USA: +1(669)289-8683 
Sign in
Choose and write on one question from below. Use the question that you are attempting as the title of your essay. Discussion essay should be between 500 and 600 words long. Your discussions must include references from the assigned course readings and a Word Count at the end of your essay.
1. Evaluate the contributions of archaeology to the reconstruction of Africa’s past.
2. In what ways did the environment (geographical location) contribute to the emergence of the ancient Egyptian civilization
Africa’s prehistory
The peopling and early history of Africa
The geography of Africa
Topography and drainage
Africa’s topography is dominated by areas of plateau
Most of the eastern and southern parts of the continent are more than 1,000 meters a.s.l
Lower lands (plains) predominate in the north and west
The Rift Valley system
Continent drained by the Nile, Niger, Congo (Zaire), Benue, Limpopo
Map of Africa (physical)
Geography of Africa cont.
Climate and Vegetation
Equitorial
Tropical – north and south of the equator
Desert and Semi-Desert
Mediterranean
Vegetation cover depends primarily on the mean annual rainfall
Vegetation zones in latitudinal bands (exceptions in East Africa because of the Rift Valley system)
Infinitely diverse and complex environment
History of Human Habitation
Long history of human habitation
Dynamic relationship between humans and environment
What is the history of this occupation?
Two theories
Traditions/myths of origin
Evolution
Traditions/myths of origin
An account of a people of their origin
Stories, folklores, drama
Relate to creation and migration
Creation stories relate to the mythical past
Migration stories relate to later periods
Evolutionary theory
In 1871, Charles Darwin hypothesized Africa to be center of human origin
Archaeological and paleontological research in the last 80 years supported this
Genetics has contributed its 2 cents
In 2000, Human Genome Project completed – the sequence of 3.1 billion subunits of DNA in 23 pairs of chromosomes.
…Evolutionary theory
Evolutionary history of primates extends to 70-80 mya
60 mya, early primates started to show several trends in N. America, S. America, Europe, Asia & Africa
Early apes and Old World monkeys appeared in Africa 23 mya and spread to Eurasia
Hominids evolved from this branch 4-8 mya
Earliest evidence found in E/Africa
Origins of Humanity
1. Primate evolution began 70 – 80 million years ago
2. Evidence of first bipedal hominids 4 million years ago, East Africa
3. Cranial volume of earliest humans: 400-550 cubic centimeters
4. Homo erectus spread to other world regions (brain size: 850 – 1,100 cc)
5. Increasing brain size yields production of stone tools
*
*
B. Earlier Stone Age
1. First stone tools primitive, but useful
2. Latter part of this period, tool-making became more deliberate
*
*
C. Middle Stone Age (200, 000 years ago)
1. Tools became even more refined a. Spear shaft construction, effective hunting
2. Use of natural pigments for art
3. Controlled use of fire
*
*
D. Later Stone Age (40,000 years ago)
1. Developed “microlithic technology”
a. Use of bow and arrow
2. Hunting, gathering for agriculture, herding
3. Naturalistic, as well as stylized, rock art
*
*
E. Food Production in Africa
1. Originated During the Later Stone Age
a. Only certain plants and animals in specific regions
2. Sickle blades used to harvest grasses
3. Grinding stones used to process grain
*
*
F. Iron Age Developments
1. Iron technology entered Africa from Middle East
2. Flourished in certain areas of the continent
3. Christianity with Romans, 4th century A.D.
4. Islam superseded in 7th century A.D.
*
*
African history and civilization:
Egypt and the Nile Valley
The Nile Valley
Nile Valley cont…
The Egyptian civilization
Over 2,000 years ago, Herodotus wrote:
“Concerning Egypt itself I shall extend my remarks to a great length, because there is no country that possess so many wonders, nor any that has such a number of works that defy description.”
Time line
c.3500 B.C. – c.3000 B.C. Predynastic Period
c.3000 B.C. – c.2686 B.C. Early Dynastic Period
c.2686 B.C. – c.2150 B.C. Old Kingdom
c.2150 B.C. – c.2050 B.C. 1st Intermediate Period
c.2050 B.C. – c.1750 B.C. Middle Kingdom
c.1750 B.C. – c.1570 B.C. 2nd Intermediate Period
c.1570 B.C. – c.1070 B.C. New Kingdom
c.1070 B.C. – c.716 B.C. 3rd Intermediate Period
c.716 B.C. – c.332 B.C. Late Period
Peopling of the Nile valley
Region had attracted proto-humans and human groups
Early population groups roamed the region as foragers
Global climate and environmental changes started from c.10,000 B.C
Deglaciation in Europe; increased rainfall in Africa (pluvial period)
Period followed by cooling (decreased rainfall in Africa)
Desiccation and desertification of Sahara
Nile Valley cont…
Peopling of the Nile valley cont…
Climatic and environmental change triggered demographic change in the valley
Population increased with waves and bands of immigrants from the Sahara to the west
Immigration from the east and the south swelled this population
Neolithic revolution and sedentary life further increased population
Social complexity: Emergence of State society
Nation-states now a dominant feature global cultural landscape
Political units that claim sovereignty and command allegiance
Record of this in Egypt date to 6,000 years ago but process started earlier
Social complexity cont…
Between 6,000 and 4,000 B.C. settlements developed along the Nile
Knowledge of the control of the annual Nile flood waters necessary for this
The communal effort for this endeavor was the basis for the Egyptian civilization
Demographic change (immigration and natural increase) led to increased competition for resources
Competition increased the potential for conflict
Social complexity…
The neolithic revolution also led to specialization
The need to avoid conflict led to co-operation
All of these processes led to the birth of the Egyptian state and civilization c.3,000 B.C.
This attributed to Pharaoh Narmer/Menes
Palette of Narmer
Social complexity cont…
Egyptian Pyramids
Highlights of Egyptian civilization
Religion
Ka and the afterlife
Architecture
Political system
Agriculture
Animal and plant domestication
Technology
Irrigation
Astronomy
Science and Medicine
The Evolution of Early Egyptian Civilization: Issues and Evidence
Author(s): Robert J. Wenke
Reviewed work(s):
Source: Journal of World Prehistory, Vol. 5, No. 3 (September 1991), pp. 279-329
Published by: Springer
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/25800600
.
Accessed: 15/08/2012 20:31
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
.
Springer is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of World Prehistory.
http://www.jstor.org
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=springer
http://www.jstor.org/stable/25800600?origin=JSTOR-pdf
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
Journal of World Prehistory, Vol. 5, No. 3, 199
1
The Evolution of Early Egyptian Civilization: Issues
and Evidence
Robert J. Wenke1
Egypt’s cultural evolution between 4000 and 2000 B. C. is reviewed in and
related to methodological and theoretical issues in contemporary archaeology.
Recent archaeological evidence from the Nile Delta is analyzed in the context
of the cultural integration of the Nile Valley and Delta after about 3200 B. C.
KEY WORDS: Egypt; Predynastic-Old Kingdom.
INTRODUCTION
Ancient Egypt, like ancient Greece, has cultural themes so potent that they
have reverberated through history. The whole complex of ancient Egyptian
“culture”?its hieroglyphs, pyramids, religion, and other elements?not only
has fascinated people through the millennia, but also has stimulated generations
of scholars, from Herodotus to the present, to seek some deeper, more com
prehensive understanding of history. Indeed, with the recent publication of
a
Jungian analysis of ancient Egypt (Rice, 1989) and a racial/ethnic interpretation
(Bernal, 1987), one might now fairly claim that nearly every major “theory”
of history has been applied to the Egyptian past, from the metaphysical to the
psychological to the materialist (e.g., Herodotus, 1972; Toynbee, 1935; Frank
fort, 1956; Childe, 1934; White, 1949; Wittfogel, 1957; Harris, 1977, 1979;
Smith, 1928; also see Carneiro, 1970; Butzer, 1976; Krzyzaniak, 1977; Hoff
man, 1979; Hassan, 1988; Wenke, 1989a; Janssen, 1978).
‘Department of Anthropology, University of Washington, DH-05, Seattle, Washington, 98195.
279
0892-7537/91/09O0-O279$06.50/O ? 1991 Plenum Publishing Corporation
280 Wenke
The archaeological record from which this long interpretive tradition has
been derived has recently been the subject of several insightful analyses (e.g.,
Trigger, 1983a; Hassan, 1988; Kemp, 1983, 1989). This paper is not intended
as a review of these reviews; instead, I focus narrowly on recent archaeological
evidence about several specific transformations that were central to Egypt’s
emergence as a complex society, particularly the cultural integration of Upper
and Lower Egypt?the defining process, in a sense, in the evolution of the
Egyptian state.
Most reviews of Egypt’s archaeological record have been prefaced with a
jeremiad about the quality of the relevant data, and unfortunately, it is still true
that the archaeological evidence we have about early Pharaonic Egypt is a pr
o
foundly inadequate and biased sample. Moreover, the “Ancient Egypt” that is
the subject of this long interpretive tradition is a farrago of archaeological “evi
dence,” interpretations of this evidence, and interpretations of these interpre
tations. “Ancient Egypt” in this sense is a work of art?a blending of materials
and ideas that, like all great art, has important but different meanings to people
of many different times and cultures.
For the reader now flinching at the dire prospect of some form of decon
structionist/postprocessualist analysis of Egyptian archaeology?or, worse, yet
another review of the intellectual pretensions of the “New Archaeology”?I
hasten to add that my objective is to provide a straightforward summary and
analysis of the empirical record of early Egyptian complex societies. To reflect
accurately, however, issues in contemporary archaeological theory, one must
consider the views of the many scholars who assert that any attempt at some
thing like a “straightforward summary and analysis of the empirical record of
early Egyptian complex societies” is a futile quest for something that is not
there (Young, 1988; Shanks and Tilley, 1989). I think that the central argu
ments of this “postprocessual” and “critical” perspective have been thor
oughly rebutted (e.g., Watson, 1990; Renfrew, 1989; Trigger, 1989); but some
of the issues raised in these epistemological controversies are relevant to this
paper because they concern the differences in objectives that have often divided
the various scholars who have analyzed ancient Egypt.
My chronological focus (Fig. 1) is the first great dynastic cycle of Egypt,
from about 4000 to about 2000 B.C., during which the core elements of ancient
Egyptian civilization first appeared. My geographical focus is the main Nile
Valley and Delta (Fig. 2)?particularly the Delta. Recent research has demon
strated the inaccuracy of the traditional notion of ancient Egypt as culturally a
“sealed test tube,” for Egypt was influenced during its entire formative era by
Western Asian cultures. I have noted what I consider the most important aspects
of this issue, but a full treatment of Egypt’s external relations is beyond the
scope of this paper.
Early Egyptian Civilization 281
NILE
LEVELS
upper egypt
lower egypt
& the fayyum
calibrated c14|
dates from
selected sites
lower
nubia
pales
tine
MESO
Ipotamia!
low I high
3000 +
4000+
a
Old Kingdom
Kom el-Hisn
Early Dynastic
(Archaic)
Protodynastic
(Naaada hi) Terminal
Predynastic
Gerzeaa
(Nagada ii)
Amratian
(Nagada I)
Desert
Neo
lithic
Late
Predynastic
Middle
Predynastic
Early
Predynastic
Late Fayyum
and
Merimda
Neolithic
,
Nagada
(South Town)
‘
Hierakonpolis
Nagada
Fayyum Neolithic
‘Hemamieh
Merimda * Minshat
Abu Omar
Abkan/
Khartoum!
Variant/
Post
Shamar
kian
Shamar
kian
other
cultures
Early
Bronze
Age iii
Early
Bronze
Age ii
Early
Bronze
Age i
Late
Chaico
lithic
Ghassu
lian
Jericho
viii
Ur iii
Larsa
Akkadian]
Early
Dynasty
i iii
Jemdet
Nasr
Late
Uruk
Early
Uruk
Late
Ubaid
Pottery
[Neolithic
Merimda
Early Fayyum
Neolithic
Qa,
6000
bc
Fig. 1. A cultural chronology of Egypt and adjacent areas (after Trigger, 1983, Fig. 1.1; Hassan,
1988). Despite some radiometric dating results that conflict with this chart (e.g., Haas et a/.,
1987), the period correlations between Egypt and Southwest Asia are supported by both radio
metric dates (e.g., Hassan and Robinson, 1987) and relative artifact seriations (e.g., von der
Way, 1987).
PRELIMINARY THEORETICAL ISSUES
Systematic archaeological research on early Egyptian complex societies is
over a century old, and it is appropriate to preface a review of this research by
considering briefly the ancient questions at the heart of all such historical inquiry:
What is the point? What can we hope to know about the past? Is there any
282 Wenke
MEDITERRANEAN SEA
QATTARA
DEPRESSION
WAD IV
NATRUN
Abu Ghalib,vAHeli
Giza.fCA
Sakkara*.
Dahshur*,
Kasr es-Sagha
FA YUM
HerakleoooliS’
BAHARIYA OASISo
– KILOMETRES
Fig. 2. The Egyptian Nile Valley and Delta, with principal ancient and modern settlements.
Many distinguishing characteristics of Egypt’s early complex societies have been explained
in terms of the sharp demarcation of Egypt’s agricultural zone by inhospitable deserts, the
transport potential of the Nile, and other environmental variables, but such environmental
cultural correlations do not constitute necessary and sufficient explanations of early Egyptian
cultural evolution.
reasonable basis to believe that early civilizations such as Egypt can be com
pared, explained, or understood in terms of general principles that are not trivial
and self-evident?
The long, convoluted debates on these issues (e.g., Salmon, 1982; Dun
nell, 1982; Watson, 1990; Trigger, 1989) have been so inconclusive they do
Early Egyptian Civilization 283
not warrant extended discussion here. Nonetheless, to evaluate what we know
about the origins of early Egyptian cultural complexity, it is necessary to exam
ine the research objectives of those who have analyzed Egypt’s archaeological
record.
Most scholars of ancient Egypt have sought simply to reconstruct ancient
Egyptian life, document its history, and understand its social and intellectual
expressions; they have attempted to determine how pyramids were built, how
many years Pepy II reigned, whether Narmer was a real historical individual,
how the royal bureaucracy functioned, the nature of4’divine kingship,*’ and so
forth. Egyptologists have not entirely neglected the modern social sciences (e.g.,
Weeks, 1979; Bietak, 1975; Assmann, 1987), but judging from the literature,
they have been unenthusiastic about the most basic premise of traditional social
science, namely, that a major objective of archaeological and historical analysis
is to formulate an empirically based explanatory science. Guksch (1985, p. 1),
for example, perceives 44in egyptology an isolationist position with regard to
results and models . . . from other sciences and a shying away from synthetic
statements as if egyptologists share the ancient Egyptians’ fear to travel beyond
the realm and to die on foreign soil.” Similarly, Frandsen states that “It is no
secret that Egyptologists are not in the forefront of the modern transformations
of the humane and social sciences” (1979, p. 167).
Barry Kemp has eloquently expressed a primary reason why Egyptologists
have been unimpressed by most social science-oriented analyses:
It is a feature of many modern treatments of the origin of early states to work, as
it were, from the bottom upwards, starting with a group of standard topics: population
pressure, agricultural improvements, the appearance of urbanism, the importance of
trade and information exchange. The state, by this view, arises autonomously from, or
with broad anonymous interrelations between, groups of people and their environment,
both the natural and the socioeconomic. States are, however, built on the urge to rule
and on visions of order. Although they have to work within the constraints of their lands
and people they generate forces, initiate changes, and generally interfere. In looking at
the state, therefore, we should keep to the forefront of our minds this generative power
that works from the top downwards and from the center outwards. (1989, p. 7)
Many social science-oriented archaeologists would agree with Kemp’s crit
icisms of traditional explanations for the rise of the state. Attempts by Childe
(1934), Wittfogel (1957), Harris (1977, 1979), and others to formulate general
models of cultural evolution on the basis of correlations between technoenvi
ronmental and demographic variables and social and political patterns and pro
cesses stimulated a great deal of creative research, and there is still much of
value about these ideas [especially, I think, in the case of Carneiro (1970)]. But
many contemporary scholars argue that identifying correlations among these
variables, patterns, and processes does not and cannot “explain” all important
aspects of the evolution of ancient civilizations (e.g., Hassan 1988, p. 166;
Trigger, 1986, 1983a; Bard, 1987, 1991; Hoffman, 1979). In fact, Kemp’s
284 Wenke
critique of traditional models of state formation is aimed at a theoretical per
spective that, for the most part, has few contemporary adherents.
But does contemporary archaeology, or social science in general, offer a
powerful theoretical alternative to traditional research methods and objectives
in the analysis of ancient Egypt?
Perhaps the most radical perspective in contemporary theoretical archae
ology is a strictly materialist and evolutionary approach. Some archaeologists
have argued that it is not possible to formulate a true science of the behavior of
extinct peoples and that the long chains of inference that must be constructed
to link the existing archaeological remains with such concepts as “class con
flict” and “political domination” cannot be measured in the archaeological
record and treated scientifically. Dunnell (1982, 1991), for example, argues that
archaeology can never be a science of behavior, because behavior does not
exist?artifacts exist; and, because any science must deal with phenomena, a
scientific archaeology must deal with artifacts, not with inferred behavior. Yet
such a science of artifacts cannot be like physics, Dunnell has argued, because
the artifactual record is primarily one created by evolutionary processes, in con
trast to the uniform timeless laws that govern the physical universe (also see
Rindos, 1984; Lumsden and Wilson, 1981; Boyd and Richerson, 1985; Wenke,
1981; Ammerman and Cavalli-Sforza, 1973; Kirch, 1990; R. N. Adams, 1981;
Cavalli-Sforza and Feldman, 1981).
I think a materialist-evolutionary approach has considerable potential, but
like all science?it is extremely reductionistic and cannot provide “common
sense” interpretations of ancient Egypt that appeal to human motivations and
behavior, and thus it will be unsatisfactory to many scholars. I illustrate the
application of materialist-evolutionary analyses below, in the context of
explaining variability in Old Kingdom pyramid construction.
A more widely held perspective in contemporary archaeology is that
archaeologists can use theories and methods from a broad range of social and
natural sciences to formulate an explanatory science of the past that can encom
pass many aspects of social structures, human intentions, social-class relation
ships, and other ideological elements (e.g., Salmon, 1982; Watson, 1990;
Schiffer, 1988; Earle and Preucel, 1987; Johnson, 1987; Wright, 1985; Payn
ter, 1989). The archaeological science these individuals envision, in contrast to
the materialist evolutionary perspective, is ultimately a science of behavior, and
they use concepts from economic geography, demography, systems theory, and
other modem social sciences to interpret the archaeological record.
In contrast to both of these perspectives, other archaeologists have argued
that it is precisely the ideologies and behaviors of ancient societies and individ
uals that must be the focal point of archaeological analysis but that empirical
scientific epistemologies are fundamentally inappropriate for understanding the
past (e.g., Shanks and Tilley, 1987a, 1987b, 1989; Hodder, 1985; Leone et
Early Egyptian Civilization 285
al., 1987). Shanks and Tilley, in particular, drawing on the work of Derrida
(e.g., 1978), Foucault (1986), and others have argued that, just as one cannot
assign a definitive single meaning to a text, one cannot make an empirically
verified and definitive interpretation of the archaeological record. We create the
past, they argue, and our interpretations of the past are limited by, and arise
out of, our own cultural context.
Debates about the relative merits of these and other perspectives [see, for
example, the 1989 exchange between Shanks and Tilley and Trigger, Renfrew,
and Wenke (1989b), and others in the Norwegian Archaeological Review] are
largely beyond the scope of this paper, but I consider them briefly here, both
because they have begun to have some impact on studies of Egypt (e.g., Has
san, 1988) and because they are directly relevant to the question of what we
know?and can know?about the Egyptian past.
Kemp, for example, expresses a view of historical causation that presents
problems for some social science-oriented archaeologists:
Why did ancient Egypt decline and its civilization fail? The same answer applies
as to all civilizations: too great and too prolonged a rejection of systematized life in
favor of freedom to manoeuvre. If the work of Middle Kingdom Egypt?and of equiv
alent periods of bureaucratic dominance in ancient China, the Indus Valley, Mesopo
tamia and Pre-Columbian Central and South America?had been pursued as a peaceful
continuum, converting all who encountered it to enthusiastic support for order and the
beauty of logical systems of government, then by now a Utopian world order might well
have been achieved. But anarchic love of disorder and the rejection of authority are
equally part of the human personality. History is a record of the struggle between the
two polarities of the mind?order and disorder, acceptance and rebellion (as the ancient
Egyptians themselves perceived). Both the rise and fall of civilization are present in
each one of us. (1989, p. 180)
In his excellent analysis of ancient Egypt, Kemp gives considerable weight
to environmental and technological variables, and the above quotation is by no
means his ultimate and complete account of Egypt’s developmental mechanics;
but explanations based on presumed psychological predispositions such as an
“anarchic love of disorder” would, from the perspective of the social sciences,
have little explanatory power. Are we to suppose that in some cases states failed
to develop in otherwise suitable surroundings because the people there failed to
develop the ideology of state control? Assertions that the explanation of the rise
and fall of civilizations is to be found in the qualities of the human mind are
indisputably true, but they end comparative analyses of ancient civilizations,
except those concerned with the evolution of human cognitive structures and
mechanisms.
Even for those who assume that the intentions and ideologies of long-dead
preliterate peoples are a legitimate field of study, Kemp’s perspective poses
some problems. Shanks and Tilley (1987a, b, 1989), for example, and many
other contemporary “critical archaeologists” (Leone et al., 1987), assume as
a major premise that one invents the past rather than discovers it and that one
286 Wenke
cannot help but invent a past that is a reflection of one’s socioeconomic and
political heritage and context. Thus, the “too great and too prolonged a rejec
tion of systematized life in favor of freedom to manoeuvre” that Kemp suggests
as a reason why all the great ancient civilizations collapsed might be viewed as
simply an expression of his sociopolitical context as an academic in twentieth
century England.
The importance of these and other epistemological issues is vividly illus
trated by the problems scholars have had simply in defining the analytical units
with which to study the past. Labeling ancient Egypt at some point or other a
“state,” for example, based on the inferred appearance of characteristics such
as centralized government or a class structured society, is more a description
than an analysis. To many scholars such typologies are inexact, atheoretical
categorizations of a continuous and multidimensional underlying variability.
McGuire argues that such “an approach inevitably degenerates into taxonomic
arguments: What is a simple society? What is a state? Transforming types into
variables eliminates the either/or decisions inherent in a typological methodol
ogy and makes taxonomic arguments largely irrelevant” (1983, p. 95; Rindos,
1984; Yoffee, 1979; cf. Wright, 1977a, p. 301, 1977b).
Figure 3 illustrates some of these issues: How do we decide where to draw
a boundary line that defines a “state” in such a pattern of continuous variabil
ity? One needs a theory or assumption that tells one which variable or variables
are critical and what changes in variable states and values “mean.”
The obvious solution to these and many other epistemological issues might
seem to be an eclectic-synthetic approach: one could integrate evidence from
every relevant discipline and build an ever more complete understanding of
ancient Egypt. We could, for example, use geophysics to reconstruct ancient
Nile hydraulics and thereby explain why Old Kingdom settlements in the Delta
were built almost exclusively on geziras; we could then use survey data to show
that these settlements increased in number during the Fifth and Sixth Dynasties;
texts of this period would tell us that these settlements probably increased in
number because of tax incentives conferred by a pharaoh interested in protecting
his eastern frontier (Badawy, 1967); finally, those scholars so inclined could
look for a general theory of history in Marx (1932, 1973; Friedman and Row
lands, 1977b; Shanks and Tilley, 1989), in Weber (1947, 1968), in evolution
ary theory (Dunnell, 1980), or in some other source. One could, in sum, attempt
to understand this ancient culture in a multifaceted way (Trigger, 1986).
Such an eclectic-synthetic approach, however, does not resolve all prob
lems. The Narmer Palette, for example, suggests changes in ancient Egyptian
perceptions and the history of the relationship of the Nile Delta and Valley, and
archaeological evidence (reviewed below) supports this in the form of the even
tual homogenization of artifact styles in the Valley and Delta. But from some
perspectives, these epigraphic and archaeological data are entirely complemen
a b c d e f g
! ill a w
800 – 100 | | c/ 1
1.5 J-
1.5
S? 5J- t ̂
high : -% sr..y g
I 6 – 600 – +8 – 75 ‘r~ I 4?~ ?| i? / S . X ‘ ft
i \ ‘ n n / ny~-< 1
1j~ 5 – 500 – +6 – j 1.0!? I?’ ‘?I . i / q
! 4″ 400 ~ +4~ | 1 U ^i^f /V / L |
5L 3- 3oo- +2- j j_ 2j-_J.^-‘.Jj Ulk^J /fl^ J VrL D i’
‘I
2-
20
0-
0-
25^-
“T
I-^–M-SJ^iHI
1
,|TI
1
0l 0L 0L L0WL 0l 0l 0i ^H^=r^r^^^ ^-1 u?w-<-g i
5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 1000
ill bc ad
“D m onj
-i a 2 a
a ? 2.
a
2 O 5′ a # S < ?o ;? * - ? Oq? ? z 3 5 a
o
S|
Fig. 3. Some hypothesized variables in Egyptian cultural evolution. Values for some of these variables are estimated from various published data; others
are simply hypotheses based on inadequate samples. The variables here are (A) coefficient of rank-size distribution of settlement size, (B) population in
millions (after Butzer, 1976), (C) population density per square kilometer (after Butzer, 1976), (D) lake volumes and stream discharge in east Africa
(after Butzer, 1976), (E) percentage of domesticated animals in total faunal assemblage (estimated from reports on excavated materials), (F) price of farmland per unit (in silver) (after Baer, 1962), and (G) monumental
architecture
in cubic meters of worked stone (after Kemp, 1983, Fig. 2.1). Many M other variables could be plotted (e.g., average transport distance of craft items), but even with the variables plotted here, the problem of social typologies ?S
is evident: At what point is Egypt a “state”? By analyzing archaeologically measurable variables, the analytical focus is placed on changes in evolutionary
tempo and mode that are fundamental to cultural
change
(compiled and drawn by M. Lehner, N. Pyne, and R. Wenke).
288 Wenke
tary only if one is attempting to reconstruct Egyptian culture history. The ancient
Egyptian ideas that one reads into
or discerns in something like the Narmer
Palette do not have the same scientific standing or utility that measurable vari
ations in ceramic styles do; indeed, from a materialist perspective the “cultural
integration” of the Nile Valley and Delta may be defined as, and in effect mean
nothing more than, measurable, statistically analyzable changes in artifact styles
and distributions. Similarly, most sociological/behavioral interpretations of early
states emphasize “power” and “domination” as effective concepts with which
to categorize and analyze early complex societies (Haas, 1982; Hassan, 1988;
Maisels, 1990, p. 10; also see Wallerstein, 1976; Kohl, 1981; Friedman and
Rowlands, 1977a). But, did some early civilization fail to appear because it did
not evolve appropriate power structures? How would we know? The extent to
which it is possible to measure “domination” directly in the archaeological
record and treat it scientifically is unclear, and some reject such concepts as
useful in an empirical science of archaeology (e.g., Dunnell, 1991).
Nor will a synthetic-eclectic approach satisfy the postprocessualists who
claim that an empirical understanding of the past in neutral scientific terms is
misdirected and impossible.
In the following review of the Egyptian archaeological record I have illus
trated these varied perspectives on the past and some of the epistemological
problems they entail. In general, I conclude that interpretations of the history
and social-political-economic structures of ancient Egypt cannot be encom
passed in the logical framework and concepts
of a truly materialist science and,
conversely, that a truly materialist science of the archaeological record?even
if that science is eventually developed into a much more powerful system than
imagined today?will not satisfy most scholars because they want to understand
the past in the common-sense terms that translate the artifacts into the familiar
behaviors of our experience.
THE CHRONOLOGY OF ANCIENT EGYPT
It may seem self-evident that to understand what happened in ancient Egypt
we have to analyze the variability over time in such variables as Nile flood
fluctuations and pyramid construction (Fig. 1), but some scholars argue that
this concept of time is inadequate as a basis for understanding ancient societies.
“Chronology may be crucial to social change, at points of sudden discontinuity,
but for the most part we may expect it to be irrelevant in pre-capitalist social
forms because of the absence of events which build on each other” (Shanks
and Tilley, 1987a, pp. 184-185). Similarly, Kemp suggests that the Egyptians
derived a great sense of stability from a view of time in which a
”
[continuity
of orderly kingship was the principal image” (1989, p. 24).
I focus here, however, on a scientific sense of chronology that allows us
Early Egyptian Civilization 289
to compare Egypt to other civilizations and to analyze its internal dynamics in
terms of the modes and tempos of evolutionary change (Fig. 3).
The principal data with which to construct such a chronology are ancient
texts, radiocarbon dates, and variations in artifact styles. No texts existed in the
crucial developmental period between 4000 and 3000 B.C., and even though
some texts recording Egyptian chronology are thought to date to the third mil
lennium B.C. (e.g., the Palermo Stone), these textual sources are ambiguous,
and scholars differ on their interpretation (e.g., Baer, 1970; Stadelmann, 1985,
p. 294). The Turin Papyrus and Mantho’s Chronicle provide lists of kings that
form the basis for the later chronology, and for the periods after the Old King
dom, the text-based chronologies provide several points that seem to be well
fixed by references to datable astronomical events (reviewed by Hassan and
Robinson, 1987, p. 125; Lehner etal, 1990).
Hassan and Robinson (1987) found good agreement between the radiocar
bon chronology and the traditional age estimates for the period between the First
and the Fifth Dynasties and for some later periods. Dates from eight samples
of acacia and sycamore wood from the tomb of Djoser, for example, are highly
consistent and average 2680 ? 104 Cal B.C., which compares well with
Edwards’ (1970) estimate of 2686 B.C. for this tomb. They also compared
historical and radiocarbon dates in order to correlate the chronology of Egypt
and Southwest Asia.
Geyh et al., (1989) found an approximate fit between the historical dates
and the radiocarbon dates for a large sample of Old Kingdom dates, except for
the Sixth Dynasty, but they question the use of radiometric dating to infer pre
cise chronologies because of sample contamination and correction-curve ambi
guities (1989, pp. 74-75).
Despite this overall correspondence, some recent radiocarbon dates con
trast sharply with the historical chronology. In our own study we (Haas et al.,
1987) found that 64 samples of carbonized organic materials taken from many
Old Kingdom pyramids, temples, and tombs averaged (both conventional and
AMS dates) about 374 years older than the text-based traditional chronology
suggests (Hayes, 1970). Various explanations of this discrepancy have been
considered (e.g., the “old wood” problem), but none is particularly convinc
ing, and the significance of these results remains unclear.
Dendrochronology has some possibilities in Egypt, because wood pre
serves so well there, but the many logs and artifacts made of Levantine conifers
have never been systematically analyzed.
The styles of Palestinian and Mesopotamian artifacts found in Egyptian
sites?particularly the Syro-Palestinian styles of pottery at Maadi (Kantor,
1965), Buto (von der Way, 1987, 1988), Tell Ibrahim Awad (van den Brink,
1988, p. 80), Mendes (Brewer et al., 1991), and many Upper Egyptian sites,
as well?seem to support the period correlations between Egypt and Southwest
Asia (Fig. 1).
290 Wenke
Traditional artifact typologies such as those produced by Tixier (1963) and
Petrie (1900a; also see Needier, 1981) still are the units in which the chronology
of the early states of Egyptian cultural evolution is analyzed but these types
(e.g., “Meidum Bowl,” “Fayyum A point”) must all be assumed to be amal
gams of stylistic, functional, and random variability. Numerous scholars have
argued that the methods used to create such units
are far from optimal (Spauld
ing, 1979; Dunnell, 1986; Read, 1982; Whallon, 1982; Close,, 1988; Lewis,
1986). Recently Egyptian pottery typologies have been recast in the form of
hierarchical attribute analyses (Arnold, 1981; Bourriau, 1981; Kroeper, 1989;
Ballet, 1990, Fig. 1). Various other scholars, however, argue that more effec
tive typologies and classifications can be constructed with nonhierarchical meth
ods (e.g., Dunnell, 1970, 1986; Read, 1982; also see Whallon and Brown,
1982; Aldenderfer, 1987).
THE ECOLOGICAL CONTEXT OF EARLY EGYPTIAN
CIVILIZATION
Through most of Egypt’s early history such simple factors as floodplain
width and flood basin size “explain,” in a statistical sense, most of the varia
bility in settlement location, size, and density. Butzer has shown (1976, Fig.
14), for example, that archaeological site density can be predicted with consid
erable accuracy by an inverse function of floodplain width. But what is the
significance of such relationships? Shanks and Tilley (1989), for example, con
sider that the physical environment is little more than background to the real
theater of archaeological analysis?the social, political, and ideological systems
that determine how people interact with their physical environments.
Butzer, in contrast, argued that “sociological hypotheses are by them
selves inadequate to explicate the processes involved in the emergence of flood
plain civilizations” (1978, p. 18), and he suggests that “[tjhere is growing
evidence that the economic history of ancient Egypt was primarily one of con
tinuous ecological readjustment to a variable water supply, combined with
repeated efforts to intensify or expand land
use in order to increase productivity.
It is in this sense that hydraulic civilization in Egypt remains inconceivable
without its ecological determinants
. . . .” (1978, p. 17).
Butzer (1978, p. 17), for example, estimates a 30% decline in Nile dis
charge during the course of the Old Kingdom and links this to the collapse of
the political order after the death of Pepy II (ca. 2167 B.C.) (also see Hassan,
1986, 1988; Hassan and Stucki, 1987; Bell, 1970). Similarly, several scholars
have suggested that declining rainfall after the end of the Pleistocene forced
desert populations into the Nile Valley and thus directly led to agricultural econ
omies (Childe, 1934; Hassan, 1984b). Brewer found evidence (1991) in fish
remains that during the Predynastic Period Nile floods were decreasing, the
Early Egyptian Civilization 291
climate was becoming more arid, and there was increased variability in winter
temperatures.
In sum, the Nile Valley’s unique physical geography has been adduced as
a proximate explanation of almost every aspect of Egyptian civilization, from
its great ideological uniformity (as facilitated by the Nile’s transport potential),
to its largely nonurban settlement patterns (a function in part, at least, of the
homogeneity of agricultural potential along the Nile and the narrow confines of
the Valley) (reviewed by Butzer, 1976, 1988; Hassan, 1988). The determining
effects of the Nile Delta’s physical geography, however, are less clear. Goe
dicke notes (1988) that the ancient Egyptian name for the Delta may derive
from the word for “aquatic plains” or “flooded land,” but on the basis of about
550 hand augerings and various soil profiles, de Wit and van Stralen report that
although “according to historical sources, marshes were well known in the delta
in ancient times, hardly any marshlike deposits . . . were found during the entire
survey” (1988, p. 138). They suggest that marsh deposits could have been
obliterated by the climate and conditions of the ancient Delta, but their evidence
and other data suggest that marshy conditions did not restrict agriculture or
settlement in this region.
In a survey of an area of the eastern Delta, Van Wesemael (1988; also see
el-Kasim, 1988) found the following. (1) All the habitation sites found during
the survey were built either on levees (nine sites) or on higher parts of geziras,
the middle Pleistocene sand formations (i.e., geziras now buried by alluvial
sediments; four sites). (2) No sherds were found on the highest parts of the
geziras, probably because “the tops of the geziras were only used as refuge
during extremely high Nile floods. These locations were too far from the agri
cultural fields” (Van Wesemael, 1988, p. 129). (3) No sherds were found on
the northeastern sides of the geziras, because these “areas were probably back
swamps in which sand, eroded from the geziras, was deposited” (Van Wese
mael, 1988, p. 129). (4) The oldest sherds found were of the Old Kingdom
period, and these were found only in occupations situated on the “higher parts
of the middle Pleistocene sand” (Van Wesemael, 1988, p. 129); but the sherds
found in occupations situated on the levees were exclusively of post-Old King
dom age. Van Wesemael warns that “this does not necessarily mean that during
the Old and Middle Kingdom settlement areas were restricted to the geziras.
However, due to shifting watercourses and high sedimentation rates, levees
formed during the Old and Middle Kingdom (ca. 2686-1750 B.C.) have been
covered with a thick layer of sediment and, therefore, do not appear in the
uppermost 2 meters of alluvial sediments” (Van Wesemael, 1988, p. 129). (5)
No sherds were found on the surface of some tells because they had been cov
ered with a “layer of clayey materials of eolian origin” (1988, p. 130; also see
Wunderlich, 1988).
Coutellier and Stanley (1987) used deep borings and other methods to ana
292 Wenke
lyze deposits that relate to four major Holocene Nile branches. They calculate
Holocene sedimentation rates at 500 cm per 1000 years and conclude that the
Delta’s coastal margin migrated northward by as much as 50 km during the past
5000 years (a progradational rate of 10 m per year). If so, the Delta’s conditions
of settlement were different at 8000 B.P. and for some time thereafter, since
many levees?the favored settlement location?were just forming, and the sea
coast and associated lagoons and marshes were much farther south. Nonethe
less, if the 5800 B.P. (uncorrected) radiocarbon date (Krzyzaniak, 1988, 1989)
from auger samples from Minshat Abu Omar (from above a layer containing
pottery) is representative, the Delta may have been occupied from the period
of initial agriculture in Egypt onward, and there seems to have been no ecolog
ical barrier to substantial settlement there throughout the Holocene.
THE EVOLUTION OF EGYPTIAN CIVILIZATION: 5000-2000 B.C.
The agricultural basis of early Egyptian complex societies has recently
been thoroughly reviewed by Hassan (1986; also see Wendorf, 1980; Wenke
etaL, 1988a; Trigger, 1983a).
Egypt’s primary domesticates of the Pharaonic era, the wheat/barley,
sheep/goat combination, were almost certainly introduced from Southwest Asia,
but the Egyptian record offers important examples of independent evolution of
domesticates and agricultural technologies that have much to offer for current
models of agricultural origins (e.g., Henry, 1989; McCorriston and Hole, 1991)
and for the determinants of the spread (e.g., Cavalli-Sforza and Feldman, 1981)
of agricultural economies (Caton-Thompson and Gardner, 1934; Wendorf and
Schild, 1976; Close and Wendorf, 1987; Close, 1987; Wendorf, 1980; Ginter
and Kozlowski, 1983, 1984, 1988; Kozlowski and Ginter, 1989; Wenke etal.,
1988a; Brewer, 1987, 1991; Eiwanger, 1982, 1984, 1987; Smith, 1989).
Kozlowski and Ginter conclude, for example, on the basis of artifact styles,
that both the Fayyum and the Merimda Beni Salama communities, which are
still the earliest known agricultural settlements in Egypt, “had one and the same
ancestor, with the cradle land in the Near East, and more specifically in the
Jordan Valley” (1989, p. 176). Others have argued a northwest African origin
(Butzer, 1976), a Sudanese origin (Arkell, 1975; Cialowicz, 1989, p. 265), and
a Saharan origin (reviewed by Hassan, 1988; also see Kuper, 1989).
In any case, by about 4000 B.C., Egyptian agriculture was a productive
mix of cattle, pigs, sheep, goats, wheat, barley, and other crops and animals
that provided the basis for the subsequent evolution of Egyptian civilization.
In terms of environmental, agricultural, and basic demographic variables,
the period from about 4000 to about 2000 B.C. can be considered a single epoch
of transformation, during which Egypt’s settlement patterns, functional inter
dependence and complexity, and other primary variables underwent parallel
Early Egyptian Civilization 293
changes in evolutionary tempo and direction, culminating in the mature Old
Kingdom state, just prior to 2000 B.C.
The primary question, then, is What were the major determinants of both
the initial complex Egyptian societies and their subsequent evolution? This
question entails important subsidiary questions, such as by what processes and
mechanisms did the Nile Valley and Delta integrate socially, economically, and
politically? What were the social, political, economic, administrative, and ide
ological organizational principles and mechanisms of the early Egyptian state?
and How does Egypt compare to other early states in its evolutionary devel
opment?
The Physical Anthropology of Ancient Egyptians
From the beginnings of research in Egypt, scholars have sought some of
the answers to the above questions by trying to trace the “genetic” affinities of
the ancient Egyptians, and this issue continues to be debated. Bemal (1987),
for example, argues that much of Classical Greek culture was derived from
Egypt and that Egyptian culture, in turn, had been in significant part a product
of black African cultures?a view rejected by most Egypt specialists but accepted
by various African-American scholars. African-American scholars are, how
ever, only the latest to “claim” the ancient Egyptians. Deny (1956), for exam
ple, argued that peoples from South or Southwest Asia were the main genetic
ancestors of the Egyptians of the Pharaonic period. As Trigger notes (1983a,
pp. 12-13), various early scholars concluded?on dubious evidence?that the
earliest Predynastic Egyptian peoples were negroid but that there were repeated
incursions of “Hamito-Semitic” peoples and that this “Dynastic Race” brought
with them the advanced civilization expressed in Early Dynastic Egypt. Emery
(1961, pp. 39-40), Edwards (1971, pp. 40-41), Petrie and Quibell (1896), and
others argued variants of this position.
The data with which to evaluate these idea are ambiguous. Too few Egyp
tians of the Neolithic period have been found (e.g., Henneberg et al., 1989) to
determine their similarity to other groups. Trigger (1983a), citing Batrawi (1945,
1946), concludes that skeletal remains from Upper Egypt show very little change
from the Predynastic into the late historical period and that, although “there
was some variation within the population, the Upper Egyptian people were
mostly small in stature and had long narrow skulls, dark wavy hair, and brown
skin …. Skeletons found at Merimda, El-Omari and Ma’adi suggest that the
Predynastic inhabitants of the Delta were taller and more sturdily built than the
Upper Egyptians and that their skulls were broader” (1983a, p. 12). But he
disputes the conclusion of others that northern populations brought “civiliza
tion” into Egypt. Berry and Berry (1967, 1973) see great genetic stability and
homogeneity persisting through the Old and Middle Kingdoms, with conse
294 Wenke
quent increases in heterogenity in the New Kingdom and later periods (also see
Angel, 1972; Keita, 1988, 1990). Leek analyzed the remains of approximately
118 men, women, and children buried in Cheops’ western necropolis at Giza,
and he concluded that only a few of the skulls exhibited any “negroid charac
teristics” (1986, p. 190).
The general appearance of people as presented in early Pharaonic paintings
and sculptures contrasts with sub-Saharan Africans, and many scholars interpret
these representations to show the ancient Egyptians as a Mediterranean type
small, with delicate extremities, brown skin, and dark hair (straight or wavy)
and eyes (reviewed in Trigger, 1983a). This is what one would expect on the
basis of the geographic-demographic context. The “races” of the world were
largely created by physical barriers to gene flow, such as the Himalayas and
the Sahara, and despite no doubt continuous gene flow down the Nile, the Sahara
isolated Egypt to some extent from sub-Saharan populations, even during wetter
intervals. Gene flow between Egypt and Southwest Asia and the Mediterranean
would probably have increased in frequency from the period of agricultural
origins onward, based on evidence of increasing commodity exchange. Con
trasting distributions through time and space of cranial and dental physical char
acteristics would be expected, depending on whether agriculture and early
cultural complexity were the direct result of the migrations of North Africans
and Southwest Asians into the Nile Valley between about 6000 and 3000 B.C.
or, alternatively, if the gene pool of Egypt remained more or less the same
during these transitional epochs and it was the cultural elements, not the people
of Southwest Asia, that were introduced to Egypt.
Samples of human remains relevant to this issue, however, are inadequate
to test these possibilities.
In addition to these various studies of the racial origins of ancient Egyp
tians, there is considerable evidence about Egyptian diet and disease (reviewed
by Loveil, 1990; also see Greene, 1972; Klug and Beck, 1985; Martin et al.,
1984; Molto, 1988; Neilsen, 1970; Podzorski, 1982; Saffirio, 1972; Cook et
al., 1988; David, 1986). This topic and the large body of literature involving
the use of craniodental morphometrics to determine genetic relatedness (e.g.,
Harris and Weeks, 1973; David 1986) are beyond the scope of this paper.
The Early and Middle Predynastic Origins of Egyptian Civilization:
Ca. 4000-3400 B.C.
Figures 4-6 illustrate the basis for the traditional view that Egyptian com
plex societies first appeared in Upper Egypt (Hassan, 1988; Trigger, 1983a;
Bard, 1987, 1991; Hays, 1984; Petrie, 1900b, 1901a, b, 1902). Predynastic
cemeteries and settlements have been recorded at many locations in Upper
Egypt, but their density appears to decline sharply north of Badari. Butzer
Early Egyptian Civilization 295
Fig. 4. Major Predynastic Egyptian sites (after Trigger, 1983; Hassan,
1988, Bard, 1991). Most of these sites were occupied for some period
between about 4000 B.C. and 3000 B.C. Many are cemeteries. Most
settlement sites were small agricultural communities. Hierakonpolis,
Nagada, and Abydos were among the largest Predynastic settlements.
observes that the low settlement density in the areas between Memphis and the
Upper Egyptian sites may have resulted from the great size of the natural flood
basins in Middle Egypt, which “would have required massive labor to bring
under control” (1978, p. 16). Also, the intensity of modern settlement in Mid
dle Egypt is such that early remains are likely obscured.
296 Wenke
Kom el-Hisn El-Beda Merimda?\ Zawyet el-Aryan?\i AbusirO. Yahudiya Lahun. A
GhuraD.^,arageh SidmantV
busir el-Meleq
/ Awlad el-Sheikh
USheikh Timai y Matmar i*Qaw
., ,EI-Ahaiwa Kawamil* P.Naga ed-Deir Abydos* m Abu Umuri? ArmanU,/
lagada Gebelein ?\ Muhammeriahv\?pi K_h / El-Masaid
EI-Kubbaniya,\?Elephantine
Fig. 5. Major Early Dynastic Egyptian sites (after Trigger, 1983, Fig. period traditionally considered the period of initial Egyptian “state” for By about 3600 B.C., however, large communities existed in Lower Egypt, rapid in the north. But to what extent was the Delta inhabited before about 3400 Early Egyptian Civilization 297
Fig. 6. Some major Old Kingdom Egyptian sites (after Trigger, 1983; van apparently largest Old Kingdom settlements, such as Memphis, have never B.C.? Occupations in the Fay yum and at Merimda, on the western edge of the
Delta, indicate that people certainly lived in Lower Egypt and at least on the 298 Wenke
It is possible that remains of early and mid-Predynastic Delta settlements tionally complex communities.
Interpretations differ concerning the nature of the first Egyptian complex konpolis and a few other sites emerged as large settlements, Predynastic Egypt’s ever, argues that in the Predynastic period and “even in Dynastic times [the along the Nile limits the growth of preindustrial settlements in a way that Meso
potamian communities, for example, were not. Hassan (1986, p. 162) suggests istrative, economic, and religious importance and that, in some periods, towns simply in response to the forces of market economies.
Various scholars (e.g., Lewarch, 1977) have questioned the application to
archaeological data of models derived from modem economies, but natural gious and ceremonial traditions, but it also is ideally placed for maximum political center in the Dakhla Oasis would have been inefficient, no matter what
religious traditions might have sanctioned it. pattern data with more effect if the composition, and not just the size and loca
tion, of communities can be determined, and we have some basic data in this
regard. Early and mid-Predynastic sites at Merimda and Maadi in Lower Egypt Early Egyptian Civilization 299
and at Nagada, Hemamieh, and other sites in the south were composed of cir around Nagada, for example, Hassan (1988; Hassan, et al., 1980; also see
Fattovich, 1979, 1984) found numerous small settlements that date to about
3750 B.C., most of them apparently the remains of simple communities made
up of 50-250 people who lived in compounds of pole-thatch huts. In subsequent mainly from larger sites, such as Hierakonpolis, which contains the complete was initially settled about 4000 B.C. by colonists from more northern parts of
Upper Egypt. He attributed the rapid growth of the community to the ecological gested that there was a “population explosion” at Hierakonpolis between 3800 tionally differentiated, in that Hierakonpolis at this time seems to have been a
major pottery producer for Upper Egypt, in general, and also produced vases, based on productive cereal agriculture and intense exploitation of domesticated
cattle, sheep, goats, and pigs. And because of the impressive size and rich economy operated in the context of significant social ranking. Between 3400 ple, or administrative center” (Hoffman et al.9 1986, p. 184), as well as a thick about 3200 B.C., Hierakonpolis became the capital of a southern Egyptian state, The site of Nagada may have been as important as Hierakonpolis in the
early Predynastic. Hassan suggests that although Predynastic Hierakonpolis and
Nagada were compact nucleated settlements with perhaps a few thousand inhab
itants, they “were probably not major centers of population and their function 300 Wenke
the residents of any Predynastic Upper Egyptian nome would have been occu
pational specialists (1988, p. 162). At the South Town area of Nagada, Barocas widely used to “lock” containers and room doors, and they conclude that these
sealings seem “to place Egyptian State” (1989, p. 301). Egyptian state centered at Hierakonpolis and Nagada are Maadi and a few nearby (Close, 1988, p. 171). Maadi comprised scores of semisubterranean pit houses communication, including the Levant and reaching northern Syria” (1989, p. magazines from the dwellings suggests a commercial enterprise” (1988, p. 160). Kemp notes that “there is growing evidence that the culture of Maadi was
representative for other regions of the Nile Delta proper” (1989, p. 44; also Maadi’s functional complexity, he invidiously compares this Buto-Maadi cul It might seem somewhat paradoxical on ecological grounds that Lower
Egypt and the Delta were not the initial heartland of cultural complexity in
Egypt, since they have wide areas of fertile land, more resource diversity than Upper Egypt were probably easier for primitive agriculturalists to farm because Early Egyptian Civilization 301
to control (also see Butzer, 1978). Carneiro’s model (1970) of early state for by natural barriers to agricultural extension, and this could have generated at Egypt. nastic cultural changes to increased trade in copper and other artifacts, but Kemp Hassan (1988), Trigger (1983a), Hoffman (1979), Bard (1991), and others The Predynastic?Early Dynastic Transition: Ca. 3400?2700 B.C.
By 3000 B.C. the whole of the Nile Valley and Delta was occupied, from Most scholars suspect that the process by which Egypt was politically uni tions, whereas Redford (1989) attributes somewhat more significance to them. early written Egyptian and suggests that the initial confrontation between Asiatic Redford notes (1989) that traditional interpretations of Egypt’s history from Norden,” with the forces of political unification and expansion moving up the 302 Wenke
Fig. 7. Barry Kemp’s reconstruction (1989) of the initial
stages of early state formation in Egypt. Most models of
early Egyptian cultural evolution assume a military con
quest of Lower Egypt and the Delta by an Upper (southern)
Egyptian polity that was more complexly organized than Nile Valley, engulfing the Delta, and expanding into Asia, but that “there is sweep of Egyptian political evolution, and that is the clear evidence in Gerzean Early Egyptian Civilization 303
and he sees in these debates “a tendency toward an Egyptian view of the world, independent Delta polity opposing an independent Valley polity, and the even
tual union of these” (1989, p. 2; also see Frankfort, 1956, pp. 15-23). tively represent scenes that some consider illustrations of the events of the polit ing and celebrating the pivotal event in Egyptian history to that of a mere dated
royal gift, given to the temple in a year named (as it happens) after a successful
campaign in the north” (1990, p. 59). independent polity roughly equal to the south in development, suggesting that logical evidence points to a marked disparity in the rate of development toward
centrality in the closing stages of prehistory” (1989, p. 44). mon to all early states, the addition of component regions to a central polity “core-periphery” problem, and Egypt apparently offers the possibility to ana
lyze the determinants and processes of this aspect of early state formation. cesses? A traditional method of measuring shifts in political power centers is
through analyzing the location of monumental architecture and mortuary cults.
Emery’s (1961) excavations of Early Dynastic tombs at North Saqqara, for
example, revealed the lavish wealth of some segments of Lower Egyptian soci
ety, but the actual tombs of the First Dynasty rulers and of some of their suc detailed variations in the sizes, shapes, and orientations of First Dynasty funer
ary enclosures at Abydos, and he concludes (as had Kemp, Kaiser, and others
earlier) that Abydos, not Saqqara, was probably the site of royal burials for The construction of the step-pyramid at Saqqara may mark the point at
which the northward shift in Egypt’s cultural center of gravity reached the loca 304 Wenke
Upper Egypt (e.g., Thebes). But what does this shift mean in social, political, artifact styles in Lower Egyptian settlements does not demonstrate significant we compare the Delta’s earliest arti cally increases, that all sizes of sites share in this pattern of stylistic similarity, Buto?the legendary capital of Predynastic Lower Egypt?has been shown
(von der Way, 1987, 1988) to contain deposits dating to at least the late fourth Syria, and probably by way of trade connections through that area to settlements pp. 247-249). The clay cones?though probably of local manufacture?are sim temple buildings (they were usually painted and embedded in mosaics on mud In addition to these putative sea routes, eastern Delta settlements and Pal Mesopotamian, influences seem strong for a short period of the Predynastic and
why this influence seems limited to Upper Egypt (Tutundzic, 1989). the first stages of changes in which Lower and Upper Egyptian communities
began to participate in the same ideological systems, and this process seems to must consider the possibility that by about 3000 B.C. the importance of Egypt’s Early Period
Dynasty 0/ Naqada I II
Naqada Naqada Naqada lib Naqada II a
el-Tell el-Iswid (S) settlement and cemetery area settlement with str.VI-IV Tell Ibrahim Awad
phase III cemetery phase II phase 1
Tell FaraNn/Buto
Schicht
V-IV Schicht III
Schicht Schicht I
Minshat Abu Omar grave group 4 grave group 3 c grave group 3 b cemetery
grave group 3 a grave group 2 grave group 1 Maadi Merimde cemetery
Ez.el-TellrT.IWorJ cemetery Fig. 8. Stratigraphic correlations of early Delta sites (from van den Brink et al., 1989, Fig. 4.2.2) (after van den Brink, 1989). Archaeologically defined, during the periods diagrammed, exhibits a relatively radical change in artifact and architectural styles between phase I and phase II. Recent excavations at Mendes (Brewer al., 1991) indicate that it contains occupations contemporary with Schicht III, V, and IV at Buto and, possibly, with Schicht II. 306 Wenke
that both Hierakonpolis and Nagada shrank in size in this period?although ment, bound up with the appearance of true urbanism in Egypt: the shift from In addition to these indications of expanding external relations, there are
signs that after 3500 B.C. relationships among Egypt’s Nile Valley and Delta Buto, Tell Iswid, and Tell Ibrahim Awad, for example, is quite distinct from pations comprising rectangular mudbrick structures and ceramics that show
stylistic similarities to Nile Valley traditions.
Figure 8 correlates some of the most important Delta sites relating to the
integration, and debates continue about the significance of discontinuities in the
stratigraphic sequences observed at these sites and differences in their compo Variations in mortuary cult lavishness cannot be assumed to be infallible Valley counterparts. About 400 late Predynastic and Early Dynastic graves have facts, jewelry of carnelian, amethyst, and?rarely?gold, and other objects. Excavations by Bakr (1988) at Ezbet el-Tell, in the eastern Delta, also objects. Bakr (1988, pp. 50-51) reports finding Narmer’s name written on two Early Egyptian Civilization 307
Krzyzaniak recorded 12 Late Predynastic and Early Dynastic sites in the
region east of Minshat Abu Omar, and he notes that artifacts from these sites Mendes and other Delta sites reflect the same pattern as Minshat Abu Omar, by about 3000 B.C. the Delta was densely settled and had artifacts that were
very similar in style to those of Middle and Upper Egypt. Indications of Narm In both Upper and Lower Egypt it is evident that there were significant early complex societies saw a period in which labor-intensive, highly decorated
pottery was replaced by mass produced forms of much less aesthetic appeal. pottery no longer served as a medium of artistic expression . . .” (1983a, p. vis Southwest Asian city-states), but this subject has never been systematically Ceramics were, of course, just one of the many commodities whose pro 308 Wenke
result of parallel developments in making copper tools (Trigger, 1983a, pp. 63
64), and Early Dynastic stone vessels are found all over the country in a great recently been studied by Kroeper (1989) and Krzyzaniak (1989), and the great Of this transition, Trigger says that the “crucial factor in the emergence the Early Dynastic Period, or slightly before, that certain craftsmen came under and craft projects (1983a, p. 67). The transition from early simple agricultural In summary, by about 2700 B.C. every element of cultural complexity national religious ideology to government controlled administration of major settlements that may have been home to thousands of inhabitants, but it is unclear political functions they provided. In general, until very late in its history Egypt thousands of small, largely self-sufficient (in terms of subsistence) communi
ties, with only modest centralization of economic production.
Old Kingdom Egypt: The Imperial Transformation
Soon after about 2700 B.C. Egypt entered the great “Pyramid Age” and provide a vivid picture of life in this age. elements during the Old Kingdom is well documented. Hundreds of tombs,
temples, and other sites have been investigated, but some of the most important comparative review of early civilizations because its regional settlement pat Early Egyptian Civilization 309
terns are poorly known. Because of the preservation problems noted above, it
is unlikely that we shall ever have Egyptian data comparable to those of, for
example, Southwest Asia, but recent research has provided a great deal of new
information. began far back in the Predynastic, and one could argue that Old Kingdom Egypt (1983, p. 71) considers the Old and Middle Kingdom periods to be a “unitary
phase,” and he sees the Middle Kingdom as essentially a reestablishment of
the cultural forms of the Old Kingdom, after a period of change in the First
Intermediate Period.
Egypt’s history in the Old Kingdom and many aspects of its religion, mor
tuary cults, dynastic succession, and other materials have been reviewed in
detail by Kemp (1983, 1989). My focus here is on several topics that most
directly relate Old Kingdom Egypt to the primary trends in demographics, eco
nomics, and general socioeconomic development of the Early Dynastic and Pre
dynastic periods, particularly with regard to areas in which there has been
considerable recent research.
Old Kingdom Egypt is interesting in this regard because since at least the
time of Marx, Old Kingdom Egypt has been considered as a prime example of
a particular type of ancient social form, a form which Wittfogel called “Oriental
Despotism,” a variant of “Hydraulic Civilizations.” In more recent analyses, complexity were based on comparisons between Old Kingdom Egypt and other
early civilizations (e.g., Steward, 1949; Carneiro, 1970; Service, 1975).
Kemp argues that to understand a civilization such as Old Kingdom Egypt, Ancient Egypt provides an early case history of the dynamics of the Great Tra
dition of culture …. It also enlarges our understanding of the scope of myth in society. require verbalization can be conveyed powerfully through art and architecture. They
provide a distinctive dimension to the assault on the senses which lies at the heart of
state ideologies. (1989, p. 107)
And he suggests (1983, p. 71) that divine kingship is “the most striking feature mechanisms through which the Egyptian state was controlled and legitimized, 76). 310 Wenke
what from Mesopotamian societies, where the king was viewed as a human
being, although in direct in contact through rituals with the gods. But the com early states: as many scholars have noted, these religious cults are superbly Any early state that did not develop a national religious cult that made it right evidence that any ancient civilization evolved without developing a complex The nature of the Old Kingdom economy is not well documented archae
ologically, but texts and tomb paintings describe a wide range of arts and crafts.
Some documents give ranks of administrators and these have been widely used cient: revenues could be assessed even on the basis of the “canals, lakes, wells,
waterbags, and trees” of an estate (Goedicke, 1967, pp. 56, 72). Kemp says country, attempting by bureaucratic methods total assessment and management ius, 1978). three distinct kinds: estates directly owned by the crown; estates that belonged (1983, p. 82; also see Jacquet-Gordon, 1962; Posener-Krieger, 1976); and When we try to match these various documentary records against the known
archaeological record, however, there are difficulties. At the level of simple ple from one area to another, as economic conditions changed, so the actual Early Egyptian Civilization 311
Nonetheless, some areas that were heavily occupied in the Old Kingdom ously underestimated in Fig. 3, given that in most areas of the Delta where
systematic surveys have been done (e.g., van den Brink, 1988), scores of small Old Kingdom settlements appear to have been widely distributed in the Despite the overall population growth of the Old Kingdom period, there necessary to sustain cultural complexity that in Mesopotamia, China, the Indus
Valley, and other early states the long-term trend was toward rapidly increasing (Wilson, 1960; Butzer, 1976). Mesopotamian urbanism, in the sense of not only populace was occupational specialists, seems to have been spurred by various regional administrative command and control institutions (Johnson, 1977, 1982, 1981), and other factors (Hole, 1987, 1990; also see Trigger, 1985). Egypt Valley’s ecological uniformity and the Nile’s transport potential, but the situ nality, of course. Various scholars have noted (Badawy, 1967; Redford, 1986) for a variety of secular motives, including the consolidation of royal power, Delta was not incorporated into the Egyptian state “even as late as the Old
Kingdom,” but the extreme stylistic similarity of the Old Kingdom ceramics strong cultural ties and interactions, as does the presence of the same styles and The Old Kingdom settlement pattern comprised at least five distinct types 312 Wenke
of settlements. (1) A national “capital” at Memphis?although Memphis’ sta Kingdom Delta settlements in fact had walls that have long since have been
destroyed by the action of the sebakhiin?farmers who dig out old occupations mainly in terms of their positions on the periphery of the Old Kingdom state administrators, artisans, and others, and eventually some of these became “for Kingdom record through reoccupation and alluviation. tlements. For the smaller and medium-sized communities, our most detailed al., 1988b; Wenke, 1986, 1989a; Wenke and Redding, 1985, 1986; Moens and provincial capital, Kom el-Hisn probably had some regional political impor Early Egyptian Civilization 313
Fig. 9. Old Kingdom architecture at Kom el-Hisn. Kom el-Hisn may be similar in size, archi (see van den Brink, 1988), but few of these have been excavated. 314 Wenke
a large community in the Fifth and Sixth Dynasties and in most later periods as Most of the main occupational mound is composed of Old Kingdom mud We have excavated only a small random sample of Kom el-Hisn, but the production. (2) Artifact styles are impressively similar to those at Old Kingdom dung was a main source of fuel, may reflect cattle raising and export as a pri argued that the predominance of the pig in the Egyptian diet well into New
Kingdom times (Hecker, 1982) suggests that there was little intensification of
agriculture until well after the Old Kingdom (also see Moens and Wetterstrom, tively minor differences in construction costs and contents of the buildings and
apparently restricted range of economic activities and social classes at Kom el Excavations at Tell Basta (Bakr, 1982; Habachi, 1957), a Delta site that
appears to have been much larger than Kom el-Hisn, revealed Old Kingdom Kingdom settlement there is unclear. Our excavations at Mendes (Brewer et
aL, 1991; Friedman, 1990b) and previous work (Hansen, 1967; Wilson, 1982) gypsum tombs for local priests and extensive complexes of mudbrick buildings major branch of the Nile and, like Buto, may have been a main connecting Early Egyptian Civilization 315
In the Nile Valley, Old Kingdom settlements seem to have been small by Kingdom fortified settlements at Buhen (O’Connor, 1987), Elephantine (Kaiser, along the Nile were probably flanked by scores of agricultural hamlets, which Provincial Old Kingdom settlement patterns probably changed consider
ably over time, paralleling national sociopolitical changes (Kanawati, 1977). appearance of provincial governors, or nomarchs. Trigger (1984a) raises the
possibility that a slow but continuous expansion and elaboration of society and
economy in the Old Kingdom may have been accompanied by growing com
plexity and power of provincial administrative institutions. The apparent emer
gence of powerful nomarchs in the Sixth Dynasty may reflect a reduction of
pharaonic power (cf. Strudwick, 1985), but the pharaohs of this period were
still able to send expeditions to Nubia and Palestine and exert considerable Much of what is known about Old Kingdom dynastic succession, ideology, long been considered barracks for workmen almost certainly were storage facil structed.
The Egyptian pyramids themselves may be precise reflections of changing the changing functional structure of Old Kingdom Egypt. They also offer an
illustration of contrasting theoretical perspectives on the general nature of
archaeological explanations. In a sense, the construction of the great pyramid (personal communication, 1983, 1985) has argued that the three pyramids at
Giza, the Sphinx, and other monuments may have been part of a single plan, 316 Wenke
basic level, however, various scholars (White, 1949; Steward, 1949) consid products, not just of the whims of the pharaohs, but of fundamental socioeco Egyptian pyramid building, including “the economic stimulus broadly equiv ilarly, as noted above, the replacement in Egypt, and in most early complex greater stability and productivity of Mesolithic economies. The general idea artifacts and beautifully decorated Predynastic Egyptian pottery, serve various
functions, including the signaling of social and economic ties. Once societies From this perspective, the Egyptian pyramids might be viewed as a form
of energy “waste” that, somewhat paradoxically, is a positive contribution to
the societies that build these monuments. How else could we explain the fact ing had to be constructed with staggering numbers of individually produced, Dunnell (1990) has explained the spatial distribution and timing of the
pyramid and mound building episodes in North American prehistory in terms long term survival. The gradual disappearance of these cults he considers to be quickly displaced other economies in this entire region. interpret the spurt of monumental construction projects in the Old Kingdom to Early Egyptian Civilization 317
economy and political system in this period, in combination with the rapid
development of contacts with foreign countries, and other factors. If so, then
the decline of pyramid building after the Old Kingdom may reflect a national
reorganization of the economy or administrative institutions in the stable forms
that persisted in Egypt for many centuries afterwards. But this is a complex rected into other architectural forms. And Kemp notes that pyramid construction
might have slowed at the end of the Old Kingdom because of the cost of main
taining existing cult centers (1989, p. 143). Also, the pyramids were just one
expression of conceptually similar investments in tombs, obelisks, etc. Sei
dlmayer has shown (1987) that in the Qau-Matmar area, at least, the First Inter
mediate Period involved no change in apparent richness of tombs. Moreover, royal power in the late Old Kingdom, as is commonly supposed (1977). Thus, how be scaled to other energy expenditures and other variables.
There seems to have been no major transformation of the basic economy
during the period when pyramid construction diminished that would be analo
gous to the change in the North American east, as discussed by Dunnell, but
many factors could have combined to reduce expenditures on pyramid com
plexes in Middle Kingdom Egypt: many lavish tombs and other complexes still being built, there may have been a rise in the power of provincial nobles
and greater diversion of resources to these provinces, and trade with Nubia and
the Mediterranean world probably became more systematized. observed in the Predynastic and Early Dynastic, toward a concentration of
national political and economic institutions in Lower Egypt and the Delta?
probably reflecting the growing importance of Egypt’s foreign relations and the
vast agricultural potential of the Delta. But southern sites such as Abydos towns were inhabited until at least the late Old Kingdom. In international trade
Old Kingdom Egypt was a major consumer of lumber from Palestine and prob
ably many other commodities as well. Redford notes that epigraphic evidence
about Old Kingdom Egypt’s relationship to Western Asia indicates that Egyp ulary of colonial administration and empire building that typifies some later
periods is evident; and he argues that Old Kingdom dynasts exploited Western
Asia for goods and labor through trade and conquest, but also through intimi
dation (1986). 318 Wenke
that Old Kingdom Egypt was a functionally differentiated, hierarchically orga SUMMARY
The central questions considered in this paper?when, how, and why the interpretations of Egypt’s origins as a complex society, and no doubt future I have considerable sympathy for the view that many scholars seem to take, past is to apply a synthetic approach in which one uses every discipline, from
sedimentology to semiotics, that is relevant to such inquiry; that one suspend standing” far exceed the narrow positivist scientific sense of those terms; and mechanics of goods production and distribution, while ignoring the ideologies Nonetheless, I have tried to illustrate why this seemingly obvious and com many virtues, is not considered a satisfactory solution by everyone. The anal
ysis presented above of variations in Egyptian pyramid construction illustrate Egyptian history and space? From a materialist scientific perspective, the designs might argue that for any real understanding of these monuments, one must con These ancient issues will probably have little impact on how research on Early Egyptian Civilization 319
appeal directly to simple human curiosity about the nature of life in the remark In sum, Egyptian civilization, as it evolved between 4000 and 2000 B.C., exactly it is that we know?and can hope to know?about the Egyptian.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
In this paper I have relied heavily on the research of Barry Kemp, Fekri
Hassan, Edwin van den Brink, Mark Lehner, and Bruce Trigger, among others. providing me with copies of unpublished papers. I am particularly grateful to organizing the bibliography. I thank the National Science Foundation and the
Bioanthropology Foundation (courtesy of Roxie Walker) for funding our field REFERENCES cago. Adams, R. N. (1981). Natural selection, energetics, and “cultural materialism.” Current Anthro
pology 22(6): 603-624.
Aldenderfer, M. S. (ed.) (1987). Quantitative Research in Archaeology, Sage, Newbury Park, CA.
al-Khouli, A. (1978). Egyptian Stone Vessels, Mainz-am-Rhein.
Ammerman, A. J., and Cavalli-Sforza, L. L. (1973). A population model for the diffusion of early Pittsburgh Press, Pittsburgh.
Angel, J. L. (1972). Biological relations of Egyptians and eastern Mediterranean populations dur
ing Pre-dynastic and Dynastic times. Journal of Human Evolution 1: 307-313.
Arkell, A. J. (1975). The Prehistory of the Nile Valley, Handbuch der Orientalisk, 1, Brill, Leiden.
Arnold, D. (ed.) (1981). Studien zur altagyptiaschen Keramik.
Arnold, D., and Arnold, D. (1979). Der Tempel Qasr el-Sagha, Philipp von Zabern, Mainz.
Assmann, J. (ed.) (1987). Problems and Priorities in Egyptian Archaeology, Routledge & Kegan Atzler, M. (1971-1972). Randglossen zur Agyptischen Vorgeschichte. Jaarbericht Ex Oriente Lux Atzler, M. (1981). Untersuchungen zur Herausbildung von Herrschaftsformen in Agypten, Ger
stenberg Verlag, Hildesheim.
Atzler, M. (1986). Randglossen zu Umwelt-Verhaltnissen und okologischen Problemen des aus
gehenden Pleistozan und des fruhen Holozdn im Niltal, zu friihen Siedlungen und zur Her
ausbildung Agyptischer Stadte (2 vols.), Privately printed, Basel.
Badawy, A. (1967). The civic sense of pharaoh and urban development in ancient Egypt. Journal
of the American Research Center in Egypt 6: 103-109.
Baer, K. (1960). Rank and Title in the Old Kingdom, University of Chicago Press, Chicago. in Egypt 1: 24-45. 320 Wenke
Bakr, M. (1982). New excavations of Zagazig University. Colloques International du CNRS No. Bakr, M. (1988). The new excavations at Ezbet el-Tell, Kufur Nigm: The first season (1984). In Ballet, P. (1988). La ceramique des Kellia: nouvelles orientations de recherches. In van den Brink, Ballet, P. (1990). Etude et prospection des ateliers de potiers d’epoque romaine tardive et byzan Bard, K. A. (1987). The geography of excavated Predynastic sites and the rise of complex society. Bard, K. A. (1991). From Farmers to Pharaohs: An Archaeological Perspective on the Rise of
Complex Society in Egypt. Ms. on file with author, Seat tle.
Bard, K. A., and Carneiro, R. L. (1989). Patterns of Predynastic settlement location, social evo
lution, and the circumscription theory. Societes Urbaines en Egypte et au Soudan, Cahiers de Barocas, C, Fattovich, R., and Tosi, M. (1989). The Oriental Institute of Naples expedition to logiczne w Poznaniu, Poznan, pp. 295-301.
Batrawi, A. M. (1945). The racial history of Egypt and Nubia, Part I. Journal of the Royal Anthro
pological Institute 75: 81-102.
Batrawi, A. M. (1946). The racial history of Egypt and Nubia, Part II. Journal of the Royal Bell, B. (1970). The oldest records of the Nile floods. Geographical Journal 136: 569-573. Fabrication of Ancient Greece, Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick, NJ.
Berry, A. C, and Berry, R. J. (1967). Origins and relationships of the ancient Egyptians: Based Berry, A. C, and Berry, R. J. (1973). Origins and relations of the ancient Egyptians. In Brothwell, Bietak, M. (1975). Tell el-Dab’a (II), Osterreich. Akad. Wiss. Denkschr. Gesamtakad. Social Sciences, American University in Cairo Press, Cairo.
Boessneck, J., and von den Dreiesch, A. (1988). Tierknochenfunde vom Tell Ibrahim Awad im Bokonyi, S. (1985). The animal remains of Maadi, Egypt: A preliminary report. In Studi di Pal
etnologia in onore di S. M. Puglisi, Universita di Roma “La Sapienza,” Rome. william Museum, Cambridge. Press, Chicago, pp. 1-80.
Brewer, D. J. (1987). Seasonality in the Prehistoric Faiyum based on the incremental growth struc Brewer, D. J. (1991). Temperature in Predynastic Egypt inferred from the remains of the Nile Brewer, D., Wenke, R., and Friedman, R. (1991). Excavations at Tell el-Rub’a: The 1990 season. Buck, P. (1989). Formation Processes of Old Kingdom Sediments at Kom el-Hisn, Egypt, Ph.D Butzer, K. W. (1976). Early Hydraulic Civilization in Egypt, University of Chicago Press, Chi
cago. Early Egyptian Civilization 321
Butzer, K. W. (1978). Perspectives on irrigation civilization in Egypt. In Schmandt-Beserat, D.
(ed.), Immortal Egypt, Undena, Malibu.
Butzer, K. W. (1984). Long-term Nile flood variation and political discontinuities in Pharaonic
Egypt. In Clark, J. D., and Brandt, S. A. (eds.), From Hunters to Farmers, University of Caneva, L, Frangipane, M., and Palmieri, A. (1987). Predynastic Egypt: New data from Maadi. Caneva, L, Frangipane, M., and Palmieri, A. (1989). Recent excavations at Maadi (Egypt). In
Krzyzaniak, L., and Kobusiewicz, M. (eds.), Late Prehistory of the Nile Basin and the Sahara, Carneiro, R. L. (1970). A theory of the origin of the state. Science 1169: 733-738.
Casini, M. (1988). Arts and crafts production in Lower Egypt during Late Predynastic times. Paper Caton-Thompson, G., and Gardner, E. (1934). The Desert Fayum, Royal Anthropological Society, Cavalli-Sforza, L., and Feldman, M. (1981). Cultural Transmission and Evolution, Princeton Uni
versity Press, Princeton, NJ.
Childe, V. G. (1934). New Light on the Most Ancient East, Kegan Paul, London.
Cialowicz, K. M. (1989). Predynastic mace-heads in the Nile Valley. In Krzyzaniak L., and Kobu
siewicz, M. (eds.), Late Prehistory of the Nile Basin and the Sahara, Muzeum Archeologiczne Close, A. E. (1980). Stylistic analysis of the Wadi Kubbaniya assemblages. In Close, A. E. (ed.), baniya, SMU Press, Dallas, pp. 245-257.
Close, A. E. (ed.) (1987). Prehistory of Arid North Africa Essays in Honor of Fred Wendorf, SMU
Press, Dallas.
Close, A. E. (1988). Current research and recent radiocarbon dates from northern Africa, Part III.
Journal of African History 29: 145-176.
Close, A. E. (ed.), Wendorf, F., and Schild, R. (assembls.). (1984). Cattle-Keepers of the Eastern
Sahara, SMU Press, Dallas.
Cook, M., Molto, E., and Anderson, C. (1988). A possible case of hyperparathyroidism in a
Roman skeleton from the Dakhleh Oasis, Egypt, diagnosed using bone histomorphometry. Coutellier, V., and Stanley, D. J. (1987). Late Quaternary stratigraphy and paleogeography of the D’Andrea, C. (1989). Preliminary report on the floral remains from Kom el-Hisn, 1988 season.
Ms. on file with author, Seattle.
David, R. A. (ed.) (1986). Science in Egyptology, Manchester University Press, Manchester.
Debono, F. (1956). La civilization predynastique d’el Omari (nord d’Helouan). Nouvelles don Derrida, J. (1978). Structure, sign and play in the discourse of the human sciences. In Writing and
Difference, Routledge and Kegan Paul, London.
Derry, D. E. (1956). The dynastic race in Egypt. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology All 80-85.
de Wit, H. E., and van Stralen, L. (1988). Geo-Archaeology and Ancient Distributaries in the 34, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam.
Dunnell, R. (1970). Seriation method and its evaluation. American Antiquity 35: 305-319.
Dunnell, R. (1980). Evolutionary theory and archaeology. In Schiffer, M. B. (ed.), Advances in
Archaeological Method and Theory, 3, Academic Press, New York.
Dunnell, R. (1982). Science, social science, and common sense: The agonizing dilemma of modern
archaeology. Journal of Anthropological Science 38: 1-25.
Dunnell, R. (1986). Methodological issues in Americanist artifact classification. In Schiffer, M. pp. 149-207.
Dunnell, R. (1990). Evolutionary theory in anthropology. Lecture, Seattle. 322 Wenke
Dunnell, R. (1991). Is a Scientific Archaeology Possible? In Embre, L. (ed.), Metaarchaeology, Earle, T., and Preucel, R. W. (1987). Processual archaeology and the radical critique. Current
Anthropology 28(4): 501-538.
Edwards, I. E. S. (1970). Absolute dating from Egyptian records and comparison with carbon-14
dating. Philosphical Transactions of the Royal Society of London 269(1193): 11-18.
Edwards, I. E. S. (1971). The Early Dynastic Period in Egypt. In Cambridge Ancient History, bridge, pp. 1-70.
Eiwanger, J. (1982). Die neolithische Siedlung von Merimde-Benisalame. Mitteilungen des Eiwanger, J. (1984). Merimde-Benisalame I. Die Funde der Urschicht, Verlag Philipp Von Zabern, Eiwanger, J. (1987). Die Archaologie der spaten Vorgeschichte: Bestand und Perspektiven. In el-Kasim, R. A. A. (1988). The archaeology of the Nile Delta: Problems and priorities. In van den
Brink, E. C. M. (ed.), The Archaeology of the Nile Delta: Problems and Priorities, Nether Emery, W. B. (1961). Archaic Egypt, Penguin, Baltimore.
Endesfelder, E. (1984). Social and economic development towards the end of the Predynastic opment of Food-Producing Cultures in North-Eastern Africa, Polish Academy of Sciences, Engles, D. R. (1990). An early dynastic cemetery at Kafr Ghattati. Journal of the American Fairservis, W. A. (1986). Excavation of the Archaic Remains East of the Niched Gate: Season of Fattovich, R. (1979). Trends in the study of Predynastic social structure. In 1st International Con
gress of Egyptology, Cairo 1976, Actes, Berlin, pp. 17-39.
Fattovich, R. (1984). Remarks on the dynamics of state formation in ancient Egypt. In Dostal, W.
(ed.), One Social Evolution, Horn, Vienna.
Foucault, M. (1986). The Foucault Reader, Rabinow, P. (ed.), Penguin, Harmondsworth.
Frandsen, P. (1979). Egyptian imperialism. In Larsen, M. T. (ed.), Power and Propaganda, Aka Frankfort, H. (1956). The Birth of Civilization in the Near East, University of Indiana Press,
Bloomington. “civilization.” In Friedman, J., and Rowlands, M. J. (eds.), The Evolution of Social Systems, Friedman, J., and Rowlands, M. J. (eds.) (1977b). The Evolution of Social Systems, University of
Pittsburgh Press, Pittsburgh. Friedman, R. (1990b). Mendes-Tell El Roba’. Ms. on file with author, Seattle.
Geyh, M., Munro, P., and Germer, R. (1989). Zur Absoluten Chronologie des Alten Reiches und Ghoneim, W. (1977). Die okonomische Bedeutung des Rindes im alten Agypten. Lexikon der
Agyptologie 5: 259.
Ginter, B., and Kozlowski, J. K. (1983). Investigations on Neolithic Settlement. In Kozlowski, J. Ginter, B., and Kozlowski, J. K. (1984). The Tarifian and the origins of the Naqadian. In Krzy Ginter, B., and Kozlowski, J. K. (1988). Holocene changes in the level of Lake Moeris and the Early Egyptian Civilization 323
ronmental Change and Human Culture in the Nile Basin and Northern Africa until the 2nd Goedicke, H. (1967). Konigliche Dokumente aus dem alten Reich, Wiesbaden.
Goedicke, H. (1971). Re-used Blocks from the Pyramid of Amenemhet I at Lisht. The Metropolitan Goedicke, H. (1988). The northeastern Delta and the Mediterranean. In van den Brink, E. C. M.
(ed.), The Archaeology of the Nile Delta: Problems and Priorities, Netherlands Foundation Greene, D. L. (1972). Dental anthropology of early Egypt and Nubia. Journal of Human Evolution
1: 315-324.
Guksch, C. E. (1985). Ethnoarchaeology in Egyptology?a view from anthropology. Paper pre Haas, H., Devine, J., Wenke, R., Lehner, M., Wolfli, W., and Bonani, G. (1987). Radiocarbon
chronology and the historical calendar in Egypt. In Aurenche, O., Evin, J., and Hours, P.
(eds.), Chronologies in the Near East. British Archaeological Reports, International Series
379: 585-606.
Haas, R. (1982). Vie Evolution of the Prehistoric State, Columbia University Press, New York.
Habachi, L. (1957). Tell Basta, Annales du Service des Antiquites de VEgypte 57.
Hamroush, H. (1989). The geomorphological context of Kom el-Hisn. In Wenke, R. (ed.), Kom
el-Hisn: Excavations at an Old Kingdom Egyptian Delta Site. Ms. on file with author, Seattle.
Hansen, D. (1967). Mendes 1965 and 1966. Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt 6: Harlan, J. F. (1985). Predynastic Settlement Patterns: A View from Hierakonpolis, Ph.D. disser
tation, Washington University, St. Louis.
Harris, M. (1977). Cannibals and Kings, Random House, New York.
Harris,M. (1979). Cultural Materialism, Random House, New York.
Hassan, F. (1984a). The beginnings of Egyptian civilization at Hierakonpolis. Quarterly Review
of Archaeology 5( 1): 13-15.
Hassan, F. (1984b). Toward a model of agricultural developments in Predynastic Egypt. In Krzy Hassan, F. (1986). Desert environment and origins of agriculture in Egypt. Norwegian Archaeo
logical Review 19: 63-76.
Hassan, F. (1988). The Predynastic of Egypt. Journal of World Prehistory 2(2): 135-185.
Hassan, F. (1990). Population ecology and civilization in ancient Egypt. Paper presented at a
seminar in Historical Ecology, School of American Research, October 14-18, 1990. Ms. on
file with author, Seattle. Hassan, F., and Robinson, S. W. (1987). High-precision radiocarbon chronometry of ancient Egypt Hassan, F., and Stucki, B. (1987). Nile floods and climatic change. In Rampino, M. R., Sanders, dictability, Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, pp. 37-46.
Hayes, W. C. (1970). Chronology I. Egypt to the end of the Twentieth Dynasty. In Cambridge Hays, T. R. (1984). Predynastic developments in Upper Egypt. In Krzyzaniak, L., and Kobusie
wicz, M., (eds.), Origins and Early Development of Food-Producing Cultures in North-East Hecker, H. (1982). A zooarchaeological inquiry into pork consumption in Egypt from Prehistoric Helck, H. W. (1962). Die Beziehungen Agyptens zu Vorderasien im 3. und 2. Jahrtausend v. Chr., Helck, H. W. (1970). Die Prophezeiung des Nfr. tj. Textzusammenstellung, Harassowitz, Wies Helck, H. W. (1974). Die altagyptische Gaue, Harrassowitz, Weisbaden.
Henneberg, M., Kobusiewicz, M., Schild, R., and Wendorf, F. (1989). The Early Neolithic,
Qarunian burial from the Northern Fayum Desert (Egypt). In Krzyzaniak, L., and Kobusie 324 Wenke
wicz, M. (eds.), Late Prehistory of the Nile Basin and the Sahara, Muzeum Archeologiczne Henry, D. O. (1989). From Foraging to Agriculture: The Levant at the End of the Ice Age, Uni Herodotus (1972). Books I and II, Godley, A. D. (transl.), Loeb Classical Library, London. ical Method and Theory, 8, Academic Press, New York, pp. 1-26.
Hoffman, M. A. (1974). The social context of trash disposal in an Early Dynastic Egyptian town. Hoffman, M. A. (1979). Egypt before the Pharaohs, Knopf, New York.
Hoffman, M. A. (1980). A rectangular amratian house from Hierakonpolis and its significance for Hoffman, M. A. (1982). The Predynastic of Hierakonpolis: An Interim Report, Egyptian Studies Hoffman, M. A. (1988). Egypt before the pharaohs. The Sciences January/February: 40-47. Krzyzaniak, L., and Kobusiewicz, M. (eds.), Late Prehistory of the Nile Basin and the Sahara, Hoffman, M. A., Hamroush, H. A., and Allen, R. O. (1986). A model of urban development for Hole, F. (ed.) (1987). The Archaeology of Western Iran, Smithsonian Institution Press, Washing Hole, F. (1990). Environmental shock and urban origins. In Rothman, M. S., and Stein, G. (eds.), Jacquet-Gordon, H. (1962). Les noms des domaines funeraires sous Tancien empire egyptien, Janssen, J. J. (1978). The early state in Egypt. In Claessen, H. J. M., and Skalnik, P. (eds.), The Jeffreys, D. G. (1985). The Survey of Memphis I, The Egypt Exploration Fund, London. 6: 479-508.
Johnson, G. (1982). Organizational structure and scalar stress. In Renfrew, C, etal. (eds.), Theory Johnson, G. (1987). The changing organization in Uruk administration on the Susiana Plain. In Kaiser, W. (1964). Einige Bermerkungen zur agyptische Friihzeit. Zeitschrift dgyptische Sprache Kaiser, W. (1985). Zur Sudausdehnung der vorgeschichtlichen Deltakulturen und zur fruhen Kaiser, W., Dreyer, G., Jaritz, H., Krekeler, A., Schlager T., and Ziermann, M. (1988). Stadt ogischen Instituts Abteilung Kairo 43: 75-114.
Kanawati, N. (1977). The Egyptian Administration in Old Kingdom: Evidence on Its Economic Kantor, H. J. (1965). The relative chronology of Egypt and its foreign correlations before the Late Chicago, Chicago. tions. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 75: 375-390.
Keita, S. O. Y. (1990). Studies of ancient crania from northern Africa. American Journal of Phys Early Egyptian Civilization 325
Kemp, B. J. (1968). Merimde and the theory of house burial in Prehistoric Egypt. Chronique Kemp, B. J. (1977). Early development of towns in Egypt. Antiquity 51: 185-200.
Kemp, B. J. (1983). Old Kingdom, Middle Kingdom and Second Intermediate Period c. 2686
1552 BC. In Trigger, B., Kemp, B., O’Connor, D., and Lloyd, A., (eds.), Ancient Egypt. A
Social History, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Kemp, B. J. (1989). Ancient Egypt. Anatomy of a Civilization, Routledge, London.
Kirch, P. V. (1990). The evolution of sociopolitical complexity in Prehistoric Hawaii: An assess
ment of the archaeological evidence. Journal of World Prehistory 4(3): 311-347.
Klug, S. B., and Beck, K.-G. (1985). Preliminary report on the human skeletal remains from Maadi
and Wadi Digla. Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archaeologischen Instituts Abteilung Kairo 41:
99-107.
Kohl, P. L. (1981). Materialist approaches in prehistory. Annual Review of Anthropology 10: 89
118.
Kohler, E. C. (1990). Buto. Tell-el-Fara’ in. Bulletin de Liaison 14: 1-4.
Kozlowski, J. K., and Ginter, B. (1989). The Fayum Neolithic in the light of new discoveries. In
Krzyzaniak, L., and Kobusiewicz, M. (eds.), Late Prehistory of the Nile Basin and the Sahara, Kroeper, K. (1988). The excavations of the Munich East-Delta expedition in Minshat Abu Omar.
In van den Brink, E. C. M. (ed.), The Archaeology of the Nile Delta: Problems and Priorities, Kroeper, K. (1989). Settlement in the Nile Delta to the end of the Old Kingdom, Ph.D. dissertation,
Uniwersytet Warszawski Wydzial Historcyczny, Warsaw.
Kroeper, K. (1990). Tell Ibrahim A wad?North-eastern Delta. Bulletin de Liaison 14: 6-8.
Kroeper, K., and Wildung, D. (1985). Minshat Abu Omar, Staatliche Agyptischer Kunst, Munich.
Kromer, K. (1978). Siedlungsfunde aus dem fruhen Alten Reich in Giseh. Denkschriften, Oester
reichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Philosophisch-historische Klasse 136: 1-130.
Krzyzaniak, L. (1977). Early Farming Cultures on the Lower Nile: The Predynastic Period in
Egypt, Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw.
Krzyzaniak, L. (1988). Research on the location of the Predynastic settlement at Minshat Abu
Omar. Paper presented at the Fifth International Congress of Egyptology, Cairo.
Krzyzaniak, L. (1989). Recent archaeological evidence on the earliest settlement in the eastern
Nile Delta. In Krzyzaniak, L., and Kobusiewicz, M. (eds.), Late Prehistory of the Nile Basin
and the Sahara, Muzeum Archeologiczne w Poznaniu, Poznan, pp. 267-285.
Kuper, R. (1989). The Eastern Sahara from North to South: Data and dates from the B.O.S. Proj the Sahara, Muzeum Archeologiczne w Poznaniu, Poznan, pp. 197-203.
Leek, F. F. (1986). Dental health and disease in ancient Egypt with special reference to the Man
chester mummies. In David, R. A. (ed.), Science in Egyptology, Manchester University Press,
Manchester, pp. 35-42.
Lehner, M. (1983). Some observations on the layout of the Khufu and Kafre pyramids. Journal of Lehner, M. (1985). The Pyramid Tomb of Hetep-heres and the Satellite Pyramid of Khufu, Philipp Lehner, M. (1991). Excavations on the Giza Plateau, 1989-90. Paper presented at the 43rd Annual
Meeting of the American Research Center in Egypt, Boston.
Lehner, M., Haas, H., and Wenke, R. (1990). Pyramids Dating Project: Phase II Research Design. Leone, M., Potter, Jr., P. B., and Schackel, P. A. (1987). Toward a critical archaeology. Current
Anthropology 28(3): 283-302.
Lewarch, D. (1977). Locational models and the archaeological study of complex societies: A
dilemma in data requirements and research design. Paper presented at the 76th Annual Meeting tle. Lewis, R. B. (1986). The analysis of contingency tables in archaeology. In Schiffer, M. B. (ed.), 326 Wenke
Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory, 9, Academic Press, New York, pp. 277 Lovell, N. (1990). Biosocial Consequences of the Development of Complex Societies in the Nile
Valley and Delta. Proposal to the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Can Lumsden, C, and Wilson, E. (1981). Genes, Mind, and Culture, Harvard University Press, Cam
bridge. Martin, D. L., Armelagos, G. J., Goodman, A. H., and van Gerven, D. P. (1984). The effects of N., and Armelagos, G. J. (eds.), Paleopathology at the Origins of Agriculture, Academic McCorriston, J., and Hole, F. (1991). The ecology of seasonal stress and the origins of agriculture McGuire, R. H. (1983). Breaking down cultural complexity: Inequality and heterogeneity. In Schif
fer, M. B. (ed.), Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory, 6, Academic Press, New
York, pp. 91-142.
Marx, K. (1932). Capital and Other Writings, Modern Library, New York.
Marx, K. (1973). Grundrisse. Foundations of the Critique of Political Economy, Vintage Press, Menghin, O. (1931, 1932, 1934). Die Grabung der Universitat Kairo bei Maadi. Mitteilungen des Millet, N. B. (1990). The Narmer macehead and related objects. Journal of the American Research Mills, A. (1984). Research in the Dakhleh Oasis. In Krzyzaniak, L., and Kobusiewicz, M., (eds.), Archeological Museum, Poznan.
Moens, M.-F., and Wetterstrom, W. (1988). The agricultural economy of an Old Kingdom town Molto, J. E. (1988). Skeletal Remains from the Dakhleh Oasis, Egypt, Society for the Study of
Egyptian Antiquities, Toronto.
Needier, W. (1981). Federn’s revision of Petrie’s Predynastic pottery classification. Journal of the
Society for the Study of Egyptian Antiquities 11: 69-74.
Neilsen, O. V. (1970). The Nubian Skeleton Through 4000 Years. Andelsbogtryk-keriet i Odense, O’Connor, D. (1987). The Old Kingdom town at Buhen. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting O’Connor, D. (1989). New funerary enclosures (talbezirke) of the Early Dynastic period at Aby Paynter, R. (1989). The archaeology of equality and inequality. Annual Review of Anthropology Petrie, W. M. F. (1900a). Sequences in prehistoric remains. Journal of the Anthropological Insti Petrie, W. M. F. (1900b). The Royal Tombs of the First Dynasty, Part 1, Egypt Exploration Fund Petrie, W. M. F. (1901a). Diospolis Parva: The Cemeteries of Abadiyeh and Hu, Egypt Explo Petrie, W. M. F. (1901b). The Royal Tombs of the Earliest Dynasties, Part 2, Egypt Exploration Petrie, W. M. F. (1902). Abydos I, Egypt Exploration Fund, London.
Petrie, W. M. F., and Quibell, J. E. (1896). Nagada and Ballas, British School of Archaeology Podzorski, P. V. (1982). A Descriptive Summary of the Human Skeletal Remains from the Early Early Egyptian Civilization 327
Posener-Krieger, P. (1976). Les archives du temple funeraire de Neferirkare-kaki, Institut Francais
d’Archeologie Orientale du Caire, Cairo.
Read, D. (1982). Towards a theory of archaeological classification. In Whallon, R., and Brown, ton, IL, pp. 56-92.
Redding, R. W. (1989). The role of the pig in the subsistence system of ancient Egypt: a parable Redford, D. B. (1986). Egypt and Western Asia in the Old Kingdom. Journal of the American Redford, D. B. (1989). Prolegomena to Archaeological Investigations of Mendes. Ms. on file with
author, Seattle. Reisner, G., and Smith, W. (1955). A History of the Giza Necropolis, Vol. II, Harvard University Renfrew, C. (1989). Comments on Archaeology into the 1990s. Norwegian Archaeological Review
22(1): 33-41.
Rice, M. (1989). Egypt’s Making: The Origins of Ancient Egypt, Routledge, London.
Rindos, D. (1984). The Origins of Agriculture, Academic Press, New York.
Rizkana, I., and Seeher, J. (1984). New light on the relation of Maadi to the Upper Egyptian Rizkana, I., and Seeher, J. (1985). The chipped stones at Maadi: Preliminary assessment of a
Predynastic industry and its long-distance relations. Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archaolo
gischen Instituts Abteilung Kairo 41: 235-255.
Saad, Z. Y. (1969). The Excavations at Helwan: Art and Civilization in the First and Second
Egyptian Dynasties, University of Oklahoma Press, Norman.
Saffirio, L. (1972). Food and dietary habits in ancient Egypt. Journal of Human Evolution 1: 297 Salmon, M. (1982). Philosophy and Archaeology, Academic, New York.
Schiffer, M. B. (1988). The Structure of Archaeological Theory. American Antiquity 53(3): 461 Schulman, A. (1988). The unification: A revisionist view. Paper presented at the Fifth International
Congress of Egyptology, Cairo. Seidlmayer, S. (1987). Wirtschaftliche und gesellschaftliche Entwicklung im Ubergang vom Alten & Kegan Paul, London.
Service, E. (1975). Origin of the State and Civilization, W. W. Norton, New York.
Shanks, M., and Tilley, C. (1987a). Social Theory and Archaeology, Polity Press, Oxford.
Shanks, M., and Tilley, C. (1987b). Reconstructing Archaeology, Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge. 22(1): 1-12.
Smith, A. B. (1989). The Near Eastern connection: Early to Mid-Holocene relations between North Smith, G. E. (1928). The Origin of Civilization, Morrow, New York.
Smith, H. S., and Jeffreys, D. G. (1986). A survey of Memphis, Egypt. Antiquity LX: 88-95.
Soghor, C. L. (1967). Inscriptions from Tell el-Rub’a. Journal of the American Research Center Spaulding, A. (1953). Statistical techniques for the discovery of artefact types. American Antiquity Spaulding, A. (1979). Multifactor analysis of association: an application to Owasco ceramics. In
Cleland, C. E. (ed.), Cultural Change and Continuity, Academic Press, New York.
Stadelmann, R. (1985). Die Agyptischen Pyramiden, Philipp von Zabern, Mainz am Rhein.
Steward, J. (1949). Cultural causality and law: a trial formulation of the development of early 328 Wenke
Strudwick, N. (1985). The Administration of Egypt in the Old Kingdom: The Highest Titles and Teeter, E. (1990). Doctoral dissertation, University of Chicago, Chicago. Anthropologiques, Prehistoriques et Ethnographiques, Algiers.
Toynbee, A. J. (1935). A Study of History, Vol. I, rev. ed., Oxford University Press, London.
Trigger, B. G. (1982). Archaeological analysis and theories of causality. Culture 2(2): 31-42.
Trigger, B. G. (1983a). The rise of Egyptian civilization. In Trigger, B., Kemp, B., O’Connor, bridge, pp. 1-70. Trigger, B. G. (1983b). Archaeology at the cross-roads: What’s new? Annual Review of Anthro
pology 13: 275-300.
Trigger, B. G. (1984a). The mainlines of socio-economic development in dynastic Egypt to the Trigger, B. G. (1984b). Alternative archaeologies: Nationalist, colonialist, imperialist. Man 19: Trigger, B. G. (1985). The evolution of pre-industrial cities: A multilinear perspective. Melanges Trigger, B. G. (1986). Prospects for a world archaeology. World Archaeology 18(1): 1-20.
Trigger, B. G. (1989). Comments on archaeology into the 1990s. Norwegian Archaeological Review
22(1): 28-31.
Tutundzic, S. P. (1989). The problem of foreign north-eastern relations of Upper Egypt, particu Prehistory of the Nile Basin and the Sahara, Muzeum Archeologiczne w Poznaniu, Poznan, van den Brink, E. C. M. (1988). The Amsterdam University Survey Expedition to the Northeastern Van Wesemael, B. (1988). The relation between natural landscape and distribution of archaeolog von der Way, T. (1987). Tell el-Fara’in?Buto, 2 Bericht mit einem Beitrag von Klaus Schmidt zu von der Way, T. (1988). Investigations concerning the early periods in the northern Delta of Egypt. Netherlands Foundation for Archaeological Research in Egypt, Amsterdam, pp. 245-249.
Wallerstein, I. (1976). The Modern World System, Academic Press, New York.
Watson, R. A. (1990). Ozymandias, King of Kings: Postprocessual radical archaeology as critique. Weber, M. (1947). The Theory of Social and Economic Organization, Oxford University Press, Weber, M. (1968). Economy and Society, Bedminster Press, New York.
Weeks, K., (ed.) (1979). Egyptology and the Social Sciences: Five Studies, American University Wendorf, F., and Schild, R. (1976). Prehistory of the Nile Valley, Academic Press, New York.
Wendorf, F., and Schild, R. (eds.) (1980). Prehistory of the Eastern Sahara, Academic Press, Wendorf, F., and Schild, R. (1984). Conclusions. In Close, A. E. (ed.), Wendorf, F., and Schild, Wenke, R. (1981). Explaining the evolution of cultural complexity: A review. In Schiffer, M. B.
(ed.), Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory, 4, Academic Press, New York. Early Egyptian Civilization 329
Wenke, R. (1986). Old Kingdom community organization in the western Egyptian Delta. Norwe
gian Archaeological Review 19(1): 15-33.
Wenke, R. (1989a). Egypt: Origins of complex societies. Annual Review of Anthropology 18: 129 Wenke, R. (1989b). Comments on archaeology into the 1990s. Norwegian Archaeological Review
22(1): 31-33.
Wenke, R. (1991). Patterns in Prehistory, 3rd ed., Oxford University Press, New York.
Wenke, R., and Redding, R. (1985). Excavations at Kom el-Hisn, 1984. Newsletter of the Amer Wenke, R., and Redding, R. (1986). Excavations at Kom el-Hisn, 1986. Newsletter of the Amer Wenke, R., Long, J., and Buck, P. (1988a). The Epipaleolithic and Neolithic subsistence and Wenke, R., Redding, R., Buck, P., Kobusiewicz, M., and Kroeper, K. (1988b). Kom el-Hisn: Center in Egypt 25: 5-34.
Whallon, R. (1982). Variables and dimensions: The critical step in quantitative typology. In Whal
lon, R., and Brown, J. A. (eds.), Essays in Archaeological Typology, Center for American
Archaeology, Evanston, IL, pp. 127-161.
Whallon, R., and Brown, J. A. (eds.) (1982). Essays in Archaeological Typology, Center for White, L. (1949). The Science of Culture, Grove Press, New York.
Wilson, J. (1988). Egyptian Food and Drink, Shire Publications, Aylesbury, UK.
Wilson, J. A. (1960). Egypt through the New Kingdom: Civilization without cities. In Kraeling, Wilson, K. (1982). Cities of the Delta, II. Mendes, Undena, Malibu.
Wittfogel, K. (1957). Oriental Despotism: A Comparative Study of Total Power, Yale University Wright, H. T. (1977a). Discussion. In Hill, J. N. (ed.), Explanation of Prehistoric Change, Aca Wright, H. T. (1977b). Recent research on the origin of the state. Annual Review of Anthropology Wright, H. T. (1986). The evolution of civilizations. In Meltzer, D., Fowler, D., and Sabloff, J. Wright, H. T., and Johnson, G. A. (1975). Population, Exchange, and Early State Formation in
Southwestern Iran. American Anthropologist 77(2): 267-289.
Wunderlich, J. (1988). Investigations on the development of the western Nile Delta in Holocene Priorities, Netherlands Foundation for Archaeological Research in Egypt, Amsterdam, pp. Yoffee, N. (1979). The decline and rise of Mesopotamian civilization: An ethnoarchaeological Young, T. C, Jr. (1988). Since Herodotus, has history been a valid concept? American Antiquity Yoyotte, J. (1961). Les principautes du Delta au temps de Tanarchie libyenne. Melanges Maspero Zartman, E. (1989). Stylistic and functional variability in Old Kingdom Egyptian ceramics: A Zibelius, K. (1978). Agyptische Siedlungen nach Texten des Alten Reiches, Wiesbaden. p. 279 Journal of World Prehistory, Vol. 5, No. 3 (September 1991), pp. 193-330 ·Discussion Assignments
You are required to answer one of the discussion questions in between 500 and 600 words. You will be penalized for having less than 500 words or exceeding 600 words. · Your essay should be titled using both the number identifier for and the exact wording of the question that you are attempting. This becomes the title/subject of your essay. Do not use your name or the Discussion number as the title/subject of your essay. A penalty of half a point (0.5) penalty will be imposed on a violation of this requirement. · The relevant Course readings must be referenced using in-text citations (author and page number – MLA style) in every discussion. Non-course materials may be used to supplement the course readings. However, a “Works Cited” with full bibliographic information must be provided for non-course materials. PowerPoint lectures may be used and cited but they are not considered course readings (they are lectures). You will lose a full point for not referencing assigned course readings in your discussion essay. A violation of this requirement will also make you ineligible for a rewrite on the said assignment. · Your essay must include a word count at the end using this format: · You will be penalized half a point (0.5) for falsifying your word count. This will also make you ineligible for a rewrite on the said assignment.
.J-Ginn
^bu Omar
i/ahim Aw ad
El-Qatta*
Abu Roash* (
Saqqara \
Maadi
j?Sheikh Ibada
\??Mustaggidah
Mahasna. Tesaid
El-Amra
El-Tariff
Hammamat
\.Ed-Deir Messawiah.l _ 4 _ . . w
^vjEast Sebaieh
HierakonpolinXaq el Qara Naq el-Hagg Zidan*\
1.2; van den Brink et at., 1989. Most of these sites were occupied for
some period between about 3000 B.C. and 2600 B.C. Note the increased
number of Delta sites, compared to the Predynastic period, during this
mation.
at Maadi and nearby sites (Fig. 4), and even if the demographic, economic,
and political center of Egypt was still in Upper Egypt, beginning after about
3400 B.C. population growth and economic expansion seem to have been most
den Brink, 1988). Between about 2600 B.C. and about 2100 B.C., the
number and size of settlements in Egypt increased substantially. Hundreds
of known Old Kingdom sites do not appear on this map. Some of the
been systematically excavated.
Delta’s margins before 4000 B.C., but there are few sites that span the period
between 4000 B.C. and about 3700 B.C., when settlement density rose sharply
in Upper Egypt and important cultural changes occurred.
have not yet been found simply because they are so deeply buried. Krzyzaniak
(1988, 1989) had to auger deeply into the watertable near Minshat Abu Omar
to find the remains that have so far yielded the earliest radiocarbon dates for
the Delta (5800 BP). But settlement in the Delta seems always to have been on
or close to the large sand and gravel mounds (geziras) produced by Nile floods,
and despite centuries of looting and excavation, there is little evidence that these
mounds ever were substantially occupied during the first half of the fourth mil
lennium B.C.?when Hierakonpolis and Nagada were already large and func
societies to evolve in Upper Egypt. Kemp (1983) suggested that once Hiera
settlement pattern was a “primate” one, meaning that a few very large settle
ments contained much of the population. Using the same data, Hassan, how
pattern] was a strongly log-normal (rank) system” (1988, p. 162). Primate dis
tributions are associated with rapid changes toward greater centralization and
differentiation of economic functions, but log-normal distributions are associ
ated with economic and sociopolitical systems in which there is relatively little
centralization of power or administration (Johnson, 1977). Hassan interprets
this log-normal pattern to be principally a reflection of the constraints of the
Nile Valley’s geography: the narrow (ca. 2-km or less) cultivable strip of land
that towns in Egypt were differentiated separately on the basis of their admin
in Egypt were deliberately located to maximize control over specific areas?not
selection does operate on human communities?the eventual apparent preem
inence of Memphis, for example, may have been legitimized by complex reli
economic integration of the Nile Valley and Delta and for orchestrating the
cultural interactions with Egypt’s foreign neighbors; an Old Kingdom national
Locational geographic models can be applied to archaeological settlement
cular huts, a few meters or less in diameter, separated by animal pens, storage
bins, trash pits, and other features of simple domestic economies. In the area
periods, such communities were transformed into much larger communities in
the typical Middle Eastern pattern of rectangular mudbrick buildings sharing
one or more walls. What we know about these architectural changes comes
Badarian-Amratian-Nagada (or Gerzean) sequence (Hoffman, 1974, 1980, 1982;
Hoffman et aL, 1986; Harlan, 1985; Friedman, 1990a; Hassan, 1984a), and
later periods as well (Fairservis, 1986). Hoffman concluded that Hierakonpolis
diversity and the exceptional agricultural potential of the region. Hoffman sug
and 3400 B.C., reaching a regional population of 5000-10,000 people in the
central area of the site. He concluded that this community was already func
maceheads, palettes, and other commodities in fine stone. This economy was
contents of some tombs of this era, Hoffman suggested that this differentiated
and 3200 B.C. the people of Hierakonpolis built a large cobblestone foundation
that Hoffman and his co-workers suggested supported a “fortified palace, tem
mudbrick wall around part of the settlement, and some large mudbrick tombs.
This and other evidence led Hoffman and his co-workers to conclude that at
and they argue that one of the important implications of their research is that it
demonstrates that “the development of Egyptian civilization was an essentially
internal and uninterrupted process” (1986, p. 183; Hoffman, 1988, 1989).
must have been primarily symbolic of a new order of life and a center of sacred
shrines and deities” (1988, p. 162), and he estimates that no more than 2% of
et al., found “state authority devices” in the form of clay sealings that were
. . . South Town within the context of the incipient
The only known Lower Egypt sites contemporary with the evolving Upper
communities (Fig. 4). Radiocarbon dates (Hassan, 1988) indicate initial settle
ment here at about 3650 B.C. and several centuries of occupation thereafter
covered by thatch roofs supported by poles (Menghin, 1931, 1932, 1934;
Caneva a/., 1987; Casini, 1988; Rizkana and Seeher, 1984, 1985; Bokonyi,
1985). In the variability of their contents, Maadi’s hundreds of graves indicate
at least some social ranking, but it is the functional changes in the community
that are most important. Many hundreds of Syro-Palestinian pots have been
found at Maadi, reflecting strong connections to Syro-Palestine and, probably,
to the evolving Uruk-Jemdet Nasr states of Greater Mesopotamia. Caneva and
her co-workers report that Maadi’s lithics also tie it “in a wide network of
291). Hassan sees “unequivocal evidence of trade as distinct from informal,
occasional transactions” (1988, p. 160) at Maadi, and he notes that the site
included a “commercial” zone, in which the “separation of the stores and
Caneva and her co-workers see”marked craft specialization in . . . activities
such as metallurgy, lithic industry, stone vase production and, above all, pottery
manufacture” (1989, pp. 291-292; Casini, 1988). The remains of apparently
domesticated equids have been found at Maadi (Bokonyi, 1985), and these ani
mals may have been used in overland trade with Palestine.
see Kaiser, 1985; Debono, 1956; Saad, 1969), but despite the evidence of
ture to what he sees as the more developed southern centers.
the south because of its Mediterranean littoral, and the stimulating effects of
contacts with Southwest Asia. But as Trigger (1983a) has noted, the initial
cultural primacy of Upper Egypt may be linked to the fact that the levees of
the smaller size of the Upper Egyptian natural flood basins made them easier
mation may also apply here: he suggested that population growth in sharply
circumscribed agricultural environments?of which the Nile Valley is a prime
example?would lead to competition for resources, which, in turn, would lead
to the development of state organizations as an outgrowth of military institu
tions. This idea may have some applicability to Egypt (Bard and Carneiro,
1989). Even though the evidence suggests little population pressure in this sense
for Egypt at any time until late in its history, when we compare Upper and
Lower Egypt it is evident that Upper Egypt is much more sharply circumscribed
least a more intense form of cultural interaction and even competition in Upper
Eiwanger (1987; also see Endesfelder, 1984) linked some of the Predy
(1989, p. 31) concludes that it “strains the evidence needlessly to promote trade
into a major force” in these evolutionary changes.
have argued that for the problem of explaining the evolution of complex soci
eties in Egypt, the most important changes in the Predynastic period may have
been the evolution of ritual systems and expanded lines of political authority.
Changes in the nature of political control and other ideologies seem to be evi
dent in iconographic representations (reviewed by Hassan, 1988), and recently
there have been several attempts to measure the changes in Predynastic social
structure by analyzing statistically variations in Predynastic graves (Atzler,
1971-1972, 1981, 1986; Bard, 1991; Eiwanger, 1987).
the Mediterranean to the Nubian frontier, and the oases of the Western Desert
as well (Figs. 5 and 6).
fied was a violent one (Fig. 7). Evidence regarding the possibility that Egyptian
developments were stimulated by contacts with Southwest Asia, however, is
less clear. Kemp (1989, pp. 31-32) discounts the importance of such connec
Redford (1989) has documented the apparent presence of Semitic elements in
and Upper Egyptian cultures may have occurred in the eastern Delta.
the Gerzean period through the First Dynasty argue a kind of “Drang nach
that of Lower Egypt.
one element that is particularly difficult to accommodate within this south-north
and later sites of artifacts and artifact (and architectural) styles that are Syro
Palestinian and Irano-Mesopotamian in origin” (1989, p. 1). He observes that
for years scholars have debated what kinds of contacts these elements reflect,
in which all things are in balance, and thus to postulate a priori an early and
The Narmer Palette, the Libyan Palette, and a few other objects figura
ical unification of Egypt, but these are to some extent equivocal. Kaiser (1985),
Schulman (1988), and others have challenged the notion that the Narmer Palette
commemorates the initial unification of Egypt, arguing that Egypt was unified
much earlier. Millet sees in his analysis of the Narmer Palette “a final demotion
from [the palette’s] once proud position as a unique historical document record
Kemp (1989, pp. 43-44), too, disputes the notion that the Delta was an
it “is naive to equate material culture and its ‘level’ with social and political
complexity. We must accept that some degree of political and social centrality
had developed in the Delta by late Predynastic times …. [But] the archaeo
This is an important issue because it involves a fundamental process com
and their subsequent administration. There is a large body of literature on this
But how do we measure archaeologically these determinants and pro
cessors appear to be at Abydos, in the area known as Umm el-Qa’ab (Kemp,
1989, p. 53). O’Connor (1989, p. 83; also see Kaiser and Dreyer, 1982) has
both First and late Second Dynasty rulers.
tion it is still at today?at the juncture of the Nile Valley and Delta?although
at various times the political and administrative center of Egypt shifted back to
and economic terms, and how can it be measured? Trigger (1983a, p. 47) and
others have pointed out that the simple presence of Upper Egyptian artifacts or
political or cultural integration. But when
facts with those of the Early Dynastic occupations elsewhere, we see evidence
that the similarity of artifact styles between the Valley and the Delta dramati
and that it encompasses not just one kind of artifact, but others as well.
millennium B.C. These early levels are beneath the watertable and excavations
have revealed only a few hundred square meters of occupations. But the exca
vators found clay cones, pottery, and other artifacts that reflect contacts with
Southwest Asian states, specifically the Amuq F period settlements in northern
in the Tigris, Balikh, Khabur, and Upper Euphrates region (von der Way, 1987,
ilar to those used at Uruk-Warka and other Mesopotamian sites to decorate
brick building walls), von der Way concludes that Maadi, which contained many
Southwest Asian pottery vessels of this same approximate time period, was only
a way station on overland routes to the east, but that Buto was a port?perhaps
the most important Delta port?for ships carrying commodities to and from
Palestine and the Uruk state (1987, p. 257).
estinian communities were probably linked by short land routes. It is also pos
sible that there were direct sea routes from the Tigris-Euphrates delta to a Red
Sea port on Egypt’s coast, perhaps opposite the Wadi Hammamat. As Trigger
notes (1983a, p. 38), this would explain why Susian, as opposed to central
Buto, Maadi, and other early Lower Egyptian sites (Fig. 8) may indicate
have occurred in the context of increasing functional differentiation, even if the
level of this differentiation, and the growing functional interdependence of which
it is a part, remains at a comparatively low level (van den Brink, 1988). One
contacts with Southwest Asia was a major factor in reshaping the demographic
pattern of Egypt and its socioeconomic fabric. Syro-Palestinian artifacts are in
evidence at most Early Dynastic Delta sites, and it is interesting in this context
Dynastic
lid
lie
str.X-VIII
str. VII
intramural burial
settlement str.W-I settlement
II
(Narmer)
(Scorpion)
cemetery
cemetery
settlement settlement settlement
cemetery cemetery (Narmer)!
the cultural integration of the Nile Valley and Delta is simply changes in Delta ceramics and architecture from distinctive local forms to those that resemble those of Upper Egypt. This change is evident at Tell Ibrahim Awad (see above), for example, which, although apparently continuously occupied
Kemp suggests that this “marks a fundamental change in the nature of settle
low density settlements to walled brick-built towns of far higher population
density” (1989, pp. 38-39).
communities were also changing. The earliest Predynastic Delta pottery from
that of the south, van den Brink found 4 m of deposits at Tell Ibrahim Awad
and notes that the earliest levels contain Predynastic pottery in styles “clearly
differing from contemporary sites in the Nile Valley and therefore possibly
reflecting an original Delta culture …” (1988, pp. 77; also see Kohler, 1990;
van den Brink et al., 1989). van den Brink found this same pattern at Tell Iswid,
with the earliest levels containing the remains of small hut-like circular struc
tures and ceramics in the earliest distinctive Delta styles, and the later occu
sition (e.g., van den Brink et al., 1989, pp. 80-82).
indicators of social-economic hierarchies, but it might be significant that the
late Predynastic mortuary cults of the Delta seem less elaborate than their Nile
been found at the east Delta site of Minshat Abu Omar (Kroeper, 1988; Kroeper
and Wildung, 1985). Kroeper has divided the Predynastic graves at Minshat
Abu Omar into four groups, based on contents, construction techniques, and
location. These groups may be from somewhat different time periods and/or
reflect different social groupings. They vary in their contents, in the number
and diversity of pottery, stone vessels, flint knives, stone palettes, copper arti
There is, however, no evidence at this point of juveniles having been buried
with extraordinary amounts of grave goods?which is often taken as a sign of
inherited status.
revealed graves, most dating to about the First Dynasty. Some of these were
two-room mudbrick tombs that contained a ceramic coffin enclosing a body and,
and in a smaller annex, stone and pottery vessels, palettes, jewelry, and other
different pots.
are similar to those from elsewhere in Egypt and, thus, that this “seems to point
to . . . close contacts between the eastern Delta and the Egyptian Nile Valley”
(1989, p. 282).
Tell Ibrahim Awad, and Ezbet el-Tell (Fig. 8), and together they indicate that
er’s name on pots at Delta sites and this stylistic uniformity suggest that by the
end of the Early Dynastic period the Valley and Delta were already integrated
socioeconomically and politically and probably had been for some time. Ser
ekhs that seem to be the Horus name of kings have been found on pottery vessels
at many Early Dynastic sites, including Beda, in the far eastern Delta. Trigger
suggests that these may be names of rulers of small Delta states that were already
trading with southwest Asia (1983a, p. 47), but the artifact stylistic similarity
of these sites to those elsewhere in Egypt suggests a considerable degree of
socioeconomic interaction with the national Egyptian state.
alterations in both the range of products and their methods of manufacture. Most
As Trigger notes, although Egypt experienced the same phenomenon, this “does
not indicate a decline in cultural or aesthetic standards. Instead it suggests that
64). In fact, the appearance of these mass-produced forms of pottery seems to
be a prime indicator of increasing complexity in the institutions administering
and controlling craft production. Johnson (1987), R. McC. Adams (1981), and
others have concluded that the rapid development of Southwest Asian states
occurred during the period when the beautiful painted wares of the early fourth
millenium were largely replaced by the unimpressive, mass-produced beveled
rim bowl. Egyptian pottery seems to have made a parallel transition in the Early
Dynastic period but its culmination was in the Old Kingdom period, when var
ious low-fired wares including “bread molds” were the dominant ceramic types.
Egypt ad Southwest Asia might be expected to show a parallel change to gov
ernmental control of ceramic?and other craft?production but also some vari
ations, as there were quite different transportation mechanisms (the Nile via-a
analyzed.
duction and distribution changed in the Early Dynastic period. Woodworking
became a much more important craft than it had been previously, possibly as a
variety of shapes and sizes (al-Khouli, 1978). Some vessels from the Delta have
number and styles of these vessels suggest not only substantial Early Dynastic
Delta occupations but also Egypt’s rapidly increasing stylistic homogeneity in
this period.
of new traditions of craftsmanship seems to be that it was at the beginning of
the patronage and control of the royal court” (1983a, p. 67). He goes on to
contrast Egypt and Mesopotamia in this regard, suggesting that it was the fact
that Egypt was under the highly centralized control of one government that
allowed Egyptian craftsmen to undertake such monumental and expensive arts
communities at about 4000 B.C. to the expansionist empire that Egypt was by
2100 B.C. was also remarkably rapid when one considers the parallel transfor
mation in Southwest Asia.
traditionally associated with early civilizations had appeared in Egypt, from a
craft production. The Early Dynastic settlement pattern (Fig. 5) included some
how complexly organized they were in terms of the number of economic and
seems to have been a powerful centralized state that nonetheless was based on
into the historical era as well, for the many surviving Old Kingdom documents
The florescence of Egyptian literature, art, architecture, and other cultural
Old Kingdom sites, such as Memphis, have never been systematically exca
vated. The known Old Kingdom settlement pattern (Fig. 6) is doubtless just the
remnant of a much more complex and extensive system that has been partially
destroyed or obscured. Wright (1986) specifically excluded Egypt from his
The Old Kingdom saw the continuation of some developmental trends that
was different from Early Dynastic Egypt primarily in a quantitative sense. Kemp
the Old Kingdom period provides Egypt’s best example of the “pristine state,”
in that it is developmentally comparable to Sumerian, Harappan, Aztec, Inca,
and early Chinese states. Indeed, most of the early models of evolving cultural
we must understand the Great Tradition:
. . . Myth is not only a narrative form of expression. Myth statements which do not
of Egypt” in the Old and Middle Kingdoms. Divine kingship provided the
and it was a unique blend of ideas about how the pharaoh received his legiti
macy through direct descent from the gods (Helck, 1970; Kemp, 1983, pp. 74
Egypt’s ideology on the nature of kingship seems to have differed some
mon element here is the important role played by national religious cults in all
efficient at motivating people at minimal costs to perform vital social functions.
and proper to fight in wars, pay taxes, share irrigation water, revere the king,
and so forth, would have been at a tremendous disadvantage?and there is no
ideology that involved religious legitimization of important social functions,
and there is no evidence that the ancient Egyptians were unique in the essential
mechanisms that evolved to link ideological elements with social functions.
to infer the nature of Old Kingdom central government administration (Baer,
1960; Strudwick, 1985). The taxation system was apparently thorough and effi
one “must imagine a network of government agencies spread throughout the
of resources” (1983, p. 83; also see Ghoneim, 1977; Helck, 1962, 1974; Zibel
Kemp suggest that Old Kingdom Egypt’s agricultural resources were of
to pious foundations?that is, individuals contributed land or other resources to
found charitable estates, some of whose produce went to support cults or to the
central government, but “whose relationship to the crown was a subtle one”
estates that were held by private individuals and were subject to taxation.
demographics, even though there is some evidence of overall population growth
in Egypt during its formative periods, the rates of growth appear to have been
slow. During this same period there were at least some technological improve
ments in agriculture and craft production, and probably some relocation of peo
effects and causes of the overall pattern of population growth may be difficult
to asses: population “density” can be thought of in terms of numbers of people
per unit of general economic productivity, rather than simple per unit of land.
In any case, there seems no evidence that population growth somehow “drove”
the cultural changes of Egypt’s formative periods.
period appear to have been only lightly occupied in previous periods (Figs.
4-6). The rate of population growth in the Old Kingdom may have been seri
Old Kingdom sites have been found, and many other Old Kingdom and pre
Old Kingdom sites are probably buried and thus unknown.
rest of Egypt, as well, even in peripheral areas, such as the Dakhla Oasis (Mills,
1984), but other formerly inhabited areas, such as the Fay yum, seem to have
been largely abandoned (Arnold and Arnold, 1979; Wenke et al., 1988a).
seem to have been few exceptionally large sites. Urban communities proved
such efficient methods for preindustrial societies to accomplish all the functions
urbanism; yet Egypt’s contrasting character in this regard has often been noted
large settlements but also communities in which a significant proportion of the
factors having to do with the increased efficiency such settlements provided in
the organization and control of craft production (Wright and Johnson, 1975),
1987), strategic relocations of people for military purposes (R. McC. Adams
may have been less urbanized than Mesopotamia simply because of the Nile
ation is somewhat more complex. Old Kingdom settlement location and size
were determined not just by local and regional environments, but by national
and international political and economic forces, and in any case, the Old King
dom settlement pattern cannot be interpreted solely in terms of economic ratio
that the pharaohs personally directed the settlement of Egypt, and they did so
stimulation of economic development, and defense of the frontiers. Trigger
(1983a, p. 47; Geodicke, 1969-1970) raises the possibility that the northeastern
from even the small sites that van den Brink reports (1988) probably reflects
evidence of state administrative documents at Kom el-Hisn, in the western Delta.
tus is based almost wholly on textual information, as its early levels remain
unexcavated (Smith and Jeffreys, 1986; Jeffreys, 1985), and it is not known if
Old Kingdom Memphis was functionally more complex than other communities
or just larger. (2) Large, walled towns. Most of the major Old Kingdom Upper
Egyptian settlements seem to have been walled complexes of tightly packed
mudbrick houses. Hierakonpolis and Abydos both grew substantially during the
Old Kingdom, compared to their Early Dynastic occupations (Kemp, 1983, pp.
98-100). The substantial enclosure walls at many Old Kingdom sites may imply
some degree of central planning and design, but most of them are not precise
rectangles or squares?they have long straight sections that sometimes form
curvilinear patterns. Kemp suggests that the lack of uniformity in wall layout
indicates that they were built on local initiative, not under the direction of the
central government (1989, p. 138). Few of the Old Kingdom sites in the Delta
seem to have been enclosed in walls, but it is entirely possible that these Old
and use the sediments for fertilizing and raising agricultural fields. (3) Forts
and trading entrepots. The Old Kingdom settlement pattern also included forts
and trading entrepots, such as Buhen and Elephantine. These seem to be marked
and may have included Delta settlements as well. They tend to be walled,
medium-sized communities on strategic points on the Nile or other trading
routes. (4) Pyramid towns. At Abusir, Giza, and elsewhere there are substantial
Old Kingdom settlements (e.g., Kromer, 1978) directly associated with pyra
mid complexes, and it appears that although the population of these commu
nities might have been partly seasonal, there was a permanent group of
tified villages” (Kemp, 1989, pp. 146-148). (5) Small provincial villages and
towns. As noted above, van den Brink’s surveys in the eastern Delta have
revealed many such small settlements, and there is reason to believe that similar
densities would be found in many areas despite the great destruction of the Old
We have substantial data from only a few of these five categories of set
evidence comes from Kom el-Hisn, in the western Delta (Fig. 9) (Wenke et
Wetterstrom, 1988; Buck, 1989; Zartman, 1989). Kom el-Hisn appears to have
been quite similar in location, general configuration, and ceramics to the scores
of Old Kingdom sites van den Brink (1988) located in the eastern Delta. As a
tance, but it seems also to have been an ordinary rural agricultural town. It was
tecture, and geographic context to the many other known Old Kingdom Delta communities
well. Old Kingdom Kom el-Hisn’s environment was, as it is today, well watered
and heavily vegetated. Hamroush (1989; also see Buck, 1989) suggests that
Kom el-Hisn’s occupations rest on a point bar deposit associated with an extinct
stream connected to a major Nile distributary?a location similar to that of most
other known small Old Kingdom Delta sites (van den Brink, 1988).
brick buildings, mainly in the form of small rooms containing hearths, storage
features, smoke-blackened pottery, burned organic materials, and other traces
of domestic activities. In general, none of the buildings we have so far revealed
exhibits evidence of vastly different construction cost or use. Nor do there appear
to be major differences in construction or contents of buildings when comparing
the three different building phases that comprise the Old Kingdom period here.
evidence to date seems most consistent with the supposition that Kom el-Hisn
was a specialized government-sponsored cattle-raising settlement or transport
station on the routes to Libya. (1) There is almost no evidence of local craft
sites all over Egypt, from Giza to the Dakhla Oasis, implying strong cultural
ties to the central Old Kingdom state. (3) Inscribed clay sealings found at Kom
el-Hisn probably reflect direct import or export of commodities to government
stores. (4) There is a radical difference between Kom el-Hisn and Nile Valley
sites in cattle-bone frequencies, which, combined with the evidence that cattle
mary economic activity?and it now appears as though many other Delta sites
have similarly high ratios of pig remains to cattle remains. [Redding (1989) has
1988; D’Andrea, 1989; Boessneck and von den Dreisch, 1988)]. (5) The rela
Hisn are consistent with a community primarily made up of subsistence farmers.
tombs, sculpture, artifacts, and other materials, but the composition of the Old
reveal that site to have been a large and diverse Old Kingdom community, with
comprising a wide range of artifacts. In antiquity, Mendes probably lay on a
point between Africa and Asia, via both maritime and overland routes.
Mesopotamian standards and relatively simply organized. Analyses of Old
etal., 1988), and elsewhere have revealed that these settlements were important
parts of the imperial administration of Egypt. These major Old Kingdom towns
for the most part have been destroyed or buried.
Baer’s analysis of rank and title in the Old Kingdom (1960) illustrated the great
complexity and change in Old Kingdom bureaucratic hierarchies. Kemp (1983,
p. 108) suggests that in Upper Egypt the control of local affairs by the pharaoh’s
overseer was gradually diluted during the late Old Kingdom, culminating in the
internal control as well.
social structure, and aesthetic traditions comes from the more than a century of
research on cult centers at Giza, Saqqara, and adjacent areas (reviewed by
Kemp, 1983, 1989; Reisner and Smith, 1955), but only recently have these
been systematically excavated. Lehner’s research at Giza (1991), for example,
has shown that the structures west of the Second (Khafra) Pyramid that have
ities. Excavations by Lehner and Hawass southeast of the Mycerinus Pyramid,
south of the modern cemetery of Nazlet Zaman, revealed what was very prob
ably a community occupied during the period in which the pyramids were con
levels of functional relationships and, to some extent, of the causal elements in
complex at Giza seems to be uninterpretable without considering the ideological
character of the early Egyptian state and even the mentalities of the pharaohs
who commanded the construction of this vast complex of monuments. Lehner
not simply the result of successive independent construction projects. At a more
ered pyramids and similar expressions of energy “waste” to have been the
nomic determinants. Kemp, for example, enumerates the positive results of
alent to ‘built-in obsolescence’ in modem technological societies” (1983, p.
87), that continued construction of mortuary cult centers would provide. Sim
societies, of ceramics that were invested with great effort and aesthetic meaning
to mass-produced wares is best understood not as a decline in the aesthetic
sensitivities of the individuals involved, but as a functional response to chang
ing socioeconomic conditions. Even the “decline” of Upper Paleolithic art into
the drab Mesolithic material culture can be interpreted as a response to the
here is that some forms of societal “waste,” including elaborate Pleistocene
have evolved more efficient mechanisms to meet such societal needs, the ways
in which material culture is invested with aesthetic meaning can also be expected
to change.
that people built huge pyramids in Egypt, Mexico, Mesopotamia (“ziggur
ats”), and even the Mississippi Valley? In fact, the amount of energy per capita
per year expended in ancient Egypt, even at the height of the pyramid period,
may not have greatly exceeded that of Mesopotamia, where every major build
dried, carried, and set mudbricks.
of the change to agricultural economies. He argues that these mortuary cults
were most elaborate in areas where foraging economies and early agricultural
economies were most marginal, and that they acted as focal points in redistrib
utive economies that linked many small groups in ways that contributed to their
a reflection of the greater stability of the maize-beans-squash agriculture that
If we consider the Egyptian pyramids from a similar viewpoint, we might
reflect instabilities associated with the rapid centralization of the Old Kingdom
matter. The Middle Kingdom saw continued construction of massive temples,
and to some extent the energy formerly invested in pyramids was simply redi
Kanawati’s assessment of the texts and tombs is that there was no decline in
it would seem that the labor and resources invested in the pyramids must some
were
In general, Old Kingdom Egypt saw an intensification of the trends, already
remained important mortuary centers, and Hierakonpolis and other southern
tians viewed Western Asia as belonging to the pharaoh, but none of the vocab
In sum, the combined archaeological and documentary evidence indicates
nized, expansionist polity that included all the characteristics traditionally asso
ciated with preindustrial cultural complexity.
Nile Valley and Nile Delta were integrated?must be considered to be only
partially answered. Evidence recently derived from Delta sites has changed some
research will change current interpretations. But the larger questions of the
nature and potential of our knowledge about the Egyptian past remain, despite
this recent research, and these questions are more important than the particulars
of Egyptian history and far more intractable.
either implicitly or explicitly, that centuries of futile epistemological debates
should long since have convinced us that the only sensible way to study the
the hopeless quest for an empirical science of history modeled on the physical
and biological sciences; that one accept that valid “explanations” and “under
that by narrowly focusing on the physical environments, demographics, and
of the ancients, only a primitive and unsatisfying understanding of antiquity can
result (Trigger, 1983b, 1984b).
mon-sense solution to the disparate objectives of various scholars, despite its
some of these issues. Is there any realistic sense in which we can “explain”
why pyramid construction is distributed through a particular period of ancient
and intentions of the people who built these monuments cannot be scientifically
measured and are unnecessary, or at least dependent, variables in the explana
tion of variations in time and space of pyramid construction. Others, however,
sider the ideological context out of which they arose.
the Egyptian past is conducted in the foreseeable future. Traditional methods
of excavation and interpretation offer the kinds of data and understandings that
able culture that was ancient Egypt.
constitutes a primary “test case” to which all the great debates about the nature
of historical inquiry can be referred, but many questions remain about what
I thank Fekri Hassan, Frank Hole, Joy McCorriston, and Kathryn Bard for
Nanette M. Pyne for editing this manuscript, preparing the illustrations, and
work in the Delta, the Egyptian Antiquities Organization for their collaboration
in this research, and Dr. Angela Close, for both her editorial assistance with
this paper and her patience.
Adams, R. McC. (1981). Heartland of Cities, Aldine, Chi
farming in Europe. In Renfrew, C. (ed.), The Explanation of Culture Change, University of
Paul, London.
22: 228-246.
Baer, K. (1962). The low price of land in ancient Egypt. Journal of the American Research Center
595, VEgyptologie en 1979, Axes prioritaires de recherches, Vol. I., CNRS, Paris, pp. 153
167.
van den Brink, E. C. M. (ed.), The Archaeology of the Nile Delta: Problems and Priorities,
Netherlands Foundation for Archaeological Research in Egypt, Amsterdam, pp. 49-62.
E. C. M. (ed.), The Archaeology of the Nile Delta: Problems and Priorities, Netherlands
Foundation for Archaeological Research in Egypt, Amsterdam, pp. 297-311.
tine. Bulletin de Liaison 14: 35.
Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt 24: 81-93.
Recherches de lTnstitut de Papyrologie et d’Egyptologie de Lille, No. 11, pp. 15-23.
Petrie’s South Town (Upper Egypt), 1977-1983: An interim report. In Krzyzaniak, L., and
Kobusiewicz, M. (eds.), Late Prehistory of the Nile Basin and the Sahara, Muzeum Archeo
Anthropological Institute 76: 131-156.
Bernal, M. (1987). Black Athena: The Afroasiatic Roots of Classical Civilization, Vol. I. The
on a study of non-metrical variations in the skull. Journal of Human Evolution 11:119-208.
D. R., and Chiarelli, B. A. (eds.), Population Biology of the Ancient Egyptians, New York.
Bietak, M. (1979). Egyptology and the urban setting. In Weeks, K. (ed.), Egyptology and the
ostlichen Nildelta. In van den Brink, E. C. M., (ed.), The Archaeology of the Nile Delta:
Problems and Priorities, Netherlands Foundation for Archaeological Research in Egypt,
Amsterdam, pp. 117-122.
Bourriau, J. (1981). Umm el-Ga’ab. Pottery from the Nile Valley Before the Arab Conquest, Fitz
Boyd, R., and Richerson, P. (1985). Culture and the Evolutionary Process, University of Chicago
tures of the Nile catfish (Pisces: Clarias). Journal of Archaeological Science 14: 459-472.
Perch. World Archaeology 22(3): 288-303.
Newsletter of the American Research Center in Egypt (in press).
dissertation, University of Washington, Seattle.
California Press, Berkeley.
The African Archaeological Review 5: 105-114.
Muzeum Archeologiczne w Poznaniu, Poznan, pp. 287-293.
presented at the International Conference on Culture and Environment Between the Sahara
and the Nile in the Early and Mid-Holocene, Poznan, Poland.
London.
w Poznaniu, Poznan, pp. 261-266.
Wendorf, F., and Schild, R. (assembls.), Loaves and Fishes: The Prehistory of Wadi Kub
American Journal of Physical Anthropology 75: 23-30.
eastern Nile Delta, Egypt. Marine Geology Hi 257-275.
nees. Bulletin de I’lnstitut d’Egypte 37: 329-339.
Eastern Nile Delta, Reports of the Laboratory of Physical Geography and Soil Science, No.
B. (ed.), Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory, 9, Academic Press, New York,
Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science (in press).
Vol. 1, Part 2, 3rd ed., Cambridge University Press, Cam
Deutschen Archdologischen Instituts Absteilung Kairo 38: 67-82.
Mainz am Rhein.
Assmann, J. (ed.), Problems and Priorities in Egyptian Archaeology, Routledge & Kegan
Paul, London.
lands Foundation for Archaeological Research in Egypt, Amsterdam.
period in Egypt. In Krzyzaniak, L., and Kobusiewicz, M., (eds.), Origins and Early Devel
Poznan.
Research Center in Egypt 27: 71-87.
1981, Hierakonpolis Project Occasional Papers in Anthropology, No. Ill, Poughkeepsie, NY.
demisk Forlag, Copenhagen.
Friedman, J., and Rowlands, M. J. (1977a). Notes toward an epigenetic model of the evolution of
University of Pittsburgh Press, Pittsburgh, pp. 201-278.
Friedman, R. (1990a). Hierakonpolis. Locality 29A. Bulletin de Liaison 14: 18-25.
der 1. Zwischenzeit nach konventionellen und kalibrierten l4-C Daten. Studien Zur Altdgyp
tischen Kultur 16: 65-81.
K. (ed.), Qasr el-Sagha 1980, Panstwowe Wydawnictwo Naukow, Warsaw, pp. 37-67.
zaniak, L., and Kobusiewicz, M. (eds.), Origin and Early Development of Food-Producing
Cultures in North-Eastern Africa, Polish Academy of Sciences, Poznan, pp. 247-60.
evolution of climate in North-Eastern Africa. Presented at International Symposium on Envi
Millennium BC, Poznan.
Museum of Art Egyptian Expedition, Vol. XX, New York.
for Archaeological Research in Egypt, Amsterdam, pp. 165-175.
sented at the 4th International Congress of Egyptology.
5-16.
zaniak, L., and Kobusiewicz, M. (eds.). Origins and Early Development of Food-Producing
Cultures in North-Eastern Africa, Polish Academy of Sciences, Poznan.
and comparisons with Nubia, Palestine and Mesopotamia. Antiquity 61(231): 119-135.
J. E., Newman, W. S., and Konigsson, L. K. (eds.), Climate, History, Periodicity and Pre
Ancient History, 3rd ed., Vol. I (I), pp. 173-193.
ern Africa, Polish Academy of Sciences, Poznan.
to New Kingdom times. Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt 19: 59-71.
Harrassowitz, Wiesbaden.
baden.
w Poznaniu, Poznan, pp. 181-196.
versity of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia.
Hodder, I. (1985). Postprocessual archaeology. In Schiffer, M. B. (ed.), Advances in Archaeolog
American Antiquity 39: 35-50.
Predynastic research. Journal of Near Eastern Studies 39: 119-137.
Association, Cairo.
Hoffman, M. A. (1989). A stratified Predynastic sequence from Hierakonpolis (Upper Egypt). In
Muzeum Archeologiczne w Poznaniu, Poznan, pp. 317-323.
the Hierakonpolis region from Predynastic through Old Kingdom times. Journal of the Amer
ican Research Center in Egypt 23: 175-187.
ton, DC.
Chiefdoms and Early States in the Near East: The Organizational Dynamics of Complexity (in
press).
Institut Francais d’Archeologie Orientale, Cairo.
Early State, Mouton, The Hague.
Johnson, G. (1977). Aspects of regional analysis in archaeology. Annual Review of Anthropology
and Explanation in Archaeology, Academic Press, New York.
Hole, F. (ed.), The Archaeology of Western Iran, Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington,
DC.
Altertumskunde 91: 86-125.
Entwicklung Oberagyptens. Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archdologischen Instituts Abteilung
Kairo 41: 61-87.
und Tempel von Elephantine 13./14/ Grabungsberich. Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archdol
Decline, Aris & Phillips, Warminster.
Bronze age. In Enrich, R. W., (ed.), Chronologies in Old World Archaeology, University of
Keita, S. O. Y. (1988). An analysis of crania from Tell Duweir using multiple discriminant func
ical Anthropology 83: 35-48.
d’Egypte 43: 22-33.
Muzeum Archeologiczne w Poznaniu, Poznan, pp. 158-179.
Netherlands Foundation for Archaeological Research in Egypt, Amsterdam, pp. 11-46.
ect. In Krzyzaniak, L., and Kobusiewicz, M. (eds.), Late Prehistory of the Nile Basin and
the American Research Center in Egypt 20: 7-29.
von Zabern, Mainz am Rhein.
Ms. on file with author, Seattle.
of the American Anthropological Association, Houston, Texas. Ms. on file with author, Seat
310.
ada. Ms. on file with author, Seattle.
Maisels, C. K. (1990). The Emergence of Civilization, Routledge, London.
socioeconomic change in prehistoric Africa: Sudanese Nubia as a case study. In Cohen, M.
Press, Orlando, FL, pp. 193-214.
in the Near East. American Anthropologist (in press).
New York.
Deutschen Archdologischen Instituts Abteilung Kairo 1: 143-147; 3: 150-154; 5: 111-118.
Center in Egypt 27: 53-59.
Origin and Early Development of Food-Producing Cultures in North-Eastern Africa, Poznan
in Egypt’s West Delta: Insights from the plant remains. Journal of Near Eastern Studies 3:
159-173.
Copenhagen.
of the American Research Center in Egypt, Memphis.
dos. Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt 26: 51-86.
18: 369-99.
tute 29: 295-301.
Memoir 18.
ration Fund, London.
Fund Memoir 21.
in Egypt, London.
Predynastic Cemetery N7000, Naga-ed-Der, Egypt, M.A. thesis, University of California,
Berkeley.
J. A. (eds.), Essays in Archaeological Typology, Center for American Archaeology, Evans
on the potential of faunal data. Ms. on file with author, Seattle.
Research Center in Egypt 23: 125-143.
Press, Cambridge, MA.
cultural sequence. Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archaologischen Instituts Abteilung Kairo 40:
237-252.
305.
485.
zum Mittleren Reich: Ein Beitrag zur Archaologie der Graberfelder der Region Qau-Matmar
in der Ersten Zwischenzeit. In Problems and Priorities in Egyptian Archaeology, Routledge
Shanks, M., and Tilley, C. (1989). Archaeology into the 1990s. Norwegian Archaeological Review
Africa and the Levant. In Krzyzaniak, L., and Kobusiewicz, M. (eds.), Late Prehistory of the
Nile Basin and the Sahara, Muzeum Archeologiczne w Poznaniu, Poznan, pp. 69-76.
in Egypt 6: 16-32.
18:305-313.
civilizations. American Anthropologist 51: 1-27.
their Holders, London.
Tixier, J. (1963). Typologie de TEpipaleolithique du Maghreb, Memoires du Centre de Recherches
D.,and Lloyd, A., (eds.), Ancient Egypt: A Social History, Cambridge University Press, Cam
end of the Old Kingdom. In Krzyzaniak, L., and Kobusiewicz, M. (eds.), Origin and Early
Development of Food-Producing Cultures in North-Eastern Africa, Polish Academy of Sci
ences, Poznan, pp. 101-108.
355-370.
Offerts a Jean Vercoutter, Editions Recherce sur les Civilisations, Paris.
larly in Badarian period: an aspect. In Krzyzaniak, L., and Kobusiewicz, M. (eds.). Late
pp. 255-260.
Nile Delta (1984-1986); With a Contribution by Willem van Zeist. In van den Brink, E. C.
M. (ed.), The Archaeology of the Nile Delta: Problems and Priorities, Netherlands Founda
tion for Archaeological Research in Egypt, Amsterdam, pp. 65-114.
ical remains in the northeastern Nile Delta. In van den Brink, E. C. M. (ed.), The Archaeology
of the Nile Delta: Problems and Priorities, Netherlands Foundation for Archaeological
Research in Egypt, Amsterdam, pp. 125-139.
den lithischen Kleinfunden. Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archdologischen Instituts Abteilung
Kairo 43: 241-250.
In van den Brink, E. C. M. (ed.), The Archaeology of the Nile Delta: Problems and Priorities,
American Antiquity 55(4): 673-689.
London.
in Cairo Press, Cairo.
New York.
R. (assembls.), Cattle-Keepers of the Eastern Sahara, SMU Press, Dallas, pp. 404-428.
155.
ican Research Center in Egypt 129: 1-11.
ican Research Center in Egypt 135: 11-17.
settlement in the Fayyum Oasis of Egypt. Journal of Field Archaeology 15(1): 29-51.
Excavations of an Old Kingdom west Delta community. Journal of the American Research
American Archaeology, Evanston, IL.
C, and Adams, R. McC. (eds.), City Invincible, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Press, New Haven, CT.
demic Press, New York, pp. 271-318.
6: 379-398.
A. (eds.), American Archaeology, Past and Future, Smithsonian Institution Press, Washing
ton, DC.
times. In van den Brink, E. C. M. (ed.), The Archaeology of the Nile Delta: Problems and
251-257.
perspective on the evolution of social complexity. American Antiquity 44: 5-35.
53(1): 7-12.
1(4): 121-179.
dissertation proposal. Ms. on file with author, Seattle.
p. 280
p. 281
p. 282
p. 283
p. 284
p. 285
p. 286
p. 287
p. 288
p. 289
p. 290
p. 291
p. 292
p. 293
p. 294
p. 295
p. 296
p. 297
p. 298
p. 299
p. 300
p. 301
p. 302
p. 303
p. 304
p. 305
p. 306
p. 307
p. 308
p. 309
p. 310
p. 311
p. 312
p. 313
p. 314
p. 315
p. 316
p. 317
p. 318
p. 319
p. 320
p. 321
p. 322
p. 323
p. 324
p. 325
p. 326
p. 327
p. 328
p. 329
Late Pleistocene Mammalian Extinctions in North America: Taxonomy, Chronology, and Explanations [pp. 193-231]
The Transition to Farming in Eastern and Northern Europe [pp. 233-278]
The Evolution of Early Egyptian Civilization: Issues and Evidence [pp. 279-329]
Back Matter
Word Count: xxx.
This word count excludes the title and references at the end of the essay. You will lose half a point (0.5) for not including a word count at the end of your Discussion essay. A violation of this requirement will also make you ineligible for a rewrite on the assignment.
