A History of the First Intermediate Period

The blog post for this week is written by Jeanne Whitehurst, who has completed her Certificate of Egyptology from the University of Manchester. She moved to Egypt over ten years ago, just before the revolution. Initially, she lived in Luxor, overlooking Karnak Temple, but now she lives in Aswan overlooking the First Cataract. She was extremely fortunate to have worked with Ted Brock on the sarcophagus of Merenptah (KV 8) as a volunteer.

The nineteenth century Egyptologists, not the Ancient Egyptians, gave the name to Intermediate periods which they defined as eras of political strife or instability, whereas stable eras are referred to as “Kingdoms” e.g., Old, Middle, New etc. The First Intermediate Period has long been labelled a “dark age” but was it and if so, what were the causes for the Old Kingdom collapse (fig. 1)? It possibly fell due to problems with succession from the Sixth Dynasty, in addition to the rising power of provincial monarchs. Alternatively, the drier climate that resulted in widespread famine across North and East Africa around 2200 BC. Hieroglyphs record that many people died of famine during this time, which probably caused the period of chaos that followed. Tales were told of people resorting to eating their children and other atrocities. The Egyptian sage Ipuwer gives a graphic description of the horrendous events of that time: “Lo, the desert claims the land, towns are ravaged. Upper Egypt became a wasteland. Lo, everyone’s hair [has fallen out]. Lo, great and small say, ‘I wish I were dead’. Lo, children of nobles are dashed against walls. Infants are put on high ground. Food is lacking. Wearers of fine linen are beaten with [sticks]. Ladies suffer like maidservants. Lo, those who were entombed are cast on high grounds. Men stir up strife unopposed. Groaning is throughout the land, mingled with laments. See now the land is deprived of kingship. What the pyramid hid is empty. The people are diminished.

Fig. 1: Stela of Hetepwt

The Seventh Dynasty marked the beginning of the First Intermediate Period because of internal strife, with the reigns of this and the succeeding Eighth Dynasty being rather obscure. It is clear, however, that both ruled from Memphis and lasted a total of only about 20 years (2150–2130), or as Manetho remarked, “There were 70 Kings in 70 days”. The king list at Abydos mentions sixteen rulers between the Old Kingdom and the reign of Montuhotep II (fig. 2). By this time the powerful nomarchs were effectively controlling their districts, and factions in the south and north vied for power. Many rulers have the name Neferkare, the throne name of Pepi II. We have evidence of a Kakaure from a small pyramid at Saqqara, while Neferkahor and Wadjkare are mentioned on the famous “Coptos decree” stating their funerary monuments were exempt from taxes due to being rulers!

Fig. 2: First Intermediate Period rulers on the Abydos king list

After the obscure reigns of the Seventh and Eighth Dynasty kings, a group of rulers rose out of Heracleopolis, 15km (9 miles) west of the modern city of Beni Suef, and 110 km (68 miles) south of Cairo. They ruled for approximately 94 years. Under the Heracleopolitan Ninth and Tenth dynasties, the nomarchs near Heracleopolis controlled their area and extended their power north to Memphis (and even into the delta) and south to Lycopolis (modern-day Asyut). In total, there were about nineteen rulers. The founder of the Ninth Dynasty, Wahkare Khety I, is often described as an evil and violent ruler who caused much harm to the inhabitants of Egypt, and, as legend would have it, was eventually killed by a crocodile. Khety I was succeeded by Khety II, also known as Meryibre, whose reign was essentially peaceful but experienced problems in the Nile Delta. His successor, Khety III, brought some degree of order to the Delta, although the power and influence of these Ninth and Tenth Dynasty kings were still insignificant compared to that of the Old Kingdom kings.

The rival southern nomarchs at Thebes established the Eleventh Dynasty controlling the area from Abydos to Elephantine, near Syene (present-day Aswan) The Theban kings are believed to have been descendants of Intef or Inyotef, the nomarch of Thebes, often called the “Keeper of the Door of the South”. He is credited with organizing Upper Egypt into an independent ruling body in the south, although he himself did not appear to have tried to claim the title of king. Intef II began the Theban assault on northern Egypt, and his successor, Intef III, completed the attack and moved into Middle Egypt against the Heracleopolitan kings. The first three kings of the Eleventh Dynasty (all named Intef) were, therefore, also the last three kings of the First Intermediate Period. They were succeeded by a line of kings who were all called Montuhotep. Montuhotep II (fig. 3), also known as Nebhepetra, who would eventually defeat the Heracleopolitan kings around 2033 BC and unify the country to bring Egypt into the Middle Kingdom.

Fig. 3: Memorial Temple of Montuhotep II at Deir el-Bahari

Another claim about the chaos of this era is the artwork, the argument rests on the interpretation that it was of poor quality in addition to an absence of monumental building projects. In fact, the opposite is true, it was a time of cultural change, the quality of the artwork may have resulted from a lack of strong central government and an absence of state-mandated art, but an explanation could be that different districts were now free to develop and create their own vision in the arts (fig. 4). The lack of monumental building was probably because the dynasties of the Old Kingdom had drained the government treasury in creating their own grand monuments such as the pyramids of Giza, so, by the time of the 7th Dynasty, there were no resources left for such projects.

Fig. 4: A "soldier stela", which was perhaps reflected the political reality of the period

The First Intermediate period saw the rise of mass-produced crafts for tomb goods. Amulets, coffins, and tomb models were among these crafts which were buried with the deceased. Tomb models (fig. 5), which were thought to come to life and attend to the tomb owners’ needs, were made of faience, stone, or wood. The elongated figures of the period have a charm of their own and required expertise in their carving. Previously, only high officials could afford tomb models but, in this era, they were available to those of less modest means.

Fig. 5: Tomb figures such as this were common during the period

Tombs of the First Intermediate Period vary in standard, but other periods do as well. An outstanding example is the beautifully decorated tomb of Ankhtifi at Mo’alla, 45km south of Luxor on the East side of the Nile (fig. 6). He was a provincial governor and military leader who exercised the power in the south of Upper Egypt under the Ninth Herakleopolitan Dynasty (around 2100 BC). He boasts about his position as the nomarch of the third Upper Egyptian nome and the measures, both peaceful and militarily, he undertook to expand his power base and aid nearby nomes.

Fig. 6: Decoration in the tomb of Ankhtifi

Three inscribed rock-cut tombs at Asyut are a main source of information for the history of the First Intermediate Period. They are historically important because they contain the autobiographical texts of Iti-ibi and Khety (tombs III and IV) that report the great struggle of the Siutian (Asyut) and Herakleopolitan troops against the Theban troops. Asyut, the ancient capital of the thirteenth Upper Egyptian nome, had great strategic importance both by water and by land, and this may well have been why it was so hotly contested.

A time of hardship, temples and tombs were pillaged, Nomarchs trying to control more land, but a time not to be overlooked when Egypt was dynamic and changing its perceptions to welcome a new age which would become the Middle Kingdom.