Ancient Greek and Roman writers about Kush
Isidor Katznelson
Translated by Osama Abdel-Rahman Elnur
Ancient Greek and Roman writings did not preserve much information about ancient Kush - Nilotic Ethiopia as the Greeks and Romans called it. Moreover, this information was sporadic and coincidental in nature. The majority of this information was contained in the works of Hellenic historians and geographers and dates back to a relatively late period. In addition, ancient writers provide very valuable indications regarding the history and geography of this region that help determine various aspects of its socio-economic structure, not only in the second half of the first millennium BC and the first centuries AD, but in much earlier times. It is also necessary to take into account that much information has come to us only through the works of Greek and Roman authors, as other sources are silent about it. Hence the importance of addressing, even briefly, these works, especially the information related to Napata and Meroe, and making an attempt to classify them and determine their nature, a task that has not been undertaken so far by any researcher (1). To accomplish this task, it is necessary to conduct more detailed and accurate studies and research.
To the Greeks of the first half of the first millennium BC, Kush was depicted. And what lies beyond it, as we will explain later, is a mythical, mythical country, located somewhere far in the east, on the coast of the ocean (Homer, Book II, Part One; The Odyssey). There live the Ethiopians, whose faces were burned by the shamash. They are friends of the gods, and the latter attend the sacrificial rituals they hold. The Greeks of that period did not have any clear and accurate ideas about the whereabouts of Kush. Until the end of ancient Greek culture, the name Ethiopians was given to peoples characterized by black skin, but a distinction was made between eastern Ethiopians and western Ethiopians. Within the Eastern Ethiopians he classified the inhabitants of India, as can be seen from the Iliad (2). Apparently, confusing and indefinite information about a distant eastern country reached the Homeric Greeks. In one of the Pelusian tablets (Py.En.74/11), which dates back to the thirteenth century BC, there is a mention of a man bearing the name of Ethiopius (the Ethiopian) Webster, 1960:94. From here it can be concluded that this name existed since times before the arrival of the Greeks to Kush, which received the name “Ethiopia” as a country whose inhabitants are black-faced. Later, this is how they came to call all lands whose inhabitants were black. Webster,1960:94
The geographical horizon expands further in "Odyssey". However, in this epic, when talking about the western Ethiopians (3), the reference was not to the inhabitants of Kush, but rather to the inhabitants of Mauritania Finsler, 1908 Since the travels of Ulysses, they must be attributed to the western part of the Mediterranean. Even Egypt seemed to Homer a distant country to which no one would travel willingly. Although Menelai, in his account to Talmach of the events after the capture of Greece, mentions his journey to Cyprus, Phoenicia, Egypt, the Ethiopians (4), etc., it is not clear what specifically the inhabitants of Kush were talking about in this case. It is not unlikely that what is meant here is any coastal country whose inhabitants were black. As is clear from the content, Manlai did not go beyond the borders of the Mediterranean; All the countries listed are located on the coasts. In general, there is no basis for assuming that the Greeks of the Homeric era penetrated beyond the southern shores of the Mediterranean Sea. Their knowledge of Egypt, which was very relative, did not extend beyond the delta regions at best. Finsler,1908
A closer acquaintance with the coastal regions of Egypt can be revealed in Canto XIV, “The Odyssey.” From the Odysseus novel, an idea can be formed about the role of piracy in expanding the geographical knowledge of the Greeks of the Homeric era. What is striking is that in his narration, which may touch to some extent on the truth, Caesar Ataka appears himself as a Cypriot, emphasizing the long-standing, sometimes hostile, and sometimes peaceful relations with Egypt.
However, the furthest south point in the Nile Valley that the Greeks could have reached in the Homeric period was at Thebes. Until the accession of Psamtik I to the throne, various Greek adventurers, combining trade and piracy, were able to reach the Nile Valley - in this case the Odyssey narrative makes sense - but they did not go beyond the cities of the delta, and therefore their information about Kush did not go beyond the audio information (1893, Mallet).
Starting in the middle of the seventh century, during the reign of Psamtik I and his Greek successors, mercenary soldiers, and later merchants and craftsmen, arrived in Egypt and penetrated into the depths of Egypt. Starting from the reign of Psamtik II (594-588 BC), there is definite evidence of reaching Kush. This evidence consists of one of the oldest traces of early Greek writing - the inscriptions at Abu Simbel (5), which were left by the mercenary jurists who arrived in the area of the second cataract as part of the expedition that pursued the fugitives who turned to the king of the Kushites (Herodotus, Book II) (6). Kush, according to the literary fragments that have come down to us from that period, remained for the Greeks an amazing country. In the works of Hesiod (Straube, 1963) and Solon's contemporary, Bergk (1843), Ethiopia and the Ethiopians appear only in mythological content, but it is not possible to identify them with a specific country or a specific people. It is difficult to agree with the hypothesis that Hesiod identified Ethiopia with Libya, since later Greek tradition identified the “unsettled Ethiopians” not only with the inhabitants of Kush Forbiger, 1877. In general, he saw that the Ethiopians “spread throughout all the southern edges of the land known to him” (Томсон, 1953: 49). For this reason one regrets the loss of the work of the logician Gikati of Melite, who visited Egypt approximately one hundred years before Herodotus and was able to collect interesting information about Kush. His work, Periodos Ges, is considered the first in a series of Greek works written about Egypt. It is possible that excerpts from his memoirs about Kush were found in the works of other logicians who collected information about Egypt (8) Wiedemann, 1884. Straube,1963Bergk 1843Forbiger,1877Томсон,1953: 49Wiedemann,1884
Thus, Herodotus is the first Greek historian who preserved for us fairly reliable information about Kush. As is known, he visited Egypt in the year 448 or 447 BC. Legrain, 1955 and stayed there for about four months. Sourdille, 1910. Therefore, it was enough time for him to learn a lot of information. He did not reach Kush, but he visited the border region - Elephantine Island - where the last Persian garrison was located in the south. Legrain,1955Sourdille,1910
The relations between the Kushites and the Persians were far from being cordial. Although the Kushites had to pay tribute to Cambyses, although this was not for a long period, they often disturbed the border regions with their attacks. Therefore, sailing on the Nile south of Elephantine was risky. Moreover, we must not forget that the entire fifth century BC. It was charged with the uprisings of the Egyptians against the Persians, bearing in mind that the Kushites played a very large role in them. One of the largest of these uprisings, the Persians succeeded in suppressing it only 6-7 years before Herodotus's visit, 1915. Волков,1915
The importance of the information provided by Herodotus about Kush is not only limited to its antiquity, but also to its diversity. In fact, the third and fourth parts of the “Histories” preserved a lot of data about this country, which is information that is very close to the truth.
Herodotus also differentiates between the "Eastern Ethiopians", who have curly hair, and the "Libyan Ethiopians", whose "hair is curly to a degree not found in any other people." By eastern Ethiopians he often meant the peoples of Gedrosia and Carmania; While what is meant, mostly, by Western Ethiopians are the Kushites who live, according to him, “in a remote country in the southwest of the habitable land - Ethiopia. There is a lot of gold, where huge elephants graze, and trees of all kinds grow.” It precisely defines the northern borders of Kush - Elephantine Island. Herodotus also notes the difference between the inhabitants of the Lower Nile Falls regions bordering Egypt and the “Ethiopians of all ages” - the tribes of the Upper Nile Falls, the Mutazungun. In fact, their description in the narrative of Cambyses’ campaign is literary laden with the distinctive aesthetic formulas of ancient Greek traditions, even though the Egyptians, in the era of the collapse of their state, were able to create a perfect vision of the strong, independent kingdom of Meroe, where ancient cults were preserved. Beardsley, 1929; Säve-Söderbergh, 1946. Herodotus did not lose sight of the cultural influence of the Egyptians on the Kushites, which makes him distinct from some later writers, for example Diodorus, who expresses a completely different point of view. Among the truly established information is the reference to the “Sun Table” in Meroe - erected in front of the Temple of the Sun, where the meat of slaughtered animals was offered as an offering to the public Garstang, 1911, as well as the reference to the tradition followed there in choosing the heir to the throne by revelation Säve-Söderbergh, 1946, although this information may not correspond to the truth in some cases. It is clear that in the time of Herodotus, Greek travelers had some information about the distant southern capital, because Herodotus’ narration stems from Greek traditions and not Egyptian traditions, as is the case with his narration about Egypt. Narrative of Cambyses' campaignBeardsley,1929Säve-Söderbergh,1946Garstang,1911
The story of the subjugation of Senusret and the other pharaohs to Kush reached Herodotus, although Herodotus’s record in this regard is full of distortions and confusion of dates, facts, and names: Xesostris (7) is the only king to whom Kush was subjugated. This error is easy to explain: the memory of the Kushites’ sovereignty over Egypt remained fresh, a sovereignty whose legitimacy the Kushites continued to confirm (for example, Nastasen) even when Egypt was under Persian sovereignty.
It also distorted the story of the Kushite occupation of Egypt. It is not clear who the 18 kings who ruled Egypt were. Lepsius had proposed a hypothesis at his time that these included, in addition to the kings of the Twenty-fifth Dynasty, the pharaohs of the Fifth and Sixth Dynasties Lepsius, 1849. However, the latter have their origins in the regions of Elephantine and Thebes. Budinger's point of view is also extended (8). If we exclude the possibility of error in this case, a question arises regarding the source on which Herodotus relied in establishing the Kushite kings, such as Kashta, Ankhi (Piya), and Tanut-Amani, as well as independent or semi-independent princes who ruled in that mysterious period in various regions and attributed to themselves the title of master of all the earth, along with the Egyptian kings. It is possible that Herodotus' statement was based on oral tradition or on a record from the records of one of the southern regions of Egypt, which had friendly relations with the Kushites in the era of Assyrian and Persian sovereignty, as the Kushites actively contributed to the Egyptian uprisings against foreign occupiers, and the Kush kings were viewed as the legitimate rulers of Egypt. It is clear that the traditions preserved by Herodotus emphasize the close relations of the Egyptians with the Kushites. The truth is that in a later period, Manetho, who is of Seventi origin, reflected in his writings the hostile point of view of Lower Egypt towards Pia and his successors (Струве, 1930), who subjugated the cities of the Delta under their control. Thus, we find that Shabaka and Taharqa represent, from his point of view, cruel killers Manetho, 1958. But Herodotus does not adopt this North-Egyptian point of view. In his writings, he portrays Sabakon (Shabaka) as a just and humane ruler. According to Herodotus, the Ethiopians are good, and their country is rich and its resources are abundant. It is possible that the “father of history” fell under the influence of the good feeling prevailing in Egyptian traditions towards the Kushites, as well as the accounts of Greek mercenaries about the countless treasures of the kings of Napata and Meroe. It was not a coincidence that the Greek groups fled during the era of Abri to Kush Sauneron and Yoyotte, 1952. Lepsius,1849Струве,1930Manetho,1958Sauneron and Yoyotte,1952
Among the Kushite kings, Herodotus knew by name only one of them - Sabakon-Shabaka, about whom he spoke more than once. Fifty years lasted the reign of Shabacca, according to Herodotus, and thus it corresponds to the period of the Twenty-fifth Dynasty (9). The truth is that from such a chronological perspective, if he was not completely replaced, it becomes unclear: thus it becomes impossible to identify the blind king Enses who replaced Sabacon (Herodotus, Book II, 137). The story that presents the exodus of the Ethiopians from Egypt resonates with the famous “Dream Obelisk” of King Tanut Amani Urkunden III, 57-77, where the facts are presented in a different order: the king’s dream preceded the campaign against Egypt. Also, specifying the time frames for Sennacherib’s campaign against Egypt during the reign of King Stone is characterized by a degree of semi-fiction and does not match reality. There is no single trace of this last king. It is possible that this Ston was one of the princes of Lower Egypt. Sennacherib's campaign can possibly be traced back to the era of Taharqa or Shebataka, who entered into confrontations with the Assyrians, confrontations that received ample narration in the Bible [Isiah, 37-9; Book of Kings 19-9] and the Cuneiform Annals Streck, 1916. The news of Psamtik I as the successor to the Twenty-fifth Dynasty completely matches the historical reality, as well as the news about Psamtik II’s campaign against Kush, which is confirmed by the inscriptions of the Greek mercenaries in Abu Simbel that were mentioned previously. In fact, Herodotus considers the two kings to be one person. Regarding the mention of Cambyses subjugating “the Ethiopians neighboring Egypt,” this fact should not be relied upon now (10). Very important are the intermittent remarks about the “long-lived Ethiopians” (11), who are referred to as tribes living in the upper falls of the Nile. This is the first detailed information, although not entirely reliable, about the inhabitants of the northern regions of Central Africa. In addition to the legendary myths, which are usual in Greek narratives about distant peoples, there is, without a doubt, a grain of truth that is important for us and which, together with local sources, can explain the characteristics of the social conditions of those tribes not in the fifth century BC. Not only that, but even in previous centuries. Urkunden III,57-77Streck,1916
Where did Herodotus get his information about Kush? The answer is contained in the twenty-ninth chapter of his second book: “I reached even the city of Elephantine myself and was an eyewitness, but as for the countries beyond that, I knew about them from accounts.”
The Greek mercenaries, who accompanied the Persian punitive campaign against Kush, as well as some individual Greek merchants, and also the Egyptians, although the latter to a lesser extent, provided Herodotus with the information that interested him (12). Thus, the news reported by Herodotus about Kush is similar, in terms of reliability and quality, to those he reported about Egypt. The only difference is that with regard to Kush, he found himself forced to rely on sources, as long as he did not go there and therefore had no way to confirm and verify. Some of his descriptions are very vivid, expressive and true, for example his description of the area of the first cataract - up to Philae. The general perception of the places located south of Philae, with the inaccuracy of determining the distances between some inhabited sites and the error in fixing their locations, is incomparable in Herodotus's description. Thus we find that he located Meroe further north than its actual location, and called the island of Philae Takempso, even though Takempso extends on both banks of the Nile in the Sinai region and mostly coincides with the Dodekascheon Sethe, 1901: 3-7. The account of the coronation of Psamtik I and of the Assyrian attack, as in many historical accounts, is taken from the temple of Ptah at Memphis Wiedmann, 1890:26-27, 397. Sethe,1901Wiedmann,1890
From all that has been said, it can be concluded that, despite much false and imaginary information, Herodotus' accounts constitute an important source that complements our information about Kush, not only in terms of its precedence or in that it became a basis from which subsequent works - Diderot, Strabo and others - were drawn, but thanks to a series of reliable information contained in the second and third "Histories" (13).
Approximately such an evaluation of Herodotus's work was presented three years later by Herminghausen in his previously mentioned doctoral thesis. Herminghausen believes that basic information about Kush reached the Greek historian from the following sources:
1- Egyptian Merchants in Elephantine (Description of the Kushite Nile Valley - Book II, 29-31).
2- Other Egyptians, including possibly priests (narration by Sabcon and Seton - Book II, 137-139-149).
3- One of the Greeks or another person visited Kush (Description of the Country - Book Three, 17-25).
Herodotus narrates all the information he received accurately. Moreover, he tries to be closer in his narration to the source, as is evident from the analysis of the chapter he devoted to Kush in his third book (14).
Among the Greek writers whose works have come down to us that are closest to Herodotus in time and in terms of the content of many of the narratives, Aristotle (384-322 BC) can be mentioned. Moreover, some passages are almost directly taken from the work of Herodotus. In Aristotle's opinion, Ethiopia is located at the end of the inhabited earth. Beyond that, life becomes impossible due to the scorching heat. He has information about the Silver Mountains from which the Nile originates, which separate the eastern and western Ethiopians. The external appearance of the Negro tribes is accurately described by Aristotle (Animal History, Book III, 9), which is natural since the Greeks had known the Negroes since long times before Aristotle Lowenherz, 1861; The characteristic curly hair of Negroes is explained by climate factors. His description of the political system in Kush was close to that of Herodotus. He also took the description of “winged serpents” from Herodotus. Therefore, it may be said that Aristotle's conceptions of Kush were based on the works of the "Father of History," but Aristotle's geographical presentation is more extensive: he knows the mountains and rivers in that country, especially the eastern branches of the Nile. However, in general, Aristotle’s knowledge of Libya did not exceed the level of Greek science in the pre-Hellenistic era, according to Bolchert (1908). Lowenherz,1861Bolchert,1908
The campaigns of Alexander the Great greatly expanded the Greek geographical horizon. They reach distant countries and seas, and the amount of descriptive works in different regions grows. In fact, these descriptive works mixed the imaginary with the real. Later Herodotus Until the end of the fourth century, when the Nestasen Obelisk was erected, no writings were available about Kush. The inscriptions uncovered in a niche covered some spaces, but not completely.
For this reason, what is available in the form of excerpts from later writers on the works of a generation of travellers, scholars, historians, and geographers of the first two centuries of the Hellenistic era is of particular importance.
Without a doubt, the first of them was Philo, who was a possible admiral of Ptolemy I. He described his journey to Kush as Aethiopeca, and gave a series of precise astronomical determinations of certain points, which were later used by Gebarkh and Artosphene (15). Philo's title is repeated in the works of subsequent writers who wrote after him on the same subject.
(1)Budge 1907 mentions only Herodotus, Diderot, Strabo, and Pliny the Elder, translating lengthy excerpts from their works. There is no detailed presentation even in Arkell's 1961 work, which was distinguished by its meticulous documentation (especially archaeological data). In Shinnie's 1967 work on Meroe culture, Greek and Roman sources are briefly referred to. Arkell 1961Shinnie 1967
(2) It is noted that Strabo strongly denies the possibility that Homer knew India. For the concept of two Ethiopians see Bataille 1952
(3) For shifts in the concept of Eastern and Western Ethiopians after Homer, see Lesky A., Athiopika.
(4) “Homer says that Menelai “arrived” in Ethiopia, realizing that he did not actually arrive there, but rather reached its borders with Egypt. It seems that the border at that period was close to Thebes, I mean the borders in Sinai and Philae. The first of the two cities is located in Egypt, and in Philae the Egyptians and Ethiopians live. Therefore, there is nothing unlikely that Menelai arrived in Philae, and reached the border region with Ethiopia, and he may have penetrated beyond that.” (Strabo).
(5) The previous dating that attributes it to the period of the reign of Psamtik I is now rejected by Sauneron and Yoyotte 1952. See the new edition of the inscriptions Bernard and Masson 1957.
(6) York and Lyke, who were the first to publish inscriptions of Greek mercenaries, identified the place mentioned in them with Abu Simbel. France put forward a hypothesis that the place was Basilix (Dakka). Wiedemann made an amendment to the reading of Psilex, indicating that it refers to the Corti located between the first waterfall and the Elephantine. Wiedemann 1880. He was the first to date the inscriptions correctly. The root “Karak” is still preserved in the names of many places in Northern Nubia - Kirkasur, Girgi and others. Sonron and Uti, the authors of the recent excellent study of this campaign of Psamtik II, believe that it was a defensive campaign aimed at protecting against an attack by the Kushites. The possibility that the Pharaoh’s army reached as far as the Fourth Cataract and even beyond that Sauneron and Yoyotte 1952. In an article that focused primarily on geographical problems, its author, K. Perrot, saw that the inscription concerns the soldiers of the division that was placed to protect the rear of the army, Préaux 1957. However, in this case it seems unclear why the names of the two commanders of the army - Potamcito and Amasis - were mentioned in the inscriptions.
(7) Zysostris in the reading of ancient Greek writers (Aristotle, Polybe, Magasphene, Eratosphene, Diodorus and others) - a legendary figure who includes in himself the characteristics of a number of warrior pharaohs who expanded the borders of Egypt in the era of the Middle and New Kingdoms: Senusret I and especially Senusret II, as well as, of course, Ramesses II. Some nineteenth-century scholars have attempted to identify Zisostris with Senusret I and II (Wilkinson), Seti I and Ramesses II (Lepsius and Bonzin). However, a complete match is not possible, as Zisostris lacks any specific historical features, and his name goes back to the pharaohs of the Twelfth Dynasty. Lange 1954.
(8) See M. Büdinger 1872 states that Herodotus, upon his arrival in Thebes, marked in his diary three well-known Kushite kings - Shebaka, Shebataka, and Taharqa - with three dashes, and later, when writing his work, he read the dashes as ΙΗ, i.e. 18. It is difficult to imagine that Herodotus, like a contemporary scholar or tourist, kept moving around with his diary to write down his notes.
(9) Struve believes that three kings who, according to Manetho, formed the Twenty-fifth Dynasty, ruled for 40 years: from 726 to 686 BC. Moreover, Kashta ruled for 31 years (763-732 BC). Some specify a period of fifty years for the rule of this dynasty from 715-663 BC. When Shabaka, Shabataka, and Taharqa ruled [see: Drioton and Vandier, 1962]. Drioton and Vandier,1962
(10) The hypothesis that Schäfer had in his time that Cambyses was precisely the king whose name can be read in the Stele of Nestasen has been completely refuted since Nestasen ruled a full two centuries after Cambyses.
(11) Based on the general meaning of the content, the talk is about “Ethiopes of all ages” (aithiopes makrobioi), and not about “Ethiopes with long bows,” as Last, 1923, tried to prove, who tried to attribute the word bios to the Homeric word “bow,” and not to the word “life.” Later, he believes, Greek writers, including Herodotus, mixed the two concepts. However, bios "bracket" is a rarely used word. The identification of Ethiopians as "hard-working" corresponds more to the mythical perception of them. Last,1923
(12) Thus we find that at the basis of his account of the campaign of Cambyses to Egypt and Kush (Herodotus, Book III, 1-38), as is clear from the political color of his account, lies an Egyptian source hostile to the invaders, a story to which Herodotus made here and there some modifications according to the accounts of the Greeks and Persians who lived in Egypt (Book III, 4, 7, 9), and it is also clear from where he extracted some complete paragraphs (Book Three, 20-24). Säve-Söderbergh (1946) believes that Herodotus's sources were hostile only to Cambyses and not to the Persians, and that the information could not have been obtained from Egyptians, but rather from Greeks or Persians. However, the Swedish Egyptologist's arguments are unconvincing on some points. To those lines that I published in 1962Кацнельсон I can now add that his controversial conclusions were refuted in a doctoral thesis presented at the University of Hamburg dedicated to Kush Herminghausen's description of Herodotus, 1964. Säve-Söderbergh,1946Herminghausen,1964
(13) Among the works that were written about Kush and have not reached us, the closest in terms of time period to the era of Herodotus, comes first and foremost the work of Democritus of Epidaea (460/470 BC), who often visited Kush, which is what Diogenes the Laerite indicates (Book IX/7-2) Mallet, 1922 Mallet,1922
(14) Herminghausen, the aforementioned reference, p. 87. In a brief evaluation of Herodotus's work, Sheeny reached a similar conclusion: Although the information provided by Herodotus about the geography of the Kingdom of Meroe is incomplete, it is basically correct. In some novels there is a degree of mythical color Shinnie, 1967 Shinnie,1967
(15) It is possible that the information provided by Pliny about the location of Meroe is due to Philo, whose work was apparently in the hands of Gibbarch. Pliny relies directly on the latter. However, Berger doubts the authenticity of Villon's visit to Meroe Berger, 1887-1893. It is possible that some astronomical measurements were made in Meroe through local efforts, as tools for astronomical measurements were uncovered during excavations conducted in the royal city, which may lead to the assumption that there is an astronomical observatory Garstang, 1914. As is known, the Egyptians had accumulated significant experience in following the stars, and then the experience could have been passed on to the Kushites. Even in the rural Meroitic cities sundials similar to Egyptian ones were found, but they were undoubtedly made in Kush, where many skilled craftsmen were found Crowfoot, 1911. Berger,1887-1893Garstang,1914Crowfoot,1911
Arkell A.J., A History of the Sudan from the Earliest Times to 1821, 2 Ed. London 1961
Bataille A., Les Memnonia, Recherches de papyrologie et d'épigraphie grecques sur la nécropole de la Thèbes en Egypte aux époques hellenistique et romaine, La Caire 1952
Beardsley G.H. 1929, The Negro in Greek and Roman Civilization, Baltimore
Bergk I. (ed) 1843, 'Poetae Lyrici Graeci', Leipzig
Bernard A. and O.Masson 1957, 'Les inscriptions grecques d'AbouSimbel, REG, t.70, No329
Budge E.A.W.1907, The Egyptian Sudan, vol.2, London
Budinger M. 1872, Zur ägyptischen Forschungen Herodot's 5. Die äthiopische Dynastie -"Sitzungsberichte der Wiener Akademoe der Wissenschaften". Philos.-hist. Classe. Bd 72
Струве В.В. 1930, Манефон и его время Записки коллегии востоковеов при Азиатском музее АН СССР т.3 вып.1,т.4
Finsler G. 1908, Homer, Leipzig-Berlin
Forbiger A. 1877, Fragmenta historicorum der alten Geographiem Bd 2, Hamburg
Garstang J. 1911, Meroe, The City of Ethiopians, Oxford
Lange K. 1954, Sesostris. Ein ägyptischer König in Mythos, Geschichte un Kunst, München
Legrain Ph.E. 1955, Hérodote. Introduction, 2 Ed. Paris
Lepsius R. 1849, Die Chronologie der Ägypter, Berlin
Preaux C. 1957, Les grecs à la découverte de l'Afrique par l'Egypte, CdE, t.27, No64
Mallet D. 1893, Les premiers établissements des Grecs en Egypte (VII et VI siècles), Paris
Manetho 1958, Aegyptiaca (Epitome), ed. W.G.Waddell, London; Loeb Classical Library
Sauneron S. and J.Yoyotte 1952, 'La campagne nubienne de Psammetique II et sa signification historique', BIFAO, t.50
Säve-Söderbergh T. 1946, 'Zu den äthiopischen Episoden bei Herodot', Eranos, t.44
Shinnie P.L 1967, Meroe: A Civilisation of the Sudan, New York-Washington
Sourdille C. 1910, La durée et l'étendue du voyage d'Hérodote en Egypte, Paris
Straube H.1963, Westkuschitische Völker Süd-Äthiopiens, Stuttgart
Томсон Д.О. 1953, История древней географии Мockвa
Webster T.B.L. 1960, Von Mykene bis Homer. Anfänge griechischer Literatur und Kunst im Lichte von Linear B. München und Wien
Wiedemann A. 1880, Die griechische Inschrift von Abu-Simbel, Rheinisches Museum fur Philologie, NF Bd 35
Wiedemann A. 1884, Ägyptische Geschichte, Bd I, Gotha
Волков И.М. Арамейские документы иудейской колонии на Элефантине в V до Р.Х. Москва ('Культурно-исторические памятники дрвнего Востока',вып.2
"Urkunden des ägyptischen Altertums", herausg. von G.Steindorff, III. H.Schäfer, Urkunden der älteren Äthiopenkönige, Liefer. 1-2, Leipzig, 1905-1908.
Streck M. 1916, Assurbanipal und die letzten assyrischen Könige bis zum Untergange Ninveh's, Bd 2. Leipzig.
Drioton E.and Vandier J. 1962, L'Egypte, 4Ed., Paris.
Last H. 1923, 'Aithiopes makrobioi', The Classical Quarterly, vol. 17, no.1.
Säve-Söderbergh T. 1946, 'Zu den athiopischen Episoden bei Herodot', Eranos, t.44.
Кацнельсон И.С. 1962, Античные писатели о Куше,-ПС,вып. 7(70).
Herminghausen D. 1964, Herodots Angaben über Athiopien mit einer kritischen Untersuchung ihrer Quellen und ihrer Funktion im Zusammenhang mit den Angaben über Ägypten, Hamburg (Dissertation zur Erlangung der Doktorwürde der Philosophischen Fakultät der Universität Hamburg).
Wiedmann A. 1890, Herodotos zweites Buch mit sachlichen Eraläuterungen, Leipzig.
Sethe K. 1901, Dodekaschoinos, Zwölfmeilenland an der Grenze von Ägypten und Nubien, Leipzig.
Mallet D. 1922, Les rapports des Grecs avec l'Egypte (de la conquête de Cambyses, 525, a celle d'Alexandre,331), Le Caire (MIFAO, t.48).
Shinnie P.L. 1962, Meroe. A Civilisation of the Sudan, New York-Washington.
Lowenherz J. 1861, Die Äthiopien in altgriechischen Kunst, Göttingen.
Bolchert P. 1908, Aristotels Erkunde von Asien un Libien, Berlin.
Berger H. 1887-1893, Geschichte der wissenschaftlichen Erdkunde der Griechen, Berlin.
Garstang J. 1914, 'Fifth Interim Report on the Excavations at Meroe in Ethiopia', Annals of Archaeology and Anthropology, University of Liverpool, vol.7.
Crowfoot J.W. 1911, The Island of Meroe, London.