This pdf of your paper in 'Interweaving Worlds: Systemic

Interactions in Eurasia, 7th to the 1st Millennia BC' belongs to the

publishers Oxbow Books and it is their copyright.

As author you are licenced to make up to 50 offprints from it,

but beyond that you may not publish it on the World Wide Web
until three years from publication (November 2014), unless the
site is a limited access intranet (password protected). If you have
queries about this please contact the editorial department at
Oxbow Books (editorial@oxbowbooks.com).

An offprint from

Interweaving worlds
Systemic Interactions in Eurasia, 7th to 1st Millennia BC

Papers from a conference

in memory of Professor Andrew Sherratt
What Would a Bronze Age World System Look Like?
World systems approaches to Europe and western Asia 4th to 1st millennia BC

Editors

Toby C. Wilkinson, Susan Sherratt and John Bennet

OXBOW BOOKS 2011

ISBN 978-1-84217-998-7

CONTENTS
Contributors

1. Introduction

Susan Sherratt
2. Global Development

Andrew Sherratt

1
4

A. The Warp: Global Systems and Interactions

3. Evolutions and Temporal Delimitations of Bronze Age World-Systems in Western
Asia and the Mediterranean

Philippe Beaujard
4. The Mediterranean and the Mediterranean World in the Age of Andrew Sherratt

Cyprian Broodbank
5. Ingestion and Food Technologies: Maintaining Differences over the Long-term in
West, South and East Asia

Dorian Q Fuller and Michael Rowlands
6. Revolutionary Secondary Products: the Development and Significance of Milking,
Animal-Traction and Wool-Gathering in Later Prehistoric Europe and the Near East

Paul Halstead and Valasia Isaakidou
7. World-Systems and Modelling Macro-Historical Processes in Later Prehistory:

an Examination of Old and a Search for New Perspectives

Philip L. Kohl
8. From Luxuries to Anxieties: a Liminal View of the Late Bronze Age World-System

Christopher M. Monroe
9. Re-integrating Diffusion: the Spread of Innovations among the Neolithic and Bronze
Age Societies of Europe and the Near East

Lorenz Rahmstorf
10. What might the Bronze Age World-System Look Like?

David A. Warburton
11. Archival and Sacrificial Economies in Bronze Age Eurasia: an Interactionist Approach

to the Hoarding of Metals

David Wengrow

7
27
37
61
77
87
100
120
135

Contents

B. The Weft: The Local and the Global

12. The Formation of Economic Systems and Social Institutions during the Fifth and Fourth

Millennia BC in the Southern Levant

Nils Anfinset
13. Negotiating Metal and the Metal Form in the Royal Tombs of Alacahyk in
North-Central Anatolia

Christoph Bachhuber
14. The Near East, Europe, and the Routes of Community in the Early Bronze Age

Black Sea

Alexander A. Bauer
15. Between Assyria and the Mediterranean World: the Prosperity of Judah and Philistia

in the Seventh Century BCE in Context

Avraham Faust and Ehud Weiss
16. Northeast Africa and the Levant in Connection: a World-Systems Perspective on

Interregional Relationships in the Early Second Millennium BC

Roxana Flammini
17. Strands of Connectivity: Assessing the Evidence for Long Distance Exchange of Silk in
Later Prehistoric Eurasia

Irene Good
18. Travelling in (World) Time: Transformation, Commoditization, and the Beginnings of

Urbanism in the Southern Levant

Raphael Greenberg
19. Bridging India and Scandinavia: Institutional Transmission and Elite Conquest during

the Bronze Age

Kristian Kristiansen
20. New Kid on the Block: the Nature of the First Systemic Contacts between Crete and the
Eastern Mediterranean around 2000 BC

Borja Legarra Herrero
21. Lost in Translation: the Emergence of Mycenaean Culture as a Phenomenon of
Glocalization

Joseph Maran
22. Anticipating the Silk Road: Some Thoughts on the WoolMurex Connection in Tyre

Jane Schneider
23. Unbounded Structures, Cultural Permeabilities and the Calyx of Change: Mesopotamia

and its World

Norman Yoffee

145
158

175
189
205
218
231
243
266
282
295
303

Contributors
Nils Anfinset
University of Bergen

Kristian Kristiansen
University of Gothenburg

Alexander A. Bauer
City University of New York

Borja Legarra Herrero

University of Leicester

Christoph Bachhuber
British Institute at Ankara

Joseph Maran
University of Heidelberg

Philippe Beaujard
CNRS

Christopher M. Monroe
Cornell University

John Bennet
University of Sheffield

Lorenz Rahmstorf
University of Mainz

Cyprian Broodbank
University College London

Michael Rowlands
University College London

Avraham Faust
Bar-Ilan University

Jane Schneider
City University of New York

Roxanna Flammini
Pontifical Catholic University of Argentina
CONICET

Susan Sherratt
University of Sheffield

Dorian Q Fuller
University College London
Irene Good
Harvard University
Raphael Greenberg
Tel Aviv University
Paul Halstead
University of Sheffield
Valasia Isaakidou
University of Sheffield
Philip L. Kohl
Wellesley College

David A. Warburton
University of Lyon
Ehud Weiss
Bar-Ilan University
David Wengrow
University College London
Toby C. Wilkinson
University of Sheffield
Norman Yoffee
University of Nevada

Archaeologist, Teacher, Friend.

Professor Andrew G. Sherratt, 19462006.

16.
Northeast Africa and the Levant in Connection: a WorldSystems Perspective on Interregional Relationships in the
Early Second Millennium BC
Roxana Flammini

In world-systems terms, the reunited Egyptian state can be classified as a core area during the Middle Kingdom,
while the Levant and Upper Nubia, mainly the cities of Byblos and Kerma respectively, can be defined as its
northern and southern peripheries, due to their supposed asymmetrical relationships to central Egypt. In the
peripheries there were no active traces of economic exploitation or political domination by the core during the
Middle Kingdom, but instead there are traces of cultural, economical or political practices originating from it.
The same is not true in the opposite direction. This paper reviews the evidence for this asymmetry in both textual
and archaeological sources and the interpretation they have received during the last few years.
Traditionally, the study of the relationships between Egypt
and its neighbours is one of the main topics in studies on
the ancient Near East, an extremely extensive spatial and
temporal one. Approaches vary in their goals and in their way
of analysis from mainly economic, political and social points
of view. In many senses, researchers concur with the view that
these relationships began due to transfers of prestige goods,
to become complemented through time with more complex
forms of interaction (Sherratt and Sherratt 1991).
With regard to Egypt, most research in this area is centred
on defining the characteristics of the links between Egypt
and the societies with whom Egyptians interacted. In such a
context, an approach that shifts the focus away from Egypt
will allow us to take the analysis to a higher level and add
a systemic examination of the relationships. Despite its
detractors, a world-systems perspective allows, precisely,
consideration of a wider view, since the fundamental unit
of historical development is not the single society, but the
entire intersocietal context within which individual societies
exist (Chase-Dunn and Hall 1993, 851; on the discussion

about the meaning of the concept world-system, with and

without hyphen, cf. Gills 2002).
Furthermore, this theoretical model shifts the focus
from an exclusive analysis of Egypt in its relationship with
other social entities to a wider field of investigation, in
which the analysis of a whole system of relationships in
operation becomes the subject, no matter what role Egypt
performed there. Thus, although the importance and the role
Egypt played was significant, it should be considered as
just one society among others in the interregional network
of relationships of the early second millennium BC (ca.
20501650 BC). Taking into account this premise, I can
move forward to propose a more accurate characterization
for this system and to delimit the role each of the systems
partners played during the period considered here.
As a matter of fact, relationships with non-Egyptian
societies took place not only from the emergence of the
Egyptian state onwards (ca. 3200 BC), but also during predynastic times. Material evidence has shown that the elites of
the proto-states of Nagada, Hierakonpolis and Abydos in the

206

Roxana Flammini

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

16. Northeast Africa and the Levant in Connection

south, and those of sites like Buto in the north, maintained

close connections with Nubian and Asiatic social groups
respectively (Bard 2002; Wenke 1991). In this way, it is highly
possible that a world-system encompassing northeast Africa
and western Asia began to form during those early times.
The denomination Egyptian world-system is commonly
used (Cline 2000; Allen 2005; Chase-Dunn et al. 2006)
following the designation of its main core. Yet an analysis of
the underlying ideas behind this term shows that its meaning
is imprecise, to say the least. The ancient Egyptian state was
its core during a long but a limited time span. Furthermore,
in different historical situations, the Egyptian state can hardly
be defined as a core (Wilkinson 1991). During the Second
Intermediate Period, it is probable that coreness shifted from
properly Egyptian cities to those under foreign domination
like Avaris and even the existence of an Egyptian state
is highly debatable. Even though the situation during the
First Intermediate Period in Egypt is less clear, it should be
taken into account, since it is possible that a number of core
cities appeared at that moment in Egypt, with the temporary
decentralization of the Egyptian unified state. In the same
way, during most of the first millennium BC, Egypt became
a periphery of cores located far away from Africa.
Thus, the conceptualization Egyptian world-system
suggests that Egypt always acted as its core. Yet as I
stated before, this is a statement hard to sustain. In fact,
any denomination based in socio-political entities lacks a
sufficient timespan to include different historical situations
or modifications in the categorization of the partners of the
relationship. Therefore, I shall propose a different designation
for this system, based on a consideration of geographical
features that allows a wider use of it.
Undoubtedly, the main axis of economic and social
connections in northeast Africa was the Nile. Starting in
the interior of Africa, this axis reached the Levant through
a sea route and a land route, both of them starting from the
Egyptian eastern Delta. Of course, not only did the Nilotic
axis connect regions, it also engaged different social groups
in an extensive network of relationships from early times on.
In this way, Asiatics, Egyptians, Nubians and later Libyans,
Cretans and other societies from the Eastern Mediterranean
were engaged in that network of interconnection.
All this means that a new definition should take into account
the importance of the Nile as an axis of interconnection. Thus,
a NiloticLevantine world-system (NLws) can be delineated
at least until the mid-second millennium BC, when firstly
Hyksos control of the Nile from the eastern Delta to Cusae
and their relationships with the Levant, and later Egyptian
control of the Levantine centres after the Hyksos were
defeated enlarged the former network of exchanges. This
new definition allows, for instance, shifting coreness from
Egypt to Nubia or to the Hyksos kingdom, avoiding the

207

contradiction of naming Egyptian a world-system in which

Egypt did not play the core role.
Following these preliminary considerations, I shall move
forward to an analysis of the NLws during the early second
millennium BC. To begin with, I shall take into account the
premise that the presence of a world-system is supported
by the existence of systemic relations among different
societies, considering that the particular configuration a
world-system presents should be understood in a specific
historical conjuncture.

The NLws in the early second millennium BC

The alternative possibilities of one world-system with multiple
core-areas (Kohl 1987) or a world-system with a core located
in Egypt which came into contact with the Mesopotamian
world-system after 1500 BC to form the central one
(Wilkinson 1991), has long been discussed among scholars.
In fact, direct or indirect relationships between partners
could be a clue to elucidating this specific point. On the
one hand, it is considered that the weakness of the ties
between Mesopotamia and Egypt makes the hypothesis of
the existence of a multiple core-areas world-system before
1500 BC hard to accept (Beaujard 2005, 417). On the other
hand, the consideration that all indirect interactions were
of systemic importance makes it possible to maintain that
there was a single global world-system (Frank and Gills
1996; for variations in the historical scope of this global
world-system, cf. Hall 2004). Possibly, the key to finding a
resolution is to reach an agreement concerning the extent of
world-systems boundaries, a topic which has received much
attention (Chase-Dunn and Hall 1993; Sherratt 1994; Allen
1997; Cline 2000; Chase-Dunn et al. 2005, 2006; Hall 2004;
Beaujard 2005). The detection of systemic relations to define
boundaries is a crucial point. In this sense, I consider that
only direct, regular, two-way relationships (Chase-Dunn and
Jorgenson 2001) are systemic, while the existence of several
interweaving world-systems in the ancient Near East should
also be taken into account.
Furthermore, I could move a step forward in defining
systemic relationships: a distinction has to be made between
different spheres of interaction (economic, social, political)
and the types of interaction that can be recognized in such
different spheres (symmetrical, asymmetrical). Symmetrical
relationships are those in which partners can be placed at the
same level of interaction, while asymmetrical relationships
recognize a differentiated status among them (related or
not to coercive long-term practices). The asymmetrical
types of systemic relationships allow us to delimit cores
and peripheries. Nevertheless, the characteristics of a given
world-system should be established in a specific historical

208

Roxana Flammini

conjuncture based on the information given by the sources.

These features can be measured and can, indeed, allow us
to delimit the scope of the NLws during the early second
millennium BC.
It is worth formulating some further considerations. The
Egyptian state did not extend over a homogeneous territory,
but rather over the banks of the Nile from the Delta in the
north to Semna in the south its southern boundary was at
Elephantine/Aswan until the 12th Dynasty reign of Sesostris
III, when Lower Nubia became part of Egypt and the southern
boundary extended progressively to Semna. Its settlement
pattern was considerably different from that of Nubia and the
Levant. During the Middle Kingdom, the Egyptian central
administration was re-established. The period was framed
by two profound crises of the state: the First and the Second
Intermediate Periods, whose particularities and development
were completely different.
Scholars traditionally agree that once the Theban rulers of
the 11th Dynasty defeated the Herakleopolitan dynastic line
by the end of the First Intermediate Period they inaugurated
one of the most important periods of state power the Middle
Kingdom despite the fact that they never abandoned the
city of Thebes. Their successors, the Theban kings of the
12th Dynasty, again moved the capital to the north, not to
Memphis but to a new location named Amenemhet ItiTawy (Amenemhet is he who seized the Two Lands) near
Lisht North. From the very beginning, these kings initiated
a strong advance on those regions where they could obtain
goods. In this way, they not only advanced along the Nile,
but sent expeditions to uninhabited locations like those
where quarries and mines could be exploited commonly
located in the western and eastern deserts or in the Sinai; and
to inhabited ones, like the land of Punt. There is no reason
to find systemic relations in those uninhabited locations, but
it is appropriate to try to find them in those places where
intersocietal relationships could have taken place. This could
be the case of the people of Punt. Even though we are aware
of the way Egyptians organized the expeditions to the land of
Punt during the Middle Kingdom, and extremely important
information regarding the port of departure of the Egyptian
expeditions (Mersa Gawasis, Red Sea coast) and the goods
Egypt acquired at Punt has been recovered (the marvels of
Punt, mainly myrrh; Fattovich and Bard 2006), there have
been no excavations at the possible places of mooring of
the Egyptian ships and of exchange with the Puntites (Aqiq
was suggested, see Fattovich 1996). Therefore, it is not
possible to advance in the analysis of these relationships
from a world-system perspective, at least until new evidence
becomes available and can be evaluated in order to determine
if systemic relations were established.
The situation along the Nile axis is better known. The early
12th Dynasty kings initiated a strong advance over Lower

Nubia ancient Wawat, located between the First Cataract

and Semna and continued the advance their predecessors
initiated over the eastern Delta, a territory where the Egyptian
state lost its presence during the crisis of the First Intermediate
Period. Both territories were incorporated (Lower Nubia)
or reincorporated (the eastern Delta) under the umbrella of
the Egyptian state during the Middle Kingdom. We can call
them linking areas because despite the fact that they were
incorporated into the boundaries of Egypt, a) the intervention
exerted by the Egyptian state on them was quite different
from the practices held in the core proper and b) their main
role was to link the core with the Levant and Upper Nubia
(Flammini 2008).
In Nubia, besides the well-known Egyptian occupation,
Nubian C-Group settlements were located mainly close to
the Nile between the First and the Second Cataracts in Lower
Nubia (Adams 1977; Anderson 1999), while the Nubian city
of Kerma was placed upstream of the Third Cataract in Upper
Nubia (Bonnet and Valbelle 2006).
Egyptians built a chain of visually interconnected
fortresses in Lower Nubia during the Middle Kingdom, a
singular feature which does not appear in the core itself.
The occupation of the fortresses was based on rotating
garrisons until the late 12th/early 13th Dynasty, when it
changed to permanent settlers. These settlers were Egyptian
colonists whose main activity was to trade with the Nubian
commercial node located in Kerma (Smith 1995; 2003). After
the fall of the Egyptian core during the Second Intermediate
Period, these people continued to work for the ruler of Kush
(Inscriptions of Ka and Sepedhor found at Buhen, cf. SveSderbergh 1949; Valbelle 2004). The Egyptian state tried
to reach three complementary goals through its actions in
Lower Nubia: firstly, to handle the movement of Nubians into
Egypt; secondly, to exploit the quarries and mines located
in the western and eastern Nubian deserts; and, thirdly, to
manage the exchange with Kerma.
During the early second millennium BC, Kerma was
an impressive city. Expanded around the deffufa, its main
building, the city was surrounded by bastioned fortifications
(Bonnet 1986; Bonnet and Valbelle 2006). Although Kerma
society was stratified, it is uncertain whether it was organized
as a state or as a kinship-based society during the Middle
Kerma period (ca. 20001750 BC). A huge hut, located near
the deffufa, probably served as a political and ritual centre, and
the necropolis, situated nearly 4 km east from the city, shows
a clearly differentiated society. During the Middle Kerma
phase, human sacrifices are attested in the major rounded
tumuli of the necropolis (Sackho 1998). Unfortunately, the
absence of written sources makes it difficult to gain detailed
knowledge of the social organization, but these two points
are separate: material evidence demonstrates that relations
with the Egyptian state were long-lasting.

16. Northeast Africa and the Levant in Connection

The eastern Delta was another territory that caught the

attention of the Egyptian state during the Middle Kingdom.
The Egyptian kings built palaces and administrative districts
(wwt) there. Moreno Garca (1999, 187188), after making
an analysis of the Tale of Sinuhe lines B19 and R4445,
proposed that these administrative districts were fortified, but
archaeological evidence of this feature has yet to be found.
These locations especially the administrative district
located in Ezbet Rushdi, near Tell el Dabca (the ancient
Avaris) favoured exchange between Egypt and the Levantine
coast, particularly the Syrian coast during the early Middle
Kingdom. Ezbet Rushdi has produced the earliest Middle
Minoan pottery fragments found in Egypt and also Levantine
pottery probably imported from the northern Levant. A
settlement of people with a strong MBIIA Levantine cultural
background was established at Tell el Dabca, probably during
the last years of Amenemhet IIIs reign (ca. 18531808 BC).
The features this site presents are unique in Egypt. It was
likely related to activities connected with the sea route to the
Levant and the exploitation of turquoise and copper in the
Sinai quarries (Marcus 2007). There is strong evidence of
people from the Levant and Egyptians taking part together in
the expeditions to Serabit el Khadim and Maghara; these joint
expeditions were organized by the Egyptian state (Gardiner,
Peet and ern 1955; Valbelle and Bonnet 1996). Manfred
Bietak pointed out that the first inhabitants of Tell el Dabca
came not only from the Levantine coast but also from an
urban tradition: all the evidence suggests that their mother
city was, precisely, Byblos (Bietak 1997, 98).
One of the main Egyptian written sources mentioning
contacts with the Levant and Nubia is the Inscription of
Amenemhet II at Mit Rahina (Marcus 2007). It refers to the
arrival of raw materials and manufactured objects as bakw,
brought to the Egyptian king by the sons of the rulers of
Asia and Nubia, and peaceful as well as punitive expeditions
mainly sent to Levantine locations (Altenmller and Moussa
1991). The translation of bakw as tribute is disputed because
there is no proof that Egypt dominated those who sent bakw, at
least during the Middle Kingdom. A more accurate translation
could be gift-offerings since it does not imply domination (it
has also been translated contributions, Galn 2002, 3334; a
discussion on the use of the term during the New Kingdom in
Warburton 1997, 237257) but still implies an asymmetrical
relationship between the giver and the receiver since the root
of the word is related to the concept of servant.
Unfortunately, it has not been possible to identify
accurately the specific sites mentioned in the Inscription,
despite the fact that many researchers have proposed the
identification of Iasy with Alasiya, i.e. Cyprus (Helck 1989;
Redford 1992; Quack 1996; see discussion in Marcus 2007,
144). Other references are extremely general as they refer
to Lebanon or Asia. Contemporary material evidence,

209

such as the Td Treasure, also shows the existence of

contacts with the Levant, but its origin is a matter of debate
(Marcus 2007). From Sesostris IIIs reign, an inscription
found in Khnumhotep IIIs mastaba in Dahshur mentions
the intervention of the Egyptian king in a dispute between
Byblos and Ullaza, where Egyptians sent ships in search of
cedar wood (Allen 2008).
Most importantly, the regional situations in Syria and
Palestine need to be distinguished. Most Syrian cities were
occupied without interruption from the last phases of the
Early Bronze to the Middle Bronze. In this way, Syrian
cities Ugarit, Byblos maintained and even improved their
connections with other political entities, like the Egyptian
state, Cyprus, or those located in the Aegean (Gerstenblith
1983; Marcus 2002). But Palestinian settlements were
abandoned by the end of the Early Bronze Age and the process
of reoccupation of the ancient sites, or the foundation of new
ones, took place during part of the following period. The very
first centres reoccupied at the beginning of the MBIIA were
located near the coast, probably influenced by the exchange
activity between Egypt and the coastal cities of the northern
Levant through the maritime route the so-called Byblosrun (Stager 1992) and the introduction of the technology
of tin-bronze. Indeed, in the beginning of the Palestinian
MBIIA new objects of tin-bronze became common among
the repertoire of Palestinian manufactured objects. They
were probably local imitations of Syrian prototypes (Dever
1987), since technical studies of metal weapons suggest
the northern Levant as the source for tin-bronze metallurgy
(Philip 1991; Marcus 2002). In this way, Palestinian cities
began to participate in the regional exchanges which also
generated a progressive expansion of networks, from the
coastal sites of Palestine to the interior (Cohen 2002).
Recent excavations in the southern Levant show that at
least two sites located near the Palestinian coast (Tell Ifshar
and Askhelon) probably participated in exchange with Egypt
and the northern Levant in the MBIIA. Egyptian ceramic
imports, together with early Levantine Painted Ware, were
found at Tell Ifshar; these findings evidence a connection
with both Egypt and the northern Levant at this sites incipient
state of settlement (Marcus 2007, 175) but this material
needs more study before it can be determined if there was
any kind of systemic relationship. Regarding the well dated
forty-seven Egyptian seal impressions found at Ashkelon
(late 12th/early 13th Dynasty), not only do they remain
unpublished but also there is no other evidence, in the city or
in the core, which would allow us to include it as a periphery
of the system in this period (Stager 2002, 353357).
From the information presented above we can infer
the existence of relationships among the regions under
consideration, but our goal is to detect systemic relations in
precise locations. In order to define them we should address

210

Roxana Flammini

the following features: on the one hand, the establishment

of the spheres of interaction; on the other, the types of
interaction. I shall refer to the concepts of heterarchy,
hierarchy and asymmetry.

Discussion: Characterizing the CorePeriphery Relationships in the NLws during

the Early Second Millennium BC
We possess information about the interaction among the
Egyptian state, many Levantine polities, and Kerma during
the early second millennium BC. Sources reveal that the
main type of interaction they maintained was based on the
exchange of goods (mainly prestige goods) through a network
of relationships. Which goods were transferred through the
system? From or through the Levant, precious metals, raw
materials and some manufactured products arrived: silver,
bronze, copper, aromatics and medicinal plants, cedar
wood, resins, moringa oil, olive oil and bronze artefacts.
From or through Upper Nubia mainly precious metals and
raw materials were brought, such as gold, ebony, incense,
animal skins and ivory (goods mentioned in the Inscription
of Amenemhet II at Mit Rahina, cf. Altenmller and Moussa
1991; Marcus 2007; or found in the Td Treasure, cf. Bisson
de la Roque 1953). Egypt produced manufactured goods with
those raw materials and metals, such as ointments, jewellery,
textiles and pottery. Unfortunately, many of these items do
not survive in the archaeological record.
Nevertheless, and despite the particular historical situation
of the partners involved in this network of exchanges, the
system not only survived but also continued to develop,
increasing the amount of goods exchanged and the number
of partners involved through time. A regional division of
labour is another feature that can be observed in these
relationships, and this differentiation helps to delineate the
role each partner performed in the system. As mentioned
above, Egypt produced mainly manufactured products a
feature commonly attributed to cores while Kerma and the
Levantine polities exported mainly raw materials a feature
commonly attributed to peripheries.
Yet, trade was not the only way goods were exchanged
during the first half of the second millennium BC: foreign
rulers sent the Egyptian king certain goods as gift-offerings,
like those enumerated in the Inscription of Amenemhet II at
Mit Rahina, while the Egyptian king sent them in exchange
objects that were usually found in their tombs, in a reciprocal
and friendly relationship, as the royal Egyptian gifts an
ointment container and a small box, both of obsidian and
gold, with the names of 12th Dynasty kings Amenemhet III
and Amenemhet IV respectively found in the royal tombs
of Byblos demonstrate (Montet 1928a, nos. 610611).

Nevertheless, as Stuart Tyson Smith rightly points

out with regard to the relationship between Egypt and
Nubia, Egyptologists and Nubiologists often place their
interactions within some kind of core-driven centre
periphery framework (Smith 2003, 58), but in this classical
model the periphery often appears subordinated to the core.
Scholarly interpretations of the relationships between Egypt
and the Levant have changed through time; from a coredriven model of domination (Giveon 1987) to one where only
friendly relationships based on exchanges existed (Liverani
1995, 316). This latter interpretation is being re-examined
today due to the information provided by the Inscription of
Amenemhet II at Mit Rahina and archaeological discoveries
on the Levantine coast (Marcus 2007).
One of the main current issues in the study of ancient worldsystems is that many ancient core-periphery relationships do
not fit into a core-driven model. In this regard, Chase-Dunn
and Hall introduced several revisions to world-systems
theory, defining two types of coreperiphery relationships.
Firstly, coreperiphery differentiation where societies at
different levels of complexity and population density are in
interaction with each other in a world-system and secondly,
core-periphery hierarchy where political, economic or
ideological domination between different societies takes
place (Chase-Dunn and Hall 1991, 19). But this bipolar
definition of power relationships among societies (interaction
with or without domination/exploitation) tends to exclude
the search for other possible situations. Yet, in the case of
the NLws of the early second millennium BC, we have to
admit that sources both textual and material evidence
cannot prove at present that the core exerted political or
military domination, or even economic exploitation, over
the peripheries. Of course, there were sources that refer
to punitive actions or specific military interventions in the
Levant, but those actions do not reflect Egyptian long-term
control of those territories. The aforementioned Inscription
of Amenemhet II at Mit Rahina mentions the capturing
of Asiatic manpower as well as goods and raw materials
through Egyptian punitive expeditions in the Levant; and the
Inscription of Khnumhotep refers to an incident between the
rulers of Byblos and Ullaza. The intervention of the Egyptian
king by request of the ruler of Byblos first, and the ruler of
Ullaza later, constitutes some extremely important data, but
it is not possible to infer from the unfortunately partially
destroyed text an accurate description of such a relationship.
Nevertheless, the text does not allow us to infer that Egyptians
exerted any kind of political, military or economic control
over those northern Levantine cities. In a recovered passage,
the ruler of Byblos allows the Egyptians to moor their ships
in the harbour of the city (Allen 2008, 34).
With regard to the relationship with Kerma, I shall refer
briefly to the steles of Semna (Berlin Museum 1157 and 14753,

16. Northeast Africa and the Levant in Connection

year 16 and 8 of 12th Dynasty king Sesostris III respectively,

cf. Lichtheim 1973, 119121; Loeben 2001) because they are
related to the role foreigners/enemies played in the Egyptian
conception of the world. Both are boundary steles, which
means that they were objects established by the Egyptian king
in a specific place to delimit the borders of the Egyptian state.
The establishment of boundary steles reflects the achievement
of a political goal precisely to delimit the borders of the
Egyptian state and of an ideological one. In this latter sense,
they were objects which allowed the restraint of chaotic forces.
Indeed, the negative conception of foreigners that is present
in them both in written form and through iconographic
representation may not always be taken in a literal sense,
considering that the ancient Egyptians had no sense of
historical facts, at least as we conceive them. So, if a text
written on a boundary stele describes punitive actions against
foreigners, these actions should be put in their own context; and
the information provided should be evaluated by comparing the
results coming from another kind of evidence, for example, the
archaeological remains. Certainly, the information provided
by the texts and the archaeological evidence prove that the
Egyptian state did not exert political or economic coercion
over Kerma during the Middle Kingdom. Thus, core-periphery
relationships in the NLws in the early second millennium BC
may need to be characterized in other terms.
I consider that the concept of heterarchy fits better in the
search to delimit the nature of core-periphery relationships
in the NLws. Heterarchy may be defined as the relation of
elements a system where each element is either unranked
relative to other elements or possesses the potential for being
ranked in a number of different ways (Crumley 1987, 158;
1995, 3, my emphasis). This definition allows us to conceive
a two-way relationship among partners working on multiple
spheres of interaction. During the early second millennium
BC, the partners of the NLws interacted basically through
exchange activities that were profitable for all of them (the
prestige goods network), without any kind of political or
military domination or economic exploitation exerted by the
core over the peripheries. These relationships, however, also
present a strong asymmetrical rather than hierarchical bias
in another sphere of interaction. This latter differentiation
deserves subsidiary consideration. In fact, hierarchy is not
opposite to heterarchy. We concur with Bondarenko, Grinin
and Korotayev (2002, 56) in that the second version of
Crumleys definition of heterarchy is most relevant for the
study of complex societies. However, when we have a system
of elements which possess the potential for being ranked in
a number of different ways, it seems impossible to speak
about the absence of hierarchy. In this case we rather deal
with a system of heterarchically arranged hierarchies. Hence,
it does not appear reasonable to denote the alternative to
heterarchy as hierarchy.

211

Heterarchical modes of interaction may or may not

be related to hierarchies. In fact, heterarchy can admit
of hierarchies in discrete but overlapping systems; it
acknowledges, for example, the possibility of internal
hierarchies within the discrete, horizontally connected
systems of heterarchical structures (Meyers 2006, 250).
In this sense, we consider that the partners involved in the
NLws were horizontally or symmetrically connected through
a network of exchange of prestige goods clearly profitable
for all them without the existence of power relationships
of domination or exploitation in between. Nevertheless, an
overlapping socio-political sphere of interaction can also be
identified where asymmetry is clearly evident.
In fact, it is possible to delineate a different situation,
because the elites of the interacting societies did not possess
the same prestigious status: the Egyptian king was recognized
as a great king among the chiefs and rulers of the ancient
Near East societies during the early second millennium BC.
Both the elites of Kerma and of Byblos adopted Egyptian
culture features as a way to enhance their local positions,
while the Egyptian elite did not adopt features related to
foreign elites. Thus, this asymmetrical bond is crucial in
the characterization of Egypt as a core, and of Kerma and
Byblos as the peripheries of the NLws during the period
considered here.
Nevertheless, can we then talk about the existence of
hierarchical relations between core and peripheries? In fact,
power hierarchies relate in some way to a socio-political
arrangement in which someone plays the boss character and
the other the employee. A bond based in power relationships
is clear in power hierarchies not only in personal but also in
social spheres of interaction. This is how many of the societies
in question organized themselves: the Egyptian, Kerman and
Byblite societies were hierarchical, stratified societies. But,
were their interactions hierarchical? We consider that this
was not the situation in the NLws, at least during the early
second millennium BC.
I prefer therefore to characterize their relationships as
asymmetrical rather than hierarchical since, despite the
fact that the peripheries exhibit features or practices that
originated in the core, these were not linked to any kind
of power relationship. As I have stated above, those core
cultural features or practices were probably adopted by
peripheral societies in order to fulfil local needs. Asymmetry
is also evident since there is no evidence of the adoption of
practices or cultural features originating in the peripheries
by the core.
In summary, during the early second millennium BC,
the hierarchical societies of Egypt, Byblos and Kerma
were linked in a heterarchical world-system, the so-called
NiloticLevantine one. Symmetrical relationships were
established at an economic level through the exchange of

212

Roxana Flammini

prestige goods, but also asymmetrical relationships were

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

Spheres of Asymmetrical Interaction in the

NLws
The Egyptian Core and Peripheral Kerma
Systemic relations with Egypt were present in Kerma, the
largest polity in Upper Nubia. There was no other Nubian
place where the Egyptian influence and material remains
appear so clearly related to the economic sphere of a polity
and to the prestige of its local elite during this period.
This does not mean that Kerma only exchanged goods
with Egypt. On the contrary, it was also connected with
more southern African societies, like the Gash Group
which occupied the region around Kassala (Mahal Teglinos)
(Fattovich 1995). These societies were engaged in an extensive
network of exchange relationships probably connected
to South Arabia, the Persian Gulf and the Indian Ocean
(Fattovich 1996). But they were outside the range of direct
Egyptian influence during this period Egyptian pottery was
not found in their settlements although some core practices,
like sealing, are evidenced in these groups. It is highly
plausible that sealing could have arrived there through Kerma
because it probably adopted this practice from the Egyptian
fortresses located in Lower Nubia (Smith 1998, 224). These
southern African societies, then, could be considered as
margins of the NLws in A. Sherratts terms (1994). In ours,
they were beyond the boundaries of the NLws by definition,
because they did not present direct, regular and two-way
relations with the core. Their relations were established with
Kerma and other southern African societies, and possibly
they were partners in a world-system which was interwoven
with the NLws, but these hypotheses have to be contrasted
with the evidence and deserve further analysis that exceeds
the scope of this paper.
Moving back to the Egyptian state, it developed an
extremely complex system of sealing and countersealing

to manage exchange activities in Lower Nubia, and a great

deal of evidence has been found in the fortresses at Kubban,
Semna, Kumma, Mirgissa, Uronarti and Askut (Kemp 1986;
Anderson 1999; Smith 2004). Specifically, Egyptian interest
in exchange activities is evidenced by the hundreds of seal
impressions found at Mirgissa and Uronarti (Gratien 1994),
by references in the boundary steles of Semna (Lichtheim
1973, 118120; Loeben 2001) and in the Semna Dispatches
(Smither 1945) as well as by the inscriptions found in the
area of the Second Cataract that make reference to individuals
related to navigation and exchange activities (ba 1974).
Moreover, seals and sealings were found in very different
contexts at Kerma. In fact, a number of seals and sealings
of Kerma were dated to the end of the Middle Kingdom
(early Classic Kerma). These findings were made both in the
necropolis and in the town. Many of them were imports from
Egypt, while others were local copies of Egyptian models.
Those found in the necropolis were possibly considered as
prestige goods by the local elite (Smith 1998), while those
found in the town were used as part of processes of exchange
activities. But recently, Charles Bonnet announced the
discovery of earlier evidence, dated to the Middle Kerma, thus
contemporaneous to the Middle Kingdom. He found seal
fragments and seal impressions, as well as stocks of finegrained clay ready to be used, it being already worked into
small balls, cylinders or rolls and stored in ditches or shallow
pits (Bonnet 2001, 31) in an area near the harbour quarter
and the entrance to the town. These objects are proof that
Kerma adopted a core-originated practice (sealing) probably
transferred through contacts with the Egyptian fortresses
located in Lower Nubia during the Middle Kingdom.
In addition, Egyptian pottery has been found in the
necropolis of Kerma. Even though the pottery came from a
cemetery, it is very likely that it arrived carrying other prestige
products possibly an aromatic cream or oil and became
luxury items once the vessels had been emptied. It vividly
shows the existence of an important network of exchanges
between Egypt and Kerma and the use of core-related items
as prestige goods, probably to fulfil local needs to reinforce
social hierarchies. Recently, J. Bourriau has demonstrated
through marl analysis of the Egyptian pottery from Kerma
that until the middle of the 12th Dynasty there was a higher
proportion of Egyptian pottery from Upper Egypt, but this
reverted to a higher proportion of pottery from the Delta from
the later 12th (when the frontier at Semna was established)
through the 13th Dynasties. Finally, by the end of the 13th
Dynasty (when the Egyptian states crisis began), there was
again only Upper Egyptian pottery (Bourriau 2004). The
Egyptian pottery found at Kerma thus reflects the fluctuations
of the internal situation of the Egyptian state.
Even though there is clear evidence of the existence of a
systemic relationship between Egypt and Kerma, it is difficult

16. Northeast Africa and the Levant in Connection

to establish when it started due to the nature of the sources.

All we can say is that contacts took place during the early
second millennium BC on a regular basis.
In short, Egypt and Kerma participated in a network of
exchanges during the Middle Kingdom, mainly of luxury
goods, and elites in both societies benefited from this
exchange. For the period under analysis, the evidence found at
Kerma suggests that certain practices related to the exchanges,
like sealing, were adopted from Egypt, which probably means
the sharing of a common logic of exchange which favoured
all the partners involved while the finding of Egyptian
pottery and sealings in the local necropolis points to its use
as a prestige good favouring the distinction of internal social
hierarchies. This latter feature demonstrates the existence of
asymmetry in the socio-political sphere of interaction. To sum
up, we conclude that a periphery of the NLws was located
at Kerma in the period considered here.
The Egyptian Core and Peripheral Byblos
Objects imported from Egypt have been found in many
Levantine cities. Among them, royal statues have been
found in Ugarit, Neirab (near Aleppo), Beirut, Qatna, Tell
Gezer, Tell Hizzin and Ebla (Scandone Matthiae 2000). In
Ebla, in the famous tomb of the local ruler Immeya, the socalled Tomb of the Lord of the Goats, an Egyptian-style
sceptre was found. The origin of the sceptre was a subject
of discussion among specialists: while Scandone Matthiae
(1997; 2003) maintains that it was imported from Egypt and
probably belonged to the 13th Dynasty king Hotepibra Sa
Aamu Hornedjheryotef, Ryholt (1998) considers that it was
locally made inspired by Egyptian motifs. Egyptianising
ivories have also been found at Ebla, as well as other local
objects with features relating to Egyptian kingship. Probably
the meaning of these Egyptianized objects was quite different
from the originals, though we are far from understanding it.
The set of ivories has been compared to two similar series,
one found in a tomb at el-Jisr, near Tell Jaffa in Palestine, and
the other in the tombs at Kerma. But the Kerma ivories have
been dated slightly later than the period considered here, when
Egypt relinquished its position as core to the Kerman kingdom
of Kush and the Hyksos kingdom located in the Eastern Delta
(Second Intermediate Period, ca. 16401530 BC).
Certainly, systemic relationships were present in the
northern Levantine city of Byblos during the early second
millennium BC: it was the Levantine site where cultural
features relating to Egypt were not only abundant, but unique,
the local elite acquiring Egyptian titles, writing, language
and religious beliefs. There is no other site in the Levant
showing such a strong bond with Egyptian features. The
asymmetry in the relationship between Egypt and Byblos is
supported by textual, material and iconographic evidence.

213

More specifically, the remains relating to the 12th and 13th

Dynasties and the elite of Byblos are strongly connected
with the late 12th Dynasty king Amenemhet III and his
successors.
Egyptian scarabs and pottery (water jars) dated to the
12th Dynasty were found in the tombs of the rulers of
Byblos. P. Montet (1928b) found in the stone sarcophagus
of Abishemu I (tomb I) an ointment container of gold and
obsidian, inscribed with the kings name. Recently, some
faience fragments found inside the stone sarcophagus were
identified as part of an Egyptian-style coffin (Schiestl 2007).
This tomb was physically connected to another one, probably
of the son of Abishemu, Yapishemuabi. In that tomb, Montet
found a small box of obsidian and gold with the name of
Amenemhet IV. These Egyptian prestige goods were used to
date the local rulers of Byblos to the last years of the 12th
Dynasty. In tomb II Montet also found a beautiful Syrian
weapon of gold and bronze with an inscription written
in Egyptian hieroglyphs and language but made locally.
The name of its owner (Yapishemuabi) is preceded by an
Egyptian title, usually given by the king to high officers
of the Egyptian administration: hati-a (high official). In
tomb IV, which probably belonged to Iantin, a fragment of
an alabaster vessel was found bearing an inscription which
could have been part of an offering formula (Montet 1928a,
787): the title hati-a appears between the Egyptian title iri-pat
(member of the elite) and the probably local title of heqa
kheqaw (ruler of rulers).
Iantin also appears in a bas relief found in the Egyptian
temple at Byblos that shows him seated in front of a
fragmentary cartouche with a name written in hieroglyphs,
that was attributed to the 13th Dynasty king Neferhotep I
(Ryholt 1997). The local ruler is depicted paying homage
to the name in the cartouche. The image is related to an
inscription written in Egyptian hieroglyphs and language
which reads: Re Harakhte, he causes him to adore Re
everyday, the hati-a of Byblos Iantin, repeating life, born to
the hati-a of Byblos Ryn, justified (Montet 1928b, figs. 89).
It is possible that Iantin was a contemporary of Zimrilim of
Mari, since the Mari archives mentioned that a Byblian king
(lugal) called Iantin had established economic relations with
Zimrilim (Kitchen 1967). If correct, this link shows that he
was independent from Egypt, as also does the fact that these
rulers used to write their names in cartouches, otherwise an
exclusive attribute of Egyptian kings. A seal found at Byblos
belonging to Ibiaw, suggests that the relationships with Egypt
were still maintained in the reign of Sobekhotep IV (Ryholt
1997, 8990).
Interestingly, the title hati-a appears only in the sources
from Byblos but not in Egyptian texts, where the foreign
rulers are called heqa (ruler). It is highly plausible that
not only the use of some Egyptian titles but also of other

214

Roxana Flammini

selected Egyptian cultural features by the rulers of Byblos

was related to their local socio-political situation, in order to
enhance their position in relation to other Levantine rulers
that could be considered as competitors, in a local system
of inter-elite relationships based on patronage (Flammini
2010). The Egyptian cultural features clearly reflect the strong
relationship between the elites of both places, and the social
influence the one had on the other.
The material evidence found at Byblos proves that the
relationship with the Egyptian state was established late
in the period (from Amenemhet IIIs reign onwards, ca.
18531808 BC) although the above-mentioned Inscription
of Khnumhotep proves that the relationship could have been
established earlier (Allen 2008). Despite these facts, we
can infer that these contacts were not random but regular,
even though we cannot determine their precise frequency.
In short, I maintain that Byblos effectively acted as the
northern periphery of the NLws from the late 12th Dynasty
to the 13th Dynasty.

Summary and Conclusions

To sum up, world-systems theory has many proponents
as well as detractors. I believe that a carefully adapted
and detailed use of several of its main concepts has more
advantages than disadvantages for the comprehension of
modes of interaction among ancient partners. A further
benefit is its explicit focus on a wider system of relationships,
allowing the consideration of many spheres and types of
interconnection. In this paper I have approached the situation
of a world-system delimited between northeast Africa and the
coastal northern Levant during the early second millennium
BC. The analysis was situated in a specific historical
conjuncture and delineated from the information provided
by the sources at our disposal. From this point of departure,
systemic relations were defined as direct, regular and twoway relationships, that revealed different and overlapping
spheres of interaction (economic, social, political) and types
of interaction (symmetrical, asymmetrical). During the early
second millennium BC systemic relations that is, direct,
regular, two way relationships were established between
Egypt and two precise locations: Kerma and Byblos. There
were no proven long-term or systematic coercive practices
in the relationships between these partners.
Two different and overlapping spheres of interaction were
distinguished in the system: one, based on the exchange of
prestige goods, and characterised by the establishment of
symmetrical relationships. A differentiation was established
with regard to the kind of goods each partner provided to the
system, taking into account that all of them benefited from
the relationship. A second sphere, based on socio-political

features, showed strong asymmetrical relationships among

the partners. These systemic asymmetrical relationships
allowed the differentiation between a core and its peripheries,
because some core practices or cultural features were adopted
by the peripheral societies probably to fulfil local needs
while it was not possible to identify a corresponding
inverse situation.
The possibility of detecting these different spheres of
interaction allowed us to conceive a heterarchical arrangement
of the world-system. In this sense, the Egyptian, Kerma and
Byblite societies were hierarchical, stratified societies whose
relationships allowed them to be heterarchically arranged
through the establishment of symmetrical and asymmetrical
relationships in different spheres of interaction
Moreover, the evidence enables us to delineate differences
in each situation. On the one side, in the Kerma-Egypt
relationship, the sources prove the existence not only of a
shared logic of exchange since the Kerma elite adopted
Egyptian exchange-related objects (seals) but also a use
of Egyptian objects (pottery, sealings) as prestige goods.
Both probably related to local needs: firstly, to achieve
economic benefits in the exchange with Egypt by sharing
that common logic of exchange, and secondly, to reinforce
social hierarchies within Kerma society. On the other side,
in the relationship of Byblos with Egypt, the elite of Byblos
adopted selected Egyptian titles, language, writing system and
religious beliefs, probably in order to improve its position in
relation to other Levantine rulers that could be considered as
competitors. This adoption was sustained by the long-term
relationship among these societies.
This brief approach to the running of this world-system
during the early second millennium BC is far from being a full
analysis, but I am convinced that an approach from an adapted
world-systems theory opens new ways to understanding these
ancient relationships.

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

References
Adams, W. Y. (1977) Nubia. Corridor to Africa, Princeton, NJ,
Princeton University Press.
Allen, J. P. (2008) The Historical Inscription of Khnumhotep
at Dahshur: Preliminary Report. Bulletin of the American
Schools of Oriental Research 352, 2939.

16. Northeast Africa and the Levant in Connection

Allen, M. (1997) Contested Peripheries. Philistia in the NeoAssyrian World-System. PhD Dissertation. Los Angeles,
University of California.
Allen, M. (2005) Power is in the Details. Administrative
Technology and the Growth of Ancient Near Eastern Cores.
In C. Chase-Dunn and E. N. Anderson (eds.) The Historical
Evolution of World-Systems (Evolutionary Processes in World
Politics), 7591. New York, Palgrave Macmillan.
Altenmller, H. and Moussa, A. (1991) Die Inschrift Amenemhets
II. aus dem Ptah-Tempel von Memphis. Ein Vorbericht.
Studien zur Altgyptischen Kultur 18, 148.
Anderson, W. (1999) The Significance of Middle Nubian CGroup Mortuary Variability, ca. 2200 B.C. to ca. 1500 B.C.,
vol. I. Montreal, McGill University.
Bard, K. (2002), The Emergence of the Egyptian State (c. 3200
2686 BC). In I. Shaw (ed.) The Oxford History of Ancient
Egypt, 5782. Oxford, Oxford University Press.
Beaujard, P. (2005) The Indian Ocean in Eurasian and African
World Systems before the Sixteenth Century. Journal of
World History 16(4), 411465.
Bietak, M. (1997) The Center of Hyksos Rule: Avaris (Tell
el Dabca). In E. Oren (ed.) The Hyksos. New Historical
and Archaeological Perspectives, 87139. Philadelphia,
University of Pennsylvania Museum.
Bisson de la Roque, F. (1953) Le Trsor de Td. Documents
de Fouilles 11. Cairo, Institut Franais dArchologie
Orientale.
Bondarenko, D., Grinin, L. and Korotayev, A. (2002) Alternative
Pathways of Social Evolution. Social Evolution & History
1(1), 5479.
Bonnet, Ch. (1986) Kerma. Territoire et Mtropole. Quatre
Leons au Collge de France. Bibliothque Gnrale de
lInstitut Franais dArchologie Orientale du Caire IX.
Cairo, Institut Franais dArchologie Orientale du Caire.
Bonnet, Ch. (2001) Les empreintes de sceaux et les sceaux de
Kerma: localisation des dcouvertes. Cahier de Recherches
de lInstitut de Papyrologie et gyptologie de Lille 22,
2731.
Bonnet, C. and Valbelle, D. (2006) The Nubian Pharaohs.
Black Kings of the Nile. Cairo, The American University in
Cairo Press.
Bourriau, J. (2004) Egyptian Pottery Found in Kerma Ancien,
Kerma Moyen and Kerma Classique Graves at Kerma. In T.
Kendall (ed.) Nubian Studies 1998. Proceedings of the Ninth
Conference of the International Society of Nubian Studies,
August 2126, 1998, Boston, Massachusetts, 313. Boston,
MA, Department of African-American Studies, Northeastern
University.
Chase-Dunn, C., Alvarez, A. and Pasciuti, D. (2005) WorldSystems in the Biogeosphere: Three Thousand Years of
Urbanization, Empire Formation and Climate Change.
Research in Rural Sociology and Development 10, 311
331.
Chase-Dunn, C. and Hall, T. (1991) Conceptualizing Core/

215

Periphery Hierarchies for Comparative Study. In C. ChaseDunn and T. Hall (eds.) Core/Periphery Relations in
Precapitalist Worlds, 544. Boulder, CO, Westview Press.
Chase-Dunn, C. and Hall, T. (1993) Comparing World-Systems:
Concepts and Working Hypotheses. Social Forces 71(4),
851886.
Chase-Dunn, C. and Jorgenson, A. (2001) Regions and
Interaction Networks: a World-System Perspective. Institute
for Research on World-Systems Working Paper 13. Riverside,
CA, University of California at Riverside. (http://escolarship.
org/uc/item/65d7k1rz).
Chase-Dunn, C., Pasciuti, D., Alvarez, A. and Hall, T. (2006)
Growth/decline phases and semi-peripheral development in
the Ancient Mesopotamian and Egyptian world-systems. In
B. K. Gills and W. R. Thompson (eds.) Globalization and
Global History, 114138. London, Routledge.
Cline, E. (2000) Contested Peripheries in World Systems
Theory: Megiddo and the Jezreel Valley as a Test Case.
Journal of World-Systems Research VI(1), 716.
Cohen, S. L. (2002) Middle Bronze Age IIA Ceramic Typology
and Settlement in the Southern Levant. In M. Bietak (ed.)
The Middle Bronze Age in the Levant. Proceedings of an
International Conference on MB IIA Ceramic Material,
Vienna, 24th26th of January 2001, 113131. Vienna,
sterreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften.
Crumley, C. (1987) A Dialectical Critique of Hierarchy. In
T. Patterson and C. Gailey (eds.) Power Relations and
State Formation, 155169. Washington DC, American
Anthropological Association.
Crumley, C. (1995) Heterarchy and the Analysis of Complex
Societies. In R. Ehrenreich, C. Crumley and J. Levy (eds.)
Heterarchy and the Analysis of Complex Societies, 16.
Archaeological Papers of the American Anthropological
Association 6. Arlington, VA, American Anthropological
Association.
Dever, W. (1987) The Middle Bronze Age: the Zenith of an Urban
Canaanite Era. Biblical Archaeologist 50, 149177.
Fattovich, R. (1995) The Gash Group. A Complex Society in
the Lowlands to the East of the Nile. Cahier de Recherches
de lInstitut de Papyrologie et gyptologie de Lille 17(1),
191200.
Fattovich, R. (1996) Punt: the Archaeological Perspective.
Beitrge zur Sudanforschung 6, 1529.
Fattovich, R. and Bard, K. (2006) The Wonderful Things of
Punt. Mersa/Wadi Gawasis, an Egyptian Port on the Red Sea.
The Society for the Study of Egyptian Antiquities Newsletter
(Fall 2006), 13.
Flammini, R. (2008) Ancient Core-Periphery Interactions. Lower
Nubia during Middle Kingdom Egypt (ca. 20501640 BC).
Journal of World Systems Research XIV(1), 5074.
Flammini, R. (2010) Elite Emulation and Patronage Relationships
in the Middle Bronze Age: The Egyptianized Dynasty of
Byblos. Tel Aviv 37(2), 154168.
Frank, A. G. and Gills, B. (1996) The World System: Five

216

Roxana Flammini

Hundred Years or Five Thousand? New York/London,

Routledge.
Galn, J. M. (2002) El Imperio Egipcio. Inscripciones, ca.
15501300 a.C. Madrid, Consejo Superior de Investigaciones
Cientficas.
Gardiner, A. H., Peet, T. E. and ern, J. (1955) The Inscriptions
of Sinai. Part II: Translation and Commentary. London,
Egypt Exploration Society.
Gerstenblith, P. (1983) The Levant at the Beginning of the
Middle Bronze Age. American School of Oriental Research
Dissertation Series 5. Winona Lake, IN, Eisenbrauns.
Gills, B. (2002) World Systems Analysis, Historical Sociology
and International Relations: The Differences a Hyphen
Makes. In S. Hobden and J. Hobson (eds.) Historical
Sociology of International Relations, 141161. Cambridge/
New York, Cambridge University Press.
Giveon, R. (1987) The Impact of Egypt on Canaan in the
Middle Bronze Age. In A. Rainey (ed.) Egypt, Israel, Sinai:
Archaeological and Historical Relationships in the Biblical
Period, 2340. Tel Aviv, Tel Aviv University.
Gratien, B. (1994) Dpartements et Institutions dans les
forteresses nubiennes au Moyen Empire. In C. Berger and
N. Grimal (eds.) Hommages Jean Leclant, vol. 2, Nubie,
Sudan, Ethiopie, 185197. Bibliothque dtude 106(2).
Cairo, Institut Franais dArchologie Orientale.
Hall, T. (2004) Intersocietal Encounters: Lessons and Questions
from a World-Systems Perspective. Paper presented at
Archaeological Institute of America Annual Meeting, San
Francisco, CA, January 3rd 2004.
Helck, W. (1989) Ein Ausgreifen des Mittleren Reiches in den
zypriotischen Raum? Gttinger Miszellen 109, 2730.
Kemp, B. J. (1986) Large Middle Kingdom Granary Buildings
(and the archaeology of administration). Zeitschrift fr
gyptische Sprache und Altertumskunde 113, 120136.
Kitchen, K. (1967) Byblos, Egypt and Mari in the Early Second
Millennium BC. Orientalia 36, 3954.
Kohl, P. (1987) The Ancient Economy, Transferable Technologies
and the Bronze Age World-System: a View from the
Northeastern Frontier of the Ancient Near East. In M.
Rowlands, M. Larsen and K. Kristiansen (eds.) Centre
and Periphery in the Ancient World, 1324. Cambridge,
Cambridge University Press.
Lichtheim, M. (1973) Ancient Egyptian Literature: a Book of
Readings, vol. I. Berkeley, CA, University of California
Press.
Liverani, M. (1995) El Antiguo Oriente. Historia, Sociedad,
Economa. Barcelona, Crtica.
Loeben, C. E. (2001) Bemerkungen zur sogenannten Kleinen
Semna-Stele (Berlin 14753). In C.-B. Arnst, I. Hafemann
and A. Lohwasser (eds.) Begegnungen: Antike Kulturen im
Niltal, Festgabe fr Erika Endesfelder, Karl-Heinz Priese,
Walter Friedrich Reineke und Steffen Wenig, 273284.
Leipzig, Helmar Wodtke und Katharina Stegbauer.
Marcus, E. (2002) The Southern Levant and Maritime Trade

during the Middle Bronze IIA Period. In E. Oren and S.

Ahituv (eds.) Aharon Kempinski Memorial Volume: Studies in
Archaeology and Related Disciplines, 241263. Beersheva,
Studies by the Department of Bible and Ancient Near East
15. Beersheva, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev Press.
Marcus, E. (2007) Amenemhet II and the Sea: Maritime Aspects
of the Mit Rahina (Memphis) Inscription. gypten und
Levante 17, 137189.
Meyers, C. (2006) Hierarchy or Heterarchy? Archaeology and
the Theorizing of Israelite Society. In S. Gitin, J. E. Wright
and J. P. Dessel (eds.) Confronting the Past. Archaeological
and Historical Essays on Ancient Israel in Honor of William
G. Dever, 245254. Winona Lake, IN, Eisenbrauns.
Montet, P. (1928a) Byblos et lgypte: quatre campagnes de
fouilles Gebeil, 1921, 1922, 1923, 1924, 2 vols. Paris, P.
Geuthner.
Montet, P (1928b) Notes et documents pour servir lhistoire
des relations entre lancienne Egypte et la Syrie. II. Nouvelles
traces des gyptiens Byblos. Kmi I(2), 8393.
Moreno Garca, J. C. (1999) wt et le milieu rural gyptien du
IIIe Millnaire. Economie, administration et organisation
territoriale, Bibliothque de lEcole des Hautes Etudes, Sciences
Historiques et Philologiques, 337. Paris, Champion.
Philip, G. (1991) Cypriot Bronzework in the Levantine World:
Conservatism, Innovation and Social Change. Journal of
Mediterranean Archaeology 4(1), 59107.
Quack, J. F. (1996) Kftw and Isy, gypten und Levante 6,
7581.
Redford, D. B. (1992) Egypt, Canaan and Israel in Ancient
Times. Princeton, Princeton University Press.
Ryholt, K. S. B. (1997) The Political Situation in Egypt
during the Second Intermediate Period, c. 18001550 B.C.
Copenhagen, Museum Tusculanum Press.
Ryholt, K. S. B. (1998) Hotepibre, a Supposed Asiatic King in
Egypt with Relations to Ebla. Bulletin of the American School
of Oriental Research 311, 16.
Sackho, A. (1998) Le pouvoir politique des pays nubiens.
Analyse du terme q et ses applications archologiques. Cahier
de Recherches de lInstitut de Papyrologie et gyptologie de
Lille 17(3), 203218.
Sve-Sderbergh, T. (1949) A Buhen Stela (Khartum no. 18).
Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 35, 5058.
Scandone Matthiae, G. (1997) The Relations between Ebla and
Egypt. In E. Oren (ed.) The Hyksos. New Historical and
Archaeological Perspectives, 415427. Philadelphia, PA,
University of Pennsylvania Museum.
Scandone Matthiae, G. (2000) Art et Politique: les Images de
Pharaon ltranger. gypten und Levante X, 187193.
Scandone Matthiae, G. (2003) Les rapports entre Ebla et lgypte
lAncien et au Moyen Empire. In Z. Hawass (ed.) Egyptology
at the Dawn of the Twenty-first Century. Proceedings of
the Eighth International Congress of Egyptologists, Vol. I,
487493. Cairo/New York, The American University in Cairo
Press.

16. Northeast Africa and the Levant in Connection

Schiestl, R. (2007) The Coffin from Tomb I at Byblos. gypten

und Levante 17, 265271.
Sherratt, A. (1994) Core, Periphery and Margin: Perspectives
on the Bronze Age. In C. Mathers and S. Stoddart (eds.)
Development and Decline in the Mediterranean Bronze Age,
335345. Sheffield Archaeological Monographs 8. Sheffield,
Sheffield Academic Press.
Sherratt, A. and Sherratt, S. (1991) From Luxuries to
Commodities. The Nature of Mediterranean Bronze Age
Trading Systems. In N. H. Gale (ed.) Bronze Age Trade in the
Mediterranean. Papers presented at the Conference Held at
Rewley House, Oxford, in December 1989, 351386. Studies
in Mediterranean Archaeology 90. Jonsered, Paul strm.
Smith, S. T. (1995) Askut in Nubia. London/New York, Kegan
Paul International.
Smith, S. T. (1998) The Transmission of an Administrative
Sealing System from Lower Nubia to Kerma. Cahier de
Recherches de lInstitut de Papyrologie et gyptologie de
Lille 19, 219230.
Smith, S. T. (2003) Wretched Kush. Ethnic Identities and
Boundaries in Egypts Nubian Empire. London, Routledge.
Smith, S. T. (2004) Sealing practice at Askut and the Nubian
fortresses: implications for Middle Kingdom scarab
chronology and historical synchronisms. In M. Bietak and
E. Czerny (eds.), Scarabs of the second millennium BC from
Egypt, Nubia, Crete and the Levant: chronological and
historical implications. Papers of a Symposium, Vienna,
10th13th of January 2002, 203219. Contributions to
the Chronology of the Eastern Mediterranean 8. Vienna,
sterreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften.
Smither, P. (1945) The Semnah Despatches. Journal of Egyptian
Archaeology 31, 310.

217

Stager, L. E. (1992) The Periodization of Palestine from

Neolithic through Early Bronze Times. In R. W. Ehrich (ed.)
Chronologies in Old World Archaeology, 3rd edition, 2241.
Chicago, IL, University of Chicago Press.
Stager, L. E. (2002) The MB IIA Ceramic Sequence at Tel
Ashkelon and its Implications for the Port Power Model
of Trade. In M. Bietak (ed.) The Middle Bronze Age in the
Levant. Proceedings of an International Conference on
MB IIA Ceramic Material, Vienna, 24th26th of January
2001, 353362. Vienna, sterreichische Akademie der
Wissenschaften.
Valbelle, D. (2004) The Cultural Significance of Iconographic
and Epigraphic Data Found in the Kingdom of Kerma. In T.
Kendall (ed.) Nubian Studies 1998. Proceedings of the Ninth
Conference of the International Society of Nubian Studies,
August 2126, 1998, Boston, Massachusetts, 176183.
Boston, MA, Northeastern University.
Valbelle, D. and Bonnet, C. (1996) Le sanctuaire dHathor,
matresse de la turquoise. Serabit el-Khadim au Moyen
Empire. Paris, ditions Picard Musumeci.
Warburton, D. A. (1997) State and Economy in Ancient Egypt.
Fiscal Vocabulary of the New Kingdom, Orbis Biblicus et
Orientalis 151. Gttingen, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.
Wenke, R. (1991) The Evolution of Early Egyptian Civilization:
Issues and Evidence. Journal of World Prehistory 5,
279329.
Wilkinson, D. (1991) Cores, Peripheries and Civilizations. In C.
Chase-Dunn and T. Hall (eds.) Core/Periphery Relations in
Precapitalist Worlds, 113166. Boulder, CO, Westview.
aba, Z. (1974) The Rock Inscriptions of Lower Nubia, Czech
Institute of Egyptology, Publication I. Prague, Charles
University of Prague.