Egypt is plainly a part of Africa, and yet this simple truth has been disputed by Western researchers, who tried to tie ancient Egyptian culture to Near Eastern civilizations for quite a long time. The link between Egypt and Africa was thus portrayed as a one-way flow, as the spread of cultural features or parts of an “advanced” or “higher” civilization over an “uncivilized” continent. This notion has to be considered within the framework of Western scientific heritage and is, it is hoped, a matter of the past.
The real understanding concerning the link between ancient Egypt and Africa (with the exception of Nubia) is, however, still limited. Most of the cultural achievements of African peoples south of the Sahara that were once regarded as markers of a sophisticated civilization, such as divine kingship, ironworking, inhumation ceremonies, and ram religious worship, have been traced back to Egypt. The foundation of these arguments has mainly been superficial parallels between ancient Egyptian practices, approximately five thousand years old, and African cultural elements of today.
Over the decades, quite a list of presumed correspondence has been compiled. Their scientific or methodological foundation needs to be viewed as poor, and few of these diffusionist hypotheses are today recognized by Egyptologists or Africanists. Over the last few decades, the argument about the link between ancient Egypt and Africa has gotten more and more heated and ideologized. In the course of this history, several of the abovementioned notions have been resurrected by Afrocentrists, who in some cases have naively embraced what can be demonstrated to be unscientific illusions.
Beyond apparent similar cultural aspects, the discussion on the link between ancient Egypt and Africa has concentrated on the subject of the “racial” affinity of the ancient Egyptians. Egyptologists and anthropologists in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries endeavored to establish that the Egyptians could not possibly have had black skin, nor could they have belonged to the “Negro race.” With the same vehemence, the African reaction, under the leadership of Cheikh Anta Diop, was obligated to establish that the ancient Egyptians had been black as proof of the African roots of the ancient civilisation.
Especially among Afrocentric groups, the subject of the race of the ancient Egyptians is still of significant relevance, although lately the very notion of race has been challenged by geneticists. The debate over Egypt’s relationship with Africa is still dominated by dogma and prejudice. This appears to have made significant research in a variety of subjects impossible, and the results of such research are still lacking.
Old Egyptian language is a member of the so-called Afroasiatic phylum, which also includes Semitic, which is spoken in both Asia and Africa; the Berber languages, which are spoken in northern Africa; Cushitic, which is spoken in northeastern Africa; Omotic, which is spoken in Ethiopia; and Chadic, which is spoken in present-day Chad. This particular linguistic phylum may be found in northeast Africa, most likely in what is now known as the Sudan. The colonization of Egypt was consequently brought about by the movement of people from Africa into the Nile Valley.
Exploration and colonization of the territories to the south of Egypt’s original territory began as early as the country’s founding. Ivory, incense, ebony, and animal skins were among the goods that were traded with the southern regions during the time before the Dynastic Period. The well-known burial narrative of Harkhuf, who lived during the Sixth Dynasty, makes reference to the importation of a pygmy or dwarf. It is possible to trace the genesis of this appellation back to its Cushitic language roots. The region of Chad, which could be accessible by historic valleys of the Nile and caravan routes that headed to the west, is also likely to have piqued the interest of the ancient Egyptians because of its accessibility.
However, to this day, there has been no discovery of any indication of an excursion to the west. Punt was a nation that had a role in ancient Egyptian history on several occasions due to its proximity to Egypt. The ancient Egyptians made reference to this area of Africa as early as the fifth dynasty. This was the location from which they acquired myrrh, electrum, fragrant plants, ivory, and gold.
On the walls of Queen Hatsheput’s temple at Deir al-Bahri, which is located close to Thebes, a narrative of a trip to Punt can be found that is particularly lengthy. Not only do we discover information on the trip here, but we also get images of everyday life and the people who lived in Punt. Only Egyptian records have the term Punt, and nothing is known about the names that the Puntites used for themselves or their homelands.
The word “punt” is only found in Egyptian records. Therefore, despite the fact that it has been going on for more than a century, people are still debating where exactly Punt may be found geographically. Following an in-depth analysis of the textual and visual sources as well as the archaeological data, there appears to be a growing consensus that Punt may be found inland from the shore of the Red Sea.
It is possible that it is connected to the cultures that existed in the Gash delta region of eastern Sudan. These cultures left traces of their presence in the Ethiopian highlands and the Upper Nile basin. Around the beginning of the twelfth century BCE, almost all historical references to Punt disappeared, and it would appear that the city’s commerce went out of business.
In spite of the fact that there is a good deal of evidence suggesting that ancient Egypt and Africa were connected in some way, it has only very seldom been feasible to connect current African designations with African items, locations, or peoples that were referenced in Egyptian texts. This huge gap in our knowledge might be filled one day if we put more emphasis on linguistic and ethnoarchaeological research that is free of ideological bias.
