The Kerma culture’s origins can be traced to the late Predynastic period in Upper Nubia, at least north of the Debba Bend, at a time when the latter (Classic and Terminal) phases of A-Group civilization were developing in Lower Nubia. Although there isn’t much evidence to support its continuation, what is found points to a social and political evolution of fewer but larger “statelets” and small “kingdoms.”
The Old Kingdom Egyptian rule over Lower Nubia (which essentially eliminated all evidence of the A-Group) gave it the opportunity to conduct direct trade with the “Pre-Kerma” peoples who ruled the Upper Nubian Nile corridor. Just south of the Third Cataract, near the type site and potential capital of Kerma, a significant and densely inhabited “Pre-Kerma” town with circular homes up to 5 meters in diameter was discovered just beneath the Middle Kerma era cemetery.
Through ceramic typology, four stages in the evolution of the Kerma civilisation may be distinguished archaeologically in the lack of written Kerma texts and with the help of scanty Egyptian records. The Late Old Kingdom and First Intermediate period, the Middle Kingdom and Second Intermediate period, and ultimately the brief end phase in the early Dynasty XVIII are essentially equivalent to the Early, Middle, Classic, and Late (or Post-) Kerma eras in Egypt.
The history of Kerma must still be viewed in the context of Egyptian history because during the Old Kingdom, Egypt was the first to make use of the gold mines in the Wadi Allaqi in the eastern desert. Power and control alternated between the two and were primarily driven by the need to regulate river traffic for trade goods. At this period, the Nile was still located considerably farther east than it is now.
Archaeological evidence from the Batn el-Hajar extends as least as far south as the Debba Bend by the end of the Old Kingdom, indicating the presence of an identifiable “Early Kerma”culture. It stands out from other neighboring contemporaneous civilizations like the “C-Group,” which appears to represent the A-replacement Group’s in Lower Nubia, and the pastoralist nomadic “Pan-Grave” peoples, who mostly inhabit the eastern desert of Nubia.
The nomadic herders of the Western Butana (found at the site of Shaqadud) and the “Gash Group” (“Middle Kassala”) of the Southern Atbai are even farther south and may have had some sort of commercial link with Early Kerma, albeit not (directly) with Egypt.
Although cattle-keepers were present in the Wadi el-Howar, knowledge of other places is insufficient for comment. The term “Kerma” is wholly contemporary and refers to the large city and nearby cemetery that G. A. Reisner unearthed between 1913 and 1916, making it up until the 1950s essentially the only Kerma site known.
The name given to the Kerma region in ancient Egypt seems to have evolved through time. In the late Old Kingdom, it was certainly “Yam” (at least in part), and maybe “Irem” afterwards.
In Dynasty XII, the term “Kush,” which is frequently used negatively, first appears in Egyptian records. It is most likely the Egyptian name for the at this point strong and centralized Upper Nubian “Kerma”state. Awa’a and Utatrerses, two Middle Kerma monarchs, are mentioned in these manuscripts, and other Kushite kings are also mentioned. The Lower Nubian Nile was within Egypt’s power throughout the Old Kingdom up until the Second Cataract, but Egypt was compelled to retire to Aswan at its terminus.
However, similar trips are not seen afterwards. Late Old Kingdom traders like Harkhuf had ventured beyond the Second Cataract to conduct business with the newly established Kerma state. During the Early Kerma/First Intermediate era in Egypt, the power vacuum thus created was filled by an expansion of Kerma culture and politics almost as far north as Aswan.
Although it is still unclear how the pastoralist C-Group peoples are related to the Kerma invaders, they too developed distinct cultural traits in Lower Nubia. Nebhepetre Montuhotep II, the founder of Dynasty XI, may have launched a military expedition to retake control of Lower Nubia as a result of the early Middle Kingdom’s rising influence and significance of Kerma (both city and kingdom). The mighty Dynasty XII rulers eventually built a number of enormous mud-brick military fortifications at key locations along the Lower Nubian Nile, and by the reign of Senwosret I, they controlled all access north of the Second Cataract.
Only in Dynasty XVIII did Egypt break through this primary Upper Nubian/Kerma boundary, which was guarded by the other important Kerma village and cemetery on Sai Island immediately south of the Batn el-Hajar.
The Egyptian army used large numbers of Nubian mercenaries, most notably archers known as the “Medjay,” who appear to have been mostly Pan-Grave. The significantly increasing amount of Egyptian products from Early to Middle Kerma tombs suggests that it was successful in avoiding the C-Group populationOther characteristics, such as hieroglyphic writing and widespread iconographical adoption, point to an overarching Egyptian acculturation, with Egyptian traders, artisans, and advisors residing at Kerma itself. In spite of this, the Kerma culture’s distinctiveness remained preserved.
With Egypt retreating to Aswan and Kerma regaining control of the entirety of Lower Nubia at the start of the Second Intermediate Period/Classic Kerma phase, the Middle Kingdom in Egypt fell into disarray in a manner similar to that of the Old Kingdom.
Egyptian and Nubian troops remained to guard the Egyptian fortifications, but they now worked for the king of Kush rather than Egypt. This is the pinnacle of Kerma civilisation, when the biggest royal burial tumuli were built, the city greatly enlarged, and vast quantities of exotic imported Egyptian artifacts (mainly from Upper Egypt and frequently heritage items) were strewn across Kerma. Beyond the Debba Bend, at least as far as the Fourth Cataract at Napata, the kingdom also grew southward. At this point, its strength matched that of Egypt under the Middle Kingdom.
In Egypt, Kamose (the final king of Dynasty XVII) at Thebes claimed that he was “between an Asiatic (the Hyksos ruler at Avaris) and a Nubian (the Kushite king)” who were politically linked against himAt this point, its strength matched that of Egypt under the Middle Kingdom. In Egypt, Kamose (the final king of Dynasty XVII) at Thebes claimed that he was “between an Asiatic (the Hyksos ruler at Avaris) and a Nubian (the Kushite king)” who were politically linked against him.
For the following century, he and his Dynasty XVIII successors waged victorious campaigns in both directions, driving out the Hyksos and the Kushites and reclaiming control of the region. This time, they adopted a completely different strategy, invading Upper Nubia during the relatively brief late or post-Kerma period and the Near East as far as the Euphrates River.
