Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 32 views

    OEoAE 3 - People PDF

    Uploaded by

    UnknownUserXXX

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content

    You might also like

    OEoAE 3 - People PDF

    Uploaded by

    UnknownUserXXX
    32 views8 pages

    Original Title

    OEoAE 3_ People.pdf

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    32 views8 pages

    OEoAE 3 - People PDF

    Uploaded by

    UnknownUserXXX

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 8
    THE OXFORD ENCYCLOPEDIA OF ANCIENT EGYPT DONALD B. REDFORD EDITOR IN CHIEF VOLUME 3 R OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS 2001 pIbLioGRAPHY ‘Buvour), Abbas, Auiour du charnp des souchets er du champ des of ares. Caco, 1941. Deals with both the Field of Rushes and the Field of Offerings, which are considered to be two separate areas. Based almost exclusively on the Pyramid Texis and the Book of Go- ‘ng Forth by Dey. Both this work and that of R, Well are now some= ‘what dated, but so far they have not been superseded, Hornung, Erk. Der yptische Mythos vor der Hinnmalsoa: Ein Atio- loge des Unvollkonmmenen. Orbis Biblicus et Orientals, 46, Fre- burg and Gatingen, 1982; 2d ed, 1991. Edition with translation ‘and commentary of the Book of the Heavonb’ Coss Contains excur sus on the dynasty of gods and on the rebellion of mankind and ther punishment. ‘ees, Hermann. “EarurGefle.*Realexion der agprisclen Refiions- ‘geschiche, edited by Hans Bonnet, pp. 161-162. Berlin, 1952. Sh rick onthe Fill of Rushes and the Field of Offerings, which are ‘considered be virally identical Leclant, Jean, “Eani-Gefile” In Leviton der Agypiolgie, 1 1150= 1160, Wiesbaden, 1975, An up-to-date surnmary of what is known bout the Field of Rushes: itso deale with the Field of fern Lesko, Leonard H. "The Field of Hetep in Egyptian Coffin Text “Tourval of the Arerican Research Conterin Egypt 9(1971-1972):89- 101. Annotated translation ofthe earliest version of chapter 110 of the Book of Going Forth by Das. Lilt, Ultich. Belge eur Histristerne der Gouenvele nd der N= thenschreiburg, Studia Aewyplica, 4 Budapest, 1978, Study of the ‘Era of the God" and of the dynasty of gods which preceded these cof the human kings. Mereer: Sainte A.B. The Pyramid Texs tn Translation and Commer tary Vol 4 New York, 1982. Pp 65-68 pive a useful excursus enti- ‘led "Marsh of Reeds and Marsh of Offerings in the Pyramid Texts. Munro, Peter. “Broshalten und Schilfolitter” Gatinger Miszellen 5 (1973): 13-16. On the interpretation of the offering table ast “Field of Offering” ‘Weil, Reymond. Le champ des roscans ele cheraps des ofrandes dvs Te eligi faint la eligon general, Paris, 1935, More compre hensive than Bayouris stad, but even more dated, especially from 8 methodological poin: of view. Funerary tex, and the Pyra ‘eats in particular, are considered to reflect a rivalry between the ‘theologies of Osiris and Re, a view few Egypiclogists would sub- scribe to nowadays. Weil epts fora sharp distintion between the ‘too Fields, stusting the Field of Rushes in the east and the Feld ‘of Offerings, undoubtedly wrongly inthe west, Worsham, Charls E. "A Reinterpreation of the So-Called Bread Loaves in Egyptian Offering Scenes.” Journal of the American Re. search Center in Fgypt 16 (1970) 7-10. Covers: much the same round az Munro article PATRIARCHY. See Gender Roles. PEOPLE. Tracking the movements and establishing the identity of peoples in the archaeological and historical records isa difficult and often ambiguous project. Physi- cal anthropology is the best source of identification, but, the early misuse of the “race concept” created overly sim- plistic definitions driven more by colonialism and racism than by science, Modern studies based on population ge~ netics are much more complex and yield more ambiguous PEOPLE 27 results, Historical linguistic evidence, espectally names. is also used to establish group identities where historical records exist, as is ofien the case in Egypt and the sur- rounding regions. Archaeological data have been used to reconstruct the identity of ethnic groups in two ways: by characterizing artifact assemblages as culture areas, with- ‘out necessarily establishing that they belong to a histori- cally known group: and by matching groups identified in texts with an artifact assemblage. Unlike physical anthro pology and linguistics, archaeological evidence is abun- dant and relatively easy to analyze, but all stu kind rest on the important assumption that a fact assemblage does in fact represent a cultural iden rather than a sphere of cultural influence or culture con tact—and this may or may not be true. Radical diffu sionists in the late nineteenth and early twentieth conti ries favored massive movements of peoples as the engine of cultural change. Thus W. M. Flinders Petrie’ "Dynastic Race’ concept linked cultural achievement with ractal identity in the origins of pharaonic civilization. These ‘models have, unfortunately, been revived by some Afro. centric scholars, who otherwise rightly emphasize Egypt's African origins. Diffusion and population movements did exist in the past, but they must be carefully demonstrated. For example, the identity of Uruk colonies (€.3500 sce) in southem Anatolia was established by using a combina. tion of architecture, material culture, and textual evi dence. In a similar way, a combination of archaeology, text, and art history has documented an Egyptian colonial presence and the diffusion (and subsequent adaptation) of certain aspects of Egyptian iconography, ideology, and institutions in Nubia and in Syria-Palestine. Race of the Ancient Egyptians. The race and origins of the ancient Egyptians have been a source of consi erable debate. Scholars in the late and early twentieth centuries rejected any consideration of the Egyptians as black Africans by defining the Egyptians either as non- African (ie., either Near Eastern or Indo-Aryan), or as members of a separate brown (as opposed to black) race, ‘or as a mixture of lighter-skinned peoples with black Afri- cans. In the latter half of the twentieth century, Afrocen- tric scholars have countered this Eurocentric and often racist perspective by characterizing the Egyptians as black and African. A common feature of all of these ap- proaches, including the last, is the connection of race to cultural achievement. At the same time, however, modem physical anthropologists have increasingly challenged the entire notion of race, replacing it with the more complex and scientifically based population genetics. ‘The origins of the modern conception of race derive from the work of nineteenth-century anthropologists like LH. Morgan and E. B. Tylor, who developed “scientific unilinear evolutionary models for the development of hu- ‘man beings from “savagery” to “civilization.” This model 28 PEOPLE profoundly influenced early Egyptological views of race. Racial groups were ranked by evolutionary categories linked to supposed intellectual capacities based on elab- orate cranial measurements, allegedly providing causal links among phenotypic traits, mental capacity, and sociopolitical dominance. This methodology, not coinei dentally, reinforced the existing Euro-American dom tion of Third World peoples with the claim of scientifically “objective” methodologies based on race and evolution. ‘Thus, the great achievements of ancient Egypt could not flow from black Africans, since theirs was an inferior race; ‘0 the “Dynastic Race” must have been white, or at least brown. ‘As early as 1897, Franz Boas challenged this racial ide- ology, in particular the argument for connections among language, culture, and biology (i.e., race). Boas demon- strated that supposedly distinctive core racial indicators could change quickly in response to clothing styles, nutri- tion, and cultural and environmental factors. Ashley Mon- tague, a student of Boas, played a key role in developing and disseminating this concept; he argued in Marts Most Dangerous Myth: The Fallacy of Race (New York, 1942) that the old paradigm of static races should be replaced by dynamic populations with overlapping characteristics. Far from being absolute, genetic traits are distributed in clines, or continuously varying distributions of traits in- consistent with racial categories. Modern physical an- thropology has demonstrated that 94 percent of human variation is found within human populations, rather than between the major populations traditionally labeled races. Biological characteristics affected by natural selection, migration, or drift are distributed in geographic grada- tions. These encompass all the features used to define ra- cial physical “phenotypes,” including facial form, hair texture, blood type, and epidermal melanin (the chemical determining darkness of skin). These physical feat cross alleged racial boundaries as if they were nonexis- tent, leading to the inevitable conclusion that there are no biological races, just clines. Physical anthropologists are increasingly concluding that racial definitions are the cul- turally defined product of selective perception and should be replaced in biological terms by the study of popu- lations and clines. Consequently, any characterization of the race of the ancient Egyptians depends on modern cul- tural definitions, not scientific study. Thus, by modern American standards it is reasonable to characterize the Egyptians as “black,” while acknowledging the scientific evidence for the physical diversity of Africans. Origins of the Egyptians in Northeastern Africa. In spite of the evidence against scientific race, both Egyptol- ogists and Afrocentric scholars often continue aitempis to define the Egyptians as members of an essentialist racial category, usually attempting to link them either to a sup- posed “Caucasoid” or *Negroid/Africoid” phenotype. Such ‘models imply that the founders of pharaonic Egypt came from sub-Saharan Africa, western Asia, or Europe/Trans- caucasus. While there was some immigration from all these areas, physical anthropology has demonstrated the fundamental continuity of ancient and modern Egyptian populations. The evidence also points to linkages to other northeastern African peoples, not coincidentally approx- imating the modern range of languages closely related to Egyptian in the Afro-Asiatic group (formerly called Hamito-Semitic). These linguistic similarities place an- cient Egyptian in a close relationship with languages spo- ken today in northeastern Africa as far west as Chad and south to Somalia. Archaeological evidence also strongly supports an African origin. A widespread northeastern AF rican cultural assemblage, ineluding distinctive multiple barbed harpoons and pottery decorated with dotted wavy line patterns, appears during the early Neolithic (also known as the Aqualithic, a reference to the mild climate ‘of the Sahara at this time). Saharan and Sudanese rock art from this time resembles early Egyptian iconography. Strong connections between Nubian (Sudanese) and Egyptian material culture continue in the later Neolithic Badarian culture of Upper Egypt. Similarities include black-topped wares, vessels with characteristic ripple- burnished surfaces, a special tulip-shaped vessel with in- cised and white-filled decoration, palettes, and harpoons. ‘The presence of formative pharaonic symbolism in the Lower Nubian A-Group royal burials at Qustul has led Bruce Williams to posit a common Eeyptian-Nubian haraonic heritage, elthough this notion has been much disputed. Other ancient Egyptian practices show strong similarities to modern African cultures, including divine Kingship, the use of headrests, body art, circumcision, and male coming-of-age rituals, all suggesting an African substratum or foundation for Egyptian civilization (rather than diffusion from sub-Saharan Africa, as claimed by some Afrocentric scholars) Other Peoples in Egypt. Throughout pharaonic Egyp’’ long history, peoples from surrounding areas in- teracted with Egyptians. Many of them settled in the Nile Valley, where they assimilated to, and sometimes exerted some influence on, Egyptian culture. We can identify a number of these groups from Egyptian records, although it must be remembered that their depiction was often col- ‘red by the stereotypes of state ideology (see below). The ‘main emphasis will be placed on groups who lived in or came to the Nile Valley in large numbers, ‘Nubians. Nubian-Egyptian trade flourished during the late Predynastic period through the first dynasty, pre- sumably accompanied by small numbers of expatriaic traders and perhaps envoys. The Early Dynastic period raids that destroyed the Lower Nubian A-Group culture brought Nubians to Egypt as slaves and perhaps merce navies. During the Old Kingdom, archaeological evidence from the Egyptian colonial settlement at Buhen at the Second Cataract reveals « population of impoverished Nubians, presumably sloves. Nubians are attested as sol- diers and administrators during the late Old Kingdom, and large numbers of Nubian mercenaries were used dur- ing the civil wars of the First Intermediate Period. A group of these Egyptianized soldiers settled at Gebelein, where funerary stelae depiet them as prosperous members of the local community. A statue of the Middle Kingdom founder Nebhepetre Mentuhotep with black skin may point to Nubian ancestry, although the use of black may simply reflect the statue's Osirian symbolism. Artistic and physical evidence suggests that his wives Ashayit, He henit, Kemsit, and Sadeh were probably Nubian. Nubian- stvle tattoos were found on women in elite burials of the period. Nubians are featured in Middle Kingdom tombs ot Beni Hasan and Meir, Later images showing a black- skinned queen Ahmose Nefertari, wife and sister or half= sister of the New Kingdom's founder, Ahmose, may indicate Nubian ancestry, although, again, black may symbolize the deceased!s connection with Osiris. ‘Vegetation in the Eastern Desert of Egypt and the Su- dan could support a sizable seminomadie pastoral popu- lation. These people are identified in Egyptian sources as, the Media, who were grouped along with Nubians and de- picted with the same physical appearance and dress. They have been identified archseologically with the so-called Pan-Grave culture, whose characteristic cemeteries are found as far north as 27° north latitude in southern Upper Egupt and range into Sudanese Nubia. Archacologicaly they are related to the Lower Nubian C-Group and Upper Nubian Kerma cultures, but they represent a distinet tra dition, Papyrus Boulag records the visit of the Media chic the Egyptian court at Thebes in the thirteenth dynasty sitesting to close relations. Medja mercenaries were em- ployed extensively during the Second Intermediate Pe- riod, in the seventeenth dynasty Theban campaigns to «rest control of Egypt from the Nile Delta-based Hyksos fiteenth dynasty. The characteristic Pan-Grave assem: hlage was found at the palace and town of Ballas, which may have served as a key staging area for the Egyptian reconquest of northern Upper Egypt and of Lower Egypt. Many Media settled in Egypt and assimilated into Egyp- ian society during the Second Intermediate Period and New Kingdom. During the New Kingdom, the word Medja" lost its ethnic connotation, becoming synony- mous with “police,” attesting to the Medja’s considerable eputation as soldiers. The Lower Nubian princes of pts New Kingdom colonial administration may have -cen drawn from acculturated Medja elite, Other Egyp- ‘anized Nubians, whether of the C-Group, Medja, or (less PEOPLE 29 likely) Kerman, entered New Kingdom society, often ris- ing to prominent positions in the government. Egypt lost control of Nubia at the end of the New King- dom, and by about 850 nce a new power arose at Napata in Upper Nubia. By about 750 BcE, the Nubian pharaoh Piya gained control of southern Upper Egypt and had his daughter Amenirdis installed as heir to the key post of “Divine Wife of Amun" at Thebes; at the death of the twenty-third dynasty “Divine Wife,” Shepenwepet, Amer- nirdis assumed the ttle and functions. In Year 21 of his reign, Piya defeated the Libyan prince Tefnakht, establish- ing the twenty-fifth dynasty as rulers over all of Egypt. A number of Nubians no doubt settled in Egypt during this period. intermarrying with Egyptians. Although Piya and hhis successors depicted themselves as the “saviors” of Egyptian civilization, their Egyptianization was not as comprehensive as royal ideology indicates. Monumental and presumably administrative texts were written in Egyptian, but they kept their Nubian names (possibly in a Nilo-Saharan language, suggesting an origin in central Africa), mode of succession, and elements of dress and regalia. Although Egyptian gods were adopted, temples renovated or built, and pyramid tombs adopted, these fea. tures were not slavishly copied but were adapted to suit Napatan needs and perceptions. After the Assyrian con- ‘quest, Kushite pharaonic culture continued to flouris the South, becoming a prominent source of Egyptian in- fluence in sub-Saharan Africa until the early cent Puntites. The earliest mention of Punt is on the Pal- ‘ermo Stone, which notes an expedition mounted under the reign of the fifth dynasty king Sahure, Contact con- tinued sporadically until the New Kingdom. Visits to the land of Punt are not mentioned in Egyptian sources after the reign of Ramesses III (¢.1150 scr). The scene of an expedition to Punt from Queen Hatshepsu’s mortuary complex at Deir el-Bahri shows Puntites with red skin and facial features similar to Egyptians, long or bobbed hair, goatee beards, and kilts. The so-called queen of Punt is represented as steatopygous. These same reliefs show the Puntites as a settled people, with houses placed on stilts. ‘The flora and fauna shown indicate a location in coastal Sudan or Eritrea. At least some Puntites visited Ezypt ‘with their families, but it is unlikely that many settled there. Pygmies. A few references from the Old Kingdom seem to refer to the people known today as Pygmies. Small numbers of Pygmies were brought to Egypt as sacred dancers. They are found in the Pyramid Texts, involved in the frenetic mortuary dance. The safe arrival of a dancing Pygmy is a matter of concern to young Pepy Il in a letter to the expedition leader Harkhut, recorded in his tomb at Aswan, These references imply that Pygmies danced espe- cially for the king, just as the king dances before the god. 30 PEOPLE If necessary, a dwarf could substitute, suggesting that Pygmies were a great rarity and never present in large numbers. Today Pyamies live in the rain forests of central Africa, although there is considerable debate regarding the antiquity of their occupation there. Libyans. Although groups from Libya (Such as the ‘Tjemech) probably interacted with Egypt from ea times, they do not reach prominence in Eeyptian records ‘until the New Kingdom. Libyans are depicted at Akhena- {en's court as emissaries or mercenaries. During the nine- teenth and twentieth dynasties, Libyans were identificd as Tichenu and became one of four essential peoples or “races” depicted in the solar theology (see below). Egvp~ tian texts mention two main groups, the Meshwesh and Lib. Slight differences in dress and appearance between. the two groups may indicate a cultural distinction, Lib- yan incursions into the western Nile Delta were a serious problem for Ramessid kings. Accounts of military cam. paigns mounted against them Indicate large numbers of cattle and sheep taken as booty, implying a significant pastoral component. The same texts mention towns, im- plying an urban civilization. Their most likely origin lies in Cyrenaica (coastal Libya), although the region is still relatively unknown archeologically: Some texts imply that they also ranged through the northern oases and Sahara, Archacologically, the oases have a distinct material eul- ture, often mixed with Egyptian pottery and artifae flecting contact and conquest at various periods. ongoing archaeological projects should permit a better definition of these groups. Libyans settled in large num bers in the Nile Delta, eventually founding the Bubestite twenty-second dynasty, based at Tanis. The third-century ‘cE Egyptian historian Manetho refers to Sheshong I as the first of a series of Libyan chiefs who ruled Egypt for two hundred years. Theban records refer to him as "Great Chief of all the Meswesh,” who had been used as police uring the New Kingdom. The kings of the Bubastite dy- nasty were at least partly Libyan, and the Saite dynast rulers may well have had some Libyan ancestry. Near Easterners (Asiaties). Evidence of contact with, the Near Fast goes back to the Predynastic period. Al- though some scholars favoring diffusionist models have argued for a massive influx through the Nile Delta or the Wadi Hammamat via the Red Sea, the consensus today {for increasing contact and interaction focused on the Delta and the Sinai, There isample textual evidence in the form of names for the presence of Syrian-Palestinians in Egyp’s public institutions and private houses. For ex- ample, the Middle Kingdom Brooklyn Papyrus lists seventy-seven servants of the lady Senebtisi, Forty-eight of whom have Near Easter names. Other texts show that new generations of families like these received Egyptian names, gradually assimilating into Egyptian society. Sev- eral stelae from this period depict servants labeled as Near Easterners, but with Egyptian names, dress, and hairstyles. Some may have come to Egypt ss captives from military campaigns, although there was consi able movement of peoples going both ways for trade and diplomacy. Egypt gtadually became more engaged with Near East- em peoples during the later Middle Kingdom, through the establishment of a major point of immigration at Tell ed- Dabia in the eastern Nile Delta. This site hay all the hall- marks of a trade diaspora, an expatriate settlement serv ing as an interface between the two trading partners, Excavations document a gradual inerease in the numbers and influence of Syrian-Palestinians at Dab'a over the course of the thirteenth dynasty. By the late thirteenth dy. nasty, Middle Bronze Age pottery makes up 40 percent of the assemblage, "warrior" tombs with typical weaponry and associated equid burials appear with great frequency, ‘and monumental temples in the standard Middle Bronze Age layout rival those of sites in Syria-Palestine. A com plex settlement hierarchy developed in Palestine during this period, anchored by major trade “gateways” at Tell ed-Dabia in the south and Hazor in the north, At the end of the thirteenth dynasty, Tell ed-Dab'a became the capital of the Syrian-Palestinian fifteenth dynasty, the Hyksos, ‘which established direct control over the northern half of Egypt and forced the Upper Egyptian seventeenth dynasty to accept a role as a vassal state. The Hyksos only partly assimilated to Egyptian culture, although itis likely that many of their descendants remained in the Delta after Egypts “expulsion” of the carly eighteenth dynasty, thereby becoming part of Egyptian New Kingdom society. ‘Substantial numbers of Near Eastern peoples, mostly Syrian-Palestinians but including individuals from Mi- tanni (Syria) and Hatti (Anatolia), were captured during the great military campaigns of the New Kingdom, which ranged as far as northern Syria, Others came as tribute From vassal states controlled by Egypt or as free traders, craftsmen, and scribes. Most prisoners were assigned to various royal and temple estates to provide labor in the fields, although some were parceled out as rewards to val- orous warriors. Skilled Near Eastern craftsmen were em ployed in Egyptian workshops, and others were employed as servants in elite and royal households, Literate elites from the Near East were often employed in the Egyptian bureaucracy, where their linguistic skills proved valuable to the conduct of international trade and diplomacy; the ambitious might rise to high positions. The Canaanite Ben-ozen became chief of the department of alimentation and beverage and chief royal herakl under Ramesses TI, ‘The chicf draftsman in the temple of Amun, Pas-Ba‘al was possibly taken prisoner under Thutmose Il, and his descendants occupied his office for six generations. An in- dividual with the Canaanite name AperE] became vizier ander Amenhotpe II1, and Chancellor Bey became a vir~ tual kingmaker at the end of the nineteenth dynasty, Egyptians intermarried with Near Easterners, and slaves \Were sometimes adopted into Egyptian families. Although ‘most Near Easterners assimilated to some degree, the cull tural influence was not unidirectional. Levantine mythical and literary motifs, loan words, and deities such as Ba‘al, Astarte, and Reshep all entered into the Egyptian cultural sphere during the New Kingdom. Mediterranean peoples. Archacological, historical, and artistic evidence point to limited interactions among Egypt, Minoan Crete, and Mycenean Greece during the Bronze Age. Pottery and other artifacts from the Aegean appear in Egypt during the Middle andl New Kingdoms. Egyptian objects also appear in the Aegean during this period. Minoan-style architectural frescoes from the be- sinning of the eighteenth dynasty at Tell ed-Dab’a in the Nile Delta suggest the presence of artisans from Crete in Egypt. Scenes of Aegean emissaries and traders, like those from the tomb of Rekhmire, vizier under Thutmose II, provide further evidence of interaction in the New King- dom. A fragmentary list of Aegean place names from the mortuary temple of Amenhotpe HII points to an Egyptian embassy for Mycenean Greece. It is not likely, howeves, ‘hat many of these Aegean peoples settled in Egypt. The “Sea Peoples” is a term used to encompass the movements of Mediterranean peoples by both sea and id at the end of the Late Bronze Age (¢.1200-1100 nce). ‘The disruptions caused by this massive migration through. he Anatolian Plateau and down the eastern Mediterra- ean coast brought down the great Hittite Empire and such coastal Levantine trading centers as Ugarit, Some captive groups were turned into mercenaries in the Fgyp- Jan army, most notably the fierce Sherden, who became site royal bodyguards under Ramesses II. The Harris Pa- oyrus notes that captive Peleset, Shardana, Weshesh, Den- ven,and Shekelesh were used as garrison forces and mer- caries under Ramesses III. The exact origin of each of hese groups is a matter of considerable debate; the con- sensus favors the Aegean and western Anatolia as the ori- ‘of most of them, Some soldiers and their families ‘ere settled in coastal Palestine, where they are identified srchaeologically with the Philistines. Others settled in Egypt. Papyrus Wilbour, a tax roll of farms in the Faiyum ‘a, lists several Shardana as landholders, Greeks and Carians began to be used as Egyptian mer- cenaties in the Late period, settling at sites like Naukratis the Nile Delta, Trade with the Mediterranean expanded ing the Saite twenty-sixth dynasty, bringing other

    You might also like