northeast africa and the levant in connection

This pdf of your paper in 'Interweaving Worlds: Systemic Interactions in Eurasia, 7th to the 1st Millennia BC' belongs to the publishers Oxbow Books and it is their copyright.As author you are licenced to make up to 50 offprints from it, but beyond that you may not publish it on the World Wide Web until three years from publication (November 2014), unless the site is a limited access intranet (password protected). If you have queries about this please contact the editorial department at Oxbow Books ([email protected]).

An offprint from

InterweavIng worldssystemic Interactions in eurasia, 7th to 1st Millennia BC

Papers from a conference in memory of Professor Andrew Sherratt

what Would a Bronze age world system look like? world systems approaches to europe and western asia 4th to 1st millennia BC

EditorsToby C. Wilkinson, Susan Sherratt and John Bennet

OXBOW BOOKS 2011ISBN 978-1-84217-998-7

Contents

Contributors v

1. Introduction 1 Susan Sherratt2. global development 4 Andrew Sherratt

a. the warp: global systems and Interactions3. evolutions and temporal delimitations of Bronze age world-systems in western asia and the Mediterranean 7 Philippe Beaujard4. the Mediterranean and the Mediterranean world in the age of andrew sherratt 27 Cyprian Broodbank5. Ingestion and Food technologies: Maintaining differences over the long-term in west, south and east asia 37 Dorian Q Fuller and Michael Rowlands6. Revolutionary Secondary Products: the Development and Significance of Milking, animal-traction and wool-gathering in later Prehistoric europe and the near east 61 Paul Halstead and Valasia Isaakidou7. world-systems and Modelling Macro-Historical Processes in later Prehistory: an examination of old and a search for new Perspectives 77 Philip L. Kohl8. From luxuries to anxieties: a liminal view of the late Bronze age world-system 87 Christopher M. Monroe9. re-integrating diffusion: the spread of Innovations among the neolithic and Bronze age societies of europe and the near east 100 Lorenz Rahmstorf10. what might the Bronze age world-system look like? 120 David A. Warburton11. Archival and Sacrificial Economies in Bronze Age Eurasia: an Interactionist Approach 135 to the Hoarding of Metals David Wengrow

vContents

B. the weft: the local and the global

12. the Formation of economic systems and social Institutions during the Fifth and Fourth Millennia BC in the southern levant 145 Nils Anfinset13. negotiating Metal and the Metal Form in the royal tombs of alacahyk in north-Central anatolia 158 Christoph Bachhuber

14. the near east, europe, and the routes of Community in the early Bronze age Black sea 175 Alexander A. Bauer15. Between assyria and the Mediterranean world: the Prosperity of Judah and Philistia in the seventh Century BCe in Context 189 Avraham Faust and Ehud Weiss16. northeast africa and the levant in Connection: a world-systems Perspective on Interregional relationships in the early second Millennium BC 205 Roxana Flammini17. strands of Connectivity: assessing the evidence for long distance exchange of silk in later Prehistoric eurasia 218 Irene Good18. travelling in (world) time: transformation, Commoditization, and the Beginnings of Urbanism in the southern levant 231 Raphael Greenberg19. Bridging India and scandinavia: Institutional transmission and elite Conquest during the Bronze age 243 Kristian Kristiansen20. new Kid on the Block: the nature of the First systemic Contacts between Crete and the eastern Mediterranean around 2000 BC 266 Borja Legarra Herrero21. lost in translation: the emergence of Mycenaean Culture as a Phenomenon of glocalization 282 Joseph Maran22. anticipating the silk road: some thoughts on the woolMurex Connection in tyre 295 Jane Schneider23. Unbounded structures, Cultural Permeabilities and the Calyx of Change: Mesopotamia and its world 303 Norman Yoffee

Nils AnfinsetUniversity of Bergen

Alexander A. BauerCity University of new York

Christoph BachhuberBritish Institute at ankara

Philippe BeaujardCnrs

John BennetUniversity of Sheffield

Cyprian BroodbankUniversity College london

Avraham FaustBar-Ilan University

Roxanna FlamminiPontifical Catholic University of ArgentinaConICet

Dorian Q FullerUniversity College london

Irene GoodHarvard University

Raphael Greenbergtel aviv University

Paul HalsteadUniversity of Sheffield

Valasia IsaakidouUniversity of Sheffield

Philip L. Kohlwellesley College

Kristian KristiansenUniversity of gothenburg

Borja Legarra HerreroUniversity of leicester

Joseph MaranUniversity of Heidelberg

Christopher M. MonroeCornell University

Lorenz RahmstorfUniversity of Mainz

Michael RowlandsUniversity College london

Jane SchneiderCity University of new York

Susan SherrattUniversity of Sheffield

David A. WarburtonUniversity of lyon

Ehud WeissBar-Ilan University

David WengrowUniversity College london

Toby C. WilkinsonUniversity of Sheffield

Norman YoffeeUniversity of nevada

ContrIBUtors

Archaeologist, Teacher, Friend.Professor Andrew G. Sherratt, 19462006.

16.

Northeast Africa and the Levant in Connection: a World-Systems Perspective on Interregional Relationships in the Early Second Millennium BC

Roxana Flammini

Traditionally, the study of the relationships between Egypt and its neighbours is one of the main topics in studies on the ancient Near East, an extremely extensive spatial and temporal one. Approaches vary in their goals and in their way of analysis from mainly economic, political and social points of view. In many senses, researchers concur with the view that these relationships began due to transfers of prestige goods, to become complemented through time with more complex forms of interaction (Sherratt and Sherratt 1991).

With regard to Egypt, most research in this area is centred on defi ning the characteristics of the links between Egypt and the societies with whom Egyptians interacted. In such a context, an approach that shifts the focus away from Egypt will allow us to take the analysis to a higher level and add a systemic examination of the relationships. Despite its detractors, a world-systems perspective allows, precisely, consideration of a wider view, since the fundamental unit of historical development is not the single society, but the entire intersocietal context within which individual societies exist (Chase-Dunn and Hall 1993, 851; on the discussion

In world-systems terms, the reunited Egyptian state can be classifi ed as a core area during the Middle Kingdom, while the Levant and Upper Nubia, mainly the cities of Byblos and Kerma respectively, can be defi ned as its northern and southern peripheries, due to their supposed asymmetrical relationships to central Egypt. In the peripheries there were no active traces of economic exploitation or political domination by the core during the Middle Kingdom, but instead there are traces of cultural, economical or political practices originating from it. The same is not true in the opposite direction. This paper reviews the evidence for this asymmetry in both textual and archaeological sources and the interpretation they have received during the last few years.

about the meaning of the concept world-system, with and without hyphen, cf. Gills 2002).

Furthermore, this theoretical model shifts the focus from an exclusive analysis of Egypt in its relationship with other social entities to a wider fi eld of investigation, in which the analysis of a whole system of relationships in operation becomes the subject, no matter what role Egypt performed there. Thus, although the importance and the role Egypt played was signifi cant, it should be considered as just one society among others in the interregional network of relationships of the early second millennium BC (ca. 20501650 BC). Taking into account this premise, I can move forward to propose a more accurate characterization for this system and to delimit the role each of the systems partners played during the period considered here.

As a matter of fact, relationships with non-Egyptian societies took place not only from the emergence of the Egyptian state onwards (ca. 3200 BC), but also during pre-dynastic times. Material evidence has shown that the elites of the proto-states of Nagada, Hierakonpolis and Abydos in the

Roxana Flammini206

Figure 16.1. Northeast Africa and the Levant during the early second millennium BC: locations cited in the text.

16. Northeast Africa and the Levant in Connection 207

south, and those of sites like Buto in the north, maintained close connections with Nubian and Asiatic social groups respectively (Bard 2002; Wenke 1991). In this way, it is highly possible that a world-system encompassing northeast Africa and western Asia began to form during those early times.

The denomination Egyptian world-system is commonly used (Cline 2000; Allen 2005; Chase-Dunn et al. 2006) following the designation of its main core. Yet an analysis of the underlying ideas behind this term shows that its meaning is imprecise, to say the least. The ancient Egyptian state was its core during a long but a limited time span. Furthermore, in different historical situations, the Egyptian state can hardly be defi ned as a core (Wilkinson 1991). During the Second Intermediate Period, it is probable that coreness shifted from properly Egyptian cities to those under foreign domination like Avaris and even the existence of an Egyptian state is highly debatable. Even though the situation during the First Intermediate Period in Egypt is less clear, it should be taken into account, since it is possible that a number of core cities appeared at that moment in Egypt, with the temporary decentralization of the Egyptian unifi ed state. In the same way, during most of the fi rst millennium BC, Egypt became a periphery of cores located far away from Africa.

Thus, the conceptualization Egyptian world-system suggests that Egypt always acted as its core. Yet as I stated before, this is a statement hard to sustain. In fact, any denomination based in socio-political entities lacks a suffi cient timespan to include different historical situations or modifi cations in the categorization of the partners of the relationship. Therefore, I shall propose a different designation for this system, based on a consideration of geographical features that allows a wider use of it.

Undoubtedly, the main axis of economic and social connections in northeast Africa was the Nile. Starting in the interior of Africa, this axis reached the Levant through a sea route and a land route, both of them starting from the Egyptian eastern Delta. Of course, not only did the Nilotic axis connect regions, it also engaged different social groups in an extensive network of relationships from early times on. In this way, Asiatics, Egyptians, Nubians and later Libyans, Cretans and other societies from the Eastern Mediterranean were engaged in that network of interconnection.

All this means that a new defi nition should take into account the importance of the Nile as an axis of interconnection. Thus, a NiloticLevantine world-system (NLws) can be delineated at least until the mid-second millennium BC, when fi rstly Hyksos control of the Nile from the eastern Delta to Cusae and their relationships with the Levant, and later Egyptian control of the Levantine centres after the Hyksos were defeated enlarged the former network of exchanges. This new defi nition allows, for instance, shifting coreness from Egypt to Nubia or to the Hyksos kingdom, avoiding the

contradiction of naming Egyptian a world-system in which Egypt did not play the core role.

Following these preliminary considerations, I shall move forward to an analysis of the NLws during the early second millennium BC. To begin with, I shall take into account the premise that the presence of a world-system is supported by the existence of systemic relations among different societies, considering that the particular confi guration a world-system presents should be understood in a specifi c historical conjuncture.

The NLws in the early second millennium BCThe alternative possibilities of one world-system with multiple core-areas (Kohl 1987) or a world-system with a core located in Egypt which came into contact with the Mesopotamian world-system after 1500 BC to form the central one (Wilkinson 1991), has long been discussed among scholars. In fact, direct or indirect relationships between partners could be a clue to elucidating this specifi c point. On the one hand, it is considered that the weakness of the ties between Mesopotamia and Egypt makes the hypothesis of the existence of a multiple core-areas world-system before 1500 BC hard to accept (Beaujard 2005, 417). On the other hand, the consideration that all indirect interactions were of systemic importance makes it possible to maintain that there was a single global world-system (Frank and Gills 1996; for variations in the historical scope of this global world-system, cf. Hall 2004). Possibly, the key to fi nding a resolution is to reach an agreement concerning the extent of world-systems boundaries, a topic which has received much attention (Chase-Dunn and Hall 1993; Sherratt 1994; Allen 1997; Cline 2000; Chase-Dunn et al. 2005, 2006; Hall 2004; Beaujard 2005). The detection of systemic relations to defi ne boundaries is a crucial point. In this sense, I consider that only direct, regular, two-way relationships (Chase-Dunn and Jorgenson 2001) are systemic, while the existence of several interweaving world-systems in the ancient Near East should also be taken into account.

Furthermore, I could move a step forward in defi ning systemic relationships: a distinction has to be made between different spheres of interaction (economic, social, political) and the types of interaction that can be recognized in such different spheres (symmetrical, asymmetrical). Symmetrical relationships are those in which partners can be placed at the same level of interaction, while asymmetrical relationships recognize a differentiated status among them (related or not to coercive long-term practices). The asymmetrical types of systemic relationships allow us to delimit cores and peripheries. Nevertheless, the characteristics of a given world-system should be established in a specifi c historical

Roxana Flammini208

conjuncture based on the information given by the sources. These features can be measured and can, indeed, allow us to delimit the scope of the NLws during the early second millennium BC.

It is worth formulating some further considerations. The Egyptian state did not extend over a homogeneous territory, but rather over the banks of the Nile from the Delta in the north to Semna in the south its southern boundary was at Elephantine/Aswan until the 12th Dynasty reign of Sesostris III, when Lower Nubia became part of Egypt and the southern boundary extended progressively to Semna. Its settlement pattern was considerably different from that of Nubia and the Levant. During the Middle Kingdom, the Egyptian central administration was re-established. The period was framed by two profound crises of the state: the First and the Second Intermediate Periods, whose particularities and development were completely different.

Scholars traditionally agree that once the Theban rulers of the 11th Dynasty defeated the Herakleopolitan dynastic line by the end of the First Intermediate Period they inaugurated one of the most important periods of state power the Middle Kingdom despite the fact that they never abandoned the city of Thebes. Their successors, the Theban kings of the 12th Dynasty, again moved the capital to the north, not to Memphis but to a new location named Amenemhet Iti-Tawy (Amenemhet is he who seized the Two Lands) near Lisht North. From the very beginning, these kings initiated a strong advance on those regions where they could obtain goods. In this way, they not only advanced along the Nile, but sent expeditions to uninhabited locations like those where quarries and mines could be exploited commonly located in the western and eastern deserts or in the Sinai; and to inhabited ones, like the land of Punt. There is no reason to fi nd systemic relations in those uninhabited locations, but it is appropriate to try to fi nd them in those places where intersocietal relationships could have taken place. This could be the case of the people of Punt. Even though we are aware of the way Egyptians organized the expeditions to the land of Punt during the Middle Kingdom, and extremely important information regarding the port of departure of the Egyptian expeditions (Mersa Gawasis, Red Sea coast) and the goods Egypt acquired at Punt has been recovered (the marvels of Punt, mainly myrrh; Fattovich and Bard 2006), there have been no excavations at the possible places of mooring of the Egyptian ships and of exchange with the Puntites (Aqiq was suggested, see Fattovich 1996). Therefore, it is not possible to advance in the analysis of these relationships from a world-system perspective, at least until new evidence becomes available and can be evaluated in order to determine if systemic relations were established.

The situation along the Nile axis is better known. The early 12th Dynasty kings initiated a strong advance over Lower

Nubia ancient Wawat, located between the First Cataract and Semna and continued the advance their predecessors initiated over the eastern Delta, a territory where the Egyptian state lost its presence during the crisis of the First Intermediate Period. Both territories were incorporated (Lower Nubia) or reincorporated (the eastern Delta) under the umbrella of the Egyptian state during the Middle Kingdom. We can call them linking areas because despite the fact that they were incorporated into the boundaries of Egypt, a) the intervention exerted by the Egyptian state on them was quite different from the practices held in the core proper and b) their main role was to link the core with the Levant and Upper Nubia (Flammini 2008).

In Nubia, besides the well-known Egyptian occupation, Nubian C-Group settlements were located mainly close to the Nile between the First and the Second Cataracts in Lower Nubia (Adams 1977; Anderson 1999), while the Nubian city of Kerma was placed upstream of the Third Cataract in Upper Nubia (Bonnet and Valbelle 2006).

Egyptians built a chain of visually interconnected fortresses in Lower Nubia during the Middle Kingdom, a singular feature which does not appear in the core itself. The occupation of the fortresses was based on rotating garrisons until the late 12th/early 13th Dynasty, when it changed to permanent settlers. These settlers were Egyptian colonists whose main activity was to trade with the Nubian commercial node located in Kerma (Smith 1995; 2003). After the fall of the Egyptian core during the Second Intermediate Period, these people continued to work for the ruler of Kush (Inscriptions of Ka and Sepedhor found at Buhen, cf. Sve-Sderbergh 1949; Valbelle 2004). The Egyptian state tried to reach three complementary goals through its actions in Lower Nubia: fi rstly, to handle the movement of Nubians into Egypt; secondly, to exploit the quarries and mines located in the western and eastern Nubian deserts; and, thirdly, to manage the exchange with Kerma.

During the early second millennium BC, Kerma was an impressive city. Expanded around the deffufa, its main building, the city was surrounded by bastioned fortifi cations (Bonnet 1986; Bonnet and Valbelle 2006). Although Kerma society was stratifi ed, it is uncertain whether it was organized as a state or as a kinship-based society during the Middle Kerma period (ca. 20001750 BC). A huge hut, located near the deffufa, probably served as a political and ritual centre, and the necropolis, situated nearly 4 km east from the city, shows a clearly differentiated society. During the Middle Kerma phase, human sacrifi ces are attested in the major rounded tumuli of the necropolis (Sackho 1998). Unfortunately, the absence of written sources makes it diffi cult to gain detailed knowledge of the social organization, but these two points are separate: material evidence demonstrates that relations with the Egyptian state were long-lasting.


The eastern Delta was another territory that caught the attention of the Egyptian state during the Middle Kingdom. The Egyptian kings built palaces and administrative districts (wwt) there. Moreno Garca (1999, 187188), after making an analysis of the Tale of Sinuhe lines B19 and R4445, proposed that these administrative districts were fortifi ed, but archaeological evidence of this feature has yet to be found.

These locations especially the administrative district located in Ezbet Rushdi, near Tell el Dabca (the ancient Avaris) favoured exchange between Egypt and the Levantine coast, particularly the Syrian coast during the early Middle Kingdom. Ezbet Rushdi has produced the earliest Middle Minoan pottery fragments found in Egypt and also Levantine pottery probably imported from the northern Levant. A settlement of people with a strong MBIIA Levantine cultural background was established at Tell el Dabca, probably during the last years of Amenemhet IIIs reign (ca. 18531808 BC). The features this site presents are unique in Egypt. It was likely related to activities connected with the sea route to the Levant and the exploitation of turquoise and copper in the Sinai quarries (Marcus 2007). There is strong evidence of people from the Levant and Egyptians taking part together in the expeditions to Serabit el Khadim and Maghara; these joint expeditions were organized by the Egyptian state (Gardiner, Peet and ern 1955; Valbelle and Bonnet 1996). Manfred Bietak pointed out that the fi rst inhabitants of Tell el Dabca came not only from the Levantine coast but also from an urban tradition: all the evidence suggests that their mother city was, precisely, Byblos (Bietak 1997, 98).

One of the main Egyptian written sources mentioning contacts with the Levant and Nubia is the Inscription of Amenemhet II at Mit Rahina (Marcus 2007). It refers to the arrival of raw materials and manufactured objects as bakw, brought to the Egyptian king by the sons of the rulers of Asia and Nubia, and peaceful as well as punitive expeditions mainly sent to Levantine locations (Altenmller and Moussa 1991). The translation of bakw as tribute is disputed because there is no proof that Egypt dominated those who sent bakw, at least during the Middle Kingdom. A more accurate translation could be gift-offerings since it does not imply domination (it has also been translated contributions, Galn 2002, 3334; a discussion on the use of the term during the New Kingdom in Warburton 1997, 237257) but still implies an asymmetrical relationship between the giver and the receiver since the root of the word is related to the concept of servant.

Unfortunately, it has not been possible to identify accurately the specifi c sites mentioned in the Inscription, despite the fact that many researchers have proposed the identifi cation of Iasy with Alasiya, i.e. Cyprus (Helck 1989; Redford 1992; Quack 1996; see discussion in Marcus 2007, 144). Other references are extremely general as they refer to Lebanon or Asia. Contemporary material evidence,

such as the Td Treasure, also shows the existence of contacts with the Levant, but its origin is a matter of debate (Marcus 2007). From Sesostris IIIs reign, an inscription found in Khnumhotep IIIs mastaba in Dahshur mentions the intervention of the Egyptian king in a dispute between Byblos and Ullaza, where Egyptians sent ships in search of cedar wood (Allen 2008).

Most importantly, the regional situations in Syria and Palestine need to be distinguished. Most Syrian cities were occupied without interruption from the last phases of the Early Bronze to the Middle Bronze. In this way, Syrian cities Ugarit, Byblos maintained and even improved their connections with other political entities, like the Egyptian state, Cyprus, or those located in the Aegean (Gerstenblith 1983; Marcus 2002). But Palestinian settlements were abandoned by the end of the Early Bronze Age and the process of reoccupation of the ancient sites, or the foundation of new ones, took place during part of the following period. The very fi rst centres reoccupied at the beginning of the MBIIA were located near the coast, probably infl uenced by the exchange activity between Egypt and the coastal cities of the northern Levant through the maritime route the so-called Byblos-run (Stager 1992) and the introduction of the technology of tin-bronze. Indeed, in the beginning of the Palestinian MBIIA new objects of tin-bronze became common among the repertoire of Palestinian manufactured objects. They were probably local imitations of Syrian prototypes (Dever 1987), since technical studies of metal weapons suggest the northern Levant as the source for tin-bronze metallurgy (Philip 1991; Marcus 2002). In this way, Palestinian cities began to participate in the regional exchanges which also generated a progressive expansion of networks, from the coastal sites of Palestine to the interior (Cohen 2002).

Recent excavations in the southern Levant show that at least two sites located near the Palestinian coast (Tell Ifshar and Askhelon) probably participated in exchange with Egypt and the northern Levant in the MBIIA. Egyptian ceramic imports, together with early Levantine Painted Ware, were found at Tell Ifshar; these fi ndings evidence a connection with both Egypt and the northern Levant at this sites incipient state of settlement (Marcus 2007, 175) but this material needs more study before it can be determined if there was any kind of systemic relationship. Regarding the well dated forty-seven Egyptian seal impressions found at Ashkelon (late 12th/early 13th Dynasty), not only do they remain unpublished but also there is no other evidence, in the city or in the core, which would allow us to include it as a periphery of the system in this period (Stager 2002, 353357).

From the information presented above we can infer the existence of relationships among the regions under consideration, but our goal is to detect systemic relations in precise locations. In order to defi ne them we should address

Roxana Flammini210

the following features: on the one hand, the establishment of the spheres of interaction; on the other, the types of interaction. I shall refer to the concepts of heterarchy, hierarchy and asymmetry.

Discussion: Characterizing the Core-Periphery Relationships in the NLws during the Early Second Millennium BCWe possess information about the interaction among the Egyptian state, many Levantine polities, and Kerma during the early second millennium BC. Sources reveal that the main type of interaction they maintained was based on the exchange of goods (mainly prestige goods) through a network of relationships. Which goods were transferred through the system? From or through the Levant, precious metals, raw materials and some manufactured products arrived: silver, bronze, copper, aromatics and medicinal plants, cedar wood, resins, moringa oil, olive oil and bronze artefacts. From or through Upper Nubia mainly precious metals and raw materials were brought, such as gold, ebony, incense, animal skins and ivory (goods mentioned in the Inscription of Amenemhet II at Mit Rahina, cf. Altenmller and Moussa 1991; Marcus 2007; or found in the Td Treasure, cf. Bisson de la Roque 1953). Egypt produced manufactured goods with those raw materials and metals, such as ointments, jewellery, textiles and pottery. Unfortunately, many of these items do not survive in the archaeological record.

Nevertheless, and despite the particular historical situation of the partners involved in this network of exchanges, the system not only survived but also continued to develop, increasing the amount of goods exchanged and the number of partners involved through time. A regional division of labour is another feature that can be observed in these relationships, and this differentiation helps to delineate the role each partner performed in the system. As mentioned above, Egypt produced mainly manufactured products a feature commonly attributed to cores while Kerma and the Levantine polities exported mainly raw materials a feature commonly attributed to peripheries.

Yet, trade was not the only way goods were exchanged during the fi rst half of the second millennium BC: foreign rulers sent the Egyptian king certain goods as gift-offerings, like those enumerated in the Inscription of Amenemhet II at Mit Rahina, while the Egyptian king sent them in exchange objects that were usually found in their tombs, in a reciprocal and friendly relationship, as the royal Egyptian gifts an ointment container and a small box, both of obsidian and gold, with the names of 12th Dynasty kings Amenemhet III and Amenemhet IV respectively found in the royal tombs of Byblos demonstrate (Montet 1928a, nos. 610611).

Nevertheless, as Stuart Tyson Smith rightly points out with regard to the relationship between Egypt and Nubia, Egyptologists and Nubiologists often place their interactions within some kind of core-driven centreperiphery framework (Smith 2003, 58), but in this classical model the periphery often appears subordinated to the core. Scholarly interpretations of the relationships between Egypt and the Levant have changed through time; from a core-driven model of domination (Giveon 1987) to one where only friendly relationships based on exchanges existed (Liverani 1995, 316). This latter interpretation is being re-examined today due to the information provided by the Inscription of Amenemhet II at Mit Rahina and archaeological discoveries on the Levantine coast (Marcus 2007).

One of the main current issues in the study of ancient world-systems is that many ancient core-periphery relationships do not fi t into a core-driven model. In this regard, Chase-Dunn and Hall introduced several revisions to world-systems theory, defi ning two types of coreperiphery relationships. Firstly, coreperiphery differentiation where societies at different levels of complexity and population density are in interaction with each other in a world-system and secondly, core-periphery hierarchy where political, economic or ideological domination between different societies takes place (Chase-Dunn and Hall 1991, 19). But this bipolar defi nition of power relationships among societies (interaction with or without domination/exploitation) tends to exclude the search for other possible situations. Yet, in the case of the NLws of the early second millennium BC, we have to admit that sources both textual and material evidence cannot prove at present that the core exerted political or military domination, or even economic exploitation, over the peripheries. Of course, there were sources that refer to punitive actions or specifi c military interventions in the Levant, but those actions do not refl ect Egyptian long-term control of those territories. The aforementioned Inscription of Amenemhet II at Mit Rahina mentions the capturing of Asiatic manpower as well as goods and raw materials through Egyptian punitive expeditions in the Levant; and the Inscription of Khnumhotep refers to an incident between the rulers of Byblos and Ullaza. The intervention of the Egyptian king by request of the ruler of Byblos fi rst, and the ruler of Ullaza later, constitutes some extremely important data, but it is not possible to infer from the unfortunately partially destroyed text an accurate description of such a relationship. Nevertheless, the text does not allow us to infer that Egyptians exerted any kind of political, military or economic control over those northern Levantine cities. In a recovered passage, the ruler of Byblos allows the Egyptians to moor their ships in the harbour of the city (Allen 2008, 34).

With regard to the relationship with Kerma, I shall refer briefl y to the steles of Semna (Berlin Museum 1157 and 14753,


year 16 and 8 of 12th Dynasty king Sesostris III respectively, cf. Lichtheim 1973, 119121; Loeben 2001) because they are related to the role foreigners/enemies played in the Egyptian conception of the world. Both are boundary steles, which means that they were objects established by the Egyptian king in a specifi c place to delimit the borders of the Egyptian state. The establishment of boundary steles refl ects the achievement of a political goal precisely to delimit the borders of the Egyptian state and of an ideological one. In this latter sense, they were objects which allowed the restraint of chaotic forces. Indeed, the negative conception of foreigners that is present in them both in written form and through iconographic representation may not always be taken in a literal sense, considering that the ancient Egyptians had no sense of historical facts, at least as we conceive them. So, if a text written on a boundary stele describes punitive actions against foreigners, these actions should be put in their own context; and the information provided should be evaluated by comparing the results coming from another kind of evidence, for example, the archaeological remains. Certainly, the information provided by the texts and the archaeological evidence prove that the Egyptian state did not exert political or economic coercion over Kerma during the Middle Kingdom. Thus, core-periphery relationships in the NLws in the early second millennium BC may need to be characterized in other terms.

I consider that the concept of heterarchy fi ts better in the search to delimit the nature of core-periphery relationships in the NLws. Heterarchy may be defi ned as the relation of elements a system where each element is either unranked relative to other elements or possesses the potential for being ranked in a number of different ways (Crumley 1987, 158; 1995, 3, my emphasis). This defi nition allows us to conceive a two-way relationship among partners working on multiple spheres of interaction. During the early second millennium BC, the partners of the NLws interacted basically through exchange activities that were profi table for all of them (the prestige goods network), without any kind of political or military domination or economic exploitation exerted by the core over the peripheries. These relationships, however, also present a strong asymmetrical rather than hierarchical bias in another sphere of interaction. This latter differentiation deserves subsidiary consideration. In fact, hierarchy is not opposite to heterarchy. We concur with Bondarenko, Grinin and Korotayev (2002, 56) in that the second version of Crumleys defi nition of heterarchy is most relevant for the study of complex societies. However, when we have a system of elements which possess the potential for being ranked in a number of different ways, it seems impossible to speak about the absence of hierarchy. In this case we rather deal with a system of heterarchically arranged hierarchies. Hence, it does not appear reasonable to denote the alternative to heterarchy as hierarchy.

Heterarchical modes of interaction may or may not be related to hierarchies. In fact, heterarchy can admit of hierarchies in discrete but overlapping systems; it acknowledges, for example, the possibility of internal hierarchies within the discrete, horizontally connected systems of heterarchical structures (Meyers 2006, 250). In this sense, we consider that the partners involved in the NLws were horizontally or symmetrically connected through a network of exchange of prestige goods clearly profi table for all them without the existence of power relationships of domination or exploitation in between. Nevertheless, an overlapping socio-political sphere of interaction can also be identifi ed where asymmetry is clearly evident.

In fact, it is possible to delineate a different situation, because the elites of the interacting societies did not possess the same prestigious status: the Egyptian king was recognized as a great king among the chiefs and rulers of the ancient Near East societies during the early second millennium BC. Both the elites of Kerma and of Byblos adopted Egyptian culture features as a way to enhance their local positions, while the Egyptian elite did not adopt features related to foreign elites. Thus, this asymmetrical bond is crucial in the characterization of Egypt as a core, and of Kerma and Byblos as the peripheries of the NLws during the period considered here.

Nevertheless, can we then talk about the existence of hierarchical relations between core and peripheries? In fact, power hierarchies relate in some way to a socio-political arrangement in which someone plays the boss character and the other the employee. A bond based in power relationships is clear in power hierarchies not only in personal but also in social spheres of interaction. This is how many of the societies in question organized themselves: the Egyptian, Kerman and Byblite societies were hierarchical, stratifi ed societies. But, were their interactions hierarchical? We consider that this was not the situation in the NLws, at least during the early second millennium BC.

I prefer therefore to characterize their relationships as asymmetrical rather than hierarchical since, despite the fact that the peripheries exhibit features or practices that originated in the core, these were not linked to any kind of power relationship. As I have stated above, those core cultural features or practices were probably adopted by peripheral societies in order to fulfi l local needs. Asymmetry is also evident since there is no evidence of the adoption of practices or cultural features originating in the peripheries by the core.

In summary, during the early second millennium BC, the hierarchical societies of Egypt, Byblos and Kerma were linked in a heterarchical world-system, the so-called NiloticLevantine one. Symmetrical relationships were established at an economic level through the exchange of

Roxana Flammini212

prestige goods, but also asymmetrical relationships were detected working in a different sphere of interaction. These asymmetrical relationships allow the differentiation of a core (Egypt) and two peripheries (Kerma and Byblos). This differentiation is reinforced by the specialized production of goods (mainly manufactured goods in the core and raw materials in the peripheries). However, we cannot set the relationship between Egypt and Kerma in parallel with that of Egypt with Byblos. Even though both are classifi ed as coreperiphery relationships, it is possible to establish differences, even though they are comparable basically through the mutually profi table and horizontally connected network of exchange of prestige goods.

Spheres of Asymmetrical Interaction in the NLws

The Egyptian Core and Peripheral KermaSystemic relations with Egypt were present in Kerma, the largest polity in Upper Nubia. There was no other Nubian place where the Egyptian infl uence and material remains appear so clearly related to the economic sphere of a polity and to the prestige of its local elite during this period.

This does not mean that Kerma only exchanged goods with Egypt. On the contrary, it was also connected with more southern African societies, like the Gash Group which occupied the region around Kassala (Mahal Teglinos) (Fattovich 1995). These societies were engaged in an extensive network of exchange relationships probably connected to South Arabia, the Persian Gulf and the Indian Ocean (Fattovich 1996). But they were outside the range of direct Egyptian infl uence during this period Egyptian pottery was not found in their settlements although some core practices, like sealing, are evidenced in these groups. It is highly plausible that sealing could have arrived there through Kerma because it probably adopted this practice from the Egyptian fortresses located in Lower Nubia (Smith 1998, 224). These southern African societies, then, could be considered as margins of the NLws in A. Sherratts terms (1994). In ours, they were beyond the boundaries of the NLws by defi nition, because they did not present direct, regular and two-way relations with the core. Their relations were established with Kerma and other southern African societies, and possibly they were partners in a world-system which was interwoven with the NLws, but these hypotheses have to be contrasted with the evidence and deserve further analysis that exceeds the scope of this paper.

Moving back to the Egyptian state, it developed an extremely complex system of sealing and countersealing

to manage exchange activities in Lower Nubia, and a great deal of evidence has been found in the fortresses at Kubban, Semna, Kumma, Mirgissa, Uronarti and Askut (Kemp 1986; Anderson 1999; Smith 2004). Specifi cally, Egyptian interest in exchange activities is evidenced by the hundreds of seal impressions found at Mirgissa and Uronarti (Gratien 1994), by references in the boundary steles of Semna (Lichtheim 1973, 118120; Loeben 2001) and in the Semna Dispatches (Smither 1945) as well as by the inscriptions found in the area of the Second Cataract that make reference to individuals related to navigation and exchange activities (ba 1974).

Moreover, seals and sealings were found in very different contexts at Kerma. In fact, a number of seals and sealings of Kerma were dated to the end of the Middle Kingdom (early Classic Kerma). These fi ndings were made both in the necropolis and in the town. Many of them were imports from Egypt, while others were local copies of Egyptian models. Those found in the necropolis were possibly considered as prestige goods by the local elite (Smith 1998), while those found in the town were used as part of processes of exchange activities. But recently, Charles Bonnet announced the discovery of earlier evidence, dated to the Middle Kerma, thus contemporaneous to the Middle Kingdom. He found seal fragments and seal impressions, as well as stocks of fi ne-grained clay ready to be used, it being already worked into small balls, cylinders or rolls and stored in ditches or shallow pits (Bonnet 2001, 31) in an area near the harbour quarter and the entrance to the town. These objects are proof that Kerma adopted a core-originated practice (sealing) probably transferred through contacts with the Egyptian fortresses located in Lower Nubia during the Middle Kingdom.

In addition, Egyptian pottery has been found in the necropolis of Kerma. Even though the pottery came from a cemetery, it is very likely that it arrived carrying other prestige products possibly an aromatic cream or oil and became luxury items once the vessels had been emptied. It vividly shows the existence of an important network of exchanges between Egypt and Kerma and the use of core-related items as prestige goods, probably to fulfi l local needs to reinforce social hierarchies. Recently, J. Bourriau has demonstrated through marl analysis of the Egyptian pottery from Kerma that until the middle of the 12th Dynasty there was a higher proportion of Egyptian pottery from Upper Egypt, but this reverted to a higher proportion of pottery from the Delta from the later 12th (when the frontier at Semna was established) through the 13th Dynasties. Finally, by the end of the 13th Dynasty (when the Egyptian states crisis began), there was again only Upper Egyptian pottery (Bourriau 2004). The Egyptian pottery found at Kerma thus refl ects the fl uctuations of the internal situation of the Egyptian state.

Even though there is clear evidence of the existence of a systemic relationship between Egypt and Kerma, it is diffi cult


to establish when it started due to the nature of the sources. All we can say is that contacts took place during the early second millennium BC on a regular basis.

In short, Egypt and Kerma participated in a network of exchanges during the Middle Kingdom, mainly of luxury goods, and elites in both societies benefited from this exchange. For the period under analysis, the evidence found at Kerma suggests that certain practices related to the exchanges, like sealing, were adopted from Egypt, which probably means the sharing of a common logic of exchange which favoured all the partners involved while the fi nding of Egyptian pottery and sealings in the local necropolis points to its use as a prestige good favouring the distinction of internal social hierarchies. This latter feature demonstrates the existence of asymmetry in the socio-political sphere of interaction. To sum up, we conclude that a periphery of the NLws was located at Kerma in the period considered here.

The Egyptian Core and Peripheral ByblosObjects imported from Egypt have been found in many Levantine cities. Among them, royal statues have been found in Ugarit, Neirab (near Aleppo), Beirut, Qatna, Tell Gezer, Tell Hizzin and Ebla (Scandone Matthiae 2000). In Ebla, in the famous tomb of the local ruler Immeya, the so-called Tomb of the Lord of the Goats, an Egyptian-style sceptre was found. The origin of the sceptre was a subject of discussion among specialists: while Scandone Matthiae (1997; 2003) maintains that it was imported from Egypt and probably belonged to the 13th Dynasty king Hotepibra Sa Aamu Hornedjheryotef, Ryholt (1998) considers that it was locally made inspired by Egyptian motifs. Egyptianising ivories have also been found at Ebla, as well as other local objects with features relating to Egyptian kingship. Probably the meaning of these Egyptianized objects was quite different from the originals, though we are far from understanding it. The set of ivories has been compared to two similar series, one found in a tomb at el-Jisr, near Tell Jaffa in Palestine, and the other in the tombs at Kerma. But the Kerma ivories have been dated slightly later than the period considered here, when Egypt relinquished its position as core to the Kerman kingdom of Kush and the Hyksos kingdom located in the Eastern Delta (Second Intermediate Period, ca. 16401530 BC).

Certainly, systemic relationships were present in the northern Levantine city of Byblos during the early second millennium BC: it was the Levantine site where cultural features relating to Egypt were not only abundant, but unique, the local elite acquiring Egyptian titles, writing, language and religious beliefs. There is no other site in the Levant showing such a strong bond with Egyptian features. The asymmetry in the relationship between Egypt and Byblos is supported by textual, material and iconographic evidence.

More specifi cally, the remains relating to the 12th and 13th Dynasties and the elite of Byblos are strongly connected with the late 12th Dynasty king Amenemhet III and his successors.

Egyptian scarabs and pottery (water jars) dated to the 12th Dynasty were found in the tombs of the rulers of Byblos. P. Montet (1928b) found in the stone sarcophagus of Abishemu I (tomb I) an ointment container of gold and obsidian, inscribed with the kings name. Recently, some faience fragments found inside the stone sarcophagus were identifi ed as part of an Egyptian-style coffi n (Schiestl 2007). This tomb was physically connected to another one, probably of the son of Abishemu, Yapishemuabi. In that tomb, Montet found a small box of obsidian and gold with the name of Amenemhet IV. These Egyptian prestige goods were used to date the local rulers of Byblos to the last years of the 12th Dynasty. In tomb II Montet also found a beautiful Syrian weapon of gold and bronze with an inscription written in Egyptian hieroglyphs and language but made locally. The name of its owner (Yapishemuabi) is preceded by an Egyptian title, usually given by the king to high offi cers of the Egyptian administration: hati-a (high offi cial). In tomb IV, which probably belonged to Iantin, a fragment of an alabaster vessel was found bearing an inscription which could have been part of an offering formula (Montet 1928a, 787): the title hati-a appears between the Egyptian title iri-pat (member of the elite) and the probably local title of heqa kheqaw (ruler of rulers).

Iantin also appears in a bas relief found in the Egyptian temple at Byblos that shows him seated in front of a fragmentary cartouche with a name written in hieroglyphs, that was attributed to the 13th Dynasty king Neferhotep I (Ryholt 1997). The local ruler is depicted paying homage to the name in the cartouche. The image is related to an inscription written in Egyptian hieroglyphs and language which reads: Re Harakhte, he causes him to adore Re everyday, the hati-a of Byblos Iantin, repeating life, born to the hati-a of Byblos Ryn, justifi ed (Montet 1928b, fi gs. 89). It is possible that Iantin was a contemporary of Zimrilim of Mari, since the Mari archives mentioned that a Byblian king (lugal) called Iantin had established economic relations with Zimrilim (Kitchen 1967). If correct, this link shows that he was independent from Egypt, as also does the fact that these rulers used to write their names in cartouches, otherwise an exclusive attribute of Egyptian kings. A seal found at Byblos belonging to Ibiaw, suggests that the relationships with Egypt were still maintained in the reign of Sobekhotep IV (Ryholt 1997, 8990).

Interestingly, the title hati-a appears only in the sources from Byblos but not in Egyptian texts, where the foreign rulers are called heqa (ruler). It is highly plausible that not only the use of some Egyptian titles but also of other

Roxana Flammini214

selected Egyptian cultural features by the rulers of Byblos was related to their local socio-political situation, in order to enhance their position in relation to other Levantine rulers that could be considered as competitors, in a local system of inter-elite relationships based on patronage (Flammini 2010). The Egyptian cultural features clearly refl ect the strong relationship between the elites of both places, and the social infl uence the one had on the other.

The material evidence found at Byblos proves that the relationship with the Egyptian state was established late in the period (from Amenemhet IIIs reign onwards, ca. 18531808 BC) although the above-mentioned Inscription of Khnumhotep proves that the relationship could have been established earlier (Allen 2008). Despite these facts, we can infer that these contacts were not random but regular, even though we cannot determine their precise frequency. In short, I maintain that Byblos effectively acted as the northern periphery of the NLws from the late 12th Dynasty to the 13th Dynasty.

Summary and ConclusionsTo sum up, world-systems theory has many proponents as well as detractors. I believe that a carefully adapted and detailed use of several of its main concepts has more advantages than disadvantages for the comprehension of modes of interaction among ancient partners. A further benefi t is its explicit focus on a wider system of relationships, allowing the consideration of many spheres and types of interconnection. In this paper I have approached the situation of a world-system delimited between northeast Africa and the coastal northern Levant during the early second millennium BC. The analysis was situated in a specific historical conjuncture and delineated from the information provided by the sources at our disposal. From this point of departure, systemic relations were defi ned as direct, regular and two-way relationships, that revealed different and overlapping spheres of interaction (economic, social, political) and types of interaction (symmetrical, asymmetrical). During the early second millennium BC systemic relations that is, direct, regular, two way relationships were established between Egypt and two precise locations: Kerma and Byblos. There were no proven long-term or systematic coercive practices in the relationships between these partners.

Two different and overlapping spheres of interaction were distinguished in the system: one, based on the exchange of prestige goods, and characterised by the establishment of symmetrical relationships. A differentiation was established with regard to the kind of goods each partner provided to the system, taking into account that all of them benefi ted from the relationship. A second sphere, based on socio-political

features, showed strong asymmetrical relationships among the partners. These systemic asymmetrical relationships allowed the differentiation between a core and its peripheries, because some core practices or cultural features were adopted by the peripheral societies probably to fulfi l local needs while it was not possible to identify a corresponding inverse situation.

The possibility of detecting these different spheres of interaction allowed us to conceive a heterarchical arrangement of the world-system. In this sense, the Egyptian, Kerma and Byblite societies were hierarchical, stratifi ed societies whose relationships allowed them to be heterarchically arranged through the establishment of symmetrical and asymmetrical relationships in different spheres of interaction

Moreover, the evidence enables us to delineate differences in each situation. On the one side, in the Kerma-Egypt relationship, the sources prove the existence not only of a shared logic of exchange since the Kerma elite adopted Egyptian exchange-related objects (seals) but also a use of Egyptian objects (pottery, sealings) as prestige goods. Both probably related to local needs: fi rstly, to achieve economic benefi ts in the exchange with Egypt by sharing that common logic of exchange, and secondly, to reinforce social hierarchies within Kerma society. On the other side, in the relationship of Byblos with Egypt, the elite of Byblos adopted selected Egyptian titles, language, writing system and religious beliefs, probably in order to improve its position in relation to other Levantine rulers that could be considered as competitors. This adoption was sustained by the long-term relationship among these societies.

This brief approach to the running of this world-system during the early second millennium BC is far from being a full analysis, but I am convinced that an approach from an adapted world-systems theory opens new ways to understanding these ancient relationships.

AcknowledgementsI am grateful to Eric Cline for reading an earlier draft of this paper. I am also indebted to Philip Kohl, David Wengrow and to an anonymous reviewer for their comments, suggestions and fruitful ideas. Of course, all errors remain only mine.

ReferencesAdams, W. Y. (1977) Nubia. Corridor to Africa, Princeton, NJ,

Princeton University Press.Allen, J. P. (2008) The Historical Inscription of Khnumhotep

at Dahshur: Preliminary Report. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 352, 2939.


Allen, M. (1997) Contested Peripheries. Philistia in the Neo-Assyrian World-System. PhD Dissertation. Los Angeles, University of California.

Allen, M. (2005) Power is in the Details. Administrative Technology and the Growth of Ancient Near Eastern Cores. In C. Chase-Dunn and E. N. Anderson (eds.) The Historical Evolution of World-Systems (Evolutionary Processes in World Politics), 7591. New York, Palgrave Macmillan.

Altenmller, H. and Moussa, A. (1991) Die Inschrift Amenemhets II. aus dem Ptah-Tempel von Memphis. Ein Vorbericht. Studien zur Altgyptischen Kultur 18, 148.

Anderson, W. (1999) The Signifi cance of Middle Nubian C-Group Mortuary Variability, ca. 2200 B.C. to ca. 1500 B.C., vol. I. Montreal, McGill University.

Bard, K. (2002), The Emergence of the Egyptian State (c. 32002686 BC). In I. Shaw (ed.) The Oxford History of Ancient Egypt, 5782. Oxford, Oxford University Press.

Beaujard, P. (2005) The Indian Ocean in Eurasian and African World Systems before the Sixteenth Century. Journal of World History 16(4), 411465.

Bietak, M. (1997) The Center of Hyksos Rule: Avaris (Tell el Dabca). In E. Oren (ed.) The Hyksos. New Historical and Archaeological Perspectives, 87139. Philadelphia, University of Pennsylvania Museum.

Bisson de la Roque, F. (1953) Le Trsor de Td. Documents de Fouilles 11. Cairo, Institut Franais dArchologie Orientale.

Bondarenko, D., Grinin, L. and Korotayev, A. (2002) Alternative Pathways of Social Evolution. Social Evolution & History 1(1), 5479.

Bonnet, Ch. (1986) Kerma. Territoire et Mtropole. Quatre Leons au Collge de France. Bibliothque Gnrale de lInstitut Franais dArchologie Orientale du Caire IX. Cairo, Institut Franais dArchologie Orientale du Caire.

Bonnet, Ch. (2001) Les empreintes de sceaux et les sceaux de Kerma: localisation des dcouvertes. Cahier de Recherches de lInstitut de Papyrologie et gyptologie de Lille 22, 2731.

Bonnet, C. and Valbelle, D. (2006) The Nubian Pharaohs. Black Kings of the Nile. Cairo, The American University in Cairo Press.

Bourriau, J. (2004) Egyptian Pottery Found in Kerma Ancien, Kerma Moyen and Kerma Classique Graves at Kerma. In T. Kendall (ed.) Nubian Studies 1998. Proceedings of the Ninth Conference of the International Society of Nubian Studies, August 2126, 1998, Boston, Massachusetts, 313. Boston, MA, Department of African-American Studies, Northeastern University.

Chase-Dunn, C., Alvarez, A. and Pasciuti, D. (2005) World-Systems in the Biogeosphere: Three Thousand Years of Urbanization, Empire Formation and Climate Change. Research in Rural Sociology and Development 10, 311331.

Chase-Dunn, C. and Hall, T. (1991) Conceptualizing Core/

Periphery Hierarchies for Comparative Study. In C. Chase-Dunn and T. Hall (eds.) Core/Periphery Relations in Precapitalist Worlds, 544. Boulder, CO, Westview Press.

Chase-Dunn, C. and Hall, T. (1993) Comparing World-Systems: Concepts and Working Hypotheses. Social Forces 71(4), 851886.

Chase-Dunn, C. and Jorgenson, A. (2001) Regions and Interaction Networks: a World-System Perspective. Institute for Research on World-Systems Working Paper 13. Riverside, CA, University of California at Riverside. (http://escolarship.org/uc/item/65d7k1rz).

Chase-Dunn, C., Pasciuti, D., Alvarez, A. and Hall, T. (2006) Growth/decline phases and semi-peripheral development in the Ancient Mesopotamian and Egyptian world-systems. In B. K. Gills and W. R. Thompson (eds.) Globalization and Global History, 114138. London, Routledge.

Cline, E. (2000) Contested Peripheries in World Systems Theory: Megiddo and the Jezreel Valley as a Test Case. Journal of World-Systems Research VI(1), 716.

Cohen, S. L. (2002) Middle Bronze Age IIA Ceramic Typology and Settlement in the Southern Levant. In M. Bietak (ed.) The Middle Bronze Age in the Levant. Proceedings of an International Conference on MB IIA Ceramic Material, Vienna, 24th26th of January 2001, 113131. Vienna, sterreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften.

Crumley, C. (1987) A Dialectical Critique of Hierarchy. In T. Patterson and C. Gailey (eds.) Power Relations and State Formation, 155169. Washington DC, American Anthropological Association.

Crumley, C. (1995) Heterarchy and the Analysis of Complex Societies. In R. Ehrenreich, C. Crumley and J. Levy (eds.) Heterarchy and the Analysis of Complex Societies, 16. Archaeological Papers of the American Anthropological Association 6. Arlington, VA, American Anthropological Association.

Dever, W. (1987) The Middle Bronze Age: the Zenith of an Urban Canaanite Era. Biblical Archaeologist 50, 149177.

Fattovich, R. (1995) The Gash Group. A Complex Society in the Lowlands to the East of the Nile. Cahier de Recherches de lInstitut de Papyrologie et gyptologie de Lille 17(1), 191200.

Fattovich, R. (1996) Punt: the Archaeological Perspective. Beitrge zur Sudanforschung 6, 1529.

Fattovich, R. and Bard, K. (2006) The Wonderful Things of Punt. Mersa/Wadi Gawasis, an Egyptian Port on the Red Sea. The Society for the Study of Egyptian Antiquities Newsletter (Fall 2006), 13.

Flammini, R. (2008) Ancient Core-Periphery Interactions. Lower Nubia during Middle Kingdom Egypt (ca. 20501640 BC). Journal of World Systems Research XIV(1), 5074.

Flammini, R. (2010) Elite Emulation and Patronage Relationships in the Middle Bronze Age: The Egyptianized Dynasty of Byblos. Tel Aviv 37(2), 154168.

Frank, A. G. and Gills, B. (1996) The World System: Five

Roxana Flammini216

Hundred Years or Five Thousand? New York/London, Routledge.

Galn, J. M. (2002) El Imperio Egipcio. Inscripciones, ca. 15501300 a.C. Madrid, Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Cientfi cas.

Gardiner, A. H., Peet, T. E. and ern, J. (1955) The Inscriptions of Sinai. Part II: Translation and Commentary. London, Egypt Exploration Society.

Gerstenblith, P. (1983) The Levant at the Beginning of the Middle Bronze Age. American School of Oriental Research Dissertation Series 5. Winona Lake, IN, Eisenbrauns.

Gills, B. (2002) World Systems Analysis, Historical Sociology and International Relations: The Differences a Hyphen Makes. In S. Hobden and J. Hobson (eds.) Historical Sociology of International Relations, 141161. Cambridge/New York, Cambridge University Press.

Giveon, R. (1987) The Impact of Egypt on Canaan in the Middle Bronze Age. In A. Rainey (ed.) Egypt, Israel, Sinai: Archaeological and Historical Relationships in the Biblical Period, 2340. Tel Aviv, Tel Aviv University.

Gratien, B. (1994) Dpartements et Institutions dans les forteresses nubiennes au Moyen Empire. In C. Berger and N. Grimal (eds.) Hommages Jean Leclant, vol. 2, Nubie, Sudan, Ethiopie, 185197. Bibliothque dtude 106(2). Cairo, Institut Franais dArchologie Orientale.

Hall, T. (2004) Intersocietal Encounters: Lessons and Questions from a World-Systems Perspective. Paper presented at Archaeological Institute of America Annual Meeting, San Francisco, CA, January 3rd 2004.

Helck, W. (1989) Ein Ausgreifen des Mittleren Reiches in den zypriotischen Raum? Gttinger Miszellen 109, 2730.

Kemp, B. J. (1986) Large Middle Kingdom Granary Buildings (and the archaeology of administration). Zeitschrift fr gyptische Sprache und Altertumskunde 113, 120136.

Kitchen, K. (1967) Byblos, Egypt and Mari in the Early Second Millennium BC. Orientalia 36, 3954.

Kohl, P. (1987) The Ancient Economy, Transferable Technologies and the Bronze Age World-System: a View from the Northeastern Frontier of the Ancient Near East. In M. Rowlands, M. Larsen and K. Kristiansen (eds.) Centre and Periphery in the Ancient World, 1324. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

Lichtheim, M. (1973) Ancient Egyptian Literature: a Book of Readings, vol. I. Berkeley, CA, University of California Press.

Liverani, M. (1995) El Antiguo Oriente. Historia, Sociedad, Economa. Barcelona, Crtica.

Loeben, C. E. (2001) Bemerkungen zur sogenannten Kleinen Semna-Stele (Berlin 14753). In C.-B. Arnst, I. Hafemann and A. Lohwasser (eds.) Begegnungen: Antike Kulturen im Niltal, Festgabe fr Erika Endesfelder, Karl-Heinz Priese, Walter Friedrich Reineke und Steffen Wenig, 273284. Leipzig, Helmar Wodtke und Katharina Stegbauer.

Marcus, E. (2002) The Southern Levant and Maritime Trade

during the Middle Bronze IIA Period. In E. Oren and S. Ahituv (eds.) Aharon Kempinski Memorial Volume: Studies in Archaeology and Related Disciplines, 241263. Beersheva, Studies by the Department of Bible and Ancient Near East 15. Beersheva, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev Press.

Marcus, E. (2007) Amenemhet II and the Sea: Maritime Aspects of the Mit Rahina (Memphis) Inscription. gypten und Levante 17, 137189.

Meyers, C. (2006) Hierarchy or Heterarchy? Archaeology and the Theorizing of Israelite Society. In S. Gitin, J. E. Wright and J. P. Dessel (eds.) Confronting the Past. Archaeological and Historical Essays on Ancient Israel in Honor of William G. Dever, 245254. Winona Lake, IN, Eisenbrauns.

Montet, P. (1928a) Byblos et lgypte: quatre campagnes de fouilles Gebeil, 1921, 1922, 1923, 1924, 2 vols. Paris, P. Geuthner.

Montet, P (1928b) Notes et documents pour servir lhistoire des relations entre lancienne Egypte et la Syrie. II. Nouvelles traces des gyptiens Byblos. Kmi I(2), 8393.

Moreno Garca, J. C. (1999) wt et le milieu rural gyptien du IIIe Millnaire. Economie, administration et organisation territoriale, Bibliothque de lEcole des Hautes Etudes, Sciences Historiques et Philologiques, 337. Paris, Champion.

Philip, G. (1991) Cypriot Bronzework in the Levantine World: Conservatism, Innovation and Social Change. Journal of Mediterranean Archaeology 4(1), 59107.

Quack, J. F. (1996) Kftw and Isy, gypten und Levante 6, 7581.

Redford, D. B. (1992) Egypt, Canaan and Israel in Ancient Times. Princeton, Princeton University Press.

Ryholt, K. S. B. (1997) The Political Situation in Egypt during the Second Intermediate Period, c. 18001550 B.C. Copenhagen, Museum Tusculanum Press.

Ryholt, K. S. B. (1998) Hotepibre, a Supposed Asiatic King in Egypt with Relations to Ebla. Bulletin of the American School of Oriental Research 311, 16.

Sackho, A. (1998) Le pouvoir politique des pays nubiens. Analyse du terme q et ses applications archologiques. Cahier de Recherches de lInstitut de Papyrologie et gyptologie de Lille 17(3), 203218.

Sve-Sderbergh, T. (1949) A Buhen Stela (Khartum no. 18). Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 35, 5058.

Scandone Matthiae, G. (1997) The Relations between Ebla and Egypt. In E. Oren (ed.) The Hyksos. New Historical and Archaeological Perspectives, 415427. Philadelphia, PA, University of Pennsylvania Museum.

Scandone Matthiae, G. (2000) Art et Politique: les Images de Pharaon ltranger. gypten und Levante X, 187193.

Scandone Matthiae, G. (2003) Les rapports entre Ebla et lgypte lAncien et au Moyen Empire. In Z. Hawass (ed.) Egyptology at the Dawn of the Twenty-first Century. Proceedings of the Eighth International Congress of Egyptologists, Vol. I, 487493. Cairo/New York, The American University in Cairo Press.


Schiestl, R. (2007) The Coffi n from Tomb I at Byblos. gypten und Levante 17, 265271.

Sherratt, A. (1994) Core, Periphery and Margin: Perspectives on the Bronze Age. In C. Mathers and S. Stoddart (eds.) Development and Decline in the Mediterranean Bronze Age, 335345. Sheffi eld Archaeological Monographs 8. Sheffi eld, Sheffi eld Academic Press.

Sherratt, A. and Sherratt, S. (1991) From Luxuries to Commodities. The Nature of Mediterranean Bronze Age Trading Systems. In N. H. Gale (ed.) Bronze Age Trade in the Mediterranean. Papers presented at the Conference Held at Rewley House, Oxford, in December 1989, 351386. Studies in Mediterranean Archaeology 90. Jonsered, Paul strm.

Smith, S. T. (1995) Askut in Nubia. London/New York, Kegan Paul International.

Smith, S. T. (1998) The Transmission of an Administrative Sealing System from Lower Nubia to Kerma. Cahier de Recherches de lInstitut de Papyrologie et gyptologie de Lille 19, 219230.

Smith, S. T. (2003) Wretched Kush. Ethnic Identities and Boundaries in Egypts Nubian Empire. London, Routledge.

Smith, S. T. (2004) Sealing practice at Askut and the Nubian fortresses: implications for Middle Kingdom scarab chronology and historical synchronisms. In M. Bietak and E. Czerny (eds.), Scarabs of the second millennium BC from Egypt, Nubia, Crete and the Levant: chronological and historical implications. Papers of a Symposium, Vienna, 10th13th of January 2002, 203219. Contributions to the Chronology of the Eastern Mediterranean 8. Vienna, sterreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften.

Smither, P. (1945) The Semnah Despatches. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 31, 310.

Stager, L. E. (1992) The Periodization of Palestine from Neolithic through Early Bronze Times. In R. W. Ehrich (ed.) Chronologies in Old World Archaeology, 3rd edition, 2241. Chicago, IL, University of Chicago Press.

Stager, L. E. (2002) The MB IIA Ceramic Sequence at Tel Ashkelon and its Implications for the Port Power Model of Trade. In M. Bietak (ed.) The Middle Bronze Age in the Levant. Proceedings of an International Conference on MB IIA Ceramic Material, Vienna, 24th26th of January 2001, 353362. Vienna, sterreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften.

Valbelle, D. (2004) The Cultural Signifi cance of Iconographic and Epigraphic Data Found in the Kingdom of Kerma. In T. Kendall (ed.) Nubian Studies 1998. Proceedings of the Ninth Conference of the International Society of Nubian Studies, August 2126, 1998, Boston, Massachusetts, 176183. Boston, MA, Northeastern University.

Valbelle, D. and Bonnet, C. (1996) Le sanctuaire dHathor, matresse de la turquoise. Serabit el-Khadim au Moyen Empire. Paris, ditions Picard Musumeci.

Warburton, D. A. (1997) State and Economy in Ancient Egypt. Fiscal Vocabulary of the New Kingdom, Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis 151. Gttingen, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.

Wenke, R. (1991) The Evolution of Early Egyptian Civilization: Issues and Evidence. Journal of World Prehistory 5, 279329.

Wilkinson, D. (1991) Cores, Peripheries and Civilizations. In C. Chase-Dunn and T. Hall (eds.) Core/Periphery Relations in Precapitalist Worlds, 113166. Boulder, CO, Westview.

aba, Z. (1974) The Rock Inscriptions of Lower Nubia, Czech Institute of Egyptology, Publication I. Prague, Charles University of Prague.

00 Interweaving Worlds.pdf01 Interweaving Worlds.pdf02 Interweaving Worlds.pdf03 Interweaving Worlds.pdf04 Interweaving Worlds.pdf05 Interweaving Worlds.pdf06 Interweaving Worlds.pdf07 Interweaving Worlds.pdf08 Interweaving Worlds.pdf09 Interweaving Worlds.pdf10 Interweaving Worlds.pdf11 Interweaving Worlds.pdf12 Interweaving Worlds.pdf13 Interweaving Worlds.pdf14 Interweaving Worlds.pdf15 Interweaving Worlds.pdf16 Interweaving Worlds.pdf17 Interweaving Worlds.pdf18 Interweaving Worlds.pdf19 Interweaving Worlds.pdf20 Interweaving Worlds.pdf21 Interweaving Worlds.pdf22 Interweaving Worlds.pdf23 Interweaving Worlds.pdf

/ColorImageDict > /JPEG2000ColorACSImageDict > /JPEG2000ColorImageDict > /AntiAliasGrayImages false /CropGrayImages true /GrayImageMinResolution 300 /GrayImageMinResolutionPolicy /OK /DownsampleGrayImages true /GrayImageDownsampleType /Bicubic /GrayImageResolution 300 /GrayImageDepth -1 /GrayImageMinDownsampleDepth 2 /GrayImageDownsampleThreshold 1.50000 /EncodeGrayImages true /GrayImageFilter /DCTEncode /AutoFilterGrayImages true /GrayImageAutoFilterStrategy /JPEG /GrayACSImageDict > /GrayImageDict > /JPEG2000GrayACSImageDict > /JPEG2000GrayImageDict > /AntiAliasMonoImages false /CropMonoImages true /MonoImageMinResolution 1200 /MonoImageMinResolutionPolicy /OK /DownsampleMonoImages true /MonoImageDownsampleType /Bicubic /MonoImageResolution 1200 /MonoImageDepth -1 /MonoImageDownsampleThreshold 1.50000 /EncodeMonoImages true /MonoImageFilter /CCITTFaxEncode /MonoImageDict > /AllowPSXObjects false /CheckCompliance [ /None ] /PDFX1aCheck false /PDFX3Check false /PDFXCompliantPDFOnly false /PDFXNoTrimBoxError true /PDFXTrimBoxToMediaBoxOffset [ 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 ] /PDFXSetBleedBoxToMediaBox true /PDFXBleedBoxToTrimBoxOffset [ 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 ] /PDFXOutputIntentProfile () /PDFXOutputConditionIdentifier () /PDFXOutputCondition () /PDFXRegistryName () /PDFXTrapped /False

/Description > /Namespace [ (Adobe) (Common) (1.0) ] /OtherNamespaces [ > /FormElements false /GenerateStructure true /IncludeBookmarks false /IncludeHyperlinks false /IncludeInteractive false /IncludeLayers false /IncludeProfiles true /MultimediaHandling /UseObjectSettings /Namespace [ (Adobe) (CreativeSuite) (2.0) ] /PDFXOutputIntentProfileSelector /NA /PreserveEditing true /UntaggedCMYKHandling /LeaveUntagged /UntaggedRGBHandling /LeaveUntagged /UseDocumentBleed false >> ]>> setdistillerparams> setpagedevice
















/Description > /Namespace [ (Adobe) (Common) (1.0) ] /OtherNamespaces [ > /FormElements false /GenerateStructure true /IncludeBookmarks false /IncludeHyperlinks false /IncludeInteractive false /IncludeLayers false /IncludeProfiles true /MultimediaHandling /UseObjectSettings /Name

northeast africa and the levant in connection

Documents

world systems

mediterranean world

bronze age world system

bronze age eurasia

late bronze age worldsystem

worldsystems perspective

world time

bronze age societies