The formation of the state of Egypt was much more complicated than just the “unification of two lands” and instead involved a complex system of interregional trade, the power of the elites, a growing demand for resources and a system of social organization. All of these things happening together allowed for the state to come into power and the common remembrance of ancient Egypt as a dominating society would not have been able to occur without each of these important milestones.
The Nile valley provided a stable environment for people of the Neolithic period and as populations grew so did resource demand and craft specialization. Because of this prosperous environment and craft specialization the elites began rising early on into the creation of Egypt. For example, there was an exclusive knife market along the Nile Valley. In addition, the smelting of copper created luxury goods for those who could afford them and helped establish an early social hierarchy.
Elites began to take more control over interregional trade and began to conduct their own trading expeditions. This created more wealth and prestige for them. “The earliest evidence for such bureaucratic processes relates to the recording and controlling of access to goods, evident in the form of cylinder seals and clay sealings of the late Chalcolithic period” (pg. 41). Material evidence such as these cylinder seals and clay sealings provide us insight regarding the elites, even though at this time there was not a writing system.
Once a writing system came into play it allowed for much more administration and organization regarding trade goods. By the early Dynastic period specific people had an even higher standing in social stratification, which was likely given to them because of a close relationship with the ruler. This social complexity was a key factor in the creation of the state.
The environment and placement of the Nile Valley was also essential in the creation of the state. The fertile land allowed for many people to survive and live in the same area, which as mentioned before allowed for further expansion. If the land couldn’t provide for the people, or provide a surplus for the people, they could not have been able to begin the craftsmanship which in turn allowed for the elites to take control and lead to the sophisticated social stratification of the state.
The first dynasty was already a very complex society with levels of people going from King to commoner. This in addition to the highly suitable environment of the Nile Valley paved the way for the eventual creation of Egypt as a society with giant tombs and great pharaohs we think of nowadays.
In terms of Egypt being a social state before and after the unification, do you think if there was a minor influence in any thing that may have transpired Egypt as we know it would be vastly different. For example, if the Nile Valley was not as fertile and ever changing as it remains to this day, Egypt could have very well become another state in whole or several states put together. Similarly like Africa. We think of the continent as a state in a sense and the countries within work together on a frequent basis. Just like upper and lower Egypt had done before becoming unified. However, Africa never signally unified their power all in one dictatorship so to speak. Egypt used Pharaohs and the close relationships made with the Pharaohs or the reigning powers that controlled the polities (prior to the unification) to delegate orders and control of others. These connections were made through educational purposes especially after writing came into the picture. Most of the commoners could not read nor write, hence pictographs and hieroglyphics. Knowing this, if a small polity prior to the unification of Egypt was to have a stronger sense of education in more than writing or reading, but in farming, craftsmanship, building sturdier structures or having important knowledge and connection in trade routes. Does this make them the elite of their small villages? Or is this the basis of where the ideas of elites come from? As the state started to unify and grow, do we see the growth of elites due to the comparing and collecting of these “elites” from smaller villages by way of themselves going to other neighboring areas and presenting what they are known for to the other village elites and from there either combing and establishing a relationship? Or in a more barbaric sense, taking over? It is the idea of where these elites come from that have established the lineage of the social structure we know of now giving us our Pharaohs.