Misplaced Pages

Dynastic race theory: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 02:08, 19 April 2007 editThanatosimii (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users3,481 edits do not remove cited information← Previous edit Latest revision as of 15:25, 22 September 2024 edit undoDsp13 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, IP block exemptions, Pending changes reviewers103,588 editsm →Origins: wlink 
(141 intermediate revisions by 53 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Short description|Theory of the origins of Dynastic Egypt}}
The '''Dynastic Race Theory''' was the earliest thesis to attempt to explain how predynastic ] developed into the Pharonic monarchy. It argued that the presence of many ]n influences in Egypt during the late predynastic period and the apparently foreign graves in the ] burials indicated an invasion of Mesopotamians into Upper Egypt, who then conquered both Upper and Lower Egypt and founded the ]
The '''dynastic race theory''' was the earliest thesis to attempt to explain how ] developed into the sophisticated monarchy of ]. The theory holds that the earliest roots of the ]ian dynastic civilisation were imported by invaders from ] who then founded the ] and brought culture to the indigenous population. This theory had strong supporters in the Egyptological community in the first half of the 20th century, but has since lost mainstream support.<ref name="Early dynastic Egypt">{{cite book |last1=Wilkinson |first1=Toby |title=Early dynastic Egypt |date=1999 |publisher=Routledge |location=London |isbn=0415186331 |pages=15}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |last1=Smith, Stuart Tyson. Redford, Donald (ed.). p28 |title=Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt - Volume 3 |url=https://archive.org/details/oxfordencyclopediaofancientegyptvolume3/page/n35/mode/2up |date=1 February 2001}}</ref>
<ref>{{cite book |last1=Yurco, Frank (1996). "An Egyptological Review". |title=Black Athena revisited |date=1996 |publisher=University of North Carolina Press |location=Chapel Hill |isbn=0807845558 |pages=62–100}}</ref><ref name="Sonia R. Zakrzewski 2007">{{cite book|author-last=Zakrzewski|author-first=Sonia R.|title=Population continuity or population change: Formation of the ancient Egyptian state|date=2007|publisher=Department of Archaeology, University of Southampton|location=Highfield, Southampton}}</ref><ref>*Pg33-"Early Nile Valley populations were primarily coextensive with indigenous African populations. Linguistic and archaeological data provide key supporting evidence for a primarily African origin".{{cite book |last1=Shomarka Keita and A.J. Boyce "The Geographic and Origins and Population Relationships of Early Ancient Egyptians". Celenko Theodore (ed). |title=Egypt in Africa |date=1996 |publisher=Indianapolis Museum of Art |location=Indianapolis, Ind. |isbn=0936260645 |pages=20–33}}</ref>


==Origins==
⚫ The Dynastic Race Theory is no longer the dominant thesis in the field of Predyanstic Archaeology, and has been largely replaced by the theory that Egypt was a ], on the grounds that such contacts are much older than the Naqada II period,<ref>Redford, Donald B., ''Egypt, Israel, and Canaan in Ancient Times'' (Princeton: University Press, 1992), p. 13.</ref> the Naqada II period had a large degree of continuity with the Naqada I period,<ref>Gardiner, Alan. ''Egypt of the Pharaohs'' (Oxford: University Press, 1961), p. 392.</ref> and the changes which did happen during the Naqada periods happened over significant amounts of time.<ref>Shaw, Ian. and Nicholson, Paul, ''The Dictionary of Ancient Egypt'' (London: British Museum Press, 1995), p. 228.</ref> However, Scholars still take pains to note that while the Dynastic Race Theory is probably fallacious, the evidence upon which it was based does still indicate significant ]<ref>Redford, ''Egypt, Israel,'' p. 17.</ref>
In the early 20th century, Egyptologist Sir ] deduced that skeletal remains found at pre-dynastic sites at ] (Upper Egypt) indicated the presence of two different races, with the Dynastic Race, also referred to as the "Followers of Horus",<ref name="ReferenceA">Emery, W.B. Archaic Egypt, Penguin Books, 1987 0-14-020462-8</ref> differentiated physically by a noticeably larger skeletal structure and cranial capacity.<ref>Derry, D.E., The Dynastic Race in Egypt, Journal of Egyptian Archaeology, vol 42, 1956</ref> Petrie concluded that the physical differences of the remains in conjunction with the previously unknown burial styles, uncharacteristic tomb architecture, and abundance of foreign artifacts, implied this race must have been an invading ruling elite that was responsible for the seemingly sudden rise of Egyptian civilization. Based on plentiful cultural evidence, Petrie determined that the invader race had come from Mesopotamia, and imposed themselves on the native ] to become their rulers. Petrie adduced new architectural styles—the distinctly Mesopotamian "niched-facade" architecture—pottery styles, cylinder seals and a few artworks, as well as numerous Predynastic rock and tomb paintings depicting Mesopotamian style boats, symbols, and figures.


This came to be called the "dynastic race theory"<ref>], Guy MacLean Rogers, </ref><ref name="Egypt pg 15">Early dynastic Egypt, by Toby A. H. Wilkinson, pg 15</ref> The theory further argued that the Mesopotamians then conquered both ] and ] and founded the ]. Predynastic and First Dynasty burial sites similar to Naqada were also found at Abydos, Sakkara, and Hieraconpolis.<ref name="ReferenceA"/>
⚫ ==References==
<div class="references-small">
<references />
</div>


Versions of the Dynastic race model were adopted by scholars as ],<ref>Egyptian Civilization Its Sumerian Origin and Real Chronology, by L. A. Waddell</ref> and ], a former Chair of Egyptology at University College London.
{{Ancient-Egypt-stub}}

==Decline==
⚫ The dynastic race theory is no longer an accepted thesis in the field of predynastic archaeology. While there is clear evidence the Naqada II culture borrowed abundantly from Mesopotamia, the most commonly held view today is that the achievements of the First Dynasty were the result of a long period of cultural and political development.<ref>Early Dynastic Egypt (Routledge, 1999), p.15</ref> Such borrowings are much older than the Naqada II period,<ref>Redford, Donald B., ''Egypt, Israel, and Canaan in Ancient Times'' (Princeton: University Press, 1992), p. 13.</ref> the Naqada II period had a large degree of continuity with the Naqada I period,<ref>Gardiner, Alan. ''Egypt of the Pharaohs'' (Oxford: University Press, 1961), p. 392.</ref> and the changes which did happen during the Naqada periods happened over significant amounts of time.<ref>Shaw, Ian. and Nicholson, Paul, ''The Dictionary of Ancient Egypt'' (London: British Museum Press, 1995), p. 228.</ref>

Modern Egyptology largely maintains the view that "state formation occurred as a mainly indigenous process", although significant differences in morphology indicated migration along the Nile Valley also took place.<ref>Sonia R. Zakrzewski: - Department of Archaeology, University of Southampton, Highfield, Southampton (2003)</ref> The Dynastic Race theory has been largely replaced by the theory Egypt was a ].

==In Afrocentrism==
In the 1950s, when the Dynastic Race Theory was widely accepted by mainstream scholarship, the Senegalese scholar ] was publicising his theory that the Ancient Egyptians were "Black Africans." Diop "paid special attention to the emergence of the Dynastic Race Theory", and claimed that European scholars supported this theory to avoid having to admit that the Ancient Egyptians were black and to characterise them as "Semitic" or "Caucasian".<ref>Epic encounters: culture, media, and U.S. interests in the Middle East – 1945-2000 by Melani McAlister</ref> Other prominent Afrocentrists, including ], later also argued against the dynastic race theory in favour of a "Black Egyptian" model.<ref>Heresy in the University: the Black Athena controversy and the Responsibilities of American Intellectuals. By Jacques Berlinerblau, pg 158</ref> Afrocentrists particularly condemn the alleged dividing of African peoples into racial clusters as being new versions of the Dynastic Race Theory and the ].<ref>History of Philosophy (3 Vols. Set), by William Turner, pg 8</ref>

==Revival==
A version of the theory has been revived by some modern scholars, most notably ],<ref>Legend – The Genesis of Civilisation, by David Rohl ::: http://www.davidrohl.com/dynastic_race_11.html</ref> and Michael Rice,<ref>Egypt's making: the origins of ancient Egypt, 5000-2000 BC, by Michael Rice</ref> who have advanced reasons in support of a Mesopotamian origin of Dynastic Egypt in books such as Rohl's ''Legend-The Genesis of Civilisation'' and Rice's ''Egypt's Making''.

According to Rohl, "There is little evidence of kingship and its rituals very much before the beginning of the 1st Dynasty; no signs of the gradual development of metal working, art, monumental architecture and writing—the defining criteria of early civilisation. Much of what we know about the pharaohs and their complex culture seems to come into existence in a flash of inspiration."<ref>Rohl, David M., Legend the Genesis of Civilisation (Arrow Books Limited, 1998), p. 253</ref> Rohl believes the catalyst for this sudden development was the influx of a Mesopotamian "foreign elite" who made their way to Egypt by sailing around the coastline of the Arabian Peninsula into the Red Sea ultimately dragging their boats across the desert to the Nile. Rohl notes numerous pre-dynastic rock carvings found in several locations from Wadi Abbad to Abydos which is suggested depict large Mesopotamian style boats with crews of up to 75, some of which appear being pulled across land.<ref>Rohl, David M., Legend the Genesis of Civilisation (Arrow Books Limited, 1998), p. 253-302</ref> Rohl believes the most dramatic evidence to support this theory is the sudden introduction of distinctly Mesopotamian "niched-facade", also known as "palace facade", architecture found in several early Dynastic sites, most notably the large 1st Dynasty mastabas at Saqqara. A depiction of a building using this kind of architecture is also an integral part of the serekh, the early Egyptian seal of kingship, and is found before the 1st Dynasty as well in the Naqada III, or "Dynasty 0" period. He says, "It is highly improbable that such specialized building techniques were independently invented in two widely separated regions at the same historical period without cultural transmission.<ref>Rohl, David M., Legend the Genesis of Civilisation (Arrow Books Limited, 1998), p. 332</ref>
In addition to the evidence available to Petrie et al., proponents also point out similarities in the names of divinities and places in the religious beliefs of the two cultures, and in depictions of regalia. For example the primeval mound of the Egyptian first creation was called the Island of Nun, and was surrounded by the Waters of Nun, while the Sumerian name for the great temple in their original city of Eridu was Nun.ki—the 'Mighty Place'—and it was built on an island in the reed swamps. Several scholars have also noted that the name Osiris is a Greek pronunciation, and that the god would have been called Asar in Egyptian, while the Sumerian god of the Eridu area was also called Asar (the Babylonian ]).<ref>Dictionary of Ancient Deities, by Patricia Turner, Charles Russell Coulter</ref> The ] of Ancient Mesopotamia (4100–2900 BC calibrated) predates the ] period of Ancient Egypt (3500-3200 BC) and indeed there is evidence of colonies of this Uruk civilization over a wide area—from the ], to the ] in the west, and as far east as Central ].<ref name="Algaze, Guillermo 2005">Algaze, Guillermo (2005) "The Uruk World System: The Dynamics of Expansion of Early Mesopotamian Civilization", (Second Edition, University of Chicago Press)</ref>

==See also==
*]

⚫ ==References==
{{reflist|2}}


] ]
]
]
]
]
]
]

Latest revision as of 15:25, 22 September 2024

Theory of the origins of Dynastic Egypt

The dynastic race theory was the earliest thesis to attempt to explain how predynastic Egypt developed into the sophisticated monarchy of Dynastic Egypt. The theory holds that the earliest roots of the ancient Egyptian dynastic civilisation were imported by invaders from Mesopotamia who then founded the First Dynasty and brought culture to the indigenous population. This theory had strong supporters in the Egyptological community in the first half of the 20th century, but has since lost mainstream support.

Origins

In the early 20th century, Egyptologist Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie deduced that skeletal remains found at pre-dynastic sites at Naqada (Upper Egypt) indicated the presence of two different races, with the Dynastic Race, also referred to as the "Followers of Horus", differentiated physically by a noticeably larger skeletal structure and cranial capacity. Petrie concluded that the physical differences of the remains in conjunction with the previously unknown burial styles, uncharacteristic tomb architecture, and abundance of foreign artifacts, implied this race must have been an invading ruling elite that was responsible for the seemingly sudden rise of Egyptian civilization. Based on plentiful cultural evidence, Petrie determined that the invader race had come from Mesopotamia, and imposed themselves on the native Badarian culture to become their rulers. Petrie adduced new architectural styles—the distinctly Mesopotamian "niched-facade" architecture—pottery styles, cylinder seals and a few artworks, as well as numerous Predynastic rock and tomb paintings depicting Mesopotamian style boats, symbols, and figures.

This came to be called the "dynastic race theory" The theory further argued that the Mesopotamians then conquered both Upper and Lower Egypt and founded the First Dynasty. Predynastic and First Dynasty burial sites similar to Naqada were also found at Abydos, Sakkara, and Hieraconpolis.

Versions of the Dynastic race model were adopted by scholars as L. A. Waddell, and Walter Bryan Emery, a former Chair of Egyptology at University College London.

Decline

The dynastic race theory is no longer an accepted thesis in the field of predynastic archaeology. While there is clear evidence the Naqada II culture borrowed abundantly from Mesopotamia, the most commonly held view today is that the achievements of the First Dynasty were the result of a long period of cultural and political development. Such borrowings are much older than the Naqada II period, the Naqada II period had a large degree of continuity with the Naqada I period, and the changes which did happen during the Naqada periods happened over significant amounts of time.

Modern Egyptology largely maintains the view that "state formation occurred as a mainly indigenous process", although significant differences in morphology indicated migration along the Nile Valley also took place. The Dynastic Race theory has been largely replaced by the theory Egypt was a hydraulic empire.

In Afrocentrism

In the 1950s, when the Dynastic Race Theory was widely accepted by mainstream scholarship, the Senegalese scholar Cheikh Anta Diop was publicising his theory that the Ancient Egyptians were "Black Africans." Diop "paid special attention to the emergence of the Dynastic Race Theory", and claimed that European scholars supported this theory to avoid having to admit that the Ancient Egyptians were black and to characterise them as "Semitic" or "Caucasian". Other prominent Afrocentrists, including Martin Bernal, later also argued against the dynastic race theory in favour of a "Black Egyptian" model. Afrocentrists particularly condemn the alleged dividing of African peoples into racial clusters as being new versions of the Dynastic Race Theory and the Hamitic hypothesis.

Revival

A version of the theory has been revived by some modern scholars, most notably David Rohl, and Michael Rice, who have advanced reasons in support of a Mesopotamian origin of Dynastic Egypt in books such as Rohl's Legend-The Genesis of Civilisation and Rice's Egypt's Making.

According to Rohl, "There is little evidence of kingship and its rituals very much before the beginning of the 1st Dynasty; no signs of the gradual development of metal working, art, monumental architecture and writing—the defining criteria of early civilisation. Much of what we know about the pharaohs and their complex culture seems to come into existence in a flash of inspiration." Rohl believes the catalyst for this sudden development was the influx of a Mesopotamian "foreign elite" who made their way to Egypt by sailing around the coastline of the Arabian Peninsula into the Red Sea ultimately dragging their boats across the desert to the Nile. Rohl notes numerous pre-dynastic rock carvings found in several locations from Wadi Abbad to Abydos which is suggested depict large Mesopotamian style boats with crews of up to 75, some of which appear being pulled across land. Rohl believes the most dramatic evidence to support this theory is the sudden introduction of distinctly Mesopotamian "niched-facade", also known as "palace facade", architecture found in several early Dynastic sites, most notably the large 1st Dynasty mastabas at Saqqara. A depiction of a building using this kind of architecture is also an integral part of the serekh, the early Egyptian seal of kingship, and is found before the 1st Dynasty as well in the Naqada III, or "Dynasty 0" period. He says, "It is highly improbable that such specialized building techniques were independently invented in two widely separated regions at the same historical period without cultural transmission.

In addition to the evidence available to Petrie et al., proponents also point out similarities in the names of divinities and places in the religious beliefs of the two cultures, and in depictions of regalia. For example the primeval mound of the Egyptian first creation was called the Island of Nun, and was surrounded by the Waters of Nun, while the Sumerian name for the great temple in their original city of Eridu was Nun.ki—the 'Mighty Place'—and it was built on an island in the reed swamps. Several scholars have also noted that the name Osiris is a Greek pronunciation, and that the god would have been called Asar in Egyptian, while the Sumerian god of the Eridu area was also called Asar (the Babylonian Marduk). The Uruk period of Ancient Mesopotamia (4100–2900 BC calibrated) predates the Naqada II period of Ancient Egypt (3500-3200 BC) and indeed there is evidence of colonies of this Uruk civilization over a wide area—from the Taurus Mountains, to the Mediterranean Sea in the west, and as far east as Central Iran.

See also

References

  1. Wilkinson, Toby (1999). Early dynastic Egypt. London: Routledge. p. 15. ISBN 0415186331.
  2. Smith, Stuart Tyson. Redford, Donald (ed.). p28 (1 February 2001). "Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt - Volume 3".{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)
  3. Yurco, Frank (1996). "An Egyptological Review". (1996). Black Athena revisited. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press. pp. 62–100. ISBN 0807845558.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)
  4. Zakrzewski, Sonia R. (2007). Population continuity or population change: Formation of the ancient Egyptian state. Highfield, Southampton: Department of Archaeology, University of Southampton.
  5. *Pg33-"Early Nile Valley populations were primarily coextensive with indigenous African populations. Linguistic and archaeological data provide key supporting evidence for a primarily African origin".Shomarka Keita and A.J. Boyce "The Geographic and Origins and Population Relationships of Early Ancient Egyptians". Celenko Theodore (ed). (1996). Egypt in Africa. Indianapolis, Ind.: Indianapolis Museum of Art. pp. 20–33. ISBN 0936260645.
  6. ^ Emery, W.B. Archaic Egypt, Penguin Books, 1987 0-14-020462-8
  7. Derry, D.E., The Dynastic Race in Egypt, Journal of Egyptian Archaeology, vol 42, 1956
  8. Mary R. Lefkowitz, Guy MacLean Rogers, Black Athena Revisited, pg65
  9. Early dynastic Egypt, by Toby A. H. Wilkinson, pg 15
  10. Egyptian Civilization Its Sumerian Origin and Real Chronology, by L. A. Waddell
  11. Early Dynastic Egypt (Routledge, 1999), p.15
  12. Redford, Donald B., Egypt, Israel, and Canaan in Ancient Times (Princeton: University Press, 1992), p. 13.
  13. Gardiner, Alan. Egypt of the Pharaohs (Oxford: University Press, 1961), p. 392.
  14. Shaw, Ian. and Nicholson, Paul, The Dictionary of Ancient Egypt (London: British Museum Press, 1995), p. 228.
  15. Sonia R. Zakrzewski: Population continuity or population change: Formation of the ancient Egyptian state - Department of Archaeology, University of Southampton, Highfield, Southampton (2003)
  16. Epic encounters: culture, media, and U.S. interests in the Middle East – 1945-2000 by Melani McAlister
  17. Heresy in the University: the Black Athena controversy and the Responsibilities of American Intellectuals. By Jacques Berlinerblau, pg 158
  18. History of Philosophy (3 Vols. Set), by William Turner, pg 8
  19. Legend – The Genesis of Civilisation, by David Rohl ::: http://www.davidrohl.com/dynastic_race_11.html
  20. Egypt's making: the origins of ancient Egypt, 5000-2000 BC, by Michael Rice
  21. Rohl, David M., Legend the Genesis of Civilisation (Arrow Books Limited, 1998), p. 253
  22. Rohl, David M., Legend the Genesis of Civilisation (Arrow Books Limited, 1998), p. 253-302
  23. Rohl, David M., Legend the Genesis of Civilisation (Arrow Books Limited, 1998), p. 332
  24. Dictionary of Ancient Deities, by Patricia Turner, Charles Russell Coulter
  25. Algaze, Guillermo (2005) "The Uruk World System: The Dynamics of Expansion of Early Mesopotamian Civilization", (Second Edition, University of Chicago Press)
Categories: