Afn'can Archaeological Review, Vol. 14, No. 1, 1997

Book Review Askut in Nubia. The Economics and Ideology of Egyptian Imperialism in the Second Millennium BC (Studies in Egyptology). By Stuart Tyson Smith (edited by Geoffrey T. Martin). Kegan Paul International, London and New York, 1995, 242 pp.

The construction of the High Dam at Aswan, and the subsequent creation of Lake Nasser, submerged some 500 km of the Nile Valley south of the first cataract. The international salvage campaign organized by UNESCO involved 27 countries in rescue excavations (S~ive-S6derbergh, 1987). Among the concessions distributed to the international teams was the Middle and New Kingdom fortress site of Askut, located just north of the second cataract. This was excavated from 1962 to 1964 by the late Alexander Badawy, under the sponsorship of the University of California, Los Angeles. Like many other salvage excavations, only sporadic documentation has been published of the work at Askut (Badawy, 1964, 1965, 1967). The monograph under review has utilized field notes and photographs retrieved from Badawy's papers, as well as the excavation's division of finds, now stored at the Fowler Museum of Cultural History, University of California, Los Angeles. Originally a doctoral thesis, Askut in Nubia is not a formal presentation of the excavation results but rather incorporates analysis of this material into a study of the dynamics of Egyptian imperialism in Nubia during the Middle and New Kingdoms. The subtitle of the work, The Economics and ldeology of Egyptian Imperialism in the Second Millennium BC, refers to the two levels of Egyptian involvement in Lower Nubia. A theoretical reconstruction of the mechanism by which Egypt made its presence in Nubia economically viable is thematically central to the work. The work begins with a brief historical sketch of the interaction between the ancient Egyptian state and the region between the first and the second cataracts known as Lower Nubia. A somewhat revised version of 69 0263-0338/97/0300-0069512.50~3© 1997 Plenum Publishing Corporation

70

Book Review

that sketch is given here to help orient the reader in the history of EgyptoNubian relations. Whereas Egypt's trade relations with the peoples of this region go back to contacts with the A-Group in the Pre- and Early Dynastic periods, 1 it was first during the Middle Kingdom (ca. 1990 BC), when a chain of fortresses manned by military personnel was constructed, that Egypt established a significant presence in the area. Exploitation of the mineral resources of the region and control over the luxury imports from the south were the fortresses' main functions. 2 In addition, border control, specifically designed to restrict the movement of southern peoples (nhsyw, "Nubians"), into Egypt, is documented on the second cataract boundary stela of Sesostris III, now in Berlin (translated on p. 40). Outside these fortresses, the archaeological record for the Middle Kingdom is dominated by the indigenous pastoralists known as the CGroup, first documented in Lower Nubia during the Late Old Kingdom (ca. 2500 BC). Although there was contact between the Egyptians and the C-Group, often involving restrictive control, 3 the material culture and social organization of the latter does not appear to have been influenced by the presence of the forts beyond the occasional occurrence of Egyptian artifacts in their burials. The weakening of Egypt's central government at the end of the Middle Kingdom (ca. 1720 BC) resulted in a gradual decline of the activities of the fortresses. This left the region free to come under the control of the Upper Nubian state of Kush, with its center at the third cataract settlement at Kerma. At this time in the north, the Delta, as well as Middle Egypt, was ruled by kings representing a population with Syro-Palestine cultural ties, known as the Hyksos. Control of Upper Egypt was gradually secured by native kings from Thebes. This division of sovereignty over Egyptian territory marked the Second Intermediate Period (ca. 1675-1550 BC). An alliance between Kush and the Hyksos kings against the kings of the 17th Dynasty provided the final impetus for military action against both powers, resulting in a reunited Egypt under a Theban king and the reoccupation of Lower Nubia at the beginning of the New Kingdom (ca. 1550-1070 BC). With the successful establishment of a new central government, Egypt returned to the Lower Nubian fortresses. The Egyptian presence during 1Early A-Group is contemporary with Naqada II (ca. 3500 BC); Terminal A-Group, with the First Dynasty (ca. 2900 BC) (cf, e.g., O'Connor, 1993, pp. 11-12). Smith (1991, p. 77) incorrectly dates the end of the A-Group to the Old Kingdom. 2Compare Smith (1991a) for a reconstruction of the manner in which the Nubian forts interacted, each with a specific role. 3For an interesting study dealing with the interaction between the Egyptian and the Nubian populations during the Middle Kingdom, see Wegner (1995).

Book Review

71

the New Kingdom differed, however, from that of the earlier occupation. A special viceroy post ("King's son of Kush") was created and native princes were incorporated into the regional administration. The military fortresses were now accompanied by temples, as well as being surrounded by expansive town sites found outside the fortress walls. The cultural assimilation of the Nubian population was a dominant feature of the New Kingdom occupation, accompanied by a rapid dissipation of the indigenous material culture. Although integrated into the Egyptian administrative structure, control of Lower Nubia weakened at the end of the New Kingdom, eventually resulting in the area south of the first cataract breaking away from Egypt, with ties finally being broken at the onset of another period of weak central government known as the Third Intermediate Period (ca. 1070-702 BC). 4 The contrast between the character of the Middle and New Kingdom occupations of Lower Nubia raises a number of questions related to the way in which Egyptian imperialism functioned. In addition, the foreign policy of the New Kingdom, consisting, on one hand, of a military occupation in Lower Nubia and, on the other, of a system of taxation for the independent vassal states in the Levant, indicates distinctly different approaches to the organization of control over the two regions during that period. These two sets of contrasts provide the background against which the author examines his central concern, the workings of the successful cultural imperialism of the New Kingdom in Lower Nubia. Citing the need for an appropriate model with which to describe Egyptian imperialism, a number of alternatives are examined. A section headed "Egyptological Formulations" reviews various possible motivations for the Egyptian incursion into Nubia, primarily those related to economic interests (local mineral resources and control of southern trade) and to the strategic role played by the fortresses in the defense of Egypt's southern border. 5 Reacting against the absence of theoretical models in the Egyptological discourse, as well as the reluctance of the humanities to apply such models, Smith describes the work of Eisenstadt (1979), Doyle (1986), and D'Altroy (1992), among others in a search for an appropriate framework for his study. Making his preference for economic, rather than military, motivation clear, the author chooses a model formulated by Alcock (1989) for the mechanism of Roman imperialism as applied to Greek cities. 4At the end of this period Egypt was united under a family of Upper Nubian kings, with a royal residence at Napata at the fourth cataract. They ruled from ca. 747 to 656 BC as the 25th Dynasty. Unfortunately S~ive-S6derbergh'sreview (1992-1993) of Smith's (1991b) initial presentation of his hypothesiswas not cited.

72

Book Review

Alcock's model hinges on the interaction of two elements, the economic needs of the imperial state and the level of adaptability of the extant infrastructure of the subject territory. Thus, the author concludes, the difference between Egyptian strategies in Syro-Palestine and Lower Nubia are to be explained by the social structures in the two regions. In the former, the sophistication of the existing domestic infrastructure was suited to a system of taxation, 6 but in the latter this infrastructure was lacking and an imposition of Egyptian stratification onto Nubian social organization was required. It is more difficult, Smith admits, to explain the contrast between the Middle Kingdom occupation and that of the New Kingdom. After reviewing possible, but unlikely, variations in the pattern of resource exploitation, h e turns to a posited change in the local Nubian infrastructure before reoccupation as the explanatory factor. He sees the Second Intermediate Period, when Lower Nubia was under K e r m a n control, as decisive. T h e cultural identity of the C-Group, perceived as strong during the Middle Kingdom, is interpreted as breaking down from its contact with the K e r m a culture and, most of all, with the Egyptian expatriate community, which was, he suggests, left behind when contact between the fortresses and Egypt was broken off. The influence of this group of Egyptians, he hypothesizes, would have created the predisposition toward cooperation with the occupying power and provided a fertile medium for acculturation. 7 During the New Kingdom this interest in things Egyptian was further enhanced when an internal economic system was instigated which encouraged intensified agricultural production, resulting in overproduction. This surplus would have been used to cover the costs of state involvement in Lower Nubia as well as supporting the emerging indigenous nobility. The economic benefits accrued by a developing elite may have been an important factor in the formula leading to the success of Egyptian imperialism in Lower Nubia. Smith sees acculturation, with accompanying social stratification, as a specific goal of Egyptian imperialism in Lower Nubia during the New Kingdom and as part of an economic strategy to create a costeffective administrative system. 6The translation of taxation into tribute (inw in ancient Egyptian) is a common motif. Compare Frandsen (1989) for a discussion of the tribute motif in relationship to the states of the Levant as one of "gift exchange." 7Compare O'Connor (1993, pp. 640 for the hypothesis that the incorporation of native Nubians into the Egyptian bureaucracyin late New KingdomNubia created the predisposition for the later organization of a native Nubian state. This was eventually to emerge as the Upper Nubian state at Napata, which went on to rule Egypt as the 25th Dynasty. The increasing reliance on Nubians within the Egyptian bureaucracy in Nubia during the New Kingdom is documented by Miiller (1979) (not cited by Smith, 1995).

Book

Review

73

Smith's hypothesis rests on two elements: the economic viability of the Nubian venture for the Egyptian state and the continuity of an influential Egyptian community bridging the Middle and New Kingdoms that could have served as a medium of acculturation. It is the search for proof of the latter which is central in his examination of the archaeological evidence from Askut and other fortress sites. The fortress of Askut is located on an island in the Batn el-Hagar, ca. 25 km north of the second cataract. The Saras region, found to the east and the west of the fort, is an area that has been often described as inhospitable. Referring to the large number of cemetery and habitation sites clustered near the fortress, Smith shows, however, that there was a substantial subsistence potential in the area, particularly since modern desertification may date from as late as the end of the New Kingdom. The author reconstructs the area during the Middle Kingdom, placing two hypothetical village groupings, one on the east and one on the west bank, and estimating a total indigenous population of ca. 400-500 people during the Middle Kingdom. It is in this environment that the Askut fort was constructed during the reign of Sesostris III (ca. 1870 BC). The inscriptions on the seals found at the site provide information regarding its function. Askut, like many other Egyptian fortresses, was designed to serve as a grain reserve (for a general discussion, see Kemp, 1986). It was also involved in overseeing the extraction and processing of gold ore from the mines at Khor Ahmed Sherif. Labor for the mines was provided at least partially by the fort's labor prison. The local administration of these activities and surveillance of the C-Group population of the Saras plains were additional tasks. In the early history of the fortresses, personnel were assigned on a rotating basis, with families accompanying only the highest-ranking officials. This system was abandoned at the end of the 12th Dynasty and replaced by one of permanent staffing, and so took on the character of a settlement. In one case, that of Buhen, families can be traced over six generations, into the late 13th Dynasty (ca. 1870-1720 BC). A similar transition between military garrison and civilian settlement was found at Askut, from an analysis of the chronological span and distribution of the ceramics. Smith's examination of this, and of the cemetery material from Mirgissa and Buhen, indicates that the Egyptian settlements of Lower Nubia date primarily to the 13th Dynasty and later (ca. 1785-1690 BC). Middle Nubian 8 elements in the ceramic assemblages from the forts 8The term Middle Nubian is used to coverall the indigenousculturesof the period including the C-Group, Pan-Grave, and Kerma.

74

Book Review

are exceedingly small (ca. 1-2%), confirming a general lack of interaction between the Egyptian and the indigenous populations during this period. For the hypothesis of continuity to hold, it is important to be able to confirm the Egyptian identity of the later inhabitants of the site and to establish a date coinciding with Kerman occupation. The late date of the Askut assemblage is confirmed through comparison with the ceramics of the Hyksos site at Tell el-Dab'a. The presence of Tell el Yahudiya Piriform lb-c Ware at Askut gives a date of ca. 1700-1650 BC, coinciding with the fall of central government in Memphis and the Kushite takeover of Lower Nubia (ca. 1690 BC). The dominance of Egyptian ceramics (comprising 80% of the total), despite a decrease from the previous occupation levels, is used as supporting evidence for the identification of the inhabitants. The archaeological record at Askut, as well as that of Mirgissa and Buhen, confirms the presence of Second Intermediate Period settlements at the fortress sites, with ceramic assemblages dominated by Egyptian types. In contrast to previous interpretations of this material as representing indigenous squatter communities, Smith sees a continuation of the 13th Dynasty Egyptian populations, comprising a group which he terms expatriate Egyptians. Although the archaeological record can be used to argue for a continued Egyptian presence in Lower Nubia during the Second Intermediate Period, there is little to support a continuity into the New Kingdom. A small number of graves at Mirgissa indicate a connection between the New Kingdom and the previous period. However, at both Buhen and Mirgissa there is a disruption in the use of the fortress structures, with no evidence of continued occupation. Only one piece of documentation can be cited that points to such a continuity. It is a single, roughly carved household altar from Askut datable to the 13th Dynasty, but associated with ceramics given a date well into the 18th Dynasty, thus covering a period of roughly 150 years. The author also refers to the Egyptianization of the C-Group as supporting evidence for the existence and influence of the expatriate Egyptians during the Second Intermediate Period. The presence of Egyptian artifacts and ceramics in Lower Nubia during this period is connected in some way, in the author's hypothesis, with this group. Otherwise the occurrence of Egyptian artifacts in both Lower and Upper Nubia during the Kushite period has been interpreted as a sign that trade between Kerma and particularly Upper Egypt continued uninterrupted even after ties between the second cataract forts and the Egyptian central government had been broken. Reciprocal finds of Kerman pottery and artifacts, sometimes associated with Kerman burial customs, are, however, found in Egypt from the Middle Kingdom to the beginning of the New Kingdom (Bourriau, 1991). Thus it

Book R e n e w

75

is difficult to attribute the presence of Egyptian artifacts in Lower Nubia at this time to the specific influence of Egyptian expatriates. The rapid replacement of characteristic Middle Nubian burial customs with those patterned on Egyptian practices, as found at .the beginning of the New Kingdom, is the best indicator of the cultural assimilation of the indigenous population. The most eloquent example of this process, as cited by Smith, is a large cemetery site known as Fadrus. Located north of Askut in the Faras district at Debeira, cemetery site 185 from the Scandinavian Joint Expedition was published by this reviewer in 1991 (S/ive-S6derbergh and Troy, 1991). Consisting of ca. 700 excavated burials, the artifacts f r o m the earliest burials indicate a date at the beginning of the 18th Dynasty, with the use of the cemetery lasting into the transition between the 18th and the 19th Dynasties (ca. 1550-1300 BC). Smith would argue, contrary to this reviewer, that a small number of the earliest graves could be of Second Intermediate date, given the ambiguity in the dating of certain ceramic types and the presence of artifacts of a transitional date such as a "large figure" scarab of Hyksos type and a Kerma beaker. This revision in dating would, he feels, verify his thesis of a preoccupation acculturation. Smith also notes the development of social stratification seen in the analysis of the chronological strata of the cemetery. 9 He would credit this altered social infrastructure to expatriate influence, although observing that the imposition of a more stratified social structure was part of the policy of the occupying power. The study concludes by reiterating the hypothesis set up in Chapter One and by finally turning to the contrast between economy and ideology referred to in the subtitle. In administrative terms Nubia, during both the Middle Kingdom and the New Kingdom, was regarded as the southernmost part of Egypt. The first Upper Egyptian nome was called Ta-sety, one of the names of Nubia, and the Viceroy of Nubia's responsibilities included territories north of Aswan. Ideologically, however, Egypt counted Nubia among its many ancient enemies known collectively as the Nine Bows. These peoples represented the powers of chaos as opposed to the order (Maat) of the Egyptian collective of 42 homes. The terms topos and mimesis were coined by Loprieno (1988) to describe the discrepancy between ide9The Fadrus cemetery provides excellentmaterial with which to examine the development of a stratified society in Lower Nubia. The first phase consists of a small number of wealthy tombs, indicating a fairly even distribution of new wealth (initial contact with the fort). The next phases show a gradual differentiationinto levels, with increasing division into the elite, middle, and lower classes. The f'mal phase of the cemetery, coinciding with the Egyptian administrative move to the south, contains very uniformly lower-class tombs, with a small number of ceramic vessels and very few other artifacts. The burial customs indicate a Nubian adaptation of the bread and beer offerings that characterize Egyptian ritual. See S/ive-Sfiderbergh and Troy (1991), and for the methodologysee Sinclair and Troy (1991).

76

Book Review

ology and reality as found in Egyptian literary sources. Smith applies this terminology to the documentation of Nubia as found in some of the private tombs of the 18th Dynasty and comes to the conclusion that the military significance of the Egyptian presence in Nubia, often emphasized in the royal inscriptions, was part of the ideological hyperbole of the kingship. The economics of imperialism was the driving force that brought the Egyptians back to the second cataract forts. Three appendices, dealing with radiocarbon dates, pottery fabrics, and illustrated objects from the Askut excavation, complete the work. This review has concentrated on presenting the main thematic line of this work, which attempts to link the archaeological evidence from Askut with a theoretic model for the dynamics of imperialism. This aspect does not, however, dominate the volume quantitatively. The interested reader will f'md several sections which present detailed ceramic analyses aimed at narrowly defining chronological phases in the stratification of the site. These sections, together with the rich illustrations, provide important documentation of this as yet unpublished excavation. The author is to be congratulated on his thorough treatment of complex archaeological material. At the center of this work, however, is a commitment to a theoretical model that requires the author to present a convincing case for the survival of the descendants of the fortress communities as an influential source of social change. The archaeological evidence for the existence of this group is tenuous at best, as the author himself admits. Even if proof of their existence were convincing, there is nothing to indicate that this group played the role ascribed to it by Smith as the primary agent of acculturation. Numerous other factors, both economic and psychological, were at work in the transformation of Lower Nubian culture, x° The author appears to see his most convincing evidence for the role of the expatriates of the Second Intermediate Period in the cemetery at Fadrus. Pushing back the date of a handful of tombs to the 17th Dynasty would, he asserts, confirm his thesis of an earlier acculturation and thus, by extension, the influence of his expatriate Egyptians. Although a few individual finds from a small number of tombs from the earliest phase of the Fadrus cemetery might lend themselves to a late 17th rather than an early 18th Dynasty date, this still places them within the range of the period 1°It is important to note that the archaeologicalevidencecontainsa small number of cemetery sites which display a continuation of Middle Nubian burial traditions, combined with an increasing number of Egyptian artifacts, dating into the 18th Dynasty.Evidence of offering rites at these sites date as late as the transition between the 18th and the 19th Dynasties, indicating a continuationof indigenous customs by some "conservative"groups for ca. 250 years after the reoccupation. S~ive-Srderbergh(1989) has termed this group "Transitional."

Book Review

77

of Egyptian conquest that began under the late 17th Dynasty king Kamose. Also, the cemetery itself does not provide evidence of continuity with the C-Group as one might expect if these tombs represented the initial steps in acculturation. Instead it is newly founded with the earliest tombs characterized by specifically Egyptian "wealth," as well as burial customs. In working through this material, it was evident to this reviewer that the prosperity of the Fadrus cemetery, particularly in its earliest phases, indicated some form of direct economic interaction with an Egyptian source, such as the nearby fort of Serra. This tie, agreeing with Smith, could have encouraged the development of social stratification found in the analysis of the different phases of the cemetery. This site does not, however, support either social stratification or acculturation dating prior to the beginning of the Egyptian reoccupation. Considering the fragile evidence for the expatriate community, it is somewhat surprising to find the author persistently referring to the importance of this group as a driving force of acculturation. He continues to conclude (p. 173) that the material has shown that this group survived into the New Kingdom, brought about change in the local infrastructure, and was almost entirely responsible for the rapid acculturation of the Nubian elite. It appears that in the choice between the archaeological evidence and the requirements of his chosen model, the author has preferred to remain loyal to his application of Alcock's theoretical reconstruction of the mechanism of imperialism. This reviewer finds the tenacity of the author on this point, given the lack of decisive evidence, somewhat difficult to understand. The author's desire to align the archaeological documentation with an explanatory model is best understood as reflecting the role of the "postsalvage" theoretician. Although the publication of the salvage excavations can hardly be regarded as complete, various analyses of the Lower Nubian material are being successively incorporated into a holistic view of the history of Egypto-Nubian relations, u From an Egyptologist's viewpoint, this is a fascinating project, as interest is focused not on Egypt as a conquering power, but on a reconstruction of the societies with which it interacted at its southern border, thus identifying Egypt as one of several actors in an ancient political Africa. Beyond the question of the applicability of a specific theoretical model, this work contains numerous sections which deal with issues of interest, such as the environmental conditions of the region and the pattern of reuse llCompare, e.g., Bonnet (1990), the articles in Davies (1991), and the reports from the latest Nubiotogy congressesat Geneva and Lille.

78

Book Review

of the fortress structures, tracing the transition from military garrison t o civilian settlement. T h e r e is also a valuable discussion of the h y p o t h e t i c a l d e p o p u l a t i o n of L o w e r Nubia during the Late N e w Kingdom. T h e m a n y questions dealt with by the author give an impressive picture of his g r a s p of the subject. This v o l u m e m a k e s a valuable contribution to the study of the E g y p tian p r e s e n c e in L o w e r Nubia. Although not a formal presentation of t h e excavation results, it provides sufficient information for the r e a d e r to o b t a i n an overview of those results, thus filling a gap in the published d o c u m e n tation. T h e detailed analysis of the ceramics and the stratigraphy o f t h e fortress site will undoubtedly r e a p p e a r in n u m e r o u s nubiological contexts as the publication of the documentation of the salvage excavations accumulates. A n d although this reviewer did not find the specifics of the c h o s e n m o d e l convincing, the m a n n e r in which the author b r o a d e n e d his analysis by the use of a theoretical f r a m e w o r k taken from outside the field m u s t be seen as an interesting attempt to i m p r o v e on Egyptological m e t h o d o l o g y .

REFERENCES Alcock, S. E. (1989). Archaeology and imperialism: Roman expansion and the Greek city. Journal of Mediterranean Archaeology 2: 87-135. Badawy, A. (I964). Preliminary report on the excavations by the University of California at Askut. Kush 12: 47-53. Badawy, A. (1965). Askut: A Middle Kingdom fortress in Nubia. Archaeology 18: 124-131. Badawy, A. (1967). Archaeological problems relating to the Egyptian fortress at Askut. Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt 5: 23-27. Bonnet, C. (ed.) (1990). Kerma, royaume de Nubie, Catalogue Musde d'Art et d'Histoire Gen~ve, Gen~ve. Bourriau, J. (1991). Relations between Egypt and Kerma during the Middle and New Kingdoms. In Davies, W. V. (ed.), Egypt and Afn'ca. Nubia from Prehistory to Islam, British Museum, London, pp. 129-144. D'Altroy, T. N. (1992). Provincial Power in the Inca Empire, Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC. Davies, W. V. (ed.) (1991). Egypt and Africa. Nubia from Prehistory to Islam, British Museum, London. Doyle, M. W (1986). Empires, Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY. Eisenstadt, S. N. (1979). Observations and queries about sociological aspects of imperialism in the Ancient World. In Trolle Larsen, M. (ed.), Power and Propaganda, Studies in Assyriology, 7, Papers from the Symposium on Empires in the Ancient World, Copenhagen. Frandsen, R J. (1989). Trade and cult. In Englund, G. (ed.), The Religion of the Ancient Egyptians. Cognitive Structures and Popular Expressions, Boreas 20, Uppsala, pp. 95-108. Kemp, B. J. (1986). Large Middle Kingdom granary buildings (and the archaeology of administration). Zeitschrift ffir iigyptische Sprache und Altertumskunde 113: 120-136. Loprieno, A. (1988). Topos und Mimesis, A.gyptologischeAbhandlungen 48, Otto Harrasowitz, Wiesbaden. MOiler, I. (1979). Der Verwaltung in der nubischen Provinz in Neuen Reich, Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Berlin.

Book Review

79

O'Connor, D. (1993). Anc&nt Nubia. Egypt's Rival in Africa, The University Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology, Philadelphia. S~ive-S6derbergh, "E (1987). Temples and Tombs of Ancient Nubia. The International Rescue Campaign at Abu Simbel, Philae and Other Sites, Thames and Hudson, London. S~ive-S6derbergh, T. (ed.) (1989). Middle Nubian Sites, Scandinavian Joint Expedition to Sudanese Nubia, Uddevalla, Vol. 4, Parts 1-2. S~ive-S6derbergh, T (1992-1993). A case study of pharaonic imperialism. The Egyptian domination of the Debeira District in Lower Nubia during the 18th Dynasty. Orientalia Suecana XLI-XLII: 254-272. S~ive-S6derbergh, T., and Troy, L. (1991). New Kdngdom Pharaonic Sites and Finds, Scandinavian Joint Expedition to Sudanese Nubia, Uppsala, Vol. 5, 2-3, Parts 2-3. Sinclair, E J. J., and Troy, L. (1991). Counting gifts to the dead: A holistic approach to the burial customs of Lower Nubia using correspondence analysis. In Davies, W. V. (ed.), Egypt and Africa. Nubia from Prehistory to Islam, British Museum, London, pp. 166-185. Smith, S. T. (1991a). Askut and the role of the Second Cataract forts. Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt 28: 107-132. Smith, S. T (1991b). A model for Egyptian imperialism in Nubia. GOttinger Miszellen 122, Gfttingen, pp. 77-102. Wegner, J. (1995). Regional control in Middle Kingdom Lower Nubia: The function and history of the site Areika. Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt 32: 127-160. L a n a Troy Department o f Egyptology Uppsala University Uppsala, Sweden