Egyptian history, as seen by Egyptologists, is traditionally categorized into major periods based on the country’s political landscape. They talk about ‘Kingdoms’ as times of political harmony with strong, centralized governments, alternating with ‘Intermediate Periods.’ These Intermediate Periods are marked by power struggles among local rulers. The First Intermediate Period began after the reign of the 8th Dynasty pharaohs in Memphis. Following this, rulers from Herakleopolis Magna, in northern Middle Egypt, took control. These rulers were later recorded as both the 9th and 10th Dynasties in Manetho’s history, due to a misinterpretation of the original king-list (more on this in Chapter I, discussing Manetho’s Aegyptiaca).
The move of the royal seat from Memphis to Herakleopolis was a significant event for the ancient Egyptians. This is indicated by the 19th-Dynasty Turin Canon, which sums up earlier Egyptian history right after the 8th Dynasty. Moreover, the temple of Seti I at Abydos doesn’t list any kings for the period between the 8th Dynasty and the start of the Middle Kingdom.
Interestingly, the Herakleopolitan rulers never gained control over southern Upper Egypt. Here, after prolonged conflicts, a Theban family rose to prominence, adopting royal titles. They would later be recognized as the 11th Dynasty in the annals of Egyptian kingship. This led to two rival states within Egypt. The era of conflict ended when Nebhepetra Mentuhotep II, a Theban king, defeated his Herakleopolitan rival and unified Egypt, marking the start of the Middle Kingdom. This chapter delves into the history from the end of the 8th Dynasty up to the reign of Nebhepetra Mentuhotep II.
Highlights
The First Intermediate Period of Ancient Egypt, a phase between the Old Kingdom and the Middle Kingdom, is characterized by several key aspects:
- Time Frame: Approximately 2181-2055 BC, spanning the 7th to the 11th Dynasties.
- Political Fragmentation: Marked by the collapse of the centralized power of the Old Kingdom, resulting in regional rulers gaining power.
- Economic Decline and Social Strife: This period witnessed economic difficulties and social unrest, often attributed to low Nile floods and famine.
- Artistic and Cultural Changes: Art and architecture saw a departure from the grandeur of the Old Kingdom, with a focus on smaller, more personal works.
- Decentralization of Power: Power shifted from the pharaohs to local nomarchs (regional governors), leading to fragmented and often competing polities.
- Religious Evolution: There was a diversification of religious practices and beliefs, moving away from the strict royal-centered religion of the Old Kingdom.
- Literary Development: This period saw the development of significant literary works, reflecting the tumultuous social and political environment.
- End of the Period: The period concluded with the reunification of Egypt under the Middle Kingdom, starting with the 11th Dynasty’s Mentuhotep II.
Chronological Problems
Our understanding of the First Intermediate Period in ancient Egypt, particularly its latter half, is quite robust. This era, lasting around 90 to 110 years, was marked by a rivalry between the Herakleopolitans and Thebans. Yet, the initial phase, when the Herakleopolitans dominated before the rise of the 11th Dynasty, remains somewhat murky. This obscurity stems from a lack of detailed records. Key data, like the names and reign durations of the Herakleopolitan rulers, are missing from the Turin Canon. Additionally, archaeological work in the Herakleopolitan heartlands of northern Middle Egypt and the Delta is not comprehensive.
At one point, due to the scant information on the Herakleopolitans, some scholars suggested that they might not have ruled independently before the 11th Dynasty. However, this theory doesn’t hold up because certain significant figures and events are distinctly placed between the 8th and 11th Dynasties.
In-depth studies of administrative and priestly role successions in Upper Egypt’s towns, along with archaeological findings, hint that the time between the 8th and 11th Dynasties spanned three to four generations. Supporting this is Manetho’s account of the 10th Dynasty’s duration, aligning with an estimate of nearly two centuries for the entire First Intermediate Period. This timeframe fits well with both prosopographical (study of individuals and family relationships) and archaeological evidence.
The Nature of the First Intermediate Period
The First Intermediate Period in ancient Egypt wasn’t just a time of political upheaval and uncertainty about the royal succession. It was also a critical era marked by crisis and innovation, deeply influencing Egyptian society and culture. This becomes clear when we look at the evidence left by monuments. The Old Kingdom is well-known for its grand mortuary complexes in Memphis, reflecting the Egyptian state’s grandeur. These impressive constructions ceased after the reign of Pepy II, only to resume with Mentuhotep II’s mortuary temple at Deir el-Bahri in Thebes.
Some historians extend the First Intermediate Period’s timeline to include the last decades of the Memphite kings post-Pepy II. While this stretches traditional dynastic divisions, it’s not without merit. Large-scale building projects are a testament to the functionality of core state institutions. The monumental hiatus during this period implies a breakdown in both the political structure and cultural norms.
However, archaeological and epigraphic records from this period also reveal a vibrant culture among the lower social classes and significant developments in Upper Egypt’s provincial towns. The First Intermediate Period wasn’t a complete collapse of Egyptian society and culture; rather, it was a period of significant, albeit temporary, shifts in the focal points of activity and energy.
To fully grasp the crisis of the pharaonic state and the journey towards re-establishing a unified political system, it’s essential to explore how political institutions were embedded within society. Egyptian history often emphasizes the royal residence, kings, and court culture. But to understand the First Intermediate Period, the focus should shift to provincial towns and the everyday people, who are the fundamental building blocks of society.
The Capital and the Provinces
The Egyptian pharaonic state was initially a centralized entity with its core institutions – the king, court, and social elite – anchored in the capital. Here, the cradle of administrative expertise and high culture thrived, alongside the central hubs of state religion and royal cults. The country was managed by royal envoys who oversaw vast sections of the Nile Valley. Despite their provincial duties, these administrators maintained a strong bond with the capital’s elite society. Up until the 5th Dynasty, the grandeur of the Old Kingdom’s culture and achievements remained predominantly in the Memphite area, highlighting a stark divide between the rulers and the rest of the country.
However, during the 5th Dynasty, and firmly by the end of the 6th, a significant shift occurred. Provincial administrators started to be assigned to individual nomes (districts) and settled there permanently. Often, these positions became hereditary within families. Initially intended to enhance administrative efficiency, this change unexpectedly altered the socio-economic landscape. Previously, economic resources were pooled at the royal residence and distributed by the central administration. Now, provincial nobles began to directly access and control local resources, creating a distinction between the central authority and the provinces within the once uniform official class.
The provincial aristocracy strived to emulate the royal court’s lifestyle, as seen in the monumental tombs emerging in regional centers. These tombs, decorated with court culture motifs, texts, and rituals, symbolized the cultural flow from the center to the periphery. The king supported this by providing specialist craftsmen, trained ritualists, and luxurious goods, aiming to reinforce loyalty bonds. However, these tombs were just the surface. The provincial elites and their staffs became distinct political entities, fostering professional specialists and retaining a larger share of local production for provincial use, reducing the royal court’s exploitation. This led to a socio-economic transformation in rural Egypt, making it economically richer and culturally more dynamic.
The Provincial Milieu
The transformation in provincial culture and economy during ancient Egypt’s 6th Dynasty and the First Intermediate Period had a profound impact on society. This is evident in the significant changes observed in the archaeological record, especially in the funerary culture. Unfortunately, due to a lack of excavated settlements from this era, we rely heavily on cemetery data to understand these changes.
A stark contrast is visible when comparing the early Old Kingdom with the late Old Kingdom and the First Intermediate Period. The number of graves significantly increased, indicating not just demographic growth but also more efficient use of agricultural resources at a local level. Moreover, in the later periods, ordinary tombs became larger and contained richer grave goods. This change made these tombs easier to identify, date, and more appealing to excavators. Previously, provincial cemeteries from the early part of the Old Kingdom were often overlooked due to a perceived lack of excavation rewards.
The rise in grave numbers and the appearance of decorated tombs in Upper Egypt reflect a shift in social consumption patterns. Interestingly, many of the high-value items found in these early First Intermediate Period graves, such as cosmetic stone vessels, gemstone ornaments, and even gold, were not just funerary artifacts but everyday items. This suggests that the provinces experienced favorable economic conditions during the late Old Kingdom and the First Intermediate Period.
The distribution of these cemeteries also offers clues about settlement patterns of the time. The landscape was peppered with villages, and the provincial capitals were identifiable by rock tombs or monumental mastaba-tombs of the aristocracy, alongside extensive cemeteries for the ordinary townspeople. While urban and village tombs were similar in design, urban tombs tended to be larger and better equipped, indicating an urbanized structure that dominated not only politically and socially but also demographically and economically.
Changes in Styles and Shapes as Signs of Cultural and Social Development
The end of the Old Kingdom in Egypt marked a significant shift in material culture, especially evident during the First Intermediate Period, where almost every artifact underwent a transformation. Let’s explore some key aspects of this change.
Pottery, a crucial artifact for archaeologists, saw a dramatic evolution. Throughout the Early Dynastic Period and the Old Kingdom, pottery was dominated by ovoid shapes, with the widest point typically above the middle. However, during the First Intermediate Period, this style was swiftly replaced by baglike or droplike shapes. This change was likely driven by the desire to maximize the efficiency of the potter’s wheel, introduced to Egyptian workshops in the 5th Dynasty. While ovoid containers required considerable manual shaping after being thrown on the wheel, bag-shaped vessels reduced this labor significantly. Interestingly, it took about 200 years after the introduction of the potter’s wheel for these traditional models to be replaced by more efficient production methods.
In provincial burials, a range of new object classes emerged. Unlike in the Old Kingdom, where grave goods from poorer burials were everyday items, the First Intermediate Period saw objects made exclusively for funerary purposes. Examples include crudely made wooden figures, boats, workshop scenes, and coloured masks made from gypsum and linen (cartonnage) for mummified bodies. Simple slab stelae also became common for marking offering places in tombs.
These developments suggest that provincial towns had both the demand and the resources to support craftsmanship in ‘non-functional’ products. More importantly, these new object types originated from Old Kingdom elite culture. For instance, model funerary figures performing daily tasks mirrored scenes from Old Kingdom mastaba-tomb decorations. This indicates a breakdown in the barriers that previously hindered cultural exchange between different social strata.
While this cultural democratization led to a wider dissemination of elite cultural traditions, it also resulted in a noticeable decline in artistic quality. Misinterpretations of iconographic patterns and inscriptions were common, and although the art of this period showed remarkable originality and creativity, many pieces were poorly made. Historians often view this as a sign of cultural decline. However, labeling this period as solely a time of decay overlooks two significant processes: the nationwide assimilation of cultural models from the Old Kingdom court culture and the rise of mass consumption.
Religious Ideas
During the First Intermediate Period and the Middle Kingdom in ancient Egypt, significant changes in material culture reflected developments in religious beliefs and ritual practices. A prime example is the introduction of mummy masks. However, the most compelling evidence of evolving belief systems in provincial society is found in the Coffin Texts. These were magical and liturgical spells inscribed primarily on wooden coffins. Although most Coffin Texts date to the Middle Kingdom, some instances indicate their emergence in the First Intermediate Period. The origins of these texts, both in terms of time and place, remain debated. The Old Kingdom’s royal Pyramid Texts, sometimes inscribed alongside Coffin Texts, provided a foundation, but the Coffin Texts introduced new materials and concepts.
Coffin Texts from the First Intermediate Period are scarce, and inscribed coffins were a privilege of the upper echelons of provincial society. However, connections between the Coffin Texts’ ideas and archaeological findings suggest that these concepts were ancient and popular. This supports the theory that the provincial milieu of the First Intermediate Period significantly influenced the Coffin Texts’ development and content.
One series of Coffin Text spells aimed to reunite a person’s family in the afterlife, extending beyond immediate relatives to include servants, followers, and friends. This desire is reflected in the evolution of tomb architecture from the 6th Dynasty onward. Originally intended for single burials, Egyptian tombs eventually expanded into multi-chambered mastabas for whole or extended families. Tomb architecture also indicated social ranking, with some burial chambers and shafts being larger or deeper, allowing for more elaborate burials. This trend of multiple, successive burials within family chambers highlights the prominence of both family size and internal hierarchy.
Therefore, the burial customs of the First Intermediate Period underscore the paramount importance of familial relationships in social organization. Religious beliefs mirrored the pivotal role of extended families as fundamental societal units. The Coffin Texts not only highlighted the authority of the family head but also his role in protecting the family from external pressures. Thus, the family served as a critical intermediary between higher social and political structures. This importance of the extended family is also evident in legal texts from the 6th to 8th Dynasties, underscoring its recognition as a vital social institution.
Regional Style and Identity
The First Intermediate Period in Egypt is particularly fascinating for its regional stylistic variations in archaeology. While the distinction in pottery styles between northern and southern Egypt is quite evident, the scenario gets more complex when we consider the variations within Upper Egypt or in different types of artifacts. Interestingly, not all object types exhibited the same degree of regional variation. This suggests that while there were diverse local styles, Egyptian material culture remained a cohesive whole rather than fragmenting into isolated regional variants.
One area where regional variation stands out is in tomb architecture. During the Old Kingdom, mastaba tombs in Upper Egypt followed a uniform design and evolutionary path. However, in the 6th Dynasty and the First Intermediate Period, unique local styles of tomb construction emerged. For instance, in Thebes, we find sqỹ tombs, and at Dendera, there are mastaba tombs with niched facades and long, sloping corridors leading to underground chambers.
These local architectural styles diverge so significantly from the principal styles of earlier periods that they can’t merely be attributed to the evolution of local workshop traditions. Rather, it seems these innovations were a deliberate effort by local elites to showcase their regional identities. This move reflects a shift from a uniform cultural expression to a more regionally diverse one, where local traditions and identities gained prominence in the architectural landscape.
Society and Government
This brief exploration of the archaeological evidence reveals that the late Old Kingdom and the First Intermediate Period were times of significant change in Egypt’s provinces. Although our current understanding of many archaeological phenomena, and the forces behind them, is still developing, it’s clear that a combination of internal dynamics and the influence of Old Kingdom provincial politics led to increased cultural, economic, and social complexity across Egypt.
These changes had a notable impact on the political system, particularly heightening tensions between the central government and the provinces. The provincial nobility, positioned between the royal court and local groups, gained new opportunities for independent action while also having to balance competing interests. This situation prompts a closer look at how the government’s organization and ideology adapted to the country’s changing social and cultural landscape. In the Old Kingdom, provincial administration typically involved a dual structure: ‘Overseers of priests’ managed local cults, which were key to economic administration, while ‘great overlords of the nome’ (or ‘nomarchs’) held the top positions.
However, it’s crucial to understand that the end of the Old Kingdom wasn’t solely due to the growing influence of nomarch families. In fact, the First Intermediate Period saw the emergence of new lines of local magnates. Despite their significant role in the country’s political evolution, the Old Kingdom aristocracy remained largely dependent on their ties to the Crown. By examining these shifts, we gain valuable insights into the interplay between social conditions and political developments during the First Intermediate Period, painting a picture of an era marked by evolving power dynamics and societal structures.
The Case of Ankhtifi: Crisis, Care, and Power
Ankhtifi, a prominent nomarch in Upper Egypt during the Herakleopolitan period of the First Intermediate Period, stands out as a quintessential example of the new breed of local rulers of this era. His autobiographical inscription in his rock tomb near el-Mo’alla, south of Thebes, is a remarkable historical document. As ‘great overlord of the nomes of Edfu and Hierakonpolis’ and ‘overseer of priests’, Ankhtifi held pivotal roles in both religious and secular governance, typical of independent local rulers of this time.
Ankhtifi’s political actions, including his efforts to stabilize Edfu and his military campaign against Thebes, reveal the smaller scale and intricacies of politics during this period. Despite his lack of long-term success or successors, Ankhtifi’s inscription exudes confidence and self-praise:
“I was the beginning and the end of mankind, unparalleled in the past and future. I achieved feats beyond my ancestors, and future generations will not match me. I fed the hungry, clothed the naked, and provided for the needy. My efforts reached from Lower Nubia to the Abydene nome, preventing starvation in my nome while others suffered. I was a protector for Hefat and Hor-mer, ensuring no one from my nome sought aid elsewhere. I am the unparalleled hero.”
Ankhtifi’s claims of mitigating famine and economic hardship reflect a common theme among local magnates of the era. Such accounts, portraying themselves as saviors during widespread starvation, have significantly influenced modern perceptions of the period, often painting it as defined by famines and economic crises. Some even link these crises to climatic changes affecting the Nile floods, contributing to the Old Kingdom’s collapse.
However, the accuracy and specificity of these famine narratives to the First Intermediate Period warrant careful examination. There’s a lack of independent evidence confirming significant climatic changes during this period. It appears that the transition to drier conditions and adaptation to lower Nile floods began earlier, during the Old Kingdom, without visibly impacting the pharaonic civilization’s progress. Recent findings from Elephantine even suggest that Egypt experienced slightly above-average flood levels during the First Intermediate Period. Thus, while these texts shed light on the period’s challenges, they should be contextualized within the broader environmental and historical framework of ancient Egypt.
Throughout Egyptian history, the prospect of famine due to irregular Nile floods was a constant concern. To fully appreciate the emphasis on this theme in the First Intermediate Period texts, it’s essential to view it against a broader literary backdrop.
The phrase Ankhtifi uses to start his account is a classic one, echoing the moral assertions often found in Old Kingdom officials’ autobiographies. During the First Intermediate Period, however, there was a significant expansion of this theme. The era’s prominent figures didn’t just offer protection and support to a select few, akin to a father’s role within his family. They took on a more expansive responsibility, extending their care to entire communities, whether it was their hometown or the nomes under their rule. This narrative underscores the perceived indispensability of rulers; without their guidance, people were portrayed as incapable of overcoming life’s challenges. This notion was closely tied to the ruler’s right to respect and authority. As Ankhtifi himself states, his wisdom and excellent planning made him a protector against harm, while those who opposed him faced retribution.
In this period, crises, particularly those involving famine and the provision of sustenance, became pivotal contexts for validating personal power and societal dependency. This likely explains why local magnates of the First Intermediate Period placed such strong emphasis on these themes. It wasn’t just about addressing a practical need; it was also a means of legitimizing their authority and demonstrating their indispensability in a society grappling with various challenges.
Competition and Armed Conflict
During the Old Kingdom in Egypt, local administrators had a duty to organize military service and lead their troops on both combative and peaceful missions. The recruitment of foreign mercenaries, like Nubians, into the Egyptian army started as early as the 6th Dynasty. By the First Intermediate Period, the military prowess and experience of local governors became pivotal in their quests for power. Ankhtifi, a prominent figure from this era, exemplifies this shift in military strategy and local governance.
Ankhtifi’s own words reflect his self-assured leadership and military acumen: “I was the problem-solver, commanding respect in war. I stood unmatched, the sole hero, speaking boldly when others were silenced by fear. My army kept the land peaceful, but their wrath could make Egypt tremble. My troops, both strong and loyal, struck fear in the hearts of our opponents in Thebes. No one dared face us, whether we sailed upstream or downstream.”
Ankhtifi’s dual role as a ruler of two nomes wasn’t unprecedented. Earlier, at the end of the 5th Dynasty, the office of ‘overseer of Upper Egypt’ was established to supervise regional administrators. Notable figures like Abihu, who governed multiple nomes during the early Herakleopolitan period, also exemplify this trend. However, Ankhtifi’s narrative of military dominance, stretching as far as Elephantine, showcases a new political reality.
What’s striking in Ankhtifi’s accounts is the absence of any mention of the king as a controlling authority, a stark departure from the Old Kingdom’s political framework where the king was the sole source of legitimate power. In this new era, local rulers like Ankhtifi operated independently, based on their personal power and ambitions. They had to defend their positions, compete with others, and were acutely aware of their achievements. Ankhtifi’s inscriptions are a testament to this newfound autonomy and self-recognition among local rulers, marking a significant shift in the political landscape of ancient Egypt.
Explore Ancient Egypt
Gods, Politics, and the Rhetoric of Power
Ankhtifi’s tomb inscriptions present a fascinating glimpse into the evolving political and cultural landscape of Egypt during the First Intermediate Period. Interestingly, the king is mentioned only once, in a context that underscores his sacred role as a mediator with nature rather than a political figure. This reflects a significant shift where deities like Horus, rather than the king, are seen as guiding political actions. For example, Ankhtifi credits Horus for his appointment to restore order in the nome of Edfu, showcasing a divine endorsement of his authority.
This trend isn’t unique to Ankhtifi’s inscriptions. Even the reunification of Egypt under Mentuhotep II was attributed to divine intervention by Montu, the god of Thebes. Local rulers often doubled as ‘overseers of priests’, intertwining their authority with religious institutions. Ankhtifi himself is depicted overseeing festivals of his local god, Hemen. Provincial temples, serving as administrative hubs and symbols of local loyalty, reinforced this blend of religious and political power.
The First Intermediate Period saw provincial cults symbolizing collective identities. Phrases like ‘beloved by his town and praised by his god’ or curses threatening divine and communal disdain for transgressors highlight this link between personal authority and local moral foundations.
Ankhtifi’s inscriptions are not just historically significant; they’re also literary masterpieces. Their brilliance lies in their originality and expressiveness, mirroring the artistic innovations of the period. Upper Egyptian artists of this era broke free from Old Kingdom conventions, adopting a more angular and expressive style. This creative liberation brought about new scenes in art, depicting soldiers, hunters, religious festivals, and even everyday activities, reflecting contemporary cultural and technological advances.
These changes suggest that the First Intermediate Period’s elite felt compelled to communicate new social developments. In a time when government couldn’t solely depend on the imposition of power, these narratives served to justify the necessity of governance and the benefits of strong rule. Ankhtifi’s texts, exemplifying these ideals, align closely with local social structures and provincial traditions, portraying this period not as one of decline, but as an era marked by significant creativity and adaptation to new social realities.
The ‘Theban Ascendancy’ and the Necropolis of el-Tarif
In the Old Kingdom, Thebes was a relatively minor provincial town. However, during the early Herakleopolitan period, it rose in prominence, evidenced by a succession of influential overseers of priests revealed through funerary stelae from el-Tarif’s extensive cemetery. A key figure in this ascendancy was a nomarch named Intef, who held dual roles as both ‘great overlord of the Theban nome’ and ‘overseer of priests’. Moreover, he also claimed titles extending his influence beyond Thebes, signifying recognition of his authority across a broader region.
Intef is likely the same ‘Intef the Great, born of Iku’ mentioned in contemporary inscriptions and honored by Senusret I in the Karnak temple. He is recognized as an ancestor of the Theban 11th Dynasty, indicating his significant legacy. His successor, Mentuhotep I, and Mentuhotep I’s son, Sehertawy Intef I, continued this lineage, though the latter’s tomb at el-Tarif remains the most tangible evidence of their reign.
In el-Tarif, a distinctive type of rock tomb, known as a saff tomb, became prevalent during the First Intermediate Period. These tombs featured a sunken court leading to a portico with a row of pillars, a narrow corridor, and a chapel containing the burial shaft. King Intef I constructed an enormous saff tomb, the Saff Dawaba, which stood out for its sheer scale and lack of painted walls, a departure from Old Kingdom royal funerary architecture. This Theban style of royal tomb, set amidst the main cemetery and surrounded by the local population’s tombs, underscored the Theban kings’ deep connection to their local society and heritage.
Intef I’s successors, Wahankh Intef II and Nakhtnebtepnefer Intef III, built similar saff tombs, maintaining this architectural tradition. The move by Mentuhotep II to Deir el-Bahri for his monumental building project might have been necessitated by the exhaustion of suitable construction space at el-Tarif. This sequence of Theban rulers and their architectural choices reflect a shift in royal priorities, focusing not just on their exalted status but also on their integration with and commitment to Theban society and traditions.
King Wahankh Intef II (2112-2063 BC)
The reign of Wahankh Intef II, lasting fifty years, marked a pivotal era in establishing the Theban monarchy during the 11th Dynasty. This period, rich in archaeological, epigraphic, and artistic findings, offers deep insights into the nature of Theban kingship.
Intef II embraced the traditional dual kingship, the nesu-bit, and the title ‘son of Ra’, affirming his divine lineage. However, he didn’t adopt the full royal protocol of the five ‘Great Names’, a significant aspect of the royal fivefold titulary. Instead, he used only his ‘birth name’, Intef, along with the ‘Horus name’ Wahankh, meaning ‘enduring of life’, and did not have a ‘throne name’ that typically included the sun-god Ra’s name. The scarcity of his representations makes it unclear whether he fully utilized all royal crowns and insignia, suggesting a recognition of his rule’s limitations.
Reflecting his roots among provincial magnates, Intef II’s biographical stele, located in his saff tomb at el-Tarif, commemorates his reign’s achievements, confirmed by his followers’ inscriptions. The last non-royal Theban nomarch before Intef II had already extended influence over much of southern Upper Egypt. However, Intef II initiated a critical northern expansion. He conquered the strategically vital nome of Abydos, a major administrative hub since the Old Kingdom, and pushed further into the 10th nome of Upper Egypt. This move signaled a clear opposition to the Herakleopolitan kings, setting the stage for intermittent warfare in the region between Abydos and Asyut for several decades. This expansion under Intef II was a defining moment in the consolidation and assertion of Theban power, reshaping the political landscape of Upper Egypt.
The King’s Men
During Intef II’s reign, several notable individuals served under his command, illustrating the centralized and controlled nature of his rule. One such figure was the military officer Djary, who played a key role in confronting the Herakleopolitan army in the Abydene nome and advancing into the 10th nome. Another was Hetepy from Elkab, who managed the administration of the three southernmost nomes. Additionally, Intef’s treasurer Tjetjy, known for his impressive stele now in the British Museum, was a significant figure in this era.
The biographical inscriptions of these men, while primarily serving to celebrate their own achievements, leave no doubt about their allegiance and recognition of Intef II’s supreme authority. For instance, Hetepy’s inscription highlights his close relationship with the king and the king’s appreciation of his service: “I was beloved of my lord and praised by the lord of this land; his majesty made this servant happy, acknowledging my successful fulfillment of his commands.”
A critical aspect of Intef II’s rule was the absence of ‘nomarchs’ in the territories he controlled. Unlike the loosely organized structure of semi-independent magnates seen at the end of the Old Kingdom, Intef II’s administration did not allow officials to become local rulers with their own domains. Instead, the state was organized as a tightly controlled system built on strong personal loyalty and centralized governance. This approach marked a significant departure from previous administrative models, reflecting a shift towards a more unified and directly controlled political structure under Theban rule.
Monuments and Art
Intef II, beyond his military achievements, is remembered for his significant contributions to religious architecture. His biographical inscription highlights his dedication to constructing temples for the gods. Notably, the earliest piece of royal construction at Karnak temple is attributed to him—a column of Wahankh Intef II. His impact on temple building is further evidenced at Elephantine, where excavations in the temple of the goddess Satet unveiled a continuous series of constructions dating back to the Early Dynastic Period. Unlike Old Kingdom rulers who only offered votive gifts to Satet, Intef II was the pioneer in erecting chapels for both Satet and Khnum and marked his work with inscriptions on their door frames, a practice his 11th Dynasty successors continued.
This pattern of enhancing temple sites wasn’t limited to Elephantine; it was widespread across Upper Egypt, with substantial royal building activities in provincial temples starting from the 11th Dynasty. Thus, Intef II’s reign initiated a new era of royal engagement and presence in sanctuaries across Egypt, a trend later expanded by Senusret I and subsequent kings.
The era of Intef II also saw the flourish of Theban 11th Dynasty art, marked by bold styles and finely crafted works featuring rounded modeling and a juxtaposition of detailed and plain surfaces. This artistic evolution mirrored the dynasty’s aspirations and desire for a fitting medium to express their identity.
By focusing on these developments in southern Upper Egypt, we can trace the rise of a political structure that paved the way for the Middle Kingdom. This evolution, crucial in Egyptian history, highlights the First Intermediate Period’s significance. However, it’s important to note that the Theban kingdom was just a small part of Egypt. The biographical narratives’ dramatic war episodes were likely localized and brief. For most people in most places, the First Intermediate Period was probably less eventful.
During this time, the Herakleopolitan kings, successors of the ancient Memphite monarchy, controlled most of Egypt. To fully understand the First Intermediate Period, we must equally consider the circumstances in the Herakleopolitan realm as well as in the south, ensuring a balanced perspective on this transformative era in Egyptian history.
The Herakleopolitan Kingdom
The Herakleopolitan Dynasty, as described by Manetho, remains largely enigmatic, with little known about its eighteen or nineteen kings who ruled Egypt for around 185 years. Most of their names and the sequence of their reigns are unknown. The only consistent piece of information is the dynasty’s founder, Khety, as contemporary sources often refer to the northern kingdom as the ‘house of Khety’. However, details about Khety’s social background and how he ascended to the throne are obscure.
There’s strong evidence supporting Manetho’s association of this dynasty with Herakleopolis Magna, likely the residence of these kings. An interesting note is that Merykara, one of the last Herakleopolitan rulers, was buried in a pyramid complex at Saqqara, aligning himself with the tradition of Memphite kingship. This connection is further emphasized by a Herakleopolitan king adopting the throne name of Neferkara Pepy II, reminiscent of the Old Kingdom’s rulers.
Despite their rule, the Herakleopolitan kings left behind no significant monuments, or none have been discovered to date. This could be partly due to limited archaeological exploration at Herakleopolis Magna (modern Ihnasya el-Medina), which only began in earnest in 1966. The absence of identifiable Herakleopolitan pyramids in Saqqara suggests their constructions were modest, unlike the grand pyramids of the Old Kingdom. This points to a less centralized system of rule, even within their own territory.
Contemporary references to the Herakleopolitan Dynasty mostly come from private monuments and biographical inscriptions in southern Middle Egypt and Upper Egypt, often discussing the Herakleopolitan-Theban war. Additionally, this period is the historical backdrop for significant Egyptian literary and philosophical works like the Teachings for King Merykara and the Tale of the Eloquent Peasant. However, these texts are believed to have been composed during the Middle Kingdom, so their historical accuracy as sources for the First Intermediate Period is debatable. For instance, the Teachings for King Merykara depict Asiatic infiltration into the eastern Delta—a plausible scenario, but one lacking independent evidence for this particular period.
Thus, while the Herakleopolitan Dynasty played a role in ancient Egyptian history, our understanding of it is limited, requiring careful interpretation of the available sources. This dynasty’s era, though not well documented, was undoubtedly a significant chapter in the larger narrative of Egypt’s dynastic history.
The Herakleopolitan Era in Social and Cultural History
The Herakleopolitan Dynasty, shrouded in mystery due to scarce dynastic history, prompts a closer look at whether this kingdom was a distinct social and cultural entity. Focusing on archaeological evidence, particularly from the Herakleopolitan stronghold areas like the Memphite and Faiyum regions, offers some insights.
In the north, where these areas lie, the archaeological data lacks the rich, coherent historical framework found in Upper Egypt, making it challenging to establish a clear sequence. Additionally, pinpointing the exact dynastic period for various monuments and artifacts is often difficult, especially in distinguishing between the Herakleopolitan period and the early Middle Kingdom.
Archaeologically, many similarities exist between the north and Upper Egypt, such as the use of wooden servant models, cartonnage masks, and family tombs. Both regions also share certain artifact styles, like stone vessels and button seal amulets. However, distinct differences emerge, especially in pottery. In the north, the traditional ovoid vessel shape continued, evolving into unique slender jars with pointed bases and peculiar necks, sticking closer to Old Kingdom traditions than the south.
Interestingly, the Old Kingdom elite culture didn’t survive even in the Herakleopolitan kingdom. The social makeup of the Memphite necropolises transformed significantly, moving away from the earlier court culture. This shift seemed dramatic to earlier Egyptologists, but it’s more accurately a transition from extraordinary conditions to a more typical provincial town cemetery style. The loss of Memphis’s dominant status post-Old Kingdom likely caused considerable changes in the local populace’s lifestyle, but this doesn’t imply a social revolution or civil war.
Key sites like Saqqara, Heliopolis, and Herakleopolis Magna feature small mastaba tombs with decorated offering chapels and false-door stelae, showcasing Herakleopolitan art. This style, while miniature, closely follows Old Kingdom traditions in ritual scenes, daily life depictions, and carving style, demonstrating the enduring legacy of the Old Kingdom in these regions.
The extent of these traditions during the First Intermediate Period is not fully captured due to the state of archaeological research. However, the 11th Dynasty King Nebhepetra Mentuhotep II later utilized the expertise of Memphite artists for his Deir el-Bahri funerary temple, marking a resurgence of skills last seen in the Old Kingdom’s pyramid era. This suggests that despite the enigmatic nature of the Herakleopolitan Dynasty, the cultural and artistic legacy of the Old Kingdom persisted, influencing future periods and contributing to the rich tapestry of Egypt’s dynastic history.
The Internal Organization of the Herakleopolitan Kingdom
During the early Herakleopolitan Period, southern Upper Egypt gradually slipped from royal control. However, certain regions, notably southern Middle Egypt, remained under Herakleopolitan influence. Key insights into this era come from prosopographical records and biographical inscriptions, particularly from the tombs of overseers of priests at Asyut. Asyut became a major military stronghold, loyal to the Herakleopolitan kings during their conflict with Theban forces. The biographies of three successive overseers in Asyut are especially informative about political dynamics and prevailing ideologies of governance.
Another significant source is a set of graffiti at the Hatnub travertine quarry, inscribed by emissaries of Neheri, a nomarch from el-Ashmunein. Although there’s some debate about their exact dating, these texts reflect Herakleopolitan cultural influences.
The Asyut and Hatnub inscriptions share themes with texts from further south. Local rulers often highlight their role in safeguarding their towns during crises. For instance, an overseer from Asyut detailed his efforts to enhance irrigation for better harvests in lean years. The military achievements of these nomarchs, both against external threats (like the Thebans) and in maintaining internal security, are also emphasized. Additionally, their contributions to temple construction and the sustenance of associated cults are noted.
Contrasting with texts like Ankhtifi’s, the Asyut inscriptions underline the importance of maintaining strong ties with the Herakleopolitan kings. These local rulers often traced their lineage to aristocratic families and shared personal connections with the royal house, such as childhood associations with royal children. The presence and interventions of the Herakleopolitan army in Upper Egypt are mentioned, indicating the tangible influence of Herakleopolitan rule in these areas.
Our understanding of the Herakleopolitan kingdom’s internal structure is limited, but available evidence suggests that its monarchs may have relied on loyal provincial aristocrats, often bound by personal ties such as kinship or friendship. These aristocrats, while loyal to the crown, also held their hometowns in high esteem, possibly viewing them as primary focal points of their allegiance. This scenario indicates that the Herakleopolitan kingdom, much like the Old Kingdom, balanced its authority on a delicate network of aristocratic loyalties, which could also have been a structural vulnerability.
Kom Dara
The Kom Dara monument in Dara, Middle Egypt, is a significant yet enigmatic site. This massive mud-brick mastaba-tomb, measuring 138 x 144 meters with walls originally about 20 meters high, dominates the landscape. Despite its size, the tomb hasn’t been fully explored. It includes a sloping corridor leading to a limestone slab-lined subterranean burial chamber, a design reminiscent of a pyramid. However, a detailed analysis reveals it was not intended as a pyramid. Its design, with access from the north and a square superstructure, echoes private tomb architecture from the late Old Kingdom and mirrors smaller tombs in the Dara cemetery.
Dated to the early First Intermediate Period based on pottery analysis, the owner of Kom Dara remains unidentified. A relief fragment bearing the name of a King Khuy, found reused at the site, has led to speculation but lacks concrete evidence. This tomb signifies its owner’s lofty political ambitions, possibly exceeding that of a typical nomarch, though there’s no clear indication they claimed royal titles.
The historical context around Kom Dara is unclear, but it suggests the owner didn’t establish an independent power base like the Thebans did later. This site’s geographical position in Middle Egypt’s fertile plains might have played a role. Any ambitious local ruler here would have faced numerous powerful rivals, potentially stabilizing the balance of power among Middle Egyptian local rulers. This balance might have supported continued royal overlordship.
Moreover, given the agricultural richness of Middle Egypt, it’s plausible the Crown had significant interests in the region and was less tolerant of local rulers’ political maneuvers compared to the more remote Theban area. This strategic importance could have influenced the Crown’s approach to maintaining control and limiting the rise of powerful local dynasts. Kom Dara, in this context, is a testament to the complex interplay of local ambition and royal authority during a dynamic period in Egyptian history.
The Final War
During Wahankh Intef II’s aggressive northern campaign, which included an attack on the Thinite nome, he eventually encountered resistance from the Asyut nomarchs. A fragmented inscription in the tomb of Ity-yeb, an overseer of priests at Asyut, mentions successful military operations against the ‘southern nomes’, hinting at a Herakleopolitan counter-attack. Furthermore, the ‘Teachings for Merykara’ suggest that Merykara’s father reclaimed Abydos, though it’s speculative whether this connects to the ‘rebellion of Thinis’ mentioned in a stele from Mentuhotep II’s fourteenth regnal year.
Despite these Herakleopolitan military efforts, they didn’t yield lasting results. Evidence from the tomb of Ity-yeb’s son, Khety II, during King Merykara’s reign, indicates ongoing conflicts with Theban forces. While detailed records of the war’s final stages are missing, it’s likely that Asyut was eventually overtaken by force, leading to the downfall of its ruling family.
The extent of Mentuhotep II’s further advances north is unclear, but it’s plausible that Middle Egypt’s Herakleopolitan rule network disintegrated following Asyut’s defeat. Local rulers might have quickly aligned with the Thebans to avoid the destruction inflicted by the ‘terror’ of the Theban king’s forces.
The ultimate fate of the last Herakleopolitan king and the fall of Herakleopolis itself are unknown. However, recent excavations at the Ihnasya el-Medina cemetery reveal extensive damage to funerary monuments, possibly signifying the sacking and plundering of the northern capital during the early Middle Kingdom. This archaeological evidence points to a violent end to Herakleopolitan rule and the ascendancy of Theban power in Egypt.
The First Intermediate Period in Retrospect
The First Intermediate Period in Egyptian history is often portrayed negatively as a time of chaos, decline, and social upheaval—a ‘dark age’ wedged between two glorious epochs. This view, however, is influenced more by Middle Kingdom literary themes than contemporary First Intermediate Period sources. Texts like the ‘Admonitions of an Egyptian Sage’ and the ‘Prophecy of Neferti’, along with other ‘pessimistic’ works, depict a society in turmoil with inverted social orders, political unrest, and moral decay. These texts don’t specifically claim to describe the First Intermediate Period and lack historical specifics. The portrayal of chaos in these works is not necessarily reflective of the actual conditions during the First Intermediate Period.
Contrary to this ‘pessimistic’ literature, First Intermediate Period inscriptions lack despair and instead showcase vigor, self-confidence, and pride in overcoming crises. While thematic parallels exist between these biographies and the Middle Kingdom texts (like famine and social unrest), these are primarily literary connections rather than historical reflections.
Interestingly, crisis narratives in First Intermediate Period inscriptions served to legitimize the power of local rulers. Later, the Middle Kingdom ‘pessimistic’ literature used the exaggerated chaos of the past to justify the strict law and order policies of its kings. Thus, the Middle Kingdom monarchy’s ideology was built on the political thoughts emerging from the First Intermediate Period.
This comparison underscores the significant impact of the First Intermediate Period on the collective consciousness and social-political views of Middle Kingdom Egyptians. However, it’s important not to rely on Middle Kingdom texts for authentic First Intermediate Period history. Contemporary sources paint a picture of dynamism and creativity rather than unrelenting chaos.
The First Intermediate Period was a critical time for local rulers, as illustrated by Senusret I’s acknowledgment of ‘count’ Intef, a forerunner of Middle Kingdom kingship, with a statue in the Karnak temple. This period also saw significant cultural advancements, with the development of new forms in material culture, including the scarab-shaped seal.
Furthermore, this era allowed popular culture to thrive, free from the dominating influence of court culture. The local populations enjoyed relative wealth and new cultural expressions, organizing their lives within their immediate communities. Therefore, the First Intermediate Period, rather than being a mere period of decline, was a time of significant social and cultural development in ancient Egypt.
