“The lion-headed Apedemak may not be a god in the Egyptian sense at all”
Interview with Egyptologist Angelika Lohwasser
Egyptologist Angelika Lohwasser from the Cluster of Excellence “Religion and Politics” is studying the relationship between cult and kingship in the Meroitic period (c. 300 BCE–320 CE) of the ancient kingdom of Kush, Egypt’s southern neighbour. Since Kush was annexed to Pharaonic Egypt as a colony in the 2nd millennium BCE, later periods also show many Egyptian influences there. As a result, researchers have a strongly Egyptian or Egyptological perspective on Kushite culture and religion. In this interview, Lohwasser talks about how she takes a new, non-Egyptian perspective on the kingdom of Kush, and in particular the relationship between the Egyptian god Amun and the Kushite god Apedemak, and how this gives her a completely new insight into Kushite kingship.
Your project at the Cluster of Excellence is investigating the relationship between kingship and cult in the kingdom of Kush from the 3rd century BCE to around the 3rd century CE. What do we know today about this kingdom?
Lohwasser: The kingdom of Kush, south of Egypt in what is now Sudan, was in close contact with the Pharaonic empire at that time. The Egyptians called this region Kush, a name that, since we do not yet know how the region named itself, we also use in research today. The Egyptians were particularly interested in Kush’s mineral resources, especially the gold mined there, but also in the trade route to Inner Africa, which saw the transport of exotic goods to Egypt. Kush was then also annexed to Egypt as a colony in the 2nd millennium BCE, with Egyptian cities and temples being built there. Egypt strongly influenced the indigenous Kushite culture during this period, at least as far as we can see it today in the archaeological context. The so-called Kushite dynasty emerged from Kush around 800 BCE, with some of its kings even ruling Egypt for a short time. It was only the Assyrian invasion of Egypt in the mid-7th century that forced them to retreat to their homeland, where the kingdom of Kush continued to exist until the 3rd century CE.
The geographical borders of the Kingdom of Kush stretched from the First Cataract – the name given to the six rapids of the Nile – at Aswan to the confluence of the Blue and White Nile, near Sudan’s present-day capital Khartoum. However, we do not know exactly to what extent the regions outside the core area in the Middle Nile Valley were really under the control of the Kushite rulers. We also assume that the area of expansion to the south changed in phases.
Researchers have divided the approximately thousand years of the kingdom of Kush into two periods. First, the Napatan period (c. 750–300 BCE), centred in Napata in the Jebel Barkal region near the Fourth Cataract of the Nile, which was more strongly influenced by Egyptian culture. Second, the so-called Meroitic period (c. 300 BCE–320 CE), which had its centre in Meroe, slightly north of the Sixth Cataract. The beginning of the Meroitic period saw the pictorial representations change and the Egyptian influence diminish. While my earlier project at the Cluster of Excellence focused on the Napatan period, I am now looking more at the Meroitic period.
What exactly did these changes look like in the Meroitic period?
Lohwasser: A number of changes took place in Kush in the 3rd century BCE: the royal cemetery was moved from northern Napata to southern Meroe, which researchers believe marks the break between the empire’s two phases. The native language, Meroitic, was now written down. The script was deciphered over a century ago, but unfortunately, we do not know the meaning of the words, as there are neither enough bilingual texts, i.e. the same texts in two languages, nor a linguistic descendant. Meroitic is extinct, which means that, despite some long inscriptions, we have not yet been able to include what they contain in our research.
Another change that the Meroitic phase saw was the appearance of previously unknown deities not attested in Egypt, including the lion-headed Apedemak, who suddenly appeared in the Meroitic period. But there are also other gods and goddesses depicted in the temples that did not exist before. We assume that these are indigenous phenomena that were probably worshipped in the southern regions not ruled by Egypt. However, since we do not know of any shrines or images from these areas prior to the Meroitic period, it is difficult to verify their actual provenance.
Finally, it is important to emphasise that the iconography in the Meroitic depictions also differs; the queens are now shown as very voluminous, and their clothing and accessories also differ significantly. Nevertheless, the basic appearance remains Egyptian in character, for example in the fact that the head is shown from the side, the upper body from the front and the legs again from the side, and also in the fact that Apedemak has an animal head – that of a male lion. However, he is the only one of the Meroitic deities to have an animal head.
What exactly are you investigating in your project?
Lohwasser: The kingdom of Kush is usually seen through Egyptian eyes. The preserved temples correspond to Egyptian types, the deities to Egyptian appearances, and in the Napatan period, the records are written in Egyptian hieroglyphics. However, we now know that, especially in the Meroitic period, many aspects differed from Egyptian culture, such as the form of government, the ideology of kingship, and burial customs. My research question addresses the extent to which religion, the pantheon of gods, and rituals also differed, especially in the Meroitic period, and how this relates to kingship.
My research focuses on the two deities Amun and Apedemak. Amun is the ancient Egyptian state god, who was also introduced to the Middle Nile Valley during the colonial period and became the supreme god of the pantheon there. Rulers were crowned in his temple, and texts tell us that he selected the new king. The Meroitic period then suddenly sees a second god, the lion-headed Apedemak, who appears just as prominently. Researchers agree that both deities functioned as state gods, a view that is based on the fact that our research to date has generally looked at the material from a strongly Egyptian or Egyptological perspective. However, I already noticed in my previous project at the Cluster of Excellence that there are also many non-Egyptian traces in the kingdom of Kush, and I would now like to use this Meroitic material as far as possible to look afresh at the Amun–Apedemak–king constellation.
Your research focuses on the Meroitic god Apedemak. Why is Apedemak so well suited to your study?
Lohwasser: Apedemak is one of the deities that first appeared in the Meroitic period. He is considered an indigenous god and dedicated to him is a special type of temple with only one room. Nevertheless, researchers have often viewed him as an Egyptian-style deity – that is, as a supernatural being to whom sacrifices were made, and for whom temples were built as homes, etc. I now see things differently. For example, Amun, the ancient state god, is also worshipped alongside Apedemak in the single-room temples. Since he is the god who chooses and crowns the king, Amun temples were still being built in the Meroitic period. Now, while Amun is also depicted in the Apedemak temples, Apedemak is not known to have been depicted in Amun temples. Why is this the case, given that both are understood to be king gods? Apedemak may have had a completely different role to Amun. To investigate this further, I need to examine the relationship between Apedemak, Amun and king in more detail.
Do you already have some initial ideas about the role of the god Apedemak?
Lohwasser: I now think that Apedemak is less a deity in the Egyptian sense and more a manifestation of kingship. I think that the single-room temples were not used to worship a deity, but instead were closely linked to kingship. I suspect that they were the site of inauguration into the office of king and thus of the transformation into a new, no longer purely human quality of the ruler. We can thus distinguish between Amun as the traditional deity who crowns the new king, and Apedemak as the incarnation of kingship, a figure that is faced by and then accepts the designated king. This is why Amun appears as king god in the lion temples, but Apedemak is not worshipped as a deity in the Amun temples.
What sources are available to you in your research?
Lohwasser: The sources are limited in that, although there are many written texts, the long ones are still incomprehensible to us. This leaves us with physical sources: temples with their architecture and depictions, as well as smaller finds. The problem here is that there are only a few excavated temples with relief depictions; in many cases, only the foundation walls remain. Nevertheless, the temple layout can also serve as a source: the temples for Amun are designed according to the ancient Egyptian type, while the lion temples for Apedemak consist of only one room. The reliefs in these temples also differ, although unfortunately we only have a moderately large corpus of depictions from two lion temples and two Amun temples. There are also some statues and smaller finds such as signet rings and amulets that can be used. Overall, each type of source must of course be examined using the appropriate methods.
What particularly exciting discovery have you made during your research?
Lohwasser: As is sometimes the case in scholarly work, discoveries come quite unexpectedly. In another research context, I studied the Egyptian god Osiris, not in his function as the Egyptian god of the dead, but in his role as a dead king, mythological ancestor of the living ruler and progenitor of all kings. In doing so, I also consulted the Meroitic tomb chapels as a source and saw that the deceased king is indeed shown here as the Osiris king. This can be seen in the fact that Osiris is not shown in his mummified form in this Meroitic depiction, but instead wears the traditional royal mantle. This makes it clear that we have the dead king as Osiris before us. I have now also found this special Meroitic form of the non-mummified Osiris outside the tomb chapels, namely as statuettes and depictions in temples. In the Meroitic conception of kingship, Osiris is therefore the ancestor of all kings and the deceased predecessor of each individual king.
This means that my research question should include not only Amun, as the god who chooses and crowns the king, and Apedemak, as the personification of kingship, but also Osiris in his Meroitic role as predecessor king and ancestor, because as such he is just as essential to the functioning of kingship. What I find particularly exciting is that, when we try to detach ourselves from the Egyptian perspective, a completely new understanding of Meroitic kingship emerges. Even if some things ultimately appear Egyptian, such as the god Amun and his temples, what lies behind this deity is indigenous to Meroitic culture. (fbu/pie)