Archaeology Midterm

Front 1

Definition of archaeology

Back 1

the study of human cultures and peoples of the past, relying on just about any record/technique that will help understand past behavior. Science of rubbish and remains. Reconstructing ancient human behavior.

Front 2

Definition of archaeological record & examples-

Back 2

The archaeological record is made up of all the physical remains of past human societies.
-artifact assemblages [such as broken pieces of pots (shards), fragments of stone, broken tools, seeds, pollen, food remains, bone, skeletal remains, wood, textiles, art and written records]
-human remains (biological and social developments)
-cultural developments of humankind
-changes in the physical environment

Front 3

Historical archaeology

Back 3

aka “text-aided” uses historical documents of people to find and add to the archaeological record through the excavation of material remains

Front 4

Prehistoric archaeology

Back 4

A multidisciplinary field that uses techniques and information from many disciplines to study NON-LITERATE ANCIENT SOCIETIES. It’s primary goal is to document human development in its entirety

Front 5

Archaeological methods & research

Back 5

Discovery, Analysis and Research
research strategy: specific questions you would like to answer or research aims you would like to achieve
archival research: information that is already known about the area or site (records, environment, history of previous work, maps, photographs)
Field Methods-
1. surveys: field walking, aerial survey, soil analysis (phosphate), geophysical survey (magnetometer; electrical resistivity; GPR)
2. Testing
3. Excavations
4. Post-excavations: Lab analysis, research, publication

Front 6

Jacob Jens Worsaae

Back 6

(1821-85) Excavated barrows and used stratigraphy to affirm Thomsen’s 3 age system (stone, bronze and iron)

Front 7

Christian Jurgen Thomsen

Back 7

(1768-1865) Director of the museum of Copenhagen and was given the task of organizing the antiquities. Developed three categories- Stone, bronze and iron. He also wrote a guidebook to help people go through the museum and understand and learn.

Front 8

V. Gordon Childe

Back 8

(1892-1957) Wrote and synthesized the work of Archaeologists to tell cultural history of archaeological cultures. Archaeology should be a narrative history, the story of each cultures, peoples and ideas. Tracing the movement of peoples and ideas. Disappeared in Australia, so depressed about archaeology not progressing.

Front 9

Lewis Binford

Back 9

(1930-present) Father of New archaeology. Processualists looked for explanations and application of archaeological findings. Applied the scientific method and reasoning. Cultures work as a system, everything was related (wrong), everyone reacts the same way (wrong!).

Front 10

Ian Hodder

Back 10

(1948-present) Early post-processualist. He emphasized the subjective explanation and interpretation of findings. Also emphasized the importance of symbolic and cognitive culture because, as they have no way to categorically or scientifically prove these aspects, they have an important impact on how cultures develop.

Front 11

Catastrophism

Back 11

the earth was created in a series of disasters, species wiped out, restart

Front 12

Uniformitarianism

Back 12

the theory that the same geologic processes occurred in the past as occur today, and that geologic formations and structures can be interpreted by observing present-day actions

Front 13

Law of superposition

Back 13

a general law stating that in any sequence of sediments or rocks that has not been overturned, the youngest sediments or rocks are at the top of the sequence and the oldest are at the bottom. Exception: intrusion and disturbance.

Front 14

Antiquarianism

Back 14

the early stage of archaeology. People were just collecting objects, and they were just doing it for fun. For collectings sake. There are no real questions being asked. Thought artifacts were mythological

Front 15

How is archaeology different than antiquarianism

Back 15

you are asking questions such as who, what, where, when, and why. You are interested in the site where you are collecting objects from.

Front 16

Cultural historical approach

Back 16

This approach is still of vital importance in the pursuit of modern archaeology. Couldn’t infer, because dating can only use chronology and compare it to other materials. Cultural change is the result of external influences on societies. Cultural rules are passed between generations and identify cultures and variations in time and space.

Front 17

Cultural historical questions

Back 17

Who, what, when and where

Front 18

Processual

Back 18

apply the scientific method to archaeology and come up with specific laws. Processual has an emphasis on EXPLANATIONS. Everything is a system, but you can’t do that for humans, different reactions. Could do tests, radiocarbon dating, needed facts to back up their hypothesis. Binford first processualist.

Front 19

Post-processual

Back 19

Ian Hodder. Focuses on symbolism and cognitive aspects. The subjective nature of interpretation. There is more inference associated with this and more DESCRIPTION. No absolute truth, everyone’s viewpoint is equally valuable. Lots of inference and interpretation.

Front 20

Danebury film

Back 20

The guy in the film was the processualist. The lady was post-processual.

Front 21

Hawke’s Ladder of Inference

Back 21

1. Technology. 2. Subsistence and Economics. 3. Social and Political Organization. 4. Ritual and Religion.

Front 22

Scientific Method (Rules)-

Back 22

1. There is a real and knowable universe. 2. The universe operates to certain understandable rules or laws. 3. These laws are immutable. 4. These laws can be discerned, studied, and understood by people through careful observation, experimentation, and research.

Front 23

Scientific Method (Steps)-

Back 23

1. Observe 2. Induce (hypotheses). 3. Deduce (if...then...statements). 4. Test.

Front 24

Occam’s Razor

Back 24

the explanation with the fewest assumptions is the best. More likely to be true, more testable.

Front 25

Assumption underlying archaeology

Back 25

The fewer assumptions you make, the more testable your hypothesis is, and that’s what separates science from pseudo-science. Good assumptions are based on fact. Example: In geology, uniformitarianism (the same scientific laws and processes are constant throughout space and time)

Front 26

Logical fallacies & faulty reasoning

Back 26

A. Incorrect assumption of a cause/effect relationship
B. Inaccurate/distorted use/interpretation of numerical statistical data
C. Faulty analogy: Comparison is carried too far, or the things compared have nothing in common
D. Oversimplification: Revelant information is ignored in order to make a point.
E. Stereotyping: People or objects are lumped together under simplistic labels.
F. Ignoring the Question: digression, obfuscation, etc.
G. Faulty Generalization: judgment is made on the basis of inaccurate or insufficient evidence.

Front 27

A. Incorrect assumption of a cause/effect relationship

Back 27

Ex: Every time we wash the car, it rains. Therefore, if we wash our car, it will rain.

Front 28

B. Inaccurate/distorted use/interpretation of numerical statistical data

Back 28

Ex: Using statistics to prove something when you’re supposed to use them to prove an experiment.

Front 29

C. Faulty analogy:

Back 29

Comparison is carried too far, or the things compared have nothing in common
Ex: Comparing modern-day hunter-gatherers to those of the Ice Age, when in reality they had different climates, different plants, and different animals, etc.

Front 30

D. Oversimplification:

Back 30

Relevant information is ignored in order to make a point.
Ex: The majority of voters in the United States are Democrats. Therefore, Democratic candidates will win every election).

Front 31

E. Stereotyping:

Back 31

People or objects are lumped together under simplistic labels.
Ex: Geico commercials with the Neanderthals

Front 32

F. Ignoring the Question:

Back 32

digression, obfuscation, etc.
Ex: The typical politician

Front 33

G. Faulty Generalization:

Back 33

judgment is made on the basis of inaccurate or insufficient evidence.
Ex: People live only along river systems. What about those who live in the mountains and on the coast?

Front 34

Unilinear cultural evolution---

Back 34

A late 19th-century evolutionary theory that envisaged all human societies as evolving along a common track from simple hunting and gathering communities to literate civilizations. Tylor and Morgan. 3 stages: primitive/savage, barbarian and civilized. This is seen in Christian Jurgensen Thomsen’s Three Age System: Stone, Bronze, Iron. Has racial implications, extremely judgemental. Not everyone changes along the same path.

Front 35

Multilinear cultural evolution

Back 35

theory of cultural evolution that sees each human culture evolving in its own way by adaptation to diverse environments: different ‘pathways’ of evolutionary development followed by different societies. Sometimes divided into four broad stages of evolving social organization: band, tribe, chiefdom, and state-organized society

Front 36

Paleoanthropology---

Back 36

a sub-discipline of archaeology which involves the study of human fossils or the origin of man, and human evolution.

Front 37

Ramapithecus assumptions

Back 37

In the search for the earliest hominid species to go against Darwin‘s theory (that the first humans were found in Africa because it showed the greatest specie diversity and the longest history of biological development), digs were done and at one point, an incomplete upper jaw was found by G. Edward Lewis in India in 1932. In 1962, it was identified by Elwyn Simons as the first known hominid species based on molar characteristics and “described it as a bipedal hunter” from 30-15 million years ago. However, in the late 60s, Wilson and Sarich compared ape and human blood proteins and the results stated that humans developed only 5-7 million years ago. Also, in the 1980s, more complete fossil specimens were found in Turkey and Pakistan which showed only superficial resemblances to humans (aka they were more monkey than man).

Front 38

Ramapithecus: Lessons learned

Back 38

1. Problems with inferring a shared evolutionary relationship from shared anatomical features. Just because two things share one or two physical characteristics doesn’t mean they have developed in the same manner anatomically.
2. Proved the problems with Darwin’s evolutionary “package” which says that you can determine cultural traits from biological traits without any concrete evidence of cultural traits. Things such as bipedalism, tools, and an enlarged brain developed at different times, thus proving the “package” wrong.

Front 39

3 types of dating-

Back 39

Relative, Historical, Absolute

Front 40

Relative Dating

Back 40

o The first type of dating developed
o Involves techniques that order things in relation to each other.
o Example techniques: Stratigraphy , seriation (changes in styles of related artifacts).
o Distinct kinds become cultural markers

Front 41

Historical Dating

Back 41

involves using the archaeological record to retrieve calendar dates.
o Attempts to assign a precise calendar date
o Is applicable only to cultures that were literate.
o Several different ancient calendars are known but not all are perfectly understood.
 Ancient calendars: Egyptian, Muslim, Hebrew, Maya, other new world calendars.
o There are often problems with correlating ancient dates with our modern calendar.
o Also includes contextual dating
-Uses artifacts with historical dates on them
-Roman skeleton with the coin

Front 42

Absolute Dating

Back 42

employs varying scientific methods to determine precise calendar dates
• C14 dating: the most commonly employed technique aka radiocarbon dating
o measures the level of the unstable isotope carbon-14 remaining in an organic substance.
o Carbon14 has a half-life of 5730 years
o Applicable up to 50,000 years ago
o The problem is whether or not the atmospheric supply now is consistent with the past
-Dendrochronology, etc

Front 43

Dendrochronolgy

Back 43

tree ring dating
o was developed to solve radiocarbon dating problems
o corrects radiocarbon dates by taking carbon dating samples from each ring, and comparing the known date to the radiocarbon results.
o This comparison allows archaeologists to correct any discrepancies between the two dates while creating a curve that indirectly shows the variation in atmospheric C14 over time.

Front 44

Other dating techniques

Back 44

developed to date discoveries further back in time
o Uranium Series Dating-tracks the decay of Uranium (238U & 235U) to daughter elements THORIUM (230Th) & PROTACTINUM (231Pa) in fossil bone. Dates objects between 500,000 & 50,000 years old
o Potassium Argon Dating- tracks radioactive decay of unstable Potassium-40 into inert Argon-40 in volcanic rock. Has a half-life of 1.3 billion years
o both borrowed from geology
o less used absolute techniques include Fission Track DatingElectron Spin, Resonance Dating, Thermoluminescence Dating, Archaeomagnetism Dating, and Varves (glacial runoff)
o many of these need to be refined and developed or can only be used in certain locations.

Front 45

Stratigraphy

Back 45

• Based on the “Law of Superpositioning” i.e. older layers are situated below younger layers)
• layers of soil can be ordered in relation to each other, with older layers generally being situated below younger layers.
• There are exceptions to the rule, but generally these occur when the natural stratigraphy has been disturbed

Front 46

Typology (seriation)-

Back 46

changes in styles in a series of related types of artifacts (similar in function or manufacture)
• distinct types become cultural markers in time and space
• By adding several typologies (pottery, stone tools, etc.) together, you can build cultural assemblages.
• cultural assemblages are collections of different but contemporaneous objects
• Cell phone example

Front 47

Artifact/Cultural Assemblages

Back 47

collection of different but contemporaneous objects. Several seriations of different artifacts can be put together in chronological order to from an assemblage. Assemblages can be used to trace an artifact to a certain culture or time and shows how the people of this era were behaving. They can also be arranged in chronological order and compared from area to area.

Front 48

Radio Carbon Dating-

Back 48

developed by Willard Libby, a form of absolute dating, a method that measures the tiny amount of radioactive isotope Carbon 14 left in organic substances, such as seeds, bones wood, etc. Organisms absorb carbon 14 throughout their lives, and once they die they steadily lose it. Limited to a reliable date of about 50,000 years. Carbon 14 has a half life of 5730 years. Radiocarbon dating establishes chronologies for areas previously lacking time scales of any kind . It can be use ANYWHERE, regardless of climate as long as there is organic material available
Problems with this method: atmospheric carbon 14 has fluctuated over time which can lead to inaccurate readings.

Front 49

dendrochronology (tree ring dating)

Back 49

developed by A.E. Douglass, a solution used to deal with the problem in radiocarbon dating with inconsistencies of carbon 14 in the atmosphere. Quite possibly the most accurate form of absolute dating. The correction of radiocarbon dates takes place by taking carbon dating samples from each ring, and comparing the known date to the radiocarbon results. This comparison allows archaeologists to correct any discrepancies between the two dates, creating a calibration curve that indirectly shows the variation in atmospheric C14 over time.

Front 50

Riddle of the Sphinx

Back 50

Old Sphinx vs. New Sphinx

Front 51

Relative dating of the Sphinx

Back 51

-data from seismic investigations led Schoch to conclude that the Sphinx was built in stages
-forensics shown that the Sphinx’s face did not resemble the face on the statues of Khafre
-the Sphinx’s body underwent mostly precipitation-induced weathering while the mastabas/tombs did not show any signs of precipitation-induced weathering; the last time that area had heavy enough rain was between 5,000 BC and 3,000 BC
-the limestone used to construct the temple looked to underwent weathering before the ashlars (granite facing stones) was put on top of the limestone
-planned to continue his studies in stratigraphic, weathering, and geomorphologic

Front 52

Traditional date vs. Schoch’s date

Back 52

-the traditional date is 2,500 BC while Schoch thinks the Sphinx dates back to 5,000 BC based on the evidence he gathered
-traditional date is based on several things:
-the origins of agriculture: agriculture was still on subsistence level (no significant surplus so professional craftsmen, and artisans could not sculpted the Sphinx) around 5,000 BC
-origins of Egyptian state: 5,000 BC = subsistence farming on cattle and cereal agriculture; 4,000 BC = ancestral lands, trading/competition with neighboring communities (increasing in social complexity/Pre-dynastic); Hierakonpolis: 3,800 BC = small communities, 3,500 BC = irrigation agriculture, royal tombs started to being built around this time and population increased to around 10,500, the elite class controlled grain surpluses, trade, construction of temples/sepulchers
-early dynastic period (2,950 BC – 2,575 BC): 1st -3rd dynasties; pharaoh traditions (royal tombs/mastabas, god-kings),
-Old Kingdom (2,575 BC – 2,150 BC): the pyramids Khafre, Khufu, and Menakure at Giza (4th dynasty, pyramid tradition started at this time) – showed they were wealthy, stable, architecture, art, trade, and full development of hieroglyphics writing
-basically if Schoch was right in his idea, then have to rethink the Egyptian history

Front 53

Paleolithic

Back 53

Old Stone Age, 2.5 millions year ago, make up over 99% of human history, ended 10,000 years ago with the end of the Ice Age

Front 54

Oldowan

Back 54

chopper tools – produced by sharpening one end of a rounded rock, produced flakes and flakes were also sharp and be used as tools; found in Africa (H. habilis found only in Africa); TOOL KIT = sharpened pebbles and flakes

Front 55

Acheulean

Back 55

Oldowan evolved into Acheulean tools; teardrop shaped hand axe – found first in East Africa then it eventually spread to Asia, Europe and Indonesia, hand axe replaced the chopper lasted around 1.5 million years eventually sophisticated technology; it was the first tools in Europe; coincides with H. erectus

Front 56

Negative evidence

Back 56

is a logical fallacy because something either is true because it cannot be proven false so thus its true, or false only because it cannot be proven; it is not advisable to build an entire argument based on negative evidence.

Front 57

Movius Line

Back 57

It’s a theoretical line drawn across Northern India from top to bottom that was created by the archaeologist Hallam Movius in the 1940s to demonstrate the difference between stone tool technologies of the East and West during the Stone Age.

Front 58

Development of the Movius Line

Back 58

this line came about because Movius realized that tools from the Paleolithic Stone Age never contained handaxes in locations east of Northern India. There were crude forms of chopping tools found in the area, but nothing as sophisticated as the handaxe.

Front 59

Theories Explaining the Movius Line

Back 59

the ancestors of the toolmakers who settled in eastern Asia left Africa before the handaxe was developed. Or the settlers moving to Asia may have known how to make handaxes but passed through a region that lacked the materials to make the handaxe. That made it so that the skills were forgotten and the knowledge was never re-introduced.

Front 60

Bamboo Technology

Back 60

The argument against the Movius line is presented that all the civilizations east of this line didn’t need the handaxe technology since they had bamboo which can be used for just about anything. Today, bamboo is used for many purposes from cooking and storage to traps and building structures, so if the bamboo technology is sufficient now, why wouldn’t it be during the Paleolithic Stone Age? It’s a good example of negative evidence to disprove something, in this case, the Movius Line.

Front 61

Three Age System:

Back 61

This is a system that came about by Christian Thomsen in which the world’s life can be categorized into three categories: The stone age, the bronze age, and the iron age, depending on the dominant material used to create technology. This system is best used when looking at European and Mediterranean civilizations though it can be used when looking at other places around the world.

Front 62

Technology and Change

Back 62

Technology is basically a term used when describing the tools and material objects used by a civilization. It can vary from a weapon all the way down to writing systems and also vary in sophistication throughout the ages. When looking at change, it’s good to do a typology of an object, as in look at the change over time (think of the evolution of a cell phone or the surf board) and then rearrange it in a logical manner as it becomes more advanced. Technology changes in civilizations and it’s important to pay attention to that.

Front 63

30. Ethnographic analogy/ Ethnographic archaeology
Review articles on “Last Stone Ax Makers” and the pottery comparison in the Philippines
• Earliest examples

Back 63

Technological studies in archaeology have been aided since the development of the processual approach by two particular methodologies: ethnoarchaeology and experimental archaeology
One of the earliest examples of this method was the use of traveler’s tales during the Age of Discovery, comparing stone tools from the Americas to those that had been found in Europe and previously explained as ‘elfshot’. This analogy, though unsystematic, nevertheless was instrumental in establishing the antiquity of mankind.

Front 64

How was ethnoarchaeology improved

Back 64

• processualist archaeologists of the 1960s suggested a more systematic approach to ethnoarchaeology. Included in this new methodology was the argument that archaeologists needed to be better versed in anthropology, often going so far as collecting their own ethnographic information for comparison. This, it was argued, would allow archaeologists to develop better databases of ethnographic data from which to work.
• processualists proposed a method by which archaeologists could maximize the similarities between the ancient and modern cultures being compared, thus maximizing the usefulness of the analogy.

Front 65

Binford & ethnoarchaeology

Back 65

To demonstrate how this methodology could work, Lewis Binford (‘The Father of New Archeology’) conducted an anthropological study among an Inuit community. After living with and documenting the group for several months, Binford allowed their campsite to weather for a period of time before returning to excavate the remains. He then compared the two datasets to see what survived and how the deterioration of the archaeological record might influence the interpretation of the site. In the end, he found that the ethnographic record, when used carefully, could fill in gaps in the archaeological record.

Front 66

4 types of commonalities

Back 66

Common level of subsistence: can’t compare farmers and hunter gatherers
Common level of technological development: metal vs. stone can’t be compared
Common level of social organization: kinship and state society (wrong)
Common ecological conditions (same region or ecological province)

Front 67

Why ethnoarchaeology isn't used as much any more

Back 67

ethnographic opportunities to study traditional technologies are quickly being lost as world cultures interact, sharing their technologies with each other. This eliminates the quality of comparison between recent cultures and ancient cultures and in there are becoming less and less cultures that use traditional methods.

Front 68

Experimental archaeology

Back 68

Definition: experimenting with ancient technologies or practices today in order to find out the effectiveness and why ancient cultures used that particular technology. This is very effective to know how cultures used technology and it gives us a better idea of how they spent their days, the effect it had on their bodies, and whether it was feasible as a technology.

Front 69

• Clovis technology

Back 69

• Long, bifacial stone tool
• Used the overshot technique
• Could kill megafauna
• “stone age weapons of mass destruction”

Front 70

• Pre-Clovis sites

Back 70

• Monte Verde, Chile
• Had mammoth remains, footprints, weapons, tools, etc.
• Older than Clovis by 1,000 years
• Meadowcroft Rockshelter
• Found Pre-Clovis manmade materials
• Remains indicate that animals lived on the west coast before Clovis
• Cactus Hill, VA

Front 71

• Clovis/Solutrean debate

Back 71

• Clovis explains how some people got to the Americas, but not everyone
• Solutreans had similar technology- double edged tool
• Solutreans would have had to have crossed the Atlantic Ocean
• Asian and Clovis tools are very different
• Solutreans and Clovis peoples used the same technique to make their tools
• Record of the Solutrean people ends 5,000 years before Clovis
• Cactus Hill, VA site between Solutrean and Clovis time periods
• Shows progression between Solutrean and Clovis culture
• Ethnographic evidence – modern Inuits and Ice Age Solutreans
• Had similar environments, and similar resources
• No evidence that the Solutreans had boats and fishing
• The coastline could be underwater
• Solutreans had lots of cave art, but there is no Clovis art in the US

Front 72

• Overcoming issues of negative evidence

Back 72

• Bradley and Stanford used ethnographic evidence to prove that it was possible for Solutreans to have crossed the Atlantic
• Assumptions made about how and why they crossed the Atlantic

Front 73

Roman baths film
• Key technologies

Back 73

• Had three rooms, cold, tepid and hot
• Domes instead of Greek columns
• Could make concrete
• Hypercaust- fire underneath, used underfloor heating for a long time
• Ducts under the floor, and flues built into the walls
• Floors raised
• Had a furnace outside the house

Front 74

Longue durée

Back 74

-“slow change”
-understand that technology usually develops over a long period of time (adapting and changing to fit the needs/wants of the people it is serving)

Front 75

Fire

Back 75

(understand that technology can be/usually is developed and changed over time to adapt to the current needs of a society or culture)
-first controlled to serve “important functions”
-Evidence of the controlled use of fire remained infrequent, however, until the migration of H. sapiens out of Africa began in 100,000 B.C., after which it began a common attribute of habitation sites.
-especially important to those in the Ice Age (40,000 years ago) when fire was needed to survive

Front 76

Uses of Fire

Back 76

-warmth
-light
-treating tools (did not occur until 20,000 years after the first evidence of controlled fire use, and then continued to be used to improve other technologies)
•made tools harder, more durable and often allowed them to have a sharper cutting edge (see Bronze Metallurgy)
-used in ceramics
•ceramics can be used unfired…benefits from firing include: more water resistant, more heat resistant (to be used for cooking purposes)
-cooking (often made for a safer diet*)
*as discussed in the readings naturally wild vegetable foods often have toxins and nutrient blockers that can be “taken care of” by cooking (or exposing them to heat)

Front 77

Coping strategies of diet

Back 77

-avoid “dangerous” foods
-geophagy: “the eating of earth” (dirt absorbs the toxins from the food and keeps them from entering the system)
-use of heat* (aka cooking!)

*heating (cooking) food has many benefits including making foods safer in an easier, faster way and can also make some foods that were inedible before now edible (ex. beans…usually too hard to eat before soaking and heating).

Front 78

Bronze Metallurgy

Back 78

With the development of Agriculture, the need for farming tools forced the invention of bronze to make plows and hoes, etc. (3,500 B.C.)
-Bronze: 90% copper, 10% tin (must be heated, melted in a forge, than shaped in a mold)
Bronze as tools and weapons
-first developed among the early powers of Mesopotamia (Sumerians)

Front 79

Formulas for the time

Back 79

Better farming tools + better farming techniques = higher surplus (“extra food”)
Higher surplus + ability to store surplus (ceramics) = larger population (ability to be sustained)
Larger population + different areas/cultures/people = need for a “protective fighting force”
Protective Fighting Force = Development of WEAPONS
Fighting Forcer + Development of weapons = conquering forces

Front 80

Hyksos

Back 80

One of these conquering forces, the Hyksos, were successful, in 1630 B.C., in conquering the delta region of Egypt. This victory was fueled in large part by the superior weaponry of the Hyksos compared to the Egyptians. At the time, the Egyptian armies were composed almost entirely of foot soldiers outfitted with stone maces. In comparison, the Hyksos came with chariots, bronze spears and composite bows. The defeat of the Egyptian armies began the ‘Second Intermediate Period’ in Egyptian history.

Front 81

End of the Hyksos

Back 81

-Egypt than divided into two areas
-Bronze metallurgy introduced and Egpytians able to form their own versions of Hyksos weapons
-Egyptian rebellion and recovery of their conquered lands
-under King Ahmose I the Egyptian weapons were improved (including a lighter chariot)

Essential after this period everything goes downhill. Kingdoms in Egypt are established and history goes on.