Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
The African Archaeological Review, 4 i1986;, pp. 83-I02
Chronology of the Khartoum ~Mesolithic' and ~Neolithic' and related sites in the Sudan: statistical analysis and comparisons with Egypt
F E K R I A . HASSAN
Abstract
Assessment of radiocarbon measurements from the central Sudan provides the following calendrical age estimates: Early Khartoum >7000- ca 5000 BC. Early Neolithic Group ca 4900-4450 BC Middle Neolithic Group ca 4400-3800 BC Late Neolithic Group ca 3500-2700 BC
These estimates indicate that the early Neolithic settlements in the central Sudan were established at about the same time as those at Merimda Beni Salama in the Nile Delta and the Fayum. The Predynastic sites of Upper Egypt are later in age. The Badarian at Hemamieh is probably coeval with Shaheinab. Available dates on the Badarian are younger than those for some Khartoum Neolithic sites, but the Badarian is poorty dated.
R~sum~
L'evatuation de datations au radiocarbone du Soudan Central a fourni les ~ges absolus
suivants: Early Khartoum >7000 c. 5000 BC Groupe du N6olithique inf6rieur c. 4900-4450 BC Groupe du N6otithique moyen c. 4400-3800 BC Groupe du N~olithique sup6rieur c. 3500--2700 BC
Ces r&ultats indiquent que les habitations n6olithiques au Soudan Central furent &ablies ~t peu pros ~ la m~me 6poque que celles ~ Merimda Beni Salama dans le Delta du Nil et au Fayoum. Les gisements pr6dynastiques de la Haute Eg'ypte sont plus r&ents. Le Badarien Hemamieh est probablement contemporain de Shaheinab. Les datations disponibles pour le Badarien sont plus r6centes que celles de certains gisements n~olithiques de Khartoum, mais
le Badarien est mal dat&
Introduction
Explanations of the origins of food production along the Nile in Egypt must be viewed in terms of both local cultural developments and contacts with contiguous populations. ArkeI1
84 Fekri A. Hassan
(1975:34), for example, has proposed that the Khartoum Neolithic was the source of the Badarian on the basis of similarities in black-topped and rippled potte~', shell fishhooks, and flat-topped maceheads. The reverse was recently proposed by Trigger (1983:41), who hypothesized that both sheep/goats and a kind of black-topped pottery had spread south from Egypt to the central Sudan. He assumed that Shaheinab, the type-site of the Khartoum Neolithic, was coeval with the Predynastic Gerzean culture of Upper Egypt.
An inter-regional chronological framework now provides a basis for assessing the temporal feasibility of such cultural contacts and diffusion. Although the number of available dates is still far from satisfactory, especially for certain key sites in both Egypt and the Sudan, there are enough dates to establish a preliminary chronological chart. The radiocarbon age measurements for Egyptian Neolithic and Predynastic sites have already been listed and analyzed (Hassan 1985). My aim here is to examine the numerous radiocarbon measure- ments now available from the Holocene sites in the central Sudan in order to provide credible age estimates for these sites. These estimates will be useful in interpreting the origins and spread of agriculture in the Nile Valley.
Conventional dates were converted to their equivalent tree-ring corrected ages using the tables of Damon el al. (1974) and Klein et al. (t982). Statistically aberrant dates were removed, and series of consistent calibrated dates from each site were averaged following the method described by Long and Rippeteau (1974). Finally, the contemporaneity of sites was examined using the t-tes t. Site locations are shown in Figure 1. Dates and corrections for sites in the central Sudan are presented in Table 1. Those from the Sudanese Desert and from Nubia are shown in Tables 2 and 3, respectively.
Terminology and classification
In practice, the terms 'Khartoum Neolithic' or 'Sudanese Neolithic' are used to refer to sites characterized by the presence of a pottery assemblage including vessels decorated with an impressed zigzag pattern and by characteristic lithic artifacts and fishing gear. Evidence for either plant cultivation or herding may be present or absent at these sites. Sites with a pottery type referred to as 'wavy line' and with no evidence of food production are referred to either as 'Khartoum Mesolithic' or 'Early Khartoum'.
The usage of the term 'Neolithic' thus may be misleading when the origin and spread of agriculture are discussed. For example, there is no evidence for domestic plants from the Sudan before the middle of the third millennium BC, and claims for domestic plants at Kadero have been withdrawn (Marks in lit. 1984). Magid (t984) reported grains of Pennisetum sp. from Shaqadud dated to ca 2700 BC: these grains may be domestic. Evidence for domestic animals is available from earlier contexts, as at Umm Direiwa, one &the early Neolithic sites (Haaland 198t).
Figure 1 Map showinglocation of radiocarbon-dated sites mentioned in text: 1 Merimda Beni Satama; 2 Fayum; 3 Hemamieh; 4 Nagada; 5 Hierakonpolis; 6 Afyeh; 7 WadiHalfa, 8 Dabarosa, HalfaDegheim; 9 DibeiraWest; 10Abka; 11 E1-Kadada, Et-Ghaba; 12 Shaqadud, Umm Direiwa; 13 Kadero, Saggai, Zakiab; t4 [Early] Khartoum; t5 Shaheinab, Sorourab; 16 Nofalab; t7 Islang; 18 Tagra; 19 Guti; 20 Kashm el Girba; 21 Mahal Teglinos; 22 Soleb; 23 Wadi Shaw (Laqiya); 24 Selima; 25 Wadi Howar (Rahib Wells); 26 Shabona; 27 Rabak.
Chronology of the Khartoum ~Mesolithic' and 'Neolithic' sites in the Sudan 85
M EDITERRANEAN SEA
1<
2 o
3
% ,,~,
EGYPT 9
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . io-~ SUDAN 24 o f,'
23 22 0
I
f /
2 5 ,/ o/
t
15 16 17
2 6 ¢
~13
j ' J
s .~.J t
i
i
d21
i (
Tab
le
1 R
adio
carb
on
ch
ron
olo
gy
of
Ear
ly K
har
tou
m,
Kh
arto
un
a N
eoli
thic
an
d r
elat
ed s
ites
.
Rad
ioca
rbo
n
Arc
haeo
logi
cal
Sit
e an
d
age
(bl~
) C
orr
ecte
d a
ge (
BC
) ~
Gro
up
P
rov
enan
ce
Lab
No.
55
68 H
alf-
Lif
e D
amo
n e
l aL
K
lein
et
al.
Mat
eria
l I
Ref
eren
ce
Ear
ly K
har
tou
m
Tag
ra
I- 1
485
8370
4-35
0 S
UA
-68
8
13
0±
22
5
- -
- S
agga
i T
-50
24
7
23
0±
100
:~
....
..
65
70
-55
90
T
-50
25
74
I0-
+10
0 :~
-~
- T
-50
26
72
50-+
110
3 .
..
..
..
..
.
T-5
027
7320
_+ 1
10:1
.
..
..
..
.
Sh
alm
na
SU
A-2
98
7
05
0±
120
63
,1.5
-546
5 S
haq
adu
d
SM
U-1
18
6
6893
_+13
1 ..
...
6190
-537
5 S
aru
rab
Q
- 15
36
6408
_+80
52
80_+
120
56
15
-50
90
I 1
AR
-3,1
76
93
30
± 1
10
......
.. H
AR
-34
75
9
37
0±
11
0
Kas
hm
el-
G
irb
a (K
G-
14)
Kh
arto
um
Neo
lith
ic
and
rel
ated
sit
es
Um
m l
)ire
iwa
I
Um
m
Dir
eiw
a II
l';I
-Gha
ba
27.0
2, 3
3 I
Gra
ve
6 G
rav
e 7
Gra
ve
25
EI-
Ush
ara
11-1
4 l,
ayer
I I
Lay
er I
I I
Isla
ng
R
abak
I,
evel
2
Lev
el 6
L
evel
15
S
hah
ein
ab
SM
U-1
13
9
6215
_+75
50
90_+
1 t5
5
38
0-4
93
5
T-3
261
4.95
0_+8
0 37
65_+
120
39
10-3
,t00
T
-404
5 5
60
0±
11
0
44.7
5_+2
10
46
90
-41
35
T
-369
7 6
01
0+
90
48
90 +
_ 11
0 5
14
0-4
58
0
5000
±30
0 38
25+
320
4405
-317
5
GIF
-63
07
5
02
0+
100
38
45+
- 14
5 40
85-3
645
GIF
-55
06
49
90+_
110
3
81
0±
150
39
45-3
635
GIF
-55
07
5
66
0±
12
0
4.5,
t0±
215
4725
-438
5
GIF
-55
05
56
60_+
120
4540
-+21
5 4
72
5-4
38
5
GI1
"-63
05
5000
+_ I
00
3823
_+ 1
45
39
50
-36
40
G
IF
-630
6 5
35
0±
100
42
11 +
_ 16
0 't
42(I
-388
0 T
-38
80
5
87
0- +
110
47
50
± 1
40
5080
-45'
1.5
T-5
132
44
90
+ 1
003
32
45
± 1
35
3500
-291
5 T
-513
3 6
05
0_
+ 10
03
4-91
5 + _
115
52
60
-47
30
T
-51
34
6
02
0+
13
03
4
89
0±
14
5
52
45
-45
85
C
-754
5,
t45_
+38
0 43
15_+
,t00
,t
815-
3685
C
-753
50
60+
_450
38
90_+
,160
,1
,120
-336
0 T
-322
2 52
60+
_80
4115
_+ 1
50
43
95
-38
00
T
-322
3 53
60-+
80
42
20
± 1
50
44.2
5-38
85
S S S S S S S C
S C
C
C S S S S S S S C S S
Ad
amso
n e
t al
. 19
74
Ad
amso
n e
t al
. 19
7'1.
C
, an
eva
1983
C
anew
t t 9
83
Cau
eva
t983
C
anev
a 19
83
Ad
amso
n e
l al
. 19
82
Mar
ks
198'
t M
oh
amm
ed-A
ll
1911
2 K
hab
lr 1
985
Kh
abir
19
85
Mar
ks
1984
-
Haa
lan
d
19gl
il
aala
nd
19
81
Haa
lan
d
1981
llaa
lan
d
1981
Geu
s pe
rs,
CO
llltll
. G
eus
1982
G
eus
1982
G
eus
1982
Geu
s pe
rs.
conl
m.
Geu
s pe
rs.
co11
1111
. E
1-A
nwar
198
1
Haa
hu
M
1984
lt
aala
nd
19
84
Haa
lan
d
1984
l,
il~b
y 19
55
l,ib
by 1
955
ltaa
lan
d
1979
H
aah
md
19
79
l,at
e N
eoli
thic
Kad
cro
I
T-2
188
(Sou
ther
n T
-218
9 M
idd
en)
SM
U-4
82
K
ader
o 1
K
N-2
821
(No
rth
ern
K
N-2
822
Mid
den
) K
N-2
823
Kad
ero
II
T-3
260
Zak
iab
102
X/9
8y (
15
cm)
T-2
818
Zak
iab
102
X/1
02y
(35
cm)
T-3
050
Nof
alab
Lev
el I
I T
-370
0 T
-370
1 G
uli
SU
A-2
11
?
Sh
aqad
ud
M
idd
en
SM
U-
1134
52
60
±9
0
50
30
±7
0
52
80
±9
0
55
00
±7
0
56
10
±5
5
53
80
±6
5
53
60
±6
0
5360
-+90
56
60-+
80
52
90
±1
00
5
52
0±
t30
54
80±
90
55
90
±7
0
5584
±74
E1-
Kcd
ada
KD
I)2
2 G
rav
e 5
GIF
-46
75
4
63
0±
80
K
I)D
22
Gra
ve
100
GIF
-52
13
4
83
0±
50
K
DD
I07
Mid
den
G
IF-5
77
0
5170
± 1
10
KD
I)21
Mid
den
G
IF-5
50
8
4.79
0± 1
10
KD
D7
6 G
rav
e 3
GIF
-577
1 4
37
0±
80
S
haq
adu
d C
ave
I,cv
el 5
4.
SM
U-1
127
4059
+__6
5 L
evel
38
SM
U-I
12
8
41
23
±8
6
l,ev
el 1
6 S
MU
-11
33
36
15-+
88
I,ev
el 7
1 S
MU
-12
08
4
04
6±
101
M
ahal
Teg
lin
os
? 3
86
0±
90
K
has
hm
eI-
Gir
ba
(N-1
20)
TX
44
6
30
50
±9
0
(N-1
25)
TX
-44
5
44.1
0±90
4115
±15
5 3
85
5±
13
0
41
37
±1
55
43
50±
190
4475
± 1
90
4-24
6± 1
,10
42
20
±1
40
4
22
0±
16
0
4540
-2(1
0 4
14
5±
16
0
43
90
±2
20
43
50±
200
4465
± 1
90
44
60
±1
95
3390
±12
0 3
62
5±
10
0
4015
±15
0 35
80±
140
5
50
7±
12
0
2675
± 1
20
2755
± 1
35
2095
± 1
55
2656
±14
5 24
15±
130
1360
±10
0 31
20±
150
4395
-380
0 40
90-3
650
4400
-386
0 45
30-3
995
4560
-,43
90
44-1
5-39
05
4425
-388
5 44
25-3
885
4-72
5-43
85
4395
-380
0 39
't0-3
660
4540
-394
5 4
55
5d
17
0
46
85
-4t3
0
3655
-306
0 38
55.-
3375
43
25-3
828
3855
-336
0 37
80--
3185
2880
-241
0 29
70-2
410
2310
-173
5 29
00-2
325
2454
-216
0
1565
-925
34
65-2
885
S S S S S S S S S S S S C
C
S S S S S C
C
C
C
C
C
C
~.
C =
cha
rcoa
l; S
= s
hell
2
....
be
yond
ran
ge o
f ca
lib
rati
on
:~
. Cor
rect
ed [
br i
soto
pic
ti'a
ctio
nati
ou
Krz
yza
nia
k 1
982
Krz
yza
nia
k 1
982
Krz
yza
nia
k 1
982
Krz
yza
nla
k !
982
K
rzy
zan
iak
198
2 K
rzy
zan
iak
t 9
82
Haa
lan
d 1
98 I
Haa
lan
d 1
978
Haa
lan
d 1
981
El
An
war
198
1 E
l A
nw
ar 1
981
Ad
amso
n e
t al
. 19
74.
(',lo
se
198'
1.
Mar
ks 1
9114
-
Gcu
s 19
81
Gcu
s 19
81
Geu
s 19
82
Geu
s 19
82
Geu
s pe
ts.
com
m.
Mar
ks 1
984
Mar
ks 1
984
Mar
ks t
984
Mar
ks 1
91/4
C
onst
ant±
n± e
l al
. 19
82
Vel
astr
o el
al.
19
68
Vel
astr
o et
al.
t968
88 Fekri A. Hassan
The Khartoum Mesolithic
Sites and radiocarbon age determinations related to the Khartoum Mesotithic (with no evidence of food production) include Tagra, Shabona, Sarurab, Saggai, and the early levels at Shaqadud. Their dates range from 8370 + 350 bp (I-1485) at Tagra (Adamson etaL 1974) to 6408 -. 80 bp at Sarurab (Mohammed-All 1982). Subsequent determinations from Sarurab II, yielded estimates of 9370 + 110 bp (HAR-3475) and 9330 + 110 bp (HAR- 3476), which indicate that Early Khartoum may date back to the tenth millennium bp (Clark 1984: I 15, Khabir 1985). The ceramic assemblage from Sarurab II includes sherds with wavy Iine and dotted wax), line motifs, as well as dotted straight line, impressed, zigzag, and tinear and twine impressions (Khabir 1985). Most Khartoum Mesolithic dates are beyond the range of tree-ring calibration tables, except for a few late ones which range from 6570-5590 BC to 5615-5090 BC (Tab. 1).
The Khartoum Neolithic and related sites
Initially, the Khartoum Neolithic was dated at its type locality--Shaheinab. Additional dates are now available from many other sites including Umm Direiwa, E1-Ghaba, tslang, Kadero, Zakiab, Nofalab, Rabak, Gull, Shaqadud, and EI-Kadada. The dates from some of these sites are older than those from Shaheinab.
The site ofUmm Direiwa (Haaland 1979) yielded three dates from one occupation (Umm Direiwa I), one of which (T-3261) is too young by comparison to the others and is rejected here. The acceptable dates (T-4045, T-3697) provide an average of 4800 -+ 100 BC. Another occupation (Umm Direiwa II) has a single date, which converts to 3825 + 320 BC, merely indicating an age somewhere between 4465 and 3185 BC.
E1-Ghaba, assigned by Geus (1982, 1983, 1984, pers. comm.) to the Khartoum Neolithic as known from Shaheinab, yielded four dates from several graves. Two congruent dates provide an average of 3830 _+ 105 BC. Two other dates, also congruent, provide an average of 4540 4-_ 150 BC. The EI-Ghaba graveyard may' thus date from about 4500 to 3800 BC. Test excavations at E1-Ushara, a nearby' site with similar ceramics (Geus pers. comm.) provided two consistent dates averaging 4000 + 105 BC.
The fishing camp at Islang Island (EI-Anwar 1981) dates to 4745 + t40 BC, and may be contemporaneous with Umm Direiwa I and E1 Ghaba.
The site of Rabak (Kosti), about 200 km south of Khartoum, preserves deposits with a maximum depth of 150 cm (Haaland 1984, E1-Mahi and Haaland 1984). The oldest level is dated to 6020 _+ t30 bp (T-5134). A middle level was dated to 6050 + 100 bp (T-5133), and an upper level to 4490 + 100 bp (T-5132). All these dates were corrected for isotopic fractionation. Regression analysis of uncorrected and corrected dates from Kadero, Zakiab, Umm Direiwa, and Shaheinab (Haaland 1984:40) provides a correlation coefficient of 0.965 for the folIowing relationship:
corrected date= 0.88 x uncorrected date + 990
The pottery from the early levels at Rabak is very similar to that of the Khartoum Neolithic. At the deepest level a few sherds of 'wavy line' pottery were recovered. The
Chronolo~ o f the Khartoum "Vlesolithic' and "Neolithic' sites in the Sudan 89
ceramics from the younger levels show great simtarities with the Jebel Moya tradition. The subsistence regime reflected in the materials recovered from the early levels indicates exploitation of Nilotic resources and cattle herding.
The date from the upper level (Level 2) at Rabak is tree-ring calibrated to 32t5 + 135 BC. The two dates from the lower levels (Levels 6 and 15) are very similar, and the averaged corrected date is 4905 4- 90 BC. It should be recalied that the Rabak dates are also corrected for isotopic fractionation. Since most other dates are not yet corrected in this manner, it may be useful for comparative purposes to compute an uncorrected age for the lower levels at Rabak. The resultant figure, 4445 BC, suggests that the site is slightly older than Kadero I- North, and as old as E1-Ghaba.
Shaheinab was first dated by Libby (i955) who obtained two dates (C-754, C-753) with large standard errors. The dates provide corrected ages of 4315 + 400 and 3890 + 460 BC, respectively. Two dates (T-3222, T-3223) by Haaland (1979) are very similar and provide an average of 4t65 + 105 BC. The average of all four dates is 4160 + 100 BC.
The southern midden at Kadero I is dated by three measurements (Krzyaniak I982), which provide a corrected average of 4015 4- 85 BC. The corrected age of the northern midden is also dated by three dates to 4330 + 95 BC. A nearby occupation (Kadero II) yielded a single date which corrects to 4220 "4- 140 BC.
The site ofZakiab (Haaland 1978, 1981 ) yielded two similar dates which give an average of 4345 _. 125 BC. The site at Nofalab, north of Omdurman, provided two dates (E1-Anwar 1981 ). The dates are similar and average 4230 + 130 BC. Guli (Adamson et aL 1974) yielded a single date which gives a corrected age of 4350 + 200 BC.
At Shaqadud, on the western fringe of the Butana, where a long sequence is also recorded (Marks 1984, Marks et at. 1982, Magid t984), one date is available for an early component (Midden, level 18) equivalent to Khartoum Neolithic. The date (SMU-1134) yields a corrected age of 4460 + t95 BC. Three other dates (Marks t984) on a younger occupation (SMU-1127, 1128, I208) are congruent and provide an average of 2695 4- 75 BC. A single date from a higher level (SMU- 1133) provides a corrected date of 2095 _. 155 BC (The dates used here are those reported by Marks [1984], which supplant previously published versions).
E1-Kadada, north of Shendi, a Neolithic occupation (Geus 1982, 1983), provided five dates. One of these (5170 4- I 10 bp) is too old by comparison with the others and may belong to an early occupation (Geus pers. comm.). There are also graves below the level dated to 5170 bp. The four acceptable dates average 3530 + 60 BC.
Late sites in eastern Sudan, not related to the Khartoum Neolithic, include Mahal Teglinos in Kassala (Constantini etal. 1982) with a corrected date of 2415 + 110 BC (N-120), and Khashm ei-Girba (Valastro et al. 1968) which yielded two dates of 3120 + 150 BC and 1360 4- ! 00 BC.
The age estimates of sites with two or more dates were tested for significant differences using the t-test~ This revealed that the Khartoum Neolithic sites belong to three chronologi- cal groups.
The early group consists of Umm Direiwa I and and the early graves at Et-Ghaba; the single date from Istang falls between those of Umm Direiwa and E1-Ghaba. The two dates from the lower levels of Rabak without correction for isotopic differentiation are not statistically different from the average of the three sites above mentioned. The estimated ages
90 Fekri A. Hassan
of the four sites in the early group are as follows (note that the Rabak and Umm Direiwa dates are based on corrections for isotopic differentiation):
Rabak 4905 + 90 BC (two dates) Umm Direiwa I 4800 + 100 BC (two dates) tslang 4745 + 140 BC (one date) Et-Ghaba 4540 _+ 150 BC (two dates).
The second group of sites with two dates or more includes Shaheinab, Kadero I, Zakiab, and Nofalab. The t-test showed that the two series from Kadero I are significantly different at the 0.05 level of probability, but similar at the .01 level. This also applies to Zakiab and Kadero I-South. Otherwise all sites are similar at the 0.05 level. The average age for these sites is about 4200 BC. The late graves at E1-Ghaba and E1-Ushara seem to belong to this phase.
The single dates on the Guli site and Kadero II are not significantly different from the average dates of the middle Neolithic group, and are thus regarded as belonging to the same time interval. The estimated ages of the sites of the middle group are as follows:
Guli 4350 _+ 200 BC (one date) Zakiab 4345 + 125 BC (two dates) Kadero i-North 4330 +- 95 BC (three dates) Nofalab 4230 + 130 BC (two dates) Kadero II 4220 + 140 BC (one date) Shaheinab 4160 + 100 BC (four dates) Kadero I-South 4015 4" 85 BC (two dates)
E1-Ushara 4000 _+ 105 BC (two dates) Late EI-Ghaba 3830 -+ 105 BC (two dates).
Dated sites attributed to the late Neolithic group in the central Sudan include E1-Kadada and Shaqadud Cave. Their estimated ages are:
Ei-Kadada 3530 +_ 60 BC (four dates) Shaqadud Cave 2695 + 75 BC (three dates).
The discovery of E1-Kadada provided the first evidence for a Neolithic culture post-dating the Khartoum Neolithic (Geus t 984:44-5). Some graves at E1-Kadada and isolated finds of wavy line sherds show a tocal variant of the Khartoum Neolithic. The E1-Kadada Neolithic itself is characterised by a large variety of vessel shapes decorated with parallel lines of dots as well as fine incision. Rippled and combed surfaces are also represented. The fauna, unlike that of the older Khartoum Neolithic, shows a high frequency of sheep and goats (Geus t984:47).
In the Shaqadud Midden, the upper 40 cm contain late Neolithic (pre-Meroitic) artifacts. The deposits overlie 'a dense accumulation of burnished sherds which are comparable to the Shaheinab Neolithic' (Marks et aL 1982:38). The artifact assemblage from the top unit of the midden is comparable with much of the material in the cave. According to Marks et aL
(t982:39), the chronology of these top layers 'places the cultural materials in the "late" NeoIithic of which so very little is known. Geus refers to it as Phase 2, Arkell as Pan-grave and, perhaps, it is comparable to Middle Kerma'. Mohammed-Aii and Marks (1984) also
Chronology o f the Khartoum 'Mesotit,~#' and 'Neolithic" sites in the Sudan 91
remark that the cave ceramics show clear similarities with stightly earlier pottery found to the east in the Gash Delta (Fattovich, Marks and Mohammed-All 1984). So far the only published date for the Gash Group is that from Mahal Teglinos, 2415 + 130 BC. Dates of 3120 -+ 150 and 1360 + 100 BC have also been obtained at Khashm el-Girba, along the Atbara River west of the Gash (Valastro et al. 1968). According to Fattovich, Marks and Mohammed-All (1984:179), the Gash Group is a member of the Kassala Phase which also includes sites of the Butana Group west of the Atbara and midway between Atbara and Kassala. On the basis of eight dates these authors suggest that the phase tasted from the fourth to the end of the second millennium BC.
The average dates from EI-Kadada and Shaqadud firmly date the central Sudan late Neolithic there from ca 3500 to ca 2700 BC. A single date from Shaqadud Cave (SMU-I t33) of 2095 + 155 BC suggests that the late Neolithic may have lasted throughout the second millennium BC.
The Neolithic of the Nile Valley: a comparative chronology
The earliest Khartoum Neolithic sites, ca 4900-4400 BC, are as old as the site of Merimda Beni Salama in the Delta, which is firmly dated to 4800 BC. In the Fayum, the early Neolithic sites date from about 5200 to 4500 BC but, unlike Merimda, there is no evidence in these sites for domesticates (Ginter et aL 1982). In Upper Egypt, the Badarian is the oIdest archaeologi- cal unit with evidence for pottery and food production. The available dates suggest that it dates to about 4400-4000 BC. This assignment is based on two radiocarbon determinations from Hemamieh (Hassan 1984c). There are no dates yet from any other Badarian site.
The initial attribution by Hays (1976) of the Khattara sites in the Nagada region to the Badarian was erroneous. It was based on the presence of a few rippled pottery sherds, but rippled pottery has been found in the Badari region in Nagada II levels. Further exacava- tions, sequence dates, and seriation by the Washington State University Expedition under my direction indicate that the early settlements in the Nagada region are late Nagada I (Hassan t981, 1984a-c, Hassan and Matson in press). At Hierakonpolis (Hoffman 1982, 1984), early occupations, perhaps dating as far back as the Badarian, were reveated in a test pit at the edge of the floodplain. Excavation of these sites and radiocarbon age determina- tions are eagerIy awaited. There are also no dates for the predynastic site at E1-Kab (Demuyunck and Vermeersch, 1978), which is attributed to the Badarian.
It may be concluded that the Badarian is probably younger than the early group of Khartoum Neolithic sites, but coeval with the middle group.
The earliest pottery in Upper Egypt seems to be that associated with the Tarifian, an industry pre-dating Nagada I (Ginter et al. t 982). The only date on this industry provides an estimate of about 5200 BC. The Tarifian may thus overlap with early Khartoum and the Fayum earl)," Neolithic.
The site of Shaheinab, dating to about 4200 BC, was most probably coeval with the Badarian, and certainly older than the Gerzean. There is thus no chronologicaljustification for assuming that the domestication of sheep/goat or cattle was introduced into the Sudan from Upper Egypt during the Gerzean.
92 Fekri A. Hassan
The Eastern Sahara and the Nile
Recent investigations in the Egyptian Sahara (Wendorf and Schild t980, Schild and Wendorf t984) and the Sudanese Desert (Kuper 1981, Gabriel and Kr6pelin 1984) indicate that the earliest food-producing communities emerged in the desert regions in the sixth millennium BC, if not earlier. Dates from Laqiya, Rahib Wells and Selima in the Sudanese Desert (Tab. 2) range from the sixth to the fourth millennium BC. Date SMU-773, with its large standard error, is here rejected. The two dates from Wadi Shaw (Laqiya) overlap for the period ca 5700 BC.
There is also good evidence from the eastern and central Sahara for severe aridity during the fifth millennium bc (Wendorfand Hassan 1980, Williams 1984). It is most likely that the droughts and unpredictability associated with this mid-Holocene aridity provided a stimulus for a population movement from the deserts to the Nile Valley (Hassan 1984d). The desert Neolithic people may have moved from various regions and settled in widely scattered places along the main Nile. This model is consistent with observed similarities between the lithic assemblages from Nagada and Kharga Oasis (Hassan and Holmes 1985), between the assemblages from Nabta Playa and the post-Shamarkian Neolithic, and between assem- blages from the Great Sand Sea and the Fayum Neolithic (Wendorfand Schitd 1984:428).
The movement from the eastern Sahara into the Nile Valley was probably followed by limited population shifts and a more significant exchange of cultural traits down and up the Nile. Development of river and land transport by means of boats and asses, together with the expansion of trade, were perhaps responsible for intensification of contracts from the Gerzean (Nagada It) onwards.
Contact between the Nilotic peoples and their Saharan neighbours before the fifth millennium BC was not altogether absent. It was most probably the actual movements of desert farmers and herders that ted to an amalgamation of Neolithic traits with those of the pre-existing Nilotic traditions.
The Khartoum Neolithic of the Central Sudan clearly shows some continuities with Early Khartoum (Clark 1984). In Nubia, similarities between the Abka Neolithic sites and older final Palaeolithic sites in the same region (Shiner 1968) also indicate continuity of Nilotic traditions.
The A-Group: chronology and Egyptian connections
Two dates (TF-47 and TF-48) from the A-Group site at Afyeh AFH-7 (Kusumgar et aL 1963) provide a calibrated average of 3025 + 120 BC. However, another date from Afyeh AFH-1 (Fairhall et al. 1966) provides a much older date of 4535 +- 205 BC (UW-30). A corrected date of 3415 4- 120 BC was also obtained from measurements on several fractions of cow hide from site SJE 277/65:4 at Halfa Degheim from a 'Classic' A-Group context (Olsson 1972:251). Dates on Terminal A-Group include 3295 _+ I20 BC (U-835/6) from Halfa Degheim, and 3155 4- 145 BC (U-2426) and 2805 -+ 1 t5 BC (U-2425/2491).from Dibeira site SJE 340. The acceptable dates for the Classic A-Group yield an average of 3240 + 70 BC and those for the Terminal A-Group yield an average of 3070 4- 70. The chronological range of the A-Group is thus from about 3400 to 2900 BC.
In Egypt, Nagada II is dated to ca 3450 BC at Nagada South Town and 3550 BC at
Tab
le 2
R
adio
carb
on c
hron
olog
y of
l)e
sert
Neo
lith
ic s
ites
in
the
Sud
an.
Rad
ioca
rbon
A
rcha
eolo
gica
l S
ite
and
age
(bp)
G
rou
p
Pro
vena
nce
Lab
No.
55
68 l
lalf
-I,i
li~
Cor
rect
ed a
ge (
BC
) :~
1)am
on e
l al
. K
leiu
el a
l.
Mat
eria
l ~
Ref
eren
ce
Sud
anes
e W
adi
Sha
w
KN
-303
4.
6550
_+65
I)
eser
t (I
,aqi
ya)
KN
-308
8 74
90+
300
Neo
lith
ic
SM
1J-7
73
4700
-+50
0 W
adi
lto
war
(R
ahib
Wel
ls)
Sel
ima
KN
-293
8 48
50+
60
KN
-296
2 55
80+
80
SM
U-9
54-
6380
+ 1
30
SM
U-9
55
59
40_+
100
5420
_ + 1 I
0 57
30-5
24,5
70
75-5
705
3650
+ 1
10
3865
-338
0 44
55±
195
4670
-412
5 52
52__
+ 16
0 56
20-5
010
4820
+__
120
5205
-456
0
S P O
S S C
C
Clo
se 1
984-
C
lose
198
4 C
lose
198
0
Ku
per
198
1 K
up
er
1981
C
lose
198
0 C
lose
198
0
i S
= sh
ell;
C =
ch
arco
al;
0 =
ostr
ich
eggs
hell
9.
- B
eyon
d ca
libr
atio
n ra
nge
Tab
le 3
R
adio
carb
on
ch
ron
olo
gy
of
Neo
lith
ic a
nd p
ost-
l)al
aeol
ithi
c si
tes
in N
ubia
Arc
haeo
logi
cal
Sit
e an
d G
rou
p
P,'o
vena
nce
I,ab
No.
Rad
ioca
rbo
n
age
(bp)
C
orr
ecte
d a
ge (
BC
) :~
5568
Hal
f-L
ite
Dam
on
et
al.
Kle
in e
t al
. M
ater
ial t
R
cl'e
rcnc
c
Sh
amar
kia
n
Abk
an
Ab
ka
Ne
olit
hic
Neo
lith
ic
Pos
t-S
ham
arki
an
Neo
lith
ic
Kh
arto
um
-V
aria
nt
Wad
i H
alt~
l S
ite
DIW
~
WS
IJ-1
76
7700
+
_ 12
0 l)
ibei
ra W
est
I)W
-51
SM
U-5
82
8
86
0±
90
A
bka
32,
U
M-7
94.
9175
_+40
0 32
, L
M
-795
9'
t50
±'t
00
A
bka
9, L
2 M
-798
13
55-+
200(
1t.)
9,
IA
M
-801
45
00+
-350
9,
IA
M
-802
4
47
0+
30
0
9, L
5 M
-803
5
96
0±
40
0
9, 1
,6
M-8
04-
8260
+-4
00(R
) W
adi
Hal
th
WS
U-1
03
5
22
0±
50
W
IIW
-5
Sou
th B
uhen
W
SU
-11
0
5120
-+ 1
00
Wad
i H
allh
, W
ItW
-7
WS
U-1
47
4-80
04-1
20
I)ab
avos
a 1
-86
4
6137
_+30
0 l)
lW-5
0
WS
U-1
74
56
00+
_200
W
adi
ttal
Ih
WS
U-1
03
52
20+
-50
l)ib
eira
',,'V
est 5
T
X-1
15
5
65
40
± 1
10
Sol
eb,
12
P-7
21
6
19
5±
70
S
oleb
, 13
P-
722
61
25
+7
0
32
30
±3
60
37
95-2
550
3190
±32
0 37
85-2
430
48
30
±4
00
53
60-4
390
,107
0±13
5 43
25--
3805
3960
__+
1'1
5
4135
-367
(I
3590
± 1
50
3860
-336
0 50
15±
305
5540
-444
.5
4't
75
+2
70
49
15-3
940
'1070
__+
135
4325
-380
5 54
10±
140
58
25-5
290
5070
± 1
15
5320
-4.9
4-5
50
05
±9
0
5285
-491
5
C
C
S S C
S ;) S C
S C
C
C
C
O
C
C
Wen
do
rf 1
968
Clo
se 1
980
Cra
ne
and
Gri
flim
196
0 C
rane
an
d G
riff
en 1
960
Cra
ne
and
Gri
fl~
n 19
60
Cra
ne
and
Gri
ffen
196
0 C
ran
e an
d G
rifl
lm 1
960
Cra
ne
and
Gri
fl'c
n 19
60
Cra
ne
and
(}ri
ltlm
19
60
Ch
atte
rs
196B
Ch
atte
rs
1968
C
hat
ters
19
68
Kam
or
1965
W
end
orf
196
8 W
end
orf
196
8 V
alas
tro
el
al,
1978
Sm
cken
rath
& R
alph
19
65
Stu
cken
ra01
& R
alph
19
65
Fin
al Q
adan
Kha
rtou
m
Var
iant
Cla
ssic
A
-Gro
up
A-G
roup
Ter
min
al
A-G
roup
Wad
i l-
Iatl
h S
ite
6054
W
SU
-190
68
30_+
200
Wad
l H
alfa
IJ
-822
, "]
/
AS
16-
V- 1
9 U
-242
9,~-
368
5 ±
90
/
U-2
49
2J
I tal
fh I
)egh
eim
U
-819
,']
sj F
,227
/65:
4 u-
818,
!,.
U-8
07 [
an
d U
-80
6 J
't655
± 8
0
Atb
ych
AF
H7,
158
T
F-4
8 4-
290±
120
AH
-17,
157
T
I"-4
7 43
80_+
115
AF
Ill
UW
-30
4660
±1(1
0 H
alfi
l D
eghe
im
U-8
35
4.55
5±75
SJ
E27
7/49
:12
U-8
34
Dib
eira
S
I E34
0/S
EI
I:5
U-2
426
,t4
40
±9
0
SIE
340/
SE
II:,
l U
-24,
25,
4160
±55
2185
±14
0
34.1
5±12
0
2965
±t7
0 30
80±
165
4-
535±
205
3295
± 1
20
3155
± 1
4-5
2805
±11
5
6175
--53
10
2310
-t89
0
3760
-315
5
3350
-265
5 33
65-2
870
4725
-,1-3
85
3635
-3(1
05
3480
-289
5 29
40-2
560
C
Wo
od
Cow
hide
C
C
c Co
wh
ide
C
C
I. C
= c
harc
oal;
S =
she
ll;
O =
ost
rich
egg
shel
l ~
Wit
h ce
ram
ics
cons
ider
ed t
o be
Neo
lidd
c (S
chil
d et
al.
19
68:7
03)
3 ..
....
....
. B
eyon
d ca
libr
atio
n ra
nge
,t W
ith
pott
ery
(Shi
ner
1968
:603
)
Shi
ner
1968
Ols
son
1972
Ols
son
1972
Kus
umga
r el
aL
19
63
Kus
umga
r el
al.
19
63
FaM
mll
et
aL
1966
Ols
son
1972
Ols
son
1972
O
lsso
n 19
72
96 Fekri A . Hassan
Hierakonpolis (Hassan 1985). Nagada III is placed at approximately 3300 BC followed by the First Dynasty dated to about 3150 BC and lasting until about 2800 BC (Hassan 1980, 1985, Kemp 1980). The A-Group thus seems to have been coeval with the later part of Nagada II and to have lasted into the period of the First Dynasty.
The A-Group was later than the post-Shamarkian Neolithic, for which two dates from sites DIW-50 and DIW-4 (Tab. 3) provide an average of 4t50 4- 120 BC. Dates on the Khartoum Variant Neolithic from Soleb indicate an age of about 5000 BC and are older than those for the A-Group. However, the A-Group may have overlapped with the Abkan, with acceptable dates of about 3200 BC, and the late Neolithic of the Sudan (cf. Trigger 1976:31-39), which is dated to about 3530 + 60 BC at E1-Kadada and 2695 + 75 BC at Shaqadud (see above). This agrees in general with the conclusions reached by Nordstrom (1972:28-29) on the basis of ceramics and other artifacts. According to Nordstrom, the 'Classic' A-Group corresponds mostly with Nagada III, and the Terminal A-Group to the transition between Nagada III and the First Dynasty. Nordstrom also identifies an Early A-Group which corresponds to a late Nagada I, and to the early and developed stages ofNagada II.
Similarities between the A-Group and the indigenous Neolithic cuitures suggests that the A-Group was not a result of a migration of Predynastic Egyptians as Adams (1970:272) concluded. The chronology supports the hypothesis that the Abkan and the Khartoum Variant both contributed to the development of the A-Group (Trigger 1983:42). Fur- thermore, the rise of provincial rulers in Nubia during the time of the A-Group (Williams 1980) is consistent with information nov," available on the existence of Neolithic communities in central Sudan and Nubia dating at least a thousand years before the A-Group.
The rise of the Pharaonic dynasties in Egypt began ca 3150 BC (Hassan, 1980, Kemp 1980), but it was preceded by a series of kings commanding large pro~Ances in Upper and Lower Egypt. These kings most probably date back to the beginning ofthe Final Predynastic period (Nagada III) dated ca 3300 BC.
Final remarks
This survey of radiocarbon dates and the critical examination of their validity and corrected values (Fig. 2) indicates that Neolithic developments (though not necessarily of the same subsistence regime) along the Nile in the Sudan were as old as those in Upper Egypt and Nubia; and that regional developments with sustained traditions characterize various cultural provinces. The boundaries between these provinces could not have been impervious to outside influences; and contacts both up and down the Nile are likely. The search for a single source of agricultural diffusion or a single province where kingship emerged and then spread is apparently futile. Cultures and ethnic entities are historical artifacts of mutable and transient character responding to the incessant forces of internal change, and to the inevitable infiltration of ideas, artifacts, and individuals from neighbouring groups.
In addition to the theoretical issues raised here and the importance of providing adequate models of the causes, routes, modes, and mechanisms of diffusion between the various cultural provinces of the Nile and the Sahara, there are several methodological considera- tions that should not be ignored. First, the number of dates so far available is woefully small, and thus any interpretations based on chronology are tentative. Single dates are almost useless at the level of temporal resolution required (_+ 50 years). At least three dates from any
3ooo .....
iooo ....
!? :::
::::~
ii!S
:::i~
::?:::
.::i::
~:;'~
i~l:~
::.~:
:~:~
::>-:!
::':?i~
~:
~::::
:i::::
:::::
. ==
====
====
====
====
====
====
====
= :s
~:::
~:::
::::
:~.,.
-~
:::
' ":::
:iE!!:
:!:!:!
:!:!:!
:i:!:i
:i~:!!
iE~:
!: !:i
:.~!:!
:!:5:i
:!:i:!
:!:{i!
i:k:
::::i:
:~:i:
i:i:i:
iglliE
i!i!i!
:i:~
:i:{:!:{
:~:!:!
;Eili#
i!!S:{
:i:!:i:i
:!:!:
~::: ::
:::ii?
!~::g
:i:i:!
:i:;:V
i ~:
:i.
..~:~:
T:i~i
}!?:~
,_ '
_Z":
2 2::
::2-
2-7
_ _
Z.~-
"}7:
"
~....
_:~2
_"
"'Z
2Z'T
-_":
: --i~
ii[::'::
::i::i!'
~i :. i~
:i
/ /
~x
~
..
..
.
' .............
'-J--~
....
I ;
g~A
AO
, L
__t7
i'.:.{
i~{::i}
i'.iT!::}
::i};5{
i:~:-f:
,~
CkpS
EO,~
.N~.
ST
....
....
C
=
1 ...
..
......
.
I
} I P
REDY
NAST
IcEAR
LY
ii:.!igii
!!!i!:-{
N~gT
-S
-! , |
~J
~.-g
RO
UP
I~O~ T-SHA M
ARKIAN
I-
t
LATE
NEOLITHIC
I I
i i I
l I
r I
I .:. : i
'L.,
~}:i"4
:-J E
L K
^OA
OA
#.
,'fIDDLE
NEOLITHIC
,000
- -
ARLY FAYUM
IEOLITHIC
TARIFIAN
.... IHE
DELTA
TIIE FAYUM
UPPER
EGYPT
XlUBIA
THE
SUDAN
Figu
re 2
C
hron
olog
ical
ch
art
o1" N
eoli
thic
sit
es o
f ce
ntra
l S
udan
an
d of
N
eoli
thic
an
d P
redy
,mst
ic
site
s of
Egy
pt
and
Nub
ia.
Th
e ch
art
shov
es
stad
stlc
al
rang
e (w
ithi
n tw
o st
anda
rd d
evia
tion
s) o
fwel
ghte
d av
erag
es.
Scal
e to
the
lef
t is
in
tree
-riH
g ca
libr
ated
yea
rs B
(3.
98 Fekri A . Hassan
single occupation or occurrence are necessary- for a reliable estimate of the time-range of that occupation. Second, many of the dates reported are on shell. The dates are apparently satisfactory on the basis of age determinations on modern shell (Geus pers. comm.), but a determination of the age of a modern shell by Burleigh (I982) indicates that the shell was older by about 150 years than expected. Accordingly, paired shell/charcoal dates from the same occurrence are atso required to evaluate the reliability of the shell dates. There is also a need to correct shelI dates for istotopic fractionation. Such corrections have been reported by Caneva (1983) and Haaland (I 984). The choice of charred material for dating should also be considered. Charred wood from trees, for example, may be significantly older than charred grain.
The analytical approach to radiocarbon dating adopted here underscores the importance of tree-ring corrections not only to ensure a standard unit of measurement (the calendrical year), but also to facilitate correlation with historical dates. Averaging, when appropriate using statistical weighting, provides greater temporal precision. Continued reference to individual dates with no regard to the magnitude of the standard deviation, as if radiocarbon dates represent a point in time rather than a temporal range, can tead to faulty interpreta- tions. It should also be noted that the temporal range of averaged dates represents a probabilisdc range, not the duration of occupation.
A further problem that should be considered in establishing a chronology of food- producing communities concerns the kind of evidence used to infer food production. Lack of domestic plants or animals may be a result of seasonal activities emphasizing utilization of wild resources by food-producing communities, lack of preservation, or inadequate retrieval methods. Also, lack of archaeological sites may be a result of geological circumstances during or after the occupation of the site. It is therefore important to investigate sites in a regional context in order to detect permanent/seasonaI settlement patterns, to assess the impact of site forming processes on preservation, and to ensure that adequate retrieval methods are employed.
Summary
Critical evaluation, tree-ring calibration, and statistical analysis of radiocarbon dates from Khartoum Mesotithic, Khartoum Neolithic, and related sites in the central Sudan provide a chronological framework for interpreting local developments of post-Palaeolithic cultures and connections with Egypt (Fig. 2). The dates so far available, reported here in tree-ring corrected years BC, suggest that the Early Khartoum (Khartoum Mesolithic) dates from >7000 BC to 5000 BC. Sites with Neolithic ceramics analogous to those from Shaheinab include an early phase which is represented at Umm Direiwa I, Islang, E1 Ghaba, and Rabak, dated from ca 4900 to 4450 BC. Shaheinab itself, and other related sites including Kadero, Zakiab, and Nofalab, date from ca 4400 to 3800 BC. Late Neolithic sites include E1- Kadada which is dated to ca 3500 BC and Shaqadud, ca 2700 BC.
Cultural continuities in the central Sudan and Nubia from Early Khartoum to the Khartoum Neolithic indicate that the Neolithic traits were amalgamated with previously established traditions. The droughts of the mid-Holocene were apparently responsible for the movement of Neolithic groups from various localities to many places along the course of the Nile both in Egypt and the Sudan. This would explain the establishment of widely
Chronology of the Khartoum 'Mesotithic' and %¥otithic' sites in the Sudan 99
separated Neolithic communities in the Nile Delta and the Fayum, Upper Egypt, Nubia, and the Sudan during more or less the same time interval, namely from about the close of the sixth millennium BC to about 4400 BC. The chronometric data now' available provide no reason to suspect that agriculture was initated at a single cradle along the Nile and then transmitted
elsewhere. Both the late manifestations of the Neolithic at E1-Kadada and the A-Group are coeval
with the interval represented by Nagada I t and Nagada III. The A-Group was coeval with the later part ofNagada II and lasted until the beginning of the First Dynasty in Egypt. It is likely that indigenous development toward provinicial states happened simultaneously both
in Nubia and Egypt.
Acknowledgements I am most grateful to Isabella Caneva, F. Geus, Randi I-taatand, A. E. Marks, Peter Shinnie, and Fred Wendorfwho read and commented on a prelimina W version of this paper. Their
comments were particularly useful in clari~'ing the position of various sites in the archaeolo-
gical sequence. Caneva, Geus, Haaland, Marks and Mohammed-All also provided references and information on radiocarbon dates. I also thank David and Laurel Phillipson
for careful and incisive editing of the text.
References Adams, W. Y. 1970. A re-appraisal of Nubian
Culture History. Orientalia 39(2):269-77. Adamson, D., Clark, J. D. and Williams,
M. A.J. I974. Barbed bone points from central Sudan and the age of the 'Early Khartourn' tradition. Nature 249:120--3.
Adamson, D. A., Williams, M. A.J. and Gillespie, R. 1982. Palaeogeography of the Gezira and of the lower Blue and White Nile valleys. In A land between two NiIes (eds M. A.J. Williams and D. A. Adamson): 165-219. Rotterdam: A. A. Balkema.
E1-Anwar, S. 1981. Archaeological excavations on the west bank of the river Nile in the Khartoum area. Nyame Akuma 18:42-5.
ArkelI, A.J. I975~ The prehistory of the Nile VatIey (Handbuch der Orientalisk). Leiden: Brill.
Burleigh, R. 1982. Two radiocarbon dates for freshwater shelI from Hierakonpolis: archaeological and geological interpretations. Journal of Archaeological Science I 0:36 t-7.
Caneva, I. 1983. Pottery-using gatherers and hunters at Saggai (Sudan): preconditions for food production. Origini 12:1-278.
Chatters, A. E. 1968. Washington State University radiococarbon measurements I. Radiocarbon 10(2):478-9.
Clark, J. D. 1984. Prehistoric cultural
continuity and economic change in the central Sudan in the early Holocene. In From Hunters to Farmers (eds J. D. Clark and S. A. Brandt): t 13--26. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Close, A. E. 1980. Current research and recent radiocarbon dates from northern Africa. Journal of African History 21:145-67.
Close, A. E. 1984. Current research and recent radiocarbon dates from northern Africa, I I. Journal of African H#tory 25:1-24.
Constantini, L., Fattovich, R., Pardini, E. and Piperno, M. 1982. Preliminary" report of archaeological investigations at the site of Mahal Teglinos (Kassala), November 1981. A~'ame Akuma 21:30--3.
Crane, H. R. and Griffen, J. B. 1960. University of Michigan radiocarbon dates V. Radiocarbon 2:31-48.
Damon, P. E., Ferguson, C. W, Long, A. and Wallick, E. I. 1974. Dendrochronologic calibration of the radiocarbon time scale. Amerfcan Antiquity 39:350-66.
Demuynck, M. A. and Vermeersch, P. M. 1978. Fouilles duns le secteur sud-ouest d'E1 Kab. tn El Kab H (ed. P. M. Vermeersch): pp. 125-44. Bruxelles: Fondation Eg'yptologique Reine Elisabeth.
100 Fekri A. Hassan
Fairhall, A. W., Shell, W. R. and Young, J. A. 1966. Radiocarbon dates at the University of Washington ItI . Radiocarbon 8:498-506.
Fattovich, R., Marks, A. E. and Mohammed- Ati, A. 1984. The archaeolog2/of the Eastern Sahel, Sudan: preliminary results. African Archaeological Review 2:173-88.
Gabriel, B. and Kr6pelin, S. 1984. Holocene Iake deposits in north-west Sudan. Palaeoecology of Africa and the Surrounding Islands 16:295-9.
Geus, F. 198t. Franco-Sudanese excavations in the Shendi area (1980). Nyame Akuma 18:37-42.
Geus, F. 1982 Franco-Sudanese excavations in the Sudan (1981-1982). Nyame Akuma 21:33-4.
Geus, F. 1983. Rapport annuet d'activitg 1980-1982. Khartoum: Directorate General for Antiquities and National Museums of the Sudan.
Geus, F. 1984. Rescuing Sudan's Ancient Cultures. Khartoum: French Unit of the Directorate Generai of Antiquities and NationaI Museums in the Sudan.
Ginter, V. B., Kozlowski, J. K., Pawlikowski, M. and Silwa, J. 1982. E1-Tarif und Qasr et-Sagha, Forschungen zur Siedlungsgeschichte des Neolithikums, der Frfihpredynastischen Epoche und des Mittleren Reiches. Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archglologischen Instituts Abteitung Kairo 38:97-129.
Haaland, R. 1978. The seasonal interconnection between Zakiab and Kadero: two Neolithic sites in the central Sudan. Nyame Akuma t3:3I-5.
Haaland, R. 1979. Report on the t979 season in the Sudan. Nyame Akuma 14:62.
Haaland, R. 1981. Migratory herdsmen and cultivating women. Bergen.
Haaland, R. 1984. Continuity and discontinuity. Norwegian Archaeological Review 17(1):39-51.
Hassan, F. A. 1980, Radiocarbon chronology of Archaic E~m/pt. Journal of Near Eastern Studies 39(3) :203-7.
Hassan, F. A. I981. The Predynastic of Egypt: subsistence-settlement studies in the Nagada- Khattara region. Final Report to the National Science Foundation, Washington D.C.
Hassan, F. A. 1984a. The beginnings of Egyptian civilization at Hierakonpolis. Quarterly Review of Archaeology 5 ( 1 ): 13-5.
Hassan, F. A. t984b. Radiocarbon chronology of Predynastic Nagada settlements, Egypt. Current Anthropology 25:681-3.
Hassan, F. A. I984c. A radiocarbon date from Hemamieh, Upper Egypt. Nyame Akuma 24/25:3.
Hassan, F. A. 1984d. Mid-Holocene desertification and human responses in the Western Desert of Eg-ypt. Paper presented at the 17th Annual Chacmool Conference, Calgary. In press.
Hassan, F. A. I985. Radiocarbon chronology of Neolithic and Predynastic sites in Upper Eg2cpt and the Delta. African Archaeological Review 3:95-116.
Hassan, F. A. and Holmes, D. L. 1985. The archaeology of the Umm el-Dabadib area, Kharga Oasis, Egypt. FRSU Research project Report 82035. Cairo: Cairo University.
Hassan, F. A. and Matson, R. G. In press. Seriation of Predynstic potsherds from the Nagada region. In Late Preh#to~y of the Nile Basin and the Sahara (ed. L. Krzyzaniak). Poznan: Polish Academy of Sciences.
Hays, T. R. 1976. Predynastic Eg2/pt: recent research. Current Anthropology 17:552-4.
Hoffman, M. A. I982, The Predynastic of Hierakonpolis. Egyptian Studies Association, Publication No. I. Cairo: University Herbarium.
Hoffman, M. A. 1984. A stratified site sequence from Hierakonpolis. Paper for the Symposium Late prehisto~' of the Nile basin and Sahara, Poznan.
Kantor, H.J . 1965. The relative chronolo~' of E~'pt and its foreign correlation before the late Bronze Age. In Chronologies in Old World Archaeology (ed. R. W. Ehrlich): pp. 1-46. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Kemp, B. 1980. Egyptian radiocarbon dating: a reply to James Metlaart. Antiquity 54:25-8.
Khabir, A. R. I985. A note on the excavation of a Neolithic site in the Sarurab area, Khartoum Province. Nyame Akuma 26:40.
Klein, J., Lerman, J. C., Damon, P. E. and Ralph., E. K. 1982. Calibration of radiocarbon dates. Radiocarbon 24(2): 103--50.
Krzyzaniak, L. 1982. Radiocarbon measuremer]~ts for the Neolithic settlement at Kadero (central Sudan). Nyame Akuma 21:38.
Kuper, R. t981. Untersuchungen der Besiedlungsgeschichte der 5stlichen Sahara. Vorbericht fiber die Expedition 1980. Be#rage
Chronology of the Khartoum 'Mesolithic' and %;eolithic' sites in the Sudan I01
zur allgemeinen und vergleichenden Archiiologie 3:215-75.
Kusumgar, S., Lal, D. and Sarna, R. P. 1963. Tara Institute radiocarbon date list, I. Radiocarbon 5:278--9.
Libby, W. F. 1955. Radiocarbon Dating. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Long, A. and Rippeteau, R. 1974. Testing contemporaneity and averaging radiocarbon dates. American Antiquity 39:205-15.
Magid, E. A. 1984. Macrobotanical remains fi'om Shaqadud: interim note. Nyame Akuma 24/25:27-8.
EI-Mahi, A. T. and Haaland, R. 1984. Archaeological research in the area of Rabak and Atbara, Sudan: 1983-1984. Nyame Akuma 24/25:28--32.
Marks, A. E., 1984. Butana Archaeological Project: 1983/84. Nyame Akuma 24/25:32-3.
Marks, A. E., Hays, T. R., Elamin, Y. and Mohammed-All, A. i982. Butana archaeological project: interim report. Nyame Akuma 21:38-40.
Mohammed-All, A. 1982. The Neolithic Period in the Sudan, c. 6000-2500 BC. Oxford: BAR International Series, 139.
Mohammed-All, A. and Marks, A. E. 1984. The prehistory of Shaqadud in the western Butana, central Sudan: a preliminary, report. Norwegian Archaeological Review 17:52-9.
Nordstrom, H.-A. (ed.) 1972 Neolithic and A- Group Sites. (Scandinavian Joint Expedition to Sudanese Nubia, vol. 3, I). Uppsala: Scandinavian University Books.
Olsson, I. U. 1972. The C 14 age determinations. In Neolithic and A-Group Sites. (Scandinavian Joint Expedition to Sudanese Nubia. Vol. 3, I). (ed. H.-A. Nordstrom): pp. 250-251. Uppsala: Scandinavian University Books.
Schild, R. and Wendor( F. t984. Lithostratigraphy of Hotocene lakes along the Kiseiba Scarp. In Cattle-keepers of the Eastern Sahara, the Neolithic of Bir Kiseiba. (eds F~ Wendorf, R. Schild and A. Close): pp. 9-40. Dallas: Southern Methodist University.
Shiner, J. 1968. The Cataract tradition. In The Prehisto~y ofN'ubia (ed. F. Wendorf): pp. 535- 629. Dallas: Southern Methodist University Press.
Stuckenrath, R. and Ralph, E. K. 1965. University of Pennsylvania radiocarbon dates VIII. Radiocarbon 7:I87-99.
Trigger: B. I976. Nubia under the Pharaohs. London: Thames and Hudson.
Trigger, B. 1983. The rise of Egyptian civilization. In Ancient Egypt, a social history (B. Trigger, B.J. Kemp, D. O'Conner and A. B. Lloyd): pp. 1-43. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Valastro, E., Davis, M. and Rightmore, C. T. 1968. University of Texas at Austin radiocarbon dates VI. Radiocarbon I0(2):384-401.
Valastro, E., Davis, M. and Varela, A. G. 1978. University &Texas at Austin radiocarbon dates XII. Rac~ocarbon 20(2):245--73.
Wendorf, F. 1968. Summary of Nubian prehisto~'. In The Prehistory of Nubia (ed. F. Wendorf): pp. 1041-59. Dallas: Southern Methodist University Press.
Wendorf, F. and Hassan, F. 1980. Holocene ecology and prehistory in the Egyptian Sahara. In The Sahara and the N'ile (eds M. A.j . Williams and H. Faure): pp. 407- 19. Rotterdam: Balkema.
Wendorf, F. and Schild, R. (eds) 1980. Prehistory of the .Egyptian Sahara. New York: Academic Press.
Wendorf, F. and Schild, R. 1984. Conclusions. In Cattle-keepers of the Eastern Sahara, the Neolithic ofBir Kiseiba (eds F. Wendor~ R. Schitd and A. Close): pp. 404-28. Dallas: Southern Methodist University.
Williams, B. 1980. The lost Pharaohs of Nubia. Archaeology Oct-Nov.
Williams, M. A.J. 1984. Late Quaternary prehistoric environments in the Sahara. In From Hunters to Farmers (eds J. D. Clark and S. A. Brandt): pp. 74-83. Berkeley: University of California Press.
102 Fekri A. Hassan
Postscript
Information was kindly communicated by R. Haaland in April 1986, while this paper was in press. Corrections for isotopic fracdonation of age measurements from Zakiab, Kadero I (southern midden), Umm Direiwa I, and Shaheinab are now available, together with additional measurements with corrections for isotopic fractionation of 5550 + 90 bp for Shaheinab (T-3699) and 5860 ± 80 bp (T-5726) for level 3 at Rabak. These data provide the following average age estimates in calendrical years for sites with known corrections for isotopic fractionation (cf. p. 90):
Rabak, lower levels (15, 6) 4905 + 90 BC (two dates) Rabak, upper level (3) 4740 + 120 BC (one date) Umm Direiwa I 4800 ~ 100 BC (two dates) Zakiab 4780 _+ 90 BC (two dates) Shaheinab 4560 _+ 70 BC (three dates) Kadero I-South 4400 + 60 BC (two dates). Sites with corrections for isotopic fractionation thus indicate that the temporal range of the
early and middle Khartoum ~Neotithic' groups is from about 4900 to 4400 BC, con- temporaneous with the early occupations in the Nile Delta and the Fayum. Shaheinab is certainly older than the Gerzean and late Amratian, but is either coeval with or slightly oIder than Hemamieh. There are also no apparent temporal gaps within the sequence of early and middle Khartoum :Neolithic' sites.
