of the phonology of place names and personal names from the relevant regions preserved in ancient texts, he argues that the terms from "Kush" and "Irem" (ancient names for Kerma and the region south of it respectively) in Egyptian texts display traits typical of Eastern Sudanic languages, while those from further north (in Lower Nubia) and east are more typical of the Afro-Asiatic family, noting: "The Irem-list also provides a similar inventory to Kush, placing this firmly in an Eastern Sudanic zone. These Irem/Kush-lists are distinctive from the Wawat-, Medjay-, Punt-, and Wetenet-lists, which provide sounds typical to Afroasiatic languages." Cooper (2017, 2020) suggests that an Eastern Sudanic language (perhaps early Meroitic) was spoken at Kerma by at least 1800 BC (the time from which toponymic evidence is available), whose arrival, and that of a new ethno-linguistic group, around that time may perhaps be indicated by a change in placenames for Upper Nubia used in Egyptian execration texts. However, Cooper also proposes that a similar Eastern Sudanic language may have been already spoken in Upper Nubia, both at Kerma and the Saï polity to its north, earlier (by Kerma Moyen, which began around 2050 BC), while north of Saï, in Lower Nubia, Cushitic languages were spoken and much later replaced by Meroitic. It is posited that early Meroitic spread, displacing Eastern Sudanic and Cushitic languages along the Nile." Archaeology 20th century archaeology When Kerma was first excavated in the 1920s, George Andrew Reisner believed that it originally served as the base for or was a fort of an Egyptian governor, and that these Egyptian rulers evolved into the independent monarchs of Kerma. Reisner's interpretation was predicated on the presence of inscribed Egyptian statues in the large burials, which he thought belonged to those named individuals. Thus, scholars accepted the view that Kerma was a trading outpost of the Egyptians, being too small and far away from the known borders of ancient Egypt to be more directly linked to it. It was only starting in mid-20th century that excavations began to reveal that Kerma city was much larger and more complex than previously assumed. It was also realized that the material culture and burial practices here are overwhelmingly of local Kerman origin rather than Egyptian. Swiss archaeologist Charles Bonnet was among the first scholars to challenge Reisner's views and, according to him, it took 20 years for Egyptologists to accept his