. A large Predynastic settlement with remains of stone huts was found by Firth (1915:9–10) in the Dakka Plain, but never investigated. Clusters of graves dating from Naqada IC to Naqada III were found surrounding the settlement, pointing to an extended use of the site, which supports the idea of a large regional center in use during the whole 4th millennium bce. It also gives further indication of communal property and uniform distribution of provisions, alongside an intra-site widespread patterning with no need for safeguarding. Storage facilities were also found in contemporary desert sites, as that at Bir Sahara in the Western Desert where two pottery caches were near the local well. The ceramics found in those pits consist of Nubian black-topped and Naqada marl wares (dated to Naqada IID, ca. 3350 bce), as well as a few Clayton rings and disks of unknown function (Gatto 2002). This combination of material culture is only known from A-Group sites, suggesting the people who left those vessels there were of Nubian heritage. The site was probably a stopping place along one of the desert roads connecting Nubia with the Egyptian oases, and highlights a new use of the desert for trade, which developed supported by request of exotic items from the rising Egyptian elites. The Nubian population obviously served as traders exchanging products from the south with Egypt. Their knowledge of both desert mobility,

The A-Group and 4th Millennium bce Nubia   131

Figure 7.2  The Predynastic site of Nag el-Qarmila (Aswan): on the foreground, the cemetery; on the middle ground, the settlement; on the background, the storage area. Aswan-Kom Ombo Archaeological Project Archive.

acquired as part of their pastoral tradition, and river navigation at the cataracts in Nubia was probably a key element in developing their role as middlemen, and their control of trade routes and way-stations. The funerary data in Lower Nubia displays geographical, chronological, and social variability. Earliest tombs consist of pits cut into the alluvium, circular in shape to become rectangular with rounded corners and with a lateral niche by mid-millennium. A peculiar beehive shape is also found in the northern cemeteries (Reisner 1910). As a rule, tombs do not have superstructures but they are closed by stone slabs. In the Gerf Hussein area there are few examples of graves covered by stone structures, which may represent a connection with the desert funerary tradition (Firth 1912:124–26) made easy by the intersection in the Dakka Plain of the Wadi Allaqi. Multiple burials are reported and typically include same sex individuals or adults and children, although the latter may have their own burial with rich offerings. Bodies are usually contracted on the left side and oriented toward the south. Most of the bodies in northern Lower Nubia were lying and/or covered by matting or linen (Gatto 2006). Many objects were placed in the graves as offerings to the dead; they included local products but also objects of Egyptian manufacture, such as pottery and palettes. Animal tombs are often found in cemeteries of the First Cataract region and date to the first part of the millennium (Flores 2003;

132   Maria Carmela Gatto Roma 2010). Inequality among the inhumations is reported, as well as the important social role of females alongside males (Gatto 2006). Archaeological evidence from this period is very scanty south of the Korosko Bend (Nordström 2014) and, inexplicably, almost absent in Upper Nubia (Honegger, this volume). This could be explained by the movement and clustering of Nubian population closer to Egypt early in the millennium, with a spread again southward only later.

Alternative Power Parallel to the rise in Egypt during the Naqada IIIA–B (3325–3085 bce) phase of a centralized political system based at Abydos (Dynasty Zero), an indigenous form of power developed in Nubia. By this time, Egypt was a sedentary society with an economy increasingly based on agriculture, although retaining traces of the symbolic value of cattle from their herding predecessors, while Nubia retained its traditional semi-nomadic organization and multi-spectrum economic pattern, with herding still having an important symbolic value (Gatto  2011a). The mobile and flexible politics practiced by the Nubian agro-pastoral peoples gave rise to a regional polity, the A-Group, based pri­ma­ rily on trade, social networking, and distributed authority. It is the interplay with Egypt that sped up the long-term process toward complexity and hierarchy that was already in place among the Nubian Neolithic communities (Gatto 2019; in prep b). In the Nubian Nile valley sites of this phase are found as far south as the Batn el-Hajar (Gatto 2006), suggesting the A-Group had an interest in including southern areas into its territory. By the end of the phase (Naqada IIIB), the number of sites both north and south of the First Cataract diminished, following a pattern of clustering in major regional centers that characterized the settlement pattern in Egypt at the inception of the unification (Gatto 2014, with references), but also, the establishment in the region of the geo-political frontier of the soon-to-be Egyptian state. Alongside the settlement at Dakka, a new important center developed at Afyeh, in the Korosko Bend (Smith 1962; Lal 1967). Located in one of the narrowest and rockiest parts of the Lower Nubian Nile valley, its setting can only be explained by the crossing in the region of the most important desert routes linking Egypt to Upper Nubia and the Central Sudan. Several stone buildings were excavated, the biggest of which covered an area of ca. 200 m2 and had at least six rooms. Pots built in as installations and fire and small storage pits, the latter plastered on the inside, were found in some of the rooms, pointing to a domestic function. A circular platform was found to the southwest of the six-room building. The great amount of material recovered, both on the surface and in stratigraphic contexts, consists of lithic, bone, and copper tools, grinding equipment, ceramic containers, but also personal adornments, such as beads and rings, spindle-whorls (which suggest textile manufacturing), and stone vessels (Stevenson 2012). Animal bones and great quantities of carbonized remains of wheat, barley, and legumes were also found (Lal 1967:106). Many are the elements that make this settlement unique, including its high position controlling

The A-Group and 4th Millennium bce Nubia   133 the trade routes, the large-scale stone architecture, and the exceptionally rich and varied material culture. Although sites like Dakka, and another found at er-Riqa, could provide useful parallels, they were not excavated (Smith 1962; Stevenson 2012), undermining a clear understanding of Afyeh’s significance, while leaving ample room for data misinterpretation (see Gatto 2006 and reply by Stevenson 2012). Cemeteries of this phase are numerous and regional variability is detected in architecture, rituality, and material culture. Grave superstructures occur only occasionally, particularly in the Dakka/Korosko region; in the northern part of Lower Nubia graves could contain up to six bodies, often wrapped in linen and matting, contrary to southern graves in which multiple inhumations comprised up to three bodies, wrapped in animal fur or leather, showing a stronger pastoral character. The percentage of Egyptian materials is also lower in the south, where only selected types of Egyptian objects reached the Second Cataract area, and this is clearly attested in the ceramic assemblage, which only consists of marl jars and bowls (some used as jar lids), with very few wavyhandled pots. Takamiya (2004) has suggested a different pattern of distribution for the Egyptian pottery from sites south of the Korosko Bend, which could imply, for this period, a trade directly controlled by the Abydos elite and its Nubian counterpart in the Second Cataract region, contrary to sites north of the Korosko Bend, where supplies would have been still provided by centers such as Hierakonpolis and Elephantine. Inequality is well attested among graves from the same cemetery and in many cases female graves are particularly rich. It has been stated that female status reflected the importance of agriculture in Nubian society, a (re)producing activity paralleled to that of giving birth (Nordström 1996). However, such status has also been noticed in the pastoral nomadic segment of the society (Gatto 2019), leaving scope for further interpretation. There is no doubt that women as mothers had a fundamental role in creating prosperity for the group and survival in times of droughts, and this is true regardless of the group economy and settlement pattern. Within a group, women are usually in charge of social order and rituality, as well as in passing knowledge through generations. The special role entrusted to women in Nubia, thus, mainly suggests a society where social cohesion, identity, and kinship following a matrilineal line were of high importance. It is, however, in specific burial grounds that narratives of power are detected. The most remarkable is Cemetery L at Qustul, which shows many unique features (Williams 1986). This small cemetery of thirty-three graves, including seven cattle burials, was part of a larger landscape of rich graveyards, but also storage facilities (Williams 1986, 1989); unfortunately, no settlement was found in association, probably already destroyed by the time the archaeological investigation took place. Burials were all thoroughly plundered and not much was left of human remains, however, in some cases the presence of multiple inhumations of adults of same or different sex, or adult and infant, was attested. This suggests the burial ground was that of an elite group rather than of powerful male individuals and that power was at least partially shared at a communal level. Most of the human graves were monumental, with large and long rectangular shafts and a lateral niche; remains of funerary beds were noticed in some of them.

134   Maria Carmela Gatto The rich and varied number of offerings were partially placed on the outer corridor, such as the large Egyptian jars, or inside the funerary chamber, such as the personal adornments. Stone incense burners were probably placed outside the burial, as indicated by their fragments being found on the surface near the shaft; an occurrence that has parallel in the cemetery of Tunqala West, in the Korosko Bend (Stevenson 2012). The graves had up to two hundred pottery vessels, 75 percent of which were local production while the rest consisted of extremely rich imports from Egypt and even Palestine. Of importance are the painted wares, also known as eggshell or variegated hematitic wares. They are of two types: deep bowls with painted patterns on the outside and black on the inside or large shallow bowls with painted patterns on the inner surface. The latter are less common than the former, which is more common in cemeteries throughout Lower Nubia; however, although the earliest examples are found in cemeteries of the Dakka Plain (contemporary to Naqada IIC–D, 3450–3350 bce), it is in Qustul that this kind of ceramic manufacture reached its peak. Here, in fact, they also have unique shapes and decorative patterns and many are miniature in size. The Qustul region seems to have been its center of production and from there probably the pottery was distributed across Nubia, a specialized production for, and controlled by, the elite. Objects such as palettes, beads, and pebbles were found in great numbers as well. Other items rarely found in A-Group funerary contexts were also of common occurrence; this is the case of incense burners, stone vessels, lip plugs, clay tokens, pieces of sculptures, bread models, seals, and mace-heads, most of which were of Egyptian provenance. As for the incense burners, they are, like the painted wares, a new item associated with rich graves, which apparently has a counterpart neither in the Egyptian world, nor in previous and following Nubian cultures, except graves in the Pre-Kerma Culture (Honegger, this volume). Usually they consist of circular-shaped soft stone vessels with only a shallow depression on the top where burning incense was placed. While their use for funerary rituals is supported by their presence in and outside the burials, a use in religious ceremonies is depicted in a seal impression found in the cemetery of Siali, south of the First Cataract (Reisner 1910, pl. 65f.; Williams 1986, Fig. 59). In the central part of the scene (Fig. 7.3), a male figure is represented sitting on a chair and looking toward a serekh (palace façade) and a standard with a falcon on top; between him and the serekh a bow is depicted, a sign interpreted by Williams (1986:169) as the archaic Egyptian name for Nubia (Ta-sety, the land of the bow). Behind him a bovine figure is standing on a pedestal, followed by two dogs. On top of the human figure there is a serekh surmounted by a falcon; a line of incense burners with a stylized pointed flame coming out of them frame the upper part of the scene. The illustration clearly refers to a ritual act attended and/or performed by a ruler, as suggested by the serekh with the falcon on top used in Egypt to write royal names. The ritual included a “divine” cow or bull and was enacted in front of a palace façade (probably a sacred building) and a falcon standard. The many Egyptian iconographic elements, such as the serekh and the falcon, are here intertwined with Nubian traditional symbols, such as the cattle, and new ones, such as the incense burners. That incense burners were objects of high symbolic value in the new Nubian political narrative is also attested by the unique scenes engraved

The A-Group and 4th Millennium bce Nubia   135

Figure 7.3  The Siali seal impression as reconstructed by Williams (1986, fig. 58a; original impression from Reisner 1910, pl. 65f). Courtesy Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago.

on two of them found in Qustul. On these burners, parades of sacred boats are represented going towards a palace façade. In both scenes, a royal figure dressed like a phar­ aoh and sitting on a throne wears the white crown of Upper Egypt. The iconography in both cases is early pharaonic (compare, for instance, the rock art tableaux of Nag elHamdulab—Hendrickx et al. 2012 with reference therein), and thus shared with Egypt, but the medium on which it is depicted is instead symbolically meaningful only in Nubia. The artist may well have been working for the Egyptian court; the patron, however, was certainly Nubian. The cemetery in Qustul is not the only cemetery of the kind in Nubia. There are other two in the Sayala area, south of the Dakka Plain. Cemetery 137 dates to the first part of the phase (corresponding to Naqada IIIA in Egypt). It contained thirty-one large graves, all rectangular, of which only thirteen were published (Firth 1927). The large amount of broken stone on the surface of the cemetery is most likely the result of broken roofing slabs, but it could also represent the remains of superstructures (Smith 1994). Although thoroughly plundered, the graves yielded evidence of multiple inhumations, several objects of Nubian manufacture, including some painted wares, and remarkable objects of Egyptian provenance. Grave 1 contained two pear-shaped mace-heads with gilded wooden handles, one of which had depicted wild fauna. Not only is the iconography of the decoration Egyptian, but the fine manufacturing suggests the object was produced in Egypt by a royal workshop and reached Sayala as a gift from one elite to another. Yet, despite the rich imports from Egypt, the Sayala cemetery does not rival that of Qustul in grave sizes and shapes or in the number and uniqueness of objects in each tomb, including those of Nubian manufacture. The cemetery of Naga Wadi, a few kilometers south of Sayala, which dates to the second part of the phase (corresponding to Naqada IIIB), has more affinities with Qustul, including the funerary architecture, the number and type of offerings, both Nubian and Egyptian, and the presence of cattle burials. The fact that in Nubia there were two contemporary burial grounds of powerful elites suggests shared and geographically distributed power.

136   Maria Carmela Gatto There are three other cemeteries that need to be mentioned because of the richness of their offerings, particularly of painted wares, incense burners, and Egyptian imports, including a few seals, but also because of their architecture. One is a small cemetery found in Tunqala West, very close to Afyeh in the Korosko Bend, where graves have stone superstructures of desert tradition. Its location, close to the major A-Group site and to the desert routes, is not coincidental. It probably relates to a desert group working for the A-Group or sharing in some way their power and wealth. The other two sites are south of the Second Cataract, at Serra West (Nordström  2014) and Saras (still unpublished except for one grave, Mills and Nordström 1966); in the latter, there is also a grave shaft covered by mudbricks, a unique occurrence in the A-Group repertoire of clear Egyptian influence. The location of those rich cemeteries at the southern border of the A-Group territory is related to the importance of trade with the south and the development in Kerma of a large semi-permanent settlement, which for the standard of that time has all the potential to be defined as an urban center (Gatto 2018; see Honegger, this volume, for further discussion). Furthermore, remains of two important cemeteries, one on Mograt Island at Abu Ahmed (Weschenfelder and Rees 2014; Weschenfelder 2015) north of the Fifth Cataract, and the other in the Sabaloka area of the Sixth Cataract (Gatto 2007), included ceramics very much like those from Qustul and the A-Group, although they are not imports as fabrics are not the same. This suggests that, by the end of the 4th millennium bce, trade controlled by the A-Group and related (allied) communities had also reached the Khartoum region. Evidence of herding in the desert is found particularly in the Laqiya region, where pottery from local campsites shows direct links with that produced in the Second Cataract region (Lange 2006), pointing to seasonality and/or segmentation among the social groups. A very large stone tumulus (20 m in diameter), found in the Wadi Allaqi heartland and radiocarbon dated to ca. 3100 bce, is evidence of contemporary funerary activities (Sadr et al. 1995). The burial pit was located on the eastern side of the stone circle, while an offering area with a fireplace and many animal bones of sheep and cattle, as well as charcoal, was in the center of the tumulus.

Collapse and Resiliency The archaeological evidence of the A-Group disappears with the beginning of the 1st Dynasty in Egypt (Naqada IIIC), dating the collapse of this early Nubian polity and the trade network under its control. A multi-scalar explanation for this includes a climatic arid spell that affected the whole of North Africa (see Gatto and Zerboni 2015, with references) and a change in the external politics of Egypt. It is possible, in fact, that the newly founded Egyptian state secured direct control of the trade system, causing not only the collapse of the A-Group but, like a domino effect, also the disappearance of the centers further south (Kerma, Mograt, and Sabaloka).

The A-Group and 4th Millennium bce Nubia   137 The traditional view sees Nubia has largely abandoned by its native population in the period between the A-Group and C-Group and during the Old Kingdom (Adams  1977:135), but a revaluation of old data and the analysis of newly acquired ­evidence—mostly of temporary sites and storage facilities—demonstrates that during the 3rd millennium bce in the Nubian Nile valley there were more sites than previously thought (Gatto  2011b with references, and Honegger, this volume). The evidence, approached with a supra-regional perspective, points to a substantial change in ­settlement pattern and in socio-economic and political organization. Nubian sites of important wealth and communal ritual function are present also in this phase, just not in the Nubian Nile valley. For example, there is an elite Nubian cemetery found by Oliver Myers in the low desert of Armant in Upper Egypt near Luxor in the 1930s, and still unpublished, that has graves with rich offerings, including many Egyptian alabaster vessels (data from EES Archive and Egyptian Centre, University of Swansea). Some of the largest graves are surrounded by several cattle burials, like those found in Qustul and Naga Wadi. The Egyptian pottery dates the site to the beginning of the 1st Dynasty, right after the abandonment of Qustul (or partially overlapping with it). Like in Qustul wealth and power are expressed with both rich Egyptian objects and Nubian media, such as cattle. Two important ritual and funerary centers broadly contemporary with the Armant cemetery have been found in the Eastern Desert: that of Wadi Kashab and that of El-Arib. In Wadi Khashab a complex system of stone structures, stelae, and a large stone enclosure with animal, mainly cattle, and human graves has been recently investigated and partially dated to this period (Osypiński and Osypińska 2016). El-Arib, instead, consists of a large cemetery with many standing stelae and again human and cattle burials. The site, yet to be investigated, was first visited by Murray (1926) and more recently by Sidebotham et al. (2008) and Harrell (pers. comm.). The pottery from El-Arib perfectly matches that from Armant (Fig. 7.4) and that from sites along the Nubian Nile valley, but also in Upper Egypt, currently defined as Pre-Kerma or B-Group (see, e.g., Gratien  1995; Raue  2008; Glück  2010; Gatto 2011b; Herbst and Smith 2014; Nordström 2014; see Honegger, this volume, with bibliography). The people living in the Middle Nile region, thus, neither disappeared nor completely lost their socio-political complexity. Rather, they adjusted to the new environmental and geo-political challenges by disaggregating and fluidly reconstructing in different terms their socio-economic organization and political system. The ephemeral nature of the sites along the Nile, and the large ceremonial complexes in the desert suggest higher mobility and communities strongly relying on collective rituality and kinship. The interplay with Egypt also changed, with segments of the pastoral elites settling closer to the Egyptian territorial core in a more symbiotic manner, as the cemetery in Armant suggests. At this latter site, Nubian symbols, such as cattle, are kept, alongside Egyptian imports; however, Egyptian royal iconography is abandoned, at least at that time in Nubian history.

138   Maria Carmela Gatto

Figure 7.4  Black-topped red-polished rippled wares from the Nubian Cemetery 1600–1700 in Armant (contemporary to the First Dynasty). This kind of ware is commonly found in PreKerma/B-Group-related sites along the Nile and in the deserts, including the Eastern Desert necropolis of El-Arib. Courtesy Egypt Exploration Society.

Conclusion The A-Group polity developed in Nubia by the end of the 4th millennium bce and can be understood as a creation in response to climatic and supra-regional geo-political changes, emphasizing trade and transport with variations in how traditional knowledge on mobility was expressed, a knowledge that was acquired by the Nubian society throughout the Holocene (Gatto 2011a, 2019; in prep b). What characterized the A-Group were: a fluid economic pattern that included more than one subsistence activity, with herding retaining a distinctive social value within the society; and organizational differences resulting from mobile and flexible politics, which gave rise to a regional polity based on trade and control over its logistics, social networking, and alliance building, and a distinct form of distributed authority. The temporal pathway to power in Nubia is marked by the following clusters of acts, changes, and developments:

The A-Group and 4th Millennium bce Nubia   139

1. 3800–3450 bce: permanent settlement of Lower Nubia following first encounter with the Naqada culture; 2. 3450–3325 bce: establishment of inter-regional social network, new economic strategy (trade), and development of early sources of power; 3. 3325–3200 bce: elite ascendency, interplay with Naqada elite, development of ideology and kingship; 4. 3200–3000 bce: royal power, supra-regional contacts, collapse; 5. post-2900 bce: resiliency and readjustment of socio-political networks and power.

The A-Group existed in the frame of historical processes and networks of practice not as a uniform and bounded entity but as one that was continually realized and performed through a web of power strategies, activities, and resources. Its interplay with the rising Egyptian state strongly affected the material outcome. However, the A-Group developed unique features that would later be shared with the following Kerma polity in Nubia and with many future African political systems.

References Cited Adams, W.Y. 1977 Nubia: Corridor to Africa. Princeton University Press. ——— 1985 Doubts about the Lost Pharaohs. Journal of Near Eastern Studies 44(3):185–92. Buchez, N. 2004 Les vases à cuire de l’époque prédynastique à Adaïma: aspects techniques, économiques et culturels. Cahiers de la Céramique Égyptienne 7:15–45. Caton-Thompson, G. and E.W.  Gardner 1934 The Desert Fayum. Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland. Crubezy, É., T.  Janin, and B.  Midant-Reynes 2002 La nécropole prédynastique d’Adaïma. Fouilles de l’Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale du Caire 47. Dee, M., D.  Wengrow, A.J.  Shortland, A.  Stevenson, F.  Brock, and C.  Bronk Ramsey 2014 Radiocarbon Dating and the Naqada Relative Chronology. Journal of Archaeological Sciences 46:319–23. Edwards, D.N. 1998 Meroe and the Sudanic Kingdoms. Journal of African History 39:175–93. Emberling, G. 2014 Pastoral States: Toward a Comparative Archaeology of Early Kush. Origini 36:125–56. Firth, C.M. 1912 The Archaeological Survey of Nubia: Report for 1908–1909. National Printing Department (Cairo). ——— 1915 The Archaeological Survey of Nubia: Report for 1909–1910. National Printing Department (Cairo). ——— 1927 The Archaeological Survey of Nubia: Report for 1910–1911. National Printing Department (Cairo). Flores, D.V. 2003 Funerary Sacrifice of Animals in the Egyptian Predynastic Period. BAR International Series 1153. Archaeopress. Friedman, R.F. 1994 Predynastic Settlement Ceramics of Upper Egypt: A Comparative Study of the Ceramics of Hemamieh, Nagada and Hierakonpolis. Doctoral dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.

140   Maria Carmela Gatto Gatto, M.C. 2002 Two Predynastic Caches at Bir Sahara (Egyptian Western Desert). Sahara 13:51–60. ——— 2006 The Nubian A-Group: A Reassessment. Archéo-Nil 16:61–76. ——— 2007 “Je voudrais te montrer un truc”: A Short Note on a Possible A-Group Related Cemetery at the Sixth Cataract of the Nile. Cahier de Recherches de l’Institut de Papyrologie et d’Égyptologie de Lille 26:115–19. ——— 2011a The Nubian Pastoral Culture as Link between Egypt and Africa. In Egypt and its African Context, ed. K. Exell, pp. 21–29. BAR International Series 2204. Archaeopress. ——— 2011b The Relative Chronology of Nubia. Archéo-Nil 21:81–100. ——— 2014 Cultural Entanglement at the Dawn of the Egyptian History: A View from the Nile First Cataract Region. Origini 36:93–123. ——— 2016 Nag el-Qarmila and the Southern Periphery of the Naqada Culture. In Egypt at its Origins 4, ed. M.D. Adams, B. Midant-Reynes, E.M. Ryan, and Y. Tristant, pp. 227–46. Peeters. Gatto, M.C. 2018 The Origin of Urban Societies in the Nile Valley. Origini: Prehistory and Protohistory of Ancient Civilizations 42(2):167–82. ——— 2019 The Late Prehistory of Nubia in its Interregional Setting. In Handbook of Ancient Nubia, ed. D. Raue, pp. 259–91. De Gruyter. ——— in prep The Neolithization Process in Nubia. In Revolutions: The Neolithisation of the Mediterranean Basin, ed. J. Rowland, G. Lucarini, and G. J. Tassie. Edition Topoi. Gatto, M.C., M.  De Dapper, R.  Gerisch, E.  Hart, S.  Hendrickx, T.  Herbich, H.  Joris, H.-Å. Nordström, M. Pitre, S. Roma, D. Święch, and D. Usai 2009 Predynastic Settlement and Cemeteries at Nag el-Qarmila, Kubbaniya. Archéo-Nil 19:186–206. Gatto, M.C. and A. Zerboni 2015 Holocene Supra-Regional Environmental Crises as Motor for Major Socio-cultural Changes in Northeastern Africa and the Sahara. African Archaeological Review 32:301–33. Glück, B. 2010 Post-A-Group and “Proto”-C-Group in Lower Nubia. In Between the Cataracts: Proceedings of the 11th Conference of Nubian Studies, ed. W. Godlewski and A. Łajtar, Part 2, Fasc. 1, pp. 371–85. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean Supplement Series 2.2/1. Warsaw University. Gratien, B. 1995 La Basse Nubie à l’Ancien Empire: Egyptiens et autochtones. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 81:43–56. Hartmann, R. 2011 The Chronology of Naqada I Tombs in the Predynastic Cemetery U at Abydos. In Egypt at its Origins 3, ed. R.F. Friedman and P.N. Fiske, pp. 917–38. Peeters. Hendrickx, S. and V. van Rossum 1994 Elkab V: The Naqada III Cemetery. Musées Royaux d’art et d’histoire. Hendrickx, S., J. Darnell, and M.C. Gatto 2012 The Earliest Representation of Royal Power in Egypt: The Rock Drawings of Nag el-Hamdulab (Aswan). Antiquity 86:1068–83. Herbst, G. and S.T.  Smith 2014 Pre-Kerma Transition at the Nile Fourth Cataract: First Assessments of a Multi-component, Stratified Prehistoric Settlement in the UCSB/ASU Salvage Concession. In The Fourth Cataract and Beyond: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference for Nubian Studies, ed. J.R.  Anderson and D.A.  Welsby, pp. 312–20. British Museum Publications on Egypt and Sudan 1. Peeters. Lal, B.B. 1967 Indian Archaeological Expedition to Nubia, 1962: A Preliminary Report. Fouilles en Nubie (1961–1963), pp. 97–118. Organisme Général des Imprimeries Gouvernementales (Cairo). Lange, M. 2006 Wadi Shaw-Wadi Sahal. Studien zur holozänen Besiedlung der Laqiya Region (Nordsudan). Africa Praehistorica 19. Köln: Heinrich Barth Institut.

The A-Group and 4th Millennium bce Nubia   141 Mills, A.J. and H.-Å. Nordström 1966 The Archaeological Survey from Gamai to Dal: Preliminary Report on the Season 1964–1965. Kush 14:1–15. Murray, G.W. 1926 Graves of Oxen in the Eastern Desert of Egypt. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 12:248–49. Nordström, H.-Å. 1972 Neolithic and A-Group Sites. Uppsala: Scandinavian University Press. ——— 1996 The Nubian A-Group: Ranking Funerary Remains. Norwegian Archaeological Review 29(1):17–39. ——— 2001 A-Group. In The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt 1, ed. D.B. Redford, pp. 44–46. Oxford University Press. ——— 2014 The West Bank Survey from Faras to Gemai, v. 1: Sites of Early Nubian, Middle Nubian and Pharaonic Age. Sudan Archaeological Research Society Publication 21. BAR International Series 2650. Archaeopress. Osypiński, P. and M.  Osypińska 2016 The Wadi Khashab Ceremonial Complex—a Manifestation of Cattle Keepers in the Eastern Desert of Egypt before the End of the Fifth Millennium BC. Azania 51(2):257–81. Piotrovsky, B. 1964 La Nubie antique. Résultats des travaux archéologiques des expéditions del l’URSS à la RAU. Moscow-Leningrad (in Russian). ——— 1967 The Early Dynastic Settlement of Khor Daoud and Wadi-Allaki: The Ancient Route to the Gold Mines. Fouilles en Nubie (1961–1963), pp. 127–40. Organisme Général des Imprimeries Gouvernementales (Cairo). Raue, D. 2008 Who Was Who in Elephantine of the Third Millennium BC? British Museum Studies in Ancient Egypt and Sudan 9:1–14. Reisner, G.A. 1910 The Archaeological Survey of Nubia: Report for 1907–1908. National Printing Department (Cairo). Roma, S. 2010 Sepolture animale nella preistoria della Valle del Nilo egiziana e Sudanese: contesti, evidence archeologiche e interpretazioni. Doctoral dissertation, Universita’ di Napoli “L’Orientale.” Sadr, K., A. Castiglioni, and A. Castiglioni 1995 Nubian Desert Archaeology: A Preliminary View, Archéologie du Nil Moyen 7:203–35. Sidebotham, S.E., M.  Hense, and H.M.  Nouwens 2008 The Red Land: The Illustrated Archaeology of Egypt’s Eastern Desert. American University in Cairo Press. Smith, H.S. 1962 Preliminary Report of the Egyptian Exploration Society’s Nubian Survey. General Organisation for Government Printing Office (Cairo). ——— 1994 The Princes of Seyala in Lower Nubia in the Predynastic and Protodynastic periods. In Hommages à Jean Leclant, v. 2: Nubie, Soudan, Ethiopie, ed. C. Berger, G. Clerc, and N.  Grimal, pp. 361–76. Bibliothèque d’Étude 106(2). Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale. Stevenson, A. 2012 Social Complexity Set in Stone? The A-Group Site of Afyeh. Sudan & Nubia 16:13–19. ——— 2016 The Egyptian Predynastic and State Formation. Journal of Archaeological Research 24(4):421–68. Takamiya, I.H. 2004 Egyptian Pottery Distribution in A-Group Cemeteries, Lower Nubia: Towards an Understanding of Exchange between the Naqada Culture and the A-Group Culture. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 90:35–62. Török, L. 2009 Between Two Worlds: The Frontier Region between Ancient Nubia and Egypt 3700 BC–AD 500. Probleme der Ägyptologie 29. Brill.

142   Maria Carmela Gatto Wendorf, F. and R. Schild 2001 Holocene Settlement of the Egyptian Sahara, v. 1: The Archaeology of Nabta Playa. Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers. Wendrich, W.Z. and R.T.J. Cappers 2005 Egypt’s Earliest Granaries: Evidence from the Fayum. Egyptian Archaeology 27:12–15. Wengrow, D., M. Dee, S. Foster, A. Stevenson, and C. Bronk Ramsey 2014 Cultural Convergence in the Neolithic Vile Valley: A Prehistoric Perspective on Egypt’s Place in Africa. Antiquity 88:95–111. Weschenfelder, J. 2015 The Terminal Neolithic Cemetery in the Funerary Landscape of MOG034, Mograt Island, Sudan. Der antike Sudan. Mitteilungen der Sudanarchäologischen Gesellschaft zu Berlin 26:145–52. Weschenfelder, J. and G. Rees 2014 Preliminary Report of the First Field Season of the Kerma Cemetery MOG034 on Mograt Island, Sudan. Der antike Sudan. Mitteilungen der Sudanarchäologischen Gesellschaft zu Berlin 25:145–54. Williams, B.B. 1980 The Lost Pharaohs of Nubia. Archaeology 33(5):14–21. ——— 1982 Notes on Prehistoric Cache Fields of Lower Egyptian Tradition at Sedment. Journal of Near Eastern Studies 41(3):213–21. ——— 1986 Excavations between Abu Simbel and the Sudanese Frontier, Part 1: The A-Group Royal Cemetery at Qustul: Cemetery L. University of Chicago Oriental Institute Nubian Expedition 3. ——— 1987 Forebears of Menes in Nubia: Myth or Reality? Journal of Near Eastern Studies 46(1):15–26. ——— 1989 Excavations between Abu Simbel and the Sudanese Frontier, Parts 2–4: Neolithic, A-Group and Post A-Group Remains from Cemeteries W, V, S, Q, T and a Cave East of Cemetery K. University of Chicago Oriental Institute Nubian Expedition 4.

chapter 8

The Pr e-K er m a Cu ltu r e a n d the Begi n n i ng of the K er m a K i ngdom Matthieu Honegger

The Pre-Kerma is a cultural entity from Upper Nubia that flourished from 3500–2500 bce. It preceded the Kerma civilization (2500–1480 bce) and anticipates some of its characteristics. Partially contemporaneous with the A-Group, it bears numerous similarities with this culture from Lower Nubia, particularly as regards pottery. The evolution of this culture is important to understand the social and economic trajectory that leads to the pastoral state of Kerma, an original entity in comparison with the common definition of primary or secondary states (Emberling 2014). If the influence of Egypt on the development and complexification of Upper Nubia is evident and leads some scholars to consider Kerma as a periphery of the Egyptian center (HafsaasTsakos 2009), it would be reductionist to limit the local evolution to a diffusionist proc­ ess from north to south. In this perspective, a better understanding of the background of the Kerma state should help to define more precisely this distinctive historical trajectory. However, the relative scarcity of archaeological data for the Pre-Kerma period does not allow reconstructing a scenario with a very high chronological resolution. For this reason, it is still difficult to identify if the local evolution to complexity is a continuous process or not. The turbulent history in Lower Nubia during this time suggests a relative discontinuity. The identification of the Pre-Kerma is relatively recent and needs to be contextualized within Nubian archaeology to fully understand the implications of the recognition of this entity. The definition of the A-Group (Gatto, this volume) dates from the early 20th century, although it was only accepted into general use in the 1960s during the salvage

144   Matthieu Honegger

Figure 8.1  Map of Upper Nubia with location of Pre-Kerma and A-Group sites. Map: Samuel Burns.

archaeology associated with the construction of the Aswan High Dam (Nordström 1972; Adams  1977). It refers to a Lower Nubian culture whose origins date back into the Nubian Neolithic traditions as well as those of the Egyptian Naqada I (Gatto 2011a). The A-Group continued into the Egyptian Predynastic period and Dynasty 0 and it has proven of great interest to researchers, due to its dynamic role in the formative years of Egyptian state. On the one hand, the A-Group maintained regular contacts with Predynastic Egypt, as attested by the presence of Egyptian grave-gifts in the tombs, and they may have been involved in the exploitation of gold resources in the Eastern Desert. On the other hand, the A-Group appears to have been organized into polities from the second half of the 4th millennium bce, from which would emerge some centers with a greater concentration of power (Nordström  2004; Gatto  2006). Beginning with the development of the Egyptian dynasties, this A-Group, known primarily from numerous cemeteries and a few habitations, disappears from the archaeological horizon. Several centuries had to elapse before the emergence of the C-Group around 2500 bce, when

The Pre-Kerma Culture and the Beginning of the Kerma Kingdom   145 there are once again signs of permanent settlement in Lower Nubia (Hafsaas, this volume; also Jesse, this volume). This hiatus continues to make it difficult to understand the disappearance of the A-Group and the origins of the C-Group. Lower Nubia was probably not devoid of population and it is possible that at the end of the A-Group period, some of the population migrated northward and southward from the region (Török 2009:54–55). To the south of the Second Cataract, Upper Nubia has long been poorly known for the periods prior to the Kerma civilization (Honegger 2010). Other than the Neolithic cemeteries in the region of Kadruka, which span the entire 5th millennium bce (Reinold 2001), no occupation was known for the period between 4000 and 2500 bce. It is in this context that the Pre-Kerma culture was originally defined, thanks to the discovery of a settlement in the middle of the Kerma eastern cemetery, which has been dated to ca. 3000 bce (Bonnet 1988). This discovery was followed by new finds between the Second and Fourth Cataracts, on the Islands of Sai (Geus 1998), Arduan (Edwards and Ali Osman 2000), and Sedeinga (Delattre 2014), in the Kerma basin (Honegger 2004a), and other sites identified during surveys around the Third Cataract (Edwards and Ali Osman 2011; Honegger et al. 2015) and beyond the Fourth Cataract (Herbst and Smith 2014). The picture is still incomplete, and relies on a limited number of discoveries, but points to the occupation of the land by an agro-pastoralist population that fills a local void preceding the Kerma civilization (Fig. 8.1).

Chronology, Pottery, and Cultural Affinities In Upper Nubia the Neolithic pastoral period of the 5th millennium bce corresponds to a prosperous episode which is well known thanks to the discovery of several cemeteries and habitation sites found on the large alluvial plain of the Northern Dongola Reach (Reinold 2001; Welsby 2001; Salvatori and Usai 2008). It is followed by a hiatus of several centuries beginning ca. 4000 bce. The reasons for this hiatus are not clear and could either be due to the current state of research, or a growing level of aridity resulting in a displacement of occupation, or a partial depopulation of the region (Honegger and Williams 2015). The Pre-Kerma starts after this hiatus in the second half of the 4th millennium and ends with the emergence of the Kerma civilization ca. 2500 bce. A series of 14 C dates and the initial study of the pottery have helped to define a Middle Phase ca. 3000 bce and a Late Phase between 2900–2600 bce (Honegger 2004a). The Early Phase is assumed to begin ca. 3500 bce, but is, to date, not documented, apart from a site in the region of Kerma, dated ca. 3200 bce, which has only yielded lithic industry. Middle Pre-Kerma pottery presents affinities with that of the A-Group (Privati 1988). Many of the dishes and bowls are red with black mouths and their surfaces are carefully polished. Their shapes are for the most part more open than in Lower Nubia. A fine

146   Matthieu Honegger

10 cm

10 cm

Middle Pre-Kerma Late Pre-Kerma

10 cm

Figure 8.2  Pre-Kerma pottery. 1. Middle phase (ca. 3000 bce) 2. Recent phase (2900–2600 bce).

r­ ippled decoration evokes a decorative technique well attested in the A-Group, but here it is limited to the upper part of the pottery in the black-colored area (Fig. 8.2). Some rare pots present a more elaborate decoration, with bands of decorative motifs or red lines on a beige background. These resemble the egg-shell pottery from the Terminal A-Group. Finally, the few jars that are known are very similar to those of the A-Group. These finds come from the settlement beneath the tumuli of the Kerma eastern cemetery (discussed further below), as well as the site of Arduan (Edwards and Ali Osman 2000), where some of the pottery was similarly decorated. Late Pre-Kerma pottery was somewhat different from that of the preceding period and which presents elements which herald the Kerma Ancien period. The most ­characteristic

The Pre-Kerma Culture and the Beginning of the Kerma Kingdom   147 decoration is composed of combed horizontal impressions and fishbone geometric motifs similar to those known from the Terminal A-Group. There are also impressed motifs of inverted triangles filled with geometric decorations, as well as a few red vases with black rims impressed with fine decorations below the lip recalling the characteristic Kerma Ancien decorations (Fig. 8.2). In addition, there are also a few sherds with a rippled decoration, although these are somewhat rare. The comparison of these elements with other complexes, and in particular the association of pottery with combed horizontal impressions, fishbone motifs, and inverted triangles filled with decorations, has permitted the identification of the Late Pre-Kerma phase over a relatively extensive area, stretching from the Fourth Cataract in the south, to Elephantine in the north. The most southerly site is a settlement 30 km southwest of Abu Hamed, close to the village of El-Ginefab (Herbst and Smith 2014). To the north, the assemblages related to the PreKerma are known in the region of the Third Cataract (Edwards and Ali Osman 2000; Honegger et al. 2015), at Soleb (Schiff Giorgini 1971:391–92), Abudiya (Geus 1978), and Sai (Garcea and Hildebrand  2009). Similar pottery has also been found at Second Cataract sites, such as Saras (Mills 1967–68), Buhen where it has been placed in a redefined B-Group (Gratien 1995), Faras (Nordström 1962), and even beyond in the stratigraphy of Elephantine (Raue 2014–15). As regards the typology of the pottery, the differences between the Pre-Kerma and A-Group are rather subtle and it is difficult to interpret their significance. Overall, they represent a single cultural horizon, but it could be that the differences observed reflect the existence of several (tribal) groups, similar to those described at a later date during the expeditions of Harkhuf (about 2287–2270 bce; Török  2009:69–70). During the Middle Pre-Kerma, the pottery is different from that of the Terminal A-Group, although it is only known from two habitation sites close to the Third Cataract, while the more numerous ensembles from Lower Nubia are for the most part known from cemeteries. For the whole of Upper Nubia, it is unfortunate that only two tombs have been attributed to the Pre-Kerma. The absence of funerary sites is probably due to the problem of archaeological visibility. The cemeteries were probably located on the alluvial plain, today intensively cultivated, and it is possible that the graves were systematically dug in shallow pits in a similar manner to the two known examples, probably resulting in their destruction through erosion or from agricultural practices. The two tombs were discovered in the settlement located beneath the eastern necropolis at Kerma and dated to 3000 bce (Honegger 2007). They were found very close to the surface and consisted of the inhumation of two adults partially destroyed by the effects of erosion. The bodies lay on their left sides in a contracted position, one with his head facing west, while the other faced east. No pottery was found and it is possible that this was destroyed by erosion. The tombs contained a series of objects, some of which are similar to those known from the A-Group, such as quartz palettes, an elephant ivory incense burner, and a copperalloy awl with a quadrangular section, which was probably not manufactured locally, but doubtless arrived by way of exchange or through contacts with Lower Nubia. During Late Pre-Kerma, the issue of contacts with Lower Nubia has to be addressed in a different manner, since the A-Group disappeared from the beginning of the 3rd

148   Matthieu Honegger ­millennium bce, and we are faced with a hiatus lasting several centuries in this region. Typological comparisons of the pottery suggest that the Pre-Kerma is known between the First and Fourth Cataracts. Once again, the known sites are all habitations, which are often eroded, at which the pottery is mostly present in the form of sherds. The cultural affinities are based on a number of decorative characteristics, and it would be hazardous to attempt to interpret the situation in terms of population make-up. It is possible that the few sites in Lower Nubia represent persistence of the A-Group in the region, and that the two entities, A-Group and Pre-Kerma, represent at that point in time a single cultural entity (Gatto 2011a). We can conceive that the commercial routes, as well as the population movements from the south towards the north, in the wake of the growing influence of Egypt starting in 3000 bce, led to a level of cultural harmonization between Upper and Lower Nubia. However, we need a greater volume of data for this period to be able to be more precise about the situation. The Pre-Kerma yields little evidence regarding direct exchanges with Egypt. At the Third Cataract, there is no evidence for exchanges with Egypt prior to beginning of the Kerma civilization, ca. 2500 bce. The first imports appear in the Kerma Ancien tombs and in the Kerma eastern cemetery in particular, in the form of small jars or vases dating from the 5th Dynasty, representing about 3 to 10 percent of total volume of pottery grave-gifts. Further north however, whether at Sedeinga (around 3000 bce; Delattre 2014) or Sai (around 2600 bce; Geus 2004), sherds from jars from the earliest dynasties have been found in the domestic pits, which, in the case of Sai, were accompanied by royal Egyptian seal impressions. The continuity between Pre-Kerma and Kerma Ancien is demonstrated by the recent discovery of an initial phase in the Kerma eastern necropolis (Honegger 2013). Prior to this discovery, the earliest known tombs were dated to ca. 2500–2400 bce, and were assimilated into the Kerma Ancien phase (Bonnet 2000). To the west of this ensemble, several tens of earlier graves have been discovered and dated between 2550 and 2450 bce. Their pits are a little more rectangular than those of Kerma Ancien, while the ritual is somewhat similar, with the bodies in a flexed position on their right side and heads pointing to the east, laid out on the pelt of a bovine with the ceramics placed on the surface, next to the tumulus. The pottery is different, however, made up almost exclusively of red vases with black mouths, which are either undecorated or decorated with combed horizontal impressions, similar to those from the Late Pre-Kerma. No red pottery was found with black mouths and fine impressed decoration under the rim, which is so characteristic of the Kerma Ancien, just as no examples of C-Group pottery were found, when these are regularly found in the Kerma Ancien assemblages (Privati 1986). This initial phase of the cemetery is interesting since it belongs to the Kerma civilization, while being distinguished by a pottery with definite links to the Late Pre-Kerma. There was therefore in all probability a degree of continuity of the population in the region to the south of the Third Cataract, where the alluvial plain was capable of supporting a large population. The intrusive elements characteristic of the C-Group within the Kerma cemetery shortly after its initial phase continue to be difficult to explain (Bonnet  1982;

The Pre-Kerma Culture and the Beginning of the Kerma Kingdom   149 Honegger 2010). They could possibly represent the arrival of a new human group from 2500 bce, if we accept the hypothesis that the C-Group, similarly to the Kerma population, were ethnic groups (Hafsaas  2005). The origins of this group, which occupied Lower Nubia from 2500 bce, continues to be unknown, and its presence in the Kerma cultural context could be indicative of contacts and a certain freedom of circulation between the two groups.

Settlement and Subsistence Economy Generally speaking, the state of conservation of Pre-Kerma habitation sites is far from perfect. They have often been subjected to intense eolian erosion and are for the most part located on land currently under cultivation. The ancient structures were made of wood and mud, with mudbricks only appearing towards the end of the Kerma Ancien period, shortly before 2000 bce (Bonnet 2014:12). The remains are therefore not easily identifiable on the surface, only visible as depressions, particularly the storage pits. On the Island of Arduan, the excavated area only brought to light a few such pits and it is difficult to estimate the size of the settlement (Edwards and Ali Osman  2000). At Sai (Geus 2004; Garcea and Hildebrand 2009), a concentration of about one hundred storage pits, discovered in 1996, was the object of several archaeological campaigns. A certain number of these pits, particularly well preserved, were still sealed by slabs of shale and silt. Sherds as well as seventeen different varieties of plants and fruits were found in the pits. The most abundant remains consisted of wheat (Triticum dicoccum) and barley (Hordeum vulgare), which proves that the storage pits were used as granaries. Two 14C dates have been obtained on the contents of the pits, which yielded dates between 2900–2600 bce.1 Surfaces around the pits were cleared, but no other structural remains were found. At Sedeinga, some ten storage pits were also excavated, without any evidence for other structures (Delattre 2014), whereas above the Fourth Cataract, the site close to the village of El-Ginefab produced evidence for two occupational phases dated between 3800 bce and 2300 bce. The evidence is in the form of semi-subterranean hearths and the post-holes of circular huts 4 m in diameter, as well as a rectangular building and a palisade (Herbst and Smith 2014). The best-known settlement is currently a large agglomeration located in the eastern cemetery of Kerma, a few kilometers to the east of the ancient town (Honegger 2004b, 2007). The site was discovered while excavating Kerma Moyen tombs, thanks to the presence of storage pits (Fig. 8.3), which were found just beneath the level of the Kerma civilization tombs. It has been excavated over an area of about one and a half hectares. At the origin it must have covered an extensive area of 5 to 10 hectares. The duration of the occupation, such as can be estimated based on the pottery style, the dates and the number of reconstructions, does not appear to have exceeded a century. This settlement displays a fascinating image of the layout of an agglomeration which can no longer be considered as a simple village and which already bears witness to increasing

150   Matthieu Honegger

Figure 8.3  View of the storage pits concentration in the Pre-Kerma agglomeration.

density and complexity (Fig. 8.4). A total of 285 pits have been excavated and considering how many must have been destroyed during the digging of the Kerma tombs, one can estimate that there must have been almost five hundred of them. They were not associated with individual houses but were grouped at the center of the settlement. That suggests a communal management of the stored resources. With the exception of two pits containing complete jars, the pits only yielded fragments of objects. They give the impression of having been emptied prior to the abandonment of the site and have in any case not been reused as rubbish dumps. Their function probably involved the storage of cereals, as was the case regarding the pits on Sai Island. Two 14C dates have been obtained; one on charcoal from a pit and the other from the organic temper from one of the jars, which yielded almost synchronous dates around 3000 bce. Several types of buildings were identified, thanks to the alignments described by the post-holes. The most numerous represent habitation huts, the majority of which have a diameter close to 4 m. On the edge of the area covered by the huts, two rectangular buildings were identified, one of which was rebuilt three times at precisely the same location, confirming the importance of the particular spot. It could have been an administrative building or the seat of power. The other building was erected with particularly

The Pre-Kerma Culture and the Beginning of the Kerma Kingdom   151

Post-holes Kerma Moyen graves Storage pits Reconstruction of huts and fences 20 m

Figure 8.4  Plan of the Pre-Kerma agglomeration.

large uprights, with an apse on the north side, which evokes the form of temples during the Kerma period (Bonnet 2000:114–16). Numerous regular alignments of posts correspond to palisades. Some of these appear to mark separations inside the habitations, but the majority is located on the periphery of the settlement. They trace large oval enclosures which correspond to cattle pens, like those currently known on the periphery of present-day villages in East Africa in which pastoralism is practiced (Denyer 1978). The hoof-prints of bovines identified inside one of these enclosures support this interpretation. Finally, the most spectacular remains have been under excavation to the north of the excavated area. They consist of an impressive system of fortifications, 8 m wide, made up of at least six parallel rows of palisades, reinforced with earthworks. Although the detailed organization of this structure is difficult to understand due to the numerous superimposed reconstruction phases and the more marked erosion in certain sectors, two entrances can be clearly made out. These are 70 m apart, with one being 8 m wide, while the second, close to a cluster of habitation huts, is limited to 4 m. The construction of a real defensive structure surrounding the agglomeration during the Pre-Kerma underscores the need for defense against local raids and indicates that conflicts could exist between communities established in Upper Nubia. We can consider that this settlement represents a first phase, which would, five hundred years later, give birth to the town of Kerma, located 4 km to the west, nearer to the present-day course of the River Nile (Bonnet, this volume). The site might have been

152   Matthieu Honegger abandoned due to the progressive silting up of the Nile channels close by. Architecturally, the Pre-Kerma agglomeration bears characteristics similar to ethnographic examples south of the Sahara (Denyer 1978). In the Nile valley, no similar site has been identified at the beginning of the 3rd millennium, but the sites for the period in question have only very partial plans, thus not permitting the general settlement organization to be apprehended (Midant-Reynes 2003:237–73). As compared to the town of Kerma, the Egyptian influence is not perceptible, due to the fact that the mudbrick was as yet unknown and that quadrangular buildings were rare. On the contrary, some architectural characteristics of the Pre-Kerma period are present in the ancient town, in that storage pits have been found in the oldest levels, by the use of wooden palisades as well as by the per­sist­ ence of huts in some quarters (Bonnet 2014). The large animal corrals inside the protective structure confirm the importance of pastoralism within these 3rd-millennium bce societies, which has on numerous occasions been evoked for the A-Group (Gatto  2011b) and the C-Group (Hafsaas  2005; Bangsgaard 2014), as well as the Kerma civilization (Chaix et al. 2012). This is explicitly expressed in the funerary rituals, but also by the presence of figurines and the representations of bovines, as well as by the supposedly ephemeral nature of their campsite settlements, which leave few identifiable remains. It has often been suggested that these groups were mobile, consequent on the practice of transhumance, which presupposes that agriculture was either not or little practiced, since few vegetable remains have been found in the archaeological record. The recent discoveries of wheat and barley in Neolithic contexts in Upper Nubia, at cemeteries dating from the 5th millennium bce, challenge this perception (Out et al. 2016). Agriculture must have been practiced since that period, even if the rare Neolithic habitation sites known have not yielded storage pits (Jesse 2004; Honegger 2006). During the Neolithic, agriculture was probably practiced on a small scale as a food supplement, rather than as a large-scale activity. In this regard, the Pre-Kerma period represents an important milestone, with the appearance of storage structures, often in large numbers and close together, which probably signifies that agriculture was practiced more intensively at that time. Pastoralism naturally maintained both its economic and ideological importance, but it does not necessarily imply that the entire community was mobile and involved in transhumance activities. In the image of actual pastoral communities from northeast Africa, it is possible that only a segment of the population accompanied the herd animals in search of fresh pastures and lived a part of the year in campsites (EvansPritchard 1940). During this period of transhumance, the rest of the community was living in permanent villages close to the agricultural fields. It is probably due to the poor state of preservation of the habitats, resulting from the use of light construction material and the effects of substantial erosion, which has led archaeologists to classify as campsites what were in all probability villages or agro-pastoral agglomerations. The discovery of the Pre-Kerma culture and the identification of its internal dynamics is an interesting phenomenon in the history of archaeological research. Thirty years ago, little was known about the protohistory of Upper Nubia and a hiatus of 1,500 years separated the most recent cemeteries of Neolithic Kadruka and the Kerma civilization. It was

The Pre-Kerma Culture and the Beginning of the Kerma Kingdom   153 naturally tempting to fill this void with the better understood culture of Lower Nubia. The disappearance of the A-Group around 3000 bce led to the belief that these folk migrated southward, supplying the impulse required for the emergence of the Kerma kingdom. Without wanting to totally discredit this scenario, it must be recognized that it is based on a diffusionist model which ignored, due to lack of knowledge, the possibilities of any local development in Upper Nubia. The Pre-Kerma has rebalanced the relationship between Upper and Lower Nubia and paved the way for a more nuanced explanation for the emergence of the Kerma civilization. Translated by: Michael Templer

Note 1.  All 14C dates are calibrated.

References Cited Adams, W.Y. 1977 Nubia: Corridor to Africa. Allen Lane. Bangsgaard, P. 2014 Nubian Faunal Practices: Exploring the C-Group “Pastoral Ideal” at Nine Cemeteries. In The Fourth Cataract and Beyond: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference for Nubian Studies, ed. J.R.  Anderson and D.A.  Welsby, pp. 347–55. British Museum Publications on Egypt and Sudan 1. Peeters. Bonnet, C. 1982 Les fouilles archéologiques de Kerma (Soudan). Rapport préliminaire sur les campagnes de 1980–81 et 1981–88. Genava n.s. 30:1–42. ——— 1988 Les fouilles archéologiques de Kerma (Soudan). Rapport préliminaire sur les campagnes de 1986–87 et 1987–88. Genava n.s. 36:5–20. ——— 2000 Edifices et rites funéraires à Kerma. Errance. ——— 2014 La ville de Kerma: une capitale nubienne au sud de l’Égypte. Favre. Chaix, L., J. Dubosson, and M. Honegger 2012 Bucrania from the Eastern Cemetery at Kerma (Sudan) and the Practice of Cattle Horn Deformation. In Prehistory of Northeastern Africa: New Ideas and Discoveries, ed. J. Kabaciński, M. Chłodnicki, and M. Kobusiewicz, pp. 189–212. Studies in African Archaeology 11. Poznań Archaeological Museum. Delattre, H. 2014 The Pre-Kerma Site of Sedeinga. In Abstracts of Papers Presented at the 13th International Conference for Nubian Studies, ed. M.  Honegger, pp. 41–42. University of Neuchâtel. Denyer, S. 1978 African Traditional Architecture. Holmes & Meier. Edwards, D.N. and Ali Osman 2000 The Archaeology of Arduan Island: The Mahas Survey 2000. Sudan & Nubia 4:58–70. ——— 2011 The Archaeology of a Nubian Frontier: Survey on the Nile Third Cataract, Sudan. Mauhaus. Emberling, G. 2014 Pastoral States: Toward a Comparative Study of Early Kush. Origini 36:125–56. Evans-Pritchard, E. E. 1940 The Nuer: A Description of the Modes of Livelihood and Political Institutions of a Nilotic People. Clarendon Press.

154   Matthieu Honegger Garcea, E.A.A. and E.A. Hildebrand 2009 Shifting Social Networks along the Nile: Middle Holocene Assemblages from Sai Island, Sudan. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 28:304–22. Gatto, M.C. 2006 The Nubian A-Group: A Reassessment. Archéo-Nil 16:61–76. ——— 2011a The Relative Chronology of Nubia. Archéo-Nil 21:81–100. ——— 2011b The Nubian Pastoral Culture as Link between Egypt and Africa: A View from the Archaeological Record. In Egypt in its African Context: Proceedings of the Conference Held at the Manchester Museum, ed. K. Exell, pp. 21–29. British Archaeological Reports 2204. Archaeopress. Gratien, B. 1995 La Basse Nubie à l’Ancien Empire: Égyptiens et autochtones. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 81:43–56. Geus, F. 1978 La prospection archéologique au sud de Dal: Abudiya (II). In Service des Antiquités du Soudan, Section française de recherche archéologique: Rapport Annuel d´Activité 1977–1978, pp. 5–21. ——— 1998 Saï 1996–1997. Archéologie du Nil Moyen 8:85–126. ——— 2004 Pre-Kerma Storage Pits on Sai Island. In Nubian Studies 1998: Proceedings of the 9th Conference of the International Society for Nubian Studies, ed. T.  Kendall, pp. 46–51. Department of African-American Studies, Northeastern University. Hafsaas, H. 2005 Cattle Pastoralists in a Multicultural Setting: The C-Group People in Lower Nubia 2500–1500 bce. The Lower Jordan River Basin Programme Publications 10. Birzeit University and Bergen University. Hafsaas-Tsakos, H. 2009 The Kingdom of Kush: An African Centre on the Periphery of the Bronze Age World System. Norwegian Archaeological Review 42(1):50–70. Herbst, G. and S.T.  Smith 2014 Pre-Kerma Transition at the Nile Fourth Cataract: First Assessments of a Multi-Component, Stratified Prehistoric Settlement in the UCSB/ASU Salvage Concession. In The Fourth Cataract and Beyond: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference for Nubian Studies, ed. J.R.  Anderson and D.A.  Welsby, pp. 311–20. British Museum Publications on Egypt and Sudan 1. Peeters. Honegger, M. 2004a The Pre-Kerma: A Cultural Group from Upper Nubia Prior to the Kerma Civilisation. Sudan & Nubia 8:38–46. ——— 2004b The Pre-Kerma Settlement at Kerma: New Elements Throw Light on the Rise of the First Nubian Kingdom. In Nubian Studies 1998: Proceedings of the Ninth Conference of the International Society for Nubian Studies, ed. T.  Kendall, pp. 83–94. Department of African-American Studies, Northeastern University. ——— 2006 Habitats préhistoriques en Nubie entre le 8e et le 3e millénaire av. J.-C.: l’exemple de la région de Kerma. In Acta Nubica: Proceedings of the 10th International Conference of Nubian Studies, ed. I. Caneva and A. Roccati, pp. 3–13. Libreria dello Stato. ——— 2007 Le Pré-Kerma de Haute Nubie. Archéonil 16:77–84. ——— 2009 The Ancient Kerma Area of the Eastern Cemetery. Kerma, documents de la mission archéologique Suisse au Soudan 2:7–11. ——— 2010 La Nubie et le Soudan: un bilan des 20 dernières années de recherche sur la Pré- et Protohistoire. Archéo-Nil 20:76–86. ——— 2013 The Oldest Sectors of the Eastern Cemetery: Neolithic Occupations and the Early Stages of the Kerma Civilisation. Kerma, documents de la mission archéologique Suisse au Soudan 5:17–31. Honegger, M., J. Bastien, and L. Kramer 2015 Survey in Wadi Farjar. Kerma, documents de la mission archéologique Suisse au Soudan 6:5–15.

The Pre-Kerma Culture and the Beginning of the Kerma Kingdom   155 Honegger, M. and M. Williams 2015 Human Occupations and Environmental Changes in the Nile Valley during the Holocene: The Case of Kerma in Upper Nubia (Northern Sudan). Quaternary Science Reviews 130:141–54. Jesse, F. 2004 The Neolithic. In Sudan: Ancient Treasures. An Exhibition of Recent Discoveries from the Sudan National Museum, ed. D. Welsby and J.R. Anderson, pp. 35–41. The British Museum. Midant-Reynes, B. 2003 Aux origines de l’Égypte: du Néolithique à l’émergence de l’État. Fayard. Mills, J. 1967–68 The Archaeological Survey from Gemai to Dal: Report on the 1965–1966 Season. Kush 15:200–10. Nordström, H.-A. 1962 Excavations and Survey in Faras, Argin and Gezira Dabarosa. Kush 10:34–58. ——— 1972 Neolithic and A-Group Sites. Scandinavian Joint Expedition to Sudanese Nubia 3. Scandinavian University Books. ——— 2004 The Nubian A-Group: Perceiving a Social Landscape. In Nubian Studies 1998: Proceedings of the 9th Conference of the International Society for Nubian Studies, ed. T. Kendall, pp. 134–44. Department of African-American Studies, Northeastern University. Out, W. A., P. Ryan, J.J. Garcia-Granero, J. Barastegui, L. Maritan, M. Madella, and D. Usai 2016 Plant Exploitation in Neolithic Sudan: A Review in the Light of New Data from the Cemeteries R12 and Ghaba. Quaternary International 412:36–53. Privati, B. 1986 Remarques sur les ateliers de potiers de Kerma et sur la céramique du Groupe C. Genava n.s. 34:23–28. ——— 1988 La céramique de l’établissement Pré-Kerma. Genava n.s. 36:21–24. Raue, D. 2014–15 Nubier auf Elephantine und an der Stufenpyramide von Sinki. Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts Abteilung Kairo 70–71:1–12. Reinold, J. 2001 Kadruka and the Neolithic in the Northern Dongola Reach. Sudan & Nubia 5:2–10. Reisner, G.A. 1910 The Archaeological Survey of Nubia: Report for 1907–1908. National Printing Department (Cairo). Salvatori, S. and D.  Usai eds. 2008 A Neolithic Cemetery in the Northern Dongola Reach: Excavations at Site R12. Sudan Archaeological Research Society Publication 16. BAR International Series 1814. Archaeopress. Schiff Giorgini, M. 1971 Soleb, v. 2: les Nécropoles. Sansoni. Török, L. 2009 Between Two Worlds: The Frontier Region between Ancient Nubia and Egypt 3700 BC–500 AD. Probleme der Ägyptologie 29. Brill. Welsby, D.A. 2001 Life on the Desert Edge: Seven Thousand Years of Settlement in the Northern Dongola Reach, Sudan. Sudan Archaeological Research Society Publication 7 and British Archaeolo gical Reports 980. Archaeopress.

chapter 9

The C- Grou p Peopl e i n Low er N u bi a Cattle Pastoralists on the Frontier between Egypt and Kush Henriette Hafsaas

During the time span from ca. 2500 to 1500 bce, cattle-herders termed the C-Group people inhabited Lower Nubia—the stretch of the Nile between the First and the Second Cataracts (Fig. 9.1). At this time, the Nile was a fertile artery through the Sahara and thus a meeting place for ethnic groups with different forms of political organization and different modes of food production. The C-Group people lived on the southern frontier of the Egyptian state, and the Egyptians invaded and thereafter occupied Lower Nubia from ca. 1938 to 1725 bce. The proximity to the Egyptian state was of fundamental importance throughout the history of the C-Group people, and the relationship with Egypt will be the overarching perspective in this review. However, the C-Group people also interacted with other ethnic groups in Nubia (i.e., the Kerma people in Upper Nubia and the Pan-Grave people of the Eastern Desert).

History of Research Archaeologists have mainly uncovered the remains of the C-Group people during salvage campaigns in connection with the building and heightening of the dams at Aswan. C-Group pottery was first recorded during preliminary surveys of Lower Nubia in 1905–1906. During subsequent excavations of the northern parts of Lower Nubia, George  A.  Reisner applied the term C-Group for the cultural remains that corresponded in time from the 7th to 16th Dynasties in Egypt. There is now consensus that

158   Henriette Hafsaas

Figure 9.1  Map of sites of the C-Group in Nubia and related sites in Egypt. Map: Samuel Burns.

the majority of the sites of this period in Lower Nubia were the remains of a people with a distinct group identity, and the term C-Group has been retained in the archaeological literature. After the conclusion of the first salvage campaign in Lower Nubia, Georg Steindorff (1935) started excavations of the largest C-Group burial ground—Cemetery N at Aniba. He made the first detailed chronological study of the C-Group graves on the basis of the material from Aniba (Steindorff  1935:8–9). Archaeologists excavated more C-Group sites in the middle and southern part of Lower Nubia during salvage campaigns during the 1930s and again during the 1960s.

The C-Group People in Lower Nubia  159 The chronological development of the C-Group was the subject of the PhD-theses of Manfred Bietak (1968) and David O’Connor (1969). They started from the work of Steindorff, but also expanded the empirical data by incorporating other cemeteries. Bietak and O’Connor used the method of horizontal stratigraphy, which postulates that cemeteries grow in size in one or more directions (Parker Pearson 1999:12); and they both proposed a concentric development of Cemetery N. Following this interpretation, the founder burials became the center of the cemetery and the dead were buried on the outskirts of a cemetery growing around this central part. Independent of each other, Bietak and O’Connor also organized other features of the burial customs and material culture of the C-Group into four assemblages, which correspond to four succeeding phases. Bietak’s terminology of the I/a-, I/b-, II/a-, and II/b-phases (Bietak 1968, table 1) are generally used today (Edwards 2004, table 4.1; Hafsaas 2006:25). Since the late 1960s, Bruce Williams (1983), Torgny Säve-Söderbergh (1989), Wendy Anderson (1996), and myself (Hafsaas 2006) have reviewed and refined but mainly confirmed the C-Group chronology.

Origins The people who established the material culture recognized as the C-Group had multiple origins. Small groups of mobile pastoralists descending from the A-Group people probably continued to live in Lower Nubia after Egypt’s violent state expansion during the 1st Dynasty. The A-Group descendants lived without permanent settlements and left scanty remains for the salvage archaeologists to notice in a region with a monumental past (Hafsaas-Tsakos 2015:394). During the same time span, the desiccation of the last habitable niches in the Green Sahara resulted in an influx of climate refugees to the Nile valley (Kuper and Kröpelin  2006:806). Furthermore, there are strong similarities between the material culture, especially the pottery, of the C-Group people and some Kerma Ancien sites in Upper Nubia dating to the second half of the 3rd millennium bce (Gratien 2014:96). The people living in Lower Nubia from around 2500 bce were probably an amalgamation of descendants of the A-Group people and immigrants from both the Sahara and Upper Nubia.

A Pastoral Way of Life The C-Group people appear to have been cattle pastoralists (Williams 2013a:3), although it may also be that they were sedentary agriculturalists with mere ambitions of becoming cattle owners (Adams 1977:154). On the one hand, the absence of specialized artifacts for plant exploitation at C-Group sites suggests that agriculture was a marginal sub­sist­ ence activity. Cattle, on the other hand, were important economically and culturally.

160   Henriette Hafsaas The C-Group people relied on their herds’ renewable resources—milk and blood—for food, while meat was probably reserved for special occasions. The C-Group people incised representations of cattle on pots, funerary stelae, and rock outcrops (Fig. 9.2). It is likely that they supplemented the diet with wild foodstuffs, fish, and grains obtained through both cultivation and trade—like other pastoralists (see Salzman 2004:9). Most of their habitation sites were of an ephemeral nature and their material culture was port­ a­ble. The C-Group people thus appear to have practiced some mobility with semipermanent settlements within confined stretches of the river, while the young men roamed along the river and into the nearby wadis with the flocks in search for pasture (Hafsaas 2006:64–71). Pastoralists need to have strategies for protecting their herds from reductions through theft and warfare, as well as to increase their herds through raids for animals. Like East African pastoralists in the ethnographic literature (Oba 2017), the young men of the C-Group people were probably warriors guarding their community and its cattle as well as raiding their neighbors. This mobile lifestyle as cattle herders was a habitual part of C-Group identity, and this contrasted with their agricultural neighbors based in villages in both Egypt and Upper Nubia.

Figure 9.2  Representations of cattle. Not to scale. Above left: Jar from grave 94 at Cemetery 115 at Qurta (Firth 1927:137). Above right: Jar from Cemetery N at Aniba (Steindorff 1935, pl. 57). Below: Funerary stela with cattle (Williams 1983: pl. 95b).

The C-Group People in Lower Nubia  161

Forging an Ethnic Identity Ethnicity must be grounded in everyday life in order to be relevant. Ethnic identities typically emerge in situations where contact is established between two or more groups, since ethnicity is an aspect of relationships between groups—not a group characteristic (Eriksen 2001:46). Ethnic identity formation can be prompted by a shared interest in protecting access to scarce essential resources and limiting this access to members of the group (Schortman 1989:55). For the C-Group people, it was important to have access to pastures for their herds and increasingly also to monitor the trade corridor to the south, and both meant controlling the river valley. Egyptians in search for mineral resources were competing with the C-Group people for the control of Lower Nubia. The descendants of the A-Group people and the newcomers from the eastern Sahara and Upper Nubia probably forged a distinct group identity from around 2500 bce in response to contact with the Egyptians, and these people became the ethnic group that we recognize as the C-Group. Also elsewhere have ethnic groups emerged through alliances between peoples with diverse origins and histories (Salzman 2004:86). People often use visible material signifiers to express ethnic identities, and these signifiers must convey the same message in several media simultaneously in order to be recognized unambiguously (Emberling 1997:318). The most conspicuous remains of the C-Group people are their cemeteries, their pots, and their decorated bodies.

The Cemeteries Most C-Group cemeteries seem to have been located on higher ground on the fringe of the desert, and the C-Group people marked the graves with a dry-laid stone ring. In the earliest cemeteries, the C-Group people also erected sandstone stelae (Fig.  9.3). The ­stelae were located in clusters and probably unrelated to specific graves. As a pastoral society without permanent settlements, it is likely that the C-Group people raised the stelae (up to 2 m in height) as territorial markers before the cemeteries reached a size by which they became markers in the landscape themselves (Hafsaas 2006:138). By marking the territory in this way, each sub-group of the C-Group people probably claimed grazing-rights in the surrounding area. Smaller sandstone slabs were also used at Kerma Ancien cemeteries in Upper Nubia, but the Kerma people used the slabs as elements in the construction of the tomb monuments (Honegger 2010:7; Welsby 2012:26). The C-Group people buried their dead in a contracted position in circular or oval burial pits. Only items of personal decoration were laid in the grave, and the mourners placed pots outside the stone ring in accordance with the orientation of the head (Hafsaas 2006:31). The burial practices and pottery offerings have been interpreted as manifestations of a belief in ancestors rather than in an afterlife (Steffensen 2007:147), and this seems to differ from the beliefs of both the Egyptians and the Kerma people.

162   Henriette Hafsaas

Figure 9.3  Stelae and stone rings in Cemetery N at Aniba (Steindorff 1935, pl. 8b).

During the II/b-phase, the elite of the C-Group people used mudbrick to build burial chambers, and a few graves had chapels attached to the superstructure. Both features were probably inspired by the burial practices of the Kerma people or the Egyptians (Hafsaas 2006:33–34), and this may be a sign of changing beliefs in what happened to a person after death, from becoming an ancestor to having an afterlife. The distribution of similar cemeteries between the First and the Second Cataracts indicates that the C-Group people recognized their common interests and formed a common ethnic identity. This becomes clearer when looking at their pottery.

The Pottery The C-Group people made distinctive pots by hand from silty clay found on the banks of the Nile (Hafsaas 2007:165). The pots were part of the female activities of food gathering, storing, preparing, and serving (cf. Haaland 1997:379); and mothers probably passed on the craft of pottery making to their daughters (cf. Herbert 1993:203). All C-Group pots had round bases that were adapted to a mobile lifestyle without furniture and where the pots stood directly in the sand (Hafsaas  2007:165). Red pots with black tops of the Nubian tradition were the commonest type. The C-Group people placed these pots outside almost every grave, often several at a time, and sherds from these pots were uncovered in large quantities at the habitation sites too. This suggests that the red pots with black tops were the regular eating and drinking bowls among the C-Group people (Hafsaas 2007:166). In the pottery repertoire were also small globular jars with incised patterns as well as cooking pots.

The C-Group People in Lower Nubia  163 The most characteristic C-Group pots were the so-called black incised bowls with incised geometric designs in elaborate patterns (Fig. 9.4). The surface was black burnished, and the incisions usually filled with white paste to contrast with the dark surface. On the early pots dating to the I/a- and I/b-phases, the decoration of the body and the base of the black incised bowls was integrated into a whole (Fig. 9.4a). The strict layout of these designs may indicate a worldview where symmetry and order were important organizing factors, for instance in the unity of the group and in the relations between the genders. On the later pots dating to the II/a- and II/b-phases, the designs were structured in concentric panels with a central base motif, which suggests a more hierarchical worldview with a focal point (Fig. 9.4b). The pottery decoration thus seems to reflect the development of a more centralized political organization in the C-Group society (see below). The C-Group people usually deposited the black incised bowls singly outside selected graves, but the occurrence of sherds at most habitation sites suggests that these pots were not made exclusively for funerary rituals (Hafsaas 2007:166). Among pastoralists, a chief can construct and maintain authority and leadership through hospitality (Salzman 2004:87), since the wealthy herd owner can build up personal power by sharing food and drink. Participation in shared meals is a way to incorporate individuals into society simultaneously as the place of each individual within the society is defined (Falk  1994:20). The meticulousness undertaken when making the black incised bowls emphasized the cultural significance of the bowls and their contents,

Figure 9.4  Black incised bowls from Cemetery N at Aniba. Not to scale. Above: Integrated designs (Steindorff 1935, pl. 33,7). Below: Designs in concentric panels (Steindorff 1935, pl. 47,3).

164   Henriette Hafsaas as well as the contexts in which the C-Group people used these pots. Moreover, the shape and size of these bowls indicate that they used them for serving drinks or special foods that circulated among the partakers in a single bowl. The inclusion and exclusion of certain people during the meal could distinguish between insiders and outsiders, while the order in which the people were served could differentiate between their ranks. The black incised bowls were thus used to establish and cement social relationships and alliances in the competition for power. The find distribution of the black incised bowls suggests that some C-Group families neither had the necessary wealth to share food nor to possess a black incised bowl. Inequality in wealth of animals and people would have excluded some individuals from the competition for power and authority (Hafsaas 2007:169–70). Acts of hospitality probably included guests from other ethnic groups, and the serving bowls would thus have a high degree of visibility. As meaningfully constituted material culture, the black incised bowls were used for expressing identity, both inside the C-Group society and towards other ethnic groups (Hafsaas 2007:171).

Personal Decoration Ethnic identity is often expressed through the visual representation of the body, and this was probably the case for the C-Group people. The most common form of bodily decoration among the C-Group people was to band the body with necklaces, bracelets, anklets, finger-rings, and hair-rings. Numerous beads of various shapes and materials were found in the C-Group graves without distinctions between gender and ages. Some beads are evidence for exchange with Egypt, such as blue-green, blue, and black disc beads of faience, metal beads of gold and silver, as well as various types of pendants. Ostrich eggshell beads as well as beads of carnelian and other stones were probably made locally, and they attest to the skills of the C-Group people. The practice of embroidering beads in lozenge patterns onto girdles or skirts of leather seems to have been characteristic for the C-Group people (Hafsaas 2006:95–98). The C-Group people made rings and bangles from a variety of materials: marine snail shells, bone, ivory, and stone. Both rings and bangles were uncovered from graves of men, women, and children. However, only C-Group men wore a white stone bangle on the upper left arm. Some rings and bangles were also made of gold, silver, and copper; and the C-Group people probably received these from Egypt (Hafsaas 2006:99–100). The items of bodily decoration uncovered from the C-Group cemeteries probably represent the traces of a lost language of identity display communicating both social positions within the society and ethnic unity towards other groups. The C-Group people were living in a multicultural setting where they interacted with Egyptians, Kerma people, and Pan-Grave people (see Hafsaas 2006). The interactions with these other ethnic groups had wide implications for the C-Group people as they continuously had to define their own identity while under constant influence from the other ethnic groups, as we will see in the historical outline that follows.

The C-Group People in Lower Nubia  165

Encounters with Egypt During the I/a-phase, the C-Group people established cemeteries at the most fertile plains of Lower Nubia. The population had become sufficiently numerous to disturb Egyptian activities by ca. 2500 bce. Snefru, the first king of the 4th Dynasty, claimed to have hacked up the Land of Nehes. From the 5th Dynasty onwards, the Egyptians used this toponym to construct the ethnonym Nehesy meaning the people of Nubia (JiménezSerrano 2006:140–41), so the Land of Nehes was probably Nubia. Snefru recorded a booty of 7,000 captives and 200,000 heads of livestock (Strudwick 2005:66). The proportion of animals to people, about 29 to 1, support the suggestion that these people were pastoralists (Adams 1977:139). The incentive of the campaign was probably to pacify the local population in order to access the mineral resources in the region. Khufu, Snefru’s successor, sent an expedition to the quarries at Gebel el-Asr in the desert to the west of Lower Nubia. Inscriptions by representatives of the kings of the 4th and 5th Dynasties suggest that they sporadically sent royal expeditions to these quarries until the reign of Djedkara (Storemyr et al. 2002:25). A walled Egyptian settlement was established at Buhen below the Second Cataract and used between the reigns of Khafra and Nyussera, and a key activity appears to have been the processing of gold and copper ore as well as wood resources (O’Connor 2014:336–38). Descendants of slaves taken in Egyptian raids to Nubia have left traces in Egypt. Three individuals described by the ethnic epithet Nehesy were depicted in 5th Dynasty burial chapels at Giza, and their modest titles indicate that they were employed in the household of the deceased (Fischer 1961:75). Statues of bound and humiliated foreign captives, among them Nehesy, have been found in the pyramid complexes of several kings of the 5th and 6th Dynasties (Shaw 2000:316). The need to depict their southern neighbors as subdued probably reflected an ambition to control the Nehesy rather than the actual reality on the ground. The earliest of the so-called execrations texts, written to magically cause destruction or harm to their enemies, date to the 6th Dynasty. The Egyptians mentioned Nehesy in such texts from the beginning (Shaw and Hirt, 2012). More information about Nubia is found in the autobiography of Weni the Elder, who served under the consecutive kings Teti, Pepy I, and Merenra of the 6th Dynasty. Weni first mentioned Nehesy during a military campaign in present-day Palestine during the reign of Pepy I. He had recruited the Nehesy as mercenaries, and they came from Irtjet, Medja, Yam, Wawat, and Kaau (Strudwick 2005:354). These places were toponyms in Nubia (see below). Unfortunately, the text gives no information on how Weni recruited the Nehesy mercenaries. In Bronze Age Europe, warriors appear to have travelled to distant chiefs in order to earn fame and foreign prestige goods (Earle and Kristiansen 2010:239). This was possibly also the case for the Nehesy mentioned in Weni’s autobiography. Copper mirrors and gold beads found in contemporary cemeteries in Nubia may thus have been military rewards to mercenaries rather than trade objects (Williams 1999:437). An important effect of the participation in large-scale military actions for

166   Henriette Hafsaas Egypt was that the Nehesy mercenaries acquired fighting experience in state-run warfare as well as knowledge about Egyptian culture and society. In the autobiography’s last reference to Nubia, Merenra sent Weni to Wawat to procure acacia wood for shipbuilding. The rulers from Irtjet, Wawat, Yam, and Medja were responsible for cutting the timber, and Weni used the boats to transport granite blocks for the king’s pyramid (Strudwick 2005:356–57). Weni’s journey to the south under Merenra is the last recorded royal expedition for resource extraction during the Old Kingdom. Thereafter, the Egyptians ventured on trading missions to Nubia. Pepy I, Merenra, and Pepy II had their names and titles carved on the rocks of the First Cataract in order to mark the southern border of Egypt and probably also to intimidate the C-Group people so that safe passage for trading expeditions to Upper Nubia could be established.

Egyptian Caravans The resumption of long-distance trade, which had thrived in A-Group times, is first evident through numerous graffiti by caravan leaders in service of Pepy I. The graffiti were carved near Tomâs—a central position in Lower Nubia since several desert routes entered the Nile valley there. The southernmost town in Egypt was located on Elephantine Island in the First Cataract. The highest officials in this town were caravan leaders on the trading ventures to the south during the reigns of Pepy I and his sons Merenra and Pepy II. The final destination for these expeditions was Yam. The location of Yam is disputed (Cooper 2012:1). Researchers have placed Yam along the Nile in Upper Nubia (e.g., Edwards 2004:78), in Central Sudan (e.g., O’Connor 1986), and deep into the Western Desert (e.g., Goedicke 1981:18). These suggestions have been based on estimations of the time taken to travel there according to the written sources, the trade goods obtained from Yam and ­textual comparisons. A recent find of an inscription mentioning Yam at Jebel Uweinat in the Western Desert has given some credibility to the suggestion that it was located to the west of the Nile (Cooper 2012:21; Williams 2013a:3). However, the dating of that inscription to the beginning of the 11th Dynasty, some three hundred years after the majority of references to Yam, weakens the suggestion. So I still find the evidence for associating Yam with Kerma in Upper Nubia more probable, as it is from that place we have material traces for a village-based society in contact with Egypt during the 6th Dynasty. At least twenty-five alabaster jars inscribed with the cartouches of Pepy I have been found at Kerma. These stone vessels and their contents were probably gifts sent to the chieftain of Yam in order to establish good relations between the sovereigns and thus facilitate the flow of trade (Morkot  2000:62; Hafsaas-Tsakos  2009:60). It is also from this time that the first Egyptian imports appear in C-Group graves (Hafsaas-Tsakos  2010:390), and sherds from C-Group pots found at Kerma sites in Upper Nubia suggest contact between Upper and Lower Nubia as well (Honegger 2010:9).

The C-Group People in Lower Nubia  167 The burial places for the elite of Elephantine were in the sandstone cliffs of Qubbat elHawa on the west bank opposite the town. Inscriptions in these tombs provide information both on the political developments in Nubia and on the relationships between Nehesy and Egyptians. The caravan leader Harkhuf made a detailed description of four trading expeditions to Yam within the time span of a decade—three during the reign of Merenra and the last when Pepy II was still a child. On the first journey, Harkhuf travelled together with his father, Iri, in order to learn the itinerary and to be introduced to the trading partners in the south. The name Iri is actually recorded in the aforementioned graffiti at Tomâs (Goedicke 1981:2). For the second mission, Harkhuf followed the Nile on his way south and passed through the territory of the ruler of Satju and Irtjet, which suggests that a single C-Group chieftain ruled these two territories. On his third mission, Harkhuf took the route via the oases in the Western Desert. It is probable that a unification of the pastoral groups in Lower Nubia convinced Harkhuf to travel through the desert rather than along the Nile. Harkhuf returned along the river “with three hundred donkeys loaded with incense, ebony, ‘heknu’ oil, aromatics, panther skins, elephant tusks, and all sorts of wonderful products,” as well as a troop of soldiers from Yam (Strudwick 2005:331). The caravan encountered the ruler of the united lands of Irtjet, Satju, and Wawat, and Harkhuf narrates that the ruler offered him oxen and goats when he saw the strength of the troop from Yam as well as Harkhuf ’s own expedition (Strudwick 2005:331). Furthermore, the ruler personally guided the caravan over the heights of Irtjet, probably the Korosko Hills, so that the long way around the bend of the river could be avoided (Goedicke 1981:16–17). Harkhuf conducted the fourth expedition on behalf of Pepy II, and he brought back a dancing pygmy who delighted the young king (Strudwick 2005:332–33).

Political Unification in Lower Nubia As we have seen, Egyptian written sources from the early 6th Dynasty refer to rulers of different territories in the south, including Wawat, Irtjet, and Satju. A reconstruction of the locations of these territories is feasible from the information given in the written sources. Wawat seems to have bordered on Egypt and stretched as far south as Korosko. Tomâs appears to have been located within the territory of Irtjet, since an inscription found there records that an official had been sent there to “open up” Irtjet for Pepy I (Strudwick 2005:150). Irtjet seems to have bordered on Satju in the south. The fertile region stretching from Amada to Toshka probably constituted the political entity Irtjet, while the territory of Satju stretched southwards from Toshka to the Second Cataract (Hafsaas 2006:71). The reconstructed territories of Wawat, Irtjet, and Satju correspond to the three most fertile districts in Lower Nubia around the plains of Dakka, Aniba, and Faras. The three largest C-Group cemeteries were located on these plains. The three chieftains of the written sources probably controlled separate territories and different segments of the

168   Henriette Hafsaas C-Group population. According to the earliest recordings of these toponyms, these political units existed before 2300 bce. The large cemeteries at Dakka, Aniba, and Faras were also among the earliest C-Group sites, and some of the graves were contemporary with the 6th Dynasty. Unequal access to objects imported from Egypt indicates incipient social stratification in the early graves of these cemeteries. The available sources suggest Dakka, Aniba, and Faras as the seats for the chieftains of the territories Wawat, Irtjet, and Satju respectively. According to Harkhuf ’s narration, Irtjet and Satju were united under a single ruler at the time of his second mission, and all three territories had become unified at the time of his third mission around 2280 bce. The toponyms of Irtjet and Satju were rarely used after the reign of Pepy II, and Wawat was used for the whole region between the First and Second Cataracts. An inscription relating to hostilities between an Egyptian caravan and the C-Group people is found in the elite tomb of Sabni and his father Mekhu from Elephantine, dating to the latter part of the reign of Pepy II. It records that the caravan-leader Mekhu died in Wawat. Sabni travelled to fetch his dead father with an army and “100 donkeys loaded with . . . all requirements for making gifts as requested by the Nehesy” (Strudwick 2005:336). Sabni’s narration suggests that his father was killed and that he paid a ransom for retrieving the corpse. Several written sources imply that the Egyptian caravans needed both armed guards and to give gifts to the local authorities in order to travel safely, as the C-Group people would attack weakly protected caravans and kill caravanleaders unwilling to pay tribute. A description of a military expedition to the south can be found in the tomb of Pepynakht I, also a noble of Elephantine. On the orders of King Pepy II, Pepynakht I went to destroy Wawat and Irtjet, and he killed many people and brought back numerous prisoners. Pepynakht I was sent on a second mission in order to subdue the foreign lands and to force the Nehesy chieftains to pay tax in form of livestock to the Egyptian king (Strudwick 2005:334–35). The autobiographies of Sabni and Pepynakht I suggest a more violent relationship between the C-Group people and the Egyptians during the latter part of the reign of Pepy II. This was probably related to the threat that the centralization of power among the C-Group people posed and the obstructions that they put on the passage through their territory (Hafsaas 2006:139).

Climate Change and Political Upheavals Environmental studies show that the Nile had a reduced flow from ca. 2200 bce resulting in food shortages in both Egypt and Lower Nubia (Hassan 1997). This coincided with a collapse of centralized government in Egypt, whereby nomarchs seized power in the south. The northern part of Egypt was ruled by a succession of kings originating

The C-Group People in Lower Nubia  169 from Herakleopolis (Seidlmayer  2000:118). In southern Egypt, some nomarchs took control over more than one nome, and there was frequently armed conflict between neighboring regions (Morkot 2000:50). Every nomarch seems to have controlled their own armies, and this provided opportunities for mercenaries. Written and archaeological sources demonstrate that Nehesy were employed as soldiers in Upper Egypt. Some Nehesy eventually settled in Egypt, while others returned to Nubia after service.

Mercenaries in Egypt The lower floods decreased the flood plain available as pasture in Lower Nubia, and this must have affected the size of the herds. Lack of grassland forced some C-Group herders to search for pasture on the wider flood plains in Egypt, but the refugees were not welcomed. The nomarch Tjemerery of the 8th Nome recorded that he was “repelling foreigners who came down from the southern mountain-lands,” which implies that they arrived via the oasis route connecting the Abydos bend with Lower Nubia (Moreno García 2010:26). Upper Egypt thus seems to have become a place of both military opportunity and climate refuge for the C-Group people (Darnell 2004:33). Anthropological research on Darfur in Sudan shows that young men leave their villages in order to compensate for the lack of food at times of famine. During crises, young men have few possibilities of becoming head of a household and thus “a man” in sociocultural terms. Among young men without a future, weapons are an easy and immediate satisfaction in the quest for survival, respect, and self-identity. The high number of marginalized men on all sides of the Darfur conflict contributed to its escalation, and the Janjaweed militia seems to have had diverse ethnic backgrounds (Willemse 2007:485–87). This situation seems comparable to the Nehesy mercenaries in Egypt. Nehesy men appear to have migrated northwards to Egypt where the internal wars created a demand for foreign mercenaries. The most important weapon among the C-Group people appears to have been the bow and arrows. The C-Group men must have been attractive as mercenaries because they were experienced in archery from their daily life as herders and hunters, as depicted in their art (see Fig. 9.2 above left). The first indication of Nehesy mercenaries being employed in internal conflicts in Egypt is probably from the tomb of Setka, nomarch of the 1st Nome. The mercenaries occur in a painted scene, which shows five black-skinned archers engaged in battle (Bestock 2017:230). It is unknown whom they attacked as the plaster in front of the scene has disappeared, but it may have been a combat against Ankhtifi—the nomarch of the two neighboring nomes to the north. Since Elephantine was on the southern border of Egypt, it is natural that this was the first place Nehesy men found a warlord to serve. At Kubbaniya, ca. 13 km north of Elephantine, three groups of graves have been found belonging to three different ethnic groups: C-Group people, Egyptianized Pan-Grave people, and Egyptians (Cohen  1993). The archaeological evidence from Kubbaniya attests to the presence of C-Group people in Egypt contemporary with the references to Nehesy mercenaries in Egyptian iconographic and written sources. Both C-Group and Pan-Grave cemeteries were also established at Hierakonpolis in the 3rd Nome

170   Henriette Hafsaas (Friedman 2001). The finds from Kubbaniya and Hierakonpolis demonstrate that some immigrants from Nubia gradually changed their cultural repertoire. In time, they probably assimilated into the mainstream of the Egyptian society (Hafsaas 2006:140). Moalla was the hometown of the nomarch Ankhtifi, who ruled the 2nd and 3rd nomes. A troop of forty-six archers, two depicted as Nehesy with black skin and the rest as Egyptians, was included in the painted decoration of Ankhtifi’s tomb (Vandier 1950:98–99). In another painting, a Nehesy archer is shown with an arrow piercing his stomach (Vandier 1950:128). Ankhtifi was fighting against the neighboring nomarchs to the south and the north. He probably conquered the 1st Nome, but has no known successors as ruler of the three southernmost nomes (Seidlmayer 2000:128). It seems that the contemporary ruler of the 4th Nome and founder of the 11th Dynasty, Intef I, seized the three southernmost nomes upon Ankhtifi’s death. In his autobiography, Ankhtifi boasted that he had not only fed his own people, but also sent barley upstream to the starving people in Wawat (Vandier 1950:220). This indicates that Wawat was the origin of the Nehesy archers in his troop. Four Nehesy archers herding cattle and goats were also depicted in Ankhtifi’s tomb (Vandier 1950, pl. 26). This suggests that some Nehesy continued their pastoral life in Egypt—possibly as herdsmen in service of Egyptians. Further evidence for Nehesy mercenaries comes from Gebelein—a village on the border between the 3rd and 4th nomes. The grave stela of Kedes mentions Nehesy soldiers, and five other stelae confirm the presence of Nehesy mercenaries since the deceased depicted themselves as archers and referred to themselves with the epithet “Nehesy” (Fischer 1961). These Nehesy followed Egyptian burial traditions, and this is a further testimony of the processes of Egyptianization among Nehesy in Egypt. The Nehesy mercenaries of Gebelein were probably employed by the regional rulers of the early 11th Dynasty based at Thebes in the 4th Nome. With the incorporation of the territory of Ankhtifi, Intef I came to rule the five southernmost nomes, and he styled himself as king of the south (Seidlmayer 2000:133–35). In the tomb of another Intef, the overseer of troops under Mentuhotep II, one of the paintings depicts a siege. Red-brown Egyptians allied with dark-brown Nehesy archers constitute an integrated force attacking a fortress defended by orange-brown Asiatics (Bestock 2017:239). A model of forty archers from the 11th Dynasty tomb of the nomarch Mesehti of the 13th Nome at Asyut shows Nehesy mercenaries as disciplined soldiers marching in ranks. Their loincloths seem to be identical to the remains of loincloths embroidered with beads in lozenge-patterns that have been found in C-Group graves (Hafsaas 2006:95). One of the archers in the model also wears a white bangle on his upper arm, which was characteristic for C-Group men (see above). Nehesy mercenaries in the tomb paintings at Beni Hasan in the 16th Nome suggests that the Egyptians recruited Nehesy mercenaries well into the 12th Dynasty (see Bestock 2017:241–51). The Nehesy mercenaries in Egypt may have derived from several ethnic groups in the south, as the present-day Janjaweed in Sudan (see above). The mercenaries thus

The C-Group People in Lower Nubia  171 c­ onformed to a cross-cultural warrior identity, and C-Group men were certainly part of this warrior class in Egypt.

Trade and Prosperity The written records are silent on trade relations between Egypt and Nubia after centralized government collapsed in Egypt, but the archaeological record demonstrates that exchanges of goods increased during the I/b-phase (Hafsaas-Tsakos 2010:391–92, figs. 1–5). With some of the population migrating, the C-Group people who remained in Lower Nubia seem to have flourished. Egyptian imports reached a peak in the graves of the C-Group people. Foodstuffs were an important part of the imports from this time onwards, as there is a marked increase in Egyptian pottery jars deposited in the C-Group cemeteries (Hafsaas-Tsakos 2010:392), and some of them still contained grains that the C-Group people may have acquired to prevent starvation, as recorded by Ankhtifi. Egyptian jewelry was also deposited in some C-Group graves. C-Group mercenaries returning from Egypt possibly brought with them some very fine gold and silver bead necklaces given as rewards for their military services and which ultimately ended up in graves in Lower Nubia (Williams  1999:437). The C-Group people also seem to have become inspired by the institution of kingship in Egypt.

The Obscure Kings of Lower Nubia Mentuhotep II of the 11th Dynasty reunited Egypt around 2055 bce. There are indications that his wife Kemsit was Nehesy in origin. The importance of Nehesy mercenaries in Upper Egypt at this time may have led to marriage alliances with ascending ruling families in the south (Morkot 2000:51–53). It was probably at this time of close cooperation that ritual dances of the C-Group women were incorporated into Egyptian rites performed for the cow goddess Hathor, as argued by Solange Ashby (2018). An inscription tentatively dated to Mentuhotep IIs reign describes an Egyptian campaign to Wawat and an oasis—probably Kurkur (Darnell 2004:24, 29). Tjehemau, a Nehesy mercenary recruited by Mentuhotep II and still in service under Amenemhat I, left another inscription in a wadi connecting Lower Nubia with Kurkur (Darnell 2004, fig. 1). The text mentions both travels through the Western Desert and the recruitment of Nehesy warriors (Darnell 2004). This suggests that it was difficult to access Lower Nubia along the river, and the reason was probably increased centralization among the C-Group people. Several rock inscriptions with the names of three otherwise unattested kings have been found in Lower Nubia (see Williams 2013b for references). The names and titles of Kakara In(tef) were recorded in fifteen inscriptions at different locations throughout Lower Nubia. Rock inscriptions of Iy-ib-khent-ra have been found at two locations in northern Lower Nubia, and his Horus name, Gereg-tawyef, had been added to one of

172   Henriette Hafsaas Kakara’s inscriptions, which indicates that Iy-ib-khent-ra was Kakara’s successor. Wadjkara Segersenti also left two inscriptions in the far north of Lower Nubia (Morkot 2000:54–55). The similarities in the structure and meaning of the names of the Egyptian king Mentuhotep III of the late 11th Dynasty and Kakara In(tef) is too close to be irrelevant (Williams 2013b:6). It is more likely that a C-Group chief aspiring to rule as an Egyptian king copied the name of Mentuhotep III than the other way around. Kakara In(tef) probably ruled at some point after Mentuhotep III ascended the throne around 2004 bce and before the 12th Dynasty king Amenemhat I initiated the conquest of Wawat in his 29th regnal year around 1956 bce. There are indications that also Amenemhat I had genealogical links to Nubia (Morkot 2000:53), and it is possible that the C-Group kings initially ruled with his consent (Morkot 2000:55).

Occupied by Egypt Several inscriptions attributed to the first kings of the 12th Dynasty describe a military conquest of Lower Nubia. This was probably a war between the expanding Egyptian state and the C-Group people, who had been organized in a single chiefdom called Wawat since 2280 bce and who had rulers copying the royal titulary of Egypt since 2000 bce. There was a repeating process on the southern frontier of Egypt, whereby local big men rose to the position of paramount chieftains due to influence of political institutions from Egypt, imported luxury goods, and strategic positions in trading networks. The regions with leaders cooperating with Egypt then appear to have been incorporated into the Egyptian state, as the Egyptians waged war on them when their powers became too strong (Hafsaas-Tsakos 2015:397). The Egyptian objectives for conquering Lower Nubia were both to curb the development of increasing centralization of the political power in the hands of the C-Group chieftain and to re-establish control over the trade in African exotics, the extraction of mineral resources, and the acquisition of slaves and mercenaries (Hafsaas-Tsakos 2010:393). The C-Group people fought a war of resistance, and it took several military expeditions before the Egyptians could establish their new southern border at Buhen below the Second Cataract around 1938 bce. Wawat was thereafter a province of Egypt (Hafsaas 2006:116). The Egyptians constructed a series of monumental fortresses in the conquered land (Bestock, this volume). The functions of the fortresses seem to have been to hold the territory through a military presence, to administer the riverine traffic, to monitor the local populations, as well as to patrol and explore the deserts. The major fortresses in Lower Nubia were placed in the most populous regions, which suggests that control and surveillance of the indigenous population were important tasks for the soldiers stationed in the fortresses (Hafsaas 2006:117–21). The Egyptians were not competing with the C-Group people for the fertile land in Lower Nubia, as they received their food rations from Egypt. The continued existence of

The C-Group People in Lower Nubia  173 the C-Group people after the Egyptian conquest was probably due to a strategy of cooperation with the Egyptians rather than fighting or fleeing. The latter option was rather impossible as there was no empty land in which they could seek refuge, while the option of continued resistance was too costly both in terms of people killed and in loss of means for food production (Hafsaas-Tsakos 2015:400). The occupiers took control of both the lucrative trade in raw materials from Upper Nubia and the mineral resources in the hinterlands of Lower Nubia, while the C-Group people continued their pastoral lifestyle without competition for pastureland. The reconciliation stimulated and facilitated exchange between the Egyptians and the C-Group people. Nevertheless, the C-Group people were to some degree forced to work for the Egyptians—both in fortress construction and in mining and quarrying (Harrell and Mittelstaedt  2015:37–38); and the Egyptian presence in Lower Nubia reduced the C-Group people to a subject population who was denied a share in the profits from both trade and resource extraction (Hafsaas  2006:142). There appear to have been little interest in Egyptian beliefs and practices among the C-Group people during this period of close co-existence. The reason is probably that it was important to communicate ethnic identity as ethnicity structured the rules for both intergroup contact and exchange (Hafsaas-Tsakos 2010:392). Written testimonies record that Senusret III annexed the Second Cataract region and the Batn el-Hajar between 1862 and 1854 bce, and he established the new southern border of Egypt at Semna—the narrowest gorge of the Nile. The Egyptians fortified the frontier zone heavily in order to defend their economic interests in the south from interferences from Kush—an emerging kingdom centered on Kerma in Upper Nubia (Bonnet, this volume).

Between Egypt and Kush The Egyptians retreated from their fortified border in Batn el-Hajar to their traditional border in the First Cataract around 1725 bce, after centralized authority withered towards the end of the 13th Dynasty. This left Lower Nubia again in the hands of the C-Group people, while the Pan-Grave people—probably coming from the Eastern Desert—also appear to have inhabited the region from this time onwards (Hafsaas 2006:143). The ruler of Kush seized control of the Egyptian fortresses and the gold mines in the Second Cataract region (Hafsaas-Tsakos 2010:393). Egyptians still garrisoned some of these fortresses, but they appear to have served the ruler of Kush (Edwards 2004:97). Kush flourished due to the transfer of control over the trade from the Egyptians to the Kerma people (Hafsaas-Tsakos  2013:82). Initially, the relations between the C-Group people and the kingdom of Kush seem to have been peaceful and characterized by cooperation. However, the Kushites were not only peaceful traders. Warriors must have played an important role in the aggressive policy of the rulers of Kush (Hafsaas-Tsakos 2013). A tomb inscription from Elkab in Upper Egypt narrates how war parties from Kush raided for booty in the region during the 17th Dynasty

174   Henriette Hafsaas (Davies 2003:52). The Egyptian rulers of Thebes in the 4th Nome probably went to counterattacks. The C-Group people were suddenly situated between two opponents fighting for the control of territory and trade—the Theban king and the Kushite king (HafsaasTsakos 2010:394). The C-Group people’s obvious concern for security appear in the fortifications of the hilltop settlement at Wadi es-Sebua (Sauneron 1965). The defensive walls with loopholes were inspired by the Egyptian fortresses, and the fortifications probably provided shelter from attacks. The C-Group people also seem to have found protection in abandoned Egyptian fortresses in Lower Nubia. Especially the relationship with Kush seems to have deteriorated, as the Kushites probably forced the C-Group people to provide them with supplies and recruits (Hafsaas-Tsakos  2010:394). Some scattered Kerma graves dating to this period have been found in C-Group cemeteries, and this is probably the material manifestations of Kushite excursions to the north (Hafsaas 2006:136). The C-Group people’s solution to the threat from the kingdom of Kush seems to have been an alliance with the 17th Dynasty king Kamose, to whom the C-Group chieftains swore allegiance (Hafsaas 2006:145). The alliance with the C-Group people made it possible for Kamose and his army to expel the Kerma people from Buhen—the northernmost fortress in the Second Cataract. This was the first step in the process whereby the ruling family of Thebes took control over Lower Nubia, reunited Egypt, and conquered Upper Nubia. Egyptian bronze daggers suddenly appear in graves of C-Group men during the II/bphase, and this suggests a stronger focus on warfare among the C-Group people (Hafsaas 2006:109–10). The Egyptians had not exported this specialized weapon to the C-Group people during the occupation. Furthermore, one of these bronze daggers was similar to an extraordinary dagger found in the tomb of Queen Ahhotep of the 17th Dynasty. This is thus a material manifestation of the close relationship between the C-Group people and the 17th Dynasty at this time (Hafsaas 2006:145–46).

Acculturation Mortuary evidence shows that the C-Group people acculturated after Lower Nubia became part of Egypt again (Säve-Söderbergh 1989:10). The large cemetery N at Aniba and many of the other well-established C-Group burial grounds were abandoned after the II/b-phase, and the black incised bowl, which was the hallmark of the C-Group material culture, disappeared from the pottery repertoire (Hafsaas 2006:47). Especially the C-Group elites seem to have become Egyptianized. Following the annexation, local chieftains at Aniba held high offices in Lower Nubia under the Egyptian viceroy (King’s Son of Kush), and they were probably in charge of their former chiefdom (Edwards 2004:108). The acculturation of the majority of the population seems to have been limited to the material culture, and they resisted Egyptian ideas, such as the belief in the afterlife. Even though

The C-Group People in Lower Nubia  175 the material culture of the C-Group people disappeared from the archaeological record after 1550 bce, their descendants continued to live in Lower Nubia as Egyptian subjects.

References Cited Adams, W.Y. 1977 Nubia: Corridor to Africa. Allen Lane. Anderson, W. 1996 The Significance of Middle Nubian C-Group Mortuary Variability, ca. 2200 B.C. to ca. 1500 B.C. Doctoral dissertation, McGill University. Ashby, S. 2018 Dancing for Hathor: Nubian Women in Egyptian Cultic Life. Dotawo 5:63–90. Bestock, L. 2017 Violence and Power in Ancient Egypt: Images and Ideology before the New Kingdom. Routledge. Bietak, M. 1968 Studien zur Chronologie der Nubischen C-Gruppe. Ein Beitrag zur Frühgeschichte Unternubiens zwischen 2200 und 1550 vor Chr. Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Philosophisch-historische Klasse, Denkschriften 97. Cohen, E.S. 1993 Egyptianization and the Acculturation Hypothesis. Doctoral dissertation, Yale University. Cooper, J. 2012 Reconsidering the Location of Yam. Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt 48:1–21. Darnell, J.C. 2004 The Route of Eleventh Dynasty Expansion into Nubia. Zeitschrift für Ägyptische Sprache und Altertumskunde 131:23–37. Davies, V.W. 2003 Kush in Egypt. A New Historical Inscription. Sudan & Nubia 7:52–54. Earle, T. and K. Kristiansen 2010 Organizing Bronze Age Societies: Concluding Thoughts. In Organizing Bronze Age Society: The Mediterranean, Central Europe, and Scandinavia Compared, ed. T. Earle and K. Kristiansen, pp. 218–56. Cambridge University Press. Edwards, D.N. 2004 The Nubian Past: An Archaeology of the Sudan. Routledge. Emberling, G. 1997 Ethnicity in Complex Societies: Archaeological Perspectives. Journal of Archaeological Research 5(4):295–344. Eriksen, T.H. 2001 Ethnic Identity, National Identity, and Intergroup Conflict: The Significance of Personal Experiences. In Social Identity, Intergroup Conflict, and Conflict Reduction, ed. R.D. Ashmore, L. Jussim, and D. Wilder, pp. 42–68. Oxford University Press. Falk, P. 1994 The Consuming Body. Sage Publications. Fischer, H.G. 1961 The Nubian Mercenaries of Gebelein during the First Intermediate Period. Kush 9:44–80. Friedman, R. 2001 Nubians at Hierakonpolis. Sudan & Nubia 5:29–45. Goedicke, H. 1981 Harkhuf ’s Travels. Journal of Near Eastern Studies 40(1):1–20. Gratien, B. 2014 Kerma North of the Third Cataract. In The Fourth Cataract and Beyond: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference for Nubian Studies, ed. J.R. Anderson and D.A. Welsby, pp. 95–101. British Museum Publications on Egypt and Sudan 1. Peeters. Haaland, R. 1997 Emergence of Sedentism: New Ways of Living, New Ways of Symbolizing. Antiquity 71:374–85. Hafsaas, H. 2006 Cattle Pastoralists in a Multicultural Setting: The C-Group People in Lower Nubia 2500–1500 BCE. The Lower Jordan River Basin Programme Publications. Birzeit University and Bergen University. ——— 2007 Pots and People in an Anthropological Perspective: The C-Group People of Lower Nubia as a Case Study. In Mélanges Offerts à Francis Geus, ed. B. Gratien, pp. 163–71. Cahier de Recherches de l’Institut de Papyrologie et d’Égyptologie de Lille 26.

176   Henriette Hafsaas Hafsaas-Tsakos, H. 2009 The Kingdom of Kush: An African Centre on the Periphery of the Bronze Age World System. Norwegian Archaeological Review 42:50–70. ——— 2010 Between Kush and Egypt: The C-Group People of Lower Nubia during the Middle Kingdom and Second Intermediate Period. In Between the Cataracts: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference for Nubian Studies, ed. W. Godlewski and A. Łajtar, Part 2, Fasc. 2, pp. 389–96. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean Supplement Series 2.2/2. Warsaw University. ——— 2013 Edges of Bronze and Expressions of Masculinity: The Emergence of a Warrior Class at Kerma in Sudan. Antiquity 87:79–91. ——— 2015 War on the Southern Frontier of the Emerging State of Ancient Egypt. Doctoral dissertation, University of Bergen. Harrell, J.A. and R.E. Mittelstaedt 2015 Newly Discovered Middle Kingdom Forts in Lower Nubia. Sudan & Nubia 19:30–39. Hassan, F. 1997 Nile Floods and Political Disorder in Early Egypt. In Third Millennium BC Climate Change and Old World Collapse, ed. H.N. Dalfes, G. Kukla, and H. Weiss, pp. 1–23. Springer. Herbert, E.W. 1993 Iron, Gender, and Power: Rituals of Transformation in African Societies. Indiana University Press. Honegger  M. 2010 The Ancient Kerma Area of the Eastern Cemetery. In Archaeological Excavations at Kerma (Sudan): Preliminary Report to the 2009–2010 Season, by M. Honegger, C.  Bonnet, P.  Ruffieux, C.  Fallet, and P.  Marti, pp. 7–11. Documents de la mission archéologique suisse au Soudan 2. Jiménez-Serrano, A. 2006 Two Different Names of Nubia before the Fifth Dynasty. Studien zur Altägyptischen Kultur 35:141–45. Kuper, R. and S.  Kröpelin 2006 Climate-Controlled Holocene Occupation in the Sahara: Motor of Africa’s Evolution. Science 313:803–807. Moreno García, J.C. 2010 War in Old Kingdom Egypt (2686–2125 BCE). In Studies on War in the Ancient Near East, ed. J. Vidal, pp. 5–41. Alter Orient und Altes Testament 372. Ugarit Verlag. Morkot, R.G. 2000 The Black Pharaohs: Egypt’s Nubian Rulers. Rubicon. Oba, G. 2017 Herder Warfare in East Africa: A Social and Spatial History. White Horse Press. O’Connor, D.B. 1969 Nubian Archaeological Material of the First to the Second Intermediate Periods: An Analytical Study. Doctoral dissertation. University of Cambridge. ——— 1986 The Locations of Yam and Kush and their Historical Implications. Journal of American Research Center in Egypt 23:26–50. ——— 2014 The Old Kingdom Town at Buhen. Egypt Exploration Society Excavation Memoir 106. Parker Pearson, M. 1999 The Archaeology of Death and Burial. Texas A&M University Press. Salzman, P.C. 2004 Pastoralists: Equality, Hierarchy, and the State. Westview Press. Sauneron, S. 1965 Un village Nubien fortifié sur la rive orientale de Ouadi es-Sebou. Bulletin de l’Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale 63:161–67. Säve-Söderbergh, T. 1989 Middle Nubian Sites. The Scandinavian Joint Expedition to Sudanese Nubia 4. Bohusläningens Boktryckeri AB. Schortman, E.M. 1989 Interregional Interaction in Prehistory: The Need for a New Perspective. American Antiquity 54(1):52–65. Seidlmayer, S. 2000 The First Intermediate Period (c. 2160–2055). In The Oxford History of Ancient Egypt, ed. I. Shaw, pp. 118–47. Oxford University Press.

The C-Group People in Lower Nubia  177 Shaw, G.  J., and A.  Hirt 2012 Execration Texts. In The Encyclopedia of Ancient History, ed. R.S. Bagnall, pp. 2592–93. Blackwell. Shaw, I. 2000 Egypt and the Outside World. In The Oxford History of Ancient Egypt, ed. I. Shaw, pp. 314–29. Oxford University Press. Steffensen, U. 2007 The Ritual Use of Mortuary Pottery in Ancient Nubia. Archéo-Nil 17:133–52. Steindorff, G. 1935 Aniba 1. Mission archéologique de Nubie, 1929–1934. J.J. Augustin. Storemyr, P., E. Bloxam, T. Heldal, and A. Salem 2002 Survey at Chephren’s Quarry, Gebel elAsr, Lower Nubia. Sudan & Nubia 6:25–29. Strudwick, N. 2005 Texts from the Pyramid Age. Society of Biblical Literature. Vandier, J. 1950 Mo’alla. La tombe d’Ankhtifi et la tombe de Sébekhotep. Bibliothèque d’Étude 18. L’Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale. Welsby, D.A. 2012 The Kerma Ancien Cemetery at Site H29 in the Northern Dongola Reach. Sudan & Nubia 16:20–28. Williams, B. 1983 Excavations between Abu Simbel and the Sudan Frontier, Part 5: C-Group, Pan Grave, and Kerma Remains at Adindan Cemeteries T, K, U, and J. University of Chicago Oriental Institute Nubian Expedition 5. ——— 1999 Serra East and the Mission of Middle Kingdom Fortresses in Nubia. In Gold of Praise: Studies on Ancient Egypt in Honor of Edward F. Wente, ed. E. Teeter and J.A. Larson, pp. 435–53. Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilization 58. ——— 2013a Some Geographical and Political Aspects to Relations between Egypt and Nubia in C-Group and Kerma Times, ca. 2500–1500 B.C.  Journal of Ancient Egyptian Interconnections 6(1):1–14. ——— 2013b Three Rulers in Nubia and the Early Middle Kingdom in Egypt. Journal of Near Eastern Studies 72(1):1–10. Willemse, K. 2007 One Foot in Heaven: Narratives on Gender and Islam in Darfur, West-Sudan. Brill.

chapter 10

K ush i n th e W ider Wor ld Du r i ng th e K er m a Per iod Bruce Beyer Williams

Introduction and Sources Kush, the state that grew from the city now known as Kerma, or Kerman Kush (Fig. 10.1), was the earliest African state south of Egypt to have a fully historical presence, having changed the geopolitics and trade of northeastern Africa and become, for a time, its greatest power. In this contribution, I deal with the role Kush played in the larger world rather than its internal development (see chapters by Hafsaas, Honegger and Bonnet, Bonnet, and Welsby, this volume). Reaching back into the 3rd millennium bce, written sources for its history and archaeological sources for its culture are inevitably fragmentary and the former are fundamentally biased toward Egypt, whose scribes wrote them. Since the sources for Egyptian history are small fragments, the fact that sources for Nubia are far fewer and more cryptic should come as no surprise. The archaeological sources, while far more plentiful, are nevertheless incomplete and biased in that they can be interpreted according to preferences, such as whether a researcher is looking for continuities vs discontinuities, unity vs fragmentation etc. Reviewing Kush in its relation to the wider ancient world exposes the frailties of official records, which, whether royal inscriptions, private commemorations, occasional tag-graffiti, or execration texts, reveals another problem of interpretation. Much of the written material records conflicts or situations that threaten conflict. Like many other peoples in history, the ancient Egyptians were extremely parsimonious in admitting defeat—where admissions occur at all1—and lavish in claiming victory and contemptuous of opponents. Thus, sources must be read through rather than being taken literally or rejected out of hand. A heavy measure of

180   Bruce Beyer Williams

Figure 10.1  Map of the Kushite Empire at its height. Map: Samuel Burns.

conjectural reconstruction must be applied to attempt to see meaningful trends or ­patterns. Throughout, we must correlate events with Egyptian history, which is the framework of regional chronology and subject to change.

Upper Nubia before Kush: The Egyptian Old Kingdom Before the foundation of the continuously occupied city of Kerma, there is evidence of some concentration of power in Upper Nubia. The record of Snefru, with its vast booty in

Kush in the Wider World during the Kerma Period   181 prisoners and cattle, could not refer to Lower Nubia at the time, which was hardly inhabited (Gatto, this volume).2 While the Pre-Kerma culture clearly occupied the place (Honegger, this volume), its name is obscured behind the generic term for Nubia, Ta-sety. As with so many incipient phases, the early geographical extent of the Kerma Culture is not clearly defined by a continuous distribution of sites in the valley. It appears at Sai in the early phase, but south of the areas surveyed and excavated to the south of Kerma (Welsby, this volume generally) the situation is obscure.3 In the Fourth Cataract, a phase was initially called Kerma Ancien (KA), but substantial differences between the material cultures of that area and the northern Dongola Reach exist that distinguish it from Kerma. At a minimum, it could be said that KA was located from at least the area just south of the Second Cataract to somewhere south of Kerma itself. KA lasted into C-Group I/b (see chapters by Bonnet; Bonnet and Honegger; and Hafsaas, this volume), and even II/a (Privati 2004: Fig. 2–11), dating to the Middle Kingdom, and the Egyptian records of the late Old Kingdom probably refer in some way to this culture. For some time, Kerma was thought to be the country of Yam, ultimate destination of the expeditions by the Elephantine governors in the late Old Kingdom, but with the discovery of Mentuhotep II’s inscription at Jebel Uweinat (Clayton et al. 2008), this important place must have been located far to the west, at least in Darfur, or even modern Chad. Instead, Old Kingdom rock-graffiti at El-Kab Oasis4 seem to indicate that the Dongola Reach area may have been on a different route, most likely the return road from Yam, making a kind of triangle, with the outward journey using the Abu Ballas trail, and the heavily laden return using the Wadi Howar to the Nile area and northward (Williams 2014:3 but see Hafsaas this volume). Several names appear for the Nubian region in the records (Williams 2014:2), and only Wawat, designating Lower Nubia, is known. Of the others, perhaps Irtjet, the most prominent, would indicate the Kerma area, but that is only a guess. If so, then by the third journey of Harkhuf, the region from Kerma to the First Cataract had one ruler.5 More important, since the records refer to several territories and rulers, it appears likely that authority in the KA culture area became divided, while Wawat, the territory north of the Second Cataract, was apparently more unified. It should be noted, however, that if the great temple (Deffufa) in the city at Kerma was first built in KA (Bonnet 2004), it was already monumental and may already have been the leading power. Thus, already, large districts south of Egypt were consolidated politically. In addition, however, Egyptians claimed to have campaigned in all the Nilotic Nubian regions and Yam,6 surely an immense field of political engagement and projecting power. It is telling that when Weni assembled an army to attack the Sand-Dwellers (Asiatics), he did so with troops from Medjay, Yam, Wawat, Irtjet, Kaau, and Tjemeh7—indicating a wide reach of power into the south, east, and west—and that Harkhuf used a troop of Yam to overawe the rulers of the Nile valley on one of his returns (Williams 2014:3). Above the Second Cataract and in the Dongola Reach, KA is quite well represented, and in the contemporary culture in the Fourth Cataract area, but the archaeology elsewhere is either difficult to correlate or, to the far south and west, nonexistent. The period in the Libyan Desert and Wadi Howar is covered by the Handessi Horizon (Jesse, this

182   Bruce Beyer Williams volume), but it betrays little in the way of contacts with Nubia. We are primarily de­pend­ ent on Egyptian records at this period. Limited as our information is, it could be said that we know of three material cultures by the end of the Old Kingdom: C-Group, Kerma Ancien (KA), and Fourth Cataract Old Kush, with an undefined geographical gap between the last two. We also know that many Nubians were considered enemies in Egypt, at least in the ritual sense, from a major group of Old Kingdom Execration Texts. We do not know which if any of these cultures the persons mentioned in the texts belonged to or even how seriously the Egyptians took the enmity expressed in the texts, nor do we know their linguistic affiliations.8

The Emergence of Kush The Old Kingdom records of Nubia after Snefru were not royal triumphs, although they refer characteristically to successful interactions, including coercion, applied in Nubia by the Egyptians, at least once with the help of a troop from Yam. By the Middle Kingdom, the records that refer to geopolitics are dominated by royal inscriptions and some of officials relating royal campaigns. These must be read more carefully, as noted above. Egypt’s relations with Nubia in the First Intermediate Period were largely with the northern part,9 and the Medjay. Most prominent in the representations are Nubian troops in the service of various local rulers where they were very strongly represented (Bietak 1985), and by the time Mentuhotep conquered (if that is the right expression)10 Lower Nubia, they served the state as well.11 Lower Nubia was not fortified at this time, but there was a series of fortified enclosures erected in the Eastern Desert, possibly to protect mining operations, but also possibly to push back against incursion from the east.12 At the end of the 11th Dynasty and for the reign of Amenemhat I, the condition of Egypt was disturbed, and the civil wars that erupted were a major opportunity for Nubian soldiers, many apparently fighting for a Theban restoration (Williams 2013:8–9). It was also at this time, apparently, that a brief dynasty of pharaonic rulers emerged in Lower Nubia as competitors to Amenemhat’s new regime at Lisht, and the last of these was a Nubian named Segersenti.13 As a result of this major challenge, late in the reign of Amenemhat I, the vizier Intefoker undertook a highly destructive campaign in Nubia that changed relations altogether (Williams 2013:8–9, 2014:4). Very shortly thereafter, this brought the first mention of, and collision with, Kush. It was Senusret I who erected the first series of forts in Lower Nubia (ca. 1950 bce)14 and it was also he who campaigned well to the south of the Second Cataract in year 18 of his reign. The question is, was this an unprovoked attack or a response to a challenge? If the campaign of Intefoker was a response to a challenge, as I believe,15 then this campaign probably was also. The nature of his campaigns is indicated by the town-ovals with the names of Nubian places, most notably Kush and Sha’at (Sai) (Zibelius-Chen 1972:154–55,

Kush in the Wider World during the Kerma Period   183 165–69). Elsewhere, a nomarch of Beni Hasan said that he followed his lord when he sailed southward of Kush (Ameni). The definite results of this (or these) campaign(s) were that subsequent operations were sent for ore, but Kush was not conquered.16 This period was presumably the start of the Kerma Moyen (KM), which is known almost to the Second Cataract (Ukma) (Vila 1987:258–65). Again, in the Fourth Cataract, the local culture bears some significant relation to Kerma, but was not part of the KM culture (Emberling and Williams  2010). A considerable expansion of Kerma town means it was a major center (Bonnet, this volume). Amenemhat II also apparently campaigned to the south, but little is known of the expedition (Grajetzki 2006:47). He also received deputations from Kush and WebetSepet (Medjay) in the south (Altenmüller 2015:36–37). One official had gold from Upper Nubia, which could be a tantalizing reference to areas as far distant as the Fourth Cataract. It was with Senusret III that a momentous change took place in Nubia, and in Egypt. We know only the Egyptian side. Senusret III erected a colossal string of fortresses from Serra East and Faras in the North to Semna South (ca. 1850 bce). He also repeatedly campaigned against Kush, now named as the principal objective; in his Second Semna Stela, there is an inadvertent explanation. While expressing contempt for the enemy as one who retreats when attacked and attacks when one shrinks back, he is not describing a broken people, as he claims, but a standard tactic of mobile forces, especially those armed with projectile weapons, and neither the city nor the necropolis at Kerma show signs of disruption. This and the fortresses are an admission of failure.17 The huge fortressbuilding program and stelae all point to a major crisis, probably a Kushite attack with some success. The stela points out Nubian tactics that I think led to the abandonment of the aggressive policy. That this crisis occurred on two fronts, Nubia and Western Asia, and was accompanied by an oppressive social reorganization that opened the door for larger crises to come, and the First Empire of Kush, could hardly be coincidence. The rise of a real power south of the Third Cataract also made one major change in Egyptian behavior. The deep, desert-faring expeditions of the Old Kingdom and 11th Dynasty were no longer undertaken (Williams 2014:4), and Punt, for example, had to be reached by sea (Manzo 2011:71 and nn. 6 and 8). About this time, we enter the world of the Middle Kingdom Execration Texts that name a number of rulers in Western Asia and Nubia as well as Egyptians and curse them and their followers. The published examples are in three groups, from Mirgissa, Saqqara, and unknown (probably Saqqara), now in Brussels. While earlier investigators assigned various dates spread over centuries for these texts, they are in fact tightly interlinked by the persons named, who often are mentioned in successive groups; otherwise, a ruler or person might be the son of the ruler of the same place in an earlier group. Historically, prosopographically, and paleographically they can be dated to at most just over a generation later in the Middle Kingdom, in the 13th Dynasty (Table 10.1; Williams 2014 n. 71). The texts curse rulers in a number of localities, including Kush, Shaat (Sai), and Medjay, as well as other persons. It is possible to infer that Upper Nubia and the deserts were politically fragmented, or controlled by rulers with enough independence to

184   Bruce Beyer Williams ­ arrant cursing individually.18 It is conjectural, but possible, that Senusret III’s forceful w response to a unified Kush disrupted unity upstream for a time, temporarily making campaigning less necessary, but not the program of fortification and military patrol.

The First Empire of Kush in the Second Intermediate Period In the last half of the 17th century bce, Kush expanded its control beyond its homeland in the Northern Dongola Reach as far as the Second Cataract to encompass the Nile valley from at least the head of the Fourth Cataract to Elephantine, and its strong influence, at least, was felt as far as the Horn of Africa. This was the First Empire of Kush, the largest political entity in Africa at the time. The date and mechanics of reconsolidation in Kush are unknown, but it seems to have occurred by the middle of the 17th century, or about the time that Hyksos rule in Egypt began in earnest. It paralleled the change from Middle Kerma to Kerma Classique (KC) archaeologically, or the phase of Tumulus KXVI (Table 10.1). Imperial Kush (in order, rulers buried in KXVI, KX, KIV, and KIII) lasted from ca. 1650 to about 1550 bce, Table 10.1  Rulers in Nubia in the Execration Texts, Pap. Bulaq 18, and Later.@ Nubia

Mirgissa Saqqara

Medja

Kerma Tum.

KꜢš

ŠꜢꜤt

WbꜢt-spt*

KXX

TrἰꜢh

ḪꜢsꜢ

BꜤkwꜢt sur TꜢἰ

(KꜢny, KꜢꜢ)

(Ἰštkn sur WꜢpἰs)

(ἸhꜢsy, WnkꜢt)

(Ἰwhj, WnkꜢt)

ꜢwꜢw

Stḳtnkḫ

BꜤkwꜢt sur TꜢἰ

WꜢḥ-ἰb**

(ἸhꜢꜢsj, WnkꜢt)

([ ]tpwhἰꜢ, WnkꜢt

KXIX

(Kwnj, [ ]Ꜣ)

Ꜣwšk WꜢḥ-ἰb

ἸꜢwnj (Gm(?)ḥw[ ], Tj? Brussels

KXVIII?

Wttrrss(?) (Ttj, ꜢwꜢꜢ)

Ꜣktwἰ (RhꜢἰ, Stjkhi)

ἸwnꜤἰ (Ṯhwfἰ, ḲhꜢwbἰ)

Ṯghḏw

ἸvꜢw Uncertain gap Bulaq 18

Pkwj or Wj*** KXVI?

[uncertain gap]

KRP148****

KX?

Trrh (?)

Kh. Nat.18

KIV?

Nḏh (?)

Kush in the Wider World during the Kerma Period   185 Table 10.1  Continued Mirgissa Saqqara

Kash

Sha’t

Webat-sepet*

Awshek

Teriahi

Chasa

Ba’kewayt sur Tyi

Wah-ib

(Kany, Kaa/Kawi)

(Ishetken sur Wapis) (Iehasy, Wenkat)

(Iewehy, Wenkat)

Awaw/Awawi

Seteqtenekech

Wah-ib**

(Keweny, []a);

Ba’kewayt sur Tyi

(Iehaasy, Wenkat) ([]tepwehi;, Wenkat) Iawny (Geme(?)hew[], Ty?

Brussels

Wetetrerses(?)

Aktewi

(Tety, Awaa/Awawi) (Rehai, Setykechi)

Iwn’i

Tjegehdjw

(Tjehewfi, Khawebi) Ityaw [Uncertain gap] Pekwey or Wey***

Bulaq 18 [Uncertain gap] KRP148**** Terereh (?) Kh. Nat. 18***** Nedjeh (?)

@ Transliterations by Scharff 1922; Sethe 1926; Posener 1940; and Koenig 1990. In parentheses, the first name is the mother, the second the father. * Called WbꜢts in Saqqara texts. ** Called Medja in the Saqqara texts, next entry specifies Ꜣwšk. ***Scharff 1922: 61. Medja, Great one of Ꜣwšḳpkwj, possibly either ꜢwšḳPkwj or Ꜣwšḳ(sic)k(sic)Wj. Or simply kwj (Rafed el-Sayed 2004:360–61). Dated to Vizier Ankhu of the 13th Dynasty. ****The order of this and the following is uncertain, and as a Ruler of Kush, Terereh is conjectural, although quite strong. If Kushite rulers, they probably correspond to KIV and KX at Kerma, although KXVI is possible. ****Association with the title “Ruler of Kush” is conjectural. Note 1: The mother of the ruler of Kush in the Mirgissa texts is the same as the mother of the ruler in the Saqqara texts. The Saqqara Texts ruler is the father of the Brussels Texts ruler. Note 2: The ruler of Shaat in the Saqqara Texts is the father of the ruler in the Brussels Texts. Note 3: The rulers of Wbat-sepet and Awshek continue in office from the Mirgissa to the Saqqara Texts; the second ruler of Wbat-sepet named in the Saqqara Texts is the same as the first ruler named in the Brusssels texts. Note 4: There are two overlapping generations in the three sets of Execration Texts. If that all were adults at the start and end, about thirty years. Note 5: Terereh, recently found in the Eastern Desert, is not explicitly named Ruler of Kush; W.V. Davies 2014:34–35. Nedjeh, from a stela found at Buhen is probably Ruler of Kush, because Ruler of Kush is specified in one phrase and Ndjh is named as a ruler in the next (Säve-Söderbergh 1949). Note 6: There are seven tumuli in the Eastern Cemetery at Kerma at the south end that by superstructure and substructure appear to be in the royal series (Reisner 1923: plans 3–4), XX, XIX (all KM), XVIII, XVI (Transitional/KC), X, IV, and III (all KC). K X and IV date to the great Kerma expansion; XVI is the first to have important Egyptian remains. There are five names of rulers in this period. If the first three, from the Execration Texts, date to the 18th century, then they are highly likely to be assigned to their correct tumulus above. K XVI, dated later than a [….]ms king, must date to the 17th century, but before the expansion. The two later rulers, if Terereh is correctly identified, would also highly likely be assigned to KIV and KX, and to the 17th Dynasty, but the order is in doubt. K XVI and K III, the latter of the 15th century and ending in the early years of the New Kingdom conquest, remain without candidate names.

186   Bruce Beyer Williams or from the beginning of the Hyksos 15th Dynasty to the earliest 18th Dynasty. The four great tumuli that make up the phase must have been for successive rulers, and date to within about a century. The first is dated by an object with an Egyptian king’s name ending in [….]ms, Dedumose of the late 13th Dynasty or the later 16th Dynasty at the latest, or about 1650 bce.19 Kush and the Kerma culture were probably coterminous by this time, but rule in Lower Nubia and above the mid-Dongola Reach as far as the Fourth Cataract is unknown. Archaeology, especially the appearance of the famous Kerma beakers, and certain records indicate that the true expansion beyond the Kushite heartland took place during the phases of tumuli KX and KIV. The numberof objects looted from Egypt found in the tumuli expanded greatly, and biographical inscriptions in Lower Nubia show that Egyptian garrison settlements had gone over to the service of Kush.20 At this time, occasional Kerma burials were made in Lower Nubia, and possibly even Egypt, indicating the presence not just of lone Kushites, but Kushites organized and supplied with the appropriate cultural equipment to make a proper burial—an expedition of some kind. At Elephantine, the ruler’s title was found enclosed in a cartouche (Pilgrim 2015). Also at this time, there were close Kerma burials made in the Fourth Cataract area and rock-pictures there show sailing ships of the type painted in the KX Deffufa (Emberling and Williams  2010:24–25; Włodarska  2010; Emberling and Williams 2014). By this time, the contacts Kamose recorded between the Hyksos in the Egyptian Delta and Kush along the oasis road must have been fully established, and the couriers could hardly have carried out their duties without horse-drawn chariots (Habachi  1972:39, 53–54), an introduction as fateful for Africa as the horse was for North America.21 It was also a time when a document indicates that power relations developed in Northeast Africa that changed its political and social dynamic in an enduring way as Kush came to envelop Lower Nubia (Wawat), the Fourth Cataract region (and perhaps above, called the islands of Khenthennefer), Medjay, and Punt, the first two directly, the latter two in at least a sphere of strong influence or even empire. This represents a major shift in power and communication from the time of Mentuhotep II, because the western power of Yam is no longer mentioned, and the radius of action has shifted eastward.22 Kushite society in its widest sense (S.T. Smith 2003; Török 2009:103–17) appears to have been diverse, but not tightly intermingled. In the Kushite heartland, so far, the Kerma culture is known from burials, but no others have clearly been identified, at least in numbers. The Fourth Cataract region had a distinct culture in Kerma Moyen times (Old Kush II), but by Classic times, especially KX–KIV, it came to be dominated by the Kerma culture, both in burial arrangements and material culture, although none of the truly wealthy Kerma burials were found there. Again, the local culture seems to have predominated thoroughly. In Lower Nubia, the cultural situation differed markedly. The old C-Group culture continued uninterrupted (Hafsaas, this volume), and some of its burials were made under large tumuli of almost monumental proportions. These sometimes had brick chapels attached to their east sides, in imitation of Kerma, while sometimes the Kerma bed burial was used. Nevertheless, the culture did not veer sharply in the direction of Kerma.

Kush in the Wider World during the Kerma Period   187 The second culture, Pan-Graves (Liszka and de Souza, this volume), had begun slightly before the northward expansion of Kerma power, but continued, its cemeteries sometimes adjoining sometimes separate from the C-Group, and the graves never as numerous. Finally, Egyptians lived in towns adjacent to some of the old fortresses (and perhaps in them), notably Askut, Buhen, and Aniba, and probably others.23 This conversion of forts into colonies paralleled the creation of the Asiatic colony at Avaris in the Delta and the special-purpose colonies in contemporary Western Asia, notably the Assyrian colonies in Anatolia. Biographical records from Buhen show that local commandants obeyed the ruler of Kush.24 As noted above the title Ruler of Kush appears also at Elephantine, in a cartouche (Pilgrim 2015), cementing the Kushite claim to pharaonic rule—also a stela with a white-crowned figure carrying a reversed bow in a recessed rock-drawing style should be assigned to this period rather than any other.25 Occasional Kerma burials show the passing of Kushites in numbers—members of expeditions or deputations. Thus with three resident cultures and Kushite overlords, Lower Nubia was truly multi-cultural. It is significant to note that for this brief period, at least, the cultures remained distinct, though sometimes residing in close proximity.26 At Kerma in the paintings of funerary chapel KX, boat crews are shown with different complexions (Bonnet 2000: fig. 63), indicating the existence of ethnic-based contingents, a continuation of old Egyptian practice. Little remains to indicate how the Kushites administered this empire. Seal impressions at Kerma indicate control over the flow of goods, but the locally made ones are uninscribed, also indicating that the handlers were not literate in any language.27 On the other hand, the Hyksos Apepi wrote a letter to the Ruler of Kush; although we don’t know the language, it was presumably Egyptian (Habachi  1972:39–40). Expatriate Egyptians were known at Kush earlier (Bonnet et al. 1991:9, fig. 6), perhaps similar to those recounted by Sinuhe in Syria, and Kushite industry, especially metals and faience, was generally carried out on Egyptian lines (Bonnet 1986; Williams 1998), surely at least partly by Egyptians. Although a few documents refer to service in Kush,28 they are cryptic and give little clue to the internal dynamic of the Kushite Empire. From the continued existence of very large tumuli at Sai (Gratien 1986a: figs. 3, 273), it can be inferred that there were subordinate centers, probably ruled by successors of the enemies named by Egyptians in the Execration Texts. The Fourth Cataract region, on the other hand, has no such burials although moderately large tumuli have been found at Mograt Island, just above the cataract,29 indicating that Kushite domination there was maintained through local, distributed, lines of authority. In Lower Nubia, likewise, the three local traditions show autonomous patterns in their burials and such habitations as we have, including a C-Group fort,30 and the few Kermans buried there were approximately at the social level of the subordinate burials in Kerma great tumuli, not a resident aristocracy. The economic base of this empire was, like Egypt, the agro-pastoral foundation of most ancient economies (Welsby, this volume). Trade in exotic goods and industry,

188   Bruce Beyer Williams notably metals, may have been managed by the state. Metal processing facilities at Kerma were set up using Egyptian techniques (Williams 1998) and located at the base of the western Deffufa in the city, a central, state-oriented location. At Hosh el-Geruf in the Fourth Cataract, well over fifty heavy grindstones were found, used to reduce gold ore, both a technological innovation and evidence that the Kushite state could project not just power, but industrial organization.31 Nearby, hammered on a rock in the spine-ridge of the island of Umm Gebir, were large ships of a type represented in the KX chapel.

Kushites and Egypt C-Group and Pan-Grave cultures are fairly easily traced in Egypt by their characteristic burials and home-made presentation pottery, as well as simple cook wares of the PanGrave culture that are found at almost all Egyptian sites, and even western oases. No definite Kerma-type burials have been found in Egypt, although there were probably isolated burials at Hu, Abydos, and Saqqara. The high-quality standard Kerma presentation pottery was a highly specialized product that I consider to have been centrally made and transferred to such regions as the Fourth Cataract and found in occasional Egyptian contexts, notably the famous Qurna burial. That, and the fact that the cookwares of the Kerma and Pan-Grave, and possibly the C-Group cultures, were not really exclusive32 means that a Kerma presence in Egypt is not really clear. Kushite influence is clear, however, and it appears at the highest level of culture, royal jewelry, and attributes. The treasure of Queen Ahhotep, founding mother of the New Kingdom, contained a Kerma-type dagger and a set of three large, golden flies (Fig. 10.2a), an ornament of strongly Kushite origin that became a military decoration in the 18th Dynasty.33 Another example sometimes cited is the appearance of Amenhotep I’s queen mother Ahmose Nefertari, who is consistently shown with a black complexion, contrary to the norms of representing Egyptian women. While various explanations have been advanced for this other than her actual appearance, there is one case where she is so shown directly opposite Amenhotep in a manner that leaves no doubt that this was actually her appearance (Fig.  10.2b). There is no information to indicate whether she was Kushite herself, the child or descendent of Kushites, or whether she might have come from some other southern group, but the fact is nevertheless important. We are now sure that the Kushites campaigned in Egypt. This had been surmised from the appearance of Egyptian sculptures in the royal tombs at Kerma, but subjected to a certain contrarian denial, despite Apepi’s incitement of a Kushite attack on Egypt. The discovery of an inscription in the tomb of Sobeknakht II at Elkab has verified such attacks, however. The writer recorded that Kush “in its length,” Wawat, the islands of

Kush in the Wider World during the Kerma Period   189 (a)

(b)

Figure 10.2  (a) Ahhotep flies Photograph: Bruce Williams; (b) Ahmose Nefertari (von Bissing 1900: pl. 6).

Khenthennefer, Medjay, and Punt assembled a force to attack Egypt.34 While the ­graffito shows that Egypt survived the attack, there is no reason to believe that it was not successful, for there are no records of its repulse in monument or legend. It is not likely to have been a sole attack, because the pillaged objects and statuary appear in all four great tumuli, including a stone vessel of Sobeknakht II himself from a subsidiary tomb in KIII.35 Despite the battles between Kush and Upper Egypt and the Hyksos and Upper Egypt, as Kamose reports, contacts and trade never ceased among the powers. Upper Egyptian cattle were pastured in the Delta and trade goods from Avaris and Western Asia were common among the burials of colonists in Nubia and found in Kerma tumuli. Evidence for this trade never ceased nor did the fortress cemeteries, indicating that Egypt’s reconquest was not overly destructive.

190   Bruce Beyer Williams

Kushite Public Art At Kerma itself, arts existed that had a distinctive cultural personality as Kerman, even when techniques and representations showed Egyptian influence and sometimes actual workmanship.36 It is more difficult to identify art away from Kerma that reflects this distinct cultural situation. Nevertheless, it is difficult to believe that some public expression of the Kushite state did not exist away from the main center, although identifying it requires conjecture. In particular, the winged sun disk of Tombos stone that once was above the door of chapel KII (Fig. 10.3) and the construction by Sopd-Hor (commandant of Buhen) of the Temple of Horus on behalf of the Ruler of Kush (Smith 1976:55–56) indicate that there was an adoption of pharaonic culture that would demand expression in a public art that referred to these rulers. Without the highly specific identifiers that characterize Egyptian art, for example, it is difficult to identify specific features of a Kushite art except for a few highly significant examples at Kerma itself, notably in the painted funerary chapel KXI. There, the figures, especially of animals, may show the result of contact with Egypt, but the subjects and design are generally non-Egyptian, files of hippopotami and giraffes, plus boat processions.37 Relatively simplified figures and scenes also appear in rock art and even stelae that appear to show us a Kushite art of the period. Above, I noted two rock-drawn ships of the type found in the painted chapel, differences being due largely to the difference in the medium, paint rather than hard stone. A critical piece of evidence is a complex of rock scenes from Nag Kolorodna in Lower Nubia (Fig. 10.4). Cut in recessed silhouette style, like the much earlier Qustul Incense

Figure 10.3  Winged Sun Disk carved on a lintel of Tombos stone at Kerma funerary chapel KII. Photograph: Bruce Williams.

Kush in the Wider World during the Kerma Period   191

Figure 10.4  A Kushite victory from Lower Nubia at Nag Kolorodna (Basch and Gorbea 1968, fig. 16).

Burner and the Buhen stela discussed just below, these scenes, closely related by style, include, at the top center a man seated on a chair within an enclosure holding a bird. In front of him is a woman who presents something to him or gestures. A file of men with arms pinioned behind their backs proceeds in a line to the enclosure or building, followed by a man who holds a bow reversed, possibly with a feather on his head. Below, a striking scene appears to date the complex. A male figure on a frame-chariot, shown not from the side but with both wheels and axle visible, has one foot on the axle and kneels on the tree between the horses.38 He holds the reins and a stick and his head is elongated as though crowned. In front of him is a man with his arms upraised at the elbows. He holds an axe in his right hand with a head that is shaped like the axes from the Ahhotep treasure (von Bissing 1900: pls. 1 and especially 3). This axe is specific to this period and the simple elongate style of the figures as well as the chariot are entirely nonEgyptian.39 I take it that this and associated similar figures on this rock face, a seated man holding a reversed bow, a curious standard that may be part of the building, wrestlers, a second figure (crowned?) holding bows and an axe, a sheep, a man leading a quadruped and a man behind are Kushite, also belong to this period.40 A stela from Buhen carved in similar style shows a male figure holding a bow reversed with arrows in one hand and a mace in the other (Fig. 10.5). He wears a white crown with uraei and is clearly a pharaonic ruler. The style is so close to the Nag Kolorodna panel that a different date is quite unlikely. A representation in hard stone was found at Tombos near Kerma. It shows a number of figures wearing the feather on their heads, and two may be part of a smiting scene of this period (Fig. 10.6). While a number of other representations in Lower Nubia especially could be added by their style to this restricted group, I will consider these to be a core around which a Kushite art of the period could be assembled.

192   Bruce Beyer Williams

Figure 10.5  The Buhen Stela (Welsby and Anderson 2004, fig. 74).

Figure 10.6  Smiting scene from Tombos. Photograph and digital chalking by B.B. Williams.

Kush in the Wider World during the Kerma Period   193

Kush and the Horse The domestic horse was brought, with the chariot, into the Nile valley during the Hyksos Age, and it is difficult to believe that the couriers who traveled to Kush and back did not use them. As noted above, at least one elaborate Nubian rock drawing depicts a chariot, associated with a figure who wields an axe of a peculiar shape found in the Ahhotep treasure.41 Whether the Buhen horse dates to this period or not,42 we have significant precursors to the horses exported from Kush in the reign of Tutankhamun,43 and, far more importantly, the horses that appear across the Sahara in the so-called Equid period of Saharan rock art (see Lhote 1982). Although we know no details, it is clear that the appearance of African megafauna, especially rhinoceros and elephants in Kushite inlays (Reisner 1923: pl. 55), indicates direct experience with the rainlands well to the south of the Great Bend of the Nile where these animals continued to exist in a zone that permitted broad access across Africa.

The World of the Kushite Empire and the Beginning of the End Kush, whose control apparently extended through the Fourth Cataract and whose power extended to the Horn of Africa, was in this time the largest and most powerful political entity in northeast Africa. It was the southern anchor of a complex of states that stretched from the Zagros to the Mediterranean, and from almost the Black Sea to the Horn of Africa, and was the first inner-African power to step onto the world stage. In the center were the state complexes of Babylon, Assyria, Yamkhad, and the Hyksos, with whom the Kushites were allied. In the next generation, the mid-16th century bce, the rising powers of the Hittites and Egypt forcefully asserted themselves,44 and new peoples entered the arena of this world. If the Hyksos Apepi could call on Kush to pull Kamose away from Avaris, as he successfully did,45 staving off his own demise for a time, the collapse occurred anyway, as determined Hittite and Egyptian campaigning dismantled the Asiatic and Kushite political complexes. For Kush, its conquest is part of another chapter, but it left an enduring legacy.

The Legacy of Old Kush For the first time Kush united a long stretch of the middle Nile valley into a functioning political unit. While some social groups in that unit remained distinct, notably Egyptian settlers and Kushites, the C-Group and Pan-Grave cultures grew closer together in

194   Bruce Beyer Williams C-Group phase III,46 helping to pave the way for a far-reaching cultural transformation amounting to a conversion that began in this period and was completed in the next phase (Williams 2018 ). From the appointment of such rulers as those of Teh-Khet, I conclude that early New Kingdom Egyptian administration of Kush represented an adaptation of existing Kushite arrangements, mirroring Egyptian imperial administration in Western Asia, where Egypt ruled through local princes, but with a difference. Nubia, under its Egyptian governor titled “King’s Son of Kush,” was more like a third kingdom than an empire. Despite decades of more or less determined resistance, Kush also paved the way for the incorporation of most territory into the new Egyptian regime—commonly called an empire—in Nubia, leaving the Fourth Cataract and above as a reservoir of coherent Nubian traditions in the Nile valley (Klimaszewska-Drabot 2005:365–66; Emberling and Williams 2008:18–19, fig. 10). Kush’s adoption of some Egyptian-style pharaonic symbolism also probably helped along the way to this conversion (B. Williams, Chapter 22, this volume). Perhaps its most important legacy is that it created a unit that was the political basis for New Kingdom Nubia and the ultimate precursor for great things to come.

Abbreviation Urk.  Kurt Sethe, Urkunden des alten Reichs. J.C. Hinrichs’sche Buchhandlung.

Notes 1. Merikare is a remarkable exception, and he presents a military doctrine that was used directly by the Middle Kingdom rulers (Williams 1999:439, 2017). 2. Williams 2014:1–2. Recent dating of some occupation material to this period by Gatto does not alter the situation (Gatto et al. 2012:89). The one complete cup is small. Note that the comparisons are with Elephantine level 13/12 attributed to the late 12th through mid13th Dynasties (95). Small jars on figs. 4–5, for example, are later than, say, quarry dumps of the Middle Kingdom at Serra East. For a more complete analysis of the Egyptian pottery, and a date in the 13th Dynasty, see Gallorini and Giuliani 2012. 3. Phillips (2003:391–94) recorded some earlier Kerma pottery from one site in the survey above Old Dongola and possibly a little more. 4. Kröpelin and Kuper 2006–2007: figs. 7–11. 5. He was, however, overawed by the troop of Yam (Urk. I 127 l. 4). 6. Urk. II:101–102. He refers to Nubians of Ta-Tjemeh also. 7. Urk. II:101–102. It is difficult to determine whether he campaigned there to raise the troops. 8. Abu Bakr and Osing (1973:101 no. 14) noted one Tabiry in the names, but this single name is insufficient to establish a relation with the 25th Dynasty. 9. Note that Ankhtify of Mo’alla sent food relief to Wawat (Vandier 1950:28, 220–31, inscr. 10; and generally Williams 2014:4). 10. Darnell 2004. Note that Mentuhotep was able to recruit personally in the area, indicating an acceptance by the C-Group Nubians. 11. They were found in other walks of life as well and at court, in high positions; see Meurer, this volume.

Kush in the Wider World during the Kerma Period   195 12. Harrell and Mittelstaedt 2015. Note that these fortifications could be considered a stage in the development of security arrangements for Upper Egypt and Nubia responding to progressively determined and well-organized challenges. 13. Williams 2013: especially 2–4. This second instance of pharaonic culture in Nubia points to the further adoption later by Kush. See also Hafsaas this volume. 14. This was apparently mainly to control it, but some large forts like Buhen were erected toward the southern end. Williams 1999, 2013:4 n. 29, 2014:5; and Obsomer 1995:254–61 for year 5. 15. Delivered by the Lower Nubian dynasty that seems to have represented an attempt at 11th Dynasty restoration. Williams 2013: summarized 9–10. 16. Simpson 2001. The translation of ore would give a precedent for gathering ore at centers such as Hosh el-Geruf for processing. 17. The modest scale of the inscriptions is another indication that no great victory happened. See generally Tallet 2005:40–52 for the campaigns. The claim of triumph by Khusebek, if such it was, at Sekmem also rings hollow, for he fought mainly in the rearguard during the retreat. Senusret beat a retreat and Khusebek commanded a rear guard (Williams 2014:4, 2017; Tallet 2005:172–77). For the fortresses, see Williams 1999 and Tallet 2005:53–68. 18. Roughly the same structure is indicated for Western Asia, an area substantially organized into coalitions dominated by senior rulers. 19. Note the shattered basin of King [….]ms from Tumulus KXVI, Dedumose at the earliest (Reisner 1923:517–19), long considered a late king in the 13th Dynasty, but reassigned to the 16th Dynasty (Ryholt 1997:156–57), or roughly the same time. 20. Pace Knoblauch 2012:87–88, where it was rejected on grounds that the context was not clear; the Buhen stela probably dates to this time. Its style is close to that of rock art apparently of this period in Lower Nubia (below, “Public Art”) and it does not correspond to the style of any phase in Egyptian relief; Kush was known to control Lower Nubia at this time. 21. For the Equid period in Saharan rock art, see Lhote 1982; Sozzani 1990, for example. Note that there is a difference between the presence of horses and the innovations of domestication and the chariot. 22. Because of the uncertainty in identifying some of the places in the Middle Kingdom Execration Texts, it is difficult to determine when this shift occurred. 23. Bietak 1968:92–131 codified the criteria for distinguishing the cultures. 24. H.S. Smith 1976:41 (I’ah-wesir), 55–56 (Sopd-Hor), 73–76 (Sobekemheb). 25. See above n. 20. The stela (H.S.  Smith  1976:58, 691) is entirely consistent with the Nag Kolordna tableaux, Fig. 10.4. An apparent smiting scene appears on a rock at Tombos in a style close to that of Kerma representation (Williams 2006-2007), and KII had a winged sun disk lintel made of Tombos stone (Fig. 10.3). One or two other major representations appear to show a Kushite victory and smiting scene (Figs. 10.4, 10.6). 26. The Egyptians were probably most separated. Note also that the name ‘Aam appears at Buhen, “Asiatic.” Randall-MacIver and Woolley 1911:180 (H1-in filiation), 183 (J14), 27. Gratien 1986b, 1991, 1993; note that most seal impressions from Egyptian contexts of the period are from design scarabs also. 28. Above n. 24. 29. Emberling and Williams 2010; Włodarska 2010. For Mograt, see Lange 2012. 30. Steindorff  1935:202–19 (C-Group); Bietak  1968:92–131; Gratien  1985; Sauneron and Jacquet 2005:304. 31. Use of such stones has been presumed to commence with the New Kingdom (Klemm and Klemm  1994:201), but there is no evidence of New Kingdom activity at Hosh el-Geruf

196   Bruce Beyer Williams despite a large corpus of ceramics from Neolithic, Kerma (mostly), and Napatan periods and the stones apparently date to Kerma/Old Kush times (Meyer 2010). 32. Cf. Bourriau 1981; the types illustrated are not discrete. 33. I would assume that these flies depict not an ordinary house or stable fly, but the similarlooking tiny, fierce African black fly, simulosum damnosum, a curse of life in the cataract regions. For a similar dagger, see Dunham and Janssen 1960: pl. 130 a, 24-3-500 from S552, a very large group. 34. W.V. Davies 2003, 2005. In referring to Kush, the Kamose stela mentions Khenthennefer. 35. Reisner 1923 K334:18. 36. Some objects show a clear reception of specifically Egyptian symbolism at a wider social level. See Reisner 1923 II: pls. 48:1 (mirrors with falcons flanking the disk), 54–56 (inlays with protective vultures, Thoueris-type figures, djed-pillars), for example. 37. The bulls interlocking horns appear in Middle Kingdom art and rock drawings, but the fishing and scenes of houses with ladders do not. See Bonnet 2000; and Török 2009:139–56 for a detailed analysis of the paintings. 38. See n. 42 below. 39. See Vila 1976: fig. 49 for a second example, from Kosha East south of the Second Cataract. 40. A cow and calf below are apparently C-Group. 41. Basch and Gorbea 1968: fig. 16; also Lhote 1982: figs. 34, 38, 47. The chariot is shown with eight-spoke wheels, unlike other early Egyptian and Aegean chariots which have four (from the Amarna period onward they have six) and from this and the drawing perspective, it is not canonical. See Lhote 1982: fig. 15, for an example with 8-spoke wheels; for structure, see pp. 72–76. Note also the chariot drawn by bovines shown in Huy’s tomb is also found in Saharan rock art (Lhote 1982:78–91). The Kosha East chariot (Vila 1976: fig. 48; Lhote 1982: fig. 70) has no spokes. As one might suspect, the topic of the horse in the Sahara has been discussed in detail with varying results (Lhote  1982:160–71; Muzzolini 1990), but the combined features of the particular Saharan type (chariot structure, dressage, bovines) noted above indicate that the technology of the chariot, as well as dressage and the use of bovines, probably derived from Kush by way of the rainlands. 42. Emery, Smith, and Millard 1979:191–95. 43. de Garis Davies and Gardiner 1926: pls. 12, 31; also de Garis Davies 1962: pl. 3. 44. See Cole 2014:6. The chronology therein would place the Hittite campaigns culminating in the fall of Babylon in the later Hyksos Age and first decades of the 18th Dynasty. 45. Habachi 1972. The general tenor is, of course, triumphal, but Kamose leaves Avaris untaken and the letter to the Ruler of Kush is the reason why, 46. For C-Group III, see Bietak 1968:113–17. Note the transition in local rulers’ burials at Serra East as an adaptation (Williams 1993:149–50, 162–82).

References Cited Abu Bakr, A.M. and J.  Osing 1973 Ächtungstexte aus dem Alten Reich. Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts Abteilung Kairo 29:97–133. Altenmüller, H. 2015 Zwei Annalenfragmente aus dem frühen Mittleren Reich. Studien zur Altägyptischen Kultur Beihefte 16. Helmut Buske. Basch, M.A. and M.A. Gorbea 1968 Estudios de arte rupestre nubio, v. 1: Yacimentos situados en la orilla oriental del Nilo entre Nag Kolorodna y Kars [sic] Ibrim (Nubia egipcia). Memorias de la Misión Arqueológica en Egipto 10. Ministerio de Asuntos Exteriores, Ministerio de Educación Nacional.

Kush in the Wider World during the Kerma Period   197 Bietak, M. 1968 Studien zur Chronologie der nubischen C-Gruppe. Ein Beitrag zur frühgeschichte Unternubiens zwischen 2200 und 1550 vor Chr. Berichte des Österreichischen Nationalkomitees der UNESCO-Aktion für die Rettung der Nubischen Altertümer 5. Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, philosophisch-historische Klasse, Denkschriften 97. Hermann Böhlaus. ——— 1985 Zu den Nubischen Bogenschützen aus Assiut. Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der ersten Zwischenzeit. In Mélanges Gamal eddin Mokhtar 1:87–97. Bibliothèque d’Études 97. Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale. Bonnet, C. 1986 Atelier de bronziers à Kerma. In Nubische Studien. Tagungsakten der 5. internationalen Konferenz der International Society for Nubian Studies, ed. M. Krause, pp. 19–22. Philipp von Zabern ——— 2000 Edifices et rites funéraires à Kerma. Errance. ——— 2004 Le temple principal de la ville de Kerma et son quartier religieux. Errance. Bonnet, C., B. Gratien, S.M. Ahmed, M. el Tayeb, and C. Simon 1991 Les fouilles archéologiques de Kerma (Soudan). Rapport préliminaire sur les campagnes de 1988–1989, 1989–1990 et 1990–1991. Genava n.s. 29:5–41. Bourriau, J. 1981 Nubians in Egypt during the Second Intermediate Period: An Interpretation Based on the Egyptian Ceramic Evidence. In Studien zur altägyptischen Keramik, ed. D. Arnold, pp. 25–41. Philipp von Zabern. Clayton, J., A.  De Trafford, and M.  Borda 2008 A Hieroglyphic Inscription Found at Jebel Uweinat Mentioning Yam and Tekhebet. Sahara 19:129–35. Cole, S. 2014 Chronology Revisited. In Mesopotamian Pottery: A Guide to the Babylonian Tradition in the Second Millennium  B.C., ed. H.  Gasche and J.  Armstrong, pp. 3–6. Mesopotamian History and Environment Series 2 Memoirs 6. The University of Ghent and the Oriental Institute. Darnell, J. 2004 The Route of Eleventh Dynasty Expansion into Nubia. Zeitschrift für ägyptische Sprache 131:23–37. Davies, W.V. 2003 Kush in Egypt: A New Historical Inscription. Sudan & Nubia 7:52–54. de Garis Davies, N. 1962 Tutankhamun’s Painted Box. Oxford University Press. de Garis Davies, N. and A. Gardiner 1926 The Tomb of Huy, Viceroy of Nubia in the Reign of Tut’ankhamūn (No. 40). Theban Tombs Series 4. Egypt Exploration Society. ——— 1962 Tutankhamun’s Painted Box. Oxford University Press. ——— 2005 Egypt and Nubia: Conflict with the Kingdom of Kush. In Hatshepsut: From Queen to Pharaoh, ed. C.  Roehrig, pp. 49–56. The Metropolitan Museum and Yale University Press. ——— 2014 The Korosko Road Project: Recording Egyptian Inscriptions in the Eastern Desert and Elsewhere. Sudan & Nubia 18:30–43. Dunham, D. and J. M. A. Janssen 1960 Semna Kumma, Second Cataract Forts, vol. I. Boston: Museum of Fine Arts. Emberling, G. and B.  Williams 2008 The Oriental Institute Nubian Expedition, Field Operation, 2008. Oriental Institute News and Notes 198:15–20. ——— 2010 The Kingdom of Kush in the 4th Cataract: Archaeological Salvage of the Oriental Institute Nubian Expedition 2007 Season, Part 1: Preliminary Report on the Sites of Hosh el-Geruf and El-Widay. Gdańsk Archaeological Museum African Reports 7:17–38. Emery, W.B., H.S. Smith, and A. Millard 1979 The Fortress of Buhen: The Archaeological Report. Excavations at Buhen 1. Egypt Exploration Society Excavation Memoir 49. Gallorini, C. and S. Giuliani 2012 Egyptian Pottery from the Pan Grave Cemetery at Nag el Qarmila, Aswan. In Handbook of the Pottery of the Egyptian Middle Kingdom, v. 2: The

198   Bruce Beyer Williams Regional Volume, ed. R. Schiestl and Anne Seiler, pp. 321–28. Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Denkschriften der Gesamtakademie 72. Contributions to the Chronology of the Eastern Mediterranean 31. Gatto, M.C., C.  Gallorini, and S.  Roma 2012 Pan-Grave Pottery from Nag el-Qarmila and Sheikh Mohamed Cemeteries in Gharb Aswan. In Nubian Pottery from Egyptian Cultural Contexts of the Middle and Early New Kingdom, ed. I.  Forstner-Müller and P.  Rose, pp. 83–102. Ergänzungsheft zu den Jahresheften des Österreichischen Archäologischen Institutes in Wien 13. Grajetzki, W. 2006 The Middle Kingdom of Ancient Egypt: History, Archaeology and Society. Duckworth. Gratien, B. 1985 Le village fortifié du groupe C à Ouadi es-Sebua Est, typologie de la céramiques. Cahier de Recherches de l’Institut de Papyrologie et d’Égyptologie de Lille 7:39–69. ——— 1986a Saï I: la nécropole Kerma. Éditions du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique. ——— 1986b Premieres constatations sur les empreintes de sceaux de la forteresse de Mirgissa. In Nubische Studien. Tagungsakten der 5. internationalen Konferenz der International Society for Nubian Studies, ed. M. Krause, pp. 89–91. Philipp von Zabern. ——— 1991 Empreintes de sceaux et administration à Kerma (Kerma Classique). Genava n.s. 39:21–24. ——— 1993 Nouvelles empreintes de sceaux à Kerma: Aperçus sur l’administration de Kouch au milieu du 2e millénaire av. J-C. Genava n.s. 41:27–32. ——— 2002 La fin du royaume Kerma—la situation dans l’arrière-pays. In Tides of the Desert Contributions to the Archaeology and Environmental History of Africa in Honour of Rudolph Kuper, ed. Jennerstrasse 8, pp. 219–30. Africa Praehistorica 14. Heinrich Barth Institut. Habachi, L. 1972 The Second Stela of Kamose and his Struggle against the Hyksos Ruler and his Capital. Abhandlungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts Kairo Ägyptologische Reihe 8. J.J. Augustin. Harrell, J.A. and R.E. Mittelstaedt 2015 Newly Discovered Middle Kingdom Forts in Lower Nubia. Sudan & Nubia 19:30–39. Klemm, R. and D. Klemm 1994 Chronologischer Abriss der antiken Goldgewinnung in der Ostwüste Ägyptens. Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts Kairo 50:189–222. Klimaszewska-Drabot, E. 2005 Neolithic to Napatan Pottery from Uli Island Preliminary Report. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean 16:357–68. Knoblauch, C. 2012 The Ruler of Kush (Kerma) at Buhen during the Second Intermediate Period: A Reinterpretation of Buhen Stela 691 and Related Objects. In Egyptology in Australia and New Zealand 2009, ed. C.M.  Knoblauch and J.C.  Gill, pp. 85–96. BAR International Series 2355. Archaeopress. Koenig, Y. 1990 Les textes d’envoûtement de Mirgissa. Revue d’Égyptoplogie 41:101–25. Kröpelin, S. and Kuper, R. 2006-2007 More Corridors to Africa. Cahier de Recherches de l’Institut de Papyrologie et d’Égyptologie de Lille 26:219–29. Lange, M. 2012 Prehistoric Sites on Mograt Island (Northern Sudan). In Proceedings of the Third International Conference on the Archaeology of the Fourth Nile Cataract, ed. H.P. Wotzka, pp. 303–11. Africa Praehistorica 22. Lhote, H. 1982 Les chars rupestres saharienes, des Syrtes au Niger, par le pays des Garamantes et des Atlantes. Éditions des Hespérides. Manzo, A. 2011 Punt in Egypt and Beyond: Comments on the Impact of Maritime Activities of the 12th Dynasty in the Red Sea on Egyptian Crafts with Some Historical and Ideological Thoughts. Ägypten und Levante 21:71–85.

Kush in the Wider World during the Kerma Period   199 Meyer, C. 2010 The Kingdom of Kush in the 4th Cataract: Archaeological Salvage of the Oriental Institute Nubian Expedition 2007 Season. Part II. Grinding Stones and Gold Mining at Hosh el-Guruf, Sudan. Gdańsk Archaeological Museum African Reports 7:39–52. Muzzolini, A. 1990 Au sujet de la datation des chars au “gallop volant.” Sahara 3:115–18. Obsomer, C. 1995 Sésostris Ier. Étude chronologique et historique du règne. Safran. Phillips, J. 2003 An Overview of the Ceramics. In Survey and Excavations between Old Dongola and Ez-Zuma, ed. B. Żurawski, pp. 387–437. Southern Dongola Reach Survey 1. Nubia 2. Editions Neriton. Pilgrim, C. von 2015 An Authentication Sealing of the “Ruler of Kush” from Elephantine. In From the Delta to the Cataract: Studies Dedicated to Mohamed el-Bialy, ed. A.  JimenezSerrano and C. von Pilgrim, pp. 218–26. Culture and History of the Ancient Near East 76. Brill. Posener, G. 1940 Princes et pays d’Asie et de Nubie. Textes hiératiques sur des figurines d’envoûtement du moyen empire. Fondation Égyptologique Reine Élisabeth. Privati, B. 2004 Kerma: classification des céramiques de la nécropole orientale. In Nubian Studies 1998. Proceddings of the Ninth Conference of the International Society of Nubian Studies August 21-26 1998, ed. Timothy Kendal, pp. 145–156. Boston, Massachusetts: Northeastern University. Rafed el-Sayed 2004 r’n MDA.iw—lingua blemmyica tu-bedawie. Ein Sprachenkontinuum im Areal der nubischen Ostwüste und seine (sprach-) historischen Implikationen. Studien zum Altägyptischen Kultur 32:351–62. Randall-MacIver, D. and C. Woolley 1911 Buhen. Eckley B. Coxe Junior Expedition to Nubia 7–8. University Museum (Philadelphia). Reisner, G.A. 1923 Excavations at Kerma. Harvard African Studies 5–6. Peabody Museum of Harvard University. Ryholt, K. 1997 The Political Situation in Egypt during the Second Intermediate Period c. 1800–1500 B.C. Carsten Niebuhr Institute Publications 20. Museum Tusculanum Press. Säve-Söderbergh, T. 1949 A Buhen Stela from the Second Intermediate Period (Khartum No. 18). Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 35:50–58. Sauneron, S. and J.  Jacquet 2005 Ouadi es-Sebou’ est. Un village fortifié du Groupe C en Nubie. Bulletin de l’Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale 105:321–56. Sethe, K. 1926 Die Ächtung feindlicher Fürsten, Völker und Dinge auf altägyptischen Tongefässscherben des mittleren Reiches. De Gruyter. Simpson, W.K. 2001 Studies in the Twelfth Egyptian Dynasty III: Year 25 in the Era of the Oryx Nome and the Famine Years in Early Dynasty 12. Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt 38:7–8. Smith, H.S. 1976 The Fortress of Buhen: The Inscriptions. Excavations at Buhen 2. Egypt Exploration Society Excavation Memoir 48. Scharff, A. 1922 Ein Rechnungsbuch des königlichen Hofes der 13. Dynastie. Zeitschrift für ägyptische Sprache 57:51–68. Smith, S.T. 2003 Wretched Kush: Ethnic Identities and Boundaries in Egypt’s Nubian Empire. Routledge. Sozzani, M. 1990 Due carri al galoppo volante e un dipinto insolito nel Tadrart Acacus. Sahara 3:192. Steindorff, G. 1935 Aniba 1. Mission archéologique de Nubie, 1929–1934. J.J. Augustin. Tallet, P. 2005 Sésotris III et la fin de la XIIe Dynastie. Flammarion. Török, L. 2009 Between Two Worlds: The Frontier Region between Ancient Nubia and Egypt 3700 BC–AD 500. Probleme der Ägyptologie 29. Brill.

200   Bruce Beyer Williams Vandier, J. 1950 Mo’alla: La tombe d’Ankhtifi et la tombe de Sébekhotep. Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale, Bibliothèque d’Étude 18. Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale. Vila, A. 1976 La prospection archéologique de la vallée du Nil au sud de la cataracte de Dal (Nubie soudanaise), v. 4: District de Mograkka (Est et Ouest), district de Kosha (Est et Ouest). Centre Nationale de la Recherche Scientifique. ——— 1987 Le cimitière kermaïque d’Ukma ouest. Éditions du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique. von Bissing, F.W. 1900 Ein thebanischer Grabfund aus dem Anfang des neuen Reichs. Alexander Duncker. Williams, B.B. 1993 Excavations at Serra East, George R Hughes and James E. Knudstad, Directors, Parts 1–5: A-Group, C-Group, Pan-Grave, New Kingdom, and X-Group Remains from Cemeteries A-G and Rock Shelters. University of Chicago Oriental Institute Nubian Expedition 10. ——— 1998 Industrial Metallurgy in Egypt and Sudan. In Proceedings of the First International Conference on Ancient Egyptian Mining & Metallurgy and Conservation of Metallic Artifacts, pp. 201–206. Ministry of Culture, Supreme Council of Antiquities (Cairo). ——— 1999 Serra East and the Mission of Middle Kingdom Fortresses in Nubia. In Gold of Praise, Studies on Ancient Egypt in Honor of Edward F. Wente, ed. E. Teeter and J.A. Larson, pp. 435–53. Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilization 58. The Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago. ——— 2006–2007 The Adoption and Rejection of Egyptian Symbolic Culture in Nubia. In Mélanges offerts à Francis Geus, ed. B.  Gratien. Cahier de Recherches de l’Institut de Papyrologie et d’Égyptologie de Lille 26:399–410. ——— 2013 Three Rulers of Nubia and the Early Middle Kingdom in Egypt. Journal of Near Eastern Studies 72:1–10. ——— 2014 Some Geographical and Political Aspects to Relations between Egypt and Nubia and C-Group and Kerma Times, ca. 2500–1500 B.C.  Journal of Ancient Egyptian Interconnections 6:1–14. ——— 2017 Security Conditions and Methods in the Middle Kingdom. In Essays for the Library of Seshat, Studies Presented to Janet H. Johnson, ed. R.K. Ritner, pp. 457–68. Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilization 70. The Oriental Institute. ——— 2018 Egyptians and Nubians in the Early New Kingdom and the Kushite Background. In From Microcosm to Macrocosm. Individual households and cities in Ancient Egypt and Nubia, J. Budka, and J. Auenmüller, pp. 93–106. Leiden: Sidestone Press. Włodarska, M. 2010 Kerma Burials in the Fourth Cataract Region, Three Seasons of Excavations at Shemkhiya. Gdańsk Archaeological Museum African Reports 7:321–28. Zibelius-Chen, K. 1972 Afrikanische Orts und Völkernamen in hieroglyphischen und hieratischen Texten. Beihefte zum Tübinger Atlas des Vorderen Orients B1. Ludwig Reichert. ——— 2007 Die Medja in altägyptischen Quellen. Studien zur Altägyptischen Kultur 36:391–405.

chapter 11

The Cities of K er m a a n d Pn u bs-Dok k i Gel Charles Bonnet

Around the mid-3rd millennium bce, a Nubian city was founded along the main course of the Nile (Bonnet 2014:216–24). It succeeded an extensive settlement, for which a fortified precinct, areas of huts, and several hundred granary pits were partly cleared. Like the even earlier Neolithic settlements, this Pre-Kerma agglomeration lies 4 km to the east of the modern Nile channel, where several dried arms of the river cross a fertile plain that favored the settlement of the first farmers (Honegger 1997:113–18, 2007:202–11). The study of the development of the Nubian city of Kerma, occupied for more than a thousand years, enabled us to recognize its role as capital of a prosperous and in­de­pend­ent kingdom that took advantage of its geographical location by weaving a network of exchanges in Central Sudan and as far as the land of Punt. Ongoing research at the neighboring site of Dokki Gel, some 700 m north of Kerma, revealed the presence of another fortified city of a unique type, featuring many huge monuments of worship and palaces, all of them displaying a circular or oval plan and made of mudbrick according to original techniques (Bonnet  2012,  2013). Although work at the site has so far only focused on the most recent levels—the late Kerma Classique and the early New Kingdom—we can reasonably assume that this city, which we understand as a ceremonial site, had much earlier roots. Its architecture suggests an association between Kerma and Central Africa. One can make the hypothesis that other southern kingdoms were represented there, as part of a federation of armed forces united under the aegis of the rulers of Kerma in order to counter the advance of the pharaoh’s armies. This hypothesis would explain specific features observed in the defense systems of this city, which differ from all other known examples. In any case, the different structures provide good evidence that an impressive military power existed upstream of the Third Cataract. These federations of communities could also explain the presence of the chain of fortresses established by the Egyptian pharaohs in

202   Charles Bonnet the Middle Kingdom (Emery et al. 1979; see also Bestock, this volume). It is likely that these different forces, the composition of which may have varied according to the periods, have challenged each other for several centuries.

The Nubian City of Kerma Overlooked by the Deffufa, a massive mudbrick structure still preserved today to a height of about 20 m, the remains of the Nubian city of Kerma would extend over more than 25 hectares during the Kerma Classique (1750–1450 bce), its most flourishing period (Fig. 11.1). Deeply eroded by the strong winds, the site lies on a mild slope, and the structures are showing on the surface nearly everywhere. Generally speaking, the best-­preserved levels are those of the Kerma Moyen (2050–1750 bce), but in places the Kerma Classique layers are also preserved. The stratigraphy, well established in the mound formed by the religious area and the Deffufa, its main temple, was connected with the different sectors of the city. The ditches that surrounded the urban center could not be entirely excavated, but geomorphological studies indicate that the different arms of the Nile and its main course would run all around the site, which was thus probably established on an elongated island that would probably reach as far as Dokki Gel (Marcolongo and Surian 1997). Some riverbeds now filled with windblown sand were still visible some fifty years ago. The ditches of the city were additional man-made defensive features which the annual flood could fill, and on their slopes we often identified traces of agricultural fields. Soon after it was abandoned, the site was used as a burial ground. But to avoid more damage to the already badly worn structures of the ancient city, we seldom excavated in depth, and only a few tombs and funerary chambers were cleared, most of them Napatan and Meroitic. The pits left by the descending passages and the poor remains of foundations of brick pyramids show that there were many tombs, probably very rich, judging by their often impressive dimensions. These different necropolises would extend far beyond the protected site. However, the most important burial ground is still the one that developed 4 km east of the Nubian city, and which is contemporary with it (Bonnet and Honegger, this volume). It covers some 90 hectares, and the number of tombs has been estimated at 40,000. Approximately 1 km to the south, in a modern district which is increasingly densified, other cemeteries, a temple, and the remains of a port area were the object of several rescue excavations (see below). From the beginning, the ancient city of Kerma seems to have been organized on both sides of an almost north-south axis. This central way was protected by a large number of bastions oriented towards the circulation axis. These military devices were built with wooden posts and mounds of galous, a mixture of silt, straw, and dung formed by hand in large heaps. Wooden fences placed lengthways complete the ensemble, and separate the way from the neighboring areas. This organization is all the more peculiar since the original urban core established to the east of the way is surrounded by a quadrangular

200 W

100 W

0.0

100 E

200 N

100 N

0.0

100 S

200 S

300 S

Figure 11.1  The Nubian city of Kerma during the Kerma Classique period (1750–1450 bce). 1 Central way 2 Deffufa, the main temple 3 Ceremonial palace 4 Residential palaces 5 Audience hall 6 Secondary settlement for the cult of deceased kings 7 Places with seal impressions and seals

204   Charles Bonnet precinct measuring some 85 m on its side; it protected a place of worship, and was connected to a ceremonial palace. Huts made of soil and wood, with a diameter ranging from 3.0 to 4.3 m, seem to have formed an area of dwellings that were often rebuilt. During the Kerma Ancien period (2500–2050 bce), a new rectangular precinct was built, leaving intact the central way defended by doors opening through the wall. One notes that the way would extend far beyond the city wall, as much on the southern side where it must have joined a temple and the port area, as on the northern side where one can identify one or several ways leading to the ceremonial city of Dokki Gel. The fortified city of Kerma seems to keep this layout during several centuries, as its defense systems are constantly reorganized and fortified. If the Kerma Ancien settlement may seem relatively modest with its 3 hectares of urbanized surface area, one must not forget that from the beginning the surrounding areas were also occupied. The religious complex next to the main temple marks the core of the city. Almost opposite, two large dwellings equipped with courtyards enclosed by fences should probably be interpreted as a royal domain with the residential palace. Directly to the south, a rounded construction restored several times at the same spot was probably used as an audience room for the king. Several buildings along the axis way suggest the presence of a centralized power. One notes more particularly some vast houses with their courtyard extending to the south, sheltered from the wind, where occupants would take delivery of goods, as suggested by the numerous seal impressions found there. The first fortress had a precinct flanked by huge bastions probably placed side by side, but the state of preservation makes it impossible to know if this was the case for the complete perimeter. As to the fortifications of the second half of the Kerma Ancien period, the kind of structure abutting the precinct varies according to the phases of the wall. For instance, to the southeast are found bastions placed side by side forming a steep slope towering above the ditches, whereas the eastern wall shows bastions with larger intervals between them, a feature found in some Egyptian fortresses of the Middle Kingdom at the Second Cataract (Smith 1966). To the west, the precinct consists in solid mounds of 6 m diameter, abutting circular elements forming serpentine walls that could have been very high. The main gate to the west displays a course with a double orientation. Two mounds are in the continuation of the precinct on each side, forming two high towers, with rows of posts forming a very narrow passage. Between the two structures, we found hundreds of postholes, as well as straight traces in the soil. Later, mudbrick structures would form new rectangular towers and a stronger access. A very large number of cattle hoof prints show that the herds could also take shelter within the city walls. During the Kerma Moyen period (2050–1750 bce), the city was extended, some ditches were filled and others added probably by partly using the meanders of the river, the fortifications were enlarged, and one can study the organization of more complex defense systems. To the southwest, separated by a deep canal, a significant secondary settlement developed on the remains of an Kerma Ancien settlement. It includes several chapels, which were first made of wood, and later enlarged and made of mudbrick. After the study of this ensemble, we can suggest that the worship places and their large workshops for the production of offerings could pertain to an institution devoted to the cult

The Cities of Kerma and Pnubs-Dokki Gel   205 of deceased kings, similar to the Egyptian Hut-ka. This institution is well known during the Old Kingdom, when expeditions made contact with the Land of Yam (Roccati 1982). The fortified system developed from small mudbrick bastions to large defense systems equipped with casemates buttressing thick walls built on stone foundations. During the Kerma Classique period (1750–1500 bce), huge bastions covered some of the chapels devoted to the worship of the ancestor kings. The main city was also better defended, and a tower surrounded by several structures was built above a projection of the southern gate with parallel bastions of the Kerma Moyen. A massive wall bordered a courtyard protected by a precinct decorated with baked bricks anchored in thick mudbrick foundations. Ahead of this device, a wall 28 m long was built of very roughly hewn stone blocks, forming a solid trapezoidal mound supported by square buttresses. There is no doubt that this building method was directly inspired by the Egyptian architecture present in the Second Cataract forts (Vercoutter 1964, 1965), for example in Mirgissa. The inner organization of the city enables us to observe, close to the fortified gates, large dwellings with courtyards used for the traffic of goods. Indeed, hundreds of seal impressions suggest the opening of containers from remote countries, like the Hyksos kingdom or from the region of Lower Egypt. However, there seem to be no state supplies in the city, as no food storage complex was found, with the exception of those associated with a palace of the late Kerma Classique. This is not the case for other settlements close to the metropolis, like those of Gism el-Arba, where silos of the Kerma period are very numerous (Gratien et al. 2003). One can assume that the city was associated with the hinterland, where the food products necessary for the inhabitants were produced. This centralization proves that the royal administrative ensemble was indeed the capital of the independent kingdom of Kerma, and that a considerable part of Nubia was under its control.

The Port Area and its Religious Foundations; a Royal Tomb of the Kerma Classique and the Indigenous Funerary Area One kilometer south of the ancient city, an area close to the Nile was probably used as a port, as strongly suggested by several administrative buildings which could partly be identified. Large huts made of planted posts could also be cleared in Kerma Moyen levels where abundant archaeological material was preserved. Of later date, a large stone building with three rooms must be linked with the exchange of goods. The latter were protected by thick walls, and a sealing center with rolls of sealing clay was placed next to a stone well and storage rooms. An annex made of mudbrick contained seal impressions of the late Egyptian Middle Kingdom and of the Second Intermediate Period, some of

206   Charles Bonnet

Figure 11.2  The royal tomb of one of the last kings of Kerma.

them bearing the names of Hyksos kings. The inventoried material includes faience beads, fragments of bronze, and many pottery vessels (Bonnet 2014:209–14). Less than 100 m away, a religious complex was studied. The main temple of the late Kerma Classique is poorly preserved, but its mudbrick foundations draw a plan with three bays preceded by a pylon, as shown by the presence of stone fragments. This monument is founded on a previous building, the plan of which, also made of three parts, could be restored thanks to the aligned holes left by the posts forming its frame. A precinct made of large posts would link this temple to a rectangular chapel rebuilt several times on the same spot, first made of wood and then of mudbrick. An exceptional royal tomb was found in the vicinity of these remains, confirming a transfer of the Kerma necropolis during the final years of the kingdom (Fig. 11.2). Its construction required a considerable effort: the 6 m deep funerary shaft is in the shape of an inverted cone, its walls being entirely built with large stones from the Third Cataract. On the northern side, a very large staircase would give access to the tomb, and was originally topped by a chapel decorated with faience tiles. Countless fragments of objects, often precious, were found in the filling. This tomb was severely looted shortly after the burial. The superstructure of the tomb is almost totally gone, only a circular foundation of about 17 m in diameter was preserved, made of fired bricks for the outer cladding, and of mudbricks inside. By comparison with the tombs of the C-Group, one can assume that the shaft was covered by a thick rounded masonry structure equipped with a protruding area for the chapel.

The Cities of Kerma and Pnubs-Dokki Gel   207 Other cemeteries were identified in the neighboring sectors, which pertain to different periods spanning from the New Kingdom to the Christian period. One should also not forget that Richard Lepsius had mentioned the presence of other stone circles that, in all likelihood, also pertained to tombs of the Kerma Classique (Lepsius 1897–1913).

The African City of Dokki Gel Some 700 m north of the ancient Nubian capital, and probably contemporary with it, were uncovered the remains of another urban center. As mentioned above, to this day only the occupation layers of the Kerma Classique and of the New Kingdom have been identified, as the archaeological levels display complex phases, and it will take time to reach the depth of the earlier structures. It is clear that architectural remains are present far beyond the site protected today: geophysical research carried out by T. Herbich and R. St. Ryndziewicz in 2016 is very promising, as they reveal the presence of monumental structures under the cultivated fields directly south of the site. In a first phase of work at the site, we excavated the buildings pertaining to the Napatan and Meroitic kingdoms, followed by those of the New Kingdom. More recently, deeper layers yielded other remains showing the existence of a very different kind of architecture, far from both the Nubian city and the Egyptian constructions of the New Kingdom occupation. The main buildings discovered were above all devoted to religious and ceremonial functions, and significant fortifications would have protected these buildings (Bonnet 2009, 2013). The first precinct of this ceremonial city with African features is quadrangular, with lowered angles to the north; it measured 170 m in length and 80 m in width, with a wall thickness of more than 6 m (Fig. 11.3). The dimensions of the gates, which were closed by double towers, would vary according to their size, with a diameter ranging from 6 to 14 m. For the main axes which were partly studied to the northwest, large oval or circular entrance halls were placed in front of the entrance. With a diameter exceeding 50 m and several hundreds of powerful columns placed at relatively large intervals, these buildings were probably used to gather visitors before they could enter the urban center. This layout is also reminiscent of some recent African compounds, where a hut enables guests to gather before entering the owner’s main hut. These vestibules can be found next to a place of worship, marked by an altar or a sacred tree. In Dokki Gel, several fortified systems were built around these entrance buildings and along the access towards the center of the city. Although we do not yet understand the whole organization, one can point out the diversity in shape and position of the bastions, suggesting a good knowledge of warfare. If we are far from the overwhelming Egyptian military architecture, there is no doubt as to the effectiveness of the infrastructures created with very different means by the Nubian and African troops. Some 50 to 60 m away, a second precinct would surround the first one; it is today completely recovered by the defense fronts set up by the Egyptians during the occupation of the territory since 1480 bce.

208   Charles Bonnet 100.00W

150.00W

50.00W

0.00

50.00N

50 .00N 3 0

20 m

0.00

0 .00

3 H 50.00S

50.00S F

A

C

G

B

100.00S

100.00S

2 2 1

150.00S

150.00S

E

D 200.00S

200.00S 150.00W

100.00W

50.00W

0.00

Figure 11.3  The African city of Dokki Gel during the Kerma Classique and the beginning of the New Kingdom. A, B, C, D, E, G Ceremonial palaces F, H Entrance halls 1 The ceremonial city with the first precinct 2 Places of worship 3 Fortifications

The Cities of Kerma and Pnubs-Dokki Gel   209 It is in the area between the two precincts that were found the remains of the large circular buildings that we interpret as ceremonial palaces. These constructions, which were entered through gates equipped with two towers of different diameter, were crossed by aisles leading to thrones installed on a pedestal preceded by semi-circular steps. The inner space was occupied by a considerable quantity of columns, up to 1,400 for Palace A, of low diameter (0.70 m). These supports were probably quite high, as they would stand on foundations deeply rooted in the ground (from 1.0 to 1.5 m). Placed at close intervals, these columns would form a symbolic forest. Several thrones were found in these monuments, which could reach a length of up to 50 m. They would often open towards a gate of the city and the location of a temple identified by its remains. Other places of worship were or still are currently excavated. They show an oval layout, from 20 to 40 m in length, their walls strengthened by circular or ovoid buttresses. In the center were found pedestals preceded by several steps. According to similar elements found in a later Egyptian temple, these structures were used as a base for a naos. Their entrances are preceded by narrow corridors also flanked by protections.

The menenu of Thutmose I The intervention of Thutmose I in Dokki Gel shows a strong reaction against the danger represented by the Nubian and African military power (Fig. 11.4). The menenu that he established there is protected by a precinct equipped with huge bastions placed side by side. The defense of the accesses to the northwest is equally impressive, and somehow responds to the Nubian defenses. Indeed, the access is protected by a rectangular foregate that, during the reign of Hatshepsut, reached a length of 80 m, to which one must add the 20 m of the gate. A second fortified gate of the same kind is placed in the axis of the main temple, in the middle of the city. The aim of this new Egyptian architecture is to make temples, palaces, and food storage impregnable, and also to show the role played by the institution. Nevertheless, the defense systems and monuments were leveled by an alliance of local troops and, once the latter were vanquished, they were rebuilt with the same size under Thutmose II and Hatshepsut (Bonnet 2015). When the ancient city, capital of the Nubian kingdom, is definitely abandoned, the Egyptian city of Pnubs takes over on the location of the ceremonial city of Dokki Gel. In the early 18th Dynasty, Egypt reached an extraordinary might, which enabled it to gain control over the southern people, and over the networks of exchanges. This policy would last for three centuries, and all kinds of precious and exotic goods would be sent to Egypt. The ongoing archaeological works open a complex field of research for this period of great changes, which remains to be better understood.

210   Charles Bonnet 150.00W

100.00W

50.00N

50 .00N

6

0 0.00

0.00

50.00W

20 m 0 .00

5

50.00S

50.00S

3

7 100.00S

6

100.00S

1

1

1

6

150.00S

150.00S

2

200.00S

200.00S 150.00W

100.00W

Figure 11.4 The menenu of Thutmose I. 1 Egyptian temples 2 Palaces 3 Food storage 4 Central gate 5 Northwest foregate 6 Places of worship for the African population 7 Pottery workshop

50.00W

0.00

The Cities of Kerma and Pnubs-Dokki Gel   211

Conclusions The recent discoveries in Kerma and Dokki Gel inform us on the origins of an African architecture of great interest. The kingdoms located in the southern margins of Egypt probably managed to unite so as to try and face the danger and to regain control of the trade routes. One can assume that the leaders of these coalitions would gather with the Nubians to discuss their offensive strategies and to materialize their alliance through religious ceremonies in the different oval or circular temples prepared for the occasion. Several traditions were thus represented, and the preservation of their independence needed defense systems capable of facing an empire whose military might is unquestioned. We could establish the unique nature of some fortifications and the diversity of the means used to build huge circular towers and countless elongated bastions of various dimensions which could form mounds measuring up to 40 m in length. Other structures of smaller size are round, with rather thin walls, and were reached through a narrow passage defended by elevated oval structures. A central quadrangular foundation was probably used as a staircase leading to a defense platform. According to the magnetic surveys, the remains pertain to multiple structures, which considerably enlarge the archaeological sectors. One must thus admit that the population density should be entirely revised. The presence of two indigenous cities very close to one another is still only partly explained, and one must wait for the discovery of the houses and daily life objects of the troops stationed in the area. One should also stress that the study of the mudbrick masonry is only in its early stages for the structures probably displaying African features. The variety of the examples found will offer many other opportunities to highlight a heritage which remains to discover. Translated by: Pierre Meyrat

References Cited Bonnet, C. 2009 Un ensemble religieux nubien devant une forteresse égyptienne du début de la XVIIIe dynastie. Genava n.s. 57:98–103. ——— 2012 Les grands monuments égyptiens et nubiens du début de la XVIIIe dynastie sur le site de Doukki Gel (Kerma). Bulletin de l’Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale 112:57–75. ——— 2013 Découverte d’une nouvelle ville cérémonielle nubienne et le menenou de Thoutmosis Ier (Doukki Gel, Soudan). Comptes Rendus de l’Académie des Inscriptions et Belles Lettres April-June: 807–23. ——— 2014 La ville de Kerma. Une capitale nubienne au sud de l’Égypte. Éditions Favre. ——— 2015 Une ville cérémonielle africaine du début du Nouvel Empire égyptien. Bulletin de l’Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale 115:1–14. Emery, W.B., H.S. Smith, and A. Millard 1979 The Fortress of Buhen: The Archaeological Report. Egypt Exploration Society Excavation Memoir 49. Gratien, B., S. Marchi, O. Thuriot, and J.-M. Willot 2003 Gism el-Arba, habitat 2. Rapport préliminaire sur un centre de stockage Kerma au bord du Nil. Cahier de Recherches de l’Institut de Papyrologie et d’Egyptologie de Lille. 23:29–43.

212   Charles Bonnet Honegger, M. 1997 Kerma: l’agglomération pré-Kerma. Genava n.s. 45:113–18. ——— 2007 Aux origines de Kerma. Genava n.s. 55:201–12. Lepsius, K.R. 1897–1913 Denkmäler aus Aegypten und Aethiopien, Texte, ed. E.  Naville. J.C Hinrichs. Marcolongo, B. and N. Surian 1997 Kerma: les sites archéologiques de Kerma et de Kadruka dans leur contexte géomorphologique. Genava n.s. 45:119–23. Roccati, A. 1982 La littérature historique sous l’Ancien Empire égyptien. Éditions du Cerf. Smith, H.S. 1966 Report on the Excavations of the Egypt Exploration Society at Kor, 1965. Kush 14:187–243. Vercoutter, J. 1964 Excavations at Mirgissa I (October–December 1962). Kush 12:57–62. ——— 1965 Excavations at Mirgissa II (October 1963–March 1964). Kush 13:62–73.

chapter 12

The Easter n Cem etery of K er m a Charles Bonnet and Matthieu Honegger

The Eastern Cemetery of Kerma is the largest known for this kingdom, which extended from the Second to the Fourth Cataract. It is located a few kilometers south of the Third Cataract on the right bank of the Nile, 4 km to the east of the ancient city of Kerma (Bonnet, this volume). These two sites developed simultaneously between 2500 and 1500/1480 bce. The archaeological exploration of Kerma was initiated by George Reisner between 1913 and 1916. He undertook some research on the central building of the ancient city, named the western Deffufa, which he interpreted as an Egyptian fort. His main archaeological activity was however concentrated on the Eastern Cemetery where he excavated many hundreds of graves (Reisner 1923; Dunham et al. 1982). In 1977, archaeological work at Kerma was resumed by a Swiss team led by Charles Bonnet, who undertook during more than thirty years extensive excavations in the ancient city and opened twenty-seven sectors in different areas of the cemetery in order to establish the chronology of this civilization (Bonnet 1992, 2000). Since 1998, a new project has been initiated by Matthieu Honegger in the oldest sectors of the cemetery to better understand its early stages of development and the emergence of a stratified society (Honegger 2013; Honegger and Fallet 2015).

General Development of the Cemetery A recent plan of the cemetery, including the tumuli of the largest graves visible on the surface and the main graves excavated by the different teams, gives a general idea of its organization (Fig. 12.1). To date, it covers about 70 hectares and, according to estimates calculated from completely excavated sectors, comprises approximately 40,000 tombs. Since the time of Reisner, its western part has been partially destroyed by the extension

214   Charles Bonnet and Matthieu Honegger

initial limit of the cemetery

4

26

3

Sectors excavated by G.A. Reisner

1

28

Sectors excavated by the Swiss mission

27 2 6

5

23

N

Kerma ancien 2550–2050 BCE

22 21

7

8

20 9 25

10

11 12

14 13 24 M

15

Kerma moyen 2050–1750 BCE

16

19 17

18

XVI

XI X IV Kerma classique 1750–1500 BCE

II

100 m

III

Figure 12.1  Plan of the Eastern Cemetery of Kerma with the main graves and tumuli, and the location of the excavated sectors.

The Eastern Cemetery of Kerma   215 of cultivated fields. The Eastern Cemetery is one of the few areas of the Kerma alluvial plain that have not been cultivated over the millennia. The sheer number of graves, particularly their stone and earth tumuli, has contributed to the preservation of the area. For this reason, it contains the remains of many Neolithic settlements either on the surface or in stratigraphic contexts, covered by silt deposits laid down by ancient Nile floods. In the center of the cemetery (Sector 12) was also discovered the Pre-Kerma settlement covering many hectares (Honegger, this volume). Developed from north to south, the necropolis was exploited during the entire span of the Kerma civilization. Reisner was aware of the topochronological development of the cemetery but he inverted the chronology, thinking that the largest tumuli from the end of the Kerma civilization, which contained many Egyptian objects and statues belonging to Egyptian rulers of the Middle Kingdom, represented the first stage of the site. For him, the most impressive achievements at Kerma should have been of Egyptian origin. He thought that the smaller and poorer graves located in the central and northern parts of the cemetery were more recent, representing the products of a presumed Nubian decadence when the Egyptians were supposed to gradually abandon the site and leave the control to local Nubian overlords. This interpretation was first criticized in 1920 by Hermann Junker, who recognized a Nubian origin in the Kerma civilization. Subsequently, other archaeologists provided arguments accepting the idea that Kerma was the center of a local kingdom and that the chronology of this civilization should be reconsidered (Kendall 1997; Bonnet 2000). A first detailed chronology of the Kerma civilization was proposed based on a study of the material recovered from the excavations within the cemetery of Sai Island, the second largest Kerma cemetery (Gratien 1978). This chronology was fine-tuned based primarily on the study of the pottery from the excavations of Bonnet in the Eastern Cemetery (Privati 1999). It proposed a division of the Kerma civilization into three periods: Kerma Ancien (KA: 2500–2050 bce), Kerma Moyen (KM: 2050–1750 BCE), and Kerma Classique (KC: 1750–1500 bce). Each period is subdivided into phases: KA I–IV, KM I–VIII, and KC I–II. The dating of the phases was established by the associated Egyptian pottery (Bourriau 2004). More recently, a series of 14C dates from the oldest part of the necropolis have attempted to define the initial stages of its development. They suggest that the first graves were established ca. 2550 bce with an initial Kerma Ancien phase in which pottery shows analogies with the Late Pre-Kerma (Honegger, this volume). Then, the Kerma Ancien phase I developed between 2450 and 2300 bce, followed by phase II (2300–2150 bce). The end of this period (Kerma Ancien III–IV) covers a short interval of about one hundred years and coincides with the First Intermediate Period in Egypt. The first large tumuli appeared at this time. The Kerma Moyen period is contemporaneous with the Egyptian Middle Kingdom and corresponds to a spectacular development of the kingdom and its main cemetery. This period covers more than half of the whole funerary area and is characterized by the multiplication of great tumuli of 20 to 40 m in diameter, which follow its central ridge. During the Kerma Classique, the topographic development changed orientation, starting from the northeast to extend to the southwest.

216   Charles Bonnet and Matthieu Honegger The population buried in the cemetery should correspond to that which was living in the ancient city of Kerma. Except for the children under 5 years old, who are clearly under-represented, it does not appear that there was a selection of the dead based on sex or age (Fallet 2013). The anthropological studies of skeletons suggest a high incidence of violent injuries during the first phases of the cemetery (Agathe Chen pers. comm.) as it is the case during the Kerma Classique with a significant proportion of trauma (Judd 2002). Morphometric analyses mainly based on cranial features show a marked diversity of the Kerma Ancien population, which progressively decreased to give rise to a more homogeneous population during the Kerma Classique (Simon 1986, 1992). These results are currently being updated in order to propose a critical interpretation of this phenomenon (Fallet 2011). It is possible that the Kerma Ancien population was mixed or was at least constituted by bringing together different groups (Bonnet 1990). During the evolution of this civilization, the stability of the community buried in the Eastern Cemetery could explain the process of homogenization.

Funerary Rituals The main characteristics of the funerary ritual and its evolution are well known and have been described on numerous occasions (Reisner 1923; Bonnet 1990, 2000). The depth of the grave can attain 2 m or more for the largest ones. It was covered by a tumulus composed of mud, with black stones and white gravel on top, carefully arranged in circular patterns. Some pottery was placed around the tumuli and likely represents the remains of funerary feasts. Within the burials, the bodies were in similar flexed positions resting in the right side, head toward the east. During the Kerma Ancien, they were systematically placed on a carefully cut piece of bovine skin and then covered by a second skin (Fig. 12.2). Later, they were installed on a bed. The Kerma Ancien tombs are circular and small; they generally contain the remains of a single individual. Only at the end of this period do larger burials appear; these are indicative of greater social distinction between individuals. Objects deposited within and around these burials are notably more numerous, as is the presence of animal offerings. Pottery and objects imported from Egypt can be found in small proportions at this period (3–10 percent) and increase later, especially during the Kerma Classique. Complete caprines and dogs were placed in the graves and bucrania could be deposited in front of the tumuli (Fig. 12.3). Several hundred of them can be found close to the ­largest Kerma Moyen graves (Chaix 2000; Chaix et al. 2012). Within some graves, the bodies of accompanying individuals were buried next to the deceased. Small subsidiary graves were dug around or sometimes inside the largest tumuli. Differences between burials increase during the Kerma Moyen and, for this period, it is not rare to find grave-pits of up to 10–15 m in diameter. This ranking between burials suggests a stratified society that would culminate at the end of the Kingdom of Kerma. The central inhumations in the largest tumuli are supposed to be the graves of the rulers;

1m

Figure 12.2  Graves of an archer and of a woman with a stick of the Kerma Ancien II Phase (2300–2100 bce), found in Sector 23 of the Eastern Cemetery of Kerma. The grave of the archer contained two individuals: a young man in the central position and a woman placed by his side. A dog, a bow, an ostrich-feathers fan, and a bronze mirror accompanied the young man. The grave with a wooden stick contained a woman aged 20–29 years. Both graves were partially plundered and parts of the skeletons are here reconstructed.

218   Charles Bonnet and Matthieu Honegger Pottery and offerings

Bed

Chapel

Edge of the tumulus Sheep

2m

Bucrania

Figure 12.3  Kerma Moyen grave with bucrania deposited south of the tumuli and a mudbrick chapel located to the west (ca. 1900 bce).

the other tumuli could belong to high-status individuals or to free men and women (Hafsaas-Tsakos 2013). Anthropological studies indicate that the accompanying individuals deposited around the central inhumation and those coming from subsidiary small graves show similarities with the people buried in the other graves (Eades 2003; Judd and Irish 2009), and could have been part of the Kerma community. In certain instances, a mudbrick chapel was erected on the west side of the tumulus. During the Kerma Classique, pits were generally rectangular. Animal offerings in the graves become less numerous compared to the earlier period. Bucrania were still deposited in front of tumuli, but are fewer in number. Even in the larger tombs, measuring more than 30 m in diameter, only a few dozen were included. The decrease in the use of oxen in the funerary rituals corroborates the notion of the decline in stockbreeding due

The Eastern Cemetery of Kerma   219 to increased aridity, which was noted with the fauna of the city of Kerma (Chaix 1994). The Kerma Classique period can be divided in an Early Phase with tumuli no larger than 40 m and a Late Phase with the largest graves of the cemetery. The three most famous ones were built to a uniform size with tumuli approximately 90 m in diameter (KIII, IV, X). Composed of a complex internal structure of mudbrick walls with a corridor giving access to a central vaulted chamber, they are assumed to belong to the most powerful rulers of Kerma (Kendall 1997). It is in these royal graves that the number of subsidiary graves and accompanying individuals increase considerably and can reach many hundreds. The grave goods found in these burials and in some subsidiary ones were particularly elaborate and the proportion of Egyptian imports high. The fine Nubian pottery, some burial beds with ivory inlays representing animals and probably divinities, mica ornaments of leather caps, quartzite statues and others of local production, express the richness and the sophistication of the Nubian society. Many other objects were of Egyptian origin, obtained by trade (jars, copper daggers, stone vessels, etc.) or during periodic raids such as was probably the case for the Middle Kingdom statues found in the largest graves. Two monumental funerary temples (KII, KXI) were erected northwest of the tumuli KIII and KX. They measure about 40 to 50 m in length and are composed of two narrow rooms. Their internal walls were painted with scenes of animals and fleets of ships (Bonnet 2000). The Eastern Cemetery was abandoned as a location for royal burials during the conquest of Kush by the Egyptians of the 18th Dynasty.

The Origins of the Cemetery and the Beginning of Stratified Society Systematic excavations have been carried out these last years in the oldest sectors of the cemetery. In Sector 28, an initial phase has recently been identified and dated ca. 2550 bce. It concerns several tens of graves whose pits are a little more rectangular that those from Kerma Ancien. However, the ritual is similar, with the bodies in the same flexed position, laid out on the pelt of a bovine with the pottery placed on the surface, next to the tumulus. The pottery is different from that known for Kerma Ancien and is made up exclusively of red vases with black mouths, which are either undecorated, or decorated with combed horizontal impressions, similar to those from the Late Pre-Kerma. No red pottery was found with black mouths and fine impressed decoration under the rim, which is so characteristic of the Kerma Ancien, just as no examples of C-Group pottery were found, when these are regularly found in the Kerma Ancien assemblages (Bonnet  1982; Privati  1982,  1986). A few decades after these early graves, the Kerma Ancien I, contemporaneous with the 5th Dynasty, developed between 2450 and 2300 bce. In Sectors 1 and 27, the typical Kerma graves whose tumuli are covered with black stones and white gravels, coexist with graves of C-Group tradition, where stelae are arranged around the tumuli. There is no spatial opposition between these two kinds of

220   Charles Bonnet and Matthieu Honegger graves. Both are dispersed over the same area and the typical C-Group vessels, especially the completely black bowls with geometric motifs, are not specifically located next to the graves with stelae. It is the same for the typical Kerma Ancien I pottery which can be found in association with both kinds of tumuli (Honegger 2013). There is clearly a mixture between these two cultural traditions. The interpretation of this coexistence depends on whatever significance we attribute to the two cultural groups, as established by Reisner between C-Group and Kerma (Reisner  1910). We could be dealing with closely related populations and the C-Group intrusions might indicate associations between the two groups (marriage?). The presence of C-Group pottery continues during Kerma Ancien II, but in smaller proportions. The small Kerma Ancien I burials do not contain numerous grave deposits and they give the image of relative equality of treatment in the face of death. Animal sacrifices are not attested and graves with accompanying individuals are exceptional. These first inhumations were less rich in objects of value than the later ones and thus less attractive to the pillagers. About two-thirds of them were still intact or have been only slightly disturbed (Honegger and Fallet 2015). The Kerma Ancien II phase (2300–2150 bce) shows spectacular changes in the funerary rites. The tombs are generally larger, contain more objects, and are systematically plundered. Animal sacrifices make their appearance (dogs, caprines) as well as bucrania in front of the tumuli. Tombs with multiple burials are also more frequent. All these indices point to the emergence of a first stratification within society, before the appearance of the large tumuli of 20 m in diameter at the end of Kerma Ancien and the beginning of Kerma Moyen (Hafsaas-Tsakos 2013). In Sector 23 (Kerma Ancien II) a total of twenty-seven tombs with bow(s) and/or quivers have been identified, while nine others contained a shepherd stick (Fig. 12.2). The presence of the bow and its attributes (quiver, arrows) clearly evokes the importance of the bowmen in Nubia, particularly in the Kingdom of Kerma. The qualities of Nubian archers were repeatedly stressed by their northern neighbors, who recruited them from the end of the Old Kingdom. Apart from the well-known forty figurines of Nubian archers found in the grave of Prince Mesehti of the 11th Dynasty at Assiut, they are sometimes represented on stelae, temple reliefs, or rock carvings. However, it is quite unusual for archers to be identified in graves. For the Kerma period, it is only in the Eastern Cemetery that they are evidenced. Some archers were discovered by Bonnet in different sectors; the most famous is an almost intact tomb of an archer naturally mummified (Bonnet 1982). These discoveries enriched by remains of arrowheads or bow strings, show that archers are regularly present in graves dated from Kerma Ancien II to Kerma Moyen. To date however, it is only in Sector 23 that such a concentration has been evidenced. The anthropological study of the skeletons shows that these archers are exclusively represented by males, while those with sticks are associated with females. When they were not too heavily plundered, these graves regularly contained an ostrich-feather fan in the hand of the deceased, sea-shell earrings, strings of stone or faience beads, and bracelets or rings. More valuable grave goods are represented by bronze mirrors slipped into their leather bag, pendants, necklaces, and earrings made of gold. At the feet of the deceased has sometimes been found a leather bag,

The Eastern Cemetery of Kerma   221 while in the larger tombs one or two sacrificed dogs, or else a sheep. The references to war, the hunt, and pastoralism no doubt bore symbolic values. In Predynastic Egypt, hunting scenes usually express the power of the elite (Hendrickx 2011). Bows, dogs on leads, control of the natural world, and their correlation with military triumphs are some of the recurrent themes that will later be found in Pharaonic Egypt. By analogy, it is possible that the references to the hunt or warfare at Kerma carry the same connotations. The Kerma Ancien II phase, contemporaneous with the 6th Dynasty in Egypt, is the period of more intensive interactions with the Egyptians as related in Harkhuf ’s biography (Török 2009:67–72). The contacts might not always have been peaceful and could have enhanced the value of the role of archers. In the Eastern Cemetery, this period also evidences the emergence of a first elite which expresses itself in richer tombs, in which an important number are endowed with bows and to a lesser extent with shepherd sticks. It is from this time that the Kerma society will evolve rapidly into a more stratified and more complex society.

Chapels and Temples Beginning in Kerma Ancien, cult locations appear to be associated with tombs. The remains of the wooden structures, which were in a poor state of conservation, and which were for the most part located to the northwest of the tumuli, evolved as the funerary area expanded. Thus, at the inception of Kerma Moyen, there were rectilinear windbreaks made of upright posts which offered protection from the sudden windstorms from the north. The graves and their close vicinity, thus protected, facilitated the meetings of a small number of persons. The archaeological material found on the surface has been substantially damaged by the passage of people, animals, and more recently motor vehicles, and it is therefore difficult to identify the traces of ceremonies by the few sherds or a single baked clay representation of a bull. Notwithstanding, we have discovered on the Kerma Moyen tumuli pots imitating Egyptian productions, accompanied by a baked clay offering table, in which were modeled the outlines of various animal shapes—­caprines or bovines. It is possible that these locations, destined for the cults associated with the memory of the deceased, were next to a stela, such as was the case for the large tumuli dating from the Kerma Classique, where cones of dolomitic marble were discovered. It is again during the Kerma Moyen that the first mudbrick funerary chapels made their appearance (Bonnet 2000:26–53). They appear to have been used for a relatively short time and their modest dimensions suggest that the devotion related to a single tomb. In front of these elongated buildings, a spread of sherds has often been found, which were possibly associated with libations. A short time later, the chapels became larger with a square floor plan, and contained one or several wooden uprights to support light roofing material. Their location is indicated by small bases made of sandstone or dolomitic marble, which often have a lip to maintain the post. The doors are usually to

222   Charles Bonnet and Matthieu Honegger the south, slightly off-center in relation to the posts. The buildings increased in size by stages, and during the Kerma Classique received a painted decoration, fragments of which have been discovered in the destruction levels. We must also point out that at this time the chapels could be doubled-up and that the offering deposits consisted of large containers made of earth, resembling silos. Two particularly impressive temples are associated with the last royal tombs to the south (Bonnet 2000:54–143). Their entrances are located in relation to the transversal corridor that crosses the tumuli. One of these temples, the eastern Deffufa (KII), which is still standing to a height of over 10 m, has a floor-plan made up of two large rectangular chambers one behind the other. The monumental entrance is to the south, with a monolithic lintel on which a winged disc has been sculpted. The arch above the doorway to the second chamber has been remodeled on several occasions; above it, on a prepared platform, was set a stela carved in the shape of an obelisk, whose fragments were either noted or represented by the first European travelers during the 19th century. The two chambers of this Deffufa had vaulted ceilings spanning the 6-meter-wide structure, and a few bricks have remained in place, notwithstanding the general collapse still visible in the masonry. After placing solid granite bases for pillars, a new lighter roof was installed, no doubt made of palm tree fronds and reeds. During the excavations of the eastern Deffufa, Reisner noted traces of several scenes painted on the walls, which a century later have unfortunately disappeared; the extant photographs however allow us to reconstruct a fair-sized scene in which appear a number of sailing boats. A recent excavation of the floor uncovered a paved surface made up of several tens of reused paving stones, one of which is engraved with a boat. A wealth of material from the first chamber was discovered at a certain depth, which has permitted the reconstruction of decorative elements, notably tiles made of blue and black faience, fixed to bronze wires with gypsum. Access to the upper gallery was via a staircase that was also painted. Following a conflagration, the staircase was condemned by means of a solid covering that completely hid it. The second temple is a little earlier (KXI). It also contains a staircase to the upper gallery that originally contained the monolithic stelae that were discovered in front of the monument. This temple has been levelled by the wind, but the two interior halls are preserved to a height of about 1 m. The walls retain pictures (Bonnet 2000:65–102) representing on the western wall the African animal kingdom, with giraffes, hippopotami, and bovines. On the eastern wall, scenes of everyday life represent a well, boats, desert animals, and a fight between two bovines. The base of a naos (shrine) on the north side is also painted with ladders. The orientation of this temple, as with the western Deffufa in the Nubian capital, is marked by an enclosed apse made of mudbricks, consolidated at a later date with a solid covering (Fig. 12.4). Later still, the walls of the building would be doubled-up with an outer casing made of stone. The architectural evolution indicates that the north hall with its apse constituted the original construction, and that this was subsequently extended southward in the direction of Tumulus KX. Several phases of restoration have been noted inside this tomb, as well as the burial of more than three hundred subsidiary persons in the transversal corridor.

The Eastern Cemetery of Kerma   223

KI

KII

KXI

0

20 m

Figure 12.4  Funerary temples KII and KXI, compared with the temple KI of the ancient city.

The End of the Eastern Cemetery and the Western Royal Grave The Eastern Cemetery was probably connected to the city of Kerma by means of ditches that permitted the dead to be transported by boat, but not all of these dead arms of the Nile have been identified. As recently as a few decades ago, during periods of high water, large areas were under water. Curiously, after a millennium of use, when the Kingdom

224   Charles Bonnet and Matthieu Honegger was at its apogee, the rulers decided to move the funerary area closer to the capital. The Eastern Necropolis was thus abandoned. It is in the environs that we consider to be the port quarter on the Nile that a temple and a large chapel were erected, and that an extraordinary royal tomb was constructed. During Karl-Richard Lepsius’s famous expedition to Egypt and Nubia, he noted that there was a quay along the bank of the Nile as well as several large circles of stones (Lepsius 1849–1913; 1897–1913), and it is probable that the royal tomb that we excavated 1 km to the south of the western Deffufa corresponds to one of these circles (Bonnet 2000:144–57). The superstructure of this tomb is circular, and must have been several meters high. It is flanked on the north by a chapel with projecting walls to the front. The circular wall made of stone is faced with baked bricks. This religious construction, as with the eastern Deffufa, was decorated with faience tiles strung to some of the roof-beams or walls, with possible representations of animals. Beneath the cult-building, there is a wide staircase made with thick slabs of ferruginous sandstone. Two flights of eleven steps lead down to a paved flooring beneath an enormous well in the shape of an inverted cone, made of massive masonry in different types of stone originating from the Tombos quarries, over 20 km from Kerma. On the stairs and in the lower stratigraphic levels thousands of fragments of prestigious objects were found: statues made of granite, faience tiles, gold sheets, semi-precious stones, and different types of beads and pottery. The destruction was not accomplished by treasure-hunters since the fill levels were highly disturbed and the valuable objects reduced to fragments. The study of the sherds suggests that this tomb was constructed during the second half of the Kerma Classique period, and that it was violated shortly after the conquest by Thutmose I during the New Kingdom. We can therefore assume that one of the last kings of Kerma was buried here. The design of this tomb is however different to those under the tumuli of the Eastern Cemetery. The presence of a chapel to the north and a characteristic circular superstructure are in all respects comparable to the contemporaneous ones from Lower Nubia, attributed to the populations of C-Group. The new necropolis remains an unresolved enigma, even if all the subsequent large Kerma cemeteries were established within the ancient town and in close vicinity to this tomb. We must also take note that this transition period coincided with the transformations studied in the town of Pnubs, modern Dokki Gel (Valbelle 2009; Bonnet 2012), located 2 km away, from whence comes a large sherd from a Canopic Vase belonging to a deceased whose name ended with Mesen. There was therefore an important necropolis dating from the New Kingdom and the Meroitic period at this location. Translated by: Michael Templer

References Cited Bonnet, C. 1982 Les fouilles archéologiques de Kerma (Soudan). Rapport préliminaire sur les campagnes de 1980–81 et 1981–82. Genava n.s. 30:1–42. ——— 1990 Kerma. Royaume de Nubie. Musée d’art et d’histoire. ——— 1992 Excavations at the Nubian Royal Town of Kerma 1975–91. Antiquity 66:611–25. ——— 2000 Edifices et rites funéraires à Kerma. Errance.

The Eastern Cemetery of Kerma   225 ——— 2012 Les grands monuments égyptiens et nubiens du début de la XVIIIe dynastie sur le site de Doukki Gel (Kerma). Bulletin de l’Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale 112:57–75. Bourriau, J. 2004 Egyptian Pottery Found in Kerma Ancien, Kerma Moyen, and Kerma Classique Graves at Kerma. In Nubian Studies 1998: Proceedings of the Ninth Conference of the International Society for Nubian Studies, ed. T. Kendall, pp. 3–13. Department of AfricanAmerican Studies, Northeastern University. Chaix, L. 1994 Nouvelles données de l’archéozoologie au nord du Soudan. In Hommages à Jean Leclant, v. 2: Nubie, Soudan, Éthiopie, ed. C. Berger, G. Clerc, and N. Grimal, pp. 105–10. Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale. ——— 2000 Les animaux et les morts à Kerma (Soudan) entre 2500 et 1500 avant J.-C. Faits archéologiques et interprétations. In Ces animaux que l’homme choisit d’inhumer. Contribution à l’étude de la place et du rôle de l’animal dans les rites funéraires, ed. L. Bodson, pp. 15–39. Colloques d’histoire des connaissances zoologiques 11. Université de Liège. Chaix, L., J. Dubosson, and M. Honegger 2012 Bucrania from the Eastern Cemetery at Kerma (Sudan) and the Practice of Cattle Horn Deformation. In Prehistory of Northeastern Africa: New Ideas and Discoveries, ed. J. Kabaciński, M. Chłodnicki, and M. Kobusiewicz, pp. 189–212. Studies in African Archaeology 11. Poznań Archaeological Museum. Dunham, D., S. D’Auria, and G.A. Reisner 1982 Excavations at Kerma, Part VI. Museum of Fine Arts, Boston. Eades, S. 2003 Etude du déterminisme familial des traits non-métriques dentaires afin d’identifier des groups d’individus apparentés en context funéraire archéologique. Application aux ensembles archéologiques de Kerma (Soudan). Doctoral dissertation, University of Geneva. Fallet, C. 2011 Population and Funerary Traditions in the Eastern Cemetery of Kerma in Nubia (2500–1500 BC). Kerma, documents de la mission archéologique Suisse au Soudan 3:15–17. ——— 2013 Bioarchaeological Study of the Ancient Sectors of the Eastern Cemetery: Latest Results. Kerma, documents de la mission archéologique Suisse au Soudan 5:32–36. Gratien, B. 1978 Les cultures Kerma. Essai de classification. Université de Lille III. Hafsaas-Tsakos, H. 2013 Edges of Bronze and Expressions of Masculinity: The Emergence of a Warrior Class at Kerma in Sudan. Antiquity 87:79–91. Hendrickx, S. 2011 Hunting and Social Complexity in Predynastic Egypt. Bulletin des séances de l’Académie royale des Sciences d’Outre-Mer 57:237–63. Honegger, M. 2013 The Oldest Sectors of the Eastern Cemetery: Neolithic Occupations and the Early Stages of the Kerma Civilisation. Kerma, documents de la mission archéologique Suisse au Soudan 5:17–31. Honegger, M. and C. Fallet 2015 Archers’ Tombs of Kerma Ancien. Kerma, documents de la mission archéologique Suisse au Soudan 6:16–30. Judd, M. 2002 Ancient Injury Recidivism: An Example from the Kerma Period of Ancient Nubia, International Journal of Osteoarchaeology 12:89–102. Judd, M. and J. Irish 2009 Dying to Serve: The Mass Burials at Kerma. Antiquity 83:709–22. Kendall, T. 1997 Kerma and the Kingdom of Kush 2500–1500 bc The Archaeological Discovery of an Ancient Nubian Empire. National Museum of African Art, Smithsonian Institution. Lepsius, K.R. 1849–59 Denkmäler aus Aegypten und Aethiopien. Nicolaische Buchhandlung. ——— 1897–1913 Denkmäler aus Aegypten und Aethiopien, Text, ed. E. Naville. J.C. Hinrichs. Privati, B. 1982 Nouveaux éléments pour une classification de la céramique du Kerma ancien. Genava n.s. 30:27–36.

226   Charles Bonnet and Matthieu Honegger ——— 1986 Remarques sur les ateliers de potiers de Kerma et sur la céramique du Groupe C. Genava n.s. 34:23–28. ——— 1999 La céramique de la nécropole orientale de Kerma (Soudan): essai de classification. Cahier de Recherche de l’Institut de Papyrologie et d’Egyptologie de Lille 20:41–69. Reisner, G.A. 1910 The Archaeological Survey of Nubia: Report for 1907–1908. National Printing Department (Cairo). ——— 1923 Excavations at Kerma. Harvard African Studies 5–6. Peabody Museum of Harvard University. Simon, C. 1986 Les populations Kerma: evolution interne et relations historiques dans le context égypto-nubien. Archéologie du Nil Moyen 3:139–47. ——— 1992 Evaluation de la morphologie des populations humaines de Nubie: essai sur la variabilité des populations. In Études Nubiennes: actes du VIIe Congrès international d’Études Nubiennes, ed. C. Bonnet, v. 2, pp. 287–94. Valbelle, D. 2009 Kerma. Les inscriptions et la statuaire. Genava n.s. 57:115–17.

chapter 13

Pa n- Gr av e a n d M edjay At the Intersection of Archaeology and History Kate Liszka and Aaron de Souza

Writing ancient Egyptian and Nubian history is a tricky endeavor, especially because the ancients never set out to write history for history’s sake. Egyptians created textual and artistic data for specific purposes that reflect their perspectives and only sometimes relate to Egyptian history. Archaeological data, on the other hand, provide insights into the life and death of ancient peoples, but rarely align with the historical record. Seldom do textual and archaeological corpora align, limiting the extent to which the two types of data can be correlated. This article revisits the long-standing assumption that the Medjay-people of the Egyptian textual and artistic record can be equated to the PanGrave archaeological culture, and considers the historiographic complexities of linking textual and archaeological data. Through an examination of the Medjay–Pan-Grave problem, we identify deficiencies of this model and attempt to reconcile these different sources. Although we find many similarities when we scrutinize how these sources portray the lives people were living, we conclude that the historical and archaeological sources cannot and should not readily be equated.

The Pan-Grave Tradition The Pan-Grave tradition was first identified by Petrie at Hu in Cemetery X and stood out on the basis of the distinctly un-Egyptian material assemblages associated with contracted burials in the shallow, circular, “pan-shaped” graves that gave the tradition its name (Petrie  1901:45–49). Further Pan-Grave sites were discovered soon after, most notably in Upper Egypt at Rifeh (Petrie 1907:20–22), Balabish (Wainwright 1920:1–52), Qau and Badari (Brunton 1930:3–7), and Mostagedda (Brunton 1937:114–33; Fig. 13.1). Other Pan-Grave sites were recorded in Lower Nubia such as those at Ginari (Firth 1912:55–61), Dakka (Firth 1915:138–40), and Kubban (Firth 1927:46–98), and also

228   Kate Liszka and Aaron de Souza

Figure 13.1  Map of Egypt, Nubia, and the Eastern Desert. Map: Samuel Burns.

at Aniba (Steindorff  1935:193–96). Over the following decades, extensive finds were made during the UNESCO salvage operations of the early 1960s at Sayala (Bietak 1966, 1968), in the Second Cataract region by The Scandinavian Joint Expedition (SJE) (Säve-Söderbergh 1989:15–19), and at Adindan and Serra by the Oriental Institute Nubian Expedition (OINE) (Williams  1983:11–113, 1993:121–48). More recently, sites have been discovered at Hierakonpolis (Friedman 2001:33–38), Moalla (Manassa 2012), and at various locations around the Wadi Kubbaniya (Gatto et al. 2012; Gatto 2014). Despite being known to Egyptology for over a century, our understanding of the PanGrave people has changed little since Petrie’s initial discovery. We do, however, have a much greater understanding of the culture’s geographic reach and regional variations across its wide distribution, but many questions remain about their identity and their relationship to Nile valley populations in Egypt and Nubia.

Pan-Grave and Medjay   229 (a)

(b)

0 1 2 cm

Figure 13.2 Pan-Grave pottery. (a) Black-topped bowl from Debeira East, SJE Site 47. Photograph: A. de Souza, Courtesy Museum Gustavianum, Uppsala University. (b) Incised bowl from Debeira East, SJE Site 47. Drawing: A. de Souza.

Both large and small Pan-Grave cemeteries exist. The small size of many Pan-Grave cemeteries in Lower Nubia may reflect equally small family groups that would have been able to move easily across the desert. Moreover, Pan-Grave cemeteries are generally located in the low desert and away from the cultivation, perhaps pointing toward a closer connection to the desert than to the river valley. The precise dates during which Pan-Grave tradition is archaeologically attested are unclear. Associated Egyptian pottery suggests that the earliest sites in the Nile valley can be dated to the late 12th Dynasty, ca. 1850–1800 bce (Gatto et al. 2012; Gatto 2014), at which point the culture becomes visible in the archaeological record. The bulk of the evidence for the Pan-Grave tradition dates from the 13th Dynasty to the end of the Second Intermediate Period (ca. 1800–1550 bce) and comes mainly from self-contained cemeteries, but also in Egyptian settlement contexts. Their archaeology suggests that bearers of the Pan-Grave tradition may have integrated into Egyptian society; however, their role (if they had one) is a subject of debate (Forstner-Müller and Rose 2012). The mortuary evidence shows that Pan-Grave communities adopted certain Egyptian-style customs such as burial in an extended supine position in deep rectangular pits. This process of acculturation is typically termed “Egyptianization,” and this has often been cited as the reason for the archaeological “disappearance” of the Pan-Grave culture by the beginning of the 18th Dynasty (Bietak 1966:72–73; Säve-Söderbergh 1989:18). More recent research has demonstrated that the material expression of Pan-Grave identity actually remained distinct in spite of contact with Egyptian and other Nubian populations (de Souza 2013:116–18). The Pan-Grave culture is recognizable through its archaeological remains. Their pottery includes black-topped wares, burnished wares, and decorated wares with simple incised linear motifs and distinctive modeled or recessed rims (Fig. 13.2). Other diagnostic features include horns, frontal bones, and skulls of sheep, goats, and cattle decorated with red and black painted designs (Fig.  13.3; also Fig.  16.2, this volume), and

230   Kate Liszka and Aaron de Souza

Figure 13.3  Left: Painted ox skull from Mostagedda grave 3252. After Brunton 1937: pl. lxxvi.66; Right: Pan-Grave goat skull from Debeira East, SJE Site 47. Photograph: A. de Souza, Courtesy Museum Gustavianum, Uppsala University.

characteristic jewelry such as bracelets and armbands comprising rectangular motherof-pearl plaque beads. Pan-Grave burials show a preference for goats and sheep over cattle, which corresponds to a usual herd structure of pastoral nomads from North Africa (Bangsgaard 2013:291). Weapons including axes (Wainwright 1920: pl. xiii; Brunton 1937: pl. lxxvii), arrows (Friedman 2001:37), and other paraphernalia associated with archery (Wainwright 1920: pl. xii) have also been found at some Pan-Grave sites in Egypt. Most of the weapons are of Egyptian style and manufacture, which has been used to support the idea that the PanGrave communities living in Egypt served as mercenaries in the Egyptian army (see below). The graves themselves show a broad range of variation, and the shallow “pan-shaped” circular pits that give the culture its name are not the only type. Deep oval and rectangular graves are frequently attested especially at larger cemeteries such as Mostagedda (Brunton 1937:122) and Site 47 at Debeira East (Säve-Söderbergh 1989:167–69). Graves at some sites are surmounted by tumuli or rings of loose stones (Bietak 1966:49–51), while at others there is no evidence of any such superstructure. Corresponding variations in the Pan-Grave and Egyptian pottery suggest that these differences may reflect chronological sequences and regional variation (de Souza 2019: 80–81, 140–150). Settlement evidence for the Pan-Grave culture is lacking. Possible campsites have been identified in the low desert around Qau and Badari (Brunton 1930:3–4) and in cave shelters north of Aswan (Gatto et al. 2012:39). Pottery that may be attributed to the Pan-

Pan-Grave and Medjay   231 Grave tradition is found in Upper Egyptian settlements, notably at Tell Edfu, Elephantine, and Aswan, with scattered attestations in Lower Egypt (Forstner-Müller and Rose 2012). Attributing this non-Egyptian (i.e., Nubian) pottery from Egyptian cultural settings to one or another tradition is problematic, and in most cases, this pottery is the only evidence of a possible Nubian presence at these sites, raising questions of who actually produced and used this pottery and how it came to be found in an Egyptian settlement (Bourriau 1990:17; Forstner-Müller and Rose 2012). It is clear that Nubian communities were living among, or at least near, Egyptian communities, but the nature of the interactions between the two populations remains uncertain.

The Medjay The word Medjay is mentioned in nearly two hundred sources for over 1,500 years (Zibelius 1972:133–37; Meurer 1996:91–108). It is first attested in the 6th Dynasty, ca. 2300 bce, and its use continues regularly through the end of the New Kingdom, ca. 1050 bce. This chronological range is over a millennium longer than archaeological attestations for the Pan-Grave culture. Medjay is an Egyptian word whose use has puzzled scholars because its sources seem to indicate contradictory types of people or occupations (Takács 2008:811–15). Yet these contradictions more likely reflect a change in the way that Egyptians used the word Medjay over time and space. Moreover, various uses also reflect different types of interactions that were often based on where the contact occurred; the region and circumstances of the contact often changed how Egyptians used the word Medjay. Artistic evidence for the Medjay is much less common and unfortunately cannot directly address the question of whether the Medjay and the Pan-Grave peoples are related. Only three images of Medjay occur prior to the New Kingdom, contemporary with the Pan-Grave archaeological culture. The first is a depiction of two women stereotypically drawn as Nubians in the sarcophagus of Aashyet at Deir el-Bahri (drawing: Metropolitan Museum of Art 48.105.32); this image dates to the 11th Dynasty, about two centuries before the earliest appearance of Pan-Grave material. The other two depictions portray the Medjay as Egyptians; both a statue of a priest from Karnak, dating to the reign of Amenemhat III, and the stela of Res and Ptahwer from the 13th Dynasty are discussed below. During the Old and Middle Kingdoms, the Medjay seem to have been pastoral nomads who had come from an area the Egyptians called Medja-land. Medja-land is a vague geographic term that refers to a large area of the Eastern Desert, east of Lower Nubia, probably centered on the Wadis Allaqi and Gabgaba. Egyptians considered these Medjay-people to be Nubians. Many of these Medjay came into contact with Egyptians as itinerant workers, traders, or immigrants. Scholars originally generalized that all of the Medjay living in Egypt prior to the New Kingdom worked as mercenaries or security guards. This simplification is based on texts like the Biography of Weni from the Old

232   Kate Liszka and Aaron de Souza Kingdom that demonstrates that the Egyptians sometimes hired them as mercenaries, but they actually held a variety of jobs (Gardiner 1947:*73–*89; Liszka 2011, and in prep.). At the beginning of the New Kingdom the definition of the word Medjay began to shift away from Nubian pastoral nomads. This change likely occurred because of the reputation that some Medjay made as formidable fighters called the “Bowmen of the Medjay” during the wars against the Hyksos of the Second Intermediate Period in the Kamose Stela (Simpson 2003:345–50; Liszka in prep.). Over the next one hundred years, uses of the word Medjay to refer to Nubians from the Eastern Desert phased out, and the meaning of the word Medjay predominately referred to a group of elite soldiers who protected areas of Pharaonic interest, like the capital cities, the tombs of the kings, and the desert borders of Egypt. The definition therefore slowly changed to an occupational title, referring to these elite soldiers, that people of any ethnicity could earn, as opposed to the earlier references to an innate, ethnic stereotype. Scholars have also used references to their soldiering activity in the New Kingdom to assume that Medjay of the Old and Middle Kingdoms only held the roles of mercenaries or security guards (Gardiner 1947:*73–*89; Liszka 2011, and in prep.).

How Scholars Had Linked the Medjay and the Pan-Grave Scholars have suggested two primary reasons to support the equation between the PanGrave archaeological culture and the Medjay of the Egyptian textual record. First in 1941, Säve-Söderbergh expanded on Weigall’s (1907:8, 26–27) arguments that the Medjay and the Pan-Grave are linked because they both fought as mercenaries during the wars of the Second Intermediate Period. The “Bowmen of the Medjay” had been lauded as great warriors in the Kamose Stela (Säve-Söderbergh 1941:135–40). Bearers of the PanGrave culture were also thought to be mercenaries because of weapons found in their tombs and because of a frontal-bone of a bovid skull from Mostagedda that was painted with a soldier whose name was written in hieroglyphs (Arkell 1961:78–79; Cooper and Barnard 2017). Säve-Söderbergh also pointed out that Pan-Grave cemeteries known at that time only occurred in the area of Egypt controlled by the Theban dynasts from Aswan to Cusae (Säve-Söderbergh  1941:139). Archaeologists have since discovered other cemeteries, like those in Lower Nubia and perhaps elsewhere (Liszka 2015), demonstrating that this line of reasoning should be reconsidered. In 1966, Bietak proposed another reason to associate the Medjay and the Pan-Grave. He suggested that both came from the same region in the Eastern Desert, east of Lower Nubia. Scholars still follow substantive evidence to demonstrate that Medja-land was located there (Bietak 1966:61–78). Such evidence includes the Semna Dispatches, which mention Medjay-people entering the Nile valley from the desert (Smither 1945; Kraemer and Liszka 2016). Ibhet, a subdivision of Medja-land, was also in the Eastern Desert

Pan-Grave and Medjay   233 because a stela was found in that location naming Ibhet (Zibelius-Chen 1994). In addition, the fortress of Serra East, located on the east bank of the Nile in Lower Nubia, was named “Repelling the Medjay” (Bietak 1966:75). Bietak then argued that the Pan-Grave tradition also originated in the Eastern Desert. His conclusions were based on two key pieces of evidence: first he identified what he claimed was a cluster of Pan-Grave sites around the mouth of the Wadi Allaqi, which he subsequently argued was a major entry point into the Nile valley. Second, he cited ceramic evidence from Kassala, Agordat, and Khor Arbaat, that show striking similarities to Pan-Grave pottery from the Nile valley. As a result, Bietak deduced that the Pan-Grave tradition most likely originated in the Eastern Desert (Bietak 1966:61–78). Several archaeologists have since conducted surveys and excavations across a region of the Eastern Desert known as the Atbai and along the Red Sea (esp. Manzo 2012). These scholars identified a chronological sequence for several cultures active in this region. Most notably, Sadr argued that the Jebel Mokram archaeological tradition of the Atbai may be related to the Pan-Grave of the Nile valley because of the similar incised decoration applied to their pottery (Sadr 1987; Sadr 1990. See also Manzo 2017:43–54). The idea that the Medjay and the Pan-Grave are one and the same has been largely unchallenged since the idea was introduced, with many scholars citing mixed evidence from both sides to write a more detailed—but inaccurate—narrative of history of the Medjay–Pan-Grave peoples in the Second Intermediate Period (for counterarguments, see Barnard 2009; Liszka 2015). In order to write a history of that time, we must deconstruct this model to its foundation and start anew. Several similarities exist between the textually attested Medjay and the archaeologically known Pan-Grave in their connections to pastoral societies, and in their roles interacting with the Egyptian establishment as well as the Egyptian people. Nevertheless, as we will demonstrate below, they are not the same. They simply follow standard patterns and themes of pastoral nomads, as immigrants acculturating into a new place. Moreover, the bearers of the Pan-Grave tradition and the Medjay are not the only pastoralists or pastoral nomadic peoples interacting with the Egyptians in this way. The Egyptian textual record also refers to Aamu, Heryw-Sha, Inwtiyw, Nemy-Sha, and Khentyw-Ta. All these pastoral nomadic peoples supposedly originated in various parts of the Eastern Desert, the Levant, or the Western Desert (Zibelius 1972; Schneider 2003; Barnard 2009). Similarly, other Nubian archaeological cultures, like the C-Group, were also pastoralists mainly living near the Nile in Lower Nubia who maintained similar types of interactions in Egypt and with the Egyptians (Hafsaas 2006). Thus, when examining textual and artistic data alongside archaeological data in order to write history, one must focus on the larger patterns of encounter that are similar due to analogous circumstances. Anthropologists and sociologists have laid out several theoretical models that help us understand people of the past. The stories of the Medjay as seen through Egyptian texts and the Pan-Grave as attested through archaeology have similar components expressed through different types of data. Below, we will examine the theory and the extent to which similarities exist between these peoples, but the burden

234   Kate Liszka and Aaron de Souza of proof should always lie on scholars seeking to connect two very different types of ­circumstantial data.

Theories of Pastoralists, Pastoral Nomads, and Acculturation Those called the Medjay, the bearers of the Pan-Grave tradition, and several other groups can be considered to have originated from peoples who lived as pastoralists or pastoral nomads. Pastoralism is an economic way of life centered on extended families maintaining animal herds; it is not an ethnic group despite the fact that it often manifests in such terms. Both pastoralists and pastoral nomads keep large herds of animals, such as sheep, goat, and/or cattle. They must move their animals to seasonal food and water sources. In Egypt and Nubia, pastoralists primary stayed along the Nile valley, while pastoral nomads would travel much longer distances and take their animals into the high deserts in search of other seasonal food and water. Pastoral nomads follow specific seasonal paths, usually circling through the same regions annually. They often return to the same handful of camps to stay for a few months at each. Because of the life that they lead, pastoral nomads are often superior hunters, desert trackers, and can travel through the desert over long distances quickly (Khazanov 1994:15–25). Pastoralists and pastoral nomads cannot live in isolation. Their dependence on animals and the wild landscape meant that they only produced animal-based products like meat, milk, skins, or fat. They rely on sedentary societies for basic agricultural food staples, like bread and beer. Pastoralists and pastoral nomads acquire these any way that they can, through raid, trade, and employment. These mechanisms of exchange can change from family to family and from day to day. Many pastoralists and pastoral nomads seek temporary, seasonal, or permanent employment in a sedentary community fulfilling any job that they can get (Khazanov  1994: esp. 68–84; Leder and Streck 2005). Because of their skills in hunting, and a general need for soldiers in sedentary societies, many pastoralists and pastoral nomads find employment in armies (Khazanov 2001:13–16). Often because pastoral nomads are most loyal to their extended families, multiple families from the same larger group take jobs on opposing sides of a war. Up to half of every generation of pastoral nomads also move permanently into the sedentary society, never to return to the desert. Over the next few generations, their families fully acculturate to the sedentary community (Leder and Streck  2005: esp. 10–11). Sociologists have demonstrated that acculturation is generational. By the fourth generation of an immigrant family, individuals are often fully integrated into a new society; they have little or no knowledge of their family’s traditional practices, language, or even religious beliefs (Chun et al. 2003: esp. 64–69). Exceptions to this acculturation model exist in two cases: first, when a group of people phenotypically look so different that the

Pan-Grave and Medjay   235 local people actively exclude them from fully assimilating; second, when a large immigrant community lives and works together separately within another community, and they actively maintain their original practices and beliefs (Schneider  2003:144–46; 2010:291–339; Chun et al.,  2003:71–72). In these segregated immigrant communities, people work hard to maintain culturally significant practices that are important to their beliefs and identity; these practices are often signified by culturally significant objects. Thus, these immigrant communities are often much easier to identify archaeologically in their burial practices than in daily life because burials are often more important to their community’s identity and because they stand out as being archaeologically different (Emberling  1997; Jones  1997:90–115). This second case of purposeful separation occasionally occurs in ancient Egypt, as may be evidenced by non-Egyptian archaeological cultures appearing in Egypt during the Second Intermediate Period, like the C-Group or the Hyksos (Hafsaas, this volume). The daily life of an immigrant community is more difficult to see archaeologically because these people often purchase locally available goods and live in locally designed houses. However, when specific objects have been charged with cultural significance, that community continues to make those objects on their own. For example, ancient Nubian communities appear to have passed on the knowledge of making their own specialized handmade pottery (Hafsaas  2006:76–80). Moreover, each separate pastoral community passes on the knowledge of this craft to the next generation in their own immediate community; because so many different communities are producing their own ceramics simultaneously, variation occurs. That is to say, it is normal for lots of individual pastoral nomadic groups living near one another to have pottery that is broadly similar and yet different in details (Grillo 2012). Because of the great regional variation, both in the remains that the Pan-Grave peoples left behind and the context in which the Medjay foreigners would have interacted with Egyptians and the Egyptian government, it is vital to examine our evidence regionally. Only in particular regional contexts can we then apply the theories of pastoral nomadism and acculturation effectively to look at the extent to which these two groups may share similar stories.

Medjay and Pan-Grave Living in Egypt along the Nile Valley During the late Middle Kingdom and Second Intermediate Period, evidence exists for both the Pan-Grave and the Medjay permanently living in the Egyptian Nile valley. They held various roles within the wider Egyptian community, similar to immigrants around the world today. The jobs held by Medjay who were settled in Egypt are known because they are discussed in Egyptian evidence. For example, two Medjay women seem to appear as

236   Kate Liszka and Aaron de Souza members of an elite household working for the Priestess of Hathor Aashyet (Metropolitan Museum of Art 48.105.32; Liszka 2018). Additionally, the Lahun Papyri are administrative documents that date to the end of the 12th Dynasty and reflect how temples at Lahun functioned. Several groups of foreigners worked for the temple fulfilling various functions, including Asiatics and Medjay (Petrik 2011). Scholars used to assume that these Medjay must have been security guards for this temple because of their later connections to the police and occasional connections as mercenaries (e.g., Gardiner 1947:*82; Meurer 1996:102). However, the doorkeepers mentioned in the same temple papyri fulfilled the roles of security guards, not the Medjay. Instead the Medjay held many roles for the temple including dancing during festivals, possibly maintaining the temple’s lands or animals, and taking on the role of minor priests in temple rituals (Schneider  2003:327–32; Liszka in prep.). Similarly a statue dating to the reign of Amenemhat III is inscribed for a Medjay who was also a lector priest for the temple of Karnak (Marée 2014). This dual identification demonstrates how some foreign Medjay acculturated into Egyptian society, taking on Egyptian religious beliefs and practices, and yet still self-identified as a Medjay. Some Medjay living in Egypt were also employed by the Egyptian army. The Bowmen of the Medjay were lauded as great warriors in the Kamose Stela (Simpson 2003:345–50). Cross-culturally, pastoral nomads often take jobs in armies especially during times of war because of their similar skill set and need for employment (Khazanov 2001:13–16). In the Middle Kingdom, Medjay were associated with multiple occupations, like many other itinerant laborers. We can also see the generational Egyptianization of a Medjay family in the stela of Res and Ptahwer from the 13th Dynasty. Res commissioned a funerary stela fully in line with Egyptian religious practice at the end of the Middle Kingdom. It depicts him offering to his deceased relatives, including his parents Ptahwer and Satepihw. And yet, Res made sure that he, his father, and his mother were identified as Medjay with every occurrence of their names (Schneider 2003:93, 98; Liszka 2011:166). This demonstrates acculturation to Egyptian religious practice, while also identifying their pastoral nomadic roots. The emphasis of a family and even a female Medjay in this stela support that the Medjay at this time were not an occupational group, but rather a group that one was born into. The archaeological evidence from Upper Egypt similarly reflects differing levels of interaction between Egyptians and Pan-Grave communities living in the region. In general, there are two types of Pan-Grave cemeteries found in Upper Egypt: large PanGrave cemeteries that show a higher level of integration with Egyptian society, and small cemeteries that were most likely used by extended families of Pan-Grave people who appear to have been more culturally separate from local Egyptian communities. The larger cemeteries in Upper Egypt such as Mostagedda, Balabish, and presumably Rifeh attest to a sizeable Pan-Grave population living and dying in this area for a period of approximately three to four generations. These cemeteries show a mixture of circular “Nubian” grave pits with rectangular “Egyptianized” graves (Bourriau  1981:28; de

Pan-Grave and Medjay   237 Souza 2013:111–13), most likely reflecting the generational nature of acculturation, with external influence becoming more visible over time. Weapons such as axes, daggers, and archery equipment are also more frequent at larger Upper Egyptian sites, and this has been used as evidence for the assumed role of Pan-Grave communities as mercenaries in Egyptian service. Ryholt (1997:178) has observed that the Pan-Grave sites appear to be strategically located close to urban centers and suggests that the Pan-Grave communities acted as garrison guards, although it has also been noticed that weapons occur almost as frequently in the graves of women and children as they do in male graves (Liszka 2015:50). It is therefore possible that some of the people buried in these larger cemeteries worked as mercenaries for the Egyptians, just as some Medjay and many other pastoralists may also have been mercenaries. Further evidence of close ties between Pan-Grave and Egyptian communities is the utilitarian Pan-Grave pottery found in Egyptian settlements and religious contexts (Wegner 2007:241; Forstner-Müller and Rose 2012; Jacquet-Gordon 2012:83–85; Raue 2019; de Souza 2019:98–113). This Nubian-style pottery from Egyptian cultural contexts comes with a complex array of problems relating to classification, cultural identification, and terminology. It is not always clear if the pottery can be assigned to one or another culture, nor is it clear who actually produced and used the pottery (Aston 2012:163–164; Ayers and Moeller 2012; Raue 2012). However, the presence of distinctly Nubian pottery within Egyptian settlements is a indication of the close ties and interactions between some Pan-Grave and Egyptian communities. There are, however, much smaller Pan-Grave cemeteries such as Tod (Barguet 1952) and those around the Wadi Kubbaniya (Gatto et al. 2012; Gatto 2014) that do suggest a differing degree of interaction and exchange between Pan-Grave and Egyptian communities. The sites listed above are small, numbering less than a dozen burials in most cases, suggesting that they were burial places for one or more extended families. These sites comprise circular graves often surmounted by a loose stone superstructure, with none of the rectangular shafts seen at the larger cemeteries in Middle Egypt (e.g., Mostagedda, Rifeh). Egyptian pottery is minimal, grave types and mode of burial are distinctly Nubian, there are no Egyptian weapons, and the Pan-Grave pottery does not show the stylistic or morphological developments seen in Middle Egypt. This mortuary differentiation may reflect similar divisions that existed between living Pan-Grave and Egyptian communities. It is impossible to know if this was a conscious separation on the part of the Pan-Grave communities, or exclusion by Egyptians, but it is clear that the relationship between Egyptians and the bearers of Pan-Grave tradition was complex and varied. This variety and complexity fits well with the many different ways that extended families of pastoral nomads acculturate in sedentary communities. Unfortunately, similar textual evidence for Medjay living in Egypt who have experienced minimal acculturation does not exist. That does not mean that they are absent from this multicultural society. Because all of our references to the Medjay are from Egyptian sources, it means that some level of contact must have occurred before they appeared in the sources in the first place.

238   Kate Liszka and Aaron de Souza

Medjay and Pan-Grave Living in Lower Nubia along the Nile Valley Several of these pastoralists and pastoral nomads also interacted with Egyptians along the Nile valley in Lower Nubia. The Egyptian fortresses would have been employers of Nubian laborers and consumers of Nubian goods, as evidenced by Middle Nubian pottery at sites such as Askut (Smith  2003:97–135) and Mirgissa (Vercoutter 1970). In these bastions, we see cultural interactions through texts and archaeology; people were integrating and likely intermarrying (Smith 2003:133, 192). However, outside the Egyptian fortresses, Nubians maintained their traditional cultural practices, with less widespread Egyptianization—unlike those living in the Egyptian Nile valley. Egyptians recorded their interactions with people they called the Medjay (pastoral nomads from the Eastern Desert) and the Nehesy-Nubians (peoples from the Nubian Nile valley) in the Semna Dispatches (Posener  1958). In Semna Dispatch 3, several Medjay are members of a patrol with Egyptian fighters, protecting the Egyptian forts; they worked for the forts as a means of earning food staples. Some scholars suggested that they worked solely as interpreters in this endeavor. However, their roles would likely have been much greater because no small patrol would need more than one interpreter. The Semna Dispatches also record Nehesy-Nubians coming to the forts to conduct trade with the Egyptians. These Nubians were local pastoralists who probably lived within a day’s journey of the forts or closer (Smither 1945; Kraemer and Liszka 2016). Both Medjay and Nehesy-Nubians tried to improve their own lives through trade and employment like pastoralists and pastoral nomads everywhere. Differing levels of cultural interaction are also evident in the numerous Pan-Grave cemeteries along the Lower Nubian Nile valley. Cemeteries such as Sayala B and G (Bietak 1966:43–78), Serra C (Williams 1993:124–32), and Aniba C (Steindorff 1935:193–96) are small and isolated, comprising no more than a dozen graves that show little or no evidence for interaction with Egyptians. The assemblages from these sites not only share commonalities with each other, but also with the small Pan-Grave cemeteries in Upper Egypt. The grave pits are circular with stone ring superstructures, the pottery forms and wares are comparable, and associated Egyptian pottery is minimal. These similarities suggest that the assemblages in small cemeteries represent Pan-Grave communities that did not have significant exchanges with other Egyptian or Nubian cultures. Two other small Pan-Grave cemeteries occur at Kubban Cemetery 110 and Adindan K, but in these cases, they are located near larger non–Pan-Grave cemeteries; the former is adjacent to a large Egyptian cemetery, and the latter is adjacent to a C-Group cemetery (Hafsaas, this volume). The assemblages are distinctly Pan-Grave but the grave pits at both sites range from circular to rectangular, which points toward closer contact with Egyptian rather than C-Group culture. The proximity of these groups in death suggests

Pan-Grave and Medjay   239 that these Pan-Grave communities were interacting to varying degrees with Egyptians and C-Group Nubians and were not living in cultural isolation. At the other end of the spectrum, SJE Site 47 at Debeira East (SäveSöderbergh 1989:166–74), the largest known Pan-Grave cemetery, shows evidence of chronological developments and Egyptian influence. The graves range from circular to rectangular, Pan-Grave pottery varies across the site and includes elements seen at sites in Upper and Middle Egypt, and the relatively low quantity of Egyptian pottery can be dated to the late 17th and early 18th Dynasties (de Souza 2019:123). Numerous Egyptian scarabs were found at SJE Site 170, also at Debeira East, which together with the development from circular to rectangular graves also suggests ongoing interaction and exchange with Egyptians. The small Cemetery 58:100 at Ginari (Firth 1912:57–61) provides a unique insight into interactions between Egyptians and Nubians in Lower Nubia. This site comprises two distinct halves—one composed of circular graves with Pan-Grave assemblages, and another composed of rectangular graves with predominately Egyptian material dating to the early 18th Dynasty. Bietak (1968:45–46) interpreted this clear division as evidence for rapid Egyptianization of the population buried at this location. A closer examination of the site, however, shows that both halves are clearly distinct with little evidence of any mixing or transition from Nubian to Egyptian customs and material culture (de Souza 2019:71). The pottery from the Nubian half of the cemetery is similar to Pan-Grave ceramics from Upper and Middle Egypt, dated to the very beginning of the 18th Dynasty. Based on these internal differences, Cemetery 58:100 at Ginari may be re-interpreted as one cemetery used by two distinct populations at the same time—one Nubian, one Egyptian—reflecting simultaneous cultural interaction and conscious separation between the two populations. The varying nature of Pan-Grave sites in Lower Nubia demonstrates that the Egyptianization model may not be applicable to all sites and assemblages, especially in cases where cultural interaction and exchange was less direct. There is certainly evidence that some Pan-Grave populations in Lower Nubia adopted Egyptian customs and material culture, but the presence of Pan-Grave material culture at the beginning of the 18th Dynasty suggests that the tradition did not entirely disappear (de Souza 2013). The Pan-Grave cemeteries at Ginari and Kubban appear to have been established in Lower Nubia at the same time during which previous scholars claimed that the Pan-Grave archaeological culture was “disappearing.” This only occurs in Lower Nubia at the time when Egypt is trying to reassert its dominance in this area. If one accepts that at least some Pan-Grave individuals did act as mercenary soldiers, then the evidence from Ginari and Kubban might reflect a purposeful relocation of Pan-Grave populations in order to assist the Egyptians in their re-stabilization of Nubia following the political instability of the preceding period. From this point, the archaeological trail of the PanGrave people goes cold, but it is possible that the formerly pastoral nomads may have returned to their mobile roots or assimilated into local sedentary communities, or both, thus “disappearing” from the archaeological record in the Nile valley.

240   Kate Liszka and Aaron de Souza

Medjay and Pan-Grave Living in the Eastern Desert The majority of our evidence for the Medjay and the Pan-Grave exist in contexts from the Nile valley. Yet Bietak and other scholars had associated these groups with the Eastern Desert, east of Lower Nubia. The textual and archaeological evidence connecting both groups to the Eastern Desert is minimal and contain significant gaps, but compelling connections may be still exist to connect both groups to the Eastern Desert as pastoral nomads. For example, Semna Dispatch 5 documents an extended family of Medjay pastoral nomads including women and children who “descended from the desert,” seeking employment at the fortress of Elephantine. When their request was denied, they were “dismissed to their desert” (Smither 1945:9; Liszka 2011:159–60). We also see evidence of Medjay in the Eastern Desert possibly raiding into Egyptian communities in the Nile valley. The fortress of Serra East is named “Repelling the Medjay” as a possible reflection of raiding capabilities of some of those pastoral nomads (Knudstad  1966:175–76). Similarly, in Papyrus Ramesseum 18, the official Djeba probably held the title Controller of the Medjay; in this document, he is sent to the fortress of Kubban to “administer his district.” This likely meant that he oversaw the nearby Medjay pastoral nomads, possibly those living in and around the Wadi Allaqi, whose mouth is at Kubban (Liszka and Kraemer 2016:168, 183–84). Moreover, we also see Medjay, associated with the desert, trading with individual Egyptians and even the Egyptian government. A biographical stela from Gebelein provides the owner with the epithet, “one who traversed the deserts of the Medjay to search for cattle for his god, being a tribute on male-cattle” (Vernus  1986:141–44). The text alludes to all the hallmarks of pastoral nomadism: desert, animals, and possibly trade. Medjay pastoral nomads probably also supplied the Egyptian palace with luxury products for the festival of Montu during the 13th Dynasty. Papyrus Boulaq 18 records an extended family of Medjay coming to the palace; one person is even associated with Awshaq, a subdivision of Medja-land. The Medjay are listed among other artisans and specialized functionaries supplying products for the festival, and they received payments for their goods (Liszka under review). This interaction demonstrates the level of dependency that the Egyptians also had on pastoral nomads to supply products from the Eastern Desert. At this time, Medjay seems to be a general word to refer to foreigners of the Eastern Desert, rather than a specific group. However, in official governmental records when Egyptians needed to be more precise, they would refer instead to subdivisions of area. For example, in an official tally of taxes acquired from part of these people, they used the term Webat-sepet to refer to a subdivision (Guo 1999:52). Similarly, in administrative records listing official enemies of the state of Egypt to be magically damned in execration rituals, the Egyptians referred to the Medjay subdivisions of Awshaq and Webat-sepet

Pan-Grave and Medjay   241 (Liszka 2011:152). Because of the pastoral nomadic nature of these peoples, it is possible that these subdivisions may refer to specific clans or extended families often in communication with one another. It further demonstrates that the Eastern Desert pastoral nomads were important to the Egyptian economy and administration too. At certain points in time and in certain social contexts, the groups depended on each other. The evidence connecting the Pan-Grave to the Eastern Desert as pastoral nomads is much more limited and the subject of much debate, but nevertheless provides compelling data to connect the Pan-Grave tradition, at least in part, to the Eastern Desert. This subject is particularly contested by scholars because limited survey and excavation has been published about the vast expanse of the Eastern Desert, leaving the evidence open to conjecture. Pastoral nomads traversing any desert landscape would only have left a small archaeological footprint, consisting mostly of hearths and tent posts, and most of their goods would have been carried in nets or animal-skin sacks (Cribb 1991:65–97). Therefore, the little surviving evidence from the desert is not unexpected. At present, the strongest archaeological connection between the Pan-Grave culture and the Eastern Desert is the Jebel Mokram group attested in the southern Atbai Desert and the Red Sea Coast in the area around Kassala (Sadr 1987:270–79; Manzo 2017:43–54). This connection is based largely on the almost identical handmade ceramic styles of both cultures, and the presence of Jebel Mokram pottery in short-lived occupational levels at Mahal Teglinos (Manzo et al. 2011:27–30) and Agordat (Brandt et al. 2008:33–47) may be examples of evidence related to Pan-Grave settlements missing from the Eastern Desert. Importantly, recent 14C tests have provided a date of ca. 1800 bce for evidence from Mahal Teglinos (Manzo 2017:43), demonstrating that the Jebel Mokram Group and the Pan-Grave culture were active at the same time in different regions. Both the Pan-Grave culture and the Jebel Mokram Group show a preference for small, open vessel forms (e.g., bowls and pots), which would have been lighter and easier to transport without the risk of breakage. There is also a near complete absence of closed vessel forms (e.g., storage vessels) for both cultures; only a handful of closed Pan-Grave vessels are known from sites in the Nile valley. Closed vessels from Pan-Grave cemeteries are almost invariably of Egyptian manufacture, and are all of an easily transportable size. This pattern fits well with their origins as pastoral nomads in the desert who would have used nets or animal skins for storage and who would have owned only select ceramics because of their itinerant nature (Cribb 1991:70–73). Despite the compelling similarities, it must be stressed that there is no other explicit material evidence (e.g. plaque beads, painted bucrania) to directly link the Pan-Grave tradition of the Nile Valley with sites like Jebel Mokram, other than pottery and chronology. According to anthropological theory, Pan-Grave pastoral nomads should have always been interacting with local sedentary populations and display some sort of contact at all times, not just during the Late Middle Kingdom and Second Intermediate Period when we see them in the archaeological record. To explain their sudden archaeological appearance in the Nile valley, Bietak and others hypothesized that a drought in the Eastern Desert at the end of the Middle Kingdom forced pastoral nomads to immigrate to sedentary societies in much larger numbers than before (Bietak  1966:71–73).

242   Kate Liszka and Aaron de Souza However, some of the smaller Pan-Grave cemeteries in the Nile valley—those showing little acculturation—pre-date the larger Pan-Grave cemeteries in Upper Egypt (Gatto 2014:24–25), and may support a trickle of Pan-Grave people entering Egypt over a longer period of time. Additionally, Nubian pottery has been found in late 12th–early 13th Dynasty contexts at Serra fortress that displays some characteristics of Pan-Grave wares, but yet is distinctly different (Williams in prep.). It is therefore possible that contact between Egyptians and desert-based people was taking place at the fortresses long before the supposed appearance of what we now call the Pan-Grave culture. Given the chronological and ceramic parallels, it is possible that the Jebel Mokram/ Pan-Grave population living in the Eastern Desert of northeastern Sudan migrated for reasons as yet unknown (Manzo 2017:52), with some groups moving toward the Nile, while others moved toward the Gash Delta area. The wide scatter along the Nile valley of Pan-Grave cemeteries showing earlier characteristics suggests that they entered the valley at multiple points around the same time, and not via at a single entry point such as the Wadi Allaqi (Bietak 1966:71). Then over the next few hundred years, the now segregated populations that had relocated in the Gash Delta and the Nile valley follow different developmental paths. The populations in the Nile valley, now recognized as the Pan-Grave tradition, follow different trajectories depending on their socio-cultural context and level of interaction with Egyptian communities, only “disappearing” from the archaeological record in Egypt at the dawn of the 18th Dynasty (de Souza 2019:143–50). In Lower Nubia, however, Pan-Grave traditions continue until Egypt reassumes control over that region, further into the early 18th Dynasty (de Souza 2019:148), after which their fate remains unclear. All the while, the populations that remained in the Eastern Desert continued on as the Jebel Mokram Group, until they, too, are no longer archaeologically visible. These varying developmental trajectories further support a mobile existence, by which different populations develop in different ways depending on the social and geographical environment in which they find themselves.

Medjay and Pan-Grave Living in Upper Nubia There is also some evidence that the Medjay and the Pan-Grave may not be exclusively associated with the Nile valley and the Atbai during the late Middle Kingdom and Second Intermediate Period. At the end of the Second Intermediate Period, Kush in Upper Nubia, centered on the city of Kerma, pulled together various Nubian peoples to raid northward into Egypt. The graffito of Sobeknakht II at Elkab explains that Kush’s attacking coalition included the “Islands of Khenthennefer, Punt, and the Medjay” (Davies 2003); here the Medjay are noted as a people rather than a place, like the other members of attacking forces. Egyptians recording this event identified these peoples as incorporating many soldiers fitting the Egyptian stereotype of Medjay. This text associates them with a much larger region south of Egypt,

Pan-Grave and Medjay   243 rather than the Eastern Desert. However, it still fits well with the model of pastoral nomads, who find employment with anyone hiring. During wars, sedentary countries often hire entire regiments of pastoral nomadic soldiers (Wink 2001:285–89). Kerma was also a large sedentary society probably incorporating these itinerant workers too. Like pastoral nomads worldwide, the Medjay did not maintain loyalties to a larger entity. It would be normal for some to fight on the side of the Kushites, while others fought on the side of the Egyptians, as we see in the Kamose Stela. The Kamose Stela not only celebrates the military prowess of their Bowmen of the Medjay fighting for the Egyptians, it explains their heroic deeds. Their unit was chosen to destroy the Setiu who had dwellings in the Eastern and Western Deserts, while the remainder of Kamose’s army stayed in the Nile valley (Simpson 2003:345–50). This choice demonstrates the Medjay’s skills travelling over desert lands like other pastoral nomadic groups. These possible connections between bearers of the Pan-Grave tradition and Kerma are also evident in the archaeological record. The graves and assemblages at El-Widay (Emberling and Williams  2010:23–36; Emberling et al.  2014:329–36) and Shemkhiya (Włodarska 2014:321–28) near the Fourth Cataract display complex combinations of characteristics from the Pan-Grave, Kerma, and other traditions that may be described as a local cultural variant resulting from networks of intercultural contact in the region (de Souza 2019:85–88). Emberling and Williams have proposed that the presence of this Pan-Grave–like pottery reflects links between the sedentary Kerma populations and nomadic desert groups. Although this is a very plausible possibility, it is important to recognize the striking similarities between the possible Pan-Grave pottery at the Fourth Cataract and that from late 17th Dynasty Pan-Grave contexts in Middle Egypt. Surprisingly, some of the closest parallels for this Pan-Grave–style pottery comes from the northernmost sites in Middle Egypt based on the vessel forms, surface treatments, and sharply defined black tops. This type of Pan-Grave pottery may be dated to the late 17th and early 18th Dynasties, which would fit well with the Kerma Moyen and Classique date assigned to these cemeteries. The vast distance between the Pan-Grave pottery in Middle Egypt and El-Widay, as well as the late date of the site, further support the idea that Pan-Grave peoples living in Egypt during the Second Intermediate Period relocated at the beginning of the Egyptian New Kingdom. This relocation, if indeed it actually happened, may have been strategic. If it is accepted that some Pan-Grave people were soldiers supporting Egyptian rulers in their battles against the Hyksos, then it may be the case that the same soldiers were taken south to reconquer Nubia after the Hyksos had been expelled (de Souza 2019:148–153).

Pan-Grave Skeletons One last contentious group of primary evidence exists that some scholars have used to connect the Pan-Grave with the Medjay circumstantially. Pan-Grave skeletons at Sayala were found to be more robust and larger than C-Group skeletons from the same place

244   Kate Liszka and Aaron de Souza (Ehgartner and Jungwirth 1966:83–88). Bietak used this information to argue that larger, more robust people would make excellent mercenaries, like the Medjay (although there is no evidence that the Medjay were physically larger than the Egyptians or other Nubians). Bietak’s argument makes the assumption that no other people than the PanGrave and the Medjay would have taken jobs as mercenaries, when that is not the case. During a time of war, all types of people fight as we saw in the tomb of Sobeknakht II. When Bietak’s physical anthropological team studied the thirteen Pan-Grave skeletons (eight well-preserved) and thirty-eight C-Group skeletons (fifteen well-preserved) in 1966, they first suggested that the Pan-Grave skeletons were a “Negrid race” similar to Kassala peoples on the other side of the Eastern Desert. This assumption was based on a visual comparison with the modern population and Bietak’s observation of similar pottery in this area. The tenuous connections became reified at that time and scholars assumed this was true for all other Pan-Grave skeletons across Egypt and Nubia. However, when the full study of the skeletons was released in 1984, the scientific tests demonstrated that these Pan-Grave skeletons were (1) of mixed “Paleoeuropid and Negrid” origin and (2) most related to the late Paleolithic people at Wadi Halfa (Strouhal and Jungwirth 1984:185–91). No other physical anthropological work has ever been conducted to demonstrate that Pan-Grave skeletons are more robust than others. Pan-Grave skeletons found at Hierakonpolis show stronger muscle connections in their legs that may be consistent with archery (Friedman 2001:37), but these physical attributes support changes to the body as a result of frequent activity, rather than a population that is innately larger, as Bietak had suggested. Ultimately, the sample size for the analysis of Pan-Grave human remains from Sayala and Hierakonpolis is too small to form any conclusions, and the available data should be approached with caution.

The Pan-Grave and the Medjay in Retrospect On the one hand, there do appear to be some connections between the Pan-Grave tradition and the Medjay. Both are thought to have begun as pastoral nomads that may have originated in the desert regions to the east of the Nile. Both appear to have had a close social connection with the Egyptians, which led to varying degrees of acculturation to Egyptian norms over time. On the other hand, there is as much, if not more evidence that the cultures should not be equated. The Medjay are attested in texts for far longer than the Pan-Grave tradition is attested archaeologically, there is no way to associate the Pan-Grave to the Medjay—as opposed to many other textually attested pastoral nomad groups—directly, and their overlapping histories show many more similarities in Upper Egypt and Lower Nubia than anywhere else. The equation between the two is more likely to be the product of scholarship that has been reified during the last century. It is possible

Pan-Grave and Medjay   245 that some Pan-Grave were Medjay and vice versa, but this is not true for all PanGrave or Medjay peoples. The issues raised throughout this chapter demonstrate that historiographical linking of texts and archaeology must be made with caution.

References Cited Arkell, A. 1961 A History of the Sudan: From the Earliest Times to 1821. Athlone. Aston, D. 2012 From the Deep South to the Far North: Nubian Sherds from Khatan’a and Ezbet Helmi (Tell el-Dab’a ). In Nubian Pottery from Egyptian Cultural Contexts of the Middle and Early New Kingdom, ed. I.  Forstner-Müller and P.  Rose, pp. 159–80. Ergänzungshefte zu den Jahresheften des Österreichischen Archäologischen Institutes 13. Ayers, N. and N. Moeller 2012 Nubian Pottery Traditions during the 2nd Millennium BC at Tell Edfu. In Nubian Pottery from Egyptian Cultural Contexts of the Middle and Early New Kingdom, ed. I.  Forstner-Müller and P.  Rose, pp. 103–16. Ergänzungshefte zu den Jahresheften des Österreichischen Archäologischen Institutes 13. Bangsgaard, P. 2013 Pan-Grave Faunal Practices: Ritual Deposits at Five Cemeteries in Lower Nubia. Anthropozoologica 48(2):287–97. Barguet, P. 1952 Quelques tombes du massif nord de la nécropole de Tôd. Bulletin de l’Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale 50:17–31. Barnard, H. 2009 The Archaeology of Pastoral Nomads between the Nile and the Red Sea. In Nomads, Tribes, and the State in the Ancient Near East: Cross-Disciplinary Perspectives, ed. J. Szuchman, pp. 15–42. Oriental Institute Seminars 5. Bietak, M. 1966 Ausgrabungen in Sayala-Nubien 1961–1965: Denkmäler der C-Gruppe und der Pan-Gräber-Kultur. Hermann Böhlaus. ——— 1968 Studien zur Chronologie der nubischen C-Gruppe: Ein Beitrag zur Frühgeschichte Unternubiens zwischen 2200 und 1550 vor Chr. Hermann Böhlaus. Bourriau, J. 1981 Nubians in Egypt during the Second Intermediate Period: An Interpretation Based on the Egyptian Ceramic Evidence. In Studien zur altägyptischen Keramik, ed. D. Arnold, pp. 25–42. Philipp von Zabern. ——— 1990 The Pottery. In Deir el-Ballas: Preliminary Report on the Deir el-Ballas Expedition, 1980–1986, ed. P. Lacovara, pp. 15–22. American Research Center in Egypt. Brandt, S.A., A.  Manzo, and C.  Perlingieri 2008 Linking the Highlands to the Lowlands: Implications of a Test Excavation at Kokan Rockshelter, Agordat, Eritrea. In The Archaeology of Ancient Eritrea, ed. P.R. Schmidt, M.C. Curtis, and Z. Teka, pp. 33–48. Red Sea Press. Brunton, G. 1930 Qau and Badari III. Bernard Quaritch. ——— 1937 Mostagedda and the Tasian Culture. Bernard Quaritch. Chun, K., P. Organista, and G. Marin eds. 2003 Acculturation: Advances in Theory, Measurement, and Applied Research. American Psychological Association. Cooper, J. and H.  Barnard. 2017 New Insights in the Inscription on a Painted Pan-Grave Bucranium from Grave 3252 at Cemetery 3100/3200 in Mostagedda (Middle Egypt). African Archaeological Review 34:363–76. Cribb, R. 1991 Nomads in Archaeology. Cambridge University Press. Davies, V. 2003 Sobeknakht of Elkab and the Coming of Kush. Egyptian Archaeology 23:3–6. de Souza, A. 2013 The Egyptianisation of the Pan-Grave Culture: A New Look at an Old Idea. Bulletin of the Australian Centre for Egyptology 24:109–26.

246   Kate Liszka and Aaron de Souza ——— 2016 Crossed Lines. An Analysis of the Pan-Grave Ceramic Tradition in Upper Egypt, Lower Nubia, and Beyond. Doctoral dissertation, Department of Ancient History, Macquarie University, Sydney. ——— 2019 New Horizons: The Pan-Grave Ceramic Tradition in Context. Middle Kingdom Studies 9. London: Golden House Publications. Ehgartner, W. and J.  Jungwirth 1966 Anthropologische Angaben über die Skelette der C-Gruppen- und Pan-Gräber aus dem Bezirk Sayala, Ägyptisch-Nubien. In Ausgrabungen in Sayala-Nubien 1961–1965: Denkmäler der C-Gruppe und der Pan-Gräber-Kultur, pp. 83–88: Hermann Böhlaus Nachf., 1966. Emberling, G. 1997 Ethnicity in Complex Societies: Archaeological Perspectives, Journal of Archaeological Research 5(4):295–344. Emberling, G. and B. Williams 2010 The Kingdom of Kush in the 4th Cataract: Archaeological Salvage of the Oriental Institute Nubian Expedition 2007 Season (part I). Preliminary Report on the Sites of Hosh el-Guruf and El-Widay. Gdańsk Archaeological Museum African Reports 7:7–38. Emberling, G., B. Williams, M. Ingvoldstad, and T.R. James 2014 Peripheral Vision: Identity at the Margins of the Early Kingdom of Kush. In The Fourth Cataract and Beyond: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference for Nubian Studies, ed. J.R. Anderson and D.A. Welsby, pp. 329–36. British Museum Publications on Egypt and Sudan 1. Peeters. Firth, C.M. 1912 The Archaeological Survey of Nubia: Report for 1908–1909. Government Press (Cairo). ——— 1915 The Archaeological Survey of Nubia: Report for 1909–1910. Government Press (Cairo). ——— 1927 The Archaeological Survey of Nubia: Report for 1910–1911. Government Press (Cairo). Forstner-Müller, I. and P. Rose eds. 2012 Nubian Pottery from Egyptian Cultural Contexts of the Middle and Early New Kingdom. Ergänzungshefte zu den Jahresheften des Österreichischen Archäologischen Institutes 13. Friedman, R. 2001 Nubians at Hierakonpolis: Excavations in the Nubian Cemeteries. Sudan & Nubia 5:29–38. Gardiner, A. 1947 Ancient Egyptian Onomastica. Oxford University Press. Gatto, M.C. 2014 Peripatetic Nomads along the Nile: Unfolding the Nubian Pan-Grave Culture of the Second Intermediate Period. Journal of Ancient Egyptian Interconnections 6(1):11–28. Gatto, M.C., C.  Gallorini, and S.  Roma. 2012 Pan-Grave Pottery from Nag el-Qarmila and Sheikh Mohamed Cemeteries in Gharb Aswan. In Nubian Pottery from Egyptian Cultural Contexts of the Middle Kingdom and Early New Kingdom, ed. I. Forstner-Müller and P. Rose, pp. 83–102. Ergänzungshefte zu den Jahresheften des Österreichischen Archäologischen Institutes 13. Grillo, K. 2012 The Materiality of Mobile Pastoralism: Ethnoarchaeological Perspectives from Samburu, Kenya. Doctoral dissertation, Department of Anthropology, Washington University in St. Louis. Guo, D. 1999 The Inscription of Amenemhet II from Memphis: Transliteration, Translation, and Commentary. Journal of Ancient Civilizations 14:45–66. Hafsaas, H. 2006 Cattle Pastoralists in a Multicultural Setting: The C-Group People in Lower Nubia 2500–1500 BCE. University of Bergen. Jacquet-Gordon, H. 2012 Karnak-Nord 10. Le trésor de Thoutmosis Ier. La céramique 1. Texte. Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale.

Pan-Grave and Medjay   247 Jones, S. 1997 The Archaeology of Ethnicity: Constructing Identities in the Past and Present. Routledge. Khazanov, A. 1994 Nomads and the Outside World. The University of Wisconsin Press. ——— 2001 Nomads in the History of the Sedentary World. In Nomads in the Sedentary World, ed. A. Khazanov and A. Wink, pp. 1–23. Curzon. Knudstad, J. 1966 Serra East and Dorginarti: A Preliminary Report on the 1963–64 Excavations of the University of Chicago Oriental Institute Sudan Expedition. Kush 14:165–86. Kraemer B. and K. Liszka 2016 Evidence for Administration of the Nubian Fortresses in the Late Middle Kingdom: The Semna Dispatches. Journal of Egyptian History 9:1–65. Leder,  S. and B.  Streck eds. 2005 Shifts and Drifts in Nomad-Sedentary Relations. Ludwig Reichert. Liszka, K. 2011 “We Have Come from the Well of Ibhet”: Ethnogenesis of the Medjay. Journal of Egyptian History 4(2):149–71. ——— 2015 Are the Bearers of the Pan-Grave Archaeological Culture Identical to the MedjayPeople in the Egyptian Textual Record? Journal of Ancient Egyptian Interconnections 7(2):42–60. ——— 2016 Evidence for Administration of the Nubian Fortresses in the Late Middle Kingdom: P. Ramesseum 18. Journal of Egyptian History 9:151–208. ——— 2018 Discerning Ancient Identity: The Case of Aashyet's Sarcophagus (JE 47267). Journal of Egyptian History 11:185–207. ——— in prep. From Pastoral Nomads to Policemen: The Evolution and Role of the Medjay in Ancient Egypt and Nubia, c. 2300 to 1250 BCE. Probleme der Ägyptologie. Brill. ——— under review Eight Medjay Walk into a Palace: Bureaucratic Categorization and Cultural Mistranslation of Peoples in Contact. In Challenging Assumptions: Critical Approaches to the Social History of Ancient Egypt, ed. K. Cooney, N. Ben-Marzouk, and D. Candelora. Manassa, C. 2012 Nubians in the Third Upper Egyptian Nome: A View from Moalla. In Nubian Pottery from Egyptian Cultural Contexts of the Middle and Early New Kingdom, ed. I.  Forstner-Müller and P.  Rose, pp. 117–28. Ergänzungshefte zu den Jahresheften des Österreichischen Archäologischen Institutes 13. Manzo, A. 2012 From the Sea to the Deserts and Back: New Research in Eastern Sudan. British Museum Studies in Ancient Egypt and Sudan 18:75–106. ——— 2017 Eastern Sudan in its Setting: The Archaeology of a Region far from the Nile Valley. Cambridge Monographs in African Archaeology 94. Archaeopress. Manzo, A., A. Coppa, A. Beldados Aleho, and V. Zoppi. 2011 Italian Archaeological Expedition to the Sudan of the University of Naples “L’Orientale”: 2010 Field Season. http://opar.unior. it/460/. Marée, M. 2014 Master of Secrets. Art Quarterly. Art Fund. Autumn: 84–85. Meurer, G. 1996 Nubier in Ägypten bis zum Beginn des Neuen Reiches: Zur Bedeutung der Stele Berlin 14,753. Abhandlungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts Kairo Ägyptologische Reihe 13. Achet Verlag. Petrie, W.M.F. 1901 Diospolis Parva: The Cemeteries of Abadiyeh and Hu 1898–9. The Egypt Exploration Fund. ——— 1907 Gizeh and Rifeh. British School of Archaeology in Egypt; Bernard Quaritch. Petrik, M. 2011 Foreign Groups at Lahun during the Late Middle Kingdom. In From Illahun to Djeme: Papers Presented in Honour of Ulrich Luft, ed. E. Bechtold, A. Gulyás, and A. Hasznos, pp. 211–26. BAR International Series 2311. Archaeopress.

248   Kate Liszka and Aaron de Souza Posener, G. 1958 nHsy.w et mDAy.w Zeitschrift für ägyptische Sprache und Altertumskunde 83:38–43. Raue, D. 2012 Medja vs. Kerma at the First Cataract: Terminological Problems. In Nubian Pottery from Egyptian Cultural Contexts of the Middle Kingdom and Early New Kingdom, ed. I.  Forstner-Müller and P.  Rose, pp. 49–58. Ergänzungshefte zu den Jahresheften des Österreichischen Archäologischen Institutes 13. ——— 2019 Nubien und Elephantine vom 4.–2. Jt. v. Chr. Sonderschrift des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts Abteilung Kairo. De Gruyter. Ryholt, K. 1997 The Political Situation in Egypt during the Second Intermediate Period c. 1800–1550 bc. CNI Publications 20. Museum Tusculanum Press. Sadr, K. 1987 The Territorial Expanse of the Pan-Grave Culture. In Archéologie du Nil Moyen 2:265–91. ——— 1990 The Medjay in Southern Atbai. Archéologie du Nil Moyen 4:63–87. Säve-Söderbergh, T. 1941 Ägypten und Nubien. Häkan Ohlssons Boktryckeri. ——— 1989 Middle Nubian Sites. The Scandinavian Joint Expedition to Sudanese Nubia 4 Bohuslaeningens. Schneider, T. 2003 Ausländer in Ägypten während des Mittleren Reiches und der Hyksoszeit, Teil 2: Die ausländische Bevölkerung. Ägypten und Altes Testament 43. Harrassowitz. ——— 2010 Foreigners in Egypt: Archaeological Evidence in Cultural Context. In Egyptian Archaeology, ed. W. Wendrich, pp. 143–63. Blackwell. Simpson, W. 2003 The Literature of Ancient Egypt. Yale University Press. Smith, S. T. 2003 Wretched Kush: Ethnic Identities and Boundaries in Egypt’s Nubian Empire. Routledge. Smither, P. 1945 The Semnah Despatches. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 31:3–10. Steindorff, G. 1935 Aniba 1. Mission archéologique de Nubie, 1929–1934. J.J. Augustin. Strouhal, E. and J.  Jungwirth 1984 Die anthropologische Untersuchung der C-Gruppen- und Pan-Gräber-Skelette aus Sayala, Ägyptisch-Nubien. Verlag der Osterreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. Takács, G. 2008 Etymological Dictionary of Egyptian. Brill. Vercoutter, J. 1970 Mirgissa I. Direction Générale des Relations Culturelles. Vernus, P. 1986 Études de philologie et de linguistique (V). Revue d’Égyptologie 37:139–47. Wainwright, G. 1920 Balabish. George Allen & Unwin. Wegner, J. 2007 The Mortuary Temple of Senwosret III at Abydos. The Peabody Museum of Natural History of Yale University. Weigall, A. 1907 A Report on the Antiquities of Lower Nubia (The First Cataract to the Sudan Frontier) and their Condition in 1906–7. Oxford University Press. Williams, B. 1983 Excavations between Abu Simbel and the Sudan Frontier, Part 5: C-Group, Pan Grave, and Kerma Remains at Adindan Cemeteries T, K, U, and J. University of Chicago Oriental Institute Nubian Expedition 5. ——— 1993 Excavations at Serra East, George R Hughes and James E. Knudstad, Directors, Parts 1–5: A-Group, C-Group, Pan-Grave, New Kingdom, and X-Group Remains from Cemeteries A–G and Rock Shelters. University of Chicago Oriental Institute Nubian Expedition 10. ——— in prep. Excavations at Serra East, George R Hughes and James E. Knudstad, Directors, Part 7: The Middle Kingdom Fortress, Second Intermediate Period, and New Kingdom Occupation Remains. University of Chicago Oriental Institute Nubian Expedition. Wink, A. 2001 Conclusion. In Nomads in the Sedentary World, ed. A. Khazanov and A. Wink, pp. 285–95. Curzon.

Pan-Grave and Medjay   249 Włodarska, M. 2014 Kerma Burials in the Fourth Cataract Region: Three Seasons of Excavations at Shemkhiya. In The Fourth Cataract and Beyond: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference for Nubian Studies, ed. J. R. Anderson and D. A. Welsby, pp. 321–28. British Museum Publications on Egypt and Sudan 1. Peeters. Zibelius, K. 1972 Afrikanische Orts- und Völkernamen in hieroglyphischen und hieratischen Texten. Beihefte zum Tübinger Atlas des Vorderen Orients B1. Ludwig Reichert. Zibelius-Chen, K. 1994 Die Kubanstele Ramses’ II. und die nubischen Goldregionen. In Hommages à Jean Leclant, ed. C. Berger, G. Clerc, and N. Grimal, v. 2, pp. 411–17. Bibliothèque d’Étude 106(2). Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale.

chapter 14

From H u n ters to Her ders The Libyan Desert in Prehistoric Times Friederike Jesse

Introduction The Libyan Desert is a huge area (about 1,500,000 km²) encompassing parts of presentday Egypt, Sudan, and Libya. Marked by rock thresholds and depressions and offering a large diversity of landscapes (Pachur and Altmann 2006), it constitutes the western hinterland of Nubia. Currently a hyper-arid area where only the groundwater-supported oases allow for permanent settlement, the Libyan Desert has seen considerable climatic change and accompanying cultural development (e.g., Kuper and Kröpelin 2006). A closer look at this “marginal” area is highly interesting because of its climatic history— including wetter episodes during the Holocene that are labeled “Green Sahara” in popular science—which allows us to study the interaction between human groups and their environment over time. It is also interesting for the nature and timing of the shift from a foraging to a producing way of life that occurred during the Holocene. Since domestication of animals occurred before agriculture (“cattle before crops”; Marshall and Hildebrand 2002), this area documents another pathway to a producing economy than that of the Middle East, for example. Northeast Africa is of special interest in this regard due to its proximity to the Levant from which sheep, goat, and different crops were introduced. The rather different ecological zones, especially the Nile valley and today’s desert areas east and west of it, evidence varying scenarios for the onset of food production. Finally, the Libyan Desert is not only Nubia’s hinterland but can be regarded as a core area that connects the Nile valley with the rest of North Africa. This necessitates the analysis of the relations with the surrounding regions. What kind of contacts exist and how do they change over time? What are the ways and methods of traversing this region? Is there reciprocal influence, especially between the Libyan Desert and the Nile valley?

252   Friederike Jesse The Nubian past can only be completely understood when taking into account also the desert regions west of the Nile (e.g., Friedman ed. 2002). The interplay between both regions, the Nile valley and the Libyan Desert, is influenced by the intermingling of climatic and cultural development in the Libyan Desert, the different economic adaptations over time, and changing networks of contact. These will be important points in the following outline of the cultural development in the Libyan Desert in today’s southern Egypt and northern Sudan. The term Western Desert will be used when referring to the Egyptian part, whereas the term South Libyan Desert describes the Sudanese part. Archaeological research on Nubia’s western hinterland began in the 1920s and 1930s (for an overview of the history of early research, see Hinkel  1979:11–21). Intensive research started in the 1970s with the onset of the Combined Prehistoric Expedition (CPE) in the Western Desert of Egypt (e.g., Wendorf and Schild eds. 1980, 2001) and the B.O.S.  project working between 1980 and 1993 in different regions between the Mediterranean coast and the Wadi Howar in Sudan (for an overview, see Kuper 1995). The latter’s work was continued from 1995 to 2007 within Cologne University’s Collaborative Research Centre ACACIA (e.g., Bubenzer et al. eds. 2007; for both projects see also the African Archaeology Archive Cologne (AAArC): http://arachne.dainst. org/project/afrarchcologne). Projects focusing on Wadi Sura in the Gilf Kebir (e.g., Kuper ed. 2013), Selima Oasis (Jesse et al. 2015), and Gala Abu Ahmed in lower Wadi Howar (e.g., Jesse 2013) added to the picture. Despite all this research, archaeological knowledge on the Libyan Desert is still a patchwork and large parts of the cultural puzzle are missing.

The Beginnings The Pleistocene in the Libyan Desert is marked by climatic oscillations between humid and arid periods of different intensity ending with a hyper-arid period starting around 40,000 years ago (Garcea ed. 2010). The earliest evidence for human presence dates back to Late Acheulean. Human occupation, attributed a minimum age of 350,000 bp, took place at Bir Tarfawi and Bir Sahara (Wendorf and Schild eds. 1980). Acheulean evidence was also found in Jebel Uweinat and Gilf Kebir (Clark 1992:29), in Selima Oasis, the Laqiya region, around Jebel Rahib, in the El-Qa’ab depression (Gamal Idris 1994), and at Abu Tabari (Lange 2005:17). Among the recorded finds, handaxes are most prominent (e.g., Gamal Idris 1994: pls. 11–16). Not much can be said about the layout or dating of these sites as either the assemblages were not in primary position (e.g., Bir Sahara, Bir Tarfawi) or not yet excavated (most sites in Sudan). Nothing can be said about the persons behind the archaeological evidence as no Pleistocene human remains have been found in the Libyan Desert so far. During the Middle Paleolithic, starting roughly 200,000 years ago, two major entities are important: Mousterian and Aterian (Wendorf and Schild  1992:43). The latter is roughly dated between 90,000 and 40,000 bp in the area (Kleindienst  2001:7;

From Hunters to Herders   253 Scerri 2013:114) and shares specific features with the Nubian Complex typical for the Middle Paleolithic of Northeast Africa (see Van Peer 1998). Both are characterized by techniques to produce tanged points and bifoliates and both have been associated with the Lupemban technocomplex of sub-Saharan Africa (Kleindienst  2001:8; Scerri 2013:116). Aterian is present in the Laqiya region, around Jebel Rahib (Gamal Idris 1994:158–62 and pls. 32–35) and in Gilf Kebir (site 80/37; Schön 1996:511). Middle Paleolithic artifacts also occur in the El-Qa’ab depression (Yahia Fadol Tahir and Ahmed Hamid Nassr 2015). Evidence mainly comes from surface collections that are difficult to date. “Holoporting”—collection and re-use of Middle Paleolithic pieces by the Holocene occupants (Aterian points were especially favored)—also bias the picture (Kleindienst 2001:9). The only stratified situation for Middle Paleolithic material so far was recorded at Burg et Tuyur 80/64 where in a small trench of about 1.5 m depth small handaxes as well as Levallois flakes and cores were excavated in layers underneath a Holocene occupation (Gamal Idris 1994:172). Large-scale excavation only took place in Bir Tarfawi and Bir Sahara East where the CPE evidenced Middle Paleolithic occupation datable between roughly 230,000 and 60,000 bp (Wendorf et al.  1993). The lithic industry can be included in the Nubian Complex (Van Peer 1998:118, fig. 1). Denticulated pieces, side-scrapers, and Mousterian points are most prominent among the tools. Bifoliate pieces and pedunculated tools only appear at the end of the occupational sequence. The sites are interpreted as campsites, workshop areas, and/or butchering sites and show a similar strategy of resource exploitation over a long time. Selective, perhaps seasonal, hunting of small gazelles and much more opportunistic meat procurement from other big game (either by hunting or by scavenging) can be inferred (Wendorf and Schild  1992; Wendorf et al.  1993; for Paleolithic occupation in the Nile valley, see Masojc, this volume, with references).

The Holocene Sequence After the long hyper-arid period at the end of the Pleistocene, global warming led to a humid period starting at around 9000 cal bce that defines the beginning of the Holocene, which completely changed the appearance of the whole area. Monsoonal rains coming from the south turned the Libyan Desert to an environment suitable for human settlement. Lakes, sometimes of great dimensions, existed, and the approximately 1,050 km course of Wadi Howar at the southern margin of the Libyan Desert has to be imagined as a chain of temporary lakes and water pools with partial fluvial action after rainfall. Savannah vegetation bordered the stretches of water and large mammals thrived (Neumann  1989; Kuper and Kröpelin  2006; Pachur and Altmann  2006; Jesse 2008:53). With the onset of increasing aridity from about 5300 bce onward, the Western Desert in Egypt no longer supported sedentary human occupation. The resulting population movement either to the south in areas still hospitable or toward the Nile

254   Friederike Jesse valley had a significant impact on the formation of complex societies along the Nile. The southward shift of desiccation allowed for longer settlement in the regions further south such as the Laqiya region or the Wadi Howar. In the latter, the actual conditions are established only about 3,000 years ago (e.g., Kuper and Kröpelin 2006). Not only climate, but also fundamental changes in lifestyle affected cultural development in the Holocene. In particular, the adoption of a producing way of life, which followed an independent trajectory in Africa with cattle before crops, contrary to what is known for the Middle East, for example (for the African way see, e.g., Marshall and Hildebrand 2002), and also the appearance of complex societies in the Nile valley. Given the problems of terminology when dealing with large areas, the broad terms Early, Middle, and Late Holocene will be used (cf. Kuper 2006) and, for further specification within these time slices, the regional chronologies. Of great importance is the advance of pastoralism (e.g., Jesse et al. 2013; Kuper and Riemer 2013) and generally the mobility of people, objects, and thoughts.

The Early Holocene (ca. 9000–7000 bce) It is still unknown exactly when and from where the first people reoccupied the Libyan Desert at the onset of the Holocene (Kuper and Riemer 2013:36–37; see also Kuper, J. in press). In the 9th millennium bce, settlement is attested in the Nabta-Kiseiba region and the Gilf Kebir (Table 14.1). In the area of Gilf Kebir, the earliest sites belong to the Gilf A phase (ca. 8500–6500 bce) and are characterized by an Epipaleolithic lithic industry that includes elongated triangles, backed points, and microliths, and an economy based on hunting and gathering (Gehlen et al. 2002:104–105; Linstädter ed. 2005:359–60). In the Nabta-Kiseiba area, however, the discovery of pottery sherds and bones of presumably domesticated cattle on the earliest Holocene occupation sites led to the proposal of a Neolithic cultural sequence there with El-Adam (ca. 8800–6500 bce) as the first phase (e.g. Close 1992; Wendorf and Schild, eds. 2001; Wendorf and Schild 2004). The debate whether the cattle bones really belong to domesticated animals is still open (e.g., Riemer 2007a:106–107). Whether the scarce pottery present at some sites can really be linked with the El-Adam unit also remains an open question, as this would date the pottery as among the oldest in the Sahara (Gatto 2011:83; for the question of early pottery see Jesse 2010). The early settlers were hunting gazelle and hare, collected wild plant food, and probably used pottery. The lithic tool kit is of Epipaleolithic character and consists mainly of straight backed and pointed bladelets, lunates, and large endscrapers (Wendorf and Schild eds. 2001:653; Close 1992:164–65, figs. 4–5). During the following El-Ghorab phase (ca. 7500–7200 bce) first huts appear, oval in shape and lined with slabs. Among the lithic artifacts, elongated scalene triangles with small short sides are distinctive. Via the lithics, both phases show contact with industries in the Nile valley, the El-Adam with the Arkinian close to the second cataract and El-Ghorab with the Elkabian of the Edfu region (Wendorf and Schild 2004:15).

From Hunters to Herders   255 Table 14.1  The Holocene Sequence in the Libyan Desert—Nubia’s Western Hinterland BC

Wadi Howar

Laqiya Region

Gilf Kebir

Nabta-Kiseiba

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000

GAA fortress* (c 1250–400 BCE) Handessi (2200–1100 BCE) Leiterband (4000–2200 BCE)

(Desert) A-Group (c 3800–3000 BCE)

3500 4000 4500 5000

Handessi (2400–1600 BCE) Wadi Shaw 82/52

Dotted Wavy Line/Laqiya (c 5200–4000 BCE)

5500 6000

Early Nubian (c 4700–4200 BCE)

C-Group (2300–1600 BCE) Gilf D (?) (3300–2700 BCE) Gilf C (4400–3500 BCE)

El-Baqar (c 5400–4700 BCE)

Dotted Wavy Line/Laqiya (5700–c 4700 BCE)

Gilf B (6500–4400 BCE)

Epipalaeolithic

Gilf A (8500–6500 BCE)

6500 7000 7500 8000

El-Ansam (c 4600–3200 BCE)

8500

El-Ghanam (6000–5500 BCE) Al Jerar (6600–6100 BCE) El-Nabta (7000–6600 BCE) El-Ghorab (c 7500–7200 BCE) El-Adam (8800–7800 BCE)

9000 9500 10 000 (Jesse and Keding 2007; Jesse 2013)

(Lange 2006a and 2006b)

(Linstädter 2007; Riemer et al. 2017)

(Wendorf and Schild eds. 2001; Gatto 2011)

* GAA - Gala Abu Ahmed

Further south, Epipaleolithic evidence is sparse. There are a few sites in the Laqiya region (e.g., Wadi Shaw 83/105: arachne.dainst.org/entity/5406698, and a grave dated to the 8th millennium bce; Lange 2006a:107). There are also a few sites in Wadi Maghur west of Nukheila (Close 1992:160 and 162, fig. 2). The Wadi Howar region obviously was too moist during the Early Holocene, no traces of human occupation were found there so far (Jesse and Keding 2007; Kuper and Riemer 2013:37).

256   Friederike Jesse

The Middle Holocene (ca. 7000–3500 bce) The Early Middle Holocene (7th to 5th millennium bce) Human occupation became well established after 7000 bce (Table  14.1). The Libyan Desert is marked by two distinct traditions best represented in the lithic material: a northern bifacial complex and a southern microlithic complex featuring a flake industry. Tool tradition can best be seen in the production of arrowheads, which in the bifacial complex is characterized by bifacially retouched leaf-shaped and stemmed points and in the microlithic complex by transversal arrowheads, segments as well as stemmed and triangular points (Riemer et al. 2013:166). Elements of the bifacial complex have been found as far south as Selima Oasis (Jesse et al. 2015:168), the overlapping zone between both traditions extend for some hundred kilometers along the hypothetical boundary (Fig. 14.1) (Riemer et al. 2013:167–68; Riemer and Kindermann 2019). Linked with the microlithic complex is pottery of the Khartoum Horizon style which spreads over a large area including the south Libyan Desert, the Nubian Nile valley, and areas even further southeast in the Butana. The pottery is characterized by rocker stamping, different kinds of packed zigzag decorations, and as most prominent decorative pattern the Wavy Line, especially in its impressed form, the Dotted Wavy Line (Jesse 2002, 2003). Pottery is less frequent on sites in the Gilf Kebir or the Nabta-Kiseiba region than on sites further south in the Laqiya and Wadi Howar region (Riemer and Jesse 2006). At the end of the 7th and through the 6th millennium bce the rapid introduction of sheep and goats from the Middle East took place. This led to different pastoral expressions that for the Western Desert—where the appearance of a small number of domestic animals does not lead to significant changes in the traditional subsistence based on hunting and gathering—can best be grasped by the term “pastro-foragers” (Riemer 2007a; Kuper and Riemer 2013). The Nabta-Kiseiba area prospered due to the good climatic conditions of the Holocene Maximum. The settlers of the El-Nabta phase (ca. 7000–6600 bce) constructed “villages” with twenty or more brush or skin-covered huts, accompanied each by several large deep and often bell-shaped storage pits and large deep wells which allowed stays for long periods of the year. Intensive plant gathering is attested, among the edible plants wild sorghum was most frequent. Small game hunting and cattle byproducts supplemented the diet (Wendorf and Schild eds. 2001:658–62; Wendorf and Schild  2004:16). Among the lithics large retouched blades, burins, perforators, and backed pieces are present (Close 1992:169). Pottery was never abundant on the sites, but is more frequent during the following Al Jerar phase (ca. 6600–6100 bce) and can well be integrated from a stylistic point of view in the broad Khartoum Horizon style (Gatto 2002:73; Wendorf and Schild 2004:16). In the Al Jerar lithic industry, continuously retouched pieces are most numerous among retouched tools (Wendorf and Schild

From Hunters to Herders   257

Figure 14.1  The Libyan Desert in the 7th to 5th millennium bce. Working areas: 1 Gilf Kebir, 2 Jebel Kamil, 3 Jebel Uweinat, 4 Nabta-Kiseiba region, 5 Selima Oasis, 6 Laqiya region, 7 Erg Ennedi, 8 Wadi Howar. Base map: Heinrich-Barth-Institut; cartography: F. Jesse.

258   Friederike Jesse eds. 2001). Sites with archaeological material comparable to Al Jerar are widespread in the Western Desert (Wendorf and Schild eds. 2001:658) and found as far south as Selima Oasis (Jesse et al. 2015:167–68). With the El-Ghanam phase (ca. 6000–5500 bce), new elements such as faunal remains of sheep and goats and the first rare bifacial points appear. The pottery remains similar to that of the previous Al Jerar phase except for some changes in vessel shape and a gradual replacement of the rocker stamping by surface roughening (Wendorf and Schild 2004:17–18; for the pottery also Nelson 2002). Also in the Gilf Kebir and surroundings, the climax of prehistoric occupation can be seen. The Gilf B phase (6500–4400 bce) lithic production is characterized by a fine blade technology and a broad spectrum of tools with endscrapers made on relatively large blanks, microliths (segments, trapezes, triangles), borers, and splintered as well as edge-modified pieces (Gehlen et al. 2002:105; Linstädter ed. 2005). The mainly undecorated pottery fits within the Khartoum Horizon style (Gehlen et al. 2002:105; Riemer et al. 2017). Rock art is manifest in Gilf Kebir and Jebel Uweinat (Kuper ed. 2013; Riemer et al. 2017). During the 6th millennium bce, settlement increased in the south Libyan Desert (Table 14.1). Evidence for hunter-gatherer groups starts around 5700 bce in the Laqiya region (Jesse 2003:248–49; Lange 2006a:107) and a little later, around 5300 bce, in the Wadi Howar region (Hoelzmann et al. 2001; Jesse 2003; Jesse and Keding 2007). The large sites with a dense scatter of Khartoum Horizon style sherds, stone tools (among them microliths), grinding material, and bones indicate intensive long-term stays or repeated visits over a long period. It is to be supposed that these hunter-gatherer-fishers were of the delayed return type that means more complex hunter-gatherers with systems of storage, concepts of ownership, more permanently used sites, and evidence of social ranking and distinction, as well as resource specialization (Keding 2006). The characteristic Dotted Wavy Line sherds were often found together with Laqiya-type pottery, a regional pottery design style that is confined to the Laqiya and the Wadi Howar region (Jesse 2002, 2003; Lange 2006a). Even being largely contemporaneous, Laqiya-type pottery is to be considered as a later development within this early occupation phase. The available radiocarbon dates do not, however, allow for a clear dating of the appearance of the Laqiya type; only a tentative date of around 5000 bce can be given (Jesse 2002:93; Lange 2006a:107–109).

The Later Middle Holocene (5th to 4th millennium bce) New elements appear in the pottery of the Nabta-Kiseiba region during the El-Baqar (ca. 5400–4700 bce) and El-Ansam phases (ca. 4600–3200 bce): red wares with smoothed or polished surfaces, and later also rippled ones and black-topped vessels, appear around 5000 bce and indicate that surface treatment starts being used as decoration (Gatto  2011:85). Black-topped as well as red burnished wares are known from Dakhla and Djara (Riemer et al. 2013:169, fig. 9) but also in the Badarian and Tasian cul­ ture in Upper Egypt and the Nubian Nile valley. The use of shale-tempered wares points

From Hunters to Herders   259 to influences of the Egyptian Oases (Wendorf and Schild 2004:19–20; Gatto 2011:85). The economy of the El-Baqar and El-Ansam phase is a combination of foraging and pastoralism with mixed herds composed of cattle, sheep, and goats (Wendorf and Schild 2004:19). Ceremonial features were erected and used: stone-covered tumuli with animal burials, especially cows, and a so-called “calendar circle” made of upright stone slabs and interpreted as solar calendar, as well as megalithic alignments obviously related to star features (Wendorf and Schild eds. 2001; Schild and Wendorf 2012). At Jebel Ramlah, three cemeteries of the El-Ansam phase were excavated. Among the grave goods are not only personal adornments but also caliciform beakers (Kobusiewicz et al. 2010). Caliciform beakers are a widespread phenomenon in Northeast Africa and their frequent occurrence in funerary contexts might indicate a common body of ritual thought uniting the different cultural groups of the 5th and 4th millennium bce (Jesse 2006–2007). In the Gilf Kebir at around 4300 bce, the precipitation regime changed from a moderately arid summer-rain climate to a drier winter-rain climate, which induced a change in the vegetation cover and the appearance of exploitable grasslands on the plateau surfaces of Gilf Kebir (Kröpelin 2005). The phase Gilf C (4400–3500 bce) is characterized by thin-walled pottery decorated with incised lines or impressed patterns among them a herringbone motif. The lithic artifacts consist of large blanks and a limited tool spectrum where microliths (segments) are rare and large, edge-modified blanks as well as unmodified blanks with use retouch dominate. The introduction of domesticated animals, cattle, sheep and goat led to a pastoral nomadic use of the Gilf Kebir (Gehlen et al. 2002:107–108; Linstädter 2007:36). Rock art featuring prominently cattle is present in Gilf Kebir and Jebel Uweinat and indicate the importance of cattle not only for sub­ sist­ence (Kuper ed. 2013; Riemer et al. 2017). In the Laqiya region around 4700 bce a new pottery style appears, the Early Nubian Horizon (Table 14.1), which is characterized by mainly undecorated pottery with wellsmoothed and polished surfaces, sometimes with red coating and rippled surface. Similar pottery is known in the Abkan culture of the Nile valley and the Late Neolithic of the Nabta-Kiseiba region (Lange  2006a:109–10). In the Wadi Howar region further south, Dotted Wavy Line and Laqiya-type patterns still prevail and a foraging way of subsistence was still practiced when domestic livestock was already well established in the Nile valley (e.g., Jesse et al. 2013:73) and the first pastoralism was practiced in the Western Desert further north (Riemer 2007a; Riemer et al. 2013:174). We therefore have to account for the start of a profound shift in the interregional association networks, which becomes even more manifest during the following 4th millennium bce. The Laqiya region was then part of the settlement area of the A-Group as could be conclusively shown by the analysis of the pottery (Lange 2006b) (Fig. 14.2). The area was obviously used as pasturage during the rainy season or shortly after when sufficient grazing for cattle, sheep, and goats could be found in the depressions of Wadi Shaw, Wadi Sahal, and the Laqiya Valley. Transhumance cycles between the Nile valley and the Laqiya region therefore can be supposed (Lange 2006b:209, fig. 81). A-Group finds close to Bir Sahara indicate even larger areas of contact (Lange 2006a:113, 2006b, fig. 87).

260   Friederike Jesse

Figure 14.2 The Libyan Desert (Nubia’s western hinterland) in the 4th millennium bce. Working areas: 1 Gilf Kebir, 2 Jebel Uweinat, 3 Nabta-Kiseiba region, 4 Laqiya region, 5 Erg Ennedi, 6 Middle Wadi Howar, 7 Lower Wadi Howar (Abu Tabari region). Base map: Heinrich-Barth-Institut; cartography: F. Jesse.

From Hunters to Herders   261

Figure 14.3  Rock art at Zolat el-Hammad (Wadi Howar region). Photograph: F. Jesse 2001.

In the Wadi Howar region, completely different pottery design styles appear with the onset of the 4th millennium bce (Table  14.1, Fig.  14.2). Various Leiterband motifs become the most prominent decorative patterns and there is a marked change in the economic way of life: the people of the Leiterband Horizon were cattle-keepers (Keding 1997, 1998:9–10; Hoelzmann et al. 2001; Jesse and Keding 2007). The adoption of a food-producing way of life is sudden and complete, transitory inventories are not known and there is no evidence for a precedence of pastro-foraging comparable to areas further north. The first evidence for cattle in the Wadi Howar dates to around 4200 bce (Jesse et al. 2013:69). The question of the origin and introduction of this new way of life can only be answered tentatively at the moment. The Nile valley as a possible origin of the pastoral way of life comes to mind (Jesse et al. 2013:73). The earlier stages of the Leiterband horizon are indeed considered as a regional development out of the Shaheinab complex around Khartoum (Keding 1998:8–9). Typical for Leiterband sites are concentrations of potsherds and bones, which are the visible parts of pits. These concentrations can occur in very large numbers. On the Djabarona 84/13 site in middle Wadi Howar, over one thousand of these features have been recorded, making this site a unique one. These pits had different functions ranging from rubbish pits to ritual depositions with even intentionally buried cattle bones (Keding 1997; Jesse et al. 2013:75). The importance of cattle not only for subsistence but also for ideology is manifest in several aspects such as burying of cattle, pits with cattle bones, and rock art (Jesse et al. 2013) (Fig. 14.3). The situation in Wadi Howar is, however, complex, given the presence of Abkan-like pottery on sites in lower Wadi Howar around 4000 bce indicating north-south connections (Fig. 14.2). Around 3000 bce, Leiterband patterns appear on the sites which show

262   Friederike Jesse contact with middle Wadi Howar, but also incised herringbone patterns which find good parallels in the Nubian Nile valley (Jesse 2008). Regarding the distribution of lithic implements, especially the axes of Darfur type, different networks of change and exchange of gods become apparent: Darfur axes occur on sites in Wadi Howar, further west up to Mali but also on sites in the Laqiya region (e.g., Keding 1997:194–95).

The Late Holocene (Starting ca. 3500 bce) In the Western Desert, evidence for settlement is sparse during the 4th millennium bce. Due to increasing aridity, people migrated to the oases and the Nile valley where Predynastic and later the Dynastic period flourished (Table  14.1). In the Gilf Kebir, human activities are attested at few sites, probably even justifying the existence of a last occupation phase, Gilf D (ca. 3300–2700 bce; see e.g., Gehlen et al.  2002; Linstädter 2007). Typical for the sites is a high percentage of microliths, in particular asymmetrical transverse arrowheads, as well as many blades and long, narrow flakes among the blanks (Gehlen et al. 2002:107). However, people continued moving in the desert. There is a network of roads which were used to keep contact between the Nile valley, the oases, and areas further south and southwest. One indication of long-distance contacts are the so-called Clayton rings found in the Libyan Desert of Egypt but also northern Sudan (Riemer 2007b:25, fig. 8). The Clayton rings, conical tubes open at both ends always combined with pierced pottery disks, are still enigmatic regarding their function. At Bir Sahara, they could be dated via associated pottery to around 3000 bce (Riemer 2007b:22). Finds, for example in the vicinity of Dakhla Oasis, point to their use still in Old Kingdom times (Förster 2015:150). Given the large area of distribution, Clayton rings represent a network of contacts through the desert not necessarily, however, confined to a single group (Riemer 2007b; Riemer et al. 2013:176–77). In the Laqiya region, A-Group pottery tradition continues as evidenced at site Wadi Shaw 82/52 dated by radiocarbon to around 2500 bce. Fragments of a Maidum bowl found on the site indicate contact with the Nile valley during the Old Kingdom (Lange 2006b:473–76). Whereas the southern part of the Western Desert only shows sporadic use during the 3rd and 2nd millennium bce, areas further south still offered favorable ecological conditions for pastoral groups. In the Laqiya region and Wadi Howar, the Handessi Horizon (2400/2200–1100 cal bce) developed as part of a much wider northeast African technocomplex characterized by geometric patterns on the pottery (Jesse 2006a). Increasing aridity in the whole region also had, however, great impact on settlement patterns and the way of life. Settlement concentrated in favorable areas such as Wadi Shaw and Wadi

From Hunters to Herders   263 Sahal in the Laqiya region, Wadi Hariq, middle Wadi Howar, and Jebel Tageru (Jesse et al. 2004; Jesse 2006a). Sheep and goats, better adapted to a drier climate, were added to the herds but cattle were still important for food and thought. Two phases—Handessi A (2400/2200–1900 bce) and Handessi B (1700–1100 bce)—can be distinguished via the decorative patterns on the pottery. Handessi B, characterized by complex geometric pattern and the appearance of mat impression, is, however, not present in the Laqiya region, probably due to deteriorating ecological conditions starting there earlier on (Jesse 2006a) (Fig. 14.4). Strong similarities in pottery decoration link the Handessi sites with the C-Group and the Kerma culture of the Nubian Nile valley (Keding 1998:10–11; Jesse 2006a:1001, fig. 7). Donkeys, found at different sites of that period, indicate mobility. They were used in caravans, as described by Harkhuf, an Old Kingdom notable, in the account of his journeys beyond the borders of Egypt. Long-distance transhumance cycles can be supposed (Jesse 2006a) or cattle trade between the Handessi areas and the Nile valley with the Kerma culture and the C-Group (Riemer et al. 2013:181). The network of contact spread far. In Jebel Uweinat pottery decorated with patterns of the Handessi A phase give proof for an occupation of this mountainous region in the 2nd millennium bce (Linstädter  2007:36) and at Nabta Playa C-Group settlers are attested (Wendorf and Schild 2004:19). Economic interests made the Ancient Egyptians penetrate the desert as well. Evidence includes a rock inscription mentioning Pharaoh Mentuhotep, tribute of Yam (incense), and the so far unknown place Tekhebet(en) (desert animals) dating to the Middle Kingdom in Jebel Uweinat (see Riemer and Kuper 2013:58; Förster 2015:479–87). Further evidence includes the Abu Ballas trail, running from Dakhla Oasis southwest to Gilf Kebir and probably even beyond (Förster 2015) (Fig. 14.4). Some Egyptian sherds of New Kingdom date (18th–19th Dynasty) were found at site 82/77-1 in the Laqiya region (Lange 2006b:113). The Darb el Arba’in, the Forty Days’ Road, linking Middle Egypt with the Darfur region, probably started to be used in Pharaonic times. It was, however, not until the post-medieval period that it became the major route for camel caravans trading slaves and commodities such as ivory, ebony, salt, spices, and ostrich feathers (see, e.g., Riemer and Förster 2013:52–53). In Wadi Howar, Handessi settlement can be traced up to around 1100 bce (Jesse and Keding 2007). Then even there, climatic conditions became too arid for permanent use. Human presence is, however, sporadically accounted: stone settings in lower Wadi Howar, used as water troughs, indicate that this area was still a thoroughfare between the Nile valley and areas further to the west (Lange 2005; Jesse 2006b). The most impressive sign of human presence is the Gala Abu Ahmed fortress in lower Wadi Howar. This massive building with dry stone walls still up to 4 m high was occupied as could be shown by archaeological material (especially the small finds and the pottery) as well as radiocarbon dates between around 1250 and 400 bce. It served as a stronghold securing a water place and certainly also as a demonstration of power of the Kushite Empire in the Nile valley against the pastoral groups in the desert (Jesse 2006b, 2013).

264   Friederike Jesse

Figure 14.4  The Libyan Desert in the 3rd to 1st millennium bce. Working areas: 1 Laqiya region, 2 Wadi Hariq, 3 Erg Ennedi, 4 Middle Wadi Howar, 5 Gala Abu Ahmed fortress. Base map: Heinrich-Barth-Institut; cartography: F. Jesse.

From Hunters to Herders   265

Conclusion The western hinterland of Nubia has a long and eventful past with changing networks of contact and interaction over time. Broad cultural adaptations manifest in far-reaching techno-complexes or horizons (e.g., Dotted Wavy Line/Laqiya pottery, geometric patterns) alternate with periods of regionalization (Figs. 14.1, 14.2, 14.4). There are, however, always elements (e.g., caliciform beakers, axes of Darfur type, Clayton rings) following different mechanisms of distribution as they spread over areas with different cultural adaptations. Common ideas that cross group boundaries may be the explanation. The peculiarity of Northeast Africa, diversity of technologies (e.g., in the Aterian; see Kleindienst 2001) and adaptations (e.g., different expressions of the pastoral component, see Riemer  2007a) are manifest. The interaction between the desert areas and Nubia throughout history is, however, not yet fully captured, for Pleistocene times even less than for the Holocene. It is obvious that the Libyan Desert before drying up was an important area of settlement. There is strong evidence of contacts and exchange with the groups in the Nile valley and a cultural history which very much was influenced by the changing climate. Egypt and Nubia are seen as “gifts of the desert” (Friedman ed. 2002) and therefore the Libyan Desert should always be in mind when dealing with Nubia’s history. The Libyan Desert’s role as a bridge between the Nile valley and areas further west (e.g., the Ennedi and the Tibesti) and south (e.g., Kordofan) is only little understood so far due to a lack of data from the respective areas. Nowadays the Libyan Desert is a hyper-arid area where only the oases allow for permanent settlement. In its southern part Kababish nomads still use the Wadi Howar as pasturage for their camels. The Libyan Desert is still crossed by trade and traffic as well as some tourist groups. Large irrigation projects in southern Egypt and the gold rush in northern Sudan both endanger this cultural heritage.

References Cited Bubenzer, O., A. Bolten, and F. Darius eds. 2007 Atlas of Cultural and Environmental Change in Arid Africa. Africa Praehistorica 21. Heinrich-Barth-Institut. Clark, J.D. 1992 The Earlier Stone Age/Lower Palaeolithic in North Africa and the Sahara. In New Light on the Northeast African Past, ed. F.  Klees and R.  Kuper, pp. 17–37. Africa Praehistorica 5. Heinrich-Barth-Institut. Close, A.E. 1992 Holocene Occupation of the Eastern Sahara. In New Light on the Northeast African Past, ed. F.  Klees and R.  Kuper, pp. 155–83. Africa Praehistorica 5. Heinrich-Barth-Institut. Förster, F. 2015 Der Abu Ballas-Weg. Eine pharaonische Karawanenroute durch die Libysche Wüste. Africa Praehistorica 28. Heinrich-Barth-Institut. Friedman, R. ed. 2002 Egypt and Nubia: Gifts of the Desert. British Museum. Gamal Idris 1994 Die Altsteinzeit im Sudan. Archäologische Berichte 4. Holos.

266   Friederike Jesse Garcea, E.A.A., ed. 2010 South-Eastern Mediterranean Peoples between 130,000 and 10,000 Years Ago. Oxbow. Gatto, M.C. 2002 Early Neolithic Pottery of the Nabta-Kiseiba Area: Stylistic Attributes and Regional Relationships. In Holocene Settlement of the Egyptian Sahara, v. 2: The Pottery of Nabta Playa, ed. K. Nelson, pp. 65–78. Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers. ——— 2011 The Relative Chronology of Nubia. Archéo-Nil 21:81–100. Gehlen, B., K. Kindermann, J. Linstädter, and H. Riemer 2002 The Holocene Occupation of the Eastern Sahara: Regional Chronologies and Supra-regional Developments in Four Areas of the Absolute Desert. In Tides of the Desert—Gezeiten der Wüste: Contributions to the Archaeology and Environmental History of Africa in Honour of Rudolph Kuper, ed. Jennerstrasse 8, pp. 85–116. Africa Praehistorica 14. Heinrich-Barth-Institut. Hinkel, F.W. 1979 The Archaeological Map of the Sudan, v. 2: The Area of the South Libyan Desert. Akademie Verlag. Hoelzmann, P., B. Keding, H. Berke, S. Kröpelin, and H.-J. Kruse 2001 Environmental Change and Archaeology: Lake Evolution and Human Occupation in the Eastern Sahara during the Holocene. Palaeogeography Palaeoclimatology Palaeoecology 169:193–217. Jesse, F. 2002 Wavy Line Ceramics: Evidence from Northeastern Africa. In Holocene Settlement of the Egyptian Sahara, v. 2: The Pottery of Nabta Playa, ed. K. Nelson, pp. 79–96. Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers. ——— 2003 Rahib 80/87. Ein Wavy-Line-Fundplatz im Wadi Howar und die früheste Keramik in Nordafrika. Africa Praehistorica 16. Heinrich-Barth-Institut. ——— 2006a Pastoral Groups in the Southern Libyan Desert: The Handessi Horizon (c. 2400–1100 BC). In Archaeology of Early Northeastern Africa in Memory of Lech Krzyżaniak, ed. K. Kroeper, M. Chłodnicki, and M. Kobusiewicz, pp. 987–1004. Poznań Archaeological Museum. ——— 2006b Cattle, Sherds and Mighty Walls—The Wadi Howar from Neolithic to Kushite times. Sudan & Nubia 10:43–54. ——— 2006–2007 Un nouvel aspect du Néolithique au Wadi Howar (Nord du Soudan)—des vases caliciformes. In Mélanges offerts à Francis Geus, ed. B. Gratien, pp. 187–96. Cahier de Recherches de l’Institut de Papyrologie et d’Égyptologie de Lille 26. ——— 2008 Time of Experimentation? The 4th and 3rd Millennia BC in Lower Wadi Howar, Northwestern Sudan. In Between the Cataracts: Proceedings of the 11th Conference for Nubian Studies, ed. W. Godlewski and A. Łajtar, Part 1, pp. 49–74. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean Supplement Series 2.1. Warsaw University. ——— 2010 Early Pottery in Northern Africa—An Overview. Journal of African Archaeology 8:219–38. ——— 2013 Far from the Nile—The Gala Abu Ahmed Fortress in Lower Wadi Howar (Northern Sudan). In The Power of Walls—Fortifications in Ancient Northeastern Africa, ed. F. Jesse and C. Vogel, pp. 321–52. Colloquium Africanum 5. Heinrich-Barth-Institut. Jesse, F., C. Gradel, and F. Derrien 2015 Archaeology at Selima Oasis, Northern Sudan—Recent Research. Sudan & Nubia 19:161–69. Jesse, F. and B.  Keding 2007 Holocene Settlement Dynamics in the Wadi Howar Region (Northern Sudan) and the Ennedi Mountains (Chad). In Atlas of Cultural and Environmental Change in Arid Africa, ed. O.  Bubenzer, A.  Bolten, and F.  Darius, pp. 42–43. Africa Praehistorica 21. Heinrich-Barth-Institut. Jesse, F., B.  Keding, T.  Lenssen-Erz, and N.  Pöllath 2013 “I Hope Your Cattle Are Well”: Archaeological Evidence for Early Cattle-centred Behaviour in the Eastern Sahara of Sudan

From Hunters to Herders   267 and Chad. In Pastoralism in Africa: Past, Present and Future, ed. M. Bollig, M. Schnegg, and H.-P. Wotzka, pp. 66–103. Berghahn Books. Jesse, F., S. Kröpelin, M. Lange, N. Pöllath, and H. Berke 2004 On the Periphery of Kerma— The Handessi Horizon in Wadi Hariq, Northwestern Sudan. Journal of African Archaeology 2:123–64. Keding, B. 1997 Djabarona 84/13. Untersuchungen zur Besiedlungsgeschichte des Wadi Howar anhand der Keramik des 3. und 2. Jahrtausends v.Chr. Africa Praehistorica 9. Heinrich-Barth-Institut. ——— 1998 The Yellow Nile: New Data on Settlement and the Environment in the Sudanese Eastern Sahara. Sudan & Nubia 2:2–12. ——— 2006 Were the Hunter-Gatherers in the Eastern Sahara of the “Delayed Return” Type? An Archaeological Perspective from the Wadi Howar Region/Sudan. In Acta Nubica, ed. I. Caneva and A. Roccati, pp. 81–94. Istituto Poligrafice e Zecca dello Stato. Libreria dello Stato. Kleindienst, M. 2001 What is the Aterian? The View from Dakhleh Oasis and the Western Desert, Egypt. In The Oasis Papers, v. 1: The Proceedings of the First Conference of the Dakhleh Oasis Project, ed. C.A. Marlow and A.J. Mills, pp. 1–14. Oxbow. Kobusiewicz, M., J. Kabaciński, R. Schild, J.E. Irish, M.C. Gatto, and F. Wendorf 2010 Gebel Ramlah: Final Neolithic Cemeteries from the Western Desert of Egypt. Institute of Archaeology and Ethnology Polish Academy of Sciences, Poznań Branch. Kröpelin, S. 2005 The Geomorphological and Palaeoclimatic Framework of Prehistoric Occupation in the Wadi Bakht Area. In Wadi Bakht. Landschaftsarchäologie einer Siedlungskammer im Gilf Kebir, ed. J.  Lindstädter, pp. 51-65. Africa Praehistorica 18. Heinrich-Barth Institut. Kuper, J. in press The Epipalaeolithic Colonisation of the Eastern Sahara. Africa Praehistorica 32. Heinrich-Barth-Institut. Kuper, R. 1995 Prehistoric Research in the Southern Libyan Desert: A Brief Account and Some Conclusions of the B.O.S. Project. In Actes de la VIIIe Conférence Internationale des Études Nubiennes. Cahier de Recherches de l’Institut de Papyrologie et d’Égyptologie de Lille 17(1):123–40. ——— 2006 An Attempt at Structuring the Holocene Occupation of the Eastern Sahara. In Archaeology of Early Northeastern Africa in Memory of Lech Krzyżaniak, ed. K. Kroeper, M. Chłodnicki, and M. Kobusiewicz, pp. 261–72. Poznań Archaeological Museum. ——— ed. 2013 Wadi Sura: The Cave of the Beasts. A Rock Art Site in the Gilf Kebir (SW-Egypt). Africa Praehistorica 26. Heinrich-Barth-Institut. Kuper, R. and S.  Kröpelin 2006 Climate-Controlled Holocene Occupation in the Sahara: Motor of Africa’s Evolution. Science 313:803–807. Kuper, R. and H. Riemer 2013 Herders before Pastoralism: Prehistoric Prelude in the Eastern Sahara. In Pastoralism in Africa: Past, Present and Future, ed. M. Bollig, M. Schnegg, and H.-P. Wotzka, pp. 31–65. Berghahn Books. Lange, M. 2005 More Archaeological Work in Lower Wadi Howar (Northern Sudan): A Preliminary Report on the 2003 Field Season. Nyame Akuma 63:15–19. ——— 2006a The Archaeology of the Laqiya Region (NW-Sudan): Ceramics, Chronology and Cultures. In Acta Nubica, ed. I.  Caneva and A.  Roccati, pp. 107–15. Istituto Poligrafice e Zecca dello Stato. Libreria dello Stato. ——— 2006b Wadi Shaw—Wadi Sahal. Studien zur holozänen Besiedlung der Laqiya-Region (Nordsudan). Africa Praehistorica 19. Heinrich-Barth-Institut.

268   Friederike Jesse Linstädter, J. 2007 Rocky Islands within Oceans of Sand—Archaeology of the Jebel Ouenat/ Gilf Kebir Region, Eastern Sahara. In Atlas of Cultural and Environmental Change in Arid Africa, ed. O.  Bubenzer, A.  Bolten, and F.  Darius, pp. 34–37. Africa Praehistorica 21. Heinrich-Barth-Institut. ——— ed. 2005 Wadi Bakht. Africa Praehistorica 18. Heinrich-Barth-Institut. Nelson, K. 2002 Ceramic Types of the Nabta-Kiseiba Area. In Holocene Settlement of the Egyptian Sahara, v. 2: The Pottery of Nabta Playa, ed. K. Nelson, pp. 9–19. Kluwer Academic/ Plenum. Marshall, F. and E. Hildebrand 2002 Cattle before Crops: The Beginnings of Food Production in Africa. Journal of World Prehistory 16:99–143. Neumann, K. 1989 Zur Vegetationsgeschichte der Ostsahara im Holozän. Holzkohlen aus prähistorischen Fundstellen. In Forschungen zur Umweltgeschichte der Ostsahara, ed. R. Kuper, pp. 13–181. Africa Praehistorica 2. Heinrich-Barth-Institut. Pachur, H.-J. and N.  Altmann 2006 Die Ostsahara im Spätquartär. Ökosystemwandel im größten hyperariden Raum der Erde. Springer. Riemer, H. 2007a When Hunters Started Herding: Pastro-foragers and the Complexity of Holocene Economic Change in the Western Desert of Egypt. In Aridity, Change and Conflict in Africa, ed. M.  Bollig, O.  Bubenzer, R.  Vogelsang, and H.-P.  Wotzka, pp. 105–44. Colloquium Africanum 2. Heinrich-Barth-Institut. ——— 2007b Clayton Rings et empilements de pierres: les premiers voyages en milieu désertique dans le Sahara oriental. In Pharaons noirs. Sur la piste des quarante jours, pp. 21–27. Musée Royal de Mariemont. Riemer, H. and F. Förster 2013 Ancient Desert Roads: Towards Establishing a New Field of Archaeological Research. In Desert Road Archaeology in Ancient Egypt and Beyond, ed. F. Förster and H. Riemer, pp. 19–58. Africa Praehistorica 27. Heinrich-Barth-Institut. Riemer, H. and F.  Jesse 2006 When Decoration Made its Way: The Northern Extent of Khartoum-style Pottery in the Eastern Sahara. In Acta Nubica, ed. I. Caneva and A. Roccati, pp. 63–72. Istituto Poligrafice e Zecca dello Stato. Libreria dello Stato. Riemer, H. and K. Kindermann 2019 Eastern Saharan Prehistory during the 9th to 5th Millennium BC: The View from the “Libyan Desert”. In Handbook of Ancient Nubia, ed. D. Raue, pp. 195–216. De Gruyter. Riemer, H., M. Lange, and K. Kindermann 2013 When the Desert Dried Up: Late Prehistoric Cultures and Contacts in Egypt and Northern Sudan. In The First Cataract of the Nile: One Region—Diverse Perspectives, ed. D.  Raue, S.  Seidlmayer, and P.  Speiser, pp. 157–83. Sonderschriften des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts Kairo 36. De Gruyter. Riemer, H., S. Kröpelin, and A. Zboray 2017 Climate, Styles and Archaeology: An Integral Approach towards an Absolute Chronology of the Rock Art in the Libyan Desert (Eastern Sahara). Antiquity 91:7–23. Scerri, E.M.L. 2013 The Aterian and its Place in the North African Middle Stone Age. Quaternary International 300:111–30. Schild, R. and F. Wendorf 2012 The New Age Reuse of Nabta Playa’s Neolithic Sanctuary. In Prehistory of Northeastern Africa: New Ideas and Discoveries, ed. J.  Kabaciński, M. Chłodnicki, and M. Kobusiewicz, pp. 421–39. Studies in African Archaeology 11. Poznań Archaeological Museum. Schön, W. 1996 Ausgrabungen im Wadi el Akhdar, Gilf Kebir. Africa Praehistorica 8. Heinrich-Barth-Institut.

From Hunters to Herders   269 Van Peer, P. 1998 The Nile Corridor and the Out-of-Africa Model. Current Anthropology 39 (Supplement):115–40. Wendorf, F. and R. Schild 1992 The Middle Paleolithic of North Africa: A Status Report. In New Light on the Northeast African Past, ed. F.  Klees and R.  Kuper, pp. 39–78. Africa Praehistorica 5. Heinrich-Barth-Institut. ——— 2004 The Western Desert during the 5th and 4th millennia bce: The Late and Final Neolithic in the Nabta-Kiseiba Area. Archéo-Nil 14:13–30. Wendorf, F. and R. Schild eds. 1980 The Prehistory of the Eastern Sahara. Academic. ——— 2001 Holocene Settlement of the Egyptian Sahara, v. 1: The Archaeology of Nabta Playa. Kluwer Academic/Plenum. Wendorf, F., R.  Schild, and A.E.  Close 1993 Egypt during the Last Interglacial: The Middle Paleolithic of Bir Tarfawi and Bir Sahara East. Plenum. Yahia Fadol Tahir and Ahmed Hamid Nassr 2015 Paleolithic Stone Tools of El-Ga’ab Depression: A Techno-Typological Study from the Surface Collection. Der Antike Sudan. Mitteilungen der Sudanarchäologischen Gesellschaft zu Berlin 26:95–107.

chapter 15

Egy pti a n Fortr e sse s a n d the Col on iz ation of L ow er N u bi a i n th e M iddle K i ngdom Laurel Bestock

Architecture, Economics, Warfare, and Ideology The kings of the Egyptian 12th Dynasty (ca. 1985–1773 bce) commissioned a string of massive mudbrick fortifications along the Nile in Lower Nubia that served to control movements of people and goods both along the river and in the adjacent deserts. This territory, south of the traditional border of Egypt at the First Cataract at Aswan, was likely important to Egypt at this time for a wide variety of reasons, and the fortresses are best approached with a multi-perspective view that considers their practical and ideological significances with reference to demographic and historical shifts. The geographic region controlled by the fortresses is notable for its cataracts, not only the Second Cataract proper, but also unnumbered rapids such as the Dal Cataract and the Batn el-Hajar (Belly of Rocks)—areas of rapids that would have been impassable by boat except during the inundation, and were thus well suited to control. In addition to considering the original purposes of their foundation, understanding the relevance of the fortresses requires addressing differences between them, how they changed and were used during the centuries of their occupation, and their relation to the landscape and peoples around them.1

272   Laurel Bestock

The State of Research Most of the fortresses were excavated during the Aswan Dam salvage of the 1960s as the territory they occupied is more or less precisely congruent with the area flooded by the dam. Early in this millennium it was discovered that two of the fortresses remain above water, and recent work on them and in the desert is once more expanding the data available to interpret Middle Kingdom control of Nubia (Fig. 15.1) (Welsby 2004; Knoblauch et al. 2013; Harrell and Mittelstaedt 2015). Sources for our knowledge of the fortresses in Lower Nubia are their archaeological remains; archaeological remains in their vicinity, including settlements, signal posts, a long wall running on the west bank of the river between fortresses, cemeteries both Egyptian and indigenous, and a slipway for dragging boats overland around a rough stretch of river; archaeological remains in the deserts, including other fortifications and mines; and texts. Inscribed objects such as seal impressions and ration dockets from the fortresses, as well as letters known from Thebes, help illuminate fortress activities and administration, and monumental royal inscriptions contribute another viewpoint.

Figure 15.1  Uronarti fortress, recently discovered to be above water. The image is from the north and shows the largely denuded remains of the thick exterior walls as well as the betterpreserved interior buildings of this southern fortress. Kite aerial photograph: Kathryn Howley and Laurel Bestock.

Egyptian Fortresses and the Colonization   273

Purposes of the Fortresses The fortresses are neither homogeneous nor simple, and the reasons behind their construction appear to have been multiple. Economic motives for controlling this area included trade in various goods with people to the south. Gold was another factor; the gold-rich quartz seams of the Nubian Eastern Desert are mined even today.2 While Egyptian access to these resources in the Old Kingdom had not required serious fortification in Nubia, both the nature of the Egyptian state and local and regional demographics had changed by the Middle Kingdom. Military objectives may have been both local and long-distance and may have shifted over the course of the fortresses’ construction. There were contemporary indigenous populations in Lower Nubia, predominantly the sedentary so-called C-Group (Hafsaas, this volume), but also people of the PanGrave culture (Schneider 2003). The C-Group left extensive remains of both settlements and cemeteries, with a higher concentration in the north, where there was more floodplain available for agriculture; C-Group ceramics are also commonly found among the assemblages at the fortresses. It has been suggested that a combination of local leaders and Egyptian refugees from the civil wars of the early Middle Kingdom posed a direct threat that was a factor in the early 12th Dynasty expansion to the south (Williams 2013). Furthermore, the C-Group is increasingly understood to have had cultural affinities to Kerma—a wealthy, stratified, and growing power to the south (see chapters by Bonnet and by Bonnet and Honegger, this volume). That Kerma was already a major power is increasingly clear. Egyptian military campaigns to the south are well-attested, and an intended military function of the later group of fortresses in particular was likely to protect Egyptian interests in the face of Kerman growth as well as to serve as bases for campaigns (Vogel 2013). In addition to economic and military functions, the fortresses can be examined from the perspective of royal ideology and the bureaucratic Egyptian state on the basis of monumental royal inscriptions, the size of the fortresses themselves, and comparison of the often-programmatic gridded nature of their interior appointments with other royally founded settlements of the Middle Kingdom.

Chronology The foundation and primary use of the fortresses belong to the 12th Dynasty, when garrisoning forces presumably were sent there on regular rotations from Egypt. In the 13th Dynasty, the rotation of troops may have declined; an increase in Egyptian burials in fortress cemeteries, including women and children, can be read as evidence that soldiers and their families became more permanent occupants there at this time. Egypt lost control of Lower Nubia in the Second Intermediate Period, but the process was complex and not all forts were abandoned; for instance, two classically Egyptian private stelae of this period from Buhen say that their owners served the Kerman king of

274   Laurel Bestock Kush (Säve-Söderbergh 1949). What little evidence we have of military attacks on the forts probably dates to their reconquest by Egypt at the beginning of the New Kingdom. The militant and expansionist New Kingdom pharaohs established new centers farther up the Nile, but the Middle Kingdom forts were not entirely forgotten. Some were continually occupied and remodeled, and even those that were largely abandoned often were given stone temples carved in fine relief by the Thutmosid kings. There were at least two major phases of fortress construction in the 12th Dynasty. The northern fortresses, many with caravansary-like plans with inner and outer forts, seem to have been mostly founded in the reign of Senusret I. In Buhen’s case, he initiated construction at a site that had already seen an Egyptian occupation in the Old Kingdom (O’Connor 2014). The southern fortresses, on outcrops that guarded the river at strategic narrows, appear to have been largely built by Senusret III, three generations later. He is usually credited with major renovations and expansions at most northern forts. The evidence for these dates is not always secure and arguments about specific chronology within the fortress system are often circular, but the basic notion of an expansion of the system in the later 12th Dynasty is probably correct. In addition to differences in layout, the fortresses often had different institutions, as shown through the numerous discovered seal impressions. Such specialization indicates that the fortresses were mutually dependent and functioned more as a system than as individual outposts. Furthermore, there is no cause to think that the regional chronological differences represent a hardfought, step-by-step pushing of a contested border further south. That the northern forts remained in use and were expanded when the southern ones were built emphasizes the sense of a fortified frontier zone. This was not a boundary, a line in the sand, but rather a deep zone controlled by a connected series of interdependent monuments that had notable differences in layout, individual histories, and separate relations to their natural and human environments. The following descriptions of each fort aim to highlight both some of their individual features and their places as components of a larger whole.

The Fortresses It is surprisingly difficult to draw up a precise list of the Middle Kingdom fortresses, in part because ancient lists (Gardiner 1916) and archaeological remains do not entirely match; because defining a “fortress” turns out not to be straightforward; and because of difficulties in dating some of the hastily excavated remains. This region was often a frontier and consequently saw different waves of fortification building, which can cause confusion. Two island fortresses once considered to be Middle Kingdom in origin, Dorginarti and Dabnarti, are unlikely to have been so (Ruby  1964:54; Heidorn  1991; B. Williams, Chapter 22, this volume). The fortified site of Areika, long considered to date to the Second Intermediate Period, has instead to be added to the list of Middle Kingdom sites (Wegner 1995).

Egyptian Fortresses and the Colonization   275

Figure 15.2  Map of the fortresses. One of the Eastern Desert fortresses has been omitted because of scale, but is located near the others. Map: Samuel Burns.

The Northern Nile Fortresses The northern Nile fortresses (Fig. 15.2), which covered a territory that stretched south to the upper reaches of the Second Cataract, are of two basic types. One is characterized by truly massive defensive walls defining regular rectangular plans, in most cases with exterior second rings of defense and extremely regularly planned interior buildings. Walls were of mudbrick, sometimes founded on constructions of undressed stone. One side of these fortresses ran parallel to the river, to which stairs descended; quays were found in some cases. These fortresses were large in area and situated on relatively flat plains, though the region in general is rocky and terracing was often required before construction could occur. Dry ditches often surrounded the fortification walls; these were part of the defensive apparatus. The second northern type, much less well known, is somewhat smaller, less regular in plan, and has thinner perimeter walls of either stone or brick that are not monumental defenses of the type seen at their larger cousins. Many

276   Laurel Bestock of the northern forts of both types had multiple construction phases, with most of the first type showing a major expansion usually attributed to the middle of the 12th Dynasty, when the fortress system as a whole was extended. South of Elephantine, the first Nile fortresses are two that pinch the river: Kubban and Ikkur. Kubban lay on the east bank at the mouth of the Wadi Allaqi, a valley that led to a particularly gold-rich area of the Eastern Desert. Both of Kuban’s major phases were rectangular mudbrick structures with regularly spaced bastions, strongly fortified gates, and an exterior dry ditch; the second phase wall was 6 m wide at its base, a massive construction consistent with many of the other fortresses (Emery and Kirwan 1935:26–69). The number of seal impressions recovered there was small, making its administrative functions unknown and perhaps originally minimal. Ikkur, almost directly across the Nile from Kubban and very similar to it, does not seem to have been mentioned in ancient lists of Nubian fortresses and might have been considered ancillary to Kubban. Ikkur had two concentric defensive lines built at different times but of the same-size bricks (Firth 1912:22–25). C-Group remains are relatively abundant in the vicinity of Ikkur and may have been one reason for its establishment; C-Group ceramics were also recovered in the excavation of the fortress itself. The site of Areika, excavated before the extensive work that led to a greater understanding of the fortress system and the C-Group, was recognized from the first to have both Egyptian and Nubian material culture, but was first dated later than the Middle Kingdom (Randall-MacIver and Woolley 1909). The site covered 2,800 m2 and lay in an area with numerous C-group settlements and cemeteries. Areika included a self-contained set of contiguous constructions, including residential buildings and an administrative structure, similar to other fortresses. It did not, however, have the complicated fortifications typical of other sites, only a relatively thin stone perimeter wall (Wegner 1995). That this was defensive is suggested by the presence of arrow loops and a single gate. Wegner has shown that the Egyptian ceramics and seal impressions at Areika belong to the early 12th Dynasty, while its last phases of occupation are purely C-Group. Aniba, the next fortress to the south, was likewise in an area of concentrated C-Group remains. It lay on the Nile’s east bank and exhibited a rectangular inner fortification composed of a thick wall, with bastions, a parapet, and a dry, plastered ditch as additional defensive features (Steindorff 1935–37). In this case the second phase of construction was the addition of the outer fort, datable by inscription to the reign of Senusret II. Next in line was Serra East, which was so heavily rebuilt in the New Kingdom that not much remains of the original Middle Kingdom architecture, though an inscribed doorjamb of Senusret III has been found, and dumps from that period included numerous seal impressions. Middle Kingdom ceramic kilns have also been uncovered within the fortification walls, and are important for our understanding of the potentially itinerant nature of production at the fortresses (Knudstad  1966:174–75; Reshetnikova and Williams 2016). The fortress appears to have been small and simple, and included the odd feature of a deep basin covering a substantial part of its interior. Originally interpreted as a harbor, it has more recently been identified as a pen for imprisoning captives

Egyptian Fortresses and the Colonization   277 (Williams 1999). Unusually among the northern forts, Serra may have been founded later in the 12th Dynasty, possibly when the southern forts were constructed. Faras demonstrates the blurry line between a fortified site and a monumental fortress. While badly eroded and scantily published, the basic structure of the walls is clear. Built of mudbrick, they were 3.3 m thick and enclosed an area of approximately 70 × 80 m (Griffith 1921:80–83). Only the northwest side had either salients or a second line of defense; the latter was very thin (only 55 cm), enclosed only a narrow tract, and was not well anchored to the main fort. The interior buildings, also largely brick, show none of the regularity known from most fortresses and include several round silos. Despite these differences from the more monumental forts, Faras undoubtedly belongs in an overview of the fortress system, as demonstrated by large quantities of characteristic Middle Kingdom bread molds; seal impressions from two pattern scarabs were also abundant here. Buhen lay on the west bank of the Nile, about 40 km south of Serra East; it was a masterpiece of military engineering and is often used as the type-site for the entire group (Emery et al. 1979). It had two rings of defenses, and the whole structure was an approximate rectangle that was oriented north-south and abutted the river on its east side. Both the inner and outer fortifications had multiple construction phases; what is described here is the latest major Middle Kingdom plan. The outer wall enclosed an area of approximately 450 × 150 m, while a massive gate in the western wall, practically a fort in its own right, covered an area of 30 × 47 m. The north, south, and west walls were strengthened with rectangular bastions. The dry ditch averaged 6 m wide and 3 m deep and was brilliantly whitewashed with gypsum plaster. The area between the inner and outer fortifications seems to have been largely left free of construction, but one residential area was excavated in the north. Buhen’s inner fortification was extremely regular: a rectangle measuring 138 × 150 m, with walls 5 m thick. It shared its eastern wall with the outer defenses along the river, and two quays protruded into the water. Each 5 m wide, the northernmost of these was hollow, allowing for the protection of the river stairs. Around the outside of the inner fortification on all sides but that next to the river ran a low wall with regular rounded bastions; this protected a walkway at the base of the wall, its abundant arrow loops allowing for excellent fire into and across the dry ditch. The scale of these walls deserves pause. Not only would they have presented exceptionally strong proof against attack, but they are also engineering marvels and would have required coordination of building materials and labor in an area where these things were not abundant. The walls were strengthened with layers of reed matting and wooden beams, possibly imported. But it is the bricks themselves that are the most impressive: the excavators calculated (with an assumption about the height of the walls that they thought conservative) that just the fortifications alone, not including interior buildings, would have required over thirteen million bricks. The bricks themselves averaged 37 × 18 × 12 cm (Emery et al. 1979:39–41). This is a spectacular amount of mud, which causes one to wonder whether the local floodplain could have provided it at all, or without irreparable damage to whatever agriculture and pasturing was locally practiced.

278   Laurel Bestock Buhen’s interior buildings are better known than those in most other fortresses, though understanding them is not straightforward both because the fortress was extensively reused in the New Kingdom and because of how the excavation was recorded. The inner fort’s entire area was covered with construction, perpendicularly arranged along streets that followed the terracing leveling the site. The gateway, massive though not on the scale of the outer gate, was centered on the west wall. It did not lead directly to a west-east running street but instead required anyone entering to turn. A street ran around the inside of the wall in most places; two west-east streets lined up with the quays. Official buildings covered the northern part of the inner fort, including what the excavators interpreted as the fortress headquarters and the commander’s residence; it had stairways to a second story and a large columned hall. The south seems to have been extensively taken up with buildings with small rooms, usually interpreted as barracks. Additional structures included storerooms and what was probably a temple; temples are usually difficult to identify in Middle Kingdom forts and do not seem to have been of primary importance. The rich artifactual record from Buhen includes some weapons, datable to the Middle Kingdom, and axe head molds. This is more substantial evidence of direct military function than is generally present at the fortresses. Large areas of Buhen’s fortifications were violently destroyed, often including evidence of conflagration. This was likely the result of a large attack; the most convincing explanation is that it was retaken by the Egyptian state at the start of the New Kingdom (S.T. Smith 1995:121–22). Kor lay on the west bank of the Nile, 4.5 km south of Buhen. Badly eroded and incompletely excavated, Kor had both inner and outer fortification walls and was rebuilt and expanded as is typical for northern forts. However, it was unusual in its construction and layout, does not appear on the fortress lists, and is usually considered to have been subsidiary to Buhen (H.S. Smith 1966). While the enclosed space within the inner walls was exceptionally large, measuring 615 × 140 m, the walls themselves were narrower, built of rough-hewn stone in mud mortar rather than brick, and lacking a ditch. Kor’s residential areas were found inside the inner fortification; no seal impressions were excavated here, which is again different from most forts. Despite its size, Kor’s closest parallels are the fortified settlements of Areika and those in the Eastern Desert (see below). Mirgissa, like Buhen, has loomed large not only physically but also in its place in our understanding of the fortress system. Located at the southern end of the Second Cataract, Mirgissa’s inner fortifications and appointments were similar to Buhen’s; its outer ring, in this case including a section along the river, was much closer, providing for less defended space immediately adjacent to the inner fort than at Buhen. However, additional features made Mirgissa substantially larger and show a diversity not found at other forts. For example, a partly fortified town of considerable size was located north of the main defensive structures and was apparently connected to them by a thick wall, which enclosed part of the plain. Covering some 16,000 m2, the northern town had a wall 1 m thick of unhewn stone blocks. Inside were found houses of both mudbrick and stone, as well as elaborate irrigated gardens. Also associated with the town were substan-

Egyptian Fortresses and the Colonization   279 tial numbers of ceramic kilns and associated clay mixing areas. This town was adjacent to a harbor, which supports the conclusion that Mirgissa was the principal trading depot within the fortress system, as indicated by inscriptions found elsewhere (see below). The site also contained major cemeteries, largely dated to the 13th Dynasty, which provide some of the strongest evidence for a shift in the permanence of garrisons then (Vercoutter 1970:16). Another extramural element was the slipway 2 km long built to drag ships around an impassable section of the river. This was constructed largely of mud, with regularly spaced timber beams serving as reinforcement below. It was lined with impressions from the hulls of dragged ships, and the hoof prints of animals show that their labor was employed in the process (Vercoutter 1970:204–14).

The Southern Fortresses South of Mirgissa, the fortresses had a somewhat different character. While their inner appointments were still perpendicularly laid out and recognizably Egyptian, their overall configurations were less regular. In most cases they conformed to the topography; they were located in notably rocky areas and were therefore oddly shaped, much smaller, and usually had no exterior ring or ditches. Some of them had long spur walls that did not circle any ground but ran along ridges abutting the enclosed spaces. They were also much more tightly clustered than the northern fortresses, with six forts in a space of about 30 km (see Fig. 15.2). This distribution certainly allowed for tighter control of the river and may be related to greater threats coming from the south in the later 12th Dynasty, when they were built. The northernmost of this group of fortresses was Askut, located on an island in the rocky area known as the Batn el-Hajar (Badawy 1964, 1966; S.T. Smith 1995). A concentration of C-Group remains was found nearby. Askut’s main walls were built much as the fortification walls found to the north, with courses of bricks interspersed with wooden beams and layers of matting. The walls were 6.8 m thick at base, founded on a sloped stone-built glacis, and had square buttresses. Most of the interior buildings were rectangular and aligned with one another, but the kite shape of the overall fortress plan necessitated triangular rooms in some cases. A large percentage of the plan was taken up by storerooms, with typically square granaries of the Middle Kingdom particularly evident; that these could have sustained a much larger population than might have lived inside the walls suggests that Askut might have fed expeditions or housed grain for trade (Kemp  1986:132–33). Numerous seal impressions from Askut attest to its ­various institutions. A basin outside the walls has also been interpreted as a settling basin for gold processing, a water-intensive process that would have been much better accomplished at the river than near mines (Badawy  1966:25; S.T.  Smith  1995:47). Occupational debris from Askut appears to form an unbroken sequence from the late 12th Dynasty to the early New Kingdom; while not without serious problems, the stratigraphic deposits from Askut are the best preserved and most helpful from any of the forts (S.T. Smith 1995; Knoblauch 2007).

280   Laurel Bestock Shalfak is situated on a rocky promontory overlooking the west bank of the Nile in yet another largely inaccessible area. Its plan is an irregular rectangle, with two projecting spur walls; the northern one measured 115 m long and protected the river stairs and a stone quay (Dunham 1967:129). The smallest of the fortresses, Shalfak is also one of the two that remain above water today. It has a granary near its major gateway, a single thicker-walled house analogous to the “commander’s house” at Buhen, and a small number of residential-style buildings interpreted as barracks. The other fortress that survives is Uronarti, built on the northern spur of an island about 5 km upriver from Shalfak (Dunham 1967; Knoblauch et al. 2013). A boundary stela of Senusret III gives his regnal year 16 as the construction date of the fortress. The fort is roughly triangular in shape, with a northern spur wall 250 m long and a shorter eastern one (Fig. 15.3). A fortified main gate at the southern end sits at the top of a steep slope. At Uronarti the granaries are in the north, the administrative buildings in the south, and the residential areas in between; a river staircase descends a treacherous path from the northeast and was partly covered as it approached the water. A study of deposition patterns of seal impressions from both Uronarti and Askut has shown that administrative practices largely conformed to the expectations raised by the architecture of the fortresses, with, for instance, institutional seals with counterseals found in abundance at Uronarti’s granaries and the southern administrative buildings. There were also deposits of seal impressions from within the “barracks”; these were private name or design seals, showing that individuals living in these spaces in the later phases of the fortress’s use also engaged in tracking goods, but in a slightly different way (Penacho 2015:211–14). Extensive remodeling of the interior buildings at Uronarti demonstrates how much the populations living in the fortresses adapted even their basic architecture over the course of their Middle Kingdom occupation; notably, most of the streets were built into, changing patterns of movement substantially (Knoblauch and Bestock 2017). At the southern end of the fortress system, Semna and Kumma opposed one another across the river at a very narrow and swift spot, with Semna South on a flat area on the west bank and 1 km south. Semna was a relatively large, L-shaped fort on a rocky promontory on the west bank; it had both an outer glacis and a ditch below the wall on its sides away from the river (Dunham and Janssen 1960:5–15). Excavated interior remains included a number of standard Middle Kingdom tripartite houses similar to the residential areas of other fortresses. No granaries were found at this fort. Kumma, on the east bank, was a smaller fortress that would have been enclosed on an island during the yearly inundation. Almost square in plan, it had an official building and granaries, with relatively little space taken up by residential appointments (Dunham and Janssen 1960:113–22). The cemeteries in the vicinity of Semna and Kumma included rock-cut tombs with Middle Kingdom objects and later Egyptian burials (Dunham and Janssen 1960:74). Semna South was the southernmost Egyptian construction of the Middle Kingdom. Its walls were unusually thick, at 12 m, and encompassed a space little more than 30 m to a side (Vercoutter 1966). Two foundation deposits, the only ones known from the fortresses, were found beneath the walls. Few remains were discovered within the fortress

100 m

barrack houses

200 m

treasury?

granary

300 m

400 m

Figure 15.3  Plan of Uronarti. Plan after AEGARON no. 0086, http://digital2.library.ucla.edu/dlcontent/aegaron/pdf/0086.pdf.

Uronarti Fortress

0m

N

67

barrack houses

administration building

Plan No. 0086

282   Laurel Bestock itself, but its rubbish pits suggest that it was not used after the late 12th Dynasty, unlike its immediate northern neighbors that were continually occupied well into the 13th Dynasty; this may have been due to siltation after unusually high Nile floods (Žabkar and Žabkar 1982:15).

Related Remains The Egyptian occupation of Nubia includes elements other than massive forts along the Nile, and these are probably underrepresented in the surviving material and in publication. They are in many cases difficult to interpret, but are also a focus of active current research. The following is not a comprehensive list, but will highlight some of the known additional defensive and non-defensive archaeological remains. Additional defensive features include both substantial constructions and what appear to be signaling stations. A large wall was built along the Nile’s western side in the southern part of the fortress system (inset, Fig. 15.2). Over 3 km of it survived until the flooding of the area, and it may have been longer originally. The wall was not directly attached to any of the individual fortresses, though its mudbrick construction (some 6 m thick) is similar to that of their outer walls (Mills 1967–68; Knoblauch et al. 2013:138). Whether manned or not, this wall would have presented a serious impediment to reaching the river from the west. An enduring question is the degree to which the fortresses were in visual communication with one another, and what other forms of intercommunication might have existed. The southern fortresses are close enough to one another that they might have been intervisible from the tops of their walls. Stone constructions on hills both near some of the fortresses and out in the desert might have provided mutually visible posts over longer distances; the problem is dating these constructions, which are of a very long-lived local type and not always associated with datable finds. One example is a line of stone huts on Gebel Sula in the Western Desert. While this outcrop is not close to any of the fortresses, it is visible from Mirgissa, 24 km to the east, and has a single relay visible from Semna far to the south. Ceramics found at Gebel Sula are pharaonic, demonstrating how, with just two relays, visual communication might have been maintained over the 35 km between northern Mirgissa and southern Semna (Dunham 1967:141). Other archaeological remains associated with the Egyptian occupation lie outside any fortified areas and are not notably defensive themselves. We have already seen this with regard to the harbor and slipway at Mirgissa, and the gold washing area at Askut. Two examples from Uronarti are additionally instructive. On the southern part of the island, in a depression between two hills, there was a nearly square, elaborate mudbrick structure usually referred to in scholarship as a “campaign palace” for Senusret III while

Egyptian Fortresses and the Colonization   283 he was at war, though this cannot be proved (Kemp  1986:135–36; Knoblauch et al. 2013:129–30). Whatever its use, it is remarkable that such a substantial and clearly important structure stood far from the protection of the fortification. The importance of extramural elements is also shown by a recently discovered collection of stone huts at Uronarti; over thirty have been located, some 250 m from the fortress, and archival photographs suggest that many more might have existed (Bestock and Knoblauch 2014). While this type of construction is not unknown in the area, it is more usually associated with the C-Group. In this case, all associated ceramics are Egyptian, and the site’s occupation seems to date to the earlier part of Uronarti’s use. Who lived here, outside the walls? Did the occupants of these huts build the fortress from an undefended position, or support it once it was up and running? While unanswered, these questions remind us that the fortress system did not stop at the fortress walls, that it enabled a more complex set of relationships than we are always able to see, and that neither architecture nor other material remains can be read as simple proxies for ethnic identity. In addition to the variety of sites in the Nile valley that worked in conjunction with the fortress system, contemporary installations in the desert may be regarded as related. Five fortresses are known from the wadis of the Eastern Desert near Elephantine, four of them quite recently discovered; all are dated to the Middle Kingdom on the basis of pottery (Harrell and Mittelstaedt 2015). The best known of the five is El-Hudi, which is adjacent to amethyst mines (Ahmed Fakhry 1952; Shaw and Jameson 1993). The desert forts are notably different from most of the Nile forts, with the fortified settlements of Kor and Areika the closest parallels. Their walls are built of undressed and unmortared stone and are thinner and shorter than those of the brick Nile forts, never reaching above about 2 m in height (Fig. 15.4). In most cases the walls have protruding bastions as well as arrow loops, but their defensive utility in this landscape has been questioned (Harrell and Mittelstaedt 2015:19). They cover large areas of up to 9,000 m2 and include interior buildings of which the ground-plans have been interpreted as both Egyptian (straight walls and right angles, such as standard three-room Middle Kingdom houses at El-Hisnein East) and C-Group (stone circles, though see above for the stone circles at Uronarti); ceramics of both cultures have been found in these installations. Most, if not all, of the desert forts are directly associated with gold mines, and in some cases with amethyst and possibly copper mines. The locations of the fortresses could not have supported populations independent of valley supplies. That there are both C-Group and Egyptian material remains suggests a complex population, but it is unlikely that anyone was there independent of the Egyptian state requiring it for the purpose of mining, possibly as forced labor (Harrell and Mittelstaedt 2015:20). While the desert forts are thus intimately tied to one of the functions of the Nile forts, they also remind us that no aspect of this picture, from architecture to cultural entanglement, was homogeneous across the fortress system.

284   Laurel Bestock

Figure 15.4  Dhimit South, one of the recently discovered Eastern Desert fortresses, viewed from the west. Photograph courtesy of James A. Harrell (The University of Toledo).

Texts A variety of textual material is also associated with the fortresses either physically or because it refers to fortress administration. Since the fortresses were part of the Middle Kingdom bureaucratic state, they were ordered by the kings, on whose behalf monumental texts were composed; and administered by literate officials, who kept records, received labeled goods, stamped containers, and inscribed graffiti including some that discuss their violent domination over Nubians (many of which are published and discussed in Žába 1974). A few of these texts are particularly helpful in illuminating the nuanced nature of the fortress system, though it must be remembered that the textual record is deeply skewed towards the elite and the Egyptian. Many or most occupants of the fortresses would have been illiterate, and indigenous languages were not written. Senusret III erected stelae at the southern fortresses, three of which are known, containing two texts commonly known as the Semna stelae. They discuss the nature and meaning of Egyptian control of this area, but should not be read as entirely straightforward accounts of pragmatic matters, since they are monumental royal documents. Both texts name Heh as a boundary; there is some disagreement about whether this refers specifically to Semna or to the whole region of the southern forts, but the disagreement

Egyptian Fortresses and the Colonization   285 itself probably reflects the fact that an ideological document was more precise in terminology than the actual situation on the ground in a border zone. The first of these texts appears legalistic and states that all Nubians coming by land or water, with herds or trade goods, shall not be allowed to cross unless they are coming to trade in Mirgissa, in which case they may proceed past Heh but not on their own ships. The second, preserved on copies from both Semna and Uronarti, is more blatantly ideological in nature. It speaks in strident terms about the cowardice of the Nubians and the physical strength of the king—who has violently subdued the Nubian populations—as well as the moral imperative of maintaining the border at Heh for future kings (Eyre 1990; Seidlmayer 2000; Loeben 2001). The names of the fortresses themselves often echo this ideological aspect of their existence: for instance, Askut is “Destroying the Nubians,” and Semna West is “Senusret III is Powerful” (Gardiner 1916). The so-called Semna Dispatches are texts of a very different type. Found at Thebes compiled into a single, now fragmentary, register, they consist of both letters sent to the southern fortresses from Egypt and more local letters between fortresses (Smither 1945; Kraemer and Liszka 2016). They record many of the daily concerns of the fortresses, including intensive surveillance patrols sent out to observe even small movements in the desert and control over people allowed to trade. They also allow us to more clearly understand the process of communication between the fortresses: the same dispatch sent from Elephantine by way of every fort, for example, probably took twenty-one days to travel the 350 km to Semna West (Kraemer and Liszka 2016:30). That both vigilance and the movement of people and goods were constant preoccupations of the fortress garrisons is evident in these letters. Taken together, the archaeological and textual evidence of Middle Kingdom Egyptian activities in Lower Nubia present a complex picture of military, economic, and ideological components—expansionist in inception, variously separate and entangled in continuance. Not only are all of these factors present and necessary for interpreting both the foundation and the longer functioning of the fortress system, but there is also no particular reason to consider them as rigidly separate. Gold, in a non-monetized world, was related as much to ideology as to economics. The need for physical control of the border zone, once pushed south, may have been created as well as served by the very construction of the fortresses. Once indigenous and Egyptian populations lived in the same places, modes of cultural and economic exchange developed in local, presumably even personal, ways; while some fortresses exhibit a near-total lack of interaction during the majority of the period of occupation, others, particularly in their cemeteries, show the occupying forces adopting Nubian customs (Knoblauch 2008). The Middle Kingdom fortresses of Lower Nubia were neither just Egyptian, nor just Nubian; they were neither just practical nodes of a military and economic bureaucracy, nor just ideological statements about the power of Egyptian kingship. Together, bricks and rhetoric reflected and enabled the nuanced dynamic of the southern Egyptian frontier nearly four thousand years ago.

286   Laurel Bestock

Notes 1. I am deeply grateful to my co-director on the Uronarti Regional Archaeology Project, Christian Knoblauch, without whom I would not be working on Nubian fortresses in the first place. Any mistakes here are mine, any good ideas shared with Christian. I am happy to thank Luiza Silva for help editing the manuscript. 2. The current gold rush is destructive of archaeological evidence in many cases (Harrell and Mittelstaedt 2015). Definitively dated Middle Kingdom gold mines in Nubia are surprisingly rare (Klemm and Klemm 2013:606), but this is probably not representative. Mines at Saras, near the Nile, were certainly in operation while the fortresses were used in the Middle Kingdom (Mills 1967–68:204–206).

References Cited Adams, W.Y. 1977 Nubia: Corridor to Africa. Princeton University Press. Ahmed Fakhry 1952 The Inscriptions of the Amethyst Quarries at Wadi el Hudi. Government Press (Cairo). Badawy, A. 1964 Preliminary Report on the Excavations by the University of California at Askut (First Season, October 1962–January 1963). Kush 12:47–53. ——— 1966 Archaeological Problems Relating to the Egyptian Fortress at Askut. Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt 5:23–27. Bestock, L. and C. Knoblauch 2014 Revisiting Middle Kingdom Interactions in Nubia: The Uronarti Regional Archaeological Project. Journal of Ancient Egyptian Interconnections 6(4):32–35. Dunham, D. 1967 Second Cataract Forts, v. 2: Uronarti, Shalfak, Mirgissa. Museum of Fine Arts (Boston). Dunham, D. and J.M.A. Janssen 1960 Second Cataract Forts, v. 1: Semna, Kumma. Museum of Fine Arts (Boston). Emery, W.B. and L.P. Kirwan 1935 The Excavations and Survey between Wadi es-Sebua and Adindan, 1929–1931. Mission archéologique de Nubie 1929–1934. Government Press (Cairo). Emery, W.B., H.S. Smith, and A. Millard 1979 The Fortress of Buhen: The Archaeological Report. Egypt Exploration Society Excavation Memoir 49. Eyre, C.J. 1990 The Semna Stelae: Quotation, Genre, and Functions of Literature. In Studies in Egyptology Presented to Miriam Lichtheim, ed. S.  Israelit-Groll, v. 1, pp. 134–65. Magnes Press. Firth, C.M. 1912 The Archaeological Survey of Nubia: Report for 1908–1909. Government Press (Cairo). Flammini, R. 2008 Ancient Core-Periphery Interactions: Lower Nubia during Middle Kingdom Egypt (ca. 2050–1640 bc). Journal of World-Systems Research 14(1):50–74. Gardiner, A.H. 1916 An Ancient List of the Fortresses of Nubia. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 3(2/3):184–92. Griffith, F.L. 1921 Oxford Excavations in Nubia, III–VII. Liverpool Annals of Archaeology and Anthropology 8:65–104. Harrell, J.A. and R.E. Mittelstaedt 2015 Newly Discovered Middle Kingdom Forts in Lower Nubia. Sudan & Nubia 19:30–39.

Egyptian Fortresses and the Colonization   287 Heidorn, L.A. 1991 The Saite and Persian Period Forts at Dorginarti. In Egypt and Africa: Nubia from Prehistory to Islam, ed. W.V. Davies, pp. 205–19. British Museum Press; Egypt Exploration Society. Kemp, B.J. 1986 Large Middle Kingdom Granary Buildings. Zeitschrift für ägyptische Sprache und Altertumskunde 113:120–36. Klemm, R. and D.  Klemm 2013 Gold and Gold Mining in Ancient Egypt and Nubia: Geoarchaeology of the Ancient Gold Mining Sites in the Egyptian and Sudanese Eastern Deserts, trans. P. Larsen. Springer. Knoblauch, C. 2007 Askut in Nubia: A Re-examination of the Ceramic Chronology. In Proceedings of the Fourth Central European Conference of Young Egyptologists, ed. K. Endreffy and A. Gulyás, pp. 225–38. Studia Aegyptiaca 18. Université Eötvös Loránd de Budapest. ——— 2008 The Egyptian Cemeteries in Lower Nubia during the First Half of the Second Millennium bc. Doctoral dissertation, Macquarie University. Knoblauch, C. and L. Bestock 2017 Evolving Communities: The Egyptian Fortress on Uronarti in the Late Middle Kingdom. Sudan & Nubia 21:50–58. Knoblauch, C., L.  Bestock, and A.  Makovics 2013 The Uronarti Regional Archaeological Project: Final Report of the 2012 Survey. Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts Abteilung Kairo 69:103–42. Knudstad, J. 1966 Serra East and Dorginarti: A Preliminary Report on the 1963–64 Excavations of the University of Chicago Oriental Institute Sudan Expedition. Kush 14:165–86. Kraemer, B. and K. Liszka 2016 Evidence for Administration of the Nubian Fortresses in the Late Middle Kingdom: The Semna Dispatches. Journal of Egyptian History 9(1):1–65. Loeben, C.E. 2001 Bemerkungen zur sogenannten “Kleinen Semna-Stele” (Berlin 14,753). In Begegnungen: Antike Kulturen im Niltal. Festgabe für E. Endesfelder, K. Priese, W.F. Reinecke, S. Wenig, ed. C. Arnst, I. Hafemann, and A. Lohwasser, pp. 273–84. Wodtke und Stegbauer. Mills, A.J. 1967–68 The Archaeological Survey from Gemai to Dal: Report on the 1965–1966 season. Kush 15:200–10. O’Connor, D. 2014 The Old Kingdom Town of Buhen. Egypt Exploration Society Excavation Memoir 106. Penacho, S. 2015 Deciphering Sealing Practices at Uronarti and Askut: A Spatial Analysis of the Built Environment and Individual Sealers. Doctoral dissertation, University of Chicago. Randall-MacIver, R. and C.L. Woolley 1909 Areika. Eckley B. Coxe Junior Expedition to Nubia 1. University Museum (Philadelphia). Reshetnikova, N. and B. Williams 2016 Pottery Production during the Middle Kingdom at Serra East Fortress in Nubia. In Vienna 2—Ancient Egyptian Ceramics, ed. B.  Bader, C.M. Knoblauch, and E.C. Köhler, pp. 487–505. Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta 245. Peeters. Ruby, J.W. 1964 Preliminary Report of the University of California Expedition to Dabnarti, 1963. Kush 12:54–56. Säve-Söderbergh, T. 1949 A Buhen Stela from the Second Intermediate Period (Kharṭūm No. 18). Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 35:50–58. Schneider, T. 2003 Ausländer in Ägypten während des Mittleren Reiches und der Hyksoszeit, Teil 2: Die ausländische Bevölkerung. Ägypten und Altes Testament 42. Harrassowitz. Seidlmayer, S.J. 2000 Zu Fundort und Aufstellungskontext der großen Semna-Stele Sesostris’ III. Studien zur Altägyptischen Kultur 28:233–42. Shaw, I. and R. Jameson 1993 Amethyst Mining in the Eastern Desert: A Preliminary Survey at Wadi el-Hudi. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 79:81–97.

288   Laurel Bestock Smith, H.S. 1966 Kor: Report on the Excavations of the Egyptian Exploration Society at Kor, 1965. Kush 14:187–243. Smith, S.T. 1995 Askut in Nubia: The Economics and Ideology of Egyptian Imperialism in the Second Millennium bc. Kegan Paul. ——— 2003 Wretched Kush: Ethnic Identities and Boundaries in Egypt’s Nubian Empire. Routledge. Smither, P.C. 1945 The Semnah Despatches. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 31:3–10. Steindorff, G. 1935–37 Aniba. Mission archéologique de Nubie, 1929–1934. J.J. Augustin. Török, L. 2009 Between Two Worlds: The Frontier Region between Ancient Nubia and Egypt, 3700 BC–AD 500. Probleme der Ägyptologie 29. Brill. Trigger, B. 1976 Nubia under the Pharaohs. Ancient Peoples and Places 85. Thames and Hudson. Vercoutter, J. 1966 Semna South Fort and the Records of Nile Levels at Kumma. Kush 14:125–64. ——— 1970 Mirgissa 1. Direction Générale des Relations Culturelles, Scientifiques et Techniques. Vogel, C. 2004 Ägyptische Festungen und Garrisonen bis zum Ende des Mittleren Reiches. Hildesheimer ägyptologische Beiträge 46. Gerstenberg. ——— 2013 Keeping the Enemy Out—Egyptian Fortifications of the Third and Second Millennium BC. In The Power of Walls: Fortifications in Ancient Northeastern Africa, ed. F. Jesse and C. Vogel, pp. 73–100. Colloquium Africanum 5. Heinrich-Barth-Institut. Wegner, J.W. 1995 Regional Control in Middle Kingdom Lower Nubia: The Function and History of the Site of Areika. Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt 32:127–60. Welsby, D.A. 2004 Hidden Treasures of Lake Nubia. Sudan & Nubia 8:103–104. Williams, B. 1999 Serra East and the Mission of Middle Kingdom Fortresses in Nubia. In Gold of Praise: Studies on Ancient Egypt in Honor of Edward F. Wente, ed. E. Teeter and J.A. Larson, pp. 435–53. Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago. ——— 2013 Three Rulers in Nubia and the Early Middle Kingdom in Egypt. Journal of Near Eastern Studies 72(1):1–10. Žába, Z. 1974 The Rock Inscriptions of Lower Nubia. Universita Karlova, Prague. Žabkar, L.V. and J.J.  Žabkar 1982 Semna South: A Preliminary Report on the 1966–68 Excavations of the University of Chicago Oriental Institute Expedition to Sudanese Nubia. Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt 19:7–50. Zibelius-Chen, K. 1988 Die ägyptische Expansion nach Nubien: Eine Darlegung der Grundfaktoren. Beihefte zum Tübinger Atlas des Vorderen Orients B78. Reichert.

chapter 16

N u bi a ns i n Egy pt from the Ea r ly Dy nastic Per iod to th e N ew K i ngdom Georg K. Meurer

Introduction Egyptian culture is unthinkable without Nubian immigrants and their multifaceted contributions. There was a continual immigration of Nubians into Egyptian territory, progressing to the north over the centuries. This is proven by cemeteries, pottery finds, and to a lesser extent settlements of Nubians. The immigrants with originally only Nubian background soon came, however, under massive influence of their hosts and—if they did not return to their home countries—became Egyptianized and integrated into Egyptian society. As the term “Egyptianization” today is considered somewhat inopportune, the process can also be described as “acculturation” or better as “cultural entanglement”; for the frontier region of Aswan, the amalgam of Egyptian and Nubian cultural elements is best be identified as “creolization.” Finally, Egyptian culture profited immensely over the centuries from the workforce, technical skills, and individual knowledge of Nubians as from all other foreigners, too.

Early Settlement of Eastern Sahara and the Nile Valley Since prehistoric times, Nubians were in more or less regular contact with the population of the Egyptian Nile valley. Reasons for these contacts are manifold; one of the most important factors was change of climatic conditions in the Eastern Sahara with the

290   Georg K. Meurer Western Desert areas, the Nile valley itself, and in the Eastern Desert. As a result of intensive archaeological research during the last thirty years, we are much better informed today about climatic changes and the resulting migrations (Usai 2005; Riemer et al.  2013). When aridity returned to the Eastern Sahara progressively in the Late Holocene (ca. 5300–3500 bce), there was a retreat of population from the Central Sahara to regions at the fringes that around 5300 bce also reached the Nile valley and the Fayum and therefore significantly contributed to the “multi-componential origin of the predynastic Neolithic” (Vermeersch  2008:98; Riemer et al.  2013:174). This process clearly points to a common ancestry of Nubians and Egyptians (Jesse, this volume).

The A-Group and Related Cultures Even though the Eastern Sahara retained only a marginal nomadic population after this change in climate, there always were trails crossing the desert into nearly all directions (in general Förster and Riemer 2013). The most important was the Darb el-Arba’in (Forty Days’ Road) which started at Assiut and continued via Kharga, Selima (Jesse et al. 2015: 168–69), and Wadi Howar. Most probably, Libo-Nubian groups were moving between the Kharga Oasis and the Nile valley at the Qena Bend (via Farshût and the Alamat-Tal roads) regularly from early Badarian to early Predynastic times. The still poorly understood Tasian Culture was likely one of the manifestations of these groups or evolved from the same cultural complex (D. Darnell 2002:168–69; Riemer et al. 2013:172). Further, there is evidence that the Libo-Nubian groups were related to the Abkan and A-Group cultures and that distinctive features of the Badarian and Naqada I cultures reached the Nile valley through these contacts, which would mean that all these cultures had common ancestors (D. Darnell 2002:159, 169; Riemer et al. 2013:170). Gatto (2014b:111) even postulates that “the cultural substratum in Upper Egypt as a whole is mostly Nubian-related,” and this is far further northwards than Kubbaniya, which had formerly been suggested to represent the northernmost A-Group outpost in Egypt. Our knowledge of Early A-Group presence in this southernmost region of Egyptian territory is mainly based on evidence from Sheikh Mohamed (Kubbaniya South), Nag el-Qarmila (Gatto and Zampetti  2007:4–6; Gatto  2013:65), Shellal, and Khor Bahan (a little south of Shellal). However, Early A-Group pottery or other material was also found in Upper Egyptian sites including Naqada, Adaima (Gatto 2011:149), Mamariye, Elkab, Hierakonpolis (Enclosure of Khasekhemui, flood-plain town of Nekhen, Predynastic temple HK 29A, Tomb 2 HK 6; Gatto 2003:14–15 and Gatto online), and Armant (Gatto online and Gatto  2006:229–30: possible A-Group campsites). These Upper Egyptian sites in the broader borderland between Egypt and Nubia seem to represent a regional variant of a culture that combined both Egyptian and Nubian traditions—Gatto speaks of “creolization” (Gatto 2009:126–32). However, what is considered to constitute the A-Group culture in its entirety, in general shows a large diversity in cultural repertoire. Against this background, it seems appropriate to speak of A-Groups (in plural) with regional variations (Gatto 2000:107).

Nubians in Egypt from the Early Dynastic Period   291 At this time there existed a cohabitation and exchange, or as Gatto (2014b:97) states, an entanglement, of Egyptian and Nubian cultures in Upper Egypt and around the First Cataract, having a common ethnic and cultural background (Gatto 2011:150; see Gatto, this volume). Therefore the region of the First Cataract cannot be seen as a tight border between Egypt and Nubia; this has to be located about 65 km in the north at Gebel esSilsila, where the later 1st Nome had its northern border, too (Gatto 2005:74). Nubians obviously were part of the “indigenous” population of this southern part of what would later be Egypt. They had not been subdued by the Naqadan population, but were certainly involved in trading most of the valuable materials required by elites in the north (Gatto online; she sees for example Cemetery U at Abydos as the destination of this trade; Gatto 2011:150). The formative process of the early Egyptian (Pharaonic) state seemed to be accompanied by a need to sharpen an Egyptian collective identity and Egyptocentric worldview. The process included the dualistic concept of order versus chaos, juxtaposing Egypt against the outside/foreign (Gatto  2011:149–50 and  2014b:114, 117). This resulted in a stronger control of the borders, exemplified by a fort on Elephantine Island. HafsaasTsakos (2015) has suggested several waves of violent expulsion of A-Group populations out of Upper Egypt and Lower Nubia around 3100–3000 bce. Survivors either left the Nile valley to areas in the Western Desert like the Laqiya Region or Bir Sahara, where this culture was also extant in a semi-nomadic way of life (Lange 2003:121–23), or perhaps to Upper Nubia. Other small groups may have stayed on in the Aswan region. However, it is certainly not correct to assume that Lower Nubia was depopulated between the mid-1st Dynasty (around 2900 bce) and the 5th Dynasty (ca. 2494–2345 bce), when the C-Group appeared in this area. Instead, it can be assumed that minor and impoverished entities of the original A-Group populations remained in Lower Nubia, leaving hardly any material traces of their reduced culture. Indirect proof of this could be the constant low level of Nubian ceramics found at all strata of the Egyptian settlement of Elephantine from the late 1st Dynasty until the 5th Dynasty. However, it must be underlined that this material cannot be directly attributed to either the A-Group or another contemporary Nubian culture (Raue  2002:20–21,  2008:2–5). Finally, one entry on the Palermo stone for the reign of Pharaoh Snefru mentions 7,000 Nubian prisoners brought to Egypt, and a rock inscription at Khor el-Aquiba notes 17,000 prisoners that may have originated from Lower Nubia (Meurer 1996:99).

The C-Group Until recently the C-Group (Hafsaas, this volume) was thought to have entered history during the 6th Dynasty (or perhaps already at the end of the 5th Dynasty, at Elephantine; Raue 2002:21) and lasted until the 18th Dynasty at the beginning of the New Kingdom. This group originated from the later A-Group in contact with the Kerma Ancien, partly in Lower, but mainly in Upper Nubia, and further incorporated immigrations from the Eastern Sahara (Meurer 1996:60–63; Buzon 2011:25, 30, 32, 34). It was also suggested that

292   Georg K. Meurer already a “Proto”–C-Group could be traced back as early as the 4th Dynasty (Glück 2005). Related material (so-called “heavy incised ware”) has been recorded not only at Kurkur Oasis, Bir Nakhala, Wadi Shaw, Camp 49, Wadi Howar, and Debod (23), but also at Gedeko (77/1), Meris Markos (41), Moalla (69/10, 4 tombs), Dendera, Ballas (242) and Ginari (58/1; Glück). In addition to these sporadic finds, a few typical C-Group vessels are known from Gebelein, and several sherds were reported from Dahshur (Meurer 1996:90). Kubbaniya North has again been thought to be the northernmost extension of the C-Group in Egypt (Meurer 1996:90). However, there is now new evidence for the presence of C-Group population in Egypt from recent excavations. At Elephantine (Raue 2002:22), nearly each large pottery assemblage from the First Intermediate Period until the 11th Dynasty contains C-Group material (remarkably reflecting the general development of this culture in Lower Nubia). However, from the end of the 12th Dynasty until the 18th or early 19th Dynasty only sporadic C-Group material can be identified (while there is a sudden appearance of Pan-Grave and later Kerma material, see below; Raue  2002:22–23). Several settlements of the C-Group existed nearby, for example at Nag el-Qarmila (Raue 2013:153–54). Of greatest interest, however, is the excavation of a complete C-Group cemetery 113 km north of Elephantine at Hierakonpolis (HK 27). The cemetery comprises more than sixty tombs and represents the northernmost known archaeological site of the C-Group in Egypt. HK 27 developed in four stages from the 11th to the early 13th Dynasty. Egyptian influences in the material repertoire are limited and comprise primarily some Egyptian pottery among the grave goods, mudbricks used for building the tumulus-shaped superstructures and a few wooden coffins. Overall, the evidence shows that primarily Nubian traditions were kept in funerary architecture, the way grave goods were deposited, the pottery corpus, the use of leather for clothes and even personal adornment (i.e., finds of braided locks typically worn by Nubian men; Friedman 2007a, 2007b; Milliet 2007). Archaeological data do not elucidate the reasons for which the C-Group population was living at Elephantine or Hierakonpolis. Raue (2013:153–55) suggested that areas north of Naga el-Faris (downstream from the Qubbet el-Hawa) until Kubbaniya (at the entry of Wadi Kubbaniya), where archaeological evidence for different Nubian populations was found, was unfavorable land in which the Egyptians themselves had no interest, leaving it to Nubians to settle there. This would also fit the assumption that the C-Group people were part of the ordinary population in Upper Egypt rather than irregular visitors (Giuliani 2013:69). Raue further suggested that the C-Group people offered their services as guardians, mercenaries, hunters, or manual workers in estates in exchange for food supplies. At Hierakonpolis, a scene in the tomb of Ny-ankh-Pepy, a governor of this town in the early 12th Dynasty, shows Nubians assisting the tomb owner in a lion hunt (Friedman 2007a:62). Generally it is believed that C-Group people were employed by different Upper Egyptian nome governors as mercenaries in their private armies through the late 6th Dynasty and during the First Intermediate Period (Weschenfelder 2014:361; compare for example the Gebelein stelae, Kubisch 2000:244–45, 247, 264). Examination of skeletal remains showed that they were part of a long-term population in Egypt that was well integrated and of similar health as the Egyptians. That also means that they were

Nubians in Egypt from the Early Dynastic Period   293 not slaves or prisoners. On the other hand, their bones did not show more evidence of physical trauma that could have been caused by employment as mercenaries active in fights. However, several men (and women!) seemed to have been exceptionally active in physical work or sport (or entertainment; Judd 2007:63–65). Of course they may have been again involved in the import of valuable materials coming over the desert trails ending at Hierakonpolis, as the A-Group did before (Williams 2014:64), and/or their skills in leather treatment were happily engaged by the Egyptians (Friedman 2007a:60). Friedman (1999:101–104) concluded from finds of presumably C-Group ceramics at another site at Hierakonpolis (HK 64) that the C-Group Nubians could also have been involved as performers (dancers, etc.) in an Egyptian ritual for the goddess Hathor’s mythical return from the desert at the onset of inundation. She cited other objects found with the ceramics to support this interpretation: a Predynastic deposit of ostrich feathers (AMS dated to 3140 +/– 50 bce), late Second Intermediate Period pottery, and a stone with, as it seems, an epithet of Hathor. At this time, semi-nomadic desert pastoralists often returned to the Nile valley to graze their stock and therefore may have been seen by the Egyptians as symbols for the return of Hathor and consequently entrusted with important roles in this ritual. An interesting detail of Nubian presence, or better contact, in Egypt is Egyptian ceramics found at Elephantine, Elkab, Dendera, and Karnak North that have been identified as imitation of C-Group IIa pottery because of their incised geometric motifs. As Rzeuska (2010:398–410) showed, this was not produced in Egypt by Nubian potters (“human transfer”) but was copied from imported Nubian samples. Apparently the Egyptians appreciated Nubian pottery. Similarly, a hieratic papyrus from the late Second Intermediate Period or early 18th Dynasty mentions that a scribe Hori acquired Medjay vessels in Nubia and exported them to Egypt (Raue 2002:23). After living for several generations at Hierakonpolis, the C-Group population vanished from the archaeological record (Friedman online). The Egyptianization observed here at Kubbaniya and Lower Nubia is the common explanation for this disappearing (Meurer  1996:65; however, van Pelt  2013:539 now prefers to speak of cultural entanglement).

Medjay/Pan-Grave Culture Men from Lower Nubia were not the only foreigners from the south who were employed by the Egyptians as mercenaries. Papyri dating from the 6th Dynasty found at Elephantine mention troops from Medja and Wawat. The territory Medja (Liszka and de Souza, this volume)—“the land of traversing,” and to be localized southeast of the Nile in the Eastern Desert presumably from the height of the Qena Bend southwards until the southern Atbai—was also mentioned in a decree which Pepy I issued for the pyramid town of Snefru at Dahshur. The title of the addressee of the decree is “Chief of the auxiliary forces of Medja, Yam and Irtjet.” Weni, another high official under Pepy I at

294   Georg K. Meurer Abydos, commanded mercenary troops from Medja and other Nubian territories (Meurer 1996:99, 101). The employment of apparently experienced fighters from Medja continued during the First Intermediate Period (see, e.g., records from Hatnub and Naqada; Meurer 1996:101) when they constituted essential contingents of provincial governor troops which helped stabilize their power. Possibly the earliest depiction of a group of seventeen or eighteen Medjay mercenaries is preserved in the Ka-Chapel of the nomarch Shemai, whose wife Nubt was a daughter of King Neferkauhor during the 8th Dynasty, at Koptos (Kom el-Koffar), where a track to Wadi Hammamat in the Eastern Desert started (Michaux-Colombot 2014:509–10). In the Middle Kingdom, the well-known Semna dispatches, dating to the reign of Amenemhat III, not only speak of small groups of Medjay searching for a chance to immigrate into Egyptian territory “because the desert is dying of hunger,” but also mention Medjay troops securing Egypt’s southern border against these trespassers. In the Second Intermediate Period, Papyrus Boulaq 18, dating under Sobekhotep II of the 13th Dynasty, refers to an official delegation of high-ranking Medjay to the royal court. The so-called Second Kamose stela informs about Medjay mercenaries in the Theban army at the beginning of the New Kingdom (Meurer 1996:103–108). Despite the fact that there is no definite proof for equation, the Medjay have customarily been identified with the so-called Pan-Grave culture (contra this theory: Liszka 2015; pro: Näser 2012, Williams 2014; with greater reservation: Barnard 2009). The Pan-Grave culture is represented in Egypt archaeologically not before end of the 12th Dynasty and only in a very limited time range between ca. 1775 to 1500 bce (end of the 17th Dynasty). Their small cemeteries, in general not exceeding fifty graves, have been registered mostly in Upper Egypt at Rifeh, Mostagedda, Badari, Qau, Balabish, Hu, Thebes, El-Tôd, Gebelein (for the latter Näser 2013:138 and n. 21: Pan-Grave pottery and jewelry from here at Turin Museum), with exceptions in Dahshur and Qasr es-Sagha (Meurer 1996:83–84). However, recently further cemeteries were excavated at Moalla, Hierakonpolis, Edfu, and Naq el-Qarmila near Elephantine (Fig. 16.1). Two cemeteries at Hierakonpolis (HK 21A and HK 47) show all typical features of the Pan-Grave culture: they have been dated to the 13th Dynasty (Friedman 2001 with further literature). Two cemeteries (SM14 and WK11) at Nag el-Qarmila, near Wadi Kubbaniya and Wadi Abu Subeira, had been in use possibly over three generations during the mid-13th Dynasty (Gatto et al. 2009; Giuliani 2013; Gatto 2014a:18–21). In this area, reaching as far as Qubbet el-Hawa, two of the rare campsites (i.e., WK 14) have also been excavated. They comprise only perishable structures as well as a lookout (Gatto et al. 2012:38; Gatto 2014a:16–18). At Moalla, at least two dozen tombs were found, dating from the late 13th to the 17th Dynasty (cemetery H3; Manassa 2011:5–6, 2012a:119). At Edfu, Pan-Grave tombs also show superstructures in the shape of stone rings, so far known for this culture from Lower Nubia only (Friedman 2001:34 referring to Effland 1999:30–31; Ayers and Moeller 2012). In addition to the funerary evidence that directly confirms the presence of Pan-Grave people, their typical pottery has been reported from many sites throughout Egypt.1 As investigations expand, it seems that indeed most Egyptian settlement sites of the period in question contain a small percentage of this material (Näser, pers. comm.). Although

Nubians in Egypt from the Early Dynastic Period   295

Figure 16.1  Map of Pan-Grave culture remains in Egypt. Map: Samuel Burns. 1 Tell ed-Dab’a (Avaris) 2 Memphis 3 Dahshur 4 Qasr es-Sagha 5 Lisht 6 Kahun/Illahun 7 Harageh 8 Rifeh

9 Mostagedda 10 Badari 11 Qau 12 Balabish 13 Abydos 14 Hu 15 Deir el-Ballas 16 El-Khizam 17 Gebel Antef

18 Thebes 19 Armant 20 El-Tôd 21 Gebelein 22 Moalla 23 Ed-Deir 24 Esna 25 El-Kab 26 Hierakonpolis

27 Edfu 28 Gemeniyeh 29 Daraw West 30 Nag el-Qarmila 31 Elephantine 32 Kharga Oasis 33 Gebel ell-Zeit 34 Mersa/Wadi Gawasis

isolated potsherds are no proof for the physical presence of Pan-Grave groups or individuals at a site, they nonetheless indicate continuous connections, at least in the form of trade or other kinds of contact. The greater percentage of Pan-Grave sites is concentrated within the territory that the Theban rulers controlled during the Second Intermediate Period, especially at its northernmost border area to Middle Egypt, which was occupied by the Hyksos who also might have drawn some groups of Pan-Grave people to themselves. It has been assumed

296   Georg K. Meurer that they were employed as mercenaries primarily by the Thebans, playing an active role in the liberation wars of Egypt against the Hyksos domination at the end of the 17th Dynasty. However, warfare certainly was not their only occupation in Egypt. Several papyri from Lahun mention Medjay dancers related to rituals in the temple of Senusret II at this site and perhaps security personal in this temple, too (Giuliani 2004:289–90; Petrik  2011:214–17). Three or four queens of Mentuhotep II Nephepetre had Medjay attendants and one or more of the queens may even have been of Nubian origin (Meurer 1996:113–14; Williams 2014:65 and n. 51). At Mersa/Wadi Gawasis, Pan-Grave people were employed for transporting supplies, and they also participated in mining activities or prospections, like they did in the amethyst mines of Wadi el-Hudi, with the Theban and Aswan regions acting as possible counterparts of the mining enterprises (Weschenfelder 2014:360). Other typical occupations of Pan-Grave groups were escorting caravans and patrols at Egypt’s borders. For their services, the Medjay seem to have been rewarded with supplies by the government, and—as the funerary record shows— they were also allowed to settle in small groups with their families and herd their stock. Beside the fact that Egyptians cherished the skills of the Pan-Grave in the military and security sphere, the main, and perhaps most important, reason for Eastern Desert dwellers to come to the Nile valley may have been climatic changes in their regions of origin (Gatto 2014a:14). Living a pastoral semi-nomadic and peripatetic (Gatto 2014a:16) way of life, they followed the shifting vegetation to herd their stock (mostly sheep, goats, and to a lesser extent cattle). They also offered their services (as ostrich hunt, Gatto 2014a:25) and trade goods (cattle and their products, medicinal plants or charcoal from acacias from the desert, etc.; Barnard 2009:16). When the Egyptian control over Lower Nubia and the borders at the Second and finally First Cataracts broke down in the Second Intermediate Period, part of the PanGrave population in form of small families (Gatto 2014a:16) could enter Egypt without the previously imposed constraints. In the new environment, they could certainly practice their original way of life only to a very restricted degree; however, at least in practicing their funerary rituals they maintained their beliefs as authentic as possible. Their burials show the typical features: leather matting underneath the bodies, offerings like Nerita-shells, bracelets made of mother-of-pearl spacers and especially the superstructures with sometimes painted bucrania; despite of a large variability or “multiple traditions” between different localities (Liszka 2015:43), for example of their pottery. Gatto interprets this as the result of a “strong rituality” (2014a:25). Until now it has not been possible to develop an internal chronology of the Pan-Grave cemeteries; however, some tombs (of men, less of women, who perhaps held on to traditions longer, Näser 2012:87) show growing Egyptian influence as for example rectangular burial pits, sometimes endowed with wooden coffins. This points to a process of acculturation or assimilation to Egyptian beliefs (i.e., Egyptianization). A remarkable singular find is a bucranium from Mostagedda (Fig. 16.2) that clearly shows adoption of Egyptian funerary customs, namely depicting the dead and writing down his name, in this case Qeskanet (Näser 2012:88–89). However, one has to acknowledge that whatever we see as Pan-Grave cultural expressions in Egypt may only be the result of a population under economic stress and a culture strongly modified by the influence of their new liv-

Nubians in Egypt from the Early Dynastic Period   297 66

1:2

5252

ox-skull

Figure 16.2 G. Brunton Mostagedda and the Tasian Culture, London 1937: pl. LXXVI.

ing conditions in a foreign world (Näser 2012:89, 2013:139). This may also explain why no definite archaeological evidence for the Pan-Grave culture has yet been identified in presumed regions of their origin in the Eastern Desert itself, a fact that certainly cannot only be attributed to limited excavation activities. The disappearance of the Pan-Grave culture from the archaeological record in Egypt around 1500 bce may not have been result of the mentioned Egyptianization (and therefore growing “invisibility”: de Souza 2013:116). A more plausible reason for their vanishing might be that they returned to the Eastern Desert, but further south than before due to changes in climate.

Kerma As the latest Nubian entity representatives of the Kerma culture can be found in Egypt about two or three generations later than the Pan-Grave people, from the late Second Intermediate Period until the early to mid-18th Dynasty. This culture was situated in Upper Nubia south of the Second Cataract extending far in the Sudan since Predynastic

298   Georg K. Meurer times until Thutmose II in the New Kingdom, when Egypt conquered this country (see chapters by Bonnet; Bonnet and Honegger; and B. Williams, Chapter 10 this volume). The main reason for this late intrusion into Egypt has been the security belt of a chain of huge strongholds along the Nile between Kubban at the entry of Wadi Allaqi and Semna South at the southernmost point of the Second Cataract. These forts were built mostly in the 12th Dynasty by Senusret I to Senusret III and were built to control Lower Nubia and the southern border to Upper Nubia, preventing a possible influx of Nubian people (Meurer 1996:33–51). This function is well documented by the small Semna stela (Berlin 14,753; Fig. 16.3), erected by Senusret III at the fort of Semna. The text clearly states that Nehesy-Nubians were allowed to travel downstream (as far as Mirgissa) only for trading goods, or as messengers or ambassadors (Meurer 1996). These Nehesy-Nubians must have been Kerma representatives. Single tombs and very small cemeteries, up to maximum of three burials, have been found at Saqqara, Dahshur, Gurob, Lisht, Qau, Abydos, Hu (?), Abadiyeh, and Dra Abu

Figure 16.3  Drawing of stela Berlin 14,753, © Christiane Müller 1996.

Nubians in Egypt from the Early Dynastic Period   299 el-Naga/Qurna (Thebes) (Meurer 1996:89; for Dahshur and Lisht: Gratien 2006:125). Kerma settlements are not known from Egypt. As has been recorded for the Pan-Grave culture, Kerma pottery is reported from additional sites in Egypt (Fig. 16.4).2 While in Upper Egypt the presence of Kerma people can be registered archaeologically from the end of the Second Intermediate Period until the early 18th Dynasty, in the MemphisFayum region they do not occur before beginning of the New Kingdom. In Tell el-Dab’a (Avaris) they can be found until early/mid-18th Dynasty (Fuscaldo 2008:107, 110), here in domestic context only. As Fuscaldo (2004:113) stated, Kerma men could have been

Figure 16.4  Map of Kerma culture remains in Egypt. Map: Samuel Burns. 1 Tell Hebua 2 Tell ed-Dab’a (Avaris) 3 Memphis 4 Saqqara 5 Lisht 6 Dahshur 7 Kahun

8 Gurob 9 Qau 10 Abydos 11 Hu 12 Abadiyeh 13 Deir el-Ballas 14 Karnak (Thebes) 15 Qurna

16 Alamat Tal Road/ Gebel Tjauti 17 Moalla 18 Hierakonpolis 19 Edfu 20 Elephantine 21 Kharga Oasis

22 D  akhla Oasis (Ayn Asil) 23 Mersa/Wadi Gawasis

300   Georg K. Meurer mercenaries in Pharaoh Ahmose’s army and later, after the defeat of Kerma under Thutmose III, prisoners of war (Fuscaldo 2004:110). Perhaps two of the latter have been offered in an execration ritual, as two separated skulls have been found at Tell el-Dab’a locus 1053, dating to the early 18th Dynasty. However, these captives, once again, could have been trained, “Egyptianized” and employed as soldiers in military campaigns against Middle Eastern enemies. This scenario would also explain the larger amount of domestic ceramic material (cooking-pots) found at Tell el-Dab’a (Ezbet Helmi) in the last two decades (Hein 2001:207; Aston 2012:168–70). Interestingly, the Egyptian tradition of employing Nubian mercenaries seems to have been continued (see also possible Kerma flint arrowheads found at Tell el Dab’a, and perhaps a few skeletons of Nubians; however, see with restraints Matić 2014). Also at Deir el-Ballas, a residence and camp for troops of the Theban army against the Hyksos at the end of the 17th or beginning of the 18th Dynasty, there have been found many—and exclusively—Nubian cooking vessels, Kerma and Pan-Grave, presumably in use by auxiliary mercenary troops of these ethnoi (Hein 2001:199). The earlier presence in Upper Egypt can further be explained by merchants who supposedly travelled via Kharga (Aston  2012:163). However, the Hyksos also exchanged trade-goods with Nubia via the Darb el-Arba’in to bypass the Theban area (Colin 2005:39). Finds of typical pottery from the oases at Tell el-Dab’a (locus 81/1) proof that goods were transported from the Delta likewise in the other direction (Aston and Bader  2009:61–63; Forstner-Müller  2011:4–5: found together with possible Kerma Moyen ware) via Tundaba (D. Darnell 2002:169). For both, Hyksos and Thebes, there is evidence for diplomatic contacts to Kerma. It is seductive to follow Ryholt’s identification of the mother of the sixth king of 14th Dynasty of the Hyksos, Nehesy, as Nubian princess (1997:114–15) and Rilly’s proposal that a list of “proto-Meroitic names on P. Golenischeff perhaps represents a diplomatic delegation from Kush to the Hyksos” (2007:207–14). In the region of Thebes, the annals of Amenemhat II report a delegation of the children of the rulers of Kush (the common designation of the kingdom of Kerma) and Webat-Sepet (this is Pan-Grave territory) to bring their tributes. Part of this levy were 990 servants; they certainly had to remain in Egypt (Meurer 1996:102). Archaeological evidence for the presence of Kerma people is later in date. Perhaps a member of a Kerma delegation could have been the so-called “Qurna Queen,” a certainly high ranking but not stringent royal woman, endowed with an exceptionally rich fully Egyptian burial, but including several delicate Kerma beakers and dating to the end of the 17th Dynasty (Eremin et al. 2000). After the vanishing of Egypt’s control over the forts of the Second Cataract at the end of the Middle Kingdom, Lower Nubia was occupied by the progressively strengthening Kerma. The Kerma kingdom also executed raids on Upper Egyptian territory, as we know from a newly discovered inscription in the tomb of Sobeknakht at Elkab from the 17th Dynasty: “Kush came . . . having stirred up the tribes of Wawat, the island-[dwellers?] of Khenthennefer, Punt and the Medjau . . .” (Davies  2003). Egyptian sculptures and other material found in royal tombs and temples at Kerma city can be identified as booty from these raids, which had been conducted by a temporal alliance of different Nubian cultures (Davies 2003:53–54; Valbelle 2004:181–83).

Nubians in Egypt from the Early Dynastic Period   301 While traversing Upper Egypt they may well have left their pottery at temporary resting places too.

New Kingdom and the Question of Acculturation (Egyptianization) During the New Kingdom, Egypt tried to control its borders through chains of strongholds, executed wars against its immediate neighbours, and cultivated the dogma of order (Ma’at) = Egypt versus chaotic disorder (Isfet) = the foreign. But from the New Kingdom on at the latest the reality was another one: daily life in Egypt was in fact affected by political pragmatism and to a lesser extent xenophobia (van Pelt 2013:527). Particularly in the New Kingdom, tens of thousands of foreigners from the Middle East, Libya, and Nubia entered Egypt. John Ray therefore speaks of a “kaleidoscope of different nationalities which seems to characterize New Kingdom Egypt” (after Schneider 2003:336, 2010:154). Especially the borderland around Aswan, but also the Theban area until Assiut, observed through all times a high level of traffic of non-sedentary Nubians. Likewise, Nubian merchants perambulated through the deserts and on the desert roads (Gatto 2001–2002:59). This also might explain why the territory of the King’s Son of Kush expanded in the New Kingdom from Nubia in the south until Hierakonpolis/ Elkab in the north, as this area indeed comprised a high percentage of Nubian indigenous population (Gatto 2005:74). On the other hand campaigns of, for example, Amenhotep III against Nubia, in his ­regnal-year 5 and after year 30, report about 30,000 and 1,000 prisoners, respectively (including men, women, and children; O’Connor 1998:264–65 and 269–70). Several tombs of nobles at Thebes depict annual deliveries of tributes from all known subdued or at least allied nations with servants and carriers as part of the levies who had to remain in Egypt (Panagiotopoulos 2006:379–85; van Pelt 2013:538). Most of the captives and servants were handed over, for example, as working forces to the temples (engaged in agriculture, in building projects or in the mining industry) or have been trained and employed as mercenaries in separate contingents of the army. It is not clear whether the paramilitary police force called the Medjay (after the ethnicon Medjay of the Middle Kingdom) was at least partly recruited from among ethnic Nubians. The name also may have been retained from earlier times even though it no longer designated an ethnically specific force (cf. Schneider 2003:92–93; Liszka 2010:315–20; Michaux-Colombot 2014:513–15). Diplomatic legations came to Egypt (for example far away from Punt under Horemheb; Säve-Söderbergh  1946:26–27) and the annals of Thutmose III refer to a daughter of one of the chieftains from Irem as part of the tributes; she certainly was integrated in the royal harem (Meurer  1996:114). Amenhotep III also welcomed foreign princesses (for example Princess Gilushepa from Mitanni) as diplomatic gifts and introduced them into his harem. Perhaps this also happened with Nubian princesses, too, as tomb KV 40 in the Valley of the Kings contained objects of high-ranking women with

302   Georg K. Meurer Nubian (and Levantine) names; actually they could have been court women of foreign princesses (Bickel 2015:88). The children of foreign chieftains and rulers were given over to the institution kap where they have been instructed as “children of the kap” (Panagiotopoulos 2006:399–400) together with Egyptian royal princes and princesses. After their education, they could be sent back to their homelands where they would act as loyal vassals of Egypt. Other foreign individuals were employed in royal building activities, for example, at Deir el-Medina (Asiatics or Libyans documented; Menéndez 2015:794) or were assigned as reward to merited officials and functionaries and have also been esteemed as prestigious property (P. Koller 8; Meurer 1996:134). In the New Kingdom there can be, however, observed a certain degree of segregation of groups of foreigners—for example, at the mortuary temple of Thutmose IV at Thebes there have been erected boundary stelae to mark the settlements of foreign war prisoners (stela 8 speaks of prisoners from Kush, Schneider 2003:178). But most information points in the direction of a strong acceptance of all foreigners who were willing to adopt the Egyptian way of life. If this was achieved, it is no longer appropriate to speak of foreigners; instead, we should talk about Egyptians with foreign origin or roots. Of course, this resulted in varied levels of acculturation or integration. Therefore, the Egyptian society certainly showed a complex situation of different, inhomogeneous, sometimes quickly acculturated groups and people (Schneider 2003:335–36). It is known that prisoners of war were even forced to learn the Egyptian language: Rameses III took care that the language of Libyan prisoners “disappeared”: KRI V, 90; Schneider 2006:206 and the teaching of Ani from the End of the New Kingdom states: “One teaches the Nubian to speak Egyptian, the Syrian and other strangers too” (Smith 2007:226). However, they certainly were not able to reach an advanced stage of integration into Egyptian society. In contrast, other foreigners had the chance to marry Egyptians (about one hundred cases known; Schneider  2003:292–314, 334, 336). Their “multi-ethnic offspring” (van Pelt 2013:540) definitely promoted a fruitful entanglement of Egyptian and Nubian cultures. For the Egyptian state, the integration of large amounts of foreigners with their huge potential was an enormous challenge. However, as a positive result, specialized artisans brought their knowledge, for example in glass and metal making, weaponry and warfare, textile production and dyeing, woodworking and ship building, but literary and religious influences can also be ascertained (Schneider 2010:154; van Pelt 2013:529). Individuals, especially for example those educated at the kap who ambitiously searched for a career in the Egyptian civil service, had very good chances to climb high in the hierarchy. In our sources they mostly cannot be differentiated from native Egyptians, but sometimes showed their foreign roots through single features, like using foreign names (even in second or third generations). For example, Hekanefer, a child of the kap and prince of Miam under Tutankhamun, who held a “mediatory position between Egyptian government and local communities” (van Pelt 2013:537) and lived in Lower Nubia and Egypt both, was depicted in the tomb of the King’s Son of Kush Huy (in Thebes, TT 40) with black skin and Nubian traditional clothing. In his own tomb in Nubia, he was shown in Egyptian manner only (Booth  2005:47–48; Smith  2007:239–40; van Pelt 2013:534–38). This could express (after van Pelt 2013:535) a “culturally entangled identity, which combined their local identity with an identity linked to the colonial culture.”

Nubians in Egypt from the Early Dynastic Period   303 Another example, restricted to Egypt itself, was the child of the kap and fan-bearer of the king Maiherperi, presumably contemporaneous to Amenhotep II and owner of tomb KV 36 in the Valley of the Kings. He depicted himself in his book of the dead with black skin, curly hair, and typical accessories (like the cowrie-shell necklace) as native Nubian (Schneider 2010:155). Already some presumably C-Group Nubian mercenaries at Gebelein from the First Intermediate Period owned typical Egyptian stelae on which they have been depicted as Egyptians with few Nubian accessories, but still named themselves with the ethnicon Nehesyu (Kubisch 2000:244–45, 247, 264). These examples show that it was possible, and comparatively easy, to live—if desired—a kind of secondary culture next to the Egyptian, even if this is rarely expressed. As Charlotte Booth points out, these residents with foreign roots can be defined now as Egyptians (rmtj; Loprieno 1988:36, vs chastiu = not acculturated foreigners; Schneider 2006:213), who can be characterized as living in the Nile valley, speaking Egyptian, worshipping Egyptian deities, and performing Egyptian burial customs. Finally, this achieved Egyptianization or cultural entanglement resulted in full acceptance by Egyptian society (Booth 2005:48). This contribution was submitted in autumn 2016. As excavations and scholarly discourse are developing rapidly, a number of quite important newer publications could not be included. The author would especially like to mention the following article and two monographs: J.C. Moreno García 2018 Elusive “Libyans”: Identities, lifestyles and Mobile Populations in NE Africa (late 4th-early 2nd millennium bce). Journal of Egyptian History 11:147–84; A.M. de Souza 2019 New Horizons: The Pan-Grave Ceramic Tradition in Context. Middle Kingdom Studies 9. Golden House Publications; D. Raue 2019 Elephantine und Nubien vom 4.-2. Jahrtausend v. Chr. Sonderschriften des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts Abteilung Kairo 40. De Gruyter.

Notes 1. For a list see Meurer (1996:84–85), which can now be complemented by: Tell el-Dab’a (Forstner-Müller and Rose  2012); El-Tôd (Manassa online); Gebel Antef north of the Valley of the Kings at Thebes (J.C. Darnell 2002:132); Elephantine (from stratum 13, dating to the end of the 12th or early 13th Dynasty, Raue  2002:22); Mersa/Wadi Gawasis (Manzo 2012:213, 224) and Gebel el-Zeit at the Red Sea coast (the first early Pan-Grave site far away from the Nile, Michaux-Colombot 1992:31; Liszka 2015:47–48); and Kharga Oasis (Manassa 2012b:133) deep in the Western Desert. 2. For a list see Meurer 1996:90, to which can be added now: Karnak (at Thebes); Edfu (Ayers and Möller 2012:111); Moalla; Elephantine (only very limited material); Ayn Asil (Dakhla); Kharga; Alamat Tal and Gebel Tjauti in the Western Desert (for these all Gratien 2006:126–29), and once again Mersa/Wadi Gawasis at the Red Sea (Manzo 2012:213, 224).

References Cited Aston, D.A. 2012 From the Deep South to the Far North: Nubian Sherds from Khatan’a and ‘Ezbet Helmi (Tell el-Dab’a). In Nubian Pottery from Egyptian Cultural Contexts of the

304   Georg K. Meurer Middle and Early New Kingdom, ed. I.  Forstner-Müller and P.  Rose, pp. 159–79. Ergänzungshefte zu den Jahresheften des Österreichischen Archäologischen Institutes 13. Aston, D.A. and B. Bader 2009 Fishes, Ringstands, Nudes and Hippos: A Preliminary Report on the Hyksos Palace Pit Complex L81. Egypt & Levant 19:19–89. Ayers, N. and N. Moeller 2012 Nubian Pottery Traditions during the 2nd Millennium bc at Tell Edfu. In Nubian Pottery from Egyptian Cultural Contexts of the Middle and Early New Kingdom, ed. I. Forstner-Müller and P. Rose, pp. 103–15. Ergänzungshefte zu den Jahresheften des Österreichischen Archäologischen Institutes 13. Barnard, H. 2009 The Archaeology of the Pastoral Nomads between the Nile and the Red Sea. In Nomads, Tribes, and the State in the Ancient Near East, ed. J.  Szuchman, pp. 15–41. Oriental Institute Seminars 5. Bickel, S. 2015 Das Grab KV 40 im Tal der Könige. Eine Familiengruft Amenophis’ III. Sokar. Geschichte & Archäologie Altägyptens 30:78–89. Booth, C. 2005 The Role of Foreigners in Ancient Egypt: A Study of Non-Stereotypical Artistic Representations. BAR International Series 1426. Archaeopress. Buzon, M. 2011 Nubian Identity in the Bronze Age: Patterns of Cultural and Biological Variation. Department of Anthropology Faculty Publications, Paper 1, Purdue University. Colin, F. 2005 Kamose et les Hyksos dans l’oasis de Djesdjes. Bulletin de l’Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale 105:35–47. Darnell, D. 2002 Gravel of the Desert and Broken Pots in the Road: Ceramic Evidence from the Routes between the Nile and Kharga Oasis. In Egypt and Nubia: Gifts of the Desert, ed. R. Friedman, pp. 156–77. British Museum Press. Darnell, J.C. 2002 Opening the Narrow Doors of the Desert: Discoveries of the Theban Desert Road Survey. In Egypt and Nubia: Gifts of the Desert, ed. R. Friedman, pp. 132–55. British Museum Press. Davies, V. 2003 Kush in Egypt: A New Historical Inscription. Sudan & Nubia 7:52–54. de Souza, A. 2013 The Egyptianisation of the Pan-Grave Culture: A New Look at an Old Idea. Bulletin of the Australian Centre for Egyptology 24:109–26. Effland, A. 1999 Zur Grabungsgeschichte der archäologischen Stätten zwischen Hager Edfu und Nag’ el-Hisaja al-gharbi. In Bericht über drei Surveys. Materialien und Studien, ed. D. Kurth, pp. 21–39. Die Inschriften des Tempels von Edfu, Begleitheft 5. Harrassowitz. Eremin, K., E.  Goring, B.  Manley, and C.  Cartwright 2000 A 17th Dynasty Queen in Edinburgh? KMT: A Modern Journal of Ancient Egypt 11(3):32–40. Förster, F. and H. Riemer eds. 2013 Desert Road Archaeology in Ancient Egypt and Beyond. Africa Praehistorica 27. Heinrich-Barth-Institut. Forstner-Müller, I. 2011 Ritual Activity in a Palace of the 15th Dynasty (Hyksos) at Avaris. In Palace and Temple: 5th Symposium on Egyptian Royal Ideology, ed. R. Gundlach, pp. 1–21. Königtum, Staat und Gesellschaft früher Hochkulturen 4(2). Harrassowitz. Forstner-Müller, I. and P. Rose 2012 Nubian Pottery at Avaris in the Second Intermediate Period and the New Kingdom: Some Remarks. In Nubian Pottery from Egyptian Cultural Contexts of the Middle and Early New Kingdom, ed. I.  Forstner-Müller and P.  Rose, pp. 181–212. Ergänzungshefte zu den Jahresheften des Österreichischen Archäologischen Institutes 13. Friedman, R. 1999 Pots, Pebbles and Petroglyphs Part II: 1996 Excavations at Hierakonpolis Locality HK 64. In Studies of Ancient Egypt in Honour of H.S. Smith, ed. A. Leahy and J. Tait. Occasional Publications 13, pp. 101–108. The Egypt Exploration Society. ——— 2001 Nubians at Hierakonpolis: Excavations in the Nubian Cemeteries. Sudan & Nubia 5:29–38. ——— 2007a The Nubian Cemetery at Hierakonpolis, Egypt. Results of the 2007 Season. The C-Group Cemetery at Locality HK27C. Sudan & Nubia 11:57–62.

Nubians in Egypt from the Early Dynastic Period   305 ——— 2007b Return to the C-Group: Excavations in the Nubian Cemetery 2007. Nekhen News 19:20–22. ——— online Hierakonpolis—City of the Hawk: Explore the Nubian Cemeteries. HK27C—C Group and HK47 and Pan-Graves. Hierakonpolis Expedition. http://www.hierakonpolisonline.org/index.php/explore-the-nubian-cemeteries (accessed September 6, 2015). Fuscaldo, P. 2004 The Nubian Pottery from the Palace District of Avaris at ‘Ezbet Helmi, Areas H/III and H/VI Part II: The “Classic” Kerma Pottery from the Second Intermediate Period and the 18th Dynasty. Egypt & Levant 14:111–19. ——— 2008 The Nubian Pottery from the Palace District of Avaris at ‘Ezbet Helmi, Areas H/ III and H/VI Part III: The “Classic” Kerma Pottery from the Second Intermediate Period and the 18th Dynasty. Egypt & Levant 18:107–27. Gatto, M.C. 2000 The Most Ancient Evidence of the “A-Groups” Culture in Lower Nubia. In Recent Research into the Stone Age of Northeastern Africa, ed. L. Krzyżaniak, K. Kroeper, and M. Kobusiewicz, pp. 105–17. Studies in African Archaeology 7. Poznań Archaeological Museum. ——— 2001–2002 Two Predynastic Pottery Caches at Bir Sahara (Egyptian Western Desert). Sahara 13:51–60. ——— 2003 Hunting the Elusive Nubian A-Group. Nekhen News 15:14–15. ——— 2005 Nubians in Egypt: Survey in the Aswan-Kom Ombo Region. Sudan & Nubia 9:72–75. ——— 2006 The Early A-Group in Upper Lower Nubia, Upper Egypt and the Surrounding Deserts. In Archaeology of Early Northeastern Africa, ed. K. Kroeper, M. Chłodnicki, and M.  Kobusiewicz, pp. 223–34. Studies in African Archaeology 9. Poznań Archaeological Museum. ——— 2009 Egypt and Nubia in the 5th–4th Millennia bce: A View from the First Cataract and its Surroundings. British Museum Studies in Ancient Egypt and Sudan 13:125–45. ——— 2011 Review of J. Roy (2011), The Politics of Trade: Egypt and Lower Nubia in the 4th Millennium BC. Sudan & Nubia 15:148–51. ——— 2013 Late Prehistoric Sites in the Area between Aswan and Kom Ombo. In The First Cataract of the Nile: One Region—Diverse Perspectives, ed. D. Raue, S. J. Seidlmayer, and P. Speiser, pp. 59–65. Sonderschriften des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts Abteilung Kairo 36. De Gruyter. ——— 2014a Peripatetic Nomads along the Nile: Unfolding the Nubian Pan Grave Culture of the Second Intermediate Period. Journal of Ancient Egyptian Interconnections 6(1):11–28. ——— 2014b Cultural Entanglement at the Dawn of the Egyptian History: A View from the Nile First Cataract Region. Origini 36:93–123. ——— Hunting for the Elusive Nubian A-Group People. Archaeology’s Interactive Dig. http:// interactive.archaeology.org/hierakonpolis/nubian.html (accessed September 6, 2015). Gatto, M.C., J.C.  Darnell, M.  De Dapper, C.  Gallorini, R.  Gerisch, S.  Giuliani, E.  Hart, S. Hendrickx, T. Herbich, H. Joris, I. Klose, C.M. Manassa, M. Marée, H.-Å. Nordström, M. Pitre, G. Pyke, D. Raue, S. Roma, P. Rose, D. Święch, and D. Usai 2009 Archaeological Investigation in the Aswan-Kom Ombo Region (2007–2008). Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts Abteilung Kairo 65:10–47. Gatto, M.C., C. Gallorini, and S. Roma 2012 Pan-Grave Pottery from Nag el-Qarmila and Sheikh Mohamed Cemeteries in Gharb Aswan. In Nubian Pottery from Egyptian Cultural Contexts of the Middle and Early New Kingdom, ed. I.  Forstner-Müller and P.  Rose, pp. 83–102. Ergänzungshefte zu den Jahresheften des Österreichischen Archäologischen Institutes 13. Gatto, M.C. and D. Zampetti 2007 The British Museum-University of Rome “La Sapienza” Archaeological Project in the Aswan-Kom Ombo Region. Report on the 2007 Field Season.

306   Georg K. Meurer http://www.disci.unibo.it/it/ricerca/archeologia/missioni-archeologiche/missioniarcheologiche-allestero/aswan-kom-ombo-egitto/report-missioni-akap/report–2007 (accessed June 4, 2018). Giuliani, S. 2004 Some Cultural Aspects of the Medja of the Eastern Desert. In Nubian Studies 1998: Proceedings of the Ninth Conference of the International Society of Nubian Studies, ed. T. Kendall, pp. 286–90. Department of African-American Studies, Northeastern University. ——— 2013 C-Group and Pan-Grave between Aswan and Kom Ombo. In The First Cataract of the Nile: One Region—Diverse Perspectives, ed. D. Raue, S. J. Seidlmayer, and P. Speiser, pp. 67–75. Sonderschriften des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts Abteilung Kairo 36. De Gruyter. Glück, B. 2005 Zur Frage der Datierung der frühen C-Gruppe in Unternubien. Egypt & Levant 15:131–51. Gratien, B. 2006 Kerma People in Egypt (Middle and Classic Kerma). In Archaeology of Early Northeastern Africa, ed. K.  Kroeper, M.  Chłodnicki, and M.  Kobusiewicz, pp. 119–34. Studies in African Archaeology 9. Poznań Archaeological Museum. Hafsaas-Tsakos, H. 2015 War on the Southern Frontier of the Emerging State of Ancient Egypt: A Warfare Perspective on the History of the A-Group People in Lower Nubia during the 4th Millennium bce. Dissertation abstract, University of Bergen, Norway. Hein, I. 2001 Kerma in Auaris. In Begegnungen. Antike Kulturen im Niltal, ed. C.-B. Arnst, I. Hafemann, and A. Lohwasser, pp. 199–212. Verlag Helmar Wodtke und Katharina Stegbauer. Jesse, F., C. Gradel, and F. Derrien 2015 Archaeology at Selima Oasis, Northern Sudan: Recent Research. Sudan & Nubia 19:161–69. Judd, M. 2007 Overview of the Hierakonpolis C-Group. Sudan & Nubia 11:63–65. KRI V 1983 Ramesside Inscriptions, Historical and Biographical, v. 6: Setnakht, Ramesses III, and Contemporaries, ed. K.A. Kitchen. B.H. Blackwell. Kubisch, S. 2000 Die Stelen der I.  Zwischenzeit aus Gebelein. Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts Abteilung Kairo 56:239–65. Lange, M. 2003 A-Group Settlement Sites from the Laqiya Region (Eastern Sahara, Northwest Sudan). In Cultural Markers in the Late Prehistory of Northeastern Africa and Recent Research, ed. L. Krzyżaniak, K. Kroeper, and M. Kobusiewicz, pp. 105–27. Studies in African Archaeology 8. Poznań Archaeological Museum. Liszka, K. 2010 “Medjay” (no. 188) in the Onomasticon of Amenemope. In Millions of Jubilees: Studies in Honor of David  P.  Silverman, ed. Z.  Hawass and J.H.  Wegner, v. 1, pp. 315–31. Cahiers Supplémentaires des Annales du Service des Antiquités de l’Égypte 39(1). Supreme Council of Antiquities Egypt. ——— 2015 Are the Bearers of the Pan-Grave Archaeological Culture Identical to the MedjayPeople in the Egyptian Textual Record? Journal of Ancient Egyptian Interconnections 7(2):42–60. Loprieno, A. 1988 Topos und Mimesis. Zum Ausländer in der ägyptischen Literatur. Ägyptologische Abhandlungen 48. Harrassowitz. Manassa, C. 2011 El-Moalla to El-Deir. In UCLA Encyclopedia of Egyptology, ed. W. Wendrich. https://escholarship.org/uc/item/4pc0w4hg (accessed November 13, 2016). ——— 2012a Nubians in the Third Upper Egyptian Nome: A View from Moalla. In Nubian Pottery from Egyptian Cultural Contexts of the Middle and Early New Kingdom, ed. I.  Forstner-Müller and P.  Rose, pp. 117–27. Ergänzungshefte zu den Jahresheften des Österreichischen Archäologischen Institutes 13. ——— 2012b Middle Nubian Ceramics from Umm Mawagir, Kharga Oasis. In Nubian Pottery from Egyptian Cultural Contexts of the Middle and Early New Kingdom, ed. I.  ForstnerMüller and P. Rose, pp. 129–48. Ergänzungshefte zu den Jahresheften des Österreichischen Archäologischen Institutes 13.

Nubians in Egypt from the Early Dynastic Period   307 ——— Mo’alla Survey Project: Mo’alla Necropolis; A Pan Grave Cemetery: Area H3. Yale Egyptological Institute in Egypt. https://egyptology.yale.edu/expeditions/past-and-jointprojects/moalla-survey-project/pan-grave-cemetery-area-h3 (accessed August 25, 2015). Manzo, A. 2012 Typological, Chronological and Functional Remarks on the Ceramic Materials of Nubian Type from the Middle Kingdom Harbour of Mersa/Wadi Gawasis, Red Sea, Egypt. In Nubian Pottery from Egyptian Cultural Contexts of the Middle and Early New Kingdom, ed. I. Forstner-Müller and P. Rose, pp. 213–32. Ergänzungshefte zu den Jahresheften des Österreichischen Archäologischen Institutes 13. Matić, U. 2014 “Nubian” Archers in Avaris: A Study of Culture Historical Reasoning in Archaeology of Egypt. Issues in Ethnology and Anthropology 9(3):697–712. Menéndez, G. 2015 Foreigners in Deir el-Medina during the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Dynasties. In Proceedings of the Tenth International Congress of Egyptologists, ed. P. Kousoulis and N. Lazaridis, pp. 791–804. Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta 241. Peeters. Meurer, G. 1996 Nubier in Ägypten bis zum Beginn des Neuen Reiches. Zur Bedeutung der Stele Berlin 14.753. Abhandlungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts Abteilung Kairo 13. Achet. Michaux-Colombot, D. 1992 The MD _ 3Y.W not Policemen but an Ethnic Group from the Eastern Desert. In Études Nubiennes: Conférence de Genève. Actes du VIIe Congrès international d’études nubiennes, v. 2, ed. C. Bonnet, pp. 29–36. Édition des Belles Lettres. ——— 2014 Pitfall Concepts in the Round of “Nubia”: Ta-Sety, Nehesy, Medja, Maga and Punt Revisited. In The Fourth Cataract and Beyond: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference for Nubian Studies, ed. J.R.  Anderson and D.A.  Welsby, pp. 507–22. British Museum Publications on Egypt and Sudan 1. Peeters. Milliet, M. 2007 HK27C Revisited: Egyptian Pottery in the Nubian Cemetery. Nekhen News 24:24–25. Näser, C. 2012 Nomads at the Nile: Towards an Archaeology of Interaction. In The History of the Peoples of the Eastern Desert, ed. H.  Barnard and K.  Duistermaat, pp. 81–92. Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Monograph 73. University of California, Los Angeles. ——— 2013 Structures and Realities of Egyptian-Nubian Interactions from the Late Old Kingdom to the Early New Kingdom. In The First Cataract of the Nile: One Region—Diverse Perspectives, ed. D. Raue, S. J. Seidlmayer, and P. Speiser, pp. 135–48. Sonderschriften des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts Abteilung Kairo 36. De Gruyter. O’Connor, D. 1998 Amenhotep III and Nubia. In Amenhotep III: Perspectives on his Reign, ed. D. O’Connor and E.H. Cline, pp. 261–70. University of Michigan Press. Panagiotopoulos, D. 2006 Foreigners in Egypt in the Time of Hatshepsut and Thutmose III. In Thutmose III: A New Biography, ed. E.H. Cline and D. O’Connor, pp. 370–412. University of Michigan Press. Petrik, M. 2011 Foreign Groups at Lahun during the Late Middle Kingdom. In From Illahun to Djeme: Papers Presented in Honour of Ulrich Luft, ed. E. Bechtold, A. Gulyás, and A. Hasznos, pp. 211–26. BAR International Series 2311. Archaeopress. Raue, D. 2002 Nubians on Elephantine Island. Sudan & Nubia 6:20–24. ——— 2008 Who Was Who in Elephantine of the Third Millennium BC? British Museum Studies on Ancient Egypt and Sudan 9:2–14. ——— 2013 Centre and Periphery. Elephantine and its Surroundings in the Third Millennium BC. In The First Cataract of the Nile: One Region—Diverse Perspectives, ed. D.  Raue, S. J. Seidlmayer, and P. Speiser, pp. 149–55. Sonderschriften des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts Abteilung Kairo 36. De Gruyter. Riemer, H., M. Lange, and K. Kindermann 2013 When the Desert Dried Up: Late Prehistoric Cultures and Contacts in Egypt and Northern Sudan. In The First Cataract of the Nile: One

308   Georg K. Meurer Region—Diverse Perspectives, ed. D.  Raue, S.  J.  Seidlmayer, and P.  Speiser, pp. 157–83. Sonderschriften des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts Abteilung Kairo 36. De Gruyter. Rilly, C. 2007 The Earliest Traces of Meroitic. In Advances in Nilo-Saharan Linguistics: Proceedings of the 8th Nilo-Saharan Linguistics Colloquium, ed. D. Payne, and M. Reh, pp. 207–14. Nilo-Saharan 22. Rüdiger Köppe. Ryholt, K. 1997 The Political Situation in Egypt during the Second Intermediate Period c. 1800–1550 bc. Carsten Niebuhr Institute Publications 20. Museum Tusculanum Press. Rzeuska, T.I. 2010 Zigzag, Triangle and Fish Fin: On the Relations of Egypt and C-Group during the Middle Kingdom. In Between the Cataracts: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference for Nubian Studies, ed. W. Godlewski and A. Łajtar, Part 2, Fasc. 2, pp. 397–419. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean Supplement Series 2.2/2. Warsaw University. Säve-Söderbergh, T. 1946 The Navy of the Eighteenth Egyptian Dynasty. Recueil de Travaux 6. Uppsala University. Schneider, T. 2003 Ausländer in Ägypten während des Mittleren Reiches und der Hyksoszeit, Teil 2: Die ausländische Bevölkerung. Ägypten und Altes Testaments 42, Harrassowitz. ——— 2006 Akkulturation—Identität—Elitekultur: Eine Positionsbestimmung zur Frage der Existenz und des Status von Ausländern in der Elite des Neuen Reiches. In Der ägyptische Hof des Neuen Reiches. Seine Gesellschaft und Kultur im Spannungsfeld zwischen Innen- und Außenpolitik, ed. R. Gundlach and A. Klug, pp. 201–16. Königtum, Staat und Gesellschaft früher Hochkulturen 2. Harrassowitz. ——— 2010 Foreigners in Egypt: Archaeological Evidence and Cultural Context. In Egyptian Archaeology, ed. W. Wendrich, pp. 143–63. Blackwell. Smith, S.T. 2007 Ethnicity and Culture. In The Egyptian World, ed. T. Wilkinson, pp. 218–41. Routledge. Usai, D. 2005 Early Holocene Seasonal Movements between the Desert and the Nile Valley: Details from the Lithic Industry of Some Khartoum Variant and Some Nabta/Kiseiba Sites. Journal of African Archaeology 3:103–15. Valbelle, D. 2004 The Cultural Significance of Iconographic and Epigraphic Data Found in the Kingdom of Kerma. In Nubian Studies 1998: Proceedings of the Ninth Conference of the International Society of Nubian Studies, ed. T. Kendall, pp. 176–83. Department of AfricanAmerican Studies, Northeastern University. van Pelt, W.P. 2013 Revising Egypto-Nubian Relations in New Kingdom Lower Nubia: From Egyptianization to Cultural Entanglement. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 23(3):523–50. Vermeersch, P.M. ed. 2008 A Holocene Prehistoric Sequence in the Egyptian Red Sea Area: The Tree Shelter. Egyptian Prehistory Monographs 7. Leuven University Press. Weschenfelder, P. 2014 Linking the Eastern Desert and the Nile Valley: Pan-Grave People from the Late Middle Kingdom to the Early New Kingdom. In The Fourth Cataract and Beyond: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference for Nubian Studies, ed. J.R. Anderson and D.A. Welsby, pp. 357–66. British Museum Publications on Egypt and Sudan 1. Peeters. Williams, B.B. 2014 Some Geographical and Political Aspects to Relations between Egypt and Nubia in C-Group and Kerma Times, ca. 2500–1500 BC. Journal of Ancient Egyptian Interconnections 6(1):62–75.

Chapter 17

Hum a n A da ptation to En v ironm en ta l Ch a nge i n the Norther n Dong ol a R each Derek A. Welsby

Surveys in the Middle Nile Valley Archaeological surveys have played a fundamental role in contributing to our under­ standing of the Middle Nile valley. In many of these surveys the archaeological commu­ nity has been forced to react with too little time, money, and trained staff available to do adequate work before major infrastructure projects have destroyed vast swathes of the landscape along with innumerable archaeological sites. The primary destructive agency has been the construction of dams, which in themselves cause considerable damage, but generally in a relatively restricted area. Much more destructive are the reservoirs they impound which stretch far upstream. To these must be added the destruction caused by the infrastructure needed to build the dams, roads, quarries, settlements for the work­ ers, extensive power lines often extending many hundreds of kilometers, and the reset­ tlement areas for the displaced population. The first of these dam projects was built at Aswan at the end of the 19th century and was completed in 1902. It was heightened in 1907 and again in the late 1920s before being superseded by the Aswan High Dam, begun in the late 1950s. Meanwhile other dams were built on the White and Blue Niles in Central Sudan and in the current phase of dam building one has been constructed at the Fourth Cataract (2002–2008) and two on the Setit River while the Roseires Dam has been heightened.

310   Derek A. Welsby While no archaeological work preceded the initial construction of the Aswan Dam, rescue archaeology became an integral part of the subsequent heightenings of the dam and the construction of its successor. Meanwhile, no archaeological work was con­ ducted in advance of the other dams at Sinnar, Jebel Aulia, Roseires, and Khashm elGirba, although a low level survey was undertaken at the Fourth Cataract when it was first planned in the 1940s (Gray 1949). More recently, rescue projects have been mounted in conjunction with the dams built or heightened since 2002, including the Merowe Dam, those on the Setit and at Roseires.1 None of these projects has been research driven, many important questions only becoming apparent as the work progressed, or long after the fieldwork was completed, by which time many sites of interest had van­ ished forever. In addition to the rescue surveys, there have been a number of other surveys although much archaeological activity on the Middle Nile has been site-based. The importance of setting sites in the regional context is now generally appreciated and increasingly addressed (Edwards, this volume). Immediately pre-dating the intense archaeological activity associated with the Aswan High Dam, whose reservoir flooded deep into Sudan, was a survey of the Keraba and Butana by the Humboldt University under the direction of Fritz Hintze (1959) but this was soon terminated in favor of a long-term program of excavation at Musawwarat es-Sufra. One of the most extensive non-rescue surveys in the Middle Nile valley was that directed by André Vila on behalf of the SFDAS. Beginning in 1975, this continued the High Dam campaign’s survey south from Dal to close to Sedeinga. This was an ambitious undertaking; both banks of the Nile were stud­ ied along with the islands, small-scale excavations, and a few major excavations were undertaken, and most importantly, it was published quickly. Since then there have been several further surveys which were not primarily a response to a rescue threat, most in the Nile valley but important and systematic surveys in the Libyan Desert to the west of the Nile (e.g., Kuper 1995; Jesse 2006) and in the Eastern Desert (e.g., Castiglioni et al. 2010; Castiglioni and Castiglioni 2014)2 have been undertaken and several surveys are currently underway.3 Notwithstanding over a cen­ tury of archaeological activity, there are still parts of the Nile valley in northern and cen­ tral Sudan that have never been surveyed, as well as vast areas outside the valley. The importance of surveys cannot be overestimated. However, in certain academic circles the type of survey often undertaken in Sudan is deemed of little value and this has often had a very negative effect on efforts to raise the necessary funds to undertake the work. Many of the surveys in the Middle Nile valley have not been research driven, but have been prompted directly by rescue concerns—the most recent of these is the work at the Fourth Cataract. Other surveys, while always mindful of the increasing threat to archaeological sites and past landscapes from modern development, have been under­ taken to fill gaps in the archaeological map of Sudan. The Northern Dongola Reach sur­ vey discussed here was one such undertaking. The results of that survey, which will be described in some detail below, and of that at the Fourth Cataract and others, belie any criticism from academic circles. The insistence on the formulation of detailed research questions in advance of a project is laudatory in many parts of the developed world

Human Adaptation to Environmental Change   311 where the duration and scale of archaeological activities over the last two centuries and more have provided a sound basic understanding of human activity across vast swathes of time. In those contexts data collection for its own sake cannot readily be justified. However, it is not possible to formulate research questions in a vacuum. In Sudan, and in many other parts of the world, there are regions where we know next to nothing of their history and archaeology. In those, the basic groundwork needs to be put in place and the essential first stage is to document whatever sites are present on the ground. It is only then that pertinent research questions arise. The essential nature and value of this approach has recently been highlighted by the international survey operation, the Merowe Dam Archaeological Salvage Project, or­gan­ized by the National Corporation for Antiquities and Museums in Sudan in advance of the dam built at the Fourth Cataract (Welsby  2008; see also chapters by Salah M. Ahmed and by Näser, this volume). Prior to the project this was one of the least-known reaches of the Middle Nile valley. As a result of the project a vast number of sites were located, documented, and some excavated. The results have revolutionized our understanding of that part of the Nile valley and has impacted significantly on our perception of the role of other cataract zones along the Nile. During the course of the work, as the knowledge base grew, some of the limited resources available were chan­ neled towards the emerging research questions.

Life on the Desert Edge: The Environmental Background As a region becomes more hostile to sustaining life, so the natural environment and cli­ mate assume a fundamental impact on both flora and fauna. The hyper-arid zone of the Eastern Sahara is one such region but, unlike most other hyper arid zones, the presence of a perennial river running through it creates a dramatic contrast. On the one hand is the almost lifeless desert while on the other, close to the Nile, there is the potential to support lush vegetation and large fauna on the river banks as well as in the river itself. The importance of the environment on influencing and to a large extent dictating human activity in a marginal region is vastly greater than in less extreme regions and, therefore, its study is an essential component of any archaeological project. The focus of this paper is on the Northern Dongola Reach of the Nile but the issues raised are equally relevant for other reaches of the river where it flows through the Sahara. Regional surveys can focus on sites of a particular period or type, but are frequently designed to record all evidence for human activity, which in the Northern Dongola Reach covers many millennia. The Northern Dongola Reach Survey sought to record all  evidence for human activity from the earliest material found right up to the ­pre-­modern—the latest sites documented probably date to the 19th century. Before one can give meaning to the observed data for human activity it is essential to understand the

312   Derek A. Welsby environment within which the people under study lived and, therefore, what challenges were faced and what opportunities were available. Natural forces such as climate and environmental conditions have to be taken into account but also technological develop­ ments and subsistence strategies which allowed different degrees of viability for human activity in the region over time. Into this scenario must also be added the Nile. Although a perennial river, it is far from constant both in its rate of flow and in its course. Heavily influenced by the monsoon winds which deposit considerable amounts of rainfall on the Ethiopian highlands, it is a life-giving force with its constant flow and its annual inundations. However, the river levels fluctuate dramatically and unpredictably, offering years of plenty along with lean years when the floods are low, punctuated with others where the flood levels are catastrophic.4

Genesis of the Project Prior to the project in the Northern Dongola Reach, only one site had been excavated, the Pharaonic and Kushite town at Kawa (Macadam 1949, 1955), while a few others had been noted in passing (Monneret de Villard 1935–57:242; Arkell 1950:35; Bonnet 1986: pl. III; Bonnet ed. 1990: pl. 13). The Northern Dongola Reach survey, conducted by the Sudan Archaeological Research Society from 1993–97, focused on the Nile valley over a distance of 80 km on the east bank from Eimani to Mulwad between the river and the edge of the desert pla­ teau. It was a project conceived not to answer any major research questions but again, as with the surveys noted above, to fill a gap in our knowledge of a particular reach of the Nile. The survey sought to document all sites over four seasons of approximately two months’ duration in the field per season. The region was divided into a grid of 5 minutes of latitude and longitude and an east-west transect was done through the center of each grid square, on the plateau edge on foot and elsewhere by car. The rest of the survey was rather less systematic, with the recording of all sites noted while driving through the concession. As the work developed, the preferential areas for human settlement along the current river channel and along particular paleochannels focused detailed surveys along those features and on the margins of the Seleim basin in the north of the conces­ sion. In the wide-open landscape, a large proportion of the sites can be expected to have been observed, although much will have been masked by the dune belts. As these dune belts continue to move, further sites may be revealed over time as others vanish beneath the encroaching dunes. The concession does not stand in isolation. On the east bank to the south surveys had been conducted in 1976 and between 1984 and 1985 by the Royal Ontario Museum, ini­ tially under the direction of Nicholas Millet, thereafter by Krzysztof Grzymski

Human Adaptation to Environmental Change   313 (Grzymski  1987). To the north was the concession of the Section Française de la Direction des Antiquités du Soudan (SFDAS), for long directed by Jacques Reinold, within which the University of Lille also conducted excavations (Gratien  1999; Reinold 2001) while north of that was the Swiss concession with work focused at Tabo under Charles Maystre (Bonnet  2011) and thereafter at Kerma by Charles Bonnet (Bonnet 2014) and latterly in conjunction with Matthieu Honegger (Honegger 2014). The west bank was surveyed briefly between Ed-Debba and Khandaq by Jacques Reinold (Reinold 1993) and further north in the river valley a little more intensively by the University of California team (Smith 1998–2002). These teams have all worked inde­ pendently and only the detailed survey data from the SARS work has been published in full (Welsby 2001). The limit of the SARS concession to the west marks a significant boundary between the alluvial plain and the rocky desert, with very limited potential for human activity. The eastern limit on the east bank of the Nile is of little consequence. People live on both sides of the river and crossing from one side to another by even the most primi­ tive of boats is not a journey of any great moment.5 To the south the SARS concession broadly coincided with the point where the desert plateau swings away from the river. Immediately upstream for approximately 13 km there is very limited alluvial land on the river’s east bank. The northern limit of the concession is a line drawn on the map and is of no geographical or historical significance. In this context one result of the SARS survey is particularly intriguing. A very common find on settlements sites within the concession were winged axeheads made from ferruginous sandstone. Several hundred of these were found on almost all of the settlements, but never on cemetery sites, right up to a few hundred meters from the SFDAS concession. However, not a single axe of this type has ever been recorded elsewhere in Sudan— with this one category of artifact the SARS concession seems to reflect an archaeologi­ cal reality, encompassing the total distribution of this artifact type (Welsby 2001:382–86—axes of types 3 and 4). The whole of this region has been extensively reworked by the Nile for millennia and the valley is infilled with alluvium deposited by the river. Almost all the conces­ sion, which extended from the river across the valley to the east, a maximum distance of 18 km was covered by Nile alluvium with, in a few places, pebble river terraces and with very occasional outcropping of bedrock except along the eastern margins where this was common. The only major relief was offered by Barqat Kuluf, a sandstone inselberg rising from the plain with steep to vertical sides and a flat summit. In many areas the alluvium was covered in a deposit of sand with, in the central and southern part, prominent bands of active barchan (crescent-shaped) dunes. There was an inter­ mittent band of modern settlement and associated farming land along the river and a much more dispersed settlement along the more prominent paleochannels. All cur­ rent activity away from the river is of recent date, dating from the mid-20th century onwards.

314   Derek A. Welsby

The Archaeology Paleolithic and Mesolithic Although there is extensive evidence for occupation of this date, the remains have largely been found on the margins of the Nile valley and in the deserts to the east (see for example Honegger  2004b,  2011,  2014) and west (Yahia Fadl Tahir  2013). During the NDRS work was focused on the valley floor and no evidence for a human presence in these periods was noted. Certainly in the early Holocene when the northward move­ ment of the tropical convergence zone displaced the climatic zones approximately 500 km (Kuper and Kröpelin 2006) to the north, the region was savannah with the valley possibly too wet to form an ideal habitat for humans.

The Neolithic With the onset of the Neolithic the region became more arid and clearly the alluvial plains in the valley became desirable places to occupy. Sites of this period are highly visible in the landscape. The most prominent features were the cemeteries, the most extensive were the occupation scatters. Cemeteries were nucleated and utilized over long periods, in view of the number of graves found within them, over two hundred bodies in some cases. The distribution of the cemeteries spans from the very southern end of the SARS concession into that of SFDAS to the north. In the latter area seventeen cemeteries have been discov­ ered and many were investigated by Jacques Reinold (2001) and this work, under different direction, is ongoing. To these may be added approximately forty cemeteries in the SARS concession published in the final report (Welsby 2001:570–72) with a further two ­cemeteries brought to the attention of the Kawa mission in the last few years, following disturbance of hitherto unknown cemeteries during agricultural activities Welsby and Welsby Sjöström 2020. Following on from the SARS survey one cemetery within its concession, at site R12 immediately adjacent to the Seleim basin, was totally excavated by an Italian mission (Salvatori and Usai 2008). The cemetery contained a total of 168 individuals (Judd 2008:83). The Neolithic settlements visible during the survey consisted of vast areas of occupa­ tion material, as also observed by Reinold immediately to the north. The impression given is of extensive occupation over a wide area, but it is clear that none of this material is actually in situ vertically—the strata the artifacts were deposited on having been totally removed by erosion, concentrating what must have been many episodes of occu­ pation onto a single surface (but now see Langlois et al. 2019). Well-preserved remains of Neolithic settlements can be expected, but only where those settlements have been sealed by the large Kerma settlements and cemeteries which abound in the area, a phe­ nomenon seen in the Eastern Cemetery at Kerma. Both the occupation scatters and cemeteries are scattered across the central and east­ ern parts of the valley floor with no particular preference being shown for any locality.

Human Adaptation to Environmental Change   315 This suggests that the nature of settlement was viable over a wide area, perhaps the result of the limited demands make on the environment by the Neolithic settlers and the more hospitable climatic regime, where water and other essential resources were widely available.

Pre-Kerma During the survey no evidence was noted for the Pre-Kerma which is presumably more a failure on the part of the researchers to adequately recognize the distinctive ceramics of that period rather than there being a total absence of material of that date. Some PreKerma sherds were recovered during the excavation of the Neolithic cemetery at site R12 from a pit excavated into the top of the mound (Salvatori and Usai 2008:2). Pre-Kerma material is abundant to the north in the settlement beneath the later Kerma-period Eastern cemetery at Kerma, where the culture was first recognized (Bonnet 1987). PreKerma material has also been found as far upstream as Ginefab close to Abu Hamed (Smith and Herbst 2005, 2008). In the environs of Kerma there is insufficient data to attempt a reconstruction of the settlement patterns at that time (see Honegger 2004a: col. pl. XVII).

Kerma With the onset of the Kerma period the archaeological landscape was transformed. For the first time we have readily recognizable cemeteries and settlements throughout the region, in stark contrast to earlier periods. The survival of cemeteries of this period as readily rec­ ognizable features of the landscape is little different from the earlier Neolithic cemeteries. Both have suffered, in many cases from extensive erosion, but the stones employed in the tomb monuments have mitigated the effects of erosion, and in many places Kerma tumuli survive intact, having fulfilled one of their raison d’être for over three and a half millennia. The greater survival of settlements may be the result of various factors:

1. The younger age of the sites, which have not endured quite the same exposure to erosion faced by the Neolithic remains. 2. The possibility of reduced erosion after the Neolithic. 3. The move away from a reliance on timber towards constructions in more dura­ ble materials such as mudbrick, jalous, and stone. An incidental by-product of the use of these more durable materials are that when they collapse there is a dramatic build-up of rubble, which helps to preserve the lowermost sections of walling.

The greater visibility of Kerma sites in the archaeological record allows the observa­ tion of something approaching a complete view of the settlement patterns across the region. During the Kerma period, significant natural and human factors increasingly

316   Derek A. Welsby impacted the population. The local climate was becoming much drier as the Holocene wet phase drew to a close. The more dispersed occupation of the Neolithic gave way to settlements focused in locations with ready access to perennial water sources. These water sources will have been increasingly important also as a result of changing life­ styles, with a greater reliance on agriculture and animal husbandry, along with an increase in population made possible by these economic developments and the stimulus provided by the rise of Kerma as a major international power. Although the local climate was becoming increasingly arid (see Kuper and Kröpelin 2006 for a summary of the changing climatic conditions in the Eastern Sahara) and, presumably, as what rainfall there was became increasing erratic, the region was able to prosper through reliance on the then current hydrological landscape. In the ear­ lier part of the Kerma period the Nile flowed in a braided channel across over 16 km of the valley floor forming massive islands, one 28 km in length by a maximum of 6.4 km wide, another at least 60 km long by 16 km wide. These channels greatly increased the length of the river banks available for agriculture. The potential is clearly reflected in the archaeological record. Along the channels were closely spaced settlements on both banks (Fig. 17.1) indicating an intensive use of the riverine resources, in particular the water the river provided for human and animal consumption, but also for farming activ­ ities. From the distribution of sites (Fig. 17.2) it would appear that the eastern channels

Figure 17.1  Aerial view of the Alfreda Nile by the modern village of Hillat en-Nakhla looking upstream. Several Kerma settlements are visible along with a very extensive well field on the left bank.

Human Adaptation to Environmental Change   317

SELEI M

BASIN

Hawaniva vile

Alfreda vile

Kawa

M13

H25

BARQUAT KULUF

Settlement Settlement? Occupation scatter Occupation scatter? Cemetery Cemetery?

0

25 km

Figure 17.2  Kerma period sites in the Northern Dongola Reach between Mulwad and Eimani. The sites on the left bank of the Nile were discovered by the University of California, Santa Barbara team.

318   Derek A. Welsby were more attractive for settlement, perhaps because those channels were less deeply incised than the western channel, allowing easier access to water. However, it must be borne in mind that the western channel has been occupied continuously up to the pres­ ent day and this may have resulted in the masking of earlier remains. The other major factor making the Northern Dongola Reach particularly attractive for settlement is the presence of a number of low-lying basins, of which the Kerma basin is the best known. A southern extension of the Kerma basin, today known as the Seleim basin, extended about 55 km to the south of ancient Kerma. Several Kerma-period sites were set on the margins of the basin and presumably their inhabitants were involved in the utilization of the basin itself. Today the nature of the Kerma basin has been dramati­ cally transformed by the development of an extensive irrigation system; its initial devel­ opment by the Anglo-Egyptian Condominium administration early last century was the reason for Reisner’s work being focused in the Kerma region from 1913 until 1916 (Reisner 1914:10). However, at the southern end of the basin the natural environment remains. In that area the basin provides, for several months after the period of high Nile flood, extensive areas of pasture as well as the presence of seasonal lakes which are a rich resource of fish. Currently water does not flood from the Nile into the basin, but as the groundwater rises to the surface it sustains flora and creates the lakes. A similar situa­ tion is to be expected in the Kerma period, with the likelihood that groundwater levels were higher as a result of greater local rainfall and the presence of additional active Nile channels. The Kerma settlements in the region are characterized by the presence of a specific building type consisting of square and rectangular structures with stone external walls in a few cases, but more commonly with lines of stone blocks, presumably to support the uprights of timber-framed buildings. All these buildings also have internal parallel rows of stone blocks set closely together. In the building excavated at site P4 (Fig. 17.3) it was

Figure 17.3  The largest of the storage buildings discovered in the Northern Dongola reach, at site P4.

Human Adaptation to Environmental Change   319 clear that the blocks were designed to support a raised floor, with up to three blocks being set one upon another to achieve the desired height for the floor (Welsby 2001: pls. 4.3 and 4.4). No trace of the floor timbers was located at P4, but some were found at Gism el-Arba, a Kerma-period settlement 23 km to the south of Kerma (Welsby 2001:581 n. 7). The provision of a raised floor is a typical feature of storage buildings. Parallels can be found in the early Kushite store buildings at Sanam Abu Dom, in granaries of the Roman period, and in modern installations, as for example in the Nuba Mountains (Welsby 2019a). The raised floors are designed to allow air to circulate below to combat damp and to provide some protection from rodents and insects. Large numbers of these storerooms were found within Kerma settlements—up to thirty were observed at site M13 (Welsby 2001:94–97). The largest at site P4 was about 11 m2 (Welsby 2001: pl. 2). The extensive provision of storage facilities in these settlements seems out of all pro­ portion to the number of people who might be expected to have inhabited them. It might be suggested that these installations were part of the state administrative system for the collection of surplus produce from the hinterland of Kerma, prior to its redistri­ bution to state officials and employees along with the army.

Egyptian Control When the Egyptians conquered Kush around 1500 bce and established firm control over its territory by the mid-15th century bce a major Egyptian urban center was founded at Dokki Gel, 1 km north of the Kushite capital, and by the mid-14th century bce if not earlier urban centers also existed at Tombos (Smith and Buzon 2018), Tabo (Bonnet 2011), and Kawa (Macadam 1955:12). By the New Kingdom, on the basis of the evidence from the SARS survey, there was a great change in the settlement patterns in the Northern Dongola Reach, something that may have occurred over an extended period contemporary with the transitions from Kushite to Egyptian control. The number of sites occupied fell dra­ matically from about 150 Kerma settlements at the maximum down to about twenty-five sites, of which four were on the banks of the western Nile channel (Welsby 2001: fig. 14.7). Detailed geomorphological work on the hydrology of the region has indicated that the eastern paleochannels ceased to flow as perennial streams at least by about 1300 bce, although there was fluvial activity thereafter for almost two millennia (Macklin et al. 2013:697). Clearly the carrying capacity of the region away from the main Nile channels was severely diminished. Over the winters of 2013–14, 2014–15 and 2019 excavations at one of these New Kingdom sites, H25 on the right bank of the Alfreda Nile, has found extensive evidence for occupation. Although many of these structures are very different from the Kerma period store buildings noted above they nevertheless appear to have had an identical function. Raised floors have been dispensed with, but stone floors have been provided instead, sealed with plaster which laps up onto the walls (Thomas 2014). No purely domestic buildings have been found. The presence of the storage structures along with the large quantities of Egyptian pottery suggests a close connection with the Egyptian administration. It would appear that, while the number of settlements in the

320   Derek A. Welsby region may have decreased dramatically, the function of the settlements remained the same, as collection points for surplus produce now being sent to the Egyptian rather than the Kushite taxman. The only other site of this type and date investigated is that  at Gism el-Arba. Here however, occupation ceased early in the New Kingdom (Gratien 1999:11). Too little work has been conducted in the Northern Dongola Reach to obtain details of the farming practices used. Only in one small area do we get a hint of the methods employed. Immediately downstream of the diffluence of the Hawawiya and Alfreda Niles there is evidence on the latter for walls running across the paleochannel (Welsby 2001: pls. 3.10 and 3.11, fig. 3.26—features 123, 138, and 139). Such wadi walls are a common feature of water management systems in arid environments and have been studied in detail in for example the Roman period in Tripolitania and in the Negev (Barker et al. 1996). They function in areas where there is a reasonable expectation of rainfall and serve to slow down the water runoff, allowing it to penetrate into the ground as well as reducing erosion. The dampened earth can then be used for cropping. The position of these walls in the paleochannel bed indicate that this was not at that time a perennial stream and that the amount of waters expected to flow along it was limited. In this case the water may have been expected to result from the main Nile channel over­ topping its banks during the annual flood rather than to harvest rainwater. The lowrelief terrain in this part of the NDR would not be ideal to concentrate sufficient rainwater into this system. The latest evidence for Egyptian political control at Kawa are cartouches of Rameses VI (1143–1136 bce) usurping those of earlier rulers on columns in the Tutankhamun temple (Macadam 1955:14; see also Welsby 2017) while the earliest evidence for a Kushite presence can be dated to the reign of King Shabaqo in the late 8th century bce.6 During the intervening years the political situation is far from clear. There is no reason to postu­ late a major population change at this time, but it is clear that life away from the western Nile channel was becoming increasingly precarious. Very few habitation sites away from the river survived into the 1st millennium bce and none of these lasted into the second half of the millennium. The prime cause of this depopulation will have been natural. A culmination of the shift towards a hyper-arid environment occurred at this time (Welsby et al. 2002:36). This coincided with the lapse of strong centralized control, and with a probably consequent fall in demand for food surpluses to feed the non-primary food producers in the urban centers—the administrators, soldiers, and priests and the crafts­ men servicing their needs—the incentive to work the more marginal land will have vanished. The final phase of occupation in the Northern Dongola Reach away from the western Nile channel is clearly documented on the ground. Throughout the region are vast num­ bers of pebble-covered mounds (Figs. 17.1 and 17.4), up to one thousand in one locality. These are almost invariably either in the beds of the paleochannels or close to their banks. Several of these were tested by excavation and in all cases they were found to be wells.7 The formation processes of these mounds is extremely interesting as they are a combination of man-made and natural features. On the digging of the wells, the alluvial

Human Adaptation to Environmental Change   321

Figure 17.4  View over the well field at site H10 on the Hawawiya Nile looking east across the channel.

upcast formed a mound around the well shaft, which was then covered by pebbles as the well diggers penetrated through the thick deposit of naturally occurring pebbles imme­ diately overlying the sandstone bedrock which needed to be broken through to reach the aquifer. Subsequently erosion of the surface deposits continued, but the upcast mounds around the wells were protected by the pebble layer so that while the surround­ ing alluvial plain was subjected to severe eolian erosion the mounds became ever more prominent features of the landscape.8 The close proximity of large numbers of wells is a feature of several areas in the Sudan today, now all much further south within the belt of reliable summer rains.9 There the well fields are used by pastoralists, each herdsman dig­ ging out his well and watering his flocks while his neighbors do the same. Wells are con­ tinually being refilled by sand and sediments, but are reopened and cleaned out year on year. Clearly in the NDR, presumably when sedentary occupation sustained by farming was no longer viable because of the failed eastern Nile channels, a nomadic and pastoral lifestyle was adopted where mobility offered greater opportunities to utilize dwindling and less reliable resources. Water continued to be available from the wells tapping into the aquifer, but as rainfall became ever scarcer the amount of fodder available for the animals will have decreased until the whole economic system collapsed. At that point the desert became a wilderness, traversed only by travelers at least into the 20th century, a gap in occupation of 2,500 years or more.

From the 1st Millennium bce to the Present With the abandonment of the regions to the east of the main Nile channel, settlement was focused exclusively in close proximity to the river. South of the Kawa area the focus of settlement, at least by the medieval period, appears to have shifted to the left bank which, although lacking extensive agricultural land, was largely immune to the prob­ lems of windblown sand, which was a major factor on the other bank. In the post-medieval

322   Derek A. Welsby period, important centers developed or continued to be occupied, among them Khandaq and Qasr Wad Nimieri (Ward 1905:57–58; Crawford 1951:32–33, 36–38) and ultimately Dongola el-Ordi, which is now the regional capital. To the north of Kawa, important settlements also flourished on the east bank, among them Kerma which has benefitted enormously from investment in irrigation projects initiated by the adminis­ tration of the Anglo-Egyptian Condominium immediately prior to the First World War.

Summary The Northern Dongola Reach survey was able to chart the complex interaction of human activity and the changing climatic regime and nature of the Nile against the backdrop of often dramatic political changes. The impact of an increasingly arid climate as the Holocene wet phase waned forced a concentration of human settlement along the channels of the Nile, a concentration perhaps abetted by the economic stimulus of Kerma for an agricultural surplus to feed the non-food producers among its urban pop­ ulation. The system came increasingly under pressure as the number of Nile channels reduced, forcing a gradual abandonment of a settled lifestyle based on agriculture. The population tried to cope with the increasingly inhospitable environment, probably by large-scale migration out of the area and by those left behind moving over to a mobile pastoral existence, allowing greater flexibility with regard to the less stable conditions.10 Water was not the main problem, with innumerable wells being dug to water flocks and people, but as the region became desert an absence of fodder will have made the region untenable for human occupation relying on pastoralism, and it was abandoned for over two and a half millennia. The survey raised a number of issues regarding the interpretation of the observed environment. What is abundantly clear is that the present-day environment surveyed bears little relation to that occupied by the people whose lives archaeologists are attempting to study and understand. It is physically different, with the ground surface itself being several meters lower than it was in the Kerma period, for example. The east­ ern river channels have gone and the local rainfall has all but vanished. The dangers of interpreting survey data, which have been discussed many times before,11 were high­ lighted particularly with the many thousands of wells which were initially interpreted as tumuli until excavation revealed otherwise. Survey should always be seen as the first stage in any project. Taken on its own there is a very great likelihood that serious errors of interpretation will result and it should be deemed essential that at least some excava­ tions are undertaken to provide a greater understanding of the observed results. It might be argued that the excavation component must be considerable, to allow any possibility of the correct interpretation of the survey data. Too great a reliance on survey data can lead to serious misinterpretation of the nature and scale of human activity. This was particularly the case in the NDRS with our understanding of the nature of sites. Many stood on prominent mounds which might be considered man-made, but are actually a combination of human and natural agencies as noted above. Nowhere is this

Human Adaptation to Environmental Change   323 clearer than with the well fields. The recent excavations at site H25 are demonstrating the scale of activity which was almost totally invisible to the survey team but were rapidly revealed by the excavation team. A New Kingdom presence in the form of a scatter of pottery was noted at the site by the former, a totally unexpected substantial settlement was revealed by the latter.

Notes 1. For an overview of the former, see Welsby  2008; for Roseires, see Mahmoud Suliman Bashir et al. 2012. 2. The work in the Eastern Desert principally by the CeRDO missions were not rescuedriven. In the vast and inhospitable terrain to the east of the Nile between it and the Red Sea Hills, no large-scale threat to the archaeological remains could be envisaged at the time the surveys took place. In the last few years, however, the situation has dramatically changed with the new “gold rush” and many sites recorded by CeRDO are now either in imminent danger or have already been destroyed. Some areas of the Libyan Desert par­ ticularly close to Jebel Uweinat are being similarly affected. 3. For a detailed discussion and listing of the various types of survey undertaken in the region up to the beginning of this century, see Grzymski 2006:385ff. 4. For example river levels fell between 1965 and 1973 with the flows in the Atbara and Blue Niles dropping 22–29 percent below their long-term means. In the context of this paper it is noteworthy that this caused a decline in the flow of the Nile at Dongola of 11 percent (Walsh 1991:50). 5. The river was a more significant logistical barrier for archaeologists both here and in the Fourth Cataract, as earlier at the Second Cataract, leading to the unfortunate separate study of each river bank. 6. For a recent discussion of the evidence for early Kushite occupation at Kawa, see Welsby, 2019b. 7. Two of these wells, dug into the former bed of the Hawawiya Nile channel, have been OSL dated to 1170 bce (±120 yr) and 1440 bce (±140) (Macklin et al. 2013). 8. The impact of human activities was clear on many sites. At the Kerma Ancien cemetery of P37 the stone tomb monuments have created a similar effect. While the graves at the top of the slope were preserved almost to their full depth—some were still 2.05 m in depth— half-way down the slope bodies were on the present ground surface, while further down piles of bones indicated where even the bottom of the graves had been blown away (Welsby 2001:206ff., 608). 9. For a description of well fields used by the Kababish in northern Kordofan, see Asad 1970:25–27. 10. For a suggested reversion to pastoralism during and at the end of the New Kingdom in Lower Nubia partly for economic reasons, see Trigger 1985:470; Fuller 1994:115–16. 11. For a useful discussion with references, see Garcea and Sebastiani 1999:55ff.

References Cited Arkell, A.J. 1950 Varia Sudanica. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 36:24–40. Asad, T. 1970 The Kababish Arabs: Power, Authority and Consent in a Nomadic Tribe. Hurst and Co.

324   Derek A. Welsby Barker, G.W.W., D. Gilbertson, G.D.B. Jones, and D. J. Mattingly 1996 Farming the Desert: The UNESCO Libyan Valleys Archaeological Survey, v. 1: Synthesis. UNESCO Publishing/ Department of Antiquities (Tripoli)/Society for Libyan Studies. Bonnet, C. 1986 Kerma, territoire et métropole. Quatre leçons au Collège de France. Bibliothèque Générale 9. Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale du Caire. ——— 1987 Travaux de la Mission de l’Université de Genève sur le site de Kerma (Soudan, Province du Nord). Bulletin de la Société Française d’Égyptologie 109:8–23. ——— 2011 Le site archéologique de Tabo. Une nouvelle réflexion. In La pioche et la plume. Hommages archéologiques à Patrice Lenoble, ed. V. Rondot, F. Alpi, and F. Villeneuve, pp. 283–93. ——— 2014 Forty Years Research on Kerma Cultures. In The Fourth Cataract and Beyond: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference for Nubian Studies, ed. J.R. Anderson and D.A. Welsby, pp. 81–93. British Museum Publications on Egypt and Sudan 1. Peeters. Bonnet, C. ed. 1990 Kerma, royaume De Nubie. Musée d’art et d’histoire, Genève. Castiglioni, A. and A. Castiglioni 2014 La recherche de la terre d’Amou. In The Fourth Cataract and Beyond: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference for Nubian Studies, ed. J.R.  Anderson and D.A.  Welsby, pp. 523–30. British Museum Publications on Egypt and Sudan 1. Peeters. Castiglioni, A., A. Castiglioni, and C. Bonnet 2010 The Gold Mines of the Kingdom of Kerma. In Between the Cataracts: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference for Nubian Studies, ed. W.  Godlewski and A.  Łajtar, Part 2, Fasc. 1, pp. 263–70. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean Supplement Series 2.2/1. Warsaw University. Crawford, O.G.S. 1951 The Fung Kingdom of Sennar. John Bellows Ltd. Fuller, D.Q. 1994 Chiefdom, State or Checklist? A Review Article [of D.  O’Connor 1993, Ancient Nubia: Egypt’s Rival in Africa]. Archaeological Review from Cambridge 13:113–22. Garcea, E.A.A. and R. Sebastiani 1999 Advantages and Limitations of Survey: The Case of the Napata Region. Archéologie du Nil Moyen 8:55–83. Gratien, B. 1999 Some Rural Settlements at Gism El-Arba in the Northern Dongola Reach. Sudan & Nubia 3:10–12. Gray, T. 1949 The Fourth Cataract. Sudan Notes and Records 30:120–21. Grzymski, K.A. 1987 Archaeological Reconnaissance in Upper Nubia. Sudan Studies on Ancient Egypt 14. Benben. ——— 2006 Territory and Landscape Archaeology in the Middle Nile Valley 1000 BC–AD 1500. In Acta Nubica: Proceedings of the X International Conference of Nubian Studies, ed. I. Caneva and A. Roccati, pp. 377–93. Libreria dello Stato. Hintze, F. 1959 Preliminary Report of the Butana Expedition 1958. Kush 7:171–96. Honegger, M. 2004a The Pre-Kerma: a Cultural Group from Upper Nubia Prior to the Kerma Civilisation. Sudan & Nubia 7:38–46. ——— 2004b Settlement and Cemeteries of the Mesolithic and Early Neolithic at El-Barga (Kerma Region). Sudan & Nubia 7:27–32. Honegger, M. 2011 Excavations at Wadi el-Arab. Kerma, documents de la mission archéologique suisse au Soudan 3:3–8. ——— 2014 Recent Advances in our Understanding of Prehistory in Northern Sudan. In The Fourth Cataract and Beyond: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference for Nubian Studies, ed. J.R.  Anderson and D.A.  Welsby, pp. 19–30. British Museum Publications on Egypt and Sudan 1. Peeters. Jesse, F. 2006 Cattle, Sherds and Mighty Walls—The Wadi Howar from Neolithic to Kushite Times. Sudan & Nubia 10:43–54.

Human Adaptation to Environmental Change   325 Judd, M. 2008 The Human Skeletal Analysis. In A Neolithic Cemetery in the Northern Dongola Reach (Sudan): Excavations at Site R12, ed. S.  Salvatori and D.  Usai, pp. 83–104. Sudan Archaeological Research Society Publication 16. BAR International Series 1814. Archaeopress. Kuper, R. 1995 Prehistoric Research in the Southern Libyan Desert: A Brief Account and Some Conclusions of the B.O.S.  Project. Cahier de Recherches de l’Institut de Papyrologie et d’Égyptologie de Lille 17:123–42. Kuper, R. and S.  Kröpelin 2006 Climate- controlled Holocene Occupation in the Sahara: Motor of Africa’s Evolution. Science 313:803–807. Langlois, O., G. Durrenmath, L. Khalidi, Hisham Khidir Ahmed Karrar, L. Cez, L. Gourichon, H. Sambo and C. Pruvost 2019. Chronicle of a Destruction Foretold: A Belated Reassessment of the Preservation Status of Neolithic Habitation Sites in the Kadruka concession (Northern Dongola Reach, Sudan). Sudan & Nubia 23:61–67. Macadam, M.F.L. 1949 The Temples of Kawa, v. 1: The Inscriptions. Oxford University Press. ——— 1955 The Temples of Kawa, v. 2: History and Archaeology of the Site. Oxford University Press. Macklin, M.G., J.C. Woodward, D.A. Welsby, G.A.T. Duller, F.M. Williams, and M.A.J. Williams 2013 Reach-scale River Dynamics Moderate the Impact of Rapid Holocene Climate Change on Floodwater Farming in the Desert Nile. Geology 41:695–98. Mahmoud Suliman Bashir, Murtada Bushara Mohamed, and Mohamed Saad Abdalah 2012 Rosieres Dam Heightening Archaeological Salvage Project. The Excavations at Azaza Site ROSE 5, Preliminary Report. Sudan & Nubia 16:132–39. Monneret de Villard, U. 1935–57 La Nubia Medioevale. Mission Archéologique de Nubie 1929–1934. Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale. Reinold, J. 1993 S.F.D.A.S. Rapport préliminaire de la campagne 1991–1992 dans la Province du Nord. Kush 16:142–68. ——— 2001 Kadruka and the Neolithic in the Northern Dongola Reach. Sudan & Nubia 5:2–10. Reisner, G.A. 1914 New Acquisitions of the Egyptian Department: A Garrison Which Held the Northern Sudan in the Hyksos Period, about 1700 B.C. Bulletin of the Museum of Fine Art 12:9–24. Salvatori, S. and D. Usai 2008 A Neolithic Cemetery in the Northern Dongola Reach (Sudan): Excavations at Site R12. Sudan Archaeological Research Society Publications 16. BAR International Series 1814. Archaeopress. Smith, S.T. 1998–2002 The University of California Dongola Reach Expedition, West Bank Reconnaissance Survey, 1997–1998. Kush 18:157–72. Smith, S.T. and M.R. Buzon 2018 The Fortified Settlement at Tombos and Egyptian Colonial Strategy in New Kingdom Nubia. In From Microcosm to Macrocosm: Individual Households and Cities in Ancient Egypt and Nubia, ed. J. Budka and J. Auenmüller, pp. 205–25. Sidestone. Smith, S.T. and G.  Herbst 2005 The UCSB West (Left) Bank Archaeological Survey from El-Kab to Mograt. In Proceedings of the Archaeology of the Fourth Nile Cataract, ed. H. Paner and S. Jakobielski, pp. 133–44. Gdańsk Archaeological Museum African Reports 4. ——— 2008 Neolithic through Kerma Settlement at Ginefab. In Actes de la 4e Conférence Internationale sur I’Archéologie de la 4e Cataracte du Nil, ed. B. Gratien, pp. 203–16. Cahier de Recherches de l’Institut de Papyrologie et d’Egyptologie de Lille Supplément 7. Thomas, R.I. 2014 The Qatar-Sudan Archaeological Project in the Northern Dongola Reach. El-Eided Mohamadein (H25): A Kerma, New Kingdom and Napatan Settlement on the Alfreda Nile. Sudan & Nubia 18:58–68.

326   Derek A. Welsby Trigger, B.G. 1985 Land and Trade as Patterns in Sudanese History. In Studi di Paletnologia in Onore di Salvatore  M.  Puglisi, ed. M.  Liverani, A.  Palmieri, and R.  Peroni, pp. 465–75. Università di Roma “La Sapienza,” Dipartimento di scienze storiche, archeologiche e antro­ pologiche dell’antichità. Walsh, R.P.D. 1991 Climate, Hydrology, and Water Resources. In The Agriculture of the Sudan, ed. G.M. Craig, pp. 19–53. Oxford University Press. Ward, J. 1905 Our Sudan, its Pyramids and Progress. John Murray. Welsby, D. A. 2001 Life on the Desert Edge: 7000 Years of Settlement in the Northern Dongola Reach, Sudan. Sudan Archaeological Research Society Publication 7. BAR International Series 980. Archaeopress. ——— 2008 The Merowe Dam Archaeological Salvage Project: Summary of the Results 1996–2006. In Between the Cataracts: Proceedings of the 11th Conference for Nubian Studies, ed. W.  Godlewski and A.  Łajtar, Part 1, pp. 33–47. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean Supplement Series 2.1. Warsaw University. ——— 2017 Gematon between the Reigns of Ramesses VI and Taharqo. In Nubia in the New Kingdom: Lived Experience, Pharaonic Control and Indigenous Traditions, ed. N. Spencer, A. Stevens, and M. Binder, pp. 475–87. British Museum Publications on Egypt and Sudan 3. Peeters. Welsby, D.A. 2019a A Forest or a Jungle of Columns? An Aspect of Architecture in the Kerma and Kushite Periods. Sudan & Nubia 23:144–51. Welsby, D.A. 2019b Settlements of the Early Kushite period. In Handbook of Ancient Nubia, ed. D. Raue, pp. 591–620. De Gruyter. Welsby, D.A., M.G.  Macklin, and J.C.  Woodward 2002 Human Responses to Holocene Environmental Changes in the Northern Dongola Reach of the Nile, Sudan. In Egypt and Nubia: Gifts of the Desert, ed. R. Friedman, pp. 28–38. British Museum. Welsby, D.A. and I. Welsby Sjöström 2020 More Evidence for the Neolithic in the Northern Dongola Reach. In Tales of Three Worlds. Archaeology and Beyond: Asia, Italy, Africa. A Tribute to Sandro Salvatori, ed. D. Usai, S. Tuzzato, and M. Vidale pp. 302–324. Archaeopress. Yahia Fadl Tahir 2013 Archaeological, Ethnographical and Ecological Project of El-Ga’ab Basin in Western Dongola: A Report on the Second Season 2010. Sudan & Nubia 17:124–30.

chapter 18

Egy pti a n Conqu est a n d A dmi n istr ation of N u bi a Dominique Valbelle

Though Middle Egyptian kings such as Senusret I or Senusret III seem to have been rather powerful ones, they never succeeded in conquering the country of Kush. They built the Second Cataract fortresses, called menenu—listed during the 13th Dynasty on the Ramesseum papyrus X—in response to the Kushite defenses of Kerma and Dokki Gel. During the Second Intermediate Period, those fortresses passed under the authority of the king of Kush, as some Egyptian members of the staff in Buhen record it on their stelae (Smith 1976:80). Egypt was then reduced to a territory of variable extent, according to the respective attacks of Hyksos in the North and of Kushites in the South. The kings of that period were called “king inside Thebes,” the south of the country and Lower Nubia being no more part of the Egyptian territory, as a dipinto in the tomb of Sobeknakht in Elkab during the 17th Dynasty shows: “Kush came . . . aroused (?) along his length, he having stirred up the tribes of Wawat, . . . of Khenthennefer, Punt and the Medjaw . . . ” (Davies 2003a, 2003c, 2003d).

The Stages of the Conquest Shortly after the reconquest of Egypt, that of Nubia became one of the priorities for the first pharaohs of the 18th Dynasty (Fig. 18.1). In a graffito in Arminna west, the names of Kamose and Ahmose are followed by those of the “viceroys” they appointed—with the title of “King’s Sons”—Teti and Djehuty (Simpson 1963:34, pl. 17b, fig. 27). The control of the fortresses in the Second Cataract was naturally the first step: the stela of year 3 of Kamose commemorates probably the (re)building of the fortifications of the inner town in Buhen; under Ahmose, the commandant Turo erected, in the northern part of the

328   Dominique Valbelle

Figure 18.1  The Egyptian conquest of Nubia in the 18th Dynasty until the death of Amenhotep II. Map: Samuel Burns.

site, a temple to the local Horus (Smith  1976:8.82.209–210, pl. II.1, LVIII.1, LXXX). Remains of that reign preserved in Nubia are nevertheless rather few. The biographical narrative of the commander of a ship’s contingent Ahmes, son of Abana, in his tomb at Elkab (Davies 2009b) contains a brief but precise account of the king Ahmose’s military campaign. Among the thousands of relief fragments from the funerary temple of Ahmose in Abydos, a few pieces may refer to the “liberation” war conducted by the king, but the attempt to connect it to a Nubian campaign, which would be evoked also on a relief from Sai (Harvey 1998:363–64), is highly hypothetical. It is still difficult to define the nature and extent of the Egyptian occupation of the site at the time (Budka 2011:31). Commemorations prove nevertheless that Ahmose had already conquered the island (L. Gabolde 2011:117–26), while his cartouche on Jebel Kajbar, at the Third Cataract, implies that his troops reached that place (Edwards 2006:58–59). The military action of his successor, Amenhotep I, is mentioned in the biography of the Director of Sealed Items Ahmes Pennekhebet (Davies 2014a). The campaign referred

Egyptian Conquest and Administration of Nubia   329 to is commemorated in a graffito of year 8 let by Turo, then “Confidant of the King in the Southern Countries” and “King’s Son,” in Uronarti, where the later may have built a temple outside the north gate (Dunham 1967:13, pl. XXVI). In a graffito of year 9 in Semna, he is “King’s Son of the Southern Countries” (Hintze and Reineke 1989:153, no. 512). In Sai, the ceramics of level 5 (Budka  2011:23–32) suggest that a first temple had been erected under Amenhotep I (Vercoutter 1975:15, pl. III, S.413; L. Gabolde 2011:127–29). Sometime during the beginning of the 18th Dynasty, the scribe and mayor of Nekhen Hormeni tells on his stela (Florence inv. 2549: Bosticco 1965:22–24) that he was sent, when he grew old, to Wawat to bring the tributes by boat. It indicates that, as a legacy of the Second Intermediate Period, the territory of Lower Nubia seems to include already the south of Upper Egypt as far as Hierakonpolis. The conquest of Kush was probably planned by Thutmose I since his coronation, as he sent to Turo a decree to display it in Aswan, Kubban, and Wadi Halfa, revealing his five names, one year and a half before the date appearing on the great Tombos rock stela: year 2, 2nd month of akhet, 15th day. Two other inscriptions, at Akasha (Davies 2014b:40–41, pl. 23, fig. 14) and Tangur (Hintze and Reinecke 1989:171–72, pl. 238) are roughly dated to year 2. Undated inscriptions were engraved on a distant rock at Kurgus, beyond the Fourth Cataract, to mark the new southern border of the Egyptian Empire; they are inspired by Senusret III’s stelae in Uronarti and Semna (Davies 2004). The return of the victorious army is commemorated at Sehel (Gasse and Rondot  2007:128–29, 478). Most of the Egyptian Middle Kingdom fortresses on the Second Cataract were reconstructed and reoccupied by this time. Remains from the reign of Thutmose I have been discovered in Semna where a temple was erected (Reisner  1929:73). In Upper Nubia, several new menenu were founded in order to collect and secure the tributes, and to promote the cult of Egyptian gods, the reputation of Pharaoh, and Egyptian culture. Two stelae mention the creation of those foundations by Thutmose I. The stela of Thutmose II, on the road between Aswan and Philae, evokes: “ . . . those menenu, which your father built at the time of his victories” (L. Gabolde 2004:132–33), while that of Thutmose III in Jebel Barkal proclaims: “He made (this) as his monument for his father [Amun-Rē], lord of Nesuttawy in the menenu (called) ‘Slaughter-of-the-Foreigners,’ ” implying the pre-existence of a fortified town when Thutmose III decided to build in it a “resting place of eternity” (Stela BMFA 23.733, ll. 1–2: Valbelle 2014:248). Archaeological remains of a menenu of that reign were recently found on the site of Dokki Gel (Bonnet 2015; see Bonnet, this volume). Erected directly on the erased walls of the last buildings of a Kerma Classic African ceremonial town, huge Egyptian defenses with a hypostyle hall leading to three temples, two ceremonial palaces, granaries, an area for the cattle, and ceramic ovens were discovered there. A place was reserved for local temples and a ceremonial palace near the northern one of Thutmose I, where the throne was built in a local way, so as to show that the king, adopting indigenous royal practices, became the legitimate sovereign of that country. No commemorative monument of the conquest from that level has been discovered yet. However, the provenance of the statue of Turo, known to have been found in Kerma

330   Dominique Valbelle (Habachi  1980:630), may be re-examined in the light of those discoveries: the gods named in the inscriptions suggest that it had been made for Buhen or Semna, but it is no longer unthinkable that a statue of that King’s Son of Kush could have been found in the ancient capital of the kingdom of Kush where he certainly was in charge of the erection of the menenu. Nevertheless the conquest of Upper Nubia was quickly challenged around the end of the reign of Thutmose I. At the very beginning of the reign of his successor Thutmose II, a coalition of Kushites and allies regained possession of the Egyptian menenu established in the heart of the ancient realm of Kush, as the stela of year 1 of Thutmose II, on the road between Aswan and Philae, reports it: “So then a prince in the north of Kushthe-wretch, has come to a rebellion with two Nubian Iuntyw among the children of the prince of Kush-the-wretch, who had fled before the lord of the Two Lands, the day of the slaughter (done by) the Perfect God. The country was divided into three parts, each one independent (from the other two)” (L. Gabolde 2004:132–33). Those two Nubian Iuntyw are seemingly the leaders of the populations whose architectural remains of African type have been recently discovered in Dokki Gel (Bonnet 2015; see Bonnet, this volume). Whether native of southern or western countries, they came from lands expanding on or beyond the borders of Kush, regions which the Egyptians called “Khenthennefer.” The scale of the revolt is visible in Dokki Gel: the Egyptian defenses and all the internal constructions of the menenu were erased as severely as Thutmose I had done with the previous African town, and new fortifications were erected in order to prevent the return of the Egyptians. The stela of year 1 of Thutmose II commemorates a quick and successful repression by the Egyptian forces, but several other texts suggest that Queen Hatshepsut (1478–1459 bce) had to organize at least one victorious campaign against Kush to restore the complete authority of Egypt over the region (Hintze and Reinecke 1989:172, no. 562, pl. 239). In Dokki Gel, most of the constructions of the first menenu were rebuilt in their original place, except the southern ceremonial palace (Bonnet 2015). Fragments from the decoration of the contemporaneous temples provided chronological reference marks. Nevertheless, according to their state of destruction, it is difficult to date precisely their erection during the reign of Thutmose II, the co-regency of Hatshepsut and Thutmose III, or her reign (Bonnet and Valbelle in prep.). The first occurrences of the toponym Pa-nebes—“the jujube-tree”—appear then as an epithet of Amun on private stelae of that level (Valbelle 2003). Rich documentation of that period found in Lower Nubia reveals the first steps of the Egyptian organization set to administrate those territories. Two temples were built respectively in Buhen and Semna. The first one was erected and decorated by order of Hatshepsut, before being usurped by Thutmose III (Caminos 1974:4, 23, 41, pl. 29, 42). A decree of year 2 of Thutmose III for the renewal of offerings is inscribed on the east wall of the second one (Caminos  1998:41–48, pls. 24–27; Laboury  2014:56–60). Since the decree was dated at the beginning of the regency, the identity of the King’s Son responsible for carrying out the royal order has been recently discussed (Davies 2008:30–31) and the name of Seni was proposed. The man, who succeeded Satayt and his son Turo, is

Egyptian Conquest and Administration of Nubia   331 probably the author of a biographical text summarizing the principal stages of his career under the reigns of Ahmose to Thutmose II, on the façade of the same temple. Another man may have occupied the function between year 2 and year 7, when the referent king is still Thutmose III: the Overseer of Southern Countries Penrē whose statue was found in Dokki Gel (Valbelle 2007) may be the Penrē/Payrē/Parē buried in “shaft 3” of Sheikh Abd el-Gurna (Bács 2014). On his Dokki Gel statue, only “Overseer of Southern Foreign Countries” is preserved; on his funerary cones he is “First King’s Son”; on his canopic jar, “King’s Son, Overseer of the Southern Foreign Countries” and son of the “Dignitary, King’s Son Sekheru”; on a statue found in the Ramesseum, only “Overseer of the Southern Foreign Countries.” The discovery in Dokki Gel of his broken statue—the most important one of the New Kingdom found on the site—near the remains of the western temple of Hatshepsut, suggests that he may have been commissioned to rebuild the temples after the destruction of those of Thutmose I, even if his biographical text makes no allusion to it. The date of year 10 [of Thutmose III?] on a Canaanite jar may give a terminus for Penrē’s office. The next King’s Son Inebny/Amenemnekhu left numerous inscriptions between Sehel and Tombos—Shalfak, Kumma, Tangur, and Dal—among which three inscriptions are dated respectively to year 12, 18, and 20 of Thutmose III (Davies 2008), that is, after the coronation of Hatshepsut. His name, as well as that of the queen—Maātkarē— and her representations, are hammered out on several inscriptions. North of the Second Cataract, between Aniba and Buhen, several monuments, undated but roughly contemporaneous, provide complementary information on the administration of Lower Nubia. Se, Commander of the Country, Overseer of the Gold of Every Place of the King’s Son, King’s Son, Overseer of the Southern Countries, left a graffito in Arminna East, near the inscriptions of his predecessors, Teti and Djehuty. The apparent contemporaneity of several king’s sons endowed with other titles suggests that the function was not yet restricted to one man only, but conferred to officials in charge of various missions. The king’s sons were helped by deputies at least since the time of Hatshepsut: the oldest one known is Ruiu, a Nubian man incorporated in the Egyptian administration of his land, whose tomb and block statues were found in Aniba (Steindorff 1937:70, pl. 37d). The process of acculturation seems to have been successful in the region of Tehkhet where another Nubian family was in charge of the local administration for the benefit of Egypt. In addition to their Nubian birth-names they had Egyptian names and Egyptian titles, and were buried in tombs of Egyptian type in Debeira provided with Egyptian funerary equipment (Säve-Söderbergh and Troy 1991:182–211, pls. 45–60).

Organizing the Administration of Nubia The proper reign of Thutmose III, after year 22, and the nomination of a new King’s Son, named Nehy, who had followed the king in Syria (Caminos 1974: v. 1:47–53, pls. 60–62) mark the structuring of the administration in the Nubian territories. The Annals of

332   Dominique Valbelle Thutmose III in Karnak report only the king’s victories in the Middle East (Redford 2003; Delange 2015:113–83, pls. I–II), but mention, from year 31 to year 42, tributes from Wawat and Kush—with [four] sons of the prince of Irem in year 34—showing clearly that the authority of Egypt in Nubia was no longer questioned. Evoking only the victories of the king in Naharina, the Jebel Barkal stela of year 47 (Redford 2003:103–19) confirms that the king needed no longer to pacify the country, but simply intended to record the extent of his authority. In the same spirit, his inscriptions on the rock of Kurgus (Davies 2004) are placed beside those of his grandfather in order to express his proper power. Two graffiti in Sehel mention a victorious campaign against Kush in year 50. But, situated near similar inscriptions of Thutmose I, they may have been inspired by them, like in Kurgus. A panel on the lower part of the east wall of the Semna temple recalls the career of Nehy, especially his appointment as King’s Son, Overseer of the Southern Countries, whose northern limit was Nekhen (Hierakonpolis) and southern limit a menenu whose name is lost (Caminos 1998:61–65, pls. 29–31). On a pillar in Sai, he records the building of a temple in the menenu of Shaāt in year 25 (Minault-Gout 2006–2007:276–92, fig. 3d; Azim and Carlotti 2011–12). The enclosure wall of the town was erected under Thutmose III (Budka and Doyen  2012–13:178–82). Nehy left inscriptions in Kumma where his name is erased (Caminos 1998, v. 2:12–13), in Ellesija, in Qasr Ibrim where he had a shrine (Caminos 1968:35–43, pls. 6–11), and on the rock of Kurgus (Davies 2003b:56, fig. 4), showing his involvement beside the king. His office in Aniba, whose gate was preserved, stood in the annexes of the temple (Steindorff 1937:31–35, pls. 16–18). Although lists of foreign countries submitted to the king of Egypt are already attested in the Treasury of Thutmose I in Karnak North and in the temple of Hatshepsut in Deir el-Bahri, those on the sixth and seventh pylons in Karnak represent monumental testimonies of the Egyptian domination over the known world, even if the relationships which Egypt entertained at that time with those countries may have been of various natures. The comparison of those lists with the tributes enumerated in the Annals gives precious indications about the hierarchy and connections between the countries mentioned. The precision regarding the amounts and provenance of each tribute presupposes the implementation of an efficient administrative network exploiting the wealth of occupied territories—especially gold (Morkot 1995:175–87)—filling the Treasury and the Granary, and collecting other kinds of precious and exotic products. Despite the gaps in our documentation, it seems clear that most of the first king’s sons in charge of Nubia during the first half of the 18th Dynasty had a strong connection with Thebes and the temple of Amun. Some of them placed their statue in a temple of the west bank, while their sepulture, or pieces of their funerary equipment, have been identified in the Theban necropolis. It does not mean that they were born in Thebes. Usersatet, who may have been native of the region of the First Cataract according to his name including that of the local goddess, was brought up in the Harem and accompanied Amenhotep II as a royal herald to Takhsy before being appointed king’s son. A stela in Semna reproduces a letter that the king addressed to him in year 23 (Manuelian 1987:156–58; Darnell 2014). The distrust of the king towards the Nubians is

Egyptian Conquest and Administration of Nubia   333 expressed by his decision to hang on the walls of Napata one of the vanquished princes of Takhsy, to underline his power to the Kushites and so prevent any project of revolt. One of the stelae of year 3 commemorating this event was placed in the sanctuary of Amada (Mohamed Aly et al. 1967:N 7). The presentation of the Nubian tribute to the king is illustrated and commented in the shrine of Usersatet on the cliff of Ibrim (Caminos 1968:59–75, pls. 23–35). The nature and amount of chariots, living panthers, and other products collected—gold, precious stones, ivory, ebony, and perfumes—are impressive, as well as the 2,549 bearers necessary to bring them. The contribution of Amenhotep II and his representative is also visible in temples already built by his predecessors, either in Lower Nubia—Amada and Kumma—as in Upper Nubia—Tabo and Dokki Gel. For an unknown reason, the name of Usersatet was erased on several of his monuments (Gasse and Rondot 2003:43,  2007:147–55; Davies  2009a), while it is untouched on others. A graffito in Tombos associates him with the fan-bearer and Overseer of the Southern Countries Hekaemsasem; the mention of Usersatet’s collaborators in various graffiti gives us an idea about the staff working for the viceroy, such as his deputies Sennefer and Mehu, or his scribe Nehesy. The provenance of his shabti is unknown and his tomb still undiscovered.

A Better Knowledge of Upper Nubia It is under the reign of Thutmose IV (1401–1391) that the complete title “King’s Son of Kush” is attested for Amenhotep in connection with that of “Overseer of the Southern Countries,” although the short writing—“King’s Son”—was still concurrently used (Bryan 1991:250–51). The appearance, in Theban tombs during the same reign, of the first accurate representations of real black men bringing the southern tributes may not be a coincidence. The Egyptians had improved their knowledge of all of Nubia (Fig. 18.2) and acquired control of the roads leading to Darfur and Kordofan (Vercoutter 1980). Only two military campaigns, in years 2 and 7, are attested in Lower Nubia. The king had a more active architectural policy there than his predecessor, especially in Amada where the courtyard was transformed into a hypostyle hall. In Upper Nubia, some blocks of a temple with his names were found in Tabo (Jacquet-Gordon et al. 1969:6, pl. XXIII.1; JacquetGordon in prep.); in Dokki Gel, a new sanctuary preceded by a wide pronaos was erected at the rear part of the hypostyle hall of Thutmose III (Bonnet 2001:209, 2003:261–64); and, in Jebel Barkal, some blocks of a temple of Thutmose IV were reused in later monuments (Kendall et al. 2017). Caused by a revolt of Kush, the victorious campaign of year 5 of Amenhotep III was widely proclaimed in Egypt and in Nubia, in particular on a rock stela next to that of Thutmose II, on the road between Aswan and Philae (Valbelle 2015:481–82). The campaign commemorated in Semna by the King’s Son Merymes is probably another one. He

334   Dominique Valbelle

Figure 18.2  Egyptian-occupied territory in Nubia from the reign of Thutmose IV to the death of Seti I. Map: Samuel Burns.

set rock inscriptions in Wadi Abbad, Ellesija and Tombos. As under the preceding reigns, several temples were built in Lower Nubia (Wadi es-Sebua, Aniba, Kubban) and Upper Nubia (Sai, Tabo, Dokki Gel). While several Egyptians were buried in Aniba or Sai, the tomb of Merymes has been located in West Thebes. But the reign of Amenhotep III marks a turning-point in the royal policy in Nubia. As in Egypt proper, the king transformed the image of the temples, thanks to his architect, Amenhotep, son of Hapu. He founded in Soleb, north of the Third Cataract, a menenu called “Khāemmaāt” where he ordered the erection of a temple of the same style as that of Luxor, much more impressive than those of his predecessors in Nubia, mainly consecrated to the cult of his sacred image. Three jubilees were celebrated there and represented on the rear walls of the first pylon (Schiff Giorgini et al. 1998–2003). The queen Tiy had her own temple erected in Sedeinga (Rilly 2015), 15 km further north. The region chosen by Amenhotep III, around the Third Cataract, would remain the temple center until Sety I.

Egyptian Conquest and Administration of Nubia   335 Despite his apparent determination, early in his reign, of limiting his world to the territory of Amarna, Amenhotep IV/Akhenaten (1352–1339 bce) showed an interest in Nubia. He usurped the gate of his father’s temple in Soleb and founded a new town nearby, in Sesebi (Blackman 1937:148–49). His King’s Son Djehutymes was also active in Dokki Gel, where he erected two temples to the new dynastic god, Aten, using the previous monuments as a quarry. The name of the city of Kawa (Gematen), included that of the god who replaced Amun, which implies an Amarnan foundation, though no remains from that period have been found there to date. In Jebel Barkal, two fragmentary statues of Djehutymes and undecorated talatat blocks were discovered (Kendall 2009; Kendall et al. 2017); all over Nubia, the hammering out of the representations and name of Amun was as systematic as it is in Egypt. During the following reigns, the domination of Kush remained essential in the expression of Egyptian power as the iconography of the time shows, on the chest of Tutankhamun and in the speos of Horemheb in Gebel es-Silsila (Thiem 2000:141–42), but no military campaign in Nubia seems attested. Amenhotep, called Huy, the King’s Son of Tutankhamun, built a temple in Kawa (Macadam  1949–55), a chapel in Jebel Barkal (Kendall et al. 2017), and the representation of his official activities occupies a large place in the decoration of his tomb in Gurnet Murai (de Garis Davies and Gardiner 1926; M. Gabolde 2015:242–53). The first scene took place in the Amun temple where he received, in the presence of the king, the seal of his “office of King’s Son of Kush from Nekhen to Karoy/Nesuttawy.” Then he sailed upstream to Faras where he was welcomed by his subordinates—the first prophet of the king, the deputy of Kush, the governor of Khāemmaāt, and a director of the herds—in “the menenu Sehetep-netjeru,” the contemporary seat of the local government, where he built a temple. The evaluation of the local products, especially gold, is depicted in details, before their transportation in Thebes and presentation to the king by the prince of Miam Hekanefer and his family, in ceremonial Nubian dresses. The Egyptian-style tomb of Hekanefer in Toshka East (Simpson 1963:2–18) and his titles of “Bearer of the Carrying Chair of the Lord of the Two Lands, Child of the kap” suggest that he has been educated with the royal children and was familiar to the Pharaoh. The King’s Son of Ay, Paser, maybe a son of Amenhotep/ Huy, made a niche in Jebel es-Shams. Two King’s Sons—Iuny and the son of Paser, Amenemipet—are known under the reign of Sety I. In addition to a temple, or at least its annexes, in Aksha (Fuscaldo 1992:195) and some restorations in Amada, he was the last Egyptian king who displayed an active policy in Upper Nubia. He founded, north of the Third Cataract, a new menenu called “the House of Menmaātrē” (Amara West) as a center of economic management for the region (P. Spencer 1997; N. Spencer et al. 2014). He also set a rock stela near the speos of Thutmose III in Jebel Dosha and rebuilt the town of Sesebi. Nearby, on the rock of Nauri, was engraved a long decree regulating the means granted to “the Temple of Millions of Years (of) the King of South and North Egypt, Menmaātrē-happy-in-Abydos” (Kitchen 1975:45–58, 1993:38–50). In Dokki Gel, several fragmentary blocks from a temple and a stamped handle of jar with the name of the temple of Sety I in Abydos

336   Dominique Valbelle (Valbelle 2005:252–53, fig. 5) confirm the connection between the royal foundation and the site of Pa-nebes. Further south, in Jebel Barkal, a badly preserved stela commemorates in year 3 or 11 (?) of Sety I “the re[construction] of a broad hall of appearances,” which has been tentatively identified with one of the first stages of temple B 503 (Kendall et al. 2017). A military campaign, celebrated on two stelae in Sai and Amara (Vercoutter 1980), was led in year 8 (?) by the king against “the enemies of Irem-the-wretch (who) planned a rebellion.” The land of Irem had been included, immediately after Kush, in the lists of the southern foreign populations submitted to Egypt since Thutmose III. The mention of a menenu—whose name is incomplete—reached by Sety I confirms that Irem belonged to the Egyptian possessions in Nubia. The King’s Son Amenemipet erected in Qasr Ibrim a third stela, undated, evoking generally the glory of Pharaoh, where the slaughtering of Kush is balanced by the trampling down of the Retenu, in the southern Levant.

Last Policy under the Ramessides The Nubian policy of Rameses II was rather different from that of his father: he built many temples in Lower Nubia, giving the first place in their decoration to his southern victories and to the cult of his own effigies, associated with the cult of Amun, Ptah, or Rē-horakhty (Fig. 18.3). Thus, the hemispeos of Beit el-Wali, Gerf Hussein, Wadi esSebua, Ed-Derr, and the two speos temples of Abu Simbel were built on the Nile bank, seemingly outside any settlement. In Abu Simbel, he added on the top of the front gate a monumental rebus of his name in the round. Further south, he followed the work of his father in Amara West and in Aksha where his temple was called “House of Usermaātrē, great god, lord of Nubia,” “as a monument for his living image.” But he seems not to have been much involved in architectural programs south of the Third Cataract, as if he considered no more those territories as being part of the Egyptian Empire: a stela in Dokki Gel (Valbelle 2005:253, fig. 7), few blocks reused in the temple of Taharqo in Tabo (Jacquet-Gordon, forthcoming), the usurpation of some columns in the temple of Tutankhamun in Kawa (Macadam 1949–55: v. 2:32–34) and a chapel in Jebel Barkal (Kendall et al.  2017). His King’s Sons— Amenenmipet, Iuny, Paser II, Meryiun, Hekanakhte, Huy II, Setau, and maybe Ānhotep (Dewachter  1978, I/2,  1985)—also left many other testimonies but only north of the Third Cataract. The same is mostly true for the following King’s Sons of the end of the 19th Dynasty— Messuy and Khāemteri—and of the beginning of the 20th Dynasty—Hori I and II, buried in Bubastis from where they originated. However a recarved talatat was reused in a temple built in Dokki Gel under Rameses III, figured with the captain of the bowmen of Kush Bakensetekh (Bonnet and Valbelle 2000:1115, fig. 12), who left also a graffito in Buhen (Caminos 1974: pl. 56.2). Under Rameses VI, the King’s Son Saiset appears on a stela in Amara, where the commander of garrison Ramesesnakht decorated the gate of

Egyptian Conquest and Administration of Nubia   337

Figure 18.3 Egyptian Nubia from the reign of Ramses II to the last Ramessides. Map: Samuel Burns.

the temple; with the Overseer of Southern Countries Nebmaātrēnakh, he engraved some graffiti on columns of the temple of Tutankhamun in Kawa, while a shabti of Rameses VII was discovered on the same site (Macadam 1949–55: v. 1:84–86, pl. 39). The deputy under Rameses VI, Penniut, was buried in Aniba (Steindorff 1937: v. 2, pls. 101–104). Then, three King’s Sons of the same family—Naherha, Wentawat, and Ramesesnakht— followed each other until the reign of Rameses IX. A large inscription of year 6 ­commemorates the completion of the decoration in the temple of Amara. The political and economic situation, quickly deteriorating in Egypt, brought some changes on the management of Nubia and on the office of King’s Son of Kush. Since year 9 of Rameses XI the King’s Son Panehesy began a conflict with the high priest of Amun Amenhotep. He bore the titles of “General, Overseer of the Granaries of Pharaoh” and resided in Thebes. A letter sent by the king in year 17 confirms his authority on the southern part of the country, but two years later, considered as an enemy, he was compelled to withdraw to Nubia. It is probably in year 19—first year of the “Repeating-of-

338   Dominique Valbelle birth”—that Herihor became high priest of Amun, adding to that title those of Panehesy, especially “King’s Son of Kush, Overseer of the Southern Countries.” Herihor’s son, Piankh was sent to Lower Nubia as commander of the army to subdue Panehesy who, despite a long war known through the correspondence with the scribes of the Tomb, seems to have died unvanquished and was buried in Aniba where his name remained untouched (Steindorff 1937: v. 2:240–41, pl. 29), while Nubia stopped being part of the Egyptian territories. The title “King’s Son of Kush,” which did not correspond any more to the previous office, disappeared, except for its mention on the funerary equipment of Neskhons, wife of the high priest Pinedjem II. Without Egyptian texts for two centuries, Nubia, deeply acculturated, seems anyhow to have kept some strong connections with Egypt as the 25th Dynasty demonstrates.

References Cited Azim, M. and J.-Fr. Carlotti 2011–12 Le temple A de l’île de Saï et ses abords. Cahier de Recherches de l’Institut de Papyrologie et d’Égyptologie de Lille 29:11–65. Bács, T.A. 2014 Overseers of Southern Foreign Lands and Thebes in the Reign of Hatshepsut. In Creativity and Innovation in the Reign of Hatshepsut, ed. J.  Galán, B.M.  Bryan, and P.F. Dorman, pp. 411–26. Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilization 69. Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago. Blackman, W.S. 1937 Preliminary Report of the Excavations at Sesebi, Northern Province, Anglo-Egyptian Sudan, 1936–37. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 23:145–51. Bonnet, C. 2001 Kerma. Rapport préliminaire sur les campagnes de 1999–2000 et 2000–2001. Genava n.s. 49:197–217. ——— 2003 Kerma. Rapport préliminaire sur les campagnes de 2001–2002 et 2002–2003. Genava n.s. 51:257–80. Bonnet, C. 2015 Une ville cérémonielle africaine du début du Nouvel Empire. Bulletin de l’Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale 115:1–14. Bonnet, C. and D.  Valbelle 2000 Les sanctuaires de Kerma, du Nouvel Empire à l’époque méroïtique. Comptes rendus des l’Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres: 1099–1020. in prep. Les temples égyptiens de Panébes (Doukki Gel/Kerma). Bosticco, S. 1965 Le stele egiziane del Nuovo Regno. Museo archologico di Firenze. Bryan, B.M. 1991 The Reign of Thutmose IV. Johns Hopkins University Press. Budka, J. 2011 The Early New Kingdom at Sai Island: Preliminary Results Based on the Pottery Analysis (4th Season 2010). Sudan & Nubia 15:23–33. Budka, J. and F.  Doyen 2012–13 Living in New Kingdom Towns in Upper Nubia—New Evidence from Recent Excavations on Sai Island. Ägypten & Levante 22/23:167–208. Caminos, R.  A. 1968 The Shrines and Rock-Inscriptions of Ibrim. Archaeological Survey of Egypt Memoir 32. Egypt Exploration Society. ——— 1974 The New-Kingdom Temples of Buhen I–II. Archaeological Survey of Egypt Memoirs 33–34. Egypt Exploration Society. ——— 1998 Semna-Kumma, vv. I–II: The Temple of Semna, The Temple of Kumma. Archaeological Survey of Egypt Memoirs 37–38. Egypt Exploration Society. Darnell, J.C. 2014 The Stela of the Viceroy Usersatet (Boston MFA 25.632), his Shrine at Qasr Ibrim, and the Festival of Nubian Tribute under Amenhotep II. Egypte Nilotique et Méditerranéenne 7:239–76: http://www.enim-egyptologie.fr/index.php?page=enim-7&n=11.

Egyptian Conquest and Administration of Nubia   339 Davies, W.V. 2003a Kouch en Égypte: une nouvelle inscription à El-Kab. Bulletin de la Société Française d’Égyptologie 157:38–44. ——— 2003b Kurgus 2002: The Inscriptions and Rock-Drawings. Sudan & Nubia 7:55–57. ——— 2003c Kush in Egypt. Sudan & Nubia 7:52–54. ——— 2003d Sobeknakht of Elkab and the Coming of Kush. Egyptian Archaeology 23:3–6. ——— 2004 The Rock Inscriptions at Kurgus in the Sudan. In Sehel entre Égypte et Nubie, ed. A. Gasse and V. Rondot, pp. 149–60. Orientalia Monspeliensia 14. ——— 2008 Tombos and the Viceroy Inebny/Amenemnekhu. Sudan & Nubia 12:25–33. ——— 2009a The British Museum Epigraphic Survey at Tombos: The Stela of Usersatet and Hekaemsasem. Sudan & Nubia 13:21–29. ——— 2009b The Tomb of Ahmose Son-of-Ibana at Elkab. In Studies in Honour of Luc Limme, ed. W.  Claes, H.  De Meulenaere, and S.  Hendrickx, pp. 139–76. Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta 191. ——— 2014a A View from Elkab: The Tomb and Statues of Ahmose-Pennekhbet. In Creativity and Innovation in the Reign of Hatshepsut, ed. J. Galán, B.M. Bryan, and P.F. Dorman, pp. 381–407. Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilization 69. Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago. ——— 2014b The Korosko Road Project: Recording Egyptian Inscriptions in the Eastern Desert and Elsewhere. Sudan & Nubia 18:30–43. de Garis Davies, N. and A.H. Gardiner 1926 The Tomb of Huy, Viceroy of Nubia in the Reign of Tut’ankhamūn (No. 40). Theban Tombs Series 4. Egypt Exploration Society. Delange, E. 2015 Monuments égyptiens du Nouvel Empire. Musée du Louvre. Dewachter, M. 1978 Répertoire des vice-rois de Kouch. Mémoire de l’École Pratique des Hautes Études, inédit, Paris. ——— 1985 Huisseries au temple Nord de Ouadi es-Séboua. Cahier de Recherche de l’Institut de Papyrologie et d’Égyptologie de Lille 7:23–37. Dunham, D. 1967 Uronarti, Shalfak, Mirgissa. Second Cataract Forts 2. Museum of Fine Arts. Edwards, D.N. 2006 Drawings on Rocks: The Most Enduring Monuments of Middle Nubia. Sudan & Nubia 10:55–63. Fuscaldo, P. 1992 Aksha (Serra West): The Dating of the Site. In Sesto Congresso Internazionale di Egittologia Atti 1, pp. 195–99. International Association of Egyptologists. Gabolde, L. 2004 La stèle de Thoutmosis II à Assouan, témoin historique et archétype littéraire. In Sehel entre Égypte et Nubie, ed. A.  Gasse and V.  Rondot, pp. 129–48. Orientalia Monspeliensia 14. ——— 2011 Réexamen des jalons de la présence de la XVIIIe dynastie naissante à Saï. Cahier de Recherche de l’Institut de Papyrologie et d’Égyptologie de Lille 29:115–37. Gabolde, M. 2015 Toutankhamon. Pygmalion. Gasse A. and V. Rondot 2003 The Egyptian Conquest and Administration of Nubia during the  New Kingdom: The Testimony of the Sehel Rock-Inscriptions. Sudan & Nubia 7:40–46. ——— 2007 Les inscriptions de Séhel. Mémoire de l’Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale 126. Habachi, L. 1980 Königssohn von Kusch. Lexikon der Ägyptologie 3:630–40. Harvey, S.P. 1998 The Cults of King Ahmose at Abydos. Doctoral dissertation, University of Pennsylvania. Hintze F. and W.F. Reinecke 1989 Felsinschriften aus dem sudanesischen Nubien. Publikation der Nubien-Expedition 1961–1963. Akademie Verlag. Jacquet-Gordon, H. in prep. Tabo, v. II: Blocs témoins des constructions successives sur le site de Tabo. Bibliothèque Générale, Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale.

340   Dominique Valbelle Jacquet-Gordon, H., C. Bonnet, and J. Jacquet 1969 Pnubs and the Temple of Tabo on Argo Island. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 55:103–11. Kendall, T. 2009 Talatat Architecture at Jebel Barkal: Report of the NCAM Mission 2008–2009. Sudan & Nubia 13:2–16. Kendall, T., El-Hassan Ahmed Mohamed, H. Wilson, J. Haynes, and D. Klotz 2017 Jebel Barkal in the New Kingdom: An Emerging Picture. In Nubia in the New Kingdom: Lived Experience, Pharaonic Control and Indigenous Traditions, ed. N. Spencer, A. Stevens, and M. Binder, pp. 155–88. British Museum Publications on Egypt and Sudan 3. Peeters. Kitchen, K.A. 1975 Ramesside Inscriptions: Historical and Biographical, v. 1. B.H. Blackwell. ——— 1993 Ramesside Inscriptions Translated and Annotated, v. 1. B.H. Blackwell. Laboury, D. 2014 How and Why Did Hatshepsut Invent the Image of her Royal Power? In Creativity and Innovation in the Reign of Hatshepsut, ed. J.  Galán, B.M.  Bryan, and P.F. Dorman, pp. 49–91. Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilization 69. Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago. Macadam, M.F.L. 1949–55 The Temples of Kawa. Oxford University Press. Manuelian, P.D. 1987 Studies in the Reign of Amenophis II. Hildesheimer Ägyptologische Beiträge 26. Pelizaeus Museum. Minault-Gout, A. 2006–2007 Les installations du début du Nouvel Empire à Saï: un état de la question. Cahier de Recherches de l’Institut de Papyrologie et d’Égyptologie de Lille 26:275–93. Mohamed Aly, Fouad Abdel-Hamid, and M. Dewachter 1967 Le temple d’Amada 4. Centre de Documentation et d’Études sur l’Ancienne Égypte. Morkot R. 1995 The Economy of Nubia in the New Kingdom. Actes de la VIIIe conference international des Études Nubiennes I. Communications principals. Cahier de Recherches de l’Institut de Papyrologie et d’Égyptologie de Lille 17:175–87. Redford, D.B. 2003 The Wars in Syria and Palestine of Thutmose III. Brill. Reisner, G.A. 1929 Ancient Egyptian Forts at Semna and Uronarti. Bulletin of the Museum of Fine Arts Boston 27:64–75. Rilly  C. 2015 Le miroir brisé de la reine. Bulletin de la Société Française d’Égyptologie 191–92:39–59. Säve-Söderbergh, T. and L. Troy 1991 New Kingdom Pharaonic Sites: The Finds and the Sites. The Scandinavian Joint Expedition to Sudanese Nubia 5:2–3. Schiff-Giorgini, M. 1998–2003 Soleb 3–5: The Temple. Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale. Simpson, W.K. 1963 Heka-Nefer and the Dynastic Material from Toshka and Arminna. Publication of the Pennsylvania-Yale Expedition to Egypt 1. The Peabody Museum of Natural History of Yale University and the University Museum of the University of Pennsylvania. Smith, H.S. 1976 The Fortress of Buhen: The Inscriptions. Egypt Exploration Society Excavation Memoir 48. Spencer, N., A. Stevens, and M. Binder 2014 Amara West: Living in Egyptian Nubia. British Museum. Spencer, P. 1997 Amara West, v. 1: The Architectural Report. Egypt Exploration Society Excavation Memoir 63. Steindorff, G. 1937 Aniba, v. 2: Mission Archéologique de Nubie 1929–1934. J.J. Augustin. Thiem, A.-Ch. 2000 Speos von Gebel es-Silsileh. Ägypten und Altes Testament 47. Harrassowitz. Valbelle, D. 2003 L’Amon de Pnoubs. Revue d’Égyptologie 54:191–211. ——— 2005 Kerma. Les inscriptions et la statuaire. Genava n.s. 53:251–54.

Egyptian Conquest and Administration of Nubia   341 ——— 2007 Penrê et les directeurs des pays étrangers méridionaux dans la première moitié de la XVIIIe dynastie. Revue d’Égyptologie 58:157–75. ——— 2014 Le khénou de Ramsès II. In The Workman’s Progress: Studies in the Village of Deir el-Medina and Other Documents from Western Thebes in Honour of Rob Demarée, ed. B.J.J.  Haring, O.E.  Kaper, and R.  van Walsem, pp. 237–54. Egyptologische Uitgaven 28. Nederlands Instituut voor het Nabije Oosten. ——— 2015 Où et comment les Égyptiens ont-ils commémoré leurs campagnes militaires contre Kerma? Bulletin de l’Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale 115:471–86. Vercoutter, J. 1975 La XVIIIe dynastie à Saï et en Haute Nubie. Cahier de Recherches de l’Institut de Papyrologie et d’Égyptologie de Lille 1:9–38. ——— 1980 Le pays Irem et la pénétration égyptienne en Afrique. In Livre du Centenaire 1880–1990, ed. J.  Vercoutter, pp. 168–73. Mémoire de l’Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale 104.

chapter 19

The A m u n Cu lt a n d Its Dev el opm en t i n N u bi a Luc Gabolde

The Origins of Amun and Connections with Nubia The theology of Amun is a combination of three different concepts blended together by the Theban rulers of the Egyptian 11th Dynasty:

1. the concept of the “Hidden One” known as far back as the Pyramid Texts (or earlier); 2. the solar deity Ra, provider of royal legitimacy; 3. the iconography and liturgies of ithyphallic Min of Koptos.

Though Amun is clearly a Theban composition (Gabolde 2018b: pp. 565–66), it has sometimes been hypothesized that some aspects of the deity may have originated from the Sudan. As a matter of fact, the kings of the 25th Egypto-Kushite Dynasty and their Napatan successors promoted myths, sometimes traceable back to Ramesside times, which make clear allusions to some potential Nubian roots of the deity at Jebel Barkal.1 Although there is no doubt that from the New Kingdom onwards some mythical connections were drawn between Amun and Nubia, nothing of this kind is attested in Kush during the Middle Kingdom when the god was first worshipped at Thebes, or in the Old Kingdom when the divine concept of the “Hidden One/Hidden of Name” appears in the Pyramid Texts.

344   Luc Gabolde Moreover, it should be noted that the Middle Kingdom conquest of Lower Nubia had apparently not led to any introduction of the cult of Amun in the land of Kush. Setting aside the onomastic, the god is not encountered in Egyptian inscriptions of  Middle Kingdom Nubia, except one isolated mention at Jebel Turob (H. Smith 1972:48). A private monument of the 13th Dynasty from Buhen (H. Smith 1976:5–6, pl. I,1) does mention, in the offerings-formula, Amun-R[a (?)], Sebek, Isis, and Horus, but it does not prove the existence of a cult of the god on this site. His potential mention and representation on the recently revealed stela in the name of Senusret III at Nauri is to be dated to the New Kingdom as convincingly proposed by the editor (Rondot 2008). Amun appears thus to be peculiarly insignificant among the Egyptian deities attested in Nubia at this early time. Nor was Amun considered by the Egyptian rulers to be a conquering deity: it is Montu, not Amun, who is thanked for the victories on the stela recording Senusret I’s campaign in Nubia (stela Florence 2540). This noticeable absence may be explained by the fact that the goal of the conquest was to secure the frontier, not to implement a colonization of the land aiming at a cultural or religious expansion. The real emergence of Amun in Nubia dates to the New Kingdom. It more or less followed in space and time the advances of pharaoh’s armies into the land of Kush.

The Name of the God: Egyptian Rather than Nubian The name of the god has been sometimes regarded as having a potential Nubian origin and being connected with the root aman meaning “water” in Old Nubian (Lepsius 1880:268–69) as well as in the Nobiin language (Rilly 2010:445). However, this hypothesis is not relevant for the question of the god’s origins since these languages are millennia more recent than the appearance of Amun. On the other hand, the link between the name of Amun and the Egyptian concept of “hidden” (ỉmn) is well acknowledged by the Kushites themselves (Tanwetamani; Eide et al. 1994:198–99(29)) and can easily be traced back to the Pyramid Texts.

The Ram-Headed Amun: Origins The Ram-headed Amun was considered by the Kushites themselves to be the local form of the god of Karnak (Kormysheva 1994, 2004:111–12). On a zoological level, it seems that rams of the two species Ovis longipes paleoaegyptiaca (with wavy horizontal horns) and Ovis aries platyura aegyptiaca (with horns wound

The Amun Cult and its Development in Nubia   345

Figure 19.1  Ram-Headed Amun on the rock stela of Thutmose I at Kurgus (after Davies 2017:71, figs. 6 and 7. Courtesy Vivian Davies).

around the ears) were present in early history of Nubia from where they could have spread to Egypt (see Chaix and Grant 1987 and Bickel 1991, though Boessneck 1988:72– 73 claims that the Ovis aries could have been imported from the Middle East). The most ancient exemplar of a ram-headed (“criocephalic”) Amun in Nubia as well as in Egypt is carved on the sacred rock of Kurgus and dates to the reign of Thutmose I (Figs. 19.1–2) (Davies 2017:71, figs. 6–7). As the Nubian kingdom of Kerma was a society rooted in pastoralism (Bradley 2013; Emberling 2014; Doyen and Gabolde 2017), the existence of a Nubian ram-deity pre-existing the New Kingdom Egyptian conquest has occasionally been inferred from some other—in fact extremely scarce—clues (Wildung 1984:181–82; Kormysheva  2004:109; Török  2009:151–52), though, unlike bovids, ovicaprids were only rarely depicted in Nubian artistic productions (Kleinitz 2012:33).2 The clues remain fragile and fail to constitute a definite proof of a pre-existing ovine cult in Kush, though the possibility cannot be totally discarded. Indeed it would be quite plausible that the prevalence of ram-headed Amun in the land of Kush had resulted

346   Luc Gabolde 0

10

20 cm

Figure 19.2 Ram-Headed Amun on the rock stela of Thutmose III at Kurgus (after Davies 2017:71, figs. 6 and 7. Courtesy Vivian Davies).

from the conjunction of Egyptian and Kushite religious traditions (Valbelle and Bonnet 2003:296–97) promoted by two peoples who, after tough fights, were keen to find common concepts in each other’s cultures and beliefs. Pamminger (1992:109) suggested that the Luxor temple had been founded in order to provide the ram-headed Nubian Amun of Napata with an Egyptian home at Thebes. However, as he also noted, Amenhotep III’s Amun at Luxor is never the typical criocephalic deity of Nubia. Neither is he designated there with a specific relation with Kush. Moreover, when the temple was founded, under the reign of Ahmose (Urk. IV:25, 9–11), the conquest of Nubia was not achieved, Napata had not yet been reached, and the supposed criocephalic aspect of the local god was still unknown to the Egyptians.

The Cult of the Ram-Headed Amun As mentioned, the ram-headed aspect of Amun appears at Kurgus at the Egyptian initiative of Thutmose I (copied by Thutmose III), with the two feathers and the sun disk.

The Amun Cult and its Development in Nubia   347 It  has been suggested that he could represent Amun of Napata (Pamminger 1992:106 n. 148). This ovine aspect was also shared by Amun of Pnubs, at least after the Amarna episode (Valbelle 2003a:192–93), mainly figured as a criocephalic sphinx under a jujube tree. At Napata, the year 47 stela of Thutmose III at Barkal is so damaged that the image of the god is unrecognizable (see however the plausible restoration of Kendall, this volume), but the ram-headed deity is present on another stela from the courtyard of B 501 sometimes attributed to the same king (Török 2002:48 n. 35; Dunham 1970:43 no. 20-2166, pl. XLVII/H but Goedicke 1972, dates the stela to the Ramesside period). The criocephalic Amun became the basic representation of Amun as a Nubian deity: Amun of Napata (e.g., Grimal  1981: pls. I, V, VIII, X; Kormysheva  2004:111–12), of Kawa (Macadam 1955: pl. XVIIIa), of Naga (Kröper et al. 2011:16, 22, 25, 26), of Musawwarat es-Sufra, of Meroe (Hintze  1971: pl. 41) among many others, whereas the original Amun-Ra of Karnak (“Lord of the Thrones of the Two Lands, who presides over Karnak”) usually kept his genuine anthropomorphic aspect in Kush (e.g., Hintze 1971: pl. 24). The recumbent ram of Amun is paramount on dromoi (processional ways into temples). The animal standing on its legs was venerated as rhny, “ram,” or labelled Amun-Ra in “popular” religion (e.g., Habachi 1960:51; Valbelle and Bonnet 2003:300–301, figs. 3–4, 6); however, like in Egypt (except in the Late Period: see Fabre 2012), there is no clue that a sacred living ram was ever bred and worshiped as the divine earthly embodiment of Amun: so far, no necropolis for the sacred animal was ever found, nor is any priesthood ever attested for his cult; the incarnation of the god on the earth was apparently the king. It is the occasional merging of Amun with Khnum of Elephantine which, in the late period, in the area of Elephantine, eventually resulted in the worship of the ram as a sacred animal of Khnum-Amun (Kormysheva  2004:112–13; and overall Yoyotte 2005:479). Other animals were also potentially associated with Amun in Nubia: bulls,3 geese,4 crocodiles,5 and cobras.6

A Solarized Deity As in Egypt, the Nubian Amun was solarized (Amun-Ra) and, occasionally, merged with Horakhty (Rameses II, Horakhty-Amun, Wadi es-Sebua: see Gauthier 1912:168– 69; Aramatelqo “beloved of Amun-Ra-Harakhty”: see Eide et al.  1994:290–91; Török  2002:303) and Atum (Priese  1974:222–23). Amun-Ra-Horakhty-Atum is attested on the statue of Bakenwerel (KRI 6:528,7; Dunham  1970:32, fig. 26) and in inscriptions from B 501 of Menma’atre-setepenimen Aktisanes (?) (Khartoum 5227; Dunham 1970:34, pl. XXXVII). It has also been suggested that the so-called Sun Temple M250 at Meroe was the place of the unification of the Amun worshipped in Meroe City with Ra (Török 2002:220). For the solar rituals, a specific dais-room was created, following a tradition of solar altars attested from the Middle Kingdom

348   Luc Gabolde onwards at Karnak (Gabolde 2018b: 247–58) and present in most of the funerary New Kingdom Theban temples. In Sudan, this room was shaped like the wabet of late Egyptian temples (Wolf 2006:242–43; Coppens 2007:215–19; Rocheleau 2008:77).

The Anthropomorphic Amun The Theban Amun was represented as a human deity with mortar-shaped crown and two high feathers (Török 1997a:303). It is under this aspect that he appeared before the Amarna period at Kerma-Pnubs (Valbelle  2003a:202 fig. 7, 203, fig. 8). It is also the

Figure 19.3  Amun on a pillar of Thutmose III at Sai Island, restored after Amarnan chiseling out. Photograph: L. Gabolde.

Figure 19.4  Amun at Musawwarat es-Sufra. Photograph: C. Näser.

The Amun Cult and its Development in Nubia   349 image of the god at Sai (Fig. 19.3), at Soleb (Schiff-Giorgini et al. 1998: pl. 28), at Kawa under Tutankhamun (Macadam 1955: pl. V), and at Sanam (Griffith 1922: pls. XIII, XX,4, XLVIII), though in the latter two sites he may also be represented as criocephalic (Sanam: Griffith 1922: pls. XXXVII, LIV,5) or as a criosphinx (Kawa: Macadam 1955: pl. IV). Occasionally the feathers are stuck in a diadem or a ribbon prolonged by a vertical tail. A uraeus adorns the forepart of the mortar in Meroitic representations (e.g., Naga: Griffith and Crowfoot 1911: pls. XXI and XXIII; Musawwarat es-Sufra: Hintze 1971:25; Fig.  19.4), but it is seldom attested in Egypt (Gabolde  2018b: 544–45). A solar disk appears at the base of the feathers in the Ramesside period (e.g., Habachi 1960: pl. XIV) and is paramount in the Napatan and Meroitic ages. The ithyphallic Amun is represented at Soleb (Schiff-Giorgini et al. 1998: pls. 122–25) and Amun of Ope is attested in funerary inscriptions (as Mnp/Amnp cf. Eide et al. 1996:670, 675), once as an ithyphallic deity in B 300 at Napata (Taharqo, LD V:pl. 10) and maybe another time at Naga (Griffith and Crowfoot  1911: pl. XXIII; Kröper et al. 2011:157). It is not clear whether Amun of Ope designates Amun of Luxor or—more likely—that of Djeme (Medinet Habu), that is, the god Amenope (Quaegebeur 1986:104–107). It has been suggested that Amun-bull-of-Nubia of Sanam could be equated with Kamutef and would have played locally the role of Amun of Djeme (Török 1997a:304 with evolution in Török 2002:77 and n. 172; Guermeur 2005:524). His cult was transferred to Meroe where he is regularly mentioned as “Amun of Ope in Meroe (City).”

Amuns of Nubia The Holy Cities of Amun in the Area of Napata After the Egyptian conquest of Nubia during the New Kingdom, temples to Amun were founded in the controlled territories. Under Egyptian occupation, the center of the “Amunian” faith remained Thebes and the Nubian Amuns were considered his peripheral emanations. With the 25th Dynasty a shift appears: almost equal importance is assigned to Thebes and to Napata. Later, the Napatan and Meroitic theological centers of “Amunism” remained at Napata, progressively identified with a more and more mythical Thebes. The cult of Amun was focused in Nubia on three and then four holy cities: Napata (which progressively replaced Karnak as source of legitimacy), Pnubs, Kawa, and then Sanam (Eide et al.  1994:223(34): Anlamani) or Tara (Eide et al.  1996:442– 43(78): Harsiyotef). These distinct Amuns of Nubia also had chapels in the other towns, like Amun of Pnubs at B 300 at Barkal and at Sanam (Valbelle 2003a:192–94, 209) and

350   Luc Gabolde Amun of Napata at Sanam (Guermeur 2005:524). Later, equivalents in the Butana region were promoted: Meroe housing Amun of Thebes of Napata (?), Amun of Meroe (M 260), and Amun of Ope (Amnp; temple not identified), Naga also housing Amun of the city of Thebes, Amni Notete and Amun of Naga Amni Tolqtete, as well as Amni Berote (Amun of Bero probably Meroe) and Amni Mede[w]i[te], Amun of Medewi (Török 2002:244; Wolf 2006:240).

Napata The most prominent Amun in Kush was certainly that of Jebel Barkal. At the foot of the holy mountain of the local Kushite populations, extraordinarily named nswt tȝwy (“Nesut Tawy” or “Throne of the Two Lands” as transcribed by the Egyptians), Thutmose III erected, before his year 47, “an eternal repository chapel-ḫnw” for “Amun Lord of the Thrones of the Two Lands/who dwells in the pure mountain” inside a fortified stronghold (Urk. IV:1228, 12–14), probably where, later on, the great Napatan temple of Amun B 500 would stand. In B 500 the oldest architectural remains seem to date to Tutankhamun if we exclude pre-Amarna undated brick structures found on the spot (Kendall et al. 2017:150, 170–72). Horemheb (Kendall et al. 2017:173–74) and Sety I (B 503) also left architectural traces. Contributions of Rameses II, Piye (Piankhy), Taharqo, Tanwetamani, Amanishakheto, Amanitore, Natakamani, and Arnekhamani are recorded (Török 2002:48–50, 69, 205, 297, 313; Guermeur 2005:524; Rocheleau 2008:33). In the vicinity of B 500, Thutmose IV seems to have dedicated a temple to Ra-Horakhty and/or Amun (B 600: Kendall and Wolf  2011). Jebel Barkal B 700 was dedicated to Amun in Napatan and Meroitic times: Atlanersa and Senkamanisken left their names (Török  2002:157–72; Rocheleau  2008:34). Jebel Barkal B 800, dedicated to Amun by Kashta or Piye (Piankhy), was modified by Anlamani. It was destroyed under Aspelta (Török 2002:50–53, 259–60; Rocheleau 2008:35–36). At Napata, Amun, as an emanation of Karnak’s god, kept his Theban epithets nb nswt tȝwy, “Lord of the Thrones of the Two Lands,” and ḫnty Ỉpt-swt, “preeminent in Karnak,” augmented with local designation: n Npt/ḥry-ỉb ḏw wʿb/nṯr-ʿȝ ḫnty Tȝ-Stt, “of Napata/ who dwells in the Pure Mountain/great god preeminent in the Bow-Land” (e.g., Eide et al. 1996:473(84): Nastasen). The site of Barkal itself was considered “the Karnak of Amun of  Napata” (Eide et al.  1996:444(78): Harsiyotef) and Nastasen designates it Ipt-Swt Pr-Nbw, “Karnak’s House of Gold,” or as Ipt-Swt Nbw, “Karnak of Gold” (Eide et al. 1996:443, 444(78), 478, 480(84)), while Napata is clearly assimilated with Thebes (in Eide et al. 1996:488(84)).

Pnubs As the ancient Kushite capital of the kingdom, Kerma/Pnubs (Dokki Gel) was duly provided with temples to Amun-Ra of Pnubs, Pa-Nebes/Hery-ib Pa-Nebes (Valbelle 2003a;

The Amun Cult and its Development in Nubia   351 Guermeur 2005:501–508; Rocheleau 2008:21). The oldest remains date to Thutmose I or II and a temple from Thutmose IV is also attested there (Bonnet  2003:209; Valbelle 2003b:229). Napatan and Meroitic sanctuaries left traces mentioning Taharqo, Shabaqo, Amannote-erike, and Amanikhareqerem (Valbelle and Bonnet  2000; Valbelle 2003b:233). The deity worshipped in the temples erected in the New Kingdom and then rebuilt by Taharqo at Tabo on Argo Island remains unknown (Bonnet 2011), but it is definitely not Amun of Pnubs as previously thought (Jacquet Gordon et al.  1969; Hein 1991:63; Rocheleau 2008:25, 76–77).

Kawa In Kawa Temple A, Amun is named the “Lion on the terrace who dwells at Gem-paaten,” represented as an anthropomorphic deity (Macadam  1949: pl. II, V; Macadam 1955: pl. 3) or a criosphinx (Macadam 1955: pl. 4). The temple was possibly founded by Amenhotep III (?) and certainly built by Tutankhamun (Török 2002:139–42; Guermeur  2005:509–10; Rocheleau  2008:26). Kawa Temple T was dedicated to Amun “Lion on the terrace who dwells at Gematen” by Taharqo (Török 2002:80–128, 282–97; Guermeur  2005:511–18; Rocheleau  2008:28). Later on, Temple Kawa B to Amun “who dwells at Gematen” was erected by Harsiyotef (?) and enlarged in Meroitic  times (Török  2002:148–56, 282; Guermeur  2005:510; Rocheleau  2008:27). The god is then mainly criocephalic (Macadam 1949: pl. XXIVd; Macadam 1955: pls. 6, 8, 10, 14, 16).

Sanam At Sanam, Amun was “Bull of Nubia” (Tȝ-Sty) in a temple built by Taharqo (Griffith 1922; Török 2002:134–39, 282; Guermeur 2005:519–23; Rocheleau 2008:32).

Tara In the vicinity of Napata (?), the city of Tara/Taret/Tale devoted to Bastet used to house a temple to Amun of Tara, inserted in the coronation journey by Harsiyotef, apparently as a substitute to Sanam (Eide et al. 1996:443).

The Other Cult Places of Amun Amun Temples in Nubia The early dissemination of the “Amunian” cults among the Kushites left few traces at Debeira where local princes converted to Egyptian religious beliefs occasionally

352   Luc Gabolde addressed their prayers to “Amun-Ra, Lord of the Thrones of the Two Lands” (and to “Horus, lord of Buhen”; Säve-Söderbergh 1960:28, fig. 2). Apart from the four holy cities mentioned above, the list of the sanctuaries dedicated to Amun can be summarized as follows (combining the data of Hein 1991; Török 2002; Guermeur 2005; Rocheleau 2008): • Debod: Amun (Anthropomorphic and criocephalic) associated with Mahes-lion; Sety II (?) Ergamenes, Adikhalamani, Ptolemy VI, Roman (Hein  1991:5; Guermeur 2005:476–81; Rocheleau 2008:10). • Takhompso: Amun of Takhompso; Taharqo (Guermeur 2005:482–84). • Beit el Wali: Amun “Lord of the Thrones of the Two Lands, preeminent at Karnak, who dwells/preeminent in/Lord of Ta-sety”; Sety I, Rameses II, Merenptah, Sety II (Hein 1991:5). • Wadi es-Sebua: Amun pȝ nb mṯnw (“Lord of the tracks”); Rameses II and other Ramessides (Guermeur 2005:485–90). • Amada: Amun-Ra “Lord of the Thrones of the Two Lands” and Ra-Harakhty; Amenhotep II, Thutmose IV, Sety I (Brandt 2000:285; Rocheleau 2008:11). • Abu Simbel: Amun-Ra her-ib (KRI II:749,1); Amun of Abu Oda (invited deity), Amun-Ra ḥry-ỉb tȝ-sty (KRI II:750,1, Amun of Nubia), Amun of Napata (invited deity) nb nswt Tȝwy ḥry-ỉb pȝ ḏw-wʿb Npt (KRI II, 750,15–16); Rameses II. • Abu Oda: Amun of Karnak and Amun-ḥry (“satisfied”)/ḥry-ỉb Amun-ḥry-ỉb, “Who resides in ‘Amun-Who-Is-Here’ (= Abu Oda)” (shared with Thoth); Horemheb (Guermeur 2005:492–93). • Aksha: Amun-Ra ḥry-ỉb pr wsr-mʿȝt Rʿ stp.n Rʿ (shared with Rameses II deified); Sety I, Rameses II (Guermeur 2005:494–95; Rocheleau 2008:15). • Amara East: Amun; Meroitic, Natakamani, Amanitore (Török  2002:254–55; Rocheleau 2008:16). • Amara West: Amun of Perem (?); Sety I, Rameses II (Guermeur  2005:495–97; Rocheleau 2008:17). • Sai: Amun-Ra nb-nswt-Tȝwy, nswt-nṯrw, nb pt, ḥry-ỉb tȝ-Stỉ; [Amenhotep I ?] Thutmose III, Amenhotep II, Amenhotep III (Thill 1997:112–13; Rocheleau 2008:18; Azim and Carlotti 2011; Davies 2014:7–9; Doyen and Gabolde 2017:151, fig. 2). • Sedeinga: Amun ḥry-ỉb ḥwt-Tỉyỉ (invited deity); Amenhotep III (Rilly and Francigny 2013:64–65). • Soleb: Amun-Ra Nb-nswt-Tȝwy ḥry-ỉb mnnw ḫʿ-m-Mȝʿt (sharing with deified Amenhotep III); Amenhotep III (Guermeur 2005:498; Rocheleau 2008:19). • Sesebi: Amun-Ra and Theban Triad; Amenhotep IV, Sety I (Guermeur 2005:499– 500; Rocheleau 2008:20).

Amun Temples in the Isle of Meroe and Nearby The first buildings at Meroe date to the early 25th Dynasty (Török  1997b:25; Wenig 2013:162):

The Amun Cult and its Development in Nubia   353 • Dangeil Kôm II: Amun; Amanitore, Natakamani (Rocheleau 2008:37; Anderson and Salah Mohamed Ahmed 2013). • Meroe, double temple KC 104: Amun (?); Meroitic, Amanitore, Arikhankaror (Rocheleau 2008:39). Meroe M 260: Amun Nete; Meroitic, Amanishakheto, Amanikhabale, Amanitore, and Natakamani (Török  2002:314–30; Rocheleau 2008:41). Meroe M292 and M298 [early Amun Temple ?]: [Amun ?]; Napatan and early Meroitic, cartouches of Senkamanisken, Anlamani, Queen Nasalsa, Aspelta, Aramatelqo, Malonaqen, Amani-Natki, Karkamani, Amaniastbarqo, Siaspiqo, Talakhamani, and Amanislo (Török 2002:315; Rocheleau 2008:42). • Musawwarat es-Sufra, great enclosure, T 100 Amun (invited deity?); (Wenig 2001; Török 2002:173; Rocheleau 2008:65). Musawwarat es-Sufra, Löwentempel: Amun in subordinate position regarding Apedemak (Hintze 1971: pls. 25, 41, 59, 63, 79, 81, 85, 89, 93, 97; Török 2002:187–200). • El Hassa: Amun of Tabakha; Amanikhareqerem, Meroitic (Rondot 2012). • Muweis (Baud 2014:775). • Wad Ben Naga South Temple Kom C WBN 300: Amun (sharing with Isis and Hathor); Meroitic, Natakamani Amanitore (Rocheleau 2008:48; Onderka 2014). • Naga N 100: Amun of Tolkte; Meroitic, Natakamani, Amanitore, and Prince Arkhamani (Török 2002:241–53). Naga N 500: Amun and invited deities; Meroitic kandake Shanakdakhete (Rocheleau 2008:55; Kröper et al. 2011:16–26).

Entourage of Amun Amun, as in Egypt, was accompanied by a consort: Mut. At Napata she was eventually assimilated to lion-headed Hathor-Tefnut and accompanied by her son Khonsu. As a criocephalic Nubian god, Amun was associated at Kawa with the goddesses Anukis and Satis (Macadam 1955: pls. VI, XVII), or with Anukis alone (Macadam 1949: pls. 6, 8, 1955: pl. XVIII) but, as anthropomorphic Amun of Karnak with Mut (Macadam 1949: pls. 6, 8, 1955: pl. XVIII). Amun appears with Satis at Sai Island as well as at Musawwarat esSufra (Hintze 1971: pl. 41). Mentions of Amunet are scarce and not specifically associated with her consort (Gauthier 1912:168, 170).

Politico-religious Background of the Expansion of Amun’s Cult The nature of the religion of Amun in Nubia is still an object of investigations; however, provisional conclusions can be drawn from the available documentation.

354   Luc Gabolde The diffusion of Amun’s cult in Nubia seems to be characterized by a genuine conversion of the Kushites to Egyptian religious beliefs (Yellin 1995; Török 1997a:126, 2002: 51–53), applied to a form of Amun (ram-headed) characteristic of Nubia, or considered as a local deity (Török 1997a:263). With time, the religious practices and beliefs incorporated more and more Kushite features. In that respect, the adoption of the Egyptian religion should in no way be considered to be acculturation: from its origins, Kushite culture was quite assertive (S. Smith 1998:256–57; but nuanced view in Kemp 1997) and remained vivid as proved by the extensive survival of its language. The conversion was mainly led by the Kushite elite and seems to have affected the general population much less than the members of the court (although Török 2009:210–11 suggests a wider adoption of the Amun cult). Although the adoption of Egyptian beliefs began under the New Kingdom Egyptian occupation, the shift to an official Kushite state religion seems to have occurred in a short span of time (around one generation) as shown by the fast change of funeral practices at El-Kurru (Török 1997a:126; Kendall 1999; Morkot 2003). The converted Kushite leaders promoted themselves as champions of Amun, as initiators of a religious renewal, and as authentic guardians of “Amunism.” This myth of authenticity was promoted by Kashta and Piye (Piankhy) and was later regularly revived (see Agartharchides’ record of the Ethiopian origins of Egypt, Eide et al. 1996:645(142)). As the Egyptian gods, including Amun, supposedly understood and read exclusively the Egyptian language and script, they were per force addressed by the Kushite rulers in Egyptian idiom, written in Egyptian hieroglyphic script. The adoption of the Egyptian Amunian faith by the Nubians and the expansion of Amun’s cult in Kush was accompanied (and sometimes preceded) by the spreading of other Egyptian beliefs (Isis, Horus, etc.), particularly the Osirian religion (Wenig 2013:160–61). Some of its funerary practices are evident in the tombs of the Nubian princes of Te-khet at Debeira or that of Hekanefer at Toshka. Similarly, the inscription of Queen Katimala at Semna (Eide et al. 1994:35–41(1); Darnell 2006; Collombert 2008; Ritner 2009:456–59) with the allusions to the pride of “serving among the servants of Amun” makes her a clear precursor of the Kushite 25th Dynasty. With time, the original Egyptian documentation became less accessible or understood (Török in Eide et al. 1996:421) and the Kushite intelligentsia progressively reached a state of relative autonomy from the Egyptian sources of the cult after the adoption of the Meroitic script in cursive and in Meroitic hieroglyphic scripts in the second half of the 3rd century bce (Török 1997a:344–45; Rilly in prep.). The Kushite dynasty’s involvement in Egyptian culture was mainly religious and institutional and the major politico-cultural investment of this royal family in Egypt passed through the appointment of some of its members to prominent religious functions—to that of the “divine votaresses of Amun” or high priesthood of Amun (Shabaqo’s grandson Harkhebi, High Priest of Amun) on the one side, and to that of “pharaoh” on the

The Amun Cult and its Development in Nubia   355 other, whereas the high positions in administrations mainly remained in the hands of the Egyptian descendants of the great Theban families (Török 2009:351). This policy of the Kushite dynasty towards Amun’s clerical hierarchy was also applied in Nubia: Alara committed to the cult of Amun, dedicating his sister to his temple at Kawa (Edwards  2004:116) or at Napata (Török  2002:51). Emblematic of this policy is the involvement of King Anlamani who states: His Majesty gave his sisters, four women, to the gods, to be sistrum-players: one to Amûn of Napata (Jebel Barkal), one to Amen-Rê of “Finding-(the)-Aton” (Kawa), one to Amûn of Pnubs (Kerma), and one to Amen-Rê, bull of Bow-land/Nubia (Sanam), in order to shake the sistrum before them. (Kawa VIII–1, 24–25, Eide et al. 1994:223(34))

It is this adoption of the Egyptian religious and royal ideology that legitimized the hereditary royal authority of the Kushite rulers (Török  1995; Welsby  1996:74; Edwards 2004:116).

Amun’s Characteristics, Prerogatives, and Functions in Nubia Royal Legitimation As was already the case in Egypt (from its origins in the Middle Kingdom), Amun in Nubia was the warrant of royal legitimacy, mainly manifested during the coronation rites through: • Election by means of repeated oracles (see Török, 1997:241–47).7 These oracles could be manifested through dreams (e.g., Tanwetamani: Eide et al.  1994:196– 98(29); and Nastasen: Eide et al.  1996:475–79(84)); through signs of the divine images/bark during processions (Aspelta, election stela: Eide et al. 1996:235(37)); and in front of the permanent image in the holy of the holies (e.g., Amannoteerike: Eide et al. 1996:415–16(71)). Oracles of the god are attested supporting either the designation of a king by one of his predecessors, like Amannote-erike being declared heir of Talakhamani (Török 1997a:193, 217 n. 114), or the selection of the king among his brothers by Amun (e.g., Aspelta: Eide et al. 1994:242(37)). Note that oracles of the god may also have concerned more secular affairs supposed to express the god’s will as the necessity to implement restorations in a temple, as for Harsiyotef (Eide et al. 1996:442(78); Török 1997a:385).

356   Luc Gabolde • Divine fatherhood. Nubian kings presented themselves as bodily sons of Amun, following an Egyptian tradition8 that is echoed by royal titularies such as that of Amannote-erike, “born of Amun of Thebes” (Kawa IX, l. 21, Eide et al. 1996:401– 403(71)). The rulers’ predestination to kingship from the womb of their mother, by means of a “miracle” (bỉȝ), is also included (e.g., Taharqo: Eide et al. 1994:173 (24); or Amannote-erike: Eide et al. 1996:401(71)). However, the myth of the sonship from Amun was not really interwoven with the matrilinear tradition of the Kushite rulers through any myth of marriage to a god (i.e., a theogamy as attested for Hatshepsut and Amenhotep III). As son and embodiment of the god, the king’s deeds were considered to be deeds of the god: “it was you (Amun) that acted for me (Harsiyotef)” (Eide et al.  1996:448(78); also by Nastasen: Eide et al. 1996:493(84)). • Coronation rituals and journey. The coronation of the king by Amun was supposed to occur at Napata, as attested by Piye’s (Piankhy’s) Horus name (ḫʿw-mNpt, “appearing crowned in Napata” (Eide et al. 1994:58(8)), but was also reiterated in Thebes, after the conquest of Egypt: ḫʿw-m-Wȝst (Eide et al. 1994:54(7)). Napatan and Meroitic kings also followed the tradition of a ­coronation ceremony to be accomplished first at Napata, even if the accession of the king at the death of his predecessor had occurred at Meroe, like Anlamani (Török’s comment in Eide et al. 1994:226; Török 1997a:232) or Amannote-erike (Eide et al. 1996:401–402(71)). In Nubia, the rites included a visit to other holy sanctuaries of Amun. Amannoteerike records that he was crowned at Napata then moved to Kawa, to Pnubs, and back to Kawa (Eide et al. 1996:406–11(71)) and Harsiyotef mentions his journey to Kawa and Pnubs or Tara (Eide et al. 1996:442–44 (78)).

Amun Provider of Water and Flood The links between Amun and the waters (Nile, flood, water table, rains) was already well established in the Egyptian New Kingdom, the inundation being supposed to flow out of his feet (M. Gabolde 1995:254). Since the flood arrived from the far south, Amun played a key role in Nubia in the inundation process.9 Connections between the rams and the waters have frequently been put forward, the animal being credited with the capability to find springs under its hoofs (Leclant 1949:202–206). Several texts do insist that Amun controlled the liquid element.10

Amun Dwelling in Caves and Mountains The significant number of rock-cut sanctuaries of Amun in Nubia (e.g., Abu Oda, Jebel Qeili, Abu Simbel) compared to the relatively rare rock-cut temples (speos temples) to Amun in Egypt leads us to conclude that in Nubia the god was considered as dwelling the mountains and cliffs and even embodied them (Adrom 2004; Williams 2006, 2007)

The Amun Cult and its Development in Nubia   357 and being thus the dehenet (cliff/escarpment) itself (Reisner 1931:82, 89–100, pls. V–VI; Eide et al. 1994:55(8); Gabolde and Rondot 2018:394–96).11

Demiurge/Creator As had been observed in Egypt (only since the Second Intermediate Period onwards: Bickel 1994:160–61), Amun was considered to be a creator god in Nubia.12 Thus the temple was seen as the primeval mound, figuring the place of the world’s creation (Török 1997a:315).

Provider of Lands and Victories Amun in Nubia brought victories and new lands to the king and to his realm. Note that the presentation of bow and arrows by Amun to the king (Hintze 1971: pl. 89; Eide et al. 1996:408(71)), instead of the traditional scimitar (only mentioned in Eide et al. 1996:404), appears to be a Kushite feature shared by Apedemak (see Eide et al.  1996:425; Török 2002:277 n. 71).

Amun’s Cult and Temple Organization in Kush Cult Rituals The representations of daily or solemn rituals show that the liturgies followed the Egyptian prototype with local adaptations. Typically, conical offering breads were still in use (Anderson et al. 2007; Kröper et al. 2011:107). In Meroitic times, the offering ritual evolved with innovations like the specific ankh-shaped libation tables found in situ at Naga (Wildung  1999:306, fig. 3; 329, fig. 21a), El-Hassa (Rondot  2012:177–79), and Meroe (Näser 2004:232–33). The foundation rites were also modified with the deposit of old Egyptian genuine artifacts, unusually shaped natural stones, and prehistoric flints, considered to validate ancientness and sacredness (Kröper et al.  2011:97–100; Rondot 2012; Francigny and de Voogt 2014; Kendall 2017).

Incomes and Offerings The restitution of lands to Amun of Pnubs and of Kawa, with all the people attached to them as described in the inscription of Amannote-erike (Eide et al. 1996:410–11(71)), shows that the income of Amun’s temples continued to rely on land possession with the

358   Luc Gabolde attached workers, cattle, and agricultural productions. The wealth of Amun endowments in liturgical vessels of gold, silver, bronze, temple furniture, raw material, incense myrrh, jewelry, lands, and cattle are proudly listed on temple inscriptions and stelae (e.g., Taharqo: Eide et al.  1994:165–71(24); Amannote-erike, already mentioned; Harsiyotef: Eide et al. 1996:444–47(78); Nastasen: Eide et al. 1996:473; 483–91(84)).

Riverine and Processional Bark The riverine bark still existed and was represented at Sanam (Griffith 1922: pl. XXVI) as well as the portable bark, for processions (e.g., between Napata and Sanam, see Griffith 1922: pl. XXVII). The last is represented on its pedestal at Soleb (Schiff-Giorgini et al. 1998: pl. 49) and the carriers are still identifiable in the hypostyle of Temple T at Kawa (Macadam 1955: pls. XIV–XV).

Festivals In spite of the lack of festival calendars preserved in Kushite temples (Török 1997a:318) it seems that the dates of the festivals of Amun in Nubia had been adjusted with those of Amun at Thebes (especially to the 2nd and 3rd months of the akhet season devoted to the Opet festival; see Macadam 1949:48 n. 25). The multiplication of the god’s appearances in procession on new festival days seems to have been a specific care of the Kushite rulers and a religious and political issue (e.g., Amannote-erike: Eide et al. 1996:410(71)).

Priesthood As in Egypt, the cult was theoretically led by the king (who seems to have been given the role of the First Prophet: Török 1997a:316) and the rituals performed inside the temple remained unopen to the public and restricted to the priests’ caste, the royal family, and notabilities. A Second, Third, and Fourth Prophet of Amun are attested in Nubia (e.g., at Sanam: Eide et  al. 1994:264–65(39); at Kawa: Eide et al. 1994:220(34), Anlamani), as well as “pure” (wâb) or great-“pure”-priests and lector priests (e.g., Eide et al. 1996:416–17(71), Amannote-erike). The feminine clergy is also represented with sistrum-players devoted to Amun of Napata, Kawa, Pnubs and Sanam (e.g., Anlamani, Eide et al. 1994:223(34)), divine votaresses, mainly from the royal entourage (with Török’s comment in Eide et al. 1994:240; 262).

Temples The architecture of the Amun temples under Egyptian occupation (28th–30th Dynasties) reflected mainly New Kingdom Amunian architecture—with its diversity—

The Amun Cult and its Development in Nubia   359 (Hein 1991; Rocheleau 2008; Azim and Carlotti 2011). The architecture and decoration of the Napatan temples dedicated to Amun were also conceived in continuation of their Egyptian precursors and of their iconographical syntax (Török 2002:40–46) as expected in the case of the adoption of religious beliefs. In that respect it is quite significant to see the clear difference of architecture that distinguishes Apedemak’s sanctuaries from Amun’s. The Amun temples in Nubia are reviewed in Rocheleau (2008) and comprehensive studies of most of them are scrutinized in Török (2002). Their basic components can be summarized as follows: • a processional way marked out with ram statues (Naga, Muweis, El Hassa, Meroe, Dangeil, Napata, with prototype at Soleb); • occasionally a bark repository (e.g., Naga, El-Hassa, etc.); • a great altar off the axis (El-Hassa; Naga; Meroe M250; Kawa); • a pylon preceding: • a courtyard with a peristyle and/or • a hypostyle hall; • an offering hall; • a visiting deities hall; • the sanctuary with: • the naos (generally only the base survives) for the cultic statue which may have been of small dimensions. The naos was possibly of rounded shape like the Omphalos of Napata or base at El-Hassa (Rondot and Nogara in prep.); • a dais-room possibly dedicated to Ra-Horakhty; • side sacristies; • and occasionally a contra temple (Naga, with ram statue and altar; and El-Hassa). As a final statement, it appears that Nubia—a country regarded by the Egyptians as full of magic and mysteries—was certainly for them a place where their dynastic god Amun had some roots, an idea reinforced by the fact that the flood came from this far south. This theme was of course adopted and amplified under the Kushite, Napatan, and Meroitic rulers, once the local chiefs had embraced the Amunian faith in a genuine religious conversion, which included the use of a specific religious language and script: Egyptian. In that respect, this situation constitutes one of the first occurrences of a phenomenon later paralleled by Christianity’s expansion backed by the liturgical use of Latin, or by Islam’s spread along with its liturgical use of Arabic language.

Abbreviations KRI I–VIII Kitchen, K.A. 1975–90 Ramesside Inscriptions: Historical and Biographical. B.H. Blackwell.

360   Luc Gabolde Urk. IV Sethe, K.  1906–1909 Urkunden der 18. Dynastie. Historische-biographische Urkunden 1–17. J.C. Hinrichs. Helck, W. 1956–58 Urkunden der 18. Dynastie. Historische-biographische Urkunden 18–22. Akademie Verlag.

Notes 1. For example, the Ramesside ostracon D.  el-M.  1072 (Posener  1936:40; pl. 40; FischerElfert 1997:1–4; Zibelius-Chen 2011:160) makes a clear allusion to Jebel Barkal as source of the Nile in connection with an epithet of Amun and with the god Amun himself: “As to ‘Degal,’ (it is) the name of the harbor and ‘(Jebel) Ta-waww [in Egyptian “remote land”],’  (it is) the name of the escarpment. As to ‘Nakhysmekas,’ (it is) the name of the ­goddess, (that is) the water from which Amun went out in the land of Kush.” The toponym Ta-waww echoes the more complete local (Nubian) designation nswt-Tȝwy “of the sacred (pure) mountain” (ḏw-wʿb; see Thiem 2000:23 n. 78) in the Barkal stela of Thutmose III (Urk. IV:1238, 5–7). Chapter 163 of the Book of the Dead (Wüthrich 2010:115, 118, 132–33, 146–47; Wüthrich  2015: v. 19(1):105–107, 19(2):56) equally states, about Amun, that “It is him who rests to the northwest of Napata’s escarpment in Nubia.” And the link between Amun and Jebel Barkal through the toponym nswt-Tȝwy is once more displayed on a passage of the year 11 stela of Seti I discovered on the site (Khartoum SN 2856 = Reisner and Reisner 1933:73–78, pl. 8 = KRI I:76, 7–8 (l. 19)): “O Lords [ . . . and Goddess] who preside over the (deified Cobra) of Nesut-Tawy (= Jebel Barkal).” The Aspelta stela of year 1 from Jebel Barkal (Eide et al.  1994:237, l. 12 (37)) moreover states that: “Amen-Rê, lord of the Thrones of Two-lands, who resides in Pure-mountain (Jebel Barkal)—he is a god of Kush . . . . He has been the god of the kings of Kush since the time of Rê.” Much later, Greek papyri  claimed “[Hail] to you, Khonsu in Thebes . . . the son of the Ethiopian . . .” (Betz 1992:209), or declared in their Greek and Demotic versions (Griffith and Thompson 1904:193, v°, col. XX): “Ho? Amun, this lofty male, this male of Ethiopia (ȝkš) who came down from Meroe to Egypt.” 2. (1) A finely elaborated glazed quartz ram head found by Reisner in tumulus KIII of Kerma (Boston, MFA 20.118; Reisner 1923a:139, no. XIII, 1923b:51) and dated to Kerma Classique (Wildung  1984:181–82;  1999:102–103, no. 104; Kormysheva  2004:113). However, many items  from the grave, including other glazed quartzite objects, could as well originate from Egypt, by trade or looting, though some may also have been produced at Kerma by Egyptian expatriates (Reisner 1923a:17, 1923b:49–50). The ram head itself has no equivalent in the contemporary Nubian zoomorphic production. (2) Remains of rams found by Bonnet in burials dated to Kerma Ancien (Bonnet 1984:15–17; Chaix 1993) and showing on one of the ram’s heads a specific spherical ornament attached between the horns have also been put forward. However, the animals may also be part of a funerary ritual sacrifice (Chaix  2003) as there was not one single animal but several individuals and they were clearly buried in human tombs and together with the owner. (3) A supposed sheep-headed (?), female (?), pregnant (?) C-Group figurine from Askut (Los Angeles, Museum of Cultural History no. 400-1541; Wenig 1978:122 cat. no. 12) reused in a kind of Egyptianinfluenced-style shrine with a cavetto cornice accompanied by an Egyptian stela is also questionable as it was not found in a genuine context, but was possibly borrowed. Its ­interpretation is ambiguous (the sheep’s head is hardly recognizable) and it would be

The Amun Cult and its Development in Nubia   361 rather uncommon to see a female deity transformed into a male one. (4) An animal fig­ur­ ine from Aniba, dated to the C-Group and showing a quadruped with a globe between the horns (Wenig 1978:129 cat. no. 20), has also been put forward, but its zoological identification remains controversial (bull or ram?) whereas the spherical ornament is clearly worked like hair loops, not like a solar element. (5) A ram-headed pouring spout of a so-called “teapot”-vessel type from Tumulus III at Kerma (Wenig 1978:157, cat. no. 65) is also inconclusive as other animals—not deities—like the bull are also encountered for this kind of luxury pottery of almost certainly profane use. 3. The (raging) bull (Thutmose I and III panels on the sacred rock of Kurgus: Davies 2001:48–49, 2017:73 fig.8) with oversized bull-hieroglyph of Kamutef. The bull is also ­associated with Amun of Sanam as “Amun-the-bull-lord-of-Nubia-Tȝ-Stỉ” (Guermeur 2005:521ff.). 4. Geese labelled “Amun” + epithets mentioned on a stela found at Kerma/Dokki-Gel (Valbelle  2009:113) in direct line of the Egyptian tradition, apparently not attested in Napatan or Meroitic spheres. 5. The crocodile suggested by Kormysheva (2004:122–23) as a specifically Nubian form of the deity, on the basis of a representation at Abu-Simbel (Porter and Moss 1952:106–[VIII] identical with Champollion 1844:597 and 902); the other mention of this saurian aspect is however Theban (Coulon and Jambon 2015). In Kush the crocodile may have occasionally been associated with the ram-headed Amun of Pnubs but once in subdued position and twice as part of private names (Sobek-hotep and Sobek-em-hat; see Kormysheva 1999:290 fig. 8 for the first and figs. 6–7 for the others); there is in fact no real clue that the crocodile was an aspect of this god, rather than just an associated deity or a dreaded creature as convincingly shown by Lohwasser 2011. 6. It has been suggested by Kendall (2008), for whom the pinnacle of Jebel Barkal would represent a uraeus (as well as an ithyphallic Amun), that the cobra was a form of Amun. Though the cobra may indeed be a symbolic interpretation of Barkal’s pinnacle—associated with the god—it is however not certain that it represented Amun himself. The association of the cobra with the pinnacle is attested in numerous reliefs (Kendall 1988, 2004, 2008) and in the above-quoted passage of Sety I’s stela where nswtTȝwy (i.e., here Jebel Barkal) is written with a serpent as determinative (KRI I:76,8). An amulet found in tomb K 51 at El-Kurru (Boston MFA 21.304, obverse) shows a cobra apparently labelled Ỉmn(-Rʿ), nb, “Amun(-Ra) the Lord” and a bronze statuette of a rearing ram-headed uraeus, from Barkal, B 700, room 704 (Boston MFA 24.960, Dunham 1970:71, no. 16-3-225) is one of the punctual, rare, and late representations of a possible symbolic symbiosis of Amun with the cobra and, eventually, the pinnacle (T. Kendall noticed also the criocephalic uraeus of the smiting king on the pylon of Beg. N 19). 7. Quoted as “Beautiful wonder” (bỉȝt nfr) and performed by his father Amun for Amannoteerike (Eide et al. 1996:403 (71); Török, 1997a:193, 217). 8. e.g., Piye (Piankhy): Eide et al. 1994:55, 58 (8); Eide et al. 1994:77 (9); Taharqo, (Kawa IV): Eide et al. 1994:140–41 (21); Eide et al. 1994:147 (22); Anlamani: Eide et al. 1994:219 (34). 9. Ramesside ostracon D. el-M. 1072 states: “As to ‘Nakhysmekas,’ (it is) the name of the goddess, (that is) the water from which Amun went out in the land of Kush.” (Posener 1936:40, pl. 40; Gabolde 2018a:92–95; Gabolde and Rondot 2018:393, 396–97). 10. e.g., the inundation stela of year 6 of Taharqo (Kawa V: Eide et al. 1994:150 (22)): “When the time for the rising (7) of the inundation came, it continued rising greatly each day and it passed many days rising at the rate of one cubit every day. It penetrated the hills of

362   Luc Gabolde South-land, it overtopped the mounds of North-land, and the land was (again) Primeval Waters, an inert (expanse), without land being (8) distinguishable from river. It rose to a height of 21 cubits, one palm, and 2 1/2 digits at the harbor of Dominion (Thebes). . . . (9) Well, then, the sky (even) rained in Bow-land (Nubia) and adorned all the hills. . . . The inundation came as a cattle-thief, and flooded this whole land” (see also, among many others, the hymn to Amun from Temple of T Kawa, reign of Taharqo: Török 2002:85). 11. e.g., Piye (Piankhy) triumphal stela: Eide et al. 1994:71–72; 95 (9); Amannote-erike, Kawa IX: Eide et al. 1996:404–405 (71). 12. “The Lord who made what exists, Amun, who fashioned men . . . etc.” (Taharqo hymn to Amun from the temple of T Kawa: Török 2002:85 after Macadam 1955:102, pls. XXIV and XLVI, among many others).

References Cited Adrom, F. 2004 Der Gipfel der Frömmigkeit? Überlegungen zur Semantik und religiosen Symbölik von t3-dhn.t. Lingua Aegyptia 12:1–20. Anderson, J.R., A.C. D’Andrea, A. Logan, Salah Mohamed Ahmed 2007 Bread Moulds from the Amun Temple at Dangeil, Nile State—An Addendum. Sudan & Nubia 11:89–93. Anderson, J. and Salah Mohamed Ahmed 2013 Dangeil 2012: Sacred Ram—Avatar of the God Amun. Sudan & Nubia 17:70–77. Azim, M. and J.-F. Carlotti 2011 Le temple A de l’île de Saï et ses abords. Cahier de Recherches de l’Institut de Papyrologie et d’Égyptologie de Lille 29:11–65. Baud, M. 2014 Downtown Muweis—A Progress Report (2007–2011). In The Fourth Cataract and Beyond: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference for Nubian Studies, ed. J.R.  Anderson and D.A.  Welsby, pp. 763–82. British Museum Publications on Egypt and Sudan 1. Peeters. Betz, H.D. 1992 The Greek Magical Papyri in Translation. University of Chicago Press. Bickel, S. 1991 L’iconographie du dieu Khnoum. Bulletin de l’Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale 91:55–67. ——— 1994 La cosmogonie égyptienne avant le Nouvel Empire. Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis 134. Éditions Universitaires (Fribourg) and Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht. Boessneck, J. 1988 Die Tierwelt des alten Ägypten. C.H. Beck. Bonnet, C. 1984 Les fouilles archéologiques de Kerma (Soudan). Genava n.s. 32:5–20. ——— 2003 Kerma. Rapport préliminaire sur les campagnes de 1999–2000 et 2000–2001. Genava n.s. 49:199–219. ——— 2011 Le site archéologique de Tabo. Une nouvelle réflexion. In La pioche et la plume. Autour du Soudan, du Liban et de la Jordanie. Hommages archéologiques à Patrice Lenoble, ed. V. Rondot, F. Alpi, and F. Villeneuve, pp. 283–93. Presses de l’Université Paris-Sorbonne. Bradley R.J. 2013 Nomads in the Archaeological Record: Case Studies in the Northern Provinces of the Sudan. Meroitica 13. Akademie Verlag. Brandt, P.J. 2000 The Monuments of Seti I: Epigraphic, Historical, and Art Historical Analysis. Probleme der Ägyptologie 16. Brill. Chaix, L. 1993 Les moutons décorés de Kerma (Soudan): problèmes d’interprétation. In Memorie della Società italiana di scienze naturali e del Museo civico di storia naturale di Milano 26(2):161–64.

The Amun Cult and its Development in Nubia   363 Chaix, L. 2003 La découpe de l’agneau. Un rite funéraire à Kerma (Soudan) vers 2000 av. J.-C. In Sens dessus dessous. La recherche du sens en Préhistoire. Recueil de textes offerts à Jean Leclerc et Claude Masset. Revue Archéologique de Picardie n.s. 21:219–24. http://www. persee.fr/doc/pica_1272–6117_2003_hos_21_1_2649. Chaix, L. and A. Grant 1987 A Study of a Prehistoric Population of Sheep (Ovis aries L.) from Kerma (Sudan): Archaeozoological and Archaeological Implications. Archaeozoologia 1:77–92. Champollion, J.-F. 1844 Monuments de l’Egypte et de la Nubie. Notices descriptives conformes aux manuscrits autographes rédigés sur les lieux. Firmin Didot. Collombert, P. 2008 Par-delà Bien et Mal. L’inscription de la reine Katimala à Semna. Kush 19:185–218. Coppens, F. 2007 The Wabet: Tradition and Innovation in Temples of the Ptolemaic and Roman Period. Czech Institute of Egyptology. Coulon, L. and E. Jambon 2015 Cachette de Karnak Database Entry 84. http://www.ifao.egnet. net/bases/cachette/?id=84 (Version 2, October 30, 2015). Darnell, J.C. 2006 The Inscription of Queen Katimala at Semna: Textual Evidence for the Origins of the Napatan State. Yale Egyptological Studies 7. Yale University Press. Davies, W.V. 2001 Kurgus 2000: The Egyptian Inscriptions. Sudan & Nubia 5:46–58. ——— 2014 From Halfa to Kareima: F.W. Green in Sudan. Sudan & Nubia 18:2–19. ——— 2017 The Egyptians at Kurgus. In Nubia in the New Kingdom: Lived Experience, Pharaonic Control and Indigenous Traditions, ed. N. Spencer, A. Stevens, and M. Binder, pp. 65–105. British Museum Publications on Egypt and Sudan 3. Peeters. Doyen, F. and L. Gabolde 2017 Egyptians versus Kushites: The Cultural Question of Writing or Not. In Nubia in the New Kingdom: Lived Experience, Pharaonic Control and Indigenous Traditions, ed. N.  Spencer, A.  Stevens, and M.  Binder, pp. 149–58. British Museum Publications on Egypt and Sudan 3. Peeters. Dunham D. 1970 The Barkal Temples. Museum of Fine Arts (Boston). Edwards, D.N. 2004 The Nubian Past: An Archaeology of the Sudan. Routledge. Eide, T., T.  Hägg, R.H.  Pierce, and L.  Török eds. 1994 Fontes Historiae Nubiorum: Textual Sources for the History of the Middle Nile Region between the Eighth Century BC and the Sixth Century AD, v. 1: From the Eighth to the Mid-Fifth Century BC. Department of Classics, University of Bergen. ——— eds. 1996 Fontes Historiae Nubiorum: Textual Sources for the History of the Middle Nile Region between the Eighth Century BC and the Sixth Century AD, v. 2: From the Mid-Fifth to the First Century BC. Department of Greek, Latin and Egyptology, University of Bergen. Emberling, G. 2014 Pastoral States: Toward a Comparative Archaeology of Early Kush. Origini 36:125–56. Fabre, D. 2012 “Tous ceux qui ont élevé un sanctuaire à Zeus thébain (…) considèrent les béliers comme sacrés.” La campagne de fouilles 2012 de l’IEASM à Thônis-Héracléion et “l’image vivante de culte” d’Amon. http://www.ieasm.org/downloads/IEASM_religion_ Belier_Amon_df.pdf. Accessed December 2016. Fischer-Elfert, H.-W. 1997 Lesefunde im literarischen Steinbruch von Deir el-Medineh. Kleine Ägyptische Texte 12. Harrassowitz. Francigny, V. and A. de Voogt 2014 Jeux de la nature en dépôts votifs et funéraires dans les royaumes nubiens. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 100:233–43.

364   Luc Gabolde Gabolde, L. 2018a Insight into the Perception of the Divine and Royal Powers among the Kushites and the Egyptians. In Nubian Archaeology in the XXIst Century: Proceedings of the Thirteenth International Conference for Nubian Studies, ed. M. Honegger, pp. 91–103. Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta 273. Peeters. Gabolde, L. 2018b Karnak, Amon-Rê. La genèse d’un temple, la naissance d’un dieu. Bibliothèque d’Étude 167. Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale. Gabolde, M. 1995 L’inondation sous les pieds d’Amon. Bulletin de l’Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale 95:235–58. Gauthier, H. 1912 Le temple de Ouadi es-Sebouâ. Les temples immergés de la Nubie. Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale. Goedicke, H. 1972 Review of The Barkal Temples, excavated by George Andrew Reisner. American Journal of Archaeology 76:89. Griffith, F.L. 1922 Oxford Excavations in Nubia 2, parts VIII–XVII: Napata, Sanam Temple, Treasury, and Town. Liverpool Annals of Archaeology and Anthropology 9:67–124. Griffith, F.L. and J.W. Crowfoot 1911 The Island of Meroe and Meroitic Inscriptions, v. 1: Sôba to Dangêl. Archaeological Survey of Egypt 19. Egypt Exploration Fund. Griffith, F.L. and H.  Thompson 1904 The Demotic Magical Papyrus of London and Leiden. H. Grevel. Grimal, N.-C. 1981 Quatre stèles napatéennes au Musée du Caire JE 48863–48866. Mémoires de l’Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale 106. Guermeur, I. 2005 Les cultes d’Amon hors de Thèbes. Bibliothèque de l’École des Hautes Études, Sciences Religieuses 123. Habachi, L. 1960 Five Stelae from the Temple of Amenophis III at Es-Sebua’ now in the Aswan Museum. Kush 8:45–52. Hein, I. 1991 Die ramessidische Bautätigkeit in Nubien. Göttinger Orientforschung IV(22). Harrassowitz. Hintze, F. 1971 Musawwarat es Sufra I(2): Der Löwentempel. Akademie Verlag. Jacquet-Gordon, H., C. Bonnet, and J. Jacquet 1969 Pnubs and the Temple of Tabo on Argo Island. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 55:103–11. Kemp, B.J. 1997 Why Empires Rise. Review Feature: Askut in Nubia by Stuart Tyson Smith. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 7(1):125–31. Kendall, T. 1988 The Cliff Shrine of Taharqa and the ‘Uraeus’ on Gebel Barkal. In Fifth International Congress of Egyptology: Abstracts of Papers, pp. 153–54. ——— 1999 The Origin of the Napatan State: El Kurru and the Evidence for Royal Ancestors. Studien zum antiken Sudan, ed. S. Wenig, pp. 3–117. Meroitica 15. Harrassowitz. ——— 2004 The Monument of Taharqa on Gebel Barkal. In Neueste Feldforschungen im Sudan und in Eritrea. Akten des Symposiums Berlin, ed. S.  Wenig, pp. 1–46. Meroitica 21. Harrassowitz. ——— 2008 Why Did Taharqa Build his Tomb at Nuri? In Between the Cataracts: Proceedings of the 11th Conference for Nubian Studies, ed. W.  Godlewski and A.  Łajtar, Part 1, pp. 117–47. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean Supplement Series 2.1. Warsaw University. ——— 2017 B 700—Sub Chapels: Talatat Enclosures for the Aten Cult. http://www.jebelbarkal. org/frames/B700subchapels.pdf (April 28, 2017). Kendall, T., El-Hassan Mohamed, H. Wilson, J. Haynes, and D. Klotz 2017 Jebel Barkal in the New Kingdom: An Emerging Picture. In Nubia in the New Kingdom: Lived Experience,

The Amun Cult and its Development in Nubia   365 Pharaonic Control and Indigenous Traditions, ed. N. Spencer, A. Stevens, and M. Binder, pp. 155–88. British Museum Publications on Egypt and Sudan 3. Peeters. Kendall, T. and P. Wolf, P. 2011 B 600: A Temple of Thutmose IV at Jebel Barkal. In La pioche et  la plume. Autour du Soudan, du Liban et de la Jordanie. Hommages archéologiques à Patrice Lenoble, ed. V. Rondot, F. Alpi, and F. Villeneuve, pp. 237–59. Presses de l’Université Paris-Sorbonne. Kleinitz, C. 2012 Rock Art at the Fourth Nile Cataract: An Overview. In Proceedings of the Third International Conference on the Archaeology of the Fourth Nile Cataract, ed. H-P. Wotzka, pp. 33–50. Africa Praehistorica 22. Heinrich-Barth-Institut. Kormysheva, E. 1994 Le nom d’Amon sur les monuments royaux de Kouch. In Hommages à Jean Leclant, v. 2: Nubie, Soudan, Éthiopie, ed. C. Berger, G. Clerc, and N. Grimal, pp. 251– 61. Bibliothèque d’Étude 106(2). Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale. ——— 1999 Amun of Pnubs on the Plaques from Kush. In Recent Research in Kushite History and Archaeology: Proceedings of the 8th International Conference for Meroitic Studies, ed. D.A. Welsby, pp. 285–91. British Museum Occasional Paper 131. ——— 2004 On the Origin and Evolution of the Amun Cult in Nubia. In Nubian Studies 1998: Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference of Nubian Studies, ed T. Kendall, pp. 109– 33. Department of African-American Studies, Northeastern University. Kröper, K., S. Schoske, and D. Wildung eds. 2011 Königsstadt Naga. Grabungen in der Wüste des Sudan. Naga-Projekt (Berlin). Leclant, J. 1949 “Per Africae Sitientia”. Témoignages des sources classiques sur les pistes menant à l’oasis d’Ammon. Bulletin de l’Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale 49:193–253. Lepsius, K.R. 1880 Nubische Grammatik, mit einer Einleitung über die Volker und Sprachen Afrika’s. W. Hertz. Lohwasser, A. 2011 Devil and God: The Crocodile in Kush. In La pioche et la plume. Autour du Soudan, du Liban et de la Jordanie. Hommages archéologiques à Patrice Lenoble, ed. V. Rondot, F. Alpi, and F. Villeneuve, pp. 383–89. Presses de l’Université Paris-Sorbonne. Macadam, M.F.L. 1949 The Temples of Kawa, v. 1: The Inscriptions. Oxford University Press. ——— 1955 The Temples of Kawa, v. 2: History and Archaeology of the Site. Oxford University Press. Morkot, R. 2003 On the Priestly Origin of the Napatan Kings: The Adaptation, Demise and Resurrection of Ideas in Writing Nubian History. In Ancient Egypt in Africa, ed. D. O’Connor and A. Reid, pp. 151–68. UCL Press. Näser, C. 2004 The Small Finds. In The Capital of Kush, v. 2: Meroe Excavations 1973–1984, P.L. Shinnie and J.R. Anderson, pp. 215–311. Meroitica 20. Harrassowitz. Onderka, P. 2014 Wad ben Naga: A History of the Site. Sudan & Nubia 18:83–92. Pamminger, P. 1992 Amun und Luxor—Der Widder und das Kultbild. Beiträge zur Sudanforschung 5:93–140. Porter, R. and B. Moss 1952 Topographical Bibliography of Ancient Egyptian Hieroglyphic Texts Reliefs, and Paintings, v. 7: Nubia, the Deserts, and Outside Egypt. Griffith Institute. http:// www.griffith.ox.ac.uk/topbib/pdf/pm7.pdf. Posener, G. 1936 Catalogue des ostraca hiératiques littéraires de Deir el-Médineh, v. 1: Documents de fouilles de l’Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale 1. Priese, K.-H. 1974 Die Statue des napatanischen Königs Aramatelqo (Amtelqa). Berlin, Ägyptisches Museum Inv.-Nr. 2249. In Festschrift zum 150 jährigen Bestehen des Berliner Ägyptischen Museums Berlin, pp. 211–32. Akademie Verlag.

366   Luc Gabolde Quaegebeur, J. 1986 Amenophis nom royal et nom divin. Revue d’Égyptologie 37:97–106. Reisner, G.A. 1923a Excavations at Kerma 1–3. Harvard African Studies V. Peabody Museum of Harvard University. ——— 1923b Excavations at Kerma 4–5. Harvard African Studies VI Peabody Museum of Harvard University. ——— 1931 Inscribed Monuments from Gebel Barkal (1). Zeitschrift für ägyptische Sprache 66:76–100. Reisner, G.A. and M.B. Reisner 1933 Inscribed Monuments from Gebel Barkal Part 3: The Stela of Sety I. Zeitschrift für ägyptische Sprache 69(2):73–78. Rilly, C. 2010 La méroïtique et sa famille linguistique. Peeters. ——— in prep. Arnekhamani’s Sistrum: New Insights on the Appearance of the Meroitic Script. Paper presented at the 12th International Conference for Meroitic Studies, Prague (2016). Rilly, C. and V. Francigny 2013 Sedeinga 2012: A Season of Unexpected Discoveries. Sudan & Nubia 17:61–65. Ritner, R.K. 2009 The Libyan Anarchy: Inscriptions from Egypt’s Third Intermediate Period. Writings from the Ancient World 21. Society of Biblical Literature. Rocheleau, C. 2008 Amun Temples in Nubia: A Typological Study of New Kingdom, Napatan and Meroitic Temples. BAR International Series 1850. Archaeopress. Rondot, V. 2008 A Hitherto Unknown Rock Stela in the Name of Senusret III at Nauri (Mahas Country). Kush 19:179–84. ——— 2012 El-Hassa. Un temple à Amon dans l’île de Meroe au Ier siècle de notre ère. Comptes Rendus de l’Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres 2012(1):167–82. Rondot, V. and L. Gabolde 2018 Les dhnw.t de Kouch. In Hommages à L. Török, in T.A. Bács, Á. Bollók, T. Vidap (éd.) Across the Mediterranean – along the Nile, Studies in Egyptology, Nubiology and Late Antiquity Dedicated to László Török on the Occasion of His 75th Birthday, pp. 391–410. Institute of Archaeology, Research Centre for the Humanities, Hungarian Academy of Sciences and Museum of Fine Arts. Rondot, V. and G.  Nogara in prep. Meroitic Model “Temple and Ceremonial Palace”: The Archaeological Demonstration at El-Hassa. Paper presented at the 12th International Conference for Meroitic Studies, Prague (2016). Säve-Söderbergh, T. 1960 The Paintings in the Tom of Djehuty-hetep at Debeira. Kush 8:25–44. Schiff-Giorgini, M., J. Leclant, C. Robichon, and N. Beaux 1998 Soleb, v. 5: Le temple, bas-reliefs et inscriptions. Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale. Smith, H.S. 1972 The Rock Inscriptions of Buhen. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 58:43–82. ——— 1976 The Fortress of Buhen: The Inscriptions. Egypt Exploration Society Excavation Memoir 48. Smith S.T. 1998 Nubia and Egypt: Interaction, Acculturation, and Secondary State Formation from the Third to First Millennium B.C. In Studies in Culture Contact, Interaction, Culture Change, and Archaeology, ed. J.G.  Cusick, pp. 256–87. Center for Archaeological Investigations Occasional Paper 25. Southern Illinois University. Thiem, A.-C. 2000 Speos von Gebel es-Silsileh, Analyse der architektonischen und ikonographischen Konzeption im Rahmen des politischen und legitimatorischen Programmes der Nachamarnazeit. Ägypten und Altes Testament 47. Harrassowitz.

The Amun Cult and its Development in Nubia   367 Thill, F. 1997 Les premiers dépôts de fondation de Saï. Cahier de Recherches de l’Institut de Papyrologie et d’Égyptologie de Lille 17(2):105–17. Actes de la VIIIe conférence internationale des études nubiennes. Török, L. 1995 The Emergence of the Kingdom of Kush and her Myth of the State in the First Millennium BC. Actes de la VIIIe conférence internationale des études nubiennes. Cahier de Recherches de l’Institut de Papyrologie et d’Égyptologie de Lille 17(1):203–28. ——— 1997a The Kingdom of Kush: Handbook of the Napatan-Meroitic Civilization. Handbuch der Orientalistik 1(31). Brill. ——— 1997b Meroe City: An Ancient African Capital. John Garstang’s Excavations in the Sudan. Egypt Exploration Society Occasional Publications 12. ——— 2002 The Image of the Ordered World in Ancient Nubian Art: The Construction of the Kushite Mind, 800 BC–300 AD. Probleme der Ägyptologie 18. Brill. ——— 2009 Between Two Worlds: The Frontier Region between Ancient Nubia and Egypt 3700 BC–AD 500. Probleme der Ägyptologie 29. Brill. Valbelle, D. 2003a L’Amon de Pnoubs. Revue d’Égyptologie 54:191–217. ——— 2003b Kerma, les inscriptions. Genava n.s. 49:229–34. ——— 2009 Kerma, les inscriptions et la statuaire. Genava n.s. 57:109–19. Valbelle, D. and C.  Bonnet 2000 Les sanctuaires de Kerma du Nouvel Empire à l’époque méroïtique, Comptes Rendus de l’Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres, juillet-octobre, pp. 1099–1120. ——— 2003 Amon à Kerma. In Hommages à Fayza Haikal, ed. N.  Grimal, A.  Kamel, and C.M. Sheikholeslami, pp. 289–304. Bibliothèque d’Étude 138. Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale. Welsby, D.A. 1996 The Kingdom of Kush: The Napatan and Meroitic Empires. British Museum. Wenig, S. 1978 Africa in Antiquity: The Arts of Ancient Nubia and the Sudan, v. 2: The Catalogue. The Brooklyn Museum. ——— 2001 Musawwarat es-Sufra: Interpreting the Great Enclosure. Sudan & Nubia 5:71–86. ——— 2013 Die Heraufkunft der 25. Dynastie. In Die Kulturen Nubiens—ein afrikanisches Vermächtnis, ed. S. Wenig and K. Zibelius-Chen, pp. 157–71. J.J. Röll. Wildung, D. 1984 Sésostris und Amenemhat. Ägypten im Mittleren Reich. Hirmer. ——— 1999 Die Stadt in der Steppe. Grabungen des ägyptischen Museums Berlin in NagaSudan. Stiftung Preussischer Kulturbesitz. Williams, B. 2006 The Cave Shrine and the Gebel. In Timelines: Studies in Honour of Manfred Bietak, v. 3, ed. E.  Czerny, I.  Hein, H.  Hunger, D.  Melman, and A.  Schwab, pp. 149–58. Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta 149. Peeters. ——— 2007 The Adoption and Rejection of Egyptian Symbolic Culture in Nubia. In Mélanges offerts à Francis Geus, ed. B.  Gratien. Cahier de Recherches de l’Institut de Papyrologie et d’Égyptologie de Lille 26:399–410. Wolf, P. 2006 Temples in the Meroitic South—Some Aspects of Typology, Cult and Function. In Acta Nubica: Proceedings of the X International Conference of Nubian Studies, ed. I. Caneva and A. Roccati, pp. 239–62. Libreria dello Stato. Wüthrich, A. 2010 Éléments de théologie thébaine. Les chapitres supplémentaires du Livre des Morts. Studien zum Altägyptischen Totenbuch 16. Harrassowitz.

368   Luc Gabolde ——— 2015 Édition synoptique et traduction des chapitres supplémentaires du Livre des Morts 162 à 167. Studien zum Altägyptischen Totentexten 19(1–2). Harrassowitz. Yellin, J.W. 1995 Egyptian Religion and its Ongoing Impact on the Formation of the Napatan State. A Contribution to László Török’s Main Paper: The Emergence of the Kingdom of Kush and her Myth of the State in the First Millennium BC. VIIIe Conférence Internationale des Études Nubiennes. Cahiers de Recherches de l’Institut de Papyrologie et d’Égyptologie de Lille 17(1):243–63. Yoyotte, J. 2005 Bélier. In Le bestiaire des Pharaons, ed. P. Vernus and J. Yoyotte, pp. 471–90. Perrin. Zibelius-Chen, K. 2011 “Nubisches” Sprachmaterial in hieroglyphischen und hieratischen Texten. Meroitica 25. Harrassowitz.

chapter 20

The N u bi a n Ex per ience of Egy pti a n Domi nation Du r i ng th e N ew K i ngdom Stuart Tyson Smith

The Nubian experiences of Egyptian domination during the New Kingdom (ca. 1500–1070 bce) has tended to be characterized through an Egyptian lens. When viewed from an  Egyptocentric perspective, both texts and archaeological evidence, largely drawn from Lower Nubia, suggest that Nubians assimilated in the context of intensive colonization and an imperial policy of acculturation. There has in particular been a tendency to assume a uniform imperial policy and outcome for the entire region between the First and Fourth Cataracts. Early scholars like Breasted (1909:561) and later Emery (1965:206–208) assumed that all of Nubia assimilated to an inherently superior Egyptian culture. More recently, Kemp (1978, 1997) has articulated this view explicitly, arguing that imperial policy in the new Kingdom was focused on a kind of civilizing mission to spread of Egyptian culture to the south. As for the Nubians, they succumbed to the inherent appeal of Egyptian material culture and practices in a natural one-way cultural transmission from dominant core to subordinate periphery. This top-down view of assimilation was understandable given the strong pattern of cultural replacement seen in Lower Nubia and the general lack of archaeological investigation south of the Second Cataract before the 1980s. A re-evaluation of the record from Lower Nubia and new fieldwork in Upper Nubia is complicating this unidirectional model of cultural influence, instead pointing towards a more complex set of intercultural entanglements in which Nubians played an active role. The complex intersection of imperial strategy and indigenous

370   Stuart Tyson Smith response is reflected in the variability of the empire’s footprint, from Lower Nubia, with its long history of imperial entanglements and heavy continuing investments in imperial infrastructure, to the lighter imperial impacts in the south between the Third and Fourth Cataracts (see Spencer et al. 2017). The indigenous experience of domination was conditioned by responses to imperial policy and Egyptian colonists, but also varied within sites, between sites, and between regions through an accumulation of individual choices by a range of Nubians. The geographic and ethnic term Nubia/Nubian first emerged in Late Antiquity, but is used here to refer to the geographic region and its indigenous occupants (Fig. 20.1). At the same time, the ethnonym “Nubian” encompasses a number of different but related groups in antiquity that are identified archaeologically and/or through ancient Egyptian historical sources. The Egyptians referred to Nubians in a number of ways, from the generic Setiu (bow-people) and Nehesy to more specific ethnonyms like the “tall Terekpeople in their garments, with fans of gold, high hairstyles, and their jewelry of ivory” mentioned in a Ramesside model letter describing the Presentation of Inu (author’s

Figure 20.1  Map of Nubia during the New Kingdom. Map: Samuel Burns.

The Nubian Experience of Egyptian Domination   371 translation, after Gardiner  1937). Redford (2004) confidently asserts that the term Nehesy (Nubian) corresponds to our racial category “Black.” Like some other Egyptologists, he supports this notion by stating that the original meaning of the word was “bronzed/burnt,” although the actual translation is “bite or sting (like an insect)” (Erman and Grapow 1926, v.2:303). This etymology makes more sense given the fame of Nubian archery, and shows that we must try and avoid mapping our own notions of racial categories onto expressions of difference in antiquity. Peoples ranging through the Eastern Desert were also grouped by the Egyptians with Nubians, but distinguished through individual toponyms and ethnonyms. The most notable were the Medjay, perennial Egyptian allies linked archaeologically to the semi-nomadic Pan-Grave culture (but for the complicated nature of this term, see Liszka and de Souza, this volume). Toponyms used by the Egyptians varied depending on the context of the inscription, from the generic use of Kush to refer to all of Nubia to specific place names like Ibhet, a focus of military activity probably located in the Eastern Desert. The Egyptians also differentiated between Wawat, Lower Nubia, and Kush, Upper Nubia, a distinction that corresponds to the territory of the archaeological C-Group and Kerma kingdom, respectively. In particular, the king at Kerma was referred to as the Ruler of Kush and when Thutmose I defeated him, he stated in triumphal inscriptions at Tombos that he “overthrew Kush.” Although the variability in the use of terms by the ancient Egyptians may seem inconsistent to us today, it is important to remember that ethnicity is multiscalar, mutable, and situationally contingent, both self-identified and ascribed by others (Smith 2003b). The terminology used by the Egyptians is thus completely valid, but must be interpreted critically since it represents views filtered through Egyptian experience, administrative necessity, and ideological formulations, depending on the specific historical and social context.

Imperial Domination and Subaltern Responses Empires rarely act altruistically, and there are indications that Egypt’s imperial policy during the New Kingdom was focused on the exploitation of resources that contributed to the larger political economy, especially gold and cattle, and access to trade in exotic materials like ivory, ebony, and incense (for a debate on this issue, see Smith 1995, 1997; Kemp 1997). Kemp takes a more benevolent view of Egypt’s imperial goals, arguing that “some recognition, at least, should be given to the positive side of this early attempt to extend what, to the Egyptians themselves, was a civilized way of life” (Kemp 1978:56). This view is, however, problematic. As Dietler points out, the notion of the “civilizing” impulse of Classical civilization was created in the 19th century to justify modern colonialism with a romanticized appeal to Hellenism, a notion that Kemp echoes with an Egyptological twist. This modern colonial narrative has increasingly been replaced with

372   Stuart Tyson Smith more nuanced interaction-based models that reject unidirectional cultural transfer between dominant core and subordinate periphery for a more balanced view that acknowledges the complexities of cultural entanglements and indigenous agency in the context of imperial domination (Gardner 2007; Dietler 2010). The reality of the Nubian experience lies somewhere in between exploitation and Kemp’s more positive view of empire. Textual sources reflect both suppression of dissent and economic exploitation, but at the same time Nubian collaborators could gain wealth and positions of power. Without assuming uniform assimilation, elements of Egyptian material culture and practices did have a broad appeal, in particular in the funerary realm and especially in Lower Nubia. Discussing Greece under the Roman Empire, Alcock (2005) points out that colonial societies are not monolithic, but multi-ethnic and stratified, with different segments of society reflecting different interests and experiences of imperial dominance. Similarly, van Dommelen (2005) argues that different cultural features were not passively borrowed, but instead new cultural configurations were actively constructed through an accumulation of individual choices. On the positive side, even in the case of strong imperial domination and cultural influence, dominated peoples would have played an active role in shaping the colonial encounter. Dietler’s (2010) consumption-based model of cultural entanglement highlights the role of individual choices in the adoption, adaptation, indifference, and rejection of intercultural borrowing. Through a nuanced analysis of the intersection of the different social logics of the parties involved, agency is both potentially discernable and historically crucial to understanding larger developments like the spread of Egyptian funerary practices in both Lower and Upper Nubia during the New Kingdom. These exchanges between individuals can be further understood through a practice theory approach with cultural change produced through a constant dialectic between the constraints of habitus, cultural predispositions to an extent shared by other members of society, and the pressure of individual adaptation and innovation with exposure to new practices in different social contexts (Bourdieu  1977), a dynamic highlighted in colonial encounters like this one.

Nubians under Egyptian Domination The Nubian experience of Egyptian domination was varied and complex. For some, Egyptian material culture and practices had a strong appeal, while others rejected Egyptian influence in spite of some cultural entanglements. Location also played a pivotal role in defining the Nubian experience. Impacts and cultural influence were heaviest in Lower Nubia and Upper Nubia up to the Third Cataract (Fig. 20.1). In contrast, Upper Nubia through the Fourth Cataract reflects a larger degree of Nubian autonomy, while the Fourth Cataract region shows the least impact. Even within these different zones, the course of empire was shaped by different segments of the population at

The Nubian Experience of Egyptian Domination   373 ­ ifferent locales and even between specific social contexts within communities. Finally, d relationships between Nubians and the empire were not static, but changed diachronically from the initial conquest in the early 18th Dynasty through a period of consolidation later in the 18th Dynasty, changing significantly in the Ramesside period (19th to 20th Dynasties). The following discussion is organized thematically along the lines of Dietler’s entanglement model and Scott’s ideas about subaltern resistance to reflect different Nubian responses to the Egyptian conquest, taking into account both regional and temporal variability.

Resistance, Rejection, and Indifference As Scott (1985) suggests in his study of peasant resistance, overt rebellion is the riskiest strategy of resistance against domination. The failure of an uprising typically results in death to the conspirators and reprisals against the general population, a consequence that is documented in triumphal inscriptions and depictions from Egyptian monuments. Scott argues that for this reason resistance to domination typically employs more subtle means, challenging the state without overtly threatening the dominant power structures and thus provoking a brutal response. This typically takes the form of individual actions including lack of compliance to imperial dictates through withholding or reductions in work and payments due to the dominating authority. The latter is implied in a model letter addressed from the chief colonial administrator, the Viceroy of Kush Paser, to a Nubian prince that exhorts him to pay his due at the Inu ceremony, suggesting that compliance with the technically voluntary payments could be a problem (Caminos 1954:437–46). Symbolic expressions of resistance that did not cross the line of overt rebellion are another way that subaltern groups push back against domination. This might include maintenance of and emphasis upon local traditions as a means of resisting Egyptian cultural influence. Examples of the rejection of Egyptian material culture and practices and maintenance of Nubian forms may provide indications of a similar strategy that avoided direct confrontation by deploying ethnic solidarity as a means of pushing back against Egyptian social and political hegemony. Historical sources suggest that outright rebellion by Nubians against Egyptian domination did occur, but was rare, in spite of the ideological trope of the pharaoh campaigning to the south. As a part of the topos of continually defeating/taming chaos in the form of foreign enemies, triumphal texts and scenes often exaggerated smaller-scale military action. Sometimes the campaigns were ahistorical, as with the accounts of military actions that Rameses III claimed as his own but copied from the mortuary temple of his namesake, Rameses II (for discussion, see Liverani 1990). Säve-Söderbergh and Troy (1991) point out that most of the New Kingdom campaigns mentioned in monumental inscriptions were outside of and/or at the margins of the area under colonial control, aimed at protecting trade routes and/or resource extraction. Uprisings within the New Kingdom colony did sometimes occur, but were put down with a strong military

374   Stuart Tyson Smith response, as Scott would predict. Merenptah boasted of his harsh reaction to a rebellion in Lower Nubia (ca. 1219 bce; Säve-Söderbergh and Troy 1991:3–6): The wild lion sent the hot blast of his mouth against the land of Wawat. They were destroyed at once. There is no heir to their land, all having been brought to Egypt together. Their chiefs have been set on fire in the presence of their supporters (? or relatives?). As for the rest, the hands of some were cut off because of their crimes; others, their ears and eyes were removed, taken back to Kush and made into heaps in their settlements. Never again will Kush repeat rebellion.

There is a degree of hyperbole here; this is, after all, an ideological document. But it does indicate the kind of response that a Nubian rebellion might provoke. We cannot say how Nubians reacted to triumphal depictions of the symbolic and sometimes literal defeat of “wretched Kush” on Nubian monuments. Perhaps they saw other Nubians, not themselves, in those representations. As noted above, most of the recorded military expeditions were not mounted to suppress internal rebellions, but were instead aimed at nomadic groups and others outside of the main Egyptian imperial sphere of influence. In at least some cases, however, this ideological topos seems to represent a subordinating message aimed at conquered Nubians. For example, in the text accompanying scenes of Nubian campaigns at Rameses II’s Beit el-Wali temple one of the defeated Nubians states (Säve-Söderbergh and Troy  1991:3; Kitchen  1993, v. 2:61–62): “O children who were big in your hearts and had forgotten what you had been told: ‘Cause not the lion to go out and enter Kush.’ ” In a more direct act of intimidation, Amenhotep II boasts of hanging the body of a rebellious Levantine prince on the walls of Napata “to demonstrate the victories of His Majesty for eternity to all the inhabitants of the low lands and high lands in Nubian country” (Säve-Söderbergh and Troy 1991:3). At a minimum, the princes and general populace were exposed to a kind of political theater that denigrated Nubians through monumental art, inscriptions, and in events like the Presentation of Inu discussed below. Säve-Söderbergh’s (1989) analysis of cemeteries near the Second Cataract in the Scandinavian Joint Concession identified evidence for the continuation of Nubian burial practices into the New Kingdom. Although they had large amounts of Egyptian pottery, the interments of “transitional” cemeteries 176, 218, and 229 were made in tombs with Nubian-style tumulus superstructures and the few undisturbed burials were almost all in Nubian flexed position. The pottery from 176 in particular points to a Ramesside-period date (cf. Hope  1989:94, fig. 92; Säve-Söderbergh  1989: pl. 36; Aston 1998:311, no. 999; 494–97, nos. 2487 and 2498). The cemetery’s late start could indicate a group of Nubians deliberately distancing themselves from the more Egyptianizing communities represented by earlier sites like Fadrus. A distinctive handmade ware with incised decoration finds parallels at El-Kurru, suggesting that the site continued into the Third Intermediate/early Napatan period (Säve-Söderbergh 1989: pl. 38, 2–4). Two sherds of the same type also appear at Askut from a late New Kingdom/ Third Intermediate Period context. This patterning may reflect larger ties among

The Nubian Experience of Egyptian Domination   375 Nubians outside of their colonial relationships, either generally or perhaps facilitated by mobile groups. Dating from the early to mid-18th Dynasty, Site 35 is of particular interest, combining C-Group, Pan-Grave, and Egyptian features/material culture (SäveSöderbergh  1989:159–65). Pan-Grave features include stone-lined cists and some pottery, but lack other typical features like bucrania and a north-south orientation for the graves. In addition to pottery, one burial was wrapped in a woven matting of “wooden sticks,” more likely the kind of heavy reed mat-work commonly utilized for poorer Egyptian burials. In spite of the cemetery’s predominantly Nubian character, the mix of features suggests a complex cultural entanglement with threads coming from Egyptian influence, local C-Group traditions, and cultural features and perhaps individuals from mobile groups like the Medjay/Pan-Grave, who ranged between the Eastern Desert and the Nile valley. A similar pattern appears at the Fourth Cataract, where Nubian burial traditions continued into the New Kingdom (Welsby 2003, Site 4-F-74). Welsby and Welsby Sjöström (2007:384) extend this phenomenon to the Dongola reach, noting that “until very recently, sites dating to the New Kingdom through the early Kushite period were difficult to locate on the ground . . . sites which in the past may have been pushed back by scholars into the Kerma Classique period . . . actually may have continued to be occupied much later.” Additionally, small numbers of individuals placed in Nubian-style flexed burial position appear alongside overwhelmingly Egyptian practices at Fadrus as well as cemeteries connected with colonies like Serra East, Soleb, and Tombos (Schiff Giorgini 1972; Säve-Söderbergh and Troy 1991; Williams 1993; Smith 2008). In spite of the widespread availability of Egyptian wheel-thrown pottery, Nubian handmade traditions also continue even at Egyptian colonial sites throughout the New Kingdom, if not at the same level of quality as the earlier fine wares (Säve-Söderbergh and Troy 1991; Smith 2008). It is now clear that indigenous forms never disappeared in Upper Nubia and even in Lower Nubia in spite of the widespread assimilation to Egyptian practices discussed above (Shinnie 1996:103). While this could simply represent indifference to the colonizing culture, Scott emphasizes the role of less overt forms of resistance against state authority, and some Nubians may have chosen more subtle means of opposition to imperial domination by rejecting Egyptian influence and maintaining Nubian practices in the face of the more widespread cultural assimilation discussed below.

Collaboration and Assimilation There is a strong if not entirely uniform pattern of assimilation to Egyptian practices and adoption of material culture from the First through Third Cataract. There would have been incentives for those who did assimilate, in particular for the elite. Many Nubians joined the colonial bureaucracy, like those officials buried in Egyptian-style tombs at Aniba who traced their ancestry to individuals with Nubian names (Steindorff 1937). The Egyptian administration also incorporated regional leaders with the title wer (prince). The latter were grouped regionally into princes of Wawat (Lower Nubia) and

376   Stuart Tyson Smith Kush (Upper Nubia). This kind of collaboration with the empire would have brought the indigenous participants in the imperial bureaucracy power through Egypt’s bureaucratic structure and wealth through royal patronage and the larger political economy. Cultural assimilation would also have potentially conveyed benefits lower down the socioeconomic ladder (see discussion of Fadrus below). The larger pattern of cultural assimilation seen in Lower Nubia thus likely represents to at least some extent a deliberate strategy by Nubians in the context of Egyptian domination as much as a reflection of imperial policy or the inherent appeal of Egyptian civilization and material culture. Decoration and grave goods in tombs of the Lower Nubian princes make a strong self-assertion of Egyptian identity, suggesting that they had assimilated to Egyptian norms (Fig. 20.2; Simpson 1963; Säve-Söderbergh and Troy 1991). In representations of the Presentation of Inu ceremony, the princes do, however, appear as Nubian, conforming to the Egyptian ideological ethnic stereotype, or topos, of Nubians through dress, accoutrements, and even physiognomy (Fig. 20.2). Inu is often translated in this context as “tribute,” but the meaning of the word and significance of the event is more complex. As a kind of exchange of gifts, the ceremony symbolically reinforced and demonstrated a reciprocal relationship between the pharaoh and his subjects, both Egyptian and foreign (Bleiberg 1996; Spalinger 1996). The representation of Nubians in these scenes is

Figure 20.2 The prince of Tehkhet Djehutyhotep and his wife Tentnub receiving funerary ­offerings as Egyptians in their tomb in Nubia (National Museum, Khartoum, photograph by author).

The Nubian Experience of Egyptian Domination   377 complex, as can be seen in the tomb of Tutankhamun’s Viceroy, Amenhotep Huy (Fig. 20.3). By this time, the Nubian topos allowed for an alternate representation with most of the features of the traditional depiction, feathered headdress, leather belt and sash, panther-skin cape, ivory jewelry, and physiognomy, but with an Egyptian-style kilt and optional shirt. This likely reflects the more or less widespread use of Egyptian dress in the colony. The leading figures on the top three registers, presumably the princes, wear different variations of this costume, similar to the representation of a Nubian trampled by a sphinx on Tutankhamun’s painted box. The offering bearers that follow are similarly rendered in the Nubian topos. The figures in the first register are labeled as the princes of Wawat (Lower Nubia), and one is identified as Hekanefer, Prince of Miam (Aniba). The accompanying text only mentions princes of Kush venerating the king, the reference to the princes of Wawat seems to be a gloss rather than part of the formal decoration. This omission in the formal inscriptions is curious and may be an example of the more general use of Kush, since the Lower Nubian princes are in the same pose of adoration as their Upper Nubian counterparts in the lower registers. Several individuals in the first and third registers appear more Egyptian, apart from darker skin, jewelry, and a few odd ornaments like ivory jewelry and the tassels depicted on their arms. Egyptians are

Princes of Wawat Hekanefer of Miam

Topical Prince’s Offspring of All Foreign Lands

Prisoners = Enslaved?

Princes of Kush

Topical

Topical

Huy Presents the Nubian Inu

Egyptianized?

Topical

Princes of Kush

Huy Returns Rewarded

Huy’s Household in Thebes

Figure 20.3  Nubians present Inu to Tutankhamen in the tomb of the Viceroy Huy (Lepsius 1849–59, Abt. III, Band VI:117).

378   Stuart Tyson Smith apparently also present. The individuals leading cattle look completely Egyptian, including physiognomy, as do all of the individuals in the lowest register, although these are identified as Huy’s Theban household (and entourage?) greeting him upon his being rewarded with gold necklaces by the king. The group following the Lower Nubian princes and labeled “offspring of the princes” have the least Nubian physiognomy and the most elaborate Egyptian-style court outfits, including the wearing of a gold or gilt modius, a kind of diadem that could be worn alone but often served as the platform for a more elaborate royal or divine crown. Although most often associated with queens like Nefertari, the modius was common from the Ramesside period for men and deities (Goebs in press). A woman at the back of the Lower Nubian delegation also wears a modius, in this case topped by an elaborate feathered plume, interpreted by Van Pelt (2013) as a parasol, although it is not clear why he takes that view. The modius frequently served as the base for Egyptian plumed headdresses and this is a more likely context for interpretation. Although as Van Pelt points out the example here has no direct parallel, the plumed headdress worn by Anukis might have provided some degree of inspiration. As Török (2009) notes, the Aswan triad of Khnum, Satet, and Anukis was popular in Nubia, consistent with the strong Nubian influence in the 1st Upper Egyptian Nome, Ta-sety or “Land of the Bow,” and more specifically at Elephantine (Raue 2002). Khnum’s manifestation as a Ram and Satet’s cattlehorned crown would resonate with the symbolic importance of sheep and cattle in Nubia. She also rides in a chariot pulled by calves, a unique combination. Van Pelt identifies these as oxen and suggests a Nubian adaptation of the chariot for use with oxen. However, the animal’s diminutive size and the fact that their horns have not yet emerged clearly identifies them as calves, not yet mature. Thus, instead of a practical purpose, the use of young male animals here must have some symbolic and/or religious significance, reflecting the entanglement of Egyptian and Nubian material and cultural features. The group of prisoners at the end of the first register are represented in the older Nubian topos with leather kilts, distinctive feathered hairstyle, ivory jewelry, and physiognomy. Some of the Nubian soldiers on Tutankhamun’s painted box are represented similarly, although others seem to be wearing a short Egyptian-style kilt. In keeping with this diversity, the first prisoner in Huy’s scene wears an Egyptian-style kilt. This suggests these prisoners were taken in a military expedition against a mixed group that included some more “Egyptianized” Nubians. They could be a desert group or one beyond Egyptian direct control, or alternatively an area in Upper Nubia or group of holdouts in Lower Nubia led by someone who interacted more with the colonial ap­pa­ ratus. It is likely that these individuals were destined for enslavement, attached to a temple or royal institution. Slavery was never very extensive, even in New Kingdom Egypt (biblical tradition notwithstanding). The most common context for enslavement was military activity, as seems likely here. For example, at the beginning of the New Kingdom, Ahmose son of Ibana mentions being awarded individuals that he personally captured in battle (Lichtheim 1976:12–14). Substantial numbers of combatants and noncombatants might be enslaved during a large military campaign or otherwise bound to an individual like Ahmose or an institution. In his Semna Stela, Amenhotep III men-

The Nubian Experience of Egyptian Domination   379 tions capturing 740 Nubians during his campaign against Ibhet, including 250 women and 175 children. Lists of tribute presented to the temple of Amun-Ra at Karnak give some sense of the absolute numbers of people routinely transferred from Nubia and the Levant from years 31 to 41 of the reign of Thutmose III (Sethe  1906:695–728; SäveSöderbergh 1941:226). Although damage has resulted in the loss of some year’s tallies, the preserved entries range from 134 to twenty-one individuals from Kush from the five years preserved, totaling more than 372 over eight years with at least fragmentary figures. The numbers for Wawat are not surprisingly fewer given the region’s much smaller population, between thirty-four and five from Wawat, totaling eighty-five for the six years preserved. Säve-Söderbergh noted that the numbers of enslaved people coming from Nubia were much smaller than from the Levant. Taking the damage into account, he estimates the total number of slaves taken from Nubia in the tribute lists at around 1,250 over eleven years. During the same period, over 2,990 enslaved people were brought from Syria. Additionally, like Egyptians, Nubians within the Egyptian sphere of control would have been subject to conscription. For example, the Viceroy Merymose mentions levying troops from colonial communities stretching from the First to Third Cataract for the Ibhet campaign noted above (Morris 2005:324). I have argued that the Nubian dress of the princes in the Presentation Ceremony does not represent their self-identification as Nubian, but rather reflects an act of political theater where they performed the role of the foreigner-topos, the chaotic enemy who embodies isfet (“chaos, wrong”), against ma’at (“order, right”; Loprieno  1988; Smith 2003b). The princes participating in this carefully staged event would have been required by the Egyptian organizers to shift from an Egyptian to Nubian identity in order to demonstrate, through performance, their subordination through the king’s enforcement of ma’at by taming of the earthly forces of isfet, represented by Egypt’s foreign enemies (Fig. 20.3). Removed from these ideological constraints at home, princes like Djehutyhotep of Tehkhet or Hekanefer of Miam were free to create a more mimetical self-representation in their tombs (Fig. 20.2), where they appear as Egyptian officials, even including the standard male/female, red/yellow coloring that characterized Egyptians (Smith 2017). Their particular costume and physiognomy mimics the appearance of Nubians as defeated enemies in the topos, for example the heads on the cattle lead in as offerings and more generally as in the scene of Tutankhamun trampling a Nubian and Asiatic on the side of the painted box from his tomb (Fig. 20.4). While it is likely that the variability in dress to some extent reflects a variability in cultural practice and thus assimilation, the ideological context complicates interpretation by forcing us to question the topical appearance of any Nubians playing a formal role in the event (i.e., the princes and offering bearers). There are, however, some unusual features in the Lower Nubian delegation that imply something different in contrast with Upper Nubia. Some other features resonate with the Nubians who appear more Egyptian, including the use of ivory jewelry and the ornaments, perhaps animal tails (see Van Pelt 2013) dangling from their upper arms. One is reminded of Maiherperi, who wears Nubian-style ivory jewelry, has a Nubian physiognomy, but is otherwise represented as Egyptian in his Book of the Dead from his tomb in the Valley of the Kings (Daressy 1902). Another

380   Stuart Tyson Smith

Figure 20.4  Comparison of Nubian costume in the tomb of Huy and Tutankhamen’s painted box (painted box, Egyptian Museum, Cairo, photographs by the author).

clear difference are the prisoners represented at the end of the first register, who were likely represented as they appeared when they were captured. Setting aside those Nubians appearing in the foreigner-topos, the scene may be an example of mimesis. The retention of some Nubian features points towards entanglement, while the variability in costume and physiognomy may reflect differences between Nubian groups, especially between the more “Egyptianized” individuals in the first and third registers, notably the elaborate costume of the “offspring,” as well as the more traditional dress of all but one of the prisoners. Lazlo Török (2009:275–83); followed by van Pelt (2013) instead interprets the different depictions of the princes and others in the scenes as reflecting a dual Egyptian-Nubian identity, which they could choose to express in different social contexts. Along the same lines, Darnell and Manassa (2007) assert that far from subordinating, their appearance in Nubian regalia affirmed their special status and pride as native leaders within the Egyptian administration. In support, they draw a direct comparison with the British colonial Durbars of the 19th and early 20th centuries, where the maharajas appeared in

The Nubian Experience of Egyptian Domination   381 all their regalia at the coronation of the British monarch as empress/emperor of India. Many of the maharajas themselves, however, saw the event and in particular the mandate of “native” regalia as humiliating (Gandhi 1993:230), including the second most important, Sayoji Rao, the Gaekwad of Baroda (Nuckolls 1990), who at the 1911 Durbar departed from protocol by carrying an English-style walking stick and refusing to don elements of the mandated costume. He remarked to a fellow maharajah “that it would have been all right if we had not to act in it like animals in a circus” (IndiaToday 2011). It is hard to know what the Nubian princes and their entourage thought of the Inu ceremony, but it seems likely that they would have found it oppressive. Correspondence to the pharaoh from the king of Babylon, whose gifts were treated as if coming from a subordinate, shows that he was clearly not amused (Liverani 1990:274). If their appearance as Nubians in the event really represented an expression of ethnic pride and enhanced political status, then the princes would have highlighted this aspect of their identity in their tombs. Instead, they appear the most Egyptian in their tombs, where they had the most choice to express self-identity. They only appear Nubian in the Inu ceremony, where they likely had little choice with its ideological overtones and highly choreographed nature. Scott (1990) reminds us that similar more modern events are carefully staged to create a façade of order and uniform support for their respective leaders, masking dissent, a subordinating dynamic that also likely played out in Nubia. Lower Nubia saw widespread assimilation to Egyptian cultural norms beyond the elite. In their analysis of the rural cemetery at Fadrus, Säve-Söderbergh and Troy (1991) argued that the adoption of Egyptian funerary practices was somewhat superficial, since only a small number of items normally associated with mummification and an Osirian afterlife appear in the cemetery, in particular inscribed objects like stelae, shabtis, and heart scarabs, as well as canopic jars indicating evisceration during mummification. However, this argument fails to recognize that all of these items characterize funerary practice among the highest elite (i.e., titled officials), appearing in similar small quantities in non-elite cemeteries in Egypt (Smith 1992; Grajetzki 2003:66–83). They are relatively rare even in wealthy colonial cemeteries like Tombos (Smith 2003b:163–66, figs. 6.28–34). A similar pattern appears at other Lower Nubian cemeteries like Qustul, which include elaborate coffined burials, rare shabtis, but like Fadrus occasional flexed burials interspersed between the supine, coffined burials (Williams 1992). Török (2009; again followed by van Pelt 2013) revived this argument, adding that burials of individuals extended but on their side reflect a kind of Nubian sensibility, but burial on the side is in fact common in Egypt before and during the New Kingdom, appearing in Nubia at sites like Tombos. Similarly, van Pelt asserts that the wealthier burials at Fadrus might be expected to have these esoteric grave goods, but in fact their social position is more consistent with comparable Egyptian burials without such equipment (see Grajetzki 2003:66–83, who specifically discusses Fadrus as representative of more general burial practice). Far more indicative of a broad acceptance of Egyptian funerary practice are the consistent east-west orientation of burials at Fadrus and other cemeteries, head to the west oriented to the morning horizon in order to receive the rejuvenating rays of the sun reborn after battling the evil snake god Apophis in the Netherworld (Assmann

Percentage of all burials over time

382   Stuart Tyson Smith Status Low Middle High

40

30

20

10

0

1550–1479 BCE Early Dynasty 18 Prosperity & Early Adopters

1479–1391 BCE Mid-Dynasty 18 Expansion & Stratification

1391–1307 BCE Late Dynasty 18 Decline & Impoverishment

Figure 20.5  Distribution of wealth over time at Fadrus (chart by author).

2005:317–24). Extended burial in coffins, which were themselves typically inscribed, is also an extremely common feature of Egyptian burial practice. Simple amulets like scarabs are also very common in both Egypt and Nubia during this period. They acted as magical symbols of rebirth connected with the god Khepri, the manifestation of the sun god as he is reborn on the horizon. Indeed, the strong adoption of Egyptian norms is so widespread and complete that it suggests more than only a strategy of collaboration, but also a profound religious shift. The distribution of wealth at Fadrus points to an initial phase of prosperity that SäveSöderbergh and Troy (1991:248–50) connect to new economic opportunities that the empire provided, pointing towards the kind of incentives that came with collaboration and assimilation. As the cemetery expanded in size through the mid-18th Dynasty, social stratification emerged, with the local elite remaining about the same size and the number of poorer burials increasing (Fig. 20.5). Its latest phases, however, reflect a gradual pattern of impoverishment that they attribute to a shift in imperial focus southward into Upper Nubia after Thutmose III. This trajectory in the distribution of wealth could alternatively be seen as reflecting a top down pattern of assimilation with a group of early adopters and their followers in the initial, more prosperous phase benefitting from collaboration with the colonial regime, gradually shifting to a more normal Egyptian pattern of inequality as the larger population was incorporated into the Egyptianized community (Smith 1998). The economic and numerical decline reflected in the latest phases could represent the final realignment of Lower Nubia to a socio-economic profile similar to that of contemporary Egypt with the poor left in the countryside and the affluent concentrated in urban centers, in this case Buhen (see also Trigger 1965:112; Kemp 1978:39–43; Morkot 1987:38–39). If this was the case, then Fadrus would reflect the ultimately negative impacts of the empire on the larger Nubian populace, as eco-

The Nubian Experience of Egyptian Domination   383 nomic inequality grew under Egyptian social and economic reorganization designed to create a self-sustaining imperial infrastructure (Smith 1995).

Entanglement, Hybridity, and Mutual Influence Beyond strategies of collaboration and resistance through ethnic solidarity, intercultural interaction produces cultural entanglements that often have unintended consequences for the individuals living under imperial domination as well as representatives of the dominant power. This kind of cultural borrowing also has a diachronic dimension, eventually the adoption or adaptation of different features would become internalized, ceasing to be marked as “foreign” (Silliman 2009). Although Egyptologists often posit the disappearance of Nubian culture, many features continue through the colonial era and were either maintained or blended with Egyptian practices, including Nubia’s vibrant handmade pottery tradition and cultural practices like flexed and bed burial and an emphasis on cattle. Some areas of Nubian culture influenced Egyptian culture, both at home and in the colonies, in particular military dress and equipment, cuisine, and the ram symbolism connected with the god Amun. These cultural entanglements could intentionally and/or unintentionally produce hybrid forms that ultimately undermined ideologies that institutionalized cultural dominance through the construction of categories of dominant colonial self and dominated indigenous other (Bhabha  1994; Liebmann 2015). In Nubia, these intercultural dynamics followed a gendered dynamic that also appears in at least some contemporary colonial situations (e.g., Lightfoot, Martinez, and Schiff 1998), and produced cultural hybrids that may have influenced the rise of the “Egyptianized” second kingdom of Kush, whose kings eventually ruled as the 25th Dynasty. Three main case studies will illustrate these cultural and diachronic dynamics: (1) a gendered pattern of entanglement at the Egyptian colonies of Askut and Tombos, and entanglements that produced hybridity in both (2) a colonial context at Tombos and (3) an indigenous context at Hillat el-Arab, which lay near the important religious and political center of Napata at the Fourth Cataract. Burials at Tombos and Hillat el-Arab both seem to begin in the Ramesside period and to continue after the end of the empire.

Askut and Tombos The Egyptian fortress of Askut was established around 1850 bce at the Second Cataract on the southern border of Egypt’s Middle Kingdom empire. The site was occupied continuously through at least the end of the New Kingdom (Smith 1995). Nubian material culture appears at Askut from the very beginning, reflecting the kind of cultural entanglements discussed above. In particular, distinctive handmade Nubian cooking pottery comes to dominate that particular sub-assemblage during the New Kingdom, rising from an already high proportion of 40 percent in the Middle Kingdom to an overwhelming 85 percent in the New Kingdom and Napatan period (Fig. 20.6). At the same time, Nubian serving and storage vessels remain a minor component of their respective

384   Stuart Tyson Smith 100

Percent Nubian

80

60 Middle Kingdom 2nd Int. Period

40

New Kingdom Napatan period

20

0

Service

Storage

Cooking

Figure 20.6  Proportions of Nubian pottery over time at Askut with illustration of a Middle Kingdom serving vessel, Second Intermediate Period storage vessel, and New Kingdom cookpots (chart by author).

sub-assemblages at 10 percent or less. This is not because cooking vessels in an Egyptian wheel-thrown tradition were not available. They are common in Egypt and do appear in the ceramic assemblage at Askut (Smith  2003b). Nubian pottery appears in many Egyptian colonial sites, often dominating the cooking assemblage as at Amara West, an important Upper Nubian administrative center founded in the 19th Dynasty as the seat of the southern “Deputy of Kush” (Spencer 2014), suggesting that the Nubian influence on foodways was a widespread phenomenon. This distinctive patterning points to a gendered dynamic, with Nubian women entering into the Egyptian colonial communities and introducing Nubian foodways in a way that transformed the colonial culture. The presence of Nubian-style female figurines in this otherwise Egyptian colonial context reinforces this gendered patterning (Fig.  20.7). In particular, one example of a female figurine found near a household shrine in the house of Meryka at Askut points towards the integration of Nubian practices connected to fertility into the colony’s religious life. The dramatic nature of the shift in cooking wares and the evidence for personal religion point towards a position in society consistent with Egyptian texts like the popular “Teachings of Ptahhotep” that advise that wives (at least of officials) should be in charge of the household (Smith 2003b). This conclusion is reinforced and extended by the presence of burials of women in Nubian flexed style in otherwise Egyptian tombs in the cemetery at the New Kingdom colony of Tombos (Fig. 20.8). Their burial position, flexed but with legs out and hands to the head, finds close parallels at Soleb (Schiff-Giorgini 1972, fig. 616 sq26, but not sexed) and to late Second Intermediate Period burials at Kerma, in particular associated with

The Nubian Experience of Egyptian Domination   385

0

0

1

1

2m

2 cm

Figure 20.7  Nubian fertility figurine associated with the household shrine of Meryka at Askut (prepared by author).

the latest royal tumuli, KIII, KIV, and KX (Reisner 1923). Reisner interpreted the placement of hands around the head as a protective gesture made as the individuals were sacrificed by being buried alive. He also saw irregularities in the placement and arrangement of individual bodies as indicative of live burial (Reisner 1923:70–72). The context of the Tombos burials in a vaulted chamber rules out any possibility that they were buried alive in a continuation of the Kerma practice of human sacrifice for elite and royal burials. Although the existence of human sacrifice on a large scale for royal and small scale for elite burials is clear, Reisner’s interpretation of burial position to indicate live burial is questionable. Burial placement is in fact remarkably consistent in spite of some variability (Judd and Irish 2009). Almost all burials were flexed on their right side, head to the east and face to the north, some with the knees out, some pressed more to the chest. At least one hand and often both were pressed towards the face in a similar pose to the Tombos and Soleb burials. Even more telling, both individual burials and principal, non-sacrificial burials show the same body placement and variability as the sacrifices, including subsidiary burials from royal tombs KIII (Reisner 1923: K 314, 329, 333), KIV (416, 425, 427), and KX (1024, 1041, 1065, 1067). Several of the principle burials show a similar placement to the burials at Tombos and Soleb. In the end, it is not clear just how the sacrificial burials died, or even the exact extent to which the burials were contemporaneous, although many clearly were. There is no evidence of perimortem trauma, although soft-tissue trauma cannot be ruled out. The use of a sedative or poison is

386   Stuart Tyson Smith

Figure 20.8  Plan of Tombos with flexed burials indicated by a white asterisk (prepared by author).

­ ossible and perhaps likely, but evidence for that is lacking, unlike the royal tombs at Ur in p Mesopotamia where cups and jars were associated with the carefully arranged sacrificial dead (Judd and Irish 2009). As with the presence of flexed burials at Fadrus and elsewhere in Nubia, Nubian practices and material culture did not completely disappear even at colonial centers in spite of the widespread alignment to Egyptian beliefs seen in burial practice, architecture, and material culture. Tombos was founded around the reign of Thutmose III, after the reorganization of the empire that eliminated or removed the Kushite royal line from power. The colony lies at the headwaters of the Third Cataract, a geopolitical chokepoint just north of the former Kushite capital at Kerma where traffic along the Nile could be easily monitored. It is thus far the southernmost Egyptian cemetery identified, and with the large inscription of Thutmose I and inscriptions of later Viceroys likely marked an important internal boundary within the empire (Morkot 2013). The pyramid tombs of

The Nubian Experience of Egyptian Domination   387 high officials reflect the importance of the site in the colonial administration. The largest was dedicated to an official named Siamun (Units 1 and 4), who held the title ScribeReckoner of the Gold of Kush, which suggests that he played an important role in the assembly of the annual “tribute” presented to the king at the Inu ceremony. The six women buried at Tombos during the New Kingdom in flexed position appear alongside otherwise Egyptian-style supine, coffined burials of both men and women (Fig. 20.8, Units 6, 7, 36, and 37). All but one are head to the east lying on their right side with face looking towards the north, consistent with burial traditions at Kerma but opposite to the usual western orientation of Egyptian practice. At least two of these women were placed upon a bed, again a long-standing Nubian practice. A Nubian fine ware blacktopped bowl was associated with these two women. Nubian pottery also appears in small quantities throughout the cemetery, in particular in the courtyard of Siamun’s tomb, where it may have been used to cook funeral feasts. The choice to adhere to Nubian burial practices within a colonial context would have made an important public assertion of the Nubian identity of these women and by extension their families, who after all would have been the ones responsible for the funeral (Smith and Buzon 2014). One of the burials was of an elderly woman who suffered from such severe osteoporosis that her spine had broken, paralyzing her lower limbs. That she lived for long enough for the bones to atrophy suggests a high level of care, again a sign of the integration of these Nubian women into colonial society. Finally, one of the burials had been disturbed by ancient looters shortly after she was interred, a sign of disrespect that was, however, all too common in Egypt itself as well as Nubia. Her arm was pushed aside to expose a necklace, presumably to steal a valuable piece of jewelry. The rest of the necklace lay in situ behind the skull and included faience amulets dedicated to the Egyptian household god Bes. One was so treasured that it remained on her necklace in spite of the head having broken off in antiquity, strung through the arms. In spite of her, or her family’s, emphasis on a Nubian identity in death, she was apparently so attached to the Egyptian deity that she wore the amulets dedicated to him in both life and death, a nice example of the complexities of cultural entanglement and her ability to make choices about what to adopt and what to reject. In the case of Bes, an accumulation of choices like the woman from Tombos would eventually lead to the household deity’s incorporation and adaptation as a prominent figure in a Nubian religious context by the 25th Dynasty (see Smith 2014 for discussion). The presence of valuable jewelry also suggests a level of prosperity that would not be consistent with a slave or even a servant. The fact that these public commemorations of Nubian-ness were tolerated in the colony’s cemetery, and that the women were placed not in a segregated area but interspersed within communal crypts, also points towards their role as respected members of the community with filial ties to Egyptian colonists. The Nubian cooking pottery at colonial sites in Lower and Upper Nubia may reflect a similar dynamic, not just a largely unconscious entanglement connected to foodways introduced by women into colonial communities, but an act of resistance in what Scott (Scott 1985, 1990) characterizes as a hidden transcript, in this case against Egyptian cultural hegemony and one that in some ways Nubianized Egyptian colonial society (Smith  2003b:189–93). The

388   Stuart Tyson Smith Nubian women who joined Egyptian colonial communities could have played a variety of roles, perhaps marrying into the colony, but also possible are more subordinating positions as servants, concubines, or slaves, although the latter is unlikely given the limited scope of Egyptian slavery, which as noted above was closely tied to military activity.

Hillat el-Arab and Tombos The cemetery at Hillat el-Arab provides another example of entanglement that adds both regional and diachronic dimensions to the colonial experience. Located near and probably connected to the colonial center at Napata, the site lay in a part of the empire with a much lighter imperial signature than the area between the First and Third Cataracts. Recent archaeological surveys have confirmed Trigger’s (1965) early impression that there was no widespread Egyptianized imperial culture between the Third and Fourth Cataracts (Grzymski 1987; Welsby 2001; Smith 2003a; Żurawski 2003). As noted above, a number of sites in the Dongola Reach south of Kawa contain post Kushite/preNapatan–period pottery, implying extensive settlement during the New Kingdom, but maintaining a Kerma cultural affiliation. Only one site had New Kingdom pottery (a total of thirty-one sites, see Welsby 2001:589–91, table 14.7). Similarly, Phillips notes that several sites farther south around the great bend contained pottery similar to but not within Kerma traditions. She suggests the continuation of Kerma traditions after the conquest in the region (Żurawski 2003:394–95). Only four sites had Egyptian temples, the older Kerma centers of Tabo and Kerma-Dokki Gel, as well as at Kawa and Jebel Barkal. These sites, along with Tombos, were placed at strategic points of control, with Barkal and Tombos (along with Tabo and Dokki-Gel) situated either end of the Dongola Reach and Kawa lying at a key juncture between fertile agricultural basins and a likely desert route to Barkal that cut across the great bend of the Nile (Fig. 20.1). The nature of New Kingdom settlement at Kerma suggests a blend of Egyptian and Nubian features, and one might expect an Egyptianizing cemetery to have been identified if it existed. The absence of substantial Egyptian settlement remains and cemeteries at Kawa and Barkal implies a smaller-scale colonial presence than the “temple towns” and older fortress communities between the First and Third Cataracts. The massive temple of Rameses II at Abu Simbel might provide a useful model. It had only a small mudbrick village and modest cemetery to serve the cult (Emery and Kirwan  1935:478, pl. 68). Something similarly small scale could have been destroyed, overlooked, or obscured at Kawa or Barkal. A fortress with rotating garrisons at the latter would also leave little trace outside the fort itself, which remains unidentified archaeologically. This evidence supports Morkot’s division between a more territorial approach in the north, which was incorporated directly into the social, political, religious, and economic spheres, contrasted with a more hegemonic imperial strategy running through the great bend of the Nile that allowed local princes a degree of autonomy similar to their Levantine counterparts (cf. Morkot 1987, 2013; Hassig 1988; Smith 2003b). Hillat el-Arab appeared in this larger imperial context during the 19th Dynasty, continuing through the end of the New Kingdom and ultimately through the 25th Dynasty. It was very likely the burial place of the local “princes of Kush” mentioned and depicted in Egyptian texts and monuments. Vincentelli (2006:184) argues that given the lack of

The Nubian Experience of Egyptian Domination   389 evidence for a cemetery of Egyptian personnel at Napata, the imperial center may have been entrusted to this local line of princes. In this case, they could be seen as adopting a strategy of collaboration like the “princes of Wawat.” Unlike their Lower Nubian counterparts, however, Vincentelli notes that burial practice at Hillat el-Arab departs from Egyptian norms in a number of substantial ways. Although most burials are supine, following Egyptian practice, there is no fixed orientation like the majority of burials at Fadrus, which are oriented head to the west Egyptian style. In some cases, they are even paired in opposite orientations head to toe in a novel orientation that is a clear departure from both Nubian and Egyptian practice. Shabtis and other specialized funerary objects are also absent. This is less remarkable for a site like Fadrus than an elite cemetery like Hillat el-Arab, where at least a few shabtis, heart scarabs, and the like would be expected. However, it should be noted that the very poor preservation of organic material could partially explain the absence of shabtis, since they were often made of wood. Similarly, there is no evidence for coffins, which one would expect even given the poor preservation of wood, but there are indications of bed burials, a long-standing Nubian practice. Two tombs contained burials of horses, and one of a dog, resonating with the common inclusion of animals in earlier Kushite tradition and, along with a few examples from other colonial sites like Soleb and Tombos, presaging the later horse burials connected with the 25th Dynasty kings at El-Kurru. Unfortunately, the superstructures have disappeared, although the substructures with chambers coming off of vertical shafts and often used for multiple burials largely conform to Egyptian practice. Decoration in the underground complex of one large 19th Dynasty tomb, however, reflects an adaptation or fusion of some Nubian and Egyptian ideas, including imagery of boats evoking the Osirian-themed journey to Abydos but in a Nubian art style. Strictly Nubian cattle imagery also appears in the same complex. The 19th Dynasty also saw the emergence of more mixed practices at Tombos with the addition of a new cemetery with traditionally Nubian tumulus monuments immediately adjacent to the older cemetery with its Egyptian-style mudbrick pyramids and ­chapels (Fig.  20.7; Smith and Buzon  2014). As at Hillat el-Arab, burials continued through the 25th Dynasty in both areas of the cemetery. All but two of the burials are supine, the exceptions both women of the Third Intermediate Period buried on a bed (Units 20 and 57B, three additional flexed burials appear in Units 31 and 47 in the older part of the cemetery). Bed burials are common, but coffins also appear, as do Egyptian amulets, pointing out both similarities and contrasts with Hillat el-Arab. The burials at Tombos are almost all oriented according to the Egyptian solar theology, east-west (head to the west), reflecting Egyptian influence. The burial of a horse at Tombos just after the end of the New Kingdom empire, however, provides another feature in common with Hillat elArab, although in this case placed in the shaft of a re-used New Kingdom pyramid ­chapel (Unit 23). The substructures are also different, consisting of a shaft leading to a usually northern side-chamber or niche—communal crypts, another Egyptian feature, are lacking at Tombos, but present at Hillat el-Arab. A similarly diverse set of burial practices can be seen at Amara West (Binder et al. 2011). Both mudbrick tombs and tumuli co-exist in the cemetery, but the underground complexes are more Egyptian in style, consisting of chambers coming off of vertical shafts. Burial practice otherwise

390   Stuart Tyson Smith adheres to a more Egyptian style, although eventually flexed burials also appear, as at Tombos earlier and elsewhere in both Upper and Lower Nubia.

Conclusions The Nubian experience of Egyptian dominance was variable and depended on an intersection of colonial policy and individual choices that resulted in cultural exchange and transformations, but also the maintenance of Nubian traditions in the face of Egyptian hegemony. Death or worse was the fate of those who rebelled, like the last king of Kush and the leaders who led the Lower Nubian rebellion during the reign of Merenptah. Others, like the Nubian princes, benefited from collaboration, perhaps at the expense of the larger populace with the increasing concentration of wealth under imperial government. The colonial encounter also created long-lasting entanglements reflecting not just Egyptian influence in Nubia, but also Nubian influence within Egyptian colonial communities and even more broadly in New Kingdom Egypt. The maintenance of Nubian cultural practices was tolerated even in colonial contexts where such acts would have pushed against the structures of dominance and subordination tied to the ethnic stereotypes of the foreigner-topos. Eventually hybrid forms emerged that would have further eroded the ideological distinction between Nubian and Egyptian. As Bhabha (1994:110–11) points out, hybridity’s creation of ambivalence can be seen as a strategic act of re­sist­ance within the deferential relations of colonial power (cf. Boyarin 2005). Hybrid forms can also serve the imperial power by linking indigenous practices with imperial institutions (Liebmann 2015). For example, the syncretisms that resulted in the adoption of ram imagery for Amun-Ra and placed his origins in the sacred mountain of Jebel Barkal would have strengthened the incorporation of Nubia into the Egyptian sphere, but with the unintended consequence of eroding the topos of self and other reflected in imperial ideology. As Dietler points out, intercultural consumption of material culture and practices was ultimately driven by an accumulation of personal choices of adoption, adaptation, rejection, or indifference. These decisions could be driven and/or constrained by larger political and economic dynamics, particularly in the context of imperial domination, but the mosaic of individual choices that characterize colonial encounters could produce outcomes that might transform both indigenous and colonial societies, as was the case in New Kingdom Nubia.

References Cited Alcock, S. 2005 Roman Colonies in the Eastern Empire: A Tale of Four Cities. In The Archaeology of Colonial Encounters, ed. G. Stein, pp. 297–329. School of American Research Press. Assmann, J. 2005 Death and Salvation in Ancient Egypt. Cornell University Press. Aston, D.A. 1998 Die Keramik des Grabungsplatzes Q I. Forschungen in der Ramses-Stadt. Grabungen des Pelizaeus-Museums Hildesheim in Qantir-Pi-Ramesse. Philipp von Zabern.

The Nubian Experience of Egyptian Domination   391 Bhabha, H.K. 1994 The Location of Culture. Routledge. Binder, M., N. Spencer, and M. Millet 2011 Cemetery D at Amara West: The Ramesside Period and Beyond. British Museum Studies in Ancient Egypt and Sudan 16:47–99. Bleiberg, E.L. 1996 The Official Gift in Ancient Egypt. University of Oklahoma Press. Bourdieu, P. 1977 Outline of a Theory of Practice. Cambridge University Press. Boyarin, D. 2005 Hybridity and Heresy: Apartheid Comparative Religion in Late Antiquity. In Postcolonial Studies and Beyond, edited by A. Loomba, S. Kaul, M. Bunzi, B. Antoinette, and J. Esty, pp. 339–58. Duke University Press. Breasted, J.H. 1909 A History of Egypt from the Earliest Times to the Persian Conquest, second edition. C. Scribner’s Sons. Caminos, R.A. 1954 Late Egyptian Miscellanies. Oxford University Press. Daressy, G. 1902 Fouilles de la vallée des rois (1898–1899), Catalogue général des antiquités égyptiennes du Musée du Caire nos. 24001–24990, v. 3. Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale. Darnell, J.C. and C. Manassa 2007 Tutankhamun’s Armies: Battle and Conquest during Ancient Egypt’s Late Eighteenth Dynasty. John Wiley & Sons. Dietler, M. 2010 Archaeologies of Colonialism: Consumption, Entanglement, and Violence in Ancient Mediterranean France. University of California Press. Emery, W.B. 1965 Egypt in Nubia. Hutchinson. Emery, W.B. and L.P. Kirwan 1935 The Excavations and Survey between Wadi Es-Sebua and Adindan 1929–1931, v. 1. Mission Archéologique de Nubie 1929–1934. Government Press (Cairo) Erman, A., and H. Grapow 1926 Wörterbuch der aegyptischen Sprache. J.C. Hinrichs. Gandhi, M. 1993 An Autobiography: The Story of my Experiments with Truth, trans. M.H. Desai. Beacon Press. Gardner, A. 2007 An Archaeology of Identity: Soldiers and Society in Late Roman Britain. Publications of the Institute of Archaeology, University College London. Left Coast Press. Gardiner, A.H. 1937 Late-Egyptian Miscellanies. Bibliotheca aegyptiaca 7. Fondation aegyptologique Reine Elisabeth. Goebs, K. in press Crowns (Egypt). In Iconography of Deities and Demons in the Ancient Near East, ed. J. Eggler and C. Uehlinger. Brill. Grajetzki, W. 2003 Burial Customs in Ancient Egypt: Life in Death for Rich and Poor. Duckworth. Grzymski, K. 1987 Archaeological Reconnaissance in Upper Nubia. Benben. Hassig, R. 1988 Aztec Warfare: Imperial Expansion and Political Control. University of Oklahoma Press. Hope, C.A. 1989 Pottery of the Egyptian New Kingdom: Three Studies. Victoria College Press. India Today Group 2011 The Maharaja Who Chose to Insult the King Emperor. India Today, December 11, 2011 [accessed May 6, 2014]. Available from http://indiatoday.intoday.in/ story/baroda-maharaja-sayajirao-iii-gaekwad-insulted-the-emperor/1/163801.html. Judd, M. and J.  Irish 2009 Dying to Serve: The Mass Burials at Kerma. Antiquity 83(321):709–22. Kemp, B.J. 1978 Imperialism and Empire in New Kingdom Egypt (c. 1575–1087 B.C.). In Imperialism in the Ancient World, ed. P.D.A.  Garnsey and C.R.  Whittaker, pp. 7–57. Cambridge University Press. ——— 1997 Why Empires Rise. Review Feature, Askut in Nubia. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 7:125–31. Kitchen, K.A. 1993 Ramesside Inscriptions. B.H. Blackwell. Lichtheim, Miriam 1976 Ancient Egyptian Literature: A Book of Readings, v. 2: The New Kingdom. University of California Press.

392   Stuart Tyson Smith Liebmann, M. 2015 The Mickey Mouse Kachina and other “Double Objects”: Hybridity in the Material Culture of Colonial Encounters. Journal of Social Archaeology 15(3):319–41. Lightfoot, K.G., A.  Martinez, and A.M.  Schiff 1998 Daily Practice and Material Culture in Pluralistic Social Settings: An Archaeological Study of Culture Change and Persistence from Fort Ross, California. American Antiquity 63(2):199–222. Liverani, M. 1990 Prestige and Interest: International Relations in the Near East ca. 1600–1100 B.C. Sargon. Loprieno, A. 1988 Topos und Mimesis. Zum Ausländer in der ägyptischen Literatur. Ägyptologische Abhandlungen 48. O. Harrassowitz. Morris, E. 2005 The Architecture of Imperialism: Military Bases and the Evolution of Foreign Policy in Egypt's New Kingdom. Probleme der Ägyptologie 22. Brill. Morkot, R.G. 1987 Studies in New Kingdom Nubia 1. Politics, Economics and Ideology: Egyptian Imperialism in Nubia. Wepwawet: Research Papers in Egyptology 3:29–49. ——— 2013 From Conquered to Conqueror: The Organization of Nubia in the New Kingdom and the Kushite Administration of Egypt. In Ancient Egyptian Administration, ed. J.C. Moreno García, pp. 911–64. Brill. Nuckolls, C.W. 1990 The Durbar Incident. Modern Asian Studies 24(3):529–59. Raue, D. 2002 Nubians on Elephantine Island. Sudan & Nubia 6:20–24. Redford, D.B. 2004 From Slave to Pharaoh: The Black Experience of Ancient Egypt. Johns Hopkins University Press. Reisner, G.A. 1923 Excavations at Kerma. Harvard African Studies V–VI. Peabody Museum of Harvard University. Säve-Söderbergh, T. 1941 Ägypten und Nubien. Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte altägyptischer Aussenpolitik. Håkon Ohlsson. Säve-Söderbergh, T. 1989 Middle Nubian Sites. Scandinavian Joint Expedition to Sudanese Nubia 4. Munksgaard. Säve-Söderbergh, T. and L.  Troy 1991 New Kingdom Pharaonic Sites. Scandinavian Joint Expedition to Sudanese Nubia. Almqvist and Wiksell. Schiff Giorgini, M. 1972 Soleb, v. 2: Les nécropoles. Sansoni. Scott, J.C. 1985 Weapons of the Weak: Everyday Forms of Peasant Resistance. Yale University Press. ———1990 Domination and the Arts of Resistance: Hidden Transcripts. Yale University Press. Sethe, K. 1906 Urkunden der 18. Dynastie, v. 4: Historisch-biographische Urkunden. J.C. Hinrichs. Shinnie, P.L. 1996 Ancient Nubia. Kegan Paul. Silliman, S.W. 2009 Change and Continuity, Practice and Memory: Native American Persistence in Colonial New England. American Antiquity 74(2):211–30. Simpson, W.K. 1963 Heka-nefer and the Dynastic Material from Toshka and Arminna. Publications of the Pennsylvania-Yale Expedition to Egypt 1. Peabody Museum of Natural History of Yale University. Smith, S.T. 1992 Intact Tombs of the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Dynasties from Thebes and the New Kingdom Burial System. Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts Kairo 48:193–231. ——— 1995 Askut in Nubia: The Economics and Ideology of Egyptian Imperialism in the Second Millennium BC. Kegan Paul. ——— 1997 Ancient Egyptian Imperialism: Ideological Vision or Economic Exploitation. Reply to Critics of Askut in Nubia. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 7(2):301–307.

The Nubian Experience of Egyptian Domination   393 ——— 1998 Nubia and Egypt: Interaction, Acculturation, and Secondary State Formation from the Third to First Millennium B.C. In Studies in Culture Contact: Interaction, Culture Change, and Archaeology, ed. J.G.  Cusick, pp. 256–87. Center for Archaeological Investigations Occasional Paper 25. Southern Illinois University. ——— 2003a The UCLA Dongola Reach Expedition, 1997–98 West Bank Surveys. Kush 18:157–72. ——— 2003b Wretched Kush: Ethnic Identities and Boundaries in Egypt’s Nubian Empire. Routledge. ——— 2008 Tombos and the Transition from the New Kingdom to the Napatan Period in Upper Nubia. In Between the Cataracts: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference of Nubian Studies, ed. W. Godlewski and A. Łajtar, Part 1, pp. 95–115. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean Supplement Series 2.1. Warsaw University. ——— 2014 Desert and River: Consumption and Colonial Entanglements in Roman and Late Antique Nubia. In Inside and Out: Interactions between Rome and the Peoples on the Arabian and Egyptian Frontiers in Late Antiquity, ed. J.H.F.  Dijkstra and G.  Fisher, pp. 89–107. Peeters. ——— 2017 Colonial Gatherings: The Presentation of Inu in New Kingdom Egypt and the British Imperial Durbar, a Comparison. In Gatherings: Past and Present. Proceedings from the 2013 Archaeology of Gatherings International Conference, ed. F. Belgane, pp. 102–12. BAR International Series 2832. Archaeopress. Smith, S.T. and M.R. Buzon 2014 Identity, Commemoration, and Remembrance in Colonial Encounters: Burials at Tombos during the Egyptian New Kingdom Nubian Empire and its Aftermath. In Remembering the Dead in the Ancient Near East: Recent Contributions from Bioarchaeology and Mortuary Archaeology, ed. B. Porter, pp. 185–215. University of Colorado Press. Spalinger, A. 1996 From Local to Global: The Extension of an Egyptian Bureaucratic Term to the Empire. Studien zur Altägyptischen Kultur 23:353–76. Spencer, N. 2014 Creating and Re-Shaping Egypt in Kush: Responses at Amara West. Journal of Ancient Egyptian Interconnections 6(1):42–61. Spencer, N., A. Stevens, and M. Binder eds. 2017 Nubia in the New Kingdom: Lived Experience, Pharaonic Control and Indigenous Traditions. British Museum Publications on Egypt and Sudan 3. Peeters. Steindorff, G. 1937 Aniba 2. Mission archéologique de Nubie, 1929–1934. J.J. Augustin. Török, L. 2009 Between Two Worlds: The Frontier Region between Ancient Nubia and Egypt, 3700 BC–AD 500. Probleme der Ägyptologie 29. Brill. Trigger, B.G. 1965 History and Settlement in Lower Nubia. Yale University Press. van Dommelen, P. 2005 Colonial Interactions and Hybrid Practices: Phoenician and Carthaginian Settlement in the Ancient Mediterranean. In The Archaeology of Colonial Encounters, ed. G. Stein, pp. 109–42. School of American Research Press. van Pelt, P. 2013 Revising Egypto-Nubian Relations in New Kingdom Lower Nubia: From Egyptianization to Cultural Entanglement. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 23:523–50. Vincentelli, I. 2006 Hillat el-Arab: The Joint Sudanese-Italian Expedition in the Napatan Region, Sudan. BAR International Series 1570. Archaeopress. Welsby, D.A. 2001 Life on the Desert Edge: Seven Thousand Years of Settlement in the Northern Dongola Reach, Sudan. Sudan Archaeological Research Society Publication 7. BAR International Series 980. Archeopress. ——— 2003 The Amri to Kirbekan Survey: The 2002–2003 Season. Sudan & Nubia 7:26–32.

394   Stuart Tyson Smith Welsby, D.A. and I.W.  Sjöström 2006-2007 The Dongola Reach and the Fourth Cataract: Continuity and Change during the 2nd and 1st Millennia BC. Cahier de Recherches de l'Institut de Papyrologie et d'Égyptologie de Lille 26:379–98. Williams, B.B. 1992 Excavations between Abu Simbel and the Sudan Frontier, Part 6: New Kingdom Remains from Cemeteries R, V, S, and W at Qustul and Cemetery K at Adindan. University of Chicago Oriental Institute Nubian Expedition 6. ——— 1993 Excavations at Serra East, George  R.  Hughes and James  E.  Knudstad, Directors, Parts 1–5: A-Group, C-Group, Pan Grave, New Kingdom, and X-Group Remains from Cemeteries A-G and Rock Shelters. University of Chicago Oriental Institute Nubian Expedition 10. Żurawski, B. 2003 Survey and Excavations between Old Dongola and Ez-Zuma. Southern Dongola Reach Survey 1. Neriton.

CHAPTER 21

History a n d th e K ushite Roya l I nscr iptions Jeremy Pope

Introduction “The word history,” Baruch Halpern observed, “is like a secret set of homonyms” (1988:6). In the study of Nubia, it has been used with a set of at least three different mean­ ings: (1) History as Past: popular surveys and encyclopedias have occasionally placed the full sweep of the region’s past, from the Paleolithic to the modern era, under the con­ven­ ient general heading of “historical” Nubia, irrespective of distinctions in source material and methodology (e.g., Lobban 2004); by such a broad definition, the entirety of this Oxford Handbook might be included among the subject matter of Nubian history. (2) History as Documented Past: more frequently, scholars have marked the commence­ ment of Nubian history with the appearance of the first documents written by Egyptians of the Early Dynastic period in reference to their southern neighbors (e.g., Budge 1907; Arkell 1961). (3) History as Genre: a stricter formulation would define history as a particular kind of document, one that not only provides material for the modern scholar’s interpretation of the past but also represents an attempt at interpreting the past by the author of the document himself or herself. The most popular articulation of this concept is arguably Johan Huizinga’s proposal that “history is the intellectual form in which a civilization renders account to itself of its past” (1936:9). For most of the Nubian past, oral accounts were not rendered into written form, so that the surviving evidence of col­ lective memory for those eras is confined to pictorial, sculptural, and architectural rep­ resentations. Yet this situation changed quite dramatically at the onset of the 1st millennium bce. The Second Kingdom of Kush, also known as the Napatan era (ca. 10th–3rd centuries bce), is the earliest period from which retrospective inscriptions have survived in Nubia that record Kushite perceptions and uses of the past; it is conse­ quently the first era for which the possibility of Nubian History as Genre may be cau­ tiously evaluated on the basis of written testimony.

396   Jeremy Pope Analysis of an intellectual form or genre cannot simply reduce the documents’ con­ tents to a digest of events; it must examine the manner in which those events were nar­ rated (Liverani 1973:182). From the Second Kingdom of Kush, more than two dozen inscriptions in Nubia concern episodes from the authors’ recent past, and the majority of these also make reference to previous reigns, decades, or centuries in the region’s deeper past (Table 21.1). Table 21.1  Selected Kushite Royal Inscriptions in Nubia. Century

Reign

Text

Deeper Past

?

Katimala

KSI

•

?

?

EXC

8

bce

7

bce

th th

Pi(ankh)y

  Taharqo

     

Ritner 2009 Sargent 2004 / Gozzoli 2018

•

Peust 1999

K XV

Eide et al. 1996 §92

BSS

Ritner 2009 / Colin 2020

GTS

Ritner 2009 / Spalinger 2016

K III

   

K XIV

Latest Translation / Discussion

Ritner 2009

K IV

•

Ritner 2009 / Jansen-Winkeln 2003

KV

•

Ritner 2009 / Gozzoli 2009

K VI

•

Ritner 2009 / Jansen-Winkeln 2003

K VII

•

Ritner 2009

SHI

•

Pope 2014a

LNG

Pope 2014a

Tanutamani

TDS

Sargent 2004 / Eltze 2017

Anlamani

ANE

•

Sargent 2004

ASE

•

Ritner 2009 / Gozzoli 2018

ADS

•

Sargent 2004 / Vinogradov 2012

Aspelta  

DGS

6th(?) bce

KHA

•

Sargent 2004

5

AER I

•

Sargent 2004 / Eltze 2018

th

bce

Amannoteerike

    4

th

bce

  3

rd

bce

Valbelle 2012

AER II

Eide et al. 1996 §72

AER III

Eide et al. 1996 §73

AER IV

Eide et al. 1996 §74

Harsiyotef

HAR

•

Sargent 2004

Nastasen

NAS

•

Sargent 2004

Sabrakamani

K XIII

Eide et al. 1996 §96

KSI=Katimala’s Semna Inscription; EXC=Excommunication Stela; K=Kawa stelae (with Roman numerals); BSS=Barkal Sandstone Stela; GTS=Great Triumphal Stela; SHI=Sanam Historical Inscription; LNG=Lower Nubian Graffiti; TDS=Tanutamani’s Dream Stela; ANE=Anlamani’s Enthronement Stela; ASE=Aspelta’s Enthronement Stela; ADS=Aspelta’s Dedication Stela; DGS=Dukki Gel Stela; KHA=Khaliut Stela; AER=Amannote-erike's Inscriptions (with Roman numerals); HAR=Harsiyotef’s Stela; NAS=Nastasen’s Stela.

History and the Kushite Royal Inscriptions   397 All were written in Egyptian hieroglyphic script but were displayed in Nubia during antiquity, and most scholars agree that each text was commissioned by a Kushite indi­ vidual. While a few have survived in mere fragments, others are quite lengthy, none more so than Pi(ankh)y’s Great Triumphal Stela, which contains an estimated nine hun­ dred verses spread across 159 horizontal lines. Jan Assmann equated this text to “a twovolume work in our literary culture” (2002:330), while László Török has discerned within the same inscription seven multi-chapter “books” differentiated by plot turns and narrative framing devices (2002:377–82). Space does not permit here a detailed dis­ cussion of the contents of every Kushite text, but their combined scope is noteworthy: as an ensemble, the inscriptions listed in Table 21.1 span the foundational events of the kingdom, its annexation and rule of neighboring Egypt during the 8th and 7th centuries bce, and its subsequent evolution across four centuries after the loss of Egypt. The inscriptions also cover a rich diversity of subject matter, including: descriptions of enthronement procedures; quoted dialogue from commoners and from deliberations of the royal council; statements of political and religious creed; codes of ritual purity and military conduct; accounts of temple construction, maintenance, and staffing; genealo­ gies and commemorations of named ancestors; interpretation of dreams; consultation of oracles; allusion to natural wonders; toponymic and ethnonymic lists and narratives; and violent struggles against foreign and internecine antagonists. As a result of their “wealth of picturesque details and manifestations of personal temperament,” Alan Gardiner praised the Kushite texts as “some of the most interesting hieroglyphic inscrip­ tions” (1935:219), and Miriam Lichtheim has classed Pi(ankh)y’s Great Triumphal Stela in particular as “the foremost historical inscription” in either Nubia or Egypt during all of the 1st millennium bce (1980:66). Nevertheless, these very same Kushite records impose severe constraints upon the work of modern scholars. Most problematic is the fact that every retrospective text dur­ ing this era appears to have been commissioned by a member of the royal family; the private inscriptions and private papyri so valuable to Egyptology are unparalleled in Nubia during the Second Kingdom of Kush (Pope 2019). Moreover, the Kushite royal inscriptions never identify their authors or scribes (cf. Van Seters  1983:16; Loprieno 2003:139). Nonroyal elites and commoners do not speak for themselves in the surviving texts, so their individual and collective agendas often remain obscure (cf. Breisach 1983:12; Van Seters 1983:2). These limitations of the textual evidence have been repeatedly emphasized by Nubiologists writing for nonspecialist audiences (e.g., Arkell 1961:114–15, 143, 153; Adams 1977:1, 267; Pope 2014b). While such laments can be justified, they are often misinterpreted by readers outside of the discipline of Nubiology. For instance, after consulting several published surveys of the Nubian past, Yaacov Shavit arrived at the following conclusion: “There is no ­written Kushite literature at all. Not even in the annals of the Egyptian priests was the history of Kush preserved; if it was, nothing remains” (2001:194). Shavit’s estimation of Kush as a nonliterate society devoid of recorded history is not unusual: similar categorizations of the Kushite past as prehistoric or ahistoric inform modern disciplinary divisions and have been tacitly accepted by some historians of broader Africa (e.g., Schick 1995:67–71; Robertshaw  2004:388–89; Henige  2005:185)—and even occasionally by Egyptologists (e.g., Redford 2004:146).

398   Jeremy Pope The intended meaning of Shavit’s conclusion is unfortunately not clarified by any attempt to define history for the reader, but a case can indeed be made for the exclusion of the Kushite royal corpus from the genre. If History as Genre is limited to only those texts that anticipated the formal conventions of modern academic monographs and doctoral theses, then the Kushite texts would not qualify: no surviving Kushite inscrip­ tion offers a critical dialectic adjudicating between what Hecataeus of Miletus would later call the “many and laughable” claims about the past (Jacoby  1995:318[F1], 535). Instead, each Kushite text offers a single perspective without either critique or acknowl­ edgment of alternative viewpoints. As a result, the corpus provides few grounds upon which to determine whether any Kushite author wrote in a good faith attempt to accu­ rately record the past (cf. Van Seters 1983:278). In addition, there appears to be no word in the Kushite corpus corresponding directly to the Greek concept of historia; if Kushite authors viewed retrospective texts as part of a distinct genre, they did not communicate this distinction with categorical terminology (cf. Hoffmeier  1992:295). Furthermore, some modern scholars have stipulated that the writing of history should be profane in outlook (Van Seters  1983:211) and unmixed with other textual genres (Redford 1986:xiv–xv); by this standard, the Kushite corpus would lie quite beyond the pale. However, these strictures upon the definition of history are by no means universally accepted in the profession, so the discussion that follows will not endorse any one defi­ nition or attempt to justify its application to the Kushite texts. The concern of the present chapter is not to define the Kushite corpus but instead to highlight some of its functions in order to facilitate comparative readings by scholars and students across multiple dis­ ciplines. The popular refrain that Kush was bereft of historical writing risks misleading the nonspecialist reader to assume that the Kushite royal inscriptions lack other charac­ teristics commonly associated with the genre, especially: (1) commemoration of abrupt change; (2) explanation of human causality; (3) investigation of source material; and (4) presentation to a broad audience. A closer inspection of selected texts below reveals that each of these features is demonstrably present in the Kushite corpus and crucially important to understanding Kushite perceptions and uses of the past.

Kushite “History as Festival”? A systematic refusal to commemorate abrupt change has been posited as characteristic of numerous societies; while the members of such societies do not neglect the reportage of dated events, they perceive those events to be mere imitations or instantiations of a preformed and archetypal pattern—like the just war, righteous suffering, and restora­ tion of order (Lévi-Strauss 1962:230–37; Goody and Watt 1963; Eliade 1965:4–5, 32–35; Liverani 1973:182–83, 187). Erik Hornung interprets ancient Egypt as a paradigm case—a society that produced “History as Festival” through ritual drama that conflated past, present, and future in order to preserve the monarchical state and its moral order

History and the Kushite Royal Inscriptions   399 (1992:147–64). While Hornung describes the content of Egyptian documents as “histor­ ical,” he concedes the “fundamental differences between the Egyptian conception of his­ tory and our own,” which emphasizes watershed events and linear development (1992:156). Thus, Assmann distinguishes the modern Egyptological concept of history as “what happened in spite of ” ancient Egypt’s archetypal pattern (2006:500), and Redford raises the possibility that Egyptian mythology “effectually destroys history, being antithetic to it from the outset” (2003:6). Shavit’s claim that ancient Kushite soci­ ety lacked historical writing might logically be taken to suggest that Kushite authors likewise produced “History as Festival” and thereby refused to commemorate abrupt change. A critical assessment of Hornung’s model as an explanation of the Egyptian record (Schneider 2014) lies beyond the scope of this chapter, because “History as Festival” is a fortiori inadequate as an explanation of the Kushite record. The problem is best illustrated by one of the earliest and most frequently commemorated events in the corpus: Alara’s covenant. Two generations after the life of the Kushite king Alara, his grandnephew Taharqo recalled the covenant on a stela erected in Upper Nubia; asserting his family’s special relationship with the local god, Amun-Ra of Kawa, Taharqo explained: [T]he mothers of my mother were dedicated to Him by their elder brother, the Son of Re, Alara, the justified, with the words: “This god knows who is loyal to Him. Hasten, O He who comes to the one who calls to Him! May You look after the wombs of my female relatives for me; may You establish their children on earth; may You act for them as You have acted for me; may You cause that they attain prosper­ ity.” As He [Amun-Ra] hearkened to what he [Alara] said regarding us, so He ele­ vated me as king just as he had said to Him. (Ritner 2009:538)

Another of Taharqo’s stelae recounts the same episode again in a speech by King Alara that clarifies the nature of the god Amun-Ra’s intervention: You have acted for her [Taharqo’s grandmother] just as You have acted for the one [Alara] who acted for You, as a wonder unimagined, unbelieved by plotters, when You repelled for me [Alara] evil plots against me, and You elevated me as king. (Ritner 2009:552)

Interestingly, neither passage invokes a preformed, archetypal pattern like the divine birth and sonship of Egyptian kings; instead, Kushite kingship—the fundamental insti­ tution of the entire corpus—is traced here to a watershed event produced by the actions of a singular man in linear time (Török 1997:258). The external evidence of Katimala’s Semna Inscription reveals that a cult of Amun had been maintained in Nubia across the preceding epoch (Ritner 2009:456–59), but later Kushite kings marked the inauguration of their own covenant with the god by commemorating a specific event and its mortal protagonist—and they would continue to do so for at least the next three hundred years.

400   Jeremy Pope

Figure 21.1  Stela of Nastasen, 4th century bce (Berlin ÄMP 2268). Alara is mentioned in the eighth horizontal line. Courtesy of bpk, Berlin/Aegyptisches Museum und Papyrussammlung/ Sandra Steiß/Art Resource, NY.

During the 5th century bce, the Kushite king Amannote-erike would credit Amun-Ra of Kawa with having “given to me just as You did for King Alara,” and a century later King Nastasen would honor “the power of the king, the Living One, Alara” (Sargent 2004:237, 397). Even more concretely, Nastasen would describe the site of Taqat in Upper Nubia as “the great place, the garden, in which the king, the Living One, Alara, grew up” (Fig. 21.1; Eide et al. 1996:477). In Kush’s retrospective corpus, Alara’s lifetime is marked as a beginning, so that his Kushite ancestors are never explicitly invoked in the royal inscriptions of the 8th through 3rd centuries bce.

History and the Kushite Royal Inscriptions   401 This account of the Kushite dynasty’s origins also shows the divergent results pro­ duced by the various meanings of history. Treatments of Nubian History as Past privilege the excavation results from El-Kurru to posit the earliest burials at that site as the historical origins of the Kushite royal line (Morkot  2003). By contrast, History as Documented Past has traced the Napatan state to Semna as the site of Kush’s earliest royal inscription (Darnell 2006:x, 55–62) and, alternatively, emphasized the testimony of later Greek and Egyptian inscriptions to propose Meroe as the dynasty’s birthplace (cf. Pope 2014a:5–33). Yet Kushite History as Genre does not commemorate either El-Kurru, Semna, or Meroe as ancestral seats, instead giving prominence to Kawa as the site of Alara’s covenant and to Taqat as his hometown. The manner in which the Kushite kings narrated their own origins provides an invaluable window into their understanding of the past, regardless of whether their explanations of change can actually be reconciled with external evidence.

Causality and the “Lord of History” Closely related to the problem of historical change is that of historical causality. In his classic What Is History?, E. H. Carr asserted that “[t]he study of history is a study of causes,” citing the precedent of Herodotus’s stated desire “to give the cause of [the Greeks and the barbarians] fighting one another” (1961:113). It is arguably this search for why, whence, and whither that differentiates the historian’s work from that of the annalist and the chronicler and that often drives an historical account toward “narrative closure” (White 1980:5–6). Yet all causal explanations are not created equal; scholars are justifi­ ably dissatisfied with dei ex machina that attribute complex historical phenomena to the inscrutable force of divine will. For this reason, Van Seters has distinguished those sources that resort to supernatural explanation from proper histories that foreground individual and collective human agency (Van Seters  1983:211; contra Hoffmeier 1992:296–97). Thus, when the Kushite royal inscriptions are excluded from History as Genre, one of the many possible inferences that readers may draw is that human causality must be absent, or at least muted, in the corpus. This sharp dichotomy between divine and human causality is premised on the faulty assumption that the two cannot coexist in a single historical account. The assumption is contradicted by Pi(ankh)y’s Great Triumphal Stela, where divine and human causality operate simultaneously at different levels of the same narrative. On the surface, Pi(ankh)y’s ultimate victory is assured from the outset through emphasis upon the supernatural force of his royal predestination, and his antagonist, the Libyan warlord Tefnakht, remains throughout the narrative such an abstract representative of Chaos that the two leaders never actually meet face to face in battle. At another level, however, the entire account pivots around a decidedly more concrete and political casus belli: the desertion of Pi(ankh)y’s Egyptian ally, Nimlot of Hermopolis. As Anthony Spalinger has recently observed, “[n]owhere else in Egyptian military literature do we read of such

402   Jeremy Pope barefaced desertion in war” (2016:243). Before Nimlot’s betrayal, Pi(ankh)y only laughs insouciantly at the news of Tefnakht’s conquests in Lower Egypt, but after Nimlot’s desertion, Pi(ankh)y quickly dispatches his army to intervene. The Kushite king is first stimulated to “rage” by Nimlot’s subsequent escape, and the scene of Nimlot’s eventual surrender is then depicted graphically at the top of the stela and described at unusual length in the narrative below, so that his role in the conflict overshadows not only that of Pi(ankh)y’s other allies, but even that of the chief instigator, Tefnakht. The effect of these authorial emphases is to elevate Nimlot’s desertion in the hierarchy of temporal causes that lay behind the Kushite conquest of Egypt. It must also be stressed at this point that the hermeneutic ambition to quarantine divine and human causality from one another is particularly ill suited to the 1st millen­ nium bce. During this era, the evidence for religious practice in neighboring Egypt shows an increasing tendency to solicit divine intervention and adjudication through prayer and oracle. Following the religious upheavals of the New Kingdom, the god Amun was now conceptualized not only as royal patron and cosmic guarantor, but also as champion of the individual and orchestrator of daily events; in Assmann’s phrasing, the god had become “lord of history” (1990:26). This mingling of the affairs of god with those of man was also not unilateral. In the Kushite royal corpus, the Excommunication Stela seems to recount the manipulation of the temple oracle by a family of priests who “conspired in their heart(s) about killing a man who had committed no crime,” and their guilt was then discovered only because “the god made them speak with their [own] mouths” (Sargent 2004:215). For History as Documented Past, the text’s valuable data are perhaps its details of crime and punishment, but for History as Genre the inscription’s more remarkable feature is its apparent acknowledgment that divine will might be falsi­ fied (Eide et al. 1994:258). Even though supernatural causality is ubiquitous in the cor­ pus, its presence did not prevent Kushite authors from simultaneously emphasizing human agency.

Kushite Archives and Archaism The oft-invoked standard of historia “in the Greek sense” requires that its author engaged in “inquiry” or “investigation” (Van Seters 1983:4, 11; Van de Mieroop 1999:2; Redford 2003:6). After all, Hecataeus, Herodotus, and Thucydides constructed their narratives about the past not only through the passive inheritance of local lore but also through travel and oral interviews. For cultures with a longer record of literacy than Archaic and Classical Greece, the ancient author of history could combine oral accounts with a greater proportion of archival material—as Herodotus discovered during his sojourn in Egypt. Yet the archive’s convenient centralization of source material also rein­ troduces the specter of authorial passivity: Was the Kushite temple a site of active inquiry into diverse source material, or was it merely the repository of a univocal and

History and the Kushite Royal Inscriptions   403 wholly conservative tradition? Shavit’s assertion that Kush was altogether devoid of “written literature” does not countenance either possibility. As a starting point, a reasonable case can be made for the diversity of source material available to the Kushite scribe. Very few papyrus records have survived in Nubia from the Second Kingdom of Kush, but László Török’s meticulous analysis of the Kushite royal stelae and wall inscriptions has inferred the existence of a vanished paper trail in the Kushite temples consisting of literary works, funerary texts, inventory lists, royal daybooks, and annals (2002:335–38; cf. Redford 1986). Copies of earlier literary works abound in Egypt during the Kushite era, as do quotations from such works in Nubia within the Kushite royal inscriptions (Jasnow 1999:194–98, 202–203), and the sarcoph­ agi of Anlamani and Aspelta excerpt a wide variety of contemporaneous and much older Egyptian funerary texts (Doll 1978:367–71). The consultation of temple inventories is likewise suggested by the meticulous recording of even small donations over a span of several years in Kawa stelae III, VI, and XIV, as well as in Taharqo’s Sanam Historical Inscription and in the stelae of Harsiyotef and Nastasen. There is indeed every reason to believe that the multiple coronations of Kushite kings were documented on papyri, for lector priests are shown reading from these in the coronation scenes at Kawa and Sanam (Török 2002:103, figs. 19, 23). Particularly intriguing is the fact that the reputed philhel­ lene and usurper Arkamani I (3rd century bce) selectively emulated the royal titulary of Amasis, another famous philhellene and usurper who ruled in neighboring Egypt three hundred years prior (Török 2002:338). These examples reflect the existence of a detailed (albeit perhaps discontinuous) archive that was available to the scribes of Kush, and they lend some credence to Taharqo’s otherwise hackneyed claim in Kawa V that he too had consulted some form of “ancestral annals” (Ritner 2009:543). The further possibility that Kushite scribes were critically searching that archival material, rather than merely curating and reproducing it, is more difficult to evaluate. The preserved inscriptions do not include clear examples of mutual contradiction between successive texts (cf. Halpern 1988:267); instead, when an ancient Kushite mon­ arch, scribe, or mason deemed an earlier inscription unsatisfactory, he or she simply effaced the offending passages altogether. The most notorious example is Aspelta’s Enthronement Stela, one of the most retrospective of all Kushite inscriptions (Fig. 21.2): in  its original form, the text legitimated the king by listing seven generations of his ancestresses, but a later vandal carefully chiseled out the names. In fact, damnatio memoriae of this kind occurred with striking frequency across the corpus, also marring the Excommunication Stela, the Barkal Sandstone Stela, and Pi(ankh)y’s Great Triumphal Stela. The erasures combine to bowdlerize the ensemble of Kushite texts, creating an impression of continuous and univocal tradition; logically, however, the repeated erasures suggest to the critical historian precisely the opposite— that some Kushite accounts of the past were the product of competing agendas. The proc­ess of scribal composition is further obscured by our ignorance of how the archive itself had been constituted: if Kushite kings and their scribes were actively supplement­ ing inherited texts with additional sources procured from outside of the local temple, their inquiries are rarely marked as such in Nubia itself.

404   Jeremy Pope

Figure 21.2  Enthronement Stela of Aspelta, 7th century BCE (Cairo JE 48866). Courtesy of Alain Guilleux and the Egyptian Museum in Cairo.

However, expanding our purview beyond Table 21.1 to include texts commissioned by the Kushite kings in neighboring Egypt yields more information about their investiga­ tions into the past. Jan Assmann and Antonio Loprieno have both identified the era of Kushite rule as a turning point in historical consciousness: due in part to the novelty of this Kushite regime in Egypt, but perhaps also to the novelty of literacy within the regime itself (Redford 1986:138; Loprieno 2003:141), “the Kushites trod more self-consciously” in the footprints of the past (Assmann  2002:362), treating history as something

History and the Kushite Royal Inscriptions   405 that must be actively retrieved across a perceived break, rather than something passively inherited through continuous transmission. This new, archaistic spirit was manifested not only in etiology and iconatrophy, but also in the purported discovery and explicit citation of older source material. The most famous example is the so-called Memphite Theology or Shabako Stone, in which the Kushite king claims to reproduce the contents of a worm-eaten papyrus ancestors (Breasted 1901; cf. Krauss 1999), but scholars have long debated the possibility that even the surviving fragments of the Palermo Stone might also be a Kushite king’s reproduction of a much earlier Egyptian papyrus (Wilkinson  2000:23–24; cf. Baines  2007:183). Noting the contemporaneous parallels with both Josiah’s discovery of the Book of Law (2 Kings 22:8–10; 2 Chronicles 34:15–18) and the Classical transcription of earlier Homeric oral epic, Loprieno (2003:153–54) sit­ uates the Kushite regime within a newly “international perspective on history” that emphasized active inquiry into a lost past after the collapse of the Late Bronze Age. As with the model of “History as Festival” and the problems of causality discussed above, the passive inheritance of tradition might conceivably be argued for earlier epochs, but it does not fit the more investigative Zeitgeist of the Second Kingdom of Kush and its contemporaries during the 1st millennium bce.

The Audience(s) of Kushite Texts Working from opposite ends of the Western historical timeline, John Van Seters and E.H. Carr both identified a corporate nature in the genre of history: to merit the name, a history should speak for, about, and to a “people” (Carr 1961:199; Van Seters 1983:5). By contrast, Kush’s retrospective texts have often been portrayed as alien imports brought southward by Egyptian émigré priests to divulge arcana and Kushite royal vainglory to the gods and their clergy (e.g., Adams 1977:1; Derchain 1996:88; cf. Morkot 2003). After all, every one of the texts listed in Table 21.1 above was composed in the Egyptian lan­ guage and script for a Kushite royal patron, and the majority were installed in a temple and explicitly addressed to one or more deities. The popular image of Kush as a nonliter­ ate and ahistorical society is both product and perpetuator of these disclaimers. Yet this description greatly oversimplifies the Kushite corpus and its social context. Firstly, of the thirty-four officials resident in Kush and explicitly named and titled in royal stelae of the Second Kingdom, a full three-quarters (twenty-six individuals) bear non-Egyptian names—most notably the Chief Scribe of Kush, Malowiamani (Pope 2014a:146–48). Secondly, while the Kushite inscriptions certainly have their share of royal vanity, they are far from solipsistic; a pair of generals are credited by name in Pi(ankh)y’s Great Triumphal Stela, as too are multiple nonroyal officials in the stelae of Aspelta. In several instances, the royal corpus implicates nonroyal Kushites in its narra­ tives, whether they be the “entire assembly” whose public deliberations are dramatized in Aspelta’s Enthronement Stela or “all the boys and all the women who were in this nome, seizing all the plunder they wanted,” after Amannote-erike’s defeat of the desert

406   Jeremy Pope

Figure 21.3  View from west of Kawa stelae VIII and V (viewer’s left to right) in forecourt of Temple T; criosphinxes of Amun-Re flanking doorway. Copyright: Griffith Institute, University of Oxford.

nomads (Revez 2014:215; Vinogradov 2015). Thirdly, the majority of Kush’s retrospective inscriptions were installed not in the privacy of the temple’s inner sancta, but rather in the open forecourts where they could be viewed by members of the populace who had come to deliver prayers to the criosphinx statues of the god Amun (Fig.  21.3; Török 2002:283). Noting the recurrent use of speeches, dialogues, choruses, verse, and especially “thought couplets” in the Kushite royal inscriptions, Török (2002:395–98) has argued that these texts were composed for oral recitation to a larger public—either spoken in the Egyptian language for an audience of bilingual Kushites, or translated aloud into the native language(s) of Nubia. Török therefore emphasizes that in Nubia: [t]he temple forecourts were the very places where the identity of the community was canonised, re-defined, and renewed . . . . The inscriptions displayed in the tem­ ple courts as texts formulating and perpetuating historical memory and identity could fulfil their function only if the learned priests interpreted them for the rest of society. (2002:284–85, 334)

History and the Kushite Royal Inscriptions   407 For Kushite History as Documented Past, we should be as skeptical about the popular acceptance of Kushite royal propaganda as we are about the latter’s depiction of popu­ lar will, but for an examination of Kushite History as Genre it is equally significant that the corpus attempts to speak for, about, and to the people of Kush (cf. Van Seters 1983:5§4).

Conclusion Inscriptions from the Second Kingdom of Kush continue to frustrate the efforts of histo­ rians: all surviving retrospective texts were commissioned by a member of the royal family; several are marred by deliberate erasures or promote dynastic origins that corre­ late poorly with other excavated evidence; and none identifies its author, cites compet­ ing viewpoints, explicitly invokes its membership in a distinct genre, or refrains from mixing genres or from invoking supernatural causality. As a result, the Kushite royal inscriptions will fail to satisfy many readers’ criteria for History as Genre. Yet the catego­ rization of the corpus should not then be taken to imply that it lacks other characteris­ tics commonly associated with historical writing, especially: commemoration of abrupt change; explanation of human causality; investigation of source material; and presenta­ tion to a broad audience. Each of these features is demonstrably present in the Kushite corpus, which therefore continues to prove a rich lode of information, not only for the modern scholar’s reconstruction of events, but also for understanding ancient Kushite perceptions and uses of the past.

References Cited Adams, W.Y. 1977 Nubia: Corridor to Africa. Princeton University Press. Arkell, A.J. 1961 A History of the Sudan: From the Earliest Times to 1821. Athlone. Assmann, J. 1990 Guilt and Remembrance: On the Theologization of History in the Ancient Near East. History and Memory 2/1:5–33. ——— 2002 The Mind of Egypt: History and Meaning in the Time of the Pharaohs. Metropolitan Books. ——— 2006 Zeit und Geschichte in frühen Kulturen. In Time and History: Proceedings of the 28th International Wittgenstein Symposium, ed. F.  Stadler and M.  Stöltzner, pp. 489–507. Ontos. Baines, J. 2007 Ancient Egyptian Concepts and Uses of the Past: Third to Second Millennium Evidence. In Visual and Written Culture in Ancient Egypt, by J. Baines, pp. 179–201. Oxford University Press. Breasted, J.H. 1901 The Philosophy of a Memphite Priest. Zeitschrift für ägyptische Sprache und Altertumskunde 39:39–54. Breisach, E. 1983 Historiography: Ancient, Medieval, and Modern. University of Chicago Press. Budge, E.A.W. 1907 The Egyptian Sûdân: Its History and Monuments. K. Paul, Trench, Trübner & Co.

408   Jeremy Pope Carnet de laboratoire en archéologie égyptienne, 6 May 2020, 1–18 §§1–30, https://clae. hypotheses.org/189 (accessed July 27, 2020). Carr, E.H. 1961 What Is History? Alfred A. Knopf. Colin, F. 2020 Le faiseur de rois et de chefs libyens, sur la stèle de Napata au Musée de Khartoum, SNM 1851. Darnell, J.C. 2006 The Inscription of Queen Katimala at Semna: Textual Evidence for the Origins of the Napatan State. Yale Egyptological Studies 7. Yale University Press. Derchain, P. 1996 Auteur et société. In Ancient Egyptian Literature: History and Forms, ed. A. Loprieno, pp. 83–94. E.J. Brill. Doll, S.K. 1978 Texts and Decoration on the Napatan Sarcophagi of Anlamani and Aspelta. Doctoral dissertation, Department of Classical and Oriental Studies, Brandeis University. Eide, T., T.  Hägg, R.H.  Pierce, and L.  Török eds. 1994 Fontes Historiae Nubiorum: Textual Sources for the History of the Middle Nile Region between the Eighth Century BC and the Sixth Century AD, v. 1: From the Eighth to the Mid-Fifth Century BC. Department of Classics, University of Bergen. ——— 1996 Fontes Historiae Nubiorum: Textual Sources for the History of the Middle Nile Region between the Eighth Century BC and the Sixth Century AD, v. 2: From the Mid-Fifth to the First Century BC. Department of Greek, Latin, and Egyptology, University of Bergen. Eltze, E. 2017 There and Back(?) again: The Ideological Significance of Tanutamani's Travel into Egypt. In Global Egyptology: Negotiations in the Production of Knowledges on Ancient Egypt in Global Contexts, ed. C. Langer, pp. 77-90. Golden House Publications. ——— 2018 The Reign of Amannote-erike: Analyses of Identity and Kingship. Doctoral disserta­ tion, Department of Ancient History and Classics, University of Auckland. Eliade, M. 1965 The Myth of the Eternal Return. Pantheon Books. Eltze, E. 2017 There and Back(?) again: The Ideological Significance of Tanutamani's Travel into Egypt. In Global Egyptology: Negotiations in the Production of Knowledges on Ancient Egypt in Global Contexts, ed. C. Langer, pp. 77–90. ——— Golden House Publications. 2018 The Reign of Amannote-erike: Analyses of Identity and Kingship. Doctoral dissertation, Department of Ancient History and Classics, University of Auckland. Gardiner, A.H. 1935 Piankhi’s Instructions to his Army. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 21:219–23. Goody, J. and I. Watt 1963 The Consequences of Literacy. Comparative Studies in Society and History 5(3):304–45. Gozzoli, R. 2009 Kawa V and Taharqo’s By3wt: Some Aspects of Nubian Royal Ideology. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 95:235–48. ——— 2018 Legitimacy and Erasures: Aspelta as King of Kush. In Nubian Archaeology in the XXIst Century: Proceedings of the Thirteenth International Conference for Nubian Studies, Neuchâtel, 1st-6th September 2014, ed. Matthieu Honneger, pp. 345–352. Peeters. Halpern, B. 1988 The First Historians: The Hebrew Bible and History. Harper & Row. Henige, D. 2005 Inscriptions Are Texts Too. History in Africa 32:185–97. Hoffmeier, J. 1992 The Problem of “History” in Egyptian Royal Inscriptions. In Sesto Congresso Internazionale di Egittologia: Atti, ed. Jean Leclant, v. 1, pp. 291–99. Hornung, E. 1992 Idea into Image: Essays on Ancient Egyptian Thought. Timken. Huizinga, J. 1936 A Definition of the Concept of History. In Philosophy and History: Essays Presented to Ernst Cassirer, ed. R. Klibansky and H.J. Patton, pp. 1–10. Oxford.

History and the Kushite Royal Inscriptions   409 Jacoby, F. 1995 Die Fragmente der Griechischen Historiker. Erster Teil: Genealogie und Mythographie. E.J. Brill. Jansen-Winkeln, K. 2003 Alara und Taharka: Zur Geschichte des nubischen Königshauses. Orientalia 72:141–58. Jasnow, R. 1999 Remarks on Continuity in Egyptian Literary Tradition. In Gold of Praise: Studies on Ancient Egypt in Honor of Edward F. Wente, ed. E. Teeter and J.A. Larson, pp. 193–210. Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilization 58. Oriental Institute. Krauss, R. 1999 Wie jung ist die memphitische Philosophie auf dem Shabaqo-Stein? In Gold of Praise: Studies on Ancient Egypt in Honor of Edward F. Wente, ed. E. Teeter and J.A. Larson, pp. 239–46. Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilization 58. Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago. Lévi-Strauss, C. 1962 The Savage Mind. University of Chicago Press. Lichtheim, M. 1980 Ancient Egyptian Literature, v. 3. University of California Press. Liverani, M. 1973 Memorandum on the Approach to Historiographic Texts. Orientalia 42:178–94. Lobban, R. 2004 Historical Dictionary of Ancient and Medieval Nubia. Scarecrow Press. Loprieno, A. 2003 Views of the Past in Egypt during the First Millennium BC. In “Never Had the Like Occurred”: Egypt’s View of its Past, ed. J. Tait, pp. 139–54. UCL Press. Morkot, R.G. 2003 On the Priestly Origin of the Napatan Kings: The Adaptation, Demise and Resurrection of Ideas in Writing Nubian History. In Ancient Egypt in Africa, ed. D. O’Connor and A. Reid, pp. 151–68. UCL Press. Peust, C. 1999 Das Napatanische: Ein ägyptischer Dialekt aus dem Nubien des späten ersten vorchristlichen Jahrtausends: Texte, Glossar, Grammatik. Peust & Gutschmidt. Pope, J. 2014a The Double Kingdom under Taharqo: Studies in the History of Kush and Egypt, c. 690–664 BC. Culture and History of the Ancient Near East 69. Brill. ——— 2014b Beyond the Broken Reed: Kushite Intervention and the Limits of l’histoire événementielle. In Sennacherib at the Gates of Jerusalem, 701 B.C.E.: Story, History, and Historiography, ed. I. Kalimi and S. Richardson, pp. 105–60. Brill. ——— 2019 Self-Presentation in the Twenty-fifth Dynasty. In Living Forever: Self-Presentation in Ancient Egypt, ed. H. Bassir, pp. 191–206. American University in Cairo Press. Redford, D.B. 1986 Pharaonic King-Lists, Annals, and Day-Books: A Contribution to the Study of the Egyptian Sense of History. Benben. ——— 2003 The Writing of the History of Ancient Egypt. In Egyptology at the Dawn of the Twenty-first Century: Proceedings of the Eighth International Congress of Egyptologists, v. 2: History/Religion, ed. Z. Hawass and L. Brock , pp. 1–22. American University in Cairo Press. ——— 2004 From Slave to Pharaoh: The Black Experience of Ancient Egypt. Johns Hopkins University Press. Revez, J. 2014 A Case of Dialing the Wrong Number—The Failed Human Appeal to Ra in Aspelta’s Election Stela (Cairo JE 48866). Der Antike Sudan. Mitteilungen der Sudanarchäologischen Gesellschaft 25:211–24. Ritner, R. 2009 The Libyan Anarchy: Inscriptions from Egypt’s Third Intermediate Period. Society of Biblical Literature. Robertshaw, P. 2004 African Historical Archaeology(ies): Past, Present, and a Possible Future. In African Historical Archaeologies, ed. A.  M.  Reid and P.  J.  Lane, pp. 375–91. Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers. Sargent, K. 2004 The Napatan Royal Inscriptions: Egyptian in Nubia. Doctoral dissertation, Yale University.

410   Jeremy Pope Schick, K.D. 1995 Prehistoric Africa. In Africa, third edition, ed. P.M. Martin and P. O’Meara, pp. 49–72. Indiana University Press. Schneider, T. 2014 History as Festival? A Reassessment of the Use of the Past and the Place of Historiography in Ancient Egyptian Thought. In Thinking, Recording, and Writing History in the Ancient World, ed. K. Raaflaub, pp. 117–43. Wiley Blackwell. Shavit, Y. 2001 History in Black: African-Americans in Search of an Ancient Past. Frank Cass. Spalinger, A. 2016 Pianchy/Piye: Between Two Worlds. In De la Nubia à Qadech/From Nubia to Kadesh, ed. C. Karlshausen and C. Obsomer, pp. 235–74. Éditions Safran. Török, L. 1997 The Kingdom of Kush: Handbook of the Napatan-Meroitic Civilization. Handbuch der Orientalistik 1(31). Brill. ——— 2002 The Image of the Ordered World in Ancient Nubian Art: The Construction of the Kushite Mind, 800 BC–300 AD. Probleme der Ägyptologie 18. Brill. Valbelle, D. 2012 Les stèles de l’an 3 d’Aspelta. Bibliothèque d’Étude 154. Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale. Van de Mieroop, M. 1999 Cuneiform Texts and the Writing of History. Routledge. Van Seters, J. 1983 In Search of History: Historiography in the Ancient World and the Origins of Biblical History. Yale University Press. Vinogradov, A. 2012 The Golden Cage: What Is the “Dedication Stele” Dedicated To? Der Antike Sudan. Mitteilungen der Sudanarchäologischen Gesellschaft 23:105–16. ——— 2015 War and Charity in Kush. In The Kushite World: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference for Meroitic Studies, ed. M.H.  Zach, pp. 573–84. Verein der Förderer der Sudanforschung. White, H. 1980 The Value of Narrativity in the Representation of Reality. Critical Inquiry 7(1) (On Narrative):5–27. Wilkinson, T.A.H. 2000 Royal Annals of Ancient Egypt: The Palermo Stone and its Associated Fragments. Kegan Paul International.

chapter 22

The Na pata n N eo -K ushite State 1 The Intermediate Period and Second Empire Bruce BEYER Williams

General Background From the first quarter of the 1st millennium bce until the mid-4th century ce, the Kushite state maintained a monumental civilization along the Middle Nile in an unbroken dynastic succession unparalleled in the ancient world.1 A nearly complete sequence of its rulers left monuments despite disagreements over details of each reign. A few rulers left records that illuminate the career of the state (Pope, this volume). Later, the emergence of a native script in the 3rd century bce expands knowledge into the other persons and institutions. From the 8th century bce onward, art—funerary and religious—informs us about some state activities. Great non-royal cemeteries at Meroe and Sanam, and smaller ones at Missiminia, Tombos, and elsewhere, as well as monumental tombs at Thebes, offer much information about the culture and religion of Kushiteoriented population. Tumulus cemeteries at Tombos and in the Second Cataract (Debeira East, SJE 176) offer important information about arrivals from other parts of Nubia before the 25th Dynasty. Temples at Jebel Barkal, Kawa, Dokki Gel (Kerma), Ibrim, and elsewhere reveal institutional developments. However, the towns and villages are largely unknown. From the 25th Dynasty and its aftermath, a large palace was excavated at Jebel Barkal, and the great emporium of Sanam is emerging. There are three fortresses, Qala Abu Ahmed in the Wadi Howar west of the Nile, Jebel Sahaba, and Dorginarti, at the north end of the Second Cataract, the latter offering major insight into domestic arrangements. Some sites and arrangements, notably in burials, reverted from an Egyptian style to Nubian (Török 1997:115–25),2 but Egyptian objects continued to be imported and practices, especially in burials, continued, although not exclusively (see below). Even in the early phases of the Kushite revival, at El-Kurru, and Sanam,

412   Bruce BEYER Williams Egyptianizing manufactures are prominent, not just in symbolic or luxury items, such as faience (Dunham 1950: figs. 1c, 17b, for example), but especially ordinary manufactures such as pottery (Dunham 1950: fig. 3a).3 It must be stressed that Nubia was not a cultural monolith. Not only were Kushites and Egyptians present there in numbers, but also persons of other cultures within the wider region. They are difficult to connect with the names of various peoples, but differences can be detected. Since A-Group times, Nubia had been sending goods and persons northward. Even though persons returned home, often with some wealth, Nubia maintained an entirely distinctive cultural environment down to the New Kingdom. Thereafter it was bound in an intimate relationship with Egyptian culture (for example Török 1997). Moreover, Kush was a part of the wider world and the geopolitical conditions affected its career. Although we know of no Assyrians or Babylonians who went to Nubia, Kushites did go to Assyria (Heidorn 1997), and there was a major Jewish garrison on its northern border. Thus, the events of the 8th and 7th centuries were a natural engagement with the wider ancient world.

Written Sources and Technical Problems As considered in this essay, the records of ancient societies before about 450 bce are not historical inquiries in the modern sense but fragments, statements, representations, objects, and even narratives subject to historical inquiry (but see Pope, this volume, for a more complete discussion). The following is not a recitation of sources, but an attempt to make the events of the Napatan period understandable to readers. Despite the fact that this is a fully historical period in the Middle East and Egypt, there are gaps, ambiguities, and contradictions in the sources and some of the following is subject to substantial change. Two technical problems raise significant barriers to understanding the archaeology of this period. First, the archaeological sequences, now built largely from occupation debris in Egypt, are not clear and the synchronization with historical chronologies is problematic. Second, 14C dating cannot distinguish dates between 800 and 400 bce, all of which fall in the Hallstatt Plateau, which means that they read the same after calibration, affecting also dates whose margin for error cross the boundaries.

From the End of the New Kingdom to Kashta The period from the end of the New Kingdom (1077 bce) to the adoption of Amenirdis I as God’s Wife of Amun (Kashta, ca. 765–753 bce) is clouded by a lack of clear

The Napatan Neo-Kushite State 1   413 ­ ocumentary and archeological evidence such that some would see a direct succession d in religion, and possibly rule, from the New Kingdom and some would see a break. At issue is the succession of rulers at El-Kurru, which were clustered shortly before Kashta, but given an extended sequence reaching back to the 2nd millennium by long chronology advocates (Török 1997:101–30), not plausible or possible given the date of certain imports and the number of reigns.4 The story begins at the end of the New Kingdom when the Viceroy of Nubia, Panehesy (“The Nubian”) intervened in Thebes in a dispute that led to the temporary deposition of the High Priest Amenhotep. He in turn retreated from Thebes and was followed to Nubia by a later high priest with a military force. The story is complex, conjectural, and dark (Thijs  2003); it may only demonstrate the special relation of Amun to Nubia. Panehesy lived on in Nubia and was buried in tomb SA-38 at Aniba (Steindorff 1937: 240–41). After Panehesy’s retreat from Thebes,5 the rulers of Egypt left no record of control in Nubia. Some Egyptian viceroys of Nubia continued to be named, but none left any evidence that he or she held any sway in the lands south of Aswan and they do not make up a list.6 This argues that the events and remains there were all created there, and Egyptian actors there were part of the Nubian scene, not formally directed by an Egyptian state. This may well have been a reprise of the situation in the Second Intermediate Period, when Egyptian settlers stayed on after administration disappeared. There was probably new immigration, to exploit some of Nubia’s wealth, whether organized locally or from Egypt, or to find refuge from upheavals farther north. There is reason to believe that after Panehesy, the Nubian Empire continued independently on its own course looking to the Ramesside past rather than contemporary developments in Egypt. On arrival in Thebes about 750 bce, the Kushites were already fully equipped with sufficient cultural knowledge and devotion to exercise the highest political and religious authority and to do so while maintaining a distinct Kushite identity within pharaonic civilization.

Queen-King Katimala Carved on the façade of the Semna Temple of Thutmose III, the elaborate panel of Katimala (Fig. 22.1)7 shows her confronting Isis, and to the right, an extended inscription describes a repeated conflict of fundamental importance (Darnell  2006:66–67 yearly; Ritner  2009:458 continually). It is professionally drawn and inscribed—by a scribe of limited training—and has been dated variously to the 10th or 9th century, between the New Kingdom and the Napatan period. Although indebted to Ramesside precedents in representation and Late Egyptian in language (Darnell 2006:7–15, 47; also Ritner  2009:456), the scene and inscription deal with clearly regional problems and conflicts, and it is justly regarded as the first of the great Kushite inscriptions. Katimala was an early neo-Kushite queen. Most notably, she also carried the title nesu-bity, king. The inscription is difficult and has often been disregarded,8 but important facts are clear. Katimala as queen could not only take the title of nesu-bity when the king failed, but also executive action; she was in fact queen regnant.9 She had access to fully profes-

414   Bruce BEYER Williams

Figure 22.1  The inscribed panel on the New Kingdom Temple of Semna of Queen-King Katimala is the primary historical source for events in Nubia during the first two centuries of the 1st millennium bce. Photo-montage Bruce Williams.

sional artists and scribes, the latter with some Egyptian education—which implies a court of some substance and a state apparatus, including an army. She summoned a council of thirty chiefs.10 If each was territorial, this would imply a wide authority, possibly or probably the heartland of Kush. A repeated crisis was caused by one Makaresh, who resided near the Mountain of Gold (Eastern Desert), and stole gold and silver and slaughtered the offering cattle of Amun. The interests of Amun were dominant—he elected her to serve as in later Kushite succession (B. Williams, Chapter 23, this volume)—in return Katimala was able to augment his territory (Darnell 2006:71). These facts, and the conflict carried to the Mountain of Gold, surely the Eastern Desert, indicate an authority that extended far from Semna. She was successful, or we would not have her text. Her court implies a palace somewhere and a royal cemetery. She must date somewhere in this period, perhaps the 10th or 9th century bce.11 At present, the Katimala inscription is the only one clearly dated to this period in Nubia.

Ari/Ariamani A certain King Ary or Aryamani left a stela at Kawa that very likely belongs to this period.12 Because his titles recall Ramesside examples, he was originally and is generally

The Napatan Neo-Kushite State 1   415 still dated to the period between Nastasen (B. Williams, Chapter 23, this volume) and the beginning of the Meroitic period. However, there is significant reason to date him much earlier, close to the Ramesside period itself.13 His relief is close to Ramesside originals14 and differs in most important respects from the later Napatan stelae.15 Although this donation stela has been translated, despite language that rivals Katimala in difficulty, it has not had systematic scrutiny so its consideration here is provisional, although, if true, it would make Katimala not a singularity. The figures are more crudely drafted than Katimala’s, so if placed correctly here it would probably belong at a somewhat greater distance from its Ramesside forbears.

Archaeology of the 10th through Early 8th Centuries bce The lack of textual evidence has been matched by a gap in archaeological evidence in the north, partly because materials, mostly from tombs, have been assigned to betterknown periods.16 Few materials are reliably dated, leaving much to estimate. For the later part of the period and the 25th Dynasty, there are ordered contexts at El-Kurru that give some guidance. The burial of a soldier at Tombos, dated to Shabaqo or slightly later, contained distinctive remains (S. Smith 2006–2007:7–13, 2007) that form, with material from Lower Nubia to Sanam,17 and even probably Meroe (Dunham 1963: fig. A: 16–17, 24–25, fig. 40), a clear chronological band. The most indicative site is the fortress at Dorginarti, where Levels III and IV, likely an Egypto-Nubian colony, serve as a nucleus for identifying and broadly dating other remains of the Nubian Intermediate period (Heidorn n.d.). Graves exhibit a variety of materials and customs. Egyptian-type burials seem to continue from the New Kingdom, both in the Second Cataract region and to the south. They tend to be very poor, in some cases almost stacks of burials, and can be difficult to identify clearly.18 Nubian customs are notable in Cemetery D at Serra East and it,19 with the much larger cemetery 176 at Debeira East (Säve-Söderbergh 1989:103–106, pls. 35–38; Heidorn 1994), establishes the existence of a Nubian population. Burials at Qustul are more mixed in date, with at least one from the pre-25th Dynasty phase being flexed (Williams 1990: fig. 22, W 86, with a burnished bowl of Dorginarti type). Several others were extended, and possibly of Egyptians or Nubians following Egyptian customs.20 South of the Second Cataract, some major sites have remains that appear to date to this period before the 25th Dynasty, but they are not fully published, including Amara West, with some flexed burials, and Tombos, with both flexed and extended burials under tumuli. Burials in Egyptian-style tombs at Amara have pottery that closely resembles Dorginarti, although it is much less diverse (Binder 2011: especially pp. 50–51). As many as fifteen sites surveyed by the Vila team between Dal and Abri had material of this date, some Egyptianizing, while the Abri-Missiminia cemetery furnished a considerable amount of material (Vila  1980, generally). While some Egyptian-style burials may date to this period at Tombos, the tumulus cemetery provided the most interesting

416   Bruce BEYER Williams evidence of Nubian burials.21 Soleb apparently had some evidence from the period.22 Sanam’s Napatan phase appears to begin before the 25th Dynasty (Lohwasser 2008 v. 2:26–27; Lohwasser 2010:91–96), and Hillat el-Arab nearby continued from the New Kingdom.23 Comparisons of pottery from Dorginarti, and Egyptian-type tombs at Amara and Soleb, indicate that there was some continuity in the culture at old Egyptian centers, using mainly Egyptian, but some Nubian-type pottery, and additionally, stone arrowheads. New Kingdom chamber tombs were often reused for Egyptianizing burials. Nubianstyle burials were generally put in new cemeteries with single-burials. Strong differences between the Tombos cemetery at the Third Cataract, for example and Cemetery 176 at Debeira East or Cemetery D at Serra, both north of the Second, indicate that Nubian culture was not uniform. Most pottery at these sites is of Egyptian origin or type (Binder 2011: pls. 4, 8, fig. 6, from Amara West), but there was much Nubian pottery also, and Nubian objects such as stone arrowheads and rocker stamps for pottery decoration.

Archaeology: Fortresses, Habitations, and Storehouses Dorginarti, the fortress at Jebel Sahaba, and the fortress Qala Abu Ahmed in the Wadi Howar exhibit a number of features in common, despite differences in building technique.24 All three are irregular in shape, despite the availability of space in the Wadi Howar, and they contrast with Egyptian practice from the New Kingdom onward, which preferred rectangles. Piers or bastions are elongated and rectangular. Gates have flanking piers or towers and two internal stairs that on either side lead to the wall tops from inside the gate, an arrangement that differs from earlier fortresses. Built with laminated and heavily repaired walls and also elongated rectangular towers with opposed double stairways, Dorginarti resembles fortresses at Jebel Sahaba and Qala Abu Ahmed in design.25 Its interior space was zoned, with three distinct areas, two architecturally separated from one another. To the east was a series of granaries that could be reached directly from a water gate and stair, perhaps isolated for control or to mitigate the danger of explosion. West of the stair, was a large, well-built rectangular formal building roughly similar to Napatan structures at Kerma, which opened to the north, apparently with a spacious open area around it, and two granaries of its own. The western zone had dwellings, storerooms, and granaries backed up against the wall, most dwellings to the north, granaries and other structures to the south. Although less formal in shape, the dwellings of various sizes resemble the dwelling structures with walls a single brick wide at the temples of Dokki Gel and Medinet Habu.26 Socially, the fortress of Dorginarti was sharply divided between the large and solidly built house of its presumed commandant and the irregular, thin-walled structures for

The Napatan Neo-Kushite State 1   417 the garrison, in contrast to the solid and regimented design of normal Egyptian military housing. The purpose of the northern forts may be explained by an elongated building at Gezira Dabarosa (west bank), which had an amphora of pre-25th Dynasty shape buried in one of the rooms, which indicates that the structure was constructed before Napatan times (Hewes 1964, Lister 1967:63 and fig. 23a–b; Adams 2004: pl. 3). The site had been reused, and the rooms had features such as ovens added. The layout, in three sections, consisted of simple elongate rooms, one end against an exterior wall, but only one section had a reasonably well-preserved plan. This appears to be a part—one side—of an irregular magazine (compare Adams 2004: fig. 1 with Vincentelli n.d. general map). That there are multiple structures joined together indicates a common and sustained purpose. Gezira Dabarosa is located between the fortresses of Jebel Sahaba and Dorginarti, and I suggest that the three installations were part of a complex rather like the much larger establishment at Sanam.27 Structures thought to be earlier than the Taharqo Temple at Qasr Ibrim may actually date to this period, but the 14C dates abut on the Hallstatt Plateau at the single sigma, and at the double, they are in it (Horton 1991:264–68; Rose 2008:200).28 It is possible that recent excavations at Kawa had some archaeological material dating to the 8th and 9th centuries, but the evidence is not sufficient as yet to make a determination.29 Dokki Gel had no decisively earlier pottery, but housing was rather like regularized Dorginarti.30 The later Napatan buildings at Kerma are like the central structures at Dorginarti.31

Summary: The Nubian Intermediate Period From the middle of the 11th century to the middle of the 8th century bce, evidence for the history and archaeology of Nubia is limited, but thought-provoking. The only personalities of the era are Katimala and probably Ari(amani) who bridge between the New Kingdom and Napatan periods, but mark a truly new beginning in Kush. Katimala, queen regnant, with the trappings and resources of a state, acted to deal with a crisis caused by an enemy from the desert, and she apparently succeeded, leaving us with the first royal novel of the rulers of Kush (Ritner 2009:456–59). References to Amun in her inscription all imply a continuity for his priesthood, administration, and property, a continuity supported by the donation stela of Ari(amani). Dorginarti Fortress was founded at the northern end of the Second Cataract, not far from Katimala’s inscription at Semna. This fortress had at least partly contemporary sister fortresses, one farther north at Jebel Sahaba, and one far to the south, in the Wadi Howar, and possibly others.32 Between the first two were the warehouses of Gezira

418   Bruce BEYER Williams Dabarosa, making a commercial, political, and military complex that implies state support and control, by a dynast such as Katimala. In any case, trade and contact between Libyan-ruled Egypt and Nubia did not cease, even though there is no direct evidence of empire there. Pottery, and some objects were widespread, not just in the north, or even the area between the Second and Third Cataracts, but was imported even to the remote Fourth Cataract.33 The foregoing summary presents only a reconstruction of conditions that emerged by the time the Third Intermediate Period in Egypt was fully mature. These supported the emergence of the Napatan state under the El-Kurru kings for whose history Katimala is as important as Piankhy. Although the El-Kurru cemetery did not start in or shortly after the Ramesside period, Katimala’s testimony, and probably Ari(amani) show that pharaonic kingship, with all its consequences, was established in Nubia before her time. The beginning, then, was Viceroy Panehesy’s withdrawal from Upper Egypt and High Priest Paiankh’s failure to dislodge him. The Napatan state emerged34 from conditions that were partly a continuation of those from the late New Kingdom in Kush and partly a product of new immigration. Probably Napatan rule at Meroe was also an outgrowth of a relationship that had existed for centuries, fueled in part by the trade in inner-African items. If Sanam was a gathering and stopping point, Meroe probably was also (Pope 2014b:8–33 for an extended discussion).

The Napatan State The imperial state that emerged in the late 8th century had already established key institutions locally that were Egyptian-inspired.35 These had been modified according to local beliefs, as shown by the tumulus design of the earliest tombs at El-Kurru. There were some special developments, such as the treatment of horses that were exported to Assyria before Piankhy conquered Egypt and listed them among his concerns (Heidorn 1997), and he and other rulers buried them carefully at El-Kurru. Although the pyramid did not become the royal symbolic burial structure with the first rulers buried at El-Kurru, the institutions of Kush were, from his own monuments, already well formed. Piankhy’s looking back to New Kingdom institutional models of kingship (Török in Eide et al. 1994:61; see Ritner 2009:466–67) rather than those of the Third Intermediate Period was less an innovation than a continuation. Before Piankhy’s campaign of year 21 (Ritner 2009:465–92; Fitzenreiter 2018), about or before 720 bce, little is known of the acts of his two predecessors Alara and Kashta. Of Alara, we know almost nothing except that he was an ancestor named in a number of documents. Kashta wound up in charge of the Thebaid before 750 and had his daughter adopted as God’s Wife of Amun, which apparently legitimized his role there and put her (and him) in charge of its administration.36 His inscription at Aswan (Eide et al. 1994:4, 45–46), the ease of his and his daughter’s acceptance and surviving stelae of his Queen

The Napatan Neo-Kushite State 1   419 Paabtameri and General Pekertror (Fig. 22.2) clearly demonstrate that the completeness and individuality of Kushite engagement with Egypt had been long established (Lohwasser 2001:79–80). Piankhy’s campaign,37 which established Kushite rule throughout Egypt, was triggered only thirty or so years later by the sudden, but well-supported (i.e., carefully planned) expansion of Tefnakht of Sais across the Delta and southward into Middle Egypt as far as Hermopolis. That it occurred after a generation shows that the Kushites had not been considered a threat and that the Kushites originally had no imperial ambitions. The willingness of so many kings and chieftains to agree may be related to rapid Assyrian advances in Syria-Palestine. Surely Piankhy was also aware of Assyrian capabilities, for Kushites were well known in that empire as military personnel (Heidorn 1997; Pope 2014a:155–56). The campaign took place in the context of Assyria’s rapid, systematic, and aggressive expansion to the west and south, starting with the absorption of the Phoenician cities into a tightly controlled provincial status, complete with mass deportations, by Tiglath-pileser III in the 730s. He continued with the conquest of Samaria, which induced a ruler in the delta (probably Osorkon IV) to aid Israel, then to send horses to Sargon II. Israel was destroyed in the late 720s, practically about the time of

Figure 22.2  Stela of Pekertror. Oriental Institute Museum photo 15974, object E6408. Courtesy of the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago.

420   Bruce BEYER Williams Tefnakht’s attack on Piankhy. With the Levant, including Cyprus, north of Judah and Philistia finally in the hands of one of the world’s most infamously aggressive powers, Tefnakht made his move, which surely was deeply intertwined with the dramatic events nearby, now in the hands of the ferocious Sargon II.38 Despite taking place in a single year, the campaign was relatively leisurely; Kush was well prepared. Piankhy sent his army and deputies to handle the opening offensive by Tefnakht and his allies.39 Nimlot of Hermopolis had simply ordered his fortifications destroyed, for example. The army won a victory and Piankhy resolved to travel north, while in the meantime they won three more victories, killing the son of Tefnakht. After winning the siege of Hermopolis using a counterwall, archer’s platform, and stonethrowing devices, he ultimately received the capitulation of Nimlot (shown on the lunette, horse’s bridle and sistrum in hand). Piankhy took Lahun, Meidum, and Lisht before landing at Memphis, where he advanced on a well-supplied army of 8,000 and Tefnakht, who promptly fled on horseback. Ultimately, Piankhy assaulted the city from ships in the harbor, taking advantage of high water, and then received submission of most rulers except Tefnakht. Just as Kashta’s reception at Thebes shows that his arrival was not a sudden intrusion into Egypt by some untutored and illegitimate rustic but a ruler more acceptable than the ones he replaced, Piankhy’s campaign was carried out by a skilled and disciplined army. Punishments were not meted out to the rulers and the populations were apparently not pillaged. This was the arrival of a dominant power that had already been a part of the polyarchy. Piankhy did not uproot the dynasts he conquered but only insisted on their submission. Piankhy was succeeded by Shabataqo,40 who was faced with a rebellion led by Bekenranef of Sais, capital of Piankhy’s old opponent. Shabataqo quickly quelled Bekenranef, burning him alive (Manetho: frs. 64–65) for the sacrilegious rebellion. Shabataqo raised an army from Kush (Török 1997:170; Ritner 2009:538) under the command of Taharqo, his cousin,41 despite having extradited a rebel, Iamani of Ashdod, to the Assyrians (Elayi 2017:80–81), a preparation he did not live to use. Instead, it was the next king, Shabaqo, who sent this army to support the coalition of Phoenicians, Philistines, and Judah against Assyria,42 part of the immense rebellions the Assyrians faced on the death in battle of Sargon II in 705. In 701, his successor Sennacherib met Taharqo and the coalition at Eltekeh where the Assyrians, as always, claimed victory, with rather contradictory opinions from other sources. However, the Assyrians were able to take cities and invest Jerusalem itself, putting the city under blockade without assault,43 until Taharqo arrived with a new army after the Assyrians suffered losses before Jerusalem, attributed by Isaiah to divine intervention (Isaiah 36–37). Sennacherib retreated to Philistia, which means the Assyrians suffered a reverse severe enough to break off the fight and for Taharqo’s troops to return to Egypt, also as always victorious.44 However accomplished, forcing the Assyrian army to retreat was a victory45 and it and troubles with Babylon, which Sennacherib destroyed, and resulting internal disruption kept Assyria away from Egypt for about a generation—and Judah stood.46

The Napatan Neo-Kushite State 1   421 Although the consequences stretched over many centuries, Taharqo’s victory was, in fact, far-reaching, and possibly one of the most significant in ancient history.47 The Assyrians had extirpated Israel and the primary carrier of its traditions was Judah. Left to pursue the siege of Jerusalem, it would surely—despite assertions of divine intervention and Assyrian claims of large tribute—have suffered the fate of Lachish, boastfully celebrated in relief, and before it Israel, whose tribes were lost. Instead, after distraction by war, rebellion, and assassination, when the Assyrians again marched west, the goal was Egypt, again and again. The course of three great living civilizations would have been utterly different, and possibly nonexistent, had Taharqo’s resolve failed on this occasion. Unwitting it was, but Taharqo’s achievement was massive in consequence nevertheless. Whether it was the Assyrian advance or the rebellion of Bekenranef/Bocchoris of Sais48 that spurred the move we do not know, but Shabaqo moved his capital from Napata to Memphis, the center of pharaonic Egypt and the most strategic location in the country. He also expanded a building program for temples in Egypt, appointed a son High Priest of Amun, an office he re-established, and other Kushites to important posts. It is probably not a coincidence that the Memphite Theology was inscribed at this time. The Assyrians pushed back, the remainder of Shabaqo’s reign was not troubled from that quarter, and neither were the first seventeen or so years of his successor Taharqo. The latter began an ambitious program of temple construction that made him one of the great builders, a by-product of the generation or more of relative peace in Egypt49 and the respite from the Assyrian threat bought by the Eltekeh campaign, the Babylonian revolt, and dynastic upheaval in Assyria50 that culminated in the destruction of Babylon and the assassination of Sennacherib by his older sons. Meanwhile, in Assyria, Sennacherib’s youngest son, Esarhaddon, ascended the throne with two agenda items: the restoration of Babylon, and the settlement of the KushiteEgyptian problem, where Eltekeh had permanently deflected Assyria’s western interests toward the Nile. The Egyptian campaigns were prepared by an advance along the coast, removing Taharqo’s allies and destroying Sidon. The first attack, in 673, failed, a defeat in the eastern delta that has been called one of Assyria’s worst (Török  1997:180; Eph’al  2005:99; Kahn  2006:252), and Esarhaddon left Egypt (Eph’al  2005:100 citing Onasch). Although Taharqo reinforced his army from Kush, Esarhaddon returned in 671, and after three battles at the frontier, Taharqo fled wounded, and Memphis fell rapidly with a vast booty and royal captives that indicate the defeat was a surprise.51 While Esarhaddon undertook some limited Assyrianization of his new conquest, naming some places and appointing some Assyrian officials (Kahn 2006:254), he reestablished the Libyan polyarchy in the delta (Kahn 2006:256). Taharqo’s defeat was not decisive and as soon as Esarhaddon departed, he returned to the delta and Esarhaddon died on the way to dislodge him, in 669. Ashurbanipal (Bleibtreu 2013 generally) was able to return in 667, defeating Taharqo decisively enough at Pelusium at the boundary of Egypt that Taharqo fled upstream, first to Thebes, and then, when the Assyrians pursued, to Kush, where he remained until his death in 664. After receiving submission of the Egyptian dynasts, and Montuemhat, Kushite-appointed (and Kushite?) mayor of

422   Bruce BEYER Williams Thebes, Ashurbanipal returned to Assyria. In 665, a revolt plotted by some dynasts was thwarted by Assurbanipal, who left only one Necho as ruler of Sais and Memphis and his son Psamtek I ruler of Athribis (Kahn 2006:259–61, told somewhat differently). Tanwetamani, son of Shabaqo, who succeeded Taharqo in 664, quickly moved forward, taking Upper Egypt without opposition. He seized Memphis and defeated Sais, killing Necho. and forcing Psamtek to take refuge with Assurbanipal, who responded decisively. When in 664/663 the Assyrians arrived Tanwetamani fled to Thebes, and on the arrival of an army, to Kush. The Assyrians sacked Thebes, but left the local political institutions and persons including Kushite rule in place (Török 1997:185; Kahn 2006: 262–66). Psamtek was given his and his father’s realm plus Heliopolis, from which he was able to gain control of the rest of the Delta, expel Assyrian troops,52 and in 656 establish Saite rule in Upper Egypt (then still under Tanwetamani, at least in name) with the adoption of his daughter Nitocris by Kushite Shepenwepet II and divine votaress-elect Amenirdis II, thus fully respecting the prior legitimacy of Kushite rule.53 Assyria had left Kush itself unmolested, possibly because of its difficult logistics, but also possibly to guarantee the Saites’ loyalty to Assyria as their guarantor against the southern power, which remained a worry until Psamtek II’s campaign, discussed below.

Atlanersa, Senkamanisken, Anlamani, Aspelta: An Interpretation While many of the relationships between rulers, their wives, and children who came to the throne are known, most of the people and events from the period after Tanwetamani’s retreat from Thebes are shadowy, and many are but names. Sometimes the succession is doubtful. The first four make a group because their statuary, mostly found in caches, forms a stylistic unit up to the highest standards of contemporary Egypt. The end of this series represents a watershed in the history of Kush, and probably also Egypt. Psamtek II (Psammetichos in Greek), himself of probably Libyan extraction, was consolidated in Egypt, only with the help of foreign troops from a source ultimately decisive in the fate of the ancient world, but his dynasty, ironically, had been put in place by Assyria. His predecessor Necho had tried to rescue the scrap held by Ashur-uballit II at Harran, then Carchemish (605) to no avail in some serious campaigning, a defeat that must surely have severely dented the dynasty’s prestige, credibility, and legitimacy. Babylon, now under the great king Nebuchadnezzar, was now making threatening moves toward Egypt. Kush had, with wide acceptance, overwhelmed the northern kingdom before and might again. Psamtek had the help of some tough and highly formidable troops with arms and tactics effective against archery, perhaps the best around, but these rent-a-hoplites were unreliable. He made a major strike south,54 to weaken Kush, perhaps even demoralize it away from pharaonic aspirations, but to leave it vulnerable to incursions at least. In that he was successful, for, while earlier Kushite inscriptions talk

The Napatan Neo-Kushite State 1   423 about conquering to the north, every major one thereafter speaks of conflict closer, uprising, or invasion of Kush from regions nearby.55 Apparently in the reign of Aspelta, Psamtek II launched his campaign against Kush.56 No document gives a reason for the assault and details are conjectural, but it was clearly intended as a major attack and it seems to have resulted in the destruction, not just of Aspelta’s palace at Jebel Barkal but possibly also royal statuary, which was broken up and dumped into caches at Pnubs (Dokki Gel), and Jebel Barkal.57 In addition, the last sealings in magazines at Sanam were dated to Anlamani (Vincentelli  2006–2007: 376, 2011:273–74). Psamtek claimed 4,200 prisoners from a battle at Pr-nbs (probably Pnubs), a very large casualty figure.58 A stela from Tanis says that the objective was the land of šs (Shes) and the residence of the qur (king) at trgb (Tergeb). The destruction of Aspelta’s palace would then indicate that the army reached Jebel Barkal. The army reached t3 dhnt (Dehnet),59 where the enemy was massacred. Greek graffiti at Abu Simbel state that the campaign went as far as the river allowed (at flood season). Plausibly combining the accounts, Psamtek’s army met the army of Kush near Dokki Gel (Pnubs), and having the victory, would have continued upstream to Napata, slaughtered the enemy (near Nuri?), and finally stopping at the Fourth Cataract, the most formidable of the river’s obstacles,60 or proceeding onward to the junction of the Atbara, where the Nile was no longer a single river. Thereafter, the Saites established a remarkable, lightly fortified but well and formally designed rectangular fort on top of Dorginarti (level II), not only marking the frontier, but saying in the language of its structure that Kush was not a threat.61

Continuity in the Neo-Kushite State Throughout this period of violent upheaval, the political and institutional stamina (and rationality) of the participants was remarkable. In Kush, this stamina was maintained for over nine centuries. Just as Egypt afterwards remained a unit, so did Kush. This is remarkable because the long stretches of the Middle Nile were a temptation for raiders and freebooters, with a lighter population spread over a much longer distance. By this time, Meroe had apparently become a major hub of the kingdom.62 Aspelta’s reign, nevertheless, represented a major change in the geopolitical status of the Napatan state, henceforth, its theater of action would be confined to the Middle Nile and adjacent deserts, with forays into gold land.

Notes 1. It was the second state called Kush to occupy the Middle Nile, thus the current reference to it as Neo-Kushite. See B. Williams, Chapter 23, this volume. 2. In this essay, I refer to Nubian in the broader geographical rather than the linguistic sense.

424   Bruce BEYER Williams 3. Note the Napatan period workshop and kiln at Kerma (Salah ed-Din Mohamed Ahmed 1992:75–85, figs. 6–7). 4. The El-Kurru cemetery does not support extending the generations (Dunham 1950:2–3, see Morkot 2000:138–42, for example, but especially Heidorn 1994 for imports). Note that square foundations should be pyramids and not mastabas as restored. 5. Kitchen  1986:247 citing von Beckerath, and Wente has Panehesy restoring Amenhotep after his suppression. He lasted in Thebes for years 12–17 at least. Year 19 began the renaissance (p. 248), which begins Herihor’s ascendance. 6. Török 1997:108 n. 190 (list of viceroys), also Zibelius-Chen 1989:335–36; the wife of High Priest of Amun Pinedjem II Neskhons, who held the title. It was (Kitchen 1986:275–76) one of a string of titles that testify to its meaninglessness. An official named Menkheperre on a block from Barkal (Kendall et al. 2017:187 and fig. 19) could be one of a number of persons by that name in the New Kingdom, and not necessarily the high priest. If the reading “true of voice” at the end of the name is correct, it could name the high priest and be significant as an indicator that Amun’s cult continued. Kitchen (1986:293) notes that Sheshonq I brought Nubian products to Amun of Karnak. As this includes dom nuts, yellow-red ochre, and bulls it hardly reflects a substantial effort or rule. Kitchen (1986:295 n. 292) notes the presence of Kušim in the Palestine campaign of 925 bce (2 Chronicles 12:3–4)—Kushites (Kitchen: Nubians). These were likely mercenaries rather than a forced levy, slave or “conscript” pace Kitchen. This was the last hint of relations with Nubia before Kashta although the Assyrians got African animals from Takelot II (850–825 bce: Kitchen 1986:326, but the single-horn animal on the black obelisk is not a rhinoceros) and Egypt was wracked by civil war, especially in the Thebaid from 836 (Kitchen 1986:330). By 818 bce, a polyarchy was established, which had its effect even in the Thebaid (Kitchen  1986:337–39, and the situation only got worse, 340–58). Zibelius-Chen (1989) itemized the evidence and putative evidence for the Third Intermediate Period in Nubia and none of it indicates direct control. Reconsideration of Katimala below is a strong contra-indication of Egyptian rule. Note the Viceroy’s authority had extended to Hierakonpolis in Egypt. 7. Darnell  2006; Ritner  2009:456–59. An alternate translation and interpretation by Collombert (2008) is not accepted here. 8. Darnell (2006: generally, especially p. 11), indicates the tableau and the text look to Ramesside originals rather than of the Third Intermediate Period, consistent with a scribal tradition surviving in an Egyptian community. 9. See Török  1997:127 (on p. 54 he calls the preservation of her monument poor) and Ritner 2009:7, 455; he restores her as the ultimate ancestress of Aspelta and considers her queen regnant and part of the dynasty (Ritner 2009:456–59). 10. Darnell  2006:31. This is roughly the scale of the delegation that presented Aspelta to Amun-Ra for election. 11. See note 9. If the Kushites in the Palestinian campaign of Zerah the Kushite date to ca. 897, and his defeat is connected in some way, it might explain the stela (see Kitchen 1986:309). 12. Macadam 1949, pls. 32–34. 13. Eide et al.  1996:522–28, especially 522 indicates the generally accepted date; see Morkot 2000:146–50. Note that one or more of the rulers assigned by Eide et al. to Jebel Barkal tombs may also belong to this earlier phase. 14. Epigraphic Survey 1981 (Khonsu), pls. 155, 168, 179 (Ramesses XI) 156, 163 (Herihor). For flat raised relief, see Montet 1947, pl. IXc.

The Napatan Neo-Kushite State 1   425 15. Napatan stelae for this purpose are all online; see also Macadam 1949, pls. 7–15 for example. Napatan stelae show royal sandal straps continuing from the toe above the instep to the ankle—not as in Ramesside examples above. For actual (gold) sandals with this arrangement see Montet 1951, pl. XXXII. 16. Williams 1990:29–45, noted for the 25th Dynasty. See Nordström 2014:121–43, where most material dated to the New Kingdom is actually Napatan. 17. Griffith  1923: pl. 18:XI; Williams  1990, pl. 7a–c; S.  Smith  2006–2007:349 and fig. 2, for example. See Lohwasser 2010:94–95. Aspelta’s name is missing from the cemetery at Sanam. 18. Williams 1990:74, fig. 25; Nordström 2014:134–37 5-T-32; see also 24-D-1, 24-E-12, 24-I-10, 24-I-12, 24-I-13, 24-H-5, 5-S-4, 5. 19. Williams 1993:133–42; see fig. 90b (red-rim bowl) and fig. 85d for the pilgrim flask. fig. 87c–d are vessels of types related to early El-Kurru (Dunham 1950: fig. 4b) and Cemetery 176 at Debeira East (Säve-Söderbergh 1989: pl. 36 H5L). For a Nubian contracted burial, see Nordström 2014:126, 24-E-12/b. 20. Williams 1990 VA 2: fig. 23, with handmade red-topped bowl. See a tomb at Abu Sir 5-T–32 in Nordström 2014:134–36. 21. Smith 2006–2007, 2007, 2008. 22. Schiff-Giorgini  1971: pls. XV:28, 32, XVI:44, for example apparently reused tombs. For Sedeinga, see generally Berger el-Naggar 2008. Available evidence is uncertain. 23. Sjöström and Thomas  2011, fig. 1. Comparisons with Dorginarti are not clear, unlike Amara West. 24. Heidorn n.d. In addition, fortresses at Karni Island in the Fifth Cataract (Drzewiecki 2012: pls. 18–21) and Abu ‘Id (Jaritz 1986; Aston 1994) in Upper Egypt south of Edfu have been dated to this general period. Evidence from Karni is sparse, while that from Abu ‘Id, while consistent with a date in the 25th Dynasty and even Piankhy (ca. 750–650) is subject to the ambiguities of archaeological chronology in this period. 25. Compare gates in Jesse and Kuper (2004: fig. 2) with the water gate at Dorginarti (Heidorn n.d.: Plan 1 above right) and Sahaba (Säve-Söderbergh and Troy 1991: pl. 216). For other possible forts, see Crawford 1953:17–18 (Jebel Nakheru) and 36–38 (Fura Wells) as well as Karni Island. 26. Bonnet 2007: fig. 7, lower left. Hölscher (1954: fig. 7, pl. 4c–d) published houses at Medinet Habu that resemble the Dorginarti layout. 27. Sanam, being less vulnerable from the north and east, should have required less protection (see Zibelius-Chen 1989:339). 28. Pottery from the area dates to this period, but remains unpublished (Heidorn pers. comm.). 29. Sjöström and Thomas 2011:64, fig. 1, noting handmade pottery. Kawa temple is difficult to compare; see Macadam  1955: pl. 32 2021 vs Heidorn n.d.: fig. 44 for example. See also Welsby 2017, especially Fig. 5. 30. Ruffieux 2007: fig. 1 left. Pottery, pls. 1–6 include burnished beakers. 31. Salah ed-Din Mohamed Ahmed 1992: figs. 3–4. See also Heidorn n.d.: fig. 77 vs Salah edDin 1992, fig. 15:I A4. Kerma continued later—note beakers fig. 23: I E3. 32. Fura Wells (Crawford 1953:36–38), Karni Island (Drzewiecki 2012:12–15). Plans compare well with known fortresses, but pottery of Karni is not conclusive. 33. Some sites identified in Williams 1990 had remains dating to the Dorginarti phase, and almost all of the material presented as “Pharaonic” from the West Bank Survey seems to belong to this period (Nordström 2014:121–43). 34. Alara came from Taqat, across from Jebel Barkal (Pope 2014b:35).

426   Bruce BEYER Williams 35. This is much earlier than proposed by Török in Eide et al. 1994:4, p. 46. 36. Török  1997:144–53. Ritner (2009:454) restores Katimala as the first of Aspelta’s royal ancestors. 37. See, generally, Grimal 1981. Possibly, it was preceded by some military action in year 4, but based only on a mention of the army of Ta-Mehu (Török 1997:156). 38. See Elayi  2017:78–82 for a summary of relations under Sargon II. The identity of most persons is conjectural. She points out that Sargon apparently regarded the “Brook of Egypt” as his boundary. 39. Already in place, apparently. For a possible military settlement of this period at Abu ‘Id south of Edfu, see Jaritz 1986. Aston (1994) confirmed the date using sherds from a surface collection. 40. Jurman 2017 summarizes arguments for placing Shabataqo before Shabaqo in the sequence of the 25th Dynasty. 41. Called King’s Brother (Eide et al. 1994:139; Ritner 2009:538) whom Shabaqo had sent to be with the recruits in Nubia, another example of military careers among cadet royals, like General Pekertror son of Paabtameri, King Kashta’s sister (Lohwasser 2001:172–73). 42. As pointed out by Pope (2014a:111–31) Egyptian (-Kushite) sources are almost silent concerning the Assyrian campaigns. After examining alternative explanations he accepts security as the most likely motivation for the Kushite intervention in Asia (pp. 131–38), an explanation that can also be applied to Piankhy’s campaign, which was reactive. The role of trade (pp. 156–60) is more difficult to specify, although it is one factor that clearly appears in inscriptional evidence. 43. As with all biblical events, this one has been subject of intense and continuing discussion, which cannot even be summarized here. Onasch (1994:12) indicates Timna and Ekron and omits Lachish, which was included in the opinion that Sennacherib fought only one campaign in the West. Despite Shea (1985), the single campaign remains the most widely accepted. See Laato 1995 for Lachish and a strong lesson in reading Assyrian (and other ancient and many modern) political documents. This campaign was part of a wide-ranging geopolitical move against Assyrian power that included Babylonia as well as the SyroPalestinian states, Egypt, and Kush (Brinkman 1973:91). At least from the time of the letter of Apepi to the Ruler of Kush and probably before, we cannot assume that events happened in isolation, but that major political and military movements in one part of the ancient world were made with knowledge of movements and conditions elsewhere, and often probably coordinated, even if we do not possess direct evidence. 44. As Pope points out (2014a:111–30), Egypto-Kushite records are virtually silent on Asiatic relations and campaigns, save for some difficult and doubtful allusions. In this case, success would have been less than triumphant. Note that Egyptian military activity, even successful, was not always commemorated in monuments, and we do not have annals from this time. Török (1997:170 n. 303) quotes Onasch who thinks Taharqo concentrated troops after Eltekeh, preventing the destruction of Jerusalem. For Kitchen’s (1986) reconstruction of events, see pp. 383–85; n. 822 discusses a probable strategy. Despite numerous discussions, I consider Kitchen’s reconstruction the most likely and based on the source with the least prejudice. Fales (2014:247–48) thinks Sennacherib’s strategy was successful, but the fact that he abandoned an investment or even siege clearly indicates otherwise in a career that saw great ruthlessness, not only in the west, but also against the sacred city of Babylon, where his act of destruction was so unpopular it led to his death at the hands of his sons. See also Franklin (in press) for the same conclusion. Note that a siege is actually a blockade.

The Napatan Neo-Kushite State 1   427 45. The burial of a soldier at Tombos in a middling vault grave was quite rich. That he was a soldier of some talent was proved by his heavy iron spear, his iron barbed javelins, and his bow with complex microlith-tipped arrows (Smith 2006–2007, fig. 5, 2007: pls. 20–22) of types found as far south as Jebel Moya (Addison 1949: pls. LXXXIII–LXXXIV various, but not assembled with side flakes). He had a pile of amulets, including a scarab of Shabaqo, four bronze (copper alloy) bowls, two decorated with incised rows of cattle and a beautifully decorated openwork box with iron cosmetic implements and spectacular faience (three known so far, the box is only half explored) jars. The metal bowls may be Phoenician work and, in any case, this was the great external campaign of the age; defeated warriors do not die rich. 46. In a fairly routine approach to reading through the bombast of Assyrian annals, the war machine may have been battered enough by the Eltekeh campaign to tempt the Babylonians to make a move. 47. While not stated exactly in this way generally, Richardson (2014) called it the “First World Event,” citing numerous references in ancient and medieval as well as biblical sources that indicate its profound religious importance. This importance continues to this day along with the cultural and historical consequences. 48. Either sole king of the 24th Dynasty according to Manetho or the third after an Osorkon and Tefnakht as Ritner refashioned it (Ritner 2009:435–49). 49. The only evidence of campaigning against Libya and Asia are personnel presumed to be captive in the Kawa lists (Török 1997:172). 50. Brinkman 1973, 2004a–d. Tiglath-Pileser III made himself king of Babylon, which was not accepted in Babylonia very well, and when Shalmaneser V was overthrown by Sargon II, it began a generation of rebellion and conquest that culminated in the destruction of Babylon in 689 by Sennacherib after protracted struggles with Babylon and Elam. Thus, the Eltekeh campaign in 701 came near the beginning of this phase of struggle that ended in 689, but Sennacherib was otherwise busy campaigning in Syria, Anatolia, the Zagros, and Arabia until his death in 681. In this we take a rather allied position to that of Pope (2014a:156–60) to emphasize the reactive and security-oriented nature of Kushite policy. 51. Eph’al 2005 104–109. If it took three battles, and the wounding of the king, it was hard fought (Kahn 2006:252; see also Kahn 2004). Pope (2014a:156) expresses skepticism that Kushites misjudged the relative capabilities of the two armies, a skepticism justified by Esarhaddon’s initial defeat and the difficulty of this campaign. 52. Török (1997:187) believes with the help of Gyges of Lydia—most likely, Assurbanipal indulged this, as he had problems elsewhere, especially in Babylon and Elam. Spalinger believed the foreign troops were used to quell other dynasts (1976:142); this was the beginning of the relationship between the Saites and the Aegean. 53. Török (1997:188) infers from the Nitocris stela and reliefs of her arrival in Thebes that this was negotiated by Montuemhat. There were ships on the relief blocks, probably delivering Nitocris to Thebes (Kitchen 1986:236–39). Note, in this context, that an attempt to identify a stela of a Montuemhat at Semna with the great Theban, was carefully examined by Pope (2014b:154–74) and rejected. For Greek involvement in these events, see Burstein this volume. 54. Török (1997:360–63, and in more detail 371–74). He advocated a more restricted campaign, but did not know of the destruction of Aspelta’s palace or the Dokki Gel cache or the Sanam seals (also in entries in Eide et al. 1994 cited above). In any case, the records from Shellal and Tanis (see Eide et al. 1994:41) as well as the graffiti at Abu Simbel and Buhen clearly indicate a major formal effort, and the timing at inundation—unnecessary

428   Bruce BEYER Williams for a short campaign—indicates a deep thrust, which was also in character for early Saite campaigns. The vagueness of place names could be attributed to the Greek, Carian, and northern Egyptian (many actually Libyan) soldiers’ unfamiliarity with the region. See Burstein this volume. 55. Katimala’s problems with Makaresh curiously rehearse those recited by Harsiyotef and Nastasen. These incursions, especially when families and cattle were brought, also rehearse what probably happened at the end of Meroe; populations moved about. 56. Eph’al 2003:179; in addition, Nebuchadnezzar was defeated in his attack on Egypt, a severe security threat that had to be kept at bay for some time (180–83). Attempts (Koch 2014: n. 15 and Eide et al. 1994 here nn. 52–56) to minimize the significance of the campaign by placing it near Egypt may be discounted on a number of points. Dorginarti, with a garrison of a few hundred at most, was much earlier, and little evidence of occupation remained in northern Nubia by this time. Pharaohs were often not present on important campaigns, as at Eltekeh, or when Piankhy allowed his generals to conduct the decisive early phases of his campaign. The campaign had to be against a large force, since the number of prisoners—4,200—is equivalent to half an army in Egypt and the presence of expensive Aegean mercenaries argues for the presence of a truly formidable foe. The destruction of Aspelta’s palace by fire and the caches of broken statues indicate a wide disturbance, and the end of the Sanam cemetery and trade hub point to a major change, either produced by, or a result of this operation. 57. Generally, Anderson 2009. See Wolf and Nowotnick (this volume), who believe the caches were made in Meroitic times. 58. Eide et al. 1994:281–82, no. 41 Stela of Psamtek II year 3 from Shellal. The name is given pr-nbs. The hill country is probably just the determinative indicating its foreignness. There is no real hill country in that area. A place unsuitable for horses must refer to some local peculiarity, perhaps a sandy old Nile channel. 59. Eide et al. 1994:284–85, ta dehnet was a name for the necropolis at Memphis and Tihneh el-Gebel, and it means The Hill. It could refer to the royal necropoleis or that of Sanam (Lohwasser 2008, v. 1:260–61), which essentially ended about this time, although Sanam is hardly a hill. 60. Still navigable at certain times. Petherick’s sailing vessel in 1864 went from the upper White Nile to Cairo in a single season. This reconstruction of events simply unites the Tanis and Karnak/Shellal versions and sees no contradiction, only an extension in the Tanite version, pace Török in Eide et al. 1994:284–85. If, on the other hand, Kerkis named by the Greek graffiti (Eide et al. 1994:42, 287–88) is Kurgus, then we have a longer campaign, but it would be difficult to see where the river would not allow continuing. At that season, however, the river would have become two rivers at the Atbara, and that would explain the phrase. 61. Heidorn n.d.: ch. 6. 62. See above. As Pope points out, Dangeil has the first unequivocal monuments, but some early burials at Meroe were quite rich. See Dunham 1963:3–25 for example.

References Cited Adams, W.Y. 2004 Site 6-G–9 and the Problem of Early Kushite Settlement in Lower Nubia. Sudan & Nubia 8:64–69. Addison, F. 1949 Jebel Moya. The Wellcome Excavations in the Sudan. Oxford University Press. Anderson, J. 2009 What Are These Doing Here above the Fifth Cataract?!! Napatan Royal Statues at Dangeil. Sudan & Nubia 13:78–86.

The Napatan Neo-Kushite State 1   429 Aston, D. 1994 Sherds from a Fortified Townsite near Abu ‘Id. Cahiers de la Céramique Égyptienne 4: 19–39. Berger el-Naggar, C. 2008 Contribution de Sedeinga à l’histoire de la Nubie. In Between the Cataracts: Proceedings of the 11th Conference of Nubian Studies, ed. W.  Godlewski and A. Łajtar, Part 1, pp. 179–93. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean Supplement Series 2.1. Warsaw University. Binder, M. 2011 The 10th–9th century BC—New Evidence from Cemetery C of Amara West. Sudan & Nubia 15:39–53. Bleibtreu, E. 2013 Die feldzüge Assurbanipals nach Ägypten. In Florilegium Aegyptiacum. Eine wissenschaftlich Blütenles von Schüler und Freunden für Helmut Satzinger zum 75. Geburtstag, ed J.  Budka, R.  Gundacker, and G.  Pieke, pp. 21–40. Göttinger Miszellen Beihefte 14. Seminar für Ägyptologie und Koptologie der Georg-August-Universität. Bonnet, C. 2007 La ville de Doukki Gel après les derniers chantiers archéologiques. Genava n.s. 55:187–200. Brinkman, J.A. 1973 Sennacherib’s Babylonian Problem: An Interpretation. Journal of Cuneiform Studies 25:89–95. ——— 2004a Assyria. In The Oxford Companion to the Bible, ed. B. Metzger and M. Coogan. Oxford University Press Online. ——— 2004b Tiglath-Pileser III. In The Oxford Companion to the Bible, ed. B. Metzger and M. Coogan. Oxford University Press Online. ——— 2004c Shalmaneser  V.  In The Oxford Companion to the Bible, ed. B.  Metzger and M. Coogan. Oxford University Press Online. ——— 2004d Sennacherib. In The Oxford Companion to the Bible, ed. B.  Metzger and M. Coogan eds. Oxford University Press Online. Collombert, P. 2008 Par-delà bien et mal. L’inscription de la reine Katimala à Semna. Kush 19:185–218. Crawford, O.G.S. 1953 Castles and Churches in the Middle Nile Region. With a note on the inscriptions by M. F. Laming Macadam. Sudan Antiquities Service Occasional Papers No. 2. Khartoum: Sudan Antiquities Service. Darnell, J. 2006 The Inscription of Queen Katimala at Semna: Textual Evidence for the Origins the Napatan State. Yale Egyptological Studies 7. Yale Egyptological Seminar. Drzewiecki, M. 2012 Fortresses of Sudan 2012, Preliminary Report. National Corporation for Antiquities and Museums, Sudan. Dunham, D. 1950 El Kurru. Royal Cemeteries of Kush 1. Harvard University Press. ——— 1963 The West and South Cemeteries at Meroë. Royal Cemeteries of Kush 5. Museum of Fine Arts. Eide, T., T.  Hägg, R.H.  Pierce, and L.  Török eds. 1994 Fontes Historiae Nubiorum: Textual Sources for the History of the Middle Nile Region between the Eighth Century BC and the Sixth Century AD, v. 1: From the Eighth to the Mid-Fifth Century BC. Department of Classics, University of Bergen. Eide, T., T.  Hägg, R.H.  Pierce, and L.  Török eds. 1996 Fontes Historiae Nubiorum: Textual Sources for the History of the Middle Nile Region between the Eighth Century BC and the Sixth Century AD, v. 2: From the Mid-Fifth to the First Century BC. Department of Classics, University of Bergen. Elayi, J. 2017 Sargon II, King of Assyria. Archaeology and Biblical Studies 22. SBL Press. Eph’al, I. 2003 Nebuchadnezzar the Warrior: Remarks on his Military Achievements. Israel Exploration Journal 33:178–91. ——— 2005 Esarhaddon, Egypt, and Shubria: Politics and Propaganda. Journal of Cuneiform Studies 57:99–111.

430   Bruce BEYER Williams Epigraphic Survey 1981 The Temple of Khonsu, v. 2: Scenes and Inscriptions in the Court and the First Hypostyle Hall. Oriental Institute Publications 103. Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago. Fales, F. 2014 The Road to Judah: 701 B.C.E in the Context of Sennacherib’s Political-Military Strategy. In Sennacherib at the Gates of Jerusalem: Story, History and Historiography, ed. I. Kalimi and S. Richardson, pp. 223–48. Culture and History of the Ancient Near East 71. Leiden and Boston: Brill. Fitzenreiter, M. 2018 Piye’s Conquest of Egypt (about 727 B.C.E.). In Allerhand Kleinigkeiten, pp. 105–22. Internet Beiträge zur Ägyptologie und Sudanarchäologie 20. Golden House. Franklin, N. in press The Kushite Connection: The Destruction of Lachish and the Salvation of Jerusalem. In Tell It in Gath: Studies in the History and Archaeology of Israel. Essays in Honor of A.M. Maeir on the Occasion of his Sixtieth Birthday. Ägypten und Altes Testament. Zaphon. Grimal, N. 1981 La stele triomphale de Pi(‘ankh)y au Musée du Caire JE 48862 et 47086–47089. Mémoires de l’Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale du Caire 105. Griffith, F.L. 1923 Oxford Excavations in Nubia XVIII: The Cemetery of Sanam. Liverpool Annals of Archaeology and Anthropology 10:73–171. Heidorn, L. 1994 Historical Implications of the Pottery from the Earliest Tombs at el-Kurru. Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt 31:115–31. ——— 1997 The Horses of Kush. Journal of Near Eastern Studies 56:105–14. ——— n.d. Excavations at Dorginarti, James E. Knudstad, Director, Part 1: The Second Cataract Fortress of Dorginarti. University of Chicago Oriental Institute Nubian Expedition 14. The Oriental Institute. Hölscher, U. 1954 The Excavation of Medinet Habu, v. 5: Post-Ramessid Remains. Oriental Institute Publications 66. University of Chicago Press. Horton, M. 1991 Africa in Egypt: New Evidence from Qasr Ibrim. In Egypt and Africa: Nubia from Prehistory to Islam, ed. W.V. Davies, pp. 264–77. British Museum Press. Jaritz, H. 1986 On Three Townsites in the Upper Thebaid. Cahier de Recherches de l’Institut de Papyrologie et d’Égyptologie de Lille 8:37–42. Jesse, F. and R.  Kuper 2004 Gala Abu Ahmed—Eine Festung am Wadi Howar. Der Antike Sudan. Mitteilungen der Sudanarchäologischen Gesellschaft 15:137–42. Jurman, Claus 2017 The Order of the Kushite Kings According to Sources from the Eastern Desert and Thebes. Or: Shabataka Was Here First! Journal of Egyptian History 10:124–51. Kahn, D. 2004 Taharqa, King of Kush and the Assyrians. Journal of the Society for the Study of Egyptian Antiquities 31:109–28. ——— 2006 The Assyrian Invasions of Egypt (673–663 B.C.) and the Final Expulsion of the Kushites. Studien zur Altägyptischen Kultur 34:251–67. Kendall, T., El-Hassan Ahmed Mohamed, H. Wilson, J. Haynes, and D. Klotz 2017 Jebel Barkal in the New Kingdom: An Emerging Picture. In Nubia in the New Kingdom: Lived Experience, Pharaonic Control and Indigenous Traditions, ed. N. Spencer, A. Stevens, and M. Binder, pp. 159–92. British Museum Publications on Egypt and Sudan 3. Peeters. Kitchen, K.A. 1986 The Third Intermediate Period in Egypt (1100–650 B.C.). Aris and Phillips. Koch, C. 2014 Usurpation and the Erasure of Names during the Twenty-sixth Dynasty. In Thebes in the First Millennium BC, ed. E. Pischikova, J. Budka, and K. Griffin, pp. 397–413. Cambridge Scholars. Laato, A. 1995 Assyrian Propaganda and the Falsification of History in the Royal Inscriptions of Sennacherib. Vetus Testamentum 45:198–226. Lister, F.C. 1967 Ceramic Studies of the Historic Periods in Ancient Nubia. University of Utah Anthropology Papers 86. University of Utah Press.

The Napatan Neo-Kushite State 1   431 Lohwasser, A. 2001 Die königlichen Frauen im antiken Reich von Kusch, 25. Dynastie bis zur Zeit des Nastasen. Meroitica 19. Harrassowitz. ——— 2008 Archäologisches Inventar und funeräre Praxis im Friedhof von Sanam. Perspektiven einer kulturhistorischen Interpretation. Habilitationsschrift 2008. ——— 2010 The Kushite Cemetery of Sanam: A Non-Royal Burial Ground of the Nubian Capital, c. 800–600 B.C. Golden House. Macadam, M.F.L. 1949 The Temples of Kawa, Part 1: The Inscriptions. Oxford University Press. ——— 1955 The Temples of Kawa, v. 2: History and Archaeology of the Site. Oxford University Press. Montet, P. 1947 Les constructions et le tombeau d’Osorkon II á Tanis. Centre national de la Recherche scientifique. ——— 1951 Les constructions et le tombeau de Psousennès á Tanis. Centre national de la Recherche scientifique. Morkot, R.G. 2000 The Black Pharaohs: Egypt’s Nubian Rulers. Rubicon Press. Nordström, H.-Å. 2014 The West Bank Survey from Faras to Gemai, v. 1: Sites of Early Nubian, Middle Nubian and Pharaonic Age. Sudan Archaeological Research Society Publication 21. BAR International Series 2650. Hadrian Books. Onasch, H.-U. 1994 Die assyrischen Eroberungen Ägyptens. Harrassowitz. Pope, J. 2014a Beyond the Broken Reed: Kushite Intervention and the Limits of l’histoire événementielle. In Sennacherib at the Gates of Jerusalem: Story, History and Historiography, ed. I. Kalimi and S. Richardson, pp. 105–60. Culture and History of the Ancient Near East 71. Brill. ——— 2014b The Double Kingdom under Taharqo. Culture and History of the Ancient Near East 69. Brill. Richardson, S. 2014 The First “World Event”: Sennacherib at Jerusalem. In Sennacherib at the Gates of Jerusalem: Story, History and Historiography, ed. I.  Kalimi and S.  Richardson, pp. 433–506. Culture and History of the Ancient Near East 71. Brill. Rose, P. 2008 Early Settlement at Qasr Ibrim. In Between the Cataracts: Proceedings of the 11th Conference of Nubian Studies, ed. W. Godlewski and A. Łajtar, Part 1, pp. 195–209. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean Supplement Series 2.1. Warsaw University. Ritner, R.K. 2009 The Libyan Anarchy: Inscriptions from Egypt’s Third Intermediate Period. Society of Biblical Literature. Ruffieux, P. 2007 Ensemble céramiques napatéens découverts durant les campagnes 2005–2006 et 2006–2007 à Dokki Gel (Kerma). Genava n.s. 55:221–39. Salah ed-Din Mohamed Ahmed 1992 L’agglomération napatéenne a Kerma, enquête archéologique et ethnographique en milieu urbain. Éditions Recherche sur les Civilisations. Säve-Söderbergh, T. ed. 1989 Middle Nubian Sites. The Scandinavian Joint Expedition to Sudanese Nubia 4. Paul Åstrom. Säve-Söderbergh, T. and L. Troy 1991 New Kingdom Pharaonic Sites the Finds and the Sites. The Scandinavian Joint Expedition to Sudanese Nubia 5(3). Almqvist and Wiksell. Schiff Giorgini, M. 1971 Soleb, v. 2: Les nécropoles. Sansoni. Shea, W.H. 1985 Sennacherib’s Second Palestinian Campaign. Journal of Biblical Literature 104:401–18. Sjöström, I.W. and R. Thomas 2011 The Kushite Pottery Sequence at Kawa: Parallels at Home and Abroad. Sudan & Nubia 15:64–71. Smith, S.T. 2006–2007 A New Napatan Cemetery at Tombos. In Mélanges offerts â Francis Geus, ed. B.  Gratien, pp. 347–52. Cahier de Recherches de l’Institut de Papyrologie et d’Égyptologie de Lille 26.

432   Bruce BEYER Williams ——— 2007 Death at Tombos: Pyramids, Iron, and the Rise of the Napatan Dynasty. Sudan & Nubia 11:2–14. ——— 2008 Tombos and the Transition Period from the New Kingdom to the Napatan Period in Upper Nubia. In Between the Cataracts: Proceedings of the 11th Conference of Nubian Studies, ed. W.  Godlewski and A.  Łajtar, Part 1, pp. 95–116. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean Supplement Series 2.1. Warsaw University. Spalinger, A.J. 1976 Psammetichus, King of Egypt: 1. Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt 13:133–47. Steindorff, G. 1937 Aniba 2. Mission archéologique de Nubie, 1929–1934. J.J. Augustin. Thijs, A. 2003 The Troubled Careers of Amenhotep and Panehsy: The High Priest of Amun and the Viceroy of Kush under the Last Ramessides. Studien zur Altägyptischen Kultur 31:289–306. Török, L. 1997 The Kingdom of Kush: Handbook of the Napatan-Meroitic Civilization. Handbuch der Orientalistik 1(31). Brill. Vila, A. 1980 La prospection archéologique de la vallée du Nil au sud de la cataracte de Dal (Nubie soudanaise), Fascicule 12: la nécropole de Missiminia I, les sepultures napatéennes. Centre nationale de la recherche scientifique. Vincentelli, I. 2006–2007 Some Clay Sealings from Sanam Abu Dom. In Mélanges offerts à Francis Geus, ed. B. Gratien, pp. 371–78. Cahier de Recherches de l’Institut de Papyrologie et d’Égyptologie de Lille 26. ——— 2011 The Treasury and Other Buildings at Sanam (Suda). In La Pioche et la Plume. Autour du Soudan, du Liban et de la Jordanie. Hommage archéologiques à Patrice Lenoble, ed. V. Rondot, F. Alpi, and F. Villeneuve, pp. 269–82. UPS. ——— 2017 Gematon between the Reigns of Ramses VI and Taharqa. In Nubia in the New Kingdom: Lived Experience, Pharaonic Control and Indigenous Traditions, ed. N. Spencer, A. Stevens, and M. Binder, pp. 475–87. British Museum Publications on Egypt and Sudan 3. Peeters. Williams, B.B. 1990 Excavations between Abu Simbel and the Sudan Frontier, Keith C. Seele, Director, Part 7: Twenty-fifth Dynasty and Napatan Remains at Qustul: Cemeteries W and V. University of Chicago Oriental Institute Nubian Expedition 7. ——— 1993 Excavations at Serra East, George R Hughes and James E. Knudstad, Directors, Parts 1–5: A-Group, C-Group, Pan-Grave, New Kingdom, and X-Group Remains from Cemeteries A-G and Rock Shelters. University of Chicago Oriental Institute Nubian Expedition 10.

chapter 23

The Na pata n N eo K ushite State 2 Eclipse and Revival in the Later Napatan Period; Conditions in the State Bruce BEYER Williams

Napatan History and Continuity The framework of Napatan history is formed by an almost unbroken sequence of royal tombs in necropoleis of El-Kurru, Nuri, Meroe, and Jebel Barkal, often including tombs of queens (Yellin, this volume). The names and titularies of the kings and queens in these tombs are almost all known. While the order has sometimes been challenged and in detail, sometimes modified, it remains basically intact, although the duration of the reigns and correlation with events in the wider world is a matter of conjecture. Some information about the intended political posture of the kings has been derived from the titularies, and while useful, the inferences can be deceptive and cannot be used to determine actual events. There are three interruptions of the sequence, two related, and each of uncertain significance, although some conjectures are possible. First, the El-Kurru cemetery is dominated by a large pyramid, Ku. 1, that was never used for a burial and never assigned to a ruler despite its obvious importance (Emberling 2015). It can be roughly dated by reliefs in its chapel to about or just after the time of Nastasen, or the last third of the 4th century bce.1 At Jebel Barkal, an early group of pyramids is clustered around another exceptionally large pyramid, Bar. 11, assigned either to Nastasen’s successor “Aktisanes (?)” or the following ruler. Aryamani is most often cited here—and sometimes assigned Bar. 14—but he is probably earlier (see B. Williams, Chapter 22, this volume). A third pyramid in the cluster assigned to an immediate successor Kash[ . . . ] (Welsby 1996:207–209; Török

434   Bruce BEYER Williams 1997a:203), which would link Ku. 1 and the early Barkal cluster into a continuum. If the dating is correct, the sequence of cemeteries would be: • El-Kurru: through Shabataqo; • Nuri: Taharqo; • El-Kurru: Tanwetamani; • Nuri: Atlanersa through Nastasen; • El-Kurru 1: (unknown post-Nastasen); • Jebel Barkal: First Cluster (Bar. 11, 14, 15 or “Aktisanes” late 4th century bce) and possibly Bar. 7 Sabrakamani?; • Meroe: Arkamani and following, beginning in the earlier 3rd century bce (Török 1997a:200–206; differing from Dunham 1957:6–7). Attempts to read dynastic change into this sequence are bedeviled by the fact that dynasty does not mean family, but a “holding power.” Thus, Egypt had dynasties that were entirely unstable in succession, such as the Thirteenth, or changed family once, as the Eighteenth, and in the Third Intermediate and Saite periods, this was also true; Amasis was a usurper. The location of the royal tomb is something of an ­indicator, although without a guiding rule. At best, Ku. 1, with the early cluster at Barkal (provisionally dated), was clearly a move away from Nuri, which culminated in the more radical move to Meroe as a kind of transition. The second cluster at Barkal may have been part of some unknown quarrel (as also the isolated small pyramids). Both changes took place contemporaneously with huge upheavals to the north that left Egypt in entirely new hands and in the second case resulted in military action against Aswan. The change was a recognition and response to major changes in the geopolitical environment and an attempt to adapt to it. How we sort that into dynasties is another matter.2 Like the preceding 25th Dynasty, of which it was a continuation, the later Napatan period is illuminated by only a few revealing texts, all in Egyptian.3 The Greeks occasionally commented on Nubia, or “Aithiopia,”4 but the Egyptians almost never, and Persian references seem ambiguous. Thus, we are forced to reconstruct certain conditions from only the few royal documents, which is surely misleading (Pope, this volume). After Katimala, the major rulers’ inscriptions are Piankhy’s stelae; Taharqo, several stelae and inscriptions; Tanwetamani, Dream Stela; Aspelta, Election Stela and Adoption Stela; Amannote-erike, Inscription Kawa IX; Harsiyotef Annals; Nastasen Stela, and the Banishment Stela of uncertain early Napatan date. While there is reason to believe that rulers from Tanwetamani through Nastasen generally resided at Meroe before their accession, it was Amun at Jebel Barkal who elected them despite other stops in the coronation journey, always including Finding the Aten (Kawa) and Pnubs (Dokki Gel). Archaeology remains largely funerary and religious, but we lack large-scale towns and villages in publication, although this is gradually being rectified.

The Napatan Neo-Kushite State 2   435

The Later Napatan Period After Aspelta, Napatan history is scarcely more than a list of names down to the later 5th century bce: Aramatelqo, Malonaqen, Analamoye, Amani-nataki-lebte, Karkamani, Amaniastabarqo, Siospiqo, Nasakhma, Malowiamani, and Talakhamani. Eide et al. (1996:45–55) devote some space to analyzing the possible projects implied by their names, but such projects may never have been realized or attempted in the real world, and in any case, we have no evidence otherwise. A papyrus records a ship-borne caravan to Nubia in 529 (Eide et al. 1994:298(51)), but we know few details except that soldiers were assigned to it, and the plague that struck Athens in 430 (Thucydides 2.48; Eide et al. 1996:68) was reported to have begun in Ethiopia south of Egypt. Even the extensive documents from the Jewish military colony at Elephantine in the 5th century bce (Porten 1996:74–268) tell us nothing of Nubian affairs in this long period. Ethiopians are among the tribute bearers on the Apadana (ORINST P 8981), but the representation is generic and difficult to evaluate as is the claim of Kushites fighting in the Persian army (next section). However, a fair number of kings from this period are attested on objects and blocks that were found in M 294 and M 295 at Meroe (Török 1997b:235–42) indicating that some monumental building occurred in what was probably by then the main royal residence.

Herodotus and Aithiopia(ns) Of the Greek historians active in the 5th and 4th centuries (Burstein, this volume), only Herodotus (active ca. 450–430) commented on Aithiopia(ns),5 although poets spoke of it from Homer onward. Commentaries on his work concerning this region are plentiful and varied, and range from outright rejection to guarded acceptance, at least in part.6 As Eide et al. (1994:304(56)) says, “It is difficult to evaluate Herodotus’ work as a historical source because of the great diversity of its contents and our lack of knowledge of Herodotus’ own sources.” In addition, it is not often clear whom Herodotus is describing. Aithiopia refers to the south, Libya to the north (Eide et al. 1994:319–20(61–62)), so we do not know when he is referring to Kush and when he is discussing some other people or location. Herodotus’ description of the Nile above Elephantine (Eide et al. 1994:302–12(56); Török 2014:31–32) can very roughly be reconciled with geography as far as Meroe, where he comments that Zeus’s oracle commands when to go to war, something exactly reflected in the Napatan inscriptions. After that, he discusses the automoloi, or “deserters,” who left Elephantine in the time of Psamtek II in a fantastic fashion, but noting, accurately, that the Persians had a garrison at Elephantine, which we now know to have been Jewish (see immediately above). His description ends with the statement that the river at

436   Bruce BEYER Williams the land of the automoloi flows from west to east, which for some time had geographers thinking that the Niger was somehow connected, although it actually probably refers, dimly, to the Bahr el-Ghazal. On the other hand, his reference to Aithiopian tribute (Eide et al. 1994:312–14(57)) may refer to the Atbai,7 and the soldiers in Xerxes’s army as described (Eide et al. 1994:314–15(58); Török 2014:116–17) would not have been from Kush. Although Kushites used stone arrowheads, and presumably self-bows,8 the description of painted bodies indicates southerners. The Aithiopian Logos (Eide et al. 1994:323–31(65); Török 2014:40–53), on the other hand, appears to be largely anti­Persian propaganda and fanciful. Herodotus tells us much of what Greeks knew or thought about Africa, including Egypt and Kush, but little information about either that we could not get from firmer sources and nothing that we have not had to verify independently. Still, the fact that he recounts no conflicts between Kush and Egypt after the Psamtek II attack (Eide et al. 1994:322–23(64); Török 2014:30) is significant, as is the fact that the Cambyses campaign (Burstein, this volume; Eide et al. 1994:323– 31(65); Török 2014:32–36), probably a fictionalized failure, is the only incident of the Persian period.9 In the 4th century bce,10 Harsiyotef and his third successor Nastasen speak of considerable conflict, mostly with desert peoples similar to, or the same as, some recorded in the late 5th century bce by Amannote-erike, the Rehres and Meded as well as others; they involved invasion of Meroe and even attacks on temples (Table 23.1). Some action took place on the river and in the north. Harsiyotef in his eleventh year campaigned in lower Nubia (Aknet), reaching Aswan (Suwent) on behalf of his deputy, Gasaiu. His opponents, Beraga and Saamaniso, whom he killed at Aswan, might be a Persian official and his Egyptian subordinate,11 which would place the event during the Persian campaign of 343–342 or immediately thereafter.12 Beraga could be Greek or even Aramaic. The two could have been rogue officials of the 30th Dynasty and Beraga a Greek, a Persian, or a Judean.13 The third successor, Nastasen, left the last Napatan royal monument inscribed in Egyptian (Török  1997a:388), and the last document to directly record campaigns for centuries, as the Meroitic records are even more sparse. In his first year, he fought against a certain Kambasawden who had transport ships, which Nastasen seized. He also seized lands and cattle; if Zibelius-Chen’s identification of Korti for the place name Kuratape (Zibelius-Chen 1972:164; Eide et al. 1996:486(84)) is correct the campaign would have been in Lower Nubia (or the Korti in Sukkot) or ranging from just south of Kubban likely to Derr, or Daraw (Tarawdie), where the enemy was destroyed. Thus, after Harsiyotef ’s campaign, northernmost Nubia was not held by Kush. An identification of this Kambasawden with Khababash, rebel-king in Upper Egypt just before Darius Codomannus, is most unlikely, because there were twenty-four recorded years of Harsiyotef ’s reign after his Lower Nubian expedition plus two more reigns, at least one substantial, before Nastasen. Kambasawden likely dates at least to Ptolemy’s satrapy (ended 305, Wojciechowska 2016:75–79). Thereafter Nastasen fought in places apparently away from the river to the south, Mekhindekennete (Eide et al. 1996:487(84)) but also Abu Simbel (Eide et al. 1996:489);

Medede

Medede

Medede

Aknet (L. Nubia Braga)

Mekhuf

Rehresa

Rehresa

Mekhuf

?

Mekhindekennete

Rabala, Akulakuro

Arrasa

Makhsherkharta

Mayokue

Mediye Mediye

Same 3

Same 5

Same 6

Same 11

Same 16

Same 18

Same 23

Same 35

Nastasen

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same Same

Tamakheyta

Abso of Mahae

Ayonku

Khambasawdn

Arawa + ?

Kharawa

Rehresa

Harsiyotef 2

Sycomore of  Sarsare

Luboden

Tshare

Meroe Shaykara

Meroe

a town

Anreware

Koroton (west)

Sawearaga

Meroe N

Location

Meded

Enemy Ruler

Same 2

People/Place

Irike-Amanote 1 Rehrehes

King/year

Women Gold 2,000 deben Cattle 35,330 Stock 55,526

Women Cattle 203,146 Stock 33,050

Women Gold 1,212 deben Cattle 22,120 Stock 55,200

Women Cattle 20,216 Stock 603,107

Women 2,236 Cattle 209,659 Stock 505,349

Lands, herds

4 lands in Taqotet

Cattle

Animals, men, women+?

Cattle

Booty

Table 23.1  Campaigns and Peoples of the Late Napatan Period

Returned property of Kawa Returned property of Bastet of Tarare

Kh had boats, Karatape to Tawaryewl

Saamaniso

Chief surrendered

3 towns at location

Arrives Kawa after 9 days

Invasion for occupation

Remarks

438   Bruce BEYER Williams Nastasen had an even more active career campaigning than Harsiyotef, in only eight years to Harsiyotef ’s thirty-five. Török (Eide et al. 1996:501) notes that the numbers of cattle from some campaigns are astonishing—over 500,000—but says that they may not be implausible because the people were cattle breeders.14 The Napatan state in the 4th century bce was under pressure from the desert and the north, and unable to take advantage of the large-scale conflicts in the Mediterranean World.

Intra-African Relations Little is known of the intra-African relations of the Kushite state. As noted above, campaigns against adjacent peoples of the desert are documented repeatedly.15 The scale of operations, not just in animals, but also people, is significant. In the time of Amannoteerike (Eide et al. 1996:403(71)), the desert dwellers from the north entered the nome (of Meroe?) with cattle and families. Harsiyotef did not give numbers for his captives, but Nastasen (Eide et al. 1996:488(84)) gives 2,236 women from Mekhindekennete. While he does not give numbers of people for other campaigns, the numbers of cattle and other animals are comparable and comparable also to the numbers in the campaign of Ezana against the Bedja and even the numbers in the army that opposed Piankhy (8,000) and of casualties at Kawa in the campaign of Psamtek (4,200; B. Williams, Chapter 22, this volume). These numbers are very small compared, for example with the numbers of exiles in Assyrian records. However, they do indicate, both from cattle and people, that the peoples of the deserts were organized into larger groups than families, and that they had well-identified leaders and commanders proudly named by their Kushite captors. Archaeology in the areas away from the Nile is in its infancy, but a few finds are of interest. In the Wadi Howar 120 km west of the Dongola Reach is a major Napatan period fortress, Qala Abu Ahmad (modern name) which served as an outpost, and probable trade center, early in the Napatan or even Intermediate period (Jesse, this volume). In the Bayuda, well away from the Nile, were some Napatan Kushite buildings, complete with columns. They existed for only a short time, were burnt, and not rebuilt (Kendall  2007). The campaigns are frequently characterized as rebellions, and their leaders named. A number were said to be invasions, of Kawa, the temple of Bastet to the south, and even Meroe, but a number seem to have taken place in the homeland of the “rebel,” leading one to suspect that these were at least partly predatory expeditions for loot in slaves, cattle, and gold. Little archaeology actually belonging to people in the deserts clearly relates them to Kush. One major group of gold objects with an emerald from the Eastern Desert very likely dates to this period, rather than Meroitic times.16 Relations with the Ethiopian Plateau are also difficult to identify.17 To the south, a very large body of material, much belonging to this period, was excavated at Jebel Moya. The culture is very different from Napatan Kush, but a few objects indicate trade.18 In the highly complex cultural and linguistic environment of Sudan, autonomous traditions are to be expected.

The Napatan Neo-Kushite State 2   439 The current state of knowledge is quite limited, but it can be said that the monumental civilization of Napatan Kush was centered and based on the Nile, both from inscriptions and actual remains. It maintained outposts to the west, in the Bayuda and the Wadi Howar, the fortress being quite durable. To the east, relations were contested and conflicts and predation were recorded both toward the Nile and away. Relations to the south, notably at Jebel Moya, seem to have been trade. In later, Meroitic times, Kush expanded east of the Nile, and apparently upstream, at least on the Blue Nile, but two major differences separate the geopolitical situation of Kush from the other great states that emerged in Africa west of the Ethiopian Plateau. At all times, Kush was absolutely centered on the Nile, even when such centers as Naga (Naqa) and Musawwarat es-Sufra were built some 50 and 25 km from the river respectively, an orbit they never tried to escape. Thus, it was not given to the expansions and contractions of the Sudanic imperial states. Second, Kush was sustained in what I have called here a stable dynastic and cultural succession for a millennium or more, a record not only unrivalled in Saharan Africa, but rivalled elsewhere, perhaps, only by the Venetian Republic.

The Constitution of the State At Aspelta’s accession, there were six Commanders of the Army, six Commanders and Overseers of Fortresses, six Overseers of Documents, and seven officials who were Overseers of Seals of the Estate of the King (Eide et al. 1994:234–35). These acted as a kind of council that spoke to the army after the death of the king wanting their lord to appear. The army insisted that their lord was present but they did not know who it was. Ra, however has appointed a ruler, his son, and the army demands to go to Amen-Ra in Jebel Barkal, God of Kush, because nothing can be accomplished without him. The commandants and companions of the palace (officials) went to the temple and found the prophets and major wab-priests standing outside. After appealing to them, the priests and officials entered the temple and appealed to the god. They placed the king’s brothers before the god, but he did not choose one; a second time, they placed Aspelta before the god and the god accepted him as king (nesu). Amun-Ra says that he was son of the king and the king’s sister, king’s mother, mistress of Kush, whose mothers were king’s sisters going back six generations, names erased but no evidence of cartouches or room for any other titles. They were therefore royals (King’s Daughters), but probably not queens.19 The commanders and officials praise Amun-Ra, after which Aspelta entered and received the crowns said to be of his brother Anlamani. After suitable speeches, Aspelta appeared before the army, which acclaimed him as king. As always in pharaonic culture, and especially since Papyrus Westcar, pharaoh was a son of god—Ra or Amun-Ra—and selected, elected, and legitimized by him. The texts make clear that the true pharaoh already exists when the army says that he is among them but they do not know who he is. When he confronts the god in the temple, he is identified; the selection happened before. Sometimes in Kush, the succession was

440   Bruce BEYER Williams between brothers giving the appearance of being matrilineal, and sometimes it appears patrilineal,20 although there is no clear statement of succession other than divine election. In a secular analysis, the real selection would have been made from royals in the army by the council indicated above, with the collaboration of the priests and acclamation of the army. These pillars of the state—a kind of estates general—would have acted without reference to the people. The most likely candidates would have been in the royal family, especially an heir designate who could hold a throne in dangerous times, for example someone with military experience. Dangerous times they were, certainly the earlier era through Aspelta, and later from Amannote-erike to the 3rd century bce. We have only this one document that describes this complex process, but if it was regular, then it would go far toward explaining the astonishing longevity of the Kushite state, because it balanced the major interests of the kingdom. We have heard of commanders, high officials, the army, and the priesthood,21 to whom we could add king’s sisters appointed to positions in the temples of some power. At the bottom of the social heap were captives assigned as servants, and we hear in the texts only of those assigned to temples as donations.22 Perhaps above them, we hear of places (villages?, towns?) assigned as property to the temples, with their people, presumably unfree.23 The records tell us almost nothing of those not in the attested categories. Later, the prosopography of a lower official class is better known, from Meroitic inscriptions. In this period cemeteries of Sanam,24 Missiminia,25 Begrawiya West and South (Dunham 1963), and a few others (Lohwasser 2008, v. 2:3–14) tell us that they existed, but they do not inform us of ranks, titles, or functions.

The Economy of Kush If the records of Harsiyotef and Nastasen are to be believed, the resources in cattle, sheep, and goats of Kush proper and surrounding regions were immense in relation to the population.26 Agriculture must have included grains, even though the arable land was much more restricted than in the Thebaid of Egypt. Villages belonging to temples and royal estates indicate that it was partly performed by unfree labor.27 Dates had already been cultivated in the New Kingdom. The magazines of Sanam and Debeira show that trade was important, and the remains of ivory at the former clearly indicate the nature of the products of inner Africa were central. Horses were apparently also exported, as in the New Kingdom. We do not know if slaves were part of the  northward traffic at this period, since the records are only royal inscriptions.28 In return, Kush received manufactures, especially industrially produced pottery, wine, even from western Asia, and, if the outsized granaries in the east of Dorginarti fort are any clue, grain.29 After Aspelta, there was a change in activity by the state. We see little evidence of building, and by the late 5th century bce, Amannote-erike, in his inscription, pays a great deal of attention to repairs to neglected temples and the restoration of property

The Napatan Neo-Kushite State 2   441 that had apparently been usurped or taken away, including villages and people, as well as movables. These restorations continued under Harsiyotef. In the early 1st millennium bce, a revolutionary new technology appeared in Kush: iron. It was smelted, and probably manufactured into implements and weapons in the region of Meroe (Humphris, this volume). Despite the fact that it rusts away, it has appeared in northern Nubia (Williams 1990) and in all the cemetery sites of size belonging to the Napatan period; the objects are fairly numerous. Despite its ephemeral character when buried, the tomb of a soldier at Tombos (Smith  2007) produced several javelins and a spearhead, demonstrating that its use had spread to the regular army, most likely for its normal equipment. While the significance of Kush in the Iron Age transformation of Africa has yet to be determined, the importance of iron, and its manufacture in Kush, is certain.

Napatan Kushite Culture and Egypt The intimate and even symbiotic relationship between Kush in the Napatan period and Egypt has been the most persistent topic in Nubian Studies. It is a major topic of discussion in every conference where Napatan culture is discussed, and the subject of shelves of books and bins of articles.30 It has taken two general directions. After Lepsius verified that the visible Kushite monuments were later, not earlier than the oldest in Egypt, a reaction set in and opinion predominated that Kush was a mere imitation of Egypt and a not very competent one at that (Breasted 1911:382–83), although certain monuments, such as the Piankhy Stela, always engendered respect (Breasted 1911:370). After the High Dam rescue, renewed research, especially in art history, began to see not only elements of originality but also a pursuit of quality that led into the great achievements of the Saite period.31 By now, almost all aspects of the civilization have been scrutinized to determine the relationship between Kush and Egypt. In the three-century-long Intermediate period, we have only the inscription of Katimala to inform us about formal culture and, probably the stele of Ari (B. Williams, Chapter 22, this volume). The representations clearly look to Ramesside models, as does the language, although there are interesting, probably local, differences.32 By this time in the Third Intermediate Period, Egyptian language and art had moved on in different directions (Török 1997a:189). What is said is unique, but some elements in the narrative point clearly to the Piankhy Stela and its successors, yet her discussion with the council reminds us of Kamose before the attack on Avaris and Rameses at Qadesh. However, she began a tradition that Piankhy perfected and was followed through Nastasen that has no parallel in Egypt (Pope, this volume). The special relation between Kush and Egypt is most prominently displayed in formal art (Yellin, this volume). Very much like the situation at the beginning of the New Kingdom, the Intermediate period and Napatan period seem to have been ages of cultural diversity as reflected in burial customs.33 Where we have evidence, in the north, Egyptian and Egyptianized res-

442   Bruce BEYER Williams idents, especially in the area of temple towns, such as Amara West and Kawa, were present as successors to the New Kingdom.34 The dates are difficult, but in some locations, as the Tombos tumulus cemetery and SJE site 176, Nubian (geographical) graves exist that seem to have been for newcomers.35 At the high end of the social scale, the El-Kurru cemetery shows a progression from tumulus to pyramid (Dunham 1950:121–24). The pyramid was certainly an Egyptian development but its adoption in Nubia was that of the narrow, tall New Kingdom pyramid used for private tombs. This appeared in Nubia first as a development from the tumulus at Serra East in the early 18th Dynasty (Williams 1993:150–52, pl. 3, 2017), demonstrating an early equivalence of tumulus and pyramid that was repeated in the reign of Piankhy. As was the case in the early New Kingdom—actually beginning slightly earlier—Egyptian-style burial customs and manufactures were adopted in Kush quite widely. In the beginning, the burials of Kushites, as opposed to Egyptians of the succession or new immigrants from elsewhere in Nubia, were very often flexed in shafts with holes at the corners or trenches at the ends, a revival of the bed-type burial from Kerma times. Pottery and small objects were already imported, but Egyptian-type objects were also produced in Nubia, often with distinctively local features (Vila 1980:18–32). By shortly after Piankhy, burials were regularly extended and some even had coffins, or at least elaborate bead nets. Even pyramids were constructed, at least at Tombos (Smith 2007) and probably Soleb, possibly elsewhere. Coffin-type burials became the rule, and offering tables were occasionally provided (Vila  1980:111, 114, figs. 103–108, for example). All of these features were Egyptianizing, but overwhelmingly they differed from contemporary Egypt. Accounting for the maintenance of cultural distinction from Egypt in Nubia and for the thoroughgoing adoption of an Egyptian or Egyptianizing culture has been a problem. One solution was asserted by Frankfort and put forward in more explicit detail by me. It proposed that the different religious cultures reflected in art and archaeology were actually polarities of a shared religious impulse that places responsibility for maintaining an ordered world on a representative incarnation of the transcendent universal power, in Kush and Egypt, a god, the chosen son of Amun-Ra.36

Conclusion From the time of Piankhy through Tanwetamani, Kush had operated on an imperial scale, with the full resources of Egypt, enough to contest supremacy in alliance with others, against Assyria. Large-scale geopolitics were the major concern. After expulsion from Egypt, the scale of operation shrank drastically, such that the great officers of state appear to have numbered twenty-five. Rather later Kush was under threat; we hear of invasions and rebellions from the desert and steppe,37 always successfully repelled, so we are told, and campaigns to the north are limited to battling “rebels” in Lower Nubia and the Aswan region. There is a contrast between the conditions of Old Kush, where the state sat on the crossroads that led far to the west, east, and south, to a more defensive concentration on the Nile as the Napatan period wore on. Later, in the Meroitic period,

The Napatan Neo-Kushite State 2   443 Kush would again push outward, into the Butana and northward, into Lower Nubia, creating new centers of population and monumentality.

Notes 1. Yellin 2015; this results in a different sequence for the change in the royal burials than that presented by Török (1997a:300). Instead of an oscillation Nuri–El-Kurru–Nuri–Barkal, Nuri ends with Nastasen, then there is a brief experimental period with Ku. 1 and Bar. 11 etc. before the burial place was moved to Meroe. 2. Wolf and Nowotnick (this volume) see the move of the burial place to Meroe as dynastic change. 3. Pope (this volume). Texts are so few that attempts to establish the first or last example are futile. 4. Also used to indicate other parts of Africa and even India. Down to the end of the 4th century, Herodotus’s comments were the most extensive and those were relatively brief. Note that I use the term Aithiopia(n) when referring to a Classical author, Ethiopian when dealing with other references to inner-Africans in English who are not clearly distinguished by region or ethnicity. 5. For a masterful and detailed analysis of Herodotus and his discussions of Nubia and Northeast Africa generally, see Török 2014. The details cited in Eide et al. (1994, 1996) are echoed in this work, but much more directed toward a philosophy of history. 6. Eide et al. 1994:56–65; see especially a partial bibliography, pp. 302–303. Section numbering varies, so only citations to Eide et al. (1994, 1996) appear here. 7. Török 2014:26. 8. The bow held by an Ethiopian on a black-figure vase in the Metropolitan museum is recurved in the manner of a composite bow and also has the bindings expected on such a bow (Snowden  1970: fig. 18). Note that this highly credible representation pre-dates Xerxes, probably by more than a generation, indicating a familiarity with Africans that shows a continuing stream of trans-Saharan movement. 9. The tomb S 24 at Meroe where the famous Sotades Rhyton was found (Dunham 1963:383–90; Török 2014:26) dates to the early Meroitic period almost two centuries after the production of the vessel; it is a wealthy, but non-royal tomb. These circumstances make it far more likely that the rhyton was an antique pillaged or sold off after the fall of Persia than some kind of gift to Kush. 10. For the Rehres, see Eide et al. 1996:401(71) (Amannote-erike), no. 78:448, and 451–452 (all Harsiyotef). In the first instance they enter the nome of Meroe with their large and small cattle. In year 18 of Harsiyotef, the Rehresa entered Meroe under command of a certain Kh[a]raw, very likely, a Khara name noted later as Blemmye/Bedja (Rilly, this volume). In year 23, the invasion was repeated by an Arwawa or Irwawa (and a certain Sahkara). For the wider history of the period, see Ruzicka 2012 and Wojciechowska 2016, especially ch. 1: Chronology. 11. The original Bagoas was involved in Artaxerxes’s invasion of Egypt, but was forced to take poison at court after he presumably killed Artaxerxes, the invasion occurring 343–342 (Ruzica 2012:176–98) or 340/339 (Wojciechowska 2016:53; for the death of Artaxerxes, 75). 12. Ruzica 2012, pp. 200–202, for example. Dating a marriage contract to Nectanebo at Edfu does not necessarily mean he controlled the town. 13. The chronology of events during Persia’s reconquest of Egypt is uncertain. No Kushite source refers to Nectanebo II’s flight to Ethiopia after his defeat by Artaxerxes III.

444   Bruce BEYER Williams Wojciechowska 2016:55–57. Records of the Jewish garrison at Elephantine cease early in the 4th century. 14. These figures roughly correspond to cattle taken from the Bedja (Bougaeitoi) by Ezana ca. 350 ce, 3,112 cattle, 6,224 sheep (Bernand 1982:107). In 2014, South Sudan had about 11.7 million cattle for 13 million people according to the Ministry of Agriculture. Amongst the Nuer (Evans-Pritchard 1940), expected bridewealth was forty head of cattle, but actually twenty to thirty, sixteen being the minimum; in 1923, Jackson reported thirteen to fifteen, but earlier up to forty was not unusual; Coriat said the Gaawar wanted fifty head, but later fifteen or thirty. 15. The peoples are variously named, with several, especially Meded, that appear related to Medjay. Later relations can also be inferred. For example, one Egyptian papyrus from 513 (Rylands IX, 5/2–5; Eide et al. 1994: no. 50) records a Blemmye named Wahibre-mer, an early attestation. See above n. 7; if the chief of the Reheresa who invaded Meroe has a Blemmye name, then it is likely that this complex of peoples appear under both larger umbrella designations, Blemmye (and related), and Meded-Medjay (and related), with various names for localities and subdivisions. For a similar situation much earlier note the different rulerships of the Medjay in the Execration Texts (B. Williams, Chapter 10, this volume, Table 10.1, and a certain Medja coincidentally named Wah-ib). The ancient scribes made no attempt to be consistent or systematic. 16. Castiglione et al 1998:160–61 and 172–73. The unique set of objects appear more Napatan than Meroitic and probably are booty from a raid against a temple as recorded in the stelae. 17. Hatke (2013:18–24) generally summarizes the situation, which contrasts with the earlier environment of wide contacts. See M. Williams, this volume. 18. Williams 1990: fig. 10a vs Addison 1949: pl. L:2. Other Jebel Moya scarabs and plaques belong to the general style of Sanam-Qustul. See also Wejat eyes (Williams 1990: fig. 10h–j and Addison 1949: pl. 49:1–6 as well as ram’s heads 20–22). Arrowheads (Heidorn n.d. vs Addison 1949: pl. 81, especially below) and some microliths (Addison 1949: pl. 83:30–33 and 36–38) may compare with the arrow-point complexes of Tombos. See Addison 1949: pl. 108:10 vs Sanam pottery, for example. 19. See Grimal 1981: pl. VII. Erasures included not just Aspelta, but his father in addition to the series of female ancestors; they were destroying him and all his named family, and not singling out a special female legitimation. 20. See Török, 1997:215–41 on legitimation. 21. Eide et al. 1994:39, 259–68. Eleven officials are named on the adoption stela, where the benefices given Madikenen daughter of Nasalsa by King Amani[ ]ru are devolved on Kheb, daughter of Madikenen, witnessed by thirteen priests and two scribes. For a list of named officials in the Early Napatan period, see Pope  2004:146–47, Table A and more generally 145–50. 22. Eide et al. 1996:406–407, 410, 420(71). See Pope 2004, especially 144–45, for persons as donations in the Sanam inscription of Taharqo. 23. See n. 27 below. 24. Griffith 1923; Lohwasser 2008, especially v. III.3.5–6:297–306; Lohwasser 2010, especially pp. 135–45. 25. Vila  1980. The prominent cemetery Abri is in an area assumed to be poor during this period (Pope 2004:174–80). Most remains on the West Bank in the Second Cataract area presented as “Pharaonic” (or New Kingdom; Nordström 2014:121–43) appear to be early

The Napatan Neo-Kushite State 2   445 Napatan. Given that East Bank Cemetery 176 was also (early) 1st millennium, the region did have an occupation. 26. Compare ratios of cattle to people in booty. Nastasen (Eide et al. 1996: 487–88) archers sent against Mekhindekennete got 2,236 women, 209,659 cattle, and 505,349 livestock, presumably sheep and goats. The totals are surprising, but precise, and given bridewealth values in the last century, not unbelievable. 27. Eide et al. 1996:487(84); Nastasen, villages or regions of Reteqe and Wepes for Amun-Ra of Napata. 28. Eide et al. 1996:487(84); Nastasen gives 200 people, 110 women to Amun-Ra of Napata as a share; on an earlier occasion 200 men. Since they are listed with livestock, they must be slaves. The 2,236 women taken from Mekhindekennete are also listed with livestock and were, therefore, commodities. He took women on most occasions during campaigns, so the total for the reign would have been substantial. Burstein (1995) also remarks on the trade, especially to note the sparseness of evidence in ancient times although it was also persistent. See Smith, this volume, for earlier examples. 29. The large organized granaries in the east appear to have commercial and military significance. 30. See, for example Török 1997a and 2002; Lohwasser 2008, 2010:121–25, for example. 31. Török 2011; also a recurrent theme throughout Török 1997a. 32. Darnell 2006:11, 48. Possibly derived from Ramesside temples in Nubia rather than Egypt. 33. Williams  1990:29–44. As developed in Heidorn  n.d., evidence shows that Intermediate period burials as well as Dorginarti fortress existed. 34. Binder 2011; Nordström 2014:134–37; Welsby 2017. 35. Säve-Söderbergh ed. 1989 200–205: pl. 36. The incised vessels H5L are a type that appears at El-Kurru and the pilgrim bottles include post–New Kingdom types. See Smith 2006–2007. 36. Frankfort 1978:6; Williams 1991; Török 1997a:189–341 generally;. 37. The threats likely contributed to the Meroitic expansion. See Pope 2014:157 n. 226. The later Napatan Kushite state apparently did not successfully spread outward from the Nile to the extent it did later in the Meroitic period.

References Cited Addison, F. 1949 Jebel Moya: The Wellcome Excavations in the Sudan. Oxford University Press. Bernand, E. 1982 Nouvelle versions de la campagne du Roi Ezana contre les Bedja. Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik 45:105–14. Binder, M. 2011 The 10th–9th century BC—New Evidence from Cemetery C of Amara West. Sudan & Nubia 15:39–53. Breasted, J.H. 1911 A History of the Ancient Egyptians. Charles Scribner’s Sons. Burstein, S. 1995 The Nubian Slave Trade in Antiquity: A Suggestion. In Graeco-Africana: Studies in the History of Greek Relations with Egypt and Nubia, by S. Burstein, pp. 195–205. Caratzas. Castiglioni, Al., An. Castiglioni, and J.  Vercoutter 1998 Das Goldland der Pharaonen. Die Entdeckung von Berenike Pancrisia. Philipp von Zabern. Darnell, J. 2006 The Inscription of Queen Katimala at Semna: Textual Evidence for the Origins of the Napatan State. Yale Egyptological Studies 7. Yale Egyptological Seminar.

446   Bruce BEYER Williams Dunham, D. 1950 El Kurru. Royal Cemeteries of Kush 1. Harvard University Press. ——— 1957 Royal Tombs of Meroe and Barkal. Royal Cemeteries of Kush 4. Museum of Fine Arts. ——— 1963 The West and South Cemeteries at Meroë. Royal Cemeteries of Kush 5. Museum of Fine Arts. Eide, T., T.  Hägg, R.H.  Pierce, and L.  Török eds. 1994 Fontes Historiae Nubiorum: Textual Sources for the History of the Middle Nile Region between the Eighth Century BC and the Sixth Century AD, v. 1: From the Eighth to the Mid-Fifth Century BC. Department of Classics, University of Bergen. ——— 1996 Fontes Historiae Nubiorum: Textual Sources for the History of the Middle Nile Region between the Eighth Century BC and the Sixth Century AD, v. 2: From the Mid-Fifth to the First Century BC. Department of Greek, Latin and Egyptology, University of Bergen. Emberling, G. 2015 Excavation of Pyramid Ku. 1. Sudan & Nubia 19:60–62. Evans-Pritchard, E.E. 1940 The Nuer: A Description of the Modes of Livelihood and Political Institutions of a Nilotic People. Clarendon. Frankfort, H. 1978 Kingship and the Gods, second edition. University of Chicago Press. Griffith, F.L. 1923 Oxford Excavations in Nubia XVIII: The Cemetery of Sanam. University of Liverpool Annals of Archaeology and Anthropology 10:73–171. Grimal, N. 1981 La stele triomphale de Pi(‘ankh)y au Musée du Caire JE 48862 et 47086–47089. Mémoires de l’Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale du Caire 105. Hatke, G. 2013 Aksum and Nubia: Warfare, Commerce, and Political Fictions in Ancient Northeast Africa. New York University Press. Heidorn, L. n.d. Excavations at Dorginarti, James E. Knudstad, Director, Part 1: The Second Cataract Fortress of Dorginarti. University of Chicago Oriental Institute Nubian Expedition 14. The Oriental Institute. Kendall, T. 2007 Evidence for a Napatan Occupation of the Wadi Muqaddam: Excavations at al-Meragh in the Bayuda Desert (1999–2000). In Mélanges offerts à Francis Geus, ed. B. Gratien, pp. 197–204. Cahier de Recherches de l’Institut de Papyrologie et d’Égyptologie de Lille 26. Lohwasser, A. 2008 Archäologisches Inventar und funeräre Praxis im Friedhof von Sanam. Perspektiven einer kulturhistorischen Interpretation. Habilitationsschrift 2008. ——— 2010 The Kushite Cemetery of Sanam: A Non-Royal Burial Ground of the Nubian Capital, c. 800–600 BC. Golden House Publications. Nordström, H.-Å. 2014 The West Bank Survey from Faras to Gemai, v. 1: Sites of Early Nubian, Middle Nubian and Pharaonic Age. Sudan Archaeological Research Society Publication Number 21. BAR International Series 2650. Hadrian Books. Pope, J. 2004 The Double Kingdom under Taharqo. Culture and History of the Ancient Near East 69. Brill. ——— 2014 Beyond the Broken Reed: Kushite Intervention and the Limits of l’histoire événementielle. In Sennacherib at the Gates of Jerusalem: Story, History and Historiography, ed. I. Kalimi and S. Richardson, pp. 105–60. Culture and History of the Ancient Near East 71. Brill. Porten, B. et al. 1996 The Elephantine Papyri: Three Millennia of Cross-cultural Continuity and Change. Brill. Ruzicka, S. 2012 Trouble in the West: Egypt and the Persian Empire, 525-332 BCE. Oxford University Press. Säve-Söderbergh, T. ed. 1989 Middle Nubian Sites. The Scandinavian Joint Expedition to Sudanese Nubia 4. Paul Åstrom.

The Napatan Neo-Kushite State 2   447 Smith, S.T. 2006–2007 A New Napatan Cemetery at Tombos. In Mélanges offerts à Francis Geus, ed. B.  Gratien, pp. 347–52. Cahier de Recherches de l’Institut de Papyrologie et d’Égyptologie de Lille 26. ——— 2007 Death at Tombos: Pyramids, Iron, and the Rise of the Napatan Dynasty. Sudan & Nubia 11:2–14. Snowden, F.M. 1970 Blacks in Antiquity: Ethiopians in the Greco-Roman Experience. Belknap Press of Harvard University. Török, L. 1997a The Kingdom of Kush: Handbook of the Napatan-Meroitic Civilization. Handbuch der Orientalistik 1(31). Brill. ——— 1997b Meroe City: An Ancient African Capital. John Garstang’s Excavations in the Sudan. Egypt Exploration Society Occasional Publications 12. ——— 2002 The Image of the Ordered World in Ancient Nubian Art: The Construction of the Kushite Mind, 800 BC–300 AD. Probleme der Ägyptologie 18. Brill. ——— 2011 Adoption and Adaptation: The Sense of Culture Transfer between Ancient Nubia and Egypt. Hungarian Academy of Sciences. ——— 2014 Herodotus in Nubia. Mnemosyne Supplements 368. Brill. Vila, A. 1980 La prospection archéologique de la vallée du Nil au sud de la cataracte de Dal (Nubie soudanaise), 12: La nécropole de Missiminia 1: Les sepultures napatéennes. Centre Nationale de la Recherche Scientifique. Welsby, D. 1996 The Kingdom of Kush: The Napatan and Meroitic Empires. British Museum Press. ——— 2017 Gematon between the reigns of Ramses VI and Taharqa. In Nubia in the New Kingdom: Lived Experience, Pharaonic Control and Indigenous traditions, ed. N. Spencer, A. Stevens, and M. Binder, pp. 491–524. British Museum Publications on Egypt and Sudan 3. Peeters. Williams, B.B. 1990 Excavations between Abu Simbel and the Sudan Frontier, Keith C. Seele, Director, Part 7: Twenty-fifth Dynasty and Napatan Remains at Qustul: Cemeteries W and V. University of Chicago Oriental Institute Nubian Expedition 7. ——— 1991 A Prospectus for Exploring the Historical Essence of Ancient Nubia. In Egypt and Africa: Nubia from Prehistory to Islam, ed. W.V. Davies, pp. 74–91. British Museum Press. ——— 1993 Excavations at Serra East, George  R.  Hughes and James  E.  Knudstad, Directors, Parts 1–5: A-Group, C-Group, Pan-Grave, New Kingdom, and X-Group Remains from Cemeteries A-G and Rock Shelters. University of Chicago Oriental Institute Nubian Expedition 10. ——— 2017 The New Kingdom Town at Serra East and its Cemetery. In Nubia in the New Kingdom: Lived Experience, Pharaonic Control and Indigenous traditions, ed. N. Spencer, A. Stevens, and M. Binder, pp. 309–21. British Museum Publications on Egypt and Sudan 3. Peeters. Wojciechowska, A. 2016 From Amyrtaeus to Ptolemy: Egypt in the Fourth Century  B.C. Philippika 97. Harrassowitz. Yellin, J.W. 2015 The Pyramid Chapel Decorations of Ku.1. Sudan & Nubia 19:63–65. Zibelius-Chen, K. 1972 Afrikanische Orts und Völkernamen in hieroglyphischen und hieratischen Texten. Beihefte zum Tübinger Atlas des Vorderen Orients B1. Ludwig Reichert. ——— 1989 Überlegungen zur ägyptischen Nubienpolitik in der Dritten Zwischenzeit. Studien zur Altägyptischen Kultur 16:329–45.

chapter 24

J ebel Ba r k a l “Karnak” of Kush Timothy Kendall and El-Hassan Ahmed Mohamed

Introduction: Jebel Barkal and Ancient Napata In the mid-18th Dynasty the Egyptians fixed the upper limit of their settled frontier in Nubia at Jebel Barkal,1 a lone sandstone butte on the right bank of the Nile some 354 km upstream from Kerma and about 80 km up the reverse curve of the Nile’s Great Bend (Fig. 24.1). Rising abruptly 104 m from a nearly flat desert plain, it faces the river, presently about 1.5 km distant, with a sheer cliff 80 to 90 m high and approximately 250 m long. If its isolation and sharp profile are striking, it possesses another feature that made it a natural wonder in antiquity and gave it extraordinary religious and political significance. This is a towering, statue-like pinnacle, 75 m high, that projects from its south corner (Fig. 24.2). To the ancients this monolith was remarkable because, when viewed from different angles, it assumed different shapes that suggested the presence within it of different divine entities, which apparently combined to confirm for the Egyptians the presence here of their state god Amun in his many “manifestations.”2 From the moment the Egyptians set eyes on Jebel Barkal, they seem to have recognized in it the archetypal “Primeval Mound” of popular myth and to have declared it a birthplace of Amun of Karnak, as supreme Creator, whose chief cult center at Thebes lay 1,260 km (or two to three months’ boat journey) downriver. They called it by two names: Dju-wa’ab (“Pure Mountain”)3 and Neset/Nesut-Tawy (“Throne[s] of the Two Lands,” written either as a singular or plural) (Reisner and Reisner 1933a:35, l. 33; see n. 25 below). The latter name identified the hill retroactively as the “Throne[s] of the Two Lands” that had been part of the common epithet of Amun of Karnak—“Lord of the Throne[s] of the Two Lands”—since the time of Mentuhotep II, more than five hundred years earlier.4

450   Timothy Kendall and El-Hassan Ahmed Mohamed

Figure 24.1  Aerial view of Jebel Barkal, looking north across the Nile, with the Barkal pyramids visible at left. Reprinted by permission of the photographer, Enrico Ferorelli (photograph: 1989).

Figure 24.2  View of the Jebel Barkal cliff and pinnacle from the second court of the Great Amun Temple (B 500). Photograph: T. Kendall.

Jebel Barkal: “Karnak” of Kush   451 It is still unclear whether any permanent Egyptian settlement had existed at Jebel Barkal before Year 33 of Thutmose III, who is known to have led his army into this region about 1446–1444 bce to campaign further upstream against the Nubian polities Miu and Irem (W.V. Davies 2001:52; Kendall and El-Hassan Ahmed Mohamed 2017:156–59). In his Jebel Barkal Stela, erected in his year 47 (ca. 1432 bce), he described an Egyptian fort at the site, but he does not say whether he was its builder. Bradbury (1984–85:12) has proposed that the first builder was Thutmose I or II, which, if true, would suggest that the site had been occupied by the Egyptians throughout the entire joint reign of Hatshepsut and Thutmose III. The fort included a small temple for Amun, described as the god’s “rest house for eternity.” By the reign of Amenhotep II the fort had become a walled Egyptian settlement called “Napata” (Kendall and El-Hassan Ahmed Mohamed 2017:161–62) (which may have been built on or beside a pre-existing native Nubian town, called Deger or Degel).5 Napata’s main population center almost certainly lay on the right bank between Jebel Barkal and the Nile, but little archaeological work has yet been done here to clarify the settlement (Tucker and Emberling 2016). The town, which probably had satellite villages on the left bank, would have had little importance as a river port, for here, on the Nile’s reverse curve, the normally swift current, flowing SW, and the prevailing north wind would have conspired most of the year to keep boats downstream from reaching the town by sail or oar. Such ships could only have reached Napata by being towed laboriously from the banks. Aside from the town’s early defensive position as a barrier against hostile Nubian groups attempting to move downstream into Egyptian-held territory, its only other strategic significance for Egypt seems to have been that it lay at the main Nile crossing-point of a key overland caravan route connecting the Sixth Cataract region with the Third. At Napata, where this road intersected the river, there must have been an important ferry where goods from the south bank could be transferred to the north bank and stockpiled before being sent down to Egypt as part of the annual “tribute of Kush.” From its founding, however, Napata’s greatest importance for Egypt seems to have been as the host settlement of “Pure Mountain,” whose Amun sanctuary would ultimately become the most important (and most remote) in Egypt’s Nubian empire (Fig.  24.2). As a perceived primeval home of the Theban god, this sanctuary would become a conceptual twin of Karnak near what was for the Egyptians the upper limit of the earth. Jebel Barkal was a cultic outpost which, like all the other Amun sanctuaries further downstream, must have been operated by the Theban clergy on behalf of the central Theban religious establishment (Török 2009:228–29).

The Nature of Amun of Jebel Barkal The history of the Amun cult at Jebel Barkal probably begins with Thutmose I. In his year 2 (ca. 1504 bce), after destroying Kerma, he led his army upstream around the Great Bend of the Nile, passing Jebel Barkal and halting at the Hagar el-Merwa—a distance of

452   Timothy Kendall and El-Hassan Ahmed Mohamed about 570 km (Bradbury 1984–85; W.V. Davies 1998, 2001, 2005:51–52; Kendall 2007). There he placed an inscription with an image of Amun (solarized as “Amun-Ra”), depicted in a novel way as a ram-headed man, crowned with twin plumes and a sun disk. A secondary label adds the name of the god’s primeval, ithyphallic aspect “Amun-Ra Kamutef,” which personified the self-generating essence of divine kingship and was believed to father the king and his godlike essence, called “the royal ka” (Walker 1991:32–38; L. Bell 1997:178, 294 n. 110; W.V.  Davies  2001:48–52; Klotz  2006:125–28, 145–46). This is the earliest known representation of Amun in ram-headed guise, a form by which he would soon become familiar as the Amun of Jebel Barkal (and, later, in rare images, also as the Amun of Luxor Temple at Thebes [Pamminger 1992:99–115]). Nearly sixty years after his grandfather’s epic journey, Thutmose III would repeat it, re-inscribe the Hagar el-Merwa with a duplicate text and image of the god—again adding his alternate designation “Amun-Ra Kamutef ”—and at Jebel Barkal erect his Jebel Barkal Stela, the earliest known inscription from the site (Reisner and Reisner 1933a; W.V. Davies 2001:47–52). Its text states that the king dedicated it to Amun-Ra, called by his ancient Theban title neb Nesut-Tawy (“Lord of the Thrones of the Two Lands”), while making it clear that the same Amun dwelt inside Jebel Barkal, which, as he tells us, was itself called Nesut-Tawy “before it was known among men” (Reisner and Reisner 1933a:20, 33, 36–37). This last remark implies that when the Egyptians discovered this anomalous mountain at the upper limit of their empire, they identified it as the Neset/Nesut-Tawy (“Throne(s) of the Two Lands”), which for the past five centuries had regularly appeared in Amun’s title at Thebes—presumably “before (the mountain) was known among men.” This pseudo-historic designation linked Jebel Barkal firmly to Amun-Ra of Karnak (or Thebes) and indicated that it had been recognized both as a preeminent ancient residence of the god and as a Nubian manifestation of his central Theban sanctuary. In his Jebel Barkal stela Thutmose III informs us (l. 2) that the god was present at the mountain in two forms: one, by whose “guidance” the king seized the “Northerners,” and the other, called his “ka,” by whose “command” he seized the “Southerners.” These two forms were obviously those that had appeared back-to-back in the lunette, before their images were erased by the Atenists (Reisner and Reisner 1933a: pl. III). Although their figures are lost, we can be certain of their appearance because the same two forms of the god, always in the same directional relationship, were routinely depicted this way on so many later stelae and temple walls from Jebel Barkal (Fig. 24.3, left). From these we can be sure that the Amun on the left (indicating downstream, “north,” Egypt) was anthropomorphic (i.e., Amun’s most common Theban form) and that it was he who allowed the king to seize the “Northerners.” The Amun on the right (indicating upstream, “south,” Kush) was ram-headed and identical to the god depicted at the Hagar el-Merwa.6 His special association with Jebel Barkal is proven by his title, which escaped erasure: “. . . [he] who is in Pure Mountain.” It was this form of Amun, called the god’s “ka,” by whose command the king was said to have seized the “Southerners.”7 That he was a form of Kamutef (as he was so labeled at the Hagar el-Merwa) is suggested by evidence presented below.

Jebel Barkal: “Karnak” of Kush   453 As in Nubia, Amun also typically appeared in Egypt in two forms, but with a difference. One form, as above, was fully human, wearing a kilt and a crown from which rose two tall feathers and a sun disk. The other was a mummiform man, ithyphallic, with one arm upraised, bent at the elbow, supporting a flail (Fig. 24.3, center). If the first represented Amun as the universal god of Karnak (i.e., the “northern” Amun at Jebel Barkal), the latter was his primeval aspect, Min-Amun or Amun-Ra Kamutef—seemingly the Egyptian manifestation of the Nubian ram-headed Amun. Jebel Barkal was surely imagined as a home of both aspects of the Theban god, and, from the orientation of the Amun temples at Pnubs, Kawa, and Luxor, which were parallel to the Nile with their sanctuaries directed upstream, the mountain would appear to have been the real focus of the evolving Nubian Amun cult under the Egyptians. Unlike these temples, those at Jebel Barkal were not directed further upstream but towards the mountain itself, in which the god was thought to dwell. In l. 43 of the Jebel Barkal Stela, the Amun of the mountain is described as “the great god of the First Time, the primeval one who created [the king’s] beauty” (Reisner and Reisner 1933a:37). This was just as the king had described the Theban god back home (Cumming 1982:16). The implication is, thus, that the Amun of Jebel Barkal was viewed as a southern manifestation of the primeval form of the Theban Amun and that the two could speak and act for each other. The southern Amun, however, was probably perceived as the real Creator because he dwelt closest to the sources of life: the Nile headwaters. As such, he would also have been judged the true source of Egyptian kingship. The surviving texts associated with the erased images of the dual Amuns in the Jebel Barkal Stela appear to confirm this, for the Egyptian Amun (at left) is said to have granted Thutmose III “all lands and all foreign countries,” while his Nubian aspect at right is said to have granted him “the kingship of the Two Lands.” This statement is crucial to understanding Jebel Barkal’s future cultic and political significance, for, like its name Neset/Nesut-Tawy, it linked the mountain to “thrones” and kingship. Here Thutmose III could identify Amun’s local ram-headed form (at least for the benefit of the local inhabitants) as the source of his kingship, while in Egypt he knew that the same god, in his ithyphallic guise, had also granted it there. Why this god in Nubia conventionally appeared ram-headed rather than ithyphallic is still unclear. It is generally assumed that the ram form indicated a syncretization of the Egyptian Amun with a local, ram-headed, pre-conquest Nubian deity, and that the ram had particular associations with water, with the Nile, with fertility, with the sources of Creation, and, by extension, with the West (Kormysheva  2004:111–14; Rocheleau 2005:14–36; Török 2009:249–51 n. 329). However, the close association of the ram, the phallus, and Min is noted already in Coffin Text 967 (Faulkner 1978:III, 92). Much later Diodorus (1.88) wrote that the Egyptians “deified the goat, just as the Greeks are said to have honored Priapus, because of the generative member; for this animal has a very great propensity for copulation, and it is fitting that honor be shown to that member of the body, which is the cause of generation” (Oldfather 1960:303). The ram head and the phallus, thus, doubtless had similar procreative connotations.

Figure 24.3  (Left) The two forms of Amun believed to occupy Jebel Barkal: one anthropomorphic, identical to Amun of Karnak and symbolic of downstream, “north” (Egypt) and present time, and the other ram-headed, symbolic of upstream, “south” (Nubia) and primeval time (from the Stele of Harsiyotef, Cairo Museum.) Although their figures were erased on Thutmose III’s Jebel Barkal Stela by the Atenists, it was the god on the right that was said in preserved text to have granted the “kingship of the Two Lands”; (Center) The ithyphallic Kamutef, who shared functions with (and was probably an alternate aspect of) the ram-headed Nubian Amun as primeval Creator and progenitor of kingship (From the White Chapel of Senusret I at Karnak); (Right) A figure of Kamutef with a ram head, from Medinet Habu, room 40. Photographs: T. Kendall.

Jebel Barkal: “Karnak” of Kush   455 To ancient visitors, Jebel Barkal itself would have suggested that it was a residence of the god’s procreative aspect, for not only did it appear to be an archetype of the mythical “Primeval Mound” (Fig. 24.1), but its pinnacle would have evoked the god’s phallus.8 As recently as the early 20th century, some animist peoples living in the Nuba hills in Kordofan still venerated large tubular stones or upright rocks of phallic shape as sources of generative power and ancestors (G. Bell 1936; Bolton 1936:99). Given the colossal scale of the Jebel Barkal pinnacle, one would suspect that, long before the Egyptians arrived on the scene, the mountain was the center of a major Nubian fertility cult—although, admittedly, no archaeological proof of this has yet been found. It is, nevertheless, a fact that the Amun hymn of Papyrus Boulaq 17, which dates from Dynasty 17 or ­earlier,9 already placed Kamutef, as Creator and source of kingship, in Punt and at the headwaters of the Nile, where he was imagined to have originated and to have first appeared in coronation as king (Pritchard  1969:365; Assmann  1995:120–21; Luiselli 2004).10 With this text, and its early date, one naturally wonders if Jebel Barkal was already well known by the Egyptians and had already been recognized by them as the center of an ancient Nubian cult linked to Min. Gabolde (this volume) has doubted the existence of Amun in Nubia prior to the Egyptian conquest because his name does not occur there, but we need not assume by this that there was not already an ancient Min-like Nubian deity at Jebel Barkal. As suggested by Papyrus Boulaq 17 and by the so-called Nubian spells of the Book of the Dead (BD 162–65), a native ithyphallic Creator god may already have existed there under one or more native Nubian names (T.G.  Allen  1974:156–61; Kendall  2008:137–39)—a god whom, after the conquest, the Egyptians would have merged with Amun. If the above-named texts suggest that Jebel Barkal was linked to an ithyphallic form of Amun, a crude rock drawing, cut on a natural panel high on the mountain’s western slope (Fig. 24.4) seems to prove it. The scene is one of many surviving ancient depictions of Jebel Barkal, referenced below, in which the mountain is shown as a god’s residence fronted by a rearing uraeus. In this particular scene, the mountain appears as a stepped rectangle, inside which the great god sits enthroned, while the pinnacle is shown crudely as a uraeus with a ram’s head and a single upraised human arm, supporting a flail. The sketch turns the serpentine pinnacle into an embodiment of Kamutef, subtly associating the rearing cobra form with the god’s erect phallus. A bronze statuette of a rearing uraeus

Figure 24.4  Rock drawing on Jebel Barkal showing Amun-Ra enthroned within the mountain, while before him rises a ram-headed uraeus with arm upraised, supporting a flail, in the manner of Kamutef. Photograph and drawing: T. Kendall.

456   Timothy Kendall and El-Hassan Ahmed Mohamed with ram’s head, found in temple B 700, apparently belongs to this same genre (Wildung 1997:199–200). In the Middle Kingdom Amun was conceptually merged with the ancient sun-god Ra-Atum of Heliopolis, who was sometimes pictured as an ithyphallic Min (Lacau and Chevrier  1969: pl. 2; Gabolde  2013:29–30). This syncretization allowed Amun, as Amun-Ra, to absorb Atum’s role in the Heliopolitan creation myth of the Primeval Mound (Walker 1991:1–21). Just as Thebes had come to be called “Southern Heliopolis” in early Dynasty 18 (Gabolde 1998:143), so had Jebel Barkal, as a rediscovered Nubian manifestation of Thebes, come to be identified as “Heliopolis” at about the same time (Kendall 2008:125 n. 16). Obviously its shape as a “Primeval Mound” and its phallicshaped pinnacle would have convinced ancient visitors of its association with Atum, who, according to popular myth, after pulling himself out of the Nun (i.e., the waters that covered the earth at the beginning of time) and up onto the Mound (i.e., the first land that appeared), took his phallus in his hand, masturbated, and, by this act, selfgenerated the first gods, the brother-sister pair, Shu and Tefnut, who became the ancestors of all the other gods (Faulkner 1969:198 [PT 527]). Not surprisingly, Shu and Tefnut would both play outsized roles at Jebel Barkal in connection with the myth of the “Eye of Ra,” the goddess embodied in the Creator’s uraeus, the form of which was plainly visible in the pinnacle (Kendall 2008:126 n. 27; Török 2009:338). That Atum and Kamutef were at times understood to be the same god is made clear from certain key texts (e.g., Pritchard 1969:365–67; Assmann 1995:130–31). These imagine a god that was at once primeval Creator and first king, who engendered the living king, who himself becomes the god’s “statue . . . placed upon the earth” (B. Davies 1992:12). At Jebel Barkal, we see, the pinnacle is not only a phallic essence but also a vague image of a royal statue, crowned with a White Crown (Fig. 24.5). To ancient onlookers, one suspects, this would have “proven” that the mountain was not only the site of Creation but also the place where the god first appeared as king, and where kingship itself and the “royal ka” were first engendered—both being indivisible aspects of Kamutef. In art, Jebel Barkal was always depicted as a cut-away mountain fronted by a uraeus, which either hung from the cliff top or rose from its base. Inside the mountain Amun (or sometimes Ra, Shu, or Khonsu, with or without a goddess) was depicted standing or enthroned. The mountain itself could also be shown entirely as a snake overarching the god within.11 To ancient eyes, the pinnacle looked like a uraeus. When viewed from its west side, it looked like a uraeus crowned with a sun disk (Fig. 24.6): that is, the god’s uraeus. When viewed from its east side, it looked like a uraeus wearing the White Crown: that is, the king’s uraeus. The earliest complete image of Jebel Barkal shown in this way dates to Rameses II and appears at Abu Simbel (Fig. 24.7). That this was a well-known contem­ porary image-type of the mountain, however, is suggested by a faience inlay from B 600, dating probably to Thutmose IV, which shows the same Amun enthroned inside the same slope-fronted mountain, now with Mut standing behind him. Unfortunately its uraeus element has been lost (Dunham 1970: pl. LVI, C).

Figure 24.5  Although the pinnacle is never explicitly represented in art as a royal statue, there is ample textual evidence to suggest that it was thought to conceal a king’s figure, variously identified as Osiris, Atum, or Amun as “ka” (Kendall 2008:136–43). At right is the funerary stela, from Nuri, of King Senkamanisken represented as Osiris. Khartoum, Sudan National Museum. Reprinted by permission of the photographer Enrico Ferorelli (photograph: 1989).

Figure 24.6  (Left) The pinnacle at Jebel Barkal seen from the west. (Right) The same view rendered by the sculptors of Taharqo on the NE wall of the first rock-cut room in B 300. Here the king and queen make offerings to the enthroned “Amun-Ra, Lord of the Throne of the Two Lands, who is in Pure Mountain,” with the goddess Mut standing behind him. The god appears ram-headed because he is viewed from downstream looking upstream. The pinnacle is shown, as it actually appears, as a uraeus hanging from the cliff, wearing a sun disk (or orb) on its head. Photograph: T. Kendall. Drawing: Robisek 1989:5.

Jebel Barkal: “Karnak” of Kush   459 In Egyptian the words for “uraeus” and “eye” were nearly identical and so formed puns on each other, and in religious contexts came to mean the same thing (Kendall 2008:126 n. 26). Thus, when the pinnacle appeared as the god’s uraeus, it was known as the “Eye of Ra” and was imagined to embody any one or all of the great goddesses associated with the god’s uraeus, especially Hathor and Mut (or their leonine aspects Tefnut and Sekhmet) (Kendall 2008:126 n. 27). Their temples, B 200 and 300 (and their 18th Dynasty predecessor B 300-sub), were all built just below and on the west side of the pinnacle, from which vantage the rock looked most like the “Eye of Ra” (Fig. 24.6). With the pinnacle understood to be the “Eye of Ra,” Jebel Barkal naturally became the southern focus of the famous Egyptian legend of the “Eye,” in which the main protagonists were the first children of Amun-Ra (as Atum): Shu and Tefnut. According to the story, Tefnut, as her father’s protective “Eye/Uraeus,” left him in a fit of rage after they quarreled and took up residence in distant Nubia. Helpless without her, he dispatched his son Shu to find her, pacify her, and bring her back to Egypt, which he did. Upon her return, the “Eye”—the goddess in cobra form—again mounted on her father’s forehead as his protective uraeus (Darnell  1998; Kendall  2008:126 n. 27; Török 2009:338 n. 139). When the pinnacle appeared crowned with the White Crown, it became a royal uraeus, known as the “Eye of Horus.” This “Eye” was the royal uraeus goddess Nekhbet, goddess of Upper Egypt (Fig. 24.7). Interestingly, the destroyed temple in front of the pinnacle (B 1100) seems to have been dedicated not only to Nekhbet but also to her

Figure 24.7  (Left) The pinnacle at Jebel Barkal seen from the east. (Right) The same view rendered by the sculptors of Ramses II on the south wall of the Great Hall of his temple at Abu Simbel. Here, represented presiding over the southern limit of the empire, “Amun-Ra, Lord of the Thrones of the Two Lands, Foremost in Karnak” is shown sitting inside Jebel Barkal, with the pinnacle rendered as a royal uraeus crowned with the White Crown. The god is anthropomorphic because he is seen from upstream looking downstream, towards Egypt. Photograph: T. Kendall. Drawing: P.D. Manuelian, reproduced with permission of P.D. Manuelian.

460   Timothy Kendall and El-Hassan Ahmed Mohamed counterpart in Lower Egypt, Wadjet. This suggests that when seen from the west (i.e., downstream = “north”) side, the pinnacle was also perceived to be a cobra wearing the Red Crown (Fig.  24.6, left). The sanctuaries of these goddesses of the king’s crown were known respectively as the “Great House” and “House of Flame” and were those into which the kings went during their coronations to receive their crowns and uraei.12 First built of talatat blocks in the 18th Dynasty, the same temple was rebuilt in Napatan and again in Meroitic times, showing that coronation rituals were held here in front of the pinnacle (i.e., the “royal uraeus” or “double uraeus”) by both Egyptian and Kushite kings for at least sixteen centuries. Jebel Barkal, which appeared most conspicuously to have a royal uraeus wearing a White Crown on its cliff (Fig.  24.7), must have proclaimed Napata to be the formal southern limit of Upper Egypt.13 Nekhbet, the goddess of Upper Egypt, had her primary northern sanctuary at Elkab/Nekheb (which lay across the river from Nekhen [Hierakonpolis]). That Jebel Barkal was indeed considered the southern limit of an “Upper Egypt” that included all of Kush appears to be confirmed by the tomb biography of Amenhotep-Huy, Tutankhamun’s Viceroy of Kush, where his authority is stated to have extended from “Nekhen to Nesut-Tawy (= Jebel Barkal)” (de G.  Davies and Gardiner 1926:10, pl. VI). The various forms and meanings attached to the pinnacle, as well as its overwhelming size, apparently convinced all ancient onlookers that they were in the presence of Amun as supreme Creator and generator of kingship. As phallus, the pinnacle suggested the god’s nature as ultimate source of fertility, male sexual power, and fatherhood. As uraeus, it suggested his nature as ultimate source of female power, female sexuality, and motherhood.14 And as royal statue and royal uraeus, the pinnacle suggested that here in primeval times he had emerged as his own child, the king and “royal ka.” The protean rock shaft, indeed, seemed to offer “proof ” that Jebel Barkal was the original residence of Amun-Ra Kamutef, the primeval, self-generating, self-reproducing personification of divine kingship, who combined in one being his own father, mother, and child (see n. 3).

Jebel Barkal in the New Kingdom As remote from Egypt as it was, Jebel Barkal seems to have been visited by—or was at least patronized by—most of the pharaohs of the New Kingdom. The site has yielded architectural remains and/or monuments associated with Thutmose III, Amenhotep II, Thutmose IV, Amenhotep III, Amenhotep IV/Akhenaten, Tutankhamun, Horemheb, Sety I, Rameses II, Dynasty 20, and Dynasty 21 (High Priest Menkheperre) (Kendall and El-Hassan Ahmed Mohamed 2017). On its east cliff there is also an unfinished inscription, attributable to Thutmose III, or possibly Hatshepsut.15 The deepest level of the Amun Temple (B 500-sub) is mud brick and probably attributable to Thutmose III. The first stone building at the site is B 600, built by Thutmose IV,

Jebel Barkal: “Karnak” of Kush   461 apparently as an enthronement pavilion (judging from its later Kushite function) (Fig.  24.8) (Kendall and Wolf  2011). The first stone phase of the Amun Temple is ­attributed to the proto-Amarna period (co-regency of Amenhotep III and IV), when B 500-sub was replaced by a small temple with tripartite sanctuary built entirely of yellow sandstone talatat blocks (Kendall and El-Hassan Ahmed Mohamed 2017:165–68). Under the sole reign of Akhenaten the site must have become an Aten sanctuary, as revealed by erasures of Amun’s name from contemporary monuments and by the ex­ist­ence of several small roofless Aten chapels(?) built with similar yellow talatat (B 700-sub 1, 3, B 520-sub, B 522) (Kendall  2009:8–12; Kendall and El-Hassan Ahmed Mohamed 2017:168–70). Under Tutankhamun and Horemheb, B 500 was extended with a new court and second pylon, now built of distinctive white sandstone talatat. Other post-Amarna temples, built with similar blocks, were dedicated at the same time to Mut and/or Hathor (B 300-sub) and to Nekhbet and Wadjet (B 1100). Talatat blocks bearing reliefs of Amenhotep-Huy, Tutankhamun’s Viceroy of Kush, and his wife were recovered beneath Ramesside pavements in B 500 (court B 503; Kendall and El-Hassan Ahmed Mohamed 2017:170–75). To what extent Hatshepsut may have involved herself with Jebel Barkal cannot be known, since her works would either have been claimed by Thutmose III or obliterated by him. But her sudden interest at Thebes in the primeval Amun as her parent, and her presumed construction (or expansion) of the first phase of Luxor Temple (J.P. Allen 2005:83–84) would appear to have been stimulated by something extraordinary. One

Figure 24.8  Site plan of the Jebel Barkal sanctuary, by Robert C. Rosa III.

462   Timothy Kendall and El-Hassan Ahmed Mohamed suspects it developed from a new awareness of the god’s origin and nature—likely through knowledge of Jebel Barkal, either from her father or because she herself had accompanied him on his remarkable journey as a teenager and had actually beheld the mountain (Kendall 2007). If the Luxor site had had no conspicuous significance prior to the reign of Thutmose I, one must wonder why it became so important afterwards. Luxor Temple, called “Southern Sanctuary/Harem,” was built 2.7 km south of Karnak, parallel to the Nile, on the east bank at Thebes, with its sanctuary directed upstream, as if, like the New Kingdom Amun temples at Pnubs and Kawa, pointing to a god imagined to dwell far upriver (Török 2009:224, 249–50). Amenhotep III seems to have built little or nothing at Jebel Barkal, but his vast expansion of Luxor looks like a lavish gift to the same god: presumably the primeval Amun imagined to dwell at Jebel Barkal (Pamminger  1992; J.P. Allen 2005:84; Keller 2005:97; Török 2009:224, 227, 250). Pamminger’s suggestion that Luxor was built as a “Theban Napata” seems quite correct, although up to now his theory has received little acceptance by Egyptologists.16 Like Luxor, as described by Horemheb in his coronation stela, Jebel Barkal was developed as a coronation complex, suggesting that its function was very similar to Luxor’s.17 Each place was conceived as a primeval mound, to which the king felt compelled to travel in order to unite with his imagined divine progenitor. By this union, the king was thought to become one with his “ka,” thereby gaining the body and power of his cosmic sire, an event culminating in a coronation.18 If we compare Jebel Barkal with Luxor, however, we see that really only one of these sites was a true “mound” possessed of visible “proofs” of the Creator’s presence.19 Luxor, lacking such natural “proofs,” looks only like a grandiose substitute residence for this god, built for him at Thebes—presumably to make it possible for the pharaohs to visit him locally and on a regular basis, without having to make the arduous boat voyage to Upper Nubia. The ritualized bark procession between Karnak and Luxor during the Opet Festival appears to be simply a magical substitute for the actual voyage. And if the god inside his Theban temple appears only in his local anthropomorphic/ithyphallic forms, it is noteworthy that he occasionally appears elsewhere at Thebes as a ram-headed Amun, identical in every way to the god of Jebel Barkal (Pamminger 1992:99–115). It is also significant that inside the temple one of the crowns he placed on the king’s head sported ram’s horns, suggestive of both his (and its) Nubian origins. This again suggests that the god’s ithyphallic/“northern” and ram-headed/ “southern” forms were merely iconographic synonyms. That there was an unusually close “sister-city” relationship between Napata and Thebes throughout the New Kingdom seems fairly clear. When, for example, Amenhotep II returned to Egypt with seven captive rulers of Takhsy in Syria, he killed six of them and hung their bodies from the walls of Karnak, while the seventh he brought to Jebel Barkal, executed him and hung his body from “the walls of Napata” (Manuelian 1987:94). When Akhenaten, before his year 5, built Aten complexes in East Karnak and at Heliopolis, he seems also to have built another at Jebel Barkal (Kendall 2009). In East Karnak, at the center of the complex, he raised a platform called

Jebel Barkal: “Karnak” of Kush   463 a “Pure Mound” (Ka’iy Wa’ab) to replicate the Heliopolitan mound and then erected upon it a benben monolith (i.e., a phallic-shaped stone) evocative of the god’s creative act—both features of which are also seemingly present at Jebel Barkal (“Pure Mountain”: Dju Wa’ab) (Kendall  2009:13). Sety I, in his own (very damaged) Jebel Barkal Stela, speaks of “Heliopolis” and a benben as if in a Napatan context, and he apparently installed the gods Atum and Ptah in new sanctuaries within the Amun Temple (Reisner and Reisner 1933b:73–78, l. B–3; Kendall 2008:125 n. 16; Kendall and El-Hassan Ahmed Mohamed 2017:177–78). Rameses II, probably near the end of his life, seems to have initiated a plan to add a gigantic hypostyle hall of fifty-six to sixty columns to the Amun temple at Jebel Barkal. This work appears to have been an attempt to give B 500 corresponding status with Karnak Temple, to which he had also just added a hypostyle hall (Kendall and El-Hassan Ahmed Mohamed 2017:178–81). But the king seems to have died before this work had barely begun, and it was left unfinished at the end of the New Kingdom. The Egyptians occupied Napata probably for about four centuries but were forced to withdraw from the region when their frontiers destabilized during the 11th century bce. Communications between the priestly establishments of Karnak and Jebel Barkal, however, must have continued for some decades into the Third Intermediate Period, as suggested by several blocks recently found at Jebel Barkal (reused in Taharqo’s B 200) that appear to have derived from a small chapel dedicated there by the Theban high priest (and later king) Menkheperre of Dynasty 21 (Kendall and El-Hassan Ahmed Mohamed 2017:182–84).

Jebel Barkal under Kushite Rule Little more is known of Jebel Barkal until the early 8th century bce, when we find the sanctuary suddenly being restored by members of a local Nubian ruling family, whose graves are found at El-Kurru, 13 km downstream from Napata (Kendall 1999a, 1999b; Török 2009:311). At the time, under the tutelage of a revived or still-functioning Amun priesthood, these princes became “Egyptianized.” Having become devoted to Amun of Napata (and the god’s other regional Nubian manifestations) and to his alter ego, Amun of Karnak in Egypt, they began restoring his old temples, which had fallen into disrepair, and building new ones. At Jebel Barkal, the first new construction they undertook was temple B 800, which had no Egyptian antecedent. This temple, now poorly preserved, was parallel to and about 50 m southwest (= downstream = “north”) of B 500. It was also similar to, if just a little smaller than, B 500, as it was then, making the two temples near twins. Clearly B 800 was a temple intended to house the “northern” (i.e., anthropomorphic) aspect of Amun of Karnak (as confirmed by Nastasen’s later description of it as “the temple of Thebes”: Eide et al.  1996:488). B 500, now meant to house his “southern” (i.e., ramheaded) aspect, was probably that known contemporaneously as the “the Karnak of

464   Timothy Kendall and El-Hassan Ahmed Mohamed Amun of Napata” (Eide et al. 1996:444), with variants “Golden House of Karnak” and “Karnak of Gold” (Eide et al. 1996:443, 444, 478, 480). B 800 offers an interesting comparison to Luxor Temple, for just as the Egyptians appear to have built Luxor as a Theban shrine to a primeval form of Amun of Karnak whose aspect they recognized as dwelling at Jebel Barkal, the early Napatan kings seem to have built B 800 at Jebel Barkal as a local Napatan shrine to the universal Amun of Karnak whose aspect they recognized as dwelling at Thebes. And yet both temples, which were directed toward the mountain, again show that the same twin aspects of Amun were thought to dwell as a unity inside Jebel Barkal (Kendall 2014:663–66, 672). B 800 provides evidence of Kushite interest in re-establishing the ties that bound Jebel Barkal and Karnak during the New Kingdom and in reuniting the god’s entire southern domain as it had been during the Egyptian imperial age. Like the pharaohs before them, the Napatan kings now claimed Amun of Jebel Barkal as their own father. And by also claiming the pharaohs as their “ancestors,” they began presenting themselves as the rightful heirs to the kingship of Upper Egypt, a hegemony, which included Kush, that had not really existed since the end of the New Kingdom and which was now symbolized by a new type of crown: the cap crown. The origin of the cap crown has been much-discussed (W.V. Davies 1982; Török 1987; Leahy 1992:232–39), but its Kushite manifestation seems to have had a rather uncomplicated origin. Naturally if the pinnacle on Jebel Barkal was recognized as a royal uraeus (or two), the cliff would have been seen as a great “forehead” (an alternate meaning of the Egyptian word “cliff ”: dehenet). The profile of Jebel Barkal, thus, would have been recognized as a king’s or god’s head or crown emerging from the desert floor. When the hill is viewed from the E side, one sees that it has the exact shape of the Kushite cap crown, which can hardly be a coincidence (Fig.  24.9). This suggests that the form of the crown was intended to imitate the profile of Jebel Barkal, which would have proclaimed its wearers to be the unique heirs of the primeval kingship granted by the ancient god of the ­mountain— who was, in fact, “Amun of Karnak” (Eide et al. 1994:55–56; Kendall 2008:131 n. 34). A strong indicator that Amun of Jebel Barkal and Amun of Karnak were perceived as the same god, as they had been in the time of Thutmose III, and evidence that this god could grant kingship to a ruler whether in Napata or in Thebes is found in the so-called Sandstone Stela of Piankhy (Reisner 1931:89–94, pls. V, VI; Eide et al. 1994:55–62).20 If its main text has been largely lost, the lunette remains intact and pictures an enthroned, ram-headed Amun, crowned only with a sun disk, called “Lord of the Thrones of the Two Lands of Pure Cliff/Forehead” (Dehen Wa’ab = Jebel Barkal), announcing his gift of Egyptian kingship and the “primeval crown” to his son (ostensibly Piankhy, whose names and image were carved over an earlier erased royal figure). The god states: “No other can decree a king; it is I that grants kingship to whomever I will,” and he presents a Red Crown and a cap crown to the king at right, who states: “Amun of Napata has granted me to be ruler of every foreign country . . . . Amun of Thebes has granted me to be ruler of Egypt (Kemet)” (Eide et al. 1994:57). The text echoes Thutmose’s Jebel Barkal Stela of seven centuries before, except that in the earlier stela it was Amun of Jebel Barkal

Jebel Barkal: “Karnak” of Kush   465

Figure 24.9  The shape of the Kushite “cap crown” at left (on King Shabataqo, in the chapel of Osiris-Hekadjet at Karnak) appears to have been inspired by the shape of Jebel Barkal. (Left) Myśliwiec  1988: pl. 34, reproduced with permission of K.  Myśliwiec (reversed); (Right) Photograph: T. Kendall.

who granted “the kingship of the Two Lands” to Thutmose while Amun of Karnak granted him “all lands and all foreign countries.” Although the king speaks of the two gods granting him differing royal authorities, it is the one pictured god “of Pure Cliff ” (crowned just like the composite primeval god Amun-Ra-Harakhty-Atum in a relief block found in the Amun Temple [B 500] [Dunham 1970: pl. XXXVII]),21 who speaks and acts for both the Theban and Napatan Amuns, both of whom, it should be remembered, were housed at Jebel Barkal in the twin temples B 500 and 800. Backed by the primeval authority of Amun in Napata, the Kushite king could now claim himself to be both the champion of the god’s “double” at Thebes as well as King of Upper Egypt—claims justified by the king’s origin from Jebel Barkal, home of the “Upper Egyptian uraeus” (Fig. 24.7). Kashta was probably the first of his line to claim Upper Egyptian kingship (Török  2009:319; Lohwasser  2016a:125). Piankhy seems to have been de facto King of Upper Egypt before his 20th year (Eide et al. 1994:113–18). When the Thebaid was threatened by Tefnakht’s armed Lower Egyptian coalition, Piankhy, as protector of the Thebaid, led his army to Thebes in his year 20, celebrated the Opet at Luxor, made offerings to Amun at Karnak, then overwhelmed all resistance as far north as Memphis and the southern Delta. This now gave him the right to wear the Red Crown. Recalling that Amun of Jebel Barkal, as first stated by Thutmose III in his Jebel Barkal Stela, had granted him the complete kingship of Egypt, so Piankhy could claim the same kingship from the same god—confirmed by Amun’s alter-ego at Thebes (to whom he married his own sister, as “God’s Wife of Amun” [Lohwasser 2016a])—thus establishing his family as Egypt’s 25th Dynasty. During the 8th century bce, the kings of Napata built a new palace at Jebel Barkal (B 1200) (Kendall and Wolf 2007), as well as new temples B 800 and 900 (Kendall 2014).

466   Timothy Kendall and El-Hassan Ahmed Mohamed In B 500 Piankhy completed Rameses’s hypostyle hall (but with only forty-six columns), added an enthronement chamber, and extended the great temple to its final length of 156 m, making it the largest temple in Nubia.22 In the early 7th century, Taharqo replaced the old 18th Dynasty temple of Hathor and Mut (B 300-sub) with magnificent new temples for each goddess: B 200 (Hathor) and B 300 (Mut).23 It was probably also he who replaced the 18th Dynasty B 1100 with a new temple to the royal uraeus goddesses in the same series (see n. 13). Additionally he ordered a panel of inscription, covered with sheet gold, to be placed on the “inaccessible” summit of the Jebel Barkal pinnacle with a probable statue of himself, now lost, raised up 73 m from ground level and installed in a socket beneath it (Kendall 2004b, 2008:139–40). The effect of this would seemingly have been to unite the king forever with his father Kamutef and the source of the royal ka. The Kushites were ultimately expelled from Egypt by the Assyrians in 661 bce (Török 1997:180–87), but they re-established their court at Napata. The first post–25th Dynasty construction there was temple B 700, built by Atlanersa and completed by Senkamanisken, which seems to have had a function connected with the renewal of kingship after the death of a king, an event which apparently paralleled the rebirth of Amun-Ra as Sun god after his own union with Osiris, as presented in the royal funerary text called the Amduat (Kendall 2014:674–78).24 B 800 was now substantially rebuilt in stone by Anlamani, and he and Aspelta both labored to renew the palace (B 1200), which was lavishly decorated with murals, carved columns, and new throne rooms (Kendall and Wolf 2007). Like other Kushite religious and economic centers, Napata appears to have been a target in 593 bce of the invading army of the 26th Dynasty king Psamtek II (Kendall 1996:468–76; Bonnet and Valbelle 2006:164–71; Kendall and Wolf 2007:86–87; Török 2009:359–61). The evidence for widespread fire damage to the sanctuary and for deliberate destruction of the royal statues is extensive. One suspects that Jebel Barkal, as the “Nubian Karnak,” was the main objective of the Egyptian ruler, since he would have wished to put an end, once and for all, to Kushite pretensions to his throne and to the Amun-oracle that continued to promote them. Half a century may have passed after its destruction before the Jebel Barkal sanctuary was again made fully operational (Kendall and Wolf 2007:87). But the Kushite kings had now moved south to Meroe, carrying with them “Amun of Napata” and “Amun of Thebes” to the new capital and installing them in the great temple there (Török 2002:316, 328). They also spread the god’s worship (in his dual aspects) to all major settlements above the Fifth Cataract. The Jebel Barkal sanctuary, however, was ultimately restored to its former glory so that the ancient kingship traditions could be resumed in their original place, and for yet more centuries the site continued as the place where Amun selected each new king and where the primary coronation ceremonies of the kingdom took place (Török 1997:220–34). Until the 3rd century bce, Napata was also the place to which each king returned for burial—in a pyramid built at for him nearby Nuri (Dunham 1955). Subsequently, while most of the rulers preferred burial at Meroe, a few—intermittently through the early 2nd century ce—still chose to build their pyramids beside “Pure Mountain” (Dunham 1957).

Jebel Barkal: “Karnak” of Kush   467 In 23 bce, Napata was reportedly attacked again and “razed . . . to the ground,” this time by a Roman army (Eide et al. 1998:828–35, 882–84, esp. 834 and refs.), but no evidence for damage relating to this event has yet been found archaeologically. The site, however, did undergo its last major restoration during the joint reign of Natakamani and Amanitore in the early or mid-1st century ce. This royal pair completely restored the Great Amun Temple (B 500), added a kiosk (B 501) to its first court, rebuilt for the third time B 1100, added a mammisi (B 561),25 and erected an enormous new palace (B 1500), 63 m2, with its associated complex (Donadoni 1993; Roccati 2008; Ciampini and Bąkowska-Czerner 2014). Echoes of the Kushite royal tradition—namely that the primeval kingship of Egypt had originated in Kush—were recorded in the 1st century bce by Diodorus (3.3.2–7), who stated that Osiris, the first king of Egypt, was actually a native Kushite (“Aithiopian”), who came north (like the Nile waters) at the beginning of time to colonize Egypt, bringing with him “Egyptian” civilization. This, he further stated, explained why both the Egyptian and Kushite kings (in the manner of Osiris) wore “tall pointed felt hats ending in a knob” (Eide et al. 1996:644–45). With this, we may speculate that the source of the legend was probably the pinnacle on Jebel Barkal, which, having the vague form of a royal figure wearing the White Crown, would have offered visible “proof ” to the Nubians that Osiris was one of their own (Fig. 24.5) (Kendall 2008:136–43). The demise of Jebel Barkal as a viable cult place seems to have been brought about by a catastrophic earthquake in the 3rd century ce, which appears to have caused a cliff collapse that destroyed temples B 600, 700, and B 1100 and likely severely damaged others. The same event also seems to have toppled temple B 561 and its kiosk B 560. Even before the end of the Meroitic period, it is clear that the fallen ruins of these latter buildings were being used as domestic dwellings.

Acknowledgments We would like to express our profound gratitude, first, to QSAP (the Qatar-Sudan Archaeological Project) for its generous financial support of our archaeological mission, and, second, to NCAM (the Sudan National Corporation of Antiquities and Museums), its director, Dr. Abdelrahman Ali Mohamed and staff for their ever-friendly and unfailing assistance, without which our work would not have been possible. Many thanks also to Dr. David Klotz for his great help in reading over this paper and making so many excellent criticisms and comments, and for proposing so many outstanding references, which have greatly improved it.

Notes 1. In earlier literature, the name is regularly spelled “Gebel Barkal.” However, the rendering “Jebel . . . ” is to be preferred now because it reflects Sudanese (rather than Egyptian) pronunciation and brings the name into conformity with the English rendering of all other mountain names in Sudan, which are written “Jebel . . . .” As for the name “Barkal,” this was a spelling popularized by Cailliaud (1826, v. 3:198–227 passim), but more commonly one

468   Timothy Kendall and El-Hassan Ahmed Mohamed finds in 19th-century sources the variants “  .  .  .  Berkel, Birkel, Birquel” (e.g., Hoskins  1835:134–59 passim). Today one still hears it pronounced locally as “Jebel elBirkel.” The Sudanese themselves seem to be unaware of the name’s origin and meaning, but it likely derived from the old colloquial Arabic word birghîl (“land near water or between cultivated ground and the desert”) (Steingass  1884:119). Since the mountain indeed stands between cultivated land and the desert, the rendering Jebel el-Birghîl may have been its original form. 2. Eide et al. 1994:181–83. From Taharqo’s prayer to Amun at Karnak: “Amun-Ra . . . the noble ba who rises in heaven, whose images are secret, whose appearances are numerous, whose true form is unknown . . . through whose manifestations all manifestations manifest themselves . . . the elder who was first to come into existence . . . father of fathers, mother of ­mothers . . . . King-of-Upper-and-Lower Egypt, Amun-Ra, Lord of the Thrones of the Two Lands, lord of heaven, earth, water, and mountains . . . .” 3. Several other hills seem also to have been called “Pure Mountain”: one in the Wadi Hammamat; Gebel es-Silsila; Abu ‘Oda; Jebel Dosha; and Abu Simbel. DesrochesNoblecourt and Kuentz  1968:203–205 n. 342; Thiem  2000:23–24 n. 342; and W.V. Davies 2004:3, 19, fig. 27. 4. Goedicke  1992. In Thebes, this title seems originally to have been a conceptual epithet of Amun as a possessor of the triple inheritance (all three “thrones”) of Egypt: Memphis, Heliopolis, Thebes (Klotz  2006:123–24; Cauville  2010). When Jebel Barkal was so named, Nesut-Tawy (“Thrones of the Two Lands”) then became a geographical epithet but without geographic determinative. It was also frequently rendered Neset-Tawy (“Throne . . .”). At Jebel Barkal itself “neb Nesut-Tawy” increasingly became the title of the “northern” Amun (see Fig.  24.7), while “neb Neset-Tawy” became the designation of the local Amun (see Fig. 24.6), but the titles could be interchangeable (see n. 25). To what extent in Egypt (after the early 18th Dynasty) the god’s title “neb Nesut-Tawy” referenced Jebel Barkal remains unclear. 5. As in Ramesside ostracon 1072: “As for Deger, it is the name of the town; Tawawu is the name of the cliff. As for Nekhesmekes, it is the name of a goddess; as for the water which comes forth, Amun is in it in the land of Kush.” Gabolde (this volume) has proposed ­in­gen­iously that the name Tawawu may be a Nubian dialectical variant of the Egyptian name of Jebel Barkal [Nesut]-Tawy, and thus that Napata and Deger may be the same place. Nekhesmekes would then be the uraeus goddess embodied in the Jebel Barkal pinnacle. See Figs. 24.6, 24.7. 6. A figure of Amun in this same guise appears intact on a small, crude stela from Jebel Barkal  before a king called “Men-kheper-re”; Dunham  1970:43, pl. XLVII/H; Török 2002:299. The king appears to be Thutmose III, but there is a real possibility that he could also be the Theban High Priest-turned-King, Menkheperre (Kendall and El-Hassan Ahmed Mohamed 2017:182–84). 7. These same two forms of the god are arranged in this same way on many monuments: (a) the Dream Stela of Tanwetamani (Grimal 1981: pl. 1), (b) the Stela of Harsiyotef (Grimal 1981: pl. 10), (c) the Nastasen Stela (Budge 1912: pl. 1), (d) the Tanyidamani stela (Dunham 1970: pl. 60a); and (e) in the rooms B 303 and 305 (side walls and rear wall) of B 300 (Robisek 1989:109, 111, 113, 114). The anthropomorphic Amun on the left is always identified as “Lord of the Throne(s) of the Two Lands (Jebel Barkal?)” and “foremost in Karnak,” even though it is clear that he, along with the ram-headed Amun, also resided in Jebel Barkal (Fig. 24.7; see also n. 25).

Jebel Barkal: “Karnak” of Kush   469 8. As in the Dynasty 21 papyrus of Her-weben, where an ithyphallic Ra-Osiris, with upright phallus, is shown reclining on a hillside surrounded by a snake (Klotz 2006:32–34). 9. Select sections of the text, pertaining to the god as king, first appear on a 17th Dynasty statue found in the temple of Mentuhotep II at Deir el-Bahri: BM 40959; Luiselli 2004:XIII, XX, G; XXII, G. 10. The text minimizes the god’s associations with Upper Nubia by describing him only as “Lord of the Medjai and Ruler of Punt . . . unique in his nature like the fluid of the gods . . . for love of whom the Nile has come” (Pritchard 1969:365–66). It may be, however, that during the 17th Dynasty the Egyptians would have been reluctant to speak directly about Upper Nubia, given its occupation at that time by the threatening power of Kush, through which Punt was accessible by river. The notable exception is the inscription in the tomb of Sobeknakht II, a Dynasty 17 governor of Elkab, who proves the river route to Punt by describing a massive attack on Elkab by an army of allied Nubian groups led by Kush, including Wawat (Lower Nubia), Khenthennefer (Upper Nubia), Punt (Eastern Sudan) and Medjay (Eastern and Nubian Deserts): W.V. Davies 2005:52–53 n. 9. Amun’s association with the Middle Nile is otherwise abundantly clear: Rocheleau  2005:14–36; Török 2009:224, 249–51 (and see n. 6 above). 11. For a full presentation of the iconography of Jebel Barkal, see Kendall 2008:126–40 and Kendall: “Religious and Political Significance.” Cf. also Lohwasser 2015, who catalogs iconography showing Khonsu seated within Jebel Barkal. 12. Kendall: http://www.jebelbarkal.org/frames/B1100.pdf. The temple is identified not only by reliefs depicting the two goddesses but also by a text naming a Per-wer [“Great House”] and Per-neser [“House of Flame”]) on the jamb of a doorway leading from the Napatan palace (B 1200) to the B 1100 ruins. See Dunham  1970: pl. LXII, B, C; Kendall 2008:125 n. 21. 13. Note the small statuette of a ram-headed Amun wearing a White Crown, pictured by Andrews  1994: fig. 27. Thanks to Paul Mooney for bringing this object to our attention. 14. On the male and female associations of the pinnacle, see Klotz 2006: 145–46; Kendall 2008: 137–39. 15. Still unpublished, the inscription can be seen on the east cliff face, about 3 m above the top of the scree. The work was barely started before it was abandoned, and it preserves only the right wing of the Behdetite with two incised lines for text, bearing only an incomplete Horus name: Ka-nakht . . . (“Strong Bull . . .”), which was used by both kings. 16. But note Darnell 2010:7 and refs.: “Amun of Luxor appears to have been a fecundity figure, both ram-headed and ithyphallic anthropomorphic, related to Nubia and the inundation . . . appropriate both to the southern node of the east bank Theban festival cycle and to the ram-form of the deified ruler in Nubia.” 17. Gardiner  1953:15. The Horemheb text describes the king’s going into a Per-wer [“Great House”] and Per-neser [“House of Flame”] attached to the palace at Luxor and there receiving his crowns from the goddess Weret-Hekau in the presence of Amun. At Jebel Barkal, the earliest phase of the same sanctuaries (contained within B 1100) was associated with a block inscribed for Horemheb (see above, n. 13). 18. Kozloff and Bryan 1992:86–87; L. Bell 1997:157–76. In some 25th Dynasty and later Meroitic reliefs in Sudan, the king seems to physically merge with and to become Amun at Jebel Barkal, then to separate from him as his first-born son Shu, and then to metamorphose again into his own physical self. See Kendall 2014:680–82 n. 56.

470   Timothy Kendall and El-Hassan Ahmed Mohamed 19. But Gabolde (2013:22–24, fig. 7a–d) has suggested that both the Karnak and Luxor sites, prior to the Middle Kingdom, were islands. 20. Lohwasser 2016b presents a strong case suggesting the stela was originally made for a king other than Piankhy. 21. The same god is pictured in newly exposed reliefs at Luxor Temple, preceded by Rameses II and followed by Atum. Boraik 2008:134, pl. XX. 22. Kendall: http://www.jebelbarkal.org/frames/B500NapMer.pdf. 23. Kendall: http://www.jebelbarkal.org/frames/B200300.pdf. 24. Kendall: http://www.jebelbarkal.org/frames/B700.pdf. The texts on the fallen columns in B 700 provide all the variants of the god’s name at Jebel Barkal: “Amun-Ra, Lord of the Thrones of the Two Lands, who is in Pure Mountain,” “Amun-Ra, Lord of the Throne of the Two Lands, who is in Pure Mountain,” “Amun of Napata,” “Amun of Napata, who is in Pure Mountain,” “Amun-Ra, Lord of the Throne of the Two Lands, Foremost in Karnak,” “Amun-Ra, Lord of the Thrones of the Two Lands, Foremost in [Karnak]” (Kendall 2014:676). 25. Kendall: http://www.jebelbarkal.org/frames/B560561.pdf.

References Cited Allen, J.P. 2005 The Role of Amun. In Hatshepsut: From Queen to Pharaoh, ed. C.H. Roehrig, pp. 83–85. Metropolitan Museum of Art. Allen, T.G. ed. 1974 The Book of the Dead or Going Forth by Day. Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilization 37. University of Chicago Press. Andrews, C. 1994 Amulets of Ancient Egypt. University of Texas Press. Assmann, J. 1995 Egyptian Solar Religion in the New Kingdom: Re, Amun and the Crisis of Polytheism. Routledge. Bell, G. 1936 Notes: Nuba Fertility Stones. Sudan Notes and Records 19:314–16. Bell, L. 1997 The New Kingdom “Divine” Temple: The Example of Luxor. In Temples of Ancient Egypt, ed. B.E. Shafer, pp. 127–84. Cornell University Press. Bolton, A.R.C. 1936 The Dubab and Nuba of Jebel Daier. Sudan Notes and Records 19:92–108. Bonnet, C. and D.  Valbelle 2006 The Nubian Pharaohs: Black Kings on the Nile. American University of Cairo Press. Boraik, M. 2008 Inside the Mosque of Abu el-Haggag: Rediscovering Long Lost Parts of Luxor Temple. A Preliminary Report. Memnonia 19:123–49. Bradbury, L. 1984–85 The Tombos Inscription: A New Interpretation. Serapis 8:1–20. Budge, E.A.W. 1912 Egyptian Literature, v. 2: Annals of Nubian Kings. Kegan Paul, Trench, Trübner & Co. Cauville, S. 2010 Les trois capitales—Osiris-le roi. Revue d’Égyptologie 61:1–42. Ciampini, E.M. and G. Bąkowska-Czerner 2014 Meroitic Kingship and Water: The Case of Napata (B 2200). In The Fourth Cataract and Beyond: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference for Nubian Studies, ed. J.R.  Anderson and D.A.  Welsby, pp. 695–701. British Museum Publications on Egypt and Sudan 1. Peeters. Cumming, B. 1982 Egyptian Historical Records of the Later Eighteenth Dynasty 1. Aris & Phillips. Darnell, J.C. 1998 The Apotropaic Goddess in the Eye. Studien zur Altägyptischen Kultur 24:35–48.

Jebel Barkal: “Karnak” of Kush   471 ——— 2010 Opet Festival. UCLA Encyclopedia of Egyptology, ed. J. Dieleman and W. Wendrich (online). Davies, B.G. 1992 Egyptian Historical Records of the Later Eighteenth Dynasty 4. Aris & Phillips. Davies, W.V. 1982 The Origin of the Blue Crown. The Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 68:69–74. ——— 1998 New Fieldwork at Kurgus: The Pharaonic Inscriptions. Sudan & Nubia 2:26–30. ——— 2001 Kurgus 2000: The Egyptian Inscriptions. Sudan & Nubia 5:46–58. ——— 2004 The Egyptian Inscriptions at Jebel Dosha, Sudan. British Museum Studies in Ancient Egypt and Sudan 4:1–20. ——— 2005 Egypt and Nubia: Conflict with the Kingdom of Kush. In Hatshepsut: From Queen to Pharaoh, ed. C.H. Roehrig, pp. 49–56. Metropolitan Museum of Art. de G. Davies, N. and A.H. Gardiner 1926 The Tomb of Huy, Viceroy of Nubia in the Reign of Tut’ankhamun (no. 60). Theban Tomb Series 4. Egypt Exploration Society. Desroches-Noblecourt, C. and C.  Kuentz. 1968 Le petit temple d’Abou Simbel, v. 1: Étude archéologique et épigraphique, essai d’interprétation. Centre de Documentation et d’Étude sur l’Ancienne Égypte Mémoires 1. Donadoni, S. 1993 Excavations of University of Rome at Natakamani Palace. Kush 16:101–15. Dunham, D. 1955 Nuri. Royal Cemeteries of Kush 2. Museum of Fine Arts (Boston). ——— 1957 Royal Tombs at Meroe and Barkal. Royal Cemeteries of Kush 3. Museum of Fine Arts (Boston). ——— 1970 The Barkal Temples. Museum of Fine Arts (Boston). Eide, T., T.  Hägg, R.  H.  Pierce, and L.  Török eds. 1994 Fontes Historiae Nubiorum: Textual Sources for the History of the Middle Nile Region between the Eighth Century BC and the Sixth Century AD, v. 1: From the Eighth to the Mid-Fifth Century BC. Department of Classics, University of Bergen. ——— 1996 Fontes Historiae Nubiorum: Textual Sources for the History of the Middle Nile Region between the Eighth Century BC and the Sixth Century AD, v. 2: From the Mid-Fifth to the First Century BC. Department of Greek, Latin and Egyptology, University of Bergen. ——— 1998 Fontes Historiae Nubiorum: Textual Sources for the History of the Middle Nile Region between the Eighth Century BC and the Sixth Century AD, v. 3: From the First to the Sixth Century AD. IKRR/Department of Greek, Latin and Egyptology, University of Bergen. Faulkner, R.O. 1969 The Ancient Egyptian Pyramid Texts. Aris & Phillips. ——— 1978 The Ancient Egyptian Coffin Texts. Aris & Phillips. Hoskins, G.A. 1835 Travels in Ethiopia. Longman, Rees, Orme, Green & Longman. Gabolde, L. 1998 Le “grand chateau d’Amon” de Sesostris 1er à Karnak. Mémoires de l’Académie des Inscriptions et Belles Lettres 17. De Boccard. ——— 2013 Les origines de Karnak et la genèse de la théologie d’Amon. Bulletin de la Société Française d’Égyptologie 186–87:13–35. Gardiner, A.H. 1953 The Coronation of King Haremhab. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 39:13–31. Goedicke H. 1992 Imn nb nswt t3wy. In The Intellectual Heritage of Egypt: Studies Presented to László Kákosy, ed. U.  Luft, pp. 197–203. Studia Aegyptiaca 14. Chaire d’Égyptologie (Budapest).

472   Timothy Kendall and El-Hassan Ahmed Mohamed Grimal, N.-C. 1981 Quatre stèles napateénnes au Musée du Caire JE 48863–48866. Études sur la propaganda royale égyptienne 2. Mémoires de l’Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale 106. Keller, C.A. 2005 The Joint Reign of Hatshepsut and Thutmose III. In Hatshepsut: From Queen to Pharaoh, ed. C.H. Roehrig, 96–98. Metropolitan Museum of Art. Kendall, T. 1996 Fragments Lost and Found: Two Kushite Objects Augmented. In Studies in Honor of William Kelly Simpson, ed. P.D.  Manuelian, pp. 468–76. Museum of Fine Arts (Boston). ——— 1999a The Origin of the Napatan State: El-Kurru and the Evidence for the Royal Ancestors. In Studien zum antiken Sudan, ed. S. Wenig, pp. 3–117. Meroitica 15. Harrassowitz. ——— 1999b A Response to László Török’s “Long Chronology” of El Kurru. In Studien zum antiken Sudan, ed. S. Wenig, pp. 164–76. Meroitica 15. Harrassowitz. ——— 2004b The Monument of Taharqa on Gebel Barkal. In Neueste Feldforschungen im Sudan und in Eritrea, ed. S. Wenig, pp. 1–45. Meroitica 21. Harrassowitz. ——— 2007 Hatshepsut in Kush? Society for the Study of Egyptian Antiquities Newsletter (winter):1–5. ——— 2008 Why Did Taharqa Build his Tomb at Nuri? In Between the Cataracts: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference for Nubian Studies, ed. W. Godlewski and A. Łajtar, Part 1, pp. 117–47. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean Supplement Series 2.1. Warsaw University. ——— 2009 Talatat Architecture at Jebel Barkal. Sudan & Nubia 13:2–16. ——— 2014 Reused Relief Blocks of Piankhy from B 900: Toward a Decipherment of the Osiris Cult at Jebel Barkal. In The Fourth Cataract and Beyond: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference for Nubian Studies, ed. J.R. Anderson and D.A. Welsby, pp. 663–86. British Museum Publications on Egypt and Sudan 1. Peeters. Kendall, T. and El-Hassan Ahmed Mohamed 2017 Jebel Barkal in the New Kingdom: An Emerging Picture. In Nubia in the New Kingdom: Lived Experience, Pharaonic Control and Indigenous Traditions, ed. N. Spencer, A. Stevens, and M. Binder, pp. 155–85. British Museum Publications on Egypt and Sudan 3. Peeters. Kendall, T. and P. Wolf 2007 Excavations in the Palace of Aspelta at Jebel Barkal, March 2007. Sudan & Nubia 11:82–88. ——— 2011 B 600: A Temple of Thutmose IV at Jebel Barkal. In La pioche et la plume. Autour du Soudan, du Liban et de la Jordanie. Hommages archéologiques à Patrice Lenoble, ed. V. Rondot, F. Alpi, and F. Villeneuve, pp. 237–59. Presses de l’Université Paris-Sorbonne. Klotz, D. 2006 Adoration of the Ram: Five Hymns to Amun-Re from Hibis Temple. Yale Egyptological Studies 6. Yale University. Kormysheva, E. 2004 On the Origin and Evolution of the Amun Cult in Nubia. In Nubian Studies 1998: Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference of Nubian Studies, ed. T. Kendall, pp. 109–33. Northeastern University. Kozloff, A. and B.M. Bryan 1992 Egypt’s Dazzling Sun: Amenhotep III and his World. Cleveland Museum of Arts. Lacau, P. and H.  Chevrier 1969 Une chapelle de Sésostris Ier à Karnak. Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale. Leahy, A. 1992 Royal Iconography and Dynastic Change, 750–525 B.C.: The Blue and Cap Crowns. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 78:223–40.

Jebel Barkal: “Karnak” of Kush   473 Lohwasser, A. 2015 Khonsu Sitting IN Jebel Barkal. In Der Antike Sudan. Mitteilungen der Sudanarchäologischen Gesellschaft zu Berlin 26:245–49. ——— 2016a “Nubianness” and the God’s Wives of the 25th Dynasty: Office Holders, the Institution, Reception and Reaction. In Prayer and Power: Proceedings of the Conference on the God’s Wives of Amun in Egypt during the First Millennium BC, ed. M. Becker, A.I. Blöbaum, and A. Lohwasser, pp. 121–36. Ägypten und Altes Testament 84. Ugarit-Verlag. ——— 2016b Deconstructing Early Kushite Ideology: On the Unknown King of the So-Called Coronation Stele of Pi(ankh)y. Paper presented at the 12 International Conference for Meroitic Studies, Prague. Luiselli, M.M. 2004 Der Amun-Re Hymnus des P. Boulaq 17 (P. Kairo CG 58038). Harrassowitz. Manuelian, P.D. 1987 Studies in the Reign of Amenophis II. Hildesheimer Ägyptologische Beiträge 26. Gerstenberg Verlag. Myśliwiec, K. 1988 Royal Portraiture of the Dynasties XXI–XXX. Philipp von Zabern. Oldfather, C.H. trans. 1960 Diodorus of Sicily 1. Loeb Classical Library 279. Harvard University Press. Pamminger, P. 1992 Amun und Luxor—Der Widder und das Kultbild. Beiträge zur Sudanforschung 5:93–140. Pritchard, J.B. ed. 1969 Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament, third edition. Princeton University Press. Reisner, G.A. 1931 Inscribed Monuments from Gebel Barkal. Zeitschrift für Ägyptische Sprache und Altertumskunde 66:76–100. Reisner, G.A. and M.B. Reisner 1933a Inscribed Monuments from Gebel Barkal, Part 2: The Granite Stele of Thutmose III. Zeitschrift für Ägyptische Sprache und Altertumskunde 69:24–39. ——— 1933b Inscribed Monuments from Gebel Barkal, Part 3: The Stela of Sety I. Zeitschrift für Ägyptische Sprache und Altertumskunde 69:73–78. Robisek, C. 1989 Das Bildprogramm des Mut-Tempels am Gebel Barkal. Beiträge zur Ägyptologie 8. Universität Wien. Roccati, A. 2008 The Italian Archaeological Expedition to Jebel Barkal/Napata. In Between the Cataracts: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference for Nubian Studies, ed. W. Godlewski and A. Łajtar, Part 1, pp. 249–61. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean Supplement Series 2.1. Warsaw University. Rocheleau, C. 2005 Amun Temples in Nubia. A Comparative Study of New Kingdom, Napatan, and Meroitic Temples. Doctoral dissertation, University of Toronto. Steingass, F. 1884 The Student’s Arabic-English Dictionary. W.H. Allen. Thiem, A.-C. 2000 Speos von Gebel es-Silsileh. Analyse der architektonischen und ikonographischen Konzeption im Rahmen des politischen und legitamatorischen Programmes der Nachamarnazeit. Ägypten und Altes Testament 47. Török, L. 1987 The Royal Crowns of Kush: A Study in Middle Nile Valley Regalia and Iconography in the 1st millennium BC and AD. Cambridge Monographs in African Archaeology 18. Oxford University Press. ——— 1997 The Kingdom of Kush: Handbook of the Napatan-Meroitic Civilization. Handbuch der Orientalistik 1(31). Brill. ——— 2002 The Image of the Ordered World in Ancient Nubian Art: The Construction of the Kushite Mind, 800 BC–300 AD. Probleme der Ägyptologie 18. Brill.

474   Timothy Kendall and El-Hassan Ahmed Mohamed ——— 2009 Between Two Worlds: The Frontier Region between Ancient Nubia and Egypt 3700 BC–AD 500. Probleme der Ägyptologie 29. Brill. Tucker, G. and G. Emberling 2016 Settlement in the Heartland of Napatan Kush: A Test of Magnetic Gradiometry at El-Kurru, Sanam, and Jebel Barkal. Sudan & Nubia 20:50–56. Walker, E.J. 1991 Aspects of the Primaeval Nature of Egyptian Kingship: Pharaoh as Atum. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, University of Chicago. Wildung, D. ed. 1997 Sudan: Ancient Kingdoms of the Nile. Flammarion.

chapter 25

N u bi a ns i n Egy pt du r i ng th e 25th Dy nast y Julia Budka

Introduction The 1st millennium bce was a period in which Egypt faced several foreign rulers and considerable influence from outside of their home (Morkot  2000; Myśliwiec  2000; Vittmann 2003; Winnicki 2009). In the 8th century bce, Egypt was conquered by rulers from Kush (Nubia). These Kushite kings with their homeland around Napata dominated Egypt as the 25th Dynasty for a short period of about seventy years (722–655 bce). The Kushite rule was ended by the Assyrian invasion of Egypt, which expelled the 25th Dynasty and installed the 26th Dynasty. Little is known about the origins and royal succession of the 25th Dynasty. Essential for understanding the origins of the Kushite Empire is the early history of the royal cemetery at El-Kurru. However, the chronology and significance of this necropolis have been much discussed and are still debated (see Török 2015). The Kushite dynasty ruling Egypt began with an invasion by Kashta of Upper Egypt. It is significant that he adopted Egyptian royal names and ordered the erection of a monument in Egyptian style, dedicated to Egyptian gods. Obviously, the “Egyptianization” of the foreign rulers started early and was motivated not only by the familiarity of Kushites with Egyptian monuments dating back to the New Kingdom built in Nubia, but also by the need of the new rulers to legitimize their right to the Egyptian throne. This is clearly illustrated by the victory stela of Piye (Piankhy), who followed Kashta and succeeded in conquering Egypt as far as the Mediterranean Sea—celebrating this victory on an Egyptian-style monument with Egyptian ritual scenes, but with certain aspects referring to his indigenous identity (for Piye's reign see now Broekman 2020). Consequently, several scholars have challenged earlier acculturation models for the rise of the Napatan state and provided alternative views in the last years (Smith 2013:96–97). Despite of a high

476   Julia Budka

ag

a

degree of “Egyptianization,” Kushites of both royal and non-royal status are, like other non-Egyptians, often recognizable by name and personal representation in 25th Dynasty Egypt. As will be demonstrated below, generalized terms like “the Nubians in Egypt” are not suitable for the actual situation. Nubians were an integral part of Late Egyptian society and—with the exception of the royal family—did not represent themselves as an ethnic group. The individuality of these people and their complex cultural identity is much more important than considering ancestry only.1 Kushite royal building activity is traceable in the various religious and administrative centers of Egypt—especially at Memphis, Abydos, and Thebes. Thebes was in particular a prosperous city during the 25th Dynasty with a notable royal building activity (Fig. 25.1). New ritual structures and chapels were set up in the Karnak temple (Montu, Amun, and Mut precincts) and a front part was added to an existing temple at Medinet Habu. Although the architecture and decoration is almost completely Egyptian, partly referring to earlier models (sometimes called “archaism”), stylistic features and innovative aspects testify to a very specific Kushite production in Egypt (Pischikova 2014; Pischikova, Budka, Griffin 2018).

Temple of Hatshepsut

bd hA a eik rn Sh -Qu el

elra

Asa

D

sif

Ramses IV

Thutmosis III a th din Sou asif Ramesseum s

e l-M

ir e

De

Ab

u

Temple of Mentuhotep

N

Deir el-Bahari

Sethos I

A

Merenptah

es

eb

n Th ter

Temple of Amun

Karnak - North

Karnak

Ba

Ea st

N

nk

Medinet Habu

IL E

es W

Karnak - South

Luxor temple

N

0

Scale :1 / 50000

2km

Figure 25.1  Plan of Thebes (East and West Bank) with the major sites of the 25th Dynasty (Asasif, South Asasif, Medinet Habu, and Karnak) in connection to the earlier sacred landscape. After Baines and Málek 1980:85; Eigner 1984: fig. 2; Cabrol 2001: pl. 7; Arnold 1996:110.

Nubians in Egypt during the 25th Dynasty   477

Evidence for Nubians in 25th Dynasty Egypt High-ranking Kushites and members of the 25th Dynasty royal court are well traceable by several sources, especially statues, stelae, and tomb monuments. But apart from these highest elite officials and royal family members, Nubians in 1st millennium bce Egypt are difficult to trace. With a general focus on stone temples and tombs, few other monuments and especially very rarely settlement areas have been excavated (cf. Sullivan 2013). However, the main reason for the difficulties is not the missing evidence, but rather the problem of identifying Kushites in Egyptian contexts (Wenig 1990: 346; Vittmann 2007; Budka 2010b). Nubians are known to have adopted Egyptian names (especially princes who did not become kings, e.g., Horemakhet, the son of King Shabaqo) and were represented in thoroughly Egyptian style (e.g., Nesshutefnut, the son of King Taharqo). In other cases, Kushite identity is revealed through non-Egyptian names (or the names of the parents) and a specific way of representation (body proportions, coiffure, and clothing) on coffins, stelae, statues, and other objects. Therefore, identifying Kushites in Egypt is a question of names, titles, clothing, and other markers (Budka and Kammerzell 2007; Vittmann 2007; Budka 2010b). One has to stress that we cannot identify just one aspect that denotes someone necessarily coming from Kush—these markers have to be viewed within the context and case by case, in order to prove their significance (Vittmann 2007; Budka 2010b; Leahy 2014). There is an unavoidable bias in the source material for Nubians in Egypt in favor of the funerary sphere and elite objects of the monumental discourse (Table  25.1). Additional findings in settlements and more ceramic material would be necessary to address Kushite cultural identity on multiple levels. Much potential lies here in a detailed comparison with evidence excavated in modern Sudan (Smith 2013; Budka 2014c). Because of the problems with identifying Kushites in the Egyptian records, the exact number of people who migrated from Nubia into Egypt during the 25th Dynasty remains uncertain. A good percentage of these immigrants possibly settled in Egypt together with their families or founded new families through marriage with Egyptian women. Consequently, a large number of offspring from Kushite-Kushite or KushiteEgyptian pairs must have been born in Egypt (Morkot 2000:289). As the second generation of foreigners, they may also have stayed in their new homeland after the retreat of the Kushite rulers in 653 bce. Again, such people are difficult to trace in the material evidence—in addition, most members of the lower social classes were archaeologically invisible in any case (see Table 25.1). The two key sites for Nubian burials and other sources from the 25th Dynasty, both from the royal family and various social strata, are Thebes and Abydos. Thebes, on both the West and East Banks, provides rich information about the Kushite administrative system (Morkot  2013; Naunton  2014; Pope  2014). From the Karnak cachette (an ­enormous cache with hundreds of statues and objects buried in the temple of Karnak,

478   Julia Budka Table 25.1  Sources for Nubians in 25th Dynasty Egypt (Adapted from a Libyan Identity Model by Jurman 2015:38). Category

Source material

Language

Indirect via hieroglyphic versions of personal names (with syllabic writing) and other words (see Zibelius-Chen 2011)

Ancestry

Biarchaeological: no published material from Egypt (but see observations for “negroid features” of Irw in Tomb VII); self-representation: genealogies

Political organization

Royal documents and monuments; titles and names (see Naunton 2014: Egyptian administrative system replaced by Kushite one?)

Social organization

Titles and names on statues and stelae; little settlement architecture (Karnak South); no information about lower ranks

Habitus

Indirect: personal representations—mostly from funerary contexts and strongly context-related; epithet: Tabiry, queen of Piankhy “the great of the foreigners” (see Vittmann 2007, 140)

Diet and daily Almost no sources (little pottery evidence—but some drinking vessels and cooking life pots from secondary tomb contexts; some texts) Religion and funerary customs

Indirect: temples (difference Egypt/Kush; Amun and Osiris also in Kush, but with Kushite gods), stelae, inscriptions; direct: tomb architecture, burial equipment

discovered by Georges Legrain between 1903 and 1907; see Coulon 2016), several statues were dedicated by Kushite officials with high-ranking titles and are important sources for administrative and prosopographical questions (Dallibor 2005:131). In combination with archaeological evidence from tombs and burials, we can reconstruct that certain key offices like the post of Mayor of Thebes were held by Kushites, selected and appointed by the king (Strudwick  1995:93; Budka  2012b:48). Kings’ sons were installed as high priests and other offices, and marriage alliances with leading Theban families are well attested (e.g., Montuemhat, Fourth Prophet of Amun and Mayor of Thebes). Female Kushite family members were installed as God’s Wives of Amun with a considerable political influence and impact on building activities in Thebes (Ayad 2009; Koch 2012). These women were buried—in line with the tradition of the earlier Libyan period—in tomb chapels at Medinet Habu (Budka 2010a:77–78). It seems likely that military officials during the 25th Dynasty would be also of Kushite origin, even if evidence for holders of military titles is scarce. Christopher Naunton has proposed that this lack of titles can be explained by the replacement of the Egyptian system with a Kushite administrative system, in which titles played a different role (Naunton 2014:105–106 with references; see also Pope 2014). Several types of Theban funerary monuments were constructed for Nubians: shaft tombs (secondary shafts in earlier structures, attested in Qurna by high officials like Fourth Priests of Amun; Strudwick 2000:252; Budka 2010a:341–42); small mudbrick

Nubians in Egypt during the 25th Dynasty   479 chapels in the Asasif (of lower-ranking persons; Budka 2010a:342); and large monumental temple tombs in the Southern Asasif (Eigner 1984:33–34; Pischikova 2014). The latter are especially significant; TT 391 and TT 223 represent a novel type of tomb that became the standard funerary architecture for the highest officials of both Egyptian and Nubian descent during the 25th and 26th Dynasties (Eigner  1984:40–42; Budka  2010a:63). These temple tombs were integrated into the sacred landscape of Thebes, associated with Karnak, and reflect on earlier monuments on the West Bank, especially the New Kingdom Houses of Millions of Years, large royal temples with a vital role to guarantee royal authority and legitimization, in particular on the occasion of festivals (Fig. 25.2). There are certain parallels between the tomb architecture used by Kushites in Thebes and at Abydos, which were also reflected in monuments in Nubia. At Abydos, Kushite elites recognized the sacred landscape of earlier periods and Kushite monuments were implemented into this system. This can be illustrated by Cemetery D located at the northern part of the site with burials of royal women and their courtiers, including male members of the royal family (Wenig 1990; Lohwasser 2001:79–80; Budka 2012a:33–35; Leahy 2014). The burials in Cemetery D are not well preserved, but shaft tombs, tomb types with chapels, vaulted brick tombs, and pyramids can be identified (Budka 2012a:37–44). The burial of Prince Ptahmaakheru in Cemetery D is the only known

Figure 25.2  The setting of the Kushite monumental tombs in Southern Asasif. Note the close location of the Ramesseum (New Kingdom House of Millions of Years). Photograph: Julia

Budka, 2006.

480   Julia Budka burial place in Egypt for a son of a Kushite ruler (Leahy  2014:70). In general, these Kushite interments at Abydos need to be seen in light of the importance of rituals and votive offerings for the god Osiris at Umm el-Qaab, the burial ground of the earliest Egyptian kings on a desert plateau of Abydos (Budka  2012a:30–31; Budka  2014b; Leahy 2014:86–87). Osiris, the Egyptian god of the underworld, was essential for royal legitimacy: Egyptian kings were associated with the god in death, receiving like the god eternal life after resurrection while the royal successor was identified as Osiris’s son Horus. The prominence of ceremonies during the 25th Dynasty at the presumed burial place of the god Osiris at Umm el-Qaab might explain the references to Abydene monuments and rituals in Kush. For example, the much-debated form of the underground rooms of the pyramid of Taharqo in Nuri (Kendall 2008) as burial ground of Osiris Taharqo requires the understanding of the Osireion at Abydos (see now Lohwasser 2019). Traces of pottery rituals at Umm el-Qaab find close parallels at both royal Kushite cemeteries, El-Kurru (Budka 2014a, see below), and Nuri (Budka 2010c:45–46). Most essential for the Kushite focus on Abydos and Osiris was the importance of both the site (as earliest royal necropolis) and the god (as lord of the dead) for royal legitimacy and key concepts of the Egyptian funerary tradition. It is therefore probably not a coincidence that the Kushite ruler who constructed in Kush the monument influenced most by Abydene perceptions, King Taharqo, had major difficulties with his legitimacy after complications around his succession (Török 2015:36–37).

Kushite Tomb Groups in Egypt The main resource for identifying lower- and middle-ranking Nubians in Egypt is burial equipment. More than twenty Theban tomb groups are those of Nubians (Budka 2010a:330–41,  2010b; Musso and Petacchi  2011; Böhm and Herrmann  2016) and at Abydos, a minimum of seven (Budka 2012a). Of course, the total number of burials must have been considerably higher. For example, other than pottery, almost no objects from the original burials have survived from the monumental Kushite tombs in the Southern Asasif. Most finds from Thebes are therefore remains from lower-ranking Kushite burials, where the repertoire of intact groups of burials within Tomb VII in the Asasif can be called typical (Budka 2010a). An interesting example here is the burial of the lady Kherirw, which appears to fit into the standards of Egyptian tomb groups of the mid- to late 25th Dynasty, as established by Aston (2009:395–96). However, despite its Egyptian character and appearance on first glance, the Kushite origin of its owner is not neglected within the equipment. Small details like the spelling of the personal names, the representations of the persons (Fig. 25.3), and specialized objects are evidence of the cultural identity of the people ­buried. Another object that reveals the cultural identity of its owner is the small beaker (reg. 306) from one of the infant burials in Tomb VII. It is made of a non-Egyptian marl fabric and finds its closest parallels from the chapel of the god’s wife Amenirdis I in

Nubians in Egypt during the 25th Dynasty   481

Figure 25.3  Kherirw in indigenous Kushite garments on her inner coffin from Tomb VII. © Austrian Academy of Sciences.

Medinet Habu (daughter of King Kashta) and particularly in Kushite cemeteries of Nubia (e.g., Nuri; see Budka 2010a:345–46). The three infant burials of the 25th Dynasty in Tomb VII—for one of which a drinking vessel from back home became a burial gift— give a small glimpse of personal tragedies normally well concealed by the monumental discourse and display of idealized families. The individualized design of objects of Egyptian origin can also show aspects of the Kushite identity in Egypt. This is best illustrated by the example of the burial of Niu from TT 99, whose openwork coffin and funerary servant figures (shabtis) are highly unusual by Egyptian standards. Unlike Egyptian shabtis, these figures carry baskets on their heads like those from the burials of royal women in the cemetery at El-Kurru (Budka 2010b:505, with references; Musso and Petacchi 2011; see Fig. 25.4 middle right). Another possible Kushite adaptation of an Egyptian shabti comes from Tomb VII. Whereas the lady Kherirw had two Egyptian-style shabti boxes found in situ with simple clay shabtis, a peculiar clay shabti was found in the shaft filling of the tomb. A small, beardless clay shabti (K02/17) appears to have a kalathos (a flat-topped cylindrical headdress as is well known for statues of the God’s Wives of Amun (Budka 2010a:344–45, fig. 120). The sometimes-peculiar shabtis associated with Kushite tomb groups illustrate further that the Kushites occasionally took on Egyptian burial customs and used their equipment without knowing the function or inventing an individual interpretation. In the case of shabtis, evidence from royal burials strongly indicates that the concept of

482   Julia Budka

Indigenous garment

Writing of names Specific types of shabtis

Bead net (?)

Kushite vessels (esp. drinking & cooking)

Figure 25.4  Specific features of Kushite tomb groups and representations in Egypt. Top after Lohwasser 2001; shabti (mid right) after Musso and Petacchi 2011.

Kushite shabtis differs from the Egyptian one (see Lohwasser 2001:99–103; Balanda 2014; Balanda 2020:123–32). For example, shabtis were found dislocated in various tombs in El-Kurru—it is generally ruled out that this happened accidently, but that these shabtis were rather used as some votive or presents. This might also be the case for shabtis of Kushite God’s Wives of Amun found in Medinet Habu scattered between several shaft burials including some of their female attendants (Budka 2010a:344–45). Specific Kushite funerary concepts were adopted by Egyptians as well. The most prominent example is the use of the bead net, attested in Egypt from the 25th Dynasty to the Ptolemaic period. It seems to have originated from Nubia (see Budka 2010a:255, 343 with references) and would therefore represent a Kushite impact on Late Egyptian funerary customs. A complete example of a bead net was exposed on the mummy of Irw found in situ in his set of coffins in Tomb VII (see Fig. 25.4, bottom left; Budka 2010a:257).

Nubians in Egypt during the 25th Dynasty   483 Another Kushite funerary tradition traceable in Egypt is the bed burial. The burial of King Piankhy (Ku. 17) illustrates an identification of the Kushite burial bed with the idea of the Egyptian embalming bed (Welsby 1996:82). A bed of bronze was found at Medinet Habu in the crypt of Amenirdis I, daughter of Kashta, and might recall this equation (Budka 2010b:343). Possible fragments of a wooden funerary bed are also associated with the burial of Queen Paabtamery at Abydos (Budka 2012a:45–48). Another interesting example is a woman also with the name Amenirdis in Lahun, buried in non-Egyptian style in the late 8th or early 7th century bce on a bed in the shape of a lion. This female burial could therefore be the only evidence for a Kushite burial outside Upper Egypt (Budka 2012a:48).

The Identity of Nubians in Egypt As demonstrated by Günter Vittmann, five elements of the Egyptian culture are often adopted by foreigners: name, cult, funerary culture/tradition, iconography of objects, and the use of hieroglyphic script (Vittmann 2003:241–42). In the following, the use and specific aspects of these features by Kushites in Egypt will be presented, reflecting on the state of the source material (Table 25.1). Again, it must be stressed that only the examples where an identification as Nubian is certain or very likely can be considered. Persons that appear completely Egyptian are invisible, but should not be forgotten (cf. Vittmann 2006).

Name The most direct evidence for the Kushite language during the 25th Dynasty in Egypt are personal names (see Breyer  2009 with references; Zibelius-Chen  2011). However, although the birth names of all Kushite rulers and the names of queens and princesses are Kushite, Kushite names are otherwise less frequent (Vittmann  2007:143). Many examples illustrate that Kushites used an Egyptian name, especially in priestly offices and the funerary sphere (Vittmann 2007:153–57). Vittmann and others have collected prominent examples for officials retaining Kushite names like Karabesken/Kelbasken, Pekertror, and Ariketekana (Budka and Kammerzell 2007; Vittmann 2007; ZibeliusChen 2009; Zibelius-Chen 2011). A case study from Tomb VII in the Asasif illustrates that Kushites could have both an Egyptian and a foreign name (Budka  2010b:506, 509). For example, from the intact burial of the lady Kherirw (see above), her father is called on her innermost coffin in syllabic writing, Penpen-aneh/Penah, instead of Pawen like on the outer coffins. Kherirw’s mother probably only had a Kushite name, Linjma or Limmty, which appears written in several variants (see Zibelius-Chen 2009; Budka 2010b:505) that might illustrate difficulties in spelling a foreign name in hieroglyphs.

484   Julia Budka Another category of names is constituted by foreign names in Egyptianized forms— names which seem Egyptian because the reading of the elements forming the name would also make sense in Egyptian but actually conceal a Kushite name (see Vittmann 2007:151–53). One of the most prominent examples is the queen Paabtamery attested on a stela from Abydos (Vittmann 2007:151, fig. 7) and mentioned above for her possible bed burial.

Cult As far as the source material allows, Kushites in Egypt adopted Egyptian cult in temples, the sacred landscape and tomb monuments. An intense royal building program at Karnak and on the Theban West bank is traceable, including monuments of the God’s Wives of Amun. Private statues illustrate the continuing importance of Amun-Ra and Osiris within the Theban sacral topography. The Kushite interest in Abydos—testified by pottery, tombs, and stelae—is certainly linked with an interest in the god Osiris and the cult for the god at his presumed tomb at Umm el-Qaab. The general focus on Osiris during the 1st millennium bce markedly increased during the 25th Dynasty and is clearly linked to the significance of the god for royal legitimacy and ancestor cult.

Funerary Culture As in other periods of the Egyptian history, most sources for Nubians derive from the funerary record. As mentioned above, several different types of tombs are attested in Thebes and Abydos. At both sites, the tomb architecture represents a mixture of tradition and innovation—the Osirian tomb, the Houses of Millions of Years and pyramids are some of the traditional Egyptian elements that were used to create something new. The Kushite focus on Abydos and the god Osiris clearly illustrate that key concepts of the Egyptian funerary tradition were of great importance during the 25th Dynasty. The evidence for Kushite tomb groups was presented above. Similar observations like for the tomb decoration and architecture are possible for burial goods, with “archaizing” objects like stone vessels and the reintroduction of old Egyptian traditions like real canopic jars. New elements deriving from indigenous Nubian customs are also present, possibly including the tradition of the bead net and the bed burial (Fig. 25.4). Kushite shabtis illustrate that the 25th Dynasty also modified the function of wellestablished Egyptian funerary customs, both on the royal and non-royal level. Another aspect of Egyptian funerary ritual probably influenced the Kushites as well: the smashing of red vessels attested at the royal cemetery at El-Kurru finds close parallels at Abydos (Budka 2014b). Pottery is an integral, but often neglected part of Egyptian tomb groups, including during the 25th Dynasty. This also holds true for Kushite tomb groups in Egypt, where the use of indigenous Nubian vessels is typical, especially drinking vessels and cooking

Nubians in Egypt during the 25th Dynasty   485 pots. These vessels were probably used in daily life before they became a burial gift (Budka  2014c). Attested in monumental tomb architecture like TT 223, their use as burial gifts stems from a long-lasting Nubian tradition, but differs from the contemporaneous Egyptian burial customs (Budka 2014c:510–11). Overall, slight modifications of the funerary equipment can be traced in Kushite burials in Egypt, despite the generally Egyptian features.

Iconography of Objects This theme can be divided into two categories: (1) the iconography of objects used by Kushites like items of the burial equipment (e.g., mirrors) and (2) the iconography of objects representing Kushite individuals in both two- and three-dimensional works of art. For the first category, it must be stressed that many Kushite tomb groups are completely Egyptian in style, with slight differences seen only in the small details, like a specific use of hieroglyphs and personal representations. However, there are other object categories that were using Egyptian iconography with more modifications, such as shabtis or mirrors with personal representations in Kushite style (cf. Fig.  25.4 top left),  as well as scenes on stelae with individuals presenting mirrors to a goddess (Vittmann 2007:147). Two-dimensional representations of Kushites are well attested on reliefs, stelae, and coffins. Very helpful for identifying Kushite women is that they are often dressed in Kushite style clothing (Fig.  25.4 top), with men sometimes also represented in their native Kushite garments (Vittmann  2007:141). Several stelae, predominantly from Abydos, attest to female and male Kushites because of un-Egyptian names, representations in Kushite costume, or sometimes with dark skin (Leclant  1965:123; Dallibor 2005:137–38). One of the rare cases for the use of Kushite female costume on coffins is the complete set of Kherirw, from the Tomb VII in the Asasif (Fig. 25.3). Here she is wearing an unEgyptian coiffure (short wig or natural, very curly hair) and a Kushite dress with fringes on the sleeves. Another characteristic Kushite feature of this costume is a small tail-like appendix on the bottom of the dress that, according to Lohwasser, represents a female fertility symbol in the shape of a fox-tail (Lohwasser 1999:593). The body proportions of Kherirw are also un-Egyptian and find parallels in representations of other Kushite females on stelae from both Egypt and Kush. Another important case study is Udjarenes, Montuemhat’s Kushite wife. She is represented in the reliefs of TT 34 both as Nubian and as Egyptian, according to context (Russmann 1997; Vittmann 2007:155). In a seated group-statue in the first court of TT 34, she is probably depicted as completely Egyptian. By contrast, her stone shabtis discovered in the same tomb, but used within the burial compartment and therefore less visible than the group-statue, display typical Kushite facial features (Lohwasser 2001:190–91; Budka 2010a:331). It has to be noted, however, that almost all of the stone shabtis of the 25th and 26th Dynasty found in Egypt show such “Kushite” features, including those of

486   Julia Budka the prominent Egyptian officials Harwa, Montuemhat, and Padimenope. Thus, artistic trends and references to the royal Kushite portrait might also explain the style of Udjarenes’s shabtis.2 In this respect it is interesting to note that Udjarenes’s son with Montuemhat, Pasherenmut, is attested from the Karnak cachette with a striding statue (CG 42243) which reflects Old Kingdom models, but shows clear facial expressions of Kushite style (Bothmer 1960:66). A possible reflection of Kushite identity can also be found in the face of the standing statue of prince Horemakhet (CG 42204) (Russmann 2010:954). Male Kushites may also be depicted wearing non-Egyptian costumes—the general Pekertror is depicted on his stela (Chicago OIM 6408) with an indigenous costume, the so-called “Kushite cloak” (Hallmann 2007). This specific cloak is also attested in threedimensional examples, like the striding statue of Artekana (JE 38018; cf. Dallibor 2005:137–38). Perhaps displaying realistic features, Artekana is depicted with unusual, un-Egyptian body forms and the “Kushite cloak” (Hallmann 2007). To conclude, reliefs and statues produced in Egypt displaying indigenous Kushites may show Nubian features, but can also appear completely Egyptian in style. Kushite features like the costume, hair, or skin color are not always attested together, but sometimes also as singular features in otherwise Egyptian style statuary, relief or wall painting (Budka 2012b:50–51).

Use of Hieroglyphic Script This category is closely linked to names because Kushite names were often spelled in unusual hieroglyphs and syllabic writing. The case of Tomb VII with its in situ Kushite burials illustrates that the spelling of Kushite names may vary on one object and differs from one item to another. In addition, coffin inscriptions may show elements which could suggest that the owner (and/or the craftsman) was not literate—some passages were omitted or strangely written (see Budka 2010b). Also noteworthy is a coffin with pseudo-hieroglyphs from the Kushite Tomb VII in the Asasif. The Ptah-Sokar-Osiris figure of Kherirw from the same tomb was left uninscribed, but found in situ next to her coffin set (Budka 2010a:263). All in all, the records suggest that aside from the highest elite, the use of the hieroglyphic script by Nubians was different than by Egyptians, perhaps indicating a lower value for the script because of another use of language/a different language.

Summary To sum up, five aspects of records associated with Kushites in Egypt can be named for reconstructing Kushite identity: (1) personal names and their hieroglyphic orthography, (2) representations of persons, (3) use/misuse or lack of hieroglyphic inscriptions, (4)

Nubians in Egypt during the 25th Dynasty   487 imported objects of daily use and finally, (5) the individualized design of Egyptian objects. In general, these are elements of the Egyptian culture frequently adopted by foreigners (Vittmann  2003:241–42). The way these features were reinterpreted provides information about the cultural identity of the person adopting them. In this context, it is important to note that this self-confidence of Kushites is exceptional for foreigners in Egypt; probably the majority were never fully acculturated and an insistence on Kushite tradition is obvious. The references to their foreign descent may vary but was, for example, openly demonstrated by the fact that Kushites chose in some contexts to represent themselves wearing their indigenous costume in Egyptian context (Lohwasser 2006:136). All in all, the heterogeneous record for Nubians of the 25th Dynasty in Egypt makes it difficult to speak of them as one ethnic group (cf. Budka 2012b). It is not just about ancestry, but rather about cultural identity that is very much depending on the specific context; people switched between Egyptian, Kushite, or hybrid identities according to context/monument. Therefore, one cannot speak of a uniform type of “first generation Kushite” or “second generation Kushite.” Furthermore, a large number of Kushites— from both the first and second generation—remain archaeologically invisible, because we cannot identify them as Nubians. This fragmented state of evidence, particularly the personal dynamics, draws a complex and still incomplete picture of Nubians in Egypt during the 25th Dynasty. Cultural markers like names, coiffure, and costume are identifiable, but it is difficult to provide standard rules for the use of such markers. Ongoing archaeological fieldwork in both Egypt and Sudan has much potential for improving our knowledge. To conclude, it is essential to regard Kushites as integral parts of the Egyptian society of the 25th Dynasty and therefore relevant on various levels, for social stratification as well as funerary and artistic traditions, which show an intriguing mixture of innovation and tradition.

Notes 1. For a similar approach for Libyans and their identity, see Jurman 2015. 2. I would like to thank Meg Gundlach for several discussions in this matter.

References Cited Arnold, D. 1996 Die Tempel Ägyptens, Götterwohnungen, Baudenkmäler, Kultstätten. Bechtermünz. Aston, D.A. 2009 Burial Assemblages of Dynasty 21–25: Chronology, Typology, Developments. Contributions to the Chronology of the Eastern Mediterranean 21. Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Denkschriften der Gesamtakademie 54. Ayad, M. 2009 God’s Wife, God’s Servant: The God’s Wife of Amun. Routledge. Baines, J. and J. Malek 1980 Atlas of Ancient Egypt. Phaidon. Balanda, B. 2014 Protecting the Mummy—A Reinterpretation of Shabtis in Napatan Funerary Customs. In The Fourth Cataract and Beyond: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference for Nubian Studies, ed. J.R.  Anderson and D.A.  Welsby, pp. 655–62. British Museum Publications on Egypt and Sudan 1. Peeters.

488   Julia Budka Balanda, B. 2020 Development of Royal Funeral Traditions along the Middle Nile Valley during the Napatan Period. J.H. Röll. Böhm, B. and S. Herrmann 2016 Der Spätzeitsarg der Schep-en-Hor im Naturalienkabinett und Stadtmuseum Waldenburg. Schriften zur Ägyptologie 3. Verlag Dr. Kovač. Bothmer, B. von 1960 Egyptian Sculpture of the Late Period. The Brooklyn Museum. Breyer, F. 2009 Zu einigen kuschitischen Namen, Titeln und Epitheta. Der Antike Sudan. Mitteilungen der Sudanarchäologischen Gesellschaft zu Berlin 20:169–71. Broekman, G.P.F. 2020 The Reign of the Kushite King Piye: Reconsidering Kushite Relations with Egypt, Assyria, and the Palestinian Rulers. In Ein Kundiger, der in die Gottesworte eingedrungen ist: Festschrift für den Ägyptologen Karl Jansen-Winkeln zum 65. Geburtstag, ed. S.-W. Hsu, V. P.-M. Laisney and J. Moje, pp. 1–9. Zaphon. Budka, J. 2010a Bestattungsbrauchtum und Friedhofsstruktur im Asasif. Eine Untersuchung der spätzeit­lichen Befunde anhand der Ergebnisse der österreichischen Ausgrabungen in den Jahren 1969–1977. Untersuch­ungen der Zweigstelle Kairo des Österreichischen Archäolog­ ischen Instituts 34. Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Denkschriften der Gesamtakademie 59. ——— 2010b Kushite Tomb Groups in Late Period Thebes. In Between the Cataracts: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference of Nubian Studies, ed. W. Godlewski and A. Łajtar, Part 2, Fasc. 2, pp. 503–18. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean Supplement 2.2/2. Warsaw University. ——— 2010c V. Die Keramik des Osiriskults: Erste Beobachtungen zu Formen, Datierung und Funktion. In Studien zum Osiriskult in Umm el-Qaab/Abydos—Ein Vor­bericht, by U. Effland, J.  Budka, and A.  Effland. Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts Abteilung Kairo 66:42–58. ——— 2012a Kuschiten in Abydos: Einige Überlegungen zur Nutzung von Cemetery D (Mace) während der 25. Dynastie. Göttinger Miszellen 232:29–51. ——— 2012b Individuen, indigene Gruppen oder integrierter Teil der ägyptischen Gesellschaft? Zur soziologischen Aussagekraft materieller Hinterlassenschaften von Kuschiten im spätzeitlichen Ägypten. In Sozialisationen. Individuum—Gruppe—Gesellschaft, ed. G.  Neunert, K.  Gabler, and A.  Verbovsek, pp. 46–60. Beiträge des ersten Münchner Arbeitskreises Junge Aegyptologie 1. Harrassowitz. ——— 2014a Egyptian Impact on Pot-breaking Ceremonies at El Kurru? A Re-examination. In The Fourth Cataract and Beyond: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference for Nubian Studies, ed. J.R. Anderson and D.A. Welsby, pp. 641–54. British Museum Publications on Egypt and Sudan 1. Peeters. ——— 2014b Votivgaben für Osiris. Sokar 29:56–65. ——— 2014c Kushite Pottery from the Tomb of Karakhamun: Towards a Reconstruction of the Use of Pottery in Twenty-fifth Dynasty Temple Tombs. In Thebes in the First Millennium BC, ed. E. Pischikova, J. Budka, and K. Griffin, pp. 503–20. Cambridge Scholars. Budka, J. and F. Kammerzell 2007 Kuschiten in Theben. Eine archäologische Spurensuche. Der Antike Sudan. Mitteilungen der Sudanarchäologischen Gesellschaft zu Berlin 18:163–77. Cabrol, A. 2001 Les voies processionnelles de Thèbes. Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta 97. Peeters. Coulon, L. ed. 2016 La cachette de Karnak. Nouvelles perspectives sur les découvertes de Georges Legrain. Bibliothèque d’Étude 161. Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale. Dallibor, K. 2005 Taharqo—Pharao aus Kusch. Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte und Kultur der 25. Dynastie. Schriften zur Ägyptologie A6. Achet Verlag.

Nubians in Egypt during the 25th Dynasty   489 Eigner, D. 1984 Die monumentalen Grabbauten der Spätzeit in der Thebanischen Nekropole. Untersuchungen der Zweigstelle Kairo 6. Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Denkschriften der Gesamtakademie 8. Hallmann, A. 2007 The “Kushite Cloak” of Pekartror and Iriketakana: Novelty or Tradition? Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt 43:15–27. Jurman, C. 2015 “Wenn das Fremde zum Eigenen wird.” Identitätsbilder und Repräsentationsstrategien im multiethnischen Milieu Ägyptens während der Dritten Zwischenzeit. In Das Eigene und das Fremde. Akten der 4. Tagung des Zentrums Archäologie und Altertumswissenschaften an der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, ed. A. Pülz and E. Trinkl, pp. 33–49. Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften. Kendall, T. 2008 Why Did Taharqa Build his Tomb at Nuri? In Between the Cataracts: Proceedings of the 11th Conference for Nubian Studies, ed. W. Godlewski and A. Łajtar, Part 1, pp. 117–47. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean, Supplement Series 2.1. Warsaw University. Koch, C. 2012 “Die den Amun mit ihrer Stimme zufriedenstellen.” Gottesgemahlinnen und Musikerinnen im thebanischen Amunstaat von der 22. bis zur 26. Dynastie. Studien zu den Ritualszenen altägypischer Tempel 27. J.H. Röll Verlag. Leahy, A. 2014 Kushites at Abydos: The Royal Family and Beyond. In Thebes in the First Millennium BC, ed. E. Pischikova, J. Budka, and K. Griffin, pp. 61–95. Cambridge Scholars. Leclant, J. 1965 Recherches sur les monuments thébains de la XXVe Dynastie dite éthiopienne. Bibliothèque d’Étude 36. Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale. Lohwasser, A. 1999 Die Darstellung der Tracht der Kuschitinnen der 25. Dynastie. In Studien zum antiken Sudan, ed. S.  Wenig, pp. 586–603. Akten der 7. Internationalen Tagung für meroitistische Forschungen. Meroitica 15. Harrassowitz. ——— 2001 Die königlichen Frauen im antiken Reich von Kusch, 25. Dynastie bis zur Zeit Nastasen. Meroitica 19. Harrassowitz. ——— 2006 Fremde Heimat. Selektive Akkulturation in Kusch. In Timelines: Studies in Honour of Manfred Bietak, ed. E. Czerny, I. Hein, H. Hunger, D. Melman, and A. Schwab, pp. 133–38. Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta 149(3). Peeters. ——— 2019 Doubling the Double Kingdom: Taharqo's Creation of a Religio-political Landscape. In Egyptian Royal Ideology and Kingship under Periods of Foreign Rulers: Case Studies from the First Millennium BC, ed. J. Budka, pp. 65–79. 9. Symposion zur ägyptischen Königsideologie. Harrassowitz. Morkot, R.G. 2000 The Black Pharaohs: Egypt’s Nubian Rulers. Rubicon. ——— 2013 From Conquered to Conqueror: The Organization of Nubia in the New Kingdom and the Kushite Administration of Egypt. In Ancient Egyptian Administration, ed. J.C. Moreno García, pp. 911–63. Brill. Musso, S. and S. Petacchi 2011 Kushite Shabtis with Basket on the Head: An Innovation from the Royal Burials of Kush. New Evidence from Some Egyptian Collections in Italy. Der Antike Sudan. Mitteilungen der Sudanarchäologischen Gesellschaft zu Berlin 22:137–42. Myśliwiec, K. 2000 The Twilight of Ancient Egypt: First Millennium B.C.E. Cornell University Press. Naunton, C. 2014 Titles of Karakhamun and the Kushite Administration of Thebes. In Tombs of the South Asasif Necropolis: Thebes, Karakhamun (TT 223), and Karabasken (TT 391) in the Twenty-fifth Dynasty, ed. E. Pischikova, pp. 103–107. American University in Cairo Press. Pischikova, E. ed. 2014 Tombs of the South Asasif Necropolis: Thebes, Karakhamun (TT 223), and Karabasken (TT 391) in the Twenty-Fifth Dynasty. American University in Cairo Press.

490   Julia Budka Pischikova, E., J. Budka, and K. Griffin eds. 2018 Thebes in the First Millennium BC: Art and Archaeology of the Kushite Period and Beyond. Golden House. Pope, J. 2014 The Double Kingdom under Taharqo: Studies in the History of Kush and Egypt, c. 690–664 BC. Culture and History of the Ancient Near East 69. Brill. Russmann, E.R. 1997 Mentuemhat’s Kushite Wife (Further Remarks on the Decoration of the Tomb of Mentuemhat). Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt 34:21–39. ——— 2010 Late Period Sculpture. In A Companion to Ancient Egypt, ed. A.B. Lloyd, pp. 944–69. Wiley Blackwell. Smith, S.T. 2013 Revenge of the Kushites: Assimilation and Resistance in Egypt’s New Kingdom Empire and Nubian Ascendancy over Egypt. In Empires and Diversity: On the Crossroads of Archaeology, Anthropology, and History, ed. G.E. Areshian, pp. 84–107. Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Press. Strudwick, N. 1995 The Fourth Priest of Amun, Wedjahor. Göttinger Miszellen 148:91–94. ——— 2000 The Theban Tomb of Senneferi [TT.99]: An Overview of Work Undertaken from 1992 to 1999. Memnonia 11:241–66. Sullivan, E. 2013 A Glimpse into Ancient Thebes: Excavations at South Karnak (2004–2006). British Archaeological Reports International Series 2538. Archaeopress. Török, L. 2015 The Periods of Kushite History from the Tenth Century BC to the AD Fourth Century. Studia Aegyptiaca Supplements 1. Ísisz Foundation. Vittmann, G. 2003 Ägypten und die Fremden im ersten vorchristlichen Jahrtausend. Philipp von Zabern. ——— 2006 Zwischen Integration und Ausgrenzung. Zur Akkulturation von Ausländern im spätzeitlichen Ägypten. In Altertum und Mittelmeerraum. Die antike Welt diesseits und jenseits der Levante. Festschrift für Peter W. Haider, ed. R. Rollinger and B. Truschnegg, pp. 561–95. Oriens et Occidens 12. Franz Steiner. ——— 2007 A Question of Names, Titles, and Iconography: Kushites in Priestly, Administrative and Other Positions from Dynasties 25 to 26. Der Antike Sudan. Mitteilungen der Sudanarchäologischen Gesellschaft zu Berlin 18:139–61. Welsby, D. 1996 The Kingdom of Kush: The Napatan and Meroitic Empires. British Museum Press. Wenig, S. 1990 Pabatma—Pekereslo—Pekar-tror. Ein Beitrag zur Frühgeschichte der Kuschiten. In Studia in Honorem Fritz Hintze, ed. D. Apelt, E. Endesfelder, and S. Wenig, pp. 333–52. Meroitica 12. Akademie Verlag. Winnicki, J.K. 2009 Late Egypt and her Neighbours: Foreign Population in Egypt in the First Millennium BC. The Journal of Juristic Papyrology Supplement 12. Warsaw University. Zibelius-Chen, K. 2009 Zur Lesung eines Personennnamens der 25. Dynastie. Göttinger Miszellen 221:105–107. ——— 2011 “Nubisches” Sprachmaterial in hieroglyphischen und hieratischen Texten. Personennamen, Appellativa, Phrasen vom Neuen Reich bis in die napatanische und meroitische Zeit. Meroitica 25. Harrassowitz.

chapter 26

K ushites i n Egy pt, 664 BCE–1 4 CE Egypt and Kush in the Borderlands of Lower Nubia Kathryn Howley

After almost a century of Kushite rule over, and presence in, Egypt, the retreat of King Tanwetamani to Kush in the face of the invading Assyrian armies of Ashurbanipal brought a close to the 25th Dynasty. So ended the presence of Kushite kings on the throne in Egypt; but was this an end to Kushites in Egypt? This chapter will examine textual and archaeological evidence dating from 664 bce—the point at which the Kushite kings were ejected from Egypt—until 14 ce, the end of the reign of Augustus, thus covering the Egyptian Late period, Ptolemaic era, and the beginning of the Roman period. In the immediate aftermath of the 25th Dynasty, the ongoing presence of Nubians in Egypt was driven by the continuity of Kushite officials remaining in political and priestly office in Thebes. Over time, however, it is striking that so few Kushites can be identified in the archaeological and textual records in Egypt. Rather, in the later 1st millennium the presence of Kushites in Egypt is overwhelmingly concentrated in the areas immediately south of the First Cataract that were claimed by Egypt as Egyptian territory. In this nominally Egyptian region with a mostly Nubian population, two different cultures with two different conceptions of borders became deeply entangled.1 Their interaction is monumentally inscribed on the Lower Nubian landscape through the medium of their shared religious practice. The study of Kushites in Egypt presupposes a clear sense of where Kush ended and Egypt began, yet this superficially simple distinction is in fact challenging to make, and would have elicited different answers from Egyptians and Nubians. Indeed, many of the instances of Kushites in Egypt to be discussed in this chapter arose because of differing conceptions among Kushites and Egyptians of what exactly was meant by “Kush” and “Egypt.” Kushite adherence to traditionally Egyptian religious practices, and a Kushite sense of ownership over Egyptian religion, certainly blurred the boundaries

492   Kathryn Howley between Egypt and Kush from a Kushite point of view, and encouraged the continued presence of Kushites in Egypt in order to trade religious items, serve in religious offices, and worship at temples of Egyptian gods. In addition, while the native population of Egypt had for millennia exhibited a clear cultural identity and was geographically enclosed by borders that were enforced both ideologically and physically, this was not the case for the Nubians, a modern descriptor that includes a large number of different cultural groups that lived in the Middle Nile region. The clear boundaries set between Egyptian and non-Egyptian territory by the Egyptians were not shared by Nubian groups who lived and worshipped in the area, creating a problem when Kushites inevitably transgressed the Egyptian borders. This was increasingly the case in the Greco-Roman period, when interaction between Egypt and Kush was focused on the area between the First and Second Cataracts of the Nile, nominally Egyptian territory. The Kushites, working from very different systems of social organization, had no such sense of geographical boundaries, and were drawn to the area south of the First Cataract by its long-standing religious importance, recognized by both Kushites and Egyptians. These two groups, then, shared religious beliefs, yet had very different cultural expectations, particularly relating to control of territory. The resulting conflict created a series of monumental religious buildings that exhibited a complex mélange of cultural influences, even while the area became a political battlefield: at one time the southernmost reaches of Egypt, at another the northernmost stretch of Kush. These “debatable lands”2 south of the First Cataract therefore demonstrate the characteristic feature of Egypto-Kushite relations after 664 bce: that continuing contact between the two very different cultures was driven by their shared religious belief, at the same time as interaction between their differing cultural expectations sparked conflict and created an innovative, entangled material culture. Frontiers and borderlands, despite their popular conception as rigid limits, are often areas in which archaeologists seek in vain clear boundaries between cultural groups (e.g., Lightfoot and Martinez 1995). The interactions that took place in the marchlands between the First and Second Cataracts, therefore, are not unusual in border areas, but strikingly the disconnect between ideological expectation of clear boundaries and the reality of overlapping zones of interaction was as much an issue for Egyptians and Kushites as it is for modern researchers. In fact, the conflict created by this disconnect increased the amount of interaction between Egypt and Kush, and drove the ongoing presence of Kushites in Egypt. Egyptians had been accustomed to centralized government throughout their history, and had a very clear cultural identity. Boundaries and borders were inscribed ideologically as well as physically on the landscape, as the famous boundary stelae of Senusret III in Nubia and Akhenaten at Amarna make clear (see, e.g., Smith 2005). The idea of boundaries was even encoded into the Egyptian language, with tjas, “border,” being a very common word in royal inscriptions. The policing of these borders had a long history in Egyptian culture, the network of fortresses that guarded the Egyptian border with Nubia in the Middle Kingdom being the most well-known example. Such ideologies become particularly problematic when they cross a natural geographical border: however far south into Nubia the Egyptian pharaohs sought to set their frontier, the rocky barriers of the Nile cataracts led Aswan to be the de facto

Kushites in Egypt, 664 bce–14 ce   493 s­outhern border of Egypt for millennia, as indeed the Greek epigrams inscribed at Philae recognized it to be (Eide et al. 1996:169, 170; see further below). The Egyptian state, however, whether controlled by native Egyptians, the Ptolemies, or Romans, attempted to overcome these natural, locally recognized borders and push further south. This caused conflict with Nubians and at the same time prompted an astonishing building campaign in which Egyptian religious practice took on a decidedly local flavor. State organization in Nubia, however, worked rather differently than in Egypt. Nubians did not have a single, recognizable ethnic identity as in Egypt, but rather a wide variety of different tribal groups existed in the area, several of which are identified in classical textual sources (e.g., Herodotus 2.29.2–5; Diodorus Siculus 3.8–10; Strabo 17.1.53). Nor was government centralized, but most likely functioned through a segmentary system of state organization. In such a society, the concept of “borders” is not applicable—instead of controlling territory, the state is concerned with spheres of influence, mostly centered on religion, and different areas of the state may offer different levels of allegiance to the center. This type of state organization has been persuasively demonstrated for the Meroitic state by David Edwards (Edwards 1996), and more recent work has also argued for such organization earlier in Kushite history (Pope  2014, ch. 8; Howley 2015a). The incompatibility of such Nubian behaviors with the Egyptian ideology of maintaining a rigid border in territory with a Nubian population—in other words, a fundamental misunderstanding between the two sides of what was “Egyptian” and what was “Kushite”—led to the high level of interaction in the area south of the First Cataract. As Wilson (1994:103) has noted, “the visibility of boundaries is always in the eye of the beholder.”

Kushites in Egypt during the 26th Dynasty (Middle Napatan Period) The rule of the Kushite kings of the 25th Dynasty in Egypt had been plagued since the time of Taharqo by incursions of the imperially minded Assyrians. The dynasty finally ended with the invasion of the Assyrian army in 664 bce under Ashurbanipal, which penetrated as far south as the Kushite stronghold of Thebes, forever driving Tanwetamani back to Kush and the Kushite kings out of Egypt (Kitchen 1986: §355). The post–25th Dynasty kings of Kush, though no longer holding territorial control over Egypt, nevertheless continued to present themselves in much the same way as their 25th Dynasty predecessors. They were buried under pyramids at Nuri in tombs filled with Egyptian-style grave goods and hieroglyphic Egyptian writing, and showed their piety to Egyptian gods by adding to the Egyptian-style temples in Nubia (e.g., Dunham 1955). Recent work on both the Egyptian and Kushite archaeology of this period supplements the few textual sources to help us understand what role the Kushites continued to play in Egypt, and show that a rich cultural interchange persisted between the two cultures in this period even after the Kushite kings left Egypt. Much of this interchange was focused

494   Kathryn Howley on the religious sphere, in which Egypt and Kush continued to share belief and practice, despite the political break between them. Textual evidence gives us the clearest evidence of continued Nubian presence in Egypt after the end of the 25th Dynasty, demonstrating the persistence of Kushite officials in high office at the beginning of the 26th Dynasty (see also Budka, this volume, for 25th Dynasty evidence). Several Kushite officials stayed in office after the removal of Tanwetamani (see Winnicki 2009:468–72 for a list of these individuals, identified usually through their non-Egyptian names), the most notable of whom was the God’s Wife of Amun, who occupied the most powerful priestly position in Thebes. The Nitocris Adoption Stela, a text of Psamtek I that commemorates the adoption of his daughter into the line of succession of the God’s Wife of Amun, shows that Nitocris did not replace the Nubian incumbent Shepenwepet, or her first-in-line successor, Amenirdis II, another Kushite, but instead assumed the position of second-in-line (Caminos 1964:79). Another major Kushite official whom textual evidence shows to have stayed in office under Psamtek I was Harkhebi, High Priest of Amun at Thebes, the grandson of Shabaqo (Parker 1962). In addition, Wedjarenes, the wife of Montuemhat, the powerful Mayor of Thebes during the 25th–26th Dynasty, was Kushite, and a granddaughter of the 25th Dynasty king Piankhy. We can assume that she also remained in Egypt after the departure of King Tanwetamani, and although her burial has not been found, the presence of shabti figurines inscribed with her name attest to her burial in Egypt (Russmann 1997; Budka 2010). Outside Thebes, several royal Kushite women were buried at Abydos, the cult center of Osiris. Among them was Queen Peksater, the wife of the 25th Dynasty king Piankhy. A lintel and three doorjambs demonstrate the presence of her tomb at Abydos. A stela dedicated to the funerary cult of Peksater, though unprovenanced, has also been attributed to Abydos in about 630 bce (a 26th Dynasty date) on stylistic grounds (Munro 1973; Leahy 1994). Peksater is referred to on this stela by her 25th Dynasty title as “great royal wife,” and if the dating of the stela is correct, she would have been referred to by this title even after the Kushites were no longer in power in Egypt. Tracing less elite Kushites in the archaeological record is rather more challenging, as the coffin ensemble of Kherirw shows. Kherirw’s coffins can be stylistically dated to the transitional period between the 25th and 26th Dynasties (Budka 2010:507). On the inner coffin, she is represented wearing a non-Egyptian, Kushite loose dress, clearly communicating her cultural origin. Our identification of Kherirw as a Nubian rests on only this one small iconographical detail of a burial assemblage that is otherwise Egyptian in appearance. Those Kushites who lacked the means or inclination to personalize their burial equipment with a non-Egyptian name likely appear no differently in the archaeological record than Egyptians. The burial of Kherirw suggests that many more Kushites lived in Thebes than we currently know of in the early 26th Dynasty, though we are unable to identify them (Vittmann 2007:157). The contrast between Kherirw’s Kushite dress and her Egyptian burial is also important to note. While Kushites in Egypt adhered to traditionally Egyptian religious beliefs, they did not necessarily adopt other Egyptian cultural markers. As will be seen, this is only one of several pieces of evidence that the focus of the Kushite presence in Egypt during the 26th Dynasty was religious in nature.

Kushites in Egypt, 664 bce–14 ce   495 If the Kushites themselves are difficult to find, Egyptian tombs do preserve evidence of Kushite influence during the 26th Dynasty. Funerary religion in Egypt underwent various changes in the 25th Dynasty that persisted into the 26th Dynasty, after the Kushite kings had left Egypt. Although superficially Egyptian in appearance, there is evidence to suggest that some of these developments were introduced by Kushites. The addition of a bead net or shroud over the mummified body of the deceased is one such change that was introduced in Egypt in the 25th Dynasty and then persisted in Egyptian burial practice through the Ptolemaic period. The bead net seems to have appeared in Kush before its introduction in Egypt (Bosse-Griffiths 1978; Budka 2010:514), and is seen on Kushite royal burials of the 25th Dynasty and later. The practice’s Kushite rather than Egyptian origin is perhaps also indicated by the fact that bead nets are one of the very few “Egyptianizing” features that appear in Kushite non-royal burials of the period, in contrast to the majority of Egyptian objects that are restricted to the royal tombs (see for example Dunham 1963:61, 395; Vila 1980:99–100, 153; Lohwasser 2010:62–63). Offering tables represent another development in Egyptian funerary practice in the 26th Dynasty that was likely prompted by Kushite influence. Offering tables play no part in Egyptian burials of the 21st–24th Dynasties (Aston 2009), yet we do have a faience

Figure 26.1 Faience shabti of King Senkamanisken (Nuri tomb 3). Sudan National Museum 1631. Photograph: K. Howley.

496   Kathryn Howley

Figure 26.2  Miniature plaques from foundation deposits of Middle Napatan royal tombs at Nuri. Sudan National Museum 1466. Photograph: K. Howley.

example from Kush dating to the end of this period, found in the earliest tomb at the royal cemetery of El-Kurru (Dunham 1950:51). Another faience fragment of a table is also attested belonging to King Kashta, the predecessor of the first king of the 25th Dynasty, Piankhy (Dunham 1950:23). Offering tables, as with beaded nets, are one of the few “Egyptian” items that appear in non-royal Kushite burials, possibly because of the existence of libation rituals in earlier Kushite religion (Bonnet 1997:90). The only examples known from Egypt during the 25th Dynasty are connected with Kushites: those belonging to Amenirdis I or II, God’s Wife of Amun (CG 23100, BM EA1310). Offering tables do not appear as part of the burial assemblage of Egyptians in Egypt, however, until the 26th Dynasty, clearly demonstrating the practice’s origin in Kush (in Thebes, Assmann 1973: Abb. 7; Bietak and Reiser-Haslauer 1978: taf. 82 and 85; Graefe 2003:156–57; BM 967; BM EA1485. In Lower Egypt, CG 23100, 23,102, 23,106, 23,110, 23,249; BM EA94 and EA610; Bareš 1999:68). The much earlier appearance in Kush of offering tables in funerary assemblages, and the presence of offering tables in Kushite tombs in Egypt in the 25th Dynasty, makes it likely that the reintroduction of offering tables into Egyptian tombs during the 26th Dynasty was because of Kushite practice. Kushite influence on Egyptian funerary practices (i.e., in the religious sphere) was therefore being felt

Kushites in Egypt, 664 bce–14 ce   497

Figure 26.3  Miniature faience cup from foundation deposit of King Aspelta (Nuri tomb 8). Sudan National Museum 1509. Photograph: K. Howley.

even at a time when, politically, traces of the 25th Dynasty Kushite kings were suffering damnatio memoriae. The evidence of Kushite presence in Egypt in the 26th Dynasty, particularly for religious purposes, can be strengthened through the examination of evidence from Kush. While this evidence is generally indirect, royal Kushite material culture from this time period suggests that for royal Kushites, adherence to Egyptian religion required continued contact with 26th Dynasty Egypt. The burials of the Kushite kings at the royal cemetery of Nuri provide evidence not only for objects imported from Egypt, but also specialized Egyptian knowledge required to use them in an Egyptian way. The travel of knowledge as well as objects suggests that the relationship embodied by such objects is more than just a trading association, and probably also involved the movement of people between the two lands. Evidence includes shabti figurines that bear stylistic peculiarities matching contemporaneous Theban examples (Fig.  26.1), and foundation deposits that reflect 26th Dynasty fashions instead of older 25th Dynasty practices (Figs. 26.2, 26.3). In the case of the foundation deposits, not only the style of the objects but the way in which they were used (in specific assemblages and to mark the foundation of tombs rather than temples) is a 26th Dynasty innovation in Egypt, demonstrating

498   Kathryn Howley that specialized knowledge travelled along with objects from Egypt to Kush (Dunham 1955; Howley 2015b).

Kushites in Egypt during the Persian Period (Late Napatan Period) In 591 bce, the 26th Dynasty king Psamtek II invaded Kush, and penetrated as far south as the Third Cataract. Psamtek’s well-known stelae, set up in Tanis, Karnak, and Shellal, suggest that this attack may have been prompted by the territorial ambitions of the Kushite king (likely Aspelta) against Egypt (Sauneron and Yoyotte 1952; Goedicke 1981). In the period directly following Psamtek II’s invasion, archaeological evidence from Kush demonstrates that its relationship with Egypt underwent a change. The land controlled by Kush seems to have diminished; Egyptian material dating to the 26th and 27th Dynasties at the fort of Dorginarti in the region of the Second Cataract suggests that Lower Nubia had become part of Egyptian territory (Heidorn 1991). In addition, the longest Egyptian text offered by the first ten Late Napatan kings is a single heart scarab, that of Amani-nataki-lebte (MFA 20.645). Not only did the use of Egyptian text decrease dramatically at the beginning of this period, but the burial goods in Kushite royal tombs no longer followed the development of their Egyptian counterparts. Indeed, the features of items such as shabtis became so un-Egyptian looking as to prompt their description as “bastardized and degenerate” by one well-known Egyptologist (Redford 2004:146). The break of the stylistic link between the Egyptianizing objects in the Kushite royal tombs and grave goods found in Egypt suggests that after the campaign of Psamtek II, the trading links and other cultural exchanges between Kush and Egypt were severely diminished, though royal Kushites continued to adhere to Egyptian funerary religion. The related expansion of Egypt south of the First Cataract into what had been Kushite land marked a new phase of Egypto-Kushite relations in which territorial as well as cultural boundaries became imprecise, and inspired new types of interaction in which the Kushite influence on Egyptian culture was much more pronounced. From the second half of the 5th century bce to the second half of the 4th, three powerful Kushite kings renewed their interest in Egyptian writing and left several historical inscriptions that give us more information about Kushite presence in Egypt in the Late Napatan period and support the archaeological evidence from Dorginarti (AmannoteErike: Macadam 1949:50–67, pls. 17–26; Eide et al. 1996:71; Harsiyotef: Grimal 1981:40– 61, pls. X–XXV; Eide et al. 1996:78; Nastasen: Eide et al. 1996:84, Urk. III.2, 137–52). The stelae of Harsiyotef and Nastasen are particularly informative about the new character of Kushite presence in Egypt in the Persian period. Numerous successful battles in Lower Nubia are recorded in the stelae of Harsiyotef and Nastasen, particularly in the area around Abu Simbel, yet the region between the First and Second Cataracts appears to have been under Egyptian control. Most of these skirmishes were fought against other

Kushites in Egypt, 664 bce–14 ce   499 Nubian ethnic groups, demonstrating the non-Egyptian character of the population in this part of Egyptian territory. Most interestingly, in year 11 of Harsiyotef, a battle was fought at Akane (Eide et al.  1996:78, l. 93), probably to be identified as the Second Cataract fort of Mirgissa (Zibelius  1972:101). The text specifies that Kushite forces reached as far north as Aswan, definitively in Egyptian territory (Eide et al. 1996:78, l. 94). Presumably Harsiyotef was able to maintain control over the area south of Aswan, as he notes a festival that he held for Ra at Abu Simbel at the end of his inscription (Eide et al. 1996:78, l. 156). The disruption caused by the invasion of Psamtek II temporarily put an end to trade between the Kushites and Egyptians in the Late Napatan period, though royal Kushites continued to practice Egyptian religion. However, the newly expanded Egyptian territory, into an area south of the First Cataract inhabited by many different Nubian groups, marked a new chapter of Kushite presence in Egypt in which the blurring of territorial boundaries intensified the cultural blurring that had already begun with Kushite adherence to Egyptian religious practice.

The Ptolemaic Period (Meroitic Kingdom) The establishment of the Ptolemaic dynasty in Egypt in 305 bce brought an end to foreign invasions and the political instability that had plagued the country after the end of the 26th Dynasty, but the presence of a foreign ruling dynasty irreversibly changed the social and political fabric of Egypt. Despite this, the interaction between Egypt and Kush remained centered on Lower Nubia and its shifting boundaries. As is also seen in earlier periods, the number of Kushites north of the First Cataract (identified by their nonEgyptian names or ethnic descriptors) was vanishingly small (Winnicki 2009:474–76). While names referencing Nubia (“The-Nubian” or “The-Kushite”) are common in the Demotic, hieroglyphic, and Greek prosopography of the period, these names are written in the Egyptian language and almost certainly referred not to the ethnic identity of the holder but to their dark complexion (Winnicki 2009:479–84). While political relations were often strained between the Ptolemies and the Kushite rulers at Meroe, religion continued to be the main medium through which cultural exchange operated, and more peaceful interaction flourished at the many religious sites used by both Egyptians and Nubians between the First and Second Cataracts of the Nile (an area known in classical sources as the Triakontaschoinos, or “thirty-mile stretch,” a schoinos being roughly equal to 10 km). Both Meroites and Ptolemies constructed a large variety of temples in this small but religiously important stretch of thinly populated territory,3 the political wrangling producing a unique form of religious expression deriving from the forcible meeting of three different cultures: Egyptian, Meroitic, and Greek.

500   Kathryn Howley As in the Late Napatan period, despite nominal Egyptian control it is likely that the population of the Triakontaschoinos consisted of mainly Nubian ethnic groups. This can be demonstrated archaeologically by the mortuary inscriptions of Kushites, written in Meroitic, found at Faras (north of the Second Cataract): the stelae of Tsemerese (Eide et al. 1996:154) and Hllhror (Eide et al. 1996:155) can be dated to the late 2nd–early 1st century bce. The Ptolemies were therefore trying to maintain an area with a majority non-Egyptian population as part of Egyptian territory. This, unsurprisingly, resulted in military tension between the two powers. A letter to Ptolemy (probably II) from the garrison at Elephantine at the First Cataract reports that “Aithiopians [Kushites] came down and laid siege” (Eide et al. 1996:97), which may have prompted Ptolemy II’s military expedition into Nubia in about 275 bce, as reported by Agatharchides (quoted in Diodorus 1.37.5; Hölbl 2001:55). Although the Ptolemies claimed the Triakontaschoinos as Egyptian territory, they recognized in several ways the unusual situation produced by its Nubian population. The Kushite nome list inscribed by Ptolemy II in room I of the Temple of Isis at Philae (Urk. II, 12.27; Eide et al. 1996:112), a standardized depiction of Kushite nomes bringing tribute to Philae, lists areas from Biga and Philae in the north, through Napata, all the way to “Farthest-Upper-Kush,” south of Meroe. The list is notable for classifying areas within Egyptian territory, including Philae, as “Kushite” rather than “Egyptian,” along with areas much further south that were certainly not occupied by the Ptolemies, including Meroe itself. Ptolemy VI inscribed a similar Kushite nome list at the same temple around 150 bce in which no distinction is made between Lower Nubian districts belonging to Egypt and areas under Meroitic control further south (Junker 1958; Eide et al. 1996:137). Lower Nubia therefore does not seem to be regarded as a true part of Egypt by the Ptolemies but as a land apart, even if their control over the territory was jealously guarded. Evidence from the Kushite point of view suggests that the Ptolemies were not always as in control of Lower Nubia as the nome lists claim, bolstering our impression of the unusual status of the area. A stela of the Meroitic king Adikhalamani that was discovered under the pavement of the hypostyle hall at Philae, dating approximately to the turn of the 2nd century bce, depicts the king showing his piety to the gods of the Philae area. He bears the epithet “beloved of Isis” (the cult goddess of Philae) and is shown offering to other local deities. The stela therefore demonstrates not just Meroitic presence at Philae at this time, but Meroitic participation in the cult there. The reuse of the stela as foundation blocks again reflects the ongoing conflict between the shared religion and the political animosity of the Meroitic and Ptolemaic states; it was probably dismantled by Ptolemy V Epiphanes, builder of the hypostyle hall, who may have wished to remove traces of Kushite influence from Philae after the Meroites had supported an Egyptian rebellion against him (Farid 1978; for Kushite participation in the Egyptian rebellion against Ptolemy V, see Second Philae Decree of Ptolemy V, Urk. II.217–30; Eide et al. 1996:134). The presence of both Ptolemaic and Meroitic construction in not just the same region, but in the same sanctuaries, is striking, and occurred at temples throughout the

Kushites in Egypt, 664 bce–14 ce   501 Triakontaschoinos. The temple at Dakka, begun by Ptolemy IV, was later expanded by both the Meroitic king Arkamani (Roeder 1930) and Ptolemy IX. Arkamani also built sanctuaries at Philae and contributed to the early Mandulis sanctuary at Kalabsha (Winter 1981). In addition to the stela at Philae, his successor Adikhalamani completed a shrine at Debod that had been begun by Ptolemy IV (Roeder 1911) with Ptolemies VI, VIII, and XII providing later additions. With the exception of the dismantled stela, it is striking that two supposedly opposed powers should add to each other’s buildings with apparently no attempt to hide or destroy the work of their enemies: this has led some scholars to postulate a collaboration between the Meroitic and Ptolemaic rulers in this area (e.g., Fisher et al.  2012:383). However, the Meroitic building activity in the Triakontaschoinos seems to be limited only to Arkamani and Adikhalamani, whose reigns coincide with Upper Egyptian revolts against Ptolemaic rule. The pattern of Meroitic building between the First and Second Nile Cataracts therefore seems to reflect the tense political situation between Egypt and Kush (see Eide et al.  1996:591). Regardless, it is significant that the religious beliefs shared by Egyptians and Kushites allowed such monumental construction to continue unhindered in the Triakontaschoinos. The force of shared religion can be seen in the influence that Nubian practices began to exert on Egyptian activity in the Ptolemaic period. As part of their temple building program, the Ptolemies began to dedicate shrines to gods of Kushite origin as well as traditionally Egyptian deities when building sanctuaries in the Triakontaschoinos. Ptolemy IV erected a temple to the god Arensnuphis at Philae, and also to Mandulis at Kalabsha (Török 2009:387). While no doubt the presence of Kushite gods could have made Ptolemaic occupation more palatable to the mostly Nubian population, the majority Egyptian audience at Philae counsels against a purely cynical reading of this adoption of foreign deities by Egyptian pharaohs. Gods such as Arensnuphis (Winter  1973) took their place in the temples of the Triakontaschoinos next to local forms of Egyptian gods, like Thoth of Pnubs and Isis of Philae, and appear to have been fully integrated into cult practice there, demonstrating the transformation this Egyptian-sponsored state religion underwent in the face of shifting borders with Kush.

Kushites in Egypt during the Early Roman Period The emperor Augustus, in defeating Antony and Cleopatra at the Battle of Actium in 31 bce, inherited both the province of Egypt and its troublesome southern border from the Ptolemies. The emperor (and now pharaoh) brought with him the Roman imperialist project of ever-expanding borders, exacerbating political tensions with the Meroitic kingdom still further. The clash of differing conceptions of borders continued to affect the presence of Kushites in Egypt, with the Egyptian and Roman ideologically rigid idea

502   Kathryn Howley of boundaries struggling against the elastic Kushite approach to territory, in an area mostly inhabited by a variety of different Nubian groups. In addition, they had to grapple with natural boundaries: although Rome claimed the Triakontaschoinos, later reduced to the Dodekaschoinos (the roughly 180 km stretch south of the First Cataract), as theirs, textual evidence from Philae makes it clear that Aswan, or Philae itself, was considered the true border by those living in the area. This reality continued to break down the divisions between what was “Egyptian” and what was “Kushite,” and led to the influence of Kushite culture on religious practice in the area growing ever stronger. Politically, Rome was clear as to its sovereignty over Lower Nubia. The Roman governor of Egypt, Cornelius Gallus, erected a trilingual stela at Philae in 30/29 bce in which he installed a governor over what he called the new Roman province of Triakontaschoinos Aethiopiae, receiving the King of Meroe “under his protection” (Bernand  1969; Eide et al. 1996:163–65). Rome therefore set the borders of Egypt as far into Nubia as the Ptolemies did. The reality of the situation is somewhat harder to determine, however, especially since the Latin, Greek, and Egyptian hieroglyphic versions of the stela all use different terminology: while in Latin the Meroitic king is in the subordinate position of in tutelam to Gallus—under his protection—the Greek version describes his status as that of proxenia or “public friend.” Augustus also sought to bolster this impression of Roman control over Lower Nubia, briefly recounting his army’s successful foray into Kush as far south as Napata at the Fourth Cataract (Res Gestae, 26.5). Recalling the Ptolemaic nome lists, this assertion of absolute Egyptian domination over Lower Nubia does not tell the whole truth of the political situation. The Meroitic state was certainly not happy to withdraw completely from this so-called Egyptian territory, and Strabo describes Meroitic incursions beyond the Egyptian border that culminated in Meroitic raids as far north into Egyptian territory as Aswan, “pulling down statues of Caesar” in the process (Strabo 17.1.53–54).4 The famous Meroe Head of Augustus may represent an archaeological remnant of these campaigns. This monumental Roman bronze head, in almost perfect condition, was discovered beneath the threshold of building M 292 at Meroe by Garstang in 1910. Its fine manufacture and stylistic details suggest an Alexandrian origin (Opper 2014:47), and suggest the possibility that this was among the looted items taken from Egypt by the Meroitic ruler after a successful raid, then placed to be symbolically trampled beneath his feet as an enemy of Meroe. Further indications that Augustus’s and Gallus’s assessment of the border between Kush and Egypt was probably not shared by the Meroites are given by Strabo, who is clear that nomadic Nubian tribes lived at this time as far north as Aswan (Strabo 17.1.53). Just as in the Ptolemaic period, Kushites therefore were already living happily (Strabo notes they are “not warlike”) in nominally Egyptian territory. The unrest between the two cultures continued, until the Roman prefect Cornelius Gallus sent Meroitic envoys to visit Augustus himself on the island of Samos. The terms of the resulting treaty, as described by Strabo, give the reader pause. The mighty Caesar, after “[the Meroites] had achieved all they had asked for . . . even exempted them from the taxes he had imposed.” In addition to these surprisingly generous terms, which sound strangely like capitulation, the border between Rome’s Egyptian province and

Kushites in Egypt, 664 bce–14 ce   503 Meroe was set at Hiera Sycaminos (modern Maharraqa), a considerable reduction of territory from the Ptolemaic “Thirty-Mile Land” (Triakontaschoinos) to the “TwelveMile Land” or Dodekaschoinos (Strabo 17.1.54). The Roman efforts to enforce the newly reduced Dodekaschoinos as Egyptian territory faced a further obstacle from local Egyptian conceptions of the Dodekaschoinos and its cultural affiliation. For local Egyptians the border between the two lands seems to have been set at Philae, located at the natural boundary of the First Cataract. Greek epigrams from the time of Augustus inscribed at the Isis temple describe Philae as “the border (peras) of Egypt” and conversely, the “limit (orion) of the land of the Aithiopians” (Eide et al. 1996:709-13). The liminal status of Philae is confirmed by Strabo, who claims that while “Aswan belongs to Egypt, Philae is a settlement common to the Aithiopians and Egyptians” (Strabo 1.2.32). This de facto border seems to have been in operation for some time, given that Strabo’s picture is confirmed by the 5th-century bce writings of Herodotus (2.29.2–5), who describes the land upstream of the First Cataract: “from Elephantine [Island] on, the country is inhabited by Ethiopians, and so is half the island, while the other half is inhabited by Egyptians. Next to the island there is a great lake around which nomad Aithiopians live.” The idea of the Dodekaschoinos as a border zone that is neither quite Egyptian or Kushite is communicated even more strongly by another Greek dedicatory inscription at the temple of Dakka, south of the First Cataract, where the author Apollonius describes Dakka as lying “between Egypt and Aithiopia” (CIG 5078). The temples of the Dodekaschoinos suggest even more strongly that, despite imperial propaganda, the Romans recognized the “in-between” status of Lower Nubia, and that official Roman temple construction in the area reflected Kushite practice and belief. Augustus had severely scaled back temple-building activities in Egypt proper, yet embarked on a construction spree in the Dodekaschoinos, a further indication of the power of the disputed borders to drive religious expression. Augustus incorporated Kushite gods into his Dodekaschoinos temples in the same way as the Ptolemies, yet did so even more enthusiastically than his predecessors. Kalabsha is perhaps the most impressive result of this policy, representing the largest temple in Lower Nubia after the temple of Isis at Philae. Kalabsha, though exhibiting a classic Ptolemaic Egyptian temple layout, was dedicated chiefly to the Kushite god Mandulis. Not only is the god borrowed, but Meroitic art influenced the style of his depictions: Mandulis is shown as a human-headed bird (in contrast to the normal form of Egyptian deities with an animal head and human body), and in a very similar style to Meroitic grave markers (Fig.  26.4). The heavily rimmed eyes are also redolent of Meroitic styles. Mandulis also appears in Roman period temples at Dendur, Ajuala, Maharraqa, and Philae. The temple of Dendur, now in the Metropolitan Museum of Art New York (MMA 68.154), exhibits a particularly interesting development of Augustus’s use of Kushite gods in Dodekaschoinos temples. The main gods of the temple are the brothers Padiset and Pahor. Though they have good Egyptian names, based on the names of Egyptian deities Isis and Horus, the inscriptions of the temple name them as sons of Kuper, a

504   Kathryn Howley

Figure 26.4  The Kushite god Mandulis depicted at the Temple of Kalabsha. Photograph: K. Howley.

member of the Nubian Blemmye tribe (perhaps one of the nomadic Aithiopians of the First Cataract area described by Herodotus and Strabo). The reason for their deification is unknown, though it is likely that the family had been amenable to Roman oversight in the area (Aldred 1978). Augustus is shown worshipping these two brothers in numerous scenes on the temple, in addition to gods of the main Egyptian pantheon, Egyptian gods of the cataract area such as Satis, and the Kushite gods Mandulis and Arensnuphis. The unprecedented development of using deified local Nubians as cult gods demonstrates the vitality that was lent to Egyptian religion in this area as a result of the border disputes. The Dodekaschoinos also hosted Kushite building projects in the Roman period, just as it did under the Ptolemies. King Akrakamani made an inscription at Dakka, a Ptolemaic temple foundation, in around 25 bce (see Eide et al. 1996:688 for dating), during the period of the Meroitic raids against Egypt (Eide et al. 1996:162). There is also an inscription of King Teriteqas at Dakka from the late 1st century bce, again probably dating to a period of resistance against Augustus (Eide et al. 1996:173). Once more reflecting Ptolemaic trends, these Meroitic additions take place during periods when Rome was not in control of the territory. However, again following the Ptolemaic pattern, neither

Kushites in Egypt, 664 bce–14 ce   505 Kushite inscriptions nor later Roman building seek to remove any trace of the opposing power. Rather, they each add to a long record of cultural interaction between Egypt and Kush in a shared religious space. This history of shared use is well illustrated by the juxtaposition of different art styles at the Roman-period temple of Maharraqa at the southernmost edge of the Dodekaschoinos, described by Belzoni in 1916 as comprising representations of Isis in Greek style and costume next to another representation of Isis in a wholly Egyptian mode (Christophe  1963:26). Graffiti, common throughout the Dodekaschoinos temples in Demotic, Greek and Meroitic, also attest to the different populations who regularly used the temples (e.g., Griffith  1935–37; Bresciani  1969; Burkhardt 1985; Cruz-Uribe 2016).

Discussion and Conclusions During the Late Napatan period, material culture from the fort at Dorginarti suggests an Egyptian military presence in Lower Nubia, while Kushite textual sources recount battles between Egypt and Kush in the region. In the Ptolemaic and Roman periods, Kushite presence in Egypt was also centered on the land between the First and Second Nile Cataracts, and did not include a significant Kushite population further north than Aswan (Winnicki 2009:477). Such interaction (and in many periods, conflict), concentrated on the border zone, was a result of a mismatch between Egyptian ­ideology—a belief that the area fell within Egyptian territory—and the reality that much of the population was Nubian, as is shown by the many classical sources that discuss the Nubian groups that lived south of Aswan. The inability, or disinclination, of the Nubians (particularly the Meroitic state) to respect the Egyptian-imposed borders, also added to this sphere of focused interaction that was in turn combative and creative. The long history of interaction between Kush and Egypt helped to shape Kushite presence in Egypt in the post–25th Dynasty period, and added to the differing conceptions among Kushites and Egyptians of what constituted “Egypt” and “Egyptian.” Egyptians had been building temples in Nubia since the New Kingdom, and this New Kingdom Egyptian colonial occupation of Kush was perhaps the impetus for the largescale royal Kushite adoption of Egyptian religion in the 25th Dynasty (Buzon et al. 2016). Over the course of centuries, traditionally Egyptian religious beliefs and material culture such as Egyptian-style temples had become so entwined in Kushite culture that the 25th Dynasty king Piankhy was able to claim himself as the most pious worshipper of the Egyptian state god Amun on his Victory Stela (Grimal 1981). There is no evidence that this sense of ownership over Egyptian religion ceased after the Kushites had left Egypt in 650 bce: in fact, religion drove much of the continuing presence of Kushites in Egypt during the 26th Dynasty, necessitating as it did the trade in religious equipment and texts. Using the framework of “entanglement” (a concept that has recently been applied to the understanding of Kushite material and its Egyptianizing elements

506   Kathryn Howley with much success in, e.g., Smith 2014, 2015; Buzon et al. 2016), we might therefore suggest that the continuing presence of Kushites in Egypt through the Ptolemaic and Roman periods is based on the sense that traditionally Egyptian religion, and therefore interest in the religiously important area south of the First Cataract, was considered just as much Kushite as Egyptian by the Meroitic kings. The roots of worship of the Egyptian pantheon ran so deep in Kushite culture by this point that they could no longer be distinguished from the worship of gods who originated in Kush, thus prompting the unusual juxtaposition (from an Egyptian point of view) in the temples of the Dodekaschoinos of gods such as Mandulis and Arensnuphis with Isis and Thoth. The use of entanglement as a framework to understand the presence of Kush in Egypt after 664 bce is also particularly useful because it stresses the two-way nature of cultural exchange. Thus, the somewhat striking recognition by the Ptolemies and Romans of Kushite gods as part of the religious fabric of the frontier area can be seen as one outcome of the long cultural entanglement that had existed between Egypt and Kush at this point. As we have seen, this entanglement existed before the Greco-Roman period, but its material products were far less visible: the reintroduction of offering tables and nets into 26th Dynasty Egyptian burials was probably based on the use of these items in earlier Kushite funerary religion, but the effect is subtle in an era when Kushites were not threatening Egyptian territory. It is when Egyptian borders were challenged by the mismatch between Kushites’ and Egyptians’ shared religion and incompatible worldview that a physical embodiment of the entanglement of these two cultures was produced in the form of the temples of the Dodekaschoinos. The Kushite raids into Egyptian territory around Aswan without apparent intent to invade, and the almost collaborative Meroitic additions to Egyptian shrines, also demonstrate the Kushites’ non-Egyptian, elastic attitudes to the concept of borders and boundaries. It is clear that the retreat of the Kushite kings back to Kush at the end of the 25th Dynasty did not mean an end to Kushite presence in Egypt. The long entanglement between the two cultures had led to shared religious beliefs, despite their very different cultural backgrounds. This religious practice provided a medium through which Kushite presence in Egypt could continue in the centuries following Tanwetamani’s departure; initially through continued inhabitation of priestly roles and the trade in religious objects and texts, and later through contributing to the religious landscape of the Dodekaschoinos. Although it seems that the Meroitic state no longer had any interest in ruling over Egypt, shared religious interests in the Greco-Roman period combined with disputes over the use of Lower Nubian territory meant that the nominally Egyptian area south of the First Cataract inspired a concentration of Kushite presence in Egypt not seen since the 25th Dynasty, visible in artifacts such as the Meroe head of Augustus and Meroitic additions to Egyptian-built shrines. In the frontier zone between Egypt and Kush, religion acted as the stage upon which the clash of Egyptian and Kushite worldviews was acted out: the unique and plentiful artistic products of this conflict clearly demonstrate the two-way nature of the interaction between Egypt and Kush, even after the end of the 25th Dynasty.

Kushites in Egypt, 664 bce–14 ce   507

Abbreviations BM: CG: CIG: MFA: MMA: Urk:

British Museum Catalogue général des antiquités égyptiennes du Musée du Caire Corpus Inscriptionum Graecarum Museum of Fine Arts, Boston Metropolitan Museum of Art Urkunden des ägyptischen Altertums

Notes 1.  “Kush” in this chapter will be used to refer to the territory and culture of the Napatan and Meroitic period kings. “Nubia” is used as a geographical designation that refers to the land between the First and Sixth Cataracts of the Nile, and “Nubian” as a general descriptor for the many different ethnic groups that lived in this region. “Lower Nubia” comprises the northern part of Nubia, between the First and Second Cataracts. 2.  “Debatable lands” is a term taken from British medieval history, designating the contested territory in the borderlands between Scotland and England. These lands were the source of continual disputes between the two kingdoms, but their inhabitants often switched allegiances as it suited them and developed their own cultural identity derived from their circumstances that can still be seen today in folk songs from the area. 3.  The island of Biga at the First Cataract was believed by Egyptians to be one of the burial places of Osiris. 4.  “The Aethiopians, by an unexpected onset, took Aswan and Elephantine and Philae, and enslaved the inhabitants, and also pulled down the statues of Caesar” (Strabo 17.1.53–54).

References Cited Aldred, C. 1978 The Temple of Dendur. Metropolitan Museum of Art. Assmann, J. 1973 Das Grab des Basa (Nr. 389) in der Thebanischen Nekropole. Deutsches Archäologisches Institut Abteilung Kairo Archäologische Veröffentlichungen 6. Philipp von Zabern. Aston, D.A. 2009 Burial Assemblages of Dynasty 21–25: Chronology-Typology-Developments. Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Denkschriften der Gesamtakademie 54. Bareš, L. 1999 The Shaft Tomb of Udjahorresnet at Abusir. Abusir 4. Universitas Carolina Pragensis. Bernand, É. 1969 Les inscriptions grecques et latines de Philae, v. 2. Haut et bas empire. Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique. Bietak, M. and E.  Reiser-Haslauer 1978 Das Grab des ‘Anch-Hor, Obersthofmeister der Gottesgemahlin Nitokris. Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Denkschriften der Gesamtakademie 6. Bonnet, C. 1997 The Kingdom of Kerma: 2500–1500 BC. In Sudan: Ancient Kingdoms of the Nile, ed. D. Wildung, pp. 89–116. Flammarion. Bosse-Griffiths, K. 1978 Some Egyptian Bead-work Faces in the Wellcome Collection at University College, Swansea. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 64:99–106.

508   Kathryn Howley Bresciani, E. 1969 Graffiti démotiques du Dodécaschoene: Qertassi—Kalabcha—Dendour— Dakka—Maharraqa. Centre de documentation et d’études sur l’ancienne Égypte. Budka, J. 2010 Kushite Tomb Groups in Late Period Thebes. In Between the Cataracts: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference of Nubian Studies, ed. W. Godlewski and A. Łajtar, Part 2, Fasc. 2, pp. 503–18. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean Supplement Series 2.2/2. University of Warsaw. Burkhardt, A. 1985 Ägypter und Meroiten im Dodekaschoinos. Untersuchungen zur Typologie und Bedeutung der demotischen Graffiti. Meroitica 8. Akademie Verlag. Buzon, M.R., S.T.  Smith, and A.  Simonetti 2016 Entanglement and the Formation of the Ancient Nubian State. American Anthropologist 118(2):284–300. Caminos, R.A. 1964 The Nitocris Adoption Stela. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 50:71–101. Christophe, L.-A. 1963 Sanctuaires nubiens disparus. Chronique d’Égypte 38:17–29. Cruz-Uribe, E. 2016 The Demotic Graffiti from the Temple of Isis on Philae Island. Material and Visual Culture of Ancient Egypt 3. Lockwood Press. Dunham, D. 1950 El Kurru. Royal Cemeteries of Kush 1. Harvard University Press. ——— 1955 Nuri. Royal Cemeteries of Kush 2. Museum of Fine Arts. ——— 1963 The West and South Cemeteries at Meroë. Royal Cemeteries of Kush 5. Museum of Fine Arts. Edwards, D. 1996 The Archaeology of the Meroitic State: New Perspectives on its Social and Political Organization. BAR International Series 640. Tempus Reparatum. Eide, T., T.  Hägg, R.H.  Pierce, and L.  Török eds. 1996 Fontes Historiae Nubiorum: Textual Sources for the History of the Middle Nile Region between the Eighth Century BC and the Sixth Century AD, v. 2: From the Mid-Fifth to the First Century BC. Department of Greek, Latin and Egyptology, University of Bergen. Farid, A. 1978 The Stela of Adikhalamani Found at Philae. Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts Abteilung Kairo 34:53–56. Fisher, M.M., P. Lacovara, S. Ikram, and S. D’Auria eds. 2012 Ancient Nubia: African Kingdoms on the Nile. American University in Cairo Press. Goedicke, H. 1981 The Campaign of Psammetik II against Nubia. Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts Abteilung Kairo 37:187–98. Graefe, E. 2003 Das Grab des Padihorresnet, Obervermögensverwalter der Gottesgemahlin des Amun (Thebanisches Grab Nr. 196). Monumenta Aegyptiaca 9. Brepols. Griffith, F.L. 1935–37 Catalogue of the Demotic Graffiti of the Dodecaschoenus. Les temples immergés de la Nubie 19–20. Oxford University Press. Grimal, N.-C. 1981 Quatre stèles napatéennes au Musée du Caire. JE 48863–48866: textes et indices. Mémoires de l’Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale 106. Heidorn, L.A. 1991 The Saite and Persian Period Forts at Dorginarti. In Egypt and Africa: Nubia from Prehistory to Islam, ed. W.V. Davies, pp. 205–19. British Museum Press. Hölbl, G. 2001 A History of the Ptolemaic Empire. Routledge. Howley, K. 2015a Sudanic Statecraft? Political Organization in the Early Napatan Period. Journal of Ancient Egyptian Interconnections 7(2):30–41. ——— 2015b The Royal Tombs of Nuri: Cultural Interaction between Nubia and Egypt in the Middle Napatan Period. Doctoral dissertation, Department of Egyptology and Assyriology, Brown University. Janes, G. and T. Bangbala 2002 Shabtis—A Private View: Ancient Egyptian Funerary Statuettes in European Private Collections. Cybèle.

Kushites in Egypt, 664 bce–14 ce   509 Junker, H. 1958 Der grosse Pylon des Tempels der Isis in Philä. R.M. Rohrer. Kitchen, K. 1986 The Third Intermediate Period in Egypt. Aris and Phillips. Leahy, A. 1994 Kushite Monuments at Abydos. In The Unbroken Reed: Studies in the Culture and Heritage of Ancient Egypt in Honour of A. F. Shore, ed. C. Eyre, A. Leahy, and L.M. Leahy, pp. 171–92. Egypt Exploration Society. Lightfoot, K.G. and A. Martinez 1995 Frontiers and Boundaries in Archaeological Perspective. Annual Review of Anthropology 24:471–92. Lohwasser, A. 2010 The Kushite Cemetery of Sanam: A Non-Royal Burial Ground of the Nubian Capital, c. 800–600 BC. Golden House. Macadam, M.F.L. 1949 The Temples of Kawa, v. 1: The Inscriptions. Oxford University Press. Munro, P. 1973 Die spätägyptischer Totenstelen. Ägyptologische Forschungen 25. J.J. Augustin. Opper, T. 2014 The Meroë Head of Augustus. British Museum. Parker, R. 1962 A Saite Oracle Papyrus from Thebes in the Brooklyn Museum. Brown Egyptological Studies 4. Brown University Press. Pope, J. 2014 The Double Kingdom under Taharqo: Studies in the History of Kush and Egypt, c. 690–664 BC. Culture and History of the Ancient Near East 69. Brill. Redford, D. 2004 From Slave to Pharaoh: The Black Experience of Ancient Egypt. Johns Hopkins University Press. Roeder, G. 1911 Debod bis Bab Kalabsche: Tempel und Inschriften. Les Temples Immergés de la Nubie. Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale. ——— 1930 Der Tempel von Dakke. Les Temples Immergés de la Nubie. Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale. Russmann, E.R. 1997 Mentuemhat’s Kushite Wife. Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt 34:21–39. Sauneron, S. and J. Yoyotte 1952 La campagne nubienne de Psammétique II et sa signification historique. Bulletin de l’Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale 50:157–207. Smith, S.T. 2005 To the Supports of Heaven: Political and Ideological Conceptions of Frontiers in Ancient Egypt. In Untaming the Frontier in Anthropology, Archaeology, and History, ed. B.J. Parker and L. Rodseth, pp. 207–37. University of Arizona Press. ——— 2014 Desert and River: Consumption and Colonial Entanglements in Roman and Late Antique Nubia. In Inside and Out: Interactions between Rome and the Peoples on the Arabian and Egyptian Frontiers in Late Antiquity, ed. J.H.F. Dijkstra and G. Fisher, pp. 91–109. Late Antique History and Religion 8. Peeters. ——— 2015 Hekanefer and the Lower Nubian Princes: Entanglement, Double Identity, or Topos and Mimesis? In Fuzzy Boundaries: Festschrift für Antonio Loprieno, v. 2, ed. H. Amstutz, A. Dorn, M. Müller, M. Ronsdorf, and S. Uljas, pp. 767–79. Widmaier Verlag. Török, L. 2009 Between Two Worlds: The Frontier Region between Ancient Nubia and Egypt, 3700 BC–AD 500. Probleme der Ägyptologie 29. Brill. Vila, A. 1980 La nécropole de Missiminia, v. 1: les sépultures napatéennes. La prospection archéologique de la vallée du Nil, au sud de la cataracte de Dal (Nubie Soudanaise) 12. Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique. Vittmann, G. 2007 A Question of Names, Titles and Iconography: Kushites in Priestly, Administrative and other Positions from Dynasties 25 to 26. Der Antike Sudan. Mitteilungen der Sudanarchäologischen Gesellschaft 18:139–61. Weinstein, J.M. 1973 Foundation Deposits in Ancient Egypt. Doctoral dissertation, Department of Oriental Studies, University of Pennsylvania.

510   Kathryn Howley Wilson, T.M. 1994 Symbolic Dimensions to the Irish Border. In Border Approaches: Anthropological Perspectives on Frontiers, ed. H.  Donnan and T.M.  Wilson, pp. 101–18. University Press of America. Winnicki, J.K. 2009 Late Egypt and her Neighbours: Foreign Population in Egypt in the First Millennium BC. JJP Supplements 12. Journal of Juristic Papyrology. Winter, E. 1973 Arensnuphis. Sein Name und seine Herkunft. Revue d’Égyptologie 25:235–50. ——— 1981 Ergamenes II. Seine Datierung und seine Bautätigkeit in Nubien. Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts Abteilung Kairo 37:509–13. Zibelius, K. 1972 Afrikanische Orts- und Völkernamen in hieroglyphischen und hieratischen Texten. Beihefte zum Tübinger Atlas des Vorderen Orients B1. Ludwig Reichert.

chapter 27

The M eroitic Hea rtl a n d Pawel Wolf and Ulrike Nowotnick

Introduction

The Geographical Setting In the early 1st millennium bce, the Kushite kingdom was centered at Jebel Barkal with deserts restricting settlement on either side of the Nile valley. At latest from the mid-1st millennium bce, it gradually extended its interests, claims, and influence southward into a territory with semi-arid Sahelian and savanna-like Sudanic regimes and monsoonal summer rains. This territory was called by Hellenistic geographers the Island of Meroe. Its increasing exploitation had vital economic, political, and cultural impact on the kingdom, in particular during its Meroitic period between the beginning of the 3rd century bce and the mid-4th century ce. The classical authors described the Island as follows: Two rivers discharge their water into it [the Nile],1 flowing from some lakes in the east [Lake Tana] and enclosing Meroe, an island of considerable size. One of them is called Astaboras [Atbara, Takkaze] and flows on its eastern side, the other Astapous; but some call it Astasobas [the Blue Nile], saying that the Astapous is another river [White Nile] flowing from some lakes in the south [Lake Victoria and Lake Albert], and that this river makes up almost the whole straight part of the Nile; its flooding is caused by the summer rains. Beyond the confluence of the Astaboras and the Nile, at a distance of 700 stadia, lies the city of Meroe, with the same name as the island . . . . (Strabo 17.1.2; Eide et al. 1996, no. 109)

512   Pawel Wolf and Ulrike Nowotnick and: Their [the Aithiopians’] greatest royal seat is Meroe, a city with the same name as the island. The island is said to be shaped like an oblong shield [scutum]. Its dimensions have perhaps been overstated: about three thousand stades long and one thousand stades wide. The island has many mountains and large forests, and it is populated partly by nomads, partly by hunters, and partly by farmers. There are also copper, iron, and gold mines, and various kinds of precious stones. It is surrounded on the Libyan side by large deserts [southern Bayuda and Libyan Desert], on the Arabian side by continuous cliffs [Red Sea Hills and Abyssinian Highlands], and upstream, or southwards, by the confluences of the rivers Astaboras, Astapous, and Astasobas .... (Strabo 17.2.2; Eide et al. 1998, no. 187)

According to these accounts, this geographic entity was perceived as an oblongshaped island of approximately 550 km by 180–280 km located between the Mayas Wetlands at the foot of the Ethiopian highlands (some 120 km northwest of Lake Tana) and the Nile-Atbara junction. It was enclosed to the east by the Atbara, in the west by the Dinder/Rahad river basin, the Blue Nile and the Nile (Fig. 27.1).2 A different matter is the term “Meroitic heartland”, traditionally used to paraphrase the territorial extent of the Kushite kingdom’s nucleus during the Meroitic period. It is not a geographical term but based on the presently known distribution of archaeological sites that imply direct Meroitic control and cultural influence. It refers to a region encompassing ca. 22,000 km2 in the northwest of the Island of Meroe, stretching from the Atbara River in the north, upstream along the Nile’s east bank, until Wad Ben Naga and the watershed between the Sixth Nile Cataract and Jebel Qeili. It extends several dozen kilometers into the eastern savanna-hinterland, called El-Daheira (the high stony ground) and El-Keraba (the gravelly undulating ground), which are commonly summarized under the term Western Butana (cf. H.H.S. Morant in Gleichen 1905:103–15; Crowfoot 1911:9–11; Khidir Ahmed 1984:9–20). The west bank of the Nile, the flat peneplain of the Central and Southern Butana further east and southeast with their clay-rich vertisols, the so-called “black cotton” soils, as well as the Sharq el-Ateik to the south of the watershed did not yet reveal substantial sites with abundant Meroitic cultural markers, which suggests that these regions were not under direct Meroitic control. Nevertheless, the kingdom exerted various political, religious, and economic forms of power over large parts of the heartland and for over 1,400 km along the Nile valley down to Lower Nubia, and it maintained economic and cultural relations to the neighboring southern regions as far as Sinnar, Jebel Moya, and Kosti, 450 km south of Meroe. Besides the 25th Dynasty, which for a short period had ruled over Egypt as well, the Meroitic kingdom represented in its heyday “the most extensive political structure of the region before the nineteenth century” and “almost certainly the greatest state hitherto seen in sub-Saharan Africa” (Edwards 2004:141; see also Edwards 1996:90–92; Khider Adam Eisa 1999; Lohwasser 2014; Usai et al. 2014; Brass 2016:156–57).

The Meroitic Heartland   513

Figure 27.1  Map indicating the “Island of Meroe” and relevant archaeological sites of the Meroitic period. © QMPS, Cartography: N. Spiske-Salamanek and P. Wolf.

514   Pawel Wolf and Ulrike Nowotnick

The Ecological Setting in the Meroitic Heartland By forcing the retreat of human settlement into ecological niches and the sub-Saharan savannas, mid- and late Holocene climate change gradually turned the eastern Sahara into an ecological boundary and “fostered more regionally diverse sociocultural adaptations” (Kuper and Kröpelin 2006; Bubenzer et al. 2007). Besides emmer wheat and barley as cereal staples along the Nile, cultivation of domesticated sorghum is testified in the 2nd millennium bce in the Gash delta to the east of the Island of Meroe (Fuller 2014:167–70; Manzo  2017:37; Winchell et al. 2017). Staples with summer seasonality like sorghum must have become increasingly important for communities populating the sub-Saharan savannas and iron tools were instrumental for their cultivation in the hard savanna soils, which in turn may have fostered iron production (Sutton 2004). The natural habitat of the Meroitic heartland was highly advantageous for producing iron and Meroe’s location at the interface of the Nile with the savanna promoted the diffusion of technological knowledge and cultural traditions between Inner Africa, the Sahel, the highlands in the Northern Horn and the Classical World in the north. These geographical and ecological factors probably supported the development of Meroe to one of the most important centers of Northeast Africa’s Iron Age in the last millennium bce (Wolf forthcoming). Fertile silts brought by the annual Nile inundation permitted riverside farming and even cash-crop oriented agriculture. There was apparently no need for intensive forms of crop cultivation, since farming might have taken advantage of natural levees along the river and of inundation backwater in the wadi fans (Wolf et al.  2014b:115–16; Wolf 2015:12–13; forthcoming). Large seasonal river systems like the Wadis Awatib, El-Hawad, and Mukabrab drained towards the Nile valley and facilitated the cultivation of sorghum based on soil moisture in the hinterland, which is attested by Meroitic centers such as Musawwarat es-Sufra, Naga, and Basa with temples and large artificial reservoirs (Arabic hafir, pl. hafa’ir) retaining water for people, livestock, and supplementary irrigation at productive wadi stretches (Scheibner 2004, 2011, 2014; M. Hinkel 2015). The open savanna landscape with steppes, grasslands, and acacia woods along these seasonal streams provided much potential for collecting, hunting, and grazing, which was already perceived in Pliny’s Naturalis historia (6.185; Eide et al. 1998, no. 206). Agro-pastoralism with seasonal patterns of movement is still practiced in the region today. The acacia woods supplied fuel for pyrotechnical “industries” as well as gum arabic. Nile silts for bricks and ceramics as well as gravel and cretaceous lime for durable lime plaster were readily available on the early Holocene river banks along the Nile, while the sandstone mountains in the Western Butana provided raw materials for monumental buildings, reliefs, and sculptures, kaolin for the manufacture of fine ware, and in particular abundant ore for iron production (Humphris et al. 2018; Wolf forthcoming). Irrespective of Strabo’s account, there are no substantial gold or copper resources known from the Island of Meroe. However, apart from the Nubian gold mines, gold resources are known along the southern Blue Nile near El-Roseires, while copper might have been traded from Lower Nubia or more southwestern localities like Hofrat el-Nahas in Southern Darfur (Whiteman 1971:217–34; Nicholson and Shaw 2000:150–51; cf. Edwards 1996:28, 90;

The Meroitic Heartland   515 Khidir Ahmed 1999:301). Meroe’s location was highly beneficial for the exchange of raw materials and commodities—the ecological corridor along the Nile ensured longdistance exchange with Egypt as well as with regions along the Blue and White Niles. Additional communication networks along the extensive wadi systems El-Hawad and Awatib linked the heartland to the fertile Southern Butana and—via the Wadis Soba, Rabob, and El-Hasib—to the Blue Nile and the woods and wetlands of the Dinder/Rahad river basin with abundant wildlife such as elephants, giraffes, antelopes, baboons, wildcats, ostriches, and guinea fowl.

Textual and Archaeological Sources Relating to the Meroitic Period Historical information about the Island of Meroe, the Meroitic heartland, and the history of the kingdom is rather limited. Royal inscriptions comparable to the Napatan historiographic accounts from Piankhy to Nastasen do not appear before the end of the 2nd century bce (Leclant et al. eds. 2000) and our understanding of these Meroitic texts is quite poor. Therefore, we largely rely on external, notably Hellenistic, Roman, and Axumite textual sources (Eide et al. eds. 1994, 1996, 1998) as well as on information rendered by archaeological and iconographic evidence.3 Regarding the kingdom’s chronology, a relative sequence of Kushite rulers was established by George A. Reisner in  1923 on the basis of their tombs’ typological features, locations, and grave goods. Notwithstanding various amendments and revisions, it largely withstands paleographical and iconographical scrutiny (Rilly 2004, 2006, 2017; Yellin 2014, 2015) and is still considered “the chronology of the Kushite kingdom and the spine of its cultural history” (Török 2015:13–14).

The Meroitic Heartland in Chronological Perspective The Meroitic Heartland in Pre- and Early Kushite Times In contrast to abundant evidence for prehistoric occupation (Azhari Sadig 2012; Ahmed Nassr 2016), a substantial proto-historic population of the 2nd millennia bce is as yet unattested in the heartland of Meroe. However, a number of Bronze Age period graves (Lenoble 1987:227–37; Anderson et al. 2015:89–90) and the re-emergence of sub-Saharan cultural features in the succeeding Kushite period, such as black-polished ceramics with impressed decoration and tumulus-graves with crouched inhumations, imply that a population with a common Sudanic cultural substratum must have existed in the region already prior to the 1st millennium bce. It is therefore not surprising that the

516   Pawel Wolf and Ulrike Nowotnick earliest known mudbrick and wooden structures of a sedentary settlement at the site of Meroe date back to at least the 9th century bce (Shinnie and Anderson 2004:85, 364; Grzymski 2005:56–57; see also Grzymski, this volume). Subsistence strategies and cultural features of its inhabitants remain unknown but can probably be associated with agro-pastoralism and early iron smelting. Supported by a substantial iron production (Humphris and Scheibner 2017), Meroe developed parallel to the early Kushite kingdom and the 25th Dynasty in the north. Since the 8th century bce, burials in the cemeteries of Begrawiya West and South testify to the emergence of a hierarchically stratified population near Meroe with indigenous as well as Egyptianized funerary customs (Yellin, this volume), such as mummification, wooden coffins, and mastaba and pyramid superstructures, as well as grave decoration (Fig. 27.2). Inscribed grave goods referring to Kashta and royal members of the 25th Dynasty illustrate the close connection between the two regions (Pope 2014:11). Grave goods bearing the name of Shabaqo were discovered in Kushite tombs south of the Fifth Cataract near Berber (Mahmoud Suliman Bashir  2016) and individual objects of that period naming Piankhy and Shabaqo spread as far as Jebel Moya (Brass 2016:65). The links to the ruling families in the north may have been supported by intermarriage, indicated for example by the iconography of queens on Kushite royal monuments (Lohwasser 2001:222–25; Török 2015:37–38, 41–42). Beyond the elite cemeteries of Meroe, east-west extended burials in rectangular

Figure 27.2 Egyptianized grave decoration in the burial chambers of Queen Khennuwa’s tomb Beg. S 503 in the royal cemetery of Begrawiya South (late 5th century bce). © QMPS, Photograph: P. Wolf.

The Meroitic Heartland   517 pit graves containing scarabs and amulets coexisted with local burial traditions with crouched inhumations and variable orientations (Geus 1982:187). While Kushite royal activity is clearly confirmed at Dangeil near the Fifth Cataract already during the reign of King Taharqo (Anderson and Salah eldin Mohamed Ahmed  2014), Kushite kings are not attested in the settlement of Meroe before Senkamanisken in the second half of the 7th century bce (Török 2015:41–44). Therefore, assumptions that the Meroitic heartland was annexed by the 25th Dynasty, or that the ancestral origins of the 25th Dynasty lie in the heartland of Meroe do not withstand textual and archaeological source criticism (Pope 2014:5–33). In addition, the lack of evidence of royal building activity at Meroe poses the question whether or not the Meroe region was part of the Kushite political unit before the reign of Aspelta. Since the beginning of the 6th century bce, however, Kushite domination at Meroe increased and it is conceivable that King Aspelta started a generous extension of the settlement into a residential town (Hinkel and Sievertsen 2002:33). This expansion into the Meroitic heartland may be explained less by individual political events in the north such as the military campaign of Psamtek II in 593 bce, but more by the above-mentioned favorable environmental and economic conditions prevailing in the Island of Meroe. There are several indications for a more intensive Kushite dominion of Meroe since Aspelta’s reign, paralleled by a gradual change in the political status of the local clans (Pope 2014:32–33). Indigenous traits in their graves at the cemeteries of Begrawiya West and South decreased; textual evidence of Kushite kings relate to regional hostilities and the Royal City’s enclosure wall was constructed (Hinkel and Sievertsen  2002:15), perhaps in response to recurrently reported military conflicts. From the 5th century bce onwards, the heartland of Meroe increasingly gained economic and political power. The slag mounds at the town site of Meroe illustrate an expansion of iron production (Humphris and Scheibner 2017) and considerable royal presence is evident within the Royal City of Meroe. Its huge sandstone enclosure wall obviously delimited the elite district from production areas and domestic quarters. Meroe developed into a Kushite residence with growing administrative and political significance alongside Napata, Pnubs, and Gematon and became the starting point of the royal coronation journey. From abroad, it was now perceived as a significant urban residence of the kingdom: the “capital of all the other Aithiopians” (Herodotus 2.29.6; Eide et al. 1994, no. 56; emphasis added). Recent archaeological reconnaissance yielded Napatan remains in the environs of the town, such as extensive tumulus fields with Napatan graves or a potential rural habitation site with ceramics and fire places (Wolf 2015:7–9; Wolf et al. 2015b:130). Larger amounts of Napatan ceramics have been observed at Qoz Burra on the west bank of the Nile opposite Meroe and early dates associated with the large hafir and the Great Enclosure at Musawwarat es-Sufra (Scheibner 2011) indicate that the state meanwhile controlled centers in the savanna hinterland and promoted the exploitation of its natural resources through large-scale building activities and elements of water harvesting. Objects bearing the name of King Harsiyotef found near the confluence of the two Niles (Eide et al. 1996, no. 78) suggest that a state-controlled exchange of inner-African products

518   Pawel Wolf and Ulrike Nowotnick involved central parts of the Island of Meroe and the adjoining Gezira already in the late Napatan period.

The Transition to the Meroitic Period in the First Half of the 3rd Century bce The association of the transition from the Napatan to the Meroitic period of the Kushite kingdom with individual historical events is still debated in recent literature (cf. Török  2008:163 for references). King Arkamani I’s relocation of the royal necropolis to Meroe or an assumed transfer of a supposed capital from Napata to Meroe, sometimes related to Egyptian military campaigns into Nubia, are still regarded as turning points. However, the development of Meroe to a significant residence had already started in early Napatan times. In the Meroitic period, further central settlements developed in the heartland, such as Wad Ben Naga, Naga, Muweis, and El-Hassa. On the other hand, northern centers such as Napata (the place of coronation), Dokki Gel, and Sai kept their outstanding political, religious, and residential status for many centuries throughout the Meroitic period. The model of an “ambulatory kingship” with several major centers in the kingdom therefore corresponds much better to the present archaeological evidence than the assumption of a single capital and its transfer to Meroe (Török 1997a:230–34, 2008:159–62). Based on favorable ecological conditions, a large subsistence potential of savanna crops, and a strategic location for long-distance exchange, Meroe’s massive production of iron and the procurement of inner-African commodities had progressively added to the crown’s revenue already during the Napatan period—necessarily by the increasing economical involvement of the local communities of the Meroe region, which naturally demanded greater political influence. The demand of the Ptolemies in Egypt for inner-African exotica and particularly African elephants at the end of the 4th century bce must have additionally shifted the balance point of the kingdom’s value creation to the Island of Meroe. These economic developments may consequently have caused political and dynastic changes in the Kushite royal house, which finally appear to have triggered the eclipse of the Napatan dynasties by possibly even a coup d’etat of Ptolemy’s II contemporary, King Arkamani I (Eide et al.  1996, no. 142; Török 1997a:395, 420–24, 2011b:13–19). He is the first of a long line of ruling kings and queens buried at Meroe and his choice of Begrawiya South as royal burial ground expresses—apart from indicating a distinct political decision—his close relationship to the local clans of Meroe. Experiments with the relocation of royal burials between the cemeteries of El-Kurru, Nuri, Meroe, and Jebel Barkal occurred more than once in Kushite history and were often related to dynastic changes (Yellin 2009, 2014, 2015; Török 2015:67, 77–78). Arkamani I’s decisive shift of royal emphasis towards the heartland of Meroe may thus indicate a dynastic change, albeit not a fundamental break in the kingdom’s history. The academic division of the Kushite history into a Napatan and a Meroitic period is, however, rather justified by a number of distinct sub-Saharan cultural features which

The Meroitic Heartland   519 appear in the self-representation of the ruling elites during the 3rd century bce and progressively take shape during the subsequent periods, paralleled by a gradual detachment from Napatan-Egyptianized traditions. For example, regional deities such as Apedemak, Amesemi, and Sebiumeker were introduced into the official pantheon (Fig.  27.3), Egyptian was replaced by Meroitic written language on royal monuments through a locally developed script, and “African” iconography and style entered official representation, combined with external influences in architecture and art. These cultural markers are archaeologically more apparent in the Meroitic heartland than in the north of the kingdom, but how far they affected all levels of society remains largely unexplored. Their implementation is, however, associated with the emergence of a new settlement landscape in the Meroitic heartland (Wolf et al. 2019) and new forms of material culture and its production techniques, for example of pottery. Cultural changes of this kind were not an isolated phenomenon at that time. In ancient Ethiopia, a comparable shift towards sub-Saharan features in material culture and funerary customs involving discontinuity with the previous Ethiopian-Sabaean cultural ties seems to have taken place during the contemporaneous Proto-Axumite period in the 4th–1st centuries bce (Finneran 2007:141–43; Phillipson 2012:41–44).

Figure 27.3  Early Meroitic representation of the lion-headed god Apedemak (Musawwarat es-Sufra, Apedemak temple, late 3rd century bce). Photograph: © P. Wolf.

520   Pawel Wolf and Ulrike Nowotnick These developments may have been associated with socio-economic models deviating from a temple-based economy that may have prevailed in the Napatan period. The royal palaces and associated archaeological evidence—seals and various commodities recovered in their large magazines—suggest that in the Meroitic period, royal administration had displaced temple administration in the organization of production, surplus accumulation, and redistribution (cf. Edwards  1996:26–27). Rather than alluding to a coup d’etat, Agatharchides’s narration of Arkamani I’s elimination of the priesthood at Meroe (Diodorus Siculus 3.6, see Eide et al. 1996, no. 142) may thus hint at a disempowerment of political institutions, which were based on a former temple economy. The model of a “segmentary state” with common “Sudanic” features (Edwards 1996, 1998, 1999b; cf. Fuller 2003; Török 2008; Pope 2014:285–92; Khidir Ahmed 2015) as opposed to the traditionally dominating Egyptocentric view of the Kushite polity as a centralized government with territorial sovereignty, seems to better suit certain features of the state economy and the socio-political organization in the Kushite kingdom during the following Meroitic period. In particular, the rather patchy geographical evidence of royal investment implies that territorial sovereignty was limited to the state’s core areas in the Meroitic heartland and central places in Upper Nubia. Here, the kingdom’s territorial sovereignty was realized by controlling population and subsistence resources as well as by direct accumulation, redistribution, and organization of the exchange of agro-pastoral surplus, whereas in between these core areas and in the periphery, direct coercive power was rather exercised by local elites. To maintain royal suzerainty over their local sovereignty, the Meroitic crown was forced to legitimate its authority by means of inter-marriage, ritual performance, and hegemony as well as by a prestigegoods economy, providing valuable commodities like wine, oil, and honey from Ptolemaic and Roman Egypt and fine tableware, furniture, jewelry, and luxury items of Mediterranean style or origin (Fig. 27.4). Apart from local production of Hellenizingstyle items in the kingdom’s core areas, the royal house was able to acquire such commodities through diplomatic gifts and exchange against slaves, gold, iron tools, gum arabic, and natron, as well as inner-African exotica. The control over craft production in the core areas, a certain military force for raids and the monopoly of long-distance exchange were therefore vital to sustain economic and political power. The loss of particularly the latter monopoly finally resulted in dramatic political consequences at the end of the Meroitic period.

Early Meroitic Period (3rd–2nd Century bce) The economic potential of the Meroitic heartland apparently boosted in the Early Meroitic period—not least by an ambitious building program in its riverine core areas which brought urbanization to sub-Saharan Africa by establishing a dense network of settlements along the Nile (Baud 2008, 2010; Wolf et al. 2019). Brick-built riverbank towns like Hamadab, El-Hassa, Muweis, and Wad Ben Naga became foci for production and economic development. The urban structure of Hamadab, which was founded according

The Meroitic Heartland   521

Figure 27.4  Head of a statue of Dionysos, found in the pyramid tomb Beg. N 5 of Prince Arikankharor in the royal cemetery of Begrawiya North (mid-1st century ce). Bronze and silver, H. 13 cm. Harvard University–Boston Museum of Fine Arts Expedition 24.957. Photograph: © Museum of Fine Arts (Boston).

to a planned design (Wolf et al. 2014a, 2014b), its town wall and the tower-house H 3000, indicate that it housed a larger non-agrarian population engaged in a craft production based on division of labor that was probably organized and controlled by the state to enhance productivity and surplus product. The Royal City of Meroe saw a fundamental urban restructuring in a consistent design with large thick-walled building complexes and storage facilities, in addition to the renewal of the town wall (Hinkel and Sievertsen  2002:19–20, 40; Edwards 2004:146–47). Crucial for the development of the urban landscape and the provision for its growing non–food-producing population were extensive agricultural and pastoral productivity in the controlled parts of the heartland and the distribution of its resources: raw materials, fabricated products, and workforce. Apart from the dominant cattle husbandry (Chaix 2016:131), cultivation of savanna crops such as sorghum along the major wadis of the immediate hinterland and possibly also in the Butana proper, became central to the kingdom’s subsistence potential (Fuller 2014:168, 170–72; see Fuller and Lucas, this volume). Royal control of the heartland expanded along these wadi systems by developing an infrastructural network of artificial water reservoirs associated with

522   Pawel Wolf and Ulrike Nowotnick larger sanctuaries at Musawwarat es-Sufra (Aborepe), Naga (Tolkte), and Basa, as well as promoting smaller sites such as Umm Usuda, Murabba, ‘Alim, and Jebel Hardan (Edwards 2004:150–53; Scheibner 2014; M. Hinkel 2015). These developments were paralleled by the iron production at Meroe that was apparently driven by the demand for iron tools to facilitate savanna crop cultivation, the digging of water reservoirs, quarrying of sandstone, and for procuring ores and other resources, as well as possibly for weaponry (Humphris and Scheibner 2017). The significance of the elephant in the official iconography at Musawwarat es-Sufra— in addition to hundreds of graffiti depicting elephants, giraffes, lions, baboons, crocodiles, rhinoceroses, hunting scenes, and humans interpreted as members of various ethnic, elite, and occupational groups (U. Hintze 1979; Kleinitz 2013)—reflect the relevance for the royal house of the Island of Meroe with its abundant wildlife and human resources (Fig. 27.5). Political authority over population and networks became increasingly crucial for a state-controlled allocation of African game, animal skins, ivory, ebony, and other exotica as well as hunting elephants by Greek and Egyptian experts (Török  1997a:396). While the Nile remained the major artery for exchange with Ptolemaic Egypt, various African commodities, in particular elephants, were exported via trade routes crossing the Eastern and Central Butana towards the Red Sea and the Ptolemaic ports (Eide et al. 1996, no. 120). The Meroitic heartland became a relevant partner in transregional distribution networks spanning as far as Ptolemaic Egypt, the Mediterranean, Arabia, and the Middle East—with the central and eastern Sudanese lowlands and probably even the Abyssinian highlands entering the operational range of the kingdom. While the significance of formerly important places in Upper Nubia such as Kawa and Sanam apparently degraded, sites in the Meroitic heartland became now the focus of considerable royal investment. In the second half of the 3rd century bce, Musawwarat es-Sufra developed under King Arnekhamani into a central place for the worship of regional deities and the legitimization of royal power (Wenig 2001; Wolf 2001; Török 2002b:173–86; 2011b:189–238; Eigner 2010), possibly playing a mediating role in transfer and communication (Dornisch in Wenig 2001:86). Architects and sculptors, likely of various cultural backgrounds, expressed the supra-regional significance of this site by merging Egypto-Kushite, Ptolemaic, and Hellenistic design principles with sculptural solutions and architectural concepts deriving from the Hellenistic Orient and prevalent in Tigray and South Arabia such as terrace buildings, single-roomed shrines and “hollow wall” masonry (F. Hintze 1979; Priese 2003; Eigner 2010; Török 2011b:214–38; Wolf 2014:360–77). By restoring Kushite rule over Lower Nubia during the first decades of the 2nd century bce, kings Arkamani and Adikhalamani opted to revive Kushite political influence in the north (Török 2009:377–426). Their presence at temples in Philae, Dakka, Debot, and Kalabsha illustrate their support of non-Egyptian communities in the Dodekaschoinos, which probably remained administered by Kushite governors during the later Ptolemaic domination. Already since the reign of Arkamani I, Meroitic culture was characterized by close ties to the Hellenistic world. The contact to Ptolemaic Egypt not only brought new impulses into Meroitic theology (Hallof 2005), but also to the

The Meroitic Heartland   523

Figure 27.5  Relief representation of an elephant flanked by lions in the Apedemak temple of Musawwarat es-Sufra (late 3rd century bce). © Musawwarat Archive, Humboldt University (Berlin).

material culture, which quickly replaced most Napatan types. Early Meroitic pottery now incorporated strong stimuli from the north resulting in wheelmade types with new shapes, decoration, and production techniques different from the previous period. By adopting features of drinking equipment such as wine amphorae, askoi, colanders, pitchers, and kraters (Manzo 2006:83–85; Nowotnick 2016), the privileged now copied Hellenistic lifestyle and culinary customs. Alongside a standardized wheelmade industry, local traditions with predominantly dark burnished handmade wares became more apparent, signifying a common ceramic horizon in the Early Meroitic period. Many handmade jars have nearly identical shapes and decoration motifs over large distances from Lower Nubia to Jebel Moya (Gerharz 1994; figs. 49–50), suggestive of specialists’ rather than domestic production (Török 2009:243–45; Edwards 2014). Closely related burial assemblages in the Meroitic heartland and Nubia with almost identical grave goods furthermore verify a common cultural horizon from the 2nd century bce onwards, of course with regional and social variations. Burial customs, particularly of the upper society levels, often adhered to Egyptianized traditions with small mudbrick pyramids and generally east-west orientation of tomb construction and burial attitude (Mahmoud Suliman Bashir and David  2015:104), whereas regional

524   Pawel Wolf and Ulrike Nowotnick c­ emeteries in the Meroitic heartland like at Berber, Gabati, and Kadada, show a wide diversity of funerary rites. Most of the tombs were not marked by superstructures, others were covered by low earthen tumuli. There were two main types of substructures entered by a sloping ramp: axial and perpendicular chambers. The bodies were laid in extended dorsal position or contracted, often with head to the south (Mahmoud elTayeb 2010:3–4), occasionally to the west (Geus 1982:181). The number of grave goods in Early Meroitic times was often limited to personal adornments and a few pottery vessels, red wheelmade jars occurring alongside black handmade wares. The coexistence of Egyptian and indigenous practices may be influenced by various factors, but the degree of Egyptianization seems to be a social one, distinguishing elite from non-elite interments. This clear dichotomy implies that a large part of the Meroitic society in the heartland never acculturated to Egyptian practices.

Classic Meroitic Period—The Golden Age (1st Century bce–1st Century ce) From the turn to the last century bce, new features visible in the royal succession and the self-representation of the ruling elite suggest essential changes in the kingdom’s governmental regime. Several female rulers such as Amanirenas, Amanishakheto, Shanakdakheto,4 Nawidemak, and Amanitore ascended the throne. These queens equaled ruling kings in their political and ritual influence, in their titles, building activities, and tomb furnishings. A conscious choice of “African aesthetics” in royal iconography marks the sub-Saharan cultural roots of these elites and their policy (Fig. 27.6). The representations of queens display wide hips, fully frontal breasts, long fingernails, and fat folds (Dann, this volume). Emphasis is put on characteristic facial scars (Amanishakheto, Natakamani), Meroitic royal names prevail over Egyptianized titles, and Meroitic writing was widely applied in official and royal mortuary monuments as opposed to Egyptian hieroglyphs. After Rome’s annexation of Egypt in 30 bce, Meroe had to assert its northern border towards the new powerful neighbor, who probably opted for further territorial gain (Eide et al. 1996, no. 166). Queen Amanirenas and King Teriteqas supported local insurgents who had occupied Syene, Elephantine, and Philae in 25 bce, which in turn caused a military conflict with Rome and resulted in 21/20 bce in a peace treaty with Augustus according to which Meroe kept the sovereignty over the southern part of the Triakontaschoinos (Török 2009:427–35). In its aftermath, contacts to the external world became more abundant and peaceful relations with Rome favored the economic development of the kingdom. This period and in particular the coregency of King Natakamani and Queen Amanitore around the mid-1st century ce are regarded as the kingdom’s Golden Age, which persisted until Amanikhareqerem’s reign at the end of that century. Multiple architectural solutions with diverse layouts emerged—well exemplified by shrines with various ground plans along the processional avenue at Meroe (Shinnie and Anderson  2004:62–66). A “renaissance” of Meroitic representative architecture

The Meroitic Heartland   525

Figure 27.6  Representation of Queen Amanishakheto with facial scars and wide hips on the chapel pylon of her tomb Beg. N 6 at the royal cemetery Begrawiya North (early 1st century ce). Redrawn after Chapman and Dunham 1952: pl. 17.

c­ ulminated in unique prototypes such as the temple complex M 250 near Meroe with single-roomed podium shrines enclosed by Hellenistic peripteral colonnades (Hinkel 2001:253–55, 265). Analogous to the 3rd century bce, Roman and Hellenistic as well as traditional Egyptianizing elements contributed to a unique fusion of cosmopolitan architectural and iconographic solutions, for instance in the Apedemak temple and the Hathor chapel at Naga (Wildung and Riedel 2011) and the so-called Royal Baths at Meroe, which particularly emphasized the Meroitic taste for Hellenistic fashion (S.  Wolf  2008; Török 2011b:139–88). Based on apparent economic prosperity, political stability, sacral authority, and a strategic policy, Natakamani and Amanitore unfolded an extensive building program, which appears to embrace the entire Meroitic realm like their pyramids Beg. N 1 and 22 virtually embrace the burials of their predecessors at the royal cemetery of Begrawiya North. It is particularly illustrated by the rehabilitation of the country’s central sanctuaries with new temples and large-scale reconstructions for example at Meroe, Naga, and Dangeil as well as in the kingdom’s northern centers Napata, Dokki Gel, and Sai. These temples, often extended with processional avenues and kiosks, were designed according to standardized layouts adhering to traditional Egyptian conventions, upgraded with Ptolemaic features (Wolf 2006). It is well conceivable that the abolished

526   Pawel Wolf and Ulrike Nowotnick s­ tatuary of Kushite kings unearthed at Napata, Dokki Gel, and Dangeil (Dunham 1970; Bonnet and Valbelle 2005; Anderson and Salah eldin Mohamed Ahmed 2014) is related to these rehabilitation measures.5 A densely populated urban landscape of brick-built settlements with crowded housing structures, production areas, and cemeteries had meanwhile developed in the Meroitic heartland along the Nile’s east bank (Fig. 27.7; Wolf et al. 2019). Settlements like Meroe, Muweis, and Wad Ben Naga as well as satellite towns like Hamadab retained their planned urban layout but were now refurbished, partially with new temples and monumental palatial buildings. These palaces, known for example at Meroe, Wad Ben Naga, Muweis, and Napata, represent typical examples of this period’s profane architecture (Maillot 2016). Constructed on large square-shaped platforms according to standardized layouts, they incorporated Egyptian, Hellenistic, and Roman architectural elements. They apparently played a central role in the economic administration, the control of production as well as the accumulation and redistribution of goods by the Meroitic royalty and their appointed officials (Edwards 1996:26–27).

Domestic quarters

Well West gate

Altar

East gate

Temple

Domestic quarters Tower house

0

10

20

30 m Lower town

Ceramic kilns

Figure 27.7  Plan of the Meroitic urban town of Hamadab near Meroe. © Hamadab Project.

The Meroitic Heartland   527 That the urban communities accommodated considerable work force was even observed by Nero’s centurions, as is conveyed by Pliny, who stated that the Island of Meroe would supply 3,000 artisans (Eide et al. 1998, no. 206). The large multi-roomed housing blocks at Hamadab, for example, did not serve for agricultural or official activities, but were inhabited by laborers, servants, guards, artisans, workmen, and their families (Wolf et al. 2015b:129–30). Part of Hamadab’s population may have invested its labor in the surrounding fields, in neighboring Meroe or in the various quarries and mining places nearby. However, within the habitation quarters, craft activities such as jewelry making, stone working, spinning and weaving, and possibly also the working of wood or leather was carried out. Textile production is attested by spindle whorls and loom weights recovered from the domestic structures of Hamadab and from other sites in the heartland and further south (Yvanez 2016; cf. Wolf et al. 2015b: fig. 11). Cotton seeds found at Hamadab and Pliny’s mention of cotton trees (Eide et al. 1998, no. 203) indicate that besides its labor-intensive processing, its cultivation had also been established in the Island of Meroe, presumably in response to Rome’s demand for textiles (Fuller 2014:172–74). It is not unreasonable to assume that the large hafa’ir in the Meroe region were instrumental for extended agricultural activities, for example the cultivation of such cash crops on acreages with regulated irrigation beyond the immediate Nile valley (Wolf 2015:127–28; forthcoming). Apart from lifestyle and cuisine, also local Meroitic crafts in pottery, glass, and metalwork were inspired by the cultural and material influx from the Hellenistic and Roman world (e.g., Török 2011b:239–300). Specialized production is testified by areas with furnaces, kilns, and waste dumps at Meroe (Shinnie and Anderson 2004:73–79; Humphris and Scheibner 2017), Muweis (Baud  2015), and Hamadab (Wolf et al.  2014b:110). Circular pottery kilns at these sites (Török 1997b:173–74; Baud 2008:53–54; Wolf et al. 2014a:728–30) are indicative of large-scale ceramic production with standardized updraft kilns that may have been introduced from the Roman world. A distinct outcome of the Classic Meroitic ceramic production was the famous “eggshell ware,” which was made from kaolinitic clay, a white-firing material, procured from clay layers in the nearby sandstone mountains (Wolf et al. 2014a:733). Appearing without any precursors around the turn of the eras, these thin-walled and highly decorated vessels of outstanding quality were perfected in the Classic and Late Meroitic periods and thus represent chronological markers for this time (Fig. 27.8). They are found at various places, from the heartland to Lower Nubia, but unambiguous production sites have as yet been identified only at Hamadab and Musawwarat es-Sufra, where they were produced alongside wheelmade coarse wares (Edwards 1999a; Näser and Wetendorf 2015; Nowotnick forthcoming). Distinctive recipes used for glazing faience objects (Sackho-Autissier 2016:34–35), their wide distribution, as well as their typical Meroitic style and iconography demonstrate that faience making was another local craft in the kingdom. A copper-alloy figurine from the temple of Hamadab representing the indigenous god Sebiumeker (Wolf 2003), locally fabricated bronze bells with representations of captives (Dunham 1957:141, 151 and pls. LV–LVI), and oil lamps (Sakoutis 2009:74–77) show that Meroitic craftsmen had access to specific raw materials and technological knowledge (Fig. 27.9). A piece of raw glass

528   Pawel Wolf and Ulrike Nowotnick

Figure 27.8  Painted bowl from the cemetery of Berber as an example of the unique decoration style of Meroitic fine ware. © NCAM excavations at Berber, Mahmoud Suliman Bashir.

recovered from Hamadab’s production waste dumps beyond the town wall hint at glass processing in these centers (Wolf 2008: fig. 74c). It is not known to what extent these crafts, industries, and agricultural activities were commissioned by the royal house. Scale and standardization suggest that they were centrally organized, but supervision and administration may have been executed by a hierarchy of local officials as indicated by seals and sealing impressions recovered from these towns. Production facilities in these urban centers naturally demanded large amounts of fuel, raw materials, and a supply of agrarian resources from a productive hinterland. In the settlements, domesticated animals—and among them cattle—represent by far the most common faunal remains, followed by sheep/goat and only a low proportion of pig, camel, and donkey (Chaix 2016; cf. Nolde 2016). Besides a continuous cultivation of winter-grown cereals like emmer wheat and barley along the Nile valley, sorghum and other sub-Saharan staples had become a substantial part of the kingdom’s economy all over the country, which can be perceived by plant remains from Hamadab (Matthews and Nowotnick 2019:478) and the frequent use of sorghum ears (sp. dhurra) in official representation as well as on utilitarian items (Fig. 27.10; Fuller 2014:167–72 and fig. 14.6). The wadis served as important routes to the hinterland, perhaps to access agricultural and pastoral products for the riverine population. Awlib and Abu Erteila, located near the mouth of the Wadi el-Hawad, as well as Basa, situated less than 30 km upstream the wadi, were provided with temples and hafa’ir and may well have been the primary hinterland breadbaskets

The Meroitic Heartland   529

Figure 27.9 Objects of craft production from the urban town of Hamadab. © Hamadab Project. (a) leaf-shaped arrowhead made of carnelian flint (L. 2.4 cm); (b, c) pendants in the shape of a sow (faience, H.  1.6 cm) and a hippopotamus (rhyolite?, H.  1.3 cm); (d, e) faience rosettes, presumably for furniture decoration (Dms. 4.2 cm and 3.9 cm); (f) iron nail from the town’s main gate (L. 17.7 cm); (g) leaf-shaped iron arrowhead (L. 9.2 cm); (h, i) clay seals showing a seated lion (Dm. 2.4 cm) and an ‘ankh-sign on crescent (Dm. 2.1 cm); (j, k) faience pendants in the shape of a lion’s head (Hs. 2.8 cm and 2.5 cm); (l) stone thumb ring for archers (granodiorite, Dm. 3.7 cm); (m, n) faience pendants representing the ram-headed god Amun with sun disk and uraeus (H. 4 cm) and a sun disk with two uraei (H. 2.6 cm); (o) spindle whorl of fired clay decorated with symbols of sorghum ears (Dm. 4.2 cm); (p) bronze figurine of the Meroitic god Sebiumeker (H. 12.2 cm); (q) faience lid in the shape of a lioness with her cubs (5 cm × 3.8 cm, H. 3 cm); (r) quartzite figurine of a seated lion-headed deity (H. 5.5 cm).

530   Pawel Wolf and Ulrike Nowotnick

Figure 27.10  Sorghum (dhurra) was a popular symbol in the Meroitic heartland, often found on utilitarian items as well as in official representations such as the Jebel Qeili rock carving of Shorakaror receiving bound prisoners and a bunch of millet cobs from a sun deity (mid-1st century ce). Redrawn from Hintze 1959: fig. 2.

for Meroe, while Musawwarat and Naga may have supplied the riverside settlements of Muweis and Wad Ben Naga with additional agro-pastoral products. Besides ritual hegemony, the crown’s statewide authority was largely based on its acknowledgment by provincial and administrative hierarchies, the authority of which must naturally have increased. The luxury objects recovered from the royal pyramids at Meroe illustrate how the crown’s prestige-goods economy benefitted from exchange with Rome. The Roman world was interested in raw materials, cotton, slaves, and innerAfrican exotica, well illustrated by the Neronian expedition to the sources of the Nile— or rather to the southern parts of the Island of Meroe attractive in respect to these commodities (Eide et al. 1998, nos. 206–209). It was therefore an economic imperative for the Meroitic royal house to maintain a supply network for such commodities spanning from the southern peripheries through provincial elites at main way-stations to intermediaries in Lower Nubia. Maintaining closer relations to the north, these intermediaries may have profited significantly more from the exchange than the suppliers of the raw materials and commodities in the south. Lower and Middle Nubian elites increasingly gained administrative control as important chainmen in this network and progressively became high-ranking members of the royal house, such as the official Akinidad, who wrote his name in royal cartouche and appeared in royal context on the

The Meroitic Heartland   531 walls of temple M 250 near Meroe (Török  2002a,  2009:456–513,  2015:85–93). Iconographical features in the royal mortuary chapel decorations now emphasize the representation of crown princes and increasingly also other court members, illustrating their prominent role and the growing influence of regional and administrative elites (Yellin 2015). The crown princes Arikankharor, Arakakhataror, and Shorakaror exerted royal power already during the reigns of Natakamani and Amanitore. Shorakaror left a triumphal rock-carving at Jebel Qeili, which is regarded as the southern limit of direct Meroitic control (Fig. 27.10; Eide et al. 1998, no. 215). A growing socio-economic dependence of the royal house is also apparent in regard to intermediaries organizing the exchange network towards the southern periphery of the kingdom. The flourishing towns of Naga (Kröper et al.  2011; Wildung and Kröper 2016) and Wad Ben Naga (Onderka et al. 2013) at the interface of the Meroitic heartland with its southern margins illustrate the changing economic, political, and cultural realities in the Classic Meroitic period. While Musawwarat es-Sufra, a significant royal center in the Early Meroitic period, experienced just renovations and smaller extensions in the 1st century ce (F. Hintze and U. Hintze 1970:62; cf. Scheibner 2011:37), royal investment now focused on Wad Ben Naga as is illustrated by the palace of Amanishakheto, and particularly on Naga with the construction of the Amun and Apedemak temples and a Hathor chapel under Natakamani and Amanitore (Fig. 27.11) as well as temple N 200 under Amanakhareqerema. The emergence of a powerful local

Figure 27.11  The Hathor Chapel at Naga (1st century ce) is an illustrative example of the Meroitic taste for eclecticism. It combines Roman features such as Corinthian columns and arched windows with cavetto cornices and winged sun discs of Egyptian Pharaonic style. Photograph: © Naga Project.

532   Pawel Wolf and Ulrike Nowotnick elite at Naga is additionally suggested by the representative architecture in its residential district (Wildung 1999:74–79; Wildung and Kröper 2006:17) and by monumental private statuary which was unknown in earlier periods (Wildung and Riedel 2011:140–44; Török 2015:88). The transformation of Meroe’s Royal City with the erection of multiple palaces may similarly be associated with the increased power of administrative elites (Hinkel and Sievertsen 2002:48). In this period, the so-called Commoners’ Cemeteries immediately east of Meroe were opened and since the end of the 1st century ce local princes partially of non-royal lineage repeatedly ascended the throne and were buried with royal-type offering tables and benediction formulas in the elite cemeteries of Meroe (Rilly 2006). Egyptian customs of axial burial chambers and east-west orientations that had survived into this period’s mortuary traditions were now gradually replaced by perpendicular chambers with weapons and military insignia increasingly accompanying the dead (Mahmoud el-Tayeb 2010:3–4).

Late Meroitic Period (2nd–End of 3rd Century ce) From the beginning of the 2nd century ce, the kingdom is characterized by an apparent decline of the royal economic potential and central authority. It has been proposed that the former Napatan core region centered on Jebel Barkal, as well as larger parts of the Bayuda, had possibly shaken off Meroitic control by the 3rd century ce, suggested by the abandonment of major cult centers and squatter occupation therein and by displaying autonomous cultural features and funerary traditions (Lohwasser 2013b). It is intriguing to relate some of the driving forces behind such developments to Nubian-speaking communities: they are known to have settled west of the Nile between Meroe and the Third Cataract since the 3rd century bce (Eide et al. 1996, no. 109) and were probably involved in the economy of the kingdom. In the east, the early Axumite kingdom had developed into Meroe’s serious rival as a vendor of African commodities to the Roman world and the Indian Ocean. In the first half of the 3rd century ce, it expanded its sphere of influence towards the Egyptian border and the northern Island of Meroe as is reported in the Adulitana II (Eide et al. 1998, no. 234; Hatke 2013). While it remains questionable to what extent Axumite competition in long-distance exchange may have caused direct economic consequences for the Meroitic crown (Edwards 2004:184), the Axumite land gain and the subjugation of the Eastern Desert’s population, among them the Beja/Blemmyes who some generations later invaded Lower Nubia, affected Meroe insofar as its principal exchange corridor to the Roman world led along the Nile through Lower Nubia, the loss of which should severely affect its economic basis. Notwithstanding the abovementioned regionalization in Upper Nubia, relations to Lower Nubia and Roman Egypt were maintained, not least through a network of desert roads. Political links between Meroe and the Lower Nubian elites are documented by their Meroitic titles and grave goods as well as by the so-called Pilgerinschriften at Philae (Burkhardt  1985; Török 2002a, 2009:443–513). Pasan, King Teqorideamani’s “Great Envoy to Rome,” for example, left a Demotic graffito in 10 April 253 ce (Burkhardt 1985:114–17; Eide et al.

The Meroitic Heartland   533 1998, no. 260)—the last dated inscription recording the name of a Meroitic ruler— reporting rites performed during religious festivals, and royal donations to the temple of Isis and the regional population on behalf of the king, as well as the transfer of diplomatic gifts to and from Rome. Such relations were intended to safeguard the political survival of the kingdom. However, through various agricultural innovations, cash crops such as cotton, dates, and grapes as well as wheat, barley, and summer cereals developed to significant staples in Lower Nubia and provided a subsistence basis for its growing autonomy (Fuller 2014). In the Meroitic heartland, royal building activity and control mechanisms decreased from the 2nd century ce. Former royal edifices like the palace of Amanishakheto at Wad Ben Naga fell into ruins (Vrtal 2013:62; Onderka 2014:88); shrines like the Amun temple at Naga (Wildung in Kröper et al.  2011:51) and the temple of Hamadab (Wolf et al. 2014b:104) were abandoned. The urban communities apparently persisted, but a decline in materials, infrastructure, and central supervision of their development is apparent. After the reign of Natakamani and Amanitore, a hiatus in the occupation of Meroe’s Royal City is indicated by the accumulation of a substantial sand dune. Thereafter, the city lost its monumental character, modest dwellings replaced f­ormer large constructions, and the town wall was abandoned (Hinkel and Sievertsen 2002:30–31). Similarly, sand accumulations in the main street of Hamadab and the absence of substantial repairs at its town gate indicate the decrease of infrastructural maintenance in the 2nd century ce. At the end of this period, sacral facilities and the central well at Hamadab were abandoned and ruined buildings were exploited for construction materials, while an increasingly irregular road system and the abandonment of the town wall indicate the lack of centrally controlled construction and production activities in this last urban period of the settlement (Wolf et al. 2014b:110, 2015:117). The cemeteries likewise illustrate the decline of royal economic power: While the Commoners’ Cemeteries east of Meroe and the cemeteries at Kadada and Gabati contain large numbers of well-equipped Late Meroitic graves, the royal tombs at Begrawiya North become small and of poor quality. The common grave types of this period are tumulus graves, often with circular shafts and side niche chamber, testifying to a consolidation of Sub-Saharan traditions. This type remained in use until Post-Meroitic times. In addition, descending ramps terminating in a perpendicular chamber were widely used, for example at Kadada and Gabati. A special type in the region of Kadada, Meroe, Akad, El-Fereikha near Dangeil, and Berber are graves with a double descendary to a single large chamber with rich equipment. The richer graves of the local elite placed emphasis on triumphal aspects, such as weaponry and the ritual sacrifice of animals and possibly humans (Welsby 1996:89–91). Offering tables, incense burners, palm fronds, and assumed libation vessels are the remains of performed rituals (Lenoble 1995). Burial customs and grave furniture gradually evolved into more autochthonous assemblages towards the Post-Meroitic period (Geus 1983:21–22; Francigny 2017). The deceased were entombed on beds, supplied with a growing number of accompanying goods, among them series of similar pottery jars and bowls, bronze and glass vessels, and sometimes archery equipment.

534   Pawel Wolf and Ulrike Nowotnick However, the Meroitic heartland still experienced a very productive phase. The significance of sorghum and cotton as exchange goods and status markers is documented until the mid-4th century ce (Edwards 2004:170; Burstein 2009:117–18). Iron tools and standardized ceramic vessels continue to be fabricated in the production areas of the riverine settlements, where settlement activity even appears to have increased: the growth of Hamadab over the abandoned town wall and its spread into the suburbs during the 3rd century ce was paralleled by a densification within the habitation quarters and the construction of probably multistoried housing, indicating population increase or influx from rural areas (Wolf et al. 2014a:727). Normalized Meroitic features such as ceramic types, spindle whorls, and dense mudbrick settlements appear far south of Meroe at Abu Geili, Saqadi (Crawford and Addison 1951), and further sites in the Gezira (Yvanez 2016).

Terminal Meroitic Period—Isolation and Collapse of the Meroe Royalty (4th Century ce) The territorial disintegration of the kingdom, the final collapse of its royal administration, and the political downfall of the crown in Meroe were not homogeneous processes. Instead, the “individual territorial units of the Late Meroitic kingdom were scenes of different developments during the last century of its existence” (Török  1999:152; Lohwasser 2013b). In Lower Nubia, Meroe asserted its influence with the help of local elites and, after Diocletian’s withdrawal of the Roman garrisons in 298 ce, it took over the control of the entire Dodekaschoinos, at least for a short period. The last Meroitic ruler known by name, Yesebokheamani, is attested around the late 3rd century ce by inscriptions at Qasr Ibrim, Philae, and Meroe City, where a dedication text in the Apedemak temple mentions ongoing cults of Isis and Horus at Philae and Sedeinga as well as the cult of Amun at Napata (Eide et al. 1998, no. 276). For his successors, no royal building activity is as yet attested in Lower Nubia. The Blemmyes of the Eastern Desert repeatedly invaded this region and were ultimately defeated not before the mid-5th century ce (Eide et al. 1998, no. 317; Burstein 2006). Large amounts of Roman objects in Lower Nubian contexts dating to the 4th century ce and later—in contrast to their concurrent paucity in the heartland—indicate that at around the turn of the 4th century ce, the royal house of Meroe had lost stable relations to Lower Nubia and the control over the exchange systems with Roman Egypt and the Mediterranean world. Deprived of one of the central pillars of its economy, it was now driven into economic weakness and political isolation. The last Meroitic rulers very probably came under the protectorate of Axum. An early 4th-century Axumite king, possibly Ousanas, lists Kush as one of his vassals, and fragments of two Axumite triumphal texts from the same period recovered at Meroe may be regarded as proof of invasion into the very core of the Meroitic heartland (Hofmann 1971; Burstein 1981; Eide et al. 1998, nos. 285–86; Hatke 2013). The disrepair and finally the

The Meroitic Heartland   535 abandonment of temples and shrines in several settlements of the heartland indicate a decline of royal support for local cults which certainly must have borne the consequence that the Meroitic crown gradually lost its ritual hegemony implying that it became unable to recruit larger military forces. The Axumite attacks may have additionally contributed to its downfall and subordination. Around 360 ce, the well-known triumphal inscriptions of the Axumite king Ezana refers to attacks against the Noba, accused of having threatened the western frontier of his realm, as well as punishment campaigns against straw and brick-built settlements to the north and south of the Atbara reported to have been inhabited by Meroites and Noba, though remarkably without mention of any Meroitic ruler nor an attack against the town site of Meroe (Eide et al. 1998:1097–1100; Burstein 2009:115–19; Hatke 2013). In addition, the number of victims, prisoners, and booty listed are far too small as to ruin a state. Ezana was therefore not the final blow to the Meroitic crown. Instead, the latter was too weak to be his equal already before his campaign. Notwithstanding Ezana’s mention of having captured officials and a member of the royal house, the abandonment of the pyramid cemetery of Begrawiya West shortly after the mid-4th century ce suggests that central administration and royalty in Meroe had come to an end by this time (Török 2015:97). Traditionally, ethnic processes such as the migration of Nubian-speaking Noba populations were regarded as one of the main factors for the collapse of the Meroitic state (cf. Eide et al. 1998:1098–99; Török 1999:134 for references). Ezana’s report refers to the Noba not as members of an autonomous polity, but apparently as living in close association with Meroitic-speaking communities in those rural straw settlements and brickbuilt towns, possessing grain, copper, iron, cotton trees, temples, and altars and even holding higher administrative positions. Recent research reconsidered the term “Nob”  in Meroitic language a social rather than solely an ethnic designation (Rilly 2008:217–19, 2014:1178). This additionally turns attention away from purely ethnic migration hypotheses and also highlights internal socio-economic developments within Meroitic society (Edwards 1996:92–93; Lenoble 1999; Török 1999:142–45, 2011a; Edwards 2011). After the present-day hyper-arid ecosystem had established in the eastern Sahara during the last millennium bce (Kuper and Kröpelin 2006; Kröpelin et al. 2008), the general ecological situation did not dramatically change in the sub-Saharan savannas. However, a gradual decrease of interannual rainfall and surface runoff availability and reliability has been indicated for Late to Post-Meroitic times (Berking  2011:92–93). In correspondence with these ecological dynamics, large-scale projects like the establishment of huge artificial water reservoirs, and intensive agro-pastoral exploitation of hinterland sites like Naga, Basa, and Musawwarat, as well as the immense demand of acacia fuel for its riverine centers, may have exceeded the regeneration potential of the natural habitat at productive places in the ecologically vulnerable Western Butana (Akhtar-Schuster and Mensching  1993; Akhtar-Schuster  1995; Edwards  1996:92; Scheibner 2011:37, 2014:315–20; M. Hinkel 2015:xxxi). It seems that ecological processes “primarily caused by human activity and impact and only secondarily due to climatic shifts” (Berking 2011:95) led to regional land degradation and desertification, indicated, for example, by sand dunes at Meroe town site and in the water reservoirs of Meroe,

536   Pawel Wolf and Ulrike Nowotnick Musawwarat, and Naga (Hinkel and Sievertsen 2002:30; Berking and Schütt 2011:37; Scheibner 2011:37). Deteriorating conditions are corroborated by the late Meroitic animal economy as well. Faunal remains, previously dominated by cattle, gradually shifted towards caprids and particularly goats during Post-Meroitic and Christian periods, perhaps because these are better adapted to dryer environments (Chaix 2016:131–33). The interplay of socio-economic dynamics with ecological and ethnic pressure alongside political developments and exogenic forces may have culminated in a profound restructuring of the kingdom and finally its disintegration. The loss of royal power has finally led to the collapse of centrally administrated craft production and massproduced material culture, long-distance exchange and official temple cult—and is well illustrated by the disappearance of socially determined cultural expressions such as monumental architecture, Egyptianized forms of burial traditions, and the official use of Meroitic written language. However, these developments did not necessarily involve immediate population decrease or a decline of general productivity. In contrast to dynamic forms of living such as seasonal movements or nomadic pastoralism, sedentary settlement usually reacts rather indolently to both socio-economic instability and ecological stress. Human presence is attested in the former Meroitic heartland throughout the Post-Meroitic period by squatter occupation, craft production, ceramic finds, and numerous, though unexplored, tumulus cemeteries. At Meroe and Hamadab, iron production continued, albeit on a local level, until the mid-6th century ce (Wolf et al. 2014:106; Humphris and Scheibner 2017). While decentralized subsistence strategies may have been sufficient for smaller population groups, it was not enough to sustain large settlements and centralized powers in the long term. The riverine towns, established during the heydays of the Meroitic period, now gradually disappeared from the landscape as their population slowly dispersed towards the hinterland, perhaps resuming other strategies of livelihood. Large tumuli with rich burials at El-Hobagi, Sururab, and Tanqasi—remarkably on the Noba-dominated west bank of the Nile—testify to the fragmentation of the territory into smaller polities (Lenoble 1999; Török 2011a). While the lack of military fortifications among Meroitic sites in the heartland indicates a widely unchallenged acceptance of the former Meroitic crown’s suzerainty—as Agatharchides may have alluded to in Diodorus 3.7 (Eide et al. 1996, no. 142)—a chain of military installations along the Nile (Drzewiecki 2016) now reflects times of political instability and possibly military quarrels between local polities. Resuming cultural features that reflect older sub-Saharan traditions, the PostMeroitic culture in the former Meroitic heartland is characterized by the prevalence of tumuli, bed burials, and handmade ceramics with impressed decorative patterns, while the material manifestation of the Meroitic elite and urban culture almost disappeared with the collapse of the central government. Around the early second half of the 1st millennium ce, urban occupation in the former heartland ended. During the following medieval period, there is little evidence for occupation in the wider Meroe region. The center of the Christian kingdom of Alwa lay farther south at Soba. A substantial reoccupation of the former Meroitic heartland along the Nile took place not before the 16th century by Arabic-speaking Ja’alin agriculturalists.

The Meroitic Heartland   537

Notes 1. Notes in [] brackets were inserted by the authors. 2 . Prior to the travels of J. Bruce and the rediscovery of Meroe by F. Cailliaud, there had been a lot of dispute about the re-location of this Island (e.g., Delisle 1749; Bruce 1813:453–58, who called it Atbara). For the southern limits of the Island, which are usually neglected particularly in archaeological literature, see, e.g., Delisle  1749:412; Bruce  1813:455; Renouard  1845:566; Crowfoot  1911:10. For the question whether “Island of Meroe” may have also designated the actual town site of Meroe, see Wolf 2015:124–31; Wolf et al. 2015a (with further literature). 3. For general introductions to the history and archaeology of the Meroitic kingdom, see, e.g., Adams  1977; Török  1988,  1997a; Welsby  1996; Edwards  2004; Baud ed.  2010; Lohwasser 2013a; Rilly 2017; Raue 2019. 4. For a re-interpretation of the chronology regarding Queen Shanakdakheto and her possible identification with Queen Amanishakheto, see Rilly  2011:183–85, 2017:261–63; cf. Yellin 2014:80–81, but see also Török 2015:77 and n. 375. 5. The caches at Napata and Dokki Gel were associated with the military campaign of Psamtek II against Kush in 593 bce, while it is questionable whether his troops advanced as far upstream as Dangeil (Anderson and Salah eldin Mohamed Ahmed  2014:618–19). Since Late Napatan and Meroitic life-sized royal statuary is generally rare, it is not surprising that the broken statues of Aspelta are the latest evidence in these contexts.

References Cited Adams, W.Y. 1977 Nubia: Corridor to Africa. Princeton University Press. Ahmed H. Nassr 2016 Late Prehistoric Sites from the Sabaloka Province North of Khartoum on the Eastern bank of the Nile, Sudan. Afrique: Archéologie & Arts 12:21–42. Akhtar-Schuster, M. 1995 Degradationsprozesse und Desertifikation im semiariden randtropischen Gebiet der Butana/Rep. Sudan. Göttinger Beiträge zur Land- und Forstwirtschaft in den Tropen und Subtropen 105. Verlag Erich Goltze. Akhtar-Schuster, M. and H.  Mensching 1993 Desertification in the Butana. GeoJournal 31(1):41–50. Anderson, J.A. and Salah eldin Mohamed Ahmed 2014 Early Kushite Royal Statues at Dangeil, Sudan. In Anderson and Welsby eds., pp. 613–19. Anderson J.R. and D.A. Welsby eds. 2014 The Fourth Cataract and Beyond: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference for Nubian Studies. British Museum Publications on Egypt and Sudan 1. Peeters. Anderson J.R., Mahmoud Suliman Bashir, and Rihab Khidir elRasheed 2015 The Qatar-Sudan Archaeological Project at Dangeil—Satyrs, Rulers, Archers and Pyramids: A Miscellany from Dangeil 2014–15. Sudan & Nubia 19:88–94. Azhari  M.  Sadig 2012 Chronology and Cultural Development of the Sudanese Neolithic. Beiträge zur Sudanforschung 11:137–84. Baud, M. 2008 The Meroitic Royal City of Muweis: First Steps into an Urban Settlement of Riverine Upper Nubia. Sudan & Nubia 12:52–63. ——— 2010 Méroé. Un monde urbain. In Méroé. Un empire sur le Nil, ed. M. Baud, pp. 211–24. Musée du Louvre.

538   Pawel Wolf and Ulrike Nowotnick ——— 2015 Trois saisons à Mouweis: premier bilan archéologique. In Zach ed., pp. 97–110. Baud, M. ed. 2010 Méroé. Un empire sur le Nil. Musée du Louvre. Berking, J. 2011 Geoarchaeology in Drylands, Palaeoenvironmantal Reconstructions in the Vicinity of Naga, Central Sudan. Doctoral dissertation, Freie Universität Berlin. http:// www.diss.fu-berlin.de/diss/receive/FUDISS_thesis_000000034747 (accessed April 21, 2017). Berking, J. and B.  Schütt 2011 Geoarchaeology and Chronostratigraphy in the Vicinity of Meroitic Naga in Northern Sudan—A Review. eTopoi: Journal for Ancient Studies 1:23–43. Bonnet, C. and D. Valbelle 2005 Des pharaons venus d’Afrique. La cachette de Kerma. Philipp von Zabern. Brass, M.J. 2016 Reinterpreting Chronology and Society at the Mortuary Complex of Jebel Moya (Sudan). Cambridge Monographs in African Archaeology 92. Archaeopress. Bruce, J. 1813 Travels to Discover the Source of the Nile, in the years 1768, 1769, 1770, 1771, 1772, & 1773. Third edition, v. 6. George Ramsay and Company. Bubenzer, O., A. Bolten, and F. Darius eds. 2007 Atlas of Cultural and Environmental Change in Arid Africa. Africa Praehistorica 21. Heinrich Barth-Institut E. V. Burkhardt, A. 1985 Ägypter und Meroiten im Dodekaschoinos, Untersuchungen zur Typologie und Bedeutung der demotischen Graffiti. Meroitica 8. Akademie Verlag. Burstein, S. 1981 Axum and the Fall of Meroe. Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt 18:47–50. ——— 2006 Silko’s Bad Conscience: A New Interpretation of the Silko Inscription (FHN 317). In Caneva and Roccati eds., pp. 447–50. ——— 2009 Ancient African Civilizations: Kush and Axum. Marcus Wiener Publishers. Caneva, I. and A. Roccati eds. 2006 Acta Nubica: Proceedings of the X International Conference of Nubian Studies. Libreria dello Stato. Instituto Poligraphico e Zecca dello Stato. Chaix, L. 2016 Archéozoologie méroïtique et chrétienne en Nubie. Dotawo: A Journal of Nubian Studies 3(1):127–36. Chapman, S.E. and D. Dunham 1952 Decorated Chapels of the Meroitic Pyramids at Meroe and Barkal. Royal Cemeteries of Kush 3. Museum of Fine Arts (Boston). Crawford, O.G.S. and F.  Addison 1951 Abu Geili and Saqadi & Dar el Mek. The Wellcome Excavations in the Sudan 3. Oxford University Press. Crowfoot, J.W. 1911 The Island of Meroe. Egypt Exploration Fund. Delisle 1749 Muthmaßungen von der Lage der Insel Meroe. In Der Königlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften in Paris physische Abhandlungen, Dritter Theil welcher die Jahre, 1707, 1708, 1709, 1710 in sich hält, ed. W. Balth and A. von Steinwehr. Johann Jacob Korn. Drzewiecki, M. 2016 Mighty Kingdoms and their Forts: The Role of Fortified Sites in the Fall of Meroe and Rise of Medieval Realms in Upper Nubia. Nubia 6. Institute of Mediterranean and Oriental Cultures of the Polish Academy of Sciences. Dunham, D. 1957 Royal Tombs at Meroe and Barkal. Royal Cemeteries of Kush 4. Museum of Fine Arts (Boston). ——— 1970 The Barkal Temples, Excavated by George Andrew Reisner. Museum of Fine Arts (Boston). Edwards, D.N. 1996 The Archaeology of the Meroitic State: New Perspectives on its Social and Political Organisation. BAR International Series 640. Tempus Reparatum. ——— 1998 Meroe and the Sudanic Kingdoms. Journal of African History 39:175–93. ——— 1999a A Meroitic Pottery Workshop at Musawwarat es Sufra: Preliminary Report on the Excavations 1997 in Courtyard 224 of the Great Enclosure. Meroitica 17(2). Harrassowitz.

The Meroitic Heartland   539 ——— 1999b Meroe in the Savannah—Meroe as a Sudanic Kingdom? In Wenig ed., pp. 312–20. ——— 2004 The Nubian Past: An Archaeology of the Sudan. Routledge. ——— 2011 From Meroe to “Nubia”: Exploring Culture Change without the “Noba”. In Rondot et al., pp. 501–14. Edwards, D.N. 2014 Early Meroitic Pottery and the Creation of an Early Imperial Culture? In Lohwasser and Wolf eds., pp. 51–64. Eide, T., T.  Hägg, R.  H.  Pierce, and L.  Török eds. 1994 Fontes Historiae Nubiorum: Textual Sources for the History of the Middle Nile Region between the Eighth Century BC and the Sixth Century AD, v. 1: From the Eighth to the Mid-Fifth Century BC. Department of Classics, University of Bergen. ——— 1996 Fontes Historiae Nubiorum: Textual Sources for the History of the Middle Nile Region between the Eighth Century BC and the Sixth Century AD, v. 2: From the Mid-Fifth to the First Century BC. Department of Greek, Latin, and Egyptology, University of Bergen. ——— 1998 Fontes Historiae Nubiorum: Textual Sources for the History of the Middle Nile Region between the Eighth Century BC and the Sixth Century AD, v. 3: From the First to the Sixth Century AD. IKRR/Department of Greek, Latin, and Egyptology, University of Bergen. Eigner, D. 2010 Where Kings Met Gods: The Great Enclosure at Musawwarat es Sufra. Der antike Sudan. Mitteilungen der Sudanarchäologischen Gesellschaft zu Berlin 21:7–22. Finneran, N. 2007 The Archaeology of Ethiopia. Routledge. Francigny, V. 2017 Les coutumes funéraires dans le royaume de Méroé. Les enterrements privés. Éditions de Boccard. Fuller, D.Q. 2003 Pharaonic or Sudanic? Models for Meroitic Society and Change. In Ancient Egypt and Africa, ed. D. O’Connor and A. Reid, pp. 169–84. UCL Press. ——— 2014 Agricultural Innovation and State Collapse in Meroitic Nubia: The Impact of the Savannah Package. In Archaeology of African Plant Use, ed. C.  Stevens, S.  Nixon, M.A. Murray, and D.Q. Fuller, pp. 165–77. Left Coast Press. Gerharz, R. 1994 Jebel Moya. Meroitica 14. Akademie Verlag. Geus, F. 1982 La nécropole méroitique d’el Kadada. In Meroitic Studies: Proceedings of the Third International Meroitic Conference, ed. N.B. Millet and A.L. Kelley, pp. 178–87. Meroitica 6. Akademie Verlag. ——— 1983 Rapport annuel d’activité 1980–1982. Directorate general for antiquities and national museums of the Sudan. French archaeological research unit. Gleichen, E. 1905 The Anglo-Egyptian Sudan: A Compendium Prepared by Officers of the Sudan Government. His Majesty’s Stationery Office. Haerison and Sons. Godlewski, W. and A. Łajtar eds. 2008 Between the Cataracts: Proceedings of the 11th Conference for Nubian Studies, Part 1: Main Papers. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean Supplement Series 2.1. Warsaw University. Grzymski, K. 2005 Meroe, the Capital of Kush: Old Problems and New Discoveries. Sudan & Nubia 9:47–58. Hallof, J. 2005 Philae in Musawwarat es Sufra. Der antike Sudan. Mitteilungen der Sudanarchäologischen Gesellschaft zu Berlin 16:35–48. Hatke, G. 2013 Aksum and Nubia: Warfare, Commerce, and Political Fictions in Ancient Northeast Africa. http://dlib.nyu.edu/awdl/isaw/hatke2013-aksum-and-nubia/ (accessed February 4, 2017).

540   Pawel Wolf and Ulrike Nowotnick Hinkel, F.W. 2001 Der Tempelkomplex Meroe 250. The Archaeological Map of the Sudan, Supplement I.1; I.2a–b. Selbstverlag des Hrsg. Hinkel, F.W. and U.  Sievertsen 2002 Die Royal City von Meroe und die repräsentative Profanarchitektur in Kusch. The Archaeological Map of the Sudan Supplement 4. Forschungsarchiv Friedrich W. Hinkel, Berlin. Verlag Monumenta Sudanica. Hinkel, M. 2015 Die Hafire im Sudan—Eine Untersuchung zur Geschichte des frühen Wasserspeicherbaus (fertiggestellt und herausgegeben von Walter  F.  Reinecke). The Archaeological Map of the Sudan, Supplement 2. Deutsches Archäologisches Institut, Berlin. Habelt-Verlag. Hintze, F. 1959 Preliminary Report of the Butana Expedition 1958 Made by the Institute for Egyptology of the Humboldt University, Berlin. Kush 7:171–96. ——— 1979 Elemente der meroitischen Kultur. In F. Hintze ed., pp. 101–105. Hintze, F. ed. 1979 Africa in Antiquity: The Arts of Ancient Nubia and the Sudan. Proceedings of the Symposium Held in Conjunction with the Exhibition, Brooklyn, September 29–October 1, 1978. Meroitica 5. Akademie Verlag. Hintze, F. and U.  Hintze 1970 Einige neue Ergebnisse der Ausgrabungen des Instituts für Ägyptologie der Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin in Musawwarat es Sufra’. In Kunst und Geschichte Nubiens in christlicher Zeit. Ergebnisse und Probleme auf Grund der jüngsten Ausgrabungen, ed. E. Dinkler, pp. 49–70. Bongers. Hintze, U. 1979 The Graffiti from the Great Enclosure at Musawwarat es Sufra. In F. Hintze ed. 1979, pp. 135–50. Hofmann, I. 1971 Bemerkungen zum Ende des meroitischen Reiches. In Afrikanische Sprachen und Kulturen—Ein Querschnitt. Hamburger Beiträge zur Afrika-Kunde 14. Deutsches Institut für Afrikaforschung. Humphris J. and T. Scheibner 2017 A New Radiocarbon Chronology for Ancient Iron  Production in the Meroe Region of Sudan. African Archaeological Review 34:377–413. Humphris J., R. Bussert, F. Alshishani, and T. Scheibner 2018. The Ancient Mines of Meroe. Azania 53(3):291–311. Khider Adam Eisa 1999 The Extremities of the Kushite State during the Meroitic Period. In Wenig ed., pp. 366–71. Khidir A. Ahmed 1984 Meroitic Settlement in the Central Sudan: An Analysis of Sites in the Nile Valley and the Western Butana. Cambridge Monographs in African Archaeology 8. BAR International Series 197. ——— 1999 Economy and Environment in the Empire of Kush. In Wenig ed., pp. 291–311. ——— 2015 Meroe, a State of the Nile Valley. In Zach ed., pp. 1–8. Kleinitz, C. 2013 Die Sekundärbilder und -inschriften der Großen Anlage von Musawwarat es Sufra und das “Musawwarat Graffiti Project.” In Die Kulturen Nubiens—ein afrikanisches Vermächtnis, ed. S. Wenig and K. Zibelius-Chen, pp. 399–413. J.H. Röll. Kröpelin S. et al. 2008 Climate-Driven Ecosystem Succession in the Sahara: The Past 6000 Years. Science 320:765–68 (DOI: 10.1126/science.1154913). Kröper, K., S. Schoske, and D. Wildung 2011 Königsstadt Naga: Grabungen in der Wüste des Sudan = Naga: Royal City. Naga-Projekt Berlin. Staatliches Museum Ägyptischer Kunst München. Kuper, R. and S.  Kröpelin 2006 Climate-Controlled Holocene Occupation in the Sahara: Motor of Africa’s Evolution. Science 313:803–807. Leclant, J., A. Heyler, C. Berger-El Naggar, C. Carrier, and C. Rilly 2000 Répertoire d’épigraphie méroïtique. Corpus des inscriptions publiées. De Boccard.

The Meroitic Heartland   541 Lenoble, P. 1987 Quatre tumulus sur mille du Djebel Makbor  A.M.S.  NE–36–0/3-X–1. Archéologie du Nil Moyen 2:207–50. ——— 1995 La petite bouteille noire un recipient meroeen de la libation funeraire. Archéologie du Nil Moyen 7:143–62. ——— 1999 The Division of the Meroitic Empire and the End of Pyramid Building in the 4th Century AD: An Introduction to Further Excavations of Imperial Mounds in the Sudan. In Welsby ed., pp. 157–97. Lohwasser, A. 2001 Die königlichen Frauen im antiken Reich von Kusch: 25. Dynastie bis zur Zeit des Nastasen. Meroitica 19. Harrassowitz. ——— 2013a Die meroitische Periode des Reiches von Kusch (um 270 v. Chr.—ca. 330/350 n. Chr.). In Die Kulturen Nubiens—ein afrikanisches Vermächtnis, ed. S. Wenig and K. ZibeliusChen, pp. 227–44. J.H. Röll. ——— 2013b Das “Ende von Meroe”—Gedanken zur Regionalität von Ereignissen. In Ägypten und sein Umfeld in der Spätantike. Vom Regierungsantritt Diokletians 284/285 bis zur arabischen Eroberung des Vorderen Orients um 635–646, ed. F. Feder and A. Lohwasser, pp. 275–90. Philippika 61. Harrassowitz. ——— 2014 Kush and her Neighbours beyond the Nile Valley. In Anderson and Welsby eds., pp. 125–34. Lohwasser, A. and P. Wolf eds. 2014 Ein Forscherleben zwischen den Welten. Zum 80. Geburtstag von Steffen Wenig. Der antike Sudan, Sonderheft 2014. Harrassowitz. Mahmoud el-Tayeb 2010 The Post-Meroitic from Kirwan to the Present. Sudan & Nubia 14:2–14. Mahmoud Suliman Bashir 2016 Excavations in the Meroitic Cemetery at Berber, Seasons 2015 and 2016. Sudan & Nubia 20:57–61. Mahmoud Suliman Bashir and R.  David 2015 The Meroitic Cemetery at Berber: Recent Fieldwork and Discussion on Internal Chronology. Sudan & Nubia 19:97–105. Maillot, M. 2016 Palais et grandes demeures du royaume de Méroé. Presses de l’Univ. ParisSorbonne (PUPS). Manzo, A. 2006 Apedemak and Dionysos: Further Remarks on the “Cult of the Grape” in Kush. Sudan & Nubia 10:82–94. ——— 2017 Eastern Sudan in its Setting: The Archaeology of a Region Far from the Nile Valley. Cambridge Monographs in African Archaeology 94. Archaeopress. Matthews, S. and U. Nowotnick 2019 Culinary interactions. Connecting foodways in Early Iron Age Africa, Azania: Archaeological Research in Africa 10:468–486. Näser, C. and M. Wetendorf 2015 The Musawwarat Pottery Project 2014/15. Der antike Sudan. Mitteilungen der Sudanarchäologischen Gesellschaft zu Berlin 26:35–74. Nicholson P. T. and I. Shaw eds. 2000 Ancient Egyptian Materials and Technology. Cambridge University Press. Nolde, N. 2016 Tierknochenfunde der Grabungskampagne 2014 und 2015 in Musawwarat esSufra, Sudan. Der antike Sudan. Mitteilungen der Sudanarchäologischen Gesellschaft zu Berlin 27:19–24. Nowotnick, U. forthcoming Ceramic Technology, Production and Use in an Urban Settlement on the Middle Nile. The Pottery Assemblage from Late Meroitic Hamadab, ca. 2nd to 4th century AD. Doctoral dissertation, Humboldt University of Berlin. Nowotnick, U. 2016 Hellenistic Influence on Ceramics from Meroe and Hamadab (Sudan). In Traditions and Innovations: Tracking the Development of Pottery from the Late Classical to the Early Imperial Periods, ed. P. Kögler and S. Japp, pp. 399–414. Phoibos. Onderka, P. 2014 Wad ben Naga: A History of the Site. Sudan & Nubia 18:83–92.

542   Pawel Wolf and Ulrike Nowotnick Onderka, P., V. Vrtal, J. Daskova, M. Dufkova, A. Gatzsche, R. John, E. Spindler, and F. Vacek 2013 Wad Ben Naga 1821–2013. National Museum Prague. Phillipson, D.W. 2012 Foundations of an African Civilisation: Aksum & the Northern Horn 1000 BC–AD 1300. J. Currey. Pope J. 2014 The Double Kingdom under Taharqo: Studies in the History of Kush and Egypt, c. 690–664 BC. Culture and History of the Ancient Near East 69. Brill. Priese, K.-H. 2003 Bauen in Musawwarat. Der antike Sudan. Mitteilungen der Sudanarchäologischen Gesellschaft zu Berlin 14:53–72. Raue, D. ed. 2019 Handbook of Ancient Nubia. De Gruyter. Reisner, G.A. 1923 The Meroitic Kingdom of Ethiopia: A Chronological Outline. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 9:34–77. Renouard G.C. 1845 Nubia. In Encyclopædia Metropolitana, ed. S.T. Coleridge et al., v. 22:557–71. B. Fellowes et al. Rilly, C. 2004 Meroitic Paleography as a Tool for Chronology: Prospects and Limits. Arkamani: Sudan Electronic Journal of Archaeology and Anthropology http://archive.is/D7Qj1 (accessed September 18, 2016). ——— 2006 Palaeographical Evidence for Local Princes in Begrawwiya West. In Caneva and Roccati eds., pp. 435–42. ——— 2008 Enemy Brothers: Kinship and Relationship between Meroites and Nubians (Noba). In Godlewski and Łajtar eds., pp. 211–25. ——— 2011 Meroitische Texte aus Naga/Meroitic Texts from Naga. In Königsstadt Naga: Grabungen in der Wüste des Sudan = Naga: Royal City, ed. K.  Kröper, S.  Schoske, and D.  Wildung, pp. 176–201. Naga-Projekt Berlin. Staatliches Museum Ägyptischer Kunst München. ——— 2014 Language and Ethnicity in Ancient Sudan. In Anderson and Welsby eds., pp. 1169–88. ——— 2017 Histoire du Soudan, des origines à la chute du sultanat Fung. In Histoire et Civilisations du Soudan, ed. O. Cabon, pp. 26–445. Études d’égyptologie 15. Soleb. Rondot V., F. Alpi, and F. Villeneuve eds. 2011 La pioche et la plume. Autour du Soudan, du Liban et de la Jordanie. Hommages archéologiques à Patrice Lenoble. Presses de l’Univ. ParisSorbonne (PUPS). Sackho-Autissier, A. 2016 Les faïences d’époque méroïtique conservées au musée du Louvre. Technologie et production. Les prémices d’une recherche. Dotawo: A Journal of Nubian Studies 3(1):29–39. Sakoutis, S.J. 2009 The Origins of Three Meroitic Bronze Oil Lamps in the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston. MA thesis, Department of Art and Design, Georgia State University http:// scholarworks.gsu.edu/art_design_theses/47 (accessed April 7, 2017). Scheibner, T. 2004 Neue Erkenntnisse zur Wasserversorgung von Musawwarat es Sufra (I)— Das Übergeordnete Wasserversorgungssystem, Teil I: Wassergewinnung und -speicherung. Der antike Sudan. Mitteilungen der Sudanarchäologischen Gesellschaft zu Berlin 15:39–64. ——— 2011 Neue und alte 14C-Daten aus Musawwarat es-Sufra und ihre Aussagemöglichkeiten zur absoluten und relativen Chronologie des Fundplatzes. Der antike Sudan. Mitteilungen der Sudanarchäologischen Gesellschaft zu Berlin 22:7–40. ——— 2014 Entstehung, Ursprung und Nutzung—Die Hafire in Musawwarat es-Sufra und in der Keraba als Wirtschaftsbauten. In Lohwasser and Wolf eds., pp. 299–322. Shinnie, P.L. and J.R.  Anderson eds. 2004 The Capital of Kush, v. 2: Meroe Excavations, 1973–1984. Meroitica 20. Harrassowitz.

The Meroitic Heartland   543 Sutton, J.E.G. 2004 Africa, Agriculture and Iron. In Combining the Past and the Present: Archaeological Perspectives on Society. Proceedings from the Conference “Pre-history in a Global Perspective” held in Bergen, August 31st-September 2nd 2001, in Honour of Professor Randi Haaland’s 60th Anniversary, ed. T. Oestigaard, N. Anfinset, and T. Saetersdal, pp. 107–17. BAR International Series 1210. Török, L. 1988 Geschichte Meroes. Ein Beitrag über die Quellenlage und den Forschungsstand. In Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt, Teil 2: Principat 10,1. Provinzen und Randvölker: Politische Geschichte. Afrika und Ägypten, ed. H. Temporini and W. Haase, pp. 107–341. De Gruyter. ——— 1997a The Kingdom of Kush: Handbook of the Napatan-Meroitic Civilization. Handbuch der Orientalistik 1(31). Brill. ——— 1997b Meroe City: An Ancient African Capital. John Garstang’s Excavations in the Sudan. Egypt Exploration Society Occasional Publications 12. ——— 1999 The End of Meroe. In Welsby ed., pp. 133–56. ——— 2002a Kinship and Decorum: (Re)constructing the Meroitic Élite. Der antike Sudan. Mitteilungen der Sudanarchäologischen Gesellschaft zu Berlin 13:60–84. ——— 2002b The Image of the Ordered World in Ancient Nubian Art: The Construction of the Kushite Mind, 800 BC–300 AD. Probleme der Ägyptologie 18. Brill. ——— 2008 From Chiefdom to “Segmentary State.” Meroitic Studies: A Personal View. In Godlewski and Łajtar eds., pp. 159–78. ——— 2009 Between Two Worlds: The Frontier Region between Ancient Nubia and Egypt, 3700 BC–AD 500. Probleme der Ägyptologie 29. Brill. ——— 2011a From Hobagi to Ballana. In Rondot et al., pp. 515–31. ——— 2011b Hellenizing Art in Ancient Nubia 300 BC–AD 250 and its Egyptian Models: A Study in “Acculturation.” Culture and History of the Ancient Near East 53. Brill. ——— 2015 The Periods of Kushite History from the Tenth Century BC to the AD Fourth Century. Studia Aegyptiaca Supplements 1. Usai, D., S. Salvatori, T. Jakob, and R. David 2014 The Al Khiday Cemetery in Central Sudan and its “Classic/Late Meroitic” Period Graves. Journal of African Archaeology 12(2):183–204. Vrtal, V. 2013 The Palace of Queen Amanishakheto (WBN 100). In Onderka et al. eds., pp. 57–62. Welsby, D.A. 1996 The Kingdom of Kush: The Napatan and Meroitic Empires. British Museum Press. ——— ed. 1999 Recent Research in Kushite History and Archaeology: Proceedings of the 8th International Conference for Meroitic Studies. British Museum Occasional Paper 131. British Museum Press. Wenig, S. 2001 Musawwarat es-Sufra—Interpreting the Great Enclosure. Sudan & Nubia 5:71–88. ——— ed. 1999 Studien zum antiken Sudan: Akten der 7. Internationalen Tagung für meroitistische Forschungen. Meroitica 15. Harrassowitz. Whiteman, A.J. 1971 The Geology of the Sudan Republic. Clarendon Press. Wildung, D. 1999 Die Stadt in der Steppe. Stiftung Preußischer Kulturbesitz. Wildung, D. and K. Kröper 2006 Naga—Royal City of Ancient Sudan. Stiftung Preußischer Kulturbesitz. ——— 2016 A Short Guide to the Ancient Site of Naga (Sudan). Staatliches Museum Ägyptischer Kunst München. Wildung, D. and A. Riedel 2011 The Arts of Naga. In Kröper et al. eds., pp. 110–51.

544   Pawel Wolf and Ulrike Nowotnick Winchell, F., C.J. Stevens, C. Murphy, L. Champion, and D.Q. Fuller 2017 Evidence for Sorghum Domestication in Fourth Millennium bc Eastern Sudan: Spikelet Morphology from Ceramic Impressions of the Butana Group. Current Anthropology 58(5):673–83. Wolf, P. 2001 Die Höhle des Löwen—Zur Deutung der Großen Anlage von Musawwarat es Sufra. In Begegnungen—Antike Kulturen im Niltal, Festgabe für Erika Endesfelder, KarlHeinz Priese, Walter Friedrich Reineke, Steffen Wenig, ed. C.-B.  Arnst, I.  Hafemann, and A. Lohwasser, pp. 473–508. Wodtke und Stegbauer. ——— 2003 Die Bronzestatuette des kuschitischen Gottes Sebiumeker aus dem Tempel von Hamadab. Der antike Sudan. Mitteilungen der Sudanarchäologischen Gesellschaft zu Berlin 14:97–110. ——— 2006 Temples in the Meroitic South—Some Aspects of Typology, Cult and Function. In Caneva and Roccati eds., pp. 239–62. ——— 2008 Hamadab. Archäologischer Anzeiger 2008(2):196–215. ——— 2014 Essay über den meroitischen Eklektizismus in Musawwarat es Sufra, oder: woher stammt der meroitische Einraumtempel? In Lohwasser and Wolf eds., pp. 351–94. ——— 2015 The Qatar-Sudan Archaeological Project—The Meroitic Town of Hamadab and the Palaeo-Environment of the Meroe Region. Sudan & Nubia 19:115–31. ——— 2019 Settlement in the Meroitic Kingdom. In Handbook of Ancient Nubia, ed. D. Raue, pp. 713–82. De Gruyter. ——— forthcoming The Natural and Cultural Landscape of the Meroe Region. In Proceedings of the Second Archaeological Bayuda Conference “Bayuda and its Neighbours”, ed. H. Paner. Wolf, P., U. Nowotnick, and C. Hof 2014a The Meroitic Urban Town of Hamadab in 2010. In Anderson and Welsby eds., pp. 719–38. Wolf, P., U. Nowotnick, and F. Wöß 2014b Meroitic Hamadab—A Century after its Discovery. Sudan & Nubia 18:104–20. Wolf, P., R. Schomacker, U. Nowotnick, V. Eichmann, T. Scheibner, and N. Salamanek 2015a The ‘Island of Meroe’ and the Palaeo-environment of the Greater Meroe Region. In Der andere Blick. Forscherlust und Wissensdrang, Museumsgabe zum 80. Geburtstag von KarlHeinz Priese, ed. K. Finneiser and J. Helmbold-Doyé, pp. 247–91. Ägyptisches Museum und Papyrussammlung der Staatlichen Museen zu Berlin. EB Verlag. Wolf, P., U. Nowotnick, and C. Hof 2015b Hamadab—Insights into Development and Lifestyle of a Meroitic Urban Settlement. In Zach ed., pp. 123–39. Wolf, S. 2008 Die sog. Royal Baths in Meroë. Archäologischer Anzeiger 2008(2):166–88. Yellin, J. 2009 La transition entre le Napatéen tardif et l’époque meroïtique d’après les recherches sur la nécropole royale sud de Meroe. Bulletin de la Société Française d’Égyptologie 174:8–28. ——— 2014 Chronology and Attribution of Royal Pyramids at Meroe and Gebel Barkal: BEG N 8, BEG N 12, BAR 5 AND BAR 2. Journal of Ancient Egyptian Interconnections 6(1):76–88. ——— 2015 Meroitic Royal Chronology: The Conflict with Rome and its Aftermath. Sudan & Nubia 19:2–15. Yvanez, E. 2016 Spinning in Meroitic Sudan: Textile Production Implements from Abu Geili. Dotawo: A Journal of Nubian Studies 3(1):153–77. Zach, M., ed. 2015 The Kushite World: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference for Meroitic Studies. Beiträge zur Sudanforschung Beiheft 9. Verein der Förderer der Sudanforschung.

chapter 28

The Cit y of M eroe Krzysztof Grzymski

Introduction Meroe was the political, cultural, industrial, and religious center of the great African Kingdom of Kush, present-day Sudan, from at least the 5th century bce until the early 4th century ce. The excavations carried out by British, Sudanese, Canadian, and German archaeologists unearthed so far only a part of what is one of the largest archaeological sites in Africa. Meroitic civilization was one of the earliest literate civilizations in Africa and the excavations revealed not only the remains of monumental buildings but also numerous inscriptions in Egyptian, Meroitic, and even Greek languages.

Name The name of this Kushite capital city appears in numerous Meroitic, Egyptian, and Greek texts. Its native version is written as either Bedewi or Medewi, the first sign representing a bilabial [m] (Rilly 2007:390). The grapheme d was used in writing an apical consonant that was transcribed in Egyptian and Greek as r (Rilly 2007:365–66). In early Napatan texts written in Egyptian hieroglyphs, the name of the city is rendered Brwt, while in the Ptolemaic texts it is rendered as Mirw3i and in demotic inscriptions as Mrwt (Zibelius 1972:106–107; Rilly 2007:30–32). The Greeks rendered the name as Μερόη and this was transliterated as Meroe in Latin and modern languages. The stela of Psamtek II found at Tanis and dated to 593 bce described this pharaoh’s invasion of Kush. It mentioned a place named mrw(?), which might have been Meroe, although this is by no means certain. The earliest confirmed reference to Meroe is in the Kawa inscription IX, of the Napatan king Amannote-erike.1 His rule is traditionally dated to the second half of the 5th century bce (Macadam 1949:51). The text states that when his predecessor,

546   Krzysztof Grzymski King Talakhamani, died Amannote-erike was in the company of his brothers in his palace at Meroe (B3rwt). Roughly contemporary is Herodotus’s description of Meroe as the seat of the king (Eide et al. 1994:307–309). It has been suggested by Macadam (1966:52) that the name of the modern village of Begrawiya, which is sometimes applied to the entire area around the ancient site, preserves that of the ancient city.

Location and Natural Setting Meroe is located within the monsoon rain belt region of Central Sudan in a savannahlike environment some 200 km north of Khartoum (see also Wolf and Nowotnick, this volume). The ancient city is situated on the east bank of the Nile on a slightly elevated ground between two small wadis: Wadi Tarabil to the north and Wadi Hadjala to the south. It is possible that in antiquity the latter wadi branched out during the rainy season, making Meroe a seasonal island from time to time. A little further south is the large Wadi Hawad, which extends southeast into the Butana area and further in the direction of the Red Sea and the Ethiopian highlands. Presently the ruins of Meroe lie some 500 to 800 m east of the Nile separated from the river by agricultural land. A slight depression, which during exceptionally high Nile floods fills with water, now separates the cultivated fields from the remains of the ancient city. This seasonally flooded canal might be the remainder of a Nile branch that extended in antiquity along the west edge of Meroe. The archaeological remains are protected by a barbed-wire fence and this ensures the preservation of a dense coverage of acacia trees on the site. It is likely that in antiquity this kind of acacia forest extended along the entire length of the cultivable area north and south of the city. The fenced area does not include all the ancient remains as some are now under the modern villages of Deragab and Kijeik, respectively to the north and south of Meroe. To the east of the wooded area there is a gravelly plain bordered by the mountainous plateau, forming a semicircle around the plain and cut only by the abovementioned wadis. This “Greater Meroe” encompasses an area of approximately 5 × 2 km (Ali Osman M. Salih 2015:117). Seasonal rainfall provides grazing for the cattle herds and allows for the cultivation of sorghum and other crops in the wadis. In antiquity, some of the rainwater was stored in large basins, known as hafirs, one of which is located near Meroe. Cattle herding was apparently of major importance to the economy of ancient Meroe, as is clear from the predominance of cattle bones found during the modern excavations (Shinnie 1974:251; Carter and Foley 1980:301; Chaix, pers. comm.). This is also confirmed by the Classical authors, such as Strabo of Amaseia, who mentioned that cattle breeding was so important that a successful breeder could be chosen as the king. We learn further that, apart from cattle, Meroites kept sheep, goats, and dogs that were small but ferocious (something that has not changed since ancient times). Strabo also provides this additional information about the ancient Meroites:

The City of Meroe   547 They live on millet and barley, from which they also make a beverage. Butter and suet serve as their olive oil. Nor do they have fruit trees except for a few date palms in the royal gardens. . . . They make use of meat, blood, milk, and cheese. . . . Their greatest royal seat is Meroe, the city with the same name as the island. (Translated by Hägg in Eide et al. 1998:815)

The Island of Meroe was the term used by several ancient authors to describe the area confined by the rivers Nile, Atbara, and the Blue Nile. Strabo also reports that the land was populated by nomads, hunters, and farmers and that the Meroites were mining copper, gold, iron, and precious minerals. The area where iron deposits occurred was recently identified several kilometers east of Meroe by Jane Humphris and her team from the University College London, Doha. Deposits of kaolin clays, which were used in the production of fine ceramics, were also found in the neighborhood of Meroe (Robertson 1992:47). Another important resource coming from the area of Meroe was salt. Gold and minerals together with ebony, ivory, and skins of exotic animals were certainly major trade items exported to Egypt and beyond. The hunting of elephants, lions and leopards, ostriches, and many other animals was also mentioned in Strabo’s account. The presence of lions and ostriches near Meroe is recorded by some European travelers as late as the early 19th century.

Discovery The first detailed description of Nubia, or Aithiopia as it was called by the Greeks, was provided by Greek historian and traveler, Herodotus of Halicarnassus, who was born around 485 bce. (For Classical authors writing on Nubia, see Burstein, this volume.) In his work Herodotus mentions the city of Meroe by name: he calls it the capital of the “Ethiopians” and provides the first known description of the city. Thus, he mentions the fountain of youth, where water supposedly flowed that allowed the Kushites to attain the ripe old age of 120. Herodotus also refers to a prison where the prisoners were bound in fetters of gold, and to a place or a building outside the city limit, called “Table of the Sun.” The main deities worshipped at Meroe were said to be Zeus and Dionysus, which are the names given by the Greeks to Amun and Osiris. It is apparent from Herodotus’s description that by the mid-5th century bce, Meroe was the thriving city: the political, economic, and possibly also religious center of the Kingdom of Kush. The influx of Greek settlers, merchants, and scholars to Egypt during the Ptolemaic period led naturally to increased knowledge about the neighboring countries. When the army of Octavian Augustus landed in Egypt in 30 bce, the interest in Meroe extended also to Roman writers. Thanks to the writings of Greek and Roman authors, we know that a certain Simonides the Younger, a Greek, lived for five years at Meroe and wrote an account, now lost, about the country and the city. Another Greek visitor to Meroe was Bion of Soloi in the 3rd century bce whose list of fifty-two towns between Aswan and

548   Krzysztof Grzymski Meroe was preserved in Pliny’s work (Priese 1975). The great Alexandrian scholars, such as Eratosthenes of Cyrene and Claudius Ptolemaeus, calculated the exact geographical position of Meroe giving its latitude as 16°25´ North, very close to the actual 16°56´. Pliny the Elder (who died tragically at Pompeii in 79 ce) reported that, between 61 and 63 ce, the emperor Nero sent a spying mission that reached Meroe. We learn from that account that the city of Meroe, then apparently ruled by a woman, had an important temple of Amun. The copying in medieval monasteries of the works of these Classical authors assured the preservation of the knowledge of Meroe, however modest, in the consciousness of the Europeans. The introduction of the printing press and the resulting increase in literacy meant that more people became aware of the story of Meroe. These Classical accounts were of primary importance in the re-discovery of the city of Meroe, particularly by the first European to visit the place in modern times, a Scottish aristocrat named James Bruce of Kinnaird. According to his description, Bruce visited Meroe on October 21, 1772 on his return journey from Abyssinia to Egypt. This is what he said about the site: . . . this is the first scene of ruins I have met, since that of Axum in Abyssinia. We have heaps of broken pedestals, like those of Axum, all plainly designed for the statues of the dog; some pieces of obelisk, likewise, with hieroglyphics, almost totally obliterated. The Arabs told us that these ruins were very extensive; and that many pieces of statues, both of men and animals, had been dug up there; the statues of the men were mostly of black stone. It is impossible to avoid risking a guess that this is the ancient city of Meroe, whose latitude should be 16 deg. 26 min; and I apprehend further, that in this island was the observatory of that famous cradle of astronomy. (Bruce 1805, v. 6:445)

Bruce was of course correct in his identification of the site as Meroe. The puzzling reference to the statues of the dog was almost certainly a misprint for “god,” unless, of course, he mis-identified the ram statues standing in front of the Amun temple as dogs. His knowledge of the Classical authors, his interest in astronomy and his excellent memory contributed to this epoch-making discovery. After Bruce’s visit, forty years passed before Meroe was visited again by a European, the Swiss-born Johann Ludwig Burckhardt. Travelling with a caravan from Berber to Shendi, he noticed on April 17, 1814: . . . low mounds consisting of rubbish, and red burnt bricks; they were about eighty paces in length, and extended quite across the arable soil, for at least one mile eastwards. . . . The mounds have the appearance of having served as a wall (we passed some foundations of buildings, of moderate size, constructed of hewn stones . . .). (Burckhardt 1819:275)

Burckhardt did not name the site, but there can be little doubt that he saw the ruins of Meroe and very likely a massive enclosure wall of what was later identified as the Royal City. These discoveries whetted the appetites of other Europeans to travel to Nubia in

The City of Meroe   549 search of ancient remains. When the Turco-Egyptian army invaded Sudan in 1821, it was accompanied or followed by a number of scholars and travelers. Several of them left accounts of their visit to Meroe, but their interest lay exclusively in the pyramids, with the only exception being the French naturalist and mineralogist, Frédéric Cailliaud, who arrived at Meroe on April 25, 1821. His sketch of the ruins, which he called “Assour,” shows clearly a section of the Enclosure Wall and the temple of Amun, where three pairs of rams were marked in front of the temple.2 More than twenty years later, the Prussian expedition directed by Karl Lepsius visited Meroe. Although during their three weeks stay in April 1844 they concentrated on recording the pyramids, Lepsius’s team also produced the first detailed plan of the ruins of the city (Lepsius 1849: Abt. 1, pl. 132).

Excavations The writings of Classical authors and the reports of early travelers were the only sources of information about the city of Meroe prior to the University of Liverpool expedition led by John Garstang. The Garstang team worked on the site from 1909 until 1914, when the outbreak of the First World War forced the termination of the excavations. The results of the first campaign were published in 1911 by Garstang, Sayce, and Griffith and this publication was followed by a series of interim reports published between 1910 and 1916 in the Liverpool Annals of Anthropology and Archaeology and in annual exhibition catalogues. These excavations revealed four main topographical elements of the Meroe town site: (1) the Royal City separated from the rest of the site by a stone Enclosure Wall, (2) the Amun Temple complex abutting the Enclosure Wall on the east side, (3) North Mound and (4) South Mound (Fig. 28.1). Located further east were private cemeteries and a large temple complex identified with Herodotus’s “Table of the Sun.” Garstang numbered various structures at the site by using one to three digit numbers preceded by the letter M and this reference system remains in use (e.g., the Temple of Amun is also known as M 260). Half a century later, new excavations at Meroe were undertaken by Peter Shinnie. He directed the excavations first on behalf of the University of Ghana, later the University of Khartoum, and finally the University of Khartoum in collaboration with the University of Calgary from 1965 until 1974 and again in 1983–84. Between the North and South Mounds, Shinnie located a processional way leading towards the Amun Temple that was lined on both sides with smaller temples. The results of Shinnie’s work were presented in great detail in two final reports (Shinnie and Bradley 1980; Shinnie and Anderson 2004). Two valuable interpretative essays summarizing the results of the Khartoum-Calgary mission were also published (Shinnie  1974; Robertson  1992). Garstang, on the other hand, never produced a final report. It was only thanks to the labors of a Hungarian scholar, László Török, who carefully analyzed all the published material and the unpublished archival records held at the University of Liverpool, that a kind of the posthumous “final report” appeared (Török 1997). Moreover, Török’s monumental work also

550   Krzysztof Grzymski

Figure 28.1  Plan of Meroe City.

contained references to the post-Garstang investigations at Meroe, such as those carried out by Shinnie and his co-director, Ahmed M. Ali Hakem (1988). These were further supplemented by Török’s comments and observations based on his excellent knowledge of the Meroitic culture. This newly available material, as well as the careful analysis of Garstang’s original publications, allowed Friedrich Hinkel and Uwe Sievertsen to produce a detailed study of the architectural history of the Royal City (Hinkel and Sievertsen 2002; Sievertsen 2002, 2003). In 1992, a brief field campaign at Meroe was carried out by the joint German-Sudanese mission (Wenig 1994; Eigner 1996, 2000; P. Wolf 1996; Näser 2004). In 1999, another German team directed by Simone Wolf and Hans Onasch began its investigation of the

The City of Meroe   551 so-called Royal Bath complex within the Royal City and this work continues to the present day (S. Wolf et al. 2009; S. Wolf and Onasch 2016). Also in 1999, the SudaneseCanadian excavations at Meroe were revived with the Royal Ontario Museum replacing the University of Calgary as the partner of the University of Khartoum. The project was co-directed by two former students of Shinnie, Krzysztof Grzymski and Ali Osman, the latter later replaced first by Intisar Soghayroun and then eventually by Hwida Mohamed Adam (Grzymski 2003, 2015). This team clarified the architectural history of the Amun Temple, explored the south part of palace M 750, and surveyed and excavated domestic remains in the South Mound. The areas beyond the protective fence delineating the town site have not been explored in modern times. However, it must be noted that the ancient site extends to the north, east, and south of the barbed wire fence. This is ­particularly noticeable immediately to the north, in the village of Deragab, where Garstang excavated temple M 600, attributed to Isis. Walls and column drums from unexcavated structures can be seen in various places throughout the village.

Origin of Meroe Reisner’s excavations at the West Cemetery at Meroe revealed graves of high officials and relatives of the early Kushite kings from Piankhy to Taharqo, dating to 750–664 bce (Dunham 1963:3–18) thus showing that Meroe played a very important role from the very beginning of the Kushite state. Epigraphic evidence from within the city goes back to the 7th-century bce rulers Senkamanisken and Anlamani, whose names were inscribed on objects found near palace M 294 within the Royal City compound (Török  1997:27; Grzymski  2004:168). However, the earliest archaeological material pre-dates these finds and it is clear that the city was established long before 750 bce. The earliest radiocarbon date was provided by a sample from the Khartoum-Calgary excavations collected during the excavations at the south gate of the Royal City.3 The sample dated to 6450–6240 bce and, if correct, would point to a possible Khartoum Mesolithic presence in the area. It is noteworthy that an Early Khartoum sherd was found by this author near palace M 950 in the northern part of the Royal City. Three other samples collected by the Khartoum-Calgary expedition came from pits dug into natural soil and were not associated with specific structures (Grzymski 2005:57). They were radiocarbon dated to 1730–1410 bce, 1400–1000 bce, and 1270–940 bce and may indicate some human activity in the area. Hakem in fact postulated that the earliest settlement at Meroe was established in the 10th century bce (Ahmed  M.  Ali Hakem 1972:639). It has been suggested that these rubbish pits, and possibly the round hut found by Shinnie in trench M.79, were the remains of camps of transhumant pastoralists then living in the area (Robertson 1992:45). However, the series of postholes forming a plan of a round hut was thought by the excavator to date to 750–700 bce (Shinnie 1974:254–55; Shinnie and Bradley 1980:28–29). The earliest dates associated with specific structures come from samples collected in the foundation level of the

552   Krzysztof Grzymski building M 292: 961–841 bce and 881–721 bce (Shinnie and Anderson 2004:85 and 364). More recently the Khartoum-Toronto mission uncovered under the northeast corner of palace M 750S a part of an earlier building constructed of small bricks, measuring 23–26 × 13 × 8 cm and usually associated with the 25th Dynasty (in contrast to the later periods when bricks measured 34 × 17 × 8–9 cm). Next to these early mudbrick walls, a large quantity of the Early Napatan pottery was also found (Grzymski and Grzymska 2012:48–49). The four charcoal samples collected in this area provided the following dates: 1010–800 bce, 920–770 bce, 840–770 bce, 790–520 bce which, when added to those from M 292, confirm the early establishment of a Kushite settlement in the Meroe area.4 Interestingly, both structures are located quite far apart which might suggest that the early town of Meroe was already occupying a substantial area by the 10th–9th century bce.

The Royal City Prior to Garstang’s excavations the only remarkable structure noted by early visitors to the site was the massive stone wall constructed of large, roughly hewn blocks of local sandstone. This impressive masonry wall is about 3.5 to 4 m thick and forms an irregular rectangle 195 m wide and extends in length for 295 m on the east side and 365 m on the west. While the large sections of the wall stand several meters high above the ground, its southern part is barely visible on the surface. It was the area encompassed by this Enclosure Wall which was termed by Garstang the “Royal City,” because of the numerous monumental buildings (Garstang 1912:46, 48). The construction of the Enclosure Wall was dated to the 3rd century bce by Garstang and Sayce and mid-3rd century to mid-2nd century bce by Török (Török 1997:41–46). In their detailed study of the Royal City Hinkel and Sievertsen (2002:15–16) dated the construction of the Enclosure Wall to their Building Period II which falls during the earlier phase of Garstang’s Middle Meroitic I (300–100 bce). The creation of such a separate royal district during the 3rd century bce coincides chronologically with the appearance of the first royal burials at the South Cemetery. Nevertheless, the kings and their immediate family resided in their palaces at Meroe long before that date as is explicitly mentioned in the 5th-century bce Kawa inscription of Amannote-erike and the 4th-century bce stela of Nastasen. The irregular, trapezoid shape of the area surrounded by the Enclosure Wall may suggest that in some sections it lies over earlier pre-3rd century bce walls or perhaps is a result of later re-building, especially in the southern part of the Royal City. This can only be determined by excavating the entire length of the wall. It has been suggested that despite its massive size, the Enclosure Wall was erected not so much to defend the Royal City from the enemy attack as to protect it from the high Nile floods (Bradley 1982:168). The location of the five gates, two on the north and one each on the east, west, and south sides, is also asymmetrical and this may reflect the position of the most important ­structures prior to the erection of the wall. Among such key structures would be palaces

The City of Meroe   553 M 294 and M 295 or rather earlier buildings located beneath these two palaces. Because numerous finds associated with New Year celebrations were found below M 294 (Török 1997:154), it has been postulated that an (early) Amun Temple was located somewhere in the area. The presumed temple was oriented north-south, with the entrance on the south side, and to its right (starboard side) stood an early pre-M 295 palace (Török 1997:30). The magnetometric survey carried out in the open area north and east of M 294 by Tomasz Herbich on behalf of the Toronto-Khartoum mission failed to reveal any temple remains. This, however, is not conclusive as the remains of the putative temple may lie below the depth penetrated by a magnetometer. Certainly, the objects found in this area strongly support Török’s view that an early Amun Temple was located somewhere in this area. However, it is more likely that the proposed (early) Amun Temple was oriented east-west, just like the (late) Amun Temple M 260 erected extra muros. Thus, the east gate in the Enclosure Wall would lead directly to the entrance of the (early) Amun Temple located somewhere in the center of the Royal City, perhaps in the areas designated M 293 and M 999. The southernmost part of the Royal City was never excavated by Garstang and the magnetometric survey conducted by Herbich in this area failed to reveal any substantial structures, except for a series of circular features extending north of the south (or, more correctly, southeastern) gate. The layout of four pairs of circles is reminiscent of the features identified by Garstang as brick-lined tree pits, which he found near the northwest gate. These were interpreted as showing a tree-lined avenue leading into the city, towards palace M 950. It was the north part of the Royal City that was the most extensively excavated. The stratigraphy of this area is complex and reflects the long history of the city of Meroe. The earliest 14C dates came from beneath the foundations of M 292, clearly an important cultic building that underwent a series of construction and rebuilding phases from the 10th century bce until the end of Meroe in the early 4th century ce. This continuity of building and rebuilding of chapel M 292 is somewhat reminiscent of the development in the temple of Satet at Elephantine, where a series of shrines were erected in the same place, century after century (Dreyer 1986: Taf. 1–4). The deity worshipped in chapel M 292 is unknown, but perhaps it was a god (or goddess) of victory. The shrine, and the deity, was of primary importance to the Meroites as is shown by the deposition there of the bronze head of the emperor Augustus. This was found in front of the threshold of the later phase M 292. A unique feature of the chapel was its painted decoration. Unfortunately, the painted murals decorating the interior were destroyed during a violent storm some years after Garstang’s excavations. However, the scene showing a king, a queen, and various prisoners was preserved in watercolors made by Garstang’s collaborator, Horst Schliephack (Shinnie and Bradley 1981). Among other interesting buildings in the north part of the Royal City one finds at least three palaces, M 950, M 990, and M 998, dating to the last centuries bce and early centuries ce. These palaces, like other structures within the Royal City, were erected over earlier structures and also underwent themselves a series of rebuilding phases. An unusual feature found within, and below, M 950 was an astronomical observatory

554   Krzysztof Grzymski ­ esignated room M 964. Its function was determined by the graffiti incised on the wall d showing an individual with an astronomical instrument observing the sky and making calculations (Depuydt 1998; Logan and Williams 2000). This is the second-oldest identified observatory in the world, next only to Monte Alban in Mexico. Most of the buildings excavated in the northeast part of the Royal City seem to be domestic quarters, magazines and storage houses. In the latest phases, some of these buildings were erected over and above the Enclosure Wall, which apparently lost its importance. Another unique structure of the later period is the so-called Royal Bath complex located on the western edge of the Royal City between the Enclosure Wall and palace M 295. Here a brick-lined and plaster-covered pool 2.4 m deep was surrounded by an ambulatory filled with locally made statuary clearly inspired by Hellenistic art. Water flowed into the basin from the south side with water inlets cleverly concealed by the painted wall. The latest research suggests that a pipe fitted into a column stood in the center of the pool so that the water would flow into the basin from the spouts in the south wall and sprinkle fountain-like in the center (Onasch and Wolf 2016). The latter feature brings to mind Herodotus’s observation several centuries earlier of the “fountain of youth” at Meroe, which secured longevity of the Meroites. The belief in the rejuvenating power of water can certainly be detected in the decoration of the Royal Bath. The wall paintings and the statuary show connection to the cults of Dionysus and Apedemak, both deities associated with re-birth, well-being, and fertility (Yellin 2012:262).

Amun Temple Complex The Amun Temple at Meroe, also known as M 260, is the second-largest Kushite temple, surpassed in size only by temple B 500 at Jebel Barkal. It was excavated by Garstang in a somewhat hurried manner with the debris dumped next to or over the presumed exterior walls, obstructing the clarity of the layout. Moreover, even within the excavated area the walls were neither fully traced nor, when exposed, marked properly on the plan. In recent years the Khartoum-Toronto team directed by Grzymski cleared parts of the temple and excavated a few sondage trenches, gaining better understanding of the layout and chronology of M 260 (Grzymski 2008:229–31, 2017). This work resulted in identifying the location of entrances, correcting the wall courses, discovering several inscriptions and, ultimately, producing a new plan of the temple (Fig. 28.2). The Temple of Amun was oriented east-west, with the entrance on the east side opening in the direction of Jebel el Hadjies, some 7 km away. During the winter solstice, the sun rose directly behind this mountain. In front of the entrance stood kiosk M 280, dated to the 3rd century ce (Hinkel 1989:240). Between the kiosk and the temple entrance stood three pairs of rams, of which only four are presently standing. The main entrance does not form an elaborate pylon but seems to be a simple portal cut through the wall that enclosed the entire temple complex with its magazines and priests’ quarters. A large colonnaded forecourt M 271 had in its

The City of Meroe   555

0

10

20

30m

Figure 28.2  Plan of Amun Temple at Meroe.

center a kiosk built in the 1st century ce by Natakamani and Amanitore. Two more gates, one on each the north and south sides offered additional access to the forecourt. The core of the temple, which was separated from the forecourt by a pylon, is formed by a series of halls and side rooms ultimately leading to the sanctuary M 261. The first hypostyle hall, M 270, has embedded in the floor a stone basin, a feature otherwise unknown in the Egyptian or Meroitic temples. It was in this room that numerous Meroitic inscriptions were found by the Khartoum-Toronto mission (Grzymski 2008:229). This added to the corpus of inscriptions found here by Garstang, including a long inscription of Queen Amanishakheto, which was found standing in M 271 near entrance to M 270. The function of many rooms in the Amun Temple is uncertain, including the socalled dais room M 266. Such chambers with a stand for a throne were found in many Meroitic Amun temples. They were usually partly unroofed and this was also the case in Meroe.5 Along all the three sides of this core temple ran a corridor 2 m wide separating it from other structures built within the temenos wall, such as the magazines and priests houses (M 740) on the south side of the temple and the platform M 267 which served as a contra-temple. Sondages excavated in the northwest corner of room M 268 and in the west end of corridor M 274 revealed foundations made of red bricks and showed that the present building was placed directly on natural soil. Only one 14C date has been obtained so far from charcoal collected near the foundations in room M 268. This date is 90 bce to 1 ce and while a single radiocarbon date is insufficient to secure confidently that the temple was founded at that time it is indeed very likely that the core part of the (late) Amun Temple was in fact built in the 1st century bce. The courtyard M 271 and the kiosk M 279 were later additions to the temple and it is at this point impossible to establish whether they both were constructed at the same time in the 1st century ce or whether the kiosk pre-dates (or post-dates) the courtyard.

556   Krzysztof Grzymski Little can be said about the buildings, rooms, and other structures immediately north and south of M 260. New excavations of the University of Khartoum team carried out between the temple and the north temenos wall unearthed some walls, but the project has just begun. A large complex of magazines and houses marked as M 740 remains to be excavated, a task made more onerous by Garstang dumping much of the debris from the Amun Temple excavations in this area. The Khartoum-Calgary expedition discovered in the 1970s a series of small temples located east of M 260 on both sides of a wide, open avenue. These small, multi-roomed temples show quite a diversity of layouts: a simple-three roomed edifice (M720), a building erected on a high podium (KC 101), or a double temple (KC 104) superficially similar to the well-known temple at Kom Ombo. These and other buildings graced the two sides of the formal Processional Way, which also separated two domestic areas known as the North Mound and the South Mound.

North Mound This area was explored by Shinnie, who excavated a long trench parallel to the Processional Way. Further north, in the highest part of the mound, another deep trench was excavated to reveal the depth of the occupation deposits. In 1992 the GermanSudanese mission also excavated a trench in the North Mound. All these investigations revealed extensive domestic occupations. Unfortunately, because of the layout of the excavation unit, each measuring 8 × 8 m, not a single complete house plan was identified. Apart from the domestic remains, the areas covered with heaps of iron slag were also investigated and several iron smelting furnaces were discovered. Further north Garstang excavated pottery kilns and at the northern end of the modern village of Deragab, beyond the North Mound he uncovered a substantial temple, possibly for the goddess Isis.

South Mound The largest building located on the western edge of the South Mound was palace M 750. Only the casemate foundations built of various reused sandstone blocks are preserved, showing a somewhat unusual plan: a rectangular building on the northern part and a square building on the southern part. The latter has a typical plan of a Meroitic palace known from other sites such as Jebel Barkal, Naga, or Muweis. Between the two parts of M 750 was an open space, perhaps a garden, enclosed on the east and west side by a stone wall. Various hypotheses were put forward to explain this unusual layout, the most likely one suggesting that M 750N represented a temple, while M 750S was a palace. The excavations carried out at the palace M 750S unearthed underneath a number of earlier

The City of Meroe   557 structures, some going back to the 9th–8th century bce, and others from the 4th–3rd century bce. The palace itself was erected in the early 2nd century ce (Grzymski and Grzymska 2008:49–50). The construction method was similar to many other monumental structures at Meroe: the stone foundations supported a building made of red bricks, plastered on the exterior and interior and covered with a roof made of wood and palm fronds on which rested small bricks. Numerous traces of burning suggest that the palace was destroyed by fire. Other structures, mainly domestic remains such as M 712, M 711, and SM 100, were only cursorily explored (Grzymski  2005:47–50). The first one, located near the Processional Way, apart from the remains of houses built of mudbrick, also contained a bakery. Flimsy mudbrick walls were also found in M 711. However, the structure found at SM 100 and which was partly exposed due to its proximity to the site fence, had foundations made of flat sandstone slabs often encountered in the larger structures in the Royal City and in the Amun Temple. Two charcoal samples collected at SM 100 provided unusually early dates (840–410 bce and 520–370 bce) proving that city of Meroe occupied quite a substantial area very early on.

Life in Meroe Much information about the daily life of this royal capital of Kush can be gleaned from the descriptions provided by the Greek and Roman authors quoted above. The archaeological material, predominantly ceramics, but also objects of art, inscriptions, remains of industrial production (iron), animal bones, and many others, give us more data. The layout of the city and its division into the royal/administrative, religious, and domestic and industrial districts provides evidence for a degree of urban planning. It was clearly by design that the iron smelting furnaces were found on the eastern edge of the city, far away from the Royal City on the west side of the city. Considering the seasonal rains, it is not surprising that some streets were lined with sherds providing the hard surface as found on the west side of M 750 (Grzymski and Grzymska 2015, pl. 2). Estimating the population size of an ancient city is a difficult task and estimates vary substantially. Nevertheless one can risk the opinion that the city was inhabited by anywhere from two thousand to nine thousand people (Grzymski 1981; Edwards 2004:147). These estimates included members of the Meroitic royal family and upper classes, ordinary people, servants, and slaves. The majority of the population lived in simple houses built of sun-dried mudbricks. They consumed local cereals, such as sorghum and millet, as well as fruits, and ate plenty of meat, mostly beef, as the majority of bones found by Shinnie and by the KhartoumToronto expedition were cattle bones, with a small proportion of sheep, goat, and even some pig or warthog bones. The broader area was frequented by African game animals, but relatively few bones of wild animals were found during the excavations and nothing is known about the consumption of fish. The food was stored in large clay containers.

558   Krzysztof Grzymski The finds from excavations also included objects made of basketry. These were used presumably for storing dry goods and for covering cooked dishes, carried from the outside kitchen, as is the case with modern tabak. The house interiors were simple with angareeb beds as the most common piece of furniture. Very few fancy lamps were found and it seems that concave sherds from broken pots and small, round, handmade bowls were filled with animal fat and suet to serve as lamps (Grzymski 2006). The decline of Meroe can be detected in the archaeological material already in the late 3rd century ce but the life in the city came to a violent end with the conquest and destruction caused by the Ethiopian army of King Ezana of Axum in the early 4th century ce. Two Greek inscriptions found on the site confirm the Axumite presence at Meroe. It is uncertain if the city of Meroe was inhabited after its decline and destruction in the 4th century. The cemeteries found by Garstang immediately east of the town site contained mostly the Post-Meroitic remains, but there is no convincing evidence of the Post-Meroitic occupation in the city itself. Yet, despite the gradual decline of the city and the kingdom, it is most interesting to notice that the name of one of the last known Meroitic rulers, Talakhideamani, was found in an inscription in the Isis Temple at Philae and, recently, at Meroe on the south wall of M 267 within the Amun Temple complex (Rilly 2017). These documents from the two ends of the Meroitic Kingdom show that the city of Meroe remained the center of political power until the very end of its existence.

Notes 1. The name of the king, as read by the discoverer of the Kawa inscription, was Aman-noteyerike (Macadam 1949:52–53). The subsequently used form Irike-Amanote was introduced by Priese on the basis of the comparison to the name of King Ark-amani (Priese 1968:184– 88, 1973:156 n. 1). However, the hieroglyphic writing of “Arike/Irike” and “Ark” is different and there is no reason to doubt Macadam’s interpretation. The spelling used in this article is suggested by C. Rilly (pers. comm., September 2016). 2. This earliest plan of Meroe City is kept with other Cailliaud papers in the Museum d’Histoire Naturelle in Nantes, Cailliaud’s hometown. 3. The 14C dates from the University of Khartoum-University of Calgary expedition are listed in Shinnie and Anderson 2004:363–64. 4. It must be noted that calibration of the dates between 700 bce and 400 bce poses certain problems, the so-called “Hallstatt plateau”; see Hajdas 2008:16–18. 5. Garstang’s plan shows four pairs of columns while in fact only six columns were placed in M 266 leaving the easternmost part unroofed.

References Cited Ahmed  M.  Ali Hakem 1972 Meroitic Settlement of the Butana (Central Sudan). In Man, Settlement and Urbanism, ed. P.J.  Ucko, R.  Tringham, and G.W.  Dimbleby, pp. 639–46. Duckworth. ——— 1988 Meroitic Architecture: A Background of an African Civilization. University of Khartoum Press.

The City of Meroe   559 Ali Osman M. Salih 2015 The Archaeology of Greater Meroe: The University of Khartoum, Department of Archaeology, and the Royal Ontario Museum, Toronto Joint Archaeological Activities. Project Two: The Northern Environs. In The Kushite World: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference for Meroitic Studies, ed. M.H.  Zach, pp. 115–21. Verein der Förderer der Sudanforschung. Bradley, R.J. 1982 Varia from the City of Meroe. In Meroitic Studies: Proceedings of the Third International Meroitic Conference, ed. N.B. Millet and A.L. Kelley, pp. 163–70. Meroitica 6. Akademie Verlag. Bruce of Kinnaird, J. 1805 Travels to Discover the Source of the Nile, in the Years 1768, 1769, 1770, 1771 & 1772, second edition. Alexander Murray. Burckhardt, J.L. 1819 Travels in Nubia. John Murray. Carter, P.L. and R.  Foley 1980 A Report on the Fauna from the Excavations at Meroe, 1967–1972. In The Capital of Kush, v. 1: Meroe Excavations 1965–1972, ed. P.L. Shinnie and R.J. Bradley, pp. 298–310. Meroitica 4. Akademie Verlag. Depuydt, L. 1998 Gnomons at Meroë and Early Trigonometry. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 84:171–80. Dreyer, G. 1986 Der Tempel der Satet. Die Funde der Frühzeit und des Alten Reiches. Elephantine 8. Philipp von Zabern. Dunham, D. 1963 The West and South Cemeteries at Meroë. Royal Cemeteries of Kush 5. Museum of Fine Arts. Edwards, D. 2004 The Nubian Past. Routledge. Eide, T., T.  Hägg, R.H.  Pierce, and L.  Török eds. 1994 Fontes Historiae Nubiorum: Textual Sources for the History of the Middle Nile Region between the Eighth Century BC and the Sixth Century AD, v. 1: From the Eighth to the Mid-Fifth Century BC. Department of Classics, University of Bergen. ——— 1998 Fontes Historiae Nubiorum: Textual Sources for the History of the Middle Nile Region between the Eighth Century BC and the Sixth Century AD, v. 3: From the First to the Sixth Century AD. IKRR/Department of Greek, Latin and Egyptology, University of Bergen. Eigner, D. 1996 Die Grabung am Schlackenhügel NW 1 in Meroe. Der Antike Sudan. Mitteilungen der Sudanarchäologischen Gesellschaft zu Berlin 4:23–27. ——— 2000 Meroe Joint Excavations: Excavations at Slag Heap NW 1 in Meroe. Der Antike Sudan. Mitteilungen der Sudanarchäologischen Gesellschaft zu Berlin 10:74–76. Garstang, J. 1912 Second Interim Report on the Excavations at Meroe in Ethiopia. Liverpool Annals of Anthropology and Archaeology 4:45–65. Garstang, J., A.H. Sayce, and F.L. Griffith 1911 Meroë: The City of the Ethiopians. Clarendon. Grzymski, K. 1981 The Population Size of the Meroitic Kingdom: An Estimation. In African Historical Demography 2, ed. C. Fyfe, C. and D. McMaster, pp. 259–73. Centre for African Studies, University of Edinburgh. ——— 2003 Meroe Reports 1. SSEA Publications 17. ——— 2004 Meroe. In Sudan Ancient Treasures, ed. D. Welsby and J. Anderson, pp. 165–69. British Museum. ——— 2005 Meroe, the Capital of Kush: Old Problems and New Discoveries. Sudan & Nubia 9:47–58. ——— 2006 Egyptian Lamps, Meroitic Candlesticks and Hittite Champagne Glasses. Journal of the Society for the Study of Egyptian Antiquities 33:109–18. ——— 2008 Recent Research at the Palaces and Temples of Meroe: A Contribution to the Study of Meroitic Civilization. In Between the Cataracts: Proceedings of the 11th Conference

560   Krzysztof Grzymski for Nubian Studies, ed. W. Godlewski, W. and A. Łajtar, Part 1, pp. 227–38. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean Supplement Series 2.1. Warsaw University. ——— 2015 A Visit to Meroe, the Ancient Royal Capital. Qatar-Sudan Archaeological Project. ——— 2017 The Amun Temple Revisited. Sudan & Nubia 21:134–43. Grzymski, K. and I. Grzymska 2008 Excavations in Palace M750S at Meroe. Sudan & Nubia 12:47–51. ——— 2015 A Brief Report on Recent Excavations at Meroe. In The Kushite World: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference for Meroitic Studies, ed. M.H. Zach, pp. 111–13. Verein der Förderer der Sudanforschung. Hajdas, I. 2008 Radiocarbon Dating and its Applications in Quaternary Studies. Eiszeitalter und Gegenwart Quaternary Science Journal 57(1–2):2–24. Hinkel, F.W. 1989 Säule und Interkolumnium in der meroitischen Architektur. Metrologische Vorstudien zu einer Klassifikation der Bauwerke. In Studia Meroitica 1984: Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference for Meroitic Studies, ed. S. Donadoni and S. Wenig, pp. 231–67. Meroitica 10. Akademie Verlag. Hinkel, F.W. and U.  Sievertsen 2002 Die Royal City von Meroe und die repräsentative Profanarchitektur in Kusch. The Archaeological Map of the Sudan Supplement IV. Verlag Monumenta Sudanica. Lepsius, C.R. 1849 Denkmaeler aus Aegypten und Aethiopien. Nicolaische Buchhandlung. Logan, T.J. and B. Williams, 2000 On the Meroe Observatory. Beiträge zur Sudanforschung 7:59–84. Macadam, M.F.L. 1949 The Temples of Kawa, v. 1: The Inscriptions. Oxford University Press. ——— 1966 Queen Nawidemak. Bulletin of the Allen Memorial Art Museum 23:42–71. Näser, C. 2004 The Meroe Joint Excavations 1992 on the North Mound at Meroe. In Neueste Feldforschungen im Sudan und in Eritrea, ed. S. Wenig, pp. 71–101. Meroitica 21. Harrassowitz. Onasch, H.-U. and S.  Wolf 2016 The Royal Baths at Meroë. State of Research Work and Preservation Measures. Paper Presented at the 12th International Conference for Meroitic Studies, Prague. Priese, K-H. 1968 Nichtägyptische Namen und Wörter in den ägyptischen Inschriften der Könige von Kusch. Mitteilungen des Instituts für Orientforschung 14:165–91. ——— 1973 Articula. Études et Travaux 7:155–62. ——— 1975 Das “äthiopische” Niltal bei Bion und Juba (Arbeitsbericht). In Nubia. Récentes Recherches, ed. K. Michalowski, pp. 108–10. Musée National (Warsaw). Rilly, C. 2007 La langue du royaume de Méroé. Bibliothèque de l’École des Hautes Études, Sciences Historiques et Philologiques 344. Champion. ——— 2017 New Light on the Royal Lineage in the Last Decades of the Meroitic Kingdom: The Inscription of the Temple of Amun at Meroe found in 2012 by the Sudanese-Canadian Mission. Sudan & Nubia 21:144–47. Robertson, J.H. 1992 History and Archaeology at Meroe. In An African Commitment: Papers in Honour of Peter Lewis Shinnie, ed. J.  Sterner and N.  David, pp. 35–50. University of Calgary Press. Shinnie, P.L. 1974 Meroe in the Sudan. In Archaeological Researches in Retrospect, ed. G.R. Willey, pp. 237–65. Winthrop. Shinnie, P.L. and R.J.  Bradley 1980 The Capital of Kush, v. 1: Meroe Excavations 1965–1972. Meroitica 4. Akademie Verlag. ——— 1981 The Murals from the Augustus Temple, Meroe. Studies in Ancient Egypt, the Aegean, and the Sudan: Essays in Honor of Dows Dunham on the Occasion of his 90th

The City of Meroe   561 Birthday, ed. W.K. Simpson and W. Davis, pp. 167–72. Department of Egyptian and Ancient Near Eastern Art, Museum of Fine Arts. Shinnie, P.L. and J.R. Anderson 2004 The Capital of Kush, v. 2: Meroe Excavations 1973–1984. Meroitica 20. Harrassowitz. Sievertsen, U. 2002 Civil Architecture in the Empire of Kush and the Royal City of Meroe. Archéologie du Nil Moyen 9:163–81. ——— 2003 Herrschaftsarchitektur in Meroe. Kontinuität und Wandel in der urbanen Entwicklung einer kuschitischen Hauptstadt. Beiträge zur Sudanforschung 8:107–46. Török. L. 1997 Meroe City: An Ancient African Capital. John Garstang’s Excavations in the Sudan. Egypt Exploration Society Occasional Publications 12. Wolf, P. 1996 Vorbericht über die Ausgrabungen am Tempel MJE 105. Der Antike Sudan. Mitteilungen der Sudanarchäologischen Gesellschaft zu Berlin 4:28–43. Wolf, S. and H.-U.  Onasch 2016 A New Protective Shelter for the Royal Baths at Meroë (Sudan). Booklet. Wolf, S., P.  Wolf, H.-U.  Onasch, C.  Hof, and U.  Nowotnick 2009 Meroe und Hamadab— Stadtstrukturen und Lebensformen im afrikanischen Reich von Kusch. Die Arbeiten der Kampagnen 2008 und 2009. Archäologischer Anzeiger 2009/2, 215–62. Wenig, S. 1994 Meroe Joint Excavations Bericht über die Vorkampagne 1992. Der Antike Sudan. Mitteilungen der Sudanarchäologischen Gesellschaft zu Berlin 1:15–19. Yellin, J. 2012 Meroe. In Ancient Nubia: African Kingdoms on the Nile, ed. M.M.  Fisher, P. Lacovara, S. Ikram, and S. D’Auria, pp. 258–73. American University of Cairo Press. Zibelius, K. 1972 Afrikanische Orts- und Völkernamen in hieroglyphischen und hieratischen Texten. Beihefte zum Tübinger Atlas des Vorderen Orients B1. Reichert.

OUP UNCORRECTED AUTOPAGE PROOFS – , 11/11/2020, SPi

chapter 29

The Roya l a n d Elite Cem eter ie s at M eroe Janice W. Yellin

The royal capital of Meroe lies between the Fourth and Fifth Cataracts of the Nile River, over 200 km north of Khartoum (Grzymski, this volume). Elites and rulers were buried in three necropolises near the town, the Southern, Northern, and Western Royal Cemeteries (Fig. 29.1), that span the entire Kushite period (from the beginning of the Napatan period, early 9th century bce to the end of the Meroitic period in the mid-4th century ce). There are also four non-elite cemeteries near the Western Royal Cemetery excavated early in the twentieth century by John Garstang (1911) who found pillaged, impoverished burials dating to the Meroitic and Post-Meroitic periods (Fig. 29.1). The three royal cemeteries were excavated in the first part of the 20th century by the Harvard University–Boston Museum of Fine Arts Expedition to the Sudan led by G.A. Reisner. The fragmentary nature of the information from the cemeteries is largely due to a combination of factors—looting that began in antiquity and continued into modern times and less exacting standards followed earlier in the previous century for excavation and documentation. Nonetheless, the royal and elite cemeteries of Meroe still provide significant information for understanding ancient Meroe—particularly its history, chronology, and the lives of its most privileged citizens. The tombs’ decoration and furnishings, as well the organization of individual burials within the cemeteries reveal elements underlying the social/economic/political structure of the Meroitic state. For example, the study of chapel reliefs’ depictions of the rulers and members of the royal family offer insights into: the organization of the royal court (i.e., composition of the mortuary procession), kingship dogma (i.e., iconography of royal regalia), and the nature of royal succession (i.e., the types and rank of close family members placed near the seated ruler). Furthermore, the manner in which and the objects with which royal and elite Meroites chose to be buried offers insights into their religious beliefs, art, industries, and architecture. Typologies of the architecture, decorations, and objects associated with these burials contribute to establishing a relative chronology, while the occasional inscription or object found in a tomb can offer evidence allowing for the

Dictionary:

OUP UNCORRECTED AUTOPAGE PROOFS – , 11/11/2020, SPi

564   Janice W. Yellin

Figure 29.1  Plan of the Area of Meroe including Western, Southern, and Northern Cemeteries. Plan of the Area of Meroë. DAI, Archives F. W. Hinkel. © DAI, Archives F.W. Hinkel, D-DAI-ZArch-FWH-CAD-00001-3j4f.dwg.

identification of a fixed date. The fact that the Meroitic language is undeciphered makes information derived from these tombs particularly important. Reisner named the cemeteries at Meroe after a nearby village, Begrawiya. He distinguished between the three cemeteries by labelling them as Begrawiya South (Beg. S), Begrawiya North (Beg. N) (Fig. 29.2), and Begrawiya West (Beg. W). He then numbered their tombs sequentially as he excavated them. His system is still used to identify the individual tombs (Beg. S 4, Beg. N 32, Beg. W 6, etc.). Reisner created the first chronological sequence of the royal burials in the Southern and Northern Royal Cemeteries based on their locations within their cemeteries in concert with features of their design. He assumed that the most desirable locations, such as hilltops (as opposed to gullies or hillsides), would have been selected first and that tombs in these locations would have been earlier in date than those in the less desirable locations, with burials being made from west to east. His chronological sequence of the royal pyramids created in combination with attributions of ownership to specific rulers, although problematic, still provides the current framework for constructing Meroitic history. Elite and royal burials in these cemeteries typically included a pyramid with a chapel on its east face that was constructed over one to three rock-cut burial chambers accessed

Dictionary:

OUP UNCORRECTED AUTOPAGE PROOFS – , 11/11/2020, SPi

The Royal and Elite Cemeteries at Meroe   565

Figure 29.2  View of Southern (foreground) and Northern (background) Royal Cemeteries. Photograph: © J.W. Yellin, 2001.

by a descendary. The small chapels provided the setting for the performance of essential mortuary rites, notably the giving and consecration of funerary offerings to sustain the afterlife, as well as the inauguration of the tomb owner’s funerary/ancestor cult. Representations in royal chapels indicated that priest-led processions of family ­members included the bringing of food, drink, and cattle that was to have been consumed at a funerary meal, the final ceremony and communion with the tomb owner. Evidence for funerary meals, such as drink vessels and food including animal bones left in front of tombs’ sealed burial chambers, has been found in elite and more humble burials throughout Meroe (Yellin 2012:138, 141–42). After the rediscovery of Meroe in 1772 by James Bruce (Bruce 1790, v. 4), the pyramids in the Southern and Northern Royal Cemeteries were recorded in the 19th century by Frédéric Cailliaud in 1821 (Cailliaud  1823–27), Louis-Maurice-Adolphe Linant de Bellefonds in 1821 (Shinnie 1958), and Carl R. Lepsius in 1844 (Lepsius 1849–59), among others. Unfortunately, these pyramids also received the far less beneficent attentions of treasure hunters, most notoriously the adventurer Giuseppe Ferlini. In 1834 after finding a cache of golden jewelry in a queen’s pyramid (Beg. N 6) Ferlini dismantled a large number of pyramids looking for additional treasure (Ferlini 1838). He compounded the damage when he reported that the gold was found inside the top of the pyramid itself, falsifying its location in order to mislead other treasure hunters (Markowitz and Lacovara 1996). This fabrication led Wallace Budge (1907) to dismantle most of the remaining pyramids in a futile search for treasures hidden within them. Scientific expeditions began in earnest in

Dictionary:

OUP UNCORRECTED AUTOPAGE PROOFS – , 11/11/2020, SPi

566   Janice W. Yellin the first part of the 20th century. In 1906, James Henry Breasted (1905–1907) led the first photographic expedition to the pyramids and, most importantly, in 1920–24 George Reisner (1921–22, 1923, 1925) conducted the first scientific excavation of the cemeteries that were published decades later by his assistant, Dows Dunham in the Royal Cemeteries of Kush series (Chapman and Dunham 1952; Dunham 1957, 1963). After Reisner’s expedition, the cemeteries stood vulnerable to the depredations of climate and human activities. In 1986 the Sudan Antiquities Service1 charged the architect Friedrich Hinkel (1986, 1997, 2000; Hinkel and Yellin in prep.) to undertake documentation, restoration, and reconstruction work first for the northern group of pyramids (1976–88) and later for the southern and western groups (1996–2007). In 2014, Qatar Museums started the Qatari Mission for the Pyramids of Sudan (QMPS) directed by HE Sheikh Hassan bin Mohamed bin Ali Al-Thani (Vice Chair of Qatar Museums) to conduct research on the royal pyramids, as well as to preserve and present them in accordance with international guidelines in cooperation with National Corporations for Antiquities and Museums (NCAM) in Khartoum and the German Archaeological Institute (DAI) in Berlin (Riedel et al. 2016). The German Archaeological Institute intends to publish the results of QMPS recent investigations as well as the work of Friedrich Hinkel and the author (Hinkel and Yellin in prep.) as supplements of the series The Archaeological Map of the Sudan (A.M.S.).

Overview of the Royal and Elite Cemeteries The Southern and Western Royal Cemeteries (early 9th–early 3rd centuries bce) contained Napatan burials. These chronologically concurre­nt cemeteries were perhaps used by different family groups. Their first burials were non-elite, simple pit graves ­without superstructures. Elite burials with pyramids and rectangular monuments built above single rock-cut burial chambers appeared several generations later alongside the pit graves. In the mid-3rd century bce, the Southern Royal Cemetery was chosen for the first royal burials at Meroe and two generations of kings and their queens were buried beneath pyramids along its eastern hilltop, while the Western Royal Cemetery became the burial ground for non-ruling members of the royal family and their court. When the southern cemetery filled, a new royal necropolis, the Northern Royal Cemetery, was opened to its north across the Wadi Tarabil. After the first two generations of burials, non-ruling queens joined other family and court members interred in the Western Royal Cemetery. Because of the poor condition of many superstructures of elite burials in these and other Meroitic cemeteries, the completed form of the monuments with rectangular footprints is uncertain. Due to the rectangular ground plan, they have been identified as mastabas (bench-shaped monuments). Millet’s discovery of a stone frame for the type of niche inserted into the eastern faces of royal pyramids at Meroe (i.e., Beg. N 19) at Gebel Adda among monuments with a rectangular plan suggests that the rectangular monuments

Dictionary:

OUP UNCORRECTED AUTOPAGE PROOFS – , 11/11/2020, SPi

The Royal and Elite Cemeteries at Meroe   567 were also pyramids (Millet  1963:161). Huber and Edwards (2012:81–82), who reexamined the Gebel Adda excavation records, think it unlikely that these were pyramids, but most rectangular monuments in Meroitic elite cemeteries were probably pyramids since a pyramid base does not have to be square and mastabas were an architectural form with no history in Nubia (Francigny 2012:53). Indeed, in major provincial necropolises such as Karanog (Woolley and Randall-MacIver 1910) many of the large rectangular foundations belong to tombs of important royal officials for whom a pyramid burial would have been expected (Francigny, this volume). Napatan and Meroitic pyramids were far smaller (the largest Meroitic pyramids were perhaps 35 m high) and more steeply angled (typically 68–73 degrees) than Egyptian royal pyramids (Fig. 29.3). The largest Egyptian royal pyramid, that of Khufu (ca. 2650–2580 bce) at Giza was originally 146.5 m high and most Egyptian royal pyramids had slopes of approximately 40–50 degrees. The Meroitic pyramids’ truncated tops were completed by the addition of a capstone. Napatan and Meroitic pyramids resembled similarly sized, steep pyramids built by Egyptians living in Nubia during Egypt’s New Kingdom (ca. 1550–1070 bce) at sites like Tombos. Unlike the many solid stone Napatan pyramids at Nuri, with the notable exception of Beg. S 7, Beg. S 9, Beg. S 2, and Beg. S 6 (see discussion below), the early pyramids of Meroe were built of sandstone rubble encased by an outer mantle consisting of one or two layers of dressed sandstone blocks (Fig. 29.4). They were built with the aid of a shaduf, an ancient lever-based lifting device typically used in antiquity

Figure 29.3  View Northern Royal Cemetery pyramids from left to right Beg. N 27, 28, 29 in the foreground (restored by F.W. Hinkel). Photograph: © J.W. Yellin, 2001.

Dictionary:

OUP UNCORRECTED AUTOPAGE PROOFS – , 11/11/2020, SPi

568   Janice W. Yellin

Figure 29.4  Destroyed Napatan Beg. S pyramid showing stone outer mantle and stone rubble core. Photograph: J.W. Yellin, 2015.

to lift water from irrigation canals (Hinkel  2000:19–20). When the economy of the Meroitic state faltered, the outer mantles of later pyramids were built of red brick rather than stone. Pyramids were sometimes built on a stone plinth, were smooth-sided or stepped, and sometimes had corner moldings. Consistent, different combinations of these characteristics led Reisner to categorize the superstructures by a number of types (Dunham 1957: facing p. 206). Hinkel, who worked decades to conserve these monuments, revised Reisner’s categories of pyramid superstructures arguing that there were only three main types of superstructures (with sub-groups) (Hinkel 1984, 2000:17–18). According to him, Reisner’s Type VII was used for the earliest pyramids up to ca. 185 bce; Reisner’s Type X was dominant between 185 bce–100 ce, and Reisner’s Type XII was in use between 100 bce to the end of Meroe in ca. 350 ce. The exteriors of the pyramids were sometimes embellished. Pieces of lime plaster found by Hinkel while reconstructing the Northern Royal Cemetery pyramids indicated that some were covered in a smooth coating of plaster after completion. Although there is no surviving evidence for plastered and painted pyramids in the Southern and Western Royal Cemetery, Rilly and Francigny (2013) found evidence for this practice on an elite pyramid at Sedeinga, so even elite pyramids might have been plastered and painted. The upper section of some east faces had a stone-framed niche that might have held a faience plaque or human-headed ba-bird (see Pl. 31.10) that represented the tomb owner in a revivified and transfigured state. Most pyramids were probably crowned by one of seven types of finial-like capstones placed on their truncated summits. There is a considerable amount of ancient graffiti on the pyramids and in certain chapels such as Beg. N 9 indicating that in antiquity these monuments were an object of continuing veneration among the general population (Paner, this volume).

Dictionary:

OUP UNCORRECTED AUTOPAGE PROOFS – , 11/11/2020, SPi

The Royal and Elite Cemeteries at Meroe   569 Decorated stone or stone-lined red brick offering chapels, the locale of the tomb owner’s ongoing mortuary cult conducted by priests, completed the features shared by all pyramids at Meroe. Constructed against the eastern faces of the pyramids, chapels typically had pylons, some of which were decorated with the image of the ruler smiting enemies (Beg. N 6, Beg. N 17, Beg. N 20) (see Fig. 31.5b) as originally carved on Egyptian and later some Meroitic temple pylons (see Fig. 31.5a). Ritual scenes and sometimes texts to sustain the owner’s afterlife were executed in low relief or simply incised on their inner walls. These were covered with plaster and painted in bright colors; gold leaf might have been applied to depictions of jewelry. As noted, the chapel scenes not only present Meroitic beliefs and ritual practices (Yellin 1995; Zach 1999), but through their depictions of the rulers, their families, and members of the royal circle supply information about the organization of the royal court, as well as aid in dating their monuments through distinctive elements in their style and iconography (see Figs. 29.17, 31.6-8; 31.10) (Yellin 2014; Wenig 2015). As the locale for the owner’s mortuary cult, chapels were furnished with ritual objects such as offering tables (see Pl. 31.9), stelae (see Pl. 31.10), and ba-birds (see Pl. 31.11). The offering table, the most essential and common cult object, rested on a low podium inside the larger chapels or in front of the smaller ones (e.g., Gebel Adda—Huber and Edwards 2012:82). Offerings were carved on its center and its edges were often inscribed. Offering table and stela inscriptions included genealogies that expressed the owner’s status in addition to invocations asking for food and drink offerings. Ba-bird statues Fig. 31.10 represented the tomb owner as one who was magically transformed and able to partake of the offerings. The placement of ba-bird statues is uncertain since none has been found in situ. In order to watch and partake of the offering rituals being conducted on the offering table one might have been set on the flat roof of the offering chapel, in a niche cut into the eastern face of the superstructure or, before capstones were introduced, on the summit of the pyramid. Because the pyramids were roughly oriented to the cardinal compass points, ritual scenes and funerary objects in these east-facing ­chapels were illuminated and activated by life-giving rays of the rising sun. In the earliest of the royal chapels, baboons with their arms raised in adoration flanked the interior of the eastern entrance into the chapel ready to greet the sun as it rose in the eastern horizon. This imagery and perhaps the chapels’ eastern orientation had its origins in Egyptian concepts. Burial chambers (three for kings, two for queens, and typically only one for elites) were dug beneath the pyramids and accessed by a stepped descendary that was cut in front of or underneath the chapel. If it was cut beneath the chapel, the pyramid and ­chapel were constructed when the descendary was refilled after the burial since they would have collapsed if built over an unfilled one. Once interment was completed, the doorway into the burial chambers was blocked and remnants from the final funeral ceremonies such as a funerary meal and the sacrifice of cattle were often placed in front of the blocked door and in the stairway before it was re-filled. Small foundation offerings that sometimes included gold rings and amulets were typically placed beneath each corner of a royal pyramid when construction began. All three cemeteries were pillaged well before Reisner’s excavations and most often only small objects like simple amulets or

Dictionary:

OUP UNCORRECTED AUTOPAGE PROOFS – , 11/11/2020, SPi

570   Janice W. Yellin objects without intrinsic value like ceramics occasionally survived tomb robbers. Among the more rarely discovered, valuable grave goods were gold jewelry and amulets, faience jewelry, vessels, semi-precious stone beads and amulets, weaponry, and small personal items such as razors, tweezers and make-up. Among the rarest and most valuable objects found were imports from Egypt and the Mediterranean world such as painted ceramics and finely crafted bronze objects such as lamps that reflected the wealth and cosmopolitan nature of elite society particularly in the first half of the Meroitic period. With the exception of painted burial chambers in two Southern Royal Cemetery queens’ pyramids (Beg. S 10 and Beg. S 503) that dated to the late Napatan period and a king’s pyramid, Beg. N 9 dating to the Meroitic Middle period (Murtada Bushara Mohamed and Mahmoud Suliman Bashir 2018:100–103), burial chamber walls appear to have been undecorated although stone coffin benches with carved religious images and texts were found in a cluster of burials in the Northern Royal Cemetery (i.e., Beg. N 7, Beg. N 8, Beg. N 9). Evidence for family and later opportunistic re-burials such as were common in Meroitic elite cemeteries including the western one at Meroe was not found in royal tombs.

The Western Elite Cemetery at Meroe Located on a flat plain between the town of Meroe and the “Sun Temple” (M 250), the Western Royal Cemetery contains no royal burials. Several generations earlier than the Southern Royal Cemetery, it is the earliest of the cemeteries at Meroe with elite burials and the one that was in the longest continuous use (Fig. 29.5). While the hilly nature of the Southern Royal Cemetery’s site limited its expansion, the flat plain of the Western one allowed it to be used for elite burials until the end of the Meroitic period (mid-4th century ce) (Fig. 29.6). The largest of the three cemeteries, it contained over 800 graves (early 9th century bce onwards) of which about 171 had monuments (2nd century bce–4th century ce). Of the burials with monuments, eighty-nine have indeterminate superstructures and eighty-two had pyramids. Because their owners ranged in social status and wealth, tombs from the same general period varied in size and quality. For example the pyramid of Beg. W 25 is 3.4 m2 while that of Beg. W 14 is 11 m2 even though they were probably built less than five generations apart. The cemetery was home to the burials of non-ruling Meroitic queens, princes, and other members of the extended royal family. It has been suggested that the final rulers of Meroe or perhaps a separate dynasty of local rulers were responsible for some of its last pyramids. However, reliefs on the chapel walls of their purported pyramids did not show their owners as rulers. Because this cemetery was in use for the entire Meroitic period, the impact of the Meroitic practice of re-using tombs (e.g., Gebel Adda—Huber and Edwards 2012:84–85; Rilly and Francigny 2010:63) is clearly visible in the large number of tombs that were reopened and had earlier burials disturbed to make way for newer ones. Some instances of re-use happened in quick succession suggesting that these tombs were used for members of one family. In many other instances reburials occurred sporadically over

Dictionary:

Figure 29.5  Meroe, the Western Royal Cemetery. Plan of Western Royal Cemetery from folded plan in Dunham (1963).

OUP UNCORRECTED AUTOPAGE PROOFS – , 11/11/2020, SPi

Dictionary:

OUP UNCORRECTED AUTOPAGE PROOFS – , 11/11/2020, SPi

572   Janice W. Yellin

Figure 29.6  View of Western Royal Cemetery. Photograph: © Timothy Kendall.

a long span of time, so it seems that these tombs were re-purposed for unrelated burials. There were also possible instances of simultaneous multiple burials that might reflect human sacrifice (Török  1997:445–46). However, there is no clear evidence for  this practices so perhaps these burials were chronologically close rather than simultaneous. The disturbances to burials extended to the mortuary objects placed in the chapels, especially offering tables which were very frequently usurped and moved to later burials. As in the Southern and Northern Royal Cemetery, pyramids were built of stone or red brick mantles around a rubble core. The number of stone monuments demonstrated the overall wealth and status of those buried in the Western Royal Cemetery. Under each pyramid there was usually only a single burial chamber, accessed by a descendary, that was typically roofed with a mudbrick barrel vault. The small offering chapels were markedly similar to Southern and Northern Royal Cemetery ones in their ritual furnishings. The pyramid of prince Tedeqen (Beg. W 19, 2nd century bce) was the earliest pyramid to have a full panoply of funerary cult objects (offering table, stela, offering basin) typically found in chapels. As in elite burials throughout Meroe, an offering table was placed on a low brick podium before the chapel that held a funerary stela identifying the owner and his/her lineage (Fig. 31.10). The chapels were decorated with relief scenes, but only a handful of the western walls and western ends of the north and south walls of pyramid chapels were documented or preserved. The general program of decoration was similar to chapels in the other two necropolises. On the west walls, there was a niche surrounded by an overlapping

Dictionary:

OUP UNCORRECTED AUTOPAGE PROOFS – , 11/11/2020, SPi

The Royal and Elite Cemeteries at Meroe   573 sequence of carved lintels with winged discs with the owner offering to Osiris carved inside it (e.g., Beg. W 5) and the western ends of the northern and southern walls depicted the seated tomb owner with a winged Isis behind him/her (e.g., Beg. W 8). The east section of these walls was almost always destroyed; the partial survival of this area in Beg. W 8 showed offerings being made on the owner’s behalf that were very similar to scenes on the north and south walls of southern cemetery chapels. Re-used relief blocks found by Reisner in Beg. W 3 (Harvard University­–Boston Museum of Fine Arts Expedition to the Sudan, 1921–22 photographs C 9931, 9933, 9934) were almost identical in style and content to parts Beg. S 7’s chapel reliefs (ca. early to mid-3rd century bce) indicating that chapels in both cemeteries were made by the same workshops. Similarities in chapel and certain later offering table decorations to ones from the Northern Royal Cemetery indicate that their owners were entitled to celebrate a mortuary cult very similar to that of Meroitic rulers. Western Royal Cemetery tombs were pillaged although not quite as thoroughly as the Southern and Northern ones, so grave gifts including examples of luxury objects imported from the Mediterranean world such as painted Greek vases and Roman bronze objects were found by Reisner’s expedition. In addition, typical grave gifts of local origin consisting mainly of small luxury objects, amulets, vessels associated with food and drink offerings as well as small personal items were found. Even the loweststatus tombs contained simple pots and strings of beads. Burial patterns that reflected the social organization of elites in provincial governmental centers (Edwards 1996, 1999; Török 2009:427–513) have been identified in cemeteries such as Karanog (O’Connor 1993: fig. 7.4) and Sedeinga (Rilly and Francigny 2011:75). In these cemeteries, lower-status burials clustered around a larger more significant monument (see Fig. 29.8). This pattern has been understood to express the desire of community members to be buried near the tomb of a significant predecessor (likely family members and their dependents wishing to be buried near an important ancestor). Differences in the sizes, placements, and designs of these burials reflected the status and social identity of their occupants (O’Connor 1993). In light of these findings, a re-examination of burials in the Western Royal Cemetery revealed that some appeared to follow a similar distribution pattern in that a large pyramid was surrounded by clusters of smaller, less-wealthy burials, suggesting that these were constructed in family/clan burial areas in which social identities and status of different family members were expressed through the size and placement of their tombs around the burial of a significant ancestor, such as the placement of pyramids Beg. W 19, Beg. W 20, and Beg. W 30 (Fig. 29.7). Beg. W 19 was quite large and its chapel reliefs indicate that its owner was a very important member of the royal court, perhaps a prince. Beg. W 20’s pyramid was inserted into a space between Beg. W 19 and Beg. W 30 that was barely large enough to hold it and as a result portions of its structure impinge on the other two pre-existing pyramids (Dunham  1963:89). Given that there was space available elsewhere in the cemetery at the time of its construction, the owner of Beg. W 20’s pyramid clearly desired to be buried in close proximity to the owner of Beg. W 19 even at the expense of wedging his tomb between it and Beg. W 30. This burial pattern, identifiable in important elite cemeteries throughout the Meroitic state,

Dictionary:

OUP UNCORRECTED AUTOPAGE PROOFS – , 11/11/2020, SPi

574   Janice W. Yellin

Figure 29.7  Western Royal Cemetery, detail showing Beg. W 19, Beg. W 20, and Beg. W 30. After folded plan in Dunham (1963).

speaks to the existence of a network of powerful family groups, many of whom lived in provincial governance centers such as Arminna West (Trigger 1967), Faras (Griffith 1921, 1922,  1923,  1924), Gebel Adda (Huber and Edwards  2012), Kawa (Welsby 2009,  2010,  2011), Karanog (Woolley and MacIver  1910), and Sedeinga (Rilly and Francigny 2010, 2011, 2013, 2018). These families of administrators, military figures or priests were allied with the ruling family and shared governance of the state. The Western Royal Cemetery was the most prestigious in this network of elite necropolises and as such it may have been the model for features it shared with them. By the 1st century bce, burials of high-status individuals in these provincial elite burial grounds were marked by pyramids that adopted the architectural, decorative, and ritual features found in Meroe’s Western Royal Cemetery (Török 2009:414) (see Francigny, this volume for a further discussion of this practice and of provincial royal cemeteries).

The Southern Royal and Elite Cemetery Located approximately 4 km southeast of the royal city, the Southern Royal Cemetery, dating from the early 8th to mid-3rd century bce, has approximately 220 burials including ninety with superstructures, twenty-four of which were definitely pyramids

Dictionary:

OUP UNCORRECTED AUTOPAGE PROOFS – , 11/11/2020, SPi

The Royal and Elite Cemeteries at Meroe   575 Tumuli field Cemetery 1

N

Cemetery 3

16

19

13

17

Gebel Adda

9

15 14

12 11

7 6

5

Second Season 1963–64 Plan of Cemetery 3 and Pyramids

8 3

Islamic mudbrick superstructures

2

Pyramid numbers: 1–5 stone structures 6–19 mud brick structures

0

5

10

20

30

40 m

Survey by Peter Mayer, Drawing by Reinhard Huber

Figure 29.8  Gebel Adda, Second Season 1963–64. Plan of Cemetery 3 and Pyramids. Survey by Peter Mayer. Drawing by Reinhard Huber; note spatial distribution of elite graves. Plan: © Reinhard Huber (Huber and Edwards 2012).

(Fig. 29.9). The tombs in this cemetery were heavily pillaged, but the limited number of grave gifts found were very similar in type to those in the Western Royal Cemetery. Its earliest burials were Napatan pit graves dug on the western hilltop. To their east, elite Late Napatan–Early Meroitic pyramid burials (i.e., Beg. S 500 and Beg. S 501) stand along a north-south ridge roughly perpendicular to the east-west spine of the hilltop. Pyramids were then built on the middle area of this spine along the eastern edge of the hilltop (i.e., Beg. S 7, Beg. S 8, Beg. S 9). This group belongs to the transitional phase between the Napatan and Meroitic periods (late 4th–3rd centuries bce) having been built in the generations immediately preceding the burial of King Arkamani I (Beg. S 6, ca. 270 bce), the first king to have been buried at Meroe rather than at Napata (Jebel Barkal).

Dictionary:

Figure 29.9  Meroe, The Southern Royal Cemetery based on map III in Dunham 1963. © DAI, Archives F.W. Hinkel, D-DAI-CAD-00005 Gen_Plan_All.Dwg.

OUP UNCORRECTED AUTOPAGE PROOFS – , 11/11/2020, SPi

Dictionary:

OUP UNCORRECTED AUTOPAGE PROOFS – , 11/11/2020, SPi

The Royal and Elite Cemeteries at Meroe   577 Arkamani I’s burial is considered by scholars to mark the end of the Napatan period and beginning of the Meroitic period (chronology in Rilly and De Voogt  2012:187–88). Meroitic royal burials, architecture, chapel decorations, and, most significantly, the practice of burying the kings’ wives in the same cemetery as their husbands all followed Napatan traditions. Since Kushites showed a marked preference for being buried among family members, the first royal burials at Meroe may have been the result of the ascendancy of a branch of the royal family with a connection to Meroe rather than a significant cultural or political rupture (Yellin 2009). As in the Western Royal Cemetery, lower-status burials clustered around a larger patron monument. Based on Dunham (1963:374), Beg. S 32 was built in the first half of the 6th century bce (during generations 11–12 of Napatan rule) on the north-south ridge. A number of chronologically related, lower-status graves near it were similar in distribution to the burial clusters at Karanog and Sedeinga. Furthermore, in order to be near Beg. S 32, some of these tombs were dug in less desirable, lower elevations even though elevated sites further from the patron pyramid were available. The choice of locations and differences in the relative sizes and status of the different burials suggest that here too these clusters represented the burials of a family members and their dependents of different social status. Among larger, later Napatan pyramids built along the center of the west-east hilltop are several solid stone-core pyramids, Beg. S 7, Beg. S 9, Beg. S 6, and Beg. S 2. In 2018, the southern cemetery pyramids were inspected by the author using a drone with a camera that confirmed that they had a solid core of stone blocks. Since Beg. S 6 followed the Napatan tradition of solid stone construction, it was the last known completely solid stone pyramid in Kush and was Napatan rather than Meroitic in tradition. The ensuing royal burials, Beg. S 5, Beg S. 4, Beg. S 1, Beg. S 3, return to using typical stone-encased rubble-core pyramids like the last royal pyramids at Nuri. Of the Late Napatan–Early Meroitic pyramids (first half of the 3rd century bce) only the chapels and decorations of the last ones (in chronological order: Beg. S 7, Beg. S 10, Beg. S 503, Beg. S 6, Beg. S 5, and Beg. S 4) survived. The content and layout of their relief scenes were very similar. The east walls had protective figures with knives at the doorways; above them were baboons hailing the rising sun. Registers on the eastern half of long north and south walls were notable in that they had images recording the preparation and performance of actual funerary offering rites in which foodstuffs of many kinds were prepared and offered. Drink offerings particularly in the form of libations were by far the most common ones. This focus on libations continued in pyramid chapels and on offering table images throughout the Meroitic period. Anubis, Isis, and Thoth were the deities most frequently depicted in the chapels. Anubis and Isis were responsible for the offerings while Thoth recorded and declared them on behalf of the seated tomb owner who watched these activities from the walls’ western end (Fig. 29.10; Fig. 31.6a–b). The west walls had a niche for a stela or an Osirian triad. The niche was surmounted by a scene of the day bark in which the transfigured tomb owner traveled across the heavens in the company of the sun god Ra and other deities. Funerary texts were carved on either side of the niche (Figs.  29.11–12; Fig. 31.6c). Texts on all the walls were written in Egyptian and what survived is mostly legible despite occasional errors in orthography.

Dictionary:

Figure 29.10  Beg. S 4 Queen Kanarta (mid-3rd century bce) south wall of chapel showing seated queen receiving offerings. © DAI Zentrale and J.W. Yellin. Drawing: I. Fechner.

OUP UNCORRECTED AUTOPAGE PROOFS – , 11/11/2020, SPi

Dictionary:

OUP UNCORRECTED AUTOPAGE PROOFS – , 11/11/2020, SPi

The Royal and Elite Cemeteries at Meroe   579

Figure 29.11  Beg. S 10 Queen Bartare (mid-3rd century bce) west wall above niche showing day bark with king and gods traveling with the sun god Ra. © DAI Zentrale and J.W.  Yellin. Drawing: I. Fechner.

Figure 29.12  Beg. S 5 King Amanislo (mid-3rd century bce) west wall detail showing day bark with king and gods traveling with the sun god Ra. © DAI, Archives  F.W.  Hinkel, D-DAI-ZArch-FWH-F-KB-sw-710-17. Photograph: © F.W. Hinkel.

The Northern Royal Cemetery Royal tombs were built in the Northern Royal Cemetery (Figs. 29.13–14) after the first two generations of kings’ and queens’ burials filled the Southern one. Forty-one ­pyramids belonging to thirty kings, eight ruling queens, and three crown princes

Dictionary:

OUP UNCORRECTED AUTOPAGE PROOFS – , 11/11/2020, SPi

580   Janice W. Yellin (co-regents?) (ca. 270 bce–350 ce) still stand along its hilltop and eastern slope. As had been customary in the southern necropolis, queens were buried here for the first two generations. Thereafter, their burials were made in the Western Royal Cemetery with other important royal family members. This change, along with the appearance of other cultural features generally recognized as Meroitic as distinct from Napatan ones, marked the real beginning of the Meroitic period (Yellin 2009). Variations in the plan, construction, materials, and sizes of Northern Royal Cemetery pyramids reflected both innovative aspects of Meroitic culture as well as, in the later burials, its economic decline. The earliest pyramids were dressed stone with rubble fill, but over time less labor intensive and costly red brick supplanted the use of stone and the size of the pyramids became smaller reflecting the diminishing wealth and power of the Meroitic rulers (Fig. 29.15). The largest pyramid, Beg. N 11 (mid-2nd century bce) belonged to a ruling queen. Constructed with a dressed stone mantle around a rubble core, it was approximately 19.30 m2 and ca. 26 m high while Beg. N 26 (ca. second half of the 3rd century ce), a later king’s pyramid, had a red-brick mantle around its rubble core and was only ca. 6.3 m2. Remains of some pyramids yielded plaster chips with red or red-brown paint on them indicating that some were plastered to create a smooth surface that hid their unimpressive brick construction. Plaster fragments from Beg. N 51 have traces of black or brown outlines of a row of large fivepointed stars on a red background suggesting that a ring of stars encircled the base of a red or brown painted pyramid (Hinkel 2000:18, pl. XII). The window-like niches with stone frames set into their eastern faces may have contained ba-birds, a winged sun disc, or a faience plaque with texts of unknown content. In this cemetery, the capstones were varied; some were flat with pairs of holes that allowed for small statues such as ba-birds to be attached to them and others were often themselves shaped like small pyramids (Hinkel 1981, 1982a, 1982b). The pyramid’s offering chapel became a more complex ritual space in the Northern Royal Cemetery. The largest pyramid Beg. N 11 had the most elaborate chapel design with two decorated forecourts in front of it (Fig. 29.16). A number of chapels, including stonelined brick ones, had single courtyards with two columns or a small kiosk with columns (Fig. 29.16, Beg. N 13; Fig. 29.3, Beg. N 27). To further reflect their role as a mortuary “temple,” pylons (i.e., Beg. N 11, Beg. N 6, Beg. N 20, and Beg. N 19) were carved with large triumphal images of the ruler such as were found on temple pylons in Egypt and Meroe (Fig. 31.5a). The interior chapel reliefs are an important source of information for religious practices, court social structure, and dating the pyramids. The east, north, south, and west walls had the same general themes as walls with the same orientation in the Southern Royal Cemetery chapels. Individual scenes used within this framework evolved over time and fell into distinct groups (Yellin 1995:201). In the first two generations reliefs on the east, north, and south walls were extremely similar to those from the Southern Royal Cemetery (Group A, mid- to end 3rd century bce) and had narrative labels and offering texts in Egyptian hieroglyphs. West walls had day barks above niches flanked by Egyptian mortuary texts. The next group (Group B, beginning 2nd century bce to mid-1st century ce)

Dictionary:

Figure 29.13  Meroe, the Northern Royal Cemetery based on map IV in Dunham 1957. © DAI, Archives F.W. Hinkel, D-DAI-Z-Arch-FWH-CAD00002-Beg_nord.dwg.

OUP UNCORRECTED AUTOPAGE PROOFS – , 11/11/2020, SPi

Dictionary:

OUP UNCORRECTED AUTOPAGE PROOFS – , 11/11/2020, SPi

Figure 29.14  Reconstruction drawing of the Northern Royal Cemetery. © DAI, Archives F.W. Hinkel, D-DAI-Z-Arch-FWH-Z0232-9. Drawing: F.W. Hinkel.

Figure 29.15  View from left to right of Beg. N 30 King (early 3rd century ce) showing brick construction; Beg. N 19 King Tarekeniwal (first half 2nd century ce) and in the background Beg. N 11 with pylons showing dressed stone mantle with rubble core. Photograph: © J.W. Yellin, 2001.

Dictionary:

OUP UNCORRECTED AUTOPAGE PROOFS – , 11/11/2020, SPi

The Royal and Elite Cemeteries at Meroe   583

Figure 29.16  Reconstruction drawing from left to right of Beg. N 11 ruling queen (first half 2nd century bce) showing its pylon, two forecourts, and chapel with pylon; Beg. N 12 King Taneyidamani showing its forecourt and chapel with pylon; and Beg. N 13 king showing its ­chapel with pylon (both second half 2nd century bce). © DAI, Archives F.W. Hinkel, D-DAI-ZArch-FWH-Z0043. Drawing: M. Hinkel.

had similar offering scenes on north and south walls while also including New Kingdom Egyptian temple ritual scenes (i.e., the Henu-bark procession of Sokar, Driving of the Calves) and vignettes from the Egyptian Book of the Dead (i.e., Judgment before Osiris, Guardians of the Underworld) that probably came from various texts originating in Egyptian temple archives (Fig.  29.17). The west walls had niches flanked by funerary scenes from the Book of the Dead. Like Group A chapels, Group B had inscriptions and labels in Egyptian hieroglyphs, although most are damaged. Texts became shorter and more infrequent over time. Two unusual chapels in this group dating to the mid-1st ­century ce, Beg. N 1 (Queen Amanitore) and Beg. N 5 (Prince? Arikhankhoror) had scenes and texts indicating direct experience with contemporary Ptolemaic temple rites and texts. The final group of chapels, Group C (mid-1st–mid-4th century ce), had scenes of contemporary rituals from the Greco-Roman temples of Lower Nubia in which Meroitic priests, envoys, and pilgrims were known to have participated. Imagery in this group privileged the essential funerary beliefs and practices of Kushite religion— the giving and consecration of funerary offerings and the inauguration of the tomb owner’s funerary/ancestor cult as witnessed by the funeral procession of family members

Dictionary:

OUP UNCORRECTED AUTOPAGE PROOFS – , 11/11/2020, SPi

584   Janice W. Yellin

Figure 29.17  Beg. N 11 ruling queen (first half 2nd century bce) eastern portion of north wall showing rite of leading in the calves taken from Egyptian temples and the Judgment before Osiris taken from the Book of the Dead. Lepsius (1849–59) Abth. V, Bl. 31. © Universitäts- und Landesbibliothek Sachsen Anhalt in Halle (Saale).

(Fig.  29.18). While Egyptian hieroglyphic texts accompanied Group A and some Group B chapels, only short Meroitic hieroglyph or cursive texts made an occasional appearance on Group C chapel walls and images in the latest Group C chapels were badly rendered and crudely incised into the wall surfaces. As with the construction of their pyramids, one can see the decline in the wealth and power of the Meroitic rulers echoed by the decline in the quality and complexity of the pyramid chapel reliefs. With the exception of Beg. N 9 (Murtada Bushara Mohamed and Mahmoud Suliman Bashir 2018), all Northern cemetery burial chambers appear to have been undecorated. A king’s tomb generally had three burial chambers. The first chamber was square with various combinations of niches and pillars; the second chamber was wider than the

Dictionary:

OUP UNCORRECTED AUTOPAGE PROOFS – , 11/11/2020, SPi

The Royal and Elite Cemeteries at Meroe   585

Figure 29.18  Beg. N 28 King Teqorideamani (second half 3rd century ce) north wall showing funerary procession of family members and an offering for seated ruler. Lepsius (1849–59) Abth. V, Bl. 48. © Universitäts- und Landesbibliothek Sachsen Anhalt in Halle (Saale).

other two and the burial chamber was the simplest with a niche in the west wall and a stone bench for the coffin. Queens’ burial chambers omitted the second room. Here too because some descendaries were dug beneath chapels and pyramids, the monuments could have only been built after the burial when the filling of the descendary was completed. Thus these particular pyramids and chapels were constructed by the tomb owner’s successor (Hinkel 2000:12).

Summary Each cemetery, through the distinctive nature of its burials, offers insights into the development, history, and culture of the Meroitic state. The Southern Royal Cemetery contains burials from the early Napatan period into and beyond the transition from Napata to Meroe as the dominant political and cultural center. The pyramids of the Northern Royal Cemetery present the most complete, discrete sequence of royal monuments in Meroe. The Western Royal Cemetery has a history of continuous occupation from earliest Napatan times to the end of the Meroitic state and the largest amount of surviving mortuary objects and ceramics. In size and consistency, chapel decorations offer an unparalleled corpus for the study of Meroitic aesthetics, funerary religion, and royal

Dictionary:

OUP UNCORRECTED AUTOPAGE PROOFS – , 11/11/2020, SPi

586   Janice W. Yellin dogma. When used in combination, a tomb’s grave goods, architecture, and chapel decorations can be effective tools for establishing a relative chronology (Yellin 2014, 2015). The three royal cemeteries at Meroe have been subjected to extensive looting, excavation, and environmental damage. Some of the information shared in this brief entry is based on archival materials from 19th- and 20th-century early travelers to Meroe, Reisner’s unpublished excavation materials and photographs (Reisner (1921–22)) and work in the cemeteries since Reisner’s excavations, particularly that of F.W. Hinkel and the Qatari Mission for the Pyramids of the Sudan. Although there appears to be little that still remains to be discovered in these cemeteries (with the possible exception of reopening tombs with inscriptions and decorations poorly documented by Reisner as has been done by the NCAM/QMPS team for Beg. S 503 in 2016 and Beg. N 9 in 2018), there is still much about their inhabitants and the kingdom of Meroe that can be learned from the study of these cemeteries and archival sources.

Note 1. Later integrated into the National Corporation for Antiquities and Museums (NCAM) when that entity was established in 1991.

References Cited Bellefonds, L.-M.-A. de 1822 Bankes Manuscript, Bankes Manuscript National Trust UK. Breasted, J.H. 1905–1907 The 1905–1907 Breasted Expeditions to Egypt and the Sudan. A Photographic Study. https://oi.uchicago.edu/collections/photographic-archives/1905-1907breasted-expeditions-egypt-and-sudan. Accessed April 20, 2018. Bruce, J. 1790 Travels to Discover the Source of the Nile: In the Years 1768, 1769, 1770, 1771, 1772 and 1773. G.G.J and J. Robinson. Budge, E.A.W. 1907 The Egyptian Sûdân. Kegan Paul, Trench, Trübner & Co. Cailliaud, F. 1823–27 Voyage à Méroé, au Fleuve Blanc . . . à Syouah, et dans cinq autres oasis; fait dans les années 1819, 1820, 1821 et 1822. Paris: Imprimerie Nationale. Chapman, S. and D. Dunham 1952 Decorated Chapels of the Meroitic Pyramids at Meroe and Barkal. Royal Cemeteries of Kush 3. Museum of Fine Arts. Dunham, D. 1957 Royal Tombs at Meroë and Barkal. Royal Cemeteries of Kush 4. Museum of Fine Arts (Boston). ——— 1963 The West and South Cemetery at Meroë. Royal Cemeteries of Kush 5. Museum of Fine Arts (Boston). Edwards, D.N. 1996 The Archaeology of the Meroitic State: New Perspectives on its Social and Political Organisation. BAR International Series 640. Tempus Reparatum. ——— 1999 Meroitic Ceramic Studies I: A Preliminary Study of the Meroe West Cemetery. Meroitic Newsletter 26:53–77. Ferlini, G. 1838 Relation Historique des Fouilles Operées dans la Nubia par le docteur Joseph Ferlini de Bologna, suivie d’un catalogue des objets qu’il a trouvés dans l’une des quarante-sept pyramides aux environs de l’ancienne ville de Meroe, et d’une description des grands déserts de Coruscah et de Sinnaar. De Salviucci.

Dictionary:

OUP UNCORRECTED AUTOPAGE PROOFS – , 11/11/2020, SPi

The Royal and Elite Cemeteries at Meroe   587 Francigny, V. 2012 Preparing for the Afterlife in the Provinces of Nubia. Sudan & Nubia 16:52–59. Garstang, J., A.H. Sayce, and F.L. Griffith 1911 Meroë: The City of the Ethiopians. Clarendon. Griffith, F.Ll. 1921 Oxford Excavations in Nubia. Liverpool Annals of Archaeology 8:1–17. ——— 1922 Oxford Excavations in Nubia. Liverpool Annals of Archaeology 9:67–125. ——— 1923 Oxford Excavations in Nubia. Liverpool Annals of Archaeology 10:73–172. ——— 1924 Oxford Excavations in Nubia. Liverpool Annals of Archaeology 11:115–25; 141–80. Hinkel, F.W. 1981 Pyramide oder Pyramidienstumpf? Ein Beitrag zu Fragen der Planung, konstruktiven Baudurchführung und Architektur der Pyramiden von Meroe (Teil A). Zeitschrift für ägyptische Sprache und Altertumskunde 108:105–24. ——— 1982a Pyramide oder Pyramidienstumpf? Ein Beitrag zu Fragen der Planung, ­konstruktiven Baudurchführung und Architektur der Pyramiden von Meroe (Teil B). Zeitschrift für ägyptische Sprache und Altertumskunde 109:27–61. ——— 1982b Pyramide oder Pyramidienstumpf? Ein Beitrag zu Fragen der Planung, ­konstruktiven Baudurchführung und Architektur der Pyramiden von Meroe (Teil C und D). Zeitschrift für ägyptische Sprache und Altertumskunde 109:127–147. ——— 1984 Die meroitischen Pyramiden. Formen, Kriterien und Bauweisen. In Meroitistische Forschungen 1980, ed. F. Hintze, pp. 310–31. Meroitica 7. Akademie Verlag (Berlin). ——— 1986 Reconstruction Work at the Royal Cemetery at Meroe. In Nubische Studien. Tagungsakten der 5. Internationalen Konferenz der International Society for Nubian Studies, ed. M. Krause, pp. 99–108. Philipp von Zabern. ——— 1997 Meroitic Architecture. In Sudan: Ancient Kingdoms of the Nile, ed. D. Wildung, pp. 391–417. Flammarion. ——— 2000 The Royal Pyramids of Meroe: Architecture, Construction and Reconstruction of a Sacred Landscape. Sudan & Nubia 4:11–26. Hinkel, F.W. and J.W. Yellin in prep. The Necropolises of Kush, v. 1: Meroe: The Southern Royal Cemetery. The Archaeological Map of the Sudan Supplement VI. Deutsches Archäologisches Institut. Huber, R. and D.N.  Edwards 2012 Gebel Adda Cemeteries 3 and 4 (1963–1964). Sudan & Nubia 16:180–87. Lepsius, C.R. 1849–59 Denkmaeler aus Aegypten und Aethiopien. G. Wigand. Markowitz, Y. and P. Lacovara 1996 The Ferlini Treasure in Archeological Perspective. Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt 33:1–9. Millet, N.B. 1963 Gebel Adda Preliminary Report for 1963. Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt 2:147–65. Murtada Bushara Mohamed and Mahmoud Suliman Bashir 2018 Re-opening the Burial Chambers of Beg. N 9: Preliminary Report. Sudan & Nubia 22:100–106. O’Connor, D. 1993 Ancient Nubia: Egypt’s Rival in Africa. University Museum (Philadelphia). Reisner, G.A. 1921–22 Archives of the Harvard University–Boston Museum of Fine Arts Expedition to the Sudan. Department of Art of the Ancient World. Museum of Fine Arts (Boston). ——— 1923 The Meroitic Kingdom of Ethiopia: A Chronological Outline. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 9:34–77, 154–60. ——— 1925 Excavations in Egypt and Ethiopia 1922–1925. Museum of Fine Arts Bulletin 23:17–29.

Dictionary:

OUP UNCORRECTED AUTOPAGE PROOFS – , 11/11/2020, SPi

588   Janice W. Yellin Riedel, A., M. S. Bashir, P. Wolf, M. B. Mohamed, and C. Kleinitz 2016 The Qatari Mission for the Pyramids of Sudan: Archaeological Investigation, Conservation and Site Management at Meroe 2015/2016. Sudan & Nubia 20:62–74. Rilly, C. and A.  De Voogt 2012 The Meroitic Language and Writing System. Cambridge University Press. Rilly, C. and V.  Francigny 2010 Excavations at Sedeinga: A New Start. Sudan & Nubia 14:62–68. ——— 2011 The Late Meroitic Cemetery at Sedeinga. Campaign 2010. Sudan & Nubia 15:72–79. ——— 2013 Excavations of the French Archaeological Mission, Sedeinga 2012: Season of Unexpected Discoveries. Sudan & Nubia 17:61–65. ——— 2018 Closer to the Ancestors. Excavations of the French Mission in Sedeinga 2013–2017. Sudan & Nubia 22:65–74. Shinnie, M. trans. 1958 Journal d’un voyage a Méroé dans les années 1821 et 1822, by L.M.A. Linant de Bellefonds. Sudan Antiquities Service Occasional Papers 4. Török, L. 1997 The Kingdom of Kush: Handbook of the Napatan-Meroitic Civilization. Handbuch der Orientalistik 1(31). Brill. ——— 2009 Between Two Worlds: The Frontier Region between Ancient Nubia and Egypt 3700 BC–AD 500. Probleme der Ägyptologie 29. Brill. Trigger, B. 1967 The Late Nubian Settlement at Arminna West. Yale University Press. Welsby, D.A. 2009 Houses and Pyramids at Kawa, Excavations 2009–2009. Sudan & Nubia 13:72–77. ——— 2010 Excavations at Kawa, 2009–10. Sudan & Nubia 14:48–55. ——— 2011 Excavations at Kawa, 2009–10. Sudan & Nubia 15:54–63. Wenig, S. 2015 Untersuchungen zur Ikonographie der Darstellungen der meroitisichen Königsfamilie und zu Fragen der Chronologie des Reiches von Meroe. Internet-Beiträge zur Ägyptologie und Sudanarchäologie 17. http://www2.rz.hu-berlin.de/nilus/net-publications/ ibaes17/. Woolley, C.L. and D.R. MacIver 1910 Karanòg: The Romano-Nubian Cemetery. Eckley B. Coxe Junior Expedition to Nubia 3–4. University Museum (Philadelphia). Yellin, J.W. 1995 Meroitic Funerary Religion. In Aufsteig und Niedergang der römische Welt, v. 2: Principat, v. 18.5, ed. W. Haase and H. Temporini, pp. 2869–92. De Gruyter. ——— 2009 La transition entre le Napatéen tardif et l’époque méroïtique d’après les recherches sur la nécropole royale sud de Méroé. Bulletin de la Société Française d’Égyptologie 174:8–28. ——— 2012 Nubian Religion. In Ancient Nubia: African Kingdoms on the Nile, eds. M.M Fisher, P.  Lacovara, S.  Ikram, and S.  D’Auria, pp. 125–44. American University in Cairo Press. ——— 2014 The Chronology and Attribution of Royal Pyramids at Meroe and Gebel Barkal: BEG N 8, BEG N 12, BAR 5 and BAR 2. Journal of Ancient Near Eastern Interconnections 16:76–88. ——— 2015 Meroitic Royal Chronology: The Conflict with Rome and its Aftermath. Sudan & Nubia 19:2–15. Zach, M. 1999 Vergöttlichte meroitische Herrscher. In Studien zum antiken Sudan, ed. S. Wenig, pp. 685–99. Meroitica 15. Harrassowitz.

Dictionary:

chapter 30

Death a n d Bu r i a l i n the K i ngdom of M eroe Vincent Francigny

In a changing cultural landscape such as Nubia during Late Antiquity, there is more to learn from the common population than from the conservative circles of power that surrounded the royal family and the capital Meroe. With only a few settlements thoroughly studied, compared with over one hundred excavated cemeteries, there is also no doubt that funerary archaeology has been our primary source of information on the living, reaching beyond the usual descriptive analysis to understand the complexity of the Meroitic society itself. Through iconography and art, we develop a sense of what Meroites looked like and how they prepared themselves to face death. Symbols and texts point at local or widespread religious beliefs, underlining cultural differences between imported traditions and regional practices. Individuals, often buried together in the same grave, offer an opportunity for bioanthropology (Buzon, this volume) to study family relationships and improve our knowledge of food, diet, health, diseases, and environment. The role of gender, often associated with Meroe and the prominent figure of the Kandake, also raises questions about the social structure in the provinces of the kingdom, where some women from elite groups seem to have been quite influential and to have held important religious titles. Elaborate protective measures to preserve the corpse, perhaps mummified for some members of the royal family, show undeniable concerns about the afterlife and reflect a constant influence from Egyptian traditions and the Mediterranean world. However, Meroites always proved to be selective in borrowing ideas from the outside world and extremely resourceful in how they adapted them to their own political, cultural, and religious system.

590   Vincent Francigny

The Last Pyramids of the Nile Valley During the Napatan-Meroitic period, new features slowly occupied the funerary landscape of Nubian cemeteries. First built for the royal family, the pyramid became a common marker of elite burials around the capital and progressively throughout the kingdom. Particularly valued by the ruling class in the north, near the border with Egypt, the monument came to be accompanied by a miniature offering chapel and some material such as a stela and an offering table, sometimes covered with an inscription. While in royal graves the size of the chapel easily supports a detailed iconographic program showing the funerary ceremony (Yellin, this volume), no decoration can be found on monuments built for the rest of the population. Only during the Meroitic period will a statue of the dead find its place near elite graves. Resembling first the Egyptian ba-bird, this statue rapidly evolved to adopt an almost complete anthropoid shape representing the dead with all his or her attributes of wealth and power (Francigny 2009). The origins of these new features lie in a combination of cultural practices adopted from Egypt and pragmatic choices made by the royal family, later copied by a growing part of the population. They help us to understand how the Kushite society was shaped in a land marked by a considerable Pharaonic heritage, particularly visible in official and religious architecture. In that sense, the adoption of the pyramidal monument represents an important step into the formation of what should be called a Nubian Pharaonic identity. Contrary to a common idea, the pyramid was not introduced to Nubia under the rulers of the 25th Dynasty, as the first monuments built in Nubia date back to the New Kingdom colonial period. At that time, though the Egyptian kingship had abandoned it for over eight centuries, it was common for the aristocracy to be buried under small pyramidal monuments. Some of them, while sent to administer the newly conquered regions of Wawat and Kush, so to speak the north of actual Nubia, imported this new funerary tradition. At Aniba, where the King’s Son of Kush ruled, and later at Tombos, small mudbrick pyramids were thus erected for the first time in Nubia (Steindorff 1937; Williams 1993). Later, while a native kingship emerged in the region of the Jebel Barkal, the pyramid rapidly became part of a strategy to establish a new Pharaonic society in Nubia. Adopted by the king Piankhy in the second half of the 8th century bce, the funerary pyramid tradition began a new life that would only end toward the 4th century ce. First reserved for the king and the royal family during the 25th Dynasty and the early Napatan period, the monument progressively appeared at the surface of the high-ranked official graves in the cemeteries of the main administrative centers of the kingdom. At the end of the Napatan period and especially during the Meroitic period, the multiplication of small pyramids accompanied by a chapel and other mortuary features began to transform the religious landscape of Nubia. Temples, palaces, royal graves, and places of pilgrimage, so far the main locations to celebrate the official cults, had to

Death and Burial in the Kingdom of Meroe   591

Figure 30.1  Aerial view of pyramid field at Sedeinga. Sedeinga Mission © B-N Chagny.

­ itness the rise of an authentic cult for the dead, closer and easily accessible for the comw mon population. A deceased person, commemorated and remembered through his monument, and possibly an inscription, could thus become an approachable intercessor between the realm of the gods and the living world. The reasons behind the adoption of the pyramid by the new rulers of Nubia are linked to the conquest of Egypt and probably also to the fascination of the royal family for some ancient figures of Egyptian history (from whom some borrowed their coronation names) and their astonishing monuments. The choice of the pyramid was indeed profoundly opposed to the old burial tradition under a tumulus, a funerary structure that was used across the entire sub-Saharan region. The older tradition of the tumulus that survived during the Meroitic period through a fringe of the population would therefore naturally come back to the forefront of the scene after the collapse of the Egyptianized central power at the capital Meroe. The advantages of borrowing from Egypt its well-established official cult of the dead king matched the determination of the new rising family that wanted to legitimatize its authority across the Nubian territory. This process, described as “the Egyptianization of the royal tomb” (Török  1997:327), was initiated from Nubia and to a certain degree adapted to the Nubian culture. It also followed the changes in Napatan-Meroitic society by opening to a larger part of the population over time. The appropriation of the py­ram­ i­dal symbol by the king and the elite helped to build a new victorious identity for the Nubians, as they began to see themselves as the true heirs of the Egyptian cultural history. It is quite a surprising outcome considering the very long history of Egyptian prop­ a­ganda against “wretched Kush” and the many conflicts that had opposed the two, often

592   Vincent Francigny to the disadvantage of the Nubians. The occupation of Egypt, though limited in time, might have injected enough strength in the Nubian culture to overcome the past and faithfully embrace its newly built history. All the kings of the 25th Dynasty, and later those of the Napatan and the Meroitic kingdoms, were buried under a pyramid. First located at El-Kurru during the 8th century bce, the royal cemetery moved to Nuri under the reign of Taharqo in the 7th century bce, then to Jebel Barkal around the 4th century bce (reign of Aktisanes?) and finally to Meroe under the reign of Arkamani I at the beginning of the 3rd century bce. At the beginning of the 2nd and at the end of the 1st centuries bce, some royal burials took place again at Jebel Barkal, but it is still unclear if these episodes correspond to a split of Meroe in two, or to the local origin of the ruler at that time (Dunham 1950, 1955, 1957). Royal Kushite pyramids, like their late Egyptian models, were small in size but with steep walls that gave a powerful impression when seen from the ground. The tallest was about 50 m high (for Taharqo in Nuri), but in average most did not exceed 30 m in height. Non-royal pyramids were generally much smaller, also because they mostly used mudbricks instead of stone. By adopting the pyramidal grave monument, provincial elite groups had intended to copy the king’s grave, though in reality they followed the models already established by non-ruling members of the royal family. The well-known monument built for the prince Tedeqene in the West Cemetery at Meroe is often cited (Török 2009:420) as an example of this influence toward local elite. Though the pyramids built for the elite tried to copy the official standards, from the very beginning they also had their differences. Furthermore, most of the components of the funerary monument such as the chapel, the capstone, the texts, or the statuary also changed over time, accentuating the gap between the two traditions, royal and nonroyal. The capstone is a good example of these disparities. In Egypt, royal monuments had a pointed decorated block (pyramidion) at the top, while in Meroe the last stone on a pyramid had a circular base with two holes, probably to insert a bronze solar disk. On elite graves in the countryside, the capstone didn’t follow either of these traditions, but rather took the shape of a lotus bud about to bloom but tied with symbolic ropes. This diversity shows how the adoption of foreign traditions was made possible at Meroe by creating new models adapted to the local architectural, religious, and artistic background. It also illustrates how regional traditions and beliefs could override the codes used in the capital.

A Twofold Funerary Tradition Unlike the graves from the royal circles and the highest elite groups at Meroe, which were all Egyptianized, many graves from lower-level officials seem to have mixed local and foreign traditions. It is therefore possible to encounter in a single unit two contemporaneous burials, one following the Egyptian way (coffin, extended position, bead net),

Death and Burial in the Kingdom of Meroe   593 and the other a Nubian-style ritual (crouched position without coffin). The latter burials were never totally closed to foreign influence, but had not embraced all the aspects of Egyptianized mortuary practices. Above the grave, the choice of the superstructure also revealed the existence of two traditions. If the king, the royal family, and many high-ranked officials opted for the pyramid, a part of the population continued to use the tumulus, the traditional funerary monument used in Nubia since the protohistoric period. Until now, only a few excavations have revealed the true extent of the tumulus grave tradition in the kingdom of Meroe. But discoveries such as the 4th-century ce royal tumuli at El-Hobagi (Lenoble 1994), in Central Sudan, proved that the tradition had never been abandoned and was probably strong enough in the southern part of the kingdom to be reinstated by the new ruler who succeeded the last kings buried under pyramids at Meroe. In Central Sudan (Wolf and Nowotnick, this volume) at the end of the 1st millennium bce, new royal cities such as Hamadab, El-Hassa, and Muweis emerged in the periphery of Meroe. Based on official institutions such as an Amun temple or a royal palace, the elaborate plans of these towns confirm the high density of population that surrounded the capital. But for every settlement discovered and currently excavated, almost no attempts have been made to look at the cemeteries. This unbalanced approach leaves us with random discoveries to study the nature of the funerary religion in the region. One of them was made in the 1980s at El-Kadada, during the construction of a large channel and water pump (Lenoble 1987a). Unsurprisingly the site showed that during the Late Meroitic period, wealthy people of the local community were buried under tumuli. The difficulty with tumulus architecture is that it uses natural material available in the vicinity of the cemetery, on top of the soil extracted from the excavation of the grave itself. In other words, it has a tendency over time to disappear into the landscape, unless it is covered with rocks or has kept its circular elevated shape. Unfortunately, Central Sudan is a region affected every year by strong rains, washing away the plain-lands between the hills. Another problem with the tumulus is that it belongs to a long-lasting tradition. Except for a few cases such as C-Group tumuli, it can be quite difficult to date a tumulus from its general appearance. During the recent survey of the Fourth Cataract region, many tumuli thought to be Post-Meroitic in date were finally attributed to the Kerma period after some of them were excavated. Of course, the material left at the surface by plunderers help determine the cultural profile of the grave—up to a certain limit though, because tumuli fields hide another problem: they can be diachronic, which means that different historical phases can be found in a single funerary area, with structures that all look similar. The case study of Jebel Makbor (Lenoble 1987b), near Meroe, summarizes it all. On a jebel covered with approximately one thousand graves, four tumuli with the same appearance and located only a few meters from each other show that one belongs to the protohistoric period, one to the Meroitic period and two to the medieval period. Though in the Fourth Cataract area, after years of intensive archaeological activities, we are now able to refine our expertise with mound graves typologies, such tools are

594   Vincent Francigny ­ aradoxically missing for the most populated area of the kingdom, where we continue p to massively focus on royal foundations. The geographical distribution of tumulus fields of the Meroitic period or the transition with the Post-Meroitic period is quite informative, even though our knowledge remains limited for Central Sudan. To the north of the region between Jebel Barkal and Kawa, the tumulus was completely abandoned during the Meroitic period. While elite groups and later the middle class adopted the pyramid, the poorest graves found in Meroitic cemeteries seem to have had no superstructure on the surface. Sometimes this was because a pyramid originally built for one or two burial chambers became, after generations, a collective monument for a cluster of graves installed all around, where space was still available. The last tumulus superstructures in this region are found at Sedeinga (Francigny 2016:64). They date back to the Late Napatan period and were built with a mixed architecture consisting of an oval-shaped soil mound coming from the pit excavation, covered with a mudbrick dome sealed with mortar. All the known examples belong to tombs of children while monuments of adults were already pyramids, some of them having a surprising circular wall built in the middle and completely hidden when the construction was completed. Upstream of Jebel Barkal, both traditions are found, with pyramids erected for the royal family and the subsequent circles. Recent discoveries such as Gabati (Edwards 1998) and Berber (Mahmoud Suliman Bashir 2010) indicate that a few pyramids for highestranked local officials are even expected in almost all the cemeteries of a decent size.

Figure 30.2 Late Napatan tumulus grave between two pyramids. Sedeinga Mission © V. Francigny.

Death and Burial in the Kingdom of Meroe   595

The Cult of the Dead The funerary rituals developed from a combination of Egyptian concepts and local traditions are still puzzling because of their diversity and the selective process they imply, although they can partly be described through archaeological observations. Their regional distribution, also reflected in the material culture and the funerary equipment, would benefit from a better understanding of the administrative divisions of the kingdom. Török (1997:512) points out that the so-called democratization of the funerary religion during the Early Meroitic period corresponds to a broader change in the society marked by the emergence of the first Kandake and the creation of a new writing system. But it is not clear to what extent all these transformations were part of an intentional reform, or whether they correspond to the growing independence of regional powers and changes in the structure of the royal family itself. Spreading rapidly and probably influencing the populations living beyond the margins of the kingdom, the Meroitic cult of the dead is mostly known through the large series of pyramidal monuments, funerary chapels, and liturgical material associated with them. For the people still buried under tumuli, even when the graves possess plenty of similarities with those found under pyramids, the post-mortem rituals remain hard to define. During the Fourth Cataract survey, the great number of Meroitic tumuli found untouched but with a lot of ceramic pots broken at their surface (Wolf and Nowotnick 2005) indicates at least the possible existence of a funerary cult performed in a more humble and traditional way. The funerary chapel, as we know it (built on the east side of a pyramid) during the Napatan-Meroitic period, was introduced in Nubia during the New Kingdom colonization. However, a funerary cult was performed outside the grave as early as the C-Group period, and funerary temples were already built next to royal graves at Kerma (Bonnet 2000). Apart from the royal graves at Meroe and Barkal, most of the funerary chapels dating from the Meroitic period were reduced-size monuments that could only, in the best case, host a stela and some material. The chapel, even symbolic, was seen as a tangible bridge between the grave (i.e., the deceased) and the living (i.e., the family or the clan); a place in front of which rituals could be performed and prayers conveyed to the other world. For the largest non-royal chapels, it became common to combine the mudbrick architecture with stone elements such as a threshold, a lintel, and doorjambs. Local differences are often observed in this regard, and not only in artistic style and technique. For example, all the lintels with an inscription come from a single site, Sedeinga, and attest the relative freedom of high officials to turn funerary rituals to their advantage (Rilly 2013). When decorated, the doorjambs usually opposed two divinities, one on each side of the door, pouring a libation for the dead. Anubis, the Egyptian god protector of the grave, generally faces either Isis or Nephthys. This scene appears on the doorjambs

596   Vincent Francigny

Figure 30.3  Isis pouring a libation for the dead. Doorjamb of a chapel at Sedeinga. Sedeinga Mission © V. Francigny.

around the 2nd century bce and was borrowed from the iconography of the offering tables. Anubis, gaining in popularity during the Roman period, is also more often depicted in Meroitic art than he was during the Napatan period. However his name is never mentioned in the funerary texts, where Isis and Osiris remain the main figures of the funerary religion. The lintels of non-royal funerary chapels were made in an archaic Egyptian style, ­figuring a winged sun disc flanked by two uraeus-serpents. Most of the official buildings (temples, palaces, royal tombs) during the Meroitic period have their doors surmounted with this type of lintel. More than an act of faith local elites appropriated a symbol that legitimated their status and power, because a private edifice that looks like an official temple carries the idea that it participates in the cosmic order, of which the central figure is the king himself. The space in front of the chapel was used to perform the rituals dedicated to the dead, among which the libation poured on an offering table was probably most important. The table was placed on a small pedestal made with mudbricks, often built on top of the descendary after it was filled up at the end of the funeral. During the libation, the table would receive the liquid before it could find its way to the ground through the apex.

Death and Burial in the Kingdom of Meroe   597 During that process, the water would magically convey the prayers and the food offerings carved on the table, directly to the dead. Initially found in Egypt to serve the gods and goddesses in their temples, as well as the dead king, the offering table travelled to Nubia during the New Kingdom colonization and remained a central object in Napatan sanctuaries. In the kingdom of Meroe, the number of tables discovered increased considerably as it was commonly found associated with the main tombs of elite groups. Meroitic offering tables are so similar to those made in Roman Egypt that, without a text, it would sometimes be impossible to differentiate the two. Its surface decoration alternates between carved and incised scenes, always with great care for bilateral symmetry in the composition. Two categories of ­decoration dominate: the representations of offerings and the figural scenes where divinities perform a libation. In the latter case, Anubis generally faces Isis or Nephthys, as on the doorjambs of the chapel. The offering tables with a figural scene were first associated with the extended royal family members, as they were not designed for the king whose chapel was already adorned with offering rituals. Reaching the provinces of the kingdom quite quickly, the first known examples in Lower Nubia were always reserved to the highest figures of the local elite. Török (2009:422) used the distribution of offering tables to locate the most influential centers of power in the Meroitic kingdom: Meroe, Karanog, Faras, Sedeinga, and Sai Island. In addition to the growing enthusiasm for pyramidal burial monuments, the democratization of the offering table offers another example on how the distance that separates the royal family from “local rulers” was unrelentingly shrinking during the Meroitic period. Another vital element for the cult of the dead was the funerary stela, probably set up in the small chapel. During the Napatan period, it was reserved to the royal circles, while at Meroe it became as common as the offering table in front of graves of officials. Here also, two main categories can be identified, though a multitude of alternatives exist. The first one consists of stelae only conceived to support a funerary inscription, with the exception of a winged sun disc sometimes carved at the top. The second one shows a figural scene representing the deceased, alone or accompanied by a member of his family, and sometimes a text written in the spaces left empty. If for the first category the texts were always carved, the figural scenes could be incised, carved, or painted. Their details represent an invaluable source of information for the studies of garments, ornaments, and physical appearance. In the countryside, funerary texts start to be written around the 1st century bce. Invocations addressed to Isis and Osiris, benedictions for the dead, and statements of family relationships are the main focus of these texts (Rilly, this volume), which thus provide a unique insight into Meroitic society and its administrative structure. Depending on the context, some titles could remain in the same family and in one place for generations, while in some other cases high-ranked officials could accumulate many titles by travelling throughout their career. In the West Cemetery at Sedeinga, nine graves were installed on a small hillock at a distance from the rest of the funerary area. Dating from the Napatan period, the graves

598   Vincent Francigny were later reused during the Meroitic time with new pyramids added in front of the ruined monuments. One grave in particular, belonging to a local ruler named Natemakhora (end of 2nd century ce), was found with three funerary texts carved on the stela, the lintel, and the threshold of the chapel. This abundance of written material, each text repeating and completing the other, reproduce at a lower scale the ostentatious logic of the texts covering the walls of a temple. In that case, the inscriptions were not meant to better serve the deceased in the afterlife, but to emphasize his rank and social identity. Unsurprisingly, Natemakhora’s inscriptions bear the highest title known in the region between the Second and the Third Cataract: sleqene: Atiye-te-l-o-wi (“He was sleqene at Sedeinga”). The mobility of the elites, and their tendency to mention far kinship ties if a person held an important title or was based in the capital, are very useful for studies of geography. Through funerary inscriptions, we can thus locate some of the main settlements and specify their role. This is how we know, for example, that the regional capital of Lower Nubia was located in Nlote (Karanog), where the pesto (a sort of governor) was buried with his family; that Tene (Shablul) had many ambassadors sent to Roman Egypt; that Gebel Adda was the fief of the powerful Wayekiye clan; or that Shablul was probably the place where the priests of Qasr Ibrim were buried.

Figure 30.4  Stela of Lapakhidaye. Sudan National Museum © V. Francigny.

Death and Burial in the Kingdom of Meroe   599 All the non-royal funerary texts were written using the cursive Meroitic script (Rilly, this volume). Its creation was probably motivated by practical needs in the administration of the kingdom, but the fact that it was also commonly used for royal texts, instead of hieroglyphic, shows that it was meant to be widely accessible; by contrast with Egypt, where hieroglyphic script was exclusively used by elite and religious communities. The development of funerary inscriptions dedicated to local rulers, officials, and their relatives became an important step in forging the identity and domination of elite groups upon the rest of the population. The emergence of a new writing system probably owes a lot to these elite groups who used it very early to commemorate their dead. So many changes such as the widespread uses of pyramidal monuments or the increasing number of formal titles given to local administrators would never have happened if they were not reflecting a major evolution in the relation between the royal family and the court or provincial elite groups. The tacit agreement between the royal and non-royal authorities regarding the use of former royal prerogatives in funerary contexts was apparently facilitated by the common use of this script and the easy flow of communication it offered.

The Ba-statue: A Meroitic Reinvention When stelae and offering tables became popular among the elites, another component of the cult of the dead appeared in the shape of a funerary statue. Known through hundreds of pieces, mostly incomplete, these statues changed from a bird-like shape to an almost complete anthropomorphic sculpture. It was called a ba-statue, in reference to the Egyptian ba, the human soul that would leave the body at the time of death, and often represented as a bird with a human head. In the case of the Meroitic specimen (a reference to the Sokar-Osiris depicted on some royal chapels?), it probably had a broader significance encompassing the other Egyptian concept of the ka, the vital essence that could inhabit the statue and be sustained through food offerings. It was recently proposed that the early ba-statues were located at the top of the py­ram­ i­dal monuments, before the capstone appeared (Francigny 2012:56). Indeed, late anthropomorphic statues have a flat surface at the bottom that is sometimes paired with a stone base where it was inserted. A statue of this type could not be placed in a location that was subject to strong winds. Moving down from the top of the monument to the chapel, the reduced distance between the statue and the ground provided a good reason to personify the sculpture and turn it into a representation of the deceased with all his insignia of power. However, this progressive change and focus on the identity of the dead was not to the benefit of the grave owner only, but was also meant to highlight the status of the whole family or clan. From the descriptive point of view, late ba-statues offer detailed information about garments, ornaments, headdresses, and other symbolic attributes. Though they ­certainly all refer to social ranks, functions, or titles, we are still far from being able to

600   Vincent Francigny identify all of them. For example, the long necklace with large spherical beads seen on some statues belongs to the highest official (pesto), while the short version was reserved to the royal heir (peqer), as seen on the chapel decoration at Meroe (for example Beg. N 20). The late anthropomorphic ba-statue is clearly influenced by the representation of the male royal court members depicted on the walls of palaces, temples, and royal funerary chapels. Female anthropomorphic ba-statues, with apparent nudity, emphasize the social role of mother and ultimately the fecundity figures of the queen and the goddesses assimilated to her. Thus, there is a direct connection between the official representations of the queen shown with prominent breasts and the elite female figures buried far from the capital. It supports the idea that more royal privileges were conceded to regional powers during the Meroitic period, in comparison with the more conservative Napatan time. The human-like sculpture associated with the grave can then be compared to the statues of gods and kings hosted in temples. The chapel, serving as a private family temple, probably replaced in certain occasions the main religious sanctuaries.

Mortuary Equipment During the funeral, the choice of the objects that would enter the grave and accompany the deceased through their journey to the afterlife was extremely meaningful. Likely, the funerals for the lowest classes of the Meroitic society were accompanied by rituals performed by the family itself, rather than local priests. As much as the elite groups could copy the royal family mortuary practices, the commoners must have tried to reproduce the sacraments performed for the elite. A well-known object associated with the Egyptianized grave of the first Nubian kings was the shabti. From Piankhy until Nastasen, it belonged to the equipment of the grave, but completely disappeared when the royal cemetery was transferred to Meroe. However, non-royal graves were never equipped with shabtis, suggesting that the royal prerogative remained strong and that even the highest-ranked officials had limited options to copy the king’s tomb and funerals. Apart from liturgical tools used during the ceremony such as libation bowls and incense burners, two other main categories of objects were placed in the burial chamber: personal belongings and the remains of the funerary banquet. On the body itself, it seems that most of the dead who had valuable ornaments and jewelry were buried wearing them. Amulets on necklaces could play a role in protecting the deceased, though they were initially made for the living. The most popular were Isis Lactans and Bes amulets, often buried with children. Anklets, armlets, and earrings were quite common, while fingers could have one or more seal rings. Not all the ornaments were put on the dead, as some of them were placed in small boxes or caskets made of wood. A rare talisman (Rilly 2007:216) was once found in a grave at Sai Island, with an inscription written on leather and probably brought from a pilgrimage to the Amun

Death and Burial in the Kingdom of Meroe   601 temple at Primis (Qasr Ibrim). Other personal objects included small metallic utensils like tweezers, needles, or spatulas. Wood or ivory kohl tubes and small oil containers made of glass or ceramic were sometimes put in a casket or on basketry trays. Next to the body, a range of weapons could be placed, though they were not always authentic, nor do they indicate that the deceased belonged to the army. For example, large series of arrows and quivers were probably given to honor an official, rather than to signify the burial of a real archer (Lenoble 1997). The largest series of objects found in Meroitic graves are always ceramic containers (jars, bottles, etc.) and utensils (bowls, cups, etc.). Both local wheelmade and handmade traditions are represented, in addition to imported vessels such as amphorae or lekythoi. Resembling the well-known Roman tradition of the funerary banquet (Riggs  2005), wealthy Meroites were buried with the food and drink containers that were probably used during the funerals. The large quantities and the rarity of some products must have been used to reinforce the leading position of some families over the communities of riverine settlements. Other containers, such as water bottle covered with a cup, might also have played a practical role in sustaining the deceased in the afterlife.

The Treatment of the Corpse No canopic jars or bandages have been found in non-royal Meroitic graves, meaning that no mummification process was involved, though it is often mentioned in modern literature. The reason could be that it was widely accepted throughout the kingdom that natural desiccation of the corpse was sufficient to preserve the dead. If the royal iconography sometimes refers to mummification, it simply shows that even when an Egyptian concept was borrowed by the Kushites, it was not necessarily adopted as a practice. While Meroites were aware of the mummification but did not use it, in Egypt it was so popular that it turned into a kind of funerary industry. The absence of mummification eliminates the existence of specialized workshops where the dead were sent, and most of non-royal post-mortem rituals on the corpse must have been done within the family premises. To avoid rapid decay, the body was probably washed or scented with oils and preserved from insects with incense-like substances. Both tools, the oil container and the incense burner, were then placed into the grave, as well as the bed (if any was used), as the living could probably not use them anymore. Many beds, generally with the legs dismantled due to the lack of space, were therefore discovered in Meroitic graves. Lying on a bed, on a funerary bench made of stone or simply on the floor, the deceased was often resting in a wood coffin or wrapped in a shroud. Mostly using cotton fabric, a typically Nubian production that later spread to Egypt (Mayer-Thurman and Williams 1979:36), shrouds were usually not decorated, though a few exceptional specimens show references to Egyptian religious figures.

602   Vincent Francigny

Figure 30.5  Decorated shroud from Sai Island. SIAM © V. Francigny.

Inherited from the Egyptian colonization and the Napatan period, the wood coffin was another common feature of Meroitic burials. Men and women could both be buried in coffins. Some Meroitic coffins were made with Ficus sycamorus wood, also used in the Egyptian tradition. It attests the deep influence of the Osirian theology throughout the Kushite period, with its particular focus on the preservation of the corpse, as the transfiguration of the dead allowed them to be assimilated to the god and to triumph against death. Once the grave was closed and the funeral over, many things could still happen to the corpse in relation to human activities. As some Meroitic graves were from the beginning designed for several burials, they could be reopened and the corpses moved if not reduced over time to a selection of a few bones. Alternatively, with openings for legitimate purposes, plunderers looking for metal and jewelry could periodically visit the grave, often causing irreversible damage to the bodies.

References Bonnet, C. 2000 Édifices et rites funéraires à Kerma. Errance. Dunham, D. 1950 El Kurru. Royal Cemeteries of Kush 1. Harvard University Press.

Death and Burial in the Kingdom of Meroe   603 ——— 1955 Nuri. Royal Cemeteries of Kush 2.Museum of Fine Arts (Boston). ——— 1957 Royal Tombs of Meroe and Barkal. Royal Cemeteries of Kush 4. Boston: Museum of Fine Arts (Boston). Edwards, D.N. 1998 Gabati: A Meroitic, Post-Meroitic and Medieval Cemetery in Central Sudan. Sudan Archaeological Research Society Publication 3. BAR International Series 740. Archaeopress. Francigny, V. 2009 Dans les mains du défunt. Beiträge zur Sudanforschung 10:75–80. ——— 2012 Preparing for the Afterlife in the Provinces of Meroe. Sudan & Nubia 16:52–59. ——— 2016 Les pratiques funéraires dans le royaume de Méroé. Les enterrements privés. De Boccard. Kendall, T. 1989 Ethnoarchaeology in Meroitic Studies. In Studia Meroitica 1984: Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference for Meroitic Studies, ed. S. Donadoni and S. Wenig, pp. 625–745. Meroitica 10. Akademie Verlag. Lenoble, P. 1987a Trois tombes de la region de Méroé. La clôture des fouilles historiques d’elKadada en 1985 et 1986. Archéologie du Nil Moyen 2:89–119. ——— 1987b Quatre tombes sur mille de Djebel Makbor, AMS NE–36-0/3-X–1. Archéologie du Nil Moyen 2:207–50. ——— 1994 Du Méroïtique au Postméroïtique dans la région méridionale du Royaume de Méroé. Recherches sur la période de transition. Doctoral dissertation, Paris IV Sorbonne. ——— 1997 Enterrer les flèches, enterrer l’Empire: I. Carquois et flèches des tombes imperials à el-Hobagi. Cahier de Recherches de l’Institut de Papyrologie et d’Égyptologie de Lille 17(2):137–52. Mahmoud Suliman Bashir 2010 A Recently Discovered Meroitic Cemetery at Berber, River Nile State, Sudan. Preliminary Report. Sudan & Nubia 14:69–74. Mayer-Thurman, C.C. and B.  Williams 1979 Ancient Textiles from Nubia. Art Institute and Oriental Institute of Chicago. Riggs, C. 2005 The Beautiful Burial in Roman Egypt. Oxford University Press. Rilly, C. 2007 La langue du royaume de Méroé. Un panorama de la plus ancienne culture écrite d’Afrique subsaharienne. Bibliothèque de l’École des Hautes Études, Sciences Historiques et Philologiques 344. Honoré Champion. ——— 2013 Sur les traces de Jean Leclant à Sedeinga. Les textes méroïtiques du prince Natemakhora. Archéo-Nil 23:91–110. Steindorff, G. 1937 Aniba 2. Mission archéologique de Nubie, 1929–1934. J.J. Augustin. Török, L. 1997 The Kingdom of Kush: Handbook of the Napatan-Meroitic Civilization. Handbuch der Orientalistik 1(31). Brill. ——— 2009 Between Two Worlds: The Frontier Region between Ancient Nubia and Egypt 3700 BC–AD 500. Probleme der Ägyptologie 29. Brill. Williams, B.B. 1993 Excavations at Serra East, George R Hughes and James  E.  Knudstad, Directors, Parts 1–5: A-Group, C-Group, Pan-Grave, New Kingdom, and X-Group Remains from Cemeteries A-G and Rock Shelters. University of Chicago Oriental Institute Nubian Expedition 10. Wolf, P. and U. Nowotnick 2005 The Second Season of the SARS Anglo-German Expedition to the Fourth Cataract. Sudan & Nubia 9:23–31.

Chapter 31

Proleg om ena to th e Stu dy of M eroitic A rt Janice W. Yellin

Dedicated to William and Nettie Adams Pioneers who set the bar high for scholarship, decency and kindness for all of us who work in Nubian Studies.

Introduction Elite visual arts of the Meroitic Kingdom, the last great ancient state in Kush, while related to their predecessors, particularly those of the Napatan kingdom, demonstrate a distinctive and original aesthetic. Yet the essential qualities, interests, and developments of Meroitic art have not been the subject of a general and systematic exploration.1 This brief overview explores Kushite visual culture and its indigenous nature. To do this, It was decided to keep a particular focus on elite art, which can often be linked to specific reigns, in order to develop a periodization that parallels our current understanding of Meroitic chronology. It is hoped that the periodization offered here as well as information about style and iconography presented throughout this study will prove useful as a basis for future studies of Meroitic art history including its ceramics, metalwork, and jewelry, which were sophisticated forms of visual expression. Constructing a history of Meroitic art poses numerous challenges. Its fundamental nature is obscured by appropriations and adaptations, sometimes systematic,2 sometimes eclectic,3 first and foremost from pharaonic and Greco-Roman Egypt, then from the arts of the Mediterranean world. As Smith (2003) has demonstrated, the cultures of Egypt and Kush were entangled as a result of Egypt’s colonialization of Nubia including intermarriages between Egyptians and Nubians particularly during the New Kingdom. Assimilations and “ownership” of Egyptian culture and religion have a long history in Kush that continued into the Meroitic period sometimes making the distinction between conscious appropriations and adaptions and truly assimilated pharaonic cultural and visual features challenging. Because Meroitic artists enjoyed a degree of independence,

606   Janice W. Yellin different visual styles and standards of quality coexisted without necessarily following particular paths of stylistic development. While stylistic trends during a specific period can ­sometimes be identified, Meroites did not appear to expect consistency in style and quality; therefore, some contemporaneous works shared stylistic features while others did not often complicating the identification of visual styles and study of their development over time, a standard methodology used for organizing and constructing an art history.

The Meaning of Iconography vs Style An important distinction is made between iconographical and stylistic features and their analysis in this discussion of Meroitic art and its visual features. The boundaries between these two components of visual imagery can sometimes be treated as fungible. However, it is entirely possible to have scenes containing the same iconography executed in very different visual styles. Therefore, in this study, “iconography” refers to features that express the content and meaning of an image or scene. “Style” refers to the manner in which these features are implemented or presented (for a discussion of this important distinction, see Pischikova 2018:25–28).

Framework of this Study While there is good contextual data for more recently discovered works of art, many pieces are without provenance or were found during excavations conducted early in the 20th century so their documentation is incomplete. Since we do not yet have a complete understanding of Meroitic culture and history, the placement and understanding of an object or image in its proper, documented historical or cultural context is not always possible. It is thus problematic to construct full historical or stylistic sequences for Meroitic art or to ascertain what the cultural associations and appearance of an object or image meant to its original audience. Iconography, when present, can help contextualize an object as well as help decode its meaning for a viewer who recognizes visual symbols in its design that are based on cultural knowledge shared with its maker. Given the various constraints, different approaches through which Meroitic art can be studied are (1) as art reflecting its culture, (2) as art created within a specific period of time and its periodization, or (3) as art reflecting different indigenous and foreign visual styles that were unified by the way(s) in which they were combined and used. Each approach offers its own challenges. Each of these approaches is explored below.

Art Reflecting its Culture In Meroe, elite art was created for religious, political, and social purposes, i.e. to express cult and mortuary beliefs, to present and reinforce state dominion over the population, and to establish social status through the ownership and bestowal of

Prolegomena to the Study of Meroitic Art   607 ­ restige objects or through the representation of an individual in ways that reflected p his/her place in society. The majority of surviving examples of Meroitic art come from funerary, temple, or palace contexts. Sculptures, particularly temple, palace, and tomb reliefs, comprise the largest corpus. Based on general stylistic and iconographical ­features and cultural trends, Meroitic art can be divided into Early, Middle, and Late  periods. In the most current sequence of rulers, the Early period covers the reigns of King Arkamani I (mid-3rd century bce) up through the reigns of Queen Amanirenas and King Teriteqas (end of 1st century bce). The Middle period spans the  reigns of Queen Amanishakheto (first half of 1st century ce) to Queen Amanikhatashan or shortly thereafter (first half of 2nd century ce). The Late period begins with King Amanitaraqide (second half of 2nd century ce) continuing until the reign of King Yesebokheamani and the end of the Meroitic kingdom (mid-4th ­century ce).4 The historical and visual features defining these three periods are discussed below (“Art Created within a Specific Period of Time”).

Materials Meroitic artists employed a variety of media, most typically paint, stone, wood, metals, and clay to make and decorate a variety of objects. Whether the large number of works in stone reflects its popularity or its greater durability is not known. Painting was used to decorate numerous types of ritual objects such as coffins (e.g., Sedeinga), linen shrouds, funerary stelae (Second–Fourth Cataract region), and wood votive plaques (e.g., Qasr Ibrim) and was an inexpensive, fairly common practice. Brick walls of temples and palaces were covered with plaster and painted. The manner of preparing walls for painted scenes varied. On temples, a robust type of lime plaster was used for their exteriors (Anderson and Salah eldin Mohamed Ahmed 2011:4), but a more delicate mud backing with whitewash and gum Arabic was apparently used for more protected interior walls, as was the case for Meroe temple M 720 (Bradley 2003:66), and in the burial chambers of Beg. S 503,5 whose painted walls were tested when the tomb was re-opened by the Qatar Mission for the Pyramids of the Sudan (QMPS) in 2016. Testing found that the burial chamber walls had been prepared for painting with a very clean, fine-grained clay plaster without any traces of lime or any mixture of macro organic remains. Gum Arabic might have been included, but none could be detected.6 Sandstone was the most common stone used for buildings, their reliefs, and for sculptures, as it was extremely plentiful. Ninety-two sandstone quarries around Meroe alone have been identified by B.  Cech. Sandstone can have varying degrees of hardness depending mainly on its cementation.7 While there were sculptures made from harder, intensely cementated stone, typically a softer stone was used. Sandstone reliefs and sculptures were plastered and painted. Granite was much rarer. When used for royal sculptures and stelae, it does not seem to have been painted (Abdelrahman Ali Mohamed 2012:4). Several small statuettes of steatite and serpentinite and one steatite stela have been found at Meroe and nearby El-Hassa.8

608   Janice W. Yellin Wooden sculptures are rare, no doubt due to their vulnerability to decay in damp circumstances and to insect attacks. A small fragment of a fertility figure with offerings carved in low raised relief comes from what may have been a wooden offering stand in room 102 of the Amun Temple at Naga demonstrating that wood relief was used to adorn furnishings (Kröper et al. 2011:41, pl. 41). Copper alloys, gold, and silver were used to create statuettes, votive gifts, ritual objects, jewelry, vessels, mirrors, and lamps, many of which demonstrated high levels of craft. Metal items were cast using the lost wax method (Fitzenreiter 2003). These were luxury items requiring a certain degree of skill and resources to produce, so those found outside a royal context were probably prestige gifts from the royal court. A copper alloy was the most common metal used for special domestic and temple objects like vessels, lamps, censers, and adornments for divine barks as well as statuettes of royalty and gods. Gold and silver were rarer and used for jewelry and royal and divine statuettes. The tinbronze offering table found at Kawa (Welsby 2014) and the bronze queen’s head from the El-Hassa Amun Temple cache (Rondot 2012) offer glimpses of what has been lost due to metal’s intrinsic value and potential for re-use. Faience production had a long, continuous history in Nubia, having been well established during the Kerma period. In addition to faience beads and small amulets that were relatively common in all classes of Meroitic burials, there were also more elaborate objects: jewelry (pectorals, etc.), cult objects (e.g., sistra, ankh-shaped libation trays set in temple floors), decorative wall plaques and sculptures found in temples, palaces, and royal and elite tombs. Unusual as well as large faience objects demonstrated a degree of originality that indicated a well-developed faience industry at Meroe and El-Hassa (PierratBonnefois  2010:121). Clay’s accessibility and ease of use made it a basic material for non-elite art objects such as vessels, beads, and amulets including some human and animal figurines whose style and manufacture reached back to Neolithic times (SackhoAutissier 2010). In addition to the more utilitarian ceramics that reflected various longlived indigenous traditions, painted ceramics were a varied and important form of elite and non-elite artistic expression. One elite type, fine “eggshell ware” which appeared in the 1st century bce, was particularly distinctive in its quality. Ceramics of this and other fine ware types were decorated with lively motifs that included animals, humans, gods, and scenes with Dionysiac references including satyrs (Pl. 31.1a–c). Some decorations reflected imagery used in monumental contexts (Bard 1999:521) (compare Pl. 31.1d–e with Fig. 31.12a–b).

Decoration of Temples Meroitic temples were not only places of worship for the god(s) to whom they were dedicated, but served state purposes such as legitimating the rulers who built them as well as communicating their dominion over the population who would have visited their temples. Temples were colorful and decorated with wall paintings, reliefs, and statues (Kuckertz 2019:811–45). Approached through an avenue of ram-headed sphinxes, as at

Prolegomena to the Study of Meroitic Art   609 Dangeil, they had stone or mudbrick walls9 and columns covered in plastered and vividly painted scenes (Anderson and Salah eldin Mohamed Ahmed 2006). Following Egyptian practices, the exterior walls of temples and chapels were carved with sunken reliefs and interiors with raised ones, techniques that allowed for better viewing under the different lighting conditions. Faience plaques were set into some walls and hung from others. Protomes of apotropaic gods in human or animal form (Fig. 31.1)10 were placed over entrances and drain spouts were often surmounted by a lion. Altars and bark stands (Aldenhoven 2014) placed in kiosks and sanctuaries were decorated with raised reliefs (Fig. 31.2) or, as in the solar court of the Amun Temple at Naga, plastered and painted (Kröper et al. 2011: pl. 38). There might be small offering chapels that would have served as repositories for votive offerings in the form of small statuettes and amulets (Kröper 2014). Half-life-sized statues of gods and rulers, such as the “archer king” ( Pl. 31.3a) (Maystre 1986; Rondot 2011; Wolf 2003) or even smaller ones (Pl. 31.3c) were found in temples. Life-sized statues are rare (Pl. 31.4a–c; Fig. 31.16c), but temples had over-life-sized, free-standing statues of rulers (Pl. 31.5a–b) and the guardian gods, Arensnuphis and Sebiumeker (Pl. 31.17a–b), who were also carved as over-life-size attached figures on interior columns

Figure 31.1  Protome, Lion Temple, Musawwarat es-Sufra, second half 3rd century bce, H: 52.2 cm, SNM 19466. Photograph: © Ursula Hintze, Sudan Archaeological Collection & Archive at Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, HU-SUDAN_H_MUS_PH_465/1-4_1964.

610   Janice W. Yellin

Figure 31.2  Bark Stand of Amanitore and Natakamani, Wad ben Naga, sandstone, mid-1st century ce, H: 116 cm, Äg Museum, Berlin InvNr. 7261m. Photographs of two sides: (a) Queen Amanitore. (b) Isis. Photographs: © Ägyptisches Museum, Berlin.

(Pl. 31.6a–b) and at the entrance to Temple 100 in the Great Enclosure of Musawwarat es-Sufra (Pl. 31.5c). Colossal seated figures of Amun and Mut flanked the sanctuary entrance of the Typhonium, Wad ben Naga (Onderka 2014:88–89, figs. 12, 13). Bound prisoners formed another distinct group of temple and palace sculptures. Small bound prisoners (Pl. 31.7a) sometimes impaled by staffs, as well as a rare life-sized prisoner gripped by a fierce lion (Pl. 31.7b) all reflected the triumphal nature of Meroitic kingship dogma. There were also variously sized lions representing Apedemak, recumbent rams representing Amun of Napata, and frogs near reservoirs. Finally, temples also held large royal stela to commemorate important events such as coronations and military victories (Pl. 31.16a–c) and smaller ones given as votive offerings to the temple’s god(s) (Fig. 31.3a–b; Pl. 31.16d). While temple relief decorations sometimes appropriated or adapted scenes from Egyptian ­pharaonic and Greco-Roman temples. Their walls were not covered with register after register of stereotypical cult scenes as in Egypt, but had distinctive images whose iconography expressed fundamental Meroitic ideas, often about the nature of kingship dogma and the rulers’ relationship to state gods (Figs. 31.4, 31.5). The lateral exterior walls of the Lion Temples at both Naga and Musawwarat es-Sufra were filled with processions of state gods facing the ruler(s) who built the temple to publicly endorse that ruler’s right to the throne (Fig. 31.4a-b; Pl. 31.8a–b). Furthermore, in the Lion Temple at Naga, the gods participating in this declaration of royal legitimation were assigned to either a feminine (north) wall or a masculine (south) wall, a gendered theological kingship construct

(a2)

(d)

(b)

(e)

Figure 31.3  (a) Stela of Queen Amanishakheto, Amun Temple, Naga, first half 1st century ce, sandstone, H: 26.5 cm, Naga Nr. 101/19, SNM 31338. Photograph: © Naga Project. (b) Goddess Amesemi, fragment of stela of Queen Amanishakheto (?), Lion Temple, Naga, first half 1st century ce, sandstone, Naga nr. 301/4, SNM 27499. Photograph: © Naga Project. (c) Head of Queen Amanishakheto, Beg. N 6, pylon of pyramid chapel of Queen Amanishakheto, Meroe, first half 1st century ce, Äg. Museum, Berlin InvNr. 2244, 2245. Photograph: © Ägyptisches Museum, Berlin. (d) Head of Queen Amanishakheto (?), Palace Wad ben Naga, painted sandstone, Sudan National Museum. Photograph: © Jiří Vaněk. (e) Stela of Prince Arikankharor, detail, mid-1st century ce, sandstone, L: 25.4 cm, Worcester Art Museum 192.145. Photograph: © Worchester Art Museum, Massachusetts, USA Museum purchase/Bridgeman Images.

(c)

(a1)

612   Janice W. Yellin

Figure 31.4 (a) Exterior, west wall, Lion Temple, Naga, mid-1st century ce. Photograph: ©  Naga Project. (b) Exterior, west wall. Lion Temple, Naga, mid-1st century ce, after Lepsius 1849–59 Abth  V., pls. 59–60. © Universitäts- und Landesbibliothek Sachesen Anhalt in Halle (Saale).

Figure 31.5  (a) King Natakamani and Queen Amanitore, Pylon, Lion Temple, Naga, mid-1st century ce. Lepsius 1849–59 Abth. V, pl. 56. ©  Universitäts- und Landesbibliothek Sachesen Anhalt in Halle (Saale); Universitäts- und Landesbibliothek Sachsen Anhalt in Halle (Saale). (b) Queen Amanishakheto, Pylon of pyramid chapel, Beg. N 6, Meroe, first half 1st century ce. Lepsius 1849–59 Abth. V, pl. 40; © Universitäts- und Landesbibliothek Sachsen Anhalt in Halle (Saale).

614   Janice W. Yellin without Egyptian parallels. On the pylon of this temple (Fig.  31.5a), the traditional Egyptian scene of the ruler smiting foreign enemies was re-conceptualized in Meroitic terms. Stylistically, the rulers’ proportions and the decorative patterning of their garments express a Meroitic aesthetic, and conceptually the inclusion of the lion god Apedemak between the king’s feet refers to Apedemak’s role in protecting the Meroitic state and its ruler (see also Fig. 31.4a–b, rear exterior wall of the same temple on which the central, three-headed Apedemak acknowledges these two rulers). In general, wall inscriptions, so plentiful in Egyptian temples but always more limited in Meroitic temples, were ultimately relegated to identifying the figures portrayed in the reliefs. Meroites were content to rely on iconography alone to communicate the meaning of temple scenes, a pragmatic decision in a society in which only the smallest percentage of its population was literate and one that indicated temple decorations were intended as a means of communicating directly with the population.

Decoration of Royal Palaces Like temples, royal palaces were visually rich environments (Maillot 2008). The walls of the residential level were decorated with vividly colored paintings on plaster as in Meroe Palace 750, 1st–2nd century ce (Grzymski 2010) or painted reliefs modelled in the plaster that sometimes also had gold leaf (Vercoutter 1962). Faience wall plaques were affixed to their walls and assumed a variety of forms. There were cartouches surmounted by double plumes, floral motifs, ankhs, and sa-knots, protective symbols, as well as plaques with representational images, the most complex of which were divine nursing or offering scenes within a small chapel (Sackho-Autissier 2011; Maillot 2016:133–35, cat. 31–33). Sculptures stood within public areas (Vercoutter 1962: Fig. 14; Maillot 2016, v. 2: Fig. 107).

Decoration of Burials Royal Burials at Meroe Only elite and royal tombs were decorated. At the royal centers of Meroe and Jebel Barkal, rulers and close family members were buried beneath pyramids that had small chapels with funerary rituals carved on their interior walls. Some had triumphal images on their pylons like the Lion Temple’s pylon at Naga (Fig. 31.5a). Beneath the royal pyramids, a few burial chambers, such as Beg. N 9 (Murtada Bushara Mohamed and Mahmoud Suliman Bashir 2018:102–104; Pls. 8–9), are known to have had wall paintings with mortuary scenes and texts along with stone coffin benches with similar relief decorations. Within these chambers, the dead was believed to become an Osiris who would live eternally, partaking of offerings and libations shown on the chapel’s walls and placed on offering tables at the chapel. Pyramid chapels and their reliefs served a single purpose—to insure the successful afterlife of the pyramid’s owner. The chapel reliefs typically bore no resemblance in iconography or style to that of contemporary temple

Prolegomena to the Study of Meroitic Art   615

Figure 31.6  (a) Queen Kanarata-Reqenem Saralanam, north and south walls, pyramid chapel of Queen Kanarata, Beg. S 4, Meroe, mid-3rd century bce. Lepsius 1849–59 Abth. V, pl. 52a, b; Universitäts- und Landesbibliothek Sachsen Anhalt in Halle (Saale). (b) Day Bark, west wall, pyramid chapel of King Amanislo, Beg. S 5, Meroe, mid-3rd century bce. Lepsius 1849–59 Abth. V, pl. 53b. © Universitäts- und Landesbibliothek Sachsen Anhalt in Halle (Saale).

616   Janice W. Yellin

Figure 31.7  (a) West end, south wall, pyramid chapel of Queen Amanakhatashan (?), first half 2nd century ce, Beg. N 18, Meroe, first half 2nd century ce. Lepsius 1849–59 Abth. V, pl. 51c; © Universitäts- und Landesbibliothek Sachsen Anhalt in Halle (Saale). (b) Isis behind Queen Amanakhatashan (?), detail of west end, south wall, pyramid chapel of Queen Amanakhatashan, Beg. N 18, Meroe, first half 2nd century ce. Photograph: © J.W. Yellin 2016. (c) Queen, south wall, pyramid chapel of Queen Amanikhalika, Beg. N 32, Meroe, 3rd century ce. Photograph: © T. Kendall 1986.

decorations. Created in a sphere of their own,11 chapel decorations used Egyptian sources just as Napatan funerary religion, beginning with Dynasty 25, had drawn heavily on Egyptian mortuary gods and beliefs while creating distinctive adaptations that were meaningful to them (Doll 2014, in press; Yellin 2014). Relief scenes carved on Early (­ mid-3rd century–end of 1st century bce) (Fig. 31.6a-b) and Middle (first half of 1st century ce–first half of  2nd century ce) period (Fig.  31.7a–b) royal pyramid chapel walls at Meroe varied in style, iconography, and content, but all reflect an intelligent reworking of Egyptian religious concepts and imagery through their selection, organization, and application. By comparison Late period chapel decorations (second half of 2nd century– mid-4th century ce) (Fig. 31.7c) were far more Meroitic particularly in style and content underscoring the extent to which Egyptian elements had been selected and re-worked in the two previous periods. Chapel imagery also reflected contemporary circumstances.

Figure 31.8  (a) Choiak procession, south wall detail, pyramid chapel of King Arkamani II, Beg. N 7, Meroe, end 3rd–beginning 2nd century bce. Lepsius 1849–59 Abth. V, pl. 38. © Universitäts- und Landesbibliothek Sachsen Anhalt in Halle (Saale). (b) Choiak procession, detail south wall, pyramid chapel of King Arkamani II, Beg. N 7, Meroe, end 3rd–beginning 2nd century bce. Photograph: © J.W. Yellin 2016. (c) Choiak procession, south wall detail, pyramid chapel of Queen Amanitore, Beg. N 1, Meroe, mid-1st century ce. Photograph: © QMPS, photograph P. Wolf.

618   Janice W. Yellin The Egyptian Khoiak festival first appeared in Meroitic pyramid chapels (Fig. 31.8a–b) as a result of their owners’ heightened activity in Lower Nubia during the Theban revolt (Yellin 2015a) and again during the reigns of Amanitore, Natakamani, and their princes, mid-1st century ce, when there was a revival of interest in Egyptian art and culture— both ancient and current (Fig. 31.8c). The pyramid chapel walls of Queen Amanitore (Beg. N 1) and her son, Prince Arikankharor (Beg. N 5), created unique scenarios for achieving and sustaining their owners’ afterlife based on Egyptian imagery. The quality of the art and use of archival and contemporary Egyptian mortuary and temple sources for their imagery suggest these scenarios were the work of knowledgeable priests and artists, perhaps from Lower Nubia Egyptian temples (Fig. 31.9a–b). The chapels were furnished with offering tables that were carved with images of breads, lotus flowers, and water, milk, beer, or wine. They often had an inscription with an offering prayer that invoked Osiris and Isis, identified the tomb owner, gave his/her ancestry, and stated that s/he would receive food, drink, and prayers (Pl. 31.9; Fig. 31.18).

Elite Burials between the Second and Fourth Cataracts Officials and members of elite families living between the Second and Fourth Cataracts in Nubia in governmental provincial centers such as Sedeinga, Faras, Karanog, and Arminna West, adopted the practice of pyramid burials. Their modest pyramids had small chapels (Fig. 31.10) with stone doorjambs decorated with Anubis (Pl. 31.10a) on one side and a goddess on the other making libations that were surmounted by a lintel with a winged sun-disc. Together these created a theologically distilled version of the royal chapel decorations. Decorated stelae (Pl. 31.10b–d), offering tables (Pl. 31.9a–c, e), and ba-birds (Pl. 31.11a–d) furnished the chapels and were essential components of the mortuary cult (Francigny 2016:38–56) (Fig. 31.10). As on royal and elite offering tables from Meroe (Pl. 31.9d), there were tables carved with images of offerings, an invocation to Osiris and Isis, the owner’s genealogy and prayers for offerings (Pl. 31.9a–c, e–f). The stelae represented the tomb owners with iconography that preserved their social identities (Pl. 31.10b–d). Human-headed ba-bird statues originated at Meroe but were far more important and common in Nubian burials between the Second and Fourth Cataracts. Representatives of the deceased in a transfigured state, ba-birds could leave the tomb at will and receive the nourishment offered at the chapels.12 Doorjambs, babirds, stelae, and offering tables are among the only sculptures made outside an elite context and so many were crudely carved by untrained hands (Pls. 31.11d, 31.10c, 31.9e). Mortuary gifts that survived the near-total pillaging of royal and elite cemeteries included finely made objects such as personal items, vessels, weapons, and jewelry (Francigny 2016:38–56 and infra). Jewelry (Lacovara and Markowitz 2017; Markowitz and Doxey 2014), and vessels of clay (Evina 2010) and of faience (Pierrat-Bonnefois 2010; Sackho-Autissier 2016) in particular displayed artistry and originality. The ceramics found in tombs exhibited a wide range of techniques, styles, and traditions. For example, finely made and decorated Meroitic fine wares (Pl. 31.1a–d) were contemporaneous with incised and punched decorated black ware whose design dates to the Neolithic period.

Figure 31.9  (a) Offering, detail north wall pyramid chapel of Queen Amanitore, Beg. N. 1, Meroe, mid-1st century ce. Photograph P.2844/N.1914 A, © Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago. (b) Prince Arikankharor as Egyptian lector priest, south side, east wall pyramid chapel of Prince Arikankharor, Beg. N 5, Meroe, mid-1st century ce. Photograph 2855/N. 1925 A, © Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago.

620   Janice W. Yellin

Figure 31.10  Pyramid reconstruction tomb G 174 with offering table and ba-bird, Karanog. Plates, 1910, pl. 114. Photograph: © University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology.

Prolegomena to the Study of Meroitic Art   621

Non-elite Burials Almost all burials throughout Meroe had grave gifts, so poorer burials yielded many examples of non-elite Meroitic art. Ceramics, divine statuettes (infrequent), modest pieces of jewelry, beads, and amulets as well as the aforementioned poorly made offering tables or stelae have been found in non-elite burials.

Production of Art The contexts in which Meroitic royal, elite, and non-elite art were produced are incompletely documented. Production areas for ceramics and faience have been identified in several towns.13 Although production areas in which stonework occurred would not have left behind the same evidence for production as metal (furnaces) or clay working (kilns), the complete absence of evidence for stone carving in settlements, even for smaller objects such as offering tables, is surprising.14 The discovery of two unfinished sculptures at Naga and Wad ben Naga15 (Fig. 31.11) in the locations where they were intended to stand suggests that, given the typically soft nature of Meroitic sandstone, in order to prevent damage statues were not sculpted until brought to their final location. It is worth noting that the unfinished sculptures were not large, so size and weight were not factors in their being carved on site. Copper-alloy chisels as well as lumps of paint that might have been used to paint stone surfaces have been found at locations with stone carvings and reliefs.16

Workshops and Visual Style The significant range of diversity in the quality and visual styles of royal and elite art even when contemporaneous in time and place suggests the absence of an official, ongoing workshop system involved in establishing and maintaining particular standards of craft and style for royal/elite art.17 Instead, during most periods, non-funerary art was probably created on location by individuals or autonomous working groups under the direction of artists whose training and skills varied widely. If a royal undertaking was large, such as building the temples at Naga, local artisans supplemented the official workforce, and these working groups functioned as long as they were needed to complete a particular task.18 Sculptures demonstrating different visual styles and degrees of quality at Naga, particularly as found in and around the Amun Temple (Kröper et al. 2011:146–50), are evidence for a variety of working groups. In prosperous times during the Early and particularly Middle periods, artisans working within the royal circle would have been supported by numerous projects and would have had the wherewithal and need to train new workers, providing a higher degree of quality and continuity in craft and style for relatively limited periods. For example, a face-type developed for Queen Amanishakheto not only appears on stelae from Naga as might be expected (Fig. 31.3a–b), but also at Meroe in depictions of her and her near descendant, Arikankharor (Fig. 31.3c, e).19 Because the decoration of royal pyramid chapels at Meroe and Barkal was a specialized, established, and ongoing process, there may have been a more organized system

622   Janice W. Yellin

Figure 31.11  (a) Unfinished sculpture of Ram-headed Amun, Amun Temple, Naga, first half 1st century ce, sandstone, H: 60.3 cm, Naga Nr. 101/22, SNM 34545. Photograph: © Naga Project. (b1,2) Unfinished sculpture of Sebiumeker, c. 1st century ce Palace Wad ben Naga, sandstone, H: 27.1 cm, SNM 62/9/101. Photograph: © Jiří Vaněk.

Prolegomena to the Study of Meroitic Art   623 behind the creation of funerary art for all the royal cemeteries at Meroe. Early and Middle period royal pyramid chapels appear to have been carved with a fair degree of skill by set groups of artisans under the direction of priests versed in mortuary religion20 and Egyptian mortuary texts (Yellin 2014). The continuity found in several generations of chapel decoration might reflect oversight by the same priest(s), the use of copybooks and shared mortuary texts, or the simple expedient of copying from nearby predecessor(s). During the Late period, the quality of decoration is less consistent, reflecting less prosperous times. The rapid decline in the quality of the last royal pyramid chapels (compare Fig. 31.7b with 31.7c) and offering table decorations (compare Pl. 31.9a with 31.9g) indicated there was a dearth of trained arts and artisans even at the royal court. There are some indications as to how labor was allocated and organized among artists working in temples and pyramid chapels. In several of the royal pyramid chapels at Meroe, it is possible to recognize the hand of a particular artist in the decoration of two generations of chapels, but even when chapels are chronologically contiguous, differences in the stylistic execution of their figures and other details suggest that they were not often made by the same artists. Texts and imagery differed in the style of their carving, indicating that there was a division of labor between workers with different training - ones who were artists and ones who were literate or at least familiar with writing. So at Meroe, there were draftsmen to draw the scenes, artisans to carve them, and still others to carve the texts.21 Stelae from Sedeinga demonstrated that this practice was also followed by elites with the wealth to support it (Francigny 2011:77). As noted, freestanding sculptures were apparently carved at the Amun Temple at Naga and the palace at Wad ben Naga contemporaneously with the carving of their reliefs. Perhaps the same artists would have carved both two- and three-dimensional sculptures, which explains why the general quality of stone sculptures from temples was not nearly as good as their reliefs. Three-dimensional sculptures are technically much more challenging to make than two-dimensional relief scenes especially when using artist’s models, or copybooks. Outside the realm of official art, differences in the quality of craft and the varieties of visual styles as opposed to variability in iconography in contemporaneous objects are even more noticeable. In Nubia, some offering tables or ba-birds appear to have been made by the same workshop since faces and bodies look very similar; but the overall stylistic variety of offering tables, stelae, and ba-birds within cemeteries suggests that single artisans or small workshops worked independently of one another. For example, offering tables from related sites of Sai and Sedeinga shared the same iconography tradition, but not the same style or quality; two offering tables from the same cemetery at Sai (Pl. 31.9e-f) shared iconography but reflect very different skill levels of their artisans. This was also true for stelae (Pl. 31.10b–d) and ba-birds (Pl. 31.11a–d) from Nubian cemeteries. This variety demonstrates that consistency in style was not of interest, which is particularly clear when considering ba-birds. There are very abstract ones, vividly naturalistic ones (compare Pl. 31.11a, d with 31.11b–c), and everything in between. For Meroites, the image or object needed to offer what was necessary for

624   Janice W. Yellin its ritual purpose; its individual style and aesthetics were often of secondary or no particular interest. This attitude and the resulting variety of styles and artisanship argue for the autonomy and individuality of Meroitic artists and artisans, particularly outside the royal sphere.

General Stylistic Features of Meroitic Art Indigenous Features As was the case for Roman art (Brendel 1979), the openness to appropriations and adaptations that marks Meroitic art presents challenges to understanding its indigenous nature. Though we need to learn more about Meroe, we can still recognize Meroitic sensibilities in the originality with which appropriations and adaptations were employed as well as in the use of certain stylistic features. Among the Meroitic features are the abstraction of forms created by strongly simplifying their underlying geometry and their preference for particular male and female body types. Meroites also delighted in emphasizing decorative surface patterns created by clothing, adornments, hair, or fur such as for the clothing on the north, south, and west walls (Fig. 31.4; Pl. 31.8a–b), on the lion’s mane on the pylon of the Lion Temple at Naga (Fig. 31.5a) and on the stela of Amanishakheto (Fig. 31.3a, goddess on left). Unmediated examples of indigenous style and iconography while uncommon can be found in objects such as: ba-birds, block-like statues from the Amun Temple at Naga, mid-1st century ce (Kröper et al. 2011:146–49), and in the simple objects made by and for non-elites such as clay figurines and amulets (Evina 2010:111, 113; Sackho-Autissier 2010; Kröper et al. 2011). There are also unique examples like the small granite head of a queen from Meroe KC 104 (Pl. 31.12a) and the bronze head of a queen thought to be the terminus of a royal staff from a cachette in the Amun Temple, El-Hassa (Pl. 31.12b). Their differences demonstrate the challenges of defining a particular visual style. African facial features and a tendency towards the abstraction of natural forms are not unusual in Meroitic art,22 but the strong abstraction of these two faces created through the simplification of and emphasis on their African features is handled very differently by each artist.

Abstraction and Naturalism as Components of Visual Style In general, Meroitic representations of the human form demonstrated how its art was increasingly shaped by a taste for abstraction created through the simplification of underlying geometric forms. However, there were a smaller number of representations displaying naturalistic tendencies, reflecting the individuality of Meroitic artists. As will be discussed below (“Art Created within a Specific Period of Time” and “Art Reflecting Different Indigenous and Foreign Visual Styles”), sometimes this naturalism sprang from an appropriation of classical features, but in other instances it appears to be based on an artist’s first-hand observations of the visual world, such as naturalistically modelled head of a queen (Pl. 31.12c)23 and ba-birds from lower Nubia (Pl. 31.11c) as well as painted ceramics that are naturalistic in their renderings of figures and animals, some of whom

Figure 31.12  (a1,2) Drumming scene, east wall, pyramid chapel of Queen Nahirqo (?), Beg. N 11, Meroe, mid-2nd century bce. Photograph P. 2893/N 1963, © Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago. (b) Drummer, detail, east wall, pyramid chapel of King, Beg. N 8, Meroe, first half 2nd century bce. Drawing: © J.W. Yellin 2016. (c) Elderly men in funerary procession, detail, south wall, pyramid chapel of King Taneyidamani, Beg. N 12, Meroe, end 2nd century bce. Photograph: © J.W. Yellin 2016.

626   Janice W. Yellin are turning into or moving through space (Pl.31.1c, e). Of interest are instances in which actual events were depicted as the artist might have seen them, such as the ceramic cup with drummer (Pl. 31.1d, note the drummer’s unshaven face) and similar scenes from the chapels of Beg. N 11 and N 8 (Fig. 31.12a–b). A funerary procession on the south chapel wall of Beg. N 12 depicted mourners whose names were written beside them. Among them were two elderly men, one hunchbacked (Fig. 31.12c second figure from the left), whose specificity implies that this was a factual visual record of an actual event. Details such as these suggests interesting possibilities about the level of reality underlying other chapel ritual scenes.

Treatment of Forms in Space For two-dimensional reliefs and paintings, perceptually rendering three-dimensional forms in space posed challenges because to do so illusionistically called for foreshortening, the compressed depiction of forms that project from or into the picture plane. Avoiding distortions of the fundamental contours of a known form, an adjustment demanded when foreshortening occurs, provided the motivation for the distinctive combination of frontal and profile viewpoints (i.e. a profile head above a frontal upper torso resting on profile hips and legs) for the human form typical of Egyptian (and other) art. Each viewpoint was selected to avoid the need to foreshorten that specific body part. Meroitic artists typically followed this strategy but with more individuality than in Egypt as can be seen in the frontal representation of Apedemak alongside the figures in the combined viewpoints on the exterior rear wall of the Lion Temple at Naga (Fig.  31.4a-b). For females, Egyptians usually depicted only one breast in profile view on a frontal chest, but beginning with the Meroitic Middle period both breasts were typically depicted on a frontal chest (Fig.  31.2a). Meroitic artists also sometimes depicted figures frontally (Pls. 31.1c, d drummer) or in full profile view even though they had to use foreshortening on some body parts to so (Fig.  31.13a-b). In some examples, foreshortened figures appeared alongside Classical content and iconography (Fig. 31.13a-b; Pl. 31.1c). While foreshortened representations may be seen as evidence for direct Classical influence,24 similar uses of foreshortening also appeared in the popular arts of Ptolemaic and Roman Egypt suggesting that frontal renderings that demanded foreshortened elements were becoming more common so this style of rendering might have been filtered through Egyptian art. For example the Egyptian coffin bed of Herty, 1st–3rd century ce (Fig. 31.13c–d) depicted Egyptians frontally but for the Egyptian gods flanking them used a combination of viewpoints, paralleling the way Meroitic artists used different stylistic “rules” for representing Egyptian deities versus actual persons. Because the clarity of a narrative was paramount, images were spatially organized conceptually rather than perceptually. A line along the pictorial plane served as a ground line that established a narrow shelf on which figures stood and moved parallel to the picture plane without receding into space. Narratives unfolded sequentially as a series of contiguous vignettes along the ground line (Fig. 31.6a-b; Pl. 31.18a) while actions occurring within a single event were shown within a shared image/frame (Figs. 31.7a, 31.8a–c, 31.12a).

Prolegomena to the Study of Meroitic Art   627

Figure 31.13  (a) Column drum (?) or puteal (?) as if “unspooled”, Meroe M 200, faience, Louvre E 11522. Photograph: © 2003 Musée du Louvre, dist. RMN-Grand Palais/Christian Décamps. (b) Dancing boy, detail column drum (?) or puteal (?), Meroe M 200, faience, Louvre E 11522. Photograph: © 2003 Musée du Louvre, dist. RMN-Grand Palais/Christian Décamps. (c) Overall view of Funerary Bed of Herty, Thebes, Egypt, Roman period, ca. 30 bce–642 ce, wood, gessoed and painted, L: 200, H: 67, W: 102 cm, ROM 910.27. Photograph: © Royal Ontario Museum. (d) Frontal figures, detail Funerary Bed of Herty, Thebes, Egypt, Roman period, ca. 30 bce–642 ce, wood, gessoed and painted, L: 200, H: 67, W: 102 cm, ROM 910.27. Photograph: © Royal Ontario Museum.

Representation of the Figure An established canon or a grid was not used to create consistent proportional relationships between body parts as was done in Egypt (see n. 33). While there might be trends in different periods that demonstrated a preference for specific physical proportions, there was no consistency (see below, “Art Created within a Specific Period of Time”). Meroitic figures are typically clothed.25 Faces, often the most detailed part of the body, were usually treated generically. Other than the occasional modelling of the soft tissues around cheeks and mouths, most faces were not treated plastically, as is very noticeable in the treatment of their eyes with their sharply carved upper and lower eyelids. The way in

628   Janice W. Yellin which eye treatments were done varies (compare Pl. 31.13a with 31.13d–e) although the low degree of plastic modeling of the soft tissues around eyes, cheeks, and mouths is consistent. There are exceptions such as the head of a queen (Pl. 31.12c) and the faience head of a king (Pl. 31.13e), both of which softly model the rulers’ African features. In relief and sculpture, bodies tended to have little interior modeling and, with occasional exceptions (Pl. 31.6a-b), were often presented as hard, inorganic surfaces. One such exception was Nubian ba-birds, which offered an encyclopedic selection of surface treatments ranging from naturalistic plasticity (Pl. 31.11c) to abstract, hard planar surfaces (see Pl. 31.11a, d). Imbuing bodies with a sense of animation by suggesting movement was important to Meroitic artists. Two female nudes (Pl. 31.4a–b), which Meroitic artists modelled after Hellenistic prototypes that demonstrated the pitfalls of attempting contrapposto (weight shift that occurs when a body is in motion) without understanding or being able to ­render its anatomical underpinnings. More typically, artists implied motion through a leaning of the torso that created a diagonal, forward-moving line of direction starting at a back leg whose heel was lifting off the ground (Pl. 31.3a, c). In two dimensions, a sense of movement was suggested in similar fashion—figures lean forward, knees may be bent (Pl. 31.9c–d), and one or both legs have their heels lifted (Pl. 31.9a, g).

Sculptural Types in the Round Meroites preferred either smaller freestanding (up to approximately half life-sized) (Pl. 31.3a, c) or over-life-sized sculptures of gods or rulers that decorated cult temples and palaces (Pl. 31.5a-c) to almost or fully life-sized statues (Pls. 31.4a–c, 31.14a-b). Frontality is nearly universally observed; parts of the body do not rotate off a frontal orientation. Stone statues preserved the sense of the four planes of the blocks from which they were carved (Figs. 31.11, 31.15, 31.16c) and have little negative space due to the danger of breakage during or after carving them. Metal sculptures with their greater tensile strength may have a more open form (Pl. 31.3a, c) with arms and legs extended. The sculptures from the Royal Baths and one from the royal palace at Meroe reflect Classical influences that depart from these stylistic features. They include unique sculptural types such as a reclining male (Pl. 31.4c), a banqueting couple (Fig. 31.14b), a pan pipe-player, and an aulosplayer (Fig. 31.14a, c) and female nudes in Classical poses (Pl. 31.4a–b). The nudes and banqueting couple are not frontally oriented or block-like. Due to its awkward imitation of a Classical pose, the nude from the royal palace is unusually open for a stone sculpture. Ba-birds and standing figures, usually male, are the two most common types of freestanding sculpture. Standing male and female types are similar to Egyptian ones, with a striding pose for males being the most frequent. Other types based on Egyptian prototypes included statuettes of a seated Isis nursing the infant Horus (Fig. 31.16a–c)26 and ramheaded sphinxes (Wildung and Kroeper 2006: pl. 23a–b). Human-headed ba-birds (Pl. 31.11a–d), although derived from Egyptian imagery for the revitalized dead, were singularly Meroitic in their adoption by all social classes as essential elements of the mortuary cult, particularly in Lower Nubia (Török 2014b:629–31; Francigny 2016:37–48). Hawk-headed statues found in royal and elite burials at Meroe and later at Karanog might

Prolegomena to the Study of Meroitic Art   629

Figure 31.14 (a) Pan pipe player, Royal Baths, Meroe, 1st century ce (?), painted sandstone. Photograph: © The Garstang Museum of Archaeology, University of Liverpool. (b) Reclining couple, Royal Baths, Meroe, 1st century ce (?), sandstone (destroyed World War II). Photograph: © The Garstang Museum of Archaeology, University of Liverpool. (c) Nude, left (cf. pl. 31.4a); Aulos-player, right, Royal Baths, Meroe, 1st century ce (?), painted sandstone. Photograph: © The Garstang Museum of Archaeology, University of Liverpool.

have been their prototypes. The most Egyptian-looking ba-birds with human heads and feet appeared only in the area between the Second and Fourth Cataracts in Nubia, perhaps as result of this area’s ongoing contact with Egypt (Török 2002, 67). Different stylistic approaches can be seen in the basic treatment of their bodies (i.e. the avian quality of the lower torso, p ­ articularly the wings, may be stressed or minimized; compare Pl. 31.11a with 31.11c) and, as noted, varying degrees of naturalism or abstraction (compare Pl. 31.11a, e with 31.11.c) existed. The iconography and clothing on many of the statues was meant to communicate the social status of their owners (Török 2002) (Pl. 31.11b). The variety of styles

630   Janice W. Yellin

Figure 31.15  (a, b) Lions, Palace B 1500 of Natakamani, Jebel Barkal, mid-1st century ce, sandstone, H: 150 cm, Jebel Barkal Museum, Sudan. Photograph: © P.  Wolf. (c) Lion, Temple of Amun, Meroe, 1st century ce, sandstone. Photograph: © The Garstang Museum of Archaeology, University of Liverpool.

Prolegomena to the Study of Meroitic Art   631

Figure 31.16  (a) Seated Isis, Amun Temple, Naga, 1st–2nd centuries ce, faience, H: 10 cm, Naga Nr. 107/5, SNM 31333. Photograph: © Naga Project. (b) Seated Isis, el-Hassa, 3rd century bce, serpentinite, H: 9.2 cm, SNM HAS 150. Photograph: © 2010 Musée du Louvre, dist. RMNGrand Palais/Christian Décamps. (c) Seated Isis, Jebel Barkal, granite, Äg Museum, Berlin InvNr. 2258. Photograph: © World History Archive/Alamy Stock Photograph.

and iconography is, even by Meroitic standards, considerable. Some of these differences reflect local traditions, but in other cases, because ba-birds were also made for non-elites, the lack of training and talent of their makers would have played a role in their great variety (compare Pl. 31.11a with 31.11b and 31.11d). The numerous small statuettes (Pl. 31.3a, c), relief images, and plaques of nude, bound prisoners, who were sometimes impaled by a lance or devoured by a lion (Pl. 31.7a–b), reflect another development of an Egyptian motif into a distinctly Meroitic image and concept. As noted earlier, animal sculptures such as seated or recumbent lions guarded sacral structures and palaces (Fig. 31.15a–c) and ram-headed sphinxes placed along the processional way of temples were frequently made. Less common were baboons from temple settings and frogs at the edges of water reservoirs.27

Relief Sculpture Relief carving was used extensively. As discussed, stone ritual objects such as offering tables, stelae, altars, and bark stands had raised and, less frequently, sunk reliefs carved on them as did temples, palaces, and pyramid chapel walls. The quality of relief carvings on monuments and ritual objects is often difficult to ascertain because their soft sandstone was often exposed to the elements and their surfaces abraded. However, altars, stelae, temple, and pyramid chapel reliefs found in the first half of the 20th century that have been protected in museums or that have been covered in sand since antiquity demonstrate

Figure 31.17  South wall, pyramid chapel of Queen Nahirqo (?), Beg N 11, Meroe, mid-2nd century bce, BM EA719. Photograph: © The Trustees of the British Museum.

Prolegomena to the Study of Meroitic Art   633 that Early and Middle period reliefs (Figs. 31.1, 31.4, 31.3a, 31.7b, 31.8c, 31.9a–b, 31.17; Pl. 31.15a–b), unlike Late period reliefs Fig. 31.7c; Pl. 31.15c), were well executed. (See below, “Art Created within a Specific Period of Time,” for a discussion of periodization).

Temple Reliefs Relatively intact Meroitic temples are rare and the best-preserved examples are the Early period Lion Temple at Musawwarat es-Sufra, and the Middle period Lion and Amun Temples at Naga. The iconographical programs of both Lion Temples are similar, showing the ruler and his family being acknowledged as king by Meroitic state gods on their lateral and back exterior walls. Interior wall and column reliefs are dominated by scenes in which the ruler makes offerings to gods in return for their protection and favors. With the exception of investiture scenes found in some temples, depictions of rituals or festivals are notably absent. The heavily damaged Temple M 250 at Meroe is unique in its decorative program (Török 2004). An unusual podium temple with ramps and a free-standing peristyle court on its upper terrace (Hinkel 2001), it was built by Aspelta (?), end of the 7th century–beginning of 6th century bce, rebuilt during the Middle period by Prince Akinidad (end of 1st century bce) and modified in the 1st century ce. During Akinidad’s rebuilding, the exterior of the lower podium was covered with reliefs depicting warfare and a victory procession that are unique in their narrative content and are interestingly archaizing in style (Hinkel 2001: pls. C1–67). Stylistic developments in temple relief are discussed below (“Art Created within a Specific Period of Time”).

Pyramid Chapel Reliefs Pyramid chapels and their reliefs provide the largest and chronologically continuous corpus of relief sculptures. They can be grouped into three iconographical types that demonstrate the stylistic developments discussed below (“Art Created within a Specific Period of Time”). Early period royal chapels in the Southern Cemetery had well-made low raised reliefs that were Napatan in content and style. They showed the actual rituals performed at the funeral on their north and south walls (Fig. 31.6a). On the west walls, which were symbolically linked to the burial chambers, were depictions of the successfully reborn owner traveling in the company of the sun god Ra during his daily journey across the sky (Fig. 31.6b). Shortly after the first royal burials began in the Northern Cemetery, their iconographical programs became more complex introducing archival Egyptian temple and mortuary texts as well as contemporary religious sources that created elaborate visual narratives combining Egyptian and Kushite funerary beliefs. This practice continued in Middle period chapels although over time their iconographical programs, while still borrowing heavily from Egyptian iconography and sources, became simpler, especially in the Western Cemetery pyramid chapels belonging to members of the royal court. The reliefs carved on their surfaces were higher reliefs than in the Early or Late periods and the workmanship was competent and occasionally excellent (i.e. Beg. N 11, N 13, N 1, N 5) (Fig. 31.17; Pl. 31.15b). Late period chapels offered the most direct expression of Meroitic funerary religion by limiting images and iconography to those that addressed its two

634   Janice W. Yellin most fundamental concerns: the successful transition to being an Osiris and the inauguration of the deceased’s funerary cult as witnessed by the entire royal court. The quality of the carving and drafting declined dramatically in the last centuries of the Meroitic state and decorations were reduced to simple incised images that were probably plastered and painted in order to provide the missing details (Pl. 31.15c) (Yellin 1995).

Offering Table Reliefs Offering tables, upon which food and drink offerings were placed, were the most essential component of the funerary cult since offerings were necessary for sustaining the afterlife. An ancient ritual object dating to the early days of Egyptian civilization, they were probably introduced into Nubia centuries earlier by Egyptians living there. Rectangular with a spout projecting off the middle of a longer side, Egyptian tables had a basic offering formula carved along their edges and their centers filled with images of bread, fruits, meats, and drink containers and Napatan and early Meroitic offering tables mimic Egyptian decoration. However, by the 2nd century bce as demonstrated by the offering table of Tedeqen (Pl. 31.9d), Meroites had rethought their meaning, ­decoration, and texts. As with ba-birds, they reshaped Egyptian forms and concepts by combining them with indigenous elements to create an expression of their own beliefs and practices. To Meroites, offering-table decorations, made using either incised or raised relief, recorded and magically re-created an actual offering rite. The relatively common offering tables showing Anubis and a companion goddess, most often Nephthys, making offerings that were unparalleled in Egypt or Napata, depicted real rites c­ onducted at the burial by mask-wearing priests. A sub-group of Middle to Late period ones from the Northern and Western Cemeteries introduced iconography (also carved on contemporary pyramid chapel walls) that associated their depictions of Anubis and Nephthys (Pl. 31.9a) with an important ritual celebrated for Osiris during the Festival of Khoiak (Yellin 1982a) and Festival of Entry (Pope 2010) at the Temple of Isis at Philae in which Meroitic ambassadors, priests, and pilgrims participated (Ashby 2020).28 Like ba-birds and funerary stelae, all classes of Meroitic society used offering tables, so the quality of their decorations runs the gamut from finely drafted and carved ones to ones roughly cut into the prescribed shape with crude, simple images scratched onto them, perhaps by family members (compare Pl. 31.9b–d with 31.9e–g). It is clear from examining the style of offering tables from the same cemeteries that, with some exceptions, they were made by different artisans (compare Pl. 31.9e with 31.9f) who typically followed local iconographical design traditions. Some of the traditional designs had two variants— one with Anubis and goddess pouring a libation on distinctly arranged offerings or, more frequently, one with the same arrangement of offerings flanked by large offering vessels that acted as signifiers for the gods’ presence (compare Pl. 31.9a with 31.9b; Fig. 31.18 Styles 1–4). There were iconographical design types used throughout the country as well as local Nubian ones derived from contemporary Greco-Roman offering tables (Francigny 2016:48–49). Almost all Meroitic offering tables fall into one of seven iconographical design types, only two of which did not have a variant with Anubis and a goddess (Fig. 31.18).29

Prolegomena to the Study of Meroitic Art   635 Style One (a)

Early E

Style Two (b)

Style Three (f)

Style Four (i)

(c)

(d)

Late (g)

(h)

Style Five (j)

(k)

(l)

(m) Style Six

(n) Style Seven

Figure 31.18  Typology of Meroitic Offering Tables. © J.W. Yellin 1978. a. Karanog, Tomb 140, Griffith 1911: pl. 11(52). b. Central Cemetery, Meroe, Tomb 307, Garstang et al. 1911: pl. 56(2). c. Central Cemetery, Meroe, Tomb 307, Garstang et al. 1911: pl. 6(7). d. Central Cemetery, Meroe, Tomb 307, Garstang et al. 1911: pl. 56(1). e. Central Cemetery, Meroe, Tomb 307, Garstang et al. 1911: pl. 56(3). f. Beg. N 15, Meroe, Dunham 1957: pl. 40d. g. Karanog, Tomb G 187, Griffith 1911: pl. 16(77). h. Beg. N 36, Meroe, Dunham 1957: pl. 39e. i. Faras, Tomb 1030 (?), Griffith 1922: pl. 13(17). j. Faras, Tomb 2903, Griffith 1925: pl. 28(1). k. West Cemetery, Meroe, Tomb 3, D. Dunham 1963: fig. 152(1). l. Central Cemetery, Meroe, Tomb 302, Garstang et al. 1911: pl. 55(1). m. Karanog, Tomb G 136, Griffith 1911: pl. 8(40). n. Karanog, Tomb G 70, Griffith 1911: pl. 4(20).

Funerary Stela Reliefs Stone funerary stelae formed the third and final component of royal and elite burial furnishings. They were used in Meroe by members of the royal family buried in the Western Cemetery30 and by elites governing the area between the Second to Fourth Cataracts in Nubia. Differences in their iconography suggest that stelae from these two regions origi-

636   Janice W. Yellin nated in different traditions. Those from the Western Cemetery are Egyptian, showing the deceased standing before Osiris making a traditional Egyptian cool water and incense offering in return for which s/he would receive protection and benefits, while Nubian stelae were divorced from visual references to Egyptian concepts. Some had texts in Meroitic cursive (Pl. 31.10b–c), many simply depicted one or two figures who usually stood beneath a winged disc (Pl. 31.10d)31 was used perhaps to provide a home for their spirits and to represent their social status (Török 2002:68). The Meroe stelae were carved; Lower Nubian ones could be carved (Pl. 31.10b) and sometimes also painted (Pl. 31.10c) or were only painted (Pl. 31.10d).

Royal Non-Funerary Stelae Reliefs Rulers erected stelae in temples and palaces to commemorate an important event in their reigns (Pl. 31.16a–d) or to reinforce their claims to the throne by depicting themselves in the embrace and/or presence of god(s) (Fig. 31.3a–b). To these ends, several were found in situ in locations that were accessible to the public. Some continued Napatan traditions, having opposing images of the ruler before god(s), typically Amun, in their lunettes, beneath which was a long text. The stela of Taneyidamani32 (Pl. 31.16a–b) used an original design to legitimize his rule. On one side, carved in sunken relief, the king was shown defeating Meroe’s enemies with an extensive inscription in Meroitic cursive below it. In an unusual scene on the other lunette, the king, carved in very high raised relief was wearing the panther-headed garment of a priest. He was flanked by both the human- and the ram-headed Amun, who were carved in lower raised relief with another long inscription in Meroitic cursive below the lunette. These two scenes expressed the dual aspects of the ruler as the defender of the state and as a mediator who provided the gods’ protection. Later stela, inscribed or uninscribed, were decorated with original combinations of Meroitic and Egyptian iconography in a visual style that was Meroitic (Pl. 31.16c–d). These demonstrated a tendency towards eclecticism that became stronger over time.

Art Created within a Specific Period of Time: Preliminary Periodization of Meroitic Art Two types of data necessary for writing any art history—knowledge of the historical and chronological circumstances under which the art was produced and a body of dated and, ideally, stylistically and iconographically related works of art—are substantially incomplete for Meroe. While the broad outlines of Meroitic history and chronology are coming into focus (Török 2014a; Rilly  2017:182–313), there are significant questions about the dating and sequence of many rulers and historical events. In fact there are periods for which little is known other than the (possible) name of the ruler(s) who governed the Meroitic state. Many works of art are without provenance, creating varying degrees of uncertainty when dating and contextualizing them with the sculptures

Prolegomena to the Study of Meroitic Art   637 of Naga as an important exception (Wildung 2018). As has been discussed, there was a great deal of stylistic variety among contemporaneous works of art. Given these constraints and bearing in mind that there did not appear to have been an established ongoing state system of workshops whose art might have demonstrated continuity and consistency in stylistic features that would have facilitated their dating, this broad periodization and organization of Meroitic art is preliminary and intended to posit a framework for future art historical studies.

The Early Period (mid-3rd century bce–first half of 1st century ce) This is marked by the transition from Late Napatan art, whose style can still be recognized in the first decorated royal pyramid chapels in the Southern Cemetery at Meroe (Yellin 2009) to the introduction of Meroitic concepts and style. Later in the Early period, after royal burials moved to the Northern Cemetery, iconography and, to a lesser degree, style diverged from Napatan art (Yellin 2009). This coincided with the introduction of archival Egyptian Ramesside sources and contemporary Ptolemaic and Hellenistic features in royal/elite sculpture, pyramid chapel, and temple decorations. The Ptolemaic and Hellenistic influences were likely the result of heightened Meroitic activities in Lower Nubia both at the beginning and at the end of this period. The first period of intense engagement in Lower Nubia occurred during a rebellion in Thebes (205–186 bce) that drew Ptolemaic oversight away from Nubia, allowing King Arkamani II and his successor, King Adkihalamani the opportunity to build chapels at Debod and Dakke and to have a greater involvement in Lower Nubian temples, particularly the Temple of Isis at Philae. Toward the end of the Early period, Meroitic rulers (King Teriteqas, Queen Amanirenas, Prince Akinidad) fought two campaigns against the newly established Roman presence in Lower Nubia (25/22 bce) (Yellin 2015b). The conflict and ensuing Treaty of Samos, in which Rome granted terms favorable to Meroitic participation in the religious and economic life of Lower Nubia, made Roman Egyptian and Classical art more accessible. Early period male and female body types had their origins in Napatan art. The forms and proportions of bodies followed identifiable stylistic trends but without the systematic, consistent, established ratios that are the basis for a canon of proportions such as existed in Egypt (Robins, 1994).33 There is a dearth of three dimensional female sculptures other than goddesses in amulet form and scale. In two- and three-dimensional representations of males, as in Napatan art, the male had a cylindrical neck that tended to be thick and long. In reliefs, unlike sculptures, the back of the head no longer lined up with the back of the neck—a distinctive trait of Napatan sculptures. The neck met broad, horizontal shoulders at a right angle. The upper torso of male bodies was an inverted triangle; a lateral dorsal line often divided the figure vertically. In both relief and sculpture, a majority of Early period males were small-headed with oversized shoulders and upper chests. In one group of sculptures, the area between the waist and upper thighs was distinctly attenuated and hips were no wider than very thick legs that went straight into the foot without narrowing for the ankle (Pl. 31.3a–c).34 Because of this preference for heavy forms, male statues, particularly the

638   Janice W. Yellin smaller ones Meroites preferred, were both more powerful and more awkward than Napatan sculptures. Some Meroitic sculptures of the 3rd century bce have faces that are rather delicate with a narrow, full mouth and rounded cheeks. There are sometimes drill holes in the corners of the upturned mouths that give an appearance of smiling (Pl. 31.3d). Males and females carved in relief followed Napatan traditions more consistently than sculptures did. The first chapels had females with bodies similar to late Napatan ones (compare Pl. 31.2a with b–c) with long curvilinear bodies that had pronounced buttocks and swelling thighs, features that would remain prominent although females would get heavier in the Middle period (Pl. 31.2d(1)). Males represented on pyramid chapels at Meroe and on the walls of the Lion Temple at Musawwarat es-Sufra (Pls. 31.3b, 31.15a), like statues, had broad straight shoulders that were noticeably wider than their hips. They looked distinctly different from later male figures in that their bodies were considerably longer in relationship to their width than those on the Middle period Lion Temple at Naga (Fig. 31.4) and on the Stela of Arikankharor (Pl. 31.16c) and as a result the earlier figures looked more slender. Their external contours were more angular than Middle period figures. There are also several offering tables and stelae from Meroe with very slender figures carved on them35 exaggerating this Early period taste for atten­ uated torsos. By the end of the Early period, Napatan forms and content are replaced by innovative uses of archival Egyptian and to a lesser extent contemporary Ptolemaic Egyptian sources in temple (e.g., Lion Temple, Musawwarat es-Sufra) and pyramid chapel (e.g., Beg N 7) decorations. In two and three dimensional sculptures proportions of males become fuller and less attenuated. Females carved in relief become more substantial, a trend that will continue. This gradual abandonment of Napatan traditions is paralleled by changes in royal burial customs, pyramid chapel and temple decorations indicating the emergence of a different ruling group at the capital (Yellin 2009).

The Middle Period (first half of 1st century ce–first half of 2nd century ce) The Middle period covers approximately a century of unprecedented artistic and cultural development during the most prosperous epoch of Meroitic history, particularly under the reigns of Queen Amanitore, her son Natakamani and their immediate successors (Török 2009:411–507; Rilly 2018:270–91). As noted, representations departed from Napatan traditions, and instead the visual arts combined distinctive local features with a mélange of cultural appropriations and adaptations that included scenes and texts from pharaonic Egypt (Fig. 31.8a–c), Greco-Roman Lower Nubian temples (Fig. 31.9a-b), and Hellenistic-style sculptures (Fig. 31.14a–c; Pl. 31.4a–c). At Naga, these appeared contemporaneously offering vivid, new expressions of Kushite sensibilities and concepts (Fig. 31.3a). Middle period royal art from Meroe and its surrounding territory differed from the preceding and following periods in that it was of very high quality and developed distinctive stylistic features during the reigns of several rulers. This can probably be ascribed to royal workshops with highly trained artists and artisans whose establishment and

Prolegomena to the Study of Meroitic Art   639 atypical longevity were due to the large number of royal building and reconstruction activities undertaken during this period of Meroe’s greatest prosperity. At the beginning of the Middle period, body types changed in ways that remained more or less consistent through the Late period (Dann, this volume). In temple reliefs, a comparison between figures on the exterior walls of the Lion Temple at Naga (Fig. 31.4a–b) to those on the Early period Lion Temple at Musawwarat es-Sufra (Pls. 31.3b, 31.15a) shows that shoulders and hips of later Naga figures were now the same width and that their lengthto-width ratio was closer. These features created a more solid and squatter body type that endured to the end of later Meroitic period. The exterior contours of the Naga figures were also more curvilinear and less angular than earlier ones at Musawwarat. Following this trend, female body types became rounder, voluptuous, and more heavily proportioned than males’. In temple and pyramid chapel reliefs, females had broad, but somewhat rounded shoulders below which very full breasts filled upper torsos that ended in a wide waist. Over time female bodies became ever heavier and their lower torsos more and more dramatically steatopygous (compare Fig. 31.2a with Fig. 31.5a–b; Pl. 31.4a–b). Numerous images of males and females, such as the bronze head from El-Hassa, expressed this ideal of corpulence through the addition of a double chin and folds of fat on the front and back of the neck (Fig. 31.3a–c, e; Pl. 31.12b). The more slender female body of the Early period did not entirely disappear; it was used exclusively for Egyptian goddesses (compare Fig. 31.2a with 31.2b), an acknowledgment of the difference between the Meroitic ideal female body and the Egyptian one. Interestingly the bodies of Egyptian male gods and mortals were not treated differently.

The Late Period (second half of 2nd century ce–mid-4th century ce) The Late period art was shaped by the gradual decline in the wealth and power of the Meroitic state that can be seen in the smaller size and poorer construction of pyramids in the Northern Royal Cemetery, which became progressively smaller and which were ultimately built entirely of brick rather than of dressed stone around a rubble core (Fig. 29.15). The scenes on their chapels were merely incised and then covered with a skim coat of plaster and painted (Pl. 31.15c). Walls that were once covered in registers filled with scenes expressing complex theological beliefs gave way to far fewer images of only the most fundamental funerary needs—offerings for the owner as Osiris that were shaped by Meroitic participation in the cult of Isis at Philae (Yellin 1982a; Pope 2010; Ashby 2020), and images depicting processions of court and family members to document the establishment of the owner’s mortuary/ancestor cult. Figures in these scenes become ever more compressed and heavy. It is clear from the lessened effort that went into producing the reliefs that the royal court was impoverished; however the quality of draftsmanship in some of these chapels is quite good suggesting there was still some degree of training and continuity among the artists responsible for them. The impoverishment and diminution of the royal court at Meroe explains the paucity of art produced outside a funerary context. In Nubia, the area south of the Second Cataract fared better in this period, perhaps because Meroitic town sites were not economically tied to the royal court and so their

640   Janice W. Yellin economies were not as damaged when foreign trade routes for African luxury goods, which had been a source of wealth for rulers, moved away from Meroe. Much of what survives of Late period Meroitic art, mainly offering tables, stelae, and ba-birds, comes from the small pyramid burials of important provincial families who governed Nubia or served as priests and administrators in Nubian temples. As always, the execution and stylistic quality of these objects varied, but with the rare exception, these never reached the standard set by Middle period art.

Art Reflecting Different Indigenous and Foreign Visual Styles: Meroitic Appropriations and Adaptations of Napatan, Pharaonic, and Greco-Roman Egyptian, and Classical Art Contemporary foreign influences reached Meroe mainly through imports, travel, and official exchanges. Egyptian, Hellenistic, and Roman artists/artisans working in Meroe36 may have had an impact on royal art disproportionate to their numbers during those periods when rulers had the resources and desire to adorn their court and temples with art that was being created beyond Meroe’s borders.37 The relatively small number of artists and artisans employed in the creation of royal art as well as the decentralized workshop system would have offered foreigners, e.g. priests, artists, and architects, especially if they had royal sponsorship, the ability to shape the art. Finally, Meroitic society included different ethnic groups with their own visual traditions, some not yet identified, which makes it difficult to assess the exact nature of cultural exchanges between Meroe and the external world.

Napatan Art Napatan influences, as noted, can still be seen at the beginning of the Early period in that male and female body types resembled late Napatan ones, particularly the adoption and use of a distinctive Napatan female body type (compare Pl. 31.2a with 31.2b–c) and in the relief decorations for the first royal burials at Meroe. By the Middle period, The abandonment of Napatan features for more authentic expressions of Meroitic aesthetics can be seen in the development of a voluptuous female body type (Figs. 31.2a, 31.4) that represents a genuine Meroitic cultural ideal. Dynasty 25 and later male royal Napatan sculptures with elements of Old and Middle Kingdom Egyptian stylistic features, such as the broad shoulders and chest and powerful legs with exaggerated musculature (Russmann 1974) are visible during the Early period in wall scenes of the Lion Temple at Musawwarat esSufra (Pl.31.15a). As noted a comparison with Middle period figures on the Lion Temple at Naga (Fig. 31.4a–b) reveals a different, more compact male figure that further represents an assertion of Meroitic aesthetics. Finally the as noted, the type of decorations on Early

Prolegomena to the Study of Meroitic Art   641 period pyramid chapels, derived from Napatan ones at Nuri, disappears several generations after the first burials in the Northern cemetery. Thus by the Middle period, elites originating from a culture we recognize as Meroitic have emerged to lead the Kushite state.

Pharaonic, Greco-Roman Egyptian, and Classical Art Meroitic culture’s artistic responses to Pharaonic Egyptian art were complex and varied. Kushite cultural identity especially in the territory around Meroe remained the dominant force in responses to and appropriations of Egyptian art and culture. In Lower Nubia, where Kushites and Egyptians always interacted on a much more direct, intense level there were different instances of cultural/artistic assimilation and transformations of Meroitic art, such as the ba-birds (Török 2011:273–77). Since Kushites had been living with and appropriating aspects of Egyptian culture for millennia, some of what seemed to be appropriations or adaptations from Egypt were actually ancient and thoroughly assimilated which raises a fundamental question when considering issues of appropri­ ation and adaption. At what point did the use of visual features such as depicting a figure using a combination of views or depicting an Egyptian god along with innumerable other elements of Egyptian art and culture that had been introduced into Kush millennia earlier, cease to be foreign, while keeping in mind that there is clear evidence the Meroites were also very deliberate in some appropriations of Egyptian art and culture such as the different body types used to depict Meroitic females and Egyptian goddesses (Fig. 31.2a–b)? Further complicating our understanding of this issue were the archaizing impulses that surfaced throughout Meroitic history.38 These impulses drew official circles anew to the arts and religion of Egypt’s New Kingdom (particularly the Ramesside period) and Late period as well as back to the Napatan period with its own broad appropriations of Egyptian art and concepts, albeit with distinctly Kushite uses. During archaizing periods such as the reigns of King Arkamani II (mid-3rd century bce) and King Natakamani and Queen Amanitore (mid-1st century ce), the presence of Egyptian inscriptions alongside very accurate Egyptian iconography in temples, tombs, and on royal stelae indicated that their creation was overseen by artists and literate priests with access to temple archives for pharaonic materials (Yellin 1979, 1990, 2014) and to GrecoRoman sources for contemporary images and inscriptions. Yet even during periods of intense uses of Egyptian iconography and of scenes copied from Egyptian sources for religious and state art, indigenous features and ideas reshaped the Egyptian materials to suit Meroitic culture and aesthetics. A case in point is the use of a venerable Egyptian motif on the pylon of the Lion Temple at Naga (mid-1st century ce) showing Queen Amanitore and King Natakamani smiting state enemies (Fig. 31.5a). However, the style used to depict this scene reflected Meroitic aesthetics in the wealth of rich surface patterns created for their royal garments and regalia and by the queen’s ample proportions, while its iconography reflected Meroitic beliefs through the inclusion of the lion god Apedemak, who played an important role in kingship dogma and the protection of the Meroitic kingdom.39 As was discussed above (“General Stylistic Features of Meroitic Art”), relief and painting incorporated Egyptian art’s basic approach to representing the three-dimensional

642   Janice W. Yellin world on two-dimensional surfaces, while overall three-dimensional sculptures demonstrated less Egyptian influence. Perhaps there were fewer Egyptian sources for three-dimensional sculpture available in Meroe than there were for relief carvings. Egyptian-style two-dimensional imagery would have been more readily available in sources such as copybooks, illustrated texts, and painted objects, but statues would have required artists’ models or imported sculptures. An exception to this may have been the over-life-sized architectural statues placed in front of Early and Middle period temples.40 The idea for and style of these colossal sculptures might have been inspired by the still visible Ramesside Nubian temple colossi and over-life-sized columnar statues. A comparison of the over-life-sized statues of guardian gods, Arensnuphis and Sebiumeker from the Isis Temple, Meroe 600 (Pl. 31.17a–b) with colossi from Ramesses II temples at Gerf Hussein (Pl. 31.17c), Abu Simbel, and Wadi es-Sebua in Lower Nubia reveals similarities in their very heavy proportions and emphasis on massive, simplified forms. Two royal colossi from Tabo Temple (Pl. 31.5a–b) and the two gods at the entrance to Temple 100 at Musawwarat es-Sufra (Pl. 31.5c) are less squat and compressed than the Isis Temple colossi, but still have massive bodies resembling the Ramesside figures. The size and architectural nature of the Ramesside temple statues necessitated that they were carved on site perhaps by local Nubian artisans, so these similarities to later Meroitic statues may not have been due to Egyptian taste but rather demonstrate that there is a fundamental Nubian cultural preference for a massive, powerful non-Egyptian male body type pre-dated the Napatan and Meroitic periods. Ptolemaic influence was probably introduced through Meroitic activities in the Greco-Roman temples of Lower Nubia, most especially at the Isis Temple at Philae. Column statues of Arensnuphis and Sebiumeker from Temple 100 at Musawwarat esSufra (Pl. 31.6a–b),41 were better proportioned than other large-scale sculptures and their garments atypically revealed the forms beneath them, features that reflected contemporary Ptolemaic-Classical influences visible elsewhere in the temple. Two male headless sculptures from Naga (Pl. 31.14a), very close copies of a Ptolemaic type, were perhaps the work a foreign artist or imported from Egypt.42 The ease with which a Meroitic artist could sometimes appropriate Greco-Roman Egyptian stylistic features was demonstrated by a female faience figure from Naga (Pl. 31.14b).43 Although Meroitic in body type and proportions, the artist seamlessly integrated stylistic features from Ptolemaic Egypt and the Classical world (draping of garment into a vertical central fold, individual corkscrew curls) indicating a high degree of familiarity with his sources.44 In the course of their political, religious, and economic interactions with Ptolemaic and Roman Egypt, Meroites also appropriated visual forms and style(s) with varying degrees of success from the royal court in Alexandria, which offered access to art from the Mediterranean world that inspired new types, styles, and iconography.45 The sculptures from the Royal Baths at Meroe (Pl. 31.4a–c; Fig. 31.14),46 a notable example, were unevenly successful when depicting Hellenistic form, style, and movement. The simpler pose of a reclining male (Pl. 31.4c) is more successfully rendered than the Venus Fig. (Pl. 31.4a) whose proportions were far from ideal and whose contrapposto pose was not understood. Direct Mediterranean influences on Meroitic art appear to have been less profound and more episodic than those from Greco-Roman Egypt’s. The impact of direct encounters

Prolegomena to the Study of Meroitic Art   643 with Hellenistic and later Roman art through trade, the presence of foreign artisans, and the giving of prestige gifts such as were found in royal and elite Meroitic burials (Beg. N 2, N 18, and Beg. W 122) is challenging to differentiate from less direct Hellenistic and Roman influences that came to Meroe through and Roman Egypt, particularly since Hellenistic features could have come from the court at Alexandria. However it arrived, Hellenistic influence was clearly at play in the creation and decoration of the Royal Bath at Meroe, faience column drums (? or puteal (?) (Grzymski 2014)) at Meroe (Fig. 31.13a–b), grape clusters and vine motifs on fine ware ceramics and on the pyramid chapel walls of Beg. N 11 appear to be related to an affinity for the cult of Dionysus and his rites, particularly during the late 1st century bce–1st century ce. As noted, Hellenistic iconography also appeared during this period in the interior of Lion Temple at Naga and in a rock carving at Jebel Qeili, both of which have depictions of Hellenistic solar gods (see n. 44).

Summary Openness to innovation, variety, and change are fundamental characteristics of Meroitic art. Meroites had a talent for bringing different local and foreign visual traditions together and as a result, indigenous, pharaonic, and contemporary Egyptian as well as Mediterranean influences shaped and re-shaped Meroitic arts in varying degrees and combinations. Within the same time period and sometimes within the same class of objects (i.e. royal statuary, ba-birds) there could be: art created with stylistic features adopted from Egyptian or Classical art, art that displayed a surprising degree of naturalism, art in which natural forms underwent some degree of abstraction, and art made by artists with widely different skills and talent. The absence of an official workshop system may have played a significant role in this wealth of visual expressions, as did an innate tolerance for a diversity of styles. Cultural variety within the Meroitic kingdom, as can be seen for example in the number of regional ceramic traditions as well as politically in its confederation-like organization of different groups loyal to the ruler at Meroe, might have also played a role in this phenomenon. At its finest, the art of Meroe is a prime example of the sum being greater than its parts.

Notes 1. Works of Meroitic art have been documented primarily as archaeological artifacts in a series of exhibitions and their catalogues that began with the Brooklyn Museum’s pioneering exhibit, Africa in Antiquity (Wenig 1978); followed by Sudan: Ancient Kingdoms of the Nile, Egyptian Museum, Berlin (Wildung 1997); British Museum Sudan: Ancient Treasures (Welsby and Anderson 2004); Nubia. Los reinos del Nilo en Sudan, Madrid (Pérez Die and Berenguer 2003); Naga: Royal City, Staatliche Sammlung für Ägyptische Kunst, Munich (Kröper et al. 2011); Méroé. Un empire sur le Nil, Louvre, Paris (Baud et al. 2010). An exception is the groundbreaking Museum of Fine Arts, Boston’s Ancient Nubia Now exhibit (October 2019–January 2020) that placed Nubia in its African context and addressed western academic prejudices. No catalogue was produced. Several of these catalogues offer

644   Janice W. Yellin brief, general overviews of Meroitic art, particularly Baud 2010, but fail to address many of the fundamental issues of art history raised here. Wenig has addressed Meroitic art in two pioneering overviews (1975; 1978). His most recent work (2019) offers only contextual data for some types of Meroitic art with the exception of dating some sculptures based on trends in proportions which are misidentified as canons of proportions (see n. 33). Török, who has written numerous studies of Meroitic art, limits their focus to specific works or regions (i.e. Török 2004, 2011). J. Kuckertz (2019) has written an excellent overview of temple decorations with a gazetteer. 2. For example, the decorated royal pyramid chapels at Meroe and Jebel Barkal demonstrate systematic adaptations of Egyptian mortuary beliefs, texts, iconography, and practices (Yellin 2014, 2015b). 3. The stela of Arikankharor, mid-1st century ce, Meroe (?), sandstone, Worcester Art Museum, 192.145 (Pl. 31.16c) is an example of Meroitic eclecticism. The combination of viewpoints (a conceptual rendering) used for depicting the prince and the general scene are based on Egyptian prototypes, yet the features and proportions of the prince as well as much of the iconography (winged deity, objects held by the prince) are Meroitic. The dog attacking an enemy is rendered frontally (a perceptual rendering) much as a Classical artist might have done. 4. The dates used in this entry are from the history and chronology of Rilly (2017:182–313) unless otherwise noted. 5. The identification system for individual pyramids at Meroe was established by G.A. Reisner during the Harvard University–Museum of Fine Arts Boston Expedition at Meroe in 1919–23. It is based on the abbreviation of the name of a nearby town, Begrawiya (= Beg.), the initial identifying the cemetery (South, North, West), and a sequential discrete number attached to each burial. Therefore, Beg. S 503 is a royal pyramid numbered 503 in the Southern Cemetery near Begrawiya, at Meroe. 6. Pers. comm., P. Wolf, July 19, 2017. 7. The more intense the cementation (iron oxides and silica) is, the harder the stone is. The cementation in sandstone varied from quarry to quarry and even within a quarry since different areas might have stone with varying amounts of cementation, pers. comm., B. Cech, May 18, 2017; see also Cech and Bussert 2018; Cech in 2018. 8. According to geologist R. Bussert, the occurrence of serpentinites and most likely steatite (the formation of these two stones often occurs together) nearest to Meroe is in the Bayuda. These are relatively small outcroppings, so he considers the most practical source likely to be “. . . the Keraf Suture NE of Abu Hamed or the Atmur-Delgo Suture in direction of Wadi Halfa, because these places are relatively close to the Nile, not too far from Meroe and probably were under the control of the Kingdom of Meroe.” The stone is also found in Egypt’s Eastern Desert, so acquiring the stone through trade cannot be discounted since all the sculptures were small (pers. comm., R. Bussert, July 12, 2017). See n. 26 for examples. 9. Meroe (Bradley 1984) and Dangeil (Anderson and Salah eldin Mohamed Ahmed 2006, 2011), among many other temples. 10. Such as the human-headed Arensnuphis and Sebiumeker who flanked the lion-headed god Apedemak, Lion Temple, Musawwarat es-Sufra, 2nd century bce. 11. Török sees little influence from temple and palace decoration in the pyramid chapel decorations so he considers their decoration to be the task of a separate workforce composed of priests and “mostly second-rate artisans” (Török 2014b:621–34, 629). While the creation of a separate workforce led by a priest specially versed in mortuary religion seems likely, until the Late Meroitic period, when the quality of art declines in general, almost all royal chapels at Meroe and Jebel Barkal were well crafted.

Prolegomena to the Study of Meroitic Art   645 12. Ba-birds were derived from an Egyptian concept for an empowered aspect of the deceased represented as a human-headed bird. The dead, in the spiritual form of a bird, was able to come and go from the tomb to benefit from the funerary offerings left in the tomb’s chapel. Their exact placement in the tomb is uncertain. Some may have stood atop the small pyramid, others on the chapel roof or within the chapel because as the tomb owners’ surrogates, they could enjoy offerings left at the chapels; for a discussion of their placement, cf. Francigny 2016: 40–44. For the social iconography present in certain statues, see Török 2002; Quertinmont 2014–15. 13. A workshop in Muweis contained figurines and ceramics in different states of completion indicating that potters and craftsmen working with clay shared the same workspace and equipment (Baud 2010b); a workshop area at Hamadab outside the walled city had large ceramic working areas (Nowotnick and Wolf 2011); Meroe had workshops at the northern edge of the city (Török 1997:173–74). 14. B. Cech discovered discarded column drums and blocks at some of Meroe’s quarries but nothing that suggested sculptures were prepared or produced at or near their quarry sites (pers. comm., Cech July 11, 2017; Cech 2018). Similarly, unfinished column drums, discovered in 2016 by the Qatar Mission for the Pyramids of the Sudan (QMPS) in the fill of Beg. S 503 led P. Wolf to suggest that architectural elements underwent preliminary work at the nearby quarries. However he found no evidence for sculpture having been worked at either location. (pers. comm., Wolf July 11, 2017). 15. Unfinished statue of Sebiumeker, SNM 62/9/101, H: 27.1 cm, palace, Wad ben Naga (Vercoutter  1962:285, fig. 14) (Fig. 31.11b–c); unfinished ram-headed Amun, Hypostyle Hall, Amun Temple, Naga (Fig. 31.11a). As noted by Wildung, the temple roof collapsed on the unfinished sculpture at Naga proving it was being carved at its final location (Kröper et al. 2011:129–30, pl. 166, Kat. 95). 16. Three copper-alloy chisels in burial chamber of Beg. S 32 (Dunham 1963:374, fig. 204.A) and lumps of “colouring matter,” SNM 02411, were found in Beg. W 125 (Dunham 1963:161). F. Hintze (1959) found a chisel at the lion temple at Musawwarat es-Sufra. 17. In his study of Meroitic sculpture, Török, while sometimes employing different arguments, arrives at a very similar understanding of the circumstances under which royal reliefs, sculptures, and pyramid chapels were created and the impact that the lack of an ongoing workshop system had on the quality and continuity of stylistic features (Török 2014b:628–29). 18. For one such scenario, see Török’s description of circumstances behind the making of the Royal Bath sculptures (Török 2011:174–75). 19. Distinctively similar facial features were used on stelae from Naga depicting Queen Amanishakheto, reliefs from her temple at Wad ben Naga, and her pyramid chapel’s pylon. A desirable fullness is expressed through the depiction of ample rolls of flesh added to her torso, neck and face. Her eyelids are extended towards her ears and their upper lids are carved below and within an area that was hollowed out to create shadow, features that are closely shared with Arikankharor. However she is depicted more generically on her chapel’s north and south walls, a difference resulting from the separate production of official and funerary art. 20. As also noted by Török (2014:629). 21. Images and hieroglyphs were carved by different hands on the north and south walls of Beg. S 6, Beg. S 5, and Beg. S 4. 22. i.e. head of a queen, 20–50 ce, Jebel Barkal B 500, sandstone, MFA 24.1797 (Pl. 31.12c); Amanitore, mid-1st century ce, pylon, Lion Temple, Naga (Fig. 31.5a); Amanakhereqerema, end 1st century ce, Temple 200, Naga, SNM N200–275 (Kröper et al. 2011: pl. 90) and

646   Janice W. Yellin Amanitenmomide, first half 2nd century ce, Beg. N 17, south, north walls, Äg. Museum, Berlin InvNr. 2260 (Lepsius 1849–59 Abth. V, pl. 50d); small faience head, 1st–3rd century ce, SNM 22967 (Pl. 31.13e). 23. Museum of Fine Arts Boston 24.1797 with traces of gilding and inlays of Egyptian blue. 24. Including the Hellenistic solar god and the foreshortened falling figures on the lower right in Shorkaror’s rock carving at Jebel Qeili, 1st century ce and other foreshortened renderings accompanied by Dionysiac imagery on faience column drum (?) or puteal (?) from Meroe M 200 (Török 2014b:200–202, pl. 64) (Fig. 31.13b) and a rounded jar with dancing satyrs from Karanog, tomb 112, 1st–2nd century ce (Rondot 2010: pl. 273) (Pl. 31.1c). 25. Nudes, other than prisoners, are rare and appear to reflect Hellenistic influence, i.e. sculptures from the royal palace and Baths at Meroe (Pl. 31.4a–b), nude figures on columns bases at Musawwarat es-Sufra, Isis on an offering table, SNM 536 (Pl. 31.9c), and a male dancer on a faience column drum (?) or puteal (?) from Meroe, Louvre AE 11522 (Fig. 31.13b). 26. Isis feeding Horus: (1) Amun Temple, Naga, 1st–2nd century ce, SNM 31333, faience, H: 17.2 cm (Fig. 31.16a); (2) Amun Temple, El-Hassa, ca. 3rd century bce, SNM HAS 150, steatite, H: 9.2 cm (Fig. 31.16b, upper torso only) which was identified as an Egyptian import (Rondot  2010). However, its use of steatite and stylistic resemblance to steatite figures of the same date found at Meroe suggests it too may be of local manufacture; (3) World Museum, Liverpool, MCM 47.49.711, stone, lower torso only; and (4) a rare lifesized sculpture from Jebel Barkal, Meroitic period, Äg. Museum, Berlin, InvNr. 2258, granite (Fig. 31.16c). 27. i.e. (1) lions, palace BAR 1500, Jebel Barkal, mid-1st century ce and Amun Temple, Meroe (Fig. 31.15a–c); (2) ram-headed sphinxes, Amun Temple, Naga, mid-1st century ce (Wildung 2006: pl. 23a–b); (3) seated baboon, Temple of Amun, Meroe, SNM 536; and (4) frogs, Basa temple hafir, mid-1st century bce, SNM 24393. 28. The scene illustrates the pouring of milk libations by Isis and Anubis at the tomb (the Abaton) of Osiris during the Festival of Entry (Yellin 1982a, 151–55, 2015a; Pope 2008–2009, 68–103; Ashby (formerly Bumbaugh) 2011, 2020:188–202.). 29. The classification of offering tables by Hofmann (1991:77–111) is needlessly complex and inaccurate because it failed to recognize what the essential shared iconography elements between offering tables were. For an alternate, simpler typology, see Fig. 31.18 (Yellin 1982b:227–34, Fig. 4). 30. i.e. (1) Tedeqene’s stela, ca. 2nd century bce (Pl. 31.10e); (2) Beg. W 18, MFA 23.870; (3) Taktidamani’s stela, 140–55 ce, Beg. W 18, Äg. Museum, Berlin InvNr. 2253. 31. There were also unique stelae such as one from Faras whose upper section had a winged serpent and vase between two ba-birds (Michalowski 1965:41–42, fig. 12). 32. Temple of Amun, B 551, Jebel Barkal in the approach to the first pylon, end of 2nd century bce, granite, MFA 23.736 (Dunham 1970:60, pls. XXXIX–XLIII). 33. Wenig’s (2020: 848 and ff.) use of that term is misleading. A canon sets consistent ratios for the size of body parts in relationship to one another that artists follow. The ratios are based on the division or multiplication of an established module (i.e., length of the body might always be 7 times that of the head or 7:1). There are trends in proportions (what Wenig is actually discussing), but no set canons for proportions in Meroe which is not surprising given the absence of a workshop system. 34. i.e. (1) “Archer King,” early 3rd century bce, Tabo Temple, SNM 24705 (Pl. 31.3a); (2) a statuette of king as a worshipper, 3rd century bce(?), SNM 5359 (Pl. 31.3c–d); (based on its regalia it is sometimes identified as Napatan, but the same regalia is also found in this period); (3) detail of an unprovenanced statue of a ruler and prince, International Museum

Prolegomena to the Study of Meroitic Art   647 of Nubia, Aswan (Pl. 31.2d(1)) that, based on its style and proportions, may date to the end of the Early Meroitic period. 35. As on offering tables (Pl. 31.9c-d) and the Stela of Tedeqen (Pl. 31.10e). 36. While difficult to attest to their presence with certainty, a mason’s mark in Greek at Musawwarat es-Sufra offers a rare proof for this. 37. i.e. the Lion Temple at Musawwarat es-Sufra has texts from Philae and some columns carved in Hellenistic style, 2nd century bce (Török 2001:228–40), and the Royal Baths at Meroe (M 95, 194, 195) have Hellenistic architecture and sculptures, 1st century ce (S. Wolf and Onasch 2010). 38. For Napatan use of archaisms, see Tiradritti 2008. 39. Also the creation of male and female realms on separate walls of temples as first noted by Wenig or the selection and recombination of Egyptian funerary imagery and texts in the royal pyramid chapels (Yellin 1990, 1995). As demonstrated by S. Doll, this independence of thought in the use of Egyptian religious art and ideas has roots in Dynasty 25 and the Napatan period (Doll 2014). 40. Early period: (1) Sebiumeker and Arensnuphis and columnar statues of Sebiumeker and Arensnuphis, both 2nd century bce, Temple 100, Musawwarat es-Sufra (Pl. 31.6a–b); (2) Arensnuphis, Edinburgh, Royal Scottish Museum 1910.110.36, H: 2.25 m (Pl. 31.17a); (3) Sebiumeker, Copenhagen, Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek AEIN 1082, H: 2.23(Pl. 31.17b), both 1st century bce, Temple of Isis, M 600, Meroe. Middle period: (1) head from a statue of Sebiumeker, SNM 24564, first half 1st century ce(?), H: 62 cm, Meroe Temple 282 (KC102) (Pl. 31.13a). The style of its eyes with a second deep fold in the upper eyelid is similar to representations of Amanishakheto, such as is found on a modeled plaster relief from Wad ben Naga, SNM 62/10/29, so this head should probably be dated to her reign. (2) Colossi of Meroitic kings, SNM 23982 (Pl. 31.5b, south statue), SNM 23983 (Pl. 31.5a, north statue), H: ca. 7 m, Tabo Temple, Argo Island. The colossi are dated to the Early period, mid- to late 3rd century bce, by Török (2014b:623), but based on iconography Rondot’s (2011) date in the Middle period (1st–2nd century ce) is more likely. 41. Columnar statues of Sebiumeker and Arensnuphis 2nd century bce, Temple 100, Musawwarat es-Sufra (Bagh 2015:40, fig. 1.25). 42. Two male figures were found near Temple 600, Naga, both of ferricrete sandstone (Kröper et al. 2011:143, 145; Wildung 2018, 254–58) and a similar one was found in the Meroitic temple at Qasr Ibrim (Plumley 1975:21, pl. X.1). Because of their long mantles with fringed edges and the way in which the garments gather, R.S.  Bianchi finds their similarity to other Ptolemaic sculptures of this type to be quite striking and would date them on stylistic grounds to ca. 15 bce–ce 15 (pers. comm., Bianchi May 7, 2017). 43. Found in pieces in and near the sun court of the Amun Temple, Naga, mid-1st century ce, H: 49.6 cm. (Kröper et al. 2011:138, 141–42). 44. Pers. comm., Bianchi, May 9, 2017. For an illustrated discussion of this garment type, see Bianchi  1980:9–31; for a contemporary example, see Brophy  2015:39. I am indebted to Bianchi for bringing these examples to my attention. 45. In addition to the Royal Baths’ sculptures, Hellenistic solar gods in the Lion Temple, Naga, and at Jebel Qeili (Baud 2010a: figs. 88–89; https://www.researchgate.net/figure/272017413_ fig1_Figure-1-Lapidary-relief-scene-from-Gebel-Qeili-Sudan-depicting-sorghum-inhand-of) demonstrate the introduction of Hellenistic iconography as well as style. 46. The dating of the sculptures found in the Royal Baths is not certain. The faces of several, such as the reclining man, Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek, AEIN 1484 (Pl. 31.4c), and a reclining couple destroyed in World War II, formerly in World Museum, Liverpool, Garstang

648   Janice W. Yellin Expedition photograph JG-M-L-052 (1912), Liverpool Garstang Museum of Archaeology (Fig. 31.14b). The “Reclining Couple, Garstang Expedition Photo” among others shared the type of faces seen in Early period sculptures. For this reason, that group is tentatively dated to the Early period in agreement with Török (2011:145–88), while others showing Hellenistic influence, such as the Venus, Munich ÄS 1334 (Pl. 31.4a), may have been made in the 2nd–3rd century ce (Bagh 2015:74–78). Thematically the earlier sculptures may have been related to a Dionysiac theme while the nude statues probably were not.

References Cited Abdelrahman Ali Mohamed 2012 Quarrying for the King—The Sources of Stone for Kushite Royal Monuments. Sudan & Nubia 16:2–7. Aldenhoven, K. 2014 Kushite Barque Stands. In The Fourth Cataract and Beyond: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference for Nubian Studies, ed. J.R. Anderson and D.A. Welsby, pp. 601–11. British Museum Publications on Egypt and Sudan 1. Peeters. Anderson, J. and Salah eldin Mohamed Ahmed 2006 Painted Plaster: A Glimpse into the Decorative Programme Used in the Amun Temple at Dangeil, Sudan. Studies in Honor of Nicholas Millet (Part II). Journal of the Society for the Study of Egyptian Antiquities 32:1–15. ——— 2011 Dangeil 2010: Meroitic Wall Paintings Unearthed and Conservation Strategies Considered. Sudan & Nubia 15:80–89. Ashby (formerly Bumbaugh), S. 2011 Meroitic Worship of Isis at Philae. In Egypt in its African Context, ed. K. Exell, pp. 66–69. BAR International Series 2204. Archaeopress. ______2020 A Calling out to Isis. The Enduring Nubian Presence at Philae. Gorgias Press. Bagh, T. 2015 Finds from the Excavations of J. Garstang in Meroe and F.Ll. Griffith in Kawa in the Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek. Meddelelser fra Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek 17. Bard, K.A. 1999 Encyclopedia of the Archaeology of Ancient Egypt. Routledge. Baud, M. 2010a Culture d’Afrique, modèles égyptiens et influences méditerranéennes. In Méroé. Un Empire sur Nil, ed. M. Baud, A. Sackho-Autissier, and S. Labbé-Toutée, pp. 76–98. Musée du Louvre. ——— 2010b Mouweis. Une ville riveraine de la région de Méroé. Dossiers d’Archéologie. Horssérie 18 (Mars 2010):14–19. Baud, M., A. Sackho-Autissier and S. Labbé-Toutée, eds. 2010 Méroé. Un empire sur le Nil. Musée du Louvre. Bianchi, R.S. 1980 Not the Isis Knot. Bulletin of the Egyptological Seminar 2:9–31. Bradley, R.J. 1984 Wall Paintings from Meroe Townsite. Meroitica 7:421–23. ——— 2003 Painted Plaster Murals from Meroe Townsite. Sudan & Nubia 7:66–70. Brendel, O.J. 1979 Prolegomena to the Study of Roman Art. Yale University Press. Brophy, E. 2015 Royal Statues in Egypt 300 BC–AD 220. Archaeopress Egyptology 10. Cech, B. 2018 Catalogue of Quarries. In The Quarries of Meroe, Sudan, Part 2: Catalogue, ed. B. Cech, T. Rehren, and Abdelrahman Ali Mohamed. UCL Qatar Series in Archaeology and Cultural Heritage 2. Cech, B. and R. Bussert 2018 Petrography of Sandstone Samples from Selected Quarries. In The Quarries of Meroe, Sudan, Part 1: Texts, ed. B. Cech, T. Rehren, and Abdelrahman Ali Mohamed. UCL Qatar Series in Archaeology and Cultural Heritage. Doll, S. 2014 The Royal Mortuary Cult at Nuri, 593–431 BC. Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt 50:191–219.

Prolegomena to the Study of Meroitic Art   649 ——— in press The Resurrection of Tanutamani: The Stories from the Tomb. In Collected Papers of the 12th International Conference of Meroitic Studies, ed. P. Onderka. Doxey, D. 2018 Arts of Ancient Nubia: Museum of Fine Arts Highlights. Museum of Fine Arts (Boston). Dunham, D. 1957 Royal Tombs at Meroe and Barkal. Royal Cemeteries of Kush 4. Museum of Fine Arts (Boston). ——— 1963 The West and South Cemeteries at Meroë. The Royal Cemeteries of Kush 5. Museum of Fine Arts (Boston). ——— 1970 The Barkal Temples. Museum of Fine Arts (Boston). Evina, M. 2010 Une double tradition céramique. In Méroé. Un empire sur le Nil, ed. M. Baud, A. Sackho-Autissier, and S. Labbé-Toutée, pp. 105–17, Musée du Louvre. Fitzenreiter, M. 2003 Die Herstellung einer Bronzereplik der Statuette von Hamadab. Der Antike Sudan. Mitteilungen der Sudanarchäologischen Gesellschaft zu Berlin 14:113–18. Francigny, V. 2011 The Late Meroitic Cemetery at Sedeinga. Campaign 2010. Sudan & Nubia 15:72–79. ——— 2016 Les coutumes funéraires dans le royaume de Méroé. Les enterrements privés. Orient Méditerranée/Archéologie 22. Éditions de Boccard. Garstang, J., A.H. Sayce, and F.L. Griffith 1911 Meroë: The City of the Ethiopians. Clarendon. Griffith, F.L. 1911 The Meroitic Inscriptions of Shablûl and Karanóg. Eckley  B.  Coxe Junior Expedition to Nubia 6. University Museum (Philadelphia). ——— 1922 Meroitic Funerary Inscriptions from Faras, Nubia. In Recueil d’études égyptologiques dediées à la mémoire de Jean-Francois Champollion, pp. 565–600. ­ E. Champion. ——— 1925 Oxford Excavations in Nubia. Liverpool Annals of Archaeology and Anthropology 12:57–172. Grzymski, K.A. 2010 La fondation de Méroé-ville: nouvelles données. In Méroé. Un empire sur le Nil., ed. M. Baud, A. Sackho-Autissier, and S. Labbé-Toutée, pp. 65–66. Musée du Louvre. ——— 2014 The Decorated Faience Puteals from Meroe In Ein Forscherleben zwischen den Welten. Zum 80. Geburtstag von Steffen Wenig. ed. A. Lohwasser and P. Wolf, pp. 165–68. Mitteilungen der Sudanarchäologischen Gesellschaft zu Berlin E.V. Sonderheft. Hinkel, F.W. 2001 Der Tempelkomplex Meroe 250. The Archaeological Map of the Sudan. Supplement 1.2a. Monumenta Sudanica. Hintze, F. 1959 Studien zur meroitischen Chronologie und zu den Opfertafeln aus den Pyramiden von Meroe. Akademie Verlag. Hofmann, I. 1991 Steine für die Ewigkeit. Meroitische Opfertafeln und Totenstelen. Beiträge zur Sudanforschung 6. Druckerei St. Gabriel. Kröper, K. 2014 Excavation of “Offering Chapel 360” in Naga. In The Fourth Cataract and Beyond: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference for Nubian Studies, ed. J.R. Anderson and D.A. Welsby, pp. 711–17. British Museum Publications on Egypt and Sudan 1. Peeters. Kröper, K., S.  Schoske, and D.  Wildung 2011 Naga—Royal City. Ägyptisches Museum und Papyrussammlung Staatliche Museen zu Berlin. Kuckertz, J. 2019 Meroitic Temples and their Decoration In Handbook of Ancient Nubia, ed. D. Raue, pp. 811–46. De Gruyter. Lacovara, P. and Y. Markowitz 2017 Nubian Gold. American University Press. Lepsius, K.R. 1849–59 Denkmaeler aus Aegypten und Aethiopien. Nicolaische Buchhandlung. Maillot, M. 2008 Palais du royaume de Meroe. Les relais du pouvoir central. Camenae 2:1–8.

650   Janice W. Yellin ——— 2016 Palais et grandes demeures du royaume de Méroé, les relais du pouvoir central. Traditions locales et méditerranéennes. PUPS/SFDAS. Markowitz, Y. and D. Doxey 2014 Jewels of Ancient Nubia. Museum of Fine Arts (Boston). Maystre, C. 1986 Tabo, v. 1: Statue en bronze d’un roi méroïtique. Musée National de Khartoum, Inv. 24705. Georg Éditeur. Michalowski, K. 1965 Faras II, Fouilles Polonaises 1961–1962. Warsaw. Murtada Bushara Mohamed and Mahmoud Suliman Bashir 2018 Re-Opening the Burial Chambers of Beg. N 9: Preliminary Report. Sudan & Nubia 22:100–106. Nowotnick, U. and P. Wolf 2011 Keramikproduktion in der Unterstadt, Meroë und Hamadab— Zwei Städte im Mittleren Niltal in den Jahrhunderten um die Zeitenwende, Die Arbeiten der Kampagne 2010. Archäologischer Anzeiger 2011(2):234–37. Onderka, P. 2014 Wad ben Naga: A History of the Site. Sudan & Nubia 18:83–92. Pérez Die, Carmen and Francesca Berenguer eds. 2003 Nubia. Los reinos del Nilo en Sud. Fundación “la Caixa”. Pierrat-Bonnefois, G. 2010 Les objets de faïence. In Méroé. Un empire sur le Nil, ed. M. Baud, A. Sackho-Autissier, and S. Labbé-Toutée, pp. 118–23. Musée du Louvre. Pischikova, E. 2018 Recording the Art of Karakhamun. In Thebes in the First Millennium BC: Art and Archaeology of the Kushite Period and Beyond, ed. E.  Pischikova, J.  Budka, and K. Griffin. Cambridge Scholars Publishing. 3:25–48. Plumley, J.M. 1975 Qaṣr Ibrîm, 1974. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 61:5–27. Pope, J. 2008–2009 The Demotic Proskynema of a Meroïtic Envoy to Roman Egypt (Philae 416). Enchoria. Zeitschrift für Demotistik und Koptologie 31:68–103. ——— 2010 Meroitic Diplomacy and the Festival of Entry. In The Fourth Cataract and Beyond: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference for Nubian Studies, ed. J.R. Anderson, J. and D.A. Welsby, pp. 577–82. British Museum Publications on Egypt and Sudan 1. Peeters. Quertinmont, A. 2014–15 La statuaire funéraire des dignitaires provinciaux de l’empire méroïtique. Journal for the Society of Egyptian Antiquities 41:37–45. Raue, D., ed. 2019, Handbook of Ancient Nubia. De Gruyter. Rilly, C. 2017 Histoire du Soudan des origines à la chute du sultanat Fung. In Histoire et civilisations du Soudan, ed. O. Perdu, pp. 182–313. Soleb. Robbins, G. 1994 Proportion and Style in Ancient Egyptian Art. University of Texas Press. Rondot, V. 2010 Le matériel cultuel du temple à Amon d’el-Hassa. In Méroé. Un empire sur le Nil, ed. M.  Baud, A.  Sackho-Autissier, and S.  Labée-Toutée, pp. 236–39. Musée du Louvre. ——— 2011 L’empereur et le petit prince. Les deux colosses d’Argo. Iconographie, symbolique et datation. In La pioche et la plume. Autour du Soudan, du Liban et de la Jordanie. Hommages Archéologiques à Patrice Lenoble, ed. V. Rondot, F. Alpi, F. Villeneuve, pp. 414–40. PUPS. ——— 2012 El-Hassa. Un temple à Amon dans l’île de Méroé au 1er siècle de notre ère. Comptes rendus des séances de l’Académie des inscriptions et belles-lettres (Paris) I:167–82. Russmann, E. 1974 The Representation of the King in the XXVth Dynasty. Monographies Reine Elisabeth 3. Sackho-Autissier, A. 2010 Les figurines d’argile. In Méroé. Un empire sur le Nil, ed. M. Baud, A. Sackho-Autissier, and S. Labée-Toutée, pp. 114–17. Musée du Louvre. ——— 2011 Ouad ben Naga inconnu. Quelques objets en faïence du palais royal. In La pioche et la plume. Autour du Soudan, du Liban et de la Jordanie, ed. V.  Rondot, F.  Alpi, and F. Villeneuve, pp. 359–75. PUPS.

Prolegomena to the Study of Meroitic Art   651 ——— 2016 Les faïences d’époque méroïtique conservée au musée du Louvre. Technologie et production: les prémices d’une recherce. Dotawo: A Journal of Nubian Studies 3(1/2). Smith, Stuart Tyson 2003 Wretched Kush: Ethnic Identities and Boundaries in Egypt’s Nubian Empire. Routledge. Tiradritti, F. 2008 Pharaonic Renaissance: Archaism and the Sense of History. Cankarjev Dom. Török, László 1997 Meroe City: An Ancient African Capital. John Garstang’s Excavations in the Sudan. Egypt Exploration Society Occasional Publications 12. ——— 2001 The Image of the Ordered World in Ancient Nubian Art: The Construction of the Kushite Mind, 800 BC–300 AD. Probleme der Ägyptologie 18. Brill. ——— 2002 Kinship and Decorum: (Re-) Constructing the Meroitic Élite. Mitteilungen des Deutsches Archäologisches Instituts Kairo 13:60–84. ——— 2004 Archaism and Innovation in 1st Century BC Meroitic art: Meroe Temple M 250 Revisited. Azania: Archaeological Research in Africa 39(1):203–24. ——— 2009 Between Two Worlds: The Frontier Region between Ancient Nubia and Egypt 3700 BC–AD 500. Probleme der Ägyptologie. Brill. ——— 2011 Hellenizing Art in Ancient Nubia 200 BC–AD 250 and its Egyptian Models: A Study in “Acculturation.” Culture and History of the Ancient Near East 53. Brill. ——— 2014a The Periods of Kushite History. The 13th International Conference for Nubian Studies. ——— 2014b Quality, Style and Nubianness: Prolegomena to a History of Meroitic Sculpture In The Fourth Cataract and Beyond: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference for Nubian Studies, ed. J.R. Anderson and D.A. Welsby, pp. 621–34. British Museum Publications on Egypt and Sudan 1. Peeters. Vercoutter, Jacques 1962 Un palais des “Candaces,” contemporain d’Auguste (Fouilles à Wadban-Naga 1958–1960). Syria 39:263–99. Welsby, D.A. 2014 Kawa: The Pharaonic and Kushite Town of Gematon—History and Archaeology of the Site. http://www.sudarchrs.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Kawa_ QSAP_English_booklet.pdf. Welsby, D.A. and J.R. Anderson eds. 2004 Sudan: Ancient Treasures. An Exhibition of Recent Discoveries from the Sudan National Museum. British Museum Press. Wenig, S. 1975 Die Kunst im Reich von Meroe. In Das Alte Ägypten. In Propyläen Kunstgeschichte, Bd. 15. ed. C. Vandersleyen, pp. 412–27. Propyläen Verlag. ——— 1978 Africa in Antiquity, v. 2: The Catalogue. Brooklyn Museum. _______ 2019 Art of the Meroitic Kingdom In Handbook of Ancient Nubia, ed D. Raue, pp. 847–74. De Gruyter. Wildung, D. ed. 1997 Sudan Ancient Kingdoms of the Nile. Flammarion. Wildung, D. and K. Kroeper 2006 Naga: Royal City of Ancient Sudan. Ägyptisches Museum und Papyrussammlung Staatliche Museen zu Berlin. Wildung, D. 2018 Naga Skulptur.Urgarit-Verlag. Wolf, P. 2003 Die Bronzestatuette des kuschitischen Gottes Sebiumeker aus dem Tempel von Hamadab. Der Antike Sudan. Mitteilungen der Sudanarchäologischen Gesellschaft zu Berlin 14:97–107. Wolf, S. and H.-U. Onasch 2010 Les “bains royaux” de Méroé. Kouch et le monde méditerranéen au début du notre ère. Dossier d’Archéologie. Hors-série 18 (mars 2010):44–49. Yellin, J.W. 1979 A Suggested Interpretation of the Relief Decoration in the Type B Chapels at Begrawiyeh North. Meroitica 5:157–64. ——— 1982a Abaton Style Milk Libations at Meroe. Meroitica 6:151–55. ——— 1982b The Role of Anubis in Meroitic Religion. Aris & Phillips.

652   Janice W. Yellin ——— 1990 The Decorated Pyramid Chapels of Meroe and Meroitic Funerary Religion. Meroitica 12:362–74. ——— 1995 Meroitic Funerary Religion. Aufsteig und Niedergang der römische Welt. Part II: Principate, 18.5 18.5. De Gruyter. ——— 2009 La transition entre le Napatéen tardif et l’époque méroïtique d’après les recherches sur la nécropole royale sud de Méroé. Bulletin de la Société Française d’Égyptologie 174:8–28. ——— 2014 The Kushite Nature of Early Meroitic Mortuary Religion: A Pragmatic Approach to Osirian Beliefs. In Ein Forscherleben zwischen den Welten. Zum 80. Geburtstag von Steffen Wenig, ed. A. Lohwasser and P. Wolf, pp. 395–404. Sudanarchäologischen Gesellschaft zu Berlin. ——— 2015a The Interplay of Egyptian and Meroitic Religion in the Dodecaschoenos [Lower Nubia]. Paper presented at the International Conference of Egyptology, Florence, Italy August 2015. ——— 2015b Meroitic Royal Chronology: The Conflict with Rome and its Aftermath. Sudan & Nubia 19:2–15.

chapter 32

L a nguage a n d W r iti ng i n th e K i ngdom of M eroe Claude Rilly

The Linguistic Situation in Ancient Sudan The present Republic of Sudan, even after the secession of its southern territories in 2012, displays a great linguistic diversity. From the four superfamilies (or phyla) into which linguists generally classify all the languages of Africa,1 no less than three are present in Sudan: Afro-Asiatic (Arabic; Beja along the Red Sea), Nilo-Saharan (Nubian along the Nile, in Kordofan and Darfur; Fur, Daju, Tama in Darfur, etc.), and NigerCongo (Kordofanian languages such as Tegali or Koalib in the Nuba Mountains). Apart from Arabic, which was introduced in the 14th century ce and has become the mother tongue of 60 percent of the population, the current language distribution has probably been in place for many centuries. Afro-Asiatic and Nilo-Saharan languages are already attested in the earliest written traces of Sudanese languages in Egyptian inscriptions. These texts include no obvious traces of Niger-Congo languages, probably because they were spoken too far south to come to the notice of the Egyptians.

Egyptian The Afro-Asiatic phylum, also called Hamito-Semitic, is divided into six branches: Ancient Egyptian, Semitic, Berber, Cushitic, Omotic, and Chadic. Ancient Egyptian was of course the language of the administration in Nubia during the Egyptian colonization until it came to an end. It kept later a particular status as the only written language

654   Claude Rilly during the kingdom of Napata, although its knowledge was restricted to a small number of learned people and scribes revolving around the royal court.2 Except for some expatriate scribe families in early Napatan times,3 Egyptian was no longer a spoken language in Sudan. In Late Napatan times, even royal scribes had some difficulties writing Egyptian correctly and the type of mistakes that can found in their spelling or syntax shows clearly the influence of their mother tongue, Meroitic. When a specific writing system was invented for Meroitic, in the 3rd century bce, the use of Egyptian for royal inscriptions declined dramatically. In the kingdom of Meroe, it was essentially limited to the cartouches of the rulers and to the funerary texts engraved on the walls of their tombs.

Cushitic Languages The Cushitic branch of Afro-Asiatic comprises many languages spoken in the Horn of Africa: Somali, Oromo, Afar, etc. This family is today represented in Sudan by a single language: Beja. It is spoken by different tribes located in a long strip along the Red Sea, extending from the south of Egypt to Eritrea. They traditionally had a pastoral way of life. The Beja tribes can be traced back to the Medjay first attested in the Egyptian inscriptions of the Old Kingdom (Liszka and de Souza, this volume).4 They are described in greater detail in the Execration Texts of the 12th Dynasty, where Pharaoh’s magicians recorded on different objects the names of the foreign rulers in order to bewitch them, and in the Semna Despatches (administrative reports from the Egyptian garrisons in Nubia). At this time, the Medjay lived in the Eastern Desert, at the level of the First and Second Cataracts, and were divided into three chiefdoms. The names of their rulers are clearly related to modern Cushitic languages and particularly to Beja.5 The Medjay appear later in late Napatan royal inscriptions6 where they are called Meded or Medy and are described as enemies of the Kushites, who fought several battles against them. A second Cushitic-speaking tribe, also adversaries of the Kushite rulers, was the Blemmyes, first mentioned in the Napatan Stela of King Anlamani (late 7th century bce) under the name of Bulahau (Eide et al. 1994:221). They are also attested in Egyptian texts, as many of them had settled in Egypt during the 26th Dynasty. After Anlamani, their name disappears from the Napatan royal chronicles, but it seems that they were now designated by a new name, spelt Lehlehes, which sounds like a derogatory term— such as Greek barbaroi for peoples who were not Greek-speakers. In Harsiyotef ’s Stela (Eide et al. 1996:451, l. 100), their first ruler is called Kharawe. This name includes a first element khara- which is the word for “lord” in Blemmyan (Beja haɖa). At the middle of the 3rd century ce, the Blemmyes were part of the invaders who put an end to the kingdom of Meroe. They settled in the city of Talmis (modern Kalabsha) in Lower Nubia until they were defeated by the Noubades around 450 ce. Several documents, written in Greek but quoting the native names of their princes and officers, have been found in Kalabsha, Qasr Ibrim, and Gebelein in Upper Egypt. Many of these names include elements that are very close to modern Beja. It is difficult to decide if the Blemmyes were

Language and Writing in the Kingdom of Meroe   655 one of the Beja tribes or if they were a distinct group speaking a related language. Similarly, it has been assumed that the languages of the A-Group (3700–2800 bce) and of the early kingdom of Kerma (2450–2150 bce) were also Cushitic.7 This makes sense historically, but linguistic evidence, based on rare words from Egyptian sources, is so weak that these assumptions remain highly speculative.

Meroitic The Nilo-Saharan phylum is the most debatable grouping of African languages made by Greenberg. It includes from eleven to thirteen families or isolated languages.8 However, the core of this phylum, Eastern Sudanic, is the best-established family, with solid lexical and morphosyntactic connections between languages. It comprises eleven sub-groups, which can be classified into five branches: Northern East Sudanic (aka NES), Surmic/ Nilotic, Gebel, Temein, and Daju.9 Many of these languages are spoken in Sudan but also in Chad, Eritrea, Ethiopia, South Sudan, Uganda, Kenya, and Tanzania. The NES branch is in turn composed of three sub-branches: Eastern NES (Nara, Nubian, and Meroitic), Taman, and Nyima (Table 32.1). The spread of the NES family from Eastern Chad (Taman) to Western Eritrea (Nara) can be explained by an original cradle located along the Wadi Howar, a former tributary of the Nile now dried up except in its upper course in Ennedi and Darfur. The progressive desertification of Eastern Sahara between the 5th and the 2nd millennia bce has forced the speakers of the original NES language to migrate in different groups to more hospitable areas, either in Darfur/Wadai (Taman), in Southern Kordofan (Nyima, Proto-Nubian), or along the Nile (Meroitic) and its tributaries (Nara).

Table 32.1  Genealogical Tree of Northern East Sudanic Languages (NES) Proto-Northern East Sudanic

Meroitic Proto-Nubian Proto-Western Nubian

Proto-Taman Proto-Nile Nubian

Old dongolawi

Nara

Birgid

Midob

Kordofan Nubian

Proto-Nyima

Kenuzi

Dongolawi

Old Nubian

Nobiin

Tama

Mararit

Nyimang

Afitti

656   Claude Rilly The first Meroitic speakers seem to have merged with the population of Kerma. The date of this event and the way it happened, either peacefully or violently, is not known. However, the fact that the name of the kingdom of Kerma in Egyptian sources switches from “Yam” in Harkhuf ’s report (ca. 2250 bce) to “Kush” in Senusret I’s stela from Buhen (ca. 1950 bce)10 might echo a significant change in leadership at the end of the Kerma Ancien period (2450–2150 bce). “Kush” will remain the Egyptian and Meroitic designation of the country until the end of Antiquity. The names of the princes of Kush and their parents in the Execration Texts of the 12th Dynasty include a restricted consonantal inventory which is clearly not Cushitic but fits closely the later Meroitic phonology (Rilly  2007:5–11). Later on, a list of foreign officials, written on the back of Papyrus Golenischeff around 1580/1550 bce, includes names that are clearly Proto-Meroitic. Considering the original location of this papyrus (Medinet el-Fayyum in Egypt) and its date (end of the Hyksos period), it can be suggested that we are dealing with a document relating to a delegation sent by the ruler of Kerma to the Hyksos kingdom through the oasis road.11 Anthropological studies conducted on the skeletons from the necropolis of Kerma (Simon et al. 1990) have shown that the population of the capital was composed of three physically different groups. One of them might have been the early Meroitic speakers, who apparently held a high social position in the kingdom since the Kerma Moyen period. Meroitic names still occur in the Egyptian texts after the conquest of Kerma, showing a linguistic continuity in Northern Sudan until the rise of the kings of Napata. The birth names of the rulers of the 25th Dynasty are all Meroitic and there is no doubt that, until the end of Meroe in the 4th century ce, this language was dominant in the Kushite kingdom.

Nubian The Nubian languages12 are the closest to Meroitic among the NES family. They include today six languages and dialectal groups: Nobiin in the north of the Nile valley in Sudan; Dongolawi further south around the city of Dongola and a closely related dialect, Kenuzi, in Egyptian Nubia; Kordofan Nubian, a dialectal group, in the north of the Nuba Mountains in Kordofan; Midob in Northern Darfur; Birgid (nearly extinct) in Southern Darfur. After the split of the NES family, in the 3rd millennium bce, the Nobas (speakers of Proto-Nubian) probably stayed further south in Kordofan, where they led a nomadic lifestyle. The word “Nubian,” in Greek Noba, from Meroitic Nob (pronounced /nuba/) is a derogatory name meaning “slave” given to them by a Meroites. It is of course not their self-name, which can be reconstructed as *magur, with a possible variant *magi.13 This word is also attested in Meroitic: Mho (pronounced /maxu/) is a “neutral” designation of the Nobas, used in several texts, especially in very late Meroitic and Post-Meroitic times.14 The presence of the Nobas in the vicinity of Kush goes back to several centuries before the kingdom of Meroe. The Egyptian sources during the colonization of Nubia in the 18th Dynasty mention a special corps of local soldiers who are called m(‘)gȝ “Maga” or mgj “Magi.”15 The word is followed by the child determinative, more rarely by the leg,

Language and Writing in the Kingdom of Meroe   657 doubtlessly to indicate that these warriors were very young infantrymen, probably teenagers. Many centuries later, the Napatan stelae of Harsiyotef and Nastasen record several military campaigns against a people called Mḫ.16 The word is also written with the child and the leg determinatives. According to these Napatan sources, they were cattle raisers living far from the Nile and were divided into several populous tribes. There is no doubt that they are the ancestors of the Nobas, whom Eratosthenes in the middle of the 3rd century bce described as “a great people,” who “live in Libya [i.e., west of the Nile] . . . .  They are not subject to the Ethiopians (i.e., Meroites), but are divided in many independent kingdoms.” The names Maga/Magi of the Egyptian sources, Mḫ in the Napatan stelae, and Mho in the Meroitic texts can be equated with the self-name of Nobas, *magur or *magi. During the Meroitic period, the conflicts with the Nobas became more and more frequent, probably because these livestock herders were compelled by increasing aridity to migrate towards to the Nile. Until the end of the 3rd century ce, the Meroitic armies were able to repel these repeated incursions, as shown by mentions of battles against the Nobas in several Meroitic texts from Lower Nubia. However, in the mid-4th century ce, the Nobas invaded the kingdom of Meroe, which was soon to be divided into three kingdoms. As a result of this elite replacement and probably also of the conversion of these elites to Christianity, the Nubian languages replaced Meroitic in early Middle Ages: Old Nubian in the northern kingdom (later province) of Nobadia, Old Dongolawi in the kingdom of Makuria, and Soba Nubian in the kingdom of Alodia. This description of the linguistic situation in Nubia and Northern Sudan in Antiquity can by no means be considered as comprehensive. We are limited to languages which have their own writing-system (Egyptian, Meroitic), which are extensively quoted in texts written in the former languages (Early Meroitic, Blemmyan, Medjay) or which can be reconstructed (Proto-Nubian). For the rest, we are left with assumptions in which historical and geographical considerations hardly outbalance the paucity of philological data (A-Group and C-Group languages). In addition, we can tell nothing of languages which have completely disappeared and have not left any trace in Egyptian or Meroitic texts.

Meroitic Language Since the rediscovery of ancient Sudanese civilizations in the aftermath of Mohamed Ali’s expedition in 1820–22, Meroitic inscriptions have been a key issue for scholars. It took nearly a century to decipher the two scripts (cursive and hieroglyphic) and the complete understanding of the texts, after one more century, is still a work in progress. The first inscription was copied in 1819 by the French-German architect Franz-Christian Gau and published without comment in 1822 in his volume entitled Antiquités de la Nubie ou Monuments inédits des bords du Nil, entre la première et la seconde cataracte. Later on, the French explorer Frédéric Cailliaud in his Voyage à Méroé and the German Egyptologist Carl Richard Lepsius in his Denkmäler aus Aegypten und Aethiopien published tens of Meroitic inscriptions.

658   Claude Rilly

History of Research Lepsius was the first to characterize the cursive script as a kind of Demotic “alphabet” with a number of signs ranging from twenty-five to thirty, which was close to the truth. Several attempts to decipher the hieroglyphic script, made by famous Egyptologists such as Emil Brugsch or Adolf Erman, were unsuccessful. In 1907, the British Egyptologist Francis Ll. Griffith was entrusted with the study of several new Meroitic texts found in the freshly excavated necropolis at Karanog and Shablul, in Egyptian Nubia. His excellent intuitions and his deep knowledge of Demotic led him quickly to the solution. His final decipherment of the two scripts was explained at length in the Preface of his book published in 1911, The Meroitic Inscriptions of Shablûl and Karanóg. The texts could now be “read,” that is transliterated sign after sign, but the next issue was to understand the meaning of the texts. Meroitic disappeared a long time ago and no closely related language that could have helped in this task was known. No extensive bilingual text has been found so far. Griffith tried to find connections with Old Nubian but his expectations were frustrated. After him, some attempts were made to link Meroitic and Cushitic languages, but this did not bring any positive results. The next generations of Meroiticists accordingly turned to internal approaches. Griffith already could translate some words and shed some light on the grammar and syntax of this language by using the so-called “philological method.” It consists in deducing the meaning of the unknown elements of a sentence by using the elements that are already known, and checking this meaning in different sentences. Since the decipherment, some words were already known, for instance those borrowed from Egyptian (Wos “Isis,” Amni “Amun,” ant “priest,” etc.) and more were added little by little. Some progress in the understanding of Meroitic lexicon, in line with this method, was made particularly by Nicholas Millet (1982) and Inge Hofmann (1981). Another type of internal approach is the “structural-analytic method,” developed by Fritz Hintze (Hintze 1963, 1979). It consisted in comparing the syntactic structures in large sets of sentences and it clarified some aspects of the Meroitic grammar. More recently, the comparative method was revived, after decades of abandonment, by the present author. The Canadian archaeologist Bruce Trigger (1964) had suggested that Meroitic could belong to the Eastern Sudanic linguistic group, which had been postulated by Greenberg (1963). Unfortunately, Trigger used some questionable data for Meroitic, so that his paper was lambasted by Hintze and his theory was discredited. The present author revisited Trigger’s assumption with more reliable data for Meroitic and much larger data for the Eastern Sudanic languages, in great part resulting from field linguistic surveys (Rilly 2010). As required by Hintze in his review of Trigger’s article (Hintze 1973:323–27), the Meroitic words and morphemes were not compared separately with Nubian or Nara, but with reconstructed Proto-NES elements. The inclusion of Meroitic in the NES language group was met with general agreement among the specialists17 and can now be considered as a reliable tool for the translation of Meroitic texts. This “comparative method” is by no means a quick-fix solution to translate Meroitic, because the genetic and chronological distance between Meroitic and the closest related

Language and Writing in the Kingdom of Meroe   659 languages is not shorter than, say, between English and Greek among the IndoEuropean languages. That is why it must be used together with other approaches such as the “philological method.” Here is an example of how the comparative method can help the understanding of Meroitic. Among the various gifts which the Meroitic kings used to crave from the gods, the most frequent is expressed by a word written pwrite, and pronounced /bawarit/. A comparison with the Egyptian texts shows that this word may mean “life,” “breath of life.” Indeed, in the temple of Apedemak at Naga, there is an inscription (REM 0019) where the sentence pwrite lbxte “give them life,” is followed by the Egyptian sign ‘nḫ “life.” The word pwrite, when compared with related languages, should however have a slightly different meaning like “vital force,” since Western Proto-NES has *boor“strong,”18 *boor‑iti “strength, energy.” An earlier Meroitic formula, in Taneyidamani’s stela (REM 1044) was wte lxte “give him life,” where wte (pronounced /wat/) means literally “existence” and can be compared with Nara wùd- “to exist,” Old Nubian woo- “to be.”19 This was a more accurate translation of Egyptian ‘nḫ but, for unknown reasons, the formula with pwrite was later preferred.

Grammatical Outline Meroitic exhibits the same structural features as all the NES languages. It is agglutinative, which means that the grammatical morphemes are concatenated one after the other. The main word order is subject/object/verb. The adjective and the article (‑l or ‑li) follow the noun. There are postpositions, no prepositions. There is no grammatical gender: for example, qore “ruler” can be used for a king or a ruling queen. A special feature of Meroitic is its two genitives. The original NES genitive (possessee + possessor) was preserved for inalienable relations such as kinship: ant‑li kdite‑l, “the priest’s sister,” lit. “priest-the sister-the.” A new analytic genitive was however created with the postposition ‑se “of,” for alienable relations (possessor + possessee + postposition): ant mk-li-se-l “the priest of the god,” lit. “priest god-the-of-the.” One can compare with two genitives in English, Saxon (“my friend’s house”) and Norman (“the house of my friend”). The case-system, which in Proto-NES comprised three cases, nominative, objective (accusative/dative), and genitive, is only vestigial in Meroitic.20 An objective marker ‑w is attested in some instances, but it is optional. For example, the so-called “C formula” of the funerary texts is usually x(r) mlo-l holkete “serve him a good meal,” lit. “meal good-a serve ye!.” But in the royal version of this formula (called C´), the objective marker is added after the object: x(r) mlo-l‑w holkete. The other functions are conveyed by postpositions, for example ‑te “in” for locative: Pilqe-te “in Philae.” The plural of nouns is marked only by the article plural form ‑leb: apote “envoy,” apote-leb “envoys.” No evidence for plural markers added directly to the noun has been found so far. The structure of the non-verbal clauses, thanks to the numerous studies of the funerary texts where they are common, is now well understood. They use a copula ‑o or ‑owi “(he/ she) is” in the singular, ‑kwi “(they) are” in the plural: qo qore Nobo-l-o “this one is the king

660   Claude Rilly of the Nobas,” lit. “this-one king Noba-the-is”; apote-leb yetmde-leb-kwi “they are nephews of envoys,” lit. “envoy-the (pl.) nephew-the (pl.)-they are.” By contrast, the verbal clauses are still obscure in major part, because little is known about the verb morphology. The phonology of Meroitic is one of the best known aspects of the language. It is partly deduced from the writing-system, which is phonetic, partly from transcriptions of Meroitic words in Egyptian, Latin, and Greek (e.g., kdke “Queen Mother,” Greek Kandake) and inversely, of Meroitic words borrowed from these languages (e.g., pelmos “general, strategus” from Eg. pȝ-mr-mš’). The phonology of Meroitic is rather simple, as is the case of most of the NES-languages. The vowels are /i/, /e/, /a/, /o/, /u/, and /ǝ/. The vowel /o/ has no specific sign (this shortcoming is a legacy from Egyptian) and is marked by u. The consonant inventory (Table  32.2) is limited, as it is in most of the NESlanguages. Some Meroitic letters such as p or y probably did not represent actual Meroitic phonemes: p is encountered mostly in Egyptian loan-words beginning with the article p(ȝ) and was certainly pronounced /b/, as shown by several spelling variants. The letter y was mainly used to avoid vowel signs to occur in isolation, which was an infringement of the writing-system conventions (see below). It was not actually pronounced. Finally, it seems that the letter x was pronounced [x] (like in Scottish loch) in Egyptian loan-words and [ŋ] (like “ng” in “king”) in native words, but further evidence is required to confirm this assertion.

Meroitic Scripts Although it was spoken for two millennia, Meroitic was not endowed with a specific writing system (Table 32.3) before the early days of the Kingdom of Meroe. Unlike Egyptian, the cursive script was the first to appear, because it was a natural development of Early Demotic which was then the dominant script in Egypt. The hieroglyphic script was Table 32.2  Consonant Inventory of Meroitic (In Italics, Meroitic signs transliterated; in Roman: phonetic values) labial voiced stop

coronal

velar

labialized velar

b or p [b] d [d] ~ [ɖ]

unvoiced stop

t [t]

k [k]

q [kw]

fricative

s [ɕ]

x [x] (Egyptian loanwords)

h [xw] (Egyptian loanwords)

approximant

l [l] x [ŋ] (native words)

h [ŋw] (native words)

trill nasal

m [m]

r [r] n [n]

Language and Writing in the Kingdom of Meroe   661 Table 32.3  Meroitic Scripts hieroglyphic

cursive

transliteration

values

a

a

a

initial /a/ or /u/

b

b

b

/ba/

d

d

d

/da/

e

e

e

/e/, /ǝ/, or no vowel

H

H

h

/xwa/ and /ŋwa/ (?)

i

i

i

modifier /i/

k

k

k

/ka/

l

l

l

/la/

m

m

m

/ma/

n

n

n

/na/

N

N

ne

/ne/, /nǝ/, or /n/

o

o

o

modifier /u/

p

p

p

/pa/ (Egypt.); /ba/

q

q

q

/kwa/

r

r

r

/ra/

s

s

s

/sa/

S

S

se

/se/, /sǝ/, or /s/

t

t

t

/ta/

T

T

te

/te/, /tǝ/, or /t/

u

u

to

/tu/

w

w

w

/wa/

h

h

x

/xa/ and /ŋa/ (?)

y

y

y

dummy vowel support

:

:

:

word-divider

c­ reated much later, in order to replace in the temples the Egyptian hieroglyphs, whose knowledge was almost forgotten in Kush. The first datable inscription is engraved in cursive signs on the handle of a bronze sistrum which appeared on the antiquities market in 2015 (Rilly in prep.). The artifact displays on the loop the two cartouches in Egyptian script of King Arnekhamani “beloved of Isis,” which gives a date around 220 bce for this instrument. The Meroitic inscription on the handle yields for the first time the Meroitic form of the royal name: Elxmni. The writing-system is already fully developed in this inscription. In addition, some Meroitic graffiti from the Amun temples in Kawa and Dokki Gel look paleographically earlier. Accordingly, a date around the beginning of the 3rd century bce seems the most likely for the advent of the cursive script.

662   Claude Rilly The development of the Meroitic cursive script from Early Demotic, although it is substantiated by the forms of the major part of the signs, is still obscure. First of all, the writing system is completely different. Demotic, like Egyptian hieroglyphs, uses a mixed system, partly consonantal, partly logographic, whereas the Meroitic system is an alphasyllabary with purely phonetic signs. Admittedly, the name of Amun is rendered by a logogram borrowed from Demotic in early graffiti from Kawa and Dokki Gel (REM 0648A, 0662, 1377, 1378) and a later one from Dakka (REM 0092), but it is written phonetically (A)mni already on Arnekhamani’s sistrum and systematically from the 1st century ce on. Second, five Meroitic cursive signs (d, e, i, ne, to) are so different from their Demotic counterpart that a direct filiation in these cases is hardly possible. For these reasons, it is highly probable that there existed in Kush, before the invention of the Meroitic script, a local form of Demotic, a missing link between Egyptian Demotic and Meroitic, from which no trace has been found to date. It is anyway difficult to imagine that the extensive use of written Egyptian which is attested in Napatan royal contexts could have been limited to the engraving of hieroglyphs on stone. Texts in Late Hieratic or Demotic written on papyrus or ostraca must have existed, possibly in small number, and archaeologists may find some instances in the future. The Meroitic hieroglyphic script follows the same rules as the cursive script. Just the signs are different. They are all borrowed from the Egyptian hieroglyphs. However, the phonetic values of some Meroitic signs are at variance with their Egyptian counterparts: k for instance is /ka/, contrasting with the value sȝ of the Egyptian duck, e is /e/, and not šw like the Egyptian ostrich feather, etc. These differences can be explained by a selection of Egyptian hieroglyphs resembling the Meroitic cursive characters: k looks like k in early cursive and the specific curve of the feather e is reminiscent of the cursive sign e. In these cases, the Meroitic process is ironically the opposite of the history of Egyptian scripts: the cursive signs are the origins of the Meroitic hieroglyphic signs. This particular feature tends to show that this script was not a “natural” development from the Egyptian hieroglyphs, but an artificial creation made by one or several scribes, such as the invention of Cyrillic or Armenian alphabets. The most important point was that texts in Meroitic could be engraved in temples with signs which retained the magical value of the Egyptian hieroglyphs. Another feature peculiar to this script is that the orientation of signs is the opposite of Egyptian hieroglyphs. The script can also be written from right to left or left to right (whereas the cursive is right to left, like Demotic), but the human and animal figures are looking to the end and not, as in Egypt, to the beginning of the line. This was clearly devised to put in line the gaze direction of the figures and the reading direction. The earliest hieroglyphic inscriptions date back to the reign of Taneyidamani (ca. 150 bce). The first (REM 1140) is engraved on a bronze flagpole sheath from Jebel Barkal and gives the royal name in cursive and in two hieroglyphic cartouches. The hieroglyphic sign for d is still an awkward adaptation of the cursive sign, resembling the Egyptian hieroglyph nb. By contrast, in the second inscription (REM 1044A), also a double cartouche of King Taneyidamani, the sign for d is an eye, as in classical hieroglyphic script. It is therefore obvious that the creation of the hieroglyphic script took place during this reign.

Language and Writing in the Kingdom of Meroe   663 The Meroitic writing system is an alphasyllabary (also called “semi-syllabary” or “abugida”), like the Indian scripts, the Old Persian cuneiform, and the Ethiopic syllabary. Like full syllabaries, these scripts are based on the syllable. But unlike full syllabaries, there are no specific signs for all the possible syllables. The basic signs represent a consonant followed by the “inherent” vowel /a/. In Meroitic, the cursive sign m, hieroglyphic m, was read /ma/. If another vowel is required, the basic sign is followed by a vocalic modifier which switches its vocalic value. In several alphasyllabaries, for example in Tibetan, this modifier is a diacritic sign which is added above or below the basic sign. In Meroitic, it is located after the basic sign: the cursive signs im, hieroglyphic im, was read /mi/. Because of this separate position of the modifier, the Meroitic script was considered an alphabet until Hintze proved otherwise (Hintze 1973). Nonetheless, the old theory is still reflected in the scholarly tradition of transliterating each sign by a single Latin letter: for instance, rqp “prince” is transliterated pqr and not pa-qa-ra, which would be closer to the actual pronunciation. Finally, there are four special basic signs with fixed vocalic values: curs. N, hiero. N ne; curs. S hiero. S se; curs. T hiero. T te; u hiero. u to. Alphasyllabaries offer an economic and convenient system to transcribe sequences that follow a consonant + vowel pattern, but when it comes to consonant clusters, each script had to find a specific way to address the issue. In the Indian scripts, the second (and possibly third) consonant was placed under the first and it resulted in complex ligatures. In Meroitic and Ethiopic scripts, a dummy vocalic sign was introduced between the two consonants. In both cases, this zero-vowel sign was the vocalic modifier for /ǝ/,21 which is in Meroitic the same as for /e/. For example, the name of a city in Lower Nubia called “Qurta” in modern times was in Meroitic iteroq. The scholarly transliteration of this word is Qoreti but it was pronounced /qurti/. The same method was used for final consonants: eroq “ruler,” transliterated qore, was actually pronounced /qur/. The nasal consonants were not written when occurring before another consonant: ekdk, “Kandake, Queen Mother,” transliterated kdke, was pronounced /kandake/, as shown by the Greek and Latin sources mentioning this title. Another difficulty of alphasyllabaries is the writing of isolated vowels, mainly at the beginning of words. In Meroitic, there is a special sign for initial /a/ and /u/, in cursive a, in hieroglyphic a. In both cases it is transliterated a: inma Amni, “Amun,” pronounced /amanai/, irosa Asori, “Osiris,” pronounced /usuri/. For initial /e/ and /i/, it was possible in early stages of the script to use the vocalic modifiers e and i as basic signs: ekire erike “begotten child.” From the 1st century ce, this liberty with the alphasyllabic rules was corrected by using a dummy “y”: erike became ekirey yerike, but the actual pronunciation remained unchanged. The numerals (Table 32.4) are also derived from Early Demotic for the major part, but the digits 1 to 4 are borrowed from Egyptian hieroglyphs and the signs 10, 20, 40, and 50 resemble their counterparts in Abnormal Hieratic. This poses again the question of a local form of Demotic, yet unattested, as the source of the cursive script. The recent publication by Jochen Hallof of a numerical ostracon from Qasr Ibrim found in 1980 has considerably increased the number of attested signs.22 The highest numeral was 5,000 in Griffith’s list23 but it has now reached 900,000. This ostracon, probably an exercise for

664   Claude Rilly Table 32.4  Attested Meroitic Numerals 1

9

200

6,000

50,000

2

10

300

7,000

60,000

3

20

400

8,000

100,000

4

30

500

9,000

500,000

5

40

600

10,000

600,000

6

50

700

20,000

700,000

7

70

800

30,000

800,000

8

100

1,000

40,000

900,000

students, gives for each rank (fractions, units, tens, etc.) a variable number of instances (from five to ten). Thanks to this inscription, three values that were erroneous in Griffith table could be amended: his “5” is actually “7,” his “8” is “5,” and his “7” is “8.” The fractions were represented by sets of dots, very similar to pips on dice. Their system was not decimal, but duodecimal (like inches in the Imperial system), as confirmed by the ex­ist­ ence of a set of ten or eleven dots on two ostraca from Attiri. Unfortunately, only the first five fractions are given in the Qasr Ibrim ostracon.24 The Meroitic scripts did not survive long after the fall of Meroe. The last hieroglyphic inscription so far known (REM 1222) is engraved on a bronze bowl found in the tumulus of a Noba prince in El-Hobagi.25 The burial context has a 14C date of 350 ± 50 ce. The wall inscription of the Blemmyan king Kharamadoye in the temple of Kalabsha (REM 0094), dated to ca. 420 ce by Török (Eide et al. 1998:1103–1107), has been traditionally regarded as the last cursive text. However, some Meroitic graffiti (REM 0114, 0116, 0117) engraved on the roof of the mammisi (divine birth house) at Philae might be later. They were written by priests of the Smet family (in Meroitic Semeti), who also left in the same place the last Demotic inscription, dated to 452 ce (Dijkstra 2010). The Meroitic texts must have been inscribed more or less at the same time.

Language and Writing in the Kingdom of Meroe   665

Meroitic Texts Approximately 2,000 Meroitic texts have been found so far in excavations and surveys conducted in Sudan and in Egyptian Nubia, from which 1,600 have been published. They are listed in the Répertoire d’Épigraphie méroïtique (REM). Many of them are very short or severely damaged. The longest text, with 161 lines in cursive script, is engraved on King Taneyidamani’s stela found in Jebel Barkal and kept in the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston (MFA 23.736). Stone is by far the writing material which is most frequently found, because of its durability, but the form of the cursive signs, with their curves and long tails, show that Meroitic texts were chiefly traced with ink on potsherds and papyrus. Ostraca are fairly common but papyri are very fragile and suffered from the harsh climatic conditions of Sudan. Only a few tens of them have been found so far in Qasr Ibrim and were recently published by Hallof. Many of the written documents found to date are funerary texts, inscribed on offeringtables or stelae (Fig.  32.1). They are very standardized and follow more or less the same patterns: invocation to Isis and Osiris, name of the deceased and his/her parents, official titles of the deceased and of his/her most famous relatives, final benedictions

Figure 32.1  Funerary stela of the lady Arekadakheto (REM 0261), Karanog, 2nd/3rd century ce. © Fonds Leclant/Groupe d’études méroïtiques de Paris.

666   Claude Rilly requiring the gods to provide water, bread, and a good meal to him/her. These stereotyped formulae and the great number of texts explain why they are the best understood Meroitic documents. It is unfortunately a totally different story for the royal chronicles and decrees. Two dozen of them have been found, mostly in Meroe, Barkal, and Naga. They are the descendants of the Napatan royal stelae and like them, describe wars and pious foundations with a richer vocabulary and morphology than funerary texts. For that reason, their content is still in great part a puzzle for scholars. The official inscriptions of the temple, mainly captions accompanying the figures of gods and kings, are our main source of texts written in hieroglyphic script. Only a few dozen are known so far, principally at Naga (Fig. 32.2). Hundreds of Meroitic graffiti engraved by pilgrims on the walls of the temples at Philae, Kawa, Musawwarat, etc. have been found. Some of them include more or less detailed prayers to the gods. The proskynemata (adoration graffiti) just mention the name of the pilgrim and his presence in front of the deity. There are in addition about sixty ostraca, mainly from Faras, recording administrative accounts. Despite appearances, the amount of Meroitic inscriptions found so far is not sufficient. Many more texts, ideally in good state of preservation, would be required to allow major advances in the understanding of this lost language. Fortunately, Meroitic archaeology is still a young discipline and many significant finds can be reasonably expected in the next decades.

Figure 32.2  Abacus of a column from the Amun Temple in Naga, with Meroitic cartouches of King Natakamani, Queen Amanitore, and Prince Arakakhataror, mid-first century ce. © C. Rilly.

Language and Writing in the Kingdom of Meroe   667

Abbreviations NES:   Northern East Sudanic (language family including Meroitic and Nubian). REM:  Répertoire d’Épigraphie méroïtique, see Leclant et al. 2000.

Notes 1. This classification goes back to Greenberg 1963 and is still considered valid, although some rare African languages are now regarded as probable isolates. The fourth phylum, KhoiSan, is restricted to Southern Africa plus two languages of Tanzania. 2. Egyptian inscriptions are known in Napatan royal sites such as Barkal, Sanam, Meroe but are completely absent from important provincial centers. For instance, the huge Napatan necropolis at Sedeinga, capital of its nome, did not yield any inscription in Egyptian. 3. See Rilly 2012:75–77; Valbelle 2012:41–42. 4. New linguistic evidence for this rather old identification can be found in Rilly 2014:1175. See also Rafed el-Sayed 2011: 216; Zibelius-Chen 2014:275 n. 61 with further references. 5. See Rilly 2014:1170–71; Zibelius-Chen 2014:290–91. 6. Amannote-erike, l. 46; Harsiyotef, ll. 78, 81, 85, 89; Nastasen, ll. 61, 64: see Eide et al. 1996:400–28, 438–64, 467–501. 7. Zibelius-Chen 2014:278–80, 284–86. 8. A discussion on this topic and a comprehensive list of the Nilo-Saharan languages with geographical and demographical details plus references can be found in Rilly 2010:37–58. The inclusion of two isolated languages, Songhai and Shabo, into this phylum differs from one scholar to another. 9. NES and Surmic/Nilotic must probably be merged in a coordinate group. See Rilly 2016:153. 10. This stela, dated to year 18 of this king, contains the first historical mention of “Kush” (spelt Kȝz). It is kept today in Florence Museum (No. 1542). See Zibelius-Chen 2014:288–89 for discussion of the switch from Yam to Kush. 11. For a detailed study of this “Crocodilopolis list,” see Rilly 2007:5–11. 12. In this paper, the word “Nubia” is used in a geographical sense to designate the Middle Nile Valley, according to the Egyptological tradition. By contrast, “Nubian” is used in a linguistic sense and is restricted to the Nubian-speaking tribes and their languages, which were introduced in the Nile Valley only after the fall of Meroe in the 4th century ce. 13. This reconstruction is based on “Makuria,” the name of the northern medieval kingdom of Nubia, on the self-name of the Birgid Nubians Murgi, and on the Old Nubian name of the province of Nobadia, Migi. For further details, see Rilly 2014:1178–79. 14. For instance in REM 0129 (ca. 300 bce) and REM 0094 (ca. 420 bce): see Rilly 2014:1177–79. 15. In Amenhotep III’s victory stela from Semna (BM EA657), the viceroy of Nubia Merymose fights against the land of Ibhet (location unknown) and captures 250 Magi-soldiers. In other texts, they are used by the Egyptians as auxiliary troops. 16. Harsiyotef, ll. 97, 113, 115; Nastasen, ll. 46, 55: see Peust 1999:54, 1214; Rilly 2014:1176. The undeniable link between the Mḫ of the Napatan stelae and the Maga of the Egyptian texts is however a new element. 17. See for example Zibelius-Chen 2014:247. 18. Rilly 2010:456; the reconstructed form for Western NES, given as *bor-, must be amended to read *boor- with long vowel.

668   Claude Rilly 19. The word wte was first translated “life” by Monneret de Villard  1937:101–103. Because pwrite was clearly a translation of Egyptian ‘nḫ, the alternative Meroitic word wte was tentatively translated “protection” in one of the author’s early articles (Rilly 2000:105 n. 5) and considered borrowed from Egyptian wdȝ.t. The comparative method shows that pwrite and wte are both genuine Meroitic words with reflexes in related languages. 20. For this “differential marking,” see Rilly 2010:392–95. 21. This sound is a mid-central vowel, like the “a” in “about.” It is also called “schwa.” 22. REM 2112; cf. Hallof 2009, 2011:111–12, pl. 46. 23. Griffith 1916:22–25 and pl. VI. 24. The author’s interpretation of the first five signs of the ostracon differs from Hallof ’s. He regards them as units, whereas the author regards them as fractions, like in all the other numerical ostraca. 25. For a discussion of the date and an analysis of the inscription, see Rilly 2011.

References Cited Dijkstra, J.H.F. 2010 Les derniers prêtres de Philae, un mystère? Égypte, Afrique et Orient 60:57–66. Eide, T., T.  Hägg, R.H.  Pierce, and L.  Török eds. 1994 Fontes Historiae Nubiorum: Textual Sources for the History of the Middle Nile Region between the Eighth Century BC and the Sixth Century AD, v. 1: From the Eighth to the Mid-Fifth Century BC. Department of Classics, University of Bergen. ——— 1996 Fontes Historiae Nubiorum: Textual Sources for the History of the Middle Nile Region between the Eighth Century BC and the Sixth Century AD, v. 2: From the Mid-Fifth to the First Century BC. Department of Greek, Latin and Egyptology, University of Bergen. ——— 1998 Fontes Historiae Nubiorum: Textual Sources for the History of the Middle Nile Region between the Eighth Century BC and the Sixth Century AD, v. 3: From the First to the Sixth Century AD. IKRR/Department of Greek, Latin, and Egyptology, University of Bergen. Greenberg, J.H. 1963 Languages of Africa. Mouton. Griffith, F.L. 1911 The Meroitic Inscriptions of Shablûl and Karanóg. Eckley  B.  Coxe Junior Expedition to Nubia 6. University Museum (Philadelphia). ——— 1916 Meroitic Studies. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 3:22–30. Hallof, J. 2009 Ein meroitisches Zahlenostrakon aus Qasr Ibrim. Beiträge zur Sudanforschung 10:91–101. ——— 2011 The Meroitic Inscriptions from Qasr Ibrim, v. 1: Inscriptions on Ostraka. J.H. Röll. Hintze, F. 1963 Die Struktur der “Deskriptionssätze” in den meroitischen Totentexten. Mitteilungen des Instituts für Orientforschung der Deutschen Akademie der Wissenschaften 9(1):1–28. ——— 1973 Some Problems of Meroitic Philology. In Sudan in Altertum, v. 1: Internationale Tagung für meroitistische Forschungen in Berlin 1971, ed. F. Hintze, pp. 321–36. Meroitica 1. Akademie Verlag. ——— 1979 Beiträge zur meroitischen Grammatik. Meroitica 3. Akademie Verlag. Hofmann, I. 1981 Material für eine meroitische Grammatik. Veröffentlichungen der Institute für Afrikanistik und Ägyptologie der Universität Wien 16. Afro-Pub.

Language and Writing in the Kingdom of Meroe   669 Leclant, J., A. Heyler, C. Berger-El Naggar, C. Carrier, and C. Rilly 2000 Répertoire d’Épigraphie Méroïtique. Corpus des inscriptions publiés. De Boccard. Millet, N.B. 1982 The Meroitic Texts from the Qasr Ibrim Cemeteries. In The Cemeteries of Qaṣr Ibrîm: A Report of the Excavations Conducted by W.B. Emery in 1961, ed. A.J. Mills, pp. 68–81. Egypt Exploration Society Excavation Memoir 51. Monneret de Villard, U. 1937 Iscrizione meroitica di Kawa. Aegyptus 17:101–103. Peust, C. 1999 Das Napatanische. Ein Ägyptischer Dialekt aus dem Nubien des späten ersten vorchristlichen Jahrtausends. Texte, Glossar, Grammatik. Peust & Gutschmidt. Rafed el-Sayed 2011 Afrikanischstämmiger Lehnworschatz in älteren Ägyptisch. Untersuchungen zur ägyptisch-afrikanischen lexikalischen Interferenz im dritten und zweiten Jahrtausend v. Chr. Orientalia Lovanensia Analecta 211. Peeters. Rilly, C. 2000 Deux exemples de décrets amulétiques oraculaires en méroïtique. Les ostraca REM 1317/1168 et REM 1319 de Shokan. Meroitic Newsletter 27:99–118. ——— 2007 La langue du royaume de Méroé. Un panorama de la plus ancienne culture écrite d’Afrique subsaharienne. Champion. ——— 2010 Le méroïtique et sa famille linguistique. Peeters. ——— 2011 Les chouettes ont des oreilles. L’inscription méroïtique hiéroglyphique d’el-Hobagi REM 1222. In La pioche et la plume. Autour du Soudan, du Liban et de la Jordanie. Hommages archéologiques à Patrice Lenoble, ed. V.  Rondot, F.  Alpi, and F.  Villeneuve, pp. 481–99. Presses de l’université Paris-Sorbonne. ——— 2012 L’apport des deux stèles à notre connaissance de l’écriture en hiéroglyphes égyptiens des anthroponymes et toponymes napatéens. Annexe. In Les stèles de l’an 3 d’Aspelta, by D. Valbelle, pp. 73–91. Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale Bibliothèque d’Étude 154. ——— 2014 Language and Ethnicity in Ancient Sudan. In The Fourth Cataract and Beyond: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference for Nubian Studies, ed. J.R. Anderson and D.A. Welsby, pp. 1169–88. British Museum Publications on Egypt and Sudan 1. Peeters. ——— 2016 The Wadi Howar Diaspora and its Role in the Spread of East Sudanic Languages from the Fourth to the First Millennia bce. In Reconstruction et classification généalogique. Tendances actuelles, ed. K. Pozdniakov. Faits de Langues 47(1):151–64. ——— in prep. Le sistre d’Arnekhamani, la plus ancienne inscription méroïtique datée, Revue d’Égyptologie. Simon, C., C. Kramar, and A. Susisni 1990 Étude des ossements humains. In Kerma, royaume de Nubie. L’antiquité africaine au temps des pharaons, ed. C.  Bonnet, pp. 101–108. Musée d’Art et d’Histoire (Geneva). Trigger, B.G. 1964 Meroitic and Eastern Sudanic: A Linguistic Relationship? Kush 12:188–94. Valbelle, D. 2012 Les stèles de l’an 3 d’Aspelta. Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale Bibliothèque d’Étude 154. Zibelius-Chen, K. 2014 Sprachen Nubiens in pharaonischer Zeit. Lingua Aegyptia 22:267–309.

Chapter 33

The Easter n De sert i n the 1st M il l en n ium bce a n d 1st M illen n ium ce Andrea Manzo

Introduction The relevance of the Eastern Desert in the processes affecting northeastern Africa in the 1st millennium bce–1st millennium ce is related to three main factors. The first is the pastoral and mobile style of life adopted by its inhabitants to cope with the arid conditions of the region (Andersen 2012:127) and the symbiotic economic relationships, possibly already defined in the 5th–4th millennia bce, with the agropastoral inhabitants of the Nile valley (Barnard 2012a:4, 13). The second factor is the richness of mineral resources characterizing the Eastern Desert. As in earlier times, gold continued to be crucial in making the Eastern Desert a relevant area not only for the neighboring regions, but for the entire ancient world (Klemm and Klemm  2013:609–11; see also Barnard  2012b:176–77). Other resources like emerald mines, and in the Egyptian Eastern Desert, stone quarries were also important (Harrell and Storemyr 2009:9–18; see also Barnard 2012a:6, 2012b:177). A third factor is the important tracks crossing the Eastern Desert. These usually allowed direct access to the inner mining areas from the Nile valley, but also allowed avoiding the meanders of the Nile, as in the case of the Abu Hamed track, and gave access to the coast of the Red Sea and its harbors ­(Shinnie  ­1991:­51–53; Manzo  1999:11–12). The Red Sea harbors were certainly already important in the Bronze Age but now became gateways to a maritime network extending to the Indian

672   Andrea Manzo Ocean and, after the spread of Islam in Africa, were hubs of pilgrimage routes (Barnard 2012b:176–77). The Eastern Desert is a largely mountainous region with deep and sometimes also large valleys formed by water erosion in wetter periods and forming natural ways of movement across the region (Barbour 1961:130; Updegraff 1988:51; Barnard 2012a:6) (Fig. 33.1a). Moreover, in the beds of these ancient rivers, under several meters of loose sediments, there are sometimes underground pockets of water (Barbour 1961:31, 130; Barnard 2012b:182). These can be reached by excavating wells, and this possibility represented a crucial factor both for the local inhabitants of the Eastern Desert, and for the Nile valley people who moved across the region. Always brought to light by erosion, sometimes the above-mentioned mineral resources are exposed on the flanks of the Red Sea hills (Barnard 2012b:182). Climate in this region was by the 1st millennium bce already similar to that of the present—characterized by dry conditions (Andersen 2012:129; Barnard 2012b:181)—but there were also areas with some vegetation, mainly represented by acacias and occasionally other species and some bushes and grasses (Barbour  1961:39–40, 49, 66–67, 71–72; Barnard  2012a:4,  2012b:182; see also Andersen 2012:130–31) (Fig. 33.2). Rains are very rare but do occur sometimes and may cause flash floods mainly in winter in the northern part of the Eastern Desert, while its southern sector is affected by tropical summer rains, which also characterize the Ethiopian highlands, and feed some rivers crossing the southern fringes of Eastern Sudan (Barbour 1961:221, 226–27; Updegraff 1988:51; Barnard 2012a:4) (Fig. 33.1b). Of course, the highly seasonal and limited availability of resources scattered in wide areas favored the adoption of a mobile life style by the human groups inhabiting the region since very ancient times, and this was also true for the 1st millennium bce–1st ­millennium ce. It should be stressed from the very beginning that environmental conditions also affect the availability of archaeological evidence from the Eastern Desert. It is not only the environmental difficulties that greatly limit exploration of the region (Vercoutter 1994:63–64), but also the nomadic style of life of the ancient inhabitants of the region that resulted in sites with no stratification and represented only by scatters of archaeological materials on the surface without visible architectural components. Those sites are usually severely eroded by wind, easily destroyed by natural and anthropic factors, and difficult to identify in the absence of intensive surveys, which is the most suitable approach to record nomadic camps (Gates-Foster  2012:202–203). If in general the remains of most of the settlement sites are very limited, a substantial amount of materials are related to more permanent occupation in the mining areas, near the quarries in Egypt, and to the stations connected to the wells scattered along the tracks crossing the region and often associated with rock art and rock inscriptions, as well as to the isolated or grouped tombs of different types occurring all over the region (Vercoutter 1994:65–68). Given the economic relevance of the resources available in the region, some infor­ mation can be obtained from external written sources, whose availability is often conditioned by socio-political factors in the cultural contexts in which they were

The Eastern Desert in the 1st Millennium BCE and 1st Millennium CE   673

Figure 33.1  Satellite images showing: (a) the Eastern Desert and the surrounding regions, the hilly and ragged terrain is also evident; (b) the climatic and ecological areas of the Eastern Desert, the ones with code PA are characterized by winter rains, the ones with code AT by summer rains, rainfall is increasing moving northwards and southwards respectively. Based on Google Earth satellite imagery.

­ roduced, and, as shown below, are not homogeneously distributed through time. p Consequently, our reconstruction of the history of the region resulting from the integration of the archaeological evidence and written sources is still very limited and many questions are still waiting for answers.

674   Andrea Manzo

Figure 33.2  View of the landscape in the Jebel Mesham area, near Derudeb, on the southern fringes of the Eastern Desert, a dry environment with some vegetation; two tumuli in the foreground. Courtesy of the Italian Archaeological Expedition to the Eastern Sudan of the Università di Napoli “L’Orientale.”

The Textual Sources The available written sources mentioning the Eastern Desert and its inhabitants are texts in Egyptian, written both by Egyptians and Nubians, and, for the later phases, in Greek, Latin, Coptic, Meroitic, and Arabic. While the texts in Meroitic were produced by Nubians, those in Greek and Latin were mainly produced by Mediterranean geographers and historians, while those in Coptic were written by Egyptian Christian monks, and the texts in Arabic by Muslim geographers and historians. It should be stressed from the very beginning that no written sources produced by the inhabitants of the Eastern Desert themselves are available. The only exception is represented by a limited number of late (5th century ce) texts, such as the inscription in Meroitic language of Kharamadoye, whose identification as a Blemmyan king is very likely (Rilly 2008:192–93; see also Eide et al. 1998:1103–1107) and a few Greek and Coptic diplomatic and legal texts (see below). Therefore, in most of the available external sources the inhabitants of the Eastern Desert are typically depicted as barbaric people, sometimes also characterized by monstrous features (Updegraff  1988:64–65), inhabiting inhospitable, exotic,

The Eastern Desert in the 1st Millennium BCE and 1st Millennium CE   675 and dangerous regions (Eide et al. 1994:331), trying to raid and eventually invade and settle the Nile valley (Updegraff 1988:46, 63). Nevertheless, since the very beginning and through all the periods, some of these texts are also related to the presence of individuals originating from groups inhabiting the Eastern Desert who settled in the Nile valley and who are quoted in legal documents and letters, showing their integration in the cultural and social context of the valley (see, e.g., Updegraff  1988:57–61; Eide et al. 1994:296–97 [l. 5]; Eide et al. 1996:579–80, 613–14 [l. 21]; Eide et al. 1998:1196–1216; Pierce 2012:237). Despite all their limits, the epigraphic texts produced for celebrating the victories of the Kushite and Egyptian rulers and, later on, the geographic and historical literary texts provide some insights into the history of Eastern Desert and its inhabitants and their economy, as well as the variety of people of the region.

Napatan Sources (7th–4th century bce) A group which likely settled in the Eastern Desert and called Burahayu, a name perhaps related to the one of the Blemmyes (Updegraff 1988:55–56), were the opponents of the late 7th-century bce Napatan king Anlamani (Eide et al.  1994:221–22 [ll. 16–20]). A vanquished people labeled as Mededet, a name possibly related to the earlier Egyptian ­geographic and ethnic name “Medjay” (see Zibelius  1972:133; Updegraff  1988:57; also Liszka and de Souza, this volume), settled east of the Kushite kingdom, and perhaps more specifically east of Kawa, and is mentioned in several hieroglyphic inscriptions of Napatan kings such as Amannote-erike of the second half of the 5th century bce (Eide et al. 1996:407 [l. 46]) and Harsiyotef of the first half of the 4th century bce (Eide et al. 1996:448–50 [ll. 78–91]), while a region named Medeyyt rebelled against Nastasen in the second half of the 4th century bce (Eide et al. 1996:492 [l. 61]).

Meroitic and Ptolemaic Sources (4th century bce–4th century ce) Unfortunately, our limited understanding of the Meroitic language limits our efforts to reconstruct the relations between the Kushite kingdom and the inhabitants of the Eastern Desert from the last centuries bce to the 4th century ce through textual evidence. Given the interest in elephants and its active involvement in the Red Sea and on the African Red Sea coast, leading to the establishment of coastal stations there (see Scullard 1974:126; Barnard 2012b:176), it is possible that in the 3rd century bce Ptolemaic Egypt established political relations with the coastal groups, and perhaps also with those settled inland, i.e. in the Eastern Desert. Some of these groups, like the Megabaroi and the Blemmyes, may also have been in the Kushite sphere of political influence, as related by Strabo 17.1.2 (Eide et al. 1996:559–60, see also Updegraff 1988:79).

676   Andrea Manzo

Late Roman, Byzantine, Blemmyan, and Nubian Sources (4th–6th century ce) The limited understanding of the Meroitic sources is a true pity, not only because no information is available on the relations between Kushites and peoples of the Eastern Desert from the 3rd century bce to the 4th century ce, but also considering the role attributed from the 3rd century ce onwards in the textual sources on Roman and Byzantine Egypt to the inhabitants of the Eastern Desert (Eide et al. 1998:1054, 1057–59, 1060–63, 1063–65, 1065–66, 1087–92, 1107–1109, 1110–12, 1138–41). Particularly from the 3rd century ce, the Blemmyes conducted repeated attacks and raids in the valley, possibly connected with the rebellions characterizing Roman Egypt in this phase (Burstein, this volume). These events contributed greatly to the insecurity of the province of Egypt (Updegraff 1988:68–72). So far the only textual source supporting the hypothesis that a similar situation may have affected Kush too, is a passage in a text in honor of Emperor Maximianus relating to a possible war between the Meroites and the Blemmyes (Updegraff 1988:87; Eide et al. 1998:1056–57). Already at the end of the 4th century ce, the military activities conducted by the Blemmyes may have resulted in their occupation of part of Lower Nubia as explicitly stated by Epiphanius of Salamis (Eide et al. 1998:1115–21) and later on by Olympiodorus (Eide et al. 1998:1126–28), and perhaps also shown by the Meroitic inscription of the Blemmyan king Kharamadoye at Kalabsha (see again Rilly 2008:192–93). The occupation of a part of Lower Nubia by the Blemmyes is certainly also shown by the Greek graffiti of Blemmyan kings in the temple of Mandulis at Kalabsha (Eide et al. 1998:1128–31, 1131–32). The war with the kings of Noubades led to the end of the Blemmyan occupation of Lower Nubia perhaps before the mid-5th century ce, as shown by the inscription of Silko, King of Noubades, at Kalabsha (Eide et al. 1998:1147–53) and by a letter found at Qasr Ibrim addressed to the ruler of the Noubades by the king of the Blemmyes, to have their lost territories returned (Eide et al. 1998:1158–65).

Axumite Sources In the same centuries, unstable military and political conditions are suggested also for the regions on the southern fringes of the Eastern Desert. Axumite sources going back to the time of King Ezana, in the mid-4th century ce, as well as the earlier inscription (Adulitana II) of an anonymous king of Axum—or possibly just of Adulis—mention military campaigns conducted against the “Bega” (i.e., the Beja), a name identifying the inhabitants of the Eastern Desert living north of the regions directly controlled by the Axumite kings (Zaborski  1968:299–300; Eide et al.  1998:1094–96). Interestingly, according to a marginal note to the text of Cosmas Indicopleustes, who copied in the 6th century the Adulitana inscription, the Beja had to be identified with the Blemmyes (see also Updegraff 1988:86) and the presence of groups related to the inhabitants of the Eastern Desert also in regions farther south is perhaps already suggested by Ptolemy in

The Eastern Desert in the 1st Millennium BCE and 1st Millennium CE   677 the 2nd century ce (Updegraff 1988:65). A further Axumite inscription perhaps to be ascribed to the predecessor of Ezana mentions a campaign against the region of Metet possibly also related to the Eastern Desert and to the Mededet of the Napatan sources (Hatke 2013:80–82). All these Axumite military activities may have been connected to the unrest that the inhabitants of the Eastern Desert were causing on the fringes of the Axumite kingdom, making the important tracks crossing the region unsafe, like the one mentioned by Procopius of Caesarea leading from Axum to Elephantine (Updegraff 1988:73–74). It is noteworthy that the anonymous king of the inscription Adulitana II explicitly mentions the opening of a track directly leading from his territories to Egypt after a victory against the groups inhabiting the regions crossed by the road: the Atalmo, the Taggaites, and the Beja (Eide et al.  1998:951; see also Updegraff 1988:86–87). On the contrary, the campaign against the Beja by Ezana seems more limited and resulted in the surrender of the kings of six Beja tribes, and in the distribution of beer, wine, water, bread, and meat to them, as well as of some cattle after their deportation and resettlement (Zaborski 1968:300–301). Thus, perhaps the Axumite king wanted to incorporate some Beja tribes into his state, allowing them to settle in territories under his control and perhaps to collaborate in the defense of his interests in exchange (Zaborski 1968:305). Similar accommodations may have been attempted on the southern border of Egypt, where in the 4th century ce groups of Blemmyes may have already become federated with the empire (Eide et al. 1998:1083–87).

Textual Sources: Discussion Most of the sources quoted so far seem to be characterized by the occurrence of several ethnic and geographic names related to the Eastern Desert, a region apparently inhabited by a variety of groups which were also felt as different and thus often labeled with different names by the Kushites and later on by the Axumites. This aspect is also very evident in the Mediterranean sources going back to Hellenistic times, such as Eratosthenes in Strabo 17.1.2 (Updegraff 1988:62; Eide et al. 1996:559–60 n. 109) distinguishing “towards the Red Sea the Megabaroi and the Blemmyes, who are subject to the Aithiopians but are neighbors of the Egyptians; and along the sea live the Troglodytes.” The same three main groups are also mentioned in Strabo 17.10.53 (Eide et al. 1998:830 n. 190; see in general Pierce 2012:228–34). A similar variety in the peopling as well as some of the names already occurring in the Hellenistic sources, like Trog(l)odytes and Megabarri, is also reported later on by Pliny the Elder’s Naturalis historia 6.189–90, where the Mattitae, too, perhaps the Mededet of the Napatan and the Metet of the Axumite sources, are listed (Eide et al. 1998:859 n. 198; see also Hatke 2013:81). The same variety also emerges from the Arabic sources dating to the end of the 1st millennium ce. Al-Yaqubi mentions seven Beja “kingdoms” in the region between Aswan and the EthioEritrean highlands, but includes among them also a couple of kingdoms on the highlands (see, e.g., Vantini  1975:71–72). According to the Arab geographer Ibn Hawqal, some of the tribes that settled at the southern fringes of the Eastern Desert were vassals

678   Andrea Manzo of the kingdom of Alwa (Vantini  1975:163–64), and this suggests that the Christian Nubian kingdoms may also have sometimes attempted to extend their influence to the Eastern Desert and its inhabitants. As far as the socio-political organization of the groups inhabiting the Eastern Desert is concerned, Strabo stresses the fact that the Troglodytes were divided into tribes, each one with its own ruler (Eide et al. 1998:826). A similar organization may have also characterized the Blemmyes in later times, as in the 5th century ce Olympiodorus mentions their phylarchoi, a term that could be translated as “tribal chiefs,” below a king (Eide et al. 1998:1126–28). The six tribes subdued by Ezana (see above) were ruled by six different kings and the Arab geographer Yaqubi mentions five Beja “kingdoms” including several different tribes. Nevertheless, the division into several groups or tribes by the inhabitants of the Eastern Desert did not prevent some of these groups from recognizing the authority of a paramount chief who called himself basileus (“king”) and mentions phylarchs below him, as for example in a Greek letter addressed to the king of Noubades (see above). This is also evident in the Arabic sources (see, e.g., Vantini 1975:624–25). As far as the other social characteristics of the groups inhabiting the Eastern Desert are concerned, the only aspect considered remarkable by the sources was the fact related by Strabo 16.4.17, that the Troglodytes had their wives and children in common and that, most likely because of their prestige and respect, women could put an end to the fights (Eide et al. 1998:826). The texts also give some insights on the economy of the groups inhabiting the Eastern Desert. Interestingly, some of the names of those groups described by the Hellenistic sources like those mentioned by Strabo 16.4.8–13 are related to their style of life and especially diet habits (Eide et al. 1998:823–26; Pierce 2012:228). This may not necessarily reflect a real division into several ethnic groups, but may be possibly explained by the fact that a single group could conduct a specialized exploitation of specific resources in different seasons and could therefore be described with different names of this type in different occasions. Given the interest of ivory and, especially in Hellenistic times, of elephants (see Barnard 2012b:176), special emphasis was placed on the description of local groups hunting elephants and living between the Nile and the Red Sea, as for example in Strabo 16.4.10 and Pliny Naturalis historia 8.26 (Eide et al. 1998:824–25, 861–63 respectively). Strabo 17.1.53 also refers to the Troglodytes, the Blemmyes, and the Megabaroi as nomads who were used to raiding the regions of the Nile valley (Updegraff 1988:63; Eide et al. 1998:830). If the nomadic style of life is clearly related to a pastoral economy, this passage also draws our attention to the economic relevance these raids could have had for those groups. Apparently, the practice of raiding, perhaps already carried out in earlier times (see above), not only continued in Egypt in the first centuries ce (see, e.g., Eide et al. 1998:933 n. 224), but dramatically increased after the 3rd century ce, as referred to by several sources (Pierce 2012:235–37). Similar raids were also conducted after the Arab conquest of Egypt in the 7th century ce and the establishment of fines by the Arab rulers of Egypt, which the inhabitants of the Eastern Desert had to pay for every sheep or cow they seized (Vantini 1975:59, 153–55, 276). It should be noted that the relevance of the

The Eastern Desert in the 1st Millennium BCE and 1st Millennium CE   679 nomadic and pastoral life style does not exclude the practice of agriculture in some parts of the Eastern Desert by sedentary or semi-sedentary groups of Beja, described as cultivating sorghum in the Arabic sources (Vantini 1975:160). At least, from the 8th–9th century ce the inhabitants of the Eastern Desert were also increasingly involved in the organization and management of the caravans of Muslim pilgrims directed towards the harbors to cross the Red Sea (Vantini 1975:153–55), and this may have represented a further source of income for them. Of course, the large number of references to the Eastern Desert and its inhabitants dating to the Hellenistic period is easily explained by the interest in the resources of the region as well as the trade routes crossing it (Barnard  2012b:176–77; GatesFoster 2012:193–201). This is clearly evident for example in the detailed description of the extraction of gold in the mines under the authority of the kings of Egypt in the 2ndcentury bce work by Agatharchides reported by Diodorus Siculus 3.12 (Eide et al. 1996:657–59). Other valued mineral resources of the region are mentioned, such as the emerald mines which are said by Epiphanius of Elephantine to have been controlled first by the Romans, and later on, possibly from the end of the 4th century ce, by the Blemmyes (Eide et al. 1998:1115–21). The gold and emerald mines are also mentioned in several Arabic sources and are the reason that led groups of Arabs to settle in the Eastern Desert as early as the 8th century, where they took full control of the exploitation of these resources (Vantini 1975:71–72, 151–52), and to blend with the local people through mixed marriages (Vantini 1975:71–72, 131, 151–53, 190, 626–27). According to the Arabic sources, the settlement of groups of Arabs in the Eastern Desert and the mixed marriages not only impacted the social structure of the groups inhabiting the region, but also their religious beliefs. Sometimes, the rulers of the Beja tribes are explicitly said to be Muslim and to speak Arabic (see, e.g., Vantini 1975:164), but an indirect evidence of the conversion to Islam is also represented by the Arabic names characterizing some Beja rulers mentioned in the Arabic sources from the 9th century ce onwards (Vantini 1975:626–27, 729). Nevertheless, despite his name, a Beja ruler named Ali Baba is said by the Egyptian historian Et-Taghribirdi to have worshipped an idol of black stone (Vantini 1975:731), suggesting that the conversion to Islam was only nominal and that the process of conversion may have lasted for a long time (Vantini 1975:153, 161–62, 624). Before the conversion to Islam, the Beja were described by Aswani, a 10th-century Arabic writer, as pagans (Vantini 1975:630–31), but a few passages also suggest that some of them may have been christianized (Vantini 1975:148, 276 see also Eide et al. 1998:1212–14). Of course, some documents point to the adoption of Christianity by single Blemmyes living in Upper Egypt (Eide et al. 1998:1199, 1212–14) and an ostracon possibly bearing a translation into the Beja language of Psalm 29, 3–5 (Browne 2003) also suggests that the Christian faith had some diffusion among the people of the Eastern Desert. For the earliest phases, just few passages provide some insights on the religion of the inhabitants of the Eastern Desert. Wine libations and slaughtered animals were offered to the gods (Eide et al.  1998:1090–91), devoted especially to Mandulis, and in the region of Kalabsha, where the main temple of this god was located, the presence of priests (Eide et al.  1998:1127–32) as well as of Blemmyan

680   Andrea Manzo cult societies (Eide et al. 1998:1134–38) is recorded. Moreover, the Blemmyes are also mentioned in the treaty allowing pilgrims to cross the Roman border to reach the temple of Philae, as well as allowing the annual voyage of the cult statue of Isis across the Roman border (Eide et al. 1998:1153–57), and this certainly suggests their devotion also to that goddess.

The Archaeological Data As already stressed, the discontinuity of available archaeological data through the examined period is not clearly related to phases of less intensive occupation of the Eastern Desert, but only reflects the actual limits in the exploration of the region. Indirect evidence of the relevance of the Eastern Desert and its inhabitants at the very beginning of the studied period may be represented by the discovery in ancestral Kushite tombs at El-Kurru of a large number of gold objects and even of gold nuggets used as pendants (Dunham 1950:16, fig. 2d; Markowitz and Doxey 2014:108). It was suggested, although admittedly on a very limited evidence, that some mining sites in the Eastern Desert were actively exploited in post–New Kingdom times (Klemm and Klemm 2013:611). Of course, the mines in the Eastern Desert were not the only gold sources available; as recently demonstrated, at that time there was the exploitation of gold mining sites in the Fourth Cataract area like Hosh el-Guruf (Emberling and Williams 2010:38). Nevertheless, the abundance of gold available to the ancestors of the 25th Dynasty, to the 25th Dynasty itself, and to the Napatan kings (see Markowitz and Doxey 2014:108–109) may suggest that they were also able to maintain access to the mines located in the Nubian Eastern Desert. Unfortunately, so far no evidence clearly dating to the 1st millennium bce was collected in the Nubian Eastern Desert itself (see also Lassányi 2012:252). Somehow ambiguous materials were collected in a round funerary platform tumulus in the Wadi Gabgaba basin: seventeen gold artifacts of Kushite type including rings, rosettes, scarabs, flies, a hand with forearm, and bivalve and cowry shells (Sadr et al.  1995:218, fig. 23) (Fig.  33.3). According to the excavators, these objects were probably looted and wrapped in a rag which was 14C dated to the 1st century bce–1st century ce, and hidden in a later looted tomb where they had been finally found and which was not earlier than the 3rd–4th century ce. Interestingly, the radiometric date obtained from the rag containing the jewels is compatible with the chronology suggested for the jewels themselves by the comparison of the cowry-shaped gold beads with the ones decorating some jewels of the Meroitic queen Amanishakheto or an ornament from Faras of the same period (Wenig 1978:240–41 n. 168, 243, and 248 n. 171). Given the apparent internal consistency of the assemblage of gold artifacts and of their dating with the one resulting from the radiometric analysis, it may be suggested that the gold artifacts were looted in the Eastern Desert itself, in an earlier tomb, although it remains impossible to specify if these objects arrived in the Eastern Desert in exchange for something, perhaps, given their value and quality, as a “diplomatic gift,” or if they were already

The Eastern Desert in the 1st Millennium BCE and 1st Millennium CE   681

Figure 33.3  Gold artifacts of Kushite type including rings, rosettes, scarabs, flies, a hand with forearm, and bivalve and cowry shells from around funerary platform tumulus in the Wadi Gabgaba basin. Length of the hand with forearm amulet 6.4 cm. Courtesy of Angelo CastiglioniCentro Ricerche Deserto Orientale. Photograph: Rocco Ricci © The British Museum.

the result of the looting of a Kushite Meroitic elite tomb somewhere in the Nile valley. An occupation phase may also go back to the last centuries bce at Deraheib, in the upper Wadi Allaqi, where some Hellenistic and Ptolemaic coins and artifacts—without associated structures—have been recorded (Sadr et al. 2004:198–99). Not less isolated, but certainly less enigmatic in the light of what was previously said, is the presence of a scatter of Meroitic sherds at Goz Regeb, immediately east of the Atbara (Manzo 2017), and of possible Greek-Roman remains on the Sudanese coast near Aqiq: they may well be ascribed to the phases of the intense Mediterranean maritime activities on the Red Sea between the last centuries bce and the early centuries ce (Seeger et al. 2006:11–12).

1st Millennium bce Southwest of Aqiq, in Eastern Sudan, between the southern fringes of the Eastern Desert and the Ethio-Eritrean highlands, the first part of the 1st millennium bce is marked by the transition between two distinct phases, possibly genetically connected: the Jebel Mokram Group, certainly linked to the earlier local cultures and still characterized by a component related to the Middle Nubian and especially Pan-Grave tradition (Liszka and de Souza, this volume), and the Hagiz Group, with some elements of continuity with the previous phases in the material culture, but also showing several innovations mainly evident in the settlement pattern and, presumably, in the adaptive system (Fattovich 1990:21–22; Manzo 2012:65). Essentially, already in the Jebel Mokram Group times, a large number of sites were located in the steppe, far away not only from the Gash River but also from the other streams crossing the region and this trend continued with the Hagiz Group, when the large permanent villages apparently disappeared, and the most fertile areas were completely deserted (Sadr 1991:45–50), with the only possible

682   Andrea Manzo notable exception of the Gash delta, where traces of sites and of the cultivation of sorghum have been documented for this phase (Manzo  2012:101, 105) (Fig.  33.4). This change in the settlement pattern was likely related to a change in the life style of the inhabitants of the region, becoming more and more nomadic, while their economy from an agropastoral system was changing into an almost fully pastoral one, based on cattle breeding, as perhaps also supported by the few available direct indicators of the subsistence system (Sadr 1991:52–64). This process may also be reflected in the increasing frequency of organic temper making the vessels of the Hagiz Group lighter and in the occurrence of handles and grips, two features favoring their portability, as shown by more recent research (Manzo 2017). However, the ultimate reason for this change in the style of life and economy remains unexplained; eventual environmental or climatic factors cannot explain the complete abandonment of the most fertile parts of the region. While the political and military pressures from the Kushite and possibly more southern powers based on the Ethio-Eritrean plateau could be plausible explanations, another possible explanation, although largely unproven, could be the increasing symbiotic relationship with the neighboring regions stimulating the rise of nomads specialized in specific economic functions on the fringes of the states (Sadr 1991:71, 127–30). Whatever the reason was, this situation apparently lasted on the southern fringes of the Eastern Desert until the end of the 1st millennium ce.

1st Millennium ce For the 1st millennium ce and basically starting from the 3rd century ce, more archaeological evidence is also available for the Nubian Eastern Desert, and this is mainly represented by a large number of funerary sites with cylindrical stone superstructures, as well as by sites characterized by a specific class of pottery—Eastern Desert Ware—scattered throughout the area. Eastern Desert Ware is a substantial and very distinct ceramic corpus that can be quite safely ascribed to the inhabitants of the Eastern Desert (Barnard 2002, 2006, 2008; Barnard and Strouhal 2004:32–33; Barnard and Rose 2007:197–98). It is mainly represented by small cups and beakers with very few examples of bottles and some special shapes possibly to be interpreted as incense-burners or offering vessels, always characterized by a rich incised and impressed decoration often enhanced by colored paste and associated with high quality black and/or red surfaces (Fig. 33.5). Its distribution is very broad (Barnard and Strouhal 2004:32–33; Barnard et al. 2006; Barnard and Rose 2007:185–86, fig. 7-1, 2008:1, 20, fig. 1-1; Manzo  2014:237–46, fig. 15)—Eastern Desert Ware has been discovered in the Egyptian Eastern Desert South of the Wadi Hammamat and in the Roman and late Roman ports on the Egyptian Red Sea coast, in the Sudanese Eastern Desert, in the area of the Wadi Allaqi, Wadi Gabgaba, in the inner Red Sea Hills, in the region of Tabot, near the Jebel Qoqay/Romeladid, in Eastern Sudan east of the modern town of Kassala, and also in some sites in the Nile valley, in Lower Nubia in the Kalabsha-Wadi Qitna region (Fig. 33.6). Interestingly, the sites where it

The Eastern Desert in the 1st Millennium BCE and 1st Millennium CE   683

Figure 33.4  The change in the distribution of settlements in Eastern Sudan from (a) Jebel Mokram Group to (b) Hagiz Group and their relationship with the soils more suitable for agriculture (marked in darker colors), suggesting the adoption of a nomadic and pastoral style of life on the southern fringes of the Eastern Desert in the early 1st millennium bce. Courtesy of the Italian Archaeological Expedition to the Eastern Sudan of the Università di Napoli “L’Orientale”; elaborated by V. Zoppi.

occurs in Lower Nubia are within the area that may have been occupied by the Blemmyes according to the written sources (see above). Usually, Eastern Desert Ware represents only a small percentage of the ceramic collection from the sites in the Egyptian Eastern Desert and from Lower Nubia (Strouhal 1982:217, 1984:103; Barnard 2002:54, 2008:19, 103, 105, 2012b:179). Therefore, it has been suggested that the occurrence of Eastern Desert Ware at these sites can be related to the co-presence of limited groups of people from the Eastern Desert and of a majority of Lower Nubians or Egyptians. On the contrary, although this may be related to the limits of the investigations so far conducted there, this is not always the case for some sites of the Nubian Eastern Desert known only from surface collections (Manzo 2014:238–41), possibly for Tabot and certainly for the sites of the Kassala area (Manzo 2004:79). Interestingly, single occurrences of Eastern Desert Ware were also recorded in sites in the Fourth Cataract region and near Kurgus, and on the Ethiopian highlands, not far from Axum (Manzo 2014:237, 243–45) (Fig. 33.6). Settlement sites with structural remains of this period in the Nubian Eastern Desert are usually characterized by small rounded dwellings abutting each other and sometimes forming clusters, and are often associated with Aswani medieval ceramics (see Sadr et al. 2004:200; Lassányi 2012:253–56). Very few settlements are different. At Tabot, some large stone structures and so far unexplained rectangular platforms occur

684   Andrea Manzo

Figure 33.5  Eastern Desert Ware from Bir Nurayet, in the Sudanese Eastern Desert. Courtesy of the Bir Nurayet Project, Institute of Archeology and Ethnology Polish Academy of Sciences, Poznań. Photograph: Maciej Jórdeczka.

(Anwar A. Magid et al. 1995:166–67; Anwar A. Magid 2004:161), possibly a similar pattern characterized the poorly explored sites of Khor Nubt (see Gardner Wilkinson, Llewellyn, and de Rachewiltz quoted in Oman 1998:30, 32–33, 52) and Deraheib, where a possible settlement consisting of square structures and a couple of major isolated buildings has been recorded, but whose visible structures mainly go back to later phases (Sadr et al. 2004:198–200) (Fig. 33.7). Tabot also provided some evidence of the subsistence system adopted by the inhabitants of the site as some bones of cattle, and feces of sheep and goats were collected there, as well as grinding stones suggesting the exploitation of plants (Anwar A. Magid et al. 1995:170; Anwar A. Magid 2004:162–63). Moreover, at Tabot, archaeological evidence of some kind of involvement in long-distance exchanges is represented by ceramic materials imported from Egypt and the Mediterranean (Anwar A. Magid et al. 1995:169; Anwar A. Magid 2004:164–65, fig. 7). Interestingly, sherds of late Roman amphorae, perhaps arriving via Axum, were also collected in the Khatmiya Group sites in Eastern Sudan (Manzo 2004:79, pl. 6, 1–2). The association in some necropolises near Kalabsha, in Lower Nubia, between Eastern Desert Ware and a specific type of cylindrical platform tumulus, completely different from the usual gravel or soil mound tumulus of the contemporary tombs in the rest of Nubia, suggested that this type of funerary structure may also be ascribed to the

The Eastern Desert in the 1st Millennium BCE and 1st Millennium CE   685

Figure 33.6  Satellite image of the Eastern Desert and neighbor regions showing the sites where Eastern Desert Ware was collected as well as the main gold mining areas. Based on Google Earth satellite imagery.

Eastern Desert peoples (Strouhal 1984:270; see also Lassányi 2012:265). This hypothesis has been recently confirmed by the occurrence of the same association between Eastern Desert Ware and this type of structure recorded in sites of the Eastern Desert (see, e.g., Sadr et al. 1995:220–21; Castiglioni et al. 1997:163–64; Krzywinski 2012:151) and on its southern fringes like at Jebel Qoqay/Romeladid (Manzo 2014:241–43) (Fig. 33.8). These tombs, also known as akerataheils, usually contain bodies in contracted position directly protected by narrow funerary chambers built with larger stones and placed directly on the natural surface or in shallow pits, and invariably covered by cylindrical stone platforms of undressed stones (Lassányi 2012:262–63). Sometimes these structures are clustering and abutting each other, as clearly shown in the case of Wadi Qitna, in Lower Nubia, and surrounded by low walls forming enclosures (Strouhal 1984:92–93), perhaps suggesting family, clan, or other type of social affiliations (Lassányi 2012:265). Also at Wadi Qitna, the erection of undressed and uninscribed monolithic stelae was noted on some of these structures (Strouhal 1984:93–94). Concentrations of pottery around and on the structures, which at Wadi Qitna could be accessed through stairs, may suggest that funerary offerings, libations (see also Lassányi 2012:268), and possibly even meals took place there. As far as the distribution of these graves is concerned, it should be

686   Andrea Manzo

Figure 33.7 General view of the two main structures at Deraheib. Courtesy of Angelo Castiglioni-Centro Ricerche Deserto Orientale.

remarked that they are not necessarily associated with settlements of any kind and their absence is notable especially in the immediate vicinity of some of the large settlement sites in the Eastern Desert, like Deraheib (Sadr et al. 2004:200). A further, more elaborated, possible type of funerary structure consisting of several rounded stone platforms connected by walls between them and with a square stone platform exclusively occurring in a specific sector of the Sudanese Eastern Desert, in the Sinkat-Haya area (Krzywinski 2012:146–47), for the moment remains enigmatic and still awaits proper investigation. Interestingly, in the Kassala region the sites of the Khatmiya Group, whose pottery is very closely related to the Eastern Desert Ware, are not the only archaeological evidence for the 1st millennium ce. The Hagiz Group occupation continued, as previously stressed, in the region between the Gash and the Atbara and in the Gash delta, but near Jebel Ofreik, northeast of Goz Regeb and further south some sites with tumulus covering burials in contracted position and associated with Post-Meroitic pottery occur (Manzo  2004:75–77; Manzo  2012:45, 68, fig. 99). This suggests that at that time the region was inhabited by different groups, possibly exploiting specific contiguous and partially overlapping territories. With the notable exception of the funerary rituals, archaeology does not provide data on the religious practices of the inhabitants of the Nubian Eastern Desert, and also the evidence for studying the spread of Christianity is for the moment very limited. It was suggested that the cross characterizing some Eastern Desert Ware decorations may be

The Eastern Desert in the 1st Millennium BCE and 1st Millennium CE   687

Figure 33.8  Cylindrical stone platform at Jebel Qoqay/Romeladid, in the southern sector of  the Eastern Desert. Some fragments of Eastern Desert Ware were collected. Courtesy of the  Italian Archaeological Expedition to the Eastern Sudan of the Università di Napoli “L’Orientale.”

related to the adoption of the Christian faith by some groups living in the Eastern Desert (Sadr 1995:161; Castiglioni, Castiglioni, and Sadr 1997:166), but this is clearly difficult to prove. The occurrence of extended burials in graves marked by a cylindrical stone platform in the Mons Smaragdus area may be a more reliable element, also because these graves are apparently close to a structure which may be identified with a church (Krzywinski  2012:149–50). Moreover, a possible Christian monastic anachoretic site (lavra) was recorded in the region of the Mons Smaragdus (Sidebotham et al. 2004:23). The possible occurrence of a church was also suggested for the site of Deraheib (Sadr 1995:161) and, if confirmed, such a structure in an important center in the heart of the Eastern Desert should be regarded at least as proof of tolerance towards Christianity there. In the more southern regions of the Eastern Sudan a Christian site with material culture intriguingly related to the Middle Nile valley and not to Axum was recorded in the Gash delta (Fattovich 1984:399–402). The earliest archaeological evidence of the presence of Islamized groups in the Nubian Eastern Desert is represented by the cemetery associated with Arabic inscriptions dated to the 9th century ce at the site of Khor Nubt (Oman 1998:54–55) (Fig. 33.9). The available evidence for this site only allows a general idea of the structures associated with the inscriptions: they are described as “elliptical earth graves” and rectangular, perhaps originally domed, structures (Llewellyn in Oman 1998:33–35). On the contrary, in

688   Andrea Manzo

Figure 33.9 Funerary stela with Arabic inscription from the Khor Nubt, dating to 287 A.H. Courtesy of the Italian Archaeological Expedition to the Khor Nubt of the Università di Napoli “L’Orientale.”

the case of other Islamic sites like the cemetery of Jebel Maman and other sites in Eastern Sudan as well as in the Sudanese coastal area, the tombs are well preserved structures consisting of cubic bases topped by further squared or cylindrical elements and by a dome, but no dating evidence was collected nearby and their chronology is debatable (Salah Omer Elsadig  2000:38; Fattovich  2010:103–104) (Fig. 33.10). Likewise the evidence of Islamized communities represented by possible mosques near several gold mining sites of the Eastern Desert unfortunately remains undated (see, e.g., Klemm and Klemm 2013:378, 380, 433, 440, 476, 537, figs. 6.34, 6.92, 6.100, 6.130, 6.190). Coastal sites characterized by traces of occupation going back to the second half of the 1st millennium ce and of the presence of Islam were recorded at El-Rih, south of Aqiq, and at Aydhab. At El-Rih, buildings made from coral blocks, cisterns associated with materials sometimes imported from the Far East and dating from the 10th century ce, as well as funerary inscriptions dating to the 10th–11th centuries ce, were recorded (Kawatoko 1993a, 1993b:208–209). Aydhab is characterized by coral stone structures, apparently associated with archaeological materials, some also imported from the Far East, but apparently not earlier than the 13th century (Kawatoko 1993b:204–208).

The Eastern Desert in the 1st Millennium BCE and 1st Millennium CE   689

Final Remarks One of the traits characterizing the Nubian Eastern Desert according to the written sources was the fact that it was inhabited by several different groups, with different habits and, as highlighted in the Hellenistic and early Roman sources, style of life and diet. For the moment, perhaps also due to the limits in the archaeological exploration of the Eastern Desert, this variety does not emerge from the archaeological data, with the notable exception of Eastern Sudan, where Hagiz Group, Khatmiya Group, and PostMeroitic sites characterized in the same centuries different, partially overlapping sectors of the region. On the contrary, at least for the period better represented in the available archaeological evidence, from the 3rd to the 7th century ce, some cultural traits like cylindrical platform graves and Eastern Desert Ware seem to characterize the whole Eastern Desert, from the Wadi Hammamat in Egypt to the Ethio-Eritrean highlands in the south (see also Lassányi 2012:267), although with some possible regional variants (see, e.g., Manzo 2004:78–79). This apparent inconsistency between written sources and archaeological evidence may be certainly related to the complex relations linking material culture and identity, and made even more complicate in our case by the fact that presumed identities were defined and ascribed to the inhabitants of the Eastern Desert by outsiders. On the other hand, the extension of the distribution of Eastern Desert Ware and of the cylindrical funerary platforms is not surprising if we take into consideration the seasonal movements that characterized the life styles of the groups of the Eastern Desert, a factor which certainly favored contacts between them and the sharing of cultural traits even over long distances. Of course, important discontinuities in the distribution of the Eastern Desert Ware can be remarked mainly on the southern fringes of the area where it occurs. Sites of the Khatmiya Group of Eastern Sudan are somehow isolated from the other southernmost Eastern Desert Ware sites (Manzo 2014:246–47). This may be related to historical factors like the above-mentioned resettlement of groups of Beja, possibly from the Eastern Desert, inside or on the fringes of the territory under the Axumite control referred to in the mid-4th century ce by King Ezana or to other so far unspecified reasons. Also, as far as the economy of the inhabitants of the Eastern Desert is concerned, apparently the articulated range of adaptations recorded in the written sources, especially in Hellenistic and early Roman times is not reflected in the archaeological record: this may be largely due to its incompleteness and to the fact that the archaeological detection of some of those activities may require very thorough strategies of investigation in the field, not yet applied in the region. Nevertheless, it is highly likely that other specialized activities were indeed associated to animal breeding and to a limited, most likely sorghum based, agriculture, which is also supported by some finds from the Roman port in Berenike (Lassányi 2012:267). Interestingly, agriculture is almost completely overlooked in the external written sources describing the style of life of the inhabitants of the Eastern Desert, but this may be explained by the fact that it may have been practiced in inner areas, like for example the Gash delta or the Tabot region, both far from the Nile

690   Andrea Manzo valley and the Red Sea coast—the areas where the information on the Eastern Desert and its inhabitants may have been primarily collected by outsiders. The written sources often depict the people of the region as warriors and marauders, but there are very few direct traces of this in the archaeological record except perhaps for a few arrowheads whose shape was thought to be typical of the Eastern Desert (see Lassányi 2012:267, fig. 18.17). Most likely in this case the textual sources are ideologically biased, possibly by the traditional need of the states of the valley to depict the people living in areas usually out of their reach as personification of chaotic forces, and highly conditioned by undeniable specific traumatic events in the relations between the Nile valley people and inhabitants of the deserts. Other sources, like the legal texts from Gebelein as well as the occurrence of Eastern Desert Ware in several Roman sites in the Eastern Desert and on the Red Sea coast as well as in sites in the Nubian Nile valley shows that every day, most likely less traumatic, contacts with the inhabitants of the Eastern Desert did actually exist. Moreover, the occurrence of ceramic materials imported from Egypt and the Mediterranean at Tabot, a site located in a strategic spot along the tracks network, and in the Khatmiya Group sites in the Kassala area, all dating to a phase when Mediterranean imports were extremely rare in Upper Nubia and central Sudan (Manzo 2004:80), may also demonstrate the efficiency of the north-south routes crossing the Eastern Desert, and connecting Egypt and the Ethiopian highlands, possibly the same routes mentioned in the late Roman sources and by the Axumite kings. A form of involvement in the trade going on along the Red Sea cannot be excluded as well. Those finds may also suggest the possible involvement of the groups of the Eastern Desert in trade taking place along those routes, like they were later on involved in the organization and management of the caravans of pilgrims to Mecca. Of course, the availability of materials imported from the lower Nile valley or the Ethio-Eritrean highlands to the groups of the Eastern Desert may also be explained by the long-established relations of economic symbiosis with those regions, based on the exchange of crops and the products related to breeding, a pattern whose dynamics and diachronic changes still remains largely unexplored, as this will require accurate and systematic paleobotanical and archaeozoological investigations at sites in the Eastern Desert. Regarding the economy of the groups inhabiting the Eastern Desert, the fact that some sites with Eastern Desert Ware are located inside gold-bearing areas may suggest the involvement of the inhabitants of the Eastern Desert in the exploitation of the gold sources (Manzo 2014:247; see also Klemm and Klemm 2013:374–75, fig. 6.31), even if the written sources are somehow ambiguous about that. Of course, the occurrence of gold objects in a 5th-millennium bce tomb investigated in the Wadi Elei, as well as the identification of a possible mining pit overlapped by the same tomb are an indirect evidence that the exploitation of the gold sources may have been conducted by the inhabitants of the region since very ancient times (Sadr et al. 1995:209–10). However, this exploitation may also have been indirect, as possibly the inhabitants of the Eastern Desert may have taken advantage of the work of groups of miners mostly coming from the Nile valley. Hence, the clarification of this point will require new fieldwork.

Figure 33.10  View of the Islamic cemetery at Jebel Maman, in Eastern Sudan. Courtesy of the Italian Archaeological Expedition to the Eastern Sudan of the Università di Napoli “L’Orientale.”

692   Andrea Manzo The possible presence of a certain number of people from the Nile valley related to the exploitation of the natural resources of the Eastern Desert may also suggest how and where exogenous and new religious ideologies, like the cult of Isis, Christianity, and, later on, Islam may have spread in this region. In turn, in the Nile valley, the cult of Mandulis, the god of the Blemmyes par excellence, may have been characterized by ­elements of the still largely unknown religious practices of the inhabitants of the Eastern Desert. This kind of interactions in the field of religion, certainly adds to the possibility of balancing the relations between the Christian communities in the Nile valley and the groups living in the Eastern Desert as they are depicted in the written sources. These relations were evidently not based just on the looting of the Christian communities and on the persecution of the Christian holy men by groups of marauders from the Eastern Desert, but sometimes also on reciprocal interest and the usual symbiotic interaction (see above). Christian monastic communities may also have settled in the Eastern Desert, starting symbiotic relations based on mutual benefits with the local inhabitants, as it is well known for later periods on the northern fringes of the Eastern Desert itself (Starkey 2012:319–24). As far as the relations with the Nile valley states are concerned, and also considering the interest in the resources of the region and the large availability of gold to the Kushites, in the earliest phases a form of incorporation of some of the groups inhabiting the Eastern Desert into the Kushite state may be envisaged (see also Adams 1979:9), or at least it may be imagined that a part of the Eastern Desert was inside the sphere of influence of Kush, whose rulers regularly conducted campaigns in the regions East of the Nile valley. The tantalizing evidence of the Kushite Meroitic jewels from a disturbed context in the Wadi Allaqi basin may be explained within this framework. Some kind of prolonged relations with Kush and Egypt also seems to be confirmed by the incorporation of some cultural traits rooted in the Nile valley in the Blemmyan culture, like for example the cult of Isis. In the field of the expression of the royal ideology, the possible use of Meroitic script and language in the inscription of Kharamadoye, if we admit that this was a Blemmyan king, is noteworthy because it may suggest that the Meroitic kingship was regarded as a model, perhaps also in the perspective of legitimating the Blemmyan control of a part of Lower Nubia. Interestingly, the scarcity of gold objects in the cemeteries of the aristocracy of Noubades at Qustul and Ballana (Dann 2009:160) contrasts with the availability of gold in Meroitic times and may suggest that the situation had changed and that the problematic relations with the Blemmyes also registered in the textual evidence affected the possibility of the Noubades of accessing the mineral resources of the Eastern Desert. In more southern regions, the lack of any reference or archaeological remains related to a Kushite presence east of the Atbara suggests that Eastern Sudan, the region between the southern fringes of the Eastern Desert and the Ethio-Eritrean plateau remained outside the influence of the Kushite state, even when its axis moved to the south in Meroitic times (see also Adams 1979:9). An opposite view was recently proposed, suggesting that there may have been a symbiotic relation between the inhabitants of this area and the

The Eastern Desert in the 1st Millennium BCE and 1st Millennium CE   693 Meroitic state, also allowing a frequent relation of the Meroites with the Red Sea coast (Brass 2014:266), but this hypothesis is not supported by any positive evidence, except for the so far isolated scatter of Meroitic sherds from Goz Regeb (see above). Also in this case the situation may have changed after the end of the Kushite state, with the presence of some sites containing Post-Meroitic tumulus in Eastern Sudan and even of a Christian site, perhaps to be regarded as somehow related to the extension of the influence of the kingdom of Alwa in that region, also suggested by the written sources (see also Fattovich 1984:405). Despite the scanty available data, it seems evident both from the textual and the archaeological data that from the 3rd century ce the relevance of the groups inhabiting the Eastern Desert dramatically increased in the macro-regional setting of northeastern Africa. Apparently, they started having more intense interactions with the neighbor regions and an increasingly active military and political role, but the explanation for this is far from clear. It was suggested that the adoption of the camel by these groups may have been a crucial factor in this (see Updegraff 1988:89; Manzo 2004:81). Apparently, the camel became more widespread in the Eastern Desert only in Roman times (Barnard 2012a:14) and starting from the 1st century bce it may have been progressively adopted by the inhabitants of the region, perhaps also as a consequence of the gradual reduction of the areas with grass and herbs (Krzywinski 2012:148). This certainly gave the inhabitants of the Eastern Desert not only an animal to be exploited for meat and milk more suitable to a dry environment, but also an adapted beast of burden and an effective charger. Nevertheless, the intense military activity of the inhabitants of the Eastern Desert from the 3rd century ce onwards widely described in the texts can only be explained by the association between the availability of the camel and the weakness of the states of the Nile valley. Certainly, the internal weakness both of the Roman Empire, with the abandonment of several praesidia in the Egyptian Eastern Desert (see also Lassányi 2012:251), and in the south of the Kushite state may have favored this, leaving more space for the expansion of the military and political sphere of action of the leaders of the groups inhabiting the Eastern Desert. Later on, the rise of the Post-Meroitic states in the Nubian Nile valley seems to have again confined the sphere of influence of the peoples of the Eastern Desert to their home region. Nevertheless, they continued to be crucial for the resources of the region they inhabited, whose exploitation may have favored the precocious penetration of Islam, and for the tracks leading to the Red Sea ports, revitalized by the fact that they were now becoming hubs on the route of the Islamic pilgrimage.

References Cited Adams, W.Y. 1979 Kush and the Peoples of Northeast Africa. In Africa in Antiquity: The Arts of Ancient Nubia and the Sudan, ed. F. Hintze, pp. 9–13. Meroitica 5. Akademie Verlag. Andersen, G.L. 2012 Vegetation and Management Regime Continuity in the Cultural Landscape of the Eastern Desert. In Barnard and Duistermaat eds., pp. 127–39.

694   Andrea Manzo Anwar A. Magid 2004 The Site of Tabot: An Old Waystation in the Southern Red Sea Hills. In Neueste Feldforschungen im Sudan und in Eritrea, ed. S. Wenig, pp. 155–72. Meroitica 21. Harrassowitz. Anwar A. Magid, R.H. Pierce, and K. Krzywinski 1995 Test Excavations in the Southern Red Sea Hills (Sudan): Cultural Linkages to the North. Archéologie du Nil Moyen 7:163–90. Barbour, K.M. 1961 The Republic of the Sudan: A Regional Geography. University of London Press. Barnard, H. 2002 Eastern Desert Ware, a First Introduction. Sudan & Nubia 6:53–57. ——— 2006 Eastern Desert Ware: Fine Pottery from an Arid Wasteland. Egyptian Archaeology 28:29–30. ——— 2008 Eastern Desert Ware: Traces of the Inhabitants of the Eastern Deserts in Egypt and Sudan during the 4th–6th Centuries ce. BAR International Series 1824. Archaeopress. ——— 2012a Introduction to Part 1: From Adam to Alexander (500.000–2500 Years Ago). In Barnard and Duistermaat eds., pp. 3–23. ——— 2012b Introduction to Part 2: The Last 2500 Years. In Barnard and Duistermaat eds. 2012, pp. 176–88. Barnard, H. and K.  Duistermaat eds. 2012 The History of the Peoples of the Eastern Desert. Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Monograph 73. Barnard, H., A.N. Dooley, and K.F. Faull 2006 New Data on the Eastern Desert Ware from Sayala (Lower Nubia) in the Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna. Ägypten und Levante 15:49–64. Barnard, H. and P. Rose 2007 Eastern Desert Ware from Berenike and Kab Marfu’a. In Berenike 1999/2000: Report on the Excavations at Berenike, including Excavations in Wadi Kalalat and Siket, and the Survey of the Mons Smaragdus Region, ed. S.E. Sidebotham and W. Wendrich, pp. 183–99. Cotsen Institute of Archaeology. Barnard, H. and E.  Strouhal 2004 Wadi Qitna Revisited. Annals of the Náprstek Museum 25:29–55. Brass, M.J. 2014 Interactions and Pastoralism along the Southern and Southeastern Frontiers of the Meroitic State, Sudan. Journal of World Prehistory 28:255–88. Browne, G.M. 2003 Textus Blemmyicus Aetatis Christianae. Stipes Publishing. Castiglioni, A., A. Castiglioni, and K. Sadr 1997 Sur les traces des Blemmis: les tombes Bejas au premier millénaire après J.-C.  dans les collines de la Mer Rouge. Actes de la VIIIe Conférence Internationale des Études Nubiennes 2. Cahier de Recherches de l’Institut de Papyrologie et d’Egyptologie de Lille 17(2):163–67. Dann, R.J. 2009 The Archaeology of Late Antique Sudan. Cambria. Dunham, D. 1950 El Kurru. Royal Cemeteries of Kush 1. Harvard University Press and Museum of Fine Arts. Eide, T., T.  Hägg, R.H.  Pierce, and L.  Török eds. 1994 Fontes Historiae Nubiorum: Textual Sources for the History of the Middle Nile Region between the Eighth Century BC and the Sixth Century AD, v. 1: From the Eighth to the Mid-Fifth Century BC. Department of Classics, University of Bergen. ——— 1996 Fontes Historiae Nubiorum: Textual Sources for the History of the Middle Nile Region between the Eighth Century BC and the Sixth Century AD, v. 2: From the Mid-Fifth to the First Century BC. Department of Greek, Latin, and Egyptology, University of Bergen. ——— 1998 Fontes Historiae Nubiorum: Textual Sources for the History of the Middle Nile Region between the Eighth Century BC and the Sixth Century AD, v. 3: From the First to the

The Eastern Desert in the 1st Millennium BCE and 1st Millennium CE   695 Sixth Century AD. IKRR/Department of Greek, Latin, and Egyptology, University of Bergen. Emberling, G. and B. Williams 2010 The Kingdom of Kush in the 4th Cataract: Archaeological Salvage of the Oriental Institute Nubian Expedition 2007 Season. Part I. Preliminary Report on the Sites of Hosh el-Guruf and El-Widay. Gdańsk Archaeological Museum African Reports 7:17–38. Fattovich, R. 1984 Possible Christian Remains in the Gash Delta, Kassala Province (Sudan). Annali dell’Istituto Orientale di Napoli 44:399–406. ——— 1990 The Peopling of the Northern Ethiopian-Sudanese Borderland between 7000 and 1000 BP: A Preliminary Model. Nubica 1–2:3–45. ——— 2010 The Early Spread of Islam in the Eritrean-Sudanese Lowlands (ca. AD 800–1500) from an Archaeological Perspective. In L’Islam in Etiopia. Bilanci e prospettive, ed. A. Gori and B. Scarcia Amoretti, pp. 89–107. Civiltà del Mediterraneo 16–17. Edizioni di Storia e Letteratura. Gates-Foster, J. 2012 The Eastern Desert during the Ptolemaic Period: An Emerging Picture. In Barnard and Duistermaat eds. 2012, pp. 191–203. Harrell, J.A. and P. Storemyr 2009 Ancient Egyptian Quarries—An Illustrated Overview. In QuarryScapes: Ancient Stone Quarry Landscapes in the Eastern Mediterranean, ed. N. AbuJaber, E. Bloxam, P. Degryse, and T. Heldal, pp. 7–50. Geological Survey of Norway Special Publication 12. Hatke, G. 2013 Aksum and Nubia: Warfare, Commerce, and Political Fictions in Ancient Northeast Africa. New York University Press and Institute for the Study of the Ancient World. Kawatoko, M. 1993a On the Tombstones at the Bāḍiʽ Site, the al-Rīḥ Island. Kush 16:186–202. ——— 1993b Preliminary Survey of ʽAydhāb and Bāḍiʽ Sites. Kush 16:203–24. Klemm, R, and D.  Klemm 2013 Gold and Gold Mining in Ancient Egypt and Nubia: Geoarchaeology of the Ancient Gold Mining Sites in the Egyptian and Sudanese Eastern Desert. Springer. Krzywinski, K. 2012 The Eastern Desert Tombs and Cultural Continuity. In Barnard and Duistermaat eds., pp. 141–55. Lassányi, G. 2012 On the Archaeology of the Native Population of the Eastern Desert in the First-Seventh Centuries ce. In Barnard and Duistermaat eds., pp. 249–69. Manzo, A. 1999 Echanges et contacts le long du Nil et de la Mer Rouge à l’époque protohistorique (IIIe et IIe millénaire avant J.-C.). Une synthèse préliminaire. BAR International Series 782, Cambridge Monographs in African Archaeology 48. Archaeopress. ——— 2004 Late Antique Evidences in SE Sudan. Sudan & Nubia 8:75–83. ——— 2012 Italian Archaeological Expedition to the Eastern Sudan of the University of Naples “L’Orientale”. Report of the 2011 Field Season. Università degli studi di Napoli “L’Orientale”. ——— 2014 New Eastern Desert Ware Finds from Sudan and Ethiopia. In Ein Forscherleben zwischen den Welten. Zum 80. Geburtstag von Steffen Wenig, ed. A. Lohwasser and P. Wolf, pp. 237–52. Sudanarchäologischen Gesellschaft zu Berlin. ——— 2017 Eastern Sudan in its Setting: The Archaeology of a Region Far from the Nile Valley. Cambridge Monographs in African Archaeology 94. Archaeopress. Markowitz, Y.J. and D.M. Doxey 2014 Jewels of Ancient Nubia. Museum of Fine Arts (Boston). Oman, G. 1998 The Book of Khor Nubt: Epigraphic Evidence of an Islamic-Arabic Settlement in Nubia (Sudan) in the III–IV centuries A.H./X–XI AD. Part One: Preliminaries and Transcription of the Texts. Istituto Universitario Orientale.

696   Andrea Manzo Pierce, R.H. 2012 A Blemmy by Any Other Name . . . A Study in Greek Ethnography. In Barnard and Duistermaat eds., pp. 227–37. Rilly, C. 2008 The Last Traces of Meroitic. A Tentative Scenario for the Disappearance of the Meroitic Script. In The Disappearance of the Writing Systems, ed. J. Baines, J. Benne, and S. Houston, pp. 183–205. Equinox. Sadr, K. 1991 The Development of Nomadism in Ancient Northeast Africa. University of Pennsylvania Press. ——— 1995 Barlumi di archeologia nel deserto nubiano. In L’Eldorado dei faraoni. Alla scoperta di Berenice Pancrisia, ed. A. Castiglioni, A. Castiglioni, and J. Vercoutter, pp. 147–73. Istituto Geografico De Agostini. Sadr, K., A. Castiglioni, and A. Castiglioni 1995 Nubian Desert Archaeology: A Preliminary View. Archéologie du Nil Moyen 7:203–35. Sadr, K., A. Castiglioni, and A. Castiglioni 2004 The Archaeological sequence in the Nubian Desert: CeRDO’s Exploration 1989–1994. In Neueste Feldforschungen im Sudan und in Eritrea, ed. S. Wenig, pp. 191–204. Meroitica 21. Harrassowitz. Salah Omer Elsadig 2000 The Domed Tombs of the Eastern Sudan. Sudan & Nubia 4:37–43. Scullard, H.H. 1974 The Elephant in the Greek and Roman World. Thames and Hudson. Seeger, J.A., S.E. Sidebotham, J.A. Harrell, and M. Pons 2006 A Brief Archaeological Survey of the Aqiq Region (Red Sea Coast), Sudan. Sahara 7:7–18. Shinnie, P.L. 1991 Trade Routes of the Ancient Sudan 3000 BC–AD 350. In Egypt and Africa: Nubia from Prehistory to Islam, ed. W.V. Davies, pp. 49–53. British Museum. Sidebotham, S.E., H.M. Nouwens, A.M. Hense, and J.A. Harrell 2004 Preliminary Report on Archaeological Fieldwork at Sikait (Eastern Desert of Egypt), and Environs: 2002–2003. Sahara 15:7–30. Starkey, J.C.M. 2012 Desert Imagery: Bedouin, Monks, Demons and Hermits around Saint Anthony’s Monastery. In Barnard and Duistermaat eds., pp. 313–30. Strouhal, E. 1982 Hand-made Pottery of the IVth to VIth centuries AD in the Dodecaschoinos. In Nubian Studies: Proceedings of the Symposium for Nubian Studies, ed. J.M. Plumley, pp. 215–22. Aris & Phillips. ——— 1984 Wadi Qitna and Kalabsha-South: Late Roman-Early Byzantine Tumuli Cemeteries in Egyptian Nubia, v. 1: Archaeology. Univerzita Karlova. Updegraff, R.T. 1988 The Blemmyes I. The Rise of the Blemmyes and the Roman Withdrawal from Nubia under Diocletian. In Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt, v 2: Principat 10.1. Politische Geschichte (Provinzen und Randvölker: Afrika und Ägypten), ed. H. Temporini, pp. 44–106. De Gruyter. Vantini, G. 1975 Oriental Sources Concerning Nubia. Polish Academy of Sciences and Akademie der Wissenschaften (Heidelberg). Vercoutter, J. 1994 L’Egypte et le désert de la Nubie entre Nil et Mer Rouge. Sahara 6:63–68. Wenig, S. 1978 Africa in Antiquity, v. 2: The Arts of Ancient Nubia and the Sudan. Brooklyn Museum. Zaborski, A. 1968 Some Remarks Concerning ʿEzānā’s Inscriptions and the Beja Tribes. Folia Orientalia 9:298–306 [1967]. Zibelius, K. 1972 Afrikanische Orts- und Völkernamen in hieroglyphischen und hieratischen Texten. Beihefte zum Tübinger Atlas des Vorderen Orients B1. Reichert.

Chapter 34

Gr eek a n d Rom a n V iews of A ncien t N u bi a Stanley M. Burstein

Kush occupies a privileged place in African historiography. While our knowledge of the ancient history of much of the interior of Africa is scanty, ancient Kush is the subject of an extensive and rich historiography extending back more than two hundred years to the identification of the site of Meroe, the last of the Kushite capitals, by the Scottish explorer James Bruce in 1772. The reason is clear. Here alone in Sub-Saharan Africa are found archaeological and, more important, textual sources of the type familiar to ancient historians. The textual sources for Kushite history include documents written in a variety of languages including Egyptian, Greek, Latin, Hebrew, and the poorly understood local language conventionally known as Meroitic. From the beginning of modern Kushite historiography, historians have accorded particular importance to texts written in Greek and Latin. The unique status enjoyed by the Greek and Latin accounts of Kush has been the result of three factors: the prestige enjoyed by Classics in European culture since the Renaissance; the fact that these accounts seem to provide extended and reliable descriptions of Kush and its peoples; and the absence from them of the crude racial stereotyping found in many later accounts of the region (Snowden 1970, 1983). Unfortunately, these same factors have also tended to insulate the Classical records of Kush from critical scrutiny. The purpose of this paper is to trace the history of the image of Kush in Greek and Latin literature and locate it in the political and intellectual contexts in which it developed.

The Classical Accounts of Kush The original extent of Classical writing on Kush—Aithiopia in the terminology of the Greeks and Romans—was substantial. Seven authors are reported to have written books

698   Stanley M. Burstein devoted specifically to Aithiopia and its peoples. One of them, Simonides the Younger, even claimed to have lived in Meroe, the last of the capitals of Kush, for five years. In addition, agents of the Ptolemaic and Roman governments of Egypt who visited Kush submitted reports of their activities that were preserved in the official archives at Alexandria and Rome. Unfortunately, none of these works is extant in its original form. Much of their content survives, however, in brief excurses—they can easily be encompassed within a slim volume—in various general works on history and geography and encyclopedias such as those of Diodorus, Strabo, and Pliny the Elder.1 Although contact between Kush and the Mediterranean occurred throughout antiquity, Kush’s location made it peripheral to Greek life and thought. Located at the southernmost limit of the world known to the Greeks, contact between Greece and Kush was infrequent, being limited primarily to periods when relations between Greece and Egypt were close. As a result, Greek knowledge of Kush and its peoples expanded episodically. Most new information was a byproduct of military operations mounted against Kush from Egypt (Burstein ed. 1989:1–12; Zibelius-Chen 1989; Burstein 1993). The most important of these campaigns were: Psamtek II’s Nubian campaign of 593 bce; the Persian king Cambyses’s campaign of the late 520s bce; the Nubian campaign of Ptolemy II in the 270s bce; the campaigns of C. Petronius, Prefect of Egypt, in the late 20s bce; and the projected but never executed campaign of the Roman emperor Nero in the 60s ce. Moreover, as Greek knowledge of Kush tended to be mediated through Egyptian sources, it is not surprising that Greek writers interpreted Kushite history and culture in an Egyptian context, emphasizing military conflict between Kush and Egypt and those aspects of Kushite ethnography that threw light on the history of Egypt and the relationship between Egyptian and Kushite culture.

Blameless Aithiopians The 2nd-century bce Greek historian Agatharchides of Cnidus asserted that Greeks did not enter Nubia before Ptolemy II campaigned there in the 270s bce (BNJ 86 F 19.37.5). Agatharchides was right about the epochal importance of Ptolemy II’s Nubian campaign for Greek knowledge of the Upper Nile valley, but wrong about the previous history of Greek contact with the region. Egyptian sources, specifically the Satrap Stela (Simpson et al. 2003:392–97; Burstein 2015:118–26), indicate that Ptolemy I had, in fact, already campaigned in Nubia in the late 4th century bce. More important, Greek awareness of a country inhabited by dark-skinned people located somewhere beyond Egypt was much older, dating to the mid-2nd millennium bce. The Greek term for Kushites—“Aithiopian” or “Burnt-faced people”—is probably a calque of an Egyptian phrase—“Nehesy with face dried [sc. by the sun]”—attested as early as the beginning of the New Kingdom (Vandersleyen 1981:193–94). Late Minoan II frescoes point to the existence of Nubian soldiers at Knossos, and Mycenaean frescoes from Pylos (Snowden 1976:136–37) together with the mention of a landowner named

Greek and Roman Views of Ancient Nubia   699 a­ i-ti-jo-qo, the Aithiopian, in Linear B tablets from Pylos raise the possibility of the presence of Kushites on the Greek mainland as well (Ventris and Chadwick 1959:99, 243–44, 248, 250–52, 414). The collapse of the Mycenaean kingdoms at the end of the Bronze Age severed relations between the Aegean and Egypt for almost four centuries, leaving Dark Age Greeks with little more awareness of Kush than the idea that the term “Aithiopia” referred to a remote land located somewhere near the rising sun that was inhabited by a dark-skinned people. That legacy sufficed for Greek poets to create the earliest Greek image of Kush: that of the Blameless Aithiopians, who lived on the shores of Ocean where the sun rose and set and were honored by the gods for their piety. That image was already fully formed by the late 8th century bce, when the poet of the Iliad remarked (Iliad 1.423) that “Zeus had gone to Ocean2 to the land of the Blameless Aithiopians / to feast and all the gods followed him.” A generation later the poet of the Odyssey added further detail (Odyssey 1.23), describing the Aithiopians as “divided in two, the most remote of men,” while the now lost Aithiopis, one of the sequels of the Iliad, recounted how the Aithiopian prince Memnon, the son of Eos (“Dawn”), fought the Greeks during the final phase of the Trojan War (Griffith 1998:213–14). Although the mythical land of Aithiopia had not yet been identified with Kush—Memnon’s connection with Eos indicates that it was located in the east instead of the south (Lesky 1959)—the image of the Aithiopians as the pious and just inhabitants of a utopian land had become part of the legendary history of Greece and would strongly influence the formulation of later Greek ideas concerning Kush.

First Contact Greeks reestablished direct contact with Egypt, and through Egypt with Kush and its peoples, in the mid-7th century bce. The first Greeks to encounter Kushites since the end of the Bronze Age were soldiers provided to Psamtek I by Gyges of Lydia in the 650s bce to assist his revolt against his Assyrian overlords. It was the use of these same troops and their descendants by the Pharaohs of the 26th Dynasty to ward off Kushite attempts to reassert their authority in Egypt that again brought Greeks into direct contact with Kush and Kushites. Greek soldiers helped Psamtek I defeat Tanwetamani, the last king of the 25th Dynasty, shortly after winning his independence from the Assyrians (Polyaenus 7.3; Burstein 1985); and their descendants participated in the campaign that Psamtek II launched deep into Nubia in 593 bce and later served in the garrisons that the 26th Dynasty maintained at Elephantine (Breasted 1906 v. 4, §994). Greek settlement in Saite Egypt and service in its military transformed the Greek image of Kush. The most important result was the relocation of Aithiopia by writers and artists from the mythical space of Greek legend to the real space of the Nile valley south of Egypt (Hecataeus BNJ 1 Ff 326–27), and the depiction of its inhabitants with a new realism. So, the 6th-century bce philosopher Xenophanes (Kirk et al.  1983:168–69)

700   Stanley M. Burstein claimed that “Aithiopians say that their gods are snub-nosed and black.” Contemporary Greek pottery also contained vivid images of sub-Saharan Africans, most notably in  depictions of the entourages of such legendary Egyptian and Aithiopian rulers as  Busiris and Memnon3 and accurate relief representations of blacks on Attic ­drinking cups (Snowden 1976:139–48). Not until the late 5th century bce, however, was there a comparable shift in Greek interest from the legendary to the contemporary history of Kush. The catalyst for this change was the publication of Herodotus’s Histories, which focused on an event of the recent instead of the distant past: the Persian invasion of Greece in 480/79 bce, an event in which Kush played a small but significant role. Immediately after his conquest of Egypt in the late 520s bce, the Persian king Cambyses had invaded Kush. The campaign’s results and the character of Kush’s subsequent relations with Persia have been controversial since antiquity. By the time Herodotus visited Egypt in the second half of the 5th century bce, Egyptian tradition had become firmly hostile to Cambyses as the founder of the hated Persian regime, so it is not surprising that in his account the Nubian campaign is depicted as a disastrous failure. Elsewhere in his history, however, Herodotus included Kush among the vassal states of Persia that acknowledged Persian suzerainty by sending symbolic gifts of native products. In the case of Kush those gifts were sent every second year and included ivory, ebony, and gold. This alternative view of Kush’s relationship to Persia is supported by Persian inscriptions listing Kush among the subject peoples of Persia and representations at Persepolis of Kushite envoys and their gifts, and, most importantly, by the participation of Kushite units in the Persian invasion of Greece in 480/79 (Burstein 1981; Lloyd 1988). Herodotus’s account of Kush was based on information acquired in Egypt and its limitations are clear, particularly with regard to the geography of the Upper Nile valley (Török 2014). So, while he knew that Meroe was the capital of Kush and that the Nile extended a considerable distance south of the city in the central Sudan, he was unaware of the complex network of tributaries that join the Nile in the southern Sudan, or its source in modern Uganda, suggesting instead that its origin was in West Africa, perhaps as a result of confusion with the Niger River. He was also ignorant of the Upper Nile’s two most distinctive features: the cataracts or rapids that hinder all river-borne communication in the region and the summer rains that are the ultimate cause of the flood that had puzzled Greek intellectuals for almost two centuries. Herodotus’s knowledge of Kushite history was similarly limited. Only in one area of his account is there precision: relations between Kush and Egypt during the 25th and 26th Dynasties. So, he refers to: the establishment of Napatan rule in Egypt by Shabaqo and its end (Herodotus 2.137, 139, 152); the mutiny and defection to Aithiopia of the Aswan garrison under Psamtek I (Herodotus 2.30) whose identification was to be a central question of Hellenistic accounts of Aithiopia; the Nubian campaign of Psamtek II (Herodotus 2.16.1); and, of course, Cambyses’s invasion of the Sudan. His only two references to Nubian culture, the existence of Zeus and Dionysus—Amun and Osiris—at Napata together with an oracle of the former (Herodotus 2.29.7) and the importance of

Greek and Roman Views of Ancient Nubia   701 Egyptian influence on the development of Nubian culture (Herodotus 2.30.4–5), are also strongly Egyptocentric. The identification of Aithiopia and Kush did not, however, mean that Herodotus had abandoned the hope of establishing connections between Greek myth and Kush that had characterized archaic Greek thought. The opposite was true. By identifying Amun and Osiris with Zeus and Dionysus and Jebel Barkal—Amun’s holy mountain—with Nysa, the mountain where Dionysus was raised,4 he even forged new connections (Herodotus 2.146.2). Homer’s Blameless Aithiopians also reappeared in the guise of the Long-Lived Aithiopians, whose utopian kingdom supposedly was the target of Cambyses’s ill-fated campaign. Significantly, however, Herodotus placed their kingdom outside the Nile valley on the shores of Ocean, beyond the barren wastes that marked the end of his knowledge of the upper Nile valley (Herodotus 3.17.1, 114; cf. Burstein 1981:3–4) and saw in Cambyses’s attempt to conquer it evidence of the madness and tyranny his Egyptian informants claimed characterized his reign. Herodotus’s account of Nubia remained authoritative for over a century. New information about Kush preserved in the fragments of the lost histories of Egypt of Aristagoras of Miletus and Hecataeus of Abdera and the works of Aristotle reveals a dramatic improvement in Greek knowledge of the 25th Dynasty during the 4th century bce. Herodotus’s erroneous chronology of Shabako’s conquest of Egypt was corrected, and three additional kings were added to the list of “Aithiopian” rulers of Egypt: Aktisanes, Taharqo, and Tanwetamani. The details, however, remained unclear. Vague stories clearly were circulating in Greece concerning Taharqo and a late Napatan king named Aktisanes (Eide et al. 1998:87–88), but the chronology and details of their reigns in Greek accounts were unclear, since Taharqo was credited with the conquest of the western Mediterranean and Aktisanes was mistakenly made a contemporary of the 18th Dynasty king Ahmose—an error of over a millennium!—and believed to have invaded and conquered Egypt (Priese 1977; Burstein 1999:120–21). Knowledge of the geography and hydrology of the upper Nile valley also improved. Aristagoras (BNJ 608 F 10; Burstein ed. 1989:145 n. 4) may have picked up some hearsay information about the area south of Meroe if his “Aithiopian land called Psebo” is a reference to the area of Soba, the capital of the medieval Nubian kingdom of Alwa, while Aristotle was vaguely aware of the existence of tributaries of the Nile in the central and southern Sudan (Meteorologica 1.13, 350b 11–14). Aristotle was also able to cite eyewitness reports of summer rains in the region to justify his assertion in his treatise (On the Nile Flood) that the long contentious question of the cause of the Nile flood was “no ­longer a problem” (Aristotle, BNJ 646 F 1.10). The source of this new information about Kush is not known. The fact that the information in Aristagoras and Hecataeus concerned primarily the 25th Dynasty and its successors, while their knowledge of conditions in contemporary Nubia remained vague, suggests that they obtained their information in Egypt. Less certain is the source of Aristotle’s expanded knowledge of the geography of the Upper Nile valley. One possibility is that Aristotle had access to information from the reports of an expedition sent by Alexander to explore Nubia during his stay in Egypt (Burstein 1976; Malinowski 2014).

702   Stanley M. Burstein Whatever their sources of information, the fact remains that 4th-century writers were only able to remedy some of the most obvious deficiencies of Herodotus’s account. Their knowledge of the area’s complex geography and ethnography remained limited and unfocused. Aristotle, for example, continued to believe that most of “Aithiopia” lay within an uninhabited wasteland that extended from the Tropic of Cancer to the equator (Meteorologica 2.5, 362b), and his account of Kush and its environs in the Meteorology is little more than a schematic sketch of the region’s geographic features that bears little relationship to the realities of the upper reaches of the Nile. Alexander’s conquest of Egypt and the subsequent establishment of Ptolemaic rule in Egypt changed this situation dramatically.

The Ptolemaic Image of Kush The Greek view of Kush acquired greater detail and precision during the early Hellenistic period. As already mentioned, the transformation of the Greek image of Kush was a byproduct of the Nubian campaign conducted by Ptolemy II in the late 270s bce and the expansion of Greek involvement in Nubia that followed it. All that is known about the campaign itself is that a reference in the fragments of Agatharchides of Cnidus’s On the Erythraean Sea (Burstein 1986, 2012; Burstein ed. 1989:52) to five hundred cavalry being recruited in the Aegean and equipped with Kushite-style armor suggests that it was on a considerable scale and reflected good knowledge of conditions in Nubia. We are better informed, however, with regard to the origins of the war and its implications for relations between Ptolemaic Egypt and Kush in the 3rd century bce. Fragments of a speech in favor of war from the first book of On the Erythraean Sea suggests that the pretext for the campaign was Kushite attempts to expand their influence in Lower Nubia, and the results of the campaign reflected that concern. Theocritus (17.86–87), who celebrated the Nubian campaign as one of Ptolemy II’s great achievements, observed that he “cut off a part of Black Aithiopia.” Although Theocritus has usually been interpreted as referring only to the Dodekaschoinos—the roughly 120 km stretch of the Nile immediately south of the First Cataract—and the important gold mining region of the Nile in the Wadi Allaqi, whose horrors Agatharchides (Burstein ed. 1989:58–68) described so vividly, epigraphic and numismatic evidence indicates that Ptolemy II probably also garrisoned some of the old Middle Kingdom forts in the Second Cataract area (Burstein 1993:43). Temporarily, at least, the whole of lower Nubia from Aswan to the modern border between Egypt and the Sudan at Wadi Halfa came under Ptolemaic control as a result of Ptolemy II’s Nubian campaign. Pre-empting Kushite ambitions in lower Nubia was, however, only the pretext for Ptolemy II’s Nubian campaign. The real cause of the 3rd-century Ptolemys’ continuing interest in the Sudan was something else: their desire to find a secure source of war elephants. The military use of elephants was of long standing in Asia. The Greeks and Macedonians first encountered them in battle, however, in India in 326 bce. Thereafter,

Greek and Roman Views of Ancient Nubia   703 despite their mixed record in combat, Hellenistic rulers assigned a high priority to the acquisition of war elephants. But geography placed the Ptolemies at a disadvantage in this ancient “arms race,” since their Seleucid rivals in Syria controlled the land routes to India, the chief source of elephants and elephant handlers. By the 270s bce the situation had become critical, since the elephants Ptolemy II had inherited from his father were too old to face in battle the fresh beasts of his rival Antiochus I, and had to be replaced. Hence the interest of Ptolemy II and his successors in Nubia, and their concern to maintain a strong presence there with results that are clear even in our fragmentary sources. For three-quarters of a century relations between Ptolemaic Egypt and Kush were unusually close. Elephant hunting expeditions, sometimes numbering hundreds of men, repeatedly penetrated Upper Nubia, either from the north via the Nile valley or from the east via the Red Sea port of Ptolemais of the Hunts, modern Aqiq, while explorers traveled throughout Kushite territory (Desanges  1970; Burstein  1996,  2008). Following a precedent set by Alexander the Great, Ptolemaic explorers and agents prepared reports on their activities, which were preserved at Alexandria (Pfister  1961; Peremans 1967; Burstein ed. 1989:29–33). The results are apparent in the sudden precision of Hellenistic accounts of Nubia and in Kushite archaeology. The most dramatic improvement was in Greek knowledge of the geography of the Upper Nile valley (Burstein 2000). The distances and principal settlements between the Egyptian border and Meroe were recorded (Priese 1984; Török 1997:347–52), the sources of elephants were noted, key astronomical phenomena were observed (Pliny, Natural History 2.183–86; Strabo 2.1.20), and the course of the Nile south of Egypt was accurately described for the first time. Its three principal tributaries—the Atbara, and Blue and White Niles—were correctly identified together with their native names and their meanings (Burstein ed. 1989:89, 90 n. 4). Rumors even reached Alexandria of the White Nile’s ultimate sources in Lake Albert and Lake Victoria in modern Uganda (Huss 1990). Equally important, the extent of the Torrid Zone—the uninhabited wasteland believed to lay between the Tropics and Equator—was narrowed sharply as explorers’ reports documented human occupation deep in the interior of Africa (Geminus, Introduction to the Phenomena 16). The ethnographic map of Nubia also snapped into clear focus. As might be expected, the bulk of the information concerned the kingdom of Kush and its capital, Meroe, the Ptolemies’ chief rival for influence in Nubia. The reports detailed its relations with other ethnic groups in the region and described the principal features of Kushite culture, especially the public aspects of Kushite kingship. The expansion of Greek knowledge of Nubian ethnography was not, however, limited to Kush. Elephant hunting also brought Ptolemaic agents into contact with many of the non-civilized inhabitants of the region. Those contacts are reflected in vivid descriptions of their lifeways including such exotic practices as the blood-drinking of the nomadic Trogodytes of the Red Sea hills, and the hunting mimicry used to lure ostriches to their deaths (Burstein ed.  1989:100–101, 108–15). The high quality of the Ptolemaic accounts of Nubia and its peoples is clear, but so are their limitations. Ptolemaic diplomats and military observers were good observers, but

704   Stanley M. Burstein they were not trained anthropologists. It is not surprising, therefore, that they sometimes misunderstood what they saw or were told as in the case of their mistaking a troop of apes, possibly chimpanzees, for a tribe of tree-living natives (Burstein ed. 1989:92–94) or identifying various peoples living in the Gezira—the region south of modern Khartoum formed by the junction of the White and Blue Niles—with the descendants of Psamtek I’s mutineers mentioned by Herodotus (Aristokreon, BNJ 667 F 3; Bion, BNJ 668 F 6). More serious and pervasive, however, was the influence on the extant accounts of Nubia of philosophical theories of human development and barbarian stereotypes. So, Agatharchides of Cnidus, whose On the Erythraean Sea was the most important Hellenistic source on the region, organized the ethnographies in his work according to an evolutionary scheme propounded by the Peripatetic philosopher Dicaearchus. According to Dicearchus, human societies develop in a series of regular stages from food collecting through animal herding to agriculture. The culture and even the psychology of people at each stage of development was shaped by their adaptation to their environment and characterized by distinctive economic and marital regimes (Cole 1967:149–50; Blundell 1986:153–54; Burstein ed. 1989:26–28). Agatharchides identified the fish-eating populations of the Red Sea coast with the first stage in Dicearchus’s scheme (Burstein ed. 1989:68–89). The simplest of these groups had not yet developed language and any sense of social solidarity while all, he claimed, lacked marriage and laws as well as the moral excesses of civilization since “they have chosen to follow the divine path to living, not that which attempts to improve on nature with opinions” (Burstein ed. 1989:87–88). Agatharchides similarly treated the nomadic Trogodytes of the Red Sea hills as exemplary of Dicearchus’s second stage and ascribed to them property in the form of their flocks, government by chiefs, intergroup warfare over access to pasture, social stratification, and the beginnings of marriage as evidenced by the special position accorded to the chief ’s principal sexual partner (Burstein ed. 1989:108–15). The treatment of Kush in Hellenistic ethnography was complex since the accounts of Ptolemaic explorers mixed their own observations and comments with statements concerning their history and culture credited to Kushites. The results were uneven. On the one hand, the public aspects of the Kushite monarchy were relatively accurately described including Amun’s oracular confirmation of a new king, the divine origin and divinity of the Kushite king, the Kushite ideal of matrilineal succession and the connection of the title Kandake to that ideal, the practice of retainer sacrifice at the death of a king (Burstein 1999:121), and the political dependence on Kush of peoples living further south in the Sudan. On the other hand, the incorporation into Kushite royal regalia of such Egyptian royal elements as the white crown and the was-scepter (Diodorus 3.3.6)5 led to the rejection of Herodotus’s correct perception of Egyptian influence on the origins of Nubian elite culture in favor of chauvinistic Kushite claims that they had colonized Egypt (Diodorus 3.3.2)! Equally serious was the impact of Ptolemaic imperial policy on the Hellenistic accounts of Kush. Less clear is the character of the relationship between Kush and Ptolemaic Egypt. The treatment of Kush by Ptolemy II and his immediate successors has been vaguely ­characterized as “intimidation” (Török 2009:384), but circumstantial evidence suggests

Greek and Roman Views of Ancient Nubia   705 r­ elations were closer, that Kush, in fact, was a Ptolemaic client state until the end of the 3rd century bce. Not only did Kush suffer military defeat and loss of territory in Lower Nubia, but it also had to acquiesce in the public affirmation of Ptolemaic claims of su­ze­ rainty. Thus, Meroe was included among the Nubian nomes obligated to bring offerings to Ptolemy II’s new temple of Isis at Philae (Kockelmann and Rickert 2015:177–259) and “Aithiopian” gift bearers, that is bearers of what Egyptians called inu or “official gifts,” took part in the great procession Ptolemy II staged at Alexandria in the 270s bce (Rice 1983:19, 95–98; Bleiberg 1996). Kush also endured foreign penetration of its territory on a scale unparalleled since its conquest and colonization a millennium earlier by New Kingdom Egypt. Not surprisingly, Ptolemaic intervention very likely generated resistance within Kush. Its violent suppression by the philhellenic king Ergamenes (= Arkamani I), the contemporary of Ptolemy II (Török  1992:555–61), was probably described in a famous fragment of his On Affairs in Asia by Agatharchides (BNJ 86 F 21.3.6)in terms of the triumph of Greek rationalism over barbarian superstition represented by the priests of the Kushite royal god Amun: The strangest of all their customs, however, is that concerning the death of their kings. In Meroe, whenever it enters the mind of the priests, who care for the worship and rites of the gods and occupy the highest and most exalted status, they send a messenger to the king ordering him to die. They say that the gods have revealed this to them and that the order of the immortals must in no way be disregarded by those of mortal nature. They also assert other things such as would be accepted by a nature of limited intelligence that has been raised in accordance with customs that are ancient and difficult to eradicate and does not possess arguments with which to oppose arbitrary commands. In earlier times, therefore, the kings obeyed the priests, not having been conquered by weapons or force but their reason having been overcome by this superstition. During the reign of the second Ptolemy, however, Ergamenes, the king of the Aithiopians, who had received a Greek education and understood philosophy, first dared to spurn this practice. He made a decision that was worthy of his royal rank and entered accompanied by some soldiers the shrine where was located the gold temple of the Aithiopians, and killed all the priests. After abolishing this custom, he reorganized affairs in accordance with his own plans.

Rome and Kush Although a friendly government at Meroe facilitated Ptolemaic access to Kushite territory, large-scale Ptolemaic intervention in Nubia ended in the last decade of the 3rd century bce. The reasons were complex. The poor performance of Ptolemy IV’s elephants at the Battle of Raphia near Gaza in 217 bce exposed the inadequacies of the Ptolemaic elephant corps, while chronic instability in Upper Egypt forced the later Ptolemies to concentrate their efforts on maintaining their control of Egypt instead of their influence in Nubia. As a

706   Stanley M. Burstein result, although trade with Kush continued, the Ptolemaic presence in Nubia gradually crumbled during the 2nd and 1st centuries bce. At the same time the kings of Kush took advantage of the decline of Ptolemaic power and tried to realize their centuries-long dream of extending their authority over all Lower Nubia to the First Cataract. And they were on the verge of finally achieving their goal, when Rome intervened in 30 bce. Immediately after the establishment of Roman authority in Upper Egypt, C. Cornelius Gallus, the new Roman Prefect of Egypt, invaded Nubia, appointed a Roman client ruler for Lower Nubia, and forced local Kushite officials to recognize Roman suzerainty and to agree to pay tribute to Rome (Burstein 1988). Roman suzerainty over Kush proved ephemeral. Instead of peace, the late 20s bce were marked by a series of raids and counterraids by Kushite and Roman forces. Peace was restored only in 20 bce, when Augustus met with Kushite ambassadors at Samos and granted them “all that they desired, and . . . even remitted the tribute he had imposed” (Strabo 17.1.54; Jameson 1968). Scholars have interpreted Strabo’s words to mean that Augustus signed a treaty recognizing the independence of Kush and have viewed these events as the beginning of an almost three-century long period of peace between Rome and Kush that was marked by an expansion of trade with Roman Egypt and unprecedented prosperity in Kush. That trade between Roman Egypt and Kush expanded greatly during the early centuries is clear. Evidence of this trade is readily to be found in the numerous imported luxury goods—mostly high-quality metal, glass, and ceramic objects, jewelry, beads, and mirrors; and household furnishings—imported from Roman Egypt that have been discovered at various Kushite sites (Burstein  1993:50–51). As recent history amply attests, however, trade is compatible with many different relationships between states besides peace, and the same was true in antiquity. Roman imperial ideology precluded recognition of equality between Rome and neighboring states. Once a state had come under Roman rule, for however brief a period, it was considered a part of the Roman Empire forever more. Expediency might induce an emperor to hold such claims in abeyance as Augustus did in the case of Britain, which Julius Caesar had claimed for Rome, but such restraint was not recognition of in­de­pend­ ence but only deferral of the imposition of Roman rule until a suitable occasion presented itself. Not surprisingly, therefore, relations between Rome and Kush in the early centuries ce are best described as marked by long periods of tense peace broken at intervals by brief outbreaks of overt hostilities. Equally unsurprising is the fact that the tense relations between Rome and Kush were reflected in Roman accounts of Kush. While Kushites might celebrate their escape from Roman rule as a “victory” by building a shrine (Temple M 292) at Meroe in which Roman soldiers were depicted as humble prisoners and Roman power was symbolically trampled each time a person crossed its threshold under which a splendid bronze head of Augustus (Opper 2014) had been buried, Roman authors had the more difficult task of presenting Augustus’s concessions to the Kushites as something more than a humiliating abandonment of conquered territory, territory, moreover, that had long been famed in Greek saga. They achieved this goal by adopting a two-pronged strategy: emphasizing Kush’s military impotence and inability to threaten Roman Egypt and its

Greek and Roman Views of Ancient Nubia   707 poverty, as evidenced by the “flimsy” brick and wood architecture of Meroe reported by Roman agents, which rendered its conquest unprofitable. So, the late 1st-century bce– early 1st-century ce geographer Strabo maintained that “the Aithiopians, who extend towards the south and Meroe, are neither numerous . . . nor well prepared either for war or the pursuit of any other mode of life” (Strabo 17.1.53); while the 1st-century ce encyclopedist Pliny the Elder depicted not the glorious kingdom of Greek legend but an impoverished Kush whose territory had been transformed into a virtual desert not, he claimed, by Roman arms but “gradually worn down by wars with Egypt in which it was alternately victorious and defeated, although it had been a famous and powerful state until the Trojan War when Memnon was king” (Natural History 6.181–82). In withdrawing from Nubia, therefore, Augustus had merely unilaterally abandoned temporarily an unprofitable extension of Roman power while simultaneously asserting control of the part of Nubia that was essential to the security of Roman Egypt and had significant economic resources—the Dodekaschoinos and the gold mines in the desert east of it. Meanwhile, trade could be counted on to provide the African slaves, ivory, and other exotic products so valued by the Roman aristocracy. As a result, the main lines of the Hellenistic image of Aithiopia remained largely intact, although it did change in detail as traders and Roman agents provided new information about its natural environment. So, Nero’s explorers in the early 60s ce provided the first information about the Sudd, the great marshland located in the southern Sudan (Seneca, Natural Questions 6.8.3; Pliny, Natural History 6.181). More important for Classical understanding of the geography of northeast Africa, however, was new information about the ultimate source of the Nile. Specifically, the theory of a West African origin of the Nile first proposed by Herodotus in the 5th century bce and revived in the late 1st century bce by the scholar king of Mauretania, Juba II (BNJ 275 F 38), was finally rejected in the 2nd century ce in favor of an East African origin that became a central feature of the Ptolemaic geography of Africa. The source of the new information about the upper Nile was contact with East Africa fueled by the growth of the Indian Ocean trade in the early centuries ce (Ptolemy, Geography 1.9, 17). A less positive result of the growth of the Indian Ocean trade but one that was more important for the development of the popular idea of Kush, however, was speculation concerning India as the source of Kushite culture that appeared in such late ancient works as Philostratus’s Life of Apollonius of Tyana, the Aithiopika of the novelist Heliodorus, and the Alexander Romance. Still, it was only in Late Antiquity, when the kingdom of Kush had disappeared and Egypt’s southern frontier had come under attack from its Nobadian and Blemmyan successor states, that the Roman image of the peoples of the Upper Nile valley finally underwent substantial change. Faced with a new and serious military threat, Christian Roman writers ignored the strong Greek influence on the organization of these new states,6 describing them, instead, in terms of old stereotypes in which the Blemmyes were depicted as treacherous and cruel barbarians, who worshipped evil gods and violated all norms of civilized behavior. Although hints of the new image of the Blemmyes are found in many authors, the fullest and clearest statement of it is found in the 6th-century ce historian Procopius, who

708   Stanley M. Burstein explained the insecurity of Egypt’s southern frontier by the late Roman government’s failure to understand that for “all barbarians, it is simply not possible for them to keep faith with the Romans unless through fear of active defensive forces” (Procopius, Histories 1.19.28–35; Christides 1973; Updegraff 1988:62–67), and that this was especially true of the Blemmyes, “who even have the custom of sacrificing human beings to the Sun” (Procopius, Histories 1.19.27–37). Further development of the Classical image of the peoples of ancient Nubia was blocked, however, by the emergence of Axum as the principal Christian state in northeast Africa and the consequent reinterpretation of the term Aithiopia as referring to Axum. The result is apparent in the medieval Ethiopian Kebra Nagast (Budge 1932:40) where the eunuch official of Kandake mentioned in the biblical Book of Acts (8.27) is identified as an agent of the Queen of Ethiopia (= Axum) and not of Meroe.

Conclusion Once the image of the peoples of Kush had reached its final form in Late Antiquity, it colored subsequent Greek accounts of Nubia and its inhabitants until the Arab conquests of the 7th century ce severed contact between the region and the late Roman state. Despite the fragmentary state of the evidence for the history of its development, it is clear that the Classical ethnographic tradition concerning Kush was rich and varied. Like modern ethnographies, however, the ancient accounts of Kush were not simply objective reports of cultural realities. On the contrary, from the beginning of direct Greek contact with Kush in the 7th century bce to the end of the tradition in Late Antiquity, the influence of Greek theories of history and cultural development, attitudes toward Egypt and Persia, and, especially, the imperial policies of Ptolemaic Egypt and Rome toward Nubia are readily apparent in the surviving Classical accounts of the region. Nevertheless, we have to wait for the beginning of the Arabic tradition concerning Nubia in the late 9th century ce for accounts of equal quality, so that the Classical ethnographies of Aithiopia, even in their present fragmentary state, remain valuable sources for historians of ancient Nubia.

Acknowledgments This article is a revised and expanded version of Burstein 2004, reprinted with permission of Drs. Carolyn Fluehr-Lobban and Kharyssa Rhodes.

Abbreviations BNJ = Brill’s New Jacoby. Editor in Chief: Ian Worthington (University of Missouri). Brill Online, 2016. Reference. BNJ-contributors. June 8, 2016 .

Greek and Roman Views of Ancient Nubia   709

Notes 1. The main sources are collected in Burstein ed. 2009 and BNJ 666–73. Unless otherwise noted, translations of the works of specific Greek and Latin authors are available in the Loeb Classical Library. 2. “Ocean” was the great river believed to surround the inhabited world in Greek mythology. 3. Memnon, however, was usually portrayed with Greek features. 4. The identification of Nysa with Jebel Barkal was probably based on the similarity in sound with Ta-Nehesy, the Egyptian name for Nubia (cf. Desanges 1978:233 n. 93). 5. The was-scepter had a straight shaft with a handle in the form of a canine head and a two-pronged base. The description of it as “plow-shaped” is a good approximation of its appearance. 6. For their use of Greek titles modeled on those of the late Roman Empire, see Hägg 1990.

References Cited Bleiberg, E. 1996 The Official Gift in Ancient Egypt. University of Oklahoma Press. Blundell, S. 1986 The Origins of Civilization in Greek & Roman Thought. Croom Helm. Breasted, J.H. 1906 Ancient Records of Egypt. University of Chicago Press. Budge, E.A.W. trans. 1932 The Queen of Sheba and her Only Son Menyelek. Oxford University Press. Burstein, S.M. 1976 Alexander, Callisthenes, and the Sources of the Nile. Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 17:135–46. ——— 1981 Herodotus and the Emergence of Meroe. Journal of the Society for the Study of Egyptian Antiquities 11:1–5. ——— 1985 Psamtek the First and the End of Nubian Domination in Egypt. Journal of the Society for the Study of Egyptian Antiquities 14:31–34. ——— 1986 The Ethiopian War of Ptolemy V: An Historical Myth? Beiträge zur Sudanforschung 1:17–23. ——— 1988 Cornelius Gallus and Aithiopia. The Ancient History Bulletin 2:16–20. ——— 1993 The Hellenistic Fringe: The Case of Meroe. In Hellenistic History and Culture, ed. P. Green, pp. 38–54. University of California Press. ——— 1996 Ivory and the Ptolemaic Exploration of the Red Sea. Topoi 6:799–807. ——— 1999 The Origins of the Napatan State in Classical Sources. Meroitica 15:118–26. ——— 2000 Exploration and Ethnography in Ptolemaic Egypt. The Ancient World 31:31–37. ——— 2004 From Blameless Aithiopians to Faithless Blemmyes: Non-racial Stereotypes in Greek and Roman Accounts of Kush. In Race and Identity in the Nile Valley: Ancient and Modern Perspectives, ed. C. Fluehr-Lobban and K. Rhodes, pp. 71–85. Red Sea Press. ——— 2008 Elephants for Ptolemy II: Ptolemaic Policy in Nubia in the Third Century BC. In Ptolemy Philadelphus and his World, ed. P. McKechnie and P. Guillaume, pp. 235–47. Brill. ——— 2012 Agatharchides of Cnidus, On the Erythrean Sea F 20: A Note on the History of Cavalry in Kush. Beiträge zur Sudanforschung 11:15–19. ——— 2015 Alexander’s Unintended Legacy: Borders. In Greece, Macedon and Persia: Studies in Social, Political and Military History in Honour of Waldemar Heckel, ed. T.  Howe, E.E. Garvin, and G. Wrightson, pp. 118–26. Oxbow.

710   Stanley M. Burstein Burstein, S.M. ed. 1989 Agatharchides of Cnidus, On the Erythraean Sea. Hakluyt Society. ——— 2009 Ancient African Civilizations: Kush and Axum, second edition. Markus Wiener. Christides, V. 1973 Once Again the Narrations of Nilus Sinaiticus. Byzantion 43:39–50. Cole, T. 1967 Democritus and the Sources of Greek Anthropology. American Philological Association. Desanges, J. 1970 Les chasseurs d’éléphants d’Abou Simbel. In Actes du 92ème congrès national des societés savantes, section archéologique, pp. 31–50. ——— 1978 Recherches sur l’activité des Méditerranéens aux confins de l’Afrique. De Boccard. Eide, T., T.  Hägg, R.H.  Pierce, and L.  Török eds. 1998 Fontes Historiae Nubiorum: Textual Sources for the History of the Middle Nile Region between the Eighth Century BC and the Sixth Century AD, v. 3: From the First to the Sixth Century AD. IKRR/Department of Greek, Latin, and Egyptology, University of Bergen. Evans, J. and J.  Lennart Berggren trans. 2006 Geminos’s Introduction to the Phenomena. Princeton University Press. Griffith, D. 1998 The Origin of Memnon. Classical Antiquity 17:212–35. Hägg, T. 1990 Titles and Honorific Epithets in Nubian Greek Texts. Symbolae Osloenses 65:144–77. Huss, W. 1990 Die Quellen des Nils. Chronique d’Égypte 130:334–43. Jameson, S. 1968 Chronology of the Campaigns of Aelius Gallus and C. Petronius. Journal of Roman Studies 58:71–84. Kirk, G.S., J.E.  Raven, and M.  Schofield. 1983 The Presocratic Philosophers, second edition. Cambridge University Press. Kockelmann, H. and A. Rickert 2015 Von Meroe bis Indien. Fremdvölkerlisten und nubische Gabenträger in den griechisch-römischen Tempeln. Harrassowitz. Krentz, P. and E.L. Wheeler eds. and trans. 1994 Polyaenus Stratagems of War. Ares. Lesky, A. 1959 Aithiopika. Hermes 87:27–38. Lloyd, A.B. 1988 Herodotus on Cambyses: Some Thoughts on Recent Work. In Achaemenid History, v. 3: Method and Theory, ed. A.  Kuhrt and H.  Sancisi-Weerdenburg, pp. 55–66. Nederlands Instituut voor her Nabije Osten. Malinowski, G. 2014 Alexander and the Beginning of the Greek Exploration in Nilotic Africa. In Alexander the Great and Egypt: History, Art, Tradition, ed. V. Grieb, K. Nawotka, and A. Wojciechowska, pp. 273–85. Harrassowitz. Opper, Thorsten 2014 The Meroë Head of Augustus. The British Museum Press. Peremans, W. 1967 Diodore de Sicile et Agatharchide de Cnide. Historia 16:432–55. Pfister, F. 1961 Das Alexander-Archiv und die hellistisch-römisch Wissenschaft. Historia 10:30–67. Priese, K.-H. 1977 Eine verschollene Bauinschrift des frühmeroitischen Königs Aktisanes (?) vom Gebel Barkal. In Ägypten und Kusch, ed. E. Endesfelder, K.-H. Priese, W. F. Reinecke, and S. Wenig, pp. 343–67. Akademie Verlag. ——— 1984 Orte des mittleren Niltals in der Überlieferung bis zum Ende des Christlichen Mittelalters. In Meroitistische Forschungen 1980, ed. F.  Hintze, pp. 484–97. Meroitica 7. Akademie Verlag. Rice, E.E. 1983 The Grand Procession of Ptolemy Philadelphus. Oxford University Press. Simpson, W.K., R. Ritner, V.A. Tobin, and E.F. Wente, Jr. 2003 The Literature of Ancient Egypt: An Anthology of Stories, Instructions, Stelae, Autobiographies, and Poetry, third edition. Yale University Press. Snowden, F., Jr. 1970 Ethiopians in the Greco-Roman Experience. Harvard University Press.

Greek and Roman Views of Ancient Nubia   711 ——— 1976 Iconographical Evidence on the Black Populations in Greco-Roman Antiquity. In The Image of the Black in Western Art, v. 1: From the Pharaohs to the Fall of the Roman Empire, ed. L. Bugner, pp. 133–245. William Morrow. ——— 1983 Before Color Prejudice: The Ancient View of Blacks. Harvard University Press. Török, L. 1992 Amasis and Ergamenes. Studia Aegyptiaca 14:555–61. ——— 1997 The Kingdom of Kush: Handbook of the Napatan-Meroitic Civilization. Handbuch der Orientalistik 1(31). Brill. ——— 2009 Between Two Worlds: The Frontier Region between Ancient Nubia and Egypt 3700 BC–500 AD. Probleme der Ägyptologie 29. Brill. ——— 2014 Herodotus in Nubia. Mnemosyne Supplements 368. Brill. Updegraff, R.T. 1988 The Blemmyes I: The Rise of the Blemmyes and the Roman Withdrawal from Nubia under Diocletian. In Aufstieg und Niedergang der Römischen Welt II Principat 10.1, ed. H. Temporini, pp. 44–106. De Gruyter. Vandersleyen, C. 1981 Sources égyptiennes pour l’éthiopie des Grecs. Bulletin de l’Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale 81 Supplément:191–95. Ventris, M. and J.  Chadwick 1959 Documents in Mycenaean Greek. Cambridge University Press. Zibelius-Chen, K. 1989 Überlegungen zur ägyptischen Nubienpolitik in der Dritten Zwischenzeit. Studien zur altägyptischen Kultur 16:329–45.

Chapter 35

The X- Grou p Per iod i n L ow er N u bi a Rachael J. Dann

Introduction The X-Group period is the term given to the period in Lower Nubia between the fall of the Meroitic Empire (ca. 350 ce) and the official adoption of Christianity in 543 ce (Vantini 1975). The characteristic aspect of the material culture of the X-Group is the pottery repertoire (discussed below), which is also used to define the geographical extent of the X-Group (Fig.  35.1). Primarily based in Lower Nubia, in the areas between the First and Second Cataract, characteristic X-Group pottery types are found as far south as the region of the Third Cataract, which appears to have been a significant natural boundary and cultural frontier in the Late X-Group/Early Christian period (Kirwan 1939:34; Ali Osman and Edwards 2012:5). The term “X-Group” originated with George Reisner, who in 1910 was in the process of excavating cemetery 15 at the site of Gudhi, where he uncovered eleven graves of a type unfamiliar to him. He surmised that these graves belonged to a cultural type which he recognized as being later in date to both the A- and C-Groups. He called this cultural group the “X-Group” (Reisner 1910:149–54). Nonetheless, a substantial amount of later scholarship has debated the name which should be applied to this material. This debate has been dominated by a desire to link the cultural material with a particular type site (namely Ballana), or with one or other historical group named in textual sources (most frequently, the Blemmye or the Nobadae). Numerous Classical writers mention the ­existence of different peoples in Lower Nubia during this time period such as the Noba, Anouba, Blemmyes, Beja, Nobades, Nobatae, and Nubae. The Ezana stela found at Meroe lists the Mangurto, Khasa, Barya, “the blacks” and “the red people” (Kirwan; Adams 1977:386). Trigger (1969) argued that the X-Group should be re-named “Ballana culture,”

714   Rachael J. Dann

Figure 35.1  Map showing many X-Group sites (after Edwards 2004:113; Dann 2009:12). Map: Samuel Burns.

in order to emphasize the Lower Nubian origins of the culture. Adams (1965:160) thought that the Blemmye were likely to be the same as, or linked with, nomadic Beja tribes who themselves could be identified as the Medjay of Pharaonic Egypt (see Török 1987a:47ff., 226ff.), and a similar argument was made by Zaborski (1989) on etymological grounds. Säve-Söderbergh (1981:5) thought that the rulers at Ballana may have been the Blemmye. In contrast, Williams termed the X-Group at Qustul “Noba,” due to correspondences with historical sources naming the Nobadae, and argued that the X-Group should henceforth be termed “Noubadian culture” (Williams 1991b:3, 158). Edwards also called the tombs at Ballana, Nobadian (Edwards 2004:206). Sadr suggested that a group called the Red Noba took control of Nubia from the Dodekaschoinos to Dongola in the early centuries ce, but did not displace the Meroitic people who were settled there (Sadr 1991:124). In this chapter, the term X-Group is preferred, as a more neutral term that does not assume an identification with a particular site, or historically attested group (see also discussions in Plumley 1975:25–26).

The X-Group Period in Lower Nubia   715

Textual Sources Fragmentary historical sources provide some insights into the socio-political situation in Lower Nubia at this time, but the sources must be viewed with caution as they were frequently written by foreigners who had either never visited the area, or who had particular biases. Local written sources also exist, although these writings do not describe the political situation in Lower Nubia in any depth. While the written sources point to the political control of Lower Nubia by the Blemmye and Nobadae at different points, they remain archaeologically invisible from a material culture perspective, except perhaps in terms of certain aspects of the pottery repertoire (see below). In both Pliny’s Natural History written in the early 1st century ce and Ptolemy’s Geography of the 2nd century ce, certain archaeological sites are recognizable: the sites of Beqe/Boqh and Amod (a Meroitic-era term) may be identified as Ballana and Qustul respectively (Eide et al. 1998:805–808) and also Bacchus and Abuncis with Ballana (Eide et al. 1998:877–79, 927–30). Olympiodorus visited Lower Nubia in 423 ce, and recorded that at that point the Blemmye occupied Phoinikon (El-Laqeita), Khiris, Thapis (Taifa), Talmis (Kalabsha), and Prima (Qurta) (Eide et al. 1998:1127–28). Kalabsha was an important cult site during this period, and housed a temple to the god Mandulis, a Nubian solar deity. A number of inscriptions relevant to the historiography of Lower Nubia until the middle of the 5th century ce were placed here. Two are particularly notable. The Phonen inscription (Gauthier 1911: pl. CIII A) provides evidence for the organization of cult activities relating to local deities, with similar cult organizations being known from Roman Egypt. In the inscription Phonen is named as “phylarch,” or “tribal chief,” which suggests either that the Blemmyes had a system of deputizing their rule, or that they were adopting the terminology of the Eastern Roman Empire in defining themselves (Eide et al. 1998:1134–38). This may be the same Phonen who is later named as king of the Blemmyes in a papyrus letter to King Abourni of the Noubades found at Qasr Ibrim and dating to the mid-5th century ce (Eide et al. 1998:1158–65; Török 2009:526–27; and see Chrysos 1978 for a broader discussion). A further important 5th-century inscription (which likely pre-dates the Qasr Ibrim letter), is the so called “Victory Inscription” of King Silko (Gautier 1911: pl. 72A) in which he identifies himself as “king of the Nobades and all the Aithiopians,” and records his triumphs over the Blemmyes (Eide et al. 1998:1150; Fig. 35.2). The inscription is also viewed as significant due to the use of the words theos (“God”), and eidolon (“image”), as Silko appears to position himself as being under the patronage of God, while the Blemmyes still worship and swear by images (Eide et al. 1998:1147–53). The archaeological evidence for religious and funerary practices clearly attests to complex ritual identities in this period. This is demonstrated by the continued activity at ancient religious sites dedicated to different deities and the combination of diverse motifs in material ­culture—Egyptian, Kushite, and Christian, whose significance is complex.

716   Rachael J. Dann

Figure 35.2  Representation of King Silko(?) on horseback in the act of spearing an enemy inscribed on the wall of the Temple of Mandulis at Kalabsha. Photograph: Derek Welsby.

Settlement In the Late Meroitic period (ca. 3rd century ce) the saqia waterwheel was introduced in Lower Nubia, allowing for the possibility of extending the area of land under cultivation and for developing new cropping regimes (Adams 1977:420). The qadus pots that were used on the saqia are widely found on archaeological sites of this period. The best evidence for these significant changes in agricultural practice and associated lifeways (Edwards 1996) comes from the remarkable preservation of the organic remains at Qasr Ibrim, where various types of sorghum and wheat, pearl millet, termis beans, sesame, and peas had been introduced by the Late Meroitic period (Rowley-Conwy  1989; Edwards 2004:203). Despite the barrenness of the landscape, the collapse of the Kushite Empire, and the movement of people, some of whom appear to have been nomadic or semi-nomadic, there is more continuity of sites and re-use of sites in Lower Nubia in the X-Group period than has sometimes been acknowledged. The use and function of the sites may change, but settlement activities seem to gravitate towards pre-existing sites. Large-scale settlement construction that is comparable to that of the Meroitic period further south appears to be absent during the X-Group period in Lower Nubia. X-Group occupation

The X-Group Period in Lower Nubia   717 levels at various sites instead show evidence for re-use, re-modeling, and smaller-scale building than was evident in the Meroitic period. Furthermore, part of the inscription on the Ezana stela states that Ezana encountered people who lived in towns constructed from brick and towns constructed from reeds (Emery and Kirwan 1938:9), and so the construction of dwellings from perishable materials that would be unlikely to survive in the archaeological record cannot be wholly dismissed. During the X-Group period at Qasr Ibrim, structures were erected over earlier buildings of the Meroitic period in an area called “tavern street.” On both sides of the street, the buildings were re-floored on several occasions due to the accumulation of debris within the structures. In some cases, refuse had built up to such a level both within the building and on the street that the original doorways in the buildings were rendered unusable. In order to counteract this problem, the occupants simply extended the properties upwards. This is in marked contrast to previous occupation in this part of the site. Layers of debris on top of the city’s defenses dating to the X-Group period suggest that by this time, the defenses were no longer being maintained (Adams 1982:28). Refuse found in structure X 5 included cups, bowls, goblets, wine amphorae, and ash along with both an offering table and a libation table suggesting that feasting, or other related ritual functions, were practiced in this space (Rose 1992:150). A particularly unusual feature of this complex were the “roofed crypts” containing ceramics, organic material, and sometimes a dog or cat skeleton. The crypts were only accessible via a trapdoor. Papyrus documents written in Meroitic, Greek, and Coptic were also discovered here, probable evidence of the multi-linguistic situation in Lower Nubia at the time (however the context of this material is insecure, and may represent a mixed dump of material; Adams 2000:31–33). A series of unusual features at several sites which appear to have parallel characteristics while maintaining their own particular set of elements. These complexes may have provided locations for cultic activities. The “Weinstuben” was a substantial structure excavated at Sayala. This feature is dated to 408–50 ce by a coin of Theodosius II discovered under the steps at the entrance to the structure. Here, a central sunken courtyard was enclosed by nineteen dry stone walled units set in mud. A low bench ran round the edge of the interior walls inside the buildings, some of which contained stone tables and niches that may have been associated storerooms. The buildings were decorated with sculpted elements of faces, some of which may be identified as the god Bes. The buildings also contained hearths and an abundance of ash, while artifactual finds included fragments of glass and bronze vessels, beads, mortars, animal bones and teeth, and clay bells with clappers and handles (Kromer 1967). These rooms appear to have held a commensal function, as much of the material found here was associated with eating and drinking, and seem to parallel structures like X 5 at Ibrim. Other similar “taverns” were found at Mirgissa and (later) at Abd el Qadir (Welsby 2002:111). Further comparative material occurs at Gebel Adda (Millet 1963, 1964, 1967). Here, a temple of the Meroitic period was altered in X-Group times, when a series of pits were dug into the surface of the temple floor and then roofed with poles and straw. Finds inside the pits included ceramic drinking cups and wine jars that appear to underscore the importance of

718   Rachael J. Dann c­ ommensality and drinking in this social setting. The excavator even suggested that the pits were enclosed “clubhouses” for male drinkers (Millet 1967:58). Temple 6 at Ibrim was a focus of libation-based ritual activities where deposits of cups and ladles were deposited (see below) (Driskell et al. 1989; Adams 2013) A complex stone-built, paved structure lined with stone benches known as the “Bergheiligtum” was excavated at Bab Kalabsha. The barrel-vaulted structure was internally decorated with molded features (rosettes, uraei, and faces) and housed stone bench structures, offering tables, and a variety of pottery types (Ricke et al. 1967:1–14, taf. 3–10). While this structure and its use clearly parallels that of the Sayala Weinstuben and other commensal spaces, the Bergheiligtum saw continued use and remodeling into the Christian period (Ricke et al. 1967, taf. 9). During the X-Group period at Meinarti near the Second Cataract, activity moved away from its former Kushite focus around the temple and wine press, to flimsier structures crowded together. This phase of rebuilding occurred after a period of abandonment in the 5th century, when the site was covered in sand. Parallels for the tightly clustered rooms with thin walls at Meinarti can be found in the contemporary structures excavated at Gezira Dabarosa (Hewes 1964:180–83; Adams 2000:99–100).

Ritual Practice The reuse of already defined sacred areas appears to be a pattern in the X-Group period in Lower Nubia, and there is some continuity of practice. Qasr Ibrim seems to have remained a center for pagan pilgrimage alongside Philae, which remained open until 537 ce (Török 2009:515), despite various edicts dating to the 4th century (Bowman 2009:192). Coin and oil libations are known from late Roman Egypt and this practice continued in both Temple 6 (which dates back to the 25th Dynasty) and Temple 4 at Qasr Ibrim (Driskell at al. 1989; Rose 1992:144). During these oil and coin libations, the oily mixture was poured directly onto the temple floor. One of the temples contained more than 150 bronze coins embedded in the mud floor of the temple at various levels. Confined to an area 5 × 3.5 m, and close to a small plinth projecting from the wall, the offerings may have been made to a deity whose statue was originally located here (Plumley 1975:17). A small copper outline of a bull had also been included as an offering (Plumley 1975:16), perhaps as a substitute for meat. The Ibrim coins date from the late 2nd century ce through to the early 5th century ce, indicating that coin libation practice was quite long-lived. Shafts cut into the floor of Temple 1 are possibly Pharaonic in date but according to the ceramic deposits within, the sacred space was reused during the late 4th century. The temple itself does not follow the plan of other temples in Lower Nubia, but its façade has similar proportions to other temples in the Dodekaschoinos. It has been suggested that the Blemmye were living at Qasr Ibrim at this point and Rose (1992:148) considered that

The X-Group Period in Lower Nubia   719 the temple may have been constructed as a funerary monument to a high-ranking person, in the Roman style. Whether or not this high-ranking person was then deposited in the reused shaft (number 1105), or whether the deposits therein were part of a ritual performed in that person’s honor is not known. These small pieces of evidence (alongside the textual evidence mentioned earlier) offer glimpses into aspects of cultic practice, however, the major source of evidence concerning ritual in the X-Group relates to funerary practices.

Burial Practice The type and layout of both grave substructures and superstructures during the X-Group are varied. Many of the cemeteries of the X-Group period show evidence of the use of grave markers whether cairns or tumuli of earth, the use of which can be traced back to the A-Group (Welsby 1996:80, 100). Certain tumuli at Kalabsha south, such as those of tumulus complex K, were made from heaps of stone forming cairns over the stone chambers, a practice also found at Gebel Adda (Strouhal 1984). At Arminna West, by the late 4th century, oval-shaped tumuli were constructed with mudbrick paving around the edge (Fuller 1997:121). Other X-Group burials were placed in naturally occurring stone crevices (sometimes enlarged to hold the body) with heaps of rubble over the top. Early X-Group interments at Gebel Adda re-used the Meroitic period pyramids that were still standing, although the majority of the burials at the site that dated to this period lay in unmarked pits. It is possible, however, that the Gebel Adda burials may represent true X-Group burials and that the pyramids are therefore the latest to be constructed in the Nile valley (Welsby 1996:92; although there may be a Post-Meroitic pyramid at Soba East: Welsby and Davies 2002:2). Burials at Wadi Qitna, dating to between the 3rd and 5th centuries ce were placed beneath stone slab superstructures of an almost circular shape, or under stone cairns (Strouhal 1984:85). Many other Post-Meroitic cemeteries also contain tumuli such as Firka, Kosha, Ez-Zuma, and Hajar el-Beida. Further south, tumuli cemeteries also exist at Tanqasi and El-Hobagi. The El-Hobagi mounds date to the mid-4th century (Welsby 1996:92), or to the very late 4th or early 5th century (Edwards 2004:191). The material culture (i.e., weaponry) from the graves suggests a strong martial element to the culture and some continuity with previous Meroitic beliefs and practices (Lenoble et al. 1994). The relationship between the elite culture of Lower Nubia and Upper Nubia have significant similarities in monument type and aspects of material culture (although the pottery repertoire differs significantly), but they remain at a sufficient distance from one another to appear to represent two centers of power. Graves in the Kushite cemetery of Arminna West were reused, so that some burials of the X-Group period were found beneath pyramid tombs or mastabas. It is debatable whether the interments at the site are those of a new cultural group, or whether they are the burials of the kin of the original occupants who had adopted a new or mixed cultural

720   Rachael J. Dann repertoire. Late Kushite and X-Group burials excavated at Wadi Qitna were arranged in clusters, and these may represent family groups (Welsby 2002:46). A number of these tumuli were enclosed by mudbrick walls with small corridors running in between the monuments, sometimes with small gateways (Strouhal 1984:21–72). This spatial interrelationship is suggestive of close ties between those buried in these graves (Fig. 35.3). Burials dating to the 4th and 5th centuries ce in Lower Nubia are mostly of the pit and side-chamber type, with some use of a pit and end-chamber construction. Both types were in use during the Meroitic period, and indicate continuity between the Meroitic and X-Group periods. Edwards (2004:175) has argued that the pit and side-chamber form of grave construction became increasingly popular in Upper Nubia during the Meroitic period, which also emphasizes continuity in building type, and provides a link between the center of Meroitic power in the south and Lower Nubia much further to the north. At

Figure 35.3  Tumulus Cluster 2 at Wadi Qitna, showing the grave structures and their overlapping groundplans (Strouhal 1984:26 fig. 5).

The X-Group Period in Lower Nubia   721 Gamai, graves were often composed of a shaft cut into the earth with a side-niche at the bottom (Bates and Dunham 1927). Such grave types were also excavated at Serra East (Säve-Söderbergh et al. 1981) and occur in the early phase at Qustul. Another grave type at Gamai comprised a stairway or ramp leading to a hollowed out chamber which might be divided into two chambers by a narrow wall. The layout and construction of many tombs at Gamai, along with the larger tombs at Kosha and Firka, indicate a relationship with later royal graves at Qustul and those of the early period at Ballana. At these sites a ramp or stairway leads down to two or three rooms hollowed out from the alluvium often covered with a barrel vault, while at the surface, tumuli mark the graves. While the earliest X-Group graves at Gamai lacked a superstructure, they had been positioned in close association with mounds that had been previously constructed. The tombs themselves were less complex than those at Qustul, but the majority had a comparable diameter to the smaller Qustul mounds. However Mound E at Gamai was larger than any at Qustul, and is comparable to the largest at Ballana (Bates and Dunham 1927:73–82, pl. 54). For this reason, Mound E is thought to be the latest in the cemetery (Rose 1992:101). The substructures at Qustul are unique, as they are the only examples from this period of truly multi-chambered burial places. Superstructures were often constructed, and while the smallest constructions may have been of earth, stones, or a combination of the two, the larger tumuli seen at Gamai and Qustul were always earth constructions. The practice of interment within side-chamber and end-chamber tombs continued in Lower Nubia into the 5th and early 6th centuries, although certain cemeteries, such as Kalabsha, went out of use in this period (Strouhal 1984:266). However, the large cemeteries, numbered 192 and 193 at Qasr Ibrim and the site at Ballana came into use. An apparent innovation was the use of small pits within the grave structure to receive the body. The Gebel Adda cemetery continued to receive burials under tumuli, but a new grave substructure appeared consisting of a narrow trench covered with stone slabs or a mudbrick vault, for example, the burial of the “blacksmith” (Millet 1964: pl. 3, fig. 8). The graves in Site 25 at Serra East were made up of a ramp or stairway descending to a pit with either a side or an end niche. The majority of the graves at Serra East are of the side niche type, although some of the graves consist of an irregular but vertical shaft with a trench cut into the floor to receive the body. Such graves are believed by the excavators to be Late X-Group or Early Christian (Säve-Söderbergh et al. 1981). The orientation of bodies within tombs has been used as a possible indicator of ethnic grouping, and as a chronological indicator. Interments of the early Napatan period tended to be flexed, while those of the later period were supine and extended, often oriented east-west. X-Group burials differed in being oriented north-south, while later east-west burials might indicate individuals who had converted to Christianity (Welsby 2002:40). However this generalization does not necessarily hold true; the interments at Qustul and Ballana, for example, were arranged in a variety of physical positions and were oriented in different directions (see for example Qustul tomb 3, Emery and Kirwan 1938, fig. 8). Some individuals were buried in a flexed position, but this was not a paramount concern at either Qustul or Ballana. Flexed burial was also a minority practice in the X-Group graves at Faras West (Griffith 1925:72).

722   Rachael J. Dann

Qustul and Ballana Excavated by Emery and Kirwan (1938), Farid (1963), and Seele (published by Williams 1991a, 1991b), the cemeteries at Qustul and Ballana are known as the royal tombs of the X-Group period. The dating of the cemeteries has been established via the careful art-historical work of Török (1987a), with the Qustul cemetery beginning around 380 ce, and the subsequent Ballana cemetery beginning at about 420 ce, with activity ending around 500 ce. In the case of Qustul, ritual activity at the site has a long history that continued from the A-Group period over three thousand years earlier, and a cemetery was also in use at the site during the Meroitic period. To some extent the X-Group cemetery at Qustul represents a continuity of space and place, and a continued connection to the landscape. The depth of history at the site may have been a crucial factor in locating the X-Group royal tombs here, although there is a likely gap of approximately a century between the end of Meroitic activity and the commencement of X-Group activity at Qustul (Edwards 2004:202). The Emery and Kirwan excavations recovered archaeological evidence of the complex material culture and ritual practices at the sites. Gebel Adda (and also Faras) have been proposed as possible settlement sites corresponding to the large royal cemeteries at Qustul and Ballana (Rose 1992:89; Welsby 2002:24), but Millet (1967:58) has been reticent about this identification. More recent reassessment of the remains from Gebel Adda has noted that the architectural similarities between the site and the Qustul and Ballana cemeteries is suggestive of a particular regional practice developing in this period (Huber and Edwards 2010; Huber and Edwards 2014:87). The royal tombs consisted of multi-chambered, brick-lined substructures, which were often barrel-vaulted, and which were entered via a ramp, sometimes followed by a forecourt, then the main part of the tombs. Ballana is the only cemetery of this period to exhibit multi-chambered substructures (Rose  1992:130). After the burials the tombs were covered with large tumuli, some of which were truly monumental: the tumulus with the largest approximate volume (Ballana tomb 122) was estimated to contain over 6,000 m3 of earth (Dann 2009:116–18). The ramps of the tombs, particularly at Qustul, were the location of a variety of animals who had been sacrificially killed (Dann 2008, 2009:128–30). Frequently, the tombs also contained multiple human burials that appear to have been interred at the same time, and this evidence, alongside aspects of the osteological evidence (El-Batrawi 1935), has led to the interpretation that the multiple burials are evidence for the existence of human sacrifice (Dann 2007, 2009) or the execution of prisoners (Lenoble 1996). The most ubiquitous type of material culture in the royal tombs is pottery, and in some cases very large quantities were deposited. It would appear, from the spatial location of the pottery within certain tombs, that one of the rooms in the tomb could be used as a storage area. A large quantity of pottery found in Ballana tomb 80 for example, was almost all contained within Room 3 (Fig. 35.4). It may be presumed that both the pottery and whatever was contained within it were valued. Other items were dispersed throughout the tomb (Emery and Kirwan 1938: fig. 76).

The X-Group Period in Lower Nubia   723

Figure 35.4  Tomb 80 at Ballana showing the position of the artifacts, and animal and human burials, including the ruler who lies on a bed wearing a silver crown and other jewelry (Emery and Kirwan 1938a: fig. 64).

724   Rachael J. Dann Like the pottery, much of the material from the tombs exhibits a range of styles— pharaonic, Meroitic, Classical, Byzantine—in their decoration. This aspect of the assemblages in the royal tombs at Qustul and Ballana makes them distinctively different to other X-Group sites of the period. In particular, the metal items, including the bronze animal trappings, bronze tablewares, and series of silver crowns encrusted with jewels are especially distinctive (Török 1987b). Bed burial was also used for the principal interment in certain tombs, such as tomb 31 at Qustul and tombs 80 and 95 at Ballana (Emery and Kirwan 1938: figs. 26, 64, and 68; Fig. 35.5). Further aspects of ritual practice recovered in the Oriental Institute excavations at the sites include a series of pits containing dismembered animal remains to the west of certain tumuli at Qustul. Furthermore, rows of small mudbrick buildings which can be interpreted as single-chambered chapels were found to the north of some the tumuli. Fifty-one chapels were found with QT31, fifty-four with QT48, and fourteen with QT36. A single chapel was excavated to the north of QT56. The chapels were constructed in an east-west row, facing south, and while the chapels were built in a single consecutive line they were probably constructed at intervals, as the individual orientation of the buildings alters slightly. The chapels were two to three meters wide, with a door in the southern wall and

Figure. 35.5 Typical X-Group Red Ware in goblet forms, with painted decoration (SäveSöderbergh et al. 1981: pl. 72).

The X-Group Period in Lower Nubia   725 small pedestals in the westernmost chapels may have been constructed for libation tables (Williams 1991b:26–27). A large kidney shaped enclosure, positioned to the east of the large tomb 80 at Ballana, was also excavated. Constructed from mudbrick, the structure showed signs of repair and may have been in use for some length of time (Williams 1991b:27, pls. 1, 404), although its exact purpose remains obscure. These finds are very significant as they provide evidence of ritual practice within a wider cemetery landscape, and establish that the tumuli should not be considered as isolated acts of construction and interment, but as aspects of a more varied type of cultic practice (Dann 2009).

Material Culture Throughout the X-Group period, the practice of interring the dead with grave goods is found. Fragments of textiles and leather, bead jewelry, metalwork, weaponry, and pottery were all common depositions in the grave (Mayer Thurman and Williams 1979; Bénazeth 1999; see metal vessels in Mills 1982). The function and significance of these objects remains open to debate. They may represent the personal belongings of the dead, or of the mourners, or they may signify a belief in equipping the dead for an afterlife. The general practice in the period was that the vast majority of the social group were furnished with artifacts in the grave, although nuances between sites and between different groups no doubt existed. The royal tombs at Qustul and Ballana were sometimes very richly furnished with both local and imported objects. The pottery, bronze serving vessels, and items of personal adornment were particularly numerous and the dramatic inclusion of animal and human bodies in the staging of the funerary rites were significant in negotiating power and identity (Dann 2009). In the X-Group period, pottery is the most numerous find type, and forms the basis for broad dating of the period. The goblet-shaped drinking cup is particularly characteristic. In 1992, Rose undertook a seriation of the pottery finds from the major archaeological sites of the X-Group. Ceramics of the late Meroitic period show a decline in the number of fineware vessels and a decrease in decoration. The assemblage that Rose terms “Ptolemaic-Roman” contained many imports from Aswan including lekythoi, amphorae, plates, jugs, and shallow-footed bowls. This repertoire extended as far south as Qasr Ibrim, south of which it began to include “Meroitic” elements. This distribution correlates with the (sometime) extent of Roman Egypt. Accordingly, it would seem that Lower Nubia had no indigenous ceramic tradition of its own during the Late Meroitic period (Rose 1992:170). This absence may be due in part to the apparent lack of occupation in Lower Nubia during this period, given the harsh environmental conditions, which ameliorated after the introduction of the waterwheel (the demographic changes are evidenced in osteoarchaeological studies: Armelagos et al. 1981; Van Gerven et al. 1981). The early X-Group ceramics exhibit a change in shape of jars and shallow footed bowls, and probably took their inspiration from the Ptolemaic-Roman assemblage. The Ptolemaic-Roman assemblage continued in northern Nubia even when early X-Group traits began to appear further south. The X-Group assemblage, including a new range of

726   Rachael J. Dann imported amphorae from beyond Egypt, is found from Qasr Ibrim to Gamai, but also at Kosha and Firka. Rose sees this as the reassertion of Meroitic traits and indigenous culture. The finewares of this period are more akin to the Ptolemaic-Roman assemblage than the Meroitic, and certain forms from Aswan that occurred in the PtolemaicRoman assemblage were also discovered in the Meroitic Extra-Dodekaschoinos. It would appear that the only widespread imported pottery forms at this period are the lekythoi and small amphorae. However, certain imports from far beyond the Aswan region demonstrate the long-distance trade routes that the X-Group people had access to. One particular form of amphora (Adams’s Family L, Emery and Kirwan’s type 13a) is known around the Mediterranean and in Northern Europe (Emery and Kirwan 1938; Adams 1986; Peacock and Williams 1986:188–89). Two major centers of pottery manufacture were those at Debeira and Gezira Dabarosa, where similar double-chambered kiln and work area sites were excavated (Adams 1986:602–603). At both sites production was based around the wheelmade red wares—the classic X-Group goblets and stemmed cups (Adams types R1, and later R2 and R5), and qadus pots (U1 types, Adams 1986:14–16). Locally handmade vessels were common in the X-Group period, but as their manufacture was probably local, and perhaps at a household level, therefore leaving little archaeological trace of the production process (Strouhal 1982; Adams 1986:38). A further class of pottery evident in the X-Group period is the so-called “Eastern Desert Ware” (Barnard 2002). This is handmade pottery with a sandy fabric and distinctive incised, and impressed decorations, sometimes with white inlay or red slip, which is found at sites in the Eastern Desert, and at Wadi Qitna and Kalabsha in the Valley (Strouhal 1984). Bernard suggests that the groups using these vessels should be termed “Eastern Desert Dwellers” (2009), and this part of the pottery repertoire is suggestive of mobile or semi-mobile populations, living to the East of the Nile (Barnard 2005, 2006).

Meroitic Antecedents and Cultural Complexity The nature of the relationship between the X-Group and Meroitic culture of the preceding period remains an unresolved question. Adams argued that “since evolution rather than revolution is the normal process in cultural development, we must accept as a ‘null hypothesis’ the idea that the X-Group culture was a direct outgrowth of the Meroïtic” (Adams 1965:163). There is plenty of evidence for continuity between the Meroitic period and the X-Group period both in terms of the way that sites continued to be occupied and used, and in terms of continuities in cultural practices. Indeed, aspects of continuity reach back beyond the Meroitic period. For instance, the tradition of tumulus burial is far

The X-Group Period in Lower Nubia   727 e­ arlier than the tradition of pyramid building and stretches far back into the mortuary practices of the Sudan (Welsby 1996:100). Tumuli were found at the Kushite period cemetery at Kawa (Welsby and Davies 2002:25). The tumuli over the burials at Qustul and Ballana, plus the tradition of bed burials, and the inclusion of human and animal sacrifices leads to an obvious parallel with the much earlier burials at Kerma (see Reisner 1923). Such features are also found in both the Napatan and Meroitic periods (Dunham  1950; Welsby  1996:81–82). Bed burials occur, for instance, in the middle necropolis (tombs M 300–399) at Meroe (Török  1987a:266). The royal cemeteries at Meroe sometimes contained multiple burials that have been interpreted as human sacrifices. Sixteen tombs in the north and west cemeteries at Meroe contained additional burials. Five such burials were in the tomb of a king, one in that of a queen, and one in that of a prince. Others were in tombs where the status of the owner was uncertain (Welsby 1996:89; but see also Lenoble 1996). Animal sacrifices also occurred at Meroe and at El-Kurru, and have been interpreted by Lenoble as an important aspect of Nubian kingship ideology that at Qustul and Ballana maintained a connection to the royal burials at Meroe (Lenoble 1994:121–22 and Flores 1996 for a related argument). However, there are also significant breaks with the preceding period, among the most obvious being a decline in monumental building, no widespread use of a written language, and no distinctive artistic tradition. The archaeological evidence of the X-Group period largely consists in cemetery sites, and therefore the question of the survival or influence of Meroitic culture rests largely on questions of religious or ritual practice. While aspects of continuity are clear, evidence also suggests the destruction or re-use of sacred areas of Meroitic date at for example, Gebel Adda and Qasr Ibrim. At Meinarti at the beginning of the X-Group period, a Meroitic building, perhaps a store room or temple was also destroyed (Adams 1965:164). Further evidence of such destruction is found further south at Dangeil and Meroe, but the dating of these events is not secure (Edwards 2004:187). This evidence is therefore rather contradictory. It points to either an X-Group indifference towards previous ritual sites that were not considered to be in any way sacred, or perhaps to iconoclastic acts, but also to a continuity of interest and activity at such sites. The decorative schema of some of the complex material culture found within the Qustul and Ballana graves is especially rich in terms of the debate concerning Meroitic (or Kushitic) origins and influence. Some of the pottery was certainly imported, such as the mica-dusted amphorae (Emery and Kirwan type 13a, 1938:390; Adams’s ware U18, 1986:581) and Rose has argued that the folding chairs were gifts from the Byzantine Empire (1992:132). Certain pottery vessels are painted with Greek graffito, while the silver jewelry bears hieroglyphic signs and depictions of Egyptian gods and goddesses. While it is possible to trace the origins and parallels for such images (and for certain practices, as outlined above), perhaps a more meaningful discussion lies in orientating the debate towards the significance of such artifacts, images, and practices within the indigenous context of the X-Group period itself.

728   Rachael J. Dann

References Cited Adams, W.Y. 1965 Post-Pharaonic Nubia in the Light of Archaeology II. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 51:160–78. ——— 1977 Nubia: Corridor to Africa. Princeton University Press. ——— 1982 Qasr Ibrim, an Archaeological Conspectus. In Nubian Studies: Proceedings of the Symposium for Nubian Studies, ed J. M. Plumley, pp. 25–38. Aris and Phillips. ——— 1986 Ceramic Industries of Medieval Nubia. University of Kentucky Press. ——— 2000 Meinarti I: The Late Meroitic, Ballaña and Transitional Occupation. Sudan Archaeological Research Society Publication 5. BAR International Series 895. Archaeopress. ——— 2013 Qasr Ibrim: The Ballana Phase. Egypt Exploration Society. Barnard, H. 2002 Eastern Desert Ware, a First Introduction. Sudan & Nubia 6:53–57. ——— 2005 “Sire, il n’y a pas de Blemmyes”: A Re-evaluation of Historical and Archaeological Data. In People of the Red Sea, ed J.C.  Starkey, pp. 23–40. Seminar for Arabian Studies Monograph 3. Archaeopress. ——— 2006 The Macroscopic Description of Eastern Desert Ware (1935–2002). In Acta Nubica: Proceedings of the X International Conference of Nubian Studies, ed I. Caneva and A. Roccati, pp. 51–62. Libreria dello Stato. ——— 2009 The Desert Hinterland of Qasr Ibrim. In Qasr Ibrim: Between Egypt and Africa. Studies in Cultural Exchange, ed J. van der Vliet and J. L. Hagen, pp. 83–103. Peeters. Bates, O. and D. Dunham 1927 Excavations at Gammai. Harvard African Studies 8. Peabody Museum of Harvard University. Bénazeth, D. 1999 Un ensemble de bronze coptes récemment acquis par le Louvre. In Ägypten und Nubien in spätantiker und christlicher Zeit, v. 1: Materielle Kultur, Kunst und religiöses Leben, ed. S.  Emmel, M.  Krause, S.  G.  Richter, and S.  Schaten, pp. 79–86. Akten des 6 Internationalen Koptologenkongresses. Reichert. Bowman, A.K. 2009 Egypt after the Pharaohs, 332 BC–AD 642. British Museum Press. Chrysos, E.K. 1978 The Title ΒΑΣΙΛΕΥΣ in Early Byzantine International Relations. Dumbarton Oaks Papers 32:29–75. Dann, R.J. 2007 Changing Patterns of Violence at Qustul and Ballana. Part One: The Humans. Der Antike Sudan. Mitteilungen der Sudanarchäologischen Gesellschaft zu Berlin 18:189–200. ——— 2008 Changing Patterns of Violence at Qustul and Ballana. Part Two: The Animals Der Antike Sudan. Mitteilungen der Sudanarchäologischen Gesellschaft zu Berlin 19:111–20. ——— 2009 The Archaeology of Late Antique Sudan: Aesthetics and Identity in the Royal X-Group Tombs at Qustul and Ballana. Cambria Press. Driskell, B.N., N.K. Adams, P.G. and French. 1989 A Newly Discovered Temple at Qasr Ibrim: Preliminary Report. Archéologie du Nil Moyen 3:11–49. Dunham, D. 1950 El Kurru. Royal Cemeteries of Kush 1. Harvard University Press. Edwards, D.N. 1994 Post-Meroitic (‘X-Group’) and Christian Burials at Sesibi, Sudanese Nubia. The Excavations of 1937. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 80:159–78. ——— 1996 The Archaeology of the Meroitic State: New Perspectives on its Social and Political Organisation. Cambridge Monographs in African Archaeology 38. BAR International Series 640. Tempus Reparatum. ——— 2004 The Nubian Past: An Archaeology of the Sudan. Routledge. Eide, T., T.  Hägg, R.H.  Pierce, and L.  Török eds. 1998 Fontes Historiae Nubiorum: Textual Sources for the History of the Middle Nile Region between the Eighth Century BC and the

The X-Group Period in Lower Nubia   729 Sixth Century AD, v. 3: From the First to the Sixth Century AD. IKRR/Department of Greek, Latin, and Egyptology, University of Bergen. El-Batrawi, A.M. 1935 Report on the Human Remains. Mission Archéologie de Nubie, 1929–1934. Government Press (Cairo). Emery, W.B. and L.P.  Kirwan 1938 The Royal Tombs of Ballana and Qustul. Mission Archéologique de Nubie 1929–1934. Government Press (Cairo). Farid, S. 1963 Excavations at Ballana 1958–1959. General Organization for Government Printing Offices. Flores, D. 1996 The Funerary Sacrifice of Animals in Nubia during the Meroitic and PostMeroitic Periods. Beiträge zur Sudanforschung 6:31–50. Fuller, D. 1997 The Confluence of History and Archaeology in Lower Nubia: Scales of Continuity and Change. Archaeological Review from Cambridge 14(1):105–28. Gautier, H. 1911 Le temple de Kalabcha, v. 2: Les temples immergés de la Nubie. Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale. Griffith, F.L. 1925 Oxford Excavations in Nubia. Liverpool Annals of Archaeology and Anthropology 12:57–172. Hewes, G.W. 1964 Gezira Dabarosa: Report of the University of Colorado Nubian Expedition. 1962–1963 Season. Kush 12:174–87. Huber, R. and D.N. Edwards 2010 Gebel Adda Cemetery One 1963: Post-Medieval Reuse of X-Group Tumuli. Sudan & Nubia 14:83–90. ——— 2014 Gebel Adda Cemeteries 3 and 4 (1963–1964). Sudan & Nubia 16:80–87. Kirwan, L. 1939 The Oxford University Excavations at Firka. Oxford University Press. ——— 1960 The Decline and Fall of Meroe. Kush 8:163–73. Kromer, K. 1967 Römische Weinstuben in Sayala (Unternubien). Österreichischen Akademie des Wissenschaften. Lenoble, P. 1994 Une monture pour mon royaume. Sacrifices triomphaux de chevaux et de méhara d’el Kurru à Ballana. Archéologie du Nil Moyen 6:107–30. ——— 1996 Les “sacrifices humaines” de Méroé, Qustul et Ballana 1. Le massacre de nombreux prisonniers. Beiträge zur Sudanforschung 6:59–87. Lenoble, P., R.-P. Disseaux, A.A. Mohamed, B. Ronce, and J. Bialais 1994 La fouille du tumulus à enceinte el Hobagi III. Meroitic Newsletter 25:53–88. Mayer Thurman, C.C. and B.  Williams eds. 1979 Ancient Textiles from Nubia: Meroitic, X-Group, and Christian Fabrics from Ballana and Qustul. Art Institute of Chicago. Millet, N.B. 1963 Gebel Adda: Preliminary Report for 1963. Journal of the American Research Centre in Egypt 3:147–65. ——— 1964 Gebel Adda Expedition Preliminary Report, 1963–1964. Journal of the American Research Centre in Egypt 3:7–14. ——— 1967 Gebel Adda Preliminary Report, 1965–1966. Journal of the American Research Centre in Egypt 6:53–64. Mills, A.J. 1982 The Cemeteries of Qaṣr Ibrîm. Egypt Exploration Society Excavation Memoir 51. Osman, A. and D.N. Edwards 2012 The Archaeology of a Nubian Frontier: Survey on the Nile Third Cataract, Sudan. Mauhaus. Peacock, D.P.S. and D.F. Williams 1986 Amphorae and the Roman Economy: An Introductory Guide. Longman. Plumley, J.M. 1975. Qasr Ibrim, 1974. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 61:5–27. Plumley, J.M., W.Y.  Adams, and E.  Crowfoot 1977 Qasr Ibrim, 1976. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 63:29–47.

730   Rachael J. Dann Reisner, G.A. 1910 The Archaeological Survey of Nubia: Report for 1907–1908, v. 1: Archaeological Report. National Printing Department. ——— 1923 Excavations at Kerma. Harvard African Studies 5–6. Peabody Museum of Harvard University. Ricke, H., C. Fingerhuth, L. Habachi, and L. Žabkar 1967 Ausgrabungen von Khor Dehmit bis Bet El-Wali. Oriental Institute Nubian Expedition 2. University of Chicago Press. Rose, P.J. 1992 The Aftermath of the Roman Frontier in Lower Nubia. Doctoral dissertation, Department of Archaeology, University of Cambridge. Rowley-Conwy, P. 1989 Nubia AD 0–500 and the “Islamic” Agricultural Revolution: Preliminary Botanical Evidence from Qasr Ibrim, Egyptian Nubia. Archéologie du Nil Moyen 3:131–38. Sadr, K. 1991 The Development of Nomadism in Ancient Northeast Africa. University of Pennsylvania Press. Säve-Söderbergh, T., G.  Englund, and H-Å. Nordström 1981 Late Nubian Cemeteries. The Scandinavian Joint Expedition to Sudanese Nubia 6. Scandinavian University Books. Strouhal, E. 1982 Hand-Made Pottery of the IVth to VIth Centuries AD in the Dodecaschoinos. In Nubian Studies, ed. J. Plumley, pp. 215–22. Aris and Phillips. ——— 1984 Wadi Qitna and Kalabsha South: Late Roman-Early Byzantine Tumuli Cemeteries in Egyptian Nubia. Charles University. Török, L. 1987a Late Antique Nubia. Antaeus 16. Archaeological Institute of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences. ——— 1987b The Royal Crowns of Kush: A Study of Middle Nile Regalia and Iconography in the 1st millennia B.C.  and A.D. Cambridge Monographs in African Archaeology 18. BAR International Series 338. Archaeopress. ——— 2009 Between Two Worlds: The Frontier Region between Ancient Nubia and Egypt 3700 BC–500 AD. Probleme der Ägyptologie 29. Brill. Trigger, B.G. 1969 The Royal Tombs at Qustul and Ballana and their Meroitic Antecedents. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 5:117–28. Vantini, G. 1975 Oriental Sources Concerning Nubia. Polish Academy of Sciences and Heidelberger Akademie der Wissenschaften. Welsby, D.A. 1996 The Kingdom of Kush: The Napatan and Meroitic Empires. British Museum Press. ——— 2002 The Medieval Kingdoms of Nubia: Pagans, Christians and Muslims along the Middle Nile. British Museum Press. Welsby, D. and V. Davies 2002 Uncovering Ancient Sudan: A Decade of Discovery by the Sudan Archaeological Research Society. Sudan Archaeological Research Society. Williams, B.B. 1991a Excavations between Abu Simbel and the Sudan Frontier, Part 8: Meroitic Remains from Qustul Cemetery Q, Ballana Cemetery B, and a Ballana Settlement. University of Chicago Oriental Institute Nubian Expedition 8. ——— 1991b Excavations between Abu Simbel and the Sudan Frontier, Part 9: Noubadian X-Group Remains from Royal Complexes in Cemeteries Q and 219 and from Private Cemeteries Q, R, V, W, B, J and M at Qustul and Ballana. University of Chicago Oriental Institute Nubian Expedition 9. Zaborski, A. 1989 The Problem of Blemmyes-Beja: An Etymology Beiträge zur Sudanforschung 4:169–78.

Chapter 36

Post-M eroe i n U pper N u bi a Mahmoud El-Tayeb

Introduction Since its early days, the history of the third phase of the Kushite kingdom—the Meroitic period—contained some chapters which are still largely unclear. First of all, debatable were the reason or reasons behind the transfer of the Kushite capital from Napata to Meroe. George Reisner saw the shift of the capital as due to internal dynastic rivalry (Reisner 1920:263), while Arkell (1961:144–46) and Shinnie (1967:32–33) suggested that the Egyptian military campaign led by King Psamtek II of the 26th Dynasty against Napata was the cause. Economic factors may also have been involved. During the late Napatan period, the economy of the state was badly affected by a feud between the 26th Dynasty and Napata. In turn, this enmity had a direct impact on the trade between Egypt and Nubia. Apart from the Nile trade, the caravan trade through the western and eastern deserts had also highly suffered from the attacks of the desert tribes. No doubt, raids of the desert tribes from both east and west had constituted a constant threat to the Napatan state, and played a significant role in weakening its central power. Another economic reason assumed by Arkell is changes in the regional climate in the north (Arkell  1961:148; Tylecote  1982:29). While the external military campaign as the explanation for the shift of the capital from Napata to Meroe has faced many challenges, there is wide acceptance of the economic role in the transfer of the capital. Further debates concerned the date of the transfer of the capital to Meroe. Reisner states that Napata, although destroyed after the reign of Aspelta in the 6th century bce by the raid of Psamtek II, continued to function as capital until the death of Nastasen (328–308 bce). Therefore, he dated the shift to Meroe to the 4th century bce

732   Mahmoud El-Tayeb (Reisner 1923:34–75). Yet Reisner’s late date has been rejected by a number of scholars, among them Wainwright (1952:75–77) and Dunham (1947:7,  1950), who placed the transfer in the 6th century bce (538 bce), as he concluded from a comparative study of the royal cemeteries in both Napata and Meroe. An interesting view on this subject is presented by Adams (1964:116), who pointed out the probability of the existence of two capitals, Napata and Meroe, in two independent kingdoms which were inhabited contemporaneously during the entire period known as the kingdom of Kush. Adams argued that the lack of evidence for such an assumption cannot be taken as a negative evidence, especially with the currently poor state of excavation and research in Nubia (see also Mahmoud el-Tayeb 2002:25–27). The end of the Meroitic state is one of the most ambiguous and controversial periods in Nubian history. As Adams (1977:383) put it, the “circumstances attending the final downfall of Kush are largely unrecorded.” Scholars have debated the reasons for the fall of the kingdom and the date of the events since Reisner’s excavations at Meroe in 1920. Some scholars have invoked political explanations—external military invasion (namely by the Axumite king Ezana), and/or waves of internal immigration of a new ethnic population from south Kordofan (“people with inferior culture invaded the Middle Nile valley and put an end to a superior culture!”). According to those prominent scholars (for instance, Shinnie 1955, 1967; Hintze 1959, 1967; Kirwan 1960, 1981; Arkell 1961), these invaders are the same Noba of the Ezana inscription. They used archaeological evidence, such as pottery types, grave structures, and burial customs, to prove their (unjustified) conclusions. Hence, the unanswered question is whether the fall of Meroe was a result of a one sudden blow, or did it result from a long process of decline? On the other hand, some scholars argue that since the end of the 2nd/beginning of the 3rd century ce the decline had started and the kingdom began to plunge slowly into a dark age until the final breakdown of its central authority. However, it is generally accepted that economic, social, and political factors lay behind the final collapse of the central state. Adams summarized these factors as follows: “the rapid impoverishment of Egypt, the traditional market for most of the Nubian export. The increased threat of the long distance caravan trade between Meroe and Egypt, and the rise of Axum as a strong trade rival in the region” (Adams 1977:383–90). Furthermore, the exact date of the final demise of the Meroitic royal power is not less controversial. For instance, Reisner dated the final collapse of the central power in Meroe to the middle of the 4th century ce (Reisner 1923:75–76). Both Dunham and Arkell agree with Reisner on this date (Dunham 1957:10; Arkell 1961:171–73). Their dating is mainly based on the inscription of the Axumite king Ezana (DAE 11), which is dated to the mid-4th century ce. Reinterpretation of the same inscription has also convinced Hintze and Haycock to accept Reisner’s mid-4th century date ­ (Haycock 1967:107–20; Hintze 1967). Yet an earlier date of the 3rd or early 4th century ce is suggested by both Monneret de Villard and Shinnie, based on readings of two fragmentary stela from Meroe (Garstang et al.  1911; Monneret de Villard  1938:37; Shinnie 1967:55–56). A later date than that set by Reisner is given by László Török, who assigned the year 370 ce to be the most suitable according to his readings of Ezana’s

Post-Meroe in Upper Nubia   733 inscription (DAE 11) (Török 1988:33–40). In a recent study of documents and inscriptions concerning the Axumite-Noba invasion, Hatke also reached a date which agrees with the date given by Török (Hatke  2013:71–100). Today, however, it is generally accepted that the middle of the 4th century ce was the time when the royal central power in Meroe had come to an end, and thus disappeared from the Nubian history. Thenceforth began the last chapter of the Kushite kingdom, the so called “Post-Meroitic period.” (The rise and fall of the Meroitic state is discussed in some details in Mahmoud el-Tayeb 2002:28, 32, 2012:27–40.) At the onset of the 20th century, Reisner conducted the first archaeological survey in northern Lower Nubia. During this survey he excavated cemeteries that contained unfamiliar mortuary practices and archaeological remnants that he designated the X-Group (Reisner 1910). The first decade of the last century witnessed the inauguration of the Meroitic research in Nubia by the excavations of L. Woolley at Karanog (Woolley and Randall-MacIver 1910). During the following three decades, further excavations on Meroitic and Post-Meroitic sites were undertaken at Karanog and Gamai (Bates and Dunham 1927). In Upper Nubia, in the core of the Meroitic territory, Garstang excavated the “Royal City” at Meroe in 1909 and began excavation in the West Cemetery. His dating of the handmade pottery he discovered, attributed the burials to an early Meroitic date ca. 1000–300 bce (Garstang et al. 1911:29–36). Only fifteen years later, his dating was shown to be erroneous by Bentley and Crowfoot, who instead assigned a very late date ca. 4th–6th century ce (Bentley and Crowfoot 1924:18–28). Since then, the excavation of the French Unit attached to the Sudan Antiquities Service at El-Kadada in Shendi Reach has revealed for the first time existence of a transitional period between the Late and Post-Meroitic periods in the region, attested by simultaneous discovery of both wheel and handmade pottery in the excavated burials (Geus and Lenoble 1985:67–92), a fact that has been confirmed by the excavations of Gdańsk Archaeological Museum in the Fourth Cataract region (see Mahmoud el-Tayeb and Kołosowska  2007:22–23; Mahmoud el-Tayeb 2012:53–56). In order to understand the historical events in late Upper Nubia, its population movements and distribution as well as the social and cultural changes, one should first put under consideration the geological formation and environmental conditions that enable an understanding of the reasons behind any essential changes. Upper Nubia, which extends from the region of the Third Cataract in the north to almost the regions of Sinnar and Kosti in the south, can be subdivided into three major zones. This subdivision is based on the geological and geographical interlinks between these zones. Contrary to the earlier opinions of Chittick and Adams, study of “Post-Meroe” in Upper Nubia thus cannot be dealt with as a homogenous subject in one specific uniform territory, even if it represents a single cultural horizon (Chittick 1957:73; Kirwan 1960; Adams  1977:424; Kirwan  1981). Analysis of the archaeological material (particularly grave types, funerary rites, and pottery production) leads to a clear subdivision of Upper Nubia into the aforementioned zones, with three main types of burials and three groups of pottery (Fig. 36.1).

734   Mahmoud El-Tayeb Aswan First Cataract Red Sea Karanog

Second Cataract

Gemmai

Lower Nubia

di G Wa

Baten El-Hagar

Wa di A llaq i

D on

Abu-Hamed

g ol a R e a c h

Ni le

p

El-A Hagar el-Beida Hager Sail Jebel Kulgieli Fifth Cataract Karima-Napata Fourth Cataract Merowe El-Kassinger Dangeil El-Zuma Tanqasi El-Fereikha W Usli adi Abu D Berber om

r p e

Middle Nile Region

ile eN Blu

le te Ni Whi

El-Gezira Region El-Kawa

Sennar

ara Atb

Meroe Shendi El-Kadada El-Hobagi Sixth Cataract Musawwarat es-Sufra El-Geili Gereif East Khartoum Soba El-Ushara Es-Sabeil

Kosti

0

Gabati

N u b i a

uqqadam Wadi M

ar ow Old DongolaH i d Jebel el-Ghaddar Wa k eli l-M e i ad W

U

Third Cataract Tabo

aba abg

Dal Cataract

Umm Sunt Amara el-Nasri El Roseirs

100 km

Figure 36.1  Map of Upper Nubia, showing the three zones of Post-Meroe period.

Post-Meroe in Upper Nubia   735 The sequence of the subdivided zones, from south to north is: the Gezira from as far as Roseires and Kosti some distance below Latitude 12, down to the junction of the Blue and White Niles. This zone is dominated by burials of Type I (see below) and is distinguished by the production of black-ware pottery. The second zone extends from Khartoum area to include the Sixth Cataract, Shendi, and Abu Hamed Reaches. The Middle Nile valley is dominated by burials of Type II and is mainly distinguished by production of red- or brown-ware handmade pottery. The northern zone occupies the territory of Dongola Reach between the Third and Fourth Nile Cataracts. The Reach is dominated by Type III burials and is distinguished by production of high quality wheelmade small red-slipped vessels. Although each of these zones is dominated by a single type of burial and pottery production, other types can also be found in some cases. Yet, the mortuary traditions appear to follow a wide distribution of practices with clear variations from one zone to another.

Burial Types Type I is the so-called “beehive” or flask-shaped tomb, consisting of a round burial chamber with a narrow neck-shaped shaft. To date, the data gained from the few examined burials in the Blue and White Nile areas are insufficient to give satisfactory evidence for the southern burial practice. Nonetheless, the present data can help considerably in creating a general framework for these burial practices. The arrangement of the burial seems to follow an established canon, although with slight diversities. The common rite divides the burials into two sides, one occupied by the deceased with his back towards the edge of the burial, and the other for the grave offerings. The body was usually buried in contracted position, laid on the right side (rarely on the left) with head due south, facing east, but in some cases the head may be oriented east or west. Pottery vessels are often deposited opposite the deceased, either near the upper or lower limbs. Personal armaments are usually found just in front of the face and chest. Type I tombs were found in different sites in this zone, especially in the Blue Nile area. Some of these sites were found north and south of Sinnar West, at Karim’s Garden and at Umm Sunut, Amara el-Nasri, as well as Quz Nasra near Marengan (Balfour  1952; Edwards 1991:41–54; Abd El-Rahman Ali 2003). Yet the site of El-Ushara, which is situated on the left side of the White Nile about 6 km south of Omdurman, is classified as the type site of these burials (Fig. 36.2; see Marshall and Adam 1951:40–46). Type II are cave-like burials, consisting of a descending ramp oriented east-west, leading to a burial chamber cut perpendicularly at its western end into a cave-like shape. Access to the burial chamber is often made easy by one step cut at the entrance below the surface level of the ramp. The tumulus superstructure is more elaborate in shape and far more diverse than that of Type I. Its construction is dependent mainly on the availability of local materials. Therefore, the tumuli can be built of earth, earth mixed with gravel, pure gravel, or cairns of black ferrocrete stones. While the size of the tumuli was nearly

736   Mahmoud El-Tayeb

Grave

Grave

Unexcav.

Grave

0

4

meters

1. Ushara (South-North Section)

SOFT GRAY SAND

0

50 cm.

2. EI Sabeil (South-North Section)

Figure 36.2  Southern zone burials.

the same in the first zone, a great variation in size between the tumuli in the second zone is quite conspicuous (see Mahmoud el-Tayeb 2002:66–67). Burial arrangement in the middle zone appear to be organized according to a very well-established canon of funerary rites. The dead were generally buried in contracted position, closer to the inner edge of the burial chamber, in a common north-south alignment. Head orientation and face direction, however, do not seem to follow a strict rule—the head could be oriented north or south, and the body laid either on its left or right side, often on a bed-like arrangement of pure sand or mud (Geus 1982:181, fig. 4) and rarely on an actual bed, wooden

Post-Meroe in Upper Nubia   737 bench, or frame (Lenoble et al. 1994:53–112, pls. 7, 9–10; Edwards 1998:69–111). These differences in body orientation might have emanated from the regional peculiarities of each population group. Funerary offerings were deposited in a special and intended order. Big jars and vessels were located next to the entrance opposite the body of the deceased, forming one or even more rows. Such a practice of offering arrangement in the burial is obviously a continuity from at least the Classic Meroitic period (for instance see Lenoble 1987:89–103, pl. I; Mahmoud Suliman Bashir 2010:69–74). Small pottery vessels were placed nearer to the dead, often around the upper limb. One type of black handmade pot was often placed near the skull, a phenomenon that Lenoble interpreted as being connected with a libation cult for the goddess Isis (Lenoble 1991a:246–52, 1995). When found, armament, usually consisting of a bow, iron or bronze arrowheads, stone archer’s loose, or knife, was always placed in front of the dead. Spears were rarely found among the offerings. The best example for this practice is recorded by Lenoble in tumuli III and VI at El-Hobagi (Lenoble et al. 1994:54–87, pls. 9, 10; Fig. 36.3). Type III is the side niche “lateral burial” consisting of a rectangular vertical shaft oriented east-west. It is provided at the bottom with a side niche, basically hewn into its southern long wall. Yet, recent excavations in the Fourth Cataract region have revealed some variants in the construction of the tomb substructure, in which the burial chamber happened to be cut into other sides than the traditional southern long one (Mahmoud el-Tayeb 2012:57–63, Fig. 14f, h, g, i). This type is distinguished by two variants of superstructures. The first is a simple conical mound, piled with an admixture of earth sediment and some small stones and gravel. It clearly varies in size from small to large. The second variant of superstructure is a flat-topped low circular mound of earth revetted with small black stones. Generally these are of similar size. Beneath both of these variants is a characteristic substructure as described above. At the turn of the 4th century ce, this type of construction appeared to be widespread throughout the Dongola Reach, at least from the Letti basin upstream to the Fourth Cataract region. Burial chambers of this type are relatively small in size, just wide enough to receive the dead and a few funerary offerings. The deceased occupies a larger space, often laid in contracted position on its right side, in an east-west alignment, head due east facing north, resting on a bed-like bench prepared of mud and covered with a layer of pure sand (Mahmoud el-Tayeb 1994:66–70, figs. 3, 4). Notable in this zone is the absence—to date—of the traditional bed (“angareeb”), which is a well-known burial practice in the central zone (for instance see Edwards 1998:72–111). Apparently, in the Dongola Reach the angareeb was replaced by a kind of wooden frame or bier. It should also be mentioned that biers are very rarely recorded in the other central and southern zones. It is best documented by Lenoble at El-Hobagi III and VI (Lenoble et al. 1994:77–78, fig. 9, 10). As usual, grave goods comprise pottery vessels, mainly very distinctive small wheelmade red-slipped bowls, cups, and goblets, all of high quality, which were noted in this zone for the first time at Jebel Ghaddar Southern Cemetery (Mahmoud el-Tayeb 1994:68, fig. 2, 79). Handmade pottery is quite scarce, consisting mainly of medium-size beer jars and small bowls of red-brown color, sometimes decorated with mat-impressed patterns (Fig. 36.4).

738   Mahmoud El-Tayeb

Figure 36.3  Central zone burials.

Post-Meroe in Upper Nubia   739

Figure 36.4  Northern zone burials.

740   Mahmoud El-Tayeb The Fourth Cataract Region, which constitutes a contiguous zone, offered a cultural link between Dongola Reach and the territory of the Central Nile Valley. In accordance, an interesting variant of burial construction was discovered for the first time in this region (Fig. 36.5). During the course of the salvage campaign a unique type of burial construction was discovered on both sides of the Nile. It mainly comprised a combination of two types of burial construction which are characteristic for the central zone— (the east-west descending ramp)—and Dongola Reach(the rectangular vertical shaft with side niche). This combination is classified as a construction variant in the northern zone dated to transitional period from late Meroitic to early Post-Meroitic (300–350 ce) (for more information, see Mahmoud el-Tayeb and Kołosowska 2007:21; Mahmoud elTayeb 2012: 53–56). The tumulus burial is often seen as a significant element distinguishing the PostMeroitic period (by Kirwan, Arkell, Hintze, and others, noted above). This element has sometimes been classified as being intrusive to the Nile valley by new ethnic groups that invaded the Nile valley in the mid-4th century ce. Yet excavations attest to the tumulus graves in Nubia since the A-Group and C-Group periods. It became the predominant structure during the Old Kush (Kerma) period and the early phase of the Napatan period (for more information on this subject, see Kendall 1982:20, fig. 15.1). Since that time, this type of structure developed throughout Nubia, in accordance with specific local conditions in each separate zone, where regionalism played a crucial role in the life and traditions of these communities. The use of tumulus burials is, thus, simply a revival of a Nubian practice by the Noba people, who thereafter considered it as part of their burial traditions (for this interpretation, see Lenoble and Nigm ed Din Mohamed Sharif 1992:626–35; see also Dunham 1953:87–94). It should be mentioned also that regionalism and diversity even within one cultural horizon must have been a result of the societal composition in Upper Nubia—it is improbable that such a large territory was occupied by a single ethnic group. So far this aspect has received very little attention from archaeologists and historians. Hence, if the invasion theory is rejected, a gradual infiltration of another ethnic group or groups might be reasonable and even quite possible. For instance, an earlier infiltration of Noba tribes into some territories of southern Upper Nubia should also be discussed. This idea is based on linguistic analysis conducted by Zyhlarz. On this point Zyhlarz is quoted by Trimingham: “. . . Nubian was introduced into the Nile valley from southern Kordofān by the Nuba in the 3rd century B.C. If so, then Nubian and Meroitic must have existed side by side in the Island of Meroë” (Trimingham  1965:36). Whatever the case, one would ask, what is the impact of the Noba on Meroitic society? Although infiltration of Noba groups cannot be denied, archaeology and the material culture hitherto discovered do not attest to any role of newcomers to the Meroitic territory.

Post-Meroe in Upper Nubia   741

v8 v9

A

v11

A v1 v2 v4 v3

v10

B

v12 v7

B A

v6

B

0.0

0.5

A

B

0.0

1m

0.5

1.

c c A

B

A

B

0.0 0.5 1 m 2.

Figure 36.5  Northern zone burials, transitional period (El-Kassinger, Ab-Heregil).

1m

742   Mahmoud El-Tayeb

The Pottery Pottery is one of the most important items of material culture in any society throughout ancient times. Generally it can be taken as a good indicator of stability or instability and standard of living in any community, as it can tell about the relationship between neighboring societies or even between political entities. Meroitic pottery was found in quantities in several important settlements of the period. In contrast, no Post-Meroitic pottery has been noted from any significant settlement. Therefore, our main source of our information and knowledge of Post-Meroitic pottery, its production, and development comes from cemeteries, where pottery was deposited in considerable numbers in elite and common burials as well, often constituting more than half of the offerings deposited in graves. Post-Meroitic pottery constitutes a quite significant cultural factor in this period, both as a mark of identity and as dating material. Unfortunately, until now there has been no comprehensive study either of Meroitic or Post-Meroitic pottery, apart from some articles and reports written on specific sites. Although the subject deserves a separate study, this chapter is an attempt to demonstrate some features of cultural changes and regional characteristics of pottery production—and its development—in Upper Nubia during the period under study. Variations in burial practices in the three zones of Upper Nubia is also noticeable in pottery. Surprisingly, Napatan pottery production, which emanated from Egyptian tradition, had only negligible impact on early Meroitic pottery, except in a type of wheelmade red-slipped deep cups, flat dishes, and bowls with untreated surfaces (Garstang et al. 1911:5, 7, pl. XLII; Rose 1998:144, 158–59, 162, fig. 6.16; Mahmoud. el-Tayeb and G. Gar El-Nabi 1998:41–46, fig. 6 LHMD 1/1, fig. 10 LHMD 2/17; Edwards 1999:22, 25: cup ZN 820, pls. V, VIII: cup 820; Welsby 2008:38, pl. 12). Not much is known about the later phase of the Napatan period and the abrupt breakup of the Napatan tradition of pottery production and the appearance of a new type of black pottery manufactured by hand. Evidently the black handmade pottery represents the original ware whose antecedents lie in the Neolithic period—El-Ghaba and El-Geili for instance. However, the repertoire of the early period (4th–3rd century bce), both wheelmade and handmade, was limited. It mainly consists of bowls of different profiles and beer jars with rounded body, short neck, and wide mouth. Although this production comprises both black and red wares, black ware was more common especially in the southern zone, while it slowly diminished towards the north. Despite the northern inspiration from Ptolemaic and Roman Egypt—particularly in the northern zone of the Dongola Reach, and especially in vessel form and manufacturing techniques—many painted motifs were derived from earlier traditions: continuous use of dotted-impressed motifs and representations of human figures, wild animals, birds, reptiles, plants, stamped decoration, and some ceremonial scenes. One might ask, what happened to handmade production during the Classic Meroitic period? Was any pottery produced by hand, or did it completely disappear to “revive” again in the Post-Meroitic period?

Post-Meroe in Upper Nubia   743 According to some historical sources, later confirmed by archaeological evidence, the Meroitic kingdom underwent a period of decline, weakness, and poverty, for various reasons, in the late phase of its existence (Adams 1977:383–90). At this crucial time, the end of centralized authority in the heartland seemed to be followed by the demise of the workshops that produced wheelmade pottery, but this fact was probably only confined to the central and southern zones of the Upper Nubia. Evidently, the decline process continued gradually for some considerable time until a point at which these workshops ceased to exist. The production of black and dark brown handmade ware was preponderant in the late Meroitic and early Post-Meroitic periods (3rd–4th century ce), mainly in the southern regions above the Fifth Cataract, including the Gezira between the two Niles. Characteristic forms in the assemblage were distinctive ovoid-bodied beer jars, with long, inward-sloping necks, narrow mouth, and out-flared rim. Bowls were represented by three forms: large and medium-sized closed bowls with smoothed, burnished surface; open, ledge-rimmed bowls; and bowls with beveled rim. Characteristic decoration was still the dot-impressed pattern, in different forms, occasionally in-filled with red or white substance—a tradition that originated in the C-group culture—or short notches on top of the rim (Marshall and Adam  1953:40–46; Lenoble  1987:106, pl. IV, 233, fig. 4.4, 1991b:172–73, figs. 4, 5/3; Edwards 1991:43–45, fig. 5, pls. II–III; Anderson and Salah el din Mohamed Ahmed 2002:15–29; Abdel Rahman Ali Mohamed 2003, pl. XLIX, LI, LII). Several scholars distinguish the early phase of this new period by the appearance of a type of large handmade beer jar. This distinctive type has a globular body decorated with a distinctive mat-impressed pattern. The long, broad neck is usually covered with a red slip, while the shoulders and chest are often decorated with red-slipped stripes in horizontal or zigzag pattern. Although this type was characteristic for the early PostMeroitic period (ca. 350–450 ce), its production was maintained with continuous evolution in form and decoration into the Late Post-Meroitic period. So far, nothing is known of its origin, but most probably it was first manufactured in professional workshops in the Shendi Reach, as suggested by its abundant appearance in the cemeteries of this region. Its range of distribution extended as far north as Dongola Reach, never beyond, as so far it has not been recorded in the Gezira region, further than Soba West (Garstang et al.  1911:38–42, pls. XLIII–XLIV; Lenoble  1987:114 A, 117, pls. XII, XV; Phillips  1987:35–41; Lenoble  1994:51–88; Rose  1998:142–86; Mahmoud elTayeb 1999:604–15, figs. 3a–b; Phillips and Mahmoud el-Tayeb 2003:458–62; Lemiesz 2007:372–73; Mohamed Faroug et al. 2007:11, fig. 6, pl. LIV; Żurawski 2008:435).

Transitional Pottery (ca. 300–350 ce) Due to lack of serious study program in the southern zone between the two Niles, our knowledge to date about the cultural development of this zone is far from satisfactory. The Fourth Cataract salvage campaign, although limited, has offered an excellent chance for archaeologists to observe and investigate some cultural developments that have not

744   Mahmoud El-Tayeb been noted elsewhere in Upper Nubia. One of these is the transformation of the Meroitic society from Late Meroitic to early Post-Meroitic, through a hitherto unknown specific transitional period (ca. 300–350 ce), apart from the aforementioned El-Kadada in Shendi Reach. Close study of the ceramic material has led to a conclusion that pottery production appears to witness a kind of revival during this transitional period, after a time of decline. Based on Classic Meroitic production, some forms of cups as well as large- and medium-size beer jars/bottles started to appear in funerary deposits. Moreover, decoration of the vessels with simple plant patterns like leaves, palm tree branches, or just stripes around body, painted in white, can all be seen as a modest attempt compared with the rich decorative motifs of Classic Meroitic pottery. The situation in the Dongola Reach was quite different, for archaeological evidence in this region attests to the ceramic industry’s independent development, meaning that the collapse and disappearance of Meroe’s central authority had no direct impact upon ceramic production in the northern zone. Production of wheelmade pottery continued until the end of the Christian period. Burials from the transitional phase between late Meroitic and early Post-Meroitic usually contained pottery produced by both wheelmade and handmade techniques. Beer jars are of large size (about 40 cm in diameter), with globular body and medium-length broad neck. Body surface was slightly smoothed or coated with thin layer of reddish or light brown slip, often undecorated. In this phase appeared a tendency for production of handmade bowls imitating similar imported metal vessels. Examples of this type were present among the material found in a plundered burial at Ab-Heregil in the Fourth Cataract region. Wheelmade vessels in general appear to be an outgrowth or later version of Meroitic pottery. These comprise mediumsize bottles with rounded body and short narrow rim, surface coated with red slip, consistently undecorated. Cups comprise also a type with rounded base, straight sides, and simple tapered rim, occasionally out-flared. The external surface was covered only with red slip, or in some cases roughly decorated with plant designs, such as palm date branches, simple single or double white lines painted around the body, or various impressed patterns. The simple designs applied on pottery in this period no doubt represent a great departure from the rich Classic Meroitic tradition of painted decoration (for examples, see Mahmoud el-Tayeb 2012:88–89, figs. 27–30; Fig. 36.6).

Post-Meroitic Ceramic Production The pottery repertoire of this period (Figs. 36.7–11) generally consists of small vessels, cups, bowls, and beer jars, manufactured by two different techniques, wheel-turned or handmade. The vessel forms and decoration are limited in variety, in contrast to the earlier Meroitic period. The production depended on Nile silt for making handmade vessels, especially beer jars, cooking vessels, and occasionally bowls. Wheel-turned vessels were mainly made out of desert clay, and a mixture of desert clay and Nile silt was also used in both manufacturing techniques. Most of the vessels are of red or brown ware, while black ware is very rare and mostly confined to small handmade bowls and pots.

Post-Meroe in Upper Nubia   745

2.

1.

0

5 cm

0

5 cm

5 cm 3.

4.

0

5.

6.

Figure 36.6  Pottery from the transitional period (Fourth Cataract region).

746   Mahmoud El-Tayeb

0

CMS

0

10

1. 2.

4.

5.

0

CMS

10

Figure 36.7  Post-Meroitic pottery, southern zone (Karim’s Garden).

CMS

10

Post-Meroe in Upper Nubia   747

HBG III

0 10 cm Esh SHEITEB Tumulus 4

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

Figure 36.8  Post-Meroitic pottery, central zone (El-Sheiteb, El-Hobagi, El-Sabiel).

748   Mahmoud El-Tayeb DR-12cm

1.

DR-8cm

DR-12cm

DR-8cm

2.

3.

DR-c.19cm

5.

Figure 36.9  Post-Meroitic pottery, central zone (El-Hobagi).

4.

Post-Meroe in Upper Nubia   749

0

cm 3

0

cm 3

0 cm 5 0

2 cm

Figure 36.10  Post-Meroitic pottery, northern zone (El-Zuma, El-Kassinger).

750   Mahmoud El-Tayeb T1/e

T1/i

T1/f

T1/j

T1/g

T1/k T1/h

0 1

0 1

5 cm

5 cm

Figure 36.11  Post-Meroitic pottery, northern zone (Jebel Ghaddar Southern Cemetery).

Clay for wheelmade pottery appears to be carefully selected and well prepared. It often has a texture ranging from semi-fine to medium, with medium hardness fabric. In contrast, the clay for the handmade pottery seems to be prepared, often, without special care, and usually with abundant inclusions of organic materials (such as chopped grass, tiny seeds, and plants) or non-organic materials (mica, particles of quartz, granite, or basalt of varied size). Texture is often from medium to coarse, rarely semi-fine. The same thing can also be said about the fabric. However, it should be noted that the ceramic body for domestic ware was intentionally prepared with inclusions of organic material appropriate to the vessel’s function.

Post-Meroe in Upper Nubia   751 The largest vessels are beer jars. These can be classified according to the manufacturing method (wheel-/handmade) and size (large, medium, and small). Large vessels have body diameter 40–60 cm, and height 40–75 cm. Medium-size beer jars often measure 25–35 cm in body diameter and 30–35 cm in height. Standard dimensions for the small beer jars is around 20–25 cm in diameter and 25–30 cm in height. Handmade beer jars were quite common in the graves of this period. They were found in the graves at Tanqasi and Tabo as well as the cemeteries at Jebel Ghaddar North (ROM 32/1), Usli, and in other several cemeteries recently excavated in the Fourth Cataract Region, among them: El-Kassinger, J. Kulgieli, Hagar El-Beida, El-Ar, and El-Sada. The southern influence is evident in large handmade jars, some with broad neck and mouth with slightly out-flared rim, and others distinguished by broad shoulders and long inward-sloping collar neck with narrow mouth (Shinnie 1954, fig. 8; Phillips 1987:35–50, figs. 1–2, pl. 9a; JacquetGordon and Bonnet 1971–72:77–84; Phillips and Mahmoud el-Tayeb 2003:403–404, pls. 23–29; Żurawski  2003:384–85, figs. 20–21; Lemiesz  2007:372–73, fig. 2; Mahmoud ­el-Tayeb and Kołosowska 2007:48, fig. 2c; 49, above; Osypiński 2007 350, fig. 6.7–9). Its body is covered with mat-impressed decoration, while the shoulders and neck are often covered with red slip. This type of jar is well known from various sites between the Fifth Cataract and Khartoum. Probably it is earlier in date than the other mentioned types of beer jars. The beginning of the 4th century ce could be a suitable date for its first appearance on the basis of analogies with material from central Sudan (Shendi Reach, El-Hobagi  T.  III, T.  VI, El-Sheiteb  T.4; see Lenoble  1987, pls. XII, XV,  1990:79–91, 1994:74–55; 85). This type of beer jar also tends to be produced in specialized workshops and was not made in households as suggested by Crowfoot (1925:125–36) in the early twentieth century. Both Crowfoot and Bentley based their assumptions on analogies with ceramic material from the Eastern and Western Noba mountains (Bentley and Crowfoot 1924:18–28). This large type was not as common as the medium-size type in the Dongola Reach, especially in the late phase of the Post-Meroitic period. To date, it seems that the region of the Fourth Cataract is the place where the concentration of this type is most obvious on both banks of the Nile. Medium and small beer jars share the same brown or dark brown ware, made out of Nile silt, fairly roughly executed. In both types, the body is rounded and covered with a mat-impressed pattern executed in different ways, with a short and narrow or medium-length neck. Medium-size jars tend to be better made than the small jars, which were often poorly manufactured with irregular shape. It is clear that this type of beer jar and the small gourd-shaped pot are the most common vessels in the early Post-Meroitic period. They were found in nearly all excavated cemeteries in the Dongola Reach. Worth mentioning is that close observation and scrutiny study of the material culture of this period in the Dongola Reach, both mortuary traditions and pottery evolution, led to a conclusion that the so called “Post-Meroitic” comprises two cultural phases. Phase I is dated ca. 350–450 ce, while Phase II is dated ca. 450–550 ce. Each of these phases encompasses changes in the local traditions. Pottery evolution can be followed in

752   Mahmoud El-Tayeb the production of beer jars/bottles, small bowls, cups, and kitchen ware. However, two groups of objects deserve special comments. First, of great interest is the distinctive wheelmade bowl, which undoubtedly testifies to cultural continuity. It is a totally different type of bowl that originated in the Meroitic period and maintained a continuous evolution until Phase II of the Post-Meroitic period, appearing with some varieties throughout Lower and Upper Nubia. The simplest form, found at El-Kadada in a Meroitic burial, is a heavy hemispherical shaped body of about 6.5 cm in height and 15 cm in rim diameter. Another variant of this bowl is slightly larger, reaching up to 18 cm in rim diameter and about 7 cm in height, with sides out-flared, and a flattened base (Lenoble 1987: pl. IV c, 20). A more developed version of the same type was found in the Meroitic part of the cemetery at Gabati some 200 km northward of El-Kadada, with standard dimensions of 12 cm in rim diameter and 9 cm in height (Rose 1998:158, fig. 6.12 bottom, fig. 6.13). A similar but larger variant of the vessel of about 9.1 cm in height and 14.6 cm in rim diameter, was discovered in the West Cemetery at Meroe (Dunham 1963:189, fig. 135c; see also p. 342, fig. F). A variant ­similar to the one from Meroe with a solid ring base was found at the site of Musawwarat es-Sufra, with dimensions ca. 14.9–15.4 cm in rim diameter and 7.2–7.8 cm in height (Edwards 1999:24, 86, 95, pl. VIII, ZN 734, ZN 733, ZN 732, pl. 2.11). Other parallel vessels that have been very recently discovered in Meroitic cemeteries at Berber and Sai Island attest to the ubiquity of this type and its wide range of distribution (Mahmoud Suliman Bashir 2010:69–74; Romain and Susan El-Khangi 2011, unpublished report on Berber Meroitic pottery assemblage; David  2010:60–61, fig. 1a–b). In the Dongola Reach, bowls of this type were found in a late Meroitic burial at Hagar Sail, and in the Post-Meroitic cemetery of El-Kassinger Bahri in the Fourth Cataract region as well as at Ez-Zuma field (Mahmoud el-Tayeb and Czyżewska  2011:9, fig. 6c). The first two are ­similar to the El-Kadada bowl. Despite the larger size of the latter and to some extent their varying quality of manufacture, the general shape is similar. They range in size from 14–18 cm in rim diameter and 7.7–10.6 cm in height. Body sides either rounded or out-turned to form small ledges, or beveled rims. The base of the vessels is often of irregular rounded, flattened, conical shape, and in some versions has a low ring base. Surface treatment tends to be wet-smoothed and burnished, or coated with red slip in and out, executed to different degrees (Mahmoud el-Tayeb 2012:96, fig. 36). Two additional vessels with probable ritual functions deserve highlighting. The most common of them is the so-called gourd-shaped pot. These are generally small vessels, varying in size and slightly in shape. These handmade vessels were usually manufactured out of black or brown ware. Decoration on the vessels is rare and mostly confined to simple designs, mainly impressed dots, or incised lines applied in geometrical design, sometimes filled with a red or white substance. Painted decoration is far simpler and more limited than the impressed or incised styles. The gourd-shaped pot appears to have a wide range of distribution, extending from the southern Gezira as far north as the Dongola Reach. Pots of this type were often discovered located near the head of the deceased in Post-Meroitic burials. Based on the vessel location, Lenoble connected it

Post-Meroe in Upper Nubia   753 with an Isis libation cult (for more details on the vessel function and the libation cult, see Yellin 1982; Lenoble 1995:151–55). The second type dated to the same period and was distributed from north to south like the previous one. It is a large handmade spouted bowl of open or closed forms. The closed form, which was less popular, is distinguished by a globular body with 15 cm in diameter, and 5 cm of mouth diameter, with a short spout attached just below the rim. The open form was more common and frequent in the burials. The bowls have a rounded body with sides slightly turned-in. The external surface is usually covered with reddish slip or only wet-smoothed and burnished. Its standard dimensions range from 16.5–20.5 cm in height to 18–24 cm in rim diameter, with a short spout not exceeding 5.5 cm. Spouted bowls are known in the Nubian culture as early as the Final Neolithic at Jebel Ramlah (Kobusiewicz et al. 2010:73, fig. 1.80,6; 74, 77), and the Kerma Classique period, where different forms had been found in the Eastern Cemetery. Following the tradition of the Egyptian Old Kingdom, Reisner states “The type R.P. XXXII and S.C. XXIX with handles and spout is most suitable for serving wine or beer” (Reisner 1923:359, 363–64, 406, pl. 71; Dunham et al. 1982:252, cxx). Among this group mentioned by Reisner are three handle-less vessels with spout (p. 359, fig. 239, 9–10; p. 406, fig. 283, XXII,1), whose ­function is not explained by him. During the Meroitic period small spouted cups/bowls were used as infant feeders. Although spouted bowls were found in several cemeteries such as Meroe, El-Kadada, El-Fereikha, Gabati, and Ez-Zuma, the function of this vessel is still a matter of conjecture (Garstang et al. 1911:41, pl. XLVI, vessels 42–43 / Lenoble and Nigm ed Din Mohamed Shari 1992:87, pl. III, KDD 85/28, 7; Mallinson et al. 1994:26, pl. 3; 29, fig. 4.7; Anderson and Salah el din Mohamed Ahmed  2002:17, fig. 8.6; Mahmoud el-Tayeb 2010:11–12, pl. 6). From a practical point of view this form is not likely to have been a drinking vessel. Reisner’s interpretation for the vessels with handles seems reasonable as it has parallels in the Egyptian tradition of beer making, yet there is much doubt that the Upper Nubian type could be of a similar function. Since usually only a single bowl is found within the offering utensils set, one would assume that the vessel might have been part of a purification ceremony, rather than used to pour liquids to a kind of vessel with narrow mouth, for medium-size cups are more practical for such purposes and much easier to deal with (for more details on the subject see Mahmoud el-Tayeb 2012).

Conclusions To date, the number of the excavated cemeteries and burials dated to the Early Makuria period in Dongola Reach is still unsatisfactory compared with what has not been examined yet. Despite this fact, the material discussed above no doubt gives some idea about pottery development and evolution in the Makurian core lands. The character of the local production is evident, and the northern influence from Lower Nubia and even

754   Mahmoud El-Tayeb Upper Egypt is certain, affected to some extent by Hellenistic, Roman, and Byzantine Egypt. Meanwhile, the material allows us to observe that southern influence—above the Fourth Cataract—in pottery production of the period under study is quite negligible. It is mostly confined to handmade beer jars in various versions, from the transitional till the second phase of the “Post-Meroitic” period. Yet, the most common wheel-turned wares continued to be produced in the same local tradition unaffected by the political changes that took place in the core land. Ceramic production also does not reflect any kind of change or development based on immigration to Upper Nubia as a whole, or the Dongola Reach specifically, of certain and definite ethnic groups of population. However, after almost more than a century one would dare to say that study of the Post-Meroitic period in Upper Nubia is still in its childhood if not in its infancy, for we still know very little about this period. First of all, apart from the works of the French Unit at El-Kadada and the international salvage campaign in the Fourth Cataract region, no further comprehensive research project on the Post-Meroitic period has ever been planned in Upper Nubia. As mentioned above, the hitherto available archaeological material has not provided any convincing evidence of external invasions concerning the end of the Meroitic state. Hence, one would ask if the term “Post-Meroe” is still valid, or whether it should be replaced by a more fitting term. At the end of this study one would repeat that the afore-demonstrated material points in a quite conspicuous way to a tradition and indigenous culture that went uninterrupted—in spite of the political events— through a long evolution from the 4th century bce to the 7th century ce. In its heyday, it witnessed times of glory and prosperity, followed by phases of weakness and poverty. Yet, the demise of the central royal authority led to disintegration of the once-united political entity. Even though the culture itself continued to exist, it was gradually replaced by a new culture. That is what Lenoble called continuous evolution (Lenoble and Nigm Eldin M. Sharif 1992:629). Consequently, following the same way of thinking, one would propose the term “Terminal Meroe” in place of the unjustified nomenclature that has been used for a century, “Post-Meroe.”

Abbreviations DAE:  E. Littman et al. (1913), Deutsche Aksum Expedition (1905–1910). Georg Reimer.

References Cited Abdel Rahman Ali Mohamed 2003 The Blue Nile Archaeological Salvage Project: Amara elNasri. Sudan & Nubia 7:91–97. Adams, W.Y. 1964 Post-Pharaonic Nubia in Light of Archaeology. I.  Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 50:102–120. ———. 1977 Nubia: Corridor to Africa. Princeton University Press. Anderson, J. and Salah el din Mohamed Ahmed 2002 Archaeological Reconnaissance in the Berber-Abidiya Region, 1997, A Post-Meroitic Double-Shaft Tomb in El-Fereikha. Archéologie du Nil Moyen 9:15–29.

Post-Meroe in Upper Nubia   755 Arkell, A.J. 1961 A History of the Sudan: From the Earliest Times to 1821. Athlone. Balfour, P.G. 1952 Early Cultures of the Northern Blue Nile. Sudan Notes and Records 33:202–214. Bates, O. and D. Dunham 1927 Excavations at Gammai. Harvard African Studies 8. Peabody Museum of Harvard University. Bentley, O. and J.W. Crowfoot 1924 Nuba Pots in the Gordon College. Sudan Notes and Records 7(2):18–28. Chittick, H.N. 1957 A New Type of Mound Grave. Kush 5:73–77. Crowfoot, J.W. 1925 Further Notes on Pottery. Sudan Notes and Records 8:125–136. David, R. 2010 Second Report on the Ceramics from The Meroitic Cemetery 8-B–5.A. Sudan & Nubia 14:60–61. Dunham, D. 1947 The Kingdom of Kush at Napata and Meroe. Outline of the Ancient History of the Sudan, part V. Sudan Notes and Records 28:1–9. ——— 1963 The West and South Cemeteries at Meroë. Royal Cemeteries of Kush 5. Museum of Fine Arts (Boston). Dunham, D., S. D’Auria, and G.A. Reisner 1982 Excavations at Kerma Part 6. Department of Egyptian and Near Eastern Art, Museum of Fine Arts (Boston). ——— 1950 El Kurru. Royal Cemeteries of Kush 1. Harvard University Press. ——— 1953 From Tumulus to Pyramid and Back. Archaeology 6(2):87–94. ——— 1957 Royal Tombs at Meroë and Barkal. Royal Cemeteries of Kush 4. Museum of Fine Arts. Edwards, D.N. 1991 Three Cemetery Sites on the Blue Nile. Archéologie du Nil Moyen 5:41–64. ——— 1998 Gabati: A Meroitic, Post-Meroitic and Medieval Cemetery in the Central Sudan. BAR International Series 740. Archaeopress. ——— 1999 A Meroitic Pottery Workshop at Musawwarat es Sufra: Preliminary Report on the Excavations 1997 in the Courtyard 224 of the Great Enclosure. Musawwarat es Sufra 3. Meroitica 17(2). Harrassowitz. Garstang, J., A.H. Sayce, and F.L. Griffith 1911 Meroë: The City of the Ethiopians. Clarendon Press. Geus, F. 1982 La nécropole méroïtique d’El Kadada. In Meroitic Studies: Proceedings of the Third International Meroitic Conference, ed. N.B.  Millet and A.L.  Kelley, pp. 178–187. Meroitica 6. Akademie Verlag. Geus, F. and P.  Lenoble 1985 Évolution du cimetière méroïtique d’el-Kadada (Tragma). La transition vers le post-méroïtique en milieu rural meridional. In Mélanges offerts à Jean Vercoutter, ed. F. Geus and F. Thill, pp. 67–92. Éditions Recherche sur les Civilisations. Hatke, G. 2013 Aksum and Nubia: Warfare, Commerce, and Political Fictions in Ancient Northeast Africa. New York University Press and The Institute for the Study of the Ancient World. 2013. Haycock, B. 1967 The Later Phase of the Meroitic Civilization. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 53:107–120. Hintze, F. 1959 Preliminary Report on the Butana Expedition, 1958, Made by the Institute of Egyptology of Humboldt University Berlin. Kush 7:171–196. ——— 1967 Meroe und die Noba. Zeitschrift für ägyptische Sprache 94:79–86. Jacquet-Gordon, H. and C. Bonnet 1971–72 Tombs of the Tanqasi Culture at Tabo. Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt 9:77–84. Kendall, T. 1982 Kush: Lost Kingdom of the Nile. Brockton Art Museum/Fuller Memorial.

756   Mahmoud El-Tayeb Kirwan, L.P. 1960 The Decline and Fall of Meroe. Kush 8:163–173. ——— 1981 The X-Group Problem. In Meroitic Studies: Proceedings of the Third International Meroitic Conference, ed. N.B. Millet and A.L. Kelley, pp. 191–204. Meroitica 6. Akademie Verlag. Kobusiewicz, M., J.  Kabaciński, R.  Schild, J.D.  Irish, M.C.  Gatto, F.  Wendorf 2010 Gebel Ramlah: Final Neolithic Cemeteries from the Western Desert of Egypt. Institute of Archaeology and Ethnology Polish Academy of Sciences, Lemiesz, M. 2007 Hagar el-Beida 1: Excavations of a Late/Post-Meroitic Cemetery. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean 17:368–373. Lenoble, P. 1987 Trois tombes de région de Méroé. La clôture des fouilles historiques d’el Kadada en 1985 et 1986. Archéologie du Nil Moyen 2:89–119. ——— 1990 Documentation tumulaire et céramique entre 5e et 6e Cataractes. Un exemple de “prospection orientée” visant à renseigner la “Fin de Méroé.” In Études nubiennes: Conférence de Genève, ed. C. Bonnet, v. 1, pp. 79–97. ——— 1991a Plateaux de gobelets dans les sépultures de Méroé. Un équipement liturgique de la libation Isiaque “éthiopienne.” In Egypt and Africa. Nubia from Prehistory to Islam, ed. W.V. Davies, pp. 246–252. British Museum. ——— 1991b Chiens De Pains—Une Tombe Postpyramidale. A Double Descenderie Hors De Meroe. Archéologie du Nil Moyen 5:167–183. ——— 1995 La petite bouteille noire. Un récipient méroéen de la libation funéraire. Archéologie du Nil Moyen 7:143–162. Lenoble, P. and Nigm ed Din Mohamed Sharif 1992 Barbarians at the Gates? The Royal Mounds of El-Hobagi and the End of Meroë. Antiquity 66:626–635. Lenoble, P., R.-P. Disseaux, Abd el Rahman Ali Mohamed, B. Ronce, and J. Bialais 1994 La fouille du tumulus à enceinte el-Hobagi III A. M. S.NE–36–0/7-N–3. Meroitic Newsletter 25:53–124. Mahmoud el-Tayeb 1994 Excavation at El-Ghaddar, Old Dongola. In: Études nubiennes: Conférence de Genève, ed. C. Bonnet, v. 2, pp. 66–79. ——— 2002 Genesis of the Makurian Culture in the Light of Archaeological Sources. Cahier de Recherches de l’Institut de Papyrologie et d’Égyptologie de Lille Supplement 6. ——— 2012 Funerary Traditions in Nubian Early Makuria. Gdańsk Archaeological Museum African Reports 9. Monograph Series 1. Mahmoud el-Tayeb 1999 Rescue Excavation at El Sabeil (Soba West). In Studien zum antiken Sudan, ed. S. Wenig, pp. 604–615. Meroitica 15. Harrassowitz. Mahmoud el-Tayeb and Ghalia Gar El-Nabi 1998 The Meroitic Cemetery at Al-Ahamda. Gdańsk Archaeological Museum African Reports 1:39–48. Mahmoud el-Tayeb and E. Kołosowska 2007 Meroitic Burial Traditions in the Fourth Cataract Region. In Proceedings of the Second International Conference on the Archaeology of the Fourth Nile Cataract, ed. C. Näser and M. Lange, pp. 11–25. Meroitica 23. Harrassowitz. Mahmoud el-Tayeb and E. Czyżewska 2011 Early Makuria Research Project. Excavations at El-Zuma: The Third Season, Jan.-Feb. 2009. Sudan & Nubia 15:1–16. Mahmoud Suliman Bashir 2010 Recently Discovered Meroitic Cemetery at Berber, River Nile State, Sudan. Preliminary Report. Sudan & Nubia 14:69–74. Mallinson, M., J.M.  Filer, and L.M.V.  Smith 1994 The SARS Survey from Begrawwyiah to Atbara. SARS Newsletter 6:18–33. Marshall, K. and Abdelrahman Adam 1953 Excavations on a Mound Grave at Ushara. Kush 1:40–46.

Post-Meroe in Upper Nubia   757 Mohamed Faroug, Yassin M. Saeed, and A. Tsakos 2007 Akad Excavation Project. Preliminary Report on the 2005 and 2006 Seasons. Sudan & Nubia 11:98–107. Monneret de Villard, U. 1938 Storia della Nubia cristiana. Pontificium Institutum Orientalium Studiorum. Osypiński, P. 2007 Es-Sadda 1: Excavations of a Post-Meroitic Cemetery (Two Seasons). Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean 17:348–363. Phillips, J. 1987 Test Excavations at El-Ghaddar. In Archaeological Reconnaissance in Upper Nubia, ed. K. Grzymski, pp. 35–41. SSEA Publications 14. Benben. Phillips, J. and Mahmoud el-Tayeb 2003 The Pottery Assemblage from the Hammur Abbassiya Tumulus Field (SDRS Hammur 2). In Survey and Excavations between Old Dongola and Ez-Zuma, ed. B.  Żurawski, pp. 458–462. Southern Dongola Reach Survey 1. Nubia 2. Neriton. Reisner, G.A. 1910 The Archaeological Survey of Nubia. The Report for 1907–08. National Printing Department (Cairo). ——— 1920 The Barkal Temples in 1916. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 6:247–264. ——— 1923 The Meroitic Kingdom of Ethiopia: A Chronological Outline. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 9:34–77. Rose, P.J. 1998 Meroitic Pottery. In Gabati: A Meroitic, Post-Meroitic and Medieval Cemetery in the Central Sudan, by D.N. Edwards, v. 1:138–141. BAR International Series 740. Archaeopress. Shinnie, P.L. 1954 Excavations at Tanqasi, 1953. Kush 2:66–85. ——— 1955 The Fall of Meroe. Kush 3:82–85. ——— 1967 Meroe: A Civilization of the Sudan. Frederick A. Praeger. Török, L. 1988 Late Antique Nubia. Archaeological Institute of The Hungarian Academy of Sciences. Trimingham, J.S. 1965 Islam in the Sudan, 2nd ed. Frank Cass & Co. Tylecote, R.F. 1982 Metal Working at Meroe, Sudan. In Meroitic Studies: Proceedings of the Third International Meroitic Conference, ed. N.B. Millet and A.L. Kelley, pp. 29–49. Meroitica 6. Akademie Verlag. Wainwright, G.A. 1952 The Date of the Rise of Meroe. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 38:75–77. Welsby, D. 2008 The Northern Dongola Reach Survey. Excavations at Kawa, 2007–8. Sudan & Nubia 12:34–46. Woolley, C.L. and D.  Randall-MacIver 1910 Karanóg: The Romano- Nubian Cemetery. Eckley B. Coxe Junior Expedition to Nubia 3–4. University Museum (Philadelphia). Yellin, J.W. 1982 Abaton-style Milk Libation at Meroe. In Meroitic Studies: Proceedings of the Third International Meroitic Conference, ed. N.B.  Millet and A.L.  Kelley, pp. 151–155. Meroitica 6. Akademie Verlag. Żurawski, B. 2003 Survey and Excavations between Old Dongola and Ez-Zuma. Southern Dongola Reach Survey 1. Nubia 2. Neriton. ——— 2008 Shemkhiya. Season 2006. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean 18:433–444.

Chapter 37

The History of M edieva l N u bi a Giovanni R. Ruffini

Nubian civilization is not the same as the Nubian state. Whether medieval, or Christian, Nubia was a cultural unity is still an open question. Moreover, it is a question perhaps better left to archaeologists, and one leaning considerably on how we define our terms. The situation is simpler when we study the Nubian state. We can speak of one state at times, two states, three states, and at the beginning, perhaps, and the end, no Nubia at all. Politically at least, the history of medieval Nubia is circular, returning to the same state of decentralization with which it began. The first step in this process—the end of the Meroitic state—is shrouded in mystery (see chapters by Wolf and Nowotnick and by Mahmoud el-Tayeb, this volume; Edwards 2004:182–211; Obłuski 2014:17–22). Most of what we can say has a high degree of uncertainty. In the 4th century ce, the capital city, Meroe itself, begins to shrink in size, its temples and palaces falling out of use. In the middle of the century, the long sequence of royal pyramid tombs at Meroe comes to an end. Meroitic as a written language is dead, at least in the surviving evidence, by the end of the 4th century or start of the 5th. Several possible models explain these events, but there is no consensus. Cause and effect are hard to untangle in these models. Steady infiltration of the Nile valley by outsiders—particularly the Blemmyes and other nomadic raiders known as the Noba— may have played a role, but the evidence is thin. Likewise, contributing economic factors are obscure. The rise of Axumite Ethiopia may have diverted valuable trade from Meroitic territory. Economic changes in neighboring Roman Egypt, particularly in the oases of the Western Desert, may have hurt the Meroitic economy as well. Raids from Axumite Ethiopia over the course of several decades in the mid-300s may have played a role in finishing the Meroitic state, although scholars are more skeptical of this possibility today than they were in the past.1 In any case, the central state must have been desperately weak by this time, if not completely absent.

760   Giovanni R. Ruffini In subsequent decades, written evidence reveals a radical transformation in the political landscape. In the place of a central Meroitic state, we see three smaller kingdoms: Nobadia in the north, Makuria in the center, and Alwa in the south. Makuria and Alwa are obscure in the extreme in the 5th and 6th centuries. We know none of their kings by name and indigenous written evidence from this period is thin. Modern scholars lean too heavily on the literary evidence describing the conversion of these kingdoms to Christianity, literary evidence written from a Mediterranean perspective by authors with no apparent first-hand knowledge of Nubia itself. John of Ephesus describes the Christianization of Nubia as the fruit of a competition between the orthodox Byzantine Emperor Justinian and his miaphysite wife Theodora. Theodora’s representative, a priest named Julian, reached Nobadia first, and found the royal court there ready to embrace Christianity. The king of Alwa sent an embassy to Nobadia requesting a bishop to teach and baptize his people. A bishop named Longinus made the journey, a difficult one hampered by aggressive interference by the king of Makuria. Another source describes the conversion of Makuria thanks to an embassy they sent to Constantinople in the reign of Justin II. Scholars have argued over the apparent friction between Makuria and its neighbors, and whether this friction had anything to do with the doctrinal debates dividing Mediterranean Christianity in this period. In truth, the evidence is simply not strong enough to answer our questions.2 We know more—or at least, guess on safer ground—about Nobadia than Makuria and Alwa, in part because of Nobadia’s proximity to Roman Egypt and that region’s rich range of written sources.3 An indigenous population seems to survive through the 4th century in northern Nubia. They are ultimately under the administration of the Blemmyes, a nomadic people of the Eastern Desert settling in the Nile valley in some sort of alliance or formal relationship with the Meroites. But at the start of the 5th century, a new people, the Nobades, appear in the written record. Under two consecutive kings, Silko and Aburni, “in the 430s and 440s the Nobades gradually pressed down the Nile from territories to the north of the Second Cataract” and consolidate their rule over northern Nubia, driving out the Blemmyes (Obłuski 2014:35). But Nobadia’s state structures only rarely come into view. The epigraphic evidence is tight-lipped and often undatable. A Coptic inscription recording the construction of a church in the temple of Dendur comes from the mid-6th century (Ochała  2011a: DBMNT 517). We learn the name of the king, Eirpanome, and some of his officials, whose titles are mostly Byzantine in origin. A Greek foundation inscription for the town of Ikhmindi from the second half of the 6th century names a King Tokiltoeton and his exarch Joseph, who also appears in the Dendur inscription (DBMNT 458). Together, the inscriptions create the impression of a Christian church and a Nubian state working side by side to project an appearance of growing influence and strength. These epigraphic sources are indigenous Nubian products, while the Mediterranean literary sources are outsiders looking in. We lose both views at the end of the 6th century. The tumult of the 7th century—with the great war between Byzantium and Persia followed in short order by the early Islamic conquests—distracts Mediterranean authors from events in Nubia, or blinds them to those events altogether. If indigenous Nubian

The History of Medieval Nubia   761 sources exist for the political history of the 7th century, archaeologists have yet to find them.4 This is one of our greatest challenges in reconstructing Nubian history. No chronicles survive to help us build a continuous history. The few surviving sources cover isolated episodes separated by many decades or even a century at a stretch. The 7th century sees the single most consequential event for the future of Nubian civilization: the rise of Islam. The conquest of Egypt is quick work, and the Muslim invaders soon turn their eyes south to Nubia. We have no contemporary sources for the Arab invasions of Nubia in the 640s and 650s, and no native sources at all. We have instead a series of later authors, all foreign and predominantly Arab Muslims, some writing as much as eight hundred years later. Modern scholars have fought heroically to weave a whole cloth out of this mess of tangled threads, but skepticism should prevail. Several different versions survive of the Arab invasion of Nubia in 640/641 (Obłuski unpublished). ‘Amr’s forces enter Nubia. Some versions claim they are driven off, almost at once. Another claims that they remain at war for several years, until a change of governors in Egypt. This first conflict ends in a peace treaty, or at least a truce. In the years after the death of the caliph Umar (644), the Nubians break this truce, raiding Upper Egypt repeatedly and with great effect. In 652, Abdalla ibn Sa’d leads a retaliatory invasion. According to Maqrizi, who died in Cairo nearly eight hundred years later, this invasion culminates in a devastating siege of Makuria’s capital, Dongola, during which the Muslims destroy the roof of the local church. The Nubian king, Qalidurut, sues for peace.5 He and Abdallah conclude a peace in which the Nubians will supply 360 slaves a year in exchange for a shipment of Egyptian grain (Vantini 1975:639). Nubian studies knows this agreement—and variants of it recorded in other sources— as the Baqt. In fact, the Baqt refers specifically to the Nubian obligation to send slaves to Egypt, and not to the agreement as a whole.6 A range of Arabic sources from the 9th and 10th centuries records a number of Egyptian and Nubian treaty obligations above and beyond the shipment of slaves and grain, and the same sources record specific deliveries from the 10th century into the 13th. The shifting terms give the impression that the agreement evolves over time, with the Nubians themselves resisting payment when the balance of power with Muslim Egypt gives them greater levels of confidence (Obłuski unpublished). When Nubia’s Baqt obligations next appear in the sources, the kings of Makuria at Dongola go years at a time ignoring their payments before successfully renegotiating the agreement (see below, p. 763). We have glided over a key problem in the history of this period: the unification of Makuria and Nobadia. We know no Nobadian king after Orfiulo, who appears in the conversion narrative of John of Ephesus in the 570s.7 The next king we see in Nobadia is Merkurios, who appears in Greek foundation inscriptions in Faras and Tafa and a Coptic foundation inscription from Faras in the first decade of the 700s (DBMNT 67, DBMNT 531, and DBMNT 32 respectively). But he is clearly the king of Makuria, ruling from Dongola. The History of the Patriarchs of Alexandria calls him the New Constantine, who “became by his beautiful conduct like one of the Disciples” (Vantini 1975:40).

762   Giovanni R. Ruffini The unification of Makuria and Nobadia must have taken place at some point between the reign of King Orfiulo and the reign of King Merkurios. One the one hand, given his prominence in the evidence, and his unique epithet, Merkurios himself is a tempting candidate to credit for the unification (Obłuski 2014:200). On the other hand, the silence of Nobadian evidence after Orfiulo and the clear evidence for direct ties between Egypt and Makuria suggests a much earlier date for unification (Godlewski 2013a:126). An earlier date would also explain the narratives of the Arab invasion, which focus on direct Muslim strikes on Dongola, bypassing Nobadia as if it were not even there.8 The unification obviously has significant political and cultural impact. Its cultural impact is clearest in church architecture. The churches of Nobadia are quite unlike those of Makuria prior to unification. This changes at the beginning of the 8th century, and a Makurianization of architecture impacts new and renovated churches in Nobadia (Obłuski 2016:507–508). And yet, doctrinally, the arrows of influence may point in the other direction. In the 6th century, Makurian delegates to Constantinople “stated their friendship with the Romans” (John of Biclar: Vantini 1975:28). This may indicate ecclesiastical loyalty to Chalcedonian Christianity rather than to the nascent miaphysite church in Egypt, which apparently commanded the loyalty of Nobadia and Alwa. And yet, by the 8th century, Makuria too is loyal to Alexandria, having oddly adopted the ecclesiastical allegiances of the northern Nubians they have absorbed. But in practice, the theological niceties of Chalcedon probably weigh little on Nubian Christians. As the Islamic conquest of Egypt pushes the Roman Empire into the distance, the Makurian church likely moves seamlessly into the Coptic hierarchy, perhaps without any real awareness of a meaningful change. Literary evidence suggests that internal disputes destabilize Nubia in this period (John the Deacon in Vantini 1975:40–43). After the reign of Merkurios, his son Zacharias “occupied himself with the word of God and the salvation of his soul” (John the Deacon in Vantini 1975:40). Choosing not to take the throne himself, he appoints several kings in succession. The second of these, King Abraham, has an ongoing dispute with the bishop of Dongola and even threatens to return Nubia to idolatry if the Coptic patriarch does not excommunicate the bishop. This conflict ends with the bishop’s forced retirement to a Nubian monastery and Zacharias’s decision to remove Abraham from the throne. Whether these internal disputes are purely personal or cultural and theological ripples from the unification of Nobadia and Makuria may never be clear. Politically, the impact of unification is clearer. The eparch of Nobadia governs the north where kings of Nobadia once ruled instead. He holds a variety of titles, some of them equivalent and others more obscure. He is eparchos in Greek, migin songoj or “the songoj of Migi” in Nubian, and sahib ej-jebel or “lord of the mountain” in Arabic. Arabic literary evidence describes the eparch as the region’s governor, among the highest ranking of Nubia’s protectors, and the representative of the king (e.g., Maqrizi’s Khitat in Vantini 1975:602–3). With this power, he controls all travel and trade in and out of the region. Arabic documentary evidence confuses the picture: surviving letters from Arab merchants found at Qasr Ibrim address the sahib el-khayl or “lord of the horses,” who also has the Nubian title eikshil. In these letters, it is the eikshil who seems to control the

The History of Medieval Nubia   763 region’s travel and trade. Despite modern claims to the contrary, these two officials are not the same.9 Whatever the exact situation, this unified Nubia is a single state, but not a tightly centralized one. Nubian documents from Qasr Ibrim’s later medieval period show the complexity of the situation.10 One letter writer notes that “we looked toward the eparch, the eikshil and the king.”11 Another letter writer notes that “God kept the king safe through his patience. God gave to you and your eparch, keeping you both safe.”12 Royal proclamations found in northern Nubia show the king at Dongola involved in northern affairs at the lowest levels, managing local plots of land and rewriting tribute payments to local churches.13 Likewise, the eparch is in active correspondence throughout northern Nubia, ordering grain payments, monitoring slave sales, keeping track of the wine stores. But when the king appears, he never does business with the eparch, and when the eparch appears, he never does business with the king. We might do better to imagine not a political hierarchy but a constellation of powers, growing brighter and dimmer as the seasons change. Likewise, Nubia’s own sense of confidence in international affairs grows and fades in this period. We see a striking zenith in the reign of King Kyriakos, a contemporary of Michael, the patriarch of Alexandria (743–67 ce). Michael, apparently under severe financial pressure from the Muslim authorities, goes to Upper Egypt “to beg for assistance from the people there” (Abū al-Makārim (pseudo-Abu Salih) in Vantini 1975:329). Kyriakos, “angry and filled with indignation” at the patriarch’s plight, invades Egypt with a large force, doing considerable damage to the lands of Upper Egypt. When the governor of Egypt releases the patriarch from his financial obligations, Kyriakos returns to Nubia and peace resumes. An equally striking low point in Nubian confidence comes in the reign of King Zacharias in the 830s ce. External sources record the arrival of an embassy from the caliph at Baghdad demanding payment of some fourteen years of arrears in Baqt payments (Michael the Syrian in Vantini 1975:316–17 and Abū al-Makārim (pseudo-Abu Salih) in Vantini 1975:330). Nubia’s ruler at the time, Zacharias, is not a member of the royal family, but rules in the name of his son George, who is a member of the royal family on his mother’s side. Faced with diplomatic pressure from Baghdad and rebellions at home, Zacharias sends George to Baghdad to treat with the caliph in person. George is well received both in Cairo and in the new Abbasid capital of Samarra, where witnesses describe him as “well mannered, educated and handsome, worthy of the royal rank.”14 The logic behind such a rare embassy is necessarily speculative, but Nubia must judge itself in no condition to resist outside pressure. This is likely due in part to Zacharias’s own tenuous grip on power as a regent of sorts during the birth of a new dynasty (Godlewski 2002:76–79). But this new dynasty is a success, and Nubia in the 10th, 11th, and 12th centuries is in a golden age. Literary sources credit Raphael, the Nubian king at the dawn of the 11th century, with renovations to the royal palace, including the introduction of “several domes built of red brick” (Abū al-Makārim (pseudo-Abu Salih) in Vantini 1975:326). George, archbishop of Dongola in the second half of the 11th century, is one of the period’s

764   Giovanni R. Ruffini ­ ominating figures. A likely member of the royal family—perhaps even son of the king d himself (Godlewski 2013b:665–66)—George remakes Nubia’s religious landscape. His episcopate sees the construction of an unparalleled burial crypt in one of Dongola’s monasteries and new churches in Dongola and nearby Banganarti. The same period sees an indigenization of Nubian church and court practices. This includes the widespread introduction of Nubian-language religious texts and documentary forms, and the adoption of new royal regalia in preference to the older Byzantine styles (Godlewski 2013b:667–71). Scattered sources from earlier centuries indicate that Makuria was sometimes subordinate to Alwa, its neighbor to the south, and sometimes ruled over it (Welsby 2002:89). In the 11th century, a marriage alliance between the royal families of Makuria and Alwa results in the unification of the two powers.15 For the first time in seven hundred years, a single state rules all of Nubia. The Nubian kingdom of Dotawo appears in our sources rather abruptly, as if it emerges from nowhere. The name does not appear at all before the middle of the 11th century ce.16 Dotawo was known first from sources in Nobadia, specifically the texts from Qasr Ibrim. The name’s apparent regionalism and late appearance created the impression that Dotawo was some sort of sub-kingdom or local power, perhaps a splinter kingdom emerging from the chaos at Dongola in later centuries. Now it seems clear that Dotawo is the indigenous name for the Nubian state in the later medieval period (Ruffini 2013). Its appearance solely in a Nubian-language context, where Makuria does not appear, suggests that we should prefer Dotawo when looking at the Nubian state through native eyes.17 Power struggles and abdication punctuate the history of the Nubian crown from this point on. But the two phenomena may not be related. Both documentary and literary sources repeatedly describe a general, matrilineal principle of succession to the throne by the king’s sister’s son and provide ample specific examples. And yet, earlier centuries show royal succession both by the king’s son and the king’s nephew, and later centuries show coup attempts by fratrilineal nephews and others with less obvious claims to the crown. Some of this may indicate a change in the succession system, perhaps related to the unification of Makuria and Alwa.18 But we should resist the temptation to create too rigid a scheme. The power struggles prove the opposite: that Nubia has no clear system of succession and that court consensus on the successor could easily falter.19 The abdications may prove something else entirely. Solomon—perhaps the first man to rule over a united Nubian state—abdicates prior to 1072 (Ruffini 2012:247 n. 73) and withdraws into a life of prayer at a church of Saint Onnophrios some ten days from Aswan. Summoned to Cairo by the vizier, he lives there for a year before his death in the late 1070s, having earned a reputation for his piety and religious learning (Vantini 1975:331–32). King George, who takes the throne in 1132, also abdicates, and likewise dies in Egypt, in the late 1150s, in a monastery in Wadi en-Natrun (van Gerven Oei 2011). Another king—perhaps the great Moses George, who resists the invasion of Saladin—appears in Constantinople in 1203 after a pilgrimage to Jerusalem, reportedly on his way first to Rome and ultimately to Santiago de Compostela.20 These examples, generations apart, may prove only that a strain of personal piety ran through the Nubian

The History of Medieval Nubia   765 royal line, a piety shown in Solomon’s own reported belief that a king cannot “be saved by God while he still governs among men” (see n. 19 below). The Baqt’s long and tenuous peace does not last forever. Saladin’s tumultuous career rewrites the political landscape of the Middle East in the late 1100s. His decision to end Fatimid rule in Egypt permanently destabilizes relations between Egypt and Nubia. His brother Shams ed-Dawla invades Nubia in the 1170s, sacking Qasr Ibrim. This Egyptian invasion “evidently reawakened in the Nubians a concern for their defences” (Adams 1996:6). Architectural signs of this change include the heavy fortification of Qasr Ibrim itself against future invasions. But these geopolitical earthquakes do not yet impact Nubia’s internal politics. Moses George, king at the time of the invasion, reigns for over a half century. Literary sources describe his confident encounter with Shams ed-Dawla’s emissary, whom he stamps with a hot iron cross and dismisses with laughter (Ruffini 2012:248). This confident independence does not last. The 1270s and 1280s bring another period of intense instability, poor relations with Egypt intertwined with ongoing internal strife.21 The Nubian king David is at the heart of the problem. His claim to the throne appears illegal, coming at the expense of both the previous king and the legitimate heir Mashkouda, the previous king’s sister’s son. But the situation is murky: the previous king was his uncle and Mashkouda his cousin. David may well feel wronged by the ambiguities in Nubia’s matrilineal succession system. His decision to invade Egypt in the early 1270s only stirs trouble. David’s cousin Mashkouda travels to Cairo in search of help claiming David’s throne. The wali of Qos launches Egypt’s counter-strike into Nubia. He captures and kills Marturokoudda, the eparch of Nobadia and a prominent local landowner, and puts a more obscure figure named Qamar ad-Dawla in charge of northern Nubia. Egyptian forces ultimately capture David himself and put his cousin Mashkouda on the Nubian throne. The scenario replays itself in 1285/1286, but with less clarity.22 This time, the Egyptian invasion has no apparent motive. In the face of this invasion, the Nubian king Sumon orders Gourresi, his eparch, to evacuate Nobadia. Nubian forces fall back to Dongola and the result is a complicated tug-of-war. King Sumon loses the capital twice in the next four years as the Egyptians struggle to impose his sister’s son on the Nubian throne. Despite this, Gourresi, his eparch, maintains his position in Nobadia, perhaps due to his well-known ties to the local chieftains and prominent elite. In 1291, when Sumon secures his throne for good, he kills Gourresi and writes to the Egyptian sultan promising renewed payment of the Baqt. Twenty years later, the cycle begins again. The Nubian king Kudanpes kills his brother, perhaps to secure his own (weaker?) claim to the throne. Early in the 1310s he comes to Cairo on bended knee, “bringing the fine (qawd) imposed on him, after the killing of his brother.”23 The gesture is inadequate, and in a few years Egypt’s sultan plots to replace Kudanpes with one of his nephews. A diplomatic protest comes to nothing: Kudanpes ultimately returns to Cairo in chains, and his nephew, Kanz ad-Dawla, seizes the throne. The implications are intriguing, and remind us of events four or five hundred years in the past. Confident Nubian kings ignore Egypt or provoke it, but at their peril. Weaker

766   Giovanni R. Ruffini members of the royal family take advantage of this brashness and court Egyptian help in recurring dynastic struggles. Egypt obliges, hoping for increased revenue when a weak and loyal friend sits on Nubia’s throne. Centrifugal forces at the local level make the eparchs of Nobadia key figures in this struggle, mediating between Cairo and Dongola on the one hand, between Nubian center and Nubian periphery on the other. Siti is the last well-documented king of this period (Ochała 2011b). He appears in several visitor’s inscriptions on church walls in Banganarti, not far from the capital at Dongola. He appears on a visitor’s inscription much further afield, in Abu Negila, Kordofan, roughly 200 km southwest of Dongola. He also appears in Old Nubian documents from Edfu and Qasr Ibrim. One of the latter texts is a royal decree in Siti’s own words, distributing portions of royal land in the north.24 This decree is evidence that Dongola still rules Nobadia as late as the 1330s.25 This ongoing unity, combined with evidence of Nubian influence deep into the western Sudan, gives the impression that Siti was “a powerful king of a strong and large state” (Ochała 2011b:155). If so, it is a large and strong state in the midst of massive demographic change. The reign of Kudanpes two decades earlier reminds us: his successor on the throne is his nephew, Kanz ad-Dawla. He is the first Muslim to rule Nubia from Dongola. An inscription from 1317 found inside an audience room in the king’s throne hall records the foundation of a mosque, the first tangible evidence for Muslim worship in the Nubian capital.26 And Kanz ad-Dawla is Kudanpes’s sister’s son. The matrilineal nature of Nubian royal succession combined with the need to marry eligible royal women to powerful male allies introduces Islam into Nubia’s royal family. The Awlād Kanz and the Banū Ja’d Arabs are two groups at the center of these massive shifts. Literary sources state that the Awlād Kanz “had married the daughters of the kings of Nubia . . . thereby increasing their power considerably.”27 This was not always a stabilizing trend. In the 1360s, the Awlād Kanz occupy portions of southern Egypt, disrupting the region’s travel and trade. At the same time, in 1365, the Banī Ja’d ally themselves with a claimant to the Nubian throne, another king’s sister’s son. The usurper, successfully seizing Dongola, soon turns on his Arab allies, burning their guest house and massacring their armies. The usurper himself flees the resulting chaos, leaving Dongola in ruins, with no king on the throne.28 He manages a reconciliation with the rest of the royal family, through which he becomes eparch and governs from Qasr Ibrim, loyal to the legitimate king, who now rules Dotawo from Gebel Adda.29 Arab tribes occupy Meinarti, and presumably other sites as well. Dongola is lost forever. The career of Bishop Timotheos shows the consequences of this chaos and confusion in the next decade. Nubia’s Christian church remains subordinate to the Patriarch of Alexandria, as did that of Ethiopia. And yet, unlike Ethiopian kings, who had Egyptian monks appointed as their metropolitans, Nubian kings long enjoy the right to nominate their own people as episcopal candidates. This had been true two centuries before, when Moses George made an episcopal nomination to the Coptic patriarch Mark III (1166–89 ce; Adams 1996:227–29). Timotheos likely becomes bishop in the same way, but we cannot be sure.

The History of Medieval Nubia   767 Two long paper scrolls found under the body of Bishop Timotheos in a cathedral crypt in Qasr Ibrim tell us almost all we know about his life and career. These scrolls, one in Coptic and one in Arabic, are letters of testimonial to the church and people of Nubia from the Coptic Patriarch Gabriel IV (1370–78 ce). They tell us that a priest and monk named Timotheos, a Nubian by birth, has been made bishop of Faras after the death of Abba Athanasios. His elevation takes place in the presence of Egyptian bishops at Cairo’s Hanging Garden Church in 1371. His enthronement takes place—again, in the presence of Egyptian bishops—three months later, in 1372, at a church in southern Egypt. His body is the final piece of evidence. He dies at—or at least near—Qasr Ibrim, his appointment scrolls still with him. We may guess that he never makes it to Faras, his titular bishopric. His enthronement in Egypt, instead of Nubia, may even suggest that he never plans on trying. The bishopric of Faras may have been an imaginary thing by now, a fictional appointment to a dead church, held by men living in a sort of ecclesiastical exile in their own native land. Timotheos is the last one we know to hold the title. For over a hundred years, we know no Nubian kings. The long silence begins with King Siti in the 1330s, and the end is a mystery. Church and state structures survive—at least on paper—deep into the 1400s.30 King Ioel rules Dotawo from the 1460s to the 1480s, if not longer. Eparchs still govern Nobadia and bishops still sit at Ibrim throughout the same period. The documentary evidence for this appears only in the north, in Nobadia, but this may be nothing more than an accident of archaeology. We simply cannot judge the strength and the extent of the Nubian state in this period. When the Nubian-language documents stop, we go blind. A methodological lesson hides in this darkness. Our written sources are foreign literary works on the one hand and indigenous documents and inscriptions on the other. Vast treasures are lost in the histories and saints’ lives medieval Nubians never wrote (see Ruffini this volume). The foreign literary works are the source of nearly all our knowledge about Nubia’s internal political instability. This alone should make us suspicious: it is the outside view, inherently under-informed. The indigenous documents and inscriptions paint no such picture. Instead, they show a legal system stable over many centuries and an economic system also stable even in the midst of major foreign policy crises. Adama, eparch during the invasions of Saladin, and his successors in later centuries may be at the center of political and military firestorms. But judging from their ongoing investments in agricultural land in the midst of these same crises, we would never know it. And this too should make us suspicious. When archaeology and other written records restore our sight, we have clearly missed something in the meantime. In northern Nubia, an unnamed “Lord of Nubia” resists an Egyptian raid in 1518, but we know nothing more (Ibn Iyas: Vantini  1975:783). The Ottomans have already entered Egypt, and will soon control the entire region. They occupy Qasr Ibrim and Sai in the 1560s, with no suggestion of a central state in place to resist them (Welsby 2002:254). Dotawo is gone. In southern Nubia, the Funj sultanate appears as if from nowhere. Umarah Dunqas establishes its capital at Sinnar after a victory over the Nuba in 1504/1505 (Tabaqat Dayfallah: Vantini 1975:784). Soba, the ancient capital of Alwa, is already a city in ruins (Welsby 2002:255). With one eye on the past, we

768   Giovanni R. Ruffini are back where we began a thousand years before: Nubian civilization continues, but the central state is dead. With an eye on the future, we are on the verge of a Nubian renaissance (Spaulding, this volume).

Acknowledgments I would like to thank Adam Łajtar and Robin Seignobos, who—always generous with their time and advice—have read and helped me to improve an earlier draft of this chapter. Abbreviations for publications in the citations follow the standards set in the “Guide to the Texts” article at www.MedievalNubia.info. Translations are adapted from those in the published editions.

Abbreviations DBMNT  Database of Medieval Nubian Texts (http://www.dbmnt.uw.edu.pl/).

Notes 1. Skepticism: Edwards  2004:183–85. For the most recent and robust defense of Axumite involvement, see Hatke 2013, particularly pp. 143–47. 2. But see above, p. 762. Because this chapter addresses the political history of the Nubian state, I do not address questions of Christianization among the Nubian people as a whole. To be clear, I accept what I take to be the general trend in the field, namely a growing tendency to speak of “a longer-term and more complex process” of religious change, rather than one initiated solely by royal leadership manifest in, e.g., “a sudden replacement of full-blown traditional cults by the Church.” See Dijkstra 2013, which I quote here (120), for a discussion of these longer-term processes in the context of Qasr Ibrim. 3. For the following survey of northern Nubia, see Obłuski 2014:23–38. 4. The DBMNT records (in a search on September 10, 2016) 402 texts with a potential 7thcentury date. Almost all of these are dated to general ranges, the vast majority of them from the 6th to the 8th centuries or later. Six date to a range solely limited to the 7th century. Only DBMNT 499, 612, and 628 offer the potential for precise 6th-century dates. The latter mentions King Merkurios (about whom, see pp. 761–62), but tells us nothing about him. 5. Qalidurut no doubt masks via transliteration and transmission across language barriers a more obviously Nubian royal name, as with Orfiulo in n. 7 below. 6. For the Baqt, see Spaulding 1995; most recently Seignobos 2016:54–59. 7. Vantini 1975:18 n. 14 speculates that Orfiulo is the same as Eirpanome. The unvocalized Syrian version of the name, rendered in English as Orfiulo, in any case surely masks a more obviously Nubian name altered in transmission. 8. Although see now Obłuski in prep., contesting the historicity of the narratives of a decisive battle at Dongola. 9. Adams (2010:246–55) assumes that the eikshil and “lord of the horses” is the eparch. Adams (1996:245) follows Plumley (1970:14) in taking the Arabic sahib ej-jebel as an error for sahib

The History of Medieval Nubia   769 el-khayl and cites personal communication from Gerald M. Browne asserting that mourtin ngodil (lord of the horse) is one of the eparch’s Old Nubian honorifics. This is incorrect. The Nubian titles migin songoj and mourtin ngodil are never used to refer to the same p ­ erson at the same time, and are held by two different people in one 12th-century land sale (P.QI 3.37). Ourouêl/Ourouwi, if the same person, held both titles at different times (see P.QI 4 introd. p. 37). Diachronic analysis of the evidence, based on complete editions of the unpublished Arabic documentary evidence, may clarify the picture, perhaps revealing a transition of responsibilities from one official to the other. Note the prominence of the eikshil in the Arabic letters from the earlier medieval period and the title’s scarcity in later Nubian texts (P.QI 4 introd. p. 35). 10. See P.QI volumes 1–4 with P.QI 4 introd., pp. 30–43. 11. P.QI 4.93, the letter writer an eparch himself. 12. P.QI 4.95, slightly altering the translation of the ed.princ. 13. P.QI 4.66 and 113 for the former, and P.QI 3.30 for the latter. 14. Michael the Syrian in Vantini 1975:320. Samarra, not Baghdad: Seignobos 2016:142–43. 15. Following the speculative reconstruction at Godlewski 2008:271. 16. DBMNT “Toponyms & Ethnonyms” search on August 15, 2016. 17. I take the addresses on the outside of Old Nubian letters to be fossilized Greek, as is clear from, e.g., use of the conjunction kai and the dative tôi. When “Makuria” appears in various abbreviated forms in these addresses, it is thus embedded in traditional scribal forms dating back centuries. 18. Ruffini 2016:540–41, generally summarizing Godlewski’s numerous discussions of the issue. 19. See Abd el-Shaheed 1998:15 for the succession struggle after King Solomon in the 1070s. Lack of court consensus may indeed account for Basil’s ability to turn one brother against another in this context. 20. The evidence: Rostkowska 1982. Moses George: Ruffini 2012:251. 21. This period receives its best and most recent treatment in Seignobos 2016:277–306, superseding what I had written on the subject in Ruffini 2013:182–88 and 2016:544–46. 22. See now Seignobos 2016:307–45 for more robust coverage of this period and an attempt to resolve divergent literary traditions regarding Gourresi and King Ayay. 23. Vantini 1975:691, but following the reconstruction at Seignobos 2016:275, 346–49 and t. II, 77–80: Kudanpes is the brother of two of his royal predecessors, David and Ayay. 24. P.QI 4.66; the interpretation of the text is far from clear. 25. The decree’s opening protocol names both the bishop of Dongola and the eparch of Nobadia, and the text describes Siti as king of Dotawo. The date is by comparison to P.QI 4.68, also written in the reign of Siti, and explicitly dated to 1333. 26. Note Seignobos 2016:353–56, arguing that the inscription does not relate to its eventual find-spot, but was moved there from its original location. 27. Al-Maqrizi in Vantini 1975:698. For what follows, see Vantini 1975:698–702. 28. Although see Łajtar 2005:311, suggesting that the Paper, King of Dongola, attested in an inscription from Banganarti sat on the throne of Dongola “after the Kingdom of Makuria ceased to exist, having split into a series of chiefdoms.” 29. Seignobos 2016:367–68 has discovered their names: King Apakure and his nephew Šihab ed-Din Maĝid. 30. See particularly P.QI 4.63 = DBMNT 644 (1463 ce) and the unpublished text from Gebel Adda (DBMNT 700, 1483 ce).

770   Giovanni R. Ruffini

References Cited Adams, W.Y. 1996 Qasr Ibrim: The Late Mediaeval Period. Egypt Exploration Society Excavation Memoir 59. ——— 2010 Qasr Ibrim: The Earlier Medieval Period. Egypt Exploration Society Excavation Memoir 89. Dijkstra, J.H.F. 2013 Qasr Ibrim and the Religious Transformation of Lower Nubia. In Qasr Ibrim, between Egypt and Africa: Studies in Cultural Exchange, ed. J.  van der Vliet and J.L. Hagen, pp. 111–22. Egyptologische Uitgaven 26. Peeters and Nederlands Instituut voor het Nabije Oosten. Edwards, D.N. 2004 The Nubian Past: An Archaeology of the Sudan. Routledge. Godlewski, W. 2002 Introduction to the Golden Age of Makuria (9th–11th Centuries). Africana Bulletin 50:75–98. ——— 2008 Bishops and Kings: The Official Program of the Pachoras (Faras) Cathedral. In Between the Cataracts: Proceedings of the 11th Conference for Nubian Studies, ed. W.  Godlewski and A.  Łajtar, Part 2, Fasc. 1, pp. 263–82. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean Supplement Series 2.2/1. Warsaw University. ——— 2013a A Short Essay on the History of Nobadia from Roman to Mamluk Times. In Qasr Ibrim, between Egypt and Africa: Studies in Cultural Exchange, ed. J.  van der Vliet and J.L. Hagen, pp. 123–33. Egyptologische Uitgaven 26. Peeters and Nederlands Instituut voor het Nabije Oosten. ——— 2013b Archbishop Georgios of Dongola: Socio-political Change in the Kingdom of Makuria in the Second Half of the 11th Century. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean 22:663–77. Hatke, G. 2013 Aksum and Nubia: Warfare, Commerce, and Political Fictions in Ancient Northeast Africa. New York University Press and Institute for the Study of the Ancient World. Łajtar, A. 2005 Banganarti 2004 Inscriptions. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean 16:309–13. Obłuski, A. 2014 The Rise of Nobadia: Social Changes in Northern Nubia in Late Antiquity. Journal of Juristic Papyrology Supplement 20. ——— 2016 Nobadian and Makurian Church Architecture: Qasr el-Wizz, a Case Study. In Aegyptus et Nubia Christiana: The Włodzimierz Godlewski Jubilee Volume on the Occasion of his 70th Birthday, ed. A. Łajtar, A. Obłuski, and I. Zych, pp. 481–512. Polish Centre of Mediterranean Archaeology, University of Warsaw. ——— unpublished First Contacts between Islam and Nubia: A Nubiological Perspective. Ochała, G. 2011a The Date of the Dendur Foundation Inscription Reconsidered. Bulletin of the American Society of Papyrologists 48:217–24. ——— 2011b A King of Makuria in Kordofan. In Nubian Voices: Studies in Christian Nubian Culture, ed. A.  Łajtar and J.  van der Vliet, pp. 149–55. Journal of Juristic Papyrology Supplement Series 15. Plumley, J.M. 1970 Qasr Ibrim 1969. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 56:12–18. Rostkowska, B. 1982 The Visit of a Nubian King to Constantinople in ad 1203. In New Discoveries in Nubia: Proceedings of the Colloquium on Nubian Studies, ed. P. van Moorsel, pp. 113–16. Egyptologische Uitgaven 2. Nederlands Instituut voor het Nabije Oosten. Ruffini, G.R. 2012 Medieval Nubia: A Social and Economic History. Oxford University Press.

The History of Medieval Nubia   771 ——— 2013 Newer Light on the Kingdom of Dotawo. In Qasr Ibrim, between Egypt and Africa: Studies in Cultural Exchange, ed. J. van der Vliet and J.L. Hagen, pp. 179–91. Egyptologische Uitgaven 26. Peeters and Nederlands Instituut voor het Nabije Oosten. ——— 2016 Dotawo’s Later Dynasties: A Speculative History. In Aegyptus et Nubia Christiana: The Włodzimierz Godlewski Jubilee Volume on the Occasion of his 70th Birthday, ed. A. Łajtar, A. Obłuski, and I. Zych, pp. 539–52. Polish Centre of Mediterranean Archaeology, University of Warsaw. Seignobos, R. 2016 L’Égypte et la Nubie à l’époque medieval. Élaboration et transmission des savoirs historiographiques (641–ca. 1500). Doctoral dissertation, Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne. Spaulding, J. 1995 Medieval Christian Nubia and the Islamic World: A Reconsideration of the Baqt Treaty. International Journal of African Historical Studies 28(3):577–94. van Gerven Oei, V.W.J. 2011 The Old Nubian Memorial for King George. In Nubian Voices: Studies in Christian Nubian Culture, ed. A. Łajtar and J. van der Vliet, pp. 225–62. Journal of Juristic Papyrology Supplement Series 15. Vantini, G. 1975 Oriental Sources Concerning Nubia. Polish Academy of Sciences and Heidelberger Akademie der Wissenschaften. Welsby, D. 2002 The Medieval Kingdoms of Nubia: Pagans, Christians and Muslims along the Middle Nile. British Museum.

Chapter 38

N u bi a n Texts, N u bi a n Li v e s Giovanni R. Ruffini

Most of what you are about to read is imaginary.1 It combines distinct events from different times and places. It is a fictional tapestry woven together from many real but unrelated threads. One thread begins with a Nubian church man named Petro traveling in Egypt. He writes back home, addressing the bishop of Qasr Ibrim in northern Nubia and complaining about a mishap during the course of his travels. “I suffered a great loss in Egypt, and I cannot pay.”2 He has gotten as far north into Egypt as modern El-Ashmunein, and has had to sell his goods. As it happens, the Arab merchant buying his goods—we never do learn his name—is heading south himself into Nubia, business there being a regular part of his annual cycle. When the merchant comes to Nubia, he first enters the territory of the eparch or governor of Nobadia, Nubia’s northernmost region, home to the great cities of Faras and Qasr Ibrim. The rules are different in Nobadia—at least, some of our sources say so— and the eparch has a strict say over who can travel further south and which goods go with them. It may be better for the merchant to stop in Nobadia and do his business there, where things work more like they do in Egypt, and he can still use his Egyptian money with ease.3 He offloads in Meinarti, the Island of Michael, a major center of economic and political activity in the region, home at times to the eparch himself.4 The merchant, servant to Mohamed ibn Zayd, a man of Aswan, has a worse time in Nubia than Petro did in Egypt.5 Nubian officials arrest him and confiscate his goods. They beat his master and break his hand, nearly killing him. An Egyptian judge tries to intervene with the eparch, but cannot get any meaningful information. The Egyptians accuse Nubia of violating the terms of the pact between the two states, and Mohamed’s merchant is a victim of the disagreement. We never learn his fate, hearing only that Egypt demands a thousand dinar in blood money from Nubia if he turns out to be dead. But what about the church man Petro? When he returns to Nubia, he is anxious to forget his Egyptian misfortunes, and better yet, to protect himself against the inevitable dangers of the next trip. He heads through town, trying to remember which church had

774   Giovanni R. Ruffini the scriptorium he visited last time. When he finds it, the students are already at work. One is copying the alphabet, another using cheap charcoal to scratch out a Greek invocation to the Holy Trinity, en onomati tou patros kai tou uiou kai tou agiou pneumatos. The head monk makes him what he needs, a small piece of paper covered in magical ring-letters and repeating syllabic chants: xisina xas xos xallo xoxon. It closes with his own name and an agrammatical prayer to the body of the son of God, uios sarxi theos. The paper stays with him now, in a leather pouch around his neck, keeping him safe.6 This is only one of the monk’s jobs this morning. Food shipments have arrived from monastic landholdings just upriver, and they come with the lading bills written out by the scribe at the other end. He has to check the actual amounts of grain against the claims on the bills, just a few lines of Greek, but efficient: “Given by Markos, 50 artabas of barley.”7 He has met Markos only once, years before, and Markos has no connection at all to the monastery itself. He works on a dock at a small village, handling shipping for dozens of estates and shipmasters in the region, overseeing food and wine alike. Most of the shipments are small, like this one, and boring. At other times, he sees the large jars of wine heading for one of the bishops, or the cathedral at Faras, and brings himself there in his mind. On the walls of the cathedral he can see one inscription after the next, but he cannot read all of them: some of the texts in Greek have obscure vocabulary he never needs in his work at the docks; other texts are in Coptic, which means nothing to him at all. Other texts on the walls in the cathedral at Faras are in his own native tongue, and his eyes fall on names he recognizes: “Mariamê’s: 2 touski and 10 loaves of kapa bread. That of Mashshouda: 2 touski and 10 loaves of kapa bread. Eio’s: 1 touski and 10 loaves of kapa bread.”8 The faithful bring offerings to the church for the celebration of the Eucharist. Deacons stand at the entrance to the building, taking the gifts, recording the names of the donors, and ensuring that those names are commemorated later, both on the cathedral walls and in the prayers during mass. Prayers are heard also for the names of the recently deceased and other church patrons, as well as the church owners. Graffiti on several churches in Faras show people describing themselves as church owners, a point of pride, broadcast to the fellow faithful. But it is also something to be remembered after death: the women of Meinarti make a point of erecting tombstones recording this part of their piety. One in Coptic reminds us that “the blessed Michaelikol, daughter of Iohannou the priest . . . has (the Church of Saint) Michael at Argine.” Her tombstone is one of only several like it. Michaelikol may have been a friend of Iesousyko, or at least a model for her, when she left a tombstone nine years later recording her own ownership of the church of Saint Philotheos.9 Some of these people are buried in shrouds covered in prayers and magic. Scribes throughout northern Nubia know how to make these shrouds, but the proper spacing of the words is a challenge. It requires that the words form a cross over the body of the dead. The prayers begin with stories about the Virgin Mary and end with an invocation of the Seven Sleepers of Ephesus before giving the name and titles of the deceased. One of the younger priests at Qasr Ibrim has recently started writing these burial shrouds in Old Nubian.10 This annoys the older priest specializing in these shrouds: he had been writing them in Coptic for his entire career, but the most recent burial he had done—by

Nubian Texts, Nubian Lives   775 the east wall of Qasr Ibrim’s cathedral—was probably the last he would ever be asked to do.11 These two priests are the past and the future of church writing in northern Nubia. Neither of them is a literary genius. There are few of those. They know one in Attiri writing a book on the Archangel Michael. He is collecting a series of the oldest sermons and other literary texts on the life and deeds of the angel. But he is going further than that, experimenting with new literary forms, writing a hymn to the Archangel with a complex syllable scheme, full of internal rhymes, a song better heard aloud than read on the page: tallo desa tokara oshongattika, tallo kortirra koskattika, tallo mourtigirra angokattika, tallo dalauara eiou pekilkona. “It is he who liberates the enslaved. It is he who tramples evil. It is he who causes the wise to rule. It is he who has made abundant grain glow.”12 These are bold claims, adding a curious wrinkle to Nubian theology, elevating Michael almost to the level of the Trinity he represents. The scribe’s work has been commissioned by the eparch. We do not know what the scribe earns for his effort. Maybe payment is in gold, or maybe it is one komi of wine or a jar of gide, the kind of payment scribes and witnesses often receive when participating in a land sale or some other legal transaction.13 But we do know what the patron gets for his payment: a recognition of his piety and the intercession of the patriarchs. The library of the Jesus Church of Serra East is full of texts written “in awe and deposited on the cross.” These books all end the same way, asking “whoever exults in this entire book” to exult in the deeds of the patron. An “ineffable mystery” revealed by Jesus Christ about the glorious and life-giving cross is commissioned by Doukas, “who is good and exults in joyful piety,” and has held the offices of eparch and choiak-eikshil or lord of the Choiak festival.14 It ends with a call for Jesus to open the door of heaven for Doukas, and for Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob to bless him.15 The money the eparch spends on the church library has not traveled very far. As with many of his peers, the eparch’s resources are largely tied up in the land market. He recently sold land in Lower Oudji to the Church of the Holy Trinity at Ibrim. The land itself had been in his family for nearly a decade. A woman named Kapopi had sold the land to his daughter Neuesi in several plots nine years ago.16 At the moment of the sale, the women are surrounded by eye-witnesses, over twenty of them, eating their food and drinking their wine.17 Many of them are deacons and priests, but others—Anil, Anaê, Tapara, Orin-Papasa, Zachari, Eiramil, and more—have no titles and may be nobodies, friends, family gathered for the occasion. Most land sales would indicate the sales price in gold, but the transaction between these two women is different, the land selling for “1 male camel named ‘Nubian’, 1 ornamental precious stone, 1 silver ring . . . And moreover . . . 1 slave.” For Kapopi, slaves come and go. In previous years, she had freed another slave, one named Apa, in a note adding that “whoever will cause me to enslave him, may he become estranged from God, and may the seventh seal (?) come forth against him, and let him die through the King’s curse.”18 Invoking a king may seem bold, but it is not so far from reality. Kapopi knows the bishop of Ibrim and the eparch of Nobadia, both men with access and ties to the king at Dongola. And kings have come this far north several times in her life. King George had come this way after his abdication, before settling in the Wadi en-Natrun, far to the north in Egypt.

776   Giovanni R. Ruffini Living in a monastery there, he left on his death a complex Greco-Nubian epitaph asking God to “forgive his sins, that he committed loving and hating, knowing (and) not knowing, either being in word or in deed.”19 King Solomon had headed north to Egypt after his abdication as well, generations before.20 King Moses George had almost certainly come this far north in the 1170s, forced to deal with the invasion from Egypt ordered by Saladin. In fact, some people in northern Nubia no doubt wished that the king was a little bit less involved in their affairs. When he decreed that the Epimachus Church of Ibrim West be freed from some of its tithes to the bishop of Ibrim, the bishop himself was not likely to have been happy about it.21 The king was involved in the first place because of a direct plea by Michaelko, the tot of Motiko, a minor official whose responsibilities are unknown. Motiko is not a big place, and its officials are well known to each other and throughout the community in Ibrim. Michaelko’s near contemporary, Ôkaja, the asti of Motiko, witnesses a land sale in Ibrim itself and another asti of Motiko takes wheat payments sent from there.22 Those wheat payments—a mere artaba or just over two dozen liters—are only a small part of a much larger web of taxes, rents, and commerce connecting people and places throughout northern Nubia. Some accounts of these payments give us the view from the center of town, listing all the wine coming to the bishop from the regional churches under his charge: “one komi from the Jesus church of Arminna, one from the Mary church, one from the church of Michael of Sha.”23 Other accounts give us a view closer to the farms and the fields, recording payments in crops and cash, and the sources of labor: “1 of the day’s red crop, 1 of the green, 30 pieces of Al-Hakim gold, 40 slaves.”24 The accounts do not say that the slaves are harvesting the crops. The slaves themselves are a payment, moved with the crop, and recorded in the same way. We can imagine Kapopi’s slave Apa as one of this group, before his emancipation. The other slaves and the Al-Hakim gold pieces bring us full circle. Thousands of slaves go north over the years as part of Nubia’s treaty payment to the Muslim world under the terms of the Baqt agreement. Many of these would have been captured further south, beyond Nubian territory, and brought north to Egypt, but some may well have been native Nubians. In either case, the accounts do not differentiate between them. And many slaves would have gone north to Egypt on the open market as well. Consider Mohamed ibn Zayd’s merchant, whom we met at the start of the story. The Al-Hakim gold pieces recorded in circulation in northern Nubia are from an Egyptian mint, and come to Nubia through merchants like him. They are the purchase price Egyptians pay for slaves coming north from Nubia to Egypt and beyond.25 If he is ever set free and his goods returned to him, much of his money might stay in return for the slaves he will take home.

A Survey of Text Genres Everything you have just read is perfectly plausible, and based on specific pieces of textual evidence from medieval Nubia. But its composite picture takes many liberties, particularly with geography and chronology. The actual texts providing the foundation for

Nubian Texts, Nubian Lives   777 this imaginary sketch come from several different sites and span over half a millennium. Few of the people in them are likely to have known each other, still less to have been interconnected through the social network we saw here. To some readers, this approach may be methodologically unsound. To my mind, it is a helpful way to take each text out of splendid philological isolation and let all texts speak to each other as a whole. It is a way to maximize our vision of medieval Nubia, to present a hypothetical glimpse of how its world might have worked and how some of its people might have interacted. A more traditional approach might organize the material based on genre. In broad strokes, the extant material, most of which is from northern Nubia, divides into several groups, which for our purposes include documentary, funerary, commemorative, literary, and magical. Documentary evidence gives us the greatest amount of detail about the widest socio-economic range of medieval Nubians. Legal texts are the most striking in this regard. Rare indeed is evidence introducing a slave by name and describing the circumstances of his emancipation, as we have seen above.26 The rights and privileges of Nubian women have a long historiographical tradition, but Kapopi’s land sale is a rare opportunity to hear a first-person voice support this picture. Still, the land sales—which dominate the surviving legal texts—are presumptively tools of the elite: if land ownership was common at lower levels of the economic scale, we have no evidence of it. And yet, at the edges of the elite are the crowds we have seen gather to watch their deeds and give them silent validity, not all of them members of the elite themselves perhaps, and in any case acting explicitly in the name of a larger community. One sale closes with the phrase, “all the people of the town are witnesses.”27 Letters also come by and large from the elite of Nubian society, at both the center and the periphery.28 The letters from Nubian kings amount to royal decrees or legislation, in the extant examples directed from Dongola at the affairs of Nobadia in the north.29 The eparch of Nobadia—that is, the governor of northern Nubia—is one of the primary correspondents in our surviving corpus, although that sample is skewed, coming as it does primarily from the excavations at Qasr Ibrim.30 Letters also introduce us to the affairs of bishops and a host of other secular and religious functionaries whose exact roles often escape us. The composite picture emerging from this correspondence is of an epistolary network with multiple functions: first and foremost, to order the receipt and distribution of goods at various levels of the political hierarchy, but secondly to enforce that political hierarchy, to remind the periphery of the center’s power and influence.31 Accounts tend to be tight-lipped, rarely making their nature explicit to the reader. They necessarily give rise to considerable speculation.32 Under these circumstances, it is risky to impose any typology on the surviving examples. Nonetheless, we seem to have state accounts, (e.g., those relating collections made by the eparch of Nobadia); church accounts (e.g., those relating collections made by the bishop of Ibrim); and private accounts (e.g., those relating collections from tenants to their landlords). One striking feature of these accounts is that they do not allow any real accounting. Collections in cash and kind are lumped together without any apparent organization; nothing in the layout of the texts helps facilitate any calculations; and no calculations appear to take place. Ultimately, the accounts appear to have served more as a map to networks of

778   Giovanni R. Ruffini patronage and power, as records of who on the periphery pays to acknowledge the supremacy of those at the center.33 After the documentary evidence, epigraphic funerary evidence is the next most generous in detail and demographic breadth. But it too is presumptively the domain of the elite: the cost of being commemorated in stone or on burial shroud ensures this. The breadth it gives us is through a sampling of the elite from places lacking in the generous documentary finds of Qasr Ibrim. The vast majority of the epigraphic evidence— indeed, the vast majority of all extant texts from Nubia—appears in the form of epitaphs: 382 in Greek, 477 in Coptic, but only one in Old Nubian.34 These texts sometimes tell us quite a bit about the men and women they commemorate: the titles they held, the churches they owned, the long lives they led. We would be wrong to think of these epitaphs as simple memorials for the dead. They are “liturgy by the square centimeter,” made to “assist the living in their prayers” for the dead. Nor are these prayers a solitary activity: they are meant for an audience, read or sung aloud as part of a collective social experience.35 Commemorative graffiti are a significant source of epigraphic evidence as well, particularly the 112 Greek, twenty-four Coptic, and thirty-four Old Nubian visitor’s inscriptions in churches and other important pilgrimage sites and available in the scholarly literature.36 Here, we learn less about the people themselves—visitor’s inscriptions are laconic at best—and more about their place in the crowd. At the top of Qasr Ibrim’s socalled Gebel Maktub, “the entire rock was covered with Greek [and Coptic] inscriptions.”37 Over 150 graffiti left by pilgrims to the site in the 10th and 11th centuries let us watch the wave of priests, archdeacons, deacons, and others coming to the site year after year, figures we meet only by name: Anyane, Emakke, Eskonajjil, Iobasse, Isinta, and many others come into sight for a brief moment before disappearing again.38 In exceptional cases, graffiti can give us a sense of travel throughout Nubia, both in the Nile valley and beyond: the fourteenth-century Nubian King Siti is named in a graffito in Kordofan, far from his capital at Dongola.39 In some statistically freakish cases, these graffiti even take us as far as Europe, as we see in the case of Beneseg, a merchant, perhaps, or commercial agent traveling from Provence deep into Nubia to leave a short graffito on the walls of the upper church at Banganarti, near the capital city of Dongola.40 Literary evidence gives us an even narrower glimpse at a specific socio-economic elite, the book-readers and their patrons. Doukas, the choiak-eikshil and eparch we met earlier, is the best-known case. An Old Nubian book in praise of the Holy Cross concludes with a paragraph inviting all who read it to remember Doukas’s good deed in commissioning it.41 A collection of twenty-four texts, mostly in Sahidic Coptic, from the 10th and 11th centuries (the spuriously labeled Esna-Edfu hoard) includes manuscripts copied for the Nubian churches of the Cross in Serra and Our Savior Jesus Christ in Illarte.42 One text in the hoard ends with a colophon asking Jesus to “bless the life of those who took care of this gift,” namely Mariakouda Ioannou son of Eisoupapo and his mother. Another text in the same hoard names its patron as someone from the district of Faras in northern Nubia. This literary evidence shows Nubian book patrons proclaiming their good deeds in this world with one eye on rewards in the next.

Nubian Texts, Nubian Lives   779 But literary evidence does something else for us potentially much more valuable. Nubian literary texts are among the few windows we have into the medieval Nubian sense of the past and the Nubian view of world history. In the narrowest view, these texts show us only what could be known about the past by a small range of priests and scribes, and by those with whom they shared their learning. How broadly that learning disseminated throughout the general population cannot be known. In a broader view, these texts are maps to a much larger oral environment, outlining what aspects of the past are read aloud to the general public at church services and other central events. In this view, a fairly significant portion of the Nubian population might have some sense of biblical and Roman antiquity. Medieval Nubia’s most basic textbook on world history was the Bible. We have nothing from the narrative books of the Old Testament written in indigenous Nubian, only in Greek or Coptic.43 But even if the surviving bits of the Old Testament were the only ones known in Nubia, they would still provide an intriguing glimpse into the distant past. Nubians would know the history of the Holy Land and surrounding areas. They would know of the Archangel Raphael’s trip to Media so that Tobit could see again.44 They would know of the captives sent from Jerusalem and Judah into exile in Babylon.45 They would have heard of the humbling of the Moabites; the prophecy of the destruction of Damascus; the description of the destruction of Phoenician Tyre; and perhaps most beguiling given recurring international tension, the promise that the idols of the Egyptians will fall.46 On rare occasions, Roman Late Antiquity comes into focus as well. The eighth-century anchorite grotto in Faras is remarkable in this regard. Its walls record sayings of Apa Evagrius, Apa Ezaias, and Apa Pachom and anecdotes about Apa Arsenios and Apa Makarios.47 The fifth-century Sayings of the Desert Fathers thus preserved memory in Nubia of the earliest ages of Christian monasticism in Egypt. The same grotto lists the Seven Sleepers of Ephesus, young men who hid in a cave during the persecutions of Decius around 250 ce and awoke nearly two centuries later, amazed to find a transformed and Christianized Roman Empire. The grotto also lists the Forty Martyrs of Sebaste, soldiers who were victims of the persecutions of Licinius in 320.48 From the Nubian perspective, Roman history is simply part of Christian history. No historical memory exists, for example, of conflict between Meroe and Rome under the Julio-Claudian dynasty. A Greek text from Qasr Ibrim narrates a popular legend about the death of the emperor Julian (361–363 ce), in which the martyr Mercurius kills the “impious” and “ungodly” emperor during his war against the Persian Empire.49 Reference to the reign of the Roman emperor Diocletian (284–305 ce) appears in two of the most common Nubian dating forms.50 The first form, dating a text by the number of years “from Diocletian,” was common in Nubia from the 7th through the 10th centuries, tapering off in the 11th century. The second form, dating a text by the number of years “from the martyrs” killed under Diocletian, was standard from the 11th century on. Throughout medieval Nubia, the literate class thus retained an awareness of their chronological relationship to a central event in Roman history.

780   Giovanni R. Ruffini Constantinople appears in Nubian texts as a center of royal power.51 The Archangel Raphael intercedes for the famous Christian emperor, Theodosius the Great. His son Honorius is a “God-loving king” known for his piety and his plan “to build upon the earth a church of the Archangel Raphael.” These memories of the Roman past come through a homily on Raphael attributed to John Chrysostom, himself one of the church fathers best known in Nubia and a major player in the ecclesiastical history of Constantinople during the Theodosian dynasty. No evidence suggests that these memories run very deep. Nothing suggests that anyone in Nubia could date Theodosius in relation to Diocletian, or explain what precisely Honorius was “king” of. We might even imagine some in Nubia seeing no real historical distinction between the kings of the Old Testament, the “kings” of the Roman world, and the kings of their own day. Nubian magic has yet to receive the full-length scholarly study it deserves. Many of the extant texts remain unpublished or lack proper editions. This is in part because of the considerable difficulty many of these texts pose: how can modern editors understand the bizarre shapes, the ring letters, and the repetitive sounds of the spells when we cannot be sure whether they had any meaning to their own creators? Determining the purpose of each text is the first step forward. Nubian magic is full of invocations to the “Lord Jesus Christ, protect your servant.” In some cases, a name follows. In others, the spell is deliberately anonymous, perhaps a strategy to protect the beneficiaries of the magic from evil spirits. The intended beneficiaries are female frequently enough that it seems Nubian magic had a gendered aspect to it, that care for women’s health was one of its chief functions.52 Protection of hearth and home was apparently another: this is the most likely explanation for the inscribed wooden planks and ostraca found under houses at various sites throughout Nubia.53 Nubians needed protection not simply against general, amorphous threats but against specific events and specific moments in time. The Nubian version of the story of the Christian warrior Saint Sisinios shows the hero confronting a baby-killing princess.54 Pregnancy and child-birth are obviously pivotal moments in Nubian life. Horoscopes can help their users learn the other pivotal moments. The one extant Nubian horoscope shows generalized predictions—“she will have a joyful face, she will receive power”—but also a concern with certain ages posing mortal threat: “19, 58, 77, and if she surmounts these she will live to 80.”55 Nubian magic is not limited to passive defense. It is a process, creating change over time. The strange ring-letters and geometric symbols in these spells are not mere gibberish: one theory, still unproven, suggests that they describe the negative state before the magic; the magic itself; and the positive outcome after the magic succeeds.56 Protection extends not only to the living but the dead as well. Nubians covered the walls of their tombs with gospel texts, prayers, and the names of holy figures: the Four Living Creatures, the Twenty-Four Elders of the Revelation, the Twelve Apostles. A tomb at the small site of Ukma, near the Second Cataract, shows that this practice was not limited to major ecclesiastical centers such as Dongola or Qasr Ibrim.57 This survey of genres and the fictional narrative preceding it give only a glimpse at the wealth of information hiding in Nubian texts. The first impression a beginner in Nubian

Nubian Texts, Nubian Lives   781 studies gets is the vast number of texts still unpublished. Excavation reports from Qasr Ibrim, for example, record over seven hundred texts in Arabic, Coptic, Greek, and Old Nubian from the later Christian periods alone.58 These numbers can sometimes deceive: they tend to count fragments as a whole text, even fragments too small to produce any usable text. Still, much work remains to be done, particularly on Arabic and Coptic texts. A close look at multilingualism in medieval Nubia is beyond the scope of this chapter, but recent studies have been able to establish a general picture based on the aggregate data: Nubians write in Greek throughout the entire Christian period, in official and private religious contexts; they write literature and documents in Coptic, but only until the 12th century, and generally in the north; and in Old Nubian they write literature and documents, in official and private religious contexts, with increasing frequency from the 10th century on (Łajtar and Ochała, this volume).59

Conclusion Literacy has a wide range of uses. Not every literate society uses that full range. Many things are missing from the texts of medieval Nubia. This becomes clearer when we consider the civilization of medieval Nubia in comparison to its closest cousins, medieval Christian Egypt and Ethiopia. Consider the tradition of ecclesiastical history which produced the Coptic History of the Patriarchs of Alexandria. The product, written in Arabic, draws heavily on Greek and Coptic sources, including indigenous eyewitnesses. No such tradition is known for medieval Nubia. Consider also the rich legacy of the Ethiopian gadl or saint’s life. The product has deep roots in the Christianity of Roman antiquity, but is completely indigenized in medieval Ethiopia. No such process is apparent in medieval Nubia. What can explain these gaps? The archaeological record may yet surprise us, and fill the gaps with evidence of a rich tradition in both genres, or in closely related analogs. But the safest approach assumes that what we have discovered so far is reasonably representative of what existed in the past, so we must assume that these gaps mean something. Invisible cultural preferences may have militated against committing the acts of indigenous secular leaders and holy men to writing in the form of history or hagiography. Alternatively, economics and a sort of Darwinian natural selection may have been at work. If Christian Nubia is less economically robust than its neighbors, its level of economic specialization will not be as great. Its scribes will be fewer in number, with less advanced training and reduced capacity to produce great work. Under pressure, only necessary forms of literate production will survive. This assumption gives us some leverage in tracking the death of literate Nubia. The Database of Medieval Nubian Texts (DBMNT) allows the creation of a composite picture of change over time by tracking precisely datable texts. The number of precisely datable texts from medieval Nubia peaks in the 10th century at 135. The number of precisely datable texts drops to ninety-one in the 11th century, then peaks again in the 12th at 117,

782   Giovanni R. Ruffini before dropping precipitously from the 13th to the 15th centuries, with forty-six texts, twenty-seven texts and seven texts in each century respectively.60 Once again assuming that our record is a reasonable sample of the actual past, these numbers are a striking testimony to the collapse of textual production.61 We might even suppose that they correlate in some way to the collapse of Nubian power itself. When natural selection begins to kill Nubian textual production, some genres die first. It has been noted that “(sub)literary and documentary production diminished in the final centuries,” but “less representative genres, such as visitor’s inscriptions, private prayers, and holy names seem to have retained or even increased their rates.”62 But the old documentary forms did not die completely. One of the last precisely dated texts from medieval Nubia is a land sale dating to the reign of King Ioel in 1463.63 Its structure is indistinguishable from that of Nubian land sales for centuries prior.64 Form and function intertwine: at this late date in Nubian history, someone is still competent enough to write this text—that is, the need for such training still exists—because at least some part of Nubia’s land economy is still functioning in the same way that it has for centuries. Literacy is an act of resource allocation. What people write down tells us what they value. The texts we have from medieval Nubia bring Nubians to life, give them names, reveal their deeds and help us understand their priorities. They wanted protection, for their legal rights over the land they bought and sold. They wanted recognition from the community, for their wealth, for their generous gifts of food and drink in times of public feasting. They wanted acknowledgment of their authority, in the form of the rents and taxes they receive from their estates. They wanted us to remember their power, in the form of the titles and offices they held. They wanted us to remember them for their piety, for the churches they own, the holy books they commission, the Eucharistic gifts they give. They wanted to negotiate with God and His angels, to secure their health and protection from the forces of evil. And often, in greater numbers as the centuries passed, Nubians wanted to talk to God and to proclaim to Him their presence in one of His churches: “I, Ioannou, wrote this note. Keep safe your servant.”65

Acknowledgments I would like to thank Adam Łajtar, Grzegorz Ochała, and Alexandros Tsakos, who provided their comments and suggestions on an earlier draft of this chapter.

Notes 1. The examples that follow are all imaginary, but based by analogy or comparison on the people and texts cited in subsequent notes. Abbreviations for publications in the notes follow the standards set in the “Guide to the Texts” article at www.MedievalNubia.info. Translations are adapted from those in the published editions. 2. Nubian church man traveling in Egypt: Hagen 2009:117. 3. Ruffini 2012a:172–73. 4. Adams 2014. 5. Adams 2010:248–49.

Nubian Texts, Nubian Lives   783 6. Ruffini 2012b, texts 2 and 5. 7. Ruffini 2010, texts 2–5. 8. Łajtar and Ochała 2015:78. 9. Łajtar and van der Vliet 1998. 10. Ruffini 2015. 11. Ruffini 2015:56. 12. van Gerven Oei et al. 2016. 13. Ruffini 2012a:90–98. 14. Ruffini 2012a: 52–56. 15. Browne 1989:28 (St. = DBMNT 1391). 16. P.QI 3.36 = DBMNT 584. For the identification of Adama, see Ruffini 2012a:120–21. 17. On who brings the witnesses and provides the food, see Ruffini 2012a:104 and 125–26. 18. P.QI 3.33 = DBMNT 591. 19. van Gerven Oei 2011:236. 20. Ruffini 2012a:247. 21. P.QI 3.30 with P.QI 4 p. 40 and n. 81. 22. P.QI 3.34 and 4.82. 23. e.g., P.QI 4.77. 24. Quoting selectively from P.QI 4.74. 25. Al-Hakim coins: P.QI 4.74 = DBMNT 2807. Purchase of slaves: Ruffini 2016. For an analogy from Roman Late Antiquity, see Pierce 1995. 26. See p. 775. 27. P.QI 3.44 = DBMNT 1028. 28. Ruffini 2014. 29. P.QI 3.30 = DBMNT 581; P.QI 4.66 = DBMNT 642; P.QI 4.113 = DBMNT 2854. See also Ruffini 2016. 30. Letters from the eparch of Nobadia: e.g., P.QI 3.46, 48–49, 51, 4.93–94, 99–102, 107, 112 = DBMNT 1030, 1032–33, 1035, 2835–36, 2455–56, 2842–43, 2848, 2853. 31. Ruffini 2016. 32. Ruffini 2012a, 174–98; P.QI 4 pp. 20–23. 33. Ruffini 2016. 34. Ochała 2014:31. See Łajtar and Ochała, this volume, for updated figures. 35. van der Vliet 2011:221. 36. Ochała 2014:31. 37. Łajtar and van der Vliet 2011:141, quoting Heinrich Barth via translation. 38. Łajtar and van der Vliet 2011:162. 39. Ochała 2011:154. 40. Łajtar and Płóciennik 2011:118. 41. See above, p. 775. 42. For deconstruction of the Esna-Edfu hoard and analysis of the “Nubian cluster” within it, see Williams in prep. 43. Ochała 2014:35 table 8, which excludes lectionaries and psalters. The Psalms, for example, are widely attested in Old Nubian; see Ruffini 2009:119. 44. Łajtar 2014:263. 45. Jeremiah 40:1–2 (DBMNT 1149). 46. Isaiah 16–17, 19, 23; chs. 16–17 and 23 are in DBMNT 1733, but 19 is unattested. 47. DBMNT 1639–43, 1628–29. 48. DBMNT 1651, 1646.

784   Giovanni R. Ruffini 49. Frend 1986. 50. Ochała 2011b:31–82. 51. Subsequent sentences summarize P.QI 1.10.A.ii and C.ii. 52. Ruffini 2012a:227. 53. Ruffini 2012a:225. 54. Ruffini 2012a:227. 55. P.QI 2.20. 56. Tsakos in prep. 57. Łajtar and van der Vliet 2015:118. 58. Adams 1996:217. 59. Ochała 2014:44–45. 60. See the Database online at http://www.dbmnt.uw.edu.pl/. These numbers are based on a search done on June 8, 2016. For a graph with similar results based on earlier numbers, see Ochała 2014:16. 61. See Ochała 2014:20 for discussion of potential explanations for this collapse. Unpublished and chronologically late material from Dongola, Banganarti, and Sonqi Tino will change this picture of collapse, but only somewhat. Texts from these sites are predominantly inscriptions, already statistically dominant in later centuries. 62. Ochała 2014:20. 63. P.QI 4.63 = DBMNT 644. 64. Ruffini 2012a:27–28. 65. Increase in visitor’s inscriptions over time: Ochała 2014:19.

References Cited Adams, W.Y. 1996 Qasr Ibrim: The Late Medieval Period. Egypt Exploration Society Excavation Memoir 59. ——— 2010 Qasr Ibrim: The Earlier Medieval Period. Egypt Exploration Society Excavation Memoir 89. ——— 2014 The Eparch at Meinarti. In The Fourth Cataract and Beyond: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference for Nubian Studies, ed. J.R.  Anderson and D.A.  Welsby, pp. 875–86. British Museum Publications on Egypt and Sudan 1. Peeters. Browne, G.M. 1989 Literary Texts in Old Nubian. Institut für Afrikanistic der Universität, Abteilung Sudanforschung (Vienna). Frend, W.H.C. 1986 Fragments of an Acta Martyrum from Q’asr Ibrim. Jahrbuch für Antike und Christentum 29:66–70. Hagen, J. 2009 Districts, Towns and Other Locations of Medieval Nubia and Egypt, Mentioned in the Coptic and Old Nubian Texts from Qasr Ibrim. Sudan & Nubia 13:114–19. Łajtar, A. 2014 Archangel Raphael in Inscriptions from the Upper Church at Banganarti. In Kings and Pilgrims: St Raphael Church II at Banganarti, Mid-Eleventh to Mid-Eighteenth Century, by B. Żurawski, pp. 261–83. Nubia 5. Banganarti 2. Neriton. Łajtar, A. and G. Ochała 2015 Two Wall Inscriptions from the Faras Cathedral with Lists of  People and Goods. In Nubian Voices, v. 2: New Texts and Studies on Christian Nubian  Culture, ed. A.  Łajtar, G.  Ochała, and J.  van der Vliet, pp. 73–102. Journal of Juristic Papyrology Supplement 27. University of Warsaw and Raphael Taubenschlag Foundation.

Nubian Texts, Nubian Lives   785 Łajtar, A. and T. Płóciennik 2011 A Man from Provence on the Middle Nile: A Graffito in the Upper Church at Banganarti. In Nubian Voices: Studies in Christian Nubian Culture, ed. A. Łajtar and J. van der Vliet, pp. 95–120. University of Warsaw. Łajtar, A. and J.  van der Vliet 1998 Rich Ladies of Meinarti and their Churches: With an Appended List of Sources from Christian Nubia containing the Expression “Having the Church of So-and-So.” Journal of Juristic Papyrology 28:35–53. ——— 2011 A View from a Hill: A First Presentation of the Rock Graffiti of “Gebel Maktub.” In Qasr Ibrim: Between Egypt and Africa, ed. J. van der Vliet and J. K. Hagen, pp. 157–66. Egyptologische Uitgaven 26. Peeters. ——— 2015 An Inscribed Tomb Chamber in Ukma-West. In Nubian Voices, v. 2: New Texts and Studies on Christian Nubian Culture, A. Łajtar, G. Ochała, and J. van der Vliet, pp. 103–18. Journal of Juristic Papyrology Supplement 27. University of Warsaw and Raphael Taubenschlag Foundation. Ochała, G. 2011 A King of Makuria in Kordofan. In Nubian Voices: Studies in Christian Nubian Culture, ed. A. Łajtar and J. van der Vliet, pp. 149–56. University of Warsaw. ——— 2011b Chronological Systems of Christian Nubia. Journal of Juristic Papyrology Supplement 16. University of Warsaw and Raphael Taubenschlag Foundation. ——— 2014 Multilingualism in Christian Nubia: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches. Dotawo 1:1–50. Pierce, R.H. 1995 A Sale of an Alodian Slave Girl: A Reexamination of Papyrus Strassburg Inv. 1404. Symbolae Osloensis 70:159–64. Ruffini, Giovanni 2009 Psalms 149–150: A Bilingual Greek and Old Nubian Version from Qasr Ibrim. Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik 168:112–22. ——— 2010 Nubian Ostraka from the West Bank Survey. Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik 175:231–38. ——— 2012a Medieval Nubia: A Social and Economic History. Oxford University Press. ——— 2012b The Meinarti Phylactery Factory: Medieval Nubian Ostraka from the Island of Michael. Journal of Juristic Papyrology 42:273–300. ——— 2014 May God Increase your Years: Unpublished Old Nubian Correspondence from Qasr Ibrim. In The Fourth Cataract and Beyond: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference for Nubian Studies, ed. J.R.  Anderson and D.A.  Welsby, pp. 961–70. British Museum Publications on Egypt and Sudan 1. Peeters. ——— 2015 Qasr Ibrim’s Old Nubian Burial-Shroud (QI inv. 78.1.24/53 = NI 46). In Nubian Voices, v. 2: New Texts and Studies on Christian Nubian Culture, ed. A. Łajtar, G. Ochała, and J.  van der Vliet, pp. 53–71. Journal of Juristic Papyrology Supplement 27. University of Warsaw and Raphael Taubenschlag Foundation. ——— 2016 Documentary Evidence and the Production of Power in Medieval Nubia. Afriques 7:14–19. Tsakos, Alexandros in prep. Cerre Matto, the Christian Period and Later Pottery, Glass, Small Objects, Texts, and Inscribed Objects. In Excavations at Serra East, George R Hughes and James E. Knudstad, Directors, Part 9, ed. B. Williams. Oriental Institute Nubian Expedition 13. Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago. van der Vliet, J. 2011 What Is Man? The Nubian Tradition of Coptic Funerary Inscriptions. In Nubian Voices: Studies in Christian Nubian Culture, ed. A. Łajtar and J. van der Vliet, pp. 171–224. University of Warsaw. ——— 2015 Nubian Voices from Edfu: Egyptian Scribes and Nubian Patrons in Southern Egypt. In Nubian Voices, v. 2: New Texts and Studies on Christian Nubian Culture, A. Łajtar,

786   Giovanni R. Ruffini G. Ochała, and J. van der Vliet, pp. 103–18. Journal of Juristic Papyrology Supplement 27. University of Warsaw and Raphael Taubenschlag Foundation. van Gerven Oei, V.W.J. 2011 The Old Nubian Memorial for King George. In Nubian Voices: Studies in Christian Nubian Culture, ed. A. Łajtar and J. van der Vliet, pp. 225–62. University of Warsaw. van Gerven Oei, V., V.P.-M.  Laisney, G.  Ruffini, A.  Tsakos, K.  Weber-Thum, and P. Weschenfelder 2016 The Old Nubian Texts from Attiri. Dotawo Monographs 1. Williams, Bruce, ed. in prep. Excavations at Serra East, George R Hughes and James E. Knudstad, Directors, Part 9, ed. B.  Williams. University of Chicago Oriental Institute Nubian Expedition 13.

Chapter 39

L a nguage Use a n d Liter acy i n L ate A n tiqu e a n d M edieva l N u bi a Adam Łajtar and Grzegorz Ochała

Introduction People that inhabited Nubia in Late Antique and medieval times made use of several different languages. This multilingualism, observed along both the diachronic and synchronic lines, was a consequence of factors of ethnic, political, and cultural nature. The principal element of the ethnic landscape of the Middle Nile valley in the period under consideration were Nubians, an ethnic group speaking a language of NiloSaharan family, closely related to Meroitic (Rilly  2010; Rilly, this volume). Nubians, whose original dwellings should be situated in northern Kordofan, migrated to the Nile valley probably in the first centuries of the Common Era. Their migration was one of the factors contributing to the fall of the kingdom of Meroe, on the ruins of which they formed kingdoms of their own. In the time of the Nubian kingdoms (5th–15th century) Nubian speakers inhabited the entire Middle Nile valley from the First Cataract in the north to Gezira in the south. They certainly did not form a tribal and linguistic unity, but we are poorly informed about that. The Nubian ethnos has survived in the Nile valley until the present, even if it has shrunk considerably to the area between the First Cataract and, more or less, the southern extremity of the Debba bend. Next to Nubians one has to list their brothers, the Meroites. They must have been an important element of the ethnic puzzle in the time immediately after the fall of the Meroitic kingdom, in the 4th/5th, possibly even the 6th century. Meroites are probably meant by the Nubian king Silko when he speaks about “all Ethiopians” (pantes Aithiopes)

788   Adam Łajtar and Grzegorz Ochała among his subjects in his famous triumphal inscription written on a wall of the temple at Kalabsha (Eide et al. 1998, no. 317; before ca. 450 ce). In later times Meroites underwent a complete Nubization, which made them undetectable for us. Another element of the picture are Blemmyes, commonly identified with the modern Beja. For millennia, these nomads had lived in the Eastern Desert; however, in Late Antiquity (4th–6th century), a group of them was interested in establishing a permanent settlement in Lower Nubia, in the area of Kalabsha-Tapha, which brought them into conflict with Nubians. In later times Blemmyes/Beja withdrew to their desert abodes and did not enter in close relations with the peoples of the Nile valley (see chapters by Dann, by Burstein, and by Manzo, this volume). It is difficult to evaluate the Egyptian share in the ethnic mosaic. Some Egyptians must have permanently inhabited the northern part of Lower Nubia, the so-called Dodekaschoinos, which belonged to Egypt as the province of the Roman Empire in the first three centuries of the Common Era. Smaller and bigger congeries of Egyptian Christians could also have existed in medieval times still farther south, especially in large settlements. Their source should be looked for in migrations triggered by religious or economic factors. In our opinion, however, one exaggerates when one ascribes them an essential cultural role. Starting with the 7th century, Arabic speakers, including ethnic Arabs, mark their presence in the ethnic landscape of Nubia. Apart from military campaigns, which by their very nature were isolated events not contributing importantly to the composition of the population, Arabic speakers came to Nubia essentially in two capacities: as men of interest and migrants looking for new living space. The former originated mainly from Egypt and settled in the Nile valley, the latter arrived from the Arab Peninsula and chose for their seats areas in the desert and savannah, in the borderland of the permanent Nubian settlement. Arabic elements gained in importance with time and eventually led, already in modern times, to the Arabization of large parts of historical Nubia. Politically, the main role was played by the Nubians throughout the entire period under consideration. As a result of a process that might have started already in the 3rd century and ended only in the mid-5th century, Nubians created three kingdoms of their own: Nobadia in the north, between the First and the Third Cataracts, Alwa in the south, below the Fifth Cataract, and Makuria between them, with its heartland in the Debba bend of the Nile. At a certain point of time—the exact date is debatable, but likely between the end of the 6th and the end of the 7th century—Makuria incorporated Nobadia. Starting with this moment only two kingdoms existed in the Middle Nile valley throughout the next several hundred years: Makuria—called Dotawo in internal Nubian sources—in the north, and Alwa in the south. In the second half of the 14th century, Makuria split into a series of small chiefdoms as a result of a coincidence of internal and external factors. The traditions of once great Makuria were continued in one of these chiefdoms situated to the north of the Second Cataract. This “small Makuria” might have existed until the conquest of Lower Nubia by the Ottomans in 1570s. Alwa fell slightly earlier under the invasion of the Muslim Funj coming from the southeast

Language Use and Literacy in Late Antique and Medieval Nubia   789 along the Blue Nile; its capital Soba, situated near the confluence of two Niles, was conquered by the Funj warriors in 1506. Culturally, a factor of the first importance was the neighborhood of newly created Nubian kingdoms, especially Nobadia, with the Eastern Roman state with its highly sophisticated civilization, very attractive for the outsiders. The Eastern Roman cultural influence was prominently present in the Middle Nile valley already at the time of three kingdoms. It aggravated considerably with the Christianization of the Nubia, which occurred in the second half of the 6th century, between ca. 543 and 580 ce. With the Christian faith, Nubians adopted also its cultural setting including patterns of linguistic and literary behaviors. Since the Christianization of Nubian kingdoms was carried out through and from Egypt, this cultural setting had a clear Egyptian character. Christian culture of Mediterranean origin remained living in the Middle Nile valley until the end of existence of Nubian kingdoms, even if with time African cultural elements gained importance.

Language Use in the Time of Three Kingdoms For the period of three kingdoms,1 information about language use is available only for Nobadia, and more exactly for its northern part between the First Cataract and Qasr Ibrim. It is provided by inscriptions on stone slabs or stelae, inscriptions on the walls of cult buildings, and texts written on perishable materials (papyrus and parchment). We can infer from them that written communication was carried out with the use of four languages: Greek, Coptic, Meroitic, and Demotic. The two latter languages, attested only in the initial phase of the period, were used by Meroites and Egyptians, the ethnic groups inhabiting Lower Nubia already for a long period and boasting literary traditions of their own. Their members employed them to transmit religious messages (visitors’ inscriptions in cult places, epitaphs) and political ones (Kharamadoye’s inscription in the Kalabsha Temple [Eide et al. 1998, no. 300]). Additionally, Meroites and Egyptians used also Greek on some occasions. Nubians and Blemmyes, who did not have their own literary tradition before, utilized Greek and Sahidic Coptic. Both these languages were used by them for a number of purposes of internal and external nature. Among internal purposes one can mention political (triumphal inscription of the Nobadian king Silko in the Temple of Kalabsha), administrative (inscriptions of Blemmyan kings in the Temple of Kalabsha [Eide et al. 1998, nos. 310 and 311], inscription commemorating the construction of defensives of Ikhmindi [DBMNT 458]), and religious ones (inscriptions of Blemmyan cult association in the temples of Tapha and Kalabsha [Eide et al. 1998, nos. 312 and 313]; visitors’ graffiti in cult places, especially on the island of Philae [Eide et al.  1998, no. 315]; inscription commemorating the foundation of the church in the pagan temple at Dendur [DBMNT 517]). The external purpose was the

790   Adam Łajtar and Grzegorz Ochała communication between the two ethnic groups (Greek letter of the Blemmyan king Phonen to the Nobadian king Aburni referring to an earlier letter of the latter to the ­former [Eide et al. 1998, no. 319]; Coptic letter of the Blemmyan king Yahhatek to the Nobadian king Tantani [Eide et al. 1998, no. 321]) and with the external world (Coptic letter of Viventius to Tantani [Eide et al.  1998, no. 320]; Coptic letter of Mouses to Tantani [Eide et al. 1998, no. 322]). It should be observed that the Coptic of these documents is grammatically quite correct whereas the Greek shows far-reaching deviations from its normative grammar. Obviously the Blemmyan and Nobadian users of Greek had a very imperfect command of this language or, looking at the case from another perspective, they used a highly modified and simplified variety of this language (Hägg 2002, 2010). As for the oral communication, Meroites and Egyptians apparently made use of, respectively, spoken Meroitic and a form of Egyptian, while Nubians and Blemmyes of their ethnic languages, namely Nubian and Bedawi. The existence of two last languages is revealed to us only through Nubian and Blemmyan names in Greek and Coptic texts (Satzinger 1992). Additionally, a Coptic dedicatory inscription of the church in Dendur contains one local word, samata, designating a royal official, which is found in later Nubian texts as a counterpart of the Greek domestikos and has been preserved until present in Nile-Nubian languages as a term for a supervisor of a waterwheel (saqia). There is an ostracon of Late Antique date with a text in Bedawi recorded in the Greek alphabet (Browne 2003), but it was found as far north as Saqqara.

Language Use and Literacy in the Time of Two Kingdoms Makuria Sources Although definitely not as numerous as the ones from Egypt, written sources originating from Christian Nubia represent a truly wide spectrum of forms and contents. At the moment of writing this chapter, the Database of Medieval Nubian Texts (DBMNT) contains roughly 4,400 records, but this should by no means be understood as an absolute number, as there are still a few thousand of unpublished texts that need to be entered into the database (e.g., several hundred wall inscriptions from Sonqi Tino, Dongola, and Ghazali; one thousand inscriptions on pottery from Ghazali; an unknown number of texts from Qasr Ibrim, Qasr el-Wizz, etc.), and new sources are discovered every year in archaeological excavations. In the following, we present a tentative picture of Nubian literacy on the basis of the material collected so far in the DBMNT; some figures in graphs and tables will inevitably change, some of them even drastically, when the unpublished sources are finally available.

Language Use and Literacy in Late Antique and Medieval Nubia   791 Table 39.1  Nubian written sources according to type and material Type of text

On durable materials

On non-durable materials

acclamations

41

—

alphabets

12

—

commemorative inscriptions

44

—

8

—

catalogues dates

10

—

dedicatory inscriptions

28

1

documents

29

188

1,069

—

epitaphs foundation inscriptions

14

—

invocations

37

—

154

1

86

63

legends to paintings literary texts liturgical texts

23

42

522

7

4

—

owner’s inscriptions

199

2

names official inscriptions private prayers

144

—

subliterary texts

79

20

school exercises

20

—

tags

71

—

visitor’s inscriptions total

873

—

3,467

324

Christian Nubian written sources were executed in both durable (stone, terracotta, bricks, plastered walls, ceramic, etc.) and non-durable (papyrus, parchment, paper, leather, wood, etc.) writing materials. Both groups involve different kinds of media, the most popular being stelae, walls, rocks, manuscripts, ostraca, pottery vessels; others, like metal objects, jewelry, clay stoppers, stamps, and textiles, are found only occasionally. The durable materials are by far more common than the non-durable ones in the existing corpus of medieval Nubian texts: for example, the DBMNT includes 1,073 stelae and 1,970 wall and rock inscriptions in comparison to 340 manuscripts. Material determines the character of a text inscribed on it, or vice versa. Documents of various types (official, legal, private and business letters) are the only major category of texts that was recorded almost exclusively on non-durable writing materials (Table 39.1); all the remaining types are found only on durable materials or on both durable and non-durable ones. This clear preference for texts executed in stone, rock,

792   Adam Łajtar and Grzegorz Ochała walls, etc., that is texts that are meant to survive for a long time, most ideally for eternity, has a serious implication for our understanding of Christian Nubian society and culture. Not all periods of Christian Nubian history are equally represented as far as written sources are concerned. Fig. 39.1 shows that the very beginning of this period is almost devoid of textual record.2 This can result from either the state of preservation of sources or, more probably, the fact that literary culture was only fledgling in the 6th–7th century. Even more interesting is a sudden outburst of written production in the 7th century: this is the time when a mass production of funerary stelae starts at the largest cemeteries (Ginari, Kalabsha, Sakinya, Qasr Ibrim, Dongola, Ghazali, El-Koro). Although the rate of text production seems more or less steady from the 8th to the 13th century, some nuances can be observed in particular types of texts; for example, epitaphs stop being produced after the 12th century and mass production of documents starts only in the 12th century (Ochała 2014: table 3). The further increase in number of sources in the 13th–14th century is mainly connected to one site, Banganarti, with its huge number of inscriptions (Łajtar 2020); late inscriptions occur at other sites, too (e.g., Sonqi Tino and Dongola), but they are marginally present in the DBMNT for the time being. This increase was the last impressive act of Nubian literary culture, as the number of sources from the 15th century is comparable to that from the beginning of the Christian period. Evidently, the political, cultural, and social conditions in Makuria, shrunken to its northern region, were not favorable enough for literary culture to survive the decline of the state. Six languages are attested in Makurian written sources of medieval times: Greek, Sahidic Coptic, Nubian, Arabic, Syriac, and Provençal. Of these, the two last have only a single attestation each. The remaining four have a rich documentation stretching over centuries as shown in Fig. 39.2. 900 800 787

700

659

600 500 400

404

300

458 390

388

374

200 190

100 0

44 6th c.

37 7th c.

8th c.

9th c.

10th c.

11th c.

12th c.

13th c.

14th c.

Figure 39.1  Chronological distribution of Christian Nubian written sources.

15th c.

Language Use and Literacy in Late Antique and Medieval Nubia   793 350 300 250 Greek Coptic Old Nubian Arabic

200 150 100 50 0 6th c.

7th c.

8th c.

9th c. 10th c. 11th c. 12th c. 13th c. 14th c. 15th c.

Figure 39.2  Chronological distribution of languages used in Christian Nubia.

Greek Introduced still in the pagan phase of the Nubian kingdoms and reinforced by Christianization, Greek remained in use almost until the end of the independent Nubian Christian statehood. The youngest surely dated Greek text connected with Makuria is a wall inscription in Deir Anba Hadra near Aswan left on April 7, 1322, by Joseph, bishop of an unknown Makurian see (DBMNT 557). Some Greek graffiti in the upper church at Banganarti could be still younger, for example an inscription commemorating Paper, “a small king of Dongola,” which, on account of royal titles, should be dated probably to the period after the fall of great Makuria, that is second half of the 14th/first half of the 15th century (DBMNT 685). Greek was the primary sacred language of medieval Christian Makurians. By sacred language we understand a language used in religious discourse, that is in and around sacral practices (Zakrzewska 2017). Greek was the principal language of the performative part of the liturgy including the Divine Liturgy, Liturgy of the Presanctified Gifts, baptismal liturgy, and the funerary liturgy (Brakmann 2006). The only testimony of the use of another language than Greek in the performative part of the liturgy is a parchment leaf from the Qasr el-Wizz monastery (to be published by Alexandros Tsakos) with prayers from the baptismal liturgy in Coptic. Greek is the main language attested for the creeds, a kind of text closely related to liturgy too. Among six Makurian testimonies of creeds five are in Greek (three for the Constantinopolitan Creed and two for the so-called Dongolese Creed, possibly a baptismal creed of the Makurian Church) and one in Coptic (for the Nicene Creed). The musical side of the liturgy is represented entirely by finds in Greek: ca. twenty texts on parchment leaves, walls of churches, and ostraca, composed in the best tradition of Late Antique/Early Byzantine hymnography (Deptuła 2020). A notable exception are inscriptions protruding from the mouths of

794   Adam Łajtar and Grzegorz Ochała ­ articipants of a ritual represented on a wall of the so-called South-West Annex to the p monastery on Kom H in Dongola which contain acclamations sung in honor of the Virgin (van Gerven Oei 2019); they obviously represent a late local tradition contrasting with an earlier Mediterranean one. Among 431 epitaphs in Greek known to date there are seventy-nine items with the prayer “God of spirits and all flesh, you who defeated death, etc.,” and nine epitaphs with the prayer “God of spirits and all flesh, all visible and invisible things, etc.” Both these prayers are attested as elements of the liturgy for the dead in the Byzantine Church and it is nearly certain that this was their original place in the Makurian Church too. Thus we would have indication that the funerary liturgy was held in Greek in the Makurian Church. Other Greek epitaphs also made use of liturgical phrases, even if not so straightforwardly. Generally speaking, Makurian epitaphs in Greek frequently display a sophisticated language, sometimes echoing antique models. Greek is attested as the language of religious literature. DBMNT lists fifty-two e­ xamples including twenty-eight biblical texts, eight hagiographies, and one homily; the genre of the remaining ones cannot be identified (cf. Ochała 2014: table 8, with slightly different figures). This literature was copied and used for a number of different purposes: for edifying reading, both in privacy and in public, for example during a liturgy, as apotropaia, as decorative elements, etc. Greek is also found in private prayers and acclamations, inscriptions left by visitors in sacral spaces, and inscriptions accompanying painted representations in churches. The latter category includes legends to the paintings and the so-called dedications of paintings: prayers for the donor composed of a series of requests arranged in a firm order and addressed to Jesus Christ. Among twenty-five items listed in DBMNT twenty-four are in Greek, a significant phenomenon even if there is one Nubian text of this kind in the upper church at Banganarti (DBMNT 3643). Finally, we know several magic spells showing elements of Greek language in addition to magic names and magic signs, which are linguistically neutral (Łajtar and van der Vliet 2011). Outside the sacral sphere, Greek is attested only in ostraca with receipts for the shipment of grain. Several items of this kind are known from the area of the Second Cataract (Ruffini 2010); one example of a similar nature was found in Dongola (unpublished). Greek occurs also in painted addresses on ceramic transport containers, that is in a context resembling that of the shipment ostraca (Danys and Łajtar 2016). Both the ostraca and the containers with tituli picti can be dated to the 6th–8th century on archaeological and paleographic grounds, which suggests that the use of Greek for commercial and administrative purposes in Makuria was restricted to the early Christian times; it might have followed Egyptian models of Late Antique date.

Coptic As mentioned above, the first attestations of Sahidic Coptic, the only dialect of the Egyptian language used in the Middle Nile valley, are dated already to the period of three kingdoms. The character of the earliest sources composed in this language (internal and external correspondence, foundation inscriptions) is basically retained in subsequent centuries, when we find both texts commemorating the erection of buildings

Language Use and Literacy in Late Antique and Medieval Nubia   795 (e.g., a foundation inscription of Bishop Paulos: Faras, 707 ce [DBMNT 32]); and letters (e.g., unpublished correspondence from the time of King Kyriakos: Qasr Ibrim, 8th century [DBMNT 2932–34]). To them other categories, especially religious texts, were added. Thus, the first and foremost category of Coptic sources from the Middle Nile valley are funerary stelae found throughout the Kingdom of Makuria, from Kalabsha in the north to El-Koro in the south. As a matter of fact, they are much more numerous than Greek epitaphs (519 Coptic to 382 Greek). While this difference is made up mainly by two cemeteries where the use of Coptic was overwhelming (Sakinya in the north and Ghazali in the south), the resulting percentage (58 percent Coptic vs 42 percent Greek) is representative for the majority of cemeteries where Greek and Coptic monuments occurred side by side (Ochała 2016: fig. 2). Recent studies on funerary monuments from the southernmost sites where Coptic is attested, Ghazali and El-Koro, challenge the common opinion that the use of this language was restricted to the north (former Kingdom of Nobadia) and its occurrence in the south (the heartlands of Makuria) is exceptional and must be connected with a presence of an Egyptian community (Ochała 2016). In our opinion, regional differences in the use of Coptic highlighted by previous scholarship (Junker 1925:146; Adams 1996:222; Welsby 2002:238) are of much lesser importance than the general character of the site where the language is present. Thus, monastic sites, be it Qasr el-Wizz in the north or Ghazali in the south, are more likely to produce Coptic texts, while Dongola, the seat of the state and church administration, is definitely more “Greekized.” Of course, regional differences are not to be totally discarded, as it was the north that maintained more lively contacts with Egypt, especially Upper Egypt, and it is there that vestiges of Nubian-Egyptian relations can be detected, for example in Debeira West (Shinnie 1974:44–45; Ochała 2011:114, 159–60). Another important category of Nubian written sources in Coptic are documents. The DBMNT lists forty-seven such examples, including twenty-four legal texts, nine letters, and two documents of economic character; the character of the remaining ones ­cannot be determined. All of them come from the north (Nobadia), from Qasr Ibrim, Debeira West, Abd el-Qadir, and Qasr el-Wizz. This category of texts allows for another observation concerning the use of Coptic in Christian Nubia, again in opposition to common opinions, namely that Coptic was not only the language of literature (thus, e.g., Plumley 1975) but also the language of business, law, and internal and external written communication (Hagen 2010; van der Vliet 2010) until its disappearance in the 11th century. The third major category of Coptic Nubian written sources are literary texts. Sixtythree examples are registered in the DBMNT, all of them of religious nature: twenty-three fragments of Bible, nineteen hagiographies, five homilies, three apocrypha, and two patristic texts; the character of the remaining ones cannot be established due to their state of preservation or publication. Thus, all the major genres of religious literature are represented in Coptic, which indeed supports the statement of Coptic as literary ­language. This is especially visible when we compare the figures for Coptic literary texts with those for the Greek ones (see above). An interesting piece of evidence in this

796   Adam Łajtar and Grzegorz Ochała c­ ontext is a fragment of a typikon with readings for several days in the month of Phaophi composed in Greek (rubrics) and Coptic (incipits and explicits of readings from the Psalms, Pauline Epistles, and Gospels) discovered in Qasr Ibrim (DBMNT 2769). Its existence implies that: (1) there existed complete Bible manuscripts in Coptic, from which entire readings were recited during the mass (note that we know no example of the Book of Psalms in Coptic from Christian Nubia) and (2) the persuasive part of the liturgy could have been performed in Coptic (note that we have no attestation of a lectionary in Greek from Nubia, apart from Greek/Old Nubian psalters [see below]). Apart from the three categories of texts discussed above, Coptic occasionally occurs in other types of sources, like legends to paintings, visitor’s inscriptions, and private prayers. However, these groups of sources are too small or the number of Coptic texts within them is too low to allow any more detailed analysis. Sahidic Coptic went out of use as the living language of written communication in Christian Nubia at more or less the same time as in Egypt, that is in the course of the 11th century (Fig.  39.2). Three examples from the 12th century, the letter of King Moses George to Patriarch Mark III of Alexandria found in Qasr Ibrim (DBMNT 610) and two texts inscribed on the walls of the crypt of Bishop Georgios in Dongola (DBMNT 2756 and 2759), show that the knowledge of this language, very good at that, was cultivated at least in the milieus of the capital of Makuria.

Nubian Nubian was the language of oral communication among the Nubians and their Nubianized subjects. At some point in time the language obtained a written form. It was based on the Coptic alphabet with addition of three signs for sounds not present in Coptic. The oldest indubitable attestation of the existence of written Nubian are Nubian glosses in the epitaph of the priest Istephanou from Dongola dated 797 ce (DBMNT 74). A pottery plate from Dongola with the Nubian word for ‘God’ inscribed on it (DBMNT 1316) is probably earlier (6th–7th century), but the the text may have been added at a later date. Still more uncertain is the date of an ostracon from Qasr Ibrim with a text in Nubian making reference to the persons from the time of the Christianization of Nobadia in the 6th century (DBMNT 2258). Even if it was written later than the events it refers to, we are convinced that the creation of the Nubian alphabet took place exactly at the time of the Christianization of Nubian Kingdoms as one of the means of propagation of the new faith among them, and that the oldest pieces of literacy in Nubian, dating from the time between the second half of the 6th and the second half of the 8th century, simply were not preserved. For such a view speaks the comparison with other ethnic groups Christianized in the frame of the Eastern Roman religious policy (e.g., Slavs), who obtained their own alphabets in the Christianization “package.” Another argument for the early dating of the Nubian alphabet is that the additional signs for sounds typical of North-East Sudanic were designed on the basis of appropriate signs in the Meroitic cursive script, which presupposes its knowledge at least to a certain extent. On the other side of the chronological axis, Nubian script was still used in the second half of the 15th century as proven by legal documents on parchment and inscriptions on the walls of

Language Use and Literacy in Late Antique and Medieval Nubia   797 sacral buildings dating from the time of King Ioel, who ruled Makuria reduced to the area between Qasr Ibrim and the Second Cataract (Łajtar and Ruffini 2011). Testimonies of written Nubian are rare before the end of the 1st millennium ce and consist mainly of Nubian glosses in Greek texts (see above). Starting with the 11th century their number increases rapidly to reach the peak in the 13th century (see Fig. 39.2 above). At present several hundred texts in Nubian are known (ca. 400 taken into account by us and numerous inedita), originating from the entire territory of the Kingdom of Makuria. They can be divided into three major categories: literary texts, documents and letters, and informal inscriptions. Literary texts are mostly of religious character. The large majority of them are translations from Greek, more rarely from Coptic. Among them one finds: biblical books (more often from the New Testament than from the Old Testament), lectionaries, homilies, hagiographies, and other holy texts. Biblical and homiletic texts apparently had liturgical destination: they were read during the liturgy of the word, which, in contrast to the performative part of the liturgy held in Greek, was held in the epichoric language. A similar situation might have existed with hagiographic texts: their reciting was an important element of commemorative ceremonies held on the days of saints’ feasts. The only original literary creations of religious nature in Nubian are prayers left by individuals in cult places (e.g., DBMNT 1397 and 1403). Significantly, there are no epitaphs in Nubian except for Nubian code-switching in Greek epitaphs and a mixed, GrecoNubian, epitaph of King Georgios set up in Wadi en-Natrun in Lower Egypt in 1157 ce (DBMNT 558; see below). Among Qasr Ibrim finds, there are fragments of horoscopes (DBMNT 593) and a historical narrative (?) (DBMNT 1402). The category of documents clearly splits into two groups: legal and administrative. The former group includes contracts of sale (mainly of land but also slaves), cessions of land, releases of slaves, and depositions. In the latter, one finds royal decrees, orders from high officials, lists of holdings, and accounts. Letters are both official—exchanged between persons of rank and dealing with state matters—and private. Legal documents were drafted according to a firm scheme comprising invocation of God, protocol listing the most important officials of central and local administration, body of the deed, and list of witnesses. The same structure is found in earlier Coptic documents. Obviously Nubian replaced Coptic as the legal language of Makuria, and Nubian notarial tradition followed an earlier Coptic tradition. Informal inscriptions are mostly visitors’ mementos left by believers in cult places. From the formal and semantic point of view they follow the tradition of similar inscriptions in Greek and Coptic. The Nubian language of medieval Makurian texts is frequently called Old Nubian, sometimes also Medieval Nubian, to distinguish it from modern Nubian languages spoken in the Nile valley: Nobiin, Dongolawi (Andaandi), and Kenuzi. The relation of Old Nubian to these modern languages is described in various ways in the scholarship. According to one hypothesis (Bechhaus-Gerst 2011), Old Nubian is just an earlier form of the present-day Nobiin. This, however, seems to be an oversimplification. More properly it should probably be designated as a literary language, a written variety, which

798   Adam Łajtar and Grzegorz Ochała coexisted with at least two spoken varieties corresponding with Old Nobiin and Old Dongolawi, whereby Old Nubian would be closer to the former. Elements of these spoken varieties are detectable in informal inscriptions, for instance those from Banganarti, and in the onomastics.

Other Languages From among other languages that occur in written sources originating from Christian Nubia, Arabic is certainly the most prominent one. DBMNT lists forty-eight sources, including a document of unknown contents found in Egyptian Edfu and mentioning King Siti reigning in Makuria in the first half of 14th century (DBMNT 686), but excluding a large collection of Arabic funerary stelae discovered in Khor Nubt in the Eastern Desert (Oman et al.  1998). The number will be significantly increased when a large group of Arabic documents found at Qasr Ibrim has been made available (for their preliminary presentation, see Adams 1996:223, with tables 14, 16, and 17; Adams 2010:246–55, with table 10; and Khan 2013). Also, it is possible that many Arabic inscriptions dated to the period in question escaped the attention of archaeologists due to the fact that they can be easily mistaken for modern texts. The material at our disposal consists mainly of epitaphs; thirty specimens have been found and published so far, all originating from northern Nubian (Nobadian) sites, especially from Tapha (nine), Arminna (five), Meinarti (five), and Gebel Adda (four). The bulk of the material can be dated between the ninth (832 ce is the earliest secure date) and the 12th centuries (for a basic presentation of this material, see Ochała 2011:165–76). DBMNT includes ten manuscript finds, of which only two have been properly published, a release of a slave (tadbir) of unknown provenance (DBMNT 494) and a deed of land lease from Qasr Ibrim (DBMNT 2998); the remaining eight are only mentioned in the literature. As far as we know, Qasr Ibrim has yielded a large and important collection of Arabic texts on paper. Their exact number is unknown to us (some figures are given in Adams 1996: table 17, 2010: table 10; Khan 2013:146). Among them are literary works (see Adams  2010:254, for translation of a poem), examples of religious literature (Adams  1996:241, with table 19), and magical texts (Adams  1996:241, with table 19). There are also texts that combine the use of Arabic and Old Nubian (three examples are recorded in the DBMNT 1197, 1218, and 2829; Adams 1996:222, mentions eighty-seven specimens from Qasr Ibrim). However, without a proper study, it is impossible to tell whether these are actual mixed-language texts or examples of a re-use of writing materials. Apart from these two categories, Arabic is also found in ostraca (four unpublished examples, one of them probably a letter) and wall inscriptions (three examples of names of Adam and Eve); however, all of them come from one site—Debeira West (see also above for Debeira as a site of Nubian-Egyptian cohabitation). There is also a single example of an official text in Arabic, the foundation stela from Dongola commemorating the conversion of the so-called Throne Hall to a mosque on May 29, 1317 (DBMNT 611). The material at our disposal does not allow for an in-depth study of Arabic literacy in the Middle Nile valley. It can be said, however, that while at least some of those texts

Language Use and Literacy in Late Antique and Medieval Nubia   799 (epitaphs and part of documents) were produced locally, they contain no local Nubian elements: epitaphs are modeled on Islamic patterns well known, for example, from Egypt (cf. Ochała 2011:168–69) and legal documents are composed according to Islamic law and employ well-established formularies, although involving both Muslims and Christian Nubians (Khan 2013:147). Single attestations of two other languages have been recorded from Christian Nubia: an ostracon with the Syriac alphabet found at Qasr Ibrim (van Ginkel and van der Vliet 2015) shows that there were people in Makuria who were interested in learning this language, important for the entirety of Eastern Christianity; and the Provençal graffito in the upper church at Banganarti (Łajtar and Płóciennik 2011) testifies to the fact that Makuria was visited by members of the Western Latin culture.

Language Contact The use in Christian Makuria of three languages in largely overlapping contexts caused the languages to interact. The interaction is mirrored in mixed-language texts, codeswitching, borrowing of vocabulary, and adoption of other language features. In the published material there is no bilingual text in the proper sense of the word, that is a text in which a message in one language is repeated in the other, although statements by excavators of Qasr Ibrim suggest that such texts were discovered there (Adams 1996:223). Nevertheless, we have other types of mixed-language texts at our disposal. Poetic works of the Old Testament (Psalms and Odes), in parchment codices, wooden tablets, and inscriptions on the walls of sacral buildings, are frequently recorded with alternate verses in a different language according to the pattern 1-Greek, 2-Nubian, 3-Greek, 4-Nubian, etc. This particular linguistic phenomenon may reflect the singing performance of those texts, for example during a liturgical celebration, by two choirs, of which one sang Greek and the other Nubian. There are forty-nine mixed-language epitaphs known to us, either Greco-Coptic or Greco-Nubian. As an example of the former one can cite the epitaph of Joseph, bishop of Aswan (d. 668 or 670 ce in Dongola; DBMNT 612), in which the introductory formula and the final dating lemma are in Greek and the prayer for the deceased including the biographic information about him is in Coptic. The latter are best represented by the epitaph of the Makurian king George, who died 1157 ce in Wadi en-Natrun in Lower Egypt, which essentially was edited in Nubian but has an additional prayer in Greek. Interestingly, we do not possess Coptic-Nubian epitaphs. Letters provide another interesting example of mixed-language texts. The great majority of letters known from Makuria, both official and private, are in Nubian, but their addresses are in Greek, recognizable thanks to Greek inflectional endings of nouns, Greek names of offices, and the Greek article τῷ (dative) used to introduce the addressee. Similarly, the Coptic letter of King Moses George to Mark, Patriarch of Alexandria (see above), has two Greek subscripts with an elaborated titulature of both the sender and the addressee. The use of Greek in addresses may be a remnant from the time, possibly as distant as the period of three kingdoms, when Greek was the language of correspondence. Code-switching, that is alternating between two (or more) languages in the context of a single statement, is attested for the pairs Greek-Coptic (and inversely) and Greek-Nubian

800   Adam Łajtar and Grzegorz Ochała (and inversely). Code-switching between Coptic and Nubian has no attestations in the published textual material; if it existed it must have been rare. Code-switching is best observable in epitaphs and inscriptions left by visitors in cult places. As for the epitaphs, the code may be switched while passing from the prayer for the deceased’s soul, that is something formulaic, to the information about the deceased including his/her filiation, the length of his/her life, and the date of his/her death, that is something individual. If the former is in Greek, the latter may be in Coptic (e.g., in DBMNT 491) or in Nubian (e.g., DBMNT 5). In visitors’ inscriptions, which of all products of Makurian ­literacy are most closely related to the everyday language, code-switching is very common. As a rule, it is intrasentential and the sentence mostly affected by it is “I, NN, wrote this.” In it, the subject in one language (the Greek ἐγώ, the Nubian ⲁⲓ̈, or the Coptic ⲁⲛⲟⲕ) can be connected with the predicate in another (the Greek ἔγραψα or the Nubian ⲡⲁⲓⲥⲉⲗⲟ). There are also examples of intra-word switching, for example when nouns obtain Coptic articles in a Greek linguistic context. Lexical borrowings are rather uncommon in the written texts. In Greek and Coptic sources, they actually are restricted to a few Nubian names of offices;3 in Nubian texts, they are more numerous and more diverse in both generic and semantic respects. The Old Nubian Dictionary (Browne 1996) has 1,038 entries (lexemes). Of them 110 (10.5 percent) are loanwords: seventy-seven Greek, twenty-four Egyptian, and nine Arabic; the rest probably belongs to the original, North-East Sudanic stock. The percentage is rather small when compared with, for example, Coptic or modern English, the vocabularies of which consist of borrowings in several dozen percent. The relative lexical purity of medieval Nubian shows that the language was shaped in an isolated environment and only at a later stage of its development started to incorporate words of foreign origin into its vocabulary. In this context it is important to observe that the Greek loanwords in Nubian are connected mostly, if not exclusively, with the Christian faith, Christian cult, and the cultural activity. Except for lexical borrowings, Nubian of medieval texts is relatively free of external influences, either Greek or Coptic. The same holds true for Nubian Coptic. A different situation is observed with relation to Greek, which, under the influence of the epichoric language, underwent far-reaching changes during the millennium of its use in Makuria. Results of these changes are best visible in late visitors’ inscriptions such as those from the upper church at Banganarti (Łajtar 2010; 2020) or Joseph’s dipinto from Deir Anba Hadra near Aswan. The changes affected equally phonetics, morphology, and syntax, and are also detectable in the graphic form of the language. As for phonetic changes, one can cite a substitution of /r/ for /d/ (and inversely), a phenomenon impossible within Indo-European languages but common in North-East Sudanic ones. Another example is a frequent addition of the prothetic /i/ in front of the consonant clusters /sk/, /st/, /sth/, /sfr/, sometimes also /gr/, in anlaut, whereby this /i/ is recorded as a short stroke or a dot over the initial consonant (e.g., ⲥ̇ⲧⲁⲩⲣⲟⲥ). As for morphology, one notes a complete collapse of the Greek declension system. The phenomenon is best seen in the treatment of the first-person singular pronoun: all its forms, both nominative and oblique cases,

Language Use and Literacy in Late Antique and Medieval Nubia   801 were used, irrespective of the actual grammatical context, as allomorphs of the same word meaning “I.” Syntactical changes went towards establishing a fixed word order, otherwise rather free in Greek, which eventually led to Nubian Greek’s becoming a positional language. A good illustration of that is found in genitival expressions, in which the word order is always rectum-regens, with rectum not marked morphologically as genitive. Another manifestation of the same general phenomenon is that descriptive adjectives tend to follow nouns as in Iesous megas, “the great (church of) Jesus,” frequently encountered as the name of a church. Influence of Nubian scribal practices on Greek are visible in using horizontal dash or a dot to record /i/, either between two consonants (ⲇⲩⲛⲁⲙⲛ ̄) or as a prothesis (see above).

Alwa The linguistic situation in Alwa is poorly known due to the scarcity of sources at our disposal. There are several hundred inscriptions on pottery discovered in Soba, the capital of Alwa, but they contain single words or proper names at the very best, which makes them almost useless in linguistic analysis. Also a bronze lamp-basket with an inscription in Coptic found in Soba and now in Berlin is not relevant here as it is undoubtedly an import from Egypt (DBMNT 1457). Thus, the modest material at our disposal includes: Greek epitaph of King David from Soba (DBMNT 31); Greek epitaph from a place near Wad Medani (DBMNT 2681); an opistographic marble slab with inscriptions of unknown character in Nubian from Soba (DBMNT 1456); two fragments of stone inscriptions in Nubian (DBMNT 1454 and 1455); inscription of unknown character naming King Georgios (DBMNT 733); visitors’ graffiti in Greek, Coptic, and Nubian from Soba (DBMNT 1887–89), Musawwarat es-Sufra (DBMNT 1458–72), and the pyramids of Meroe (DBMNT 991 and 2690); ostraca from Soba with texts in Greek and Nubian (DBMNT 1893–97 + an unpublished item found recently by a Sudanese team during rescue excavations); a graffito on a bowl with a quotation from Psalm 50.1 in Greek, also from Soba (DBMNT 1938). This material, albeit modest, seems to suggest that the patterns of language use in Alwa did not differ substantially from that in Makuria. All three languages of written communication in Makuria—Greek, Coptic, and Nubian—were also used in Alwa; the lack of data makes any periodization of their use impossible. All known Alwan texts seem to belong to the sacral sphere. They show Greek as the language of epitaphs, biblical literature, acts of worship such as visitors’ graffiti, and pious acclamations; Coptic is found in a visitor’s graffito, and Nubian in visitors’ graffiti and a magic spell. Nubian inscriptions written on two faces of a marble slab from Soba might be epitaphs as suggested by the phrase “[in the bosom of Abraham] and Isaac and Jacob” occurring in one of them. If so, the use of written Nubian in Alwa would have been wider than in Makuria, where the Nubian epitaphs are lacking. Interestingly, the inscriptions on the marble slab from Soba but also Nubian visitors’ graffiti from Musawwarat es-Sufra show several signs that do not occur in Nubian texts from the north. It is possible that Alwa had its

802   Adam Łajtar and Grzegorz Ochała own Nubian alphabet, slightly different than the one used in Makuria, as observed by Ernst Zyhlarz (1928:190). He also hypothesized that the language of the Alwan Nubian texts was closer to Kordofanian Nubian languages than to Nile-Nubian languages. This hypothesis may find confirmation in an ostracon with Copto-Nubian glossary, said to originate from Qena in Upper Egypt (DBMNT 1148). Nubian terms occurring in the glossary, especially the word for “water” (etto), display traits typical of Kordofanian Nubian, not found in Nile-Nubian languages.

Conclusion: The Linguistic Situation in Medieval Nubia from a Sociolinguistic Perspective The linguistic situation in medieval Nubia, in both Makuria and Alwa, can be analyzed in terms of what the sociolinguistics calls “extended diglossia.” Its main characteristic is the use of two languages, not connected with one another genetically, of which one, learned as a mother tongue in infancy, has a lower status (L), and the other, acquired in the course of formal education, a higher one (H) (Myers-Scotton  2006:76–89; Coulmas 2013:53–57). As far as Nubia is concerned, the L-language was spoken Nubian, which functioned in at least two dialectal variants. The H-languages were Greek, Sahidic Coptic, and written Nubian (Old Nubian). All three were primarily sacred languages, but with slightly different spheres of use: Greek was the language of the performative part of the liturgy, while Coptic and Nubian of its persuasive part (readings, sermons). All three languages were used for other religious purposes, such as holy texts, edifying literature, private prayers, and visitors’ mementos, although there are contexts in which Nubian is not attested (epitaphs, legends to wall paintings, dedicatory inscriptions). Coptic and Nubian were also languages of business and law, whereby the former played this role until ca. mid-11th century and the latter from this date onwards. Greek was used in the secular context in a very restricted way and only at the earliest period. The status of Arabic is not entirely clear. Initially, it probably was a minority language; however, in the final phase of the period under consideration, it could have obtained the status of yet another H-language.

Acknowledgments The authors wish to thank Claude Rilly and Ewa Zakrzewska for information and discussion.

Abbreviation DBMNT  Database of Medieval Nubian Texts

Language Use and Literacy in Late Antique and Medieval Nubia   803

Notes 1. We deliberately refrain from using the term “Post-Meroitic,” deeply rooted in scholarship, especially in archaeology, as it is highly imprecise (see also Mahmoud el-Tayeb, this volume). 2. The figures in the graph should be understood as approximate, because only 665 of 4,380 records in the DBMNT can be dated within a single century; for the remaining ones only a broad dating, encompassing two or more centuries can be established. For all those attestations the number of texts was divided by the number of centuries to which they are dated (e.g., thirty-six texts dated to the 6th–7th century produce eighteen texts for the 7th century and eighteen for the 8th). Some 650 texts are dated to the whole Christian period and therefore are not counted. 3. We leave aside Greek borrowings in Coptic as they constitute a general phenomenon, not a Nubian particularity.

References Cited Adams, W.Y. 1996 Qasr Ibrîm: The Late Mediaeval Period. Egypt Exploration Society Excavation Memoir 59. ——— 2010 Qasr Ibrîm: The Earlier Medieval Period. Egypt Exploration Society Excavation Memoir 89. Bechhaus-Gerst, M. 2011 The (Hi)story of Nobiin—1000 Years of Language Change. Peter Lang. Brakmann, H. 2006 Defunctus adhuc loquitur. Gottesdienst und Gebetsliteratur der untergegangenen Kirche in Nubien. Archiv für Liturgiewissenschaft 48:283–333. Browne, G.M. 1996 Old Nubian Dictionary. Corpus Scriptorum Christianorum Orientalium 556, Subsidia 90. Peeters. ——— 2003 Textus blemmyicus aetatis christianae. Stipes. Coulmas, F. 2013 Writing and Society: An Introduction. Cambridge University Press. Danys, K. and A. Łajtar 2016 Egyptian Amphorae LR 5/6 with Greek Dipinti found in Dongola. In Aegyptus et Nubia Christiana: The Włodzimierz Godlewski Jubilee Volume, ed. A. Łajtar, A. Obłuski, and I. Zych, pp. 347–57. Polish Centre of Mediterranean Archaeology, University of Warsaw. Deptuła, A. 2020 Liturgical Poetry in Christian Nubia. The Evidence of Wall Inscriptions in the Lower Church at Banganarti. Journal of Juristic Papyrology Supplement 38. Peeters and Raphael Taubenschlag Foundation. Eide, T., T. Hägg, R.H. Pierce, L. Török eds. 1998 Fontes Historiae Nubiorum: Textual Sources for the History of the Middle Nile Region between the Eighth Century bc and the Sixth Century ad, v. 3: From the First to the Sixth Century ad. IKRR/Department of Greek, Latin, and Egyptology, University of Bergen. Hagen, J.L. 2010 “A City That Is Set on a Hill Cannot Be Hid”: Progress Report on the Coptic Manuscripts from Qasr Ibrim. In Between the Cataracts: Proceedings of the 11th Conference for Nubian Studies, ed. W.  Godlewski and A.  Łajtar, Part 2, Fasc. 2, pp. 719–26. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean Supplement Series 2.2/2. Warsaw University. Hägg, T. 2002 Silko’s Language: A Retrospect. In A Tribute to Excellence: Studies Offered in Honor of Ernő Gaál, Ulrich Luft, László Török, ed. T. A. Bács, pp. 289–99. Studia Aegyptiaca 17. La Chaire d’égyptologie (Budapest).

804   Adam Łajtar and Grzegorz Ochała ——— 2010 Uses of Greek in the Nubian Kingdoms. In Between the Cataracts: Proceedings of the 11th Conference for Nubian Studies, ed. W. Godlewski and A. Łajtar, Part 2, Fasc. 2, pp. 755–58. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean Supplement Series 2.2/2. Warsaw University. Junker, H. 1925 Die christlichen Grabsteine Nubiens. Zeitschrift für Ägyptische Sprache 60:111–48. Khan, G. 2013 The Medieval Arabic Documents from Qasr Ibrim. In Qasr Ibrim, between Egypt and Africa: Studies in Cultural Exchange, ed. J.L. Hagen and J. van der Vliet, pp. 145–56. Egyptologische Uitgaven 26. Peeters. Łajtar, A. 2010 The Greek of the Late Christian Inscriptions from Nubia (Chiefly on the Basis of the Material from Banganarti). In Between the Cataracts: Proceedings of the 11th Conference for Nubian Studies, ed. W.  Godlewski and A.  Łajtar, Part 2, Fasc. 2, pp. 759–63. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean Supplement Series 2.2/2. Warsaw University. ——— 2020 A Late Christian Pilgrimage Centre in Nubia: The Evidence of Wall Inscriptions in the Upper Church at Banganarti. The Journal of Juristic Papyrology Supplement 39. Peeters and Raphael Taubenschlag Foundation. Łajtar, A. and T. Płóciennik 2011 A Man from Provence on the Middle Nile: A Graffito in the Upper Church at Banganarti. In Nubian Voices: Studies in Christian Nubian Culture, ed. A.  Łajtar and J.  van der Vliet, pp. 95–120. Journal of Juristic Papyrology Supplement 15. Raphael Taubenschlag Foundation. Łajtar, A. and G.R. Ruffini 2011 Qasr Ibrim’s Last Land Sale, ad 1463 (EA 90225). In Nubian Voices: Studies in Christian Nubian Culture, ed. A. Łajtar and J. van der Vliet, pp. 121–32. Journal of Juristic Papyrology Supplement 15. Raphael Taubenschlag Foundation. Łajtar, A. and J. van der Vliet 2011 A Late Christian Ostracon from Dongola. In Nubian Voices: Studies in Christian Nubian Culture, ed. A. Łajtar and J. van der Vliet, pp. 133–40. Journal of Juristic Papyrology Supplement 15. Raphael Taubenschlag Foundation. Myers-Scotton, C. 2006 Multiple Voices: An Introduction to Bilingualism. Blackwell. Ochała, G. 2011 Chronological Systems of Christian Nubia. Journal of Juristic Papyrology Supplement 16. Raphael Taubenschlag Foundation. ——— 2014 Multilingualism in Christian Nubia: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches. Dotawo 1:1–50. ——— 2016 Multilingualism in Christian Nubia: A Case Study of the Monastery of Ghazali (Wadi Abu Dom, Sudan). In Proceedings of the 27th International Congress of Papyrolgy, ed. T. Derda, A. Łajtar, and J. Urbanik, pp. 1265–83. Journal of Juristic Papyrology Supplement 28. Raphael Taubenschlag Foundation. Oman, G., V. Grassi, and A. Trombetta 1998 The Book of Khor Nubt: Epigraphic Evidence of an Islamic-Arabic Settlement in Nubia (Sudan) in the III–IV Centuries a.h./X–XI ad. Istituto Universitario Orientale. Plumley, J.M. 1975 The Christian Period at Qasr Ibrim: Some Notes on the MSS Finds. In Nubia. Récentes recherches. Actes du colloque nubiologique international, ed. K. Michałowski, pp. 101–107. National Museum (Warsaw). Rilly, C. 2010 Le meroïtique et sa famille linguistique. Afrique et langage 14. Peeters. Ruffini, G. 2010 Nubian Ostraka from the West Bank Survey. Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik 175:231–38. Satzinger, H. 1992 Personennamen von Blemmyern in koptischen und griechischen Texten: orthographische und phonetische Analyse. In Komparative Afrikanistik. Sprach-, geschichtsund literaturwissenschaftliche Aufsätze zu Ehren von Hans G. Mukarovsky, ed. E. Ebermann,

Language Use and Literacy in Late Antique and Medieval Nubia   805 E.R.  Sommerauer, and K.É. Thomanek, pp. 313–24. Veröffentlichungen der Instituts für Afrikanistik und Archäologie 61, Beiträge zur Afrikanistik 44. Afro-Pub. Shinnie, P. 1974 Multilingualism in Medieval Nubia. In Studies in Ancient Languages of the Sudan, ed. Abdelgadir Mahmoud Abdalla, pp. 41–47. Sudan Studies Library 3. University of Khartoum. van der Vliet, J. 2010 Coptic as a Nubian Literary Language: Four Theses for Discussion. In Between the Cataracts: Proceedings of the 11th Conference for Nubian Studies, ed. W.  Godlewski and A.  Łajtar, Part 2, Fasc. 2, pp. 765–71. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean Supplement Series 2.2/2. Warsaw University. van Gerven Oei V.W.J. 2019 A Dance for a Princess: The Legends on a Painting in Room 5 of the Southwest Annex of the Monastery on Kom H in Dongola. Journal of Juristic Papyrology 47:117– 35 van Ginkel, J. and J. van der Vliet 2015 A Syriac Alphabet from Qasr Ibrim. In Nubian Voices, v. 2: New Texts and Studies on Christian Nubian Culture, ed. A. Łajtar, G. Ochała, and J. van der Vliet, pp. 45–51. Journal of Juristic Papyrology Supplement 27. Raphael Taubenschlag Foundation. Welsby, D.A. 2002 The Medieval Kingdoms of Nubia: Pagans, Christians and Muslims along the Middle Nile. British Museum. Zakrzewska, E.D. 2017 The Bohairic Acts of the Martyrs as a Genre of Religious Discourse. In Christianity and Monasticism in Northern Egypt: Beni Suef, Giza, Cairo, and the Nile Delta, ed. G. Gabra and H.N. Takla, pp. 223–59. American University in Cairo Press. Zyhlarz, E. 1928 Grundzüge der nubischen Grammatik im christlichen Frühmittelalter (Altnubisch): Grammatik, Texte, Kommentar und Glossar. Abhandlungen für die Kunde des Morgenlandes 18(1). Deutsche Morgenländische Gesellschaft.

Chapter 40

The Topogr a ph y of Pow er i n M edieva l N u bi a Bogdan Żurawski

In Christian Nubia, centers of power were the seats of both political and religious authority. As political centers, these sites, as a rule heavily fortified, were the location of the residence of the king and administrative apparatus. The mighty walls and lofty palaces symbolized the stability of the kingdom and the earthly power of its sacrosanct ruler. As religious centers, they grew around great churches and were the seats of religious authorities. Last but not least, the power centers, being the axial sites in the religious sphere, were also the focus of pilgrimages. The institution of pilgrimage to the main shrines of the land was known in Nubia before establishing of the Christian Kingdoms centered at Pachoras (Faras), Tungul (Old Dongola), and Soba. The Kushite kings and their subjects journeyed to the gods to become endorsed for their sacred office, to consult the oracle, to be affirmed in the faith or helped in a life crisis situation. Although the lack of relevant written sources hampers the reconstruction of the institution of peregrinatio in Christian Nubia it should not be doubted that the emergence and growth of the pilgrimage centers was simultaneous with the establishment of political power and were complementary to the state formation process.

Tungul, the Capital During the formative years of the Christian kingdoms in the Middle Nile, the former Post-Meroitic polities coalesced into bigger units which finally became Christianized and centralized at Tungul, the most important of a dozen or so centers of power in Christian Nubia. The introduction of the Christianity as the official state cult strengthened the position of the sacrosanct basileus (king) residing in the capital (Fig. 40.1). The

808   Bogdan Żurawski

Figure 40.1 Scene of the royal investiture by the Holy Trinity. Mural painting from the Monastery on Kom H in Old Dongola. Photograph: Bogdan Żurawski.

formidable fortifications of Tungul emphasized the importance of the Makurian capital as the focal point of the realm. The town’s position on the Nile terminus of the long track to Darfur and beyond along the Wadi el-Melik boosted Tungul economy (Adams 2013:39). The proximity to the fertile Letti basin was a huge stimulus for the vigorous development of the Makurian capital. Production of the surplus food enabled organization of the state-sponsored pilgrimage center that attracted the crowds and boosted the site’s prominence in the religious sphere. The heavily fortified city of Tungul, being the seat of a bishopric, a priori became the religious center of the realm (Godlewski 2014a:162). Throughout its history, it witnessed the growth, evolution, and decline of thirteen separate churches, some of which underwent multiple reconstructions changing its layout (e.g., the four phases of the Cathedral Church; Godlewski 2013:49–57). Tungul’s axiality in the religious sphere required the huge churches and also potent relics which would enhance the prestige of the place, strengthen the status of the king, and attract pilgrims. Pilgrimage to the capital was a natural result of the position occupied by the capital in the sacral topography of the kingdom. Archaeology fully confirms that Tungul became an important pilgrimage center already at the beginning of its life as a capital of the Christian kingdom of Makuria. The

The Topography of Power in Medieval Nubia   809 primary goal of pilgrims were apparently two crypts built beneath the apse of the socalled BX Church. Inside, two men, claimed by Godlewski to be the Apostles of Makuria, were entombed (Godlewski 2013:40). Although the role of those individuals in establishing or strengthening the new faith or new monarchy in Tungul is not sufficiently elucidated, their eternal abode became the goal of pilgrimages for ages. A sequence of churches raised above these crypts was highlighted by the monumental Cruciform Church commissioned in the 9th century (Godlewski  2013:40). Styled upon Middle Eastern martyria, the Cruciform Church is the biggest church ever raised in Nubia. It symbolized the city’s axiality in the religious microcosm. Notably, it was located in the suburbs near the town’s gate, where the crowds of pilgrims could easily be accommodated and controlled. Needless to say, the presence of potent relics was essential for a church to become a pilgrimage center and a pivotal sanctuary for the realm. The role of relics in the process of constructing a religious center of power is illustrated by the Palatine Chapel in the Aachen Cathedral (Schiffers  1951:7–20). Understandably, the set of relics that Charlemagne managed to collect in Aachen was far greater than the modest collection the Nubian rulers could gather. It should be remembered, however, that the term “relics” encompasses also the bodies of the local holy men. Therefore, the inhumation of the two important personages in the crypts beneath the apse of the BX Church could have been a sufficient source of the divine power to attract the pilgrims. The access to the immediate proximity of the burials existed for a very long period and the place was visited and venerated throughout most of the history of Tungul as a capital of the Christian kingdom of Makuria. Apart from the tombs of the local holy men the Cruciform Church probably was also a home for important state relics (Godlewski 2013:41). In the religious landscape of Tungul/Dongola, there were other places that were more or less closely related to the institution of peregrinatio (cf. Żurawski 1999:427–33). The excavations on Kom H, where an important monastery was established soon after Tungul became the capital, brought to light more spaces that by virtue of their sacredness attracted pilgrims. Two crypts containing the bodies of the local bishops became goals for pilgrimages (Żurawski  1999:428). The cult of those saintly ecclesiastics expanded after the death of Archbishop Georgios in 1113 (Żurawski 1999:428). St. Anna, another saintly dweller in the monastery on Kom H, was the first Makurian saint known by name (Godlewski 2013:83; Łajtar 2014:293). His post-mortem cult was associated with his earthly abode and the grave near the southwestern corner of the monastic church (Godlewski 2014a:165). St. Anna’s cult expanded during the tenure of Archbishop Georgios (Godlewski 2014b:280). Pilgrims coming to Tungul had to be lodged for an unspecified period of time required to obtain the benefits which were the original reason behind the pilgrimage. In this context, a mention should be made of the so-called Building M interpreted as a throne hall (Godlewski 1981:39–51, 1982:26–28). The building was erected in the 9th–10th century. In 1317, a mosque was installed on its first floor. It was set up in a low, square hall accessible by an entrance of its own, and surrounded by porticos along two sides (Godlewski  1982:25–26; Obłuski et al.  2013:260–61, fig. 6). In the eastern part of the

810   Bogdan Żurawski c­ orridor, there is an apse (Godlewski and Medeksza 1987:188). Written accounts claim that in the second half of the 13th century a mosque was established in Dongola and that it housed pilgrims and travelers (Vantini 1975:574–75). There are many arguments that the Muslim institution replaced a Christian foundation that had been raised for the same purpose and topped with a chapel (Żurawski 2012:368–70). Abu al-Makarim described Dongola as a large city on the banks of the blessed Nile, with many churches, large houses, and wide streets, and the lofty king’s house with several domes built of red bricks (Vantini 1975:326). In the 17th century, Evliya Çelebi noted that there were no better houses in Dongola than the royal palace and hostel (Prokosch 1994:150–51). Tungul’s axis of political power was in the royal palace complex sited in the heavily walled upper town (Fig. 40.2). The royal complex consists of the so-called Palace of Ioannes (Building I), Cruciform Building (B.III) and the King’s Church (Building V) dedicated to St. Raphael the Archangel (Godlewski 2000:205–206; 2013:69–70). The function of B.III is a matter of debate despite the excavator’s thesis that it was a building raised to honor the defenders of Tungul in 652 ce and to commemorate the signing of the treaty with Muslims (Godlewski 2004:204). The palace proper was built at the end of the 6th century (Godlewski 2013:25). It enclosed 1200m². Its ground floor served administrative and economic functions whereas the upper floor(s) were taken by residential and official spaces. One important reason for Tungul’s prestige and civil authority was its fortifications. The mighty walls protected the town against the external enemy but also stressed the paramount position of Makurian king who crowned the politico-religious hierarchy of the state. In the 6th-century mentality, the main obligation of the ideal Christian ruler was to build churches and fortifications (Cameron 1985:124). The area enclosed within the walls of Tungul approximated 4.4 ha (Godlewski 2014a:159). Godlewski (2014a:157) dates the construction of the Tungul fortifications to the turn of the 5th century. In the first half of the 6th century, according to the same authority, the citadel in Dongola became the new center of the kingdom of Makuria at the expense of the former center in Merowe esh-Sharq (Godlewski 2014a:158–59). Throughout its history as a capital of Makuria, Tungul expanded to the north beyond the walls. Magnetic prospection carried out in 2008 identified more mudbrick dwellings between houses excavated in 1974–81 and the Cathedral (Jakobielski  2001:17–18; Godlewski 2012:290–91). The intensity of habitation in the northern suburbs is unknown. Two monasteries have been found and excavated in this region together with the pottery kilns, five churches, and seven Christian cemeteries (Jakobielski 2001:17–29).

Pachoras (Faras) in Nobadia Pachoras has a long history of being a provincial capital. Being a home to four temples, it emerged as one of the religious and also possibly administrative centers in Lower Nubia during the New Kingdom (Karkowski 1981:5) (Fig. 40.3). In the Meroitic period, it was a

Figure 40.2  Aerial Photograph of Tungul (Old Dongola) taken in February 2003. In the ­center of the picture, the Upper Town surrounded by a wall. To the left is the Mosque, the earliest in Sudan. In the lower are there are extramural churches, further down the suburbs and pottery kilns. The upper part is the so-called abandoned village of El-Ghaddar. Photograph: Bogdan Żurawski.

812   Bogdan Żurawski

Figure 40.3  F. Ch. Gau’s drawing of Faras showing a mudbrick citadel built in the 16th-17th century over the ruins of the cathedral. As seen from the river in 1818–19. After Gau (1822).

center of the province of Akin. After the 4th century ce, it became a seat of the rulers of Nobadia (Jakobielski  2002:35). The episcopal see was established there in 617 (Jakobielski 1972:28) (Fig. 40.4). Its first bishop (Aetios) may have been of Byzantine origin (Jakobielski 1972:28). In the Coptic epitaph from the neighborhood of Faras commemorating Bishop Thomas, Pachoras is called lampropolis, that is a variety of the honorific designation applied to nome-capitals in the Byzantine period (Griffith 1925a:262–63; Jakobielski 1972:78). Griffith (1925a:266), on the basis of written documents, claimed that Pachoras was the most important Christian site in the area (Fig.  40.5). Obłuski (2014b:871–72) in his recent study on the Nubian settlement system supports the thesis that it was at Pachoras rather than at Qasr Ibrim where the capital of Nobadia was located. He underlines the importance of the palatial architecture found in Pachoras as compared to none discovered so far in Qasr Ibrim. Contrary opinion was expressed by Godlewski (2006:27) who cast doubts that Pachoras was the seat of the early rulers of Nobadia suggesting that it was rather at Qasr Ibrim where the center of political power was situated. Welsby (2002:32) claimed that the core of the kingdom of Nobadia was in Jebel Adda/Ballana and Qustul region whereas Pachoras was elevated to the rank of capital of the kingdom in mid-6th century when the royal family was converted to Christianity. Regardless of its position in the Late Post-Meroitic topography of power in the Middle Nile, Pachoras was the site of one of the largest fortifications in the Middle Nile (Fig. 40.6). Having four walls 290, 110, 305, and 200 m long it covered an area of 4.4 ha (Griffith 1926a:28). Obłuski (2014a:107) estimated the area enclosed within the Pachoras fortifications as 5.4ha. Interestingly, the defensive walls of Pachoras had the same width and height as the Theodosian land walls of Constantinople. Both were probably built according to the principles contained in Byzantine military manuals (Dennis 1985:3, 35). Due to the lack of any serious excavations, the chronology of the Faras Enclosure remains more or less the same as it was in 1909 when Mileham (1910:24) dated it to the “Blemmyan period.” The cursory exploration by Griffith did not change much in respect to dating. He attributed it to the Late Meroitic period, although a voussoir (presumably a keystone) from the arch of the Western Gate, found in the rubbish, had a

The Topography of Power in Medieval Nubia   813

Figure 40.4  Bishop Petros protected by St. Peter the Apostle (left), and King Georgios II ­protected by the Virgin Mary and Child (right), 974–997. Mural painting from Faras Cathedral now in the National Museum in Warsaw. Photograph: Mieczysław Niepokólczycki.

cross sculpted upon it. On the other hand, the brick-lined ditch along the western wall of the enclosure contained early Christian graves (Griffith 1926a:25, 27–28). Griffith later modified his opinion, in favor of later dating, under the influence of Monneret de

814   Bogdan Żurawski

Figure 40.5  Faras Nativity, representation of King Moses George is in the lower left corner of the mural (end of the 10th century/beginning of the 11th century). Mural painting from Faras Cathedral now in the Sudan National Museum. Photograph: Bogdan Żurawski.

Villard, an unquestionable authority on Christian antiquities in the Middle Nile in his times. Monneret de Villard based his Early Christian dating of the Faras Enclosure on the conviction, not backed by firm arguments, that the right-angled entrance gates were introduced to Nubian fortifications with the advent of Christianity to the region (after Griffith 1927:114). Modern scholarship is also divided in regard to the date of the Faras Enclosure; Adams (1977:494) claimed the great administrative centers of Lower Nubia at Qasr Ibrim, Gebel Adda, and Pachoras were fortified in Meroitic times. Godlewski (2006:27) opted for the 6th-century date.

The Topography of Power in Medieval Nubia   815

Figure 40.6  Fragment of the Faras fortifications (Enclosure wall). Photograph: Mieczysław Niepokólczycki in 1963.

If the late Meroitic/Post-Meroitic dating is correct one cannot resist the assumption that the Faras Enclosure was the product of the same political system that managed to marshal the large manpower resources to raise the huge tumuli at Ballana and Qustul (datable to ca. 380–490 ce; Török 1986:197). In the beginning of the 8th century, when the so-called Cathedral of Paulos was built, the area within the Enclosure seems to have been filled with a grid of streets. The so-called palaces (Southern and Northern) dated to the 7th century and located north of the Cathedral, were at least two stories high, having stone portals and murals in the ground floor rooms (Godlewski  1992:286–87). The houses west from the Cathedral, perhaps contemporary with the raising of the Enclosure were already abandoned (Godlewski 2006:44, 47). Abu al-Makarim, writing in the beginning of the 13th century, began his account on Nubia with a statement that Pachoras was a capital of the province of El-Maris (Evetts and Butler 1895:260). No doubt the political floruit of the town and its economic growth coincided with the introduction of the waterwheel (saqia) to the region. The Persian waterwheel boosted the agricultural productivity of the Pachoras neighborhood probably as early as the Meroitic period (Adams 1964:119–20). Saqia pots were found in the Post-Meroitic graves (Griffith  1924: pl. XXI, pottery type XXVa, from grave 1/1519, 1925b:71, 1926b:54 n. 4). At the onset of the Christian period, the Pachoras area was producing a considerable surplus of food needed by the urban population and by its multiple pilgrimage places which brought in crowds. Altogether in Faras West at least ten churches were built. The latest was the so-called Citadel Church stratigraphically dated to “Late, if not Terminal Christian” by Adams (2009, v. 2:307). Significantly, half of all known churches in Nobadia were located within a radius of 60 km from Faras (Adams 1965:88). The Faras Cathedral, visited by the persons of highest ranks, remained the most important place of pilgrimage well into the late 15th century (Jakobielski  1974:304)

816   Bogdan Żurawski

Figure 40.7  F. Ch. Gau’s drawing of Qasr Ibrim, a capital and plans of two churches, and a house, 1818–19. After Gau (1822).

(Fig.  40.7). Its history fits the scheme observed elsewhere that pilgrimage centers ­outlived other cult places, because of their vital role in the socio-religious life of the community (Weitzmann 1982:325). Similar attempts at keeping the pilgrimage church accessible as long as possible were observed in the case of the Lower Church at Banganarti (Żurawski 2012:179). The Cathedral was not the only focus of pilgrimage at Pachoras. Griffith (1921:2), while sketching the topographical setting of the site, mentioned a pyramidal rock beyond the Nile’s paleochannel (called Sheikh Jebel), situated some 8 km from the river. On the northwest slope of the hill, there was a grotto which had been a place of pilgrimage since at least Christian times, as testified by numerous graffiti on its walls. The name of Michael was repeated along with a name of Marcus and a priest named Charis. Large stone blocks aligned to form the walls prove the antiquity of the place and the

The Topography of Power in Medieval Nubia   817 cult ­connected with it (Griffith  1921:3,  1927:94, pl. LXXIV, 3, 4). In the 1920s, the Sheikh’s tomb at the foothill was frequented by the residents of Faras and Serra (Griffith 1921:2). A goal of pilgrimages was also the so-called Anchorite Grotto, a New Kingdom tomb cut into the cliffs at the high edge of the desert to the west of the Enclosure in the Christian period transformed into a hermitage. During the hermit’s lifetime, the grotto was adorned with a series of Coptic texts painted upon its whitewashed walls (Griffith 1927:81–82). One text was written by the monk Theophilos on December 4, 738 (Jakobielski 1972:66). The place was frequented by pilgrims after the hermit’s death, as confirmed by multiple visitors’ inscriptions and graffiti (Griffith  1927:90–91, pl. LXXXIII; Jakobielski 1972:63–66). Sculptured sandal sole (“footprint”) and foot outline on stone slabs found in the Enclosure suggest the presence of the pilgrims in Pachoras in Meroitic times as well (Griffith 1926a: pl. XXX 3, 4).

Soba in Alwa British excavations, conducted in Soba East with intervals since 1903, revealed that the town on the Blue Nile flourished at the very early stage of its development as a capital of a Christian kingdom. In its heyday, Soba covered an area of 275 ha (Welsby 2014:192). However, the occupation was mainly limited to mounds separated by open spaces, some occupied by cemeteries (Welsby 2006:30, 2014:192). The residents preferred to live on the elevations because of seasonal rain floods (Soba lies in the rain belt and the monsoon brings heavy downpours). Due to the town’s loose pattern and huge extent it is rather precluded that Soba could be enclosed within any kind of defensive walls, although Budge (1907, v. 1:325) claimed to have examined a stone gateway there in 1903 (cf. also Welsby  2006:31). In the Classic Christian period, the town’s area was considerably reduced (Welsby 2002:120). If the testimony of various medieval travelers and scholars can be believed, the king of Alwa, residing in Soba, was richer that the king of Makuria, and had a greater army and more horses. Soba had fine buildings, large monasteries, and churches rich with gold. In the suburbs lived many Muslims. El-Aswani (quoted by Maqrizi in Vantini 1975:613), stressed the autocratic system of exerting power by the king of Alwa, who could reduce any of his subjects to slavery. Apart from the thriving economy based on agriculture, pasturage, and trade, a source of Soba’s wealth was also gold, which is found in plenty in the country (Tremaux 1862:277, 400; Welsby 2014:614). Abu al-Makarim, writing in the early years of the 13th century, described Soba as a capital of a large kingdom of wide districts and four hundred churches. On the banks of the Nile, and at some distance from it, there were monasteries. In the town itself was “a very large and spacious church, skillfully planned and constructed, larger than any of the other churches in the country” (Evetts and Butler 1895:263–64).

818   Bogdan Żurawski In Soba, as in Faras and Dongola, the red brick debris and lime mortar fragments on the surface of the kom suggest that a ruined church might be buried underneath. Therefore, the seventeen to twenty-nine mounds strewn with red brick and lime mortar fragments propose an unknown number of churches. Only four of these mounds have been excavated (Welsby 2014:192). In one of them (Kom B) situated near the town’s center, a complex of three churches was found. The churches on the Kom were accompanied by a structure said by the excavators to be a palace either royal or ecclesiastical (Welsby 2002:120, 2006:30–31). The numerous cemeteries indicate that the number of churches was higher than the estimates (Welsby 2002:120). The Soba churches equal in size and quality those known from Makuria and Nobadia (Welsby 2014:197). The Church A on Kom B reveals a striking resemblance to the pilgrimage church dedicated to the Archangel Raphael in Banganarti (Żurawski  2014). Both are the only two ecclesiastical structures in Nubia that exhibit a full-blown portico along three walls. Since the Banganarti church is known to be a royal foundation built to serve the growing flow of pilgrims it is possible that the Soba church was a pilgrimage center as well. The presence of a portico may support this idea. Grossmann (2002:235) commented that porticos in Christian pilgrimage centers played the same role as peristyles did in the public and communal buildings. They simply provided a privileged, shaded place for pilgrims who wanted to stay in close to the holy place. The resemblance between the Raphaelion at Banganarti and Church A at Soba, suggesting a direct influence, is strange in the light of a considerable difference in construction dates. Church A in Soba was constructed about 100–350 years earlier than the Upper Church at Banganarti. Its 14C dates “encompass 250 years embracing the 7th to 10th centuries” (Switsur 1991:350). The formal similarities between Makurian and Alwan churches stem from the similar purposes they served rather than from direct influence. The models for both churches could have been the Byzantine sanctuaries like, for example, the martyrium of St. Sergios (Basilica B) in Rusafah (Sergiopolis) which was one of the most important Syrian pilgrimage centers frequented by crowds of pilgrims from the 5th to the 12th ­century (Spanner and Guyer 1926). Like the Upper Church at Banganarti and Church A in Soba, it was provided with porticos along its both longer sides.

Qasr Ibrim: Fortress on the Rock With its seven temples, mighty ramparts enclosing about two hectares and naturally defended location on the rocky outcrop overlooking the river, Qasr Ibrim was a paramount center of power in the Kushite period (Fig. 40.8). It retained part of its glory into the Post-Meroitic period. Immediately after the fall of Meroitic authority, Qasr Ibrim was “a major commercial and administrative center” with a tight cluster of stonebuilt houses over most of the defended area (Aldsworth 2010:2, 5).

The Topography of Power in Medieval Nubia   819 At least one Nobadian king (Aburni) resided in Qasr Ibrim since the letter addressed to him has been found on the site (Eide et al. 1998, no. 319). As the tenor of the letter suggests, Aburni probably held also Talmis (Kalabsha). However, the gaps in the walls which appeared at that time indicate a lack of secular authority (Adams  1982:28). Although the fortress town was densely built over with well-constructed houses, traces of animal breeding within the walls were found (Plumley 1975:9). The Post-Meroitic houses excavated on the site were designed rather for storage than living. The excavators of the site wrote: “Protected by a massive girdle wall and an elevated situation, food surpluses and other valued goods could be preserved not only from human enemies but from the action of moisture and white ants” (Plumley and Adams 1974:214). The domestic character of the site continued in the Early Christian period (Welsby 2002:121). The change of official religion witnessed the defenses falling into decay (Adams 1982:28). On the other hand, a collection of four letters in Coptic and Greek found there, datable to the second half of the 5th century, insinuates a high position of Qasr Ibrim in the administrative network of Nobadia (Van der Vliet 2013:15–16). The conversion of the Taharqo Temple to a church was perhaps followed by the establishment of a monastic complex (Adams 1982:29). Ibrim’s main church, the Great Church, was raised over the remains of Post-Meroitic houses soon after 550 ce (Adams 1996:74; Aldsworth 2010:5). Qasr Ibrim was elevated to a rank of bishopric in the 7th century and its Great Church became the Cathedral Church (Aldsworth 2010:5). In the Classic Christian period, the hilltop was occupied by four churches, a large piazza raised to accommodate the large numbers of pilgrims, the residence of the eparch (governor) and houses of church officials (Adams 1982:29, 1996:89). Although a seat of the eparch was still there, throughout the Classic Christian period Qasr Ibrim remained predominantly a religious center. The “epigraphic importance” of the site, where superb archives have been found, does not translate into the real political power. The position of Ibrim in the politico-religious hierarchy is defined by the number of churches built on the site. With a total of five churches, Qasr Ibrim falls well behind Pachoras (ten churches in Faras West only) and Tungul with thirteen churches explored so far (Adams 2009:22–24, 35–39, 49, 189, 314). During most of the Christian period, Ibrim’s fortifications were in a “. . . very ruined condition. The fortress served as a refuge and storage place while its inhabitants maintained more conventional residences in the valley below” (Adams 1982:29, 31). The commercial and storage character of the upper town was also stressed by Abu al-Makarim who wrote that Shams ad-Dawla, after taking Qasr Ibrim in 1172–73, found there “a quantity of cotton which he carried off to Kûş and sold for a large sum” (Evetts and Butler 1895:267). Otherwise, his account on Qasr Ibrim underlines the high status of the fortress town: “In the land of Nubia is the city of Ibrim, the residence of the Lord of the Mountain, all the inhabitants of which are of the province of Maris; it is enclosed within a wall. Here is a large and beautiful church finely planned and named after our Lady, the Pure Virgin Mary” (Evetts and Butler 1895:266). In the aftermath of the capture of the city by the Ayyubid forces led by Shams edDawla the town’s fortifications, neglected since at least Post-Meroitic period, were

820   Bogdan Żurawski restored (Welsby 2002:122). In the Late Christian period, Qasr Ibrim regained some of its administrative and commercial importance. It continued to be the main seat of the eparch until the latter part of the 15th century (Adams 1982:29). It retained, however, the character of a place of refuge, storage, and pilgrimage (Adams 1996:34, 89). In early Nobadian times, Qasr Ibrim was a place of various acts of piety and veneration performed by the visitors to the site which therefore deserved the label of a pagan pilgrimage center (Welsby 2006:40). Pilgrims had visited the Amun of Pedeme in the 1st century bce or possibly earlier (Rose 1996:102). In the 1st century ce and later the visitors used to throw down coins onto the mud floor overlying the stone pavement of the temple, as an act of piety. Over 150 bronze coins, issues ranging from the early 2nd century ce to the early 5th century ce were found in 1974 in an area 5 × 3.5 m probably in front of a cult statue. The habit died out with the introduction of the Christian faith to the region (Plumley 1975:16–17). A series of pilgrim foot outlines, some with Meroitic or Christian symbols and inscriptions, carved along the ancient roadway which leads from the desert towards Qasr Ibrim confirm the popularity of the fortress and its temple among the pilgrims (Wilson 1996:103, 108, 113–14; Aldsworth 2010:4). Needless to say, the goal of most of the visitors was the Cathedral, provided with a portico along its western façade (Gartkiewicz 1982:93). They could go into the building through one of its five entrances. Such ease of access was a characteristic feature of the pilgrimage centers like the cruciform martyrium of St. Babylas in Antioch, each of its long arms being provided with a door (Lassus 1947:123–28). In general, the accessibility to the sacrum is essential in any holy place (cf. Brenk 1995:72). The Raphaelion (Upper Church) at Banganarti in its first phase of use was accessed by three entrances (Żurawski 2014:111). Visitors to the Qasr Ibrim Cathedral (and also to the 6th-century church built within the Taharqo Temple) left on the walls and on the arcades a multitude of the pilgrim scrapes (Aldsworth 2010:58 and pl. 99; cf. also Welsby 2002: fig. 11; Aldsworth 2010: pls. 139, 142, 144). They resemble the hollows scooped in the stone part of the eastern wall of the Lower Church at Banganarti near two ad sanctos tombs that were an important goal of pilgrimages (Żurawski 2012:167–68, fig. 48, 377–79, fig. 3). Notably, the custom of taking holy sand and dust from the graves of the Muslim holy men has continued in the Middle Nile until the present day (Jackson 1926:14). The Greek and Coptic (or the mixture of both) graffiti on the hilltop east of Qasr Ibrim were either left by pilgrims heading towards the Cathedral and churches in the citadel or to this particular spot which was their ultimate goal (Aldsworth 2010:1; Łajtar and Van der Vliet 2013:160). The pilgrimages to “Jebel Maktoub” lasted from around the year 900 to 1050 (Łajtar and van der Vliet  2013:166). The editors of some of the texts suggest that the sacredness of the place is associated with the cult of the Archangel Michael, since a few inscriptions invoked his name. It could also have been venerated as a “high place” since time immemorial (Łajtar and van der Vliet 2013:166).

The Topography of Power in Medieval Nubia   821

Jebel Adda in Dotawo Jebel Adda was fortified in Meroitic times (Millet 1967:53; Adams 1977:494). There is not enough data to estimate the area enclosed by its wall which were made of mudbrick, in some places faced with rough sandstone blocks. A wide gate in the middle of the eastern wall was on both sides provided with two staircases which enabled the sentries to mount the walls. At more than one occasion Adda’s defenses were strengthened by the addition of an inner brick coating or by facing the bastions with broken slabs of a local sandstone. Concurrently the so-called Acropolis of Adda was raised (Millet 1967:53–54). According to Welsby (2006:24, 32), the Nubian rulers buried at Ballana and Qustul probably resided in Jebel Adda, since the latter sits closer to both burial grounds than Faras or Qasr Ibrim. This statement disagrees, however, with Millet’s acknowledgment that no traces of “any pretentious building which might have been built or even reused in X-Group times” were found in Adda (Millet 1967:58). The hilltop fortress of Adda rose to prominence in the Late Christian period when the town became the capital of the kingdom of Dotawo. It was at this time when the impressive complex, including a church (labeled Church Seven), was built. The complex which, according to the excavator’s opinion, served as the residence of the “itinerant kings of Adda in Late Christian period” was provided with a monumental flight of steps made of stone and red brick, faced with hard plaster and painted red. The palace complex begun in the 13th century was enlarged in the 14th century and lasted until the 15th (Millet 1967:61–62). Old Meroitic fortifications were repaired by the kings of Dotawo and provided with a  new stone-lined gate made of blocks from dismantled Meroitic buildings (Millet 1967:62). Documents found at a distance from the palace complex datable to the late 15th century gave evidence of King Joel of Dotawo, Bishop Merki of Qasr Ibrim, and another priest, Urtigaddi (Millet 1967:62). It is worth noting that an anony­mous official of King Joel of Dotawo scratched a memento of his visit on the south-eastern pier in the Raphaelion at Banganarti (Łajtar in prep., cat. no. 584). King Siti of Dotawo and two of his officers also visited the Banganarti church in the first half of the 14th century (Łajtar 2008:328–29). In the Post-Meroitic period, most of the area north of Adda formed a more or less indefensible suburb. The later times did not improve much the defensive quality of the upper town as well (Millet 1967:62). Of “the large number of churches recorded at Gebel Adda” (Millet 1967:60) only three were planned. Monneret de Villard (1935, v. 1:177–79) published a sketch plan of Church I (Chiesa ad absidi contraposti) and Churches II and III (due chiese contigue). Later Church I was investigated by Deichmann during two short visits to Jebel Adda in 1936 and 1962 (Deichmann 1988:53–56). To the three tombs in the floor of Church I found by Monneret de Villard, Deichmann added eleven more and labeled the church a “Friedhofskirche” (Deichmann  1988:56). Adams (2009, v. 1:52), on the basis of

822   Bogdan Żurawski Deichmann’s suggestion, dates this Funerary Church at Adda to the 7th or early 8th century. The other churches found in Adda are only briefly mentioned by Millet (1967:60–61). Jebel Adda was probably a more important center of power in Christian times than emerges from the above description built on laconic excavation reports. The sheer size of Adda’s main church would suggest a higher rank for the site. This church has many features of a cathedral, but there is no record of a bishop of Adda (Adams 2009, v. 1:52).

Ez-Zuma: The Fortress of King Negil A pair of elite tumulus cemeteries on either side of the Nile in Ez-Zuma and in Tanqasi draw a close analogy to the Lower Nubian cemeteries of Ballana and Qustul. Although far distant in space they are contemporaries in time and to some extent in size. At Ballana and Qustul the mighty rulers of the early Nobadia were buried. Ez-Zuma and Tanqasi were certainly the burial places for the chiefs of the mighty statehood that emerged in the Post-Meroitic period in the region of Napata and Contra-Napata (Sanam) (Fig. 40.8). As noted above, it is not certain where the Nobadian rulers buried in Ballana and Qustul resided. In general, elite cemeteries appear to be isolated from contemporaneous

Figure 40.8  Tumulus field at Ez-Zuma in 2000. Photograph: Bogdan Żurawski.

The Topography of Power in Medieval Nubia   823 centers of power in the late Post-Meroitic period (Welsby 2006:32). However, a huge massively fortified enceinte in Ez-Zuma was located at a stone throw from the tumuli. This fortification no longer exists, but Lepsius in 1844 left a quite precise description of the fortress and its construction details. The southern wall facing the river was during his visit already dismantled by the local residents of Ez-Zuma. The northern and western walls survived in the shape which allowed Lepsius to remark on their internal structure. They were built of mudbrick on the substructure of small broken stones (Steinschutt) lined with big stone slabs. The sizes of these blocks had to be substantial, hence Lepsius’s description: “die zum Teil kollosal waren” (Lepsius 1897–1913, v. 5:253). The features described above to some extent liken the Ez-Zuma fortress to the Faras Enclosure, all the more that from Lepsius’s description it appears that it was 200 steps (= 150 m) square, thus enclosing an area of 2.25 ha (notably, Faras was twice as big). The Ez-Zuma fortress is now dismantled and totally overlain by the modern village. It shared the fate of the settlement at Tanqasi, on the opposite bank of the river seen in 1976 by Charles Bonnet (cf. General Discussion relating to the papers of Török and Lenoble, in Welsby ed. 1999:184; cf. also Welsby 2002:116). Nevertheless, the character of Ez-Zuma as a royal seat and a power center was perpetuated in the oral tradition recorded by Lepsius. In the Letters he writes: Three-quarters of an hour farther down the river is situated the village of Zuma, on the right bank. Near it, in the direction of the mountains, there rises an old fortress, with towers of defence, called Karat Negil, whose front walls were only destroyed and thrown down about fifty or sixty years ago, when the inhabitants of Zuma settled here. The name is derived from an ancient King of the country, Negil, in whose time the surrounding land, now dry, was still within reach of the Nile, and is said to have been fertile. (Lepsius 1853:230)

Interestingly, a southern part of Ez-Zuma (Zuma Gubli) is nowadays called Karadegil. This toponym closely resembles the name of the fortress recorded by Lepsius (Karat Negil). If the fortress really stood there it was about 10 km upstream from the fortified enceinte at Bakhit/Helleila (Żurawski 2003:369, 379–80, fig. 8 on p. 378). The presence of elite buildings which might have once stood in Zuma is suggested by the finds of the lime-plastered and painted bricks during excavations in the Zuma tumuli (Mahmoud el-Tayeb 2012:73–74). A religious life in Zuma focused in the fortress church, if any. The pilgrimage center concentrated in the so-called Anchorite Grotto, located southwest of the tumulus field, in the steep wall of a khor cut in the rocks. A man-made grotto, probably originally a Kushite or Egyptian tomb or empty quarry chamber, was inhabited by a local holy man plausibly in the first half of the 8th century. The pilgrimage center at Zuma was created and developed in a manner similar to the abode of St. Anna in Old Dongola and the Anchorite Grotto in Faras. At least ten visitors’ inscriptions have been noticed in February 2000 by Adam Łajtar who studied the Greek texts left by the pilgrims (Łajtar 2003:512–13).

824   Bogdan Żurawski On top of a cliff above the grotto, a circular mudbrick structure of about 4–6 m diameter, with entrance to the south, was found in a place known as Ali Karrar. The rotunda was possibly ceremonially connected with the grotto. Perhaps the local saint who inhabited the hermitage was buried in the circular tomb above. Notably, a circular ad sanctos tomb was found in Soba, on the eastern side of the Church B on mound B (Welsby and Daniels 1991:91–92).

Summary In Christian Nubia, religious and political power had equal authority. The presence of the abode of a king or a seat of central religious institutions (eparchial office, bishopric, etc.) were deemed essential as they situated the place at the axis of the local microcosm. The incidence of huge tumuli which needed a strong central authority to be built also gives a reason for considering a place as a center of political power (Welsby 2002:116). The diagnostic feature deemed most important is the site’s position in the spiritual topography of the earthly kingdom which is organized in imitation of the Kingdom of God. In the Christocentric monarchy, the king was obliged to emulate Christ by his philanthropic deeds and virtues (Fig. 40.9). On his way to salvation, he should excel in creating charitable institutions, protecting orphans, the poor, etc. That is mostly why the Dotawo King Moses, son of George, was praised in a legend accompanying his portrait in the Faras Cathedral with epithets exalting his philanthropic qualities (Plumley 1978:238) (cf. Fig. 40.5). State-sponsored philanthropic institutions usually associated with pilgrimage centers became the cornerstones of the nascent Nubian kingdoms based on Christian religion. The ascendancy of Tungul is the best example of this scheme. The integration of sacral

Figure 40.9  Anonymous Nubian king under the holy patronage of the Archangel Raphael accompanied by the collegium apostolicum, Upper Church at Banganarti. Ink copy: Wojciech Chmiel.

The Topography of Power in Medieval Nubia   825 topography with the politico-theological sphere became a basis on which the most important Nubian centers of power were created.

References Cited Adams, W.Y. 1964 Post-Pharaonic Nubia in the Light of Archaeology I. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 50:102–20. ——— 1965 The Architectural Evolution of the Nubian Church, 500–1400 AD. Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt 4:87–139. ——— 1977 Nubia. Corridor to Africa. Princeton University Press. ——— 1982 Qasr Ibrim: An Archaeological Conspectus. In Plumley ed., pp. 25–33. ——— 1996 Qasr Ibrim: The Late Medieval Period. Egypt Exploration Society Excavation Memoir 59. ——— 2009 The Churches of Nobadia. Sudan Archaeological Research Society Publication 17. BAR International Series 2000. Archaeopress. ——— 2013 Nubian History in Global Perspective: An Anthropological View. In Van der Vliet and Hagen eds., pp. 23–44. Aldsworth, F. 2010 Qasr Ibrim: The Cathedral Church. Egypt Exploration Society Excavation Memoir 97. Anderson, J.R. and D.A. Welsby eds. 2014 The Fourth Cataract and Beyond: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference for Nubian Studies. British Museum Publications on Egypt and Sudan 1. Peeters. Brenk, B. 1995 Der Kultort, seine Zugänglichkeit und seine Besucher. Jahrbuch für Antike und Christentum Ergänzungsband 20(1):69–122. Budge, E.A.W. 1907 The Egyptian Sûdân: Its History and Monuments. Kegan Paul, Trench, Trübner & Co. Cameron, A. 1985 Procopius and the Sixth Century. The Transformation of the Classical Heritage 10. University of California Press. Deichmann, F.W. 1988 Die Kirche I von Gebel Adda. In Nubische Forschungen, ed. F.W.  Deichmann and W.P.  Grossmann, pp. 53–56. Deutsches Archäologisches Institut Archäologische Forschungen 17. Gebr. Mann. Dennis, G.T. 1985 Three Byzantine Military Treatises. Dumbarton Oaks Texts 9. Eide, T., T.  Hägg, R.H.  Pierce, and L.  Török eds. 1998 Fontes Historiae Nubiorum: Textual Sources for the History of the Middle Nile Region between the Eighth Century BC and the Sixth Century AD, v. 3: From the First to the Sixth Century AD. IKRR/Department of Greek, Latin, and Egyptology, University of Bergen. Evetts, B.T.A. and A.J. Butler ed. and trans. 1895 The Churches and Monasteries of Egypt and Some Neighbouring Countries Attributed to Abû Ṣâliḥ the Armenian. Clarendon Press. Gartkiewicz, P. 1982 Remarks on the Cathedral at Qasr Ibrim. In Plumley ed., pp. 87–94. Gau, F.C. 1822 Antiquités de la Nubie ou Monumens inédits des bords du Nil, situés entre la première et deuxième cataracte. J.G. Cotta. Godlewski, W. 1981 Throne Hall at Old Dongola (The Sudan). Africana Bulletin 30:39–51. ——— 1982 The Mosque Building in Old Dongola. In New Discoveries in Nubia: Proceedings of the Colloquium on Nubian Studies, ed. P. Van Moorsel, pp. 21–28. Egyptologische Uitgaven 2. Nederlands Instituut voor het Nabije Oosten.

826   Bogdan Żurawski ——— 1992 The Early Period of Nubian Art. In Études nubiennes. Actes du VIIe Congrès international d’études nubiennes, ed. C. Bonnet, pp. 277–305. ——— 2000 Old Dongola. Kom A, 1999. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean 11:197–206. ——— 2004 Old Dongola. Kom A (Acropolis), 2003. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean 15:193–207. ——— 2006 Pachoras: The Cathedrals of Aetios, Paulos and Petyros: The Architecture. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean Supplement Series. Warsaw University Press. ——— 2012 Dongola 2008–2009. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean 21:289–312. ——— 2013 Dongola—Ancient Tungul. Archaeological Guide. Polish Center of Mediterranean Archaeology, University of Warsaw. http://www.pcma.uw.edu.pl/fileadmin/template/main/ file/Dongola_guide/Dongola_guide_book.pdf. ——— 2014a The Kingdom of Makuria. In Anderson and Welsby eds., pp. 155–69. ——— 2014b Dongola 2010–2011. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean 13(1):265–84. Godlewski, W. and S. Medeksza 1987 The So-called Mosque Building in Old Dongola (Sudan): A Structural Analysis. Archéologie du Nil Moyen 2:185–205. Griffith, F.L. 1921 Oxford Excavations in Nubia. Liverpool Annals of Archaeology and Anthropology 8(1):1–18. ——— 1924 Oxford Excavations in Nubia. Liverpool Annals of Archaeology and Anthropology 11(4):141–82. ——— 1925a Bakharâs: Faras in Geography and History. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 11(3–4):259–68. ——— 1925b Oxford Excavations in Nubia. Liverpool Annals of Archaeology and Anthropology 25(3–4):57–172. ——— 1926a Oxford Excavations in Nubia. Liverpool Annals of Archaeology and Anthropology 13(1–2):17–34. ——— 1926b Oxford Excavations in Nubia. Liverpool Annals of Archaeology and Anthropology 13(3–4):49–93. ——— 1927 Oxford Excavations in Nubia. Liverpool Annals of Archaeology and Anthropology 14(3–4):57–116. Grossmann, P. 2002 Christliche Architektur in Ägypten. Handbuch der Orientalistik 62. Brill. Jackson, H.C. 1926 A Trek in Abu Hamed District. Sudan Notes and Records 9(2):1–35. Jakobielski, S. 1972 A History of the Bishopric of Pachoras on the Basis of Coptic Inscriptions. Faras 3. Editions Scientifique de Pologne. ——— 1974 Inscriptions. In Faras: Wall Paintings in the Collection of the National Museum in Warsaw, ed. K. Michałowski, pp. 280–312. Wydawnictwo Artystyczno-Graficzne. ——— 2001 35 Years of Polish Excavations at Old Dongola: A Factfile. In Dongola Studien. 35 Jahre polnischer Forschungen im Zentrum des makuritischen Reiches, ed. S. Jakobielski and P.O. Scholz, pp. 1–48. Bibliotheca nubica et aethiopica 7. ZAS PAN. ——— 2002 Faras, das meroitische Phrs, das mittelalterische Pachoras. In Faras. Die Kathedrale aus dem Wüstensand. Eine Ausstellung des Kunsthistorisches Museums Wien und des Nationalmuseums in Warschau, ed. W. Seipel, pp. 35–36. Karkowski, J. 1981 The Pharaonic Inscriptions from Faras. Faras 5. PWN. Łajtar, A. 2003 Inscriptions from the “Anachorite Grotto” at Ez-Zuma. In Survey and Excavations between Old Dongola and Ez-Zuma, ed. B.  Żurawski, pp. 512–18. Southern Dongola Reach Survey I (Nubia 2). Neriton. ——— 2008 Late Christian Nubia through Visitors’ Inscriptions from the Upper Church at Banganarti. In Between the Cataracts: Proceedings of the 11th Conference for Nubian Studies,

The Topography of Power in Medieval Nubia   827 ed. W. Godlewski and A. Łajtar, Part 1, pp. 321–33. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean Supplement Series 2.1. Warsaw University. ——— 2014 Dongola 2010: Epigraphic Report. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean 23(1):285–93. ——— in prep. Late Christian Pilgrimage Centre in Banganarti: Evidence of Inscriptions. Journal of Juristic Papyrology Supplement. University of Warsaw. Łajtar, A and J. van der Vliet 2013 A View from a Hill: A First Presentation of the Rock Graffiti of “Gebel Maktub.” In Van der Vliet and Hagen eds., pp. 157–66. Lassus, J. 1947 Sanctuaires chrétiens de Syrie. P. Geuthner. Lepsius, C.R. 1853 Letters from Egypt, Ethiopia, and the Peninsula of Sinai, trans. L. Horner and J. Horner. Henry G. Bohn. ——— 1897–1913 Denkmäeler aus Ägypten und Äthiopien Text, ed. E. Naville. J.C. Hinrichs. Mahmoud el-Tayeb 2012 Funerary Traditions in Nubian Early Makuria. Gdańsk Archaeological Museum African Reports 9. Mileham, G.S. 1910 Churches in Lower Nubia. Eckley B. Coxe Junior Expedition to Nubia 2. University Museum (Philadelphia). Millet, N.B. 1967 Gebel Adda: Preliminary Report 1965–1966. Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt 6:53–63. Monneret de Villard, U. 1935–57 La Nubia Medioevale. Mission Archéologique de Nubie 1929–1934. Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale. Obłuski, A. 2014a The Rise of Nobadia: Social Changes in Northern Nubia in Late Antiquity. The Journal of Juristic Papyrology. Supplement XX. ——— 2014b Rank-size Rule in Nubian Settlement System. In Anderson and Welsby eds., pp. 867–73. Obłuski, A., W.  Godlewski, W.  Kołątaj, S.  Medeksza, and C.  Calaforra-Rzepka 2013 The Mosque Building in Dongola: Conservation and Revitalization Project. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean 22:248–72. Plumley, J.M. 1975 Qaṣr Ibrîm, 1974. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 61:5–27. ——— 1978 New Light on the Kingdom of Dotawo. In Études nubiennes, ed. J. Leclant and J. Vercoutter, pp. 231–43. Bibliothèque d’Étude 77. Institute Français d’Archéologie Orientale du Caire. Plumley, J.M. ed. 1982 Nubian Studies. Proceedings of the Symposium for Nubian Studies. Aris & Phillips. Plumley, J.M. and W.Y.  Adams 1974 Qaṣr Ibrîm, 1972. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 60:212–38. Prokosch, E. ed. and trans. 1994 Ins Land der Geheimnisvollen Func. Des türkischen Weltbummlers Evliyā Çelebi Reise durch Oberägypten und den Sudan nebst der osmanischen Provinz Habeš in den Jahren 1672/73. Styria. Rose, P. 1996 Qasr Ibrim: The Hinterland Survey. Egypt Exploration Society Excavation Memoir 62. Schiffers, H. 1951 Karls des Grossen Reliquienschatz und die Anfänge der Aachenfahrt. Veröffentlichungen des Bischöflichen Diözesanarchivs Aachen 10. Spanner, H. and S. Guyer 1926 Rusafa, die Wallfahrtsstadt des heiligen Sergios. Dietrich Reimer. Switsur, R. 1991 The Radiocarbon Ages from Soba East. In Welsby and Daniels eds., pp. 350–54. Tremaux, P. 1862 Voyage en Éthiopie, au Soudan Oriental et dans la Nigritie, v. 2: Le Soudan. Hachette.

828   Bogdan Żurawski Török, L. 1986 The Chronology of the Qustul and Ballana Cemeteries. In Nubische Studien. Tagungsakten der 5. internationalen Konferenz der International Society for Nubian Studies, ed. M. Krause, pp. 191–97. Philipp von Zabern. Van der Vliet, J. 2013 Qasr Ibrim in Lower Nubia: Cultural Interaction at the Southernmost Roman Limes. In Van der Vliet and Hagen eds., pp. 1–22. Van der Vliet, J. and J.L. Hagen eds. 2013 Qasr Ibrim: Between Egypt and Africa. Egyptologische Uitgaven 26. Peeters. Vantini, G. 1975 Oriental Sources Concerning Nubia. Polish Academy of Sciences and Heidelberger Akademie der Wissenschaften. Weitzmann, K. 1982 Loca sancta and the Representational Arts of Palestine. In Studies in the Arts at Sinai: Essays, pp. 19–41. Princeton University Press. Welsby, D.A. 2002 The Medieval Kingdoms of Nubia: Pagans, Christians and Muslims along the Middle Nile. British Museum. ——— 2006 Settlement in Nubia in the Medieval Period. In Acta Nubica: Proceedings of the X International Conference of Nubian Studies, ed. I. Caneva and A. Roccati, pp. 21–43. Libreria dello Stato. ——— 2014 The Kingdom of Alwa. In Anderson and Welsby eds., pp. 183–99. Welsby, D.A. ed. 1999 Recent Research in Kushite History and Archaeology. Proceedings of the 8th International Conference for Meroitic Studies. British Museum Occasional Paper 131. Welsby, D.A. and C.M. Daniels 1991 Soba: Archaeological Research at a Medieval Capital on the Blue Nile. Memoirs of the British Institute in Eastern Africa 12. Wilson, P. 1996 The Roadway and its Inscriptions. In Rose ed., pp. 102–17. Żurawski, B. 1999 Faith Healing, Philanthropy and Commemoration in Late Christian Dongola. In Ägypten und Nubien in spätantiker und christlicher Zeit, ed. S.  Emmel, M.  Krause, S.G.  Richter, and S.  Schaten, v. 1, pp. 423–48. Akten des 6. Internationalen Koptologenkongresses. Sprachen und Kulturen des Christlichen Orients 6(2). Reichert. ——— 2003 Survey and Excavations between Old Dongola and Ez-Zuma. Southern Dongola Reach Survey 1. Neriton. ——— 2012 St Raphael Church I at Banganarti, Mid-sixth to Mid-eleventh Century: An Introduction to the Site and the Epoch. Gdańsk Archaeological Museum African Reports 10. ——— 2014 Kings and Pilgrims: St Raphael Church II at Banganarti, Mid-Eleventh to MidEighteenth Century. Nubia 5. Banganarti 2. Neriton.

Chapter 41

The A rch a eol ogy of M edieva l N u bi a n K i ngdoms Artur Obłuski

Nomenclature The fall of the Meroitic Empire brought an ethnic change in the elites holding sway over the Nile valley. In the Dodekaschoinos in Lower Nubia, the Blemmyes took over, other tribes in the territory upriver. We do not now know their names, but we know that they formed three independent states—Nobadia, Makuria, and Alodia—which in the indigenous languages were called Migi, Dotawo, and Alwa (following Nubiological tradition, the last will be called by its indigenous name in this chapter). However, we have no evidence suggesting that the change of the overlords was caused by a large migration of peoples from outside the Nile valley. The expanding Nobadian state then expelled Blemmyes from the valley (Obłuski 2013). The language also changed. First Meroitic ceased to be used by the local population. Alien languages—Coptic and Greek—then began to be employed for administrative and religious purposes, while the general population started to speak several regional dialects of Old Nubian (Łajtar and Ochała, this volume). This early period in the history of the three medieval Nubian kingdoms is called the X-Group/Post-Meroitic/Ballana period (see Mahmoud el-Tayeb, and Dann, Chapter 35, this volume). The following period started ca. 540 with official conversion to Christianity, and is termed Christian. The religious criterion in nomenclature was also adopted for later Nubian history: the dissolution of Makuria and Alwa starts the Islamic period. These are artificial conventional classifications, as religious conversion is a lengthy process, and the process of Nubian conversion to Islam has not been studied in detail yet. The term

830   Artur Obłuski “Christian Nubia” is now well established by its long use, even if it biases our comprehension of the social and political dynamics (Obłuski 2014c). The nature, dynamics, and impact of conversion to Christianity as well as to Islam should still be rather a crucial research question than a paradigm (Edwards 1999). The nomenclature for the chronology of the medieval period under consideration in this chapter is based on the regional political dynamics in Nubia. Thus, my proposal is to call Nobadian the period between the mid-4th and the end of the 7th century for the territory between the First and Third Nile Cataract, and Makurian—the period after the late 7th century (the union of Nobadia and Makuria) until the end of the 15th century. The same term, Makurian period, will be used for the time between the mid-4th and the end of the 15th century for the territory between the Third and Fifth Cataracts. For the same timespan but in the territory south of the Fifth Cataract, the name Alwan will be used. To speak generally about Nubia in the period between the mid-fourth and the end of the 7th century ce, the term the Three Kingdoms period will be used; for the period between the unification of Nobadia and Makuria and the collapse of the Nubian kingdoms at the end of the 15th century, Two Kingdoms period will be used.

History of Research From a world system perspective, Nubia lies on the fringes of Mediterranean civilization, yet when we approach it from an African perspective, the early medieval Nubian kingdoms were among the most significant polities spread across Sudanic Africa, including also today’s Mali (McIntosh  1995), Ghana (Berthier  1997), and Ethiopia (Burstein 2009). The hybrid character of Nubia, and its suspension between two worlds, has caused it to be frequently neglected by researchers of the Mediterranean World as well as Africa, although it should be fully integrated into both macro-regional contexts. This resulted in a limited interest of the early collectors of antiquities. Eventually the Napoleonic campaign in Egypt and then the Anglo-Egyptian conquest of Sudan drew attention to Sudan in general and Nubia in particular. The main subjects of interest were objects associated with the neighboring Egypt of both the Pharaonic and Roman era. However, several sites dated to the Middle Ages, like the churches in Lower Nubia at Qasr Ibrim and in and around Faras (Mileham 1910; Clarke 1912) or the monastery at Ghazali, were too spectacular to be ignored (Obłuski et al. 2015:431). The major advances in the study of Nubian culture were made through salvage archaeology associated with the construction of dams. At the same time, dams are the biggest curse of the Middle Nile valley, since they irreversibly destroy the heritage of one of the oldest cultures of Africa and the world in general. The first systematic excavation aimed at recording the sites which were supposed to be flooded due to the heightening of the Aswan Dam between 1907 and 1912 (Reisner 1910; Firth 1915, 1927). This first campaign was focused on transportable objects, and settlements were treated marginally. After the initial excavation of a Christian cemetery on Biga Island, medieval tombs ­lacking

The Archaeology of Medieval Nubian Kingdoms   831 ­ aterial culture were almost completely omitted in the excavations in the following seam sons and sometimes not even mapped (Adams 1977:74). Despite this, the Early Three Kingdoms period (ca. 375–550) was well represented in the material due to the rich burial offerings. Other early archaeological expeditions important for the studies of medieval Nubian kingdoms were: the University of Pennsylvania’s E.B.  Coxe Jr. Expedition (1908–1909) (Mileham 1910) and Oxford University Excavations (1910–12) (Griffith 1927), both in the vicinity of Faras, the Nobadian capital and core area of the kingdom. The most spectacular discovery from the period of Three Kingdoms (ca. 375–700) was the unearthing of the royal cemeteries of early Nobadian rulers (ca. 375–500) at Qustul and Ballana, made by Emery and Kirwan between 1928 and 1931 (Emery and Kirwan 1938) during the Second Archaeological Survey of Nubia (1929–35) as well as research and publications carried out by Ugo Monneret de Villard (Monneret de Villard 1935, 1938, 1957). Several second-tier elite cemeteries were excavated at Firka and Kosha (Kirwan 1939) and Gamai (also called Gammai or Gemai) by the Harvard–Boston Expedition excavated as part of the earlier campaign of 1915–16 (Bates and Dunham 1927). The next big step in medieval archaeology was taken in the 1950s in the territories further south by Peter Shinnie, who partly excavated Soba, the capital of Alwa (Shinnie 1955), and the already-mentioned monastery of Ghazali (Shinnie and Chittick 1961). The International Campaign to Save the Monuments of Nubia of the 1960s was also focused on monuments earlier than medieval but it did bring the investigation of several settlement sites from the Middle Ages (Presedo Velo  1963,  1964,  1965; Weeks  1967; Shinnie and Shinnie 1978), and the most remarkable discovery of the cathedral of the capital city Faras with its spectacular wall paintings, made by Kazimierz Michałowski and the Polish Center of Mediterranean Archaeology (Michałowski 1974). Later, when the part of Nubia richest in antiquities was flooded by the Nubian Lake (Nasser), research on the medieval period lost its momentum—but some projects have continued: Qasr Ibrim (Egypt Exploration Society) led by George Plumley, William Adams, and Pamela Rose (Adams 1996, 2013); Soba, by Derek Welsby (Welsby and Daniels 1991; Welsby 1998), and new projects have started, like Tungul (Dongola), Polish Centre of Mediterranean Archaeology led by Stefan Jakobielski (Jakobielski and Scholz eds. 2001). Hundreds of medieval sites were also identified during several surveys in the territory of Makuria (Grzymski 1987; Welsby 2001; Smith 2003; Żurawski 2003). The other ongoing projects are two more PCMA missions at Banganarti (Żurawski 2012, 2014) and the Ghazali monastery (Obłuski 2014a, Obłuski et al. 2015). Apart from archaeological records we have at our disposal also textual sources on Nubia. The literary and historical sources known so far are all written outside Nubia. There are Roman (Byzantine) records on Nubia in the early period, collected in Fontes Historiae Nubiorum (Eide et al.  1998) and numerous Arab sources (Vantini  1975; Seignobos  2016) but no known Nubian accounts on Nubia. The only native written sources are letters and religious texts as well as various inscriptions and graffiti. Two big projects on graffiti are carried out by Adam Łajtar on evidence from Banganarti, and Grzegorz Ochała for the monastery of Ghazali (on textual sources, see Łajtar and Ochała, this volume, as well as chapters by Ruffini, this volume).

832   Artur Obłuski The majority of information at our disposal comes from the excavations of sites in Lower Nubia, and while the research coverage of the territory of Makuria is still patchy yet the gap is slowly but constantly being filled. Alwa is still neglected and thus underrepresented. The underestimation of the cultural achievements and significance of Alwa and overestimation of the wealth and importance of medieval Lower Nubia has come to dominate our perceptions of medieval Nubia as a whole. However, more southerly areas were significantly richer in terms of resources than the North. Contemporary eyewitness accounts of Arab travelers or historians who cited them record that Alwa was a better-developed country than Makuria, and the king of Alwa was more powerful and had a larger army (Vantini 1975:613). Even though archaeological data for Alwa is extremely limited, we should not doubt that it was a complex polity holding sway over vast territories of savannas and of the Nile valley.

Regional Characteristics of Medieval Nubia In Nubia of the Three Kingdoms period, three levels of regional organization can be discerned. The basic, meta-level is constituted by the kingdoms themselves. Within them there certainly were meso- and micro-levels. We find evidence of the meso-level in literary and epistolographic sources as well as in the hierarchy of settlements. The Arabic literary sources mention that the king of Makuria was the sovereign of thirteen other kings (Vantini  1975:333). In the Qasr el-Wizz monastery a letter was found written by the eparch of seven lands (Obłuski ed. in prep.). These meso-levels seem to correspond to tribal structures. A piece of modern evidence for regionalism is the dialects of the Nubian language preserved until present times: Kenuzi in the North, Mahasi around the Third Cataract in today’s area of Mahas, and Dongolawi in the Dongola Reach. The third level is constituted by “micro regionalisms”—local communities with the limited range of from one up to several settlement sites, often bound by the ties of kinship. Early in the Three Kingdoms period (380–550), there was a meaningful change in the settlement system in the territories of the nascent Nobadia and Makuria. In the North, some of the old urban centers weathered the storm of the collapse of the Meroitic Empire and played a vital role in the emerging Nobadian state. In all three new kingdoms new capitals were established and became focal points of political and, soon afterwards, religious power and authority. What is intriguing is that with few exceptions (Firka, Faras) the elite tumulus cemeteries from the early Three Kingdoms period (ca. 375–550) do not follow the settlement system. The tumuli appear in the areas where there is no evidence of strong and prominent presence of Meroites. The high ranking cemeteries of Gamai, Firka, Kosha, Wawa, Ez-Zuma, Tanqasi, Khizeinah, Hajar el-Beida, and Sururab in most cases have no associated settlements (Welsby 2002:116). These changes in the location of major centers doubtless reflect dynamic political changes taking place during the period.

The Archaeology of Medieval Nubian Kingdoms   833 During the 6th and early 7th century, the elites substantially changed the landscape of the Nubian kingdoms due to two factors. The first one was the conversion to a new religion. This required new temples for the new God: churches and monasteries. Some earlier temples, mostly in the North, were converted to churches (Richter 2002). The other factor was the elites’ urge to strengthen the centralized government and improve the security of the regions. This was achieved through the construction of a network of forts and fortified settlements. Interestingly, the current state of research suggests that this took place at roughly the same time in both Nobadia and Makuria. These changes resulted in the emergence of new centers, whose grandiose scale legitimized the power of the central authorities. The centers were also places where people were faced with and learned to respect the power of their rulers. During the Three and Two Kingdoms ­periods (375–1500), there was a significant increase of population inhabiting the Middle Nile valley. In Northern Nubia as well as in the Dongola Reach, which constituted the heartland of the kingdom of Makuria, there was an expansion of rural settlements in the 6th century. They formed a dense settlement system. One of the factors of the rapid increase in population seems to have been the widespread use of the saqiya (waterwheel), which allowed for enlargement of the area suitable for cultivation and made possible multiple harvests in a year. In the North, old centers still maintained their position (Qasr Ibrim, Gebel Adda) or even experienced a renaissance (Faras). Analyses of Nubian settlements in the full-blown kingdoms of the 11th and 12th centuries suggest the existence of a quite complex settlement pattern containing at least five different types of sites (Welsby 2006; Obłuski 2014a). The largest were Faras, Tungul, and Soba: state capitals and centers of authority and most important administration officials, such as the seat of the head of the church and the royal court—clearly a decision-making center of the highest level, affecting affairs of the entire state. There were also several regional centers, like Kalabsha for the Dodekaschoinos (seat of the exarch); Qasr lbrim for the region between the Dodekaschoinos and Faras; Firkinarti for the region of the Abri-Delgo Reach (later probably replaced by Sai Island); Jebel Sesi for the Third Cataract; Estabel and Bakhit for the Makurian territory. Most of them are submerged or have virtually not been touched by archaeologists. The absence of a confirmed important regional center between Faras and Firkinarti is notable and can be explained by the less dense occupation in Batn el-Hajar. The role of intraregional administrative centers—larger (Sabagura, Meinarti, Debeira, Serrarti, Gergetti, Abd el-Qadir), and smaller (Dibger, Ikhmindi, Sheikh Daud, Nauri, Ed-Deiga, and Merowe Sheriq)— was determined mainly by the presence of state institutions as well as economic factors (for example crafts centers, like the pottery workshop in Debeira). Some of them were newly established centers, designed to improve the integration of the states’ settlement systems. The next tier of settlements were towns of intraregional economic importance, like Gaaba, Araseer, Nabash, Abdallah-n Irqi, or Dabarosa. Their size was determined by the natural environment as well as specific local production and ease of transportation. They were seats of local fairs, presenting an easy opportunity for taxation and distribution, yet the presence of state administration there seems to have been very limited. They could have served as centers of exchange on the sub-regional level or small

834   Artur Obłuski ­ roduction centers on a local scale, as suggested by pottery production at Dabarosa p (Adams 1986). Despite the numerous (about four hundred clearly identified) nucleated settlements in Makuria, during the entire medieval period the most characteristic feature of the Nubian landscape is the almost continuous string of villages on the fringe of cultivated land and desert (Trigger 1965). A Zipf-Auerbach-rule–based analysis of the settlement system of the Makurian kingdom from the area between the First and Fourth Cataracts in the Late Makurian period reveals an interesting effect—state and regional capitals follow the rank-size rule distribution, something which was not a common feature for ancient and medieval settlement systems (Obłuski 2014a). This means that they shared high levels of integration, similar to that recorded in textual sources. Faras and Dongola, as centers of royal authority, dwarfed and dominated regional and state settlement systems, respectively. The distributions also suggest a better integration and higher level of development of settlements in Nobadia than in the Makurian heartlands—all thanks to inheriting several well-developed cities from the Meroitic Empire. The Makurian state was marked by fairly high levels of state integration in comparison to other ancient and medieval states (Obłuski 2014a).

Nobadia The territory of Nobadia, although in large part lost irrevocably under the surface of the Nubian Lake, is thus far the most archaeologically researched region of Nubia. This was the most urbanized area of the Meroitic Empire. Previous research suggested there was considerable continuity in the settlement system between Meroitic and the following period (Adams 1977:393–94). Other scholars stated that relatively few sites contained material which spanned the Meroitic/Post-Meroitic transition (Edwards 2004:201) and in many more cases the Early Nobadian occupation appeared only after a hiatus. The most recent studies found a common ground for both hypotheses (Obłuski  2014c). There is definitely continuity in some temple towns in the Dodekaschoinos, like Tafa, Dendur, Dakka, and Talmis. It is evidenced by the royal inscriptions of Kharamandoye and Silko left in the temple of Mandulis at Kalabsha, the conversion of the Dendur temple into a church in the second half of the 6th century on the order of King Tokiltoeton as well as the same act carried out on the order of King Merkurios early in the 8th century. In the Dodekaschoinos, in the frontier zone with Egypt, the situation was very complex in the 4th and 5th centuries. There is textual evidence for Blemmyan dominance over the region; however, this nomadic chiefdom controlling sedentary population in the Nile valley did not leave a lot in terms of material culture. The finds are limited to the Blemmyan elite cemeteries in Bab Kalabsha (Ricke  1967) and Wadi Qitna (Strouhal 1984), as well as Sayala, claimed to be Blemmyan, too. The Blemmyes controlled Dodekaschoinos at first together with the late Meroitic elites of Lower Nubia and then (since ca. 375) single-handedly, until their sway over this area was terminated by

The Archaeology of Medieval Nubian Kingdoms   835 the expanding Nobadian state in the second quarter of the 5th century. The fact is not surprising when we consider that in ca. 420 the Blemmyan king resided in the Eastern Desert, not willing to alter the traditional nomadic lifestyle (Eide et al. 1998:1126). Further upstream, the situation was similar: the largest Meroitic centers, like Qasr Ibrim, Jebel Adda, and Faras, were continuously occupied, while some (like Meinarti) were abandoned and then resettled. At the same time, human occupation expanded in previously uninhabited or sparsely inhabited areas, like the Batn el-Hajar (Adams 1977:395). This natural expansion of relatively small settlements has to be linked in the early phase of transition with the crisis of social relations and compromised security in the region and then with gradual consolidation of the Nobadian state and the increase of its population. When the Meroitic state ceased to fulfill its social redistributive and binding functions, part of the society had to change its subsistence strategies, and even switch to the pastoral nomadism. The newly occupied lands were far from optimal for settlement: inaccessible and unwelcoming, these habitats suggest a population valuing security rather than comfort. Between 350 and 700 ce several major urban centers arose (including Firka and Gebel Sisi) as well as a network of smaller, heavily fortified settlements: Sabagura (Stenico 1962), Ikhmindi (Stenico 1960), and Nauri. The new foundations, like Ikhmindi, Sheikh Dawd, and Sabagura, are different in their form from their Meroitic counterparts: curiously regular in terms of interior spatial organization and bearing many similarities to contemporary late Byzantine models. The regular net of double-room buildings within the enclosure and the fortifications themselves indicate the settlements’ military character. A dedicatory inscription from Ikhmindi (Sergio 1959) records its foundation for the “protection of animals and men” in the reign of King Tokiltoenon, probably in the 570s or 580s. In some settlements a church occupies the central place within the enclosure, demonstrating that the entire complex is from the post-conversion era, yet at Firkinarti a church is located on the southern spur of the island, outside the city walls and, as far as we can judge from the survey, there were no other churches inside the fortifications. Thanks to their administrative and economic functions and the coercive apparatus stationed in them, these centers were an element of stability within any given region. New foundations, like Sabagura and Ikhmindi, were also an element of the state propaganda legitimizing royal control. The energy invested in huge fortifications was at the same time an expression of the power of the state capable of creating and managing it. Urbanization and royal power were mutually supportive. In urban centers, people could experience the material as well as immaterial manifestations of power and authority (Obłuski 2014c:105). South of Qasr Ibrim there are several excavated sites with early Nobadian occupation: Tomas, Aniba, Masmas, Argin, Toshka and Arminna West, Jebel Adda, Faras, Debeira, and the most significant royal Nobadian cemeteries at Qustul and Ballana. Further upriver, around the Second Cataract lay Murshid and Gamai, at Meinarti (Adams 2000). South of the Second Cataract there is very little evidence of any substantial settlements as far as Firkinarti, yet many smaller ones have been found in areas previously not occupied. Sites in the area of the Third Cataract like Jebel Sesi and Nauri seem to date to the 6th century.

836   Artur Obłuski My analysis of the settlement system of Nobadia demonstrated that at the beginning of the 7th century the state and its settlement system were poorly integrated and dominated by small settlements. The functions usually performed by middle-sized centers were either monopolized by the larger centers or absent from the settlement system, which was dominated by petty and dispersed rural communities. Urbanization was nevertheless an important instrument for Nobadian elites, as seen, e.g., in the location of new centers in strategic yet poorly integrated areas of the northern and southern frontier, the Dodekaschoinos and the Third Cataract region, respectively. Cities served as local and regional centers of integration. Their objective was to reinforce control over the said areas and intensify integration of the entire territory into one state organism. The end of the 12th century was crucial for the history of the entire Mediterranean world and was a turning point for the Nubian kingdoms as well. The Ayyubid dynasty emerged in Egypt and the balance of power in Palestine had ultimately shifted to the Muslims. In 1173, in response to a Nubian attack on Aswan, the Ayyubid Egyptian general Shams ad-Din Turanshah raided Nubia, seized Qasr Ibrim, and damaged the city’s cathedral. Weakened Nubian control over the frontier region ignited a period of permanent insecurity and a shift of the population southbound to the inaccessible Batn elHajar and the Third Cataract region (Adams 1977:513; Edwards 2004:231). Several sites in favorable defensive position were developed in the course of the 13th century, including Kulb and Qasr Ico. Some of the settlements lacking city walls, like Debeira West and Meinarti, Arminna West, or Abdallahi-n Irqi (Barkóczi and Salomon 1974) were abandoned in that period.

Makuria The borders between the Nubian regions are described in the Arab sources. Ibn Selim placed the border between Maris (Nobadia) and Muqurra (Makuria) in the village of Bastu, which has not been located so far, but the area of the Third Cataract around Tombos and Hannek is a plausible suggestion (Welsby  2002:84). In the territory of Makuria there is much less evidence of continuity of social relations and settlement network than in the North. At the Nobadian frontier and further south in the Kerma basin there is little evidence that any Meroitic centers remained occupied down to the Makurian period and very few Early Makurian settlements from that time have been identified. On the other hand, the Two Kingdoms period experienced considerable expansion of the settlements to the west bank of the Nile, avoided before probably due to the insecurity caused by peoples migrating from what is now western Sudan. The occupation was dense between the Third Cataract and Khandaq in the Two Kingdoms period (Smith 2003:161). Several substantial settlements were identified in this area, e.g., at Sahaba and Teiti. There was also a large fortified site at Khandaq noted by several visitors to Nubia, but it is not preserved. Upstream, the situation does not change up to the southern Letti basin. Major Early Makurian presence is marked in the vicinity of Old Dongola, the capital city of the nascent Makurian state (Grzymski 1987;

The Archaeology of Medieval Nubian Kingdoms   837 Mahmoud el-Tayeb 1992), and a little to the south at Hammur (Żurawski 2000) along with four spectacular fortified sites: Estabel (Abkur), Diffar, Ed-Deiga, and Bakhit. Further upstream, the next concentration of important Early Makurian monuments was preserved at Tanqasi (Shinnie 1954; Godlewski 2008) and Ez-Zuma (see Mahmoud el-Tayeb 2012)—both monumental tumulus cemeteries—and at El-Kurru as well as Merowe Sheriq—both fortified settlements. Taken together, these constitute another important power center of the Early Makurian period. Material dated to Three Kingdoms period is absent in the old Napatan/Meroitic center at Jebel Barkal. The Merowe Dam Archaeological Salvage Project (MDASP) surveys and excavations in the Fourth Cataract region revealed numerous Makurian sites, like the Early Makurian elite tumuli cemetery at Hajar el-Beida (Chłodnicki et al. 2007), or fortified sites, like Dar el-Arab or Sueigi (Żurawski 2007). The results paint a picture of an area of dispersed but numerous small communities, not dissimilar to inhospitable areas in the North like Batn el-Hajar. Yet the MDASP still awaits proper publications. In the vicinity of Abu Hamed there is a group of fortified sites similar in design to Jebel Umm Marrihi, Jebel Nakharu, and Hosh el-Khafir (Welsby 2002:130), suggesting they are part of a large strategic undertaking.

Alwa The first problem we encounter when studying the archaeology of Alwa, apart from the scarcity of research, is the uncertainty as to where its border with Makuria was located, even in spite of the fact that this frontier territory was described in textual sources as El al-Abwab (Vantini 1975:165–66). The southern border of the kingdom lay in the land of Tubli (Tubula), on the White Nile—it ran along the Sudd swamps. Before it was even set, around the mid-4th century, the Meroitic Empire collapsed but the regional center of power presumably still lay at the city of Meroe as we can argue on the basis of the narratives of Ezana’s campaign to Nubia. By the end of the century, lower-rank tumulus burials were abundant in the vicinity of Meroe, which is in clear incongruity with the fact that there is no or very little occupation in the city itself (Bradley 1984) and elite burials ceased to be located there. The center of power shifted upriver, first to El-Hobagi and then even further south to Soba. The territories upriver, all the way to Khartoum, are virtually unknown areas as they have still never been explored archaeologically. There are also no publications of the surveys carried out in the territories of Alodia. Along the Blue and White Nile there are at least several medieval settlements. The passage of years did little to undermine the validity of the remark made by David Edwards in 1989 (Edwards 1989) that the medieval settlement system above the Fifth Cataract is essentially unknown, apart from a few sites of possible farmsteads (Mallinson 1996). The only medieval sites to have been explored south of Khartoum are Defeia (Vercoutter 1961) and a church at Saqadi (Edwards  2004:223). This lack of information is particularly intriguing when we compare it against the narrative of Ibn Hawqal, who claimed that Alwa was the most developed and the wealthiest of the medieval Nubian kingdoms and

838   Artur Obłuski that there was an uninterrupted string of villages along the banks of the Nile. Although the very wording of this statement may be a topos of Arabic literature, we cannot exclude that this topos was used to describe a reality which was close to this parable. For all these reasons, our knowledge of Alodia is dominated by results of excavations at just the site of Soba, the capital city of the kingdom. The site is ca. 275 ha in size but David Edwards has suggested this whole area was not occupied at the same time (Edwards 2004:221). Archaeological sources have shown that development in Soba was dual in character. Besides durable buildings of sun-dried and fired bricks, there were many less durable constructions, which is attested to by areas with numerous postholes in rounded patterns, suggesting traditional African-style domestic architecture. In contrast to Old Dongola and other big settlements in Makuria and Nobadia, neither the city nor even its part were fortified. Due to the better environmental condition and availability of water outside the Nile valley, the Alwan settlement pattern could have been more dispersed than the patterns in the other medieval Nubian kingdoms. However, there can be little reason to doubt that both in terms of environment and resources more southerly areas were significantly richer and more diverse than those in the arid North. We have virtually no archaeological information on the population living east of the Nile valley, except for two cemeteries located 10 km east of the river in the Northern Dongola Reach (Welsby 2002). Thus, we need to rely on Arab geographers and historians. Through all of antiquity, various tribes—now called collectively Beja—occupied the Eastern Desert. According to Al-Maqrizi, one of the groups, called “Zanafij,” was based in the desert not far from modern Berber (Vantini 1975:608). Although the picture of the ethnic situation in the desert is oversimplified and several tribes are treated as one political and ethnic entity, we seem to see a pattern whereby the strongest tribes or chiefdoms concentrated along the Eastern Desert trade routes leading to or, to put it better, from Red Sea ports: first Berenike, then Aidhab, and then Suwakin. It is very interesting that the pattern of their movement seems to have followed the shift of the ports serving the trade with the interior. This suggests that from Late Antiquity onwards, important recipients of the trade with Southeastern Asia lived south of Egypt. The extent of authority of Nubian kings over the Western Desert is not known. An inscription mentioning the Makurian king Siti (ca. 1330) and his conquest, or at least Makurian presence, has been recorded at Jebel Abu Negila, ca. 200 km southwest of Dongola, along Wadi el-Malik (Ochała 2011). A medieval church and cemetery were discovered by Jana Eger et Jebel el-Ain along the same Wadi as well (Eger 2011). The medieval occupation identified in the Western Desert, i.e., the oases Laqiya and Selima (Bonnet 1991), was also mentioned in the textual sources (Welsby 2002:84).

Religious Architecture The change in architecture during the Three Kingdoms period was substantial, since this period saw a shift to a religion radically different to one which had served the local

The Archaeology of Medieval Nubian Kingdoms   839 population in the Nile valley for three thousand years. Before that we have an interesting gap in the construction of monumental architecture in Nubia, sans tumulus tombs, for about three hundred years. Then the new power centers in the Middle Nile valley could afford to fund almost simultaneously fortified settlements and new monumental religious buildings for the new God in the main urban centers. Then new religion gradually spread through the kingdoms from urban centers to the remotest villages and ca. 700 we can say that Christianity was really embedded in the societies of Nobadia and Makuria. This is attested to by the fact that the majority of known village churches were erected around that time. With the growth and expansion of the new religion, the number of churches rose. What is intriguing is the lack of correlation between the size of the community and the number of churches associated with it; some of the temples were doubtlessly built for purposes other than serving only the local community. They could be an expression of individual piety as well as of social ranking, whereby the upper echelons of the community communicated their social position by such foundations. Their number could also depend on the local or regional social and religious dynamics that we so far lack enough data to grasp, like the appearance of local saints or miraculous events that took place in a particular location. Surveys in Nubia have identified around three hundred churches (Adams 2009). They show great variability in form and size, which is not surprising if we take into consideration the length of the Middle Nile valley and the almost one-thousand-year-long timespan of building activity by the Christians there. Christian sacral architecture of Nobadia is different from its Makurian counterpart in the early period (ca. 500–700) (Obłuski 2016:506–508). The primary difference is the arrangement of the eastern part of the building. In Makurian churches, a synthronon (bench for monks) filled the apse, causing the location of the altar in the nave and the introduction of a templon (altar screen) marking the boundary of the hierateion (eastern part of church; only for clergy). The auxiliary rooms on both sides of the sanctuary were accessed by entrances from the aisles and they were also interconnected by a passage behind the apse. From the beginning the southeastern room was occupied by a baptistery. In Nobadian churches, the eastern section was tripartite and it lacked the passage behind the apse. The lack of a synthronon allowed for direct communication between the apse and auxiliary rooms on both sides of the sanctuary. The altar of the Early Nobadian churches was situated in the apse or just in front of it. The division between the sanctuary and the naos was marked by a triumphal arch, located at the mouth of the apse or at the first pair of pillars west of the apse. In the early period, this symbolic partition between hierateion and naos was sufficient and the templon was absent. Different treatment of the western section of the church is the second distinctive feature. In Makuria, even the earliest buildings were divided into three rooms at the western end and a staircase occupied one of the corner spaces. In Nobadia, this feature was absent from the earliest churches. At the beginning of the 8th century, a process of “Makurization” of Nobadia started in the church architecture as well as in the other spheres of life. This matches information from historical narratives that the two kingdoms of Nobadia and Makuria merged into one kingdom at the end of the 7th or beginning of the 8th century. The “Makurization”

840   Artur Obłuski of the churches happened at a time when the Old Church at Qasr Ibrim was altered (Aldsworth 2010), Qasr el-Wizz was rearranged according to a fashion coming from the new capital at Tungul (Obłuski 2016), and the Paulos Cathedral was erected, that is, at the beginning of the 8th century. This development is also supported by another change in the churches at Qasr Ibrim, Faras (Godlewski 2006), and Qasr el-Wizz: the introduction of the entrances on the north and south side of the church, a feature that also belongs to the Makurian canon of sacral architecture. Later, from the end of the 12th century, churches have a tendency to be small in size. The conversion to Christianity brought to Nubia several social innovations, like monasticism, absent from the Middle Nile valley before. Christianity was probably already present, at least in northern Nubia but it was not widely spread and institutionalized. Erection of a big number of vernacular churches at the beginning of the 8th century suggests that to embed in Nubian society new religion needed about 150 years. According to the medieval Coptic historian Abū al-Makārim, there were plentiful churches and monasteries in Nubia (for monasticism see Obłuski 2019b). For the southernmost Alwa he quotes four hundred churches but none have yet been discovered (Al-Makārim 1895). While the numbers given by him were exaggerated, still the amount of churches must have been considerable, if it drew his attention. We have certain attestations of anchorites at Faras (Griffith 1927) and Ez-Zuma (Łajtar 2003) and of coenobia (communal monasteries; Jeute 1994; Anderson 1999; Jakobielski and Scholz eds. 2001; Obłuski ed. in prep.) as well as tentative laurae (more solitary monasteries; Anderson 1999). In Nobadia, the most fully studied example is that at Qasr al-Wizz (Scanlon 1970, 1972, 1974; Obłuski in prep.) located in a dominant position over a high hilltop 4 km north of the capital city of Faras. It was founded probably in the second half of the 6th century and is a place where the sole assemblage of texts from the monastic context in Nubia was excavated. David Edwards suggests the existence of an urban monastery at Qasr Ibrim on the basis of affinities of one of the buildings (Building 785) to a monastic dormitory at Qasr al-Wizz (Edwards 2004:246). Several other monasteries are located in Batn al-Hajar as well as south of Dal, for example at Akasha and Ukma (Mills 1965, 1973). Julie Anderson suggested that a small settlement on Kulbnarti may have been a lauratype community (Anderson 1999). In Makuria, monasteries were certainly located at El-Ugal (Wadi Abu Zeit), where a dormitory-like structure is clearly visible in the kite photos, two known partly excavated monasteries from Old Dongola: on Kom D and Kom H, and the Ghazali monastery in Wadi Abu Dom. Excavations on Kom D at Tungul have stopped, while Kom H is still under excavation and the works so far focused in the annexes added to the monastery proper. The latter brought to the scholars’ attention a set of wonderful wall paintings, showing the association of Makuria with the Mediterranean world by presence of influences from Byzantium, Egypt, and the Middle East, merged with indigenous African elements (Martens-Czarnecka  2011). The monastery at Ghazali, the largest coenobium identified so far in the entire Nubia, is the archetypal communal complex. It exhibits all the characteristics one may expect from such a monastery: communal spaces for worship (North and South Churches), a dormitory, two refectories and food processing facilities

The Archaeology of Medieval Nubian Kingdoms   841 with a mill and oil press, features found in monastic contexts of the Nile valley only at the Anba Hadra monastery in Aswan (Monneret de Villard  1927). Excavations at Ghazali delivered also the second largest assemblage of tombstones in the entire Nubia, all from the monastic cemetery (Ciesielska et al. 2017; Obłuski et al. in press), and the largest collection of graffiti scratched on pottery. The most intriguing feature of the monastery are two sets of over a dozen toilets each: one located in the eastern part of enclosure, the other in the North-West Annex (Obłuski et al. in press). They show a definite break with ancient tradition of latrines built as open spaces. In the former case each of the toilets is a single elongated room entered at one end with a toilet seat located at the far end and a clean out behind. In the latter it is a small slightly elevated rectangular room connected to a corridor with a bench for those waiting for their turn. The Ghazali monastery was erected in the timespan between 680 and 720, most probably by King Merkurios, who unified Makuria and Nobadia and was called the “New Constantine” in the History of Patriarchs of Alexandria (Vantini 1975:40). The monasteries were likely important beacons of literacy and craftsmanship. Several ostraca and wall inscriptions linked to education in Greek and Coptic have been recovered from Qasr el-Wizz, the monastery on Kom H in Tungul and Ghazali. The monastery of Ghazali was most certainly involved in iron smelting (Obłuski  2019a) and Kom H in parchment (Żurawski  1994) and pottery production (Obłuski 2019a). Nubian monks also delivered services which demanded a high level of education, such as those of a notarios (secretary) and/or served in the chancelleries of high court officials (Obłuski 2019a). The end of monasticism in Nubia correlates with a considerable weakening of central and regional authorities and impoverishment of Nubian society due to instability and frequent Mamluk invasions at the end of the 13th century.

Conclusion The regionalisms of medieval Nubia can be traced on three levels: states, provinces within states, and local communities. Regions seem to correspond to tribes while micro-levels of local communities to clans or extended families. In northern Nubia, regionalism was strengthened by the survival of several urban communities in the old Meroitic centers while south of the Third Nile cataract they were abandoned. The hierarchy of settlements in Nubia consisted of six levels. The first-level settlements (state capitals) dominated regional settlement systems and were far larger than second-tier cities. The latter, regional centers of power like Kalabsha and Qasr Ibrim, survived the collapse of Meroitic Empire and preserved their urban character during the transitional period. Others like Gebel Sesi, Firkinarti, or Bakhit were new foundations that became focal points of political and religious power and authority. The next two tiers formed settlements of administrative and military significance marked by the presence of fortifications. The next level’s exemplary sites are Gaaba, Araseer, Nabash, Abdallahn Irqi, or Dabarosa, towns of intraregional economic importance. The last tier were villages whose almost continuous expanse can be observed all along the banks of the Nile until today.

842   Artur Obłuski

References Cited Adams, W.Y. 1977 Nubia: Corridor to Africa. Princeton University Press. ——— 1986 Ceramic Industries of Medieval Nubia. Memoirs of the UNESCO Archaeological Survey of Sudanese Nubia. University Press of Kentucky. ——— 1996 Qaṣr Ibrîm: The Late Medieval Period. Egypt Exploration Society Excavation Memoir 59. ——— 2000 Meinarti, v. 1: The Late Meroitic, Ballaña and Transitional Occupation. BAR International Series 895. Archaeopress. ——— 2009 The Churches of Nobadia. BAR International Series 2000. Archaeopress. ——— 2013 Qasr Ibrim: The Ballaña Phase. Egypt Exploration Society Excavation Memoir 104. Aldsworth, F. 2010 Qasr Ibrim: The Cathedral Church. Egypt Exploration Society Excavation Memoir 97. Al-Makārim, A. 1895 The Churches and Monasteries of Egypt and Some Neighbouring Countries, ed. B.T.A. Evetts. Anecdota oxoniensia, Semitic series 7. Clarendon Press. Al-Maqrīzī, A.ī.‘A. 1911 El-mawãʻiz wal̓-iʻtibâr fi dhikr el-khītat wal̓-âthâr, ed. Gaston Wiet. Mémoires publiés par les membres de l’Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale du Caire 3. Anderson, J.R. 1999 Monastic Lifestyles of the Nubian Desert: Seeking the Mysterious Monks of Makuria. Sudan & Nubia 3:72–83. Barkóczi, L. and A. Salomon 1974 Abdallah Nirqi 1964: Archaeological Investigation of the Settlement Town “A.” Acta Archaeologica Academiae Scientarum Hungaricae 26:289–338. Bates, O. and D. Dunham 1927 Excavations at Gemmai. Harvard African Studies 8. Harvard University Press. Berthier, S. 1997 Recherches archéologiques sur la capitale de l’empire de Ghana. Étude d’un secteur d’habitat à Koumbi Saleh, Mauritanie: campagnes II-III-IV-V (1975–1976)–(1980–1981). Cambridge Monographs in African Archaeology 41. BAR International Series 680. Archaeopress. Bonnet, C. 1991 Les fouilles archéologiques de Kerma (Soudan). Rapport préliminaire sur les campagnes de 1988–1989 de 1989–90 et de 1990–1991. Genava n.s. 31:5–20. Bradley, R.J. 1984 Meroitic Chronology. Meroitica 7:195–211. Burstein, S. 2009 Ancient African Civilizations: Kush and Axum. Markus Wiener. Chłodnicki, M., M.  Lemiesz, A.  Longa, P.  Osypiński, and M.  Sip 2007 Fourth Cataract: Excavations at es-Sadda and Hagar el-Beida, Survey between es-Sadda and Shemkhiya: Two Seasons of Work in 2005. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean 17:337–47. Ciesielska, J.A., A. Obłuski, and R.J. Stark 2017 The Cemeteries of Ghazali, Season 2015/2016. In Bayuda Studies: Proceedings of the First International Conference on the Archaeology of the Bayuda Desert in Sudan, ed. J. Auenmüller, T. Karberg, and A. Lohwasser, pp. 257–72. Meroitica 27. Harrassowitz. Clarke, S. 1912 Christian Antiquities in the Nile Valley: A Contribution towards the Study of the Ancient Churches. Clarendon Press. Edwards, D.N. 1989 Archaeology and Settlement in Upper Nubia in the 1st Millennium ad Cambridge Monographs in African Archaeology 36. BAR International Series 537. B.A.R. ——— 1999 Christianity and Islam in the Middle Nile: Towards a Study of Religion and Social Change. In Case Studies in Archaeology and World Religion, ed. T. Insoll, pp. 94–104. BAR International Series 755. Archaeopress. ——— 2004 The Nubian Past: An Archaeology of the Sudan. Routledge.

The Archaeology of Medieval Nubian Kingdoms   843 Eger, J. 2011 Ein mittelalterliches Kloster am Gebel al-Ain? Der Antike Sudan: Mitteilungen der Sudanarchäologischen Gesellschaft zu Berlin 22:115–20. Eide, T., T.  Hägg, R.H.  Pierce, and L.  Török eds. 1998 Fontes Historiae Nubiorum: Textual Sources for the History of the Middle Nile Region between the Eighth Century BC and the Sixth Century AD, v. 3: From the First to the Sixth Century AD. IKRR/Department of Greek, Latin and Egyptology, University of Bergen. Emery, W.B. and L.P.  Kirwan 1938 The Royal Tombs of Ballana and Qustul. Mission Archéologique de Nubie 1929–1934. Government Press (Cairo). Firth, C.M. 1915 The Archaeological Survey of Nubia. Report for 1909–1910. Government Press (Cairo). ——— 1927 The Archaeological Survey of Nubia. Report for 1910–1911. Government Press (Cairo). Godlewski, W. 2006 Pachoras: The Cathedrals of Aetios, Paulos and Petros. The Architecture. Warsaw University Press. ——— 2008 MtoM: Early Makuria Research Project, Season 2006. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean 18:463–76. Griffith, F.L. 1927 Oxford Excavations in Nubia. Liverpool Annals of Archaeology and Anthropology 14:57–116. Grzymski, K. 1987 Archaeological Reconnaissance in Upper Nubia. SSEA Publications 14. Benben. Ibn Ḥawqal, M. [active 10th century] 1967 Kitāb ṣūrat al-arḍ, ed. J.H. Kramers. Bibliotheca geographorum arabicorum. Matḅ aʻ Brīl. Jakobielski, S. and P.O. Scholz eds. 2001 Dongola-Studien: 35 Jahre polnischer Forschungen im Zentrum des makuritischen Reiches. Bibliotheca Nubica et Aethiopica. Zakład Archeologii Śródziemnomorskiej PAN. Jeute, Piotr 1994 Monasteries in Nubia—An Open Issue. Nubica 1:59–97. Kirwan, L.P. 1939 The Oxford University Excavations at Firka. Oxford University Press. Łajtar, A. 2003 Inscriptions from the Anachorite Grotto at Ez-Zuma. In Survey and Excavations between Old Dongola and Ez-Zuma, ed. B. Żurawski, pp. 512–17. Nubia 2. Neriton. Mahmoud el-Tayeb 1992 Excavation at el-Ghaddar—Old Dongola. In Études nubiennes. Conférence de Genève, v. 2, ed. C. Bonnet, pp. 65–82. Actes du VIIe Congrès international d’études nubiennes. Mallinson, M.D.S. 1996 Road Archaeology in the Middle Nile. Sudan Archaeological Research Society Publication 1. Martens-Czarnecka, M. 2011 The Wall Paintings from the Monastery on Kom H in Dongola. Warsaw University Press McIntosh, S.K. 1995 Excavations at Jenné-Jeno, Hambarketolo, and Kaniana (Inland Niger Delta, Mali): The 1981 Season. University of California Publications in Anthropology. University of California Press. Michałowski, K. 1974 Faras; malowidła ścienne w zbiorach Muzeum Narodowego w Warszawie. Wydawn. Artystyczno-Graficzne. Mileham, G.S. 1910 Churches in Lower Nubia. Eckley B. Coxe Junior Expedition to Nubia 2. University Museum (Philadelphia). Mills, A.J. 1965 The Reconnaissance Survey from Gemai to Dal: A Preliminary Report for 1963–64. Kush 13:1–12. ——— 1973 The Archaeological Survey from Gemai to Dal. Report on the 1965–1966 Season. Kush 15:200–10.

844   Artur Obłuski Monneret de Villard, Ugo 1927 Il monastero di S. [i.e., Santo] Simeone presso Aswân. Tip. e Libreria Pontificia Arcivescovile S. Giuseppe. ——— 1935 La Nubia Medioevale 1–2. Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale. ——— 1938 La Storia della Nubia Christiana. Pont. Institutum Orientalium Studiorum. ——— 1957 La Nubia Medioevale 3–4. Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale. Obłuski, A. 2013 Dodekaschoinos in Late Antiquity: Ethnic Blemmyes vs. Political Blemmyes and the Arrival of Nobades. Der Antike Sudan. Mitteilungen der Sudanarchäologischen Gesellschaft zu Berlin 24:141–47. ——— 2014a Ghazali Site Presentation Project 2012–2014 Preliminary Results. Der Antike Sudan. Mitteilungen der Sudanarchäologischen Gesellschaft zu Berlin 25:197–204. ——— 2014b Rank-Size Rule in Nubian Settlement Systems. In The Fourth Cataract and Beyond: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference for Nubian Studies, ed. J.R. Anderson and D.A. Welsby, pp. 867–73. Peeters. ——— 2014c The Rise of Nobadia: Social Changes in Northern Nubia in Late Antiquity. Journal of Juristic Papyrology Supplement 20. Raphael Taubenschlag Foundation. ——— 2016 Nobadian and Makurian Church Architecture: Qasr el-Wizz, a Case Study. In Aegyptus et Nubia Christiana: The Włodzimierz Godlewski Jubilee Volume, ed. A.  Łajtar, A.  Obłuski, and I.  Zych, pp. 481–512. Polish Centre of Mediterranean Archaeology, University of Warsaw. ——— 2019a Economy of Nubian Monasticism: A Preliminary Assessment. In Monasticism and Economy: Rediscovering an Approach to Work and Poverty, ed. I. Jonveaux, T. Quartier, B. Sawicki, and P. Trianni, pp. 123–42. Studia Anselmiana. ——— 2019b The Monasteries and Monks of Nubia. Journal of Juristic Papyrology Supplement 36. Raphael Taubenschlag Foundation. Obłuski, A. ed. in prep. Excavations at Qasr el-Wizz, George T. Scanlon, Director. University of Chicago Oriental Institute Nubian Expedition 15. Obłuski, A., M.  Bogacki, W.  Małkowski, S.  Maślak, and M.  Zaki ed-Din 2015 Al-Ghazali Monastery 2012. The First Preliminary Report. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean 24:425–35. Obłuski, A. and G. Ochała 2016 La redécouverte d’un monastère nubien: premiers résultats des fouilles polonaises à el-Ghazali. In Actes de la Seizième Journée d’études coptes, ed. N. Bosson and A. Boud’hors, pp. 63–79. Études coptes 14. Centre Paul Albert-Février. Obłuski, A., G. Ochała, M. Korzeniowska, and S. Maślak in press The Excavations at Ghazali 2013–2014 (Winter). Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean 26. Ochała, G. 2011 A King of Makuria in Kordofan. In Nubian Voices: Studies in Christian Nubian Culture, ed. J.  van der Vliet and A.  Łajtar, pp. 149–56. Journal of Juristic Papyrology Supplement Series 15. Raphael Taubenschlag Foundation. Presedo Velo, F.J. 1963 Antigüedades cristianas de la isla de Kasar-Ico: (2a. catarata del Nilo, Sudán). Egipto Misión Arqueológica Española en Comité Español de la Unesco para Nubia: Memorias de la Misión Arqueológica. Dirección General de Relaciones Culturales. ——— 1964 La fortaleza nubia de Cheikh-Daud, Tumas (Egipto), ed. J. Zozaya. Egipto Misión Arqueológica Española: Memorias de la Misión Arqueológica Española en Nubia (Egipto y Sudán). Dirección General de Relaciones Culturales. ——— 1965 El poblado cristiano de la isla de Abkanarti en la segunda catarata del Nilo (Sudán). Egipto Misión Arqueológica Española: Memorias de la Misión Arqueológica Española en Nubia (Egipto y Sudán). Dirección General de Relaciones Culturales.

The Archaeology of Medieval Nubian Kingdoms   845 Reisner, G.A. 1910 The Archaeological Survey of Nubia: Report for 1907–1908. National Printing Department (Cairo). Richter, S. 2002 Studien zur Christianisierung Nubiens. Sprachen und Kulturen des christlichen Orients 11. Reichert. Ricke, H. 1967 Ausgrabungen von Khor-Dehmit bis Bet el-Wali. University of Chicago Oriental Institute Nubian Expedition 2. University of Chicago Press. Scanlon, G.T. 1970 Excavations at Kasr el-Wizz: A Preliminary Report I. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 56:29–57. ——— 1972 Excavations at Kasr el-Wizz: A Preliminary Report II: The Monastery. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 58:7–42. ——— 1974 Corrigenda: Excavations at Kasr el-Wizz: A Preliminary Report II. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 60:78. Seignobos, R. 2016 Les relations entre les pays d’islam et la Nubie (641-ca. 1340): Élaboration et transmission des savoirs historiographiques. Doctoral dissertation, Université ParisSorbonne, I (Panthéon). Sergio, D. 1959 Un epigraphe Greco-Nubiana da Ikhmindi. La Parola del Passato 14:458–65. Shinnie, P.L. 1954 Excavations at Tanqasi. Kush 2:66–85. ——— 1955 Excavations at Soba. Occasional Papers 3. Sudan Antiquities Service. Shinnie, P.L. and N.H. Chittick 1961 Ghazali: A Monastery in the Northern Sudan. Occasional Papers 5. Sudan Antiquities Service. Shinnie, P.L. and M. Shinnie 1978 Debeira West: A Mediaeval Nubian Town. Aris & Phillips. Smith, S.T. 2003 The University of California Dongola Reach Expedition: West Bank Reconnaissance Survey 1997–1998. Kush 18:157–72. Stenico, A. 1960 Ikhmindi: una città fortificata medievale della bassa Nubia. A. Nicola. ——— 1962 Sabagura. La città. Oriens Antiquus 1:55–80. Strouhal, E. 1984 Wadi Qitna and Kalabsha-South: Late Roman-Early Byzantine Tumuli Cemeteries in Egyptian Nubia, v. 1: Archaeology. Charles University of Prague. Trigger, B.G. 1965 History and Settlement in Lower Nubia. Yale University Publications in Anthropology 69. Vantini, G. 1975 Oriental Sources Concerning Nubia. Heidelberger Akademie der Wissenschaften and Polish Academy of Sciences. Vercoutter, J. 1961 Le sphinx d’Aspelta de Defeia. In Mélanges Mariette, ed. J.S.F. Garnot, pp. 97–104. Bibliothèque d’Étude 32. Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale. Weeks, K.R. 1967 The Classic Christian Townsite at Arminna West. Publications of the Pennsylvania-Yale Expedition to Egypt 3. Peabody Museum of Natural History of Yale University. Welsby, D.A. 1998 Soba, v. 2: Renewed Excavations within the Metropolis of the Kingdom of Alwa in Central Sudan. Memoirs of the British Institute in Eastern Africa 15. British Museum. ——— 2001 Life on the Desert Edge: Seven Thousand Years of Settlement in the Northern Dongola Reach, Sudan. Sudan Archaeological Research Society Publication 7. BAR International Series 980. Archaeopress. ——— 2002 The Medieval Kingdoms of Nubia: Pagans, Christians and Muslims along the Middle Nile. British Museum. ——— 2006 Settlement in Nubia in the Medieval Period. In Acta Nubica: Proceedings of the X Nubian Society Conference, ed. A. Roccati and I. Caneva, pp. 21–43. Libreria dello Stato.

846   Artur Obłuski Welsby, D.A. and C.M. Daniels 1991 Soba: Archaeological Research at a Medieval Capital on the Blue Nile. Memoirs of the British Institute in Eastern Africa 12. Żurawski, B. 1994 The Service Area in North-Eastern Corner of the Monastery on Korn H in Old Dongola: A Preliminary Report. Nubica 3:319–60. ——— 2000 The Southern Dongola Reach Survey: Report on Fieldwork in 2000. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean 11:281–90. ——— 2003 Survey and Excavations between Old Dongola and Ez-Zuma. Nubia 2. Neriton. ——— 2007 Where the Water Is Crying: Survey and Excavations in Shemkhiya, Dar el-Arab (Suegi el-Gharb) and Saffi Island Carried Out by the Polish Expedition to the Fourth Cataract in the Winter of 2004/2005. Preliminary Report. In Proceedings of the Second International Conference on the Archaeology of the Fourth Nile Cataract, ed. C. Näser and M. Lange, pp. 179–205. Meroitica 23. Harrassowitz. ——— 2012 St. Raphael Church I at Banganarti: Mid-Sixth to Mid-Eleventh Century. An Introduction to the Site and the Epoch. Gdańsk Archaeological Museum African Reports 10. Gdańsk Archaeological Museum and Heritage Protection Fund. ——— 2014 Kings and Pilgrims: St Raphael Church II at Banganarti, Mid-Eleventh to MidEighteenth Century. Nubia 5. Neriton.

Chapter 42

A rts a n d Cr a fts of the M edieva l K i ngdoms of N u bi a Dobrochna Zielińska

Introduction State of the Art The visual expression of the Christian Nubian kingdoms, from the moment of their Christianization, reflects their religious and cultural identity.1 While studying Nubian art of this period one has to consider that this quite young discipline has a dynamic history and that regular new discoveries lead to new interpretations and theories. Early research focused mainly on Lower Nubia, which still gives an unbalanced image of Nubia, especially when compared to the limited information available concerning the southern kingdom of Alwa. It strongly influenced the first syntheses of the subject and only in recent years has new material from the territory of Makuria gradually changed previous views.2 The first attempts to draw up the main lines of developments in church architecture (Adams  1965; Gartkiewicz  1982) were recently updated by studies based on recent discoveries in Dongola (the capital of Makuria) and material from nearby Banganarti and provided the basis for a better-founded comparison between two regions in their historical context (see below). As of now, there are only isolated studies devoted to the monastic (Obłuski 2019:128–201), domestic, and civic architecture (Anderson 1996).

848   Dobrochna Zielińska The first studies of Nubian wall painting were based on the discoveries in Faras. Their unique character (as painted decoration of a cathedral) and the presumed development in their style, based initially on the use of color, determined a general periodization of Nubian wall painting for a long time (Michałowski  1974:29). Later this system was rejected (Łaptaś 1996) while iconographical analyses referred to monuments other than Faras cathedral (Godlewski 1992, 1995). For pottery studies the basic publication is still the one by W.Y. Adams (1986), based on Faras workshops and thus referring to Lower Nubia. For Upper Nubia there are still only site-based reports.3 As for the Alwan pottery, the main study was based on the material from Soba (Welsby and Daniels 1991; Welsby 1998). Although reference will be made only to the most characteristic forms of wheelmade pottery production it is worth mentioning the long tradition of the local handmade pottery, which could have been the inspiration or active element in the processes of forming pottery types in particular periods. The often limited quality of documentation of early archaeological research can be explained by the fact that it concerned preliminary surveys. For Nubian art, pioneering works like the survey by U. Monneret de Villard are still a basic (and often the only) source of documentation (Monneret de Villard 1935–57). This fact is also the explanation for a lack of precise dating of the monuments, based mainly on preliminary plans and no archeological evidence. The rescue character of the big archaeological campaigns, triggered by the construction of the dams in Aswan and Merowe, forced research focused mainly on big centers and monumental buildings (churches), while more attention to domestic architecture dates back only to recent years. Last but not least, the lack of Nubian textual sources that can explain certain forms of architecture or images leaves us at a level of hypotheses, based on possible explanations derived from neighboring centers like Byzantium and Egypt.

Historical Background: Territory and Time—Misleading Factors An important element that determines the periodization in Nubian art is the history of the Nubian kingdoms (see chapters by Ruffini and by Obłuski, this volume). After the collapse of the Meroitic Empire, three independent kingdoms arose in its former territory. By lack of a central seat of authority and thus of artistic trends, their early development, although based on the Meroitic inheritance, was determined by different influences. The northern kingdom of Nobadia was strongly inspired by neighboring Byzantine Egypt, which was less visible in the independent and somehow isolated kingdom of Makuria (with some elements derived directly for the core territory of the Byzantine Empire during the reign of Justinian the Great), while in the southernmost Alwa, apparently the presence of the Blemmye tribes of the Eastern Desert can be observed as well as possible contacts with the Axumite state.

Arts and Crafts of the Medieval Kingdoms of Nubia   849 At the time of the Christianization of the Nubian kingdoms, the whole region of the Eastern Mediterranean was under the authority of Byzantium and under influence of its culture. Half a century later the Arab invasion changed this situation, while the Nubian kingdoms stayed out of the sphere. Meanwhile the unification of Makuria and Nobadia meant the end of the latter as an independent state with its own artistic tradition. A similar process, although not caused by political annexation, could be observed in the case of the southern kingdom of Alwa, which after the 9th century seems to have been influenced by the artistic center of Old Dongola (see below; also Danys and Zielińska 2017:182–84). Among important external factors, iconoclasm, which has wiped out much evidence of (especially monumental) religious art in Byzantium, leaves the analysis of the early period of Nubian art deprived of direct analogies, and could even lead to the misleading conclusion that certain phenomena appeared in Nubia earlier than in Byzantium.

Art of Nobadia (6th to 7th Century) When it comes to material culture, very little has survived from the period of the independent kingdom of Nobadia. Most of the buildings were demolished or replaced by later reconstructions and architectural elements did not survive in their original context, being reused in later constructions.

Architecture Most of the Nobadian churches present three-aisled basilica plans. In the larger cathedrals at Qasr Ibrim and Faras, the nave was divided into five aisles (Godlewski 2006a:37; Aldsworth 2010:126–36). The tripartite east part consisted of a semi-circular sanctuary that contained the altar, and two subsidiary rooms (pastophoria),4 of which the southern one served also as a baptistery (Godlewski 1992:282–85; Obłuski 2016:494–96). In most of the churches in the Faras region, the space of the sanctuary was accentuated by a triumphal arch. It consisted of a pair of columns located at the mouth of the apse or in the first pair of piers west of sanctuary. This element, apparently influenced by Byzantine Egypt, disappeared after the unification with the kingdom of Makuria (Wojciechowski 2010; Obłuski 2016:498–500). From the territory of Nobadia come some examples of churches built in adapted pharaonic temples. They are mostly dated to the 6th–7th century (Godlewski 1992:285–86). The surviving examples are known mainly from the reused rock-cut temples, which were unfit for dismantling for their building material. The plan and interior arrangement of these churches is irregular, determined by pharaonic architecture. Scattered examples of preserved civic architecture on Nobadia clearly show that (quite naturally) in the case of palaces or residential buildings the Meroitic tradition has been continued (Godlewski 1992:282, 286; Obłuski 2014:57–59).

850   Dobrochna Zielińska

Architectural Decoration Architectural stone decoration consists mainly of capitals, elements of doorways, and window grills. All these objects show two main characteristics (Godlewski 1992:286–87). The first is the still-living Meroitic tradition, which can be also distinguished in the high quality of the workshops (which means an unbroken continuation of their functioning). The style presents both pharaonic-based elements and strongly modified antique forms that were already adopted by Meroitic artists from Greco-Roman Egypt. A characteristic mixture of those elements can be found in the shape of horizontal lintels decorated with a combination of lotus flowers, ankhshaped crosses, and Maltese crosses. The continuation of the Meroitic tradition is also shown in decorated window grills that remained in use. Their decoration was based mainly on ­floral motifs like lotus flowers or fantastic creatures (Rodziewicz 1967:154; Godlewski 1982:272). The second stream was a contemporary Egyptian style, especially of Upper Egypt,5 that is visible mainly in the resemblance of the capitals and lintels from many sites of the Qasr Ibrim/Faras region with those from churches at Philae Island (Lyons 1896). Among them there are Late Antique variants of pseudo-Corinthian capitals forms and Byzantine-like inspirations of the basket-like capitals covered with dense plaited ornaments. Lintels, door frames, and voussoirs mainly show decoration based on tondos filled with different kinds of rosettes and crosses, and friezes decorated with plaited ornaments or motifs of grapevines (Lyons  1896:58, 59, 61, 66, 67; Godlewski  1982; Aldsworth 2010:99–110, 112–13). The architectural decoration was usually polychromed (Fig. 42.1; Gartkiewicz 1978:88; Ryl-Preibisz 1987:247).

Wall Painting Nobadian wall painting is represented by only a few examples, preserved in five monuments: Faras Cathedral of Aetios (Jakobielski et al. 2017), the monastery of Qasr el-Wizz (Zielińska in prep. 1) and three churches, at Naqa el-Oqba (Godlewski 1992:289), Wadi es-Sebua (van Loon at al. in prep.), and Abu Oda (Godlewski 1992:289–90). Here, in a number of cases, one can observe similarities with the Egyptian painting of that time. The apse composition in the church at Naqa el-Oqba, both in its concept (presence of angels on both sides of the central group of the Virgin and Child) and details like the form of the throne of the Theotokos, can be found in painting at Sohag (Bolmann 2016:142–43, fig. 10.19). Illusionist portals in one of the cells in Qasr el-Wizz recall similar ones on Egyptian funerary stelae (Tudor 2011:78, fig. 10) or the one in the aforementioned conch in the Red Monastery in Sohag (Bolmann 2016, fig. 10.23). On the other hand, paintings from the ceiling at Abu Oda, presenting a standing Christ and an unknown saint (Fig. 42.2), rather show the style of the Syro-Palestine/Byzantine tradition from the time of the reign of Justinian the Great, which brings to mind icons in the Monastery of Saint Catharine at Mount Sinai (Weitzmann 1978: pl. 7), illuminations in manuscripts like the Rabbula

Arts and Crafts of the Medieval Kingdoms of Nubia   851

Figure 42.1  Column capital from the Cathedral of Aetios (ca. 7th century), Faras. Courtesy of the National Museum in Warsaw. Photograph: Piotr Ligier.

Gospel (Syriac Orthodox Resources, http://sor.cua.edu/Bible/RabbulaMs.html), or 5thand 6th-century mosaic workshops in Ravenna (Deliyannis 2010).

Craftsmanship Studies of Nobadian pottery production, based on the research of the production centers at Faras and Serra (Adams 1986), show the abovementioned combination of the local, still vibrant, Meroitic tradition and strong influence from Greco-Roman/Byzantine Egypt (Danys and Zielińska 2017:179, 183; Danys in prep.).

Art of Makuria (6th–7th Century) The early art of the kingdom of Makuria is known from a relatively limited number of monuments in its heartland and its study is concentrated on Old Dongola and neighboring Banganarti and Selib as well as the Ghazali monastery in the Wadi Abu Dom.

852   Dobrochna Zielińska

Figure 42.2  Unidentified holy martyr (ca. 7th century) in the church in the adopted interior of the Speos of Horemheb, Abu Oda. Photograph: Istituto Nazionale di Archeologia e Storia dell’Arte Rome, Fondo Monneret de Villard, Inv. No. 65027.

Architecture The capital’s earliest churches are known on the basis of the two big foundations north of the citadel. The earliest structures, so-called Old Church and Building X, marked the spot of continual building activity connected apparently with one of the most important sacral monuments of the kingdom. Both structures, probably because of their unusual character, present unusual layouts. Although the Old Church is a variant of three-aisled basilica that can be linked with churches in Egypt and Syro-Palestine (Gartkiewicz 1990:88–90; Godlewski 2006b:266–68; Godlewski 2013:59–60), the mausoleum church of Building X presents a plan based on a Latin cross-shaped nave surrounded by additional rooms. Its unique shape and commemorative character could have been inspired by the famous royal mausoleum church of the Holy Apostles in Constantinople (Karydis 2020), showing influences from the Byzantine capital and the ambitions of Makurian kings (Godlewski 2013:61–63). On the basis of the 7th-century examples from Old Dongola (Godlewski 2013:64–66), Selib (Żurawski 2016a:95–97), and Ghazali (Obłuski 2014:204), typical features of the Makurian church plan can be observed to be a tripartite east part consisting of a

Arts and Crafts of the Medieval Kingdoms of Nubia   853 sanctuary and two pastophoria connected by a corridor behind the apse and a tripartite western zone with a staircase located in the southwestern corner. The apse was usually filled with a semi-circular tribune for the clergy (synthronon) and as a result the altar was moved to the eastern end of the central nave that was occupied by the sanctuary, separated from the rest of the nave by chancel screens (Godlewski 2006b:267). From the early period the only examples of mosaics are those found in the so-called Second Cathedral and Mosaic Church in Old Dongola (Żurawski ed. 2012:155, figs. 15, 16, n. 58; Godlewski 2013:126). On the basis of the palace of Ioannes in Old Dongola, the continuation of Meroitic tradition in residential architecture when it comes to planning, building technique, and elements of decoration can be observed (Godlewski 2013:262–92, 2016:29–84).

Architectural Decoration In the architectural decoration, the lack of continuation of Meroitic tradition is clearly visible, although it could also have been obscured by the state of preservation of the monumental architecture. Instead, in the early period two streams are visible. One presents a local simplified style of shallow relief, based on classical elements like acanthus leaves and volutes (Ryl-Preibisz 2001:367–72; Godlewski 2013:49–50, 64–65; Żurawski 2016b:136). The other group contains voussoirs and chancel screens of a style like that of workshops in Nobadia, strongly inspired by Byzantine Egypt (Ryl-Preibisz 2001:376–78; Żurawski 2012:150, 152, 156; Godlewski 2013:120, 2016:76).

Wall Painting The earliest known murals in Makuria are represented by isolated examples from Old Dongola. One of the earliest is the representation of an angel, based on Byzantine examples (hairstyle) but showing an upcoming Nubian style (Fig. 42.3; Godlewski 2019: 935), as well as the painted decoration from the so-called Cruciform Building, that shows the work of a high-quality workshop inspired by Byzantine technique (Zielińska 2010a).

Craftsmanship The same high quality comparable to the best Byzantine workshops can be found in objects such as a sculptured stone basin with representations of a lioness and rams (Godlewski 2016:82). The production of glass objects has been confirmed by numerous fragments of glass vessels and a glass ingot found in the palace of Ioannes (Godlewski 2013:133). In the early period of Makurian pottery, a continuation of the Meroitic tradition can be seen, with the rebirth of its painted decoration that was absent in the period after the collapse of the Meroitic state (Danys in prep.).

854   Dobrochna Zielińska

Figure 42.3 Fragment of a painting of an angel (6/7th century), Central Building, the Monastery on Kom H, Old Dongola. Courtesy of the Polish Centre for Mediterranean Archaeology, University of Warsaw. Photograph: Cristobal Calaforra-Rzepka.

Art of Makuria (8th–14th Centuries) 8th Century Soon after the unification of the kingdoms, a unification of arts can be observed. It came together with a visible stabilization of forms and style that Nubian art has chosen for its visual expression. Old Dongola, the capital of the united kingdoms, became not only the political, but also the artistic center.

Architecture In architecture, especially in big structures such as cathedrals, a tendency towards a central plan is visible. First, the rebuilding of the cathedral in Old Dongola shows the new concept of a transversal nave. The complex building was equipped with numerous additional rooms, including pastophoria, enclosed in a simple rectangular outer shape (the so-called

Arts and Crafts of the Medieval Kingdoms of Nubia   855 Third Cathedral = Church of the Granite Columns; Godlewski 2013:53–55). In the province of Nobadia, the cathedral in Faras was rebuilt according to this new concept, both in the spacious arrangement of the interior and in the architectural and, most probably,6 painted decoration (the so-called Paulos Cathedral; Godlewski 2006a:56–60, 65–66). Many churches in the territory of Nobadia that can be dated to this period (although due to the state of documentation it is impossible to state if these were new structures or earlier ones rebuilt) present mixed features; they keep a Nobadian layout of the eastern part (without the corridor connecting pastophoria) with a synthronon introduced into the space of the sanctuary and a tripartite western part added according to Makurian tradition (Obłuski 2016:500–508).

Architectural Decoration On the basis of the Faras cathedral, it is evident that the influences from Old Dongola, the capital of the united kingdoms, were clearly visible also in the architectural decoration. New capitals used in the arrangement of the Paulos Cathedral represented the tradition of local Makurian stone-work (Fig. 42.4; Ryl-Preibisz 2001:372–76).

Figure 42.4  Column capital from the Third Cathedral = Church of the Granite Columns. Courtesy of the Polish Centre for Mediterranean Archaeology, Warsaw University. Photograph: Dobrochna Zielińska.

856   Dobrochna Zielińska

Figure 42.5  St. Anna (early 8th century–first half of the 9th century), Cathedral of Paulos, Faras. Courtesy of the National Museum in Warsaw. Photograph: Piotr Ligier.

Wall Painting At the moment of unification, one can observe already a well-defined and developed concept of wall painting, which would become the most characteristic form of artistic expression of Nubian art. The painted decoration of the Paulos Cathedral in Faras is the oldest set of paintings of such a size preserved that present a unified style of simplified, frugal forms and color and refined outline (Fig.  42.5; Jakobielski et al.  2017: 44–45). Although not yet fully developed, the iconographic program shows its characteristic features, with a two-zone apse composition, scenes of the Nativity and Three Youths in the Fiery Furnace always located in the opposite corners of the nave and several individual representations of saints (about aspects of the iconographical program see below; Innemée 1995:280–82; Zielińska 2016b:47–49). In the capital, Old Dongola, not much material dated to this period has been found so far. An exception is a unique example of painted decoration in a rich private house (House A). The style of the painting, although of religious subjects, presents the same features as examples from Faras cathedral (Łaptaś 1999, Martens-Czarnecka 2001:253–59; Godlewski 2013:105–7).7

Arts and Crafts of the Medieval Kingdoms of Nubia   857

Craftsmanship The stronger position of the unified kingdom and its capital is also reflected in a unified pottery production. Characteristic for this period are the limited variations of forms and reduced decoration (Danys in prep.). More luxurious finds are very rare, represented by unique objects such as a bronze censer with busts of Christ and the Apostles (Fig. 42.6; Godlewski 2013:122–24; Wyżgoł 2017).

9th–12th Centuries The period from the 9th to the 12th century can be described as the richest and most creative period in Christian Nubian art. Especially the 9th century presents many innovative, original concepts, which, after the preceding centuries of establishing a local style, started expressing Makurian traditions and ambitions. It was characterized by the final choice of preferred forms of art and the introduction, especially in wall painting, of a

Figure 42.6  Bronze censer with busts of Christ and the Apostles (8th–10th century), Old Dongola. Courtesy of the Polish Centre for Mediterranean Archaeology, University of Warsaw. Photograph: Włodzimierz Godlewski.

858   Dobrochna Zielińska characteristic style and subjects that reflected ideas of a special importance to the Makurian state and society.

Architecture Especially in the capital region of Makuria innovative concepts in architecture were introduced. There is a visible tendency towards the central plan (the transversal nave) that was already noticed in the concept of the large cathedrals of the 8th century. It developed into a new type of church that can be observed in Old Dongola and its vicinity (Godlewski  2006b:279–81,  2013:67–71; Żurawski ed.  2012:170–79). This type of church, defined by Włodzimierz Godlewski as “cross over rectangle” type, could have been inspired by the same layout known in Greece (Godlewski 2013:67), thus indicating that influences of contemporary Byzantine art on church architecture and iconography (see below) can be taken under consideration. A unique idea was materialized in a commemorative monumental church known as the Cruciform Church. An expanded form of a multi-segment cross reflects a perfect central layout. The idea somehow follows the known Middle Eastern martyria and mausolea, but without direct parallels either in Nubia or in the world of Byzantine culture (Figs. 42.7, 42.8; Gartkiewicz 1975, 58, 62–63, fig. 6; Godlewski 2013:39–41). The position of the royal court in Old Dongola is expressed in the building identified as a throne hall. It is a unique structure: a two-storey building with a relatively small central hall, elevated on very high ground floor with a storage function. On one hand, the concepts of the building could repeat Byzantine patterns and can be compared with a similar one in Bulgaria (Godlewski 2013:43–47), while on the other hand, the raised, festive, official first floor and the entrance leading directly to the upper part of the building follow traditional concepts of Meroitic palaces (Maillot 2016:98–99, 116–17, 315). From the 10th century onwards the central plan became the predominant form for the layout of churches. It was visible again in the changes executed in the cathedral of Old Dongola (the so-called Fourth Cathedral = Church of the Granite Columns II; Godlewski  2013:55–57) and then in the cathedral in Faras (the so-called Petros Cathedral; Godlewski 2006a:93–110). The introduction of massive brick pillars, dividing the interior into smaller spaces, enabled the introduction of a vaulting system with a dominating central dome. This idea was repeated in smaller examples of “cross in square” structures in many variants that became popular (Adams  1990:322–23; Gartkiewicz 1982:92ff.).

Architectural Decoration From the 9th century onwards, one can observe the discontinuation of the use of stone architectural decoration. The latest examples are the granite columns in the Cruciform Church and the Throne Hall. The only elements that remained in use were window grills, mainly made of clay or lime mortar. Their use was limited to important religious buildings like cathedrals or pilgrimage centers (including monasteries), but they occur also in rich houses (Rodziewicz 1967; Ryl-Preibisz 2001:378–82; Godlewski 2013:127–28; Żurawski ed. 2014:115–18).

Arts and Crafts of the Medieval Kingdoms of Nubia   859

0

5m

Figure 42.7  Plan of the Cruciform Church (9th century), Old Dongola. Courtesy of the Polish Centre for Mediterranean Archaeology, University of Warsaw. Plan Włodzimierz Godlewski, Marek Puszkarski, Dobrochna Zielińska.

Wall Painting From the 9th century, wall painting became the dominating form of visual art in Makuria. Churches of various characters, ranging from big cathedrals (the rebuilt Faras cathedral—the so-called Cathedral of Petros; Godlewski  2006a:110–13; Jakobielski et al. 2017) to urban and village churches, present rich iconographic material that illustrates various rules of the fully developed Makurian iconographical program (Zielińska 2010b, 2016b:50–52). One of the most characteristic Makurian (or Nubian) iconographical concepts was the introduction of the representations of Nubian dignitaries in monumental painted decoration. This iconographical type consists of portraits of Makurian kings, royal mothers (an originally Kushite title dating back to the Napatan times; see Lohwasser and Phillips, this volume) and bishops (Fig.  42.9; Godlewski  2008; Zielińska  2014).8 Based on a Byzantine pattern, it developed on the basis of indigenous Nubian tradition of royal authority in a complex iconographic system, of which the summit can be

860   Dobrochna Zielińska

Figure 42.8  Digital reconstruction of the interior of the Cruciform Church (9th century), Old Dongola. Courtesy of the Polish Centre for Mediterranean Archaeology, University of Warsaw. Reconstruction Cristobal Calaforra-Rzepka, Włodzimierz Godlewski.

observed in the new variant of apse compositions with royal portraits as central figures, under the divine protection of Christ, the Archangel Raphael, the Holy Virgin, and Apostles (Zielińska 2014:943–45). A special position of the Archangel Raphael as a protector of the Makurian royal house was expressed in a unique pilgrimage complex at Banganarti where an unusual architectural layout of the church was designed especially to commemorate Makurian kings under the holy protection of the Archangel and Apostles shown in special chapels (Zielińska  2014:945–46; see also Żurawski, this volume). Unknown in the Byzantine tradition, such an iconographic program could be a vague continuation of the decoration of the Meroitic royal burial chapels (Yellin, Chapter 29, this volume). Another original concept created in Makuria concerns a visual expression of the Liturgy of the Presanctified Gifts, performed in the northern pastophorion in Nubian churches. Based on the idea of this liturgy, from the 9th century a representation of Christ consecrating wine in the eucharistic chalice, accompanied by the selection of prayers, became a frequently used decoration of the eastern wall of this room (Łajtar and Zielińska 2016).

Arts and Crafts of the Medieval Kingdoms of Nubia   861

Figure 42.9  Royal mother Martha under protection of the Virgin Mary and Child (early 11th century), Cathedral of Petros, Faras. Courtesy of the Sudan National Museum in Khartoum. Photograph: Dobrochna Zielińska.

The decoration of the nave became a complex system with a number of fixed elements and possible variations (see “Wall Painting” under “8th Century” in “Art of Makuria,” above). The most visible ones are dominant subjects in particular parts of the nave. Dogmatic representations, referring to the liturgy performed in the apse, were located in the eastern part of the nave, representations of female saints and royal mothers were predominant in the northern (Sulikowska 2016), while male saints, together with portraits of

862   Dobrochna Zielińska kings and bishops, were present in the southern part of the nave. The western part was rather dominated by the representations of Nubian rulers. The aforementioned portraits of representatives of Nubian authorities as a group formed a so-called “official program” (Godlewski 2008), somehow following the division of the church interior. Depictions with subjects related to the liturgy were located on the walls of the nave according to the liturgical calendar, or at least keeping basic parts of the year and fixed position in the nave (Zielińska 2010b:646–49). The creativity of local artists during this period becomes apparent in the way that a number of subjects or iconographical themes are represented in a characteristic way, like the Holy Trinity (Makowski 2016) and the Maiestas Crucis (Dobrzeniecki 1974; Innemée and Zielińska in prep.). There is also the remarkable popularity and the prominent place of archangels (Łaptaś 2010, 2016), as well as the appearance of unique iconographical themes like the apocryphal story of the palm tree on the Flight to Egypt (Zielińska 2016a).

Wall Painting of the 12th Century The unique complex of annexes of the Monastery on Kom H in Old Dongola provides a rich set of paintings, presenting a mostly 12th-century style (Martens-Czarnecka 2011). Interiors that were not limited by the rules of the church’s iconographical program show subjects otherwise unknown in Nubian church decoration. They present unusual iconographical details (often oriental elements influenced by Islamic art), presenting Nubian reality of those times (Fig. 42.10; van Gerven Oei 2017). In the 9th–12th century, the very high quality of Makurian painters’ workshops is also confirmed by their material aspects. For the execution of wall paintings, both elaborate techniques and expensive materials were used. Especially the use of lapis lazuli as a blue pigment (three centuries earlier than the common use of this pigment in Europe) in royal foundations of special importance, like the Throne Hall, the Archangel Raphael Churches on the Citadel in Old Dongola, and in Banganarti, shows the financial possibilities of Makurian rulers, but can be also linked with a still-living traditional symbolic meaning of this precious stone in the Nile valley (Zielińska ed. 2019).

Craftsmanship From the period between the 10th and 12th centuries come numerous examples of decorated funerary stelae. Commemorative inscriptions were supplemented by motifs of an aedicule surmounted by a single conch or tympanon (influenced by Egyptian tradition) or the Nubian variety of triple elements over the intercolumnium (Fig.  42.11; Welsby 2002:223; Wyżgoł in prep.). The creative character of the 9th century is also present in Makurian pottery. Painted decoration became dominant from now on, in what can be recognized as a kind of renaissance of Meroitic tradition. An enormously rich repertoire of painted ornament, geometrical, floral, and zoomorphic motifs is sometimes based on Meroitic patterns (Adams  2016:322–23), but also more often inspired by Byzantine painted pottery. A stamp used to decorate the centers of open forms is characteristic for the period of the 9th century (although simpler forms appear a bit earlier) (Fig. 42.12; Danys in prep.).

Arts and Crafts of the Medieval Kingdoms of Nubia   863

Figure 42.10  Epitaph of Marianou, bishop of Phrim, Qasr Ibrim. Courtesy of The Egypt Exploration Society, register no.66/101.

13th–14th Centuries The last two centuries of the existence of Makuria are characterized by a less influential role of the royal/state patronage. However, this period was not a kind of decline. Despite the lack of royal foundations and less refined workshops (when it comes to the material aspect, see Zielińska ed. 2019) Nubian artists expressed their creativity.

864   Dobrochna Zielińska

Figure 42.11  Religious dance scene (second half of the 12th century–13th century), Monastery on Kom H, Old Dongola. Courtesy of the Polish Centre for Mediterranean Archaeology, University of Warsaw. Photograph: Dobrochna Zielińska.

Arts and Crafts of the Medieval Kingdoms of Nubia   865

Figure 42.12  Painted vessel from Old Dongola (9th century). Courtesy of the Polish Centre for Mediterranean Archaeology, University of Warsaw. Photograph: Włodzimierz Godlewski.

Architecture The lack of big investments in building activities—founding large monuments—is characteristic for this period. Churches built in this period are of a much smaller size, even in the large centers like Old Dongola, including examples of previous structures adapted for use as small churches or chapels (Godlewski 2013:71–77). The central plan is a dominating layout of religious buildings. Small dimensions of the interiors sometimes led to the unification of the eastern part and omission the rooms in the western part of a building (Godlewski 1996a:41–46).

Wall Painting In general the rules concerning the painted decoration of churches established in the 8th–9th centuries, were maintaned in this period. In spite of the smaller size of the church interiors, the repertoire of representations seems to have been kept (Godlewski 1996:50–60), mainly by using a smaller scale of compositions or dividing big scenes (Adams 1990:325). In this period appear also new concepts, like a variant of the apse composition with the representation of the Holy Trinity (Zielińska 2016b:52–53) or new details in

866   Dobrochna Zielińska

Figure 42.13 Fragment of the Nativity scene with adoration of the Magi (13th century), Church K-21, Kulubnarti. Courtesy of the Sudan National Museum. Photograph: Dobrochna Zielińska.

known compositions, like the adoration of the Magi in the Nativity scene in Kulubnarti (Fig. 42.13).

Craftsmanship The late period in pottery production shows a continuation of the previous tendencies in forms and decoration: mainly geometrical and floral motifs based on rosettes and bands of plaited ornaments (Adams 2016:324–25; Danys in prep.).

The Art of Alwa Although the kingdom of Alwa was described by travelers as richer than Makuria, unfortunately the archaeological remains and therefore the state of research does not allow us to say anything about its material culture in a wider sense. It can be mainly discussed on the basis of the remains from Soba, the capital of the kingdom.

Arts and Crafts of the Medieval Kingdoms of Nubia   867

Stone Grave

Mud brick Red brick Red and mud brick 0

50 m

D

A

B

C

Figure 42.14  Soba, plan of Church A (7th century), Church B (the last quarter of the 8th century), and Church C (last quarter of the 8th century). Courtesy SARS Soba Archive. Drawing Derek A. Welsby.

Architecture The best example of Alwan church architecture is a group of three churches at mound B at Soba (Fig. 42.14). Church A, dated to middle of the 7th century, shows a basilica plan; Church B, dated to the second decade of the 8th century, resembles the interior layout of the cathedrals in Faras and Old Dongola, rebuilt in the same period (see above); while Church C, dated to the last quarter of the 8th century, shows a central plan (Welsby and Daniels 1991:34, 37; Welsby 2002:150, 154; Danys and Zielińska 2017: fig. 7). It shows that Alwan architecture might have developed in a similar way as in the northern kingdoms (Ruffini, Chapter 37, this volume).

Architectural Decoration A number of capitals found on this site show the same craftsmanship as the ones from Old Dongola and Faras, characteristic of the 8th century, and may be from the same workshop (Monneret De Villard 1935, tav. XCIX), which can suggest a wider sphere of influence of the Makurian capital as an artistic center.

868   Dobrochna Zielińska

Wall Painting The extremely meager remains of Alwan decorated plaster do not offer any possibility for deeper analysis. On the basis of the few preserved motifs one can find links to Makurian workshops (Edwards 1991; Danys and Zielińska 2017) as well as the decoration of the so-called Soba ware (see below).

Craftsmanship Alwan pottery presents two main groups of different workshops. First, the so-called Soba ware can be dated to the period before the 9th century and is clearly a continuation of a Meroitic tradition in most of the forms and the popularity of painted decoration that was possibly influenced by the Blemmyes and their Eastern Desert ware (Fig. 42.15). In later periods, pottery inspired by northern workshops of Makuria became dominant (Welsby 2002:234–36; Danys and Zielińska 2017:182–84).

Figure 42.15  “Soba ware” ceramic liturgical chalice (7th–9th century), Soba. Courtesy SARS Soba Archive. Photograph: Derek A. Welsby.

Arts and Crafts of the Medieval Kingdoms of Nubia   869

Notes 1. For basic reference to more aspects of material culture of this period, see Welsby 2002:172–80, 189, 195–201. Although the glass or metal production in Nubia is confirmed in archaeological excavation, the still poor evidence of this kind of object makes further analysis impossible. Another category of scattered finds, namely wooden plaques or encolpia, also raise the question of the origin of the production. Their date, difficult to establish, could be estimated to a rather late period on the basis of their style. Most of them were only published in field reports (for the references see Tsakos 2012, esp. pp.211 and recently Żurawski 2016). The ongoing research on leatherwork by André J. Veldmeijer (2013) and the project “Nubian textiles: craft, trade, costume and identity in the medieval kingdom of Makuria” [http://centrumnubia.org/en/projects/nubian-textiles/] by Magdalena Woźniak will provide more information in these fields. 2. Only recently it has resulted in a summary study of sacred architecture, including decoration and furnishings (Godlewski 2019). Using different chronological divisions, examples in the present study treated as Nobadian have been incorporated by Godlewski into Makurian art. 3. I would like to thank Katarzyna Danys for sharing her remarks on Nubian pottery (Danys: forthcoming). 4. Names of the elements in church architecture have been derived from Greek on purpose (and not Coptic or Arabic) since this language was used by the Nubian Church (Łajtar and Ochała, this volume). 5. For more about the regional similarities, see Török 1971. 6. There are no wall paintings of the cathedral in Old Dongola preserved that could show its iconographical program. See also below. 7. A few more examples of wall paintings that can be dated to this period were found in the former territory of Nobadia that present the same, defined style of the 8th century, apparently applied for the whole united kingdom. 8. On the more detailed studies of this type of representations, see also works by Bożena Rostkowska (Rostkowska 1971, 1972, 1977).

References Cited Adams, W.Y. 1965 Architectural Evolution of the Nubian Church, 500–1400 ad. Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt 4:87–139. ——— 1986 Ceramic Industries of Medieval Nubia. Memoirs of the UNESCO Archaeological Survey of Sudanese Nubia 1. University Press of Kentucky. ——— 1990 Nubian Church Architecture and Nubian Church Decoration. In Études Nubiennes. Actes du VIIe International Congrès d’études nubiennes, v. 1, ed. C. Bonnet, pp. 317–26. ——— 2016 Evolution and Revolution in Nubian Pottery. In Aegyptus et Nubia Christiana: The Wlodzimierz Godlewski Jubilee Volume, ed. A. Łajtar, A. Obłuski, and I. Zych, pp. 315–28. Polish Centre of Mediterranean Archaeology, University of Warsaw. Aldsworth, F. 2010 Qasr Ibrim: The Cathedral Church. Egypt Exploration Society Excavation Memoir 97. Anderson, J.R. 1996 Spatial and Temporal Distribution of Domestic and Civil Architecture in Christian Nubia. Doctoral dissertation, University of Toronto.

870   Dobrochna Zielińska Bolman, E.S. ed. 2016 The Red Monastery Church: Beauty and Asceticism in Upper Egypt. Yale University Press. Danys, K. in prep. Pottery of the Kingdoms of Nobadia and Makuria: A Cultural Overview. Danys, K. and D.  Zielińska 2017 Alwan Art: Towards an Insight into the Aesthetics of the Kingdom of Alwa through the Painted Pottery Decoration. Sudan & Nubia 21:177–85. Deliyannis, D.D. 2010 Ravenna in Late Antiquity. Cambridge University Press. Dobrzeniecki, T. 1974 Maiestas Domini w zabytkach polskich i obcych z Polską związanych, II, Maiestas Crucis w ściennym malarstwie Nubii (Faras). Annuaire du Musée National de Varsovie 18:215–308. Edwards, D.N. 1991 The Painted Wall Plaster. In Soba: Archaeological Research at a Medieval Capital on the Blue Nile, ed. D.A. Welsby and C.M. Daniels, pp. 259–63. Memoirs of the British Institute in Eastern Africa 12. Gartkiewicz, P.M. 1975 The Central Plan in Nubian Church Architecture. In Nubia. Récentes recherches, ed. K. Michałowski, pp. 48–64. Musée National (Warsaw). ——— 1978 Remarks on the Cathedral at Qars Ibrim. In Nubian Studies: Proceedings of the Symposium for Nubian Studies, ed. J.M. Plumley, pp. 87–94. Aris & Phillips. ——— 1982 An Introduction to the History of Nubian Church Architecture. Nubia Christiana 1:43–133. ——— 1990 The Cathedral in Old Dongola and its Antecedents. Nubia 1. Dongola 2. PWNÉditions scientifiques de Pologne. Godlewski, W. 1982 Remarks on the Art of Nobadia, V–VIII Century. In Nubische Studien. Tagungsakten der 5. Internationalen Konferenz der International Society for Nubian Studies, ed. M. Krause, pp. 269–80. Philipp von Zabern. ——— 1992 The Early Period of Nubian Art. Middle of 6th–Beginning of 9th Centuries. In Etudes nubiennes. Actes du VII Congrès international d’études nubiennes, v. 1, ed. C. Bonnet, pp. 277–305. ——— 1995 Late Period in Nubian Art from the Middle of 13th to the End of 14th Centuries. In Sudan Past and Present. Der Sudan in Vergangenheit und Gegenwart, ed. R. Gundlach, M. Kropp, and A. Leibundgut, pp. 37–63. Peter Lang. ——— 2006a Pachoras: The Cathedrals of Aetios, Paulos and Petros. The Architecture. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean Supplement Series 1. University of Warsaw Press. ——— 2006b The Churches of Dongola, their Origin and Importance in the General Line of Development of Church Architecture in Makuria. In Acta Nubica: Proceedings of the X International Conference of Nubian Studies, ed. I.  Caneva and A.  Roccati, pp. 263–86. Libreria dello Stato (Rome). ——— 2008 Bishops and Kings: The Official Program of the Pachoras (Faras) Cathedrals. In Between the Cataracts: Proceedings of the 11th Conference for Nubian Studies, ed. W. Godlewski and A. Łajtar, Part 1, pp. 263–82. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean Supplement Series 2.1. Warsaw University. ——— 2013 Dongola—Ancient Tungul. Polish Centre of Mediterranean Archaeology Archaeological Guide 1. http://www.pcma.uw.edu.pl/en/publications/pelnotekstowe/ dongola-ancient-tungul/. ——— 2016 Palatial Building SWN.B.I and Earlier Relics of Buildings SWN.B.IV and SWN.B.X.  In Dongola 2012–2014: Fieldwork, Conservation and Site Management, ed. W. Godlewski and D. Dzierzbicka, pp. 65–84. Polish Centre of Mediterranean Archaeology Excavation Series 3.

Arts and Crafts of the Medieval Kingdoms of Nubia   871 ——— 2019 The Sacral Architecture in the Kingdom of Makuria. In Handbook of Ancient Nubia, ed. D. Raue, pp. 923–44. De Gruyter. Innemée, K.C. 1995 Observations on the System of Nubian Church-Decoration. Cahier de Recherches de l’Institut de Papyrologie et d’Egyptologie de Lille 17(1):279–88. Innemée, K.C. and D. Zielińska in press The King and the Cross: The Iconography of a Painting in the Throne-hall of Dongola. In Proceedings of the 13th International Conference for Nubian Studies (Neuchâtel, 2014). Jakobielski, S., M. Martens-Czarnecka, M. Łaptaś, B. Mierzejewska, and B. Rostkowska 2017 Pachoras/Faras: The Wall Paintings from the Cathedrals of Aetios, Paulos and Petros. Polish Centre of Mediterranean Archaeology, University of Warsaw; Institute of Mediterranean and Oriental Cultures, Polish Academy of Sciences; National Museum in Warsaw. Karydis N. 2020 Justinian’s Church of the Holy Apostles: A New Reconstruction Proposal. In The Holy Apostles: Visualising a Lost Monument. Dumbarton Oaks Byzantine Symposia And Colloquia, pp. 99–131. Dumbarton Oaks, Harvard University Press. Łajtar A. and D. Zielińska 2016 The Northern Pastophorium of Nubian Churches: Ideology and Function (On the Basis of Inscriptions and Paintings). In Aegyptus et Nubia Christiana: The Wlodzimierz Godlewski Jubilee Volume, ed. A. Łajtar, A. Obłuski, and I. Zych, pp. 435–57. Polish Centre of Mediterranean Archaeology, University of Warsaw. Łaptaś, M. 1996 Paintings from the Faras Cathedral: The “Colour” Classification Method.” Nubian NoteLet 2:1–18. ——— 1999 Comments on Wall Paintings from House A in Old Dongola. In Ägypten und Nubien in späntiker und christlicher Zeit. Akten des 6. Internationalen Koptologenkongresses, ed. S. Emmel and M. Krause, pp. 230–237. Sprachen und Kulturen des christlichen Orients 6. Reichert. ——— 2010 Archangels as Protectors and Guardians in Nubian Painting. In Between the Cataracts: Proceedings of the 11th Conference for Nubian Studies, ed. W.  Godlewski and A. Łajtar, Part 2, Fasc. 2, pp. 675–81. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean Supplement Series 2.2/2. Warsaw University. ——— 2016 The Archangel Raphael as Protector, Demon Tamer, Guide and Healer: Some Aspects of the Archangel’s Activities in Nubian Painting. In Aegyptus et Nubia Christiana: The Wlodzimierz Godlewski Jubilee Volume, ed. A. Łajtar, A. Obłuski, and I. Zych, pp. 459–79. Polish Centre of Mediterranean Archaeology, University of Warsaw. Lyons, H.G. 1896 A Report on the Island and Temples of Philae. Waterlow. Maillot, M. 2016 Palais et grandes demeures du royaume de Méroé. Presses de l’université Paris-Sorbonne. Makowski, P. 2016 The Holy Trinity in Nubian Art. In Dongola 2012–2014: Fieldwork, Conservation and Site Management, ed. W.  Godlewski and D.  Dzierzbicka, pp. 293–308. Polish Centre of Mediterranean Archaeology Excavation Series 3. Martens-Czarnecka, M. 2001 Wall Paintings Discovered in Old Dongola. In Dongola-Studien. 35 Jahre polnischer Forschungen im Zentrum des makuritischen Reiches, ed. S.  Jakobielski and P.O. Scholz, pp. 253–84. Bibliotheca Nubica et Aethiopica 7. ZAŚ PAN. ——— 2011 The Wall Paintings from the Monastery on Kom H in Dongola. Dongola 3. Nubia 3. The University of Warsaw Press. Michałowski, K. 1974 Faras: Wall Paintings in the Collection of the National Museum in Warsaw. Wydawnictwo Artystyczno-Graficzne, Warsaw. Monneret De Villard  U. 1935–57 La Nubia Medioevale. Mission Archéologique de Nubie 1929–1934. Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale.

872   Dobrochna Zielińska Obłuski, A. 2014 The Rise of Nobadia: Social Changes in Northern Nubia in Late Antiquity. Journal of Juristic Papyrology Supplements 20. Rafał Taubenschlag Foundation. ——— 2016 Nobadian and Makurian Church Architecture: Qasr El-Wizz, a Case Study. In Aegyptus et Nubia Christiana: The Wlodzimierz Godlewski Jubilee Volume, ed. A.  Łajtar, A.  Obłuski, and I.  Zych, pp. 481–512. Polish Centre of Mediterranean Archaeology, University of Warsaw. Rodziewicz, M. 1967 Terakotowe kraty okienne z Faras. Rocznik Muzeum Narodowego w Warszawie, Journal of the Museum in Warsaw 11:143–74. Rostkowska, B. 1971 Remarques sur l’iconographie des éparques de Nubie. Études et Travaux 5:201–208. ——— 1972 Iconographie des personnages historiques sur les peintures de Faras. Études et Travaux 6:195–205. ——— 1978 Contribution à l’iconographie sur les personages laïcs dans les peintures murales en Nubie. In Études nubiennes. Colloque de Chantilly 1975, ed. J. Leclant and J. Vercoutter, pp. 247–52. Bibliothèque d’Étude 77. Institute Français d’Archéologie Orientale du Caire. Ryl-Preibisz, I. 1987 Nubian Stone Architectural Decoration. In Nubian Culture Past and Present, ed. T. Hägg, pp. 247–59. Almqvist & Wiksell. ——— 2001 Elements of Architectural Decoration from Old Dongola. In Dongola-Studien. 35 Jahre polnischer Forschungen im Zentrum des makuritischen Reiches, ed. S. Jakobielski and P.O. Scholz, pp. 367–85. Bibliotheca Nubica et Aethiopica 7. ZAŚ PAN. Sulikowska, A. 2016 Female Iconography in the Northern Aisle of Faras Cathedral. Journal of the Museum in Warsaw n.s. 5(41):118–29. Tsakos, A. 2012 Miscellanea Epigraphica Nubica III: Epimachos of Attiri: a Warrior Saint of Late Christian Nubia, Collectanea Christiana Orientalia 9, pp. 205–223. Török, L. 1971 Late Meroitic Elements in the Coptic Art of Upper Egypt. Acta Archaeologica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 23:167–80. Tudor, B. 2011 Christian Funerary Stelae of the Byzantine and Arab Periods from Egypt. Tectum Verlag. van Gerven Oei, V.W.J. 2017 A Dance for a Princess: The Legends on a Painting in Room 5 of the SW Annex of the Monastery on Kom H in Old Dongola (DBMNT 1364). Journal of Juristic Papyrology 47, pp. 117–35. van Loon, G.J.M. and D. Zielińska in press Le Temple du Ouadi es-Seboua : Les implantations chrétiennes. In Études Coptes XVII. Dix-neuvième journée d’études, ed. A. Boud’hors, J.H.F. Dijkstra, E. Garel, C. Louis, and N. Vanthieghem. Cahiers de la bibliothèque copte. De Boccard. van Loon, G.J.M., D. Zielińska, A. Łajtar, G. Ochała, and A. Deptuła in prep. The Greeks, as Usual, have Painted their Saints upon the Walls. In Studies on Churches and Chapels in Nubian Monuments at Wadi es-Sebua and Tafa. Journal of Juristic Papyrology Supplement. Peeters. Veldmeijer, A.J. 2013 Leatherwork from Qasr Ibrim (Egypt), v. 1: Footwear from the Ottoman Period. Sidestone Press. ——— 2016 Excavations of Gebel Adda (Lower Nubia): Ancient Nubian Leatherwork, v. 1: Sandals and Shoes. Sidestone Press. Weitzmann, K. 1978 The Icon: Holy Images—Sixth to Fourteenth Century. George Braziller. Welsby, D. A. 1998 Soba, v. 2: Renewed Excavations within the Metropolis of the Kingdom of Alwa in Central Sudan. British Museum Press. ——— 2002 The Medieval Kingdoms of Nubia: Pagans, Christians and Muslims along the Middle Nile. British Museum.

Arts and Crafts of the Medieval Kingdoms of Nubia   873 Welsby, D.A. and C.M. Daniels 1991 Soba: Archaeological Research at a Medieval Capital on the Blue Nile. Memoirs of the British Institute in Eastern Africa 12. British Institute in Eastern Africa. Wojciechowski, B. 2010 Triumphal Arches in Nubian Sacral Architecture. Études et Travaux 23:213–59. Wyżgoł, M. 2017 A Bronze Censer with Decoration from the Cathedral in Old Dongola. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean 26(1):775–88. ——— in prep. A Decoration of Makurian Stelae form the 8th to the 13th Century. Zielińska, D. 2010a Edifice without Parallel: the Cruciform Building on the Citadel in Old Dongola. In Between the Cataracts: Proceedings of the 11th Conference for Nubian Studies, ed. W.  Godlewski and A.  Łajtar, Part 2, Fasc. 2, pp. 695–703. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean Supplement Series 2.2/2. University of Warsaw. ——— 2010b The Iconographical Program in Nubian Churches: Progress Report Based on a New Reconstruction Project. In Between the Cataracts: Proceedings of the 11th Conference for Nubian Studies, ed. W. Godlewski and A. Łajtar, pp. 643–51. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean Supplement Series 2(2). University of Warsaw. ——— 2014 The Iconography of Power—The Power of Iconography: The Nubian Royal Ideology and its Expression in Wall-Painting. In The Fourth Cataract and Beyond: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference for Nubian Studies, ed. J.R. Anderson and D.A. Welsby, pp. 943–49. British Museum Publications on Egypt and Sudan 1. Peeters. ——— 2016a Painted Decoration of the Central Hall: Preliminary Inventory. In Dongola 2012–2014: Fieldwork, Conservation and Site Management, ed. W.  Godlewski and D.  Dzierzbicka, pp. 25–36. Polish Centre of Mediterranean Archaeology Excavation Series 3. ——— 2016b Faras Cathedral: A Witness of Art Development in the Nubian Kingdoms of Nobadia and Makuria. Journal of the Museum in Warsaw n.s. 5(41):46–53. ——— in prep. 1 Painted Decoration of the Qasr el Wizz Monastery: Remarks on the Iconography and Technique. In Qasr el-Wizz: A Nubian Monastery, ed. A. Obłuski. Oriental Institute Nubian Expedition 14. ——— in prep. 2 Serra. Oriental Institute Nubian Expedition. Zielińska D. ed. 2019 Nubian Wall Painting: Context, Technology and Conservation. Archetype Publications Ltd. (London). Żurawski, B. 2016a Filling in the Gaps: Excavations on the Site of Selib (1st to 13th Century). Sudan & Nubia 20:91–109. ——— 2016b A Tale of Two Sites: Ten Years of Excavation in Banganarti and Selib. Gdańsk Archaeological Museum African Reports 8:107–44. Żurawski, B. ed. 2012 St. Raphael Church I at Banganarti, Mid-Sixth to Mid-Eleventh Century: An Introduction to the Site and the Epoch. Banganarti 1. Gdańsk Archaeological Museum African Reports 10. Żurawski, B. 2016 Banganarti Nativity: Enkolpion with scene of the Birth of Jesus from House BA/2015 in Banganarti. In Aegyptus et Nubia Christiana: The Wlodzimierz Godlewski Jubilee Volume, ed. A. Łajtar, A. Obłuski, and I. Zych, pp. 647–57. Polish Centre of Mediterranean Archaeology, University of Warsaw. ——— 2014 Kings and Pilgrims: Saint Raphael Church II at Banganarti, Mid-Eleventh to MidEighteenth Century. Nubia 5. Banganarti 2. Neriton.

Chapter 43

Isl a m i n th e Fu n j a n d Ot tom a n Per iods i n Su da n A Historical and Archaeological Approach Intisar Soghayroun

Prelude The vast area of Sudan, nearly 1.9 million km2, encompasses considerable diversity geographically and culturally, which of course has also varied through the centuries. Research in the history, archaeology, and geography of the area have confirmed that the Middle Nile valley was the heart of kingdoms that flourished in the territories of present day Sudan. With its considerable area, it was and is still exposed for human movement from different directions and not just from the north and east as previously assumed. Thus the sway of Islam in Sudan has to be envisioned as coming from numerous directions at different times, as will be shown in this chapter. In the same line of thinking and as a result of current research in various parts of the country, we have new information about petty kingdoms (mekdoms) that flourished before and/or contemporary with the Funj kingdom, like the Sukarab Mekdom in the Third Cataract region dated to the 10th century AH, or the Ghidayat Mekdom in northern Kordofan. Both are under investigation to substantiate their archaeological, historical, documentary, and oral histories. It is clear that we are reviewing a dynamic topic in a large area. Accordingly our source ­material—which ranges from historical records to material remains and oral history—is diverse. Archaeological research in different directions is revealing new evidence to augment our understanding of the process of Islamization and how external and internal movements have contributed to its development.

876   Intisar Soghayroun Although we are dealing in this chapter with two distinctive powers that dominated the area, actually, in material culture, we are researching one unit, except in the architecture of power (e.g., forts) and in minor differences in religious remains. In addition, there are differences in materials used imposed by the environment of each region. For example, the materials used for building vary so that they influence the nature of buildings. The use of coral is confined to the Red sea coast where it is covered with lime plaster to protect the walls from the effect of the climate. Mud is the main traditional material both in sandy desert areas and along the Nile. Mud brick is used, whether sundried or burned, often together with stones where available. One unifying element is the construction of qubbas (domed tombs) for holy men and other institutions like the mesid, khalwa, and zawiya,1 which are found in both domains. Another point to be taken into account is that many of the famous sheikhs attested during the Funj Kingdom came from the Ottoman domain.

Information at Hand Historical and literary sources include texts written in Arabic by Muslims or in Greek by Christians, whether historians or geographers. An example of important information in these sources is the Baqt treaty (see details in Intisar Soghayroun 2004). It was the main component in Muslim-Nubian relations during the Christian kingdoms. One of its direct consequences was the spread of Islam between the First and Second Cataract (Adams 1977). Another treaty signed during the reign of the Abbasid caliph Al-Mu’tasim between the Muslims and the Beja which opened the country to Arab free movement in the area (Hassan 1973). It opened the road to gold mines in the eastern desert and to pastoralists’ movement south of the Beja land. Muslim historians also tackled other topics concerning Makurra and Alwa like the geography, the people, settlements, and major events. Post-medieval travelers recorded information on the Funj and ‘Abdallab federation, the territories, and settlements (David Reubeni 1521; Evliya Çelebi the Ottoman officer 1670s; Poncet 1699; Krump 1701; Bruce 1769–72; and Burckhardt 1813–14). Other literary evidence includes nisba (“genealogies”), which cover mainly the Funj period. They are written on varied material: parchment, papyrus, paper, leather, and even on walls. They contain more than plain genealogies of well-defined historical groups in Sudan; they throw light on religious, political, commercial, and socio-economic life. They form the basis for our cultural study of how individual Islamic families established themselves in the Sudan, and they also record tribal traditions of Sudan. Some of these documents deal with the foundation of the Funj kingdom, while others record the origin of some of the tribes. The documents are still being found with sheikhs and certain notable families, and in some archaeological sites. Ethnohistorical evidence is plentiful, and records the propagation of Islam. Learned Sudanese of the 19th century and early 20th century have written and compiled a number of accounts. The most famous one is the book known as Tabaqat Dayfallah, which

Islam in the Funj and Ottoman Periods in Sudan   877 includes innumerable biographies of saints and holy men and scholars who first carried the teaching of Islam in the Sudan (Yusuf Fadl Hasan ed. 1968). Ethnoarchaeological sources are the most direct, tangible evidence. They have long been treated as part of folkloric studies. Actually most of the objects have been in use for long periods and had undergone slight modifications. They include objects made of clay, gourd, leather, palm leaves, and metal. According to function, there are objects connected with administration like the kakar (stool), scepters, and seals; military objects like swords, spears, kettledrums, flails, and guns; and others connected with religious orders like the nehas (kettledrum), kakar, and spear for coronation purposes. Here we perceive the varied use of certain objects amid the political and religious powers. Khalwa objects like loah (tablet), ink containers, wooden bowls, sheepskin mats, rosaries, and incense burners. And objects connected with agriculture and animal husbandry like saqia (waterwheel), axes and sickles, ropes of palm leaves, and tethering wedges. This is beside household objects like beds, cloth boxes, wooden doors and their lock parts, utility wares like ceramic cooking pots, beer containers, silos for grain storage, copper objects, and others (Intisar Soghayroun 2004). Archaeologically the preliminary classification of the material culture of the Islamic period in the Sudan shows that there is a variety of Islamic sites and objects. The sites include towns and cities like Old Dongola, Khandaq in the Dongola Reach; Shendi, Berber, Arbaji, and Sinnar in the Funj domain; and Qasr Ibrim and Sai in the Ottoman domain (Fig. 43.1).2 All these towns are good examples for the study of the process of Islamization through archaeological investigation. This is beside villages, nomads’ camps, castles, and palaces of the northern mekdoms like Abkur, Dufar, and Wad Nemeiri; religious structures like mosques, mesids, khalwas, and cemeteries; and artifacts including tombstones, pottery, handwritten religious books and/or documents, leather objects, oil lamps, metal work, and imported objects.

The Historical Setting Historically, the Middle Nile valley, which is in effect the present Republic of Sudan, received Islam beginning in the 7th century ce through influences from the north, the east, and northwest, and reacted to the transformation which took place in the Dar elIslam. This influenced the development during the spread of Arabic-speaking nomads, who entered via the Suez land (Sinai Peninsula), the Eastern Desert, and the Red Sea. This profoundly affected the spiritual life of both the immigrant Muslims and the indigenous population, who converted gradually to Islam. These immigrants were mainly traders from Egypt and Hijaz and western Bilad es-Sudan (henceforth Phase I, 7th century–late 13th century). According to the Baqt treaty, Muslims built a mosque in Dongola during that century, which shows that there was a considerable number of Muslims crossing the Christian kingdom of Makuria. The migration of Arabs into Sudan increased during the Mamluk period in Egypt (13th–15th centuries ce). But their

878   Intisar Soghayroun

Figure 43.1 Old Dongola, the so-called the deserted village (private collection Intisar Soghayroun).

efforts were meager since they were not themselves educated in Islamic sciences beside their being busy with trade and grazing of their animals. The 14th century (Phase II, early 14th century–late 15th century) witnessed major changes in the Nile valley. In 1317 ce, a Muslim member of the Makurian royal family became the king, but by the 15th century, the kingdom had disintegrated into small mekdoms. These mekdoms formed the basis for others that flourished to the north (Khandaq and Khanag, Argo and Magsir in Dongola reach, Kokka in the Third Cataract region) and south of Old Dongola along the Nile valley (Abkur, Dufar, Kajebi, etc.). Beja and Arab nomads were now widespread through the eastern Sahel and Savannah, apparently participated in destroying Alwa in the 15th century ce. Some tribes moved on westwards through Kordofan and Darfur where the first recorded Muslim state (the Keira) developed in the 16th century. The 14th century witnessed as well the arrival of religious teachers coming to Sudan, which is referred to in the Tabaqat and local traditions. By 1500 (Phase III, early 16th century–early 19th century), the present territory of Sudan (north of the present-day state of South Sudan) was divided among three powers; the Ottoman Empire to the north, the Funj Kingdom in the Middle Nile valley, and the Fur Sultanate in the west (Spaulding, this volume). Within the Funj, the Shaiqiya ethnic group revolted in 1669 ce and became independent, ruling four mekdoms between the

Islam in the Funj and Ottoman Periods in Sudan   879 Fourth and Fifth Cataracts and threatening the mekdoms of Dongola and Argo Island (Adams 1977:593). The Funj were not the supreme rulers of the area. The ‘Abdellab—a Muslim Arab tribe who had fought with the Funj in defeating the Christian kingdom of Alwa—were there as a power who ruled the northern part for the Funj until the Shaiqiya revolt. Thus the balance of power changed from Ottomans, ‘Abdellab, and Funj in the Nile valley to Ottomans, Shaiqiya, ‘Abdellab, and Funj until the coming of the Mamluks in 1800 ce, which had weakened these powers.

The Funj Domain It is difficult to delimit accurately the extent of the Funj kingdom. Broadly speaking, northern Nubia from the Third Cataract to the frontiers of Egypt was part of the Ottoman Empire since 1584 ce—eighty years after the foundation of the Funj kingdom in 1504 ce. In eastern Sudan, the Beja lands were part of the Funj except for the port of Suakin which was under the control of the Funj for more than a decade before it fell in the hands of Ottoman Empire from 1523 ce. To the southeast, the Butana (area between the Blue Nile and Atbara River) and Jazira region (between the Blue and White Niles) were part of the Funj domain. To the west, Kordofan and the Nuba mountains were annexed in the 18th century while Darfur remained independent. It is not clear whether the Funj were already Muslims or Islam was imposed upon Amara Dungus (the first Funj monarch) by the leader of the “Abdellab, ‘Abdella Jamaa, but the Turks could hardly threaten the Funj at that early date. The fall of Soba, the last major non-Muslim state in the south, may also have left the Funj isolated and obliged to convert to legitimize their rule over Muslim subjects, particularly Arab tribes that had moved into the Jazira region. The conversion may also have been strategic, to facilitate trade with neighboring lands, particularly Egypt. Beginning in the 16th century, commercial activities certainly increased as indicated by the foundation of Sinnar and Arbaji and as attested by travelers’ reports. In fact much of the information about trade and its routes comes from accounts of travelers who visited the kingdom. Their writing incorporated valuable information about life at that time. Funj settlements in the north, noticeably in the region between Old Dongola and the Nile bend at Ed-Debba and up to the Mashu area in the Dongola region, confirm these growing trade activities (Crawford 1951; Ahmed Hussein 2004). This commercial stimulus combined with strategic motive provided strong impetus for the Funj conversion. But this can be impugned by the fact that trade had flourished during the Christian kingdoms with Muslims Egypt which was regulated through the Baqt treaty. Trade activities were a strong feature of the kingdom. Their influence extended over the caravan routes linking the trade centers. They established commercial relations with Egypt, and Sudanese goods found their way to Arabia, Yemen, India, and the Far East through the ports of Suakin and Massawa. During the heyday of the kingdom, pilgrims’ routes developed across the country linking the Muslim west and central Bilad es-Sudan with Mecca via Suakin. Pilgrims from Darfur and from Muslim West Africa stopped in the Funj territory to sell their goods or to earn a temporary living, while some of them settled permanently in the country.

880   Intisar Soghayroun A process that helped in the conversion to Islam and its subsequent spread throughout Sinnar was the gradual increase in the use of Arabic as the official language of administration and trade. Sudanese Muslims held Arabic in great respect for religious reasons, while the simple rural tongues isolated from both Islam and foreign trade were comparatively static. From this situation came the belief that to be a Muslim one must have blood ties to Arabia in general and to the Prophet Mohamed’s family in particular, which led to a boom in Arabic nisba documents. Then again, even at the court, Arabic was used for commercial purposes only; otherwise the Funj rulers preferred to speak their local language. The present-day Funj at Fazougli claim that Funj is a language and that their ancestors came from Mecca. They support this with the name of their first capital Famekka which means the people from Mecca (pers. comm., Manjil Zaydan, Fazougli May 2016). With the rise of the Funj Kingdom, many teachers of Islam were attracted to the Funj courts, where they were welcomed. The Funj rulers wanted to enhance their prestige among their Arab subjects as patrons of Islam. From that time onwards a new stage started. Sudanese became teachers themselves after being trained first under the Ulama (scholars), then by training abroad at Al-Azhar University in Cairo and in Mecca. The Sufi Orders also played an important role in this process, which is still continuing today. This process gave Sudan the duality we see at present: the orthodox and the ecstatic. As a consequence, Islam spread deeply and profoundly in the kingdom.

The Ottoman Domain The Ottoman Sultanate conquered Egypt in 1517 ce. Their frontier advanced from Aswan to the Second Cataract in the late 1550s and in 1583 to the Third Cataract (600 km from Khartoum); this was the Sanjak (administrative or territorial division) of Ibrim. The frontier moved further south in 1584 after warfare and a poorly defined agreement with the Funj rulers of the Sudan, and a new Sanjak of the Mahas was established for one year. This event led to the foundation of the fortress of Sai (Alexander 2000). The Ottoman military was independent of the kashifs (civilian officials of various grades, usually associated with tax collection) and were responsible to the Ottoman Sultan himself. Like the kashifs it seems that the garrison forces were placed in the country at the beginning of their regime and then were left to maintain themselves through intermarriage. The forces included Bosnians, Hungarians, Albanians, Turks, and Circassians (Adams 1977). The military forces were not confined to those at Qasr Ibrim and Sai. The accounts of Eveliya Celebi and the Vatican map (Alexander 2000) show a number of sites, many of which, like Komer, Tinare, Jebel Sese, Kadamusa, Arduan island, Musul, Simit Island, Jazira Tombos, and Hannek, have been substantiated by the recent fieldwork in the area (Intisar Soghayroun 2009; Osman and Edwards 2012). These forts seem to have been maintained by the kashifs, who at the time of Burckhardt commanded a private force of about one hundred horses.

Islam in the Funj and Ottoman Periods in Sudan   881

Data Consideration The Nature of Islam in Both Domains In the beginning, the Funj Islam was largely nominal. According to O’Fahey and Spaulding (1974), it was only in the 17th century that the new faith of Islam spread deeply among the people of Sinnar. This interpretation is based on the examination of the careers of Muslim holy men as recorded in the Tabaqat and Funj chronicles which mentioned the fugara (religious men or men of piety) to whom Sudanese scholars attributed the major responsibility for conversion of the Sudan. Yusuf Fadl Hasan (1973) thinks that the conversion of the Funj was connected with teachers from Dar al-Islam, but we find that in the very beginning of its nominal Islamization, few teachers were attracted. It is difficult to avoid the fact that before the 17th century Islam in Sinnar remained a ruling family concern related to foreign language and associated with traders and pastoralists from abroad. From the Funj chronicles (Intisar Soghayroun 2004) it appears that the reign of ‘Adlan I in the early 17th century saw a marked increase in the number and significance of Muslim missionaries in Sinnar. Some came from abroad, like Taj ed-Din el-Buhari who introduced the Qadiriya order to Sinnar, and Hassan Wad Hasuna el-Andalusi. At about the same time, the first holy men of Funj descent appeared in the historical records of Sinnar, including Mahmoud el-Araki, Idris Wad el-Arbab, and Ibrahim el-Bulad. Though few in numbers, it is highly significant that some of them had been trained abroad, likely in Egypt. About the middle of the 17th century, a new stage was achieved in the advance of Islam, beginning with the generation of holy men who succeeded Idris Wad el-Arbab and Ibrahim el-Bulad. The majority were not only of Sudanese origin, but had received their training within the Funj kingdom. All in all, with the advent of the 17th century, Sudan was in close touch with the rest of the Dar al-Islam. It was only in this century we can speak of the spread of a strong and well-informed faith of Islam. The regions in which their khalwas were founded from the Third Cataract southwards are known and surveyed and excavations may locate them. It is interesting to compare their widespread peaceful influence with the ribats3 of North Africa, which were the centers of the powerful reformist movements northwards. Burial monuments (qubbas) and ceramic evidence, especially smoking pipes,4 can be used to define Funj culture. Moving to the Ottoman domain, in Phase I, only the region between the First and Fourth Cataracts was within the Dar al-Islam through the Baqt treaty. The archaeological evidence is extensive. The tombstones are our early evidence of the presence of Muslims in Sudan in the North and the Eastern Desert and Red Sea coast (Intisar Soghayroun 2004). Excavations at Qasr Ibrim in Christian levels has produced many

882   Intisar Soghayroun manuscripts in Arabic showing the trade connections and much ceramic evidence of wheelmade pottery imported from Aswan and Fustat kilns. Ceramic evidence has also come from the excavations at Debeira West, Old Dongola, and Kulubnarti. The only large-scale excavation has been in Kulubnarti (Adams 1994), where there was no change in the house plans or in the artifactual evidence. In the 18th–19th centuries, Sufi orders also became popular in the old Ottoman Sanjak of Ibrim and many of the village shrines are of local holy men. It is unfortunate that most were destroyed by the rising waters of the Aswan and Nasser lakes without their details being recorded. But further south in the Third Cataract region, the situation is almost identical to central Sudan, where domed tombs and other religious shrines were erected over the graves of holy men. Many of the famous sheikhs of Sinnar were originally from the Ottoman domain and migrated to central Sudan in the early 16th century or earlier, a reality that calls for reconsideration of the process of Islamization of the northern part of the Sudan as a Sunni-oriented society. It has long been thought that because of the Ottoman presence in the north, most of the religious architecture were mosques and schools with no place for qubbas of the sheikhs and khalwas as most of the sheikhs had migrated south to the domain of the Funj. Now archaeology has shown that despite the migration of the Mahas tribe to central Sudan (populating areas including Khartoum and Tuti Island), there were still others who flourished far north and built khalwas and qubbas. Generally speaking, the form of Islam that prevailed in the 17th century reflected the duality that surfaced at that time throughout the wider Muslim world. Islam in Sudan bore the two faces; the orthodox and the ecstatic (Sufi). Each brought a distinctive set of institutions. The first emphasized mosques and schools while the second emphasized the khalwa in which the teacher was a holy man who possessed baraka (blessing), received through ascetic practices and spiritual exercises. Sufism brought to Sudan the orders that dictated a new form of social organization. Sufism and Islam are today synonyms for the Sudanese as terms and as a historical processes. The mystical strain, which is so apparent in Sudanese Islam, predominated from the beginning. Consequently, popular Islam can be seen as harmonious blending of old cultures and many nonIslamic traits were sealed in the context of the new religion, which itself had an innate flexibility sufficient to accommodate local beliefs. This is exemplified by continuation of the practice of non-Islamic beliefs like Haboba Soba (grandmother Soba) which has been practiced up to the 1980s at Jebel Gule west of Damazin in the heart of the Funj kingdom (Delmet  1981). The population of the Funj accepted Islam without totally uprooting their old Nubian, Coptic, or other non-Islamic beliefs, but they tried to give them Islamic meaning. Central to this understanding are the domed tombs of the Sufis and religious men which dotted the country and which are associated with visitation rite. One must take into consideration that early preachers of Islam, mainly traders and nomads, were themselves on the periphery of orthodox Islam. Their contact with and relation to cultures of the Middle Nile did not lead to dominant influence but to interaction with dynamic incorporation of non-Islamic practices in the new religion.

Islam in the Funj and Ottoman Periods in Sudan   883

Lessons from Cemeteries The Qubbas (Domed Tombs) as Cultural Indicator In Sudan, religious life is bound up with saints: to think of God without his intermediaries is impossible. So the outstanding feature of Sudanese religious life is that fullness of life is experienced through passionate devotion of holy persons who possess baraka, a supernatural power or blessing (Trimingham 1971). This in fact is a continuation of the role of the priest since the Kushite period, through the Christian period (Haydar Ibrahim 1979). This aspect of awliyya (saints) in popular Islam proves the impact of local beliefs and customs upon orthodox Islam in a direct way. It shows a kind of intricate interaction between the indigenous beliefs and the rising religion (Haydar Ibrahim 1979). The authority then came to be seen in the sheikh of the Sufi order who claims to perform miracles which are an honor. Relative to this understanding of religion: A new-comer to Sudan, having read some standard text-book on Islam, tends to take it for granted that the religion of people is that of Qur’ān and the law. The mosque is usually the most prominent object he sees and this makes him fail to understand that this is not the only, nor the most important, centre and symbol of their religion. A far more significant symbol of faith scattered about the Sudan in greater profusion than the mosque is the whitewashed domed tomb of a saint. The one may be regarded as the symbol of the system and the other of a living faith. (Trimingham 1965:105)

This explains the wide spread of domed tombs in Sudan and how people are keen to restore and preserve them to the extent that a khalwa can disappear without notice or be replaced by a cemetery: [T]he most elaborate shrines are the domed structures (gubbas) which cover the burial places of historically known sheikhs . . . [gubbas] are not merely the centers of innumerable folk cults, however; they are also legitimate historical monuments to the men who first brought a knowledge of Islamic faith . . . into the spiritual wilderness of the Sudan. (Adams 1977:575, 569)

The practices at the qubbas and other lesser shrines usually take the form of visitation at any time of the day. During such visits people would take food offering and incense to be burned inside the shrine. Furthermore there are also regular public ceremonies at some of the most famous qubbas celebrating the birthday or the day the sheikh died. This visitation rite has been noted before in the earlier cultural period of Nubia. The same is practiced by the tribes of the Blue Nile area and the State of Southern Sudan like Dinka and Nuer (Stigand 1918) and elsewhere in the Sudan.

884   Intisar Soghayroun The saints are buried under the qubba, their followers and relatives are buried adjacent to the qubba in widening circles. The historical value of these qubbas is averred by Shinnie referring to Soba: What the position was in the later 16th and 17th centuries is not clear, but we must assume a largely deserted town falling rapidly into ruins . . . . There is evidence to show that there was habitation there, but it may well have been on the site of the modern village of Soba to the south of the ancient town. This evidence of 16th–17th century occupation is the existence of a gubba, a domed tomb, of a holy man, Abd el Rahman Wad Teraf. (Shinnie 1961:15)

It is clear now that these qubbas are places of historically known sheikhs and legitimate historical monuments to the men who first propagated Islam in the Sudan. Also qubbas proved to be evidence of habitation sites in many cases as well as shedding some light on the movement of Arabs and Arabized tribes like the ‘Arakiyyin and the Mahas in Sudan (Fig. 43.2). The position of these qubbas relative to Islamic archaeology is highly important, since a great number of them are still standing. They present an architectural legacy whereby archaeology can trace origins and influences relative to earlier periods. This helps in clarifying the continuity and persistence of cultures in the Sudan—it shows that Kushite, Meroitic, Christian, and Islamic elements blended to the benefit of Islam. They can be used to demonstrate the power of imported ideas, their sources, and the circumstances associated with the importation of the new style.

Figure 43.2  Qubba, Wad Nemeiri, northern Sudan (Khandaq project 2009).

Islam in the Funj and Ottoman Periods in Sudan   885

The Lesser Shrines Lesser shrines may be a simple mud or stone building, with or without roof, or a ring of crudely piled stones are of equal importance to qubbas when it comes to research and analysis, some of them were once mosques and khalwas in the neighborhood before being turned into burial areas. The process of transformation starts when a sheikh dies. He will be buried without hesitation either in his khalwa room or next to it, and then a dome will be erected over the grave by his followers. His successor will follow in either inside the same qubba or a new one will be erected next to it. Other less important members of the family and close followers will be buried around the qubba, henceforth a cemetery is in the making and a khalwa is waning. Some of these simple shrines are also said to be tombs, while a greater number commemorate places where a saint is reputed to have gone into retreat or to have performed a miracle or perhaps where he revealed himself in a dream (bayan).5

Tombstones Tombstones are cultural indicators and they also bear decorative elements, verses from the Quran, Sufi poems, or supplications and prayers. They can tell us about literacy and where there was a strong Sufi influence and which areas were strictly Sunni (Fig. 43.3).

Figure 43.3  Example of tombstone from Mashu, a river port and customs post north of Dongola (Khandaq project 2008).

886   Intisar Soghayroun

Cemeteries and Identity Muslim cemeteries have long been neglected as devoid of valuable information. It has become obvious from recent researches that cemeteries can reflect identity of the people. There were many traditional practices at the burials and domed tombs which were observed by the 18th- and 19th-century travelers: the spread of pebbles on the surface of the grave, placing pots filled with water, and rubbing of famous sheikhs’ tombstone with dhurra (sorghum) to use the powder for blessing and medication (Burckhardt 1822). The sheikhs’ burial places are regarded as holy and safe place to store objects. Infants and fetuses are usually buried either next to a qubba or a sheikh’s grave. Women’s graves in certain areas are indicated by three tombstones (Intisar Soghayroun 2014) (Fig. 43.4).

Other Religious Buildings These include mosques, mesids, and khalwas. The use of the mosque is limited to prayer time. Their architecture generally shows local styles except for a few influenced by Egypt, Red Sea, or far west architecture. Generally they are rectangular structures built

Figure 43.4 A female grave indicated by three tombstones with pebbles spread on top (Khandaq project 2007).

Islam in the Funj and Ottoman Periods in Sudan   887

Figure 43.5  Remains of a khalwa now amid a graveyard north of Khandaq.

of mudbricks with mihrabs and sometimes wooden minbar (prayer platform) of no distinctive design. The mesid in the Ottoman domain is a place where people gather for their daily social needs, chats, or rests, and it is also where guests were received during the time of celebrations and mourning, while in central Sudan it indicates the area that encloses the khalwas, together with the takiyya6 and other buildings. The khalwa is a place where the Quran and Islamic sciences are taught. Architecturally these structures do not show any distinctive features. They are ordinary square or rectangular rooms with open courts, but they are local to the extent that they are different from any counterparts in other Islamic cities (Fig. 43.5).

Conclusions The Middle Nile with its geographical position was a zone of interaction between the north and central Africa, and west and east Africa. With this position Sudan acted as the melting pot that resulted in its unique Islamic character, cults, practices, and architectures. Central to this understanding and appreciation is the qubba, the unique artifact of Sudanese Islamic culture.

888   Intisar Soghayroun The spread of Islam in the Sudan as an ideology and as an effective socio-economic means of life could only have had happened through what we call agents of Islamization. These agents were the individual preachers, early Sudanese Muslims—individuals or groups—and Sufi orders. These agents worked together in one cultural process, although traders may also have had other agendas. What emerged after that is the unique character of Sudanese Islam. An example of the first process is the effect of Rikabi in Dongola, who arrived according to historical records early in the 14th century and founded a seat of learning there. This seat of learning was developed by his descendants the sons of Jabir who in the 16th century founded khalwas in the Shaiqiya country and acquired considerable influence. With the sons of Jabir, Islam entered a much wider stage where their scientific and spir­it­ ual activity was founded at that area and their sons and descendants dispersed all over the Sudan with their ideas and learning (Intisar Soghayroun 1987). The most decisive cultural change that took place in the Sudan was the use of Arabic as the official language, as the spoken and written language of the religion and traders. The documents excavated at Qasr Ibrim show that Arabic first appeared there before the 10th century and that Christian officials in Makuria were using it as well as Nubian in their correspondences and no evidence of the old Nubian script is found after the 15th century. Arabic was however used side-by-side with local languages (Nuba, Beja, Fur) but since they were not written except the old Nubian, they left no archaeological evidence unlike the Berber scripts further west in Mali. A second change, of great importance archaeologically was in house plans that changed to conform to the new religion, thus emphasized the separation of the “harem” or family part from the men’s diwan part. The new house plan is best seen at Suakin (Intisar Soghayroun 2004:62) and the excavations of Qal’at Sai and Qasr Ibrim, and in the palaces and deffis (Adams 1994) of the Nile mekdoms. At the only fully excavated site, Kulubnarti, we can trace the changes between Christian and Islamic periods. It is a site which continued to be used up the 19th century. The same site bears evidence for major change in pottery. The disappearance of decorated wheel-made pottery, except for imported glazed and porcelain ware in the 16th century, brought in a series of local handmade wares both in the Funj and the Ottoman zones. The Nubian-speaking villages continue to produce the utilitarian vessels in use among them today. Among other objects, non-ceramic containers including metal containers, glass objects, wooden and leather objects, and basketry, no obvious distinction can be made between the two periods except for the introduction of new types, especially firearms from the 17th century, tobacco pipes, and colored glass bangles from the 18th century. Among agriculture tools, sewing and weaving tools also do not show basis for distinguishing between the cultural inventories of the two periods. In the field of textile, some of the woolen and cotton fabrics disappeared after the end of the Christian period. Thus on typological grounds, no clear distinction can be made between the garments, the footgear, or the ornaments of late Christian period and early Islamic period. The one aspect of change

Islam in the Funj and Ottoman Periods in Sudan   889 that seems clearly related to the transition from Christianity to Islam is the use of written Arabic language (Adams 1998). The Eastern Desert and part of the Red Sea hinterland has been a wide area of interaction among Muslims since the early centuries of Islam. There are the anonymous tomb towers, standing from 3–5 m high built of local irregular stone blocks and lime mortar, while plastered from the outside (Ahmed M. Ali Hakem 1992). They are confined to the region between the foothills on the west and the Red Sea coast. Their function is still a matter of controversy (signal posts or defense posts have been excluded), but they are near burial areas. In any case, they are unique in the Middle Nile region, and none have been found in the area to the west of the Nile. At Erkoweit there is an interesting cemetery that is attributed to certain people from Kufa, Iraq (Fig. 43.6). Again in the same area there is a Majadhib order enclave with their khalwa and followers. It is important to observe the fact that Northern Sudan up to the Egyptian frontier was part of the Funj Kingdom from 1504–83 ce—almost a century. Hence one expects to find more connections with the rest of the country after the arrival of the Ottoman troops. There is extensive evidence for the presence of the Funj and Abdellab in the area south of the Third Cataract in the domain of the petty kingdoms that ruled the area north of the Shaiqiya mekdoms (cemeteries at Dambu, and hafir and Koya as well as Badai palace south of Dambu and the Funj palace at Karmakol).7

Figure 43.6  So-called Kufa cemetery. Courtesy of Suakin and The Red Sea Project, 2016.

890   Intisar Soghayroun

Notes 1. The mesid is an institution that includes a khalwa (Quranic school) along with lodging for students, open areas for students’ activities during the day and at night, and for weekly and annual Sufi celebrations. A zawiya is a room with or without walled space for daily prayers. It is also used for social occasions when marriage contracts are arranged, and people meet there in happy and sad events (like condolences on the death of a family member). 2. Old Dongola (Celebi 1938; Udal 1998); Sinnar (Crawford 1951; Intisar Soghayroun 1982); Qasr Ibrim (Alexander 2000); Arbaji (Crawford 1951; El-Tayib Khalifa Mohamed 1979); Sai (Adams 1977; Alexander 1996, 2000). 3. A ribat is a fortified settlement for temporary or permanent warriors at the frontiers of the Islamic world. They later became the residence of holy men who preferred to worship Allah in isolation like monks in Christianity. 4. The use of smoking pipes is one of the thorny issues in the history of the Funj. The Ottomans brought tobacco to northern Sudan in the late 16th century. For the Funj in the south, the pipes themselves are a widespread phenomenon, but it is not clear what they were smoking—the same tobacco introduced by the Ottomans, or something local? 5. bayan: a sign that indicates the sheikh revealed himself to somebody in a dream. 6. takkiya is from the Turkish word tekky, which means a place where jobless people can be accommodated and fed. In Muslim Sudan, it is the food preparation place inside a mesid or khalwa. 7. Known from historical accounts, the palace has not been excavated.

References Cited Adams, W.Y. 1977 Nubia: Corridor to Africa. Princeton University Press. ——— 1994 Kulubnarti, v. 1: The Architectural Remains. Program for Cultural Resource Assessment, University of Kentucky. ——— 1998 Kulubnarti, v. 2: The Artifactual Remains. Sudan Archaeological Research Society Publication 2. Ahmed Hussein 2004 The Archaeological Evidence for the Political and Religious Extension of the Funj between the 3rd and 4th Cataracts. MA thesis, University of Khartoum. Ahmed  M.  Ali Hakem 1992 Reflections on Islamic Archaeology. In Studien zum Antiken Sudan, ed. S.  Wenig, pp. 565–71. Akten der 7. Internationalen Tagung für meroitistische Forschungen. Harrassowitz. Alexander, J.A. 2000 The Archaeology and History of the Ottoman Frontier in the Middle Nile Valley 911–1233 AH/1504–1820 AD. Adumato 1:47–61. Burckhardt, J.L. 1822 Travels in Nubia, second edition. John Murray. Celebi, E. 1938 Seyahatnamesi, Misir, Sudan Habes 1672–1680, Book X. Dersaadet’te. Crawford, O.G.S. 1951 The Funj Kingdom of Sennar. Gloucester. Delmet, C. 1981 Islamization and the Traditional Society and Culture of Jabal Quli (Dar Funj). Sudan Notes and Records 62:25–46. El-Tayib Khalifa Mohamed 1979 The Site of Arbaji: An Archaeological and Historical Consideration. BA Thesis, Department of Archaeology, University of Khartoum. Haydar Ibrahim 1979 The Shaiqiya: The Cultural and Social Change of a Northern Sudanese Riverain People. Studien zur Kulturkunde 49. Franz Steiner.

Islam in the Funj and Ottoman Periods in Sudan   891 Intisar Soghayroun 1982 The Site of Sennar. BA Thesis, Department of Archaeology, University of Khartoum. ——— 1987 Domed Tombs in Central Sudan. MA thesis, American University in Cairo. ——— 2004 Islamic Archaeology in the Sudan. BAR International Series 1289. Archaeopress. ——— 2009 Ottoman Archaeology of the Middle Nile Valley in the Sudan. In The Frontiers of the Ottoman World, ed. A.C.S. Peacock, pp. 371–84. Oxford University Press. ——— 2014 Islamic Archaeology in Northern Sudan. In The Fourth Cataract and Beyond: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference for Nubian Studies, ed. J.R. Anderson and D.A. Welsby, pp. 209–16. British Museum Publications on Egypt and Sudan 1. Peeters. O’Fahey, R.S. and J.S. Spaulding 1974 Kingdoms of the Sudan. Methuen. Osman, A. and D.  Edwards 2012 The Archaeology of a Nubian Frontier: Survey on the Nile Third Cataract, Sudan. Mauhaus. Shinnie, P.L. 1961 Excavations in Soba. Sudan Antiquities Service Occasional Papers 2. Stigand, C.H. 1918 Warrior Classes of the Nuers. Sudan Notes and Records 1:116–18. Trimingham, J.S. 1965 Islam in the Sudan. Frank Cass. ——— 1971 The Sufi Orders in Islam. Oxford University Press. Udal, J.O. 1998 The Nile in Darkness: Conquest and Exploration 1504–1862. Michael Russell. Yusuf Fadl Hasan 1973 The Arabs and the Sudan. Khartoum University Press. Yusuf Fadl Hasan ed. 1968 Kitab el-Tabaqat fi Khusus al Awliya wal Salihin wal ‘Ulama wal Shu’ara fi el-Sudan, Wad Dayf Allah (The Book of Classes, Concerning Holy Men, Scholars, and Poets of Sudan). Khartoum University Press.

Chapter 44

Isl a mic N u bi a n K i ngdoms Jay Spaulding

Introduction At the close of the Middle Ages the Nubian-speaking world experienced a dramatic political and cultural renaissance under Islamic auspices. While the 15th century is presently a “dark age” to historians in the sense that few primary sources are available, there can be no mistaking the manifold and manifest consequences of the age’s dimly seen events. To borrow the interpretive perspective of Jan Vansina, in such cases the distribution of relevant phenomena across space testifies to the historical processes that generated the array of data; in short, “what you see is what happened” (Vansina 1978). The history of the 15th century may in broad outline be inferred from the conditions that existed in Nubia at the dawn of the 16th. The early 16th century vision of a reborn Islamic Nubia asks one to relinquish provisionally the established perspective of archaeology, long dominant in the consideration of older periods of northern Sudanese history, and to adopt an alternative viewpoint afforded by other disciplines, conspicuously historical linguistics and geography. The “Nubia of the archaeologists” places very great emphasis upon evidence gathered from the immediate banks of the Nile, and especially from the small northern zone where Nile Nubian languages were spoken during the 20th century (Adams  1977; Edwards 2004). The “Nubia of the linguists” is vastly larger (Fig. 44.1). In addition to the contemporary home of Nile Nubian, linguistic Nubia before the 20th century also embraced the Nile banks as far south as Nubian place-names survive; on the Blue Nile the 19th-century linguistic frontier with Berta and possibly other non-Nubian southern tongues lay near the town of Sinja (Spaulding 2007). At the dawn of the 20th century several relict Nubian languages survived west of the Nile; Kadero-Koldagi and Debri

894   Jay Spaulding

Figure 44.1  Map of Islamic Nubia. Map by Samuel Burns.

were spoken in the northern Nuba Mountains, Birgid (now probably extinct) and Meidob in eastern Darfur, and one or more recently rediscovered extinct tongues among the desert mountain communities of northern Kordofan (Bell  1973; Spaulding 2006). As Robin Thelwall has indicated, the evidence of historical linguistics designates Kordofan as the core of the Nubian speech community (Thelwall  1982). Further, around the western and southern fringes of Nubian speech lay a wide penumbra of diverse neighboring communities where culturally significant Nubian loanwords were common; for example, brief studies have treated the dispersal of Nubian terms for domestic swine and the horse (Spaulding and Spaulding 1988). From the perspective of historical geography, moreover, the broad southern rainlands of Nubia that were not dependent upon irrigation comprised the demographic and economic centerweight of the wider society; however exquisite the cultural accomplishments of the urbane Nilebank northerners beloved of archaeologists might be, it was the wealth of the southlands in men, horses, iron, gold, and exotic goods worthy of export abroad that granted ultimate power (Barbour 1961; Edwards 1998; Spaulding 2007). The Nubian renaissance of

Islamic Nubian Kingdoms   895 the long 15th century asks to be considered within an inclusive context that embraces both northern riverine culture and the rainland communities of the south and west. At the political and cultural heart of the Nubian renaissance was a broad 15th-century wave of conquest under the auspices of Islam, centered in Kordofan, that swept eastward to the Red Sea and westward into central Chad. Through the distant, retrospective eyes of the present what was probably a single movement at the beginning diverged in time into two distinct historical entities. In the east, centered in the Nile valley, was founded a state to be known as the Funj kingdom of Sinnar. It was in place by about 1500 and endured until the Turco-Egyptian conquest of 1821. The western conquests are attributable to the Tunjur, who ruled the highlands of eastern Chad and western Sudan for a century or more until displaced by the rise of the modern kingdoms of Wadai and Darfur during the 17th century. Few would expect to recover information about events of the Stone Age, or even the medieval period, through interviews with Sudanese informants living today. But no comparable chronological or cultural caesura divides modern Sudanese from the events of their own fifteenth-century history. Over most of the intervening centuries (save perhaps the last) a hypothesis of broad cultural continuity is justified (Kapteijns and Spaulding 1991). Though the links across time may be enigmatic and the evidence preserved gnomic and ambiguous, persistent traditions, originally preserved orally and then recorded in later years in Arabic or European languages, offer important if dimly focused insight into events of the Nubian renaissance. Given the paucity of archaeological and written evidence, this genre looms large on the historiographical horizon.

The Eastern Tradition: The Funj Kingdom of Sinnar, ca. 1500–1821 The last age of medieval riverine Nubia was traumatic. Successive invasions from Mamluk Egypt shattered both political and cultural assumptions (Cuoq 1986). While by the close of the 14th century a king of sorts still existed, he no longer sat in Old Dongola, and much of the medieval polity had disintegrated into modest local lordships or “captaincies” (O’Fahey and Spaulding 1974). The populace, meanwhile, had experienced the weight of repeated alien occupation and systematic slave-raiding; as a contemporary Egyptian put it, “[The Nubians] are Christians and have a hard life; they are imported and sold” (Spaulding 1995). At the local level there began a cultural transformation that repudiated Christianity in favor of Islam in a tolerant and eclectic idiom (Trimingham  1965). Northern missionaries planted a long chain of new settlements along the Nubian-speaking Nile banks, founding lineages of locally prominent holy men around which the surrounding agricultural society of the riverine “captaincies” reorganized (Holt 1973). Many of these founders of holy families were native speakers of Mahas Nubian, a language that was probably widely understood in the southlands

896   Jay Spaulding upstream from Dongola (Spaulding  1990,  2004). When wider-scale political order returned at the dawn of the 16th century, that too would be Islamic; conspicuously, the king once associated with Dongola was already a Muslim. One impetus for political renewal in 15th-century riverine Nubia was the extension toward the northern Nile of the commercial and political enterprise of the Hadaraba of Suakin (O’Fahey and Spaulding 1974; Spaulding 2008). But surviving sources indicate that local initiatives were ultimately decisive. One middle Nile community, heirs to the late medieval polity of El al-Abwab, reorganized under Islamic auspices as the Ja’aliyyin, a term derived from the name of a legendary ancestor (Yusuf Fadl Hasan 1967; Ahmad elMu’tasim 2011). The Ja’aliyyin community was then incorporated into a much larger new polity governed by a group called the “Abdallab, heirs to one ‘Abd Allah Jamma” (“The Gatherer”) (Ahmad ‘Abd el-Rahim Nasr 1969; Mohamed Salih Muhyi el-Din 1972). The ‘Abdallab came to rule the district of Dongola, the riverine Nile to the confluence, the lower Blue Nile and wide eastern lands as far south as Dabarki on the Dinder (Spaulding 2007). Kordofan too responded to the movement toward Nubian reunification, though less information is available about the process; there as elsewhere Islam was adopted as the religious idiom of Nubian resurgence. Prominent leaders emerged from a community known as the Funj. A few terms and titles in the otherwise-extinct Funj language survive in Arabic and European sources, and the variant European spellings “Fougn” and “Funnye” for the Arabic “Funj” suggest that the sound system of this language remains obscure (Burckhardt 1822; Lejean 1865). The first known Funj individual, a Muslim and a merchant, appeared in the literature about the Hadaraba of Suakin (O’Fahey and Spaulding 1974). During the 15th century the Funj expanded eastward and conquered the Nile valley. By the dawn of the 16th century the Funj had established a new realm that united most of the territories of the ancient state cultures of the eastern Sudan (Holt 1999). They overran most of what remained of medieval Alodia; a residual Alodian presence survived under Ethiopian suzerainty in the gold-producing districts of the upper Blue Nile until the Funj annexed that region in mid-17th century (Spaulding 1977a). The Funj also subdued the realm of the ‘Abdallab, but the northerners remained restive for many years, a discontent that erupted into a major revolt at the close of the 16th century under a leader named ‘Ajib (Holt 1973; O’Fahey and Spaulding 1974). The Funj planted colonies of settlers in the north, conspicuously in the zone between Old Dongola and the Nile bend at Ed-Debba; the introduction of a new domestic architecture in the city itself may also be a legacy of this policy (Godlewski 2015). Thereafter, each year when the ‘Abdallab governor appeared before the high king to present tribute, the two lords and their retinues conducted a mock combat reenacting the primal struggle that established Funj dominance within the new Islamic Nubian realm (Krump 1710). A residual duality remained, perhaps grounded in linguistic divergence; subsequent visitors often spoke of northern riverine Nubia as “Berberistan” while the southern heartlands were “Funjistan” (Dankoff and Tezcan 2011). Over the first half of its history the Funj kingdom had no fixed capital; following a pattern common in Northeast African history the royal establishment moved about

Islamic Nubian Kingdoms   897 “month by month from station to station” (O’Fahey and Spaulding 1974; Spaulding 2011). Lists of rulers, with occasional references to events, were compiled retrospectively during a later age of literacy; their record is suggestive rather than definitive (Spaulding 1997). ‘Amara Dunqas (910/1504–1505 to 940/1533–34) was succeeded by his sons Nayil (died 957/1550–51) and ‘Abd el-Qadir (died 965/1557–58). There followed two sons of Nayil, ‘Amara II (died 976/1568–69) and Dakin (died 994/1585–86). Dakin’s son Dawra was deposed in 996/1587–88). His successors were Tabl (or Tayyib) the son of ‘Abd el-Qadir I (died 1000/1591), his son Unsa (deposed 1012/1603–1604), and the latter’s son ‘Abd el-Qadir II (deposed Rajab 1015/December 1606). Then ruled ‘Adlan the son of Unsa (deposed 1020/1611–12) and Badi the son of ‘Abd el-Qadir II (died 1025/1616–17). Two imperfectly visible themes may be attributed to this period. Dakin was said to have campaigned in the east along the foot of the Ethiopian massif; the incorporation of southeastern groups such as the Beni ‘Amr and Gumuz may have occurred at this time. The revolt of the ‘Abdallab leader ‘Ajib the Great preoccupied Funj rulers at the turn of the 17th century, and like the borderland campaigns, stimulated Ethiopian involvement in Sudanese affairs; serious fighting between the two kingdoms took place in 1618–19 (O’Fahey and Spaulding 1974). The second quarter of the 17th century inaugurated an age of stability, growth, and constructive change under the kings Rubat (1025–54/1616–17 to 1644–45), Badi II (1054–92/1644–45 to 1681) and Unsa II (1092–1103/1681–92). Challenges along the southern frontier were overcome. A revolt by the vassal prince of the Nuba Mountains territory of Taqali was suppressed, and constructive relations established with the hithertohostile Shilluk kingdom, in part to contain pressure from the adjoining expansive Dinka (Beswick 2004). The residual Alodian entity in the goldfields south of the upper Blue Nile, administered for a generation or more from the dawn of the century by the Ethiopians as addis alam, their “New World,” was eventually conquered and annexed to the Funj kingdom; Islam came to dominate, but Christianity survived there to century’s end (Spaulding 1977a). Meanwhile the kings brought their roving capital to rest at Sinnar on the Blue Nile; the longstanding treasury institution there was enveloped by a huge new multistoried palace complex of packed earth destined to serve as the setting for much political drama of the age to follow. The first mosque was constructed, of fired brick. The kings sponsored caravans by which royal merchants sold the monarch’s export goods abroad and purchased exotic luxury goods and “implements of state” such as firearms (Kapteijns and Spaulding 1982, 1990; Spaulding 1984). The opening of the Funj kingdom, now often known by the name of its capital city, precipitated an influx of foreigners from many lands, conspicuously the heartlands of Islam. Nubian individuals traveled and studied abroad, returning with books and new ideas. By the end of the 17th century Sinnar had become a large and cosmopolitan city; the kings appointed magistrates to administer Islamic law at sites where foreigners and Sudanese exposed to their ways congregated (Spaulding 1977b). The government began to create written documents in Arabic, and a tradition of literate hagiography and history-writing took root among the religiously educated (Yusuf Fadl Hasan 1974; Spaulding and Mohamed Ibrahim Abu Salim 1989).

898   Jay Spaulding As foreigners returned home and composed accounts of their Sudanese experiences, knowledge about Sinnar began to accumulate in alien lands. These diverse sources make possible a coherent image of the kingdom in about 1700 and a detailed history of the age to follow (Spaulding 2007). The Funj king ruled from his capital with the assistance of a court numbering about two dozen high officials. Some were members of the royal family. Others were the governors of provinces, sometimes as many as eight in number. Another group of courtiers, said to be slaves of state, served as military officers and bureaucrats. Several Islamic holy men were present, including the scribe, a qadi (Islamic judge), and the khatib (preacher) of the Sinnar mosque. Sometimes courtesy seats were offered to visiting foreign dignitaries. The conduct of court affairs was governed by firm rules of protocol that reaffirmed the fundamental principles of government and displayed with precision the status of everyone present. Those who knew addressed the king with the salutation gar mol, apparently a vestigial ritual survival from Meroitic times (Spaulding 1974). The king regarded his subjects, in principle, as slaves; he had the right to know the identity of everyone in the realm, to summon him into the royal presence, and to confirm or modify his condition—including by execution or export abroad (Spaulding 2010b). When the king spoke formally from the throne his words had the force of law; therefore his mundane communications were normally mediated by the court “linguist” entitled manamalecna (Funj) or sid el-kalam (Arabic). The court had the responsibility of periodically judging the king; if found unsatisfactory the monarch would be deposed or executed. Similarly, when the need arose it was the court (excluding the Islamic holy men, but possibly including the Queen Mother (artiyya) and other eminent females) who elected the next king. The hereditary ruling nobility of Sinnar was a matriclan called the Funj, considered at the time the descendants of a primeval ancestress whom Arabic-speakers called “Bint ‘Ayn esh-Shams”; following the fall of the dynasty in 1718–19, it was sometimes referred to retrospectively as the “Unsab,” or kinsmen of Unsa the last monarch of the lineage. King-lists suggest that the royal electors often preferred to see a sequence of brothers on the throne, and that the transition to a younger generation of candidates was often fraught. Most of the material resources upon which the realm depended derived from the land, and Funj authority was distributed accordingly. Beneath the high king, the sultan, were two levels of subinfeudation. The provinces were eight in number: Qarri in the north, Atbara and Et-Taka in the east, El-Bahr along the Blue Nile, Alays along the White Nile, Bayla, and El-Qarbin in the Gezira between, and Kordofan in the west. Each was administered by a governor entitled manjil (Funj), and subdivided into a number of districts ruled by a nobleman of tertiary rank entitled makk. Each lord reserved a demesne of personal lands, his kursi or “seat,” and distributed the rest among his subordinates. The lords of these geographically vast and dispersed units of governance were bound together by the distinctive Funj system of kinship discipline, which was also used to incorporate culturally alien tributary fiefs such as the Nuba Mountains lordship of Taqali. The sultan ruled the realm but not his family; that was the responsibility of his maternal uncle, whom Arabic-speakers called the sid el-qum

Islamic Nubian Kingdoms   899 (“Master of the household”). Since this official had the right and duty of executing sultans when rejected by the court, he was not allowed to participate in its deliberations, but was represented there by an agent. Male Funj were themselves unable to transmit their noble status biologically; each lord, including the sultan and all his subordinate provincial and district governors, received upon investiture in office a Funj wife through whom alone he could bear noble heirs. The sultan’s sisters and daughters comprised a pool of invaluable political capital that the high king would distribute with great care to deserving subordinates. The sisters and daughters of subordinate rulers who had received Funj wives, in turn, were precious dynastic gifts worthy of bestowal upon one’s immediate superior or the sultan himself; thus the high king had about six hundred wives, a provincial manjil about two hundred, and a district makk about thirty. Because the high nobility hoarded so many noble women, there were not enough to provide spouses for all the residual male noblemen, entitled arbab; unless an arbab won the hand of a princess through exceptional feats of valor or the like, his noble status would die with him. With the passage of generations each higher lord assumed the position of maternal uncle to his Funj subordinates, holding over them the potentially lethal authority of a sid el-qum. It was the custom that when a Funj noblewoman became pregnant she return to the home of her parents until the child was born and weaned; this meant that the heirs of any subordinate lord were reared at the court of his immediate superior, where the young men served as pages or qawawid, and also as hostages for the good behavior of their father. When a sultan produced sons, each mother was removed from the palace and honorably rusticated. A sultan’s sons were raised under house arrest within the palace itself, “locked up tighter than the cloistered nuns of Christendom,” as one visitor put it (Krump 1710). When a sultan was deposed or died the court would name one of his sons as successor, whose responsibility it was to execute all his rival half-brothers. In reality, such princes sometimes escaped, often to become the avatars of dissident movements both at home and abroad. The new king’s mother returned to court as Queen Mother, and probably served as one of the court electors and participated in the management of the system of dynastic marriages. The Funj sultan was perceived as the direct and unmediated ruler of everyone in the kingdom. His word, whether conveyed in writing or via emissaries, was law; at the court of each subordinate governor a high seat was left vacant to symbolize the ultimately royal nature of justice. Individuals deemed dangerous were assassinated. The fiefs of lords could be made larger, smaller, or abolished by royal fiat. Some functions of government were reserved to officials of slave status. Conspicuous among these was the institution of the treasury, presided over at the capital palace complex by the karalrau (Funj) and represented by branches at each provincial capital. The central treasury not only stored goods collected as tax and exotic imported luxuries for redistribution by the king; it also organized the production of weapons, armor for man and horse, and currency in the form of small symbolic hoes. The treasury assessed tribute on herds and flocks throughout the country and conducted a detailed annual measurement of the year’s crops to guide tax assessments. It supervised the manufacture of iron—a theme to be

900   Jay Spaulding pursued below. The treasury managed the allocation of slaves, often collected by government raids, by the donation of which the sultan could increase the military potential of favored lords at the expense of others (Spaulding 2007). A constitutional legend of Sinnar told how Ottoman Sultan Selim the Grim, who conquered Egypt during the reign of the first Funj monarch, was dissuaded from pressing on up the Nile by learning that the Nubians were now Muslims (Holt 1967, 1973). Islamic identity defined the place of Sinnar in relation to surrounding lands, but the sultans also drew significantly upon the older cultural lexicon of Sudanic kingship—a theme more easily visible in the western realm of the Tunjur, to be discussed below. When measured against the increasingly familiar standards of the 18th-century Islamic heartlands the Funj Nubian regime could not but seem heterodox; after 1700 many of the political and socioeconomic conflicts inherent in any complex hierarchical society were being interpreted in terms of Islamic proprieties. Sultans Nol (1718–24) and Badi IV (1724–62) ended the matrilineal dynasty, and traditional Funj kinship discipline faded as patrilineal succession spread among the nobility. The new elite patrilineages often adopted Arab identities (the Funj became Umayyads), and many groups of subjects followed. In 1762 the king was overthrown by the “Hamaj,” a group of disaffected nobles and their supporters, who elevated one of their own as regent to rule in the name of a nominal king. The country sank into interminable civil war, and as the government failed, groups of subjects asserted their independence as modern Sudanese Arab tribes. The collapse of the sultan’s command economy opened the door to commercial capitalism, and as an ever-larger middle class emerged, towns increased in size and number—often to succumb in turn to the violence of the age. When the Turkish viceroy Mohamed Ali sent an army south in 1820–21 it met little resistance, and annexed the shattered remnants of the Islamic Nubian kingdom to Egypt (Hill 1959).

The Western Tradition: The Tunjur of Darfur and Wadai The wave of Islamic Nubian conquest that brought the Nile valley under Funj control by the dawn of the 16th century also swept westward across the highlands later to become the realms of Darfur and Wadai. The rulers of the Nubian renaissance in the west were known as the Tunjur. Tunjur mastery of the western highlands came to an end during the first half of the 17th century (Tubiana et al. 1978; O’Fahey 2008). The realm had left its trace upon the outside world through a few surviving contemporary records, notably an Islamic document of 1576 confirming a royal Tunjur religious endowment in Medina, and the description of the Tunjur capital of Uri by the Venetian geographer Lorenzo d’Anania in 1582 (O’Fahey 2008). The chronological antecedents to these 16th-century reports remain dim, but a rise to power a century or two previously seems probable (Spaulding 2010a). Through the legendary hindsight of their subjects the Tunjur were

Islamic Nubian Kingdoms   901 perceived as kings mighty in sorcery and ironworking, and surviving information about them may be organized around these themes. The Tunjur monarchs were Muslims, as their very names and pious endowments indicate. However, like their Funj counterparts in the east, they practiced a form of the faith that coexisted with a substantial metaphysical legacy from the Nubian past, a tradition that incorporated elements derived from the cultural lexicon of Sudanic African kingship. The king was considered responsible for the well-being of his community, and drought, plague, or famine were grounds for removing him (Lea  1994; Spaulding 2006, 2007). The routine ritual duties by which he fulfilled his obligations included symbolic leadership in significant productive activities such as turning the first soil of the season of cultivation and then harvesting the first fruits of the crop (Lea 1994). In the east, it was said that “A law among the modern Ethiopians of Sennar requires that a king cultivate and seed a field by his own hands. This work, we are told, makes him worthy of the surname of the man of the fields as a title in addition to his royalty” (Bednarski 2014). The Funj term for royal farmer was Badi, a title or throne name by which at least six Funj kings were primarily known. In a harsh desert environment, the kings west and east bore responsibility for bringing rain, which they carried out by means of rituals on mountaintops (MacMichael  1922; Tubiana  1964; Tubiana et al.  1978; Lea  1994; Welsby and Sjöström 2006). The king propitiated or sought counsel from a great snake, the python or shangul, which, it was said, lay concealed in certain mountainous caves, and was represented by priestesses (Lea 1994; Spaulding 2007). (In the east, when the Funj conquered the Christian Alodian remnant community called addis alam by the Ethiopians, they put in place an elite known as “Sons of the Python,” or Beni Shangul). These royal activities, though normal in their day, left the Tunjur elite vulnerable to critique by later generations of more conventionally orthodox Muslims, as did the fact that they also practiced matrilineal Nubian dynastic succession (Spaulding 2010a). The Tunjur, it was said, forced their subjects to remove the tops of mountains so that their castles could be constructed there. The impressive remains of these structures have been observed but not excavated; similarities to Nile Nubian pottery and construction have been noted (MacMichael  1922; Arkell  1961). Ironworking was another massive royal undertaking; information about the enterprise is centered in Kordofan, home to both the Tunjur and Funj. Iron ore is not rare in the Sudan; one important source was a bed of limonite about 3 m below the surface of a zone 80 km in radius northeast of the provincial capital of Bara. Diverse smelting sites may have existed; the largest presently known, possessing numerous industrial-scale furnaces, lay at Jebel Haraza in northcentral Kordofan. The gathering of charcoal to fuel these furnaces must have been a widespread and formidable undertaking. Ironworking, like mountaintop-leveling, was not a favored occupational choice for subjects; rather, iron production depended upon a system of royal social coercion. Slave courtiers of the royal treasury supervised the operation. Skilled ironworkers were kept available by the institution of a caste system that excluded despised craftsmen from preferable occupations such as farming or herding. Much of the heavy and sometimes dangerous labor of mining, charcoal-burning, and smelting was carried out by menial slaves. During the 17th century the arrival from

902   Jay Spaulding abroad of more conventional understandings of Islam, coupled with the vision of new, adopted Arab identities, offered an attractive escape opportunity to the community of despised craftsmen and slaves of the ironworks of Kordofan. Under the guidance of missionaries from the east and north they were one of the first groups of Islamic Nubian subjects to claim Arab identity; they became the “gathered ones,” or Jawama’a. They invested heavily in Islamic education, so that their sons would qualify as religious experts themselves. A younger generation of educated Jawama’a fled the ironworking zone of their fathers to seek opportunities in the Nubian west (Spaulding 2010a). There, they seem to have become determinedly subversive opponents of the Tunjur establishment. The western Nubian realm of the Tunjur is known almost exclusively from legends about its collapse and the formation of the new kingdoms of the 17th century that replaced it. Keira insurgents established their rule over Darfur (O’Fahey 2008) and Boro Mabang speakers consolidated power in Wadai (Tubiana et al.  1978). In both cases Jawama’a missionaries figured prominently. In Darfur they earned high court positions, including that of qadi (O’Fahey 2008). In Wadai, it was said that ‘Aysha, daughter of the last Tunjur monarch Wad Dakin, turned against her father and allied with an immigrant holy man from the east named ‘Abd el-Karim to create a new patrilineal line to rule an independent Wadai. Some traditions say that ‘Abd el-Karim himself was one of the Jawama’a; others prefer a more illustrious ancestry, but acknowledge the influence of Jawama’a missionaries in facilitating the rise of the new state (Tubiana et al. 1978). Upon expulsion from Darfur and Wadai at mid-17th century the Tunjur elite struck westward into the long series of lowland oases created by the subterranean outflow channel of Lake Chad, a zone known as Kanem. At the moment Kanem was disputed between the forces of the Dala Afnu, an emissary of Kanem’s former ruler the king of Borno, and a dissident dynastic faction called the Bulala; the Tunjur initially joined the turbulent regional politics as allies of Borno, making their capital at Mao near the north shore of Lake Chad. They were known as a regime of kings and smiths, whose ironsmelting center near the oasis of Mondo has been observed by scholarship though not excavated (Gros 1951; Huard 1964, 1966). At the dawn of the 19th century the kingdoms of Darfur and Wadai ended their long age of struggle for mastery of the erstwhile Tunjur polity and made peace; turning back to back they then directed their forces both east and west. Darfur annexed Kordofan up to the banks of the Nile and White Nile, while Wadai, under a series of gifted sultans culminating in the reign of Mohamed Sharif (1834–58) conquered Baghirmi and thrust on to the shores of Lake Chad (Kapteijns and Spaulding 1988; Spaulding 2007). The Tunjur of Kanem did not resist; but when they surrendered, it was not to any male descendant of ‘Abd el-Karim. They surrendered to the heir of the last ruler they recognized as noble; they acknowledged the legitimate mastery over themselves of ‘Aysha, the last Tunjur princess of Wadai (Gros 1951). When their last claim to political significance evaporated, the Tunjur remnants, like so many other deracinated 19th-century northern Sudanese communities, sought refuge in genealogically framed ideology (Spaulding  2000). They discovered for themselves a

Islamic Nubian Kingdoms   903 ­ istinguished if hitherto-unknown Arab ancestry from the fictitious followers of Abu d Zayd el-Hilali via “Tunis the Green” (MacMichael 1912; Poncet 1967).

Conclusion The Nubian renaissance of the long 15th century merits comparison with the Sudanese Mahdiyya of the late 19th (Holt 1970). Both were movements of political and cultural resurgence couched in distinctively Sudanese idioms of Islam. Each was a forceful military response to preceding ages of foreign intervention and intrusions from Egypt and the Red Sea. Both movements originated at the south-central margin of the Nubian world, in Kordofan, and expanded widely both eastward to the Red Sea and westward into central Chad. In both cases the movement’s hold on the western highlands was historically significant but comparatively tenuous. Within the better-consolidated eastern wing of the respective movements there existed significant tensions between the settled northern riverine cultivating communities and the dominant immigrants from the south and west whose lifestyles incorporated pastoral mobility. Each movement embodied the vision of a once or future Islamic Nubian nation arrayed across the northern and central Sudan.

References Cited Adams, W.Y. 1977 Nubia: Corridor to Africa. Princeton University Press. ——— 1982 The Coming of Nubian Speakers to the Nile Valley. In The Archaeological and Linguistic Reconstruction of African History, ed. C.  Ehret and M.  Posnanski, pp. 11–38. University of California Press. Ahmad ‘Abd el-Rahīm Nasr 1969 Ta’rīkh el-‘Abdallāb min khalīl ruwāyātihim el-simā’iyya (History of the ‘Abdallab based on their Oral Traditions). Institute of African and Asian Studies, University of Khartoum. Ahmad el-Mu‘tasim el-Shaykh 2011 Mantiqat Et-Takākī/El-Abwāb (The District of Et-Takaki/ El-Abwab). Shirkat Matābi’ al-Sūdān. Arkell, A.J. 1961 A History of the Sudan to 1821. Athlone Press. Barbour, K.M. 1961 The Republic of the Sudan: A Regional Geography. University of London Press. Bednarski, Andrew ed. and trans. 2014 The Lost Manuscript of Frédéric Cailliaud. The American University in Cairo Press. Bell, H. 1973 An Extinct Nubian Language from Kordofan Sudan Notes and Records 54:73–80. Beswick, S. 2004 Sudan’s Blood Memory: The Legacy of War, Ethnicity and Slavery in Early South Sudan. University of Rochester Press. Burckhardt, J.L. 1822 Travels in Nubia, second edition. John Murray. Cuoq, J. 1986 Islamisation de la Nubie chrétienne: VIIe–XVIe siècle. Geuthner.

904   Jay Spaulding Dankoff, R. and N. Tezcan 2011 Evliyâ çelebi’nin Nil haritası: “Dürr-i bî-misîl în ahbâr-ı Nîl” (Evliya Chelebi’s Map of the Nile). Yapı Kredi Yayınları. Edwards, D.N. 1998 Meroe and the Sudanic Kingdoms. Journal of African History 39:175–93. ——— 2004 The Nubian Past: An Archaeology of the Sudan. Routledge. Godlewski, W. 2015 Dongola—Ancient Tungul: Archaeological Guide. Polish Centre of Mediterranean Archaeology, University of Warsaw. Gros, R. 1951 Histoire des Tounjours de Mondo. Documents de CHEAM 1774. Hill, R. 1959 Egypt in the Sudan, 1820–1881. Oxford University Press. Holt, P.M. 1967 Sultan Selim I and the Sudan. Journal of African History 8:19–23. ——— 1970 The Mahdist State in the Sudan, 1881–1898. Clarendon Press. ——— 1973 Studies in the History of the Near East. Frank Cass. ——— 1999 The Sudan of the Three Niles: The Funj Chronicle, 910–1288/1504–1871. Brill. Huard, P. 1964 Nouvelle contribution à l’étude du fer au Sahara et au Tchad. Bulletin de I.F.A.N. 26B(3–4):297–395. ——— 1966 Introduction et diffusion de fer en Tchad. Journal of African History 7:377–404. Kapteijns, L. and J.  Spaulding 1982 Precolonial Trade between States in the Eastern Sudan African Economic History 11:29–62. ——— 1988 After the Millennium: Diplomatic Correspondence from Wadai and Dar Fur on the Eve of Colonial Conquest, 1885–1916. Michigan State University African Studies Center. ——— 1990 Gifts Worthy of Kings: An Episode in Dar Fur-Taqali Relations. Sudanic Africa 1:61–70. ——— 1991 The Orientalist Paradigm in the Historiography of the Late Precolonial Sudan. In Golden Ages, Dark Ages: Imagining the Past in Anthropology and History, ed. J. O’Brien and W. Roseberry, pp. 139–51. University of California Press. Krump, T. 1710 Hoher und fruchtbarer Palm-Baum des heiligen Evangelij. Georg Schlüter and Martin Happach. Lea, C.A.E. 1994 On Trek in Kordofan: The Diaries of a British District Officer in the Sudan, 1931–1933, ed. M. W. Daly. Oxford University Press. Lejean, G. 1865 Note sur les Fougns et leur idiome. Bulletin de la Société de Géographie de Paris, 5e série, 9:238–52. MacMichael, H.A. 1912 The Tribes of Northern and Central Kordofan. Cambridge University Press. ——— 1922 A History of the Arabs in the Sudan. Cambridge University Press. Mohamed Sālih Muhyī el-Dīn 1972 Mashaykhat el-‘Abdallāb wa-athruhā fī hiyāt el-Sūdān el-siyāsiyya. Al-Dār al-Sūdāniyya. O’Fahey, R.S. 2008 The Darfur Sultanate: A History. Columbia University Press. O’Fahey, R.S. and J.L. Spaulding 1974 Kingdoms of the Sudan. Methuen. Poncet, J. 1967 Le Mythe de la “catastrophe Hilalien.” Annales ESC (September-October), pp. 1099–1120. Spaulding, J. 1974 “Gar Mol!”—A Meroitic Survival in the Court Ritual of Sinnār? Meroitic Newsletter 15:11–12. ——— 1977a Alodia. Transafrican Journal of History 2:39–53. ——— 1977b The Evolution of the Islamic Judiciary in Sinnar. International Journal of Africa Historical Studies 10(3):408–26. ——— 1984 The Management of Exchange in Sinnar. In Trade and Traders in the Eastern Sudan, ed. L.O. Manger, pp. 25–48. Institute of Social Anthropology, University of Bergen. ——— 1990 The Old Shaiqi Language in Historical Perspective. History in Africa 17:283–92.

Islamic Nubian Kingdoms   905 ——— 1995 Medieval Christian Nubia and the Islamic World: A Reconsideration of the Baqt Treaty. International Journal of African Historical Studies 28(3):577–94. ——— 1997 An Incident of Dynastic Succession in Sixteenth-Century Sinnar. Northeast African Studies 4(3):23–28. ——— 2000 The Chronology of Sudanese Arabic Genealogical Tradition. History in Africa 27:325–37. ——— 2004 Classical Medieval Nubian and the Mahas Diaspora. Islam et Sociétés au Sud du Sahara 17–18:81–84. ——— 2006 Pastoralism, Slavery, Commerce, Culture and the Fate of the Nubians of Northern and Central Kordofan under Dar Fur Rule, ca. 1750–ca. 1850. International Journal of African Historical Studies 39(3):393–412. ——— 2007 The Heroic Age in Sinnar. Red Sea Press. ——— 2008 Sawakin: A Port City of the Early Modern Sudan. In Secondary Cities and Urban Networking in the Indian Ocean Realm, c. 1400–1800, ed. K.R. Hall, pp. 39–53. Lexington Books. ——— 2010a The Iron King: A Reconsideration of the Tunjur. In Sudan’s Wars and Peace Agreements, ed. J. Spaulding, S. Beswick, C. Fluehr-Lobban, and R.A. Lobban Jr., pp. 163–76. Cambridge Scholars Press. ——— 2010b “Slaves of the King?”: Rhetoric and Reality in the Nubian State Tradition. In African Systems of Slavery, ed. J. Spaulding and S. Beswick, pp. 247–65. Africa World Press. ——— 2011 Urbanization and Ironworking in the Nubian State Tradition. In The Growth of Non-Western Cities: Primary and Secondary Urban Networking, c. 900–1900, ed. K.R. Hall, pp. 155–69. Lexington Books. Spaulding, J. and J.L. Spaulding 1988 The Democratic Philosophers of the Medieval Sudan. Sprache und Geschichte in Afrika 9:247–68. Spaulding, J. and Mohamed Ibrahim Abu Salim 1989 Public Documents from Sinnar. Michigan State University Press. Thelwall, R. 1982 Linguistic Aspects of Greater Nubian History. In The Archaeological and Linguistic Reconstruction of African History, ed. C.  Ehret and M.  Posnanski, pp. 39–52. University of California Press. Trimingham, J.S. 1965 Islam in the Sudan. Cass. Tubiana, M.-J. 1964 Survivances préislamiques en pays Zaghawa. Institut d’Ethnologie. Tubiana, M.-J., Issa Hassan Khayar, and P. Deville 1978 Abd El-Karim. Propagateur de l’islam et fondateur du royaume du Ouaddaï. Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique. Vansina, J. 1978 The Children of Woot: A History of the Kuba Peoples. University of Wisconsin Press. Welsby, D.A. and I.  Welsby Sjöström 2006 Exploration at Jebel Umm Rowag (NF-36M/3-K–10). Archéologie du Nil Moyen 10:233–55. Yusuf Fadl Hasan 1967 The Arabs and the Sudan from the Seventh to the Early Sixteenth Century. Edinburgh University Press. ——— 1974 Kitāb aṭ- Ṭabaqāt fī khuṣūṣ el-awliyā’ wa-’ṣ-ṣāliḥīn wa’l-ʻulamā’ wa’l-shuʻarā’ fi’lSūdān ta’līf Mohamed el-Nūr b. Dayf Allāh (The Tabaqat [Book of Biographies] of Mohamed el-Nur b. Dayf Allah especially Concerning the Holy Men, the Righteous, the Learned and the Poets of the Sudan). University of Khartoum Press.

PA RT I I I

PE R SPE C T I V E S ON N U BI A

Chapter 45

Cat tle Cu lt u r e s i n A ncien t N u bi a Jérôme Dubosson

Introduction Cattle played a prominent role in the pre- and protohistory of northeastern Africa. From their beginning, African food-producing economies were based on cattle rearing, supplemented by sheep and goats (Marshall and Hildebrand  2002; Chaix and Honegger 2015). The origins of domestic cattle (Bos taurus) in Africa are complex and still controversial. Some favor the hypothesis of a local and independent cattle domestication in the northeastern part of the continent (Loftus et al.  1994; Wendorf and Schild  1994; Bradley et al.  1996; Wendorf and Schild  1998; Hanotte et al.  2002; Gautier 2007; Hildebrand and Grillo 2012), while others insist on an introduction from the Middle East (Riemer 2007; Linseele 2013; Smith 2013; Chaix and Honegger 2015; Garcea et al. 2016; Linseele et al. 2016). What is clear is that domestic cattle appeared in the Nabta-Bir Kiseiba region around 6500–5500 cal. bce and from the 6th millennium cal. bce onwards they started to appear in other parts of North Africa (Linseele 2013). From then on, cattle seem to have gradually spread and their role quickly extended beyond subsistence—they were indeed deeply integrated into the social and symbolic sphere of African societies. Many excavations in northern and central Sudan, from the Neolithic up to the medieval periods, recovered numerous remains of cattle both in the economy and in the funeral world, testifying to a way of life based mainly on pastoralism (Chaix and Grant 1992; Chaix 2011). Nubia was home to different cattle cultures throughout time, which developed and maintained for some of them a strong commitment towards domestic animals. Such a commitment is especially revealed in archaeology, on one side, by the practice of animal deposit in the context of funerals, and on the other side, by the practice of rock paintings

910   Jérôme Dubosson and engravings. In this chapter, the focus will be on these different practices, as they shed new light on the cultural and symbolic world of Nubian herders.

Cattle in Funerary Rituals The first evidence of the practice of animal deposits in Nubia and thus of close and complex relationships between human and animal has been found in the Neolithic cemetery of El-Barga, situated near the Third Cataract. This cemetery represents an important landmark in the understanding of the beginning of the Neolithic period in the Nile valley, as it is the most ancient cemetery known in Africa from that time (Honegger 2005). It reveals a hundred graves dated around 6000–5500 bce, with about two-thirds containing goods such as jewelry, pottery, tools, or weapons. The graves are organized in two groups within which they concentrate around two or three tombs featuring wealthier furnishings, a sign of a society with social distinctions (Honegger 2007). The precise role of cattle in this society is still unclear, but they certainly had a real value, which was not only economic. This conclusion is, for example, attested by the burial of a man, facing a child, beside whom the skull of a domesticated ox had been placed. This deposit, dated about 5750 bce, testifies to the ritual importance of cattle. The population of El-Barga seems to initiate a funerary practice that will continue to grow in significance among those who will succeed it in Nubia. The deposit of cattle skulls or horns inside a grave was a practice shared by different Nubian cultures, particularly from the 6th to 4th millennia bce (Fig. 45.1). This period shows a progressive hierarchization of Nubian societies, which is apparent in the or­gan­ i­za­tion and content of the graves. The high status of men and women is expressed by the presence of a rich funerary furniture, including a significant number of animal remains. In the Wadi el-Khowi area, about 20 km south of El-Barga, Neolithic sites (settlements and cemeteries) collectively named Kadruka have indeed revealed evidence of this practice. The Kadruka cemeteries show graves that are at first individual and poor in furniture, gradually becoming richer, arranged in a circle around the tomb of dominant figure, a chief or a king (Reinold 2000:48). For example, in the KDK1 cemetery, the grave KDK1/131 contained the skeleton of an adult male, of robust size, who died at more than 40 years of age and who was most probably the leader of an agro-pastoral community from the 5th millennium bce (Reinold 2000:73). The man was covered with one or more cattle skins tinged with yellow and a rich funerary furniture was placed with him. On his body, two cut cattle skulls (bucrania) were placed. The horns were also smeared with a white material (Reinold 2001). Other burials found in the cemeteries show deposits of horns in pits, usually placed behind the skull of the deceased (Reinold 1998). Still others show traces of coloring all around the pit, under and on the skeletons. These traces are the testimony of an animal skin used as a shroud (Reinold 1987:46). The site R12, situated a dozen kilometers south of Kadruka, shows similar examples of animal inhumation with humans. The cemetery is dated to the 5th millennium bce and

Cattle Cultures in Ancient Nubia   911

Figure 45.1  Map of principal sites with deposits of bucrania in Nubia. Map: Samuel R. Burns.

contains around 166 graves, for some two hundred people. Among the fifty-nine bucrania discovered there, only four could not be attributed to a specific grave. Then, fifty-five bucrania are distributed between thirty-six graves. Generally, the animal remains are in the graves of adult males, who are placed in a pit with a bucranium next to or over their body. However some remains have also been found in the graves of women and children. Indeed the most impressive animal deposit (six bucrania) was found in the grave of a child, between 2 and 4 years old. The bucrania came mainly from male bovines, with large and impressive horns, and are interpreted thus as symbols of prosperity, prestige, and power (Salvatori and Usai 2008:61). It is suggested that bucrania came from animals belonging to the herd of the deceased or his family and their deposit was linked to the status of the deceased (Salvatori and Usai 2008:76). The cemetery of El-Kadada, situated 180 km downstream from Khartoum and dated around the 4th millennium bce, also testifies to a close association between man and cattle. Bucrania or horns are there placed inside the grave and often in direct contact with the deceased, under the head (Reinold 1987). Generally, only one bucranium is

912   Jérôme Dubosson placed per grave. As in other cemeteries in central Sudan, the very bad preservation of the bone means that only a small amount of anthropological data can be recorded. It is thus difficult to determine whether the deposit of bucrania is specific to one sex or another, the skeletons being too decomposed. In addition, the cemetery attests to the practice of “associated deaths” (Testart 2004), as some individuals seem to have been killed during burial ceremonies, and then placed in the grave of important persons. In these graves containing more than one individual, a bucranium is almost systematically found (Reinold  1991,  1992,  2000). Exceptionally, butchered remains and sometimes corpses of sacrificed domestic animals (dogs, goats, or sheep) were buried with the deceased (Reinold 1987:29). The cemetery of El-Ghaba, located less than 1 km from El-Kadada, contains 250 Neolithic graves, and several contain bucrania. The way the skulls were cut was very similar to those from El-Kadada. The graves do not contain more than one or two bucrania, placed on top of each other behind the skull of the deceased or simply aligned behind it (Lecointe 1987). Very rarely, bones of small ruminants have been deposited in the grave, as well as a rib of a large animal (Lecointe 1987:76). These Nubian cemeteries indicate a strong growth and an initial stratification, probably on a family or clan basis, of pastoral societies during the 5th and the 4th millennia bce. The tendency towards increasing social complexity is well reflected by the funerary practices of the 3rd millennium bce. Indeed, during that period there was a noticeable change in the ritual procedures. From then on, animal skulls or horns were no longer placed only in the graves of the deceased, but on the surface next to the graves. This means that they remained visible after the closure of the graves. Moreover, cattle were sacrificed in great numbers during the funerals, from several dozen to even several thousands. Such a change did not occur suddenly, as can be observed in the cemeteries of the Pan-Grave and C-Group cultures of Lower Nubia and the Kerma culture of Upper Nubia (Chaix 2000; Hafsaas 2006; Bangsgaard 2010, 2013, 2014a; see also chapters by Liszka and de Souza and by Hafsaas, this volume). The common practices and similarities in material culture of these groups belonging to the Middle Nubian Horizon are generally explained by a shared cultural foundation and origin (Gratien  1986; Bangsgaard 2014b). Undoubtedly, these partially contemporary cultures fall within a deeply rooted tradition of animal deposits in Nubia, as they pursued the practice of animal inhumation in pits including sheep and cut body-parts of the animal inside the grave shaft. However, they moved the ritual use of animals to a new dimension with ostentatious deposits of cattle skulls in the open air. In the Pan-Grave culture (about 1850–1500 bce), skull deposits are located outside the superstructure of the shaft, and usually in shallow trenches to the south or southeast of the graves containing the deceased, always male or female adults (Bangsgaard 2013:294). They are thus spatially and possibly temporally separated from the inhumation. Sometimes, they almost entirely encircle the graves where the deceased are buried, leaving little doubt about their connection. The faunal deposits ascribed to the Pan-Grave culture derive from several cemeteries, but the largest number of the deposits derive from a single large cemetery at Debeira East, SJE 47 (Bangsgaard 2010:85). They are

Cattle Cultures in Ancient Nubia   913 mainly goats, sometimes sheep, very rarely cattle, and also gazelles. A special feature of this culture is the presence of animal skulls painted with patterns in red and black. The number of skulls per grave varies between two and sixty-five, but the vast majority contain less than twenty-five (Bangsgaard 2014b). In most cases, the remains are composed of a large number of adult females and some juveniles, as well as a few adult males. This suggests that deposits would represent typical household or subsistence flocks of herded animals (Bangsgaard 2013:291). In the C-Group culture (about 2500–1550 bce), the bucrania are placed either on the surface of the cemetery, or in a trench or in a shallow pit. Depending on the deposits, their number varies between one and six. Some of these are described exclusively as cattle and others as painted gazelle, goat, and cattle skulls (Bangsgaard  2010:29). Sometimes, one or more ceramics are associated with them. In this Nubian culture, two types of surface deposits seem to be distinguished. The first type is linked to a specific funerary event (for example, a rite of incorporation of the bereaved and communication with the deceased ancestor) and the bucrania would then be placed right next to the tumuli. Such deposits concern only men and women, never children. The second type was offerings to the cemetery in general and the bucrania would be deposited without any connection with a particular human burial (Bangsgaard 2014b). In the Kerma culture, the deposit of cattle skulls was also practiced, but the number of bucrania placed on the surface mirrors a different socio-political development. Indeed, surface remains were found in association with rich tombs and mostly in the cemeteries of the main centers of the Kerma civilization, namely the eastern cemetery of Kerma (capital of the kingdom) and the cemetery of the Sai Island, a principality located 100 km north of Kerma. In the cemeteries further away from the main centers, the animal deposits are rare and mainly consist of pieces of meat (sheep or goat) inside the grave. These cemeteries bear witness to a more modest ritual use of livestock, especially cattle (Kołosowska et al. 2003; Budka 2007; Longa and Sliwa 2007; Näser 2007; Osypiński 2007; Sip 2010; Wolf and Nowotnick 2007; Chłodnicki 2010; Paner 2014). For example, at the Kerma Ancien cemetery H29, among the ninety-seven graves, remains of cattle were only found in five graves and on the surface disassociated with any one grave (Bangsgaard 2014a). At the Kerma Moyen cemetery P37, only one surface deposit was found, in clear association with a grave (Grant 2001). Considering its location, this cemetery attests to a local Kerma culture, but most probably aware of and influenced by the ritual practices of the main centers of the Kerma civilization. The treatment of the bucrania varied during the history of the kingdom; in Kerma Ancien (2550–2050 bce), the skull preserves the nasal bones; in Kerma Moyen (2050–1750 bce), the nasals are absent; in the recent Kerma (1750–1450 bce), only the frontal bone and the horns remain (Chaix 2001, 2007). The presence of these deposits is limited at the beginning of the kingdom (Dubosson 2011). Actually, it is more common to deposit cattle horns in the pit than on the surface (Fig. 45.2). Then, these deposits become more common during the Kerma Moyen and more impressive as well (Fig. 45.3). The graves are enlarged, the animal deposits and graves goods in pits are more luxuriant and the deposits on the surface can have several hundreds or thousands

914   Jérôme Dubosson

Figure 45.2  Kerma Ancien burial with horn deposit, showing the presence of livestock close to the deceased. Photograph: Swiss Archaeological Mission in Sudan.

Figure 45.3  Some of the 4,899 bucrania deposited on the ground’s surface in front of a tumulus covering a Kerma Moyen grave at Kerma. Photograph: Swiss Archaeological Mission in Sudan.

Cattle Cultures in Ancient Nubia   915 of bucrania arranged in semi-circles on the southern border of the tumuli. During Kerma Classique the bucrania are less numerous on the surface, but they are always associated with large tombs, testifying that the practice always plays an essential role in the funerary ritual. The deceased are not clearly identified, but most probably they are exceptional figures and/or people belonging to the elite of the kingdom. They are essentially adult men, perhaps kings, princes, high dignitaries, or influential individuals of the kingdom. The bucrania were simultaneously positioned during the funerary ceremonies, some time after the burial.

Interpreting Animal Deposits: The Contribution of Anthropology The meaning, function, and time of animal deposits can be interpreted through the use of relevant ethnographic analogies. The most promising insights are provided by various East African pastoral groups, who show similar practices of animal deposits and who generally belong to the so-called Cattle Complex (Herskovits 1926). Thus, it appears that two types of animal deposits can be distinguished, mainly depending on their location, but also on form and content. The first one relates to remains in a pit of cut-out parts of the animal body, such as hides, horns, or cattle skulls. The second type presents remains on the surface of only the bucrania. It is suggested that the two types of deposits, the one in the graves and the other on the surface, may coincide with two different phases of the funeral (Van Gennep 1909; Bangsgaard 2014b). The first one would relate to the rites of separation, being the burial of the deceased and of the furnishings. The second one would relate to the rites of aggregation, which transform the deceased into his/her new status. In the present pastoral world, the first stage of funerary rituals deals with the treatment and disposal of the deceased’s body (Dubosson 2016). What is important for the living, through these rites of separation, is to protect themselves from the contagious impurity of death, which concerns not only the deceased and their personal property, but also other persons and objects who have participated in the funeral ritual. The buried remains are here linked to this phase of separation, with its associated rituals and in connection with the management of the physical death. Personal goods are placed in the grave. They are without great economic value, but indicate the deceased’s identity or status. As with such goods, when complete animals are placed next to the deceased, they should not be considered as offerings or sacrificed animals, but as “companions” (Testart  2005). The relationship of intimacy between human and cattle, which existed during the lifetime, is again expressed in the grave, as such animals are generally the favorite of their owner, those which were dearest to them (Dubosson 2014). When cut-out parts of the animal body are placed in the graves, they are generally animal skins and pieces of meat. The deceased’s family supply most of the

916   Jérôme Dubosson animals to be sacrificed. The sacrifices mark the rupture between the dead and the living, and they are also intended to appease the spirit of the dead. The meat is shared, according to customs specific to each cultural group. The number of sacrifices and deposits is ultimately associated most often with the status and/or identity of the deceased, as well as with economic capacity of his family. In a second stage, there are margin rites. It is a liminal period, during which social order is often disrupted. The living come to fear the power of the dead that could interfere with them and seek revenge. In a third phase come the rites of aggregation, which channel the removal of the dead person, while restricting the exclusion of the mourners. Their reintegration will be complete when the deceased has definitively left the world of the living. The lifting of mourning and the access to ancestor or spirit status are key moments in these rites, giving rise to celebrations that revive social cohesion. Among the rites of aggregation are meals, the purpose of which is to renew, among all the members of a surviving group, the chain that had been broken by the disappearance of one of its links (Van Gennep 1909:235). These meals can take place over several days, several weeks, or even years after burial, because when funerals are celebrated with pomp, they require a great accumulation of wealth, especially cattle for the sacrifices, as well as grain for the beer. The surface deposits of the bucrania are here to be associated with these rites of aggregation. They commemorate a sacrifice necessary to the integration of living mourners and to the aggregation of the deceased into the world of the dead or into the community of ancestors or spirits. Moreover, the ostentatious character of the remains seems primordial here. Generally, both the deceased’s family and the other mourners provide cattle for the sacrifice. Thus, the more imposing the remains, the more they reveals the prestige, fame, power, and importance of the deceased to his family, relatives and friends, and finally to his community. It seems relevant to analyze animal remains discovered in archaeology in this way, while keeping in mind that ethnology always prompts to interpretative caution, especially when it reveals the complexity of funerary rituals, the multiplicity of practices and their motivations, and the diversity of representations of the hereafter.

Nubian Pastoral Practices Revealed by Rock Art In Nubia, rock art (Paner, this volume) provides thousands of cattle images, mostly petroglyphs, which are precious sources to investigate pastoral practices and representations. Indeed, they give valuable testimonies about their creators and users, the environment, and way of life, both by the images themselves and by their location and spatial distribution in the landscape. Most of Nubian rock art dates from the end of prehistoric times (Predynastic) or Protodynastic period (Červíček 1986; Huyge 2002). However, it would be during the 3rd and 2nd millennia bce that the cattle motif would have become

Cattle Cultures in Ancient Nubia   917 dominant, with representations more than 1 m in length and complex scenes associating anthropomorphs and animals (Červíček 1974). Between the First and Second Cataracts, as well as in the areas of the Third and Fourth Cataracts, cattle are depicted in similar styles (Hellström and Langballe 1970; Otto and Buschendorf-Otto 1993; Kleinitz 2012). Moreover, they show similar traits, which bear witness to pastoral practices carried out in a well-established domestication context, extending from the Lower to Upper Nubia. Such traits are regularly considered as indicators of the engravers’ cultural identity or the influence of other cultural groups on the latter. They include deformed and ringshaped horns, marked or decorated hides, pendants, collars, cows with big udders, and an association between men and cattle. Allard-Huard (2000:41) saw in this homogeneity the influence of the C-Group cattle herders: a testimony of the distribution of their cultural traits. Edwards (2006; Edwards et al. 2012:459) also notes that the similarities observed between these Cataracts link the rock images with Kushite occupations, Kerma and C-Group. The rock art between the Fifth and Sixth Cataracts is largely unknown, due to a research gap in this part of Upper Nubia. However, cattle engravings with traits comparable to that of other Nubian regions have recently been reported (Jesse, Fiedler, and Gabriel 2013). Although it is probably too early to have a global understanding of Nubian rock art, it is already possible to highlight some of its characteristics. Indeed, cumulative data on the First and Fourth Cataract regions reveal the existence of an emphasis on cattle and a clear continuity in its representation. Indeed, the pastoral rock art in Lower and Upper Nubia lasted nearly three millennia, during which the engravers did not cease to represent cattle carrying besides specific features, such as “deformed” or shaped horns, jugular pendants and hides marked with geometric patterns (Fig.  45.4). There remains uncertainty among researchers as to whether this art represents a certain reality,

Figure 45.4  Engraving of a bovine with pendants, decorated hide, and shaped left horn at Geddi-Sabu, Sudan. Drawing: J. Dubosson.

918   Jérôme Dubosson whether these traits are really present on the cattle grazing in Nubia or whether they result from the painters’ and engravers’ imagination. Concerning the horns, the practice of cattle horn-shaping is well attested in Nubia at Kerma (Chaix 2004; Chaix et al. 2012) and also at Faras (Hall 1962). It dates back to the middle of the 3rd millennium bce, a period corresponding to the full development of pastoral rock art in Upper and Lower Nubia. Kleinitz (2009:179) thus argues that the vast majority of cattle depictions can be assigned to a Kerma tradition. It is most certainly impossible to prove that the authors of the engravings are indeed breeders from the capital of the kingdom of Kerma. More probably, in areas several days’ walking distance from each other but still within the alleged limits of the cultural territory of the Kerma civilization, between the Second and Fourth Cataracts, and a little further south after the 2nd millennium bce (Bonnet 1993), breeders of different origins came into contact on certain occasions, exchanging cattle or learning about each other’s pastoral practices. For example, it is attested that some of the Kerma’s cattle were not of local origin, but had been taken to the capital from neighboring areas (Thompson et al. 2008). Concerning the hides marked with patterns and the pendants under the neck, almost no archaeological remains can be provided directly to invalidate or affirm their ex­ist­ ence. No cattle hides decorated during the animal’s lifetime has currently been found; if pendants were anatomic elements (pathological anomalies, cut neck skin, etc.), they appear not to have been preserved, and if they were artificial (amulets, means of control, necklaces, bells, etc.), the same issue persists or they have not yet been identified as such. One cattle figure, discovered in Aniba and made by C-Group herders, could however corroborate the idea of a natural element, i.e., a dewlap cut in such a way as to create a thin strip of skin falling under the chin of the animal (Fig. 45.5; Berger et al. 1997:12; Honegger 2014:80). The multitude and the persistence of hides marked with patterns and pendants in the rock art and material culture tend to accredit their presence among the cattle browsing the pastures of Nubia. Indeed, the cattle engraved from the First to

Figure 45.5  Figure of a bovine modelled in terra cotta discovered in Aniba. The animal has under its neck an element suggesting the start of a natural pendant. Photo: M. Juillard.

Cattle Cultures in Ancient Nubia   919 the Fourth Cataracts and those incised on the funerary stelae and pottery of the C-Group of Lower Nubia had similar motifs and stylistic features (Williams  1983; Allard-Huard  2000; Friedman  2001), as well as those incised on Kerma pottery (Honegger 2012). These engraved cattle are thus dated between the middle of the 3rd millennium and the middle of the 2nd millennium bce, a period corresponding also to that of the Kerma civilization. Chronological attribution remains difficult and uncertain, as similar cattle engravings (at Sayala) have also been associated with an older Lower Nubian population, the A-Group (ca. 3700–2800 bce) (Almagro Basch and Almagro Gorbea 1968; Wildung 1996), while other cattle engravings are found above and below Middle and New Kingdom Egyptian hieroglyphic inscriptions (Žába et al. 1974; Davies 2003). The presence of cattle among the graffiti on the walls of the Great Enclosure of Musawwarat es-Sufra, from the Meroitic period (4th century bce–4th century ce) and showing similar formal features with engravings from the Fourth Cataract region, highlights in all cases a considerable longevity of customs in the graphic representation of cattle (Hintze 1979), as well as the popularity of certain themes or motifs, such as the interaction between an anthropomorph and a bovine, the latter being held by the tail. This motif is known in C-Group pottery and in more recent Meroitic pottery (Bietak  1979:122; Wildung  1996:345, cat. 404). While some continuity can now be observed, regional variations and local preferences for certain motifs and stylistic traits have also been noted (Kleinitz  2004, 2012; Kleinitz and Olsson  2005; Kleinitz and Koenitz 2006). The interpretation of rock art is not easy. Any meaning attributed to a rock image remains hypothetical, the creators of this art remaining forever mute. Nevertheless, archaeologists try to speculate, with some lines of research more fruitful than others. Some consider it useful, for example, to conceptualize engravings as forms of altars (Edwards et al. 2012:460). They draw on Sudanese ethnographic examples, testifying to an association between ancient engravings and modern altars (Balfour 1956). They also recall that for the Nuer herder, the cattle dedicated to “ghosts and spirits are his wandering shrines” (Evans-Pritchard 1940:209). When the cattle are dedicated to the protective spirits and ghosts of the ancestors, the latter are then present in the herd. In other words, it would not be so whimsical to imagine a “transformation of mobile beasts as shrines transformed into static shrines, where animals, and their protective spirits and ancestral ghosts, are fixed in the landscape in the form of rock drawings” (Edwards 2006:58). The emphasis on livestock and the care given to its representation could also be linked to the development of a cattle aesthetics in Nubia during this period of the 3rd and 2nd millennia bce, characterized by the shaping of horns, the marking of hides, the decoration of necks, and the cutting of dewlaps. Such a cattle aesthetic is still relevant nowadays, especially in East African pastoral societies, where it is used to decorate favorite animals (Dubosson 2014; Dioli 2018). If Nubian rock art has its own characteristics (technical, stylistic, and thematic), ­similarities can nevertheless be identified with other rock art regions, notably of the Sahara. Indeed, common cultural features in the vast area from the Nubo-Sudanese Nile to the Chadian Sahara have been identified by several researchers (Leclant et al. 1980;

920   Jérôme Dubosson Allard-Huard 2000:15). They suggest a constant back and forth movement between the Nile and the Sahara, of a distant common substratum (Huard and Allard-Huard 1979; Allard-Huard 2000:27) or of a common Paleo-African complex (Leclant 1990:6). To explain the Saharan and Nilotic iconographic similarities, Muzzolini (2001:213–14) also spoke of a common primitive background, of a very ancient common symbolic background testifying to a certain African identity (“africanitude”). Almagro Basch and Almagro Gorbea (1968:319) also interpreted the paintings of the wadi Korosko as the work of pastoralists with the same art as those who created the large painted ensembles found from Jebel Uweinat to Hoggar all along the southern central Sahara. This idea of a common substratum is part of an evolutionist perspective, according to which pastor­ alists or hunters-pastoralists, from the 7th millennium bce or even before, would have everywhere replaced hunters, whose culture then extended between the Red Sea and the Atlantic (Leclant et al. 1980:15). The pastoralists would have maintained or adopted the constituent parts of their predecessors’ culture. However, the idea of a single culture on the northern half of the African continent during most of the Holocene finds no archaeological confirmation and gaps in the documentation of large areas east of the great de­sert cast doubt on direct relations between the central Sahara and the Nilotic area (Le Quellec 2008, 2010). The hypothesis of direct filiation between authors of rock art in these two areas is difficult to sustain. Indeed, if comparisons can be made between certain animal representations that show similar shaped horns, marked hides, and pendants, distant spatially as well as temporally, African rock arts testify rather to parallel evolutions and successions of several cultures during the millennia.

Conclusion In Upper and Lower Nubia, cemeteries show pre- and protohistoric societies with a strong pastoral identity and ideology. Cattle were indeed a primordial element of funerary rituals. They were almost never buried alone, as was the case in some Saharan sites, where their deposits were sometimes associated with a cattle cult (Fig. 45.6; Di Lernia et al. 2013; Jesse et al. 2013). In Nubia, the animal deposits were linked to the way societies dealt with the physical and social death of their members. The animal remains (cowhides, horns, bucrania) are often in direct contact with the deceased, testifying to complex human-animal relationship and undoubtedly to the closeness that must have existed between them at the time. Moreover, these deposits tend to reflect in some way the identity or status of the deceased, even of his society. In the Neolithic period, the animal remains rarely include more than a dozen bucrania or horns, and they are almost never placed on the surface of the cemeteries. From the beginning of the Bronze Age, in pastoral societies showing increasing hierarchy, several tens, hundreds, and sometimes thousands of bucrania were ostensibly placed on the surface, near large and richly furnished graves. The magnitude of animal sacrifices here seems to reflect the status, power,

Cattle Cultures in Ancient Nubia   921

Figure 45.6  Distribution of different pre- and protohistoric cattle deposits in North and East Africa. Drawing: J. Dubosson.

wealth and prestige of the deceased (generally men), who were probably heads of families or clans, princes or kings, high dignitaries or influential individuals. The central value given to livestock by Nubian societies is also revealed by rock art. Paintings and engravings indicate pastoral practices related to the aesthetics and symbolism of cattle, such as cattle horn-shaping, the decoration or marking of hides, the wearing of pendants and collars. Indeed, these practices are not directly linked to the pastoral economy, because they do not influence the cattle profitability. Archaeological and ethnological data suggest a continuity of pastoral practices in time and space, but it would be naïve to assume a priori a unique tradition linked to a single pastoral culture. This would be tantamount to postulating an imperious conservatism of this society and ignoring the historical, cultural, political, or ecological dynamics contributing to the existence of human societies. The engravings and paintings of cattle showing shapedhorns, decorated or marked hides, and pendants must thus be considered as the work of several human populations that coexisted for some and also succeeded each other in time and space for others. The similarities observed in funerary rituals and rock art indicate that the pastoral societies of Nubia and its surroundings have, at some point of their history, had common practices and perhaps common ideas associated with cattle. This

922   Jérôme Dubosson continuity results from various phenomena that still need to be investigated in detail on a regional and interregional scale (demic diffusion, cultural diffusion chain, acculturation, assimilation, exchanges, common cultural or symbolic background, etc.). What is clear now, however, is that cattle have been a wealth that was not only economic and material, but also relational and symbolic for several millennia. It is because of this emblematic value of cattle that their remains are used (hide for body wrapping or shroud), consumed (meat for feasts), deposited (cut parts buried with the deceased), or displayed (bucrania on or next to graves).

References Cited Allard-Huard, L. 2000 Nil-Sahara dialogues rupestres. L’homme innovateur 2. Moulin de Lambres. Almagro Basch, M. and M.  Almagro Gorbea 1968 Estudios de arte rupestre nubio, v. 1: Yacimientos situados en la orilla oriental del Nilo, entre Nag Kolorodna y Kars Ibrim (Nubia egipcia), Ministerio de Asuntos Exteriores y Educacion Nacional. Direccion de Relaciones Culturales. Balfour, P.H.G. 1956 A Prehistoric Cult Still Practised in Muslim Darfur. Journal of the Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland 86(1):77–86. Bangsgaard, P. 2010 Ritual Cows or Just Another Flock of Sheep? Faunal Deposit Practices at C-Group and Pangrave Cemeteries. Museum Tusculanum. ——— 2013 Pan-Grave Faunal Practices-Ritual Deposits at Five Cemeteries in Lower Nubia. Anthropozoologica 48(2):287–97. ——— 2014a Animal Deposits at H29, a Kerma Ancien Cemetery in the Northern Dongola Reach. Sudan & Nubia 18:20–25. ——— 2014b Nubian Faunal Practices—Exploring the C-Group “Pastoral Ideal” at Nine Cemeteries. In The Fourth Cataract and Beyond: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference for Nubian Studies, ed. J.R. Anderson and D.A. Welsby, pp. 347–56. Peeters. Berger, C., G. Geoffroy-Schneiter, and J. Leclant 1997 L’ABCdaire du Soudan. Royaumes sur le Nil. Institut du monde arabe. Bietak, M. 1979 Ceramics of the C-Group Culture. In Africa in Antiquity: The Arts of Ancient Nubia and the Sudan, ed. F. Hintze, 107–27. Meroitica 5. Akademie Verlag. Bonnet, C. 1993 Kerma: les apports historiques de l’archéologie. Études nubiennes 1:101–10. Bradley, D.G., D.E. MacHugh, P. Cunningham, and R.T. Loftus 1996 Mitochondrial Diversity and the Origins of African and European Cattle. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 93(10):5131–35. Budka, J. 2007 HUNE 2005: The Kirbekan Survey. In Proceedings of the Second International Conference on the Archaeology of the Fourth Nile Cataract, ed. C. Näser and M. Lange, pp. 58–72. Harrassowitz Verlag. Červíček, P. 1974 Felsbilder des Nord-Etbai, Oberägyptens und Unternubiens. Steiner. ——— 1986 Rock Pictures of Upper Egypt and Nubia. Herder-Roma. Chaix, L. 2000 Les animaux et les morts à Kerma (Soudan) entre 2500 et 1500 avant J.-C. Faits archéologiques et interprétations. In Ces animaux que l’homme choisit d’inhumer. Contribution à l’étude de la place et du rôle de l’animal dans les rites funéraires. Colloques d’histoire des connaissances zoologiques, ed. L. Bodson, pp. 15–39. Université de Liège.

Cattle Cultures in Ancient Nubia   923 ——— 2001 Animals as Symbols: The Bucrania of the Grave KN 24 (Kerma, Northern Sudan). In Animals and Man in the Past: Essays in Honour of Dr. A.T. Clason Emeritus Professor of Archaeology, ed. H. Bruitenhuis and W. Prummel, pp. 364–70. ARC Publicate 41. ——— 2004 Les boeufs africains à cornes déformées: quelques éléments de réflexion = African Cattle with Deformed Horns: Some Thoughts. Anthropozoologica 39(1):335–42. ——— 2007 Contribution to the Knowledge of Domestic Cattle in Africa: The Osteometry of Fossil Bos taurus L. from Kerma, Sudan (2050–1750 BC). In Skeletal Series and their SocioEconomic Context, ed. G. Grupe and J. Peters, pp. 169–248. Rahden. ——— 2011 A Review of the History of Cattle in the Sudan throughout the Holocene. In People and Animals in Holocene Africa: Recent Advances in Archaeozoology, ed. H.  Jousse and J. Lesur, pp. 13–26. Africa Magna. Chaix, L. and A. Grant 1992 Cattle in Ancient Nubia. Anthropozoologica 16:61–66. Chaix, L. and M. Honegger 2015 New Data on Animal Exploitation from the Mesolithic to the Neolithic periods in Northern Sudan. In Climate and Ancient Societies, ed. S.  Kerner, R.J. Dann, and P. Bangsgaard, pp. 197–214. Museum Tusculanum Press. Chaix, L., J. Dubosson, and M. Honegger 2012 Bucrania from the Eastern Cemetery at Kerma (Sudan) and the Practice of Cattle Horn Deformation. In Prehistory of Northeastern Africa: New Ideas and Discoveries. International Symposium, ed. J. Kabaciński, M. Chłodnicki, and M.  Kobusiewicz, pp. 189–212. Studies in African Archaeology 11. Poznań Archaeological Museum. Chłodnicki, M. 2010 Archaelogical Excavations on the Tumulus Cemeteries at El-Ar 7 and 29 (Shemkhiya). Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean 19:430–34. Davies, V. 2003 Kurgus 2002: The Inscriptions and Rock Drawings. Sudan & Nubia 7:55–57. Di Lernia, S., M.A.  Tafuri, M.  Gallinaro, F.  Alhaique, M.  Balasse, L.  Cavorsi, P.D.  Fullagar, A.M. Mercuri, A. Monaco, and A. Perego 2013 Inside the “African Cattle Complex”: Animal Burials in the Holocene Central Sahara. PLOS ONE 8(2):e56879. Dioli, M. 2018 Nomad Aesthetic: Cattle Modifications among the Northern Turkana of North West Kenya. Pastoralism: Research, Policy and Practice 8(6):1–10. Dubosson, J. 2011 Cattle Sacrifice in Funerary Rituals of the Kingdom of Kerma: The Contribution of Ethnoarchaeology. Documents de la mission archéologique suisse au Soudan 3:18–24. ——— 2014 Human “Self ” and Animal “Other.” The Favourite Animal among the Hamar. In Ethiopian Images of Self and Other, ed. F. Girke, pp. 83–104. Zentrum für Interkulturelle Regionalstudien. ——— 2016 Le bétail et sa représentation chez les pasteurs de l’Afrique du nord et de l’est. Une approche ethnoarchéologique. Doctoral dissertation, Université de Neuchâtel. Edwards, D.N. 2006 Drawings on Rocks, the Most Enduring Monuments of Middle Nubia. Sudan & Nubia 10:55–63. Edwards, D.N., Ali Osman, Yahia Fadl Tahir, Azhari Mustafa Sadig, and Intisar Soghayroun el-Zein 2012 On a Nubian Frontier—Landscapes of Settlement on the Third Cataract of the Nile, Sudan. Azania 47(4):450–87. Evans-Pritchard, E.E. 1940 The Nuer: A Description of the Modes of Livelihood and Political Institutions of a Nilotic People. Clarendon Press. Friedman, R. 2001 Nubians at Hierakonpolis: Excavations in the Nubian Cemeteries. Sudan & Nubia 5:29–38. Garcea, E.A., N. Karul, and G. D’Ercole 2016 Southwest Asian Domestic Animals and Plants in Africa: Routes, Timing and Cultural Implications. Quaternary International 412:1–10.

924   Jérôme Dubosson Gautier, A. 2007 Animal Domestication in North Africa. In Aridity, Change and Conflict in Africa (Proceedings of International ACACIA Conference), ed. M.  Bollig, O.  Bubenzer, R. Vogelsang, and H.-P. Wotzka, pp. 75–89. Heinrich-Barth-Institut. Grant, A. 2001 The Animal Remains. In Life on the Desert Edge: Seven Thousand Years of Settlement in the Northern Dongola Reach, Sudan, ed. D.  Welsby, pp. 544–55. Sudan Archaeological Research Society Publication 7. BAR International Series 980. Archaeopress. Gratien, B. 1986 La nécropole Kerma. Saï 1. CNRS. Hafsaas, H. 2006 Cattle Pastoralists in a Multicultural Setting: The C-Group People in Lower Nubia 2500–1500 BCE. Birzeit University and Bergen University. Hall, H.T.B. 1962 A Note on the Cattle Skulls Excavated at Faras. Kush 10:58–61. Hanotte, O., D.G. Bradley, J.W. Ochieng, Y. Verjee, E.W. Hill, and J.E.O. Rege 2002 African Pastoralism: Genetic Imprints of Origins and Migrations. Science 296(5566):336–39. Hellström, P. and H. Langballe 1970 The Rock Drawings. The Scandinavian Joint Expedition to Sudanese Nubia 1. Läromedelsförlagen/Svenska Bokförlaget. Herskovits, M.J. 1926 The Cattle Complex in East Africa. American Anthropologist ­28(1–4):230–72; 361–88; 494–528; 633–64. Hildebrand, E.A. and K.M. Grillo 2012 Early Herders and Monumental Sites in Eastern Africa: Dating and Interpretation. Antiquity 86:338–52. Hintze, U. 1979 The Graffiti from the Great Enclosure at Musawwarat es Sufra. In Africa in Antiquity: The Arts of Ancient Nubia and the Sudan, ed. F. Hintze, pp. 135–50. Meroitica 5. Akademie Verlag. Honegger, M. 2005 El-Barga. Un site clé pour la compréhension du Mésolithique et du début du Néolithique en Nubie. Revue de paléobiologie, volume spécial 10:95–104. ——— 2007 Aux origines de Kerma. Genava 55:201–12. ——— 2012 Excavations at Wadi el-Arab and in the Eastern Cemetery of Kerma. Documents de la mission archéologique suisse au Soudan 4:3–9. ——— 2014 Aux origines des pharaons noirs. 10’000 ans d’archéologie en Nubie. Laténium. Huard, P. and L. Allard-Huard 1979 Contribution saharienne à l’approche des cultures pastorales de Nubie. Communication au IIe Congrès International d’Égyptologie, Grenoble. Huyge, D. 2002 Cosmologie, idéologie et pratiques religieuses individuelles dans l’art rupestre de l’Égypte ancienne. Bulletin de la Société préhistorique Ariège-Pyrénées 57:65–86. Jesse, F., M.  Fiedler, and B.  Gabriel 2013 A Land of Thousand Tumuli—An Archaeological Survey in the Region of El Gol, South of the 5th Nile Cataract, North Sudan. Der Antike Sudan. Mitteilungen der Sudanarchäologischen Gesellschaft zu Berlin 24:59–74. Jesse, F., B.  Keding, T.  Lenssen-Erz, and N.  Pöllath 2013 “I Hope your Cattle Are Well”: Archaeological Evidence for Early Cattle-centered Behavior in the Eastern Sahara of Sudan and Chad. In Pastoralism in Africa: Past, Present and Future, ed. M. Bollig, M. Schnegg, and H.-P. Wotzka, pp. 66–103. Berghahn. Kleinitz, C. 2004 Rock Art and “Rock Gongs” in the Fourth Nile Cataract Region: The Ishashi Island Rock Art Survey. Sudan & Nubia 8:11–16. ——— 2009 Meroitic “Property Marks” in Fourth Nile Cataract Rock Art? A Re-evaluation of an Enigmatic Class of Graphic Markings. In Pictograms or Pseudo Script? Non-Textual Identity Marks in Practical Use in Ancient Egypt and Elsewhere, ed. B.J. Haring, O.E. Kaper, and C. van Zoest, pp. 179–98. Egyptologische Uitgaven 25. Nederlands Instituut voor het Nabije Oosten.

Cattle Cultures in Ancient Nubia   925 ——— 2012 Rock Art at the Fourth Nile Cataract: An Overview. In Proceedings of the Third International Conference on the Archaeology of the Fourth Nile Cataract, ed. H.-P. Wotzka, pp. 33–50. Africa Praehistorica 22. Heinrich-Barth-Institut. Kleinitz, C. and R. Koenitz 2006 Fourth Nile Cataract Petroglyphs in Context: The ed-Doma and Dirbi Rock Art Survey. Sudan & Nubia 10:34–42. Kleinitz, C. and C. Olsson 2005 Christian Period Rock Art Landscapes in the Fourth Cataract Region: The Dar el-Arab and et-Tereif Rock Art Surveys. Sudan & Nubia 9:32–39. Kołosowska, E., Mahmoud el-Tayeb, and H.  Paner 2003 Old Kush in the Fourth Cataract Region. Sudan & Nubia 7:21–26. Le Quellec, J.-L. 2008 “Chasseurs” et “Pasteurs” au Sahara central. Les “Chasseurs archaïques” chassés du paradigme. Palethnologie 1:401–409. ——— 2010 Nil et Sahara. Vingt ans plus tard. Archéo-Nil 20:62–75. Leclant, J. 1990 Égypte, Sahara et Afrique. Archéo-Nil 0:5–9. Leclant, J., P. Huard, and L. Allard-Huard 1980 La culture des chasseurs du Nil et du Sahara. Mémoire du CRAPE. Lecointe, Y. 1987 Le site néolithique d’el Ghaba. Deux années d’activité (1985–1986). Archéologie du Nil Moyen 2:69–88. Linseele, V. 2013 Early Stock Keeping in Northeastern Africa: Near Eastern Influences and Local Developments. In Neolithisation of Northeastern Africa, ed. N.  Shirai, pp. 97–108. Studies in Early Near Eastern Production, Subsistence, and Environment 16. Ex oriente. Linseele, V., S.  Holdaway, and W.  Wendrich 2016 The Earliest Phase of Introduction of Southwest Asian Domesticated Animals into Africa: New Evidence from the Fayum Oasis in Egypt and its Implications. Quaternary International 412:11–21. Loftus, R.T., D.E. MacHugh, D.G. Bradley, P.M. Sharp, and P. Cunningham 1994 Evidence for Two Independent Domestications of Cattle. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 91(7):2757–61. Longa, A. and J.  Sliwa 2007 The El-Ar P1 Cemetery (Fourth Cataract, Sudan). Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean 19: 420–29. Marshall, F. and E. Hildebrand 2002 Cattle before Crops: The Beginnings of Food Production in Africa. Journal of World Prehistory 16(2):99–143. Muzzolini, A. 2001 Les relations entre l’Égypte et le Sahara aux temps néolithiques. In Africa antigua. El antiguo Egipto, una civilizacion africana, ed. J.C.  Autuori, pp. 205–18. Aula arqueologia. Näser, C. 2007 The Humboldt University Nubian Expedition 2005: Works on Sherari and Us. In Proceedings of the Second International Conference on the Archaeology of the Fourth Nile Cataract, ed. C. Näser and M. Lange, pp. 118–33. Harrassowitz. Paner, H. 2014 Kerma Culture in the Fourth Cataract of the Nile. In The Fourth Cataract and Beyond: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference for Nubian Studies, ed. J.R. Anderson and D.A. Welsby, pp. 53–79. British Museum Publications on Egypt and Sudan 1. Peeters. Osypiński, P. 2007 Excavations on Two Kerma Horizon Cemeteries in El-Gamamiya. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean 19:400–405. Otto, K.-H. and G. Buschendorf-Otto 1993 Felsbilder aus dem sudanesischen Nubien. Akademie Verlag. Reinold, J. 1987 Les fouilles pré- et protohistoriques de la Section Française de la Direction des Antiquités du Soudan. Archéologie du Nil moyen 2:17–60.

926   Jérôme Dubosson ——— 1991 Néolithique soudanais. Les coutumes funéraires. In Egypt and Africa: Nubia from Prehistory to Islam, ed. W.V. Davies, pp. 16–29. British Museum Press. ——— 1992 Développement d’un cimetière néolithique de type familial. Le cas du cimetière néolithique d’El Kadada (District de Taragma) au Soudan Central. Archéo-Nil 2:115–28. ——— 1998 Le Néolithique de Haute Nubie. Traditions funéraires et structures sociales. Bulletin de la Société Française d’Egyptologie 143:19–40. ——— 2000 Archéologie au Soudan. Les civilisations de Nubie. Errance. ——— 2001 Kadruka and the Neolithic in the Northern Dongola Reach. Sudan & Nubia 5:2–10. Riemer, H. 2007 When Hunters Started Herding: Pastro-Foragers and the Complexity of Holocene Economic Change in the Western Desert of Egypt. In Aridity, Change and Conflict in Africa (Proceedings of International ACACIA Conference), ed. M.  Bollig, O.  Bubenzer, R. Vogelsang, and H.-P. Wotzka, pp. 105–44. Heinrich-Barth-Institut. Salvatori, S. and D. Usai 2008 A Neolithic Cemetery in the Northern Dongola Reach: Excavations at Site R12. Sudan Archaeological Research Society Publication 16. BAR International Series 1814. Archaeopress. Sip, M. 2010 Excavations of a Kerma-Period Cemetery at El-Sadda 4. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean 19:461–65. Smith, A.C. 2013 Unraveling the Prehistoric Ancestry of the Present-day Inhabitants of Northeast Africa: An Archaeogenetic Approach to Neolithisation. In Neolithisation of Northeast Africa, ed. N. Shirai, pp. 1–27. ex oriente. Testart, A. 2004 Les morts d’accompagnement. La servitude volontaire 1. Errance. ——— 2005 Doit-on parler de “sacrifice” à propos des morts d’accompagnement? In Le sacrifce humain en Égypte ancienne et ailleurs, ed. J.-P. Albert and B. Midant-Reynes, pp. 34–57. Soleb. Thompson, A.H., L.  Chaix, and M.P.  Richards 2008 Stable Isotopes and Diet at Ancient Kerma, Upper Nubia (Sudan). Journal of Archaeological Science 35(2):376–87. Van Gennep, A. 1909 Les rites de passage. Étude systématique des rites. Librairie Critique Émile Nourry. Wendorf, F. and R. Schild 1994 Are the Early Holocene Cattle in the Eastern Sahara Domestic or Wild? Evolutionary Anthropology: Issues, News, and Reviews 3(4):118–28. ——— 1998 Nabta Playa and its Role in Northeastern African Prehistory. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 17(2):97–123. Wildung, D. 1996 Die meroitische Keramik. In Sudan. Antike Königreiche am Nil, ed. D. Wildung, pp. 341–68. Wasmuth. Williams, B. 1983 C-Group, Pan Grave, and Kerma Remains at Adindan Cemeteries T, K, U, and J. Oriental Institute Nubian Expedition 5. Wolf, P. and U. Nowotnick 2007 The 4th Season of the SARS Anglo-German Expedition to the Fourth Nile Cataract. Sudan & Nubia 11:25–34. Žába, Z., M. Verner, and F. Hintze 1974 The Rock Inscriptions of Lower Nubia (Czechoslovak Concession). Universita Karlova.

Chapter 46

Sava n na on th e N il e Long-term Agricultural Diversification and Intensification in Nubia Dorian Q. Fuller and Leilani Lucas

Introduction Nubia, that is the Middle Nile between Khartoum and Aswan, has significance as a link between sub-Saharan Africa and Egypt and the Mediterranean world. It has therefore potentially acted as a “corridor to Africa” (Adams 1977) for the spread of agricultural technologies and winter crops of Middle Eastern origin southwards, and as a corridor from Africa for summer crops of tropical origin to reach Egypt, Southwest Asia, and Europe. In recent years the northward movement of African crops through the Nubian corridor has received considerable attention in discussions of African archaeobotany and agricultural origins, in particular with the use of evidence from Qasr Ibrim to hypothesize a late domestication of sorghum (e.g., Rowley-Conwy  1989,  1991; Wetterstrom 1998; Rowley-Conwy et al. 1999). Due to its proximity to Egypt, with its long history of archaeological research, and the incentive of three dam-building projects at Aswan in the 20th century, Nubia has received much archaeological attention. In general, however, archaeologists have been much more interested in the role of Nubia as a corridor for conquest, a migration pathway of people (such as Nubian speakers), and as a center for trade in elite manufactured goods or precious raw materials. Traditionally, excavations have focused on cemetery sites, and those with the monumental architecture of temples and palaces, while the excavations of domestic habitation sites have been rare, and the systematic pursuit of evidence for past subsistence even rarer (see Trigger 1965; Adams 1977; Török 1997; Morkot 2000). There has nevertheless been a

928   Dorian Q. Fuller and Leilani Lucas considerable amount of haphazard collection and reporting of archaeobotanical ­evidence, and a smaller amount of systematic sampling via sieving or flotation. However, one of the aims of the present paper is to attempt a synthesis of the available archaeobotanical evidence for Nubian agriculture, with particular emphasis on those sites where more systematic archaeobotanical data is available. This review will demonstrate the fundamental importance of archaeobotanical contributions in order to understand the progression of agricultural developments in the greater Nubian region and their impact on the rise and fall of the Meroitic state.

The Archaeobotanical Record: Preservation, Recovery, and the State of the Evidence Quality archaeobotanical material from Nubia is currently sparse. The imbalance of evidence from settlement and cemetery sites and archaeobotanical assemblages is a result of many factors including the late introduction of flotation to the area and excavation biases in favor of cemetery contexts. When considered in terms of syntheses of Nubian cultural history, archaeobotany was largely absent from treatments of the 1960s and 1970s, which relied largely on assumptions of subsistence production derived from modern historical parallels and a limited amount of Egyptological data (e.g., Trigger 1965; Adams 1977, 1981). Although efforts at systematic recovery of plant remains are becoming more common in Nubian archaeology, most data comes from haphazard samples. A great many samples come from ceramic impressions and finds from graves. Unlike the sieved and floated samples from habitation sites, which can be related to routine domestic waste from behaviors such as crop-processing and dung-burning (Hillman 1984; Charles 1996; Reddy  1998; Murray  2000a,  2000b,  2000c; Fuller and Edwards  2001; Fuller  2004b), these other sources of evidence are biased in less well-understood ways. Impressions in ceramics, which make up most of the evidence from the Khartoum Mesolithic and Neolithic, represent the use of vegetable matter for tempering clay (Fuller  2013; McClatchie and Fuller 2014). As such we would expect them to be biased towards the types of materials most appropriate for tempering, such as grass straw and chaff, with the occasional incidental inclusion of grains, whole spikelets, or other seeds. The absence of taxa in ceramics may be more about preferences of potters than about presence/absence in subsistence, although when present, impressions are still significant lines of evidence (Fuller et al. 2007; Manning et al. 2011; McClatchie and Fuller 2014). The botanical inclusions are likely to be drawn from what is readily available in sufficient quantity in the season when and where the pottery was produced, and may not be a reflection of the full dietary range of plants or their relative importance. Nevertheless, ceramic impressions provide the best evidence to date for early use of wild sorghum and probable domestication processes between the 4th and 2nd millennium bce (Winchell

Savanna on the Nile   929 et al. 2017; Beldados et al. 2018; Fuller and Stevens 2018; see also Stemler 1990; Beldados and Costantini 2011), discussed below. Finds from graves may also be biased for reasons of symbolism, although it is likely that staple grains have almost always taken on important symbolic qualities as “daily bread” (Toussaint-Samat 2009). This lack of systematic settlement archaeobotany makes it difficult to assess the significance of apparent absences in the evidence. While the presence of a taxon is clear, assuming a secure context and valid identification, the absence of a taxon is not (Jones 1991). It could indicate three things: (1) the absence of the species from the site in prehistory; (2) the masking of the evidence for the presence of the species by processes of taphonomy; or (3) the failure to recover the evidence through excavation and/or sampling methods. Given the limited and uneven sampling for some regions of Nubia and certain periods, many of our current conclusions must be regarded as tentative, with patterns in the data becoming clearer as the African archaeobotanical database expands. A particular problem is the limited evidence available for crop production during the Kerma period, and whether or not sub-Saharan crops, especially domesticated sorghum, featured in agriculture, or whether the crops were largely the winter staples cereals (wheat and barley) that dominated Egypt. In addition, the scarcity of investigations by archaeobotanical specialists with particular experience in this region mean that some identifications may not be as taxonomically resolved nor as reliable as in other world areas. Potential issues surround the identification of particular millet species, for example, and the cultivated races of sorghum, and specific identity of the grasses Setaria and Brachiaria spp. Although the flora of much of the Nubian Nile and surrounding deserts is similar to that in Egypt; the Sahel and sub-Saharan zone include many other species and it is unlikely that these are well-represented in available archaeobotanical seed reference collections. While these reservations mean that there is much work ahead, we nevertheless think that there is a sufficient quantity of data at present to justify interpretations of the history of agricultural developments in the region as a whole. The current review updates previous assessments. For example, Fuller (2015) compiled fifty-seven sites or site phases from greater Nubia with some sort of archaeobotanical data (mostly studied through 2008), but there has been subsequent progress on several sites and assemblages. There are very few sites that have produced sufficiently robust archaeobotanical assemblages, with such examples including Qasr Ibrim (Rowley-Conwy 1989, 1991; Clapham and Rowley-Conwy 2007), medieval Soba (van der Veen and Lawrence 1991; Cartwright 1998), Napatan Kawa (Fuller 2004b), Meroitic Hamadab (under study by the authors and colleagues), and New Kingdom Amara West (Ryan et al. 2012, 2016). The majority of sites, however, have only presence/absence data from impressions in pottery and cemetery contexts. Sites with evidence are summarized in a series of maps in broad time horizons, including Early Holocene to Early Nubian (Fig.  46.1), Middle Nubian/Bronze Age (Fig.  46.2), and Late Nubian (Fig.  46.3), which correspond broadly to our chronological treatment of agricultural developments. This expands upon and updates those Egyptian sites included in the Trans-Saharan

930   Dorian Q. Fuller and Leilani Lucas

Archaeobotanical data up to 3000 BCE Wheat and barley present Domesticated sorghum present

0

250

500

750 1000 km

Figure 46.1  Map of sites with archaeobotanical evidence, up to 3000 bce. Egyptian sites are selected and represent high-quality data. (1) Minshat Abu Omar; (2) Tell Ibrahim Awad; (3) Maadi; (4) El-Omari; (5) Farafra Oasis; (6) El-Abadiya 2; (7) Nagada South; (8) Dakhla Oasis sites; (9) Adaima; (10) Hierakonpolis; (11) Abu Ballas; (12) Afyeh; (13) Nabta (E-75-6); (14) NDRS: R12; (15) El-Kadada; (16) Ghaba; (17) Shaheinab; (18) El-Zakiab; (19) Kadero; (20) Um Direiwa; (21) El-Mahalab; (22) Sheikh el-Amin; (23) Sheikh Mustafa; (24) Khashm el-Girba (KG23); (25) Rabak.

a­ rchaeobotanical database of Pelling (2014), and Nubian archaeobotanical record compiled in Fuller (2015). The broad contours of crop diversity in ancient Egypt remain those reviewed by Murray (2000a, 2000b), and while much larger numbers of plant finds are compiled by De Vartavan and Asensi Amoros (1997) many of those require critical re-assessment in terms of specific identifications and chronology.

Challenges of the Nubian Environment: Water and Seasonality The Nubian environment is on the one hand harsh, with high temperatures and little reliable rainfall, but on the other hand dependable due to the annual flooding of the Nile, which brought soil-replenishing silts as well as water. Of course Nile floods varied

Savanna on the Nile   931

Archaeobotanical data 3000–1000 BCE 0

250 500

750 1000 km

Figure 46.2  Map of sites with archaeobotanical evidence, 3000–1000 bce. Egyptian sites are selected and represent high-quality data. (1) Kom el-Hisn 3; (2) Saqqara AKT01; (3) Saqqara AKT02; (4) Lahun; (5) Amarna; (6) Abydos; (7) Gebel Roma/Wadi el-Hol A; (8) Tutankhamun’s tomb; (9) Armant: MA 21; (10) Elephantine; (11) Toshka West; (12) Buhen; (13) Semna temples; (14) Ukma; (15) Amara West; (16) Sai: 8-B-25A; (17) Doukki Gel; (18) NDRS: P1; (19) NDRS: P37; (20) Shaqadud cave; (21) Mahal Teglinos (K1); (22) Kassala: JAG 9/SEG 1.

year to year, which made attention to this variation such a cornerstone of Early Egyptian state observations (see Butzer 1976). The baseline flow of the Nile comes mainly from the White Nile which only fluctuates slightly with increases in September-October, while in contrast the Atbara and Blue Nile swell massively due to summer rains over the Ethiopian highlands between July and October. Traditional agriculture in Egypt and the northern parts of Nubia had involved planting winter crops (wheat, barley, and other taxa deriving from the Middle East) on the fresh, wet silts of receding floods after October (Butzer 1976); this allows these crops to follow their natural flowering cycles that are tied to lengthening days of late winter and spring (Willcox 1992). By contrast most cereals and other annuals originating in the northern tropics are adapted to growth during summer rainy seasons, and therefore flower as day length shortens from later summer. This means that the natural flowering cycle of sorghum, millets, and other summer crops coincides with the period of Nile floods. Growing them on the floodplain would therefore expose such crops to destruction by Nile floods. While winter varieties

932   Dorian Q. Fuller and Leilani Lucas

Archaeobotanical data 1000 bce–1000 ce 0

250 500 750 1000 km

Figure 46.3  Map of sites with archaeobotanical evidence, 1000 bce–1000 ce. (1) Karanis; (2) Saqqara; (3) Hawara; (4) El-Hibeh; (5) Antinopolis; (6) Kom el-Nana; (7) Abu Sha’ar; (8) Mons Claudianus; (9) Quseir el-Qadim; (10) Quseir el-Qadim; (11) Phoebammon; (12) Epiphanius; (13) Kellis; (14) Karga Oasis; (15) Douch; (16) Elephantine; (17) Berenike; (18) Shenshef; (19) Wadi Qitna; (20) Qasr Ibrim; (21) Faras East; (22) Nauri; (23) El-Hamra (EH-4-008); (24) Kawa; (25) Umm Muri; (26) Dangeil; (27) Meroe; (28) Hamadab; (29) Soba; (30) Jebel Qeili; (31) Mai Hutsa; (32) Weki Duba; (33) Mai Chiot; (34) Sembel; (35) Mezber; (36) Ona Nagast; (37) Axum; (38) Jebel Tomat; (39) Abu Geili; (40) Lalibela Cave; (41) Natchabiet.

of these crops are grown today, it remains unclear how long ago these varieties evolved, requiring either new mutations of flowering time genes or introgression from wild relatives in equatorial regions (e.g., southern African sorghums). Given that agriculture was not established in Africa near the Equator until perhaps around 2,000 years ago (Crowther et al. 2017), it is unlikely that such varieties would have been available to the early sorghum cultivators of Sudan or Nubia. The contrasting seasonality of cultivation, harvesting, and management of selected crops and when this is evident in Egypt and Nubia is summarized in Fig. 46.4, based on the evidence explored in this paper.

Savanna on the Nile   933 Seasonal agricultural practices

m

Neolithic Atbai (by ca. 3000 BCE

Atbara River input

600

Kha

rtou

500

le at

400 300 200 100

shitwi

Blue N ile inpu t

White Nile input

0 J wheat & barley

F

M A M

J

J

A

S

O

N

Meroitic (by ca. 100 BCE)

dameira

Napatan (by ca. 700 BCE)

700

seifi

Nubia: approximate antiquity

Kerma (by ca. 1750 BCE)

Nile Seasonality shitwi

com bine d Ni

Milions of cubic meters per day

Late Roman (by ca. 200 BCE)

Middle Kingdom (by ca. 2000 BCE)

Predynastic (by ca. 300 BCE)

Egypt: approximate antiquity

D

melons date fruit trees & vines pollination

harvests fig grape date

sorghum/ milets

Figure 46.4  Seasonality of cultivation in Nubia, with an indication of the diversity of agricultural techniques in key periods of the cultural histories of northern (Egyptian), to left, and southern (Nubian) region, to right.

An Early Nubian Frontier: The Establishment of Levantine Agriculture on the Nile Early farming in the Nile basin can be divided into two regimes, that of winter crops grown on receding flood water of the Nile and that of summer rainfall cultivation, with its origins in the savanna zones south of the Sahara (Fig. 46.1). While in traditional agriculture these regimes overlap, especially in Nubia and parts of Egypt as double cropping—two crops on the same land in alternating seasons—the archaeobotanical evidence indicates that double cropping was a relatively late development, becoming very important only from the Meroitic period onwards. We can therefore ask how and when these two different seasonal systems of food production came into existence and spread through the region. Nubia acted for millennia as a frontier between a wintercropping regime of the North and the savannah regime of the South.

934   Dorian Q. Fuller and Leilani Lucas The establishment of agricultural production in early Egypt based on Middle Eastern domesticates is well known. The key crops of early Egyptian winter cultivation all originated as part of the Neolithic agricultural origins in western Asia, including various forms of wheat, barley, and a suite of pulses (including lentil, pea, vetches, broad bean, chickpea, and grasspea), as well as flax. Alongside these crops was the domestication of the main barnyard and pastoral livestock species—sheep, goat, taurine cattle, and pig (Fuller et al. 2011; Zeder 2017). The spread of wheat and barley agriculture as reviewed by Wetterstrom (1998) remains largely correct. Despite the widespread establishment of mixed agriculture, based on wheat, barley, pulses, flax, and livestock throughout the Fertile Crescent before 6000 bce, the evidence for cereal agriculture in Egypt does not pre-date ca. 4500 bce, represented by the finds of stored cereals from the Fayum Neolithic (Wengrow 2006; Phillips et al. 2012; Holdaway et al. 2016). Once crop agriculture was established in Lower Egypt and the Fayum in the 5th millennium bce, this economy spread up the Nile and into Lower and Middle Nubia. In Egypt, finds of desiccated cereals in storage pits from the Fayum have been long known (Caton-Thompson and Gardner 1934) and date to ca. 4550–4350 bce based on charcoal from associated hearths (Wendrich et al. 2010), while similar-age sites of Merimde and El-Omari in the Nile delta have also produced cereals, assemblages dominated by emmer wheat and hulled barley forms, but also some einkorn, a small-grained freethreshing wheat from El-Omari (Helbaek 1956), the latter similar to the early “parvicoccum” tetraploid wheat of the southern Levant (Kislev  1979). As reviewed by Barich (2016), the Fayum Neolithic drew culturally on the established eastern Saharan Pastoral Neolithic technologies and traditions associated with early forager-pastoralists, who had been widely gathering wild savannah grasses as cereals, including wild sorghum (e.g., Wasylikowa and Dahlberg 1999, 2001; Fahmy 2014; Thanheiser et al. 2016), but in the Fayum Neolithic seasonal cultivation of newly introduced cereals substituted for collecting traditions. Barich (2016) identifies the arrival of wheat and barley with a second wave of immigrants from the Southern Levant in the 5th millennium bce, who provided training to local communities in cultivation (Barich 2016). Phillipps et al. (2012) have argued that the establishment of cereal cultivation in the Fayum, and presumably the Delta, was facilitated by a climatic shift that brought winter rainfall south from the Mediterranean around this time, inferring that flood recession agriculture, which was to characterize the Egyptian and Nubian practices for winter cropping, was a subsequent revolution connected to economic changes in the Predynastic (Naqada) period, from ca. 3800 bce. The directly dated emmer wheat and barley from Mostagedda indicates that flood recession cultivation was practiced in at least parts of middle Egypt by ca. 4200 bce, although it may not have been a strongly agricultural economy yet (Wengrow et al. 2014). Calling into question some of these hypotheses and orthodoxies is the recent claim that wheat and barley were already present in Middle Nubia, in the Dongola Reach, by ca. 5000 bce. Recent phytolith sampling of dental calculus and samples recovered from below skeletons from Cemetery R12, in the Northern Dongola reach, produced ­phytoliths apparently from the husk of Triticum and/or Hordeum (Madella et al. 2014;

Savanna on the Nile   935 Out et al. 2016). Morphometric analyses suggest the presence of both wheat and barley types (Out et al.  2016). Given the absence of wild members of the genera or closely related taxa in the native savannah flora of the region, these finds are interpreted as evidence for the presence of domesticated wheat and barley. A 14C date processed from phytoliths fell at 5300–5000 bce (Madella et al. 2014). Other nearby graves were dated to 4900–4600 bce (Out et al. 2016). These data suggest that wheat and barley might have already dispersed up the Nile valley by 5000 bce, half a millennium or more earlier than the normally accepted evidence from the Fayum and the Delta, but like the evidence from the Fayum, this need only indicate small-scale cultivation among seasonal mobile communities with a more pastoral-hunter-fisher focus. Regardless, the Middle Eastern cereals were important from the Neolithic onwards, and were cultivated increasingly in Egypt and the northern Nubian Nile valley over the 5th and 4th millennia bce. There is clear evidence of barley and emmer wheat cultivation in the Nubian Nile valley. Subsequent to the ca. 5000 bce phytolith evidence, charred or desiccated cereal remains from Afyeh, Toshka West, Buhen, Ukma cemetery, Sai Island, imprints from Kerma, and finds in Northern Dongola Reach survey sites attest to wheat and barley from the 4th millennium through the early 2nd millennium bce (Fuller 2015). Although systematically collected evidence is so far limited, evidence for native savannah domesticates, such as sorghum, are absent. Also absent from Nubia, but present in Egypt since the Predynastic, are additional crops including flax and pulses that exhibit the diversity of the West Asian assemblages. Pulse finds are rarer than cereals, but lentil, pea, bitter vetch, and common vetch have been reported from various Egyptian sites, starting from pulse finds at El-Omari before the end of the 5th millennium bce (Wetterstrom 1993). This indicates that the introductions from the Levant went beyond just the cereals, but it is not clear whether or not the initial adoption in Egypt and in Nubia focused only on the cereals, with the pulses being adopted later. Indeed the first evidence for pulses in Nubia comes from New Kingdom Egyptian town at Amara West (Ryan et al. 2012, 2016), although this absence may be due to limited systematic sampling.

The Origins of Sorghum and the Savannah Package In the early Holocene communities of the Sudan, which can be identified with Khartoum Mesolithic as defined by Arkell (1949), it is likely that gathered savannah grasses, including wild sorghum, were important alongside fishing and hunted game. Nevertheless, hard archaeobotanical evidence is limited, consisting primarily of just a few seed impressions in ceramics. Far more common in the Khartoum Mesolithic period are ceramics tempered with grass culm and leaf, which are unidentifiable to species, and rare impressions of husk and grain (Fuller 2013; McClatchie and Fuller 2014).

936   Dorian Q. Fuller and Leilani Lucas Nevertheless wild sorghum impressions have been reported from Sheikh el-Amin and El-Mahalab on the Blue Nile (Anwar A. Magid 2003). There is considerably more evidence of impressions of sorghum and millet grasses (Panicum, Echinochloa, Setaria, Brachiaria) in ceramics dated to the Neolithic in Central Sudan (5000–3000 bce), after the adoption of livestock. These data are suggestive of the use of gathered wild savannah grasses, as there are a range of taxa, and most sorghum impressions with preserved spikelet bases are of the wild type (Anwar  A.  Magid 1989,  2003; Stemler  1990; Beldados et al.  2015). Overall, the limited data from plant impressions in ceramics of the Neolithic in central Sudan shows a pattern similar to that of the charred plant remains from Nabta Playa site E-75-6: it shows a spectrum of savannah grasses of which wild sorghum is prominent and the largest grain present. The absence of domesticated sorghum has led to debate over whether cultivation without domestication might have been possible, or even whether wild sorghum might have been translocated to India in prehistory and then returned as a domesticated form by the Meroitic period (Haaland 1995, 1999). However, comparative studies of cereal domestication (e.g., Fuller et al. 2014) make this appear quite implausible. The data now indicate that sorghum cultivation was established away from the Nile in the northern savannah zones in the 4th and 3rd millennia bce, and was probably very well entrenched by the 2nd millennium bce. A recent study of impressions on ceramics from Khashm el-Girba 23, a site of the Butana Group dating from ca. 3500–3000 bce located on a wadi tributary of the Atbara, found a mixed assemblage of morphologically domesticated and wild-type sorghum (Winchell et al. 2017). This indicates that sorghum was under cultivation and evolving to be a domesticated cereal, and cultivation must have begun by ca. 4000 bce. Another study of impressions from large fired clay fragments from Mahal Taglinos K1, a site near Kassala, dating to 1960–1760 bce, also indicates sorghum domestication was still ongoing, but further along than at Khashm el-Girba (Beldados et al. 2018; see also Manzo 2014). Site K1 also had a small amount of pearl millet (Pennisetum glaucum), a crop originating in the West African Sahel, which must have spread east by this period. The absence of evidence for sorghum from sites in the Nile valley, such as those of the Kerma tradition or the C-Group, while it could still be due to the quite limited archaeobotanical data, is likely to indicate a segregation between the subsistence traditions of the Nile valley (based on post-flood planting) and those of the savannah (based on summer rainfall).

Diversification, Fruit Crops, and Specialization One of the recurrent hallmarks of complex societies and urbanization is evidence for agricultural diversification, including the cultivation of long-lived perennials and commodity crops. In the context of greater Mesopotamia, Sherratt (1999) outlined how this

Savanna on the Nile   937 “secondary products revolution” for plants involved the establishment of grape vine cultivation and olive groves from which processed fruits or their products (wine, oil) could be turned into commodities for long-distance trade. In terms of agricultural landscapes this has two key implications. The first is temporality of investment, as newly planted grapes or olives are unlikely to produce much fruit for a few years and only reach maximal yields after a decade, and this represents a much longer-term investment in land management than a four- to six-month cereal crop (see also Abbo et al. 2015). The second is that the land and the labor invested in cultivating these species does not directly translate into staples for the household to consume or store, the way staple grain production does, but actually takes land and labor away from caloric production. Labor must also be invested in processing facilities (like olive presses or wine presses). Nevertheless, the aspect of diversification of land use, including tree fruits, a potentially wider range of garden crops (such as melons and vegetables), and diversification of staple grains (including into more cropping seasons), is evident. The investment in many of these new crops may also lead to specialization in the production of commodity crops, especially on the most suitable land, as their trade values will normally compensate for reduced staple crop production. In dynastic Egypt it is well known that fruit and vegetable gardens, as well as longlived perennials, were grown. Murray (2000b) provides a broad overview of the taxa known from archaeology, while several works from Loret (1892) to Brewer et al. (1994) explore species through the textual and art historical evidence. The exceptional preservation at the workmen’s village at Amarna provides an impressive snapshot of the array of fruits, vegetables, and garden herbs and spices grown routinely during the 18th Dynasty (Stevens and Clapham 2014). Current evidence from Nubia fails to find much of that diversity, and future sampling work is necessary to establish whether that is absence of evidence due to preservation on Nubian sites or reflects a true lower diversity of cultivars in Nubia as opposed to Egypt. Nevertheless in Late Meroitic times and later (from ca. 1st century ce) a wide range of vegetables and herbs/spices have been found at Qasr Ibrim (Clapham and Rowley-Conwy 2007), although this still falls short of the diversity from Amarna. In part the diversity in New Kingdom Egyptian gardens was facilitated by expanded gardening techniques, chief among them being the water-lifting device the shaduf (Eyre  1994), which had its earliest use in the Sargonic period of Mesopotamia (ca. 2300 ce; Mays 2008). Diversification in the crop package of Nubia during the Bronze Age may not have been possible without the introduction of shaduf irrigation, adopted perhaps through New Kingdom Egyptian influence. Although labor-intensive, the shaduf provided an improvement to manual watering (Eyre  1994) and enabled the cultivation of waterthirsty and labor-intensive fruit crops such as date (Phoenix dactylifera), melon (Cucumis melo), and watermelon (Citrullus lanatus). Evidence of these fruits comes from the temples of Middle Kingdom Semna (van Zeist 1983). Melon (Cucumis melo) is likely a local Predynastic garden domesticate (e.g., Van Zeist and De Roller 1993), quite distinct from inferred domestication processes in China (see Fuller 2012). Watermelon was adopted by the Middle Kingdom from possible Saharan origins. Fig also came to be

938   Dorian Q. Fuller and Leilani Lucas cultivated, and recent studies at New Kingdom Amara West have demonstrated the presence of sycamore fig (Ficus sycamorus), which was widely grown in ancient Egypt (Ryan et al. 2012, 2016). The occurrence of date palm is of interest and raises the question of whether this species was native to Nubia, and when it came to be heavily managed or cultivated for its fruit. In addition to fruits at Semna, date palm presence is further indicated by wood charcoal finds from Kerma period graves (NDRS:P1 and NDRS:P37) (Cartwright 2001). It has long been inferred that the date was brought into cultivation in eastern Arabia by ca. 4000 bce (Tengberg 2012; Weiss 2015). Recent genetic studies, however, suggest deep divergence in the genomes of date palms from the central to western Sahara and North Africa from those of the Middle East, making the date palms of Nubia and Egypt a zone of hybridization between two divergent ancient date palm gene pools (Hazzouri et al. 2015). This could suggest that some wild Saharan dates were already in the wadi systems and oases when cultivated forms were introduced from Arabia. Older assessments suggest introduction into Egypt during the Middle Kingdom (Murray 2000b). It was certainly a major consumed fruit in the New Kingdom (Clapham and Stevens 2009). In Nubia, it may be that date palm remained only a minor fruit until the New Kingdom, when plantations for fruit production were well-established under Egyptian control and facilitated by new irrigation technology. Artistic evidence suggests that date palms were managed on Nubian plantations together with doum palms (Hyphaene thebaica) and other trees (Fig. 46.5); the doum palm, like the date, was a potential source of sugar/ sweetener. Dates may have also been processed for sugar via boiling, which can be inferred directly from lipid analysis of Post-Meroitic cooking sherds from Qasr Ibrim (Copley et al. 2001). Such date sugar could have in turn been fermented as an alternative to grape wine or beers. Symbolic significance came to be attached to the date palm, represented by its pinnate leaf. This was to prove a long-lasting sacred motif, best known from much later Meroitic period temple reliefs and funerary offering tables in the early centuries ce (Žabkar 1975:111–12; for a complete Meroitic date palm relief on an offering table, see Woolley and Randall-MacIver 1910: pl. 20:7108). In the Meroitic period, and continuing into the limited corpus of Post-Meroitic art through the 5th century ce, palm fronds are carried by those depicted adoring gods, by royalty, and sometimes by deities themselves, and, in some cases, a palm frond staff is surmounted by an ankh. The palm frond is also a recurrent motif on painted Meroitic pottery (e.g., Adams 1986; Williams 1991a: fig. 195c). The earliest occurrence of this was mica inlays from Kerma (Reisner  1923:273, pls. 57, 60; Žabkar 1975:112). It seems likely, therefore, that at least some consumption of dates began by the Kerma period, but the large-scale production of fruits as an exportable commodity had to wait until the innovations at the end of the Kerma period or during the New Kingdom. Grapes and the production of wine had been part of Egyptian agricultural traditions since the Predynastic, and imported Egyptian wines were long valued in Nubia. Rich A-Group graves in Lower Nubia from the middle and late 4th millennium bce included imported Egyptian jars that might have carried wine (Williams  1986), and Egyptian wines would remain a recurrent import, notable also in Meroitic and Post-Meroitic

Savanna on the Nile   939

Figure 46.5  Depiction of New Kingdom Nubian plantation with harvesting of doum palms and dates (top) and other trees, including possible carob (Ceratonia silique) (below), from tomb of Nubian prince Djehutyhotep at Debeira (19th Dynasty) (after Säve-Söderbergh 1960).

ceramic assemblages. Cultivated grape originated in the greater Fertile Crescent, perhaps in its northern part, but it seems to have been cultivated by the end of the Chalcolithic or the Earliest Bronze Age in the Levant, ca. 5000 bce (Weiss  2015). It would have been introduced to Egypt then not long after wheat and barley during the Late Neolithic or earlier Predynastic (Murray 2000c). In Nubia, grape cultivation was perhaps rare; however there is archaeobotanical evidence that suggests various efforts to grow grapes locally. Among the many inscriptions of the Nubian pharaoh Taharqo (690–664 bce) is an inscription in the Amun Temple at Kawa in which he boasts about the wine produced there (Macadam  1955:36). The

940   Dorian Q. Fuller and Leilani Lucas

Figure 46.6  Example of grapes on Meroitic painted pottery from Karanog: vine leaves (left) and grape clusters (right) (after Woolley and Randall-MacIver 1910).

r­ ecovery of charred grape pips among archaeobotanical samples seems to confirm the textual record (Fuller 2004b), although it is unclear how much wine was produced or how long this tradition lasted. Also in Taharqo’s reign, inscriptions from Sanam indicate that grapes and dates, alongside cereal foods, were among the donations to the temple (Pope 2013:480). Later in the Late Meroitic period (3rd–4th century ce), wine production appears to have been taken up in parts of Lower Nubia, as inferred from several sites with Roman-inspired wine presses (Adams 1966) and evidence for local wood charcoal of grape at Arminna West (Fuller 1999). This Lower Nubian experiment in viticulture was facilitated by an innovation in irrigation, namely the cattle-powered water well, or saqia, which seems to have come into Nubia around the 3rd century ce (Williams 1991b; Fuller 1999, 2014; Edwards 2004), and was a key component in the re-organization of agricultural systems in the Post-Meroitic period (see below). Nevertheless grape vines were a favorite decorative motif in Meroitic art on painted pottery (Fig. 46.6), which suggests familiarity of the artists with grape vines; so perhaps they were widespread in small-scale production, such as household garden vines.

Agricultural Innovations of the Meroitic Kingdom and the PostMeroitic Re-organization The agricultural basis of the Napatan period, such as that represented by Kawa (Fuller 2004a), remains largely the same as that known from the Middle Kingdom and New Kingdom Egyptian occupations in Nubia (van Zeist 1983, 1987; Cartwright 2001;

Savanna on the Nile   941 Ryan et al. 2012, 2016). The focus was on winter cereals (emmer wheat, barley) and associated pulses (lentil, pea, grasspea), but including clear evidence of broad bean, Vicia faba, which had become established in Egypt in the Middle Kingdom (Murray 2000a), and flax which was cultivated since the Predynastic (Cappers et al.  2004; Newton  2004). Nevertheless some summer crops were present, including Panicum miliaceum, so-called common millet or broomcorn millet, of ultimate Chinese origin (van Zeist 1987; Boivin and Fuller  2009), and a foxtail millet, but apparently not the Chinese Setaria italica, which is found in Nubia and Egypt today, but a lost indigenous foxtail millet, Setaria sphaceleata. These summer cereals were minor components in the studied samples from Kawa (Fuller 2004a). It is highly probable that some sorghum was present as well, since this was clearly domesticated and cultivated in the Sahelian areas to the south, for example around Kassala (see above). These summer savanna crops are likely to have been catch crops, cultivated on distal parts of the floodplain and lower wadi, where sufficient soil moisture was provided by the maximum flood levels without destroying the crops that had remained through the low Nile season, but which were situated high enough as to not be completely destroyed by flooding. The challenge of these species is that their season for sowing corresponds with the Nile flood period, and high floods could kill these crops through waterlogging. It is possible that a few were grown beyond the flood water with artificial irrigation, but the labor requirements of the shaduf are likely to have restricted its use for higher-value crops, such as fruit trees, vines, and melons. In reality, millets and sorghum are likely to have been more important further south. As highlighted by Pope (2013), the Sahelian grassland zone is likely to have extended further north than present, including much of the Bayuda Desert during the Napatan period. As such, Sanam and Jebel Barkal would have been at or near the intersection between the northern savannah agricultural traditions and the Nile floodwater farming traditions. The Napatan center would have held together a kingdom split across two very different ecologies and culinary traditions (see below). Kawa, located further north, can be expected to represent predominantly the floodwater tradition. The Meroitic period expansion of settlement further south and east through the Butana implicates a role for sorghum, both economically and symbolically (Fuller 2014, 2015). With the shift of the capital, reflected in the royal burial ground, from Napata (Nuri) to Meroe beginning in the 4th century bce, there is evidence for the cultivation of savannah crops with summer seasonality on an appreciable scale. Sorghum features in Meroitic art (Fig. 46.7) and has been recovered in archaeobotanical assemblages from Meroe, nearby Hamadab, and during the Wellcome expedition to Abu Geili on the Blue Nile, along the White Nile at Jebel Tomat, as well as in the Fourth Cataract (Fuller 2014). Other millets would have complemented sorghum, such as Setaria and pearl millet (Pennisetum glaucum), both of which are also in samples from Meroitic Hamadab (authors’ ongoing analysis). Sorghum and pearl millet both occur at Qasr Ibrim from the later Meroitic period onwards and attest to the increasing importance of summer cereal cultivation in northern Nubia (Clapham and Rowley-Conwy 2007). This savannah cultivation system also suited oasis situations. During Roman rule of Egypt, sorghum and pearl millet appear in oasis agriculture, for example at Dahkleh (Thanheiser 2011; Thanheiser et al. 2016).

942   Dorian Q. Fuller and Leilani Lucas A

B

SNM 9913 C

D

Figure 46.7 Examples of Meroitic evidence for advanced, dense-ear sorghum cultivation (probably race durra). (A) Jebel Qeili rock carving of King Shorkaror receiving sorghum from Sun god (after Hintze 1959); (B) Meroitic spindle whorl from Abu Geili with incised sorghum panicle motif (after Yvanez  2016); (C) Scene from the Lion Temple at Naqa, showing god Apedemak greeting King Natakamani, who holds an apparent dense sorghum panicle in his right hand (after Žabkar  1975); (D) Scanning electron micrograph of sorghum grain from Meroitic Hamadab that suggests plump grain of a race durra like sorghum (by authors).

Another crop of the savannah zone, liking high temperatures but requiring reliable water, was cotton. Cotton textiles apparently made locally in Nubia have long been known (e.g., Griffith and Crowfoot  1934; Mayer-Thurman and Williams  1979; Yvanez  2016). The technology for spinning and weaving is also widespread in the Meroitic world (Yvanez  2016). Recently archaeobotanical sampling at Hamadab has produced evidence for charred cotton seeds, suggesting local cultivation and on-site spinning (authors’ analysis). Like the savannah millet crops, cotton is also found at Qasr Ibrim from the Late Meroitic period, and in cultivation in the Roman Egyptian oases (Clapham and Rowley-Conwy  2009). Cotton cultivation continued throughout the occupation of Qasr Ibrim, and ancient DNA analysis has confirmed the presence of the indigenous African Gossypium herbaceum (Palmer et al. 2012). This raises the possibility that African cotton was first cultivated somewhere in or near the southern parts of the Meroitic world. There is also some likelihood that tree cotton (Gossypium arboreum), which had been grown in India and Pakistan since the Neolithic (Fuller 2015) was also introduced to parts of the Nubian region at this time. It should be noted that both of these cottons were originally perennials grown as shrubs or trees over several years, and the modern annual cotton crops one encounters in Sudan today are of New World origin and colonial introductions. Managing these early cottons would have been akin to dealing with grapevines, figs, or even date palms in terms of land management.

Savanna on the Nile   943 As already noted, the introduction of the cattle-powered saqia (Persian waterwheel) during the 3rd century ce was an important development. This system would have facilitated the expansion of both cultivation systems, the Middle Eastern winter staples and the sub-Saharan summer staples. In the winter paleo-alluvium no longer reached by Nile floods could be cultivated, while the drying valley edges left behind by receding floods could be readily irrigated. It would have been an area safe from waterlogging but irrigable and would have been ideally suited to the expansion of cotton crops. The saqia then would have facilitated cash crop production of cotton, trees, and vines as well as extending caloric staple production. More staple crop production, over two seasons of agriculture, in turn would have demanded more agricultural labor. This availability of new land and draw for labor would have been factors promoting immigration and new settlers in Lower Nubia and plausibly increased birthrates (Fuller 2015). Increased population together with increased arable potential would have laid the basis for the reliable staple surpluses on which diversification into more commodity crops and perennials would have been built, and it is in this context that the innovation of the Late Meroitic to Early Post-Meroitic both laid the economic foundation for the emergence of states in Northern Nubia. Meanwhile, expansion into cash crops, perhaps especially cotton, would have facilitated long-distance trade that in turn supplied many of the luxuries that elites demanded (Fuller 2014, 2015). This agricultural innovation in irrigation together with the diverse range of staple and commodity crops would have created positive feedbacks for agricultural change and population growth. And while these innovations might have initially promoted various forms of economic growth within the Meroitic world they can also be seen as creating the foundations for regional states, like Nobadia and Makuria, that could break away from Meroitic hegemony (Fuller 2014, 2015).

The Shifting Frontier of Bread and Porridge Traditions In addition to representing a long-term frontier where winter cereals overlapped with savannah crops like sorghum, Nubia was also a long-term frontier in cooking traditions, between a world of bread in the north and one of liquid preparations, porridges, and beers in the South. Nubia represents a porridge and beer tradition since the Neolithic distinct from the Neolithic and Bronze Age baking world that included the Egyptian bread world, as explored by Edwards (2003), Haaland (2007), and Pope (2013). On a broader geographical scale the Fertile Crescent, with its basis in pre-ceramic farming, was a zone in which bread developed early, in contrast to pre-agricultural ceramic zones with boiling-based cooking traditions, like those of the Early Holocene Sahara or Neolithic eastern Asia (Fuller and Rowlands  2011). With the rise of urbanism in

944   Dorian Q. Fuller and Leilani Lucas Mesopotamia, ceramics were also deployed as bread molds, such as the bevel-rimmed bowl, regarded as a form of bread-making that spread as far east as Pakistan (Chazan and Lehner 1990; Potts 2009). In Egypt both domed ovens for baking breads (tabun or firin) and ceramic bread molds were established since Predynastic times (the Naqada period), such as the oven remains reported from Hierakonpolis, ca. 4000–3500 bce (Hoffman 1980). In Egypt, since Predynastic times (4th millennium bce) breads were baked in ceramic molds (Samuel 1989, 1999; Rampersad 2008). From the Naqada period ovens were also made. Ovens are found as far south as Elephantine during the 2nd Dynasty (ca. 2800 bce) (Ziermann 2003). Samuel’s (1989, 1999) review of the artistic evidence, mainly from Egyptian tombs, indicates that tannurs (specialized cylindrical bread-making ovens) are represented starting in the New Kingdom (from ca. 1600 bce). Ovens at Kerma during the Classic period can be attributed to Egyptian influence, with tannur excavated at the New Kingdom Egyptian enclave of Amara West, ca. 1200–1100 bce (Spencer et al. 2014). Subsequently tannurs were found at Kawa in the 7th century bce (Welsby 2014). Under the influence of pharaonic religion, represented by Amun temples, apparent mold-made breads like those of Egypt feature in Meroitic temple depictions and funerary offering scenes (Shinnie  1967). Haaland (2014) infers that bread of wheat/barley would have been consumed by elites while “the ordinary people relied on African cuisine based on millet porridge” (Haaland 2014:657). Certainly, bread ovens as well as ceramic bread molds and associated box ovens are known from some sites, such as a Middle Kingdom Mirgissa, an Egyptian army fortress, and the temple complex at Dokki-Gel (Kerma) dating from the 1st millennium bce (Maillot  2016). At the Late Meroitic “castle” at Karanog (ca. 50–250 ce), a presumed residence of a lower Nubian governor, a large tannur was preserved in the central courtyard (Woolley 1911:23), supporting the idea that some Nubian elites partook in baked breads. The presence of ceramic bread molds, however, may be misleading. These were found in quantity in excavations at the Dangeil Amun Temple in Upper Nubia (Anderson and Ahmed 2006), but archaeobotanical analysis of preserved encrustations found that they contained a sorghum (Sorghum bicolor) product, better characterized as a stiff porridge rather than a bread (Anderson et al. 2007; Maillot 2016). This highlights that the symbolic importance of a shaped bread loaf had been adapted to the culinary traditions associated with savannah agriculture of the Meroitic heartland. These distinct culinary traditions are reflected in both material culture of cooking and concepts of appetite and food reflected in inscriptional evidence. The differing cooking traditions are preserved in the distinct vessel repertoires in Egypt and Nubia, and in the context of Egyptian enclaves in Nubia in the Middle and New Kingdoms Smith (2003) has used these distinctions to explore ethnic identities in mixed communities and to infer intermarriage of Egyptians with Nubian women. Pope (2013) has suggested how in the Napatan inscriptions of Taharqo from Sanam, a food stuff called “iwesh,” apparently a mixed viscous cereal product brought in necked globular jars, featured prominently, alongside breads, grapes, and dates. He argues that this represents a distinctive “porridge-and-pot culture” foodstuff from the Sahelian/Sudanic tradition.

Savanna on the Nile   945 Pope (2013) has also identified in Egyptian Demotic literature the term “eater of iwesh” (or variants) as an epithet applied to Nubians (the eaters of sticky or gummy foods). The key culinary division thus appears to have been recognized among ancient Egyptians and Nubians themselves in the 1st millennium bce. The importance of sorghum in the Meroitic heartland has been argued to be connected to beer, and based on ethnographic parallels the large jars so common in Meroitic graves have been interpreted as beer jars (Edwards 2003, 2004). Such jars, although differing in form and size, continued to be a prominent part of Post-Meroitic burial rituals indicating that despite many aspects of cultural change at the decline of the Meroitic state in the 4th century ce, the importance of beer made of sorghum was a tradition that cut across many cultural groups in Nubia and Central Sudan, and which presumably had its roots in the later Neolithic of the Butana and surrounding areas. Edwards (2003) further suggests that bread rose to prominence with the Christianization of Nubia from the 6th century ce. Among the new cooking ceramics that began in this period is the flat, griddle-like doka. However, rather than deriving from northern Egyptian cooking traditions, this can more plausibly be connected to the griddle traditions of the Ethiopian highlands, where fermented batters are turned into pancakes on griddles (metad), particularly Ethiopian enjera bread, made from a variety of flours (sorghum, wheat, indigenous tef) (Lyons and D’Andrea 2003). This cooking tradition presumably spread westwards through the savannah and sahel zone, giving rise to the kissra bread of Sudan. It is possible that a similar tradition had also developed in or spread to southwest Libyan, where similar ceramics are found from the Garamantian era, 1st century bce/ce (Mattingly et al. 2001; Pelling 2007). While the history of cuisine may have been additive, diversifying with new food crops and new methods of preparation, it can also suggest that bread, in various forms, through the course of Nubian history, increasingly displaced the centrality of the Neolithic savannah porridge traditions.

Concluding Remarks Regardless of the gaps in archaeobotanical evidence and the bias towards cemetery contexts, a review of the plant data from greater Nubia tells a story of overlapping agricultural systems and cooking traditions through both time and space. Further, this chapter demonstrates the impact of systematic sieving and flotation programs on our understanding of agricultural regimes and their contributions to changing cultural developments. With expanding datasets from secure settlement contexts and improvements in taxa identifications, the initial establishment of winter cereal cultivation systems from the North (of Middle Eastern origin) is increasingly well-established, with the summer cereal cultivation systems from the South (sub-Saharan origin) becoming clearer. Subsequent diversification and intensification through an integration of these two systems coupled with improvements in irrigation technologies and the introduction of

946   Dorian Q. Fuller and Leilani Lucas cash crops facilitated the development of the Meroitic state. Alongside these developments were changes in cooking traditions as a result of intersecting worlds, one of bread and baking and the other of liquids and boiling. Nubia was thus a dynamic frontier between traditions of food preparation and agricultural systems that drew from both the indigenous Sub-Saharan and Mediterranean worlds.

References Cited Abbo, S., A. Gopher, and S. Lev-Yadun 2015 Fruit Domestication in the Near East. In Plant Breeding Reviews 39, ed. J. Janick, pp. 325–78. Wiley-Blackwell. Adams, W.Y. 1966 The Vintage of Nubia. Kush 14:262–83. ——— 1977 Nubia: Corridor to Africa. Allen Lane. ——— 1981 Ecology and Economy in the Empire of Kush. Zeitschrift für Ägyptische Sprache 108(1):1–11. ——— 1986 Ceramic Industries of Medieval Nubia. University Press of Kentucky. Anderson, J. and Salah Mohamed Ahmed 2006 Bread Moulds and “Throne Halls”: Recent Discoveries in the Amun Temple Precinct at Dangeil. Sudan & Nubia 10:95–101. Anderson, J.R., A.C. D’Andrea, A. Logan, and Salah Mohamed Ahmed 2007 Bread Moulds from the Amun Temple at Dangeil, Nile State—An Addendum. Sudan & Nubia 11:89–93. Arkell, A.J. 1949 Early Khartoum: An Account of the Excavation of an Early Occupation Site. Oxford University Press. Barich, B.E. 2016 The Introduction of Neolithic Resources to North Africa: A Discussion in Light of the Holocene Research between Egypt and Libya. Quaternary International 410:198–216. Beldados, A. and L. Costantini 2011 Sorghum Exploitation at Kassala and its Environs, North Eastern Sudan in the Second and First Millennia BC. Nyame Akuma 75:33–39. Beldados, A., A.C.  D’Andrea, and A.  Manzo 2015 Filling the Gap: New Archaeobotanical Evidence for 3rd–1st Millennium BC Agricultural Economy in Sudan and Ethiopia [abstract]. Proceedings of the International Workshop for African Archaeobotany 8:151–53. Supplemento Atti Societa dei Naturalisti e Matematici di Modena 146. http://www.socnatmatmo.unimore.it/download/Suppl.Vol.146.2015.pdf. Beldados, A., A. Manzo, C. Murphy, C.J. Stevens, and D.Q. Fuller 2018 Evidence of Sorghum Cultivation and Possible Pearl Millet in the Second Millennium BCE at Kassala, Eastern Sudan. In Plants and People in Africa’s Past: Progress in African Archaeobotany, ed. A.M. Mercuri, A.C. D’Andrea, R. Fornaciari, and A. Höhn. Springer. Boivin, N. and D.Q. Fuller 2009 Shell Middens, Ships and Seeds: Exploring Coastal Subsistence, Maritime Trade and the Dispersal of Domesticates in and around the Ancient Arabian Peninsula. Journal of World Prehistory 22(2):113–80. Brewer, D.J., D.B. Redford, and S. Redford 1994 Domestic Plants and Animals: The Egyptian Origins. Aris and Phillips. Butzer, K.W. 1976 Early Hydraulic Civilization in Egypt: A Study in Cultural Ecology. University of Chicago Press. Cappers, R., T. Van Thuyne, and L. Sikking 2004 Plant Remains from Predynastic el Abadiya 2 (Naqada Area, Upper Egypt). In Egypt at its Origins: Studies in Memory of Barbara Adams, ed. S. Hendrickx, R.F. Freidman, K.M. Cialowicz, and M. Chłodnicki, pp. 277–93. Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta 138. Peeters.

Savanna on the Nile   947 Cartwright, C. 1998 The Wood, Charcoal, Plant Remains and Other Organic Material. In Soba, v. 2: Renewed Excavations within the Metropolis of the Kingdom of Alwa in Central Sudan, ed. D. Welsby, pp. 255–68. British Institute of East Africa Memoir 15. ——— 2001 The Plant Remains. In Life on the Desert Edge: Seven Thousand Years of Settlement in the Northern Dongola Reach, Sudan, by D.A. Welsby, v. 2, pp. 556–67. Sudan Archaeological Research Society Publication 7. BAR International Series 980. Archaeopress. Caton-Thompson, G. and E.W.  Gardner 1934 The Desert Fayum. Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland. Charles, M. 1996 Fodder from Dung: The Recognition and Interpretation of Dung-derived Plant Material from Archaeological Sites. Environmental Archaeology 1(1):111–22. Chazan, M. and M. Lehner 1990 An Ancient Analogy: Pot Baked Bread in Ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia. Paléorient 16(2):21–35. Clapham, A. and P. Rowley-Conwy 2007 New Discoveries at Qasr Ibrim, Lower Nubia. In Fields of Change: Progress in African Archaeobotany, Groningen Archaeological Studies 5, ed. R.T.J. Cappers, pp. 157–64. Barkhuis Publishing. ——— 2009 The Archaeobotany of Cotton (Gossypium sp. L) in Egypt and Nubia with Special Reference to Qasr Ibrim, Egyptian Nubia. In From Foragers to Farmers: Papers in Honour of Gordon C. Hillman, ed. A. Fairbairn and E. Weiss, pp. 244–53. Oxbow. Clapham A.J. and C.J. Stevens 2009 Dates and Confused: Does Measuring Date Stones Make Any Sense? In Beyond the Horizon: Studies in Egyptian Art, Archaeology and History in Honour of Barry  J.  Kemp, ed. S.  Ikram and A.  Dodson, pp. 9–27. Supreme Council of Antiquities (Cairo). Copley, M. S., P.J. Rose, A. Clapham, D.N. Edwards, M.C. Horton, and R.P. Evershed 2001 Processing Palm Fruits in the Nile Valley—Biomolecular Evidence from Qasr Ibrim. Antiquity 75:538–42. Crowther, A., M.E. Prendergast, D.Q. Fuller, and N. Boivin 2017 Subsistence Mosaics, ForagerFarmer Interactions, and the Transition to Food Production in Eastern Africa. Quaternary International. DOI: 10.1016/j.quaint.2017.01.014. De Vartavan, C. and V. Asensi Amorós 1997 Codex of Ancient Egyptian Plant Remains. London Triade Exploration. Edwards, D.N. 2003 Ancient Egypt in the Sudanese Middle Nile: A Case of Mistaken Identity? In Ancient Egypt in Africa, ed. D. O’Connor and A. Reid, pp. 137–50. UCL Press. ——— 2004 The Nubian Past: An Archaeology of Sudan. Routledge. Eyre, C.J. 1994 The Water Regime for Orchards and Plantations in Pharaonic Egypt. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 80:57–80. Fahmy, A.G. 2014 Plant Food Resources at Hidden Valley, Farafra Oasis. In From Lake to Sand: The Archaeology of Farafra Oasis, Western Desert, Egypt, ed. B.E. Barich, G. Lucarini, M.A. Hamdan, and F.A. Hassan, pp. 333–44. All’Insegna del Giglio. Fuller, D.Q. 1999 A Parochial Perspective on the End of Meroe: Changes in Cemetery and Settlement at Arminna West. In Recent Research on the Kingdom of Kush, ed. D.A. Welsby, pp. 203–17. British Museum Occasional Paper 131. ——— 2004a The Central Amri to Kirbekan Survey: A Preliminary Report on Excavations and Survey 2003–04. Sudan & Nubia 8:4–16. ——— 2004b Early Kushite Agriculture: Archaeobotanical Evidence from Kawa. Sudan & Nubia 8:70–74. ——— 2012 New Archaeobotanical Information on Plant Domestication from Macro-remains: Tracking the Evolution of Domestication Syndrome Traits. In Biodiversity in Agriculture:

948   Dorian Q. Fuller and Leilani Lucas Domestication, Evolution, and Sustainability, ed. P.  Gepts, T.R.  Famula, R.L.  Bettinger, S.B.  Brush, A.B.  Damania, P.E.  McGuire, and C.O.  Qualset, pp. 110–35. Cambridge University Press. ——— 2013 Observations on the Use of Botanical Material in Ceramic Tempering at Gobero. In Gobero: The No-Return Frontier. Archaeology and Landscape at the Saharo-Sahelian Borderland, ed. E.A.A. Garcea, pp. 241–48. Journal of African Archaeology Monograph 9. Africa Magna Verlag. ——— 2014 Agricultural Innovation and State Collapse in Meroitic Nubia: The Impact of the Savannah Package. In The Archaeology of African Plant Use, ed. C.J.  Stevens, S.  Nixon, M.A. Murray, and D.Q. Fuller, pp. 165–78. Left Coast Press. ——— 2015 The Economic Basis of the Qustul Splinter State: Cash Crops, Subsistence Shifts and Labour Demands in the Post-Meroitic Transition. In The Kushite World: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference for Meroitic Studies, ed. M.H. Zach, pp. 33–60. Beiträge zur Sudanforschung Beiheft 9. Verein der Förderer der Sudanforschung. Fuller, D.Q. and D.N. Edwards 2001 Medieval Plant Economy in Middle Nubia: Preliminary Archaeobotanical Evidence from Nauri. Sudan & Nubia 5:97–103. Fuller, D.Q. and M. Rowlands 2011 Ingestion and Food Technologies: Maintaining Differences over the Long-term in West, South and East Asia. In Interweaving Worlds—Systematic Interactions in Eurasia, 7th to 1st Millennia BC: Essays from a Conference in Memory of Professor Andrew Sherratt, ed. J.  Bennet, S.  Sherratt, and T.C.  Wilkinson, pp. 37–60. Oxbow. Fuller, D.Q. and C.J.  Stevens 2018 Sorghum Domestication and Diversification: A Current Archaeobotanical Perspective. In Plants and People in Africa’s Past: Progress in African Archaeobotany, ed. A.M. Mercuri, C. D’Andrea, R. Fornaciari, and A. Höhn. Springer. Fuller, D.Q., K.  Macdonald, and R.  Vernet 2007 Early Domesticated Pearl Millet in Dhar Nema (Mauritania): Evidence of Crop-processing Waste as Ceramic Temper. In Fields of Change: Progress in African Archaeobotany, ed. R.T.J.  Cappers, pp. 71–76. Groningen Archaeological Studies 5. Barkhuis Publishing. Fuller, D.Q., G. Willcox, and R.G. Allaby 2011 Cultivation and Domestication Had Multiple Origins: Arguments against the Core Area Hypothesis for the Origins of Agriculture in the Near East. World Archaeology 43(4):628–52. Fuller, D.Q., T.  Denham, M.  Arroyo-Kalin, L.  Lucas, C.J.  Stevens, L.  Qin, R.  Allaby, and M.D.  Purugganan 2014 Convergent Evolution and Parallelism in Plant Domestication Revealed by an Expanding Archaeological Record. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 111(17):6147–52. Griffith, F.L. and G.M. Crowfoot 1934 On the Early Use of Cotton in the Nile Valley. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 20(1):5–12. ——— 1995 Sedentism, Cultivation, and Plant Domestication in the Holocene Middle Nile Region. Journal of Field Archaeology 22:157–74. ——— 1999 The Puzzle of the Late Emergence of Domesticated Sorghum in the Nile Valley. In The Prehistory of Food: Appetites for Change, ed. C.  Gosden and J.  Hather, pp. 397–418. Routledge. ——— 2007 Porridge and Pot, Bread and Oven: Food Ways and Symbolism in Africa and the Near East from the Neolithic to the Present. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 17:165–82. ——— 2014 The Meroitic Empire: Trade and Cultural Influences in an Indian Ocean Context. African Archaeological Review 31(4):649–73.

Savanna on the Nile   949 Hazzouri, K.M., J.M. Flowers, H.J. Visser, H.S.M. Khierallah, U. Rosas, G.M. Pham, R.S. Meyer et al. 2015 Whole Genome Re-sequencing of Date Palms Yields Insights into Diversification of a Fruit Tree Crop. Nature Communications 6:8824. Helbaek, H. 1956 Ancient Egyptian Wheats. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 11:93–95. Hillman, G.C. 1984 Interpretation of Archaeological Plant Remains: The Applications of Ethnographic Models from Turkey. In Plants and Ancient Man, ed. W.  Van Zeist and W.A. Casperie, pp. 1–41. Balkema. Hintze, F. 1959 Preliminary Report of the Butana Expedition. Kush 7:171–96. Hoffman, M.A. 1980 A Rectangular Amratian House from Hierakonpolis and its Significance for Predynastic Research. Journal of Near Eastern Studies 39(2):119–37. Holdaway, S., R.  Phillipps, J.  Emmitt, and W.  Wendrich 2016 The Fayum Revisited: Reconsidering the Role of the Neolithic Package, Fayum North Shore, Egypt. Quaternary International 410:173–80. Jones, M.K. 1991 Sampling in Palaeoethnobotany. In Progress in Old World Palaeoethnobotany: A Retrospective View on the Occasion of 20 Years of International Work Group for Paleoethnobotany, ed. W. Van Zeist, K. Wasylikowa, and K.-E. Behre, pp. 53–62. A.A. Balkema. Kislev, M.E. 1979 Triticum parvicoccum sp. nov., the Oldest Naked Wheat. Israel Journal of Botany 28(2):95–107. Loret, V. 1892 La flore pharaonique d’après les documents hiéroglyphiques et les spécimens découverts dans les tombes. E. Leroux. Lyons, D. and A.C.  D’Andrea 2003 Griddles, Ovens, and Agricultural Origins: An Ethnoarchaeological Study of Bread Baking in Highland Ethiopia. American Anthropologist 105(3):515–30. Macadam, M.F.L. 1955 The Temples of Kawa, v. 2: History and Archaeology of the Site. Oxford University Press. Madella, M., J.J. García-Granero, W.A. Out, P. Ryan, and D. Usai 2014 Microbotanical Evidence of Domestic Cereals in Africa 7000 years ago. PLOS ONE 9(10): e110177. Magid, Anwar A. 1989 Plant Domestication in the Middle Nile Basin: An Archaeobotanical Case Study. BAR International Series 523. B.A.R. ——— 2003 Exploitation of Food-plants in the Early and Middle Holocene Blue Nile Area, Sudan and Neighbouring Areas. Complutum 14:345–72. Maillot, S. 2016 Two Firing Structures from Ancient Sudan: An Archaeological Note. Dotawo: A Journal of Nubian Studies 3(1):3. Manning, K., R.  Pelling, T.  Higham, J.L.  Schwenniger, and D.Q.  Fuller 2011 4500-year Old Domesticated Pearl Millet (Pennisetum glaucum) from the Tilemsi Valley, Mali: New Insights into an Alternative Cereal Domestication Pathway. Journal of Archaeological Science 38(2):312–22. Manzo, A. 2014 Beyond the Fourth Cataract: Perspectives for Research in Eastern Sudan. In The Fourth Cataract and Beyond: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference for Nubian Studies, ed. J.R. Anderson and D.A. Welsby, pp. 1149–57. British Museum Publications on Egypt and Sudan 1. Peeters. Mattingly, D. J., N. Brooks, F. Cole, J. Dore, N. Drake, A. Leone, S. Hay, S. McLaren, P. Newson, H. Parton, and R. Pelling 2001 The Fezzan Project 2001: Preliminary Report on the Fifth Season of Work. Libyan Studies 32:133–53. Mayer Thurman, C.C. and B.B. Williams 1979 Ancient Textiles from Nubia: Meroitic, X-Group and Christina Fabrics from Ballana and Qustul. Art Institute of Chicago.

950   Dorian Q. Fuller and Leilani Lucas Mays, L.W. 2008 A Very Brief History of Hydraulic Technology during Antiquity. Environmental Fluid Mechanics 8:471–84. McClatchie, M. and D.Q. Fuller 2014 Leaving a Lasting Impression: Arable Economies and Cereal Impression in Africa and Europe. In Archaeology of African Plant Use, ed. C.J. Stevens, S. Nixon, M.A. Murray, and D.Q. Fuller, pp. 259–65. Left Coast Press. Morkot R. 2000 The Black Pharaohs: Egypt’s Nubian Rulers. Rubicon. Murray, M.A. 2000a Cereal Production and Processing. In Ancient Egyptian Materials and Technology, ed. P.T. Nicholson and I. Shaw, pp. 505–36. Cambridge University Press. ——— 2000b Fruits, Vegetables, Pulses and Condiments. In Ancient Egyptian Materials and Technology, ed. P.T. Nicholson and I. Shaw, pp. 609–55. Cambridge University Press. ——— 2000c Viticulture and Wine Production. In Ancient Egyptian Materials and Technology, ed. P.T. Nicholson and I. Shaw, pp. 577–608. Cambridge University Press. Newton, C. 2004 Plant Tempering of Predynastic Pisé at Adaïma in Upper Egypt: Building Material and Taphonomy. Vegetation History and Archaeobotany 13(1):55–64. Out, W., P. Ryan, J.J. Garcia-Granero, J. Barastegui, L. Maritan, M. Madella, and D. Usai 2016 Plant Exploitation in Neolithic Sudan: A Review in the Light of New Data from the Cemeteries R12 and Ghaba. Quaternary International 412:36–53. Palmer, S.A., A.J. Clapham, P. Rose, F.O. Freitas, B.D. Owen, D. Beresford-Jones, J.D. Moore, J.L.  Kitchen, and R.G.  Allaby 2012 Archaeogenomic Evidence of Punctuated Genome Evolution in Gossypium. Molecular Biology and Evolution 29(8):2031–38. Pelling, R. 2007 Agriculture and Trade amongst the Garamantes: 3000 Years of Archaeobotanical Data from the Sahara and its Margins. Doctoral dissertation, University College London. ——— 2014 Patterns in the Archaeobotany of Africa: Developing a Database for North Africa, the Sahara and the Sahel. In Archaeology of African Plant Use, ed. C.J. Stevens, S. Nixon, M.A. Murray, and D.Q. Fuller, pp. 205–24. Left Coast Press. Phillipps, R., S. Holdaway, W. Wendrich, and R. Cappers 2012 Mid-Holocene Occupation of Egypt and Global Climatic Change. Quaternary International 251:64–76. Pope, J.W. 2013 Epigraphic Evidence for a “Porridge-and-Pot” Tradition on the Ancient Middle Nile. Azania: Archaeological Research in Africa 48(4):473–97. Potts, D. 2009 Bevel-rim Bowls and Bakeries: Evidence and Explanations from Iran and the Indo-Iranian Borderlands. Journal of Cuneiform Studies 61:1–23. Rampersad, S.R. 2008 Introducing Tell Gabbara: New Evidence for Early Dynastic Settlement in the Eastern Delta. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 94:95–106. Reddy, S.N. 1998 Fueling the Hearths in India: The Role of Dung in Paleoethnobotanical Interpretation. Paléorient 1:61–70. Reisner, G.A. 1923 Excavations at Kerma. Harvard African Studies V–VI. Peabody Museum of Harvard University. Rowley-Conwy, P. 1989 Nubia AD 0–550 and the “Islamic” Agricultural Revolution: Preliminary Botanical Evidence from Qasr Ibrim, Egyptian Nubia. Archéologie du Nil Moyen 3:131–38. ——— 1991 The Sorghum from Qasr Ibrim, Egyptian Nubia, c. 800 BC–AD 1811: A Preliminary View. In New Light on Early Farming, ed. J. Renfrew, pp. 191–212. Edinburgh University Press. Rowley-Conwy, P., W.  Deakin, and C.H.  Shaw 1999 Ancient DNA from Sorghum. In The Exploitation of Plant Resources in Ancient Africa, ed. M. van der Veen, pp. 55–61. Academic/ Plenum Publishers.

Savanna on the Nile   951 Ryan, P., C.R.  Cartwright, and N.  Spencer 2012 Archaeobotanical Research in a Pharaonic Town in Ancient Nubia. British Museum Technical Research Bulletin 6:97–106. ——— 2016 Charred Macroremains (Seeds, Fruits) and Phytoliths from Villa E12.10 at Amara West, a Pharaonic Town in Northern Sudan. In News from the Past: Progress in African Archaeobotany, ed. U. Thanheiser, pp. 95–114. Barkhuis Publishing. Samuel, D. 1989 Their Staff of Life: Initial Investigations on Ancient Egyptian Bread Baking. In Amarna Reports 5, ed. B.J. Kemp, pp. 253–90. Egypt Exploration Society. ——— 1999 Bread Making and Social Interactions at the Amarna Workmen’s Village, Egypt. World Archaeology 31:121–44. Säve-Söderbergh, T. 1960 The Paintings in the Tomb of Djehuty-hetep at Debeira. Kush 8:25–44. Sherratt, A. 1999 Cash-crops before Cash: Organic Consumables and Trade. In The Prehistory of Food: Appetites for Change, ed. C. Gosden and J. Hather, pp. 13–34. Routledge. Shinnie, P.L. 1967 Meroe. Thames & Hudson. Smith, S.T. 2003 Wretched Kush: Ethnic Identities and Boundaries in Egypt’s Nubian Empire. Routledge. Spencer, N., A. Stevens, and M. Binder 2014 Amara West: Living in Egyptian Nubia. The British Museum. Stemler, A.B. 1990 A Scanning Electron Microscopic Analysis of Plant Impressions in Pottery from Sites of Kadero, El Zakiab, Um Direiwa and El Kadada. Archéologie du Nil Moyen 4:87–106. Stevens, C. and A.  Clapham 2014 Botanical Insights into the Life of an Ancient Egyptian Village: Excavation Results from Amarna. In Archaeology of African Plant Use, ed. C.J. Stevens, S. Nixon, M.A. Murray, and D.Q. Fuller, pp. 151–64. Left Coast Press. Tengberg, M. 2012 Beginnings and Early History of Date Palm Garden Cultivation in the Middle East. Journal of Arid Environments 86:139–47. Thanheiser, U. 2011 Island of the Blessed: 8000 Years of Plant Exploitation in the Dakhleh Oasis, Egypt. In Windows on the African Past: Current Approaches to African Archaeobotany, ed. A.G. Fahmy, S. Kahlheber, and A.C. D’Andrea, pp. 79–80. Africa Magna Verlag. Thanheiser, U., S. Kahlheber, and T. Dupras 2016 Pearl Millet, Pennisetum glaucum (L.) R.Br. ssp. glaucum, in the Dakhleh Oasis, Egypt. In News from the Past: Progress in African Archaeobotany, ed. U. Thanheiser, pp. 115–26. Barkhuis Publishing. Török, L. 1997 Meroe City: An Ancient African Capital. John Garstang’s Excavations in the Sudan. Egypt Exploration Society Occasional Publications 12. Toussaint-Samat, M. 2009 A History of Food, second edition, trans. A. Bell. Wiley-Blackwell. Trigger, B.G. 1965 History and Settlement in Lower Nubia. Yale University Publications in Anthropology 69. van der Veen M. and T. Lawrence T. 1991 The Plant Remains. In Soba: Archaeological Research at a Medieval Capital on the Blue Nile, ed. D.A.  Welsby and C.M.  Daniels, pp. 264–74. Memoirs of the British Institute in Eastern Africa 12. Van Zeist, W.A. 1983 Fruits in Foundation Deposits of Two Temples. Journal of Archaeological Science 10:351–54. ——— 1987 The Plant Remains. In Le Cimetiére Kermaïque d’Ukma Ouest, ed. A.  Vila, pp. 247–55. Paris: CNRS. van Zeist, W. and G.J. de Roller 1993 Plant Remains from Maadi, a Predynastic Site in Lower Egypt. Vegetation History and Archaeobotany 2(1):1–14.

952   Dorian Q. Fuller and Leilani Lucas Wasylikowa, K. and J.A.  Dahlberg 1999 Sorghum in the Economy of the Early Neolithic Nomadic Tribes at Nabta Playa, Southern Egypt. In The Exploitation of Plant Resources in Ancient Africa, ed. M. van der Veen, pp. 11–32. Plenum. ——— 2001 Sorghum Remains from Site E-75-6. In Holocene Settlement of the Egyptian Sahara, v. 1: The Archaeology of Nabta Playa, ed. F.  Wendorf and R.  Schild, pp. 578–87. Springer/Plenum. Weiss, E. 2015 Beginnings of Fruit Growing in the Old World-Two Generations Later. Israel Journal of Plant Sciences 62(1–2):75–85. Welsby, D. 2014 Kawa: The Pharaonic and Kushite Town of Gematon. History and Archaeology of the Site. http://www.sudarchrs.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Kawa_QSAP_ English_booklet.pdf. Wendrich, W., R.E. Taylor, and J. Southon 2010 Dating Stratified Settlement Sites at Kom K and Kom W: Fifth Millennium bce Radiocarbon Ages for the Fayum Neolithic. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section B: Beam Interactions with Materials and Atoms 268(7):999–1002. ——— 2006 The Archaeology of Early Egypt: Social Transformations in North-East Africa, c. 10,000 to 2,650 BC. Cambridge University Press. Wengrow, D., M. Dee, S. Foster, A. Stevenson, and C.B. Ramsey 2014 Cultural Convergence in the Neolithic of the Nile Valley: A Prehistoric Perspective on Egypt’s Place in Africa. Antiquity 88(339):95–111. Wetterstrom, W. 1993 Foraging and Farming in Egypt: The Transition from Hunting and Gathering to Horticulture in the Nile Valley. In The Archaeology of Africa: Food, Metals and Towns, ed. T. Shaw, P. Sinclair, B. Andah, and A. Okpoko, pp. 165–226. Routledge. ——— 1998 The Origins of Agriculture in Africa: With Particular Reference to Sorghum and Pearl Millet. Review of Archaeology 19(2):30–46. Willcox, G. 1992 Some Differences between Crops of Near Eastern Origin and Those from the Tropics. In South Asian Archaeology 1989, ed. C. Jarrige, pp. 291–300. Monographs in World Archaeology 14. Prehistory Press. Williams, B.B. 1986 Excavations between Abu Simbel and the Sudanese Frontier, Part 1: The A-Group Royal Cemetery at Qustul: Cemetery L. University of Chicago Oriental Institute Nubian Expedition 3. ——— 1991a Excavations between Abu Simbel and the Sudan Frontier, Part 8: Meroitic Remains from Qustul Cemetery Q, Ballana Cemetery B, and a Ballana Settlement. University of Chicago Oriental Institute Nubian Expedition 8. ——— 1991b Excavations between Abu Simbel and the Sudan Frontier, Part 9: Noubadian X-Group Remains from Royal Complexes in Cemeteries Q and 219 and from Private Cemeteries Q, R, V, W, B, J and M at Qustul and Ballana. University of Chicago Oriental Institute Nubian Expedition 9. Winchell, F., C.J.  Stevens, C.  Murphy, L.  Champion, and D.Q.  Fuller 2017 Evidence for Sorghum Domestication in Fourth Millennium BC Eastern Sudan: Spikelet Morphology from Ceramic Impressions of the Butana Group. Current Anthropology 58(5):673–83. Woolley, C.L. 1911 Karanòg: The Town. Eckley B. Coxe Junior Expedition to Nubia 5. University Museum (Philadelphia). Woolley, C.L. and D.  Randall-MacIver 1910 Karanòg: The Romano-Nubian Cemetery. Eckley B. Coxe Junior Expedition to Nubia 3–4. University Museum (Philadelphia). Yvanez, E. 2016 Spinning in Meroitic Sudan: Textile Production Implements from Abu Geili. Dotawo: A Journal of Nubian Studies 3: article 9.

Savanna on the Nile   953 Žabkar, L.V. 1975 Apedemak, Lion God of Meroe: A Study in Egyptian-Meroitic Syncretism. Aris & Phillips. Zeder, M.A. 2017 Out of the Fertile Crescent: The Dispersal of Domestic Livestock through Europe and Africa. In Human Dispersal and Species Movement: From Prehistory to the Present, ed. M. Petraglia, N. Boivin, and R. Crassard, pp. 261–303. Cambridge University Press. Ziermann, M. 2003 Die Baustrukturen der älteren Stadt (Frühzeit und Altes Reich). Elephantine 28. Philipp von Zabern.

Chapter 47

Ex pl oitation of Geol ogica l R e sou rce s Ancient Mines and Quarries in Nubia James A. Harrell and Abdelrahman Ali Mohamed

Introduction Nubia, encompassing the Nile valley and adjacent deserts between Aswan in Egypt and Khartoum in Sudan, is well endowed with the geological resources needed to supply a succession of ancient cultures and kingdoms (see Harrell, this volume, for a discussion of Nubian geology). Igneous and metamorphic rocks of the region’s Basement Complex (Fig. 47.1) provided most of the materials: gold, gemstones, and other minerals for jewelry and the decorative arts; copper for tools, weapons, figurines, and a variety of small luxury items; and ornamental stones for statuary, stelae, sarcophagi, offering tables, bark stands, altars, and other elite objects. Overlying the Basement Complex are sedimentary rocks, with the Nubian Sandstone Formation paramount among these (Fig. 47.1). The typical sandstone of this formation was used to build Nubia’s many temples and pyramids (Fig. 47.2), and it was also commonly employed for statuary and stelae. Oolitic ironstone, a goethite-rich rock within the same formation, was the raw material for Napatan and Meroitic production of iron for tools and weapons. Two unusually hard varieties of Nubian Sandstone—iron oxide-cemented (ferruginous) and quartzcemented (silicified) rocks (also referred to as ferricrete and quartzite, respectively)— were used in buildings where extra strength was needed, such as door and window lintels, door thresholds and jambs, and the bases for wooden pillars, and also for many of the same applications as the hard ornamental stones. Grinding stones for grains and other materials were fashioned from silicified sandstone as well as from a variety of hard igneous and metamorphic rocks. Surficial sands and gravels deposited by the Nile River

956   James A. Harrell and Abdelrahman Ali Mohamed

Figure 47.1  Map of Nubia showing bedrock geology and locations of ancient quarries for building and ornamental stones (solid circles and squares, respectively) as well as for silicified sandstone (crosses). See Appendices A–C for information on the numbered quarries. The geological map is adapted from Fig. 3.2 in Harrell, this volume, with this chapter also providing additional information on the rock units identified in the map legend, including their geological ages.

Exploitation of Geological Resources   957

Figure 47.2  Map of Nubia showing the locations of ancient temples and pyramids (triangles) constructed, either largely or entirely, with sandstone and where objects carved from ornamental stones have been found. For an explanation of the abbreviated dates, see n. 2 in this Chapter’s Appendices.

958   James A. Harrell and Abdelrahman Ali Mohamed and desert wadis were another important source of gemstones and especially gold, and clay-rich muds served as the raw material for ceramics. Much has been written about Nubia’s geological resources: e.g., Hume (1937) and Hussein (1990) for Egyptian Nubia; and Whiteman (1971:214–58), Vail (1978:43–53), and especially Mageed (1998) for Sudanese Nubia. A total of 117 ancient mines and quarries have been identified in Nubia with these shown in Fig.s  47.1 and 47.3, and briefly described in Appendices A–F below. This number, however, is misleading because each of these sites is actually a complex consisting of multiple discrete workings which collectively probably amount to several hundred. The use here of the terms “mine” and “quarry” follows the convention of referring to extraction sites for metals, gemstones, and other minerals as mines, and those for building and ornamental stones and other rocks as quarries. Although the number of known ancient mines and quarries is large, many more remain to be found. Others have been destroyed by modern gold mining or are now lost beneath the waters of Lake Nasser between the First and Second Cataracts and the unnamed lake at the Fourth Cataract (Fig. 47.3). There is little evidence of medieval Christian and Islamic mining and quarrying, except for gold in the latter period. It must be admitted, however, that comparatively little attention has been given to these later periods by archaeologists, with the result that evidence of medieval mining and quarrying has probably been overlooked. When major construction projects were undertaken during medieval times (e.g., for churches, mosques, and especially Nile fortresses), the building material, apart from mudbrick, was sandstone scavenged from earlier structures and loose rock rubble harvested (rather than quarried) from local bedrock outcrops.

Quarries for Building and Ornamental Stones The greatest extraction of geological resources, in terms of volume, was for the sandstone used in Nubia’s temples and pyramids (Fig.  47.2). The quarries for this rock range in age mainly from the New Kingdom’s 18th Dynasty until the end of the Meroitic period (A1–23 in Fig. 47.1 and App. A). It is to be expected that one or more quarries will be found close to each sandstone monument and while many such quarries are known, others await discovery. The largest quarry complex (with ninety discrete workings), and by far the best documented, is in the hills east of Meroe (A21; Cech et al. 2018). The next best-studied complex supplied sandstone for the temples and pyramids at Jebel Barkal (A17; Abdelrahman Ali Mohamed  2007:44–68; see also Abdelrahman Ali Mohamed 2012). In comparison to these two cases, relatively little is known about the sources of stone for other sandstone monuments. With one minor undated exception at Meroe (Cech 2018: 48), no sandstone quarry post-dating the Meroitic period has been recognized.

Exploitation of Geological Resources   959

Figure 47.3  Map of Nubia showing the locations of ancient mines for metals (gold, solid circles; copper and other metals, solid squares) and gemstones (crosses). See this Chapter’s Appendices D–F for information on the numbered mines.

Whereas sandstone quarries were always relatively close to construction sites, the higher-value ornamental stones (i.e., those with attractive colors or patterns, and hard enough to take a polish) came from quarries that were often great distances from the temples and tombs where the stones were used (B1–6 in Fig. 1 and App. B). This is

960   James A. Harrell and Abdelrahman Ali Mohamed e­ specially so for granite and granodiorite quarried at Aswan (B1), carved objects of which have been found as far south as Dangeil above the Fifth Cataract (Fig. 47.2), about 1,500 km up the Nile from Aswan. These rocks, and in particular granodiorite (the “gray or black granite” of many writers), were employed in Nubia only during the New Kingdom and then again during the 25th Dynasty and early part of the Napatan period. Between the Third and Fourth Cataracts, the principal ornamental stones of the Napatan and Meroitic periods are granite and granite gneiss from Tombos (B5) and granite/granodiorite gneiss from Daygah (B6). The extent to which these ornamental stones were used at sites upriver from the Fourth Cataract is unknown, but Aswan granodiorite and probably also Tombos granite gneiss, at least, were used for statues of early Napatan kings found in the Dangeil temple (Anderson and Salah el-Din Mohamed Ahmed 2010:23–33). Similar rocks do occur in the Basement Complex north of Atbara and south of Shendi (Fig. 47.1), and so might have been quarried in these areas. Of more certain origin are two other hard rocks used in the Meroe region, ferruginous sandstone from the local Nubian Sandstone and basalt probably from volcanic deposits near the Fifth Cataract (Fig. 47.1). Steatite, a soft talc-rich rock from the Basement Complex, was another popular sculptural material at Meroe and elsewhere. Nothing made of anorthosite/gabbro gneiss from Chephren’s Quarry (B2) has been reported from Nubia, and objects (mostly columns) carved from the so-called “granite” from the Semna East (B3), Jebel Kitfooga (B4) and Bayuda Wells (B7) quarries have not yet been identified. Pottery at the latter quarry suggests that extraction activities might have continued from Kushite times into the medieval Christian period. White marble is found at some Nubian sites, most notably at Kerma where this rock was used for several pillar bases on the west side of the mudbrick Deffufa. The marble, like other rarely used ornamental stones in Nubia, probably came from nearby outcrops of Basement Complex rocks. Travertine (Egyptian alabaster) was occasionally employed for statuettes, jars, and other small decorative objects, and must have come from one or more of the known quarries in Egypt (R. Klemm and D. Klemm 2008:148–64; Shaw 2010). It is not uncommon for the Nubian Sandstone to be tightly cemented with quartz (forming silicified sandstone or quartzite) and there must be many localities in Nubia where this occurs. The four known ancient quarries (C1–4 in Fig. 1 and App. C) are thus probably not the only sources. Whereas the huge quarry complexes near Aswan (C1–2) supplied silicified sandstone for the full range of ornamental applications, the smaller workings near the Second Cataract (C3–4) apparently provided stone primarily for building purposes.

Mines for Metals and Gemstones The most numerous of Nubia’s ancient extraction sites are for gold. There are seventy-six known gold mines that were active, at least in part, prior to medieval times (D1–76 in Fig. 3 and App. D). Most of these are found along Wadis Allaqi and Gabgaba and their

Exploitation of Geological Resources   961 tributaries as well as near the Nile River between the Second and Third Cataracts. Another 110 mines dating to only the Islamic era have been identified in Nubia by R.  Klemm and D.  Klemm (2013), but none have been reported for the preceding Christian period. The mined gold came from quartz veins in the Basement Complex (vein or hardrock gold), and also from quartz derived from these veins and deposited in wadis or the Nile River (alluvial gold) or on hillsides as scree (colluvial gold). The most comprehensive treatment of Nubian gold mines is that of R. Klemm and D. Klemm (2013:270–591; for overviews, see also D.  Klemm et al.  2001 and D.  Klemm and R. Klemm 2017). Some silver objects have been recovered from Nubian sites with this metal almost certainly a by-product of gold production, but probably originating in Egypt where the gold deposits are richer in silver (R. Klemm and D. Klemm 2013:41–50). Lead, in the form of the mineral galena, was used for eye paint (kohl). There is one known lead mine near Aswan (E6 in Fig. 3 and App. E), but galena is one of the sulfide minerals commonly associated with gold deposits and so can be a by-product of Nubian gold mining. Unlike gold, which occurs in rock as a fairly pure metal that only needs to be physically separated from its quartz matrix, metallic copper was chemically separated from copper-bearing minerals, like chrysocolla and malachite, by smelting in a furnace. These minerals occur in a variety of rock types within the Basement Complex, including quartz veins and often in association with gold. There are only five known ancient copper mines in Nubia (E1–5 in Fig. 47.3 and App. E), but it is likely that there were others. In the first half of the 2nd millennium bce in Egypt, objects of copper and copper-arsenic alloy were replaced by ones of bronze, an alloy made by adding tin to copper (Davies 1987:24; Ogden 2000:153–61). The harder bronze was especially favored for tools and weapons. There are many known deposits of cassiterite (the principal tin-bearing mineral) in both Egypt (Hussein 1990:529–33) and Sudan (Mageed 1998:438–66), but so far no ancient mine has been identified. Beginning no later than the 6th and possibly as early as the 7th century bce in both Egypt (Muhly  1999:526; Ogden  2000:166–68) and Sudan (Humphris and Scheibner 2017:399, fig. 4), tools and weapons made of more durable iron (including carburized iron or steel) started replacing those of bronze. Meroe was ancient Nubia’s principal center of iron production (see also Humphris, this volume) with the metal smelted from the Nubian Sandstone’s oolitic ironstone. Extensive deposits of this rock are found just east of the Nile between Shendi and Atbara (Germann et al. 1990:135–36), but so far the only known ancient iron mine is in the hills northeast of Meroe (E7 in Fig. 47.3 and App. E; Humphris et al. 2018). Iron production at Meroe and nearby Hamadab ceased in the early medieval Christian period (Humphris 2014) but, given the continued use of iron tools and weapons, must have occurred elsewhere in Nubia in later times, such as at Ghazali, where major iron works have been recorded (Obłuski, this volume). By far the most commonly used gemstone in ancient Nubia was carnelian, a reddishto orangy-colored variety of chalcedony or chalcedonic quartz. Sardonyx, which is essentially carnelian with white streaks or bands, was popular and is usually identified as carnelian in the archaeological literature. Colorless (rock crystal) and white (milky)

962   James A. Harrell and Abdelrahman Ali Mohamed quartz, often with an added blue or green copper-based glaze, were also widely employed. Additional use was made of agate (banded chalcedony), amazonite, amethyst, garnet, jasper, lapis lazuli, muscovite mica, and obsidian with these stones supplemented in jewelry by several non-geologic materials, including ivory, shell, and especially faience and glass. Lapis lazuli was imported from Afghanistan through Egypt (Herrmann  1968; Payne  1968), and obsidian probably came from Ethiopia or other southern Red Sea sources (Zarins 1989; Giménez et al. 2015:352–54). All the other gemstones occur in Egypt (Harrell  2012) and most are also found in northern Sudan (Mageed 1998:173–76, 388–93, 525–29). The three known ancient mines are all in Egypt (F1–3 in Fig. 47.3 and App. F). There is one for amethyst and rock crystal at Wadi el-Hudi (F1) and another for carnelian and other chalcedonies at Stela Ridge (F2). These sites, however, date only to the Middle Kingdom and so the sources of these gemstones during earlier and later periods, as well as for the other gemstones during all periods, have yet to be identified. A likely source are the pebbles of carnelian, sardonyx, banded agate, and other varieties of chalcedony, garnet, and jasper found in gravel deposited in Nubia by the Nile River and some of the desert wadis feeding into it (Whiteman  1971:128; Mageed 1998:175–76; Harrell 2010:73–74). Carnelian used in Nubian jewelry typically has an intense reddish color, a hue which is rare in nature, and so it may have been manufactured by heat treatment of the more common brownish- and yellowish-colored chalcedonies (Nassau 1994:28, 118), which are found in abundance in Nile gravels. The third known gemstone mine is on Zabargad Island in the Red Sea (F3), but this apparently only supplied peridot to the Ptolemaic and Roman markets in Egypt and the Mediterranean region.

Exploitation of Geological Resources   963

Appendices. Ancient Mines and Quarries in Nubia A. SANDSTONE QUARRIES NO.

LOCATION1

1

WB; at St. Simeon monastery, opposite Aswan city on EB Chr?

JAH; KK08 (206)

2

EB; in and around Aswan city

NK & R

Ha60 (232–33); Ke09 (93)

3

WB; west of Dabod temple

Pt, R & Mer

DD63 (10); Ro11 (3); We07 (59)

4

WB; north, west, and especially south of Qertassi temple Pt & R

Ro11 (160–76); We07 (61–63)

5

WB; west of Tafa temples

R

Ro11 (209); We07 (66)

6

WB; northwest of Kalabsha temple

NK18, Pt & R Si70 (pl. 1); We07 (75)

7

WB; south of Abu Hor temple

Pt &/or R?

8

WB; west of Qurta temple

NK18? & R? We07 (92)

9

WB; near Agayba village

NK or R?

We07 (97)

10

WB; west of Tumas village

NK18–19

We07 (108)

11

EB; below Qasr Ibrim fortress

NK-R?

We07 (115)

12

EB; near Nag Deira village

NK?

Si63 (1)

13

EB; south of Jebel Adda fortress

R or Mer

HE16 (19–20); Mi63 (153–54)

14

WB; opposite Gezira Dabarosa island

MK or NK?

WApc

15

WB; at Hieroglyph Hill near Abd el-Kadir village (possibly MK silicified sandstone)

Ar50 (25–27)

16

WB; north of Sesebi temple

Sp09 (44–45)

17

NK18, LP25 E/NB; southwest and northeast of Jebel Barkal temples a nd pyramids at Barkal Foug, Barkal Foug Wad Shareif, Jebel & Nap-Mer Suweigat, Khor el-Harazawin, Khor el-Sadda, Sheba, and possibly other sites

AAM07 (44–68)

18

W/SB; near Nuri pyramids

Nap-Mer

AAM07 (69–70); Du55 (271)

19

E/NB; north of El-Kurru pyramids

LP25-Nap

AAM07 (37–39); AE16; Em13 (46–47); GEpc

20

WB; at Jebel Nakharu opposite Dangeil temple on EB

Mer

AAM07 (126–28)

21

east of Meroe pyramids at Hilat Umm Ali, Jebel Abu Sha’ar, Mer Jebel Awad el-Sid, Jebel Umm Ali, and possibly other sites

AGE2

NK18–19

REFERENCES3

Bu22 (103)

AAM07 (76–111); Ce18; Hi82 (28–33) (continued )

964   James A. Harrell and Abdelrahman Ali Mohamed A. SANDSTONE QUARRIES NO.

LOCATION1

AGE2

REFERENCES3

22

west and east of Musawwarat el-Sufra temples at Jebel el-Ghafalla, Jebel el-Sufra, Jebel Qubla Ma’afer, and possibly other sites

Mer

AAM07 (112–18); Be00

23

east of Naga temples on Jebel Naga

Mer

AAM07 (119–25); RH09 (28–30)

B. ORNAMENTAL STONE QUARRIES NO. LOCATION1

AGE2

ROCK TYPE4

1

EB & Nile islands: in and around Aswan city

ED-R

very coarse- to coarse-grained, pinkish to BH98; Ke09; reddish granite; medium- to fine-grained, KK08 (233–67) pinkish to reddish or light gray granite; and coarse- to medium-grained, dark gray to nearly black granodiorite

2

western Nubian Desert west of Jebel el-Asr (Chephren’s Quarry)

Pd-OK & MK12

medium- to fine-grained, light gray anorthosite gneiss and light gray and greenish-black banded gabbro gneiss

En38; HB94; He09b; He16; KK08 (323–25); St02

3

EB; in Semna East district

MK?

“black granite” (petrology unverified)

EM13 (10)

4

WB; at Jebel Kitfooga, Chr Dal cataract

“gray and red granites” (petrology unverified)

NSpc

5

EB, WB, and Nile islands west and north of Tombos village, 3rd Cataract

NK18, LP25, Nap-Mer & Chr

Ha99a; Ha99b; coarse- to medium-grained, strongly foliated, light pinkish-gray granite gneiss; Sm98 (162) and medium- to fine-grained, medium gray granite

6

W/SB; west of Daygah village, 4th Cataract

LP25 & Nap-Mer

coarse- to medium-grained, mildly foliated, Ha99b; Si10 dark gray granite gneiss to granodiorite gneiss (85–89)

7

Bayuda Wells, Bayuda Desert

Chr

“granite” (petrology unverified)

REFERENCES3

We02 (128)

C. SILICIFIED SANDSTONE QUARRIES NO. LOCATION1

AGE2

1

EB; north of Wadi Abu Aggag and Aswan city

NK18-19 & R HM06

2

WB; at Jebels Gulab, Sidi Osman, and Tingar opposite Aswan city on EB

NK18-19 & R Ha60 (224–33); He05; He09a; KK08 (219–28); St13

3

WB; west of Buhen fortress

MK &/or NK18 WApc

4

WB; near Abd el-Kadir village, opposite Dorginarti Island fortress

NK

REFERENCES3

WApc

Exploitation of Geological Resources   965 D. GOLD MINES NO. NAME and LOCATION1

DEPOSIT TYPE

AGE2

REFERENCES3

vein?

pre-Is?

EGSMA79 (15); Hu37 (748) EGSMA; JAH

24o to 26o N by 31o to 34o E 1

Kurtunos: at Jebel Kurtunos

24 to 26 N by 34 to 37 E o

o

o

o

2

Khashab: in Wadi Khashab, near Rizek Allah colluvial

R?

3

Wadi Dendekan: in an eastern tributary of Wadi Dendekan

alluvial & vein

NK? & Is? KK13 (272)

4

Shaghab: in Wadi Khashab

colluvial

pre-Is?

EGSMA; JAH

5

Mweillah I & II: in southern tributaries of Wadi Mweillah

vein?

Pt-R

SW01 (47); Zy16 (344)

22o to 24o N by 31o to 34o E 6

Wadi el-Hudi I: just northwest of Jebel el-Hudi 

vein

R or Is  

Fa52 (8); KK13 (288–93); Kl02 (57–58); SJ93 (84)

7

Wadi el-Hudi II: in Wadi el-Hudi  

vein

R or Is  

Fa52 (17); KK13 (293); Kl02 (63); SJ93 (84)

8

El-Hisnein East and West: near Wadi Siali  

vein

MK

HM15

9

Dihmit-East: just north of Wadi Dihmit

vein

pre-Is?

JAH

10

Hairiri: in Wadi Umm Araka  

alluvial & vein

NK, Kus? KK13 (295–300) & Is

11

Umm Ashira I (East): in Wadi Umm Ashira

alluvial?

NK

KK13 (300)

12

Umm Ashira II: in Wadi Umm Ashira

alluvial & vein

NK & Is

KK13 (300–301)

13

Heimur: at Jebel Heimur  

alluvial & vein

NK & Is  

Hu37 (752–55); KK13 (302–308)  

14

Ahmed Village: in Wadi Allaqi  

alluvial & colluvial

NK & Is

KK13 (309–12)

15

Umm Garaiyat: in Wadi Umm Garaiyat, an eastern tributary of Wadi Allaqi

alluvial & vein

NK, Kus & Hu37 (750–52, 761); KK13 Is (312–16)

16

Marahig I: in a northern tributary of Wadi Marahig  

alluvial & colluvial

ED-OK?, Hu37 (749); KK13 NK, Kus? (318–21) & Is  

17

Wadi Murra North: in Wadi el-Murra

alluvial

pre-Is?

JAH

18

Marahig II (East): in an eastern tributary of alluvial & Wadi Marahig colluvial

NK

KK13 (321)

19

Marahig III: in Wadi Marahig

alluvial

NK & Is

KK13 (321)

20

Ungat: at Jebel Ungat  

alluvial?

NK & Kus?

KK13 (337–38) (continued )

966   James A. Harrell and Abdelrahman Ali Mohamed D. GOLD MINES NO. NAME and LOCATION1

DEPOSIT TYPE

AGE2

REFERENCES3

22o to 24o N by 34o to 37o E 21

Abu Arta: just south of Jebel Abu Arta

vein

R

Si07 (295)

22

Bitan: near Bir Bitan in Wadi Bitan

vein

NK & Is

KK13 (273)

23

Umm Eleiga: at Atlal Umm Eleiga in Wadi Umm Eleiga 

alluvial & vein

NK, Pt?, R? & Is 

dJ81 (27–28); Hu37 (747); KK13 (273–78)

24

Abu Samra: in Wadi Howeitat, a southern tributary of Wadi Hutib

alluvial? & pre-Pt vein

Si07 (297)

25

Umm Tinaydab: in a western tributary of Wadi Umm Tinaydib, near Jebel Umm Tinaydab

?

pre-Is?

JAH

26

Shoshoba: at Jebel Shoshoba  

alluvial & vein

NK, Kus? Hu37 (755); KK13 & Is (328–31) 

27

Umm Tuyur: at Jebel Umm el-Tuyur el-Foqani

vein

pre-Is?

Hu37 (757–58); KK13 (331–33)

28

Umm Egat: in Wadi Allaqi, south of Jebel Umm Egat

vein?

pre-Is?

Hu37 (758); KK13 (338–39)

20o to 22o N by 28o to 31o E 29

Duweishat: in Duweishat East district between Jebel Attiri and Nile River 

alluvial & OK/MK?, NK & Kus vein

EM13 (10–12); Fu87 (2639–41); KK13 (557–64); Ma98 (193–95); Va78 (45)

30

Sai Island: in Nile River  

alluvial & NK colluvial

KK13 (570–72)

31

Doshe: at Jebel Doshe

?

pre-Is?

JAH; Ve59 (131)

32

Ager: in Ager district

alluvial

NK

KK13 (572)

33

Tinari: in Tinari district

alluvial & OK/MK? & Du11 (40); KK13 (576–79) colluvial NK

34

Abu Sari I, II, III & IV: in Abu Sari district

alluvial & OK/MK? & Fu87 (2639–40); KK13 (572–76); Ma98 (195–98) colluvial NK

35

Tondi: in Tondi district

alluvial & NK? colluvial

Du11 (41); KK13 (579); Mc17

20o to 22o N by 31o to 34o E 36

Sarras: in Wadi Ahmed Sherif and Sarras East district

vein

MK12

Du11 (56); EM13 (9); Fu87 (2641); KK13 (556); Ma98 (200–201); Mi67 (204, 206)

37

Wadi Gagait: in Wadi Gagait

alluvial

NK

KK13 (506–507)

38

Liseiwi 1: in Wadi Liseiwi

alluvial?

NK & Is

KK13 (507–509)

39

Liseiwi 4: in Wadi Liseiwi  

alluvial & NK colluvial

KK13 (509)

Exploitation of Geological Resources   967 40

Umm Fahm II, III, IV & V: near Jebel Umm Fahm

alluvial

NK

Du11 (55); EM13(11); Fu87 (2641); KK13 (567–68); Ma98 (202–203)

41

Wadi Dom 3: in Wadi Dom

alluvial

NK

KK13 (515)

42

Wadi Naba 5: in a northern tributary of Wadi Naba

vein

NK

KK13 (532–35); Ma98 (198–200)

43

Khor Rafit: in Khor Rafit

alluvial?

NK?

JAH; Ve59 (140)

44

Wadi Naba 1: in Wadi Naba 

alluvial & NK colluvial

KK13 (528–31); Ma98 (198–200)

45

Mosei: just northeast of Jebel Mosei in a western tributary of Wadi Gabgaba

alluvial?

Ca95 (179); KK13 (543)

46

Umm Nabardi: in Wadi Murrat

alluvial & NK, Kus? & Is vein

Ca95 (98–105, 177); KK13 (544–48); Ma98 (190–92); Va78 (45)

47

Nabi 1 & 2: in southern tributary of Wadi Abu Damna (1) and at confluence of Wadi Naba & Wadi Abu Damna (2)

alluvial & NK & Is vein?

Ca95 (179); KK13 (536–39); Ma98 (198–200)

48

Gebel Mundera: at Jebel Mundera 

vein

KK13 (548–49)

49

Umm Fit Fit: near Jebel Fit Fit 

alluvial & NK & Kus? Ca95 (110–11, 181); Du11 (64); KK13 (549) vein

50

Abu Siha: at Jebel Abu Shia  

alluvial?

51

Gabgaba: in a western tributary of Wadi Gabgaba

alluvial & pre-Is? colluvial

Ma98 (199–200)

alluvial & NK & Is vein

KK13 (447–51)

NK & Is

KK13 (452–53) KK13 (455–56)

NK?

NK? & Is?

NK, Kus? & Is

Ca95 (118, 181); KK13 (549–50)

20o to 22o N by 34o to 37o E 52

Wadi Ward Miriyan 1–2: in Wadi Ward Miriyan

53

Wadi Ward Miriyan 5: in Wadi Ward Miriyan vein

54

Nafir 5: in Wadi Nafiryam  

alluvial & NK & Is vein

55

Uar: in Wadi Uar  

alluvial? & vein

NK & Is

KK13 (396–98); Ma98 (216–19)

56

Hamisana North: in Wadi Hamisana

alluvial?

NK & Is

KK13 (463–64)

57

Hufra: in a northern tributary of Wadi Onib

alluvial?

NK

KK13 (399)

58

Wadi Onib: in Wadi Onib  

alluvial & NK & Is vein

Du11 (51); KK13 (400–12); Ma98 (219–21); Va78 (45)

59

Gabaideb 2: in Wadi Gabaideb  

alluvial & NK vein

KK13 (468–72)

60

Khor Adarmo I & II: in Khor Adarmo (I) and alluvial in a southern tributary of Khor Adarmo (II)

61

Gebeit Sharq: in Wadi Gebeit Sharq  

NK?

alluvial & NK & Is vein

KK13 (472–74); Ma98 (225) Du11 (48); KK13 (356–58); Ma98 (207–12); Va78 (45) (continued )

968   James A. Harrell and Abdelrahman Ali Mohamed D. GOLD MINES NO. NAME and LOCATION1

DEPOSIT TYPE

62

Terfawi 2 & 3: in Wadi Terfawi

alluvial

NK

Ca95 (105, 182); KK13 (502)

63

Listi: in Wadi Kiau north of Jebel Abu Dueim

alluvial? & vein

NK

KK13 (421–22)

64

Karaibitar 1: in a northern tributary of Khor Abu Dueim near Jebel Abu Dueim

alluvial

NK & Kus? KK13 (482–85)

65

Abirkateib I: in a northern tributary of Khor Abu Dueim

vein

NK & Is

Ma98 (213–16); KK13 (486–88); Va78 (45)

66

Abirkateib II: at Jebel Karibirar in a southern tributary of Khor Abu Dueim

alluvial

NK?

KK13 (488–89)

67

Techol I & II: in a northern tributary of Wadi Mogal

alluvial & NK & Is vein

68

Shikryai: at Jebel Shikryai 

vein

NK, Kus? & Is

KK13 (364–67)

AGE2

REFERENCES3

KK13 (432–37)

18o to 20o N by 31o to 34o E 69

Mograt Island: in Nile River 

alluvial

NK

KK13 (584–91)

70

Shamkhiya: on W/SB of Nile River 

alluvial

NK & Kus

KK13 (581–83)

71

Hosh el-Guruf: on E/NB of Nile River, 4th Catarac 

alluvial

NK? & Kus Ha10; KK13 (580–81)

72

Shanobkwan I: in Khor Maritret

vein

NK & Is

73

Negeim: in an eastern tributary of Wadi Senateb

alluvial & NK & Is vein

74

Aliakateb: at Khor Takhwan in an eastern tributary of Wadi Amur

vein

75

Wadi Amur: in an eastern tributary of Wadi ? Amur

76

Ganait: in a southern tributary of Wadi Amur

KK13 (368) KK13 (489–95)

NK & Kus

KK13 (372–75)

NK & Kus? KK13 (375–76)

alluvial & NK & Is vein

KK13 (384–86)

E. MINES FOR COPPER AND OTHER METALS NO. LOCATION1

METAL

AGE2

REFERENCES3

1

Samiuki I and II: just east of Jebel Abu Hamamid and Wadi Umm Samiuki  

copper

NK (in part)  

dJ81 (28); EA58; Es55 (64–66); Hu37 (837–42); Hu90 (542–43); MH58 (10–11)

2

Hilgit: just southeast of Jebel Abu Hamamid, in Wadi Halgit el-Layl Hulus

copper ? (also lead?)

3

Dihmit South: just south of Wadi Dihmit  copper

MK & R? HM15

4

Abu Seyal: in Wadi Abu Seyal, a northern copper tributary of Wadi Haimur 

MK  

EGSMA79 (14); JAH

EJ89 (38); Es55 (66–67); Hu37 (842–43); MH58 (10–11)

Exploitation of Geological Resources   969 5

Umm Fahm I: near Jebel Umm Fahm  

copper

OK & MK?

Du11 (55); EM13 (11); KK13 (564 –68); Ma98 (202–203)

6

Wadi el-Hudi: east of Wadi el-Hudi

galena

MK

Fa52 (7–8); JAH

7

Meroe: on top of sandstone plateau 5 km iron northeast of Meroe pyramids

Mer & Hu18 early Chr

F. GEMSTONE MINES NO. LOCATION 1

AGE2

1

eastern Nubian Desert west of Wadi el-Hudi

MK11–13 amethyst and rock Pt &/or R crystal

Fa52; Kl02; Li15; SJ93

2

western Nubian Desert at Stela Ridge northwest of Jebel el-Asr

MK12

carnelian and other chalcedonies

Bl06; En38 (372 & 387)

3

on Zabargad Island, Red Sea

Pt-R

peridot

HB10

MINERAL

REFERENCES3

In each appendix, mines and quarries are listed from north to south, except for the gold mines in appendix D which are listed from north to south in western and eastern sectors of two degrees latitude by three degrees longitude. Abbreviations for riverside locations are as follows: EB = east bank; WB = west bank; E/NB = east bank (north side); W/SB = west bank (south side). 2 Age abbreviations: PD = Predynastic; ED = Early Dynastic; OK = Old Kingdom; MK = Middle Kingdom; NK = New Kingdom; LP = Late Period; Pt = Ptolemaic; R = Roman; Nap = Napatan (begins with 25th Dynasty, LP25); Mer = Meroitic; Kus = Kushite, i.e., Napatan and Meroitic undifferentiated; Chr = medieval Christian; and Is = medieval Islamic. Other abbreviations: NK18 = 18th Dynasty of New Kingdom; OK/MK = Old Kingdom and/or Middle Kingdom, and NK-R = New Kingdom through Roman period. If there are multiple dates, the primary one, if known, is underlined. 3 Reference abbreviations: AAM07 = Abdelrahman Ali Mohamed  2007; AE16 = Anstis and Emberling 2016; Ar50 = Arkell 1950; Be00 = Becker 2000; BH98 = Brown and Harrell 1998; Bl06 = Bloxam 2006; Bu22= Burckhardt 1822; Ca95 = Castiglioni et al. 1995; Ce18 = Cech et al. 2018; DD63 = Daumas and Derchain  1963; dJ81 = de Jesus  1981; Du11 = Dunn  1911; Du55 = Dunham  1955; EA58 = El Shazly and Afia 1958; EGSMA = unpublished list of ancient gold mines from Egyptian Geological Survey and Mining Authority in 2005; EGSMA79 = EGSMA 1979; EJ89 = El Gayor and Jones 1989; Em13 = Emberling  2013; EM13 = Edwards and Mills  2013; En38 = Engelbach  1938; Es55 = El Shazly 1955; Fa52 = Fakhry 1952; Fu87 = Fuganti et al. 1987; GEpc = Geoff Emberling pers. comm. in 2018; Ha10 = Harrell 2010; Ha60 = Habachi 1960; Ha99a = Harrell 1999a; Ha99b = Harrell 1999b; HB10 = Harrell and Bloxam 2010; HB94 = Harrell and Brown 1994; He05 = Heldal et al. 2005; He09a = Heldal 2009; He09b = Heldal et al. 2009; He16 = Heldal et al. 2016; HE16 = Huber and Edwards 2016; Hi82 = Hinkel 1982; HM06 = Harrell and Madbouly 2006; HM15 = Harrell and Mittelstaedt 2015; Hu37 = Hume 1937; Hu90 = Hussein 1990; Hu18 = Humphris et al. 2018; JAH = unpublished field and/or satellite observations by J.A. Harrell; Ke09 = Kelany et al. 2009; KK08 = R. Klemm and D. Klemm 2008; KK13 = R. Klemm and D. Klemm 2013; Kl02 = R. Klemm et al. 2002; Li15 = Liszka 2015; Ma98 = Mageed 1998; Mc17 = McLean 2017; MH58 = Moustafa and Hilmy 1958; Mi63 = Millet 1963; Mi67 = Mills 1967–68; NSpc = Neal Spencer pers. comm. in 2016; RH09 = Riedel and Hamann 2009; Ro11 = Roeder 1911; Si07 = Sidebotham 2007; Si10 = Sidebotham et al. 2010; Si63 = Simpson 1963; Si70 = Siegler 1970; SJ93 = Shaw and Jameson 1993; Sm98 = Smith 1998–2002; Sp09 = Spence et al. 2009; St02 = Storemyr et al. 2002; St13 = Storemyr et al. 2013; SW01 = Sidebotham and Wendrich 2001–2002; Va78 = Vail (1978); Ve59 = Vercoutter 1959; WApc = William Adams pers. comm. in 1991; We02 = Welsby 2002; We07 = Weigall 1907; Zy16 = Zych et al. 2016. Numbers in parentheses are pages (or plates if pl.). 4 Grain size terminology: fine (< 1 mm), medium (1–5 mm), coarse (5 mm–3 cm), and very coarse (> 3 cm). 1

970   James A. Harrell and Abdelrahman Ali Mohamed

References Cited Abdelrahman Ali Mohamed 2007 Carrières, et travail de la pierre dans les monuments, aux époques napatéenne et méroïtique dans la vallée du Nil Moyen. Doctoral dissertation, Institut de Papyrologie et d’Égyptologie, Université Charles de Gaulle-Lille 3. ——— 2012 Quarrying for the King: The Sources of Stone for Kushite Royal Monuments. Sudan & Nubia 16:2–7. Anderson, J. and Salah el-Din Mohamed Ahmed 2010 Excavations in the Temple Precinct of Dangeil, Sudan. National Corporation for Antiquities and Museums. Anstis, S. and G. Emberling 2016 El Kurru 2015–16: Preliminary Report. Late Napatan Rockcut Structure. Sudan & Nubia 20:38–39. Arkell, A.J. 1950 Varia Sudanica. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 30:24–40. Becker, J. 2000 Die sandsteinbrüche im gebiet von Musawwarat es Sufra. Der antike Sudan. Mitteilungen der Sudanarchäologischen Gesellschaft zu Berlin 10:56–73. Brown, V.M. and J.A.  Harrell 1998 Aswan Granite and Granodiorite. Göttinger Miszellen 164:33–39. Bloxam, E. 2006 Miners and Mistresses: Middle Kingdom Mining on the Margins. Journal of Social Archaeology 6(2):277–303. Burckhardt, J.L. 1822 Travels in Nubia, second edition. John Murray Publisher. Castiglioni, A., A.  Castiglioni, and J.  Vercoutter 1995 Das Goldland der Pharaonen. Die Entdeckung von Berenike Pancrisia. Verlag Philip von Zabern. Cech, B. 2018 Meroitic Quarrying. In The Quarries of Meroe, Sudan, v. 1: Texts, ed. B. Cech, Th. Rehren, and A.A.  Mohamed, pp. 23–50. UCL Qatar Series in Archaeology and Cultural Heritage 2. Hamad bin Khalifa University Press. Cech, B., Th. Rehren, and Abdelrahman Ali Mohamed eds. 2018 The Quarries of Meroe, Sudan. UCL Qatar Series in Archaeology and Cultural Heritage 2. Hamad bin Khalifa University Press. Daumas, F. and P. Derchain 1963 Le temple de Debod. Centre de Documentation Egyptologique. Davies, W.V. 1987 Catalogue of Egyptian Antiquities in the British Museum, v. 7: Tools and Weapons, Part 1: Axes). British Museum Press. de Jesus, P.S. 1981 Eastern Desert Metal Deposits. Newsletter of the American Research Center in Egypt 115:26–29. Dunham, D. 1955 Nuri. Royal Cemeteries of Kush 2. Museum of Fine Arts (Boston). Dunn, S.C. 1911 Notes on the Mineral Deposits of the Anglo-Egyptian Sudan. Geological Survey Bulletin 1. Sudan Press. Edwards, D.N. and A.J. Mills 2013 Pharaonic Sites in the Batn el-Hajar—The Archaeological Survey of Sudanese Nubia Revisited. Sudan & Nubia 17:8–16. EGSMA 1979 Mineral Map of Egypt. Egyptian Geological Survey and Mining Authority. El Gayor, E.S. and M.P. Jones 1989 A Possible Source of Copper Ore Fragments Found at the Old Kingdom Town of Buhen. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 75:31–40. El Shazly, E.M. 1955 Recent Investigations on Egyptian Copper Deposits. In Colloque sur la Géologie Appliquée dans le Proche-Orient (Symposium on Applied Geology in the Near East), pp. 61–68. UNESCO. El Shazly, E.M. and M.S.  Afia 1958 Geology of Samiuki Deposit, Eastern Desert. Egyptian Journal of Geology 2(1):25–42. Emberling, G. 2013 New Excavations at El-Kurru: Beyond the Royal Cemetery: Investigating Settlement at El-Kurru. Sudan & Nubia 17:43–47.

Exploitation of Geological Resources   971 Engelbach, R. 1938 The Quarries of the Western Nubian Desert and the Ancient Road to Tushka. Annales du Service des Antiquités de l’Égypte 38:369–90. Fakhry, A. 1952 The Inscriptions of the Amethyst Quarries at Wadi El Hudi. Service des Antiquités de l’Égypte. Fuganti, A., G. Morteani, and G. Grundmann 1987 Gold Deposits in the Northern Nubian Desert, Sudan. In The Geology of Libya, v. 7: Third Symposium on the Geology of Libya, ed. M.J. Salem, M.T. Busrewil, and A.M. Ben Ashour, pp. 2638–42. Elsevier. Germann, K., K. Fischer, and T. Schwarz 1990 Accumulation of Lateritic Weathering Products (Kaolins, Bauxitic Laterites, Ironstones) in Sedimentary Basins of Northern Sudan. Berliner Geowissenschaftliche Abhandlungen, Reihe A: Geologie und Paläontologie 120/1:109–48. Giménez, J., J.A. Sánchez, and L. Solano 2015 Identifying the Ethiopian Origin of the Obsidian Found in Upper Egypt (Naqada Period) and the Most Likely Exchange Routes. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 101:349–59. Habachi, L. 1960 Notes on the Unfinished Obelisk of Aswan and Another Smaller One in Gharb Aswan. In Drevni i Egipet, ed. V.V. Struve, pp. 216–35. Akademi i a Nauk USSR. Harrell, J.A. 1999a The Tumbos Quarry at the Third Nile Cataract, Northern Sudan. In Recent Research in Kushite History and Archaeology—Proceedings of the 8th International Conference for Meroitic Studies, ed. D.A. Welsby, pp. 239–50. British Museum Occasional Paper 131. ——— 1999b Ancient Stone Quarries at the Third and Fourth Nile Cataracts, Northern Sudan. Sudan & Nubia 3:21–27. ——— 2010 Archaeological Geology of Hosh el-Guruf, Fourth Nile Cataract, Sudan. Gdańsk Archaeological Museum African Reports 7:71–84. ——— 2012 Gemstones. In UCLA Encyclopedia of Egyptology, ed. W.  Wendrich, online at http://digital2.library.ucla.edu/viewItem.do?ark=21198/zz002czx1r. University of California at Los Angeles. Harrell, J.A. and E. Bloxam 2010 Egypt’s Evening Emerald. Minerva 21(6):16–19. Harrell, J.A. and V.M. Brown 1994 Chephren’s Quarry in the Nubian Desert of Egypt. Nubica 3(1):43–57. Harrell, J.A. and M.I. Madbouly 2006 An Ancient Quarry for Siliceous Sandstone at Wadi Abu Aggag, Egypt. Sahara 17:51–58. Harrell, J.A. and R.E. Mittelstaedt 2015 Newly Discovered Middle Kingdom Forts in Lower Nubia. Sudan & Nubia 19:30–39. Heldal, T. 2009 Constructing a Quarry Landscape from Empirical Data—General Perspectives and a Case Study at the Aswan West Bank, Egypt. In QuarryScapes: Ancient Stone Quarry Landscapes in the Eastern Mediterranean, ed. N. Abu Jaber, E.G. Bloxam, P. Degryse, and T. Heldal, pp. 125–53. Norwegian Geological Survey of Norway, Special Publication 12. Heldal, T., E. Bloxam, P. Storemyr, and A. Kelany 2005 The Geology and Archaeology of the Ancient Silicified Sandstone Quarries at Gebel Gulab and Gebel Tingar, Aswan (Egypt). Marmora 1:11–35. Heldal, T., P.  Storemyr, E.  Bloxam, I.  Shaw, R.  Lee, and A.  Salem 2009 GPS and GIS Methodology in the Mapping of Chephren’s Quarry, Upper Egypt: a Significant Tool for Documentation and Interpretation of the Site. In ASMOSIA VII, Actes du VIIe colloque international de l’ASMOSIA—Proceedings of the 7th International Conference of the Association for the Study of Marble and Other Stones in Antiquity, ed. Y. Maniatis, pp. 227–41. École Francaise D’Athènes, Bulletin de Correspondance Hellénique supplement 51. Heldal, T., P. Storemyr, E. Bloxam, and I. Shaw 2016 Gneiss for the Pharaoh: Geology of the Third Millennium bce: Chephren’s Quarries in Southern Egypt. Geoscience Canada 43:63–78.

972   James A. Harrell and Abdelrahman Ali Mohamed Herrmann, G. 1968 Lapis Lazuli: The Early Phases of its Trade. Iraq 30:21–57. Hinkel, F.W. 1982 Pyramide oder pyramidenstumpf? Ein beitrag zu fragen der planung, konstruktiven baudurchführung und architektur der pyramiden von Meroe (Teil B). Zeitschrift für Ägyptische Sprache und Altertumskunde 109:27–33. Huber, R. and D.N. Edwards 2016 Gebel Adda and its Environs: 50 Years On. Sudan & Nubia 20:133–45. Hume, W.F. 1937 Geology of Egypt (v. 2, pt. 3). Survey of Egypt. Humphris, J. 2014 Post-Meroitic Iron Production: Initial Results and Interpretations. Sudan & Nubia 18:121–29. Humphris, J., R. Bussert, F. Al-Shishani, and T. Scheibner 2018 The Ancient Mines of Meroe. Azania 51(3):291–311. Humphris, J. and T.  Scheibner 2017 A New Radiocarbon Chronology for Ancient Iron Production in Meroe Region of Sudan. African Archaeological Review 34:377–413. Hussein, A.A.A. 1990 Mineral Deposits. In The Geology of Egypt, ed. R.  Said, pp. 511–66. A.A. Balkema. Kelany, A., M. Negem, A. Tohami, and T. Heldal 2009 Granite Quarry Survey in the Aswan Region, Egypt: Shedding New Light on Ancient Quarrying. In QuarryScapes: Ancient Stone Quarry Landscapes in the Eastern Mediterranean, ed. N. Abu Jaber, E.G. Bloxam, P. Degryse, and T. Heldal, pp. 87–98. Norwegian Geological Survey of Norway, Special Publication 12. Klemm, D. and R. Klemm 2017 New Kingdom and Early Kushite Gold Mining in Nubia. In Nubia in the New Kingdom: Lived Experience, Pharaonic Control and Indigenous Traditions, ed. N. Spencer, A. Stevens, and M. Binder, pp. 259–69. Peeters. Klemm, D., R. Klemm, and A. Murr 2001 Gold of the Pharaohs—6000 Years of Gold Mining in Egypt and Nubia. Journal of African Earth Sciences 33:643–59. Klemm, R. and D.D.  Klemm 2008 Stones and Quarries in Ancient Egypt. British Museum Press. ——— 2013 Gold and Gold Mining in Ancient Egypt and Nubia: Geoarchaeology of the Ancient Gold Mining Sites in the Egyptian and Sudanese Deserts. Springer-Verlag. Klemm, R., D.D. Klemm, and A. Murr 2002 Geo-archäologischer survey im Wadi el-Hudi. In Festschrift Arne Eggebrecht, ed. B. Schmitz, pp. 53–66. Gerstenberg Verlag. Liszka, K. 2015 Gems in the Desert: Recent Work at Wadi el-Hudi. Egyptian Archaeology 46:37–40. Mageed, A.A. 1998 Sudan Industrial Minerals and Rocks. Centre for Strategic Studies, Khartoum University. McLean, I. 2017 Human Intervention in the Landscape through Ancient Mining: A Regional Study Applying Satellite Imagery. Sudan & Nubia 21:82–97. Millet, N.B. 1963 Gebel Adda Preliminary Report for 1963. Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt 2:147–65. Mills, A.J. 1967–68 The Archaeological Survey from Gemai to Dal: Report on the 1965–1966 Season. Kush 15:200–10. Moustafa, G.A. and M.E.  Hilmy 1958 Contribution to the Geology and Mineralogy of the Hammash Copper Deposits, South Eastern Desert of Egypt. Geological Survey and Mineral Research Department, Paper 5. Muhly, J. 1999 Metallurgy. In Encyclopedia of the Archaeology of Ancient Egypt, ed. K.A. Bard, pp. 522–27. Routledge. Nassau, K. 1994 Gemstone Enhancement: History, Science and State of the Art, second edition. Butterworth/Heinemann.

Exploitation of Geological Resources   973 Ogden, J. 2000 Metals. In Ancient Egyptian Materials and Technology, ed. P.T. Nicholson and I. Shaw, pp. 148–76. University of Cambridge Press. Payne, J.C. 1968 Lapis Lazuli in Early Egypt. Iraq 30:58–61. Riedel, A. and J.  Hamann 2009 From the Quarry to the Finished Building: The Ancient Meroitic Stone Masonry at the Site of Naga/Sudan. In Proceedings of the Third International Congress on Construction History, v. 1, ed. K.-E. Kurrer, W. Lorenz, and V. Wetzk, pp. 1227–34. Brandenburg University of Technology. Roeder, G. 1911 Debod bis Bab Kalabsche. Les Temples Immergés de la Nubie. Service des Antiquités de l’Égypte. Shaw, I. 2010 Hatnub: Quarrying Travertine in Ancient Egypt. Egypt Exploration Society. Shaw, I. and R. Jameson 1993 Amethyst Mining in the Eastern Desert: A Preliminary Survey at Wadi el-Hudi. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 79:81–97. Sidebotham, S.E. 2007 Survey of the Hinterland. In Berenike 1999/2000: Report on the Excavations at Berenike, Including Excavations in Wadi Kalalat and Siket, and the Survey of the Mons Smaragdus Region, ed. S.E. Sidebotham and W.Z. Wendrich, pp. 295–303. Cotsen Institute of Archaeology, University of California at Los Angeles. Sidebotham, S.E., R.I. Thomas, and J.A. Harrell 2010 The El-Kab and Nuri-Hamdab/Fourth Cataract Survey, January 2006. In Between the Cataracts: Proceedings of the 11th Conference of Nubian Studies, ed. W.  Godlewski and A.  Łajtar, Part 2, Fasc, 1, pp. 77–110. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean Supplement Series 2.2/2. University of Warsaw. Sidebotham, S.E. and W.Z.  Wendrich 2001–2002 Berenike—Archaeological Fieldwork at a Ptolemaic-Roman Port on the Red Sea Coast of Egypt 1999–2001. Sahara 13:23–50. Siegler, K.G. 1970 Kalabsha—Architektur und Baugeschichte des Tempels. Deutsches Archäologisches Institut Abteilung Kairo, Archäologische Veröffentlichungen 1. Simpson, W.K. 1963 Heka-nefer and the Dynastic Material from Toshka and Arminna. Peabody Museum of Natural History of Yale University and University Museum of the University of Pennsylvania, Publications of the Pennsylvania–Yale Expedition to Egypt 1. Smith, S.T. 1998–2002 The University of California Dongola Reach Expedition: West Bank Reconnaissance Survey, 1997–1998. Kush 18:157–72. Spence, K., P.  Rose, J.  Bunbury, A.  Clapham, P.  Collet, G.  Smith, and N.  Soderbery 2009 Fieldwork at Sesebi, 2009. Sudan & Nubia 13:38–46. Storemyr, P., E. Bloxam, T. Heldal, and A. Salem 2002 Survey at Chephren’s Quarry, Gebel elAsr, Lower Nubia: 2002. Sudan & Nubia 6:25–31. Storemyr, P., E. Bloxam, T. Heldal, and A. Kelany 2013 Ancient Desert and Quarry Roads on the West Bank of the Nile in the First Cataract Region. In Desert Road Archaeology in Ancient Egypt and Beyond, ed. F. Förster and H. Riemer, pp. 399–423. Africa Praehistorica 27. Heinrich-Barth-Institut. Vail, J.R. 1978 Outline of the Geology and Mineral Deposits of the Democratic Republic of the Sudan and Adjacent Areas. Overseas Geology and Mineral Resources 49. Institute of Geological Sciences. Vercoutter, J. 1959 The Gold of Kush: Two Gold-Washing Stations at Faras East. Kush 7:120–53. Weigall, A.E.P. 1907 A Report on the Antiquities of Lower Nubia (the First Cataract to the Sudan Border) and their Condition in 1906–1907. Oxford University Press. Welsby, D.A. 2002 The Medieval Kingdoms of Nubia: Pagans, Christians and Muslims along the Middle Nile. British Museum Press. Whiteman, A.J. 1971 The Geology of the Sudan Republic. Clarendon Press.

974   James A. Harrell and Abdelrahman Ali Mohamed Zarins, J. 1989 Ancient Egypt and the Red Sea Trade: The Case for Obsidian in the Predynastic and Archaic Periods. In Essays in Ancient Civilization Presented to Helene  J.  Kantor, ed. A. Leonard and B.B. Williams, pp. 339–68. Oriental Institute, University of Chicago. Zych, I., S.E. Sidebotham, M. Hense, J.K. Rądkowska, and M. Woźniak 2016 Archaeological Fieldwork in Berenike in 2014 and 2015: From Hellenistic Rock-Cut Installations to Abandoned Temple Ruins. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean 25:315–48.

Chapter 48

Iron Production at M eroe Jane Humphris

Introduction: Ancient Iron Production The iron smelters of Meroe, like their contemporaries, made use of the bloomery smelting approach (so called due to the production of an iron bloom) to reduce iron metal from iron ore in the solid state. A variety of technological processes were incorporated into the chaîne opératoire, or operational sequence (see Edmonds  1990; Sigaut  2002; Humphris 2014) of iron production, from the acquisition and processing of the ore and fuel, to the construction of the furnaces, to the final shaping if the iron metal. Although the potential for variability within the technological approach to bloomery iron production from place to place and throughout time was great (Rehren et al. 2007), a number of fundamental principles applied: The bloomery furnace, in which iron ores were converted into metallic iron and siliceous slags was a metallurgical installation comprising an enclosed space filled with charges of ore and charcoal fuel and with provision for an air supply . . . . It must be made of a material capable of resisting temperatures as high as 1100–1400°C and be constructed in such a form to permit both air to be supplied to the interior and gases to be exhausted to the atmosphere, so as to ensure that reducing gases can circulate freely through the layers of ore and fuel in the charge. It must also allow for at least the minimum physical separation of slag, either towards its base or to one side, and for the removal of the metallic product, a cake of porous pasty iron of varying shape with much entrapped slag. (Pleiner 2000:141)

The iron bloom (the “cake of porous pasty iron . . . with much entrapped slag”) was removed from the furnace and further refined and shaped into the desired iron object.

976   Jane Humphris All stages of the production of an iron object required various inputs and resulted in specific outputs, and required specialist technological knowledge and skill. At the end of a complete iron production episode, the iron slag (the waste product containing various amounts of parent materials including the iron ore, clays, and fuel: see Charlton et al. 2013), was discarded along with other waste such as broken or failed fragments of the furnace structure and of the blowpipes (tuyères) used to supply air to the furnace, as well as unreduced ore and wasted fuel. Over time, this discarded waste was piled up, creating for example the famous slag heaps of Meroe. Systematic analyses of material contained within the slag heaps has great potential for reconstructing various aspects of the chaîne opératoire and sociocultural features of ancient iron production (for example, see Costin 2005; Rehren et al. 2007). However, such an approach is not without significant challenges, as described below.

Challenges to understanding ancient iron production at Meroe Determining Scale of Production For over one hundred years, the iron production remains associated with Kush, mainly evidenced by the large slag heaps at the Royal City of Meroe, have been presented as evidence of particularly intensive ancient iron production (see Humphris and Rehren 2014 for a review of the history of research on Meroitic iron production). This was most famously stated by Sayce, who in 1912 wrote: Mountains of iron-slag enclose the city-mounds on their northern and eastern sides . . . . Meroë, in fact, must have been the Birmingham of ancient Africa; the smoke of its iron-smelting furnaces must have been continually going up to heaven, and the whole of northern Africa might have been supplied by it with implements of iron. (55)

Over fifty years later in his detailed consideration of the role of Meroe in the transmission of iron technology to sub-Saharan Africa, Trigger (1969:44) noted that despite the large-scale evidence for iron production at Meroe, and a small but growing corpus of data regarding iron objects found deposited in Kushite burials, the lack of information regarding the technology and its chronology meant it was, “impossible to determine over how long a time iron was produced at Meroe or how much iron was produced at any one period.” Regarding Sayce’s description, he believed it should be “treated with some reserve.”

Iron Production at Meroe   977 Determining scale of iron production in relation to a particular period of time provides the framework within which to consider the role and impact of the technology in its social, political, and economic settings. Ascertaining scale of production, however, is a major challenge during the investigation of ancient technology. Statements regarding the scale of iron production and quantifications for iron output at Meroe such as that made by Sayce (see also Rehren 2001) have, as Trigger noted, been hindered by a lack of data regarding important aspects of the original technological processes and how these changed over time. The scale of ancient iron production is difficult to assess from the archaeometallurgical record because of at least two primary challenges. First, understanding the quantity of iron produced at any one time requires a detailed understanding of the technological approach to metallurgy, including the ingredients added and the procedures used to make iron objects, defined within a specific chronological period of time. Macroscopic, microscopic, and chemical samples of all relevant archaeometallurgical materials, positioned within a well-dated stratigraphic sequence and statistically interpreted and inserted into mass balance calculations is necessary (for example see Serneels  1993; Joosten and Kars 1999; Thomas and Young 1999; Crew 2000). Such research depends on the collection of representative samples from the time period under consideration from the entirety of a site (approaches to production could vary between smelting groups operating at the same location). The collection of representative samples associated with iron production is notoriously complicated (Humphris et al. 2009). Furthermore, the research involves extensive excavations, absolute dating, sample preparation, laboratory analysis, and data interpretation, all of which are costly and time consuming. Such comprehensive information is still lacking for Meroe, primarily due to the vast quantities of archaeometallurgical debris at the site that remains unexcavated. The second challenge to understanding scale of iron production at Meroe is the need for chronologically relevant demographic data to understand iron output in relation to the local and regional population requirements. The availability of such data in combination with comprehensive archaeometallurgical data, as described above, would provide opportunity to appreciate the role and impact of iron production and the craftspeople involved in this technology. Even when an exhaustive reconstruction of iron production during a particular period of time at Meroe is available, without the corresponding demographic data, an interpretation of the information in relation to Kush will be complicated. For example, a relatively low-yield iron production process conducted by a large population could have produced large quantities of slag, but relatively small quantities of iron per person; the scale of production in relation to requirements and productivity would have been low, despite large quantities of slag produced. Conversely, if local demand for iron was low but the smelting process produced large quantities of iron in relation to slag, the scale of production could have been high, yet the amount of slag produced would have been low. Therefore, scale of production should be seen not as an absolute figure of objects being produced, but relative to the

978   Jane Humphris labor and resources required as investment, iron object output, and the population’s internal needs and capacity for surplus production. Unfortunately, demographic data for Meroe through time is lacking. Grzymski’s (2003:85–87) assessment of potential population size within the possible area of habitation at Meroe when the city was at the height of occupation generated figures of 8,800–13,800 people. As this estimate only included those living inside the modern site boundary, the figures could be significantly higher when taking into account the areas immediately surrounding the site and the populations living in nearby Meroitic settlements. Regarding the entirety of the Kushite population, Grzymski (2003:88–90) notes various estimates ranging from 230,000 up to one million. If many of these Kushites used iron tools or weapons, the iron requirements for such a large population would have been particularly significant, at least at this time. Assuming Kush produced most of its own iron rather than importing iron objects, these requirements would have been met by the iron production at Meroe, presumably without much surplus iron available for export. Therefore, Sayce’s still much quoted suggestion (above) that Meroe was a major exporter of iron, supplying northern Africa, could well be incorrect. Moreover, the scale of iron production at Meroe presumably varied as population requirements changed. Such changes could have been driven by factors such as war, which could have created an increased demand, or population decline, which could have led to a decrease in demand. A further important point to consider is the role of recycling. Iron objects were most likely often repaired and recycled, meaning that the iron objects in use at any one time would represent more than were being produced annually. Chronologically contextualized iron objects are therefore problematic. When attempting a superficial quantification of iron production at Meroe based on the visible archaeometallurgical record, it is tempting to define such impressively vast quantities of material as the waste products of industrial-scale iron production. However, it is important to consider the terminology applied to the remains to avoid misleading characterizations. On a definition of industry, Holzberg and Giovannini (1981:319–22) state: “Some would define industry primarily in terms of the factory-based mechanized fabrication of raw materials into intermediate components or finished products.” In their view, the concept of industry focuses largely on mechanization, with the factory as a workplace within which a significant part of a population take part in manufacture. If a furnace is considered as a type of (non-automated) machine, requiring a number of individuals for its successful operation and producing specific items, and the workspace within which the furnace is situated as the factory with defined operational sequences and spaces, then iron production at Meroe, at certain times, could be viewed as industrial. This term seems to reflect large-scale (possibly surplus) production relying on ­replicated techniques, performed by an organized labor force who process raw ­materials to standardized objects, producing for an established market demand. However, the term industrial frequently implies a starting point during or after the industrial revolution and a resulting dependence on automated machinery. As such, the term is often used in relation to evolution of technological processes, production methods, and scale (Holzberg and Giovannini 1981:324), and may be inappropriate as a description

Iron Production at Meroe   979 of Kushite iron production, even during the most intensive production activity. Wilson (2008:393) suggests that industry “is a term rarely applicable to the ancient world.” Instead he defines mass production as “the production of very large quantities of the same artifact, or of essentially similar artifacts, by the same production means,” and large-scale production as including “the creation of large quantities of bulk produce . . . as well as replicated individual artifacts.” He suggests that “mass production usually, and large-scale production frequently, involved one or more of the following: division of labor, standardization of sizes and forms, and sometimes the creation of standardized, interchangeable parts” (Wilson 2008:394). Conversely, small-scale production should equate to a less formalized and productive technology in relation to the political system and demographics within which it is situated. Accordingly, based on currently available data iron production at Meroe should be spatiotemporally understood as either small-scale or mass production, especially as the production of “bulk produce” (i.e., surplus to the requirements of Kush) is unknown. However, these descriptive quantitative terms should currently be used loosely in light of the challenges noted above. If evidence for external trade in iron is revealed in the future, for example through provenance studies of iron objects found elsewhere that would possibly indicate bulk or surplus production, Kushite iron production could then be termed large-scale, according to Wilson’s theoretical framework. However, evidence for external trade in Kushite iron could also indicate a more economically profitable trade market beyond Kush, or a local propensity to use tools and object made of nonferrous materials. It is clear that defining scale of production based on the available archaeological record and terminology is a complex task.

Additional Challenges to Investigating Ancient Iron Production Recent research has demonstrated the internal composition of some of the Kushite slag heaps to be particularly heterogeneous and irregular, and the shape and size of the heaps to be misleading. Intensive investigations of slag heap MIS6 (Meroe Iron Slag mound 6; Fig.  48.1), established significantly different quantifications of metallurgical remains contained within the heap based on volume models calculated using a ground survey topographic model, geophysics data, and excavation data. The amount and type of slag within the metallurgical debris was also demonstrated to vary throughout the slag heap (Humphris and Carey 2016). Meanwhile the excavations of iron production remains at Hamadab ca. 3 km south of Meroe (Humphris 2014; conducted in collaboration with Dr. Pawel Wolf, German Archaeological Institute), demonstrated the slag heaps to be relatively thin layers of metallurgical debris overlying earlier Meroitic architecture (Humphris 2014; Humphris and Scheibner 2017). Additionally, significant sub-surface slag deposits are known to exist at Meroe (Shinnie and Anderson 2004; Carey et al. 2019). Thus the visible Kushite archaeometallurgical remains cannot be used to reliably quantify the iron production waste products at the sites.

980   Jane Humphris

MIS8

MIS7 MIS4 MIS6

MIS2 MIS3

N 0

100

200 m

Figure 48.1  Overview of the location of the slag heaps mapped at Meroe, with those mentioned in the text labeled (above); MIS4, the largest slag heap at Meroe (below).

However, despite the challenges outlined above, significant advances in understanding Kushite iron production have been made that provide a preliminary insight into the technology and its chronology. Considering that the vast majority of iron production debris remains unexcavated at Meroe (including that located within sub-surface stratigraphy), future research may well lead to the evolution of the current state of knowledge outlined below.

Iron Production at Meroe   981

Iron Production and Kush: A Summary of Current Knowledge Location of Production Ground survey and mapping around Meroe has revealed close to forty slag heaps of varying sizes and shapes visible at surface level (Fig. 48.1). These slag heaps are dispersed in a zone running north-south, situated to the east of the Royal Enclosure (the walled area behind the Amun Temple; see Carey et al. 2019 for a detailed consideration of distribution of iron production at Meroe). This zone begins ca. 450 m to the northeast of the northeastern corner of the Royal Enclosure, and extends for ca. 1,000 m to the south, never less than 200 m from the Enclosure wall. The multiple lenses of sub-surface slag deposits encountered during earlier excavations at Meroe (Shinnie 1982:47; Bradley 1984), also seem to be situated within this eastern zone. Such positioning could be related to the direction of seasonal winds, which although varying, rarely originate in the east. Consequently this positioning would have limited the smoke and soot from the iron production furnaces infiltrating the Royal Enclosure. However, this positioning could also have ensured that craft production did not take up space suitable for agriculture on the terraces of the eastern banks of the Nile (see Wolf 2015:125). Meroe was not the only Kushite iron production location. As noted above, iron was also produced at the Meroitic site of Hamadab (Humphris 2014). Most of the iron production at Hamadab has been 14C-dated to the late and Post-Meroitic period, from ca. mid-4th to mid-6th century ce (Humphris and Scheibner 2017). Iron production was also conducted at the Meroitic site of Muweis further to the southwest of Meroe, although currently little is known about the technological approach to the production at this site or its chronology. Iron slag has been reported at the site of El-Hassa, although not in large quantities (Giorgio Nogara, pers. comm.), and a small quantity of slag was also recently recovered at Musawwarat (Thomas Scheibner, pers. comm.). Thus while Meroe was seemingly the major iron production location of Kush, it was not alone in producing iron objects.

Periods of Iron Production Iron production was carried out at Meroe potentially from as early as the 25th Dynasty. The most recent archaeological research has not yet identified iron production waste dating to the last century bce or first century ce, although it is assumed that rather than an interruption in production this reflects the current state of research. Production at Meroe continued during the late Meroitic period and throughout the Post-Meroitic period, at the same time as the technological practice apparently begins at the site of Hamadab. Taking the maximum potential span of time for iron production dated so far

982   Jane Humphris based on calibrated and modeled 14C dates, the archaeometallurgical record of the Meroe area represents well over one thousand years of ferrous technology (see Humphris and Scheibner 2017).

Relationships between the Location and Scale of Iron Production and Kushite History: Early Kush At the time of writing, four slag heaps excavated at Meroe have been dated definitively to the Napatan and early Meroitic period (MIS 1/2, 2, 3, and 4; Fig. 48.1; Humphris and Scheibner 2017). Unfortunately, the early 14C dates lie within the Hallstatt Plateau, resulting in a problematic calibration of the early chronology of Kushite iron production. Nevertheless, the period from the 6th–5th century bce to the early 2nd century bce appears to have been particularly productive, having created (at the very least), the largest, eastern-most cluster of slag heaps at the site. Combined with the “vast buried mounds” of slag in sub-surface layers pre-dating the 2nd century bce (Bradley 1984:199– 203; Carey et al. 2019), a particularly high level of production intensity (presumably resulting from a high internal or external demand) is indicated during early Kush. To contextualize this level of early iron production requires a consideration of the political and economic circumstances of Napatan Kush and the early history of the city of Meroe. Meroe’s origins and early centuries are difficult to reconstruct. The Shinnie and Bradley suggest that the earliest building layers (found at the eastern end of the “50 line”) date to the 7th or 6th century bce (Shinnie and Bradley 1980:16). Bradley’s later synthesis of Meroitic chronology suggests that the earliest occupation levels at Meroe date to around the 8th–7th century bce, and indicate a “sudden burst of building activity in the 8th century bce, accompanied by almost equally rapid industrialization,” implying an “exploding population” (Bradley  1984:207). The existence of an early Amun temple and findings of luxury items indicate that in the 7th century bce, Meroe was a thriving and well-connected center (see Pope 2014 for further considerations of the origins of Meroe). Certainly the level of social organization and market demands indicated by the apparently mass-scale iron production now known for early Meroe could suggest a powerful economic center, with the social organization, wealth, exchange networks, and population numbers to support and drive forward mass-scale iron production. The ability to produce significant quantities of iron during the early periods of Kush could have given Meroe a strong role as a valuable ally and potential trade partner for those in the north and beyond. The apparent lack of iron producing capacity of neighboring territories during the Napatan period could have driven an increased level of iron production at Meroe to meet an external demand within a profitable trade network. Throughout this early period, interactions with neighboring territories, especially to the north (Török 2015:53–54), would have provided a significant stimulus to supply iron

Iron Production at Meroe   983 for the Kushite armies. Later, war presumably continued to drive demand for an iron supply from Meroe. In addition to warfare, other Kushite technological practices and artisanal activities also required substantial supplies of iron tools. For example, building construction and restoration programs characteristic of many periods of Kushite ­history required the quarrying of stone and construction and decorating of buildings, using iron chisels, hammers, and other tools (Török 2015:69–93), while agriculture also relied on iron tools for efficiency. A reliable iron supply seems to have been a contributing factor to the development of various aspects of Kush (Humphris and Scheibner 2017).

Relationships between the Location and Scale of Iron Production and Kushite History: Later Kush Recently obtained 14C dates from two slag heaps at Meroe (MIS6 and MIS8; Fig. 48.1) indicate that iron production was practiced during the late and Post-Meroitic period and thus throughout the period of apparent political decline from the late 3rd century ce, and beyond. Additionally, as mentioned above, slag heaps excavated at Hamadab date to the mid-3rd to mid-6th centuries ce (Humphris  2014; Humphris and Scheibner 2017). Such information suggests that iron production continued at a significant rate during this later time. Although there are indications of broader social change identifiable within the technological approach to iron production during the Post-Meroitic period (see below), a stable society existed to enable production to continue during these later periods. Smelters with the technological knowledge of how to make iron remained in the area and were able to perform the time-consuming and costly practice of producing iron. The smelters would have been supported by a workforce, suggesting that other parts of society were able to support and protect these craftspeople as they worked to produce iron (although the frequency of ­production at any time is unknown). Additionally, some form of market demand existed to drive the labor-intensive, resource-hungry, and time-consuming iron ­production activities. While the continuation of ferrous technology is now confirmed within the late Meroitic and Post-Meroitic times, a consideration of change in scale of production is more difficult. The Hamadab slag heaps appear indicative of relatively small-scale production, potentially accumulating from only a few smelts per year at the site. The same could also be true for MIS6, which was created over a ca. 300-year timespan and could have therefore only required a small number of smelts per year to form. The later dates produced from MIS8, as well as a general understanding of the stratigraphy of the site, suggest however that many of the slag heaps mapped at Meroe could also date to the later archaeometallurgical record of the site. Further investigations of more slag heaps at Meroe are required to understand scale of iron production during these later periods.

984   Jane Humphris The clear overlap in time span with regard to iron production at Hamadab and Meroe is interesting. The apparent decline of Kush (see Török 2015:97) and resulting decrease in central organization and power could have made it impossible for a single site to satisfy the iron demands of the region, stimulating an increase in iron production at Hamadab. Alternatively a decrease in central control could have allowed, for the first time, another iron production center to take advantage of the market demands for iron, at a time when the region was under pressure from external forces and may have needed either weapons for defense, or a valuable trading commodity to ensure a strong position in this new socio-political environment.

Iron Production: Technological Change and Continuity The archaeometallurgical remains so far analyzed provide an understanding of the composition of the slag heaps and how this changed over time, which in turn offers an insight into potential changes in furnace design and smelting parameters. For example, careful processing of the metallurgical debris excavated within chronologically distinct slag heaps has revealed a decreasing proportion of tap slag (slag separated “to one side,” see above) compared to furnace slag (slag formed within the base of the furnace) over time. This data can be used to suggest a gradual change in furnace design and operation, especially as this appears to correspond to an increase in the proportion of furnace material discarded into the slag heap in later times. Slag tapping appears to be a less central aspect of later furnace design, with more slag forming within the furnace, necessitating the deconstruction of more of the furnace shaft after each smelt to access the bloom (leading to more furnace slag and more furnace material discarded in the later slag heaps). Whether this represents an adaptation due to a loss of the skills necessary for successful slag tapping, or whether this was a deliberate choice, is so far unknown. Changes in the proportions of different waste products present as fine fragment material which makes up a significant quantity of all the slag heaps (material below 2 cm³), provides further information about possible changes in technological approaches. Fine fragments of iron ore decrease in frequency over time, potentially suggesting that in later periods, less unreduced ore fell through the furnaces and more was reduced to metal or melted into slag. Alternatively, waste ore could have been collected and r­ e-smelted. This data could represent a change in the type of ore used, a better ore p ­ rocessing technique before smelting, variation in furnace charging techniques, or an evolving proficiency in smelting as time progressed. The furnaces and workshop spaces excavated by Shinnie (Shinnie and Kense 1982) date to the later Meroitic period, while the furnace workshop excavated more recently at MIS6 was still in operation during the Post-Meroitic times. A number of features are common to all of these workshops and provide an understanding of aspects of iron smelting during these times. The furnaces were situated at either end of a rectangular space defined by a sunken floor of ca. 3 × 5 m. This sunken workshop space was lined

Iron Production at Meroe   985

Figure 48.2  Smelter Lee Sauder sitting in the central pit of the replica Late/Post-Meroitic furnace workshop to remove slag and bloom.

with re-used red bricks, with step access from ground level which was ca. 50–70 cm higher than the sunken floor. In the center of the sunken floor was a central depression ca. 1 m × 50 cm and 20 cm deep. Although Shinnie and Tylecote suggested this was a water-containing installation, recent experiments suggest the depression provided the ideal observation point from which the smelters could look up into the furnace, and from which they could drag bloom and slag out of the furnace during the smelting process (Humphris et al. 2018 a; Fig. 48.2). To supply air into the furnaces, a number of ceramic pot bellows were positioned around the back of the furnaces. These pumped air into the furnaces through tapered tuyères with the tuyère inlet positioned at the top of the pot bellows, Slag and bloom were removed from the front of the furnace at the level of the sunken floor, presumably through an arch that was blocked during the smelting process (see Shinnie and Kense 1982 and Tylecote 1982 for further descriptions). Temporal variations and consistencies in the approach to the production of technical ceramics at Meroe (the furnaces and tuyères) are evident on both the macro and micro scale (Ting and Humphris 2017; Fig. 48.3). During the earlier periods of iron production at Meroe, the tuyère pipes used to supply air to the furnaces do not exhibit clay mixing, but do demonstrate variability in shape. In later times, clay mixing and the addition of

986   Jane Humphris (a) (c)

(b)

(d)

Figure 48.3  Examples of diverse tuyères excavated within MIS4, dated to the Napatan and Early Meroitic period. (a) Square with tapered round end; (b) round; (c) square with mat impression; (d) square.

kaolinitic temper is evident. However, the furnace lining added to the internal surfaces of furnaces, presumably to improve the refractory capabilities of the furnaces, seems consistent in production approach throughout time. The fabric used to produce the furnace lining is comprised of ca. 30 percent well-rounded quartz grains (improving thermal resistance), and seems to have been collected from the nearby wadis (based on experimental research). Unlike the seemingly homogenous furnace lining, the furnace material—the clay that was used to make the furnace structure but that did not necessarily come into contact with the smelt itself due to the presence of the furnace lining— was made from unfired, heterogeneous mixed clay material with coarse, angular quartz grain inclusions. At Hamadab, the furnace debris recovered from the slag heaps often displayed gradual vitrification across the material, perhaps indicating less attention to the concept of a furnace lining. The more frequent destruction of the Hamadab furnaces outlined above would possibly negate the need for a furnace lining as an essential repair technique for furnace structures designed to be used for extended periods of time like those of Meroe. It could be hypothesized that the less frequent smelting episodes at Hamadab were carried out in furnaces designed for single or limited-use, and designed more around the concept of a slag-pit furnace. This is in contrast to Meroe’s multi-use furnaces designed to allow for slag-tapping. However, more data is required to be able to confirm such assumptions both regarding the approach to smelting at each site, and then to the implied socio-cultural and economic implications. Although certain aspects of the approach to smelting appear to have changed over time, two fundamental aspects of the long-running technological practices at Meroe and Hamadab seem to have remained constant: fuel and ore choice. Regarding fuel choice, the smelters specifically and almost exclusively used Acacia type nilotica, a highly calorific and structurally stable wood that can withstand woodland management techniques such as coppicing (Humphris and Eichhorn 2019). They also seem to have consistently extracted specific lenses of iron-rich oolithic ores containing mostly goethite and minor hematite. The ore was mined from shallow deposits on certain hilltops

Iron Production at Meroe   987

Figure 48.4  The iron ore mining landscape in the hills ca. 9 km to the east of Meroe.

ca. 9 km to the east of the city (Humphris et al. 2018; Fig. 48.4). Experimental research is beginning to shed light on the quantities of these raw materials required per smelt, and the complex chaîne opératoire of the acquisition and processing of the materials (Humphris et al. 2018; Charlton and Humphris 2019). The role of ritual and religion in Kushite iron production (if any) is unknown. At Meroe the most overt potential symbolic link between iron production and religion could be the positioning of the Apedemak Temple on one of the largest slag mounds at the site (Haaland and Haaland 2007; Fig. 48.5). If this was a deliberate expression of the link between iron and power in relation to war and fertility through a direct association with Apedemak (the Meroitic god of war and fertility), it would seem that this was a new phenomenon appearing after hundreds of years of iron production at the site. Both before and following the construction of the temple in the 1st century bce (Humphris and Scheibner 2017), no further religious, symbolic, or ritual evidence is observed in the archaeometallurgical record (although such ancient symbolic expressions may not survive or be interpreted as such from the archaeometallurgical remains). Whether an expression of this symbolic link was necessary at this moment in time, or whether the slag heap simply provided a convenient platform for the temple and was never intended as a symbolic notion, is unknown. It seems that iron production in the area of the temple ceased when construction began, and worshippers would have walked around and between slag heaps as they made their way to and from the temple. It could be speculated that this technological landscape could have formed an impressive backdrop to the temple, and this backdrop could have the intended lasting symbolic link between Apedemak and iron production. When considering Kushite iron objects, again limited data is currently available. A number of ferrous objects dating to the Meroitic period were analyzed from the site of Musawwarat es-Sufra (Rehren 1996). This assemblage was mostly comprised of nails as well as chisels, hooks, and arrowheads, among other items. Some of the objects showed possibly deliberately hardened areas of carbon-rich iron, and slag inclusions indicative

988   Jane Humphris

Figure 48.5  The red brick foundations of part of the northern wall of the Apedemak Temple situated within slag heap MIS3.

of a likely efficient smelting process. Abdu and Gordon’s analysis of twenty-six Meroitic iron objects from Lower Nubia (2004), presumed to originate from Meroe, included the investigation of chisels, weaponry, a nail, a kohl rod, and a finger ring. Their division of these items through the Kushite period suggests that hunting and weaponry was present throughout all periods, although the authors note that many objects not investigated in detail were heavily corroded. Corrosion, as well as the potential for recycling of iron objects creates a biased archaeological record of iron objects and probably prohibits an assessment of whether or not preference for the production of certain objects changed over time. Abdu and Gordon suggest that the objects produced during the earlier periods (such as the delicate finger ring and kohl rod) were forged with superior skill compared to the later objects. In the most comprehensive inventory of Kushite iron objects, Mohamed Faroug Abdelrahman (2011) noted 3,170 iron objects. The Napatan period only accounted for forty-eight of these objects, while the Meroitic period had just over one hundred more objects than the Post-Meroitic period, at 1,619. Weaponry dominated all periods. As most of these objects were found in graves, and because the rate of corrosion and of iron recycling is unknown, such data should be used with caution.

Iron Production at Meroe   989 However, these investigations do indicate the potential for iron objects to survive in the archaeological record and remain available for future metallographic analysis of well-contextualized iron objects. Provenance studies will be of particular interest as research considers Meroe as a producer for local and external markets.

Discussion For many ancient societies, the socio-political and economic impacts of iron production were profound, both in terms of the resources and knowledge required to produce the metal, and in terms of the often transformative effect of the products (Wertime and Muhly 1980; Childs and Killick 1993; Childs 1996; Pleiner 2000; Childs and Herbert 2005; Iles and Martinón-Torres 2009; Eze-Uzomaka 2013). The fundamental significance of iron production was often communicated through overt symbolic expressions linked to concepts of fertility and power (e.g., Collett  1993; Schmidt and Mapunda  1997; Burka 2012; Kose 2012; Robion-Brunner 2012). For functional tools requiring strength and durability, the properties of iron were “far in advance of any other material” (Craddock 1995:234), making it a particularly valuable ancient commodity. Despite significant investment in production, once forged an iron object could be relatively easily and repeatedly repaired and recycled, while retaining much of its original qualities. Versatility in style and type of product resulted in a plethora of iron tools with different shapes and functions available for an assortment of uses, from heavy blunt implements such as hammers, to strong sharp-edged axes, hoes, knives, and spears, as well as items of jewelry and small delicate adornments. Iron agricultural tools enabled large areas of land to be cleared and plowed, with the result that more crops could be planted and harvested to feed a growing population (Childs 1991; Childs and Herbert 2005:289). Iron implements enhanced the excavation of large hafirs (water reservoirs: Scheibner 2017:132–33); the quarrying of huge quantities of stone; the construction of buildings. Iron was also used to produce superior weaponry, as well as hunting and fishing tools: “Its ultimate effect was . . . revolutionary, encouraging both greater economic productivity and deadly efficiency in warfare” (Childs and Herbert 2005:287, 289). It is therefore unsurprising that large quantities of iron were produced at Meroe considering the site was perfectly situated to enable this production, with ore, clay, and fuel easily accessible in the immediate vicinity. This access to such important resources more than likely played a role in the development of the site as a major economic and political center. Technological practice is rooted within and embedded in social context (Edmonds 1990; Costin 1991, 2005; Pfaffenberger 1992; Sigaut 2002). The social meaning permeating ancient iron technology reflects the broader milieu of the time, for example the role and position of the technological practitioners within society and the ways in which they themselves may have viewed and experienced this (Dobres 2000:109–63), as well as the relationships between technological production (encompassing a host of linked

990   Jane Humphris technologies and their craftspeople) and the political economy within which technology was practiced. Those performing the various stages of the chaîne opératoire necessary to produce iron objects, those involved in the exchange of iron objects (both locally and further afield: Rowlands 1998), those using iron objects to transform their individual and collective life experiences, whether by cultivating land, fighting wars to secure territories, or quarrying stone for construction, were all impacted by and in turn impacted the technology of iron production within consumer-producer relationships. It is this embedded nature of technology that provides such potential for revealing further insights into Kush and Meroe through ongoing comprehensive archaeometallurgical investigations.

Conclusions and Outlook The data presented above provides a summary of current knowledge concerning iron production at Meroe. Despite a number of years of research and a slowly growing body of data, this knowledge is clearly limited and much work remains still to do. However, slowly through exhaustive excavations, sample processing, and analysis the potential of the archaeometallurgical record of Meroe, is being reached. Extensive laboratory analysis is underway and the results will eventually reveal the finer nuances of the practices and choices of the Kushite iron producers, including aspects such as quantities of iron output over time. In addition to focusing on the excavation of more of the slag mounds at Meroe, future work will also target some of the sub-surface slag deposits identified at the site to understand these in more detail. However, alongside the continued investigation of Meroe’s iron production technologies, of particular importance is the investigation of iron production locations in the wider region. Iron production sites such as those rumored to exist to the west in Kordofan, and to the east in Ethiopia, will provide essential comparative data concerning the spread of technological knowledge and the broader impact of Kushite iron production. These investigations are essential in order to contextualize Meroe within a world-system and to allow considerations of exchange networks of goods, ideas, and people.

Acknowledgments Numerous people work on the UCL Qatar research project in Sudan and in academic institutions around the world. Although too many to name here, for their dedication and contributions to the research they are sincerely thanked. Although too many to name here, for ongoing discussions about the concept of ancient industry, Vincent Serneels and Thilo Rehren are thanked, and Thilo is also thanked along with Stavroula Golfomitsou for helpful comments on an earlier draft of this paper. Thilo Rehren, then Director of UCL Qatar, encouraged and facilitated the current archaeometallurgical research at Meroe. UCL Qatar, Qatar Foundation, the Qatar-Sudan Archaeology Project (award 037) and the British Institute in Eastern Africa are thanked for their generous

Iron Production at Meroe   991 financial contributions which enable the research to take place. Finally, the National Corporation for Antiquities and Museums in Sudan, and the University of Khartoum, are acknowledged for their continuing support of the archaeometallurgical research.

References Cited Abdu, B. and R. Gordon 2004 Iron Artifacts from the Land of Kush. Journal of Archaeological Science 31:979–98. Bradley, R.J. 1984 Meroitic Chronology. In Meroitistische Forschungen 1980, ed. F. Hintze, pp. 195–211. Meroitica 7. Akademie Verlag. Burka, T. 2012 Technological Variability in Iron Metallurgy: The Case of Two Oromo Traditional Smelting Sites in Wollega, Ethiopia. In Métallurgie du Fer et Sociétés Africaines. Bilans et nouveaux paradigms dans la recherché anthropologique at archéologique, ed. C. Robion-Brunner and B. Martinelli, pp. 217–25. BAR International Series 2395. Cambridge Monographs in African Archaeology 81. Archaeopress. Carey, C., J. Humphris, and F. Stremke 2019 The Ironworking Remains in the Royal City of Meroe: New Insights on the Nile Corridor and the Kingdom of Kush. Antiquity 93(368):432–49. Charlton, M.F., P. Crew., T. Rehren, and S. Shennan 2013 Measuring Variation in Iron Smelting Slags. In The World of Iron, ed. J.  Humphris and T.  Rehren, pp. 421–32. Archetype Publications. Charlton, M. and J.  Humphris 2019 Exploring Iron Making Practice at Meroe, Sudan: A Comparative Analysis of Archaeological and Experimental Data. Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences 11:895–912. Childs, S.T. 1991 Iron as Utility or Expression: Reforging Function in Africa. In Metals in Society: Theory beyond Analysis, ed. R.M. Ehrenreich, pp. 57–67. MASCA, the University Museum, University of Pennsylvania. ——— 1996 Technological History and Culture in Western Tanzania. In The Culture and Technology of African Iron Production, ed. P.R. Schmidt, pp. 277–320. University Press of Florida. Childs, S.T. and W.H. Herbert 2005 Metallurgy and its Consequences. In African Archaeology, ed. A.B. Stahl, pp. 276–300. Blackwell. Childs, S.T. and D. Killick 1993 Indigenous African Metallurgy: Nature and Culture. Annual Review of Anthropology 22:317–37. Collett, P.D. 1993 Metaphors and Representations Associated with Precolonial Iron Smelting in Eastern and Southern Africa. In The Archaeology of Africa: Food, Metals and Towns, ed. T. Shaw., P. Sinclair, B. Andah, and A. Okpoko, pp. 499–511. Routledge. Costin, C.L. 1991 Craft Specialization: Issues in Defining, Documenting and Explaining the Organization of Production. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 3:1–56. ——— 2005 Craft Production. In Handbook of Archaeological Theories, v. 2, ed. F.A. Bentley, Herbert D.G. Maschner, and C. Chippindale, pp. 1034–99. AltaMira. Craddock, P.T. 1995 Early Metal and Mining Production. Edinburgh University Press. Crew, P. 2000 The Influence of Clay and Charcoal Ash on Bloomery Slags. In Iron in the Alps: Deposits, Mines and Metallurgy from Antiquity to the XVI Century, ed. C.  Tizzoni and M. Tizzoni, pp. 38–48. Bienno. Dobres, M.-A. 2000 Technology and Social Agency: Outlining a Practice Framework for Archaeology. Blackwell.

992   Jane Humphris Edmonds, M. 1990 Description, Understanding and the Chaine Operatoire. Archaeological Review from Cambridge 9(1):55–70. Eze-Uzomaka, P. 2013 Iron and its Influence on the Prehistoric Site of Lejja. In The World of Iron, ed. J. Humphris and T. Rehren, pp. 3–9. Archetype. Grzymski, K.A 2003 Meroe Reports 1. SSEA Publications 17. Benben Publications. Haaland, G. and R.  Haaland 2007 God of War, Worldly Ruler, and Craft Specialists in the Meroitic Kingdom of Sudan: Inferring Social Identity from Material Remains. Journal of Social Archaeology 7(3):372–92. Holzberg, C.S. and M.J. Giovannini 1981 Anthropology and Industry: Reappraisal and New Directions. Annual Review of Anthropology 10:317–60. Humphris, J. 2014 Post-Meroitic Iron Production: Initial Results and Interpretations. Sudan & Nubia 18(1):121–29. Humphris, J., and C.  Carey 2016 New Methods for Investigating Slagheaps: Integrating Geoprospection, Excavation and Quantitative Methods at Meroe, Sudan. Journal of Archaeological Science 7:132–44. Humphris, J., M. Martinon-Torres., T. Rehren, and A. Reid. 2009 Variability in Single Smelting Episodes—A Pilot Study Using Iron Slag from Uganda. Journal of Archaeological Science 36:359–69. Humphris, J. and T. Rehren 2014 Iron Production and the Kingdom of Kush: An Introduction to UCL Qatar’s Research in Sudan. In Ein Forscherleben zwischen den Welten. Zum 80. Geburtstag von Steffen Wenig, ed. A. Lohwasser and P. Wolf, pp. 177–90. Mitteilungen der Sudanarchäologischen Gesellschaft zu Berlin Sonderheft. Humphris, J. and T.  Scheibner 2017 A New Radiocarbon Chronology for Ancient Iron Production in the Meroe Region of Sudan. African Archaeology Review 34:377–413. Humphris, J., R. Bussert., F. al-Shishani, and T. Scheibner 2018 The Ancient Iron Mines of Meroe. Azania 53(3):291–311. Humphris, J., M.J.  Charlton, J.  Keen, L.  Sauder, and F.  al-Shishani 2018 a Iron Smelting in Sudan: Experimental Archaeology at the Royal City of Meroe. Journal of Field Archaeology 43(5):399–416. Humphris, J., and B. Eichhorn 2019 Fuel Selection during Long-term Ancient Iron Production in Sudan. Azania 54(1):33–54. Iles, L. and M.  Martinón-Torres 2009 Pastoralist Iron Production on the Laikipia Plateau, Kenya: Wider Implications for Archaeometallurgical Studies. Journal of Archaeological Science 36:2314–26. Joosten, I. and H. Kars 1999 Early Historical Iron Production in the Netherlands: Estimations of the Output. In Metals in Antiquity, ed. S.M.M.  Young., A.M.  Pollard., P.  Budd, and R.A. Ixer, pp. 243–51. Archaeopress. Kose, E. 2012 The Role of Iron in Foraging Societies of Northern Namibia in the 15th to the 20th Century AD. In Métallurgie du Fer et Sociétés Africaines. Bilans et nouveaux paradigms dans la recherché anthropologique at archéologique, ed. C. Robion-Brunner and B. Martinelli, pp. 209–16. BAR International Series 2395. Cambridge Monographs in African Archaeology 81. Archaeopress. Mohamed Faroug Abdelrahman 2011 A New Study Concerning Kushite and Post-Meroitic Iron Objects. In La Pioche et la Plume. Autour du Soudan, du Liban et de la Jordanie, Hommages archéologiques à Patrice Lenoble, ed. V. Rondot, V., F. Alpi, and F. Villeneuve, pp. 391–402. Presse de l’Université Paris-Sorbonne.

Iron Production at Meroe   993 Pfaffenberger, B. 1992 Social Anthropology of Technology. Annual Review of Anthropology 21:491–516. Pleiner, R. 2000 Iron in Archaeology: The European Bloomery Smelters. Archeologigky Ustav Avcr. Pope, J. 2014 The Double Kingdom under Taharqo: Studies in the History of Kush and Egypt, c. 690–664 BC. Brill. Rehren, T. 1996 Meroitische Eisenobjekte aus Musawwarat es Sufra. Der Antike Sudan. Mitteilungen der Sudanarchäologischen Gesellschaft 5:19–27. ——— 2001 Meroe, Iron and Africa. Der Antike Sudan. Mitteilungen der Sudanarchäologischen Gesellschaft 12:102–109. Rehren, T., M.F.  Charlton., S.  Chirikure, J.  Humphris., A.  Ige, and A.H.  Veldhuijzen 2007 Decisions Set in Slag—The Human Factor in African Iron Smelting. In Metals and Mines— Studies in Archaeometallurgy, ed. S.  La Niece, D.  Hook, and P.  Craddock, pp. 211–18. Archetype Publications. Robion-Brunner, C. 2012 Lecture historique, économique et spatiale de la production sidérurgique. Les sites de reduction du village de Wol (pays Dogon, Mali). In Métallurgie du Fer et Sociétés Africaines. Bilans et nouveaux paradigms dans la recherché anthropologique at archéologique, ed. C.  Robion-Brunner and B.  Martinelli, pp. 125–40. BAR International Series 2395. Cambridge Monographs in African Archaeology 81. Archaeopress. Rowlands, M. 1998 Centre and Periphery: A Review of a Concept. In Social Transformations in Archaeology, ed. K. Kristiansen and M. Rowlands, pp. 219–42. Routledge. Sayce, A.H. 1912 Second Interim Report on the Excavations at Meroë in Ethiopia, Part 2: The Historical Results. Liverpool Annals of Archaeology and Anthropology 4:55–65. Schmidt, P.R. and B.B.  Mapunda 1997 Ideology and the Archaeological Record in Africa: Interpreting Symbolism in Iron Smelting Technology. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 16:73–102. Serneels, V. 1993 Archéométrie des scories de fer. Recherches sur la sidérurgie ancienne en Suisse Occidentale. Cahiers d’Archéologie Romande 61. Colin Martin. Shinnie, P.L. 1982 Discussion Session. In Meroitic Studies: Proceedings of the Third International Meroitic Conference, ed. N.B. Millet and A.L. Kelley, pp. 43–49. Meroitica 6. Akademie Verlag. Shinnie, P.L. and J.R.  Anderson 2004 The Capital of Kush 2: Meroe Excavations 1973–1984. Meroitica 20. Harrassowitz. Shinnie, P.L. and R.J.  Bradley 1980 The Capital of Kush, v. 1: Meroe Excavations 1965–1972. Meroitica 4. Akademie Verlag. Shinnie, P.L. and F.J. Kense 1982 Meroitic Iron Working. In Meroitic Studies: Proceedings of the Third International Meroitic Conference, ed. N.B. Millet and A.L. Kelley, pp. 17–28. Meroitica 6. Akademie Verlag. Sigaut, F. 2002 Technology. In Companion Encyclopedia of Anthropology: Humanity, Culture and Social Life, ed. T. Ingold, pp. 420–59. Routledge. Ting, C. and J. Humphris 2017 The Technology and Craft Organisation of Kushite Technical Ceramic Production at Meroe and Hamadab, Sudan. Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports 16:34–43. Thomas, G.R and T.P. Young 1999 A Graphical Method to Determine Furnace Efficiency and Lining Contribution to Romano-British Bloomery Iron Making Slags (Bristol Channel Orefield, UK). In Metals in Antiquity, ed. S.M.M.  Young, A.M.  Pollard., P.  Budd, and R.A. Ixer, pp. 223–26. Archaeopress.

994   Jane Humphris Török, L. 2015 The Periods of Kushite History: From the Tenth Century BC to the AD Fourth Century. Ízisz Foundation. Trigger, B.G. 1969 The Myth of Meroe and the African Iron Age. African Historical Studies 2(1):23–50. Tylecote, R.F. 1982 Metal Working at Meroe, Sudan. In Meroitic Studies: Proceedings of the Third International Meroitic Conference, ed. N.B. Millet and A.L. Kelley, pp. 29–42. Meroitica 6. Akademie Verlag. Wertime, T. and J. Muhly eds. 1980 The Coming of the Age of Iron. Yale University Press. Wilson, A.I. 2008 Large-Scale Manufacturing, Standardization, and Trade. In The Oxford Handbook of Engineering and Technology in the Classical World, ed. J.P. Oleson, pp. 393–417. Oxford University Press. Wolf, P. 2015 The Qatar-Sudan Archaeological Project—The Meroitic Town of Hamadab and the Palaeo-environment of the Meroe Region. Sudan & Nubia 19:115–31.

Chapter 49

Tr a de i n A ncien t N u bi a Routes, Goods, and Structures Mahmoud Suliman Bashir and Geoff Emberling

Introduction Ancient economies can usefully be divided into activities of production, distribution, and consumption (Smith 2004). Each of these has social and political dimensions—­ production of goods, for example, has an associated social organization; it can be carried out by individual households, by producers who may be specialized or attached to an institution, and by institutional workshops (Costin 1991). Consumption (or use) of goods can provide for basic human needs (food and clothing) but can also mark social differences. In between production and consumption is distribution—the ways that raw materials and manufactured products are transported from source to consumer. When we move from a systemic perspective to one of individual agents, distribution can also be termed “trade,” which can occur locally as well as over longer distances. Research on trade in archaeology has a long history. Goods that have been traded over long distances are often relatively easy for archaeologists to identify, all the more so since the development of techniques of elemental and isotopic analysis. And the process of trade itself has been considered to have a wide range of effects: “influence” in diffusionist models of culture change (summarized in Trigger 2006); symbolic marking and maintenance of social hierarchies (Helms  1993); stimulation of economies (Algaze 2008); and promotion of fundamental social and political change, including the formation of states and cities (Sabloff and Lamberg-Karlovsky  1975; Liverani  2015; Kristiansen et al.  2016). Relatively non-hierarchical regional connections created by trade have been termed “interaction spheres” (Yoffee 1993), while some trade systems

996   Mahmoud Suliman Bashir and Geoff Emberling that connect states and empires with hinterlands have created core regions and peripheries in what has been termed “world systems” (after Wallerstein 1974; recent discussions in De Angelis 2013; Beaujard 2016; for Nubia, Hafsaas-Tsakos 2009). The actors in trade and the institutional structures that support them have also been the subject of a great deal of scholarship. Much ancient trade was institutional, conducted in the name of the king, queen, palace, or temple, and was often done with their financial and sometimes military support (e.g., Crawford  2013; MüllerWollermann 2016, with references). Private exchange can be more difficult to identify in the archaeological and historical record, but it is clear that private merchants were operating in Egypt and the Middle East by the second millennium bce if not earlier. The best documented of these private traders are the Old Assyrian merchant families who traded with Anatolia (recently, Larsen 2015), but the collapse of ancient Middle Eastern palace economies at the end of the Late Bronze Age around 1200 bce also led to a development of private economic activity (Moreno García 2016; Sherratt 2016). The role of nomads in trading their own distinctive products as well as facilitating longer-distance trade has also recently come under renewed discussion (Moreno García 2016; Lawler 2017). Finally, the economic processes by which goods move also vary widely. The economic historian Karl Polanyi (1957) recognized three processes for distribution of goods—­ reciprocity, redistribution, and exchange—and despite the many criticisms of other aspects of Polanyi’s work (review in Garraty 2010), this basic analytical distinction remains useful. Goods have often been exchanged in small-scale reciprocal social relationships. In smaller-scale societies of early prehistory, goods might be traded mostly locally, yet could still achieve a wide distribution through variants of what Renfrew (1975) in his study of Neolithic obsidian trade from Anatolia termed “down-the-line” trade, which he was able to identify by plotting the declining proportion of obsidian against distance from the obsidian sources (for discussion of barter economies, see cautionary note in Graeber 2012:21ff.). But this mode also accounts for the elite gift exchange that marked relationships among Egyptian and Middle Eastern states (for example) during the Amarna period (Liverani 1988), as well as trade carried out in the process of royally sponsored expeditions, like those of the Egyptian officials Weni and Harkhuf during the 6th Dynasty (see below). Raw materials could also be obtained through expeditions, particularly sponsored by kings and other institutions. These are well documented for Egyptian mining in the Sinai Peninsula and the Eastern Desert (e.g., Hoffmeier 2012; Muhs 2016:132), but may also have been a practice of Nubian rulers even if these expeditions were usually not recorded. Redistribution implies a centralized authority in a city or state that takes in goods through taxation of one kind or another and then provides them to its dependents (Earle 2011). This may be an incongruously neutral term for a process that could also be highly coercive. Identifying centralized redistribution in the archaeological record has centered on locating granaries or other food storage facilities (Paulette 2016). A related mechanism that moved goods in Nubia was tribute, particularly the tribute from areas of Nubia (Wawat and Kush) to Egypt during the New Kingdom (Vercoutter 1959).

Trade in Ancient Nubia: Routes, Goods, and Structures   997 By “exchange,” Polanyi meant market exchange, with fluctuating supply, demand, and prices, and a standard of value like weights of silver or coinage. Identifying the existence of markets in ancient societies can be difficult, but archaeologists have developed ways of analyzing regional distribution of goods and of settlements that have been suggested as indicators of a market economy (Smith 2004; Garraty 2010). Identification of possible marketplaces in the archaeological record has been tempting, but almost always difficult. The movement of goods within these different structures and networks also implies movement of people, and thus communication and sharing of information. It has often been assumed that the basic condition of ancient communities was that of isolation and that trade—particularly trade with distant areas—was rare (e.g., Trigger  2003:342). More recently, some archaeologists have proposed that interaction was more common than isolation, even in the ancient world (Wengrow 2010, inspired in part by the work of Andrew Sherratt) and that development of technology and of political complexity took place in the context of extensive interaction. Trade is thus once more an important consideration in archaeological theory. This very compressed overview represents a tiny fraction of writing on ancient economy and trade and their importance to understanding historical events and past social processes. Yet it is necessary as a background to discussing trade in ancient Nubia because there has been vanishingly little discussion by archaeologists and historians of the full range of trade within Nubia and between Nubia and its neighbors (see brief comments by Trigger 1985). There is a general consensus that trade was fundamental to the power and wealth of cultures of the Middle Nile region, especially Kush, but few more general analyses. The primary exception is the work of Edwards (1998b), who proposed a general model for trade in the states of the Middle Nile, which he termed “Sudanic states.” He suggested that states in this region derived their wealth and political authority from control over people rather than control over agricultural land, which was of relatively limited productivity (also McIntosh 1999). He suggests in particular that kings of Sudanic states attempted to exert exclusive control over long-distance trade of precious raw materials and manufactured goods (also Morkot 2016). This model proposes a minimal role for private merchants in the economy of Kush and the other cultures of the Middle Nile, and it is worth considering what other kinds of evidence might be adduced for the existence of non-royal trade in this region. In the following, we discuss currently available evidence for the routes and mech­an­ isms by which goods were exchanged within the Middle Nile and with its neighbors.

Routes in the Middle Nile Region The routes over which traders travelled within the Middle Nile region are relatively clear (Figs. 49.1 and 49.2; Vincentelli 2003; for broader African perspective, see Mitchell 2005). The primary route was along the Nile itself (Shinnie 1991), and traveling along river had

998   Mahmoud Suliman Bashir and Geoff Emberling

Figure 49.1  Regional map of routes and sites mentioned in the text. Map: Samuel Burns.

a number of advantages. The first of these is ease of transport—even the cataract regions could be traversed by boat in either direction, as a “slipway” found around the Second Cataract at Mirgissa (Vercoutter 1970), as well as the numerous depictions of boats in rock art (see, for example, Otto and Buschendorf-Otto 1993) suggest. These routes had the advantage of easy access to water, both for sustenance and for ease and speed of transport, but the disadvantage of potential taxation and even danger from local rulers along the river. Routes crossing the deserts and savanna on either side of the Nile followed seasonal or dry riverbeds (wadis) that could provide water through wells, or moved from oasis to oasis (particularly to the west of the Nile). To the east of the Nile, one set of desert routes cut off the large bends in the river and connected the main centers of ancient Kush. A route through the Bayuda Desert via the Wadi Abu Dom (currently being surveyed—see Lohwasser 2012 and recently Lohwasser et al. 2016) connected Napata to the Nile to region of Berber, north of the Kushite capital of Meroe. A less well-documented route known as the Meheila road connected Napata

Trade in Ancient Nubia: Routes, Goods, and Structures   999

Figure 49.2  Map of Kush showing routes and sites mentioned in the text. Map: Samuel Burns.

to Kawa across the Nubian desert—a route that was likely in use during the Egyptian New Kingdom as well as the Kushite period. Together, these routes were also used during the coronation rituals of Kushite kings (Török 1992). Another route, which became important during the New Kingdom conquest of Kush, connected Korosko in Lower Nubia with the region of Kurgus, site of royal inscriptions of the Egyptian pharaohs Thutmose I and Thutmose III (Davies 2001, 2003). The Korosko road traversed the gold fields of the Wadi Allaqi and then the Nubian Desert (Adams 1977:303–304; Castiglioni and Castiglioni 2006; Davies 2014; and Ruffieux and Mahmoud Suliman Bashir 2014). To the west of the Nile, routes undoubtedly connected the Nile valley with areas to the west, moving from oasis to oasis. The Abu Ballas trail connected the Dakhla Oasis in Egypt with areas further into the desert to the southwest, including the Gilf Kebir (Förster 2013). Another route, known in more recent times as the Darb el-Arbain (“40days road”), was a route for camel drivers moving from Darfur in western Sudan to Cairo. But earlier routes also passed along the Wadi el-Melik and the Wadi Howar (Jesse, this volume), the latter also known as the “Yellow Nile” and was a tributary that dried up

1000   Mahmoud Suliman Bashir and Geoff Emberling during the 1st millennium bce (M. Williams, this volume). All these routes likely connected the Nile Valley with the region of Darfur, about which almost nothing is known archaeologically, although it is likely to have been important in antiquity—perhaps even the location of ancient Yam (Clayton et al. 2008; Cooper 2012). Kushite settlement along this route included a fortress at Gala Abu Ahmed (e.g., Jesse 2014). Connections between the Middle Nile and the Red Sea are evident throughout the Nubian past, but the exact routes have only relatively recently begun to be identified (Mahmoud Suliman Bashir  2017; for harbors see Manzo, this volume). In particular, research in the region of Berber (Mahmoud Suliman Bashir  2015) has suggested more intensive contact with the Red Sea during the Meroitic period. To the east of Berber is Tabot, whose geographic location and function as identified by artifacts confirm that it was a waystation for caravan routes dated to the Meroitic period (Anwar A. Magid et al. 1995:177). Travelers moving east from Berber would have found here the first green area with fodder and water. Tabot was most probably located along one of the well-established routes and in particular the route of Berber-Sinkat-Suakin (Anwar A. Magid et al. 1995:168). Trade with regions to the south of the Middle Nile remains poorly documented in archaeological excavation, although some archaeological finds as well as Egyptian documentation of trade goods makes it clear that exchange of goods and people from this area did take place. Evidence of this trade is attested in the form of scarabs and faience objects found at Jebel Moya (see B. Williams, Chapter 23, this volume). In general, Nubian urban centers seem to have grown on major routes (or routes led to urban centers). In a discussion on the emergence of the city of Meroe, Adams suggested that it owed its existence to the control over trade routes (Adams 1977:303). In fact, the geographical location of Meroe represents an important point on this overland trade. The same was the case of Napata and Kawa, both of which achieved economic power through the control of the Meheila Desert road (Adams  1977:303; Welsby 1996:171). The location of the city of Meroe at the upstream end of the Bayuda Desert road, avoiding the hazards of the Fourth and Fifth Cataracts, gave Meroe such economic power. This overland route played a major role in connecting the northern and the southern districts of Kush. The development of the Korosko Road to Egypt as a second overland trade route enabled Meroe also to have further control over longdistance trade. This desert road became the main link between Meroe, central Sudan, and the Mediterranean world (Adams 1977:304).

Transportation in the Middle Nile Region Boats would likely have been the primary means of transporting goods along the Nile for much of Nubian history, although our available sources depict them perhaps more frequently in the service of ceremony and warfare than in economic activity. A ­depiction

Trade in Ancient Nubia: Routes, Goods, and Structures   1001 of a boat procession with a seated ruler in one and a bound prisoner in another on an incense burner from Qustul (terminal A-Group, ca. 3000 bce) is likely the earliest of these (see Williams and Logan  1987 for discussion). These ceremonial sailing boats (“barks”) represent Lower Nubian participation in the symbolisms of power that they shared with the Upper Egyptian states of the Predynastic period. A large sailing vessel with a cabin that might have served to store cargo as well as rowed galleys, which appear to have a more military character, are documented in wall paintings in a funerary chapel at Kerma (Kerma Classique, ca. 1550 bce—Bonnet 2000, figs. 52, 63, 65; Fig. 49.3). Boats with cabins are frequently represented in Nubian rock art as well (e.g., Engelmayer 1965). At the same time, the documented settlement pattern upstream of Kerma during the height of its power (Welsby 2001, v. 2:572ff.; Welsby, this volume) shows likely agricultural settlements along river channels, and some agricultural produce, at least, was likely transported along these channels to the urban center at Kerma itself. The use of domesticated animals to transport goods in Nubia is not well documented. Donkeys were used in Egypt as pack animals from the 4th millennium bce, and the Egyptian expeditions of Harkhuf and Weni in the late 3rd millennium bce used donkey caravans, but their use in Nubia is less well documented, whether through faunal remains in excavations, in depictions in rock art, or in texts. One exception is Nubians travelling with small numbers of donkeys that are mentioned in two letters sent by an Egyptian garrison in the Second Cataract region during the Middle Kingdom

Figure 49.3  Cargo boat with horse at bow and human figure standing on cargo cabin. Rock art from Sabu (near the Third Cataract), New Kingdom. Photograph: Bruce Beyer Williams.

1002   Mahmoud Suliman Bashir and Geoff Emberling (Smither 1945:6, 9). The scarcity of evidence is surprising, but perhaps explained by the fact that the native donkey species in East Africa appears to have been less amenable to domestication than donkeys in the Middle East (Blench  2000; Marshall and Weissbrod 2011). Donkeys do not appear to have been extensively used as pack animals in ancient or medieval Nubia. Horses were introduced into Nubia during the mid-second millennium bce, soon after their introduction to Egypt. They seem to have been raised on a significant scale in the Napatan period, but seemingly as trade items and local symbols of prestige rather than as pack animals (Heidorn 1997; Mallory-Greenough 2005; Schrader et al. 2018). Camels were clearly used as beasts of burden in later periods of Nubian history, although the date of their adoption is not entirely clear. They had been extensively adopted in Arabia by the end of the 2nd millennium bce (Magee 2015). The earliest datable evidence for camels in Nubia appears to be the 9th-century bce date for camel droppings in stratified contexts at Qasr Ibrim (Rowley-Conwy  1988), and they are extensively represented in Nubian rock art (e.g., Kleinitz 2007), although it is difficult to date these representations with any precision. Given the lack of other evidence for use of camels in the earlier 1st millennium bce, it seems most likely that extensive use of camels for transportation across the deserts of Nubia dates to the Meroitic period (3rd century bce and later). This brief review of possible means of transportation to facilitate trade suggests that Nubian societies did not have access to (or at least, did not use) animals or boats to ­facilitate trade before the introduction of the camel during the later 1st millennium bce.

Trade: Raw Materials and Finished Goods Nubian societies traded raw materials from their homeland as well as products they manufactured, and they also traded goods from inner Africa to Egypt and the Mediterranean world. Local trade within Nubia is also likely to have taken place, but has been less well documented. We might begin a brief chronological survey with the likelihood that some trade in animals took place throughout the Nubian past. Early herders of sheep and goats, and later cattle pastoralists, had roamed what is now the Libyan Desert from about 6000 bce (Jesse, this volume), establishing the economic and symbolic importance of cattle in particular (Dubosson, this volume). Isotopic studies of bucrania deposited around elite burials at Kerma (ca. 2000 bce) suggest that the cattle had been raised in significantly varied environments (Iacumin et al. 2001)—this might represent gift exchange of cattle. Later Egyptian tomb paintings—like that of Huy, King’s Son of Kush under Tutankhamun—that record tribute of Nubia sent to Egypt during the New Kingdom (1500–1070 bce) often depict cattle along with other products (de Garis Davies and

Trade in Ancient Nubia: Routes, Goods, and Structures   1003 Gardiner  1926). Leather may well have been an important trade item (Moreno García 2018). Other prehistoric trade included trade in shell from the Red Sea as well as trade in obsidian from the Ethiopian highlands (Harrell and Abdelrahman Ali Mohamed, this volume). With the growth of the Nubian kingdoms of the A-Group, gift exchange continued as the best-documented form of trade, with elite goods crafted in Egypt (Qustul incense burner; Sayala mace-head) found in tombs of Lower Nubia along with Egyptian and even Levantine ceramic vessels that would have contained olive oil and wine (Takamiya 2004; see Gatto, this volume). The early A-Group site of Khor Bahan (ca. 3700 bce) contains a significant proportion of Egyptian goods buried in Nubian style tombs (Gatto 2000), but it is not clear how those goods arrived at the site and we cannot assume the existence of market trade at that early period. It is not immediately obvious what Nubian products would have been sent in return (Fig. 49.4), and this likely also changed through time. One likely candidate for a Nubian trade good is gold, found in abundance in the Wadi Allaqi that leads from the Eastern Desert into Lower Nubia, but also in Upper Nubia as more recent excavations around

Figure 49.4  Nubian tribute presented to pharaoh by the Egyptian governor of Nubia, Huy, ca. 1330 bce. The scene illustrates some of the important raw materials and products of Nubia: gold, wooden furniture and objects, animals (cattle and giraffes), hides, and slaves. Painting by Charles K. Wilkinson. Metropolitan Museum of Art.

1004   Mahmoud Suliman Bashir and Geoff Emberling the Fourth Cataract have made clear (Emberling et al. 2010). Carnelian and other semiprecious stones were also possibilities (Harrell, this volume). Nubian cultures made use of incense from early times and this may also have been part of the exchange, although the sources of incense were further south in Africa (Williams 1986; Baldi 2014). Trade in large ceramic vessels—later in the form of amphorae—would continue in later Kushite and Medieval Nubian times (e.g., Hofmann 1991), although it is less clear at what point, if at all, the exchange might have shifted from gift exchange to more commercial transactions. Smaller Egyptian and Levantine pottery vessels are also regularly found in Nubia (e.g., Bourriau 2004), and some from the Kerma period appear to have been sealed (Gratien 2004). During the Egyptian 6th Dynasty (ca. 2350–2200 bce), when the Egyptian state raided and partially settled Lower Nubia, tomb biographies of Egyptian officials also document expeditions of trade and exploration into Upper Nubia. The most detailed of these accounts is that of Harkhuf, who undertook three expeditions to the Nubian polities of Yam, Irtjet, and Setju. As part of his gift exchange with Nubian rulers, he brought incense, ebony, oil, panther skins, ivory, and throw sticks on his donkey caravan, as well as livestock (text: Lichtheim 1973:23ff.; see also Török 2009:67ff.). These products represent many of the goods available in Nubia for trade. The roughly contemporary biography of Weni the Elder (Lichtheim 1973:18ff.; Richards 2002) describes his use of Nubian mercenaries in military engagements in the Levant—the movement of people accompanied trade in goods (Meurer, this volume). The Kerma kingdom (Bonnet, this volume) imported a range of goods from Egypt including ceramics (Bourriau  1991, 2004), but also manufacturing local versions of Egyptian goods. Egyptian goods also arrived in Kerma through raids conducted by the Kerma army at the height of its power. After the conquest of Nubia by the Egyptian Empire of the New Kingdom, many of these goods continued to be brought from Nubia to Egypt as tribute. They are enumerated in detail in the annals of Thutmose III (1479–1423 bce; see Vercoutter 1959) and also depicted in the tombs of Egyptian governors of Nubia like Huy (de Garis Davies and Gardiner 1926; see also Smith, this volume), with the addition of giraffes and cow-hide shields. It appears from the tomb of Huy that slaves were also part of the tribute of Kush during this period and into medieval times, when the treaty (Baqt) between Nubia and Egypt included an obligation for Nubia to deliver slaves (Edwards 2011). Kush regained its independence after 1100 bce, and in the centuries that followed, centralized political authority was gradually rebuilt, and along with it, a new trade economy. This economy is best illustrated at the 45-hectare settlement site of Sanam. The early excavations at Sanam revealed a structure that was termed the “treasury” that was over 250 m long and comprised a series of rooms on either side of a central hall demarcated by columns. It contained a wide range of finely crafted items, impressions of royal seals, and some valuable raw materials including elephant tusks (Griffith 1922). More recent excavations of additional structures on the site (Vincentelli 2011) have confirmed the association of royal seals with valuable raw materials and highly skilled craft production at Sanam, associated with import of Egyptian amphorae. These finds support the

Trade in Ancient Nubia: Routes, Goods, and Structures   1005 notion that Kushite political control was based in part on control of craft production and trade in prestige goods as Edwards’s model of Sudanic states would suggest (Edwards 1998b). During the Meroitic period (ca. 300 bce–300 ce), there is clear evidence for both trade goods imported into Kush, goods that were exported, and locally manufactured goods that were likely traded within Kush. Despite the widespread use of coinage in other regions during these periods, “the Nubian economy was never monetized” (Adams 2004:117). Among imports, a large quantity of imported Egyptian pottery has been found on Kushite sites as far south as Meroe and Wad ben Naga (Welsby 1996:174). Pottery vessels and other objects from the broader Mediterranean world have also been noted among the finds from Kush (Török 2011). The wheelmade lekythos and the small oil container were often found. A lekythos is a type of Greek pottery vessel used for storing oil, particularly olive oil. It has one handle attached to the neck of the vessel. This fine ware vessel was clearly imported into Nubia, but such a shape has been usually discovered in the Meroitic Northern Province in the area of the Second Cataract. In fact, some of the discovered lekythoi from the Meroitic cemetery at Sai Island had been identified as a locally made and others were imported from Aswan region. These various productions have been interpreted as indications of large-scale trade (David 2010:60). Finds of glass vessels have often been recorded from royal cemeteries (Edwards  1998a:65) and are undoubtedly imports into Kush from Egypt and the Mediterranean world. In general, very little glass has been found in cemeteries of common people, but a considerable number of glass objects were found in the Meroitic cemeteries at Sedeinga, Berber, and Dangeil. The glass objects are often found in two forms: first, glass bottles, among them a colored glass bottle similar to those from Sedeinga in the north (SNM no. 20407) and those found in the royal tombs at Meroe (SNM no. 525). The second form is glass beads, which are often gilded. Analysis of these beads is revealing longer-distance trade, including trade with the Indian Ocean (Then-Obłuska and Wagner 2019). Among the recorded beads of glass is a unique type from Berber. This type of bead is the so-called “gold-in-glass” beads with figurative design. “Gold-in-glass” means they were made of two layers of glass with gold foil in between. The beads have a net pattern on one side and a figurative motif on the other of Harpocrates with finger to the mouth. Gold-in-glass beads in general (there are diverse shapes of gold-in-glass beads) are said to have been produced in Egypt. Such beads are rare and they have been found primarily in Egypt and Nubia but also in southern Russia and even Iran. Among products for export from Nubia, raw materials including gold, ebony, incense, and animal products including panther skins and ostrich feathers likely continued from earlier times (Fig. 49.5). These products, along with manufactured goods, were also valued and exchanged within Kush. Horses seem to have been of special importance as trade goods from the Kushite period to recent times. The importance of horses and the great admiration for horses held by Kushite rulers during the Kingdom of Kush has been clearly evident from both burials and texts. Graves for horses were recorded from the royal cemetery at El-Kurru

1006   Mahmoud Suliman Bashir and Geoff Emberling

Figure 49.5  Meroitic objects from Berber cemetery illustrating traded materials. (a) Gold ear stud with a depiction of the god Bes. Berber cemetery, Meroitic period, ca. 3rd century ce. (b) Ivory kohl pot. Berber cemetery, Meroitic period, ca. mid-2nd century–mid-3rd century ce. (c) Ebony kohl pot. Berber cemetery, Meroitic period, ca. 3rd century ce.

as well as at Meroe, and the iconographic records show the depiction of horses on several Kushite royal monuments. Travelers who visited Sudan in the 18th and 19th centuries reported that the horses of Dongola were considered a main item of trade in the trade centers of Sudan, among which Berber is mentioned as one of the well-established markets. J.L. Burckhardt noted that the Dongola horse was well-known even in the Near East (Heidorn 1997:112). In fact, Kushite horses were mentioned in Assyrian records as being used in military battles and a clear statement concerning the import of Kushite horses and horse trainers into Assyria is associated with the mention of Nubian horse experts in the Nimrud wine list (Dalley 1985:45). This fact demonstrates the long history of horses being considered as trade items. It seems that the use of such animals in trade is a well-established tradition in Sudan because this type of trade is ongoing and has shifted from horses to camels, which are now one of the main exports from Sudan to Egypt, following the Darb el-Arba’in, and to the Gulf countries via the Red Sea. The fact that ivory and elephants themselves were exports from Kush has been noted by Welsby (1996:175–76): “Kushite ivory, more likely spoils of war or tribute, was used by the Persian king Darius to decorate his palace at Susa in Iran. This literary source makes it clear that the Ptolemies obtained war elephants from Kush and some of these may have been supplied via trade contacts with the Kushites” (see also Wolf and Nowotnick, this volume). The rise of cotton production in Meroitic times also suggests that cotton textiles were among the export products of Kush (see chapters by Wolf and Nowotnick and by Fuller and Lucas, this volume). There is also extensive evidence for local manufacture and trade of objects made of wood and metals within Kush. Wooden items were very common in the Kushite tombs and in some cases they remain exceptionally well preserved. The majority were ebony cosmetic containers used as kohl pots (Mahmoud Suliman Bashir 2013:98). Similar to those found in Berber is a tall slender container carved in the form of six flattened spheres standing on a flaring base, and also found in Karanog grave 521 (Wenig 1978:267, cat. 206). The presence of wooden products in long-distance trade is a tradition that continues into modern history. Items of such hard wood were often recorded in historical sources as

Trade in Ancient Nubia: Routes, Goods, and Structures   1007 commercial goods being brought to Egypt by caravans coming from Sinnar and Darfur (Yusuf Fadl Hasan 1977:207). Metal objects consisting of copper-alloy bowls, rings, fastening, and nails are often found in Kushite tombs. Among these metal objects are signet rings made of silver, copper-alloy, and iron. These rings together with the commonly found bowls of bronze were considered prestigious items associated with trade and exchange. Fittings of iron and copper are common finds in archaeological contexts and they can be associated with trade as well. Some were probably fittings for boxes. The majority of these objects have been found in burial contexts, but also in temples (Hintze 1962:185). Some well-preserved examples of wooden boxes from Karanog in graves 521 and 445 demonstrated that fittings consisting of copper sheets and nails seem to be used for patching cracks; however, copper-alloy rings were also used as handles for the wooden boxes (Wenig 1978:270, cat. 208). Kushite iron production appears to have been under centralized control by the ruler (Haaland and Shinnie 1985:160; see also Humphris, this volume). This argument is based on the large concentration of remains of iron working recovered in around the royal palaces and temples at the City of Meroe. Without iron weapons and an army, the state would not have been able to maintain a stable and safe trade. However, since trade was one of the main economic foundations of the Meroitic kingdom, iron objects may also have been Meroitic trade goods exported to the neighboring kingdoms, especially Egypt. Faience objects are also among the finds associated with exchange and trade and considered prestigious items as well. Their presence was rare in Meroitic cemeteries in the south, but faience items have been recovered from a number of cemeteries in Karanog and Faras located north of the Second Cataract. Some unique faience objects have been recovered from Berber and Dangeil cemeteries. A faience box lid with a partly preserved reclining leopard was found in the fill of the descendary of one of the tombs at Dangeil. It has parallels with another lid from Kumbar, near Aksha in northern Sudan, dated to the 1st century ce, now in the Sudan National Museum (SNM 23159) (Abdel Rahman Ali Mohamed and Anderson 2013:88, no. 78). The faience box to which the lid belonged was also in the descendary’s fill. The ends of the box are decorated with rosettes flanked by uraei wearing white and red crowns and two udjat-eyes adorn each side. The box legs are in the form of duck heads and holes were pierced through the ends and sides to facilitate the attachment of the lid. Some distinctive handmade pottery jars have been found across the Meroitic kingdom. These handmade jars confirm the existence of a center of production and a mech­ an­ism facilitating their wide distribution (Edwards 2014:54), perhaps organized trade and exchange for distinctive local products. Both trade and the production of indigenous items may have been controlled by the state. Handmade, globular pottery jars without necks and of a typical fabric from the southern regions illustrate trade within the kingdom during the late Meroitic period (Edwards 1998a:54, pl. 7). The different trading routes needed to be protected from different tribal groups such as Cushitic-speaking pastoralists. Jacke Phillips (1997) has emphasized that different tribal groups might have exerted some control of the overland trade routes, and that the Meroitic

1008   Mahmoud Suliman Bashir and Geoff Emberling state had an interest in constraining their power. An indication of the importance of centralized control over trade routes can be seen at Jebel Qeili, located on the road between Khartoum and Kassala, with its relief of King Shorkaror, in full royal regalia, holding in one hand weapons, spear, and a bow and arrows, while in his other hand a long cord with several tied captives. Török (1997:466) interprets this as an indication of war and conflict, and an attempt to pacify the region in a period when maintenance of undisturbed trade contact within the region was very important. Haaland (2014) has also argued quite extensively on the important of this topic. Shorkaror ruled during the 1st century ce, at a time when this trade was at its peak, and access to luxury trade goods from the interior of Africa was vital. The scene of Shorkaror is also important in a later context when discussing sorghum, where the king is offered a bunch of sorghum from a solar god, this scene suggesting both the fertility aspects of the king as well as aspects of war and conflict. The rise of Axum certainly weakened the role of Meroe in trade through its access to the goods of central Africa. In the later Kushite period, Axum appears to have been a strong opponent for Meroe in controlling trade routes to the Red Sea, which may have been an important cause for the decrease of Meroitic trade (Munro-Hay 1982:107–26; Welsby 1996:172; Burstein 2002). That together with the desert tribal threat to the caravan routes made it unstable and not safe trade. The end of Meroe was most probably a result of losing control over trade.

Conclusions Our knowledge of the Nubian economy remains partial, due in large part to an overemphasis on elite textual and iconographic records. However, some basic questions about the internal functioning of the Nubian economy have also not been posed, and archaeological research addressing the organization of production and distribution has not yet been carried through. This remains an important area for research that would allow a more balanced assessment of the organization of ancient Nubian societies.

Abbreviation SNM  Sudan National Museum

References Cited Abdel Rahman Ali Mohamed and J.R.  Anderson 2013 Highlights from the Sudan National Museum. Sudan National Museum. Adams, W.Y. 1977 Nubia: Corridor to Africa. Princeton University Press. ——— 2004 Peasant Archaeology in Nubia. Azania 39(1):111–24. Algaze, G. 2008 Ancient Mesopotamia at the Dawn of Civilization: The Evolution of an Urban Landscape. University of Chicago Press.

Trade in Ancient Nubia: Routes, Goods, and Structures   1009 Anwar A. Magid, R.H. Pierce, and K. Krzywinski 1995 Test Excavation in the Southern Red Sea Hills (Sudan): Cultural Linkages to the North. Archéologie du Nil Moyen 7:163–90. Baldi, M. 2014 Aromatic Essences in Ancient Nubia: The Sacredness of Perfumes and Incense in the Meroitic Kingdom. Journal of Intercultural and Interdisciplinary Archaeology 2014(1). Beaujard, P. 2016 The Birth of a Single Afro-Eurasian World-System (2nd Century BCE–6th Century CE). In Trade and Civilization, ed. K.  Kristiansen, T.  Lindkvist, and J.  Myrdal, pp. 263–72. TOPOI. Beaujard, P. 2016 The Birth of a Single Afro-Eurasian World-System 2004 Egyptian Pottery Found in Kerma Ancien, Kerma Moyen and Kerma Classique Graves at Kerma. In Nubian Studies 1998: Proceedings of the Ninth Conference of the International Society of Nubian Studies, ed. T. Kendall, pp. 3–13. Department of African-American Studies, Northeastern University. Blench, R.M. 2000 A History of Donkeys, Wild Asses and Mules in Africa. In The Origins and Development of African Livestock: Archaeology, Genetics, Linguistics and Ethnography, ed. R.M. Blench and K.C. MacDonald, pp. 339–54. UCL Press. Bonnet, C. 2000 Edifices et rites funéraires à Kerma. Errance. Bourriau, J. 1991 Relations between Egypt and Kerma during the Middle and New Kingdoms. In Egypt and Africa: Nubia from Prehistory to Islam, ed. W.V. Davies, pp. 129–44. British Museum Press. Burstein, S.M. 2002 Kush, Axum and the Ancient Indian Ocean Trade. In A Tribute to Excellence: Studies Offered in Honor of Ernö Gaál, Ulrich Luft, László Török, ed. T.A. Bács, pp. 127–37. Budapest: Chaire d’Egyptologie de l’Université Eötvös Loránd. Castiglioni, Al. and An. Castiglioni 2006 New Discoveries along the Route Korosko-Kurgus. In Acta Nubica: Proceedings of the X International Conference of Nubian Studies, ed. I. Caneva and A. Roccati, pp. 401–10. Libreria dello Stato. Clayton, J., A.  De Trafford, and M.  Borda 2008 A Hieroglyphic Inscription found at Jebel Uweinat Mentioning Yam and Tekhebet. Sahara 19:129–34. Cooper, J. 2012 Reconsidering the Location of Yam. Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt 48:1–12. Costin, C. 1991 Craft Specialization: Issues in Defining, Documenting, and Explaining the Organization of Production. Archaeological Method and Theory 3:1–56. Crawford, H. 2013 Trade in the Sumerian World. In The Sumerian World, ed. H. Crawford, pp. 447–61. Routledge. Dalley, S. 1985 Foreign Chariotry and Cavalry in the Armies of Tiglath-Pileser III and Sargon II. Iraq 47:31–48. David, R. 2010 Second Report on the Ceramics from the Meroitic Cemetery 8-B-5.A Sudan & Nubia 14:60–61. Davies, V. 2001 Kurgus 2000: The Egyptian Inscriptions. Sudan & Nubia 5:46–58. ——— 2003 Kurgus 2002: The Inscriptions and Rock-Drawings. Sudan & Nubia 7:55–57. ——— 2014 The Korosko Road Project: Recording Egyptian Inscriptions in the Eastern Desert and Elsewhere. Sudan & Nubia 18:30–44. De Angelis, F. ed. 2013 Regionalism and Globalism in Antiquity: Exploring their Limits. Colloquia Antiqua 7. Peeters. de Garis Davies, Ni. and A. Gardiner 1926 The Tomb of Huy, Viceroy of Nubia in the Reign of Tut’ankhamūn (No. 40). Egypt Exploration Society Theban Tombs Series 4. Earle, T. 2011 Redistribution and the Political Economy: The Evolution of an Idea. American Journal of Archaeology 115(2):237–44.

1010   Mahmoud Suliman Bashir and Geoff Emberling Edwards, D.N. 1998a Gabati: A Meroitic, Post-Meroitic and Medieval Cemetery in Central Sudan 1. BAR International Series 740. Archaeopress. ——— 1998b Meroe and the Sudanic Kingdoms. Journal of African History 39:175–93. ——— 2011 Slavery and Slaving in the Medieval and Post-Medieval Kingdoms of the Middle Nile. In Slavery in Africa: Archaeology and Memory, ed. P.J. Lane and K.C. MacDonald, pp. 79–108. Oxford University Press. ——— 2014 Early Meroitic Pottery and the Creation of an Early Imperial Culture? In Ein Forscherleben zwischen den Welten. Zum 80. Geburtstag von Steffen Wenig, ed. A. Lohwasser and P. Wolf, pp. 51–63. Sudanarchäologischen Gesellschaft zu Berlin. Emberling, G., B.B. Williams, C. Meyer, and R. Shonkwiler 2010 The Kingdom of Kush in the 4th Cataract: Archaeological Salvage of the Oriental Institute Nubian Expedition 2007 Season. Gdańsk Archaeological Museum African Reports 7:17–54. Engelmayer, R. 1965 Die Felsgravierungen im Distrikt Sayala-Nubien I. Die Schiffsdarstellungen. Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften Philosophisch-Historische Klasse Denkschriften 90. Hermann Böhlaus. Förster, F. 2013 Beyond Dakhla: The Abu Ballas Trail in the Libyan Desert (SW Egypt). In Desert Road Archaeology in Ancient Egypt and Beyond, ed. F. Förster and H. Riemer, pp. 297–337. Africa Praehistorica 27. Cologne: Heinrich-Barth-Institut. Garraty, C.P. 2010 Investigating Market Exchange in Ancient Societies: A Theoretical Review. In Archaeological Approaches to Market Exchange in Ancient Societies, ed. C.P. Garraty and B.L. Stark, pp. 3–32. University Press of Colorado. Gatto, M. 2000 The Most Ancient Evidence of the “A-Groups” [sic] Culture in Lower Nubia. In Recent Research into the Stone Age of Northeastern Africa, ed. L. Krzyżaniak, K. Kroeper, and M.  Kobusiewicz, pp. 105–17. Studies in African Archaeology 7. Poznań: Poznań Archaeological Museum. Graeber, D. 2012 Debt: The First 5,000 Years. Melville House. Gratien, B. 2004 From Egypt to Kush: Administrative Practices and Movements of Goods during the Middle Kingdom and the Second Intermediate Period. In Nubian Studies 1998: Proceedings of the Ninth Conference of the International Society of Nubian Studies, ed. T. Kendall, pp. 74–82. Department of African-American Studies, Northeastern University. Griffith, F.L. 1922 Oxford Excavations in Nubia. Liverpool Annals of Archaeology and Anthropology 9:67–124. Haaland, R. 2014 The Meroitic Empire: Trade and Cultural Influences in an Indian Ocean Context. African Archaeological Review 31(4):649–73. Haaland, R. and P. Shinnie eds. 1985 African Iron-Working: Ancient and Traditional. Norwegian University Press. Hafsaas-Tsakos, H. 2009 The Kingdom of Kush: An African Centre on the Periphery of the Bronze Age World System. Norwegian Archaeological Review 42(1):50–70. Heidorn, L. 1997 The Horses of Kush. Journal of Near Eastern Studies 56(2):105–14. Helms, M.W. 1993 Craft and the Kingly Ideal: Art, Trade, and Power. University of Texas Press. Hintze, F. 1962 Preliminary Report on the Excavations at Musawwarat Es Sufra, 1960–1. Kush 10:170–202. Hoffmeier, J.K. 2012 Sinai in Egyptian, Levantine and Hebrew (Biblical) Perspectives. In The History of the Peoples of the Eastern Desert, ed. H. Barnard and K. Duistermaat, pp. 104–24. Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Monograph 73. Cotsen Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles.

Trade in Ancient Nubia: Routes, Goods, and Structures   1011 Hofmann, I. 1991 Der Wein- und Ölimport im Meroitischen Reich. In Egypt and Africa: Nubia from Prehistory to Islam, ed. W.V. Davies, pp. 234–45. British Museum Press. Iacumin, P., H. Bocherens, and L. Chaix 2001 Keratin C and N Stable Isotope Ratios of Fossil Cattle Horn from Kerma (Sudan): A Record of Dietary Changes. Il quaternario 14(1):41–46. Jesse, F. 2014 On the Borders of Kushite Power: The Gala Abu Ahmed Fortress in Lower Wadi Howar, Northern Sudan. In The Fourth Cataract and Beyond: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference for Nubian Studies, ed. J.R. Anderson and D.A. Welsby, pp. 545–55. British Museum Publications on Egypt and Sudan 1. Peeters. Kleinitz, C. 2007 Rock Art Landscapes of the Fourth Nile Cataract: Characterisations and First Comparisons. In Proceedings of the Second International Conference on the Archaeology of the Fourth Nile Cataract, ed. C. Näser and M. Lange, pp. 213–34. Meroitica 23. Harrassowitz. Kristiansen, K., T. Lindkvist, and M. Janken eds. 2016 Trade and Civilization. TOPOI. Larsen, M.T. 2015 Ancient Kanesh: A Merchant Colony in Bronze Age Anatolia. Cambridge University Press. Lawler, A. 2017 Were Nomads the World’s First Traders? Science 358(6370):1518–19. Lichtheim, M. 1973 Ancient Egyptian Literature, v. 1: The Old and Middle Kingdoms. University of California Press. Liverani, M. 1988 Prestige and Interest: International Relations in the Near East ca. 1600–1100 bc. History of the Ancient Near East Studies 1. Sargon. ——— 2015 Exchange Models in Historical Perspective. In Policies of Exchange: Political Systems and Modes of Interaction in the Aegean and the Near East in the 2nd Millennium bce, ed. B. Eder and R. Pruzsinszky, pp. 19–31. Vienna: Austrian Academy of Sciences Press. Lohwasser, A. 2012 A Survey in the Western Bayuda: The Wadi Abu Dom Itinerary Project (W.A.D.I.). Sudan & Nubia 16:109–17. Lohwasser, A., J. Eger, and T. Karberg 2016 Das Projekt Wadi Abu Dom Itinerary (W.A.D.I.) Kampagne 2016. Der Antike Sudan. Mitteilungen der Sudanarchäologischen Gesellschaft zu Berlin 27:71–85. Magee, Peter 2015 When Was the Dromedary Domesticated in the Ancient Near East? Zeitschrift für Orient-Archäologie 8:252–77. Mahmoud Suliman Bashir 2013 A Third Season of Rescue Excavations in the Meroitic Cemetery at Berber, October 2012: Preliminary Report. Sudan & Nubia 17:90–100. ——— 2015 The Meroitic Cemetery at Berber: Discussion on Funerary Practices and Implications for the Understanding of the Role of Sorghum and Trade in the Meroitic Society in the Middle Nile Region. Doctoral dissertation, University of Bergen. ——— 2017 Archaeological Survey along the Berber-Suakin Caravan Route: Preliminary Report. Sudan & Nubia 21: 204–10. Mallory-Greenough, L. 2005 The Horse Burials of Nubia. Journal of the Society for the Study of Egyptian Antiquities 32:105–19. Marshall, F. and L.  Weissbrod 2011 Domestication Processes and Morphological Change: Through the Lens of the Donkey and African Pastoralism. Current Anthropology 52(S4):S397–S413. McIntosh, S.K. 1999 Pathways to Complexity: An African Perspective. In Beyond Chiefdoms: Pathways to Complexity in Africa, ed. S.K. McIntosh, pp. 1–30. Cambridge University Press. Mitchell, P. 2005 African Connections: Archaeological Perspectives on Africa and the Wider World. AltaMira.

1012   Mahmoud Suliman Bashir and Geoff Emberling Moreno García, J.C. 2016 Economies in Transition: Trade, “Money”, Labour and Nomads at the Turn of the 1st Millennium BC. In Dynamics of Production in the Ancient Near East 1300–500 BC, ed. J.C. Moreno García, pp. 1–39. Oxbow. ——— 2018 Leather Processing, Castor Oil, and Desert/Nubian Trade at the Turn of the 3rd/2nd Millennium BC: Some Speculative Thoughts on Egyptian Craftsmanship. In The Arts of Making in Ancient Egypt: Voices, Images, and Objects of Material Producers 2000–1550 BC, ed. G. Miniaci, J.C. Moreno García, S. Quirke, and A. Stauder, pp. 159–73. Sidestone Press. Morkot, R.G. 2016 North-east Africa and Trade at the Crossroads of the Nile Valley, the Mediterranean and the Red Sea. In Dynamics of Production in the Ancient Near East 1300–500 BC, ed. J.C. Moreno García, pp. 257–74. Oxbow. Muhs, B. 2016 The Ancient Egyptian Economy, 3000–30 bce. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Müller-Wollermann, R. 2016 Temples, Trade and Money in Egypt in the 1st Millennium BC. In Dynamics of Production in the Ancient Near East 1300–500 BC, ed. J.C. Moreno García, pp. 275–88. Oxbow. Munro-Hay, S. 1982 The Foreign Trade of the Aksumite Port of Adulis. Azania 17(1):107–25. Otto, K.-H. and G.  Buschendorf-Otto 1993 Felsbilder aus dem sudanesischen Nubien. Publikation der Nubien-Expedition 1961–1963 Band 2. Akademie Verlag. Paulette, T. 2016 Grain, Storage, and State Making in Mesopotamia (3200–2000 BC). In Storage in Complex Societies: Administration, Organization, and Control, ed. L.R. Manzanilla and M.S. Rothman, pp. 85–109. Routledge. Phillips, J. 1997 Punt and Aksum: Egypt and the Horn of Africa. Journal of African History 38(3):423–57. Polanyi, K. 1957 The Economy as Instituted Process. In Trade and Market in the Early Empires, ed. K. Polanyi, C.M. Arensberg, and H.W. Pearson, pp. 243–69. The Free Press. Renfrew, C. 1975 Trade as Action at a Distance: Questions of Integration. In Ancient Civilization and Trade, ed. J.A. Sabloff and C.C. Lamberg-Karlovsky, pp. 3–59. University of New Mexico Press. Richards, J. 2002 Text and Context in Late Old Kingdom Egypt: The Archaeology and Historiography of Weni the Elder. Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt 39:75–102. Rowley-Conwy, P. 1988 The Camel in the Nile Valley: New Radiocarbon Accelerator (AMS) dates from Qaṣr Ibrim. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 74:245–48. Ruffieux, P. and Mahmoud Suliman Bashir 2014 The Korosko Road Project: Preliminary Report on Some New Kingdom Amphorae from the Korosko Road. Sudan & Nubia 18:44–46. Sabloff, J.A. and C.C. Lamberg-Karlovsky eds. 1975 Ancient Civilization and Trade. University of New Mexico Press. Schrader, S.A., S.T. Smith, S. Olsen, and M. Buzon 2018 Symbolic Equids and Kushite State Formation: A Horse Burial at Tombos. Antiquity 92(362):383–97. Sherratt, S. 2016 From “Institutional” to “Private”: Traders, Routes and Commerce from the Late Bronze Age to the Iron Age. In Dynamics of Production in the Ancient Near East 1300–500 BC, ed. J.C. Moreno García, pp. 289–301. Oxbow. Shinnie, P.L. 1991 Trade Routes of the Ancient Sudan 3,000 BC–AD 350. In Egypt and Africa: Nubia from Prehistory to Islam, ed. W.V. Davies, pp. 49–53. British Museum Press.

Trade in Ancient Nubia: Routes, Goods, and Structures   1013 Smith, M.E. 2004 The Archaeology of Ancient State Economies. Annual Review of Anthropology 33:73–102. Smither, P. 1945 The Semnah Despatches. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 31:3–10. Takamiya, I.H. 2004 Egyptian Pottery Distribution in A-Group Cemeteries, Lower Nubia: Towards an Understanding of Exchange Systems between the Naqada Culture and the A-Group Culture. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 90:35–62. Then-Obluska, J. and B. Wagner 2019 Glass Beads and Pendants from Meroitic and Nobadian Lower Nubia, Sudan: Chemical Compositional Analysis Using Laser Ablation-Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry. Archaeometry 61(4):856–73. Török, L. 1992 Ambulatory Kingship and Settlement History: A Study on the Contribution of Archaeology to Meroitic History. In Études nubiennes. Conférence de Genève, v. 1, ed. C. Bonnet, pp. 111–26. ——— 1997 The Kingdom of Kush: Handbook of the Napatan-Meroitic Civilization. Handbuch der Orientalistik I.31. Brill. ——— 2009 Between Two Worlds: The Frontier Region between Ancient Nubia and Egypt, 3700 BC–AD 500. Probleme der Ägyptologie 29. Brill. ——— 2011 Hellenizing Art in Ancient Nubia, 300 BC–AD 250, and its Egyptian Models: A Study in “Acculturation.” Culture and History of the Ancient Near East 53. Brill. Trigger, B.G. 1985 Land and Trade as Patterns in Sudanese History. In Studi di paletnologia in onore di Salvatore  M.  Puglisi, ed. M.  Liverani, A.  Palmieri, and R.  Peroni, pp. 465–75. Università di Roma “La Sapienza.” ——— 2003 Understanding Early Civilizations. Cambridge University Press. ——— 2006 A History of Archaeological Thought, second edition. Cambridge University Press. Vercoutter, J. 1959 The Gold of Kush: Two Gold-washing Stations at Faras East. Kush 7:120–53. ——— 1970 Mirgissa 1. Direction Générale des Relations Culturelles, Scientifiques et Techniques (Paris). Vincentelli, I. 2003 Trade and Caravan Routes in Meroitic Times. In Arid Lands in Roman Times, ed. M. Liverani, pp. 79–86. Arid Zone Archaeology 4. Insegna del Giglio. ——— 2011 The Treasury and Other Buildings at Sanam. In La pioche et la plume. Autour du Soudan, du Liban et de la Jordanie. Hommages archéologiques à Patrice Lenoble, ed. V. Rondot, F. Alpi, and F. Villeneuve, pp. 269–82. Presses de l’université Paris-Sorbonne. Wallerstein, I. 1974 The Modern World System, v. 1: Capitalist Agriculture and the Origins of the European World-Economy in the Sixteenth Century. Academic Press. Welsby, D.A. 1996 The Kingdom of Kush: The Napatan and Meroitic Empires. British Museum Press. ——— 2001 Life on the Desert Edge: Seven Thousand Years of Settlement in the Northern Dongola Reach, Sudan. Sudan Archaeological Research Society Publication 7. BAR International Series 980. Oxford: Archaeopress. Wengrow, D. 2010 What Makes Civilization? The Ancient Near East and the Future of the West. Oxford University Press. Wenig, S. 1978 Africa in Antiquity: The Arts of Ancient Nubia and the Sudan, v. 2: The Catalogue. The Brooklyn Museum. Williams, B. 1986 Excavations between Abu Simbel and the Sudanese Frontier, Part 1: The A-Group Royal Cemetery at Qustul: Cemetery L. University of Chicago Oriental Institute Nubian Expedition 3.

1014   Mahmoud Suliman Bashir and Geoff Emberling Williams, B. and T.J.  Logan 1987 The Metropolitan Museum Knife Handle and Aspects of Pharaonic Imagery before Narmer. Journal of Near Eastern Studies 44(4):245–85. Yoffee, N. 1993 Mesopotamian Interaction Spheres. In Early Stages in the Evolution of Mesopotamian Civilization: Soviet Excavations in Northern Iraq, ed. N. Yoffee and J.J. Clark, pp. 257–69. University of Arizona Press. Yusuf Fadl Hasan 1977 The Fur Sultanate and the Long-Distance Caravan Trade 1650–1850. In The Central Bilad al-Sudan: Tradition and Adaptation, ed. Yusuf Fadl Hasan and Pau Doornbos, pp. 201–15. Al Tamaddon (Khartoum).

Chapter 50

Wom en i n A ncien t K ush Angelika Lohwasser and Jacke Phillips

Introduction Research into ancient Nubian women has generally been divided by two different available types of data. Royal women, of different political and familial positions but especially queens, have been extensively researched, to a large degree based on evidence through contemporary texts in several languages and scripts, burial structures and accoutrements, and visual imagery. Other women, still of elite class, can be studied through similar but far more limited available data. Both are almost solely limited to the Napatan and Meroitic periods. “Ordinary” women, down to slave level, are virtually absent and anonymous in most of these data. “Commoners,” especially women, are rarely mentioned in royal and elite texts and visual imagery, barring enumeration as slaves or captives. They can really only be studied through their physical remains, their graves and grave goods, and their anonymous depictions in the artistic repertoire, both indigenous and foreign. In mitigation, however, surviving evidence for these women encompasses the entire prehistoric and historic periods of Nubian culture. Preservation and data can be skewed, for organic preservation deteriorates southwards from the desert of Lower Nubia to the sahel of Upper Nubia so that physical remains and grave goods are less well preserved as one progresses up the Nile. Contemporary Egyptian records are an additional resource over much of its pharaonic period, especially for Nubian women living in Egypt or married to Egyptians, where they are represented in Egyptian style but with recognizable indications of their Nubian identity (van Pelt 2013; Pemler 2018).

1016   Angelika Lohwasser and Jacke Phillips

Royal and Elite Nubian Women before the Kingdom of Kush Royal women, and especially the queens, are the best documented women in the ancient sources. Most evidence dates to the Napatan and Meroitic periods, discussed below. Earlier evidence is scanty, but female importance and authority in that royal hierarchy is visible earlier. The first female Nubian “Ruler” (ḥeḳat) (Morkot 2012:119) known to us is named Satjyt of Iamenas, in an Egyptian Middle Kingdom Execration Text. Several Old Kingdom Execration Texts specifically name women, the “Foreign Ruler’s Wife” Kebity and another three lacking titles. One reference then cites the names of their mothers rather than their fathers to specifically identify them in the text (Posener 1987:29 no. A9; Ward 1989:293; Espinel 2013:27–29; Phillips 2016:288). Nordström’s (1996:36) conclusion, based on grave and cemetery analyses, that A-Group women “clearly dominated the higher classes of the rank . . . where a strong matrilineal tradition was the rule,” suggests their importance and authority extended even further back in time. At the temple of Semna is an enigmatic depiction with an inscription of Katimala (or Kadimalo or Karimala) that is dated to the Third Intermediate Period, perhaps later 10th or 9th century bce (Caminos 1998:20–27; Darnell 2006; Ritner 2009). In the caption above her, she is specifically called “Great Wife of the King, Daughter of a King,” but in the caption in front of her she is additionally called “King of Upper and Lower Egypt,” in feminine form. Therefore it is not clear if she was a ruling queen or if the appeal of the anonymous king in front of her is directed to her as a deceased royal woman. Moreover, her name can be either Meroitic (kdi “woman”; mlo “good”) or Libyan, either of which would suit a queen of that period. These few isolated records underline not only the early existence of distinct in­de­ pend­ent Nubian polities, but also the high status and power of their royal and non-royal women already at that time. Satjyt is a reigning monarch and Kebity a royal consort; Egypt not only knew them by name but also believed they and the other (untitled) women were sufficiently dangerous to warrant spells eliminating their power through magic. And it is Katimala, not her husband, who dominates both image and text at Semna (Fig. 50.1). Representations of women in Egyptian art are identified as Nubian through their physiognomy (e.g., Wildung 1997: cat. 84), clothing and accoutrements, titles, and the etymology of their names. Our most important visual source for early Nubian royal women is a tribute scene in the late 18th Dynasty tomb of Huy, King’s Son of Kush, at Thebes (Fig.  50.2; Wilkinson  1983: col. pl. 42). Here two anonymous Lower Nubian women usually called a princess and noblewoman are escorted with chiefs of Wawat and their entourage into the presence of the Viceroy of Kush Huy, one walking and the other riding in an ox-drawn cart below a sunshade. Both clearly are elite and perhaps royal, but their titles are modern interpretations. Both are richly dressed in Egyptian-style clothing with added Nubian elements, including armlets and other symbolic accoutre-

Women in Ancient Kush   1017

Figure 50.1  Panel of Katimala at the Temple of Semna (after Caminos 1998: pl. 15).

ments (van Pelt 2013:534–35), but the artist may simply be depicting stereotypically ethnic Nubian accessories rather than what they actually wore in this scene. Non-royal women in this scene are discussed below.

Royal Women and the Concept of Queenship in the Kingdom of Kush The royal women of the kingdom of Kush are documented in numerous pictorial, textual, and archaeological sources (Lohwasser 2001b:20–57). Depictions of royal women accompanying the ruler are found on temple walls as well as in the lunettes of royal stelae. Within the inscriptions of these stelae, these women are mentioned several times. These two categories of sources are most significant for the research of gender. The archaeological record, first of all the tombs within the royal cemeteries, add details to the emerging picture of representation and roles of the royal women. As with other areas of research on the kingdom of Kush, we have to deal differently with the Napatan and the Meroitic phases. On the one hand, texts of the Napatan period are written in the Egyptian language and hieroglyphs and therefore are understandable today. Since the meaning of Meroitic texts remains far from clear, we have to rely only on

1018   Angelika Lohwasser and Jacke Phillips

Figure 50.2  Tribute scene in the tomb of Huy, TT 40, 18th Dynasty (after Wilkinson  1983: col. pl. 42).

­ on-textual sources and on external texts for that period. On the other hand, although royal n women already have an extraordinary position within Kushite kingship in the Napatan period, the final step to be a ruling queen was achieved only in the Meroitic period.

The Costume of Kushite Royal Women There is a remarkable difference between Napatan and Meroitic representations of royal women (Figs. 50.3 and 50.4). In the Napatan period, a large shawl was wrapped around the body below the armpits or around the hips. A second shawl, which could be fringed or decorated with woven stripes, was worn over the first. Sometimes women draped a sash over the shoulder. A small tab-like element hangs below the hem of a dress to reach the ground. This diagnostic element has been described as a “little tail” that Lohwasser (1999) has argued is an animal tail (fox?) as a counterpart to the king’s bull’s tail. Napatan women were depicted with their natural hair, in contrast to the wigs of contemporary Egyptian women. The “Kushite headdress,” an unusual headgear with band-like elements springing upward from tiny “supports” to arch down over the back of the head, is worn in a few instances. They might be interpreted as feathers. Kushite royal woman are seldom depicted wearing the vulture headdress. Often a fillet that served to secure a lotus blossom at the forehead and/or a uraeus was tied around the head. The most frequently documented headgear consists of double plumes with sun disc and cow horns. The headdress is short and squat in comparison to its Egyptian prototype, and provided a basis for later Meroitic styles. In contrast to Napatan royal women’s clothing, the costume of the Meroitic queen (kandake) is similar to that of the king. The royal vestments consist of a long underdress and a coat with pleats and fringes at the bottom and at the vertical edge (Török 1990). A shawl with long fringes drapes over the right shoulder. Another element of the royal regalia is the tasseled cord hanging down from the shoulders of the royal person. Another costume of the queen is a dress covered with wings and feathers of the falcon. The skirt is overloaded with feathers and even the claws(?) of the bird. A girdle with two uraeus-serpents keeps the skirt tight. The upper part of the body is naked.

Women in Ancient Kush   1019

Figure 50.3  Lunette of the Stela of Harsiyotef (JE 48864) (after Grimal 1981: pl. X).

The Meroitic queen wears sandals, broad bracelets with decoration, and also jewelry on the upper arm. A famous accessory is the necklace with large spherical beads already common in the Kerma culture. Broad necklaces, rings, and earrings are typical. On the head the queen can wear a cap with a uraeus (sometimes with the body of a falcon), the Hathor-crown, the feathers of Amun, or other crowns. It is remarkable that the king’s costume is the model for that of the Meroitic queens, whereas in Napatan times it is completely different. But, in contrast to goddesses who are depicted very slim, the Meroitic queen is shown very fat—again noticeably different from Napatan queens, who were represented much slimmer.

Names and Titles of Royal Women in Kush Nearly all names of royal women are Meroitic—that is, they were indigenous, local women. Some few Kushite women with Egyptian names are known in the 25th Dynasty, but their names may also have had Meroitic versions (like the variants Paabtamery and Pabatma). The fundamental exceptions are the names of princesses who became “God’s Wives of Amun” in Egypt (see below). Several theophorous names, all composed with

1020   Angelika Lohwasser and Jacke Phillips

Figure 50.4  Depiction of Amanitore on the pylon of the Lion Temple in Naqa (after GamerWallert 1983: pl. 2).

name of the god Amani (Amun), are also known. Although typical of the Meroitic period (as in Amanirenas, Amanishakheto, Amanitore) a few already appeared in the Napatan period (Amanimalol, Amanitakaye, Tekehatamani). The titles and epithets documented for Napatan royal women are not numerous (Lohwasser 2001b:192–209). Only a few titles indicate a priestly role. Some titles imply a

Women in Ancient Kush   1021 specific status at court; others are analogous to king’s titles expressing dominion. Other titles, especially those with the element henut (mistress) hint at a political duty, but the precise meaning remains unclear (Pope 2014:222–23). The epithets express the esteem in which they were held, or refer to agreeable characteristics. All these epithets, like “great of praise,” “sweet of love,” or “great one of loveliness,” were also used in pharaonic Egypt. It seems that there is—besides the flattery—no further meaning incorporated within these epithets (contra Török 1995:102–108). Besides titles and epithets, royal women bear kinship terms. Interpretation of these terms is crucial for understanding the succession of the throne of Kush. There are different reconstructions of the succession system: patrilinear, matrilinear, collateral, election, adoption, and variations including elements of several of these opinions (for discussions see Morkot 1999; Lohwasser 2000, 2001b:226–56; Kahn 2005; Saito 2015). There are arguments for each of these systems and the problem seems unresolved as yet. Apart from the succession system, “Mother of the King” seems to be the highest rank within the kinship terms. In the Meroitic period, two distinct titles are given to royal women: kandake and qore. While qore means “ruler, king” and is used by male as well as female monarchs, kandake is exclusive to royal women. The precise meaning is unclear, but it is assumed that it identifies the mother of the ruler (Zach 1992). Kandake is the title used by Classical authors to describe the unusual influence of royal women in Meroitic state affairs and early European travelers to Sudan thought it was a personal name (Candace in English).

Royal Women in the Tombs of El-Kurru, Nuri, and Meroe The tombs of the female members of the Kushite royal court are an important source of information about their status. In the Napatan period, many are buried in the royal necropolises of El-Kurru and Nuri, some few in Egypt and some already at Meroe (Dunham 1950, 1955, 1957; summarized with literature in Lohwasser 2001b:58–138). At El-Kurru, the oldest of the royal cemeteries where the royal ancestors are buried, royal women were buried in two groups, south and north of the central group with the royal graves. Although we have very little inscriptional evidence, location, size, and equipment provide data indicative of a hierarchical distribution of burials within the cemetery. At Nuri, the tombs of the female members of the court are positioned likewise in different groups: in the southern group and within the largest tombs except those of the kings, the “Mothers of the Kings” are buried. “Kings’ Wives” were laid to rest primarily in the two rows of tombs north of the pyramid of Taharqo (Nu. 1), and seem to have had intermediate status. In the very north, there is a group with especially small graves having few textual documents and hardly any titles—the women of lowest status in the royal court. By the mid-3rd century bce most royal tombs were built at Meroe while, for unknown reasons, some members of the royal family preferred burial on the desert plateau just west of Jebel Barkal. In the royal cemeteries of Meroe (Begrawiya South and

1022   Angelika Lohwasser and Jacke Phillips North) only kings, ruling queens, and a few other queens were buried. The distribution picture is not as clear as in the Napatan cemeteries, but again we can state that other than rulers, only some queens were interred here (Dunham 1957). It is noteworthy that royal women were included in the cemeteries of the kings, which was not the case in Egypt. It is also noteworthy that male members of the royal family (except the king himself) were not given burial there. The cemeteries of El-Kurru, Nuri, and Begrawiya North are reserved only for the kings and their female complements.

Roles of Royal Women in Temple Cult and Ritual In the cult of the gods, the royal women of Kush assisted the kings by shaking the sistrum (ritual rattle) and pouring a libation—both part of the preparation for communication with the gods. Furthermore, the libation of liquid is an offering by itself and might express a wish for fertility. Thus, the Kushite royal women participated in the cult that in contemporary Egypt was restricted to the king. In the Meroitic period, and especially at the time of Natakamani and Amanitore—the rulers who left most of the known representations so far—queens could act as the king himself: she smites the enemy, she raises her hands in adoration in front of the gods in the temple, and she even receives the crowns from the gods. The most important event that ensured the continuity of kingship was the enthronement of the new king. Royal women were mentioned and represented in the context of the coronation ceremonies. In Kush, the coronation was symbolized by the “presenting of Ma’at, pectoral and necklace” motif (Lohwasser 1995). This scene is depicted in the lunette of several royal stelae as well as on temple walls. In each case the king is accompanied by two royal women, a “Mother of the King” and a “Wife of the King.” They assist him at the occasion of this crucial ceremony by shaking sistrums and pouring libation. Their presence at this very moment implies that the female counterpart was eminently important. In the Napatan period, no representation of the coronation exists without royal women. The “Mother of the King” especially played a decisive role. Besides her potential influence in the succession system, she made a journey to her newly crowned son and delivered a speech to Amun to bestow the rulership to “their” son. Since these documents are textual sources, we cannot trace them into the Meroitic period, but perhaps two seal rings of Amanishakheto hint at a similar practice in that time. One (Berlin ÄMP Inv.-No. 1747) shows the election of the future ruler by the queen, grasping the elbow of the child. This gesture is identified as the predestination of the king by the gods in ritual context (e.g., Wenig 1993:211). On the other (Berlin ÄMP Inv.-No. 1723), the goddess Mut—as divine aspect of the earthly queen—presents the future king before Amun/Amani. Although we do not yet have an explicit mention of the role of Meroitic royal wives in the coronation ceremony, these rings might refer to it.

Women in Ancient Kush   1023

Royal Women in the Ideology of Kingship The lunettes of royal Napatan stelae are a good starting point to place royal women within the conceptual frame of Kushite kingship (Fig. 50.3). In the Napatan period, the king is depicted accompanied by his mother and wife. The opposing male and female principles form a whole. They complement each other and are essential for ongoing renewal (Lohwasser 2001b:334–49). The guarantee for continuation of life and kingdom is visible in the complementary male/female dichotomy. But it is not only the complementary of gender that is depicted by the king and his female companions; the king’s mother is an expression of the ancestors. Through her presence the king is linked to his forefathers and through the presence of his wife he is connected to the future and the eternal continuation of kingship. Moreover, these two women depicted in the lunettes show layers of influence of queenship. The rule of the king is based on two factors guaranteeing the durability of rulership: the initial and unique action of a god and the continuous exercising of rulership by the king is ritualized in the coronation (granted by the god) and the performance of kingly duties such as cult activities, temple construction, and guaranteeing the order in the kingdom. Therefore, following the hypothesis of Assmann (1990:208–209), Lohwasser (2001b:344–45) proposes to confront the unique occurrence of “becoming a king” with the continuum of “being a king.” Kushite queenship is to be integrated into this scheme. The antithetical composition of the lunette renders this image precisely in its Kushite manifestation. On one side, the “Mother of the King” is shown in a manner entirely characteristic for Kush: she bears responsibility for her son becoming a king— by her descent and by her ritual role in the coronation ceremonies. On the other side, the “Wife of the King” accompanies him. She is the female component that complements the male ruler. Without the female component, renewal is impossible. Her task lies in continually reiterating that the king exists and endures. Therefore, queenship as a component of rulership is responsible for guaranteeing the kingship of the king and thus the continued existence of the kingdom. Without the female aspect, rulership would not function. The concept of queenship in Kush gave royal women the possibility of becoming active participants. In the Meroitic period, certain royal women ascended to the throne. Although the title qore is primarily male, the representation of the ruling queens was explicitly female (Fig. 50.4). But the rulership—the office of the king—was also male. We know at least six ruling queens by their tombs in Meroe. In the depictions on their pyramid chapels, we find the representation of a (usually anonymous) man behind the queen. It is reasonable to interpret these men as the male complement of the female ruler. If the ideology of the Kushite kingdom is built upon complementary male and female aspects—or powers— the male king needs a female companion like the royal women presented in the lunettes

1024   Angelika Lohwasser and Jacke Phillips of the stelae, and the female qore needs a male support as on the depictions on the pyramid chapels.

The Kushite “God’s Wives of Amun” in 25th Dynasty Egypt In Egypt, there existed a ritual office of high influence held by women, the institution of the “God’s Wives of Amun.” The “God’s Wife of Amun” (GWA) was the highest-ranking priestess in Ancient Egypt and had religious, political, and economic influence especially in the early 1st millennium bce. In the 25th Dynasty, two of the reigning God’s Wives and at least one designated women in this office were Kushite and not Egyptian (Lohwasser 2016). Amenirdis I, Shepenwepet II, and Amenirdis II were Nubian through their biological filiation, expressed by the mention of their Kushite fathers Kashta, Piye (Piankhy), and Taharqo—powerful kings of the 25th Dynasty. But it seems that at the moment the princesses entered the traditional Egyptian institution of the GWA, they adopted a nearly full Egyptian appearance. They assumed an Egyptian name (we do not know a Meroitic birth name for any of these women) and appear completely Egyptian both iconographically and according to their titles and epithets. Although no counterpart of the GWA is known in Kush, the political influence and power of this institution was fruitfully used by the Kushites to stabilize their rule in Egypt: based on the Kushite ideology of kingship, they needed a female counterpart for a successful rule. In Egypt, queenship did not have the same weight as the Kushite complement for kingship, but the institution of the GWA fulfilled Kushite requirements. Therefore, they intensified its influence and increased its power. Moreover, they assimilated the possibilities of selfrepresentation to those of the kings to convey a balance of male and female components of (ritual) power, at least in the region of Thebes. After the expulsion of the Kushite kings from Egypt, they did not transfer the institution or the office to Nubia. Within their concept of kingship, all the royal women could act as female complement and therefore as counterparts of the male king.

Non-Royal Women in Ancient Nubia Nubian studies are little influenced by the perspectives on gender that have permeated archaeological and anthropological literature over recent decades (e.g., Sorensen 2000; Hays-Gilpin 2008; Perego 2015:5–7). The title of the first sub-section below most closely follows the interpretation of gender as “often [being] used as a synonym for . . . ‘women’ ” (Wilfong 2010:164) that, given the state of the discipline for this region, is virtually all it can do. As noted by Lyons (2006:575; 2007:1), “gender has not emerged as a priority in

Women in Ancient Kush   1025 African archaeology.” Nonetheless, the roles of Napatan and Meroitic queens, princesses, and other royal women within their societies have been discussed for nearly a century (Macadam 1949:119–31). Otherwise, gendered comparison of Nubian men and women is dominated by the sometimes speculative inferences derived from statistical analyses of skeletal material and associated grave goods and comparison with recent anthropological/ethnographic data. Evidence for non-elite women is infrequent and limited, so the underlying data found in other research fields essentially is insufficient for discussion or conclusions regarding issues of Nubian gender. The paucity of specific data found in this chapter underlines the need for further research and excavation, but gender issues are addressed when sufficiently viable. Our understanding of non-royal Nubian women is far less detailed and its evidence very different, yet they are far better understood overall. The vast majority of evidence derives from excavation, analysis, and interpretation of physical remains spanning many millennia, providing a more extended although far more general picture that indicates a surprising continuity over the successive cultural periods. Extended cultural continuity is a recognized feature of Nubian society, where certain aspects continue throughout or repeatedly reappear over time and space (Phillips 2016).

Gender and the Individual Analysis of excavated bodies provides our most direct evidence for the lives of Nubian women, especially when compared to those of men. Although mostly derived from statistical osteological data, overall windows into their lives have emerged especially concerning their physical appearance, life expectancy and lifestyles, physical trauma, diseases and other health issues, and, through associated graves and grave goods, interpretation of their beliefs, occupations, interaction, and status. Physical evidence reveals a consistently lower incidence of injury than men, usually attributed to their dramatically different occupations (domestic and child-rearing vs field labor and warfare), with generally consistent life expectancy over multiple cultural periods. Mortality rates are consistent at least through to the Kerma period, and life expectancy similar to that of men in the Christian period, other than adult women aged 20–30/35 that logically is attributed to complications of pregnancy and childbirth (Armelagos 1969:259; Pudło 1999:60; Adams 2004:118). Women could live at least into their 70s despite a variety of traumatic, congenital, chronic, and degenerative medical conditions such as broken bones, spina bifida, extreme tooth wear and significant osteoporosis (Reavis 2014). That they must have lived with some conditions for decades or even their entire lives suggests general social, community, and familial acceptance, together with extended care and protection of their weaker members. One Napatan king specifically commanded his subjects: “Do not afflict the widow(!)” (Eide et al. 1994, no. 34), suggesting at minimum some measure of royal protection of women at this time at least.

1026   Angelika Lohwasser and Jacke Phillips Body proportion and body adornment are indicated through well-preserved human remains as well as artistic representation. Although not artificially mummified as in Egypt, a large number of excavated bodies preserve more than bones, both men and women. In some cases skin, hair, and organs survive well, and tell us something of their own self-perception. Tattooing and scarification are quite common throughout the centuries. The earliest evidence is seen on female figurines dating to the Neolithic through C-Group periods (Tassie 2003; see also Dann, Chapter 51, this volume). Incised lines and dashes and punctuated dots around the neck, on the upper front torso, down the legs and arms, around the genitals and buttocks, and even possibly on the forehead may be interpreted as either scarification or tattooing (or both), some with extensive coverage of the body surface. Tattooing is found on surviving excavated bodies, almost always women (and, exceptionally, some men), throughout the C-Group to Meroitic periods. Scarification is found on men as well as women over the same time, although apparently excepting the Napatan period (Tassie  2003). It has been suggested that tattooing on C-Group women was intended to distinguish the wearers from both the Egyptian and Kerma peoples to their north and south (Tassie 2003:88–89, 93, 99; Lobban 2004:77–80). Ethnographic comparison still seen today, although not among the younger generation, suggests that tattoos may indicate ethnic or tribal affiliation or social status (Kendall 1989:672–80). Excess female weight is seen as a beauty feature and social statement in many parts of Sub-Saharan Africa, including Nubia. While excavated individuals do not indicate excess weight through skin folding, artistic representation clearly indicates women preferred to be depicted as overweight. Steatopygy, where excess fat naturally accumulates around the buttocks and can extend into the hips and upper thighs, is represented on most Nubian images from the Neolithic period onwards. The vast majority of such images during the Napatan period are of royal and elite women. Early Napatan queens and goddesses are often but not always depicted as broad-hipped with heavy thighs and disproportionately narrow waist, as also seen in Egyptian art from late Dynasty 18 through the Ptolemaic period. Egyptian representations of Nubian (and Egyptian) women continue to depict them in this manner, but contemporary Nubian representations are less consistent. Napatan figures can be more or less exaggerated, but the “broad-hipped” profiles continue well into Meroitic times in Nubian art. Meroitic winged female ba-statues representing the deceased and women depicted on Napatan and later relief stelae are also broad-hipped with a disproportionately narrow waist (Woolley and Randall-MacIver 1910: pls. 2–8). Meroitic royal women are represented as proportionately overweight, but most female deities are proportionately thin, even when the two are depicted together; the varying thigh measurements of queen and deity on the Katimala scene is an early example of this visual dichotomy. It can only be assumed this was the image preferred by the women themselves. Adornment and clothing are embellishments to the body, whether for practical or aesthetic reasons. Ordinary women’s clothing in the early periods seems almost entirely limited to garments of cured cowhide—long wraparound skirts and loincloths, girdles, and skullcaps and other headdresses. Sandals are of goat- or sheepskin. Leather was ­decorated

Women in Ancient Kush   1027 (a)

(b)

Figure 50.5  Roll-out of incised design on bronze bowl from the Karanog cemetery, mid-3rd century ce (after O’Connor 1993:104–105).

with colored dyes, stamped designs and beaded patterns, and, in the Kerma period at least, tassles mica cut-outs were sewn on skullcaps (e.g., Bonnet 1990: cats. 113, 276, 282, 294). Pendant breasts indicate a typically bare torso. Two slave-women depicted in the princess’s delegation in the tomb of Huy at Thebes wear only a multi-colored skirt and distinctively Nubian animal tails tied onto their arms above the elbow, as well as large loop earrings to indicate their ethnicity (Fig.  50.2; Wilkinson  1983: col. pl. 42). Their apparently tailored skirts are comparable to the earliest surviving women’s clothing in C-Group graves and to an anonymous early Nubian goddess resembling the Egyptian Taweret. The same skirt continued to be worn not only by “commoners” but also by elite and even royal women well into the Meroitic period (Chapman and Dunham 1952:passim; Wildung 1997: cats. 309, 453; Haynes and Santini-Ritt 2012:184), including two of the three women depicted on two mid-3rd-­century ce bronze bowls from Karanog (Fig. 50.5; O’Connor 1993:104–105). Women, like men, also wore considerable quantities of brightly colored jewelry, whatever their status.

Occupations Through ethnographic inference and archaeological evidence, mainly associated grave goods, skeletal evidence, and finds distribution in habitation contexts, ordinary women mainly were concerned with child-rearing and household tasks. These would include cooking, baking and food processing, weaving and pot-making, leather processing, water collection, and likely some animal husbandry such as milking. They also ­undoubtedly worked in the fields over the annual agricultural cycle of sowing, reaping

1028   Angelika Lohwasser and Jacke Phillips and harvesting, then processing grain into bread and beer (Hafsaas  2006:16–17), all common female household tasks in pre-industrial societies. Domestic textile production is indicated by numerous loom-weights and bone needles in domestic contexts and female graves at different social classes. Some women may also have exceeded household production to barter excess goods such as pottery or textiles with neighbors or in markets. Larger households and institutions such as the royal palace, elite and wealthy households, temples, and other extended but integral communities undoubtedly included women who performed these same tasks on a more industrial scale, as well as wet-nurses, prostitutes, and other personal or institutional menials generally unrecorded in art and literature. Generic references to singers, dancers, and musicians in religious contexts clearly indicate that non-royal and non-elite women performed these roles in the temple, and very likely also in secular households and institutions. Many of these women would have been slaves, and not necessarily Nubian (Eide et al. 1998, nos. 331, 335). The individuals accompanying the deceased elite during the Kerma period may have been retainers or slaves. The vast majority of these sacrificial burials are women and young girls, rather than men and boys. Large numbers were found in the royal graves at Kerma, but one or more also accompany interred individuals of lesser rank. At the other end of the social spectrum, women individually portrayed on Napatan and Meroitic stelae and as Meroitic ba-statues (some including their name and familial affiliation) likely were noblewomen (Dunham 1963:397, fig. 220; Wildung 1997, cat. 309).

Death and Burial All social levels are represented in female graves, from very rich to very poor, to judge from their grave goods and, in some periods, grave size. Women were not segregated from men within cemeteries, nor distinguished by grave type, and were interred with similar quantities if not always similar types of grave goods. Most are individually interred, but combined male and female burials suggest husband and wife were interred together (e.g., Strouhal 1990). Burials and grave goods likely reflect familial rather than personal wealth and position, but some women were significant in their own right. Women nonetheless differed in their reaction to strong Egyptian influence and actual occupation. Female intermarriage with Egyptian men in both Egypt and Nubia is welldocumented at all levels of society up to and including queens (e.g., Vittmann 2007:155; Wildung 1997: cat. 84). Nubian women are recognizable by their physiognomy, dress, and name in Egyptian texts and art, and archaeologically distinguished from Egyptian women through their grave types, positions, orientation, and contents, both in Nubia and in Egypt. The two elite women in Huy’s tomb wear mostly Egyptian costume, but with added details distinguishing them as Nubian, and this is seen elsewhere even among Nubian women married to Egyptian men in Egypt. Nubian women also consciously chose to maintain their traditional cultural identity and continue to follow

Women in Ancient Kush   1029 t­raditional Nubian practices in the face of Egyptian colonization and Nubian male Egyptianization. Those living in the Second Intermediate Period–New Kingdom fortress town of Askut still used their familiar Kerma vessel types and cooking methodologies and they followed traditional Nubian burial practices at Tombos and Sanam despite Egyptian domination (Smith 2003:113–24; Lohwasser 2012:59–64).

Outlook Dealing with gender—whether in Nubia or elsewhere—is of course not only dealing with women. Nevertheless, we focus here on women only as analyses of kingship and society generally center on a male perspective. Development of gender-differentiated research in Nubian studies is very recent and remains unfocused, but is difficult due to the enormous quantity of material excavated when anthropological sexing either was not carried out or done with presumptive biases. Existing textual and (for most of Nubia’s history) pictorial material, almost entirely within the royal sphere, is a very small and biased corpus with limited promise for sensitive gender-differentiated research as seen elsewhere. With increased material from modern excavations (when published), a more detailed insight into this section of social life in Nubia should soon be possible.

References Cited Adams, W.Y. 2004 Peasant Archaeology in Nubia. In Fifty Years in the Archaeology of Africa: Themes in Archaeological Theory and Practice: Papers in Honour of John Alexander, ed. L. Smith, P. Rose, G. Wahida, and S. Wahida. Azania 39:111–24. Armelagos, G.J. 1969 Disease in Ancient Nubia. Science n.s. 163(3864):255–59. Assmann, J. 1990 Maat. Gerechtigkeit und Unsterblichkeit im Alten Ägypten. C.H. Beck. Bonnet, Charles 1990. Kerma, royaume de Nubie. Musée d’art et d’histoire (Geneva). Caminos, R. 1998 Semna-Kumma, v. 1: The Temple of Semna. Memoirs of the Archaeological Survey of Egypt 37. Egypt Exploration Society. Chapman, S.E. and D. Dunham 1952 Decorated Chapels of the Meroitic Pyramids at Meroë and Barkal. Royal Cemeteries of Kush 3. Museum of Fine Arts. Darnell, J.C. 2006 The Inscription of Queen Katimala at Semna: Textual Evidence for the Origins of the Napatan State. Yale Egyptological Studies 7. Yale University Press. Dunham, D. 1950 El Kurru. Royal Cemeteries of Kush 1. Harvard University Press. ——— 1955 Nuri. Royal Cemeteries of Kush 2. Museum of Fine Arts ——— 1957 Royal Tombs at Meroë and Barkal. Royal Cemeteries of Kush 4. Museum of Fine Arts. ——— 1963 The West and South Cemeteries at Meroë. Royal Cemeteries of Kush 5. Museum of Fine Arts. Eide, T., T.  Hägg, R.H.  Holton-Pierce, and L.  Török eds. 1994 Fontes Historiae Nubiorum: Textual Sources for the History of the Middle Nile Region between the Eighth Century BC and the Sixth Century AD, v. 1: From the Eighth to the Mid-Fifth Century BC. Department of Classics, University of Bergen.

1030   Angelika Lohwasser and Jacke Phillips ——— 1998 Fontes Historiae Nubiorum: Textual Sources for the History of the Middle Nile Region between the Eighth Century BC and the Sixth Century AD, v. 3: From the First to the Sixth Century AD. IKRR/Department of Greek, Latin, and Egyptology, University of Bergen. Espinel, A.D. 2013 A Newly Identified Old Kingdom Execration Text. In Decorum and Experience: Essays in Ancient Culture for John Baines, ed. E. Frood and A. McDonald, pp. 26–33. Griffith Institute. Online: https://www.academia.edu/8481136/2013_-_A_newly_ identified_Old_Kingdom_execration_text. Gamer-Wallert, I. 1983 Der Löwentempel von Naq’a in der Butana (Sudan), v. 3: Die Wandreliefs. Beihefte zum Tübinger Atlas des Vorderen Orients Reihe B, 48/3. Reichert. Grimal, N. 1981 Quatre stèles napatéennes au Musée du Caire JE 48863–48866. Mémoires de l’Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale 106. Hafsaas, H. 2006 Cattle Pastoralists in a Multicultural Setting: The C-Group People in Lower Nubia 2500–1500 bce. The Lower Jordan River Basin Programme Publication 10. Birzeit University. Hayes-Gilpin, K.A. 2008 Gender. In Handbook of Archaeological Theories, ed. R.A. Bentley, H.D.G. Maschner, and C. Chippindale, pp. 335–49. AltaMira. Haynes, J. and M.  Santini-Ritt 2012 Women in Ancient Nubia. In Ancient Nubia: African Kingdoms on the Nile, ed. M.J.  Fisher, P.  Lacovara, S.  Ikram, and S.  D’Auria, pp. 170–85. American University in Cairo Press. Kahn, D. 2005 The Royal Succession in the 25th Dynasty. Der Antike Sudan. Mitteilungen der Sudanarchäologischen Gesellschaft zu Berlin 16:143–63. Kendall, T. 1989 Ethnoarchaeology in Meroitic Studies. In Studia Meroitica 1984: Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference for Meroitic Studies, Rome 1984, ed. S. Donadoni and S. Wenig, pp. 625–745. Meroitica 10. Akademie Verlag. Lobban, R.  A. 2004 Historical Dictionary of Ancient and Medieval Nubia. Historical Dictionaries of Ancient Civilizations and Historical Eras 10. Scarecrow Press. Lohwasser, A. 1999 Die Darstellung der Tracht der Kuschitinnen in der 25. Dynastie. In Studien zum antiken Sudan, ed. S. Wenig, pp. 586–603. Meroitica 15. Harrassowitz. ——— 2000 Die Auswahl des Königs von Kusch. Beiträge zur Sudanforschung 7:85–102. ——— 2001a Queenship in Kush: Status, Role and Ideology of Royal Women. Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt 38:61–76. ——— 2001b Die königlichen Frauen im antiken Reich von Kusch. 25. Dynastie bis zur Zeit des Nastasen. Meroitica 19. Harrassowitz. ——— 2012 Aspekte der napatanischen Gesellschaft. Archäologisches Inventar und funeräre Praxis im Friedhof von Sanam—Perspektiven einer kulturhistorischen Interpretation. Contributions to the Archaeology of Egypt, Nubia and the Levant 1. Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Denkschriften der Gesamtakademie 67. ——— 2016 “Nubianess” and the God’s Wives of the 25th Dynasty: Office Holders, the Institution, Reception and Reaction. In Prayer and Power. Proceedings of the Conference on the God’s Wives of Amun in Egypt during the First Millennium BC, ed. M. Becker, A.I. Blöbaum, and A. Lohwasser, pp. 121–136. Ägypten und Altes Testament 84. Ugarit Verlag. Lyons, D. 2006 A Critical Appraisal of Gender Research in African Archaeology. In Handbook of Gender in Archaeology, ed. S.M. Nelson, pp. 595–631. AltaMira. Macadam, M.F.L. 1949 The Temples of Kawa, v. 1: The Inscriptions. Oxford University Press. Morkot, R. 1999 Kingship and Kinship in the Empire of Kush. In Studien zum antiken Sudan, ed. S. Wenig, pp. 179–229. Meroitica 15. Harrassowitz.

Women in Ancient Kush   1031 ——— 2012 Kings and Kingship in Ancient Nubia. In Ancient Nubia: African Kingdoms on the Nile, ed. M.J. Fisher, P. Lacovara, S. Ikram, and S. D’Auria, pp. 118–24. American University of Cairo Press. Nordström, H.-Å. 1996 The Nubian A-Group: Ranking Funerary Remains. Norwegian Archaeological Review 29:17–39. O’Connor, D. 1993 Ancient Nubia: Egypt’s Rival in Africa. University Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology, University of Pennsylvania. Pemler, D. 2018 Looking at Nubians in Egypt: Nubian Women in New Kingdom Tomb and Temple Scenes and the Case of TT 40 (Amenemhet Huy). Dotawo: A Journal of Nubian Studies 5:25–61. Perego, E. 2015 Bodies and Persons. In The Oxford Handbook of Archaeological Theory, ed. A.  Gardner, M.  Lake and U.  Sommer. Online: http://www.oxfordhandbooks.com/ view/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199567942.001.0001/oxfordhb–9780199567942-e-021. Phillips, J.S. 2016 Women in Ancient Nubia. In Women in Antiquity: Real Women across the Ancient World, ed. S.T. Budin and J.M. Turfa, pp. 280–98. Routledge. Pope, J. 2014 The Double Kingdom under Taharqo: Studies in the History of Kush and Egypt, c. 690–664 BC. Culture and History of the Ancient Near East 69. Brill. Posener, G. 1987 Cinq figurines d’envoûtement. Bibliothèque d’Études 101. Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale (Cairo). Pudło, A. 1999 Population of Nubia up to the 16th century BC, Przeglad AntropologicznyAnthropological Review 62:57–66. Online: https://repozytorium.amu.edu.pl/jspui/ bitstream/10593/3408/1/07pudlo.pdf. Reavis, K. 2014 Skeletal Analysis: Investigating Senescence in Ancient Nubia. Journal of Purdue Undergraduate Research 4:40–47. Online: http://dx.doi.org/10.5703/jpur.04.1.06. Ritner, R. 2009 The Libyan Anarchy: Inscriptions from Egypt’s Third Intermediate Period. Society of Biblical Literature. Saito, K. 2015 The Matrilineal Royal Succession in the Empire of Kush: A New Proposal Identifying the Kinship Terminology in the 25th and Napatan Dynasties as That of Iroquois/ Crow. Mitteilungen der Sudanarchäologischen Gesellschaft zu Berlin 26:233–44. Smith, S.T. 2003 Wretched Kush: Ethnic Identities and Boundaries in Egypt’s Nubian Empire. Routledge. Sørensen, M.L.S. 2000 Gender Archaeology. Polity Press. Strouhal, E. 1990 Family Structure of the Wadi Qitna Population (Egyptian Nubia, 3rd–5th A. D.), Nubica 1–2:611–29. Tassie, G.J. 2003 Identifying the Practice of Tattooing in Ancient Egypt and Nubia. Papers from the Institute of Archaeology 14:8–101. Online: http://www.pia-journal.co.uk/article/ view/pia.200. Török, L. 1990 The Costume of the Ruler in Meroe: Remarks on its Origins and Significance. Archéologie du Nil Moyen 4:151–202. ——— 1995 The Birth of an Ancient African Kingdom: Kush and her Myth of the State in the First Millennium BC. Cahier de Recherches de l’Institut de Papyrologie et d’Égyptologie de Lille 4. Van Pelt, P. 2013 Revising Egypto-Nubian Relations in New Kingdom Lower Egypt: From Egyptianization to Cultural Entanglement. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 23:523–50. Vittmann, G. 2007 A Question of Names, Titles, and Iconography: Kushites in Priestly, Administrative and other Positions from Dynasties 25 to 26. Der Antike Sudan. Mitteilungen der Sudanarchäologischen Gesellschaft zu Berlin 18:139–61.

1032   Angelika Lohwasser and Jacke Phillips Ward, W.A. 1989 Review of Posener 1987. Journal of the American Oriental Society 109:293–94. Wenig, S. 1993 Die Darstellungen. Untersuchungen zu Ikonographie, Inhalt und Komposition der Reliefs. In Musawwarat es Sufra, v. I.1: Der Löwentempel, Textband, pp. 74–227. Akademie Verlag. Wildung, D. ed. 1997 Sudan: Ancient Kingdoms of the Nile. Flammarion. Wilfong, T. 2010 Gender in Ancient Egypt. In Egyptian Archaeology, ed. W.  Wendrich, pp. 164–79. Wiley-Blackwell. Wilkinson, C.K. 1983 Egyptian Wall Paintings: The Metropolitan Museum of Art’s Collection of Facsimiles. The Metropolitan Museum of Art. Online: http://www.metmuseum.org/art/ metpublications/egyptian_wall_paintings_the_metropolitan_museum_of_arts_collection_ of_facsimiles#. Woolley, C.L. and Randall-MacIver, D. 1910 Karanòg: The Romano-Nubian Cemetery. Eckley B. Coxe Junior Expedition to Nubia 5. University Museum (Philadelphia). Zach, M. 1992 Meroe: Mythos und Realität einer Frauenherrschaft im antiken Afrika. In Nachrichten aus der Zeit. Ein Streifzug durch die Frauengeschichte des Altertums, ed. E. Specht, pp. 73–114. Reihe Frauenforschung 18.

Chapter 51

Perspecti v es on the Body i n A ncien t N u bi a Rachael J. Dann

Introduction Philosophy, the social sciences, and humanities have developed numerous approaches and perspectives from which to approach an understanding of the human body (see for instance key works by Shilling 1993; Grosz 1994, 1995; Gatens 1996). The body itself can be understood as a physical form that is the conduit for action and interaction in the world, while also being a physical form that is inhabited and embodied. From an archaeological perspective, the sometimes excellent preservation record for skeletal remains from Sudan form a valuable resource from which to study the nature of the human body in the past, for example in terms of nutrition, trauma, growth, and disease (for a discussion of such approaches see Buzon, this volume). However, this chapter is concerned with different social aspects of the human body and how it may have been used, figured, and performed in the past in Sudan. As a discipline, archaeology began to reconsider the nature of the human body and the manner in which it was constituted as a general consequence of the post-processual turn of the early 1980s. More specifically, the rise of feminist archaeology, then gender archaeology, were key to challenging what had seemed to be the stable, self-evident categories of sex and gender, masculinity and femininity (see the works of Butler 1990; Laqueur 1990; Wittig 1991; and for key works of feminist and gender archaeology with regard to the body, see Kus  1992; Meskell  1996,  1998,  1999,  2000; Pluciennik  2002; Thomas 2002; Meskell and Joyce 2003; Fowler 2004). In questioning the universality of these apparently obvious aspects of identity, the discussion increasingly turned towards interpretative approaches to past material, in an attempt to think through ways in which bodies and identities were formulated in the past. Archaeological context is key to such discussions, as it is now acknowledged that as

1034   Rachael J. Dann unstable categories, bodies, identities, and the social, cultural, and political meanings which accrue around them are fluid, and change through time and in different places. A further consequence of these perspectives has been an increased focus on the potential power and actions of individuals in the past. Any theory, or any interpretation that aims to explore such issues, must also engage with the body as both a means and a site for knowing, acting, and experiencing the world (Csordas  1994; Fowler  2004; Hamilakis 2011). While many archaeologists across the discipline have taken up these theoretical paradigms, applying them and adapting them to a wide variety of material (see above and Fowler and Cummings 2003; Conneller 2004; Graves 2008; Crossland 2010), engagement with theoretical issues in general, and with embodiment in particular, have been minimal within archaeological studies of the Sudan (but see Kendall 1989). Archaeologists working with Sudanese material have traditionally accepted an uncritical assumption that the body is biologically “given”: the body as the base upon which culture has been inscribed. In contrast, as culture is perceived as being the product of the human mind, and is therefore dynamic, adaptive, and holds infinite potential in contrast to passive, inscribable nature. The body has been perceived as a natural, biological given, and culture as a complex, intricate series of strategies that have enabled human civilization. Forms of culture that are particularly pertinent to the body might include the use of clothing and adornment, make-up, body modifications, and so on. In this way, culture is seen to civilize the natural body, or to put it another way, culture enables the natural body to enter a civilized state. Essentially, Sudan-based studies have tended to treat the body as a product of discourse: the body has been viewed as a vehicle for display, and is a place where hierarchy, power, and social meanings are negotiated, instead of considering the body as part of the material world. The inscription of culture on top of the passive body has resonance for any discussion about identity. This is because such a position continues to operate along a dualistic division. In this division the body has culture written on top of it, and therefore any aspect of culture or social life concerning identity such as age, ethnicity, or gender is divorced from the essentialized category of the body. Arguably, Sudanese archaeology has often taken this route in discussions involving the body, particularly in that research which concerns the historical periods, when there is a rich seam of art historical evidence which can be explored in these terms. As such, Sudanese archaeology has tended towards a similar approach to the body to that which Meskell identified as characterizing the perspectives taken by Classical and Near Eastern archaeologists to the body: a “body as display” perspective (Meskell 2000:15). There are many interesting and useful points of information to be gathered from such studies (see for instance N.  Adams  1989; Zach  1999; Török  2002). However, these approaches are essentially approaches to surfaces, and do not attempt to get closer to an understanding of embodied experience as something that is lived through, that is changeable, and that is subjectively known. Studies from an art historical perspective that engage with inscribed images, clothing, adornment, and the like surely have their place, but could be even

Perspectives on the Body in Ancient Nubia   1035 more fruitful if more nuanced approaches were incorporated in the discussion, to open up new spaces for debate. In a move towards integrating some aspects of post-processual thought in the investigation of Sudanese material, one can point to some of the discussions concerning royal iconography. The image of queenly bodies has been the subject of some debate. It is interesting to note that while the female bodies have been the subject of debate, particularly in terms of adornment and ideals of feminine beauty, the masculine body is never discussed in such terms. While it seems reasonable to argue that the depiction of royal bodies followed a certain canonical tradition and inherited (and developed) a visual legacy from Egypt, images were also made and re-made in their particular Sudanese historical and cultural context. Perhaps it is in the queen’s bodies that the most dramatic transformations take place in terms of re-thinking body image (Figs.  51.1 and  51.2). Notwithstanding the historical time difference and the proximity of Egyptian influence, we can compare for example the very svelte form of Queen Qalhata in her tomb at El-Kurru (flat stomach, small pert breasts, fine features, cropped hair, and minimal jewelry, captured mid-step as she walks hand in hand with the Four Sons of Horus), with that of Queen Amanitore on the pylon of the at Naga, a stolid looking figure with rounded limbs and very broad hips, captured in a dynamic and aggressive pose. These

Figure 51.1  Queen Qalhata, north wall of Chamber A, Ku. 5. Photograph: Rikke Therkildsen.

1036   Rachael J. Dann

Figure 51.2  King Natakamani and Queen Amanitore in the act of smiting on the pylons of the temple at Naqa (de.wikipedia.org/wiki/naga).

are feminine (or queenly) bodily ideals, each in their own particular time. The images pronounce (among other things) ideals of feminine beauty, very differently conceived of. It is also worth pointing out the evident differences between two corresponding men. King Tanwetamani (also hand in hand with the Four Sons of Horus), also in his El-Kurru tomb, is naked from the waist up, with a tightly wrapped kilt, and a jeweled girdle (see Figs. 51.2 and 51.3). He is painted as a young man, flat-stomached and with a hair-free body, calmly walking into his afterlife. By contrast, King Natakamani, mirroring the movements of Queen Amanitore, is inscribed in the moment just before he smites his enemies. His kilt is wrapped tight around his lower body. His wide-shoulders are emphasized by the nature of the action he undertakes, and his thickly muscled limbs are emphasized. Inasmuch as the two queens can be discussed in terms of their contextually aestheticized features, the two kings also embody ideals of masculine beauty, each in their own context. This is an issue (both in relation to the images, and in relation to the scholars who choose to discuss it or not) concerning the creation of gender in these periods, and the production and use of images of the body in that creation, in terms of what and how parts of the body are emphasized, ignored, revealed, decorated, and so on. This example also serves to emphasis how issues pertaining to bodies and gender intersect. Clearly, the date, context, and rationale for the depictions is different, but these examples serve to highlight the choices made in depicting bodies, all of which were conscious choices, rich with meaning.

Perspectives on the Body in Ancient Nubia   1037

Figure 51.3 King Tanwetamani, south wall of Chamber A, Ku. 16. Photograph: Rikke Therkildsen.

1038   Rachael J. Dann The identification of symbolic aspects of these images (the long history of the smiting scene, the symbolism of the jewelry and clothing, the use of canonical proportions and composition) are probably quite uncontroversial, but if we attempt to consider these images from a perspective beyond that of the two-dimensional image, what might this entail? We might consider the perception and experience of the individual(s) viewing the images, who themselves inhabit a perceiving body. This is a bodily subject that exists in the material world, but is unstable, being constantly created and defined by normative social actions—their repeated encounters with images, spaces, objects, colors, etc. An individual whose subjective embodied experience of viewing the image of Amanitore is shaped and informed by their various experiences and identity, and the physical actions involved in them (Csordas 1990:10–12; for further discussion and critique, see Bulger and Joyce  2013:73–75, and for similar archaeological approaches, see Thomas  1993; Tilley 2008). As such physical, sensual, and emotional experiences are woven together and located in the body (Kus 1992:172–74). Individuals become embodied subjects. In an attempt to consider some ways of opening up debates surrounding the nature and extent of the human body in the Sudanese past, I will turn now to a number of particular examples, ranging in time period and type, fully acknowledging that the examples taken here are a necessarily limited entrée to the possibilities.

Figured Bodies Some of the earliest figurations of the human form are those small three-dimensional clay figurines found in A-Group graves, with other types also known in the C-Group period (such as those from Site 277 A-Group (Nordström 1972:56) and Aniba Grave 677 (Steindorff 1935:72; Bianchi 2004:57–58)). These figurines are modeled to create a female body shape, wherein the focus of the bodily sexing of the figures is in the presentation of the breasts (literally, held up and presented in the figurine from site 277), and in the emphasis placed on the curvature of the waist, hips, and buttocks. Clearly significant in the creation of these figurines are the patterns applied to them, either by carving into the clay, or by painting the surface. It is possible that these designs are representations of real ways in which women’s bodies were inscribed with meaning. Bodies may have been modified permanently using scarification, cicatrization, or tattooing to inscribe cultural meaning into the flesh. Tattooing might have been performed with a small metal or bone needle periodically dipped into a dye and then used to create tiny colored punctures in the skin in a given design. Scarification and cicatrization are similar processes involving the cutting of the skin in a particular design to form a decorative scar. Cicatrization is slightly different as the wound is either rubbed with ash or some other irritant to cause inflammation, or the skin is cut with an instrument that has a curved end, which is used to hook under the skin as the instrument is drawn across it. This technique leads to the creation of a raised scar, which has a dual aesthetic effect as the scars

Perspectives on the Body in Ancient Nubia   1039 create both a visual design and a tactile experience. The A-Group figurine may represent cicatrizations which in their curved design accentuate the point of the curvature of the figure itself. Furthermore, such portable figurines which fit comfortably into the hand offer a parallel haptic (i.e., touch-based) experience, albeit in miniature, to the lived experience of moving the hands across the cicatrized skin of a living woman, and could, in itself, be a site for pleasure as the object was touched and explored prior to its ultimate deposition in the grave. A series of female skeletons excavated by the Scandinavian Joint Expedition, and dating to the A-Group period, were discovered with small sharp bronze implements, some with hooked ends, lying between their face and hands. Such items do not occur in male burials. These implements may have been used for creating cicatrices, and the fact that they occur in female burials may indicate a specifically female craft specialization (practiced on whichever individual or group), or a form of body modification that was practiced by females for females (Nordström pers. comm.; see also examples in Lohwasser 2015). If this interpretation is correct, it suggests a gendered bodily practice both in terms of the role and technique of the individual creating the tattoo, and in terms of the people who could appropriately receive and display cicatrices. In permanently modifying the physical body, cultural meaning is carved into the flesh and that meaning becomes integral to the embodied self, as the body quite literally incorporates marks of culture. These markings were not just limited to human bodies: the depiction of the goddess Amesemi on a late 1st-century bce stela from Naga shows tattoos or cicatrices on her cheek (Welsby and Andersen 2004: Cat. 163). While authors writing about tattoos, scarification, and cicatrization in ancient Egypt and Nubia have been quick to point out the possible erotic nature of such body modifications (Robins 1994:137), ethnographic examples are a reminder that other social explanations may also be possible (see for example Ebin 1979 on the transformative socializing power of tattooing among the Roro; Fisher 1984 on the scarification practices of the Dinka and Sara; Faris 1988 on Nuba cicatrizations performed after the birth of a child). Consideration of anthropological parallels may also help us to understand further aspects involved in the practice of tattooing or cicatrization. The practice of these techniques must have been a distinctly painful experience, which in itself may have required particular attitudes or modes of expression (cf. Asad 2000:44–45). Parallels to such figurines are also known from Predynastic Egypt, and have been termed “Brides of the Dead” by Bianchi (1988:20). Two 11th Dynasty bodies from Deir el-Bahri exhibit arrangements of diamond shapes made from tattooed dots and dashes (Ikram and Dodson 1998:297; Roehrig 2015). In Sudan, a mummy from Meroitic period Aksha was found with blue-black tattoos on the abdomen in a variety of geometric patterns (Vila 1967:373). These Meroitic examples were found on the bodies of women and children and seem to be a close design parallel to the 11th Dynasty examples from Egypt (Bianchi 1988:23), while later examples of Christian period tattooing have also survived in particularly desiccated burial environments, for example from the region of the Fourth Cataract.

1040   Rachael J. Dann

(a) (b)

(c) 1

cm

5

(d) Figure 51.4  Hand-modeled figurines in Egyptian style from Askut (with permission from Stuart Tyson Smith).

Evidence of a mixed assemblage of broken figurines were found in a small temple of the Second Intermediate Period to New Kingdom at Askut (Figs. 51.4 and 51.5). Smith has classified these figurines as being Egyptian or Nubian on a stylistic basis, and this offers an opportunity for the consideration of two contrasting modes of modeling female bodies, which appear to track aspects of the cultural and ethnic identities being played out at the site (Smith 2003:131–35, 2007:235). While the remains of the figures are fragmentary, the Egyptian examples exhibit a concern with modeling the hair and face, and dotted line decorations, with particular attention paid to the pubic triangle. The

Perspectives on the Body in Ancient Nubia   1041

(b)

(c) (a)

(e) (d)

(f)

(h)

(g)

0

cm

5

Figure 51.5 Hand-modeled figurines in Nubian style from Askut (with permission from Stuart Tyson Smith).

Nubian examples are quite different, with distinctively modeled, but disproportionately small heads lacking in hair, stubby limbs, and both dotted and incised lines around the neck, shoulders, and hips, which may be representative of jewelry, tattoos, scarification, or folds of fat or skin. While made of the same material, and of similar dimensions (i.e., small figures that could be easily transported, held and manipulated), the objects express very different bodily configurations of femininity.

1042   Rachael J. Dann

Crystalized Bodies Arguably, considerations of the body have most commonly been based upon those material traces that can be framed and analyzed from the perspective of art historical discussion—namely two- and three-dimensional representations, often in high-status contexts such as temples and tombs. Yet the archaeological remains offer numerous possibilities for thinking about the presentation and use of the body. The cemetery at Kadero dates to the 5th millennium bce, and consists of clusters of burials. It is a site which was in use during a period when major changes to lifestyle were occurring, as sedentism and agriculture increasingly became the cultural norm. In this context, ties to the land, the organization of labor, and the management of deficits and surpluses were being negotiated. The evidence from the funerary arena is strongly suggestive that this was a period during which the human body was increasingly a site for display and memorialization, which no doubt tied in with wider socio-economic changes. Allotting the graves and their contents into a series of “classes” (I–IV where class I graves contain no grave goods, and class IV a complex and numerous variety of objects), makes clear the vastly different measures of wealth open to certain individuals. These differences seem to split along gendered and age-based lines, with females having the poorest and least materially varied grave offerings. Adult males and infants of the youngest age group received grave goods that were both numerous and assorted. Males wore diadems of marine shell beads which were imported from the Red Sea, and the richest (class IV) graves of male adults and children included items such as ceramics, carnelian beads, mace-heads, palettes of porphyry or sandstone, stone tools, hippo and elephant ivory jewelry (bracelets and armlets). Red and yellow ochre were found in lumps, or scattered in most of the Kadero graves (Chłodnicki et al. 2011:63–65). The finds in the graves can be examined from the perspectives of technologies and manufacture, provenance, quantity and variability, date, and use patterns. Yet a very significant aspect of the nature of the objects themselves and the choices made surrounding their deposition in the grave relate very clearly to the production of certain kinds of bodies at the site. Class IV adult male and infant burials contained objects which were worn on the body in the form of diadems, armlets, bracelets, and necklaces. Other objects were part of a cosmetic kit, sometimes comprising a palette, rubbing stone, and chunks of ochre, malachite, or galena. Other items included stone mace-heads. Clearly, many of the finds in the rich graves were portable artifacts involved in the care, adornment, and public presentation of the self. Individuals were buried wearing their jewelry. The extent and variety of objects grouped with males and young infants suggest that trajectories of masculinity and very early childhood were connected and played out in materially complex ways that were not open to adult females. It is reasonable to suggest that the items in the graves were worn throughout life and were therefore indispensable items of clothing (synonymous with that individual) that were consequently also worn in death. As such, the items were actually incorporated as part of the body. The aspects of the costumes which were worn in life

Perspectives on the Body in Ancient Nubia   1043 (or which were denied to an individual) were an arena for display and communication, but the boundedness of the body is not a natural fact. The boundaries between the body and objects that were constantly worn and manipulated by individuals, or sub-groups, negotiate a breakdown in the barrier between bodies and objects, which have often been construed as two seemingly opposing fields (Chapman 2000:5). Of further significance at Kadero is the contrast between those well-furnished bodies, and those individuals (actually the majority of the Kadero population: 59.3 percent) who had no or only ceramic grave goods, and who were interred without any obvious bodily markers at all. This lack (or severe limitation) of costume, striking in its immediacy, powerfully communicated aspects of gendered difference, and made clear the elements of life from which the majority of adult women and some men were excluded. A further key articulation is that provided by the evidence from graves 97 and 113, where a woman and a child were respectively interred with especially (and unusually for the woman) rich objects. Their bodily presentation must have been especially distinctive. While it is reasonable to suppose that the bodily ornaments found in each of the graves were worn in life, and were the sites of multiple meanings, a consideration of the role of the body in the grave may also be instructive. At Kadero there was a strongly marked preference for placing the deceased in a crouched position on the right side (Chłodnicki et al. 2011:65). The richest graves at the site were found in the central areas of the cemetery, in Clusters B and C, and began in the early Neolithic, continuing into the late Neolithic (Krzyżaniak 1991:527). The early burials performed here acted as foundational moments in the constitution of specific forms of burial practice, making particular aspects of practice (such as bodily positioning) a cultural necessity. The arrangement of the body in the grave established norms concerning appropriateness and decorum, which through time became almost indispensable aspects of the burial rite: these practices crystallized particular corporeal attitudes. The body, dressed, arranged, and with particular objects placed in the grave alongside it, became a tableau, a final image of the deceased, and as such a focus for memory making which would be broadly re-enacted across the cemetery site and through time (cf. Stevenson  2007; Dann 2009).

Hybrid Bodies A further challenge to the normative assumption of bounded and readily understood bodies can be found in the iterations of the bodies of deities (cf. Wengrow 2013). In Sudan, deities were represented with human bodies (particularly Sebiumeker and Arensnuphis), or with hybrid bodies (such as the great lion-headed god Apedemak). A significant number of Ancient Egyptian gods and goddesses were imported from the North, and generally retained their original attributes, although the ram-headed form of Amun was prevalent in Sudan.

1044   Rachael J. Dann The representation of male deities often includes the clear delineation and sculpting of the sartorius, soleus, bicep, and triceps muscles, which are lacking in images of goddesses and humans. This attention to the deified male body is further exemplified by pictorial and symbolic images that appear on the flesh (especially at Musawwarat es-Sufra). It is unclear whether these images depict tattoos, scarification, or body painting. Alternatively the images may merely be representative, reflecting the numinous qualities inherent in the deified body. The attention to detail in the depiction of the muscularity of the male deities probably signifies physical power and strength. This is perhaps in part symbolic, and is indicative of the gods’ insurmountable dominion in the material and ethereal worlds. Qualities such as this are particularly appropriate for a god like Apedemak, who has a warlike personality. The quality of physical prowess is lauded in the deified male body. Certain deities, most especially the figures of Bes and Beset, are semi-hybrid bodies where a human form is clearly recognizable, but where animal attributes may have been added or emphasized to a greater or lesser degree—in this case the leonine mane, and sometimes paws. Other animals might be incorporated into the body, with examples of Bes and Beset figurines sometimes incorporating elements such as cat heads, bird wings, and extra pairs of arms. Other figurations show animals in direct association, such as the serpents that slither down the arms of the Kawa Beset (Fig. 51.6). These are bodies that

Figure 51.6  Pressed clay figure of Beset from Kawa. © SARS Kawa Archive. Photograph: Derek Welsby.

Perspectives on the Body in Ancient Nubia   1045 are clearly in the realm of the other, and their liminality, their position of being neither one thing nor another (or indeed, of being both things at once), is a source of ritual potential. The exaggerated facial features, squat bodily proportions, flagrant display of exaggerated genitalia is in direct contrast to the decorum of the high-status humans and deities seen in formal public art. Considerable license in the manufacture of these objects was perhaps possible in contrast to the more exacting standards of propriety for the canonical images. The potency and efficacy of these images lies very strongly in their disruptiveness, as vectors of fear, lust, danger, and non-normalcy. The complexity of the images, which combine many visual aspects, also enhances the multiple meanings which may be read from and into the objects.

Commensal Bodies An attempt to consider aspects of embodied life in the Sudanese past may be accessed via other kinds of archaeological remains which do not directly involve either art historical issues concerning imaging the human body, or the funerary record, both of which might be viewed as the traditional perspectives from which bodies have been discussed. If we are to attempt to move towards embodied understandings of past lives, this entails moving beyond surfaces and images, to consider lived experiences. Certain scientific analyses have provided useful insights into processes of dietary regimes, which, when considered alongside both archaeological material and ethnographic parallels can facilitate considerations of embodied experience, such as those concerning consumption, commensality, and taste. As the major utensil for food and drink, research on ceramic vessels offers a richness of possibilities, and as Haaland has pointed out, not only is the bodily experience of consuming food a socially significant one, it can also be conceptually paralleled by the presence and use of pottery vessels, which like humans have a body, an interiority, contain substances within it, and can proc­ess and eject them (R. Haaland 2007:168). Chromatography-based analyses of food-based traces in pottery vessels of the PostMeroitic period at Qasr Ibrim (Copley et al. 2001a, 2001b) are direct evidence for the processing of palm fruits. This rich source of carbohydrates and sugars was exploited to produce a concentrated sweet liquor (Copley et al. 2001b:542) which may have been added to foodstuffs such as bread or beer to alter the taste and change the fermentation process. Beer is a well-known staple commodity of ancient Sudan (Edwards  1996; Welsby 2002:210, 236), and examples both of facilities for processing alcoholic beverages (W.  Adams  1966 passim,  2000:37–39, pl. 5) and for their storage and consumption (Holthoer 1977) are known. Ethnographic parallels suggest that beer recently remained, in certain parts of the Sudan, a central part of the diet, and was a motivating factor in procuring work parties (G. Haaland 1998; Arthur 2003; R. Haaland 2007). Further work on fatty acid residues has been undertaken on New Kingdom pottery samples from Askut. Here, the evidence from the vessels traced the dominance of

1046   Rachael J. Dann Nubian identities from a culinary perspective, despite (according to the usual historical narrative) an apparently dominant Egyptian presence (Smith 2003:52–53). Food preparation and consumption were powerful means through which to articulate aspects of identity, which may have had a gendered, feminine aspect. The proportion of Nubian cooking vessels recovered in the pottery assemblage from Askut steadily increases from the Middle Kingdom, through the Second Intermediate Period and into the New Kingdom, indicating that Nubian cooking traditions (and the smells and tastes that went with them) were a significant route, both material and sensual, through which to resist and assert both continuity and difference (Smith 2003:122–24, 2007:234). The efficacy of commensal occasions in marking and reinforcing social distinctions are well known (Douglas 1984; Dietler and Hayden 2001). Staged occasions of commensality in which consuming particular foods and drinks occurred was likely a key feature of emergent power relations at the royal X-Group cemeteries, most particularly at Ballana, where preparation and serving vessels of bronze were found in significant quantities. The indigenous handmade ceramics were also used for serving meals, while imported ceramics were largely confined to amphorae, probably containing commodities such as wine and oil. Here, in sharp contrast to evidence from the earlier cemetery at Qustul which is suggestive of strongly coercive acts of control involving sacrifice of animals and humans, the Ballana evidence demonstrates another kind of enaction of social control around bodies, but one which engaged individuals in a more nurturing manner, ostensibly working on bodily senses in a pleasant way to reinforce hierarchical differences between the elite and the wider group (Dann 2009; see also Hamilakis 1999 on embodiment and feasting in Crete). Such examples demonstrate how the engagement with the necessary daily routines of processing, producing, serving, and consuming food need to be understood as significant experiences, loaded with specific situational meaning, but which are experienced and made sense of via the body. This occurs through experientially based skill-sets, which show people when a mixture smells properly fermented, or when the flour feels sufficiently ground, or the food correctly thickened on the fire. Understanding foodways, and the subjective bodily experiences of them, is a way into thinking through lived experiences in the past (Curtin 1992).

Conclusion This chapter is not an all-encompassing discussion of the body in either the broader disciplines of archaeology or the humanities, nor even in ancient Sudan, but it has attempted to outline a number of possible approaches to attempting to know past bodies and experience, and has used a series of specific examples in order to demonstrate how such ideas could be applied via material. The human body is the medium through which individuals (or the self) engages with and is embedded in the world around them. Understanding this centrality means that it is impossible to ignore as a subject of study.

Perspectives on the Body in Ancient Nubia   1047 Such an understanding is underscored when we consider how the body intersects with, is constructed, manipulated, and performed in terms of such mainstays of archaeological research as gender, power, propaganda, health, ethnicity, age, and social life. The rich and diverse nature of the archaeological record from Sudan, encompassing as it does two- and three-dimensional artworks, architectural spaces, human remains, and textual formulae offer a wide range of opportunities for exploring the construction, understanding, and subjective experiences known in the Sudanese past. Archaeologists are uniquely able to engage with the material past across a deep time perspective, meaning that further investigation of the material will undoubtedly lead to a more nuanced and illuminating set of knowledge.

References Cited Adams, N. 1989 Meroitic High Fashions: Examples from Art and Society. In Studia Meroitica 1984: Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference for Meroitic Studies, ed. S. Donadoni and S. Wenig, pp. 747–55. Meroitica 10. Akademie Verlag. Adams, W.Y. 1966 The Vintage of Nubia. Kush 14:262–83. ——— 2000 Meinarti, v. 1: The Late Meroitic, Ballaña and Transitional Occupation. Sudan Archaeological Research Society Publication 5. BAR International Series 895. Archaeopress. Arthur, J.A. 2003 Brewing Beer: Status, Wealth and Ceramic Use Alteration among the Gamo of South-Western Ethiopia. World Archaeology 34:516–28. Asad, T. 2000 Agency and Pain: An Exploration. Culture and Religion 1(1):29–60. Bianchi, R.S. 1988 Tattoo in Ancient Egypt. In Marks of Civilisation, ed. A. Rubin, pp. 21–28. Museum of Cultural History, Los Angeles. ——— 2004 Daily Life of the Nubians. Greenwood Press. Bulger, T.D. and R.A. Joyce 2013 Archaeologies of Embodied Subjectivities. In A Companion to Gender Prehistory, ed. D. Bolger, pp. 68–85. Wiley & Sons. Butler, J. 1990 Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. Routledge. Chapman, J.C. 2000 Fragmentation in Archaeology: People, Places, and Broken Objects in the Prehistory of South-eastern Europe. Routledge. Chłodnicki, M., M. Kobusiewicz, and K. Kroeper 2011 Kadero: The Lech Krzyżaniak Excavations in the Sudan. Studies in African Archaeology 10. Poznań Archaeological Museum. Conneller, C. 2004 Becoming Deer: Corporeal Transformations at Star Carr. Archaeological Dialogues 11(1):37–56. Copley, M.S., P.J. Rose, A. Clapham, D.N. Edwards, M.C. Horton, and R.P. Evershed 2001a Detection of Palm Fruit Lipids in Archaeological Pottery from Qasr Ibrim, Egyptian Nubia. Proceedings of the Royal Society: Biological Science 268(1467):593–97. ——— 2001b Processing Palm Fruits in the Nile Valley: Biomolecular Evidence from Qasr Ibrim. Antiquity 75:538–42. Crossland, Z. 2010 Materiality and Embodiment. In The Oxford Handbook of Material Culture Studies, ed. M.C. Beaudry and D. Hicks, pp. 386–405. Oxford University Press. Csordas, T.J. 1990 Embodiment as a Paradigm for Anthropology. Ethos 18(1):5–47. ——— 1994 Introduction: The Body as Representation and Being-in-the-World. In Embodiment and Experience: The Existential Ground of Culture and Self, ed. T.J. Csordas, pp. 1–24. Cambridge University Press.

1048   Rachael J. Dann Curtin, D. 1992 Food/Body/Person. In Cooking, Eating, Thinking: Transformative Philosophies of Food, ed. D. Curtin and L. Helke, pp. 3–22. Indiana University Press. Dann, R.J. 2009 The Archaeology of Late Antique Sudan: Aesthetics and Identity in the Royal X-Group Tombs at Qustul and Ballana. Cambria Press. Dietler, M. and R. Hayden eds. 2001 Feasts: Archaeological and Ethnographic Perspectives on Food, Politics and Power. Smithsonian. Douglas, M. ed. 1984 Food in the Social Order: Studies of Food and Festivities in Three American Communities. Russell Sage. Ebin, V. 1979 The Body Decorated. Thames and Hudson. Edwards, D.N. 1996 Sorghum, Beer and Kushite Society. Norwegian Archaeological Review 29:65–77. Faris  J. 1988 Significance of Differences in the Male and Female Personal Art of the Southeast Nuba. In Marks of Civilisation, ed. A. Rubin, pp. 29–40. Museum of Cultural History, UCLA. Fisher, A. 1984 Africa Adorned. Harry N. Abrams. Fowler, C. 2004 The Archaeology of Personhood: An Anthropological Approach. Routledge. Fowler, C. and V.  Cummings 2003 Places of Transformation: Building Monuments from Water and Stone in the Neolithic of the Irish Sea. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 9:1–21. Gatens, M. 1996 Imaginary Bodies: Ethics, Power and Corporeality. Routledge. Graves, C.P. 2008 From an Archaeology of Iconoclasm to an Anthropology of the Body: Images, Punishment and Personhood in England, 1500–1660. Current Anthropology 49(1):35–57. Grosz, E. 1994 Volatile Bodies: Toward a Corporeal Feminism. Indiana University Press. ——— 1995 Space, Time and Perversion. Routledge. Haaland, G. 1998 Beer, Blood and Mother’s Milk: The Symbolic Context of Economic Behaviour in Fur Society. Sudan Notes & Records 2:53–76. Haaland, R. 2007 Porridge and Pot, Bread and Oven: Foodways and Symbolism in Africa and the Near East from Prehistory to the Present. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 177(2):165–82. Hamilakis, Y. 1999 Food Technologies/Technologies of the Body: The Social Context of Wine and Oil Production and Consumption in Bronze Age Crete. World Archaeology 31(1):38–54. ——— 2011 Archaeology and the Senses: Human Experience, Memory and Affect. Cambridge University Press. Holthoer, R. 1977 New Kingdom Pharaonic Sites: Scandinavian Joint Expedition to Sudanese Nubia 5. Norwegian University Press. Ikram, S. and Dodson, A. 1998 The Mummy in Ancient Egypt. Thames and Hudson. Kendall, T. 1989 Ethnoarchaeology in Meroitic Studies. In Studia Meroitica 1984: Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference for Meroitic Studies, ed. S. Donadoni and S. Wenig, pp. 625–745. Meroitica 10. Akademie Verlag. Krzyżaniak, L. 1991 Early Farming in the Middle Nile Basin: Recent Discoveries at Kadero. Antiquity 65(248):515–32. Kus, S. 1992 Towards an Archaeology of Body and Soul. In Representations in Archaeology, ed. J.-C. Gardin and C. Peebles, pp. 168–77. University of Indiana Press.

Perspectives on the Body in Ancient Nubia   1049 Laqueur, T. 1990 Making Sex: Body and Gender from the Greeks to Freud. Harvard University Press. Lohwasser, A. 2015 A Kushite Metal Implement and its Modern African Descendants. In The Kushite World: Proceedings of the Eleventh International Conference for Meroitic Studies, ed. M. Zach, pp. 9–16. Verein der Förderer der Sudanforschung. Meskell, L.M. 1996 The Somatization of Archaeology: Institutions, Discourses, Corporeality Norwegian Archaeological Review 29(1):1–19. ——— 1998 The Irresistible Body and the Seduction of Archaeology. In Changing Bodies, Changing Meanings: Studies on the Human Body in Antiquity, ed. D. Montserrat, pp. 139–61. Routledge. ——— 1999 Archaeologies of Social Life: Age, Sex, Class et cetera. Blackwell. ——— 2000 Writing the Body in Archaeology. In Reading the Body: Representations and Remains in the Archaeological Record, ed. A.E. Rautman, pp 13–21. University of Pennsylvania Press. Meskell, L.M. and R.A.  Joyce 2003 Embodied Lives: Figuring Ancient Maya and Egyptian Experience. Routledge. Nordström, H-Å. 1972 Neolithic and A-Group Sites. Scandinavian Joint Expedition to Sudanese Nubia 3. Scandinavian University Books. Pluciennik, M. 2002 Bodies in/as Material Culture: Introduction. In Thinking through the Body: Archaeologies of Corporeality, ed. Y. Hamilakis, S. Tarlow, and M. Pluciennik, pp 173–77. Kluwer Academic/Plenum. Robins, G. 1994 Proportion and Style in Ancient Egyptian Art. Thames and Hudson. Roehrig, C. 2015 Two Tattooed Women from Thebes. Bes 19. Bulletin of the Egyptological Seminar. The Art and Culture of Ancient Egypt: Studies in Honor of Dorothea Arnold, pp. 527–36. Shilling, C. 1993 The Body and Social Theory. Sage. Steindorff, G. 1935 Aniba 1. Mission archéologique de Nubie, 1929–1934. J.J. Augustin. Stevenson, A. 2007 The Aesthetics of Predynastic Egyptian Burial: Funerary Performances in the Fourth Millennium BC. Archaeological Review from Cambridge 22(1):76–91. Smith, S.T. 2003 Wretched Kush: Ethnic Identities and Boundaries in Egypt’s Nubian Empire. Routledge. ——— 2007 Ethnicity and Culture. In The Egyptian World, ed. T.  Wilkinson, pp. 218–42. Routledge. Thomas, J. 1993 The Hermeneutics of Megalithic Space. In Interpretative Archaeology, ed. C. Tilley, pp. 73–97. Berg. ——— 2002 Archaeology’s Humanism and the Materiality of the Body. In Thinking through the Body: Archaeologies of Corporeality, ed. Y. Hamilakis, S. Tarlow, and M. Pluciennik, pp. 29–45. Kluwer/Academic Plenum. Tilley, C. 2008 Body and Image: Explorations in Landscape Phenomenology, v. 2. Left Coast. Török, L. 2002 The Image of the Ordered World in Ancient Nubian Art: The Construction of the Kushite Mind (800 BC–300 AD). Probleme der Ägyptologie 18. Brill. Vila, A. 1967 Aksha: La cimitière méroïtique d’Aksha, v. 2. Mission Archéologique Française au Soudan. Welsby, D. 2002 The Medieval Kingdoms of Nubia: Pagans, Christians and Muslims along the Middle Nile. British Museum Press.

1050   Rachael J. Dann Welsby, D. and J.R.  Anderson 2004 Sudan: Ancient Treasures: An Exhibition of Recent Discoveries. British Museum Press. Wengrow, D. 2013 The Origins of Monsters: Images and Cognition in the First Age of Mechanical Reproduction. Princeton University Press. Wittig, M. 1991 The Straight Mind and Other Essays. Beacon Press. Zach, M. 1999 Frauenschönheit in Meroe. In Recent Research in Kushite Archaeology and History, ed. D.A. Welsby, pp 293–304. British Museum Occasional Paper 131.

Chapter 52

Bioa rch a eol ogy of N u bi a Michele R. Buzon

Introduction Bioarchaeology, the examination and analysis of human skeletal remains from archaeo­ logical sites (also called physical anthropology in some contexts), offers a window into the lives of the people who once inhabited ancient Nubia. With the focus on cemetery sites early in the history of Nubian excavations, bioarchaeological research has long pro­ vided essential information about Nubian lifeways, including health, disease, daily activities, traumatic injuries, diet, and biological relationships. This article presents a review of past research, perspectives on how approaches have changed, and details on recent and ongoing excavations that demonstrate the bright future of the specialty in studies of ancient Nubia. Emphasis is placed on the importance of using a bioarchaeo­ logical approach to research, which fully incorporates the excavation and analysis of human skeletal remains within the larger project as a means of enriching data collection and interpretations. The preservation of human burials in the Nubian Nile valley is often excellent, allow­ ing for multiple types of analyses of the naturally mummified soft tissue and skeletal remains. As detailed below, the quality and abundance of osteological materials that span thousands of years from well-documented sites have resulted in exciting and inno­ vative research using both more traditional paleodemographic and paleopathological methods as well as cutting-edge techniques that use various types of human samples (e.g., bone collagen and apatite, skin, hair, blood, DNA). The large skeletal collections from Nubia that have been amassed over the past century have provided excellent opportunities for exploration of myriad topics including the history of violence, health changes resulting from sociopolitical transitions, ancestral relationships between regional groups, dietary variation, as well as cardiovascular disease and cancer.

1052   Michele R. Buzon

Excavation of Human Skeletal Remains in Nubia Research on skeletal remains from ancient Nubia has had an extensive and varied his­ tory. The primary source of Nubian archaeological skeletal material beginning in the early 20th century was excavated during the First Archaeological Survey of Nubia (Baker and Judd 2012) when the low dam at Aswan was raised in 1907, creating a larger reservoir covering additional sites (Jones 1938). As the original director of the survey, George Reisner engaged Grafton Elliot Smith to be the on-site anatomist (Reisner 1910). Excavation of burials were well underway by the time Smith arrived, with more than two thousand individuals already removed (Smith  1910). Smith recruited Frederic Wood Jones, Douglas Derry, and later H.W. Beckett to assist in the on-site analyses, with additional help from Marc Armand Ruffer, Alexander R. Ferguson, and others for ongo­ ing work on the collection in Cairo. The excavations during this project resulted in as many as ten thousand individuals from more than 150 cemeteries (Reisner  1910; Adams 1977; Jakob and Magzoub Ali 2011); anatomists were only able to record approxi­ mately six thousand (Smith and Jones 1910), with many left unstudied and now lost (Cockitt 2014). Initially, notes and observations were made on-site and material was subsequently sent to Cairo for further study. Bones of pathological interest were sent to the Royal College of Surgeons by Smith and possibly to the University College London with Derry. The Natural History Museum of London now has what remains of the Nubian Pathological Collection originally housed at the Royal College of Surgeons, which was transferred after World War II. However, the collection was badly damaged during bombing in 1941; a large quantity of human remains along with the records were destroyed (Molleson  1993). Several institutions now have small amounts of material from the Survey including KNH Centre for Biomedical Egyptology at the University of Manchester, the Duckworth Laboratory at the University of Cambridge, the South Australia Museum, and the Nubia Museum, Aswan (Cockitt 2014). After working in Lower Nubia, Reisner’s cemetery excavations continued at Nubian sites in Sudan including Kerma, El-Kurru, and Nuri. Notably, Reisner directed the exca­ vation of burials from the Kerma tumuli, producing hundreds of individuals (Reisner  1923). These remains are curated at the University of Cambridge in the Duckworth Collection and have allowed for numerous analyses. Reisner also excavated at El-Kurru and Nuri, though the recovered skeletal material was fragmentary and scanty (Dunham  1950,  1955). The Second Archaeological Survey of Nubia (1929–34) produced more than two thousand individuals from seventy-six cemeteries (Adams  1977:76). Observations and measurements were again recorded on-site. An Egyptian anatomist, Ahmed Mahmoud el-Batrawi, was appointed as Derry’s assistant for this campaign. The large numbers of excavated remains proved to be a challenge for these researchers, who often also served as the team doctor (Batrawi 1935).

Bioarchaeology of Nubia   1053 Beginning in 1960 additional collections of skeletal remains were amassed as part of the UNESCO High Dam Campaign. Foreign expeditions excavated many of the large cemeteries in the threatened area (Adams 1977). The researchers engaged in the work represented the next generation of archaeological scholars with teams using modern excavation strategies, analytical approaches, and many specialists, though some indi­ viduals participating in the research lacked archaeological experience and training. For some sites, extensive excavations were accompanied with only very limited study of the human remains before reburial. The areas that produced the largest amount of skeletal remains include the concession of the Scandinavian Joint Expedition (SJE) to Sudanese Nubia curated at the University of Copenhagen, Wadi Halfa area directed by the remove University of Colorado, and Semna South excavated by the University of Chicago Oriental Institute; now curated at Arizona State University. Because Egypt and Sudan both allowed foreign projects to curate the human skeletal remains (and other artifacts) in their home institutions (Adams 1977), the collections that were produced have made an excellent resource for bioarchaeological research, with many analyses and resulting publications over the decades since their excavation. The building of the Merowe Dam at the Fourth Cataract necessitated another interna­ tional salvage campaign from 1991–2008 with teams from half a dozen countries partici­ pating in survey and partial excavation of sites, including cemeteries at Mograt Island (Jakob 2015), cemeteries in the region between Karima and Abu Hamed by the Gdańsk Archaeological Museum Expedition (Pudło 2014), Dar el-Arab and Shemkhiya 5 (Włodarska 2014) by the Polish Academy of Sciences, El-Widay by the Oriental Institute Nubian Expedition (Ingvoldstad  2009; Emberling et al.  2014), El-Ginefab by the Arizona State University and University of California Expedition (Baker  2014; Bolhofner and Baker 2014), and over one thousand individuals excavated by the British Museum (Jakob 2007; Antoine and Ambers 2014). Continuing excavations and ongoing analyses of this material is shedding light on a region that previously had few excavated skeletal remains. In addition to salvage campaigns, excavations of cemeteries were initiated and con­ tinue at numerous sites, including Kulubnarti by William Adams, Dennis Van Gerven, and others (Adams et al. 1999); The British Museum and Sudan Archaeological Research Society excavations of Kawa (Welsby  2011), Kurgus (Haddow  2014), Amara West (Binder and Spencer 2014), and Dangeil (Pieri 2014); University of California/Purdue University excavations at Tombos (Buzon et al.  2016) and Abu Fatima; SFDAS and French excavations at Soleb, Sedeinga, Sai, Missiminia, Kadada, Kadruka, and El-Hobagi (Francigny  2009; Rilly and Francigny  2010); the Polish Centre of Mediterranean Archaeology of the University of Warsaw excavations at Old Dongola (Godlewski and Kociankowska-Bożek  2007); and early cemeteries near Khartoum directed by Donatella Usai of the IsIAO/CSSeS El-Salha Project (Usai et al.  2014). Excavations in the Kerma necropolis have continued under the direction of Charles Bonnet of the University of Geneva (Bonnet 1992) and Matthieu Honegger from the University of Neuchâtel, Switzerland (Honegger 2014).

1054   Michele R. Buzon

Paleopathological Analyses Of interest to archaeological research is the reconstruction of life for individuals who inhabited the region. While the advancement of techniques now allows researchers to investigate many topics related to health, disease, diet, activity, and biological and geo­ graphic origins, we are necessarily constrained by the preservation of material and biases associated with the analysis of cemetery samples (Buzon 2012). Individuals exca­ vated from a cemetery may not be a representative sample of the population who once lived due to preservation issues, variable burial practices, and incomplete recovery (Saunders 2008). Taphonomic factors such as soil acidity, plant and animal activity, microbial exposure, groundwater, and sunlight can all affect bone preservation, chemi­ cal composition, and appearance. Only long-term conditions will leave changes in bones while many infections and injuries leave little or no traces; thus, some individuals with no skeletal lesions may have been people who died before their bones were affected (Buzon et al. 2005). Unless soft tissue is preserved, it is generally not possible to deter­ mine the sex of a juvenile individual. Like many studies of human remains in the early 20th century, early analyses of Nubian skeletons were generally completed by medical doctors who examined the material after archaeologists had removed it. As medically trained professionals, ana­ tomical description and measurements were of interest to those working with the Archaeological Survey of Nubia. During the collection of these remains, Jones and Smith noted numerous pathological conditions in the skeletons, leading them to include detailed descriptions of disease and injuries, such as gout, dental caries (cavities), arthri­ tis, and fractures, as well as evidence for early medical intervention (Smith  1910; Jones 1938). Even before the survey was completed, Jones and Smith published exciting findings from their analyses. Derry reported on the first definite examples of tuberculo­ sis, cleft palate, and neoplasm (abnormal growth) in a skull (Smith 1910). Interesting cases from this collection were compiled in an exhibit at the Royal College of Surgeons in England, presented by the Survey Department of the Egyptian Government in 1908. Some of Batrawi’s notable finds include examples of hydrocephaly (fluid in the brain) and evidence for human sacrifice (remains of rope, cut soft tissue of the throat, and “neck wringing”) at Qustul (Batrawi 1935:179). The anatomical reports produced in the context of the Archaeological Survey of Nubia (Jones  1908b; Smith and Jones  1908,  1910; Batrawi  1935) included thorough descriptions of burials and their associated context along with chapters on fractures and other pathological conditions. While some have criticized the work of Smith, Jones, and Derry as narrow and limited to case studies (Armelagos 1997; Waldron 2000), the first volume report from this Survey can be seen as one of the earliest examples of populationbased research contextualized with archaeological information, temporal changes in disease frequency, discussions of disease etiology, and a comparative examination of pathological conditions (Baker and Judd 2012; David 2014).

Bioarchaeology of Nubia   1055 Jones and Smith were particularly interested in patterns of violence in these Nubian remains, finding splints as evidence for ancient medical intervention (Smith 1908) and skeletal and artifactual evidence of execution in Roman Nubia. Some of these interpre­ tations of trauma have been questioned. Jones (1910) attributed observed injuries to actions of spousal abuse of women by Nubian men armed with staffs. Wells (1964) sup­ ported this assertion, considering the forearm fractures resulting from parrying a blow and characterizing ancient Nubians with “short tempers and aggressive conduct.” However, these interpretations were made without other supporting evidence and assertion of a parry fracture is questionable based on the descriptions (Lovell 1997). Jones’s explanation of blood staining on ancient bone is also questionable (Jones 1908a). While blood staining may be used as evidence of perimortem trauma in forensic cases of recently deceased individuals and could possibly be seen in ancient mummied remains (Walker 2001), bone stains in archaeological bones are primarily caused by soil, metal, and organic causes (Dupras and Schultz 2013; Pitre et al. 2013). During the UNESCO High Dam Campaign, interdisciplinary excavation and analy­ sis teams included bioarchaeologists, a collaborative relationship that has been encour­ aged by some (Strouhal 1981). Trained excavators can prevent inadequate recovery of delicate remains, such as juveniles (Saunders 2008) and other data that may be lost with­ out adequate knowledge of human osteology to guide the strategy of exposure. In poorly preserved individuals, measurements can be taken in situ as well as other observations that may no longer be visible after removal (Buzon et al. 2005). The synthesis of biologi­ cal and cultural information in the burial record and skeletal remains assists in placing research within the sociopolitical context of the archaeological site (Knüsel 2010). Using an integrated bioarchaeological approach to excavations along with a more synthetic biocultural approach to analysis of skeletal remains has resulted in problem-oriented research that tests hypotheses on large samples of human remains. These trends have continued in current Nubian archaeology with some bioarchaeologists directing proj­ ects (Baker and Judd 2012) and fully integrated teams of interdisciplinary specialists involved in all aspects of excavation and research (Antoine and Amber 2014; Binder and Spencer 2014).

Biological Relationships Early researchers of Nubian skeletal remains, especially Grafton Elliot Smith, were pre­ dominantly interested in taking measurements of the cranium and observations on other anatomical features in order to investigation how and when “racial contrasts” arose; Smith considered this type of analysis the “chief aim” of the survey (Smith and Jones  1910:7). Smith and others were following the traditions of race science (Blumenbach 1825; Morton 1844) popular during the time, which equated biological characteristics with achievements. For Nile valley research, individuals and groups were generally characterized by the features associated with “Negroid” and “Caucasoid”

1056   Michele R. Buzon races. “Caucasoid” features were considered the standard against which other races were viewed. Physical traits associated with races were considered fixed with any changes presented in strictly racial-historical terms (Armelagos and Van Gerven 2003). Many early interpretations were colored by racist views common during that period (Bernal  1987). For example, though later refuted by several researchers, Reisner (1923:554–59) contended that the Egyptians must have created the grand architecture and materials remains at Kerma and A-Group sites as “Negroid” culture could not have been responsible for such grandeur. This view of non-black Egyptians as “civilizers” continued in anatomical research. Smith noted that the races of Africa mixed and blended with fluctuations occupied by Egyptian and “Negroid.” Smith considered the “Negroid” influence to dull the initiative of people and their development in the arts of civilization (Smith 1909). While Batrawi (1946) rejected linking achievement with biological characteristics, he continued the racial typology with discussions of “Negroid” and “Caucasoid” features; he considered the A-Group to be a hybrid race of pure “Negroid” and “Caucasoid,” the C-Group a con­ tinuation with increasing “Negroid” traits, and continued mixing through the Meroitic period when a new “alien” race replaced the population during the X-Group. Burnor and Harris (1967) and Strouhal (1971) sustained this line of thinking with the argument for a post-Paleolithic “Negroid” invasion into upper Egypt and lower Nubia based on cranial measurements; Billy and Chamla (1981–82) concluded that Soleb material indi­ cated an increasing “Negroid” influence in Upper Nubia at the end of the New Kingdom. Though such uses of racial typology can be appropriate in certain applied contexts (such as aiding in forensic identification), many current researchers support the idea that such racial classifications are too broad to capture real human variation needed for holistic research (Sauer  1993). Rather than aligning particular physical features with race, the goal of much research of the recent decades has focused on providing explana­ tions that account for variability and continuity in population histories of particular sites as well as environmental and social changes that may have affected their biology. For instance, in an early paper resulting from the Aswan Dam excavations, Nielsen (1973) focused his explanations on a local scale, demonstrating that C-Group and Pharaonic burials in the SJE concession area are not identical and it is likely that Egyptian immigrants are present in the samples. Carlson and Van Gerven (1977) created an innovative approach to population variation with the development of the masticatoryfunction hypothesis. Using material near Wadi Halfa as well as the SJE collection, they accounted for the shift to a more rounded skull with smaller face and reduced muscle attachments to the change in diet associated with agriculture. These groups shifted away from highly abrasive foods like grasses towards softer higher carbohydrate foods (also supported by studies of dental disease; Armelagos  1969; Beckett and Lovell 1994; Starling and Stock 2007). The softer diet decreased the mechanical demands of the chewing muscles, which resulted in reduced bone growth in the jaw and tooth size (Calcagno  1986a). This trend is seen from the Mesolithic through Christian period Nubia and parallels the global pattern of cranio-facial evolution (Carlson and Van Gerven 1977).

Bioarchaeology of Nubia   1057 Using cranial and dental discrete (non-metric) traits as well as dental measurements, other researchers have demonstrated an early population replacement prior to (Irish 2005) or just after (Godde 2012) the Mesolithic in Lower Nubia, as well as strong evidence for population continuity in later groups (Greene  1972; Calcagno  1986b; Johnson and Lovell 1995; Prowse and Lovell 1995; blood groups, Franceschi et al. 1994). Genetic evidence of modern people, however, points to south-north gene flow through the Nile valley (Lalueza Fox 1997), bi-directional migrations along the Nile valley with north to south occurring earlier than south to north (Krings et al. 1999), and a southnorth decreasing gradient of variation along the African continent (Lalueza Fox 1997; also demonstrated in craniometrics between Egyptians and Nubians, Buzon 2006a). How can the interpretations from these different types of data be reconciled? Stynder and colleagues (2009), who examined the Missiminia sample using cranial measure­ ments to evaluate the Meroitic to X-Group transition, posit that their data are consistent with population continuity, as many researchers have suggested, but that the groups weren’t genetically isolated. Gene flow can occur without a major or notable effect on cranial morphology as morphology is not static but varies across space and time. As a result, there is no “Upper Nile Negroid type” or “Lower Nile Caucasoid” type; in effect, these studies reject race as a biological concept as the types are not discrete analytical units. Lower and Upper Nubians are closely related, though they share morphological and genetic similarities with non-Nubian groups to the north and south; as part of a continuum, population movements along the Nile valley would not be expected to cause major alterations in the morphology of the local Nubian populations (Stynder et al. 2009). The consideration of gene flow through population movement at local and regional levels as well as changes in selective pressures (e.g., stress on chewing muscles) must be considered when interpreting variation in samples.

Bioarchaeological Analyses of Skeletal Collections from Ancient Nubia Comparative analyses of skeletal collections using multiple methodologies are important and vital to advance knowledge. Many older collections of Nubian skeletal remains have been studied by multiple researchers, which has expanded our understanding of various bioarchaeological topics as methodologies have developed. Technological advancements now allow for faster, less expensive analyses that require a very small amount of sample and provide data to address many research inquiries. For example, strontium isotope analysis (87Sr/86Sr) has potential for identifying first-generation immigrants in cemetery samples (Buzon and Simonetti 2013; Sandberg et al. 2014; Buzon et al. 2016; Schrader et al. 2019). Stable isotope research (e.g., carbon 12C/13C, nitrogen 14N/15N, oxygen 16O/18O) contributes to our understanding of dietary behavior, nutritional ecology, and weaning (Buzon 2012). DNA analysis of even degraded samples is now sometimes possible (Sirak

1058   Michele R. Buzon et al. 2015), which is increasing our knowledge of population relatedness as well as the identification of infectious pathogen DNA in preserved soft tissue. However, research can be sometimes hindered by the lack of context associated with the skeletal collection; Francigny and colleagues (2014) highlight the need for research­ ers to collaborate with regional archaeologists to ensure accurate information. It is imperative that details of excavated skeletal remains (sample size, demographic data, time period, location of collection) be documented and shared; ideally, bioarchaeologi­ cal researchers can work towards a centralized and regularly updated list of Nubian skel­ etal samples (Jakob and Magzoub Ali 2011). Timely publication of analysis in venues with wide readership and availability and the integration of bioarchaeological research with other archaeological data provides the best contextualization of interpretations. The following section of the article provides some selected examples of skeletal analyses from collections that have been well studied and published by researchers to demon­ strate the kinds of information that can be gained through bioarchaeological research in the region. Jebel Sahaba, located near Wadi Halfa, produced a total of fifty-eight skeletons whose associated artifacts date to the Qadan industry, 14,000–12,000 bp (Wendorf  1968), curated at The British Museum. Notable features include the high frequency of violent injuries, including seven bones with apparent parry fractures (Anderson 1968) along with projectiles and spears that had penetrated the bodies prior to death and cut marks indicative of perimortem injuries (Anderson 1968:1028). Early craniometric study of the remains suggested that the sample was homogenous and morphologically similar to the Wadi Halfa group, though more massively built than later populations (Anderson 1968). A more recent study by Irish (2005) using dental nonmetric traits notes that Jebel Sahaba is distinct from later Nubian groups. A study of the body proportions indicates that they are “tropically adapted,” supporting affinity with sub-Saharan Africans likely due to environmental similarity of conditions at the site during that period (Holliday 2015). Wadi Halfa sites excavated by the Colorado Nubian Expedition (including material originally excavated by the Spanish and Ghana expeditions) and now curated at Arizona State University curated at have been the subject of numerous studies since their excava­ tion in the 1960s and include materials dating to the Mesolithic, C-Group, Meroitic, X-Group, and Christian eras. Research by George Armelagos (1969) led the biocultural approach to population health. In addition to evidence for lice, scarification, tattooing, carcinoma, hydrocephaly, and other conditions, he found increased injuries and osteo­ phytosis (lipping of vertebral body) in the Christian sample compared to earlier groups. Females showed a much more rapid and significant rate of osteoporotic bone loss com­ pared to males. The occurrence of carious lesions indicated an increase in carbohydrate consumption since Mesolithic times. Paleopathological indicators of stress suggest that the X-Group was healthier than the preceding Meroitic and do not support ideas of pop­ ulation replacement (Greene 1982). Stable isotope analysis bone and hair samples dem­ onstrated that annual variation of food was stable for one thousand years with more C3 (wheat/barley) foods in winter and more C4 foods (millet/sorghum) in summer, with little use of stored goods (Schwarcz and White 2004); the X-Group showed a significant

Bioarchaeology of Nubia   1059 increase in millet production, likely associated with low Nile (main source of drinking water) and political/economic restructuring (White and Schwarcz  1994; White et al. 2004). However, nutritional deprivation was common as evidenced by bone measure­ ments, premature osteoporosis, and cribra orbitalia (lesions indicative of iron, folic acid, B12 deficiency; Armelagos et al. 1982). Kulubnarti was jointly excavated by William Adams, Dennis Van Gerven, and David Greene from the Colorado-Kentucky Expedition (Adams et al.  1999) and skeletal remains from the site are now curated at Arizona State University, including a Christian period island working-class cemetery (21-S-46) and mainland land-owning cemetery (21-R-2). Due to the size of the collection (over four hundred individuals) and the excellent preservation of bone and soft tissue, these remains have been studied intensively by many researchers and generations of students. Van Gerven and colleagues found that the diet was nutritionally deficient and that parasitic/bacterial infections were common (Mittler and Van Gerven 1994); health in the two areas, however, differed. Conditions were much worse on the island compared to the mainland, demonstrated via cribra orbitalia, growth arrest in teeth (enamel hypoplasia), overall smaller size, decreased pel­ vic dimensions that contributed to high infant mortality, weaning stress, fluctuating asymmetry in the skull, and osteoporosis (Hummert and Van Gerven 1983; Sandford et al. 1983; Martin and Armelagos 1985; Katzenberg et al. 1996; DeLeon 2007; Sandberg et al. 2014). Accidental fractures were common in both cemeteries, likely due to the diffi­ cult and uneven terrain of the region (Kilgore et al. 1997); bone histomorphology sug­ gests that males were involved in more physically strenuous tasks (Mulhern and Van Gerven 1997). Based on stable isotope analysis of hair, soft tissue, and bone, the commu­ nities ate predominately C3 foods with some C4, particularly in the mainland cemetery; C3 foods were more common in Wadi Halfa compared to Kulubnarti because saqia irri­ gation at Wadi Halfa allowed for more productive fields of C3 crops (Basha et al. 2016). Low amounts of animal protein and no aquatic sources were consumed with no differ­ ence between the cemeteries, though variation is seen in age groups (Turner et al. 2007; Fares et al. 2015). Tetracycline (antibiotic) labeling was discovered in bones, sourced from beer brewed with partially baked bread (Bassett et al.  1980; Armelagos  2000; Nelson et al. 2010); rates of labelled bone did not differ between the cemeteries (Margolis et al. 2015). Semna South was excavated by the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago (skeletal remains now curated at Arizona State University), with remains dating to Meroitic, X-Group, and Christian periods. Using cranial discrete traits, Godde (2010) found biological continuity in the sample. Skeletal studies have revealed high rates of craniofacial trauma indicative of social stress and injuries associated with falls due to terrain (Alvrus 1999). Three tattoos were found on Meroitic period skeletal remains on hands and an arm in complex designs that may relate to social status or group affiliation (Alvrus et al. 2001). Tattooing has also been documented in C-Group period remains, although the symbolic meaning likely differed (Tassie 2003). Amara West New Kingdom colonial settlement and cemetery sites were actively excavated (earlier excavations by the Egypt Exploration Society) beginning in 2008 by Neal

1060   Michele R. Buzon Spencer of the British Museum with bioarchaeological research led by Michaela Binder. The cemeteries begin in Kerma Ancien/Moyen and extend until as late as the early 8th century bc; graves display both Egyptian and Nubian burial features. For the post–New Kingdom sample, skeletal analyses indicate significant environmental stress as demon­ strated by low adult femur lengths, cribra orbitalia, lesions possibly indicative of scurvy (Vitamin C deficiency), and bone formation associated with infection (particularly in the ribs and maxillary sinuses suggestive of respiratory disease; Binder and Spencer 2014). Calcified arterial plaques found with five individuals provide evidence for cardiovascular disease in the population (Binder and Roberts  2014). The earliest complete example of metastatic carcinoma secondary to unknown soft tissue cancer was also found (Binder et al. 2014). High traumatic injury frequencies in the axial skele­ ton associated with falls, crashes, or direct blows to the spine may be due to risks associ­ ated with activities on multi-storied houses as well as agriculture and animal husbandry. A high frequency of osteoarthritis in the spine and joints also supports the idea of physi­ cally strenuous activities. Poor dental health and high rates of dental enamel wear indi­ cates a diet high in carbohydrates, such as dates, and the incorporation of grit (Binder and Spencer 2014). Tombos was first tested and excavated in 1991 by David Edwards and Ali M. Osman Salih (2001) of the University of Khartoum; work at the site has continued over several sea­ sons beginning in 2000 directed by Stuart Tyson Smith and bioarchaeologist Michele Buzon of the University of California Santa Barbara, expanding to a joint project in 2010 with Purdue University, where the skeletal remains are curated. Associated with a New Kingdom colonial town, the cemeteries at Tombos begin around 1400 bce and were used continuously through the Napatan period. Analysis of cranial measurements, in conjunc­ tion with burial features and strontium isotope analysis, indicates that people buried at Tombos were immigrant Egyptians, local Nubians, and their offspring (Buzon et al. 2016). New Kingdom life at Tombos did not include violent injuries (Buzon and Richman 2007) or physically strenuous labor (Schrader 2012); inhabitants were likely associated with the Egyptian administration in roles such as scribes and craftspeople. Accordingly, few signs of ill health were observed (Buzon 2006b) with a mixed C3/C4 diet high in carbohydrates (Buzon and Bombak 2010; Schrader 2013). For the post-colonial sample, life appears to have been similar, though more physically strenuous activities are indicated via overall size of the bones and muscle attachments (Schrader  2013; Gibbon and Buzon  2016). Analyses suggest continuity with the earlier population and no strontium isotope evi­ dence of immigrants (Buzon and Simonetti 2013; Schrader et al. 2014; Buzon et al. 2016). People continued to show few signs of injuries or poor health (Buzon 2014). Kerma, with excavations initiated by Reisner in 1913, has produced a substantial sam­ ple of human skeletal remains that have been the subject of numerous studies, now curated in the Duckworth Collection at the University of Cambridge. While Reisner (1923:312) posited that people buried in the “sacrificial corridor” met a violent death, there is no osteological evidence for perimortem trauma or postmortem treatment

Bioarchaeology of Nubia   1061 (Judd 2004). Craniometric analysis reveals similarity between the sacrificial and nonsacrificial individuals (Judd and Irish 2009), while paleopathological analyses also note no significant differences in health (Buzon and Judd 2008), supporting the idea that cor­ ridor burials were likely local community members who were selected or volunteered to join their king in death (Judd and Irish 2009). The sacrificial individuals, did, however, have higher rates of rugose (roughened, raised) muscle attachments, especially males, which is indicative of intensive physical labor (Schrader 2015). While craniometric analysis indicates common ancestry between C-Group and Kerma samples (though Kerma individuals tend to be larger on average, suggestive of better resources; Buzon  2011), differences in the dental non-metric traits imply that there may have been some variation in the population history of these groups in Lower and Upper Nubia (Irish  2005). Multiple injuries are found in both Kerma city and Kerma hinterland rural populations; urban samples demonstrated ulna and skull inju­ ries indicative of interpersonal violence while the rural sample displayed nonviolent injuries associated with occupational and environmental factors (Filer  1997; Judd 2002, 2004). In general, health was good at Kerma urban and rural sites with indi­ viduals who lived to old age and were well nourished (Judd 2001; Buzon 2006b). Kerma individuals included more C4 sources of food than Egyptians; protein was obtained from sheep and goats, cattle (especially in Kerma Ancien), and freshwater fish (Iacumin et al. 1998; Thompson et al. 2008). Continuing excavations in the Kerma necropolis by the Swiss Archaeological Mission have produced additional burials (curated the University of Geneva/Neuchâtel) that have great potential for expanding our under­ standing of life at Kerma (Fallet 2010, 2013). Central Sudan cemetery excavations are shedding light on the region with many skel­ etal studies in the last decade, including Jebel Sabaloka (Varadzin and Suková 2014), El-Barga (Crevecoeur 2012; Crevecoeur and Benoiston 2014), Roseiris in the Blue Nile Region and Sitite region in Eastern Sudan (Fawzi Bakhiet 2014), Gabati (Judd 2012), ElKhiday (Iacumin et al.  2016; Jakob  2014; Usai et al.  2010), Dangeil (Pieri  2014), and Berber (Mohamed Saad and Binder 2014). Research in areas that had previously had little exploration such as the Fourth Cataract, Central Sudan, and sites in the deserts away from the Nile have great potential for changing our understanding of life in these regions. Trained bioarchaeologists on project teams have increased analysis of skeletal remains for many sites. Additionally, an effort is being made to supply training in bioarchaeological methods. For example, The British Museum’s Amara West project sponsored a Bioarchaeology Field School in 2011 consisting of a one-week workshop at the National Corporation for Antiquities and Museums (NCAM) that taught participants human skeletal anatomy and burial excava­ tions strategies. The current collaborative endeavors that multiple types of archaeologi­ cal data present suggest a bright future for bioarchaeology and will no doubt provide many stimulating contributions to the reconstruction of human history and lifeways in this region.

1062   Michele R. Buzon

References Cited Adams, W.Y. 1977 Nubia: Corridor to Africa. Princeton University Press. Adams, W.Y., N.K.  Adams, D.P.  Van Gerven, and D.L.  Green 1999 Kulubnarti, v. 3: The Cemeteries. Sudan Archaeological Research Society Publication Number 4. Basingstoke Press. Alvrus, A. 1999 Fracture Patterns among the Nubians of Semna South, Sudanese Nubia. International Journal of Osteoarchaeology 9:417–29. Alvrus, A., D. Wright, and C.F. Merbs 2001 Examination of Tattoos on Mummified Tissue Using Infra-Red Reflectography. Journal of Archaeological Science 28:395–400. Anderson, J.E. 1968 Late Paleolithic Skeletal Remains from Nubia. In The Prehistory of Nubia, v. 2, ed. F. Wendorf, pp. 996–1040. Southern Methodist University Press. Antoine, D. and J. Ambers 2014 The Scientific Analysis of Human Remains from the British Museum Collections. Research Potential and Examples from the Nile Valley. In Regarding the Dead, ed. A. Fletcher, D. Antoine, and J.D. Hill, pp. 20–30. British Museum Press. Armelagos, G.J. 1969 Disease in Ancient Nubia. Science 163:255–59. ——— 1997 Smith, (Sir) Grafton Elliot (1875–1937). In History of Physical Anthropology: An Encyclopedia, ed. F. Spencer, pp. 955–57. Garland Publishing. ——— 2000 Take Two beers and Call Me in 1,600 years. Natural History 109:50–53. Armelagos, G.J., R.  Huss-Ashmore, and D.  Martin 1982 Morphometrics as Indicators of Dietary Stress in Prehistoric Sudanese Nubia. Museum Applied Science Center for Archaeology Journal 2:22–26. Armelagos, G.J. and D.P. Van Gerven 2003 A Century of Skeletal Biology and Paleopathology: Contrasts, Contradictions, and Conflicts. American Anthropologist 105:53–64. Baker, B.J. 2014 Tracking Transitions in the Fourth Cataract Region of El-Ginefab: Results of the Arizona State University Fieldwork, 2007–2009. In The Fourth Cataract and Beyond: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference for Nubian Studies, ed. J.R. Anderson and D.A. Welsby, pp. 841–55. British Museum Publications on Egypt and Sudan 1. Peeters. Baker, B.J. and M.A.  Judd 2012 Development of Paleopathology in the Nile Valley. In The Global History of Paleopathology: Pioneers and Prospects, ed. J. E. Buikstra and C. A. Roberts, pp. 209–34. Oxford University Press. Basha, W.A., A.T.  Chamberlain, M.E.  Zaki, W.A.  Kandeel, and N.H.  Fares 2016 Diet Reconstruction through Stable Isotope Analysis of Ancient Mummified Soft Tissues from Kulubnarti (Sudanese Nubia). Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports 5:71–79. Bassett, E.J., M.S. Keith, G.J. Armelagos, and D.L. Martin 1980 Tetracycline-Labeled Human Bone from Ancient Sudanese Nubia (ad 350). Science 209:1532–34. Batrawi, A.M.E. 1935 Report on the Human Remains. Mission archéologique de Nubia, 1929–1934. Government Press. ——— 1946 The Racial History of Egypt and Nubia, Part II. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland 76:131–56. Beckett, S. and N.C. Lovell 1994 Dental Disease Evidence for Agricultural Intensification in the Nubian C-Group. International Journal of Osteoarchaeology 4:223–40. Bernal, M. 1987 Black Athena: Afroasiatic Roots of Classical Civilization, v. 1: The Fabrication of Ancient Greece. Rutgers University Press. Billy, G. and M.-C. Chamla 1981–82 Les restes humains des nécropoles pharaoniques de Soleb (Nubie soudanise). L’Anthropologie 85:59–90.

Bioarchaeology of Nubia   1063 Binder, M., C. Roberts, N. Spencer, D. Antoine, and C. Cartwright 2014 On the Antiquity of Cancer: Evidence for Metastatic Carcinoma in a Young Man from Ancient Nubia (c. 1200 BC). PLOS ONE 9:e90924. Binder, M. and C.A.  Roberts 2014 Calcified Structures Associated with Human Skeletal Remains: Possible Atherosclerosis Affecting the Population Buried at Amara West, Sudan (1300–800 BC). International Journal of Paleopathology 6:20–29. Binder, M. and N. Spencer 2014 The Bioarchaeology of Amara West in Nubia: Investigating the Impacts of Political, Cultural and Environmental Change on Health and Diet. In Regarding the Dead, ed. A. Fletcher, D. Antoine, and J.D. Hill, pp. 123–36. British Museum Press. Blumenbach, J.F. 1825 A Manual of the Elements of Natural History. Translated from the tenth German edition, by R.T. Gore. Printed for W. Simpkin & R. Marshall. Bolhofner, K. and B.J. Baker 2014 Dental Ablation in Ancient Nubia. Paper presented at the 13th International Conference for Nubian Studies, Neuchâtel. Bonnet, Charles 1992 Excavations at the Nubian Royal Town of Kerma: 1975–91. Antiquity 66:611–25. Burnor, D. and J.E. Harris 1967 Racial Continuity in Lower Nubia: 12,000 BC to the Present. Indiana Academy of Science Proceedings 77:113–21. Buzon, M.R. 2006a Biological and Ethnic Identity in New Kingdom Nubia: A Case Study from Tombos. Current Anthropology 47:683–95. ——— 2006b Health of the Non-Elites at Tombos: Nutritional and Disease Stress in New Kingdom Nubia. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 130:26–37. ——— 2011 Nubian Identity in the Bronze Age: Patterns of Cultural and Biological Variation. Bioarchaeology of the Near East 5:19–40. ——— 2012 The Bioarchaeological Approach to Paleopathology. In A Companion to Paleopathology, ed. A.L. Grauer, pp. 58–75. Wiley-Blackwell. ——— 2014 Tombos during the Napatan Period (∼750–660 BC): Exploring the Consequences of Sociopolitical Transitions in Ancient Nubia. International Journal of Paleopathology 7:1–7. Buzon, M.R. and A. Bombak 2010 Dental Disease in the Nile Valley during the New Kingdom. International Journal of Osteoarchaeology 20:371–87. Buzon, M.R., J.T.  Eng, P.M.  Lambert, and P.L.  Walker 2005 Bioarchaeological Methods. In Handbook of Archaeological Methods, v. 2, ed. H.D.G. Maschner and C. Chippindale, pp. 871–918. AltaMira. Buzon, M.R. and M.A.  Judd 2008 Investigating Health at Kerma: Sacrificial versus Nonsacrificial Individuals. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 136:93–99. Buzon, M.R. and R.  Richman 2007 Traumatic Injuries and Imperialism: The Effects of Egyptian Colonial Strategies at Tombos in Upper Nubia. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 133:783–91. Buzon, M.R. and A. Simonetti 2013 Strontium Isotope (87sr/86sr) Isotope Variability in the Nile Valley: Identifying Residential Mobility during Ancient Egyptian and Nubian Sociopolitical Changes in the New Kingdom and Napatan Periods. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 151:1–9. Buzon, M.R., S.T.  Smith, and A.  Simonetti 2016 Entanglement and the Formation of the Ancient Nubian Napatan State. American Anthropologist 118:284–300. Calcagno, J.M. 1986a Dental Reduction in Post-Pleistocene Nubia. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 70:349–63.

1064   Michele R. Buzon ——— 1986b Odontometrics and Biological Continuity in the Meroitic, X-Group, and Christian Phases of Nubia. Current Anthropology 27:66–69. Carlson, D.S. and D.P. Van Gerven 1977 Masticatory Function and Post-Pleistocene Evolution in Nubia. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 46:495–506. Cockitt, J. 2014 Whose Body? The Human Remains from the 1908–1909 Season of the Archaeological Survey of Nubia. In Paleopathology in Egypt and Nubia: A Century in Review, ed. R. Metcalfe, J. Cockitt, and R. David, pp. 9–22. Archaeopress. Crèvecoeur, I. 2012 First Anthropological Insights on the Early Holocene Funerary Assemblages from El-Barga. In Archaeological Excavations at Kerma, ed. M. Honegger, pp. 12–17. Université de Neuchâtel. Crevecoeur, I. and A.-S. Benoiston 2014 Biological Identity of the Mesolithic and Neolithic Populations from El-Barga (Sudan). Paper presented at the 13th International Conference of Nubian Studies, University of Neuchâtel. David, R. 2014 Sir Grafton Elliot Smith: Palaeopathology and the Archaeological Survey of Nubia. In Paleopathology in Egypt and Nubia: A Century in Review, ed. R.  Metcalfe, J. Cockitt, and R. David, pp. 1–8. Archaeopress. DeLeon, V.B. 2007 Fluctuating Asymmetry and Stress in a Medieval Nubian Population. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 132:520–34. Dunham, D. 1950 El Kurru. Royal Cemeteries of Kush 1. Harvard University Press. ——— 1955 Nuri. Royal Cemeteries of Kush 2. Museum of Fine Arts (Boston). Dupras, T.L. and J.J. Schultz 2013 Taphonomic Bone Staining and Color Changes in Forensic Contexts. In Manual of Forensic Taphonomy, ed. J. Pokines and S.A. Symes, pp. 315–40. CRC Press. Edwards, D.N. and Ali Osman Salih 2001 New Kingdom and Kushite Sites in the Third Cataract Region, Sudanese Nubia. Göttinger Miszellen 182:7–30. Emberling, G., B.B. Williams, M. Ingvolstad, and T.R. James 2014 Peripheral Vision: Identity at the Margins of the Early Kingdom of Kush. In The Fourth Cataract and Beyond: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference for Nubian Studies, ed. J.R. Anderson and D.A. Welsby, pp. 329–36. British Museum Publications on Egypt and Sudan 1. Peeters. Fallet, C. 2010 Paleoanthropological Study of the Oldest Sectors of the Eastern Cemetery. In Archaeological Excavations at Kerma, ed. M. Honegger, pp. 12–17. Université de Neuchâtel. ——— 2013 Bioarchaeological Study of the Ancient Sectors of the Eastern Cemetery. In Archaeological Excavations at Kerma (Sudan), ed. M. Honegger, pp. 32–36. Université de Neuchâtel. Fares, N.H., M.E.  Zaki, W.A.  Keel, A.T.  Chamberlain, and W.A.  Basha 2015 Hair Nitrogen Isotopic Compositions as a Dietary Indicator of the Protein Intake in the Kulubnarti Nubian Population. Egyptian Journal of Experimental Biology (Zoology) 11:143–49. Fawzi Bakhiet 2014 Burial Customs in the Blue Nile Region and Eastern Sudan: An Overview. Paper presented at the 13th International Conference of Nubian Studies, University of Neuchâtel. Filer, J.M. 1997 Ancient Egypt and Nubia as a Source of Information for Violent Cranial Injuries. In Material Harm: Archaeological Studies of War and Violence, ed. J. Carman, pp. 47–74. Cruithne Press. Franceschi, M.G., S. Tofanelli, and G. Paoli 1994 Variance of Abo Gene Frequencies in Lower Nubia through the Last Millennium. Homo 45:51–62. Francigny, V. 2009 The Meroitic Necropolises of Sai Island. Sudan & Nubia 13:92–99.

Bioarchaeology of Nubia   1065 Francigny, V., A. de Voogt, J. Kahn, and W. Harcourt-Smith 2014 At the Border between Egypt and Nubia: Skeletal Material from El-Hesa Cemetery 2. Journal of Ancient Egyptian Interconnections 6:5–10. Gibbon, V.E. and M.R. Buzon 2016 Morphometric Assessment of the Appendicular Skeleton in the New Kingdom and Napatan Components from Tombos in Upper Nubia. International Journal of Osteoarchaeology 26:324–36. Godde, K. 2010 Who Were the Meroites? A Biological Investigation into the Nubian PostHiatus Group. International Journal of Osteoarchaeology 20:388–95. ——— 2012 A Fresh Perspective on Nubian Population Structure: A Population Genetics Approach Using Cranial Discrete Traits in Mesolithic—C-Group Nubians. South African Archaeological Bulletin 67:44–51. Godlewski, W. and J. Kociankowska-Bożek 2007 Early Makuria Research Project Season 2007. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean 19:494–99. Greene, D.L. 1972 Dental Anthropology of Early Egypt and Nubia. Journal of Human Evolution 1:315–24. ——— 1982 Discrete Dental Variations and Biological Distances of Nubian Populations. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 58:75–79. Haddow, S.D. 2014 The 2014 Season of Excavations at Kurgus: Excavations in the Cemetery, Site KRG3. Sudan & Nubia 18:138–47. Holliday, T.W. 2015 Population Affinities of the Jebel Sahaba Skeletal Sample: Limb Proportion Evidence. International Journal of Osteoarchaeology 25:466–76. Honegger, M. 2014 Recent Advances in our Understanding of Prehistory in Northern Sudan. In The Fourth Cataract and Beyond: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference for Nubian Studies, ed. J. R. Anderson and D. A. Welsby, pp. 19–30. Peeters. Hummert, J.R. and D.P.  Van Gerven 1983 Skeletal Growth in a Medieval Population from Sudanese Nubia. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 60:471–78. Iacumin, P., H. Bocherens, L. Chaix, and A. Mariotti 1998 Stable Carbon and Nitrogen Isotopes as Dietary Indicators of Ancient Nubian Populations (Northern Sudan). Journal of Archaeological Science 25:293–301. Iacumin, P., A. Di Matteo, D. Usai, S. Salvatori, and G. Venturelli 2016 Stable Isotope Study on Ancient Populations of Central Sudan: Insights on their Diet and Environment. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 160:498–518. Ingvoldstad, M. 2009 Human Skeletal Remains Report from Al-Widay I, Al-Widay II, and Umm Gebir Island Cemeteries, Sudan. Report prepared for the Oriental Institute Nubian Expedition, Chicago. Irish, J.D. 2005 Population Continuity vs. Discontinuity Revisited: Dental Affinities among Late Paleolithic through Christian-Era Nubians. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 128:520–35. Jakob, T. 2007 The Value and Future Potential of Human Skeletal Remains Excavated at the Fourth Cataract. Sudan & Nubia 11:43–47. ——— 2014 The People of Al Khiday 2: Bioarchaeological Analysis of a Multi-Phase Cemetery in Central Sudan. Paper presented at the 13th International Conference of Nubian Studies, University of Neuchâtel. ——— 2015 Preliminary Bioarchaeological Analysis of the Human Remains from Mograt Island (MOG034), 2014 and 2015. Der antike Sudan. Mitteilungen der Sudanarchäologischen Gesellschaft zu Berlin 26:169–76.

1066   Michele R. Buzon Jakob, T. and M.  Magzoub Ali 2011 Sudan. In The Routledge Handbook of Archaeological Human Remains and Legislation, ed. N. Marquez Grant and L. Fibiger, pp. 513–23. Routledge. Johnson, A. and N.C. Lovell 1995 Dental Morphological Evidence for Biological Continuity between the A-Group and C-Group Periods in Lower Nubia. International Journal of Osteoarchaeology 5:368–76. Jones, F.W. 1908a The Post-Mortem Staining of Bone Produced by the Ante-Mortem Shedding of Blood. British Medical Journal 1:734–36. ——— 1908b A Supplementary Anatomical Report, Dealing with the Work up to November 30, 1907. Bulletin of the Archaeological Survey of Nubia 1:37–39. ——— 1910 Fractured Bones and Dislocations. In The Archaeological Survey of Nubia: Report for 1907–1908, v. 2: Report on Human Remains, ed. G.E. Smith and F.W. Jones, pp. 293–342. National Printing Department. ——— 1938 In Egypt and Nubia. In Sir Grafton Elliot Smith: A Biographical Record by his Colleagues, ed. W.R. Dawson, pp. 139–48. Jonathan Cape. Judd, M.A. 2001 The Human Remains. In Life on the Desert Edge: Seven Thousand Years of Settlement in the Northern Dongola Reach, Sudan, by D.A.  Welsby, pp. 458–536. Sudan Archaeological Research Society Publication 7. BAR International Series 980. Archeopress. ——— 2002 Ancient Injury Recidivism: An Example from the Kerma Period of Ancient Nubia. International Journal of Osteoarchaeology 12:89–106. ——— 2004 Trauma in the City of Kerma: Ancient versus Modern Injury Patterns. International Journal of Osteoarchaeology 14:34–51. ——— 2012 Gabati: A Meroitic, Post-Meroitic and Medieval Cemetery in Central Sudan, v. 2: The Physical Anthropology. British Archaeological Reports International Series 2442. Judd, M.A. and J.  Irish 2009 Dying to Serve: The Mass Burials at Kerma. Antiquity 83:709–22. Katzenberg, M.A., D.A.  Herring, and S.R.  Saunders 1996 Weaning and Infant Mortality: Evaluating the Skeletal Evidence. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 101:177–99. Kilgore, L., R. Jurmain, and D.P. Van Gerven 1997 Paleoepidemiological Patterns of Trauma in a Medieval Nubian Skeletal Population. International Journal of Osteoarchaeology 7:103–14. Knüsel, C. 2010 Bioarchaeology: A Synthetic Approach. Bulletins et Mémoires de la Société d’Anthropologie de Paris 22:62–73. Krings, M., A.E. Salem, K. Bauer, H. Geisert, A.K. Malek, L. Chaix, C. Simon, D. Welsby, A. Di Rienzo, G. Utermann, A. Sajantila, S. Paabo, and M. Stoneking 1999 mtDNA Analysis of Nile River Valley Populations: A Genetic Corridor or a Barrier to Migration? American Journal of Human Genetics 64:1166–76. Lalueza Fox, C. 1997 mtDNA Analysis in Ancient Nubians Supports the Existence of Gene Flow between Sub-Sahara and North Africa in the Nile Valley. Annals of Human Biology 24:217–27. Lovell, N.C. 1997 Trauma Analysis in Paleopathology. Yearbook of Physical Anthropology 40:139–70. Margolis, J., D.P. Van Gerven, and G.J. Armelagos 2015 Homogeneity of Tetracycline Labeling across Classes in Early Christian Burials from Kulubnarti, Nubia. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 156(S60):213. Martin, D.L. and G.J. Armelagos 1985 Skeletal Remodeling and Mineralization as Indicators of Health: An Example from Prehistoric Sudanese Nubia. Journal of Human Evolution 14:527–37.

Bioarchaeology of Nubia   1067 Mittler, D.M. and D.P.  Van Gerven 1994 Developmental, Diachronic, and Demographic Analysis of Cribra Orbitalia in the Medieval Christian Populations of Kulubnarti. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 93:287–97. Mohamed Saad and M.  Binder 2014 The Berber Meroitic Cemetery—Bioarchaeological Insights into Living Conditions in a Middle-Late Meroitic Community. Paper presented at the 13th International Conference of Nubian Studies, University of Neuchâtel. Molleson, T.I. 1993 The Nubian Pathological Collection in the Natural History Museum, London. In Biological Anthropology and the Study of Ancient Egypt, ed. W. V. Davies and R. Walker, pp. 136–43. British Museum Press. Morton, S.G. 1844 Crania Aegyptiaca: Or, Observations on Egyptian Ethnography, Derived from Anatomy, History, and the Monuments. J. Pennington. Mulhern, D.M. and D.P. Van Gerven 1997 Patterns of Femoral Bone Remodeling Dynamics in a Medieval Nubian Population. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 104:133–46. Nelson, M.L., A. Dinardo, J. Hochberg, and G.J. Armelagos. 2010 Brief Communication: Mass Spectroscopic Characterization of Tetracycline in the Skeletal Remains of an Ancient Population from Sudanese Nubia 350–550 CE. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 143:151–54. Nielsen, O.V. 1973 Population Movements and Changes in Ancient Nubia with Special Reference to the Relationship between C-Group, New Kingdom and Kerma. Journal of Human Evolution 2:31–46. Pieri, A. 2014 A Kushite Cemetery at Dangeil (WTC): Preliminary Analyses of the Human Remains. Sudan & Nubia 18:78–82. Pitre, M.C., P. Mayne Correia, P.J. Mankowski, J. Klassen, M.J. Day, N.C. Lovell, and R. Currah 2013 Biofilm Growth in Human Skeletal Material from Ancient Mesopotamia. Journal of Archaeological Science 40:24–29. Prowse, T.L. and N.C.  Lovell 1995 Biological Continuity between the A- and C-Groups in Lower Nubia: Evidence from Cranial Non-Metric Traits. International Journal of Osteoarchaeology 5:103–14. Reisner, G.A. 1910 The Archaeological Survey of Nubia Report for 1907–1908, v.1: Archaeological Report. National Printing Department (Cairo). ——— 1923 Excavations at Kerma. Harvard African Studies 5–6. Peabody Museum of Harvard University. Rilly, C. and V.  Francigny 2010 Excavations at Sedeinga, a New Start. Sudan & Nubia 14:62–68. Sandberg, P.A., M.  Sponheimer, J.  Lee-Thorp, and D.  Van Gerven 2014 Intra-Tooth Stable Isotope Analysis of Dentine: A Step toward Addressing Selective Mortality in the Reconstruction of Life History in the Archaeological Record. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 155:281–93. Sandford, M.K., D.P.  Van Gerven, and R.R.  Meglen 1983 Elemental Hair Analysis: New Evidence on the Etiology of Cribra Orbitalia in Sudanese Nubia. Human Biology 55:831–44. Sauer, N.J. 1993 Applied Anthropology and the Concept of Race: A Legacy of Linnaeus. NAPA Bulletin 13:79–84. Saunders, S.R. 2007 Juvenile Skeletons and Growth-Related Studies. In Biological Anthropology of the Human Skeleton, second ed., ed. M.A.  Katzenberg and S.R.  Saunders, pp. 117–47. Wiley.

1068   Michele R. Buzon Schrader, S.A. 2012 Activity Patterns in New Kingdom Nubia: An Examination of Entheseal Remodeling and Osteoarthritis at Tombos. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 149:60–70. ——— 2013 Bioarchaeology of the Everyday: Analysis of Activity Patterns and Diet in the Nile Valley. Doctoral dissertation, Department of Anthropology, Purdue University. ——— 2015 Elucidating Inequality in Nubia: An Examination of Entheseal Changes at Kerma (Sudan). American Journal of Physical Anthropology 156:192–202. Schrader, S.A., M.R. Buzon L. Corcoran, A. Simonetti 2019 Intraregional 87Sr/86Sr Variation in Nubia: New Insights from the Third Cataract. Journal of Archaeological Science Reports 24:373–79. Schrader, S.A., M.R.  Buzon, and J.D.  Irish 2014 Illuminating the Nubian “Dark Age”: A Bioarchaeological Analysis of Dental Non-Metric Traits During the Napatan Period. HOMO—Journal of Comparative Human Biology 65:267–80. Schwarcz, H.P. and C.D. White 2004 The Grasshopper or the Ant? Cultigen-Use Strategies in Ancient Nubia from C–13 Analyses of Human Hair. Journal of Archaeological Science 31:753–62. Sirak, K.A., D.M. Fernandes, S. Connell, and R. Pinhasi 2015 No Longer the 1%: Optimizing Ancient DNA Yield from Saharan African Samples. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 156(S60):289. Smith, G.E. 1908 The Most Ancient Splints. British Medical Journal 1:732–34. ——— 1909 Archaeological Survey of Nubia Anatomical Report (a). Oct. 1 to Dec 31, 1908. Bulletin of the Archaeological Survey of Nubia 4:19–21. ——— 1910 Introduction. In The Archaeological Survey of Nubia: Report for 1907–1908, v. 2: Report on the Human Remains, ed. G.E. Smith and F.W. Jones, pp. 7–18. National Printing Department (Cairo). Smith, G.E. and F.W.  Jones 1908 The Anatomical Report. In Bulletin of the Archaeological Survey of Nubia 2:29–69. ——— 1910 The Archaeological Survey of Nubia: Report for 1907–1908, v. 2: Report on the Human Remains. National Printing Department (Cairo). Starling, A.P. and J.T. Stock 2007 Dental Indicators of Health and Stress in Early Egyptian and Nubian Agriculturalists: A Difficult Transition and Gradual Recovery. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 134:520–28. Strouhal, E. 1971 Evidence of the Early Penetration of Negroes into Prehistoric Egypt. Journal of African History 12:1–9. ——— 1981 L’état actuel des études anthropologiques dans l’ancienne Égypte et en Nubie (en Anglais). Bulletins et Mémoires de la Société d’Anthropologie de Paris, XIII Série 8:231–49. Stynder, D.D., J. Braga, and E. Crubézy 2009 Craniometric Evidence for Biological Continuity between Meroitic and Post-Meroitic Populations Buried at the Necropolis of Missiminia, Middle Nubia. The South African Archaeological Bulletin 64:122–29. Tassie, G.J. 2003 Identifying the Practice of Tattooing in Ancient Egypt and Nubia. Papers from the Institute of Archaeology 14:85–101. Thompson, A.H., L.  Chaix, and M.P.  Richards 2008 Stable Isotopes and Diet at Ancient Kerma, Upper Nubia (Sudan). Journal of Archaeological Science 35:376–87. Turner, B.L., J.L. Edwards, E.A. Quinn, J.D. Kingston, and D.P. Van Gerven 2007 Age-Related Variation in Isotopic Indicators of Diet at Medieval Kulubnarti, Sudanese Nubia. International Journal of Osteoarchaeology 17:1–25.

Bioarchaeology of Nubia   1069 Usai, D., S. Salvatori, P. Iacumin, A. Di Matteo, T. Jakob, and A. Zerboni 2010 Excavating a Unique Pre-Mesolithic Cemetery in Central Sudan. Antiquity 84:323. Usai, D., S. Salvatori, T. Jakob, and A. R. David 2014 The Al Khiday Cemetery in Central Sudan and its “Classic/Late Meroitic” Period Graves. Journal of African Archaeology 12:183–204. Varadzin, L. and L. Suková 2014 Dating and Significance of the Cemetery at the Site of Sphink, Jebel Sabaloka, 6th Nile Cataract. Paper presented at the 13th International Conference of Nubian Studies, University of Neuchâtel. Waldron, H.A. 2000 The Study of Human Remains from Nubia: The Contribution of Grafton Elliot Smith and his Colleagues to Palaeopathology. Medical History 44:363–88. Walker, P.L. 2001 A Bioarchaeological Perspective on the History of Violence. Annual Review of Anthropology 30:573–96. Wells, C. 1964 Bones, Bodies and Disease. Thames and Hudson. Welsby, D. A. 2011 Excavations in the Kushite Town and Cemetery at Kawa, 2010–11. Sudan & Nubia 15:54–63. Wendorf, F. 1968 Site 117: A Nubian Final Paleolithic Graveyard near Jebel Sahaba, Sudan. In The Prehistory of Nubia, v. 2, ed. F. Wendorf, pp. 954–95. Southern Methodist University Press. White, C., F.J. Longstaffe, and K.R. Law 2004 Exploring the Effects of Environment, Physiology and Diet on Oxygen Isotope Ratios in Ancient Nubian Bones and Teeth. Journal of Archaeological Science 31:233–50. White, C.D. and H.P. Schwarcz 1994 Temporal Trends in Stable Isotopes for Nubian Mummy Tissues. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 93:165–87. Włodarska, M. 2014 Kerma Burials in the Fourth Cataract Region—Three Seasons of Excavations at Shemkhiya. In The Fourth Cataract and Beyond: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference for Nubian Studies, ed. J.R. Anderson and D.A. Welsby, pp. 321–28. Peeters.

Chapter 53

Landscape Archaeologies in Nubia and the Middle Nile David N. Edwards

Introduction The vast landscapes of the Middle Nile present huge challenges for archaeological study, while inviting broader spatial approaches of the kind that underlie landscape archaeology (Fig.  53.1). Undergoing profound environmental transformations during the Holocene (M. Williams, this volume), this large region forms just one element of a much larger-scale Saharan-Sahelian-Sudanic world. It has also long enjoyed connections in other directions, to Ethiopia and the Horn of Africa, as well as Southwest Asia. Within the linguistic landscapes of the continent we may also note a likely early presence of (Eastern Sudanic?) Nilo-Saharan languages over much of this region with Afroasiatic speakers also present east of the Nile (Rilly and de Voogt 2012; Blench 2019; see Rilly, this volume). It is not necessary here to revisit and attempt to define, yet again, what is to be understood by the “usefully ambiguous concept” of “landscape” (Gosden and Head 1994:113). The far from fixed ontological status of landscape is now well recognized (e.g., David and Thomas 2008) and may be embraced. The importance of understanding natural landscapes and environment remains fundamental (see chapters by Harrell and by M. Williams, this volume), but landscapes may also be explored in their fashioning from nature by human hands, as sites of experience as well as repositories of memory—­ memories which may also be contested, dynamic, and fluid. Landscapes may be mapped and classified but may also investigated in relation to the practices and rhythms of everyday life as well as their social and political ordering. The intertwining of landscape and environment also invites exploration of the spaces between these categorical states, as

1072   David N. Edwards

Figure 53.1  Map of sites mentioned in the text. Map: Samuel Burns.

manifestations of both culture and nature (Gillings and Pollard  2016:11–12), in ways already generating interesting interdisciplinary approaches (e.g., Luig and von Oppen 1997; Bollig and Bubenzer 2009). The history of archaeological research in the region has been a powerful influence in the variable engagement with what has become more widely recognized in the 21st century as “landscape archaeologies.” The explicit framing of research in such terms still remains uncommon, as is more generally the case within African archaeology (McIntosh  2008; Fleisher  2013:189–90), albeit with some notable exceptions (e.g., Grzymski 2004). To date, engagement with landscape research has also varied considerably across periods. Larger-scale landscape perspectives have been more common, and necessary, in studies of the early to mid-Holocene Saharan regions (Gatto and Zerboni 2015). From the mid-Holocene such larger worlds were, however, fragmenting. Landscape-scale perspectives remain essential for exploring the complex environmental zones developing within and around the Nile valley and its tributaries through the Holocene (see also Welsby, this volume).

Landscape Archaeologies in Nubia and the Middle Nile   1073 The “Sudanese Neolithic” developed among already diverse populations of hunterfisher-gatherers. Subsequent millennia would see the development of complex constellations of herders and latterly cultivators (Marshall and Hildebrand 2002), with varying degrees of mobility. Living within often complex mosaic landscapes (Stahl 2004), population levels across the region must also be expected to have been uneven (Raynaut 1997:41). Along the Nile and its tributaries rich riverine resources, long exploited by “Mesolithic” populations, encouraged more settled lifeways grading into more mobile transhumant lifestyles also found in neighboring regions (Marshall 1990, 2000; Lane 2013). The pastoral presence has quite fundamental implications for landscape archaeology due to the very common requirements for mobility, whether in terms of seasonal transhumance or more specialized nomadism. Such mobility may in turn have profound implications for more conventional place-centered approaches to landscape (Lane 2016:196). In almost all periods and regions more-or-less mobile pastoral populations will have been present, if all too often barely glimpsed in the archaeological record (e.g., Bradley  1992; MacDonald  1999). That pastoral nomads may often appropriate space like hunter-gatherers (Schlee 1992:110) may also be noted. More landscape-aware approaches will necessarily challenge us to acknowledge more fully such populations, as well as to seek new ways to incorporate them within our research. Notwithstanding the vast scale of the Middle Nile and surrounding regions, the historical development of research has long encouraged less site-focused approaches. The ready availability of high-resolution satellite imagery now makes it very possible to explore vast landscapes in ways unthinkable a few decades ago. However, from the early 20th century progressive surveys along the Nile in response to the construction of the Aswan Dam(s), began to investigate the (soon-to-be-destroyed) linear landscape of northern Nubia at an unprecedented scale. By the second half of the 20th century, syntheses of this data had begun to appear (Adams 1977), framed at varied scales, some also beginning to draw on new approaches and the terminology of “settlement archaeology” (Trigger 1965, 1968, 1984) and “cultural ecology” (Trigger 1970). Building on some early reconnaissance surveys (Crawford 1953; Hintze 1959) more recent regional studies have continued (e.g., Welsby  2001; Näser and Lange  2007; Osman and Edwards  2012; Anderson and Welsby 2014), if still largely conceived as salvage archaeology. Periodbased studies have been undertaken at various scales, for example in relation to the “Pan-Graves” and populations of the eastern deserts (Bietak 1966; Sadr 1991; Barnard and Duistermaat 2012), within New Kingdom Nubia (Säve-Söderbergh and Troy 1991; Trigger  1996) and in the Meroitic period (Khidir Abdelkarim Ahmed  1984; Edwards 1996, 1999), as well as some important early studies of the prehistory of central and eastern Sudan (Haaland 1981, 1987; Caneva 1983, 1988; Marks 1991). If field research has been long-dominated by a focus on riverine regions north of Khartoum, the character of research outside the river valley has been more varied. Within the Saharan north, landscape-scale research of the generally open deserts has been especially productive. Important and insightful studies of the Nubian (and Egyptian) deserts and their oases, ancient and modern, have produced a wealth of data, both environmental and cultural (Kuper  1995; Jennerstrasse 8  2002; Kuper and

1074   David N. Edwards Kröpelin 2006; Jesse 2008; Yahia Fadl Tahir 2014). Further south, exploration along the onetime “Yellow Nile” tributary of the Wadi Howar has been equally productive (Keding 1996, 1998) if raising many new questions concerning adjoining regions, especially further west. Explorations of other large non-riverine landscapes still remain at an exploratory level, if now beginning the exploration of the Bayuda (Lohwasser and Karberg 2013; Auenmüller et al. 2018), some parts of eastern and southeastern Sudan (Marks 1991; Sadr 1991; Manzo 2014, 2017), areas west of the Nile (Salvatori et al. 2011; Usai 2014), and into Kordofan (Gratien 2013). The rainlands of the Gezira still remain little known, although exploratory work has continued along the White Nile and the margins of the Blue Nile (Fernandez 2003). Some of this work has been developing more explicitly landscape approaches, for example in relation to movement and routeways (Förster and Riemer eds. 2013). Here again important new possibilities may be emerging to engage with archaeologically less visible populations, still very poorly represented in our narratives. As yet there has been little discussion of the political construction of landscapes and expressions of the political (Smith 2003, 2011), an approach of particular importance in the Middle Nile as a focus of very early complex political formations in sub-Saharan Africa. Explicit attempts, to date, remain limited (e.g., Grzymski 2004:16–18), but their potential seems clear. Within such studies we may seek evidence for the material constitution of early political structures, from the formative Kushite polities and the kingdom of Kerma, through a series of later kingdoms and indeed empires (e.g., Meroe), on occasions uniting vast tracts of the Middle Nile. Across time, each new political configuration developed its own structures integrating varied environments and their populations, cultivators and herders, settled and more mobile. If most archaeological interest had to date remained focused on the Nile, the (the more recent) development of kingdoms and sultanates across the Sahelian-Sudanic belt may find many commonalities with research elsewhere in Africa (e.g., Monroe and Ogundiran 2012). A concern for the political may also prove more generally productive beyond the “state” (e.g., Johnson 1989). The ebb-and-flow of Egyptian interests into the Middle Nile, over millennia, also offers considerable scope for exploring varied imperial and colonial encounters and responses. This offers fertile ground for exploring the potentially very different engagements with Nubian landscapes of different kinds of states. Likely long-term commonalities shared within more “Sudanic” political traditions (e.g., Edwards 1998) may be very different from those emanating from the Lower Nile and the “North,” and such differences certainly invite investigation. In more recent centuries the Ottoman presence would again leave its imprint on Nubian landscapes, presaging much more widespread colonial restructurings in the 19th-century Turco-Egyptian period, into the Condominium, emanating from the re-formation and disciplining of Mohammad Ali’s Egypt (T.  Mitchell  1988). The creation of the metropolis of Khartoum and latterly Omdurman are perhaps the most obvious manifestations of such 19th-century political visions. The rather more limited evidence for significant interactions with the Ethiopian highlands is perhaps a phenomenon that invites more explicit exploration.

Landscape Archaeologies in Nubia and the Middle Nile   1075 From the mid-Holocene what must have been varied and uneven adoption of domestic livestock and latterly agriculture will have transformed subsistence regimes, the social worlds of everyday practice, and the cultural landscapes so created and inhabited. If the likely sparsity and uneven distribution of early human populations is perhaps too commonly overlooked, future research should perhaps aspire to write in to our landscapes the largely ignored populations of wild animals among which humans had to establish their place. The coexistence of humans and wild animals may itself create distinctive and diverse geographies (Lorimer 2006:497). The region still supports some of the greatest concentrations of large herbivores in Africa and large-scale migrations such as those of the 800,000 kob antelopes of the Boma Plateau ecosystem existed in the recent past. Such concentrations are by no means unique (Spinage 2012:602–605) and over the longer term must be assumed to have existed in other regional landscapes, following different paths. Following such general observations this chapter will briefly consider three general areas which appear to have particular relevance and potential for present and future research on landscapes in this region. The complex interactions of people with their environment framed as historical ecology clearly have huge research potential here, as elsewhere in Africa (Schmidt 1994; Lane 2010). Incorporating mobility into our landscapes may also broader our perspectives on how space and places have been created and understood. The long presence of larger-scale polities in the region also offers remarkable opportunities to explore landscapes of power, manifesting the more explicitly political, as well as the sacred geographies of ritual power.

Historical Ecologies and Settlement Landscapes The exploration of the interrelationship of people and environment in the Middle Nile is a project just beginning to unfold, while also posing considerable challenges. Our understandings of changing riverine regimes are improving and being extended into previously unstudied regions (e.g., Gabriel and Wolf 2007; Wolf 2015). Regional studies have been particularly important in the braided river channels south of Kerma (Woodward et al. 2001; Macklin et al. 2013). Already a focus for Mesolithic populations (Honegger 2014) this area continued to offer an extensive and varied resource base for Neolithic and later (Kerma) populations in the face of ongoing aridification of their hinterlands (Welsby 2001). Such resources may have required only limited mobility among early pastoralist populations. In later periods, changing riverine landscapes can be seen to have had significant impacts on settlements landscapes, increasingly pronounced in the more arid north (e.g., Spencer et al. 2012). The extent to which such landscapes and their use, like Saharan oases, were transformed by irrigation technologies and datepalm cultivation (Horden 2012:35) should also not be overlooked. The extent to which

1076   David N. Edwards seemingly “timeless” Nubian agricultural landscapes are in fact of relatively recent construction must also be borne in mind. The impact of increasing aridity at a very large scale may also be evident in “hunting landscapes” of northern Nubia, manifested in an abundance of “game traps.” First recognized in the Egyptian Libyan Desert (Riemer 2009) these stone constructions may now be recognized as widely distributed between the Third and First Cataracts (Edwards 2006b), as well as in the Fourth Cataract region. While those of the desert interior seem likely to date to the early to mid-Holocene, it may well be that the abundant examples along the Nile (especially so in the Batn el-Hajar) are rather later, relating to more arid conditions, wherein wild ungulates were increasingly drawn to the river, especially during the dry season. From a landscape perspective, the distribution of such features mainly to the west of the Nile and only in northerly regions raises interesting issues on the cultural and chronological associations of such hunting regimes. More explicit explorations of human-animal relations across time and space are also likely to be productive (Tigani el-Mahi 1996; Riemer et al. 2009; Jousse and Lesur 2011). With very little knowledge of Sudanic wildlife prior to the 19th century, a period which saw the decimation of most large fauna by the gun and disease (e.g., rinderpest), we are still poorly equipped to gauge their influence on human settlement in earlier periods. Some wild fauna may have been major competitors to both humans and their livestock, presenting barriers to the spread of cattle herding (Gifford-Gonzalez 2005), or indeed other domesticates (P. Mitchell 2015). Within ecological understandings we may also be challenged to more explicitly consider shifting landscapes of disease and the inter-relation of human and animal diseases (wild and domestic) within varied and dynamic landscape ecologies. As in East Africa such ecological constraints may be presumed to have been equally crucial on the diffusion and indeed ebb-and-flow of pastoralism. More recent histories suggest the importance of managed and controlled ecosystems and their dynamic nature. Shared landscapes and grazing and water, especially dry season, will also have drawn together the worlds of hunters and herders. Where seasonal transhumant forms of more mobile pastoralism developed, more explicit linkages with annual migratory patterns of wild herbivores may perhaps be sought. Buffalo, for example, may have dominated habitats, competing with and at times suppressing stock rearing. Other large fauna such as hippopotamus may have actively competed both with other herbivores as well as farmers within their riparian territories (Spinage 2012:613, 668). With the gradual spread of domestic livestock, human impacts on the landscape may be assumed to have become more evident. Deliberate landscape modification/niche construction (Parsons 2015), especially through the use of fire is also likely to have been crucial in establishing herding landscapes and the spread of pastoralism more generally. As elsewhere on the continent fire will have been of fundamental importance affecting both plant and animal life (Shorrocks 2007; Spinage 2012:259). As yet, often poor preservation of environmental data pose considerable challenges to the study of such processes, although early work in the Khartoum region has provided some evidence for humaninfluences on ecosystems, perhaps to be linked with grazing management (Barakat 1995).

Landscape Archaeologies in Nubia and the Middle Nile   1077 In later periods, human impacts on landscapes have also been debated in relation to environmental concerns, a not uncommon feature of later 20th-century research. These have manifested, for example, in relation to the possible negative impacts of woodcutting/charcoal manufacture within Meroitic ironworking (Haaland  1985), although studies in other parts Sudanic Africa (Fairhead and Leach 1998) have suggested the charcoal production need not have created unsustainable demands of woodland (Spinage 2012:356). Ongoing work in and around Meroe (Humphris 2014) may however be expected to present valuable new data concerning the specific regional developments there.

Landscapes of Settlement and Mobility: Making Places Themes of settlement and mobility and inter-relations of cultivators and herders may also be fruitfully explored, not least in relation to their potentially very different cultural constructions of landscape. Such a focus may also prove valuable in developing more nuanced social archaeologies looking beyond societal categories framed around, for example, “subsistence” (Pluciennik 2001). While some very strong attachments to place are encountered among some riverine populations, these may perhaps be rather atypical in relation to more general engagements with the landscapes of the Middle Nile over the long term. As we are increasingly aware, conventional place-centered approaches to landscapes are likely to be less useful for understanding mobile pastoralists, for whom concepts of paths rather than places may be more appropriate in their understanding of space (Lane 2016:196–97). Over the long term, we may therefore envisage some highly varied understandings of space and place. Such differences may, for example, be evident in the ebb and flow of the use of formal cemeteries, commonly understood as important spatial markers. This may also have important implications for the recognition of special (sacred?) places in the natural landscapes or indeed the creation and construction of “special places,” monumental or otherwise. In some riverine regions long-established and relatively settled Mesolithic populations may have been able to assimilate domestic livestock without major changes in their levels of mobility. Elsewhere, more mobile groups may have adopted livestock in rather different ways, while environmental changes may have impelled others to move south to seek more favorable environments (Salvatori 2012). Others may have been more open to adopting domestic livestock within more mobile herding regimes. In later periods we may already glimpse some such transformations in what has been perceived as a “late Neolithic hiatus” in central Sudan (Haaland 1984). A shift to more strongly pronounced and more mobile pastoralism (Salvatori et al. 2016:134) might indeed explain cultural change and changes in site distributions in the 4th and 3rd millennia bce, or indeed new configurations of seasonal transhumance, as may be the case along the Wadi Howar

1078   David N. Edwards (Jesse 2006). Here the importance of developing scales of analysis appropriate to changing scales of landscape use will necessarily be required. Such shifts will necessarily have transformed notions and practices of settlement. The well-recognized ephemeral character of the archaeology of mobile populations commonly makes the investigation of their “settlement” more difficult (Fig. 53.2). The recognition of just such impermanent settlements (of Post-Meroitic date) on the Bayuda margins of the Fourth Cataract region (Wolf and Nowotnick 2005) has however made clear the potential for integrating the study of living sites of more mobile pastoral communities with that of their more visible mortuary landscapes. That a more mobile and pastorally oriented population may have characterized most occupation in the Fourth (and indeed Fifth) Cataract regions may account for the sparsity of a recognizable Meroitic presence in the region, as in earlier millennia (Paner 2014). This discovery also opens up new possibilities for exploring the ebb-and-flow of pastoralism in many periods, relating to changing patterns of political authority (Spaulding and Kapteijns 2002). Such transformations may in turn have had important implications for communal activities bringing dispersed populations together, creating “places,” of various kinds. These may well relate to religious foci, while sites of periodic festivals/markets/fairs must surely have existed. Such places will also have been required (Fentress 2007) in mediating relations within and between pastoralist and sedentary communities, and indeed between rulers and their subjects (see below).

Figure 53.2  “Invisible herders.” Pastoral visitors to Middle Nubia. Ukma-Akasha ca. 1967. Photograph: Reinhard Huber.

Landscape Archaeologies in Nubia and the Middle Nile   1079 The potential roles of burials in “making places” are already well-recognized as having remarkably complex and varied histories, as also in Saharan regions (di Lernia and Tafuri 2013). The development of large formal cemeteries in riverine areas during the Neolithic (Reinold 2008; Salvatori and Usai 2008; Salvatori et al. 2016), some used for several centuries, is perhaps only one and perhaps a relatively unusual tradition to emerge, among many. Within later prehistory considerable variability is also apparent in the degree of nucleation of burials among Kushite/Kerma populations, likely to relate to the variable degree of mobility of lifestyles within, and beyond, the Nile valley. Emerging evidence from both the Fourth-Fifth Cataract region and the Bayuda Desert (Paner 2014) is establishing a basis for exploring larger-scale Kushite-Kerma landscapes. Extending well beyond the river valley such landscapes may also be shared with potentially quite distinct (Cushitic speaking?) populations originating in the eastern deserts and Red Sea Hills. Such new work is similarly important for more recent millennia. Predominantly pastoralist populations originating east of the Nile, who may clearly be linked to the historically known Blemmyes and Beja, again become more archaeologically visible in the 1st millennium ce (Barnard 2008; Barnard and Duistermaat 2012). In more recent periods such groups may have developed quite distinctive understandings of “territory” and land as a social and symbolic resource (Hjort and Dahl 1991:58; Schlee 1992). West of the Nile we also have a growing appreciation of the huge numbers of tumuli/cairns within and around the Bayuda. For the first time it is now becoming possible to begin to explore what are clearly highly varied mortuary landscapes combining both discrete cemeteries and more dispersed burials. That cairns may also be serving other purposes within more path-centered understandings of landscape (Lane 2016) must also seem likely. If commonly difficult to date without excavation, some may be recognized at Post-Meroitic, some medieval (and “Christian”) while others must clearly also relate to the Napatan/ Meroitic periods (e.g., Jesse et al. 2013). That these may often represent burial traditions quite unlike those encountered in contemporary riverine cemeteries is also becoming apparent. The varied configurations of sites, whether as “places” or along paths, dispersed or nucleated, may related to landscapes and landscape resources in many ways, also relating political and indeed, in more recent millennia, religious factors. Tracing how the advent of Christianity and latterly Islam may or may not have transformed the mortuary landscapes of regions such as the Bayuda may provide an important counterpoint to perceptions currently based almost entirely on a knowledge of settled riverine communities. The differing engagements of settled and mobile populations with landscapes and place between also have a particular significance for studies of rock art (Edwards 2006a; Kleinitz 2007; Paner, this volume). More explicitly landscape-centered approaches seem likely to be especially useful in unpicking accumulated marks of early Holocene huntergatherers, early herding populations and later cultivators and their regional variability. If however, broad spatial correlations can perhaps already be identified between the abundant pastoral rock art and other Kerma/C-Group sites in Lower and Middle Nubia, this raises interesting questions of how practices manifested in rock art were expressed

1080   David N. Edwards in other regions, beyond the rocks. Were these focused on natural places in the landscape? Did ancient and long-lived trees, for example, perform similar roles as landscape foci and powerful places, as they are known to in more recent periods? Certainly, from perspectives sensitive to issues of mobility within varied landscapes, such specific practices are less easily considered as isolated phenomena. We have some awareness of how routeways came to be marked, amidst more general practices of marking landscapes. In the later Holocene the northern Nubian “corridor” was increasingly a trans-Saharan routeway linking the Lower and Middle Nile. By the 1st millennium bce it was perhaps as much passed through as lived in. Such landscape marking includes “alien” responses to potentially unfamiliar landscapes, perceived, for example in Egyptian practices of landscape marking. These may relate to both political claims made on the land, as well as relating to practical challenges of traversing it, most obviously in navigating treacherous stretches of the Nile but also the desert hinterlands (Davies 2014; Förster 2015). More recent millennia may be characterized by a widespread decline in mobility, most influenced by increasing aridity creating a linear (riverine) oasis in northern Nubia, as well as cycles of state interventions endeavoring to control and manage their pastoral subjects, which continue today (Manger 2001). This process was not unidirectional, as the adoption of more specialized camel nomadism, for example, providing increased opportunities within recent millennia, and doubtless new ways of engaging with landscapes. However, the development of new forms of permanent irrigated agriculture appearing in northern Nubia in the 1st millennium ce clearly demanded new ways of understanding landscapes (Grzymski  2004:14) and land-ownership, and the measuring, marking, and delineation of space and place. By the medieval period we may become very aware of the appearance in the arid north of new settled “Christian” agricultural worlds, now marked with crosses, apotropaic and perhaps more literally sign-posting safe “Christian” parts of the landscape. Here again, new religious regimes constructed new Nubian sacred landscapes framed around churches and monasteries, local and regional pilgrimage centers, and indeed reached out into much more extensive networks of medieval Christendom. More recently, specifically Islamic presences may be manifest as part of the process of bringing the landscape into the “shared space, time, and community, of Islam” (Moraes Farias 1999:107). In the Middle Nile, in contrast to West African Islamic practices, Arabic graffiti/inscriptions appear relatively rare, perhaps to be related to the lack of a well-developed existing tradition of landscape inscription (Moraes Farias 2003:cxxvii) in Nubia.

Landscapes of Power In a region with so much potential to explore archaeologies of power and sovereignty researchers would seem well-placed to explore the spatial production of polities over the long term. By the 2nd millennium bce, Kerma seems to have developed as a major

Landscape Archaeologies in Nubia and the Middle Nile   1081 ­ olitical center out of number of smaller Kushite polities, although an archaeology of p Kerma with an explicitly political focus has yet to emerge. As recognized elsewhere, the spectacle of sovereignty and its violence (Smith 2011:420) is very evident at Kerma in its massive royal tumulus burials (Bonnet 2000; O’Connor 2013). However, the uniqueness of Kerma as an “urban” center around a monumental religious core and its massive necropolis raises many as yet unanswered questions concerning the spatiality of the Kerma kingdom or its material constitution as a political project. The conquest and destruction of Kerma ca. 1450 bce by an expansive New Kingdom Egyptian state would in turn transform the landscapes of much of Lower and Middle Nubia, and indeed further south. The Egyptian presence is most obviously manifested in the limited number of “temple-towns,” but is also evident in other monuments (Hein 1994) and indeed mining landscapes (Edwards and Mills 2013). How these new urban foci transformed settlement landscapes remains a question of considerable interest. It is perhaps at the landscape scale that the likely negative impacts of the Egyptian are most evident. The long-term population decline evident across Nubian landscapes (Säve-Söderbergh and Troy 1991:10–13) remains an eloquent expression of the experience of Egyptian imperial power and its limits, directly challenging the aspiration of its monuments. The settlement landscapes out of which the Napatan kingdom emerged still remain poorly understood. Beyond the ancestral tombs of its early rulers at El-Kurru its landscape presence only materializes through its engagement with the material world of Egypt in the period of the “Double Kingdom” of the 25th Dynasty. If the origins and early development of Meroe as a political center also remain obscure it would seem fruitful to more explicitly consider the political dimensions of the extension of Napatan power into this region (Pope 2014) within larger-scale processes of territorial expansion in many directions. The later creation of several “urban” centers in the Meroe region also seems likely to have been fundamental to the creation of a new state-generated landscape, manifesting some of the key strategies of Meroitic governance and subjugation. The Shendi Reach and its hinterland in the Western Butana seem likely to have been actively transformed as a core productive territory for arable and pastoral farming, directly controlled by the state (Edwards  1996:25–26). The urban centers, temples, wells, and hafirs (water reservoirs) constituted crucial components of what may be read as explicitly political landscapes. Such control may in turn have had ecological impacts on landscapes of cultivation and grazing (Spinage  2012:907). Further afield, the establishment of a (still only partially understood) presence along the Blue Nile as well as the control of more mobile pastoral groups may be seen as important to the Meroitic state. Similar transformations may be sought in relation to the medieval kingdoms, wherein the urban metropolises of Dongola and Soba are likely to have played major roles. Their architecture and monuments also transformed the landscape in very visible ways (Fig. 53.3). As elsewhere in the medieval world, the institutions of the Church, and its episcopal and monastic centers, will have played major socio-cultural and economic roles, not least in structuring landscapes and land tenure in new ways (Ruffini 2012: ch. 3). In later sultanates power may have been more

1082   David N. Edwards

Figure 53.3 Late medieval Tower-House (Site 16-U-1), Turmukki Island. Photograph: Archaeological Survey of Sudanese Nubia archive F/231:05.

obviously manifested in the settlement landscapes of Sinnar, constructed around garrison communities of slave troops and other unfree subjects (Spaulding 1985:208–209). Rather different manifestations of ritual and religious power will also have been manifested in the landscape in many forms of shrines, of kinds commonly encountered in other parts of Africa (Colson 1997). The likely importance of some natural places, are well recognized (Grzymski 2004:24); sacred mountains (Fig. 53.4) are perhaps the most prominent, although trees and forests may also be expected to have shared much of the significance encountered elsewhere on the continent (Sheridan and Nyamweru  2008). That other origins may be sought for sacred sites later developed monumentally, such as Musawwarat es-Sufra, “the resting place of the elephant?” (Rilly and Voogt 2012:102) may also be suggested. We may also ponder how and in what ways many of the Nile cataracts of the Sudan were infused with the sacred.

Landscape Archaeologies in Nubia It may be suggested that a number of different landscape approaches have particular relevance and potential for Nubian/Sudanese archaeology, in relation to both its often very varied and dynamic environments and distinctive cultural histories. A rich and distinctive archaeological record, if still only very partially documented, also has

Landscape Archaeologies in Nubia and the Middle Nile   1083

Figure 53.4  Jebel Barkal: a Sacred Mountain for Kushites and Egyptians. Photograph: David Edwards.

c­ onsiderable potential to contribute to the many and varied strands of current landscape archaeology research both within and beyond Africa.

References Cited Adams, W.Y. 1977 Nubia: Corridor to Africa. Allen Lane. Anderson, J. and D. Welsby eds. 2014 The Fourth Cataract and Beyond: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference for Nubian Studies. British Museum Publications on Egypt and Sudan 1. Peeters. Auenmüller, J., T. Karberg, and A. Lohwasser eds. 2018 Bayuda Studies: Proceedings of the First International Conference on the Archaeology of the Bayuda Desert in Sudan. Meroitica 27. Harrassowitz. Barakat, H.N. 1995 Middle Holocene Vegetation and Human Impact in Central Sudan: Charcoal from the Neolithic Site at Kadero. Vegetation History and Archaeobotany 4(2):101–108. Barnard, H. 2008 Eastern Desert Ware: Traces of the Inhabitants of the Eastern Desert in Egypt and Sudan during the 4th to 6th Centuries. BAR International Series 1824. Archaeopress. Barnard, H. and K.  Duistermaat eds. 2012 The History of the Peoples of the Eastern Desert. Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Monograph 73. Cotsen Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles. Bietak, M. 1966 Ausgrabungen im Sayala-Nubien 1961–1965: Denkmäler der C-Gruppe und der Pan-Graber-Kultur. Böhlau.

1084   David N. Edwards Blench, R. 2019 The Linguistic Prehistory of the Sahara. In Burials, Migration and Identity in the Ancient Sahara and Beyond, ed. M.C. Gatto, D.J. Mattingly, N. Ray, and M. Sterry, pp. 431–63. Trans-Saharan Archaeology 2. Cambridge University Press. Bollig, M. and O.  Bubenzer eds. 2009 African Landscapes: Interdisciplinary Approaches. Springer. Bonnet, C. 2000 Édifices et rites funéraires à Kerma. Errance. Bradley, R. 1992 Nomads in the Archaeological Record: Case Studies in the Northern Provinces of Sudan. Meroitica 13. Akademie Verlag. Caneva, I. 1983 Pottery Using Gatherers and Hunters at Saggai (Sudan): Pre-conditions for Food-production. Origini 13:7–278. ——— 1988 El Geili. The History of a Middle Nile Environment 7000 bc–AD 1500. Cambridge Monographs in African Archaeology 29. BAR International Series 424. B.A.R. Colson, E. 1997 Places of Power and Shrines of the Land. Paideuma 43:47–57. Crawford, O.G.S. 1953 Field Archaeology in the Middle Nile Region. Kush 1:1–29. David, B. and J. Thomas eds. 2008 Handbook of Landscape Archaeology. Left Coast Press. Davies, W.V. 2014 The Korosko Road Project: Recording Egyptian Inscriptions in the Eastern Desert and Elsewhere. Sudan & Nubia 18:30–44. di Lernia, S. and M.A.  Tafuri 2013 Persistent Death Places and Mobile Landmarks: The Holocene Mortuary and Isotopic Record from Wadi Takarkori (SW Libya). Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 32:1–15. Edwards, D.N. 1996 The Archaeology of the Meroitic State: New Perspectives on its Social and Political Organisation. BAR International Series 640. Tempus Reparatum. ——— 1998 Meroe and the Sudanic Kingdoms. Journal of African History 39(2):175–93. ——— 1999 Meroitic Settlement Archaeology. In Recent Research in Kushite History & Archaeology, ed. D.  Welsby, pp. 65–110. British Museum Occasional Paper 131. British Museum. ——— 2006a Drawings on Rocks: The Most Enduring Monuments of Middle Nubia. Sudan & Nubia 10:55–63. ——— 2006b Mid-Holocene Game Drives in Nubian landscapes? In Archaeology of Early Northeastern Africa, ed. K.  Kroeper, M.  Chłodnicki, and M.  Kobusiewicz, pp. 49–64. Studies in African Archaeology 9. Poznan Archaeological Museum. Edwards, D.N. and A.J. Mills 2013 “Pharaonic” Sites in the Batn al-Hajar—The “Archaeological Survey of Sudanese Nubia” Revisited. Sudan & Nubia 17:8–17. Fairhead, J. and M. Leach 1998 Reframing Deforestation: Global Analyses and Local Realities with Studies in West Africa. Routledge. Fentress, E. 2007 Where Were North African Nundinae Held? In Communities and Connections: Essays in Honour of Barry Cunliffe, ed. C. Gosden, H. Hamerow, P. de Jersey, and G. Lock, pp. 125–41. Oxford University Press. Fernandez, V.M. 2003 The Blue Nile Project. Holocene Archaeology in Central Sudan. Complutum 14:199–425. Fleisher, J. 2013 Landscape Archaeology. In The Oxford Handbook of African Archaeology, ed. P.J. Mitchell and P.J. Lane, pp. 189–99. Oxford University Press. Förster, F. 2015 Der Abu Ballas-Weg. Eine pharaonische Karawanenroute durch die Libysche Wüste. Heinrich-Barth-Institut. Förster, F. and H. Riemer eds. 2013 Desert Road Archaeology. Heinrich-Barth-Institut.

Landscape Archaeologies in Nubia and the Middle Nile   1085 Gabriel, B. and P. Wolf 2007 River and Landscape at the Fourth Nile Cataract (Sudan) during Late Quaternary. In Proceedings of the Second International Conference on the Archaeology of the Fourth Nile Cataract, ed. C. Näser and M. Lange, pp. 28–33. Meroitica 23. Harrassowitz. Gatto, M.C. and A. Zerboni 2015 Holocene Supra-Regional Environmental Changes as Trigger for Major Socio-Cultural Processes in Northeastern Africa and the Sahara. African Archaeological Review 32(2):301–33. Gifford-Gonzales, D. 2005 Pastoralism and its Consequences. In African Archaeology, ed. A. Stahl, pp. 187–224. Blackwell. Gillings, M. and J.  Pollard 2016 General Introduction. In Landscape Archaeology: Critical Concepts in Archaeology, ed. M. Gillings and J. Pollard, pp. 1–4. Taylor & Francis. Gosden, C. and L.  Head 1994 Landscape: A Usefully Ambiguous Concept. Archaeology in Oceania 29:113–16. Gratien, B. 2013 Abou Sofyan et Zankor: Prospections dans le Kordofan occidental, Soudan. Septentrion. Grzymski, K. 2004 Landscape Archaeology of Nubia and Central Sudan. African Archaeological Review 21(1):7–30. Haaland, R. 1981 Seasonality and Division of Labour. Norwegian Archaeological Review 14:44–59. ——— 1984 Continuity and Discontinuity: How to account for a Two Thousand Years Gap in the Cultural History of the Khartoum Nile Environment. Norwegian Archaeological Review 17(1):39–51. ——— 1985 Iron Production, its Socio-cultural Context and Ecological Implications. In African Iron Working, ed. R. Haaland and P.L. Shinnie, pp. 50–72. Norwegian University Press. ——— 1987 Socio-Economic Differentiation in the Neolithic Sudan. Cambridge Monographs in African Archaeology 20. BAR International Series 350. B.A.R. Hein, I. 1994 Überlegungen zur Lage der Felstempel Ramses’ II in Nubien. In Ägyptische Tempel—Struktur, Funktion und Programm, ed. R. Gundlach and M. Rochholz, pp. 131–35. Gerstenberg. Hintze, F. 1959 Preliminary Report of the Butana Expedition. Kush 7:171–96. Hjort, A.O. and G.  Dahl 1991 Responsible Man: The Atmaan Beja of North-eastern Sudan. Stockholm Studies in Social Anthropology. Honegger, M. 2014 Recent Advances in Our Understanding of Prehistory in Northern Sudan. In The Fourth Cataract and Beyond: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference for Nubian Studies, ed. J.R. Anderson and D.A. Welsby, pp. 19–30. British Museum Publications on Egypt and Sudan 1. Peeters. Horden, P. 2012 Situations Both Alike? Connectivity, the Mediterranean, the Sahara. In Saharan Frontiers, ed. J. McDougall and J. Scheele, pp. 25–38. Indiana University Press. Humphris, J. 2014 Post-Meroitic Iron Production: Initial Results and Interpretations. Sudan & Nubia 18:121–29. Jennerstrasse 8, ed. 2002 Tides of the Desert. Heinrich Barth Institut. Jesse, F. 2006 Cattle, Sherds and Mighty Walls—The Wadi Howar from Neolithic to Kushite times. Sudan & Nubia 10:43–54. ——— 2008 North of the Lower Wadi Howar—A First Reconnaissance in the Area between Jebel Abyad and the Nile Valley. Sudan & Nubia 12:17–24.

1086   David N. Edwards Jesse, F., M.  Fiedler, and B.  Gabriel 2013 A Land of Thousand Tumuli—An Archaeological Survey in the Region of El Gol, South of the 5th Nile Cataract, North Sudan. Der antike Sudan. Mitteilungen der Sudanarchäologischen Gesellschaft zu Berlin 24:59–73. Johnson, D.H. 1989 Political Ecology in the Upper Nile: The Twentieth Century Expansion of the Pastoral “Common Economy.” Journal of African History 30(3):463–86. Jousse, H. and J. Lesur eds. 2011 People and Animals in Holocene Africa: Recent Advances in Archaeozoology. Africa Magna Verlag. Keding, B. 1996 Djabarona 84/13—Untersuchungen zur Besiedlungsgechicte des Wadi Howar anhand der Keramik des 3 und 2 Jahrtausends v. Chr. Africa Praehistorica 9. HeinrichBarth-Institut. ——— 1998 The Yellow Nile: New Data on Settlement and Environment in the Sudanese Eastern Sahara. Sudan & Nubia 2:2–12. Khidir Abdelkarim Ahmed 1984 Meroitic Settlement in the Central Sudan. Cambridge Monographs in African Archaeology 8. BAR International Series 197. B.A.R. Kleinitz, C. 2007 Rock Art Landscapes of the Fourth Nile Cataract: Characterisations and First Comparisons. In Proceedings of the Second International Conference on the Archaeology of the Fourth Nile Cataract, ed. C. Näser and M. Lange, pp. 213–34. Meroitica 23. Harrassowitz. Kuper, R. 1995 Prehistoric Research in the Southern Libyan Desert: A Brief Account and Some Conclusions of the B.O.S.  Project. Cahier de Recherches de l’Institut de Papyrologie et d’Égyptologie de Lille 17(1):123–40. Kuper, R. and Kröpelin, S. 2006 Climate-controlled Holocene Occupation in the Sahara: Motor of Africa’s Evolution. Science 313:803–807. Lane, P.J. 2010 Developing Landscape Historical Ecologies in Eastern Africa: An Outline of Current Research and Potential Future Directions. African Studies 69(2):299–322. ——— 2013 Trajectories to Pastoralism in Northern and Central Kenya: An Overview of the Archaeological and Environmental Evidence. In Pastoralism in Africa: Past, Present and Future, ed. M. Bollig and H.-P. Wotzka, pp. 104–44. Berghahn. ——— 2016 Places and Paths of Memory: Archaeologies of East African Pastoralist Landscapes. In Cultural Heritage Landscapes in Sub-Saharan Africa, ed. J. Beardsley, pp. 193–234. Harvard University Press. Lohwasser, A. and T. Karberg 2013 Das Projekt Wadi Abu Dom Itinerary (W.A.D.I.), Kampagne 2013. Der Antike Sudan. Mitteilungen der Sudanarchäologischen Gesellschaft zu Berlin 24:39–50. Lorimer, H. 2006 Herding Memories of Humans and Animals. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 24(4):497–518. Luig, U. and Von Oppen, A. 1997 Landscape in Africa: Process and Vision. Paideuma 43:7–45. MacDonald, K.C. 1999 Invisible Pastoralists: An Inquiry into the Origins of Nomadic Pastoralism in the West African Sahel. In Prehistory of Food: Appetites for Change, ed. C. Gosden and J. Hather, pp. 333–49. Routledge. Macklin, M.G., J.C. Woodward, D.A. Welsby, G.A.T. Duller, F.M. Williams, and M.A.J. Williams 2013 Reach-scale River Dynamics Moderate the Impact of Rapid Holocene Climate Change on Floodwater Farming in the Desert Nile. Geology 41(6):695–98. Manger, L. 2001 Pastoralist-State Relationships among the Hadendowa Beja of Eastern Sudan. Nomadic Peoples 5(2):21–48. Manzo, A. 2014 Beyond the Fourth Cataract. Perspectives for Research in Eastern Sudan. In The Fourth Cataract and Beyond: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference for Nubian

Landscape Archaeologies in Nubia and the Middle Nile   1087 Studies, ed. J.R. Anderson and D.A. Welsby, pp. 1149–57. British Museum Publications on Egypt and Sudan 1. Peeters. ——— 2017 Eastern Sudan in its Setting: The Archaeology of a Region Far from the Nile Valley. Cambridge Monographs in African Archaeology 94. Archaeopress. Marks, A. 1991 Relationships between the Central Nile Valley and the Eastern Sudan in Later Prehistory, in Egypt and Africa. In Nubia from Prehistory to Islam, ed. W.V. Davies, pp. 30–39. British Museum Press. Marshall, F. 1990 Origins of Specialized Pastoral Production in East Africa. American Anthropologist 92:873–94. ——— 2000 The Origins and Spread of Domestic Animals in East Africa. In The Origins and Development of African Livestock: Archaeology, Genetics, Linguistics and Ethnography, ed. R. Blench and K. MacDonald, pp. 191–221. UCL Press. Marshall, F. and E. Hildebrand 2002 Cattle before Crops: The Beginnings of Food Production in Africa. Journal of World Prehistory 16(2):99–142. McIntosh  R.J. 2008 Thinking of Landscape Archaeology in Africa’s Later Prehistory: Always Something New. In Handbook of Landscape Archaeology, ed. B. David and J. Thomas, pp. 85–91. Left Coast Press. Mitchell, P. 2015 Did Disease Constrain the Spread of Domestic Dogs (Canis familiaris) into Sub-Saharan Africa? Azania 50(1):92–135. Mitchell, T. 1988 Colonizing Egypt. American University in Cairo Press. Monroe, J.C. and A.  Ogundiran eds. 2012 Power and Landscape in Atlantic West Africa. Cambridge University Press. Moraes Farias, P.F. De 1999 Tadmakkat and the Image of Mecca: Epigraphic Records of the Work of the Imagination in 11th Century West Africa. In Case Studies in the Archaeology of World Religion, ed. T. Insoll, pp. 105–15. BAR International Series 755. Archaeopress. ——— 2003 Arabic Medieval Inscriptions from the Republic of Mali. Oxford University Press. Näser, C. and M. Lange eds. 2007 Proceedings of the Second International Conference on the Archaeology of the Fourth Nile Cataract. Meroitica 23. Harrassowitz. O’Connor, D. 2013 Kerma in Nubia, the Last Mystery: The Political and Social Dynamics of an Early Nilotic State. In Amilla: The Quest for Excellence. Studies Presented to Guenter Kopcke, ed. R.B. Koehl, pp. 189–205. INSTAP Academic Press. Osman, A. and D. N. Edwards 2012 The Archaeology of a Nubian Frontier: Survey on the Nile Third Cataract, Sudan. Mauhaus. Paner, H. 2014 Kerma Culture in the Fourth Cataract of the Nile. In The Fourth Cataract and Beyond: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference for Nubian Studies, ed. J.R. Anderson and D.A. Welsby, pp. 53–79. British Museum Publications on Egypt and Sudan 1. Peeters. Parsons, I. 2015 Is Niche Construction Theory Relevant to the Proposed Adoption of Domesticates by Hunter-Gatherers in Southern Africa? African Archaeological Review 32(1):35–47. Pluciennik, M. 2001 Archaeology, Anthropology and Subsistence. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 7(4):741–58. Pope, J.W. 2014 The Double Kingdom under Taharqo. Culture and History of the Ancient Near East 69. Brill. Raynaut, C. 1997 Societies and Nature in the Sahel. Routledge. Reinold, J. 2008 La nécropole néolithique d’el-Kadada au Soudan central 1. Cultures France.

1088   David N. Edwards Riemer, H. 2009 Prehistoric Trap Hunting in the Eastern Saharan Deserts: A Re-evaluation of the Game Trap Structures. In Desert Animals in the Eastern Sahara, ed. H. Riemer, F. Förster, M. Herb, and N. Pöllath, pp. 175–88. Colloquium Africanum 4. Heinrich-Barth-Institut. Riemer, H., F. Förster, M. Herb, and N. Pöllath eds. 2009 Desert Animals in the Eastern Sahara. Colloquium Africanum 4. Heinrich-Barth-Institut. Rilly, C. and A.  de Voogt 2012 The Meroitic Language and Writing System. Cambridge University Press. Ruffini, G.R. 2012 Medieval Nubia: A Social and Economic History. Oxford University Press. Sadr, K. 1991 The Development of Nomadism in Ancient Northeast Africa. University of Pennsylvania Press. Salvatori, S. 2012 Disclosing Archaeological Complexity of the Khartoum Mesolithic: New Data at the Site and Regional Level. African Archaeological Review 29:399–472. Salvatori, S. and D. Usai 2008 A Neolithic Cemetery in the Northern Dongola Reach: Excavations at Site R12. Sudan Archaeological Research Society Publication 16. BAR International Series 1814. Archaeopress. Salvatori, S., D.  Usai, and Y.  Lecointe 2016 Ghaba: An Early Neolithic Cemetery in Central Sudan. Africa Magna. Salvatori S., D. Usai, and A. Zerboni 2011 Mesolithic Site Formation and Palaeoenvironment along the White Nile (Central Sudan). African Archaeological Review 28:177–211. Säve-Söderbergh, T. and L. Troy 1991 New Kingdom Pharaonic Sites: The Finds and the Sites. The Scandinavian Joint Expedition to Sudanese Nubia 5(2). Schlee, G. 1992 Ritual Topography and Ecological Use. In Bush Base: Forest Farm, ed. E. Croll and D. Parkin, pp. 110–28. Routledge. Schmidt, P.R. 1994 Historical Ecology and Landscape Transformation in Eastern Equatorial Africa. In Historical Ecology. Cultural Knowledge and Changing Landscapes, ed. C. Crumley, pp. 99–125. SAR Press. Sheridan, M.J. and C. Nyamweru 2008 African Sacred Groves. James Currey. Shorrocks, B. 2007 The Biology of African Savannahs. Oxford University Press. Smith, A.T. 2003 The Political Landscape: Constellations of Authority in Early Complex Polities. University of California Press. ——— 2011 Archaeologies of Sovereignty. Annual Review of Anthropology 40:415–32. Spaulding, J. 1985 The Heroic Age in Sinnār. Michigan State University. Spaulding, J. and L.  Kapteijns 2002 Land Tenure and the State in the Precolonial Sudan. Northeast African Studies 19(1):33–66. Spencer, N., J. Woodward, M. and Macklin 2012 Re-assessing the Abandonment of Amara West: The Impact of a Changing Nile? Sudan & Nubia 16:37–43. Spinage, C.A. 2012 African Ecology: Benchmarks and Historical Perspectives. Springer. Stahl, A. 2004 Political Economic Mosaics: Archaeology of the Last Two Millennia in Tropical Sub-Saharan Africa. Annual Review of Anthropology 33:145–72. Tigani el-Mahi, A. 1996 The Wildlife of the Sudan in Historical Perspective. Beiträge zur Sudanforschung 6:89–114. Trigger, B. 1965 History and Settlement in Lower Nubia. Yale University Publications in Anthropology 69. ——— 1968 The Determinants of Settlement Patterns. In Settlement Archaeology, ed. K.C. Chang, pp. 53–78. National Press. ——— 1970 The Cultural Ecology of Christian Nubia. In Kunst und Geschichte Nubiens in Christlicher Zeit, ed. E. Dinkler, pp. 347–79. Verlag Aurel Bongers.

Landscape Archaeologies in Nubia and the Middle Nile   1089 ——— 1984 History and Settlement in Lower Nubia in the Perspective of Fifteen Years. In Meroitistische Forschungen 1980, ed. F. Hintze, pp. 367–80. Meroitica 7. Akademie Verlag. ——— 1996 Toshka and Arminna in the New Kingdom. In Studies in Honor of William Kelly Simpson, ed. P.D. Manuelian, pp. 801–10. Museum of Fine Arts. Usai, D. 2014 Recent Advances in Understanding the Prehistory of Central Sudan. In The Fourth Cataract and Beyond: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference for Nubian Studies, ed. J. Anderson and D. Welsby, pp. 31–44. British Museum Publications on Egypt and Sudan 1. Peeters. Welsby, D.A. 2001 Life on the Desert Edge: Seven Thousand Years of Settlement in the Northern Dongola Reach. Sudan Archaeological Research Society Publication 7. BAR International Series 980. Archaeopress. Wolf, P. 2015 The Qatar-Sudan Archaeological Project: The Meroitic Town of Hamadab and the Palaeo-Environment of the Meroe Region. Sudan & Nubia 19:115–31. Wolf, P. and U. Nowotnick 2005 The Second Season of the SARS Anglo-German Expedition to the Fourth Cataract. Sudan & Nubia 9:23–31. Woodward, J.C., M.G. Macklin, and D.A. Welsby 2001 The Holocene Alluvial Sedimentary Record and Alluvial Geoarchaeology in the Nile Valley of Northern Sudan. In River Basin Sediment Systems: Archives of Environmental Change, ed. D.  Maddy, M.G.  Macklin, and J.C. Woodward, pp. 327–55. Taylor & Francis. Yahia Fadl Tahir 2014 Archaeology and Palaeoecology of el-Ga’ab Basin. In The Fourth Cataract and Beyond: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference for Nubian Studies, ed. J.A. Anderson and D.A. Welsby, pp. 1099–1106. British Museum Publications on Egypt and Sudan 1. Peeters.

chapter 54

N u bi a n Rock A rt Henryk Paner

Introduction The term “rock art” refers both to the defined piece of art as well as to the rock on which the petroglyphs or pictograms were made. Petroglyphs are depictions made with the use of engravings or by continuously striking the rock surface with a tool, while pictograms are depictions made with the use of color dye. It has been suggested that this association between the rock surface and the depiction made on it should be underlined by the use of the spelling “rock-art” (Taçon and Chippindale 1998); however, save for minor exceptions (Lankester 2012), this practice has not found widespread acceptance. Other terms for rock art include rock engravings (Chittick  1961; Sierts  1968),1 rock drawings (Winkler 1938; Hellström and Langballe 1970), rock carvings (Nordström 2006), rock records, rock pictures, and rock paintings. Other terms such as cups, rings, or cupules were used for various grooves and cavities made in rocks that some researchers also include as forms of rock art (Winkler 1939; Whitley 2005; Kleinitz 2007a). One of the most succinct definitions of rock art can be found in the IFRAO Glossary, where it is described as “non-utilitarian anthropic markings on rock surfaces, made either by an additive process (pictogram) or by a reductive process (petroglyph)” (Bednarik et al. 2003).2 Nonetheless, it seems that the utility character of some depictions should not eliminate them from belonging to the set of what is perceived as rock art since “an archaeology of images should treat rock art as an expression which creates and maintains practices and relations with places and landscapes” (Ljunge  2013). Andrzej Rozwadowski introduced a somewhat more comprehensive definition of rock art as “images engraved or painted on rock surfaces, in caves as well as in open spaces (on valley walls, free-standing boulders), made in prehistoric or historic times by so-called traditional cultures” (Rozwadowski 2009). Dirk Huyge introduced certain modifications to Bednarik’s definition, as he believed that those petroglyphs or pictograms created as part of the official canon of the Egyptian state (for example, Pharaonic adoration scenes),

1092   Henryk Paner should not be categorized as rock art. The Great Temple of Ramses II in Abu Simbel serves here as an example, as according to Bednarik’s definition it features a significant number of petroglyphs. However, it is also obvious that this form is of interest to Egyptologists more than rock art researchers; therefore, Huyge believes that rock art can only include “the anthropic markings on rock surfaces . . . ‘sufficiently different’ from images produced according to the officially instigated ancient Egyptian artistic canon” (Huyge 2009b).3 Discussions about Nubian rock art should emphasize that research cannot be limited only to this region’s restricted historical borders. From the dawn of history, Nubia has been a stage onto which new actors appeared continuously, arriving from neighboring areas and forming more or less permanent settlement episodes, thus changing the natural landscape into a cultural one or—by interacting with the latter—initiating its dynamic transformations. With this in mind, one must agree with J.A.  Harrell that “Nubia is generally considered to include the Nile River valley and adjacent deserts between Aswan in southern Egypt and Khartoum in central Sudan, an area extending about one thousand km north to south and nearly as far from east to west” (Harrell, this volume). It is therefore impossible to discuss Middle Nile Valley rock art even when using the most general approach without at least a very basic assessment of this phenomenon in neighboring areas.

From the History of Research The history of research into Nubian rock art in Nubia and Egypt is now over a century old, as likely one of the first research expeditions dedicated to this subject took place in 1907. Sir Arthur Weigall, as Chief Inspector of Antiquities for Upper Egypt, traversed the Wadi Hammamat on a camel and recorded rock drawings at Qasr al Banat (Weigall 1909; Lankester 2012). In 1908, Weigall continued his work near the Temple of Seti I at Kanais. However, it should be noted that even before this expedition, as early as in the 19th century, other researchers and explorers had also discovered various drawings and inscriptions in the region (Cailliaud 1822; Petrie 1888, 1892; Chester 1892), but this had never been the focus of their peregrinations.4 Almost twenty years after Weigall’s research, documenting rock art in Upper Egypt and Lower Nubia was a main goal of expeditions organized by the Deutsche Inner-Afrikanische ForschungsExpedition led by Leo Frobenius.5 Frobenius’s team commenced their work in the Aswan region in 1926; however, the complete results of these studies were only published many years later, and in fact by other researchers (Resch 1967; Červíček 1974, 1976). One of the most important and distinguished researchers dealing with Nubian rock art, Hans Winkler, whose education had been in the field of ethnography, followed in the footsteps of the aforementioned expeditions. As early as in the 1930s, thanks to the experience gained in the Nile Valley and in the Eastern and Western Desert, Winkler was able to compile a chronology of rock art for the entire region of Upper Egypt

Nubian Rock Art   1093 (Winkler 1937, 1938, 1939). One of the key assumptions made by Winkler was that representations with distinct styles should be identified with specific communities. Based on this reasoning, Winkler distinguished five separate groupings of people featured in rock art by focusing on the style and the subject matter of the depictions. These included the following: Wedge-Shaped people, Dirwa Hair people, Penis-Sheath people, Invaders from Mesopotamia wearing feathers in their hair, and the Naqada II people. One year later, based on findings made during research into petroglyphs in the Dakhla Oasis, Winkler modified his earlier conclusions and proposed only four categories of identified communities (Winkler  1939): the Earliest Hunters (the previously described Wedge-Shaped, Dirwa Hair, and Penis-Sheath peoples were incorporated into this new category), Autochthonous Mountain Dwellers, Eastern Invaders, and Early Nile Dwellers (Lankester 2012). Almost concurrently, John Dunbar conducted research in the region of the First and Second Cataracts, and he not only relatively quickly published his findings from multiple field research missions (Dunbar 1934, 1935, 1941), but also argued against Winkler’s conclusions, as did Walter Resch (1967) much later. According to the latter, the “Earliest Hunters” could not have existed in the Eastern Desert prior to the arrival of the first farmers due to the climate, which was too arid at that time. Additionally, the “Invaders from Mesopotamia,” identified by Winkler based on their angular-shaped boats, could just as well have come from the Nile Valley, whereas wearing feathers in the hair was also part of Nubian and Egyptian traditions.

The UNESCO Nubian Salvage Campaign An unquestionable breakthrough in Nubian rock art research took place with the International Campaign to Save the Monuments of Nubia, which coincided with the construction of the Aswan Dam (see Salah M. Ahmed, this volume). Research undertaken under the patronage of UNESCO in the 1960s, in the region of the Second Cataract and territories south of it up until the Third Cataract alone led to the discovery of 12,000 petroglyphs.6 Multiple petroglyph clusters were also found in the Egyptian part of Lower Nubia (Chittick 1961; Bietak and Engelmayer 1963; Almagro and Almagro 1968; Hellström and Langballe 1970; Verner 1973; Žába 1974; Vila 1979; Allard-Huard 1982; Otto and Buschendorf-Otto 1993; Váhala and Červiček 1999; Edwards 2006; Judd 2009; Suková 2011a, 2011b; Huyge 2014). In total, thousands of sites with rock art were recorded during this unprecedented campaign, which in turn inspired researchers to undertake further field research both in the Nile Valley and in desert areas in search of new sources and to further studies into interpretation and chronology (Davis  1977,  1978; Červíček 1982, 1986, 1993; Fuchs 1989; Redford and Redford 1989; M. Berger 1992; Huyge et al. 1998; Edwards and Ali Osman 2000, 2011; Rohl 2000; Darnell 2002, 2009; Morrow and Morrow 2002; Kleinitz 2004; Huyge 2005; Jesse 2005, 2006; Jesse and Peters 2009; Judd 2009). New information was also provided by research in such Western Desert oases as Kharga (Ikram 2009) and Dakhla (Kaper and Willems 2002; McDonald 2002;

1094   Henryk Paner Krzyżaniak  2004; F.  Berger  2008; Kuciewicz et al.  2011; James  2012; Kuciewicz and Kobusiewicz 2012; Polkowski 2016). Based on the newly acquired sources and the analysis of findings from older research, Pavel and Červíček (1986) distinguished six time horizons for Nubian and Egyptian rock art, in which phase A (the equivalent of Winkler’s Earliest Hunters) with multiple examples of geometric and megafauna motifs ended around 4000 bce. Phase B, dated to between 4000 and 2100 bce, featured various representations of boats (rated as “the most important motif cluster of the B Horizon”), scenes depicting hunting dogs, drawings of sandals, and some geometric motifs that “represented the religion of the Naqada culture and of the A-Group in which anthropomorphic gods appeared” (Červíček 1986). Phase C, set between 2100 and 1400 bce, was supposedly dominated by motifs that correspond to C-Group pottery (Bonnet 1993, 1997), i.e. an archaeological culture recognized in Lower Nubia during the period between the mid-3rd and mid-2nd millennia bce (Török 2009; Hafsaas-Tsakos, this volume). The latest were Phases D (1400–1050 bce), E (1050 bce–250 ce), and F (post-250 ce), with visualizations of camels appearing in the two last horizons (E and F), while their prevalence increased significantly in subsequent centuries. In Phase F, the landscape became so overrun by Christian symbols that the term “the Christianising of the Nubian landscape” is even used (Edwards 2006).

Hamdab Dam and Merowe Dam Archaeological Salvage Project In 1995, the director of the National Corporation for Antiquities and Museums of the Sudan Republic at the time, Dr. Hassan Hussein, appealed to the international archaeology community for help in saving the Archaeological Heritage of Nubia. The reason behind this call was the construction of the new Nile dam (Merowe Dam) in the Fourth Cataract region which would form a new artificial lake, 170 km in length, starting from Marwa Island (some 30 km upriver from the town of Karima) up until Mograt Island (Salah M. Ahmed, this volume). The first institution in the world to respond to the call was the Gdańsk Archaeological Museum Expedition (GAME), which as early as 1996 initiated a project to document the archaeological monuments in the Fourth Cataract region. Initially known as the Hamdab Project (HP), the initiative then attracted many missions from other countries and its name was changed to the Merowe Dam Archaeological Salvage Project (MDASP). Between 1996 and 2008, archaeologists from around the world conducted both ground surveys as well as rescue excavations in the areas at risk (Welsby 2003a; Paner and Borcowski 2005; Paner 2014a). One of the results of this campaign was the discovery of previously unknown sites with rock art. Large amounts of petroglyphs were recorded by all the missions. Undoubtedly, the greatest achievements were those of the SARS and H.U.N.E missions,7 with 496 rock-art localities documented in the four seasons of the SARS Rock-Art Project (Kleinitz 2007a). An

Nubian Rock Art   1095 interesting cluster of petroglyphs was registered near the village of Shemkhiya within the area of activities of the Poznań Archaeological Museum. Multiple, mainly singular, depictions of cattle and lithophones (“rock gongs”) were encountered in this region (Kuciewicz 2008; Jaroni and Kuciewicz 2010).

Gdańsk Archaeological Museum Expedition (GAME) Rock Art Sites One hundred and one such sites were registered in the GAME concession area, in which a few thousand drawings were discovered, all made with the use of the hammering and pecking or engraving techniques. None of these locations showed any indications of dye having been used; however, at several sites both engravings and so called Rock Gongs (Fig. 54.1), also known as “sounding stones,” “ringing rocks,” “bell rocks,” “lithophones,” and “rock chimes” were encountered (Kleinitz  2007c). These were all located at the edges of rocky elevations, close to wide-open spaces conducive to larger gatherings. Petroglyphs were located in the entire GAME concession area (ca. 150 km), on the right bank of the Nile, i.e. from the town of Karima up to Khor el-Daghfali. The largest rock art clusters were documented near Kassinger Bahri, Jebel Suegat, Umm Gebir Island, El-Suegi, Abu Haraz, Salmija, Hagar Zerga, and Ab Sayal. Some of these sites were located in the territory of the Shaiqiya ethnic group, near Hosh el-Guruf village and the hill called Jebel el-Minay, whereas all those found farther upriver were situated in Manasir territories.8 The engravings depicted wild and domestic animals, human beings, drawings of footsoles and sandalprints, social scenes and battle scenes, riders on horses and on camels, buildings, boats, religious symbols such as offering tables, as well as others, the meaning of which remains unclear. Just a few of these have been published so far (Paner 2003a, 2003b; Paner and Borcowski 2005).9 At one site in the town of Hagar Zerga (HP 788), an inscription in the Greek language was found, dated back to 1000 ce, i.e.: +ΜΙΧΑΗΛΪΩΑΝΝΟΥ, which in Alexander Tsakos’s opinion (pers. comm.) may be referring to Michael and John (two people), Michael John (one person), or Michael, son of John. Underneath the inscription, much older depictions (taking into consideration the color of the patina) of a long-horned cattle and sheep were registered (Fig. 54.2). Human beings are primarily presented in the following types of depictions: a human leading a camel, a human on a camel, a human standing with a spear, shield, sword or any combination of these warrior attributes, the schematically presented silhouette of a human alone, a human leading a horse, a human on a horse. Drawings of domesticated animals predominantly portray such creatures as cattle, dogs, camels, horses, donkeys, mules, pigs, and goats and sheep. Wild animals are also represented extensively, including the depiction of such animals as the antelope (gazelle), the giraffe, the ostrich, the elephant, the buffalo, the monkey, various birds, the scorpion, the rhinoceros, the wolf (wild dog), the hyena, the lion, the leopard (?), and the fox. Images of large animals,

1096   Henryk Paner 32°00'

32°15'

32°30'

19°15'

19°15'

19°00'

19°00'

18°45'

18°45'

18°30'

villages rock art sites railway tracks

32°00'

32°15'

18°30'

32°30'

Figure 54.1  Rock art sites in the GAME concession.

including so-called Ethiopian megafauna, are usually linked in Lower Nubia with A-Group communities (3700–2800 bce), which for Upper Nubia more or less corresponds to the Pre-Kerma Culture (Honegger 2004). Many depictions of mammals have their stylistic equivalents in the art of ancient Egypt (Osborn and Osbornovà  1998; Hendrickx 2002), which comes as no surprise given its historical interconnectedness with Nubia. Other depictions unconnected with the animal world include such objects as shrines, crosses, magical boards or games, as well as depictions of boats and geometric figures of unknown relevance. These last items are often strongly patinated and, unlike other petroglyphs, such representations were often made on flat horizontal surfaces. Engravings were frequently found in groupings, for example, on the same rock wall, on one side of a monadnock or on a boulder that was easily distinguishable from its surroundings or on smooth horizontal rocks, etc. Therefore, apart from sites with

Nubian Rock Art   1097

Figure 54.2  Hagar Zerga, site HP 788. Depictions of longhorn cattle, sheep, and medieval inscriptions. Photograph: H. Paner.

engravings, engraving clusters have been the main registry items, often synonymous with the term “panel,” understood as a grouping of depictions preserved on a naturally limited rock surface. At many locations, the aforementioned lithophones (rock gongs) have also been present close to sites with engravings (Fig. 54.3). Apart from drawings, photographs, and film documentation of the latter artefacts, there have also been attempts to register the sounds they could make. Therefore, the non-visual aspects of rock art was also taken into account, which in many previous studies had not been taken into consideration, even though “they may have played important roles both when making and using rock art” (Ouzman 2001; Kleinitz 2007c). Engravings were found mainly on rock formations (granites, rhyolites, dolerites) and sedimentary rocks (sandstones and conglomerates), mostly on hillsides or close to rock summits, on especially select smooth rock monadnock surfaces, steep well-exposed khor walls, on single boulders clearly distinguishable from their surroundings, or even on fully horizontal rock slabs, i.e. overall they are found in very diverse topographic conditions (Fig. 54.4). The aforementioned grouping of the most widely prevalent depictions has some analogies in other areas in the Fourth Cataract region (Kleinitz 2004, 20 07a, 2007b, 2008, 2010, 2012; Kleinitz and Koenitz 2006; Fawzi Hassan 2010). The almost total lack of Egyptian hieroglyphic inscriptions in the discussed region can be seen as somewhat surprising, as can the small number of inscriptions from the Christian period, given their relatively intensive Christian settlement of this area during medieval times and the presence of many Christian strongholds. The first abovementioned factor may prove the low significance of these areas in the period of Egyptian expansion during the New Kingdom (Davies 2001). In turn, the second may result from the fact that during the medieval period, settlements on the right bank of the Nile were

1098   Henryk Paner

Figure 54.3  Rock gong next to Shebabit village. Photograph: H. Paner.

less intensive in this region than on the islands and the left bank (Tsakos 2007). At several sites, petroglyphs were encountered interpreted as “amuletic or other magical signs belonging to the magico-religious sphere of the Meroitic period, . . . as part of the diverse canon of invocations and of devotional pilgrims’ markings that appear to have been made by visitors to the site or by priests on their behalf ” (Kleinitz 2009). One of the most prevalent motifs, starting from the 3rd millennium bce, are usually static depictions of cattle (Fig. 54.5). The differences in these representations are easily recognizable. The oldest drawings were made with an elegant sparse line, usually depicting rounded longhorn cattle. The animal horns portrayed in profile are drawn in a frontal perspective, while the animals’ coloration is usually represented by filling in the drawing’s outline using a pecking technique. Similar depictions known from Lower Nubia have been categorized as belonging to the C-Group (Allard-Huard 2000; Kleinitz 2007a) and are dated from between the mid-3rd to the mid-2nd millennium bce. Many cattle depictions confirm the practice of the intentional deformation of the horns, which has also been observed in other Nubian regions (Chaix and Grant 1992; Kleinitz 2007a; Chaix et al. 2012). The cattle depictions also frequently differentiate between the sexes to distinguish a cow from a bull. In many cases, a type of pendant (“pendulum”) can be observed around the animal’s neck. It would seem that the oldest depictions of cattle in the Fourth Cataract

Nubian Rock Art   1099 (a)

(e)

(f)

(b)

(g)

(c)

(h)

(d)

(i)

Figure 54.4  Examples of the rock art topography in the Fourth Cataract region. Photographs: H. Paner. (a) Hagar Zerga site HP 784.2; (b) Hagar Zerga site HP 784.5; (c) Ab Sayal site HP 696; (d) Hagar Zerga site HP 710; (e) Hagar Zerga site HP 780; (f) Jebel Suegat sites HP 31-34-42; (g) Sagiet Wagia Alia site HP 229; (h) Simit Sheriq site HP 689.1-N; (i) Hagar Zerga sites with rock art.

1100   Henryk Paner (a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

(e)

(f)

(g)

(h)

(i)

Figure 54.5  Cattle petroglyphs from the GAME concession, varied scales. (a) Ab Sayal site HP 696.5; (b) Salmija site HP 6201; (c) Ab Sayal site HP 696.1; (d) Gerf el-Kalba site HP 432.1; (e) El-Suegi site HP 779; (f) Hagar Zerga site HP 782.2a; (g) Hagar Zerga site HP 787.1; (h) Hagar Zerga site HP 791.1a; (i) Hagar Zerga site HP 791.1g.

Nubian Rock Art   1101 region can be linked to the appearance of Kerma cultural influences in these regions ca. 2500 bce (Welsby 2003b; Paner 2014a); however, it cannot be excluded that some representations might be even earlier. In Lower Nubia, for example, many of the oldest depictions of cattle have been associated with the A-Group, the beginnings of which are dated to ca. 3700 bce (Wildung 1996; Török 2009). It should be noted that cattle depictions are often accompanied by drawings of human silhouettes. The cattle motif is popular in Nubian rock art up until Christian times; therefore, on their own they cannot serve as chronological determinants. Nonetheless, when depictions of cattle and representations of camels coincide with each other on one plaque, this signifies that the former are usually older. Newer depictions of cattle often have geometrized forms with disrupted proportions and are less meticulously executed. The second most common grouping of depictions is that of camels (Fig. 54.6), often with riders, for example, in battle scenes or caravans. The scientific community widely acknowledges that it would be difficult to confirm their presence in Africa prior to the 1st millennium bce, meaning that such drawings are good dating tools (RowleyConwy 1988). Many camel depictions, unlike cattle drawings, are dynamic, also in terms of how the riders are presented, who are visibly stylistically diverse. Very often camel engravings are made on top of older cattle depictions. The above-mentioned rock gongs are usually located close to engravings and are often hard to distinguish from among the vast ocean of rocks that make up the landscape of the Fourth Cataract; however, many of them are placed in spots that provide an excellent view of a relatively extensive area. Within the territory of the GAME concession, it has been confirmed that they tend to occur both individually and in-group. It is certain that their function could have been both ritualistic, but also for entertainment as the percussive instrument was used to heighten the mood of various celebrations. On some panels with older depictions, marks can be found that indicate the use of these same rocks as lithophones; however, for the most part, rocks without engravings performed the function of rock gongs in the GAME concession area. The distribution of engravings is a topic that requires a separate paper; however, it is worth noting that in areas that guaranteed access to the Nile through rocky highlands, depictions of cattle and camels are most common. Near the area of the Fourth Cataract, in the last few years multiple examples of rock art have been found in the Wadi Abu Dom region (Gabriel and Karberg 2011), where depictions of geometric motifs, cattle, camels, human beings, Christian symbols and buildings, as well as astronomic motifs like celestial bodies, have been identified (Karberg 2009; Lohwasser 2010). A similar “corpus” of signs has been registered as part of the “Bayuda Project,” which covers the entire territory of the Bayuda Desert, and where apart from what has already been mentioned, depictions of boats, ostriches, antelopes, dogs, and other geometric motifs of unknown relevance have been identified (Paner in press).

1102   Henryk Paner (a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

(e)

(f)

(g)

(h)

(i)

(j)

(k)

(l)

Figure 54.6  El-Ghanawab and Hagar Zerga villages. Depictions of riders on camels, varied scales. (a) El-Ghanawab site HP 237.2; (b) Hagar Zerga site HP 780.2e; (c) Hagar Zerga site HP 710.9; (d) Hagar Zerga site HP 780.2; (e) Hagar Zerga site HP 610.1; (f) Hagar Zerga site HP 610.7; (g) Hagar Zerga site HP 781.11a; (h) Hagar Zerga site HP 782.2c; (i) Hagar Zerga site HP 793.1c; (j) Hagar Zerga site HP 784.16-15; (k) Haraz site HP 582; (l) Hagar Zerga site HP 791.1l.

Nubian Rock Art   1103

The Gdansk Collection of Rock Engravings When it became known in 2005 that all archaeological sites would be irrecoverably destroyed after the Merowe Dam was built, the present author submitted a proposal to NCAM to save at least the most representative examples of rock art from the GAME concession area for posterity, encompassing the area situated on the right bank of the Nile between the towns of Karima and Khor el-Daghfali. As a result, NCAM proposed all missions taking part in the MDASP campaign implement such a project, enabling all participating institutions to obtain some of the rescued petroglyphs. Ultimately, two missions decided to undertake this task: The Sudan Archaeological Research Society, led by Derek Welsby, and the Gdansk Archaeological Museum Expedition, led by Henryk Paner (2014b). The GAME campaign ultimately managed to rescue 173 panels with rock engravings and lithophones (rock gongs) weighing in total almost 30 tons from being submerged under water. The division done by a special committee formed by the NCAM and the Ministry of Youth Culture and Sport at the time10 led to one hundred panels being allocated to the National Museum in Khartoum, while seventy-one panels and two lithophones were added to the collection of the Archaeological Museum in Gdansk, thus creating the largest collection of Nubian rock art outside Sudan.

Bir Nurayet—One of the Largest Rock Art Galleries in Africa Undoubtedly, one of the largest discoveries of the last decade was at Bir Nurayet, which has been described as “one of the largest rock art galleries on the African continent, accompanied by relics of camps, settlement sites and cemeteries of communities living in the area from the early prehistory until modern times” (Bobrowski et al. 2013). The site is situated in the Red Sea Hills ca. 60 km south of the Egyptian-Sudanese border, at the foot of Jebel Magardi located in Wadi Diib. The discovery of thousands of rock engravings was made by Polish archaeologist Krzysztof Pluskota and the journalist and photographer Arita Baaijens as they journeyed on camelback along the routes leading to the ancient gold mines (Pluskota 2003a, 2003b, 2006). Over the course of three research seasons between 2010 and 2012, researchers from the Poznań Branch of the Institute of Archaeology and Ethnology of the Polish Academy of Sciences carried out the Bir Nurayet project aimed at reviewing the site and the history of settlements in this area. It is their opinion that: the main motif was the representation of long-horn cattle i.e. cows and bulls herding together or shown separately, sometimes attacked by beasts of prey, scenes of milking cows or fighting bulls. They are sometimes accompanied by men with bows and arrows and by some wild animals like elephants, lions, gazelles, antelopes, warthogs

1104   Henryk Paner and ostriches. Although camels are also frequently depicted on rocks, it is certainly the cattle that is by far the most numerous and most important motif at the site. (Bobrowski et al. 2013)

The researchers also write that the engravings found at this location are types of palimpsests.11 Two horizons are distinguishable, i.e. the Cow Period and the Camel Period. While their coexistence in the first few centuries of our era cannot be excluded, the degree of patination, the style and the subject matter seem to indicate chronologically different periods. The impulse to create these drawings was likely linked to a fertility cult and the belief that numerous cattle depictions on rock walls would magically lead to the actual multiplication of the cattle herds grazing in the shadow of Jebel Magardi with its characteristic phallic shape. Proof of this cult’s practices was provided by the finding of almost one hundred figurines depicting people and animals with a stylized phallic shape, hidden in a structure consisting of stone plaques situated at the foot of Jebel Magardi. These deposits were dated by radiocarbon analysis to the 6th century ce. Some of the petroglyphs were dated by using the TL dating method on the sediments that covered them. The dates obtained with this method oscillate at around 2200 bce, i.e. during the times of the Kerma Ancien Culture and Pan-Grave Culture, at the time occupying the area along the coast of the Red Sea and which were previously identified with the Medjay people (Michaux-Colombot  1992), an assumption that has recently been questioned (Liszka 2012; Liszka and De Souza, this volume).12

Rock Art as Part of the Landscape Dating the creation of the rock art is only the starting point for further discussions as these images should not be perceived solely as depictions of past realities. The term rock-art with “its overlapping meanings point to representational meanings and to skilled craftwork, with indications of a world of symbolism” (Chippindale and Nash 2004). Petroglyphs and pictograms placed on rocks, together with other material evidence of human activity, formed a new landscape—a cultural landscape. A cultural landscape, unlike a natural landscape, constitutes proof of the existence of various practices in the past, as well as of cultural experiences important for human perception. The moment engravings appear is just the beginning of their history: the history of their interaction with human beings, who provoked by their existence often placed new representations on top of existing petroglyphs. This often led to certain motifs being grouped at particular sites or caused the almost complete dominance of certain depictions in a specific area. This tendency is, for example, visible in the Western Desert as early as in the Naqada II period (Darnell 2009). Compositions that have existed in the landscape for hundreds or thousands of years undergo a continuous evolution of meaning, as they signified something else for their creator than for subsequent generations, while entirely different meanings are attributed

Nubian Rock Art   1105 to them in contemporary times. For example, multiple examples of modern shrines have been recorded in the Third Cataract region, situated in locations where old petroglyphs were preserved. This indicates that certain places may have had a symbolic function primarily because they were located near ancient rock drawings deemed of special importance by this specific community. Furthermore, we know of certain ethnographic analogies from Darfur with rock art as a part of existing shrines (Balfour 1956). In turn, in the Nuer community “beast dedicated to ghost and spirits are his wandering shrines,” which may be due to the fact that where both the living and the dead of a lineage collectively own cattle—the main standard of wealth and status (Evans-Pritchard 1940, 1950). In Edwards’s opinion “in such terms, it is perhaps not difficult to see a transformation of mobile ‘beasts as shrines’ into static shrines, where the animals, and their protective spirits and ancestral ghosts, are fixed in the landscape in the form of rock drawings” (Edwards 2006). This interrelation between rock art and the landscape has been discussed in many recent papers (Kleinitz 2004; Kleinitz and Olsson 2005). Dirk Huyge represents a similar understanding of the role of rock art in the landscape as he writes that: rock art may rather be meant to be “magically” active in the landscape. In other words, the rock art may be the own beholder of its surroundings and, once it is created, humans do not intervene (unless to add to/modify/update it in view of shifting religious concepts and ideologies). This is, at least, a possibility that should seriously be considered. (Huyge 2014:343)

The Inspirations behind Rock Art and its Significance In their search for what inspired the creation of rock art in Ancient Egypt, researchers most often list ideology, magic, religion, and totemism, but they have also assumed that in many cases it was just a basic need to illustrate perceived reality. However, currently it is thought that magic, especially hunting magic, was not the main source of inspiration for creating wild animal depictions, even during the Upper Palaeolithic. This is even more so in the case of the Early Neolithic when livestock and farming supplied most of the food; hunting played a minimal role in the economy of the communities of that period. According to Stan Hendrickx, “the economic importance of hunting in an agricultural society such as 4th millennium Egypt is, however, to be considered marginal, especially after the initial phase of the Naqada culture, and generally represents less than 2% of food procurement” (Huyge 2002; Vermeersch et al. 2004; Hendrickx 2006). With regards to totemism, it is believed that despite the widespread occurrence of Predynastic and Early Dynastic rock art depicting such animals as elephants, giraffes, asses, ibexes,

1106   Henryk Paner and antelopes, none of these achieved a divine status in later times, which calls into question whether any of them had been worshipped in the past. In addition, rock art does not provide any proof of special geographic or chronological preferences that would prove the existence of such a totemic cult in specific communities. Nonetheless, Červíček has repeatedly argued for the religious significance of Egyptian rock art by claiming that even making the drawing on rock was a cult act (Červíček 1986). In his opinion, most human beings are depicted in cult positions, as they “carry out liturgical actions, or represent anthropomorphic deities; boats are meant to be divine or funeral barques, and animals relate to offering rituals or represent a zoomorphic pantheon” (Červíček 1994, 1998). According to other researchers, the situation requires a more cautious and balanced approached; however “without excluding other possible meanings and motivations, it seems that the greater part of the rock art closely reflects the religious and ideological concerns of its makers” (Huyge  2009b). Moreover, Huyge—basing his assumptions on engraving examples from “Vulture Rock” in Wadi Hilal (east of El-Kab)—had concluded much earlier that “the expression of religious imagery, rather than hunting magic or totemism, is the motivation behind much of the rock art of Predynastic Upper Egypt” (Huyge 1999, 2002). Academic literature has paid much attention to giraffe representations, sometimes depicted as being led by human beings by a rope tied around its neck or simply portrayed with a rope hanging from its neck (Allard-Huard 1993; Váhala and Červíček 1999; Darnell 2009). The giraffe itself, based on interpretations referring to Pharaonic mythology, has been read as a representation of the “sun bearer” and linked with the solar cycle, like depictions of boats, human beings with raised arms, or ibexes (Huyge  2002; Gatto 2009). In turn, a giraffe restrained with a rope was seen as symbolizing the triumph of order over chaos, whereby: as human society during the middle Predynastic became more complex, so some petroglyphic solar mages began to achieve self-propulsion in a solar boat, and the solar giraffes required human control. Human figures sometimes appear as tamers or handlers of the zoomorphic solar carriers, often in the form of men who hold giraffes by ropes. (Darnell 2009)

One of the oldest giraffe representations is dated to the Epipaleolithic period (7000–5500 bce) and originates from Quft-Quseir (Redford and Redford 1989). However, it should be mentioned that sporadic depictions of animals have been encountered that would be categorized as megafauna and which are much younger than the ones mentioned above. Such examples are the giraffe and elephant depictions discovered in the Upper Nile on the Island of Us in the Fourth Cataract region (Kleinitz 2007a), and dated to the Meroitic or Post-Meroitic era. Apart from the Nile valley with five hundred such motifs registered (Judd 2009), giraffe depictions were prevalent in the Eastern Desert with eighty-six such images (Lankester 2012) and in the Western Desert (Riemer 2009; Polkowski 2016), where just in the Dakhla Oasis hundreds of giraffe representations in various configurations

Nubian Rock Art   1107 were discovered. It is believed that the giraffe was some sort of intermediary between the earthly and the heavenly sphere. There are also multiple depictions of boats in Upper Egypt and Lower Nubia, which could be considered evidence of the existence of a homogenous spiritual culture in this area (Huyge 2009b). The oldest dated boat depictions located in Upper Egypt and in Nubia originate from the Predynastic period, beginning from the Naqada I period, as well as from the Early Dynastic period.13 Most known occurrences are from the Nile valley and have received many interpretations and various typological proposals have been put forward14 (Winkler  1938; Dunbar  1941; Engelmayer  1965; Almagro and Almagro  1968; Hellström and Langballe  1970; Červíček  1974,  1978,  1986,  1993; Aksamit 1981; Vinson 1987; M. Berger 1992; Otto and Buschendorf-Otto 1993; Váhala and Červíček 1999; Huyge 2002; Kleinitz 2004; Kleinitz and Koenitz 2006; Hendrickx et al. 2012). Nonetheless, they can also be found in desert areas, such as in the Eastern Desert, where among the almost four thousand documented petroglyphs 884 were depictions of boats, 2,200 drawings of animals, and 859 of human beings (Lankester 2012). They are also encountered more sporadically in the Libyan Desert (Kröpelin 2004). Over time, it has been possible to observe how humans have subdued both earthly and cosmic chaos as manifested by the joint depictions of giraffes and boats, with “the earlier solar carriers thereby receiving a ‘modernized’ visual indication of mobility” (Darnell 2009). Furthermore, the clear symbolic merging of the world of the Nile valley and that of the desert takes place through animals being portrayed standing near boats or scenes of land animals hunted from boats (Winkler  1938; Červíček 1974). Since the Late New Kingdom and Napatan periods, depictions of sacrificial tables and so-called “horned altars,” as well as drawing of soles and sandals become noticeably more common—evidence of pilgrimages and individual piety (Verner 1973; Žába 1974; Červíček 1986; Váhala and Červíček 1999; Kleinitz 2009). Additionally, from the beginning of the Meroitic period, we can note the introduction of various signs and symbols, such as swastikas and pentagrams, spiral motifs and loops, tribal marks, signs with erotic significance, as well as various motifs of unknown meaning (Verner 1973). The Late Meroitic and Post-Meroitic periods bring about an increased prevalence of camel depictions, while we can note more widespread imaginings of crosses and sacral buildings during the Christian period. During the Arab era, cattle depictions are very rare, while camels become one of the dominant motifs, sometimes with images of cabins for women on their backs (Winkler 1939). Recently many have forwarded the view that rock art created in desert areas by Nile valley inhabitants should be interpreted as an attempt to mark the world and to connect various areas with the use of similar symbols. This would amount to a “Nilotization” of the desert, incorporating these areas into the rich cultural mosaic of the Nile valley (Darnell 2009). Undoubtedly, all attempts at explaining the motivations behind creating rock art and interpreting their meaning should refer to materials and sources from that era as much as possible; for example, by noting the environmental changes, the network

1108   Henryk Paner of settlements, the trade routes, the natural resources, travel routes, places of cult, etc. “Rock art is not an independent phenomenon, but should be studied and can indeed only be fully understood within its specific archaeological-historical context and environmental setting” (Huyge 2009b).

The Periodization of Nubian Rock Art For many petroglyphs, it is relatively easy to determine the approximate time of their origination and their chronology (primarily in a relative manner) based on their stratigraphy, the patina color (Davis  2009), accompanying inscriptions, formal studies (Červíček 1978, 1982), and to a lesser extent through archaeological methods or the use of physicochemical analyses (Watchman 2000; Bednarik 2002). With regards to patina as a complementary factor used for petroglyph dating, the following opinion seems worthy of note: “location has a greater effect on the patination of an inscription than does age” (Darnell 2002). Many new conclusions were reached thanks to Olivier Myers’s research conducted in Abka, located close to Wadi Halfa, in 1947 and 1948 (Myers 1949, 1958, 1960). Myers determined the stratigraphic relation between petroglyphs and cultural strata, which allowed him to propose a method of dating of what, in his opinion, were the oldest examples of rock art in the Nile valley. However, his analysis has been criticized (Davis 1978). Per Storemyr claimed that “the dating of the earliest Abka rock art is highly disputed and range [sic] from the 10th to the 5th millennium bce, though it seems that a later range (5000–6000 bce) is being increasingly accepted” (Storemyr 2009:136). Myers’s conclusions have been largely rectified by Whitney Davis based on an analysis of findings made by the Scandinavian Joint Expedition to Sudanese Nubia (SJE). The analysis enabled Davis to develop a chronology of engravings from the Abka region that to some extent can be representative also for other Lower Nubian territories since almost 80 percent of all the petroglyphs registered by SJE, ca. 6,000 drawings, were found in this area (Davis 2009).15 Regarding the Abka site, it is worth mentioning the documented rock art in the form of geometric motifs. It is accepted that the oldest examples of this type of art can even be dated as far back to the Late Palaeolithic period (Storemyr 2009), while the youngest such depictions originate from the Early Predynastic period. These petroglyphs have many analogies at the El-Hosh site, famous for its fish trap motifs, located near Gebel esSilsila (Huyge et al.  1998), but also at Gharb Aswan (Davis  1984; Červíček  1986; Storemyr 2008; Huyge and Storemyr 2013), near the First Cataract. “Undoubtedly, this rock art is the expression of relatively mobile groups that ranged across Upper Egypt, Lower Nubia and the adjacent deserts in the Epipaleolithic and Neolithic periods” (Storemyr 2009). Furthermore, the Gharb Aswan site holds many more depictions, all described by Winkler in the following manner: “. . . west of the river, rocky island. Giraffes, antelopes, gazelles, crocodile, ostriches, cattle, dogs. Men, some with feathers. Boats. Curved throwing-sticks. Sandals. Wavy lines and other curved compositions.

Nubian Rock Art   1109 Man with sword and shield, schematic drawings of men. Here and there scooped-out cups” (Winkler 1939). It should be noted that researchers have assumed these giraffe depictions were contemporary to Winkler’s “Earliest Hunters,” i.e. Naqada I (Huyge 2002), while most boats could have been made by “Early Nile-Valley Dwellers,” i.e. Naqada II, or somewhat later (Engelmayer 1965; Červíček 1974, 1978; Vinson 1987). Additional research conducted in Upper Egypt has proved that some petroglyphs could even have been from the Late Palaeolithic and Epipaleolithic period (Huyge et al. 2001, Huyge et al. 2007; Huyge 2009a). In 2005, three rock art sites (Qurta I, II, and III) were identified ca. 15 km north of Kom Ombo, on the east bank of the Nile between Edfu and Aswan, with a total of 180 images. Among these, the majority were cattle (Bos primigenius) depictions, making up over 75 percent of the collection, while others showed birds, hippopotamuses, fish, and hartebeest.16 Depictions of some unidentified creatures and several human figures with characteristically protruding buttocks were also recorded. Based on the analysis of the engraving techniques, their style and subject matter, as well as of the patination level and the geomorphological and archaeological context, its authors suggested dating the engravings in Qurta to the Late Pleistocene, specifically the Late Palaeolithic period, i.e. 19,000–18,000 cal yr bp (Huyge et al. 2007; Huyge 2009a; Huyge et al. 2011; Huyge and Vandenberghe 2011). Due to a certain level of disbelief among the scientific community, the authors conducted an OSL analysis to obtain absolute dating for sediments correlated with the rock art. To explain, OSL dating can determine the time that has elapsed since buried sediment grains were last exposed to sunlight (Aitken 1998; Duller 2004). The method uses the constituent mineral grains of the sediment itself, and not associated material. As such, it offers a direct means for establishing the time of sediment deposition and accumulation: The dates range from 10+−1 ka at the top to 16+−2 ka at the base of the sequence. As the covering material is aeolian and as the quartz behaves well as OSL dosimeter, we conclude that the dates for these samples are accurate sedimentation ages. They provide solid evidence for the Pleistocene age of the rock art at Qurta. (Huyge et al. 2011)

Despite the numerous above-mentioned attempts to establish the absolute dating of the rock art from Upper Egypt and Lower Nubia, in many cases it is still necessary to rely on indirect chronology. Based on the most recent findings, the geometric motif depictions known from Abka, El-Hosh, Gharb Aswan, or Wadi Howar should be listed as belonging to the oldest horizon. The petroglyphs registered in the Western Desert area might be only slightly younger. According to Lech Krzyżaniak, the depictions of obese women dressed in ornamental skirts registered at the Kharga and Dakhla oases (F. Berger 2008) could be dated to the early or mid-Holocene (Huyge 2009b), i.e. 8000–4000 bce, while Dirk Huyge believes that they can correspond to communities from the Bashendi culture and situates them in the 6th or 5th millennium bce. The depictions of Ethiopian megafauna are even younger, including representations of elephants, giraffes,

1110   Henryk Paner antelopes associated with the Late Neolithic hunter communities from the 4th millennium bce, and with Group A from Lower Nubia and Pre-Kerma period communities from Upper Nubia. On the other hand, new discoveries made in Upper Egypt, such as at Wadi Abu Subeira (Storemyr et al. 2008), Abu Tanqura Bahri, and El-Hosh, featuring, among others, naturalistic depictions of bovids (wild cattle or aurochs), birds, hippopotamuses, gazelle, fish, hartebeest, and stylized human figures, were dated approximately to the Late Palaeolithic, ca. 15,000 bce (Huyge 2009b). Determining when the first depictions of domesticated animals appeared is especially important for research into the history and economic development of Nubia and for rock art dating. Some researchers have assumed that domestic cattle and ovicaprids appeared in Upper Nubia as early as in the 5th millennium bce. However, in many areas in which a high density of Neolithic settlements has been recorded, there are no petroglyphs dated to such an early period. It is therefore more probable that the early rock depictions of domesticated animals, mainly cattle, should be dated to somewhere between the 3rd and 2nd millennium bce (Edwards 2006), so within the time horizon of the Kerma culture, or, as some prefer to refer to this time, during the Old Kush period (Kołosowska et al. 2003).17 In the 3rd millennium bce, next to commonplace depictions of cattle in rock art, it is possible to observe the clear symbolic significance of cattle in funerary customs. It should also be noted that during excavations conducted in Kerma, the archaeological material showed that a percentage of cattle bones amounted to 34 percent, while that of sheep and goats to 45 percent. “However, it should be noted that these are only average figures—cattle are most important during the early phase of the Kerma civilization, the period known as Ancient Kerma. In the later Kerma Classique period, roughly the first half of the 2nd millennium bce, cattle seem to lose some importance while sheep and goats bones increase in frequency” (Chaix and Grant 1992:63). By comparison, “now, the very arid, sub-desert environment of modern Nubia is more suitable for small ruminants than for large animals—at the present day, cattle account for less than 5 per cent of the domestic livestock, while nearly 90 per cent are sheep and goat” (Chaix and Grant 1992:63). Some Kerma culture tombs contain hundreds or even thousands of bucrania, slaughtered as sacrifice to the deceased, thus emphasizing the person’s social status.18 Significantly, the bucrania allow for the classification of cattle represented by these sacrifices as of the “longhorn” variety with a large skull and horns with a broad spread, i.e. exactly the type most frequently found in rock art identified to be from the Kerma Horizon (Chaix et al. 2012). Meanwhile, tombs registered in the Fourth Cataract area and dated to the Old Kush period only have burials with rams as sacrificial animals, whereas there are rarely any rock art depictions of these creatures. This may be the result of unknown beliefs and religious practices connected with burial rites, which, however, were not reflected in the region’s rock art. The many new publications regarding rock art in Upper Egypt and Lower Nubia, few feature a wider interpretation or periodization of rock art that would coincide with the presentation of the material itself. One of the few notable exceptions is the study into

Nubian Rock Art   1111 Elkab rock art in Upper Egypt (Huyge 2002: tab. I). After taking into account 354 depictions, the author distinguishes seven horizons from Horizon I, equivalent to the Naqada I period, up until Horizon VII, which includes the Christian and Arab periods. These seven horizons were allocated to four chronological phases with the use of motifs described as below:

Middle and Late Predynastic: Horizon I and II (3900–3650 bce) Horizon I is characterized by the dominant presence of giraffe-drawings which rarely appear in later eras and, if so, only in Horizon III, and infrequent anthropomorphic figures, antelopes, and gazelles. In Horizon II, sickle-shaped boats and right-angled vessels, anthropomorphic figures with raised arms, wild asses, ibexes, dogs, and different kinds of gazelles and antelopes are predominant, while cattle representations are lacking.

The Terminal Predynastic and Early Dynastic: Horizon III (3300–2650 bce) The greatest variety of motifs has been recorded for this period, including motifs already featuring in the earlier horizons, but now also many types of boats and, for the first time, a rich longhorn cattle representation that coincides with other animals.

The Old to New Kingdom: Horizon IV and V (2650–1070 bce) There is still a wide range of motifs, but the boats are exclusively sickle-shaped, the number of cattle images increases significantly and the occurrence of human figures decreases.

The Late Pharaonic and Post-Antique Period: Horizon VI and VII (ca. 1070 bce–after 641 ce) Cattle drawings disappear entirely and camels appear with a significant presence of human figures; deer silhouettes appear for the first time. According to the author of the above classification, in Horizon I and II the dominance of solar symbols is evident, as is that of adversaries of the sun hidden under the guise of, for example, asses, and of phenomena that eliminate solar enemies represented by de­sert

1112   Henryk Paner game symbolizing evil and chaos. Furthermore, Huyge concludes that the foundation of contemporary solar-themed rock art could be the result of a belief that providing the unobstructed functioning of the solar cycle by creating a relevant drawing on rock would offer the creator of this work the promise of rebirth after death. In the Terminal Predynastic and Early Dynastic period (Horizon III), many motifs can be associated with royal ideology and the official political unification of Egypt in the late Naqada III period. There is also a widespread occurrence of drawings with cattle depictions. “These bovid images probably represent sacrificial beasts with a specific function in the local temple cult” (Huyge 2002). During the time of the Old and New Kingdom (Horizon IV and V), there is a noticeable drop of solar symbolism in the general number of depictions, while a significant variety of different motifs appears. In the case of cattle, the diversification of horn representations is clearly observable, whereby the Old Kingdom predominantly featured longhorn cattle with a lyrate shape, the Middle Kingdom had characteristic V-shaped horns and the New Kingdom had shorthorn cattle. There is a lack of structural relations between specific depictions. From the period of the 21st Dynasty to the Islamic period (Horizon VI and VII) depictions of boats and cattle disappear, whereas visualizations of human figures and camels become commonplace. The latter animal most likely signified status, wealth and prosperity. Images of so-called “horned altars” start to appear together with images of deer, related with early Christians. The depictions from this era do not have a distinct religious background and most engravings are made on horizontal surfaces. Those that appear on vertical surfaces are usually oriented towards the West.

Conclusions Beyond a doubt, in Upper Egypt and Lower Nubia as early as from the Early Dynastic period (3200–3050 bce) rock art evolved from a phase that is defined in literature as the “preformal artistic stage” to a “formal canonical phase,” and became standardized and formalized. However, only the forms undergo change, whereas “the themes of iconography and the underlying beliefs remain very much the same” (Huyge  2002). “Pharaonic culture was a gradual outgrowth of indigenous prehistoric traditions. In fact, what occurred in Egypt between ca. 3200 and 3030 bce (at the time of state formation) was not an abrupt change of iconography but rather a profound formalization, standardization, and officialization” (Huyge 2009b). This statement can definitely not be applied to the southern and eastern part of Upper Nubia, where such a far-reaching unification of rock art was never observed. However, an attempt could be made to place the most common motifs in certain chronological frames, set within the model of cultural changes assumed by scientific research focused on this area. Based on recent discoveries made at sites on the right bank of the Nile River

Nubian Rock Art   1113 between Jebel Barkal and Khor el-Daghfali, over a distance of ca. 150 km19, the following initial conclusions for this last region can be made:





1. The scant amount of geometric motifs, including some schematic depictions of human beings, can be considered as one the oldest examples of rock art in this area and might originate from the Epipaleolithic period. 2. Depictions of giraffes (twelve petroglyphs) are less prevalent here than in Lower Nubia and Upper Egypt, and they usually lack context. Dating places them chronologically between the Late Epipaleolithic and the Pre-Kerma period, i.e. 3500–2500 bce (Honegger 2004). It would seem that the sporadic depictions of lions, rhinoceroses, leopards, antelopes (Paner and Borcowski 2005), and most drawings of ostriches fit into a similar chronological frame; however, the latter also appear in the Old Kush period. 3. Depictions of elephants are rare (six drawings; Fig.  54.7), as due to climate changes these animals were likely not present in this area as early as the Kerma period.20 That is why the discovery from Haraz of a drawing of an elephant with a mahout on the back (Fig. 54.8), is completely unique and can be placed in historical context. This might be related to the “war beasts from the Greco-Roman period” (Lankester 2012). 4. Depictions of boats (seven drawings) are strikingly scant in comparison with Lower Nubia; furthermore, they appear to be shown without a religious context (Fig. 54.9).

Figure 54.7  Jebel el-Suegat site HP 34, an elephant. Photograph: H. Paner.

1114   Henryk Paner

Figure 54.8  Haraz site HP 582. Drawing of an elephant with a mahout (driver) on its back. Photograph: H. Paner.







5. At the beginning of the Old Kush period (2500 bce), there were widespread depictions of cattle with a predominance of longhorn cattle and with multiple proof of the intentional deformation of horns; however, in certain cases the possibility of an earlier dating for cattle depictions should be taken into account. On the other hand, drawings of cattle made in the medieval period have also been documented (Kleinitz 2004). 6. Drawings of cattle often coincide with nearby rock gongs and are sometimes even found on their surfaces, “pointing to a close conceptual relationship between sound making and cattle forms” (Kleinitz 2004). 7. The vast majority of camel and horse depictions are substantially later than those of cattle, and they are prevalent both during the Christian and the Islamic periods. In several instances, the images of horses (together with riders) can be significantly older than the depictions of camels (cf. Osborn and Osbornovà 1998). 8. From the late Post-Meroitic period, an intense “Christianization” of the Fourth Cataract area’s landscape is noticeable with multiple drawings of church buildings and Christian symbols.

As in other regions of Nubia, we can see in the Fourth Cataract some preferences for some very common motifs (for example, cattle and camels) with the absence of others (for example, goats and sheep), which undoubtedly had a significant role in the local economy, but are rare in rock art. In this context, we agree with the opinion of Cornelia Kleinitz that: The apparent changes in motif preferences over time reflect the changing symbolic universes of the people of the Fourth Cataract. Thus, the petroglyphs to a substantial

Nubian Rock Art   1115

Figure 54.9  Jebel el-Fiaal, site HP 18. Cattle probably from the late Neolithic or Pre-Kerma period (at the bottom of the panel), cattle from the Old Kush with pendant (on the left), ­rowing boat with a steering oar and dogs (Old Kush period). In the center of the panel an anthropomorphic silhouette.

part represent “images of the mind” rather than only being representations of the physical environment of the time. (Kleinitz 2012)

Returning to the conclusions presented above, it should be noted that they have no reference to the area between the Second and the Fourth Cataracts, where there are other proportions in the repertoire of motifs and slightly different proposals in terms of their periodization. A good example could be sites in Abka (Davis  1977),21 Misida (AllanHuard 1993), and Jebel Wahaba on the right bank of Nile,22 Hannek (Williams 2014), Jebel Gorgod (Leclant 1984; Allard-Huard 1993), and also Sabu-Jaddi (Chittick 1961; AllardHuard 1982, 1983), where more than 1,600 rock drawings from different periods have been registered.23 For example, thirty-five drawings of elephants were counted in Abka and thirty-seven images of these animals in Gorgod, Sabu-Jeddi, and Misida. Even more numerous there are depictions of giraffes, which in the Abka were registered in the number of 113 and in Gorgod and Sabu-Jeddi in total eighty-two, but much less and much later in the latter area. Many fewer, only nineteen, depictions of hippos have been recorded at the Third Cataract, while in the Abka region there were sixteen such drawings. Also boat drawings, very rare in the area of the Fourth Cataract, were registered in the number of over one hundred petroglyphs the area of Third Cataract alone (Allard-Huard 1993). As can be seen, petroglyphs from the Second and Third Cataract regions were thoroughly researched and documented on many sites, and there have been numerous publications not only presenting these findings but also include many interpretations.

1116   Henryk Paner A good example are the chronological and cultural correlations of petroglyphs in Abka (Davis  2009), where the oldest horizon (“A”) contains “non-figurative” drawings and younger forms of wild fauna, dated to the 5th and beginning of the 4th millennium bce (horizon “B”). Horizons C and D are times of decline in petroglyphs of wild fauna and a significant increase in cattle depictions, whereas Horizon D can be attributed to the A-Group. Horizon E, often associated with the community of the C-Group, is dominated by petroglyphs of cattle. According to Williams, “cattle raising was a major focus of C-Group life” (Williams 1983). Finally, Horizon F depicts the Egyptian incursion, which found a reflection on Jebel Sheikh Suleiman near Wadi Halfa, where the indigenous monument of a royal A-Group victory over (Nubian?) peoples (Williams 1986:171–72) was presented, and in Egyptianization of the rock art, where many animal figures were made according to conventions developed in early dynastic and later Egyptian art. However, the most recent—yet to be published in full—research results, obtained within the scope of the MDASP campaign, provide broad possibilities for comparative analyzing Fourth Cataract rock engravings within the context of their contemporary settlement network, travel routes, crossings, drinking water access points,24 places of cult, lithophone monuments, etc. In-depth surveys and excavations conducted in this region, apart from providing many rock art discoveries, also provided access to information on the changes to the natural and cultural landscape from the Stone Age to the Middle Ages. This now provides a solid base to research the rock art of Upper Nubia “within its specific archaeological-historical context and environmental setting” (Huyge 2009b).

Notes 1. It is assumed that the term “engraving” refers to drawings made on rock using a sharp tool; http://www.visual-arts-cork.com/prehistoric/engravings.htm; accessed November 12, 2017. In case of most finds from Upper Nubia, drawings on hard granite rocks were carried out using the technique of “pecking” or “hammering” with small rock fragments or pebbles, which the artist usually left behind next to the drawing. However, the terms “rock drawings” and “rock engravings” are often used interchangeably concerning the drawings made on the rock using hard tools without the use of dyes and only through the reductive process. Thus, either way, these two terms are synonymous with the term “petroglyph.” 2. IFRAO International Federation of Rock Art Organizations is a federation of national and regional organizations promoting the study of paleoart and cognitive archaeology established in 1988 in Darwin (Australia), http://www.ifrao.com/ifrao/. Between 2001 and 2017, the organization published thirty-three volumes of a series entitled “Rock Art Research,” which features many articles concerning rock art from around the world: http://www. ifrao.com/list-of-contents/. 3. As a result, this article will not discuss issues connected to the fascinating “tableaux” phenomenon, such as the Scorpion Tableau from Gebel Tjauti in the Theban Western Desert (Darnell 2002) or the Gebel Sheikh Suleiman inscriptions which constitute vital evidence “for understanding the expansion of pharaonic hegemony over Lower Nubia” (Darnell 2009, further literature therein).

Nubian Rock Art   1117 4. Due to space constraints, citations from older references or studies have been limited to the bare minimum. Literature on Nubian and Egyptian rock art is very extensive and many authors have also undertaken the task of collecting all works dedicated to this subject; therefore, it is possible to refer readers interested in the history of research to these studies (Almagro and Almagro  1968; Červíček  1986; Davis  1979,  1990; Huyge  2003,  2009a,  2009b; Judd  2009). See also Hendrickx  1995; Hendrickx and Claes 2013, 2014, 2015. 5. For more information about Frobenius research on Nubian rock art, see https://frobeniusinstitut.de/, accessed June 22, 2018. 6. The studies of the Joint Scandinavian Expedition to Sudanese Nubia in the Nile Valley (Hellström and Langballe 1970) contain methodical listings of motifs registered during the campaign, amounting to 6,999 positions compiled in tables. Unfortunately, this publication has been really incomplete and for wide areas non-existent. 7. (SARS) Sudan Archaeological Research Society and (H.U.N.E.) Humboldt University Nubian Expedition. 8. Since 2008, almost all mentioned locations (apart from Kassinger and Jebel Suegat) have been submerged 30–40 m under water. 9. The present author is currently in the process of preparing a monograph regarding rock engravings from the GAME concession (Paner in press). 10. Document from 19.10.2008, no. HQAM/4/b/Gdansk Museum, signed by Hasan Hussein Idris, the General Director of NCAM. 11. Palimpsests (codex rescriptus in Latin) is an academic term referring to manuscripts written on previously used materials (papyrus, parchment), involving the removal of the previous text, though with the use of various methods it is still possible to read the removed content. In simple terms, it is overwriting something older with something newer. 12. Nevertheless, in the opinion of many researchers, the location of Medjay is sufficiently certified by an inscription from Elkab (Giuliani 2004; Davies 2003). 13. However the oldest boat representations are models from the Neolithic site at Merimda Beni Salaam in Delta and from the Badarian culture in Upper Egypt (Vinson 1994). 14. The new approach was proposed by Tony Judd (Judd 2009), who made the classification of boat drawings from the Eastern Desert based on a list of fourteen superior constructional features of these objects. It must be taken into account that many drawings of boats earlier dated to older periods based on their presence on the walls of temples, currently based on recent research are dated even to Christian times as it was in El-Kurru (Ku. 1) (G. Emberling, pers. comm.) 15. The oldest horizon at this site, Horizon A, includes “nonfigurative drawings,” which according to Myers are dated at 7500 bce. Horizon B includes depictions of giraffes, elephants, antelopes, some or all of the ostriches and human hunters. Horizon C, which primarily consists of giraffes, boats, elephants, rhinoceros, and antelopes, is dated to the later 4th and first half of the 3rd millennium bce. The turn of Horizon C and D coincides with the moment when drawings of probably domesticated animals appear. Horizon D can be appropriated to A-Group peoples, while Horizon E can be linked to C-Group peoples. 16. A large African antelope with a long head and sloping back, related to the gnus. 17. It must be stressed that the term “Old Kush” should be used in a chronological rather than a cultural sense. An approximate equivalent to this term is “Kerma Horizon,” which suggests the influence and dominance of the Kerma Culture in the period discussed.

1118   Henryk Paner 18. In the Eastern Cemetery area in Kerma, 4,899 bucrania were found near Tomb no. 253 dated to the Kerma Moyen period (Chaix et al. 2012: fig. 2). 19. The comments below do not apply to rock art on the Nile islands in the discussed area, except the Umm Gebir Island, which was incorporated into the survey conducted by GAME on the right bank of the Nile. 20. Only two depictions of elephants have been recorded in the Dakhla Oasis, while there were several hundred giraffe images (Polkowski 2016), in the Central Eastern Desert— approximately forty elephant drawings (Lankester 2012). 21. Nearly 80 percent of all drawings registered by the Scandinavian Joint Expedition are Sudanese Nubia were discovered in the Abka region, where a very rich collection of various depictions has been registered. For instance, as many as sixty-nine depiction boats, 468 cattle, and 212 antelopes were discovered on several sites in Abka (Davis 2009). Since the Middle Kingdom, we can observe numerous examples of the Egyptianization of rock art on this site. 22. See photographic documentation from Gebel Wahba posted by Bruce Beyer Williams on the pages of Academia.edu: https://www.academia.edu/36787991/Kajbar-Gebel_Wahba_ 2002, accessed June 22, 2018. 23. A rich photographic documentation of rock art from this site titled “Sabu Rock Art 2005” was posted by Bruce Beyer Williams on the pages of Academia.edu; https://www.academia. edu/36674948/Sabu_Rock_Art_2005, accessed June 22, 2018. 24. Water access points in the Nile, especially in the region of the Fourth Cataract, could have once been extremely important, because in this extremely rocky terrain they guaranteed safe descent for people and animals to the river bank via deep khors that can be found only every dozen or so kilometers.

References Cited Aitken, M. 1998 An Introduction to Optical Dating: The Dating of Quaternary Sediments by the Use of Photon-stimulated Luminescence. Oxford University Press. Aksamit, J. 1981 Representations of Boats in Predynastic Egypt. Fontes Archeologici Posnanienses 32:156–68. Allard-Huard, L. 1982 Nouveaux témoignages de la culture des Chasseurs au Gebel Gorgod, Soudan, 3e cataracte. Bulletin de la Société Préhistorique Française 79:124–28. ——— 1983 Nouvelles station rupestres dans le secteur de la 3e cataracte du Nile (Nubie soudanaises). Bulletin de la Société Préhistorique Française 80, 142–43. ——— 1993 Nile-Sahara. Dialogues of the Rocks, v. 1: The Hunters. Divajeu. ——— 2000 Nile-Sahara. Dialogues of the Rocks, v. 2: Innovative Peoples. Divajeu. Almagro, B. and G.M. Almagro 1968 Estudios de Arte Rupestre Nubio, v. 1: Yacimientos situados en la orilla oriental del Nilo, entre Nag Kolorodna y Kars Ibrim (Nubia Egipcia). Comite Español de Excavaciones Arqueologicas en el Extraŋero. Balfour, P.G. 1956 A Prehistoric Cult Still Practised in Muslim Darfur. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 86:77–86. Bednarik, R.G. 2002 The Dating of Rock Art: A Critique. Journal of Archaeological Science 29(11):1213–33. Bednarik, R., A. Muzzolini, D. Seglie, Y. Sher, and M. Consens eds. 2003 Rock Art Glossary: A Multilingual Dictionary. Brepols.

Nubian Rock Art   1119 Berger, F. 2008 Rock Art West of Dakhla: The “Women” from Dakhla. Rock Art Research 25:137–46. Berger, M.A. 1992 Predynastic Animal-headed Boats from Hierakonpolis and Southern Egypt. In The Followers of Horus: Studies Dedicated to Michael Allen Hoffman, 1944–1990, ed. R.  Friedman and B.  Adams, pp. 107–20. Oxbow Monographs 20. Egyptian Studies Association Publication 2. Oxbow Books. Bietak, M. and R.  Engelmayer 1963 Eine frühdynastische Abri-Siedlung mit Fels bildern aus Sayala-Nubien (Berichte des Österreichischen Nationalkomitees der UNESCO-Aktion für die Rettung der Nubischen Altertümer 1). Denkschriften der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Philosophisch-historische Klasse 82. Bobrowski, P., M. Jórdeczka, M. Kobusiewicz, M. Chłodnicki, and J. Kusiak 2013 What Forced the Prehistoric Cattle-Keepers to Emigrate from the Red Sea Mountains? Studia Quaternaria 30 (2):135–42. Bonnet, C. 1993 Upper Nubia from 3000 to 1000 BC. In Egypt and Africa: Nubia from Prehistory to Islam, ed. W.V. Davies, pp. 112–17. British Museum Press. ——— 1997 A-Group and Pre-Kerma. In Sudan: Ancient Kingdoms of the Nile, ed. D. Wildung, pp. 37–39. Flammarion. Cailliaud, F. 1822 Travels in the Oasis of Thebes, and in the Deserts Situated East and West of the Thebaid: In the Years 1815, 16, 17 and 18, ed. M. Jomard. R. Phillips & Co. Chaix, L. and A. Grant 1992 Cattle in Ancient Nubia. Anthropozoologica 16:61–66. Chaix, L., J. Dubosson, and M. Honegger 2012 Bucrania from the Eastern Cemetery at Kerma (Sudan) and the Practice of Cattle Horn Deformation. In Prehistory of Northeastern Africa: New Ideas and Discoveries, ed. J. Kabaciński, M. Chłodnicki, and M. Kobusiewicz, pp. 189–212. Studies in African Archaeology 11. Poznań Archaeological Museum. Chester, G.I. 1892 On Archaic Engravings on Rocks near Gebel Silsileh in Upper Egypt. The Archaeological Journal 49:120–30. Chippindale, C. and G. Nash 2004 The Figured Landscapes of Rock-art: Looking at Pictures in Place. Cambridge University Press. Chittick, H.N. 1961 Rock Engravings at Sabu. Kush 11:328–32. Červíček, P. 1974 Felsbilder des Nord-Etbai, Oberägyptens und Unternubiens: Ergebnise d. VIII. Diafe nach Ägypten 1926. Ergebnisse der Frobenius-Expeditionen 16. Franz Steiner Verlag. ——— 1976 Catalogue of the Rock Art Collection of the Frobenius Institute. Studien zur Kulturkunde 41. Franz Steiner Verlag. ——— 1978 Notes on the Chronology of the Nubian Rock Art to the End of the Bronze Age. In Études Nubiennes, ed. J. Leclant and J. Vercoutter, pp. 38–56. Bibliothèque d’Étude 77. Institute Français d’Archéologie Orientale du Caire. ——— 1982 Notes on the Chronology of Nubian Rock Art from the End of the Bronze Age Onwards. In Nubian Studies: Proceedings of the Symposium for Nubian Studies, ed. J.M. Plumley, pp. 57–63. Aris & Philips. ——— 1986 Rock Pictures of Upper Egypt and Nubia. Annali dell’Istituto Universitario Orientale di Napoli, Supplemento 46(1). Herder. ——— 1993 Chronology and Chorology of Upper Egyptian and Nubian Rock Art up to 1400 BC. Sahara 5:41–48. ——— 1994 Archaische Oranten Darstellungen auf ägyptischen und nubischen Felsbildern. In Hommages à Jean Leclant, v. 2: Nubie, Soudan, Éthiopie, ed. C.  Berger, G.  Clerc, and N. Grimal, pp. 97–103. Bibliothèque d’Étude 106. Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale. ——— 1998 Felsbilder des Nord- Etbai, Oberägyptens und Unternubiens. Franz Steiner Verlag.

1120   Henryk Paner Darnell, J. 2002 Theban Desert Road Survey in the Egyptian Western Desert, v. 1: Gebel Tjauti Rock Inscriptions and Wadi el-Hôl Rock Inscriptions. Oriental Institute Publications 119. ——— 2009 Iconographic Attraction, Iconographic Syntax, and Tableaux of Royal Ritual Power in the Pre- and Proto-Dynastic Rock Inscriptions of the Theban Western Desert. Archéo-Nil 19:83–107. Davies, V. 2001 Kurgus 2000: The Egyptian Inscriptions. Sudan & Nubia 5:46–58. ——— 2003 Kush in Egypt: A New Historical Inscription, Sudan & Nubia 7:52–54. Davis, W. 1977 Toward a Dating of Nile Valley Prehistoric Rock-Drawings. Journal of the Society for the Study of Egyptian Antiquities 8(1):25–34. ——— 1978 Dating Prehistoric Rock-Drawings in Upper Egypt and Nubia. Current Anthropology 19:216–17. ——— 1979 Sources for the Study of Rock Art in the Nile Valley. Gӧttinger Miszellen 32:59–74. ——— 1984 The Earliest Art in the Nile Valley. In Origin and Early Development of FoodProducing Cultures in North-Eastern Africa, ed. L.  Krzyżaniak and M.  Kobusiewicz, pp. 81–94. Poznań Archaeological Museum. ——— 1990 The Study of Rock Art in Africa. In A History of African Archaeology, ed. P. Robertshaw, pp. 271–95. James Currey & Heinemann. ——— 2009 History in Petroglyphs at the Second Cataract of the Nile: Archaeologies of the Standpoint, Chapter 2. http://arthistory.berkeley.edu/davis/Abka2.pdf. Duller, G.A.T. 2004 Luminescence Dating of Quaternary Sediments: Recent Advances. Journal of Quaternary Science 19:183–92. Dunbar, J. 1934 Some Nubian Rock Pictures. Sudan Notes and Records 17:137–67. ——— 1935 Some Nubian Rock Pictures. Sudan Notes and Records 18:303–307. ——— 1941 The Rock Pictures of Lower Nubia. Government Press (Cairo). Edwards, D.N. 2006 Drawings on Rocks, the Most Enduring Monuments of Middle Nubia. Sudan & Nubia 10:55–64. Edwards, D.N. and Ali Osman 2000 The Archaeology of Arduan Island—The Mahas Survey 2000. Sudan & Nubia 4:58–70. ——— 2011 The Archaeology of a Nubian Frontier: Survey on the Nile Third Cataract, Sudan. Mauhaus Publishing. Engelmayer, R. 1965 Bericht des Österreichischen Nationalkomitees der UNESCO-Aktion für die Rettung der nubischen Altertümer. 3. Die Felsgravierungen im Distrikt Sayala—Nubien 1. Die Schiffsdarstellungen. Denkschriften der Akademie der Wissenschaften in Wien, Philosophisch-historische Klasse 90. Evans-Pritchard, E.E. 1940 The Nuer: A Description of the Modes of Livelihood and Political Institutions of a Nilotic People. Clarendon Press. ——— 1950 Kinship and the Local Community among the Nuer. In African Systems of Kinship and Marriage, ed. A.R. Radcliffe-Brown and D. Forde, pp. 360–91. Oxford University Press. Fawzi Hassan 2010 Drawings in the Middle Nile Region (Preliminary Results). In Between the Cataracts: Proceedings of the 11th Conference of Nubian Studies, Part 2, Fasc. 1, ed. W.  Godlewski and A.  Łajtar, pp. 135–47. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean Supplement Series 2.2/1. Warsaw University. Fuchs, G. 1989 Rock Engravings in the Wadi el-Barramiya, Eastern Desert of Egypt. African Archaeological Review 7:127–53. Kluwer Academic. Gabriel, B. and T. Karberg 2011 Archäologischer Survey in der nördlichen Bayuda (Sudan)— Wadi Abu Dom und 4. Katarakt im Vergleich. Der antike Sudan. Mitteilungen der Sudanarchäologischen Gesellschaft 22:89–104.

Nubian Rock Art   1121 Gatto, M.C. 2009 Egypt and Nubia in the 5th–4th Millennia bce: A View from the First Cataract and its Surroundings. British Museum Studies in Ancient Egypt and Sudan 13:125–45. Giuliani, S. 2004 Some Cultural Aspects of the Medja of the Eastern Desert. In Nubian Studies 1998: Proceedings of the Ninth Conference of the International Society of Nubian Studies, ed. T. Kendall, 286–90. Department of African-American Studies Northeastern University. Hellström, P. and H. Langballe 1970 The Scandinavian Joint Expedition to Sudanese Nubia, v. 1: The Rock Drawings. Scandinavian University Books. Hendrickx, S. 1995 Analytical Bibliography of the Prehistory and Early Dynastic Period of Egypt and Northern Sudan. Egyptian Prehistory Monographs 1. Leuven University Press. ——— 2002 Bovines in Egyptian Predynastic and Early Dynastic Iconography. In Droughts, Food and Culture: Ecological Change and Food Security in Africa’s Later Prehistory, ed. F. Hassan, pp. 275–318. Springer. ——— 2006 The Dog, the Lycaon pictus and Order over Chaos in Predynastic Egypt. Studies in African Archaeology 9:723–49. Hendrickx, S. and W. Claes 2013 Bibliography of the Prehistory and the Early Dynastic Period of Egypt and Northern Sudan: 2013 Addition. Archéo-Nil 23:115–28. ——— 2014 Bibliography of the Prehistory and the Early Dynastic Period of Egypt and Northern Sudan: 2014 Addition. Archéo-Nil 24:191–206. ——— 2015 Bibliography of the Prehistory and the Early Dynastic Period of Egypt and Northern Sudan: 2015 Addition. Archéo-Nil 24:137–51. Hendrickx, S., J.C. Darnell, and M.C. Gatto 2012 The Earliest Representations of Royal Power in Egypt: The Rock Drawings of Nag el-Hamdulab (Aswan). Antiquity 86:1068–83. Honegger, M. 2004 The Pre-Kerma: A Cultural Group from Upper Nubia Prior to the Kerma Civilisation. Sudan & Nubia 8:38–46. Huyge, D. 1999 Bearers of the Sun. Discovering Archaeology 1:48–58. ——— 2002 Cosmology, Ideology and Personal Religious Practice in Ancient Egyptian Rock Art. In Egypt and Nubia: Gifts of the Desert, ed. R. Friedman, pp. 192–206. British Museum Press. ——— 2003 Grandeur in Confined Spaces: Current Rock Art Research in Egypt. In Rock Art Studies: News of the World, v. 2: Developments in Rock Art Research 1995–1999, eds. P.G. Bahn and A. Fossati, pp. 59–73. Oxbow Books. ——— 2005 The Fish Hunters of El-Hosh: Rock Art Research and Archaeological Investigations, in Upper Egypt (1998–2004). Bulletin des Séances, Académie Royale des Sciences d’OutreMer 51:231–49. ——— 2009a Late Palaeolithic and Epipalaeolithic Rock Art in Egypt: Qurta and El-Hosh. Archéo-Nil 19:119–29. ——— 2009b Rock Art. In UCLA Encyclopedia of Egyptology, ed. W. Wendrich. http://repositories.cdlib.org/nelc/uee/1460. ——— 2014 Review of the Rock Art of Lower Nubia (Czechoslovak Concession) and the Rock Paintings of Lower Nubia (Czechoslovak Concession), by Lenka Suková. Chronique d’Egypte 91(182):342–44. Huyge, D., M. De Dapper, D. Depraetere, M. Ismail, E. Marchi, R. Mommaerts, I. Regulski and A. Watchman 1998 Hilltops, Silts, and Petroglyphs: The Fish Hunters of El-Hosh (Upper Egypt). Bulletin des Musées Royaux d’Art et d’Histoire 69:97–113. Huyge D., A. Watchman, M. De Dapper, and E. Marchi 2001 Dating Egypt’s Oldest “Art”: AMS 14C Age Determinations of Rock Varnishes Covering Petroglyphs at El-Hosh (Upper Egypt). Antiquity 75:68–72.

1122   Henryk Paner Huyge, D., M. Aubert, H. Barnard, W. Claes, J.C. Darnell, M. De Dapper, E. Figari, S. Ikram, A. Lebrun-Nélis, and I. Therasse 2007 Lascaux along the Nile: Late Pleistocene Rock Art in Egypt. Antiquity 81(313). http://www.antiquity.ac.uk/projgall/huyge313/; accessed November 7, 2017. Huyge, D., D.A.G. Vandenberghe, M. De Dapper, F. Mees, W. Claes, and J.C. Darnell 2011 First Evidence of Pleistocene Rock Art in North Africa: Securing the Age of the Qurta Petroglyphs (Egypt) through OSL Dating. Antiquity 85:1184–93. Huyge, D. and P.  Storemyr 2013 Unique Geometric Rock Art at El-Hosh. Ancient Egypt 13:234–0. Huyge, D. and D. Vandenberghe 2011 Confirming the Pleistocene Age of the Qurta Rock Art. Egyptian Archaeology 39:21–24. Ikram, S. 2009 Drawing the World: Petroglyphs from Kharga Oasis. Archéo-Nil 19:67–82. James, D. 2012 Ambiguous Images: The Problems and Possibilities of Analysing Rock-art Images in the Egyptian Western Desert. In Egyptology in Australia and New Zealand 2009, ed. C.M.  Knoblauch and J.C.  Gill, pp. 71–84. BAR International Series 2355. Archaeopress. Jaroni, E. and E. Kuciewicz 2010 Rock Art Research in the Shemkhiya area (Fourth Cataract) in the 2007 Season. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean 19:378–84. Jesse, F. 2005 Rock Art in Lower Wadi Howar, Northwest Sudan. Sahara 16:27–38. ——— 2006 Cattle, Sherds and Mighty Walls—The Wadi Howar from Neolithic to Kushite Times. Sudan & Nubia 10:43–54. Jesse, F. and R. Peters 2009 Petroglyphs under the Sand—A Preliminary Report on the Field Season 2008/09 at the Fortress Gala Abu Ahmed. Sudan & Nubia 13:62–71. Judd, A. 2009 Rock Art of the Eastern Desert of Egypt: Content, Comparisons, Dating & Significance. Archaeopress and Hadrian Books. Kaper, O. and H.  Willems 2002 Policing the Desert: Old Kingdom Activity around the Dakhleh Oasis. In Egypt and Nubia: Gifts of the Desert, ed. R.F. Friedman, pp. 79–94. British Museum Press. Karberg, T. 2009 Die Felskunst um unteren Wadi Abu Dom. Der antike Sudan. Mitteilungen der Sudanarchäologischen Gesellschaft 20:131–40. Kleinitz, C. 2004 Rock Art and “Rock Gongs” in the Fourth Nile Cataract Region: The Ishashi Island Rock Art Survey. Sudan & Nubia 8:11–16. ——— 2007a Rock Art Landscapes of the Fourth Nile Cataract: Characterisations and First Comparisons. In Proceedings of the Second International Conference on the Archaeology of the Fourth Nile Cataract, ed. C. Näser and M. Lange, pp. 213–34. Meroitica 23. Harrassowitz ——— 2007b Rock Art and Archaeology: The Hadiab Survey. Sudan & Nubia 11:34–42. ——— 2007c For Whom the Bell Tolls: Rescue Recording of Petroglyphs and Rock Gongs in the Merowe Dam Reservoir Area of the Fourth Nile Cataract (Sudan). In African Rock Art: The Future of Africa’s Past, ed. J. Deacon, pp. 86–94. Trust for African Rock Art. ——— 2008 Soundscapes of the Nile Valley: “Rock Music” in the Fourth Cataract Region. In Studies in Music Archaeology, v. 6: Challenges and Aims in Music Archaeology, ed. A.A. Both, R. Eichmann, E. Hickmann, and L. Koch, pp. 131–46. Marie Leidorf. ——— 2009 Meroitic “Property Marks” in Fourth Nile Cataract Rock Art? A Re-evaluation of an Enigmatic Class of Graphic Markings. In Pictograms or Pseudo Script? Non-textual Identity Marks in Practical Use in Ancient Egypt and Elsewhere, ed. B.J.J.  Haring and O.E. Kaper, pp. 179–98. Egyptologische Uitgaven 25. Nederlands Instituut voor het Nabije Oosten.

Nubian Rock Art   1123 ——— 2010 Acoustic Elements of (Pre) Historic Rock Landscapes at the Fourth Nile Cataract. In Between the Cataracts: Proceedings of the 11th Conference of Nubian Studies, ed. W.  Godlewski and A.  Łajtar, Part 2, Fasc. 1, pp. 149–60. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean Supplement Series 2.2/1. Warsaw University. ——— 2012 Rock Art of the Fourth Nile Cataract: An Overview. In Proceedings of the Third International Conference on the Archaeology of the Fourth Nile Cataract, ed. H.-P. Wotzka, pp. 31–48. Africa Praehistorica 22. Heinrich-Barth-Institut. Kleinitz, C. and R. Koenitz 2006 Fourth Nile Cataract Petroglyphs in Context: The ed-Doma and Dirbi Island Rock Art Survey. Sudan & Nubia 10:34–42. Kleinitz, C. and C. Olsson 2005 Christian Period Rock Art Landscapes in the Fourth Cataract Region: The Dar el-Arab and et-Tereif Rock Art Surveys. Sudan & Nubia 9:31–38. Kołosowska, E., M. El-Tayeb, and H. Paner 2003 Old Kush in the Fourth Cataract Region. Sudan & Nubia 7:21–25. Kröpelin, S. 2004 New Petroglyph Sites in the Southern Libyan Desert (Sudan-Chad). Sahara 15:111–17. Krzyżaniak, L. 2004 Dakhleh Oasis: Research on Petroglyphs, 2003. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean 15:181–89. Kuciewicz, E. 2008 Rock Art Research in the Fourth Cataract Region: Preliminary report. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean 18:457–61. Kuciewicz, E. and M. Kobusiewicz 2012 Dakhleh Oasis Project, Petroglyph Unit: Rock Art Research 2009. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean 21:279–87. Kuciewicz, E., P. Polkowski, and M. Kobusiewicz 2011 Dakhleh Oasis Project, Petroglyph Unit: Rock Art Research. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean 23(1):229–44. Lankester, F.D. 2012 Predynastic & Pharaonic era Rock-Art in Egypt’s Central Eastern Desert: Distribution, Dating & Interpretation. Doctoral dissertation, Department of Archaeology, Durham University. http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/5909. Leclant, J. 1984 Les gravures rupestres du Gebel Gorgod (Nubie). In Origins & Early Development of Food-Producing Cultures in North-eastern Africa, ed. L.  Krzyżaniak and M. Kobusiewicz. Poznan, 299. Liszka, K. 2012 “We Have Come to Serve Pharaoh”: A Study of the Medjay and Pangrave as an Ethnic Group and as Mercenaries from c. 2300 bce until c. 1050 bce. Doctoral dissertation, Department of Near Eastern Languages and Civilizations, University of Pennsylvania. https://search.proquest.com/docview/1019282740. Ljunge, M. 2013 Beyond “the Phenomenological Walk”: Perspectives on the Experience of Images. Norwegian Archaeological Review 46(2):139–58. Lohwasser, A. 2010 Das Projekt Wadi Abu Dom Itinerary (W.a.d.I.), Kampagne 2010. Der antike Sudan. Mitteilungen der Sudanarchäologischen Gesellschaft 21:37–50. McDonald, M.M.A. 2002 Dakhleh Oasis in Predynastic and Early Dynastic Times: Bashendi B and the Sheikh Muftah Cultural Units. Archéo-Nil 12:109–20. Michaux-Colombot, D. 1992 ‘The Mḏ3y.w, not Policemen but an Ethnic Group from the Eastern Desert, Études nubiennes: conférence de Genève: actes du VIIe Congrès international d’études nubiennes, ed. C. Bonnet, v. 2:29–36. Morrow, J.P. and M.  Morrow eds. 2002 Rock Art Topographical Survey in Egypt’s Eastern Desert. Bloomsbury Summer School. Myers, O.H. 1949 Rock Drawings Found by the Gordon College Expedition in the Second Cataract of the Nile. Actes du XXI Congrès international des orientalistes, pp. 375–76. Imprimerie Nationale.

1124   Henryk Paner ——— 1958 Abka Re-excavated. Kush 6:131–41. ——— 1960 Abka Again. Kush 8:174–81. Nordström, H.-Å. 2006 The Discovery of the Neolithic in Nubia. Archéo-Nil 16:31–39. Osborn, D.J. and J. Osbornovà 1998 The Mammals of Ancient Egypt. Aris & Phillips. Otto, K.H. and G. Buschendorf-Otto 1993 Felsbilder aus dem Sudanesischen Nubien. Akademie Verlag. Ouzman, S. 2001 Seeing is Deceiving: Rock Art and the Non-visual. World Archaeology 33:237–56. Paner, H. 2003a Kerma Culture, Rock Art, Dome Graves and Other Discoveries in the Fourth Nile Cataract Region. Gdańsk Archaeological Museum African Reports 2:163–83. ——— 2003b Archaeological Survey on the Right Bank of the Nile between Karima and Abu Hamed: A Brief Overview. Sudan & Nubia 7:15–32. ——— 2014a Kerma Culture in the Fourth Cataract of the Nile. In The Fourth Cataract and Beyond: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference of Nubian Studies, ed. J.R. Anderson and D.A. Welsby, pp. 53–79. British Museum Publications on Egypt and Sudan 1. Peeters. ——— 2014b Ratowanie rytów naskalnych w dolinie środkowego Nilu. In Sztuka Afryki w kolekcjach i badaniach polskich, Muzeum Narodowe w Szczecinie, ed. S.  Szafrański, M. Kądziela, M. Tobota, M. Ząbek, pp. 409–30. Muzeum Narodowe. ——— in press Rock Art of the Fourth Cataract of the Nile. The GAME Concession. Paner, H., and Z. Borcowski 2005 Gdańsk Archaeological Museum Expedition. A Summary of Eight Seasons’ Work at the Fourth Cataract. Gdańsk Archaeological Museum African Reports 4:89–115. Petrie, W.M. 1888 A Season in Egypt: 1887. Field and Tuer. ——— 1892 Ten Years Digging in Egypt: 1881–1891. Religious Tract Society. Pluskota, K. 2003a Bir Nurayet galeria sztuki naskalnej Sudanu. Archeologia Żywa 3 (26):16–21. ——— 2003b On the Road to Bir Nurayet—Reflections on a Journey Through the Red Sea Hills. Gdańsk Archaeological Museum African Reports 2:185–90. ——— 2006 Bir Nurayet—The Rock Art: Gallery of the Red Sea Hills. Sudan & Nubia 10:2–7. Polkowski, P. 2016 Krajobraz i sztuka naskalna. W palimpseście egipskiej Oazy Dachla, Fontes Archaeological Posnanienses 16. Muzeum Archeologiczne w Poznaniu. Redford, D. and S.  Redford 1989 Graffiti and Petroglyphs Old and New from the Eastern Desert. Journal of the American Research Centre in Egypt 26:3–49. Resch, W.F.E. 1967 Die Felsbilder Nubiens. Akademische Druck und Verlagsanstalt. Riemer, H. 2009 Prehistoric Rock Art Research in the Western Desert of Egypt. Archéo-Nil 19:31–46. Rohl, D. 2000 The Followers of Horus: Eastern Desert Survey 1. ISIS. Rowley-Conwy, P. 1988 The Camel in the Nile Valley: New Radiocarbon Accelerator (AMS) Dates from Qasr Ibrim. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 74:245–48. Rozwadowski, A. 2009 Obrazy z przeszłości. Hermeneutyka sztuki naskalnej. Wydawnictwo Naukowe UAM. Sierts, W. 1968 How Were Rock Engravings Made? South African Journal of Science 64(7):281–85. Storemyr, P. 2008 Prehistoric Geometric Rock Art at Gharb Aswan, Upper Egypt. Sahara 19:61–76.

Nubian Rock Art   1125 ——— 2009 A Prehistoric Geometric Rock Art Landscape by the First Nile Cataract. ArchéoNil 19:129–50. Storemyr, P., A. Kelany, M.A. Negm, and A. Tohami 2008 More “Lascaux along the Nile”? Possible Late Palaeolithic Rock Art in Wadi Abu Subeira, Upper Egypt. Sahara 19:155–58. Suková, L. 2011a The Rock Art of Lower Nubia (Czechoslovak Concession). Charles University in Prague. ——— 2011b The Rock Paintings of Lower Nubia (Czechoslovak Concession). Charles University in Prague. Taçon, P.S.C. and C.  Chippindale eds. 1998 The Archaeology of Rock Art. Cambridge University Press. Török, L. 2009 Between Two Worlds: The Frontier Region between Ancient Nubia and Egypt 3700 BC–AD 500. Probleme der Ägyptologie 29. Brill. Tsakos, A. 2007 On the Medieval Inscriptional Material from M.D.A.S.P. In Proceedings of the Second International Conference on the Archaeology of the Fourth Nile Cataract, ed. C. Näser and M. Lange, pp. 235–46. Meroitica 23. Harrassowitz. Váhala, F. and P. Červíček 1999 Katalog der Festbilder aus der tschechoslowakischen Konzession in Nubien. Verlag Karolinum. Vermeersch, P.M., W. Van Neer, and S. Hendrickx 2004 El Abadiya 2, a Naqada I Site near Danfiq, Upper Egypt. In Egypt at its Origins: Studies in Memory of Barbara Adams. Proceedings of the International Conference “Origin of the State. Predynastic and Early Dynastic Egypt,” ed. S. Hendrickx, R.F. Friedman, K.M. Cialowicz, and M. Chłodnicki, pp. 213–76. Peeters. Verner, M. 1973 Some Nubian Petroglyphs. Acta Universitatis Carolinae Philologica Monographia 45. Universita Karlova. Vila, A. 1979 La prospection archéologique de la vallée du Nil au sud de la cataracte de Dal 11. Éditions du CNRS. Vinson, S.M. 1987 Boats of Egypt before the Old Kingdom. MA Thesis, University of Texas, Austin. http://nautarch.tamu.edu/pdf-files/Vinson-MA1987.pdf, accessed November 10, 2017. Watchman, A. 2000 A Review of the History of Dating Rock Varnishes. Earth-Science Reviews 49:261–77. Weigall, A.E.P. 1909 Travels in the Upper Egyptian Deserts. Blackwood. Welsby, D.A. 2003a Survey above the Fourth Nile Cataract. Sudan Archaeological Research Society Publication 10. BAR International Series 1110. Archaeopress. ——— 2003b The Amri to Kirbekan Survey in the 2002–2003 Season. Sudan & Nubia 7:26–32. Whitley, D.S. 2005 Introduction to Rock Art Research. Left Coast Press. Wildung, D. 1996 Die meroitische Keramik. In Sudan. Antike Königreiche am Nil, ed. D. Wildung, pp. 341–68. E. Wasmuth. Williams, B. B. 1983 Excavations between Abu Simbel and the Sudan Frontier, Part 5: C-Group, Pan Grave, and Kerma Remains at Adindan Cemeteries T, K, U, and J, OINE 5:116. ——— 1986 Excavations between Abu Simbel and the Sudan Frontier, Part 1: The A-Group Royal Cemetery at Qustul: Cemetery L, OINE 3. ——— 2014 Three Boats in the Rock Art of Akkad, Sudan, Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts 70/71:1–6.

1126   Henryk Paner Winkler, H.A. 1937 Völker und Völkerbewegungen im vorgeschichtlichen Oberägypten im Lichte Felsbilderfunde. W. Kohlhammer Verlag. ——— 1938 Rock-Drawings of Southern Upper Egypt, v. 1: Sir Robert Mond Desert Expedition, Season 1936–1937: Preliminary Report. Oxford University Press. ——— 1939 Rock-Drawings of Southern Upper Egypt, v. 2: Sir Robert Mond Desert Expedition, Season 1937–1938: Preliminary Report. Oxford University Press. Žába, Z. 1974 The Rock Inscriptions of Lower Nubia (Czechoslovak Concession) 1. Charles University of Prague.

chapter 55

A rch a eol ogica l Pr actice i n th e 21st Cen t u ry Reflecting on Archaeologist-Community Relationships in Sudan’s Nile Valley Jane Humphris, Rebecca Bradshaw, and Geoff Emberling

Introduction: Archaeology and Colonialism Archaeological practice on the African continent began in the colonial period of the 19th century, and alongside anthropology developed as both a tool and a reflection of the European empire-building agendas of the time (Trigger  1990). Racist views of African societies as primitive and lacking in culture dominated early academic discourse (Barnard 1999; Hassan 1999), and “any evidence of advanced [African] culture [was attributed] to the actions of civilized colonialists” (Trigger 1990:310). From missionaries, whose purpose was to save the souls of “heathens” through religious conversion, to administrators, who emphasized the “backward” nature of local populations to justify colonial domination, to those for whom Africa’s natural wealth and material culture was a means to fame and fortune (Lane 1999; Pwiti and Ndoro 1999), the continent’s ancient cultures and contemporary populations were ravaged by the “burdensome colonial experience” (Hassan 1999:393). Despite African independence in the mid-20th century, which marked the end of formal political colonization, decades later the practice of archaeology still appears in many parts of the continent to be operating “within a colonial paradigm” (Pikirayi and Schmidt 2016:3).

1128   Jane Humphris, Rebecca Bradshaw, and Geoff Emberling The colonial legacy is manifested in archaeological practices perhaps most obviously when it comes to foreign archaeologists’ hegemony over the investigation and interpretation of the past, and in the structural imbalances of power whereby these archaeologists often have more social, economic, and political authority in the community than community residents themselves. The development of archaeology has followed the same trajectory in Sudan. In the 19th and early 20th centuries European explorers and those traveling with TurcoEgyptian and Anglo-Egyptian armies were fascinated with Sudan’s ancient monuments, seeing these as imitations of pharaonic Egypt. They were particularly concerned with the potentially lucrative opportunities presented by “discovering” and removing rich material culture. Like others traveling and working in Africa, the Middle East, and elsewhere at that time, their preoccupation was primarily with the lives of the ancient upper classes: the kings, queens, and elites, whose ornate remains revealed insights into the wealthy and mysterious ancient civilizations of the “Other.” Indeed just a few decades after Lord Elgin removed the Parthenon marbles from the Athenian Acropolis and sold them to the British Museum in the early 19th century, Giuseppe Ferlini began dismantling royal and elite pyramids at the site of ancient Meroe in his hunt for “treasure” (Markowitz and Lacovara 1996; Wildung 1997). Almost a century later, E.A.W. Budge undertook investigations at the pyramids to collect items for the British Museum; he was closely followed by John Garstang, who worked at Meroe’s Royal City. Funders of the Meroe excavations were rewarded and encouraged to continue their sponsorship by having a choice of antiquities for their personal collections at the end of each season (Török 1997:1–10). Such events have conspicuously scarred the Sudanese landscape, from the partly destroyed pyramid fields to the mounds of excavation spoil that mark efforts to find and remove anything deemed “valuable” to Western museums and collectors.

Archaeology and Dam Building In Sudan, like elsewhere in Africa, independence and the hope of a prosperous postcolonial era has instead been an experience marred by war and famine, and characterized by a drive for rapid economic development. Although the Nile valley has not been a major zone of conflict, it has been the location of some of Africa’s largest and most controversial development projects, such as the hydro-electric dam projects at Aswan (at the First Cataract in Egypt) and at Merowe (at the Fourth Cataract in Sudan). These projects have had disastrous impacts on living populations affected by rising water levels and the creation of vast new lakes. In addition, the creation of the dams has led to thousands of years of archaeology being submerged (see papers in Näser and Kleinitz eds. 2012). The Aswan High Dam, with its reservoir stretching more than 500 km to the south and across the Egyptian border with Sudan, reached capacity in 1976. The UNESCOcoordinated “Nubian Rescue Campaign” that took place beforehand, was one of the first archaeological endeavors to document how a major economic development

Archaeological Practice in the 21st Century   1129 ­ rogram impacts archaeological remains. Local and international archaeological teams p spent significant time and resources in coordinated efforts to survey and document archaeological sites prior to the flooding of the reservoir. A number of architectural ­features were even dismantled and moved away from the lake site, including the ­temples at Abu Simbel and Philae (Khidir Abdelkarim Ahmed  2012). In Sudan, Friedrich W. Hinkel’s team dismantled and moved the temples of Aksha, Buhen, Semna East, and Semna West to the National Museum of Sudan in Khartoum. In the midst of such momentous salvage operations, as many as 120,000 Egyptian and Sudanese Nubians are estimated to have been forced to resettle in other locations because of the dam (Scudder 2003). Archaeologists at that time did not seem to specifically engage with the social catastrophe unfolding as they conducted their work. Changes in water flow, disease, loss of lifestyle, and an inability to adapt or compete with new neighbors, joblessness, food insecurity, and marginalization were just some of the life-altering consequences of the dam for many people (Scudder 2005). A similarly ruinous experience was endured by large groups of people living around Merowe some forty years later. Once again this dam project was based on the premise that large-scale access to better infrastructure (roads, schools, hospitals) and electricity, as well as new employment opportunities, would justify any regional “collateral damage.” The dam, flooding ca. 180 km along the Nile, led to the displacement of over fifty thousand people by the time of its inauguration in 2008 and their communities and way of life were destroyed (Hänsch 2012). Once again, archaeologists from international missions invested significant time and funding to attempt to document archaeological sites affected by the reservoir but did not engage in meaningful ways with the politics surrounding the dam’s construction nor sufficiently resist a program described by some, including the UN Human Right’s Council, as a human rights violation (Näser and Kleinitz 2012). Certainly this was the view held by some of the affected local communities, who interpreted archaeologists’ involvement in salvage archaeology as tacit support of the dam construction. The archaeologists were ultimately expelled by the Executive Committee of the Manasir, a group whose ancestral homeland lay in and around the Merowe area. A few years later in 2012–13, on hearing news that a series of dams would be built at the Fifth Cataract and along the Atbara River, some local community members here also expelled archaeologists (Kleinitz and Näser 2013). Events such as these, whereby “authoritative,” apparently well-funded foreign “specialists” arrive and start work without engaging with the local communities or the social context find parallels in the colonial period of Sudan’s history. Nor have they escaped the notice of international observers (Bosshard and Hildyard 2005) and archaeologists working elsewhere. Recognizing the severity of the situation in Sudan, in 2012 members of the Society of Africanist Archaeologists (SAfA) voted to pass a motion, which stated: Reaffirming its commitment to an African archaeology that is both socially engaged and socially responsible, and mindful of its own code of ethics, SAfA calls on its members to refrain from participating in fieldwork in areas to be affected by the proposed dams on the Middle Nile (Sudan) or other countries until and unless those

1130   Jane Humphris, Rebecca Bradshaw, and Geoff Emberling projects enjoy the support of the resident local population and have been the subject of independently conducted publically available Environmental Impact Assessments. (https://safa.rice.edu/sites/g/files/bxs1871/f/SAfAbusinessmeeting2012Toronto%20 %281%29.pdf SAfA minutes of business meeting, 2012)

The same year, the British Institute in Eastern Africa (BIEA) released a similar statement (https://preservethemiddlenile.wordpress.com). Both institutions were seeking to clarify how archaeologists should conduct themselves when working in the midst of contested development projects, and the importance of engaging with the aims and wants of local communities. Of course large-scale economic development programs, and the salvage archaeology approaches employed, generate varied responses—compare the above statements with Welsby 2008, for example—and not just from archaeological practitioners. Many Sudanese residents supported the Merowe Dam and have significantly benefitted from the development of infrastructural services. Dam construction is thus a paradigmatic example of an event that can radically divide archaeological, as well as local, national, and international communities. Yet archaeologists must nevertheless navigate and engage with the issues it raises: this is certainly our personal perspective (see below). The expulsion of salvage archaeologists further demonstrates that the roles, responsibilities, and impacts of archaeologists in Sudanese communities require careful consideration: “The case of the Middle Nile dams illustrates that archaeological work cannot take place outside of its contemporary social and political context, and that there is no neutral stance that archaeology can claim” (Kleinitz and Näser 2013:179). Indeed within the context of rapid population growth, climate change, forced migration and development, the cases of Aswan and Merowe serve to teach archaeologists that disengaged and apolitical archaeological approaches that do not challenge the colonial elements of our, practice, is not only unethical but also increasingly unsustainable.

Archaeology and Decolonization in Sudan In many regions of Africa, sometimes in reaction to similar circumstances, decolonizing approaches based (partly) on collaborative community projects are a growing aspect of archaeological work (see for example papers in Schmidt and Pikirayi 2016). These approaches attempt to overcome perceptions and practices entrenched by colonial legacies and to actively create more participatory and mutually beneficial environments. Concomitant concerns with archaeological ethics (Meskell and Pels  2005) have also produced more politically and economically responsible archaeologies elsewhere, for example in the United States, Australia, New Zealand, and South America. Heritage Studies (or proximate subjects) are being given increasing space in educational syllabi, and topics such as archaeological ethnography (Hamilakis and Anagnostopoulos 2009;

Archaeological Practice in the 21st Century   1131 Bradshaw  2017) are gaining traction. A number of other approaches—involving all, none, or some of the above—have also developed, and include “community engagement” (Humphris and Bradshaw 2017), “community archaeology” (Belford 2014) and “public archaeology” (Moshenska 2017). Because these approaches can differ both theoretically and methodologically, the terminology used to refer to community-based and community-focused work can be confusing; each project has their own titular preference. However, as the next paragraphs will show, distinctions may broadly be made between “community engagement” programs which are exogenously-conceived, and “community archaeology” programs, distinguished from “engagements” by their collaboratively conceived nature (see Humphris and Bradshaw 2017:205–206, for a further exploration of terminology related to such work). Compared to some other regions of Africa, community-based approaches in Sudan seem to have lagged behind. Yet more recently, and partly in reaction to the events associated with the Merowe Dam, some archaeologists have chosen to embark on community engagement programs. In 2013, the major financial investment of the Qatar-Sudan Archaeology Project (QSAP), which funded about 40 archaeological teams working in Sudan, provided financial means for archaeological teams to expand their research and develop additional facets of their projects, such as a greater involvement with local communities (http://www.qsap.org.qa/en/about-us.html; accessed 17 Mar 2018). QSAP’s broad mandate to promote tourism (Bradshaw 2015) has been interpreted in a wide variety of ways by different projects, and no specific guidelines for degree or methods of community engagement were provided. Nevertheless, since being supported and encouraged by QSAP, a number of archaeological missions have, for example, published booklets that explain the history of the site they work on. Such public-orientated booklets can be found detailing the archaeological history of Amara West, Kawa, Khandaq, El-Kurru, Dangeil, Meroe, and Domat el-Hamadab to name a few. Other teams have produced children’s books. The Amara West mission’s children’s book is titled, Life in the Heart of Nubia: Abri, Amara East and Ernetta Island (Fushiya et al. 2017), of which 650 were disseminated. The Mograt Island mission’s children’s book is titled, Discovering Mograt Island Together, of which one thousands were disseminated (Tully and Näser 2015; also see Tully 2014, 2015 for further details). Still others have used new technologies to engage with the community; as part of their efforts to val­or­ize and engage with local heritage spaces on Mograt Island, Kleinitz and Merlo (2014) used GIS movement-tracking technology and collaborated with local community members to map the island’s important mnemonic points. Other educational engagements have also taken place, such as such as The Cultural Heritage & Museums Festival, a collaborative event co-organized by the British Council in Sudan and the National Corporation for Antiquities and Museums in Sudan (NCAM). Co-managed by Dr. Mahmoud Suliman Bashir of NCAM, this event was held at the National Museum in Khartoum in 2014. The aim of this festival was to create a more effective learning environment for the museum’s school-aged visitors, to train young Sudanese archaeologists in the field of heritage management and the theory behind the museum’s role in education, and to highlight to decision-makers the need for

1132   Jane Humphris, Rebecca Bradshaw, and Geoff Emberling the museum to develop a separate education department (Mahmoud Suliman Bashir 2016, pers. comm). Other archaeologists are known to engage with and support local communities on an economic level; since the late 1990s, the Humboldt University (Berlin) team at Musawwarat es-Sufra, have sought to help community residents gain access to water, education and medical treatment. The team has also trained members of the local community in aspects of conservation and construction in order to provide local people with an economically viable profession; indeed, a number of trainees have successfully gone on to use these valuable skills elsewhere. On a more philanthropic level, the education of many of the children around the site has been (and still is) funded privately by team members, their families, and friends (Scheibner 2004; Thomas Scheibner pers. comm.; also see Baker 2017 for an example from the Fourth Cataract). While not an exhaustive list, it is clear that some archaeological teams in Sudan are making attempts at undertaking meaningful community engagements. However, these activities cannot for the most part be considered collaborative or systematic; by and large activities focus upon providing token educational supplements, some of which fall short even in that capacity (widely disseminated Arabic translations of booklets are rare). Indeed, the extent to which some archaeological teams working in Sudan subscribe to or are working towards a vision of “community archaeology” or “decolonizing” archaeological practice, is unclear. Because funding bodies rarely insist upon such endeavors and often will not fund them, and because these more modern visions of archaeological praxis are not yet a mandatory part of many archaeological training courses, community-related endeavors remain peripheral and “supplemental” to most archaeological work in Sudan and beyond, which still revolves primarily around the discovery of the material past (Smith and Waterton 2009). It is within this context, and with the aim of shifting our attention away from our traditional roles and towards our responsibilities, that we present our attempts to decolonize our practice through the development and implementation of community engagement activities that we see as central to our evolving role as archaeological practitioners in the 21st century. Recognizing the complex circumstances within which archaeologist-community relationships unfold in Sudan’s Nile valley, our community engagement programs have been conducted in two different social, economic and political landscapes, one around the site of Meroe Royal City, and one ca. 270 km to the northwest of Meroe around the site of El-Kurru. Both sites are incorporated within UNESCO World Heritage listings.

Case Study 1: Meroe (jane humphris and rebecca bradshaw) Meroe Royal City and its associated pyramids, both listed under the UNESCO World Heritage Site of the Island of Meroe, lie ca. 200 km north of Khartoum. The sites are situated to the east of the Nile, just north of the Wadi el-Hawad, within River Nile

Archaeological Practice in the 21st Century   1133 State. Important urban centers including Shendi and Atbara, located at the nexus of several pastoral corridors, ensure the area benefits (relatively speaking) from trade and infrastructural development. Transport networks via rail and road are comparably reliable, and the area’s proximity to the cities and large towns provides local residents with access to goods and services. Meroe’s importance as a significant ancient Kushite center (from the 8th century bce to the 4th century CE) has, for the last one hundred years, also attracted the attention of a number of archaeological teams. At the time of writing, at least five teams were working in the Meroe area.1 Meroe’s pyramid cemeteries lie ca. 5 km to the east of the Nile, near the Khartoum to Atbara highway but not surrounded by houses. In contrast, within the immediate vicinity of Meroe Royal City (henceforth “Meroe”) are a number of densely knit villages that form the core area for the community engagement strategies outlined below (Fig. 55.1). Four of these lie to the south of Meroe: Kejeik, Bejrawiya South, Hamadab, and the small railway town of Kabushiya. The residents of these villages predominately self-identify as belonging to the Ja’aliyin, one of Sudan’s two largest kinship groups (gabaayil s. gabila, often translated as “tribe/s,” for example by Maliñski (2014). Due to the region’s busy commercial nature, the area has also become home to other Sudanese groups. While a number of residents are engaged in non-farming professions (teachers, managers, traders), livelihoods are largely geared towards the agricultural sector, with farms situated between the villages and the banks of the Nile. To the east of the villages the riverine landscape quickly turns to arid scrubland before it meets the highway, which runs parallel to the river. In the space between the highway and the villages, referred to here as Upper Bejrawiya, a number of semi-nomadic/pastoralist settlements have developed over the past thirty years or so, and these made up a fifth location for our community engagement activities. The residents of these settlements predominantly self-identify as belonging to the Manasir and Hassaniya gabaayil and were attracted to the area’s proximity to busy towns and markets, as well as to major livestock routes that lead north to Egypt and east to Port Sudan and the Red Sea. Approximately 10 km north of Meroe is the principally Ja’aliyin village of Jebel Umm Ali. Although situated relatively far from the study area, archaeologists have been working at Jebel Umm Ali for a number of years to investigate the Kushite stone quarries within the jebel itself, and so this area was consequently incorporated as a sixth and final location for the initial community engagement strategies. It should be noted that between the towns and villages defined here lie numerous smaller villages and homes. Restrictions on time and money mean that the strategies outlined below have only recently directly incorporated these smaller communities, although efforts have always been made to disseminate event invitations indiscriminately across as wide an area as possible. This is a keystone of our strategy because the social make-up of the area is particularly heterogeneous, with significant economic, social, political, and religious inter- and intra-community variation existing between the residents (Humphris and Bradshaw 2017). One example of this heterogeneity that has far-reaching relevance for our project is that far from identifying with “Nubian” or “Kushite” archaeology (Arabic “athar”; what Smith 2006 would call our “authorized heritage discourse”), each gabila has its own genealogies, livelihoods, and sets of material culture representing their “heritage” (Arabic “turath”; see Bradshaw 2017).

Figure 55.1  Map showing the locations mentioned in the text. Map: Frank Stremke.

Archaeological Practice in the 21st Century   1135 UCL Qatar began archaeological research at Meroe in 2012 and initiated community engagements in 2013. As described in Humphris and Bradshaw 2017, we use the term “community engagement” according to the definition given above, but we also use it to signify shared activities and the two-way exchange of knowledge. Our initial community engagement strategies were thus created to address what we perceived as priority needs: meaningful relationships with the local residents built on trust and transparency and, consequently, an environment within which both the archaeologists and residents can effectively learn and benefit from each other. These engagements were positioned as a place from which we would gradually develop well-informed, contextually sensitive, and truly collaborative community archaeology. In 2013, the team organized an educational lecture introducing the team and the UCL Qatar research at Meroe, including why and how the work was being conducted, and presenting some preliminary results. A public camel race was also organized in collaboration with the DAI Hamadab team. In 2014, a more comprehensive two-way learning and engagement program began, with meetings held in Kejeik, Hamadab, and Kabushiya. Importantly, and based on discussions and advice provided by Sudanese colleagues, separate meetings were held for men and women, and took place in the evenings after sunset so as not to disturb the residents’ farming, household, and religious duties. The aim of the consultation meetings was to understand what residents might want from archaeology in future (if anything: as we have explained elsewhere, we did not assume anyone had any specific feelings towards archaeology). Such information was ascertained through the use of open discussions and an anonymous questionnaire. The questionnaire was conducted in Arabic by trained Sudanese team members, and included closed questions to ascertain information about local demography as well as open-ended questions about knowledges and experiences of, as well as aspirations for, archaeology. The questionnaire was designed in this way to provide the team with an understanding of residents’ education levels, age groups, and occupations, as well as their current attitudes towards archaeology and archaeologists, to see where the two might intersect. Questions about the future of archaeology, for example regarding tourism and the ways in which residents might like to be involved in archaeology, were also included. Each meeting included a detailed PowerPoint presentation introducing the new team and providing more detailed information about the research aims and objectives and the results generated so far. The meetings ended with extended open discussions, whereby two-way questioning allowed the development of greater mutual understandings. Based on positive feedback and the important information collected during the 2014 meetings, three more meetings were held in Jebel Umm Ali, Bejrawiya South, and Upper Bejrawiya in 2015. Just over one thousand people attended the 2014–15 meetings, split almost evenly between men and women, and over two hundred interviews were conducted (see Humphris and Bradshaw 2017 for a detailed assessment and critique of these meetings). Statistical analyses of data collected through the questionnaires using Nvivo computer software are being used by the UCL Qatar team to inform the development of relevant and sustainable community archaeology, but this has, naturally, not been challenge-free. One of the most fundamental developments in our approach to community engagement was the establishment in 2015 of a dedicated community engagement team, which

1136   Jane Humphris, Rebecca Bradshaw, and Geoff Emberling has ranged from three to seven members (always Sudanese and often university graduates, led by Rebecca Bradshaw). The establishment of this team increased our seasonal capabilities, precipitating an acceleration of our community engagements. More ambitious strategies could also be implemented, most notably a week-long Iron Smelting Festival that was conducted with the aim of combining scientific research with community engagement (Charlton and Humphris 2017; Humphris et al. 2018). This experimental archaeology event allowed the team to explain the ancient iron production technologies practiced at Meroe in an interactive way to local residents. The festival was designed and implemented in collaboration with Sudanese colleagues, whose work was indispensable to making the event accessible to as many Sudanese people as possible. Being cognizant of the distances between some of the villages and the festival site, a bus was hired which was timetabled to bring school children and male and female community groups to the festival site. Invitations were sent to local and national media outlets, heritage groups, universities, and stakeholders in Khartoum, including the staff of NCAM and Sudan’s National Museum. Upon their arrival to the festival, visitors were first invited to the education tent where a presentation was delivered about the Kushite period of Sudanese history and about the ancient technologies used by iron smelters at Meroe. The smelting process and the research conducted by the team was explained and the significance of the results so far was discussed. Festival attendees had unprecedented opportunity to ask questions and handle objects needed for iron production before moving to the experimental replica Meroitic furnace workshop to watch and talk to iron smelters at work. Almost one thousand people attended the festival, including over three hundred school children, and a one-hour documentary film in both Arabic and English is freely available online (English: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SPU8Uwa-jBQ; Arabic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PBCrKLx0R0I&t=1367s). Screenings of the Arabic version of the documentary took place in the six villages later that same year, and around one hundred Arabic DVDs were handed out. Two bi-lingual children’s books, Sudan’s Ancient History: Hwida and Maawia Investigate Meroe’s Iron and Hwida and Maawia Investigate Apedemak designed as fun, interactive, and educational resources, have been published (Humphris 2017, 2018). Over 1,500 of these books have been disseminated throughout the communities around Meroe as part of the wider community engagement (Fig. 55.2), and multiple copies were provided to each of the local school libraries. Most recently, the team facilitated several local heritage festivals in the area to celebrate the living heritage of the Meroe region. Hundreds of people brought objects and storeis to share with each other and with the UCL Qatar team, who documented these for a new bi-lingual book currently in press: Sudan Today: Exploring the Cultural Heritage of Meroe’s Communities. Again, hundreds of copies will be distributed around the region. The bedrock of all these activities, however, are the seasonal meetings we have with Local Popular Committees, the end-of-season parties with throw with UCL Qatar’s local employees and their families, the lectures and presentations we receive from local residents about their histories and heritage sites (Fig. 55.3), as well as our team’s attendance at numerous weddings, funerals, and graduations, as it is these experiences and memories that will underpin the development of a growing sense of trust and understanding between local communities and the archaeologists.

Archaeological Practice in the 21st Century   1137

Figure 55.2  Abdelrahman Mohamed es-Sheikh of Hamadab talking to the UCL Qatar team about the history of the village. Photograph: Rebecca Bradshaw.

Figure 55.3  The UCL Qatar children’s book being disseminated around the Meroe area.

1138   Jane Humphris, Rebecca Bradshaw, and Geoff Emberling In addition to the community engagements outlined above, and with direct relevance to their development, our engagement strategies have involved capacity-building, media engagement, and diaspora outreach. Each year since 2013, at least two Sudanese university students and/or graduates have joined the project to receive training and practical experience. In 2015, a field school was held that included one student from each of the archaeology departments in Sudan (housed at the universities of Khartoum, Nilain, Bahri, Shendi, and Dongola). During this intensive five-week program, the students participated in classroom lectures before applying their knowledge to practical tasks in the UCL Qatar dig house as training exercises, and then on site; they received specific training from various specialists involved in the project, as well as those employed by the DAI as part of the Domat el-Hamadab and the Qatari Mission to the Pyramids of Sudan (QMPS) research teams, from test-pitting and aerial photography, to landscape survey. Extensive practical assistance is also provided to the students regarding CV-writing, publishing, and grant-writing. Archaeological equipment has also been donated to some of the aforementioned universities and to the National Museum in Khartoum; in 2013 the latter was also the site of a UCL Qatar-run conservation training course for staff that covered topics such as disaster management. The team’s media outreach strategies strive to promote Meroe locally and abroad, and disseminate the results of our work as widely as possible. Television broadcasters and newspaper journalists have been regularly invited to Meroe for interviews (e.g., 2017 Al-Jazeera documentary at http://bit.ly/2sjmWxo) and have in turn invited team members to Khartoum; for example, in 2015 the authors did an interview with Capital FM 96.1 radio which was repeatedly broadcast and did an extensive two-part interview with Sudan Vision national newspaper. These activities sought to complement the host of Arabic media stories about the project and reach English-speaking residents of Sudan. In a bid to disseminate our work and promote Meroe as a location, we also screened a French subtitled version of the festival documentary (above) at the 10th International Archaeological Film Festival in Nyon, Switzerland, in 2017. Even further afield, and conscious of the strong relationships that exist between Sudanese residents and the diaspora, we have also made efforts to expand the community engagement activities in Qatar. To this end, meetings were held in 2016 at the Sudanese Cultural Centre in Doha; in 2017 a public lecture about the Sudan project at UCL Qatar in Doha was broadcast live and has since been placed online with Arabic subtitles; and in 2018, one hundred copies of the children’s book Hwida and Maawia Investigate Meroe’s Iron were officially presented to Qatar’s new National Library and to the Children’s Library of the Museum of Islamic Art, where a book reading for National Children’s book day was also held. The community engagements at Meroe described here have taught us a considerable amount and represent a substantive step forward in transforming traditional archaeological practice in Sudan. However, we recognize that we still have significant room for improvement and a considerable way to go: although the two-way meetings, festivals, and multi-media productions were a success, and have demonstrated to community residents that we are willing and desire to share knowledge and work transparently, we now need to dedicate greater space to attempting to develop “community archaeology.”

Archaeological Practice in the 21st Century   1139 A major first task will be to broaden our understanding of what constitutes “heritage” from local perspectives. But we have learned many lessons: for example through developing our understandings of and engaging with national and international geopolitics and economics, as well as local issues such as access to educational facilities and the allocation of basic resources and inter-community dynamics, we have been able to identify and address problematic aspects of our economic practices, such as our under-employment of women and our over-employment of pastoralists (see Bradshaw 2017, 2018). With the development of our community engagement strategies and the lessons we are learning, we hope to continue to work towards co-creating collaborative community archaeology in Meroe.

Case Study 2: El-Kurru (geoff emberling) El-Kurru is a village located on the Nile about 400 km north of Khartoum and about 15 km southwest of the towns of Karima and Merowe. In antiquity, it was a royal burial ground of kings and queens of Kush, including most of the kings who ruled over Egypt as its 25th Dynasty (ca. 750–653 bce). After the collapse of the empire of Kush after 300 ce and the rise of Nubian Christian kingdoms in the 6th century, this area was part of the kingdom of Makuria, which ruled through a time of greatly increased settlement and prosperity until its collapse in the 15th century. The people who live in El-Kurru village today mostly identify themselves as Shaiqiya,2 an Arabic-speaking Muslim ethnic group whose documented history extends back to the 16th century, when they established their independence from the Funj Sultanate of Sinnar. Their historical genealogies trace their descent from an ancestor named Shaiq who came from Arabia. On the other hand, place names and local dialect have led some scholars to suggest that some of the population descended from the medieval Nubian kingdoms (Spaulding 1990), while acknowledging some immigration from the Arabian Peninsula. The archaeological site at El-Kurru was first located by the Royal Prussian expedition of Lepsius in 1844 (Lepsius 1913, v. 5:254–55) and first excavated by George Reisner in 1918–19, when the names of the kings and queens buried there were first identified and its historical importance recognized by archaeologists. Today, the site is part of a UNESCO World Heritage site—“Gebel Barkal and the sites of the Napatan Region.” A new archaeological project at the site co-directed by Geoff Emberling and Rachael Dann begun in 2013 (Emberling and Dann  2013; Emberling et al.  2015; Dann and Emberling 2016) has aimed to provide broader archaeological and historical context for the royal burials. A second new project at the site, directed by Professor Abbas Sidahmed Mohamed-Ali, began in 2014 and aimed to protect the site and prepare it for a clearer presentation to visitors. The current projects began without any explicit goals for community engagement beyond that of a standard (and thus, implicitly, colonial) archaeological field research

1140   Jane Humphris, Rebecca Bradshaw, and Geoff Emberling project—we intended to conduct our research and we hoped for good working relations with the community. Emberling had previously directed an archaeological excavation at Tell Brak in northeastern Syria, and his informal (and, in retrospect, uninformed and uncreative) efforts to engage local workers in discussions about how the project could be meaningful for them beyond simple employment was entirely unsuccessful. And while some researchers in Sudan took a lesson from the experience of working in the politically and socially charged atmosphere of the Merowe Dam (4th Cataract) salvage project, as noted above, Emberling did not derive any inspiration for community archaeology from his work in that region either. Yet a combination of research design, local culture, personal relationships, funding from the Qatar-Sudan Archaeological Project with its broad mandate for projects to contribute to tourism development, and broader movements in fields including heritage studies and museum studies have ultimately resulted in a field project that is increasingly engaged with and committed to archaeology in and with the community. This brief overview traces the initial steps in that process, including recounting some implicit assumptions that turned out to be mistaken if not actively unhelpful. Emberling’s portion of the current project began with attempts to relocate elements of ancient settlement around the royal cemetery that Reisner had found but had not excavated, documented completely, or published. Timothy Kendall (1999) had published three elements of ancient settlement from Reisner’s field diaries, and there were two other presumed funerary temples that Reisner had excavated, but even the location of these remains was not clear. Our first approach to this problem was to use archaeological technology—multispectral satellite images and geophysics, combined with topographic survey and walking survey of the area, most of which is now within the modern village of El-Kurru. We also asked people in the village if they knew of any ancient remains, and they initially led us to a series of possible features, none of which was substantial.3 As we got to know people in the village and they came to overcome their concern that we were simply looking for buried gold, we met a few older people who remembered stories their fathers had told them of working with Reisner. One older man—Hassan Mohamed—was able to draw a plan of a rock-cut well that was exactly the same as the plan in Reisner’s diary. We realized that some people in the village were interested in the work we were doing and also that we would need to gain their trust to enable meaningful relationships to develop. Team members were initially quite careful about imposing our notions of heritage on people in the village, who in fact didn’t seem to care much about the archaeological site in their midst. Many archaeological projects begin with the proposition that we want local communities to care about local archaeological remains so that they will help us in the job of preserving them. This idea has a colonial aspect to it: it does not grant that local communities have agency, but rather assumes that we archaeologists can tell them what they should think is important. Members of Nubian-speaking communities frequently present themselves as the descendants of ancient Kush, but the Shaiqiya tend not to. The changes from Christianity to Islam and from Nubian to Arabic language, and the Shaiqiya’s historical narrative about their origin on the Arabian Peninsula, all contribute to the sense that Kush is not a part of their heritage.

Archaeological Practice in the 21st Century   1141 In our second season at El-Kurru (2014), a National Geographic film crew came to document our excavation for a film that would (problematically/controversially) appear as “Rise of the Black Pharaohs” (2015). We were excavating the burial chamber of the largest pyramid at the site (which Reisner had not excavated) and I was working underground with our foreman Mansour Mohamed Ahmed, who is also one of the guards of the site for NCAM: These are my ancestors. My culture and civilization comes from them. I am a part of them. We’re late. We should have been looking and learning from them a long time ago.4

While this is obviously the view of just one member of the community, he is an unusually connected (and influential) community member, and his views are certainly shared by others in the village. Beginning in 2015, the El-Kurru project was funded by QSAP. That year, we had two meetings with the men from El-Kurru who were working on the excavation—one to show the “Rise of the Black Pharaohs” and the other to explain, finally, what we had been aiming to do the last three years on the site. While the men seemed to enjoy the film— largely when they could recognize someone from the village on screen, since it was not in Arabic—they were extremely engaged during the forty-minute talk in the village we arranged in the “(Men’s) Club of Upper Kurru.” About one hundred people showed up for a talk with translation by my friend and colleague Mahmoud Suliman Bashir, who was working that year as our inspector. I gave an overview of our work and highlighted a few issues that I thought might be particularly interesting and relevant—like the fact that finds from Reisner’s excavation were in the Museum of Fine Arts in Boston, or the fact that until relatively recently the village had been inhabited by Christians. The men’s questions showed a real depth of knowledge and interest that were surprising to us at the time. They asked about the ancient name of El-Kurru and asked if there was anything that could be done about the objects from El-Kurru being in Boston. When I said that we would not be able to bring the objects back, they accepted that answer. They were much more animated about two questions I hadn’t anticipated. First, they asked where the bones of the famous kings were now (with the implication being that they were indeed beginning to consider them their ancestors). To this I replied that the tombs had been looted in antiquity and all that remained of the original burials were fragments of bone scattered in and around the burials. So, they said: the bones of the kings are in our “jerrycans” (plastic buckets we used to remove sediment from the excavation). The second question also took me by surprise—they wanted to know if I thought the ancient Kushites had darker skin than people living in the village today. I said that it was difficult to tell and showed a painting from the tomb of an Egyptian viceroy of Nubia during the New Kingdom that depicts people from Nubia with a wide range of skin tones. Their own theory was interesting, however—due to the origin story of the Shaiqiya, they assumed that they had more Arab ancestors than the Kushites would have, and so people in the village today should be lighter-skinned. I said it was possible, that it was not my own research question, and I thought to myself that this was a heritage

1142   Jane Humphris, Rebecca Bradshaw, and Geoff Emberling narrative that I had not been aware of before making this attempt at more formal (and better translated) conversation. The impetus for our next step toward an engaged community archaeology came from outside archaeology. One of the programs of the African Studies Center at the University of Michigan is the African Heritage Initiative. Its members had developed collaborations with colleagues in Ghana and South Africa and had developed perspectives and practical applications for heritage work (Peterson et al. 2015). Some of its members were also connecting notions of community archaeology with the “visitor-centered” practices of museum development, which also aims to make connections with communities rather than simply providing information (Silverman 2015). A 2016 visit by two members of this group—Ray Silverman and Kodzo Gavua—led to conversations in El-Kurru between the archaeological project and village elders (Fig.  55.4) and school teachers around heritage more broadly, not simply the archaeological version of heritage. The key question for the future direction of our heritage work in the community turned out to be: “would you like visitors to the archaeological site to learn something about your village and your culture?” As at most archaeological sites, tourism can be alienating for both tourists and locals, whether they realize it or not. When we are tourists, we visit places for our own purposes—sites fit into our own narratives, and the proc­ess can allow and even encourage us not to engage with people who live in those places. At the same time, we might have imagined that in a relatively traditional village like El-Kurru, interaction with the outside world might not be welcome. But on the contrary, people in El-Kurru were highly enthusiastic about giving visitors to the site a chance to learn about local culture, particularly about the idea that visitors to the site might have a chance to eat local food like qurasa—the thick pancake with various savory and sweet sauces that is claimed to be a Shaiqiya specialty. And thus, our community archaeology project was broadened beyond archaeology to encompass modern culture and the setting of the village itself (relating in some ways to the notion of “ecomuseums”—Davis 2011). We are currently (as of 2018) making plans for a community heritage center that will realize this vision. Our steps toward community archaeology in El-Kurru have been imperfect. Among our biggest regrets and remaining challenges is our failure to fully engage women in the village in our discussions. We made a number of attempts to make presentations to women, but our early efforts failed to overcome local cultural norms that have women’s activities more closely tied to home than to public space. This is clearly an important area for future work, and one that co-director Rachael Dann is taking on.

Conclusion As discussed at the start of the chapter, archaeology on the African continent has historically operated within a colonial framework, and Sudan is no different. However, unlike many other countries in Africa where certain practitioners have been reflexively trying

Archaeological Practice in the 21st Century   1143

Figure 55.4  Conversation with village elders in El-Kurru. Mansour Mohamed Ahmed ­standing. Photograph: Raymond Silverman, 2016.

to decolonize their practice via programs of community engagement, Sudan has lagged behind, despite pivotal events and recent financial injections from Qatar. The community engagements described above are some of the ways in which we and others are trying to emulate and contribute to the work of colleagues elsewhere on the continent, whose decolonial approaches we feel are imperative for archaeology in the future. While we recognize the traditional role of an archaeologist is to conduct archaeological research, we strongly believe that this mandate is outdated and has so far “failed communities within which archaeologists work” (Pikirayi and Schmidt 2016:19). The two case studies presented here, and the community-related work undertaken by other archaeological projects in Sudan, provide examples of archaeologists attempting to decolonize their practice, or proximate engagement activities. Whether that sense of responsibility is stimulated by a professional code of conduct (such as that provided by SAfA: https://safa.rice.edu/sites/g/files/bxs1871/f/SAfAEthicscode%20amended%20 2016.pdf, see “Code of Ethics”) or by experiences of divisive events such as the dam building mentioned earlier, or by “post-colonial guilt” and personal value systems (Cooper 2006), these actions clearly go beyond the traditional role of an archaeologist. While “many archaeologists decline a radical critique of their material and discursive practices, because it is these very practices that ensure smooth functioning of our disci-

1144   Jane Humphris, Rebecca Bradshaw, and Geoff Emberling pline” (Starzmann 2012:412), we believe that privileged, well-funded academics can no longer practice the traditional modus operandi, keeping our heads down in our trenches. We should all be aware of our roles and responsibilities as we work in the 21st century, and we should want to operate in a more engaged, socially responsible manner. The growing body of literature critiquing the role of and approaches used by archaeologists working in Africa, in addition to the adoption of collaborative community archaeologies by archaeologists across the globe, leaves practitioners in Sudan with no excuse but to do the same. We hope, therefore, that in the future, decolonizing community engagement in Sudan will move from an optional and peripheral archaeological activity to become part and parcel of the central archaeological mandate.

Notes 1. At Meroe Royal City: Dr. Hwida Mohamed, University of Khartoum; Dr. Jane Humphris, UCL Qatar; Dr. Simone Wolf and Dr. Hans-Ulrich Onasch, German Archaeological Institute (DAI). At the Meroe pyramids: Dr. Mahmoud Suliman Bashir (NCAM), and Dr. Alexandra Riedel (DAI); at the nearby site of Domat el-Hamadab: Dr. Pawel Wolf, German Archaeological Institute (DAI). 2. Transliterated in various ways: Sheygya, Shaigia, Shaiqiya, Shaikiya, also in the adjectival form Shaiqi. See Burckhardt  1822; Nicholls  1913; Ahmed  S.  Al-Shahi  1972; Hayder Ibrahim 1979; Spaulding 1990. 3. The issue of translation is not often addressed in discussions of community archaeology but it is obviously essential for communication. In the case of the El-Kurru project, we relied on a number of translators. Our Sudanese NCAM inspectors in successive years (Murtada Bushara, Mahmoud Suliman Bashir, Fakhri Hassan, and Sami Elamin) were with us throughout the season. Our Sudanese archaeological colleague, Professor Abbas Sidahmed Mohamed-Ali, has been extremely helpful, as have members of his team, particularly his student Hanaa Hafiz. Three young men in El-Kurru village (Ibrahim Sidahmed, Anwar Mahajoub, and Bakri Abdelmoneim) have taught themselves English and have translated numerous conversations. The foreign archaeologists who are a part of the El-Kurru project have generally not spoken Arabic very well, although Emberling could carry on conversations about archaeological and some other subjects. 4. At 27:48, and using the film’s subtitles, which are incomplete: https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=s7dYtXuUGWY)

References Cited Ahmed S. Al-Shahi 1972 Proverbs and Social Values in a Northern Sudanese Village. In Essays in Sudan Ethnography Presented to Sir Edward Evans-Pritchard, ed. I.  Cunnison and W. James, pp. 87–104. C. Hurst. Baker, B. 2017 Discovery, Philanthropy and Bioarchaeology in Sudan. https://asunow.asu. edu/20170502-global-engagement-asu-bioarchaeologist-sudan-philanthropy. Barnard, A. 1999 Images of Hunters and Gatherers in European Social Thought. In The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Hunters and Gatherers, ed. R.B.  Lee and R.  Daly, pp. 375–83. Cambridge University Press.

Archaeological Practice in the 21st Century   1145 Belford, P. 2014 Sustainability in Community Archaeology. Online Journal in Public Archaeology 1:21–44. Bosshard, P. and N. Hildyard 2005 A Critical Juncture for Peace, Democracy, and the Environment: Sudan and the Merowe/Hamadab Dam Project. https://www.internationalrivers.org/resources/a-critical-juncture-for-peace-democracy-and-the-environmentsudan-and-the-merowe-hamadab (accessed August 14, 2020). Bradshaw, R. 2015 Will Qatar’s Investment in Ancient Pyramids bring Tourists to Sudan? Al-Monitor (December 7). ——— 2017 Beyond Identity: The Socio-Economic Impacts of Archaeology on a NonDescendent Community in Sudan. Doctoral dissertation, School of Oriental and African Studies, University London. ——— 2018 Fāida shenū? (What Is the Benefit?): A Framework for Evaluating the Economic Impacts of Archaeological Employment. Sudan & Nubia 22:188–97. Burckhardt, J.L. 1822 Travels in Nubia. John Murray. Charlton, M.F. and J. Humphris 2017 Exploring Iron Making Practices at Meroe, Sudan—A Comparative Analysis of Archaeological and Experimental data. Journal of Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences (https://doi.org/10.1007/s12520-017-0578-2). Cooper, D.E. 2006 Truthfulness and “Inclusion” in Archaeology. In The Ethics of Archaeology: Philosophical Perspectives on Archaeological Practice, ed. C. Scarre and G. Scarre, pp. 131–45. Cambridge University Press. Dann, R.J. and G.  Emberling 2016 El Kurru 2015–16: Preliminary Report. Sudan & Nubia 20:35–49. Davis, P. 2011 Ecomuseums: A Sense of Place, second edition. Continuum. Emberling, G. and R.J. Dann 2013 New Excavations at El-Kurru: Beyond the Napatan Royal Cemetery. Sudan & Nubia 17:42–60. Emberling, G., R.J. Dann, and Abbas Sidahmed Mohamed-Ali 2015 In a Royal Cemetery of Kush: Archaeological Investigations at El-Kurru, Northern Sudan, 2014–15. Sudan & Nubia 19:54–70. Fushiya, T., S. Ahmed, H. Sorta, and F.H. Taha 2017 Life in the Heart of Nubia: Abri, Amara East and Ernetta Island. British Museum Amara West Research Project. Available at: https:// britishmuseumamarawestblog.wordpress.com/2017/04/06/amara-west-a-new-book-forchildren/. Hafsaas-Tsakos, H. 2011 Ethical Implications of Salvage Archaeology and Dam Building: The Clash between Archaeologists and Local People in Dar al-Manasir, Sudan. Journal of Social Archaeology 11(1):49–76. Hamilakis, Y. and Anagnostopoulos, A. 2009 What Is Archaeological Ethnography? Public Archaeology: Archaeological Ethnographies 8 (2–3):65–87. Hänsch, V. 2012 Chronology of a Displacement: The Drowning of the Manâsîr People. In “Nihna nâs al-bahar—We are the People of the River”: Ethnographic Research in the Fourth Nile Cataract Region, Sudan, ed. C.  Näser and C.  Kleinitz, pp. 179–228. Meroitica 26. Harrassowitz Verlag. Hassan, F.A. 1999 African Archaeology: The Call of the Future. African Affairs 98:393–406. Hayder Ibrahim 1979 The Shaiqiya: The Cultural and Social Change of a Northern Sudanese Riverain People. Studien zur Kulturkunde 49. Franz Steiner. Humphris, J. 2017 Hwida and Maawia Investigate Meroe’s Iron (children’s book). Akkadia. Humphris, J. 2018 Hwida and Maawia Investigate Apedemak. Akkadia. Humphris, J. in press Sudan Today: Exploring the Cultural Heritage of Meroe’s Communities. Akkadia.

1146   Jane Humphris, Rebecca Bradshaw, and Geoff Emberling Humphris, J. and R.  Bradshaw 2017 Understanding the “Community” before Community Archaeology: A Case Study from Sudan. Journal of Community Archaeology & Heritage 4(3):203–17. Humphris, J., Charlton, M.F., Keen, J., Sauder, L. and F. AlShishani Iron Smelting in Sudan: Experimental Archaeology at the Royal City of Meroe. Journal of Field Archaeology. Kendall, T. 1999 The Origin of the Napatan State: El Kurru and the Evidence for Royal Ancestors. In Studien zum antiken Sudan, ed. S. Wenig, pp. 3–117. Meroitica 15. Harrassowitz. Khidir Abdelkarim Ahmed 2012 From Dam to Dam: Encounters at the Cataracts. In “Nihna nâs al-bahar—We are the People of the River”: Ethnographic Research in the Fourth Nile Cataract Region, Sudan, ed. C. Näser and C. Kleinitz, C, pp. 253–68. Meroitica 26. Harrassowitz Verlag. Kleinitz, C. and S. Merlo 2014 Towards a Collaborative Exploration of Community Heritage in Archaeological Salvage Contexts: Participatory Mapping on Mograt Island, Sudan. Der Antike Sudan. Mitteilungen der Sudanarchäologischen Gesellschaft zu Berlin 25:161–75. Kleinitz, C. and C. Näser 2013 Archaeology, Development and Conflict: A Case Study from the African Continent. Archaeologies: Journal of the World Archaeological Congress 9(1):162–91. Lane, P. 1999 Archaeology, Nonconformist Missions and the “Colonization of Consciousness” in Southern Africa, c. 1820–1900. In Case Studies in Archaeology and World Religion, ed. T. Insoll, pp. 153–64. BAR International Series 755. Archaeopress. ——— 2011 Possibilities for Postcolonial Archaeology in Sub-Saharan Africa: Indigenous and Useable Pasts. World Archaeology 43(1):7–25. Lepsius, K.R. 1913 Denkmäler aus Aegypten und Aethiopien Text, v. 5. J.C. Hinrichs. Markowitz, Y. and P. Lacovara 1996 The Ferlini Treasure in Archaeological Perspective. Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt 33:1–9. Maliñski, P. 2014. Some Remarks on the Role of Volcanic Craters in the Traditional Economy of the Manasir Tribe of the Bayuda Desert. Gdańsk Archaeological Museum African Reports 11:79–88. Meskell, L. and P. Pels eds. 2005 Embedding Ethics. Berg Publishers. Moshenska, G. 2017 Introduction. Public Archaeology as Practice and Scholarship Where Archaeology Meets the World. In Key Concepts in Public Archaeology, ed. G. Moshenska, pp. 1–13. UCL Press. Näser, C. and C.  Kleinitz 2012 The Good, the Bad and the Ugly: A Case Study on the Politicisation of Archaeology and its Consequences from Northern Sudan. In “Nihna nâs al-bahar—We are the People of the River”: Ethnographic Research in the Fourth Nile Cataract Region, Sudan, ed. C. Näser and C. Kleinitz, pp. 269–304. Meroitica 26. Harrassowitz Verlag. Näser, C. and C.  Kleinitz eds. 2012 “Nihna nâs al-bahar—We are the People of the River”: Ethnographic Research in the Fourth Nile Cataract Region, Sudan. Meroitica 26. Harrassowitz Verlag. Nicholls, W. 1913 The Shaiķíya: An Account of the Shaiķíya Tribes and of the History of Dongola Province from the XIVth to the XIXth Century. Hodges, Figgis & Co. Peterson, D., K. Gavua, and C. Rassool (eds). 2015 The Politics of Heritage in Africa: Economies, Histories, and Infrastructures. International African Institute, London and Cambridge University Press. Pikirayi, I. and P.R.  Schmidt 2016 Introduction: Community Archaeology and Heritage in Africa: Decolonizing Practice. In Community Archaeology and Heritage in Africa: Decolonizing Practice, ed. P.R. Schmidt and I. Pikirayi, pp. 1–21. Routledge.

Archaeological Practice in the 21st Century   1147 Pwiti, G. and W. Ndoro 1999 The Legacy of Colonialism: Perceptions of the Cultural Heritage of Southern Africa with Special Reference to Zimbabwe. African Archaeology Review 16(3):143–53. Schmidt, P.R. and I.  Pikirayi eds. 2016 Community Archaeology and Heritage in Africa: Decolonizing Practice. Routledge. Scudder, T. 2003 The Aswan High Dam Case. Unpublished manuscript. http://people.hss. caltech.edu/~tzs/Aswan%20High%20Dam%20case.pdf. ——— 2005 A Comparative Survey of Dam-induced Resettlement in 50 Cases. With the statistical assistance of John Gay (unabridged version of the methodology and quantitative analysis with all tables): http://people.hss.caltech.edu/~tzs/50%20Dam%20Survey.pdf. Scheibner, T. 2004 Das Projekt “Symbiosis Man-Archaeology.” Inhaltliche, konzeptionelle und methodische Ansätze einer archäologischen Entwicklungshilfe. In Neueste Feldforschungen im Sudan und in Eritrea. Akten des Symposiums vom 13. bis 14. Oktober 1999 in Berlin, ed. S. Wenig, pp. 131–51. Meroitica 21. Shankland, D. 1996 Çatalhöyük: The Anthropology of an Archaeological Presence. In On the Surface: Çatalhöyük 1993–95, ed. I. Hodder, pp. 349–58. McDonald Institute. Silverman, R.A. ed. 2015 Museum as Process: Translating Local and Global Knowledges. Routledge. Smith, L., Uses of Heritage. Routledge. 2006. Smith, L., and E. Waterton eds. 2009 Heritage, Communities and Archaeology. Duckworth. Spaulding, J. 1990 The Old Shaiqi Language in Historical Perspective. History in Africa 17:283–92. Starzmann, M.T. 2012 Archaeological Fieldwork in the Middle East: Academic Agendas, Labour Politics and Neo-Colonialism. In European Archaeology Abroad: Global Settings, Comparative Perspectives, ed. S.J. van der Linde., M.H. van den Dries., N. Schlanger, and C.G. Slappendel, pp. 401–14. Sidestone Press. Trigger, B.G. 1990 The History of African Archaeology in World Perspective. In A History of African Archaeology, ed. P.T. Robertshaw, pp. 309–19. James Currey. Tully, G. 2014 Community Archaeology on Mograt Island: Sharing Spaces, Understanding Sites. Der Antike Sudan. Mitteilungen der Sudanarchäologischen Gesellschaft zu Berlin 25:155–60. ——— 2015 Community Archaeology in Sudan: Discovering Mograt Island Together. Der Antike Sudan. Mitteilungen der Sudanarchäologischen Gesellschaft zu Berlin 26:201–204. Tully, G. and C. Näser 2015 Discovering Mograt Island Together. Berlin. Welsby, D. 1996 The Kingdom of Kush: The Napatan and Meroitic Empires. British Museum Press. ——— 2008 Dams on the Nile: From Aswan to the Fourth Cataract. Sudan Studies 37:5–18. Wildung, D. 1997 Meroitic Treasure. In Sudan: Ancient Kingdoms of the Nile, ed. D. Wildung, pp. 301–40. Flammarion.

Index

Note: Page references followed by a “t” indicate table; “f ” indicate figure. AAArC. See African Archaeology Archive Cologne Aachen Cathedral  809 Abba Athanasios  767 Abbas Sidahmed Mohamed-Ali  1139 ‘Abd el-Karim  902 ‘Abdallab federation  876, 879, 896, 897 Abdalla ibn Sa’d  761 ‘Abd el-Qadir I (king)  897 ‘Abd el-Qadir II (king)  897 ‘Abdella Jamaa  879 Abd el-Qadir  795 Abdelrahman Ali Mohamed  13 Abdelrahman Mohamed es-Sheikh of Hamadab 1137f Ab-Heregil 744 Abka  1108, 1115, 1116 Abkan  113, 127, 290 pottery 259 Abnormal Hieratic  663 Abourni (king)  715 Abraham (king)  762 Abri-Delgo Reach  833 Ab Sayal site HP 696  1099f abstraction in art  624, 626, 629 Abu Ahmed  136 Abu Ballas trail  181, 263, 264f, 999 Abu Geili  941 sorghum evidence from  942f Abu Hamed  58, 59, 147, 671, 1053 Abu al-Makarim  840 on Dongola  810 on Pachoras  815 on Soba  817 Abuncis 715 Abu Negila  766

Abu Oda  850 Aburni (king)  760, 790, 819 Abu Simbel  388, 423, 499, 1129 Great Temple of Ramses II at  1092 Jebel Barkal image at  457 Abu Tanqura Bahri  1110 Abu Zayd el-Hilali  903 El-Abwab  837, 896 Abyad Plateau  54 Abydos  129, 132, 133, 169, 479, 480, 484 Kushite building activity at  476 acacia woods  514 iron furnaces fueled with  987 account texts, medieval  777 acculturation  289, 301–3 C-Group and  174–75 Pan-Grave culture and  229, 296 theories of  234–35 Acheulian  2, 83–86, 85f, 252 El-Adam (phase)  254, 255 Adams, William Y.  35, 36, 38, 831, 848, 1053, 1059 Adikhalamani (king)  500, 501, 522 Lower Nubia and  637 Adindan 238 ‘Adlan (king)  897 administrative texts, in Nubian  797 Adulitana II  532, 677 Affad 91 African Archaeology Archive Cologne (AAArC) 252 African Heritage Initiative, University of Michigan 1142 African iconography  519 African Studies Center, University of Michigan 1142

1150   index Afro-Asiatic languages  653–55, 1071 Afrocentric movement  30 Afyeh 132 agate 962 Agatharchides of Cnidus  520, 679, 698, 702, 704, 705 agriculture 132–33 cash-crop  514, 533, 943 diversification and specialization  936–40 early 933–35 Eastern Desert and  689 flood cycles and  931, 933 iron tools for  989 in Kush  440 in Meroitic heartland  514 Meroitic Kingdom innovations in  940–43 in Neolithic  152 pastoralists and  234 Post-Meroitic reorganization  940–43 riverside 514 savannah and  935–36, 941–42 seasonality of  932, 933f agro-pastoralism  514, 530 A-Group  10, 34, 125, 138–39, 144f, 290–91, 713, 1056 Early A-Group pottery  290 caravans and  166 cattle engravings  919 cemeteries of  134, 136 ceramics from  130 C-Group origins and  159 complexity of  126–27 defining 143–44 disappearance of evidence of  136, 153 figurines from  1038, 1039 funerary panorama  126 funerary rituals  134 gift exchange and  1003 languages of  655 in Laqiya  259, 262 pastoralism and  152 politics of  132 Pre-Kerma pottery and  145–47 Qustul and  722 rock art and  1096 Terminal A-Group  146, 147 wine jars  938

women in  1016 X-Group links to  719 Ahhotep (queen)  174, 188, 189f, 191 Ahmed Mahmoud el-Batrawi  1052 Ahmed Mohamed Ali el-Hakem  13 Ahmes 328 Ahmes Pennekhebet  328 Ahmose (king)  327, 328, 331, 378, 701 Ahmose Nefertari  188, 189f Aithiopia(ns)  435–36, 438, 504, 701–2 Classical writing on  697–98 Aithiopika (Heliodorus)  707 ‘Ajib the Great  897 Akane, battle at  499 akerataheils 685 Akhenaten (pharaoh)  464, 492 Akin 812 Akinidad (prince)  530, 632 Akrakamani (king)  504 Aksha 336 Aktisanes (king)  348, 433, 701 Alara (king)  399–401, 400f, 418 Alexander Romance 707 Alexander the Great  701, 703 Alfreda Nile  316f, 320 Ali Karrar  824 ‘Alim 522 Al Jerar (phase)  256, 258 alluvial deposits  73 interpreting 67 Alodia  829, 838 alphasyllabary 663 Alwa  536, 678, 701, 767, 788, 829, 847 art of  866–68 architectural decoration  867 architecture 867 craftsmanship  868, 868f wall painting  868 Christianity and  760, 762 investigations of  831, 832 language use and literacy in  801–2 Makuria and  764 pottery 848 power in  817–18 regional characteristics  837–38 Amanakhatashan (queen), pyramid chapel of 616f

index   1151 Amanikhareqerem (king)  352, 354, 524 Amani-nataki-lebte (king)  435, 498 Amanirenas (queen)  524 Amanishakheto (queen)  351, 607, 680 Garstang inscription of  555 palace of  531, 533 representations of  64n19, 524, 525f stela of  611f, 621, 624, 649n19 tomb of  9 visual style and  621 Amanislo (king)  579f Amanitaraqide (king)  607 Amanitore (queen)  351, 1022, 1035, 1036f Amun Temple and  354, 468, 531, 555 Bark Stand  610f building program by  525 Hathor chapel and  531 Lion Temple and  613f, 1020f Napata and  468 pyramid chapel  616, 617f, 619f reign of  524, 525, 531, 533, 638, 641 Amannote-erike (king)  352, 440 Amun-Ra and  400 desert nomads and  405, 436, 438 Eastern Desert and  675 Meroe and  545, 546, 552 royal legitimation and  356, 357 temple incomes and  359 ‘Amara Dunqas (king)  879, 897 Amara el-Nasri  735 ‘Amara II (king)  897 Amara West  336, 1059, 1061 figs in  937 Amara West mission  1131 Amarna 492 garden products in  937 Amarna period, elite gift exchange during 996 Amasis 434 amazonite 962 ambulatory kingship  518 Amenemhat I (king)  172, 182, 294 Amenemhat II (king)  183 Amenemipet (king’s son)  335, 336 Amenemnekhu (king’s son)  331 Amenenmipet (king’s son)  336 Amenhotep (priest)  413

Amenhotep-Huy (king’s son)  377, 461 Amenhotep I (pharaoh)  328, 329, 333–35 Amenhotep II (pharaoh)  332, 374 Amenhotep III (pharaoh)  301, 333, 334, 347 Jebel Barkal and  461, 463 Luxor and  463 Amenhotep IV (pharaoh), Jebel Barkal and 461 Amenirdis I or II  496 Amenirdis I  412–13, 483, 1024 Amenirdis II  422, 494, 1024 Amenope (deity)  349 Amesemi (deity)  519, 611f amethyst 962 mines for  283 Amod 715 amphorae 1004 ‘Amr 761 amulets 600 production of  608 Amun (deity)  383, 428n6, 547, 700–701 anthropomorphic  348–49, 454f caves and mountains and  358 characteristics, prerogatives, and functions 356–58 as creator  358 cult and temple organization  358–60 entourage of  354 Great Enclosure of Musawwarat es-Sufra and 610 holy cities in Napata area and  350–51 ithyphallic  348, 452–55 of Jebel Barkal (Napata)  351, 366n1, 451–61, 454f, 455, 466 of Karnak  449, 452, 454f, 465, 466 Nubia and  350–56 origins 343–44 politico-religious background for cult of 355–56 as provider of lands and victories  358 as provider of water and flood  357, 366n1 ram-headed 345f, 346f, 367n2, 452, 453, 454f, 1043 cult of  347 origins of  344–47 unfinished sculpture of  622f royal legitimation and  356–57

1152   index Amun (deity)  (cont.) solarized 348 as Sun god  467 temple at Jebel Barkal  348, 351, 461, 464 temple at Meroe  553, 554–56, 555f triple inheritance and  473n4 Amun of Pedeme (deity)  820 Amun-Ra (deity)  406f, 439, 455, 457f, 459f, 484 Amun-Ra-Horakhty-Atum (deity)  348, 466 Amun-Ra of Kawa (deity)  399, 400 Anatolia 996 Anba Hadra monastery  841 Anchorite Grotto  817, 823 Anderson, Wendy  159 angareeb (bed)  737 Anglo-Egyptian Condominium administration  318, 1074 Ānhotep (king’s son)  336 Ani 302 Aniba  238, 276 Cemetery N at  158, 159, 160f, 162f pyramids at  590 tomb SA-38 in  413 animal corrals  152 animal deposits, interpreting  915–16 animal sacrifices  220, 722, 727, 916, 1046 Ankhtifi (nomarch)  169, 170 Anlamani (king)  351, 356, 422–23, 467, 551 Blemmyes and  654 Burahayu and  675 Anna (St.)  809, 823 anorthosite 960 El-Ansam (phase)  258, 259 antelopes 1075 anti-Kushite rebellions  983 Antiochus I  703 Antiquities and Museum Ordinance of 1905 33 Antiquities Ordinance of 1999  13, 41 Antiquities Service  34 Antony 501 Anubis (deity)  578, 595–97 Anukis (deity)  378 Apadana 435 Apa Evagrius  779 Apa Ezaias  779 Apa Pachom  779

Apedemak (deity)  519, 519f, 523f, 626, 942f iron and  987 lions and  519f, 610, 611, 641 temples to  525, 531, 534, 987, 988f. See also Lion Temples. Apepi (king)  187, 188, 430n43 Apophis (deity)  381 Apostles of Makuria  809 appropriations, art and  624, 639–42 aquifers 60 Arabian-Nubian Shield in Paleozoic period  53 Red Sea Rift split of  54 Arabic  653, 788, 798, 800, 880 nomads speaking  877 in Sudan  888 Arab nomads  877, 878 Arakakhataror (prince)  531 Arbaji 877 archaeobotanical record early agriculture and  933 preservation, recovery, and state of evidence 928–30 sites for  930f–32f Archaeological Museum of Gdańsk  16, 17, 18 Archaeological Survey of Nubia  34–35, 1054 archaeological surveys  309–11 archaeometallurgical record  977, 978, 982, 984 slag heaps and  979 Archaic Greece  402 archaizing periods  641 architectural decoration Alwa 867 Makuria 8th century  855 9th-12th centuries  858 6th-7th centuries  853 Nobadia 850 architecture Alwa 867 Makuria 8th century  854–55 9th-12th centuries  858 6th-7th centuries  852–53 13th-14th centuries  865 in Nobadia  849–50

index   1153 Arduan Island  145 storage pits at  149 Areika  10, 274, 278 Arekadakheto, funerary stela of  665f Arensnuphis (deity)  504, 641, 642 El-Arib (phase)  137 Arikankharor (prince)  521f, 531, 611f, 616, 621 stela of  637 Aristagoras of Miletus  701 Aristotle 701–2 Arizona State University and University of California Expedition  1053 Arkamani I (king)  403, 501, 518, 520, 522, 576, 592, 607 Arkamani II (king)  641 Lower Nubia and  637 pyramid chapel of  617f Arkell, Anthony  12, 13, 33, 81, 101, 731, 732 Arkin 8 (site)  84, 85 Armant 237 cemetery in  137 pottery from  138f Arminna 776 Arminna West elite burials at  618 graffito in  327 X-Group and  719 Arnekhamani (king)  351, 522, 661 arrowheads 256 art 847 culture reflected by  606 indigenous features in  624 Makuria 8th century  854–57 9th-12th centuries  857–62 6th-7th centuries  851–53 13th-14th centuries  862, 863, 865–66 materials 607–8 Meroitic period Early 636–38 Late 639 Middle 638–39 Napatan 636 production of  621–23 Artekana 486 arterial plaques  1060

Aryamani (king)  414–15, 417, 433 Asasif  479, 480, 481f, 483, 486 Ashur-uballit II (king)  422 Ashurbanipal (king)  421–22, 491 Askut  279, 285, 374, 383–88 cooking vessels from  1046 figurines from  1040, 1040f, 1041f Nubian material culture at  383–84, 384f Aspelta (king)  351, 422–23, 435, 440 Enthronement Stela  403, 404f, 405 Meroe and  517 assimilation  369, 372, 375–83, 605 Assiut 290 Assmann, Jan  397, 399, 404 Assyria  418–22, 442 Kushites driven from Egypt by  467, 475, 491, 493 Assyrianization 421 Aswan  289, 764, 927 Anba Hadra monastery  841 Kashta inscription at  418 Meroe and  502 Nubia Museum in  37, 1052 quarries at  960 Aswan Dam. See dams archaeological activity and  310 Aswani 679 Atalmo 677 Atbai  233, 241, 436 Atbara River  63, 64, 68, 961 Acheulean dispersion and  84 headwaters 51 Kushites and  692 Meroe and  512 monthly discharge  66f summer rains and  931 Atenists 452 Aterian group  88, 252–53 Atlanersa (king)  422–23 Atum (deity)  348, 455, 457, 464 Augustus (emperor)  491, 501, 503, 504, 706, 707 Autochthonous Mountain Dwellers  1093 automoloi  435, 436 Awatib 514–15 Awlād Kanz  766 Awshaq 240

1154   index Axum  548, 558, 683, 708 trade and  1008 Axumites  532, 534, 535, 732, 733, 759 Eastern Desert textual sources from 676–77 Aydhab 688 ‘Aysha (princess)  902 Ayyubids  820, 836 Baaijens, Arita  1103 ba-bird statues  599–600, 618, 620f, 623, 627, 628, 634, 648n12, 1026 Bab Kalabsha  718, 834 Babylon  421, 422, 431n50 Bacchus 715 Back-to-Africa migration  94 Badarian culture  258 Badi (king)  897 Badi II (king)  897 Badi IV (sultan)  900 Baghirmi 902 Bahr el-Ghazal  436 Bakenwerel 348 Ballana  692, 715, 721, 727, 831 tomb  80, 722, 723f, 724, 725 tomb  95, 724 X-Group and  722–26, 723f Ballana culture  713 banded agate  962 Banganarti  766, 847, 851 investigations of  831 Lower Church at  816, 821 Raphaelion at  818, 821, 822 Banū Ja’d  766 El-Baqar phase  258, 259 Baqt treaty  761, 765, 876, 877, 879, 881 baraka  882, 883 El-Barga cemetery  910, 1061 Neolithic and Mesolithic populations at 115–16 barley  514, 528, 934, 935 in Neolithic contexts  152 Barqat Kuluf  313 Basa  514, 522 Basement Complex  51–53, 58, 955, 960 gold and  961 Bastu 836

Batare (queen)  579f Batn el-Hajar  132, 173, 271, 279, 833, 835, 837 monasteries at  840 Battle of Actium  501 Battle of Raphia  705 Bayuda Desert  60, 532, 941, 1074, 1079, 1101 trade routes through  998 Bayuda Project  1101 bead nets  482 Beckett, H.W.  1052 bed burials  483, 724, 727, 737 bedrock 55 beehive tomb  735 beer  943, 945, 1045 beer jars  743, 744, 751, 945 Begrawiya. See Meroe Beit el-Wali temple  374 Beja  532, 654, 676–79, 788, 876, 878, 1079 Bekenranef/Bocchoris of Sais  421 Belly of Rocks. See Batn el-Hajar Beni ‘Amr  897 Beni Hasan  170 Beqe/Boqh 715 Beraga 436 Berber  524, 528f, 594, 738f, 838, 877, 1061 beads from  1005 trade and  1006, 1006f trade routes and  998, 1000 Bergheiligtum 718 Berta 893 Bes (deity)  387, 717, 1044 Beset (deity)  1044, 1044f B-Group 10 Bible 779 BIEA. See British Institute of Eastern Africa Bietak, Manfred  159, 232, 233, 239, 240 Biga Island  830 Bilad es-Sudan  877, 879 Bint ‘Ayn esh-Shams  898 bioarchaeology 1051 biological relationships  1055–57 paleopathological analyses  1054–55 of skeletal remains from ancient Nubia 1057–61 Bioarchaeology Field School, Amara West 1061

index   1155 biological relationships  1055–57 Bion of Soloi  547 Birgid 894 Bir Kiseiba, domestic cattle in  909 Bir Nurayet  684f, 1103–4 Bir Sahara depression  86, 130, 252, 291 Aterian at  88 Clayton rings at  262 Site BS-14  86 Bir Sahara East  87, 253 Bir Tarfawi  87, 88, 252, 253 Aterian at  88 black cotton soils  512 black incised bowls  163, 163f bladelet industries  91 blade technology  89 Blemmyan period  812 Blemmyes  713–15, 759, 788–90, 829, 834, 835, 1079 Axumites and  532 Cushitic languages and  654–55 Eastern Desert and  674–76, 678–80, 692, 760 invasions by  534 at Qasr Ibrim  718 Roman depictions of  707 Blue Nile  2, 63, 64, 69f, 309, 1081 flood phases  71f headwaters 51 Holocene environments  70 Holocene flood history of  67–69 landscapes and  1074 Meroe and  512 monthly discharge  66f Roseires Dam and  20 summer rains and  931 boats  998, 1000–1001, 1001f in rock art  1107, 1111, 1113 bodies approaches to  1033 commensal 1045–46 crystalized 1042–43 culture and  1034 female  1035, 1036 figured 1038–41 gender and  1025–27 hybrid 1043–45

ornamentation 1042 perceiving 1038 perspectives on  1034 Boma Plateau  1075 Bonnet, Charles  213, 215, 220, 313, 823, 1053 Book of Law  405 Book of the Dead  455, 583 Booth, Charlotte  302 borderlands 492 Boro Mabang  902 B.O.S. project 252 boundaries 492 bound prisoners  610 Brachiaria spp.  929 bread 943–45 Breasted, James Henry  566 Brides of the Dead  1039 British Council in Sudan  1131 British Empire India and  380–81 Sudan and  32–33 British Institute of Eastern Africa (BIEA) 1130 British Museum  11, 1053, 1058, 1060, 1061 broad bean  934, 941 bronze  608, 961 Bronze Age  165, 699 crop diversification in  937 Meroitic Heartland and  515 palace economies collapse in late  996 Red Sea harbors and  671 broomcorn millet  941 Brown, James A.  36 Bruce, James  8, 548, 566, 697 Brugsch, Emil  658 bucrania  112, 113–14, 296, 911, 911f, 912, 913, 916, 920, 1110 as trade evidence  1002 Budge, E.A. Wallis  11, 33, 34, 566, 1128 Buhen  187, 192f, 277, 278, 280 stela at  191 Temple of Horus at  190 temples at  330 Buhen horse  193 building patterns, in X-Group period  718 Bulala 902 bulk produce  979

1156   index Burahayu 675 Burckhardt, Jean Louis (or Johann Ludwig)  8, 548 burial beds 483 chambers 570 chapels  221–22, 595 culture 484–85 decoration of  614–18 elite 618 non-elite 618 royal  614, 616, 618 offerings 737 practices adoption of Egyptian  381 Kushite 482–83 “making places” and  1079 at Meroe  516 in Meroitic heartland  524 in Meroitic Period  590 Nubian 384–87 Post-Meroe Period  735–37, 740 women and  1028–29 X-Group 719–21 rituals  134, 915 ba-statue 599–600 cattle in  910–15 cult of the dead and  595–99 of Kerma  216, 218–19 mortuary equipment  600–601 treatment of corpse  601–2 social organization and patterns in  573–76, 575f stela 597 in Makuria  795 reliefs 634 temples 223f traditions, in Meroe  592–94 Busiris 700 Butana  310, 941, 1081 Central  512, 522 Eastern 522 Southern  512, 515 Western  512, 535, 1081 Butana Group  936 Butzer, Karl  68 Buzon, Michele  1060

Byzantine period  812 Byzantium, Persia war with  760 Cailliaud, Frédéric  8, 9f, 30, 549, 657 cairns 1079 calcrete 92 calendar circle  259 caliciform beaker  113, 114f, 259 Cambrian period  53 Cambyses (king)  701 campaign of  436, 698 Kush invasion by  700 camels  693, 1002 public races  1135 in rock art  1101, 1102f, 1104, 1111, 1114 cancer (disease)  1060 cap crown  465f caravans 731 donkey 1001 Egyptian 166–67 Carboniferous period  53 cardiovascular disease  1060 carnelian  961, 962, 1004, 1042 carob 939f Carr, E.H.  401, 405 Carruthers, William  42 cartouches 614 cash-crop agriculture  514, 533, 943 cassiterite 961 catch crops  941 Cathedral of Paulos  815 cattle 909 distribution of deposits  921f in funerary rituals  910–15 horn-shaping 918 marking hides  918 in rock art  916–20, 917f, 920, 1098, 1100f, 1101, 1104, 1111, 1114 sacrifices of  916 cattle bucrania  113 Cattle Complex  915 “Caucasoid” features  1056, 1057 causality, historical  401–2 cave-like burials  735–37 Çelebi, Evliya  810, 880 cemeteries A-Group  134, 136

index   1157 Armant 137 bucrania in  911–12 cattle skulls or horns in  910 C-Group 161–62 Commoners’ Cemeteries  532, 533 of Dakka Plain  134 dynastic change and  434 Ghaba 113 H29 913 Hillat el-Arab  388–90 identity and  886 Islam and  883–86 Kadruka 910 Kerma  148, 149 Late Meroitic period  533 making places and  1079 Meroe  563, 565 Missiminia  411, 415, 1057 Northern Dongola Reach P37  913 paleopathological analyses of bodies from 1054 Pan-Grave  232, 237–39 Qustul  126, 133–35 sequence of  434 Three Kingdoms period  832 Tunqala West  134 Centre of Mediterranean Archaeology, University of Warsaw  17 Centro Mallqui–The Bioanthropology Foundation 17 ceramics. See pottery CeRDO missions  325n2 cereals  934, 935, 941 C-Group  10, 34, 137, 371, 713, 912, 1056, 1061 acculturation and  174–75 Amun and  367n2 bucrania 913 caravans and  166–67 cattle engravings  919 cattle hide marking  918–19 cemeteries 161–62 climate change and political upheavals 168–72 Egypt and  164–67, 172–73, 188, 291–93 emergence of  144–45 ethnic identity of  161–64 female figurines from  1026

figurines from  1038 First Empire of Kush and  186–87 fortresses and  273, 276, 279, 283 funerary cult and  595 Handessi and  263 history of research on  157–59 KA and  181, 220 Kerma and  148–49, 164 Kush and  173–74, 193–94 Lower Nubia and  157–58 as mercenaries  169–71, 292–93, 303 origins of  159 pastoralism and  152, 159–60 as performers  293 personal decoration  164 political unification and  167–68 pottery  162–64, 163f, 293, 743 rock art and  917, 1098 sites of  158f at SJE Site 35  375 tattooing and  1026 trade and prosperity and  171 tumuli of  593 warriors in  160 Chad 895 Chalcedonian Christianity  762 chalcedonic quartz  961 chalcedonies  961, 962 Champollion, François  31 chapel decorations  616 chapels, Kerma  221–22 charcoal 1077 chariots  200n41, 378 Charlemagne 809 Chephren’s Quarry  960 Children’s Library of the Museum of Islamic Art 1138 Choiak processions  617f Christian Nubia  536, 807 Bergheiligtum and  718 history 829 sources for  790–92, 792f Qasr Ibrim in  819–20 rock art from  1097 visual expression in  847 historical background for  848–49 women in  1025

1158   index Christianity 829 Alwa and  760 architecture and  839 bread and  945 Chalcedonian 762 in Dongola  762, 763–64 Eastern Desert and  679, 686–87, 692 Egypt and  767 landscapes and  1080 Nobadia and  762 Nubia and  8, 760, 766, 789 Rome and  779–80 social innovations and  840 visual expression and  847 chrysocolla 961 church architecture  762 cicatrization  1038, 1039 Classical art, Meroitic art influences from 640–42 Classical Greece  402 Classic Meroitic period  520, 524–32 Classical writers  7–8 Classic Christian period, Soba in  817 Classic Kerma. See Kerma Classique (KC) Claudius Ptolemaeus  548 clay, art with  608 clay mixing  986 Clayton rings  262 Cleopatra (queen)  501 climate change  74, 75, 89, 129 C-Group and  168–72 eastern Sahara and  514 Late Holocene  514 Meroitic heartland and  535–36 clothing  1026, 1027 clubhouses 718 cobras 368n6 code-switching 800 coffins 602 Cold War  36 collaboration 375–83 Collaborative Research Centre ACACIA 252 collective identity  291 colonial encounters  372 colonial era, Nubian cultural features in  383 colonial hegemony  36 colonialism, ancient  116, 187, 189, 415

New Kingdom and  369–73, 375, 377–84, 386–90, 590, 595, 597 colonialism and archaeology  32–36 in 21st century  1127–28 legislation and  13 colonial narratives  371 Colorado-Kentucky Expedition  1059 Colorado Nubian Expedition  1058 colossal sculpture  641 column statues  642 Combined Prehistoric Expedition (CPE)  81, 252, 253 commodity crops  936 common millet  941 community archaeology  1131, 1132, 1138 community engagement  1135–36 Constantinople  760, 762, 764, 780, 812, 852 Constantinopolitan Creed  793 consumption 995 cooking sherds  938 cooking traditions  943–45 copper  514, 1007 art with  608 mining and smelting  961, 972 coppicing 987 Coptic  760, 789 code-switching and  800 creeds in  793 Eastern Desert sources in  674 language contact and  799–801 literary evidence in  778, 781 in medieval Nubia  794–96 coral stone  688 Cornelius Gallus (prefect)  502, 706 coronation rituals  357 cotton 942 trade in  1006 cotton trees  527, 942 CPE. See Combined Prehistoric Expedition craft production  529f craftsmanship Alwa  868, 868f Makuria 8th century  857 9th-12th centuries  862 6th-7th centuries  853 13th-14th centuries  866 in Nobadia  851

index   1159 cranial traits  1056–57, 1059 craniometric analysis  1061 creator, Amun as  358 creolization 289 Cretaceous period  54 criosphinx statues  406, 406f crisis of 6200 BCE  116 crocodile 368n5 cross in square structures  858 Crowfoot, John W.  11 Cruciform Building  810, 853, 854f Cruciform Church  809, 858, 859f, 860f crystalized bodies  1042–43 cultivation seasonality of  932, 933f summer rainfall  933 cult of the dead  595–99 cult rituals Amun 358 rock art as  1106 cultural appropriation  638 in Meroitic art  639–42 cultural assimilation  376 cultural borrowing  383 cultural ecology  1073 cultural entanglement  289, 372, 383–88 Cultural Heritage & Museums Festival 1131 culture art reflecting  606 body and  1034 identity and  492, 1034 interations 238 Cushitic languages  654–55 Cyprus 420 Dabnarti 274 Dagash Dam  21 El-Daheira 512 Dahshur 293 DAI. See German Archaeological Institute dais room M 266  555 Dakhla Oasis  84, 85, 258, 262, 263, 999 rock art and  1093 Dakin (king)  897 Dakka  501, 503, 504 Dakka Plain  130, 131 cemeteries of  134

Dala Afnu  902 Dal Cataract  271, 310 Dal Dam  15f, 21 dams  14, 16–21 Aswan Dam  15f, 34, 830, 1073, 1128 first heightening of  10, 11 salvage projects and  40, 81, 272, 1128 second heightening of  35 Aswan High Dam  2, 10, 15f, 84, 309, 1128–29 A-Group and  144 archaeological activity and  310 building archaeology and  1128–30 human rights violations and 1129 ruinous experience of  1129 Dagash Dam  21 Dal Dam  15f, 21 destruction from  309 Hamdab Dam  1094 Kajbar Dam  15f, 21 Khashm el-Girba dam  68 Merowe Dam  14, 15f, 16–20, 39, 40, 310, 1053, 1140 salvage campaign for  105, 107 Middle Nile salvage projects and  40 Mograt Dam  21 Roseires Dam  15f, 20, 309, 310 Sabaloqa Dam  21 Setit Dam  20–21, 310 Shereiq Dam  15f, 21 Upper Atbara Dam  15f, 20–21 Dams Implementation Unit (D.I.U.)  18 d’Anania, Lorenzo  900 Dangeil  517, 609, 1061 Amun Temple at  944 Kushite king statuary at  526 quarries at  960 Dann, Rachael  1139, 1142 Dar al-Islam  881, 1105 Darb el-Arba’in (Forty Days’ Road)  263, 290, 999, 1006 Darfur  2, 33, 169, 333, 514, 808, 878, 900–903, 1007 trade routes and  999, 1000 Darius (king)  1006

1160   index Database of Medieval Nubian Texts (DBMNT)  781, 790–92, 795, 798 date palms  938, 939f, 1075 date sugar  938 David (king)  765, 801 Dawra (king)  897 DBMNT. See Database of Medieval Nubian Texts debatable lands  492, 510n2 Debba bend  788 Debeira Amun cults at  353 X-Group and  726 Debeira East  220, 239 Debeira West  795 debitage 89 Debri 893 Decius 779 decolonization of archaeology and community engagement  1132, 1139, 1143 in Sudan  1130–32 decoration of temples  608–14 Dedumose (king)  186 Dedwen (deity)  467 Deffufa  202, 203f, 213, 222, 224, 960 Deir Anba Hadra  793 Deir el-Bahri  231, 332 Deir el-Fakhuri  93 Deir el-Medina  302 deities, representations of  1044. See also specific deities demiurge, Amun as  358 Demotic  658, 662, 663, 789 Early Demotic  662, 663 Dendur  503, 760 dental measurements  1056–57 Department of Antiquities  33 Deraheib  684, 686, 686f, 687 Derry, Douglas  1052, 1054 Derudeb 674f desert clay  744 Desert Nile, flood phases  71f deserts. See also Eastern Desert; Libyan Desert; Sahara; Western Desert Bayuda Desert  60, 532, 941, 1074, 1079, 1101 trade routes through  998

Nubian Desert, trade routes in  999 Sinai Desert  74 Deutsche Inner-Afrikanische Forschungs-Expedition 1092 Developed Oldowan  83 Dhimit South  284f diadems 1042 diaspora, Sudanese residents and  1138 Dicearchus 704 diet 1059 Dinder/Rahad river basin  512 Dinka 897 Diocletian  534, 779, 780 Diodorus of Sicily  8, 468, 536, 679, 698 Dionysus (deity)  521f, 547, 700–701 Dirwa Hair people  1093 Discovering Mograt Island Together (West) 1131 distribution 995 processes of  996 D.I.U. See Dams Implementation Unit divine election  440 divine fatherhood  357 Divine Liturgy  793 Djabarona 84/13 site  261 Djara 258 Djedkara (king)  165 Djehuty (king’s son)  327, 331 Djehutyhotep (prince)  376f, 379, 939f Djeme 349 Dodekaschoinos  502–6, 522, 534, 702, 707, 833, 834 Blemmyes in  829 Red Noba and  714 temples in  718 Dohat el-Barkal  22 Dohat Meroe  22 doka 945 Dokki Gel  201, 202, 204, 207, 208f, 209, 211, 224, 327, 335, 416, 417, 518 bread ovens in  944 Egyptian temples at  388 graffiti in  661 Kushite king statuary at  526 menenu at  329, 330 Palace A at  209 revolt evidence at  330

index   1161 temples at  411 Thutmose III statue at  331 domed ovens  944 domestic cattle, origins of  909 domestic livestock  1076, 1077 Dongola  72, 714, 761, 766, 807–10, 811f, 838, 851, 854f, 877, 878, 878f, 896, 1081. See also Tungul Building M  809 Building X  852 BX Church  809 cathedral in  854, 858 Christianity in  762, 763–64 churches in  852–53, 858, 859f Church of the Granite Columns  855 Church of the Granite Columns II  858 Fourth Cathedral  858 Islam in  888 Kom B  818 Kom D  840 Kom H monastery  794, 808f, 809, 840, 841, 862, 864f South-West Annex  794 letters from  777 Mosaic Church in  853 mosque in  877 Muslim attacks on  762 Old Church in  852 Second Cathedral in  853 Third Cathedral in  855 Dongola el-Ordi  322 Dongola Reach  181, 186, 833 cemeteries in  753 lateral burials in  737, 740 Post-Meroitic pottery in  742–44, 751, 752 Dongolawi  797, 832 Dongolese Creed  793 donkeys  1001, 1002 doorjambs  595, 596f, 597, 618 Dorginarti  274, 411, 416, 432n56, 498, 505 founding of  417 Nubian Intermediate period and  415 Dotawo  764, 766, 767, 788, 824, 829 Jebel Adda in  821–22 Dotted Wavy Line pottery  103, 104f, 108, 256, 258, 259 Double Kingdom (Kush and Egypt)  1081

doum palms  938, 939f down-the-line trade  996 Dream Stela  473n7 dromoi 347 drumming scene  624, 625f dual Egyptian-Nubian identity  380 Duckworth Collection  1060 Duckworth Laboratory  1052 Dunham, Dows  566, 576, 732 Durbars  380, 381 dynasties. See also specific dynasties cemetery sequences and  434 as holding powers  434 Dynasty Zero (Egypt)  132, 144 Earliest Hunters (rock art)  1093, 1109 Early Kerma. See Kerma Ancien (KA) Early Nile Dwellers (rock art)  1093 Early Nubian Horizon (pottery)  259 earthquakes 59–60 East African Rift  82 Eastern Desert  58, 74, 228f, 325n2, 532, 534, 673f, 685f, 788, 835, 838, 877, 1003 agriculture and  689 archaeological data for  680–88 1st millennium BCE  681–82 1st millennium CE  682–88 environmental conditions in  672 factors in importance of  671 geography of  672 gold in  144, 690, 692 groups of inhabitants of  689 inhabitants of  677–78 Islam and  889 Jebel Mesham area  674f Medjay and  231, 232–33, 240–42 Pan-Grave and  233, 240–42 raiding by nomads from  678 religions in  686–88, 692 rock art in  1107 settlement distribution  683f, 686 surveys in  310 textual sources on  674–80, 689–90 Eastern Desert Atbara River project (EDAR) 85f, 86 Eastern Desert Research Center  18

1162   index Eastern Desert Ware  682–86, 684f, 685f, 687f, 689, 726 Eastern Invaders (rock art)  1093 Eastern Sahara  535 aridity in  290 early settlement of  289–90 environmental conditions of  311–12 trails crossing  290 E.B. Coxe Jr. Expedition  831 ebony 1005 economy activities of  995 palace 996 EDAR. See Eastern Desert Atbara River project Ed-Debba  105, 313, 879, 896 Edfu 766 Edwards, David  1, 493, 837, 840, 1060 eggshell ware  527, 608 Egypt 228f Arab conquest of  8, 641 Assyrians and  467, 475, 491, 493 as British protectorate  32 C-Group and  164–67, 172–73, 188, 292 Christianity and  767 cultural identity in  492 diplomatic legations to  301 early agricultural production in  934 Eastern Desert  58, 74 erosional conditions in  53 foreigners in  302 fortress-building by  183, 271, 273, 301 fruit and vegetable gardens in  937 Greek contact with  699 Greek knowledge of Kush and  698 “History as Festival” and  398–99 Islam and  761 Jebel Barkal and  449, 451 Kerma and  148 Kushites and  188–89, 467, 475, 476, 506 in early Roman period  501–5 identity of  483–86 in Persian period  498–99 in Ptolemaic period  499–501 religious beliefs  355–56, 491–92 tomb groups  476f, 480–83 during 26th Dynasty  493

Lower Nubia assimilation to norms of  381 Lower Nubia occupation by  172–73 Medjay and  235–37 mercenaries in  169–71 Meroitic art influences from  640 Napatan Kushite culture and  441–42 New Kingdom imperial policies  371–72 Northern Dongola Reach controlled by 319–21 Nubia administration by  331–33, 337f Nubia conquest by  327–31, 328f Nubia invasions from  895 Nubians in during 25th Dynasty  477–80, 478t identity of  483–86 Nubian throne and  765 Nubia occupied by 282, 335, 369, 372–90, 464 collaboration and assimilation  375–83 entanglement, hybridity, and mutual influence 383–90 resistance, rejection, and indifference 373–75 Ottoman Empire and  880, 900 Pan-Grave cultures and  188, 233, 235–37, 296 pastoral nomads in  129 physiography of southern  49–51 rebellions against  373–74 reconquest of  327 resistance to  373–75 Rome and  501–5, 524, 706 royal monuments in  592 Site 35 (SJE) and  375 Sudan and  32–33 Turkish rule in  8 Western Desert  55, 82 Egyptian caravans  166–67 Egyptian collective identity  291 Egyptian flint  107 Egyptianization  229, 236, 289, 293, 300, 301–3, 378, 464, 476, 495 of names  483–84 of royal tombs  591 Egyptian language  653–54

index   1163 Egyptian pyramids  567 The Egyptian Sûdân (Budge)  11, 33 Egyptocentrism 32 Egyptology 32 18th Dynasty  186, 209, 229, 373, 375, 434, 449, 455, 1017 quarries and  958 Eisoupapo 778 Ekron 430n43 Elephantine Island  133, 166–68, 181, 283, 291 C-Group and  292 First Empire of Kush and  186, 187 Herodotus and  435 Semna Dispatches and  285 elephants 523f hunting expeditions for  703 iconography and  522 military use of  702–3, 705 in rock art  1106, 1113 trade in  1006 trade in tusks of  1004 11th Dynasty  170, 171 desert expeditions of  183 tattooing and  1039 Elgin (Lord)  1128 elite art  605 purposes of  606 elite gift exchange  996, 1003 El Niño Southern Oscillation  70 Eltekeh  421, 430n44, 432n56 Emberling, Geoff  1139, 1140 emerald mines  671 Emery, Walter B.  10 emmer wheat  514, 528 enclosures 151 enjera bread  945 Ennedi Erg  257f, 260f, 264f entanglement 506 Enthronement Stela of Aspelta  403, 404f, 405 environmental change crisis of 6200 BCE  116 during Holocene  1071 Eocene epoch  54 eolian sediments  73 epigraphic funerary evidence  778 Epipaleolithic lithic industry  254

Epipaleolithic period  1106 Epiphanius of Elephantine  679 Epiphanius of Salamis  676 epitaphs, code-switching in  800 Equid period  193 Eratosthenes  548, 677 Ergamenes (king)  705 Erkoweit 889 Erman, Adolf  658 erosion  53, 54–55 Esarhaddon 421 Ethio-Eritrean highlands  681–82, 689, 690 Ethiopia  435, 519 Axumite 759 Nile headwaters in  66 Ethiopian Highlands  51, 58, 68, 512, 683 Ethiopian megafauna  1096 Ethiopian Plateau  2 Kushite state relations with  438–39 ethnic identity  2 C-Group and  161–64 formation of  161 signifiers of  161 ethnoarchaeological sources  877 ethnohistorical evidence, of Islam propagation 876–77 exchange  996, 997 Excommunication Stela  403 execration rituals  300 Execration Texts  165, 183, 184t, 187, 1016 Executive Committee of Manasir, archaeologists expulsion by  1129, 1130 expeditions, trade through  996 Eye of Horus  460 Ezana (king)  535, 558, 676, 678, 689, 732 Ezana stela  713, 717 Fadrus  374, 389 burial practices at  381 flexed burials at  386 wealth distribution at  382–83, 382f faiences  496, 497f, 627f, 642, 962 production of  608 royal palace decoration with  614 temple decoration and  609 trade and  1000, 1007

1164   index Faras  277, 335, 500, 767, 773, 812f, 831, 833. See also Pachoras anchorites at  840 Cathedral 813f, 815–16, 824, 849, 855 wall painting at  850 Cathedral of Aetios  851f churches in  774, 840, 849 elite burials at  618 Enclosure 815 fortifications of  815f Nativity 814f wall painting at  848 Faras West  815 farming cash-crop  514, 533 riverside 514 Fatimids 765 fatty acid residues  1045 Fayum  934, 935 Fazougli 880 feminist archaeology  1033 El-Fereikha 753 Ferguson, Alexander R.  1052 Ferlini, Giuseppe  8, 30, 566, 1128 Ferlini treasure  30 fertility cults  455 festivals, of Amun  359 15th Dynasty (Egypt)  186 5th Dynasty (Egypt)  148, 165 Fifth Cataract  19, 21 figs 937–38 figures, representation of  626–28 Firka 721 Firkinarti  833, 835 First Archaeological Survey of Nubia  1052 First Cataract  8, 10, 56, 291 debatable lands and  492, 510n2 in Second Intermediate period  296 First Intermediate period (Egypt)  182, 215, 292, 302 Medjay soldiers during  294 Firth, Cyril Mallaby  10, 35 fish  90, 111 flash floods  672 flax 934 flexed burials  384–86, 386f, 721 flint 107

floods 930 agriculture and  931, 933 Amun and  357 food production neolithic evidence of  112–15 transition to  112 foraging 251 in El-Baqar and El-Ansam  259 forearm fractures  1055 foreigner-topos 379–80 fortresses  298, 301, 327 chronology of  273–74 difficulties listing  274 map of  275f names of  285 Napatan Neo-Kushite State and  416–17 Napatan period  438 northern Nile  275–79 purposes of  273–74 reconstruction of  329 southern 279–82 state of research on  272 textual material and  284–85 Thutmose I and  329 Forty Days’ Road See Darb el-Arba’in Forty Martyrs of Sebaste  779 4th Dynasty  165, 292 Fourth Cataract  14, 19, 20, 59 archaeological survey work at  310 Pan-Grave and  243 pottery from region of  105 foxtail millet  941 French Archaeological Section (SFDAS)  13, 16, 18, 310, 313, 314, 1053 Frobenius, Leo  1092 frontality 628 frontiers 492 funerary. See burial Funj Kingdom  8, 789, 875, 876, 878, 895–900 Islam and  879–80, 898, 900 cemeteries and  883–86 nature of  881–82 other religious buildings  886–87 nobility in  898–99 sultan of  899 trade and  879 Funj Sultanate  767, 1139

index   1165 furnaces 984–86 furnace slag  984 Fur Sultanate  878 Gabati  524, 594, 753 cemetery at  533 gabbro gneiss  960 Gabgaba 960–61 Gabriel IV (patriarch)  767 Gala Abu Ahmed  252, 263, 264f, 1000 galena 961 Gamai  721, 733 Mound E at  721 GAME. See Gdańsk Archaeological Museum Expedition game traps  1076 Gardiner, Alan  397 garnet 962 Garstang, John  11, 549–53, 563, 1128 Gash Delta area  242, 514, 682 Gau, Franz-Christian  657 Gavua, Kodzo  1142 Gdańsk Archaeological Museum  733, 1053, 1103 Gdańsk Archaeological Museum Expedition (GAME) 1094 rock art sites  1095–98, 1096f, 1101 Gebel Adda  567, 575f, 727, 766, 822 X-Group at  719, 721, 722 Gebelein  170, 240, 690 stelae from  292 Gebel el-Asr  165 Gebel Silsila  93, 291, 335, 450n3, 472n3, 1108 Gebel Maktub  778 Gebel Nabta  82 Gebel Sula  282 El-Geili 742 Gematon 517 gemstones, mines for  959f, 960–62, 973 gender  133, 1015, 1029 body and  1025–27 feminine beauty  1035, 1036 occupations, of women  1027–28 gender archaeology  1033 gene flow  1057 Geography (Ptolemy)  715

geological resources  955, 958 geologic time scale  53t George (archbishop)  763–64 George (king)  764, 775 Georgios (bishop)  796 Georgios (king)  801 Gereg-tawyef 171 Gerf Hussein  131 German Archaeological Institute (DAI) 566 Gezira  718, 743, 752, 787 rainlands of  1074 X-Group and  726 Gezira Dabarosa  417–18 Gezira Formation  55 El-Ghaba  742, 912 Ghaba cemetery  113–14 caliciform beakers  114f Ghaba phase  113 El-Ghanawab 1102f Gharb Aswan  1108 Ghard Abu Mubarik  55 Ghazali  795, 852 monastery at  830, 840, 841, 851 North-West Annex at  841 Ghidayat Mekdom  875 El-Ghorab  254, 255 Gilf B phase  258 Gilf C phase  259 Gilf Kebir  2, 252, 253, 257f, 260f, 263 Early Holocene occupation of  254 Holocene sequence and  255t pottery 256 precipitation regime and  259 prehistoric occupation of  258 rock art at  259 trade routes and  999 Gilf Kebir Plateau  60 Ginari 239 El-Ginefab  147, 1053 giraffes  1106, 1113 Gism el-Arba  205, 319, 320 glass 962 trade in  1005 Godlewski, Włodzimierz  858 God’s Wives of Amun  478, 481, 482, 494, 1024–25

1166   index gold  285, 514 art with  608 Eastern Desert and  680, 690, 692 mines for  960–61, 968–72 Rome and  707 trade in  1005 gold-in-glass beads  1005 goods, movement of  996–97 Gossypium arboreum 942 Gossypium herbaceum 942 gourd-shaped pot  752 Gourresi (eparch)  765 Goz Regeb  686, 693 graffiti 774 commemorative 778 granite 607 quarries for  960 granodiorite, quarries for  960 grapes 938–40 grape vines  937 grasses 929 ceramic impressions from  936 graves. See burial Great Depression  12 Greco-Roman Egyptian art, Meroitic art influences from  640–42 Greco-Roman period  492, 506 Greece 402 Egypt contact with  699 Kush accounts from classics of  697–98 Nubia and  698–703 Greek 789 code-switching and  800 creeds in  793 language contact and  799–801 in medieval Nubia  793–94 rock art inscriptions in  1095 green corridors  87 Greene, David  1059 Green Sahara  159, 251 griddles 945 Griffith, Francis  11, 658, 663 grinding stones  103, 111, 955 groundwater 60 Grzymski, Krzysztof  14, 312, 551, 554 Meroe population assessments  978 GTOPO30 50f gum arabic  514, 607

Gumuz 897 Gurnet Murai  335 Gyges of Lydia (king)  699 habitation. See settlement Haboba Soba 882 Hadaraba 896 Hagar el-Merwa  451, 452 Hagar Zerga  1095, 1097f, 1099f, 1102f Hagiz Group  681–82, 683f, 686, 689 Hakem, Ahmed M. Ali  550 Halfa el-Jadida  84 Hallof, Jochen  663 Hallstatt Plateau  412, 417, 982 Halpern, Baruch  395 Hamadab  520, 526f, 527, 528, 529f, 533, 593, 941, 961 iron production at  981, 984, 986, 987 Hamdab Dam  1094 Hamdab Project  1094 Hamito-Semitic languages  653 Hanbury, Barnard  8 handaxes, in Libyan Desert  252 Handessi A phase  263 Handessi B phase  263 Handessi Horizon  181, 262, 263 Hanging Garden Church  767 Hannek 1115 Haraz 1114f Harkhebi 494 Harkhuf  167, 168, 181, 221, 263, 656 trade expeditions and  996, 1001, 1004 Harsiyotef (king)  403, 436, 498, 499, 675, 1019f economic records  440 Harvard-Boston Expedition  11, 35, 563, 831 Harwa 486 El-Hassa  518, 520, 593 iron slag at  981 Hassan Hussein Idris  13, 1094 Hassan bin Mohamed bin Ali al-Thani (sheikh) 566 Hassan Mohamed  1140 Hassan Wad Husana el-Andalusi  881 Hathor (deity)  457, 467, 525 chapel at Naga  531 crown 1019 Hathor-Tefnut 354 Jebel Barkal and  463

index   1167 Hatim el-Nour  13 Hatshepsut (queen)  209, 330–32 Jebel Barkal and  463 El-Hawad 514–15 Hawawiya Nile  320, 321f heathens 1127 Hecataeus of Abdera  701 Hecataeus of Miletus  398, 402 Heh  284, 285 Hekanakhte (king’s son)  336 Hekanefer (prince)  302, 335, 355, 377, 379 Heliodorus 707 Heliopolis  455, 464 Hellenism 371 Meroitic art and  637 Hellenistic period, Eastern Desert references from 679 Hendrickx, Stan  1105 Herbich, Tomasz  207, 553 herding  1077, 1078f evidence of  136 herd protection, pastoralism and  160 Herihor 338 heritage, from local perspectives  1139 Heritage studies  1130–31 Herodotus  8, 402, 435–36, 438, 445n4, 549, 554, 704, 707 on Meroe  546 on Nubia  547, 700–701 Herty 626 Hierakonpolis  133, 170, 228, 292, 944 HK27 292 HK 64  293 Hiera Sycaminos  503 hierateion 839 hieroglyphic script  486 Meroitic 662 Hillat el-Arab  383, 388–90 Hillat en-Nakhla  316f Hinkel, Friedrich  550, 566, 567, 569, 586, 1129 Hintze, Fritz  310, 658 historical causality  401–2 historical ecologies  1075–77 Histories (Herodotus)  700 historiography 697 history, meanings of  395, 398

“History as Festival,”  398–401 History of the Patriarchs of Alexandria 761, 781, 841 Hittites 193 Hllhror stela  500 El-Hobagi  536, 593, 719, 737, 837 Hofmann, Inge  658 Hofrat el-Nahas  514 Hoggar 920 Holocene African Humid Period  108 alluvial chronology  71–72 climate change during  92 environmental changes in  1071 environments 63 in main Nile  69–73 flood history, of Blue and White Nile Rivers 67–69 Humid Optimum  74 Late Holocene aridity in  290 climate change in  514 eastern Sahara and  514 Libyan Desert in  262–63 Later Middle Holocene  258–59, 261–62 Libyan Desert and  251, 253–63, 255t, 260f, 264f Maximum, Nabta-Kiseiba area during  256 paleochannels  59, 70 sub-divisions of  64t wet phase  322 Holoporting 253 Homer  435, 701 Honegger, Matthieu  213, 313, 1053 Honorius 780 Horakhty (deity)  348 Horemakhet  477, 486 Horemheb (king)  351, 461, 463 speos of  335 Hori 293 horned altars  1107 horn-shaping 918 Hornung, Erik  398, 399 horoscopes 780 horses 1002 Kush and  193 in rock art  1114 trade and  1005–6

1168   index Horus (deity)  480, 503 statuettes of  628 Temple of, at Buhen  190 El-Hosh 1110 Hosh el-Geruf  188, 680, 1095 Hoskins, George Alexander  8 hospitality, authority and leadership and 163–64 Houses of Millions of Years  479, 484 Hu Cemetery X  227 El-Hudi 283 Hudi Chert Formation  54 Huizinga, Johan  395 human-animal relations  1076 human rights violations, dam building and  1129 human sacrifices  722, 727, 1046, 1061 human skeletal remain excavation  1052–53 Humboldt University Nubian Expedition  21, 310 Humphris, Jane  547 H.U.N.E. 1094 hunter-gatherer-fisher communities emergence of  103 niches occupied by  108 hunting landscapes  1076 hunting magic  1105 Huy (king’s son)  335, 378, 1004, 1017, 1018f Nubian costume in tomb of  380f Huyge, Dirk  1091, 1106, 1109 Huy II (king’s son)  336 Hwida and Maawia Investigate Apedemak (UCL Qatar)  1136 hybrid bodies  1043–45 hybridity 383–88 hydrology 60 Hyksos  232, 300, 327 15th Dynasty  186 hymnographies 793 Iamani of Ashdod (king)  420 Ibana 378 Ibhet  232, 233, 379 Ibn Selim  836 Ibrahim el-Bulad  881 Ibrim. See Qasr Ibrim iconography African 519 African aesthetics in  524

early pharaonic  135 elephants and  522 Hellenistic 642 Makurian 859 Nubian 134 of objects  485–86 style vs  606 identity cemeteries and  886 collective 291 cultural 492 culture and  1034 dual Egyptian-Nubian  380 ethnic  2, 161–64 of Kushites in Egypt  483–86 weapons and self  169 Idris Wad el-Arbab  881 IFRAO Glossary  1091 Ikhmindi  789, 835 Ikkur 276 Iliad 699 imperial domination  371–72, 383 incense  1004, 1005 incense burners  134 India 380–81 Indian Ocean, trade on  671, 707 indigenous features in art  624 industry 978–79 Inebny (king’s son)  331 Inner Africa  514 inscriptions, code-switching in  800 Intef I (nomarch)  170 Intefoker (vizier)  182 interaction spheres  995 International Campaign to Save the Monuments of Nubia  36–38, 831, 1093 Inter-tropical Convergence Zone (ITCZ)  66, 67, 74 intra-African relations  438–39 Inu ceremony  373, 374, 376, 377f, 381, 387 Invaders from Mesopotamia (rock art)  1093 Ioannes, palace of  853 Ioel (king)  767 Irem 336 iron  441, 1077 bloom  975, 985–86 bloomery smelting  975, 984 Meroitic heartland and  514, 517

index   1169 mines for  961 ore  984, 987, 987f production of  975 challenges investigating  979–80 control of  1007 determining scale at Meroe  976–79 technological change and continuity in 984–89 tools 989 slag 985–86 slag heaps  976, 980f, 981, 982, 984, 985 Apedemak Temple and  987, 988f internal composition of  979 slag tapping  984 smelting 975 symbolic expressions and  989 trade in  1007 Tunjur and  901f war and  983 Iron Age  441 iron oxide-cemented rocks  955 Iron Smelting Festival  1136 irrigation  937, 943, 1075 Irtjet  167, 168, 1004 isfet 379 IsIAO/CSSeS El-Salha Project  1053 Isis (deity)  500, 503, 533, 578, 595, 596f, 597 Eastern Desert and  692 statuettes of  628, 631f Temple of, at Philae  500 Islam  672, 760 cemeteries and  883–86 cultural changes and  888 in Dongola  888 Eastern Desert and  679, 687, 692, 889 Egypt and  761 Funj Kingdom and  879–80, 898, 900 nature of  881–82 landscapes and  1080 Nubia and  893 Ottoman Empire and, nature of  881–82 Qasr Ibrim and  888 Red Sea and  889 rise of  761 in Sinnar  881 sources on spread of  876–77 spread of  888 Tunjur and  900–903

Islamic Funj  2 Islamic Nubia  894f Islamic period  829, 888 rock art from  1111–12 Islamization  875, 881 Island of Meroe  511–12, 513f, 517, 518, 527, 530, 532, 547 Island of Michael  773 isotope analysis  1058, 1059 Israel  419, 421 Istephanou (priest)  796 ITCZ. See Inter-tropical Convergence Zone ithyphallic Amun (deity)  348, 452–55 Iuny (king’s son)  335, 336 IVECO 18 ivory  962, 1006 iwesh 944–45 Iy-ib-khent-ra 171–72 Ja’aliyyin 896 Jebal Haraza  901 Jabir 888 Jakobielski, Stefan  831 Janjaweed militia  169 jasper 962 Jazira 879 Jebel Adda  821–22 Jebel Aulia  310 Jebel Barkal  18, 511, 518, 662, 1022, 1083f, 1113 aerial view  450f agriculture and  941 Amun of  351, 366n1, 451–61, 454f, 455, 458f, 459f, 466 Amun Temple at  348, 450f, 461, 464 Aspelta and  423 Egypt and  335, 336, 449, 451 Egyptian temples at  388 as Heliopolis  455 Herodotus on  701 images of  457 kiosk B 560  468 Kushite cap crown and  465f under Kushite rule  464–68 in New Kingdom  461–64 Osiris and  458f Palace B 1500  630f pinnacle of  458f, 459f, 460f pyramids at  22, 433

1170   index Jebel Barkal  (cont.) Pyramid Bar.  11, 433 Pyramid Bar.  14, 433 Reisner and  11 rock drawings at  456f royal burials at  614 royal cemeteries at  592 sanctuary site plan  462f Sandstone Stela  403 Shu and Tefnut and  457 spellings of name  472n1 stela of year 47 at  332 temples at  411 Temple B 200 at  467 Temple B 300 at  467 Temple B 500 at  336, 464, 465, 467, 468 Temple B 600  468 Temple B 700 at  351, 468 Temple B 800 at  351, 464, 465, 467 Temple B 900 at  467 Temple B 1100 at  468 Jebel Barkal Stela of Thutmose III  452, 453, 464, 466 Jebel Dosha  335 Jebel el-Fiaal  1115f Jebel el Hadjies  554 Jebel el-Minay  1095 Jebel es-Shams  335 Jebel Ghaddar pottery at  751 Southern Cemetery at  737, 739f Jebel Gorgod  1115 Jebel Gule  882 Jebel Hardan  522 Jebel Irhoud  86 Jebel Kajbar, Ahmose cartouche at  328 Jebel Kamil  257f Jebel Kitfooga  960 Jebel Magardi  1103 Jebel Makbor  593 Jebel Maktoub  821 Jebel Maman  688, 691f Jebel Marra  51, 60 Jebel Mesham  674f Jebel Mokram Group  241, 242, 681, 683f Jebel Moya  11, 439, 516, 523, 1000 Jebel Ofreik  686

Jebel Qeili  512, 531, 1008 sorghum evidence from  942f Jebel Qoqay  682, 685, 687f Jebel Rahib  253 Jebel Ramlah  753 El-Ansam phase cemeteries at  259 Jebel Sahaba  416, 417 cemetery 90f, 93 fortress at  411 skeletal remains from  1058 Neolithic and Paleolithic populations at 116 Jebel Suegat  1099f Jebel Tageru  263 Jebel Tomat  941 Jebel Uweinat  2, 51, 52, 55, 60, 181, 252, 257f, 260f, 920 pottery in  263 prehistoric occupation of  258 rock art at  258, 259 Jebel Wahaba  1115 Jerusalem  421, 764 jewelry burial with  600 production of  608 stones used in  962 Joel (king)  822 John of Ephesus  8, 760, 761 Jones, Frederic Wood  34, 1052, 1054, 1055 Joseph (exarch)  760 Josiah 405 Juba II (king)  707 Judah  420, 421 Julian (priest)  760 Julio-Claudian dynasty  779 Julius Caesar  706 Junker, Hermann  10, 215 Justinian (emperor)  760, 850 Justin II (emperor)  760 KA. See Kerma Ancien Kabbashi (site)  738 Ka-Chapel 294 Kadada  524, 533, 593, 733, 744, 752, 753, 911, 912 Kadero cemetery  1042–43 Kadero-Koldagi 893 Kadruka 910

index   1171 Kajbar Dam  15f, 21 Kakara 171–72 Kalabsha  503, 676, 679, 684, 715, 716f, 788, 795, 833 Temple 789 X-Group and  719, 721 kalathos 481 Kambasawden 436 Kamil Crater  55 Kamose (king)  174, 186, 327 Kamose Stela  232, 236, 243, 294 Kamutef (deity)  452, 455, 457 Kanais 1092 Kanarta (queen)  578f pyramid chapel of  615f Kandake  589, 704, 708, 1021 Kanem 902 Kanz ad-Dawla  765, 766 kaolin  514, 547 kaolinitic clay  527 kaolinitic temper  986 kap 302 Karadegil 823 Karanog  10, 567, 576, 733, 1007 elite burials at  618 tomb G 174  620f Karima  1053, 1095 Karim’s Garden  735 Karmakol  107, 108f Karnak  344, 453, 463, 465, 479 East Karnak  463, 464 Karnak North  332 Karnak Temple  464 Pure Mound  464 Kash 433 kashifs 880 Kashta (king)  412–13, 418, 420, 428n6, 466, 475, 483, 496, 516, 1024 Kassala  683, 686, 690 cereals from  941 El-Kassinger Bahri  752 Katimala (queen-king)  413–15, 417, 418, 428n6, 432n55, 434 Semna Inscription of  399, 1016, 1017, 1017f Temple of Semna of  414f Kawa  314, 319–21, 335, 594 Amun and  352, 359

Amun Temple at  939 cereals from  941 Egyptian temples at  388 graffiti in  661 ovens in  944 stelae from  403, 406f Temple A at  352 Temple T at  352, 359, 406f temples at  411 trade routes and  999, 1000 KC. See Kerma Classique Kebity 1017 Kebra Nagast 708 Kedes 170 Kemsit (queen)  171 Kendall, Timothy  1140 Kenzi  797, 832 Keraba  310, 512 Kerma  19, 109–11, 136, 143, 179, 201, 211, 313, 345, 1061. See also Pre-Kerma arts at  190 bucrania in  912 cattle engravings  919 cattle horn-shaping  918 cemetery of  213, 214f, 215–16, 219–21, 223–24 C-Group and  164 chapel KII  190 chapels and temples  221–22, 223f Classic  184, 202, 203f, 205, 207 bucrania 915 rock art from  1109 climate during  316 crop production in  929 cultural affiliations with  388 diplomatic contacts to  300 Early 204 eastern necropolis  148 Egypt and  148, 297–301 Egyptianization 300 excavation of  1052, 1060 food-producing economy evidence at  112 fortifications  204, 205, 298 funerary rituals of  216, 218–19 landscapes of power and  1080–81 locations of remains  298–99, 299f Meroitic languages and  656

1172   index Kerma (cont.) Middle  183, 184, 202, 204, 205 bucrania 913 Neolithic evidence at  115 Northern Dongola Reach during  315–19, 317f organization of  202, 204 Pan-Grave and  243 port area and religious foundations  205–7 Pre-Kerma continuity to  148 rock art  917, 1110 royal tombs  222 settlements during  315, 316f skull deposits  913 society stratification in  219–21 terminology and  371 tombs  206, 206f Tumulus KIII at  184, 367n2 Tumulus KIV at  184, 186 Tumulus KX at  184, 186, 187, 222 Tumulus KXVI at  184 Western Royal Grave at  223–24 Kerma Ancien (KA)  181, 215, 291 bucrania  913, 914f cemeteries 161 C-Group and  181, 220 chapels and temples  221 Eastern Cemetery origins in  219–21 funerary rituals  216, 217f hunting scenes and  221 rock art from  1110 Kerma Basin  145, 318 Kerma Classique (KC)  184, 202, 203f, 205, 207, 215, 216 bucrania 915 funerary rituals  216, 218–19 rock art from  1110 royal tombs  224 Kerma Horizon  1110 Kerma Moyen (KM)  183, 184, 202, 204, 205, 215 bucrania  913, 914f chapels and temples  221–22 Eastern Cemetery origins and  220 funerary rituals  216, 218f Kerma period  72 clothing in  1027

trade in  1004 tumuli and  593 women in  1025 occupations of  1028 Khaemteri (king’s son)  336 Khafra (king)  165 khalwas  881, 882, 885–87, 887f, 888 Khandaq  313, 322, 836, 877, 878, 884, 1131 Kharamadoye (king)  674, 676 Kharawe 654 Kharga Oasis  84, 85, 300 Aterian at  88 Darb el-Arba’in and  290 Lower Levallois site  87 rock art and  1093 Khartoum 837 Khartoum Horizon pottery  256, 258 Khartoum Hospital site  101, 103, 107 Khartoum Mesolithic period, agriculture in 935–36 Khartoum-Toronto mission  551–55, 557 Khartoum Variant pottery  103–5, 105f, 106t, 110, 112 Khashm el-Girba  310 Acheulean sites  84 choppers discovered at  83 site 23  936 Khashm el-Girba dam  68 Khatmiya Group  686, 689, 690 Khennuwa (queen)  516f Khenthennefer 330 Kherirw  480, 482f, 483, 485, 486, 494 El-Khiday 104f, 109–11, 1061 food-producing economy evidence at  112 pre-Mesolithic and Neolithic populations at 115–16 Khnum  347, 378 Khonsu 354 Khor Abu Anga  84 Khor Bahan  290, 1003 Khor Daoud  130 Khor el-Daghfali  1095, 1113 Khor Musa  88 Khormusan group  88 Khor Nubt  684, 688f Khufu (king)  165 King’s Church  810

index   1173 kingship ideology  1023–24 King’s Son of Kush Amenemipet  335, 336 Amenemnekhu 331 Amenenmipet 336 Ānhotep 336 Djehuty  327, 331 Hekanakhte 336 Huy  335, 378, 1004, 1017, 1018f Nubian costume in tomb of  380f Huy II  336 Inebny 331 Iuny  335, 336 Khaemteri 336 Meryiun 336 Merymes 333 Messuy 336 Naherha 337 Nehy  331, 332 Panehesy  337, 413 Paser 335 Paser II  336 Penrē 331 Ramesesnakht 337 Saiset 336 Se 331 Seni 330 Setau 336 Teti  327, 331 Turo 329 Usersatet  332, 333 Wentawat 337 Kirwan, Laurence P.  10 Kiseiba 104 kissra bread  945 KM. See Kerma Moyen KNH Centre for Biomedical Egyptology 1052 kohl  961, 1006 Kom Ombo  1109 Koptos 294 Kor 278 Kordofan  333, 732, 766, 787, 878, 894, 895, 901 Kordofanian Nubian  802 El-Koro 795 Korosko Bend  132, 133

Korosko road  999, 1000 Kosha 721 Kosha East chariot  200n41 Krzyzaniak, Lech  1109 Kubban  238, 276, 298 Kubbaniya  169, 170 Kubbaniya North  10, 292 Kubbaniya South  290 Kudanpes (king)  765 Kufa cemetery  889f Kulubnarti  882, 888, 1053, 1059 Kumma  280, 332 Kuper 503 Kurgus 683 trade routes in  999 Kurkur 171 El-Kurru  355, 374, 401, 413, 418, 464, 475, 480, 496, 518, 592 ancient settlement relocation  1140–42 animal sacrifices at  727 case study  1139–44 community archaeology regrets and challenges 1142–43 Eastern Desert evidence at  680 excavation of  1052 Ku. 1 pyramid  433, 434 landscapes of power and  1081 royal women in tombs of  1021–22 shabtis in  482 tourists in  1142 village elders  1143f Kush  3, 179, 242, 327, 330, 461, 545, 1141 agriculture in  440 Amun in  355 cult and temple organization  358–60 archives and archaism  402–5 Cambyses invasion of  700 C-Group and  173–74, 193–94 Classical accounts of  697–98 economy of  440–41 Egyptianization of  383 Egyptian occupation of  335 emergence of  182–84 First Empire of  184–88 Greek conceptions of  699 Herodotus and  700

1174   index Kush (cont.) “History as Festival” and  398–401 horses and  193 independent kingdoms within  732 intra-African relations  438–39 iron and  441, 975, 976, 978 control of  1007 in early periods  982–83 in later periods  983–84 periods of production  981–82 production locations  981 technological change and continuity in 984–89 literacy in  397 Ptolemaic image of  702–5 Ptolemy II and  704, 705 Ram-headed Amun and  345 records from  403 revolt by  333 Rome and  705–8 royal stelae of  405 royal women in concept of queenship and  1018 costume of  1018–19 kingship ideology and  1023–24 names and titles  1021 roles of  1022–23 temple cult and ritual roles of  1022–23 in tombs  1021–22 Second Kingdom of  395, 397f succession in  439–40 Thutmose I and  329 Kushite Empire  180f, 193, 327, 411 collapse of  716 Northern Dongola Reach and  319 public art of  190–91, 190f–92f Kushite period  563 trade routes in  999, 1000 Kushite revival  411–12 Kushite royal inscriptions  396–97, 396t authors and scribes of  397 thought couplets of  406 Kushites Assyria driving out of Egypt  467, 491, 493 Atbara River and  692 Augustus and  503 Blemmyes and  654

Eastern Desert and  675, 676, 692 Egypt and  188–89, 467, 475, 476, 505, 506 cultural appropriation in  640 in early Roman period  501–5 identity of  483–86 in Persian period  498–99 in Ptolemaic period  499–501 tomb groups  476f, 480–83 Egyptian religious beliefs and  355–56, 491–92 funerary culture  484–85 iconography of objects and  485–86 intra-African relations  438–39 iron objects from  988–89 Jebel Barkal under rule of  464–68 Lower Nubia and  522 as mercenaries  428n6 Meroe and  517, 518 names of  483–84 population estimates for  978 Ram-headed Amun and  344 social organization of  492 third phase of  731 visual culture of  605 Wadi Gabgaba basin artifacts  680, 681f Kushite texts  397 audience of  405–7 KV  36, 40, 301, 302 Kyriakos (king)  762–63 Lachish  421, 430n43 Lahun Papyri  236, 296 Łajtar, Adam  823, 831 Lake Albert  68, 703 Lake Chad  902 Lake Challa  68, 70, 72 Lake Nasser  60 Lake Tana  68 Lake Victoria  68, 703 Land of Nehes  165 land sale records  777 landscape archaeologies  1072 in Nubia  1082–83 pastoralism and  1073 landscapes 1071 Blue and White Niles and  1074

index   1175 burials and making places in  1079 Christianity and  1080 deliberate modifications of  1076 hunting 1076 Islam and  1080 mobility and  1073, 1077–80 of power  1080–82 rock art as part of  1104–5 settlement 1075–80 shared 1076 Lapakhidaye, stela of  598f lapis lazuli  962 Laqiya  254, 257f, 260f, 264f, 291 A-Group in  259, 262 herding evidence in  136 Holocene sequence and  255t pottery at  256, 258, 259 large-scale production  979 Last Glacial maximum (LGM)  67, 68 Late Antique period, multilingualism in  787 Late Antiquity  589 textual evidence of  779 Late Cenozoic drainage channels  74 Late Period (Egypt)  491 lateral burials  737 leadership, pastoralists and  163–64 leather 1026 trade in  1003 Leclant, Jean  14 legal texts  777 in Nubian  797 Legrain, Georges  478 Leipzig University  10 Leiterband Horizon  261 lekythos 1005 Lepsius 1139 Lepsius, Karl Richard  9, 31, 207, 224, 549, 566, 657, 658, 823 lesser shrines  885 letters  777, 790 Letters (Lepsius)  823 Letti Basin  737, 808, 836 Levallois artifacts  86–87, 89 Levallois tradition, in Affad  91 Levant 420 agriculture of  933–35 people moved to  379

lexical borrowings  800 LGM. See Last Glacial maximum Libo-Nubian groups  290 Libya 421 Libyan Desert  181, 1076 early eras of  252–53 Holocene and  251, 253–63, 255t, 257f, 260f, 264f pastoralists in  1002 rock art in  1107 surveys in  310 Lichtheim, Miriam  397 Licinius 779 Life in the Heart of Nubia (Fushiya et al.)  1131 Life of Apollonius of Tyana (Philostratus)  707 lime plaster  607 Linant de Bellefonds, Louis  8, 30, 566 Linear B tablets  699 Linjmaor Limmty  483 Lion Temple  609f, 610, 611f–13f, 614, 626, 1020f body types in art at  638 Hellenistic iconography at  642 reliefs in  632 sorghum evidence from  942f literacy 781–82 literary evidence  778, 779 lithophones 1097 liturgies 793 Liturgy of the Presanctified Gifts  860 livestock  934, 1076, 1077. See also cattle trade in  1002 loanwords 800 Local Popular Committees  1136 Lomekwian, Plio-Pleistocene sites  82 Loprieno, Antonio  404, 405 Lower Levallois site  87 Lower Nile Valley Complex  87–88 Lower Nubia  10, 37 assimilation to Egyptian norms in  381 C-Group and  157–58 cultural assimilation in  376 Egyptian identity in  376 Egyptian occupation of  172–73 Egyptian retreat from  173 funerary data in  131 Greco-Roman temples in  638 kings of  171–72

1176   index Lower Nubia  (cont.) Kushites and  522 in Late Meroitic period  532 mudbrick fortifications in  271 Pan-Grave cemeteries in  229 political unification in  167–68 Rome and  637 saqia waterwheel in  716 settlement system in  129 in Terminal Meroitic period  534 trade in  171 Lower Wadi Howar  73, 260f Lupemban technocomplex  253 Luxor temple  346, 347, 463 ma’at 379 magic  780, 1105 El-Mahalab 936 Mahal Taglinos, site K1  936 Mahal Teglinos  241 maharajahs 380–81 Mahasi 832 Mahas Nubian  895 Mahdist movement  32 Mahmoud el-Araki  881 Mahmoud Suliman Bashir  1141 Maiestas Crucis 862 Maiherperi 302 Makaresh  414, 432n55 Makhadma 90 Makuria  760–62, 764, 788, 829, 832, 847 Alwa and  764 Arabic in  798 art of  854–55 architectural decoration  853, 855 architecture  852–53, 865 craftsmanship  853, 857, 862, 866 8th century  854–57 9th-12th centuries  857–62 6th-7th centuries  851–53 13th-14th centuries  863, 865–66 wall painting  853, 854f, 856, 856f, 859–62, 865–66 Coptic in  794–96 Greek in  793–94 investigations of  831, 832 language contact  799–801

language use and literacy in  790–801 sources for  790–92, 791t Nubian in  796–98 pottery 862 regional characteristics  836–37 settlement system  834 Tungul and  808 Makurian iconography  859 Makurian period  830 malachite 961 Mamluk period  877 Nubian invasions in  895 Mandulis (deity)  503, 504, 504f, 679, 692, 715, 716f Mansour Mohamed Ahmed  1143f Maqrizi 761 Mariakouda Ioannou  778 Mariette, Auguste  33 marine isotope stage 6–2  92 marine isotope stage 7–6  86 Maris 836 market exchange  997 marketplaces, identification of  997 Mark III (patriarch)  766, 796, 799 Mashkouda (prince)  765 Massawa 879 mass production  979 matrilineal succession  704, 765, 766 Mattitae 677 Mayas Wetlands  512 Maystre, Charles  313 MDASP. See Merowe Dam Archaeological Salvage Project Mededet  675, 677 Medewi. See Meroe Medeyyt 675 medieval Nubia  759. See also Christian period Coptic in  794–96 Greek in  793–94 history of research  830–32 illusionist portals in art  850 multilingualism in  787 nomeclature for  829–30 regional characteristics  832–38 religious architecture  838–41

index   1177 text production in  792 textual evidence from  776–81 Three Kingdoms period  788, 830, 831 regional organization in  832 religious architecture in  838–41 language use in  789–90 Two Kingdoms period  830, 836 unification of  762–63 Medina 900 Medinet Habu  416, 476, 478, 480–82 burial beds in  483 Medja. See Medjay Medja-land  231, 232 Medjay  182, 227, 231–32, 293–97, 371 Beja tribes and  654 dancers 296 in Eastern Desert  240–42 in Egypt  235–37 Egyptianization of  236 in Lower Nubia  238–39 Pan-Grave links to  232–234, 243–44, 294 as soldiers  232, 236, 293–94 in Upper Nubia  242–43 Megabaroi  675, 678 Megabarri 677 megafauna  1096, 1106 Meheila road  998, 1000 Meidob 894 Meidob Hills  60 Meinarti  718, 727, 766, 773, 774 Mekhu 168 melons 937 Memnon  699, 700, 707 Memphis  421, 422 Kushite building activity at  476 Memphite Theology  405, 421 menenu  327, 329, 330, 332, 335 of Thutmose I  209, 210f Menkheperre 428n6 Menma’atre-setepenimen Aktisanes (king) 348 “(Men’s) Club of Upper Kurru”  1141 Mentuhotep (pharaoh)  263 Mentuhotep II (pharaoh)  170, 171, 181, 186, 296, 449 Mentuhotep III (pharaoh)  172 mercenaries  292–96, 300, 428n6

in Egypt  169–71 Pan-Grave  220, 237 trade and  1004 Merenptah (pharaoh)  374 Merenra (king)  165–67 Merimde 934 Merki (bishop)  822 Merkourios (king)  761, 762 Merkurios (king)  834, 841 Meroe  401, 411, 467, 526, 530, 563, 732, 753 Amun and  348, 349, 354 Amun Temple complex  554–56, 555f Amun Temple M 260  553 animal sacrifices at  727 archaizing periods in  641 Building Period II  552 cemeteries at  563, 565 city plan  550f classical authors descriptions of  511–12 colossal sculptures in  641 Commoners’ Cemeteries near  532, 533 cult of the dead in  595–99 decline of  558, 743, 759 demographic data iron production and  977 lack of  978 discovery of  547–49, 566, 697 early structures at  515–16 elite cemeteries overview for  566–70 southern 576–79 western 570–76 Enclosure Wall in  552–54 excavations at  11, 549–51 funerary traditions in  592–94 Head of Augustus  502 Herodotus and  700 iron production at  961 determining scale of  976–79 technological change and continuity in 984–89 Kiosk M 280  554 life in  557–58 location and natural setting  546–47 Middle Meroitic I  300 name of  545–46 North Mound  556

1178   index Meroe (cont.) offering tables in  597 origins of  551–52 Palace 750  614 plan of area of  564f pyramids at  9, 9f, 565 restructuring of  521 Romans and  502, 706–7 Royal Baths at  525, 551, 554, 629f art in  642 royal building activity and  517 royal burials at  614, 616, 618 Royal Cemeteries  565–66, 565f Northern 568f, 569, 570, 579–85, 580f, 581f, 633 overview for  566–70 Southern  566, 569, 570, 576–79, 577f Western  566, 569, 571f, 572f, 574f, 592, 633 Royal City case study  1132–39, 1134f, 1139–44 community engagements  1138 El-Kurru 1139–44 Royal City of  517, 521, 532, 533, 551, 552–54, 733 Royal Enclosure  981 royal women in tombs of  1021–22 Sanctuary M 261  555 sandstone quarries around  607 slag heaps  981 South Mound  556–57 specialized production at  527 Sun-Temple M250 at  348 temple decoration in  608–14 treatment of corpses  601–2 workshops and visual style in  621–23 “Meroe Multi-purpose Hydro-project, International Development Association” (Grzymski)  14 Meroitic art  605 abstraction and naturalism in  624, 626, 629 appropriations and adaptations in 639–42 body types in  637, 638 forms in space  626 general stylistic features  624–28 indigenous features in  624

materials 607–8 movement in  628 Napatan art and  636, 640 periodization of  636–39 relief sculpture  631–36 representation of figures  626–28 sculptural types in the round  628–31 Meroitic Extra-Dodekaschoinos  726 Meroitic furnace workshop  1136 Meroitic groups  110, 787–88 coronation rituals  357 X-Group and  726–27 Meroitic heartland Bronze Age and  515 in chronological perspective  515–36 Early Meroitic period  520–24 ecological changes and  535–36 ecological setting in  514–15 funerary practices in  524 geographical setting for  511–12, 513f in pre- and early Kushite times  515–18 Rome and  530, 533, 534 trade and  522 transition to Meroitic period  518–20 urban communities in  526–28 Meroitic Kingdom  499–501 agricultural innovations of  940–43 visual arts of  605 Meroitic languages  655–57, 789 consonant inventory for  660t Eastern Desert sources in  674, 675 grammatical outline for  659–60 history of research on  658–59 texts in  665–66 writing system  663 Meroitic period  2, 19, 40, 511, 513f, 563, 594, 731, 1073 Late Meroitic period  532–34 art of  639 chapel decorations  616 cotton in  942 funerary traditions in  593 saqia waterwheel in  716 Ary/Aryamani and  415 beginning of  576 Classical 524–32 Early 520–24

index   1179 art of  636–38 body types  637 iron production in  982 funerary cult and  595 funerary practices in  590 gold and  692 ideology of kingship in  1024 iron production in  985, 988 Late 532–34 art of  639 Middle, art of  638–39 Pachoras and  815 tattooing in  1026 Terminal  534–36, 753 textual and archaeological sources  515 trade in  1005 trade routes in  1000 transition to  518–20 Western Royal Cemetery and  572 women’s temple cult and ritual roles in 1022–23 Meroitic pyramids  567, 568f, 569, 578, 581 Meroitic scripts  660–64, 661t, 664t Meroitic state  493 end of  732, 733 Merowe Dam Archaeological Salvage Project (MDASP)  14, 15f, 16–20, 39, 40, 105, 107, 310, 311, 837, 1053, 1116, 1128, 1131, 1140 rock art and  1094–1103 Merowe esh-Sharq  810 Mersa/Wadi Gawasis  296 Meryiun (king’s son)  336 Merymes (king’s son)  333 Merymose (king’s son)  378–79 mesids 886 Mesolithic period  314, 1073 foraging during  103–11 pottery technology in  103 Mesozoic period  54 Messuy (king’s son)  336 metallurgy  977, 979 metals mines for  959f, 960–62 trade in  1007 metal sculptures  628 metastatic carcinoma  1060

meteorite impacts  55 Metropolitan Museum of Art New York (MMA) 503 Michael of Sha  776 Michałowski, Kazimierz  831 micro regionalisms  832 Middle Ages  893 Nubian languages in  657 Middle Egypt, proliferation of sites in  129 Middle Holocene, Libyan Desert in  256–62, 257f Middle Kerma. See Kerma Moyen Middle Kingdom  182, 263 Askut and  383–84, 384f fortresses and  274, 276, 277, 279–82, 280, 284, 327, 329 granaries of  279 Medjay and  231–32, 294 Middle Kingdom Execration Texts  183, 184t Middle Nile  2, 8, 9, 128f collapse and resiliency in  136–37 exploration in 21st century  13–23 history of archaeology of  30–39 Late Antique ethnic landscape  787 present-day archaeology of  38–39 Royal Prussian Expedition and  31 salvage projects and dams in  40 Turco-Egyptian invasion of  30 UNESCO campaign and  37 wealth and political authority in  997 Middle Nile dam case  1130 Middle Nile region trade routes in  997–1000, 998f, 999f transportation in  1000–1002 Middle Nile valley, surveys in  309–11 Middle Nubian Horizon  912 Middle Stone Age (MSA)  84, 86–89 mid-Holocene Saharan regions  1072 Migi 829 migrations, evidence of  1056–57 Mileham, Geoffrey  10, 12 millet  929, 931, 936, 941 Millet, Nicholas  312, 658 mimesis 379–80 Min (deity)  455 mineral resources  671 mines  283, 671, 958, 959f, 960–62

1180   index Minoan II, Nubians in frescoes of  698 Mirgissa  278, 282, 499, 944 MIS. See marine isotope stage Misida 1115 Missiminia  411, 415, 1057 mixed-language epitaphs  799 MMA. See Metropolitan Museum of Art New York Moalla  170, 228 mobility declines in  1080 landscapes and  1073, 1077–80 of populations  1079 Mode 1  83 modius 378 Mograt Dam  21 Mograt Island  136, 1053 Mograt Island Archaeological Mission  21, 1131 Mohamed Ali Pasha  8, 900, 1074 Mohamed ibn Zayd  773 Mokram 233 monasteries 840 Monastery of Saint Catharine  850 monasticism 840 Mondo 902 Monneret de Villard, U.  12, 732, 813–14, 822, 831, 848 monsoonal rains  253 Mons Smaragdus  687 Montu (deity)  344 Montuemhat  485, 486, 494 mortuary. See burial Moses (king)  824 Moses George (king)  421, 764–66, 776, 799, 814f mosques 886 Mostagedda 220 Mountain of Gold  414 Mount Sinai  850 Mousterian group  252–53 movement of goods  996–97 MSA. See Middle Stone Age mudbrick fortifications  271, 275 pyramids 590 structures 516 walls 609

Muhammad Sharif (king)  902 Multaga phase  113 multilingualism 787 mummification 601 Muqurra 836 Murabba 522 Murray, Tim  30 Musawwarat es-Sufra  8, 12, 310, 514, 522, 523f, 527, 530, 752, 1082 art at  637 ferrous objects at  988 Great Enclosure at  9, 517, 610 iron slag at  981 Lion Temple  609f, 610, 632, 638 Temple 100  641–42 muscovite mica  962 Museum of Fine Arts, Boston  1141 Museum of Jebel Barkal  18 Mut (deity)  354, 457, 459f, 467 Al-Mu’tasim (caliph)  876 mutual influence  383–88 Muweis  518, 520, 526, 527, 530, 593 iron production at  981 Mycenaean frescoes, Nubians in  698 Myers, Oliver  12, 137, 1108 Nabta 104 domestic cattle in  909 Nabta-Kiseiba  254, 257f, 260f Holocene sequence and  255t pottery  256, 258 Nabta-Kiseiba area, during Holocene Maximum 256 El-Nabta phase  256 Nabta Playa region  129 site E-75-6  936 Naga  8, 514, 518, 522, 525, 530–32 art production at  621, 622f Hathor Chapel at  531 Lion Temple at  610, 611f–13f, 614, 626, 632, 638 Hellenistic iconography at  642 Temple N 200 at  531 Naga el-Faris  292 Naga Wadi  137 cemetery of  135

index   1181 Nag el-Hamdulab  135 Nag el-Qarmila  129, 130, 131f, 290, 294 Nag Kolorodna  190, 191f Naherha (king’s son)  337 Nahirqo (queen)  625f pyramid chapel of  632f Napata  401, 517, 732 Amun at  351, 466 attacks on  467–68 Blemmyes and  654 coronation rituals  357 Eastern Desert textual sources from  675 Egyptian occupation of  464 Herodotus and  700 history and continuity of  433–34 holy cities of Amun in area of  350–51 Kushite king statuary at  526 landscapes of power and  1081 Meroitic pottery and  742 Rome and  468 temples in  360 Thebes and  463 trade routes and  998, 1000 Napatan art body types in  637 Meroitic art influences and  636, 640 Napatan Kushite culture  441–42 Napatan (Neo-Kushite) State archaeology of 10th through early 8th centuries  415–16 constitution of  439–40 continuity in  423 emergence of  418–22 from end of New Kingdom to Kashta  412–13 fortress, habitation, and storehouse archaeology 416–17 intra-African relations  438–39 Napatan period  374, 395, 412, 434, 518, 731 agriculture in  940 end of  576 fortresses of  438 funerary cult and  595 funerary stela in  597 ideology of kingship in  1023 iron production in  982

Kush relationship with Egypt during  441–42, 493–98 Late Napatan period  435, 437t, 498–99, 505, 594 art of  636 Sahelian grassland zone during  941 slag heaps from  982 women in  1018 women’s temple cult and ritual roles in 1023 Napatan pyramids  567, 568f, 578 Napoleonic Expedition  30–31 Naqada cultural system  128, 129 ceramic and lithic artifacts of  130 rock art and  1094 Naqada I period  126, 144 rock art from  1107 Naqada II people  1093, 1109 Naqada II period, rock art motifs of  1104 Naqada III period  126 cemeteries from  135 Egypt rise during  132 Naqa el Oqba  850 Näser, Claudia  16–17 Nastasen (king)  400, 400f, 403, 436, 438, 498, 600 economic records  440 Medeyyt rebellion against  675 Natakamani (king)  351, 1022, 1036, 1036f Amun Temples and  354, 555 Bark Stand  610f building program by  525 Lion Temple and  613f, 942f Palace 1500  630f reign of  468, 524, 525, 531, 533, 616, 641 Natemakhora 598 National Corporation of Antiquities and Museums (NCAM)  13, 14, 16–18, 20, 21, 37, 41, 42, 311, 566, 586, 1061, 1094, 1103, 1131 National Geographic  1141 National History Museum of London  1052 National Library  1138 National Museum of Sudan  1129 Naturalis historia (Pliny the Elder)  514, 677, 715

1182   index naturalism  624, 626, 629 natural selection  781–82 Naunton, Christopher  478 Nauri 835 Nawidemak (queen)  524 Nayil (king)  897 Nazlet Khater  4, 7, 89, 90f, 92 Nazlet Safaha  89 NCAM. See National Corporation of Antiquities and Museums NDRS. See Northern Dongola Reach Survey Nebmaātrēnakh 337 Nebuchadnezzar (king)  422, 432n56 Necho (king)  422 necklaces 600 Neferkauhor (king)  294 Negev 320 Negil (king)  822–24 “Negroid” features  1056, 1057 Nehesy people  165, 168, 238, 371 as mercenaries  169–71 Nehesyu 302 Nehy (king’s son)  331, 332 Nekhbet (goddess)  460 Nekhen Hormeni  329 Neolithic pastoral period, Upper Nubia and 145 Neolithic period environmental change during  314–15 Early, Ghaba phase of  113 late Neolithic hiatus  1077 Middle, pottery of  113 Sudanese 1073 neolithization of Nile Valley  115–16 pastoralism and  112 Nephthys (deity)  597 Nerita-shells 296 Nero (emperor)  527, 698 NES. See Northern East Sudanic Neskhons 338 New Archaeology  36 New Holland  18 New Kingdom  194, 207, 1073, 1142 acculturation and  301–3 Amun and  343 Askut and  383, 384f

end of  412–13 expansionism by  274 fortresses and  276, 278, 279 imperial policy during  371–72 Jebel Barkal in  461–64 Medjay and  231–32 military campaigns in  373 Northern Dongola Reach during  319 Nubia during  370f Piankhy inspiration from  418 quarries during  960 rock art from  1111–12 trade routes in  999 uprisings of colonies in  373 New Museology  37 Nicene Creed  793 Niger-Congo languages  653 Nile-Atbara junction  512 Nile basin  65f, 66 early farming in  933–35 sediment load  73 Nile Delta  934, 935 Nile River  51, 63. See also Blue Nile; White Nile baseline flow  931 Cataracts  56, 57f, 58 course changes  58–59 dry periods in  89 exchange and  522 flood phases  71f flow reductions in  168–69 fortifications along  282 Great Bend  2, 58–59 headwaters of  66, 72 Amun and  453 Herodotus on  435 Holocene environments in  69–73 Holocene environments west and east of 74 in Kerma period  316 Meroe and  512 transport on  998 Nile silts  514, 744, 930 Nile valley  102f, 511 early settlement of  289–90 Eastern Desert and  689–90, 692 food-producing economies in  112

index   1183 14th century changes in  878 Greek knowledge of  701–3 human burial preservation in  1051 last pyramids of  590–92 neolithization of  115–16 trade routes and  1000 Nile Waters Agreement of 1959  36 Nilo-Saharan languages  653, 655, 787, 1071 Nilotization 1107 Nimlot of Hermopolis  401–2, 420 19th Dynasty Hillat el-Arab and  388–89 Tombos and  389 nisba (“genealogies”)  876, 880 Nitocris 422 Nitocris Adoption Stela  494 Niu 481 Noba  535, 714, 733, 740, 759 Nobades 760 Nobadia  760–62, 765, 766, 773, 775, 788–90, 796, 812, 822, 829, 832 art of architecture 849–50 craftsmanship 851 wall painting  850–51 Christian sacral architecture in  839 letters from  777 “Makurization” of  839–40 regional characteristics  834–36 settlement system of  836 Nobadian period  830 Nobiin 797 Nol (sultan)  900 nomadic raiders  759 nomadism 1073 nomarchs  168–70, 294 nome lists  502 nomes (Egyptian) 1st  169, 170, 291 3rd 169 4th  170, 174 8th 169 13th 170 16th 170 1st Upper Egyptian  378 Nordström, Hans-Åke  127 Northern Dongola Reach  72, 109, 145, 184, 838

archaeological surveys in  310, 312–13 archaeology of  314–22 basins in  318 cemetery R12 in  113–14, 934 climate changes in  316 Egyptian control of  319–21 environmental conditions in  311–12 from 1st Millennium BCE to present 321–22 hydrology of  319 in Kerma period  315–19, 317f in Neolithic  314–15 in Paleolithic and Mesolithic  314 phytolith sampling from  934 in Pre-Kerma period  315 settlements in  315, 317f Northern Dongola Reach Survey (NDRS)  311 archaeology from  314–22 genesis of  312–13 Site H10  321f Northern East Sudanic (NES)  655, 655f Meroitic and  658, 659 northern Nile fortresses  275–79 Noubades 692 Nuba Mountains  319, 894 Nubia  1, 46n1, 49, 81, 228f, 1072f Amun and  343–44 characteristics, perogatives, and functions 356–58 forms of  350–54 politico-religious background of expansion in  355–56 Amun temples in  353–54 Arabic speakers in  788 Arab invasion of  761 archaeological explorations in 20th century 9–13 bedrock geology and tectonic development  51–54, 52f, 956f bioarchaeological analyses of skeletal remains from ancient  1057–61 central Sudan pottery differences from  113 Christianity and  8, 760, 766, 789 Classical writers and early explorers and 7–8 collapse of early polities of  136 cooking traditions  943–45

1184   index Nubia (cont.) as corridor to Africa  927 early explorers of  8–9 Eastern Desert sources and  676 Egyptian administration of  331–33, 337f Egyptian conquest of  327–31, 328f under Egyptian domination  372–90 collaboration and assimilation  375–83 entanglement, hybridity, and mutual influence 383–90 resistance, rejection, and indifference  373–75 Egyptian occupation of  282, 334f, 369 elite burials between Second and Fourth Cataracts 618 emergence of term  370 ethnic identity and  493 exploration in 21st century  13–23 geography, language, people, and time  2–3 globalization of past of  36–38 Greeks and  698–703 Herodotus on  700–701 history meanings in context of  395, 398 human burial preservation of  1051 human skeletal remain excavation in 1052–53 hydrology 60 institutionalizing archaeology of  32–36 intercultural dynamics in  383 invasions of  895 Islam and  893 landscape archaeologies in  1082–83 languages in  787 Libyan Desert and  251 during New Kingdom  370f people moved from  379 Pharaonic culture as distinct from  31 physiography of  49–51 Pleistocene human remains from  92–93 power in  132 present-day archaeology of  39–43 preserving distinct cultural environment 412 pyramids in  590 Ramessides and  336–38 Reisner cultural sequence for  34 rock art in  916–20 rulers in Execration Texts  183, 184t

salvage campaigns in  10, 11 sandstone temples and pyramids  957f seismicity 59–60 slaves from  378–79 state organization in  493 surficial geology  54–59, 56f topography of  50f unification of  762–63 volcanism in  59 Nubia: Corridor to Africa (Adams)  38 Nubia Museum  37, 1052 Nubian Archaeological Development Organization 22 Nubian Complex  87–88, 253 Nubian Desert, trade routes in  999 Nubian environment, challenges of 930–32 Nubian Intermediate period  415, 417–18 Nubian Iuntyw 330 Nubian language  656–57, 796–98 code-switching and  800 language contact and  799–801 regional dialects of  832 written 797 Nubian magic  780 The Nubian Past (Edwards)  1 Nubian Pathological Collection  1052 Nubian regalia, Egyptian nobility using 379–80 Nubian rock art history of research on  1092–93 periodization of  1108–12 UNESCO Nubian Salvage Campaign and research on  1093–94 Nubian Sandstone  960 Nubian Sandstone Formation  54, 55, 58, 60, 955, 960 Nubian society, women in  133 Nubian Swell  58, 60 Nubian traditions, artifacts of  130 Nubt 294 Nuer community  1105 numerals, Meroitic  663, 664t Nuri  480, 518, 592 excavation of  1052 royal women in tombs of  1021–22 nutritional deprivation  1059 Ny-ankh-Pepy (governor)  292

index   1185 Nysa 701 Nyussera (king)  165 obsidian  962, 996 occupations, of women  1027–28 Ochała, Grzegorz  831 ochre 1042 O’Connor, David  159 Octavian Augustus (emperor)  547 Odyssey 699 offering chapels  569, 573 offering tables  597, 608, 620f, 623 reliefs 633–34 typology of  635f OINE. See Oriental Institute Nubian Expedition Old Dongola. See Dongola Old Kingdom  180–82, 205 Clayton rings and  262 desert expeditions of  183 fortification building by  273 Medjay and  231–32 rock art from  1111–12 Old Kush  182 legacy of  193–94 rock art from  1110 Old Nubian  797 Old Nubian Dictionary 800 Oldowan, Plio-Pleistocene sites  82 Old Stone Age  81 olives 937 Olympiodorus  676, 678 El-Omari  934, 935 Omdurman 735 On Affairs in Asia (Agatharchides)  705 Onasch, Hans  430n44, 550 Onnophrios (Saint)  764 On the Erythraean Sea (Agatharchides)  702, 704 oolitic ironstone  961 Opet Festival  463 optically stimulated luminescence (OSL)  72, 84 burial dating with  93 oracles, Amun and  356–57 Orfiulo (king)  761, 762 Oriental Institute Nubian Expedition (OINE)  228, 1053, 1059

Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago 126 ornamental stones, quarries for  959–60, 968 Orogeny 53 Osirian religion  355 Osiris (deity)  467, 468, 480, 484, 547, 597, 700–701 OSL. See optically stimulated luminescence Osman, Ali  551, 1060 osteoarthritis 1060 osteoporosis 1059 ostraca 798 Ottoman Empire  2 Egypt and  880, 900 Islam and  880 cemeteries and  883–86 nature of  881–82 other religious buildings  886–87 Third Cataract region and  881–82 Oudji, Lower  775 Ousanas (king)  534 Out-of-Africa theory, Nubian perspective  93–94 ovens 944 Oxford University Excavations  831 Paabtamery (queen)  483 Pabatma (queen)  419 Pachoras  807, 810, 812–17 pack animals  1001–2 Padimenope 486 Padiset (deity)  503 Pahor (deity)  503 painting 607 on plaster  614 palace economies  996 Palace of Ioannes  810, 853 Palatine Chapel  809 Paleolithic period  252–53, 314 Late Paleolithic bladelet technology during  89 hunter-gatherers in  89–92 paleopathological analyses  1054–55 Paleozoic period, sedimentation episodes during 53 Palermo Stone  405 palisades 151 palm fronds  938

1186   index palm fruits  1045 Pan-African Event  53 Panehesy (king’s son)  337, 413 Paner 1099f Pan-Grave culture  164, 169, 170, 173, 227–31, 273, 293–97, 371, 681, 1073 acculturation and  229, 296 cemeteries  232, 237–39 cultural interactions with  238 dating of  229 disappearance of  297 in Eastern Desert  240–42 Egypt and  188, 233, 296 First Empire of Kush and  187 living in Egypt  235–37 in Lower Nubia  238–39 Medjay links to  232–234, 243–44, 294 mercenaries  220, 237, 244, 295–96 occupations 296 pottery 229f, 231, 237, 239, 294 settlement evidence  230–31 Site 35 and  375 sites  227, 295–96, 295f skeletons 243–44 skull deposits and  912–13 Thebans and  295–96 in Upper Nubia  242–43 weapons 220 panicoid grasses  111 Panicum milliaceum 941 Papyrus Boulaq  17, 455 Papyrus Boulaq  18, 294 parvicoccum tetraploid wheat  934 Pasan (envoy)  532 Paser (king’s son)  335 Paser (king’s son)  373 Paser II (king’s son)  336 pastophoria  853–55, 860 pastoral nomads  151, 234–35, 240, 241, 1078, 1078f agriculture exchange and  234 C-Group and  152, 159–60 chief ’s authority and leadership in  163–64 desert site spatial distribution and  129 in El-Baqar and El-Ansam  259 herd protection and  160 in Kerma  143

landscape archaeologies and  1073 in Libyan Desert  1002 mobile 1077 neolithization and  112 Pre-Kerma and  152 Ram-headed Amun and  345 rock art and  916–20, 917f as soldiers  236 pastro-foragers 256 Paulos Cathedral  855 pearl millet  941 peasant resistance  373 Pekertror (general)  419, 486 Peksater (queen)  494 Penis-Sheath people (rock art)  1093 Penniut 337 Penrē (king’s son)  331 Pepy I (pharaoh)  165–67, 293 Pepy II (pharaoh)  166–68 Pepynakht I  168 perceiving body  1038 peregrinatio  807, 809 perennials 937 peridot 962 Persia 700 Byzantium war with  760 Persian period  436 Kushites in Egypt during  498–99 personal decoration, C-Group  164 Petro 773 petroglyphs  1091, 1095, 1096, 1098, 1104, 1105, 1116 dating 1108 Phanerozoic sedimentary rocks  53–54 Pharaonic culture  439 bread-making and  944 civilization and  32 Meroitic art influences from  640–42 Nubia as distinct from  31 Philae  501–3, 532, 789, 850 stela at  501 Temple of Isis at  500, 558 Philae temple  1129 philanthropy 1132 Philistia 420 Philistines 420 Phillips, Jacke  1007

index   1187 Philostratus 707 Phoenicians 420 Phonen (king)  790 Phonen inscription  715 Piankhy (king/pharaoh)  338, 351, 357, 402, 418–20, 432n56, 434, 438, 442, 467, 475, 494, 496, 516, 600, 1024 burial of  483 Great Triumphal Stela of  397, 401, 403, 405 Sandstone Stela of  466 Victory Stela of  441, 505 pictograms  1091, 1104 Pila shells  111 Pilgerinschriften 532 pilgrimage centers Qasr Ibrim as  820 Tungul as  808, 809 pilgrimage routes  672, 679, 690 Pinedjem II  338 Piye (king/pharaoh). See Piankhy plant remains, recovery of  928 plaster, paintings on  614 Pleistocene environments  63 Pleistocene epoch human remains from Nubia from  92–93 Libyan Desert in  252 sub-divisions of  64t Pliny the Elder  8, 514, 527, 548, 677, 698, 707, 715 plumed headdress  378 Plumley, George  831 Pluskota, Krzystof  1103 Pnubs  209, 224, 423, 517 Amun and  352, 359 Polanyi, Karl  996, 997 Polish Academy of Sciences  1053 Polish Center of Mediterranean Archaeology  831, 1053 political authority  522 political colonization, end of  1127–28 political power  132 political theater  379 porphyry 1042 porridge 943–45 post-colonial guilt  1144 Post-Meroitic groups  110 Eastern Sudan and  693

Post-Meroitic period  20, 536, 563, 594, 734f, 753 agricultural reorganization in  940–43 burial types  735–37, 740 Central Zone  738f Northern Zone  739f, 741f Southern Zone  736f food traces from  1045 iron production in  983 pottery 742 central zone  747f, 748f ceramic production  744, 750–53 northern zone  749f, 750f southern zone  746f transitional  743–44, 745f post-processual 1035 pot bellows  985 pottery  848, 1042 A-Group  130, 290 Alwan 848 art with  608 at Askut  383–84, 384f bread-making and  944 cattle engravings on  919 C-Group  162–64, 163f, 293, 743 Dotted Wavy Line  103, 104f, 108, 256, 258, 259 Early Nubian Horizon  259 Eastern Desert  682 food traces in  1045 funerary culture and  484–85 grapes on  940f Handessi Horizon  262, 263 iron furnaces and  986 Khartoum Horizon  256 at Laqiya  256, 258, 259 Leiterband motifs  261 Makurian 862 Meroitic  523, 527 Pan-Grave 229f, 231, 237, 239, 294 Post-Meroe 742 central zone  747f, 748f ceramic production  744, 750–53 northern zone  749f, 750f southern zone  746f transitional  743–44, 745f

1188   index pottery (cont.) royal tombs  722 standardized wheelmade industry  523 trade in  1004, 1005, 1007 vegetable matter in production of  928, 936 Wavy Line  103, 104f, 107, 108, 256 wheelmade  744, 750, 752 X-Group  722, 724, 724f, 725–26 pottery technology  103, 104f, 105f, 110 Middle Neolithic  113 Nubia and central Sudan differences in  113 Pre-Kerma  145–49, 146f power, landscapes of  1080–82 Poznań Archaeological Museum  17, 1095 Pre-Acheulean period  82–83 precipitation, Gilf Kebir and  259 Predynastic/Early Dynastic Egypt  127, 144 beans in  941 boats in  1001 bread in  944 figurines from  1039 hunting scenes in  221 rock art from  1111–12 Pre-Kerma  127, 130, 134, 143, 144f, 181, 201 A-Group and  145, 146 animal corrals  152 chronology, pottery, and cultural affinities  145–49, 146f Eastern Cemetery and  215 habitation huts  150 Kerma continuity from  148 Late  215, 219 Northern Dongola Reach during  315 pastoralism and  152 rock art and  1096 settlement and subsistence economy  149–53, 151f storage pits  149–50, 150f Presentation of Inu ceremony  373, 374, 376, 377f, 379, 381, 387 Priapus 453 Priestess of Hathor Aashyet  236 priesthood, of Amun  359–60 Primis 601 processional bark, Amun and  359 Procopius of Caesarea  677, 707–8 production 995

proskynemata 666 Proto-Axumite period  519 protomes  609, 609f Proto-NES  658, 659 Psamtek I (pharaoh)  422, 494, 704 Greek soldiers helping  699 Herodotus and  700 Psamtek II (pharaoh)  422, 423, 435, 436, 438, 498, 499, 517, 545, 698, 731 Jebel Barkal and  467 Ptah (deity)  464 Ptahmaakheru (prince)  479 Ptah-Sokar-Osiris 486 Ptahwer stela  236 Ptolemaic Egypt Eastern Desert sources from  675 Kush and  702–5 Meroitic art and  637 Meroitic heartland and  522 Ptolemaic Era  491, 495, 499–501 Ptolemaic period  547 Ptolemaic-Roman assemblage  726 Ptolemy  676, 715 Ptolemy II (pharaoh)  500, 518, 698 elephants and  703 Kush and  704, 705 Theocritus on  702 Ptolemy IV (pharaoh)  501 Battle of Raphia and  705 Ptolemy V Epiphanes (pharaoh)  500 Ptolemy VI (pharaoh)  500, 501 Ptolemy VIII (pharaoh)  501 Ptolemy IX (pharaoh)  501 Ptolemy XII (pharaoh)  501 public archaeology  1131 pulses  934, 935, 941 Purdue University  1060 Pylos 698–99 pyramid chapel reliefs  632–33 pyramids 594f burial chambers  570 Egyptian 567 at El-Kurru  433 identification system for  647n5 at Jebel Barkal  433 last, of Nile valley  590–92 at Meroe  9, 9f, 565

index   1189 Meroitic  567, 568f, 569, 578, 581 mudbrick 590 Napatan  567, 568f, 578 at Northern Royal Cemetery  578, 582 in Nubia  590 offering chapels and  569 QMPS and  22 at Southern Royal Cemetery  576 superstructure types  567, 569 25th Dynasty and  592 at Western Royal Cemetery  572–73 pythons 901 Qa’ab basin  72 El-Qa’ab depression  72, 252, 253 Qadiriya order  881 Qala Abu Ahmed  411, 416, 438 Qal’at Sai  888 Qalhata (queen)  1035, 1035f Qalidurut (king)  761 Qasr el-Wizz  793, 795, 832 churches in  840 monastery of  850 Qasr Ibrim  598, 663, 715, 727, 762–64, 766, 767, 773, 795, 796, 816f, 833, 877 Arabic documents at  798 bilingual texts and  799 Blemmyes and  718 Cathedral  820–21, 849 cereals from  941 churches in  774–75 cotton from  942 Great Church  819–20 investigations of  831 Islam and  888 language use in  789 letters from  777 medieval Nubian power and  818–21 Nobadia capital and  812 Old Church at  840 as religious center  820 sack of  765 Taharqo Temple at  417 Temple 1 at  718 Temple 4 at  718 Temple 6 at  718 temples at  411

textual evidence from  777, 778 vegetables and herbs/spices at  937 X-Group and  717, 718 Qasr Ibrim West  776 Qasr Wad Nimieri  322 Qatari Mission for the Pyramids of Sudan (QMPS)  22, 23f, 566, 586, 607, 1138 Qatar Museums  566 Qatar-Sudan Archaeological Project (QSAP)  1, 21–23, 39, 40, 1131, 1140, 1141 Qena Bend  290 Qeskanet 296 QMPS. See Qatari Mission for the Pyramids of Sudan qore 1021 Qoz Burra  517 QSAP. See Qatar-Sudan Archaeological Project quarries 956f, 958–60 quartz 961 quartz-cemented rocks  955 Quaternary period  63 qubbas  876, 882, 884f, 885 as cultural indicator  883–84 Qubbet el-Hawa  167, 294 queenship 1018 Quft-Quseir 1106 qurasa (pancake)  1142 Qurna burial  188 Qurna Queen  300 Qurta Cemetery 115 at  160f rock art at  1109 Qurta II site  91f, 92 Qustul  127, 130, 134, 137, 692, 715, 727, 831 A-Group and  722 burial practices at  381 Cemetery L  126, 133 dates of burials at  415 pottery production at  134 sacrifices at  1046 tomb 31  724 X-Group and  714, 721, 722–26 Quz Nasra  735 R12 (site)  910 caliciform beakers  114f pillows 113–14

1190   index Ra 439 Ra-Atum (deity)  455 Rabbula Gospel  850 Rachael (king)  763 racial typologies  1056 racist views  1127 raids by Eastern Desert nomads  678 pastoralism and  160 rainfall cultivation and summer  933 Eastern Desert and  672 in Kerma period  316 in Meroe area  546 Rameses II (pharaoh)  351, 373, 374, 641 Abu Simbel temple of  388 Jebel Barkal and  457, 460f, 461, 464 Nubian policy of  336 Rameses III (pharaoh)  302, 373 Rameses VI (pharaoh)  320, 336, 337 Rameses VII (pharaoh)  337 Rameses IX (pharaoh)  337 Rameses XI (pharaoh)  337 Ramesesnakht (king’s son)  336, 337 Ramesseum papyrus X  327 Ramesside period  373, 374 Ari/Ariamani and  415 modius in  378 ram-headed Amun (deity). See Amun ram heads  367n2 Rao, Sayoji  381 Raphaelion at Banganarti  818, 821, 822 Ray, John  301 rebellions Bekenranef/Bocchoris of Sais  421 against Egypt  373–74 risks of  373 in Thebes  637 reciprocal social relationships  996 reciprocity 996 Red Crown  460, 466 redistribution 996 Red Monastery  850 Red Sea  679, 877 harbors on  671 Islam and  889 ports on  838 trade routes and  1000

Red Sea Coast  241 Agatharchides on  704 Eastern Desert information and  690 Red Sea Hills  50, 73, 325n2, 682, 1079, 1103 Red Sea Mountains  86 Red Sea Rift  54 Red Ware  724f regionalism 832 Reinold, Jacques  14, 35, 313, 314 Reisner, George Andrew  12f, 1139, 1141 A-Group and  127 bioarchaeology and  1052, 1056, 1060 C-Group and  157, 220 cultural sequence by  34 Kerma and  213, 214f, 215, 220, 222, 318, 367n2 Kushite ruler sequence by  515 Meroe and  551, 563, 566, 567, 570, 573, 731, 732 salvage campaigns and  10, 11, 34–35, 37 on spouted bowls  753 X-Group and  713, 733 relics 809 relief sculpture  631–36, 641 religion iron production and  987 rock art and  1106 religious conversion  833 rescue archaeology  310 resettlement projects  14, 16, 17, 19 resistance forms of  373–75 symbolic 373 respiratory disease  1060 Res stela  236 retainer sacrifice  704 Rhyolite Acheulean artifacts  85f El-Rih 688 Rikabi 888 rinderpest 1076 ring-letters 780 “Rise of the Black Pharaohs” (National Geographic) 1141 ritual hegemony  530 ritual practices iron production and  987 X-Group 718–19

index   1191 riverine bark, Amun and  359 riverine regions  1077 riverside farming  514 rock art  258, 259, 261f, 1095, 1097, 1103 animals in  1105–6 at Bir Nurayet  1103–4 boats in  998 of cattle  916–20, 917f, 920 cattle in  1100f dating  1108, 1110 defining terms for  1091 evolution of  1112 groupings of people in  1093 inspirations behind  1105–8 interpreting 919 MDASP and  1094–1103 motifs in  1098, 1104, 1111–14 Naqada culture and  1094 non-visual aspects of  1097 as part of landscape  1104–5 pastoral practices and  916–20, 917f periodization of  1108–12 religious significance of  1106 topography of  1099f UNESCO Nubian Salvage Campaign and research on  1093–94 rock crystal  962 rock gongs  1095, 1097, 1098f, 1101, 1114 Roman art  624 Roman period  491 camels and  693 Kushites in Egypt during early  501–5K Egypt and  501–5, 524, 706 gold and  707 imperial ideology of  706 Kush accounts from classics of  697–98 Kush and  705–8 Lower Nubia and  637 Meroe and  502, 706–7 Meroitic heartland and  530, 533, 534 Napata and  468 Romeladid  682, 685, 687f Rose, Pamela  831 Roseires Dam  15f, 20, 309, 310 Route of the Forty Days  290 Royal Baths  525 Royal Cemeteries of Kush series (Dunham) 566

Royal City of Meroe. See Meroe. Royal College of Surgeons  1052, 1054 royal colossi  641 royal investiture  808f royal legitimation Amun and  356–57 Osiris and  480 royal non-funerary stelae reliefs  634, 636 Royal Ontario Museum  312 royal palaces, decoration of  614 Royal Prussian Expedition  9, 31, 1139 royal tombs  222, 224 Egyptianization of  591 pottery in  722 in Qustul and Ballana  722–23, 723f royal vestments  1019 Rozwadowski, Andrzej  1091 Rubat (king)  897 Ruffer, Marc Armand  1052 Ruiu 331 Saamaniso 436 Sabagura 835 Sabaloka Gorge  51, 136 Sabaloqa Dam  21 El-Sabeil 736f Sabni 168 Sabu-Jaddi 1115 sacrificial tables  1107 SAfA. See Society of Africanist Archaeologists Sagiet Wagia Alia  1099f Sahara 920 eastern 535 Late Cenozoic drainage channels in  74 Sahel 514 Sahelian grassland zone  941 Sahidic Coptic  778, 789, 794, 796 Said, Edward  31 Sai Island  84, 111, 145, 148, 518, 600, 877 Ahmose and  328 Amenhotep I and  329 bucrania at  913 storage pits at  149, 150 tumuli at  187 Sais 422 Saiset (king’s son)  336 Saite Period  434 Saladin  764, 765

1192   index salvage projects  10, 11, 105, 107. See also dams Aswan Dam  40, 81, 272, 1128 MDASP  18–20, 39, 311, 837, 1094–1103, 1116 UNESCO Nubian Salvage Campaign  13, 36–38, 42, 43 Salvatori, Sandro  70 Samaria 419 Sanam  319, 411, 416, 1004 agriculture and  941 Amun and  352 fruits in  940 Sanam Historical Inscription  403 sandals 1026 Sand-Dwellers 181 sandstone  607, 611f, 629f, 955, 960, 1042 quarries for  959, 967 temples and pyramids built with  957f Sandstone Stela of Piankhy  466 Sanjaks  880, 882 saqia waterwheel  716, 815, 833, 943, 1059 Saras, cemetery at  136 sardonyx 962 Sargon II (king)  419, 420, 431n50 SARS. See Sudan Archaeological Research Society Satepihw 236 Satet 378 Satju  167, 168 Satjyt 1017 Saturab 2  110 Sauder, Lee  985f savannah agriculture and  933, 935–36, 941–42 trade routes crossing  998 Säve-Söderbergh, Torgny  159, 232 Saxe, Arthur  36 Sayala cemetery  135, 228, 238 Weinstuben at  717 Sayings of the Desert Fathers  779 Scandinavian Joint Concession  374 Scandinavian Joint Expedition (SJE)  228, 1039, 1053, 1056, 1108 Site 35  375 Site 47  220, 239 Site 176  442 scarabs 1000

scarification  1026, 1038, 1039 Schild, R.  82 Schmidt, Peter R.  41 Scott-Moncrieff, Philip David  11 sculpture colossal 641 frontality in  628 Hellenistic-style 638 metal 628 types of  628–31 Se (king’s son)  331 seasonal river systems  514 seasonal transhumance  1073, 1077 Sebiumeker (deity)  519, 527, 641, 642 Second Antiquities Ordinance of 1952  33 secondary products revolution  937 Second Cataract  10, 11, 21 Egyptian objects in area of  133 Egyptian occupation of region  172–73 fortresses in  327, 329 Kush occupation of region  173 pottery from region of  103, 105 salvage operations in  228 in Second Intermediate period  296 Second Intermediate period  205, 232, 233, 241, 273, 274, 293, 413 Askut and  384f fotresses during  327 Kerma and  297 Lower Nubia during  296 non-Egyptian cultures in Egypt in  235 Pan-Grave sites and  296 Tombos and  384 Sedeinga Island  145, 148, 310, 576, 594 elite burials at  618 pyramid field at  591f stelae from  623 West Cemetery at  597 sedimentation 55 Segersenti 182 Sehel, graffiti in  332 seif dunes  55 seismicity 59–60 Seleim Basin  312, 318 Seleucids 703

index   1193 Selib  851, 852 Selima oasis  252, 257f Darb el-Arba’in and  290 Selim the Grim (sultan)  900 Semien Highlands  68 Semna  280, 282, 285, 401, 414 fruits in  937, 938 graffito in  329 Katimala inscriptions at  417, 1016, 1017, 1017f Stela (Berlin)  298f stone from  960 temples at  330 Semna Dispatches  232, 238, 240, 285, 294 Semna Inscription  399 Semna South  280, 298 excavation of  1059 Semna stelae  183, 284 Semna Temple of Thutmose III  413 Semna West  285 Seni (king’s son)  330 Senkamanisken (king)  422–23, 495f, 517, 551 funerary stela of  458f Sennacherib  420, 430n43, 430n44, 431n50 Senusret I (pharaoh)  182, 274, 298, 327, 344, 656 Senusret II (pharaoh)  296 Senusret III (pharaoh)  173, 298, 327, 344, 492 fortresses and  183, 274, 276, 280, 282, 284, 285 serekh 134 Sergios (St.)  818 serpentinites 648n8 Serra Cemetery  238 Serra East  233, 240, 242, 276–77, 442 Cemetery D at  415, 479 churches in  775 Site  25, 721 X-Group and  721 Serra West  130 cemetery at  136 Service d’Antiquités of Egypt  33 Setaria italica 941 Setaria sphaceleata 941 Setaria spp.  929

Setau (king’s son)  336 Setit Dam  20–21, 310 Setit River  309 Setju 1004 settlement archaeology  1073 settlement landscapes  1075–80 settlements 148 A-Group 144 huts in, Pre-Kerma  149–52 Napatan Neo-Kushite State and  416–17 Kerma  315, 316f in Northern Dongola Reach  315, 316f, 317f Pre-Kerma 149–53 stone foundations of  129 Sety I (pharaoh)  335, 351, 368n6, 461 Jebel Barkal Stela of  464 Seven Sleepers of Ephesus  774, 779 17th Dynasty  173–74 SFDAS. See French Archaeological Section Shaāt 332 Shabaqo (king/pharaoh)  320, 421, 494, 516, 700, 701 Shabaqo Stone  405 Shabataqo (king/pharaoh)  420 Shablul 10 shabtis  389, 481, 482, 484, 485–86, 494, 495f, 497, 600 shaduf irrigation  937, 941 Shablul  12, 101, 115, 930f Shaheinab  12, 101, 115, 930f Shaheinab phase  113, 114 Shaiqiya ethnic group  878, 1095, 1139, 1142 shale-tempered wares  258 Shalfak 280 Shalmaneser V (king)  431n50 Shams ad-Din Turanshah  836 Shams ed-Dawla  765, 820 Shanakdakheto (queen)  524 shared landscapes  1076 shared meals  163–64 Sharq el-Ateik  512 Shavit, Yaacov  397, 398 shawls 1018 Sheikh Abd el-Gurna  331

1194   index Sheikh el-Amin  936 Sheikh Mohammed  290 shell  962, 1042 Shellal 290 shell gathering  111 Shemai (nomarch)  294 Shemkhiya  243, 1095 Shendi Reach  733, 743, 744, 877, 961, 1081 Shepenwepet 494 Shepenwepet II  422, 1024 Shereiq Dam  15f, 21 Sherif, Negm eldin Mohamed  13 Sheshonq I (pharaoh)  428n6 Shinnie, Peter  12, 13, 33, 549, 551, 557, 731, 732, 831, 985 on Soba  884 Shorakaror (prince)  531 Shorkaror (king)  1008 shrines 1105 shrouds  601, 602f, 774 Shu (deity)  457 Siali seal  134, 135f Siamun (scribe-reckoner)  387 Sidon 421 Sievertsen, Uwe  550 signet rings  1007 silicified sandstone quarries  968 Silko (king)  676, 716f, 760, 787, 789 Victory Inscription of  715 silt agriculture and  931 flooding and  930 silver 961 art with  608 Silverman, Ray  1142 Simit Sheriq  1099f Simonides the Younger  547, 698 Sinai Desert  74 Sinja 893 Sinkat-Haya 686 Sinnar  310, 767, 877, 895, 897, 898, 900, 1007 Islam in  881 Sinnar West  735 site 10-W-4  104f Siti (king)  766, 767 16th Dynasty  186 6th Dynasty  165

Sixth Cataract  21, 51, 56, 512 SJE. See Scandinavian Joint Expedition skeletal remains bioarchaeological analyses of  1057–61 biological relationships and  1055–57 paleopathological analyses of  1054–55 slag. See iron. slavery  378, 379 tribute and  1004 slipways 998 smelting  984, 985f Smith, Grafton Elliot  34, 1052, 1054–56 Smith, Stuart Tyson  1060 Snefru (pharaoh)  165, 291, 293 Soba  701, 767, 789, 801, 807, 817–18, 1081 Church A  818 churches 867f fall of  879 investigations of  831 qubbas and  884 Soba East  817 Sobekhotep II (pharaoh)  294 Sobeknakht II  188, 189, 327, 473n10 The Social Dimensions of Mortuary Practices 36 social organization, burial patterns and  573–76, 575f Society of Africanist Archaeologists (SAfA) 1129 Sodmein Cave  88 Sohag, Red Monastery in  850 Soleb  385, 416 Solomon (king)  764, 765, 776 Sopd-Hor 190 sorghum  514, 528, 530f, 689, 927–29, 931, 941, 942f, 945 origins of  935–36 South Australia Museum  1052 South Libyan Desert  252 Spalinger, Anthony  401 Spencer, Neal  1059–60 spouted bowls  753 standing figures  628 staple crop production  943 staple grains  929, 937 steatite  648n8, 960 steatopygy 1026

index   1195 Steindorff, George  10, 158, 159 stone quarries  671 stone ritual objects  631 storage pits, Pre-Kerma  149–50, 150f storehouses, Napatan Neo-Kushite State and 416–17 Storemyr, Per  1108 Strabo  8, 502, 514, 677, 678, 698, 706, 707 on Meroe  546, 547 structure X 5  717 St. Ryndziewicz, R.  207 style abstraction and naturalism as components of  624, 626 art production and  621, 623 iconography vs  606 stylistic rules  626 Suakin  879, 896 sub-Saharan savannas  514 subsistence systems  1077 at early Meroe  516 food-producing economies and  112 Pre-Kerma 149–53 reconstructing 111 Sudan 7 Arabic in  888 archaeology and decolonization in  1130–32 British Empire and  32–33 community based approaches  1131 diversity of  875 Egypt and  32–33 erosional conditions in  53 exploration in 21st century  13–23 institutionalizing archaeology of  32–36 Islam and  8 historical setting  877–80 sources for  876–77 spread of  888 linguistic diversity of  653 Meroe location in  546 Nubian pottery differences from central  113 pastoral nomads in  129 physiography of interior  49–51 political independence of  33 Post-Meroitc groups and Eastern  693 present-day archaeology of  39–43 salvage campaigns in  10, 11

settlement distribution in Eastern  683f tumuli in  593 Turco-Egyptian invasion of  549 Sudan Antiquities Service  12, 13, 33, 566, 733 Sudan Archaeological Research Society (SARS)  16, 17, 19, 312, 314, 319, 1053, 1094 Sudan National Museum  11, 22–23, 37, 1007 Sudan Political Service  33 Sudan’s Ancient History: Hwida and Maawia Investigate Meroe’s Iron (UCL Qatar)  1136 Sudd swamps  67, 837 Suez Canal  32 Sufis  882, 885 Sukarab Mekdom  875 summer crops  941 summer rainfall cultivation  933 Sumon (king)  765 Sunnis 885 Sururab 536 Swiss Archaeological Mission  1061 sycamore figs  938 synthronon  839, 853, 855 Syria, slaves from  379 Syriac 799 Tabaqat  878, 881 Tabl (king)  897 Tabo  313, 319 Egyptian temples at  388 pottery at  751 Tabot  683, 684, 1000 Tabo Temple  641 Taggaites 677 Et-Taghribirdi 679 Taharqo (king/pharaoh)  351, 352, 399, 420–22, 430n44, 467, 493, 701, 940, 1024 Dangeil and  517 Nuri and  592 Sanam Historical Inscription  403 on wine production  939 temple at Qasr Ibrim  417 Taj ed-Din el-Buhari  881 Takelot II (pharaoh)  428n6 Takhsy 332–33 Talakhamani (king)  356, 546

1196   index Talakhideamani (king)  558 Talmis 819 Taneyidamani (king)  662, 665 stela of  634 Tanis 423 tannurs 944 Tanqasi  536, 719, 739f, 751, 822 Tantani (king)  790 Tanwetamani (king/pharaoh)  351, 422, 442, 493, 494, 699, 701, 1036, 1037f Dream Stela of  473n7 retreat of  491 Tanyideamani (king)  583f, 625f Tapha 789 taphonomic factors  1054 Taqat 401 Tara, Amun and  352 Taramsa  1, 89 Tarekeniwal (king)  582f Ta-sety 181 Tasian culture  258, 290 tatalat blocks  461 tattooing  1026, 1038, 1039, 1059 taverns 717 taxation 996 “Teachings of Ptahhotep”  384 technology iron production and change in  984–89 social context and practice of  990 trade and  997 Tedeqene (prince)  592 Tefnakht (king)  401, 402, 420, 466 Tefnut (deity)  457 Teh-Khet 194 Tekezze-Atbara 68 Te-khet 355 Tell el-Dab’a  300 temple cult and ritual, women’s roles in 1022–23 Temple of Seti I  1092 temple reliefs  632 temples. See also specific sites Amun architecture of  360 incomes of  359 organization of  358–60 decoration of  608–14 Kerma  221–22, 223f

temple-towns 1081 templon 839 Teqorideamani (king)  585f Teriteqas (king)  504, 524 testimonies of creeds  793 Tethys Sea  54 Teti (pharaoh)  165 Teti (king’s son)  327, 331 text genres  776–81 text production  781–82, 792 Thabit Hassan Thabit  12, 13, 33 Thebaid 418 Theban restoration  182 Thebes  174, 300, 479f Amun and  343 Assyrian sack of  422 Hatshepsut and  463 Kushite building activity at  476 Kushites in  478 Napata and  463 nobles’ tombs at  301, 302 Panehesy intervention in  413 Pan-Grave and  295–96 rebellion in  637 sacral topology of  484 Semna Dispatches and  285 as Southern Heliopolis  455 Theban Tomb (TT)  99, 481 Theban Tomb (TT)  223, 485 tombs in  478–79 theft, pastoralism and  160 Thelwall, Robin  894 Theocritus 702 Theodora (queen)  760 Theodosius I, the Great  780 Theodosius II (emperor)  717 Theophilos (monk)  817 theophorous names  1021 Theotokos 850 thermoluminescence dating  86 Third Cataract  71 Ottoman Empire and  881–82 Pre-Kerma culture and  145, 147 Third Intermediate period  374, 428n6, 434, 441 13th Dynasty  173, 186, 242, 279, 282, 294, 327, 434 Medjay Egyptianization in  236

index   1197 Thomas (Bishop)  812 Thoth (deity)  578 thought couplets  406 Thucydides 402 Thutmose I (pharaoh)  329–32, 371, 386 Amun at Jebel Barkal and  451 Amun temples and  352 Luxor and  463 menenu of  209, 210f Thutmose II (pharaoh)  209, 298, 329–31, 333 Amun temples and  352 Thutmose III (pharaoh)  301, 329–32, 335, 336, 451 Amun at Jebel Barkal and  452, 453, 454f Amun temples and  351 Annals of  331–32 Jebel Barkal and  461, 463, 466 people moved during reign of  379 Semna Temple of  413 Tombos and  386 trade and  1004 Thutmose IV (pharaoh)  302, 333, 334f Amun temples and  351, 352 Jebel Barkal and  457, 461 Tiglath-pileser III (king)  419, 431n50 Timna 430n43 Timotheos (bishop)  766, 767 tin 961 Tiy (queen)  334 Tjemerery (nomarch)  169 Tod 237 Tokiltoeton (king)  760, 834 Tomâs 167 tomb architecture  478–79 Tombos  319, 383–88, 411 burials at  384–85, 386f excavation of  1060 granite gneiss at  960 19th Dynasty and  389–90 pyramids at  590 quarries at  224 stela at  329 tumulus cemetery  442 Tombos stone  190, 190f, 191 smiting scene  191, 192f tombstones  885, 885f, 886f Tomb VII  480, 481, 482f, 483, 485, 486

tools Acheulean 83–86 iron 989 in Libyan Desert  252 Török, László  397, 403, 406, 549, 550, 552, 732 Torrid Zone  703 Toshka 93 Toshka East  335 totemism 1105 trade actors in  996 archaeological research on  995–96 in ceramics  1004 effects of  995 expeditions for  996, 1001, 1004 Funj kingdom and  879 gift exchange as  1003 institutional hierarchies and  996 in Kerma period  1004 mercenaries and  1004 in Meroitic period  1005 Middle Nile region and, routes for  997–1000, 998f, 999f political power and  997 in pottery  1004, 1005, 1007 protection of routes for  1007–8 in raw materials and finished goods 1002–8 transportation and  1000–1002 transhumance  152, 259, 1073, 1077 transportation 1000–1002 trauma  1055, 1060 travel journals  30 travertine 960 Treaty of Samos  637 tree cotton  527, 942 tree fruits  937 Triakontaschoinos  499–503, 524 tribute lists  379 Trigger, Bruce  35, 43, 658 triple inheritance  473n4 Tripolitania 320 Trog(l)odytes  677, 678, 703, 704 Trojan War  699, 707 Tsakos, Alexander  1095 Tsemerese stela  500 tufas 74

1198   index tumulus  591, 594f C-Group 593 extent of tradition of  593 tumulus cluster 2  720f Wadi Kitna tumulus complex K  719 Kalabsha South Tungul. See Dongola Tunjur 900–903 Tunqala West  134 cemetery in  136 Turco-Egyptian period  1074 Turco-Egyptians, invasion of Sudan by  549 Turmukki Island  1082f Turo (king’s son)  329 Tutankhamun (pharaoh)  193, 302, 320, 335, 351, 377f Jebel Barkal and  461 Nubian costume in tomb of  380f tuyères  985, 986, 986f 12th Dynasty  229, 236, 271 Execration Texts of  656 fortresses and  274, 276, 277, 279, 282, 298 25th Dynasty  434, 475, 476, 505, 506 end of  491 God’s Wives of Amun and  1024–25 gold availability and  680 Greece and  700 iron production and  981, 982 Kushite language evidence in  483–84 landscapes of power and  1081 Nubians in Egypt during  477–80, 478t pyramids and  592 quarries during  960 21st century, archaeological practice in 1127–42 26th Dynasty  475, 506, 731 Greece and  700 Kushites in Egypt during  493–98 Typhonium 610 UCL Qatar  1135 UCL Qatar children’s books  1136, 1137f Udjarenes  485, 486 El-Ugal 840 Uganda, Nile headwaters in  66, 72 Umar (caliph)  761 Umarah Dunqas  767

Umm el-Qaab  480, 484 Umm Gebir  188 Umm Murri  19 Umm Ruwaba Formation  55 Umm Sunut  735 Umm Usuda  522 UNESCO  10, 11, 13, 14 UNESCO High Dam (Nubian Salvage) Campaign. See Aswan Dam UNESCO World Heritage Convention  36 UNESCO World Heritage List  22 UNESCO World Heritage site  1139 unfinished sculptures  621, 622f University College London  1052 University of California, Santa Barbara  18, 1060 University of California/Purdue University excavations 1053 University of Cambridge  1060 University of Chicago  18, 1059 University of Colorado  1058, 1059 University of Delaware  18 University of Khartoum  17, 1060 University of Lille  313 University of Michigan, African Studies Center 1142 University of Pennsylvania  10 Unsa (king)  897 Upper Atbara Dam  15f, 20–21 Upper Egypt Nubian cemeteries in  137 settlement system in  129 Upper Nubia  132, 144f, 473n10 concentration of power in  180–82 Egyptian conquest of  329–30 Egyptian occupation of  333–36 fortresses in  329 Medjay in  242–43 Neolithic pastoral period and  145 Pan-Grave culture in  242–43 Post-Meroe period  734f Upper Paleolithic blade technology during  89 hunter-gatherers in  89–92 uraeus  348, 368n6, 455, 457, 460–61, 1019 urban communities, in Meroitic heartland 526–28

index   1199 Uronarti fortress  272f, 280, 281f, 282, 283, 285 Urtigaddi (priest)  822 Usai, Donatella  70, 1053 Usama Abdelrahman el-Nour  14 Usersatet (king’s son)  332, 333 El-Ushara  735, 736f Valley of the Kings  301, 302 Van Gerven, Dennis  1053, 1059 Van Peer, P.  81 Van Seters, John  405 Vansina, Jan  893 Vercoutter, Jean  12, 13, 33 Vermeersch, P. M.  81 viceroy. See king’s son of Kush Vicia faba bean  941 “Victory Inscription” of King Silko  715 Vienna Academy of Sciences  10 Vila, André  310 visual arts  605 visual culture  605 Vittmann, Günter  483 Viventius (king)  790 volcanism 59 von Sieglin, Ernst  10 Vulture Rock  1106 Wadai 900–903 Wad Ben Naga  12, 512, 518, 520, 526, 530, 531, 533, 610, 611f Bark Stand of Amanitore and Natakamani 610f Wad Dakin  902 Waddington, George  8 Wadi Abu Dom  851, 998, 1101 Wadi Abu Subeira  294, 1110 Wadi Allaqi  58, 131, 231, 233, 242, 276, 298, 682, 692, 702, 1003 fortresses in  276 gold mines in  960–61 stone tumulus from  136 trade routes and  999 Wadi el-Arab  86, 113 Mesolithic occupation of  109–10 Wadi Diib  1103 Wadi Elei  690 Wadi Gabgaba  58, 59, 231, 680, 681f, 682

Wadi Gawasis  296 Wadi Hadjala  546 foods in  1059 Wadi Halfa  36, 84, 88, 93, 702, 1053, 1108 skeletal remains from  1058 Wadi Hammamat  2, 294, 682, 689 Wadi Hariq  263, 264f Wadi Hawad  546 Wadi Hilal  1106 Wadi Howar  73, 108, 181, 252–54, 257f, 260f, 264f, 411, 416, 808, 1074, 1077 Darb el-Arba’in and  290 fortresses at  438 Handessi in  263 Holocene sequence and  255t Lower  73, 260f pottery at  256, 259, 261 trade routes and  999 Wadi el-Hudi  962 Wadi Khashab  137 Wadi el-Khowi  109, 910 Wadi Korosko  920 Wadi Kubbaniya  88, 228, 237, 294 site E-78-3  90 Wadi Maghur  255 Wadi el-Melik  73 trade routes and  999 Wadi Muqaddam  58, 73 Wadi en-Natrun  764, 775, 797, 799 Wadi Qitna  685, 834 X-Group and  719, 720, 720f Wadi Sahal  259, 262–63 Wadi es-Sebua  10, 174 church at  850 Wadi Shaw  259, 262 Wadi Sura  252 wadi systems  514–15 Wadi Tarabil  546, 567 Wadi Umm Rahau  88 Wadjkara Segersenti  172 Wad Nemeiri  884f wall painting Alwa 868 at Faras  848 Makuria 854f 8th century  856, 856f 9th-12th centuries  859–62

1200   index wall painting  (cont.) 6th-7th centuries  853 13th-14th centuries  865–66 in Nobadia  850–51 war, iron and  983 war elephants  702–3 warfare, pastoralism and  160 water Amun and  357, 366n1 Eastern Desert and  672 watermelon 937 waterwheels  815, 833, 943 Wavy Line pottery  103, 104f, 107, 108, 256 Wawat  167, 168, 170, 172, 181, 293, 377 weapons iron 989 Pan-Grave 220 self-identity and  169 weathering 54–55 Webat-Sepet 185t, 240, 300 Wedge-Shaped people (rock art)  1093 Wedjarenes 494 Weigall, Arthur  1092 Weinstuben, at Sayala  717 Wellcome, Henry  11 Wellcome expedition  941 Welsby, Derek  831 Weni the Elder  165, 166, 181, 293 trade expeditions and  996, 1001, 1004 Wentawat (king’s son)  337 Western Desert  55, 82, 130, 252 aridity increasing in  253 in Late Holocene  262 pastoralism in  259 periodization for  104 rock art research and  1093 wetland plants  90 wheat  934, 935 in Neolithic contexts  152 wheelmade pottery  744, 750, 752 White Nile  2, 63, 64, 309, 432n60 flood dynamics of  73 flood phases  71f flow rates  931 headwaters  51, 703 Holocene environments  70 Holocene flood history of  67–69

landscapes and  1074 monthly discharge  66f sediments from  73 whitewash 607 El-Widay  243, 1053 wild fauna  1076 Williams, Bruce  126, 159, 714 wine 938–40 Winkler, Hans  1092–93, 1108–9 winter crops  931, 933, 941 Wolf, Simone  550 women 1015. See also gender agriculture and  133 A-Group and  1016 Askut and  384, 385f bodies of  1035, 1036 burial practices and  384, 387 death and burial  1028–29 excess weight in  1026 figurines of  1038–39 gender and body  1025–27 in Napatan period  1018 non-royal 1025 in Nubian society  133 occupations of  1027–28 royal and elite, in Kush concept of queenship and  1018 costume of  1018–19 before Kingdom of Kush  1016–17 kingship ideology and  1023–24 names and titles  1021 roles of  1022–23 temple cult and ritual roles  1022–23 in tombs  1021–22 Tombos and  384 woodcutting 1077 wooden sculptures  608 world systems  996 World War II  12 written Nubian  797 written sources  412 Xenophanes 699 Xerxes (king)  436 X-Group  10, 34, 714, 714f, 1056–58 burial practice  719–21

index   1201 commensality and  1046 material culture  725–26 Meroitic culture and  726–27 pottery  722, 724, 724f, 725–26 ritual practice  718–19 settlement 716–18 textual sources for  715 X-Group period  713 building patterns in  718 Yahhatek (king)  790 Yam  166, 167, 182, 205, 263, 1000, 1004

Yaqubi 678 Yellow Nile  108, 999, 1074 Yesebokheamani (king)  534, 607 Yusuf Fadl Hasan  881 Zabargad Island  962 Zacharias (king)  762–63 Zanafij 838 Zeus (deity)  547, 700–701 Zolat el-Hammad  261f Ez-Zuma 739f, 752, 753, 819f, 822–24 anchorites at  840