Back to Mahal Teglinos: New Pharaonic Evidence from Eastern Sudan

Introduction

In an article that appeared in this journal in 1928, J. W. Crowfoot published some potsherds collected from the surface of the site of ‘Mahal Daqlianus’ in 1917 and 1926. The site, presently known as Mahal Teglinos, near the city of Kassala in Eastern Sudan, is c. 20 km from what is now the Eritrean border (fig. 1). ¹ Since then, the archaeological exploration of that specific site – which was also labelled as Kassala 1 (K1) – and of the region in general, has provided relevant data for the reconstruction of the history of an area that, although apparently marginal, played an important role in the relationships between Egypt and inner Africa. For this reason, just over one hundred years after Crowfoot’s first visit of Mahal Teglinos, it seems appropriate to report to the readers of the JEA the results of the ongoing archaeological project and its eventual developments in the coming years.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Fig. 1.

Map showing the location of Mahal Teglinos (K1), the other sites mentioned in the text, and the area explored by the American-Sudanese and Italian expeditions in the 1980s, as well as the area under investigation by the Italian expedition and National Corporation for Antiquities and Museums (NCAM) since 2010.

After Crowfoot, the site and region were only marginally explored by professional and amateur archaeologists. This is shown by several entries recorded in the register of what is now the Sudan National Museum, the nucleus of which was originally represented by the collections of Gordon College. ² These entries describe finds collected from the surface of ancient sites in Eastern Sudan. Nevertheless, only a solitary article by A. J. Arkell on a few sites across the border, near the Eritrean city of Agordat and closely related to those of the Kassala region, was published. ³ In 1980 the first systematic archaeological research project was begun in the region by the Istituto Universitario Orientale (now Università di Napoli ‘L’Orientale’) under the direction of Rodolfo Fattovich. The aim of this project was to investigate the relationships between the Nile Valley and the Ethio-Eritrean highlands in ancient times. Possible similarities had been noted in the ceramic production of these two areas, which suggested that the first millennium BC cultures of the Ethio-Eritrean highlands may have been somehow connected to the Nile Valley cultural traditions and not exclusively to Southern Arabia as had previously been believed. ⁴ Subsequent to this project, a long regional cultural sequence starting in the sixth millennium BC and ending in the second millennium AD was defined. This was achieved in collaboration with a Sudanese-American contemporary project exploring an area immediately east of the Atbara in the Khashm el Girba region. ⁵ Amongst the established relevant facts regarding the history of the region are: the process of the adoption of domestic livestock and cultivated plants starting from at least the fourth millennium BC in Eastern Sudan, the progressive shift to a nomadic and pastoral lifestyle starting in the second millennium BC, and the rise of hierarchical societies in the region, from at least the mid-third millennium BC. ⁶ The progressive inclusion of the region in a broad network of relationships extending from Egypt to the Yemeni highlands in the late third and second millennia BC was also noted. ⁷ This led to the hypothesis that Eastern Sudan may have been part of the land of Punt, ⁸ the fabled region mentioned in Egyptian texts since the Fifth Dynasty, and from where the Egyptians imported raw materials such as aromatic gums, ebony, ivory, animal skins and precious metals. ⁹

More recently, the research project of the Università di Napoli ‘L’Orientale’, that resumed fieldwork in 2010 after a gap of fifteen years, has considerably enriched our knowledge on several issues. In addition, this project has led to the discovery of new elements that point to relations between Eastern Sudan, the Nile Valley and Egypt, which are described and discussed below.

Egyptian materials from Mahal Teglinos (K1)

In recent years, several finds pointing to links with Egypt were collected at Mahal Teglinos (K1), the largest archaeological site in Eastern Sudan. Mahal Teglinos (K1) was extensively excavated by the Italian expedition in the 1980s and 1990s, as well as after the resumption of the fieldwork in 2010. ¹⁰ These finds consist of both ceramic materials and faience beads.

A remarkable concentration of fragments of at least eight different Marl A3 jars was recorded in the central sector of Mahal Teglinos (K1) (fig. 2); ¹¹ these came from both excavated assemblages (unit K1 X-XI) ¹² and surface collection. ¹³ The sherds can be classified as from collared and shouldered jars with thickened rims, dating from the First Intermediate Period ¹⁴ to the early Middle Kingdom (Eleventh Dynasty–very beginning of the Twelfth Dynasty), ¹⁵ and perhaps also to larger ellipsoid jars without a neck or with a very short neck, dating to the same phases (fig. 3 a–c). ¹⁶ Interestingly, a couple of fragments of Marl A3, similar in fabric to the vessels in unit K1 X-XI, were also collected in the excavation unit K1 IX on the western fringes of the site of Mahal Teglinos (K1). ¹⁷ In terms of their fabrics, all of these vessels were produced in Upper Egypt. ¹⁸

OPEN IN VIEWER

Fig. 2.

Map of the site of Mahal Teglinos (K1) showing the location of the excavation units mentioned in the text. The excavation units with gray hatching were investigated from 1981 to 1995, the ones highlighted in gray from 2010 onwards.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Fig. 3.

Egyptian ceramic materials from Mahal Teglinos (K1). a–c) rim and shoulder fragments of Marl A3 jars, and d) rim sherd of a Nile B2 dish (scale in cm) from excavation unit K1 X-XI in the central sector of the site; e) rim and neck fragment of a Marl A4 flask from excavation unit K1 XIV in the western sector of the site.

In Lower Nubia, similar jars, both mid- ¹⁹ and large-sized, ²⁰ were found in C-Group cemeteries, where all the Egyptian imports are dated to the First Intermediate Period and early Middle Kingdom. ²¹ Large-sized jars of this type were also found in a C-Group cemetery at Hierakonpolis in Upper Egypt. ²² However, only three mid-sized Upper Egyptian Marl jars with a shape similar to one of the jars from Mahal Teglinos (K1) may have been found at Kerma in the southern sector of the cemetery. ²³ The southern sector of the cemetery dates to the Classic Kerma Period, which may indicate that the jars had been reused. Another jar may have been recorded in the northern sector of the cemetery, ²⁴ which likely goes back to the Early Kerma Period. In more recent excavations, fragments of five vessels of this type were brought to light in the Early Kerma and Middle Kerma sectors of the cemetery, ²⁵ but in at least one of these cases the fabric is Marl A2 and not Marl A3. ²⁶ However, it should be remarked that according to Reisner, the latter kind of fabric was generally associated with the ‘Early Nubian graves’. ²⁷ These burials correspond to the earliest phases of the Kerma culture according to the presently accepted chronology of the cemetery. ²⁸ More recently, a fragment of rim with shoulder and a more complete vessel that can possibly be ascribed to this class were collected at H29, an Early Kerma cemetery in the northern Dongola Reach. ²⁹

In the aforementioned K1 X-XI area at Mahal Teglinos (K1), a rim sherd of a Nile B2 dish was also collected (fig. 3 d). ³⁰ It can be classified as a well-known type of deep mid-sized simple vessel with a direct rim and rounded base, possibly intended for the presentation and consumption of food. This type has a very broad chronology including the First Intermediate Period and the whole of the Middle Kingdom. ³¹ The C-Group Lower Nubian sites have yielded rare fragments of Egyptian dishes or bowls, ³² while the Kerma sites dating to c. 2000 BC do not feature any of these types of vessels. ³³ The only notable exception is the cemetery of Ukma West, which was at that time the cemetery of one of the northernmost Kerma centres, immediately south of the Second Cataract. ³⁴

This last find is particularly interesting because in the previous phases of the investigations at Mahal Teglinos (K1) only a single fragment of a Nile B2 bottle or small jar came from a Gash Group assemblage dating to the very end of the third millennium BC. This fragment with wheel traces on the internal surface and a red-slipped exterior (fig. 4 a) was collected from test pit K1 I, in the central sector of the site. ³⁵ In addition to these two Nile B2 sherds, only two other fragments of Egyptian vessels in a fabric other than Marl A3 occur in the Gash Group assemblages. The first one is represented by a single sherd found in an assemblage dating to the early second millennium BC during the 1987 campaign in excavation unit BSKP-BSKQ, in an area immediately north of the eastern Gash Group cemetery at Mahal Teglinos (K1) (fig. 4 b). ³⁶ Initially considered a fragment of depurated Marl C, its association with the recently identified Marl DAN E can now be proposed based on its highly depurated fabric, the light grey band in the freshly broken fracture, as well as the thick whitish stratum on the surface. ³⁷ Unfortunately, because of its small size, the type of vessel from which this sherd originated cannot be precisely identified, but it was possibly a small flask. However, the Gash Group assemblage in which it was collected is certainly of an earlier date than 1800 BC, which along with the fabric, suggests a Middle Kingdom date. When considering the occurrence of vessels made of this fabric in Egypt itself, the sherd in question may possibly be of Upper Egyptian origin. ³⁸

OPEN IN VIEWER

Fig. 4.

Egyptian ceramic sherds from different excavation units at Mahal Teglinos (K1) and other sites in Eastern Sudan; a) fragment of a Nile B2 bottle or small jar from test pit K1 I; b) fragment of a Marl DAN E small flask from excavation unit BSKP-BSKQ; c) fragment of a Nile B1 vessel, possibly a small flask or bottle, from excavation unit K1 VI; d) fragment of a Marl A4 flask from excavation unit K1 VI; e) fragment of a Marl A3 flask from site JAG1; f) fragment of a Marl A4 flask from site UA53, excavation unit IX (scale in cm).

Finally, a fragment of a small Marl A4 type flask with flaring neck and triangular-shaped modelled rim was recently collected in excavation unit K1 XIV in a Gash Group assemblage dating to the early second millennium BC (fig. 3 e). The fragment can be safely ascribed to a class of medium to small sized flasks dating to the first half of the Twelfth Dynasty and whose shape and dimensions may suggest a use of these vessels as containers for cosmetic products. ³⁹ Its production area can be placed on the basis of the fabric in Upper Egypt. ⁴⁰ In this case, similar vessels were recorded at Kerma in the Middle Kerma sectors of the cemetery, although there the vessels were apparently of Marl A2 fabric, ⁴¹ as was the case for those from the northern Dongola Reach. ⁴²

An important contribution to studies focused on the relations between Eastern Sudan and Egypt is seen in the unprecedented discovery of fragments of Egyptian vessels in Jebel Mokram Group assemblages over the last few field seasons. A wheel-made fragment was found in excavation unit K1 VI, in a Jebel Mokram Group assemblage most likely dating after the mid-second millennium BC. ⁴³ This Nile B1 fabric sherd has small and medium sized sand inclusions and a medium to low concentration of small sized straw inclusions, a brown uniform section, a smoothed internal surface and a burnished red-slipped exterior (fig. 4 c). ⁴⁴ Although it is a body fragment, and thus it is not possible to guess the shape of the original vessel, a small flask or bottle is highly likely. Its characteristics, in terms of fabric, are comparable to the early Eighteenth Dynasty vessels found at Kerma, ⁴⁵ Sai ⁴⁶ and Lower Nubian sites. ⁴⁷ Interestingly, fragments of vessels made from Nile fabrics and dating to the New Kingdom were also collected not far from the Nile Valley in the region upstream of the confluence of the Nile and the Atbara. ⁴⁸ A Jebel Mokram Group assemblage in the same excavation unit at Mahal Teglinos (K1) also yielded a fragment, which probably formed part of the base of a greenish-yellow Marl A4 vessel (fig. 4 d). The sherd features some traces of wheel production on its internal surface and the orientation of these marks, together with the curve of the wall, may suggest that it was a part of a closed flask. The Marl A4 fabric is first found in the Middle Kingdom but was more intensively used in the New Kingdom. ⁴⁹ Therefore, the chronology of the sherd fits in well with that of its assemblage. Similarly, fragments of Marl A4 vessels were discovered in Lower and Upper Nubian sites, ⁵⁰ as well as from others upstream of the confluence of the Nile and the Atbara. ⁵¹

Ring faience beads with straight sides, c. 5 mm in diameter and 2 mm thick, were collected from some Gash Group tombs investigated at Mahal Teglinos (K1) (fig. 5). The most common type at Mahal Teglinos (K1) is green rather than blue and reminiscent of the beads found at Kerma in what Reisner called ‘the Nubian cemetery’, ⁵² i.e. the northern sector of the cemetery, dating to the Early Kerma and Middle Kerma phases. ⁵³ It is also reminiscent of the beads more recently collected in Early Kerma graves in the northern Dongola reach ⁵⁴ and in Middle Kerma graves in the Fourth Cataract region. ⁵⁵ According to B. Gratien, ring beads with dimensions similar to those from Mahal Teglinos (K1) are more common in the Early Kerma phase, but not exclusively so. However, in later phases the dimensions of the beads in Kerma assemblages decrease to an average of c. 2 mm in diameter. ⁵⁶

OPEN IN VIEWER

Fig. 5.

Faience bead necklace from a Gash Group tomb in excavation unit BPLF-Z/BPQA-E at Mahal Teglinos (K1) (scale in cm).

It has been suggested that the production of faience objects may have started at Kerma during the Early Kerma phase. ⁵⁷ Therefore, these Mahal Teglinos beads may have been manufactured at Kerma. Nevertheless, different opinions support the idea that faience beads were imported from Egypt at least in the Early Kerma and perhaps even into the Middle Kerma phases, ⁵⁸ i.e. contemporary with the Gash Group of Eastern Sudan. The fact that the body of the beads from Mahal Teglinos (K1) consisted of white paste and not quartzite or crystal (as is often the case at Kerma), ⁵⁹ may support the hypothesis that they ultimately arrived from Egypt, where this type of faience ring bead occurs from Predynastic times onwards and becomes more common from the Old Kingdom to the Late Period. ⁶⁰ Faience beads that are thought to have been produced in Egypt are widely distributed in Lower Nubian ⁶¹ and Upper Egyptian C-Group cemeteries. ⁶² Thus, Egypt remains a highly plausible candidate for the origin of the faience beads at Mahal Teglinos (K1). This hypothesis of an Egyptian origin for the Western Cemetery faience beads is also supported by the date of some of the Mahal Teglinos tombs in which they were found. These burials seem to go back as far as the earliest phase of the Gash Group, namely the first half of the third millennium BC, which is well before any evidence of faience production at Kerma. Interestingly, in some of the tombs in the Western Cemetery at Mahal Teglinos (K1) the faience ring beads were not used as spacers between amulets, as is often the case elsewhere, but to form complete strings (fig. 5). This practice followed a fashion typical of the late Old Kingdom which continued into the Middle and New Kingdoms, ⁶³ and was occasionally seen in Early Kerma assemblages in Upper Nubia. ⁶⁴

Egyptian materials from other sites in the Kassala region

Recent investigations of other sites in the Kassala region include a rescue archaeology campaign to record and excavate the sites endangered by the implementation of the Upper Atbara Irrigation Scheme. ⁶⁵ These explorations have shown that materials originating in Egypt do not occur exclusively at Mahal Teglinos (K1). Indeed, Egyptian imports have been collected from sites JAG1, UA50 and UA53 (fig. 6).

OPEN IN VIEWER

Fig. 6.

Map showing the location of sites Jebel Abu Gamal 1 (JAG1), Upper Atbara 50 (UA50), Upper Atbara 53 (UA53), and Mahal Teglinos (K1), where Egyptian pharaonic materials were collected.

JAG1 is a large, c. ten-hectare site at the foot of the Jebel Abu Gamal, some c. 30 km south of Mahal Teglinos (K1) on the border between Eritrea and Sudan. It appears to have been occupied from prehistoric times until the first millennium AD. ⁶⁶ In preparation for future excavations, a systematic survey and surface collections were conducted in the central sector of the site, where the third to second millennia BC Gash Group and Jebel Mokram Group materials seem to concentrate. In this area, a sherd from the body of a greenish Marl A3 vessel was collected on the surface (fig. 4 e). ⁶⁷ The characteristics of the fabric and its curve suggest that it was originally part of a jar similar to those recorded in the excavation of K1 X-XI at Mahal Teglinos (K1), and dating from the end of the third to the early second millennium BC.

UA53, is an archaeological site lying c. 43 km south-west of Mahal Teglinos (K1). It is characterized by an earlier fourth millennium BC Butana Group occupation, followed by a second millennium BC Jebel Mokram Group settlement and possibly tombs. Further phases of occupation of a later date have been discovered, including the remains of camps of the Hagiz Group (first millennium BC to the first millennium AD) and the Gergaf Group (mid-second millennium AD). ⁶⁸ A body fragment of a greenish-yellow Marl A4 vessel was discovered in excavation unit UA53 IX (fig. 4 f) at the site, ⁶⁹ in association with Jebel Mokram Group (second millennium BC) ceramic materials and the remains of a hut. ⁷⁰ The sherd has some traces of wheel production on the internal surface; the orientation of the wheel marks, together with the curve of the wall suggests it was a part of a closed vessel. Similar to the aforementioned Marl A4 sherds from Mahal Teglinos (K1), this fabric is first found during the Middle Kingdom but was more intensively produced in the New Kingdom. ⁷¹

Excavation unit UA53 IX at site UA53 also yielded a bronze or copper kohl stick, which was found in association with Jebel Mokram Group ceramic materials (fig. 7 a). ⁷² As this kind of object is unknown in Kerma assemblages, the kohl stick may have been imported from Egypt. This is likely to be the case for a similar copper implement from a tomb dating to the early to mid-third millennium BC at Adindan, investigated by the Oriental Institute of Chicago, ⁷³ and for a further example in a later assemblage associated with Pan-Grave elements, in Cemetery 332 in the Scandinavian Joint Expedition concession of Lower Nubia. ⁷⁴ Copper-alloy pointed tools thought to be kohl-sticks were recently found at the site of El-Eided Mohamadein (H25), located on the Alfreda Nile and dating from the Kerma to early Napatan Period. ⁷⁵

Finally, a calcite lid with a convex top and raised centre on the underside to fit the mouth of a stone vessel (fig. 7 b) was found on the surface of UA50. This site is located c. 45 km south-west of Mahal Teglinos (K1) and was occupied during the Saroba phase (c. 5000 BC), and in later occupation phases. ⁷⁶ The rounded lid most likely originated from one of the temporary camps dating to the second millennium BC, whose existence is suggested by some Jebel Mokram Group sherds scattered on the surface of the site. The raw material the fragment is made from ⁷⁷ and its typology strongly support an Egyptian origin. Indeed, the lid from UA50 can be compared with lids of calcite vessels dating from the Middle to the New Kingdom from Egyptian and Lower Nubian sites. ⁷⁸ Similar lids of Egyptian stone vessels dated to the Middle Kingdom were gathered from the surface at Kerma, ⁷⁹ and occur at Mirgissa in assemblages dating to the Second Intermediate Period. ⁸⁰

OPEN IN VIEWER

Fig. 7.

a) Bronze kohl stick from site Upper Atbara 53 (UA53), excavation unit IX; b) calcite lid from site Upper Atbara 50 (UA50) (scale in cm).

Stylistic influences and imitative processes

In recent years, new evidence of contact and exchange between Egypt and Eastern Sudan has increased thanks to the discovery of Egyptian objects in Eastern Sudan. Furthermore, other elements have emerged, suggesting that ideas and styles were exchanged between the two regions.

Site UA53 yielded a locally made stone axe-head with a rounded blade, concave sides, and two symmetrical lugs on the side to be inserted in the handle (fig. 8). Although collected on the surface, a tentative chronology can be proposed for this find, as it was found in the north-eastern sector of the site, where the Jebel Mokram Group settlement was located. ⁸¹ Similar axe-heads were also recorded in other sites of the Eritrean-Sudanese lowlands, which were surveyed in the 1980s and 1990s, and are all ascribed to the Jebel Mokram Group. ⁸² Other examples were found at the site of Agordat, 160 km east of Mahal Teglinos (K1), across the Eritrean border. ⁸³ More recently, a similar axe-head with broken lugs was also collected at ASW 19, a site in the area affected by the construction of the Upper Atbara-Setit dam. ⁸⁴ This type of stone axe-head is very unusual in Upper Nubia, and only one stone axe-head with this outline was apparently collected from a Classic Kerma site. ⁸⁵ The shape of this object and the fact that such objects appear to be isolated anomalies in local traditions of stone axe- head production strongly suggest that it may have been the reproduction a foreign prototype. This prototype can be quite safely identified as the class of Egyptian bronze axe-heads that feature a rounded sharp edge, concave sides and lugs typical of the Second Intermediate Period ⁸⁶ and the Eighteenth Dynasty. ⁸⁷

OPEN IN VIEWER

Fig. 8.

Stone axe-head from site Upper Atbara 53 (UA53) (scale in cm).

While the imitation of Egyptian objects in Eastern Sudan seems certain, it cannot be dismissed that the reverse could also have taken place. Indeed, recent studies on the regions south of Egypt have led to the realisation that foreign cultural traits from Nubia were adopted in Egypt, like was happening in the framework of contemporary relations between Egypt and the Near East. ⁸⁸ Exemplary is the well-known case of the ram-headed Amun, whose diffusion in Egypt in the New Kingdom and Third Intermediate Period may have been fostered by the popularity of ram and ram-headed deities in the religious practices of regions south of Egypt, particularly in Upper Nubia. ⁸⁹ Similarly, it has also been suggested that the C-Group ceramic traditions of Lower Nubia may have contributed to innovations evident in the Upper Egyptian pottery of the early Middle Kingdom, such as the comb incised decorations often forming a wavy pattern on the shoulder and bodies of jars and bowls, ⁹⁰ and the modelled buttons that are often associated with these decorations. ⁹¹ Nevertheless, this hypothesis presents some problems, as some of the supposed innovations arriving from the south apparently emerge earlier in Upper Egypt than in Nubia itself. ⁹² Moreover, a technical difference between the incised patterns on the Egyptian pottery at the beginning of the Middle Kingdom and those of the C-Group is represented by the fact that the latter were made with a single pointed tool, while in Egypt a multi-pointed tool or comb was used. ⁹³ It is worthwhile noting that the same stylistic and decorative patterns also occur in the ceramic tradition of Eastern Sudan, where they appear earlier than in Egypt and Nubia. Indeed, the wavy comb incised decorations on the shoulder of the jars not only occur there since the end of the third millennium BC at the latest (fig. 9 a–b), but seem to emerge from the scraping of the surface of the vessels, typical of the Atbai Ceramic Tradition, starting at least in the fifth millennium BC. ⁹⁴ As far as the clay modelled buttons are concerned, they occur in Eastern Sudan from the early second millennium BC (fig. 9 c), ⁹⁵ while, as far as I know, they do not occur in the C-Group pottery. Moreover, the Egyptian Middle Kingdom bowls with comb incised decorations on the body often have a wavy rim, ⁹⁶ a feature that is also unparalleled in the C-Group ceramic repertoire. Yet this decorative scheme is clearly reminiscent of the pinched and indented rims of the Atbai Ceramic Tradition, whose first examples were recorded in Eastern Sudan in the Butana Group ceramic assemblages, dating from the fourth to early third millennia BC, and were produced up to the second millennium BC, in Gash Group and Jebel Mokram Group times (fig. 9 d–f). ⁹⁷ On the contrary, while the comb incised lozenges sometimes found on the Middle Kingdom Egyptian jars are unparalleled in Eastern Sudan, they do occur in the C-Group. ⁹⁸ Although the presently available evidence is still largely limited and a better assessment of the issue will only be possible after a more finely tuned chronology of the emergence of these traits in the different regions is available, at least the issue can be raised on the possible connections not only between the Egyptian Middle Kingdom ceramics and ceramic traditions of Lower Nubia, but also of more southern regions, namely Eastern Sudan.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Fig. 9.

Gash Group sherds from Mahal Teglinos (K1) and other sites in Eastern Sudan; a–b) shoulder fragments of jars with incised comb decoration forming a wavy pattern from excavation unit K1 IX; c) fragment of vessels decorated with incised scraping and modelled buttons on the external surface from site Upper Atbara 86 (UA86); d–f) rim sherds of bowls with pinched and indented rims characterized by the typical wavy outline from excavation unit K1 IX (scale in cm).

Moreover, it has recently been suggested that in the Middle Kingdom intense Egyptian activities in the Red Sea area may have affected some artisanal productions in Egypt itself, mainly that of jewellery, where the imitation of sea shells in precious metals is one of the most typical traits of this period. ⁹⁹ It may be worthwhile noting that the cowrie, a type of shell precisely reproduced in gold sheet in the Egyptian jewellery ateliers of the Twelfth Dynasty, is also widely used in the personal ornaments characterizing the Gash Group tombs in Eastern Sudan at the end of the third to the beginning of the second millennia BC (fig. 10). ¹⁰⁰ Of course, the cowrie shells in Egypt and Eastern Sudan also occur in earlier assemblages. ¹⁰¹ However, we can wonder whether their popularity in both regions in the same phases is somehow related; whether the Egyptian artisans designing the jewellery in the royal ateliers were somehow inspired not only by the abundance of these shells in the Red Sea environment, ¹⁰² but also by their use as personal ornaments in some of the regions bordering the southern Red Sea, broadly speaking being part of the Red Sea milieu. Similar to the previous case, the issue can only be clarified through further investigations on the use and distribution of the personal ornaments made from these shells in the regions of the southern Red Sea.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Fig. 10.

Necklace of cowrie shells associated with a lip plug in a Gash Group tomb in excavation unit K1 XIII at Mahal Teglinos (K1) (scale in cm).

Conclusions

The investigations conducted in recent years in Eastern Sudan have not only confirmed the relations between this region and Egypt, but have also shown that traces of contact with Egypt are not only visible in Mahal Teglinos (K1), but also in other sites of the region. Moreover, it has been proven that this evidence of contact is not exclusive to the Gash Group but is also evident in the early Jebel Mokram Group period, i.e. it dates from c. the first half of the third to the mid-second millennia BC. Furthermore, the evidence described above should be placed within a broader setting that includes other elements suggesting the involvement of Eastern Sudan in a long-distance exchange network with Egypt. At Mersa/Wadi Gawasis, the harbour on the Egyptian Red Sea coast from where the maritime expeditions to the land of Punt were launched during the Middle Kingdom, fragmentary rods of Diospyros sp. (a dark hard wood perhaps to be identified with that named hbny by the Egyptians) were collected. ¹⁰³ This species grows on the northern slopes of the Ethio-Eritrean plateau, not far from the south-eastern fringes of Eastern Sudan. ¹⁰⁴ In addition to this evidence, the occurrence of sherds at Mersa/Wadi Gawasis, possibly arriving from Eastern Sudan should be mentioned as well. ¹⁰⁵ Finally, based on the occurrence of obsidian flakes at the site of Mahal Teglinos (K1) and at the related site of Agordat, it has recently been suggested that Eastern Sudan may have been part of the route of obsidian from its sources in the Ethio-Eritrean Rift Valley to reach Egypt, ¹⁰⁶ where in the Middle Kingdom this kind of stone was widely used by the artisans in the royal ateliers. ¹⁰⁷

The broad long-distance exchange network involving Eastern Sudan and extending up to Egypt, may have flowed through Upper Nubia, or the Eastern Desert and the Red Sea. Third to second millennia BC assemblages in Eastern Sudan feature finds that suggest contacts with both regions, such as ceramics and seals of Kerma Upper Nubian types on the one hand, ¹⁰⁸ and personal ornaments made from Red Sea seashells ¹⁰⁹ and imported ceramics from Yemen, ¹¹⁰ likely to have found their way to Eastern Sudan through the Red Sea, on the other hand. It cannot be excluded that the two potential alternative routes between Egypt and Eastern Sudan were working simultaneously in some periods. Nevertheless, in the aforementioned case of obsidian, it was not so. This highly recognisable type of stone was collected from both Mahal Teglinos (K1) itself and other sites of the region, in assemblages dating to the late third and early second millennia BC, and at Mersa/Wadi Gawasis on the Egyptian Red Sea coast, while the stone is notably lacking in the sites of the same phases in Upper and Lower Nubia. Therefore, it may be suggested that the route obsidian followed to arrive in Egypt was from the sources in the Danakil region to Eastern Sudan, especially, and from there it crossed the Eastern Desert and/or the Red Sea to reach Egypt. ¹¹¹

These last remarks lead us to the conclusion that at least some of the First Intermediate Period to early Middle Kingdom Egyptian ceramics found at Mahal Teglinos may have been imported into Eastern Sudan through the Eastern Desert, or more likely, given the problem posed by the overland routes and the long distance to be covered, they may have passed through the maritime routes. With regards to the Egyptian ceramics dating from the First Intermediate Period to the early Middle Kingdom from excavation unit K1 X-XI at Mahal Teglinos (K1), as already stressed in the description of the materials, the composition of the assemblage was quite different from the assemblages of Egyptian ceramic materials in Upper Nubian sites going back to the same phase. This difference suggests that they may have arrived in Eastern Sudan via a different route, perhaps the maritime one. It should also be stressed that the number of the specific type of Upper Egyptian jars from excavation unit K1 X-XI at Mahal Teglinos (K1) apparently exceeds the number of the same type of jars from Kerma. Moreover, although this type was perhaps not unknown in the northern Dongola Reach, it is completely absent in the south-easternmost sectors of the known Kerma cultural area, in the Fourth Cataract region and in the Bayuda Desert. Indeed, in the investigated assemblages of the sites on the Fourth Cataract, the region of the Kerma culture that may have been the most exposed to contact with the areas south and east of Upper Nubia like Eastern Sudan, other types of Egyptian vessels are represented. ¹¹² Therefore, the Egyptian ceramic materials from K1 X-XI may have arrived there via the Red Sea. In addition, it should be remarked that the typological homogeneity and chronological consistency of the group of jars from K1 X-XI, as well as their shared Upper Egyptian origin suggest that this assemblage of materials may result from a single exchange or contact. Interestingly, in the same assemblage, a fragment of an Egyptian dish was also found; the occurrence of Egyptian tableware in addition to the storage jars may even suggest that Egyptians had frequented the region in this specific phase. The faience beads from the Mahal Teglinos assemblages dating to the first half of the third millennium BC may have followed the same Red Sea/Eastern Desert route, some time before this kind of find started occurring widely in the Upper Nubian graves.

In contrast, the faience beads from the later Gash Group assemblages and the potsherd from the Gash Group assemblage dating to the early second millennium BC in excavation unit K1 XIV, together with the calcite lid, kohl stick, and other Egyptian ceramics from different Jebel Mokram Group assemblages may have arrived in Eastern Sudan through an Upper Nubian route. This can be deduced from the fact that these finds can be compared with Egyptian artefacts widely occurring in contemporary Upper Nubian sites. Moreover, in the case of the Egyptian ceramics from the Jebel Mokram Group assemblages, it is worthwhile recalling that they were made of fabrics that also occur in the sites recorded in the northern Butana area, upstream of the confluence of the Nile and the Atbara, c. 300 km north-west of Eastern Sudan. This may strengthen the hypothesis that the Egyptian ceramics from the second millennium BC assemblages reached Eastern Sudan via inland routes from Upper Nubia.

Therefore, the patterns of involvement of the region within the network of contacts including Egypt may have changed through time. Indeed, the evidence currently at hand suggests that we can distinguish two phases: the first phase dating to the third millennium BC and the second to the second millennium BC. In the first phase the Egyptian elements present in Eastern Sudan are rare or even absent in Upper Nubia, while in the second phase they occur not only in Upper Nubia, but sometimes also in the region upstream of the confluence of the Nile and the Atbara. This pattern may indicate that in the first phase interaction bypassed Upper Nubia and went through the Eastern Desert and Red Sea routes. In the second phase this scenario changed, and the Upper Nubian Nile Valley is likely to have played a more relevant role in the relations. It should be stressed that this does not mean that in the first phase Eastern Sudan had no connections with Upper Nubia, as Kerma elements are already found in the early Gash Group assemblages. ¹¹³ Instead it is likely that Upper Nubia was apparently not yet relevant in the dynamics of interaction between Eastern Sudan and Egypt at that time. On the contrary, the Kerma culture of Upper Nubia may have become an important intermediary from c. 2000 BC, corresponding to the Middle and Classic Kerma phases, when the Kingdom of Kush was strengthening its power. ¹¹⁴ It is perhaps not by chance that during this period the Kerma culture appears to have more extensively occupied the Fourth Cataract region, ¹¹⁵ and is also present in the Bayuda Desert, ¹¹⁶ namely those exact areas crossed by the routes leading from Upper Nubia to Eastern Sudan. Later on, after the occupation of Upper Nubia in c. 1500 BC, the Egyptians may have continued using the same inland routes, as suggested by the occurrence of New Kingdom materials from the sites upstream of the confluence of the Nile and the Atbara.

Regardless, all these elements clearly support the long-standing hypothesis that Eastern Sudan could be identified with Punt or at least, and more probably, a part of it. ¹¹⁷ This also seems to fit with the interpretation of the inscription of Sebeknakht at El Kab, mentioning a Second Intermediate Period military raid in Upper Egypt conducted by Kush and its allies, including Punt. ¹¹⁸ This document seems to suggest that at least a part of the land of Punt was close enough to Kush, a state centred on Upper Nubia, to be included in its sphere of political influence. As mentioned above, it is worth noting that evidence also exists in Eastern Sudan for contact with Upper Nubia for that phase, ¹¹⁹ suggesting that Eastern Sudan may well correspond to that part of Punt. In particular, the alliance mentioned in this specific text may depict the expansion of Kush towards the regions east and south of Upper Nubia, a process which is possibly paralleled by the Kerma culture presence in the Fourth Cataract region and in the Bayuda Desert described above.

It should also be stressed that the assemblage of Egyptian ceramics from excavation unit K1 X-XI at Mahal Teglinos (K1) may be related to contacts between Egypt and Punt taking place in the First Intermediate Period, which go unmentioned in the preserved Egyptian texts. This hypothesis may find support in the chronology of the represented types of vessels and associated local materials, as well as the associated C14 date in context K1 X-XI. ¹²⁰ Alternatively, these materials can be ascribed to the beginning of the Middle Kingdom, perhaps more specifically from the late Eleventh to the very beginning of the Twelfth Dynasty, when contacts between Egypt and Punt certainly took place. These contacts are also known from the inscription of Henu dating to the reign of Mentuhotep III, ¹²¹ along with the archaeological and textual evidence collected at the harbour of Mersa/Wadi Gawasis. ¹²² Perhaps at the end of and immediately after the First Intermediate Period, Egyptian rulers were trying to resume relations in order to gain more direct access to regions where raw materials from inner Africa were available, such as Punt and perhaps even Iam, as the recently found textual evidence in the Jebel Uweinat suggests. ¹²³ The organization and management of such expeditions in the First Intermediate Period or at the very beginning of the Middle Kingdom mainly involved the institutions of Upper Egypt; this is suggested by the area of production presumed for most of the Egyptian ceramics found in the Gash Group assemblages. Interestingly, the collections from Mersa/Wadi Gawasis dating to the Twelfth Dynasty were instead dominated by Marl C ceramics. The predominance of this type of fabric suggests that at that time supplies for expeditions to the southern Red Sea were primarily provided by institutions based in the Memphis-Fayium area, not far from the Twelfth Dynasty main royal residence, ¹²⁴ while before that perhaps Upper Egyptian institutions were mainly involved.

A further factor that deserves attention is the fact that the Egyptian imports and the imitation of Egyptian materials in Eastern Sudan may illuminate an often-overlooked aspect of the relations between Egypt and regions to the south. Indeed, these objects allow an idea of what was exported in exchange for the commodities from inner Africa, which is rarely mentioned in the Egyptian texts. As far as the calcite lid from UA50, the kohl stick from UA53, and possibly the fragment of a small Marl A4 jar from Mahal Teglinos (K1) excavation unit XIV are concerned, they suggest that cosmetics formed part of these traded goods. This trade in cosmetics is partly supported by some texts, such as the biography of Sabni, son of Mekhu, dating to the reign of Pepi II, which lists different kinds of oils/unguents among the commodities brought to Nubia and exchanged for the body of Sabni’s father who died there. ¹²⁵ Of course, the presence of an Egyptian calcite vessel in Eastern Sudan can be explained by reasons other than trade and exchange. ¹²⁶ Looting cannot be ruled out, as some of the Egyptian calcite vessels found at Kerma may have arrived in the capital of Kush in that way, ¹²⁷ and we know that Kerma-centred alliances also involving groups inhabiting regions to the south and east of Upper Nubia ravaged Upper Egypt in the Second Intermediate Period. ¹²⁸ Nevertheless, the calcite stopper from UA50 may also represent a thus far unknown form of political interaction with Egypt, such as gift exchange, possibly involving local leaders of Eastern Sudan. Stone vessels were often given as gifts in the framework of diplomatic relations, and were considered desirable and highly prized items, as well as used as markers of rank in the Near East for the whole Bronze Age. ¹²⁹ As far as the possible exportation of Egyptian jewellery in exchange for commodities from inner Africa is concerned, this trading pattern may explain the presence of the faience beads at Mahal Teglinos (K1). Such a trade in Egyptian jewellery is also supported by the mention of faience, among the commodities brought to the regions south of Egypt by Sabni, son of Mekhu. ¹³⁰ The biography of Sabni most likely refers to Nubia, a region where, as stressed above, archaeological traces of beads imported from Egypt are well known. Yet such commodities may also have reached regions further to the south, as necklaces are represented among the goods offered to the Puntites by the chief of the Egyptian expedition to Punt at Deir el-Bahari. ¹³¹ The imitations of Egyptian metal axe-heads from Jebel Mokram Group assemblages highlight that Egyptian metal weapons reached these regions. Although weapons are never explicitly mentioned as Egyptian exports in texts related to the exchanges with the southern regions, their presence among the exchanged goods is supported by the fact that weapons (amongst them an axe) are offered to the Puntites in the Deir el-Bahari reliefs. ¹³² While no Egyptian weapons have so far been found in Eastern Sudan or other regions which may have been part of Punt, this may be due to the fact that metal objects are very easily smelted and re-used and therefore rarely survive in the archaeological record. Similarly, the perishability of textiles, especially in areas affected by seasonal rains, may explain their general absence in the archaeological record in Eastern Sudan and surrounding regions. However, textiles are also sometimes listed among the commodities exported from Egypt to the southern lands, such as in the biography of Sabni. ¹³³

As for the ceramic finds, when the original shape of the Egyptian vessels from Eastern Sudan can be recognized, they seem to be overwhelmingly jars or flasks. When discussing the function of the Egyptian collared jars from Kerma, Reisner suggested that they could have been used as containers for liquids or, in the case of the smaller ones, for fats and oils. ¹³⁴ With general reference to the Egyptian ceramics from Kerma, Kendall has suggested that they may have been used for food and for perishable materials. ¹³⁵ In the Lower Nubian C-Group sites, the same types of Marl A3 jars present at Mahal Teglinos (K1) are considered to be containers of the food exported from Egypt to Lower Nubia. ¹³⁶ Therefore, this may suggest that foodstuffs were also exported from Egypt to the regions of Eastern Sudan. Of course this has already been suggested for Lower Nubia, not only in the light of the archaeological evidence, but also due to textual evidence, for example, the mention of exported honey in the biography of Sabni, son of Mekhu. ¹³⁷ Moreover, in the Punt reliefs at Deir el-Bahari, the offering of ‘bread, beer, wine, meat, fruits and all the good things of Egypt’ to the Puntites ¹³⁸ may refer to the export of foodstuffs to Punt.

Therefore, the range of Egyptian exports to Eastern Sudan and to Punt can be reconstructed from the archaeological, textual and iconographic evidence, which show that trade consisted of foodstuffs, perfumed oils, fats and cosmetics, as well as some personal ornaments and weapons. Interestingly, these commodities largely overlap with those that archaeological research has suggested were exported from Egypt to Upper Nubia in Kerma times. ¹³⁹

Furthermore, some additional remarks may also throw light on the way such exchanges took place. As already emphasized, the concentration of Egyptian sherds in the central sector of the site at Mahal Teglinos (K1) may represent the result of a single episode of interaction between the local people and the Egyptians. In addition, the occurrence of Egyptian tableware there may indeed suggest that Egyptians, and not only Egyptian commodities, reached the site. The fact that the imported sherds of jars and tableware were found associated with local ceramics, in a context of intensive preparation and consumption of food, is significant. ¹⁴⁰ It is feasible that the Egyptians may have also taken part in these communal events, which suggests not only that food (perhaps Egyptian delicacies) may have played a certain part in the exchanges between Egypt and inner Africa, but also that the sharing of food may have been crucial in these ritualized exchanges and interactions between different groups, as it is also known in other cultural contexts. ¹⁴¹ In the same assemblage at Mahal Teglinos (K1), finds like tokens and sealings clearly related to administrative activities, as well as small clay figurines of lions, a previously unprecedented find in the region suggesting the ritual use of the area, were also collected. ¹⁴² Moreover, it should be stressed that all the finds, including the fragments of Egyptian jars, were piled up in the fire-pits concentrated in this specific sector, apparently dumped after the cooking of the food and its consumption had taken place. ¹⁴³ Elsewhere, contexts with similar associations have been interpreted as the loci of highly ritualized feasts. ¹⁴⁴ This sector at Mahal Teglinos (K1) is situated in the middle of the site, between two large and intensively used cemeteries, ¹⁴⁵ a further element suggesting that ritualized feasts could have taken place in this area.

This kind of practice may have characterized the interaction between local people and foreigners, including, perhaps, the Egyptians, and also between different local groups. It has been hypothesised that from the mid-third to the early second millennia BC, Mahal Teglinos (K1) was a sacralised spot where the different groups inhabiting Eastern Sudan held meetings and interacted. This hypothesis is suggested by its ritual character, an aspect of the site which is becoming increasingly evident following the more recent investigations. ¹⁴⁶ The fact that different local groups could have met and interacted there, is suggested by the variety seen in the funerary rituals and the structures characterizing the different sectors of the two Gash Group cemeteries, namely the ones framing the food preparation and consumption area where the concentration of imported Egyptian materials has been recorded. ¹⁴⁷ The different origins of the stone used to produce the stelae that acted as funerary markers in the two Gash Group cemeteries at Mahal Teglinos (K1) has recently been pointed out and may further support this hypothesis. Therefore, feasting activities in the food preparation and consumption area at Mahal Teglinos (K1) may have had the aim of establishing networks of alliances in the region and beyond the region itself. When different groups met there, they may also have exchanged goods and commodities. ¹⁴⁸ The immediate availability of commodities arriving from a broader regional context thanks to these dynamics may well explain the relevance Mahal Teglinos (K1) had in the long-distance trade networks of exchange.

From this perspective, it should be highlighted that some Egyptian texts may also support the hypothesis that commensality was a part of the ritual interaction between different groups in second millennium BC north-eastern Africa. Passages mentioning the fact that food was given to Nubian traders apparently after a commercial exchange, occur in two of the Semna despatches, dating to the reign of Amenemhat III, ¹⁴⁹ and may well be interpreted in this way. That the Nubians in these despatches, to which the food is said to have been offered, are explicitly described as traders rules out the interpretation that these were humanitarian distributions of food made by the Egyptians in order to decrease the pressure of migrants on their southern border. ¹⁵⁰ Perhaps, a situation similar to that represented in the aforementioned Punt reliefs at Deir el-Bahari, where not only exchange but also the sharing of food between the Egyptians and Puntites may be inferred, ¹⁵¹ could have marked the interactions at Mahal Teglinos (K1).

At Mahal Teglinos (K1), the imported vessels possibly containing Egyptian delicacies are associated with locally made cooking vessels, especially those made to process local food, for example the large ceramic trays reminiscent of the ethnographic Sudanese dokka and Ethio-Eritrean moqoqo, that were possibly used for cooking sorghum bread. ¹⁵² This may also suggest that in these occasions gastronomic hybridsation took place, and Egyptian and southern cusines may have somehow intertwined. It is notable that similar phenomena may have taken place around the same period in the Egyptian fortresses of the Second Cataract, where a multi-ethnic cuisine may indeed have emerged. ¹⁵³ Of course, we cannot expect to find traces of these processes in the Egyptian texts, where Nubian cuisine was sometimes depicted as disgusting; this was most likely an act of ‘othering’ in order to stress the difference between the Egyptians and the other peoples, whose ‘barbaric’ aspects were emphasized. ¹⁵⁴ Yet, as is often the case, archaeology can point to aspects that are overlooked for ideological reasons in the texts.

A further final aspect should be emphasized as a possible consequence of the potentially crucial role played by food in the interactions that took place along the Red Sea-Punt network, both as a commodity and as an element of the rituals associated with trade. Indeed, it should be remarked that along with food, crops may even have been exchanged, as is shown by the spread of African crops from the Sahel to the Indian Ocean via the Red Sea, such as the case of sorghum, whose domestication process is likely to have largely taken place in Eastern Sudan. ¹⁵⁵ In the meantime, following the same network, crops originating in Eastern Asia may have found their way to Africa. This is shown by the grains of Panicum miliaceum, a cereal of Chinese origin, recently identified in the Kerma site of Ukma West, immediately south of the Middle Kingdom Egyptian frontier of the Second Cataract. ¹⁵⁶ Therefore, archaeology is also revealing a further and so far unsuspected aspect of the Red Sea and Egypt-Punt network of interactions, and consequently broadening the analytical perspective of the dynamics characterizing it.

To sum up, ongoing investigations in Eastern Sudan are contributing considerably to the study of the relations between Egypt and inner Africa in the third and second millennia BC. Furthermore, these contributions are in some respects broadening the perspective to include aspects and issues that have so far been disregarded. The hypotheses presented in this article will be tested in the near future through the collection of more evidence from Gash Group and Jebel Mokram Group contexts in the sites already under investigation, which will therefore enlarge the available data. Alongside this, investigations will be extended to the areas east and north of the region so far studied. Indeed, these areas are crucial to arriving at a better understanding of the relations Eastern Sudan held with the Red Sea coast and Upper Nubia respectively. In addition to that, chemical compositional analyses similar to the ones already begun on the obsidian flakes will address the issue of the origin of the faience beads from Eastern Sudan with the aim of comparing their composition with faience from Egypt and Upper Nubia. Moreover, studies are commencing that are aimed at analysing the residues on the fragments of Egyptian vessels from Eastern Sudan in order to contribute to the study of the commodities imported into the region.