Ghaba
Ghaba is a Neolithic cemetery mound and African archaeological site located in Central Sudan in the Shendi region of the Nile Valley. The site, discovered in 1977 by the Section Française de la Direction des Antiquités du Soudan while they were investigating nearby Kadada, dates to 4750–4350 and 4000–3650 cal BC. Archaeology of the site originally heavily emphasized pottery, as there were many intact or mostly intact vessels. Recent analysis has focused on study of plant material found, which indicates that Ghaba may have been domesticating cereals earlier than previously believed. Though the site is a cemetery, little analysis has taken place on the skeletons due to circumstances of the excavation and poor preservation due to the environment. The artifacts at Ghaba suggest the people who used the cemetery were part of a regionalization separating central Sudan's Neolithic from Nubia. While many traditions match with Nubia, the people represented at Ghaba had some of their own particular practices in food production and bead and pottery production, which likely occurred on a relatively small scale. They also had some distinct funerary traditions, as evidenced by their grave goods. The people at Ghaba would have likely existed at least partially in a trade network that spread through the Nile and to the Red Sea. They used agriculture, cultivation, and cattle for sustenance.
Excavation
Ghaba was discovered in 1977 by the SFDAS led by Francis Geus during their investigations of another nearby Neolithic cemetery Kadada. The primary archaeologist was Yves Lecointe. The mound was 3 meters high and 3600 square meters in area. Investigators noted that the size of the mound had likely decreased significantly due to erosion. The first excavation at Ghaba was in 1980, and further investigation took place in 1985 and 1986. The mound was divided into four quarters. The northeast section was excavated thoroughly, and test trenches were made in the other three quadrants. Many of the graves were dangerously close to the surface, where they would be threatened by erosion. 328 total graves were excavated: 265 Neolithic graves, and 63 historic graves. The bones were described as poorly preserved, and most documentation and collection was of the teeth. There was no physical anthropologist involved in the excavations, so data pertaining to sex, age, and health is very limited or completely absent. Non-skeletal material collected was preserved much better, and have been restored and photographed extensively. The graves were documented, mapped, and drawn in detail. They recorded the materials found in the grave, and the orientations and positioning of the skeletons and other materials. They were able to use the recorded depths of the burials to make conclusions about seriation of the burials and also the pottery.The skeletal material recovered are at the Research Centre in Evolutionary Anthropology and Palaeoecology in Liverpool, UK. The pottery recovered was restored and is now kept at the Khartoum National Museum.
Grave goods
About 70% of the graves at Ghaba had goods associated with them that were discovered during the excavation. Many contained pottery, but other items were shells, animal bones, bracelets, beads, pendants, palettes, grinders, malachite splinters, and a mace-head.Pottery
During excavations, archaeologists recovered 311 complete or mostly complete pottery vessels. These bowls were mostly buried upside-down next to the heads of people, which is unusual, but has been recorded at other Neolithic sites such as Kadero in a few graves, and in one case each at Al Khiday 2 and Shaheineb. Some pots showed evidence that they had been repaired before burial, indicating they were not made specifically for funerary purposes, and were functional.Recovered pots were handmade with coil technique and could be easily divided into groups based on shape. These shapes are beakers, bowls, jars, dishes, and spoons. Bowls were further broken down into types such as hemispherical, globular, conical, and composite. Jars were broken down into the types ovoid, globular, and biconical. Beakers were divided into types caliciform or cylindrical. Each type followed very similar patterns in shape. As the height changed, the width changed, and almost always in the same ratio. The shape was consistent even as they were smaller or larger. Of the most abundant category: bowls, the most common types are globular and then hemispheric.
Light brown or red surfaces of the pottery are most common. 48.39% of the vessels were decorated. Analysis of the decorations found 22 different types obtained via incision, impressions, and firing methods. There are also 7 distinct rim decoration patterns. Many of these decoration types can also be found at other Neolithic cemeteries in central Sudan and upper Nubia. The typological organization of the pottery assemblage based on shape, wall decoration, and rim decoration was used to seriate graves. The decorations covered the whole walls of the pottery which is characteristic of central Sudan. This is different than pottery in northern Sudan where decorations typically only cover the rim area.
The cylindrical beakers, of which they found 12 distinct vessels are unique to Ghaba, and not found in other assemblages associate with Neolithic Sudan. The majority of the vessel types or patterns can be linked to other Neolithic Sudanese cemeteries. For example, biconical jars at Ghaba are characterized by a red slip and black rim or semicircles. These vessels were found in graves in association with the few bucrania found. This jar shape and black semicircle decorated rim has also been found at ROM222, Shaheinab, and Kadero.
The clear categorization of pottery types at the early stages of occupation at Ghaba, suggests people moved into this region possibly from the Southern Dongola Reach. The organized pottery production may also have served as a social tool, uniting people through migration and strengthening their identities. Most likely though, it means that the majority of pottery vessels were made by specialized potters, and not in individual households.
Body ornaments
The body ornaments found at Ghaba and other Neolithic sites are less complex in their design and made with raw materials sourced closer to them than their Nubian counterparts, which suggests a regionalization of culture. The presence of body ornaments indicates a complex social and economic system, as it requires organization of production likely by specific individuals.Beads
Beads were found in 35 total graves.31 graves contained stone beads. Archaeologists categorized these into 3 categories: cylindrical, barrel, and annular. The most common type was annular. The beads were mostly made up of chalcedony as carnelian or agate, but 3 were made of quartzite. Agate comes from gravels, which could have been found at the Umm Ruwaba Formation, or at even nearer gravels that have not yet been documented in a geological survey. The presence of carnelian is less certain, as it is much more rare than agate, not found in Sudan, and looks very similar to burnt agate. There is minimal archaeological evidence to make this conclusion, but one fact that supports the burnt agate theory is that there are very rare to find lithics for carnelian, but fairly common to find pebbles and debitage labeled carnelian. The raw materials found at Ghaba in the bead assemblages and at other sites in central Sudan are different than those found at Nubian sites, which can be explained by the geology of their physical location, but also the different modes of neolithization in these regions.
Accounts of the presence of amazonite beads are conflicting. Some texts say they were not present and some say they were found but very rare. The amazonite likely would have originated from Ethiopia, and was seen in large quantities at other Neolithic cemeteries such as R12 in northern Sudan, which suggests a North African trade network may have existed in the Neolithic.
Evidence for stone bead production comes from grave 38 Inferior at R12 with 13 unperforated bead blanks, and at Ghaba's grave 47 with 7 beads partially perforated on both sides. Researchers have proposed that to produce beads, makers would heat the raw material and then break off flakes to become beads. Which would then be perforated, possibly with a perforator inserted into an animal bone or a bow drill, on both sides. Then the bead would be smoothed into its rounded shape by hand abrading or rolling them on a grinding surface with while strung on a string. The process of perforating and/or smoothing the beads may have been aided by use of sand and water to create grit, though this technique is more attributed to cylindrical beads with vertical sides more common in Nubia. If the carnelian is actually burnt agate, then there would be additional heating steps to alter the color. This proposed method encompasses bead production in Neolithic Sudan as a whole, and is not unique to Ghaba or R12. This typology and production method of beads suggests that bead production came from an individual or a household and was non-utilitarian. The number of beads suggests that the bead production was only occurring part-time. The presence of only a small portion of beads in graves at Ghaba and other Neolithic Sudanese cemeteries suggests they were symbolic and valuable - not accessible for everyone.
Presence of sea shell beads like Engina mendicaria and Nerita species may further indicate an existing trade route between the Nile Valley in Sudan and the Red Sea. Engina mendicaria beads were found in 2 graves, with 14 in one and 3 in another. This species of shell as beads were valuable in the Neolithic Persian Gulf. Four Nerita beads were found in one grave. It cannot be determined what species exactly was found, but there are three species of Nerita known in the Red Sea.