“This is the Taste of Death”

042

Can a folktale from the Middle Bronze Age provide us with information about the remote past that has eluded even extensive archaeological expeditions?

The answer is yes. The Tale of Sinuhe,¹ composed during Egypt’s Middle Kingdom, may help resolve scholarly debates about social conditions in Canaan-Syria (also known as the Levant) in the early second millennium B.C.

Sinuhe’s story takes place during the reigns of the first two pharaohs of Egypt’s 12th Dynasty: Amenemhet I (1991–1962 B.C.) and Senuseret I (1971–1928 B.C.). It is told in the first person by Sinuhe himself, a high official in Amenemhet’s court who leaves Egypt, travels to Canaan, raises a family and finally returns to Egypt in order to live out his days among his own people and receive a proper burial.

Although the earliest manuscripts of the tale date to later in the 12th Dynasty (see the sidebar to this article), the text was probably written in the 20th century B.C. A number of scholars—including Alan Gardiner,² the editor of the critical text of the Tale of Sinuhe—believe that the story was originally composed for the tomb of a real person named Sinuhe, though no such tomb has yet been discovered. Whether or not Sinuhe actually lived, the story does show a detailed acquaintance with the land of his sojourn, which in the text is called Tnw, an abbreviated form of Rtnw (Retjenu, later Retenu), the standard Egyptian name for Canaan (and perhaps north Syria). The question is, What can Sinuhe’s adventure tell us about the prevailing social and cultural conditions in Retenu/Canaan at the time, and how does this picture fit with the archaeological record?

In the ancient Near East, a period of disruption followed the destruction of Early Bronze Age III (2700–2200 B.C.) urban settlements. This period is known as the Intermediate Bronze Age or Middle Bronze Age I.^a Egyptian texts describe the unsettled conditions that prevailed after the collapse of the Old Kingdom in the 22nd century B.C.—a time known as Egypt’s First Intermediate Period. In Syria, a severe decline in the standard of living 043occurred, as we know from the archaeological record of such places as Hama and Ugarit. In Canaan³ and Transjordan,⁴ a pastoral people struggled to procure cereals and other foods they had previously been able to acquire by trade with Early Bronze Age III urban centers.

But how long did this intermediate period last? By the end of the third millennium B.C. Egypt was once again reunited under the Middle Kingdom. According to many archaeologists, however, the period of disruption lasted much longer in the Levant. In the first centuries of the second millennium B.C., they say, Canaan still lay under the cloud of a pastoral, tribal regime characteristic of Middle Bronze Age I. The Tale of Sinuhe has even been used to support this view: The consensus has always been that the famous Egyptian refugee spent many years among pastoral nomads before returning to Egypt.

But this view is mistaken, as a close reading of Sinuhe’s story will demonstrate.⁵ A higher degree of civilization prevailed in Canaan-Syria in the 20th century B.C. than many archaeologists have thought—a civilization characteristic not of Middle Bronze Age I but of the subsequent period, Middle Bronze Age IIa.

In the story,⁶ Sinuhe is a nobleman employed by Pharaoh Amenemhet’s daughter, who is married to the pharaoh’s son and co-regent, Senuseret—who eventually becomes the 12th Dynasty’s second king. As the tale begins, Sinuhe is in the field with the Egyptian army, led by Senuseret, on a campaign against the Libyans. One night, while the army marches home with booty and prisoners, messengers arrive to inform Senuseret that his father has died (in fact, he was assassinated).⁷

Sinuhe learns that Amenemhet’s other sons have also been summoned to the court, and he overhears a messenger speaking to one of them. Fearing that there might be trouble over the succession, and that he might not escape with his life, Sinuhe flees. First he turns south, traveling along the western side of the Nile. He then crosses the Nile on a rudderless barge and reverses direction, heading north toward the delta. We take up the story as he makes his escape from Egyptian territory:

I directed my steps northward. I reached the Walls of the Ruler built to repel the pastoralists (styw), to trample those who traverse the sands. I assumed a crouching position in the underbrush for fear that the sentries serving daytime watch on the wall might see me. I moved on when it was dark and I had reached Petny by 044daybreak, having made my halt on the island of Kem-wer, while an attack of thirst overtook me and I was parched and my throat was dry. I said, “This is the taste of death!” But I took courage and pulled myself together after I heard the sound of the lowing of cattle and caught sight of some pastoralists (styw). The leader (mtn) among them, who had been in Egypt, recognized me. Then he gave me water and, after I had gone with him to his clan (whyt), he boiled milk for me. They treated me well.⁸

Is it only an odd coincidence that the leader of this pastoralist group recognizes Sinuhe? It seems reasonable to infer from this passage that one of Sinuhe’s duties as a court official was to deal with desert dwellers seeking entry into the Nile Delta.

Sinuhe continues his journey northward to Retenu (Canaan):

Country (hÉ3st) gave me to country (hÉ3st). I set out for Byblos but turned back to Qedem.^b There I spent a year and a half.⁹

Sinuhe arrives at Byblos, the ancient commercial ally of Egypt on the Mediterranean coast of modern Lebanon. A hallmark of the Middle Kingdom was the renewal of maritime trade with the Lebanese coast, probably first for the import of wood (the cedars of Lebanon). In all likelihood an Egyptian commercial and diplomatic mission was maintained at Byblos. The place itself was certainly a city, an important seaport. However, it is not identified in Sinuhe’s text as a city. The author uses only the determinative for a country (hÉ3st), not the determinative for a town (dmi). This peculiar practice by the narrator has deceived most commentators, who take it as evidence that Byblos, in the 20th century B.C., had not yet become an urban center and still lay in the throes of Middle Bronze Age I. But Sinuhe’s very arrival in Byblos suggests the opposite; Byblos at the time was probably a significant city, the kind of place to which foreigners migrated.

Sinuhe journeys from Byblos to Qedem, and then he makes his way to the ruler of Retenu/Canaan. The identification of the “land of Qedem” is one of the geographical mysteries of the story. One would expect a place to the east, since the Semitic qedem means “east.” But where? It is from Qedem that Sinuhe arrives at (Re)tenu:

’Ammu-insái, the ruler (hq3) of Upper Retenu, brought me in that he might say to me: “You are happy with me since you hear the language of Egypt.” He said this because he had learned of my character and had heard of my ability since the Egyptians who were there with him had testified of me.¹⁰

Thus we learn that there are already 045Egyptians in the court of the ruler of Retenu. These Egyptians have access to ’Ammu-insái, and he heeds their recommendations. This clearly would not have been the case in a Middle Bronze Age I pastoralist society. Egyptian dignitaries simply did not visit, much less serve, local rulers of humble villages.

The archaeological testimony is overwhelming. Of the hundreds of excavated Middle Bronze Age I tombs in Canaan, no scarabs, pottery or other artifacts indicating cultural contact with Egypt have been found. The pottery from these tombs was made in either Transjordan or Cisjordan, notably from around Jerusalem and other hill-country areas. One lonely cup made of Nile silt did show up in a site in the southern desert. During the subsequent period of Middle Bronze Age IIa, however, Egyptian cultural contacts are amply attested by artifactual finds.

After discussing the demise of the late pharaoh, Amenemhet I, ’Ammu-insái and Sinuhe get down to business. ’Ammu-insái addresses himself once again to Sinuhe:

“So you are here! While you stay with me, I will treat you well.” He even placed me ahead of his own children and it was to his own daughter that he married me. It was from the choicest (lands) that he had, on the border with another land (há3st) that he let me chose from his realm.¹¹

This passage depicts a ruler who has control over considerable territory. He grants his new son-in-law the privilege of choosing a territory for his own. It happens to border on a neighboring land so that Sinuhe will in effect be guarding his father-in-law’s country in the face of a neighboring territory.

Of even more significance is Sinuhe’s description of his new territorial possession:

It was a good land, Araru (or Alalu?) was its name.¹² Figs were in it as well as vines. More abundant was its wine than water. Its honey was plentiful, its olives profuse. Every fruit was on its trees. Barley was there along with emmer wheat. There was no limit to all its cattle.

Great was that which accrued to me as a consequence of (his) love for me. He appointed me ruler (hq3) of a clan (whyt) from among the elite of his land (há3st). (Provisions) were snared for me and placed before me, besides what my own dogs brought in. Many dainties were prepared for me, milk in all kinds of cookery.

During the many years I spent, my children grew into warriors (nhátw), each one ruling his own clan (whyt).¹³

This picture of multifaceted agriculture—with fruit plantations, vineyards, traditional cereal crops and extensive herds and flocks—does not describe a people still under the shadow of Middle Bronze Age I.

Among the visitors to whom Sinuhe extends his hospitality are Egyptian emissaries. Although there were small farming communities in the Levant during Middle Bronze Age I,¹⁴ these humble settlements were hardly venues for visiting Egyptian expatriates or Egyptian diplomats. Sinuhe greets envoys “going north and south to the (Egyptian) palace … I entertained everyone (as my guest). I gave water to the thirsty; I put the lost one back on the road; and I rescued the one who had been robbed.”¹⁵

Another decisive passage establishing the type of social order envisaged by the tale is Sinuhe’s description of warfare. He takes “countermeasures” against “the tribesmen (styw) who became so insolent as to oppose the rulers of the lands (hq3w há3swt).”¹⁶ Sinuhe is responsible for defending the “rulers of the lands” against the raids of pastoralists (styw).¹⁷ Could there be a clearer picture of a sedentary agricultural society and its rulers in conflict with the non-sedentary dwellers of the steppe?

046

Sinuhe also conducts military operations against neighboring sedentary countries:

This ruler (hq3) of [Re]tenu had me carry out many missions as commander (“marshaller”) of his army, and as for every land (há3st) that I went out against, against it I made my victorious attack, driving (it) from its pasturage and wells after I had plundered its cattle and carried off its serfs. It was by my scimitar, by my bow, by my maneuvers and by my excellent planning that I slew its citizens. After he came to love me and to recognize my valor, I found favor in his heart. It was after he saw that my arms were flourishing in strength that he placed me at the head of his children.¹⁸

This is not tribal warfare; it is conflict between the established societies of the region.

There is also the incident of Sinuhe’s duel with a local champion:

There came a warrior (nhát) of [Re]tenu to insult me in my tent; a champion was he without peer, he having subdued it all. He said he would fight with me; he planned to plunder me; he meant to seize my cattle on the counsel of his clan.¹⁹

This battle of champions between Sinuhe and his challenger has been discussed extensively in relation to similar duels in other literary traditions (for example, the battles between Achilles and Hector in the Iliad and between David and Goliath in 1 Samuel). But what matters here is that duels between champions are characteristic of sedentary, developed populations. They are foreign to the behavior of nomadic pastoralists.

So the story of Sinuhe’s contest with a rival champion is further proof that he was not living in a pastoralist society. The scene in which Sinuhe is insulted in his tent is often quoted as proof that he was living among nomads. But pharaoh is often depicted in his tent when on campaign (as is Achilles at the siege of Troy).

Another argument raised by those who insist that 20th-century B.C. Canaan-Syria was dominated by nomadic tribes can be easily countered. This involves references in Sinuhe’s story (and other Egyptian texts) to the Retenu as “sand-dwellers” or “sand-farers.”

But such name-calling simply reflects Egyptian chauvinism. The Egyptians typically reckoned foreigners as inferior creatures unworthy to be called rmt (“mankind”)—Nubians to the south, Libyans to the west and Asiatics (‘3mw) to the northeast. A 6th Dynasty (c. 2345–2180 B.C.) inscription, for example, describes the campaigns of Weni, a military commander under Pharaoh Pepi I, against the “sand-dwellers.” This term must have been coined much earlier, when the Egyptians first encountered the nomads of the Sinai desert; but it was later applied to all the populations occupying the lands of the Retenu (Canaan and Syria). Weni’s description of his campaigns reveals a society that can hardly be 047classified as nomadic or pastoral: “When his majesty took action against the Asiatics who are upon the sand,” Weni says, “his majesty sent me at the head of this army”:

It was after it had ravaged the land of the sand-dwellers that this army returned in peace;

It was after it had trampled the land of the sand-dwellers that this army returned in peace;

It was after it had plundered [its] strongholds that this army returned in peace;

It was after it had cut down its fig (trees) and its vines that this army returned in peace;

It was after it had cast fire in all its [palaces?] that this army returned in peace;

It was after it had slain its troops by many myriads that this army returned in peace;

It was after [it had carried] off many [troops] as prisoners that this army returned in peace.²⁰

Donald Redford has seen the incongruity in the assumption that these “sand- dwellers”—with strongholds, fig trees, vineyards and perhaps even palaces—were primitive “desert dwellers.”²¹ His suggestion was that “upon the sand” should be rendered as “at/beside/across the sand.”²² But “sand-dwellers” derives from the Egyptians’ view that the peoples of Canaan-Syria were no better than the nomadic tribes of the Sinai desert. (Many Egyptologists of the past two centuries have, perhaps unwittingly, espoused the Egyptian view, namely that all Semites must have been “tribesmen.”)

In Sinuhe’s story, too, if the Retenu are “sand-dwellers,” they are also a civilized people who control extensive territories and maintain diplomatic ties with Egypt.

These diplomatic contacts between Sinuhe’s adopted country and his homeland eventually lead to his being invited back to Egypt by Senuseret I. Sinuhe’s correspondence cited in the narrative is accompanied by extensive praise for the pharaoh, thus revealing one of the main motives for the story: to extol the second king of the 12th Dynasty. Sinuhe’s flattery of Senuseret (“The sun rises at your pleasure”) makes sense if we remember that this former official, years ago, vanished suddenly at a tense moment and then lived among a foreign people. Now, he discharges his affairs and departs:

I was allowed to spend one more day in Araru (Alalu), handing over my possessions to my children, my eldest son taking charge of my clan; all my possessions became his: my serfs, my herds, my fruit, my fruit trees.

This servant departed southward. I arrived at Horus-ways. The commander in charge of the garrison sent a message to the palace to let it be known. Then his majesty sent an overseer of field workers of the royal palace, accompanied by loaded ships carrying gifts of royal favor for the pastoralists (styw) who came with me to escort me to Horus-ways.²³

The pastoralists who accompany Sinuhe to Egypt are obviously a desert escort and indicate nothing about the sedentary population farther north. Even in the 19th century, explorers such as Edward Robinson and H.H. Trumbull had to use Bedouin as caravanners to cross from Egypt to Palestine.

Sinuhe then returns to Egypt and is received by Senuseret I. The royal children find it hard to believe that the rustic character standing before them is an Egyptian nobleman. After cleaning himself up, Sinuhe is rewarded by being restored to his noble status. And he achieves the ultimate dream of every Egyptian: honorary burial in Egypt.

A stone pyramid was built for me in the midst of the pyramids. The masons who built tombs constructed it. A master draftsman designed it. A master sculptor carved it. The overseers of construction in the necropolis busied themselves with it. All the equipment that is placed in a tomb shaft was supplied. Mortuary priests were given to me. A funerary domain was made for me. It had fields and a garden in the right place, as is done for the Companion of the first rank. My statue was overlaid with gold, its skirt with electrum. It was his majesty who ordered it made. There is no commoner for whom the like has been done. I was in the favor of the king, until the day of landing came.²⁴

Sinuhe’s “day of landing” (his death) concludes his tale. It is frequently a moving story with vivid narrative details. When Sinuhe initially flees Egypt, as we have seen, he goes south and then reverses direction and heads north. Why? Is this simply what happened, or does Sinuhe’s vacillation suggest the disorder of his thoughts—or something else? Passages like this help bring the narrative, and Sinuhe himself, to life, as do Sinuhe’s musings on death and his longing to return home: “My eyes are heavy, my arms weak; my legs fail to follow. The heart is weary; 068death is near. May I be conducted to the city of eternity!”

But can we rely on the Tale of Sinuhe as a historical document, giving us a picture of life in Canaan-Syria in the early second millennium B.C.? Some confirmation about the society in Retenu during the period of Sinuhe comes from 12th Dynasty Execration Texts, curses against the pharaoh’s potential enemies, including 069many in Retenu. Those texts have also been misinterpreted by scholars as reflecting a pastoralist society during the 12th Dynasty. But a comparison of the Execration Texts with contemporaneous business documents from Babylonia shows that certain features of Retenu mentioned in the Egyptian texts, such as dual rulership in a city-state, were commensurate with a sedentary society.²⁵

The narrative does have the feel of a personal memoir, with extensive praise of Senuseret I added to glorify Egypt’s king. Sinuhe is not a typical epic hero: He does not accomplish miracles or commune with the gods. Afraid and uncertain, he leaves Egypt during a time of trouble, builds a career in a foreign land and returns home to die—a very plausible life.

Sir Alan Gardiner, as this great Egyptologist was to become, was probably correct in asserting that the tale was based on an inscription from the 12th Dynasty tomb of an actual Sinuhe. Perhaps we will find it someday.

Can a folktale from the Middle Bronze Age provide us with information about the remote past that has eluded even extensive archaeological expeditions? The answer is yes. The Tale of Sinuhe,1 composed during Egypt’s Middle Kingdom, may help resolve scholarly debates about social conditions in Canaan-Syria (also known as the Levant) in the early second millennium B.C. Sinuhe’s story takes place during the reigns of the first two pharaohs of Egypt’s 12th Dynasty: Amenemhet I (1991–1962 B.C.) and Senuseret I (1971–1928 B.C.). It is told in the first person by Sinuhe himself, a high official in Amenemhet’s court who […]