NubiaN FauNal Practices - exPloriNg the c-grouP “Pastoral ideal” at NiNe cemeteries 1 NubiaN FauNal Practices - exPloriNg the c-grouP “Pastoral ideal” at NiNe cemeteries PerNille baNgsgaard IntroductIon this paper presents an analysis of the faunal remains and their deposition at c-group cemeteries in lower Nubia. the aim is to place these deposits within a wider context of funerary rituals and social practices of the c-group people. Various interpretations of the Nubian c-group faunal practices can be found in the archaeological literature today (adams 1977, 152-154; bietak 1986; trigger 1965). these relate both to the daily consumption of animals as well as to the sym- bolic and ritualised use of fauna in a funerary context. however, due to the excavation history of lower Nubia, little of this research has focused on actual fau- nal remains. i offer a re-interpretation of the faunal funerary prac- tices and given these results, i discuss the role of cattle and livestock among the c-group people and the “pas- toral ideal”, as it has been described by W. adams and other scholars (adams 1977, 152-154). the faunal deposits from nine c-group cemeteries excavated by the scandinavian Joint expedition to sudanese Nubia (sJe) from 1961 to 1964 forms the basis of the primary analysis. the findings clearly testify to a remarkably stable tradition of funerary rituals. two different types of fau- nal deposits were identified including cut cattle skulls located on the original surface of the cemetery and complete sheep deposited alongside the human skele- ton in the grave shaft. the two types of deposits repre- sent significantly different contexts, thus indicating dif- ferent spatial and temporal relationships with the burial event. c-Group Fauna, Facts and MIsunderstandInGs the c-group of lower Nubia is situated in the archaeological record from approximately 2400 bc to 1550 bc (bietak 1986, 116) and as such is contempo- rary with the Pan-grave and Kerma cultures in sudan and with pharaonic egypt to the north. much of the academic debate concerning the c-group has concentrated on two specific questions. Firstly, on the geographical origin of the c-group as an ethnic group, where various models suggested have included foreign introductions from the eastern desert, the Western desert, or from the south in the Khartoum region (trigger 1976, 52-54). the time-span separating the end of the a-group and the start of the c-group has, however, diminished significantly through recent research. combined with a high degree of similarity and continuity in their respective material cultures it becomes likely that the a-group should be identified as the c-group’s cultural predecessor. additionally, the many similarities between both the a-group and pre- Kerma (edwards 2004, 67-68) as well as between the early c-group and the early Kerma material cultures, supports an argument for close contact or cultural links between the two, or possibly even points to their shar- ing joint origins (gratien 1978, 275). secondly, the likely subsistence strategies employed by the c-group culture have been scrutinised. the widespread uses of cattle iconography, which is incised into pottery vessels or into stelae of the early c-group graves or on the natural rock at a number of locations, are all well-known (adams 1977, 152-54; shinnie 1996, 62-63). this prominence of cattle imagery has led scholars such as bietak to identify the c-group people as pastoralist or cattle herders (bietak 1986, 118; taylor 1991, 19). the everyday meat consumption of the c-group was not, however, based on cattle. all faunal evidence available from habitation sites indi- cates that the primary meat supply was dominated by domesticated sheep and goat, as at sayala (bietak 1966, 33) and at sJe 18 in the Faras region (bangsgaard 2010, 23-25), or by hunted gazelle (adams 1977, 154, 12; gautier 1968, 97-99) as at Wadi Káragan (carlson 1966, 53-62). additionally, the archaeological evidence has attested agriculture at c-group habitations, and this could well have been the main basis of subsistence (adams 1977, 154; säve-söderbergh 1989a, 11; trig- ger 1976, 80). despite this difference between the conjectured sta- tus of the c-group pastoral subsistence and the posi-