The post-excavation processing of the Kerma cemetery GiE 003 is in full swing (see also an earlier blog post). There are some interesting observations regarding the diachronic development of the site and also its spatial organisation. A case study on the latter is presented below.
Trench 3 excavated in GiE 003 yielded Classic Kerma burial pits (Budka et al. 2023, Budka 2024). The trench is situated in the northwestern extent of our excavations at the site. It shows a relatively large area on its eastern side in which no burial pits were found. This apparent ‘gap’ contrasts with the surrounding areas, which show dense burial activity and graves laid out very regularly in the same orientation. Such a deliberate avoidance of this area raises some questions about ceremonial practices associated with the cemetery’s use.
Plan of Trench 3 in GiE 003 with Kerma burial pits and an area void of graves around an irregular pit.
In the middle of the area in question, a shallow depression with an irregular outline was found. First thought to be an unfinished burial pit, it might in fact be a marog-digging pit. Its dimensions are 1.97 meters in length, 1.67 meters in width, and 0.23 meters in depth.
The pit was dug into the alluvial soil and found filled with compacted sand, containing numerous brownish-grey clay clumps, medium to large in size,. Some human remains were found in the northeastern part of the pit − most likely coming from nearby burial pits. Most of the burials in Trench 3 appear to have been looted and dispersed human bones were found across the surface of the trench.
Of course, it is also possible that the pit itself was cut by the ancient looters (maybe in Medieval times) when they were looking for burial pits at the site.
Nevertheless, the gap between the otherwise evenly aligned east-west graves is unlikely to be coincidental. One possible explanation for the gap in burial pits in Trench 3 is that we have cut into an area used for funerary practices and intentionally kept clear of graves. Although, as we have not excavated the entire cemetery, this is still difficult to fully judge.
Interestingly, similar spatial patterns can be observed at Ukma, another provincial Kerma cemetery, where areas void of graves are in particular present in the southern part between Classic Kerma burial pits which are comparable to those at GiE 003 (see Vila 1987, general plan of the site). These recurring patterns suggest that such gaps were common in Kerma cemeteries.
Further analysis, including additional excavations of GiE 003 and comparison with other Kerma cemeteries, might allow us to better understand the reasons for these gaps. A better comprehension of the spatial dynamics of Trench 3 within the context of GiE 003 could provide new insights into patterns of funerary practices during Kerma times.
References:
Budka et al. 2023 = Budka, J., Rose, K., Ward, C., Cultural diversity in the Bronze Age in the Attab to Ferka region: new results based on excavations in 2023, MittSAG 34 (2023), 19–35.
Budka 2024 = Budka, J., Introduction. Regionality of resource management in Bronze Age Sudan: an overview and case studies, in: J. Budka and R. Lemos (eds), Landscapeand resource management in Bronze Age Nubia: Archaeological perspectives on the exploration of natural resources and the circulation of 751 commodities in the Middle Nile; Wiesbaden 2024, 19–33.
Vile 1987 = Vila, A. (avec les contributions de Guillemette Andreu et de Wilhem van Zeist), Le cimetière kermaïque d’Ukma Ouest, Paris 1987.
I am delighted to announce the next DiverseNile Seminar Series. Nahed Al-Hakim will speak about “Animal industries within Kerma civilization”.
Nahed has been an archaeologist with the Ministry of Tourism and Antiquities since 2004 and currently serves as the Director of Scientific Research at the Karnak temples.
In 2022, she earned a master’s degree in ancient history and civilization, focusing on „Raw Materials and Industries in the Kushite Civilization.“ Currently, she is pursuing her doctorate at the Faculty of African Graduate Studies, Cairo University, with a dissertation on the Osirian religion during the Napatan period, examining the cemeteries of Kurru and Nuri in Sudan, as well as Abydos and Thebes in Egypt. A very exciting topic and highly relevant for both Egyptology and Sudan Archaeology!
The upcoming DiverseNile Seminar lecture will focus on results from Nahed’s MA thesis and will highlight the importance of animals in Kerma culture. I am very much looking forward to this and hope you can join us – it’s also the last lecture for 2024, so not to be missed!
These days, it is anything but easy to think of our friends and colleagues in Sudan. After all, our working area in northern Sudan has seen the worst rainfall in decades and there is still no end to the war in sight. Nevertheless – inspired by the EAA last week in Rome and fully motivated by meetings there with colleagues who also work in Sudan – I was able to achieve great results regarding our survey in Attab West in the last few days. It was a kind of by-product of my preparation for the International Conference for Meroitic Studies next week in Münster.
Among other things, I will be talking about dry-stone walls in Münster – and that’s why I took another look at all our drone images and, above all, the georeferenced orthophotos and digital elevation models, especially from Attab West and Ginis West.
The level of detail in these photos and models is simply marvellous! And so I was finally able to correctly localise a site in Attab West that I had never actually found on site in Sudan! But that will be a topic for another time.
Today we want to focus on a detail about the New Kingdom settlement site 2-T-62. Vila describes it as a habitation site whose structures are spread over a series of small mounds that extend from east to west over 200 metres and a width of 50 metres, 175 metres from the Nile. The site also contains several dry-stone walls, although their dating is not certain.
For a long time, we weren’t sure whether the site we excavated in 2022 and 2023, AtW 001, really belonged to the larger site 2-T-62 or not – but the answer is now a resounding yes. The special discovery this week, however, is that from my desk here in Munich, I have finally found the mudbrick building 2-T-62/1 that Vila excavated in the 1970s!
It was simply not recognisable on site – there were no more pottery sherds, other artefacts or mudbricks lying around. However, the dimensions can be easily checked on the orthophoto – they fit perfectly. Vila described 2-T-62/1 as a rectangular structure measuring 9 m x 7 m, orientated from east to west, of which only one layer of the foundation walls survives (Vila 1977, 88-89). Inside, a courtyard with a fireplace was identified in the north-west corner, bordered by rooms to the east and south. The room in the south-east corner contained the remains of a schist floor/pavement – something we know very well from the urban sites of Sai Island and Amara West. Some of the schist slabs can still be recognised on the orthophoto.
The digital elevation model also clearly shows the excavated building and the surrounding landscape. AtW 001 is located on a small mound to the west, the building 2-T-62/1 on another mound further to the east. A possible palaeochannel runs north of the two mounds from east to west (see Budka et al. 2023).
This successful remote sensing and the new results of 2-T-62 are comforting in several ways – on the one hand they clarify open questions and on the other hand they offer a very good opportunity to analyse our data even when we cannot be on site in Sudan.
References
Budka et al. 2023 = Budka, J., Rose, K. and C. Ward. Cultural diversity in the Bronze Age in the Attab to Ferka region: new results based on excavations in 2023. MittSAG – Der Antike Sudan 34, 2023: 19−35.
Vila 1977 = Vila, A. La prospection archéologique de la Vallée du Nil, au Sud de la Cataracte de Dal (Nubie Soudanaise). Fascicule 6: District de Attab (Est et Ouest). Paris 1977.
I am delighted that today there will be a joint presentation by my dear friend and colleague Huda Magzoub and me at the SASA conference. Under the title “The Munich University Attab to Ferka Survey Project 2018-2023: Archaeology, gold, and landscape” we will summarize some aspects of our work in Sudan.
Since Huda is currently having very restricted internet, being displaced with her family in Sudan because of the current war, she sent me a video which I incorporated in the presentation. As much as it hurts not to be able to see her online or in person, it’s a wonderful feeling to present some outcome of our common work and to focus for a change on archaeology & scientific research despite of all the tragedies connected with the war in Sudan.
In our paper today, we will give an overview of the activities and results of the MUAFS project from its start in 2018 until 2023, with a special focus on new findings regarding ancient gold working in the region. In addition, modern gold working and the challenging of preserving cultural heritage in a remote area in times of war will be addressed. Thus, the presentation will follow a comparative approach to analyze gold working throughout the ages. This is especially relevant for Sudan as gold mining has been already in ancient times not just an economic activity but a testament to technological and cultural advancements. Gold has served as a catalyst for cultural evolution, economic prosperity, and sometimes conflict. We will address these aspects and thus highlight some features of the multifaceted story of gold in Sudan, tracing its influence from the dawn of civilization to the contemporary era. Finally, modern concepts of ancient gold working can be critically revisited thanks to the new evidence in the MUAFS concession, making the paper highly relevant for the general theme of the conference.
I am very grateful to the conference organizers for accepting our paper and for giving Huda as a displaced Sudanese archaeologists a forum to share her research in times of war.
While our PostDoc Hassan Aglan is busy with finalising the documentation from our excavation in 2023 in Kerma cemetery GiE 003, I went back to some tombs we excavated there already in 2022. Today, I would like to present a very interesting burial which is characteristic for the Middle Kerma Period (see Budka 2022).
Feature 26 in Trench 2 is a representative circular pit of the Middle Kerma period with typical dimensions (2.4m in diameter). Like the other structures in GiE 003, this grave was also looted. Nevertheless, some interesting finds were found: human and animal bones; pottery; a wooden fragment; a snail which is pierced and functioned as a pendant; a pebble pendant; 86 small sandstone disc beads; 10 small faience disc beads (blue); 1 large flat disc bead made of shell/bone; 1 small green faience disc bead and one copper dagger.
Feature 26 is the only burial in Trench 2 which yielded some personal adornments (a beautiful snail pendant and a pebble pendant, both of Nubian tradition) as well as grave goods like a dagger and two animal offerings in situ. That various materials were used for beads in diverse sizes in this tomb is also remarkable.
The dagger is especially significant – unfortunately, MUAFS 027 is a broken piece (12.2 cm in lenght), decorated with four lines stemming from the tip until the bottom, forming a triangular pattern.
Copper daggers are well attested from funerary contexts in Kerma city and are probably associated with ceremonial use. Following Andrea Manzo (2016), this dagger can be interpreted as an indicator of elite status and Kerma identity (see also Walsh 2022).
However, one of the ceramic vessels from Feature 26, 363-3/2022, a small black topped bowl with irregular incised decoration is slightly unusual but has parallels in both the Kerma tradition and the Pan-Grave horizon (de Souza 2019, 214, fig. 19a).
While most of the ceramics found in Feature 26 are typical for Middle Kerma burials, this vessel maybe also links to the Pan-Grave horizon and illustrates the cultural diversity attested in GiE 003.
This might illustrate cultural encounters between various Nubian groups in the region. Considering the discovery of Feature 50 in Trench 5 in 2023, this is now especially likely.
Similar to Feature 50, two almost complete animal skeletons were found in Feature 26. They were carefully excavated by our inspector Huda Magzoub and appear to be goat/sheep, but this needs to be confirmed by zooarchaeological analysis. At the Kerma cemeteries of Ukma and Akasha, also gazelle offerings were frequently found in Middle Kerma circular pit types (see Vila 1987, 32-33 and e.g. Tomb 2, 39, fig. 41; Maystre 1980, 190).
Overall, Feature 26 offers a wealth of stimulating questions and shows how much potential there is in the cemetery GiE 003 and that our work is far from finished.
References
Budka 2022 = J. Budka, Investigating Nubian funerary practices of marginal communities: new evidence from a Kerma cemetery at Ginis, Egitto e Vicino Oriente 45 (2022), 37‒62.
Manzo 2016 = A. Manzo, “Weapons, ideology and identity at Kerma (Upper Nubia, 2500-1500 BC)”, Annali Sezione Orientale 76 (1-2) (2016), 3-29.
Maystre 1980 = C. Maystre, Akasha I, Genève 1980.
de Souza 2019 = A. de Souza, New horizons: the Pan-Grave ceramic tradition in context, Middle Kingdom Studies 9, London 2019.
Vila 1987 = A. Vila, Le cimetière Kermaique d’Ukma Ouest, Paris 1987.
The start of this year’s DiverseNile Seminar on May 7th is approaching! I am very much looking forward to the lecture by Mohamed Bashir (currently Visiting Research Scholar, Institute for the Study of the Ancient World, NYU) with the title “Lost landscapes, hidden histories: Palaeoecological reconstructions and archaeological investigations of the ancient city of Kedurma and its hinterland, Northern Sudan”.
„This study addresses the complicated/unexplored relationship between the ancient city of Kedurma in the Third Cataract region of northern Sudan and the surrounding hinterland. It focuses on the reconstruction of the palaeoecological conditions and the exploration of the archaeological remains, looking for the dynamic process that shaped the landscape over time in interaction with environmental factors and human activities. By integrating palaeoecological data and archaeological finds, this study seeks to uncover the historical development of the city and its hinterland.
Through interdisciplinary approaches, including survey, excavation, and analysis of archaeological artefacts, we can identify patterns of land use, settlement dynamics and cultural interactions. Through analysis, we seek to reconstruct past environments and human interventions in this urban periphery. This research contributes to a deeper understanding of the surrounding landscapes of the Third Cataract region and their impact on the development of Kedurma, as well as their significance in a broader historical narrative.
Ultimately, this study sheds light on the interconnectedness of human societies, urbanization and environmental change and offers valuable perspectives for urban planning, heritage conservation and sustainable development.“
This presentation ties in perfectly with the goals of the DiverseNile project and our investigations of the hinterland of the ancient cities of Amara West and Sai Island applying the landscape biography approach. This case study will also showcase the importance to investigate urbanization processes in the Middle Nile – also in respect to sustainable development goals as Mohamed pointed out. All in all, there are plenty of reasons why you should attend this upcoming seminar!
In my own presentation, „The International Age in pharaonic Egypt: aspects of trade, exchange and marking systems“, I focused on the distribution of marked Oases amphorae as well as on the question of pot mark traditions in Nubia.
For me, it is striking that there are no pre-firing marking practices on Nubian ceramics – but a new trend for post-fired marks attested in the Middle Bronze Age on Egyptian imported Marl clay vessels (in C-Group and Kerma contexts). This is for example well illustrated by the upper part of a storage vessel we found last year in the Kerma cemetery GiE 003 at Ginis East: a large post-fired mark was scratched into the Marl clay surface – presumably in Nubia and for sure intended to transmit a code (as well as decorative aspects?).
Upper part of an Egyptian Marl clay vessel from GiE 003 with a post-fired pot mark.
There is still much research to be conducted on these post-firing pot marks on Egyptian jars found in Nubian contexts – aspects of agency (by whom, where and how was the scratching done) as well as sensory facets (the Egyptian jars have a totally different hardness, colour, and texture than Nubian Nile clay vessels) need to be considered.
Another important aspect of my presentation was the comparison between the pot mark tradition on New Kingdom Sai, Elephantine and in the rural hinterland of Sai, in the MUAFS concession. Here, I got much inspiration from a splendid chapter in an edited volume by Juan Carlos Moreno García with the title “Markets, transactions, and ancient Egypt: new venues for research in a comparative perspective” (Moreno García 2021).
I completely agree with Moreno García (2021) that New Kingdom temple towns in Nubia like Sai were “multifunction centres used, among other purposes, to facilitate contacts between different peoples arrived there to trade, and that some kind of divine sanction at a sacred environment was considered indispensable to formalize the transactions that occurred there.” The last aspect is especially interesting, placing the temples within the towns into a new context – the conversion of the religious landscape of New Kingdom Nubia has already received much attention, but not yet within the framework of trade and transactions. The general role of the temple towns as multifunctional and as trade hubs is well established and was already discussed by several scholars (see Budka 2020, 401, 407 with references as well as passim).
Within New Kingdom Nubia, it is especially relevant to look beyond the colonial towns with their temples, harbours and large-scale storage facilities. This is where the DiverseNile Project steps in and adds much food for thought based on the evidence in the MUAFS concession which is the hinterland of Sai in the 18th Dynasty and of Amara West in the Ramesside era.
Inspired by reading Moreno García’s 2021 chapter, I think it is possible to view the intriguing site AtW 001 from a new perspective. Since 2022, I was convinced that this rural site has something to do with the exchange of goods, especially the distribution of ceramics in 18th Dynasty Nubia (see Budka 2022, as “control posts for trade, gold transport and possibly the communication between hinterland communities and the newly established Egyptian centre on Sai Island”).
Based on the results from the 2023, we could go a bit further and suggest that the “site might well have been linked to seasonal traffic/routes into the desert, possibly in connection with the provision of transport animals and livestock for gold working expeditions” (Budka et al. 2023, 29). In this context, we observed that “The lack of significant architectural remains suggests that AtW 001 was linked to a nearby settlement or temporary, possibly seasonal structures” (Budka et al. 2023, 30). Following ideas by Moreno García, I would now like to add that the lack of substantial architectural remains at AtW 001 could also be explained in a way that the open spaces of the sites were intended to serve travellers and to supervise trade. This would also allow to justify the large number of simple storage pits on the site. With its mix of material culture, including large amounts of Nubian ceramics as well as in-between vessels (see https://www.sudansurvey.gwi.uni-muenchen.de/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/IMG_9979-2048×1536.jpg), the site at Attab West could indeed have functioned as a seasonal market and a meeting place for various groups, including mobile communities.
All in all, New Kingdom Nubia seems to be an excellent case study for state-built meeting points and trade centres like Sai and other temple towns, but also for seasonal and occasional markets as illustrated by AtW 001 – the latter stressing the importance of semi-nomadic and nomadic groups when we talk about the exchange of commodities. These various types of markets and most importantly the diverse communities being involved are likely to be the keys for understanding the multiple use of marking systems we find in New Kingdom Egypt and Nubia.
References Budka 2020 = J. Budka, AcrossBorders 2. Living in New Kingdom Sai. Archaeology of Egypt, Sudan and the Levant 1. Vienna: Austrian Academy of Sciences Press, 2020.
Budka 2022 = J. Budka, Early New Kingdom settlement activities in the periphery of Sai Island: towards a contextualisation of fresh evidence from Attab West, MittSAG – Der Antike Sudan 33, 2022, 45‒61.
Budka et al. 2023 = J. Budka, K. Rose & C. Ward, Cultural diversity in the Bronze Age in the Attab to Ferka region: new results based on excavations in 2023, MittSAG – Der Antike Sudan 34, 2023, 19−35.
Moreno García 2021 = J.C. Moreno García, Markets, transactions, and ancient Egypt: new venues for research in a comparative perspective. In Moreno García, Juan Carlos (ed.), Markets and exchanges in pre-modern and traditional societies, 189−229. Oxford; Philadelphia: Oxbow Books, 2021.
With all the snow here in Munich, it is quite a good timing to see the new volume of the Project Repository Journal going live. It includes a new dissemination article about our season in Sudan earlier this year.
Check it out if you want to know more about our works at sites like the Kerma cemetery GiE 003, the domestic site AtW 002 along the major paleochannel in Attab West dating to the early New Kingdom and the larger New Kingdom settlement site AtW 001 which was located on a former island, close to the present Nile on the west bank of Attab.
As much as it is a joy to see such an outreach of our project, we are widely concerned about the risks the people and the cultural heritage of Sudan are currently facing – may this terrible war end soon. Hoping that peace will come as soon as possible, our thoughts are with all of our friends and colleagues.
As a “landscape” archaeologist, I often have to ask myself, “What do I actually mean when I talk about landscapes?” This is far from a simple exercise, as landscapes seem to defy singular definition. Landscapes are also inherently multidimensional and interact with multi-layered social phenomena and processes such as economy, subsistence, religion, ritual, and political organization. I define landscape as the integration of natural surroundings with cultural phenomena which constitute and are constituted by social relationships. Landscapes are continuously reinvigorated and transformed by the experiences and identities of humans operating within them, and the interactions between humans, animals, ecosystems, climate, and topography. As I delve further into analysis of the landscapes of the Munich University Attab to Ferka Survey region, I try to revisit these central questions; what are landscapes and how can we best approach them from an archaeological and theoretical toolkit?
Drone photo taken in February 2023 by K. Rose showing the landscape near the Nile, from Attab West.
Landscape archaeology tackles the nuances of culture, environment, memory, meaning, and place-making. Landscape perspectives have evolved to recognize the permeability and relativity of landscapes, in that societies imbue their own sense of place and time on spaces (Anschuetz et al. 2001). This is a realization that extends beyond archaeology, as works from the realms of architecture, design, environmental studies, geography, history, psychology, and others reiterate the same principles. As the architect Amos Rapoport writes, “People seem to shape and interact with built environments/material culture primarily through meaning and this seems to hold over time, cross-culturally, and in all kinds of environments, contexts, and situations” (1990: 42). Anschuetz et al. (2001) argue for the adoption of a unified landscape perspective, which accounts for the theoretical and methodological development of the field and builds an epistemology of landscapes. The authors claim, “a landscape approach complements traditional archaeological space and time systematics through its processual and scientific means of analysis while at the same time integrating human history and agency into their constructions” (187). This perspective unites the main concerns and objectives of the two most dominant theoretical schools within the discipline of archaeology, Processualism (New Archaeology) and Post-processualism.
As someone who also is particularly interested in cemeteries, I often think about the intersections between landscapes and death. Neither death, nor landscapes were static components of ancient life. Cemeteries can be reconceptualized within archaeology as “mortuary landscapes.” Mortuary landscapes are not isolated phenomena; monuments of death scattered throughout the landscape. They, in concert with the natural landscape, are physically and ideologically transformative embodiments of long term social and cultural processes. Many works have explored this reconceptualization of cemeteries as inextricable from their natural and cultural surroundings (for examples pertaining to North Africa, see Stone and Stirling 2007 and Richards 1999, 2005). My working definition of mortuary landscapes is that they are built landscapes of burial, consisting of tombs, temples, and other constructions dedicated to death, strategically integrated with natural surroundings. These landscapes are complex, hubs of activity that develop and change over time due to natural and cultural processes. We must consider mortuary landscapes as active and dynamic spaces for the maintenance of identities of the dead and living.
Many past studies since the mid-20th century have situated a discussion of landscape archaeology within the context of the culture, history, geography, and environment of ancient Nubia and modern-day Sudan (Ahmed 1984; Caneva 1988; Edwards 1989; Garcea and Sebastiani 1998; Grzymski 2004; Hinkel 1994; Trigger 1965, 1982; Welsby 1998; Williams 1985). With respect to cemeteries, landscapes have also been integrated into studies from Neolithic to post-Medieval Nubia (Bashir 2021; Costanzo et al 2021; Emberling 2012; Weschenfelder 2015). There is a need for more studies that evaluate diachronic relationships between mortuary practices and landscapes using systematic, spatial methodologies. I intend to delve further into the application of systematic and spatial methodologies to Nubian contexts in a future blog post.
A framework that I think is helpful in achieving this mortuary landscape approach is “inscribing” the landscape. Inscription as a concept and a process has been discussed within the field of archaeology broadly. For example, in David and Wilson’s edited volume, Inscribed Landscapes: Marking and Making Place, landscape inscription is presented as a two-fold process: 1) the physical marking of the natural environment through monument construction such as rock art, and 2) and the social engagement of people with their environment that embodies landscapes with memories and “anchors people in place” (2002: 6). In studies of Nubia, the process of inscribing is discussed with reference to identity formation (Buzon et al 2016: 285) as well as landscape formation (Ambridge 2007). While there are many ways to describe this concept, I want to emphasize landscape inscription as a continuous process of imprinting and reproducing social meaning and relationships onto the physical environment through interactions and alterations that create a material signature. This includes the construction of architecture, and the use and manipulation of natural resources and features in creating patterns. Inscribing the landscape is akin to creating a dialogue between material culture and natural surroundings to translate the immaterial aspects of social relationships and phenomena. The landscape is the canvas on which the images of social meaning are drawn. This does not imply that social meaning can only be viewed or understood in one way. Interpretations will differ according to the perspectives, objectives, and biases of the inscribers and the viewers. Landscape inscription does not have an end point, so long as humans are interacting with their surroundings.
As archaeology for decades has attempted to reconcile structure and agency within the past, I conceive of landscapes as both agents and products of actions, processes, and changes. Furthermore, considering the process of death and veneration of the dead adds an interesting dimension to the landscape equation. In many cultures, such as the ones under investigation by the DiverseNile Project, death is obviously not viewed as an end result or product of a life. It is the continuation, an open door to another stage of being, an unfinished sentence. Landscapes, to me, exist in a similar plane, always in a process of becoming, never serving as a conclusion.
Ultimately, we hope that through a social biography approach to landscape (Budka 2020: 57; Kolen and Renes 2015) that delves into the interconnectedness of people, environment, material culture, and all organisms we can elucidate further patterns in landscape use and management over time; and identify more trajectories of continuity and change the inscribed landscapes of the Attab to Ferka region.
References:
Ahmed, K. A. (1984) Meroitic Settlement in the Central Sudan: An analysis of Sites in the Nile Valley and the Western Butana. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports, International Series 197.
Ambridge, L. (2007) ‘Inscribing the Napatan Landscape: Architecture and Royal Identity’ in N. Yoffee (ed.), Negotiating the Past in the Past: Identity, Memory, and Landscape in Archaeological Research. Tucson: The University of Arizona Press, pp. 128-154.
Anschuetz, K.F., Wilshusen, R.H. and Scheick, C.L. (2001) ‘An Archaeology of Landscapes: Perspectives and Directions,’ Journal of Archaeological Research, 9(2), pp.157-211.
Bashir, M.A.S. (2021) ‘Medieval and Post-Medieval Archaeology in the Sudan: A Study of Two Cemeteries at Mura, Northern State,’ The Algerian Journal of Humanities, 3(1), pp. 178-201.
Budka, J. (2020) ‘Kerma Presence at Ginis East: The 2020 Season of the Munich University Attab to Ferka Survey Project,’ Sudan & Nubia, 24, pp.57-71.
Caneva, I. (1988) El Geili: The History of a Middle Nile Environment, 7000 B.C.–A.D. 1500. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports, International Series 424.
Costanzo, S., Brandolini, F., Idriss Ahmed, H., Zerboni, A. and Manzo, A. (2021) ‘Creating the Funerary Landscape of Eastern Sudan,’ PLoS ONE, 16(7), pp. e0253511–e0253511.
David, B. and M. Wilson (eds.) (2002) Inscribed Landscapes: Marking and Making Place. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press.
Edwards, D. (1989) Archaeology and Settlement in Upper Nubia in the 1st Millennium A.D. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports, International Series 537.
Emberling, G. (2012) ‘Archaeological Salvage in the Fourth Cataract, Northern Sudan (1991 2008)’ in M. Fisher, P. Lacovara, S. D’Auria, and S. Ikram (eds.), Ancient Nubia: African Kingdoms on the Nile. Cairo: American University in Cairo Press: pp. 71-77.
Garcea, E. and R. Sebastiani (1998) ‘Advantages and Limitations of Surveys: The Case of the Napatan Region,’ Archéologie du Nil Moyen, 8, pp. 55-83.
Grzymski, K., (2004) ‘Landscape Archaeology of Nubia and Central Sudan.’ African Archaeological Review, 21(1), pp.7-30.
Hinkel, M. (1994) ‘The Water Reservoirs in Ancient Sudan’ in C. Bonnet (ed.), Etudes nubiennes. Conférence de Genève. Actes du VIIe Congrès International d’études nubiennes. Volume II. Genève: Mission Archéologique de l’Université de Genève au Soudan, pp. 171-175.
Kolen, J. and J. Renes (2015) ‘Landscape Biographies: Key Issues’, in J. Kolen, J. Renes and R. Hermans (eds.), Landscape Biographies: Geographical, Historical and Archaeological Perspectives on the Production and Transmission of Landscapes. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, pp. 21-47.
Rapoport, A. (1990) History and Precedent in American Design. New York: Plenum Press.
Richards, J. (1999) ‘Conceptual landscapes in the Egyptian Nile valley’ in Ashmore, W. and B. Knapp (eds.), Archaeologies of Landscape: Contemporary Perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 83-100.
Richards, J. (2005) Society and Death in Ancient Egypt: Mortuary Landscapes of the Middle Kingdom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Trigger, B. G. (1965) History and Settlement in Lower Nubia. New Haven: Yale University, Department of Anthropology (Yale University Publications in Anthropology 69).
Trigger, B. G. (1982) ‘Reisner to Adams: Paradigms of Nubian cultural history’ in J.M. Plumley (ed.), Nubian Studies. Warminster, pp. 223–226.
Welsby, D. (1998) ‘Roman Military Installations Along the Nile South of the First Cataract,’ Archeologie du Nil Moyen, 8, pp. 157–182.
Weschenfelder, J. (2015) ‘The Terminal Neolithic Cemetery in the Funerary Landscape of MOG034, Mograt Island, Sudan,’ Der Antike Sudan. Mitteilungen der Sudanarchäologischen Gesellschaft zu Berlin, 26, pp.145-152.
Williams, B. (1985) ‘A Chronology of Meroitic Occupation Below the Fourth Cataract,’ Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt, 22, pp. 149–195.
For an Africanist archaeologist working in North Africa, the fall and winter seasons are mostly dedicated to excavation, while spring marks some how the beginning of the “conference season”.
The EMAC is a important biennial conference gathering scholars and researchers with a broad spectrum background on ceramic technological and provenance studies from both the humanistic and hard science disciplinary areas. New approaches and up-to-date laboratory techniques to the study of ancient ceramics are typically presented in terms of analytical procedures, methodological papers, and case studies from all around the world.
The 1st EMAC edition took place in Rome, in 1991, while the first EMAC I personally attended was in Vienna, in 2011. This year, after two years of postponement because of the Covid Pandemic, the 16th edition of the EMAC has been back as an in-person conference in Italy, held by the University of Pisa, in the splendid setting of its Medieval and Renaissance town which is also one of the oldest and most prestigious universities in Europe. Further, this year the EMAC conference was preceded by a 1st edition of the EMAC School dedicated to PhD students and young researchers as an opportunity for advanced training in non-destructive and non-invasive methods for the study of archaeological ceramics.
The conference (June 14-16) consists of six scientific sessions covering the diverse topics of Digital archaeology and potteries studies (S1), Experimental archaeology, technological traces, use wear and organic residues (S2 + S4), Raw materials ecologies and provenance (S3), Technology and production (S5), and Theory and Methods (S6).
Title page of our talk at the 16th EMAC in Pisa.
Our paper titled Chemical Characterization of Bronze Age Nile clayey ceramics from northern Sudan – is it really all the same?, co-authored by our PI, Julia Budka, Johannes H. Sterba, our colleague from the AI in Vienna, and by myself was included in Session 3: Raw materials ecologies an provenance. All in all, it summarized our study on over 600 ceramic samples conducted in the last 10 years within the framework of Julia’s ERC projects AcrossBorders and DiverseNile, dealing with the challenging but otherwise successful application of bulk geochemical analysis (Neutron Activation Analysis or NAA) to establish provenance for these characteristic vessels manufactured in Nile clay.
Specifically, our case study spans several millennia from prehistory to the Late Bronze Age (New Kingdom period) and comprises ceramic material collected over a long stretch of the Nile, including our last samples from the new sites excavated in the MUAFS concession area, the AcrossBorders ceramic samples from the temple town of Sai Island, and further reference material among which the beautiful potsherds from the site of Dukki Gel, Kerma. Within this large data set, we aimed to investigate minute changes in the chemical composition of Nile clayey ceramics that might help to differentiate their provenance and production technology. In detail, we looked for bulk compositional differences (or otherwise similarities) between different traditions (i.e., wheel-made Egyptian style and hand-made Nubian style pottery), chronological periods, and sites/locations. We focused our interpretation on the preparation of the clay, that is the particular recipe or formula adopted by the ancient potters to produce their vessels. We recognized in fact that considering just the clay raw material is possibly not sufficiently representative of the whole range of cultural and social drives as well as of performative actions (e.g., depuration of the clay, tempering and so on) carried out at the anthropic level to make a given paste particularly suitable for the production of a certain type of traditional vessel.
Ceramic sherds submitted to INAA within our large scope provenance study. Samples from the DiverseNile field season 2023 and from Amara West are here included although not yet analysed.
I am pleased to remark here that our talk was appreciated not only as a specific case study but more in general for the questions and challenges it proposed at the interpretative level, as a methodological paper.
Further, I really valued the holistic vision of the conference and the successful attempt of the organizing board to well intertwine over the different sessions the many different subjects and issues on ceramic production and use, such as to ideally follow all the successive stages of the manufacturing sequence, from raw material procurement to preparation, production, use and finally discard of the vessel. Further, this 16th EMAC gave more space to experimental archaeology, ethnographic study, and finally first tried to incorporate ORA studies in the wide range of inorganic analyses on ancient ceramics.
Of particular interest for us was certainly the talk given by Maritan et al. on the local and imported ceramic material from the Meroitic site of Sedeinga, nearby Sai Island, but I also much appreciated the methodological communication by Hein, Buxeda, Garrigós and Kilikoglou on the “Representativeness of a ceramic assemblage – significance and confidence in relation to sample size”, and the many good papers on the issue of manufacturing and shaping techniques, among which that by Gait et al. which nicely introduced the application of non destructive small-angle neutron scattering analysis (SANS) to identify forming techniques for both wheel made and handmade pots.
To conclude, I deeply admired the eco-friendly and low environmental impact slant of this 16th EMAC edition with its delicious and fully vegetarian Italian buffet, organic wine tasting, non-printed program and abstract book, and mostly the EMAC 2023 committee decision to donate the funds to charitable initiatives for the planet and the communities that inhabit it.
The splendid sun set view in Pisa from the restaurant terrace where the EMAC 2023 social dinner took place. Photo by Johannes Sterba.
