Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
KEY WORDS
inequality
ABSTRACT
Cemetery T a t Naqada has been postulated as being the
interment site of a predynastic royal or ruling elite due to its small, localized
area and the richness of its burial goods. In order to examine possible biological differentiation between the individuals buried in Cemetery T and those
buried in other, possibly lower Istatus cemeteries a t Naqada, nonmetric dental
morphological data were analyzed using the Mean Measure of Divergence
statistic. Results indicate that Cemetery T shows some biological distinction
from both Cemetery B and the Great Cemetery. The size of the difference
supports the archaeological interpretation that Cemetery T represents a ruling or elite segment (or lineage) of the local population at Naqada, rather than
a ruling or elite immigrant population. Given the problem of small samples,
however, this interpretation is tentative. o 1994 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
The ancient Egyptian civilization is well
known for its striking remains, such as the
pyramids, the burial riches of King Tutankhamun, and the form of writing ltnown
as hieroglyphics. Some of the fundamental
questions in the study of this civilization,
however, concern aspects of its formation,
such as its environmental, politicail and
ideological associations and antecedents
(Bard, 1992; Hassan, 1988; Wenke, 1989,
1991), and the timing and nature of social
inequality (Anderson, 1992; Bard, 1988,
1989; Griswold, 1992). Social inequality is
clearly evident in the pyramids of Giza, near
Cairo, which are monumental tombs for
pharaohs of the Old Kingdom (a name attributed to the period of rule by the royal
Dynasties 111-VI, c. 2686-2181 B.C.), and in
the ornate grave goods found with the
mummy of King Tutankhamun, who was
buried in a rock cut tomb in the Valley of
the Kings in southern Egypt, the traditional burial place for royalty of the New
Kingdom (Dynasties XVIII-XX, c. 15701070 B.C). The origins of the inequalit,y that
manifested itself in monumental architecture and opulence in life and death for those
0 1994 WILEY-LISS. INC.
428
LIBYA
Fig. 1. Map of Egypt and Nubia showing the location of the predynastic site of Naqada.
429
cranial nonmetric traits analysis al,;G O was years, the sex of each specimen was conapplied to the Naqada series and to the firmed at the time of this study, following
question of racial admixture in Egyptian contemporary osteological procedures (Bass,
history (Berry and Berry, 1972; Berry et al., 1987; Ubelaker, 1989; White, 1991). Fifty
1967).Now part of the Duckworth Collection females, 72 males, and 9 individuals of unat Cambridge University, the materi.11 con- known sex comprise the total sample; the
tinues to be the subject of craniometric in- sex distribution is the same in all three cemvestigation into the biological affinities of etery subsamples.
the ancient Egyptians (Crichton, 1966;
Forty-three morphological traits of the
Keita, 1990,1992).
permanent dentition were scored by Love11
Biological affinity studies also can be in accordance with the criteria and scoring
based profitably on dental morphological plaques established by Turner et al. (1991).
traits, which are well suited to biological dis- The data collection took place over a period
tance analyses because: (1)many traits are of one month. Intraobserver variation was
independent of each other as well as inde- assessed by repeated scoring of 25 toothpendent of age and sex; (2) there is a high trait combinations in a randomly selected
genetic component in occurrence and ex- subsample of 20 individuals and was found
pression; and ( 3 ) the amount of intergroup to be well within the limits recommended by
variation in trait frequencies is high (Irish Nichol and Turner (1986). All available
and Turner, 1990). Teeth also are often bet- teeth were scored individually, but only the
ter preserved than are bones and are rarely antimere showing the highest degree of trait
altered significantly by postmortem diagen- expression was used in the analysis, accordesis, so data can be obtained from fragmen- ing to the individual count method (Turner
tary remains that are unsuitable for cranial and Scott, 1977). Unfortunately, the scores
metric and nonmetric study. Nonnnetric for many of the 43 morphological traits could
traits of the dentition in skeletal samples not be included in subsequent statistical
from ancient Nubia, to the south of Egypt, analysis due to small samples of observable
have been examined in several studies of teeth within the cranial samples for each
population affinity (Greene, 1967, 1972, cemetery; premortem tooth loss due to peri1982; Irish and Turner, 1990; Turner and odontal disease or infectious abscessing, seMarkowitz, 1990). The purpose of this study vere tooth wear, and postmortem tooth loss
was to examine nonmetrical morphological and breakage are the causes of the small
traits of the teeth t o address the question of samples of teeth. Although some workers inwhether any degree of biological differentia- clude a trait in an intersample comparison if
tion can be detected among the skeletal Sam- it is observed in only one of the samples beples obtained from Cemeteries B, T, and the ing considered (i.e., it is absent in the other
Great Cemetery at Naqada.
samples), this procedure can magnify the influence of chance occurrences of rare traits
MATERIALS AND METHODS
in small samples, such as those available in
Skeletal samples were examined at the this study. Therefore, only traits that were
Department of Biological Anthropology a t observed in at least two of the three samples
Cambridge University: 38 skulls from Cem- were included in the analysis. Any toothetery B, 26 skulls from Cemetery T, and 67 trait combination that was wholly unobservskulls from the Great Cemetery. Sex alf the able in any of the cemetery samples was necindividuals was determined at the tirne of essarily ignored. Accordingly, the final data
excavation by Warren (18971, who assisted set was reduced to 11 morphological traits,
Petrie in the field. Later, sex was reassessed scored as 24 tooth-trait combinations (see
when the specimens were accessioned by the Table 1). Since anterior teeth, i.e., the inciDuckworth Laboratory at Cambridge Uni- sors and canines, are most easily lost or broversity. Since postcrania are available for ken in the burial environment, it is not surmany of the Naqada specimens, these deter- prising that these 11traits all are found on
minations of sex were largely accurate, but the posterior molar and premolar teeth. To
because methods have improved over the avoid eliminating traits which have con-
430
.-
Cemetery B
_
217
6/16
3/12
319
4/18
1/13
1/10
3116
2111
0122
2/20
9114
116
0115
619
8/10
118
117
516
15/15
3/14
6114
7/16
16/19
Great
Cemetery
Cemetery T~
10128
17/32
11/24
21/35
6/38
8/33
7/31
10136
6/29
2/49
4/46
24/29
14/26
4131
17/25
6/18
6/16
2/13
23/32
32/37
4137
9/26
25/37
33/44
Total
-~
013
417
114
117
5/14
119
115
1111
3/10
3/17
2/13
8115
213
217
45
12/38
27/55
15/40
25/51
15/70
10155
9/46
14/63
11/50
5/88
8/89
41/58
17/35
6/53
27/39
16/36
7/29
3/23
32/42
57/66
7/62
15/47
35/64
60177
218
015
013
414
10114
0111
017
3111
11/14
'Frequencies are given as the number ofexpressions of the trait over the number of observable teeth
+ -21 sin-'
(1
[-I)
k + l
n + l
MMD'
SD
Standardized MMD
Approx. p-values
'MMO
B-Great
Cemeteries
B-T
T-Great
0.0101
0.0464
0.2186
0.335
0.2415
0.0836
2.8890
0.0206
0.1065
0.0665
1.6006
0.068
standard deviation.
431
0.0370
0.0431
0.8584
0.178
0.1388
0.0621
2.2350
0.0375
432
tus-differentiated group which is not biologically distinct from the population using the
Great Cemetery.
One possible explanation of the biological
distinction among the cemeteries is that it
represents temporal variation. Hoffman
(1979) suggested that Cemetery T was constructed and used in the Late Gerzean
(Naqada 111) period (c. 3200-3050 B.C.),
while Davis (1983)concluded that Cemetery
T was used contemporaneously with the
Great Cemetery throughout the entire
Gerzean period (c. 4000-3050 B.C.) rather
than just the late Gerzean period. The possibility exists, therefore, that the distinctions
found among Cemetery T, Cemetery B and
the Great Cemetery are the result of microevolutionary changes over time, rather than
a contemporaneous distinction of an elite
group from the general population. The
magnitudes of the raw MMD distances, however, are incompatible with this interpretation given the time period in question. According to Turners (1986) proposed rate of
dental microevolution, these distances
would represent up to 13,000years of microevolution if indeed the occupants of Cemetery T were temporally distinct from the
population that is now represented in the
other two cemeteries.
Alternatively, Cemetery T may represent
a different, i.e., immigrant population, although this would have taken place several
generations earlier in order for cultural assimilation to be complete, i.e., for the grave
goods to be so unquestionably similar in
style, if not richness, among the cemeteries.
Although population movements along the
Nile undoubtedly occurred, we suspect that
in the predynastic period these were more
individual, family, or other small unit phenomena, rather than the transplantation of
large groups. Given the archaeological and
biological evidence, we believe that the most
likely and most parsimonious explanation
for the magnitude of the distances between
Cemetery T and the other cemeteries is that
of inbreeding within a segment of a population. Ruling or elite classes or lineages often
have preferential, within group, marriage
rules. Thus, genetic drift could account for
the greater than expected distance between
this group and the general population. Al-
433
Nichol CR, and Turner CG I1 (1986) Intra- and interobserver concordance in classifying dental morphology.
Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 69.299315.
Pearson K (1985) Regression, heredity, and panmixia.
Phil. Trans. 187(A):279-281.
Petrie WMF (1901) Diospolis Parva: The Cemeteries of
Abadiyeh and Hu. London: Egypt Exploration Fund
Publication No. 20.
Petrie WMF, and Quibell J E (1896) Naqada and Ballas
1895. London: Bernard Quaritch.
Sjevold T (1973) The occurrence of minor non-metrical
variants in the skeleton and their quantitative treatment for population comparison. Homo 24~204-233.
Sofaer JA, Smith P, and Kaye E (1986) Affinities between contemporary and skeletal Jewish and nonJewish groups based on tooth morphology. Am. J .
Phys. Anthropol. 7Ot265-275.
Turner CG I1 (1986) Dentochronological separation estimates for Pacific Rim populations. Science 232:11401142.
Turner CG 11, and Markowitz MA (1990)Dental discontinuity between Late Pleistocene and recent Nubians:
Peopling of the Eurafrican-Asian triangle I. Homo 41:
32-41.
Turner CG 11, and Scott RG (1977) Dentition of Easter
Islanders. In AA Dahlberg and TA Graber (eds.): Orofacial Growth and Development. The Hague: Mouton,
pp. 229-249.
Turner CG 11, Nichol CR, and Scott RG (1991) Scoring
procedures for key morphological traits of the permanent dentition: The Arizona State University dental
anthropology system. In MA Kelley and CS Larson
(eds.): Advances in Dental Anthropology. New York:
Wiley-Liss, pp. 13-31.
Ubelaker DH (1989) Human Skeletal Remains: Excavation, analysis, interpretation. Second Edition. Washington: Taraxacum.
Warren E (1897) An investigation on the variability of
the human skeleton with special reference to the
Naqada race. Phil. Trans. Royal SOC.189:135-227.
Wenke R J (1989) Egypt: Origins of complex society.
Ann. Rev. Anthropol. IBr129-155.
Wenke RJ (1991) The evolution of early Egyptian civilization: Issues and evidence. J. World Prehistory
5t279-329.
White TD (1991) Human Osteology. San Diego: Academic Press.