papers from the thirty-seventh meeting of the seminar for arabian studies held in london, 17-19 july...

Amphora trade between South Arabia and East Africa in the first millennium BC: a re-examination of the evidenceAuthor(s): Alexandra PorterSource: Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies, Vol. 34, Papers from the thirty-seventh meeting of the Seminar for Arabian Studies held in London, 17-19 July 2003 (2004),pp. 261-275Published by: ArchaeopressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/41223823 .

Accessed: 11/06/2014 04:08

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Archaeopress is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Proceedings of theSeminar for Arabian Studies.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 188.72.96.149 on Wed, 11 Jun 2014 04:08:47 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=archaeopress

http://www.jstor.org/stable/41223823?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 34 (2004) : 261-275

Amphora trade between South Arabia and East Africa in the first millennium ВС: a re-examination of the evidence

Alexandra Porter

Introduction

The American Foundation for the Study of Man [AFSM] excavated the archaeological site of Hajar Ibn Humayd in the Wâdï Bayhãn, Yemen, in 1950-1951. A particular type of ceramic vessel, here termed "amphora", was discovered during these excavations (Van Beek 1969: 170-171, 256). This was a particularly exciting discovery because the same type of vessel had been found at the site of Yeha in East Africa (Anfray 1963: 175, 179, 183, 185, 187, pl. CXXVIII/la-c, 2d: J.E. 2285, 2248, 2179, 2366; pl. CXL: J.E. 2366, 2129). More exciting still was the conclusion in Van Beek's excavation report that the amphorae had been imported to Hajar Ibn Humayd, located in central Yemen, from Yeha, situated in the Tigre province of northern Ethio- pia: "At the very least, it [the amphora] indicates that Hajar Bin Humeid participated in ... trade relations that extended beyond the Red Sea into Ethiopia" (Van Beek 1969: 93, 369). This paper will re-examine the ceramic evidence for a suggested commercial link between South Arabia and East Africa during the first millennium ВС.

The importance of Hajar Bin Humeid by Van Beek is widely recognized by archaeologists and epigraphers (1969). The excavation report presented radiocarbon dates that demonstrated writing was in use in South Arabia by the eighth century ВС. This was a very significant discovery for the chronology of South Arabia, about which there was a lively debate between support- ers of a long and a short chronology. The core of the report consisted of the first stratified ceramic typology for South Arabia. Van Beek's typological analysis was supplemented by two specialist reports which explored ceramic provenance; these included a pétrographie thin- section analysis and a neutron activation analysis (NAA), scientific techniques that were rarely used in archaeological reports at the time (Al Kital, Chan & Sayre 1969: 387-398; Melson 1969: 409^13). After more than thirty years, Van Beek's excavation report

remains the major resource for South Arabian ceramic parallels and dating.

This examination of Van Beek's conclusions regard- ing the provenance of the amphorae forms part of a much wider investigation on the production, distribution and circulation of this distinctive vessel, which com- prises a thin-section analysis of over five hundred amphorae and other pottery types from nineteen archaeological sites in Yemen, Ethiopia and Eritrea (Porter, in preparation).

FIGURE 1. The amphorae are section-built and have an everted rim, a very narrow neck, a conical-shaped body and a flared pedestal base. Occasionally the amphorae

have knobs on the shoulder.

Amphora description

The amphora has an unmistakeable set of morphological characteristics, which include an everted rim, a very



262 Alexandra Porter

} ■■§ -о 1

I во

'I I "в I §

I I

!

i



Amphora trade between South Arabia and East Africa in the first millennium ВС 263

narrow neck, a conical-shaped body and a flared pedestal base (Fig. 1). The vessels are also characterized by clay that is often heavily tempered with sand, making the fabric coarse, dense and heavy. Anfray first published this jar-type under a variety of names depending on the size of the vessel: "amphorettes" (Anfray 1963: 175, 185), "grandes jarres" (Anfray 1963: 179, 183, 187), and "jarres" (Anfray 1963: pl. CXXVIII). Van Beek labelled the vessel "Type 4100 Jar 1" (Van Beek 1969: fig. 1 13); it is also known by the name "amphora" (Fattovich 1977: 76-77; Fattovich 1980: 32) and "tor- pedo-shaped jar" (Glanzman 1994: 308-324). For the purposes of this paper the term "amphora" is used, de- spite its recognized shortcomings.1

The very restricted neck, everted rim and thick walls indicate that the vessel was used to contain a liquid or viscous substance. The absence of handles suggests that the contents were not hot. Glanzman noted that the liquid might have had a special value because this jar-type has been found with grave offerings in tombs in both South Arabia and East Africa. Due to the discovery of amphorae at a large number of South Arabian sites that were involved in the overland trade of incense, or that were located close to incense-producing areas, Glanzman has made the intriguing suggestion that the jar might have contained precious myrrh oil or was somehow connected to the trade that was conducted along the caravan routes (Glanzman 1994: 315, 323). The results of an organic residue analysis of the amphorae may reveal the function of the vessel and even lead to the designation of a more appropriate name (Porter & Durham, in preparation).2

The distribution of amphorae Van Beek recognized that this particular vessel had an exceptionally wide distribution and he identified a number of pre-Islamic sites in Yemen, in addition to the pre- Aksumite site of Yeha in northern Ethiopia, where amphorae could be found (Van Beek 1969: 92, 170). Fol- lowing on from this research, Glanzman compiled information from published literature and from excavations and surveys in the Wadï al-Jubah region to provide a more comprehensive idea of the amphora's distribution (Glanzman 1994: 315-319, 322-324). As further research on this potentially important trade-vessel was needed (Van Beek 1969: 369; Glanzman 1994: 387, 315), a survey of pre-Islamic and pre-Aksumite sites and museum pottery collections in Yemen and Ethiopia has been completed by the author (Porter 2001). The archaeological sites with amphorae are shown in Fig. 2.

Amphorae are very common in the Mãrib region;

they have been discovered in large numbers at the Aw- wäm temple (Albright 1958: 102, fig. 192; Van Beek 1969: fig. 113: Mãrib +1-2), the BarDän temple, Sam- sara and Sirwäh. The form is also well known at al- Durayb in the Wadï Yalã (de Maigret 1988: fig. 23/10, 12-15; 2002: fig. 42/10, 12-15; Garbini 1992: figs 4, 11, 15, 16, 21). The vessels have been discovered at Hajar al-Rayhanï and two smaller sites in the Wadï al- Jubah: al-Hajar (HJR45) and Hajar Aba al-Jaradah (HAJ50) (Toplyn 1985: 21, 24; Glanzman 1987: 195; McGovern & Wnuk 1987: 183, 185; Glanzman 1994: 315). So far only a single example has been published from Tamnac (Sedov 1996: fig. 7/2) and at least two amphorae were discovered at Hajar Ibn Humayd in the Wadï Bayhän (Van Beek 1969: 170, fig. 133/Jar 1: M H20026, Jar 1: L HI 884). Three complete amphorae have been unearthed at Hajar Surbän (Breton 1998: 220/SUR-2-16: BM 639, SUR-2-17: BM 640; Porter 2002: 141). They have also been identified at Hajar am- Husaynah (Breton 1998: 225, pl. 19/HSY-l) and Hajar Yahir in the Wadï Markhah region. They have been published from Raybün (Van Beek 1969: fig. 1 13/WH46+1-3) and Adiat al-Sultan (Harding 1964: pis XVII.29, XVIII.29). The author found them amongst the ceramics excavated at Shabwa and on the surface of al-Banrah (see Doe 1971: fig. 32), Huraydah, Sünah and Mashghah in the Hadramawt (Van Beek 1969: fig. 113/WH 47+1-2, WH 24+1-2). They have also been discovered at various Sabaean-related sites on the Ti- hãmah including al-Hämid, Wäqir, al-Midamman and al-Kashawbah (Ciuk & Keall 1996: pl. 95/1: STN 177, 172, 185). They have been found at Kharibat Sacud, the National Museum in SanacäD has examples in its collec- tion which are thought to be from Hajar al-Khäniq and the University Museum in SancãD has examples from the Jawf region.

Zarins et al. report that "sand-tempered" pottery known as "Type VIII" or "Type K", which was likened to Van Beek's Type 4100, occurred in southern Saudi Arabia at Najrãn, near Zahrän Janüb, the Tihämah coastal port of al-Rayyän, and El Baethat in the Wadï Tathlïth. It would seem that amphorae were present at the ancient city of Najrän and the nearby dam, but it is difficult to confirm their existence at all these sites because illustrations of the sherds have not been published and various sand-tempered forms dating to different time periods were identified during the survey (Zarins et al 1983: 29, 31-32; Zarins, Murad & Al-Yish 1981: 33-34). The sand-tempered sherds discovered by Parr and Gazdar at Zubaydah, near Buraydah and cUnayzah, in the northern province of Saudi Arabia, which Zarins et al. suggest are related to Van Beek's type 4100, are




certainly not amphorae (Parr & Gazdar 1980: 116; Za- rìnsetal. 1983:32).

Amphorae have been found across the Red Sea at the pre-Aksumite site at Yeha in Ethiopia and Matara in Eritrea.3 The author has examined one pottery sherd from the "D site" at Aksum which was thought to be an amphora or "alabastron" (Phillips 2000: fig. 267/d; Phil- lips, forthcoming) but it does not have the correct form to be included in this pottery type. No doubt there will be additional sites with amphorae to add to this list (Por- ter 2002: 141).

The distribution of the amphorae covers territories occupied by the Sabaeans, Qatabanians, Awsanis, Had- ramis and Minaeans. When the amphorae have been found in datable contexts they usually date within the first millennium ВС, but the most common occurrence is in the first half of the first millennium ВС, when the Sabaeans controlled a large part of South Arabia and the Sabaean-related kingdom of Daamat arose in East Af- rica (Glanzman 1994: 322). The amphorae have not been found at Late Bronze Age sites such as Sihi or Sabr, or at later archaeological sites that post-date the period of the caravan kingdoms.

Amphora-trade between South Arabia and East Africa

The consistency of the amphora manufacturing tradition (see Glanzman 1994: 310-313; Porter, in preparation) across such a vast area prompted Van Beek to explore whether amphorae were traded (Van Beek 1969: 92).

4

Van Beek sent a total of forty-one pottery sherds, including sand-, grass- and steatite-tempered types to Al Kital, Chan and Sayre for neutron activation analysis (NAA) to discover whether Type 4100 vessels were imported to Hajar Ibn Humayd. Thirty sand-tempered sherds from Hajar Ibn Humayd, Märib, various sites in the Hadramawt, and Yeha in the Tigre province of northern Ethiopia were included in the research; most but not all of these samples were amphorae (Van Beek 1969: 92; Al Kital, Chan & Sayre 1969: 387-398).

Three groups were distinguished on the basis of chemical composition: Group 1: the grass-tempered sherds; Group 2: fourteen sand-tempered amphorae including two of the six sand-tempered samples from Ha- jar Ibn Humayd, eight sand-tempered sherds from various sites in the Wadï Hadramawt and all four sand- tempered samples from Yeha in Ethiopia; and Group 3: all the steatite-tempered sherds. The remaining sixteen sand-tempered sherds from Hajar Ibn Humayd (including amphora rim sherd H2026 from level M),5 sites in

the Hadramawt, and Märib were all of varying composition and could not be grouped (Al Kital, Chan & Sayre 1969: 388, 391). The authors concluded that sand- tempered sherds in Group 2 from Hajar Ibn Humayd (including amphora base sherd H 1884 from level L), the Wadï Hadramawt (including from the sites of Raybun, Adiat al-Sultan, Huraydah and Mashghah) and Yeha in Ethiopia had a similar chemical composition and there- fore originated from the same location. It was suggested that they were imported from Ethiopia, not on the basis of their composition, but simply on the observation that amphorae were more common at Yeha (AI Kita, Chan & Sayre 1969: 391). Van Beek concurred, "Some of our Hajar bin Humeid examples are almost certainly imports from Ethiopia", as they were, "not sufficiently common to have been a local product" (Van Beek 1969: 92, 369). He concluded that the amphorae indicated commercial relations between South Arabia and East Africa during the first half of the first millennium ВС (1969:92-93,369).

The long distance transfer of ceramic vessels across the Red Sea during the first half of the first millennium ВС is a very interesting proposal, which prompts many logistic, cultural and economic questions, yet it is essen- tial to establish whether Van Beek and Al Kital, Chan and Sayre actually had evidence for trade across the Red Sea.

Thin-section analysis methodology

Petrological analysis is the principal method for identi- fying and classifying the mineralogical composition of pottery fabrics and linking them to their geological environments (Williams 1979: 73; Rice 1987: 376).6 The approach is based on the principle that a locally- manufactured pot will contain locally-sourced minerals and rock fragments which will reflect the regional geology. Imported vessels may be recognized if they contain mineral associations that could not have originated near the site. Thin-section analysis was particularly appropriate for this study because the amphora fabrics were rough and sandy and full of medium to coarse sand- sized igneous, metamorphic and sedimentary lithics, which provided important information about the provenance of the pottery.

Pottery provenance studies often run into difficulties due to homogenous geology across large areas or similar geology in different places. South Arabia and East Africa have proved to be an ideal location for a broad ceramic provenance study using thin-section analysis as there is a wide variety of rocks in Yemen, Ethiopia and




Eritrea, the majority of which are regionally specific (Fig. 3).

The Yemen is divided into three main geological provinces: the western highlands comprised primarily of volcanic rocks, a metamorphic terrane south of the Ramlat al-Sabcatayn formed of peneplaned basement rocks, and the carbonate tableland of the Hadramawt in the east (Garzanti et al 2001: fig. 2). Primarily Precam- brian low-grade metamorphic s are exposed in northern Ethiopia and Eritrea. As the composition of the sand is often specific to a geological province (2001: 294), the sand that is incorporated into ceramic fabrics retains a distinct geological signature, and this has been ex- tremely helpful in the characterization of local, regional and imported pottery.

In this study the composition and provenance of the amphorae from Hajar Ibn Humayd is examined and compared to amphorae discovered at Yeha in Ethiopia. Characterization of the geological catchments at both sites coupled with ceramic thin-section analysis will allow us to investigate Van Beek's claims for pottery trade across the Red Sea during the first millennium ВС.

Thin-section analysis of the amphorae from Hajar Ibn Humayd

The author sampled and thin-sectioned the two diagnos- tic amphorae sherds available from Hajar Ibn Humayd; both sherds were included in the neutron activation analysis conducted by Al Kital, Chan and Sayre (Jar 1 Rim, Level M, H2026/H43 and Jar 1 Base, Level L, HI 884). Thin-section analysis revealed that the two amphorae originated from a similar geological environment as they both contained plutonic and metamorphic rock fragments, probably derived from granites, gneisses and schists. Amphora M2026/H43 (Petrofabric 71) contained angular plutonic inclusions comprised of quartz, feldspar, sericite and microcline, perhaps derived from granite, amphibole- and biotite-bearing metamorphic lithics from gneisses and schists, free amphibole, biotite and muscovite and no volcanic inclusions (Fig. 4a). Amphora L HI 884 (Petrofabric 70) also contained lithics and minerals derived from plutonic rocks, biotite and hornblende-bearing metamorphic lithics, free hornblende and biotite, talc/muscovite (?)

FIGURE 3. A geological map of Yemen showing the primarily volcanic western highlands, the metamorphic terranes south of the Ramlat al-Sabcatayn, and the carbonates of the Hadramawt in the east.

The map is modified from Garzanti et al. 2001: fig. 2.




Figure 4a. A line drawing and photomicrograph (40x) of Amphora M2026/H43/71 showing amphibole (amph), quartz and feldspar derived from plutonic/meta-igneous (qz, K-feld) and epidote-bearing metamorphic lithic (epi). 4b: A line drawing and photomicrograph (25x) of Amphora L HI 884/70 showing plutonic/meta-igneous detritus (qz, plag, feldspathic lithic) and amphibole- and biotite-bearing metamorphic lithic with schistose texture (sch).

The illustrations were modified from Van Beek 1969: fig. 133.




Figure 5a. A framework pie diagram (QFL %)for Amphorae H2026/H43/7 1 from Hajar Ibn Humayd. 5 b. A framework pie diagram (QFL %) for Amphorae

HI 884/70 from Hajar Ibn Humayd. These pie diagrams illustrate the similarity between the

two amphorae from Hajar Ibn Humayd. The thin- sections were ribbon counted and all grains over 4 units

(< 0. 125 mm) were identified and measured.

and no volcanic inclusions (Figs 4b, 5a, b). The plutonic and amphibole-bearing metamorphics

that characterized the amphorae fabrics from Hajar Ibn Humayd were probably derived from the Wadï Bayhãn geological catchment. The Wadï Bayhãn region is a suture zone between two metamorphic terranes: the Abas Gneiss terrane consisting primarily of migmatic hornblende-biotite ortho-gneiss (miam) to the west and al-Bayda island arc terrane comprising meta-sediments (sci) and meta-volcanics (sak) to the east (Windley, Whitehouse & Ba-Bttat 1996: 131-132). Gneissic granite jabais extrude to the east and west of the Wadï Bayhän (granite/gst) and para- and ortho-gneisses flank the sides of the valley (Fig. 6). There are no volcanic rocks or sedimentary lithics within the Wadï Bayhän drainage catchment nor were there any inclusions derived from these rock types in the amphorae from Hajar Ibn Humayd.

On the basis of thin-section analysis, it is highly likely that these amphorae were produced at or near the site of Hajar Ibn Humayd or in the surrounding area

FIGURE 6. The Wadï Bayhãn geological catchment for Hajar Ibn Humayd.




Figure 7. Amphora JE 2248 found in Tomb 9 at Yeha, Ethiopia.

because the composition of the fabric, rich in plutonic rock detritus, high-grade metamorphic rock fragments and amphibole, is compatible with the geology of the Wãdí Bayhãn region. There is no evidence to suggest that these amphorae came from Ethiopia, as the geology from this region is distinct from the Wãdí Bayhän (see below).

Only one amphora sherd (L H 1884) was included in the thin-section analysis by Melson published in the Hajar Bin Humeid volume; this sherd was thin- sectioned by the author (see above) and was included in Al Kital, Chan and Sayre's NAA analysis (Melson 1969: 410-411, 413).7 Significantly, Melson grouped this amphora with the locally produced "grass-tempered" wares from Hajar Ibn Humayd in his compositional analysis. Melson suggests that this group of pottery was locally produced because they were comprised "mainly of quartz and feldspar-rich rocks, ultimately derived from granitic igneous rocks and gneisses" (1969: 410-411). The author also examined a number of grass-tempered

sherds from Hajar Ibn Humayd in thin-section; they largely contain quartz, feldspar, free amphibole and biotite, and while they have a considerably finer fabric, the grass-tempered sherds have a similar composition to the amphora. The sherds in this compositional group occasionally contain talc derived from the regionally sourced talc-actinolite-chlorite schist that was used as tempering material in the locally or regionally produced "steatite-tempered" pottery found at Hajar Ibn Humayd. Where Melson's thin-section analysis clearly suggests that amphora L HI 884 was locally produced, in the same volume and without any reference to Melson's analysis, Al Kital, Chan and Sayre state that this amphora was imported from Ethiopia, a view supported by Van Beek (Al Kital, Chan & Sayre 1969: 387-398; Melson 1969: 410-411; Van Beek 1969: 369). This author's thin-section analysis of the amphorae from Ha- jar Ibn Humayd corroborates Melson's claim that the sand-tempered pottery was locally produced because the composition of the amphorae reflects the geology of the Wãdí Bayhãn region.

Thin-section analysis of the amphorae from Yeha

We will now examine the provenance of the amphorae that were discovered at the Sabaean-related site of Yeha, in the ancient kingdom of Daamat, in present-day Ethiopia, and compare them with the amphorae that were discovered at Hajar Ibn Humayd.8 The author was permitted to sample all the amphorae sherds, as well as one complete amphora (JE 2248, Fig. 7), found during the excavations at Yeha; this pottery is stored in the National Museum in Addis Ababa (Anfray 1963: pl. CXXVIII/lb; Fattovich 1980: pl. XLIII left).9 The remaining complete amphorae were examined closely in hand-specimen as they could not be sampled for thin- sectioning. The fabrics were all distinctly micaceous and similar to those amphorae that were sampled.

Amphora Y5400 Y73T4DII (Petrofabric 36) from Yeha contained metamorphic and volcanic detritus including a high percentage of biotite chlorite schists, sericite schist, epidote- and amphibole-bearing metamorphics, a small percentage of mafic and felsic volcanics, free amphibole, biotite, chlorite, quartz, plagioclase and sericite. The very fine fraction was rich in biotite, muscovite and chlorite (Fig. 8a, b). This amphora cannot have originated in the same geological catchment as the amphorae from Hajar Ibn Humayd because it contained volcanics and because the fabric incorporated a considerably higher percentage of schists and a significantly lower percentage of detritus derived




FIGURE 8a. A photomicrograph (4 Ox) ofYeha Amphora Y5400 Y73T4DII showing sericite schist (ssch), feldspar (feld), quartz (qz) and mimerons b ioti te lathes (hi). 8 b. A framework pie diagram (QFL %) of Amphora

Y 5400 Y73 T4DII (Petrofabric 36).

Figure 9a. A drawing of Amphora Variant JE 2360 (Petrofabric 38). This vessel is unusual because of its shape and fine fabric; the streaky burnished red slip and knobs are occasionally found on amphorae

with coarser fabrics. 9b. A photomicrograph showing the fine mica-rich fabric of this vessel. 9c. A framework pie diagram (QFL %) of Amphora JE 2360 (Petrofabric 38).

from intrusive rocks and amphibole. Another distin- guishing factor was that the fine fraction was much richer in micas than in the amphorae from Hajar Ibn Humayd.

Complete amphora JE 2248 (Petrofabric 37) from Yeha contained biotite chlorite schist, sericite schist, epidote- and amphibole-bearing metamorphic rock fragments, polycrystalline quartz, feldspar with poikioblasts, free amphibole, biotite, muscovite, and

chlorite (Fig. 7). The sample lacked volcanics but it was a tiny sample; the amphora was undoubtedly derived from a similar geological environment to sample Y5400 due to the high percentage of mica schist and the presence of epidote- and amphibole-bearing metamorphics.

Amphora JE 2360 (Petrofabric 38) is texturally distinct from the former two examples in that it has a very fine mica-rich fabric (Fig. 9b). The sherd contained detritus largely derived from metamorphic sources: chlo-




(Fig. 9c). On the basis of the composition of Amphora JE 2360, it is clear that the vessel came from a very similar environment to the other two amphorae. The vessel was covered in a streaky burnished red slip, which occasionally occurs on the coarser sand-tempered amphorae, but in this case it was probably used to help create the impression of the coarser sand-tempered types; the form of this vessel varied from the character- istic amphora shape in that it had thinner walls and rim (Fig. 9a). It is probable that this fine fabric variety was an imitation of the sand-tempered amphorae.

The chlorite-, biotite-, and sericite-bearing schists that characterize the amphorae fabrics from Yeha repre- sent the most abundant rock type in the local region. According to the geological map of Ethiopia compiled by Merla et al. (1979), the geology in the Yeha region is comprised primarily of Pre-Cambrian low-grade metamorphics (slates, phyllites, chloritic and sericitic shists) (lm), Hyperalkaline silicic lavas and domes (Ртг), tillites and glacial sandstones (t), and flood basalts and trachybasalts with rare basic tuffs (To) (Fig. 10). It is clear that the amphorae from Yeha were locally or regionally produced because they contain a large amount of schists, a relatively low percentage of plutonic lithics, and occasionally volcanic inclusions.

Discussion and conclusions

Thin-section examination of the Hajar Ibn Humayd amphorae that were included in the NAA conducted by Al Kital, Chan and Sayre (Rim M H2026/H43 and Base L HI 884) and samples from Yeha in Ethiopia, allows a reassessment of Van Beek's assertions for amphora trade across the Red Sea.

It is evident that the Hajar Ibn Humayd amphorae were locally or regionally produced, contrary to what has been suggested by Van Beek (1969: 93, 369) and Al Kital, Chan and Sayre (1969: 387-398). The Hajar Ibn Humayd amphorae contained a high percentage of intrusive lithics and metamorphic rock fragments largely derived from amphibole gneisses, unlike the amphorae examined from Yeha. The gneisses and amphibole biotite schists in the Wadï Bayhän geological catchment were the source of the free amphibole that was so common in the Hajar Ibn Humayd pottery fabrics. There were no volcanic inclusions in the amphorae and there are no volcanic sources in the Wadï Bayhän geological catchment. The Yeha region has a small volcanic com- ponent and one amphora from Yeha contained mafic

and felsic volcanic inclusions. The Yeha amphorae all contained a high percentage of low-grade metamorphic detritus such as chlorite, biotite, and sericite schists. The Yeha geological catchment has a prevalence of low- grade metamorphics including chloritic and sericite schists. The high percentage of mica in the Yeha amphorae was largely sourced from these schists. The composition of the Yeha amphorae strongly suggests that they too were locally or regionally produced. The composition of the amphora samples from Hajar Ibn Humayd and Yeha reflects their distinct geological environments. It is highly improbable that the Hajar Ibn Humayd amphorae were imported from Yeha (or vice versa)}0 The thin-section analysis undertaken by this author corroborates Melson's original pétrographie results and proves that the amphorae examined by Al Ki- tal, Chan and Sayre did not originate in Ethiopia.

Having established that the amphorae were locally produced, we need to examine the original suggestion for trade made by Van Beek and Al Kital, Chan and Sayre. the basis of the neutron activation analysis results ir conclusion was not robust for a variety of methods gical and conceptual reasons. The three NAA groups were distinguished on the basis of their composition, roughly according to their different pottery tempering traditions (i.e. grass-, steatite- and sand-tempered pottery), but it is impossible to provenance pottery purely on the basis of these data. A number of pottery traditions can exist within one ceramic corpus just as one pottery tradition can be represented in many ceramic corpora. The NAA was sensitive enough to dis- tinguish between a number of the sand-tempered pots as there was a significant number of distinct outliers labelled "miscellaneous", but the technique could not re- solve the important compositional differences that ex- isted among the amphorae in Group 2. NAA provides chemical results that can rarely be fully understood without thin-section analysis or some other form of mineralogical study because it cannot provide any information about how a particular element was incorporated into the pottery or how it is distributed within the fabric (Rice 1987: 372). The NAA data was not corre- lated with the mineralogical composition of the pottery or the geological catchments of the sites so that ceramic fabrics and geological environments could not be con- vincingly linked. The NAA report did not refer to the results of Melson's thin-section analysis even though both Al Kital, Chan and Sayre and Melson analysed the same pottery types and in at least one instance examined




Figure 10. A map showing the geological catchment of the Yeha region.

14°oo'_ ^ш^афШ/f ^s - -) - .^ ^%:

Jon' ? 40 km

LEGEND - ZJ

I Г Qa 1 DUNE SAND S[ o. j [.JKs.i TAWILAH SANDSTONE

£ -2 ЩЩ WADIS &OUTWASH ° | с ^g^i PLAIN DEPOSITS % -ir- ^^==:::^ á

1 "ДИ QUATERANRYVOLCANICS ¡[ l|l EH ^^==:::^ AKBRA SHALES

Q.

о g г I- 1 I г® gr [4^=1-1 г

I 1 |t

I GRANITE ANATEXITE §1L L=~3

[4^=1-1 UPPER BASIC VOLCANICS ф |

^fra CLASTICS&EVAPORiTES .1 {КИИ ^NEISSIC GRANITE

¡ || [55] GRANITE j 1-^ шшяш SERICITE-CHLORiTE H[o ^o шшяш schist

1 1 *Я I MIDDLE ACIDIC VOLCANICS J li г 1 SERICITE-ACTINOLITE 2 I

| §"! I !ül I SCHIST

g gr [Л •Tte :' Л LOWER ACIDIC VOLCANICS о ^

-,

LS¿L h -It •Tte ,J & sediments -g,^ ||i [ '

z -, ] meta-ultramafics

LU О 'SZ О L _3

L ;- ' !

° « I " Г kSÏSi AMPHIBOLITE & AMPHIBOLE I 1

« I 2 "

1 Г

Ibìo kSÏSi

GNEISS "S -S

• Modem town ^^ Drainage catchment

| Ancient capital boundary . Ancient site with ^

^ Drainage direction ж amphorae (sampled) '^У Geological boundary

Geological information modified from:

A Geological Map of Ethiopia and Somalia (1973). G. Merla, E. Abbate, A. Azzaroli, P. Bruni, P. Canuti, M. Fazzuoli, M. Sagri & P. Tacconi. Department of Geology and Paleontology, University of Florence, Italy. Centro Stampa, Firenze 1 979. Structural framework omitted.




the identical amphora sherd. The deciding factor in the conclusion that the amphorae were Ethiopian imports was the paucity of amphorae at Hajar Ibn Humayd (Van Beek 1969: 92-93; Al Kital, Chan & Sayre 1969: 391). This is an unreliable basis upon which to determine the origin of the ceramics, especially when there was re- course to two complementary scientific techniques that could have been used more effectively to examine the provenance of the pottery.

In conclusion, detailed thin-section analysis of amphorae from Hajar Ibn Humayd and from Yeha does not support Van Beek and Al Kital, Chan and Sayre's asser- tion that amphorae were traded across the Red Sea during the first millennium ВС. Rather, this ceramic analysis suggests that the amphorae were locally or regionally produced.

Acknowledgements The author would like to thank the following individuals and organizations for their advice, support, and sponsor- ship: The Institute of Archaeology, University College Lon- don Graduate School, the University of London Central Research Fund, the Society for Arabian Studies, the British- Yemeni Society, the Leigh Douglas Foundation, the Royal Ontario Museum, the American Foundation for the Study of Man, and the Social Sciences and Hu- manities Research Council of Canada. Dr Harriet Craw- ford, Dr William Glanzman, Dr Burkhard Vogt, Dr Ed- ward Keall, Mr Carl Phillips, Dr Jean-François Breton, Dr Aleksandr Sedov, Dr Alessandro de Maigret, Dr Francis Anfray, Dr David Phillipson, Dr Jackie Phillips, Dr Eduardo Garzanti and Dr Juris Zarins. Additional thanks are extended to Mrs. Merilyn Phillips Hodgson, President for the American Foundation for the Study of Man, for loaning me the pottery from Hajar Ibn Humayd; Mr Muluneh Gebre Mariam, Manager of the National Museum in Addis Ababa for permitting me to study and sample the pottery from Yeha; Menkir Bitew for his curatorial assistance; and Dr William Glanzman for his useful comments on this paper.

Notes 1 The author recognizes that "amphora" is not an ideal

term for this particular jar-type because of the associations with Greek and Roman amphorae, which functioned as packaging for maritime trade. The assumption that these vessels were Graeco-Roman in- fluenced was one of the reasons this term was origi-

nally adopted (Anfray 1963: 175, n.l). The term "amphora" is only partially appropriate in the morphological sense of the term in that this jar has a long pointed body and a very restricted neck, making it an efficient container for liquids, but this vessel has a flared pedestal base and is missing the loop handles that are typical of Classical amphorae. Hav- ing outlined the limitations of the term, "amphora" will be used here because it is an established name in South Arabian archaeology and the assumption about its functions inherent in the name - that is that it was a container used to transport goods over long distances - is the central question of this paper. 2 The author is involved in a joint project with a col- league at the University of Newcastle to analyse the contents of the amphorae; some very interesting results have been discovered (Porter & Durham, in preparation). For amphorae at Yeha and Matara see Anfray 1963: 175, 179, 183, 185, 187, pl. CXXVIII/la-c, 2d: J.E. 2285, 2248, 2179, 2366; pl. CXL: J.E. 2366; pl. CXL: J.E. 2129; Van Beek 1969: 92, fig. 113: Yeha 1; Fattovich 1980: 20, 90, pl. XLIII; Anfray 1966: 14; Scholtz 1984: 22, Abb. 33 left). 4 Trade implies buying and selling, a transaction or exchange. Although the presence of a foreign pot at a site might indicate trade, this is not always the case and movement or transfer for other reasons should also be considered. These were sampled and examined by the author using thin-section analysis (see below). For introductory information about thin-section analysis see Shepard 1995: 139-141, 157; Rye 1981: 50-51: Rice 1987: 375-382.

7 Amphora L HI 884 is mislabelled as a "grass- tempered" potsherd in plate 69c (Melson 1969: 413). A number of amphorae were discovered in some tombs associated with the temple at Yeha (Anfray 1963: 175, 179, 183, 185, 187, pl. CXXVIII 1/a-c, 2d: J.E. 2285, 2248, 2179, 2366; pl. CXL: J.E. 2366; pl. CXL: J.E. 2129). The amphorae and pottery from Matara, in present-day Eritrea, will be discussed in a future publication (Porter, in preparation). The unmarked samples from Yeha included in the Hajar Ibn Humayd NAA analysis were not available for examination. Fattovich suggested that amphorae could have been imported into Ethiopia from South Arabia (Fattovich 1977: 77).




References

Albright F.P. 1958. Catalogue of objects found in Mãrib excavations. Pages 269-275 in R.L. Bowen, Jr. & F.P.

Albright (eds), Archaeological Discoveries in South Arabia. (Publications of the American Foundation for the Study of Man, 2). Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins Press.

Anfray F. 1963. Une campagne de fouilles à Yehä (février-mars 1960). Annales d'Ethiopie 5: 171-192. 1966. La poterie de Matara, esquisse typologique. Rassegna di Studi Etiopici 22: 5-74, figs 1-13.

Breton J-F. 1998. Essai de classement chronologique. Pages 202-227 in J-F. Breton, J.C. Arramond, B. Coque-

Delhuille & P. Gentelle, Une vallée aride du Yémen antique: Le wâdî Bayhân. Paris: Éditions Recherche sur les Civilisations.

Ciuk С & Keall E. 1996. Zabid Project Pottery Manual 1995, Pre-Islamic and Islamic Ceramics from the Zabid area,

North Yemen. (British Archaeological Reports, International Series, 655). Oxford: Tempus Reparátům.

de Maigret A. (ed.) 1988. The Sabaean Archaeological Complex in the Wãdí Yalã (Eastern Khawlãn at-Tiyãl, Yemen

Arab Republic): A Preliminary Report. (Reports and Memoirs, 21). Rome: Istituto Italiano per il Medio ed Estremo Oriente.

2002. Arabia Felix: An Exploration of the Archaeological History of Yemen. London: Stacey Interna- tional.

DoeB. 1971. Southern Arabia. London: Thames & Hudson.

Fattovich R. 1977. Pre-Axumite civilization of Ethiopia: A provisional review. Proceedings of the Seminar for

Arabian Studies 7: 73-78. 1980. Materiali per lo studio della ceramica pre-aksumita etiopica. (Annali dell'Istituto Orientale di

Napoli 40, Supplemento 25). Napoli: Istituto Orientale di Napoli. Garbini G.

1992. Le iscrizioni su ceramica da ad-Darayb - Yalã. Yemen 1 : 79-91 . Garzanti E., Vezzoli G., Andò S. & Castiglioni G.

2001. Petrology of Rifted-Margin Sand (Red Sea and Gulf of Aden, Yemen). Journal of Geology 109: 277-297.

Glanzman W.D. 1987. Ceramic Technology II: Fabrication Methods. Pages 191-205 in W.D. Glanzman & A.O.

Ghaleb, The Wadi al-Jubah archaeological project, iii. Site reconnaissance in the Yemen Arab Republic, 1984: The stratigraphie probe at Hajar ar-Rayhani. Washington, DC: American Foundation for the Study of Man.

1994. Toward a Classification and Chronology of Pottery from HR3 (Hajar ar-Rayhani), Wadi al- Jubah, Republic of Yemen. PhD Dissertation, University of Pennsylvania. Ann Arbor: UMI (AAT 9521036).

Harding G.L. 1964. Archaeology in the Aden Protectorates. London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office.

Al Kital R.A., Chan L-H. & Sayre E.V. 1969. Neutron activation analysis of pottery sherds from Hajar bin Humeid and related areas. Pages

387-398 in G.W. Van Beek, Hajar bin Humeid, Investigations at a Pre-Islamic Site in South Arabia. (Publications of the American Foundation for the Study of Man, 5). Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins Press.

Melson W.G. 1969. Note on the petrography of potsherds from Hajar Bin Humeid and other South Arabian locali-




ties. Pages 409-413 in G.W. Van Beek, Hajar bin Humeid, Investigations at a Pre-Islamic Site in South Arabia. (Publications of the American Foundation for the Study of Man, 5). Balti- more, MD: Johns Hopkins Press.

Merla G., Abbate E., Azzaroli A., Bruni P., Canuti P., Fazzuoli M., Sagri M. & Tacconi P. 1979. A Geological Map of Ethiopia and Somalia (1973) 1:2,000,000 and Comment with a Map of

Major Landforms. (Department of Geology & Palaeontology, University of Florence, Consig- lio Nazionale delle Ricerche, Italy). Florence: Centro Stampa.

McGovern P. & Wnuk С. 1987. Ceramic Technology I: Petrography, Firing and Surface Decoration. Pages 181-190 in W.D.

Glanzman & A.O. Ghaleb, The Wadi al-Jubah archaeological project, iii. Site reconnaissance in the Yemen Arab Republic, 1984: The stratigraphie probe at Hajar ar-Rayhani. Washington, DC: American Foundation for the Study of Man.

Parr P.J. & Gazdar M. 1980. A report on the Soundings at Zubaida (al-cAmärä) in the al-Qasim Region. Atlal 4: 107-1 17.

Phillips J. 2000. Pottery and clay objects. Pages 303-337 in D.W. Phillipson, Archaeology at Aksum, Ethiopia,

1993-97. ii/2. (British Institute in Eastern Africa, Memoir 17). (Reports of the Research Com- mittee of the Society of Antiquaries of London, 65). London: British Institute in Eastern Af- rica/Society of Antiquaries of London.

(forthcoming). Pre-Aksumite Aksum and its Neighbours. In P. Lunde & A. Porter (eds), The Red Sea: Trade and Travel. (British Archaeological Reports International Series). Oxford: Archaeopress.

Porter A. 200 1 . Society Grant Report. Bulletin of the Society for Arabian Studies 6:7-10. 2002. Ceramic jar with everted rim. Page 141 in St.J. Simpson (ed.), Queen ofSheba: Treasures of

Ancient Yemen. London: British Museum Press. (in preparation). Production and circulation of amphorae in South Arabia and East Africa in the first millen-

nium ВС: a thin-section analysis. PhD thesis, University College, University of London. Porter A. & Durham B.

(in preparation). Organic residue analysis of amphorae from Ancient South Arabia. Rice P.M.

1987. Pottery Analysis. A Sourcebook. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Rye O.S.

1981. Pottery Technology: Principals and Reconstruction. (Manuals on Archaeology, 4). Washing- ton, DC: Taraxacum.

Scholz P. 1984. Auf den Spuren der äthiopischen Vergangenheit zwischen dem Niltal und Arabia Felix. Antike

Welt 1 5/3: 2-34. SedovA.V.

1996. On the origin of the agricultural settlements in Hadramawt. Pages 67-86 in C.J. Robin & I. Ga- jda (eds), Arabia Antiqua, Early Origins of the South Arabian States. (Serie Orientale Roma, 70/1). Rome: Istituto Italiano per il Medio ed Estremo Oriente.

Shepard A.O. 1995. Ceramics for the Archaeologist. (Carnegie Institution of Washington, Publication 609). Was-

hington, DC: Carnegie Institution of Washington. Toplyn M.R.

1985. Site Reconnaissance. Pages 5-33 in J.A. Blakely, J.A. Sauer & M.R. Toplyn, The Wadi Al- Jubah Archaeological Project, ii. Site Reconnaissance in North Yemen, 1983. Washington, DC: The American Foundation for the Study of Man.

Van Beek G.W. 1969. Hajar Bin Humeid. Investigations at a Pre-Islamic Site in South Arabia. (Publications of the

American Foundation for the Study of Man, 5). Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins Press.




Williams D.F. 1979. Ceramic petrology and the archaeologist. Pages 73-76 in M. Millet (ed.), Pottery and the Ar-

chaeologist (Institute of Archaeology Occasional Publication, 4). London: Clarendon Press. Windley B.F., Whitehouse MJ. & Ba-Bttat M.A.

1996. Early Precambrian gneiss terranes and Pan- African island arcs in Yemen: Crustal accretion of the eastern Arabian Shield. Geology 24/2: 131-134.

Zarins J., Murad A. & Al-Yish K. 1981. The Second Preliminary Report on the Southwestern Province. Atlal 5: 9-42.

Zarins J., Kabawi A.R., Murad A.J.S. & Rashad S. 1983. Preliminary Report on the Najran/Ukhdud Survey and Excavations 1982/1402 AH. Atlal 7: 22-

40.

Author's address Alexandra Porter, Department of Ancient Near Eastern Art, The Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1000 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY 10028-0198, USA. e-mail [email protected] and ACLPorte^netscape.net



papers from the thirty-seventh meeting of the seminar for arabian studies held in london, 17-19 july...

Documents