When Greek was an African Language | Page 3

a problem because of their Seleucid rivals'
monopoly of Indian elephants and mahouts. They had no choice except
to find an African source for elephants and that led to the establishment
of close relations between Ptolemaic Egypt and Kush that lasted for the
remainder of the third century BC. Armed elephant hunting expeditions,
sometimes numbering hundreds of men as well as explorers and
diplomats—one named Simonides the Younger even lived at Meroe for
seven years and wrote an unfortunately now lost book about his
experiences-- freely circulated throughout Kushite territory.
On the Greek side the results of Ptolemy II and his successors' initiative
are clear and uncontroversial. Besides gaining access to a ready supply
of African products including hardwoods, incense, gold, slaves, ivory,
and even animals for Egyptian temples and Ptolemy's zoo including a
rhinoceros, the reports Ptolemaic explorers and hunters prepared
revolutionized Greek knowledge of the African interior. [12] They

recorded the Nile valley between the Egyptian border and Meroe in
detail. They correctly identified the Nile's three principal
tributaries—the Atbara, Blue and White Niles— together with their
native names and meanings. Rumors may even have reached them of
the Nile's ultimate source in Lake Victoria in modern Uganda. [13]
The ethnographic map of Nubia also snapped into clear focus. As might
be expected, the bulk of the information concerned the kingdom of
Kush and its capital, Meroe, the Ptolemies chief rival for influence in
Nubia. The reports detailed its relations with other ethnic groups in the
region and described the principal features of Kushite culture,
especially the public aspects of Kushite kingship including details of
the coronation ritual and the succession rules of the Kushite kings,
descriptions of Kushite royal regalia and the practice of human
sacrifice at the death of a king.
While the high quality of the Ptolemaic accounts of Nubia and its
peoples are clear, so also are their limitations. Ptolemaic diplomats and
military officers were good observers; they even recorded a dangerous
form of elephant hunting that was still in use in the 19 &supth; th
century. [14] They were not, however, anthropologists. They could,
and sometimes did, misunderstand what they saw or were told, once
mistaking a troop of chimpanzees for a tribe of tree-living natives. Still,
with all their flaws the Hellenistic accounts of Nubia were not equaled
until the high Middle Ages. On the Greek side, therefore, the results of
Ptolemy II's and his successors' activities in Nubia are clear: Greeks
acquired access to elephants and other sub-Saharan African products
and relatively accurate information of contemporary Kush and its
culture that contemporary historians of the Sudan still find useful. But
what about the impact on Kushites and their culture?
Military defeat, loss of territory, and foreign penetration of their
territory on a scale unparalleled since the conquest of Nubia a
millennium earlier by New Kingdom Egypt characterize the initial
Kushite encounter with Ptolemaic Egypt. This would hardly seem at
first glance a promising foundation for cultural exchange. Nevertheless,
as I mentioned earlier, scholars have long maintained that, despite all

these negatives, contact with Ptolemaic Egypt inspired the kings of
Kush to pursue a policy of deliberate policy of Hellenization that
ultimately transformed their capital Meroe into a "little Nubian
Alexandria." The principal evidence for this thesis is a passage from the
first century BC historian Diodorus [15] describing a bloody
confrontation in the 3 &suprd; rd century BC between a Greek
educated king, Ergamenes—Arqamani--and the priesthood of Amon at
Meroe. Specifically, according to Diodorus, study of Greek philosophy
enabled Ergamenes to brush aside the priests' demand that he commit
suicide and to enter "with his soldiers into the unapproachable place
where stood, as it turned out, the golden shrine of the Ethiopians, put
the priests to the sword, and after abolishing this custom thereafter
ordered affairs after his own will."
The Greek bias of Diodorus' account is obvious, but archaeological
evidence also leaves no doubt of the far-reaching impact of Ergamenes'
revolution. Henceforth Kushite political and religious life was
centralized at Meroe. The old royal cemetery at Napata near the fourth
cataract of the Nile was replaced by a new burial ground east of Meroe.
Kushite royal iconography reveals that the kings of Kush also adopted
a new, less Egyptianizing style of regalia. The evidence, moreover,
indicates that in the third century BC Kushite kings transferred their
patronage from Egyptian gods like Amon to local deities connected
with the office of the king but lacking identifiable Egyptian
backgrounds such as the lion headed war-god Apedemak. These deities
were also worshipped in temples that creatively combined Egyptian
and Nubian traditions such as the so-called Lion Temples and the huge
pilgrimage site of Musawarrat es Sufra. Finally, a new quasi-alphabetic