MERGE AND THE SUDANIC KINGDOMS

Most studies of the Kushite (Meroitic) kingdom of Sudan have tended to focus on its more Egyptianized cultural features, while its roots wit hin Sudanic Africa remain poorly understood. Egyptocentric perspective s and research traditions have also tended largely to ignore the Sudan ic context of the exceptionally early kingdoms that developed in the M iddle Nile and their possible significance for the history of early st ate development in sub-Saharan Africa. Historical and anthropological studies of the power bases of later states with Sudanic Africa suggest they have a number of distinctive features. The control of exchange n etworks and prestige-goods, the procurement of valuables through warfa re, and forms of ritual power appear crucial; the development of admin istrative structures and the direct control of production appear less important. Similar patterns can be seen in historical studies of late and post-medieval kingdoms in the Middle Nile and archaeological resea rch into the Kushite state further suggests that they may also be seen much earlier. Kushite royal power was heavily dependent on the contro l of long-distance exchange as well as the enhancement of ritual power s through assimilation of various aspects of Egyptian royal cults. The importation and redistribution of prestigious exotic artefacts provid ed an important source of social and political power, building on exis ting networks and enabling the integration of regional socio-political units on an unprecedented scale. The ritual hegemony of the Kushite c rown may also have been particularly influential in binding together o therwise quite loosely integrated regions. In contrast with Egypt and many early Eurasian states, the direct control of production and the p ower if generated was quite restricted, limited to a relatively small core area of the kingdom. There, following a pattern common within Sud anic Africa, the control of savannah populations was managed through t he management of permanent water sources.This interpretation suggests that past studies which have focused on the Egyptian contribution to t he development of early states in the Middle Nile have overestimated t he importance of external influences. Their particular contribution ma y have been in increasing the scale of political integration possible and in building on pre-existing structures, but the presence of the mo re obvious northern influences on the region's material culture should not obscure the existence of recognisably Sudanic states much earlier than is commonly supposed.