Early Dynastic Egypt

by Toby A H Wilkinson

  upon local factors. Thus, some communities were dealt a fatal blow by the rise of Memphis; others, perhaps with greater natural advantages, survived and prospered.

  The repercussions were certainly felt as far afield as Tarkhan. Having been an important centre during the period of state formation (‘Dynasty 0’), Tarkhan subsequently declined to a provincial backwater by the end of the First Dynasty. It is probable that, by the middle of the First Dynasty or so, Memphis had become the largest city in Egypt. Hence, whilst there is no evidence to support Petrie’s suggestion that the Tarkhan settlement was actually ‘the temporary capital of the dynastic people, before the founding of Memphis’ (Petrie 1914:1), his linkage of the growth of Memphis with the decline of Tarkhan is probably a valid one. The rise of Memphis and the huge expansion of the cemetery at Helwan seem to have had little effect, however, on the community at Tura. This was probably a direct successor of the Predynastic settlement at Maadi, since the two sites are only 1 kilometre apart. The area’s ecological and strategic advantages (discussed above) were clearly attractive to settlement. Such local factors seem to have enabled the community to survive and prosper even after the growth of Memphis: the burial record at Tura continues unbroken throughout ‘Dynasty 0’ and the Early Dynastic period, with some of the wealthiest graves dating to the First Dynasty. Also largely unaffected was the community at Abu Rawash, at the northern end of the Memphite necropolis. The sequence of Early Dynastic cemeteries continues unbroken, the number of interments undiminished, throughout ‘Dynasty 0’, the First and Second Dynasties. At Zawiyet el-Aryan, nearer Memphis, the picture is very different. The foundation and growth of the new capital appears to have dealt the small community a fatal blow, the number of burials in the cemetery showing a dramatic decline after the beginning of the First Dynasty (although the burial rate increases again slightly towards the end of the First Dynasty; and a similar temporary resurgence of local activity may also be reflected in the First Dynasty élite mastabas at Tarkhan [Wilkinson 1993a:211]).

  THE DELTA

  Recent survey and excavation have revealed that the Delta was a flourishing area in Predynastic and Early Dynastic times (van den Brink 1992c; Wilkinson 1996b:91–6). Wherever intensive surveys have been conducted, numerous early sites have been discovered, often in quite dense concentrations (Wenke and Brewer 1996:271). In terms of landscape, resources and factors affecting early settlement, the Delta presents a very different picture from the Nile valley south of Memphis (Wenke and Brewer 1996:271).

  Geography and trade seem to have been particularly influential in the development of the Delta. Sites raised above the low-lying floodplain were favoured for early settlement; in practice this meant the levees of Nile branches and geziras. The latter seem to be concentrated in the eastern Delta, giving this region an advantage. The most striking feature of the Delta, apart from the flatness of the terrain, is the network of branching waterways which divides the land into natural pockets. This would have acted as something of a barrier to east-west communication, although settlements located on the main Nile branches would have enjoyed easy access both to the Nile valley upstream and to the Mediterranean Sea. The proximity of the Delta to Egypt’s Near Eastern neighbours—especially Syria-Palestine—gave the region a leading role in foreign trade.

  As trade in prestige commodities intensified during the period of state formation, sites in the Delta which controlled or channelled such trade were able to reap the benefits. The very existence of some communities, such as Minshat Abu Omar in the north-eastern Delta, seems to have been based on trade with Palestine (Kroeper and Wildung 1985:97– 8). As a result of geographical and economic factors, then, the most important early settlements in the Delta seem to have grown up on major Nile branches, often close to the Mediterranean coast, or at focal points on Near Eastern trade routes. This helps to explain the prominence of sites like Buto, Saïs and Mendes, as well as Minshat Abu Omar. In general, early sites are concentrated in the north-eastern Delta and along the western Nile branches. By contrast, the central Delta seems to have been rather sparsely populated in the Early Dynastic period (Wenke and Brewer 1996:272).

  After the unification of Egypt, the policies of the state towards Lower Egypt became primary determinants of regional development. Large areas of fertile and productive agricultural land made the Delta an attractive location for the foundation of royal domains and estates, which the Early Dynastic kings established to provide for their mortuary cults and to support the royal household (Wilkinson 1996b:96). The efficient exploitation of the Delta’s natural resources also required a network of strategically located collection points, where agricultural produce could be gathered for distribution to the central treasury. This factor probably had a significant impact on the settlement pattern of the Delta in the Old Kingdom. The policies of the central government affected Delta communities in other ways as well. From the beginning of the First Dynasty, foreign trade may have become a royal monopoly. For a site like Minshat Abu Omar, the ‘nationalisation’ of trade would have removed its key advantage and the basis for its prosperity. On another level, the court was keen to promote and defend the territorial integrity of the state, partly through the explicit demarcation of national frontiers. It seems likely that certain Delta sites were chosen to act as strategic border posts by the Early Dynastic government, perhaps giving some settlements a new raison d’être. Buto and Kom el-Hisn may have performed such a role with respect to the western Delta, guarding the Egyptian state against infiltration by Libyan peoples (Wenke and Brewer 1996). As part of the intensive program of royal propaganda launched by Egypt’s early kings, important Delta sites were visited by the king. He may have had residences at the more important locations, and there are inscriptions which suggest a royal palace at Buto in the Early Dynastic period (hwt p-Hr-msn, attested on seal-impressions and inscribed stone vessels). The presence of a royal residence would naturally have boosted the importance of a local community, and this is another way in which the state may have influenced the development of Delta sites. Hence, the history of the Delta during the late Predynastic and Early Dynastic periods reflects the interplay of a combination of factors, geographical, economic and political. These can be seen at work more closely in the most intensively studied region of the Delta.

  The north-eastern Delta

  The north-eastern Delta has emerged as an area of substantial early activity (Kroeper 1989), as attested by the concentration of élite objects found at sites in the region (Clédat 1914; Leclant 1952:244; Fischer 1958, 1963) and confirmed by the excavation of numerous settlement and cemetery sites.

  In the western Delta, before the end of the fifth millennium, the landscape seems to have been free from the effects of the inundation, making it more attractive for Neolithic settlement. However, from at least the beginning of the fourth millennium, climatic and geological conditions in the western Delta changed significantly, necessitating the removal of settlements to higher ground. This seems to have tilted the balance in favour of the eastern Delta as the more favourable area for settlement (Andres and Wunderlich 1992:164). The widespread presence of ‘turtle-backs’ or geziras in the eastern Delta offered attractive locations for villages and their accompanying cemeteries. It is noteworthy that all of the eastern Delta archaeological sites investigated in recent years are located on geziras, including Tell Ibrahim Awad (van den Brink 1992b), Tell el- Farkha (Chlodnicki et al. 1992) and Minshat Abu Omar (Krzyzaniak 1992). At a time when contacts between Egypt and the Near East were intensifying, the added attraction of access to trade routes helps to explain the concentration of late Predynastic and Early Dynastic sites in the eastern Delta revealed by recent excavations (Bard 1987; but note the comments of Chlodnicki et al 1992:183).

  Following the unification of Egypt, some communities in the eastern Delta continued to flourish for as long as the court maintained intensive contacts with southern Palestine. However, by the beginning of the Second Dynasty, a realignment of trading relati
ons, combined with a possible change in the course of the main eastern Nile branch, removed the strategic advantages of these communities. A rise in sea level may also have contributed, making the low-lying areas uninhabitable (Kroeper and Wildung 1985:98). The abandonment of the cemetery at Minshat Abu Omar by the end of the Second Dynasty at the latest mirrors the decline of the region as a whole. The administrative structure imposed by the First Dynasty kings on the Delta seems to have treated it as ‘unclaimed land’, ripe for appropriation by the court for the foundation of royal estates (Wilkinson 1996b:96). In contrast with sites in the central and western Delta which retained their importance throughout the Early Dynastic period and beyond, the erstwhile important Predynastic centres of the eastern Delta were either abandoned entirely or declined to become distant provincial backwaters. Not until the late Middle Kingdom was the eastern Delta once again to occupy a central position in Egyptian political and economic life.

  EPILOGUE‌

  Early Dynastic Egypt has come of age. It can no longer be regarded as an obscure transition, bridging the gap between the beguiling Predynastic period and the spectacular Old Kingdom. The Early Dynastic period deserves to be treated in its own right as a major stage of ancient Egyptian civilisation; not just any stage, but the formative one. As we have seen, most of the key features which, for us, define ancient Egyptian civilisation were initially developed by the ruling élite of the Early Dynastic period. The mechanisms of rule which remained at the heart of Egyptian government for some three thousand years had their origin in the first three dynasties. They were formulated in response to the enormous challenge of ruling the world’s first nation state. Their particular character suited not only the geography of Egypt but also the Egyptian psyche. Whether administrative structures, foreign relations, the ideology of divine kingship, royal mortuary architecture or the practice of religion, the solutions adopted by Egypt’s early rulers to the problem of establishing authority moulded their country and profoundly influenced its subsequent development. Away from the interests and influence of the court, however, local communities and the regions had their own concerns. Such factors were equally important for the character of life in the Nile valley and for the trajectory of Egyptian history.

  After more than a century of interest in the earliest period of Egyptian history, we can now attempt to answer the question, ‘what came before the pyramids?’ The body of evidence for Early Dynastic Egypt is considerable (if complex) and growing all the time. Every year, new information from excavations and scholarly studies is enhancing our understanding of Egypt’s early civilisation. The picture is far from complete, but it is certain that in future years many more pieces of the puzzle will fall into place.

  GLOSSARY

  ‌

  From the outset, it has been the author’s intention to make this book as accessible as possible to non-Egyptologists. Specialist and technical vocabulary has therefore been kept to a minimum. However, in the interests of accuracy and conciseness it has proved necessary to retain some terms which may be unfamiliar to readers from outside the field of Egyptology. Such terms fall into two broad categories: specialist words and phrases which are confined to the study of ancient Egypt, and terms which are in general usage but which have a specific, sometimes different, meaning to Egyptologists. For the sake of clarity, both types of term have been included in the following glossary. It is important to understand that certain words and phrases will be used in slightly different ways by different authors. The glossary below explains the meaning of terms as they are used in the current work. The first instance of each glossary entry in the text has been marked in bold.

  A-group (n.) The indigenous Neolithic culture of Lower Nubia which flourished in the second half of the fourth millennium BC.

  amuletic (adj.) Possessing the magical, protective power of an amulet (a small object worn about the person to protect its wearer from malign forces).

  Amuq (n.) A plain in coastal northern Syria; also used to describe the cultural sequence of this region during the fourth and early third millenniums BC.

  annals (n.) Records of the reigns of the Early Dynastic period and early Old Kingdom, compiled at a later date and inscribed on blocks of stone which would originally have been set up in a temple context. Several fragments of ancient annals stones have survived, notably the Palermo Stone and the associated Cairo fragment. When complete, they would have recorded the major events of each king’s reign-from the beginning of the First Dynasty to the middle of the Fifth – in a year-by-year format.

  apotropaic (adj.) Able to ward off evil.

  Archaic (adj.) Term used to denote the first two dynasties as a period of Egyptian history; now often replaced by Early Dynastic.

  Asiatic (n. and adj.) An inhabitant of the lands to the north-east of Egypt (present-day Sinai, Israel, Jordan, Lebanon and Syria). Its pejo-rative tone accurately reflects the usage of the parallel ancient Egyptian term 3m.

  bark (n.) The sacred or ritual boat of a king or deity.

  breccia (n.) Technically ‘red and white limestone breccia’; a rock with white inclusions in an orange-red matrix, favoured for stone vessels and small sculptures in the Early Dynastic period.

  cartouche (n.) In ancient Egyptian inscriptions, the elongated oval frame used to enclose certain royal names from the end of the Third Dynasty.

  cenotaph (n.) A tomb or other monument built for purely symbolic purposes.

  ceramic (adj.) Referring to pottery.

  ceramicist (n.) A specialist who studies (ancient Egyptian) pottery.

  Chalcolithic (n. and adj.) Literally ‘copper stone age’; an archaeological period applied to the Near East; the transitional stage between the end of the Neolithic and the beginning of the Early Bronze Age (EBI) when copper and stone tools were both in use; its dating varies from region to region, but in the Levant it roughly corresponds to

  c. 4000–3600 BC, equivalent to the Badarian and Naqada I periods in Upper Egypt.

  co-regency (n.) A constitutional practice whereby a king’s successor (usually his eldest surviving son) would be crowned during his predecessor’s (father’s) lifetime, and the two monarchs would reign jointly for a period. The practice was designed to ensure a smooth transition of power from one reign to the next.

  corvée labour (n.) The administrative and economic system whereby agricultural workers (the bulk of the population in ancient Egypt) gave their labour to the state during the annual inundation in return for the use of the land—which in theory belonged to the king—the rest of the year; this system allowed the state to mobilise the huge resources of manpower needed to build royal monuments such as the pyramids.

  cosmological (adj.) Referring to speculation about the composition and workings of the universe (cosmology).

  cursive (adj.) Describing inscriptions written in ink with a running hand, the individual signs more hastily executed than monumental hieroglyphs.

  cylinder seal (n.) A cylindrical piece of stone (or occasionally wood), carved with an inscription, often identifying ownership; to seal an item, the cylinder would be rolled over a sealing of wet clay, making an impression of the original inscription.

  cylinder vessel (n.) A cylindrical jar, up to about 30 centimetres in height, usually made from marl clay pottery and fired to a pale cream colour, probably in imitation of stone. Cylinder vessels of stone, usually travertine, are also known. Pottery cylinder vessels were manufactured in large numbers during the late Predynastic to Early Dynastic transition. The pattern of the incised decorative band around the shoulder changed over time, making cylinder vessels a good chronological indicator.

  demography (n.) The study of population, especially its distribution.

  diorite (n.) A hard, igneous rock, dark with lighter mottles, obtained principally from the western desert, and used for stone vessels and statuary.

  djed-pillar (n.) An ancient fetish of unknown origin, associated with the god Ptah and, later, with Osiris, god of the dead; used as the hier
oglyphic sign for ‘stability’, the symbol may represent a leafless tree or a notched stick; sometimes called the ‘backbone of Osiris’.

  dolomite (n.) A variety of limestone composed of calcium and magnesium carbonate, used for stone vessels.

  domain (n.) A royal foundation, comprising an area of agricultural land together with its livestock and workforce; established to provide income for a king’s mortuary cult.

  double crown (n.) In Egyptian iconography, the crown formed by combining the separate red crown and white crown.

  ‘Dynasty 0’ (n.) Term coined to describe the late Predynastic kings who ruled over part or all of Egypt before the beginning of the First Dynasty. The use of the word ‘dynasty’ is misleading since the rulers before Narmer probably belonged to a variety

  of royal houses, some of them perhaps reigning concurrently in different parts of the country.

  Early Dynastic (adj.) Term applied to the first major phase of Egyptian history, comprising the first two or (in this book) three dynasties; increasingly favoured as an alternative to the term Archaic.

  EBI (n. and adj.) Early Bronze Age I. An archaeological period (divided into an earlier phase EBIa and a later phase EBIb) applied to the Near East, c. 3600–3000 BC; it follows the Chalcolithic, and corresponds to the Naqada II and Naqada III periods in Egypt.

  EBII (n. and adj.) Early Bronze Age II. An archaeological period applied to the Near East, c. 3000–2700 BC; it follows the EBI.