Hunting, gathering of wild plants, fishing, pottery (the earliest pottery in Sudan), grindstones, worked flint, ceramics, and ostrich eggshell beads. Early attempts at farming, or at least, the periodic harvesting of wild cereals by semi-nomadic hunter-gatherers, as evidenced by ‘sickle-sheen’ on their tools. We even see how the earliest inhabitants lived on an environment which was intimately bound to moist and arid phases in the climate of the region. Khartoum lies in the center of the Sudan at the junction of where the White Nile and the Blue Nile meet to form the great Nile River. This junction forms a superb and unique sight, with both the White and Blue Niles flowing side by side, each with its own color. The Nile River is possibly the most famous river in history. It was by its banks that one of the oldest civilizations in the world began.
7000 B.C. South Nubia (Sudan). Hunting, gathering, fishing, pottery, worked copper, beautiful ceramics and fine sculpture. Around 6000 years ago central Saharan ideas arrived in the Nile valley, adding mummification and other rituals to the potent mix which was to become the Egyptian civilization. The [Acacus] Mummy. In around 5000 B.C. there was a change in climate and the region became increasingly dryer. The population trekked out of the Sahara region towards the Nile valley below the second Cataract where they made permanent or semi-permanent settlements. Animals were domesticated for the first time and hunting grew less important. Goats, sheep and cattle are descended from the wild creatures that used to populate the regions lying close to the Nile valley. People also started farming. Thus, Nubia, Egypt’s southern neighbor with its own civilization, preceded ancient Egyptian (Kemet) civilization.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Khartoum "Mesolithic" copyright of Andrea Byrnes andie@easynet.co.uk 2003
Where the Blue and White Niles meet a vast settlement area from the 7th millennium BC onwards was identified and excavated by Arkell in the 1940s. Arkell named it “The Early Khartoum.” The site sat in a layer which was 2Ms deep at its thickest and was filled with quartz flakes and brown incised pottery, grind stones and fragments of shell. No earlier Pleistocene sites have been found which might have evolved into the Khartoum Mesolithic and at the moment its origins are a mystery.
The inhabitants of Khartoum Mesolithic settlements were describes as hunter-fisher-potters. There is no sign of the domestication of plants or animals but the economy and technology had moved on from the Palaeolithic, so for convenience it has been designated Mesolithic. However, it should be clear that this should not be confused with the European Mesolithic and its cultural, technological and economic affiliations. It should be considered instead as a phase that sits between Egyptian/Sudanese Palaeolithic and Neolithic phases “In the game of definitions, the presence of pottery – especially in the African context – hardly ties in with the conventional idea of the Mesolithic . . . . For convenience, however, we retain . . . the term ‘Khartoum Mesolithic’ simply because it is now enshrined in the literature (while acknowledging, nevertheless, its trued Neolithicizing nature)” (Midant-Reynes 1992/2000, p.93).
Sites belonging typologically to the Khartoum Mesolithic (Arkell’s Early Khartoum) include Sorurab 1 and 2, Shabana, Shaqadud, Siggai, Abu Darbain and Anebis. Dates from these sites range between 9370+/-110 BP and 6408+/-80 BP.
The environment, on the basis of the fauna, including porcupines, warthogs and buffaloes, was a humid savannah landscape.
Tools were made of stone and bone. Lithics, made from local chert and quartz and distantly-located rhyolite (whose nearest sources was 80 km away) include quartz microlithic flakes, stone rings (with an average 10cm diameter) and pestles and mortars. Bone tools include barbed harpoons.
Pottery was of two types, the first consisting of large bowls made from brown fabric which was well-fired and was decorated with wavy lines, the second decorated with dotted way lines. They were only polished on the interior.
Burials were deposited in a contracted position and were accompanied with body jewellery made from ostrich shells.
The settlement must have been inhabited on a seasonal basis, as it was located below the level of the annual inundation. Seventeen graves were found within the settlement. The economy was based on river animals (including crocodiles, turtles and hippos) with a high preponderance of fish. “The Khartoum Mesolithic evolved at a time when the Sahara was enjoying favourable climatic conditions in lacustrine environments; the representation of the harpoon is indicative of an economy based on fishing (along with hunting and gathering)” (Midant-Reynes 1992/2000 p.98).
It is possible that there was more opportunity to live a semi sedentary lifestyle under the conditions that existed at this time: “The best evidence of increased sedentariness in Holocene times in the Nile Valley is the presumably pre-agricultural ‘Khartoum Mesolithic’ culture, whose type-site appears to have been inhabited, at least seasonally, for considerable periods of time” (Trigger 1983, p.16).
posted
The Origins and Development of African Livestock: Archaeology, Genetics, Linguistics and Ethnography. Edited by Roger M. Blench and Kevin C. MacDonald. London: University College London Press, 2000. Pp. xx-546.
". . . . Juliet Clutton-Brock [Senior Scientist in the Department of Zoology at the British Museum] tells us that molecular biological evidence, bone evidence and archaeology all point to the likelihood `that African cattle may have had a separate and autochthonous evolution, both from the taurine cattle of Europe and from the zebu cattle of south Asia' (p. 33)."
"The domestication of African cattle from the indigenous Bos primigenius africanus occurred somewhere in North Africa. Archaeological evidence suggests that the Eastern Sahara and Sudan, from as early as 9000 bp, was one large area of development. Linguistic evidence discussed by M. Bechhaus-Gerst (Chapter 24) points to a date well before 6000 bp (p. 457) for familiarity with cattle herding by proto Eastern Sudanic speakers living somewhere between Darfur and Kordofan."
Book review by David Schoenbrun, Northwestern University
Posts: 1549 | From: California, USA | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
However, it should be clear that this should not be confused with the European Mesolithic and its cultural, technological and economic affiliations.
It should be considered instead as a phase that sits between Egyptian/Sudanese Palaeolithic and Neolithic phases “In the game of definitions, the presence of pottery – especially in the African context – hardly ties in with the conventional idea of the Mesolithic . . . . For convenience, however, we retain . . . the term ‘Khartoum Mesolithic’ simply because it is now enshrined in the literature (while acknowledging, nevertheless, its trued Neolithicizing nature)” (Midant-Reynes 1992/2000, p.93).
...hence, the game towards continued confusion and misleading, by retaining terms which the author clearly understands to be erroneous for reasons stated. In that "lithic" underlies stone tooling techniques of the given culture in association with the observed changes in socio-economic progression, clearly three phases of lithic tooling or techniques are observed here, and hence, the resort to the term "Meso-lithic". However, as the author acknowledges, the socio-economic orientation of this culture speaks more of a Neolithic character. How about using a term like "proto-Neolithic", if not inclined to call it "Neolithic"?
-------------------- Truth - a liar penetrating device! Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Generally in prehistoric African studies the terms Early Middle and Late are applied to Stone Ages. The time periods covered do not at all coincide with paleo meso and neo lithics outside the continent or its far northeast extension. Using extraAfrican terminology has been seen as "history-colonization," a method whereby certain prized areas in Africa continued to associated with European historic and cultural development.
Independent naming is one of the first steps of self definition and understanding. To that end Arkell's term "Early Khartoum" should've remained current. Either that or independent minded African prehistorians need to invent another appropriate descriptor.
posted
Keeping in mind genotyping as a litmus, we have to consider that without barriers like mountains, rivers, forest, jungle, etc. much of those areas are contiguous, without the boundaries that are delineated today.
To use the descriptive "Egyptian Nubia" is to deny Nubia as a whole and act as though they are a separate area/people when in antiquity they were not! Perhaps with the defeat of the native dynasties and the birth of Islam, the separation may have become permanaent, as we have been programmed to believe. Well, some of us.
Posts: 1290 | From: usa | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Nubia extends both north and south across the border of Egypt/Sudan. The territory Nubia covers was just a small part of Kush.
Correct. Another lie told about this implies that Kush = Nubia.
This is relevant to a prior conversation wherein it was noted that Nubia is actually in North Africa and not in sub-sahara Africa.
This is inconvenient for misguided Africanists who play along with the Nubia = sub sahara = true negro ruse.
Kemetians, ethnic Nubians and other Black Africans were native to North Africa.
There is no need to torture geographical reality in order to drive Blacks south into some imaginary bantu-stan called sub-sahara.
Africans have to stop playing on the defensive and following Eurocentric dictacts.
Why does the brilliant Black scholar Shomarka Keita go unheeded? sub sahara does not define/delimit authentic Africanity
Is it because he is talking over our heads? ? ?
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Nubia extends both north and south across the border of Egypt/Sudan. The territory Nubia covers was just a small part of Kush.
I quite correctly defined Kush as encompassing the entire modern nation of Sudan and the part of the modern nation of Egypt where sandstone dominates the topography. i.e. Nubia, Egyptian Nubia not Sudanese Nubia.
I did not want to define Kush as ancient Sudan without including the part of Nubia claimed by Egypt. I had no need to include Sudanese Nubia in the topic header since the part of Nubia in Sudan is already covered by the word Sudan itself.
Also if you've been reading all I wrote you've seen I started by including the entire Lower Nile Valley as a unified cultural complex up until the time monarchies developed when the peoples of TaSeti.x3st and TaWy both themselves demarcated their separation.
I've also shown that the royalty of Kush had a certain claim to the throne of KM.t stemming from Gebal Barkal's Amun cult well before Piye established the 25th dynasty which is where all the "standard" "mainstream" historians jump to after briefly examining A-group and C-group times.
Not to mention proving that Senwosret III's boast weren't at all racial epithets since he himself was of Kush ancestry holding the throne from his ancestor Amenemhet's application of that certain claim to the throne and "prophecy" of Neferty.
I understand where you're coming from and I know you can contribute some proactive information about Kush to this thread. We already have too much protest literature. We must build up a new positive in outlook history of Kush not just negatively tear down the old falsehoods which helps keeping them alive by always bringing them to mind though only to deconstruct them.
Thanks
quote:Originally posted by yazid904: Keeping in mind genotyping as a litmus, we have to consider that without barriers like mountains, rivers, forest, jungle, etc. much of those areas are contiguous, without the boundaries that are delineated today.
To use the descriptive "Egyptian Nubia" is to deny Nubia as a whole and act as though they are a separate area/people when in antiquity they were not! Perhaps with the defeat of the native dynasties and the birth of Islam, the separation may have become permanaent, as we have been programmed to believe. Well, some of us.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
[QUOTE]Originally posted by alTakruri: [qb] Nubia extends both north and south across the border of Egypt/Sudan. The territory Nubia covers was just a small part of Kush.
I quite correctly defined Kush as encompassing the entire modern nation of Sudan and the part of the modern nation of Egypt where sandstone dominates the topography. i.e. Nubia, Egyptian Nubia not Sudanese Nubia.
I did not want to define Kush as ancient Sudan without including the part of Nubia claimed by Egypt. I had no need to include Sudanese Nubia in the topic header since the part of Nubia in Sudan is already covered by the word Sudan itself.
Also if you've been reading all I wrote you've seen I started by including the entire Lower Nile Valley as a unified cultural complex up until the time monarchies developed when the peoples of TaSeti.x3st and TaWy both themselves demarcated their separation.
I've also shown that the royalty of Kush had a certain claim to the throne of KM.t stemming from Gebal Barkal's Amun cult well before Piye established the 25th dynasty which is where all the "standard" "mainstream" historians jump to after briefly examining A-group and C-group times.
Not to mention proving that Senwosret III's boast weren't at all racial epithets since he himself was of Kush ancestry holding the throne from his ancestor Amenemhet's application of that certain claim to the throne and "prophecy" of Neferty.
I understand where you're coming from and I know you can contribute some proactive information about Kush to this thread. We already have too much protest literature. We must build up a new positive in outlook history of Kush not just negatively tear down the old falsehoods which helps keeping them alive by always bringing them to mind though only to deconstruct them.
Thanks
--------------------------------------
I see now and it was my point long ago but i guess it got lost on the way,lower nubia is really nubia proper and is really located in northern africa for while the rest(upper/and southern nubia) kush,alwa,sennar etc,is really located in eastern africa since modern sudan is really mostly or a east african state that is not sub-saharan but linked to it.
Posts: 2688 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote: I see now and it was my point long ago but i guess it got lost on the way,lower nubia is really nubia proper and is really located in northern africa for while the rest(upper/and southern nubia) kush,alwa,sennar etc,is really located in eastern africa since modern sudan is really mostly or a east african state that is not sub-saharan but linked to it.
Kenndo I hope you really get the point, if not here is one more pointer. Kemet went to war against the Hyksos and Nubia,that comment might sound true but it is misleading and here is why, Kemet didnot go to war with Nubia. Kemet actually went to war against the Hyksos which at the time of this great war the Hyksos were united with Kerma, while Kemet was united with Kush so if we are to view Kush and Kerma as another name for Nubia then we would never comprehend the intricacies of that particular war. This is why it is important to use the names that the Kemetic writers used when they told their stories and not play the lump them all in one same name game.
Here is a pretty old map of the Southern area\Kush.
New Kalabsha at Aswan Twenty-three Nubian monuments were saved from the rising waters of Lake Nasser back in the 1960s, but only now is the Temple of Gerf Hussein seeing the light of day,
Egypt has a new temple -- the Temple of Gerf Hussein, now rebuilt on the island of New Kalabsha, where the stone blocks transported from the old site half way between Aswan and Abu Simbel have been lying in the searing sun for 30 years.
The blocks of Gerf Hussein, alone among the monuments transported to New Kalabsha, were left unattended, appearing to all intents and purposes to be no more than rocks carefully laid out for some obscure future construction. Yet these anonymous blocks were actually a dismantled rock temple that went by the name of Per- Ptah, the "House of Ptah", founded in the reign of Ramses II by Setaw, a high- ranking official who held the post of viceroy of Nubia, and who supervised its construction on the same plan as Ramses' temple at Wadi Al-Sebua (Valley of the Lions).
Since few people can lay claim to having seen the temple in its original location in the Nubian village from which the temple took its name (see map), its reconstruction ranks as one of the most momentous archaeological activities of today. It recalls those days, back in the late 1960s, before the completion of the High Dam, when one could still sail from the port of Shellal south of Aswan through Nubia and see the temples in their original locations, mostly overlooking the Nile.
Last month the island of New Kalabsha was inspected by officials from the Ministry of Culture and the Supreme Council of Antiquities (SCA) in preparation for the official opening of New Kalabsha and its five monuments -- three temples, a kiosk and a tomb. However, that one, Gerf Hussein, only so recently been reconstructed, begs the question: why the long delay, and, indeed, the delay in officially opening up New Kalabsha to the public? One explanation could lie in that the site was originally expected to remain as a part of the mainland, but when the River Nile backed up on itself after the completion of the High Dam, New Kalabsha -- and its salvaged monuments -- found itself an island, unapproachable except by launch from the High Dam port.
Among the temples was the famous Kalabsha Temple itself, dedicated to the Lower Nubian sun god Mandulis, a structure 76 metres long and 22 metres wide, which was rescued by the Federal Republic of Germany in a major operation during which 20,000 tons of dismantled stone were transported and re- erected within a space of 18 months. The Temple of Beit Al-Wali -- one of Ramses II's rock-hewn temples, known as "the house of the holy man" because it was used as a hermit's dwelling -- was saved by a Polish archaeological team financed by a joint Oriental Institute of Chicago/Swiss Institute of Cairo project. The elegantly columned structure known as the Kiosk of Kertassi, dedicated to two Nubian deities, and the small rock-cut chapel with reliefs of an unidentified Pharaoh offering to the Nubian god Dedwen (known as the Chapel of Dedwen) were reconstructed by an Egyptian mission of the Egyptian Antiquities Organisation, now the SCA.
When President Gamal Abdel-Nasser went ahead with plans for the construction of the High Dam and it became clear that the beautiful land that once linked Egypt and Sudan would be lost forever, the monuments were surveyed and an archaeological rescue operation was launched on an unprecedented scale. The magnitude of the task forced Egypt to seek the help of the United Nations Education, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO). Within a few months, the Documentation and Study Centre for the History of Art and Civilisation of Ancient Egypt was founded and missions started making detailed surveys, plans and photographs of all the threatened sites and buildings.
A photogrammetic survey of the area lying within the Egyptian stretch of Nubia, Lower Nubia, was carried out by L'Institut Géographique Nationale, and in 1959 UNESCO took the first major step of calling together a group of leading authorities in various fields of archaeology and architecture to make recommendations. This "committee of 13", as it was called, was drawn from eight countries. Its task was to consider how the excavations should be handled, whether the monuments should be removed to safety or preserved in situ, and, of course, what the work would cost and who should pay for it.
To encourage collaboration -- and with time running out -- Egypt's then culture minister announced that his government would cede to the foreign archaeological teams half of all finds made during excavations, other than those considered unique or essential to Egypt's national collections. Moreover, any country which sent an archaeological expedition to Nubia would be given a concession to dig in Egypt itself. Finally, Egypt would allow the transfer abroad of certain Nubian temples and various antiquities from the state reserves.
The response was immediate. In March 1960 UNESCO's director-general, Vittorino Veronese, launched the appeal which resulted, eventually, in the saving of 23 temples -- some completely, some only partially. Some were transported abroad and have been erected in fine locations: the Ptolemaic Temple of Debod in Madrid, Spain, on a cliff with an artificial channel in front of it; that of Tafa (also Ptolemaic) in the courtyard of the Rijksmuseum van Oudheden in Leiden, Netherlands; Dendur, which dates from the Roman period, in a vast hall, the Sackler Wing in the Metropolitan Museum in New York; and a rock-temple from the time of Thutmose III (ca. 1450 BC) in Turin Museum, Italy.
The temples saved near to their original locations in Nubia included the most well known, the Temples of Ramses II at Abu Simbel, which were rebuilt atop the mountain; the Temple of Isis, now constructed on the neighbouring Island of Agilkai (still known as Philae); and the temples of Maharraka, Dakka and Sebua, which were dismantled and re-erected at a site at Wadi Al-Sebua. The temples of Derr and Amada were transported to a safe site near Amada.
Now, at last, Gerf Hussein has been added to the list. It is a fine temple, approached through a large quadrangular court surrounded on three sides by covered colonnades of elegantly fashioned lotus columns, and dedicated to the cults of Re-Harakhte and Amun-Re. In the rock- hewn part of the temple is a large hall, its ceiling supported by six pillars against which stand colossal statues of Ramses II. An ante- chamber leads to the three chapels, the largest of which is the sanctuary decorated with reliefs of Ramses II in the company of the gods; in one relief he offers fresh vegetables to the god Ptah.
In the Nubia Museum at Aswan, on a rocky slope of sandstone and granite overlooking the ancient Egyptian granite quarry which houses more than 3,000 items from various sites in Nubia, the focal point of its central exhibition hall is a colossal statue of Ramses II which hails from Gerf Hussein. It is unique in not having been fashioned by royal sculptors, but by the people of Nubia, in sandstone. It was too fragile to be transported to New Kalabsha along the architectural elements of his salvaged temple and the other statues.
The Nubia Museum, like New Kalabsha, had an inordinately long gestation period. It was originally scheduled for completion in 1987, subsequently postponed, more than once, and finally opened to the public only in November 1997.
It has taken a long time to resuscitate Nubia's heritage but, based on the popularity of the Nubia Museum, where Nubian family groups roam around the two-level, well laid-out galleries to show their children a glimpse of their past -- the dioramas of Nubian village life and folklore help them to do so -- it is fair to postulate that, once reconstruction of the temple of Gerf Hussein is complete and the island of New Kalabsha opens with all its reconstructed temples and its visitors' centre, it, too, will be one of the main attractions in Aswan.
Questions: Can we come to the conclusion that the Tasians and Badarians are the same people? where does the Badarians come in, under what name?
posted
known history- The kerma period of kush had only southern kemit,(southern upper egypt)wanted to free itself from kerma and the northern part of egypt,so it was not united and egypt went to war and won. KUSH HAD A alliance with northern kemit but that does not mean that they were united,since each region had thier own kings and was using each other to take over egypt.
Egypt won on both fronts and later conqured both regions except southern nubia but as you know the south(upper nubia) rebelled from time to time and nubia(lower and upper nubia-kush)later freed itself in 1085 b.c..
A-group lower nubia was more similiar to egypt,BUT of course that change later and change back again much later in late ancient times while southern/and upper nubia was distinct from egypt (nubia was heterogeneous) just like songhay was distinct from mali. ausar puts up posts ONCE IN AWHILE about this and some others.
Posts: 2688 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Too make it clear what people are looking at The map is showing the northern part of lower nubia,now apart of modern egypt.
Posts: 2688 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Kemet went to war against the Hyksos and Nubia,that comment might sound true but it is misleading and here is why, Kemet didnot go to war with Nubia.
Correct. In fact there is no understanding the history of the founding of the new Kingdom at all, when saddled with a "Egypt vs. Nubia" context.
On the one hand the New kingdom founders are said to come from "Nubia", on the other, they are said to be at war with Nubia.
On the one hand their enemies are said to include "nubians:" Kushites, on the other their allies are said to include "nubians": Medijay.
Nubian all along, being a contrived, Eurocentric imposition seldom ever found in the primary text.
It's just a false dichotomy, it serves it's purpose which is to keep everyone confused and failing to grasp the critical themes of Nile VAlley history which include:
the continual erosion of Native African soverignity via assault from the Levantine and the restoration of Nile Valley Civilisation from Ta Khent, the south, the heartland and homeland.... Inner Africa.
One specific that can be changed in terms of conceptualising the Nile Valley - is to note the 25th dynasty as the last of the Native Nile Valley dynasties in Km.t history.
Chancellor Williams made the 1st solid attempt in this direction.
He studied Nile Valley Egypt up to the 25th dynasty - and at that point - followed it southwards where Native African autonomy continued for quite some time thereafter.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
Rasol you have brought up an important point, that being that both Kushites and Medijay lived in Nubia. Although this would appear contradictory , given the obvious differences they showed in terms of loyalty to the Egyptians or the Hyksos, it is easy explained by the origin of the two groups: Kushite and Medijay.
The Armana Letters make it clear that the Medijay belonged to the Meluhha/Punt confederation. As many people have noted some Egyptian records maintain that Punt was the original homeland for some Egyptians.
Many Kushites on the otherhand, belonged to the Tehenu group , which correspond, according to some researchers to the C-Group people. Given the fact that the Kushites included many Tehenu, it was only natural that they may have been more favorable to the Hyksos, than the Egyptians, since some members of this group may have been descendants of Tehenu people.
As a result, when you bring up the multi-ethnic aspects of the political scene during this period you are highlighting the fact that the character of African politics at this time were complicated to say the least.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
Rasol you have brought up an important point, that being that both Kushites and Medijay lived in Nubia. Although this would appear contradictory , given the obvious differences they showed in terms of loyalty to the Egyptians or the Hyksos, it is easy explained by the origin of the two groups: Kushite and Medijay.
The Armana Letters make it clear that the Medijay belonged to the Meluhha/Punt confederation. As many people have noted some Egyptian records maintain that Punt was the original homeland for some Egyptians.
Many Kushites on the otherhand, belonged to the Tehenu group , which correspond, according to some researchers to the C-Group people. Given the fact that the Kushites included many Tehenu, it was only natural that they may have been more favorable to the Hyksos, than the Egyptians, since some members of this group may have been descendants of Tehenu people.
As a result, when you bring up the multi-ethnic aspects of the political scene during this period you are highlighting the fact that the character of African politics at this time were complicated to say the least.
I have to Disagree with you on this one about the kerma group and later kushites.
The c-group and kerma group kushites share broad similarities ,but for the most part are very different.
recent research suggest that folks from yam,or prekerma group and earlier upper and southern nubians came from the dafur,noba region southwest sudan and the southern central sahara and southern sahara region and the kushites came from this group.
Now on the other hand the c-group resettle lower nubia in 2400 b.c. After the a-group disappeared ,so the c-group nubians have a different origin in the sahara and came from the libyan desert while the kushites came from the southwest and they were already in upper nubia before the c-group came in, so the c-group were mostly likely or may have been from the tehenu group while the kushites were not-like supercar would say the nubians were/are heterogeneous.
later kushites that formed the napatan and later period of kush would be new waves of nubians(kushites) from the southwestern sudan and during this time the c-group nubians disappeared since we have no on going proof of settlements in lower nubia at this time and lower nubia was empty again until new waves of kushites from the south came in.
so kushites do not have a tehenu origin but mostly likely the c-group in lower nubia did.The kerma kush group clearly evolved from the pre-kerma group in upper nubia.
lower nubia always had a small population while the rest of nubia was always never empty and had a much larger population. THE comments you made about the medjay seems to be on point and your last comment as well.
correction-in the book i have the c-group came from the a-group so the c-group do not have a tehenu origin,i just found the info in time.so few a-group nubians survived and became the c-group .
A very good book on the c-group and early kush would be ancient nubia:egypt's rival in africa by david o'conner.Some of it needs updating but when it comes to very early upper/and southern nubia and the date there are more recent info or books for that. I have it in my house and the info i just gave above was taken from the book. I read some of it again before i posted because i wanted to make sure i get it right.
quote:As a result, when you bring up the multi-ethnic aspects of the political scene during this period you are highlighting the fact that the character of African politics at this time were complicated to say the least.
Correct. And there is no reason to believe that politics were over-determined by ethnic factors.
And most important: the Nubia vs. Egypt dialetic is modern European politics, it is not ancient African politics.
African scholars should continue to reject Europe's attempt to impose it's racial mindset on African history.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
For example's sake for the time being let's start with events around 3500 BCE or so. We'll do a fuller temporal spatial outline later.
A lot of the confusion would subside once recognition of Kesh as beginning where limestone ends and sandstone begins to be the deciding rock base along the Lower Nile Valley (Gebel el Silsila, Nag el Hasaya) and continuing to at least the junctures of the White Nile and the Blue Nile is accepted as fact. At that point we can begin to break down the regions and peoples in this vast area.
Before the Egyptians learned the word Kesh they used their own word NHHSW (southerners) to designate all the variety of folk south of them. We find this word illustrated by a generalized picture painting in the Book of Gates. This shows the RT RMT themselves noticed a political spatial "dichotomy" but not a biological lineal difference between NHHSW and RT RMT. Otherwise there'd only one designation HPYW ("Nilers") in that religious text.
We know they saw no "racial" difference because we have one depiction of a scene in the Book of Gates where RT RMT and NHHSW are depicted exactly the same. And we have other art pieces not of a religious nature were Kmtyw have skin tones ranging from red-brown to black and Keshli have skin tones ranging from red-brown to black.
Kenset (TaSeti, Wawat) was south Egypt and south of Egypt. The unifiers of the Two Lands (TaWY) were from TaSeti.x3st which at the time extended northward to just south of what would be Edfu. Thus the first nome of Egypt was TaSeti.nwt. But TaSeti.x3st was more extensive than just TaSeti.nwt. It also included Wawat and part if not all of Yam.
As there are always rival factions seeking authority over land, such factions disputed TaSeti.nwt and adjacent regions of Wawat being under suzereignity of the relatively newly unified Two Lands. That their kinsmen accomplished the unification played no role in the power struggle. The old sovereignty of TaSeti.x3st and the new polity of TaWy struggled against each other for hegemony over TaSeti.nwt which spilled over into and became a struggle over northern Wawat as well. In time it became a struggle over what was once all the lands that had the Khartoum Late Stone Age cultural complex.
The sepatw (nomes) TaSeti and Heru's Throne (commemorating the conquering Shemsu Hor?) were topographically part of Kesh. The Shemsu Hor did not unify the Two Lands in the name of TaSeti.x3st. They did it in their own name to carve out their own kingdom. The rulership of TaSeti.x3st never accepted that cleavage and all throughout the written historic period of Lower Nile Valley history retained their claim on the throne of TaWy and TaWy recognized the primacy of that claim because no one legitimately held that throne unless they were descended from or married to a princess/queen of known and verifiable southern ancestry.
The TaWy rulership felt the whole Nile Valley belonged to them just as Kesht sovereigns felt the entire region from what we call Khartoum all the way downriver to the Great Green Sea (the Mediterranean) was rightfully theirs.
The situation can be compared to a family inheritance validated by matrilineal succession. Brothers fight over the inheritance of mother. Each manages to get some piece of it. Both have designs to obtain all of it. Both recognize their right to it stems from the mother they have in common. One brother lives in proximity of strangers who themselves covet the inheritance. And when the stranger succeeds in stealing it from the brother living next door to them, then by intrigue or by violence the brother more distant from the intruding stranger comes along to assure the inheritance remains within the family, restoring the ancient family values as well.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:The situation can be compared to a family inheritance validated by matrilineal succession. Brothers fight over the inheritance of mother.
Each manages to get some piece of it. Both have designs to obtain all of it. Both recognize their right to it stems from the mother they have in common. One brother lives in proximity of strangers who themselves covet the inheritance.
And when the stranger succeeds in stealing it from the brother living next door to them, then by intrigue or by violence the brother more distant from the intruding stranger comes along to assure the inheritance remains within the family, restoring the ancient family values as well.
Wally has written of the attempt to discourage understanding of the matrilineal legitimist nature of Km.t society so as to allow free speculation regarding the identity of Kemetic royalty.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: For example's sake for the time being let's start with events around 3500 BCE or so. We'll do a fuller temporal spatial outline later.
A lot of the confusion would subside once recognition of Kesh as beginning where limestone ends and sandstone begins to be the deciding rock base along the Lower Nile Valley (Gebel el Silsila, Nag el Hasaya) and continuing to at least the junctures of the White Nile and the Blue Nile is accepted as fact. At that point we can begin to break down the regions and peoples in this vast area.
Before the Egyptians learned the word Kesh they used their own word NHHSW (southerners) to designate all the variety of folk south of them. We find this word illustrated by a generalized picture painting in the Book of Gates. This shows the RT RMT themselves noticed a political spatial "dichotomy" but not a biological lineal difference between NHHSW and RT RMT. Otherwise there'd only one designation HPYW ("Nilers") in that religious text.
We know they saw no "racial" difference because we have one depiction of a scene in the Book of Gates where RT RMT and NHHSW are depicted exactly the same. And we have other art pieces not of a religious nature were Kmtyw have skin tones ranging from red-brown to black and Keshli have skin tones ranging from red-brown to black.
Kenset (TaSeti, Wawat) was south Egypt and south of Egypt. The unifiers of the Two Lands (TaWY) were from TaSeti.x3st which at the time extended northward to just south of what would be Edfu. Thus the first nome of Egypt was TaSeti.nwt. But TaSeti.x3st was more extensive than just TaSeti.nwt. It also included Wawat and part if not all of Yam.
As there are always rival factions seeking authority over land, such factions disputed TaSeti.nwt and adjacent regions of Wawat being under suzereignity of the relatively newly unified Two Lands. That their kinsmen accomplished the unification played no role in the power struggle. The old sovereignty of TaSeti.x3st and the new polity of TaWy struggled against each other for hegemony over TaSeti.nwt which spilled over into and became a struggle over northern Wawat as well. In time it became a struggle over what was once all the lands that had the Khartoum Late Stone Age cultural complex.
The sepatw (nomes) TaSeti and Heru's Throne (commemorating the conquering Shemsu Hor?) were topographically part of Kesh. The Shemsu Hor did not unify the Two Lands in the name of TaSeti.x3st. They did it in their own name to carve out their own kingdom. The rulership of TaSeti.x3st never accepted that cleavage and all throughout the written historic period of Lower Nile Valley history retained their claim on the throne of TaWy and TaWy recognized the primacy of that claim because no one legitimately held that throne unless they were descended from or married to a princess/queen of known and verifiable southern ancestry.
The TaWy rulership felt the whole Nile Valley belonged to them just as Kesht sovereigns felt the entire region from what we call Khartoum all the way downriver to the Great Green Sea (the Mediterranean) was rightfully theirs.
The situation can be compared to a family inheritance validated by matrilineal succession. Brothers fight over the inheritance of mother. Each manages to get some piece of it. Both have designs to obtain all of it. Both recognize their right to it stems from the mother they have in common. One brother lives in proximity of strangers who themselves covet the inheritance. And when the stranger succeeds in stealing it from the brother living next door to them, then by intrigue or by violence the brother more distant from the intruding stranger comes along to assure the inheritance remains within the family, restoring the ancient family values as well.
since we know that the egyptians called lower nubia and yam ta-seti we must make it clear on this point,The a-group kingdom in lower nubia never had control south of the second cataract since pre-kerma or yam was a independent kingdom in upper nubia and was older than the a-group but the a-group had control of southern egypt at one time.
To make this more clear-
A. Earliest Nubia B. From Hunting to Gathering to Self-Subsistence C. A-Group and C-Group Cultures D. Lower Nubia: 2500-2000 BC E. Upper Nubia: 2500-2000 BC F. Kerma and the Kingdom of Kush
G. The Egyptian Conquest of Nubia H. Kushite Resurgence I. The Napatan State J. The Meriotic State K. From Unity to Fragmentation L. The Nubian Christian Kingdoms M. Nubia and Islam
C. The Emergence of the State: The A-Group and Pre-Kerma Periods: 3500-2500 B.C. 1. Lower Nubia's Mystery People: The "A-Group" From about 3500 BC at least two important cultures emerged in Nubia that may suggest the existence of early states controlling major territories and trade routes. The first was centered in Lower Nubia, between the First and Second Cataracts, and the other was centered in Upper Nubia, between the Third and Fourth Cataracts. If there were others, we don't yet know. While these two seem to be related, they also differ in many respects, and yet there can be no doubt that they were in communication with one other, just as they were probably both in contact with Predynastic and Early Dynastic Egypt. Because of finds of central African products in contemporary Egyptian contexts, we can be sure that both of these early Nubian "kingdoms" had a hand in and benefitted from some sort of north-south Nile trade linking central Africa with Egypt.
The early Lower Nubian culture was discovered in 1907 by the famous Egyptologist George A. Reisner during his archaeological survey south of Aswan, which he undertook on behalf of the Egyptian Government just prior to the first raising of the Aswan Dam.
The people of this early Nubian culture used no writing, and none of the earliest Egyptian inscriptions (which appeared about 3200 B.C.) preserve their original name. (The Egyptian texts call Nubia only by an Egyptian name: "Land of the Bow"). Reisner thus called these people, known only by their grave goods, the "A-Group," since theirs was the earliest culture he had found in Lower Nubia. The name has been used by archaeologists ever since.
A-Group remains are quite distinct from those of contemporary Egypt, so there is good reason to suspect that the people differed from the Egyptians politically, linguistically and culturally, and perhaps ethnically. Their unmistakable objects have been found well distributed throughout Lower Nubia, from the Second Cataract north to Aswan, and a few of their objects have been found at Hierakonpolis, site of the earliest Egyptian capital in Upper Egypt. Although a few small and rather poor looking settlement sites were identified before the region was flooded forever by the Aswan High Dam, the A-Group people are known primarily from their much more prosperous looking cemeteries. Laid in pits beneath small mounds, the dead were arranged flexed, facing west. Obviously they had a strong belief in the afterlife, for the bodies were accompanied by elegant thin-walled painted pottery of their own manufacture, polished stone palettes for grinding eye cosmetics, mica mirrors, as well as a variety of luxury items imported from Egypt.
These included food jars, linen for clothing, copper tools, and small ornaments. Since Lower Nubia, agriculturally, was a poor land, and since at that time it had no recognized natural resources (gold being discovered somewhat later), we must wonder how there came to be so much Egyptian material in these graves. Oddly, very few A-Group products have ever been found in Egypt. It seems most likely that these people purchased their Egyptian goods directly from Egyptian river traders by using as barter raw materials they had obtained from further south in the Sudan. On the other hand, they might also have received their Egyptian goods from Egyptian shippers as tolls in exchange for allowing the Egyptians safe passage to Upper Nubia. In any case, about 3200 B.C. the A-Group people seem to have been middle-men in an ever increasing trade in exotic raw materials flowing between Egypt and the distant south.
In 1962, at a place called Qustul, about 180 miles (300 km) upriver from Aswan, a University of Chicago team, under the direction of Dr. Keith Seele, discovered a series of plundered, but still unusally rich, tombs containing massive quantities of Egyptian trade goods and luxury items. Since the rising floodwaters were advancing rapidly, the tombs were excavated hastily and the material put in storage. In the early 1980's, when he first examined the material prior to its final publication, Prehistorian Bruce B. Williams theorized that the tombs may have belonged to a dynasty of ten to twelve A-Group kings and that, like Upper and Lower Egypt at about the same time, Lower Nubia may also have developed a strong centralized authority. Two of the objects found in the tombs were sandstone incense burners, made of local stone, carved in intaglio with scenes that seemed to show ancient Egyptian kings, dressed in traditional tall crown (signifying rule over the south) and protected by the falcon god Horus. What made Williams' theory so controversial was that he proposed that the objects did not show early Egyptian kings but rather A-Group kings, and that the objects - and the A-Group kingship - were earlier by at least two centuries than the Egyptian kingship of the same form. He went on to suggest that this hypothetical Nubian kingship became the model for the later Egyptian. The argument was quickly seized by American Afrocentrists as proof that Egyptian-style kingship was not home-grown but was imported from central Africa, and that the report by the Greek historian Diodorus Siculus in the first century BC that Egyptian civilization had derived from Nubia ("Aithiopia") was confirmed.
While Williams' theory was intriguing, it could never be proven or disproven absolutely because shortly after the clearing of the tombs all of Qustul had been flooded forever by the Aswan Dam and could not be reinvestigated. Given the large numbers of imported Egyptian goods in the tombs, one could also never be certain if the incense burners, too, were not simply Egyptian imports rather than Nubian products, as most would have assumed them to be. The fact that they were made of local stone seemed to confirm that they were Nubian, and many other objects and pottery vessels seemed to have a Sudanese origin. Williams' characterization of the tombs as belonging to a time "prior to any known Egyptian kingship" now has to be modified by the recent discovery at Abydos in Egypt of Egyptian royal artifacts that do indeed seem to reach back as far as the Qustul tombs (about 3400 BC).
For unknown reasons, perhaps in dispute with the A-Group rulers over commodity prices or control of trade routes, or in rivalry for empire, the earliest Egyptian pharaohs, as recorded in their brief inscriptions, seem to have been determined to conquer the "Land of the Bow." At least five Egyptian military campaigns into Lower Nubia are recorded between 3100 and 2500 BC. A text of the Fourth Dynasty king Sneferu (ca. 2575-2555 B.C.), for example, reports that the Egyptians carried away from Nubia seven thousand captives and 200,000 head of cattle. These conquests ultimately had the effect of eradicating all traces of the A-Group - at least in the archaaeological record - suggesting either that a large Nubian population went to Egypt, or that it was assimilated, or that it was driven some distance away from the river into the desert grasslands. This allowed the Egyptians to move into the area tentatively and to establish small fortified settlements at strategic points. One of these settlements was located at Buhen, at the approach to the Second Cataract, which was ideally situated as a trading station where Egyptian shippers from Aswan could meet Nubian merchants from the deep south and barter their goods directly with them.
2. Upper Nubia's First Kingdom? The Pre-Kerma Culture
The site of Kerma, about 10 miles (16.5 km) south of the Third Cataract, and about 350 miles (580 km) upstream (south) from Aswan, is known to have been that of the largest city in the Sudan during the period about 2000-1500 BC. Although we do not yet know its ancient name, Kerma was the probable capital of the first Nubian state to call itself Kush, and there is every reason to believe that this phase was the latest of a major town that had already existed here continuously for two or three thousand years. This isolated but highly fertile region of the Nile Valley, between Sai Island and the Fourth Cataract, was uniquely suited for human settlement, independent cultural evolution, and state formation. It was on a wide low-lying plain, which the Nile irrigated with multiple channels, creating many islands. In antiquity greater rainfall stimulated seasonal growth of grasses in the plains and enabled the residents to raise cattle on a grand scale. Whatever king could achieve political power over this district could control all river traffic between Egypt and the lands to the south - traffic from which he could collect tolls, receive gifts, and amass great wealth.
In 1986 the expedition of the University of Geneva, Switzerland, under the direction of Dr. Charles Bonnet, was excavating at the ancient city site of Kerma, which dates to about 2500-1500 BC. Beneath the cemetery of this city, about 1.5 mi (2.7 km) east of the Nile, they found ruins of a second, older town, dating from about 3500-2700 BC. This town is now called the "Pre-Kerma settlement" and its culture the "Pre-Kerma." Mixed with these remains were traces of an even older town, which have yielded carbon dates stretching back to about 4800 BC.
Between 1995 and 1998, 5000 sq. m. of the Pre-Kerma town were cleared, revealing part of a complex plan including the remains of some 50 round houses, which could be identified only by their surviving patterns of post holes. The average house plan was just over 13 ft. (3-3.5 m) in diameter, but several were over 23 ft.(7-7.5 m) in diameter, suggesting that they were used for important community functions or were occupied by important persons. Such houses are very similar to a type of rural African dwelling still used in the Sudan. These are round, with conical roofs, and were made of vertical posts and woven mats, sometimes covered by layers of mud plaster. It was the vertical posts whose holes survived in the ground. Some of the structures, however, were only 3-4 ft. ( 1 - 1.3 m) in diameter, suggesting their likely use as pens for young animals, such as one still sees today in the Sudan.
Two other buildings in the Pre-Kerma town were rectangular in plan. Comparing these with seemingly similar structures in use today by rural Sudanese nomads, we can suggest that they might have been elevated platforms used to store animal fodder. There were also double lines of holes, suggesting where fences had been built as animal corrals. The modern fences of the Sudanese nomads are built in exactly the same way.
Although no imported Egyptian pottery or other material has yet been found in the Pre-Kerma settlement, there seems little doubt that the ivory and other African products found in contemporary Egyptian sites were procured originally from the people of Upper Nubia. Such goods would also have passed through the hands of the A-Group Nubians. Rock drawings of very early ships of this period have been found scratched in the boulders of the Second and Third Cataracts, which would seem to prove that between 3500 and 2900 BC there was at least limited direct river traffic between Egypt and the northern Sudan. So little excavation has been carried out on sites of this period in Sudan that it would be dangerous to assume that the relative simplicity of the Pre-Kerma townsite was an accurate indication of the level of the political and cultural attainments of all of Upper Nubia. If there was a kingship in Lower Nubia during the mid-fourth millennium BC, it would not be far-fetched to assume that there was one of equal importance here as well. On Sai Island, about 100 mi (170 km) downstream from Kerma, another huge early town site has been identified by a French team from the University of Lille, under the direction of Dr. Francis Geus.
At Kerma about 2700 B.C. the Nile channel shifted suddenly to the west, and the Pre-Kerma settlement was abandoned. Closer to the river a new town was built, and it was this city that would ultimately become the capital of Upper Nubia.
Kenndo *Can you please tell me about the ROMAN A Group?*
Kenndo Can you please tell me about the Greek A Group?
Kenndo Can you please tell me about the Mesopotamian A Group?
A and B Groups are for people who can't read so please let go the Nubia A group nonsense.
Ta-Seti: The World's First Monarchy? 3800-3100BC In 1962 Keith C. Seele, director of the University of Chicago's Oriental Institute Nubian Expedition, made a fascinating find at a site called Qutsul. In Lower Nubia, near the modern Egyptian-Sudanese border, Qutsul was home to what archaeologists called the A-Group culture.
Seele uncovered a cemetery of A-Group tombs at Qutsul which he designated Cemetery L. Given the vast amount of artifacts recovered at Cemetery L, only a preliminary analysis could be made on the 33 tombs and associated artifacts. Seele's analysis led him to conclude that he had uncovered evidence of pre-dynastic Nubian princes and kings.
The archaeological world scoffed at Seele's suggestions. It had been concluded long ago that A-Group Nubia was too simple a culture to support the complexity of a pharaonic dynasty. Thus any evidence of A-Group culture was thought to represent at best scattered chiefdoms or kin groups. It was not until 1977, fifteen years since Seele's initial excavation and two years after his death, that a systematic analysis of the Cemetery L artifacts was carried out by archaeologist Bruce Williams. The Qutsul site contained more than 1,000 completed and fragmented painted pots as well as over 100 stone vessels. After months of analysis, Bruce Williams began to see in the artifacts what he described as, "a wealth and complexity that could only be called royal".
And there is a great deal of evidence for Williams' claim. There are for instance the distinctive A-Group incense burners found at Qutsul in large numbers. Williams states that these incense burners, "were incised and carved with representations and symbols of Egyptian royalty---a decisive indication of the true meaning of the size and wealth of the Qutsul tombs". On several incense burners symbols of Egyptian royalty appear in late pre-dynastic times in the form of Serekhs. Serekhs appear often in late pre-dynastic times surmounted by a falcon, the symbol of the god Horus. These falcon-Horus symbols were representative of the pharaoh. They were later used to enclose the Horus name of first and second Egyptian dynasty rulers.
Incense burner found in one of the earliest and wealthiest tombs of Cemetery L.
It shows a procession of three ships moving towards a palace facade. The first ship features a kneeling prisoner held by a rope in the grasp of a guard. It is the middle ship however that is most intriguing. Though the figure in the middle ship is nearly destroyed, the white conical crown that would later become representative of dynastic Upper Egypt is clearly evident. Of this symbolism Williams states, "the crown indicates that the figure is a king, and the falcon should be seen as perched on a serekh, together a characteristic representation in early dynastic Egypt". As Williams further states, "the Qutsul burner furnishes the earliest definite representation of a king in the Nile Valley or anywhere".
Thus we have here the symbols of Egyptian kingship, complete with crown, flail and religious symbolism existing in Lower Nubia some 300 years before the first reputed king in Egyptian history, Narmer, takes the throne. Williams argues that this is evidence of three separate kingdoms existing in the Nile Valley in pre-dynastic times: Lower Egypt, Upper Egypt and Lower Nubia, with Lower Nubia being the oldest.
At an A-Group storage cache at Siali, which lies north of Qutsul, is more proof of royalty. On a portion of a seal from this find is a man saluting a bow and a palace façade with the Horus-falcon. Williams states, “the obvious interpretation is that the man is saluting the name for Nubia - Ta-Seti, or 'Land of the Bow.'” This indicates that Ta-Seti was indeed an established kingship and state.
Other evidence pointed out by Williams show Ta-Seti kings engaged in military campaigns in Upper Egypt and Libya. Williams states the following in regards to this:
“the fallen enemy is labeled Ta-Shemau or Upper Egypt. Although the second group remaining on this bowl is fainter than the first, it can be seen that 'the enemy' has fallen on his back rather than forward. The long flat sign (land) extends from the enemy's knee and the unimpeded vertical identifying sign appears to make a kind of question above - this, in all probability, is the label Ta-Tjemeh or Libya”.
This passage, taking into account other evidence of artifacts of Syrian-Palestinian manufacture, display a powerful kingdom conducting military, diplomatic and trading activities well beyond its borders.
Thus archaeological evidence denotes a well-defined culture some 300 years before Egypt's first dynasty. What is more, they illustrate definitive cultural icons the Horus-falcon, the conical white crown of Upper Egypt - which will appear in Egypt beginning in its formative dynasties. These discoveries have led Dr. Williams to propose that, "the idea of a pharaoh may have come down the Nile from Nubia to Egypt that would make Nubian civilization the ancestor of Egypt's at least in one critical aspect".
Thus Qutsul in Nubia could very well be the seat of Egypt's founding dynasty and represents the world's oldest monarchy. And of course this idea of divine kingship is by no means exclusive to either Nubia or Egypt.
Many other African peoples traditionally imputed the souls of dead ancestors a godlike ability to bring good fortune or dire consequences. The souls of dead kings are said to be especially important. Among Ifa practicing Yoruba the Orisas are said to be ancestral spirits, many of them past rulers, who determine human life. In Uganda, kings were believed to continue watching over their people long after death. Special temples were even built through which their spirits can be consulted for advice. The "Souls of Neken", legendary pre-dynastic rulers worshipped in Egypt, are now thought to have actually existed.
With this belief in a god-like king came the association of the king with the land. Thus while a powerful king ensured the land's prosperity, a sick or weak king often foretold its demise. Many believed the kings of prehistoric Egypt were put to death (ritual or otherwise) when they became sick or weak. This unique practice was known in many African societies such as the Sofala whose king was required to commit suicide when he became weak. Ritualistic-symbolic death eventually replaced the actual practice and could be found among the traditional Yoruba, Dagomba, Shamba, Igara, Songhay, the Hausa of Gobir, Katensa, Daura and Shilluk to name a few.
For more information see:
Sertima, Ivan. Egypt: Child of Africa
Service, Pamela F. The Ancient African Kingdom of Kush
Kenndo stop trying to confuse people because Ancient Nubia is a MYTH, you know this just as the average reader who reads the books of Authors that wrote before 1800 A.D. Nubia is a gimmick that the Sudanese government is trying to sell to TOURIST so let it go Kenndo.
The Nubian Tourism Bureau has enlisted your company, Delta Travel, to promote tourism in Nubia. The presidents of Delta Travel, Mrs. Mazzola and Mr. Santee, have divided the employees into groups with each group focusing on creating a travel brochure that will entice tourists to visit Nubia (modern day Sudan). Your group will need to research Nubia using the links provided here, your textbook, and any other resources you choose.
posted
2. Upper Nubia's First Kingdom? The Pre-Kerma Culture
In 1986 the expedition of the University of Geneva, Switzerland, under the direction of Dr. Charles Bonnet, was excavating at the ancient city site of Kerma, which dates to about 2500-1500 BC. Beneath the cemetery of this city, about 1.5 mi (2.7 km) east of the Nile, they found ruins of a second, older town, dating from about 3500-2700 BC. This town is now called the "Pre-Kerma settlement" and its culture the "Pre-Kerma." Mixed with these remains were traces of an even older town, which have yielded carbon dates stretching back to about 4800 BC.
recent research note-pre-kerma A city(in upper nubia or yam) really goes back to 5000 b.c. Civilization in (upper nubia)is much older than ta-seti( or lower nubia proper)of course the egyptians called the regions south of lower nubia ta-seti too but it had other names as well and the a-group is just a name of what modern archaelogists called the material culture of lower nubia of that time,and civilization goes back to 8000 b.c. in southern nubia to the period called khartoum mesolithic.
Posts: 2688 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Excerpts from a lousy titled article with some decent info that a few forum members have previously told us about.
Kesh from the 1st cataract to Meroe
quote: KERMA – BLACK AFRICA'S OLDEST CIVILISATION Story by DAVID KEYS | August 2005 | Impressions Magazine |
Archaeologists in Sudan are unearthing one of the world’s oldest civilisations – an ancient kingdom which began to flourish 5,000 years ago, hundreds of miles to the south of ancient Egypt.
Excavations – directed by Swiss archaeologists, Professor Charles Bonnet and Dr Matthieu Honegger – have been revealing a royal palace, temples, extraordinary tombs and a massive ancient city on the banks of the Nile in Northern Sudan. ...
As a direct result of these and other excavations, Sudan is emerging as one of the most significant archaeological regions in the world. Due to the country’s superbly preserved archaeology, it has yielded evidence of early cattle domestication that pre-dates any in Egypt’s Nile Valley. What’s more, the earliest Sudanese civilisation ... is the most ancient African urban culture outside the Land of the Pharaohs. It flourished as a totally independent political entity for at least 15 centuries – until finally, around 1500BC, it was conquered by the Pharaohs of Egypt.
This ancient Sudanese civilisation appears to have been ruled by a series of extraordinarily powerful kings – perhaps even emperors. Several of the royal tombs were spectacular man-made hills, 30 metres wide and up to 15 metres high. To underline their power in this life (and the next), the rulers of Kerma seem to have had the unsettling habit of taking all their retainers and many of their relatives with them to the afterlife! One tomb held 400 skeletons. Even before these kings began taking human escorts with them to eternity, their funerals had still been massive ritual events in which their imperial power over vast areas of territory was symbolically demonstrated. Indeed, excavations and subsequent scientific investigations over the last few years have revealed that some of the kings had themselves buried alongside the remains of literally thousands of cattle. In front of one royal grave, the king’s retainers had sacrificed 4,500 of the animals – arranging their skulls in a huge, horn-shaped crescent in front of the tomb. But of greatest significance was the chemical analysis of the horns, which revealed that the cattle had been reared in different environments and been brought to the funeral from the length and breadth of the kingdom.
What’s clear is that Kerma’s civilisation emerged out of an ancient pastoral culture that had flourished in that part of Sudan since at least 7000BC when the first settlements were established. Nearby Kerma archaeologists have discovered one of the two oldest cemeteries ever found in Africa – dating back to 7500BC – and the oldest evidence of cattle domestication ever found in Sudan or, indeed, in the Egyptian Nile Valley.
The economic basisof both of the pre-urban and urban cultures of ancient Kerma was cattle. The peoplethemselves seem to have comefrom two distinct areasand may originally have belonged totwo tribal groups. Excavations last winter revealed how, for the first 100 years of Kerma’s existence, these two peoples continued to preserve their distinct cultural traditions while living in the same city. Although the distinctions may have been tribal in origin, they also reflected differences in wealth and possibly social status. Kerma was an extraordinarily prosperous empire. It was an advanced [ ] African state which established itself very successfully as a middle-man between sub-Saharan Africa and Egypt. It therefore supplied ancient Egypt with everything from tropical animals and slaves to gold and precious hardwoods. Archaeologists have been unearthing truly wonderful works of art in Kerma – everything from model hippopotami, lions, giraffes, falcons, vultures, scorpions and crocodiles made of faience, mica, ivory and quartz to bracelets, ear decorations and necklaces made of gold, shell and faience. Kerma ceramics are among the most elegant from the ancient world – strikingly modern-looking with simple shapes and bold geometric designs.
The kingdom’s capital was defended by substantial city walls. At least two miles of ramparts and dozens of bastions protected it from attack. Yet by around 1500BC, the defences failed and Kerma was conquered and occupied by the Egyptians, led by Pharaoh Tuthmosis I, one of the most militarily aggressive rulers the world had ever seen.
Bronze Age Sudan’s fight to protect its independence and its resistance against Egyptian occupation was one of the longest military struggles of the ancient world, lasting some 220 years (roughly 1550-1330BC). Indeed, in a sense, this ancient conflict had started even earlier. For, in around 1900BC, when Kerma was already a major kingdom, the Egyptian Pharaoh Senusret II (literally “Man of the Goddess of Thebes”) officially established the southern border of Egypt “in order to prevent” any people from Kerma “crossing the frontier, by water or by land unless for trading or other approved purposes”. Not content with simply maintaining a heavily policed border, the Pharaoh’s son and successor, Senusret III, started to attack Kerma. In order to facilitate troop movements, the Egyptians built a canal around the Nile’s first great series of rapids (the First Cataract) near Aswan. Then the Pharaoh launched a series of invasions and boasted of his exploits in the Kingdom of Kerma. ...
But Senusret failed to permanently subdue Kerma and the Kingdom survived for another 300 years, growing ever more powerful. Indeed, by the mid-17th Century BC, it was ruling over southern Egypt as far north as Elephantine Island near Aswan. But after Egypt was re-united in around 1550BC, the Pharaohs began to re-launch their long-suspended campaign to conquer Kerma. A region, often known in history as Nubia, the Kingdom of Kerma managed to withstand raids by the first two rulers of this powerful and aggressive re-united new Egypt, but, a few decades later, a military strongman, Tuthmosis I, came to power and almost immediately invaded and conquered it. ...
Ancient Egypt’s rulers had wanted control over Kerma for economic – as well as purely political – reasons. For Kerma had, for centuries, controlled the flow of gold, ivory, ebony and slaves into Egypt. For its survival, Egypt depended on wealth, but much of that wealth came from outside its borders and its supply had, in effect, been partially controlled by the independent non-Egyptian empire of Kerma. But although under military occupation from the time of Tuthmosis I, Kerma’s spirit of independence was not dead. Indeed, for the next two centuries, Sudanese resistance leaders led revolt after revolt against their new Pharaonic overlords.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote: Even before [Kerma] kings began taking human escorts with them to eternity, their funerals had still been massive ritual events in which their imperial power over vast areas of territory was symbolically demonstrated. Indeed, excavations and subsequent scientific investigations over the last few years have revealed that some of the kings had themselves buried alongside the remains of literally thousands of cattle. In front of one royal grave, the king’s retainers had sacrificed 4,500 of the animals – arranging their skulls in a huge, horn-shaped crescent in front of the tomb. But of greatest significance was the chemical analysis of the horns, which revealed that the cattle had been reared in different environments and been brought to the funeral from the length and breadth of the kingdom.
What’s clear is that Kerma’s civilisation emerged out of an ancient pastoral culture that had flourished in that part of Sudan since at least 7000BC when the first settlements were established. Nearby Kerma archaeologists have discovered one of the two oldest cemeteries ever found in Africa – dating back to 7500BC – and the oldest evidence of cattle domestication ever found in Sudan or, indeed, in the Egyptian Nile Valley.
The economic basis of both of the pre-urban and urban cultures of ancient Kerma was cattle.
David Keys article cited in a previous post. [quote]
All the following quotes are from Wendorf & Schild Nabta Playa and Its Role in Northeastern African Prehistory Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 17, 97–123 (1998) article no. AA980319
[quote] ... [Nabta Playa] site [E-75-8] has yielded the highest frequency of cattle bones of any locality in the Nubian Desert. In this connection it is useful to note that among many African pastoralists today, cattle are frequently sacrificed and consumed at important ceremonial occasions to celebrate the birth or death of an important personage and at betrothals and marriages. The suggestion that Site E-75-8 was where people gathered for ceremonial purposes in the late Middle Neolithic anticipates the slightly later emergence of Nabta Playa as a regional ceremonial center similar to the regional centers that occur even today in Sub-Saharan Africa, where they serve to bind together groups that are often widely separated in space.
. . . .
These cattle burials and offerings appear to indicate the presence of a cattle cult. Both the stratigraphic and radiocarbon evidence place these cattle tumuli at the beginning of the Late Neolithic wet interval, around 7500–7400 cal B.P.
quote: Many of these tribes in the Upper Nile build earthen tumuli, some of which are still in use. They serve as deliberately constructed regional centers for groups that are divided into sections or lineages. Because they are the foci of religious, political, and social functions for those groups, these regional centers serve to bond the lineages together. These centers are also associated with themes of sacrifice, death,and burial (Johnson 1990). In some instances they become the focal point of royal rites and the royal capital itself (Howell and Thompson 1946), although most of them seem not to be connected to a particular settlement. In some instances the shrines include mounds built over sacrificed cattle, while other mounds cover burials of prominent leaders (Bedri 1939: 131; Howell 1948: 53). There are historic records that retainers were sometimes buried with these leaders (Johnson 1990: 49).
. . . .
Unfortunately for our purposes, the modern cattle pastoralists living 500 to 800 km south of the Egyptian border, in northern Darfur and Kordofan, such as the Gura’an, Kababish, and Baggara, who might be expected to share many burial and religious features with the Nabta group, are Moslems, and traces of their earlier beliefs are scant (Asad 1970; Lampen 1933; Seligman and Seligman 1918). Nevertheless, the tribes living in northern Darfur use cattle for bride payments, to settle blood debts, and to determine wealth and prestige; they never kill cattle for their meat except on ceremonial occasions. Although most groups live in the desert throughout the year, the Baggara who live in northern Kordofan have strong ties with the Nubians living along the Nile near Dongola, and during periods of extreme drought they move to the river.
...
Almost all of the animastic tribes living farther south, along the Upper Nile, are cattle pastoralists. Cattle dominate their lives: they are their primary wealth; they are used to pay bride-payments and blood fines, and they are the basis for prestige.
... there is a documented case where an unusually powerful Nuer ruler sacrificed numerous cattle and covered them with an earthen mound to demonstrate his importance and wealth (Herskovits 1926: 28).
. . . .
Most of the modern Nilotic cattle pastoralists bury their dead in simple, shallow graves with a small decorated stick or pole shrine nearby. Cattle are sometimes sacrificed as part of the ceremony, particularly for their leaders and the wealthy. Burial among the Nuba and the Moro, however, is in chambers from 2 to 3 m below the surface and about 2.5 m in diameter that are reached by shafts dug from the surface (Seligman and Seligman 1932: 404 and 486).
quote: Even before [Kerma] kings began taking human escorts with them to eternity, their funerals had still been massive ritual events in which their imperial power over vast areas of territory was symbolically demonstrated. Indeed, excavations and subsequent scientific investigations over the last few years have revealed that some of the kings had themselves buried alongside the remains of literally thousands of cattle. In front of one royal grave, the king’s retainers had sacrificed 4,500 of the animals – arranging their skulls in a huge, horn-shaped crescent in front of the tomb. But of greatest significance was the chemical analysis of the horns, which revealed that the cattle had been reared in different environments and been brought to the funeral from the length and breadth of the kingdom.
What’s clear is that Kerma’s civilisation emerged out of an ancient pastoral culture that had flourished in that part of Sudan since at least 7000BC when the first settlements were established. Nearby Kerma archaeologists have discovered one of the two oldest cemeteries ever found in Africa – dating back to 7500BC – and the oldest evidence of cattle domestication ever found in Sudan or, indeed, in the Egyptian Nile Valley.
The economic basis of both of the pre-urban and urban cultures of ancient Kerma was cattle.
David Keys article cited in a previous post.
All the following quotes are from Wendorf & Schild Nabta Playa and Its Role in Northeastern African Prehistory Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 17, 97–123 (1998) article no. AA980319
quote: ... [Nabta Playa] site [E-75-8] has yielded the highest frequency of cattle bones of any locality in the Nubian Desert. In this connection it is useful to note that among many African pastoralists today, cattle are frequently sacrificed and consumed at important ceremonial occasions to celebrate the birth or death of an important personage and at betrothals and marriages. The suggestion that Site E-75-8 was where people gathered for ceremonial purposes in the late Middle Neolithic anticipates the slightly later emergence of Nabta Playa as a regional ceremonial center similar to the regional centers that occur even today in Sub-Saharan Africa, where they serve to bind together groups that are often widely separated in space.
. . . .
These cattle burials and offerings appear to indicate the presence of a cattle cult. Both the stratigraphic and radiocarbon evidence place these cattle tumuli at the beginning of the Late Neolithic wet interval, around 7500–7400 cal B.P.
quote: Many of these tribes in the Upper Nile build earthen tumuli, some of which are still in use. They serve as deliberately constructed regional centers for groups that are divided into sections or lineages. Because they are the foci of religious, political, and social functions for those groups, these regional centers serve to bond the lineages together. These centers are also associated with themes of sacrifice, death,and burial (Johnson 1990). In some instances they become the focal point of royal rites and the royal capital itself (Howell and Thompson 1946), although most of them seem not to be connected to a particular settlement. In some instances the shrines include mounds built over sacrificed cattle, while other mounds cover burials of prominent leaders (Bedri 1939: 131; Howell 1948: 53). There are historic records that retainers were sometimes buried with these leaders (Johnson 1990: 49).
. . . .
Unfortunately for our purposes, the modern cattle pastoralists living 500 to 800 km south of the Egyptian border, in northern Darfur and Kordofan, such as the Gura’an, Kababish, and Baggara, who might be expected to share many burial and religious features with the Nabta group, are Moslems, and traces of their earlier beliefs are scant (Asad 1970; Lampen 1933; Seligman and Seligman 1918). Nevertheless, the tribes living in northern Darfur use cattle for bride payments, to settle blood debts, and to determine wealth and prestige; they never kill cattle for their meat except on ceremonial occasions. Although most groups live in the desert throughout the year, the Baggara who live in northern Kordofan have strong ties with the Nubians living along the Nile near Dongola, and during periods of extreme drought they move to the river.
...
Almost all of the animastic tribes living farther south, along the Upper Nile, are cattle pastoralists. Cattle dominate their lives: they are their primary wealth; they are used to pay bride-payments and blood fines, and they are the basis for prestige.
... there is a documented case where an unusually powerful Nuer ruler sacrificed numerous cattle and covered them with an earthen mound to demonstrate his importance and wealth (Herskovits 1926: 28).
. . . .
Most of the modern Nilotic cattle pastoralists bury their dead in simple, shallow graves with a small decorated stick or pole shrine nearby. Cattle are sometimes sacrificed as part of the ceremony, particularly for their leaders and the wealthy. Burial among the Nuba and the Moro, however, is in chambers from 2 to 3 m below the surface and about 2.5 m in diameter that are reached by shafts dug from the surface (Seligman and Seligman 1932: 404 and 486).
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Aswani_Aswan posted the full text on the now defunct SaharaSahel BBS. Presented here, snippets relative to and relevent on the preceding three posts. Sorry I didn't meld a coherent synthesis article after analysing all of these sources as I normally would but you know sometimes.........
quote:
Neolithic settlement (around 4600 cal. BC)
Around Kerma, several sites date from the Neolithic period, but only one of these has been excavated. It occupied the same location as the eastern cemetery of the Kerma civilisation. It was buried under several dozen centimetres of Nile silt, and could be uncovered in an area which had been revealed by wind erosion. This site is part of a group of several stratified Neolithic settlements. They had all been subject to erosion by the Nile, before being covered by flood silt, showing that this location was reoccupied on several occasions, and that it was not protected from Nile floods. These settlements may have been seasonal, and have been linked to populations practising animal husbandry who occupied the alluvial plain during the dry season seeking pastureland. The site yielded hearths and postholes, as well as pottery, stone objects (flints, grinders and grindstones) and faunal remains. The species represented consisted mainly of cattle and domestic caprines. An isolated human bone was also found, indicating that graves were dug nearby. The settlement structures can be reconstructed from the posthole alignments. They consisted of oval huts, rectangular buildings, wind-breaks located to the north of the hearths, and a series of palisades, some of which seem to have formed enclosures.
For the fifth millennium, excavated settlements are rare in Nubia and in the rest of Sudan. The best-documented examples are again located in central Sudan. They contained artefacts and hearths, but no structure outlined by postholes has been found, although we know that they existed in Egypt at this time. That this society practised animal husbandry has, already, been noted on several occasions, and the paucity of known settlements has sometimes been interpreted as reflecting the mobility of human groups.
quote:
Pre-Kerma settlement (around 3000 cal. BC)
. . . .
Compared to the Neolithic, where animal husbandry played a major role, the Pre-Kerma and A-Group periods may have seen a progressive transformation, characterised by the increasing development of agriculture, even though animal husbandry still played an important role.
M. Honegger, (???(Ch. Bonnet, D.A.Welsby, D. Wildung Sudan Archaeological Mission of the University of Geneva, Switzerland, Sudan Archaeological Research Society, and the Museums of Berlin)???) Prehistoric settlements in Nubia from the 8th millennium to the 3rd millennia cal. BC Tenth International Conference of the International Society for Nubian Studies September 9-14, 2002 - Rome, Italy
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
The so-called "Deffufa," the massive brick structure at the center of the city of Kerma, which was part of the temple complex. Stairs led up to its flat top, where religious ceremonies were probably held. About 1700-1500 BCE.
By c.2500 BCE we can already see the development of urban centres and a highly complex social world in northern Sudan, centred on Kerma. The religious centre of the town is marked by this great mudbrick monument; in the foreground the foundations of a massive round wooden building - perhaps a palace or audience hall - are marked out.
Foundations of a round building at Kerma thought to be an early palace. It dates to about the time of Harkhuf's travels. Possibly this was the residence of the king of Yam whom Harkhuf visited. Like many important royal African palaces of only a century ago, this building was made of mud brick and had an overhanging pointed roof supported by wooden posts. _____________________________________ Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
From the Matthieu Honegger report of Prehistoric settlements in Nubia from the 8th millennium to the 3rd millennia cal. BC [a snippet was also posted here] the following pieces of information were made available…
So far, thirty-seven sites predating the Kerma civilisation have been identified.
Five of them have been radiocarbon-dated, and their artefacts are currently being studied. Among these sites, three settlements have been excavated more or less extensively. Dated respectively from around 7400 cal. BC (Early Khartoum), 4600 cal. BC (Neolithic) and 3000 cal. BC (pre-Kerma), they have provided crucial data on architecture and spatial organisation. Using these three examples, we shall try to summarise our knowledge of Nubian settlements between the 8th and the 3rd millennia cal. BC.
Apparently, Kerma region prior to the “Kerma” cultural complex, is by ordinary definition pre-Kerma, but the application of dating and terminology here, are meant to delineate the times contemporaneous to the various settlements in question, and the cultural elements attached to them. Kenndo’s often emphasis on the pre-Kerma stretching back to as far as the 5th millennium cal. BC, is understandable to the extent that pre-Kerma, as I mentioned earlier, can mean prior to the “Kerma” cultural complex, and that radio-Carbon dating is based on the items thus far dated in the archeological sites, and so, providing best estimation of dates. Certain things need to be taken into account however,…
Concerning the Neolithic settlements
Around Kerma, several sites date from the Neolithic period, but only one of these has been excavated.It occupied the same location as the eastern cemetery of the Kerma civilisation…
This site is part of a group of several stratified Neolithic settlements. They had all been subject to erosion by the Nile, before being covered by flood silt, showing that this location was reoccupied on several occasions, and that it was not protected from Nile floods. These settlements may have been seasonal, and have been linked to populations practising animal husbandry who occupied the alluvial plain during the dry season seeking pastureland. The site yielded hearths and postholes, as well as pottery, stone objects (flints, grinders and grindstones) and faunal remains…
For the **fifth millennium**, excavated settlements are rare in Nubia and in the rest of Sudan.
The best-documented examples are again located in central Sudan. They contained artefacts and hearths, but no structure outlined by postholes has been found, although we know that they existed in Egypt at this time. That this society practised animal husbandry has, already, been noted on several occasions, and the paucity of known settlements has sometimes been interpreted as reflecting the mobility of human groups.
Whereas by 3000 cal. BC,…
Three Pre-Kerma settlements are known, and one has been extensively excavated over about ten years. It consists of a village, uncovered over an area of about one hectare, that was also located at the site of the eastern necropolis of the Kerma civilisation. Unlike the Neolithic sites, this settlement was not covered by Nile silt…
Which brings me to the following mentioned on the Nubianet.org site:
In 1986 the expedition of the University of Geneva, Switzerland, under the direction of Dr. Charles Bonnet, was excavating at the ancient city site of Kerma, which dates to about 2500-1500 BC. Beneath the cemetery of this city, about 1.5 mi (2.7 km) east of the Nile, they found ruins of second, older town, dating from about 3500-2700 BC. This town is now called the "Pre-Kerma settlement" and its culture the "Pre-Kerma."Mixed with these remains were traces of an even older town, which have yielded carbon dates stretching back to about 4800 BC.
It is a wonder that if Honegger reports “three” Pre-Kerma settlements and that “one has been extensively excavated over 10 years“, then in which one of these settlements is the Nubianet.org piece referring to, where traces of an older town have come to the fore? Well, let’s analyze:
Back to the Honegger report,…
Two rectangular buildings, quite different from one another, were identified close to the palisades. They probably fulfilled a specific function, but it is difficult to imagine what this may have been as no artefacts were preserved at surface level…
I suspect that these two structures, are the ones that the Nubianet.org site was referring to, and apparently “imagining what they may have been” used for based on…
Between 1995 and 1998, 5000 sq. m. of the Pre-Kerma town were cleared, revealing part of a complex plan including the remains of some 50 round houses, which could be identified only by their surviving patterns of post holes…
Two other buildings in the Pre-Kerma town were rectangular in plan. Comparing these with seemingly similar structures in use today by rural Sudanese nomads, we can suggest that they might have been elevated platforms used to store animal fodder. There were also double lines of holes, suggesting where fences had been built as animal corrals. The modern fences of the Sudanese nomads are built in exactly the same way.
So, from the looks of things, the Honegger report was referring to Nubianet.org’s “Pre-Kerma town”, as the one that has been excavated over ten years, and with the implication of being the site which has provided more material information on “architecture or spatial organization”, than the other sites, presumably the other two “known” Pre-Kerma settlements, mentioned earlier. Speaking of which,…
…Other Pre-Kerma or A-Group sites with settlement structures have been discovered between the first and the third cataracts of the Nile valley. Unfortunately, these have yielded precious little information concerning architecture or spatial organisation, though they are often represented by storage pits (Arduan, Sai, Khor Daoud). It would seem that the latter developed during a relatively late phase of Nubian prehistory, as this type of structure is not known at sites predating the second half of the fourth millennium BC. The appearance of these generally numerous and grouped pits could be linked to the rising importance of agriculture in the economy and, in consequence, to increasingly permanent habitation sites.
On a final note, at least for now,…
…Indeed, the settlement of the Kerma region, with its numerous phases of rebuilding and ample storage areas, seems to point to a permanent occupation lasting over several decades. Compared to the Neolithic, where animal husbandry played a major role, the Pre-Kerma and A-Group periods may have seen a progressive transformation, characterised by the increasing development of agriculture, even though animal husbandry still played an important role. This evolution of the subsistence economy was probably one of the conditions necessary for the emergence of more complex societies, such as the one present at Kerma during the second half of the third millennium BC.
To conclude, several parallels may be drawn between the Pre-Kerma settlement and the ancient city of Kerma, whose earliest structures date from around 2300 to 2200 cal. BC. This town displayed certain architectural traditions which were inherited from the preceding period, such as huts, storage pits and palisades. But this was the full extent of the similarities: the dominant architectural forms at Kerma were built of mud bricks, which were apparently unknown during the Pre-Kerma period. The buildings were generally rectangular and possessed internal subdivisions. This spatial organisation reveals a desire for urbanism, with monumental buildings and a system of hierarchised streets and passages. All these elements were new to Nubian architecture. We are still lacking the intermediate stages, and need to define the importance of influences from the Egyptian civilisation. - M. Honegger
It would seem that the “older town”, “traces” of which appear in the “Pre-Kerma Town”, is not the Pre-Kerma town, and has yet to be named, and perhaps its further relation with the “Pre-Kerma town” has to be specified. These could well be traces of older structures during the transition to increasing “permanent settlements” into the region, in contrast to the situation implied in the earlier/Neolithic settlements, i.e. as Honegger put it, paucity of known settlements has sometimes been interpreted as reflecting the mobility of human groups. [and perhaps "seasonal" settlements].
For anyone interested in reviewing the full Honegger report, click here!
Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
What is the relationship of Ta Khent vis a vis Khent Hennefer?
quote:Originally posted by rasol:
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
Why were Ta Meri ([united] Egypt) and Ta Shemu ([Upper] Egypt) united but Ta Seti left out to become an enemy?
And if the newly unified Egyptians considered Ta Seti to be an enemy, why then did they concieve the Prophecy of Neferti which states that a son of a woman from Ta Seti is the legitimate ruler of Egypt?
...
The Km.t.rm.t are related to the Khentu. [founders] of Ta Khent. Ta Khent is the [1st nome] of Km.t. Ta Khent is also Ta Seti.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
There was an intimate if exploitive sibling relationship between T3Wy and Kesh. For the longest time and Egypt did rank some of Wawat and some of Kesh among the Nine Bows (traditional symbolic enemies of the state) clear until late New Kingdom times.
The important thing to remember is that certain Keshli families always, since the foundation of the Dynastic period, had a right to the throne of T3Wy because of their noble status in Gebel Barkal the prime residence of Amun the father of legitimacy to rulership everywhere along the entire Nile Valley. A history of the Amun/Amon/Amen cult and priesthood would be revealing. The root of this lies at Gebel Barkal, that sacred spot near the 4th cataract holy to Amun which linked kingship in KM.t with certain families in Kesh so that we see throughout the history of KM.t there were rulers who held the throne due to Nehesi wives, mothers, or descent.
* As early as dynasty 3, Zanakht sits the throne.
* 4th dynasty queen Khentkaues births the first kings of the 5th dynasty.
* In the 6th dynaty the Uahka family is building NHHSY architected tombs in KM.t
* The 12th dynasty is established by the Uahka family. Its kings bear the name of Amun in their own names just as Keshli kings will bear Amani names.
To my mind this shows a pre-18th dynasty affiliation of Amun among the NHHSYW most likely associated with Gebel Barkal. Where else would the prominence of Amun stem from that it was not used in KM.t in kings name before introduced by a dynasty of NHHSY roots?
quote: a cult of Amen existed at Thebes under the Ancient Empire, it is doubtful if it possessed any more than a local importance until the XIIth dynasty. When the princes of Thebes conquered their rivals in the north and obtained the sovereignty of Egypt, their god Amen and his priesthood became a great power in the land, and an entirely new temple was built by them, in his honour, at Karnak on the right bank of the Nile. The temple was quite small, and resembled in form and arrangement some of the small Nubian temples; it consisted of a shrine, with a few small chambers grouped about it, and a forecourt, with a colonnade on two sides of it. Amen was not the oldest god worshipped there, and his sanctuary seems to have absorbed the shrine of the ancient goddess Apit. ...
ERNEST A. WALLIS BUDGE TUTANKHAMEN AMENISM, ATENISM AND EGYPTIAN MONOTHEISM New York: Dodd, Mead & Co. 1923 Chap 2 TUTANKHAMEN AND THE CULT OF AMEN
Gebel Barkal was way up south at the 4th cataract deep in Kesh. Yet it was the seat of Amun and pharoanic legitimacy. I imagine the reason that certain NHHSYW females endowed their husbands or sons with a natural and undisputed right to the throne of KM.t was because they hailed from the right family from Gebel Barkal of old from before the times of dynastic Egypt.
For instance: * the Uakha family established the 12th dynasty * the name Amenhotep or Amememhet shows the Uakha connection to Amun and Gebel Barkal * Amenemhet I's (of Neferti Prophecy fame) Uakha family ancestry and marrige ties legitimized his natural right to the throne
I think that Gebel Barka was known to the A-Group originators of the royalty concept of dynasty 0 and possibly the first attempts of state establishment (judging by the finds of Qustul), and here's why:
quote: ... long before the Egyptians had set eyes on Gebel Barkal, the Nubians, too, had held it sacred. Although no pre-Egyptian settlement or cultic remains have yet been found there, unstratified Nubian pottery has been recovered, dating from the Neolithic, Pre-Kerma, and Kerma periods. This indicates that the site must have been occupied at least since the fourth millennium BC. The discovery on the summit of Gebel Barkal of thousands of chipped stone wasters, made of types of stones that can only be found on the desert floor, suggests that people brought stones to the summit to work them, a practice that implies a religious motivation. Likewise, the similarity between the sanctuary at Barkal, as it appeared in the Egyptian and Kushite periods, and that of Kerma, as it appeared at the end of the Classic Kerma phase, may suggest that there was a pre- Egyptian cultic connection between Gebel Barkal and the "Western Deffufa" at Kerma. There exists at least the possibility that the latter, a rectangular, brick built, mountain-like platform 19 m high, may have been built at Kerma as a magical substitute or "double" of Gebel Barkal.
from Arkamani
quote: ... the Egyptian pharaohs of Dynasty 18 had recognized Gebel Barkal as an ancient source of Egyptian kingship and had themselves crowned there to affirm their rule, the new kings of Kush rediscovered this tradition and [] used it to prove their right to rule Egypt. Since the first to recognize the religious significance of Gebel Barkal had been the Pharoah Thutmose III (ca. 1479-1425 BC)[.]
. . . .
If [the Keshli] have traditionally been portrayed by historians as "foreigners" in Egypt, they surely did not see themselves as such, despite their different ethnic, cultural and linguistic origin. In their minds Egypt and Kush were northern and southern halves of an ancient original domain of Amun. These two lands, they believed, had been united in mythological times; subsequently they grew apart, to be united again in historical times only by the greatest pharaohs. As "sons" of Amun, the Napatan monarchs saw themselves as heirs of those pharaohs [. . .] believ[ing] they were the god's representatives - from his southern sphere - chosen to unite and protect his ancient empire and to restore ma'at - "truth, order, and propriety" in the Egyptian sense - throughout the land.
from Nubianet
There is a natural topographical feature (the holy Ipet Sut) at Gebel Barkal that made it the earthly home of Amun/Amani. Each ruler of Kmt had to have their legitimacy tied in to being a descendent of Amun. This is why through all the 3000 years of the Kmtyw civilization being of a certain family from Gebel Barkal or marrying into that family was an unquestioned and undisputed recognition of a natural right to the Amun seat or throne of Kmt. Hence no problem when a king of Kesh came to hold pharaohship, but rather in fact being considered by the Ta Shamaw priesthood as the very soul of pharaonic legitimacy.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ... if the newly unified Egyptians considered Ta Seti to be an enemy, why then did they concieve the Prophecy of Neferti which states that a son of a woman from Ta Seti is the legitimate ruler of Egypt?
posted
============================================== * Since first writing this I've found the report is Honeggers solo effort * ==============================================
It must be understood that the quoted from "Honegger report" was prepared under the auspices of the International Society for Nubian Studies for their Tenth International Conference. Though the url bears honneger's name the piece itself appears to be Honegger in collusion with Charles Bonnet, -- who heads the Sudan Archaeological Mission of the University of Geneva, Switzerland -- Derek Welsby, -- Sudan Archaeological Research Society-- and Deitrich Wildung -- who directs the Ägyptisches Museum of Berlin --.
Honneger, a prehistorian, spent a little time at Bonnet's, an archaeologist, digs. "Honeneger's" writings are based on the work of Bonnet.
Education Development Center, Inc. holds the copyright to the info Kenndo got off the Nubianet page. The EDC's website, digNubia (clickable link), credits their Kerma data to Dr. Charles Bonnet and the Sudan Archaeological Mission of the University of Geneva, Switzerland. For the past 30 years he, and they, have carried on excavations of the Kerma site three months out of every year.
The site where the Kesht city of Kerma was built was obviously a prime location that apparently attracted people since the days of Nabta Playa whose inhabitants may well have made some of the neolithic settlements
Because the same basic economic and cultural traits are identifiable in all stages of the Kerma location, David Keys' observation that
quote: Kerma’s civilisation emerged out of an ancient pastoral culture that had flourished in that part of Sudan since at least 7000BC when the first settlements were established.
is a perfectly valid one and shows a certain continuity that characterizes the Middle Nile Valley. Keys, a journalist, may've meant BP since the data doesn't support his BC date (i.e., 7000BC=9000BP whereas 7000BP=5000BC).
Urban "Kerma" didn't pop up full blown out of nowhere and couldn't've arisen in the form it did without the successions of thousands of years of previous inhabitants at the site; neolithic, A & C groups (?), Yam, to Kush. I wrote Kerma in quotes because that's really the name of the modern village currently at that location. Its actually Keshli name is unknown.
The "Honegger report" uses only three of the three dozen known settlements to illustrate a summary of "Nubian settlements between the 8th and the 3rd millennia cal. BC." We shouldn't imagine these to be examples of a one and only neolithic or preKerma town. To know which towns either the ISN or EDC writeups are referring to we need to know the precise archaeologists' designations of each settlement and their phases. There were settlements both east and west of the city of Kerma and previous to it. Here are four. Are any of them included in either of the reports? Without precise labels for them or for the ones in the reports, which we aren't supplied with, we simply can't know.
4500 BCE - ruled town at western edge of Kerma; round houses, cattle corrals 3850 BCE - town east of Kerma; houses, fences, storage pits 3500 BCE - ruled town at western edge of Kerma; round houses, cattle corrals 1850 BCE - town east of Kerma; houses, fences, storage pits 1700 BCE - large central town; palaces, houses, temples, walls, moats 1450 BCE - KM.t burns the city, Keshli nobility relocates upriver
What I gather is that there were broad phases of settlement at the 50 acre Kerma location so that the labels neolithic settlement and pre-Kerma settlement refer to temporal ranges either of which includes many settlements. No one of the several settlements is THE neolithic Kerma town or THE pre-Kerma town.
quote:Originally posted by Supercar: It would seem that the “older town”, “traces” of which appear in the “Pre-Kerma Town”, is not the Pre-Kerma town, and has yet to be named, and perhaps its further relation with the “Pre-Kerma town” has to be specified. These could well be traces of older structures during the transition to increasing “permanent settlements” into the region, in contrast to the situation implied in the earlier/Neolithic settlements, i.e. as Honegger put it, paucity of known settlements has sometimes been interpreted as reflecting the mobility of human groups. [and perhaps "seasonal" settlements].
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
THE "pre-Kerma" town here, refers to the context in which it was placed in the Nubianet.org site [for details, please see my earlier postings on Kerma settlements, and which requires 'careful' reading]!
Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: But recent excavations at Kerma have revealed that while Lower Nubia was falling under Egyptian control and loosing its inhabitants, a complex society was emerging in the Kerma Basin. There, east of the Antique town of Kerma, in an area that became later its necropolis, the eroded remains of a settlement, which may have extended over 2 ha at least and which has been dated around 3000 BC, have been unearthed since 1986. The occupation layer is unfortunately very poorly preserved, hence the information on the material culture and subsistence patterns rather limited. But remains of features, mainly storage pits, hearths and postholes, allow a reconstruction of the internal arrangement of the site. According to Honegger (1999), who publishes a convincing plan, at this stage of the work precise recording of the postholes indicates, in the excavated areas, «around 50 circular huts which must have served as houses and, in the case of the smaller ones, possibly grain stores», «two rectangular buildings … possibly related to the administrative or religious systems of the community» and «numerous palisades». Some of the latter «seem to demarcate divisions of the interior habitation area», while «the majority … could constitute an encircling fortification» with «large bastions related to one of the entrances of the town, following a model known in the ancient city of Kerma». Although there are some doubts about the actual function of those fences, because their form «evokes also a cattle enclosure», the size of the settlement, its internal layout as well as other data such as the use of wattle and daub and the durability of the occupation evidenced by regular reconstruction, point to a complex social organisation not met anywhere else for that time-period in Nubia. This would also involve a related territory that, as far as I know, has not yet been evaluated. Indeed such an evaluation would require an approach of settlement patterns and economic behaviour on a regional basis, that present information does not allow. Future research will certainly indicate a settlement of increasing size related to an expending territory that, as suggested by its discoverer (Bonnet 2000 : 10), was the forerunner of antique Kerma which, according to him, came into existence in about 2400 BC, when that settlement moved west near the main branch of the Nile.
Francis Geus The Middle Nile Valley from Later Prehistory to the end of the New Kingdom Tenth International Conference of the International Society for Nubian Studies September 9-14, 2002 - Rome, Italy
Osiris of Ta-khent lying on his bier, with the Hawk-goddess at the head and a vulture-goddess at the foot.
The Osiris Ani, whose word is truth, praiseth Osiris Khenti-Amenti Un-Nefer, and saith:- Hail, my Lord, who dost hasten through eternity, whose existence is for ever, Lord of Lords, King of Kings, Sovereign, God of the Gods, who live in their shrines,.... gods.... men. Make thou for me a seat with those who are in Khert-Neter, who adore the forms of thy KA, and who traverse millions of millions of years....... May no delay arise for thee in Ta-mera. Let them come to thee, all of them, great as well as small. May this god give the power to enterin and to come forth from Khert-Neter, without repulse, at any door of the Tuat, to the KA of the Osiris Ani. http://www.touregypt.net/osirfun.htmPosts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
Here we show some DNA evidence showing a DIFFERENCE between Kerma and Kush notably the Gurna People. This should explain why Kerma sided with the hyksos and Kush sided with Kemet.
Here is a very good study done on the area called Nubia.
quote: According to the population pairwise differentiation test (Appendix Ib), most of these populations appear not significantly different (with alpha value equal to 0.01), with the exception of the outgroup which is different from all the other populations. Only the Nubian population from Kerma and the Sudanese population from Dinka display a significant difference with some populations (Kerma with Assiout, Mansoura, Upper Egypt and Dongola populations, and Dinka with Kerma and Mansoura populations), although the Fst values are under 0.10 for all these populations
quote:The Gurna area could be the meeting point of two independent waves of migration from the Near East and from sub-Saharan Africa , as suggested by the central position of the Gurna population in the unrooted NJ tree and the genetic and the nucleotidic diversity of the analysed populations. The presence in the Gurna gene pool of haplogroups found in Near Eastern populations but absent in sub-Saharan ones (like U4), and haplogroups found in sub-Saharan populations but only sporadically present in Near Eastern ones (like L1), reinforces this observation.
quote: However, the Gurnawi gene pool does not consist of a simple combination of Near Eastern and sub-Saharan gene pools, but also includes an East African specific component. This situation has already been observed for the Ethiopian gene pool (Passarino et al. 1998). Thus, the report of a second population in this geographic area showing a similar distribution of mtDNA haplotypes, including the same high frequency of a specific haplogroup (M1), raises the question of a hypothetical presence of an ancestral East African population. Such a population, as evoked by Passarino et al. (1998) for Ethiopia, could have settled on a wider area from Egypt to Ethiopia (including Sudan), the differences observed in current populations being due to further influences from neighbours (South Arabian peninsula for Ethiopia (Maca-Meyer et al. 2001), sub-Saharan input for Sudan as demonstrated in this study by a high exchange rate between Sudanese and Kenyan populations). A similar hypothesis of the existence of an ancestral population characterized by a specific haplogroup could also be evoked in the Maghreb with the U6 haplogroup (Brakez et al. 2001; Rando et al. 1998). The results of this study point to a genetic structure of the Gurna population similar to that of the Ethiopian one. This population structure has probably been conserved in some other Egyptian populations even though those which have already been analyzed, such as Mansoura, Assiout and Cairo, failed to show the same characteristics. Mansoura, Assiout and Cairo are very big cities with much continuous and current admixture of individuals from several other regions and countries forming great melting pots. Consequently, data from these great conurbations could be somewhat biased. More extensive investigation of the genetic structure of Egyptians from other villages and from Ethiopian and Sudanese populations will be required to complete the understanding of the structuring of the current population from the ancestral East African population.
Here we show some DNA evidence showing a DIFFERENCE between Kerma and Kush notably the Gurna People. This should explain why Kerma sided with the hyksos and Kush sided with Kemet.
Granted that there were several settlements in the region in the pre-Kerma periods, are you saying that the populations who resided at Kerma and Kush, were different folks, i.e., no continuity observed?
Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: Granted that there were several settlements in the region in the pre-Kerma periods, are you saying that the populations who resided at Kerma and Kush, were different folks, i.e., no continuity observed?
This is a good question, I think that at some point within 2500 B.C to 2000 B.C Kerma area was abondoned and later got inhabitted by a foreign group that eventually sided with the Hyksos upon their invasion. Though Kush might have had strong ties with Kemet and showed continuity thus they sided with Kemet in order to remove the Hyksos. The puzzle here is that Kerma sided with the Hyksos which implies that they felt that Kemet did NOT hold their best interest. Though Kush sided with Kemet showing they were very loyal to Kemet, the question then is why did Kush support Kemet and Kerma support the Hyksos? The war that led to the expulsion of the Hyksos proves that a difference between Kerma and Kush existed in my opinion.
posted
^What was the name given to this new group of "Kerma", if they hadn't been "Kushites", and what was that given to the "Kushites", which supposedly differentiated them from the said "contemporaneous" folks in "Kerma"? From your understanding, where did the "Kerma" folks of the Kerma cultural complex move to, after abandoning the Kerma area?
-------------------- Truth - a liar penetrating device! Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
That makes no sense. The term Kerma is a modern term for a village around Northern Sudan. Kush[although some dispute it] was a term that ancient Kemetians applied to regions in the Upper Nile. The town known today as Kerma is possibly the Yam of the Old Kingdom texts of Km.t.
Since the people of Kerma had no writting,and Merotic is mostly undeciphered we don't know much about them except from archaeological remains. We do have some textual correspondence between the Kushites and Hykos leader that was intercepted by Kamose.
Posts: 8675 | From: Tukuler al~Takruri as Ardo since OCT2014 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
ausar quote: _________________________________________________________ Since the people of Kerma had no writting,and Merotic is mostly undeciphered we don't know much about them except from archaeological remains. We do have some textual correspondence between the Kushites and Hykos leader that was intercepted by Kamose. _______________________________________________________________
When you have the time could you summarize this correspondence, especially the greeting.
....
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
Right know I don't have neither the time nor acess to even basic ancient Egyptian texts. I believe the correspondence and Kamose aprehending the Kushite messanger to the Hykos comes from the Kamose stela. You can read second hand translations of the stea in the following books:
Ancient Egyptian Literature: A Book of Readings: Vol. 2, The New Kingdom (Paperback) by Miriam Lichtheim
The second Stela of Kamose and his struggle against the Hyksos ruler and his capital
by Labib Habachi
Posts: 8675 | From: Tukuler al~Takruri as Ardo since OCT2014 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
Here we show some DNA evidence showing a DIFFERENCE between Kerma and Kush notably the Gurna People. This should explain why Kerma sided with the hyksos and Kush sided with Kemet.
Here is a very good study done on the area called Nubia.
Forgive me since I haven't been following all the info here yet, but I thought that Kerma was the capital of Kush. Is there really a difference between Kerman and Kush?
quote: According to the population pairwise differentiation test (Appendix Ib), most of these populations appear not significantly different (with alpha value equal to 0.01), with the exception of the outgroup which is different from all the other populations. Only the Nubian population from Kerma and the Sudanese population from Dinka display a significant difference with some populations (Kerma with Assiout, Mansoura, Upper Egypt and Dongola populations, and Dinka with Kerma and Mansoura populations), although the Fst values are under 0.10 for all these populations
quote:The Gurna area could be the meeting point of two independent waves of migration from the Near East and from sub-Saharan Africa , as suggested by the central position of the Gurna population in the unrooted NJ tree and the genetic and the nucleotidic diversity of the analysed populations. The presence in the Gurna gene pool of haplogroups found in Near Eastern populations but absent in sub-Saharan ones (like U4), and haplogroups found in sub-Saharan populations but only sporadically present in Near Eastern ones (like L1), reinforces this observation.
quote: However, the Gurnawi gene pool does not consist of a simple combination of Near Eastern and sub-Saharan gene pools, but also includes an East African specific component. This situation has already been observed for the Ethiopian gene pool (Passarino et al. 1998). Thus, the report of a second population in this geographic area showing a similar distribution of mtDNA haplotypes, including the same high frequency of a specific haplogroup (M1), raises the question of a hypothetical presence of an ancestral East African population. Such a population, as evoked by Passarino et al. (1998) for Ethiopia, could have settled on a wider area from Egypt to Ethiopia (including Sudan), the differences observed in current populations being due to further influences from neighbours (South Arabian peninsula for Ethiopia (Maca-Meyer et al. 2001), sub-Saharan input for Sudan as demonstrated in this study by a high exchange rate between Sudanese and Kenyan populations). A similar hypothesis of the existence of an ancestral population characterized by a specific haplogroup could also be evoked in the Maghreb with the U6 haplogroup (Brakez et al. 2001; Rando et al. 1998). The results of this study point to a genetic structure of the Gurna population similar to that of the Ethiopian one. This population structure has probably been conserved in some other Egyptian populations even though those which have already been analyzed, such as Mansoura, Assiout and Cairo, failed to show the same characteristics. Mansoura, Assiout and Cairo are very big cities with much continuous and current admixture of individuals from several other regions and countries forming great melting pots. Consequently, data from these great conurbations could be somewhat biased. More extensive investigation of the genetic structure of Egyptians from other villages and from Ethiopian and Sudanese populations will be required to complete the understanding of the structuring of the current population from the ancestral East African population.
So the question is what do these folks really mean by Near Eastern ancestry?? Notice how they distinguish East African ancestry from Sub-Saharan ancestry as if East Africa is not part of Sub-Sahara. What do they studies really define, recent population movements or ancient ones?
Posts: 26236 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
ausar quote: ____________________________________________________________ Right know I don't have neither the time nor acess to even basic ancient Egyptian texts. I believe the correspondence and Kamose aprehending the Kushite messanger to the Hykos comes from the Kamose stela. You can read second hand translations of the stea in the following books:
Ancient Egyptian Literature: A Book of Readings: Vol. 2, The New Kingdom (Paperback) by Miriam Lichtheim
The second Stela of Kamose and his struggle against the Hyksos ruler and his capital
by Labib Habachi _______________________________________________________________
quote:So the question is what do these folks really mean by Near Eastern ancestry?? Notice how they distinguish East African ancestry from Sub-Saharan ancestry as if East Africa is not part of Sub-Sahara. What do they studies really define, recent population movements or ancient ones?
Well, the samples of the population was taken from a place in Egypt called Gurna. This region is inhabited both by Sa3eedi people and also immigrants from Arabia that came during the 13th century. Gurna is the only area in Luxor that has large amounts of mixture with Arabs. Some of the people living around Gurna are desendants of Horobot warriors that migrated to Egypt.
see the following:
The people who live in Qurna are Saidi people ? that is to say, Upper Egyptians. From Beni Suef to Aswan, these people count themselves as different to those from the Delta. Egyptologists will tell you that these people are the direct descendants of the Ancient Egyptians, and this is of course so. In Qurna, however, many of the families trace their descent back to three brothers who came from Arabia ? not Bedouin but Arab. The branches of the family I know are the Horabati ? the ?Warriors? ? an extended network of cousins and cousins of cousins
Overall, some of the people of Qurna look lighter than surrounding people of Luxor but you still find people in Qurna that look like the overall population with a dark-brownish color.
Posts: 8675 | From: Tukuler al~Takruri as Ardo since OCT2014 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
We have to rely on Kmtyw texts because the Nehhesyw deferred writing full texts until very late in their history. The Kmtyw took to gathering all the polities of the limestone region of the Nile Valley into one nation. This was the Lower Nile Valley a.k.a. TaMeri, the Beloved Land.
In the sandstone regions of the Nile Valley the Nehhesyw we know as the A-Group had various polities in the Middle Nile Valley. TaSeti is a term that covers all those separate polities. A few of those polities appear to have confederated by territory into three states. Eventually those three states formed a nation with, and named after, Wawat. TaSeti once extended from Nag el Hasaya, Edfu in what became T3wy's 2nd sepat (nome), to the Batn el Hagar (just above the 2nd cataract).
TaShema[u/w], the southern of the Two Lands (T3wy) took over the sandstone region from Edfu (Djeba/Nesen) to the 1st cataract. This area became the southern half of the 2nd sepat (Heru's Throne) and all of the 1st sepat (TaSeti.nwt). The area between the 1st and 2nd cataracts retained the name TaSeti.x3st and was an active part of Wawat (the "Conspirators"). How far Wawat extended south of the 2nd cataract is unknown but probably only to the Batn el Hagar (Rocky Belly).
Yam may've began just south of the Batn el Hagar and was the next state above Wawat. Sai may've been a northern polity under Yam. Yam probably extended as far as the 4th cataract judging from the fact that "Ancient Urban Kerma" artifacts have been unearthed from the 3rd to at least the 4th cataracts. At this period in time Kush was the next territory upriver. Kerma appears to have been Yam's capital. Yam enjoyed a most favorable trade relationship with T3wy.
"Urban Kerma" was a magnet for populations west and east of the Nile as well as those south upriver in the Upper Nile Valley. At some point in time Yam disappears from the record as the Keshli took over "Middle Urban Kerma" and toughened up terms of trade with T3wy. Resentful of a situation it was powerless to overturn, the Kmtyw label the nation of Kesht as "Kesh keshyt" (Kush the contemptable).
As far as I can gather, Kesh was a nation located at least between the 4th and 5th cataracts with Gebel Barkal (Napata)as an important politico-religious center for all the Nile Valley. As a kingdom on its way to empire Kesh began to control provinces all the way upriver to the Butana and all the way downriver to somewhere between the 2nd and 1st cataracts. "Classic Urban Kerma" was the capital of Kush. So during Hysos times Kerma cannot be juxtaposed to Kush. In its heyday Kush was the most far flung ancient world empire. Its borders were the Butana (confluence of the White and Blue Niles) way in the south and the city of Megiddo (in the Levant) far to the north.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |5000 |4800 |3800 |3500 |2850 |2700 |2450 |2300 |2150 |2050 |2000 |1750 |1640 |1550 |1530 |1500 |525 |"0" |350| ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | SAI | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | N. KERMA | P. KERMA | | A. KERMA | M. KERMA | C. KERMA | ----------- ----------- ----- ----------------- ----------- -----------------------| | A-GROUP | | C-GROUP | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | TA SETI ? <- WAWAT -> ? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ? <- YAM | KUSH | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | PRE EARLY & OLD TA_MERI | | MIDDLE KINGDOM | NEW KINGDOM - DYN. 26 | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- | HYKSOS | -----------
__________WAWAT________________________KINGDOM OF KUSH______________________EMPIRE OF KUSH_____
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
This is a good question, I think that at some point within 2500 B.C to 2000 B.C Kerma area was abondoned and later got inhabitted by a foreign group that eventually sided with the Hyksos upon their invasion. Though Kush might have had strong ties with Kemet and showed continuity thus they sided with Kemet in order to remove the Hyksos.
The puzzle here is that Kerma sided with the Hyksos which implies that they felt that Kemet did NOT hold their best interest. Though Kush sided with Kemet showing they were very loyal to Kemet, the question then is why did Kush support Kemet and Kerma support the Hyksos? The war that led to the expulsion of the Hyksos proves that a difference between Kerma and Kush existed in my opinion.
Hotep
My feedback:
What was the name given to this new group of "Kerma", if they hadn't been "Kushites", and what was that given to the "Kushites", which supposedly differentiated them from the said "contemporaneous" folks in "Kerma"? From your understanding, where did the "Kerma" folks of the Kerma cultural complex move to, after abandoning the Kerma area?
Ausar commented:
That makes no sense. The term Kerma is a modern term for a village around Northern Sudan. Kush[although some dispute it] was a term that ancient Kemetians applied to regions in the Upper Nile. The town known today as Kerma is possibly the Yam of the Old Kingdom texts of Km.t.
Since the people of Kerma had no writting,and Merotic is mostly undeciphered we don't know much about them except from archaeological remains. We do have some textual correspondence between the Kushites and Hykos leader that was intercepted by Kamose.
And…
Hello, Dr. Winters,
Right know I don't have neither the time nor acess to even basic ancient Egyptian texts. I believe the correspondence and Kamose aprehending the Kushite messanger to the Hykos comes from the Kamose stela. You can read second hand translations of the stea in the following books:
Ancient Egyptian Literature: A Book of Readings: Vol. 2, The New Kingdom (Paperback) by Miriam Lichtheim
The second Stela of Kamose and his struggle against the Hyksos ruler and his capital
by Labib Habachi
-------
It should be clear...unless, someone knows something to the contrary, and would therefore like to share the specifics of those details.
-------------------- Truth - a liar penetrating device! Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
To move this Hyksos Kerma thing back where it started before it hopefully spins a new thread of its own.
I don't know about the Kerma Keshli helping the Hyksos. I do know the Keshli and the Hyksos helped themselves to slices of KM.t territory. I want to learn about any actual practical Hyksos Kerma alliance.
All I can dig up is this one letter the Hyksos wrote to the Kerma Keshli that never even made it to the proposed recipient:
quote: Apophis tried to expand the war to a second front, by calling on the ruler of Kush, at Egypt's southern border, to attack Kamose to the rear. As the inscription indicates, Apophis' plan did not succeed.
(18) ... I captured (19) his messenger in the oasis upland, as he was going south to Kush with a written dispatch, and I found on it the following, in writing by the hand of the Ruler of Avaris:
(20) "[É] son of Re, Apophis greets my son the ruler of Kush. Why have you arisen as ruler without letting me know? Do you (21) see what Egypt has done to me? The Ruler which is in her midst - Kamose-the-Mighty, given life! - is pushing me off my (own) land! I have not attacked him in any way comparable to (22) all that he has done to you; he has chopped up the Two Lands to their grief, my land and yours, and he has hacked them up. Come north! Do not hold back! (23) See, he is here with me: There is none who will stand up to you in Egypt. See, I will not give him a way out until you arrive! Then we (24) shall divide the towns of Egypt, and [Khent]-hen-nofer{12} shall be in joy."
Note 12. another name for Kush
2nd stela of Kamose (Habachi 1972)
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
This comment was funny and extremely correct in my opinion.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic