 |
ARKAMANI
Sudan Electronic Journal of Archaeology
and Anthropology
|
THE "C-GROUPS" CULTURE OF
LOWER NUBIA
Maria Costanza De Simone
Dynamics of populations, movements and responses to climatic
change in Africa, B.E.Barich and M.C.Gatto (eds), Bonsignori Editorem Rome 1997:
111-124.
![]()
The evolutionary theory
![]()
The migration theory
![]()
The Sources
![]()
The Middle Nubian Phases
The Middle Nubian I
The Middle Nubian II
The Middle Nubian III
![]()
Refrences
Organized
archaeological research began in Nubia only in 1906. The then director of the Egyptian Antiquity Service, the French-Itahan Maspero, entrusted Weigall to carry out an inspection of the Egyptian
monuments in the area, that ran the risk of being
covered by water as a consequence of the raising of the dam. Weigall was the first to point out the presence of autochtonous cultures different from the Egyptian ones.
Reisner was the first researcher to carry out a
classification in chronological sequence (Reisner 1910). A very important phase of this
sequence is represented by the "C-Groups" Culture, called also
Middle Nubian. The Middle Nubian or "C-Groups" is a long and unbroken
tradition in the cultural history of Lower Nubia,
which, according to the Egyptian texts, passed through a climatically
favorable period with high population levels.
It
is not easy to explain the origin of the "C-Groups" Culture.
Researchers have put forward several theories, including the emigration theory
and the evolutionary theory.
The evolutionary theory
The
evolutionary theory maintains that "C-Groups" Culture derives from
the earlier "A-Groups" Culture. This latter was composed of small
communities organized in modest agrarian and/or agro-pastoral settlements. Over
the course of time the leaders of these communities increased their power. Much
of the material collected on the sites is of Egyptian provenance, and this
seems to suggest the existence of close ties between the two countries
(Nordstrom 1972 ; Gatto n.d.).
Later, power
became centralized in Egypt, and Egypt began to wield a more dominant influence
over its neighbours, in order to obtain the products
of the Red Sea mountains and Central Sudan. Whilst in Egypt the first dynasties were forming, it
seems that in Nubia the "A-Groups" Culture suffered
a collapse. Archeological evidence seems to support the idea that the Middle Nubian
sequence was essentially a continuation and development of the last phase of
the "A-Groups" Culture, called also Early Nubian. Sites have been
found which were inhabited during both periods and the black-topped bowls, as
well as burial practices, continued on from Early Nubian phase.
In Middle Nubian I
phase new elements seem to appear: but they do not, in my view, exclude the
possibility of continuity. For example, many skeletons have been found in the
"C-Groups" tombs that have Negroid characteristics, while skeletons
of the preceding period have characteristics similar to those of the Egyptians.
The
answers to these questions may be supplied by the latest research at Kerma (AA.Vv. 1990). The new discoveries suggest the existence,
since the Neolithic Period, of a sedentary community governed by local leaders
who wielded a certain amount of power. The discovery of a Pre-Kerma settlement
with contemporary pottery in the area of the Third Cataract would suggest a
socio-political climate in Middle Nubia different from that in Lower Nubia. Around the year 3000 BC the demographic
growth that began in the late Neolithic Period was consolidated. No Egyptian
imports have been found, and it appears that this society was organized
entirely independently.
Although
Lower Nubia acted as a buffer state for almost 2000 years, we can find many similarities in
the material collected at the southern border of
Egypt and in Upper Nubia. Without doubt there an intense network of
ties existed, and certain cultural traits seem to suggest the emergence of a
definitive power. The high quality of the pottery is a throwback to prehistoric
times. But the evolution of the forms, the decoration and the fabric testify to
rapid change, connected to the construction of a Kingdom, without doubt that of
Kerma. The increased demand by the Egyptians for its exotic products gave this
Kingdom, which could be that of Yam according to the texts of the Old Kingdom, a decisive role.
The
history of the Kerma civilization is only recorded from 2500 BC. This phase is called by researchers Ancient Kerma. In the
eastern necropolis of Kerma "C-Groups" tombs have been found close to
typical Kerma ones. Therefore there was a measure of coexistence of the two
peoples before the "C-Groups" gained a greater degree of autonomy at
the Second Cataract region (Bonnet 1982). This
could explain the presence of Negroid skeletons in "C-Groups" tombs.
Although
dominated and watched by the pharaonic armies, the
"C-Groups" peoples re-established themselves in Lower Nubia and developed a culture similar to that
of Kerma. During the Classic Kerma Period (1750-1500 BC) unification took place under
the authority of Kerma. This view seems to be supported by fortified
villages, such as those at Amada and Wadi es-Sebua, and by the Kerma graves found in that area.
Whilst to the south of the Second Cataract the buffer zone was constituted by
the Kingdom of Kerma itself, to the north the buffer was, in all
probability, the "C-Groups".
The military
strength of the Kingdom of Kerma (called also
Kingdom of Kush) constituted a concern for Egypt, which set up a barrier, made up of a
number of fortresses, in the area of the Second Cataract. Taking advantage of
internal Egyptian strife, the Kerma were able to increase their territory
during the Second Intermediate Period (1674-1553
BC).
Another
new element found in "C-Groups" tombs is the appearance of drawings
of cattle. For around 1000 years their graphic art was limited to the
representation of cattle on stone, funerary stelae,
and on pottery. Those who supported the idea of immigration used this new
element as the fundamental basis of their thesis. They claim that, while the
economy of "A-Groups" was based principally on agriculture, that of
the "C-Groups" was based on the raising of livestock. This, the
argument runs, means that the people of the "AGroups"
were sedentary farmers, while those of the "C-Groups" were nomadic
shepherds, and that, therefore, they were two different peoples.
The
osteological evidence, however, suggests a different
story. The discovery of bones of cattle, cattle skins and cattle graves in
many "A-Groups" sites indicate that pastoralism,
far from being unknown to "A-Groups", was in fact an essential part
of their economy (Gatto this volume).
At
this point I would also like to suggest that in the period prior to the unification
of Upper and Lower
Egypt the
relations between Egyptians and the "AGroups",
according to the archeological evidence, were good or, at least, the Egyptians did not represent the threatening
presence that they were later to become. In fact "A-Groups" sites
testify to a strong sedentariness, which is a sign of
a certain tranquillity, and the presence of many Egyptian
objects indicates the existence of normal commercial relations, and therefore
probably also friendly relations. The "A-Groups" Culture reaches an
apex at the end of the Gerzean period (about 3300-3050 BC). From the beginning of the
First Dynasty (c. 3050 BC) we have no
more information on this culture. There is evidence of a diminution in the
volume of the Nile flood during the First Dynasty which may be correlated with
a lowering of the floodplain in Lower Nubia from the maximum of 6 to 7 meters above the present level: this
was reached between 4000 and 3000 BC (Wendt 1966). While these events may have adversely affected
Lower Nubia more than they did Egypt, it is impossible to attribute the total
disappearance of the "AGroups" in Lower Nubia entirely to
natural causes. Nor is there explicit evidence of Egyptian military activity in
Lower Nubia after the early First Dynasty.
Unification
in Egypt may have had negative repercussions on Nubia. In all probability this centralization of
power presented itself as a threat in Nubian eyes, and they hastened to seek
for allies amongst their southern neighbours who at
that time were establishing the basis of a powerful state. This could explain
the co-habitation for a certain period of the early "C-Groups" and
Ancient Kerma. This continued until the "C-Groups" withdrawal into
Lower Nubia,
where they no longer practiced, at least at the beginning, the sedentary life
that had been that of "A-Groups". In contrast, they
started a nomadic existence whose economic base could only have been pastoralism (the bovine stelae go
back to the early "C-Groups") (Steindorff
1935).
The most important "C-Groups" settlements that
definitely indicate a sedentary life go back to the Second Intermediate Period, that is the period of Nubian unification under the
Kingdom of
Kerma.
The migration theory
As for the migration theory, some researchers found in this new cultur co
elements which were lacking in the "A-Groups" one, and
so they supposed that innovations had been brought to
Nubia as a result of
migration. As for the region from which this emigration came, many theories
have been proposed.
According to Firth, the migration moved from the
Eastern
Desert or from the Atbara region. Murdoch
identified the "C-Groups" with the Beja of
the
Eastern
Desert and suggested that it
was them who introduced milking to the region. He suggested that the previous
inhabitants of
Nubia had already borrowed
animal husbandry from the Egyptians and transmitted it to other groups, who
subsequently passed it on to
West Africa. Junker accepted the theory of the Hamitic, Eastern origin of these groups.
On the contrary Bates, Kirwan
and Emery support a western and specifically Libyan origin. But the common
cultural elements between the "CGroups"
and the Libyans consist of factors which were widely distributed in
North Africa, so they are not a
proof of a common origin of both cultures. Some of these common traits are: a
worship of cows, the use of kilts for women, anatomical resemblance,
similarities in the burial position.
Arkell pointed out
similarities between the "C-Groups" Culture and the Ondurman one in the
Khartoum region, mainly on the
basis of the incised black ware. Afterwards, the same researcher showed a
connection between the Wadi Howar
ware, in the
Western
Desert, and the Nubian ware.
Shaw discovered some rock drawings in the Wadi
Hussein; the same area showed representations of cattle with vertical lines
along the body, like those found in the rock drawings and on the pottery in
Lower Nubia. Likewise there are
numerous resemblances between the "C-Groups" and the Pan Grave
Cultures, the latter originated in the
Eastern
Desert. Arkell
has tried to explain the similarities among these cultures as the result of a
series of migrations. Postulating an origin of Middle Nubian culture somewhere
west of the
Nile, he suggests that increasing aridity drove these people
into the
Nile
Valley during the First
Intermediate Period. Later perhaps with the
increasing dessication of grazing lands close to the
river, some of the Middle Nubian pastoralists migrated up the Wadi El Allaqi into the
Eastern
Desert (Trigger
1965).
No reliable elements allow us to assess with absolute
certainty all these views. But I think that it is better, according to the
evidence available, to stress the theory of the continuity between Early Nubian
and Middle Nubian.
The Sources
The sources of information on the "C-Groups", as
for all Nubian history, can be divided between written (Egyptian) and
archaeological (on-site research) sources. Of these, the written records have
been available for longer. They are documents that testify to the sending of
expeditions. These expeditions left a mark of their passing in rock drawings,
in the presence of valuable precious objects given in exchange for local
products, in tombs, temples, and the remains of settlements.
These documents may be either royal or private, but even the latter refer
to expeditions organized by the palace-expeditions which, even if they did not
have specific military goals, had to be carefully organized and supported by
troops that could guarantee their safety among scarcely-known peoples (Bongrani Fanfoni
1991).
The Middle Nubian Phases
Following the archaeological research carried out in the
last decades, the Middle Nubian culture has been divided by scholars into
4
phases. The first phase, or Middle Nubian I, corresponds
to
Egyptian
Ancient
Kingdom and First Intermediate
Period (about
2626 - 2040
BC).
The second phase, or Middle Nubian II, is contemporary
with Middle Kingdom
(2040-1674
BC). The third phase
corresponds to the Second Intermediate Period
(1674-1553
BC).
The Middle Nubian IV is the culture that survived in the
New Kingdom
(1552-1069 ?
BC).
The Middle Nubian I
Among the historic texts the oldest is the so-called
Palermo Stonel.This chronicle states that, during the
Snefru
Kingdom
(2625
BC), an expedition to
Nubia was engaged in combat
a conflict, which resulted in the capture of 7,000
prisoners and 200,000 cattle. One can argue that
Lower Nubia
was inhabited by a high population of shepherds (belonging to the
"C-Groups"). Beside, since Snefru ordered
the construction of boats,
in loco,
we can deduce that the enviroment was favorable for growing large trees.
Five
inscriptions found by a Spanish mission in the area of Khor
el Akibeh in 1964, a few Kilometers to the south of Tomas but on the eastern bank, tend to
suggest that Snefru's mission was directed towards
Lower Nubia. Two of these inscriptions deal with
expeditions organized to search for precious stones and materials, two others
record military expeditions -
"the governor of the nomo
of Cinopoli Khabaubet came
with an army of 20,000 men to raze Wawat". The
inscription was dated by Lopez to the end of the Sixth Dynasty (2200 BC). A more recent study by Helck (1974) has
proved, though, that the inscription, like another found close to it, cannot be
later than the Fifth Dynasty (25102460 BC ). He reaches this conclusion on the basis that
the person name is typical of the Third Dynasty and the beginning of the
Fourth (2625 BC).
The
inscription next to it indicates that the Egyptians did not only seek materials
in Nubia but also a work force which, Helck imagines,
could have been used to tend the cattle, which was also, to a great degree,
stolen in Nubia itself - "The governor of the Northern sector of the Western nomo Sawib, 17,000 Nubians have
been captured". The heigh number of
Nubian prisoners, testified by the
Palermo stone and the documents of Khor el Akibeh, and the great
numbers of Egyptian troops involved in the military expeditions indicate the
presence of a large population. Furthermore, the population must have been
largely composed of herders since the booty of the expedition consisted largely
of abundant cattle. Contacts between Egyptians and Nubians in this period seem
to have been occasional and hostile. However, during the course of the Fifth
Dynasty they became more frequent and, as it is demonstrated by the accounts of
the individuals who took part, basically peaceful, up until the time of Merenra. Although, not strictlyspeaking,
historical sources, it is necessary to cite the finding in "C-Groups"
tombs of some seals, which were studied and dated by Petrie (1925). These date from the Fourth Dynasty
to Middle Kingdom.
From
the accounts of Egyptian travelers from Pepi I
Kingdom onwards, we know that the settled population in Nubia must have been large and organized, since
Uni speaks already of tribes which were ruled by
princes
(hk3w). These princes ruled in the areas of Wawat,
Irtjet, Satju, Medja, Kaw and Yam. That to Yam
was the most southerly of the expeditions organized by the Governors of Aswan,
and other high officials. They brought back ebony, oil, leopard skins, ivory
and other things wanted by the Egyptians.
In
the latest dynasty of the Old
Kingdom there was
a gradual weakening of the pharaoh's authority. This caused changes in the
relations with Nubia too. In fact the inscription of Snefru speaks of 7,000 slaves
and 200,000 head of cattle brought from
Nubia, while the Harkuf inscription speaks of scrupulous negotiations with
Nubian rulers.
Nubia went through an
organizational-political evolution: Wawat took
command of Irtjet and Satju.
It is possible that the rise of the
Kerma
Kingdom in the Dongola plain
contributed to the Egyptian crisis in
Nubia; O'Connor's view
(O'Connor 1993) is very interesting. According to him the powerful
Kingdom of
Yam, in the Berber-Shendi reach, and the unification of the Kingdoms of Wawat, Satju and Irtjet, resulted in a Kingdom stretching from
Lower Nubia to the Dongola Reach.
The new research in Kerma tends to support this hypothesis, but further
research is necessary to confirm it.
During the
Old Kingdom, until the Eleventh
Dynasty, the presence of Nubians in
Egypt is well documented.
The Nubians, who were used as mercenaries, are designated, according to
Egyptian texts, as `33w ; and we see`33w of Yam,
therefore from
Upper Nubia, and `33w of Wawat
and Medjaw, therefore from
Lower Nubia (Bongrani
Fanfoni in press). We find them at Dashur, engaged in a police force guarding the pyramid of Pepi I. Some of them were part of an elite group under the
command of an Egyptian officer. Others called Nhsyw htp (w) "offered Nubians" (i.e. hostages),
seemed to have been part of a sort of lower-rank police corps charged with
collecting taxes.
In any case we have a rather disquieting document which
recounts how the Nubians were dealt with in a hostile manner by the Egyptians.
These are the socalled Execration Texts, found in the necropolis of
Giza, and dated back to the
Sixth Dynasty. They are cursive texts, written in hieratic on small figurines
of people with their hands tied behind their backs or on pottery deliberately
broken in exorcistic practices. Around 400 pieces
have been found. Of the people named, the majority are Nubians.
In addition to their presence at Dashur,
traces of them have been found also in
Upper Egypt, at the following
localities: Hatnub quarries, near Hermopolis,
in Wadi Hammamat, at Naqada, at Dendera, at Gebelein, at Assiut and at Tebe. In the environment of
Upper Egypt it appeared that the
stranger arriving from the South found different conditions, more conducive
than those at Dashur. Such conditions favoured their absorption by the local culture. This is
proved by the Egyptian names that they themselves and their children adopted.
At the same time they maintained strong ties with their mother-culture. In this
context it is necessary to recall the presence in
Egypt of the Pan Grave
tombs, previously mentioned. In these tombs the position of the body, the kind
of offerings, the animal sacrifice buried outside the
grave, all suggest an analogy with the "C-Groups" Culture.
During this period the "C-Groups" occupied all
Lower Nubia, with large
settlements at Faras, Aniba
and Dakka. As we can see from the settlements, they
seem, at the beginning, to have been nomads. In fact at Sayala
(Bietak 1986)
shelters have been found on the rocky
surface, consisting of a stone circle with some poles in the centre that supported
the roof, which was of reed mats or animal skin. The cattle were kept in an
oval stone enclosure. The complex was spacious enough to keep many animals
during the night.
The period over
which this settlement was occupied was short. The osteological
evidence showed that sheep were the basis of the economy. However, the art for
about 1,000 years is limited to representations of cattle as mentioned above.
Besides that they buried clay models of cattle and sometimes butchered cattle
in their cemeteries.
We can deduce that
the cattle were abundant enough to be exported. In fact this is corroborated by
an inscription of Harkuf and Pepinakht,
from Elephantine, that declares that the chiefs exported
cattle, sheep and goats. Their clothing was also based mostly on leather -
analysis of the hair indicates this was mainly from bovines.
We
know that this population had clothing of a simple form but, at the same time,
well made and rich in decorative and colorful elements. They used goat skin for
sandals. As for the funerary customs, the body was placed on the right side in
a semi-flexed position, the head pointing East.
The pottery found
in the cemeteries consisted primarily of black mouthed bowls similar to the
"A-Groups" ones and a new incised black pottery that was to persist
throughout this culture. Animal dung was used for pottery. Mirrors have been
found in the tombs, although rarely. Seals, necklaces in faience, and other
stones occur more frequently.
The Middle Nubian II
A
series of fortifications was built by the Egyptians in the Second Cataract
area. These fortifications were made up of three essential parts: a fortified
citadel, a town at the foot of the citadel, a port and the annexes to the
fortress.
The
inscriptions of Amenemat I, Sesostri
I and of the visir Antefoqer, show that the
Egyptians had to face a strong enemy, and only after an intense military campaign,
that lasted about
20 years, were they able to establish their control. In fact,
the most valuable sources of information we have on the institutions of
Lower Nubia in this period are Egyptian texts,
official royal stele, rock-cut inscriptions, funerary monuments, statuettes and
archives. Another source not to be overlooked is seals. The evidence that
emerges from these documents is that power was exerted by the military class,
who held numerous administrative offices. Titles with military connotations
appear
306
times, as compared to
266 times for administrative and honoristic titles,
19 for religious titles and 24
for
the title of the lady of the house (Gratien
1995).
So,
these fortresses were not only places for gathering
luxuries and cattle, or defence structures against
the people of Kush,
who were becoming more and more organized, and the nomads of the desert who
might disturb the Egyptian operations in Nubia, but they also served to control the local
people.
The Nubian people
must have constituted a real danger for the Egyptians, as is testified also by
the execration texts of this period found at Mirgissa.
The Egyptian
occupation was forced. It has already been shown, thanks to the work carried
out at Mirgissa and Askut,
that
hnrt,
or forced labour, was prevalent in
Nubia during this period. It is probable that
those forced to work in this manner were, in fact, Nubians. Yet, they remained
autonomous in spite of this, and continued to preserve their egalitarian tribal
society.
It
seems that in this period the population increased largely and the "CGroups" sedentarization
process continued throughout this second phase, even if it does not represent
the period of maximum prosperity. Numerous "CGroups"
settlements of this period have been found. They consisted of houses, partly
constructed with dry-stone walls. Two types of dwelling were present: single
roomed circular structures, and agglomerations of
curvilinear rooms with a roof supported by a complex structure of beams. Silos
and tethering posts for domestic animals were found within these houses.
The
villages and cemeteries found at Aniba, Faras, Dakka, do not seem to have
been large. The superstructures of graves were broader and lower than before.
Grave pits were mostly rectangular and sometimes were lined and covered with
large stone slabs. The body was generally flexed, on its right side, facing
North or West, and often rested on a straw pillow. We know from these funerary
discoveries about their clothes; they were made of locally-produced leather.
Men wore a kilt, sandals and headgear. As for the pottery, it is the same as
that of the previous period, but globular red ware pots were added to the repertoire
of native vessels. Pottery figurines representing women and cattle were also
buried with the dead.
The
economic subsistence of this period was based essentially on pastoralism. Moreover, the Egyptians began to mine for
gold in the Wadi-el Allaqi
and the Wadi Gabgaba.
Nubian gold was a very important economic factor for Egypt. It is very difficult to imagine that the
Nubians could have accepted this situation. Many annual high-waters are
recorded in a series of inscriptions that were carved on both banks of the Nile above the Semna
Cataract. Most of these inscriptions date from the reign of Amenemhet
III, but there are others from the reigns of Amenemhet
IV and Queen Sobekneferu, the last ruler of the
Twelfth Dynasty, and Sekhemre-Khutowe and Sekhemkare, the first Kings of the Thirteenth Dynasty
(1790-1785
BC).
These high floods
damaged Egyptian installations in Nubia. These data contrast with some dispatches
sent from the Egyptians fortresses which testify that at the end of the Twelfth Dynasty there were some trespassing of
Nubians in the zone controlled by the Egyptians. The Nubians justified such
trespassing with the necessity to get closer to the river, forced to do so by
the drought and famine. It is probable that such trespassing took place, but
for different reasons, since the high floods attested by the above mentioned
documents in fact do not justify the Nubians approaching the river. It is
possible, instead, that this trespassing in the Egyptian zone coincided with a
weakening of Egyptian power in Nubia, due to problems in Egyptian internal
politics, but also to the growing power of Kush, who
slowly invaded Lower Nubia, beginning a peaceful cohabitation. The Kushites occupied all Wawat and
settled in the Egyptian fortresses.
The Middle Nubian III
The
Egyptian garrisons abandoned Nubia at the end of the Twelfth Dynasty. During
the Fourteenth Dynasty the Hyksos, kings of Asiatic
origin settled in the Delta. They, like their vassals in Upper Egypt, pay the King of Kush
for passage in Nubia, as can be deduced from discoveries in the
cemeteries of Lower
Nubia. We know
from the latest research carried out at Kerma that during the Middle Kingdom
institutions existed at Kerma and that there was a state administration which
oversaw the circulation of goods in the whole of Nubia. It is possible, even given the present
limits of knowledge, to understand the nature of this organization. Since the
Lower Nubian sites have largely been destroyed by water, it is necessary to
develop out research on Upper Nubian sites.
The
history of Lower
Nubia during the
Second Intermediate Period is not quite clear. In this period the population
increased notably - this is reflected in the distribution of settlements not
only in the richest regions but also in the poorest ones. Society became more
complex and stratified than it had been formerly, with rich tombs on the
margins of the "C-Groups" cemeteries. Some tombs at Aniba are up to 16 metres in
diameter.
The
central room is often built with a mud-brick vault, in Egyptian style. The big
tombs of high-class have a chapel of mud-bricks on the north side of their
superstructure, a custom introduced by the Kerma Culture. Also the burial
placed on the
"angareb"
(bed), shows a
strong Kerma influence in Lower
Nubia. Other
influences come from the Pan Grave Culture, as the bucrania
offerings show us. Weapons are not frequently attested, but some bronze axes
occur. They are present in former tombs.
As
for the pottery, the ware of the former period continues, but appears
impoverished in the simple tombs. A new introduction is the jar with carved
geometrical patterns, found mostly in the richest tombs.
The villages in
this period have house agglomerations with enclosure walls,
while at Wadi es-Sebua a
fortified village of the "C-Groups" was placed on the top of a hill
that, on the east side, was protected by a cliff sloping towards the river and,
on the other side, by a semi-circular perimeter wall built of rough stone
blocks.
The
Nubian people therefore enjoyed prosperity during the Second Intermediate
Period. The population of Lower
Nubia underwent a
large increase and Egyptian trade goods were prevalent. They were once more
able to engage in trade or to charge tolls on goods passing through their
territory. This situation continued when Wawat was
occupied by Kush. Profits derived from this trade enhanced
the status of local chiefs, and perhaps also of entrepreneurs, producing an
indigenous society more complex than it had been formerly.
The increasing
prosperity encouraged the Egyptianization of the
"CGroups". We know from texts that the
whole period of Egyptian domination during the New Kingdom was characterized by the attempts of the Kushitic people to organize themselves
and to ally themselves with people of Lower Nubia
and Beja in order to escape oppression and
exploitation.
In
spite of Egyptian domination, the "C-Groups" Culture survived after
the middle of the Eighteenth Dynasty. Egyptian power in this period expressed
itself not only by the rebuilding of the fortresses and towns of the Middle
Kingdom, but also by the building of large temples. These temple-towns, became the center of government, redistribution and
the propagation of the Egyptian royal ideology.
The alter ego
of the pharaonic power was the "Viceroy of Kush", appointed directly by the king. In spite of
the Egyptian presence in Nubia during the New Kingdom, it seems that it was not of the colonial
kind. The Viceroy in fact was helped by Nubia officials called "zdenw", appointed by him. We know under Tutankamon
of three
"idenw"
for Wawat and six for
Kush. In this period members of the oldest
families of princes were sent to Egypt to be educated and then sent back to their
homeland to occupy important government posts.
Egyptian
domination brought only a small number of immigrants to Nubia: high civil and military officials and the
priests of the Egyptian cults. But it left the original social stratification
more or less intact. The monuments of the indigenous princely families of The-khet in Lower
Nubia indicate
that the original chiefdom territories constituted governmental units, and
their indigenous chiefs were included in the Egyptian hierarchy. Though
subordinate to the Viceroy, the native princes held a hereditary office in
accordance with their traditions (Török 1995).
We
know that though these temple-towns controlled almost entirely the land and
agricultural production, there is no doubt that the indigenous princes were
land-holders, and the Pennut donation text indicates
that the elite held estates privately as well as by virtue of their offices (Morkot 1995).
Much controversy
has arisen regarding this matter as the archaeological evidence for this
period doesn't agree with the written records. The cemeteries of this period contain tombs that show the mixing of the
"C-Groups"', Pan Grave and Kerma Cultures. Other tombs are, instead,
in Egyptian style, with a rectangular pit, dug in the rock or alluvial soil.
The richest tombs have a subterranean end chamber or lateral niche to receive
the body. The deceased was laid on his back rather than on his side, and in the
richest burials the body was placed in a wooden coffin. Food dishes have been
found in the tombs as well as toilet objects and other tools. There are no
traces of Egyptian mortuary rites or religion. The absence of stele, shawabti, figures, scarabs, and of the
immortalization of the name of the deceased in any form at all, clearly
indicates the maintenance of indigenous beliefs.
The
Egyptian concepts of the after-life were adopted apparently only by the
Egyptian-educated members of the elite. Most of the tombs seem to date from the
Eighteenth Dynasty, while the second part of the New Kingdom is characterized by the absence of
cemeteries. One view is that the population decreased due to climatic factors.
This view is denied by the textual data and by temple and tomb paintings from
the New Kingdom, that show a different situation. In all Nubian tribute lists of
the New Kingdom, and especially in the Annals of Thutmose
III or in the Harris Papirus, numerous cattle,
agricultural products and wood are attested. Furthermore the import of ebony
testifies to an area characterized by a tropical, humid climate. We have
further confirmation of this situation during the long reign of Ramsses II.
The presence of
considerable inhabited areas is attested by lists of the urban centers
documented in the numerous temples that the king built in Lower Nubia. The majesty of these temples, and
therefore of an organized society of priests who had administrative functions
and gathered the Nubian tributes, shows necessarily a good climatic situation.
How
can we explain the absence of archaeological data? The hypothesis of Egyptianization does not explain the scarcity of
archaeological data. Not one of the views advanced up to now can be accepted as
certain. But I think that one of the realistic views is that the Egyptian
conquest had reduced one part of the Nubian people to slavery, as some texts
confirm. The taxes bore heavily on these people and this struck a serious blow
to the local tribal economy. Therefore many people were compelled to escape
towards the South where, meanwhile, the Kushitic
Empire was more and more organized. Many other Nubians were employed as labourers in the gold mines, whose exploitation required
considerable work and took the lives of many people. Many others were charged
in tending the cattle that were bred in the large estates of the temple-towns.
Other people were incorporated into the Egyptian army during the Asiatic wars.
Yet
the local culture survived longest among the poorest classes and the latest
cemeteries found have simple graves, without stone superstructures, and poorly
furnished tombs (De Simone in press).
Concerning the indigenous elite, they survived the
collapse of the Viceregal system and maintained some
authority. Also a number of the Egyptian urban settlements survived.
All these elements, together with the history of the Viceroy of Nubia Pineasi, who organized an autonomous Nubian state, are
further confirmation that
Lower Nubia was not depopulated by climatic factors,
but grew and flourished as a buffer state to the new Nubian Empire,
that for the first time took command of
Egypt.
Note
'
A tablet of basalt,
written on both sides and found in small pieces at Abido.
The most important fragment is - for reasons that are far from clear- in the
Museum of Palermo. The stone is an annal
that lists the succession of sovereigns and the most important episodes of the
reigns, dated by the levels of the Nile
floods.
REFERENCES
Aa.Vv. 1990. Kerma, Royaume de Nubie.
Geneve: Roto-sadag.
Bietak M.B. 1986. The C-Group
and Pan Grave Culture in Nubia. In Nubia
Past and Present (ed. T. Hagg): 113-128.
Uppsala.
Bongrani Fanfoni L. 1991. La Nubia nei documenti egizaani
dall'Antico Regno al Primo Periodo Intermediario.
Roma: Euroma - La
Goliardica.
Bongrani
Fanfoni L. in
press. On the word `33w. Gottinger Maszellen.
Bonnet C. 1982. Les Fouilles archeologiques de Kerma (Soudan). Genava XXX: 30.
De Simone M.C. in press. Il problema cronologico del Gruppo-B in Bassa
Nubia. CRIPEL.
Gatto
M.C. n.d.
Ambiente e Societa
nella Nubia del IV' Millennio a.C.. Universita di Roma "La Sapienza"
(M. A. dissertation), Roma, 1993.
Gratien
B. 1995. Les institutions egyptiennes en Nubie au Moyen Empire d'apres les
empreintes des sceaux.
CRIPEL
17: 149-166.
Helck W. 1974. Die bedeutung der Felsinschriffen J. Lopez. Studien zur Altagyptischen Kultur 1:215-225.
Morkot R. 1995. The Economy of
Nubia in the
New Kingdom: CRIPEL
17: 175-189.
Nordström H.A. 1972. Neolithic and A-Group sites. Scandinavian joint Expedition to Sudanese Nubia, Vol. 3.
Uppsala:
Scandinavian
University Press.
O'Connor D. 1993. Ancient Nubia, Egypt's
Rival in
Africa.
Philadelphia:
University of
Pennsylvania.
Petrie W.M.F. 1925. Buttons and design Scarabs.
London:
British
School of Archaeology in
Egypt.
Reisner A. G. 1910. The Archaeological Survey of Nubia,
Report for 1907-1908.
Cairo: National Printing Department.
Stiendorff G.
1935.
Anaba I. Gluckstadt and Hamburt:
J.J. Augustin.
Török L. 1995. The emergence
of the
Kingdom of
Kush and her Myth of the
State in the First Millennium BC.
CRIPEL 17:203-228.
Trigger B. G.
1965. History and
Settlements in Lower
Nubia.
Yale:
Yale
University Press.
Wendt W.E. 1966. Two Prehistoric Archaeological Sites in Egyptian
Nubia. Portilla 102: 1-46.