affad settlement in sudan.pdf

Journal of African Archaeology Vol. 9 (2), 2011, pp. 177–188 177

AffAd 23, A LAte MiddLe PALAeoLithic Site with Refitted LithicS And AniMAL ReMAinS in the

SoutheRn dongoLA ReAch, SudAn

Piotr Osypiński, Marta Osypińska & Achilles Gautier

Abstract

Affad 23, situated in upper alluvial deposits related to a former channel of the Nile in the Affad District, Southern Dongola Reach, Sudan, is mainly known through its up-per or surface level. The combined data concerning the position of the site, composition of the lithic assemblage, freshness, refittings and dispersion of the artefacts point to a late Middle Palaeolithic workshop used for short periods. It utilized discoid and levallois debitage of Hudi Chert collected from the palaeochannel during the low-water season. The animal remains suggest opportunistic hunting of medium-sized antelopes, probably mainly kobs living near the site, some dorcas gazelles, occasionally hippopotamus and other big game, as well as small ver-tebrates, much less visible in the collected samples. A lower level, separated from the surface level by a deposit of some 30 cm, represents an earlier workshop. The easy access to chert in the palaeochannel may also explain the existence of other Paleolithic sites along the channel as workshops.

Résumé

Affad 23, situé dans les alluvions supérieurs en connexion avec un ancien chenal du Nile dans le district d’Affad, zone méridionale du Dongola au Soudan, est connu prin-cipalement par son niveau supérieur ou de surface. Les données combinées concernant la position topographi-que du site, la composition de l’assemblage lithique, la fraicheur, les remontages et la dispersion des artéfacts indiquent un atelier du Paléolithique Moyen tardif, occupé pour de courtes périodes. Il utilisait le débitage discoïde et Levallois du Hudi Chert, récolté du paléo-chenal au cours de la saison des basses eaux. Les restes animaux suggèrent la chasse opportuniste d’antilopes de taille moyenne, probablement surtout des kobs vivant près du site, des gazelles dorcas, occasionnellement d’hippopota-mes et d’autre gibier de grande taille, ainsi que de petits vertébrés, beaucoup moins visibles dans les échantillons récoltés. Le niveau inférieur, séparé du niveau supérieur par quelque 30 cm de dépôts, représente un atelier plus ancien. L’accès facile au chert du paléo-chenal explique peut-être aussi d’autres sites du Paléolithique Moyen le long du chenal comme autant d’ateliers.

Keywords: Late Middle Palaeolithic, Sudan, Southern Dongola Reach, refittings, workshop

DOI 10.3213/2191-5784-10186 Published online November 2, 2011 © Africa Magna Verlag, Frankfurt M.

Piotr Osypiński 8 [email protected] * Polish Center of Mediterranean Archaeology (Warsaw University) & Patrimonium Foundation, Rubiez 46, PL-61-612 Poznan, Poland

Marta Osypińska 8 [email protected] * Institute of Archaeology and Ethnology, Polish Academy of Science, Rubiez 46, PL-61-612 Poznan, Poland

Achilles Gautier 8 [email protected] * Palaeontology Research Unit, Ghent University, Krijgslaan 281/S8, B-9000 Ghent, Belgium

P. Osypiński, M. Osypińska & A. Gautier

Journal of African Archaeology Vol. 9 (2), 2011178

Operating within the framework of the Polish Joint Archaeological Mission to the Middle Nile Valley, the Southern Dongola Reach Survey (SDRS), directed by ZuRAwSki (2003), discovered a plethora of archaeological remains. Interesting among the many sites are the ones with lithics, typologically attributable to the Middle Pal-aeolithic. Moreover, at one of these occurrences, labeled Affad 23, animal bone remains occur in appreciable quan-tity. This is exceptional, because until now Palaeolithic occurrences with animal remains are very rare in Sudan. Discovered during the 1998/99 season of the SDRS, the detailed analysis and excavation of Affad 23 were an independent project of the first two authors, for which fieldwork took place in February 2003. A preliminary report and notes saw the light already in the same year (Osypiński 2003; Osypińska 2003; Osypiński & Osypińska 2003). In the present report, the first author deals with the archaeology of the site and its context, the second author with the animal remains, while the third author helped with some of the animal identifications, notes on the archaeozoological record of north-east Africa and the synthesis of the various data and inferences.

Most of the Middle Palaeolithic sites in the man-tiqa or district Affad discovered during the SDRS are located north of the palaeochannel of the Nile on alluvial deposits no doubt related to the palaeochannel (Fig. 1; ZuRAwSki 2003: 262–263). Among these, Affad 23 is situated about 1.5 km north of the first buildings of the village Affad (N18°01’30.6’’, E31°10’26.7’’). The surface of the site is formed by a lag deposit due to de-flation, bringing together younger, rounded microlithic artefacts with a marked patina and older, very well preserved artefacts made utilizing discoidal methods mainly on chert, as well as numerous animal bone re-mains. The microlithic finds are made on quartz pebbles, ferruginous sandstone, agate and porphyry and include lunates and some endscrapers on cortical flakes. They

are assignable to the Khartoum Mesolithic and the suc-ceeding Neolithic, known from other sites in the region. A concentration of early ceramic sites with microlithic industries occurs some 2.5 km to the east of Affad 23. No doubt the makers of these sites also came to the Af-fad 23 area; they do not concern us further.

The surface level with the older artefacts has been labeled Level 1, to distinguish it from Level 2, encoun-tered in a test excavation (1 sq.m) and separated from the surface layer by 30 cm of fine sand with disintegrat-ing silt passing downwards into silt, both with calcare-ous concretions. The artefacts of Level 2 resemble the fresh ones of Level 1 and lack of refittings of artefacts originated from the two horizons confirms the inde-pendence of Levels 1 and 2. Artefacts, mainly those from Level 2, were often encrusted with calcareous cement, as visible on the photographs in Osypiński & Osypińska (2003: 272).

On most terrestrial surfaces a very thin rain of ani-mal remains is continuously deposited. Concentrations of animal remains in particular loci relate to specific taphonomic factors or agents. The association of such concentrations with artefacts establishes most often a causal link between the remains and human activity. In our case, the bones are no doubt associated with the older artefacts in Level 1, for the question does not arise whether they might rather be connected with the mi-crolithic artefacts. The preservation of the bones is not at all comparable with that observed in the Holocene sites analysed by the third author (see, for example, gAutieR 1986). Moreover, bones originally associ-ated with the microliths would not have survived the erosion and concentration in the lag deposit. As to the fact that no bones were collected from the lower level this is no doubt due to the limited surface excavated in the test trench.

Fig.1: Location of Affad 23, based on an aerial photograph . The boundaries of the palaeochannel could not be traced precisely; it extends between the Affad village and cultivated area (grey) and the string of Middle Palaeolithic sites (black for Affad 23).

Fig. 1. Location of Affad 23, based on an aerial photo-graph. The boundaries of the palaeochannel could not be traced precisely; it extends between the Affad village and cultivated area (grey) and the string of Middle Palaeolithic sites (black for Affad 23).

Affad 23, a Late Middle Palaeolithic Site

Journal of African Archaeology Vol. 9 (2), 2011 179

The artefacts of Level 1 were concentrated in an area of some 25 x 25 m, but less densely distributed artefacts were also recorded around the central cluster-ing in an area of 200 x 200 m. Our study concerns the some 1200 artefacts of the central area. As to the bone remains, some 800 pieces were collected by hand, including 252 from the central part.

Level 1 lithics

The assemblage of Level 1 consists of 1206 artefacts but is dominated by waste products (1120 finds or ca 92.9 %), only 20 cores (1.7 %), 18 retouched flake tools and 47 unretouched flakes with facetted butts (together 5.4 %). The latter flakes can be added to the final forms only in a few cases. A bifacial form completes the as-semblage.

The raw material used was predominantly chert of various kinds, more or less porous, with many gas bubbles, crystalline inclusions and small fossils, belong-

ing to the Hudi Chert, common in the whole Dongola Reach, as well as up the Nile towards the 4th Cataract (whiteMAn 1971; Osypiński 2010). The raw material palette is completed by quartzite, flint and petrified wood. Seventeen of the artefacts show evidence of ex-posure to fire. They belong to the general waste category and none could be refitted, indicating that their exposure to fire was no doubt accidental. All the cortical surfaces of the finds bear traces of rolling and even polishing due to fluvial transport. These traces indicate that the raw materials were collected from the palaeochannel during low water. Even today, it is easy to collect similar rocks from the recent Nile near Affad in winter when the water is low. Middle Palaeolithic exploitation of palaeochan-nel chert deposits has also been recorded along the Egyptian Nile (VeRMeeRSch et al. 1986).

Figures 2 and 3 present the first exercise in refit-ting and dispersion of Sudanese prehistoric artefacts. A comparable method was used for the study of late Middle Palaeolithic assemblages of Taramsa I in the Lower Nile Valley I, with elongated flakes interpreted

Fig. 2: Affad 23, Level 1, general view of the refitted artefacts.

Fig. 2. Affad 23, Level 1, general view of the refitted artefacts.



as transitional Middle – Late Palaeolithic elements (VAn PeeR 1992, 1998). Our exercise was made pos-sible by the exceptional preservation of the artefacts and their restricted dispersal, as most were discovered in a cluster of some 25 by 15 m. Figure 2 shows clearly three concentrations of chert debitage: a western, an eastern and a south-western one. These concentra-tions do not overlap with the concentrations of bone remains (Osypiński & Osypińska 2003: 271) and sug-gest preservation of activity areas respectively related to butchering and artefact knapping. Each concentration moreover contained but elements of a few blocks only. A very telling feature is the very low number of flakes with facetted butts or prepared with more than one negative. However, the western concentration produced also some elements pointing to platform preparation. Around the concentration also most of the facetted flakes which could not be refitted were found. Most of the refitted flakes have cortical, plain or pointed butts, the latter often in the form of big, almost complete hertz cone. Without any doubt, the debitage was done by direct percussion with a hard hammer.

Figures 2 and 3 show the direction of artefact dis-persal of each block. The western and biggest concen-tration show deposition of artefacts to the north and the north-east. Interesting is the fact that single elements of the blocks from that concentration are linked with other concentrations. For example, the initial phases of the debitage of blocks 1 and 32 were done in the eastern concentration, but the final stages of debitage took place in the western concentration.

In the eastern concentration dispersion of the refitted

artefacts shows dominantly directions to the north-west, the west and the south-west. A distinctive feature of this concentration is the complete absence of artefacts to the east, it suggests some physical barrier there, perhaps a windbreak or some vegetation, precluding dispersal to the east. The presence of only a few flakes with facetted butts is another feature of the concentration suggest-ing typical initial debitage done in the place, probably unrelated with activities on the spot using stone tools. On the other hand most of the retouched tools, mainly temporary scrapers, come from this area.

Fig. 3: Affad 23, Level 1, dispersion of selected artefacts (levallois flakes, cores and tools).

Fig. 3. Affad 23, Level 1, dispersion of selected artefacts (levallois flakes, cores and tools).



The last and smallest concentration, the one of the south-east, is also characterized by a few refittings and the dispersal of waste products to the north-west. A single flake with facetted butt was recorded here, but no retouched forms.

The cores of Level 1 are exclusively discoidal in concept, but not one of them can be classified as typi-cal levallois, with a formed debitage surface, a facetted striking platform and the negative of a removed pre-determined flake. Both initial and final forms of cores are present. One of the initial forms is an almost ideal preform for further levallois debitage (Fig. 4c). The debitage surface is formed by negatives of flakes mainly removed from one direction; the opposite end was pre-pared with a series of small elongated negatives.

The flakes with facetted butts which could be refitted pertain to two categories. The first one groups typical levallois products, among which only two refittings were found: one of two products in a sequence (Fig. 4b), the second the result of a Siret accident (Fig. 4a). No other elements could be refitted, so it was impossible to link the final actions with particular se-quences of debitage. The second category of facetted flakes con-tains single products removed during the forming or repairing of debitage surfaces (Fig. 4d and e). These elements confirm the careful preparation of striking platforms, even if the cores are not typical levallois.

The tools comprise seven temporary scrapers (Fig. 6d and e), four burins (Fig. 6b and c), three side-scrapers, two den-ticulate tools (Fig. 6f, g and h), two notched tools and a single bifacial form (Fig. 6a). They are made of irregular flakes or chunks, except the burins, which are made on flakes with facetted butts. Their characteristic fea-ture consists in the removal of the burin spall along the edge of the butt and versal or positive face together with the bulb. As to the bifacial form, it was made on a thick chunk of chert. Compara-ble Middle Palaeolithic bifacial tools from the 4th cataract con-

firm its production on a flake/chunk blank; however, our find is much more robust.

Level 2 lithics

The subsurface artefacts were in general similar to the ones described above. Although the sample consists of 36 artefacts only, 14 elements could be refitted in three blocks. These blocks point to initial debitage with decor-tication and the formation of the pre-surface of debitage and discoidal striking platforms. Among the other finds, a single flake with facetted butt was registered (Fig. 7a and b) as well as two cores. The first one is the only core in the whole assemblage of Affad 23 that can be classified as a typical levallois core of the late kind, as described

Fig; 4: Affad 23, Level 1, refitted artefacts demonstrating levallois reduction; a & b: refitted flakes; c: block 8a; d: block 14.; e: levallois core perform. Drawings P. Osypinski.

Fig. 4. Affad 23, Level 1, refitted artefacts demonstrating levallois reduction; a, b: refit-ted flakes; c: block 8a; d: block 14; e: levallois core perform. Drawings P. Osypiński.



Fig

5: A

ffad

23, L

evel

1, r

efitt

ed a

rtefa

cts

show

ing

cent

ripet

al s

urfa

ce s

hapi

ng w

ith b

utt p

repa

ratio

n; a

: bl

ock

7; b

: blo

ck 8

b; c

: blo

ck 5

. Dra

win

gs P

. Osy

pins

ki.

Fig

6: A

ffad

23, L

evel

1, r

etou

ched

tool

s; a

: bifa

cial

tool

; b &

c: b

urin

s; d

& e

: scr

aper

s; f,

g &

h:

dent

icul

ates

; Dra

win

gs P

. Osy

pins

ki.

Fig.

5. A

ffad

23, L

evel

1, r

efitte

d ar

tefa

cts

show

ing

cent

ripet

al s

urfa

ce s

hapi

ng

with

but

t pre

para

tion;

a: b

lock

7; b

: blo

ck 8

b; c

: blo

ck 5

. Dra

win

gs P

. Osy

pińs

ki.

Fig.

6. A

ffad

23, L

evel

1, r

etou

ched

tool

s; a

: bifa

cial

tool

; b, c

: bur

ins;

d,

e: s

crap

ers;

f, g

, h: d

entic

ulat

es; D

raw

ings

P. O

sypi

ński

.



by VAn PeeR (1991); it is characterized by the bidirec-tional formation of the debitage surface (Fig. 7c). The removal of the final flake failed due to a missed strike or a wrong debitage angle, resulting in a huge bulb and an short outline. The other core can be classified as a single platform, but might also be a failed or abandoned byproduct with a discoidal platform made on a large chunk (Fig. 7d).

Lithic technology

The numerous refittings show the initial stages of raw material testing and the shaping of surfaces definable as flaking surfaces and striking platforms, the latter usually on three sides of the artefacts. The alternate forming of the two surfaces was clearly visible. Already in the initial stages of the debitage, precise platform preparation was used for the removal of particular technological products. This action can be observed in the blocks numbered 7 (Fig. 5a), 8 (Fig. 4c and d), 14 (Fig. 5b), 21, 25, 26, 29 and 32. Facetting was

used only for the flakes removed during the shaping off the flak-ing surface. All the blocks have a debitage surface shaped from two sides, but the facetted products were removed from one side only. Block 19 was the only one with a facetted platform found on each removed flake.

In a few blocks, the refitted flakes show an almost complete sequence of bidirectional or cen-tripetal debitage surface forming, but the cores were not found (Fig. 5c). The discovery of refitted final levallois flakes at the site confirms their production on the spot, but no doubt attractive, that is, well exploitable cores were taken from the site.

Only in the case of the few burins, made on levallois flakes, can we speak of intentional tool production on predetermined blanks. All the other retouched forms were produced on coinci-dental waste of the initial centrip-etal debitage.

From the foregoing it should be clear that both assemblages preserve relics of initial chert deb-itage workshops, using discoidal

methods and platform faceting, probably to prepare blanks for further levallois reduction; also the number of typical levallois products is low. Such artefact in-ventories have been recorded from quarry sites further north along the Nile (WendOrf & schild 1992: 69). No evidence of quarrying was found at Affad 23, but as already said, the nearby Nile palaeochannel appears to be the main source of raw material. The low number of cores, or rather their blanks, also fits the workshop hypothesis: the best products were taken off for fur-ther exploitation in other places. From such places some levallois flakes without refitting links returned to Affad 23. The preservation of the artefacts and their restricted dispersion indicate very limited disturbance by trampling or other postdepositional factors. Most likely people came to the investigated area but a few times, perhaps even only once. As to the fact that Level 1 is separated from Level 2 by some 30 cm of sedi-ment, it suggests reuse of the site as a workshop after some time. We do not known the function of the other Middle Palaeolithic sites in the vicinity of Affad 23, but there is a chance that they were also workshops.

Fig. 7: Affad 23, Level 2, selected artefacts; a & b: flake fragments with facetted butt; c & d: cores. Drawings P. Osypinski.

Fig. 7. Affad 23, Level 2, selected artefacts; a, b: flake fragments with facetted butt; c, d: cores. Drawings P. Osypiński.



If that is the case, people probably visited periodically the region for quite a long time to collect and prepare lithic material for further exploitation elsewhere. The repeated use of the same sites and most likely repetitive behavioural patterns were seen on Sai Island in much older occurrences, dating back to ca 200 ka (VAn PeeR et al. 2003).

Dating

Affad 23 was occupied during the later period of sedi-mentation of the formation in which it occurs. This formation reaches about 15 m above the present Nile level and we may look for deposits referable to the same phase in the history of the river on the left bank of the Nile, opposite Affad. There two surveys took place. The latest, during the Merowe Dam Salvage Project, located several Middle Palaeolithic sites (gARceA 2003; Geus & lecOinte 2003), but these cannot be linked with our site. The 1966/67 survey by the Southern Meth-odist University Expedition however recorded three late Middle Palaeolithic occurrences associated with the Goshabi Formation, but the three reports dealing with the survey differ somewhat (de heinZeLin 1968; MARkS et al. 1968a, 1968b). The Goshabi Formation reaches to ca 13 m above the present-day floodplain and consists apparently of a more silty lower sequence covered by coarser fluvial sediments. At least one of the Middle Palaeolithic sites appears to be reminiscent of the Khormusan of the Wadi Halfa region. Tentatively the Goshabi Formation has been correlated with the Sahaba Formation of the Wadi Halfa region, but the lower part of the formation was also linked with the Dibeira-Jer Formation of the mentioned region. Cor-relating fluviatile deposits from regions separated by several hundreds of kilometers is a hazardous exercise, as the absolute dates now available demonstrate. The Sahaba Formation spans roughly the period between 20 and 10 ky. The Khormusan is beyond the reach of radiocarbon dating, but has been put in the final phase of

the Middle Palaeolithic (paulissen & Vermeersch 1987; VeRMeeRSch 1992; WendOrf & schild 1992; VAn PeeR 1998). Affad 23 appears to fit in the same bracket.

Animal remains

As said, the animal remains were collected by hand from the central site and the area around this central part, measuring 200 m x 200 m. The finds are mod-erately affected by weathering cracks and sometimes encrusted with some calcareous cement. Their colour is black or dark grey with spots of lighter grey. Round-ing of the remains is limited and may be due mainly, if not completely, to abrasion during the formation of the lag deposit. Preliminary sorting of the bones was done in Sudan. The remains thought to be identifiable were brought to Poland, but only limited comparative documentation was available there.

Table 1 summarizes the absolute and relative fre-quencies of the assemblage for the central site, the as-semblage of the surrounding area and the combined assemblages. The quantitative differences in the central and peripheral assemblages reflect the haphazard dis-tribution of activities on the site, but the dominance of the medium-sized antelopes is clear. The not identi-fied fragments also appear to be derived mainly from medium-sized mammals. Notes on the animals iden-tified follow. Examples of Holocene faunal spectra from Central Sudan referred to in the notes come from: Saggai, Kadada, Kadero, Shaqadud, Abu Darbein, and related sites (gAutieR 1983, 1986, 2006; PeteRS 1991, 1995). As said, few Palaeolithic sites with animal re-mains are known from Sudan. Two Middle Paleolithic occurrences on the Blue Nile, Abu Hugar and Singa, yielded restricted faunal assemblages (BAte 1951). A human skull cap of Singa derives from an archaic Homo sapiens and has been dated between 170 and 150 ky ago (kLein 1999: 312, fig. 5.29 and 398). As a single assemblage some animal remains have been described

cluster periphery totals n % n % n %

Nile monitor (Varanus niloticus) 2 5.4 3 2.3 5 3.0Cape hare (Lepus capensis) 1 2.7 3 2.3 4 2.4hippopotamus (Hippopotamus amphibius) 18 14.0 18 10.9medium-sized antelope 26 70.3 73 56.6 99 59.6dorcas gazelle (Gazella dorcas) 5 13.5 29 22.5 34 20.5large bovid 3 8.1 3 2.3 6 3.6total identified vertebrates 37 100.0 14.7 129 100.0 23.6 166 100.0 20.8not identified vertebrate remains 215 85.3 418 76.4 633 79.2total vertebrates 252 100.0 547 100.0 799 100.0

Tab. 1. The fauna of the Middle Palaeolithic site Affad 23.



from two much older sites near the 3th Cataract with Lower Pleistocene artefacts, Kaddanarti and Kabrinarti (chAix et al. 2000). Not yet published are the finds from Wadi Umm Rahau near the 4th Cataract, associated with artefacts attributable to the Middle Palaeolithic (D. Makowiecki, pers. comm.). As to the many finds from the Wadi Halfa region, they compare well with finds from further north along the Nile (gAutieR 1987) and are best added to the archaeozoological record of the Palaeolithic and Holocene hunter-gatherers of the Nile in Egypt. The publications cited contain data on the diagnostic features, present distribution and ecol-ogy of the animals encountered and are not repeated in what follows. Measurements are given following Von den dRieSch (1976). An asterisk before a measurement indicates that, together with others below, it concerns one specimen.

Nile monitor (Varanus niloticus)

Some separate and coarticulating vertebrae prove the presence at the site of the monitor lizard. These finds were originally attributed to bird and fish. The monitor has been recorded in small quantities from most of the sites of the Khartoum Mesolithic and the succeeding Neolithic of the Central Sudanese Nile.

Cape hare (Lepus capensis)

A lagomorph is represented by a mandibular fragment, a fragment of a scapula, and two pelvic fragments. Most likely the finds pertain to the Cape hare, which is well represented in the archaeofaunas of the Egyptian

Nile Valley (gAutieR 1987). It is much less well repre-sented in the Holocene archaeofaunas from the Central Sudanese Nile. In fact, it would seem that the hare was added to the faunal spectrum during the Neolithic, as if people were not interested in this small prey animal in earlier times.

Hippopotamus (Hippopotamus amphibius)

Several jaw fragments with jugal teeth (some of these may derive from one animal) as well as two cranial fragments, some remains of four humeri and one frag-ment of a radius, were collected. A large rib probably represents also this pachyderm. No measurements could be taken. As the already cited vertebrates, hip-popotamus is a regular but not frequent member of the Holocene archaeofaunas from the Central Sudanese Nile. The extant hippopotamus is also known from the Kaddanrti/Kabrinarti assemblage.

Medium sized antelopes, including kob (Kobus kob) (Fig. 8, B–F)

This category of bovid encloses various remains of medium-sized bovids, but most frequent are vertebrae, cannon bones and phalanges. Unfortunately, jugal teeth which are generally diagnostic are missing in the col-lection. In the preliminary report on the faunal remains, these finds were grouped as dama gazelle (Gazella dama). This large gazelle however does not occur to-day east of the Nile and in the past the same situation probably prevailed. The well preserved finds also do not exhibit the slender habitus of gazelles.

Fig. 8: Some bone finds from Affad 23. A: distal metacarpus, plantar view, dorcas gazelle; B: third phalanx, medium sized antelope, attributable to kob; C: skull fragment with horn core, female dorcas gazelle; D: second phalanx medium sized antelope, kob?; E: astragalus medium sized antelope, kob?; F: fragmented distal metatarsus, medium sized antelope, kob?; G: horncore, male dorcas gazelle. Scale A-F equals c. 20mm; scale G c.30 mm.

Fig. 8. Some bone finds from Affad 23. A: distal metacarpus, plantar view, dorcas gazelle; B: third phalanx, medium sized antelope, attributable to kob; C: skull fragment with horn core, female dorcas gazelle; D: second phalanx medium sized antelope, kob?; E: astragalus medium sized antelope, kob?; F: fragmented distal metatarsus, medium sized antelope, kob?; G: horncore, male dorcas gazelle. Scale A–F equals ca 20 mm; scale G ca 30 mm.



male horncore, A-P. diameter base *25.3 TR. diameter base 18.5female horncore, A-P. diameter base *13.6 TR. diameter base 10.5humerus, Bd 27.0radius, Bp 25.5mc, Bd 18.8astragalus, Glm 26.8

Tab. 3. Affad 23, measurements of dorcas gazelle remains (in mm).

humerus, Bd 39.8radius, Bp 33.0 Bd 31.5 34.2mc, Bp 28.2 29.0astragalus, GLl *38.3 *42.2 GLm 35.8 38.8 Bd 21.7 24.6mt, Bd 27.0ph.1, Bp 15.0 17.7ph. 2, GL *25.3 *28.0 Bp 13.6 15.0 Bd 11.0 12.0ph. 3, LSD *34.5 *37.2 *37.7 *38.4 *39.0 Ld 29.0 30.6 30.8 31.6 31.4

Tab. 2. Affad 23, measurements of medium-sized bovid re-mains (in mm).

The measurements (Tab. 2) indicate indeed that the finds originate from a medium-sized bovid about 1.4 to 1.5 times larger than the small gazelle described next, measuring some 75 to 95 cm at the withers. In fact most of the measurements compare favourably with those of kob (Kobus kob) from Saggai. Kob is frequently en-countered in the Holocene sites of the Central Sudanese Nile and was apparently an easy prey for late prehistoric hunters. The attachment of kob to its grazing grounds is so strong that in East Africa human settlement may proceed with kob attempting to go on living almost at the new villages. At least part of the finds grouped here derive from kob. Other antelopes of comparable size, such as bohor reedbuck (Redunca redunca) or bushbuck (Tragelaphus scriptus), also occurring in Central Suda-nese Holocene sites, may of course have contributed to the sample. In the Kaddanarti/Kabinarti two fragments of medium-sized antelopes occur, one of them referable to Kobus or Redunca. Abu Hugar and Singa yielded some remains of antelopes of medium and larger size.

Dorcas gazelle (Gazella dorcas) (Fig. 8, A, C, G)

This small gazelle is represented by a much less diver-sified lot of skeletal remains in comparison with the foregoing, including two male horncores, one female horncore, five mandibular fragments with teeth some vertebrae and four canon bones.

The measurements (Tab. 3) fall in the upper range of extant dorcas gazelles or are a bit larger, as in smaller extant red-fronted gazelles (G. rufifrons; PeteRS 1986b). The latter have been recorded in Holocene sites of the Central Sudan, but those finds appear generally larger than their present-day offspring. Dorcas gazelles from Palaeolithic sites in the Wadi Halfa region were origi-nally included in this species, but fossil dorcas gazelles

are larger than their recent offspring and the Wadi Halfa gazelles have been re-identified as dorcas gazelles. The preliminary identification or the Affad gazelle can be retained. Apart from the small gazelles from the Holocene sites above, a small, not further identified gazelle, has been recorded from Singa.

Large bovid, wild cattle or African buffalo(Bos primigenius or Syncerus caffer)?

A pelvis fragment and an astragalus compare with their homologs of large cattle. A vertebra and three ribs seem to belong to the same bovid. These remains may repre-sent either buffalo, or wild cattle or aurochs. Wild cattle (Bos primigenius) is well known from Palaeolithic and later sites in the Wadi Halfa region (gAutieR 1968), but it penetrated apparently quite far into Sudan, for it has been recorded from sites dated about 10ky bp near Kas-sala (MARkS et al. 1987). In later sites near Kassala it is replaced by the extant buffalo. If buffalo, the remains may derive from the predecessor of the extant African buffalo (Syncerus caffer) or from the giant buffalo; in the view of the third author, the latter is an extinct subspecies (S. caffer antiquus) of the extant buffalo and not a separate species (Syncerus antiquus) (PeteRS et al. 1994). The medial length of the astragalus (ca 75 m) fits in the range of large domestic cattle and extant African buffalo (PeteRS 1986a). Extant buffalo occurs in small quantities in the Holocene archaeofauna from the Central Sudanese Nile. Buffalo is also present in the Kaddanarti/kabrinarti assemblage. The Singa buffalo skull is assignable to giant buffalo.

Palaeoecology

The identification rate, that is, the ratio identified bones/total number of bones of the whole Affad bone collection is 20.8 %. In the Holocene sites of the Central Sudan rates of less than 10 % have been calculated and we may assume some taphonomic loss and sampling bias with respect to the Holocene sites. Taphonomic loss refers to the fact that remains of small animals may not have been preserved, sampling bias to the fact that the collecting by



hand tends to overlook small remains, such as those of fish, reptiles and birds. We should also not forget that the Holocene faunal collections are much larger than the one from Affad and, as known, faunal diversity increases with sample size. The Holocene sites were occupied at least in a semi-sedentary manner for quite a long time and offered in this respect much better chances to sample the avail-able mammalian fauna of their catchment areas, including monkeys, several rodents, carnivores and plant-eaters of varying size. Thus, the limited spectrum of Affad 23, even if we accept that our medium-sized antelope group hides several species, corroborates the hypothesis that the use of the site was periodical and not intensive. People came to the place to collect and prepare lithics for further use elsewhere and hunted opportunistically, bagging mainly medium sized antelopes, probably mostly kob which may have lived near the site, some dorcas gazelles when they came to the water, and occasionally a hippopotamus, an aurochs or a buffalo. Lizards, hare and probably other small terrestrial vertebrates were also on the menu, but their share is difficult to evaluate. As to the absence of fish remains, people were most probably not fishing, for the site appears to have been occupied in the low water season of the Nile. VAn neeR (2004) demonstrated that during Middle and Upper Palaeolithic times in Egypt and the Wadi Halfa region fishing was restricted to the shallow waters of the alluvial plain during the high water season. There is no reason to assume that the situation was differ-ent further to the south. The antelope and gazelle remains indicate butchering on the site, but butchering of larger animals may also have been done on the site, if we accept localized hunting and limited transport of carcases.

Summary and conclusion

The available data on Affad 23 and its general context indicate that the site is a late Middle Palaeolithic work-shop using discoid and levallois methods for initial stone artefact reduction. Its occupants exploited the Hudi Chert from the Nile palaeochannel near the site during the low water season and hunted probably in an opportunistic way. Their game bag included mainly medium-sized an-telopes, probably mostly kob, some dorcas gazelles, a few bigger mammals and smaller much less visible terrestrial vertebrates, most likely hunted or trapped near the site. The existence of two levels, the freshness, refittings and dispersion of the lithics point to recurrent occupation for an appreciable time but probably never intensive. Possi-bly other Middle Palaeolithic sites in the area were used in the same way, suggesting that people may have paid regularly visits to the area for a long time to exploit the Hudi Chert from the palaeochannel. Excavations of Affad 23 and a choice of other Middle Palaeolithic sites in its vicinity may corroborate the explanations here advanced about the nature of the site, as well as about the concentra-tion of Middle Palaeolithic sites near Affad.

Acknowledgements

The first authors thank the SDRS for logistic help dur-ing the field work in Affad 23. Daniel Makowiecki (In-stitute of Archaeology, Nicolaus Copernicus University, Torun) provided preliminary information on the site of Wadi Umm Rahau. The third author thanks Elena Gar-cea (Laboratory for Archaeology, University of Cas-sino) and Philip Van Peer (Research Unit Archeology, University of Louvain) for their comments on Middle Palaeolithic occurrences on both sides of the Nile valley near Affad. Bert Van Bocxlaer, younger colleague of the third author, willingly composed the figure with bone photographs provided by the first authors.

References

Bate, D.M.A. 1951. The mammals of Singa and Abu Hugar. Fossils Mammals of Africa 2, 1–28.

Chaix, L., Faure, M., Guérin, C. & Honegger, M. 2000. Kaddan-arti, a Lower Pleistocene assemblage from Northern Sudan. In: Krzyzaniak, L., Kroeper, K. & Kobusiewicz, M. (eds.), Recent Research Into the Stone Age of Northeastern Africa. Poznan Archaeological Museum, Poznan, pp. 33–46.

de Heinzelin, J. 1968. Survey in the Debba-Korti Area. Kush 15, 59–78.

Garcea, E.A.A. 2003. Paleolithic sites at El-Multaga. Nyame Akuma 59, 62–65.

Gautier, A. 1968. Mamalian remains of the northern Sudan and southern Egypt. In: Wendorf, F. (ed.), The Prehistory of Nubia, vol. I. Fort Burgwin Research Center & Southern Methodist University, Dallas, pp. 80–99.

Gautier, A. 1983. Animal life along the prehistoric Nile, the evi-dence from Saggai 1 and Geili (Sudan). Origini 13, 50–115.

Gautier, A. 1986. La faune de l’occupation néolithique d’el Kadada (secteurs12-22-32) au Soudan Central. Archéologie du Nil Moyen 1, 59–111.

Gautier, A. 1987. Fishing, fowling and hunting in late palaeolithic times in the Nile valley in Upper Egypt. Palaeoecology of Africa 18, 429–440.

Gautier, A. 2006. The faunal remains of the Early Neolithic site Ka-dero, Central Sudan. In: Kroeper, K., Chodnicki, M. & Kobus-iewicz, M. (eds.), Archaeoloogy of Early Northeastern Africa. Poznan Archaeoloical Museum, Poznan, pp. 113–117.

Geus, F. & Lecointe, Y. 2003. Survey and excavation at el-Multaga, a resettlement area related to the construction of the Merowe Dam: preliminary results. Sudan & Nubia 7, 33–40.

Klein, R.G. 1999. The Human Career. University of Chicago Press, Chicago/London.

Marks, A.E., Shiner, J. & Hays, T.R. 1968a. Survey and excava-tions in the Dongola Reach, Sudan. Current Anthropology 9 (4), 319–323.



Marks, A.E., Hays, T.R. & de Heinzelin, J. 1968b. Preliminary Report of the Southern Methodist University Expedition in the Dongola Reach. Kush 15, 165–192.

Marks, A.E., Peters, J. & Van Neer, W. 1987. Late Pleistocene and early Holocene occupations in the upper Atbara river valley. In: Close, A.E. (ed.), Prehistory of Arid North Africa. Essays in Honor of Fred Wendorf. Southern Methodist University Press, Dallas, pp. 137–161.

Osypińska, M. 2003. Faunal remains from the Southern Dongola Reach. In: Żurawski, B. (ed.), Survey and Excavations between Old Dongola and Ez-Zuma. Zakład Śródziemnomorskiej Polskiej Akademii Nauk & Wydawnictwo Neriton, Warsaw, pp. 490–492.

Osypiński, P. 2003. Southern Dongola Reach in prehistory. In: Żurawski, B. (ed.), Survey and Excavations between Old Dongo-la and Ez-Zuma. Zakład Śródziemnomorskiej Polskiej Akademii Nauk & Wydawnictwo Neriton, Warsaw, pp. 463–467.

Osypiński, P. 2010. A corpus of lithic raw material from the inventories of the Fourth Cataract. Gdańsk Archaeological Museum African Reports 6, 139–146.

Osypiński, P. & Osypińska, M. 2003. Affad 23. In: Żurawski, B. (ed.), Survey and Excavations between Old Dongola and Ez-Zuma. Zakład Śródziemnomorskiej Polskiej Akademii Nauk & Wydawnictwo Neriton, Warsaw, pp. 270–272.

Paulissen, E. & Vermeersch, P. 1987. Earth, man and climate in the Egyptian Nile valley during the Pleistocene. In: Close, A.E. (ed.), Prehistory of Arid North Africa. Essays in Honor of Fred Wendorf. Southern Methodist University, Dallas, pp. 29–67.

Peters, J. 1986a. Osteomorphology and Osteometry of the Ap-pendicular Skeleton of African Buffalo, Syncerus caffer (SPARRMAN, 1779) and Cattle, Bos primigenius f. Taurus BOJANUS, 1827. Occasional Papers 1. Laboratorium voor Paleontologie, Rijksuniversiteit Gent.

Peters, J. 1986b. Osteomorphology and Osteometry of the Appendicular Skeleton of Grant’s Gazelle, Gazella granti Brooke, 1872, Bohor Reedbuck, Redunca redunca (Pallas, 1767) and Bushbuck, Tragelaphus scriptus (Pallas, 1766). Occasional Papers 2. Laboratorium voor Paleontologie, Rijksuniversiteit Gent.

Peters, J. 1991. The faunal remains from Shaqadud. In: Marks, A.E. & Mohamed-Ali, A. (eds.), The Late Prehistory of the Eastern Sudan. The Mesolithic and Neolithic of Shaqadud, Sudan. Southern Methodist University Press, Dallas, pp. 197–235.

Peters, J. 1995. Mesolithic subsistence between the 5th and the 6th Nile Cataract: the archaeofaunas from Abu Darbein, El Damer and Aneibis,(Sudan). In: Haaland, R. & Magid, A.A. (eds.), Aqualithic Sites along the Rivers Nile and Atbara, Sudan. Alma Mater Forlag, Bergen, pp. 178–244.

Peters, J., Gautier, A., Brink, J.S. & Haenen, W. 1994. Late Quaternary extinction of ungulates in sub-Saharan Africa: a reductionist’s approach. Journal of Archaeological Science 21 (1), 17–28.

Van Neer, W. 2004. Evolution of prehistoric fishing in the Nile valley. Journal of African Archaeology 2 (2), 251–269.

Van Peer, Ph. 1991. Interassemblage variability and levallois styles: the case of the northern African Middle Palaeolithic. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 10 (2), 107–151.

Van Peer, Ph. 1992. The Levallois Reduction Strategy. Mono-graphs in World Archaeology 13. Prehistory Press, Madis-con.

Van Peer, Ph. 1998. The Nile corridor and the out-of-Africa model – an examination of the archaeological record. Current Anthropology 39 (special issue 1), 115–140.

Van Peer, Ph., Fullagar, R., Stokes, S., Bailey, R.M., Moeyersons, J., Steenhoudt, F., Geerts, A., Vanderbeken, T., De Dapper, M. & Geus, F. 2003. The Early to Middle Stone Age transi-tion and the emergence of modern human behaviour at site 8-B-11, Sai Island, Sudan. Journal of Human Evolution 45 (2), 187–193.

Vermeersch, P.M. 1992. The Upper and Late Palaeolithic of Northern and Eastern Africa. In: Klees, F. & Kuper, R. (eds.), New Light on the Northeastern African Past. Current Prehistoric Research. Africa Prehistorica 5. Heinrich Barth Institut, Köln, pp. 99–154.

Vermeersch, P.M., Paulissen, E., Gijselings, G. & Janssen, J. 1986. Middle Palaeolithic chert exploitation pits near Qena (Upper Egypt). Paléorient 12, 61–65.

Wendorf, F. & Schild, R. 1992. The Middle Palaeolithic of North Africa: a status report. In: Klees, F. & Kuper, R. (eds.), New Light on the Northeastern African Past. Current Prehistoric Research. Africa Prehistorica 5. Heinrich Barth Institut, Köln, pp. 39–80.

Whiteman, J. 1971. Geology of the Sudan Republic. Oxford University Press, Oxford.

von den Driesch, A. 1976. A Guide to the Measurements of Animal Bones from Archaeological Sites. Peabody Museum Bulletin 1. Harvard University, Cambridge.

Zurawski, B. (ed.) 2003. Survey and Excavations between Old Dongola and Ez-Zuma. Zakład Śródziemnomorskiej Polskiej Akademii Nauk & Wydawnictwo Neriton, Warsaw.

affad settlement in sudan.pdf

Documents

Transcript of affad settlement in sudan.pdf