VI.4 Arabian Peninsula: a Ceramic Study Programme at the Cefrepa

Maria-Paola Pellegrino et Anne Benoist

p. 136-141


Texte intégral

1One of the aims of the Cefrepa (previously entitled Cefas) based in Kuwait, is to support the work of researchers and students in human and social sciences and in archaeology in the territories forming the Arabian Peninsula, in collaboration with national Authorities and French research teams working in these countries. Financial support for internships, for mobility and for analyses and studies is granted each year to researchers and students attending French Universities in order to carry out programs of research in different regions of Arabia.

2One of the programmes of research supported entails defining the different steps of the evolution of regional settlement in South-east Arabia (United Arab Emirates and Sultanate of Oman) from the end of the Bronze Age (mid-2nd millennium bc) until the Iron Age (end of the 2nd millennium bc), through the study of the pottery collected on the site of Masāfī-5 (MSF-5).

The Pottery Study at Masāfī-5 (MSF-5)

3The site of Masāfī-5 (MSF-5) is located in the Emirate of Fujairah (UAE), in the northern part of the Hajjar Mountains. Archaeological excavations at MSF-5 have been carried out by the French Archaeological Mission in the UAE1 since 2011, in collaboration with the Fujairah Tourism and Culture Authority (FTCA) (Degli Esposti, Benoist 2015). The pottery assemblage unearthed during the last four campaigns is dated between the 16th and 11th centuries bc. This interval corresponds to the transitional period between the late Bronze Age and the early Iron Age in the north of the United Arab Emirates. As such, the discovery of this new ceramic assemblage provides key elements to understand the different stages of chrono-cultural evolution between these two periods. The pottery study was subsequently extended to all the settlement sites as well as to a large part of the funerary sites of the region (Tell Abraq, Shimal, Kalba,2 and several collective tombs in the north-eastern UAE) (fig. 78). Finally, the chrono-cultural evolution emerging from the comparative study of these different sites was compared to the one recently suggested in central Oman by research carried out on the monumental site of Salut by the Italian Mission to Oman (IMTO).

Figure 78. Map showing the main sites mentioned in the text

Image 10000000000002A60000022446065075BC76957F.jpg

© J. Charbonnier.

The Issue of Defining the Transition Period between the Late Bronze Age & the Iron Age

4Beyond the necessity of a better definition of the transition between the Late Bronze Age and the Iron Age, the question is raised as to the reasons that can be attributed to the formation at the end of the 2nd millennium bc and during the first half of the 1st millennium bc of a unified regional prosperous culture combining irrigated agriculture, handcraft production (copper, softstone, etc), the use of domestic camel for transportation and exchanges and sharing several practices such as rituals organised around one or several deities or principles associated to the image of the snake. Several driving forces have been successively emphasized to explain this development: the possible importation of irrigation techniques using subterranean galleries from Iran, domestication of the camel, redevelopment of interregional exchanges favouring exportation of copper. Today, some of these assumptions have been invalidated; others are recognised as possible elements among others that might have played a role in this process.

5One of the particularities of this region that was known as the land of Magan or Makkan in Mesopotamian sources is that it didn’t experiment the development of writing before a considerable lapse of time, although it was surrounded by other regions (Mesopotamia, Iran, Yemen, ) where writing had already been developed. Thus, internal historical sources are missing to explain the origin of such a unified culture identifiable only by archaeological data, and to hierarchize processes that might have been at the origin of the formation there of possible kingdoms, such as the kingdom of Qadê, mentioned in the archives of the Ishtar temple at Niniveh.

6The development of the Iron Age unified culture follows a period still little known and barely understood, that has long been considered as obscure, a period marked by an apparent decline during which local populations abandoned by their previous commercial partners (Mesopotamia and Indus) and facing technological difficulties (possible drying up of water tables such as evidenced at Hili) turned themselves towards an extensive way of living combining more reduced agriculture, semi-nomadic herding and exploitation of marine resources. The re-discovery and redefinition of the end of the Bronze Age and the beginning of the Iron Age have been the occasion of several discussions. Two opposing pictures are offered by two different searchers, one in the UAE, the other in central Oman. Meanwhile in the UAE, two periods were defined, called “Late Bronze Age” (1600-1300 bc) and “Iron Age I” (1300-1100 BC) (Magee 1996); the absence of any culture comparable to the Iron Age I was underlined by J. Schreiber (Schreiber 2010), while C. Phillips suggested a beginning of the period of apparition of the Iron Age, as defined in the UAE as the “Iron Age II” culture (1100-600 BC: Magee 1996), as early as 1300 BC (Phillips 2010). The discovery of Masāfī-5 was the opportunity to re-examination of the question.

Masāfī-5’s role in chrono-cultural definition

7The site of Masāfī-5 yielded a rich assemblage organised in different stratified levels which could be dated between 1600 and 1100 bc. This collection was soon understood to be an original corpus, sharing some common points with other assemblages from the northern UAE (Shimal, Tell Abraq, Kalba), but also unique for its fabrics, for some of its shapes and for its decoration techniques.

8The methodology used for the study of the pottery combines:

  • A macroscopic study (associating the study of fabrics, shapes, surface treatments and decoration);

  • A technological examination of the potsherds aiding the identification of practices regarding the shaping of the different vessels;

  • Petrographic analysis of some samples from different sites located in the northern UAE. The latter was carried out in collaboration with Sophie Méry, and once the data available, a comparison of the pottery composition and the geological background of the sites was made with the help of geomorphologists.

9The macroscopic study of potsherds from Masāfī-5 enabled the definition of several groups, each characterised by different criteria of matrix, temper, surface treatment, shapes and decoration. The petrographic analyses of samples from each group corroborated the homogeneity of the fabrics of most of them, allowing their definition as production groups (Pellegrino et al. 2020). The most frequent group at Masāfī-5 (Group 1) is characterised by a petrographic composition compatible with local geology (fig. 79).

Figure 79. Characteristic shapes of Group 1 (M5-8976 and M5-8788) and Group 2 (M5-8892 and M5-8306) identified at Masāfī-5

Image 10000000000002A9000002DE2A09FE8A75987713.jpg

Drawing. M.-P. Pellegrino.

10The different groups identified at Masāfī-5 were traced by macroscopic and petrographic analyses on other sites of the northern Emirates, although in different quantities. Some of them could be regionally localised owing to their compatibility with the geological environment of the site where they were the most frequent. For instance, Group 2 was identified as a probable production originating from northern Emirates (region of Ras al Khaimah). The presence of these groups on several sites evidenced exchange networks from one site to the other, exchanges to which Masāfī-5 was fully integrated; meanwhile the technical characteristics, the set of shapes and the decorations of each group pointed to a relative diversity of the different productions, opening up new questions on the phenomenon of transmission of older techniques, here obviously quite distinct from one area to another.

11Additionally the question of pottery evolution in northern UAE could be reviewed through a systematic study of the evolution of the corpus on each site. It has been demonstrated that the limit proposed by P. Magee for distinguishing two periods in this region (Late bronze Age and Iron Age I) were not coherent with the very slow and progressive evolution of the corpus on each site, changes being more linked to a slow evolution of network patterns than to a technical and cultural break. This result led to cancel the somewhat artificial subdivision previously proposed in this region between a “Late Bronze Age” (previously 1600-1300 bc) and an “Iron Age I” (previously 1300-1100 bc), extending the appellation “Late bronze Age” up to the period covering the whole interval (1600-1100 bc). The disappearance of the appellation “Iron Age I” gave place to the proposal to replace the appellation Iron Age II (Magee 1996) by “early Iron Age”.

The Cefrepa Cooperation for Pottery Studies
Considering ceramic studies, the main contribution made by the Cefrepa is the support it provides to research on pottery developed thanks to cooperation with French archaeological missions and researchers or students working on ceramics in Arabia.
Among the former missions should be mentioned the French-Koweïti Archaeological Mission in Failaka, supervised by J. B
onneric, which includes a review of the pottery sequence of the Hellenistic fortress of Tell Sa‘id (3rd century ad) and of the Sassanid-Islamic site of al Qusur (5th-9th century ad).
In South-east Arabia, the Cefrepa is a partner of the French Archaeological Mission in the UAE (Dir. S. Méry), which has developed several projects extending from the Neolithic period (Aqab, Umm al Qusayn) up to the Iron Age (Masāfī). It is also associated to the research developed in central Oman (regions of Adam, Jebel Moudhmar and Bisyah) by the Archaeological Mission in Adam (Dir. G. Gernez, and since 2020, M. Jean and M. Sauvage), as well as the archaeological mission on the coastal Islamic site of Qalhat (Dir. A. Rougeulle).
In Saudi Arabia, the Cefrepa is associated to the project “Oasis de l’Arabie déserte” (Dir. G. Charloux) which investigates several antique sites from Saudi Arabia (Najrân; Dûmat al-Jandal; al-Kharj). It is also participating in the French-Saudi-Nederland’s Archaeological project on the pre-Islamic city of Thāj (Dir. J.Rohmer, M.Al-Hajiri, A. Al-Jallad). All these missions have incredibly accelerated the construction of chrono-cultural sequences of North-western, central and eastern Arabia, from the Bronze Age to the Middle Islamic period.
These archaeological research missions in Arabia have enabled the discovery and excavation of several workshops dating from the late pre-Islamic and the Islamic periods. (Thāj, Yamāma, al Kharj, Qalhāt). The Cefrepa is also supporting a project devoted to the study of these workshops developed by Fabien Lesguer (University of Paris I). The aim is to study the
chaine opératoire, the spatial organisation and the integration of a potters’ workshop during the pre-islamic and Islamic periods in order to highlight the evolution of pottery traditions in the long term. Archaeological studies are supplemented by ethnoarchaeological research (region of Bahla, central Oman).

Figure 80: Maria-Paola Pellegrino at Tell Abraq

Image 100000000000019600000209572541F8D9C977D5.jpg

Conclusions

12Finally, the comparison between the situation observed in the UAE and the situation observed in the Sultanate of Oman allowed to propose a global hypothesis regarding the evolution of pottery traditions in these two regions and the formation of a homogenous cultural complex in the region at the very end of the second/beginning of the 1st millennium bc. The Late Bronze Age defined in the United Arab Emirates appears to be geographically restricted to a region comprised between Ras al Khaimah and al Aïn. In central Oman, direct evolution of the potter’s traditions from existing cultural characteristics during the Middle Bronze Age (also called Wadi sud period: 2000-1600 bc) to those that will remain predominant during a large part of the Iron Age until the 6th century bc and possibly even later. They were developed in central Oman 200 years before they appeared in the UAE where they were the result of diffusion. In view of this aspect, the origin of the Iron Age culture that extended over all south-east Arabia during the first half of the 1st millennium bc can be located in central Oman. Such an example shows the importance of the study of pottery in proto-historical approaches of the evolution of settlement patterns and in the definition of cultural entities.

Notes de bas de page

1  The French Archaeological mission in UAE is led by S. Méry. From 2006 until 2016 systematic research at Masāfī were conducted by A. Benoist and since 2017 the excavations are under the supervision of J. Charbonnier.

2  The samples from these other sites were analysed thanks to the kind authorisation of P. Magee (director of Tell Abraq international project), C. Velde (field director of the German Archaeological mission in Shimal) and C. Phillips (field director of the English Archaeological mission in Kalba).


Le texte seul est utilisable sous licence Creative Commons - Attribution - Partage dans les Mêmes Conditions 4.0 International - CC BY-SA 4.0. Les autres éléments (illustrations, fichiers annexes importés) sont « Tous droits réservés », sauf mention contraire.