Eqyptian Empire: A very quick overview

Unlike the Akkadian empire in my last few blogs, the Egyptian empire has been a lot more resilient in respect to the rise and fall of its civilizations in response to changing climate. This has been characterised in the different pottery assemblages on the Nile into 3 different kingdoms: Old, Middle and new which date from 2760-2225, 2035-1668 and 1570-1070BC respectively (Butzer 1980c).  This would indicate periods of settlement growth, accompanied by strong governmental leadership and control, followed by a factor, or combination which led to stagnation and eventual decline. 

The Egyptian economy heavily relied on agriculture, with episodic growth being in part a result of new irrigation technology which allowed settlements to buffer themselves against adverse climate change (Butzer 1980c). In essence the power of the elites came with the flooding of the Nile banks, providing water for its crops, which is especially important as the majority of flood water of the Nile actually fell within the borders of Ethiopia (Bard 1994). So it is not far of a stretch to assume that these cyclic rise and collapse of the empire might be related to the response of the Nile. Increased aridity would result in less flow, less flow in turn would mean increased deposition resulting in less agricultural land fed by the Nile, resulting in hardship (Bard Bard 1994).

So, what is the social-economic impacts of increasing aridity and reduced flood levels from the Nile? The most obvious is going to be hyper-inflation of the currency due to low stocks and high demand, this was observed during the end of the New Kingdom, whereby Grain prices rose 24 faster than the previous rate (Butzer 1980c). This in turn would cause social unrest and eventual abandonment of the flood plain for better land to cultivate. 

Though, in terms of Egypt, this assumption would neglect other prominent mechanisms which led to the downfall of the separate Kingdoms. The best example is Ramesses’s the II which, in the face of floods, civil unrest and wars managed to keep Egypt united and keep some control over his subjects and territories. Compare this to the collapse at the end of 6^th Dynasty, where by 31 Kings ruled Egypt in the space of 120 years (Bard 1994)! This highlights the importance of power and control of the monarch, those who were able to adapt grow and face the challenges managed to weather the course and prolong the settlement of their people, where as in the latter case, immense civil outcry and lack of control obviously played a huge part in the kingdoms downfall and fragmentation (Bard 1994). 

So is it Social political issues exacerbated by the climate, or the climate dictating the weakened stance of the monarchs? In my opinion, I believe the former is true. Why? Because of the 3 different assemblages in the archaeological record, shifts that seem to be to rapid to be explained by the improvement and worsening of climate. There must have been some form of catalyst which set everything in motion, which then became accentuated due to climatic pressures.

So, Why do you think the Egyptians didn’t stand the test of time?