{"title":"重新评估政治边界的作用(tꜢšw)","authors":"Oren Siegel","doi":"10.1163/18741665-bja10011","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Chains of frontier fortresses and the presence of boundary stelae have understandably encouraged scholars to emphasize parallels between Pharaonic political boundaries and contemporary political borders. However, ancient Egyptian territoriality and conceptions of political boundaries differed in several key ways. First, Pharaonic boundaries were not defined by their permeability, but rather their capacity to be altered by royal action. Second, specific territorial claims were often less vital than the sovereign act of claiming or marking a boundary. Finally, ancient Egyptian boundaries were often discussed in personal terms, as belonging to a particular pharaoh. They were not abstracted, linear features that aspired to an ahistorical permanence, but functioned as powerful, performative displays of political authority in liminal spaces. Recognizing these fundamental differences builds upon the insights of earlier scholarship and provides new perspectives on Pharaonic boundary-making practices.","PeriodicalId":41016,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Egyptian History","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reevaluating the Role of Inter-Polity Boundaries (tꜢšw) in Middle and New Kingdom Egypt\",\"authors\":\"Oren Siegel\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/18741665-bja10011\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n Chains of frontier fortresses and the presence of boundary stelae have understandably encouraged scholars to emphasize parallels between Pharaonic political boundaries and contemporary political borders. However, ancient Egyptian territoriality and conceptions of political boundaries differed in several key ways. First, Pharaonic boundaries were not defined by their permeability, but rather their capacity to be altered by royal action. Second, specific territorial claims were often less vital than the sovereign act of claiming or marking a boundary. Finally, ancient Egyptian boundaries were often discussed in personal terms, as belonging to a particular pharaoh. They were not abstracted, linear features that aspired to an ahistorical permanence, but functioned as powerful, performative displays of political authority in liminal spaces. Recognizing these fundamental differences builds upon the insights of earlier scholarship and provides new perspectives on Pharaonic boundary-making practices.\",\"PeriodicalId\":41016,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Egyptian History\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-09-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Egyptian History\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/18741665-bja10011\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Egyptian History","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18741665-bja10011","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Reevaluating the Role of Inter-Polity Boundaries (tꜢšw) in Middle and New Kingdom Egypt
Chains of frontier fortresses and the presence of boundary stelae have understandably encouraged scholars to emphasize parallels between Pharaonic political boundaries and contemporary political borders. However, ancient Egyptian territoriality and conceptions of political boundaries differed in several key ways. First, Pharaonic boundaries were not defined by their permeability, but rather their capacity to be altered by royal action. Second, specific territorial claims were often less vital than the sovereign act of claiming or marking a boundary. Finally, ancient Egyptian boundaries were often discussed in personal terms, as belonging to a particular pharaoh. They were not abstracted, linear features that aspired to an ahistorical permanence, but functioned as powerful, performative displays of political authority in liminal spaces. Recognizing these fundamental differences builds upon the insights of earlier scholarship and provides new perspectives on Pharaonic boundary-making practices.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Egyptian History (JEgH) aims to encourage and stimulate a focused debate on writing and interpreting Egyptian history ranging from the Neolithic foundations of Ancient Egypt to its modern reception. It covers all aspects of Ancient Egyptian history (political, social, economic, and intellectual) and of modern historiography about Ancient Egypt (methodologies, hermeneutics, interplay between historiography and other disciplines, and history of modern Egyptological historiography). The journal is open to contributions in English, German, and French.