Förster, F. (2013), Beyond Dakhla: The Abu Ballas Trail in the Libyan Desert (SW Egypt)

AFRICA PRAEHISTORICA Desert Road Archaeology 27 HEINRICH-BARTH-INSTITUT Institut für Ur- und Frühgeschichte der Universität zu Köln Forschungsstelle Afrika 27 A F R I C A P R A E H I S T O R I C A Monographien zur Archäologie und Umwelt Afrikas Monographs on African Archaeology and Environment Monographies sur l’Archéologie et l’Environnement d’Afrique Edited by Rudolph Kuper KÖLN 2013 Desert Road Archaeology in Ancient Egypt and Beyond Edited by Frank Förster & Heiko Riemer H E I N R I C H - B A R T H - I N S T I T U T © HEINRICH-BARTH-INSTITUT e.V., Köln 2013 Jennerstr. 8, D–50823 Köln http://www.hbi-ev.uni-koeln.de This book is in copyright. No reproduction of any part may take place without the written permission of the publisher. Bibliographic information published by Die Deutsche Bibliothek The Deutsche Bibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliographie; detailed bibliographic data are available on the Internet at http://dnb.ddb.de Financed by Heinrich-Barth-Institut e.V. Printed in Germany by Hans Kock GmbH, Bielefeld Typeset and layout: Heiko Riemer Copy editors: Elizabeth Hart and Rachel Herbert Set in Palatino ISBN 978-3-927688-41-4 ISSN 0947-2673 Contents Prologue by Rudolph Kuper . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Foreword by Steven E. Sidebotham . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Editors’ preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Introduction 1 Heiko Riemer & Frank Förster Ancient desert roads: Towards establishing a new field of archaeological research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Methods, approaches, and historical perspectives 2 Olaf Bubenzer & Andreas Bolten Top down: New satellite data and ground-truth data as base for a reconstruction of ancient caravan routes. Examples from the Western Desert of Egypt . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 3 Heiko Riemer Lessons in landscape learning: The dawn of long-distance travel and navigation in Egypt’s Western Desert from prehistoric to Old Kingdom times . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77 4 Heidi Köpp Desert travel and transport in ancient Egypt. An overview based on epigraphic, pictorial and archaeological evidence . . . . . . . . . . 107 5 Klaus Peter Kuhlmann The realm of “two deserts”: Siwah Oasis between east and west . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133 6 Meike Meerpohl Footprints in the sand: Recent long-distance camel trade in the Libyan Desert (northeast Chad/southeast Libya) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167 7 Frank Förster, Heiko Riemer & Moez Mahir, with an appendix by Frank Darius Donkeys to El-Fasher or how the present informs the past . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 193 7 Roads and regions I: Egypt’s Western Desert, and Bayuda 8 8 John Coleman Darnell, with the assistance of Deborah Darnell The Girga Road: Abu Ziyâr, Tundaba, and the integration of the southern oases into the Pharaonic state . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 221 9 Corinna Rossi & Salima Ikram Evidence of desert routes across northern Kharga (Egypt’s Western Desert) . . . . . . . 265 10 Laure Pantalacci Broadening horizons: Distant places and travels in Dakhla and the Western Desert at the end of the 3rd millennium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 283 11 Frank Förster Beyond Dakhla: The Abu Ballas Trail in the Libyan Desert (SW Egypt) . . . . . . . . . . . 297 12 Stan Hendrickx, Frank Förster & Merel Eyckerman The Pharaonic pottery of the Abu Ballas Trail: ‘Filling stations’ along a desert highway in southwestern Egypt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 339 13 András Zboray Prehistoric trails in the environs of Karkur Talh, Jebel Uweinat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 381 14 Heinz-Josef Thissen Donkeys and water: Demotic ostraca in Cologne as evidence for desert travel between Oxyrhynchos and the Bahariya Oasis in the 2nd century BC . . . . . . . . . . . . . 391 15 Per Storemyr, Elizabeth Bloxam, Tom Heldal & Adel Kelany Ancient desert and quarry roads on the west bank of the Nile in the First Cataract region . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 399 16 Angelika Lohwasser Tracks in the Bayuda desert. The project ‘Wadi Abu Dom Itinerary’ (W.A.D.I.) . . . . . . . 425 Roads and regions II: Cyrenaica, Marmarica, Sinai, and Arabian Peninsula 17 Steven Snape A stroll along the corniche? Coastal routes between the Nile Delta and Cyrenaica in the Late Bronze Age . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 439 18 Thomas Vetter, Anna-Katharina Rieger & Heike Möller Water, routes and rangelands: Ancient traffic and grazing infrastructure in the eastern Marmarica (northwestern Egypt) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 455 19 James K. Hoffmeier & Stephen O. Moshier “A highway out of Egypt”: The main road from Egypt to Canaan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 485 20 Claire Somaglino & Pierre Tallet A road to the Arabian Peninsula in the reign of Ramesses III . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 511 Roads and regions III: Egypt’s Eastern Desert 21 Ian Shaw “We went forth to the desert land…”: Retracing the routes between the Nile Valley and the Hatnub travertine quarries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 521 22 Kathryn A. Bard, Rodolfo Fattovich & Andrea Manzo The ancient harbor at Mersa/Wadi Gawasis and how to get there: New evidence of Pharaonic seafaring expeditions in the Red Sea . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 533 23 Adam Bülow-Jacobsen Communication, travel, and transportation in Egypt’s Eastern Desert during Roman times (1st to 3rd century AD) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 557 Road index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 575 Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 577 9 Frank Förster Beyond Dakhla: The Abu Ballas Trail in the Libyan Desert (SW Egypt)* Abstract The so-called Abu Ballas Trail is a Pharaonic donkey caravan route in the hyper-arid Libyan Desert that connects the Dakhla Oasis with the Gilf Kebir Plateau, a vast mountain massif approximately 400 km to the southwest. Discovered in 1999 and subsequently explored by missions of the ACACIA project, this long-distance desert route in modern Egypt’s south-western quarter, which was episodically used by donkey caravans since the late third millennium BC, not only represents the earliest evidence for trans-Saharan traffic, but also attests to hitherto unknown Pharaonic advances into African regions several hundred kilometres from the Nile Valley. In all likelihood the trail was part of a much longer route, the next leg of which presumably led to the Jebel Ouenat, another mountain massif situated some 200 km further to the southwest, as this is the nearest place with permanent water. From there it would be possible to reach more southern, sub-Saharan regions in the territory of modern Sudan or Chad. This article will present an overview of the archaeological remains found along the trail and discuss some practical aspects of long-distance desert travelling and transportation in Pharaonic times when the principal beast of burden was the donkey. Moreover, the question of the possible purpose(s) and historical significance of the trail will be addressed, also taking into account a hieroglyphic rock inscription recently discovered at Jebel Ouenat. There is reason to assume that, at least in the troubled times of the late Old Kingdom or (early) First Intermediate Period (around 2200/2100 BC), the Abu Ballas Trail served as an alternative trade route into, or from, sub-Saharan regions like the mysterious Yam country of ancient Egyptian records in order to import luxury items such as incense, ivory, ebony, valuable oils, and skins – perhaps via nomadic ‘Libyan’ tribes acting as middlemen or intermediaries. Keywords: trans-Saharan traffic, trade, donkey caravan, supply station, pottery, rock art, Gilf Kebir, Jebel Ouenat, Yam, Sudan, Chad, Old Kingdom, First Intermediate Period, Second Intermediate Period, New Kingdom 1. Introduction The Dakhla Oasis, situated some 300 km from the Nile Valley in Egypt’s Western Desert, can be regarded as the most southwesterly outpost of Pharaonic civilisation. When an exceptionally strong sand storm revealed, in 1947, the first traces of the late Old Kingdom town at Balat/Ayn Asil in the eastern part of the oasis, it came as quite a surprise to the scientific, Nile-oriented community (though some ancient monuments and artefacts of later date had been known before).1 Over more than 30 years, systematic research by missions of the Institut français d’archéologie oriental (IFAO) and the Dakhleh Oasis Project (DOP) has revealed many aspects of ancient life in this remote region, the archaeological potential of which is far from being exhausted. The discovery of a long-distance desert route some years ago, which extends the known * Updated and substantially enlarged version of an article published online in 2007 (Förster 2007a). As for the Pharaonic pottery found along the Abu Ballas Trail, see the more detailed presentation by Hendrickx et al., this volume, which also includes a reconstruction of the various patterns of distribution of the main supply depots. 1 See, for example, the fairly personal account of Ahmed Fakhry (1973: 219–222). The Abu Ballas Trail 297 Fig. 1 Map showing the chain of archaeological sites along the Abu Ballas Trail. limit of Egyptian influence several hundred kilometres further towards the heart of the continent, was another surprise. In 1999 and 2000, the German desert traveller Carlo Bergmann found several sites which form a chain of staging posts on an almost straight line, the end of which lies close to the Gilf Kebir Plateau in the Libyan Desert, about 400 km southwest of its starting-point in Dakhla (Bergmann 2001: 367–460) [Fig. 1]. The midpoint of the trail is the well known, but for a long time mysterious, Abu Ballas or ‘Pottery Hill’ site where large amounts of Pharaonic pottery were discovered as early as 1918 and 1923, respectively (Kemal el Dine & Franchet 1927; Ball 1927: 122, n. ‡; Jarvis 1936: 114–116; cf. Förster & Kuper 2003) [Figs. 2–4]. 298 Frank Förster Rudolph Kuper, for many years interested in the riddle of these pots (cf. Bergmann 2001: 409f.; Kuper 2006: 359), immediately initiated investigations of the new sites within the prehistoric research program of the Collaborative Research Centre 389 ACACIA at the University of Cologne.2 This paper, presenting some of the results of the ACACIA project, will mainly focus on the material 2 Cf. Kuper 2001; 2002: 9f., pls. 18–23; 2003a; 2003b: 17–26, figs. 2–6; 2006: 357–361, figs. 2–10; Kuhlmann 2002: 149–158; Förster & Kuper 2003; Schönfeld 2004; Förster 2007a; 2007b; 2010; 2011; Riemer et al. 2005; Riemer 2007a; Förster et al. 2010. For preliminary reports on individual field and study campaigns, see the ‘ACACIA field reports 2002–2006’ available online at <www.unikoeln.de/sfb389/> s.v. Section E, Project E3 (November 12, 2012). Fig. 2 Abu Ballas or ‘Pottery Hill’ (site Abu Ballas 85/55), the northern (on the right hand) of two isolated sandstone cones, some 200 km southwest of the Dakhla Oasis. evidence, practical use, and possible purpose of the trail in the late Old Kingdom or (early) First Intermediate Period (around 2200/2100 BC). The physical remains of that period are by far the most numerous and informative along the trail. Moreover, there is a strong connection with the oasis’ capital and administrative centre at Balat/Ayn Asil around the late 6th dynasty or slightly later, allowing the use of the local chronology established by IFAO colleagues. Other periods of Pharaonic activity are attested on the route as well, principally through ceramic evidence. This material has been thoroughly studied by Stan Hendrickx, and includes vessels of the Second Intermediate Period (c. 1800–1550 BC), the later 18th dynasty (c. 1400–1300 BC) and the Ramesside Period (first half, c. 1300–1160 BC) (cf. Hendrickx et al., this volume). In addition, a few artefacts point to use during Roman and Islamic times; others can be dated to the Predynastic or Early Dynastic Periods. But whatever happened on the trail during its apparently episodic use over the centuries, the activities in the late Old Kingdom or First Intermediate Period have left the most distinctive and abundant traces. Fig. 3 Northern pottery depot at Abu Ballas, once consisting of more than a hundred late Old Kingdom/First Intermediate Period storage jars. Photograph taken by John Ball after excavation in March 1923 (Ball 1927: fig. facing p. 125, above). 2. The Abu Ballas Trail in the late Old Kingdom/First Intermediate Period 2.1. Establishment and first period of use Clearly these early Egyptian enterprises did not venture into barren, hostile regions hitherto totally unexplored. Some years ago, Olaf Kaper and Harco Willems reported a number of 4th or 5th dynasty hilltop sites on the periphery of Dakhla which had Fig. 4 The Egyptian Prince Kemal el-Din at the southern pottery depot of Abu Ballas which included some 18th dynasty amphorae. Obviously the vessels had been arranged for the picture taken by John Ball in March 1923 (Ball 1927: fig. facing p. 125, below). The Abu Ballas Trail 299 Fig. 5 Map showing Old Kingdom hilltop sites on the periphery of Dakhla, used as watch posts to control the oasis’ eastern, southern and southwestern fringes. Note the course of the Abu Ballas Trail, suggesting Balat/Ayn Asil as point of departure. been used as watch posts in order to control the access roads to the oasis from the east as well as from the south (Kaper & Willems 2002; cf. Kaper 2009). Similar sites along the southwestern fringes of the oasis, surveyed and partly excavated by missions of the ACACIA project, can now be added (Riemer et al. 2005; Förster 2010) [Fig. 5]. Another remarkable discovery by Carlo Bergmann, a desert camp site with hieroglyphic rock inscriptions some 60 km southwest of Dakhla, demonstrates an Egyptian interest in that area already at the time of Khufu and Radjedef (Bergmann & Kuhlmann 2001; Kuhlmann 2002: 133–138, figs. 2–10; 2005; Kuper 2003b: 26–33, figs. 7–12; Kuper & Förster 2003; Förster 2008; Wagner & Heller 2012). According to the analysis of the epigraphic material by Klaus Peter Kuhlmann (2005: 245–251, figs. 1–8), Pharaonic expeditions of up to 400 men came here to procure mineral pow- 300 Frank Förster der used for paint, perhaps intended for the decoration of the 4th dynasty pyramid complexes and adjoining tombs of the nobles. Although this site, the so-called ‘Radjedef’s Water-Mountain’ (Chufu 01/1), is several kilometres off the Abu Ballas Trail [cf. Fig. 1], where no pottery of the early Old Kingdom has yet been found, it is difficult not to conclude that the Egyptian settlers of later times already had knowledge of the regions to the south and west (cf. also Hope 2007). There is even some archaeological evidence indicating the presence of Egyptian hunting parties from the Nile Valley in the desert southwest of Dakhla during late Predynastic or Early Dynastic times (cf. Hendrickx et al. 2009). Crossing the vast, waterless terrain between Dakhla and the Gilf Kebir must always have been a risky challenge in Pharaonic times when, until the introduction of the domesticated camel in the first millennium BC,3 the principal beast of burden was the donkey.4 Without any wells or water holes in between, and only sparse vegetation at best, small groups of desert travellers could hardly have carried more than the provision in water and food they and their animals would need for the journey – and this had to be well prepared. An elaborate system of road markers made of loose stones (alamat) is one of the features of the trail (cf. Riemer 2007a; Förster et al. 2010; Förster 2011: chapter 5.2; Riemer, this volume) [Fig. 6], and sometimes the tracks of the donkeys leading to these artificial points of orientation are still visible after thousands of years [Fig. 7]. Donkey bones and droppings have been detected at some sites, and small stone circles measuring up to two metres in diameter might well have served as basins for watering or feeding them (cf. Hendrickx et al., this volume: figs. 34; 35; Förster 2011: chapter 5.4) [Fig. 8]. Moreover, a few representations of resting donkeys have been found incised on Ramesside storage jars, which constitute additional evidence of the use of this frugal animal along the trail in Pharaonic times (Figs. 49; 50; cf. Hendrickx et al., this volume: fig. 25). In the late Old Kingdom or early First Intermediate Period, some authorities decided to install supply depots at more or less regular distances in order not only to facilitate transits for donkey caravans, but to free their backs for other goods that needed to be transported. A great number of large earthen storage jars, identical to the ones used in Balat/Ayn Asil at the same time in terms of typology and fabric, had been selected for that purpose [Figs. 9; 10]. However, being 50–60 cm in height and with a capacity of around 30 litres, they exceed the Fig. 6 The trail’s largest road sign, or alam: a carefully stacked pile of stones more than two metres high (‘Muhattah Umm elAlamat’, site Jaqub 99/30). The impressive construction also served as a wind-break for a small resting area at its foot, delimited by two dry stone walls. Fig. 7 Ancient donkey track passing-by a simple upright stone slab (between sites Jaqub 99/35 and Jaqub 99/34). 3 For the ongoing debate on the appearance of the domesticated camel in Egypt see, inter alia, Midant-Reynes & Braunstein-Silvestre 1977; Ripinsky 1985; Rowley-Conwy 1988; Brewer et al. 1994: 104f.; Pusch 1996; Osborn & Osbornová 1998: 155–157; Kuhrt 1999. Cf. also Köpp, this volume. 4 The economic role of the domesticated donkey in ancient Egypt is a topic that has not attracted much scholarly attention (cf. Förster 2011: chapter 11). For a general overview, see Brewer et al. 1994: 99f.; Osborn & Osbornová 1998: 132–136 (with further references). See also the more recent studies by Power (2004) and Janssen (2005). Small clay models of loaded donkeys have been found in Balat, see Boutantin 1999: 61, figs. 20; 21 (no. 71); Marchand & Soukiassian 2010: 334, photo 512. Fig. 8 One of a number of small stone circles which probably served as basins for watering or feeding donkeys (‘Muhattah Umm el-Alamat’, site Jaqub 99/30). The Abu Ballas Trail 301 Fig. 9 Some late Old Kingdom/First Intermediate Period storage jars (as well as the lower part of an 18th dynasty amphora) found at Abu Ballas. average size of the vessels used in the capital of the oasis (which are 30–40 cm in height 5). At about twenty sites, usually at the foot of prominent sandstone hills, the remains of some 300 vessels of this type have been found, mostly broken and heavily eroded (cf. Hendrickx et al., this volume: tab. 1). The original number was probably much higher, and more concentrations may still await discovery. According to descriptions given by John Ball, Prince Kemal el-Din, and C.S. Jarvis, more than a hundred jars, still in a good state of preservation and dumped in regular order, were excavated at Abu Ballas in 1923 (Kemal el Dine & Franchet 1927; Ball 1927: 122, n. ‡; Jarvis 1936: 114–116) [cf. Fig. 3]. Unfortunately, the site is now bereft of much of its original material due to the activities of off-road tourists (cf. Förster & Kuper 2003: figs. 1; 2). Some of the storage jars bear incised potmarks that are also known from Balat (which apparently represents the departure point for the trail; cf. Fig. 5). Marks known from the area of the governor’s palace at Ayn Asil are especially prominent.6 A potmark resembling the hieroglyphic sign for h, , occurs frequently (cf. Soukiassian et al. 2002: 456– 459, figs. 269 [592b; 1389]; 270 [647e]) [Fig. 10], and a few combinations of hieroglyphs are probably to be considered as personal names or titles, identifying the owner of the content before the vessel had been reused. Large collective storage areas necessitating such identifications of personal ownership are, up to now, only known from the governor’s residence (cf. Soukiassian et al. 2002: 333; 457, n. 116; Pantalacci 2013: 211, n. 50). The variety of about thirty different potmark motifs, incised both before and after firing, adds to the suspicion that the trail’s storage facilities had been produced in the pottery workshops of the administrative centre, but not specifically for this purpose (cf. Förster 2011: chapter 6.1.5). Many of the jars, which were probably closed with a piece of leather when filled or re-filled,7 show mineral stains characteristic for the evaporation of liquids. Water was of course the most basic need in these desert environments, and using pottery deposits as artificial water reservoirs appears to be an age-old ‘technique’ of long-distance desert travel, which has even been reported by Herodotus (III, 6– 7) (cf. Hendrickx et al., this volume). Nevertheless, some of the vessels might have contained grain or other foodstuffs deposited for the donkeys and 5 Soukiassian et al. 2002: 107; Valloggia 1986: 150. Larger vessels do occur in Balat, but rarely (e.g., Minault-Gout 1992: 167f.; Castel et al. 2001: figs. 145–152). Cf. Hendrickx et al., this volume. Fig. 10 Drawing of one of the better preserved storage jars bearing a -potmark on its upper body. 302 Frank Förster 6 For the residence of the local dynasty of state-controlled ‘rulers of the oasis’ (HqAw wHAt), see Soukiassian 1997; Soukiassian et al. 2002; Valloggia 2004: 80–93; Jeuthe 2012: 29–35, figs. 1–3. 7 For an Egyptian representation of this practice, see Balcz 1934: 78, fig. 105. Some fragments of thin leather pieces have been excavated at Abu Ballas in 2002 (cf. Förster 2011: chapter 6.6.3). 2 3 Fig. 11 Lower part of a storage jar (no. 2) still containing remains of barley grain when excavated at site Jaqub 00/20 in March 2006. The small supply depot, consisting of four vessels, is conspicuously marked by an arrangement of stone slabs, most of which had collapsed. their drivers. This assumption was evidenced by the recovery of a jar still containing some barley grain at one of the smaller stations [Fig. 11]. Multiple erosion lines caused by wind-blown sand are visible on the exterior of some vessels. They always occur at an angle of 20–45 degrees compared to the central axis of the jars, but at different places, thus indicating a repeated use after they had lain empty for a while. For how long or for how often the jars were used is however difficult to estimate. The sites along the trail where late Old Kingdom/First Intermediate Period pottery has been found (cf. Hendrickx et al., this volume: tab. 1) differ much in size and structure. Sometimes there are only a few sherds without any further archaeological context, probably the remains of one or two jars accidently broken during transport. Others yielded a number of vessels which had been carefully stored in rock shelters close to where people were to spend the night. The most important sites, however, are those where several dozen vessels had been deposited and where simple 1 4 stone structures, hearths, rock engravings and a number of other artefacts attest to temporary occupation for more than one day or night. Two sites belong to this latter category: the original Abu Ballas site (labelled Abu Ballas 85/55 in the ACACIA site catalogue) [Figs. 2–4] and one named ‘Muhattah Jaqub’ by Carlo Bergmann (2001: 386– 388) (= Jaqub 99/31–32) where some 70 jars have Fig. 12 Some remains of large storage jars excavated at ‘Muhattah Jaqub’ (site Jaqub 99/31). The Abu Ballas Trail 303 Fig. 13 Stone slab incised with a grid of thirty squares that likely represents a senet-game board. The artefact, seen and photographed in front of the small cave at Abu Ballas [cf. Figs. 21; 22] in October 2000, has since disappeared. Fragments of senet-game boards made of local sandstone were also excavated at ‘Muhattah Jaqub’ (site Jaqub 99/31). been excavated [Fig. 12] (cf. Hendrickx et al., this volume: fig. 33). Besides the storage jars, both sites yielded similar cups and bowls, as well as large vats used for the preparation of bread dough (see below). Furthermore, identical potmarks have been found in both places. These two sites are therefore not only contemporaneous but should be considered elements of the same operation(s). It is clear that some people stayed here for a while, probably to keep watch over the provisions until they would be needed. Senet-game boards made of local sandstone [Fig. 13], reworked pottery sherds and flint stones used as tools [Fig. 14], and a few rock engravings elucidate how they spent their time at these lonely outposts. Among the latter, there are rows of notches which may be interpreted as a counting of days (cf. Förster 2011: chapter 6.3.4) [Figs. 15; 16]. More sophisticated rock art, already discussed by Rhotert (1952: 70–74, pl. XXXVI,3–6), is attested at Abu Ballas (cf. Förster 2011: chapter 6.3.1): a scene showing a bearded ‘Libyan’ (?) hunter with two dogs chasing a gazelle [Fig. 17], and one depicting a cow suckling its calf [Fig. 18]. For ‘Muhattah Jaqub’ a spiral motif may be mentioned [Fig. 19]. Rock shelters, some of which were furnished with small walls made of loose stones as well as with hearths, were used as resting places [Fig. 20]. At Abu Ballas, a small cave (c. 2 x 1.5 m, Fig. 14 Tools made of reworked pottery sherds (nos. 1–4) as well as of flint and other stones (nos. 5–8) excavated at ‘Muhattah Jaqub’ (site Jaqub 99/31) (Schönfeld 2004: fig. 66, slightly modified). 304 Frank Förster Fig. 15 Row of notches engraved upon a rock face at a resting place at Abu Ballas [cf. Fig. 22]. Fig. 17 Rock engraving at Abu Ballas showing a ‘Libyan’ (?) hunter with two dogs chasing a gazelle. Fig. 18 Representation of a cow suckling its calf at Abu Ballas. Fig. 16 Four rows of notches engraved upon rock faces at resting places at ‘Muhattah Jaqub’ (site Jaqub 99/31) (Schönfeld 2004: fig. 52). max. height 1.2 m) halfway up the southeastern slope of the hill, thus affording a good vantage point, was excavated by the ACACIA-team in 2002 [Figs. 21; 22]. One of the duties of the people stationed here apparently was to prepare bread on a comparatively large scale, probably in order to supply the members of the caravan to come. Sherds from four large vats, each with a capacity of more than 50 litres, have been found at Abu Ballas, and three or four are attested for ‘Muhattah Jaqub’ [Fig. 23].8 Cu- Fig. 19 A spiral motif, one of a few rock engravings at ‘Muhattah Jaqub’ (site Jaqub 99/31). 8 Similar vats were found in Balat, see Soukiassian et al. 1990: 112f., pl. 33; Castel et al. 2001: 132, fig. 135 (C78); Soukiassian et al. 2002: 503, fig. 335 (1228/1). Cf. also Hendrickx et al., this volume. The Abu Ballas Trail 305 riously, one of them has a representation of a standing king wearing the double crown of Upper and Lower Egypt on its outer bottom, incised before firing [Fig. 24] (see also Hendrickx et al., this volume: figs. 6; 9). Since inscriptions are almost entirely missing from the trail, this depiction of an unnamed Pharaoh is the only evidence so far which might attest to activities of an official nature in the period under discussion. 2.2. Logistics Fig. 20 Dry stone wall surrounding a small resting area beneath a rock shelter at ‘Muhattah Jaqub’ (site Jaqub 99/32). The two sites under discussion also provide a clue for understanding the distribution pattern of the main supply depots. ‘Muhattah Jaqub’ is situated almost 80 km northeast of Abu Ballas, where the next large depot has been installed [cf. Fig. 1]. This distance most probably relates to the donkey’s ability to go without water for two or three days (cf. Os- Fig. 21 Entrance of a small natural cave halfway up the southeastern slope of the Abu Ballas hill [cf. Fig. 2], excavated in spring 2002. 306 Frank Förster Fig. 22 Ground-plan showing the cave’s dimensions as well as the position of finds within the rock niche area in front of it: fragments of storage jars, cups and vats (Schönfeld 2004: fig. 12). Note the hearth on the lower left and the position, marked by ‘B’, of the notches shown in Fig. 15. Fig. 23 99/31). One of the vats found at ‘Muhattah Jaqub’ (site Jaqub born & Osbornová 1998: 132; Dill 1938: 104; 109), an ability the Egyptians certainly made use of. Thus, the pack animals either walked c. 40 km per day and were watered at the end of every second, or they needed three days at a rate of c. 25–30 km to cover the distance, getting their water at the end of every third. Though the former figure cannot be excluded, ancient and modern comparative data suggest the latter to be more realistic under the given circumstances (cf. Förster 2011: chapter 11.2). Moreover, the positions of intermediate, smaller sites where people could spend the night before arriving at a main depot (cf. Fig. 1; Hendrickx et al., this volume: tab. 1) support such an interpretation. Of course, one cannot expect a mathematically exact distribution of supply depots, but rather one that was dictated by practical considerations and experience. More difficult terrain along some parts of the route would certainly have increased the journey time, and this is only one of the factors which might have had an impact on daily travel rates. Nevertheless, assuming an average rate of c. 25–30 km per day for a pack train consisting of, perhaps, up to 100 donkeys, it can reasonably be argued that the journey from the Dakhla Oasis to the outskirts of the Gilf Kebir Plateau (or vice versa) could take around two weeks (for details, see Hendrickx et al., this volume). Presumably, the journeys were undertaken in the colder seasons, i.e. in winter or early spring. Winter rains might have even provided fresh grass Fig. 24 Representation of a standing Pharaoh, incised on the flat outer bottom of a broken vat found at Abu Ballas. Note the necklace and the staff, or shepherd’s crook, in the king’s left hand. See also Hendrickx et al., this volume: figs. 6; 9. in places, especially in the surroundings of the mountainous region of the Gilf Kebir, frequently blessed with cloud-cover. Setting up such a chain of supply depots must have been a logistical challenge and a laborious task as well (cf. Förster 2011: chapter 12). The storage jars weigh 14–15 kg on average; filled with water, they could attain c. 45 kg in weight, not easy to handle in the heat of the desert. To avoid a loss of precious water if a donkey lost its load, the vessels would The Abu Ballas Trail 307 Fig. 26 A bedouin boy with a water bag made of a goat skin (from an old postcard by Lehnert & Landrock, Cairo). Fig. 25 Detail of a desert hunting scene in the tomb of Senbi at Meir, 12th dynasty. The person on the left carries a water bag slung on his shoulder (detail from Blackman 1914: pl. 7, slightly modified). have been transported empty, and filled at their final destination. It is most likely that the water was carried separately in light, flexible water bags which usually were made of goat skins (so-called girbas; cf., for example, Gasse 1994: 172f.). Though today often replaced by the plastic jerrycan, this device was and still is the most essential equipment of bedouins and other desert travellers [Figs. 25; 26] (cf. also Köpp, this volume: figs. 1; 2). A curious clay object found at Balat and said perhaps to represent a hippopotamus may actually be a model of such a water bag (Soukiassian et al. 1990: 127, pl. 45 [no. 15]). The jars, on the other hand, were probably carried in baskets. At one of the stations used in Ramesside times (‘Muhattah el-Homareen’ = site Jaqub 99/33), the remains of such a means of transportation have been found, still covered with vessels of that period [Fig. 27]. Using donkeys, jars and water bags to prepare a way through the desert – how exactly did this work? Without taking into account the additional weight of packing devices such as baskets and Fig. 27 The well-preserved remains of a woven basket or bag uncovered below an assemblage of Ramesside storage jars at ‘Muhattah elHomareen’ (site Jaqub 99/33). 308 Frank Förster Fig. 28 Below: transport of four water jars in two baskets fixed on donkey-back, modern Dakhla (Henein 1997: 168, fig. 102). Above: a donkey carrying two vessels as depicted in the 18th dynasty tomb of Mahu at el-Amarna (Davies 1906: pl. 24, lower right). ropes, a donkey load may well have consisted of either four empty storage jars or two large water bags, each filled with c. 30 litres of water [Figs. 28; 29]. Distributing these loads of c. 60 kg evenly on the animals’ flanks was of course important. In order to place a water depot of c. 3000 litres at Abu Ballas, for example, 25 donkeys were needed to carry a hundred containers, and 50 more to get the vessels filled. However, during the c. 200 km journey from Dakhla to Abu Ballas and back again, the animals as well as their drivers would need provisions, which could only have been provided at intermediate supply stations set up before. The successive installation of these supply stations up to the Gilf Kebir and the repeated filling of their storage capacities when going back and forth was evidently an enormous effort involving many donkey convoys (cf. Förster 2011: chapters 9–14). 2.3. When, where, and why? Revealing Pharaonic advances far into the Libyan Desert and thereby contributing to the early history of trans-Saharan traffic is interesting enough. Furthermore, the archaeological evidence of the trail allows valuable insights into the methods and strategies of long-distance desert travel at the end of the third millennium BC. But what was the reason for using the route in such a manner in the late Old Kingdom/First Intermediate Period? What motivated such an expenditure of resources? The answer probably lay on the backs of the donkeys, once Fig. 29 A donkey carrying two large water bags made of animal skins. Detail from a modern trade caravan in northern Chad (photo: M. Meerpohl; cf. also Förster et al., this volume: fig. 18). all the supply stations were ready for use. But whatever the pack animals transported (cargoes of up to c. five tons per caravan, cf. Hendrickx et al., this volume), traces have yet to be found in the archaeological record. In order to offer a hypothetical explanation (cf. Förster 2011: chapter 16), two main aspects have to be dealt with. Firstly, what was the final destination of the caravans (certainly not the Gilf Kebir), and secondly, when exactly did the activities take place? Due to excavated material, the latter can be answered more easily. The cups and bowls used at the stations have their best parallels in finds from the so-called ‘première phase post-incendie’ at Ayn Asil (cf. Hendrickx et al., this volume). This is the local phase that immediately followed the deliberate destruction by fire of the governors’ residence around the end of the reign of Pepi II or slightly later (Soukiassian et al. 2002: 9–12; 521–523, figs. 1; 5; cf. Soukiassian 1997 and, most recently, Jeuthe 2012: 14; 22; 459). We do not know what this decisive event meant to the line of governors in the late 6th dynasty and thereafter. However, we do know that some governors still (or again) reigned in the oasis in the First Intermediate Period (cf. Aufrère 2000; Pantalacci 2005: 235; Jeuthe 2012: 13; 22). Two radiocarbon dates from charcoal samples, stratigraphically connected with the cups and bowls at Abu Ballas and ‘Muhattah Jaqub’, center around a calibrated age of 2190 ± 30 years BC (KIA-20683; KIA-20684). Accepting a long duration for the First Intermediate Period (Seidlmayer 1997; 2000: 119; cf. von Beckerath 1997: 143–145), this would lead us to The Abu Ballas Trail 309 Fig. 30 Rock engravings at ‘Muhattah Harding King’ (site Jaqub 99/35). On the right, a swastika-like motif which probably developed from a combination of four antelopes’ foreparts as found on late Old Kingdom/First Intermediate Period button seals (cf. Wiese 1996: 84 [fig. 29]; 133–135, pls. 24–27). the very end of the Old Kingdom, i.e. the 8th dynasty, or the beginning of the following epoch. Some simple motifs, engraved on the rocks of the trail’s stations and known from contemporary button seals, fit well with this chronological context: for example ‘swastikas’ [Fig. 30], looped ropes [Fig. 31] and the spiral form from ‘Muhattah Jaqub’ already mentioned [Fig. 19] (cf. Wiese 1996: pls. 27 [nos. 555–557]; 50 [nos. 1040; 1041]; Pantalacci 2005: 238, figs. 4 [no. 3816]; 5 [no. 4421], cf. p. 236, fig. 2). The hunting scene from Abu Ballas [Fig. 17] can best be compared with similar scenes painted on First Intermediate Period bowls that have been found at Qubbet el-Hawa near Aswan (Edel 2008: 1962–1974, figs. 271; 272; 1998f., figs. 47; 48; cf. Förster 2007a: figs. 37; 38; 2011: chapter 6.3.1; see already Kuper 2002: 9f., pl. 21) [Fig. 32]. Where the trail ultimately led to is, on the other hand, difficult to answer. The nearest places with permanent water are the Kufra Oases in modern Libya, some 350 km to the northwest of the eastern fringes of the (southern) Gilf Kebir, and Jebel Ouenat, some 200 km to the southwest. Kufra, however, surrounded by seas of sand, is rather isolated and probably became important for trade-caravans only with the introduction of the camel as the ‘ship of the desert’.9 Therefore, and for other reasons, it should be assumed that the next leg of the route led towards Jebel Ouenat, the island-like most elevated feature in the whole of the eastern Sahara, which has a number of rain-fed wells at its foot (in Arabic, Jebel Ouenat means ‘Mountain of little springs’).10 From there it would be possible to reach more southern, sub-Saharan regions in the territory of modern Sudan or Chad. Until a few years ago, however, no evidence has been found at Jebel Ouenat, nor in the Gilf Kebir proper, that attests to an Egyptian presence there – except for, perhaps, a single sherd found already in 1980 in the southwestern part of the Gilf Kebir Plateau (B.O.S. site Wadi el Akhdar 80/55; cf. Fig. 1). The sherd was only recently identified by Stan Hendrickx as belonging to a storage jar of the late Old Kingdom/First Intermediate Period (see Riemer, this volume: fig. 24). Epigraphic material from Ayn Asil might help to shed some light on the matter. A few hieratic let9 In the 1930s, the Hungarian desert explorer László E. Almásy proposed that Abu Ballas was a water station marking the first third of a route connecting Dakhla with the Kufra Oases. In his opinion, one of the ‘green’ valleys of the northwestern Gilf Kebir Plateau, Wadi Abd el-Melik (which he claimed was the legendary lost oasis of ‘Zarzura’), was another intermediate stop after two thirds of the distance. See Almásy 1999: 108f. Fig. 31 Looped ropes engraved on a broken stone slab found at site Jaqub 00/21. The hieroglyphic signs on the right may be read as snb, ‘health’. 310 Frank Förster 10 For Jebel Ouenat, situated in a direct line with the trail [cf. Fig. 1], and its modern exploration, see Simons 1973; von Czerniewicz et al. 2004. Fig. 32 Two painted bowls, dated to the First Intermediate Period, from a tomb at Qubbet el-Hawa (QH 207) near Aswan (Edel 2008: 1969f., figs. 271; 272). Both desert hunting scenes, showing a Nubian and an Egyptian individual, respectively, accompanied by two dogs, can easily be compared to the rock engraving at Abu Ballas [Fig. 17]. ters of administrative contents, written on clay tablets and stored in the archives of the governor’s palace before it was destroyed, prove the existence of Egyptian relations with distant regions, the names of which are otherwise unattested (cf. Pantalacci, this volume). One letter records a complaint that a potter has not yet arrived at a place called Rudjet (RwDt), probably one of the villages in the oasis’ (western?) outskirts, in order ‘to prepare a way’ for the chief of a foreign region called Demi-iu (r irt wAt HqA n ¨mi-iw) (tablet no. 3686: Pantalacci (drawing) 1998a: 306–310, fig. 1; cf. Posener-Krieger 1992: 45f., fig. 7; see also Pantalacci 1998b: 836) [Fig. 33].11 Another letter mentions that something should be taken from a granary that ‘enriches (or fills, sxwd) the way’ of the same chief (tablet no. 3685: Pantalacci 2008: 152f., fig. 1; cf. Posener-Krieger 1992: 45; Valloggia 2004: 96, fig. 81) [Fig. 34]. Apparently, the 11 L. Pantalacci meanwhile favours a different reading of the mentioned place-names: Ai{r}(t) instead of RwDt, and ¨miw instead of ¨mi-iw (cf. Pantalacci, this volume). (hieroglyphic transcription) Fig. 33 Hieratic letter inscribed on a clay tablet that has been excavated from the archives of the governor’s palace in Ayn Asil, late Old Kingdom (tablet no. 3686: Pantalacci 1998a: fig. 1, slightly modified). Fig. 34 Another letter from the same archives (tablet no. 3685: Pantalacci 2008: fig. 1). Both letters appear to refer to some measures taken by the local administration to facilitate movements of foreign groups coming to Dakhla. The Abu Ballas Trail 311 local administration took some measures to facilitate movements of foreign groups coming to Dakhla, measures that included the delivery or disposal of pottery and grain. A connection between the subject of the letters and the slightly later establishment of the trail’s supply depots seems reasonable. But where is Demi-iu to be located? Since the place-name can be translated as ‘village (or perhaps better: landing-place) of the island’ (cf. PosenerKrieger 1992: 45), it is, again, tempting to think of Jebel Ouenat and one of the wells at its foot. In the 1920s, about 150 people of the Goran tribe, originating from northern Chad, had settled there for some years, and their leader, Sheikh Herri [Fig. 35], was known as the ‘king of Ouenat’ (Hassanein Bey 1926: 194f.). Was the ‘chief of Demi-iu’ a forerunner of Sheikh Herri, 4000 years ago? In recent centuries, nomadic tribes from the south, such as the Goran or Tibu, frequently came to the Jebel Ouenat and Gilf Kebir when, during the rainy season or shortly after, the region offered good pastures for their animals (cf. Almásy 1999: 168–223, esp. 215–221). This was probably an age-old tradition. In northwestern Sudan, where better climatic conditions prevailed in ancient times (cf. Kuper & Kröpelin 2006), there is archaeological evidence indicating that highly mobile groups of pastoralists roamed vast areas of the eastern Sahara around the end of the third millennium BC. Domestic donkeys served as pack animals, and the specific pottery of these groups has been found, for example, in the Laqiya region, in Wadi Hariq and up to the Wadi Howar in the south (Jesse et al. 2004; Jesse 2006). There is reason to assume that the transhumance cycles of the nomads, who might have been termed TmHw-‘Libyans’ by the Egyptians, not only encompassed these areas, but also the Jebel Ouenat region and the Nile Valley south of the Third Cataract (cf. Jesse et al. 2004: 156–158; von Czerniewicz et al. 2004: 85). The latter includes the region where the Kerma state emerged, an important trading centre perhaps, or probably, to be identified with the Yam country of Egyptian records (cf. Bonnet 1998: 89; Manzo 1999: 17–20; Obsomer 2007 [with further references]). An inscribed execration figure from Balat mentioning Yam (or a representative of it) seems to point to some relations between Dakhla and that country in the late Old Kingdom period (Grimal 1985; cf. Pantalacci, this volume) [Fig. 36]. Additionally, the raw material for some objects made of ivory, gold, and ostrich eggs that have been found in the governors’ mastaba tombs might well have come from there or other sub-Saharan regions (Valloggia 2004: figs. 75; 124; 133; 144–148). The famous biography of Harkhuf (Sethe 1933: 120–131; Lichtheim 1973: 23–27; cf. the most recent study by Obsomer 2007), and other sources, indicate that by the late 6th dynasty, a few generations before the stations of the Abu Ballas Trail were established, it had become increasingly difficult to reach Yam due to a confederacy of hostile chiefdoms in Lower Nubia: Irtjet, Setju and Wawat. On his third journey to Yam during the reign of Merenra, Harkhuf preferred a route he called ‘the Fig. 35 Sheikh Herri (on the left), the ‘king of Ouenat’ in the 1920s, and one of his fellows (Hassanein Bey 1926: fig. facing p. 192). Fig. 36 Fragments of an inscribed execration figure from Balat mentioning Yam or a representative of that country, late Old Kingdom (Grimal 1985: 112, pl. 1, slightly modified). 312 Frank Förster Fig. 37 Map of Northeast Africa showing the general course of the Abu Ballas Trail, its junctions to the Egyptian Nile Valley, and possible destinations in subSaharan regions. For the general climatic conditions, rainfall and vegetation zones during the Pharaonic periods under discussion, see Kuper & Kröpelin 2006. oasis road’ (wAt wHAt) instead of one closer to the Nile, probably to avoid trouble. This time, however, he found his trading partner not at his residence in Yam, but on his way ‘to smite TmHw-Libyans to the western corner of heaven’. Harkhuf wisely followed and ‘satisfied’ (sHtp) him, as the text in his rock tomb at Qubbet elHawa near Aswan concisely states. The journey was most successful: Harkhuf returned to Egypt with 300 donkeys laden with ‘all sorts of good products’ such as incense, ebony, oils, panther skins and ivory. When he passed by, on his way back closer to the Nile, the residence of the ruler of Irtjet, Setju and Wawat, his pack train was escorted by troops from Yam, guaranteeing a safe passage. Among the valuable goods Harkhuf finally delivered to his king there was also the information that ‘Libyan’ tribes coming from the west or northwest were, at least sporadically, in contact with Yam. So, in short, the Abu Ballas Trail may not have been the first leg of a route destined to open up new territories, or markets, in Kufra, northern Chad or the Darfur region in Sudan when the central power of the Egyptian state was already in an advanced state of deterioration. Rather, it may have been part of a route that ultimately led to the Nile Valley in Upper Nubia, south of the Third Cataract [cf. Fig. 37]. In a time when more direct communication between Egypt and Yam had become a serious problem, the search for an alternative trade route might well have become a requirement. ‘Libyan’ nomadic groups could have acted as middlemen or intermediaries, and one of their leaders who could have managed part of the profitable traffic perhaps had a The Abu Ballas Trail 313 Fig. 39 The semi-hieratic Middle Kingdom rock inscription left by the steward Mery at site Meri 95/5 (photo taken by R. Kuper in 1995). Unfortunately, in the meantime, the inscription was heavily damaged by an obscene graffito incised by a modern visitor (see Kuper 2007: fig. 12). Fig. 38 ‘Mery’s Rock’ (site Meri 95/5), about 30 km southwest of Dakhla. temporary base at Jebel Ouenat (for the formation of prehistoric ‘gateway communities’ in interregional trade systems, see Hirth 1978; cf. also Tebes 2006). The main tasks of the local administration in Dakhla would have been to organize communications, engage ‘Libyan’ groups to participate, and to make the most difficult desert stretch between the Gilf Kebir Plateau and the Dakhla Oasis passable for donkey caravans. It almost goes without saying that this scenario raises a number of questions and will remain a mere hypothesis until new material comes to light (see below). In any case, the archaeological evidence does not appear to attest to a very intense or long use of the Abu Ballas Trail in the period under discussion: the pottery seems most homogeneous and the rock engravings found at some of the stations are comparatively few in number. The four rows of notches at ‘Muhattah Jaqub’ [Fig. 16] may well represent the minimum number of seasons when all of the trail’s supply stations were ready for use. In the Middle Kingdom, probably during the 12th dynasty, the steward (imy-rA pr) Mery left a short semi-hieratic inscription, the only one so far known from the trail, at a conspicuous rock about 30 km southwest of Dakhla (‘Mery’s Rock’: Fig. 38, cf. Fig. 1) (published by Burkard 1997; cf. Baud et al. 1999: 7, fig. 8; Kuhlmann 2002: 156–158, figs. 17; 18; Förster 2011: chapter 6.3.6). As it states, Mery set 314 Frank Förster out in regnal year 23 of an unnamed king ‘in order to search out the oasis dwellers’ (r Da(r) wHAtyw) [Fig. 39].12 The arrival of foreign groups at Dakhla in the late Old Kingdom or early First Intermediate Period was probably part of the collective memory in much later times, when a chain of forts was set up in Lower Nubia, in order to control direct access to the regions further south (for the function of the Second Cataract forts see, inter alia, Trigger 1982; Kemp 1989: 166–178; Smith 1991). We do not know how far Mery advanced on his reconnaissance trip, but no Middle Kingdom pottery has been found along the trail (cf. Hendrickx et al., this volume). It was not before the early New Kingdom that large amounts of storage jars were once again deposited between Dakhla and the Gilf Kebir (see further down). 3. New evidence from Jebel Ouenat In regard to the questions raised above, things have considerably changed since the original version of this article (Förster 2007a) has been published. In 12 Burkard’s reading requires the modifications outlined by Darnell 2002: 73. Fig. 40 The recently discovered Mentuhotep inscription engraved on a conspicuous rock in the Sudanese part of Jebel Ouenat (photo: A. Zboray). November 2007, the passionate desert explorer Mark Borda, accompanied by Mahmoud Marai, surprisingly discovered a hieroglyphic rock inscription carved on a conspicuous sandstone boulder in the Sudanese part of Jebel Ouenat, a few kilometres from the well at Ayn Murr [Figs. 40; 41]. Published in 2008 (Clayton et al. 2008), this important epigraphic record, which is augmented by some pictorial representations (‘vignettes’), gives fresh impetus to efforts to reveal the historical significance of the Abu Ballas Trail in Pharaonic times (cf. Förster 2011: chapter 16.6). Unless future discoveries prove otherwise, the Egyptian expedition that left the inscription behind at this remote place, situated some 700 km from the Nile Valley, in all probability travelled along the route from Dakhla via Abu Ballas and the Gilf Kebir Plateau. In turn, this new discovery might be regarded as proof for Fig. 41 Left: Close-up of the rock inscription (photo: A. Zboray). Right: Drawing of the inscription as published by Clayton et al. (2008: 129, fig. 2). For a more accurate tracing, see Pantalacci, this volume: fig. 7. The Abu Ballas Trail 315 Fig. 42 Inscription on a 6th dynasty stone vessel found at Abusir: The Punt country, personified as a female, brings ‘all (sorts of) myrrh’ (antyw nb) to Pharaoh Teti (detail from Kaplony 1965: 37, no. 86). the assumption, expressed above, that the trail indeed continued in a southwesterly direction to Jebel Ouenat, the nearest place with permanent water. The inscription, evidently engraved by an experienced hand, consists of two main parts. On the left, the cartouche of a Pharaoh named sA-Ra MnTwHtp(w) ‘Son of (the sun-god) Ra, Mentuhotep’ is shown, introduced by the title nsw-bity ‘King of Upper and Lower Egypt’ and accompanied by the epitheton ¡r anx Dt ‘Horus (= the King), living eternally’ as well as by a representation of the king seated on a throne in a pavillon-like structure. On the right, two foreign countries, Yam (ImA/IAm) and an otherwise unattested country called Tekhebet or Tekhebeten (Txbt(n)),13 are said to bring (Hr ms) specific ‘offerings’ to the Egyptian king: incense (snTr) in the case of Yam, and a product the identification of which remains unclear due to the bad preservation of the respective hieroglyphs (mA ‘desert animal’/‘oryx’?; cf. Hannig 2003: 494) in the case of Tekhebet(en). Both countries are additionally shown as personifications delivering their goods in front of Pharaoh: a substance – probably a heap of incense carried in a basket or other container – and a living oryx, respectively. The kinds of products appear to indicate different ways of life or subsistence strategies for the countries’ inhabitants, i.e. sedentary vs. nomadic. Judging by the layout, Yam as the deliverer of incense – a product always highly valued in the Nile Valley – seems to be of greater importance since it proceeds the representation of 316 Frank Förster Tekhebet(en) and directly faces the king and his cartouche. Moreover, it is represented by two human figures – one kneeling, one prostrating in front of the king – while there is only a single kneeling figure representing Tekhebet(en). This rather spectacular discovery is indisputable proof that ancient Egyptian expeditions at least once reached Jebel Ouenat. Moreover, it attests to Egyptian contact with two foreign regions, both of which must have been accessible from the area where the inscription was found, perhaps marking a kind of contact zone or meeting place (see below). According to ancient Egyptian royal ideology and iconography, the countries are represented as dominated by the king, who receives ‘offerings’ or ‘tribute’ brought by them. In reality, however, this may just refer to the exchange of goods between trade partners (cf. Hallmann 2006). A similar representation is known, for example, from a decorated 6th dynasty stone vessel found at Abusir where the personified country of Punt is shown as bringing ‘all (sorts of) myrrh’ (antyw nb) to Pharaoh Teti [Fig. 42]. It is well conceivable that the term Tekhebet(en) refers to nomadic groups, or tribes, of TmHw‘Libyans’ who acted as middlemen or intermediaries in trade relations between Egypt and Yam, as hypothetically outlined above. Their special skills and experience in long-range desert travelling would have qualified them to do so, and a temporary base at Jebel Ouenat perhaps led to the formation of a ‘gateway community’ that participated in the profitable traffic. At times, donkey trains starting from Yam and heading for Jebel Ouenat might even have been accompanied by representatives of Yam. According to the editors, the inscribed boulder is “situated about 40 m up the slope of a hill that lies on the edge of an open plain, facing an easterly direction”. A “natural terrace measuring about 5000 13 For the difficulties in reading the latter toponym, see Pantalacci, this volume; cf. also El-Sayed 2011: 295f. Clayton et al. (2008: 131) suggest reading Txbt, from a verbal root txb meaning ‘to irrigate, to sprinkle’. According to them, this toponym might apply to the Jebel Ouenat proper (for the use of txb to describe regions receiving rainfall, see Thompson 1994: 19 [great Aton hymn, 18th dynasty]). This reading however implies that the following single (!) water-sign is a determinative and not a phonetic component n, such as is attested in the writing of the word Dt below the representation of the king [cf. Fig. 41, left]. 1 2 3 4 Fig. 43 Rock drawings found in the immediate vicinity of the Mentuhotep inscription [cf. Fig. 41], apparently representing copies made by local inhabitants or travellers of the figured ‘offering’ bearers from Yam (nos. 1; 2) and Tekhebet(en) (nos. 3; 4) (photos: A. Zboray). square metres that lies just above the inscription” may have provided “a protected place for a small settlement or encampment”; it “also offers a good look out post for observing movements in the desert below to the East and South” (Clayton et al. 2008: 129; 132). In the vicinity of the inscription, a number of rock drawings have been noted that might indeed be related to local inhabitants. Some of them appear as copies of the ‘offering’ bearers represented in the inscription’s vignettes (Zboray & Borda 2010: 187f., figs. 35–40) [Fig. 43], and most recently a drawing that seems to be a crude copy of the seated king has also been found (pers. comm. A. Zboray, March 2013; cf. now Zboray & Borda 2013: fig. 5). Moreover, there is a representation of a loaded donkey (op.cit.: fig. 7) that closely resembles that of a number of pack animals shown in a rock art scene discovered a few years ago at Karkur Talh, about 20 kilometres to the north (Cambieri & Peroschi 2010: figs. 10; 12). Here, a small donkey caravan, including some human drivers, is depicted as part of a larger composition – a most unusual, if not unique, motif in the rock art imagery of Jebel Ouenat [Fig. 44]. This new pictorial evidence adds considerable weight to the suspicion that some areas of the Jebel Ouenat were, at least sporadically, still roamed by nomadic groups around the time when the inscription was produced. In the surroundings of the inscribed boulder, other traces of human activity have Fig. 44 Representation of a train of loaded donkeys and their drivers recently discovered, among other rock art scenes, at Karkur Talh, Jebel Ouenat (Cambieri & Peroschi 2010: fig. 12; details: photos taken by A. Zboray). An almost identical image of such a pack animal has also been found in the vicinity of the Mentuhotep inscription, some 20 km to the south. The Abu Ballas Trail 317 been observed as well: a rather large number of stone circles, measuring between two and six metres in diameter (probably the remains of hut or tent bases), scattered potsherds, and a small natural cave decorated with rock drawings, along with some other rock art spots (cf. Clayton et al. 2008: 132f.; Zboray & Borda 2010: 187f., figs. 31–34). The stylistic diversity of the rock art, also including a few paintings, led to the assumption that this area was either occupied for a long period of time, or was visited by various groups at more or less the same time. According to Clayton et al. (2008: 133), there is reason to assume that the area was “some sort of temporary meeting point for diverse peoples coming from far and wide”, and it “may have been a trading hub or trans-shipment centre” “on intersecting long distance trade routes”. In any case, the great archaeological potential of this important site and its environs is clear, and future investigations – an urgent need in view of increasing desert tourism – certainly will shed more light on this matter.14 Due to the writing of the king’s name and title (with sA-Ra written within the cartouche), there is little doubt that the Pharaoh mentioned and depicted in the Jebel Ouenat inscription is Mentuhotep II of the Theban 11th dynasty (2046–1995 BC; von Beckerath 1997: 188), the founder of the Middle Kingdom (cf. von Beckerath 1999: 76–81; Postel 2004; Clayton et al. 2008: 131). However, there are some indications that point to a date proceeding the reunification of Upper and Lower Egypt during his reign. According to the available epigraphic evidence from the Nile Valley, such a writing of Mentuhotep II’s name and title only occurs in his early reign restricted to parts of Upper Egypt, while after the re-unification of Egypt the title sA-Ra is always written in front of the cartouche (cf. von Beckerath 1999: 4; 79). Moreover, the representation of the seated king shows him as wearing the Red Crown of Lower Egypt – probably a visual expression of his claim to become ruler of Egypt’s northern part as well. If the re-unification of the Two Lands would already have been achieved when the inscription was carved, the king probably would have been depicted as wearing the combined double crown of Upper and Lower Egypt. Finally, there is an important royal inscription found at Deir el-Ballas which, though only fragmentarily preserved and lacking the king’s name, has convincingly been attributed to the reign of Mentuhotep II. As it states, the king 318 Frank Förster had annexed (sdmi) both Wawat and ‘the oasis region’ (wHAt) to Upper Egypt (Ømaw) before his troops moved further north to fight against the Heracleopolitans of the 9th/10th dynasties who ruled over Lower Egypt and more southern parts of the country (cf. Fischer 1964: 112f., pl. 37; Giddy 1987: 53f.; 107; see also the most recent study by Darnell 2008). The Jebel Ouenat inscription now makes it virtually certain that the term wHAt of the Deir el-Ballas inscription refers to the southern oasis region of Dakhla and probably also Kharga (and not to Kurkur as suggested by Darnell 2004: 29), which had been brought under Theban control at a comparatively early date in 11th dynasty expansion. This is to some extent also confirmed by the recent discovery at Mut el-Kharab of epigraphic evidence attesting an early Middle Kingdom governor (HAtya) of the Dakhla Oasis who presumably lived under Mentuhotep II (Hope & Kaper 2010). In broader historical terms, the Ouenat inscription therefore appears not to date to the Middle Kingdom but to the First Intermediate Period, albeit to the end of that period. Nevertheless, there seems to be a considerable lapse of time between the establishment and earliest period of use of the Abu Ballas Trail and its stations, on the one hand, and the creation of the inscription, on the other, since the datable artefacts found along the trail clearly point to the very end of the Old Kingdom – i.e., the 8th dynasty – or the beginning of the First Intermediate Period, as outlined above. However, it cannot be excluded that the route and its pottery deposits continued to be used, if only occasionally, for several decades, namely by travellers who did not leave any ‘fresh’ material behind that would show up in the archaeological record as definitely more recent, such as domestic pottery. This line of reasoning is supported by a single radiocarbon date that has been obtained from a charcoal sample taken from a hearth excavated in front of the small cave at Abu Ballas [cf. Fig. 22]. The date, 2060 ± 70 calBC (KIA-20682), attests to activities during the late First Intermediate Period, which did not leave 14 To our knowledge, no scientific investigation has yet been carried out in the area, the exact location of which is being kept secret to prevent disturbance or vandalism. Unfortunately, in autumn 2010, an attempt to personally visit the site from Khartoum failed, due to the insecure general situation caused by rebel movements in the Darfur conflict. any other recognizable traces on the spot (or elsewhere along the route, as far as is known today). Moreover, the already mentioned remains of barley grain found in one of a group of four late Old Kingdom/early First Intermediate Period storage jars at site Jaqub 00/20 [cf. Fig. 11] surprisingly provided a radiocarbon date of 1845 ± 55 calBC (Poz-23221). This proves that at least the few jars at this site (and perhaps at others as well) had been reused in much later times. Dating to the 12th dynasty, this small supply depot, placed at a distance of 166 km from Balat and both conspicuously marked and protected by an intricate arrangement of stone slabs, can perhaps even be related to the reconnaissance trip of the steward Mery who left the short semihieratic rock inscription c. 30 km southwest of Dakhla [cf. Fig. 39]. It is, therefore, quite conceivable that the 11th dynasty expedition party – perhaps equally small in number as Mery’s group later on – had reused some of the old storage jars to get to the Gilf Kebir, and further on to Jebel Ouenat. In general, it should be assumed that the Abu Ballas Trail saw much more traffic than can be proven archaeologically at this time – a well-known problem in any attempt to study ‘nomadic’ activities (cf., for example, Hauser, ed., 2006). The reasons why Mentuhotep II, according to the Deir el-Ballas inscription, conquered Wawat early in his reign are quite understandable. Controlling this region would have eliminated the potential threat of attack on the Theban kingdom by Lower Nubian groups while struggling with the Heracleopolitans and their allies in the north (cf. Zibelius-Chen 1988: 230). Moreover, Mentuhotep II might have reinforced his army by ‘recruiting’ a considerable number of Nubian mercenaries (cf. Darnell 2004) and, last but not least, he might also have wished to re-open the traditional trade route to regions further south, i.e. in Upper Nubia. In contrast, the reasons for the ‘annexation’ of the southern oases, especially Dakhla, to the Theban realm at such an early date – perhaps even before Wawat was conquered – are, at first glance, less obvious. The economic potential of the distant oases was limited, and major efforts to integrate Kharga into the administrative and economic system of Upper Egypt and to secure access to that region along the Girga Road apparently did not take place before the 12th dynasty (cf. Darnell, this volume). Also, provided he was still loyal to the legal successors of the Memphite kings in the north, the Egyptian governor who ruled Dakhla during the late First Intermediate Period would hardly have commanded military forces strong enough to pose a serious threat that had to be eliminated by the Thebans before moving on towards Middle and Lower Egypt. Therefore, Mentuhotep II’s strategy to bring wHAt under his control early in his reign, as well as the raison d’être of his inscription at Jebel Ouenat, might tentatively be explained as follows. On behalf of the Heracleopolitan court, the local officials in Dakhla continued (or at least aimed) to collect sub-Saharan trade goods delivered by ‘Libyan’ nomadic groups along a desert route via Jebel Ouenat and Gilf Kebir, and transferred them to the Nile Valley, most likely along the Darb el-Tawil, thus bypassing Upper Egypt and the Theban realm [cf. Fig. 37]. Well aware of the importance of luxury items – such as incense, ivory, oils, skins, and perhaps even gold – for maintaining royal power and prestige, Mentuhotep II decided to cut off the Heracleopolitans’ only access to those products by taking their outpost in Dakhla. By doing so, he might already have dealt them a serious blow before a more direct confrontation in the Nile Valley was arranged. Once Dakhla was occupied, a mission was sent to the temporary base at Jebel Ouenat of the ‘Libyan’ groups that acted as middlemen in long-distance trade relations between Egypt and Yam. The ‘official’ if not propagandistic inscription the mission left behind clearly showed who was to become the new lord in Egypt, and its pictorial elements made this message understandable even to foreigners. Whether the place-name Demi-iu recorded on the older clay tablets from Balat [cf. Figs. 33; 34] actually referred to the site or area where the Mentuhotep inscription was found cannot, of course, be proven. The 11th dynasty scribe applied (ad hoc?) a different, more general term to refer to the nomadic groups and their supposed ‘homeland’, a term that might, or might not, have denoted the entire Jebel Ouenat region (cf. n. 13, above). Be that as it may, there is no reason to doubt that the principal trade partner of the Egyptians was the same in both periods: Yam. Considering the remote location of the rock inscription, situated some 700 km from the Nile Valley, this new epigraphic attestation of the country adds “a whole new dimension to the debate concerning the location of this foreign land”, as the editors rightly state (Clayton et al. 2008: 129). The Abu Ballas Trail 319 Yam – or what the ancient Egyptians conceived to be Yam – might actually have been located much further to the west (and south) than has hitherto been assumed by most scholars (cf. Obsomer 2007 [with further references]), including sub-Saharan regions like Darfur in Sudan (as already suggested by Arkell 1961: 42–44; 214)15 or the Ennedi mountains in Chad [cf. Fig. 37]. Even an area as remote as the Chad Basin, advocated by C. Bergmann as the ultimate target of the Egyptian activities along the Abu Ballas Trail (Bergmann 2001: 376; 457f.; cf. most recently also Schneider 2010; 2011), cannot fully be excluded.16 However, the autobiographical inscription of Weni from Abydos, which provides the earliest notion of Yam (6th dynasty, reign of Pepi I), mentions mercenaries from that country who participated in an Asiatic campaign together with recruits from Irtjet, Medja, Wawat and other foreign regions. The same text also refers to Yamites having been hired by the Egyptians as workmen (Sethe 1933: 101; 109; cf. Edel 1955: 65). This does not attest to a location of Yam very far from the Nile Valley, at least in those times. Moreover, from an archaeological point of view, up to now only Kerma in the Dongola Reach south of the Third Cataract has qualified to be regarded as the potential trading centre or capital of the perhaps quite extensive kingdom of Yam (cf. Bonnet 1998; Lacovara 1999 [with further references]). One also has to keep in mind that this foreign land, provided it was indeed situated somewhere between the Third and Fourth Cataract, might perhaps only have acted as an intermediary of sub-Saharan trade goods that were delivered from regions further to the south or southwest. Finally, the Egyptian denomination ImA/IAm might have been rather vague in terms of a precise geographical setting, comparable with the broad meaning of TA-TmHw that apparently subsumed the entire realm of all the ‘Libyan’ tribes west of the Nile Val- 15 For a route connecting El-Fasher and Jebel Ouenat, which was used in the early 20th century AD, see Arkell 1922; Almásy 1935. 16 Whereas regions like the Shendi Reach of the Nile south of the Fifth Cataract (cf. O’Connor 1986) or Lower Nubia between the First and Second Cataract (cf., for example, Kuhlmann 2002: 139–142) can hardly be claimed any longer as the potential location of Yam. 320 Frank Förster ley (cf. Snape 2003: 94f.; see also Liszka 2011). As such, from an Egyptian point of view, ‘Yam’ might also have encompassed sub-Saharan regions that were located at a considerable distance west of the Nile. Wherever Yam and its hinterland were located in the late third millennium BC, it can be stated with some certainty now that the Abu Ballas Trail was part of an alternative trade route through the Libyan Desert that connected Pharaonic Egypt with sub-Saharan regions, at least in the troubled times of the late Old Kingdom/First Intermediate Period. The use of this trans-Saharan route probably predates that of the famous Darb el-Arbain between Asyut and Darfur by many centuries (cf. Roe 2005– 2006). The Egyptians themselves might have travelled the route in its entire length rarely – if at all. They apparently preferred the goods from the south to be delivered by cooperating ‘Libyan’ groups. Nevertheless, it was their organizational and logistical skills that set the scene: By building a ‘bridge’ consisting of a chain of supply depots between the Gilf Kebir and Dakhla Oasis they enabled donkey trade caravans to cross the most difficult desert stretch along the route. With the re-unification of Egypt and the construction of the great fortress complex along the Second Cataract in Nubia the Abu Ballas Trail appears to have fallen out of use, at least in regard to caravan traffic with huge numbers of pack animals (cf. Förster 2011: chapter 17). Mery’s rock inscription and the barley deposit at site Jaqub 00/20 mentioned above constitute the only known traces of small-scale operations in those times, and the conspicuous lack of any Middle Kingdom ceramics along the trail is an important piece of (negative) evidence supporting this view. Moreover, Dakhla seems to have declined to a rather insignificant outpost of the Pharaonic empire and remained so for most of the Middle Kingdom period. The former capital at Ayn Asil lay in ruins, and the area was not resettled before the 13th dynasty (cf. Marchand & Soukiassian 2010). In fact, local governors (HAtyw-a) still (or again) reigned in the oasis from an unknown base yet to be discovered. However, they appear to have enjoyed a rather independent life, even able to represent themselves with royal insignia (cf. Baud et al. 1999). At times, the distant oasis became a refuge for criminal elements from the Nile Valley, and in the early 12th dynasty Sesostris I even had to send a military expedition from Thebes ‘in order to secure the land of the oasis dwellers’ (r irt rwD tA wHAtyw) (Anthes 1930; Schäfer 1905; cf. Giddy 1987: 56–58; 61; see also Darnell, this volume). Middle Kingdom Dakhla therefore appears as a lonely outpost in foreign territory without strong ties to the Nile Valley. 4. The Abu Ballas Trail in later Pharaonic periods Compared to the late Old Kingdom/First Intermediate Period, much less conclusive information is currently available on the trail’s use in Pharaonic periods following the Middle Kingdom. The archaeological evidence from a number of sites – almost exclusively consisting of ceramics only – proves little more than that the route, or part thereof, was again travelled along during Second Intermediate Period and New Kingdom times. Later Pharaonic activities are, as yet, not attested.17 While a fortunate constellation of various sources permitted appraisal of the purpose and historical significance of the trail during the former periods, any attempt to shed light on the motivations behind its later use remains sophisticated guesswork at best. In general, one should always keep in mind the possibility that the reasons for travelling the Abu Ballas Trail might have changed over time, especially when considering the different socio-economic and geo-political situations of the Nile Valley and remote regions during the various periods concerned. 4.1. Second Intermediate Period The activities in the Second Intermediate Period (c. 1800–1550 BC) are evidenced by the remains of a few vessels only (cf. Hendrickx et al., this volume). This alone indicates that the trail was not travelled by large donkey caravans in those times, but by 17 With the possible exception of a radiocarbon date (1060 ± 60 calBC, KIA-12423) obtained from a date stone, Phoenix dactylifera, excavated in a hearth at site Jaqub 99/30 (‘Muhattah Umm el-Alamat’). This date may point to activities during the early Third Intermediate Period (21st dynasty; cf. von Beckerath 1997: 190). small groups that did not depend on a chain of supply depots comparable in size to those dating to the late Old Kindom/First Intermediate Period. Considering the circumstances of extreme wind erosion in the desert, it is hardly conceivable that large amounts of late Old Kingdom/First Intermediate Period storage jars were still preserved well enough to have been reused during the Second Intermediate Period. Moreover, the few vessels, all made from an untempered oasis fabric, were not found in archaeological relation with the older pottery present at each of the four sites concerned (Meri 99/37, Jaqub 99/35, 99/31 and 99/32). Notably, these sites are all situated within the first third of the route, up to a distance of c. 130 km from Balat, whereas no finds of Second Intermediate Period age are known from regions further to the southwest (cf. Hendrickx et al., this volume: tab. 1; fig. 32). This may point to limited activities of hunting parties from Dakhla (cf. Pantalacci & Lesur-Gebremariam 2009) or Egyptian desert patrols that monitored areas southwest of the oasis, such as are known from other regions and periods (e.g., in Middle Kingdom Nubia as recorded by the Semna dispatches, cf. Smither 1945, or in the region of Kurkur Oasis under the reign of Tutankhamun, cf. Darnell 2003; see also Hendrickx et al., this volume: figs. 29; 31). In regard to potential desert patrols, it is interesting to note that the few sites that yielded Second Intermediate Period pottery are, roughly speaking, situated up to the point where the southeastern extension of the Great Sand Sea ends [cf. Figs. 1; 37]. This happens to be the area most effective for surveying traffic from the north to the south, or vice versa, that aims to bypass the western side of Dakhla. There, only a comparatively narrow corridor between the escarpment of the Egyptian Limestone Plateau to the east and the longitudinal dune fields of the Great Sand Sea to the west would have permitted movement in those directions. Although not precisely datable due to the bad preservation of the few jars and bowls, it is tempting to relate the Second Intermediate Period activities along this leg of the trail to a well-known event in a time when Egypt was, again, divided into two parts – the northern ruled by the foreign Hyksos and their vassals (15th/16th dynasties) and the southern by the Thebans of the 17th dynasty. According to a historical text preserved on two stelae and the so-called Carnavon tablet, and dating to the The Abu Ballas Trail 321 reign of Kamose, the last king of the 17th dynasty (cf. Habachi 1972; Smith & Smith 1976), a Hyksos messenger was intercepted by a Theban patrol in the surroundings of an unnamed oasis (m-Hrt [or m Hryt] wHAt) (cf. Smith & Smith 1976: 61; Giddy 1987: 66; Kuhlmann 2002: 146; Graeff 2005: 71, n. 4). This messenger carried a letter sent by the Hyksos king Apophis, from his residence in the eastern Nile Delta, to Nubia in order to convince the king of Kush/Kerma to engage the Thebans in Upper Egypt in a two-front war. By intercepting the message Kamose defeated this plan, and his successor Ahmose later on managed to drive the Hyksos out of the Delta and to re-unite Upper and Lower Egypt. The glorious times of the 18th dynasty began. This is not to say that the messenger, who probably chose a route leading from the western Nile Delta or Fayum via the chain of Western Desert oases to southern Kharga and further on to Nubia, was of all things intercepted southwest of the Dakhla Oasis. Most scholars indeed favour identification of wHAt in the text with Bahariya (cf. Colin 2005 [with further references]) since the same text also mentions the capture of that oasis – clearly referred to as ©sDs – by Kamose’s troops at a later point of time. However, there are other opinions, suggesting the environs of either Kharga or Dakhla as the region where the event actually took place (Osing 1994: 163; Kuhlmann 2002: 146f.; Graeff 2005: 71f.; see also Darnell 2007: 41). The small-scale operations along the Abu Ballas Trail during the Second Intermediate Period may rather be regarded as another indication of a general Theban strategy to control various Western Desert routes in order to monitor traffic and avoid disagreeable communications between Lower Egypt and Nubia – and this perhaps even before the reign of Kamose.18 This tentative suggestion is however only one conceivable scenario among others that would ex- 18 Direct or indirect contacts between Dakhla and Nubia during the Second Intermediate Period are attested by a small number of bowls excavated at Ayn Asil and identified as “céramique domestique de tradition Kerma”. See Marchand & Soukiassian 2010: VI; 206f.; figs. 263–265; photos 458–460 (on p. 325). For a Kushite attack on Elkab in Upper Egypt during the Second Intermediate Period, proving the very real threat that could be expected from the south in those times, see Davies 2003. 322 Frank Förster plain the presence of Second Intermediate Period pottery along the trail (cf. Förster 2011: chapter 18.1). In any case, use of Dakhla as the startingpoint for these activities does not appear to have been a major focus for the Nile Valley Egyptians during most of this period. According to the limited archaeological evidence available from the oasis itself, there are no indications for the presence of local governors (or other officials) or any administrative buildings which could point to the oasis’ integration into the Nilotic administration and economy (cf. Baud 1997; Marchand & Soukiassian 2010). At Ayn Asil, an Egyptian settlement is known to have existed around 1700–1600 BC (Marchand & Soukiassian 2010), apparently a “self-sufficient community without strong links to the Valley” (Bourriau in op.cit.: VI). Direct contacts are there only attested for somewhat later times, mainly through ceramic imports from the Nile Valley and locally produced vessels of Nilotic forms, both dating to the end of the Second Intermediate Period or the beginning of the New Kingdom (for a similar situation in Kharga, see Darnell, this volume). However, the settlement at Ayn Asil apparently had already been abandoned at that time, and the pottery finds seem to indicate temporary activities only, “rather an expedition than any long term occupation” (Bourriau in Marchand & Soukiassian 2010: VIf.). Such expeditions from the Nile Valley, using temporary bases both in Kharga and Dakhla, might have been of growing interest to investigate both the strategic and economic potential of the southern oases and their route network at the turn of a new epoch. 4.2. New Kingdom, 18th dynasty In the later 18th dynasty (c. 1400–1300 BC), the Abu Ballas Trail saw a revival of – comparatively speaking – large-scale caravan traffic (cf. Förster 2011: chapter 18.2). This is evidenced by more than a hundred large storage jars, almost exclusively amphorae, which have been found at eight sites. The distribution of these sites indicates that the trail was travelled along in its full length in those times (cf. Hendrickx et al., this volume: tab.1; fig. 32). The last known supply station, site El-Nahud 00/6 (‘Khasin Berlin’) [Fig. 45], was situated only a few kilometres from the eastern outskirts of the Gilf Kebir Plateau. Compared to the late Old Kingdom/First Fig. 45 18th dynasty pottery deposit at site El-Nahud 00/6, situated a few kilometres from the eastern outskirts of the Gilf Kebir (for a close-up of some vessels, see Hendrickx et al., this volume: fig. 14). Intermediate Period activities, however, both the number of sites and the amount of jars so far attested from this period are considerably lower. The estimated capacity of the main supply depots would have provided water for caravans consisting of about 25–30 donkeys at best, limiting the maximum amount of cargo that could be transported to c. 1.5–1.8 tons. This is only a third of what was possible in the former period (cf. Hendrickx et al., this volume). Moreover, no domestic pottery such as cups, bowls or vats have yet been found at the sites (although it must be noted that some of them have only been surveyed and still await excavation). With the possible exception of a rock art panel at site Jaqub 99/34 (‘Muhattah Amphorae’), no rock engravings which could definitely be attributed to the 18th dynasty are attested along the route (cf. Förster 2011: chapter 6.3). A number of fundamental differences, both in regard to the scale and organization of the caravan traffic, are therefore visible when compared to the late Old Kingdom/First Intermediate Period activities. The main supply stations apparently were not manned by people who stayed there for a while to keep watch over the provisions until they would be needed. There is also no indication of local bread production at the sites. Moreover, the pottery deposits do not appear to have been thoroughly installed in order to maintain them for a longer period of time (for site Jaqub 99/34, see Hendrickx et al., this volume: fig. 34). Finally, the storage jars seem rather homogeneous in terms of fabric, shape and fabrication technique, except for a few vessels from site El-Nahud 00/6 (cf. op.cit.). All of this points to a low intensity of caravan traffic during the 18th dynasty, probably restricted to a relatively short period of time. In view of the distribution pattern of the main supply stations (cf. Hendrickx et al., this volume: fig. 32) there is little doubt that the expeditions of the 18th dynasty did not start from Ayn Asil, but rather from a much closer point in the southwestern part of Dakhla, probably Mut el-Kharab or its surroundings. Recent excavations directed by C.A. Hope on behalf of the Dakhleh Oasis Project have revealed that Mut el-Kharab was a major settlement and likely the oasis’ capital from sometime in the New Kingdom onwards (cf. Hope 2005; Hope et al. 2008; Long 2008; Hope & Kaper 2010: 221; 2011: 219–226). Although administrative buildings still await discovery, the names of a number of New Kingdom rulers are attested on reused blocks excavated at the site, namely Thutmosis III, Haremhab, and Ramses IV (op.cit.). The desert deity Seth, lord of chaos, was venerated here in Ramesside times and perhaps even earlier, and his cult continued uninterrupted into the Roman period (Hope & Kaper 2011: 226ff., esp. 235). It is not easy to understand the reasons for travelling the Abu Ballas Trail up to the Gilf Kebir, and possibly further on, in a time when both the Western Desert’s oases and Nubia were under direct control by the Egyptians (in contrast to the historical periods discussed above). Both distant regions now were part of the empire’s administrative and economic system: Kharga and Dakhla as ‘the Southern The Abu Ballas Trail 323 Fig. 46 Representatives of African countries bringing various luxury items such as gold, ebony, incense (?), and a leopard skin. Fragment of painted plaster from the Theban tomb of Sobekhotep, 18th dynasty. Courtesy of the British Museum, London (inv. EA 922). Oasis’ (wHAt rsyt), as well as ‘the Northern Oasis’ (wHAt mHtyt) consisting of Bahariya and Farafra, were firmly connected to the Nile Valley, and a high official (Hry-tp n wHAt or HAty-a n wHAt) who resided in This/Thinis in the 8th Upper Egyptian nome19 was responsible for all affairs concerned with them (cf. Giddy 1987: 65–93; Valloggia 2004: 167–169; see also Darnell, this volume). The latter included the import of agricultural products from the oases, such as baskets and bags, textiles, cereals, dates and – perhaps most important – wine (cf. Giddy 1980; 1987: 84–90; 156f.; tab. 8; Marchand & Tallet 1999; Hallmann 2006: 272f.). Archaeological as well as epigraphic evidence from Ayn Asil proves the existence of an institution – or at least major storage yard – at this site, from which large quantities of wine amphorae were trans-shipped to the Nile Valley during the 18th and probably up to the 20th dynasty (cf. Marchand & Tallet 1999). In the vicinity of Ayn Asil as well as in Mut el-Kharab, settlements and temples or chapels are attested too (cf. op.cit.; 324 Frank Förster Hope & Kaper 2011). At the same time, Nubia was controlled and administered as an Egyptian province by a viceroy holding the title of ‘the King’s Son of Kush’. Just as representatives of the western oases appear as ‘offering’ or ‘tribute’ bearers in 18th dynasty high officials’ tombs in Thebes, so too do Nubians and representatives of other African countries, delivering their valuable products from the south [Figs. 46; 47]. Under the reign of Thutmosis III (1479–1425 BC), the Pharaonic empire had reached its greatest extension of power, stretching from the Euphrates region in the north to sub-Saharan areas south of the Fourth Cataract (cf., e.g., Morenz & Popko 2010 [with further references]). Pharaoh received goods, tributes and manpower from far and wide. Against this background, it is difficult to imagine that the Abu Ballas Trail again served as an alternative trade route into sub-Saharan regions as was apparently the case in the late Old Kingdom/First Intermediate Period under completely different economic and geo-political circumstances. Although probably restricted to a relatively short period of time, it however should be noted that the 18th dynasty activities along the trail could only roughly be dated through archaeological material. The typological analysis of the pottery (cf. Hendrickx et al., this volume), in combination with a radiocarbon date obtained from donkey droppings excavated at Abu Ballas (1360 ± 40 calBC, KIA23062), provides a date range of at least 80 years, spanning from the reign of Amenophis II to that of Tutankhamun or his successor Ay (c. 1400–1320 BC). During this period, the general situation in Nubia – as well as in other distant regions – might have undergone considerable changes, and military campaigns to secure the southern province were conducted more than once during the 18th dynasty (cf. Zibelius-Chen 1988). From a historical perspective, it would therefore make a notable difference if one knew whether the activities took place, for ex- 19 Already in the late 6th dynasty, Harkhuf had chosen the Thinite Nome as the starting-point for his third journey to Yam via ‘the oasis road’ (wAt wHAt), see Valloggia 1981; Osing 1994: 164, n. 22. For the route connecting This/Thinis with the southern oases, see Marchand & Tallet 1999: 308 with n. 11; Graeff 2005: 75–80; 109–111; maps 10; 19. Fig. 47 Ancient Egyptian registration of African merchandise: gold, ivory, ebony, leopard skins, incense (?), ostrich feathers and eggs, etc. Theban tomb of Rekhmire, 18th dynasty (Castiglioni et al. 1998: fig. on p. 15). ample, in the reign of Thutmosis III’s immediate successor, Amenophis II, or in the Amarna or postAmarna period, i.e. at the other end of the respective time span. Nevertheless, it is reasonable to expect that any efforts either to maintain or to (re-)open access to sub-Saharan regions and their products would, in those times, normally have emanated from somewhere in the Nubian Nile Valley, rather than from distant Dakhla and through forbidding desert country. Therefore, other motivations might have prompted the trail’s temporary use in the later 18th dynasty. Since the examination of a scarab in one of Tutankhamun’s pectorals surprisingly proved that the gem was made of a piece of ‘Libyan Desert Glass’ (cf. de Michele 1998) [Fig. 48], it was claimed that this exotic piece found its way to the jewelleryworkshops at either Tell el-Amarna or Thebes via the Abu Ballas Trail and the southern oases (cf. George 2000; Kuhlmann 2002: 158; Kuper 2003b: 25). This indeed seems likely. However, a single piece of ‘Libyan Desert Glass’ found in the Nile Valley does not prove that Egyptian expeditions ever reached the so-called ‘Glass Area’, which is situated about 200 km north of the Gilf Kebir, at the southwestern fringes of the Great Sand Sea [cf. Fig. 37]. Here, it is probable that a meteorite impact some millions of years ago caused sand and sandstone to melt under high pressures and temperatures, creating lumps of a natural silica glass which are unique world-wide. There is no indication at all of a Pharaonic presence in this region, and an attempt to get there by way of the Abu Ballas Trail, heading to the southern Gilf Kebir, would have meant an enormous detour. Given the fact that both artefacts and raw pieces of ‘Libyan Desert Glass’ were spread by prehistoric people over hundreds of kilometres from the source area (cf. Riemer 2007b: fig. 7), it is much more straightforward to assume that Tutankhamun’s scarab was made of a stray find, either Fig. 48 One of the pectorals found in the tomb of Tutankhamun, 18th dynasty, now on display in the Egyptian Museum in Cairo (JdE 61884; photo courtesy of G. Negro). The small scarab (18 x 28 mm) in the center is made of a piece of ‘Libyan Desert Glass’ (cf. de Michele 1998). The Abu Ballas Trail 325 picked up by a member of an Egyptian expedition or nomads at some point west or southwest of Dakhla, and then taken along to the oasis. A tiny little piece of Desert Glass, measuring c. 30 x 12 mm, indeed has been found at one of the smaller stations along the Abu Ballas Trail, at site Meri 00/16, only about 30 km southwest of Dakhla. As a surface find however, it was not related to the Pharaonic pottery (dating to the late Old Kingdom/First Intermediate Period) that has been found at the site, and other prehistoric artefacts were present in the immediate vicinity as well. Therefore, the idea of Egyptians ‘harvesting’ ‘Libyan Desert Glass’ in the area of its origin does not appear to be a convincing explanation of the 18th dynasty activities along the trail (cf. Kuhlmann 2002: 158; Förster 2011: chapter 6.6.5). In view of the location of, and distance to, the Kufra Oases in modern Libya [cf. Fig. 37], it seems equally improbable that the expeditions under discussion aimed for that distant region in order to investigate its economic and/or strategic potential. If New Kingdom Egyptians had any knowledge at all about the existence of this isolated group of oases (cf. Kuhlmann 2002: 158; this volume), they would have chosen another, more direct route to get there, i.e. via the northern part of the Gilf Kebir. Again, there is, as yet, no archaeological evidence which would attest to the use of such a route in Pharaonic times. Provided the 18th dynasty activities along the Abu Ballas Trail continued beyond the Gilf Kebir, in all probability they would have led to Jebel Ouenat and its natural water resources, just as in the late Old Kingdom/First Intermediate Period. Whether nomadic groups were still (sporadically) present in this region and could, again, have acted as intermediaries or middlemen in interregional trade relations cannot yet be proven, but deteriorating climatic conditions might have caused their complete disappearance. A few Nubian ceramics excavated at Balat/Ayn Asil which date to the end of the Second Intermediate Period or early New Kingdom point to direct or indirect contact between Dakhla and regions further to the south (Marchand & Tallet 1999: 326; 333; 338; fig. 45). This pottery, however, could have been imported via the Kharga Oasis, rather than along a desert route much further to the west.20 Considering the apparent short-term use of the Abu Ballas Trail during the 18th dynasty, the activities might best be considered against the back- 326 Frank Förster ground of the Pharaonic concept of ‘extending the existing’, a vital part of royal ideology that was, naturally, of special importance during the imperialistic New Kingdom (cf. Hornung 1990: 87f.). Driven by ambitions to extend, if possible, the Pharaonic realm further to the ‘wild west’ rather than by serious economic needs, some efforts could have been made to search out the potential benefits to the empire of regions like the Gilf Kebir or Jebel Ouenat, or even areas beyond. It might have quickly become apparent that there were no natural resources, no areas to be cultivated, and no points of contact or strategic importance which were worth the organizational and logistical efforts necessary to conduct large-scale caravan traffic along an old long-distance desert route, the existence of which was perhaps still known in Dakhla. The same conclusion might have been achieved if the Egyptians were checking out the possibility of establishing, in addition to the Nile Valley route, a second access route to sub-Saharan regions in order to directly reach areas like the Darfur region and thereby become independent of intermediaries in the south. A curious piece of shiny stone was perhaps the most valuable object these expeditions brought back to Dakhla. In contrast to such a scenario, however, it is also conceivable that the motivations behind the 18th dynasty activities were of a more local or regional scale, and the possible role of ‘Libyan’ nomads from the southwest lies completely in the dark. All of this, however, remains speculation until new material comes to light. It is possible that related evidence may show up through further investigations both in the Gilf Kebir/Jebel Ouenat region and in Dakhla, especially in the area of Mut el-Kharab, where perhaps some informative written evidence still awaits discovery. 20 In this context, a small sandstone stela discovered in the region of the Kurkur Oasis in Lower Nubia, c. 55 km southwest of Aswan, and dating to the reign of Tutankhamun may be mentioned (Darnell 2003; cf. Hendrickx et al., this volume: fig. 31). As its hieroglyphic text states, desert patrols were regularly monitoring large areas west of the Nubian Nile Valley, which attests to a more or less intensive traffic in this region during those times. Cf. Darnell 2007: 43: “Egyptian hegemony over Nubia was further supported by the creation of the ‘Western Wall of Pharaoh’, apparently a string of outposts and patrol routes [...]. The defensive ensemble appears to have been governed out of the fortress of Faras, and extended at least as far north as the oasis of Kurkur.” 4.3. Late New Kingdom (Ramesside Period) Only three sites along the Abu Ballas Trail yielded pottery that can be attributed to the Ramesside Period (19th–20th dynasties; 1292–1070/69 BC according to von Beckerath 1997: 190). All of them are situated within the first half of the trail, and at one site (Jaqub 00/19) the remains consist of a single vessel only, probably removed in later times from one of the other two sites under discussion. The latter however range among the trail’s largest pottery deposits. At site Jaqub 99/33 (‘Muhattah el-Homareen’) [Fig. 49] and Jaqub 99/30 (‘Muhattah Umm el-Alamat’) [Fig. 50], 95 and 71 large storage jars are attested, respectively (cf. Hendrickx et al., this volume: tab. 1; figs. 32; 35). The jars from both sites are rather uniform in shape – generally with small vertical handles – and identical in terms of fabric and fabrication technique. They appear to have been produced in Dakhla especially for the purpose of being taken into the desert (op.cit.). Almost identical potmarks representing resting donkeys, incised before firing and obviously made by the same hand, were found on vessels from both sites, thus proving the latter to have been elements of the same operation (see inserts in Figs. 49; 50; cf. Hendrickx et al., this volume: fig. 25). Besides the storage jars, only a few pieces of domestic pottery have been recovered: a spouted vessel, a small plate, a cup, and a restricted bowl (op.cit.). A sample from the well-preserved remains of a basket excavated at site Jaqub 99/33 [cf. Fig. 27] yielded a radiocarbon date of 1230 ± 70 calBC (UtC8868), thus dating the desert operation to the first half of the Ramesside Period (19th/early 20th dynasty). Taking into account another radiocarbon date that was obtained from a sample of charcoal from a hearth excavated at site Jaqub 99/30 (1180 ± 90 calBC; Erl-2877), the activities can be dated somewhat more precisely to 1270–1160 BC. This date range covers the reigns of seven kings, from Ramses II to Ramses III (cf. Förster 2011: chapter 6.2). This desert operation almost certainly started from Mut el-Kharab (or its surroundings), which, by the Ramesside Period at the latest, had become both the oasis’ capital and its religious centre, and remained so for centuries (see above). Site Jaqub 99/33 is situated at a distance of c. 90 km from Mut el-Kharab, i.e. about three days by donkey, while site Jaqub 99/30 is only 33 km further to the southwest. This distance between the two pottery deposits is conspicuously short, and does not fit with the much larger intervals between the other main supply stations along the Abu Ballas Trail (ranging from 64 to c. 90 km; cf. Hendrickx et al., this volume: tab. 2). Moreover, all of the nearly 100 vessels at ‘Muhattah el-Homareen’ were found in a general deposit rather atypical for large pottery dumps. Instead of having been concentrated near the foot of a hill or outcrop, they were spread over c. 300 square metres amid a sweeping, sandy plain that did not offer any natural shelter for protection against the wind. Accordingly, the preservation of the jars is very bad. Their appearance when they were discovered in March 1999 was recorded on a photo taken by C. Bergmann [Fig. 49]. They resemble the description given by Jarvis (1936: 115) of the northern pottery deposit at Abu Ballas that was discovered 76 years earlier, in March 1923: “[...] we noticed some queer small red circles flush with the surface of the ground, and on examination they proved to be large earthenware pots buried in the soil with the exposed portion neatly sliced off by the action of the blown sand. The pottery was nearly an inch thick and of the hardest earthenware, but the friction of the sand had cut clean through it.” However, in contrast to the better protected late Old Kingdom/First Intermediate Period storage jars at Abu Ballas, of which several had been found with a sandblasted hole in the vessel wall while others remained intact (cf. Fig. 3; Hendrickx et al., this volume: fig. 10,1), almost all of the Ramesside vessels at site Jaqub 99/33 were reduced to bowl-like remains, or even to shapeless wall sherds, eroded from all sides. The short distance between the two sites, the unsheltered location with the rather chaotic distribution of the vessels at ‘Muhattah el-Homareen’, and particularly the absence of any other Ramesside pottery deposits further to the southwest, all point to one conclusion: At some point during the 19th or early 20th dynasty an attempt had been made to create again a chain of supply stations along the trail. This would have allowed for caravan traffic of a considerable scale, judged by the storage capacity of respectively 1900 and 1420 litres available at the sites (cf. Hendrickx et al., this volume: tab. 2). However, due to unknown reasons – a sudden sandstorm perhaps? – the undertaking was aborted, and The Abu Ballas Trail 327 Fig. 49 Site Jaqub 99/33 on the day of discovery (picture reproduced from Bergmann 2001: 7th photo between pp. 272/273; for an aerial photograph of the Ramesside pottery deposit, see Hendrickx et al., this volume: fig. 35). The insert shows one of the vessels from the site which bears the engraved representation of two resting donkeys (cf. Hendrickx et al., this volume: fig. 25). This unusual potmark motif inspired Bergmann to name the site ‘Muhattah el-Homareen’, ‘Station of the two donkeys’. never taken up again. Without any detailed information on hand, it would be idle to speculate on all possible scenarios that could have led to this undertaking, and its failure (cf. Förster 2011: chapter 18.3). Compared to the 18th dynasty situation discussed above, a more precise chronological determination of the Ramesside activities along the trail is even more desirable. During this period, the Pharaonic empire faced a number of growing threats, including imperialistic struggles outside of Egypt proper with the Hittite empire under the long reign of Ramses II (1279– 1213 BC); the advance of the so-called Sea Peoples from the eastern Mediterranean; and the threat posed by wandering ‘Libyan’ tribes from the northwest – probably originating from regions within the Cyrenaica – such as the archaeologically poorly known Tjehenu, Meshwesh and Libu, in the course of the following reigns (for the latter, see Osing 1980; O’Connor 1990a; Jansen-Winkeln 2002; Snape 2003).21 The situation in Nubia also underwent considerable changes, starting from a rather firm control of the southern countries under Ramses II, who built some of the most impressive rock temples in Nubia, up to the time of Ramses III (1183/82– 1152/51 BC) when a ‘King’s Son of Kush’ is still attested but probably lost much of the former power 328 Frank Förster attributed to this office. Already under the reign of Merenptah (1213–1203 BC) a Nubian revolt, apparently coordinated with ‘Libyan’ attacks in the north (cf. Manassa 2003: 95–97), had to be put down, and in view of the growing military challenges in Lower Egypt this situation will not have improved during the following decades (for the individual reigns, see the concise summaries in Schneider 1994). The penetration of ‘Libyan’ tribes into the western Nile Delta, which had been prevented during the reign of Ramses II through the construction of a chain of fortified well stations along the Marmarican coast (cf. Snape 2003: 100–105; Snape, this volume), finally led to the great ‘Libyan’ wars under Merenptah and, later on, Ramses III. In the course 21 Cf. also the more general remarks by O’Connor (1990b: 249): “Even today, the archaeological map of north-east Africa tends to reflect the archaeological interest or disinterest of Egyptologists in the past. For late prehistoric and Pharaonic times, the Nubian Nile and, to a much lesser extent, the flanking deserts and the northern Butana are well on the way to comprehensive mapping, but the west remains enigmatic. [...] Further west, the Libyans of Cyrenaica, known from texts to have been long in contact with Egypt and of quite critical importance to it in the late second and earlier first millennia BC, remain archaeologically unknown [...].” This situation did not change much (cf. Snape, this volume). Fig. 50 Site Jaqub 99/30 (‘Muhattah Umm el-Alamat’), the second way station that yielded large amounts of Ramesside storage jars, as viewed from southwest. The hill is conspicuously marked by an exceptionally large alam on top [cf. Fig. 6] which prompted the station’s Arabic designation, ‘Mother of road signs’. A donkey potmark on a sherd (see insert) strikingly resembles those found at Jaqub 99/33 [cf. Fig. 49], and almost certainly was made by the same person. Thus the two sites appear to have been elements of the same desert operation. of this rather long and complex process, the western Delta and an oasis region (wHAt), probably Siwa, in addition to access roads to other northern oases, were temporarily controlled by ‘Libyans’ (cf. Giddy 1987: 92; Snape 2003: 96; Manassa 2003: 31f.; 94ff.). Even though Ramses III succeeded in defending Egypt from a ‘Libyan’ invasion in his regnal year 11, groups of nomads arrived in the Nile Valley, especially in the Theban region, somewhat later in the 20th dynasty (cf. Haring 1992; 1993). Their repeated appearance on the west bank of the Nile caused some interruptions in the daily routine of the workmen’s community in Deir el-Medina, either because the ‘Libyan’ groups posed a threat, or because they were trying to exchange goods (cf. the discussion in Häggman 2002: 288–308). It is well conceivable, if not probable, that such ‘Libyan’ groups occasionally also reached the southern oases. However, according to what is currently known from Dakhla, if only by rather scanty archaeological evidence, the general situation in the oasis does not appear to have changed much since the 18th dynasty. Large quantities of wine were still exported from Ayn Asil to the Nile Valley (cf. Marchand & Tallet 1999). Moreover, there is, as yet, no indication of a major upheaval in the oasis’ capital at Mut el-Kharab, or elsewhere in the region (cf. Hope & Kaper 2011: 225f.). This however does not exclude the possibility that ‘Libyans’ were temporarily present there, perhaps using the southern oases as stepping-stones on their way to the Nile Valley. As Papyrus Anastasi IV, dating to the late 19th dynasty, records, the Egyptians hired some foreign people called the Tjektana (TktAnA) who surveyed the area of the oases (tA n wHAt), probably in order to get information about movements of hostile ‘Libyan’ tribes (cf. Giddy 1987: 91f.; Kuhlmann 2002: 151; Darnell 2007: 44). The Tjektana themselves were probably of ‘Libyan’ origin too, and appear to have consisted of people who were allowed to live in the oases, at least temporarily. This indicates a different treatment of the foreigners, or various groups thereof, by the Egyptians, which can be compared to the role the Medjaiu – originally nomads from the Nubian Eastern Desert – played: While representing a potential threat when acting in tribal coalitions, individuals or single groups of them offered their services as mercenaries, patrolmen, or scouts, and were highly welcome (cf., e.g., Hendrickx et al., this volume: fig. 31; Zibelius-Chen 2007; Liszka 2011). The Ramesside supply depots of the Abu Ballas Trail are, of course, far too large to have been intended to be used by small groups of desert patrols, The Abu Ballas Trail 329 whether consisting of Egyptians or Tjektana. It appears equally unlikely that they were placed there to enable hostile ‘Libyan’ tribes from the northwest to bypass (and thereby to spare) Dakhla in order to let them reach the Nile Valley via Kharga as fast as possible. It is more plausible that the pottery dumps are traces of some military measures to impede a ‘Libyan’ incursion. However, situated at a distance of three or four day’s march from the southwestern outskirts of Dakhla, the dumps would have been rather far away from the oasis for such a purpose. Moreover, there is no archaeological evidence indicating the presence of large numbers of people at the sites. Therefore, an attempt, for whatever reason, to facilitate long-range caravan traffic in a southwesterly direction appears to be the most likely explanation for the presence of the large pottery deposits. For the time being, the motivation behind the aborted Ramesside undertaking along the Abu Ballas Trail remains a mystery. Any serious attempt at explanation requires more detailed information on both the chronological and regional setting of the activities, whether that explanation is an endeavour to establish an alternative trade route into sub-Saharan regions, or security measures to protect Egypt’s western border, to name but two possibilities. Hopefully, such conclusive information may emerge from continued excavations at Mut elKharab. But whatever prompted the Ramesside operation, and whatever led to its abandonment, there was either no need or no possibility to continue what had been started. This may indicate a major change of some sort, perhaps not only locally in Dakhla. During the following Third Intermediate Period when Egypt, or parts thereof, were under foreign rule (cf. Kitchen 1986), the Dakhla Oasis appears to have declined to a rather insignificant outpost again – a remote island in the desert (cf. Morris 2010) that was of no special economic or strategic value to the ruling class in the Nile Valley or Delta. Tellingly, the oasis now served as a place of banishment to get rid of disagreeable persons, at least during the 21st dynasty (cf. von Beckerath 1968; Giddy 1987: 92f.). In a time when ‘Libyan’ chiefdoms were established in the Delta, a stela found at Mut el-Kharab records that one of these foreign rulers, Sheshonq I of the early 22nd dynasty (946/45–925/24 BC), once even sent an expedition to Dakhla in order to quell an 330 Frank Förster uprising (cf. Gardiner 1933). The oasis’ decrease in significance seems to be reflected by the complete lack of any archaeological evidence along the Abu Ballas Trail which could point to a continuation of its use. Only much later, during the Roman period, do a few ceramic finds attest to sporadic activities that took place again along the route (cf. Hendrickx et al., this volume). 5. Conclusions According to the available archaeological evidence, the Abu Ballas Trail appears to be a long-distance desert route that was only used episodically over many centuries, probably motivated in most cases by specific geo-political and/or economic circumstances. Enormous efforts and resource expenditures were necessary to enable donkey caravans to cross the barren, waterless regions between Dakhla and the Gilf Kebir, and probably beyond, during various Pharaonic periods. Due to a fortunate constellation of various sources, including the recently discovered Mentuhotep inscription at Jebel Ouenat, it can reasonably be argued that during the late Old Kingdom/First Intermediate Period the trail was part of an alternative trade route to, or from, subSaharan regions when the traditional route along the Nile Valley was blocked by a confederacy of hostile chiefdoms in Lower Nubia. In all probability, luxury items such as incense, ivory, valuable oils and skins were imported via Dakhla to the Egyptian Nile Valley, although direct evidence is lacking in the archaeological record. This was apparently achieved through cooperation with ‘Libyan’ nomads, who acted as middlemen in trade relations between Egypt and the mysterious Yam country (or other sub-Saharan regions in modern Sudan or Chad), and had a temporary base at Jebel Ouenat. Also, during part of the New Kingdom period (later 18th dynasty and first half of the Ramesside Period) the Abu Ballas Trail might again have been intended to serve as an alternative trade route connecting the Pharaonic realm with sub-Saharan regions and their products. Due to the scarcity of related (written) sources currently available, however, other motivations for its use, which was probably restricted now to a relatively short period of time (18th dynasty) or even one, aborted undertaking only (Ramesside Period), cannot be excluded. Com- pared to the late Old Kingdom/First Intermediate Period as the heyday of the route’s use, the physical remains of these periods are far less numerous and informative along the trail, and they prove little more than that large-scale and long-range caravan traffic again took place, or was intended to take place. In contrast, the meager traces left by Second Intermediate Period activities along the first third of the route point to small-scale operations that were restricted both in the range of activities and in the number of people and pack animals involved. These activities might best be explained as evidence of Theban desert patrols monitoring (potential) movements southwest of Dakhla in a time when disagreeable communications between Lower Egypt and Nubia had to be avoided. However, this is again only one of a number of conceivable scenarios. In general, one should be cautious not to make too direct a connection between elements of the trail’s use history and specific ‘historical’ events we luckily know about through surviving epigraphic material in the Nile Valley, such as the Kamose text mentioning the interception of a Hyksos messenger near an oasis. Moreover, it should be noted that without the very few vessel remains dating to the Second Intermediate Period we would not know anything about activities along the trail during those times. This also holds true for sporadic Middle Kingdom travels, which are only attested by Mery’s rock inscription and the barley deposit at site Jaqub 00/20, again reminding us that ‘nomadic’ activities rarely left clear traces in the archaeological record. In other words, the Abu Ballas Trail probably saw much more traffic than is archaeologically attested, and the large pottery deposits which are the most obvious and rather precisely datable remains should not be regarded as representing ‘the whole story’. Moreover, the pottery dumps, once installed at the individual supply stations, might have continued to be used for a considerable period of time – until the circumstances of extreme wind erosion in the desert made them ineffectual. Nevertheless, the Abu Ballas Trail always remained an extremely difficult desert route, and as such it does not appear to have been used very often, at least in terms of large-scale caravan traffic. As indicated by a few isolated later finds, the trail may have been sporadically travelled (or crossed) for unknown reasons in Roman and Islamic times, when the domesticated camel acted as the ‘ship of the desert’ and long-range desert travelling was much easier (cf. Förster 2011: chapter 19). However, in contrast to heavily trafficked caravan routes such as the famous Darb el-Arbain, the archaeological features of the Pharaonic trail have only been lightly shaped by later human activities. Although a number of the sites had been disturbed to some degree in antiquity or more recently, most of them reflect the original situation when left behind after their last use in Pharaonic times. The route, therefore, apparently was only important occasionally, and eventually fell into oblivion. In any case, the Abu Ballas Trail, though still far from being sufficiently investigated (especially in regard to its supposed continuation between the Gilf Kebir and Jebel Ouenat), represents the earliest known evidence of trans-Saharan traffic, dating back to the late third millennium BC. With this evidence now in hand, the scientific horizon of Egyptology is considerably broadened, at least up to a point where the modern borders of Egypt, Sudan and Libya converge – and perhaps far beyond. Acknowledgements The scientific investigation of the Abu Ballas Trail has been carried out within the scope of ACACIA’s subprojects A1 ‘Climatic change and human settlement between the Nile Valley and the Central Sahara’ and E3 ‘Routes and trade in arid zones’. ACACIA (‘Arid Climate, Adaptation and Cultural Innovation in Africa’) is the acronym of a Collaborative Research Centre (SFB 389) at the University of Cologne generously funded by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft from 1995 to 2007. My sincere thanks go to Rudolph Kuper who, as the head of subproject E3, entrusted me to deal with this fascinating subject from an Egyptologist’s point of view (and generously provided some of his photographs for illustrating this article), as well as to my colleagues Stan Hendrickx, Michael Herb, Heiko Riemer and Peter Schönfeld who contributed to the research in many ways. The analysis by Stan Hendrickx of the trail’s pottery deposits has been made possible by a grant of the Fonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek Vlaanderen, Belgium. Nadja Pöllath (Institut für Paläoanatomie und Geschichte der Tiermedizin, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München) and Stefanie Nußbaum (SFB 389 ACACIA) investigated the animal and plant remains. Work in Egypt was kindly permitted by the Permanent Committee of the Supreme Council of Antiquities and supported by Maher Bashendi and Sayed Yamany, Chief Inspectors, Dakhla Oasis. Finally, special thanks go to András Zboray for providing photographs of the hieroglyphic rock inscription at Jebel Ouenat and related material. A more in-depth analysis of the Pharaonic use of the trail is to be found in this author’s Ph.D. dissertation (Förster 2011), which will be published in the ‘Africa Praehistorica’ series of the Heinrich-Barth-Institute, Cologne. The Abu Ballas Trail 331 References Almásy, L.E. de (1935) 259–276. — Bir Bidi. Sudan Notes and Records 18: (1999) Schwimmer in der Wüste. Auf der Suche nach der Oase Zarzura (München: Deutscher Taschenbuch Verlag) [new and enlarged edition of Almásy, L.E. (1939) Unbekannte Sahara. Mit Flugzeug und Auto in der Libyschen Wüste (Leipzig: Brockhaus)]. Anthes, R. (1930) Eine Polizeistreife des Mittleren Reiches in die westliche Oase. Zeitschrift für Ägyptische Sprache und Altertumskunde 65: 108–114. Arkell, A.J. (1922) The Southern Route to Kufra. From El Fasher to the Senussi and Back with Ali Dinar's Caravan, 1915– 16. Told by Bidi Awdi, the Guide. Sudan Notes and Records 5: 130–136. — (1961) A History of the Sudan. From the Earliest Times to 1821 (London: Athlone Press) [2nd, revised edition]. Aufrère, S.H. (2000) Et les oasis? Relations entre les oasis méridionales et Thèbes. Égypte, Afrique & Orient 18: 41– 44. Balcz, H. (1934) Die Gefäßdarstellungen des Alten Reiches. Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts, Abteilung Kairo 5: 45–94. Ball, J. (1927) Problems of the Libyan Desert. Geographical Journal 70: 21–38; 105–128; 209–224. Baud, M. (1997) Balat/Ayn-Asil, oasis de Dakhla. La ville de la Deuxième Période intermédiaire. Bulletin de l’Institut français d’archéologie orientale 97: 19–34. Baud, M., F. Colin & P. Tallet (1999) Les gouverneurs de l’oasis de Dakhla au Moyen Empire. Bulletin de l’Institut français d’archéologie orientale 99: 1–19. Bergmann, C. (2001) Der letzte Beduine. Meine Karawanen zu den Geheimnissen der Wüste (Reinbek bei Hamburg: Rowohlt). Bergmann, C. & K.P. Kuhlmann (2001) Die Expedition des Cheops. GEO [Germany], Special 5: Ägypten: 120–127. Blackman, A.M. (1914) The Rock Tombs of Meir I: The Tombchapel of Ukh-hotp’s Son Senbi. Archaeological Survey of Egypt 22 (London: Egypt Exploration Fund). Bonnet, C. (1998) Das Königreich von Kerma. In: D. Wildung (ed.), Die Pharaonen des Goldlandes. Antike Königreiche im Sudan (Mannheim: Waanders Uitgevers) 89–95. Boutantin, C. (1999) Les figurines en terre crue de la nécropole de Balat. Bulletin de l’Institut français d’archéologie orientale 99: 41–61. Brewer, D.J., D.B. Redford & S. Redford (1994) Domestic Plants and Animals: The Egyptian Origins (Warminster: Aris & Phillips). Burkard, G. (1997) Inscription in the Dakhla Region. Text, Translation and Comments. Sahara 9: 152–153. 332 Frank Förster Cambieri, F. & M.E. Peroschi (2010) Report on New Rock Art Sites in the Area of Jebel Uweinat, Eastern Sahara. Sahara 21: 175–177. Castel, G., L. Pantalacci & N. Cherpion (2001) Le mastaba de Khentika. Tombeau d’un gouverneur de l’Oasis à la fin de l’Ancien Empire. Balat V. Fouilles de l’Institut français d’archéologie orientale 40 (Le Caire: Institut français d’archéologie orientale). Castiglioni, A., A. Castiglioni & J. Vercoutter (1998) Das Goldland der Pharaonen. Die Entdeckung von Berenike Pancrisia (Mainz: Philipp von Zabern). Clayton, J., A. De Trafford & M. Borda (2008) A Hieroglyphic Inscription found at Jebel Uweinat mentioning Yam and Tekhebet. Sahara 19: 129–134. Colin, F. (2005) Kamose et les Hyksos dans l’oasis de Djesdjes. Bulletin de l’Institut français d’archéologie orientale 105: 35–47. Darnell, J.C. (2002) Theban Desert Road Survey in the Egyptian Western Desert. Vol. 1: Gebel Tjauti Rock Inscriptions 1– 45 and Wadi el–Hôl Rock Inscriptions 1–45. Oriental Institute Publications 119 (Chicago: The Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago). — (2003) A Stela of the Reign of Tutankhamun from the Region of Kurkur Oasis. Studien zur Altägyptischen Kultur 31: 73–91. — (2004) The Route of Eleventh Dynasty Expansion into Nubia. An Interpretation Based on the Rock Inscriptions of Tjehemau at Abisko. Zeitschrift für Ägyptische Sprache und Altertumskunde 131: 23–37. — (2007) The Deserts. In: T. Wilkinson (ed.), The Egyptian World. Routledge World Series 10 (London/New York: Routledge) 29–48. — (2008) The Eleventh Dynasty Royal Inscription from Deir el-Ballas. Revue d’Égyptologie 59: 81–110. Davies, N. de Garis (1906) The Rock Tombs of El Amarna. Vol. IV: The Tombs of Penthu, Mahu, and Others. Archaeological Survey of Egypt 16 (London: Egypt Exploration Fund). Davies, V. (2003) Sobeknakht of Elkab and the coming of Kush. Egyptian Archaeology 23: 3–6. de Michele, V. (1998) The ‘Libyan Desert Glass’ Scarab in Tutankhamen’s Pectoral. Sahara 10: 107–109. Dill, D.B. (1938) Life, Heat, and Altitude. Physiological Effects of Hot Climates and Great Heights (Cambridge: Harvard University Press). Edel, E. (1955) Inschriften des Alten Reiches V. Die Reiseberichte des ¡r-xwjf (Herchuf). In: O. Firchow (ed.), Ägyptologische Studien [Festschrift Hermann Grapow]. Deutsche Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin, Institut für Orientforschung, Veröffentlichung Nr. 29 (Berlin: Akademie Verlag) 51–75. — (2008) Die Felsgräbernekropole der Qubbet el Hawa bei Assuan. I. Abteilung, Band 3: Architektur, Darstellungen, Texte, archäologischer Befund und Funde der Gräber QH 102–QH 209. Aus dem Nachlaß verfaßt und herausgegeben von Karl-J. Seyfried und Gerd Vieler (Paderborn et al.: Ferdinand Schöningh). El-Sayed, R. (2011) Afrikanischstämmiger Lehnwortschatz im älteren Ägyptisch. Untersuchungen zur ägyptischafrikanischen lexikalischen Interferenz im dritten und zweiten Jahrtausend v. Chr. Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta 211 (Leuven et al.: Peeters). Fakhry, A. (1973) The Search for Texts in the Western Desert. In: Textes et langages de l’Égypte pharaonique. Cent cinquante années de recherches 1822–1972. Hommages à Jean-François Champollion. Bibliothèque d’Étude 64/2 (Le Caire: Institut français d’archéologie orientale du Caire) 207–222. Fischer, H.G. (1964) Inscriptions from the Coptite Nome. Analecta Orientalia 40 (Rome: Pontificium Institutum Biblicum). Förster, F. (2007a) With donkeys, jars and water bags into the Libyan Desert: the Abu Ballas Trail in the late Old Kingdom / First Intermediate Period. British Museum Studies in Ancient Egypt and Sudan 7: 1–36 <www.britishmuseum.org/research/publications/online_journals/bmsaes/issue_7/foerster.aspx> (November 12, 2012). — — — — (2007b) The Abu Ballas Trail: a Pharaonic donkey-caravan route in the Libyan Desert (SW-Egypt). In: O. Bubenzer, A. Bolten & F. Darius (eds.), Atlas of Cultural and Environmental Change in Arid Africa. Africa Praehistorica 21 (Köln: Heinrich-Barth-Institut) 130–133. (2008) Preliminary report on the seal impressions found at site Chufu 01/01 in the Dakhla region (2002 campaign). Göttinger Miszellen 217: 17–25. (2010) Gottes Ohr in der Wüste. Ein demotisch und hieroglyphisch beschrifteter Steinblock von einem sogenannten hilltop site südlich der Oase Dachla. In: H. Knuf, C. Leitz & D. von Recklinghausen (eds.), Honi soit qui mal y pense. Studien zum pharaonischen, griechischrömischen und spätantiken Ägypten zu Ehren von Heinz-Josef Thissen. Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta 194 (Leuven et al.: Peeters) 69–78. (2011) Der Abu Ballas-Weg. Eine pharaonische Karawanenroute durch die Libysche Wüste. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of Cologne. Förster, F. & R. Kuper (2003) Abu Ballas (Pottery Hill): Call for Information. Sahara 14: 167–168. Förster, F., H. Riemer, A. Bolten, O. Bubenzer, S. Hendrickx & F. Darius (2010) Tracing Linear Structures: Remote Sensing, Landscape Classification and the Archaeology of Desert Roads in the Eastern Sahara. In: W.J.G. Möhlig, O. Bubenzer & G. Menz (eds.), Towards Interdisciplinarity. Experiences of the Long-term ACACIA Project. Topics in Interdisciplinary African Studies 15 (Köln: Rüdiger Köppe) 49–75. Gardiner, A.H. (1933) The Dakhleh Stela. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 19: 19–30. Gasse, A. (1994) L’approvisionnement en eau dans les mines et carrières. In: B. Menu (ed.), Les problèmes institutionnels de l’eau en Égypte ancienne et dans l’Antiquité méditerranéenne. Bibliothèque d’Étude 110 (Le Caire: Institut français d’archéologie orientale) 169–176. George, U. (2000) Der Stein des Tutanchamun. GEO Magazin [Germany] 10/2000: 18–46. Giddy, L.L. (1980) Some Exports from the Oases of the Libyan Desert into the Nile Valley – Tomb 131 at Thebes. In: J. Vercoutter (ed.), Livre du Centenaire 1880–1980. Mémoires publiés par les membres de l’Institut français d’archéologie orientale du Caire 104 (Le Caire: Institut français d’archéologie orientale) 119–125. — (1987) Egyptian Oases. Bahariya, Dakhla, Farafra and Kharga during Pharaonic Times (Warminster: Aris & Phillips). Graeff, J.-P. (2005) nen.de). Die Straßen Ägyptens (Berlin: dissertatio- Grimal, N.-C. (1985) Les “noyés” de Balat. In: Mélanges offerts à Jean Vercoutter (Paris: Editions Recherche sur les Civilisations) 111–121. Habachi, L. (1972) The Second Stela of Kamose and his Struggle against the Hyksos Ruler and his Capital. Abhandlungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts, Abteilung Kairo 8 (Glückstadt: Augustin). Häggman, S. (2002) Directing Deir el-Medina. The External Administration of the Necropolis. Uppsala Studies in Egyptology 4 (Uppsala: Department of Archaeology and Ancient History, Uppsala University). Hallmann, S. (2006) Die Tributszenen des Neuen Reiches. Ägypten und Altes Testament 66 (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz). Hannig, R. (2003) Ägyptisches Wörterbuch I: Altes Reich und Erste Zwischenzeit. Hannig-Lexica 4 / Kulturgeschichte der antiken Welt 98 (Mainz: Philipp von Zabern). Haring, B. (1992) Libyans in the Late Twentieth Dynasty. In: R.J. Demarée & A. Egberts (eds.), Village Voices. Proceedings of the Symposium ‘Texts from Deir el-Medina and their interpretation’, Leiden, May 31 – June 1, 1991 (Leiden: Centre of Non-Western Studies, Leiden University) 71–80. — (1993) Libyans in the Theban Region, 20th Dynasty. In: Atti del VI Congresso Internazionale di Egittologia (Turin: International Congress of Egyptology) 159–165. Hassanein Bey, A.M. (1926) haus). Rätsel der Wüste (Leipzig: Brock- The Abu Ballas Trail 333 Hauser, S.R., ed. (2006) Die Sichtbarkeit von Nomaden und saisonaler Besiedlung in der Archäologie: Multidisziplinäre Annäherungen an ein methodisches Problem. Mitteilungen des Sonderforschungsbereichs “Differenz und Integration – Wechselwirkung zwischen nomadischen und seßhaften Lebensformen in Zivilisationen der Alten Welt” 9. Orientwissenschaftliche Hefte 21/2006 (Halle/Saale: Martin-Luther-Universität Halle-Wittenberg). Hendrickx, S., H. Riemer, F. Förster & J.C. Darnell (2009) Late Predynastic/Early Dynastic rock art scenes of Barbary sheep hunting in Egypt’s Western Desert. From capturing wild animals to the women of the ‘Acacia House’. In: H. Riemer, F. Förster, M. Herb & N. Pöllath (eds.), Desert animals in the eastern Sahara: Status, economic significance, and cultural reflection in antiquity. Proceedings of an Interdisciplinary ACACIA Workshop held at the University of Cologne December 14–15, 2007. Colloquium Africanum 4 (Köln: Heinrich-Barth-Institut) 189–244. Henein, N.H. (1997) Poterie et potiers d’al-Qasr, Oasis de Dakhla. Bibliothèque d’Étude 116 (Le Caire: Institut français d’archéologie orientale). Hirth, K.G. (1978) Interregional Trade and the Formation of Prehistoric Gateway Communities. American Antiquity 43: 35–45. Hope, C.A. (2005) Mut el-Kharab: Seth’s City in Dakhleh Oasis. Egyptian Archaeology 27: 3–6. — (2007) Egypt and ‘Libya’ to the End of the Old Kingdom: A View from Dakhleh Oasis. In: Z.A. Hawass & J. Richards (eds.), The Archaeology and Art of Ancient Egypt. Essays in Honor of David B. O’Connor. Annales du Service des Antiquités de l’Égypte, Cahiers 36/2 (Le Caire: Service des Antiquités de l’Égypte) 399–415. Hope, C.A. & O.E. Kaper (2010) A Gouvernor of Dakhleh Oasis in the Early Middle Kingdom. In: A. Woods, A. McFarlane & S. Binder (eds.), Egyptian Culture and Society. Studies in Honour of Naguib Kanawati, vol. I. Annales du Service des Antiquités de l’Égypte, Cahiers 38 [2 vols.] (Le Caire: Service des Antiquités de l’Égypte) 219–245. — (2011) Egyptian Interest in the Oases in the New Kingdom and a New Stela for Seth from Mut el-Kharab. In: M. Collier & S. Snape (eds.), Ramesside Studies in Honour of K.A. Kitchen (Bolton: Rutherford Press) 219–236. Hope, C.A., G.E. Bowen, W. Dolling, E. Healey, J. Milner & O.E. Kaper (2008) The Excavations at Mut el-Kharab, Dakhleh Oasis in 2008. Bulletin of the Australian Centre for Egyptology 19: 49–71. Hornung, E. (1990) Geist der Pharaonenzeit (Zürich/München: Artemis) [2nd edition]. 334 Frank Förster Jansen-Winkeln, K. (2002) Ägyptische Geschichte im Zeitalter der Wanderungen von Seevölkern und Libyern. In: E.A. Braun-Holzinger & H. Matthäus (eds.), Die nahöstlichen Kulturen und Griechenland an der Wende vom 2. zum 1. Jahrtausend v. Chr. Kontinuität und Wandel von Strukturen und Mechanismen kultureller Interaktion. Kolloquium des Sonderforschungsbereiches 295 “Kulturelle und sprachliche Kontakte” der Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz, 11.–12. Dezember 1998 (Möhnesee: Bibliopolis) 123–142. Janssen, J.J. (2005) Donkeys at Deir el-Medîna. Egyptologische Uitgaven 19 (Leiden: Nederlands Instituut voor het Nabije Oosten). Jarvis, C.S. (1936) Three Deserts (London: John Murray). Jesse, F. (2006) Pastoral Groups in the Southern Libyan Desert: The Handessi Horizon (c. 2400–1100 BC). In: K. Kroeper, M. Chlodnicki & M. Kobusiewicz (eds.), Archaeology of Early Northeastern Africa. In Memory of Lech Krzyzaniak. Studies in African Archaeology 9 (Poznan: Poznan Archaeological Museum) 987–1004. Jesse, F., S. Kröpelin, M. Lange, N. Pöllath & H. Berke (2004) On the Periphery of Kerma – The Handessi Horizon in Wadi Hariq, Northwestern Sudan. Journal of African Archaeology 2 (2): 123–164. Jeuthe, C. (2012) Ein Werkstattkomplex im Palast der 1. Zwischenzeit in Ayn Asil. Balat X. Fouilles de l’Institut français d’archéologie orientale 71 (Le Caire: Institut français d’archéologie orientale). Kaper, O.E. (2009) Soldier’s Identity Marks of the Old Kingdom in the Western Desert. In: B.J.J. Haring & O.E. Kaper (eds.), Pictograms or Pseudo Script? Non-textual Identity Marks in Practical Use in Ancient Egypt and Elsewhere. Proceedings of a Conference in Leiden, 19–20 December 2006. Egyptologische Uitgaven 25 (Leuven: Peeters) 169– 178. Kaper, O.E. & H. Willems (2002) Policing the Desert: Old Kingdom Activity around the Dakhleh Oasis. In: R.F. Friedman (ed.), Egypt and Nubia: Gifts of the Desert (London: British Museum Press) 79–94. Kaplony, P. (1965) Bemerkungen zu einigen Steingefäßen mit archaischen Königsnamen. Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts, Abteilung Kairo 20: 1–46. Kemal el Dine, H. & L. Franchet (1927) Les dépots de jarres du désert de Lybie [sic]. Revue scientifique 65: 596–600. Kemp, B.J. (1989) Ancient Egypt. Anatomy of a Civilization (London/New York: Routledge). Kitchen, K.A. (1986) The Third Intermediate Period in Egypt (1100–650 B.C.) (Warminster: Aris & Phillips) [2nd edition]. Kuhlmann, K.P. (2002) The “Oasis Bypath” or The Issue of Desert Trade in Pharaonic Times. In: “Jennerstrasse 8” (ed.), Tides of the Desert – Gezeiten der Wüste. Contributions to the Archaeology and Environmental History of Africa in Honour of Rudolph Kuper. Africa Praehistorica 14 (Köln: Heinrich-Barth-Institut) 125–170. — (2005) Der “Wasserberg des Djedefre” (Chufu 01/1). Ein Lagerplatz mit Expeditionsinschriften der 4. Dynastie im Raum der Oase Dachla. Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts, Abteilung Kairo 61: 243–289. Kuhrt, A. (1999) The Exploitation of the Camel in the Neo-Assyrian Empire. In: A. Leahy & J. Tait (eds.), Studies on Ancient Egypt in Honour of H.S. Smith. EES Occasional Publications 13 (London: Egypt Exploration Society) 179– 184. Kuper, R. (2001) By Donkey Train to Kufra? – How Mr Meri Went West. Antiquity 75: 801–802. — — (2002) Routes and Roots in Egypt’s Western Desert. The Early Holocene Resettlement of the Eastern Sahara. In: R.F. Friedman (ed.), Egypt and Nubia: Gifts of the Desert (London: British Museum Press) 1–12. (2003a) The Abu Ballas Trail: Pharaonic Advances into the Libyan Desert. In: Z. Hawass & L. Pinch Brock (eds.), Egyptology at the Dawn of the Twenty-First Century. Proceedings of the Eighth International Congress of Egyptologists, Cairo 2000. Vol. 2: History, Religion (Cairo/New York: American University in Cairo Press) 372–376. — (2003b) Les marches occidentales de l’Egypte: dernières nouvelles. Bulletin de la Société française d’Egyptologie 158: 12–34. — (2006) News from Nubia’s western hinterland. In: I. Caneva & A. Roccati (eds.), Acta Nubica. Proceedings of the X. International Conference of Nubian Studies, Rome 9–14 September 2002 (Roma: Università di Roma ‘La Sapienza’) 355–363. — (2007) Desert parks in the eastern Sahara. In: O. Bubenzer, A. Bolten & F. Darius (eds.), Atlas of Cultural and Environmental Change in Arid Africa. Africa Praehistorica 21 (Köln: Heinrich-Barth-Institut) 118–121. Long, R.A. (2008) Ceramics at Mut el-Kharab, Dakhleh Oasis: Evidence for a New Kingdom Temple. Bulletin of the Australian Centre for Egyptology 19: 95–110. Manassa, C. (2003) The Great Karnak Inscription of Merneptah: Grand Strategy in the 13th Century BC. Yale Egyptological Studies 5 (New Haven: Yale Egyptological Seminar, Yale University). Manzo, A. (1999) Échanges et contacts de long du Nil et de la Mer Rouge dans l’époque protohistorique (IIIe et IIe millénaires avant J.-C.). Une synthèse préliminaire. Cambridge Monographs in African Archaeology 48 / BAR International Series 782 (Oxford: Archaeopress). Marchand, S. & G. Soukiassian (2010) Un habitat de la XIIIe dynastie – 2e Période Intermédiaire à Ayn Asil. Balat VIII. Fouilles de l’Institut français d’archéologie orientale 59 (Le Caire: Institut français d’archéologie orientale). Marchand, S. & P. Tallet (1999) Ayn Asil et l’oasis de Dakhla au Nouvel Empire. Bulletin de l’Institut français d’archéologie orientale 99: 307–352. Midant-Reynes, B. & F. Braunstein-Silvestre (1977) Le chameau en Égypte. Orientalia 46: 337–362. Minault-Gout, A. (1992) Le mastaba d’Ima-Pepi (Mastaba II), fin de l’Ancien Empire. Balat II. Fouilles de l’Institut français d’archéologie orientale 33 (Le Caire: Institut français d’archéologie orientale). Morenz, L.D. & L. Popko (2010) The Second Intermediate Period and the New Kingdom. In: A.B. Lloyd (ed.), A Companion to Ancient Egypt, vol. I. Blackwell Companions to the Ancient World (Malden, Mass. et al.: Wiley-Blackwell) 101–119. Morris, E.F. (2010) Insularity and island identity in the oases bordering Egypt’s Great Sand Sea. In: Z.A. Hawass & S. Ikram (eds.), Thebes and Beyond. Studies in Honour of Kent R. Weeks. Annales du Service des Antiquités de l’Égypte, Cahiers 41 (Le Caire: Service des Antiquités de l’Égypte) 127–144. Kuper, R. & F. Förster (2003) Khufu’s ‘mefat’ expeditions into the Libyan Desert. Egyptian Archaeology 23: 25–28. Obsomer, C. (2007) Les expéditions d’Herkhouf (VIe dynastie) et la localisation de Iam. In: M.-C. Bruwier (ed.), Pharaons noirs. Sur la Piste des Quarante Jours. Catalogue de l’exposition du 9 mars au 2 septembre 2007 par le Musée royal de Mariemont (Mariemont: Musée royal de Mariemont) 39–52. Kuper, R. & S. Kröpelin (2006) Climate-Controlled Holocene Occupation in the Sahara: Motor of Africa’s Evolution. Science 313: 803–807 [with Supporting Online Material]. O’Connor, D. (1986) The Locations of Yam and Kush and their Historical Implications. Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt 23: 27–50. Lacovara, P. (1999) Kerma. In: K.A. Bard (ed.), Encyclopedia of the Archaeology of Ancient Egypt (London/New York: Routledge) 404–406. — (1990a) The Nature of Tjemhu (Libyan) Society in the Later New Kingdom. In: A. Leahy (ed.), Libya and Egypt c. 1300–750 BC (London: SOAS Centre of Near and Middle Eastern Studies et al.) 29–113. — (1990b) Egyptology & Archaeology: An African Perspective. In: P. Robertshaw (ed.), A History of African Archaeology (London/Portsmouth [N.H.]: Currey/Heinemann) 236–251. Lichtheim, M. (1973) Ancient Egyptian Literature. A Book of Readings. Vol. I: The Old and Middle Kingdoms (Berkeley et al.: University of California Press). Liszka, K. (2011) “We have come from the well of Ibhet“: Ethnogenesis of the Medjay. Journal of Egyptian History 4: 149–171. The Abu Ballas Trail 335 Osborn, D.J. & J. Osbornová (1998) The Mammals of Ancient Egypt. The Natural History of Egypt 4 (Warminster: Aris & Phillips). Osing, J. (1980) Libyen, Libyer. In: W. Helck & W. Westendorf (eds.), Lexikon der Ägyptologie, vol. III (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz) 1015–1033. — (1994) Les voies de communication entre les oasis égyptiennes et la vallée du Nil. In: J. Teixidor & I. Urio (eds.), Voyages et voyageurs au Proche-Orient ancien. Actes du colloque de Cartigny 1988, Centre d’Étude du ProcheOrient Ancien (CEPOA), Université de Genève. Les Cahiers du CEPOA 6 (Leuven: Peeters) 159–173. Pantalacci, L. (1998a) La documentation épistolaire du palais des gouverneurs à Balat-Ayn Asil. Bulletin de l’Institut français d’archéologie orientale 98: 303–315. — (1998b) Les habitants de Balat à la VIème dynastie: esquisse d’histoire sociale. In: C.J. Eyre (ed.), Proceedings of the Seventh International Congress of Egyptologists, Cambridge, 3–9 September 1995. Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta 82 (Leuven: Peeters) 829–837. — (2005) Sceaux et empreintes de sceaux comme critères de datation. Les enseignements des fouilles de Balat. In: L. Pantalacci & C. Berger-el-Naggar (eds.), Des Néferkarê aux Montouhotep. Travaux archéologiques en cours sur la fin de la VIe dynastie et la Première Période Intermédiaire. Actes du Colloque CNRS – Université LumièreLyon 2, tenu le 5–7 juillet 2001. Travaux de la Maison de l’Orient et de la Méditerranée 40 (Lyon: Jean Pouilloux) 229–238. — — (2008) Archivage et scribes dans l’oasis de Dakhla (Égypte) à la fin du IIIe millénaire. In: L. Pantalacci (ed.), La lettre d’archive. Communication administrative et personnelle dans l’Antiquité proche-orientale et égyptienne. Actes du colloque de l’Université de Lyon 2, 9–10 juillet 2004. Bibliothèque générale 32 (Le Caire: Institut français d’archéologie orientale) 141–153. (2013) Balat, a Frontier Town and Its Archive. In: J.C. Moreno García (ed.), Ancient Egyptian Administration. Handbuch der Orientalistik I.104 (Leiden/Boston: Brill) 197–214. Pantalacci, L. & J. Lesur-Gebremariam (2009) Wild animals downtown: Evidence from Balat, Dakhla Oasis (end of the 3rd millennium BC). In: H. Riemer, F. Förster, M. Herb & N. Pöllath (eds.), Desert animals in the eastern Sahara: Status, economic significance, and cultural reflection in antiquity. Proceedings of an Interdisciplinary ACACIA Workshop held at the University of Cologne December 14–15, 2007. Colloquium Africanum 4 (Köln: Heinrich-Barth-Institut) 245–259. Posener-Krieger, P. (1992) Les tablettes en terre crue de Balat. In: É. Lalou (ed.), Les tablettes à écrire de l’Antiquité à l’Époque Moderne. Bibliologia 12 (Turnhout: Brepols) 41– 52. 336 Frank Förster Postel, L. (2004) Protocole des souverains égyptiens et dogme monarchique au début du Moyen Empire: des premiers Antef au début du règne d’Amenemhat Ier. Monographies Reine Élisabeth 10 (Turnhout: Brepols). Power, R.K. (2004) Deconstructing, Deciphering and Dating the Donkey in Old Kingdom Wall Painting and Relief. Bulletin of the Australian Centre for Egyptology 15: 131–151. Pusch, E.B. (1996) Ein Dromedar aus der Ramses-Stadt. Ägypten & Levante 6: 107–118. Rhotert, H. (1952) Libysche Felsbilder. Ergebnisse der XI. und XII. Deutschen Inner-Afrikanischen Forschungs-Expedition (DIAFE) 1933/1934/1935. Veröffentlichung des Frobenius-Instituts an der Johann Wolfgang Goethe-Universität, Frankfurt am Main (Darmstadt: L.C. Wittich). Riemer, H. (2007a) The archaeology of a desert road – the navigation system of the Abu Ballas Trail. In: O. Bubenzer, A. Bolten & F. Darius (eds.), Atlas of Cultural and Environmental Change in Arid Africa. Africa Praehistorica 21 (Köln: Heinrich-Barth-Institut) 134–135. — (2007b) Mapping the movement of pastro-foragers: the spread of Desert Glass and other objects in the eastern Sahara during the Holocene ‘humid phase’. In: O. Bubenzer, A. Bolten & F. Darius (eds.), Atlas of Cultural and Environmental Change in Arid Africa. Africa Praehistorica 21 (Köln: Heinrich-Barth-Institut) 30–33. Riemer, H., F. Förster, S. Hendrickx, B. Eichhorn, S. Nußbaum, N. Pöllath, P. Schönfeld & G. Wagner (2005) Zwei pharaonische Wüstenstationen südwestlich von Dachla. Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts, Abteilung Kairo 61: 291–350. Ripinsky, M. (1985) The Camel in Dynastic Egypt. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 71: 134–141. Roe, A. (2005–2006) The Old Darb al Arbein Caravan Route and Kharga Oasis in Antiquity. Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt 42: 119–129. Rowley-Conwy, P. (1988) The Camel in the Nile Valley: new Radiocarbon Accelerator (AMS) dates from Qasr Ibrîm. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 74: 245–248. Schäfer, H. (1905) Ein Zug nach der großen Oase unter Sesostris I. Zeitschrift für Ägyptische Sprache und Altertumskunde 42: 124–128. Schneider, T. (1994) Lexikon der Pharaonen. Die altägyptischen Könige von der Frühzeit bis zur Römerherrschaft (Zürich: Artemis). — (2010) The West Beyond the West: The Mysterious “Wernes” of the Egyptian Underworld and the Chad Palaeolakes. Journal of Ancient Egyptian Interconnections 2/4: 1–14. — (2011) Egypt and the Chad: Some Additional Remarks. Journal of Ancient Egyptian Interconnections 3/4: 12–15. Schönfeld, P. (2004) Wegstationen auf dem Abu Ballas Trail. Dynastische Fundplätze aus der Western Desert Ägyptens. Unpublished MA thesis, Rheinische FriedrichWilhelms-Universität zu Bonn [summary in Archäologische Informationen 30/1, 2007: 133–140]. Seidlmayer, S.J. (1997) Zwei Anmerkungen zur Dynastie der Herakleopoliten. Göttinger Miszellen 157: 81–90. — (2000) The First Intermediate Period (c. 2160–2055 BC). In: I. Shaw (ed.), The Oxford History of Ancient Egypt (Oxford: Oxford University Press) 118–147. Sethe, K. (1933) Urkunden des Alten Reichs I. Urkunden des ägyptischen Altertums, 1. Abt., Bd. I (Leipzig: J.C. Hinrichs). Simons, P. (1973) Uweinat, ein Insel-Gebirge am “Grenzkreuz”. In: H. Schiffers (ed.), Die Sahara und ihre Randgebiete. Darstellung eines Naturgroßraumes. Bd. III: Regionalgeographie. Afrika-Studien 62 (München: Weltforum Verlag) 423–429. Smith, H.S. & A. Smith (1976) A Reconsideration of the Kamose Texts. Zeitschrift für Ägyptische Sprache und Altertumskunde 103: 48–76. Smith, S.T. (1991) Askut and the Role of the Second Cataract Forts. Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt 28: 107–132. Smither, P.C. (1945) The Semnah Despatches. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 31: 3–10. Snape, S. (2003) The Emergence of Libya on the Horizon of Egypt. In: D. O’Connor & S. Quirke (eds.), Mysterious Lands. Encounters with Ancient Egypt (London: UCL Press) 93–106. Soukiassian, G. (1997) A Governor’s Palace at Ayn Asil, Dakhla Oasis. Egyptian Archaeology 11: 15–17. Soukiassian, G., M. Wuttmann, L. Pantalacci, P. Ballet & M. Picon (1990) Les ateliers de potiers d’Ayn-Asil. Fin de l’Ancien Empire, Première Période intermédiaire. Balat III. Fouilles de l’Institut français d’archéologie orientale 34 (Le Caire: Institut français d’archéologie orientale). Soukiassian, G., M. Wuttmann & L. Pantalacci (2002) Le palais des gouverneurs de l’époque de Pépy II: Les sanctuaires de ka et leurs dépendances. Balat VI. Fouilles de l’Institut français d’archéologie orientale 46 (Le Caire: Institut français d’archéologie orientale). Trigger, B.G. (1982) The Reasons for the Construction of the Second Cataract Forts. Journal of the Society for the Study of Egyptian Antiquities 12: 1–6. Valloggia, M. (1981) This sur la route des oasis. Bulletin de l’Institut français d’archéologie orientale 81, Suppl.: 185–190. — (1986) Le mastaba de Medou-Nefer. Balat I. Fouilles de l’Institut français d’archéologie orientale 31,1–2 (Le Caire: Institut français d’archéologie orientale). — (2004) Les oasis d’Égypte dans l’Antiquité. Des origines au deuxième millénaire avant J.-C. (Gollion: Infolio éditions). von Beckerath, J. (1968) Die “Stele der Verbannten” im Museum des Louvre. Revue d’Égyptologie 20: 7–36. — (1997) Chronologie des pharaonischen Ägypten. Die Zeitbestimmung der ägyptischen Geschichte von der Vorzeit bis 332 v. Chr. Münchner Ägyptologische Studien 46 (Mainz: Philipp von Zabern). — (1999) Handbuch der ägyptischen Königsnamen. Münchner Ägyptologische Studien 49 (Mainz: Philipp von Zabern) [2nd edition]. von Czerniewicz, M., T. Lenssen-Erz & J. Linstädter (2004) Preliminary Investigations in the Djebel Uweinat Region, Libyan Desert. Journal of African Archaeology 2 (1): 81– 96. Wagner, G. & K. Heller (2012) Chufu 01/01 – a Pharaonic Outpost in the Western Desert of Egypt. In: J. Kabacinski, M. Chlodnicki & M. Kobusiewicz (eds.), Prehistory of Northeastern Africa: New Ideas and Discoveries. Studies in African Archaeology 11 (Poznan: Poznan Archaeological Museum) 349–364. Wiese, A.B. (1996) Die Anfänge der ägyptischen StempelsiegelAmulette. Eine typologische und religionsgeschichtliche Untersuchung zu den “Knopfsiegeln” und verwandten Objekten der 6. bis frühen 12. Dynastie. Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis, Series Archaeologica 12 (Freiburg/Göttingen: Universitätsverlag Freiburg / Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht Göttingen). Zboray, A. & M. Borda (2010) Some Recent Results of the Survey of Jebel Uweinat. Sahara 21: 181–189. — (2013) New finds and observations made during a recent visit to Jebel Uweinat (northwest Sudan). Sahara 24: 214–218. Tebes, J.M. (2006) Trade and Nomads: The Commercial Relations between the Negev, Edom, and the Mediterranean in the Late Iron Age. Journal of the Serbian Archaeological Society 22: 45–62. Zibelius-Chen, K. (1988) Die ägyptische Expansion nach Nubien. Eine Darlegung der Grundfaktoren. Tübinger Atlas des Vorderen Orients, Beihefte Reihe B (Geisteswissenschaften), Nr. 78 (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz). Thompson, S.E. (1994) The Anointing of Officials in Ancient Egypt. Journal of Near Eastern Studies 53: 15–25. — (2007) Die Medja in altägyptischen Quellen. Studien zur Altägyptischen Kultur 36: 391–405. The Abu Ballas Trail 337