On Borders and Expansion: Egyptian Imperialism in the Levant during the Ramesside Period

Georgia Xekalaki

doi:10.3390/heritage4040216

Abstract

This paper aims to define the way Egyptians perceived the boundaries of their land and reassesses the impact of Egyptian colonialism during the Ramesside period (c. 1292–1069 BCE). During this era, expansive wars, diplomatic action and land administration/governance reforms led Egypt to control a large part of modern Israel, Palestine, Lebanon and Syria. To refer to this period, historians often use the terms Egyptian “empire” and Egyptian “imperialism”, extending terminology coined in the 19th century to describe modern cases of political dominance to Late Bronze Age Egypt. Furthermore, traditional scholarship also presents Egypt’s borders in such a way that Egypt appears as a solid territory with fixed borders, despite evidence pointing to a different model of geographical division. Seeking to explore whether the use of modern terms on ancient Egypt may be an anachronism, this paper reviews the scholarship on (a) Egyptian records documenting conquests and (b) contextual archaeological evidence from the southern Near East itself. This review highlights differences between modern and ancient conceptions of land domination. Finally, Egyptian border-related terms are used in a strictly local symbolic cultural context but not in the one of international diplomacy. As for Egypt’s boundary, it was mostly formed as a buffer zone rather than a borderline.

Highlights

In the history of academic research, scholarly interest in a local perspective on an imperialistic or colonial situation is a prevalent, but relatively new, area
With regard to the meaning of imperialism for the Egyptians and their consequent activity in the Levant, we have successfully assessed: (a)the scholarship on Egyptian records and (b) the Egyptian heritage elements found within Southern Near Eastern contextual archaeological evidence
Cultural imperialism was present but limited as contextual evidence shows that most Egyptian cultural assets, though influential [43] (p. 126), were eventually appropriated rather than reproduced in the framework of the local Levantine/Canaanite cultural expression, and did not affect Southern Near Eastern heritage in the long term [34] (p. 249).It has been shown that the local population and its elites were instrumental in shaping historical events in their area all through the Late Bronze Age and the Early Iron Age [44] (p. 125)

Summary

Introduction

In the history of academic research, scholarly interest in a local perspective on an imperialistic or colonial situation is a prevalent, but relatively new, area. The term “imperialism” describes models of domination of a national entity over others that combine territorial expansion, political control, economic exploitation, and cultural influence. As an idea, it stems within the sphere of the 19th c. The term has been adapted and established to identify domination policies of other ancient territorial powers classified as ‘empires’, including pharaonic Egypt. Egypt’s policies towards its southern as well as northeastern neighbors have been persuasively identified as “imperialism” by modern scholarship [2]. 8), there is enough space for exploring the exact dynamics of Egyptian expansion during the Ramesside period, from the aspect of aims and motives that characterize the cultural modality Since imperial systems are dynamic in nature [5] (p. 8), there is enough space for exploring the exact dynamics of Egyptian expansion during the Ramesside period, from the aspect of aims and motives that characterize the cultural modality

Objectives

Discussion

Conclusion