https://www.academia.

edu/9111021/
Where_is_Punt
CLD 300
Where is the land of Punt?

Front cover image: Scenes from Deir el-Bahari showingEgyptians arriving at Punt and
greeting the chief of Punt and his wife. (Kitchen (1993) 595).

655298 Word count: 9,981 Troy Sagrillo

7th May 2014
Contents

Introduction…………………………………………………………………………………3

Chapter 1: Textual evidence…………………………………………………………………7

Punt as “God’s land”……………………………………………………………………...…7

Topographical lists………………………………………………………………………..…8

Records of expeditions and visits from Puntites………………………………………..…..10

Chapter 2: Artistic evidence………………………………………………………………....18

The Deir el-Bahari reliefs…………………………………………………………………...18

Other depictions of Punt in tombs…………………………………………………………..22

Chapter 2: Archaeological evidence…………………………………………………………27

Middle Kingdom finds at Mersa/Wadi Gawasis…………………………………………….29

New Kingdom finds at Mersa/Wadi Gawasis………………………………………………..30

Surface remains at Mersa/Wadi Gawasis…………………………………………………….32

Conclusion……………………………………………………………………………………36

Table of figures………………………………………………………………………………39

Bibliography………………………………………………………………………………….50
655298 CLD300
Where is the land of Punt?

Introduction

Punt is a topic that has become popular relatively late in this history of Egyptology, mainly
due to its undeciphered reality, but also one that has incited strong opinions and differences. The
‘nation’ of Punt, thought to have existed as a civilisation between c.2500 BC and c.600 BC, 1 is
mentioned in a trading capacity throughout the history of ancient Egypt. But unlike other nations
that had been a longstanding part of Egypt’s history, such as Nubia and Libya, Punt was never
invaded by an Egyptian military force,2 nor did the Egyptians ever build permanent centres there,
despite spending extended periods of time (up to three months) there during expeditions. 3
Additionally, allusions made to Punt are often scarce and brief, as well as having suffered damage
before their rediscovery in modern times, and have not been found outside of Egypt. This has led
to questions regarding the nature of the relationship between the two, as well as the location of
Punt. The latter will form the focus of this paper, which will analyse representations of Punt and
Puntites in both art and texts, as well as the archaeological evidence contributing to finding the
mystical land. Theories suggested include numerous locations including the southern Arabian
coast and Eritrean/Somalian border within the Horn of Africa. This paper will provide evidence
from both sides of this argument, while concluding that Punt most likely had an African location.

However, before analysing the location, various other factors must be acknowledged. First
is the aforementioned purely trade-based relationship between Egypt and Punt. This has been
taken as fact by many scholars, and will be considered as such through this paper. It seems
unlikely that, if Punt was occupied by Egyptian force, it would not be depicted, considering the
popularity of depicting these events in Egyptian ideology. Military success is even depicted when
its occurrence is questionable (the Battle of Qadesh for example4). It may also be that Punt was out
of Egypt’s sphere of influence, therefore making a military campaign impossible or the threat
from Punt incredibly small. 5 However, Punt’s trade with Egypt and occasional mention on
topographical lists suggests otherwise. The conclusion reached in terms of this peculiar
relationship is a straightforward one; it was simply easier for the Egyptians to rely on the Puntites
to produce and occasionally deliver the trade goods, rather than invade and take Punt as a vassal. 6
This is strengthened by the seemingly remote location of Punt; a campaign there would seem to be
a waste of resources, especially when travel via the ocean was concerned.7 The mythical nature of
Punt can also be linked to this; Kitchen suggests that the ‘mythical land’ conception is not entirely
a modern construction and that the ancient Egyptians themselves may well have seen Punt as a

1
Phillips (1997) 423.
2
Meeks (2003) 54; Kitchen (1999) 174.
3
O’Connor (1983) 271; Kitchen (1971) 196.
4
Butler (2010) 20-28.
5
Glennister (2008) 94; Kitchen (1999) 174; Pirelli (1993) 387.
6
O’Connor (1983) 271.
7
Kitchen (1999) 174.
Page 2 of 36
655298 CLD300
Where is the land of Punt?

mythical, far-away land,8 one not to be interfered with, a concept that could have links with Punt’s
inclusion in the easterly region of “God’s land”, an issue which will be tackled later in this paper.

It is clear that trade with Punt was an aspect which dominated the relationship9 between the
two powers and it seems that for some of these traded commodities, their origins, or at least
supply from Punt is significant. It is alluded to that comparable goods from Kush are not
satisfactory for use in religious ceremonies, suggesting a special dimension to the goods from
Punt,10 possibly due to the conception of Punt as part of “God’s land”, a region regarded as special
due to its production of luxury goods. This is further attested by descriptions of the goods from
Punt, in particular a Middle Kingdom text which refers to the aromatics of Punt as a sign of the
presence of the gods.11 This theory is reinforced by the use of the word ‘marvels’ with regard to
the goods from Punt. The word has not been used in reference to any other land, suggesting a
differentiation to those goods from Punt.12 This reference demonstrates the level at which Egypt
differentiated between their neighbours and that, to them, a product was not just superficially
useful; there were many levels to the definition of a product.

Another dimension to this trade relationship was that Punt often acted as an intermediary for
other African nations when trading with Egypt. Little is known about most of these nations, but
three are understood, to a varying degree: Amu, Irem and Bia-Punt. Most is known about Bia-
Punt, which is thought to be a region within Punt 13 (most likely to be in Northern Eritrea 14 )
designated to mining. It is mentioned in some of the earliest references to trade with this region,
such as a record from the Sixth Dynasty when Pepi II demands “more than the mining region of
Punt 15 ”, as well as much later in Egyptian history, during the reign of Amenemhat III when
expeditions to Punt and Bia-Punt are recorded on stela.16This suggests separate expeditions to Punt
and Bia-Punt, which are attested but merge into larger projects later in history. This is reflected in
the change of the meaning of the term biA, which in the earlier periods of expeditions, referred to
the region described above. By the time of Hatshepsut’s expedition in the Eighteenth Dynasty, the
term had developed to mean ‘wonders’, to describe goods from Punt in general. 17Amu is also
mentioned individually, but only in terms of products being from the region, such as gold,
electrum,ebony and ivory.18 There is one suspected expedition to Amu, under Pepi II, when it is

8
Kitchen (1999) 174; Meeks (2003) 58; Glennister (2008) 130.
9
O’Connor (1983) 271.
10
Meeks (2003) 67.
11
Kitchen (1993) 591.
12
Glennister (2008) 130.
13
Cozzolino (1993) 395.
14
Fattovich (2012) 13.
15
Sethe (1933) 128.
16
Fattovich and Bard (2013) 7.
17
Cozzolino (1993) 395.
18
Meeks (2003) 65; Kitchen (1999) 175;Cozzolino (1993) 391.
Page 3 of 36
655298 CLD300
Where is the land of Punt?

thought the Egyptians unexpectedly stopped at Punt on their return from Amu, suggesting that it is
a region laying further inland than Punt.19 Otherwise, it is suggestive that goods from Amu were
delivered via Punt, either to the Egyptian coast or collected by Egyptians on expeditions there. Of
the three, Irem is the most difficult and challenging to locate. 20 Much in regard to it is based on
superficial theory, but it is known to have existed and traded at least once with Egypt through
Punt.

Academic literature on the topic is more limited than other areas, but still significant for an
investigation. Punt has been acknowledged since the publication of the Punt reliefs at Deir el-
Bahari, in Hatshepsut’s mortuary temple by Naville in the early 1900s. 21 Little was published
between then and 1968, when Rolf Herzog published the first work devoted to the location, Punt.
Since then, various scholars including Kitchen, who has become the authority on the location of
Punt, Bradbury, Meeks, Cozzolino and archaeologists such as Sayed, Fattovich and Bard, have all
published on the location of Punt and the extent of its relationship with Egypt. This dissertation
will aim to collate the opinions expressed by these scholars, among others, to reach a conclusion
regarding the location of Punt.

19
Kitchen (1993); Phillips (1997) 426.
20
Kitchen (1999) 177.
21
Naville (1908) vol. VII plates VII, VIII, IX.
Page 4 of 36
655298 CLD300
Where is the land of Punt?

Chapter 1: Textual evidence

Textual evidence regarding the location of Punt is often difficult to analyse,

despite being relatively abundant in comparison to other types of evidence.1 Often,
short inscriptions, graffito or allusions to the mystical land of Punt are all that is
uncovered. Additionally, religious references can be ambiguous in their nature,
meaning extra care must be taken throughout analysis of these passages. These issues
will be tackled in this chapter as well as analysing specific references in relation to
the location of Punt, such as topographical lists, royal records and graffiti.

Punt as “God’s land”

The main issue regarding textual references to Punt is when it is referred to in a

religious context, as part of “God’s land”; a region regarded as holy by the Egyptians
due to its role in providing luxury goods.2 This is a challenge through the entire time
period, but the nature of what Egyptians mean by “God’s land” does change over that
time. By the Eighteenth Dynasty, “God’s land” and Punt are one and the same, but in
earlier periods, especially the Old Kingdom and early Middle Kingdom, it is not clear
where the boundaries lie.3 It is thought that in the Eleventh Dynasty, the two begin to
synchronize, but some texts may refer to them in the context of separate locations,
others may regard them as the same place.4 By the New Kingdom, the term “God’s
land” had a wide geographical reference and could refer to any territory outside of
Egypt that provides the valley with luxurious goods, 5 therefore encompassing a
number of nations spanning from Syria, the Arabian coast and even into the Far East
and India (Afghanistan provided lapis lazuli). The textual evidence which provides
most difficulties as well as potentially valuable information is the story of the
Shipwrecked Sailor, from the Middle Kingdom. Although not discussed in detail in
this paper, the Shipwrecked Sailor does have some basis in fact, due to its
corroboration with other evidence we have, such as the inscriptions from Henu, an
individual on the expedition under Hatshepsut, as well as the timescale of the story
(two months to reach Punt), which is similar to the times estimated in modern
scholarship.6

Topographical lists

1
Meeks (2003) 54.
2
Meeks (2003) 58.
3
Glennister (2008) 132; Bradbury (1988) 127.
4
Bradbury (1988) 127.
5
Bradbury (1988) 130.
6
Wicker (1998) 157; Bradbury (1988) 140.
Page 5 of 36
655298 CLD300
Where is the land of Punt?

The most challenging but also informative group of textual evidence is

topographical lists, a key feature throughout Egyptian history. Topographical lists are
important as features of kingship, by listing their neighbours in these documents;
pharaohs are defining them as part of the Egyptian cosmos, and through the nature of
that, under their extended power.7 Three key lists mention Punt, and in each it is seen
in a slightly different geographical context. The first list, of Thutmose III, includes
Punt and has been interpreted as representing the south in general.8 This would be a
straightforward analysis based on the locations mentioned following Punt, “Kush,
Irem and Wawat9”, all locations we can place today,10 in a general southerly direction
from Egypt proper.11 At the very least, we can define them as being upstream on the
Nile from Egypt, towards the White and Blue Niles to the source. What confuses this
list is the addition at the end of Tjehenu, a region of southern Libya, 12 which
obviously cannot be defined as south of Egypt, or upstream on the Nile. This is the
feature that defines this list as ‘southerly’ opposed to ‘regions to the south of
Egypt’.13 The addition of Tjehenu also shows that substantial regions within nations
could be included on these lists. This list reveals three potential features regarding the
location of Punt, firstly that it is a southerly region, and from its placement in the list,
somewhere close to Kush, Irem and Wawat, but also that it could be a significant
region of a larger nation, as is the case with the inclusion of Tjehenu.

More features are added to this list, with a later copy, written during the reign
of Amenhotep II. The list appears to copy that of Thutmose, with the added
modification of separating the southern locations into two subsections, African and
Near Eastern.14 Punt is mentioned in sequence among the Near Eastern nations, a
point which has been dismissed immediately as a scribal error by modern scholars, 15
despite Punt also being listed among Near Eastern location on other lists, such as that
of Amenhotep II at Soleb. On this list, again Punt is mentioned among Near Eastern
powers, such as Mitanni and Qadesh.16 If this is interpreted as fact, it can be argued
that the location of Punt may lie in parts of Arabia, considered to be part of the Near

7
Poo (2005) 59.
8
Meeks (2003) 56.
9
Sethe (1957) 796-98.
10
Of these locations, Bia-Punt and Amu have secure locations, but Irem, due to a lack of information
is much harder to place. (Kitchen (1999) 177).
11
Meeks places all these locations in Nubia, but other works are less sure on the location of Irem.
(Meeks (2003) 56.).
12
Meeks (2003) 56.
13
Meeks (2003) 56.
14
Meeks (2003) 56-7.
15
Fakhry (1937) 51.
16
Meeks (2003) 57.
Page 6 of 36
655298 CLD300
Where is the land of Punt?

East in Egyptian times. Dimitri Meeks uses this in his argument suggesting Punt lay
along the southern coast of the Arabian Peninsula,17 paired with the interpretation of
Punt as a southerly region from the original version of the list. Again, in this list Punt
is mentioned in sequence with locations we know to be in the Near East, such as
Mitanni and Qadesh.18 However, the simple placement of Punt among these locations
does not mean they are within the same regions; this is certainly not the case with the
interpretation of the list from the time of Thutmose III, for example the distances
between Kush and Wawat would mean they are not considered close neighbours. In a
similar interpretation as before, it could be that these locations were grouped in terms
of their general eastward distribution. This, combined with the previous version of
the list, suggests a south-eastern location, but does little to specify within this broad
range. A similar placement is repeated in later topographical lists, including one from
Kom Ombo, dated to the Greco-Roman period.19 In this list, Punt is recorded among
Palestine and Mesopotamia, the new powers replacing those mentioned in earlier
lists. Contemporary with the Punt expedition of Ptolemy II, this reference shows us
the importance Punt still had in Egyptian trade, even after the cultural change
experienced after the Macedonian invasion. However, care must be taken with regard
to the use of evidence from this time period, as much is idealised and traditional, in
order to legitimise the Ptolemies’ reign as Egyptian pharaohs. 20 The positioning of
Punt near eastern nations is interesting, but provides little progress in the
investigation.

Topographical lists often prove challenging to analyse and in this context again
they have done so. Numerous factors influence the nature of the lists, including (but
not exclusively) religion, foreign relations and to a certain extent they can act
propagandistically for pharaohs, proving their powers and authority over foreign
lands. In these lists, Punt is not once mentioned in identical sequences of regions, but
from them we can imply that the Egyptians travelled both east and south 21 in order to
reach the mysterious land, potentially via the Nile, or the Red Sea.22

Records of expeditions and visits from Puntites

In addition, there are also royal records of Punt, often in the context of an
expedition report, mostly concerned with the demands of pharaohs and goods

17
Meeks (2003) 77.
18
Meeks (2003) 58.
19
Meeks (2003) 64.
20
Hölbl (2001) 85; Glennister (2008) 3.
21
Cozzolino (1993)391.
22
Phillips (1997) 425.
Page 7 of 36
655298 CLD300
Where is the land of Punt?

received from Punt. There are also more informal records, from non-royals, mostly
elite, recording their travels to Punt or the receipt of goods, either in their tombs or as
graffiti during their journey. Both types of records can be found as early as the Fifth
Dynasty,23 spanning from the Old Kingdom through to the Ramesside Period, where
records decline. The earliest reference to Punt is on the Palmero Stone, where the
receipt of myrrh, electrum and slaves from Punt are recorded.24 It is common for the
Old Kingdom references to refer solely to the goods received, including pygmies (on
at least two occasions in the Fifth and Sixth Dynasties25), ebony and incense among
other luxury goods. In the Sixth Dynasty however, we start to see more informal,
personal records of experiences of Punt. Khnumhotep, a contemporary of Pepi II,
remarks on his trip to Punt in a way which suggests it was not a commonly travelled
route (“I went out…to Punt and got back safely26”), and refers to his companions on
the expedition, including an individual called Khui, who recorded his own
experiences as graffiti in the Wadi Hammamat.27 This suggests that they were on the
same expedition; it seems unlikely that two expeditions would have been sent within
the reign of Pepi II, despite his long reign, it would be counterproductive to use twice
as many resources when one expedition could expand to bring more materials back to
Egypt. The location of Khui’s graffiti is also interesting- it is thought the Wadi
Hammamat was part of one of the potential routes the Egyptians took to the coast,28
where they would construct their seafaring vessels and launch the expedition to Punt.
Ship building is also described in this period, where it is distinguished that the ships
for reaching Punt were built in the desert,29 opposed to the Nile boats which were
built in the valley, implying that they were different to the standard boats used on the
Nile. 30 Successful construction in the valley and transportation of the seafaring
vessels to the coast would have proved too risky, it was much more straightforward to
temporarily move the construction to the coast and build there.

Textual evidence is less apparent in the Middle Kingdom, but that may be due
to the limits I have implemented onto this dissertation to deal with the evidence in
portions, rather than a realistic drop in relations at this time. The majority of the
archaeological evidence found at Wadi/Mersa Gawasis is from this period, 31 so stelae

23
Phillips (1997) 426.
24
Wicker (1998) 155; Kitchen (1993) 587; Meeks (2003) 71.
25
Kitchen (1993) 588-9.
26
Newberry (1938) 182.
27
Kitchen (1993) 589.
28
Bradbury (1988) 132; Fattovich (2012) 2; Kitchen (1993) 592; Glennister (2008) 132.
29
Kitchen (1993) 588-9
30
Kitchen (1993) 589.
31
Fattovich and Bard (2013) 4; Fattovich (2012) 4.
Page 8 of 36
655298 CLD300
Where is the land of Punt?

found in these excavations will be dealt with in the archaeology section of this paper.
Despite them indeed being textual in nature, their interpretation in an archaeological
context provides more evidence toward the arguments of the location of Punt than
simply dealing with them in an isolated textual manner. One inscription which stands
out, however, is an Eleventh Dynasty inscription from the Wadi Hammamat,
contemporary with the reign of Montuhotep III. In the inscription an individual
named Henu32 describes ships leaving for Punt “from Coptos33”, further attesting to
travel through the Wadi Hammamat to the coast to launch the ships.34 However, this
can also be interpreted in terms of Nile travel, suggesting that the ships described
here travelled up the Nile towards the source, and reached Punt this way, a theory
argued by Herzog.35The notion of a ‘ship’ over a boat in the translation suggests a
sturdy, seafaring vessel, but it is impossible to tell either way without the original
text.

We also gain more information from the route(s) taken to Punt from a Twelfth
Dynasty inscription from the reign of Amenemhat II. Found in Bir Umm Al-
Huwaytat in the Wadi Gasus, the inscription refers clearly to a seafaring expedition to
Punt,36 suggesting that during the Middle Kingdom the Red Sea was used to reach
Punt, 37 most probably launching from Mersa Gawasis, the focus of recent
archaeological work by Rodolfo Fattovich and Kathryn Bard.38 This provides a useful
insight into not only the expedition to Punt under Amenemhat II, but the way in
which the crew travelled there. Wadi Gasus has been hypothesised as part of one of
the routes the Egyptians would have used to reach the coast,39 and this argument is
strengthened with the rediscovery of this inscription.

In the New Kingdom, the amount of textual references increases, especially

contemporary to the famous expedition undertaken by Hatshepsut in the Eighteenth
Dynasty. However, many texts from this period are of a religious nature, but despite
the problems this can present, they are not excluded from analysis in this paper. This
does mean that extra care often has to be taken with some sources. Despite this, many
texts from the New Kingdom are extremely useful when examining the location of
Punt, for example numerous stelae and inscriptions. The most famous descriptions of

32
Phillips (1997) 427.
33
Breasted (1906) 208-11.
34
Kitchen (1993) 592.
35
Herzog (1968) 29.
36
Fattovich (2012) 5.
37
Phillips (1997) 425.
38
Fattovich and Bard (2013) 3; Fattovich (2012) 3.
39
Kitchen (1999) 173; Fattovich (2012) 5.
Page 9 of 36
655298 CLD300
Where is the land of Punt?

Punt, the Deir el-Bahari reliefs from Hatshepsut’s mortuary temple, will not be
discussed in this chapter; their relevance is stronger in the chapter dedicated to artistic
representations regarding Punt. Her successor, Thutmose III, however, twice records
the receipt of goods from Punt40 in his annals at Karnak.41 The brief, administrative
nature of his records suggests that it is the Puntite people who are delivering the
goods to Egypt, not the Egyptians travelling to the land to collect them. 42 This theory
is strengthened by both the lack of archaeological evidence for this time, as well as a
number of Theban tomb reliefs showing visiting Puntites,43 ranging between the dates
of the reign of Thutmose III and Amenhotep II. 44 These specific reliefs will be
discussed later in the chapter dealing with artistic representations. Later
representations of visiting Puntites can also be found surprisingly, at Amarna, in the
tomb of Meryre, a high official of Akhenaten, as well as later in reliefs at Karnak
from the reign of Horemheb,45 proving that the relationship between Punt and Egypt
was strong, especially to survive through a period of internal change in Egypt.

There are also other inscriptions which refer to these visits from Puntites. From
regnal year thirty-six of Amenhotep III’s reign, Sinai inscription 211 reads “I went
forth by the sea-coast to announce the marvels of Punt, to receive aromatic gums,
which the chiefs had brought in their khementy-boats, as revenue from lands
unknown46”, and can reveal a considerable variety of facts regarding the location of
Punt. From this inscription, we can tell the Egyptians travelled to the “sea-coast” to
meet the Puntites, suggesting that they would do the same to travel to Punt, as
Kitchen argues,47 contrary to the views published originally by Herzog. Although in
modern times we are yet to establish the exact image of a khementy-boat, we can use
the imagery from the aforementioned tomb reliefs to draw conclusions. The tomb
reliefs are contemporary with this inscription, and the boats seen in the images can be
defined as seafaring, due to their sturdy construction and high sides, designed to be
capable of pushing through strong waves and winds 48 (figure 1). The mention of
“lands unknown” also suggests other nations aside from Punt, adding to the argument

40
Kitchen (1993) 597.
41
Phillips (1997) 433.
42
Saleh (1973) 382.
43
TT39, TT100, TT89, TT143 (Kitchen (1999) 598-99.) (Throughout this dissertation the
abbreviation TT will refer to ‘Theban Tomb’).
44
Kitchen (1993) 597.
45
Kitchen (1999) 600-1; Kitchen (1993) 600.
46
Davis (1994) 48.
47
Kitchen (1999) 174.
48
Kitchen (1999) 174.
Page 10 of 36
655298 CLD300
Where is the land of Punt?

that Punt acted as an intermediary for other African nations, and it may have been
that the Egyptians were fully aware of this.

In addition to these visits from Puntites we also have textual evidence for
expeditions other than the famed Hatshepsut trip. The example we have is from the
Ramesside period, recorded on the Great Harris Papyrus, detailing an expedition
under Ramesses III.49 This is not as personalised and detailed as some of the other
accounts from other expeditions; it is a purely matter-of-fact account, listing the crew
travelling and little of the goods received. From all the products we know of Punt,
myrrh is the only one mentioned specifically in this papyrus,50 an unusual feature
based on other reports which tend to be full of lists of exotic and luxury goods. This
attests more to the importance of myrrh in the trade relationship Egypt had with
Punt. 51 In addition, there is a second piece of evidence from this period, a list,
contemporary with the Great Harris Papyrus, which details more products, including
gums and resins, in Ramesses III’s memorial temple at Medinet Habu. 52 As seen
earlier in the Sixth Dynasty records, it would be uneconomical and unlikely for a
pharaoh to send two expeditions, especially if one only returned with myrrh, so it is
acceptable to assume both these documents refer to the same expedition.

After the Ramesside period, there is a considerable break until the next
substantial reference to Punt, which isn’t until the Late and Greco-Roman periods.
Reasons for this are many-fold, and when analysed it is not a sudden and unexpected
change, a view which is often portrayed in modern scholarship. After the New
Kingdom and the Ramesside Period, the centres of kingship moved from the
traditional Middle Egypt cities north to the Delta, where access to the East was much
easier via the Sinai Peninsula.53 It may well be that connections were not as strong
during these periods, and with the successful invasion and rule of various foreign
groups, the depiction of wealth changed. During the Third Intermediate Period in
particular, silver was popular and extremely expensive and hard to obtain. Silver was
produced in the north of the Mediterranean, the opposite direction to the rough
placement of Punt. Despite this reduction of sources, we can presuppose continued
relations, however, due to the ambiguous fleeting references, such as those of Seti I in
his temple at Abydos,54 and the occurrence of later texts. It is clear some contact was

49
Kitchen (1993) 601-2.
50
Kitchen (1999) 602.
51
Wainwright (1947) 143.
52
Kitchen (1999) 602.
53
Kitchen (1993) 602.
54
Kitchen (1993) 600.
Page 11 of 36
655298 CLD300
Where is the land of Punt?

maintained or preserved, at least in records, otherwise later pharaohs, such as

Ptolemy II would have had no knowledge of the land of how to reach it. We next get
a substantial reference to Punt on the Defenneh stela, from the Twenty-sixth
Dynasty.55 In this text, Punt is mentioned in a purely geographical context, where the
‘mountains of Punt’ are said to be where the inundation rains fall to influence the
annual flooding of the Nile.56 Despite giving us little information regarding the details
of the expedition, this provides valuable information regarding the potential location
of Punt. If the rains that fall on Punt influence the inundation, they must fall around
the source of the Nile, therefore placing Punt at the region around the White and Blue
Niles. The assumption of coastal links limits this to the source of the Blue Nile, in the
vicinity of Ethiopia, Sudan and Eritrea57 (figure 2).

Alone, many of these texts struggle to provide substantial evidence for the
location of Punt, but combined, it is clear that the Egyptians travelled in both easterly
and southerly directions to reach Punt, probably by sea, suggesting a region on the
coast of the Red Sea. The inclusion of Tjehenu on one of the lists also suggests that
Punt could be a region within a larger nation. However, so little is known about the
surrounding regions of Punt, and none are attested more, suggesting that if anything,
Punt could be the largest region in the area, surrounded by smaller, less powerful
groups. The use of religious texts in this analysis may be considered by some as
inaccurate and bias, due to the nature of Punt being part of the larger “God’s land”,
but when analysed with care and attention, and an understanding of the meaning of
“God’s land”, these texts can also contribute to the overall understanding of the
location of Punt.The purpose of a text may influence how its content is portrayed, for
example a tomb inscription may be idealised, as is also the way with topographical
lists. Tradition (for example smiting of the enemies or the Nine Bows) may influence
how nations are portrayed on lists, or why they are placed next to each other.
However, we can see from the allusions and references made that the Egyptians were
likely to have travelled to Punt via the coast, probably onto the Red Sea. 58 The
reference from the Twenty-sixth Dynasty describing the mountains of Punt also
suggests a more inland region, one that has connections to the Nile, close to the
Sudanese/Ethiopian border.

55
Kitchen (1993) 602.
56
Kitchen (1993) 602.
57
Baines and Malek (1980) 20; Kitchen (1993)605; Kitchen (1971) 188; Fattovich and Bard (2013) 7;
Saleh (1972) 247.
58
Phillips (1997) 425.
Page 12 of 36
655298 CLD300
Where is the land of Punt?

Chapter 2: Artistic evidence

Similarly to textual references to Punt, artistic representations span the entire

time period of ancient Egyptian history. The group also contains the most famous
representations; the Punt reliefs from Hatshepsut’s mortuary temple at Deir el-Bahari.
In addition to these famous images, there are many more which also provide valuable
clues to locating Punt as well as defining the relationship the land had with Egypt.
However, like the textual references, we can encounter issues with the reliability of
these images, especially those coming from tombs, which are often idealised. Most of
the surviving depictions of Punt come from tombs, and although they must be dealt
with caution, they can reveal a lot about the nature of the relationship Egypt had with
the nation, as well as the location of Punt from the depictions of the goods brought
back.

Despite the majority of artistic sources coming from tombs, one of the earliest
examples we have is a Sixth Dynasty vase, from the reign of Teti.1 Images of Punt
can be seen in a symbolic way, and the inscriptions surrounding the image refer to the
produce of Punt, specifically myrrh. This mention of myrrh in particular reinforces
the importance of luxury goods, 2 such as myrrh as well as incense, in the trade
relationship between the two nations.

The Deir el-Bahari reliefs

The following artistic depictions to be analysed are from a mortuary context,

including the reliefs from Deir el-Bahari. Of course, it is important to remember
when dealing with this sort of evidence the original intention of the reliefs; to be
perfect for eternity in the afterlife, as a representation of Hatshepsut’s achievements
as pharaoh. Specifically with the Hatshepsut reliefs, there are difficulties as to
whether they truly depict Punt, or simply a typical exotic location, with all the
products of Punt shown to make it clear which exotic location is being referenced. 3
This has led some scholars to describe the reliefs at Deir el-Bahari as a ‘typological
portrait’4 rather than a realistic depiction of Punt. It is the proportions of the reliefs
which reveal the depictions’ unrealistic nature, which is shown in an exemplary
manner with the fish swimming beneath the ships on the Red Sea5 (figure 3).Others
have also compared the reliefs to those of the Botanical Gardens at Karnak, (figure
1
Phillips (1997) 426; Kitchen (1993) 587.
2
Dixon (1979) 55; Phillips (1997) 423.
3
Pirelli (1993) 385.
4
Pirelli (1993) 386.
5
Pirelli (1993) 386.
Page 13 of 36
655298 CLD300
Where is the land of Punt?

4)from the reign of Thutmose III, in that they are both representations of species that
the pharaoh had access to.6 In both of these scenes, specifically that of Punt at Deir
el-Medina, the foreign goods and peoples permeate into Egyptian reality. In this
controlled way, the Egyptians could integrate foreign (and potentially hostile) aspects
into their cosmos, and therefore legitimise the foreign land as part of the wider tA
nTr, therefore meaning all the produce from Punt delivered to Egypt became gifts to
Amun.7 This process would have been particularly important for Hatshepsut, as the
suggestion and exaggeration of her divine lineage was key to legitimising her as a
pharaoh.8 In this sense, we should consider the reliefs at Deir el-Bahari less as a travel
diary, so not what was actually seen in Punt, but as a depiction of the expectations
Egyptians should have before travelling there. 9 Despite this, the reliefs are of
immense value when analysing the relationship and location of Punt, but caution
should be exercised, as would be with any mortuary or tomb reliefs.

The reliefs are highly detailed, but not all aspects of the depictions give us
clues to Punt’s true location. However, the aspects which have been used in modern
arguments include the ebony, gold and electrum depicted as well as many other
materials and commodities. Interestingly, the products which seem to have been most
important to the Egyptians (incense, for example) do not give us a clear indication of
the location, many of the species depicted can be found in numerous locations in
Africa.10 In order to move towards locating Punt, the locations of the (identifiable)
species depicted must be culminated, as Kenneth Kitchen has done in his 1971
review of Herzog’s original work Punt. Kitchen highlights dom-palms, 11 ebony,
baboons, giraffes, rhinoceroses, as well as a number of incense tree species 12 as
pivotal in finding the location of Punt. The analysis of these species and their growth
in Africa or Arabia shows that little can be concluded from the species analysis from
Deir el-Medina alone.

Other sections of the reliefs show various other aspects of the expedition, such
as the expedition travelling to the land of Punt, including seafaring vessels and travel
on foot.13 Egyptians can be seen loading goods into seafaring ships (their high sides
6
Beaux (1990) 26; Pirelli (1993) 386.
7
Pirelli (1993) 387-9.
8
Davies (2004) 59.
9
Pirelli (1993) 388.
10
Kitchen (1993) 603.
11
Remains of dom-palm nuts have been found at Mersa/Wadi Gawasis (Fattovich, Bard and Ward
(2011) 2).
12
Kitchen (1993) 603; Kitchen (1971) 186.
13
Phillips (1997) 429.
Page 14 of 36
655298 CLD300
Where is the land of Punt?

make them capable of surviving the ocean waves), as well as marching by foot with
the Puntite chiefs to what Kitchen suggests is a more inland region of Punt. 14 It is
clear that the main part of the journey was made by ship,15 but overland travel was
required at either coast. The reliefs and inscriptions also suggest that the expedition
was launched at the Theban quays by Amun, suggesting that Nile boats took the
expedition equipment as far as possible (most likely to a wadi, Gawasis, Hammamat
and Gasus have been suggested as routes to the coast16), where they were taken to the
coast and assembled onto the ships, which had been constructed at the coastal region
where the expeditions launched into the Red Sea. The aforementioned fish that can be
seen swimming alongside the expedition ships have been successfully identified as
Red Sea species, 17 meaning there is little supporting evidence for expeditions
travelling to Punt via the Nile, as suggested by Herzog.18

Alone, many of these factors may seem inconclusive towards locating Punt, but
when combined, we see that the majority of the features have an origin in the Horn of
Africa, around the Sudanese/Ethiopian border, as well as the Eritrean Mountains.19
For example, the baboons depicted are hamadryas baboons, a specific specie which
only lives in mountainous regions. When this is paired with other species shown in
the reliefs, such as rhinoceros and giraffe, Kitchen removes Arabia from his argument
regarding Punt’s location.20 Aspects of the reliefs which give further evidence to this
argument are the pile-dwellings that can be seen in a fragment of the reliefs. Kitchen
argues that these are similar to modern day tribal dwellings, now found in south
Sudan and east Africa.21 This is echoed by other scholars, such as Saleh who suggests
the dwellings resemble that of the modern region of Bahr el-Ghazal in their shape and
construction 22 (figure 5). However, this is disputed; some scholars disagree
completely and suggest the buildings were not used for living at all, Wicker suggests
that these buildings were used as granaries, suggesting that the scale of the buildings
in contrast to the trees makes them too small to be used as homes, as is the case in
modern Uganda, where storerooms are raised from the ground, protecting them from
flooding and vermin. 23 This is an interesting theory but must be considered with

14
Kitchen (1993) 605.
15
Kitchen (1993) 592.
16
Fattovich (2012) 6; Kitchen (1993) 592; Glennister (2008) 25.
17
Kitchen (1999) 173.
18
Herzog (1968) 81-83.
19
Kitchen (1993) 603.
20
Kitchen (1971) 187.
21
Kitchen (1971) 188.
22
Saleh (1972) 249.
23
Wicker (1998) 164.
Page 15 of 36
655298 CLD300
Where is the land of Punt?

caution; it is clear from the aforementioned scale of the ships and fish that this is not
always a realistic detail in the reliefs.Kitchen also continues to make further cultural
associations between the people of Punt and regions of east Africa, highlighting the
body adornment seen on the Chief of Punt and his wife in the reliefs. This is likened
to that seen in various Sudanese tribes in modern times, further adding weight to the
suggestion that Punt lies in the hinterland and coastal regions of eastern Africa.24 The
race of people depicted in the relief is difficult to define; they do not fit with any of
the stereotypical images produced by the Egyptians to differentiate between their
neighbours (figure 6). In the reliefs a multicultural race can be seen, consisting of
people resembling Africans25 as well as others who are dressed in an Egyptian style,
which has been taken by some to attest to previous visits from the Egyptians.26

Other depictions of Punt in tombs

Hatshepsut’s reliefs are not the only depictions from the Eighteenth Dynasty.
Contemporary with her reign is TT67 of Hepusoneb (PM67) which shows the felling
of incense trees.27 This suggests that Hepusoneb was likely on the expedition under
Hatshepsut, and was involved with the incense returned to Egypt. This also helps by
corroborating the Deir el-Medina reliefs, as they show incense exported out to Egypt.
Having supporting evidence puts more reliability into the depictions from
Hatshepsut’s mortuary temple, despite the support also being from a funerary context.
By seeing the same details, from (presumably) the same expedition, we can put more
faith in the other aspects of both scenes.

In another depiction from the New Kingdom the aspect of visiting Puntites is
shown, as mentioned in the previous chapter. Puntite people can be seen delivering
goods to the Egyptian coastline,28 the first of these which comes from the tomb of
Meryre at Amarna. In particular we see deliveries of myrrh and incense, again
highlighting the importance of these luxury goods to the relationship. Other instances
of this will be detailed shortly, but it is interesting to highlight the apparent strength
that the trade relationship between Egypt and Punt had that relations were able to
continue in this time of religious and political upheaval. The Amarna period was by
no means a quiet period in terms of foreign relations, but it seems unusual that
offerings normally associated with the cult of Amun were shown being brought to

24
Kitchen (1971) 188.
25
Glennister (2008) 2; 113.
26
Wicker (1998) 164.
27
Phillips (1997) 433; Davies (1961) 19.
28
O’Connor (1983) 270.
Page 16 of 36
655298 CLD300
Where is the land of Punt?

Amarna in a time when Amun was erased from society. What can be concluded from
this is the importance of the relations, as well as the individual products to the
pharaoh; only the most prized products of Punt are shown as coming into Egypt in
this depiction.

We also see Puntites bringing commodities to Egypt in the work of Horemheb

at Karnak (PM183),29 although in this depiction the specific products are not listed
nor can be identified, only that they are packed and delivered to the Egyptian by the
Puntites. Depictions of visiting Puntites seem to be a theme of this time period, apart
from the expedition of Hatshepsut and contemporary depiction from Hepusoneb, the
representations we have are all of visiting Puntites delivering their products opposed
to Egyptian expeditions. These seem to have occurred more regularly than the
expeditions conducted by the Egyptians, which may explain the apparent large gaps
of time between recorded expeditions.

The best representations we have of these visits come from those involved in
them directly and can be seen in four Theban tombs from the between of Thutmose II
to Amenhotep II. The first of these, TT39 (PM72), tomb of Puyreme (figure 7), 30
shows the deceased receiving goods from Retjenu and Punt, including “gold of
Amu”, which is listed amongst other “marvels of Punt”, adding to the argument that
Punt acted as an intermediary between other African nations, such as Amu, and that
Egypt did not have direct contact with these places.

The role other nations have in the depictions of visiting Puntites gives us more
clues towards the location of the land and the relationship it held with Egypt through
pharaonic history. In TT100 (PM207), the tomb of the vizier Rekhmire (figure 8),
numerous other nations are shown, including a delivery of goods to Egypt from
Puntites. 31 Conclusions have been drawn concerning the guidelines regarding the
hostility of other nations based on these depictions. It is thought that those powers
reached by land, for example Libya, Syria and Nubia, are considered a threat as they
are much more easily reached, whereas those reached via the sea, such as Punt and
the Aegean, are not as threatening to the internal order within Egypt’s boundaries. 32
On the walls of the tomb devoted to Punt, scenes can be seen showing both the
people of Punt and their produce, such as baboons, ibex, monkeys, cheetah and
incense trees, which Rekhmire can be seen inspecting with his advisors. Again, we

29
Kitchen (1993) 600.
30
Davies (1961) 23; Kitchen (1993) 597.
31
Kitchen (1993) 599; Davies (1961) 22.
32
Phillips (1997) 425.
Page 17 of 36
655298 CLD300
Where is the land of Punt?

can see the importance the Egyptians bestowed on the trade of incense with Punt, as
total care is taken with the incense trees, which are transported alive, to be
transplanted back in Egypt, a project which was attested numerous times (during
every expedition undertaken by Egyptians and many times when Puntites delivered to
Egypt), the vast majority of which failed. 33 This demonstrates how pivotal incense
was in the trade; so much so that the Egyptians tried to grow and harvest their own
trees to avoid this apparent dependence on Punt, 34 as well as the difficulties in
logistics and danger of travelling there to collect the goods.35 In contrast, the animals
traded are not always given as much care. Most are already dead, presumably to be
used for their skins. Despite giving us little evidence regarding the location, this does
remind us of the priorities Egypt had regarding the trade with Punt.

Similar products (cheetah and incense trees) can be seen in TT89 (PM182), the
tomb of Amenmose (figure 9), delivered to the Egyptian coast by Puntites. 36 In the
registers next to the deliveries, donkeys and people laden with produce ‘for barter’
can be seen. This suggests Egypt was sending goods back to Punt, in a two-way trade
system. However, the goods seen are not of the same calibre as that sent from Punt,
they do not include any precious, semi-precious or luxury materials. Despite the
apparent two-way trading, this alludes towards dominance of some sort from Egypt,
or an emphasis of importance on the produce of Egypt from Punt, similar to that
Egypt placed on incense from Punt.

This collection of goods for the return to Punt can again be seen in TT143
(PM255-7), belonging to an unknown man (figure 10). 37 From the tomb reliefs
mentioned in this chapter (except the Deir el-Bahari reliefs), this individual devotes
the most space to Punt (five registers), again emphasising the importance of the
relationship between the two nations. In this scene, chiefs of Punt can be seen
presenting gold and incense trees before the king, thought to be Amenhotep III due to
the dating of the tomb. Amongst the goods and people we can see high-sided,
seafaring boats,38 suggesting that the Puntites travelled via the Red Sea to Egypt and
did not use the Nile, despite Punt being indirectly accessible by following the Nile
overland.39 In this relief, the deceased can be seen arriving with donkeys and people

33
Dixon (1979) 64.
34
Glennister (2008) 17.
35
Dixon (1979) 64.
36
Davies (1961) 21; Kitchen (1993) 599.
37
Kitchen (1993) 599; Davies (1961) 21; Phillips (1997) 434.
38
Kitchen (1999) 174.
39
Phillips (1997) 425.
Page 18 of 36
655298 CLD300
Where is the land of Punt?

with goods apparently for return to Punt, he is also accompanied by a military escort
and dogs. This brings questions into the nature of the relationship shared between
Egypt and Punt; was it solely trade based? And if so, why did the Egyptians feel they
required a military escort? This could provide clues towards the journey the
Egyptians took to meet the Puntites at the coast; if they travelled via a network of
wadis, as has been suggested, the need for a military escort would be explained. The
wadis, despite being within the country of Egypt, were outside of the Nile valley
proper and provided ideal places for bandits and robbers to prey on travellers,
especially those laden with goods to send to Punt.

The artistic depictions we have in regard to Punt are the richest in terms of
evidence showing the goods that were traded. From analysing the origins of these
commodities we can see they tend to fall within the region of Eastern Africa, similar
to that suggested by Kitchen. Additionally, the importance of incense in the
relationship is again highlighted as pivotal in the trading relationship. The key feature
we learn from these reliefs is that the Egyptians and Puntites both used the sea to
travel between the lands;40 in both the expedition reliefs and those showing visiting
Puntites, seafaring vessels are depicted. When paired with the inscriptions describing
travels to the “sea-coast” from the previous chapter, we can conclude that this was the
main way of travel between the two, with overland caravans required at either
coastline.

40
Wicker (1998) 157.
Page 19 of 36
655298 CLD300
Where is the land of Punt?

Chapter 3: Archaeological evidence

Archaeology is the sphere of research regarding Punt which has truly

developed in recent years; new excavations at Mersa/Wadi Gawasis (2633’26”
north, 3402’11” east1) (figure 11) have uncovered new evidence giving us a clearer
interpretation of the relationship between Egypt and Punt. However, pwnt, as it
appears in the Egyptian records, has not been discovered in archaeological terms,
despite numerous theories locating the nation in various areas of the African Horn
and south Arabian coast. Based on the evidence analysed in previous chapters, such
as the depictions of goods sent back to Punt, archaeological evidence of Egyptian
materials in Punt, if it was discovered, would be unlikely. This would mean defining
Punt and proving its true location would be extremely difficult, as we have little
information regarding the nature of the country apart from the evidence discussed in
this paper. It may be that securing a definite location for Punt is never achieved; we
have little suggestive evidence so far, and are gaining knowledge regarding the travel
from the archaeology at Mersa/Wadi Gawasis, but little in reference to Punt itself.

Additionally, the archaeological evidence we have regarding the relationship

Egypt had with Punt and its location often give more depth to the understanding
already existing of these issues. Egyptian records suggest there was no contact
between the two before the Fifth Dynasty, but archaeological evidence suggests trade
between these two areas occurred much before. Cowrie shells (figure 12) naturally
occur between the Red Sea and The Maldives, but have been found in graves in the
Nile Valley dating to as early as the Neolithic period in Nubia. 2 This suggests a trade
route between Egypt and this area before the development of pharaonic, centralized
culture in the Nile Valley or at the least trade through an intermediary that could or
could not be the region the Egyptians later referred to as Punt. There is also evidence
for a strong trading network between African and Arabian peoples from the 7 th
millennium BC onwards and it is thought that the people in this region now referred
to as Punt, near to the modern Ethio-Sudanese border, would have acted as
intermediaries between this network and the Nile Valley, 3 suggestive of an
established, non-primitive culture.4 It is not likely that these relationships survived
unification and thousands of years intact, but it may be that similar items from similar
regions were traded. It may even be that the Egyptians trading in pharaonic times

1
Fattovich (2012) 4.
2
Phillips (1997) 426.
3
Fattovich (1993) 400-1; Glennister (2008) 119.
4
Glennister (2008) 119; Fattovich, Sadr and Vitagliano (1989) 347.
Page 20 of 36
655298 CLD300
Where is the land of Punt?

were unaware of the earlier relationships Egypt may have had with the regions of
Punt and east Africa, even if through an intermediary.

One of the most significant archaeological discoveries related to Punt is the

Twelfth Dynasty harbour at Mersa/Wadi Gawasis (at the modern site of Saww) in
1977 by Abdel Sayed,5 and it was defined as the landing point for expeditions to and
from Punt. 6 Despite discovering the harbour, little work was done until the early
2000s when the University of Naples L’Orientale (UNO) and Italian Institute for
Africa and the Orient (IsIAO) began work at Mersa/Wadi Gawasis.7 This site and the
work there under this mission will be the focus of this chapter, mainly due to the lack
of archaeological work completed in the Horn of Africa or on the Arabian coast, the
key suggested locations for Punt. It is this site which has, so far, provided most
archaeological finds regarding expeditions to Punt, enabling many professionals,
including Egyptologists, archaeologists, botanists and geologists among others, to
piece together the nature of the expeditions, including their destination. The aims of
this mission, which ran through ten field seasons from 2001 to 2011, were to confirm
the site’s use as a harbour to Punt in pharaonic times, understand the organisation of
expeditions and to provide archaeological evidence for the location of Punt.8

The first finds to provide evidence for expeditions for Punt via the Red Sea
were discovered by Sayed and included ostraca, timbers and limestone anchors. 9
These items provided the first archaeological evidence for seagoing travel to Punt,
against Nile-based travel, a hypothesis which had been argued by scholars before
these discoveries. Nile travel to Punt has also been suggested in more recent works,
but only as a minor accompaniment to use of the Red Sea. It is now recognised that
the majority of travel was made via the Red Sea, with overland travel at each coast.10

Middle Kingdom finds at Mersa/Wadi Gawasis

The majority of evidence from Mersa/Wadi Gawasis is from the Middle

Kingdom, mainly the Twelfth Dynasty, 11 including ship timber, anchors, ropes,
boxes, administration, stelae, ostraca, papyri and ceramics,12 but it was used briefly
before and after this period. Potsherds found attest to the Old Kingdom and First
5
Sayed (1977) 141.
6
Fattovich and Bard (2013) 3; Fattovich (2012) 2.
7
Fattovich (2012) 3.
8
Fattovich (2012) 3.
9
Fattovich (2012) 2.
10
Phillips (1997) 425.
11
Meeks (2003) 75.
12
Fattovich (2012) 4.
Page 21 of 36
655298 CLD300
Where is the land of Punt?

Intermediate Period as well as the Second Intermediate Period and New Kingdom, 13
but pale in comparison to the evidence from the Middle Kingdom, 14 suggesting a
surge in the use of the harbour in this time, and short-term use of the harbour in the
peripheral periods, such as the fleeting evidence for an expedition from Mersa/Wadi
Gawasis in Dynasty Seventeen under Sesostris I. 15 Potsherds from the Middle
Kingdom have also been found, and constitute a significant proportion of the finds
dating to this period, the Twelfth Dynasty in particular. 16 However, not all of the
ceramics from the site are attributed to the Egyptians. The finds include Maʿlayba
ware, originating from the Aden region (south Arabia), as well as wares from Eritrea,
Sudan and Middle Nubia. 17 This suggests a wide trading network, but also adds
weight to the argument of Punt being located in Arabia instead of/as well as Africa,
as argued by scholars.18 Some ceramics are also found to have been produced on site,
in kilns and ovens found in the surface remains, which will be covered shortly,
suggesting that the site was inhabited at least for temporary periods, and structures
were built to provide for the expeditions, and account for mistakes, such as a shortage
of storage.

One of the most interesting finds dating to the Middle Kingdom is Stela five,
rediscovered in 2004, dating to the reign of Amenemhat III.19 Detailing an expedition
to both Punt and Bia-Punt20 (the mining region of Punt), the stela adds to the previous
discussions of the nature of Punt’s neighbours, notably Bia-Punt in this case.
Numerous other finds from the site refer to both locations, suggesting that they lay in
close proximity, or were even very similar in location, but the differentiation from the
sources suggests that they produced different products, the basis of the translation of
Bia-Punt as the “mining region of Punt” in this time period.

New Kingdom finds from Mersa/Wadi Gawasis

Potsherds again prove to be an important section of the New Kingdom finds,

and are traceable through the Wadi Gawasis to the Nile Valley, providing evidence
for the route(s) the Egyptians took from the Nile Valley to the harbour. Other
significant finds dating to the New Kingdom include two timber blades for the rudder

13
Bard and Fattovich (2008) 22.
14
Fattovich (2012) 5.
15
Kitchen (1993) 590.
16
Meeks (2003) 75.
17
Fattovich and Bard (2013) 7.
18
Meeks; Fattovich
19
Bard, Fattovich, Arpin et al. (2005) 8.
20
Fattovich (2012) 4; Fattovich and Bard (2013) 7.
Page 22 of 36
655298 CLD300
Where is the land of Punt?

of a ship, 21 suggesting the seafaring vessels were constructed at the coast, 22 as

aforementioned, instead of in the Nile Valley with the boats for use on the river. The
timber in question is of two different trees; cedar from the Levant23 and Nile acacia,24
proving how complex an operation building boats for an expedition was and
providing an explanation for the apparent scarcity of such large-scale expeditions.
This gives us more background detail to the expeditions and information regarding
the equipment and materials used across the history of Egypt in these expeditions, but
adds little towards finding the location of Punt. These finds, however are
contemporary with the famous expedition of Hatshepsut,25 which suggests that this
was the launching and landing point for her expedition. This would not be
unreasonable; the reliefs from Deir el-Bahari do show ships capable of surviving the
journey down the Red Sea coast, and timbers such as cedar would be strong enough
to become part of such vessels.26

This increase in evidence from the Middle Kingdom, followed by a significant

drop in the New Kingdom does not provide evidence for a lack of contacts between
Punt and Egypt in the later dynasties. This surge in use of the harbour can be
explained in context of two factors, the increase of trade between Egypt and the
Levant, giving them more access to the materials required for expeditions to Punt
(including specific timbers and knowledge of techniques.27 Additionally, at the same
time of the turmoil of the First Intermediate Period and rise of the Middle Kingdom,
developments can be seen in the Kerma region of Nubia, where a new, powerful
civilisation grew. This may explain why more seafaring expeditions are seen to leave
and arrive from Mersa/Wadi Gawasis in the New Kingdom28 as the growth of Kerma
meant that an overland route, which may well have been used more commonly in the
Old Kingdom,29 was no longer a secure or viable route to take.30 Land routes which
have been suggested follow the Nile south, through Nubia and towards the source of
the Nile, or across the Sinai Peninsula to the Arabian coast.31 The latter is obviously

21
Fattovich (2012) 5; Fattovich and Bard (2013) 5.
22
Kitchen (1993) 589.
23
Fattovich (2012) 14; Fattovich and Bard (2010) 11.
24
Fattovich and Bard (2013) 6; Fattovich and Bard (2010) 11.
25
Fattovich and Bard (2013) 6.
26
Kitchen (1999) 174.
27
Fattovich and Bard (2010) 11.
28
Fattovich (1993) 403.
29
Fattovich (1993) 403.
30
Fattovich and Bard (2013) 4; Fattovich (2012) 14; Fattovich and Bard (2010) 11.
31
Fattovich (2012) 2.
Page 23 of 36
655298 CLD300
Where is the land of Punt?

relevant to the view of Punt laying in Arabia, but the growth of Kerma could serve as
an explanation for a reduction of the use of the Nubian route.

Surface remains at Mersa/Wadi Gawasis

These finds suggest Mersa/Wadi Gawasis was a busy port during the times of
expeditions to Punt, but the surface remains that have been excavated there suggest it
was not always so. No permanent buildings have been found, except for the rock cut
caves, albeit these would have been used temporarily and returned to for later
expeditions. The surface remains can be split into various different sections, based
upon their purpose in the port: ceremonial shrines, shelters/camps, storerooms/caves
and industrial.32 An industrial area furthers the argument that expedition equipment,
that is, ships, weaponry, ceramic and stone tools and storage,33 were produced on-site
instead of in the Nile Valley and transported to the coast. This meant that the
Egyptians were never under or over prepared for the expeditions or the deliveries;
they could produce as much or as little as they required to transport the goods back to
the valley. The building of shrines suggests that the Egyptians stayed here for
extended, if only temporary, periods of time. They are the only permanent structures
at the site, attesting further to the importance they and the ceremonial finds had to the
site. Additionally, their location (orientated towards the ocean34) suggests they may
have been used as landmarks, enabling the ships returning from Punt to locate the
harbour easily.35 This adds a further dimension to the use of the site and shows that it
was intended to be safe and used for long periods of time, even if only used sparingly
through those periods.

There is no evidence across the site for permanent inhabitation. 36 This is not
particularly surprising, as it was neither required nor practical for the Egyptians; they
only needed access to the coast when undertaking expeditions or receiving goods
from the Puntites. Additionally, despite the excavation of an industrial area at the
port, little in the way of permanent food and beer production has been found,
suggesting the supplies for a stay at Mersa/Wadi Gawasis were transported there
from the Nile Valley, 37 at least in their raw form, and transformed into edible
products at the port, using basic camping processes. Evidence of camps have been

32
Fattovich and Bard (2008) 22; Fattovich (2012) 4; Fattovich and Bard (2013) 3.
33
Fattovich and Bard (2013) 6.
34
Fattovich and Bard (2010) 2.
35
Fattovich and Bard (2010) 2.
36
Fattovich (2012) 4.
37
Fattovich and Bard (2013) 6.
Page 24 of 36
655298 CLD300
Where is the land of Punt?

uncovered, both away from the shore and on the beach, where hearths, animal
remains and charcoal have been found,38 suggesting goods were brought out to the
coast from the Nile Valley to sustain the expedition teams whilst at Mersa/Wadi
Gawasis.

In addition to these finds, remains of products from Punt have also been found
at the port, giving us further clues towards the purpose of the trade with Punt, as well
as the location, based on the origin of these products, such as obsidian and ebony, as
well as others. Over forty cargo boxes have been found at the port, with a mixture of
materials in them, which leaves questions as to their apparent abandonment at the
site. Could it be that goods were transferred from box to box at the port? Or that these
goods could be found more suitable travelling locations in other parts of the caravan;
that these boxes were surplus to requirement? Of course we will never know truly
why they are here and others are not. Two of these boxes are inscribed with the
regnal year eight of Amenemhat IV, further adding to the use of the harbour through
the Middle Kingdom. These boxes are also inscribed with descriptions of their origin,
said to be holding the “wonders of Punt39”, so it is unclear if this was a delivery of
goods or an expedition by the Egyptians, but either way, demonstrates continuing
relations between the two.

From the data collected at Mersa/Wadi Gawasis, the leading archaeologists on

the mission, Rodolfo Fattovich and Kathryn Bard, tend to agree with Kitchen’s
conclusions regarding the location of Punt, as within the coastal and hinterland of the
Eritrea/Somalia region of the Horn of Africa,40 but this is not fully substantiated, even
after ten seasons of digging.41 They also agree that Punt would have had continuing,
good relations with Egypt, and suggest it could have been in contact with other
nations, relationships which are yet to be uncovered in modern times. 42 However,
they also add an interesting dimension to the argument which has not been
investigated fully; that Punt, with its strong seafaring relations, could have existed on
either or both sides of the Red Sea,43 therefore encompassing both opposing views.
There is evidence that both sides of this coastline were linked, if only by trade, from
at least the early Holocene period.44 Of course, more theoretical and archaeological

38
Fattovich and Bard (2010) 9.
39
Fattovich and Bard (2013) 7.
40
Fattovich (2012) 2; Fattovich and Bard (2013) 9.
41
Fattovich (1993) 399; Glennister (2008) 119.
42
Fattovich (2012) 13.
43
Saleh (1972) 249; Fattovich and Bard (2013) 9; Fattovich (2012) 13.
44
Fattovich (2012) 13.
Page 25 of 36
655298 CLD300
Where is the land of Punt?

work has to be done on this theory before it can be fully considered, but it is an
interesting point, especially when regarded in the context of previously analysed
evidence, such as the inconsistencies of the topographical lists and origins of products
sourced from Punt. There is also the complication of being able to effectively define
Punt as such, within a region which obviously was full of small to mid-size cultures,
probably with similar languages, traditions, clothing and buildings. The only sure
way archaeologists would be able to define Punt would be by finding Egyptian
materials there, the likelihood of which is very low, as the goods thought to have
been traded are those which would degrade over time, such as linens, beads and
food.45

45
Phillips (1997) 439.
Page 26 of 36
655298 CLD300
Where is the land of Punt?

Conclusion

Despite the ambiguous nature of Punt’s location, there seems to have been a
considerable number of expeditions there, led by Egyptians throughout the country’s
history. There are expeditions from the very earliest dynasties, under Pepi II among
others, through the Middle Kingdom under Amenemhat II and into the New
Kingdom, with expeditions from Hatshepsut and Ramesses III1. Despite records of
these expeditions surviving, they are often sparse in nature, suggesting that other
expeditions could go on undiscovered. If not fully fledged expeditions to Punt, it is
certain Egypt had more contact with this land than the handful of expeditions we
know of. However, it may be that other expeditions were structured differently, and
did not need as much documentation or resources, for example the use of an overland
or Nile-based route. 2 A route such as these would require less administration;
specialist boats would not need to be constructed and a huge crew would not need to
be assembled. Evidence of Puntites visiting Egypt with goods is relatively common
and of good quality, surviving in both artistic and textual capacities, suggesting that
contact could have continued in this way between the major expeditions, explaining
how Egyptian knowledge of Punt and how to get there survived the seemingly large
gaps between the expeditions. These combined show how sophisticated the contact
between the two nations was, and the level of establishment achieved in Punt by the
cultural group(s) living there, to be able to continuously supply Egypt with the
luxurious goods it required.

One of the biggest challenges faced when locating Punt is understanding the
original intention of the Egyptian word, pwnt. Modern scholars cannot understand, or
tell from the remaining sources, if the term referred to a group of people, a particular
ethnicity, a specific region, or a place which produced a certain material (incense for
example). 3 It is unlikely that the ethnicity of the people living in Punt stayed
completely static for the entire period they were trading with Egypt for. After all,
Egypt is the most comparable country in terms of a constant culture, religion and
political system, but despite this, the ethnicity of the people did change, even though
they were still considered Egyptians. With migration and foreign invasion, it is
impossible for a culture to remain completely unchanged or unaffected over this
many years. Therefore, this dissertation would suggest that the Punt was a region, not
a term regarding a group of people, and that the people within this region may well

1
Kitchen (1993) 601.
2
Phillips (1997) 425; Fattovich (1993) 403
3
Saleh (1972) 248.
Page 27 of 36
655298 CLD300
Where is the land of Punt?

have changed, but the traditions and skills of this culture will have stayed the same,
enabling them to continually supply Egypt with their native and neighbour’s goods.

Despite the recent archaeological work completed on the leaving and landing
port for many expeditions to Punt, as well as the extensive academic literature
available on the topic, the location of Punt is still unsubstantiated. However,
numerous academic opinions exist, ranging from the south Arabian Peninsula, the
Ethiopian mountains, and both. The evidence considered adds to all of these theories,
but the most convincing is that of Kenneth Kitchen, that Punt lies “between the Red
Sea and the middle Nile, in the north/north-west Ethiopian highlands and eastern
Sudan4” (figure 13). Most of the species that are seen traded from Punt come from
this region; it can be reached both overland and by sea and is close to the mountains
referred to in the Ptolemaic inscriptions referring to the rains of the inundation.
However, the concept of migration and invasion, mentioned above, will always affect
populations, traditions and languages within cultures. And whilst some may survive,
others will be lost, almost completely. When little is known about these cultures in
modern times, it means defining them amongst our modern conceptions and borders
is often near impossible.5
Table of figures

Figure 1 High-sided boats used by the expedition team under Hatshepsut in Dynasty
Eighteen (Kitchen (1993) 593).

Figure 2 The source of the Blue Nile (exploringafrica.matrix.msu.edu accessed 02.05.2014).

4
Kitchen (1971) 188
5
Kitchen (1999) 178.
Page 28 of 36
655298 CLD300
Where is the land of Punt?

Figure 3 Proportions of the species of fish swimming beneath the ships in the Red Sea
(Kitchen (1993) 593).

Figure 4Scene of the Botanical Gardens at Karnak, from the reign of Thutmose III
(www.1worldtours.com accessed 02.05.2014).

Page 29 of 36
655298 CLD300
Where is the land of Punt?

Figure 5 Buildings in Punt, which have been interpreted as both dwellings and storerooms
(Kitchen (1993) 595).

Figure 6Egyptian stereotypes of foreigners, from Ramesses III’s mortuary temple at Medinet
Habu showing (from left to right) a Nubian, Syrian, Shashu-Bedouin and a Hittite (Shaw
(2000) 321).

Figure 7TT39 of Puyreme (PM72; Kitchen (1993) 598

Page 30 of 36
655298 CLD300
Where is the land of Punt?

Figure 8 TT100 of Rekhmire (PM207; Kitchen (1993) 599).

Figure 9
TT89 of Amenmose (PM182; Kitchen (1993) 600).

Figure 10 TT143 of an unknown man (PM255-57; Kitchen (1993) 599).

Page 31 of 36
655298 CLD300
Where is the land of Punt?

Figure 11 The location of Mersa/Wadi Gawasis (Fattovich (2012) 19).

Figure 12
Cowrie shells (estatebeads.com/natural/shell2 accessed 29.04.2014).

Page 32 of 36
655298 CLD300
Where is the land of Punt?

Figure 13
The location of Punt, surrounded by Wawat, Kush, Irem and Amu. (Kitchen (1999) 175).

Page 33 of 36
655298 CLD300
Where is the land of Punt?

Bibliography

Books

Bard K.A., R. Fattovich, T. Arpin, S.T. Childs, C.S.Lim, C.Perlingieri, R.Pirelli and
C.Zazzaro (2005) ‘Recent Excavations at the pharaonic port of Mersa Gawasis on the
Red Sea 2004-5 field season’ <www.archaeogate.com> .

Baines, J. and J. Malek (2000) Cultural Atlas of Ancient Egypt. Revised ed. Oxford:
Andromeda.

Beaux, N. (1990) Le cabinet des curiosités de Thutmosis III, Plantes et animaux du “Jardin
botanique” de Karnak. Leuven: OLA 36.

Bradbury, L. (1988) ‘Reflections on travelling to “God’s land” and Punt in the Middle
Kingdom’ Journal of the American Research Centre in Egypt 25: 127-56.

Breasted, J.H. (1906) Ancient Records of Egypt: Historical documents from the earliest times
to the Persian conquest I. Chicago: Chicago University Press.

Butler, R. (2010) Battles that changed history. Amersham: Amber Books Ltd.

Cozzolino, C. (1993) ‘The land of Punt’ in G.M. Zaccone and T.R. di Netro (eds.) Sesto
Congresso Internazionale di Egittologia Atti II391-98. Turin: Società Italiana.

Davies, N.M. (1961) ‘A fragment of a Punt scene’ Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 47: 19-
23.

Davies, V. (2004) ‘Hatshepsut’s use of Thutmosis III in her program of legitimisation’

Journal of American Research Centre in Egypt 41: 55-66.

Davis, B.G. (1994) Egyptian historical records of the later Eighteenth Dynasty Fascile V.
Warminster: Aris and Philips Ltd.

Dixon, D.M. (1979) ‘The transplantation of incense trees in Egypt’ The journal of Egyptian
Archaeology 55: 55-65.

Fakhry, A. (1937) ‘Blocs décorés provenant du Temple d Louxor Annales du Service des
Antiquities de l’Egypte 37: 51-56.

Fattovich, R. (2012) ‘Egypt’s trade with Punt: new discoveries on the Red Sea Coast’ British
Museum Studies in Ancient Egypt and the Sudan 18: 1-59.

---------------- (1993) ‘Punt: the archaeological perspective’ in G.M. Zaccone and T.R. di
Netro (eds.) Sesto Congresso Internazionale di Egittologia Atti II399-405. Turin: Società
Italiana.

Page 34 of 36
655298 CLD300
Where is the land of Punt?

Fattovich, R. and K.A. Bard (2013) ‘The land of Punt and recent archaeological and textual
evidence from the pharaonic harbour at Mersa/Wadi Gawasis, Egypt’ in S. Chrisomalis
and A. Costopoulos (eds.) Human Expeditions: inspired by Bruce Trigger. Toronto:
University of Toronto Press 3-11.

---------------------------------- (2010) ‘Spatial use of the Twelfth Dynasty harbour of

Mersa/Wadi Gawasis for the seafaring expeditions to Punt’ Journal of Ancient Egyptian
Interconnections 2: 1-13.

---------------------------------- (2008) ‘Harbour of pharaohs to the land of Punt (Marsa/Wadi

Gawasis report 2007-08)’ Newsletter Archaeologia (EISA) 0: 22-38.

Fattovich, R., K.A. Bard and C. Ward, (2011) Mersa/Wadi Gawasis 2010-2011: A
preliminary report, Newsletter di Archeologia CISA 2: 73-101.

Fattovich, R., K. Sadr and S.Vitagliano (1989) ‘Society and territory in the Gash delta
(Kassala, eastern Sudan), 3000 BC-AD 300/400 Origini 14: 329-57.

Glennister, C.L. (2008) Profiling Punt: using trade relations to locate “God’s land” M.Phil
thesis in Ancient Cultures. University of Stellenbosch: South Africa.

Herzog, R. (1968) Punt.Abhandlungen des Deutsches Archäologischen Instituts Kairo,

Ägyptische Reihe 6. Glückstadt: Verlag J. J.

Hölbl, G. (2001) A history of the Ptolemaic Empire. Oxon: Routledge.

Kitchen, K.A. (1999) “Further thoughts on Punt and its neighbours” in Studies on Ancient
Egypt in Honour of H.S. Smith A. Leahy and J. Tait (eds.) London: Occasional
Publications 173-179.

---------------- (1993) “The land of Punt” in The Archaeology of African: Food, Metals and
Towns T. Shaw, P. Sinclair, B. Andah and A. Okpoko (eds.) London: Routledge.

---------------- (1971) “Punt and how to get there” Orientalia 40: 184-207.

Meeks, D. (2003) ‘Locating Punt’ in D. O’Connor and S. Quirke (eds.) Mysterious Lands 53-
80. London: UCL Press.

Naville, E. (1908) The temple of Deir el-Bahari, introductory memoir and six volumes III.
London: The Offices of the Egypt Exploration Fund.

Newberry, P. (1938) ‘Three Old Kingdom travellers to Byblos and Pwenet’ Journal of
Egyptian Archaeology 24: 182-84.

O’Connor, D. (1983) ‘New Kingdom and Third Intermediate Period 1552-664 BC’ in B.G.
Trigger (ed.) Ancient Egypt: A Social History 183-278. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.

Page 35 of 36
655298 CLD300
Where is the land of Punt?

Phillips, J. (1997) ‘Punt and Askum: Egypt and the Horn of Africa’ The Journal of African
History 38: 3: 423-457.

Pirelli, R. (1993) ‘Punt in Egyptian myth and trade’ in G.M. Zaccone and T.R. di Netro (eds.)
Sesto Congresso Internazionale di Egittologia Atti II383-90. Turin: Società Italiana.

Poo, M. (2005) Enemies of Civilisation: attitudes towards foreigners in ancient

Mesopotamia, Egypt, and China. Albany: State University of New York Press.

Saleh, A.A. (1972) ‘The Gnbtyw of Thutmosis III’s annals and the South Arabian
Geb(b)anitae of the Classical writers’ Bulletin de l'Institut Francais d'Archeaologie
Orientale72: 245-62.

--------------- (1973) ‘An open question on intermediaries in the incense trade during
pharaonic times’ Orientalia 42: 370-82.

Sayed, A.M.H. (1977) ‘Discovery of the site of the Twelfth Dynasty port at Wadi Gawasis on
the Red Sea shore’ Revue d’Egyptologie 29: 140-78.

Sethe, K. (1957) Urkunden der 18, Dynastie IV. Leipzig: J.C. Hinrichs.

----------- (1933) Urkunden des Alten Reichs I. Leipzig: J.C. Hinrichs.

Shaw, I (2000) ‘Egypt and the outside world’ in I. Shaw (ed.) Oxford history of Ancient
Egypt 314-29. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Wainwright, G.A. (1947) ‘Early foreign trade in East Africa’ Man 47: 143-48.

Wicker, F.D.P. (1998) ‘The road to Punt’ The Geographical Journal 164: 2: 155-67.

Websites

Estate beads (2014) Natural shells. Retrieved from: <estatebeads.com/natural/shells2>.

Exploring Africa (2014) Module six: African Geography. Retrieved from:

<exploringafrica.matrix.msu.edu>.

1 World Tours (2014) Egypt Enthusiasts Itinerary. Retrieved from:

<www.1worldtours.com>.

Page 36 of 36