Possible Survival of punt and early sabaic trade

[Midas]

So I was thinking about punt and then I was wondering about exactly how long it survived after the famous hatsheput trade. Then when I looked it up on Wikipedia expeditions to punt apparently went on even till the 20th dynasty and rhey speculate it ended sometime before the collapse of the new kingdom.

So were talking about somewhere between 1150-1070. Then I remebred the sabean inscription found in puntland which is dated to the end of the 8th century b.c to early 7th century b.c so somewhere in the early 700s b.c for a middle date. And what did the sabeans go there for ? Incense. So I think my point should be obvious by now. We're looking at a 300-400 year gap. Between the last eygptian-punt trade and this sabaic trade. Also keep in mind that if you take into account the fact that this trade had probaly been going for a long time before it was worth the sabaean ruling elites to sponsor this expedition and build a temple. then we could be looking at a much smaller gap of maybe a 100-200 years or possibly a trade that never stopped but merely shifted partners.

@NidarNidar @Idilinaa @Shimbiris @Emir of Zayla @The alchemist

 

[Midas]

Makes me wonder if the trade never fully died but merely became smaller than did punt maintain any political continuity for way longer than we have any record for ?

 

[Barkhadle1520]

So I was thinking about punt and then I was wondering about exactly how long it survived after the famous hatsheput trade. Then when I looked it up on Wikipedia expeditions to punt apparently went on even till the 20th dynasty and rhey speculate it ended sometime before the collapse of the new kingdom.
View attachment 366994
So were talking about somewhere between 1150-1070. Then I remebred the sabean inscription found in puntland which is dated to the end of the 8th century b.c to early 7th century b.c so somewhere in the early 700s b.c for a middle date. And what did the sabeans go there for ? Incense. So I think my point should be obvious by now. We're looking at a 300-400 year gap. Between the last eygptian-punt trade and this sabaic trade. Also keep in mind that if you take into account the fact that this trade had probaly been going for a long time before it was worth the sabaean ruling elites to sponsor this expedition and build a temple. then we could be looking at a much smaller gap of maybe a 100-200 years or possibly a trade that never stopped but merely shifted partners.

@NidarNidar @Idilinaa @Shimbiris @Emir of Zayla @The alchemist

Your mistake is in thinking punt is a kingdom

 

[Midas]

Your mistake is in thinking punt is a kingdom

It obviously was to some extent. In the mid 1500s when kerma invaded eygpt one of the other groups mentioned who helped in thr invasion was punt. Theres also the fact that about a century later hatsheputs expedition mentions a queen ati and a king parehu.

But im honestly more interested in the culutral continuity. The fact that we have only 300-400 years between the last eygptian account of punt and the building of a temple and sending of an expedition by the sabean rulers for incense is to me the most definitive proof you can possibly get outside of actually digging up anicent eygptian artifacts.

 

[Barkhadle1520]

It obviously was to some extent. In the mid 1500s when kerma invaded eygpt one of the other groups mentioned who helped in thr invasion was punt. Theres also the fact that about a century later hatsheputs expedition mentions a queen ati and a king parehu.

But im honestly more interested in the culutral continuity. The fact that we have only 300-400 years between the last eygptian account of punt and the building of a temple and sending of an expedition by the sabean rulers for incense is to me the most definitive proof you can possibly get outside of actually digging up anicent eygptian artifacts.

No it was not, it was literally just the egyptian name for the region that Periplus would name as Barbaria 1000 years later

An inscription for Ramses 3 even says "the countries of punt"

Claiming it was a kingdom is stupid, what kind of kingdom lasts from 3000BC up to 100BC (last mention during ptolemaic egypt)

 

[Midas]

No it was not, it was literally just the egyptian name for the region that Periplus would name as Barbaria 1000 years later

An inscription for Ramses 3 even says "the countries of punt"
View attachment 367007

Claiming it was a kingdom is stupid, what kind of kingdom lasts from 3000BC up to 100BC (last mention during ptolemaic egypt)

Who the hell said it was a single kingdom lasting 3 thousand years? I simply rejected your claim that there was never a kingdom.
Do you realize how big the difference between those two positions are.

 

[Barkhadle1520]

Who the hell said it was a single kingdom lasting 3 thousand years? I simply rejected your claim that there was never a kingdom.
Do you realize how big the difference between those two positions are.

I think there was never a kingdom then, it was always just city states competing for trade

 

[Midas]

Also instead of engaging with what I'm saying why do you keep creating these fake strawman claims .

 

[Midas]

I think there was never a kingdom then, it was always just city states competing for trade

What is your obsession with this city state vs kingdom distinction? Also if their was never a kingdom who where the eygptians talking abkut when they mentioned a queen atiya and king parehu ?

 

[Barkhadle1520]

What is your obsession with this city state vs kingdom distinction? Also if their was never a kingdom who where the eygptians talking abkut when they mentioned a queen atiya and king parehu ?

They were the chiefs of the place they visited, and at that time I dont even think it was city states but just tribes, no stone dwellings or cities even drawn by the egyptians but only huts