The Atef crown, historically associated with the god Ausar, plays a significant role in ancient Kemetic iconography. This crown is essentially the Hedjet crown of Upper Kemet, adorned with two ostrich feathers on either side, symbolizing truth and justice. The Hedjet has its origins in Upper Kemet and Lower Nubia, with one of its earliest representations found on the Qustul incense burner, dating back to the second half of the fourth millennium BCE and unearthed in Sudan at the Qustul site. This artifact has been linked to the Holy Mountain of Jebel Barkal by Kendall, Timothy, and El-Hassan Ahmed Mohamed, who note its striking pinnacle resembling high felt hats with a knob on top. Professor Christopher Ehret has cited recent work which revealed the Qustul state in Nubia was a site of great antiquity and influence within the framework of Nile Valley civilization. Ehret also wrote that:
“The Qustul elite and ruler in the second half of the fourth millennium participated together with their counterparts in the communities of the Naqada culture of southern Egypt in creating the emerging culture and paraphernalia of pharaonic culture.”
Ehret, Christopher, The Civilizations of Africa: A History to 1800, University of California Press, 2023: https://archive.org/details/civilizationsofa0000ehre
While the Hedjat crown is older in terms of its origins and use in the early dynastic period, the Atef crown, while significant, appears later in the historical timeline as part of the evolving royal symbolism associated with Ausar and the afterlife. The Qustul incense burner serves as evidence of these complex interactions, indicating that the Qustul elite participated in the cultural developments that would lead to the later prominence of both crowns in Kemetic iconography. Dr. Shomarka Keita, Research Affiliate in the Department of Anthropology at the Smithsonian Institution, and A. J. Boyce of the Institute of Biological Anthropology and St. John's College Oxford University would echo these sentiments in an article published in 2005 where they state:
“There was some shared iconography in the kingdoms that emerged in Nubia and upper Egypt around 3300 BCE (Williams 1986)...Nubian and upper Egyptian proximity and on some level, shared culture, Nubia’s possible participation in Egyptian state-building, and later partial political absorption in Dynasty I, would have reinforced biological overlap. Interactions between Nubia and Egypt occurred in the period between 4000 and 3000 BCE.”
S.O.Y. Keita, A. J. Boyce, History in Africa, Volume 32, 2005, p. 239: https://muse.jhu.edu/article/187884
Bruce Beyer Williams, an Egyptgolgist recognized for his expertise in ancient Nubian history and archaeology, comments on the great antiquity of Ta-Seti which predates Dynasty 1, and the unification of Upper and Lower Kemet by at least 4 centuries. As well as these early examples of pharaonic symbolism discovered at the Qustul burial site:
“Apart from other "firsts" in representation and art, the Qustul incense burner stands out at this writing, not as a provincial imitation of some unknown Egyptian monument but as the first self-evident pharaonic monument from the Nile Valley, the first unequivocal representation of a pharaoh in his person, the first definite linking of the pharaoh's figure with the Horns falcon, palace facade, and boat that later became the sacred bark, the first self-evident representation of an event linked with the royals sacrifice, and the first datable monument-ceremonial object that compares with the slate palettes and maceheads of Egypt."
Dr. Williams noted that, “The wealth was vastly superior to any contemporary tombs in Nubia or Egypt down to the royal cemetery at Abydos; this includes the thousand painted bowls, a hundred stone vessels from the cemetery, twenty-two storage jars in one tomb, and local objects in unusual numbers and quantity.' The pharaonic symbolism that appears, for the first time in the archaeological record here, includes a symbolic reference that predates the Iry-Hor nesu with Horns association at Abydos (who is believed to have ruled before the unification of Upper and Lower Egypt).
The most stunning find is the seal with the name "Ta-Seti" that yields the most staggering implication, regarding the relationship between Nubia and Egypt in prehistory: and here is the significance. As Dr. Christopher Ehret pointed out in The Civilizations of Africa:
"By 3,500 BCE, a cultural world of sacral chiefdoms and petty sacral kingdoms was gradually coming into being in Nubia, and the ideas that undergirded these social formations also took hold in the far south of Egypt. Recent archaeological work shows that this political and cultural outlook then spread from southern Egypt northward into Lower Egypt after perhaps 3300, culminating in the establishment of a unified Egypt around 3,100 BCE. For a while between 3,400 and 3200 BCE, the most powerful of the small states may have been Ta-Seti, actually located in the northern Nubian stretches of the Nile, just south of Egypt. The pictorial documents left by its kings reveal Ta-Seti's claim to having conquered and ruled over Upper Egypt for the time. The kingdom had strong connections both up and down the Nile. Imported items from as far north as the Syria-Palestine region turn up in the grave goods of the rulers.”
The seal with the mention of Ta-Seti dates to around 3300-3250 BCE. This date is significant as it aligns with the timeframe attributed to King Scorpion's reign, marking a critical period in the transition from pre-dynastic to dynastic Egypt. Beyer's findings suggest that the seal connects Ta-Seti with the emergence of a hierarchical society and the beginnings of accountancy, which played a crucial role in the organization of resources and the establishment of early state structures. This dating situated Ta-Seti within a broader context of political and social development in ancient Nubia, providing insight into its influence on subsequent Kemetic civilization and into the social and political structures that existed in Nubia prior to the Gerzean period.
“The Qustul incense burner and Horns of Nekhen incense burner are royal documents and other incense burners with serekhs are comparable with the prehistoric palace facades from Egypt. The Qustul incense burner clearly shows the nesu with Horns about four generations before Iry-Hor, and a series of roughly contemporary seals and sealings from other sites refer to the dynasty by the use of the same unusual form of palace facade. One sealing actually refers to the named Ta-Seti, the name used at this period on the plaque of Hor-Aha from Abydos, the Gebel Sheikh Sulieman inscription, as well as this sealing from Nubia, that connects this particular form of palace facade with the name Ta-Seti”.
Larry Ross, Nubia and Egypt: From Prehistory to the Meroitic Period, Edwin Mellen Press, 2012, p. 73-75: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/283504727_Nubia_and_Egypt_10000_BC_to_400_AD_-_From_Prehistory_to_the_Meroitic_Period
It isimportant to note that these events take place prior to the emergence of what academics today view as the Egyptian identity as noted by Larry Ross on page 53:
“Cultural identity and 'nationalism' did not exist, as we understand it in modern terms, at the time.”
This early Pharaonic iconography would eventually travel north into Lower Egypt with the absorption of the Delta into the Southern Pharaonic Kingdom and the unification of Upper and Lower Egypt. It is important to note that at the time of the unification around 3100 BCE Egypt and Nubia had already had centuries of interaction and cultural fusion which culminated into the 1st Dynasty. The Naqada civilization in Upper Egypt ultimately defeated the Ta-Setians of Qustul which was abandoned and absorbed into what is now recognized as the first dynastic monarchy.
“Dynasty I brought the political conquest of the A-Group Nubian kingdom Ta Seti by Egyptian kings (Wilkinson 1999). Lower Nubia seems to have become largely “depopulated,” based on archeological evidence, but this more likely means that Nubians were partially bio-culturally assimilated into southern Egypt.”
S.O.Y. Keita, A. J. Boyce, History in Africa, Volume 32, 2005, p. 239: https://muse.jhu.edu/article/187884
Early African neolithic populations were among the first to settle in the Levant region making ancient Africans the dominant group in regions such as ancient Israel, Palestine and Syria. The flow of culture and influence coincides with the movement of people from as far south as the horn of Africa into Western Asia. Ehret cited other genetic evidence which had identified the Horn of Africa as a source of a genetic marker.
"Ehret cited other genetic evidence which had identified the Horn of Africa as a source of a genetic marker “M35 /215” Y-chromosome lineage for a significant population component which moved north from that region into Egypt and the Levant."
Ehret, Christopher (20 June 2023). Ancient Africa: A Global History, to 300 CE. Princeton University Press. pp. 97, 167: https://www.academia.edu/121820837/Ancient_Africa_a_global_history_to_300_ce_by_Christopher_Ehret_Princeton_and_Oxford_Princeton_University_Press_2023_224_pp_27_95_22_00_hardback_ISBN_9780691244099
Furthermore the remains of early Judean/Hebrew populations were studied and found to cluster closely with Badairans, the Nubian A-Group and other ancient Northeast African populations. The remains were unearthed and believed to be victims from the Siege of Lachish which was the result of Assyrian attacks on Israel and Judea during the 7th century BCE.
"In 2020, Godde analyzed a series of crania which included two Egyptian (predynastic Badarian and Naqada series), a series of A-Group Nubians, and a Bronze Age series from Lachish, Palestine. The two pre-dynastic series had strongest affinities, followed by closeness between the Naqada and the Nubian series. Further, the Nubian A-Group plotted nearer to the Egyptians and the Lachish sample placed more closely to Naqada than Badari. According to Godde the spatial-temporal model applied to the pattern of biological distances explains the more distant relationship of Badari to Lachish than Naqada to Lachish as gene flow will cause populations to become more similar over time. Overall, both Egyptian samples were more similar to the Nubian series than to the Lachish series."
Source: Godde, Kane (2020). "A biological perspective of the relationship between Egypt, Nubia, and the Near East during the Predynastic period". ResearchGate. Archived from the original on 15 April 2022. Retrieved 16 March 2022.
These studies suggest a genetic continuity beginning in Africa near the source of the Nile and migrating north into Egypt and the Levant. This migration is supported by the distribution of the E3 haplogroup, which indicates a historical connection between sub-Saharan African populations and those in the Nile Valley and beyond. The E3 haplogroup, particularly its subclades, shows a higher frequency in regions around the Nile and suggests that these genetic lineages were carried northward through ancient migrations, influencing the genetic landscape of Egypt and the Levant over time.
Moreover, the findings imply that various genetic markers are reflective of a complex interplay of local and external influences, where indigenous African populations contributed significantly to the gene pool observed in modern Egyptians and peoples of the Levant. This continuity challenges simplistic narratives of migration and highlights the intricate tapestry of human history in the region.
The Atef crown's significance extends beyond Kemetic borders, influencing the artistic expressions and religious motifs of the Levant. Canaanite depictions of local deities wearing the Atef crown illustrate the cultural exchange occurring during the Late Bronze Age. One such figure is described as "not the Egyptian king but rather an ancient Near Eastern depiction of a local deity," highlighting the fusion of styles and motifs during this period. This "Egyptianizing" style permeated the artistic expressions of the Levant, a testament to the extensive cultural interactions of the time.
Hazor, Pharaoh, 20th Dynasty, 1188 BCE–1069 BCE, Jerusalem, Israel Museum, Licence: CC0 1.0 Universal
Archaeological findings at sites like Hazor further underscore the presence of Egyptian influence in the Levant. Numerous Egyptian statues, including one discovered in 2013 with the paws of a sphinx, indicate a complex relationship between the Canaanites and their Egyptian counterparts. The deliberate smashing of these artifacts suggests political tensions or shifts in religious beliefs within the region, marking a significant transition in the cultural landscape of the Levant.
Additionally, Herodotus, the ancient Greek historian, provides valuable insights into the interactions between Egyptians and the peoples of the Levant. He documents the exploits of Egyptians and Kushites in regions like Palestine, noting monuments inscribed with declarations of conquest. His accounts reveal a pronounced sense of Egyptian authority and influence extending beyond their borders, emphasizing the broader implications of Egyptian cultural and political dominance.
In conclusion, the ancient Egyptian influence on the Levant, particularly through the adoption of iconography like the Atef crown, signifies a profound cultural intermingling during the Late Bronze Age. The fusion of artistic styles, alongside physical evidence of Egyptian artifacts in Canaanite sites, illustrates the depth of this influence. These interactions not only shaped the religious and cultural identities of the Levant but also reflected the broader dynamics of power and exchange in the ancient Near East.
Black African Origins of Ancient Egypt | WATCH NOW https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zYnUaRMSM_4&t=1854s
Visit our Digital Library and Virtual Museum:
"I have not spoken angrily or arrogantly. I have not cursed anyone in thought, word or deeds." ~ 35th & 36th Principals of Ma'at
תגובות