Anth 309 PPT Lecture 7 Dynasties 0 2 Int

ANT 309:
Egypt in the Age of the Pyramids

(Predyn.–Second Intermediate Period: 5,000-1550 BC)
Lecture 7:
Early Dynastic Egypt: Dyns.0-2
© Notes & images compiled by Gregory Mumford 2023
Instructor tips for lectures, etc.:
(1). Attend class regularly (& listen) …
→ Many clarifications, tips, announcements,
reinforcement & reviews of materials/concepts.
(2). Take notes on lectures, etc. …

→ The act of writing down notes, even with
most course materials and instructions online,
serves as an invaluable aid to one focusing on
a class topic and retaining information better.
https://howtostudyincollege.com/how-to-get-good-grades/note-taking-strategies/
(3). Complete the required textbook
readings, and/or review the ppt.,
prior to the specific class day …
→ This will provide greater clarity and
comprehension of the material, and will enable
asking focused questions where something
may be less clear (in the textbook or lecture).
(4). Ask questions during the class if

you are confused/wish more data
→ The class is an ideal place to ask for more
clarity or further information not contained in
the textbook, ppt., and/or lecture (If nobody
asks questions, the lecture proceeds …).
(5). Complete optional materials:

→ Additional reinforcement, studying & bonus?
Questions regarding Dynasty 0 - Early Dynastic (Archaic/Thinite Dyns.1-2):
• How do we reconstruct a “HISTORY” for Dyns. 0-2 with minimal data?
- Various contemporary inscriptions (minimal detail): dockets, stelae, etc.
- Pictorial renditions of events with minimal to no captions
- Varying archaeological data and inferences from such data
- Various later histories (varying reliability: Palermo Stone; King Lists; Manetho)
• We gain a series of possible to probable, to a few known events, etc., per

ruler.
• On-going discoveries, re-assessments, new technology, and other new

approaches are changing our interpretations continuously:
- Mostly refinement of information
- Sometimes ground-breaking new information
→ Early Egyptian “history” tends to be a blend of history, archaeology, art, etc.

In search of Egypt’s “founder”:
• 3rd cent. BC: Manetho relates,
via variously preserved excerpts
from his original Aegyptiaca,
that the first king of Dynasty 1
was “Menes of This (whom
Herodotus named Min)”
• 450 BC: Herodotus relates that
“the priests told me it was Min,
the first king of Egypt.”
• 1300-1200 BC: Ramesside King M
Lists venerate the cartouche-name
of an early King Meni who is placed
N
at the advent of a list of ancestor
kings: e.g., Sety I Abydos List.
• 3000-2900 BC: a contemporary
i
clay sealing, listing Dynasty 1 kings,
places Narmer at the beginning.
• A docket naming Narmer’s successor
notes King Aha & Mn: Aha vs. Narmer
In search of Egypt’s founder:
• 1300-1200 BC: Ramesside King
notes King
Modern Aha &
priests Mn: Aha
relaying infovs.
toNarmer
tourists
?
• 1300-1200 BC: A Ramesside King
List venerates the cartouche-name
= King M-n-i
= King Meni
places Narmer at the beginning. or Menes
or Min
notes King Aha & Mn: Aha vs. Narmer or Mn
was “Menes of This (whom Clay sealing of King Qa‘a, who lists
Herodotus named Min)” his predecessors from most recent
• 450 BC: Herodotus relates that going back to (King) Narmer, Aha, +
“the priests told me it was Min, i.e., he is acknowledging Narmer
the first king of Egypt.” as the “first” king in his royal lineage.
• 1300-1200 BC: Ramesside King

ListsMeni
King venerate the cartouche-name
is placed first in the Abydos
of an early King Meni
King List –i.e., a veneratedwho ancestor
is placed
at the
Sety advent
I and of a list
his son, of ancestor
Ramesses II …
• 3,000-2,900 BC: A contemporary
Horus-name of
• A docket naming Narmer’s successor King Narmer.
notes King Aha & Mn: Aha vs. Narmer
• 1300-1200 BC: Ramesside King Docket of Aha (Narmer’s successor)
Hieroglyph “mn”
notes King Aha & Mn: Aha vs. Narmer Horus-name: Aha; Nbty-name: Mn
Serekh/Horus-name of King Narmer = also found beside name Mn
Clay sealing fragments of Narmer with Mn-sign
Identity of Menes / Min still debated:

• King Narmer - Well-attested founder
of Dynasty 1 lineage
at Abydos (tombs)
- Not really attested at
Saqqara (Memphis)
• King Aha - Well-attested son or
successor of Narmer
at Abydos (tombs)
- Attested activity at
Saqqara (Memphis)
Regardless of who was really “Menes”,
if Greek tales of Menes are even true,
what = known about Egypt’s unification?
We need to look at both contemporary

Predynastic through Early Dynastic
evidence and later accounts & legends
regarding: …
1. Brief overview of Predynastic

and trends toward cultural and
political unity in Egypt
2. An overview of the Protodynastic,

especially the few known kings.
3. Overview of Dynasty 1 rulers
4. Overview of Dynasty 2 rulers
5. Next: details on Protodyn./Dyn.0

Abydos royal tombs & cult.
THE UNIFICATION OF
EGYPT
ca. 3200 - 3000 BC
and
EARLY DYNASTIC PERIOD
(ca. 3000 - 2700 BC)
Unification:
• Egypt’s political unification occurred BUTO
- no earlier than late Naqada II,
- no later than late Naqada III (Dyn.0)
• How unification took place = unknown.
Review:
• Naqada II culture reaches Fayum (Gerza).
• Naqada IIc: Site of Maadi disappears.
• Naqada IIc-III: Buto-Maadi culture becomes
increasingly dominated by Naqada culture:
E.g., Buto; Tell Farkha.
• Naqada III: Graves at Minshat Abu Omar
now change to Naqada funerary customs:
E.g., rectilinear, larger, frequently mud-lined, NAQADA
bodies on left side facing East, wealthier
(also stone containers; cosmetic items;
jewellery; copper utensils).
Implications of Naqada items & customs → N:
• Trade? Colonization? Influence? Conquest?
Trends towards unification:
Theoretical mechanisms of unification:
• a. Wet-Dry trend → Neolithic “revolution”
• b. Initially small egalitarian settlements
• c. Emerging agricultural communities
• d. Proto-states (Hierakonpolis; Naqada; Abydos)
• e. Proto-kingdom in Upper Egypt (Not LE)
• f. Political unification
NB: Delta lacks evidence for Proto-kingdom
Other ideas:
• Agriculture → more sedentary life →
• Need/desire for non-indigenous resources,
• More craft specialization → export items,
• Trade & traders (filling a needed niche),
• Resource rich areas (gold) → becoming
wealthier → soc. stratification → rulers,
• Agency? 1 ruler? (e.g., Napoleon; Shaka)
• Cutting out less organized middleman?
(i.e., UE kingdom(s) vs. Delta city states?) B.J. Kemp theory / model
• NB: Naqada II culture in S. Egypt displays behind Egypt’s unification.
much greater soc. stratification, trade, etc.
Why didn’t the delta “win”?: = Major trading intermediary with East Med.
- Fewer resources; Many Nile branches & poorer contact may have encouraged disunity.
Trends towards unification:
Theoretical mechanisms of unification:
• a. Wet-Dry trend → Neolithic “revolution”
• b. Initially small egalitarian settlements
• c. Emerging agricultural communities
• d. Proto-states (Hierakonpolis; Naqada; Abydos)
• e. Proto-kingdom in Upper Egypt (Not LE) Syria
• f. Political unification Mesopot-
NB: Delta lacks evidence for Proto-kingdom amia
Other ideas: Delta trading
• → Agriculture & more sedentary life → intermediaries
• Desire/need for non-indigenous resources,
• More craft specialization → export items,
• Trade & traders (filling a needed niche),
• Resource rich areas (gold) → becoming
wealthier → soc. stratification → rulers,
• Agency? 1 ruler? (e.g., Napoleon; Shaka) Upper
• Cutting out less organized middleman? Egypt
(i.e., UE kingdom(s) vs. Delta city states?) Red
• NB: Naqada II culture in S. Egypt displays Sea
much greater soc. stratification, trade, etc. trade?
Proto-state/kingdom at Abydos:
GOLD
Further trends towards unification:
Evidence for emergence of Southern kings:
• Late OK Egypt recognizes pre-Dyn.1 rulers:
Abydos = recognized as birthplace of kingship
• Predynastic yields early royal iconography:
- Red Crown (Naqada I)
- Smiting motif & painted tomb at Hrknpls (N-II)
- Sceptre & royal tombs at Abydos (N-III)
- Writing & royal iconography Aby & Hrk (N-III)
The role of warfare(?) in unification:

• Naqada III items contains many motifs of
battle, (southern) kings dominating Northland,
slain enemies, royal tours, oaths of allegiance,
etc.
- King Scorpion smiting (Gebel Tjauti [Luxor])
- Narmer palette (Hierakonpolis)
- Narmer macehead (Hierakonpolis)
- Narmer on carved items (Hierakonpolis; etc.)
- Narmer smiting (Abydos Cem.B ivory piece)
• Late OK Egypt recognizes pre-Dyn.1 rulers
(Abydos recognized as birthplace of kingship)
- Smiting motif & painted tomb at Hrknpls (N-II) Naqada II:
- Sceptre & royal tombs at Abydos (N-III) Painted Tomb

etc.
- Narmer on carved items (Hierakonpolis; etc.) N III:
- Narmer smiting (Abydos Cem.B ivory piece) Narmer
palette
Predynastic yields early royal iconography:

Heqa-sceptre
• Naqada III items contains
from Tomb manyU-j motifs of
etc.
Later wooden
- Narmer macehead Heqa-sceptre
(Hierakonpolis)
- Narmer on carved (no. 1519)
items in
(Hierakonpolis; etc.) Abydos:
the Louvre
- Narmer smiting (Abydos Cem.B ivory piece) Cemetery U
Museum
https://collections.louvre.fr/en/ark:/53355/cl010013502 Tomb U-j
•Predynastic yields early royal iconography:
etc.
King Scorpion
macehead
- Writing & royal iconography A & H (N-III)

battle: (southern) kings dominating Northland,
etc.
- King Scorpion? (Gebel Tjauti [Naqada IIIA])
Further trends towards unification: Findspot of the
Evidence for emergence of Southern kings: Narmer Palette
at Hierakonpolis

etc.

etc.
Abydos Tablet
(ivory docket)
http://www.ancientarchitects.
- Sceptre & royal tombs at co.uk/2021/03/was-sphinx-
Abydos (N-III)
depicted-on-narmer-palette.
html

etc.

etc.
Rise of Southern Proto-kingdoms:
- In N-III: Naqada/Nubt loses its
former power (→ no wealthy tombs)
- Abydos and Hierakonpolis remain
powerful towns and → centres.
- Nekhen
Hierakonpolis
News:becomes a centre
Hierakonpolis
for falcon-god Horus (a symbol of
the kingship and living king).
- Abydos emerges as a centre for
royal burials (N-III → Dyn.2) &
cult of Khentimentiu (later Osiris:
a symbol of the deceased king).
- Naqada-3 Cemetery U at Abydos:
Tomb U-j: 200 dockets; early writing
King “Scorpion”<a> (= diff. one)
- Late Naqada-3 Cemetery-B Abydos:
Pit-tomb: Iri-hor (seals; etc.)
Pit-tomb: Ka (seals; etc.)
Pit-tomb: Narmer (seals; etc.)
Pit-tomb: Aha (1st king of Dyn.1)
http://www.hierakonpolis-online.org/nekhennews/nn-28-2016.pdf
Rise of Southern Proto-kingdoms: Hierakonpolis:
- In N-III: Naqada/Nubt loses its Dyn.6,
former power (no wealthy tombs) gold
- Abydos and Hierakonpolis remain Horus
powerful towns and → centres. votive
- Hierakonpolis becomes a centre
for falcon-god Horus (= a symbol of
Rise of Southern Proto-kingdoms: Abydos:
former power (no wealthy tombs)
Dyn.18: Tomb
- Abydos emerges as a centre for of Tutankhamun
cult of Khentimentiu (+later Osiris:
Rise of Southern Proto-kingdoms:
royal burials (N-III → Dyn.2) & Abydos:
cult of Khentimentiu (later Osiris: Tomb
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10814-016-9094-7
U-j
Rise of Southern Proto-kingdoms: Abydos: cemetery B
PROTODYNASTIC -
EARLY DYNASTIC:
Ca. 3,200 - 2686 BC
“Historical” Overview
The Unification of Ancient Egypt: Protodynastic–Early Dynastic Egypt.
The rise of the Thinite Dynasty (Abydos).
Protodynastic rulers Dynasty “0”/late Naqada III a-b

3,200-3,000 BC Kings Tomb Uj?, Iry-Hor, Ka, “A”,“B”,“Scorpion/Crocodile”
Early Dynastic (also Archaic / Thinite period [Naqada IIIc]):

• Dynasty 1 Kings Narmer, Aha, Djer, Djet, Queen Merneith, Den,
3,000-2,890 BC Anedjib, Semerkhet, Qa’a, *(and Ba and Sneferka).
• Dynasty 2 Kings Hetepsekhemwy, Raneb, Nynetjer, Weneg, Sened,

2,890-2,686 BC *(Nubnefer), *(Sekhemib-Perenmaat), Peribsen, and
Khasekhem/Khasekhem(wy).
Other aspects of the Early Dynastic period:

• Kingship Evolving iconography, regalia, titles, royal tombs, etc.
• Administration Controlling former independent regions, polities, the delta
• Society People’s place in a new and changing social structure
• Religion The rise of national/major deities and cult centres

Naqada III/Dyn.0 (Protodynastic period): 3,200 – 3,000 BC
ABYDOS Ancestral town of Dyns.1-2 kings in southern Egypt (UE)
Series of Protodynastic – Dyns.1-2 elite/royal tombs
Exact sequence of rulers = uncertain
1. “Ruler” (?) owner of Tomb U-j (Abydos)
2. King Iry-Hor owner of Tomb B0/1/2 (Abydos)
3. King “B” (name?) represented by items bearing his royal serekh-name [x?]
4. King “A” (Akhedji?) represented by items bearing his royal serekh-name [x?]
5. King “Scorpion” possible owner of Tomb B50 (Abydos?)

and/or “Crocodile”
6. King Ka equated with Tomb B7/9 (Abydos)

beside known Dyn.1 tombs
* King Narmer Probable founder of a unified Egypt in Dynasty 1

(Abydos)
Proto-state/kingdom at Abydos:
GOLD
Naqada III/Dyn.0 (Protodynastic period): Ca. 3,200 – 3,000 BC.
1. “RULER” (?) owner of Tomb U-j (ABYDOS)
• Name “Scorpion”(?) -Item bearing scorpion

-sign from this tomb
• Leader/king(?) a. Largest tomb in Protodyn.

portion of cemetery.
b. Wealthiest tomb: over
400 Palestinian-style jars
(local clays & imported)
•Earliest writing -Early Egyptian hieroglyphs

2. KING Iry-Hor owner of Tomb B0/1/2 (ABYDOS)
• Name Iry-Hor -Associated with items from Tomb B0?1/2

-Many intact & broken pottery vessels bearing his name
• King(?) -Royal Horus-falcon on Egyptian “r”-sign (a “mouth”).

-Later evolves into Serekh-name (one of 5 royal titles).
-Horus-falcon is intimately connected to kingship.
• Kingdom? -Abydos
• Placement in Dyn.0 a. Relative position to other elite
= uncertain: graves = earlier than King Ka
b. Early form of Serekh-name.
*Later
Serekh of
King “B”
*

3. KING “B” (name?) represented by items bearing his royal serekh-name [x?]
• Name Difficult to read

→ “B” in sequence
• Placement Poorly drawn, may
be first serekh-name
• Kingdom? Name found at Armant
and Hierakonpolis
a. Southern Kingdom?
Later b. Abydene Kingdom?
Dyn.1:
Djet King “B”s serekh:
Earlier than A? ABYDOS
Armant
Hierakonpolis
4. KING “A” represented by items with his royal serekh-name [x?]
• Name? 3 maceheads signs (Akhedji)
• Placement? Serekh-name more developed

* E. Delta
• Kingdom? Name on items at Tura (Cairo) * Tura
and in East delta
Is he from Abydos?
(Naqada III culture now
dominates all Egypt)
Earlier King B serekh Protodyn.:

ABYDOS
King A (Akhedji?)
→
5. KING Scorpion (and/or “Crocodile”)
• Name Scorpion
• Placement Close to Narmer (based on
SW Palestine?
stylistic similarities)
Precedes lists with Narmer+ Minshat Abu Omar
• Kingdom/ Attested in Main Hoard of Tarkhan

influence votives at Hierakonpolis
Not found at Abydos (may
have owned Tomb B50?)
Tarkhan; E.Delta; Palestine?
ABYDOS
Hierakonpolis
5. KING Scorpion
(continued …)
• Macehead of King Scorpion from a hoard of royal items found in the Main
Deposit at Hierakonpolis (including items of King Narmer).
• It reveals: King Scorpion opening an irrigation channel

Defeated peoples (rekhyt-birds hanging from standards (polities)
Echelon perspective (figure sizes are arranged by ranking)
Early royal iconography -White Crown (southern/Upper Egypt)
-Royal Bull’s tail (hanging from kilt)
-Name introduced by a rosette
-King followed by retainers (fan-bearers)
6. KING Ka equated with Tomb B7/9 (Abydos) beside known Dyn.1 tombs
• Name Ka
SW Palestine
• Placement Many items bearing his name
in Tomb B7/9 at Abydos Ibrahim Awad
(closest to Nrmr-Dyn.1 tombs) Helwan
Tarkhan
• Kingdom/ Occurs elsewhere at Abydos,
influence Tarkhan, Helwan, Ibrahim
Awad & SW Palestine.
ABYDOS
Narmer
*KA
DYNASTY 0 / 1:
ca. 3,000-2,890 BC
Historical background:
Rulers *. Narmer
1. Aha
2. Djer
3. Djet
4. Qn Merneith
5. Den
6. Anedjib
7. Semerkhet
8. Qa’a
9. *Ba
10.*Sneferka
Dynasty 0:
1. King Narmer.
7. KING Narmer
• Narmer The “Striking/nasty catfish” Narmer name distribution:
• Placement Precedes King Aha (Dyn.1) Tell Erani
a. Sealings of Den & Qaa Tell Arad
provide sequence of rulers Buto Nahal Tillah
b. Abydos tomb sequence M. Abu Omar
Z. el-Aryan
• Kingdom/ Serekh in Egypt & S.Palestine
Tura
influence Helwan
• Identification Is he Manetho’s “Menes”? Tarkhan
Menes later cited as unifying W. Qash
Upper & Lower Egypt.
Narmer’s other names = ???
ABYDOS
Naqada
Hierakonpolis
Late Naqada III/Protodynastic: Narmer.
• Cow goddesses (= Bat or Hathor)
• Serekh-name of Narmer (“striking catfish”)
• Narmer: largest figure (echelon perspective)
• White Crown of Upper Egypt (= south)
• Probably “Royal beard” (later squared),
unless this is an “early” divine beard
(curled), commemorating deceased Narmer
• Royal Bull’s tail behind kilt;
• Front apron: Hanging strips +cow-head top
•Smiting enemy (royal smiting motif)
• Royal Horus-falcon symbolically seizing
anthropomorphised delta (= Ta-mehw).
Note: Appearance of a register line
• Fleeing/slain enemy (with place names)
• Accompanied by a sandal-bearer,
carrying an ewer (for pouring water over
the hands and feet), and the king’s sandals.
His proximity & size show his importance
in relation to the king.
Egypt’s Initial Imperialism:
Southern Egypt versus the North.
Horus falcon = symbolizing

King (Narmer), as the living Horus
Son of Osiris, Lord of the Dead.
Anthropomorphized arm holding

rope to which captive is bound.
Emblematic marsh plant of Lower

Egypt (= Delta / North) and glyph
T3-mḥw for Lower Egypt.
Anthropomorphized as a bearded
Captive ().
→ essentially the message is clear:
The Horus-King of Egypt has subjugated

the peoples of the Delta/North.
Protodynastic: Narmer palette
Echelon perspective:
(1) Narmer, (2) two officials; (3) standard
bearers.
Narmer wearing the Red Crown (the

traditional crown of Lower Egypt [North]) in
his role as ruler of Northern Egypt
Southern standards: falcons, jackal, etc.

Reviewing bodies of decapitated enemies
Presence of boat implies riverine campaign
Two animals with entwined necks

a. Symbolizing unification of the two lands
b. Symbolizing restraint of chaos
c. Motif parallels from Mesopotamia
Bull breaching fortified town & trampling

an enemy = symbolizes the king (Narmer).
The king is often linked with the strength of
a bull (e.g., later epithet: “Strong Bull Rising
In Thebes”) and has a kilt with a Bull’s tail.
PROTODYNASTIC IN GENERAL:
TOWNS PALETTE:
Protodynastic walled towns:

Simple depictions of
housing inside
Early allusions
to siege warfare
From a cache of votives in a

temple deposit at Hierakonpolis
(South of Abydos)
• Commodity labels from Abydos reveal Narmer:

a. as a “catfish” (his name) “striking” enemies
b. as a “catfish striking” a bearded man with
*
a marsh plant on his head (= T3-mhw: delta)
• Plaque with bound prisoners.
• Early dating system using specific events
• Note: Protective vulture (Mwt) above Narmer →
found throughout pharaonic art & iconography.
*
Ceremonial macehead of Narmer: Main Deposit at Hierakonpolis
Main figure:
• Narmer wearing Red Crown on a raised throne with
a protective vulture, fan-bearers, & his regular attendants
Rows 1-3: “diplomatic marriage”(?) versus another scenario.

• Animal pen and same four standards (on Narmer palette)
• Cult statue?/princess? in carrying chair & 3 attendants
• Quantities of tribute (animals, etc.)
Hierakonpolis
End panel:
• Heron-shrine (Djebaut at Buto, Delta); North-type shrine
• Pen with wild animals: Captured?; affiliated with cult?
Early Dynastic period:
Dynasty 1 (3,200-2,890 BC):
King Narmer
ROYAL TOMB at Abydos
Aha
Narmer
Narmer
Aha
Narmer’s rel. small tomb at
Abydos: vs. Hor-Aha (Dyn.1)
Dynasty 0 / 1:
*. King Menes
(Narmer vs. Aha)
Dyn.1: Menes = Horus Narmer? or Aha!
Herodotus (ca. 450 BC) relates that
• “Menes of This (Abydos) reigned for 60 years.
• He made a foreign expedition & won renown,
but was carried off by a hippopotamus.”
• Menes changed the Nile’s course to found a
new capital at Memphis.
Later excerpts from Manetho (3rd cent. BC):

• Menes = first king of Dyn.1
• Menes = renown in governing his kingdom
• Menes = reigned 30 years / 62 years
• Menes = conducted campaign outside Egypt
• Menes = killed by hippopotamus
Diodorus Siculus:
• Menes = miraculously saved from a crocodile Note: Hunting hippopotami and other
wild game was a favourite sport of
Herodotus and Josephus: pharaohs; hence, it is not unlikely that
• Menes’ successor built a palace at Memphis Menes (Narmer?/Aha?) met his end in
(Athothis/Uchoreus = Horus Aha?/Djer?) such an accident. E.g., T.III & elephant
Many of these later histories remain unsubstantiated

No monuments with Narmer’s name at Dyn.1 Memphis; Dyn.3 Saqqara = Narmer’s name
But, Narmer’s name appears on items throughout Egypt and in SW Palestine.
Ca. 450 BC tale recounted by
Herodotus regarding King Min:
“The priests told me that it was Min
<Menes> the first king of Egypt, who
raised the dam which protects Memphis
from the floods.
The river used to flow along the base
of the sandy hills on the Libyan border,
and this monarch, by damming it up
at the bend about a hundred furlongs
(12.5 miles; 7.8 km) south of Memphis,
drained the original channel
and diverted it to a new one half-way Memphis
between the two lines of hills.
To this day the elbow which the Nile
forms here, where it is forced into its
new channel, is most carefully watched
by the Persians, who strengthen the
dam every year; for should the river
burst it, Memphis might be completely
overwhelmed. …” → NEXT PAGE
Coring showing c.3000 BC Nile course
Lake Abusir once extended south
--reflecting high floods (Herodotus)
Herodotus cont. (Min / Menes):
“On the land which had been drained
by the diversion of the river,
King Min <Menes> built the city
which is now called Memphis
-- it lies in the narrow part of Egypt–
and afterwards on the north and west
sides of the town excavated a lake,
communicating with the river,
which itself protects it on the east.
In addition to this the priests told me ED cemetery
that he built there the large and very
remarkable temple of Hephaestus.”
Manetho’s excerpts on Memphis:
= No mention of ‘Menes’ at Memphis,
but equates Menes with King Min
in Herodotus (“Narmer” =?/absent!)
- Relates via all three versions that
King Athothis (Menes’ son = Aha?),
built a (royal) palace at Memphis.
Kitchen’s plan of OK - NK Memphis
Early Dynastic Memphis:
• The “White Walls”
• Lies beneath Nile flood plain
to the east of a modern village
Abusir, near the mastaba tombs
of Dynasties 1-2.
• Coring has located the Middle
Kingdom levels.
• ED-FIP Memphis = not located …
Distribution of drill cores in the area
of Mit Rahina
LINK: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/307803087_Questioning_the_Location_of_the_Old_Kingdom_Capital_of_Memphis_Egypt/figures?lo=1
Dynasty 1:
1. King Aha.
Early Dynastic period: Dynasty 1 (3,200-2,890 BC): King Aha.
1. KING Aha. “The fighting Horus”
• Fragmentary entry in Palermo Stone SW Palestine
records biennial cattle census (tax):
The dispatch of officials every 2 years
Abu Roash
• North Saqqara cemetery:
Zawiyet el-Aryan
Mastaba (= tomb) of an official has many Saqqara
clay sealings with Aha’s name. Hewan
• Queen may be Benerib (an ivory box bears
Aha’s name alongside her name).
• His mother may be Queen Neith-hotep

(buried at Naqada; name = northern: Sais) Abydos
Naqada
Serekh-name: Horus Aha; Nebty-name: = Men (Menes?)
KING Aha (continued …).
Connections with delta shrines:

• shrine of goddess Neith (NW Delta)
depicted on a docket with a fleet of ships
Suggested human sacrifice (?):

• uncertain interpretations based on a few
depictions (versus execution?; other?)
Military campaign against Lower Nubia(?)

• Ta-Sety (“land of the bow”)
(also a name associated with southernmost
Egypt)
Events in King Aha’s reign – poss. connections with Neith of Sais (NW Delta)
Dynasty 1 (3,200-2,890 BC):
King Aha
= first large / substantial tomb
AHA
Dynasty 1:
2. King Djer.
Early Dynastic period: Dynasty 1 (3,200-2,890 BC): King Djer.
2. KING Djer. “Horus who succours”
Excerpts from Manetho: if Athothis = Djer(?):
• called a son of Menes
• 27 or 57 year reign (Eusebius; Africanus)
• Renown for anatomical works
Saqqara
Domestic affairs: Tura
Palermo Stone: Helwan
• Fluctuating Nile flood heights (1 - 3.21 m)
• Festivals:
a. various deities
b. the union of the two lands Abydos
c. “Circuit of the Wall”
• Cult:
a. making & dedicating a statue
Early Dynastic period: Dynasty 1 (3,200-2,890 BC): King Djer.
KING Djer. (continued …)
Abydos:
• labels alluding to connections with Buto (delta)
(shrine of the Heron [Djebaut; older name])
Palermo Stone:
• festival of Djet (Uto/Wadjet = Buto)
International affairs(?):
His serekh-name = initially believed to be at
Gebel Sheikh Suleiman in Nubia (N. Sudan):
• BUT this Serekh name = misread as “Djer”
• Previously cited as evidence for King Djer
campaigning into Nubia
• Now = read as an earlier, late Predynastic
inscription.
Dynasty 1 (3,200-2,890 BC): ASWAN
KING Djer
• Old idea that his serekh-name
= at Gebel Sheikh Suleiman
in Lower Nubia;
• Now = read as an earlier,
late Predynastic inscription.
Second
cataract
Dynasty 1 (3,200-2,890 BC):
King Djer
ROYAL TOMB at Abydos …
*plus Funerary Enclosure/Palace
*
Dynasty 1:
3. King Djet.
Early Dynastic period: Dynasty 1 (3,200-2,890 BC): King Djet.
3. KING Djet. “The Cobra”
Excerpts from Manetho:

• 23 years (Africanus)
• 42 years (Eusebius)
Nazlet Batran
• Later references to a great famine in Egypt Tarkhan
More contemporary ancient sources:

• closer to 20 year reign length
Domestic affairs:
• Dedicated statuary at cultic centres Abydos
(e.g., limestone statue base at Hierakonpolis)
International relations: Hierakonpolis

• Canaanite pottery in tombs
Early Dynastic period: Dynasty 1 (3,200-2,890 BC): King Djet.
KING Djet. (continued …)
King Djet depicted in the Double Crown
in a rock-cut text.
• White Crown of Upper Egypt (= South)

• Red Crown of Lower Egypt (= North)
• Earliest occurrence of this combination
• The concept of both Upper and Lower

Egypt combined into one!
• Implies a conscious effort, beginning

as early as Djet, visibly promoting the
unity of two lands as one.
• Further implication that there is a need,

or desire, to promote unity (unrest?).
King Djet:
• Reportedly had a “Double
Crown” on the Horus Falcon
accompanying his serekh-
name in a rock-cut text
in Western Desert (near
Edfu).
• Otherwise, his successor,
King Den, is well-illustrated
wearing a Double Crown in
various images.
Dynasty 1 (3,200-2,890 BC):
KING Djet
ROYAL tomb at Abydos
* Funerary enclosure/Palace
Dynasty 1:
4. Queen Merneith.
Early Dynastic period: Dynasty 1 (3,200-2,890 BC): Queen Merneith.
4. QN Mer-neith. “Beloved of Neith”
• May have been a senior wife? of King Djet
• Possibly the daughter? of King Djer
• Her Abydos tomb has features

Saqqara
found in kings’ tombs, showing
her importance and probable
independent reign.
• Called “King’s mother” on a

sealing (regent of Den?)
Abydos
Dynasty 1:
5. King Den.
Early Dynastic period: Dynasty 1 (3,200-2,890 BC): King Den.
5. KING Den. “Horus who strikes”
Excerpts from Manetho: SW Palestine
• He assigned 20 years to Den

Abu Roash
• more likely over 30+ years
Helwan
• Vessel fragment notes Den celebrated a 2nd
Saqqara
Sed festival (re-affirming right to rule and
rejuvenation rites; after 30 years of rule) S. Sinai
• 40 year reign (Palermo Stone)
Name distribution:
• Throughout Egypt, Sinai and in SW Palestine. Abydos
KING Den. (continued …)
Domestic affairs:
Palermo Stone:
• King’s attendance at cultic festivals
•
•Celebration of Sed-festival (as king of
Upper Egypt & king of Lower Egypt)
• Hippopotamus hunting
•Commissioning building of a temple
•Opening irrigation basins for a temple:

(“Mansion-called-Seat-of-the-Gods”)
Main Deposit at Hierakonpolis:

• Inscribed ivory and stone vessels from
votive (= cultic) offerings dedicated by Den.
KING Den. (continued …)
Royal hunting motif:

Hippo hunting scene.
International affairs:
Palermo Stone:
• Smiting of the Iwnw-peoples
(perhaps in South Sinai, where
iwnwt-tribes are noted later)
Ivory dockets/labels:
• Military action against Asiatic-
style persons.
Archaeological evidence:
• inscribed sealing bearing Den’s
name in SW Palestine (En-Besor)
name also in Southwest Sinai
Dynasty 1 (3,200-2,890 BC):
King Den
Dynasty 1:
6. King Anedjib.
Early Dynastic period: Dynasty 1 (3,200-2,890 BC): King Anedjib
6.KING Anedjib “Slaughterer of hearts”

SW Palestine?
Later excerpts from Manetho:

• reign of 26 years (Africanus; Eusebius)
Ancient contemporary sources: Saqqara

• stone vessel fragments note a Sed festival Helwan
(= 30+ years)
Domestic Affairs:
• may have dedicated statues (depicted on
vases)
Abydos
International relations:
• Possibly on clay sealings from En-Besor
Dynasty 1 (3,200-2,890 BC):
King Anedjib
Dynasty 1:
7. King Semerkhet.
Early Dynastic period: Dynasty 1 (3,200-2,890 BC): King Semerkhet.
7. KING Semerkhet “Thoughtful friend”

• A great disaster befell Egypt
(e.g., pestilence)
Saqqara
Palermo Stone:
• Commissioning statues for temples
• Building a structure (his funerary enclosure?)
• Flood levels regular
• Biennial cattle census (tax)
Contemporary ancient evidence: Abydos

•Semerkhet accepted as legitimate successor
(versus a debate over him being a usurper)
• Continued pottery imports from Palestine
No
Dynasty 1 (3,200-2,890 BC):
Semerkhet
Dyn.1 examples of imported Syrian jars.
Dynasty 1:
8. King Qa‘a.
Early Dynastic period: Dynasty 1 (3,200-2,890 BC): King Qa’a.
8. KING Qa’a. “His arm is raised”

• 26 year reign (Africanus; Eusebius)
Saqqara
Contemporary ancient records: Abu Sir
• Stone bowl citing 2nd Sed-festival (30+ years) Helwan
Domestic Affairs (Palermo Stone):

• Commissioned building a shrine/temple
• Attended festivals
•Officials collecting lumber for royal workshop
Abydos
International Affairs:
• Ivory rod depicting Asiatic (Palestine) El-Kab
perhaps reflecting a campaign? Symbolic?
Dynasty 1 (3,200-2,890 BC):
King Qa’a
Late Dynasty 1:
(After King Qa‘a)

Late Dynasty 1 (ca. 2890 BC):
Probable civil strife!

Palermo Stone:
• Records a significant drop in the average
height of the Nile at the end of Dynasty 1. SAQQARA
• Low floods → low crop yield → famine
→ probable political turbulence.
(especially prolonged low Niles, removing
long-term grain supplies & seed grain?)
Contemporary ancient sources:

• There is some evidence for two late Dyn. 1 ABYDOS
rulers based at Saqqara (northern Egypt) ?
King Ba Saqqara
King Sneferka
King (?) Abydos

Dynasty 1:
9. King Ba.
Early Dynastic period: Dynasty 1 (3,200-2,890 BC): King Ba.
9. KING Ba.
Contemporary ancient evidence:

• Serekh-name on a stone vessel later placed
in the Step Pyramid complex (Dyn.3: Djoser) Saqqara
• stone vessel usurped from Qaa (Dyn.1)
• King Ba not attested in later King Lists
• Very meagre evidence (brief reign)

Dynasty 1:
10. King Sneferka.

Early Dynastic period: Dynasty 1 (3,200-2,890 BC): King Sneferka.
10. KING Sneferka.
Contemporary ancient evidence:

• Serekh-name on stone vessels from North
Saqqara and the Step Pyramid complex
(Dyn.3: Djoser) Saqqara
• Stone vessels retain name of Qaa (Dyn.1)
• King Sneferka not attested in later King Lists
• His name is restricted to North Egypt
However:
• Prior to Ba and Sneferka, King Qaa’s
Abydos tomb (late Dyn.1) has jar sealings
of the first king of Dyn.2 (Hetepsekhemwy),
suggesting a peaceful transition Dyns.1-2
--at least in Southern Egypt.
DYNASTY 2:
ca. 2,890 – 2,686 BC
Historical background:
Rulers 1. Hetepsekhemwy
2. Raneb
3. Nynetjer
4. Weneg
5. Sened
6. *Nubnefer
7. *Sekhemib-Perenmaat
8. Peribsen
9. Khasekhem/Khasekhem(wy)
Dynasty 2:
1.King
2. Hetepsekhemwy.
Early Dynastic period: Dynasty 2 (2,890 – 2,686 BC): King Hetepsekhemwy.
1. KING Hetepsekhemwy.
• 38 year reign.
• possible earthquake
Giza
Saqqara
• Inscribed materials throughout Egypt, implies
Helwan
• Egypt = reunified
Domestic affairs:
• Meagre evidence: Large tomb → implies stability
Badari
•Palestinian pottery continues to be imported Abydos
(= wine, etc.)
Royal burial: change to Saqqara!
Dynasty 2 (2,890 – 2,686 BC):
Hetepsekhemwy.
ROYAL TOMB at Saqqara
Early Dyn.2: Saqqara.
• Possible combination of 2 pairs of
(a). Eastern subterranean tomb
(b). Western funerary enclosure
• Royal candidates for tombs & encl.
E.g., King Hetepsekhemwy
E.g., King Nynetjer
• Duplicates Abydos royal complex.
but now in Northern Egypt (Saqqara)
Entry to the subterranean galleries

of Hetepsekhemwy’s Saqqara tomb
Dynasty 2:
2. King Raneb.
Early Dynastic period: Dynasty 2 (2,890 – 2,686 BC): King Raneb.
2. KING Raneb. “Ra is [my] lord”

(others: Nebra: “Lord of the Sun”)
• assign 39 years (Africanus; Eusebius)
• references to various cults Saqqara
(Apis & Mnevis Bulls; Ram-god)

• Items found throughout Egypt → stability
• pottery continues to be imported
from Palestine.
Royal Tomb:
• unlocated,
Armant
• but = a royal stela in Memphite region
Dynasty 2:
3. King Nynetjer.
Early Dynastic period: Dynasty 2 (2,890 – 2,686 BC): King Nynetjer.
3. KING Nynetjer.
• said to allow women to hold office of king
(= unsubstantiated) Giza
Palermo Stone: Saqqara
• 17 biennial census → 34+ years Helwan
• very low flood levels
• festivals; building a shrine/temple
• biennial tax
• destruction of towns (no details)
Years 13-15 =turbulence (civil strife) Statue!

Year 19 attending festival of Djet at Buto
festival of Nekhbet at El-Kab
Royal Tomb:
• Saqqara
Dynasty 2 (2,890 – 2,686 BC):
Nynetjer.
ROYAL TOMB at Saqqara

Dynasty 2 (2,890 – 2,686 BC):
Tomb of Nynetjer
Room A.500: layers of pottery
Early Dynastic period: Dynasty 2 (2,890 – 2,686 BC):Tomb of Nynetjer
Early Dyn.2: Saqqara.
• Possible combination of 2 pairs of
(a). Eastern subterranean tomb
(b). Western funerary enclosure
• Royal candidates for tombs & encl.
E.g., King Hetepsekhemwy
E.g., King Nynetjer
• Duplicates Abydos royal complex.
E.g., Hetepsekhemwy’s subterranean tomb: Nynetjer = similar

Dynasty 2:
4. King Weneg.
Early Dynastic period: Dynasty 2 (2,890 – 2,686 BC): King Weneg.
4. KING Weneg.
• 17 years (Africanus; Eusebius)
Domestic affairs:
• Little known
Saqqara
•Recognized by later rulers as legitimate king
• name occurs at N. Saqqara & Step Pyramid
• Probably controlled area around Memphis
• Little known (pottery exports continued)
Royal Tomb: unlocated.

Dynasty 2:
5. King Sened.
Early Dynastic period: Dynasty 2 (2,890 – 2,686 BC): King Sened.
5. KING Sened.
• assigned 41 years
• remembered in the Late Period (6th cent
BC) through a statuette bearing his name Saqqara
Egyptian King Lists:
• place Sened as second successor to
Nynetjer
Dynasty 4:
• Tomb of Shery (Saqqara) mentions King
Sened in connection with local mortuary cult.
Domestic and International Affairs:

• Little known; controlled Memphite area
Royal Tomb:
• unidentified
Dynasty 2:
6. King Nubnefer.
Early Dynastic period: Dynasty 2 (2,890 – 2,686 BC): King Nubnefer.
6. KING Nubnefer.
• If Nubnefer = “Chaires”, he is ascribed 17
years?
Saqqara
• Nesw-bity name Nub-nefer appears on
stone vessels at Saqqara
Domestic and
• little known
• Controlled at least
the Memphite area
Royal Tomb:
• unlocated
Dynasty 2:
7. King
Sekhemib-Perenmaat
Early Dynastic period: Dynasty 2 (2,890 – 2,686 BC): King Sekhemib ….
7. KING Sekhemib-Perenmaat.
(“Horus is powerful of heart”)
• Nile flows with “water & honey for 11 days” Saqqara
(= later folklore)
Identity and placement:
• remain uncertain, but Egypt appears united
• Some contextual evidence suggests this may
represent the first name of King Peribsen (the
“next” king), before Peribsen adopted the Abydos
Seth-deity for his serekh-name.
Manetho: Nephercheres
(Aufrere says = [?])
Elephantine
Early Dynastic period: Dynasty 2 (2,890 – 2,686 BC): King Sekhemib ….
KING Sekhemib-Perenmaat (cont…)
Domestic affairs:
• The broader distribution of his name on items
throughout Egypt suggests a return to
prosperity (in contrast to the preceding five Saqqara
reigns).
• Stone vessels with his name, from Saqqara,
have the epithet “tribute of foreign lands”
* Similar to Peribsen’s epithet “tribute of Setjet”
Abydos
No royal tomb:
i.e., It remains unlocated
Conclusion:
May very well be an earlier form of the name Elephantine
for King Peribsen → “NEXT” KING
Dynasty 2:
8. King
Peribsen.
Early Dynastic period: Dynasty 2 (2,890 – 2,686 BC): King Peribsen.
8. KING Peribsen.
Later excerpts in Manetho:
• Perhaps Manetho’s Sesochris: 48 years
(Aufrere makes no suggestion here)
Domestic Affairs:
• Peribsen returns the location of the royal ?Saqqara (Dyn.4)
tomb to Abydos, restoring or creating a link
with the birthplace of kingship.
• Dyn.4 Saqqara Tomb of Shery: Peribsen cult
Serekh-names:
a. Sekhem-ib = Horus
b. Peribsen = Seth(!) Abydos
RADICAL break with

Tradition; Horus had
always been on serekh
Early Dynastic period: Dyn.2 (2,890 – 2,686 BC): King Peribsen.
8. KING Peribsen (continued …)
Horus versus Seth:
• In Egyptian mythology HORUS SETH
Seth is the traditional
enemy of Horus:
Story of the Contendings

of Horus and Seth:
• Seth kills his brother Osiris
& takes throne!
• Osiris’ son, Horus, fights
with his uncle for his right
to rule. Horus later wins.
Radical selection of Seth:

→
• Peribsen’s choice of Seth
= not a whim.
• Choosing Seth = political
statement
• Does it reflect a rebellion?
• Did he usurp control of S?
Seth =
later
erased
Who did it: Khasekhem → Khasekhemwy (?)
Peribsen
Dynasty 2 (2,890 – 2,686 BC)
Peribsen
Dynasty 2:
9. King Khasekhem
(& Khasekhemwy).
Early Dynastic period: Dynasty 2 (2,890 – 2,686 BC): King Khasekhem(wy)
9. KING Khasekhem.
Horus: “The power has appeared”
KING Khasekhemwy.
Horus-Seth:“The two powers have appeared”

• If Khaserkhem(wy) is Cheneres, he may have
reigned 30 years.

• The presence of Sed-festival style clothing
on statues of Khaserkhem(wy) suggests a
30+ year reign.
Abydos
Domestic affairs:
• Probable rival kingdoms early in reign
Hierakonpolis
9. KING Khasekhem (continued …)

Domestic affairs:
• King Khasekhem initially adopts the Horus
Northern foes?
serekh with only the White Crown (UE)
• This directly contrasts Peribsen (his
predecessor, or an early contemporary?)
This suggests a change in policy

(but both kings are buried at Abydos)
• Khasekhem builds in S. Egypt
Abydos
Hierakonpolis
Hierakonpolis Gebelein
Dynasty 2 (2,890 – 2,686 BC):
King Khasekhem
Domestic affairs (continued …)

• Statues of Khasekhem at Hierakonpolis
depict slain enemies
cite “47,209” northern enemies
• A votive (cultic) offering bears the caption:

“The year of fighting the northern enemy”
• At El-Kab (Southern Egypt) the vulture-

goddess (Nekhbet of Nekheb) stands
over a ring enclosing the word “besh”
for “rebel”
Hence:
• King Khasekhem, as King of Upper Egypt,
apparently fought and defeated northern
foes (whoever they might have been).
Dynasty 2 (2,890 – 2,686 BC):
King Khasekhem
Reconciliation?
• Khasekhem’s victory may not have
been absolute.
• Khasekhem apparently changes

his Horus-name to hold both
the Horus and Seth deities
• His name is apparently changed to

Khasekhemy “The Two Powers
have Appeared” = Horus & Seth
• A new epithet appears:

“The Two Lands are at Peace in
him” (nbwy htp im.f)
• Seth is acknowledged, but Horus

retains his place as well.
Dynasty 2 (2,890 – 2,686 BC):
King Khasekhem
Hence:
• There appears to be a definite
reconciliation with followers of Seth.
• Khasekhemwy is attempting to
reconcile a formerly split kingdom
• Both Peribsen & Khasekhem(wy)

= buried at Abydos.
Problem(s):
• Both Peribsen and Khasekhem’s
serekh names are attested mainly
in southern Egypt.
• Did Peribsen gain control of the
South?
• Could Peribsen actually have been
Khasekhem’s enemy?
• Were both simply fighting the North
Early Dynastic period: Byblos
Dynasty 2 (2,890 – 2,686 BC):
9. KING Khasekhemwy (continued …)

Domestic affairs:
• Building projects throughout Egypt
-Stone temple (Hierakonpolis)
-Stone temple (Gebelein) Saqqara
-Building a stone temple (Palermo Stone)
-Making a copper statue (Palermo Stone)
-Shipbuilding
• Khasekhemwy’s name appears on a stone
vase at Byblos (diplomatic relations/trade) Abydos
a. Seth has Red Crown (= North)
b. Horus has Double Crown (= Both Lands)
Gebelein
• Shipbuilding noted in Palermo Stone
= maritime shipping? Hierakonpolis
• Title “Overseer of foreign lands” appears.
• Raid into Nubia?: Nubia?
“Humbling the foreign land” + Ta-Sety) →
9. KING Khasekhemwy (continued …)
Gisr el-Mudir at Saqqara:
• Survey & excavation reveal late
ED (i.e., Dyn.2) pottery & design
• May = Khasekhemwy enclosure
LATE PREDYNASTIC
TO EARLY DYNASTIC:
Ca. 3,200 - 2686 BC
EARLY DYNASTIC
PERIOD:
Early Dynastic State: Dyn.1 Saqqara: Stela of Merka.
• Kingship = well-established in Dyns.1-2 Seated official with titles.
• Administration evident via writing

(e.g., dockets; commemorative items; +)
• Capital = established at Memphis
(apex of the delta; strategic location)
• Provincial capitals/centres are apparent
• Taxation inferred via agricultural produce
livestock, labour → large, wealthy cities.
• Royal court appears to foster & maintain
artisans, etc., → prod. set royal art styles
i.e., standardized royal iconography.
• Established an ideology of divine kingship:
- Legitimizing Abydos rulers (vs. others?)
- Promoting unity under one ruler
- Visible state deities (e.g., Horus)
versus local ones (e.g., Min of Koptos)
Early Dynastic State:
•Distribution
Kingship =of drill cores in thein
well-established area of Mit
Dyns.1-2
Rahina: The symbols indicate individual auger
cores that reveal positive finds of occupation,
(after Jeffreys and Tavares 1994).
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/307803087_Questioning_the_Location_of_the_Old_Kingdom_Capital_of_Memphis_Egypt/figures?lo=1
“Climate-driven early agricultural origins and development in the Nile Delta,

Egypt,” Journal of Archaeological Science, Vol. 136, December 2021
Link: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0305440321001680
Buto
• Established an ideology of divine kingship: Buto:
Buto: ED building
The Archaeology of Urbanism in Ancient Egypt From the Predynastic Period to the
End of the Middle Kingdom, pp. 59 - 112
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139942119.006
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2016.
versus local ones (e.g., Min of Koptos;
Satet at Elephantine; etc.)
Link: https://www.ucl.ac.uk/museums-static/
digitalegypt/3d/coptos/coptos2.html
• Kingship = well-established in Dyns.1-2
Other emerging features in ED:
• Capital at Memphis yields a cemetery
for high officials at adjacent N.Saqqara
• Royal cemetery at Abydos lacks burials
for high officials (only retainers).
• Infer conscripted labour (tax) to build
state, temple, and public structures.
• Less evidence for a military force,
- other than Dyn.1 fortifications, Abydos
- military name/epithets in kings’ names
royal
- textual-pictorial sources portraying
battles, executions, captives, etc. tombs
• Long-distance trade increasing:
- Cedar from Lebanon
- Copper: E. Desert, Sinai, etc.
- Gold: E. Desert (Egypt-Nubia)
- Stone: diff. areas of Egypt & desert
- Obsidian: from Ethiopia (via Red Sea)
- Turquoise: South Sinai
- Lapis lazuli: Afghanistan, etc. Saqqara mastaba tombs
• Royal cemetery at Abydos mostly lacks
burials for high officials (only retainers).
• Infer conscripted labour (tax) to build
state, temple, and public structures.
- other than Dyn.1 fortifications,
battles, executions, captives, etc.
- Obsidian:labor
Conscript from for
Ethiopia (viaEgypt
tax: ED Red Sea)
…
- Lapis lazuli: Afghanistan, etc.
- other than Dyn.1 fortifications,
battles, executions, captives, etc.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turquoise
Other emerging features in ED: Lapis lazuli
Ethiopian
obsidian
LATE PREDYNASTIC
TO EARLY DYNASTIC:
Ca. 3,200 - 2686 BC
SUMMARY:
Dyn.”0” to Early Dynastic Summary:
Foundation of a “unified” kingdom:
• Who is King “Menes”? (i.e., the later, traditional “founder” of a unified Egypt)
• Is Menes: … King Narmer? King Aha? Another ruler? None (i.e., fictitious)?
• How did Egypt become a unified state?
- Ultimately, perhaps beginning with climate change → Neolithic revolution →
urbanization → social stratification → trade & warfare → alliances → etc.???
- Population pressures, warfare, etc.
- Hydraulic civilization theories? Rise of organized irrigation for crops initiating
centralized authorities, administration, etc. → rise of state.
Evidence for a Proto-Dynastic (Naqada III / Dyn.0) unified(?) Kingdom:
• 6-7 early kings buried in cemetery U at Abydos
• They have serekh names, which are traditional titles found in pharaonic times
• No other site has tombs or rulers with such serekh names: i.e., Abydos seems
to be the home town of the earliest kings (southern Egypt → unified state)
• Naqada III pottery slowly dominates the Delta: 40% → 98% at Buto.
• The serekh names of these rulers spread increasingly throughout Egypt and
later into Palestine: does this reflect political control? trade? both? More? Less?
History and other data on Early Dynastic Egypt:
Understanding political control:
• Serekh name dispersal = possible areas of control, or influence.
• Royal-private monuments and/or burial place associated with a given ruler
i.e., = area of allegiance and influence.
• Concentration of elite tombs (e.g., courtiers) at traditional national capital:
Memphis: i.e., Saqqara burial field to immediate West of Memphis (buried)
• Comparison of other sites to capital (Memphis) and royal hometown burial site
(Abydos).
• Foundation of national capital: Narmer? Versus Aha? (Menes): prob. = Aha.
• Rise and fall of custom for sacrificial burials (of retainers) near royal tombs of
Dynasty 1: indicates a certain degree of control over retainers.
• Allusions to raids into Nubia: dockets, labels, and rock texts in Nubia (vs. trade)
• Allusions to raids into Palestine: dockets, labels, and finds in Palestine (trade?)
• Potential civil strife and war: limited dispersal of royal name, Saqqara burial site
and two contemporary rulers in North versus South; other data (Horus & Seth
figures on serekh-name: does this reflect later Contendings of Horus & Seth?).
History and other data on Early Dynastic Egypt:
Activities during a typical king’s reign:
• Palermo Stone and dockets/labels, clay sealings, etc., allude to …
Temples:
(a). Temple construction –including in stone in late Dynasty 2 (some blocks)
(b). Conducting rites in temples
(c). Providing gifts, etc., to temples throughout Egypt
(d). Commissioning cult statues for temples
Royal activities:
(a). Sed festival (after 30 years): renewing kingship, vitality, oaths of allegiance
from provincial officials and deities, etc. (Dyns.1-2); biennial cattle taxation
(b). Marriages? –alluded to in dockets & tombs (perhaps diplomatic marriages)
(c). Royal hunting: scenes of hippo hunt; later ref. to king being killed in a hunt.
(d). Adoption of Double Crown (temp. King Djet [Dyn.1]): --symbolism?
Unification of two distinct kingdoms? Fictitious? Trying to forge unity? Impl.?
(e). Maritime trade with Byblos (Lebanon): royal names etc. found there.
Trends:
• Increasingly elaborate royal subterranean tombs & enclosures; wealth & food;
mounded superstructures; pair of royal stelae. Rock-cut tombs at Saqqara
• Some isolated plagues noted.
• Low Niles recorded: famines (in late Dyn.1). Actually = sporadic, but grad. trend
Selected sources on
Early Dynastic
(“Thinite”/ “Archaic”)
Egypt
Selected sources on Early Dynastic (Thinite/Archaic) Egypt …
2009
2002
Some pdf files on Academia:

https://www.academia.edu/45047271/Egypt_and_the_Levant_INTERRELATIONS_
FROM_THE_4TH_THROUGH_THE_EARLY_3RD_MILLENNIUM_BCE_Edited_
by
Selected sources on Prehistoric/Predynastic Egypt …
2005
2021
1962
LINK: https://digital.lib.uiowa.edu/islandora/object/ui%3Asocjustice_1928
1962
LINK: https://digital.lib.uiowa.edu/islandora/object/ui%3Asocjustice_1928
1961
German summary: “The last king of the First Dynasty, Qa'a, was entombed around 2800 BCE in
Umm al-Qaab. In the underground mudbrick building, the royal burial chamber is surrounded by
additional burial chambers as well as storage room for funerary goods. The tomb was modified and
enlarged over nearly twenty years during Qa'a's reign to meet changing requires, a fact which is
represented here in the results of the follow-up study of the German Archeological Institute in Cairo.
Through these changes, the tomb represents a typological link between the tombs of the First
Dynasty in Abydos and the Second Dynasty in Saqqara. The finds within the tomb reflect the
relationship between the king and his environment: the people and things in the adjoining tombs
should help to provide an image of the court in service to the king during in the afterlife. At the end
of the 19th century, excavation began in Umm el-Qaab and inventories of the grave goods were
made by the archeologists so that the grave goods could be kept in their original context on the one
hand and intrusive objects could be separated from the original on the other. This careful
preservation of the state of the find ensures the dating of the tomb of Qa'a can be safely used as a
reference for other burial from the end of First Dynasty.German description:The last king of the 1st
dynasty, Qa'a, died around 2800 BC. buried in Umm el-Qaab. In the underground mud-brick building,
the royal burial chamber is surrounded by rooms for additional burials and stores for grave goods.
In the course of the king's more than 20-year reign, the tomb was adapted and expanded several
times to meet changing requirements, as the results of the follow-up investigations by the German
Archaeological Institute in Cairo presented here show. Due to these changes, the tomb represents a
typological link between the tombs of the 1st dynasty in Abydos and the 2nd dynasty in Saqqara.
The distribution of the finds within the tomb in turn reflects the relationship of the king to his
environment: The additions and people in the side graves were intended to serve as an image of the
royal household to provide for the king in the afterlife. During the excavations in Umm el-Qaab,
which began at the end of the 19th century, the moveable inventory of the graves was rearranged so
that the find material had to be separated into original parts of the grave equipment and grave goods
on the one hand and intrusive objects on the other. In this way, the dating function of the artefacts
from the tomb of Qa'a can be guaranteed and used at other excavation sites as a reference for the
end of the 1st dynasty. so that the find material had to be separated into original components of the
burial equipment and grave goods on the one hand and intrusive objects on the other. In this way,
the dating function of the artefacts from the tomb of Qa'a can be guaranteed and used at other
excavation sites as a reference for the end of the 1st dynasty. so that the find material had to be
separated into original components of the burial equipment and grave goods on the one hand and
intrusive objects on the other. In this way, the dating function of the artefacts from the tomb of Qa’a
can be guaranteed and used at other excavation sites as a reference for the end of the 1st dynasty”
See https://books.google.com/books/about/Umm_el_Qaab_Das_Grab_des_Qa%CA%BBa_
Architekt.html?id=0GZBwAEACAAJ
.
2017
2004
2004
German summary: “The tomb of King Ninetjer (c. 2780 BC), one of the four known royal graves of the 2nd
Selected sources on Early Dynastic Dynasty, lies in the necropolis at Saqqara, about 24 km southwest of Cairo. The tomb was designed as an
(Thinite/Archaic) Egypt …
underground rock-cut tomb, which was worked into the limestone massif by means of gallery construction.
The complex extends over a surface of about 77 by 50.50 meters and is divided into 192 rooms, which
proceed through the bedrock in a labyrinthine manner. Origianlly, there was an aboveground extension,
probably a grave mound, of which no remains have been preserved. The results of the archaeological and
architectural analysis of the tomb complex are presented in this publication. The chief focus of the research
in the analysis of the tomb architecture: using the methods of construction, the sequence of building phases
of the complex and the later stages of use have been worked out, the building techniques have been studies
and the planning and execution of the site has been reconstructed. Five blueprints present the visualization
of possible variations of the superstructure. For the first time, an interpretation for the labyrinthine layout of
the tomb is presented. The structural analysis of the royal grave concludes a general investigation of the
building typology for the tombs of the 1st and 3rd dynasties. The lines of development are presented in
several hierarchical levels, through which makes it possible to classify previously undated tombs. Various
stages of development that attest to a system of tomb protection, the architectonic design,German
description:The tomb of King Ninetjer (around 2780 BC), one of the four royal tombs of the 2nd dynasty
known so far, is located in the necropolis of Saqqara, about 25 km south-west of Cairo. It is designed as an
underground rock tomb, which was driven into the natural limestone massif using tunnel construction. The
complex extends over an area of approx. 77.00 mx 50.50 m and is divided into 192 rooms that run through
the rock like a labyrinth. Originally there was probably a burial mound above ground, of which no remains
have been preserved. In this publication, the results of the archaeological and architectural research of the
tomb are presented. The main focus of research is the analysis of the tomb architecture: Using the methods
of building research, the construction phase sequence of the tomb complex and the later phases of use are
worked out, structural engineering examined and the construction process reconstructed. Five drafts are
used to visualize possible superstructure variants. In addition, an interpretation of the labyrinthine ground
plan is presented for the first time. The architectural analysis of the king's tomb is followed by a general
structural study of tombs from the 1st to 3rd dynasties. Lines of development are shown on different
hierarchical levels, which makes it possible to classify previously undated graves. Furthermore, various
stages of development with regard to the tomb security systems can be proven, and new statements about
cult practices and ideas about the afterlife can be made on the basis of the architectural design and the
archaeological findings. Five drafts are used to visualize possible superstructure variants. In addition, an
interpretation of the labyrinthine ground plan is presented for the first time. The architectural analysis of the
king's tomb is followed by a general structural study of tombs from the 1st to 3rd dynasties. Lines of
development are shown on different hierarchical levels, which makes it possible to classify previously
undated graves. Furthermore, various stages of development with regard to the tomb security systems can
be proven, and new statements about cult practices and ideas about the afterlife can be made on the basis
of the architectural design and the archaeological findings. Five drafts are used to visualize possible
superstructure variants. In addition, an interpretation of the labyrinthine ground plan is presented for the
first time. The architectural analysis of the king's tomb is followed by a general structural study of tombs
from the 1st to 3rd dynasties. Lines of development are shown on different hierarchical levels, which makes
it possible to classify previously undated graves. Furthermore, various stages of development with regard to
the tomb security systems can be proven, and new statements about cult practices and ideas about the
afterlife can be made on the basis of the architectural design and the archaeological findings. In addition, an
of the architectural design and the archaeological findings. In addition, an interpretation of the labyrinthine
ground plan is presented for the first time. The architectural analysis of the king's tomb is followed by a
general structural study of tombs from the 1st to 3rd dynasties. Lines of development are shown on different
hierarchical levels, which makes it possible to classify previously undated graves. Furthermore, various stages
of development with regard to the tomb security systems can be proven, and new statements about cult
2014 practices and ideas about the afterlife can be made on the basis of the architectural design and the
archaeological findings. Lines of development are shown on different hierarchical levels, which makes it
possible to classify previously undated graves. Furthermore, …” SEE AMAZON.COM
German summary: “The tomb of King Ninetjer (c. 2780 BC), one of the four known royal graves of the 2nd
Selected sources on Early Dynastic Dynasty, lies in the necropolis at Saqqara, about 24 km southwest of Cairo. The tomb was designed as an
(Thinite/Archaic) Egypt …
underground rock-cut tomb, which was worked into the limestone massif by means of gallery construction.
The complex extends over a surface of about 77 by 50.50 meters and is divided into 192 rooms, which
proceed through the bedrock in a labyrinthine manner. Origianlly, there was an aboveground extension,
probably a grave mound, of which no remains have been preserved. The results of the archaeological and
architectural analysis of the tomb complex are presented in this publication. The chief focus of the research
in the analysis of the tomb architecture: using the methods of construction, the sequence of building phases
of the complex and the later stages of use have been worked out, the building techniques have been studies
and the planning and execution of the site has been reconstructed. Five blueprints present the visualization
of possible variations of the superstructure. For the first time, an interpretation for the labyrinthine layout of
the tomb is presented. The structural analysis of the royal grave concludes a general investigation of the
building typology for the tombs of the 1st and 3rd dynasties. The lines of development are presented in
several hierarchical levels, through which makes it possible to classify previously undated tombs. Various
stages of development that attest to a system of tomb protection, the architectonic design,German
description:The tomb of King Ninetjer (around 2780 BC), one of the four royal tombs of the 2nd dynasty
known so far, is located in the necropolis of Saqqara, about 25 km south-west of Cairo. It is designed as an
underground rock tomb, which was driven into the natural limestone massif using tunnel construction. The
complex extends over an area of approx. 77.00 mx 50.50 m and is divided into 192 rooms that run through
the rock like a labyrinth. Originally there was probably a burial mound above ground, of which no remains
have been preserved. In this publication, the results of the archaeological and architectural research of the
tomb are presented. The main focus of research is the analysis of the tomb architecture: Using the methods
of building research, the construction phase sequence of the tomb complex and the later phases of use are
worked out, structural engineering examined and the construction process reconstructed. Five drafts are
used to visualize possible superstructure variants. In addition, an interpretation of the labyrinthine ground
plan is presented for the first time. The architectural analysis of the king's tomb is followed by a general
structural study of tombs from the 1st to 3rd dynasties. Lines of development are shown on different
hierarchical levels, which makes it possible to classify previously undated graves. Furthermore, various
stages of development with regard to the tomb security systems can be proven, and new statements about
cult practices and ideas about the afterlife can be made on the basis of the architectural design and the
archaeological findings. Five drafts are used to visualize possible superstructure variants. In addition, an
of the architectural design and the archaeological findings. Five drafts are used to visualize possible
superstructure variants. In addition, an interpretation of the labyrinthine ground plan is presented for the
first time. The architectural analysis of the king's tomb is followed by a general structural study of tombs
from the 1st to 3rd dynasties. Lines of development are shown on different hierarchical levels, which makes
it possible to classify previously undated graves. Furthermore, various stages of development with regard to
the tomb security systems can be proven, and new statements about cult practices and ideas about the
afterlife can be made on the basis of the architectural design and the archaeological findings. In addition, an
of the architectural design and the archaeological findings. In addition, an interpretation of the labyrinthine
ground plan is presented for the first time. The architectural analysis of the king's tomb is followed by a
general structural study of tombs from the 1st to 3rd dynasties. Lines of development are shown on different
hierarchical levels, which makes it possible to classify previously undated graves. Furthermore, various stages
of development with regard to the tomb security systems can be proven, and new statements about cult
2014 practices and ideas about the afterlife can be made on the basis of the architectural design and the
archaeological findings. Lines of development are shown on different hierarchical levels, which makes it
possible to classify previously undated graves. Furthermore, …” SEE AMAZON.COM
German Summary: “Nachdem sich der Bestattungsort der Konige zu Beginn der 2.
Dynastie nach Saqqara in die Nahe der Residenzstadt Memphis verlagert hatte, kehrte
Konig Peribsen (um 2760? v.Chr.) mit seinem Grabbau in die traditionsreiche Nekropole
Umm el-Qaab zuruck. Dort liess er sich, wie bereits die Konige der 1. Dynastie, im
Wustensand ein unterirdisches Modellhaus aus Nilschlammziegeln errichten, in dessen
Zentrum sich die Grabkammer befindet. Auf der Grundlage von Archaologie, Architektur
und Bauforschung untersucht Claudia Lacher-Raschdorff die Grabanlage hinsichtlich ihrer
Bauplanung, Baudurchfuhrung und Bautechnik. Dabei spielt die Entwicklung des
ursprunglichen Entwurfsplans eine ebenso wichtige Rolle wie die Rekonstruktion des
Dachaufbaus. Mittels statischer Berechnungen zur Tragfahigkeit der unterirdischen
Konstruktion und einer Analyse der diversen Entwurfselemente kann die Form und Hohe
eines bislang vermuteten Oberbaus geklart werden. Ausgehend von der Betrachtung der
abweichenden Graberschliessungssysteme, der Topographie und einer entwicklungs-
geschichtlichen Untersuchung der Kultformen werden mogliche historische Wegfuhrungen
in Bezug auf die im Fruchtland liegenden grossflachigen Talbezirke und das als Unterwelt
interpretierte Wadi rekonstruiert. Zudem werden Fragestellungen zum Thema Kult,
Jenseitsvorstellungen und zur bauhistorischen Einordnung diskutiert und, wo moglich,
beantwortet.“
SUMMARY ON RELATED ASPECT BY AUTHOR (in English):

“The tomb of Ninetjer can best be described as a subterranean 'path’
or corridor tomb, which is cut out of the natural rock (Fig. 2) were
found of the tumulus or mastaba which once may have marked the
tomb above ground. Originally, the tomb was entered from the north
via a rock-cut ramp, which was subsequently blocked by two large
portcullis stones. Today, most of the ramp is covered by the mastaba
of Neb-Kau-Hor, which was built upon the entrance at the end of
Dynasty 5”
https://www.academia.edu/44401091/The_tomb_of_king_Ninetjer_at_Saqqara
”
2020
2015
1997
1984
Selected sources on Prehistoric/
Predynastic Egypt …
2009
2011
1901
Free pdf:
https://ia800200.us.archive.org/33/items/cu31924020551267/cu31924020551267.pdf
1900
Free pdf:
https://archive.org/details/royaltombsoffirs00petr/mode/2up
1990
1969
2002
1996
1993
1980
SEE ALSO: https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/term/BIB771
2006
2009
1999

Anth 309 PPT Lecture 7 Dynasties 0 2 Int

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Anth 309 PPT Lecture 7 Dynasties 0 2 Int

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Anth 309 PPT Lecture 7 Dynasties 0 2 Int

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ANT 309:

Egypt in the Age of the Pyramids

(2). Take notes on lectures, etc. …

(4). Ask questions during the class if

(5). Complete optional materials:

- Various contemporary inscriptions (minimal detail): dockets, stelae, etc.

- Pictorial renditions of events with minimal to no captions

- Varying archaeological data and inferences from such data

• We gain a series of possible to probable, to a few known events, etc., per

• On-going discoveries, re-assessments, new technology, and other new

- Mostly refinement of information

- Sometimes ground-breaking new information

→ Early Egyptian “history” tends to be a blend of history, archaeology, art, etc.

• 1300-1200 BC: Ramesside King

Clay sealing fragments of Narmer with Mn-sign

Identity of Menes / Min still debated:

We need to look at both contemporary

1. Brief overview of Predynastic

2. An overview of the Protodynastic,

3. Overview of Dynasty 1 rulers

4. Overview of Dynasty 2 rulers

5. Next: details on Protodyn./Dyn.0

The role of warfare(?) in unification:

The role of warfare(?) in unification:

The role of warfare(?) in unification:

The role of warfare(?) in unification:

The role of warfare(?) in unification:

The role of warfare(?) in unification:

The role of warfare(?) in unification:

The role of warfare(?) in unification:

Protodynastic rulers Dynasty “0”/late Naqada III a-b

Early Dynastic (also Archaic / Thinite period [Naqada IIIc]):

• Dynasty 2 Kings Hetepsekhemwy, Raneb, Nynetjer, Weneg, Sened,

Other aspects of the Early Dynastic period:

• Administration Controlling former independent regions, polities, the delta

• Society People’s place in a new and changing social structure

• Religion The rise of national/major deities and cult centres

1. “Ruler” (?) owner of Tomb U-j (Abydos)

2. King Iry-Hor owner of Tomb B0/1/2 (Abydos)

5. King “Scorpion” possible owner of Tomb B50 (Abydos?)

6. King Ka equated with Tomb B7/9 (Abydos)

* King Narmer Probable founder of a unified Egypt in Dynasty 1

1. “RULER” (?) owner of Tomb U-j (ABYDOS)

• Name “Scorpion”(?) -Item bearing scorpion

• Leader/king(?) a. Largest tomb in Protodyn.

•Earliest writing -Early Egyptian hieroglyphs

• Name Iry-Hor -Associated with items from Tomb B0?1/2

• King(?) -Royal Horus-falcon on Egyptian “r”-sign (a “mouth”).

• Name Difficult to read

• Name? 3 maceheads signs (Akhedji)

• Placement? Serekh-name more developed

Earlier King B serekh Protodyn.:

• Kingdom/ Attested in Main Hoard of Tarkhan

• It reveals: King Scorpion opening an irrigation channel

Horus falcon = symbolizing

Anthropomorphized arm holding

Emblematic marsh plant of Lower

→ essentially the message is clear:

The Horus-King of Egypt has subjugated