Egyptian Fortresses and the Colonization of Lower Nubia in the Middle Kingdom

In the early part of the 2nd millennium bce, the Egyptian state took control of Lower Nubia, building a series of monumental fortresses along the Nile that are remarkable for their sophisticated military architecture. This was Egypt’s first major expansion beyond its traditional borders. Various theoretical models of imperialism and core-periphery interactions have been brought to bear on studies of the forts and their populations, seeking to explain the military, economic, and ideological purposes behind the original construction of the monuments as well as the apparently shifting nature of their occupation, from probable rotating garrisons to more permanent settlement, and their interactions with local populations (cf. Trigger 1976:64–81; Adams 1977:183–88; Zibelius-Chen 1988:69–135; S.T. Smith 1995, 2003; Williams 1999; Flammini 2008; Török 2009:79–101; Vogel 2004; Knoblauch 2008). The resulting picture of Egyptian occupation of Nubia is a nuanced if not entirely agreed upon one. The fortresses are important to archaeology more broadly because they offer a richly documented case study for consideration of state control of foreign territory; they belong in the broader discourse about imperialism, colonization, and colonialism, how different state strategies of control can be understood in the material record, and how people live and interact in border zones. That the methods of Middle Kingdom control can be contrasted to both earlier and later Egyptian strategies of interaction with Nubia, and that the region is one of modern colonial entanglements, makes a critical approach to its occupation in the Middle Kingdom all the more vital.

Jebel Barkal

Jebel (“Mt”) Barkal stood at the center of ancient Napata, the city farthest up the Nile from Thebes in Egypt’s Nubian empire. Following their conquest of Kush, the Egyptians identified this hill as a residence of a primeval aspect (“ka”) of Amun of Karnak, whom they depicted locally as a ram-headed man but who is revealed here to be a form of Kamutef. Once perceived as a creation site and a birthplace of Amun (being nearest the Nile sources), Jebel Barkal naturally came to be understood as the birthplace of the “royal ka.” This “discovery” apparently prompted the pharaohs to build Luxor Temple at Thebes as a ritual substitute for Amun’s temple at Napata, enabling the kings to house the Nubian god (their imagined “father”) in their capital and to reunite locally with him and with their “royal kas.” The Egyptian belief that their kingship sprang from “Amun of Karnak” at Jebel Barkal/Luxor was revived in the 8th century bce by the kings of Kush, who used it to claim Egyptian kingship for themselves during the 25th Dynasty and subsequently. This paper summarizes what is currently known of Jebel Barkal’s historical and religious significance and presents the results of the latest archaeological investigations.

The Archaeology of Medieval Nubian Kingdoms

The following chapter approaches the archaeology of medieval Nubia from a regional perspective. First, it presents the nomenclature used for chronology, then the history of archaeological research in Nubia determined by construction of dams on the Nile. The focus of the paper are the settlement systems of two medieval Nubian kingdoms: Nobadia and Makuria. Alwa is treated lightly due to the limited data. They are discussed in a static (settlement hierarchy) and dynamic perspective (integration of settlement systems in time). Church architecture as an indicator of regionalism is also debated. Some topics integrally associated with archaeology of Nubia like historical sources (Ruffini, this volume), languages (Łajtar and Ochała, this volume), capitals of the states (Żurawski, this volume), art and pottery (Zielińska, this volume) are generally absent here but are tackled by other authors in the same volume.

Post-Meroe in Upper Nubia

Upper Nubia stretches from the Second Cataract upstream to the Gezira region south of Khartoum, including Sinnar-Roseires on the southern Blue Nile and Kosti on the White Nile, a distance of not less than 1,500 km. Close observation of the material culture excavated in this ample territory shows a subdivision of Upper Nubia into three zones after the Meroitic Period, in spite of the broad similarities within this cultural horizon. Aspects of regionalism are based on geographical and natural elements in addition to the variety of mortuary practice and pottery production, which are the main sources of information about the period under study. One of the major problems is the lack of organized comprehensive studies in Upper Nubia. Therefore, still debatable are the conventional theories on the Axumite and Noba invasions, while as demonstrated in this text, there is no tangible evidence for such theories in archaeological material. Still open for discussion is the term “Post-Meroe.”

The Royal and Elite Cemeteries at Meroe

The earliest of the three royal cemeteries at Meroe, the Western Royal Cemetery (early 9th century bce) had elite Napatan and Meroitic burials including those of Meroitic queens and princes, while the slightly later Southern Royal Cemetery had elite Napatan and Meroitic burials as well as the first two generations of royal burials at Meroe. Both have areas in which smaller pyramids belonging to family members and dependents surrounded larger (patron) ones. The Northern Royal Cemetery (ca. 270 bce–350 ce), inaugurated when the southern one filled, has the pyramid burials of Meroitic kings, ruling queens, and important (crown?) princes. The small chapels abutting royal and important elite pyramids had reliefs showing funeral rites and the establishment of their owners’ mortuary/ancestor cults. These burials and their decorations are important for understanding Meroitic history, social organization, art, and religion.

Language and Writing in the Kingdom of Meroe

Sudan is one the rare places in inner Africa where the study of languages can rely on a long historical depth, thanks to ancient Egyptian sources. Two linguistic phyla, Afro-Asiatic and Nilo-Saharan, are present in the region for millennia. Meroitic, belonging to the Nilo-Saharan phylum, was since the 2nd millennium bce the main spoken language of Nubia. Although its two scripts were deciphered in 1911, the language is not yet fully understood. Further progress is expected from linguistic comparison with living languages of the same family and from future excavations.

Pan-Grave and Medjay

For almost a century, many scholars have assumed that the Medjay of the Egyptian textual record can be directly associated with the Pan-Grave archaeological culture. In this article, the authors deconstruct this connection and consider the extent to which the archaeological and textual evidence can be reconciled based on geography and cultural circumstances. Both groups shared pastoral nomadic roots linked to the Eastern Desert, both went through similar processes of acculturation, and both groups had some of their members fight as mercenaries during the wars of the Second Intermediate Period. However, the evidence from the Nile Valley and Eastern Desert of Egypt and Nubia demonstrates that a direct connection between the Pan-Grave culture and the Medjay cannot be supported.

Egyptian Conquest and Administration of Nubia

After the Second Intermediate Period (1730–1552 bce), the reconquest of Lower Nubia and the conquest of Upper Nubia by the Egyptian army happened in several phases during the New Kingdom, the powerful realm of Kush being supported by large African coalitions. Since the reign of Thutmose III (1458–1426 bce), the country being at last pacified, an administrative disposal was improved to exploit the resources of Nubia, whose knowledge increased until the death of Sety I. Rameses II (1279–1214 bce) was mostly interested in Lower Egypt where he built several temples devoted to the cult of his own sacred image but apparently less in Upper Nubia. After his reign, the interest of Egypt for the Nubian territories decreased along with its political and economic supremacy.

Kushites in Egypt, 664 BCE–14 CE

After the end of the 25th Dynasty in 664 bce, Kushite kings no longer had territorial control over Egypt. Nevertheless, reflecting the long history of interaction between the two lands, Kushite presence in Egypt continued. This article discusses evidence for Kushites in Egypt from the beginning of the 26th Dynasty to the end of the reign of Augustus, and argues that the continuing presence of Kushites in Egypt was largely driven by the shared religious practice of the two cultures. The differing cultural backgrounds of the two lands, in particular their incompatible views of territorial borders, meant that religious interaction often went side by side with political conflict. This conflict produced a unique religious architecture in the frontier region in which the two-way, entangled nature of interaction between Kushite and Egyptian culture can be seen.

Nubians in Egypt from the Early Dynastic Period to the New Kingdom

Nubians lived in Egypt from Predynastic times and through all periods. In the Aswan region, they were part of the indigenous population from Old to Middle Kingdom (A-Group, C-Group). From late Middle Kingdom through Second Intermediate Period, representatives of the Pan-Grave culture, presumably to be identified with the Medjay, and later the Kerma culture was present in Upper Egypt (Theban area) progressively up to the Delta at Tell el-Dab’a until the 18th Dynasty. Despite the official Egyptian dogma that regarded foreigners as elements of chaos, the reality shows that Nubians were integrated in the Egyptian society when accepting the Egyptian way of life. This is also visible in the wider range of occupations performed by native Nubians. While from time to time foreign groups also left the Egyptian Nile Valley, this Egyptianization or cultural entanglement resulted in a disappearing of foreigners in the sources.