THE HIERAKONPOLIS REGION
The growth of the Hierakonpolis region during the Predynastic period has been the focus of much research and is fairly well understood. By contrast, the subsequent history of this part of Egypt during the Early Dynastic period is still rather obscure, although significant contributions have been made in recent years (notably Hoffman et al. 1986). By combining the information derived from excavations at Elkab and Hierakonpolis, we can begin to sketch a picture of development for this part of southern Upper Egypt during the first three dynasties (Figure 10.1 ). Although the fates of the two sites were intertwined, the importance of each derives from a particular set of ecological and economic factors. Lying some 15 kilometres to the south of Hierakonpolis, on the west bank, the town of Edfu grew up during the Old Kingdom, eventually eclipsing Hierakonpolis as the main regional centre. The history of southern Upper Egypt during the Early Dynastic period and early Old Kingdom can be charted in the varying fortunes of these three sites.
Figure 10.1 Map of the Hierakonpolis region showing sites mentioned in the text (after Needier 1984: map 3). Capitals denote ancient place names.
The resource base
To the south of the Hierakonpolis region, at Gebel es-Silsila, the cliffs of the Nubian sandstone formation come close to the river, forming a pronounced constriction. South of this point, the more resistant nature of the rock causes the river to flow in a much narrower floodplain, greatly reducing the strip of cultivable land along the banks of the Nile. Hierakonpolis thus represents the southernmost point of agricultural productivity in Egypt (Bard 1987:90). However, the growth of the region during the Predynastic period resulted from a combination of advantages, strategic as well as agricultural.
In addition to an unusually large area of fertile floodplain (Fairservis 1971–2:10), the Hierakonpolis region offered other ecological advantages which made it particularly attractive for early settlement. In Predynastic times, the wide expanse of what is now low desert would have been less arid savannah, capable of supporting game as well as providing pasturage for livestock. The combination of arable and grazing land was clearly advantageous, and ‘the existence of a now defunct Nile channel close to the edge of the desert may have attracted settlers to an array of closely spaced ecozones’
(R.Friedman 1994:388–9; cf. Hoffman et al. 1986:178). The presence of abundant fuel, desert clays and suitable locations for kilns favoured the development of large-scale pottery production (Hoffman 1984:237), an industry which reached industrial proportions as early as the Naqada I period. Hierakonpolis seems also to have developed as an important entrepôt for prestige goods imported from Nubia and the African hinterland, especially elephant ivory, ebony and gold (cf. Bard 1987:90–1). During the period of state formation, Hierakonpolis was a centre of production and distribution for Egyptian goods found in Lower Nubian A-Group graves, including the pottery known as ‘Late- ware’ or ‘Hard orange ware’ (Takamiya 1994; B.Adams 1995:21). Finally, the site of Hierakonpolis lies opposite the head of a major wadi system, the Wadi Abbad, which gave access to the mineral resources of the eastern desert, including gold-bearing rocks which were probably exploited in Predynastic times. This factor may have been a key one for the early importance of Hierakonpolis (Trigger, in Trigger et al. 1983:39; R.Friedman 1994:389). Hierakonpolis thus had the agricultural base to support a substantial population, and the concentration of resources to produce a regular surplus. This in turn enabled craft specialisation. Ready access to raw materials and favourable sites for pottery manufacture provided further support for local industry; access to markets and a strategic location astride an important trade route encouraged economic activity.
In sharp contrast to the situation on the west bank, the strip of cultivable land in the vicinity of Elkab is extremely narrow. The present course of the Nile is probably not very different from that in ancient times. Then, as now, the town of Elkab seems to have been situated on the river’s edge. As a result, control of river traffic—rather than access to a large area of fertile floodplain—was one of the keys to the site’s prosperity. Moreover, the location of Elkab at the mouth of the Wadi Hellal permitted control of land routes as well (Hendrickx 1994:10). Elkab must therefore have been an important communications and transport node from Predynastic times. The Wadi Hellal also gave access to the wider wadi system of the eastern desert with its gold-bearing rocks. Gold was certainly dispatched via Elkab during historic times (Hendrickx 1994:10, quoting Helck 1975:126); whilst soda, also mined in the vicinity (Hendrickx 1994:10, quoting Lucas 1962:192–8), provided a further mineral resource. Whatever the benefits of raw materials and a strategic location, a site can enjoy little long-term viability without at least some agricultural potential. Although lacking in alluvial arable land, the population of Elkab did have access to grazing land, in the Wadi Hellal. The wadi appears to have supported limited pasturage as late as the end of the Old Kingdom, indicating that rainfall must have been considerably higher in ancient times. A savanna-type environment probably extended several kilometres along the wadi, providing hunting grounds. Rock drawings, some of which are likely to be Predynastic, show some of the game which lived in the area and which the local population hunted (Hendrickx 1994:10). Like its neighbour over the river, Elkab benefited from the twin blessings of a resource base (though with the emphasis on minerals rather than agricultural land) and a strategic location.
Changing patterns of settlement
The pattern of Predynastic settlement in and around Hierakonpolis is relatively well- established. Due to its unique combination of advantages, Hierakonpolis itself seems to have been the focus of regional settlement. No doubt a buoyant local economy and the
presence of a ceremonial centre attracted people from the surrounding region. Although there has been no systematic survey of the Hierakonpolis region beyond the limits of the American expedition’s concession, visits by members of the expedition to nearby desert- edge sites, local knowledge and an earlier archaeological-geological survey (Kaiser 1961b) all indicate that Hierakonpolis is the only significant Predynastic settlement in the area (Hoffman 1984:236). However, de Morgan’s survey of the region in 1906–7 and 1907–8 revealed at least 20 Predynastic and/or Early Dynastic sites between Esna and Gebel es-Silsila (Needier 1984; Bard 1987:81). This suggests that southern Upper Egypt was quite extensively settled during the Predynastic period (cf. Bard 1987:81), and subsequently experienced a nucleation of settlement at the beginning of the Early Dynastic period (in common with other regions of Egypt).
Adaïma was the largest site excavated by de Morgan, and is now the focus of ongoing excavations (Midant-Reynes et al 1990, 1992, 1996). The cemetery was used continuously from late Naqada I to the beginning of the First Dynasty (Midant-Reynes et al. 1992:141); continued activity into the Early Dynastic period is attested by the lithic assemblage, in particular a fragment of a large, bifacially ripple-flaked, flint knife (Needier 1984:83). On the east bank of the Nile, 12 kilometres north of Elkab, de Morgan reported a heavily plundered cemetery at es-Siba‘iya East which seems to have remained in use throughout much of the Early Dynastic period (Needier 1984:146). Indeed, a nearby children’s cemetery, largely unexplored, can be dated by its associated pottery to the middle of the First Dynasty. Only 5 kilometres north of Nekhen, a very large cemetery of over 200 graves was excavated at el-Mamariya (Needier 1984:90). It seems to have comprised two distinct areas: an earlier one dating to the Predynastic period (Naqada I–II) (Needier 1984:91), and a later one spanning the end of the First Dynasty and the Second Dynasty. In the southern part of the Hierakonpolis region, 7 kilometres north of Edfu, de Morgan excavated an Early Dynastic cemetery of about 100 tombs at el-Qara. His notebooks also mention a settlement at this site, but no investigations were made (Needier 1984:122).
It is difficult to draw reliable conclusions from the published results of de Morgan’s survey and excavations, but if the site of Adaïma may be taken as typical of the region as a whole, it would appear t
hat many communities which had flourished during the Predynastic period were subsequently abandoned in the aftermath of state formation: a phenomenon which marks the rise of urbanism. As Nekhen and Elkab emerged as leading centres of economic activity and population, many smaller village communities in the vicinity seem to have succumbed to the inevitable pressures. A few, such as es-Siba‘iya East and el-Qara must have retained enough local advantages to survive. The settlement at el-Mamariya may actually have benefited from its proximity to Nekhen; the local population may have been able to take some part in the increased economic activity which was now concentrated within its neighbouring town.
During the late Naqada II and throughout the Naqada III periods the Hierakonpolis region witnessed a progressive shift of settlement away from the Great Wadi and towards the floodplain (B.Adams 1995). The town of Nekhen continued to grow during the First Dynasty; the site as a whole witnessed renewed royal patronage at the end of the Second Dynasty. Occupation of the walled town and its two outliers seems to have persisted into the early Old Kingdom (B.Adams 1995:64), and Nekhen may have continued during this period as ‘an important manufacturing and trading centre for copper and, possibly, gold’
(Hoffman et al. 1986). The settled area at Elkab seems to have remained fairly static during the late Predynastic and Early Dynastic periods (cf. Hendrickx and Huyge 1989: pl. II). Strategic considerations, which lay behind the location of the early town, probably prevented any significant shift of the settled area.
THE NAQADA REGION
Whilst the Hierakonpolis region seems to have been at the forefront of state formation, another site has emerged as the leading Upper Egyptian centre in earlier Predynastic times. This is Naqada, located on the west bank of the Nile, opposite the entrance to the Wadi Hammamat. The wadi, ‘one of the relatively few direct and well watered accesses to the Red Sea coast’ (R.Friedman 1994:286), afforded easy access to the gold reserves of the eastern desert. Moreover, the bend in the Nile as it flows through the Naqada region ‘brings the river closer to the Red Sea than at any other point in its course’ (R.Friedman 1994:286). Both these geographic factors would have made Naqada (and Coptos, on the opposite bank of the Nile) an ideal centre for the Predynastic gold trade. After the early First Dynasty the major focus of population moved northwards to a new location, the town of Nubt. During the course of the Early Dynastic period, this too declined in importance, as Naqada was relegated to a position of provincial obscurity. The eclipse of Naqada was accompanied by the rise of Dendera, some 25 kilometres to the north, and perhaps of Thebes, a similar distance to the south. This is probably no coincidence, and may be part of a more widespread phenomenon in which the role of provincial capital was transferred from the traditional centre – in many cases an important Predynastic settlement—to a new town (Kemp 1989).
Coptos, Hu and the rise of Dendera
Just why Naqada—rather than Coptos, located directly at the mouth of the Wadi Hammamat—came to dominate the surrounding region in the Predynastic period is not clear. It is a curious fact that all the most important centres of late Predynastic and Early Dynastic Upper Egypt were located on the west bank of the river (with the possible exception of Elephantine, an island in the Nile). Whether this is pure coincidence, or whether the west bank had a natural advantage, is difficult to say. In Upper Egypt today, the expanse of floodplain is wider on the west bank than on the east bank, but this may not have been the case in the fourth millennium BC. The Coptos colossi indicate that this site was an important cult centre from late Predynastic times, and the symbols carved on these statues suggest that Coptos was a centre of long-distance trade in artefacts from the Red Sea coast; but it never seems to have become a major regional focus of population. At the beginning of the Old Kingdom, both Coptos and the neighbouring site of Hu/Abadiya (cf. Williams 1986:176) were displaced as important provincial centres by Dendera: the titles borne by the early Fourth Dynasty administrators of Dendera refer to a grouping of three adjacent districts, Coptos, Dendera and Hu (Fischer 1968). The centralisation of power which seems to have occurred at the beginning of the Old Kingdom—and which is most spectacularly attested by the pyramids of the Fourth Dynasty—was achieved partly by means of a fundamental reorganisation of economic
and administrative structures. The evidence from sites such as Dendera suggests that another plank of this programme was a conscious policy to integrate the provinces of Upper Egypt by removing the reins of power from the hands of the traditional ruling families (which may have retained significant influence over their communities during the Early Dynastic period). Centres such as Hierakonpolis, Naqada, Coptos and Hu had risen to great prominence during the Predynastic period. Following the formation of the Egyptian state, regional capitals would have served as key nodes in the national administrative apparatus. The transfer of this role from traditional centres to new towns would have been an effective means of bypassing pre-existing regional power structures and exerting central control.
Smaller communities
A re-examination of the evidence has shown that, far from being isolated centres within an otherwise sparsely populated region, Naqada and Coptos were surrounded by an extensive network of smaller communities, all of which seem to have benefited from the region’s economic and political advantages (R.Friedman 1994:345, fig. 8.1; contra Patch 1991:353). Although settlement remains have only been identified at a few sites – Coptos, Naqada North Town and South Town, and Khattara—a larger number of cemeteries have been excavated in the Naqada region, pointing to a relatively dense settlement pattern. On the east bank of the Nile, the most significant site published to date is the Predynastic burial ground at Khozam, 25 kilometres south of Coptos (Hendrickx 1992). Here, a series of cemeteries seems to have been strung out along the desert edge, comprising many hundreds of burials ranging in date from the Badarian or Naqada I period to the threshold of the First Dynasty. The general picture at Khozam seems to parallel that in other regions of Upper Egypt: a series of small cemeteries spanned the entire duration of the Predynastic period, only to be abandoned at the beginning of the Early Dynastic period when the regional population moved to fewer, densely packed settlements, in this case Naqada and Coptos.
THE ABYDOS REGION
The Abydos region (Figure 10.2) was at the heart of the state formation process, and the demographic changes which took place here during the first three dynasties reflect the wider political developments affecting the nation as a whole. A detailed archaeological survey of the Abydos region (Patch 1991) has indicated that the local south-east quadrant of the region was always lightly settled; by contrast, settlements were more numerous in the north-east quadrant and along the entire west bank of the region (O’Connor 1990:6). By the Old Kingdom at the latest, settlement clustered around two major centres, Abydos itself and This, the regional capital.
Figure 10.2 Map of the Abydos region showing sites mentioned in the text (after Wilkinson 1993a: fig. 22). Capitals denote ancient place names.
The resource base
‘Abydos today is the richest agricultural zone in Upper Egypt, and presumably agriculture was the basis of its wealth in Predynastic times’ (Bard 1987:90). Moreover, it has been suggested that herding and the exploitation of large stands of timber may have been important elements in the regional economy (O’Connor 1990:6). However, the capacity to produce a food surplus is, on its own, not enough to explain the rise to prominence of the Abydos region during the Predynastic period. A similar advantage
must have been shared by other stretches of the Nile valley which did not develop a central place on the scale of Abydos/This (Bard 1987:90–1). The Abydos region seems to have benefited from a strategic location for trade. Abydos itself lies closer to the oases of the western desert than any other site in the Nile valley. It is possible that the Abydos region acted as an entrepôt for prestige materials (such as elephant ivory, hard stones for vessels and beads, and ochre) entering the Nile valley from the western desert (Bard 1987:90)
.
The town and cemeteries of This
‘The history and functions of Abydos cannot be understood without reference to Thinis’ (O’Connor 1990:6). Ironically, the principal settlement in the Abydos region during the Predynastic and Early Dynastic periods has not been located by archaeologists. The town probably lay close to, if not directly beneath, the modern town of Girga. An inscribed statue fragment which mentions Thinis is said to have been found at the nearby site of el- Birba, a little to the west; this may help to identify the precise whereabouts of the ancient settlement (Brovarski 1986:475, 481 n. 2). If the burials at Naga ed-Deir may be taken as a guide—the cemetery probably served This as its main burial ground—the town seems to have existed from at least the Naqada I period. It assumed a greater significance during the late Predynastic period, as the presumed capital of one of the three Upper Egyptian polities, Naqada and Hierakonpolis being the other two. The political and economic power wielded by the late Predynastic Thinite kings must have brought the town itself prosperity and importance on a truly national scale. However, the victorious Thinite kings of the First Dynasty chose to found a new national capital at the junction of Upper and Lower Egypt: Memphis. The town of This probably drew some benefit from its close contacts with the court, but it was to be denied a role as the pre-eminent city of the newly unified state. Instead, it was relegated to the position of a regional capital.
Early Dynastic Egypt Page 48
