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 II |
| Naqada | |
| This | |
| Hierakonpolis |
| Naqada II | |
| Naqada II | |
| Naqada IIC-D | |
| Naqada IIC | |
| Naqada IID | |
| Gerzean period |
| [5,000 to 15,000] people |
| [5,000 to 20,000] km2 |
| 13,000 people | 3500 BCE |
| 50,000 people | 3400 BCE 3300 BCE |
| present | |
| absent |
| unknown |
| absent | 3550 BCE 3401 BCE |
| present | 3400 BCE 3300 BCE |
| absent | 3400 BCE 3300 BCE |
| unknown |
| inferred absent |
| inferred absent |
| inferred absent |
| inferred absent |
| inferred absent |
| present | |
| absent |
| inferred absent |
| inferred absent |
| inferred absent |
| inferred absent |
| absent |
| absent |
| unknown |
| absent |
| inferred absent |
| present |
| inferred absent |
| inferred absent |
| absent |
| unknown |
| present |
| inferred absent |
| present |
| inferred absent |
| absent | 3500 BCE 3401 BCE |
| present | 3400 BCE 3301 BCE |
| present |
| Year Range | Naqada II (eg_naqada_2) was in: |
|---|---|
| (3550 BCE 3301 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.
inapplicable: Naqada was an independent culture. However, because of Naqadians’ expansion to the North in the late Naqada II, during that time it coexisted with Maadi sites in the Nile Delta.
Unknown
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.
Hierakonpolis [>5000]
[1]
.
EWA: Naqada is likely to have a greater population. would this be the figure of over 13,000?
Naqada IC-IIB: over 13,000
[2]
Hoffman thought that in most of villages less than 75 people lived. In centers there were much more
[3]
is the IC-IIB a typo? elsewhere we have written IIA-IIB. IC-IIB doesn’t make sense chronologically.
Naqada IIA-IIB: over 13,000
[4]
[1]: Hoffman, M. A. 1982. The Predynastic of Hierakonpolis - an Interim Report. Cairo: Cairo University Herbarium. pg: 144.
[2]: G. p. Gilbert: 2004. Weapons, Warriors and Warfare in Early Egypt. BAR International Series 1208: Oxford. pg: 108.
[3]: Ciałowicz, M.A. 1999. Początki cywilizacji egipskiej. Warszawa-Kraków: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.pg:156.
[4]: These are calculations made by G. p. Gilbert: 2004. Weapons, Warriors and Warfare in Early Egypt. Oxford; BAR International Series 1208. pg: 108.
KM2. Estimate will be somewhere under 25,000 KM2 and somewhere over 3,000 KM2. A code of [5,000-20,000] captures the main part of this range.
Upper Egypt is the core territory of Naqada culture.
Naqada II
"Gerzean culture extended from its source at Naqada northwards toward the Delta (Minshat Abu Omar) and southwards as far as Nubia."
[1]
Another more popular theory indicates a continuous existence of a few developing political and territorial chiefdoms or even a proto-states
[2]
[3]
[4]
The size of those polities varied and changed during the process of state formation. It seems, however, that until the end of Naqada IIB period (3400 BCE) only three polities in Upper Egypt prevailed (there is still a huge lack of information about the Middle Egypt region), which remain quite stable for the rest of the Naqada II period. The exact size of polity territories remains uncoded
[5]
[1]: (Midant-Reynes 2000, 50)
[2]: for example: Köhler, E. C. 2010. "Theories of State Formation". [in:] Wendrich, W. [ed.]. Egyptian Archaeology. Chichester: Blackwell Publishing. pg: 44, 47
[3]: Köhler, E. C. 2011. "The Rise of the Egyptian State" The Origins of Egyptian Civilization. Teeter, E.[ed.]. Chicago: The Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago. pg: 123
[4]: Savage, S. H. "Some Recent Trends in the Archaeology of Predynastic Egypt". Journal of Archaeological Research 9/2 (2001):129.
[5]: Andelkovic, B. 2011. "Political Organisation of Egypt in the Predynastic Period". [in:] Teeter, E. [ed.]. Before the Pyramids: The Origin of the Egyptian Civilization. Chichago: The Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago. pg: 28-29.
People.
EWA: standard ref is Michael Dee. Dee, Michael, David Wengrow, Andrew Shortland, Alice Stevenson, Fiona Brock, Linus Girdland Flink, and Christopher Ramsey 2013. An absolute chronology for early Egypt using radiocarbon dating and Bayesian statistical modelling. Proceedings of the Royal Society A 469 (2159, November, article no. 2013.0395), 1-10. This data need to be incorporated.
13,000: 3500-3400 BCE; 50,000: 3400-3200 BCE
Naqada IIA-IIB: over 13,000; Naqada IIC-D: 50,000
[1]
The ref here should be David Wengrow’s book.
[1]: These are calculations made by G. p. Gilbert: 2004. Weapons, Warriors and Warfare in Early Egypt. Oxford; BAR International Series 1208. pg: 108.
People.
EWA: standard ref is Michael Dee. Dee, Michael, David Wengrow, Andrew Shortland, Alice Stevenson, Fiona Brock, Linus Girdland Flink, and Christopher Ramsey 2013. An absolute chronology for early Egypt using radiocarbon dating and Bayesian statistical modelling. Proceedings of the Royal Society A 469 (2159, November, article no. 2013.0395), 1-10. This data need to be incorporated.
13,000: 3500-3400 BCE; 50,000: 3400-3200 BCE
Naqada IIA-IIB: over 13,000; Naqada IIC-D: 50,000
[1]
The ref here should be David Wengrow’s book.
[1]: These are calculations made by G. p. Gilbert: 2004. Weapons, Warriors and Warfare in Early Egypt. Oxford; BAR International Series 1208. pg: 108.
[1]
1. Large centres (Hierakonpolis, Naqada, Abydos...)
2. Minor centres (e.g. Adaima)
3. Villages (inferred)Gerzean: "The hierarchy of chiefs amounted in essence to a hierarchical management system. Village chiefs were "clients" of a district chief, who in turn was a client to a regional chief. Clients owed loyalty to their superior chief (Mair, 1967)."
"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)."
[2]
[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]: (Hassan 1988, 162)
"The scene in the Late Predynastic (Gerzean) Painted Tomb in Hierakonpolis (Kantor, 1944), showing a person smiting enemies in a manner prototypical of that of the later Pharaoh (Baines, 1987), indicates that regional, paramount chiefs may have commanded warriors who were mobilized by district and community chiefs."
[1]
1. Chief
2. Warriors
[1]: (Hassan 1988, 172)
Gerzean: "The hierarchy of chiefs amounted in essence to a hierarchical management system. Village chiefs were "clients" of a district chief, who in turn was a client to a regional chief. Clients owed loyalty to their superior chief (Mair, 1967)."
[1]
Hierakonpolis and Abydos: "some kind of “royal” authority or primitive chiefdom existed about 3700 BCE, well before the Predynastic kings of Abydos"
[2]
1. ?Proto-king
1-2. Regional chief (was this the king?)
3. District chief
4. Village chief
[1]: (Hassan 1988, 172)
[2]: (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)
[1] There is no convincing evidence for a functioning 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 participate in warfare when required" [2] .
[1]: Shaw, I. 1991 Egyptian Warfare and Weapons. Buckinghamshire: Shire Publications. pg: 26.
[2]: Gilbert, G. P. 2004. Weapons, Warriors and Warfare in Early Egypt. Oxford: BAR International Series 1208. pg: 86.
In the Predynastic period there is no proof of the existence of a professional army. There is probably also no hieroglyphic sign meaning "army" by Dynastic Period [1] . Moreover, in Ancient Egyptian unitary state, introduction of regular army took place during the New Kingdom [2] .
[1]: Kahl, J. 1994. Das System der ägyptischen Hieroglyphenschrift in der 0.-3. Dynastie. Göttinger Orientforschungen IV: Ägypten 29. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag. pg: 423.
[2]: Shaw, I. 1991 Egyptian Warfare and Weapons. Buckinghamshire: Shire Publications. pg: 26.
A few buildings existed, to which administrative function was assigned because of their architecture - bigger than for a typical household - and the findings from inside them. Example: the palace/administrative structure at HK34 at Hierakonpolis [1] or building complex in Naqada, South Town, associated with significant amount of seals, clay sealings, counters and tokens [2]
[1]: Friedman, R. 2011. "Hierakonpolis". [in:] Before the Pyramids.The Origin of Egyptian Civilization. Teeter, E.[ed.]. Chicago: The Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago. pg: 35.
[2]: Köhler, E. C. "Theories of State Formation". [in:] Wendrich, W. [ed.]. Egyptian Archaeology. Chichester: Blackwell Publishing. pg: 41.
A few buildings existed, to which administrative function was assigned because of their architecture - bigger than for a typical household - and the findings from inside them. Example: the palace/administrative structure at HK34 at Hierakonpolis [1] or building complex in Naqada, South Town, associated with significant amount of seals, clay sealings, counters and tokens [2]
[1]: Friedman, R. 2011. "Hierakonpolis". [in:] Before the Pyramids.The Origin of Egyptian Civilization. Teeter, E.[ed.]. Chicago: The Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago. pg: 35.
[2]: Köhler, E. C. "Theories of State Formation". [in:] Wendrich, W. [ed.]. Egyptian Archaeology. Chichester: Blackwell Publishing. pg: 41.
absent
Naqada I-IIB
Naqada IIC-III
disputed_present_absent
Trade and recording
Probably the earliest evidence of bureaucratic processes can be observed in relation to trade and recording, and controlling of access to some goods which was standing behind that trade. Presumably it was not so much a full-bureaucracy but a set of obligations for a certain group of people.
From the Naqada IIC and Naqada IID existence of an administrative apparatus is well represented in the works of Andelkovic (2004) and Hendrickx (2002).
[1]
[2]
However there is currently are only indirect sources of evidence. We can name “artifacts of administration”
[1]
such as cylinder and stamp seals, seal impressions, labels, etc.
Altogether, those artifacts and architecture indicate the beginning of bureaucracy apparatus on the quite developed if not centralized level. Not all scientists, however, agree that existence of full-time, centralized bureaucracy is without any doubt. They rather talk about a “simple form of administration.”
[3]
.
[1]: Andelković, B. 2004. "Paramets of Statehood in Predynastic Egypt". [in:] Hendrickx,S., Adams B. et al. [ed.]. Egypt at Its Origins: Studies in Memory of Barbara Adams : Proceedings of the International Conference "Origin of the State, Predynastic and Early Dynastic Egypt," Krakow, 28 August - 1st September 2002. Leuven:Peters Publishers. pg: 1048.
[2]: Honoré, E. 2007. "Earliest Cylinder-Seal Glyptic in Egypt: From Greater Mesopotamia to Naqada". paper from The International Conference in Naqada and Qus region’s heritage. Naqada. pg: 39,43.
[3]: Wengrow, D. 2006. The Archaeology of Early Egypt. Social Transformation of North-East Africa, 10,000 to 2650 BC. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pg:264.
absent
Naqada I-IIB
Naqada IIC-III
disputed_present_absent
Trade and recording
Probably the earliest evidence of bureaucratic processes can be observed in relation to trade and recording, and controlling of access to some goods which was standing behind that trade. Presumably it was not so much a full-bureaucracy but a set of obligations for a certain group of people.
From the Naqada IIC and Naqada IID existence of an administrative apparatus is well represented in the works of Andelkovic (2004) and Hendrickx (2002).
[1]
[2]
However there is currently are only indirect sources of evidence. We can name “artifacts of administration”
[1]
such as cylinder and stamp seals, seal impressions, labels, etc.
Altogether, those artifacts and architecture indicate the beginning of bureaucracy apparatus on the quite developed if not centralized level. Not all scientists, however, agree that existence of full-time, centralized bureaucracy is without any doubt. They rather talk about a “simple form of administration.”
[3]
.
[1]: Andelković, B. 2004. "Paramets of Statehood in Predynastic Egypt". [in:] Hendrickx,S., Adams B. et al. [ed.]. Egypt at Its Origins: Studies in Memory of Barbara Adams : Proceedings of the International Conference "Origin of the State, Predynastic and Early Dynastic Egypt," Krakow, 28 August - 1st September 2002. Leuven:Peters Publishers. pg: 1048.
[2]: Honoré, E. 2007. "Earliest Cylinder-Seal Glyptic in Egypt: From Greater Mesopotamia to Naqada". paper from The International Conference in Naqada and Qus region’s heritage. Naqada. pg: 39,43.
[3]: Wengrow, D. 2006. The Archaeology of Early Egypt. Social Transformation of North-East Africa, 10,000 to 2650 BC. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pg:264.
absent
Naqada I-IIB
Naqada IIC-III
disputed_present_absent
Trade and recording
Probably the earliest evidence of bureaucratic processes can be observed in relation to trade and recording, and controlling of access to some goods which was standing behind that trade. Presumably it was not so much a full-bureaucracy but a set of obligations for a certain group of people.
From the Naqada IIC and Naqada IID existence of an administrative apparatus is well represented in the works of Andelkovic (2004) and Hendrickx (2002).
[1]
[2]
However there is currently are only indirect sources of evidence. We can name “artifacts of administration”
[1]
such as cylinder and stamp seals, seal impressions, labels, etc.
Altogether, those artifacts and architecture indicate the beginning of bureaucracy apparatus on the quite developed if not centralized level. Not all scientists, however, agree that existence of full-time, centralized bureaucracy is without any doubt. They rather talk about a “simple form of administration.”
[3]
.
[1]: Andelković, B. 2004. "Paramets of Statehood in Predynastic Egypt". [in:] Hendrickx,S., Adams B. et al. [ed.]. Egypt at Its Origins: Studies in Memory of Barbara Adams : Proceedings of the International Conference "Origin of the State, Predynastic and Early Dynastic Egypt," Krakow, 28 August - 1st September 2002. Leuven:Peters Publishers. pg: 1048.
[2]: Honoré, E. 2007. "Earliest Cylinder-Seal Glyptic in Egypt: From Greater Mesopotamia to Naqada". paper from The International Conference in Naqada and Qus region’s heritage. Naqada. pg: 39,43.
[3]: Wengrow, D. 2006. The Archaeology of Early Egypt. Social Transformation of North-East Africa, 10,000 to 2650 BC. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pg:264.
irrigation canals or dams. a dam would also count as a water source infrastructure for agricultural use. "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] However, 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] - does this suggest irrigation systems appear as a response to climate change, when the "natural irrigation" (known before the Naqada II period) no longer became as effective? The closest and earliest evidence we have for digging associated with irrigation is the ceremonial inauguration of a waterwork on the macehead of the Scorpion King, which shows two workmen with hoes excavating while the king wields a large hoe and a man holding a basket anticipates the king’s action. The scene may represent not the digging of a canal but rather the ceremonial breaking of a dam to let floodwater flow into a natural irrigation basin, an act which was traditional in later times. [1] The iconographical interpretation of the mace-head of the Skorpion raises a lot of controversy and it is said that it could either be the canal building in a particular place (possibly Memphis), and not appearance of the irrigation system in general - or, there are also interpretations which are far from the canal digging. [3]
[1]: (Hassan 1988, 156)
[2]: Perez-Largacha, A. "Chiefs and Protodynastic Egypt. A hydraulic relation ?". Archéo-Nil 5 (1995): 80-81.
[3]: Ciałowicz, K. M. 1999. Początki cywilizacji egipskiej. Warszawa-Kraków: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN. pg: 338-339.
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] However, wells do not count as a supply system.
[1]: (Franzmeier 2007)
Boats were in widespread use, but there is no archaeological evidence of port structures in the Predynastic Period.
John Baines confirmed that these should not count as true written records until Naqada III. 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.
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.
Altogether, those artifacts and architecture indicate the beginning of bureaucracy apparatus on the quite developed if not centralized level. Not all scientists, however, agree that existence of full-time, centralized bureaucracy is without any doubt. They rather talk about a “simple form of administration.” [1] Messengers would be part of a simple form of administration.
[1]: Wengrow, D. 2006. The Archaeology of Early Egypt. Social Transformation of North-East Africa, 10,000 to 2650 BC. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pg:264.
Crenellated walls around dwellings common from Amratian Period (Naqada I) onwards [1] "In the northern part of South Town Petrie found the remains of a thick mudbrick wall, which appeared to be "a fortification with divisions within it" (Petrie and Quibell 1896: 54)." [2]
[1]: (Midant-Reynes 2000, 52)
[2]: (Bard 1994, 272)
Not mentioned for this period in Shaw’s (1991, 15-24) discussion of Egyptian fortifications. [1]
[1]: (Shaw 1991: 15-24) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/7J8H86XF.
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)
Summaries of the development of Egyptian weaponry usually begin with the Late Predynastic. //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] [2]
[1]: Gilbert, G. P. 2004. Weapons, Warriors and Warfare in Early Egypt. BAR International Series 1208: Oxford. pg: 22-23, 70-71.
[2]: K Hoffmeier in D B Redford. ed. 2001. The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt. Oxford. Have been able to discover there is a ’slings and stones’ section in volume P-Z 2: 409-10.
[1] "The bow was probably between 6,000 and 10,000 years old by the dawn of the Bronze Age". [2] "The principal weapons in the late Predynastic and Protodynastic Periods were undoubtedly the bow and arrow, spear, axe and mace. These are frequently shown in relief depictions of hunting and battle scenes (figure 18)." [3]
[1]: Gilbert, G. P. 2004. Weapons, Warriors and Warfare in Early Egypt. BAR International Series 1208: Oxford. pg: 34-70, 166-183
[2]: (Gabriel 2002, 27-28) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport.
[3]: (Shaw 1991: 31) Shaw, Ian. 1991. Egyptian Warfare and Weapons. Princes Risborough: Shire. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/7J8H86XF.
not among discovered weapons [1] "The principal weapons in the late Predynastic and Protodynastic Periods were undoubtedly the bow and arrow, spear, axe and mace. These are frequently shown in relief depictions of hunting and battle scenes (figure 18). Comparatively large numbers of maceheads have been excavated at late Predynastic and Protodynastic sites." [2]
[1]: Gilbert, G. P. 2004. Weapons, Warriors and Warfare in Early Egypt. BAR International Series 1208: Oxford. pg: 22-23, 70-71.
[2]: (Shaw 1991: 31) Shaw, Ian. 1991. Egyptian Warfare and Weapons. Princes Risborough: Shire. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/7J8H86XF.
[1] "Composite bows are known from both Mesopotamia and the Great Steppe from the III millennium BCE." [2] "The composite bows spread into Palestine around 1800 BCE and were introduced into Egypt by the Hyksos in 1700 BCE." [3]
[1]: Gilbert, G. P. 2004. Weapons, Warriors and Warfare in Early Egypt. BAR International Series 1208: Oxford. pg: 34-70, 166-183
[2]: Sergey A Nefedov, RAN Institute of History and Archaeology, Yekaterinburg, Russia. Personal Communication to Peter Turchin. January 2018.
[3]: (Roy 2015, 20) Kaushik Roy. 2015. Warfare in Pre-British India - 1500 BCE to 1740 CE. Routledge. London.
[1] Mace was the dominant weapon of war between 4000-2500 BCE in Sumer and until the Hyksos invasions (1700 BCE) in Egypt. [2] "The principal weapons in the late Predynastic and Protodynastic Periods were undoubtedly the bow and arrow, spear, axe and mace. These are frequently shown in relief depictions of hunting and battle scenes (figure 18). Comparatively large numbers of maceheads have been excavated at late Predynastic and Protodynastic sites." [3]
[1]: Gilbert, G. P. 2004. Weapons, Warriors and Warfare in Early Egypt. BAR International Series 1208: Oxford. pg: 34-70, 166-183
[2]: (Gabriel 2002, 24-25) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport.
[3]: (Shaw 1991: 31) Shaw, Ian. 1991. Egyptian Warfare and Weapons. Princes Risborough: Shire. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/7J8H86XF.
Long straight sword introduced to Egypt late in the New Kingdom period by Sherden mercenaries and the ’Sea Peoples.’ (C. el Mahdy). [1] "The principal weapons in the late Predynastic and Protodynastic Periods were undoubtedly the bow and arrow, spear, axe and mace. These are frequently shown in relief depictions of hunting and battle scenes (figure 18)." [2]
[1]: (Healy 1992)
[2]: (Shaw 1991: 31) Shaw, Ian. 1991. Egyptian Warfare and Weapons. Princes Risborough: Shire. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/7J8H86XF.
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] The principal weapons in the late Predynastic and Protodynastic Periods were undoubtedly the bow and arrow, spear, axe and mace. These are frequently shown in relief depictions of hunting and battle scenes (figure 18)." [2]
[1]: Gilbert, G. P. 2004. Weapons, Warriors and Warfare in Early Egypt. BAR International Series 1208: Oxford. pg: 22-23, 70-71.
[2]: (Shaw 1991: 31) Shaw, Ian. 1991. Egyptian Warfare and Weapons. Princes Risborough: Shire. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/7J8H86XF.
"The principal weapons in the late Predynastic and Protodynastic Periods were undoubtedly the bow and arrow, spear, axe and mace. These are frequently shown in relief depictions of hunting and battle scenes (figure 18)." [1]
[1]: (Shaw 1991: 31) Shaw, Ian. 1991. Egyptian Warfare and Weapons. Princes Risborough: Shire. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/7J8H86XF.
Before Naqada period people used the flint daggers, but they later disappeared. Metal daggers appeared no earlier than during Naqada IIC-D [1] "The principal weapons in the late Predynastic and Protodynastic Periods were undoubtedly the bow and arrow, spear, axe and mace. These are frequently shown in relief depictions of hunting and battle scenes (figure 18)." [2]
[1]: Gilbert, G. P. 2004. Weapons, Warriors and Warfare in Early Egypt. Oxford: BAR International Series 1208. pg: 43.
[2]: (Shaw 1991: 31) Shaw, Ian. 1991. Egyptian Warfare and Weapons. Princes Risborough: Shire. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/7J8H86XF.
Before Naqada period people used the flint daggers, but they later disappeared. Metal daggers appeared no earlier than during Naqada IIC-D [1] "The principal weapons in the late Predynastic and Protodynastic Periods were undoubtedly the bow and arrow, spear, axe and mace. These are frequently shown in relief depictions of hunting and battle scenes (figure 18)." [2]
[1]: Gilbert, G. P. 2004. Weapons, Warriors and Warfare in Early Egypt. Oxford: BAR International Series 1208. pg: 43.
[2]: (Shaw 1991: 31) Shaw, Ian. 1991. Egyptian Warfare and Weapons. Princes Risborough: Shire. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/7J8H86XF.
Present. [1] What did this reference say? Was it a tool? There was no/little armour in Egyptian warfare so why was the axe used? The socket axe, introduced by the Hyksos, was not used. Egyptians used a cutting axe with the blade insecurely tied to the shaft without a socket. [2] Ideally this variable should be split as there was a great difference in performance between these two axes. "The principal weapons in the late Predynastic and Protodynastic Periods were undoubtedly the bow and arrow, spear, axe and mace. These are frequently shown in relief depictions of hunting and battle scenes (figure 18)." [3]
[1]: Gilbert, G. P. 2004. Weapons, Warriors and Warfare in Early Egypt. BAR International Series 1208: Oxford. pg: 34-70, 166-183
[2]: (Gabriel and Metz 1991, 63, 61) Richard A Gabriel. Karen S Metz. 1991. The Military Capabilities of Ancient Armies. Greenwood Press. Westport.
[3]: (Shaw 1991: 31) Shaw, Ian. 1991. Egyptian Warfare and Weapons. Princes Risborough: Shire. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/7J8H86XF.
"During the Old Kingdom and the Middle Kingdom the Egyptians depended upon the donkey’s back for land transport. ... Well before 3000 BC donkeys in Upper Egypt were trained to carry loads." [1] Donkeys were domesticated in the Naqada II period. They were used for travel and trade. [2] The donkey was probably domesticated from the African wild ass ’in more than one place’ but for the Nubian subspecies 5500-4500 BCE in the Sudan. [3] "During the Bronze Age the standard mechanism of transport was the donkey (Egypt) or the solid-wheeled cart drawn by the onager (Sumer)." [4] There is no information if donkeys had a role in warfare.
[1]: (Drews 2017, 34) Robert Drews. 2017. Militarism and the Indo-Europeanizing of Europe. Routledge. Abingdon.
[2]: Nielsen, S. 1999. The Domestic Mode of Production and Beyond. København: Det Kongelige Nordiske Oldskriftselskab. pg: 323.
[3]: (Mitchell 2018, 39) Peter Mitchell 2018. The Donkey in Human History: An Archaeological Perspective. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
[4]: (Gabriel 2002, 7) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport.
While the dogs took part in hunting, it is unknown if they also participated in military expeditions.
"From the late Predynastic Period to the Middle Kingdom, Egyptian soldiers’ only bodily protection (apart from the occasional use of a band of webbing across the shoulders and chest) was supplied by long, roughly rectangular shields made of cowhide stretched over a wooden frame." [1] [1]
[1]: (Shaw 1991: 32) Shaw, Ian. 1991. Egyptian Warfare and Weapons. Princes Risborough: Shire. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/7J8H86XF.
Cowhides probably most common material. [1] "From the late Predynastic Period to the Middle Kingdom, Egyptian soldiers’ only bodily protection (apart from the occasional use of a band of webbing across the shoulders and chest) was supplied by long, roughly rectangular shields made of cowhide stretched over a wooden frame." [2]
[1]: (Hoffmeier 2001)
[2]: (Shaw 1991: 32) Shaw, Ian. 1991. Egyptian Warfare and Weapons. Princes Risborough: Shire. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/7J8H86XF.
Technology not yet available. "By 2100 BCE the victory stele of Naram Sin appears to show plate armor, and it is likely that plate armor had been in wide use for a few hundred years. Plate armor was constructed of thin bronze plates sewn to a leather shirt or jerkin." [1] Coding this as scale armor. "From the late Predynastic Period to the Middle Kingdom, Egyptian soldiers’ only bodily protection (apart from the occasional use of a band of webbing across the shoulders and chest) was supplied by long, roughly rectangular shields made of cowhide stretched over a wooden frame." [2] [2]
[1]: (Gabriel 2002, 21) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport.
[2]: (Shaw 1991: 32) Shaw, Ian. 1991. Egyptian Warfare and Weapons. Princes Risborough: Shire. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/7J8H86XF.
"From the late Predynastic Period to the Middle Kingdom, Egyptian soldiers’ only bodily protection (apart from the occasional use of a band of webbing across the shoulders and chest) was supplied by long, roughly rectangular shields made of cowhide stretched over a wooden frame." [1] [1]
[1]: (Shaw 1991: 32) Shaw, Ian. 1991. Egyptian Warfare and Weapons. Princes Risborough: Shire. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/7J8H86XF.
In Egyptian warfare 3000-1700 BCE the "only personal protection was the shield". [1] "From the late Predynastic Period to the Middle Kingdom, Egyptian soldiers’ only bodily protection (apart from the occasional use of a band of webbing across the shoulders and chest) was supplied by long, roughly rectangular shields made of cowhide stretched over a wooden frame." [2] [2]
[1]: (Gabriel 2002, 27) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport.
[2]: (Shaw 1991: 32) Shaw, Ian. 1991. Egyptian Warfare and Weapons. Princes Risborough: Shire. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/7J8H86XF.
"From the late Predynastic Period to the Middle Kingdom, Egyptian soldiers’ only bodily protection (apart from the occasional use of a band of webbing across the shoulders and chest) was supplied by long, roughly rectangular shields made of cowhide stretched over a wooden frame." [1] [1]
[1]: (Shaw 1991: 32) Shaw, Ian. 1991. Egyptian Warfare and Weapons. Princes Risborough: Shire. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/7J8H86XF.
Technology not yet available. Lamellar armour introduced by the Assyrians (9th century BCE?): "a shirt constructed of laminated layers of leather sewn or glued together. To the outer surface of this coat were attached fitted iron plates, each plate joined to the next at the edge with no overlap and held in place by stitching or gluing." [1] "From the late Predynastic Period to the Middle Kingdom, Egyptian soldiers’ only bodily protection (apart from the occasional use of a band of webbing across the shoulders and chest) was supplied by long, roughly rectangular shields made of cowhide stretched over a wooden frame." [2] [2]
[1]: (Gabriel 2002, 21) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport.
[2]: (Shaw 1991: 32) Shaw, Ian. 1991. Egyptian Warfare and Weapons. Princes Risborough: Shire. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/7J8H86XF.
In Egyptian warfare 3000-1700 BCE the "only personal protection was the shield". [1] Not until the 18th Dynasty c1500 BCE. [2] Earliest known helmet dates to 2500 BCE in Sumer. After this time use of helmets became widespread. [3] "From the late Predynastic Period to the Middle Kingdom, Egyptian soldiers’ only bodily protection (apart from the occasional use of a band of webbing across the shoulders and chest) was supplied by long, roughly rectangular shields made of cowhide stretched over a wooden frame." [4] [4]
[1]: (Gabriel 2002, 27) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport.
[2]: (Hoffmeier 2001) J K Hoffmeier in D B Redford. ed. 2001. The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
[3]: (Gabriel 2002, 22) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport.
[4]: (Shaw 1991: 32) Shaw, Ian. 1991. Egyptian Warfare and Weapons. Princes Risborough: Shire. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/7J8H86XF.
Iron chain mail not introduced until the third century BCE, probably by Celtic peoples. [1] "From the late Predynastic Period to the Middle Kingdom, Egyptian soldiers’ only bodily protection (apart from the occasional use of a band of webbing across the shoulders and chest) was supplied by long, roughly rectangular shields made of cowhide stretched over a wooden frame." [2] [2]
[1]: (Gabriel 2002, 21) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport.
[2]: (Shaw 1991: 32) Shaw, Ian. 1991. Egyptian Warfare and Weapons. Princes Risborough: Shire. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/7J8H86XF.
In Egyptian warfare 3000-1700 BCE the "only personal protection was the shield". [1] "From the late Predynastic Period to the Middle Kingdom, Egyptian soldiers’ only bodily protection (apart from the occasional use of a band of webbing across the shoulders and chest) was supplied by long, roughly rectangular shields made of cowhide stretched over a wooden frame." [2] [2]
[1]: (Gabriel 2002, 27) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport.
[2]: (Shaw 1991: 32) Shaw, Ian. 1991. Egyptian Warfare and Weapons. Princes Risborough: Shire. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/7J8H86XF.