The Naqada is a Predynastic archaeological culture located in Upper Egypt, the strip of land flanking the Nile river south of the Faiyum region and north of the First Cataract. Named after the site where British archaeologist Flinders Petrie uncovered a necropolis of over 3000 graves in the late 19th century,
[1]
the Naqada culture is dated from around 3800 to 3100 BCE.
[2]
The Naqada has been subdivided into three periods ‒ the Amratian, Gerzean, and Semainean ‒ as well as, more recently, into Naqada IA-C, IIA-D, and IIIA-D.
[3]
[4]
Seshat’s ’Naqada 1’ (3800-3550 BCE) corresponds to the Naqada IA-IIB phases; Naqada 2 (3550-3300 BCE) to IIC-IID; and Naqada 3 (3300-3100 BCE) to IIIA-IIIB. We end Naqada 3 with the IIIB-C transition, because the First Dynasty of the Egyptian state is considered to begin with the accession of King Aha in Naqada IIIC.
[4]
Naqada III is also sometimes referred to as the Protodynastic period or ’Dynasty 0’.
Early Naqada archaeological material is clustered around the key sites of Naqada itself, Abydos, and Hierakonpolis (ancient Nekhen) in the fertile land nestled around the ’Qena bend’ of the Nile.
[5]
However, from the late Naqada II onwards, there is an archaeologically visible expansion of the culture both southwards along the Nile and northwards into Lower Egypt (the Delta), eventually reaching as far north as the Levant in Naqada IIIA-B.
[6]
Population and Political Organization
The 4th millennium BCE was a crucial period for Egyptian state formation. Prior to roughly 3800 BCE, Upper Egypt was inhabited by seasonally mobile farmers and herders, constituting an archaeological culture known as the Badarian.
[7]
However, the Naqada periods brought a series of key social transformations to the region, including increasing inequality, a greater commitment to sedentary settlement and cereal farming, the emergence of full-time craft specialists, and, towards the end of the millennium, the invention of writing.
[8]
[9]
[10]
The growth of hierarchical social structures and the unification of Upper and Lower Egypt laid the foundations for the divine kings and complex bureaucracy of the Old Kingdom and beyond.
During Naqada I, new forms of political organization appeared ‒ relatively swiftly compared to other prehistoric cultures ‒ in the upper Nile Valley.
[11]
According to the Egyptologist Branislav Anđelković, previously autonomous agricultural villages began to band together to form ’chiefdoms’ or ’proto-nomes’ between Naqada IA and IB (a ’nome’ was an administrative division in the later Egyptian state).
[12]
In Naqada IC, even larger political entities ‒ ’nome pre-states’ ‒ started to form, centred on Naqada, Abydos and Hierakonpolis. It has been suggested that a ’primitive chiefdom’ centred around a ’royal’ authority based at Hierakonpolis, had formed by around 3700 BCE.
[13]
Not all researchers agree with this terminology, believing that it creates the impression of an inexorable march towards state formation, and some prefer to stress the fragile and experimental nature of early complex social formations in Upper Egypt.
[14]
However, the term chiefdom remains in common usage as a label for the new ranked societies of the early 4th millennium.
[15]
[16]
[17]
In the Naqada II period, ’proto-states’ formed, and by the Naqada III we can speak of kings and a centralized government ruling over a unified Upper and Lower Egypt.
[18]
We lack firm figures for the population of Egypt during the Naqada. At the beginning of the period, most inhabitants of Upper Egypt were living in small villages.
[12]
However, as the 4th millennium progressed, archaeologists can discern a process of urbanization and aggregation into larger political units. The largest known settlement, Hierakonpolis, grew into a regional centre of power in the 3800‒3500 BCE period
[19]
and may have reached a population of between 5,000 and 10,000 people in the late Naqada I.
[20]
Other researchers consider this figure ’inflated’
[21]
and point to recent evidence from the Abydos region for low population numbers throughout the Predynastic period.
[22]
[1]: (Midant-Reynes 2000, 41) Béatrix Midant-Reynes. 2000. ’The Naqada Period (c. 4000-3200 BC)’, in The Oxford History of Ancient Egypt, edited by Ian Shaw, 41-56. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[2]: (Dee et al. 2013, 5) Michael Dee, David Wengrow, Andrew Shortland, Alice Stevenson, Fiona Brock, Linus Girdland Flink and Christopher Bronk Ramsey. 2013. ’An Absolute Chronology for Early Egypt Using Radiocarbon Dating and Bayesian Statistical Modelling’. Proceedings of the Royal Society A 469 (2159). DOI: 10.1098/rspa.2013.0395.
[3]: (Stevenson 2016, 424) Alice Stevenson. 2016. ’The Egyptian Predynastic and State Formation’. Journal of Archaeological Research 24: 421-68.
[4]: (Dee et al. 2013, 2) Michael Dee, David Wengrow, Andrew Shortland, Alice Stevenson, Fiona Brock, Linus Girdland Flink and Christopher Bronk Ramsey. 2013. ’An Absolute Chronology for Early Egypt Using Radiocarbon Dating and Bayesian Statistical Modelling’. Proceedings of the Royal Society A 469 (2159). DOI: 10.1098/rspa.2013.0395.
[5]: (Bard 1994, 267) Kathryn A. Bard. 1994. ’The Egyptian Predynastic: A Review of the Evidence’. Journal of Field Archaeology 21 (3): 265-88.
[6]: (Stevenson 2016, 442-43) Alice Stevenson. 2016. ’The Egyptian Predynastic and State Formation’. Journal of Archaeological Research 24: 421-68.
[7]: (Stevenson 2016, 422, 428-29) Alice Stevenson. 2016. ’The Egyptian Predynastic and State Formation’. Journal of Archaeological Research 24: 421-68.
[8]: (Stevenson 2016, 431-32, 434) Alice Stevenson. 2016. ’The Egyptian Predynastic and State Formation’. Journal of Archaeological Research 24: 421-68.
[9]: (Hendrickx 2011, 93) Stan Hendrickx. 2011. ’Crafts and Craft Specialization’, in Before the Pyramids: The Origins of Egyptian Civilization, edited by Emily Teeter, 93-98. Chicago: Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago.
[10]: (Wengrow 2011, 99) David Wengrow. 2011. ’The Invention of Writing in Egypt’, in Before the Pyramids: The Origins of Egyptian Civilization, edited by Emily Teeter, 99-103. Chicago: Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago.
[11]: (Stevenson 2016, 431-32) Alice Stevenson. 2016. ’The Egyptian Predynastic and State Formation’. Journal of Archaeological Research 24: 421-68.
[12]: (Anđelković 2011, 28) Branislav Anđelković. 2011. ’Political Organization of Egypt in the Predynastic Period’, in Before the Pyramids: The Origins of Egyptian Civilization, edited by Emily Teeter, 25-32. Chicago: Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago.
[13]: (García 2013, 187-88) Juan Carlos Moreno García. 2013. ’Building the Pharaonic State: Territory, Elite, and Power in Ancient Egypt during the Third Millennium BCE’, in Experiencing Power, Generating Authority: Cosmos, Politics, and the Ideology of Kingship in Ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia, edited by Jane A. Hill, Philip Jones, and Antonio J. Morales, 185-217. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.
[14]: (Stevenson 2016, 422, 427) Alice Stevenson. 2016. ’The Egyptian Predynastic and State Formation’. Journal of Archaeological Research 24: 421-68.
[15]: (Stevenson 2016, 422) Alice Stevenson. 2016. ’The Egyptian Predynastic and State Formation’. Journal of Archaeological Research 24: 421-68.
[16]: (Bard 2017, 2) Kathryn A. Bard. 2017. ’Political Economies of Predynastic Egypt and the Formation of the Early State’. Journal of Archaeological Research 25: 1-36.
[17]: (Koehler 2010, 32) E. Christiana Koehler. 2010. ’Prehistory’, in A Companion to Ancient Egypt, Volume 1, edited by Alan B. Lloyd, 25-47. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.
[18]: (Anđelković 2011, 29-30) Branislav Anđelković. 2011. ’Political Organization of Egypt in the Predynastic Period’, in Before the Pyramids: The Origins of Egyptian Civilization, edited by Emily Teeter, 25-32. Chicago: Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago.
[19]: (Friedman 2011, 34) Renée Friedman. 2011. ’Hierakonpolis’, in Before the Pyramids: The Origins of Egyptian Civilization, edited by Emily Teeter, 33-44. Chicago: Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago.
[20]: (Hoffman, Hamroush and Allen 1986, 181) Michael Allen Hoffman, Hany A. Hamroush and Ralph O. Allen. 1986. ’A Model of Urban Development for the Hierakonpolis Region from Predynastic through Old Kingdom Times’. Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt 23: 175-87.
[21]: (Stevenson 2016, 436) Alice Stevenson. 2016. ’The Egyptian Predynastic and State Formation’. Journal of Archaeological Research 24: 421-68.
[22]: (Patch 2004, 914) Diana Craig Patch. 2004. ’Settlement Patterns and Cultural Change in the Predynastic Period’, in Egypt at Its Origins: Studies in Memory of Barbara Adams, edited by S. Hendrickx, R. F. Friedman, K. M. Ciałowicz and M. Chłodnicki, 905-18. Leuven: Uitgeverij Peeters en Departement Oosterse Studies.
| 36 R |
| Naqada I |
| Naqada | |
| This | |
| Hierakonpolis |
| Negade Kultur | |
| culture de Nagada | |
| Naqada IA-IIB | |
| Naqada IA | |
| Naqada IB | |
| Naqada IC | |
| Naqada IIA | |
| Naqada IIB | |
| Amratian Period |
| [50 to 200] people | 3800 BCE |
| [1,000 to 2,000] people | 3700 BCE |
| 13,000 people | 3600 BCE |
| [5 to 20] km2 | 3800 BCE |
| [5,000 to 7,500] km2 | 3700 BCE 3600 BCE |
| - | 3800 BCE 3651 BCE |
| 13,000 people | 3650 BCE 3551 BCE |
| inferred absent |
| inferred absent |
| inferred absent |
| inferred absent |
| inferred absent |
| inferred absent |
| inferred absent |
| inferred absent |
| inferred absent |
| inferred absent |
| inferred absent |
| inferred absent |
| inferred absent |
| inferred absent |
| inferred absent |
| present |
| inferred absent |
| inferred absent |
| inferred absent |
| absent |
| inferred absent |
| inferred absent |
| absent |
| absent |
| inferred absent |
| inferred absent |
| absent |
| absent |
| absent |
| inferred absent |
| Year Range | Naqada I (eg_naqada_1) was in: |
|---|---|
| (3800 BCE 3551 BCE) | Upper Egypt |
Egypt during Naqada period is a collection of quasi-polities. So for the most of IVth milenium it is impossible to indicate capital.
However according to for example B. Andelković, from the Naqada IC one can talking about pre-states and there is a suggestion of 8 Upper-Egyptian centers, from which 3 remained on the very high position and were the capital of their growing polities
[1]
That is Naqada, Hierakoonpolis and This.
The political strength of all of three capitals is evident in the Naqada II period.
[1]: Andelkovic, B. 2011. "Political Organisation of Egypt in the Predynastic Period". [in:] Teeter, E. [ed.]. Before the Pyramids: The Origin of the Egyptian Cyvilization. Chichago: The Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago. pg: 28-29.
Egypt during Naqada period is a collection of quasi-polities. So for the most of IVth milenium it is impossible to indicate capital.
However according to for example B. Andelković, from the Naqada IC one can talking about pre-states and there is a suggestion of 8 Upper-Egyptian centers, from which 3 remained on the very high position and were the capital of their growing polities
[1]
That is Naqada, Hierakoonpolis and This.
The political strength of all of three capitals is evident in the Naqada II period.
[1]: Andelkovic, B. 2011. "Political Organisation of Egypt in the Predynastic Period". [in:] Teeter, E. [ed.]. Before the Pyramids: The Origin of the Egyptian Cyvilization. Chichago: The Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago. pg: 28-29.
Egypt during Naqada period is a collection of quasi-polities. So for the most of IVth milenium it is impossible to indicate capital.
However according to for example B. Andelković, from the Naqada IC one can talking about pre-states and there is a suggestion of 8 Upper-Egyptian centers, from which 3 remained on the very high position and were the capital of their growing polities
[1]
That is Naqada, Hierakoonpolis and This.
The political strength of all of three capitals is evident in the Naqada II period.
[1]: Andelkovic, B. 2011. "Political Organisation of Egypt in the Predynastic Period". [in:] Teeter, E. [ed.]. Before the Pyramids: The Origin of the Egyptian Cyvilization. Chichago: The Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago. pg: 28-29.
Amratian Period. [1] Negade Kultur (German); culture de Nagada (French).
[1]: (Midant-Reynes 2000, 43)
Amratian Period. [1] Negade Kultur (German); culture de Nagada (French).
[1]: (Midant-Reynes 2000, 43)
Amratian Period. [1] Negade Kultur (German); culture de Nagada (French).
[1]: (Midant-Reynes 2000, 43)
Amratian Period. [1] Negade Kultur (German); culture de Nagada (French).
[1]: (Midant-Reynes 2000, 43)
Amratian Period. [1] Negade Kultur (German); culture de Nagada (French).
[1]: (Midant-Reynes 2000, 43)
Amratian Period. [1] Negade Kultur (German); culture de Nagada (French).
[1]: (Midant-Reynes 2000, 43)
Amratian Period. [1] Negade Kultur (German); culture de Nagada (French).
[1]: (Midant-Reynes 2000, 43)
Amratian Period. [1] Negade Kultur (German); culture de Nagada (French).
[1]: (Midant-Reynes 2000, 43)
inapplicable: Naqada was an independent culture. However during the Naqada I period in Upper Egypt it seems that the Badarian and Naqadian sites shared the same region. And because of Naqadians’ expansion to the North in the late Naqada II, during that time it also coexisted with Maadi sites in the Nile Delta.
During the Naqada period there is a system of quasi-polities.
settlement pattern consists of scattered villages without any ties
eventually supravillages polities. By the end of that stage the chiefdoms start to change politically. First we have chiefdoms on the pre-state stages and in the Naqada III proto-states and the kings of Dynasty 0 in the later part of that period
[1]
.
There are a few centres and villages on each territory. However the exact degree of centralization is unknown - it may be loose or nominal.
[1]: Andelkovic, B. 2011. "Political Organisation of Egypt in the Predynastic Period". [in:] Teeter, E. [ed.]. Before the Pyramids: The Origin of the Egyptian Cyvilization. Chichago: The Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago. pg: 28-31.
During the Naqada period there is a system of quasi-polities.
settlement pattern consists of scattered villages without any ties
eventually supravillages polities. By the end of that stage the chiefdoms start to change politically. First we have chiefdoms on the pre-state stages and in the Naqada III proto-states and the kings of Dynasty 0 in the later part of that period
[1]
.
There are a few centres and villages on each territory. However the exact degree of centralization is unknown - it may be loose or nominal.
[1]: Andelkovic, B. 2011. "Political Organisation of Egypt in the Predynastic Period". [in:] Teeter, E. [ed.]. Before the Pyramids: The Origin of the Egyptian Cyvilization. Chichago: The Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago. pg: 28-31.
People.
Naqada IC-IIB
[1]
Hoffman thought that in most of villages less than 75 people lived. In centers there were much more
[2]
over 13,000
Naqadian Egypt is a quasi-polity, or rather a collection of quasi polities. During the majority of Naqada I there were single villages, which might have formed temporary alliances with other villages, but in fact were politically independent. Most of these villages consisted of 50 to 200 habitants. However it is possible that some of these alliances grew up to the bigger towns consisted 1,000 or 2,000 people.
Hierakonpolis and Abydos: "some kind of “royal” authority or primitive chiefdom existed about 3700 BCE, well before the Predynastic kings of Abydos"
[3]
It is during Naqada IC that these towns and villages started to unite and polities began to form. Now instead of scattered villages, there are a few chiefdoms with the town-centres, called sometimes pre-states and later, as the unification and polity development proceed, proto-states. So the rapidly changes in the polity population coded above is not only an effect of growing population but also or even first of all the result of development of the chiefdoms size.
The exact time and the spreed of unification is not known so scholars can only show the level of changes in some distinguishing point. And this is exactly what G. P. Gilbert did.
Hierakonpolis Naqada I
5,000-7,500: 3400-3000 BCE what is the reference for this?
Naqada I
[2,544-10,922] what is the reference for this?
In the Naqada I period people from the Hierakonpolis region inhabited mainly the edge of the desert. But later the situation changed. People started to move to the floodpain where the main zone of settlement quickly emerged. The population of the desert sites considerably decrease. M. A. Hoffman estimated it as:
Naqada I/II
185-835
[4]
[1]: G. p. Gilbert: 2004. Weapons, Warriors and Warfare in Early Egypt. Archaeopress: Oxford. pg: 108.
[2]: Ciałowicz, M.A. 1999. Początki cywilizacji egipskiej. Warszawa-Kraków: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.pg:156.
[3]: (Juan Carlos Moreno García 2013, 188 cite: Building the Pharaonic state: Territory, elite, and power in ancient Egypt in the 3rd millennium BCE http://www.upenn.edu/pennpress/book/toc/15127.html)
[4]: Hoffman, M. A. 1982. The Predynastic of Hierakonpolis - an Interim Report. Cairo: Cairo University Herbarium. pg:143-144
People.
Naqada IC-IIB
[1]
Hoffman thought that in most of villages less than 75 people lived. In centers there were much more
[2]
over 13,000
Naqadian Egypt is a quasi-polity, or rather a collection of quasi polities. During the majority of Naqada I there were single villages, which might have formed temporary alliances with other villages, but in fact were politically independent. Most of these villages consisted of 50 to 200 habitants. However it is possible that some of these alliances grew up to the bigger towns consisted 1,000 or 2,000 people.
Hierakonpolis and Abydos: "some kind of “royal” authority or primitive chiefdom existed about 3700 BCE, well before the Predynastic kings of Abydos"
[3]
It is during Naqada IC that these towns and villages started to unite and polities began to form. Now instead of scattered villages, there are a few chiefdoms with the town-centres, called sometimes pre-states and later, as the unification and polity development proceed, proto-states. So the rapidly changes in the polity population coded above is not only an effect of growing population but also or even first of all the result of development of the chiefdoms size.
The exact time and the spreed of unification is not known so scholars can only show the level of changes in some distinguishing point. And this is exactly what G. P. Gilbert did.
Hierakonpolis Naqada I
5,000-7,500: 3400-3000 BCE what is the reference for this?
Naqada I
[2,544-10,922] what is the reference for this?
In the Naqada I period people from the Hierakonpolis region inhabited mainly the edge of the desert. But later the situation changed. People started to move to the floodpain where the main zone of settlement quickly emerged. The population of the desert sites considerably decrease. M. A. Hoffman estimated it as:
Naqada I/II
185-835
[4]
[1]: G. p. Gilbert: 2004. Weapons, Warriors and Warfare in Early Egypt. Archaeopress: Oxford. pg: 108.
[2]: Ciałowicz, M.A. 1999. Początki cywilizacji egipskiej. Warszawa-Kraków: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.pg:156.
[3]: (Juan Carlos Moreno García 2013, 188 cite: Building the Pharaonic state: Territory, elite, and power in ancient Egypt in the 3rd millennium BCE http://www.upenn.edu/pennpress/book/toc/15127.html)
[4]: Hoffman, M. A. 1982. The Predynastic of Hierakonpolis - an Interim Report. Cairo: Cairo University Herbarium. pg:143-144
People.
Naqada IC-IIB
[1]
Hoffman thought that in most of villages less than 75 people lived. In centers there were much more
[2]
over 13,000
Naqadian Egypt is a quasi-polity, or rather a collection of quasi polities. During the majority of Naqada I there were single villages, which might have formed temporary alliances with other villages, but in fact were politically independent. Most of these villages consisted of 50 to 200 habitants. However it is possible that some of these alliances grew up to the bigger towns consisted 1,000 or 2,000 people.
Hierakonpolis and Abydos: "some kind of “royal” authority or primitive chiefdom existed about 3700 BCE, well before the Predynastic kings of Abydos"
[3]
It is during Naqada IC that these towns and villages started to unite and polities began to form. Now instead of scattered villages, there are a few chiefdoms with the town-centres, called sometimes pre-states and later, as the unification and polity development proceed, proto-states. So the rapidly changes in the polity population coded above is not only an effect of growing population but also or even first of all the result of development of the chiefdoms size.
The exact time and the spreed of unification is not known so scholars can only show the level of changes in some distinguishing point. And this is exactly what G. P. Gilbert did.
Hierakonpolis Naqada I
5,000-7,500: 3400-3000 BCE what is the reference for this?
Naqada I
[2,544-10,922] what is the reference for this?
In the Naqada I period people from the Hierakonpolis region inhabited mainly the edge of the desert. But later the situation changed. People started to move to the floodpain where the main zone of settlement quickly emerged. The population of the desert sites considerably decrease. M. A. Hoffman estimated it as:
Naqada I/II
185-835
[4]
[1]: G. p. Gilbert: 2004. Weapons, Warriors and Warfare in Early Egypt. Archaeopress: Oxford. pg: 108.
[2]: Ciałowicz, M.A. 1999. Początki cywilizacji egipskiej. Warszawa-Kraków: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.pg:156.
[3]: (Juan Carlos Moreno García 2013, 188 cite: Building the Pharaonic state: Territory, elite, and power in ancient Egypt in the 3rd millennium BCE http://www.upenn.edu/pennpress/book/toc/15127.html)
[4]: Hoffman, M. A. 1982. The Predynastic of Hierakonpolis - an Interim Report. Cairo: Cairo University Herbarium. pg:143-144
KM2. AD: estimate for 3800 BCE has been changed to 5-20 square kilometers to reflect the territory that could have been controlled by a village for agricultural/foraging purposes. Considering that Hierakonpolis covered at least 7.5km2 the range should allow for variations.
Upper Egypt is the core territory of Naqada culture.
This describes a 7.5km2, 750ha site if taken as a square
In the Naqada I period Hierakonpolis occupation "stretched for over 2.5 kilometers along the edge of the desert and back almost 3 kilometers into the great wadi that bisects the site"
[1]
Naqada I: A few thousand meters-3 ha
[2]
; Naqada II-III: uncoded quasi-polities
At the end of Naqada I the villages started to united, first creating chiefdoms/nome pre-states and in the Naqada III or even in the end of Naqada II - proto-states. The size of those polities varied and changed during the process of state formation. That remains uncoded.
[1]: Friedman, R. 2011. "Hierakonpolis". [in:] Before the Pyramids. The Orygin of Egyptian Cyvilization. Teeter, E.[ed.]. Chicago: The Oriental Instytute of the University of Chicago. pg: 34.
[2]: Ciałowicz, K. M. 1999. Początki cywilizacji egipskiej. Warszawa-Kraków: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN. pg: 110
KM2. AD: estimate for 3800 BCE has been changed to 5-20 square kilometers to reflect the territory that could have been controlled by a village for agricultural/foraging purposes. Considering that Hierakonpolis covered at least 7.5km2 the range should allow for variations.
Upper Egypt is the core territory of Naqada culture.
This describes a 7.5km2, 750ha site if taken as a square
In the Naqada I period Hierakonpolis occupation "stretched for over 2.5 kilometers along the edge of the desert and back almost 3 kilometers into the great wadi that bisects the site"
[1]
Naqada I: A few thousand meters-3 ha
[2]
; Naqada II-III: uncoded quasi-polities
At the end of Naqada I the villages started to united, first creating chiefdoms/nome pre-states and in the Naqada III or even in the end of Naqada II - proto-states. The size of those polities varied and changed during the process of state formation. That remains uncoded.
[1]: Friedman, R. 2011. "Hierakonpolis". [in:] Before the Pyramids. The Orygin of Egyptian Cyvilization. Teeter, E.[ed.]. Chicago: The Oriental Instytute of the University of Chicago. pg: 34.
[2]: Ciałowicz, K. M. 1999. Początki cywilizacji egipskiej. Warszawa-Kraków: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN. pg: 110
People. "[O]n average an Early Predynastic chiefdom consisted of a population of over 13,000 with a ceremonial centre or town including outlying settlements, as well as many villages."
150 estimate from previous RA.
50-200: [3900-3800]-3500 BCE; 13,000: 3500-3400 BCE; 50,000: 3400-3200 BCE; 60,000: 3400-3000 BCE
Naqada IA-B
[1]
Hoffman thought that in most of villages less than 75 people lived. In centers there were much more
[2]
50-200
[3]
Naqada IC-IIB
[1]
Hoffman thought that in most of villages less than 75 people lived. In centers there were much more
[2]
over 13,000
Naqadian Egypt is a quasi-polity, or rather a collection of quasi polities. During the majority of Naqada I there were single villages, which might have formed temporary alliances with other villages, but in fact were politically independent. Most of these villages consisted of 50 to 200 habitants. However it is possible that some of these alliances grew up to the bigger towns consisting of 1,000 or 2,000 people.
It is during Naqada IC that these towns and villages started to unite and polities began to form. Now instead of scattered villages, there are a few chiefdoms with the town-centres, called sometimes pre-states and later, as the unification and polity development proceed, proto-states. So the rapid changes in the polity population coded above is not only an effect of growing population but also or even first of all the result of development of the chiefdoms size.
The exact time and the spreed of unification is not known so scholars can only show the level of changes in some distinguishing point. And this is exactly what G. P. Gilbert did.
[1]: G. p. Gilbert: 2004. Weapons, Warriors and Warfare in Early Egypt. Archaeopress: Oxford. pg: 108.
[2]: Ciałowicz, M.A. 1999. Początki cywilizacji egipskiej. Warszawa-Kraków: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.pg:156.
[3]: Wilkinson, T. 2003. Genesis of the Pharaohs: Dramatic New Discoveries Rewrite the Origins of Ancient Egypt. London:Thames & Hudson. pg: 120.
People. "[O]n average an Early Predynastic chiefdom consisted of a population of over 13,000 with a ceremonial centre or town including outlying settlements, as well as many villages."
150 estimate from previous RA.
50-200: [3900-3800]-3500 BCE; 13,000: 3500-3400 BCE; 50,000: 3400-3200 BCE; 60,000: 3400-3000 BCE
Naqada IA-B
[1]
Hoffman thought that in most of villages less than 75 people lived. In centers there were much more
[2]
50-200
[3]
Naqada IC-IIB
[1]
Hoffman thought that in most of villages less than 75 people lived. In centers there were much more
[2]
over 13,000
Naqadian Egypt is a quasi-polity, or rather a collection of quasi polities. During the majority of Naqada I there were single villages, which might have formed temporary alliances with other villages, but in fact were politically independent. Most of these villages consisted of 50 to 200 habitants. However it is possible that some of these alliances grew up to the bigger towns consisting of 1,000 or 2,000 people.
It is during Naqada IC that these towns and villages started to unite and polities began to form. Now instead of scattered villages, there are a few chiefdoms with the town-centres, called sometimes pre-states and later, as the unification and polity development proceed, proto-states. So the rapid changes in the polity population coded above is not only an effect of growing population but also or even first of all the result of development of the chiefdoms size.
The exact time and the spreed of unification is not known so scholars can only show the level of changes in some distinguishing point. And this is exactly what G. P. Gilbert did.
[1]: G. p. Gilbert: 2004. Weapons, Warriors and Warfare in Early Egypt. Archaeopress: Oxford. pg: 108.
[2]: Ciałowicz, M.A. 1999. Początki cywilizacji egipskiej. Warszawa-Kraków: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.pg:156.
[3]: Wilkinson, T. 2003. Genesis of the Pharaohs: Dramatic New Discoveries Rewrite the Origins of Ancient Egypt. London:Thames & Hudson. pg: 120.
1: 4000-3650 BCE; 2: 3650-3000 BCE
[1]
Naqada IA-B: Villages
Nagada IC-III: chiefdoms/proto-states centers. Villages
Naqada IC-IIB
[2]
Hoffman thought that in most of villages less than 75 people lived. In centers there were much more
[3]
over 13,000
"The Predynastic towns were probably not major centers of population and their function must have been primarily symbolic of a new order of life and a center of sacred shrine and deities. There were probably no more than a few towns and perhaps only two important ones in all of Upper Egypt - South Town and Hierakonpolis (Kemp, 1977)."
[4]
Naqada IC-IIB
[2]
Hoffman thought that in most of villages less than 75 people lived. In centers there were much more
[3]
over 13,000
Naqadian Egypt is a quasi-polity, or rather a collection of quasi polities. During the majority of Naqada I there were single villages, which might have formed temporary alliances with other villages, but in fact were politically independent. Most of these villages consisted of 50 to 200 habitants. However it is possible that some of these alliances grew up to the bigger towns consisted 1,000 or 2,000 people.
It is during Naqada IC that these towns and villages started to unite and polities began to form. Now instead of scattered villages, there are a few chiefdoms with the town-centres, called sometimes pre-states and later, as the unification and polity development proceed, proto-states. So the rapidly changes in the polity population coded above is not only an effect of growing population but also or even first of all the result of development of the chiefdoms size.
The exact time and the spreed of unification is not known so scholars can only show the level of changes in some distinguishing point. And this is exactly what G. P. Gilbert did.
[1]: Bard, A. 1994. From farmers to pharaohs: mortuary evidence for the rise of complex society in Egypt. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press. pg: 135.
[2]: G. p. Gilbert: 2004. Weapons, Warriors and Warfare in Early Egypt. Archaeopress: Oxford. pg: 108.
[3]: Ciałowicz, M.A. 1999. Początki cywilizacji egipskiej. Warszawa-Kraków: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.pg:156.
[4]: (Hassan 1988, 162)
1: 4000-3650 BCE; 2: 3650-3000 BCE
[1]
Naqada IA-B: Villages
Nagada IC-III: chiefdoms/proto-states centers. Villages
Naqada IC-IIB
[2]
Hoffman thought that in most of villages less than 75 people lived. In centers there were much more
[3]
over 13,000
"The Predynastic towns were probably not major centers of population and their function must have been primarily symbolic of a new order of life and a center of sacred shrine and deities. There were probably no more than a few towns and perhaps only two important ones in all of Upper Egypt - South Town and Hierakonpolis (Kemp, 1977)."
[4]
Naqada IC-IIB
[2]
Hoffman thought that in most of villages less than 75 people lived. In centers there were much more
[3]
over 13,000
Naqadian Egypt is a quasi-polity, or rather a collection of quasi polities. During the majority of Naqada I there were single villages, which might have formed temporary alliances with other villages, but in fact were politically independent. Most of these villages consisted of 50 to 200 habitants. However it is possible that some of these alliances grew up to the bigger towns consisted 1,000 or 2,000 people.
It is during Naqada IC that these towns and villages started to unite and polities began to form. Now instead of scattered villages, there are a few chiefdoms with the town-centres, called sometimes pre-states and later, as the unification and polity development proceed, proto-states. So the rapidly changes in the polity population coded above is not only an effect of growing population but also or even first of all the result of development of the chiefdoms size.
The exact time and the spreed of unification is not known so scholars can only show the level of changes in some distinguishing point. And this is exactly what G. P. Gilbert did.
[1]: Bard, A. 1994. From farmers to pharaohs: mortuary evidence for the rise of complex society in Egypt. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press. pg: 135.
[2]: G. p. Gilbert: 2004. Weapons, Warriors and Warfare in Early Egypt. Archaeopress: Oxford. pg: 108.
[3]: Ciałowicz, M.A. 1999. Początki cywilizacji egipskiej. Warszawa-Kraków: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.pg:156.
[4]: (Hassan 1988, 162)
No more than 1 level. Does not have to be professional to have levels.
The introduction of professional priesthood occurred during the New Kingdom
[1]
As there is no professional priesthood in the Dynastic Egypt up to New Kingdom it seems improbable that this institution existed in the predynastic times
[2]
[1]: Doxey, D. M. 2001. "Priesthood". [in:] Redford, D. B. [ed.]. The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt 3. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Pg: 77.
[2]: Doxey D. M. 2001. "Priesthood".[in;] Redford, D. B. [ed.]. The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt. Oxford:Oxford University Press. pg: 77.
In the Predynastic period there is no proof of the existence of professional army. There is also no hieroglyphic sign meaning "army" by Dynastic Period. Moreover, in Ancient Egyptian unitary state, introduction of regular army took place during the New Kingdom
[1]
.
There can be military levels without an army if there is warfare.
[1]: Shaw, I. 1991 Egyptian Warfare and Weapons. Buckinghamshire: Shire Publications. pg: 26.
Hierakonpolis and Abydos: "some kind of “royal” authority or primitive chiefdom existed about 3700 BCE, well before the Predynastic kings of Abydos"
[1]
At the end of Naqada I the villages started to unite, first creating chiefdoms/nome pre-states and in the Naqada III or even in the end of Naqada II - proto-states. The size of those polities varied and changed during the proces of state formation. That remains uncoded.
[1]: (Juan Carlos Moreno García 2013, 188 cite: Building the Pharaonic state: Territory, elite, and power in ancient Egypt in the 3rd millennium BCE http://www.upenn.edu/pennpress/book/toc/15127.html)
There is no convincing evidence for functioning of the warrior class. G. P. Gilbert made a suggestion of existence of " the „universal warrior” type, with each man being required to maintain their efficiency as a trained warrior and being willing to participiate in warfare when required" and made an assumption that in Naqada III period "there was a trend towards the development of a "warrior arictocracy” within the Egyptian society. However (...) the king worked together with the ideology (...)prevented the “warrior aristocracy” from gaining a strength" [1] .
[1]: Gilbert, G. P. 2004. Weapons, Warriors and Warfare in Early Egypt. Oxford: Archaeopress. pg: 86.
The introduction of professional priesthood occurred during the New Kingdom [1] As there is no professional priesthood in the Dynastic Egypt up to New Kingdom it seems improbable that this institution existed in the predynastic times [2]
[1]: Doxey, D. M. 2001. "Priesthood". [in:] Redford, D. B. [ed.]. The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt 3. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Pg: 77.
[2]: Doxey D. M. 2001. "Priesthood".[in;] Redford, D. B. [ed.]. The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt. Oxford:Oxford University Press. pg: 77.
In the Predynastic period there is no proof of the existence of professional army. There is also no hieroglyphic sign meaning "army" by Dynastic Period. Moreover, in Ancient Egyptian unitary state, introduction of regular army took place during the New Kingdom [1] .
[1]: Shaw, I. 1991 Egyptian Warfare and Weapons. Buckinghamshire: Shire Publications. pg: 26.
"There is no field evidence of irrigation during the Gerzean as suggested by Krzyzaniak (1977), but some of the design motifs on Gerzean pots may be interpreted as canals." [1] The inhabitants of the Nile Valley were dependent on agriculture by c3800 BCE and "It has been noticed that in the end of Naqada I period, the climate became drier and Nile floods were declining. The fields could not be longer irrigated naturally. [2]
[1]: (Hassan 1988, 156)
[2]: Perez-Largacha, A. "Chiefs and Protodynastic Egypt. A hydraulic relation ?". Archéo-Nil 5 (1995): 80-81.
Earliest wells date to the el Napta/Al Jerar Early Neolithic (c6000-5250 BC) at Napta Playa in the Western Desert. There is written evidence for wells from 4th dynasty Old Kingdom. "Most of the inscriptions seem to be connected to mining or quarrying activities in the Eastern Desert or travel routes from the Nile Valley towards the Red Sea." [1] A pipe network that connects the drinking water to individual settlements is not known to exist / not thought to be present.
[1]: (Franzmeier 2007)
The earliest phonetic hieroglyphic writing was found in the tomb J at the Abytos Cemetary U - on the pottery vessels and small bone/ivory labels [1] . They are dated to Naqada IIIA. But it should be noticed that already in Naqada I, signs similar to hieroglyphs have been found, especially on the pottery vessels (pot marks). However "none of these signs hints at the existence of phonograms, phonetic complements or detenninatives" and "the absence of an important component of the hieroglyphic writing system does not allow us to designate these signs as "hieroglyphic writing"" [2] . It can be rather treated as an abstract symbolic system [3] Still they can be precursors of "real" hieroglyphs.
[1]: Köhler, E. C. "Theories of State Formation". [in:] Wendrich, W. [ed.]. Egyptian Archaeology. Chichester: Blackwell Publishing. pg: 41.
[2]: Kahl, J. "Hieroglyphic Writing During the Fourth Millennium BC: an Analysis of Systems". Archeo-NiI 11 (2001); 122, 124.
[3]: Meza, A. 2012. ANCIENT EGYPT BEFORE WRITING: From Markings to Hieroglyphs. Bloomington: Xlibris Corporation. pg: 25.
The earliest phonetic hieroglyphic writing was found in the tomb J at the Abytos Cemetary U - on the pottery vessels and small bone/ivory labels [1] . They are dated to Naqada IIIA. But it should be noticed that already in Naqada I, signs similar to hieroglyphs have been found, especially on the pottery vessels (pot marks). However "none of these signs hints at the existence of phonograms, phonetic complements or detenninatives" and "the absence of an important component of the hieroglyphic writing system does not allow us to designate these signs as "hieroglyphic writing"" [2] . It can be rather treated as an abstract symbolic system [3]
[1]: Köhler, E. C. "Theories of State Formation". [in:] Wendrich, W. [ed.]. Egyptian Archaeology. Chichester: Blackwell Publishing. pg: 41.
[2]: Kahl, J. "Hieroglyphic Writing During the Fourth Millennium BC: an Analysis of Systems". Archeo-NiI 11 (2001); 122, 124.
[3]: Meza, A. 2012. ANCIENT EGYPT BEFORE WRITING: From Markings to Hieroglyphs. Bloomington: Xlibris Corporation. pg: 25.
The earliest phonetic hieroglyphic writing was found in the tomb J at the Abytos Cemetary U - on the pottery vessels and small bone/ivory labels [1] . They are dated to Naqada IIIA. But it should be noticed that already in Naqada I, signs similar to hieroglyphs have been found, especially on the pottery vessels (pot marks). However "none of these signs hints at the existence of phonograms, phonetic complements or detenninatives" and "the absence of an important component of the hieroglyphic writing system does not allow us to designate these signs as "hieroglyphic writing"" [2] . It can be rather treated as an abstract symbolic system [3]
[1]: Köhler, E. C. "Theories of State Formation". [in:] Wendrich, W. [ed.]. Egyptian Archaeology. Chichester: Blackwell Publishing. pg: 41.
[2]: Kahl, J. "Hieroglyphic Writing During the Fourth Millennium BC: an Analysis of Systems". Archeo-NiI 11 (2001); 122, 124.
[3]: Meza, A. 2012. ANCIENT EGYPT BEFORE WRITING: From Markings to Hieroglyphs. Bloomington: Xlibris Corporation. pg: 25.
examples: rock-art, pottery paintings, pot-marks, iconography on the palettes and maceheads.
The earliest phonetic hieroglyphic writing was found in the tomb J at the Abytos Cemetary U - on the pottery vessels and small bone/ivory labels [1] . They are dated to Naqada IIIA. But it should be noticed that already in Naqada I, signs similar to hieroglyphs have been found, especially on the pottery vessels (pot marks). However "none of these signs hints at the existence of phonograms, phonetic complements or detenninatives" and "the absence of an important component of the hieroglyphic writing system does not allow us to designate these signs as "hieroglyphic writing"" [2] . It can be rather treated as an abstract symbolic system [3]
[1]: Köhler, E. C. "Theories of State Formation". [in:] Wendrich, W. [ed.]. Egyptian Archaeology. Chichester: Blackwell Publishing. pg: 41.
[2]: Kahl, J. "Hieroglyphic Writing During the Fourth Millennium BC: an Analysis of Systems". Archeo-NiI 11 (2001); 122, 124.
[3]: Meza, A. 2012. ANCIENT EGYPT BEFORE WRITING: From Markings to Hieroglyphs. Bloomington: Xlibris Corporation. pg: 25.
The earliest phonetic hieroglyphic writing was found in the tomb J at the Abytos Cemetary U - on the pottery vessels and small bone/ivory labels [1] . They are dated to Naqada IIIA. But it should be noticed that already in Naqada I, signs similar to hieroglyphs have been found, especially on the pottery vessels (pot marks). However "none of these signs hints at the existence of phonograms, phonetic complements or detenninatives" and "the absence of an important component of the hieroglyphic writing system does not allow us to designate these signs as "hieroglyphic writing"" [2] . It can be rather treated as an abstract symbolic system [3]
[1]: Köhler, E. C. "Theories of State Formation". [in:] Wendrich, W. [ed.]. Egyptian Archaeology. Chichester: Blackwell Publishing. pg: 41.
[2]: Kahl, J. "Hieroglyphic Writing During the Fourth Millennium BC: an Analysis of Systems". Archeo-NiI 11 (2001); 122, 124.
[3]: Meza, A. 2012. ANCIENT EGYPT BEFORE WRITING: From Markings to Hieroglyphs. Bloomington: Xlibris Corporation. pg: 25.
The earliest phonetic hieroglyphic writing was found in the tomb J at the Abytos Cemetary U - on the pottery vessels and small bone/ivory labels [1] . They are dated to Naqada IIIA. But it should be noticed that already in Naqada I, signs similar to hieroglyphs have been found, especially on the pottery vessels (pot marks). However "none of these signs hints at the existence of phonograms, phonetic complements or detenninatives" and "the absence of an important component of the hieroglyphic writing system does not allow us to designate these signs as "hieroglyphic writing"" [2] . It can be rather treated as an abstract symbolic system [3]
[1]: Köhler, E. C. "Theories of State Formation". [in:] Wendrich, W. [ed.]. Egyptian Archaeology. Chichester: Blackwell Publishing. pg: 41.
[2]: Kahl, J. "Hieroglyphic Writing During the Fourth Millennium BC: an Analysis of Systems". Archeo-NiI 11 (2001); 122, 124.
[3]: Meza, A. 2012. ANCIENT EGYPT BEFORE WRITING: From Markings to Hieroglyphs. Bloomington: Xlibris Corporation. pg: 25.
The earliest phonetic hieroglyphic writing was found in the tomb J at the Abytos Cemetary U - on the pottery vessels and small bone/ivory labels [1] . They are dated to Naqada IIIA. But it should be noticed that already in Naqada I, signs similar to hieroglyphs have been found, especially on the pottery vessels (pot marks). However "none of these signs hints at the existence of phonograms, phonetic complements or detenninatives" and "the absence of an important component of the hieroglyphic writing system does not allow us to designate these signs as "hieroglyphic writing"" [2] . It can be rather treated as an abstract symbolic system [3]
[1]: Köhler, E. C. "Theories of State Formation". [in:] Wendrich, W. [ed.]. Egyptian Archaeology. Chichester: Blackwell Publishing. pg: 41.
[2]: Kahl, J. "Hieroglyphic Writing During the Fourth Millennium BC: an Analysis of Systems". Archeo-NiI 11 (2001); 122, 124.
[3]: Meza, A. 2012. ANCIENT EGYPT BEFORE WRITING: From Markings to Hieroglyphs. Bloomington: Xlibris Corporation. pg: 25.
The earliest phonetic hieroglyphic writing was found in the tomb J at the Abytos Cemetary U - on the pottery vessels and small bone/ivory labels [1] . They are dated to Naqada IIIA. But it should be noticed that already in Naqada I, signs similar to hieroglyphs have been found, especially on the pottery vessels (pot marks). However "none of these signs hints at the existence of phonograms, phonetic complements or detenninatives" and "the absence of an important component of the hieroglyphic writing system does not allow us to designate these signs as "hieroglyphic writing"" [2] . It can be rather treated as an abstract symbolic system [3]
[1]: Köhler, E. C. "Theories of State Formation". [in:] Wendrich, W. [ed.]. Egyptian Archaeology. Chichester: Blackwell Publishing. pg: 41.
[2]: Kahl, J. "Hieroglyphic Writing During the Fourth Millennium BC: an Analysis of Systems". Archeo-NiI 11 (2001); 122, 124.
[3]: Meza, A. 2012. ANCIENT EGYPT BEFORE WRITING: From Markings to Hieroglyphs. Bloomington: Xlibris Corporation. pg: 25.
The earliest phonetic hieroglyphic writing was found in the tomb J at the Abytos Cemetary U - on the pottery vessels and small bone/ivory labels [1] . They are dated to Naqada IIIA. But it should be noticed that already in Naqada I, signs similar to hieroglyphs have been found, especially on the pottery vessels (pot marks). However "none of these signs hints at the existence of phonograms, phonetic complements or detenninatives" and "the absence of an important component of the hieroglyphic writing system does not allow us to designate these signs as "hieroglyphic writing"" [2] . It can be rather treated as an abstract symbolic system [3]
[1]: Köhler, E. C. "Theories of State Formation". [in:] Wendrich, W. [ed.]. Egyptian Archaeology. Chichester: Blackwell Publishing. pg: 41.
[2]: Kahl, J. "Hieroglyphic Writing During the Fourth Millennium BC: an Analysis of Systems". Archeo-NiI 11 (2001); 122, 124.
[3]: Meza, A. 2012. ANCIENT EGYPT BEFORE WRITING: From Markings to Hieroglyphs. Bloomington: Xlibris Corporation. pg: 25.
The earliest phonetic hieroglyphic writing was found in the tomb J at the Abytos Cemetary U - on the pottery vessels and small bone/ivory labels [1] . They are dated to Naqada IIIA. But it should be noticed that already in Naqada I, signs similar to hieroglyphs have been found, especially on the pottery vessels (pot marks). However "none of these signs hints at the existence of phonograms, phonetic complements or detenninatives" and "the absence of an important component of the hieroglyphic writing system does not allow us to designate these signs as "hieroglyphic writing"" [2] . It can be rather treated as an abstract symbolic system [3]
[1]: Köhler, E. C. "Theories of State Formation". [in:] Wendrich, W. [ed.]. Egyptian Archaeology. Chichester: Blackwell Publishing. pg: 41.
[2]: Kahl, J. "Hieroglyphic Writing During the Fourth Millennium BC: an Analysis of Systems". Archeo-NiI 11 (2001); 122, 124.
[3]: Meza, A. 2012. ANCIENT EGYPT BEFORE WRITING: From Markings to Hieroglyphs. Bloomington: Xlibris Corporation. pg: 25.
The earliest phonetic hieroglyphic writing was found in the tomb J at the Abytos Cemetary U - on the pottery vessels and small bone/ivory labels [1] . They are dated to Naqada IIIA. But it should be noticed that already in Naqada I, signs similar to hieroglyphs have been found, especially on the pottery vessels (pot marks). However "none of these signs hints at the existence of phonograms, phonetic complements or detenninatives" and "the absence of an important component of the hieroglyphic writing system does not allow us to designate these signs as "hieroglyphic writing"" [2] . It can be rather treated as an abstract symbolic system [3]
[1]: Köhler, E. C. "Theories of State Formation". [in:] Wendrich, W. [ed.]. Egyptian Archaeology. Chichester: Blackwell Publishing. pg: 41.
[2]: Kahl, J. "Hieroglyphic Writing During the Fourth Millennium BC: an Analysis of Systems". Archeo-NiI 11 (2001); 122, 124.
[3]: Meza, A. 2012. ANCIENT EGYPT BEFORE WRITING: From Markings to Hieroglyphs. Bloomington: Xlibris Corporation. pg: 25.
The earliest phonetic hieroglyphic writing was found in the tomb J at the Abytos Cemetary U - on the pottery vessels and small bone/ivory labels [1] . They are dated to Naqada IIIA. But it should be noticed that already in Naqada I, signs similar to hieroglyphs have been found, especially on the pottery vessels (pot marks). However "none of these signs hints at the existence of phonograms, phonetic complements or detenninatives" and "the absence of an important component of the hieroglyphic writing system does not allow us to designate these signs as "hieroglyphic writing"" [2] . It can be rather treated as an abstract symbolic system [3]
[1]: Köhler, E. C. "Theories of State Formation". [in:] Wendrich, W. [ed.]. Egyptian Archaeology. Chichester: Blackwell Publishing. pg: 41.
[2]: Kahl, J. "Hieroglyphic Writing During the Fourth Millennium BC: an Analysis of Systems". Archeo-NiI 11 (2001); 122, 124.
[3]: Meza, A. 2012. ANCIENT EGYPT BEFORE WRITING: From Markings to Hieroglyphs. Bloomington: Xlibris Corporation. pg: 25.
The earliest phonetic hieroglyphic writing was found in the tomb J at the Abytos Cemetary U - on the pottery vessels and small bone/ivory labels
[1]
. They are dated to Naqada IIIA. But it should be noticed that already in Naqada I, signs similar to hieroglyphs have been found, especially on the pottery vessels (pot marks). However "none of these signs hints at the existence of phonograms, phonetic complements or detenninatives" and "the absence of an important component of the hieroglyphic writing system does not allow us to designate these signs as "hieroglyphic writing""
[2]
. It can be rather treated as an abstract symbolic system
[3]
[1]: Köhler, E. C. "Theories of State Formation". [in:] Wendrich, W. [ed.]. Egyptian Archaeology. Chichester: Blackwell Publishing. pg: 41.
[2]: Kahl, J. "Hieroglyphic Writing During the Fourth Millennium BC: an Analysis of Systems". Archeo-NiI 11 (2001); 122, 124.
[3]: Meza, A. 2012. ANCIENT EGYPT BEFORE WRITING: From Markings to Hieroglyphs. Bloomington: Xlibris Corporation. pg: 25.
The earliest phonetic hieroglyphic writing was found in the tomb J at the Abytos Cemetary U - on the pottery vessels and small bone/ivory labels [1] . They are dated to Naqada IIIA. But it should be noticed that already in Naqada I, signs similar to hieroglyphs have been found, especially on the pottery vessels (pot marks). However "none of these signs hints at the existence of phonograms, phonetic complements or detenninatives" and "the absence of an important component of the hieroglyphic writing system does not allow us to designate these signs as "hieroglyphic writing"" [2] . It can be rather treated as an abstract symbolic system [3]
[1]: Köhler, E. C. "Theories of State Formation". [in:] Wendrich, W. [ed.]. Egyptian Archaeology. Chichester: Blackwell Publishing. pg: 41.
[2]: Kahl, J. "Hieroglyphic Writing During the Fourth Millennium BC: an Analysis of Systems". Archeo-NiI 11 (2001); 122, 124.
[3]: Meza, A. 2012. ANCIENT EGYPT BEFORE WRITING: From Markings to Hieroglyphs. Bloomington: Xlibris Corporation. pg: 25.
Copper metallurgy from 2500 BCE. [1] Spearheads and arrowheads initially flintstone and bone, later replaced by bronze. [2]
[1]: (Adam 1981, 235) Adam, S. 1981. “The Importance of Nubia: A Link between Central Africa and the Mediterranean.” In General History of Africa II: Ancient Civilizations of Africa, edited by G. Mokhtar, II:226-44. General History of Africa. Paris: UNESCO. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/8APQDQV3.
[2]: (Gnirs 2001)
bronze includes copper. Copper metallurgy from 2500 BCE. [1] Spearheads and arrowheads initially flintstone and bone, later replaced by bronze. [2]
[1]: (Adam 1981, 235) Adam, S. 1981. “The Importance of Nubia: A Link between Central Africa and the Mediterranean.” In General History of Africa II: Ancient Civilizations of Africa, edited by G. Mokhtar, II:226-44. General History of Africa. Paris: UNESCO. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/8APQDQV3.
[2]: (Gnirs 2001)
Tools or weapons discovered that cannot yet be adequately placed in either category include: bows, spears, lances, axes, boomerangs, staffs, clubs, slings, knives, adzes etc [1]
[1]: Gilbert, G. P. 2004. Weapons, Warriors and Warfare in Early Egypt. Archaeopress: Oxford. pg: 22-23, 70-71.
"Composite bows are known from both Mesopotamia and the Great Steppe from the III millennium BCE." [1] "The composite bows spread into Palestine around 1800 BCE and were introduced into Egypt by the Hyksos in 1700 BCE." [2]
[1]: Sergey A Nefedov, RAN Institute of History and Archaeology, Yekaterinburg, Russia. Personal Communication to Peter Turchin. January 2018.
[2]: (Roy 2015, 20) Kaushik Roy. 2015. Warfare in Pre-British India - 1500 BCE to 1740 CE. Routledge. London.
Summaries of the development of Egyptian weaponry usually begin with the Late Predynastic. However, swords appeared relatively late in Egypt (with Sherden mercenaries in the New Kingdom, Shaw 1991: 43-44), so it seems reasonable to infer absence at this stage. [1]
[1]: (Shaw 1991: 43-44) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/7J8H86XF.
Daggers present in burials in the Amratian Period. [1] absent: Naqada IA-IIB; present: Naqada IIC-III. Before Naqada period people used the flint daggers, but they later disappeared. Not earlier than during Naqada IIC-D the metal daggers appeared [2]
[1]: (Midant-Reynes 2000, 48)
[2]: Gilbert, G. P. 2004. Weapons, Warriors and Warfare in Early Egypt. Oxford: Archaeopress. pg: 43.
Daggers present in burials in the Amratian Period. [1] absent: Naqada IA-IIB; present: Naqada IIC-III. Before Naqada period people used the flint daggers, but they later disappeared. Not earlier than during Naqada IIC-D the metal daggers appeared [2]
[1]: (Midant-Reynes 2000, 48)
[2]: Gilbert, G. P. 2004. Weapons, Warriors and Warfare in Early Egypt. Oxford: Archaeopress. pg: 43.
While the dogs took part in hunting, it is unknown if they also participated in military expeditions.
No finds interpreted as armor or protection in fight. Worth noting that Egypt was relatively slow to develop defensive military technology.
No finds interpreted as armor or protection in fight. Worth noting that Egypt was relatively slow to develop defensive military technology.