Women, Gender and Identity in Third Intermediate Period Egypt

The Theban Case Study

Jean Li

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2017
• Print ISBN: 9781138125421
• eBook ISBN: 9781317298298
• Topic: Social Sciences
• Subtopic: Archaeology
• Index: Social Sciences

Women, Gender and Identity in Third Intermediate Period Egypt clarifies the role of women in Egyptian society during the first millennium BCE, allowing for more nuanced discussions of women in the Third Intermediate Period. It is an intensive study of a corpus that is both geographically and temporally localized around the city of Thebes, which was the cultural and religious centre of Egypt during this period and home to a major national necropolis. Unlike past studies which have relied heavily on literary evidence, Li presents a refreshing material culture-based analysis of identity construction in elite female burial practices. This close examination of the archaeology of women's burial presents an opportunity to investigate the social, professional and individual identities of women beyond the normative portrayals of the subordinate wife, mother and daughter.

Taking a methodological and material culture-based approach which adds new dimensions to scholarly and popular understandings of ancient Egyptian women, this fascinating and important study will aid scholars of Egyptian history and archaeology, and anyone with an interest in women and gender in the ancient world.

1
Tradition, innovation and a search for Egyptian identity in the Third Intermediate Period

Introduction

Poetically termed the “Twilight” of Egypt, the first millennium BCE is often viewed as a time of general decline (Mysliwiec 2000) of Egyptian culture. During these centuries, the political control of Egypt was initially divided between the king in the north and the High Priest of Amen controlling the south in Dynasty 21. The political fragmentation and internal weakness allowed non-Egyptians to repeatedly take control of Egypt. Beginning with Dynasty 22, the Libyan population that had already entered Egypt during the New Kingdom became a powerful presence and men of Libyan descent ascended to the throne of Egypt. By mid-eighth century BCE, the Nubian Dynasty 25 gained control of Egypt and removed the Libyans from power. Despite renewed campaigns in the Levant by the kings of Dynasties 22 and 25, Egypt lost cultural prestige in the ancient Near East and Mediterranean. Subsequently, Egypt was occupied by the Assyrians, Persians and ruled over by the Ptolemaic dynasty until the first century when it became a Roman province and ceased to exist as an independent state. Implicit in scholarship is the idea that the “beginning of the end” of Egyptian culture had its roots in the Third Intermediate Period.¹

In general Dynasties 21–25 constitute the Third Intermediate Period (1069–664 BCE), which concludes with the rise to power of the Saite Dynasty 26, which in turn inaugurated the Late Period. Chronological debates about periodization complicate discussions of the Third Intermediate Period. While most scholars (Kitchen 1986; Shaw 2000) place Dynasty 21 within the framework of the Third Intermediate Period, Bierbrier (1975) applied the term “Late New Kingdom” to the entire period from ca. 1300–664 BCE to indicate cultural continuities from the Ramesside Period. Jansen-Winkeln (2001, 2006) proposes the recognition of Dynasty 21 as part of the Libyan period and Dodson (2001, 388) suggests marking Dynasty 25 as the beginning of the Late Period. Although Fazzini (1988, 1) emphasizes the continuities between the Libyan Period and the Kushite Period.

While this periodization between the Third Intermediate Period and Late Period is based on changes in political power, in terms of culture, the transition is not so clear. Much of the cultural aspects of Dynasty 21 continued into the Libyan Period (Dynasties 22 and 23) (Leahy 1990; Jansen-Winkeln 1994), while the more expansionist socio-political policies of Dynasty 25 resemble those of Dynasty 26. Because of the continued debates over chronology and periodization (Černý 1946, Baer 1973, Niwinski 1979, Aston 1989, Dodson 2000, Jansen-Winkeln 2006), I will be primarily using the broad dates of the eighth–sixth centuries in this study.

A brief historical summary is useful to set the scene. The end of the New Kingdom was ushered in by a civil war between Panehsy, the viceroy of Kush and the Ramesses XI, King of Egypt. In the following era, the so-called Renaissance era, Ramesses XI had nominal control over what in reality was already a fragmented state. Herihor, the High Priest of Amen, controlled the south and also briefly usurped royal prerogatives (Kees 1964, 7; Kitchen 1986, 5), while the north was governed by Smendes. Upon the death of Ramesses XI, Smendes assumed the kingship of Egypt and inaugurated Dynasty 21, which marks the beginning of the Third Intermediate Period. Throughout Dynasty 21, the status quo of fragmentation was maintained and the High Priests of Amen continued to rule the south from Thebes (Kitchen 1986, 246–253).

The political fragmentation is reflected in profound changes in the ideology of rule. In the course of Dynasty 21, Egypt became a theocracy ruled by the god Amen who appointed kings as temporary holders of the royal office (Taylor 2000, 346). Kingship was devalued; the king transformed from a penultimate ruler to a subordinate of the god Amen, opening the door for the possibility of other rivals for divine favor and power. Throughout the Third Intermediate Period, High Priests of Amen, such as Pinodjem I, increasingly usurped royal prerogatives including writing their names in cartouches (Kitchen 1986, 257–259) and presenting Maat in ritual scenes (Teeter 1997, 13). Thebes effectively became the capital of an autonomous theocratic state under the control of the High Priests of Amen, who also held the post of commander of the army (Kitchen 1986, 257).

The loss of absolute power of kingship allowed the throne to fall into foreign hands at the end of Dynasty 21. Psuesennes II, the last king of Dynasty 21, married his daughter Maatkare to Osorkon, the son of Sheshonq I, the first king of the ethnically Libyan Dynasty 22 (Kitchen 1986, 286; Taylor 2000, 335). From this point on, Egypt entered the Libyan Period, here defined as Dynasties 22–24. The political fragmentation of Egypt continued, and by the end of the period, all three dynasties ruled over different regions of Egypt and two kings, a prince regent, four Great Chiefs of the Ma and a Prince of the West laid claim to the Delta (Taylor 2000, 337). Reconstructions of the end of Libyan Dynasty 22 involve the creation of a collateral Dynasty 23 by the rulers of Dynasty 22. Kitchen (1986, 336) suggested that Dynasty 23 was based at Leontopolis in the Delta. More recently, scholars (Aston 1989, 139–153; Aston & Taylor 1990, 131–154; Leahy 1990, 184–186) have challenged not only the geographical location of the power base of Dynasty 23, suggesting Thebes as an alternative, but also the composition of the dynasty by placing King Takeloth II in Dynasty 23 rather than Dynasty 22 (Ritner 2009a, 1). Egypt’s state of political fragmentation has resulted in the characterization of this period as the “Libyan Anarchy” (Ritner 2009a, 1).

During this politically chaotic period, Egypt’s closest neighbours to the south, the Nubians, known as the Kushites, took advantage of Egypt’s instability. In the eighth century, Kushite incursions into Egypt under Kashta began the end of the Libyan hegemony. There is no evidence of Nubian political presence in Egypt before the eighth century (Török 1997, 85). A stelae fragment attributed to Kashta found at Elephantine points to Nubian influence in the south before 750 BCE (Török 1997, 83). The Victory Stela of Piye found at Gebel Barkal (Grimal 1981; Taylor 2000, 353) documents the conquest of Egypt by Piye in the mid-eighth century. It appears, however, that after his successful military campaign to Lower Egypt, Piye returned to Nubia, leaving the political organization of Egypt virtually unchanged. It was not until the end of the eighth century that Kushite control of Egypt was consolidated by Piye’s successors. Shabako established Memphis as his royal residence and, from this point on, the Kushite kings ruled both Egypt and Nubia from this traditional capital of Egypt (Török 1997, 167).

During Dynasty 25, the Kushite kings undertook a policy restoring Egypt’s power and prestige at home and abroad. Dynasty 25 initiated trade with and military campaigns into the Levant as well as political machinations against the dominant power of Assyria. These political machinations backfired, however, and led first to Assyrian incursions into Egypt by Esarhaddon in 674 BCE, and subsequently, the sacking of Thebes by Ashurbanipal in 667 BCE and annexing of Egypt to the Assyrian empire (Taylor 2000, 358–359).

Returning to Assyria to deal with domestic political issues, the Assyrians installed a family from Sais in the Delta as governors of Egypt. In the midst of the collapse of the Assyrian empire, Psamtek, the Saite governor, declared Egyptian independence and became King Psamtek I. Within his first decade of rule Psamtek I achieved reunification and started Egypt on the road to the Saite renaissance, a revival of traditional Egyptian culture (Lloyd 2000, 371–372).

The Saite Period (Dynasty 26) marked the beginning of the Late Period (ca. 664–332 BCE). Under Dynasty 26, Egypt underwent a cultural renaissance in religion, arts and literature. The reestablishment of Egyptian trade with the eastern Mediterranean revived the economy. Naukratis was established as a trade centre as early as the reign of Psamtek I. By 570 BCE, Naukratis became the customs depot through which all Greek trade was by law required to flow. Agricultural production also assisted in reviving the economy of Egypt (Lloyd 2000, 374–375). This period of cultural strength and political unification ended with the Persian Empire’s conquest of Egypt in 525 BCE.

The rapid political fluctuations transformed the socio-cultural composition of Egypt during the eighth–sixth centuries BCE, and created an era whose cultural products were characterized by a tension between tradition and innovation. The dynamic interplay of innovation within traditional practices demonstrates a marked search for identity distinction, and an understanding of what it meant to be Egyptian. The increased presence of women, exemplified by the elevation in importance of the God’s Wife of Amen institution, in these cultural aspects also reflects the tension between tradition and innovation.

I Tradition and innovation

Dynasty 26’s cultural renaissance was rooted in cultural changes in the Third Intermediate Period. Among the most evident change is the appearance of a new script, demotic, and changes in literary genres. Demotic was a cursive script that developed from late New Kingdom hieratic (Lichtheim 1980, 8). In Upper Egypt, the hieratic script in the textual evidence became more and more cursive and developed into “abnormal hieratic.” The earliest datable examples of abnormal hieratic are administrative documents from Dynasties 21 or 22. The use of abnormal hieratic in Upper Egypt continued into Dynasties 25 and 26, at which time the script was used in private legal deeds (Vleeming 1981, 35ff). In Lower Egypt the first appearance of demotic is dated to the reign of Psamtek I (P. Rylands 1 & 2 and Stela Louvre C101) (Depauw 1997, 22). It was also during the reign of Psamtek I that demotic began to replace abnormal hieratic in Thebes. By the reign of Amasis at the end of Dynasty 26, demotic had become the official script of the administration and the legal system (Depauw 1997, 22–23) and assumed the position of the vernacular.

Alongside new scripts, Egyptian language usage became eclectic (der Manuelian 1994). Monumental inscriptions were composed in classical Middle Egyptian, although Late Egyptian phrasing was often included, perhaps unwittingly (Lichtheim 1980, 4). The autobiographical inscriptions of this period demonstrate a traditional piety yet at the same time there was more concern about a successful afterlife. Success and happiness were apparently dependent on the gods, but piety demanded that one enjoyed life (Lichtheim 1980, 5). In other genres, traditional New Kingdom staples such as Instructions and Tales continued to be composed but with important innovations. The Tales were lengthier and more complex than before and introduced motifs derived from other cultures (Tait 1992, 304). At the same time, there was a strong passion for the past, for example, as seen in the Setne tales that featured known historical figures such as Prince Khaemwaset of the New Kingdom.

Late Period demotic instructional literature, or wisdom texts, also differed from historical antecedents. Instructions from earlier periods usually presented moral maxims through vignettes of daily life built up through sequences of interconnecting sentences. Demotic instructions, however, were pithy and consisted of single, self-contained sentences written in plain prose, with each sentence occupying one line of the page, giving each composition a new miscellaneous character (Lichtheim 1980, 9).

Subject matter remained traditional, especially ideas applied to the proper behaviours of women (Dieleman 1998). When discussing women, the wisdom texts continued to focus on the objectification of women and distrust of women’s sexuality and in turn their potential economic impact due to their sexualized nature (Dieleman 1998, 7). The concern for power and the sexual power of women to impact the well-being of men, both emotionally and financially, has been a mainstay of Egyptian wisdom literature since the Old Kingdom. Women were given two roles, the good mother and the potentially destructive temptress. Overall, the textual evidence of the period reveals simultaneous adherence to tradition and creative innovation.

The restrictive roles of women changed, however, in the eighth–sixth centuries BCE. While still retaining the traditional titles and offices such as musicians and singers, the duties of elite women expanded exponentially. The archaeological and art historical records of this period demonstrate a new prominence of women in religious and civic life, revealing the roles women played in the innovations seen in all aspects of Egyptian culture, especially in kingship, religion, art and burial practices.

Kingship

In the eighth–sixth centuries elite women played a significant role in the government of Egypt. A succession of women holding the office of God’s Wife of Amen effectively became rulers of Thebes, taking on royal prerogatives.² As mentioned above, after the fall of the New Kingdom, the power and ideology of kingship degraded steadily. This meant that elites such as the High Priests of Amen at Thebes, who were perceived as having the favor of Amen, could and did assume the duties and prerogatives traditionally associated with kingship. Even the attempts by the early kings of Dynasty 22 to reassert the power of kingship and unify Egypt proved unsuccessful in curtailing the influence of the High Priests of Amen at Thebes.

Perhaps in an effort to combat a growing sentiment of secessionism, as well as to curtail the influence of the High Priests of Amen, Osorkon III of Dynasty 23 installed his daughter Shepenwepet I at Thebes as the God’s Wife of Amen (Kitchen 1986, 317), an office held by royal women of the New Kingdom. In the New Kingdom the title of God’s Wife of Amen appeared to have been merely one of the many titles held by royal women and seemed to have had few actual duties or political import (Robins 1993, 149–153). Beginning in the eighth century, however, the God’s Wife of Amen institution served to fulfill a political function as a royal presence in Thebes. It was so successful that it began to overshadow that of the High Priests of Amen and the God’s Wives of Amen took over the prerogatives of kingship (Kees 1964, 156–162). The status of God’s Wives of Amen rose steadily until, in Dynasty 25, these women appeared with greater prominence than the king on private and public monuments of Thebes. The status of these women was maintained to the end of the Saite Period.

As the prominence of their office rose, the God’s Wives of Amen took on the trappings of kingship outright. In an innovative manipulation of tradition, the God’s Wives of Amen used titulary that imitated the titulary of the Egyptian king (Graefe 1981, 111), complete with epithets and names written inside cartouches (Robins 1993, 156). Shepenwepet I was the first to adopt royal titulary. Her titulary consisted of the throne name “United with the heart of Amen” and the Horus name of “Horus who produces herself like Khepri”, which drew direct associations with the kingship traditionally practiced by the king as divine ruler prior to the subordination under the theocracy of Amen (Török 1997, 148). God’s Wives of Amen after Shepenwepet I continued the practice of adopting royal titulary but with throne names that referenced the goddess Mut (Zeissl 1955, 64), which may have stressed their associations with the role feminine powers played in kingship and their position in the government.

In the tombs of the high officials of Thebes located in the Asasif, the car-touches of the contemporary God’s Wife of Amen appeared to have been carved on the walls and filled before those of the kings. For example, on the lintel of the entryway to the sunken court of Ankh-Hor’s tomb (TT 414), the cartouches were first filled with Nitocris’ name. The second cartouche, presumably meant for the name of Psamtek I, was left unfilled when construction ceased on the as yet uncompleted tomb. This practice by governmental officials suggests that the adoptions of royal titulary by the God’s Wives of Amen were not merely affectations of puppet rulers but reflected their tangible religious and political influence in Thebes.

In iconography, the God’s Wives of Amen are depicted on the same scale as the gods, and/or purified, crowned and embraced by gods (Fazzini 1988, 20–21) – all of which were prerogatives traditionally reserved for the king. Among the most significant iconographic evidence of the assumption of kingly status by the God’s Wives of Amen are the scenes of the presentation of Maat to the gods by these women. Maat, as the universal tenet of truth and order, is the principle by and with which the king governed Egypt to ensure the continuity of the universe. Dating to the New Kingdom, the presentation of Maat by the king was an expression of the legitimacy of the king’s rule. These presentation scenes were placed in public areas of temples. Donors of Maat were almost universally depicted as kings until the eighth–sixth centuries when the God’s Wives of Amen depicted themselves in this traditional mode (Teeter 1997, 82–89).

In Dynasty 25 the God’s Wife of Amen, Shepenwepet II, assumed yet another royal prerogative: the celebration of the sed-festival (Ayad 2009, 112). Already established in the Early Dynastic Period, the sed-festival was the traditional jubilee of kings. Designed to renew and rejuvenate the king’s power and right to rule, the sed-festival was explicitly linked to kingship (Shaw & Nicholson 1995, 256). Depictions of Shepenwepet II celebrating her sed-festival are found on blocks that originally comprised the chapel of “Osiris-who-perpetually-gives-life” at Karnak. Although the blocks from the Chapel of “Osiris-who-perpetually-gives-life” depict Shepenwepet celebrating the sed- festival, there is evidence that Amenirdis I, Shepenwepet II’s predecessor, may have begun this practice. In relief scenes on the façade of Amenirdis’ I mortuary chapel at Medinet Habu and the chapel of “Osiris-ruler-of-eternity” at Karnak, she is depicted as receiving symbols of the sed-festival from the goddess Mut (Ayad 2009, 110–114).

The increase in power of the traditionally politically insignificant office of the God’s Wife of Amen is an example of 1) the innovations in traditional practices of the eighth–sixth centuries, and 2) the increased participation of women in these innovations. Not only were these women important agents for imposing political order, they effectively assumed the duties and privileges of kingship. The God’s Wives of Amen took on the traditional titles of kingship but also modified them to indicate their own status and power. The power held by the God’s Wives of Amen was simultaneously an indi...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Title
• Copyright
• Dedication
• Contents
• List of figures
• List of tables
• Introduction
• 1 Tradition, innovation and a search for Egyptian identity in the Third Intermediate Period
• 2 Rank, status and axes of identity
• 3 Materiality, memory and the mortuary landscape of Thebes
• 4 The symbolic economy of mortuary practices
• Conclusion: Women, gender and status in Thebes of the eighth–sixth centuries BCE
• Bibliography
• Index