reseña de askut in nubia, cambridge archaeological journal 7(1) (1997)

8/10/2019 Resea de Askut in Nubia, Cambridge Archaeological Journal 7(1) (1997)

1/16

Cambridge Archaeological Journalhttp://journals.cambridge.org/CAJ

Additional services for Cambridge Archaeological Journal:

Email alerts: Click here

Subscriptions: Click here

Commercial reprints: Click hereTerms of use : Click here

Askut in Nubia: the Economics and Ideology of Egyptian Imperialism inthe Second Millennium bc

Stuart Tyson Smith

Cambridge Archaeological Journal / Volume 7 / Issue 01 / April 1997, pp 123 - 137

DOI: 10.1017/S0959774300001505, Published online: 22 December 2008

Link to this article: http://journals.cambridge.org/abstract_S0959774300001505

How to cite this article:Stuart Tyson Smith (1997). Askut in Nubia: the Economics and Ideology of Egyptian Imperialism in the Second Millenniumbc. Cambridge Archaeological Journal, 7, pp 123-137 doi:10.1017/S0959774300001505

Request Permissions : Click here

Downloaded from http://journals.cambridge.org/CAJ, IP address: 158.109.94.33 on 02 Nov 2013


2/16

Cam bridge Archaeological Jou rnal 7:1 (1997), 123-37

Review Feature

Askut in Nubia: the Economics and Ideology of

Egyptian Imperialism in the Second Millennium

C

by Stuart Tyson Sm ith

London

New York (NY): Kegan Paul International, 1995;

ISBN 0-710 3-050 0-1, xviii + 242 pp .

The ideology of imperialism is a broad theme, replete with the

deeds

of powerful historical

figures glorying in their heroic achievem ents. T here are also the conquered peoples to

consider, often less centralized or

less

powerful than their

oppressors.

Yet we may well ask

what it is_ that drives states to conquer their neighbours? For alongside the rhetoric of

power and military success there is the daily reality of economic need or economicgreed.

Em pires exploit the ir subject provinces for ga in as well as glory. Em pire-builders a re not

only seeking

a place

in the annals of history; they

are also

looking or the massive material

rewards which successful territorial expansion can deliver.

The theme of this R eview

Feature

is the

ideology

of Egyptian expansionism in N ubia

during the 2nd m illennium BC. This was the 'golden age' of ancient E gypt,

associated

with

the names of rulers Tuthmosis III, Akhenaten and Ramesses II. For much of the New

Kingdom (1550-1000 BC)the Egyptians were at war in the Levant, founding and then

losing an empire which stretched almost to the Euphrates. At the same time they expanded

their control southwards into Nubia, a land poor in agricultural produce but rich in

minerals, above all

gold.

In Egyptian imperial ideology Nubia was represented as a

conquered province, a subjugated set of inferior

peoples.

This ideology sought to justify

Egyptian expansionism in terms of the righteous government of Egyptian kings, seeking

to impose order in place of chaos. The king was presented as universal conqueror, and it

was only natural that he should win control of neighbouring lands beyond the borders of

Egypt

itself.

Against this is the argument that imperial Egypt did not conquer Nubia for

conquest's sakenor m erely to bolster royal power and fulfil the grandiose expectations

of royal propaganda but as a calculated action with an economic objective. It was

Nubian resources rather than m ilitary glory w hich were the goal.

Such is the theory propounded by Stuart Tyson Smith in the volume considered

here. Egyptian rule in Nubia was re inforced by the construction of a series of forts along

the course of

the

Nile.

These

were first built during

the

Middle K ingdom, in an early phase

of Egyptian southward expansion, but were

reconquered

in the Nubian campaigns waged

123


3/16

Review Feature

by the first few rulers of the New Kingdom period. One of these forts

was

Askut,just

above

the Second Cataract, and now flooded by the waters behind the Aswan Dam . It is

excava tions at Askut in 1962-64 that Smith takes as the basis for his study of Egyp tian

imperialism in Nubia, charting the history of

the

site from its construction as a garrison

fort in the Midd le Kingdo m, the arrival of Egyp tian co lonists in around 1 800

BC,

its varied

fortunes during the Second Intermediate Period (1650-1550 BC)when

local

rulers seized

control, and its

recapture

by Egyptian

armies

at the start of the New Kingdom (c. 1550 BC .

Smith's thesis is that despite royal rhetoric, Egyptian imperialism in Nubia w as

driven largely by economic

objectives.

The purpose was to exploit the conquered territory

for maximum profit. In the

process,

Egyptian cultural influence spread deep into Nubia.

But it was economics, Smith maintains, w hich were the key:

Nubia in the New Kingdom was made over into an image of Egypt itself not to serve some

ideological need to replicate Egypt abroad but rather as the most efficient means of exploit-

ing the dramatic changes in the infrastructure which occurred during the Second Interme-

diatePeriod documented for the first time in detailarchaeologicallyat Askut. Theycould

with relative ease, co-opt the already extant Egyptian colonists, along with the fast accul-

turating native rulers. They naturally chose the best system available, that of Egyptitself

in order to make a self-sufficient colony. The extraction of wealth and trade in valuable

staple and wealthgoodsfueled unprecedented economic prosperity in Egypt and led to the

rapid expansion of the elite scribal class, culminating in the elaborate bureaucracy of the

New Kingdom. Royal control over the exotic wealth produced by Nubia servedas apowerful

marker of royal status and as political currency to ensure elite loyalty and to reward

participation by elites and commoners in the centralized state. Using ideology on the one

hand and socio-economic systems on the other, they created one of the world's earliest and

most successful expressions of Imperialism, using their Nubian colony tocreateprosperity

at home, and reinforce the position ofthestate both at home andabroad.

To what extent, then, was Egyptian involvement in Nubia driven by

hard headed

profit

motives? Was royal propaganda merely the

ideological

icing on the economic

cake?

And

how do these factors compare in empires elsewhere in the ancient world? To address these

questions, w e have invited four comm entators to give their own assessment of Smith's

analysis. The first two (Kemp and Trigger) are specialists in E gypt or Nubia; the others

(Postgate and Sinopoli) write from a comparative perspective. Smith himself was in the

field at the tim e of going to press, but w e

hope to

publish his response to

these

comm ents in

the next issue of CA].

124


4/16

Askut in Nubia

Why Empires Rise

Barry Kemp

McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research,

University of Cambridg e, Dow ning Street,

Cambridge, CB2 3ER

Imperialism is mostly the preserve of historians of

more recent periods, but the subject does, from time

to time, attract the attention of archaeologists and

anthropologists. Theirs tends to be an Olym pian per-

spective, one less influenced by the terms of the

debate of the imperialists themselves as they are

preserved in written records. The ancient Near East

fits uncomfortably here. It is sufficiently remote in

time and rich in archaeology to attract attention of

this kind; yet the abundance of written and artistic

sources provides a ready-made platform from which

to write history from the viewpoint of the partici-

pants. Stuart Tyson Smith's Askut is an attempt at

integration, which puts Egyptological sources

through the mill of theory.

Much of his book is a straightfor ward and very

valuable account and analysis of an archaeological

site in Sudanese Nubia, which was excavated in the

1960s ahead of the creation of the lake behind the

High Dam at Aswa n. On an island in the Nile a brick

fortress had been built as part of the military occu-

pation of Nub ia by the Egyptians in the Middle King-

dom (beginning aroun d 1850BC)(Figs. 1

2).

Three

centuries later it was modified in a way that re-

flected the very different style of domination of the

New Kingdom when, at many sites, temples and

Egyptian-style towns and civil administrations re-

placed the garrisons (Fig. 3). Although Askut is not

exactly a microcosm of w hat hap pened it was by-

passed by the large-scale temple build ing of the N ew

Kingdom Smith uses his presentation of excava-

tion results to address questions asked many times

before: what were the Egyptians up to in Nubia?

Does it count as imperialism? And why did their

policy change so greatly between the M iddle and New

Kingdoms? For an answer he looks less towards the

minutiae of Egyptological sources, primarily textual,

than to certain discussions on the nature of empires

drawn from the field of archaeology and anthropol-

ogy. The result is a stark evaluation of ancient mo-

tives,

very much in tune with the times we live in.

Basically, it was all to do with how to become richer.

From numerous reliefs and inscriptions it is

quite easy to compile an outline of a theology of

conquest of foreign lands by Pharaoh. Most of the

sources derive from the New Kingdom but the im-

ages and phrases are rooted in earlier period s. Con-

quest was simply fulfilment of a duty towards the

gods 'to enlarge the boundaries of Egypt' which were

ideally 'all that the sun's disc encircles'. Although

this ideology permeated official records and even

modes of letter-writing, Smith allows it little value

in the shaping of ancient policies.

He appeals instead to a number of neat and

very broad categorizations of imperialism dra wn up

by people predisposed to theory. One set provid es a

typology in the form of a little ma trix tha t is, indeed,

useful at an introductory stage of study, where we

can, for example, ask of our chosen area: do we have

Acculturation Imperia lism ( ' Indigenous culture

change to colonial culture') or do we have Accul-

turation Colonialism ('Change in indigenous eco-

nomic system to imperial system')? For the processes

at work he highlights a study by Alcock: 'Her ap-

proach is explicitly economic, as it relies on a cost-

minimization strategy by the dominant state as the

prime mover... [Her] system of interaction between

the needs of the imperial power and structure of

indigenous systems in a cost-minimization system

provides a good overall framework for understand-

ing changes in Egyptian imperialism .' From here he

develops an argument which is consistent with his

findings from Askut and turns several centuries of

Egyptian rule into a clever piece of economic ma-

nipula tion by Egyptian kings and their servants. The

critical point for this study is that Egypt's relations

with Nubia were ultimately driven by economic (and

not ideological) considerations which spanned the

entire system an d connected with external systems.'

The key to Smith's explanation lies in the na-

ture and p liability (or otherw ise) of the local popu la-

tion. In the Middle Kingdom this comprised local

indigenous communities who clung to their own cul-

tural identity as a means of asserting their ind epend-

ence.

Eventually Egyptian garrisons were replaced by

a settled Egyptian population which stayed behind

following the withdrawal of Egyptian military and

adm inistrative sup port at the end of the Mid dle King-

dom. It was they who provided the necessary sym-

pathetic channel for the extension of the Egyptian

way of life into Nubia w hich followed the reconq uest

at the end of the Second Intermediate Period. They

were the useful instruments of acculturation which

enabled the Egyptians to exploit the economic re-

sources of Nubia. Smith relegates ideology to the

periphery of explanation. It 'legitimizes' calculated

political acts by which economic goals are seized.

125


5/16

Review Feature

SECOND CATARACT

WadiAllaqi

Gold fields

Semna

Q

p (D Kumma

Semna

South

D Egyptian fort

Kerma andC-group

settlement

1 km

dak del

Figure 1 .Location map shoiving the second cataract forts. (After S mith 1995, fig. 1.6.)

126


6/16

Askut in Nubia

Treasury ?

'Upper Fort'

(= Com mandant ?)

\A j >rCi\'LaborPrison'?

'Storehou

1 2 3

Scale

Figure2.Askut's institutions during the Middle

Kingdom. (From Smith 1995, fig. 2.8.)

There

is a set of

questions

to

ask here, which

can

at

first sound rather naive.

If

this really was the

case,

why did those concerned not say so? Why was

the economic rationale not made explicit instead of

being concealed beneath layers of theology?For

whose benefit was the legitimization intended, given

that those who mattered subscribed to the same val-

ues as the kings themselves? The answer,Ibelieve, is

that ideology

did and

still does matter very much,

and amountstofar mo re thanacosmetic form of word s.

Let us take an admittedly extreme example from

another time and place.

In

the he yday

of

the expan-

sion

of the

Ottom an Empire, every year

saw the

marshalling

of a

huge army outside Istanbul.

Fol-

lowing grandiose ceremonies it wou ld then , in some

years,head w estwards towards Christendom , in oth-

ers eastw ards aga inst the heretic Shia empire of Iran.

The stated motive, towhich allsubscribed, was to

extend Islam (or at least its true form) into land s wh ere

it

did not

hold sway.

The

campaigns also brought

opportunities

for

individual valour

and for

booty,

and in their wake a huge administrative empire was

created which enriched the Ottomans and their cen-

ran A bandoned in the

> Middle Kingdom /

p*l Second Intermediate

,

W Period

/

rr i Strat if ied New Kin gdom /^

^ J Second Intermediate Period

NewKingdom

2

Scale

Figure 3

Askut inthe New Kingdom. (From Smith

1995 , fig. 6.2.)

tre, Istanbul. This is imperialism, yet whowould

dare pro pose that the Islamic call was only legitimiz-

ing a careful assessment of future balance sheets?

For ancient Egyptian kings theology likewise

provided the principal framework of reference which

gave meaning to m und ane acts, and it is idle to see

it

as only

a

peripheral consideration.

The

inner

dia-

logues

and

outw ard rationalizations which accom-

panied the making

of

decisions will have appealed

to more than onekind ofjustification, com bining

inextricably pragmatic assessments with asenseof

natura l preordain ed mission, and we are hardly ina

position to judge whether an economiccaseoutweighed

others

in

particular instances.

All

that

we

can legiti-

mately doisto explore the range of factors that w ere or

might have been involved,

and be

very cautious

in

prom oting those that our sources do no t mak e explicit

and that we have,

of

necessity,

to

reconstruct.

Our

ow n rationality encourag es us to view sceptically lofty

justifications

for the

intimidation

of

others,

but it

should not be used to diminish the pow er w hich such

notions exerted in their time; although, at the root of

all the deliberations that were made, there is likely

to

have been the attitude coldly sum me d up by one of

Thucy dides' speakers: 'It has always been a rule that

the we ak shou ld be subject to the s tro ng' (1.76.2).

12 7


7/16

Review Feature

I find

it

entirely reasonable

to

think that

a

sense

of mission

which

was,

after

all,

stated clearly

in

the texts

of the day

burnt within Egyptian kings

and their advisers,

or at

least

a

warm feeling

of ap-

proval

at the

prospect

of

fulfilling

an

ancient duty.

Righteousness is a powerful element in thehuman

personality. Moreover,thereason givenforrepeated

acts

of

aggression

in the New

Kingdom

'enlarg-

in g

the

boundaries

of

Egypt'

was not

just

a

terri-

torial claim. There

is

evidence

to

show both that

it

was Egyptian policy

to

encourage adoption

of

Egyp-

tian culture

and

that

it

worked very successfully.

It

sprang from

the

Egyptians'

own

view that their

way

of life

was

superior

and

also

and

this

is

crucial

imitable

by

all. Here

(in an

ironic context)

are

words

put into the mouth of the Prince of Byblos in the

Egyptian tale

of

Wenamun's voyage, dating from

the imm ediate post-imperial

age:

'Indeed, Amun

has

founded all

the

lands.

He

founded them after having

first founded

the

land

of

Egypt from which

you

have

come. Thus craftsmanship came thence so

as to

reach

the place where

I am.

Thus learning came thence

so

as

to

reach

the

place where

I am.

What

are

these

foolish travels that they madeyou do?'(i.e.it is too

lateto come with lofty demands;wehavealllearnt

from Egypt

to be as

good

as the

Egyptians

now;cf.

Lichtheim 1976, 227,

and

note

13).

In practice,

the

taming

of the

unruly foreigner

was done

in a

variety

of

ways.

By one,

representa-

tives

of the

elite were brought

up at the

Egyptian

court. Some stayed to become part

of an

increasingly

cosmopolitan society. Others returned

or

were sent

to resume their placeintheir home societies.A suc-

cessful case in Lower Nubia is likely to have been

that

of the

Princes

of

Miam,

one of

whom, Heka-

nefer, bore

the

title 'child

of the

nursery', almost

certainly bestow ed

on

those

who had

been brought

up

at the

Egyptian court.

Another

and

numerically

far

more important

way

was

through

the

colonies

and

other settlements

of foreigners established within Egypt

itself.

Here

is

partof ahymnin anobscure rock chapel attachedto

the workmen's village of Deir el-Medina which

praises king RamessesIII and histreatment of cap-

tured Libyans:

'He

m ade them cross the Nile, carried

off into Egypt. They

are

settled into strongholds

of

the victorious king. They hear

the

language

of the

(Egyptian) people , serving

the

King.

He

makes their

language disappear,

he

changes

(?)

their tongues.

They

go on a way

that they have

not

ventured

on

before' (Kitchen 1990, 21).Egyptiannesswas not a

matter

of

birth

but of

outward appearance.

The

barbarous foreigners socontemptuously defined in

official texts became Egyptians themselves

by

easy

steps.

Acculturation

was a

process

of

taming,

and

has

a

parallel

in

religion. Egyptians

in

Syria-Pales-

tine patronized foreign cults

and

brough t them back

to Egypt,

at the

same time converting them into

comfortable Egyptian forms.

Itisthus very naturalto see the NewKingdom

policy in Nubia of building towns and largetem-

ples, developed once thecountry had beenby and

large pacified,

as a

further manifestation

of

this view,

a great experiment

in

turning into reality that claim

of enlarging

the

boundaries

of

Egypt.

Yet

Smith

has

no time

for the

idea that Egyptian policy could

as-

pire

to

ideals:

'We

hav e already rejected K em p's

idea

of a

proselytizing bureacracy.

The

Egyptians

simply were

not

that interested

in

foreigners.' This

view underestimates

the

imaginative am bition

of

the

New Kingdom elite,

a

breed

of

person probably

rather different

in

outlook from their more parochi-

ally minded predecessors of the periods mat had

gone before.

So successful

did the

assimilation

of

foreigners

prove

to be

that, from

the end of the New

Kingdom

onwards,

one has to

consider carefully

the

question

of Egyptian ethnicity

and

what

one

means

by the

term 'ancient Egyptians'. They

had

become, espe-

cially

at the

level

of the

elite,

an

ethnic

mix

bound

together

by

acceptance

of the

norms

of

Egyptian

culture.

It is

linked

to one of the

remarkable features

of

the

archaeology

of

ancient Egypt. Over

the

entire

Pharaonic Period (withtheexceptionof theSecond

Intermediate Period), the many known foreign

groupsin theNile ValleyandDeltado notshowup

in

the

archaeological record.

It is as if

all those Asiat-

ics,

Libyans, Nubians

and

'Peoples

of the Sea'

left

their identifying marks

at

Egypt's threshold before

they crossed over, with

the

exception sometimes

of

their indigenous names which could

be

handed

on

through several generations.

The

most dramatic

ex-

ample concerns

the

Sudanese Kingdom

of

Napata.

Three centuries after

the

Egyptians

had

abandoned

Nubia,

a

line

of

Sudanese princes resurrected

the old

cultural ideal

and

seemingly found

in it a

justifica-

tionfor ruling Egyptaswellastheir own territory,

asifthey wereone of theEgyptian dynastiesof old,

presiding overarevitalizingof artwhich drew some

ofitsinspiration from farearlier perio ds.

It

is

also

a

mistake

to

think that Egypt's impe-

rial strategywasplayedoutagainstabackground of

a static societyathome . Smith takes E gypt itselfas a

constant sothattheanswers tochanges in imperial

strategy

can

conveniently

be

sought within Nubia

itself.

This

was not,

however,

the

case.

The

Theban

128


8/16

Askut in Nubia

kings of the early New Kingdom presided over an

important phase of state re-formation. To what ex-

tent this was deliberate and to what extent some-

thing that arose from the particular configuration of

circumstances left by the Second Intermediate Pe-

riod is somethin g that historians h ave scarcely started

to examine, although the effects are very obvious.

New K ingdom E gypt was a very different place from

the Egypt of the Middle Kingdom.

One sign was a great extension of tem ple buil d-

ing and of the associated pious foundations within

Egypt and on in to Nubia in the wake of the armies. If

we are to understand the motives of conquest and

imperial organization we need also to consider the

rationale of temple building and of pious founda-

tions wherever they were made. They display the

same mix of fulsome pious language and political

utility, in this case a system that partially integrated

the whole country (and Nubia as well) through the

ownership of productive resources and all that this

implied in terms of administration and employm ent.

But the logic was not that of cold economic calcula-

tion such as might dictate a minimization of the

costs and risks involved in transportation. For exam-

ple,

a temple which stood on the frontier of Nubia

was that dedicated to the god Khnum at Elephan-

tine.

Whether it benefited from its proximity to Nubia

through land donations there we do not know. But

by the reign of Ramesses IV it owned lands some-

where in the north of Egypt, and part of the harvest

was being shipped a long, long way upstream to

Elephantineitself.We know this because substantial

thefts by those responsible for the shipping are in-

cluded in a papyrus indictment. Elephantine exem-

plifies a common practice of distant institutional

land-ownership. The Wilbour Papyrus of the reign

of Ramesses V is a detailed land assessment for a

region in Middle Egypt in which were located lands

belonging to a numbe r of temples, some the great

temples of Thebes lying more than 500 km dis-

tant. Part of the yield of these lands would have

been sent to the storerooms situated beside the tem-

ples themselves.

We ourselves can see temple economies as an

effective instrument of integration. I think that it is

true to the ancient sources to say that, within the

confines of a single foundation, an instinctive feeling

for good housekeeping, manifested in careful record

keeping, would have urged that expenditures did

not exceed income. Economic man wa s at wor k here.

There was also a degree of centralized supervision

and control. One interesting aspect of the Wilbour

Papyrus is that it covers land owned by a range of

institutions, the palace as well as temples, and was

probably compiled for an official called the 'Chief

taxing-master'. This external supervision matches the

known cases of major temple revisions carried out

by kings. There were also other and secular bodies

with the powers which seem sometimes to have

been arbitrary to collect resources.

A fascinating and ultimately unanswerable

question is whether the most senior of the officials,

overseeing these huge accounting exercises, gained,

even if intuitively, an overall sense of how the coun-

try's economy was performing, and what shape the

accounts were in when they considered im perial ac-

tivity. Only if they did, and were able to calculate

the relative merits of different kinds of ownership,

and w ere prepared if necessary to persu ade kings to

forego temple building and pious dona tion (and per-

haps organizing mo re military campaigns) in favour

of another economic strategy, would the term cost-

minimization be applicable. I find this implausible,

and Smith himself does not really explain how he

thinks the necessary decisions were m ade.

The temple system wa s, indeed, used to exploit

conquered territories directly. The temple of A mun-

Ra at Karnak was made the owner of towns and

lands in Syria-Palestine, and the N auri Decree shows

that Seti I's magnificent temple at Abydos was en-

dowed with resources of various kinds in Upper

Nubia. But more typical for Nubia was the actual

building there of new temples which were not nec-

essarily provincial reductions of a grander Egyptian

model. Am enhotep Ill's temple a t Soleb was one of

the major monuments of his reign, and features as

such in his Kom el-Hetan stela alongside the temple

of Luxor, his mortuary temple at western Thebes,

and his great addition at Karnak, the Third Pylon.

Furtherm ore, the remains of a great building that w e

see now were only part of this astonishing invest-

ment. We have to allow for the costly equipment

that no major tem ple was without, and the lands and

livestock that gave it status (also hinted at in the

Kom el-Hetan stela). Soleb makes sense only if we

see it as the product of a policy of treating Nubia, in

the most serious way the Egyptians knew, as a fully

incorporated part of their homeland. It was a giant

experiment. We see this again at Gebel Barkal

(Napata) where, in a step of remarkable confidence,

they established a cult of Amun-Ra as a southern

counterpart to his cult at Karnak, with the far-reach-

ing consequences for later centuries.

This pattern of activity challenges the assump-

tion that New Kingdom Egypt possessed a single

centre which exploited its peripheries. The royal cou rt

129


9/16

Review Feature

and its residence cities were indeed centres of con-

spicuous consumption, but the policy of building

and endowing provincial temples also created nu-

merous lesser centres which extended with no ap-

parent diminution of scale through Nubia. Thus,

although Nubia was a source of wealth (including

gold) for the Egyptian court, it is a reasonable guess

that a significant portion of it was used to enrich the

temples that the Egyp tians built there. Smith scorns

the concept of an im perial balance-sheet with a debit

side,

but this ignores the likely way that society in

the New Kingdom had come to be constructed.

And then, at a matur e stage in the evolution of

New Kingdom society, we have Ramesses II's ex-

traordinary programme of temple-building which

embraced both Egypt and Nubia and whichisbound

to have involved a major reallocation of temple

wealth. It produced in Lower Nubia the rock-cut

temples of which the larger at Abu Simbel is one of

the major surviving monuments of his reign any-

where. What ra tional economic motives explain Abu

Simbel? It was not situated in a particularly fertile

area or one possessed of strategic importance, and

what land there was is likely to have been allocated

to the typical patchwo rk of private and institutional

ownership more than a century previously.

We can understand Ramesses II only by look-

ing to the same set of values that the Egyptians

themselve s expressed . Successful kingsh ip in ancient

Egypt encompassed the paternalistic ideal, the crea-

tion of a general feeling of well-being throughout the

country. So the acts public works of various kinds

which included warfare an d emp ire-building of

those kings who had achieved it served as models.

By em ulatin g the pa st they reinforced it. Ramesses II

became the ultimate expression of royal role-

fulfillment. Sixty years after his death and a dy-

nastic change, Ramesses IV indulged in a wishful

prayer:

More numerous are the deeds and benefactions

which I have done for your temple in order to

supply your sacred offerings, andto seekout every

effective and beneficent deed, and

to

perform them

daily in your precinct in these 4 years than those

which King [Ramesses II] did for you in his 67

years.And

so

you shall give

to me

the long lifespan

and the prolonged reign which you gave him . . .

(Peden1994,93)

There is no need to seek in the min d of Ramesses II a

grand economic plan for Egypt or for Nubia. Here

was a forceful in divi dual acting out the role for w hich

he had been prepared, and cost-minimization was

not part of it.

The danger with models of the past of the kind

that underpins

Askut

is that they create a static view

of long periods of time. Simple flow-chart systems

dom inate. History is not likemis.Events run through

the systems in surges. Typically, from time to time,

leaders are moved by a marriage of ego and ideol-

ogy to excel across the full range of cultural forms:

bigger temples, more and larger quarrying expedi-

tions,

braver military campaigns if you were a king

of ancient Egypt. Between these surges the scribes

seek to make the consequences work to the advan-

tage of themselves and their masters. They manage

the system until the next upheaval takes place, when

the fruits of their care might be thrown away.

What of the earlier period, the Middle King-

dom, in which Askut was built? The new model

state of the early New Kingdom replaced, following

the Second Intermediate Period, a state which seems

to have been less well integrated. The Middle King-

dom was a time of classic high cultu re, of rulers able

to exercise great authority, and of a deeply penetrat-

ing bureaucracy. But for much of the time kings

shared power with a local nobility in a relationship

that has sometimes been compared to the feudalism

of medieval E urope, a comparison w hich, as long as

it is not taken too far, is useful in that it illustrates

how powerful kings can co-exist with others pos-

sessing immense freedom of political manoeuvre.

The parallel certainly extends to the possession of

private armies of several hun dre d men w hich, as the

texts in the tomb of the nomarch A menem hat at Beni

Hasan reveal, a nomarch could take with him when

accompanying the king on a campaign into Nubia.

Those great fortresses in Nubia, although built to

defend Egyptian interests against hostile Nubian

kingdoms, are also statements of power, and the

part that they might have played in assisting the

kings of the Twelfth Dynasty to demonstrate their

authority to their own potentially unru ly aristocracy

is a factor that should not be ignored.

In these conditions (another of which was the

comm on con trol of local temp les by the leading local

family) the rather clumsy garrison policy in Nubia,

perh aps foun ded on the experiences of the civil wa rs

in Egypt of the preceding First Intermediate Period,

becomes more understandable. The time was not

right for the leap of imagination required to see that

Nubia was suitable ground for temple foundation

and for extension of Egyptianness.

All aspects of the study of ancient Egypt have

for so long been do min ated by textual sources that it

is easy to sympathize with those who, like Smith,

turn to archaeological theorizing for inspiration.

130


10/16

Askut in Nubia

There is, however, a danger in going too far, and of

being lured by simplistic models to underestimate

the complexity of the worlds to which archaeologi-

cal sites belong and the scale and power of the ideas

behind them . The Egyptian empire in Nubia took on

a particular shape from period to period, one we can

relate to certain universals in history, the typologies

of empire which p rovide the framework for this book.

They were the outcome, however, of visions which

were particular to their time and place. Ideology

shapes decisions as much as it legitimizes them. In-

deed, a useful rule for addressing the question of

imperialism mightb e:first find the ideology.

Nubia Rediviva

Bruce G. Trigger

Departm ent of Anthropology, McGill University,

Montreal, Quebec, Canada, H3A 2T7

Over thirty years ago Lower Nubia was drowned

beneath the waters of the High Dam and archaeo-

logical work ceased there except in Napatan and

later levels at and around the citadel of Qasr Ibrim.

After a flurry of site reports and syntheses, interest

shifted north into Egypt and farther south into the

Sudan leaving Lower Nubia largely forgotten. In

recent years, however, there has been a renewed

interest in Lower Nubia among archaeologists, many

of whom w ere not born when the region was flooded.

Research based on site reports and museum collec-

tions by David Edwards (1996) and Dorian Fuller

(1996) has resulted in new interpretations of the

Meroitic period, while work by Josef Wegner (1995)

and Wendy Anderson (1996) is transforming our

understanding of the C-Group period and the New

Kingdom. Stuart Tyson Smith's re-analysis of Alex-

ander Badawy's unpublished excavations at the

Egyptian fortress of Ask ut betw een 1962 and 1964 is

a further distin guishe d co ntributio n to the revival of

the archaeological study of Lower Nu bia. Once again

it becomes evident that ancient Nubia has great po-

tential for expan ding o ur und erstand ing of colonial-

ism a nd ethnic relations.

Askut in Nubia

exemplifies the great progress

that has been ma de since 1965 in drawing the stu dy

of ancient Egypt both technically and theoretically

into the mainstream of archaeological research.

Ronald Horvath's and Brad Bartel's definitions of

eradication, acculturation, and equilibrium strategies

provide useful categories for analyzing shifts in Egyp-

tian policy in Lower Nubia (Fig.6).My own research

convinces me that Egypt's involvement in Nubia

was primarily m otivated by economic considerations

and I agree with Smith's inference, based on Susan

Alcock's model, that the form this intervention took

in successive periods was conditioned by changing

imperial goals and the structure of indigenous sys-

tems as these were interrelated in a cost-minimiza-

tion strategy. A similar app roach was im plicit in my

schematic analysis of changing trading arrangements

between Egypt and Upper Nubia in Pharaonic times

(Trigger 1976a).

Smith's findings at Askut greatly clarify the

hitherto uncertain nature of the Egyptian presence

in Lower Nubia from the Middle into the New King-

dom. They support and extend Harry Smith's con-

clusion, based on his analysis of burial patterns at

Buhen, that the garrison of the Egyptian fort system

shifted from rotating military units to permanent

Egyptian settlers about the end of the 12th Dynasty.

It also appears that the descendants of these Egyp-

tian settlers continued to live at Askut through the

Second Intermediate Period and into the New King-

dom. The presence of much larger a mo unts of Nub ian

pottery in the Second Intermediate Period also indi-

cates that these settlers interacted much more with

C-Group, Medjay (Pan Grave), and Kerma people

than their military predecessors had done. I would

like to consider further some of the implic ations th at

Smith's findings may have for understanding what

was happenin g in Lower Nubia at this time, espe-

cially in terms of ethnic relations.

In a recent doctoral dissertation (1996) Wendy

Anderson has undertaken a detailed quantitative

analysis of mortuary remains from fifteen C-Group

cemeteries in Lower Nubia in order to investigate

changing patterns of social differentiation. Her find-

ings indicate that economic inequality was present

among the C-Group at all times and was greatest

during the middle of the Second Intermediate Pe-

riod. Yet the C-Group show s no sign of rigid stratifi-

cation at any period and locally shifting patterns of

wealth and access to Egyptian goods suggest consid-

erable competition both among and within C-Group

communities. The evidence seems to rule out the

formation of stable (state-like) hierarchies of C-Grou p

comm unities as well as the complete suppression by

the Egyptians of intercommunity competition even

at the height of Egyptian pow er in the M iddle King-

dom. On the other hand, growing evidence of tomb

and corpse destruction, the presence of weapons in

graves, and the construction of fortifications along

131


11/16

Review Feature

with the re-use of abandoned Egyptian ones by the

C-Group (Wegner 1995) appear to indicate increas-

ing conflict among C-Group communities as Egyp-

tian control weake ned in the late 12th Dynasty and

the early Second Interm ediate Period. E gyptian set-

tlers may have lived as traders in the m idst of inten-

sifying struggles am ong C-Group com munities.

It is clear from Egyp tian reco rds that at least by

the late Second Intermediate Period the rulers of

Kerma to the south claimed suzerainty over Lower

Nubia. Yet the archaeological record fails to reveal

people affiliated with the Kerma culture occupying

obvious positions of authority in Lower Nub ia. Egyp-

tian settlers continued to live in the Middle King-

dom forts, at least some of them proclaiming their

ties to the king of Kerma, while the C-Group contin-

ued to have its own leaders. Immigrant Kermans

appear as small clusters of settlement near Askut

and other Egyptian forts or as individuals living in

KAMOSE

Elephantine^

Lower Nubia

A H M O S E

Fadms

Mirgissa J ^ B 2

Semna f Askut

Wadi Allaqi

Gold fields

UpperNubia

OKurgus

Dongola

Reach

100 km

O Atbara

Key

Cataract Egyptian fortress

Overland routes O Other site

Figure 4 . The reconquest of Lower Nubia. (After Smith

1995 , fig. 6.1.)

or near a number of C-Group communities. Smith

notes that even the Saras area, around Askut, w hich

contained the only substantial concentration of Kerma

sites in Lower Nubia, had only a small population

which seems to have been concerned with trad e and

military and administrative liaison rather than with

occupying and ruling Lower Nubia. In their heart-

land to the south the Kerma people constituted a

formidable power, against which the Egyptians had

to fortify their southern frontier very carefully al-

ready in the Middle Kingdom and whose uprisings

had to be suppressed a number of times after the

conquest of Kerma in the early New Kingdom.

The archaeological evidence raises the question

of the actual control that the rulers of Kerma exer-

cised over Lower Nubia. Smith argues persuasively

that there is no indication that they annexed Lower

Nubia by force. It therefore seems likely that they

did not so much extend their control over Lower

Nubia as draw both the Egyptian settlers and the C-

Group people living there into some sort of alliance

with Kerma. Kerma's power in Lower Nubia may

never have been great and this may explain why

early in his reign Kamose had so little trouble ex-

tending his control south to Buhen. The Kerma state

and various C-Group populations may have been

allied against their respective Theban and Medjay

adversaries. The main role played by the Egyptian

settlers probably was to conduct trade between

Kerma and Egypt and to supply various kinds of

technical and military support to the Kerma rulers.

The evidence of continuity in Egyptian families

at Askut from the Second Intermediate Period into

the New Kingdom is especially interesting. On his

Karnak stelae Kamose boasted that after he had cap-

tured E gyptian towns that had rem ained loyal to the

Great Hyksos kings he burned them into heaps of

red ruins forever because they 'had forsaken Egypt

their m istre ss' (G ardiner 1961, 167). This suggests a

ruler who was unlikely to deal leniently with those

whom he regarded as traitors. At Buhen the leading

officials who had been connected with Kerma disap-

pear following K amose's conquest and possible sack-

ing of that settlement, and it is uncertain to what

extent the original Egyptian settlers were allowed to

go on living there or were replaced by new ones.

Nevertheless the evidence from Askut indicates that

at least some Egyptians in Lower Nubia were on

sufficiently good terms with the Theban government

that they survived this critical juncture. This sug-

gests that dur ing the Second Intermediate Period the

Egyptians living in Lower Nubia may have culti-

vated good relations with both the Kerma and Theban

132


12/16

Askut in Nubia

rulers while being fully subordinate to neither. A

similar complex game w as probably played by m any

local officials in midd le Egyp t in their relations w ith

the rival Theban and Hyksos rulers during the late

Second Intermediate Period.

There is also some archaeological evidence that,

following the withdrawal of Egyptian garrisons in

the 12th Dynasty , Medjay p astoralists from the East-

ern Desert may have intruded into Lower Nubia, at

first sharing and later taking over C-Group territory.

Their occupation of Lower Nubia may have intensi-

fied in the New Kingdom if, as Theban allies, they

were perm itted to occupy large parts of rural Lower

Nubia while the Egyptians continued to live in the

urban districts that grew up around the forts they

had occupied since the Middle Kingdom. Elsewhere

I have presented evidence to suggest that the New

Kingdom Nubian princes of Miam and Tehkhet

might have been of Medjay rather than C-Group

origin (Trigger 1976b,

117;

forthcoming).

One argument that I do not find fully convinc-

ing is Smith's suggestion that interaction among the

local C-Grou p, Egyptian expatriates, and Kerma peo-

ple during the Second Intermediate Period created

the infras tructure for the Egyptian pursuit of

acculturative colonialism in the New Kingdom. It

seems, as Smith acknowledges briefly (pp. 173-4),

that the Egyptian government was driven to seek

greater control over Lower Nubia as a result of their

expanding relations with powerful states in Meso-

potamia and Anatolia, which required larger and

more regular supplies of gold and exotic goods from

the south for trade and royal gift exchanges. The

need to maintain cost-effective relations with their

Medjay allies, who could if disaffected harass the

gold-mining areas of the Eastern Desert, also led the

Egyptians to concentrate the surviving C-Group peo-

ple near Egyptian centres in Lower Nubia so that

grazing and farming lands could be provided to the

Medjay. Lower Nubia seems to have been occupied

and transformed along new lines by the Egyptians

as much for political reasons that were external to

the region as because Lower Nubia itself had

changed. Smith notes that in Lower Nubia the extant

system was inadequ ate to meet New K ingdom Egyp-

tian needs without radical restructuring (p. 17). This

view also accords with Alcock's assumption that a

cost-minimizing interaction between the needs of

the imperial power and the structure of indigenous

systems provides a framework for understanding

changes in imperial systems.

Those of us wh o worked in Lower Nubia in the

1960s often have lamented that, while in 1965 this

was probably archaeologically the most extensively

studied region in the world, it ceased to be available

for further research just when the analysis of exist-

ing data might have allowed archaeologists to pose

some really interesting questions. The w ork of Stuart

Tyson Smith and others suggests that, despite severe

limitations on archaeological research in this region,

a surprising am ount can still be learned about Lower

Nubia from site reports and mu seum collections.

Imperial Motivation a Mesopotam ian

Angle

Nicholas Postgate

Faculty of Oriental Studies, University of

Cambridge, Sidgwick Avenue, Cambridge,

CB39DA

Historians of Mesopotamia are not often asked to

trespass across Sinai into Egypt, and when they do it

is often to enter an unfamiliar world. To find expla-

nations for differences between Egypt and Mesopo-

tamia tends to draw us in two directions: either to

re-assess one in the light of the other, which may

expose greater similarities than were previously ap-

parent (such as the degree of early urbanization in

Egypt),

or to seek a level of generalization in which

both civilizations are considered as members of a

larger

class.

In his opening, and originally indepen d-

ent, chapter Smith sets out to generalize, taking ex-

amples from recent work on the Inka empire

(D'Altroy) and Roman Greece (Alcock). Nothing

wro ng w ith that, but there may also be lessons to be

learnt from practices in Mesopotam ia, closer in space

and time.

In the context of Egypt, there are really only

two case studies for imperial do mina tion at our dis-

posal, Nubia and the Levant. Different strategies were

employed in the two areas, and Smith rightly insists

that the pre-existing nature of the subjected polity

will affect the mode of domination (see Smith on

Doyle, pp. 12-14). This shows clearly in Liverani's

work on the expansion of Assyrian domination in

North Mesopotamia in the ninth century BC,where

the mode of imposition correlates very closely with

the pre-existing political order, chiefdoms be ing regu -

larly plundered and annexed, kingdoms contribut-

ing tribute and granted client status (see Liverani

1992,

figs. 14-15 with pp . 117-18).

13 3


13/16

Review Feature

Smith applauds Alcock's study for balancing

the nature of the dominated polity against the 'ex-

ploitative goals of the imperial system' (p. 17), and

perha ps, since he is operating on an analytical plane,

it would have been helpful to expose the argument

more bleakly. Since we have just the one 'domina-

tor', at a fundamental level differences in the strat-

egy for domination can only exist in the

dominating

entity's objectives,in thenature of the subjected entity to

be dominated, or in

both.

This leaves on ly three

choices to explain differences:

similar objectives

dissimilar objectives

dissimilar objectives

dissimilar subjects

similar subjects

dissimilar subjects.

Where, as in the case of Nubia and the Levant, we

attempt an explanation for a differing strategy, it

will probably help to consider all three choices ex-

plicitly and also the connections between the two

sides of the pattern. Obviously, (the perception of)

differences in the subjects may lead the dom inato r to

adapt the objectives, but are there 'pure' objectives

indep enden t of the area to be dom inated, or is there

not always a feed-back between subject and objec-

tive

(e.g.

re-absorption of one-time colonists into their

'home s tate', ethnic prejudices or adm inistrative con-

cerns disqualifying the subject popula tion in the eyes

of the dominators, etc.)?

This procedure might have alleviated what

'o other

Western

Asian

Centres

To other

African Centre

Long distance exchange

Trade from exploited

periphery

Centre p g j Point of contact

Exploited periphery

Figure 5 . Near Eastern multiple world system c. 1300

BC. (After Smith 1995, fig. 1.4.)

seems to me an unfortunate polarization in Smith's

approach to imperial strategies. He recognizes two

main m otivating forces behind the forms of dom ina-

tion he describes: economic and ideological, and he

comes down firmly in favour of the economic as the

principal stimulus:

The World System can contribute to the study of

ancient imperialism through its emphasis on the

fundamentallyeconomic natureofcontactsbetween

societies, which might be the result of stronger

societies and their elites imposing themselves on

less developed areas for material profit

an d

Egypt's relations with Nubiawereultimately driven

by economic (not ideological)considerations which

spanned the entire system and connected with ex-

ternal systems, (p.

15;

cf.also

p.

178)

Much could hang on what is meant here by 'ulti-

mately', but let us press on regardless.

Smith sees his emphasis as shared by Alcock,

whose 'approach is explicitly economic, as it relies

on a cost-minimization strategy by the dominant

state as the prime mover' (p. 17). The implication is

that Alcock sees economic gain as the prime incen-

tive for a state to absorb another, or as the prime

objective against which altern ative styles of dom ina-

tion are measured. My reading of her text does not

suggest that she privileges the economic motive so

explicitly. Her general statements tend rather to ac-

knowledg e the dual im portance of the economic and

the 'symbolic': 'Politico-administrative foundations

. . . were both pragmatic and symbolic acts' (Alcock

1989,

90) or 'Consideration of the extent of political

reo rga niz atio n... can provide one basic index to the

m aterial and symbolic restructu ring at work within

each empire' (Alcock 1989, 94).

This is surely right, and unlike Smith ('ideol-

ogy serves primarily as a means of legitimization,

with only a secondary role in determining the impe-

rial strategy' p. 17;

cf.

p. 178) I am not happy to

banish ideology to the margins of imperial motiva-

tion. For instance, there are considerations of senti-

ment, a t tached to certa in terri tories or their

populations: an Egyptian tradition in Nubia features

in Smith's account of Askut (e.g. p. 176), and in

Mesopotamia we can think of the drive of Neo-

Assyrian kings to recover cities and land previously

occupied by Assyrians but overrun by Aramaean

tribes,

often described with explicit mention of the

historical background, or earlier of territorial enti-

ties with a cultural rather than political sense of

134


14/16

Askut in Nubia

identity (Postgate 1994). Clearly the appeal to such

concepts could serve as subsequent

justification

for

the expansion of territorial domination undertaken

for economic motives, but it will not do to discard

them entirely as a

motivating

force also, nor to m ain-

tain without better reason that the 'ultimate' m otiva-

tion is always economic.

No-one is likely to deny that there are strong

economic m otives built into most im perial episodes,

but it is not very productive to have a quantitative

tug-of-war with economics at one end of the rope

vs

ideology at the other, attributing a high percentage

of imperial motivation to economic causes and the

remainder to ideology. A change of approach might

help.

Rather than view them as competitors, is it not

more constructive to explore the interaction between

them? We need to ask ourselves on the one hand,

how economic motives are reflected in the ideologi-

cal statements visible to

us ,

and on the other, whether

choices in the economic sphere are skewed or deter-

mined by ideological considerations.

So,

for exam ple, the formal act of submission to

imperial domination may involve grovelling, but it

also carries with it the presentation of gifts, of one

kind or anoth er. In the case of the Assyrian em pire, a

clear formal distinction is main tained be tween goods

delivered to the person of the king by the rulers of

states acknowledging his hegemony ('tribute'), on

the one hand , and on the other hand goods contrib-

uted by provinces within the Assyrian frontier to the

Assur Temple at Assur: these are designated 'regu-

lar offerings', a nd are groceries intended for the tem-

ple kitchen, not gifts fit for monarchs. The point is

that here, as with similar contributions to central

places in amphictyonies further back in time, we

have a political statement represented symbolically

in economic term s (Postgate 1992).

Similarly, on p. 6 Smith seems to me to dismiss

too lightly the opinion attributed to Kemp that 'the

extension of the state, both secular and religious, fits

a scribal, bureaucratic value system ... it is this sub-

system, well integrated throug hout the Egyptian state

system as a whole, which drove Egyptian imperial

policy in the New Kingdom' (p. 6). The power for

self-perpetuation inherent in an established bureauc-

racy should not be underestimated, and Kemp's

wor ds have a n echo in Ur III Mesopotamia, of w hich

I recently, though quite independently, wrote that

'the intrusive tentacles of the new state provided a

tangible counterpart to the ideological construct of

the king's divine patronag e, whereby the state's char-

acter and identity were given substance by the den-

sity of its bureaucratic fabric' (Postgate 1995, 402;c f.

1994,10). In Egypt as in Mesopotamia, the principal

activity of the bureaucracy is of course the adminis-

tration of economic affairs, and here too the eco-

nomic and the ideological are inextricable.

Tracking Egyptian Imperialism in

Ancient N ubia

Carla M.

Sinopoli

Museu m of Anthropology, University of M ichigan,

Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA

In the burgeoning literature on the archaeology of

early empires, information on Egypt has been curi-

ously scarce. In my own review article on the topic

(Sinopoli

1994),

Egypt was excluded com pletely. This

was in no small part a result of my ignorance on the

subject, but the lack of attention to Egypt in m y w ork

and in the writings of other scholars interested in

comparative approaches to early empires (e.g.

D'Altroy 1992; Schreiber 1992) also results from the

relative isolation of much Egyptological research an d

writing from the mainstream of anthropological ar-

chaeology. In order to remedy m y ow n lack of knowl-

edge concerning Egyptian imperialism I therefore

turned to this volume, a revision of Sm ith's doctoral

dissertation, with considerable interest.

In his study, Stuart Tyson Smith undertak es an

admirable mission to reanalyze data from Alex-

ander Badawy's 1962-1964 work at Askut, excavated

in its entirety as part of the UNESCO Aswan Dam

Salvage Campaign. Spanning from the Midd le King-

dom thro ugh the Second Interm ediate and Ne w King-

dom periods, the fort and settlement of Askut

provides an opportunity to examine processes of

change in strategies and goals of Egyptian (and

Nub ian) impe rialism an d in political, economic, mili-

tary and ideological relations between Egypt and

Nub ia. Smith incorpora tes data from the related forts

of Buhen, Mirgissa, Semna, and Uronarti into his

discussion, presenting information on architecture,

mor tuary rem ains, and dom estic artifacts.

As a non-Egyptologist, I leave it to the special-

ists in that area to evaluate the substance of Smith's

analysis, and will limit my focus largely to his theo-

retical and methodological appro ach to the stud y of

early empires. Here, I was disappo inted. Smith's in-

terpretations of Askut are ham pered by limiting and

limited theoretical frameworks and q uestionable (and

usually implicit) assumptions concerning issues of

135


15/16

Review Feature

cultural identity, political dynamics, and the com-

plex webs of relations, participants, and activities

that constitute the creation and operation of impe-

rial states.

While much recent scholarship on early states

and empires has emphasized their internal variabil-

ity and the inherent contradictions amon g different

organizational spheres, territories, incorporated poli-

ties,

and social actors (e.g. Alcock 1993; Brumfiel

1994;

Mann 1986; Sinopoli & Morrison 1995), Smith

instead employs a rigid typological framework (pre-

sented in a 2 x 3 matrix) developed by Ronald

Horvath and Brad Bartel (pp. 8-9; Fig. 6). In this

typology, imperialism is first distinguished from co-

lonialism according to the absence or presence of

permanent settlers. Both colonialism and imperial-

ism are further subdivided into three catagories

eradication, acculturation, and equilibrium dis-

tinguished on the basis of the impact of foreign con-

querors on indigenous populations. Eradication

imperialism is defined by 'the disappearance of all

regional habitation'; acculturation imperialism is

identified by 'changes in [the] indigenous economic

system to [the] imperial system'; and equilibrium

imperialism entails 'indigenous cultural m aintenance

with only small imperial presence' (p.

9).

The criteria

used to define each subcategory differ, and include

demographic, economic, and 'cultural' characteris-

tics respectively, creating some analytical vaguen ess.

In many cases, the colonialism /imperialism distinc-

tion would likely be very hard to draw. This strict

typological approach seems anachronistic in a 1995

publication, though to his credit Smith's later dis-

cussion does allude to some of the internal variabil-

ity and historical dynamics that such a typology

necessarily obscures. Smith views imperial conquest

as an economic strategy, and seeks to document the

economic puruits of Egypt as they pursued 'cost-

minimization' to meet their 'inherently economic'

goals (p. 22). In his conclusion he claims to have

demonstrated this thesis; however, in much of his

discussion Askut seems to be a consumer of both

state and locally generated resources rather than a

generator of wea lth that benefited more distant state

coffers.

Using his typology, Smith proceeds to trace

Asku t's historical develop men t from a late 12th Dy-

nasty border fortress and storehouse ('equilibrium

imperialism') to a fortress inhabited by Egyptian set-

tlers in the 13th Dynasty ('equilibrium colonialism').

During the Second Intermediate period, control of

the fort may have shifted to local Nu bian popu lations

and Kerma. Smith suggests that the inhabitants of

Colonialism

Imperialism

Replacement of

native by

colonial culture.

Indigenous

culture change to

colonial culture.

Separate settlement

enclaves of the

two cultures.

Disappearance of

all regional

habitation

^Change in indigenous

economic system to

imperial system

Indigen ous cultural

maintenance with

only smll imperial

presence

Eradication

Acculturation

Equilibrium

Figure 6 .Horvath/Bartel matrix. (From Smith 1995,

fig. 1.2.

Askut similarly shifted their loyalties to a different

imperial power. This is a fascinating process, and

one probably common in border locales in many

imperial polities, with their characteristically fluid

and changing bound aries. A more nuanced study of

how inh abitants of such boun dary zones respond to

political transitions wo uld be quite interesting. Un-

fortunately, Sm ith's focus remains Egyptocentric and

his discussion of the dynamics of Egyptian- Nubian

relations from the Nubian perspective is minimal

throughout the work.

In the New Kingdom, Askut again comes un-

der Egyptian control, and a policy of 'acculturation

colonialism' is undertaken, resulting in the disap-

pearance of local traditions of material culture, with

a lessened need for coercive control and a greater

emphasis on economic investment and extraction. It

should, however, be pointed out that the first part of

this interpretation rests on the assumption that peo-

ple claiming Egyptian cultural identities would be

less likely to resist imperial demands and therefore

require less coercion than people with non-Egyptian

identities. Given the frequency of 'internal' rebel-

lions in many early empires, as well as Smith's fail-

ure to consider issues of identity, this seems a risky

assumption.

Throughout his discussion of these changes,

Smith refers to the descenda nts of the original Egyp-

tian settlers of Askut as 'expatriates', who during the

New Kingdom, are said to have aided in the 'accul-

turation of native C-group and Pan Grave peoples'

by 'providing a convenient infrastructure for exploi-

tation' (p. 148). I find this a curious and troubling

usage, based in an essentializing approach to Egyp-

tian (and by implication Nubian) cultural identity.

136


16/16

Askut in Nubia

Assuming Smith's reconstruction is correct, these

New Kingdom 'expatriates' were individuals whose

ancestors may have resided in the region of Askut

for at least two centuries, who had clearly under-

gone multiple shifts in political affiliation, and who

may similarly have forged new kinds of social and

kinship relations and established distinctive cul-

tural identities. Whether or not they still defined

themselves as 'Egyptians', and acted accordingly,

seems to be something to be evaluated rather than

asserted.

The volume concludes with an interesting dis-

cussion of the contrasts between Egypt's economic

relations with Nubia, as a 'part of Egypt' with the

obligations inherent therein, versus an Egyptian im-

perial ideology which portrayed Nubia as a stere-

otypical foreign enemy (again with no discussion of

Nubian perceptions of Egypt). The economic dy-

namic, which provid ed the impetus for imperialism

in Smith's model, sought to effect efficient extraction

and transfer of goods within the polity. The ideo-

logical claims, intend ed for in ternal (elite?) consum p-

tion, helped to ma intain the portra yal of the Egyptian

king as vanquisher of foreign enemies.

While I have raised questions about many of

the explicit and implicit theoretical assumptions of

this work, the book does raise several interesting

issues relevant to consideration of empires in many

parts of the world. Smith makes use of a range of

archaeological data ceramics, architecture, buri-

als,ornaments presenting qualitative and quanti-

tative assessments of tempor al and sp atial variability

in form and distributions, and using these to exam-

ine changes at Askut durin g nearly a millennium of

occupation. The book addresses a fascinating period

in a fascinating reg ion, and w hile the end result d oes

not live up to its promise, Smith has demonstrated

that there is much potential for additional work on

this topic using data from sites excavated with very

different goals in mind.

References

Alcock, S.E., 1989. Archaeology and imperialism: Roman

expansion and the Greek city.

Journal ofMediterra-

nean Archaeology2 ,87-135.

Alcock, S.E., 1993.Graecia Capta: theLandscapes ofRoman

Greece.C ambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Anderson, W., 1996. The Significance of Middle Nubian

C-Group Mortuary Variability,ca.2200

C

toca. 1500

BC. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Department of An-

thropology, McGill University, Montreal.

Brumfiel, E.M., 1994. Ethnic groups and political develop-

ment in ancient Mexico, inFactional Competition and

Political Development in the New World eds. E.M.

Brumfiel & J.W. Fox. Cam bridg e: Cam brid ge U ni-

versity Press, 89-102.

D'Altroy, T.N., 1992.ProvincialPo wer in the Inca E mpire.

Washington (DC): Smithsonian Institution Press.

Edw ards, D .N., 1996.The Archaeologyo fthe MeroiticState:

New Perspectiveson itsSocial an dPoliticalOrganisa-

tion.

(Cambridge Monographs in African Archaeol-

ogy 38; BAR International Series 640.) Oxford:

Tempus Repararum.

Fuller, D., 1996. Arminna West. Paper presen ted at Symp o-

sium on the Pennsylvania-Yale Excavations and o ther

Work in Nubia an d at Giza and Abyd os. Yale Univer-

sity, New Haven , Connecticut, March 30-31,1996.

Gardiner, A., 1961.Egypt ofthePharaohs: an Introduction.

Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Kitchen, K.A., 1990. The arrival of the Libyans in Late

New Kingdom Egypt, inLibya an d

Egypt:

1300-750

BC,ed. MA. Leahy. London: School of Oriental and

African Studies, 15-27.

Lichtheim, M., 1976.AncientEgyptianLiterature; aBook of

Readings, vol. II:the New Kingdom.Berkeley (CA),

Los Angeles (CA) & London: U niversity of Califor-

nia Press.

Liveran i, M., 1992.Studies on theAnnals ofAshurnasirpalII,

2:

Topographical Analysis. (Quaderni di Geografica

Storica 4.) Rome: Universita de Roma 'La Sapienza'.

Peden, A.J., 1994.Th e Reign ofRamesses IV . Warminster:

Aris & Phillips.

Postgate, J.N., 1992. The land of Assur and the Yoke of

Assur.World Archaeology23,247-63.

Postgate, J.N., 1994. In search of the first empires.Bulletin

ofthe American Schoolso fOriental Research293,1-13.

Postgate, J.N., 1995. Royal ideology and state administra-

tion in Sumer and Akkad, in CivilizationsoftheA n-

cient Near

East

I, ed. J.M. Sasson. New York (NY):

Charles Scribner's Sons,

395^111.

Schreiber, K.M., 1992.WariImperialism in MiddleHorizon

Peru. (Anthropological Papers 87.) An n Arbor (MI):

Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan.

Sinopoli, CM ., 1994. The archaeology of empires.Annual

ReviewofAnthroplogy23,159-80.

Sinopoli, CM., 1995. Dimensions of imperial control: the

Vijayanagara capital.American Anthropologist

97,

83-

96.

Trigger, B.G., 1976a. Kerma: the rise of an A frican civiliza-

tion.International JournalofAfrican Historical Studies

9,

1-21.

Trigger, B.G., 1976b. Nubia under the Pharaohs. London:

Thames & H udson.

Trigger, B.G., forthcoming. Toshka and Arminna in the

New Kingdom, in Studies inHonorofWilliam Kelly

Simpson.Boston: Museum of Fine Arts.

Wegner, J.W., 1995. Regional control in M iddle Kingdom

Lower Nub ia: the function and history of the site of

Areika.

Journal of the AmericanResearch Center in

Egypt32,127-60.

13 7

reseña de askut in nubia, cambridge archaeological journal 7(1) (1997)

Documents