Navigation – Plan du site

AccueilThématiques16Towards the creation of archaeolo...

Towards the creation of archaeological archives in Ghana: Reflections from Begho

Vers la création d'archives archéologiques au Ghana : réflexions depuis Begho
Daniel Kumah

Résumés

Begho, une ancienne ville marchande située au Ghana, a fait l’objet de recherches archéologiques et ethnographiques dans les années 1970 en raison de ses liens commerciaux historiques avec Djenné, cité de la boucle du Niger. Bien que de nombreux travaux aient été menés à Begho, nous savons relativement peu de choses sur les pratiques archéologiques qui y furent mises en œuvre. C’est dans ce contexte que la présente recherche a été entreprise. Cette étude a évalué, et examiné, les documents d’archives produits par les chercheurs ayant travaillé à Begho afin d’identifier et d’analyser les artefacts provenant du site et conservés au Musée d’archéologie de l’Université du Ghana. Nous nous sommes également penchés sur les carnets de terrain, plans de site, cartes, illustrations et photographies réalisés à Begho dans les années 1970. À partir de ces sources archivistiques, une recherche et une analyse des matériaux culturels de Begho conservés dans les réserves du Musée ont été effectuées. Cette recherche offre un éclairage sur la reconstruction d’un site archéologique à partir des archives et des artefacts muséaux, deux éléments essentiels dans la création d’une archive ou d’un dépôt archéologique. L’importance de cette étude réside dans sa contribution à l’établissement d’un tel dépôt ou d'une telle archive.

Haut de page

Texte intégral

Introduction

  • 1 A.L. Stoler, 2009, p. 44.
  • 2 A.J. Baird, L. McFadyen, 2014, p. 14.

1The study of archives has moved from their being mere sources of primary data to being research subjects in themselves. As Stoler noted, the archival turn in the humanities have moved from “archive-as-source” to “archive-as-subject.”1 This shift in perception, from using archives as a primary source to studying them as a topic in themselves, considers how the archive is constructed and its implications in knowledge formation.2 Archives of archaeological investigations are increasingly regarded as rich sources of the past. Some archaeologists have opined that the use and study of archives should be a practice (archive-as-practice) in archaeological investigations, particularly during excavations and post-excavation analysis and should become an essential task for the archaeologist.

  • 3 D.H. Brown, 2011; H. Bauer-Clapp, K. Kirakosian, 2017; J.D. Richards, 2017.
  • 4 J.D. Richards, 2017, p. 228.

2A significant portion of archaeology fieldwork reports from post-mid-20th-century projects, including those in Ghana, remains unpublished and largely inaccessible. This lack of publication has limited awareness of and scholarly access to key archaeological sites. Reports in archives or gray literature offer essential insights;3 however, the main obstacle is discovering their existence and locating them.4 While some records were donated to institutions, many are held by former project members or private individuals, and others have been lost or destroyed. This challenge is exemplified by the scarcity of archival materials from the Behgo excavations conducted by Merrick Posnansky.

  • 5 L. Roth, G. Chouin, A. Ogunfolakan, 2021.

3Most archaeological projects have produced records and artefacts from the field. For many decades, archaeologists focused on how to curate the material culture to the detriment of the field and laboratory records created from the archaeological works. It must be noted that we cannot separate the analysis of artefacts and features from the documentation associated with an archaeological project.5 The collection, curation, and analysis of field notes and records is gradually gaining momentum in archaeological practice.

  • 6 A. Brown, K. Perrin, 2000; K. Perrin, 2002; D.H. Brown, 2004.
  • 7 Archaeological Archives Forum, 2012.
  • 8 H. Bauer-Clapp, K. Kirakosian, 2017, p. 221.
  • 9 K. Perrin, 2002, p. 3.

4A new subfield – the study of archaeological archives – first emerged in the United Kingdom, Europe, and later in North America over the last fifteen to twenty years. The pioneering works in archaeological archives are attributed to Duncan Brown and Kathy Perrin in the United Kingdom.6 This led to the formation in the UK-based Chartered Institute for Archaeologists of a Special Interest Group on Archaeological Archives.7 This brought together archaeologists working with archival records to share resources and identify best practices.8 The Archaeological Archives Forum defined archaeological archives as: “all parts of the archaeological record, including the finds and digital records as well as the written, drawn and photographic documentation.”9

  • 10 K. Perrin et al., 2014.

5In 2012, a broader European collaboration produced a manual titled The Standard and Guide to Best Practices for Archaeological Archiving in Europe.10 This document, which was translated into many languages, focused on the issues and challenges in creating archaeological archives in Europe. In defining what an archaeological archive is, the ARCHES European group also made the connection between objects and documentation in archaeology:

  • 11 K. Perrin et al., 2014, p. 20; H. Bauer-Clapp, K. Kirakosian, 2017, p. 221.

an archaeological archive comprises all records and materials recovered during an archaeological project and identified for long-term preservation, including artefacts, ecofacts and other environmental remains, waste products, scientific samples and also written and visual documentation in paper, film and digital form.11

  • 12 H. Bauer-Clapp, K. Kirakosian, 2017, p. 221.

6However, the European perspective regarding archaeological archives is different from that of the United States, where “archive” in an archaeological context generally refers to documentation only, while objects are referred to as “collections.”12

  • 13 This was a special issue titled: For the Record: Archaeological Archives in the Twenty-First Centur (...)
  • 14 H. Bauer-Clapp, K. Kirakosian, 2017, p. 221-222.

7A 2017 issue of the journal Advances in Archaeological Practice, Volume 5, Issue 313 focused on the documentation produced as the result of an archaeological project without losing sight of the critical link between records and objects, since it is the records that provide the context for those objects, making attention to documentation as important as attention to material culture. In other words, what we as archaeologists can learn from objects is often bounded by our ability to access and understand the associated records.14 Therefore, an archaeological archive of field notes and records would be incomplete without the connection to objects, catalogued, analyzed, and/or in storage.

  • 15 L. Roth, G. Chouin, A. Ogunfolakan, 2021.
  • 16 L. Roth, G. Chouin, A. Ogunfolakan, 2021, p. 78; F. Willett, 1959a, 1959b, 2006.
  • 17 L. Roth, G. Chouin, A. Ogunfolakan, 2021, p. 78.
  • 18 L. Roth, G. Chouin, A. Ogunfolakan, 2021.

8There are a few cases of researchers employing archaeological archives as practice in their work in West Africa. Notable among them is the reconstruction of Frank Willett’s rescue excavations which occurred in 1957-1958 and 1962-1963 at Ita Yemoo, Ile-Ife in Nigeria.15 Willett’s excavation at Ita Yemoo occurred after the accidental finding of bronze artefacts by laborers digging the foundation of a building. The other cultural materials recovered at this site in Ile-Ife were metals, clay, and glass, which caused a sensation in academic circles in the mid-20th century.16 Though Willett analyzed and interpreted various artefacts and features from different contexts, most scholars were unable to critically examine his work and narratives owing to the absence of detailed archaeological reports.17 By retrieving and using Willett’s field notebooks, photographs, and sketches which were donated to the University of Glasgow’s archives, researchers were able to partially disentangle the archaeological past of the Ita Yemoo site at Ile-Ife.18

  • 19 C. Capel, 2021.
  • 20 C. Capel, 2021; C. Capel et al., 2015.

9Similarly, this approach was also employed at the famous funerary complex of the Columns Tomb Kumbi Saleh (Mauritania), which was discovered in 1914. The site was not dated, nor was its archaeology fully understood.19 The discovery of unpublished excavation notebooks and of the last remains of a supposedly lost collection of artefacts paved the way for re-examination of this now largely destroyed complex. A century after its discovery, the monument was dated to the 11th-13th centuries.20

10Building on these two research projects, this paper presents an investigation into the archaeological archives from Begho, one of the important archaeological sites in Ghana. It further reconstructs the history of the site and reflects on and interprets some of the unpublished field archives from the 1970s.

Background to the study area

  • 21 Begho, sometimes known as Bighu (I. Wilks, 1993; W.A. Massing, 2012). In some Arabic manuscripts su (...)
  • 22 M. Posnansky, 1973; 2015; A.B. Stahl, 2001.
  • 23 M. Posnansky, 2015; J. Anquandah, 1993.
  • 24 I. Wilks, 1993; W.A. Massing, 2012.

11The site of Begho21 is located near the town of Hani in the Bono Region of Ghana. The region had trade relations with the people of the Niger Bend area of Mali.22 From the 1970s to the 1980s, Merrick Posnansky conducted historical, archaeological, and ethnographic research at Begho/Hani. The site is believed to be an ancient city that played a key role in the trans-Saharan and trans-Atlantic trade networks (Fig. 1). The people of Hani have kept a strong oral historical account of the importance of the Begho area,23 while some Arabic sources also recorded the socio-economic relations between Jenne in Mali and Begho, particularly with regards to the gold trade.24

12After a preliminary survey of Begho near Hani in 1970, Merrick Posnansky commenced excavations and later established the West African Trade Project (WATP). The WATP was extended to important trade towns like Bono Manso and Ahwene Koko. Begho served as a field school for training and mentoring young students, especially the first generation of Ghanaian archaeologists and technical personnel from the department for ten years. To date, the archaeological investigation conducted at Begho remains one of the most important research projects in Ghana.

  • 25 M. Posnansky, 2015, p. 101.
  • 26 Both the oral accounts and archaeological investigations at Begho indicated that there were several (...)
  • 27 M. Posnansky, 2015, p. 96.

13The detailed survey conducted showed that the pottery scatter at Begho covered over 9.6 km square; this area included both settlements and farming areas.25 Archaeological investigations were conducted at the various Begho quarters26 and ironworking and some prehistoric sites in the area from 1970 to 1979. The excavations were carried out at Nyarko (Ny1), Brong (B1 and B2), Dwinfuor (D1, D2 and D3), Kramo (K1), Dapaa, Srede, Atwetweboso, and the Market centre. In addition, the prehistoric sites of Mumute (M1), Bonoase, and Nsesrekeseso (N1) were investigated (Fig. 2). The excavations were conducted in eight separate missions: seven led by the University of Ghana’s Department of Archaeology – in 1970, 1971 (twice), 1975 (twice) and 1975-1976 – and one led by the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) and the University of Ghana’s Department of Archaeology in 1979.27

  • 28 M. Posnansky, 2015, p. 96; 2010.
  • 29 L.B. Crossland, 1975.
  • 30 M. Posnansky, 2015, p. 107.
  • 31 L.B. Crossland, M. Posnansky, 1978; M.C. Berns, 2007.
  • 32 R. McIntosh, 1974, 1976.

14In addition, ethnoarchaeological research took place from 1977 to 1998 at Hani and its surrounding communities.28 This ethnographic research included work on the textile industry where spun cotton was woven into cloth29 and later dyed with indigo in dye pits.30 Also, the potting industry in the area, especially at the town of Bondakile, was recorded.31 Various architectural experiments were conducted on mud wall and wattle-and-daub structures at Begho.32

  • 33 G. Chouin, 2005; N. Vergote, 2020.
  • 34 M. Posnansky, 1971, 1972, 1975, 1976, 1979, 2015; J. Anquandah, 1975, 1981; L.B. Crossland, 1975, 1 (...)
  • 35 J.F. Kense, 1990, p. 150; D. Kumah, 2022, p. 396.

15The archaeological and ethnographic research carried out at Begho in the 1970s and 1980s revealed a great deal about the people’s past socioeconomic, cultural, and political lifeways. Yet little is known about the details of the archaeological work done by Merrick Posnansky and his crew. This is what some scholars refer to as the “Begho mystery,” which refers to the fact that, while so much fieldwork was done at Begho, little is known about the actual work undertaken.33 Apart from a few summary reports and articles,34 Begho lacks a comprehensive report on the archaeological investigation conducted.35

  • 36 D. Kumah, 2024; 2022, p. 47

16It has been more than four decades since the last dig took place at Begho, and archaeologists still have concerns about the project. What methodological techniques were used for surveying and excavating sites? What analysis were conducted on cultural materials? Who or what institutions carried out these investigations? Why is it that so little is known about other cultural materials unearthed at Begho, such as beads and faunal remains? Is it feasible to get a detailed overview of Begho’s pottery, ivory, and metallurgical industries, for example?36 These were some of the concerns that drove the interest of the author to first locate and “examine” the Begho archives.

Reflecting on Begho after more than 40 years

  • 37 N. Vergote, 2020; D. Kumah, 2022; 2024.
  • 38 N. Vergote, 2020, p. 47.

17Recent attempts have been made by scholars to investigate the Begho archives, due to the lengthy gap in publishing the archaeological fieldwork.37 In addition to interviewing Merrick Posnansky and a few academics in the United States, Vergote’s work mostly focused on archives from France and a few from the Institute of Archaeology, UCLA.38 The present paper focuses on the Begho archives assessed in Ghana. The bulk of the data source are archives held by African researchers who were responsible for some of the Begho sites during the project. Fortunately, these researchers’ archives have been kept and preserved for more than four decades, and they can now be accessed by the public.

  • 39 Leonard B. Crossland was a former faculty member at the Archaeology Department, University of Ghana (...)
  • 40 D. Kumah, 2022, p. 142.

18Leonard B. Crossland39 is one of the scholars who meticulously kept these Begho records. In 2018, during my quest to unravel the Begho research, I conducted a series of interviews with him to gain information regarding the archaeological investigation undertaken at Begho. During one of these encounters, he mentioned that he had some Begho archives in his possession.40 The main contents of the archives were documents of the various sites excavated at Begho from 1970 to 1975, including the B2 site in 1972, the D3 site in 1975, and the Ny1 site in 1975. Most of the records were from 1970 to 1975. He did not possess data from the 1979 excavations since he was not part of that year’s field season.

The nature of the Begho archives

19The Begho archives acquired from Leonard B. Crossland were systematically organized to glean meaningful information. Preliminary digitization of some of the fragile documents was also undertaken. Generally, most of the documents can broadly be classified as pre-field, on-site, and post-field records. The pre-field records are documents that were created in preparation for the archaeological fieldwork. They may include correspondence, proposals, and budgets. The on-site documents were created during the actual fieldwork, such as site plans, stratigraphic illustrations, and photographs. The post-field records are archives that were created after fieldwork. This includes records such as analysis sheets, artefact drawings, photographs, manuscripts, and publications.

20The Begho archives were classified and grouped into twenty (20) dossiers/folders. The first folder contains all the correspondence between the project director(s), scholars, traditional authorities, university officials, government officials, workers, and students. There was a total of 486 documents in this folder. The Field Notes dossier contained various notes that were written during fieldwork, including a total of 299 documents. The third group is the largest collection, with 14 Analysis Sheets folders containing 1,518 documents. These provide the details of the various analyses conducted on artefacts, particularly pottery. A fourth folder is the second-largest, with a total of 1,408 photographs (prints and negatives) taken in the field and during laboratory analysis.

21The fifth folder is the Drawing folder, which contains site plans, stratigraphic drawings, and artefact drawings, for a total of 100 documents. The sixth folder contains 10 maps produced during the archaeological project. Finally, the last dossier is the Publication folder. It contains 43 articles, reports, and manuscripts written about Begho. In all, the Begho archives curated by Crossland consist of twenty folders, containing a total of 3,864 files or documents (Figs. 3a-b).

Correspondence records

  • 41 D. Kumah, 2022, p. 135.
  • 42 J. Walz, M. Posnansky, 2010, p. 192.
  • 43 D. Kumah, 2022, p. 137.
  • 44 J. Walz, M. Posnansky, 2010.

22The Correspondence archive is one of the new files created after careful cataloguing. This folder has letters that were exchanged between various people who were connected to the West African Trade Project at Begho. The bulk of the documents in this archive comprises correspondence of students who applied to volunteer at Begho. The applicants included students from Ghana, Nigeria, Mali, Benin, Côte D’Ivoire, Burkina Faso, Sénégal, Kenya, Ethiopia, Zambia, Sweden, the United Kingdom, the United States, and Canada. Some of these students who trained at Begho later became renowned archaeologists, museum experts, and academics.41 Ghanaian graduate students such as Leonard B. Crossland, Emmanuel Kofi Agorsah, and Kweku Effah-Gyamfi, all of whom became academics, worked at Begho.42 Also, technical personnel such as Seth A. Dankwa, E.A. Adjedu, Ishmael O. Sowah, and Bossman Murrey, who later became key support staff for the Department of Archaeology at the University of Ghana, received field training at Begho.43 International students who excavated at Begho included Roderick J. McIntosh, Marla Berns, Susan K. McIntosh, Tim Garrard, and Candice Goucher, just to mention a few.44 From the collection, I sampled and examined two letters from students who applied to be volunteers on the project. The first letter, written by Roderick J. McIntosh from Yale University on 8 December 1971, describes how he saw the advertisement for the summer excavations at Begho. He further narrates his previous fieldwork experiences and his interest in specializing in African Prehistoric Archaeology during his graduate studies (Fig. 4a). James Boachie-Ansah, a second-year archaeology student at the University of Ghana, wrote the second letter, on 15 February 1972, to request permission to join the excavation during the Easter break (Fig. 4b).

  • 45 See N. Vergote, 2020.

23The file also contains correspondence between Merrick Posnansky and other colleagues, such as Thurstan Shaw, Peter Shinnie, and J.D. Fage. The letters discuss the findings at Begho, their interpretations, guidance on manuscripts, and conference announcements. Similarly, the Raymond Mauny collections in Paris include 33 letters exchanged between Mauny and Posnanky from 1965 to 1980 that prominently feature Begho.45

  • 46 P. Alagidede, W. Baah-Boateng, E. Nketiah-Amponsah, 2013.

24The correspondence also contains various CVs of international student applicants, responses to the application letters by Prof. Merrick Posnansky and, later, Dr. Joane Dombrowski, and the Begho Field School Application Forms (Fig. 5). The volume of letters (n=106) from students who applied to work at Begho between 1970 and 1975 demonstrates the site’s significance to Ghanaian archaeology and how Merrick Posnansky and his team successfully promoted the site to archaeologists worldwide. Furthermore, it demonstrates how the director was able to liaise with institutions and individuals, particularly in seeking funds and support for archaeological excavations. Various support came from the Ghana Association of University Teachers (GAUT) (now University Teachers Association of Ghana – UTAG), Ghana Museums and Monuments Board (GMMB), the Finance Directorate of the University of Ghana, the University Bookshop, and the Institute of Statistical, Social and Economic Research (ISSER) at the University of Ghana, to mention a few. Support came in the form of funding, vehicles, equipment, and stationery for the team. These kinds of support were crucial in Ghana in the 1970s and early 1980s, as the country was experiencing severe economic hardship.46

25The file also contains letters exchanged between archaeologists and traditional leaders at Hani. Of particular interest is the letter from Nana Kofi Ampofo (the Chief of Hani) to Dr. Joane Dombrowski (acting head of department) on 5 October 1974. In this episode, the chief informed Dombrowski of the demise and burial of the Queen Mother of Hani and subsequently invited the team and department to the celebration on 2 November (Fig. 6). This correspondence highlights the cordial relationship between the host community and the archaeologists at Begho-Hani in the mid-1970s.

26Finally, one of the letters that caught my attention was the one written by Posnansky at UCLA to Crossland, on 27 June 1980. In the letter, he stated that he had sent some Begho materials to Ghana. Merrick Posnansky made an interesting disclosure in this letter (Fig. 7) that may be relevant to our understanding of the Begho mystery:

Unfortunately, this last quarter, I have not had time to do Begho materials. I seem to be always planning and never catching up. I’m off to Somalia next week and to Jamaica later in the month, so my summer is fast slipping away. UCLA is far too busy a place, and I seem to be accumulating too many students – the last count, I was on over 15 students’ doctoral committees.

  • 47 D. Kumah, 2022, p. 147.
  • 48 Effah-Gyamfi was part of the first batch of students to excavate at Begho in 1970. He later became (...)

27He later indicated how he missed the secretarial and other support he had had at the Department of Archaeology, University of Ghana. These words, to some extent, sum up Merrick Posnansky’s busy schedule, the impact of changing countries and jobs on his scientific production, the multiplication of projects, and the supervision of an increasing number of doctoral students, all being potential reasons why he never completed his final report on Begho.47 It has also been argued that the sudden passing of Effah-Gyamfi undoubtedly impacted the West African Trade Project.48

Field Notes records

  • 49 D. Kumah, 2022.

28These records comprise notes made during archaeological or ethnographic fieldwork in the Begho area. They are mainly field records generated at sites excavated and supervised by Leonard B. Crossland – specifically, the Brong-B2, Nyarko-Ny1, Dwinfuor-D1, and D3 sites. The data include excavation context sheets, artefact summary sheets, and other field notes used during excavations at the B2, D1, D3, and Ny1 sites of Begho from 1970 to 1975. Furthermore, the folder also contains notes taken during the ethnographic field study in various communities that produce pottery in the Begho and Banda areas, including Bondakile, Sampa, and Kukua. Additionally, notes on some pottery analyses are included in this folder. One of the important documents in this file is an archive recorded by Leonard B. Crossland at the T1 (D1) site in 1972. It shows how the reconnaissance survey, contouring, site recording system, and excavation processes were conducted. The archive recorded by Crossland documented (with diagrams) activities before the excavation at the D1 site. He then reported that the quadrant method of excavation was used in smaller areas (Fig. 8a-b) at Begho.49

29There were also excavation data record forms, which recorded the project name, excavation processes, artefacts and features recovered, excavators and recorders, stratigraphy descriptions, photographs, and drawings, among other details (Fig. 9a). The field inventory record sheets documented the excavation unit, layers, bag number, and the artefacts recovered (Fig. 9b). The critical examination of these two categories of forms provides insight into the excavation process, the people who worked at the site, and the various artefacts retrieved.

Analysis Sheets records

  • 50 D. Kumah, 2022, p. 149-150.

30These folders contain various datasheets used for the analysis of cultural materials, particularly pottery from the different sites. This archive has the most extensive collection in the Begho archives, with fourteen (14) folders, each bearing a particular title. The titles on the folders are as follows: Begho Special Finds, Begho 1970 B1 Pottery Analysis datasheets, Modern Pottery, Hani Area, Begho 1971, K1 Pottery Analysis datasheets, Begho 1975 N1 Pottery Analysis datasheets, Begho Pottery Analysis sheets Kramo, Begho 1972 – Dwinfuor Pottery Analysis Data Sheets (Fig. 10), Nyarko Site datasheets, Begho 1972 B2 Pottery Analysis datasheets, Begho Pottery Analysis sheets, Begho Pottery Analysis data sheets K2 site, Begho B2 datasheets, Begho Pottery Analysis sheets Dwinfuor, and History of Past Research.50 There are one thousand five hundred and eighteen (1,518) spreadsheets in 14 folders in the analysis archive collection.

31One of the important documents in this collection is the sheet designed for pottery analysis. The form has various components, including date, recorder, excavation unit, horizontal location, vertical location, bag number, content, and catalogue. Figure 8 shows a completed pottery analysis sheet from the Mumute prehistoric site, which technician Bossman Murrey recorded on 3 March 1973.

  • 51 D. Kumah, 2022, p. 154-155.

32Similarly, the analysis records also contain some documents that provide information on the collaborative activities between specialists and laboratories that conducted analyses on specific artefacts from Begho. Over 1,500 faunal remains from the K1 (1971), D1 (1972), B2 (1972), and D3 (1975) sites were taken to the Zooarchaeology Lab, Department of Archaeology (now Grahame Clark Laboratory for Zooarchaeology) at the University of Cambridge for investigation (Figs. 11a & 11b).51 The bones may still be at Cambridge, and the analysis may be incomplete. This is due to the lack of detailed faunal analysis in documentation by Posnansky and others. Such an analysis would clarify the variety of animals exploited at Begho.

Photographs

33This folder had a total of 1,408 images, which makes it the second-largest file in the Begho archives. The archival photo collection consists of both pictures and negative images (Fig. 11). Some of the photo sheets have 36 smaller images on them, while others have 30, 24, 20, 16, 12 images in that order (Fig. 12). After critically assessing the pictures, the author classified them into three sub-themes: ethnoarchaeology, field excavation, and artefacts photographs (Figs. 13-15). The photographs were mainly taken by researchers and the technical staff who supported the Begho project.

Maps

34The author created this folder to consolidate all hand-drawn maps. In total, ten (10) maps were gathered from various folders and placed in this new Maps folder. The goal was to keep all maps separate from other files in the archives. Some of the maps in this collection show the different archaeological sites at Begho, potting communities (Figs. 16a & 16b), and place names in the Hani area. Most of these maps were prepared by the Department of Archaeology’s technical staff and date from the early 1970s through the 1980s.

Drawings

35A total of one hundred (100) drawings made up this folder. The folder has been categorized into three smaller folders: site plans, stratigraphic drawings, and artefact drawings. As part of my doctoral research, one significant activity undertaken was the redrawing and resketching of some of the site plans and soil profiles. The author did this because most of the drawings were illegible and blurred, necessitating their re-sketching for proper interpretation.

Site Plans

  • 52 D. Kumah, 2022, p. 178.
  • 53 M. Posnansky, 1971 p. 3.

36This subfolder contains the most significant number of drawings. A total of seventy-six (76) site plan drawings were identified. Drawings of excavation plans of the several sites at Begho are included in this folder. Some of the files are in excellent condition, while others are in poor condition. The site plans were often blurry and challenging to interpret and were redrawn and digitized by the author. The drawing from the B1 site, which was excavated in 1970, is the first site plan presented. This drawing is significant because it depicts the first excavation at Begho. Moreover, this plan has not been found in any Begho publication; hence, there was a need for it to be re-sketched.52 The B1 excavations were limited to a specific region of mounds, consisting of sixteen 2x2 m units.53 The original site plan (Fig. 17a) and the remodeled plan are presented below in Figure 17b.

  • 54 D. Kumah, 2022, p. 185.

37This folder also includes plans of the Dapaa ironworking complex, located approximately 1.5 to 2 km southeast of the town of Debibi, along the footpath of the Mampa River valley to Hani. There were 14 slag mounds arranged in a circle, 50 m in diameter. However, except for a plan of the excavation site published by Posnansky in 2010, there is no published plan featuring the numerous slag mounds described at the Dapaa site. The technical data included a photograph of the map showing the broader Dapaa site’s many slag mounds (and other anthropogenic mounds).54 The fuzzy nature of this photographic site plan (Fig. 18a) prompted it to be re-sketched for clarity and accurate interpretation (Fig. 18b).

Stratigraphic Profiles

  • 55 D. Kumah, 2022, p. 188.

38One of the drawbacks of the Begho project is the limited information on the stratigraphy of the numerous sites excavated. In the archives, the author discovered nineteen (19) stratigraphic drawings of various excavated sites. Mumute, Bonoase, and Dwinfuor are some of the sites with stratigraphic drawings. So far, no stratigraphic drawings of sites from the Brong, Nyarko, or Kramo quarters have been discovered. Soil profile drawings of ironworking sites such as Dapaa, Srede, and Atwetwebooso are also yet to be found.55

39All the stratigraphic profiles were scanned, and some were re-sketched. These profiles were mainly from the Dwinfuor-D3 site, where Leonard B. Crossland supervised and conducted the excavations. The stratigraphy of Trench 1 and Trench 5 (Fig. 19a) at the D3 site revealed good traces of collapsed wall material and possible wall stumps standing on thin lines of laterite platforms (Fig. 19b).

Publication folder

  • 56 M. Posnansky, 1972, 1975, 1979; L.B. Crossland, 1976; J. Anquandah, 1976; E.K. Agorsah, 1973; T. Ga (...)

40This dossier is a large book titled Vital Papers on Begho. It contains copies of 43 documents written about Begho from 1965 to 1982. Leonard B. Crossland made this compilation during the 1970s and 1980s. This is located at the library of the Department of Archaeology and Heritage Studies at the University of Ghana, Legon. The publication folder includes 11 field reports and copies of articles from Sankofa journal, written by Merrick Posnansky, Leonard B. Crossland, James Anquandah, Emmanuel Agorsah, Tim Garrard, Joana Dombrowski, Roland Fletcher, Kwame Ameyaw, and Marla Berns.56 The subject matter included archaeological fieldwork, ethnographic research, geographic investigations, and linguistic research reports at Begho.

  • 57 I.K. Afeku, 1976; S.S. Quarcoopome, 1977.

41Additionally, five papers were presented at conferences and seminars held in Kumasi and Accra from the early to mid-1970s. The most extensive collections in the folder are journal articles, book chapters, and publications (n=23). Furthermore, there were two manuscripts by Merrick Posnansky and James Anquandah, as well as two undergraduate dissertations, written by Afeku and Quarcoopome on Begho.57

Using archival documents at Begho: Its relevance, problems and limitations

42The archive presented includes data from about a decade of archaeological excavations at Begho as well as several years of ethnoarchaeological research at Hani and neighboring settlements. It does not represent the entirety of Begho’s documents. As previously stated, other Begho archives can be found at UCLA in the United States, at the African Research Library in Paris, France, and possibly in other personal archives in Ghana and the United States.

43Analyzing the data and organizing and restructuring the materials, as well as providing finding aids or making files easier to access are all necessary tasks in producing a workable archive. Even though this activity is important, it does not make the creation of the archaeological archive complete.

  • 58 D.H. Brown, 2011, p. 4.

44An archaeological archive should include two parts: documental archives and material archives. The first phase of the process of creating the archaeological archives involved the retrieval and examination of the Begho documentary archives, which included written records, drawings, photographs (including negatives and prints), reports, drafts, and published works. Furthermore, all digital-born content, such as text, data, drawings, 3D models, pictures, and video, is included in the digital material, as well as files created from digitized material, including data entered from paper and scanned images or text.58

45The problems and limitations associated with the use of documentary archives stem from the fact that some files may be lost or damaged. Some of the illustrations of Begho material, created by the department’s drafters, were missing from their original locations, particularly in the drawing files. Furthermore, several of the files found were in poor condition due to improper handling. Some documents have parts destroyed by pests and mice. This activity of pests and rodents, therefore, makes it difficult to appreciate the damaged data fully.

46Also, the fact that the Begho archives are not all in a single location is a problem and a limitation to their use. Although the author had access to these notes and documents, it is evident that a portion of the data is missing from the collection. This is especially true of the field notes from some sites and the stratigraphic drawings from B1, Ny1, K1, K2, Atwetwebooso, Srede, and Dapaa.

47Also, only five sketches of artefacts were recovered. This number is small considering the thousands of artefacts found at Begho. Reports from the correspondence folder indicate that many artefacts were sketched. Most of these drawings could have been in the custody of Merrick Posnansky. Another limitation in using the Begho documents is that some of the files lack site names, labels, dates, and the recorder’s names. It is difficult to interpret these files owing to a lack of proper information.

  • 59 D.H. Brown, 2011, p. 4.
  • 60 D. Kumah, 2022, p. 199.

48The second phase of creating the archaeological archives involves working with the material archives. A material archive encompasses all cultural materials and related samples59 that are on display in a museum exhibition, or stored, or otherwise.60

“Excavating” museum storage for Begho artefacts

49The Fowler Museum at UCLA holds seven purported pottery gold weights from Begho in its collections. However, the majority of the Begho material is held at the Museum of Archaeology at the University of Ghana, Legon, the National Museum in Accra. Due to time constraints and the inaccessibility of artefacts, the author restricted the search for Begho artefacts to the Museum of Archaeology at the University of Ghana, Legon.

  • 61 D. Kumah, 2022.

50For six months (May–August and October–November 2018), I worked in the Museum storage with the primary aim of locating Begho materials. The Museum of Archaeology did not have a proper database system at the time, making it very challenging to locate specific materials in storage. This exercise, nevertheless, enabled me to locate some of the materials and assess their state of conservation.61 A portion of the faunal remains were decomposing owing to poor storage conditions. Furthermore, some paper labels on artefacts and special finds, kept in zip-lock bags and wooden boxes, were defaced and often disintegrated, making it impossible to read or decipher their content, especially the accession numbers. Other labels (and, in some cases, parts of faunal remains) were also destroyed by pests and rodents.

  • 62 This storage room was recently expanded to make way for a new gallery, small storage and a curator’ (...)
  • 63 L.B. Crossland, M. Posnansky, 1978; L.B. Crossland, 1989.

51The museum has three storage facilities (Figs. 20a-c). The first is known as Room 13,62 located in the same building as the museum. It is a long and narrow room that contains cultural materials from Ghana and other African countries. The other two storage rooms are in a building referred to as the Archaeology Annex Building. These two stores have the largest number of artefacts. Most of the artefacts are kept in wooden cupboards, boxes, and calico cloth. The Begho materials found in the museum storage include, among other items, ceramics, smoking pipes, clay crucibles, spindle whorls, metals, faunal remains, and beads. Apart from the analysis conducted on the local pottery,63 most of the Begho artefacts found were reported by some crew members to have been analyzed. However, to date, little is known about this analysis. Hence, there was a need to locate, report, and analyze some of these materials from the museum storage.

Smoking pipes

  • 64 D. Kumah, 2022, p. 212.
  • 65 I.K. Afeku, 1976, p. 8.
  • 66 After P. Ozanne, 1969; I.K. Afeku, 1976; J.E. Phillips, 1983; J. Boachie-Ansah, 1986; S. McIntosh e (...)
  • 67 D. Kumah, 2022, p. 217-231.

52From 1970 to 1979, about 1,081 smoking pipes were recovered at Begho, making it one of the sites with the largest collections in Ghana.64 Four hundred and eighty-one (481) pipe fragments were recovered from 1970 to 1975 in the wider Begho area, including places such as Namasa and Debibi.65 Of that number, three hundred and sixty-four (364) were found in the second storage room of the Museum of Archaeology in 2018 (Fig. 21) and analyzed. These smoking pipes were excavated from the D1, D2, D3, B1, B2, K1, and De1 (Dapaa) sites from 1970 to 1975. The assemblage of the smoking pipes was grouped into five types.66. Forty-seven (47) bowls and stems were sketched and drawn.67

  • 68 D. Kumah, 2022, p. 227.

53The new typology of smoking pipes of Begho is based on what was found in storage. The typology is as follows: Type 1 are round-based imported European Kaolin pipes (Fig. 22). Type 2 are round-based local pipes (Fig. 23). The third type includes flat-based pipes with four variants: a) low bases and single-angled pipes; b) slightly high-based with double-angled pipes (Fig. 24); c) double-angled pipes with high bases in which the vertical and horizontal sides of the bases are almost perpendicular to each other; and d) double-angled pipes with extremely high bases. The fourth type of pipes are foliated-based pipes with quatrefoil bases. There are two variants (a-b): the first has projected lodes (Fig. 25), while the second has rounded lodes with a foliated collar. The fifth type of smoking pipes are sharp-angled pipes with foliate around the bowl (Fig. 26). The oldest types of Begho pipes are the Type 3 pipes, which probably date from 1630. See the probable dates (1630 to 1800s) of the various types in Table 1.68

54Table 1: Distribution of the various types of smoking pipes with their probable dates (Kumah, 2022)

S/N

Type

Probable Date

Source

1

Type 3

1630-1670

Afeku, 1976; York, 1973; Boachie-Ansah, 1986; McIntosh et al., 2003; Campbell, 2006.

2

Type 4

1670-1700

Afeku, 1976; Effah-Gyamfi, 1981; Boachie-Ansah, 1986.

3

Type 5

1700-1740 or
1720-1830

Davies, 1955; Ozanne, 1976;
Afeku, 1976; Vivian, 2005.

4

Types 1 & 2

1740-1800 or later

Afeku, 1976; Deetz, 1993.

Clay crucibles

  • 69 J. Anquandah, 1981.
  • 70 D. Kumah, 2022.
  • 71 D. Kumah, 2022, p. 233-238.
  • 72 M. Posnansky, 1976, p. 62; J. Anquandah, n.d., p. 5; L.B. Crossland, 1975, p. 20.
  • 73 D. Kumah, 2022.

55It was reported that over five hundred (500) fragments of clay crucibles were recovered at the Dwinfuor-D2 (artisan) quarter of Begho;69 however, during the search in the three museum storages, these crucibles could not be found.70 Only 19 crucibles from the B1 and B2 sites were found and analyzed, and a typology was established for them (see Fig. 28a-f). In all, seven types (A-G) of clay crucibles with various variants were identified and classified.71 These clay crucibles and other metallurgical objects from the D3 and D2 sites at Dwinfuor date from the mid-14th to the 17th century AD.72 The seven crucible types (A-G) have fifteen variants, with an average bowl diameter ranging between 4.9 and 10.5 cm. These crucibles are well fired and red-slipped and show evidence of basal abrasion (use-wear) and smudging as a result of exposure to fire.73 Close examination shows visible evidence of coiling in and outside the crucibles. They are mostly conically shaped with average flat-base diameters ranging between 1.1 and 2 cm. Also, the average thickness of these crucibles’ ranges from 0.9 to 1.5 cm, while the average height ranges from 4.3 to 5 cm (Figs. 27-28a-f).

Offering bowls (samanfo kruwa)

  • 74 M. Posnansky, 2015, 1972.
  • 75 M. Posnansky, 2015, p. 111.

56Several small bowls believed to be offering bowls were reported to have been found in both archaeological contexts74 and ethnographic settings. These offering bowls are known to the local people as samanfo kruwa (Twi dialect) – meaning, “bowls of the dead or ghosts,” or ancestral bowls. They were found at the Brong quarter (Akan royal site) in B1 and B2. The first sets were discovered in the 1970 excavations as a cluster at the corner of a house mound at the B1 (13th to 19th-century AD site). Again, in 1972, it was reported that offering bowls was discovered upside down at the B2 site (14th to 16th century AD). These features were interpreted as defunct shrines75 because similar offering bowls were found in the Palace Shrine of the Hani Chief (Fig. 29).

  • 76 D. Kumah, 2022, p. 238-241.

57A thorough search revealed that they were located in the storage area of the Museum of Archaeology, Room 13 (Fig. 30). These bowls have a buff colour and are very lightweight, with thin profiles. Some of them have burnished surfaces, while others were red-slipped. A detailed analysis and typology were conducted and established for these offering bowls.76

  • 77 D. Kumah, 2022, p. 238-241.

58The offering bowls were classified into three Types: A, B, and C, based on various physical attributes such as rim diameter, surface treatment, and shape. The three offering bowl types are well fired and have several variants, with an average diameter ranging from 10.2 to 11 cm. Two of the bowls have slightly direct and everted rims, while the third type of bowl has a squared rim form. The bowls generally have spherical-shaped profiles and heights between 6 and 6.4 cm (Figs. 36 to 38).77

Spindle whorls

  • 78 D. Kumah, 2022; M. Posnansky, 2015; L.B. Crossland, 1975.
  • 79 L.B. Crossland, 1975.
  • 80 D. Kumah, 2022, p. 249; L.B. Crossland, 1975.

59The oral history and archaeological and ethnographic reports indicated that the Begho area has a long tradition of cotton spinning and weaving, probably going back to the 15th century AD.78 Also, numerous spindle whorls were found in the museum collections. A previous attempt to classify Begho spindle whorls was based on only twelve (12) of them,79 and there was a need to update and expand the classification. A larger sample of 34 spindle whorls pieces was found in Storeroom 2 (Fig. 39). These spindle whorls were recovered from the Brong B1 and B2, Kramo-K1, and Dwinfuor-D3 sites of Begho. These spindle whorls from Begho date from the 15th to the 19th century.80

60Table 2: Distribution of Spindle Whorls from Begho Recovered and Analyzed from Museum Collections

Quarter

Site

Type

Dimensions (cm)

Description

Height

Bore diameter


Kramo


K1

A

2.25

0.3

Oval-shaped, flat base with incisions.

B

1.5

0.5

Spherical shape with flat top; incisions and circular stamps; smudged.




Dwinfuor




D3

C

2.3

0.45

Squared shape with incisions and grooves; smudged.

D (i)

2.25

0.3

Two uneven bulbs (bi-lobed); slightly burnished and partially smudged.

D (ii)

3.2

0.7

Two even bulbs (bi-lobed); slightly burnished and red-slipped.

Brong

B2

E

2.5

0.3

Circular shape; slightly burnished, smudged, with grooves.

Kramo

K1

F (Crossland’s Types B & C)

1.8

0.3

Oval base with flat head

Kramo

K1

G

2.2

0.35

Oval-shaped, flat base with incisions; smudged.

Kokua
(Modern Town)

-

H (i) (Crossland’s Type E – Ethnographically acquired)

2.95

0.4

Elliptical shape; black-slipped, burnished, with white circular paintings at both ends.

Brong

B1

H (ii)

2.35

0.45

Elliptical shape; burnished, smudged, and red-slipped.



Dwinfuor



D3

I (i)

2.0

0.4

Semi-elliptical head with flat base; burnished.

I (ii)

1.8

0.4

Semi-elliptical head with flat base; burnished and smudged; decorated with incisions, grooves, circular and “flower-like” stamps.

Kramo

K1

J

2.9

0.7

Semi-elliptical head with bulging side and flat base; burnished.

Dwinfuor

D3

K

2.6

0.4

Oval-shaped; burnished.

61See Types H to J (Fig. 33b).

Beads

  • 81 B. Collins, E.T. Steele, 2017, p. 122.
  • 82 B. Collins, E.T. Steele, 2017.

62We found several beads from Begho. Some are in excellent condition, while others are deteriorating. They range from various glass beads to “ostrich” shell beads, carnelian and stone beads (Figs. 40a-d). These beads were kept in a paper box found in Room 13. Most of the beads were from the 1970 excavation from the Brong-B1 site. A total of 84 beads were retrieved. There were 9 “ostrich” shell beads, 4 carnelian beads, 1 stone bead, and 70 glass beads, including cane/drawn and wound beads. The ostrich eggshell beads at Begho may have been traded from the Sahel and desert regions. As noted by Collins and Steele, ostrich eggshells were exchanged items in various parts of Africa, providing archaeologists with potential insight into past social networks.81 While some ostrich eggs were beaded, others were used as pendants, and some were painted or engraved, particularly in southern Africa.82

  • 83 A.D. Waela, E. Haerinck, 2006, p. 32.
  • 84 C.R. DeCorse, 1989; K. Karklin, 2012; K.E. Kidd, M.A. Kidd, 2012.
  • 85 A.B. Babalola, 2016; A.B. Babalola et al., 2017; A.B. Babalola, 2019.

63The carnelian beads, on the other hand, might have been exported from the Near East and the Indus Valley to West Africa.83 The carnelian beads are cylindrically shaped and were poorly polished. It must be noted that no chemical or laboratory analysis has been conducted on the beads; however, per close examination, most of the beads were made from glass, produced by either the drawn or wound method. They exhibit affinity to 17th-century European glass beads.84 Glass beads were produced in various parts of West Africa prior to the arrival of Europeans.85 The Begho glass beads would require further laboratory analysis to determine their origins and chemical compositions. It is worth noting that there are no traces of beads from Begho in the 1975-1979 museum collection. However, the field notes reported that a few were found from the excavations.

Metal objects

64Most of the metal objects found in storage were iron artefacts, which included slag, arrowheads, and metal disc.

Slag fragments

  • 86 M. Posnansky, 2015, 1975; J. Anquandah, 1981, 1975; L.B. Crossland, 1976.
  • 87 M. Posnansky, 1975, p. 22.
  • 88 M. Posnansky, 1975, p. 22; J. Anquandah, n.d., p. 4.
  • 89 K. Randsborg, I. Merkyte, 2009, p. 260; M. Posnansky, 1975, p. 62; J. Anquandah n.d., p. 4.
  • 90 D. Kumah, 2022, p. 255.
  • 91 Caroline Robion-Brunner, pers. comm., 10 July 2019. Caroline Robion-Brunner at the WAAA Colloquium (...)

65Several slag fragments were reported to have been excavated from Dwinfour-D2 and D3, Dapaa-De1, Atwetwebooso, and Srede sites in Begho.86 However, during the search in the storage, slag fragments excavated from Atwetwebooso in 197587 were found in a wooden box. The charcoal samples found in association with slag from these ironworking sites of Atwetwebooso date to the 2nd century AD,88 while the Dapaa site dates from the mid-13th century to the late 17th century AD.89 It is of importance to note that there are slag fragments associated with both iron smelting and blacksmithing. In all, eleven slag fragments and one lithic tool (from Dapaa) were found in the box. Most slag fragments found in storage were formed during iron smelting activities. The preliminary analysis conducted on the slag revealed that there were two types of slag fragments: tapped (external) and internal slag fragments. The tapped slag fragments are formed as a result of the molten slag which flows outside the furnace through an outlet during the process of smelting (Fig. 35a), while the internal slag fragments are usually the by-product of the smelting process and are trapped at the bottom of the furnace (Fig. 35b). Nine slag fragments from blacksmithing were also found (Fig. 35c).90 In the case of the quartz lithic tool (Fig. 36), it was most likely used for igniting fire for smelting and blacksmithing.91

Arrowheads and disc

  • 92 L.B. Crossland, 1975.
  • 93 T.F. Garrard, 1980, p.  180.

66Several arrowheads (n=98) and a metal disc, all recovered from various Begho sites (B1, B2, D3, and Dapaa), were found in Storage Room 2. Among the arrowheads, 63 were recovered from the D3 site of the Dwinfuor (artisan) quarter, with suggested dating ranging from the 14th to the 17th century.92 The forest/savanna ecotone provided the enabling environment for various animals to be exploited for subsistence purposes in the past. It would not be far-fetched to say that these arrowheads depict the hunting practices in the Begho area (Fig. 37). The metal disc has a weight of 6.5 g with a thickness of 4 mm and may have been used as a weight for gold.93 Upon close examination, it was seen that most of the arrowheads were deteriorating due to the fact that they had not been chemically treated in the lab.

Creating 3D models of selected Begho artefacts

  • 94 D. Gajski, A. Solter, M. Gašparov, 2016, p. 263.
  • 95 D. Gajski, A. Solter, M. Gašparov, 2016.

673D digitalization seeks to improve documentation of artefacts for museum visitors to have a better experience.94 Also, such digitalization is essential for further research to be conducted on cultural materials in the future. These 3D models not only improve the documentation but also provide new and more accurate information about artefacts which were not accessible by traditional documentation approaches in the past.95

  • 96 M. Quatrelivre, 2020, p. 2.

68Some Begho artefacts were taken to the TRACES Laboratory in Toulouse, specifically for the purposes of photogrammetry. These materials served as loan-artefacts for photogrammetry training and internship, from 24 February to 13 March 2020. Between 2020 and 2021, two French students, Manon Quatrelivre and Antoine Nicolet, produced two professional Masters 2 dissertations as a result of this experimental investigation.96

  • 97 Macro photography is extreme close-up photography (in the photogrammetric sense), usually of very s (...)
  • 98 L.M. Galantucci, M.G. Guerra, F. Lavecchia, 2018.
  • 99 M. Quatrelivre, 2020, p. 3.
  • 100 Some of the artefacts from the excavations from my doctoral research in 2020 at Begho were added to (...)
  • 101 M. Quatrelivre, 2020, p. 7.

69Unlike landscapes, archaeological sites, features, and layouts, and monumental constructions, the application and usage of a photogrammetric approach to macro-objects97 come with many precautionary measures.98 Quatrelivre and Nicolet’s principal goals were to observe the various protocols required to produce 3D models of macro-archaeological finds.99 The objects for the exercise were 13 in number. Seven local smoking pipes, two ivory side-blown trumpets, and one ivory bracelet from the 1970s and 2020100 excavations were successfully used (see Figs. 38-43).101 These students’ efforts resulted in creating for the first time 3D models and videos of some Begho objects.

  • 102 For the methodology employed, the technical challenges encountered, and innovations adopted by the (...)

70In all, over 500 pictures were taken of these artefacts and input into the Agisoft PhotoScan Professional version 1.4.5 software. These images helped in generating a multi-view 3D reconstruction of these cultural materials, which offered the option of rotating the object and producing a cross-section profile of the artefact (Figs. 39-41). Also, a video of one of the ivory side-blown trumpets was produced. This short video of 29 seconds provides a close-up view of the interior and the decorative motifs on the ivory trumpet (Figs. 42-43).102

71This method of digitizing these smoking pipes and ivory side-blown trumpets is an important component of the on-going Begho research. These data would form part of the museum digital database of Begho materials. Furthermore, this database would be made accessible to a wider audience through online or open access platforms and be very useful for teaching and research purposes. Also, in the case where these artefacts are destroyed or misplaced in the future, the digital database would prove valuable. It is hoped that other important Begho artefacts will also be digitalized using the photogrammetry approach.

Archaeological archives/repository: The way forward at Begho

  • 103 D. Kumah, 2022, p. 147.
  • 104 N. Vergote, 2020, p. 62.
  • 105 N. Vergote, 2020, p. 49.

72Many archaeological projects in West Africa were initiated in the past; surveys and excavations were conducted, yet too often results of these works were never published. In the case of Begho, several reasons may have accounted for this situation: Posnansky’s busy schedule both at the University of Ghana and later at UCLA, the aggravation of changing countries and jobs, working on multiple projects, and supervising many doctoral students.103 Furthermore, Rod McIntosh argued that some family issues may have delayed Posnansky’s work for decades.104 Posnansky himself noted that the research at Begho was unfortunately run on a shoestring budget of a few hundred dollars, not a few thousand dollars – what archaeologists are working with today.105

  • 106 M. Posnansky, 2004; 2015; L.B. Crossland, M. Posnansky, 1978.
  • 107 N. Vergote, 2020.

73Irrespective of all the challenges stated above, it seems that Posnansky preferred ethnoarchaeological investigations over archaeological excavations. This can be seen in his academic production, which largely adopted an ethnoarchaeological lens,106 whereas excavation reports and the analysis of materials were left to other members of the team. Ultimately, the responsibility for publishing the final excavation report may fall to a younger generation;107 the current researcher may be particularly well suited for this task.

74To unravel the Begho mystery and to fill in the knowledge gap about the work at Begho, this paper has focused on archaeological archives. It made use of both documentation archives and material archives from archaeological investigations at Begho. The author examined some of the documentary archives produced from 1970 to 1975. This “legacy” data and gray literature (existing data from previous excavations) acquired from Leonard B. Crossland proved valuable in understanding parts of the Begho enigma.

  • 108 P. Allison, 2008.
  • 109 P. Allison, 2008.

75To develop a more critical approach to the history of archaeology and excavation practice, it would be important to valorize works making use of legacy data.108 The form of the archaeological archive is related directly to the form of archaeological knowledge. Recognition of this relationship is key to working with legacy data and to developing a more critical approach to the history of archaeology and excavation practice.109

76Also, “excavating” the museum storage for Begho artefacts and conducting analysis on them helped in gaining a better understanding of the material culture of Begho. This exercise, to some extent, filled the gap left by Posnansky and his team.

  • 110 M. Posnansky, 2015.

77Despite efforts to locate all the Begho artefacts in the three storage rooms, some of them could not be found. The 17th-century Chinese porcelain,110 the unfinished ivory products, the ivory comb and bangles, the copper objects, ceramic gold weights, and the over 600 smoking pipe fragments recovered at K2 were not found in the Museum of Archaeology. It is unclear where these materials are kept.

78Finally, I am convinced there is much information to be derived from the cultural materials of Begho. However, this has not been the case since Posnansky’s last excavations in 1979. Without the reports, field notes, and archival data that was obtained, the museum search and examination of Begho materials would not have been feasible. This aspect of linking and engaging museums by curating and analyzing artefacts with the support and knowledge of archival data has contributed significantly to the creation of an archaeological archive or repository for Begho. Furthermore, the identification and analysis of various smoking pipes, clay crucibles, spindle whorls, ancestral bowls, metal artefacts, and ivory objects go a long way toward filling the gap left by Posnansky and his crew at Begho. In addition, the integration and use of modern technical applications such as photogrammetry and 3D modelling of selected Begho artefacts are essential to this research. This methodology could be replicated at other Ghanaian archaeological sites.

Conclusion

  • 111 H. Bauer-Clapp, K. Kirakosian, 2017, p. 221-223.

79Most archaeologists prioritize care for material culture over archival materials. So, there is a need for a concerted effort by archaeologists to incorporate the examination of archival records from legacy projects and grey literature in their methodological approach. Although it is argued that archaeologists need to improve their methods for accessing and curating archival records, it is acknowledged that archaeologists are not primarily archivists and would need some training. In certain cases, they may seek help from librarians or qualified archivists.111

  • 112 H.D. Brown, 2011.

80An essential component of archaeological activity is the creation of stable, consistent, logical, and easily accessible archives from fieldwork. This vast amount of collected papers, drawings, photographs, artefacts, and digital data is a resource that not only makes it possible to re-interpret initial findings but also serves as the basis for additional research, informs museum exhibitions and educational collections. The archaeological archive is growing both in size and significance as its value is more widely recognized. At a time when the reports of many archaeological projects appear as “grey literature,” and are thus only barely within the public domain, project archives have become a vital source of information.112

81When archaeological archives are conserved, catalogued, and digitized appropriately, they become a useful resource for future archaeologists. It is important to remember that archaeologists generally do not own sites but are custodians of these sites. Therefore, all data, including artefacts, documents, and records from excavation sites should be recognized and treated as global data intended for use by others in the future, rather than being regarded as personal data. This approach will enable archaeologists to re-interrogate and re-investigate past archaeological projects in terms of sites, artefacts, and records.

  • 113 M. Heilen, S.A. Manney, 2023.
  • 114 T.H. Hickerson, 2001, p. 12.

82Archaeological archives allow us to make our collections more available to a broader audience, particularly when online metadata are developed. Momentum is building toward open data and open science as well as Indigenous data sovereignty and governance. The field of archaeology is reaching a critical point where consideration of diverse constituencies, concerns, and requirements is needed to plan data collection and management approaches moving forward.113 Converting more content to digital form allows the archaeologist to better serve an existing audience while also reaching out to new ones.114

83A thorough archaeological archive is, therefore, required in cases such as Begho, where a detailed archaeological report has been lacking for over 45 years. The research demonstrated the relevance of examining documentary records and “excavating” museum collections. This enabled us to corroborate archival records with materials in museum storage, therefore creating an archaeological archive for Begho. This Begho archive would go a long way toward bridging the gap between records and storage materials by providing a valuable repository for future archaeologists who wish to re-investigate the site and replicate the process at other archaeological project sites in Ghana.

Figures

Figure 1: Map showing the Begho area in Ghana

Figure 1: Map showing the Begho area in Ghana

Illustrated by Daniel Kumah.

Figure 2: The various archaeological sites in the Begho area

Figure 2: The various archaeological sites in the Begho area

Illustrated by Daniel Kumah.

Figure 3a-b: The Begho Archives

Figure 3a-b: The Begho Archives

Note the green and red folders/dossiers which contain the archival documents.

a. Photo by Daniel Kumah, 2019. b. Photo by Gideon Agyare, 2020.

Figures 4a-b: Correspondence records

Figures 4a-b: Correspondence records

Roderick J. McIntosh and James Boachie-Ansah letters to Merrick Posnansky in 1971 and 1972, respectively, to join the excavations at Begho.

Begho Archives – Corresponding Records.

Figure 5: Begho Field School Application Form filled by Rod J. McIntosh on 3 January 1972

Figure 5: Begho Field School Application Form filled by Rod J. McIntosh on 3 January 1972

Begho Archives – Corresponding Records.

Figure 6: Letter form Nana Ampofo (Hani chief) to Dombrowski announcing the death of the Queen mother and inviting the crew to the funeral

Figure 6: Letter form Nana Ampofo (Hani chief) to Dombrowski announcing the death of the Queen mother and inviting the crew to the funeral

Source: Begho Archives – Correspondance Records.

Figure 7: Posnansky’s letter to Crossland from UCLA

Figure 7: Posnansky’s letter to Crossland from UCLA

Posnansky registering his frustration at having too many responsibilities: working in Somalia and Jamaica, and supervising over 15 doctoral students.

Begho Archives – Corresponding Records.

Figures 8a-b: Field notes describing the survey, gridding, and excavation process at Dwinfour, D1 (formerly T1) site in 1972

Figures 8a-b: Field notes describing the survey, gridding, and excavation process at Dwinfour, D1 (formerly T1) site in 1972

Begho Archives – Field Notes Records.

Figure 9a-b: Excavation Data Record and Field Inventory Record Sheets

Figure 9a-b: Excavation Data Record and Field Inventory Record Sheets

Begho Archives – Analysis Records.

Figure 10: One of the Pottery Analysis sheets from the prehistoric site of Mumute at Begho

Figure 10: One of the Pottery Analysis sheets from the prehistoric site of Mumute at Begho

Begho Archives – Analysis Records.

Figures 11a-b: Analyses on specific artefacts from Begho

Figures 11a-b: Analyses on specific artefacts from Begho

a. A list of faunal remains sent to University of Cambridge for analysis.
b. A letter from the zooarchaeologist seeking clarifications on the Begho faunal remains.

Begho Archives – Analysis Records.

Figure 12: A group image of some pictures from the Photography Folder

Figure 12: A group image of some pictures from the Photography Folder

Begho Archives – Photographic Records.

Figure 13: A photo sheet with 36 smaller images of various excavations at Begho in 1972

Figure 13: A photo sheet with 36 smaller images of various excavations at Begho in 1972

Begho Archives – Photographic Records.

Figure 14: Some of the flexed burial remains found at the units H 33 (left) and K 39 (right) at the B1 site in 1970

Figure 14: Some of the flexed burial remains found at the units H 33 (left) and K 39 (right) at the B1 site in 1970

Begho Archives – Photographic Records.

Figure 15a-f: Photos of the pottery industry at Bondakile in 1972/2

Figure 15a-f: Photos of the pottery industry at Bondakile in 1972/2

Begho Archives – Photographic Records).

Figure 16a: Map showing the various potting centers in the Begho and Bono areas

Figure 16a: Map showing the various potting centers in the Begho and Bono areas

Begho Archives – Map Records.

Figure 16b: Map showing the potting centers in the wider Begho and Bono areas

Figure 16b: Map showing the potting centers in the wider Begho and Bono areas

Illustrated by Daniel Kumah (modified after the original figure above, fig. 16a).

Figure 17a: The 1970 excavation plan of the B1 site at the Brong quarter in Begho

Figure 17a: The 1970 excavation plan of the B1 site at the Brong quarter in Begho

Begho Archives – Drawings (site plans).

Figure 17b: The 1970 excavation plan of the B1 site at the Brong quarter in Begho

Figure 17b: The 1970 excavation plan of the B1 site at the Brong quarter in Begho

Illustrated by Daniel Kumah (modified after the original figure above, fig. 16b).

Figure 18a-b: Site plan of the Dapaa iron working site

Figure 18a-b: Site plan of the Dapaa iron working site

a. Note the blurry site plan of the Dapaa iron working site.
b. Shows the modified site p
lan of the Dapaa iron working site.

a. Begho Archives – Drawings (site plans).
b. Illustrated by Daniel Kumah (modified after the original figure, fig. 18a).

Figure 19a: Stratigraphic section of Trench 5 recorded by Mr. Adjedu and Mr. Murrey on 25/08/1975

Figure 19a: Stratigraphic section of Trench 5 recorded by Mr. Adjedu and Mr. Murrey on 25/08/1975

Begho Archives – Drawings (stratigraphic profiles).

Figure 19b: The modified stratigraphic sections of Trench 5 of Dwinfuor-D3 site

Figure 19b: The modified stratigraphic sections of Trench 5 of Dwinfuor-D3 site

Illustrated by Daniel Kumah, (modified after the original figure, fig. 19a).

Figure 20a-c: Museum storage

Figure 20a-c: Museum storage

a. First storage located at the museum (Room 13).
b. Second storage located at the Archaeology Annex building (Storage 1).
c. Third storage located at the Archaeology Annex Building (Storage 2).

Photo by Daniel Kumah, 2018.

Figure 21: Fragments of smoking pipes (364) from both surface and excavations from 1970 to 1975 in the Begho area, located at the Museum of Archaeology storage (Store room 2)

Figure 21: Fragments of smoking pipes (364) from both surface and excavations from 1970 to 1975 in the Begho area, located at the Museum of Archaeology storage (Store room 2)

Photo by Daniel Kumah, 2018.

Figure 22: Begho smoking pipe Type 1

Figure 22: Begho smoking pipe Type 1

Illustrated by Daniel Kumah.

Figure 23: Begho smoking pipe Type 2

Figure 23: Begho smoking pipe Type 2

Illustrated by Daniel Kumah.

Figure 24: Begho smoking pipes Type 3A

Figure 24: Begho smoking pipes Type 3A

Illustrated by Daniel Kumah.

Figure 25: Begho smoking pipes Type 4B

Figure 25: Begho smoking pipes Type 4B

Illustrated by Daniel Kumah.

Figure 26: Begho smoking pipe Type 5

Figure 26: Begho smoking pipe Type 5

Photo by Daniel Kumah.

Figure 27: Some clay crucibles from storage

Figure 27: Some clay crucibles from storage

Photo by Daniel Kumah.

Figure 28a-f: Clay crucibles typology

Figure 28a-f: Clay crucibles typology

a. Type A. b. Type B. c. Type C. d. Type D. e. Type E. f. Type F.

Illustrated by Daniel Kumah, 2022.

Figure 29: Samafou Kruwo (offering bowls) at the Palace

Figure 29: Samafou Kruwo (offering bowls) at the Palace

Source: M. Posnansky, 2015.

Figure 30: Offering bowls in Storage Room 13

Figure 30: Offering bowls in Storage Room 13

Photo by Daniel Kumah.

Figure 31a-c: Offering bowls Type A, B and C

Figure 31a-c: Offering bowls Type A, B and C

Illustrated by Daniel Kumah.

Figure 32: The cluster of Begho spindle whorls (1970-1975) found in the museum storage

Figure 32: The cluster of Begho spindle whorls (1970-1975) found in the museum storage

Photo by Daniel Kumah.

Figure 33: Begho spindle whorls Types (A – K)

Figure 33: Begho spindle whorls Types (A – K)

Illustrated by Daniel Kumah.

Figure 34a-d: Glass beads

Figure 34a-d: Glass beads

a. Glass beads and ostrich shell.
b & c. Venetian glass beads.
d. Carnelian and stone beads.

Photo by Daniel Kumah.

Figure 35a-c: Slag fragments

Figure 35a-c: Slag fragments

a. A tapped slag from iron smelting at Atwetwebooso in Begho found in storage.
b. Internal slag fragments recovered from Atwetwebooso in Begho from storage.
c. Sample slag fragments from blacksmithing at Atwetwebooso in Begho.

Photo by Daniel Kumah.

Figure 36: Quartz from Dapaa in Begho

Figure 36: Quartz from Dapaa in Begho

Photo by Daniel Kumah.

Figure 37: Selected arrowheads and a metal disc from the Dwinfuor-D3 site

Figure 37: Selected arrowheads and a metal disc from the Dwinfuor-D3 site

Photo by Daniel Kumah.

Figure 38: The seven smoking clay pipes in the context of photographing for photogrammetry procedure

Figure 38: The seven smoking clay pipes in the context of photographing for photogrammetry procedure

Photo credits by Manon Quatrelivre and Antoine Nicolet, M. Quatrelivre, 2020.

Figure 39: The two side-blown ivory trumpets in the context of photographing for photogrammetry procedure

Figure 39: The two side-blown ivory trumpets in the context of photographing for photogrammetry procedure

Photo credits by Manon Quatrelivre and Antoine Nicolet, M. Quatrelivre, 2020.

Figure 40: The final product: a photo-realistic textured model. Multi-view 3D reconstruction of orthophotos taken of smoking pipe sample BG72, B2, H-15, L-47

Figure 40: The final product: a photo-realistic textured model. Multi-view 3D reconstruction of orthophotos taken of smoking pipe sample BG72, B2, H-15, L-47

M. Quatrelivre, 2020.

Figure 41: A multi-view 3D reconstruction of one of the recent pipes excavated in 2020 (BG20, B1-T1U2L2)

Figure 41: A multi-view 3D reconstruction of one of the recent pipes excavated in 2020 (BG20, B1-T1U2L2)

Exported in Adobe Illustrator. Note the possibilities of the various perspectives that can be observed using the PhotoScan application.

M. Quatrelivre, 2020.

Figure 42: A screenshot of the short video produced on one of the ivory side-blown trumpets from the B2 site

Figure 42: A screenshot of the short video produced on one of the ivory side-blown trumpets from the B2 site

Credit by Antoine Nicolet and Manon Quatrelivre.

Figure 43: A close-up screenshot of the video showing details of the surface decorations on the ivory trumpet

Figure 43: A close-up screenshot of the video showing details of the surface decorations on the ivory trumpet

Credit by Antoine Nicolet and Manon Quatrelivre.

Haut de page

Bibliographie

Afeku, I.K., 1976, A study of smoking pipes from Begho, Unpublished BA Dissertation, Department of Archaeology, University of Ghana-Legon.

Agorsah, E.K., 1973, The prehistory of the Begho area, [Unpublished report in Vital Papers on Begho], Department of Archaeology, University of Ghana.

Alagidede, P., Baah-Boateng, W., Nketiah-Amponsah, E., 2013, “The Ghanaian economy: an overview”, Ghanaian Journal of Economics: A Journal of the African Finance and Economics Consult, Volume 1, p. 4-34.

Allison, P., 2008, “Dealing with legacy data - An introduction”, Internet Archaeology, 24. https://doi.org/10.11141/ia.24.8

Ameyaw, K., 1965, Hani and Nswakwa tradition, Unpublished raw data, Institute of African Studies Library, University of Ghana, Legon

Anquandah, J. n.d., Early urbanization and state formation in Akanland, Unpublished manuscript, Department of Archaeology Library, University of Ghana, Legon

Anquandah, J., 1975, “Excavation at the D2 Site on The Dwinfuor Quarter of Beeo”, Nyame Akuma, 7, p. 17-19.

Anquandah, J., 1976, “The rise of civilization in the West African Sudan: An archaeological and historical perspective”, Sakofa: The Legon Journal of Archaeological and Historical Studies, 2, p. 23-32.

Anquandah, J. 1981. “Excavation at the Smith’s Quarter of Begho, Ghana – Preliminary Report”, West African Journal of Archaeology, 11, p. 131 – 144

Anquandah, J., 1993, “Urbanization and state formation in Ghana during the Iron Age”, in T. Shaw, P. Sinclair, B. Andah, A. Okpoku (Eds.), The Archaeology of Africa: Food, Metals and Towns, One World Archaeology, London, Routledge, p. 642-651.

Archaeological Archives Forum 2012, Forum Initiatives and Projects. URL: https://archives.archaeologyuk.org

Babalola, A.B., 2016, Archaeological investigations of early glass production at Igbo Olokun, IleIfe (Nigeria), Unpublished PhD dissertation, Rice University.

Babalola, A.B., 2019, “Medieval glass bead production and exchange”, in K. Berzock (ed.), Caravans of gold, fragments in time: Arts, culture, and exchange across medieval sub-Saharan Africa, 233-240, Princeton (NJ) & Oxford: Princeton University Press.

Babalola, A.B., McIntosh, S.K., Dussubieux, I., Rehren, Th., 2017, “Ife and Igbo Olokun in the history of glass in West Africa”, Antiquity, 91, p. 732-750. https://doi.org/10.15184/aqy.2017.80

Baird, A.J., McFadyen, L., 2014, Archaeological Review from Cambridge, 29 (2), p. 14-32

Bauer-Clapp, H., Kirakosian, K., 2017, “Archaeologists and archives: Revisiting an old challenge”, Advances in Archaeological Practice, 5 (3), p. 220-226. doi:10.1017/aap.2017.16

Berns, M.C., 1979, Report on Bonakire village pottery industry, Unpublished raw data, Department of Arts, University of California, Los Angeles.

Berns, M.C., 2007, “Pottery-making in Bonakire, Ghana”, African Arts, 40, p. 86-91.

Boachie-Ansah, J., 1986, “Smoking pipes and the dating of post-16th century in Ghana: The evidence from Ahwene Koko”, West African Journal of Archaeology, 16, p. 53-70.

Bradley, R., 2006, “Bridging the two cultures—Commercial archaeology and the study of prehistoric Britain”, Antiquaries Journal, 86, p. 1-13.

Brown, A., Perrin, K., 2000, A model for the description of archaeological archives, English Heritage.

Brown, D.H., 2004, “A review of standards in England for the creation, preparation and deposition of archaeological archives”, Archaeological Archives Forum. https://archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/catalogue/adsdata/arch-799-1/dissemination/pdf/Review_of_Archive_Standards.pdf

Brown, D.H, 2011, Archaeological Archives A guide to best practice in creation, compilation, transfer and curation, second Edition, Archaeological Archives Forum (AAF). https://doi.org/10.5284/1000078.

Campbell, C.C., 2006, Novel objects and new practices: An archaeological analysis of smoking pipes from Banda, Ghana, Unpublished MA Dissertation, Department of Anthropology, Binghamton University: State University of New York.

Capel, C., 2021, “Le Tombeau à colonnes de Koumbi Saleh (Mauritanie – xie-xiie siècle)”, Revue des mondes musulmans et de la Méditerranée, 149, p. 237-262.

Capel, C., Zazzo, A., Saliege, J.-F., Polet, J., 2015, “The end of a hundred-year-old archaeological riddle: First dating of the Columns Tomb of Kumbi Saleh (Mauritania)”, Rardiocarbon, 57-1, University of Arizona, Tucson, p. 65-75. DOI: 10.2458/azu_rc.57.18112

Childs, S.T., 2004, “Our collective responsibility: The ethics and practice of archaeological collections stewardship”, Society for American Archaeology, Washington, DC.

Chouin, G., 2005, “Introduction à l’archéologie de l’aire ‘Akan’. Filiations, Dialogues et Perspectives”, Journal des africanistes, 75 (2), p. 13-24.

Collins, B., Steele., E.T., 2017, “An often-overlooked resource: Ostrich (Struthio spp.) eggshell in the archaeological record”, Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports, Volume 13, p. 121-131.

Crossland, L.B., 1975, “Traditional textile industry in North West Brong Ahafo, Ghana – The archaeological and contemporary evidence”, Sankofa: The Legon Journal of Archaeological and Historical Studies, 1, p. 69-73.

Crossland, L.B., 1976, “Interim Report on Begho pottery, West African Trade Project Report, Department of Archaeology, University of Ghana, p. 36-53.

Crossland, L.B., 1989, “Pottery from the Begho-B2 Site, Ghana”, Africa Occasional Papers Series, No. 4, University of Calgary Press, Calgary.

Crossland, L., Posnansky, M., 1978, “Pottery, people and trade at Begho, Ghana”, in I. Hodder (ed.), The spatial organisation of culture, London, Duckworth, p. 77-89.

Davies, O., 1955, Excavations at Mampongtin, Legon (Mimeographed).

DeCorse, C.R., 1989, “Beads as Chronological Indicators in West African Archaeology: A Reexamination”, Beads: Journal of the Society of Bead Researchers, n° 1, p. 41-53.

Deetz, J., 1993, Flowerdew hundred: The archaeology of a Virginia plantation, 1619-1864, Charlottesville (VA), University Press of Virginia.

Dombrowski, J.C., 1976, “Mumute and Bonase – Two sites of the Kintampo industry”, Sakofa: The Legon Journal of Archaeological and Historical Studies, 2, p. 64-71.

Effah-Gyamfi, K., 1981, “Clay smoking pipes and the dating of archaeological sites from Ghana: A re-assessment”, West African Journal of Archaeology, 11, p. 1-19.

Fletcher, R.J., n.d., Models and the growth of Hani, Unpublished raw data, Department of Archaeology Library, University of Ghana.

Gajski, D., Solter, A., Gašparović, M., 2016, Applications of macro photogrammetry in archaeology, ISPRS - International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, p. 263-266.

Galantucci, L.M., Guerra, M.G., Lavecchia, F., 2018, “Photogrammetry applied to small and micro scaled objects: A review”, in Proceedings of 3rd International Conference on the Industry 4.0 Model for Advanced Manufacturing, Springer International Publishing, p. 57-77.

Garrard, T., n.d., A note on pottery gold weights from Begho, Unpublished raw data, University of Ghana, Legon.

Garrard, T.F., 1972, “Studies in Akan gold weights: 1. The origins of gold weight system”, Transactions of the Historical Society of Ghana, 13, p. 1-20.

Garrard, T.F., 1980, Akan Weights and The Gold Trade, London, Longman.

Heilen, M., Manney, S.A., 2023, “Refining archaeological data collection and management”, Advances in Archaeological Practice, 11 (1), p. 1-10. doi:10.1017/aap.2022.41

Hickerson, T.H., 2001, “Ten Challenges for the Archival Profession”, The American Archivist, 64 (1), p. 6-16.

Karklins, K., 2012, “Guide to the description and classification of glass beads found in the Americas”, BEADS, n° 24, p. 62-90.

Kense, J.F., 1990, “Archaeology in Anglophone West Africa”, in P. Robertshaw (ed.), A History of African Archaeology, London, James Currey Limited, p. 135-154.

Kidd, K.E., Kidd, M.A., 2012, “A classification system for glass beads for the use of field archaeologists”, BEADS, n° 24, p. 39-61.

Kumah, D., 2022, Begho revisited: Examining archaeological archives and “excavating” museum storages, Unpublished PhD thesis: University of Toulouse Jean Jaures.

Kumah, D., 2024, Begho (Ghana) revisited: Examining archaeological archives and ‘excavating’ museum storages, Université Toulouse - Jean Jaurès, 2023, Azania: Archaeological Research in Africa, 59 (1), p. 179. https://doi.org/10.1080/0067270X.2024.2316481

Massing, W.A., 2012, “Imams of Gonja”, Cahiers d’études africaines, n° 205, p. 57-101. URL: http://etudesafricaines.revues.org/16965

McIntosh, R.J., 1974, “Archaeology and mud wall decay in a West African village”, World Archaeology, 6 (2), p. 154-171.

McIntosh, R.J., 1976, “Finding lost walls on archaeological sites – The Hani Model”, Sakofa: The Legon Journal of Archaeological and Historical Studies, 2, p. 45-53.

McIntosh, S., Gallagher, D., McIntosh, R.J., 2003, “Tobacco pipes from excavations at the museum site, Jenne, Mali”, Journal of African Archaeology, 1 (2), p. 171-195.

McManamon, F.P., Kintigh, K.W., Ellison, L.A., Brin, A., 2017, “tDAR: A cultural heritage archive for twenty-first-century public outreach, research, and resource management”, Advances in Archaeological Practice, 5 (3), p. 238-249. https://doi.org/10.1017/aap.2017.18

Ozanne, P., 1962, “Notes on the early historic archaeology of Accra”, Transactions of the Historical Society of Ghana, VI, p. 53

Ozanne, P., 1969, “The diffusion of smoking in West Africa”, Odu, new series 11, p. 29-42.

Ozanne, P., 1976, Tobacco Pipes of Accra and Shai, Unpublished manuscript, Department of Archaeology Library, University of Ghana.

Perrin, K., 2002, Archaeological archives: Documentation, access and deposition: A way forward, Londres, English Heritage.

Perrin, K., Brown, D.H., Lange, G., Bibby, D., Carlsson, A., Degraeve, A., Kuna, M., Larsson, Y., Pálsdóttir, S.U., Stoll-Tucker, B., Dunning, C., Rogalla von Bieberstein, A., 2014, A Standard and Guide to Best Practice in Archaeological Archiving in Europe, EAC Guidelines 1, Namur, Europae Archaeologiae. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10664081

Phillips, J.E., 1983, “African smoking and pipes”, Journal of African History, 24, p. 303-319.

Podany, J., 2006, “Introduction (Part Seven)”, in N. Agnew, J. Bridgland (eds), Of the past, for the future: Integrating archaeology and conservation: Proceedings of the Conservation Theme at the 5th World Archaeological Congress, Washington, DC, 22-26 June 2003, p. 201-203. Getty Conservation Institute, Los Angeles, California.

Posnansky, M., 1971, The origins of West African trade, Reprint of Open Lecture at the University of Ghana, Department of Archaeology Library.

Posnansky, M., 1972, West African Trade Project Report on Research in 1972, Unpublished report, Department of Archaeology Mimeograph, Legon, University of Ghana.

Posnansky, M., 1973, “Aspects of Early West African Trade”, World Archaeology, 5 (2), p. 149-162.

Posnansky, M., 1975, “Iron furnace excavations at Srede and Dapaa (Debibi)”, Nyame Akuma 7, p. 21-23.

Posnansky, M., 1976, “New radiocarbon dates from Ghana”, Sankofa: The Legon Journal of Archaeological and Historical Studies, 1, p. 60-62.

Posnansky, M., 1979, Excavations at Begho, Ghana – January to March 1979, Unpublished raw data, Department of History, University of California, Los Angeles.

Posnansky, M., 2004, “Processes of Change--A Longitudinal Ethno-Archaeological Study of a Ghanaian Village: Hani 1970–98”, African Archaeological Review, n° 21, p. 31-47.

Posnansky, M., 2010, Reflecting on Begho and Hani, 1970-1998, Los Angeles, Privately Published, Merrick Posnansky.

Posnansky, M., 2015, “Begho: Life and times”, Journal of West African History, 1 (2), p. 95-118.

Quarcoopome, S.S., 1977, Assessment of some of the contributions of the West African Trade Project to the archaeology of Ghana, Unpublished BA Dissertation, Department of Archaeology, University of Ghana-Legon.

Quatrelivre, M., 2020, La photogrammétrie, applicable à tout objet archéologique ? Exemple du petit mobilier du site de Bégho (Ghana), Unpublished Masters 2 thesis, Université Toulouse Jean Jaurès.

Randsborg, K., Merkyte, I., Møller, N.A., Albek, S., 2009, Bénin archaeology: The ancient kingdoms, Wiley-Blackwell, Acta Archaeologica, Vol. 1-2, No. 80.

Richards, J.D., 2017, “Twenty years preserving data: A view from the United Kingdom”, Advances in Archaeological Practice, 5 (3). https://doi.org/10.1017/aap.2017.11

Roth, L., Chouin, G., Ogunfolakan, A., 2021, “Lost in space? Reconstructing Frank Willett’s excavations at Ita Yemoo, Ile-Ife, Nigeria: Rescue excavations (1957-1958) and Trench XIV (1962-1963)”, Afrique: Archéologie & Arts, 17, p. 77-114.

Saxby, G., 2010, Science of imaging: An introduction, CRC Press.

Schlanger, S., Wilshusen, R., Roberts, H., 2015, “From mining sites to mining data: Archaeology’s future”, KIVA, 81 (1-2), p. 80-99. https://doi.org/10.1080/00231940.2015.1118739

Stahl, A.B., 2001, Making History in Banda: Anthropological Visions of Africa’s Past, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

Stoler, A.L., 2009, Along the archival grain. Epistemic anxieties and colonial common sense, Princeton, Princeton University Press.

Sullivan, L.P, Childs, S.T., 2003, “Curating archaeological collections: From the field to the repository”, Archaeologist’s Toolkit, Vol. 6, Lanham, Maryland, AltaMira Press.

Vergote, N., 2020, Le Mystère Begho : Enquête sur les fouilles non publiées d’un site archéologique, Ghana, Unpublished Mémoire de Master 1, Université Panthéon Sorbonne.

Vivian, B., 2005, “On tobacco pipes in Asante”, Journal des Africanistes, 75 (2), p. 86-85. http://journals.openedition.org/africanistes/122

Vogt-O’Connor, D., 1999, “Archives at the millennium”, CRM, 22 (2), p. 3.

Waele, A.D., Haerinck, E., 2006, “Etched (carnelian) beads from northeast and southeast Arabia”, Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy, n° 17, p. 31-40. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0471.2006.00245.x

Walz, J., Posnansky, M., 2010, “An interview with Merrick Posnansky”, African Archaeological Review, 27 (3), p. 177-210.

Wilks, I., 1993, Forests of gold: Essays on the Akan and the Kingdom of Asante, Ohio, Ohio University Press.

Wilks, I., Levtzion, N., Haight, B., 1986, Chronicles from Gonja: A tradition of West African historiography (African Studies), Cambridge, Cambridge University of Press.

Willet, F, 1959a, “Bronze and Terra-Cotta Sculptures from Ita Yemoo, Ife”, The South African Archaeological Bulletin, 14(56), p. 135-137. DOI: 10.2307/3886983

Willet, F., 1959b, “Bronze Figure from Ita Yemoo, Ife, Nigeria”, Man, 59(308), p. 189-193.

Willet, F., 2006, “Royal Art of Ife, Nigeria: A Chapter of Accidents Archaeological Discoveries in Ife”, Arts & cultures, Musée Barbier-Mueller, p. 144-155.

York, R.N., 1973, “Excavations at New Buipe”, West African Journal of Archaeology, 3, p. 1-189.

Haut de page

Notes

1 A.L. Stoler, 2009, p. 44.

2 A.J. Baird, L. McFadyen, 2014, p. 14.

3 D.H. Brown, 2011; H. Bauer-Clapp, K. Kirakosian, 2017; J.D. Richards, 2017.

4 J.D. Richards, 2017, p. 228.

5 L. Roth, G. Chouin, A. Ogunfolakan, 2021.

6 A. Brown, K. Perrin, 2000; K. Perrin, 2002; D.H. Brown, 2004.

7 Archaeological Archives Forum, 2012.

8 H. Bauer-Clapp, K. Kirakosian, 2017, p. 221.

9 K. Perrin, 2002, p. 3.

10 K. Perrin et al., 2014.

11 K. Perrin et al., 2014, p. 20; H. Bauer-Clapp, K. Kirakosian, 2017, p. 221.

12 H. Bauer-Clapp, K. Kirakosian, 2017, p. 221.

13 This was a special issue titled: For the Record: Archaeological Archives in the Twenty-First Century, edited by Katie Kirakosian and Heidi Bauer-Clapp. The issue had ten contributions which critically interrogated the theory, practice and methods of archaeological archives from the Archaeological Data Systems (ADS) from the United Kingdom, the Digital Archaeological Record (tDAR) from the United States, colonial archives, new directions for archaeological archives for museums and explored the potential and management of moving image archives, just to mention a few.

14 H. Bauer-Clapp, K. Kirakosian, 2017, p. 221-222.

15 L. Roth, G. Chouin, A. Ogunfolakan, 2021.

16 L. Roth, G. Chouin, A. Ogunfolakan, 2021, p. 78; F. Willett, 1959a, 1959b, 2006.

17 L. Roth, G. Chouin, A. Ogunfolakan, 2021, p. 78.

18 L. Roth, G. Chouin, A. Ogunfolakan, 2021.

19 C. Capel, 2021.

20 C. Capel, 2021; C. Capel et al., 2015.

21 Begho, sometimes known as Bighu (I. Wilks, 1993; W.A. Massing, 2012). In some Arabic manuscripts such as Kitab Ghunja, Tarikh al-Sudan and Amr Ajadadina, Begho was recorded as “Bik,” “Biu,” “Biku,” “Bitu,” and “Bighu” (W.A. Massing, 2012; I. Wilks, 1993; I. Wilks et al., 1986). The oral history also shows that the local people in present-day Hani area refer to Begho as Beo or Be’o (Barnabas Appaw, a sub-chief at Hani, pers. comm., 2016; Leonard B. Crossland, a former researcher at Begho, pers. comm., 2018; see K. Ameyaw, 1965; I. Wilks, 2006, p. 10; W.A. Massing, 2012, p. 67; I. Wilks, 1993). In the Akan dialect, reference is made to Begho as “Bew,” but the town was also known as “NsƆkƆ” (Nsawkwa) from an old Akan term for the Malinke-speaking people in general (I. Wilks, 1993, p. 18).

22 M. Posnansky, 1973; 2015; A.B. Stahl, 2001.

23 M. Posnansky, 2015; J. Anquandah, 1993.

24 I. Wilks, 1993; W.A. Massing, 2012.

25 M. Posnansky, 2015, p. 101.

26 Both the oral accounts and archaeological investigations at Begho indicated that there were several quarters which were aligned along socio-political and economic lines. These included: the Nyarko quarter (first settlement site), Brong quarter (royal Akan site), Dwinfuor (Artisans site), Kramo (Mande site), and Market cente site (see M. Posnansky, 2015; J. Anquandah, 1993). The larger area also in include prehistoric sites (Mumute, Bonoase and Nsesrekeseo) and ironworking sites (Atwetweboso, Srede and Dapaa).

27 M. Posnansky, 2015, p. 96.

28 M. Posnansky, 2015, p. 96; 2010.

29 L.B. Crossland, 1975.

30 M. Posnansky, 2015, p. 107.

31 L.B. Crossland, M. Posnansky, 1978; M.C. Berns, 2007.

32 R. McIntosh, 1974, 1976.

33 G. Chouin, 2005; N. Vergote, 2020.

34 M. Posnansky, 1971, 1972, 1975, 1976, 1979, 2015; J. Anquandah, 1975, 1981; L.B. Crossland, 1975, 1989; R.J. McIntosh, 1974, 1976.

35 J.F. Kense, 1990, p. 150; D. Kumah, 2022, p. 396.

36 D. Kumah, 2024; 2022, p. 47

37 N. Vergote, 2020; D. Kumah, 2022; 2024.

38 N. Vergote, 2020, p. 47.

39 Leonard B. Crossland was a former faculty member at the Archaeology Department, University of Ghana. He retired in 2005. He served as the Head of Department of Archeology for several years. He has a long history with the Begho site. He conducted his masters research at the B2 site of Begho and produced a thesis in 1973. He supervised and directed the excavations at the Brong-B2, Dwinfuor-D3, Nyarko-Ny1 sites at Begho. In the 1980s, he became the director of the West African Trade Project.

40 D. Kumah, 2022, p. 142.

41 D. Kumah, 2022, p. 135.

42 J. Walz, M. Posnansky, 2010, p. 192.

43 D. Kumah, 2022, p. 137.

44 J. Walz, M. Posnansky, 2010.

45 See N. Vergote, 2020.

46 P. Alagidede, W. Baah-Boateng, E. Nketiah-Amponsah, 2013.

47 D. Kumah, 2022, p. 147.

48 Effah-Gyamfi was part of the first batch of students to excavate at Begho in 1970. He later became the first Ph.D. student in archaeology registered at the Department of Archaeology, University of Ghana, Legon. It is believed that he was the most favored person to have taken over from Merrick Posnansky as director of the West African Trade Project; however, this was not the case due to his sudden passing (C. DeCorse, pers. comm., 21 August 2025)

49 D. Kumah, 2022.

50 D. Kumah, 2022, p. 149-150.

51 D. Kumah, 2022, p. 154-155.

52 D. Kumah, 2022, p. 178.

53 M. Posnansky, 1971 p. 3.

54 D. Kumah, 2022, p. 185.

55 D. Kumah, 2022, p. 188.

56 M. Posnansky, 1972, 1975, 1979; L.B. Crossland, 1976; J. Anquandah, 1976; E.K. Agorsah, 1973; T. Garrard, n.d.; 1972; J.C. Dombrowski, 1976; R.J. Fletcher, n.d.; K. Ameyaw, 1965; M.C. Berns, 1979.

57 I.K. Afeku, 1976; S.S. Quarcoopome, 1977.

58 D.H. Brown, 2011, p. 4.

59 D.H. Brown, 2011, p. 4.

60 D. Kumah, 2022, p. 199.

61 D. Kumah, 2022.

62 This storage room was recently expanded to make way for a new gallery, small storage and a curator’s office. The project was funded by the German Embassy in 2024.

63 L.B. Crossland, M. Posnansky, 1978; L.B. Crossland, 1989.

64 D. Kumah, 2022, p. 212.

65 I.K. Afeku, 1976, p. 8.

66 After P. Ozanne, 1969; I.K. Afeku, 1976; J.E. Phillips, 1983; J. Boachie-Ansah, 1986; S. McIntosh et al., 2003; C.C. Campbell, 2006.

67 D. Kumah, 2022, p. 217-231.

68 D. Kumah, 2022, p. 227.

69 J. Anquandah, 1981.

70 D. Kumah, 2022.

71 D. Kumah, 2022, p. 233-238.

72 M. Posnansky, 1976, p. 62; J. Anquandah, n.d., p. 5; L.B. Crossland, 1975, p. 20.

73 D. Kumah, 2022.

74 M. Posnansky, 2015, 1972.

75 M. Posnansky, 2015, p. 111.

76 D. Kumah, 2022, p. 238-241.

77 D. Kumah, 2022, p. 238-241.

78 D. Kumah, 2022; M. Posnansky, 2015; L.B. Crossland, 1975.

79 L.B. Crossland, 1975.

80 D. Kumah, 2022, p. 249; L.B. Crossland, 1975.

81 B. Collins, E.T. Steele, 2017, p. 122.

82 B. Collins, E.T. Steele, 2017.

83 A.D. Waela, E. Haerinck, 2006, p. 32.

84 C.R. DeCorse, 1989; K. Karklin, 2012; K.E. Kidd, M.A. Kidd, 2012.

85 A.B. Babalola, 2016; A.B. Babalola et al., 2017; A.B. Babalola, 2019.

86 M. Posnansky, 2015, 1975; J. Anquandah, 1981, 1975; L.B. Crossland, 1976.

87 M. Posnansky, 1975, p. 22.

88 M. Posnansky, 1975, p. 22; J. Anquandah, n.d., p. 4.

89 K. Randsborg, I. Merkyte, 2009, p. 260; M. Posnansky, 1975, p. 62; J. Anquandah n.d., p. 4.

90 D. Kumah, 2022, p. 255.

91 Caroline Robion-Brunner, pers. comm., 10 July 2019. Caroline Robion-Brunner at the WAAA Colloquium in Accra in 2019 took the time to assist in identifying and selecting slag and crucible fragments from Begho for laboratory analysis. Caroline is a CNRS Research Director at the TRACES Laboratory, University of Toulouse – Jean Jaurès, France. Her research activities focus on the history and archaeology of metallurgy, with a particular dedication to analyzing the technical, economic, and social behaviors related to the production of metals and metal objects in Africa.

92 L.B. Crossland, 1975.

93 T.F. Garrard, 1980, p.  180.

94 D. Gajski, A. Solter, M. Gašparov, 2016, p. 263.

95 D. Gajski, A. Solter, M. Gašparov, 2016.

96 M. Quatrelivre, 2020, p. 2.

97 Macro photography is extreme close-up photography (in the photogrammetric sense), usually of very small subjects, in which the size of the subject in the photograph is greater than life size (though macro photography technically refers to the art of making very large photographs); G. Saxby, 2010; L.M. Galantucci, M.G. Guerra, F. Lavecchia, 2018.

98 L.M. Galantucci, M.G. Guerra, F. Lavecchia, 2018.

99 M. Quatrelivre, 2020, p. 3.

100 Some of the artefacts from the excavations from my doctoral research in 2020 at Begho were added to the ones from the 1970s. These objects included smoking pipes, and ivory bracelet (see D. Kumah, 2022).

101 M. Quatrelivre, 2020, p. 7.

102 For the methodology employed, the technical challenges encountered, and innovations adopted by the team when carrying out this photogrammetry activities, especially on the Begho artefacts, reference should be made to the Master’s thesis of Manon Quatrelivre and Antoine Nicolet (see M. Quatrelivre, 2020).

103 D. Kumah, 2022, p. 147.

104 N. Vergote, 2020, p. 62.

105 N. Vergote, 2020, p. 49.

106 M. Posnansky, 2004; 2015; L.B. Crossland, M. Posnansky, 1978.

107 N. Vergote, 2020.

108 P. Allison, 2008.

109 P. Allison, 2008.

110 M. Posnansky, 2015.

111 H. Bauer-Clapp, K. Kirakosian, 2017, p. 221-223.

112 H.D. Brown, 2011.

113 M. Heilen, S.A. Manney, 2023.

114 T.H. Hickerson, 2001, p. 12.

Haut de page

Table des illustrations

Titre Figure 1: Map showing the Begho area in Ghana
Crédits Illustrated by Daniel Kumah.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/afriques/docannexe/image/5988/img-1.png
Fichier image/png, 102k
Titre Figure 2: The various archaeological sites in the Begho area
Crédits Illustrated by Daniel Kumah.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/afriques/docannexe/image/5988/img-2.png
Fichier image/png, 192k
Titre Figure 3a-b: The Begho Archives
Légende Note the green and red folders/dossiers which contain the archival documents.
Crédits a. Photo by Daniel Kumah, 2019. b. Photo by Gideon Agyare, 2020.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/afriques/docannexe/image/5988/img-3.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 327k
Titre Figures 4a-b: Correspondence records
Légende Roderick J. McIntosh and James Boachie-Ansah letters to Merrick Posnansky in 1971 and 1972, respectively, to join the excavations at Begho.
Crédits Begho Archives – Corresponding Records.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/afriques/docannexe/image/5988/img-4.png
Fichier image/png, 677k
Titre Figure 5: Begho Field School Application Form filled by Rod J. McIntosh on 3 January 1972
Crédits Begho Archives – Corresponding Records.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/afriques/docannexe/image/5988/img-5.png
Fichier image/png, 143k
Titre Figure 6: Letter form Nana Ampofo (Hani chief) to Dombrowski announcing the death of the Queen mother and inviting the crew to the funeral
Crédits Source: Begho Archives – Correspondance Records.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/afriques/docannexe/image/5988/img-6.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 526k
Titre Figure 7: Posnansky’s letter to Crossland from UCLA
Légende Posnansky registering his frustration at having too many responsibilities: working in Somalia and Jamaica, and supervising over 15 doctoral students.
Crédits Begho Archives – Corresponding Records.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/afriques/docannexe/image/5988/img-7.png
Fichier image/png, 488k
Titre Figures 8a-b: Field notes describing the survey, gridding, and excavation process at Dwinfour, D1 (formerly T1) site in 1972
Crédits Begho Archives – Field Notes Records.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/afriques/docannexe/image/5988/img-8.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 493k
Titre Figure 9a-b: Excavation Data Record and Field Inventory Record Sheets
Crédits Begho Archives – Analysis Records.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/afriques/docannexe/image/5988/img-9.png
Fichier image/png, 606k
Titre Figure 10: One of the Pottery Analysis sheets from the prehistoric site of Mumute at Begho
Crédits Begho Archives – Analysis Records.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/afriques/docannexe/image/5988/img-10.png
Fichier image/png, 750k
Titre Figures 11a-b: Analyses on specific artefacts from Begho
Légende a. A list of faunal remains sent to University of Cambridge for analysis. b. A letter from the zooarchaeologist seeking clarifications on the Begho faunal remains.
Crédits Begho Archives – Analysis Records.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/afriques/docannexe/image/5988/img-11.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 437k
Titre Figure 12: A group image of some pictures from the Photography Folder
Crédits Begho Archives – Photographic Records.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/afriques/docannexe/image/5988/img-12.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 295k
Titre Figure 13: A photo sheet with 36 smaller images of various excavations at Begho in 1972
Crédits Begho Archives – Photographic Records.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/afriques/docannexe/image/5988/img-13.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 366k
Titre Figure 14: Some of the flexed burial remains found at the units H 33 (left) and K 39 (right) at the B1 site in 1970
Crédits Begho Archives – Photographic Records.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/afriques/docannexe/image/5988/img-14.png
Fichier image/png, 677k
Titre Figure 15a-f: Photos of the pottery industry at Bondakile in 1972/2
Crédits Begho Archives – Photographic Records).
URL http://journals.openedition.org/afriques/docannexe/image/5988/img-15.png
Fichier image/png, 572k
Titre Figure 16a: Map showing the various potting centers in the Begho and Bono areas
Crédits Begho Archives – Map Records.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/afriques/docannexe/image/5988/img-16.png
Fichier image/png, 1,2M
Titre Figure 16b: Map showing the potting centers in the wider Begho and Bono areas
Crédits Illustrated by Daniel Kumah (modified after the original figure above, fig. 16a).
URL http://journals.openedition.org/afriques/docannexe/image/5988/img-17.png
Fichier image/png, 166k
Titre Figure 17a: The 1970 excavation plan of the B1 site at the Brong quarter in Begho
Crédits Begho Archives – Drawings (site plans).
URL http://journals.openedition.org/afriques/docannexe/image/5988/img-18.png
Fichier image/png, 574k
Titre Figure 17b: The 1970 excavation plan of the B1 site at the Brong quarter in Begho
Crédits Illustrated by Daniel Kumah (modified after the original figure above, fig. 16b).
URL http://journals.openedition.org/afriques/docannexe/image/5988/img-19.png
Fichier image/png, 75k
Titre Figure 18a-b: Site plan of the Dapaa iron working site
Légende a. Note the blurry site plan of the Dapaa iron working site. b. Shows the modified site plan of the Dapaa iron working site.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/afriques/docannexe/image/5988/img-20.png
Fichier image/png, 262k
Titre Figure 19a: Stratigraphic section of Trench 5 recorded by Mr. Adjedu and Mr. Murrey on 25/08/1975
Crédits Begho Archives – Drawings (stratigraphic profiles).
URL http://journals.openedition.org/afriques/docannexe/image/5988/img-21.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 311k
Titre Figure 19b: The modified stratigraphic sections of Trench 5 of Dwinfuor-D3 site
Crédits Illustrated by Daniel Kumah, (modified after the original figure, fig. 19a).
URL http://journals.openedition.org/afriques/docannexe/image/5988/img-22.png
Fichier image/png, 376k
Titre Figure 20a-c: Museum storage
Légende a. First storage located at the museum (Room 13).b. Second storage located at the Archaeology Annex building (Storage 1).c. Third storage located at the Archaeology Annex Building (Storage 2).
URL http://journals.openedition.org/afriques/docannexe/image/5988/img-23.png
Fichier image/png, 616k
Titre Figure 21: Fragments of smoking pipes (364) from both surface and excavations from 1970 to 1975 in the Begho area, located at the Museum of Archaeology storage (Store room 2)
Crédits Photo by Daniel Kumah, 2018.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/afriques/docannexe/image/5988/img-24.png
Fichier image/png, 524k
Titre Figure 22: Begho smoking pipe Type 1
Crédits Illustrated by Daniel Kumah.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/afriques/docannexe/image/5988/img-25.png
Fichier image/png, 12k
Titre Figure 23: Begho smoking pipe Type 2
Crédits Illustrated by Daniel Kumah.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/afriques/docannexe/image/5988/img-26.png
Fichier image/png, 9,2k
Titre Figure 24: Begho smoking pipes Type 3A
Crédits Illustrated by Daniel Kumah.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/afriques/docannexe/image/5988/img-27.png
Fichier image/png, 72k
Titre Figure 25: Begho smoking pipes Type 4B
Crédits Illustrated by Daniel Kumah.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/afriques/docannexe/image/5988/img-28.png
Fichier image/png, 71k
Titre Figure 26: Begho smoking pipe Type 5
Crédits Photo by Daniel Kumah.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/afriques/docannexe/image/5988/img-29.png
Fichier image/png, 91k
Titre Figure 27: Some clay crucibles from storage
Crédits Photo by Daniel Kumah.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/afriques/docannexe/image/5988/img-30.png
Fichier image/png, 133k
Titre Figure 28a-f: Clay crucibles typology
Légende a. Type A. b. Type B. c. Type C. d. Type D. e. Type E. f. Type F.
Crédits Illustrated by Daniel Kumah, 2022.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/afriques/docannexe/image/5988/img-31.png
Fichier image/png, 81k
Titre Figure 29: Samafou Kruwo (offering bowls) at the Palace
Crédits Source: M. Posnansky, 2015.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/afriques/docannexe/image/5988/img-32.png
Fichier image/png, 141k
Titre Figure 30: Offering bowls in Storage Room 13
Crédits Photo by Daniel Kumah.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/afriques/docannexe/image/5988/img-33.png
Fichier image/png, 473k
Titre Figure 31a-c: Offering bowls Type A, B and C
Crédits Illustrated by Daniel Kumah.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/afriques/docannexe/image/5988/img-34.png
Fichier image/png, 63k
Titre Figure 32: The cluster of Begho spindle whorls (1970-1975) found in the museum storage
Crédits Photo by Daniel Kumah.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/afriques/docannexe/image/5988/img-35.png
Fichier image/png, 375k
Titre Figure 33: Begho spindle whorls Types (A – K)
Crédits Illustrated by Daniel Kumah.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/afriques/docannexe/image/5988/img-36.png
Fichier image/png, 69k
Titre Figure 34a-d: Glass beads
Légende a. Glass beads and ostrich shell. b & c. Venetian glass beads. d. Carnelian and stone beads.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/afriques/docannexe/image/5988/img-37.png
Fichier image/png, 409k
Titre Figure 35a-c: Slag fragments
Légende a. A tapped slag from iron smelting at Atwetwebooso in Begho found in storage.b. Internal slag fragments recovered from Atwetwebooso in Begho from storage.c. Sample slag fragments from blacksmithing at Atwetwebooso in Begho.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/afriques/docannexe/image/5988/img-38.png
Fichier image/png, 256k
Titre Figure 36: Quartz from Dapaa in Begho
Crédits Photo by Daniel Kumah.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/afriques/docannexe/image/5988/img-39.png
Fichier image/png, 137k
Titre Figure 37: Selected arrowheads and a metal disc from the Dwinfuor-D3 site
Crédits Photo by Daniel Kumah.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/afriques/docannexe/image/5988/img-40.png
Fichier image/png, 95k
Titre Figure 38: The seven smoking clay pipes in the context of photographing for photogrammetry procedure
Crédits Photo credits by Manon Quatrelivre and Antoine Nicolet, M. Quatrelivre, 2020.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/afriques/docannexe/image/5988/img-41.png
Fichier image/png, 357k
Titre Figure 39: The two side-blown ivory trumpets in the context of photographing for photogrammetry procedure
Crédits Photo credits by Manon Quatrelivre and Antoine Nicolet, M. Quatrelivre, 2020.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/afriques/docannexe/image/5988/img-42.png
Fichier image/png, 233k
Titre Figure 40: The final product: a photo-realistic textured model. Multi-view 3D reconstruction of orthophotos taken of smoking pipe sample BG72, B2, H-15, L-47
Crédits M. Quatrelivre, 2020.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/afriques/docannexe/image/5988/img-43.png
Fichier image/png, 53k
Titre Figure 41: A multi-view 3D reconstruction of one of the recent pipes excavated in 2020 (BG20, B1-T1U2L2)
Légende Exported in Adobe Illustrator. Note the possibilities of the various perspectives that can be observed using the PhotoScan application.
Crédits M. Quatrelivre, 2020.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/afriques/docannexe/image/5988/img-44.png
Fichier image/png, 108k
Titre Figure 42: A screenshot of the short video produced on one of the ivory side-blown trumpets from the B2 site
Crédits Credit by Antoine Nicolet and Manon Quatrelivre.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/afriques/docannexe/image/5988/img-45.png
Fichier image/png, 151k
Titre Figure 43: A close-up screenshot of the video showing details of the surface decorations on the ivory trumpet
Crédits Credit by Antoine Nicolet and Manon Quatrelivre.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/afriques/docannexe/image/5988/img-46.png
Fichier image/png, 318k
Haut de page

Pour citer cet article

Référence électronique

Daniel Kumah, « Towards the creation of archaeological archives in Ghana: Reflections from Begho »Afriques [En ligne], 16 | 2025, mis en ligne le 08 avril 2026, consulté le 14 mai 2026. URL : http://journals.openedition.org/afriques/5988 ; DOI : https://doi.org/10.4000/161vz

Haut de page

Droits d’auteur

CC-BY-NC-ND-4.0

Le texte seul est utilisable sous licence CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Les autres éléments (illustrations, fichiers annexes importés) sont susceptibles d’être soumis à des autorisations d’usage spécifiques.

Haut de page
Rechercher dans OpenEdition Search

Vous allez être redirigé vers OpenEdition Search