The annals of the Palermo Stone indicate that the biennial ‘following of Horus’ (šms- Hr) was an important event in the life of the court. One of its functions may have been as a tour of inspection, allowing officials of the central administration to keep up-to-date records on the agricultural potential of the provinces. However, the ‘following of Horus’ seems not to have occurred during the reign of Den, and it is likely that an alternative system of tax assessment and economic control would have been required (Martin-Pardey 1976:33–4). The nome system may therefore have been devised in Den’s reign as a substitute. However, in the absence of any firm evidence for the existence of nomes in the First Dynasty, we should probably place the origins of the system somewhere in the Second Dynasty. It is possible that the court’s move to Memphis at the beginning of the Second Dynasty—highlighted by the relocation of the royal necropolis from Abydos to Saqqara—necessitated a new mechanism for exercising control over the distant provinces of Upper Egypt. The experience of administering royal domains in the Delta provided a template, and the nome system was devised along the same lines.
Peripheral regions
Administration of the desert regions bordering the Nile valley is first attested in the reign of Qaa. The official Merka was both -mr zmỉt and h rp zmỉt, ‘administrator of the desert’ and ‘controller of the desert’ (Emery 1958: pl. 39). One title may have been connected with civil, the other with military administration (Martin-Pardey 1976:51), though this cannot be confirmed. Both titles also occur in the reign of Netjerikhet, the
-mr zmỉt Nitankh being mentioned in a rock-cut inscription at the turquoise mines of the Wadi Maghara (Gardiner and Peet 1952: pl. I). Clearly, the individual responsible for the desert approaches to the Sinai would have been an important member of a mining expedition. It is possible that Nitankh’s position gave him a degree of authority over the Sinai as well. At the end of the Third Dynasty, Pehernefer’s sphere of responsibility was defined more precisely as the western desert: one of his titles was -mr zmỉt ỉmntt, ‘administrator of the western desert’. The inscriptions of Metjen and Pehernefer suggest that the locality called hwt ỉỉt, possibly Kom el-Hisn, may have been the headquarters of
the desert administrator ( -mr zmỉt). This official would have been responsible primarily for the desert region bordering the western Delta (Martin-Pardey 1976:52), which formed a strategically important buffer zone between Egypt and the Libyan peoples to the west.
The distinction in nomenclature (Husson and Valbelle 1992:62) between, on the one hand, the low desert fringing the Nile valley (zmỉt) and, on the other, the high desert and foreign lands (h 3st), must be significant. From an administrative perspective, the low desert—valued as a source of minerals and wild game—could be exploited by means of small-scale expeditions mounted from the Nile valley itself. The desert fringes and their resources could easily have been administered from within Egypt, and the titles attested in the Early Dynastic period seem to be proof of this.
Foreign conquests
By contrast, exploitation and/or administration of the high desert and lands outside Egypt required a more expansionist programme. The imposition of Egyptian control in areas distant from the Nile valley could only be achieved by transplanting the appropriate administrative structures into foreign territory. Such a practice may be attested by the construction of an Egyptian First Dynasty ‘Residency’ at En Besor in southern Palestine. The only evidence for Egyptian administrative control over neighbouring lands during the Early Dynastic period comes in the form of two seal-impressions from the Shunet ez- Zebib, dated to the reign of Khasekhemwy, which bear the title ỉmỉ-r3 h 3st, ‘overseer of the foreign land’ (Ayrton et al. 1904: pl. IX.9; Newberry 1909: pl. XXII.IV). The ‘foreign land’ in question is not specified; from later parallels, territory to the east of Egypt—i.e. the Sinai or southern Palestine—was probably indicated. An important piece of supporting evidence in this respect is a fragment of stone relief from the temple area at Hierakonpolis. Also dated to the reign of Khasekhemwy, it lists a number of conquered territories, each name determined by the sign h 3st, ‘foreign land’. It is tempting to link the appearance of the title ỉmỉ-r3 h 3st at the end of the Second Dynasty with the start of systematic exploitation of the turquoise reserves in and around Wadi Maghara in the Sinai from the beginning of the Third Dynasty.
Increasing Egyptian involvement in neighbouring areas and the imposition of political control over territory outside the borders of Egypt are important indicators of the court’s growing confidence and coercive power. The dynamics of Egypt’s foreign relations in the Early Dynastic period are a complex mixture of ideology and practical economics, illuminating some of the problems and priorities which faced Egypt’s early rulers. The detailed nature of Egypt’s contacts with the outside world is explored in the next chapter.
CONCLUSION: THE EXERCISE OF AUTHORITY IN EARLY DYNASTIC EGYPT
The picture presented above represents no more than isolated pieces of a puzzle. It is unlikely that we will ever understand the precise structure of the Early Dynastic administration, given the limitations of the available evidence (see Figure 4.6 for an educated guess). What is possible at the present time is an investigation of particular
aspects of government, as practised by the early Egyptian state. The central theme of this book, the fashioning of ancient Egyptian civilisation by the country’s early rulers, requires at least an attempt at explaining one further theme under the heading of administration: how authority was exercised by members of the government apparatus in the first three dynasties. Here, a final category of evidence is invaluable: the careers of prominent individuals.
Individual careers
Amongst the large number of seal-impressions recovered from the First Dynasty royal tombs at Abydos and the contemporary élite burials at North Saqqara, a few high officials are mentioned quite frequently, sometimes at different stages of their career. A tentative reconstruction of these careers can be made, illustrating the opportunities for advancement within the Early Dynastic administration. From the very end of the Third Dynasty, the tomb of Metjen at Saqqara preserved numerous titles held
Figure 4.6 The structure of Early Dynastic administration. The chart shows the principal departments and functions of government, together with the titles of some of the major administrative officials ( based upon information from contemporary sources: seal-impressions, inscribed stone vessels and Third Dynasty tomb inscriptions).
by its owner during his long career, which probably began in the reign of Huni and came to an end early in the reign of Sneferu. The inscriptions provide valuable information about many aspects of the administration on the threshold of the Old Kingdom.
Amka
The career of Amka ( m-k3) seems to have begun in the reign of Djer, spanned the entire reign of his successor, Djet, and continued into the early part of Den’s reign, when Egypt was under the regency of Merneith. Seal-impressions naming Amka have been found in the tombs of all three rulers, Djer, Djet and Merneith. The different titles associated with Amka in these three contexts shed some light on his progression through the ranks of the administration. Throughout his career, Amka served in the administration of royal domains. In the reign of Djer, he was already involved in managing the domain called Hr-sh ntỉ- w, and held the titles nbỉ and (hrỉ) nhn(w) (Petrie 1901: pls XVI.121 and XVI.123, respectively). Amka retained the last of these positions under Djer’s successor (Petrie 1900: pl. XIX.10). It was in the regency of Merneith, however, that Amka’s career seems to have peaked. In addition to his previous title of nbỉ, now in the variant form h rp nbỉ, he became a mortuary priest (zh nw-3h ) (Petrie 1900: pl. XX.18) and an administrator ( -mr) (Petrie 1900: pl. XX.15). He finished his career as district administrator ( -mr) of hwt ỉhw, the locality in the western Delta which probably lay in the vicinity of Kom el-Hisn. Hence, he seems to have moved from managing specific royal foundations to a position in the regional administration of the west
ern Delta, the area where most of these foundations were probably situated.
Sekhemkasedj
A second high official whose career spanned more than one reign is Sekhemkasedj (sh m-k3-s ), almost certainly the owner of tomb S3504 at Saqqara (cf. Kaplony 1963, I: 89). Seal-impressions from the tomb, and from the burial of Djet at Abydos, indicate that it was under this king that Sekhemkasedj began his career, again in the sphere of administering royal domains. At first, he held the title nh n(w) (Petrie 1900: pl. XVIII.6, 1901: pl. XVII.129) and a parallel title nh b (Petrie 1900: pl. XVIII.6), perhaps connected in some way with the town of Elkab. His principal office, however, was as administrator ( -mr) of Djet’s own foundation, the domain W3 -Hr. Sekhemkasedj retained this responsibility throughout his career. Indeed, it has even been suggested (Kaplony 1963:110) that the domain was maintained under Merneith only until Sekhemkasedj died, then to be replaced by a new domain (possibly Hr-tpỉ-h f). During the regency of Merneith, Sekhemkasedj was ‘controller’ (h rp) rather than ‘administrator’ of W3 -Hr (Emery 1954:119, fig. 163). He also bore his earlier title nh n(w) in its later variant h rp nh n(w) (Emery 1954:119, fig. 164) and the obscure title h rp nbỉ (Emery 1954:120, fig. 165). In addition to his duties concerning the domain W3 -Hr, Sekhemkasedj was also connected with a royal estate hwt hnn(?) (Emery 1954:118, fig. 159), and towards the end of his career achieved the prestigious position of -mr of the domain Hr-sh ntỉ- w (Emery 1954:116 fig. 151), which seems to have been the most important royal foundation of the early First Dynasty.
Hemaka
Although Hemaka (hm3-k3) served under only one king, namely Den, it is possible to chart something of his career. Kaplony (1963, I: 113) proposed that Hemaka may originally have managed the domain Hr-tpỉ-h t as both administrator ( d-mr) and
controller (h rp). Later, he seems to have taken control of the more prestigious domain Hr-sh ntỉ- w, in succession to the officials Ankhka and Medjedka. Hemaka then continued to exercise authority with respect to both domains until the end of his career. The peak of Hemaka’s achievement must have come with his appointment as royal chancellor (h tmw bỉty), the position at the head of the treasury. He seems to have made the leap from a career connected with the management of royal domains to being the king’s own seal-bearer and thus the acknowledged representative of royal authority. The size and wealth of Hemaka’s tomb at North Saqqara (Emery 1938) is an eloquent testament to the position he achieved by the end of his life.
Metjen
From the disposition of the many titles throughout his tomb chapel, it may be possible to reconstruct something of Metjen’s career (Goedicke 1966). Certainly, the latest titles, inscribed on the walls of an unfinished section of the tomb, relate to a temple of Sneferu and a mortuary estate of Huni, both in the Letopolite nome (the second Lower Egyptian nome). The autobiographical inscription contains a rare piece of direct evidence for career progression: Metjen states that he became district administrator ( -mr) of the Xoïte nome (the sixth Lower Egyptian nome) after he had been z3b and hrỉ-sqr of the same nome. Whether this represented a common pattern of promotion is, of course, impossible to ascertain without comparative evidence. However, it does indicate that an official employed in the administration of a region could expect to advance within that administration, even as far as the top job.
Merka: a high official of the late First Dynasty
Merka was buried in an élite tomb at North Saqqara, mastaba S3505, in the reign of Qaa, the last king of the First Dynasty. The funerary stela of Merka (Emery 1958: pl. 39) presents the most extensive list of titles held by a single individual in the Early Dynastic period. The combination of administrative, courtly and religious titles tells us something, if not about the precise demarcation of responsibilities within the Early Dynastic government, then about the titles and offices which gave an individual status within the royal court.
Three titles are written larger than the rest and appear directly above Merka’s name. We may take these to be the titles considered most important by the deceased himself, and therefore to have indicated most clearly his rank within the highest echelons of the state (Baines 1995:132–3). Surprisingly, perhaps, two of the three titles are religious: sm3 and s(t)m. The first, usually translated ‘stolist’, was held in later periods by the priest who clothed the cult statue of a god (Faulkner 1962:227). Its significance at the end of the First Dynasty is entirely unknown. The s(t)m priest was apparently closely connected with the celebration of royal ritual, and the title may additionally have designated the king’s son. It was apparently the most important title held by Merka and appears immediately before his name. In other words, despite occupying a number of administrative offices and positions connected with the royal household (detailed below), Merka gained his exceptional status—reflected in the size and sophistication of his tomb, complete with its own funerary chapel—from an ancient religious function strongly
associated with the cult of divine kingship. This fact speaks eloquently about the ultimate source of power and authority in Early Dynastic Egypt. That Merka was a member of the royal family is probably indicated by the third title, which appears between sm3 and s(t)m. This is the designation ỉrỉ-p t, which marks Merka as a member of the group of royal kinsmen that constituted the ruling élite in the First Dynasty.
Merka’s remaining titles are written in two columns, although the rudimentary carving and arrangement of the signs at this early period make precise identification difficult. Religious titles include a possible connection with the cult of Anubis, an obscure reference to the scorpion (a cultic object attested in other Early Dynastic sources), and hm-n r Nt, ‘priest of Neith’. The association between the goddess Neith and the royal family is well attested in the First Dynasty (see Chapter 8), and provides yet another indication that Merka was a close member of the king’s immediate circle. Specific administrative offices are comparatively few, suggesting—as indicated earlier—that status came from proximity to the king rather than from occupying particular positions within the apparatus of government. Apart from two obscure references to the ‘office’ (ỉz) and a possible reference to the organisation of phyles, Merka’s primary administrative function was as ‘district administrator of the desert’ ( -mr zmỉt). The sphere of authority of such a position is not known, but it may have entailed responsibility for guarding Egypt’s desert frontiers as well as administration of the deserts themselves, their inhabitants and resources (notably stones and minerals). Whether Merka ever carried out such duties in person cannot of course be gauged, but it seems somewhat unlikely that an official based at the capital would have had much direct contact with the desert regions over which he exercised nominal authority. A further title (h rp Wnt) may indicate administrative responsibility for the region of the Hare-nome, later the fifteenth nome of Upper Egypt, which included the important travertine quarries at Hatnub. It is possible that this combination of regional administrative authority for the desert(s) and the Hare- nome reflects responsibility, above all, for the procurement and supply of raw materials for the stone-cutters of the royal workshops. The other titles held by Merka concern functions within the royal household, once again indicating his membership of the innermost circle of the court. Hence, he was a ‘follower of the king’ (šms-nswt) and ‘controller of the royal bark’ (h rp wỉ3-nswt), the latter being a position which must have been closely involved with royal visits and the periodic ‘following of Horus’. As we shall see, these two types of event were important means by which the doctrine of divine kingship was promulgated, and by which newly won political control over the whole of Egypt was maintained and bolstered. The titles ‘comptroller of the palace’ (h rp h) and ‘comptroller of the audience chamber’ (h rp zh) may have been purely honorary, or they may point to Merka having effectively controlled access to the person of the king; this would have given him great political influence in a country where the king was the ultimate source of authority. Finally, an apparent reference to singers (mrwt) (Emery 195
8:31) cannot be confirmed, since the stela is damaged at this point.
In summary, Merka’s titles reflect a society and an administrative system in which the king was at the pinnacle, both ideologically and politically. The stela of Merka adds to the impression that, aside from the departments of government responsible for state and royal income-the treasury and its sub-departments, royal foundations and the pr-nswt – Early Dynastic administration was perhaps rather loosely organised, lacking precise demarcation of responsibilities.
CHAPTER FIVE FOREIGN RELATIONS
Ancient Egyptian civilisation has traditionally been viewed as a civilisation apart. Separated from the rest of the ancient world by the effective natural borders of the eastern and western deserts and the Mediterranean Sea, the Nile valley fostered a distinctive, and in many ways unique, culture. The comparison and contrast of ancient Egypt with its neighbouring civilisation, Mesopotamia, is a familiar theme for ancient historians. However, to the Egyptologists working earlier this century, the surviving archaeological material from the beginnings of Egyptian civilisation suggested much closer contacts between these two great cultures. Particularly striking to archaeologists like Petrie and Emery were the many borrowings from Mesopotamian iconography manifest on the earliest royal objects from Egypt. Coupled with the extraordinary explosion of creativity and organisational skill which seemed to have occurred at the very inception of the Egyptian state, the artistic evidence prompted these scholars to advance the theory of the ‘Dynastic race’ (Derry 1956; Emery 1961:39–40). An invasion of people from lands to the east, superior to the indigenous Predynastic Egyptians, was proposed as the driving force behind the foundation of the Egyptian state and the emergence of ‘classic’ Egyptian civilisation. By the 1970s this theory had been largely discredited, mainly due to the results of subsequent archaeological work at sites dating to the Predynastic period. These demonstrated the long and indigenous development of many of Egyptian civilisation’s most distinctive features. Moreover, they proved that the processes of craft specialisation, state formation and artistic formalisation had begun many centuries before the beginning of the First Dynasty, in the emergent territories of Upper Egypt. Over the last twenty years, the intensive investigation of Egypt’s origins has enhanced our understanding of these processes immeasurably. Studies have all tended to stress, explicitly or implicitly, the indigenous genius of Egyptian civilisation, eager to claim originality and independence for the achievements of Nile valley culture (cf. Kantor 1965:12–13).
Early Dynastic Egypt Page 21
